Base Report of Irr For Management

ANDHRA PRADESH WATER SECTOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
(MODERNAIZATION OF NAGARJUNSAGAR PROJECT)
BASELINE SURVEY REPORT
PROJECT PREPARATION AND MANAGEMENT UNIT
2008-09
IRRIGATION & CAD DEPARTMENT
GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
PREFACE
The Andhra Pradesh Water Sector Improvement Project (APWSIP) is one of the most
prestigious projects, taken up by the Government of Andhra Pradesh in the irrigation sector with
the World Banks financial assistance. The APWSIP is meant for Modernization and
rehabilitation of the Nagarjuna Sagar Project, the largest multipurpose major irrigation project in
the state. It benefits five districts of the state, providing irrigation water to about 9 lakh hectares
of ayacut spread over Guntur and Prakasam districts on the right canal and Nalgonda, Khammam
and Krishna districts on the left canal.
The APWSIP is very complex in nature with a lot of diversified tasks. It consists of various
components such as increasing the service delivery of irrigated water with equity distribution
among all the water users, ensuring all the social and environmental safeguards, increased
intensification and diversification of irrigated agriculture, reforms in key irrigation sector like
establishment of Andhra Pradesh Water Resources Regulatory Commission, capacity building of
the Irrigation Department, Water User Organizations which are targeted to actively take part in
Participatory Irrigation Management, Water and Land Management Training and Research
Institute (WALAMTARI), which is the nodal agency to train the officials of Irrigation
Department as well as the Water User Organizations (WUO), Pilot Studies to regularize the
Groundwater usage etc.,
About Rs. 4500crores is being invested by the Government to implement APWSIP. Benchmarks
for the predetermined performance parameters have to be set before the initiation of the Project.
The impact of the project interventions towards achieving the expected outcomes, at various
stages of the project, spanning six years, will be assessed based on the baseline values.
Therefore, the Government of Andhra Pradesh decided to conduct a baseline survey, taking
2008-2009 as the reference period. We, M/s WAPCOS Ltd., New Delhi, a Government of India
Organisation, graded a Mini Ratna, have been entrusted with the task of conducting the baseline
survey.
Albeit it being a new level of assignment for us to conduct a baseline survey for a project of this
dimension, M/s WAPCOS Ltd. have dedicated ourselves to the task and successfully completed
baseline survey. In the process, we have conducted a field survey involving key informant
interviews. The key informants were households, WUOs, NSP Officials and Irrigation
department personnel. A number of professionals were employed to elicit the required
information from the key informants through scientifically designed statistical methodology and
approach, using well developed questionnaires. In addition, we collected enormous secondary
data from various related departments and organizations to make this baseline survey complete
and comprehensive in all aspects. We are very optimistic that the findings of this survey will
certainly enable the Project Authorities to assess the final impact of the project interventions
thoroughly.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost , we express our immense gratitude to Sri Aditya Nath Das, IAS, Secretary to
the Government of Andhra Pradesh, to whom we owe this project and for his unswerving
confidence in us all at WAPCOS.
We are highly indebted and thankful to Dr. G. Malsur, Project Director, APWSIP, for his eagle
eye on us, for his invaluable guidance and support, for sparing his time for us each time we
approached him despite his busy schedule.
We express our thanks on record to the CADA in general and Sri Sharath Chandra Reddy, C. E,
NSP, for facilitating us in obtaining most valuable data about irrigation parameters.
We are grateful to Sri K. Thirupathaiah, IFS, Director General, Walamtari , for extending his
cooperation in providing us with all the information related to the WUOs under NSP.
Our sincere thanks to all the concerned Officers of the departments of Agriculture,
Horticulture, Animal Husbandry, Fisheries and the ANGRAU for providing us with all the
required information in their respective fields.
Our gratitude is also due to everyone and in particular Sri Ch. Chandra Mohan, Senior
Engineering Consultant, Dr. M.N. Reddy, Senior Agriculture Consultant, Smt. G. Shailaja, Asst.
Director of Agriculture and Smt. S. Sarita, Environmental Specialist of the Project Preparation
and Management Unit for their continuous cooperation and knowledge inputs.
In special, our warm thanks to the Directorate of Economics and Statistics for sparing their
precious time for us and providing us enormous essential data crucial to our survey.
We express our profound gratitude to Sri K. Sridhara Chary , Monitoring and Evaluation
Expert and Sri. K. Shankaraiah, Geophysicist of the PPMU, without whose expertise and
supportive guidance right from the methodology to be adopted till the final report and
finishing touches, we would not have been able to accomplish the task.
Ultimately, we express our heartfelt gratitude to Sri R.S. Pathak, the Task Team Leader,
APWSIP, the World Bank and his entire team, for their endless encouragement and for
steering us on the right path in completing the baseline survey for APWSIP, Nagarjuna Sagar
Project, Government of Andhra Pradesh. Their generosity is our inspiration.
Baseline Survey for Nagarjuna Sagar Project
CONTENTS
Executive Summary
List of Tables
List of Figures
List of Annexure
Abbreviations Page No.
CHAPTER 1 I-1
INTRODUCTION I-1
1.1 The Project I-1
1.2 Andhra Pradesh Water Sector Improvement Project (APWSIP) I-1
1.3 The Project Objectives I-2
1.4 Rational and Context I-3
1.5 Project Location I-4
1.6 Profile of Project Districts I-8
1.7 Limitations of Study I-9
CHAPTER -2 II - 1
APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY II - 1

2.1 Approach II - 1
2.2 Methodology and Analysis II - 3
2.2.1 Socio-Economic Survey II - 3
2.2.2 WUAs and Village level Survey II - 5
2.2.3 Scheme level and departmental survey II - 5
2.3 Survey Design II - 6
2.4 Sample Design Criteria II - 7
2.4.1 Data Collection of household data II - 8
2.5 Techniques of Data Collection II - 10
2.6 Processing and Analysis of primary data and quality control II - 11
2.7 Socio-Economic- Indicators for Assessment II - 12
i
2.8 WUA Village Level Indicators for Assessment II - 13

2.9 Indicators for assessment- Maintenance Performance & Cost Recovery II - 14
2.10 Indicators for assessment Departmental II - 15
2.11 Sampling for Soil quality and Pesticides residues through physical
Measurements and laboratory testing II - 16
CHAPTER -3 III - 1
SOCIO-ECONOMIC PROFILE OF HOUSEHOLDS III - 1
3.1 Introduction III - 1
3.2 Demographic features III - 1
3.2.1 Household Distribution III - 1
3.2.2 Male Headed Farmers III - 2
3.2.3 Gender wise distribution III - 2
3.2.4 Male to Female ratio III - 3
3.2.5 Average House hold size III - 3
3.2.6 Composition of Social Groups III - 3
3.2.7 Migration Pattern III - 3
3.2.8 Literacy Levels III - 4
3.2.9 Occupation Structure / Employment Status III - 4
3.3 Asset Positions III - 4
3.3.1 Agricultural Implements III - 5
3.3.2 Consumer Durables III - 5
3.3.3 Living Conditions III - 6
3.3.4 Biotic Potential III - 6
3.4 Income Status III - 7
3.4.1 Sources of Income III - 7
3.4.2 Annual Income per household III - 7
3.4.3 Pre-Capita Annual Income III - 8
3.5 Consumption Expenditure III - 8
3.6 Credit / Loan III - 9
3.7 Savings III - 10
ii
CHAPTER-4 IV - 1
AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES IV - 1
4.0 General IV - 1
4.1 Introduction IV - 1
4.2 Agro-Climate IV - 2
4.3 Crops IV - 2
4.4 Data Analysis IV - 2
4.4.1 Classification of Land Holdings IV - 3
4.4.2 Land Holding Details IV - 3
4.4.3 Cropping Intensity IV - 4
4.4.4 Average Size of Land Holding IV - 4
4.5 Sources of Irrigation IV - 4
4.6 Awareness and Adaptation of Technology IV - 5
4.7 Cropping Pattern IV - 5
4.8 Area under different crops IV - 6
4.9 Yield of important crops IV - 6
4.10 Average costs and return IV - 7
4.11 Soil nutrient and pesticides IV - 12
CHAPTER 5 V-1
ACCESSES TO IRRIGATION AND IRRIGATION SERVICES DELIVERY V-1
5.1 Introduction V-1
5.2 Access to irrigation V-1
5.3 Equity of irrigation water distribution V-2
5.4 Water Use efficiencies V-3
5.5 Water Delivery efficiencies V-4
5.6 Pasture Development V-4
5.7 Irrigation service delivery V-4
5.8 Strength and capacity building farmers organizations V-5
5.9 Strengthening the department V-6
5.10 Nagarjuna Sagar System operation performance V-6
iii
CHAPTER -6 VI - 1
ACCESSES TO RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE VI - 1
6.1 General VI - 1
CHAPTER -7 VII - 1
WATER USE ASSOCIATION VII - 1
7.1 Introduction VII - 1
7.2 Participation of Members and their social status VII - 1
7.2.1 Number and members of WUAs VII - 1
7.2.2 Social Status VII - 2
7.2.3 Social Status of Elected Members VII - 2
7.2.4 Participation of Executive committee headed by woman/SC/ST/OBC of WUA VII - 2
7.3 Meeting VII - 2
7.3.1 Management Committee meetings VII - 3
7.3.2 General body meetings VII - 3
7.3.3 Transparency VII - 3
7.4 Functioning of WUAs VII - 3
7.4.1 Water Use Efficiency VII - 4
7.4.2 Area under second crop i.e. Rabi VII - 4
7.4.3 Collection of Water Tax/Charges VII - 4
7.4.3.1 Water taxes and joint azmoish VII - 4
7.4.4 Mobilization of additional tax resources VII - 5
7.5 Operation and maintenance (O&M) plan VII - 5
7.5.1 Maintenance of records VII - 5
7.5.2 Water release schedule / water budgeting VII - 6
7.5.3 Warabandi implementation VII - 6
7.5.4 Adequacy of water received by Tail End Farmers VII - 6
7.5.5 Conflict Resolution VII - 7
7.5.6 Operation and Repair works VII - 7
7.6 Water Management Practices VII - 7
7.7 Audit VII - 7
7.8 Performance of Distributaries committee VII - 8
iv
CHAPTER 8 VIII - 1
ENGINEERING FEATURES OF NSP VIII - 1
8.1 Project in brief VIII - 1
8.1.1 Dam portion VIII - 1
8.1.2 Canal System VIII - 1
8.1.3 Districts and extent of area benefited in each district by the project VIII - 2
8.2 Command area development program VIII - 2
8.3 Administrative Setup for Management of Nagarjuna Sagar Project VIII - 3
8.3.1 Irrigation Water Regulation Policy for Kharif VIII - 4
8.3.1.1 Comprehensive Kharif Water Policy for N S Left and Right Canals for
the Year 2008 VII - 4
8.3.1.2 Date of opening & closing of canals under various zones VIII - 4
8.3.1.3 Cropping Pattern VIII - 6
8.3.2 Ayacut Development under Right and Left Canals of Nagarjuna Sagar Project VIII - 7
CHAPTER -9 IX - 1
MAINTENCE PERFORMANCE AND COST RECOVERY IX - 1
9.1 System maintenance under APFMIS Act 11 of 1997 IX - 1
9.2 System maintenance performance IX - 2
9.3 Maintenance cost and budget IX - 2
9.4 System maintenance performance and cost recovery IX - 3
9.5 Institutional changes IX - 4
9.6 List of Indicators IX - 4
CHAPTER -10 X-1
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES IN SAMPLE SCHEMES X-1
10.1 Introduction X-1
10.2 Objective X-1
10.3 Environmental Indicators X-2
10.3.1 Public Health Indicators X-2
10.3.2 Groundwater Monitoring and Spatial Mapping and Zonation X-4
10.3.3 Water Logging X-5
10.3.4 Salinity X-8
v
10.3.5 Fluoride X 10
10.4 Groundwater Quality X - 11
CHAPTER 11 XI - 1
BASELINE INDICATORS XI -1
Socio-economic Indicators XI 1
WUA & Village Level Indicators XI - 9
Scheme Level & Departmental Indicators XI - 13
CHAPTER 12 XII - 1
CONCLUSIONS XII 1
vi
List of Tables
Table No Details
Table 2.1 Distribution of number of sample Water Users Associations and Households
Table 2.2 Number of WUAs in the head/middle/tail reaches in relation to three classes of ayacut
Table 3.1 Distribution of Households according to zone, canal reaches and land holding size
Table 3.2 Distribution of Male Headed Households according to zone, canal reaches and land holding
size
Table 3.3 Gender wise Distribution of Total Population according to zone, canal reaches and land holding
size (Percentage)
Table 3.4 Male to Feale Ratio of total population according to zone, canal reaches and land holding size
Table 3.5 Average Household size of total population according to zone, canal reaches and land holding
size
Table 3.6 Distribution of Social Group according to zone and canal reaches (Percentages)
Table 3.7 Pattern of migration in selected households according to zone and canal reaches (Percentages)
Table 3.8 Distribution of Occupation of Literacy Level of households according to zone and canal reaches
(Percentages)
Table 3.9 Distribution of Occupation of households according to zone and canal reaches (Percentages)
Table 3.10 Agriculture implements position of households according to zone, canal reaches and land
holding size per households
Table 3.11 Possession of per households consumer durables according to zone, canal reaches and land
holding size (No)
Table 3.12 Living conditions of selected households according to zone and canal reaches (Percent)
Table 3.13 Distribution of Livestock according to zone and canal reaches (Per HHs)
Table 3.14 Sources of Total Income according to zone and canal reaches (Percentages)
Table 3.15 Sources of Per Household Annual Income according to zone, land holding size and canal
reaches (Rs.)
Table 3.16 Sources of Per Capita Annual Income according to zone, land holding size and canal reaches
(Rs.)
Table 3.17 Pattern of Annual consumption Expenditure according to zone, land holding size and canal
reaches (Percentages)
Table 3.18 Pattern of Per Household Annual Consumption Expenditure according to zone, land holding
size and canal reaches (Rs.)
Table 3.19 Percentage of farmers borrowing loan for different purposes according to zone and canal
reaches.
Table 3.20 Different sources of credit (Percentages)
Table 3.21 Repayment pattern of Loan
Table 3.22 Distribution of Total Annual Income per Household according to Zone, land holding size and
canal reaches (Rs)
Table 3.23 Per capita savings of Household according to zone, land holding size and canal reaches (Rs.)
Table 4.1 Distribution of Percentage Operational holdings according to size classes, Zone and land Canal
reaches
Table 4.2 Distribution of Operational holding according to Zone, land holding size and canal reaches
(Acres)- Per Households
Table 4.3 Copping intensity according to zone, land holding size and canal reaches
vii
Table 4.4 Average size of holding according to zone, canal reaches and land holding size (Acres)
Table 4.5 Distribution of source of irrigation according to zone, canal reaches and land holding size
(Percentages)
Table 4.6 Awareness and Adoption of technology in the command and control area
Table 4.7 Predominant cropping in the command and control area
Table 4.8 Area under different crops according to zone, land holding size and canal reaches (Percentage)
Table 4.9 Average Yield of important crops according to zone, canal reaches (Qtls/acre)- Season wise
Table 4.10 Per Acre average costs and returns of Paddy Crop according to zone, canal reaches and land
holding size
Table 4.11 Per Acre average costs and returns of Seed Cotton according to zone, canal reaches and land
holding size
Table 4.12 Per Acre average costs and returns of Chilies Crop according to zone, canal reaches and land
holding size
Table 4.13 Per Acre average costs and returns of Groundnut Crop according to zone, canal reaches and
land holding size
Table 4.14 Per Acre average costs and returns of Black gram Crop according to zone, canal reaches and
land holding size
Table 4.15 Per Acre average costs and returns of Maize Crop according to zone, canal reaches and land
holding size
Table 4.16 (a-o) Season wise horticulture crop area for selected crops for 2008-09 for Left and Right canal of
NSS
Table 4.17 Distribution of Livestock in the NSS Command Area
Table 4.18 Soil Nutrient Parameters/Indicator Values Zone & reach wise
Table 5.1 Nagarjuna Sagar Lal Bahadur (Left) canal command Area, Production and yield per Hectare
Nalagonda
Khammam
Krishna
Table 5.4 Nagarjuna Sagar Jawahar (Right) canal command Area, Production and yield per Hectare
Guntur
Table 5.5 Nagarjuna Sagar Jawahar (Right) canal command Area, Production and yield per Hectare
Prakasam
Table 5.6 Nagarjuna Sagar Base Line Survey Equity of water Distribution Name of the project
Nagarjuna Sagar project Left canal Kharif year 2008-09
Nagarjuna Sagar project Left canal Rabi year 2008-09
Nagarjuna Sagar project Right canal Kharif year 2008-09
Nagarjuna Sagar project Right canal Rabi year 2008-09
viii
Nagarjuna Sagar project Right canal Rabi year 2008-09
Table 5.18 Nagarjuna Sagar Base Line Survey water user efficiencies Name of the project Nagarjuna
Sagar project (Left) Kharif year 2008-09
Sagar project (Left) Rabi year 2008-09
Sagar project (Right) Rabi year 2008-09
Sagar project (Right) Kharif year 2008-09
Table 5.22 Water use efficiency Kgs/cum of water
Table 5.23 Water delivery efficiency
Table 5-24(a) Pasture development2008-09 of mandals under study for left canal head reach of zone -1
Table 5-24(b) Pasture development2008-09 of mandals under study for left canal middle reach of zone -1
Table 5-24(c) Pasture development2008-09 of mandals under study for left canal tail reach of zone -1
Table 5-24(d) Pasture development2008-09 of mandals under study for left canal head reach of zone -2
Table 5-24(e) Pasture development2008-09 of mandals under study for left canal middle reach of zone -2
Table 5-24(f) Pasture development2008-09 of mandals under study for left canal tail reach of zone -2
Table 5-24(g) Pasture development2008-09 of mandals under study for left canal head reach of zone -3
Table 5-24(h) Pasture development2008-09 of mandals under study for left canal middle reach of zone -3
Table 5-24(i) Pasture development2008-09 of mandals under study for left canal tail reach of zone -3
Table 5-24(j) Pasture development2008-09 of mandals under study for Right canal head reach of zone -1
Table 5-24(k) Pasture development2008-09 of mandals under study for Right canal middle reach of zone-1
Table 5-24(l) Pasture development2008-09 of mandals under study for Right canal tail reach of zone -1
Table 5-24(m) Pasture development2008-09 of mandals under study for Right canal head reach of zone -2`
Table 5-24(n) Pasture development2008-09 of mandals under study for Right canal middle reach of zone -2
Table 5-24(o) Pasture development2008-09 of mandals under study for Right canal tail reach of zone -2
Table 5-25 Organizational chart of Nagarjuna Sagar Project
Table 5-26 Summary of Engineering performance parameters of NSP
Table 6.1 Indicators of Access to infrastructure of WUAs Zone & Reach wise
Table 7.1 List of selected WUAs as per actual field survey according to canal, Zone and reaches
Table 7.2 Size category of WUAs according to area (ha)
Table 7.3 Distribution of members in WUAs according to social group and canal, Zone and reaches (%)
Table 7.4 (a) Participation of SC/ST/OBC in WUA Executive Committee (Numbers)
ix
Table 7.4 (b) Participation of SC/ST/OBC in WUA Executive Committee (Percentage)

Table 7.5 Participation of WUA headed by woman/SC/ST/OBC in WUAs according to canal, Zone and
reaches.
Table 7.6 Management committee meetings (Percentages of WUAs)
Table 7.7 General body meetings and % of farmers participation (Percentages of WUAs)
Table 7.8 Transparency information to all Members (Wall paintings, Social Audit etc.) (Percentages of
WUAs)
Table 7.9 Water use Efficiency (Acres per MCFT) (Percentages of WUAs)
Table 7.10 Area under second crop (percentages of WUAs)
Table 7.11 Water Tax collection (Percentages of WUAs)
Table 7.12 Joint azmoish (Estimation of Tax collection) (Percentages of WUAs)
Table 7.13 Additional resources mobilization (higher tax rates, other means) (Percentages of WUAs)
Table 7.14 Maintenance of Records (Percentages of WUAs)
Table 7.15 Water release schedule (Percentages of WUAs)
Table 7.16 Warabandi implementation (Percentages of WUAs)
Table 7.17 Tail end issues & adequacy of water received by the tail ends (Percentages of WUAs)
Table 7.18 Conflict resolution (Percentages of WUAs)
Table 7.19 O&M works (Percentages of WUAs)
Table 7.20 Innovation in water management, water sharing, conjunctive use, water Audit, collective
action, cropping practices (SRI, ID, Horticulture) etc., (Percentages of WUAs)
Table 7.21 Opinion on Financial Account audited in WUAs according to canal, Zone and reaches (%)
Table 7.22 Performances of Distributaries Committees in NSP command Area
Table 8.1 Salient features of Nagarjuna Sagar Dam
Table 8.2 Statement showing year wise Ayacut development under Nagarjuna Sagar Left Canal
Table 8.3 Statement showing year wise Ayacut development under Nagarjuna Sagar Right Canal
Table 9.1 Nagarjuna Sagar project Base Line survey 2010-11 Abstract of scheme level survey data
covering Left Canal (Miryalguda, Tekulapalli) and Right Canal (Lingumguntla and Ongole circle)
for the year 2008-09
Table 9.2 Nagarjuna Sagar project Base Line survey 2010-11 Abstract of scheme level survey data
covering Left Canal (Miryalguda, Tekulapalli) and Right Canal (Lingumguntla and Ongole circle)
for the year 2008-09
Table 9.3 Water Tax- Mandal wise for 2008-2009
Table 9.4 Nagarjuna Sagar Project Base Line survey Indicative list of indicators for the year 2008-09
Table 10.1 Public Health Indicators (2008-09)
Table 10.2 Water logging in Left canal command Pre monsoon season (Jul 2008)
Table 10.3 Water logging in Left canal command Post monsoon season (Sep 2008)
Table 10.4 Water logging in Right canal command Pre monsoon season (Mar 2008)
Table 10.5 Water logging in Right canal command Post monsoon season (2008)
Table 10.6 Salinity (EC) prone areas in Left canal command- Pre monsoon (2008)
Table 10.7 Salinity (EC) prone areas in Right canal command- Pre monsoon (2008)
Table 10.8 Fluoride prone areas in Left canal Command Pre monsoon (2008)
Table 10.9 Fluoride prone areas in Right canal Command Pre monsoon (2008)
Table 10.10 Nalagonda District (2008)
Table 10.11 Khammam District (2008)
x
Table 10.12 Guntur District (2008)

Table 10.13 Krishna District (2008)
Table 10.14 Prakasam District (2008)
xi
List of Figures
Fig No Details
Figure 1.1 Left Canal Zones in Project Area
Figure 1.2 Right Canal Zones in Project Area
Figure 2.1 Schematic representation of sample Data Collection in Left canal command of NSS
Figure 2.2 Schematic representation of sample Data Collection in Left canal command of NSS
Figure 10.1 Depth of Water Level Zone Mao of NSCCA MAY 2008
Figure 10.2 Depth of Water Level Zone Mao of NSCCA SEP - 2008
Figure 10.3 EC Contour Map of NSLC Command Area 2008
Figure 10.4 Fluoride Map of Left Bank Canal Command Area - 2008
Figure 10.5 Fluoride Map of Right Bank Canal Command Area - 2008
xii
List of Annexure
Annexure No Details
Annexure III.1 Distribution of Households according to Zone, canal reaches and land holding size
Annexure III.2 Distribution of Male Headed households
Annexure III.3 Gender wise Distribution of Total Population according to Zone, canal reaches and land
holding size (Number)
Annexure III.4 Gender wise Distribution of Total Population according to zone, canal reaches and land
holding size (Percentage)
Annexure III.5 Distribution of Social Group according to Zone, canal reaches and land holding size
(Numbers)
Annexure III.6 Distribution of Social Group according to Zone, canal land holding size and canal
Annexure III.7 Distribution of Literacy Level of households according to Zone, canal reaches and land
holding size (Number)
Annexure III.8 Distribution of Literacy Level of households according to Zone, canal reaches and land
holding size (Percentages)
Annexure III.9 Distribution of Occupation of households according to Zone, canal reaches and land
holding size (Nos.)
Annexure III.10 Distribution of Occupation of households according to Zone, canal reaches and land
holding size (Percentages)
Annexure III.11 Possession of Agriculture Implements according to Zone, canal reaches and land holding
size (Number)
Annexure III.12 Per household possession of Agriculture Implements according to Zone, canal reaches
and land holding size.
Annexure III.13 Possession of consumer durables according to Zone, canal reaches and land holding size
(Number)
Annexure III.14 Per household possession of consumer durables according to Zone, canal reaches and
land holding size (per households)
Annexure III.15 Living conditions of households according to Zone, land holding size and canal reaches
(Number)
Annexure III.16 Living conditions of households according to Zone, land holding size and canal reaches
(Percentages)
Annexure III.17 Distribution of Livestock according to Zone, land holding size and canal reaches
(Number)
Annexure III.18 Distribution of Livestock according to Zone, land holding size and canal reaches (Per
HHs)
Annexure III.19 Sources to Total Income according to Zone, land holding size and canal reaches (%)
Annexure III.20 Per household total annual income from different sources according to Zone, land
holding and canal reaches (Rs.)
Annexure III.21 Distribution of Total Income according to Zone, land holding size and canal reaches (Rs.)
Annexure III.22 Distribution of Per Capita Annual Income according to zone, land holding size and canal
reaches (Rs.)
Annexure III.23 Distribution of Annual consumer expenditure per households according to Zone, land
holding and canal reaches (Rs.)
Annexure III.24 Distribution of Annual consumer expenditure per households according to Zone, land
xiii
holding and canal reaches (Percent)

Annexure III.25 Purpose of loan (Percentage of Households)
Annexure III.26 Source of Credit (Percentage of loan amount)
Annexure III.27 Repayment Structure (Percent)
Annexure III.28 Total savings of Households according to Zone, land holding size and canal reaches
Annexure III.29 Saving Per HHs according to Zone, land holding size and canal reaches
Annexure III.30 Per capita savings of Households according to Zone, land holding size and canal reaches
Annexure IV.1 Distribution of Farm Households according to Zone, canal reaches and land holding size
Annexure IV.2 Distribution of Operational holding pattern according to Zone, land holding size and
canal reaches(Acres)
Annexure IV.3 Distribution of Operational holding pattern according to Zone, canal reaches and land
holding size and canal reaches (Acres) Per Households
Annexure IV.4 Distribution of current Fallow and Waste Land according to Zone, canal reaches and
land holding size (Acres)
Annexure IV.5 Average size of land holding according to Zone, canal reaches and land holding size
(Acres)
Annexure IV.6 Distribution of Source of Irrigation according to Zone, canal reaches and land holding
size (Acres)
Annexure IV.7 Distribution of Source of Irrigation according to Zone, canal reaches and land holding
size (Percentages)
Annexure IV.8 Awareness and Adoption of Technology in the Command and Control Area
Annexure IV.9 Area under different Crops according to Zone, land holding size and canal reaches
(Acres)
Annexure IV.10 Area under different Crops according to Zone, land holding size and canal reaches
(Percent)
Annexure IV.11 Per Acre Average Costs and Returns of paddy Crop according to Zone, canal reaches
and land holding size
Annexure IV.12 Per Acre Average Costs and Returns of Seed cotton Crop according to Zone, canal
reaches and land holding size
Annexure IV.13 Per Acre Average Costs and Returns of Chilies Crop according to zone, canal reaches
land holding size
Annexure IV.14 Per Acre Average Costs and Returns of Groundnut Crop according to zone, canal
reaches land holding size
Annexure IV.15 Per Acre Average Costs and Returns of Black gram Crop according to zone, canal
reaches land holding size
Annexure IV.16 Per Acre Average Costs and Returns of Maize Crop according to zone, canal reaches
land holding size
Annexure IV.17 Soil Analysis Report of Nalgonda District
Annexure IV.18 Soil Analysis Report of Khammam District
Annexure IV.19 Soil Analysis Report of Krishna District
Annexure IV.20 Soil Analysis Report of Guntur District
Annexure IV.21 Soil Analysis Report of Prakasam District
Annexure V. 1 Component-A, Improving Irrigation Service Delivery in NSS Operation
Annexure IX. 1 Component B, Maintenance Performance
xiv
LIST OF ABRVIATIONS
ANGRAU Acharya N G Ranga Agriculture University
AP Andhra Pradesh
APERP Andhra Pradesh Economic Restructuring Project
APFMIS Andhra Pradesh Farmer's management information systems
APWSIP Andhra Pradesh Water Sector Improvement
B/C Benefit Cost ratio
BC Backward Communities
CRIDA Central Research Institute for Dry land Agriculture
CADA Command Area Development Department
CGWB Central Groundwater Board
DC Distributary committee
DDT Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane
DSS Decision support system
EC Electrical Conductivity
FRL Full Reservoir Level
GB General Body
GIS Geographical Information System
GPS Global Positioning System
GOAP Government of Andhra Pradesh
HA Hectare
HH House holds
H Head reach
HRD Human Resources Department
ICRISAT International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics
I&CAD Irrigation and Command Area Development
ID Irrigation Dry crops
KVK Krishi Vigyan Kendra
K Potassium
M Middle reach
MC Management Committee
MSP Minimum Support Price
MCM Million Cubic Meters
N Nitrogen
NGO Non Governmental organisations
NREGS National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme
NSLC Nagarjuna Sagar left Canal
NIH National Institute of Hydrology
NSRC Nagarjuna Sagar right Canal
NIRD National integrated rural development
NSS Nagarjuna Sagar Scheme
NSP Nagarjuna Sagar Project
OBC Other Backward Communities
O&M Operation and Maintenance
P Phosphorus
xv
PC Project Committee
PAD Project Appraisal Document
PIM Participatory Irrigation Management
RL Reduced level
RD Reduced distance
RSC Residual Sodium Carbonate
SAR Sodium Absorption ration
SC Scheduled caste
SRI Systematic Rice Intensification
SCADA Supervisory control and Data acquisition system
SGDP State Gross Domestic Product
T Tail reach
TMC Thousand million cubic feet
TC Technical Committee
WALAMTARI Water and Land Management and Training and Research Institute
WUA Water User Associations
WUE Water Use Efficiency
WUO Water User Organization
*******************
xvi
Executive Summary
Nagarjuna Sagar Scheme:
The multipurpose Nagarjuna Sagar Project (NSP) on the river Krishna was conceived for
optimum and beneficial utilization of Krishna river water in the year 1960. The project
comprises of a 124 m high masonry Dam flanked with earthen embankments to create a lake
with gross capacity of 408.240 TMC (11562 Mm) at full reservoir level. The NSP has two
canals taking off from the reservoir from either side. The designed discharge of the two main
canals is 11,000 cusecs each with provision for increasing the capacity. This project is having
a vast network of irrigation canals system spread over five districts namely Nalgonda,
Khammam, Krishna, Prakasam, and Guntur. Over the time, the efficiency of the system has
been decreasing due to reduced delivery efficiency of canals, damage of lining along the
canals/ distributaries and reduction in crop yields leading to reduction in ayacut areas.
APWSIP:
In order to ensure improved irrigation service delivery, providing water to the entire
contemplated command area under Nagarjunasagar scheme, the Government of Andhra
Pradesh decided to implement the Andhra Pradesh Water Sector Improvement Project
(APWSIP) with the objectives (i) to improve irrigation efficiency of service delivery on a
sustainable basis to increase productivity of irrigated agriculture in the NSP (Nagarjuna Sagar
Project) command and (ii) to strengthen the states institutional capacity for multi-sectoral
planning, development and management of its water resources.
BASELINE SURVEY:
As part of project preparation for the APWSIP, a baseline survey has been planned to collect
information of performance indicators, with 2008-09 as reference year, that will aide in
project planning as well as providing a basis for monitoring the progress of implementation
and evaluating the impact of the project.
Objective:
The objective of the present survey and analysis is to quantify pre-project conditions and fix
the benchmarks in terms of indicators to evaluate impact of modernisation programs
proposed under the APWSIP.
The survey aims to provide baseline values of different parameters to evaluate project impact
in term of changes in incomes and living standards as well as other beneficiary perceptive of
project related services. Baseline data has been collected through four (4) questionnaires ; (i)
household survey (ii) WUA and village level survey (iii) Scheme level survey and (iv)
Irrigation department survey (I & CAD).
Methodology:
A multi stage stratified random sampling system has been adopted for selecting
representative samples. The information collected includes details on households, water user
associations (WUA) and departmental/ institutional information pertaining I & CAD
department, administering the NSP. The primary data was collected from different sources
such as households, village heads, local government officials, heads of schools and members
xvii
& presidents of WUAs. Apart from survey, some information has been collected from
secondary sources.
For household data, 3000 households have been selected from the command area and 1500
from outside the command area, either provided with other irrigation sources or rain fed, with
similar socioeconomic conditions, as control, to compare the living conditions of the people
in and outside the command, from various perspectives.
Analysis:
The analysed data indicates that about 23% of surveyed population belong to SC/ST while
BCs are 36%. Nearly 70% are literates and illiteracy shows a decreasing trend as the level of
size of land holding increases. Average land holding varies from 3.2 to 3.4 Acres (own land)
in the project area compared to 3.8 in adjacent non-command areas, whereas it is minimal
with an approximate size of 0.25 Acre in case of tenancy. The average size of family in
project and non project is 3.5 and 3.6 respectively with gender distribution slightly more
towards males (54%).
Farming is found to be the main source of income (40%) both in command and non-
command areas. Income of individual households varies from Rs 46,020 (landless) to Rs
92,664 (large farmer) from farming activities. It may however be noted that landless and
small category farmers derive additional income from casual manual labour, dairy and
poultry etc., Migration for want of job/ work found to be negligible both in command and
non command areas (< 3%).
The cropping intensity, for various crops in command area (about 130%) is higher comparing
to non-command (109%) area, due to availability of relatively more water. The crop yields
for left and right canal command areas are approximately the same. The overall command
yields for Kharif paddy, Maize, Chillies and seed cotton are found to be 4689.5, 3349, 2312,
and 2080 Kgs/ ha respectively. Similarly the yields for Rabi paddy, maize, groundnut and
Blackgram were 4295, 4484, 1707 and 911.5 Kgs/ha respectively. The fertiliser and pesticide
inputs are found to be well within limits, except DDT which is banned. The occupation of
farming is higher in command area when compared to non-command area for obvious reason
of availability of water.
Under NSP command, there are two PCs, 80 DCs (48 in right and 32 in left canal) and 672
WUAs (404 in right and 268 in left canal). So far as WUOs performance is concerned, the
representation of membership from backward castes, SC and ST is almost average, on par
with state level representation in population (indicators mentioned in chapter 11). However,
the representation of women in these committees is low.
The percentage of actual area irrigated (including ID) to localised ayacut during kharif ranges
from 31.7 to 98.8, the highest being head reach in the right bank canal under Lingamguntla
circle. This is due to availability of water in the canal coupled with receipt of very good rains
during the base year (2008-09). In Miryalguda circle the percentage of actual irrigated area
to localised ayacut is about 80 in both seasons.
The general awareness about Warabandi system and entitlements (share of water) among
WUAs is average (42%), good (27%) to excellent (26%). The tax collection during Rabi
xviii
season in all circles is however poor, more in the Ongole circle where the revenue collection
is virtually zero. The primary data reveals that the cost recovery is poor in (56%) of WUAs,
average in 29% WUAs, good in 12.5% WUAs and excellent in rest. The cost recovery is a
serious matter of concern (outstanding total balance for RBC at Rs 39.68 Crores and LBC at
Rs 12.74 Crores), besides mounting O&M expenditure. Resolving conflicts by WUAs is
poor in 8%, , average in 23% , good in 36% and excellent in 33% of WUAs.
On an average the water logged area in the project during pre-monsoon is 7% while in the
post-monsoon season it is about 13%. The salinity during pre-monsoon season for left canal
and right canal which is unsuitable (EC > 2250) is about 16% and 44% of the area
respectively. In general, right canal shows more water logging and salinity. Groundwater
quality in general is good in the command area both for drinking and irrigation. However
fluoride level in parts of Nalgonda, Khammam and Guntur is a matter of concern for public
health.
The modernization of the total system will help to improve the operation of the canal system
with minimized losses so that water reaches to the tail end reaches. The relevant parameters
include water delivery efficiency (32.67%), water use efficiency at scheme level (132.5 Ha/
M cum), Water use efficiency at WUA level (107.2 Ha/ M cum).
xix
ANDHRA PRADESH WATER SECTOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT

BASELINE SURVEY KEY INDICATORS (2008-09)
Important indicators as per the baseline survey report:

Reservoir Storage :
Live storage : 5663.4 m Cum
Net live storage : 5113.0 m Cum
Available for irrigation under NSP command : 4601.0 m Cum
Area irrigated under NSP Command for the year 2008-09
Potential Created
Left Canal 4.20 L Ha
Right Canal 4.75 L Ha
Total command 8.95 L Ha
Actual Area Irrigated
Left Canal Khariff 1.99 L Ha
Rabi 2.29 L Ha
Total 4.28 L Ha
Right Canal Khariff 4.05L Ha
Rabi 1.87 L Ha
Total 5.92 L Ha
Total command 10.20 L Ha
Conveyance Efficiency at Scheme level

Sl.No System NSLC in % NSRC in %
1 Entire system 34.67 31.21
2 Project 32.67
Canal wise Water Use Efficiency (Hct/M cum) at scheme level for the year 2008-09
Left Canal Right Canal Project
136 128.9 132.5
Cropping intensity in NSP Command for the year 2008-09

Head reach Middle reach Tail end reach Total Command
136.16 127.56 126.13 130.03
Recovery of water charges for the year 2008-09

(In Rs. Millions)
Item Left Canal Right canal Project
Demand 125.40 106.09 231.50
Recovery 79.50 61.67 141.20
% Recovery 63.40 58.13 60.99
xx
Crop wise area of 5 major crops under NSP Command for the year 2008-09 (in Ha)
Paddy Cotton Chilies Groundnut Maize
733407.4 115540.3 45123.43 28328.608 23775.8
Average yields of major crops, canal and season wise under NSP for the year 2008-09
(Kgs /Ha)
Canal Kharif Rabi
Paddy Maize Chillies Seed Paddy Maize Groundnut Blackgram
Cotton
Right Canal 4560 3475 2312 2095 4323 4992 1643 963
Left Canal 4819 3223 2312 2065 4267 3982 1771 860
Overall 4689.5 3349 2312 2080 4295 4484 1707 911.5
Average yields of 5 major crops at scheme level under NSP for the year 2008-09
(Ton /Ha)
(
Sl.No Name of the crop Yield

1 Paddy 4.5
2 Maize 3.9
3 Chilles 2.3
4 Cotton 2.1
5 Ground nut 1.7
Predominant Cropping Pattern during the year 2008-09 under NSP command
Kharif Rabi
Paddy Paddy
Paddy Pulses
Paddy Groundnut/Sesamum
Cotton
Chillies
Maize Maize
Fodder Fodder
xxi
CHAPTER-1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 THE PROJECT

Andhra Pradesh (AP) is India's fourth largest state with a geographical area of 27.5
million hectare (m ha), and fifth largest population of about 80 million people.
Agriculture and allied sectors contribute about 29% (2005-06) of the State Gross
Domestic Product (SGDP), and about 73% of the state's population living in rural areas
is dependent on income from farming/agriculture for their livelihood. The rainfall in
the state is highly uneven, both spatially and temporally; most of the rainfall occurs in
just 40 to 100 days. Therefore, given the high spatial and seasonal variability of rain
water, holistic, integrated and multi-sectoral water resources planning, development
and management have a direct and critical bearing on the performance of agriculture
sector, and also on overall growth and poverty reduction. Currently, out of the total
gross cropped area of 13.65 million ha, about half is under irrigation.
Andhra Pradesh's water sector investment strategy is based on two major pillars. First,
to utilize about 40 % of the state's still unutilized share of allocated river waters
(mostly in the Godavari basin) to augment supplies of water for various uses,
particularly in the underserved areas of the state; and second, to concurrently improve
and modernize irrigation service delivery/performance of existing irrigation/water
infrastructure for better utilization of water efficiency. It is in this context Andhra
Pradesh Water sector Improvement Project (APWSIP) aims to support the second pillar
in the Government of Andhra Pradesh's (GOAP) strategy and has initiated a project
with the assistance of World Bank during 2008-09 to increase water use efficiency.
1.2 ANDHRA PRADESH WATER SECTOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT

(APWSIP)
The Government of Andhra Pradesh have decided to take up the APWSIP with an aim
to modernize and rehabilitate the NSS which is the largest multipurpose water scheme
I-1
in the state catering to about 8.95 La Ha of ayacut spread across the five districts,
Nalgonda, Khammam, Krishna on left canal and Guntur and Prakasham on Right
canal, with the assistance of the World Bank. The GoAP intends to replicate
management practices tested and implemented under APWSIP in NSS in other
schemes in the state as well.
Under APWSIP, GOAP has selected the Nagarjuna Sagar Project (NSP) for
modernization and introduction of modem management" practices/instruments, as NSP
represents a variety of management challenges. NSS is a large multipurpose water
project which generates 840 MW of hydro power, supplies water for industries, urban
and rural drinking water, and irrigates about 1 million hectare of command area. NSS
also supplies regulated river water for use in a downstream project. Deferred
maintenance, insufficient O&M allocations and poor irrigation management over the
past 40 years has left the system in a deteriorated condition. The poor condition of the
irrigation system along with inadequate management and the lack of measuring devices
have resulted in tail end areas not receiving adequate water.
1.3 THE PROJECT OBJECTIVES

The Andhra Pradesh Water Sector Improvement Project (APWSIP) scheme funded by
World Bank aims to (i) Improve irrigation efficiency of service delivery on a
sustainable basis to increase productivity of irrigated agriculture in the Nagarjuna
Sagar Scheme command area in the state of AP in India and (ii) strengthen the states
institutional capacity for multi-sectorial planning, development and management of its
water resources
The above objectives are proposed to be evaluated after undertaking a baseline survey
of socio-economic conditions prevailing in the command and adjacent non-command
(control) areas, effectiveness of WUA (Water User Associations) and the functioning
of irrigation department regulating the water supplies through the network of irrigation
channels.
I-2
BASELINE
The project envisages establishment of a baseline (benchmark) for the year 2008-09 to
evaluate the impact of proposed canal modernisation programs in terms of socio-
economic, irrigation service delivery, water user association performance and other
agricultural parameters. The baseline Survey work for Nagarjuna Sagar Project has
been awarded to WAPCOS Ltd. by PPMU, APWSIP vide contract number 1/2009-10
dated 16th June 2009. This baseline survey work has been carried out by WAPCOS
Ltd.
1.4 RATIONALE AND CONTEXT

The Government of Andhra Pradesh (GoAP) carried out a review of the performance
of the irrigation/water sector in 1996-97. Based on the review, GoAP recognized that
the performance of the sector, particularly the quality of irrigation service delivery and
coverage of planned area under irrigation were poor. Three main factors found to be
responsible were: (i) failure to meet the full annual operations & maintenance (O&M)
costs, resulting in deterioration of irrigation systems due to deferred maintenance; (ii)
lack of effective and meaningful participation of water users in irrigation
system/service management; and (iii) poor irrigation/water management practices. To
address these shortcomings AP initiated some important irrigation sector reforms in
1997, including enactment of a State legislation to enable the participation of Water
Users Organizations (WUOs) in irrigation system/irrigation service management, and
an increase in irrigation water charges by about 300 per cent. The Bank encouraged
and supported these reform initiatives in two recently closed Bank-financed projects,
namely the Third Andhra Pradesh Irrigation Project (AP-III), and Andhra Pradesh
Economic Restructuring Project (APERP), which had an irrigation component.
However, experiences from both projects indicate that further reforms are needed to
meet the present and emerging challenges and to improve the irrigation service
delivery as well as the overall irrigation/water sector performance on a sustainable
basis.
I-3
The water sector in AP is faced with critical challenges. First, competition among
different water using sectors (irrigation, urban/rural, industry, etc.) and even within the
same sector among various water users (for example, in irrigation sector among the
head, middle and tail reaches of farmers) is increasing, giving rise to disputes and
conflicts. Of the total water used in the state, about 90 per cent goes to irrigation, 8 per
cent to domestic water supplies, 0.5 percent for industrial use, and the remainder 1.5
percent for other uses such as livestock, hydro and thermal power. With rapidly
growing urban centres (current urban population is 22 million) and industries, the
long-term efficient and equitable intra- and inter-sectoral allocation and management
of the states scarce water resources will become more critical. Second, the poor
quality of irrigation service delivery is undermining the performance of irrigated
agriculture. Third, out-dated irrigation/water management practices/instruments and
low use of modern technologies are resulting in poor irrigation/water service deliveries
and low productivity of water as well as irrigated agriculture. Fourth, technical and
managerial capacity in irrigation/water sector institutions in the state have not kept
pace with time, resulting in uncoordinated and fragmented multi-sectoral planning and
management of the states water resources.
The GoAP plans to utilize the proposed Andhra Pradesh Water Sector Improvement
Project (APWSIP) as a strategic opportunity to broaden and deepen the above
mentioned state-wide water sector reforms, and also to develop a modern and
sustainable irrigation/multi-purpose water scheme level management model at NSS, to
be used subsequently in other irrigation/multi-purpose schemes in the state.
1.5 PROJECT LOCATION
The Nagaarjunsagar dam is on the river Krishna and is located in district Nalgonda at
an latitude of 1636N and longitude 7920E. The NSS provides irrigation for farmers
in 5 districts (Guntur, Prakasam, Krishna, Nalgonda, and Khammam). NSS has two
I-4
main canals systems the right canal (Jawaharlal canal) system which is 203 km long
and irrigates 1.113 million acres of land. The left canal (Lalbahadur Shastri canal)
system is 179 km long and irrigates 1.03 million acres of land. The right canal is
divided into 2 different zones, while the left canal covers three zones. Figure-1.1 and
Figure-1.2 give details about the left and right canal zones within the project area,
respectively.
I-5
Figure1.1: Left Canal Zones in Project Area
I-6
Figure 1.2: Right Canal Zones in Project Area
I-8
1.6 PROFILE OF PROJECT DISTRICTS
Five districts of the state of Andhra Pradesh namely Nalgonda, Khammam,

Krishna, Guntur and Prakasham have been the focus of the present project.
Prakasham district has the largest geographical area (17600 sq km) followed by
Khammam (16000 sq km) Krishna district has the smallest area 8700 sq. km and
Nalgonda and Guntur are spread over 14200 sq. km and 11400 sq km,
respectively. Their population ranges between 2578927 and 4465144. Krishna is
densely populated (the density being 481 per sq. km).
NS project has both Right and Left Bank Canal System. The length of right bank
canal is 203 km while that of the left main canal is 179 km. The maximum
discharge in these canals is 311.5 cumecs. The total length of branches and
distributaries of right and left canal are 5342 km and 7722 km respectively. The
length field channels of right canal and left canal are 14400 km and 9654 km,
respectively. The net irrigable area under the right bank canal system is 4.75 lakh
ha, while that under the left canal system is 4.20 lakh ha.
The major crops grown in the command area during Kharif and Rabi seasons
include paddy (major crop), Jowar, Maize, Chillies, Cotton and groundnut. The
yield and productivity depends on several factors in space and time. Some of
these include location (Head/middle/tail reach) of landholding, irrigation service
delivery efficiency, fertiliser & pesticide application besides socio-economic
conditions of farmers. The present study seeks to determine these baseline
reference values for the year 2008-09 with respect to above mentioned parameters
for evaluating the impact of proposed modernisation programs in the future by the
GoAP.
I-8
1.7 LIMITATIONS OF STUDY

The survey assumes that the primary data collected from sample villages/ WUAs
are representative and unbiased for the study area. Further it is assumed that the
data/ information gathered from survey from farmers, teachers, WUA
representatives and irrigation department officials are correct and factual for the
year 2008-09.
I-8
CHAPTER-2
APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY
2.1 APPROACH
The primary objective of the baseline survey is to collect and assess the information that
will aide in project planning as well as provide a basis for monitoring and evaluating the
impact of the proposed APWSIP project. The plan, approach and methodology to be
adopted for base line survey have been formulated viewing objectives, concepts, design,
and methodologies from the perspective of the improved project management. It
considers survey as an assessment of the functioning of the past project activities in the
context of implementation new schedules and of the use of project inputs by targeted
populations in the context of design expectation. The approach is based on an
intervention model which explains the relation between a projects inputs and outputs
between outputs and effects, and between effects and impact. The model provides a
rationale for the strategy used in order to move from the Pre-Project conditions towards
the desired state.
In project implementation, progress towards objectives is measured by the achievement

of target for project completion and the adoption of services by the targeted population at
various time intervals. It is important that these targets be expressed with reference to the
intended beneficiary population and its constituent subgroups, such as small holders, the
rural poor, women farmers, farmers in various locations, and the type of farming system
operated. The system would include a specification of the size, composition, and situation
of the targeted population in order to the extent to which the projects inputs and services
are reaching the intended beneficiaries and how they are responding to these stimuli.
The survey would review a wide range of data and information gathered from various
sources, both primary and secondary. The primary data would be collected through a
II- 1
survey involving four questionnaires from sample villages/ households for socio-
economic conditions; WUAs and departmental (I&CAD relating to NSS) functioning in
the project areas. The proposed APWSIP aims a series of reform initiatives to promote
higher productivity in agriculture and allied sectors through better water management.
Key performance indicators for measuring and monitoring progress towards project
development objectives have be discussed in detail in Project appraisal Document (2010).
Briefly these include: equity in irrigation water distribution to WUAs in NSS; Evidence
of satisfaction level among WUAs; increase in water use efficiency in NSS; Increase in
irrigated area in NSS; Percent of actual amount spent on annual O&M in NSS compared
to full O&M requirements; increase in crop yields of five major crops in NSS two years
after the implementation of developmental programs; establishment of operationalization
of APWRRC Act 2009.
The proposed baseline survey proposes to capture the performance indicators via four
components for which primary and secondary data were collected. This included (i)
socio-economics survey of households (ii) WUA & village level survey (iii) Scheme
level survey and (iv) Irrigation department survey. Apart from the primary data
secondary data would also be collected from various sources to make the baseline survey
complete and comprehensive.
The socio-economic indicators involved parameters such as literacy, income etc.;

implementation of I & CADs canal irrigation operations involved: preparation/ updating
of delivery of water and improved services; cost recovery from users; water conservation
and training, control of water-logging and salinity; Water User Associations (WUAs)
survey involved satisfaction of farmers to developmental programs and their
involvement; and finally departmental survey included project planning; programming
and budgeting and sustainable environmental management.
II- 2
2.2 METHODOLOGY AND ANALYSIS
2.2.1 Socio-Economic Survey
The baseline survey is designed to yield reliable data on those economic and social
characteristics that the project is expected to help improve the odds for successful
implementation of the project by providing managers with more detailed information on
which to base their activities. The socio-economic baseline survey involving house-hold
data provides a benchmark data on economic and social variables that will be used to
measure the effects and impact of a project after its implementation. The survey data is
primarily analyzed using with-and-without principle i.e. by comparing the socio-
economic parameters between command and control areas.
Planning Base Line Survey
Stages in planning the base line survey activities included:
- Concepts and definitions used
- Definition of eligible respondents - which types of members of the population are

included and which are to be omitted from the survey frame before sample selection
- Identification of the precise data expected from the survey
- Design of the survey in terms of the analytical method that will be used; for example -
time-series or cross-sectional analysis, and the method to be used in selecting survey
respondents
- Selection of sample
- Construction of questionnaire, including pretesting
- Implementation of survey
- Data collection, processing and analysis requirements
- Preparation of reporting formats
II- 3
Respondents
The survey covers the following broad categories zone wise, mandal wise, village wise
and reaches wise. The selected sample WUAs are shown in figure 2.1and 2.2 for left and
right bank canal system for the present baseline survey of NSS respectively. In these
figures three colures blue, green and purple have been assigned to WUAs falling in head,
middle and tail reaches respectively. The different sheads of these colures have also been
used to avoid the cluster formation so that individual WUAs can be easily
identified/demarcated.
Farmer Identity / Household Characteristics

This included: Name; age; origin; composition of family; level of education; work
distribution; etc.
Ownership and Use of Land

Farm size; land ownership and distribution system among family members; number of
plots and location; distribution of crops and cropping patterns, by plots and by sources of
irrigation; farm equipment and implements; debts, land mortgages; etc.
Household Activities
Sources of income, on-farm activities and their distribution, off-farm activities and their
distribution, livestock ownership and activities, role of women and children in on-farm
and off-farm activities, etc.
Agricultural Practices and Income
Crop/livestock types, varieties and yield (by size of plot and source of irrigation);
fertilizer, irrigation usage and other input usage and costs, by season and ownership;
production; revenues; yearly on-farm income; yearly off-farm income; sources of
finance; major production problems; perceptions on: impact of salinity on yields,
availability of groundwater; etc.
II- 4
2.2.2 WUAs and Village level Survey

Participation in Farmer Associations
Farmer participation in associations formal or informal; activities perform. The proposed
APWSIP operation aims to initiate some fundamental sector reform initiatives, e.g.
farmer rating of and attitudes towards: quality of irrigation service, operation of irrigation
system, maintenance of irrigation system, membership and participation in a Water User
Association, payment of irrigation/water fees, support services from institutional sources,
etc.
2.2.3 Scheme level and departmental survey
Engineering/ Environmental parameters

The survey here is intended to gather engineering and environmental parameters relating
to dam storage, irrigation, delivery efficiencies at project level, distributary and WUA
levels besides information relating to water logging, salinity from primary and secondary
data collection.
Institutional strengthening and capacity building
The survey would further cover aspects of institutional strengthening & capacity building
for water resources planning & management, environmental management etc. The
following aspects would be covered:
- Assessment pertaining to the use of the structures and services by the targeted
population and the consequences of that use.
- Assessment on the social, economic or environmental reasons for any unexpected
reaction by the target population that is revealed by the information about the use
of the structures and services.
- Assessment of GOAP initiated major policy reforms to provide necessary
framework to achieve project objectives with respect to (a) reorganization of I &
CAD for specialized functions (b) annual programming and budgeting with full
II- 5
budgeting and funding of O&M expenditures (c) full recovery of O&M costs
from beneficiaries (d) beneficiary participation in operation and maintenance (e)
staff specialization and continuity and increased delegation of authority.
- Training and capacity building
2.3 Survey Design

The baseline survey consist of four components viz. (i) a household survey (ii) a WUA
and village level survey (iii) a scheme level survey and (iv) Irrigation Department survey.
The baseline survey would include a general household survey, in which the household
members may be listed by demographic characteristics, the types of farming and non-
farming activities undertaken by household member, sources of income from on-farm
agricultural production, non-farm labour earnings by each member, expenditures, data on
the social or ethnic status of the household; information on selected indicators of the
quality of life-such as access to clean water, number of school-age children attending
school, etc. included. The household survey collect information regarding the income,
asset ownership, land use patterns, agricultural production, access to and use of irrigation,
extension and marketing, participation in irrigation institutions, experience with irrigation
services and payment of water charge etc. from the selected farm households.
The WUA questionnaire was used to develop village profiles and collect information on
membership and activities of WUA. The information collected in this module include
details on Water User Associations, major cropping patterns in the villages, sources of
irrigation and patterns of irrigation use, the prevailing social and economic infrastructure
in the villages, prevailing prices of selected commodities and inputs. The information was
collected from various sources such as President of WUA, Village Head, local
government officials, the Principals of a schools etc. and members of WUA Executive
Committee and General Body, besides secondary data from district statistics and training
Institutes.
II- 6
The third questionnaire collects information on scheme level parameters including the
volume of water delivered to users, irrigated area, water use efficiency, agricultural
production, and assessment and collection of water charges along various reaches.
The fourth questionnaire collects information of the staffing and delivery of services of
the Irrigation & CAD Department. This module provides a baseline to gauge the
effectiveness and efficiency of service delivery of the Irrigation Department and help
assess the performance against standard benchmarks.
2.4 Sample Design Criteria

NSS provides irrigation for farmers in 5 districts (Guntur, Prakasam, Krishna, Nalgonda,
and Khammam). NSS has two main canals- the right canal (Jawaharlal canal) which is
203 km long and irrigates 1.113 million acres of land. The left canal (Lalbahadur Shastri
canal) is 179 km long and irrigates 1.03 million acres of land. The right canal is divided
into two different zones, while the left canal covers three zones. There are 672 water user
associations (WUAs) in the command of NSS, 80 DCs and 2 PCs covering a total of
about 2,460 villages and about 850,000 households. About 50 percent of WUAs are
located in zone I, 40 percent in zone II and 10 percent in zone III of left bank canal
command. About 50 percent of WUAs are located in each of Zone 1 and Zone II of right
canal command.
As per agreement 150 WUAs have been selected randomly for the present survey. The
following criteria have been used as basis for selecting the WUAs as well as the
households in command area:
(i) Total 150 WUAs are distributed equally in both the canal systems i.e. 75 WUAs
each in left and right canal command.
II- 7
(ii) 75 WUAs in Right Bank command are further distributed equally in both the
zones i.e. I and II (38 WUAs and 37 WUAs respectively).
(iii) 75 WUAs in left bank command are further distributed equally in all the three
zones I, II, III (25 WUA each).
(iv) Landholding households and landless households within the villages have been
distributed in the ratio of 65:35. The distribution of Number of Sample Water
Users Associations and Households is presented in Table 2.1.
(v) WUAs within the various zones of the left and right canal system have been
further categorized based on number of WUAs in head, middle and tail reaches
and three classes of ayacut as depicted in Table 2.2.
2.4.1 Data Collection of household data:
As a part of Base line survey, a sample survey was conducted through a questionnaire to
study the Socio-Economic conditions of the people living in command and control areas
of the Nagarjuna Sagar Left and Right branch canal separately along with Irrigation
potential in the Upper reach, Middle reach and Tail end reach, with reference period as
2009-10 and for the Agriculture particulars of the households 2008-09 was taken as
reference period.
The multistage stratified random sampling design was adopted in selecting the
households, the first strata being District, second stage strata are WUAs and the final
stage strata is households. From each Water User Association one village has been
selected. The village was further stratified into farmer households and non-farmer
households and 14 households were selected randomly from farmer households and 6
households from non-farmer households. To analyze the advantage of canal irrigation and
also to study the disparity in their standard of living, villages were selected separately in
the command and control areas. The questionnaire was canvassed to the selected
II- 8
households of both the command and control areas. All samples are however assumed to
be unbiased, random and representative of the population.
The questionnaires were designed in 11 sub-heads and the following information was
collected from the informant. The questionnaire contains apart from general information
on 1.Religion, Social Group; Land holding extent and Occupation of the household. The
other particulars like: Household demographic particulars; 3. Land use pattern, Cropping
intensity, Cost of cultivation, 4. Income from farming; 5. Income from non-farming; 6.
Expenditure to-wards household consumption; 8. Drinking water & Sanitation facilities
etc.; 9. Marketing facilities and 10. Credit facility etc. was collected to study the existing
scenario of the people living in the area.
II- 9
Table 2.1
Distribution of number of sample Water Users Associations and Households
Zone Right bank canal Left bank canal

Zone I Zone II Zone I Zone II Zone III
H M T H M T Total H M T H M T H M T Total Grand
Item total
WUAs 13 13 12 13 12 12 75 9 8 8 9 8 8 9 8 8 75 150
Households 182 182 168 182 168 168 1050 126 112 112 126 112 112 126 112 112 1050 2100
with land
holdings
Households 78 78 72 78 72 72 450 54 48 48 54 48 48 54 48 48 450 900
without land
holdings
Total 260 260 240 260 240 240 1500 180 160 160 180 160 160 180 160 160 1500 3000
Households
II- 10
Table 2.2
Number of WUAs in the head/ middle/ tail reaches in relation to three classes of ayacut
Ayacut Right Canal System (37 WUAs in each Zone)

( Ha) Zone I Zone II
Head Middle Tail Combin Without Head Middle Tail Reach
ed not
Status
defined
750 < 2 1 4 1 1 4 4 1
750-1000 1 2 1 3 2 2 3
> 1000 10 7 6 1 2 7 5 4 1
Ayacut Left Canal System (25 WUAs in each Zone)
( Ha) Zone I Zone II Zone III
Head Middle Tail Head Middle Tail Head Middle Tail
750 < - - - 1 - - - - 1
750-1000 1 2 2 1 1 - 1 - 3
> 1000 8 6 6 7 7 8 8 8 4
2.5 Techniques of Data Collection:
Four questionnaires were prepared A entitled as household survey questionnaires meant

for 4500 Households (includes control and command); B entitled as Questionnaires for
sample WUAs at village level meant for 150 WUAs C entitled as Questionnaire for the
scheme level survey meant for eliciting information about Irrigation water charges, volume
of water delivered and area irrigated and water user efficiency in sample outlet command
and D questionnaire entitled Irrigation Department questionnaire meant for collecting
data from Irrigation Department which includes staffing pattern, adequacy of budget
support, the role of department and the volume of water etc. All the four questionnaires
have been finalized after field testing i.e. after carrying out the pilot survey conducted
during the month of Nov.2009 and changes/modifications were carried out based on the
difficulties faced by the enumerators appointed for collecting data during pilot survey. All
four questionnaires were translated into Telugu. The final report on sample design and final
II-11
questionnaires has been discussed in detail with the departmental Review Committee.
The actual field data collection was started in the second fortnight of month of February
2010. Before posting the staff for data collection in the field, they were suitably oriented
and trained during the month of December 2009 in the techniques of establishing rapport
with the farmers, interviewing respondents and recording their responses, cross checking
respondents to ensure reliability of their answers and editing the filled in questionnaires
so that all errors and omissions are corrected in the field itself.
The control villages for household surveys have been selected from areas irrigated
through other sources and rain fed areas (control) adjacent to the command area. The
control villages are the representative of similar socio-economic characteristics as that of
command villages. The selected sample size includes the households from different
categories viz., farming (landless, small, medium and large) and non-farming households
like self-employed and landless households including Tribal households.
A data entry program was designed on Microsoft Access for the data entry of all
collected data.
2.6 Processing and Analysis of primary data and quality control
The field data was collected through survey by adopting appropriate sampling techniques
with an adequate sample size to provide fairly reliable estimates of various characteristics
under study. The secondary source of data included the published/ unpublished reports,
project reports, different progress reports and other relevant material available with the
implementing agencies as well as various line departments.
The supervisors randomly checked the interviewers and the interviews. The checking of
filled in questionnaires was carried out firstly among the investigators/enumerators and
II-12
finally a double check by the supervisor. Experts from WAPCOS as well as from PPMU
also visited the field for random check of data being collected and made on the spot
observations and guided the field staff so that true picture is obtained with respect to the
required data. Data processing included checking errors for consistency, units and
abnormal values (data cleaning). The primary data collected was also checked from
secondary data obtained from published literature from the department of statistics. The
collected data was checked, verified and validated before any analysis was attempted.
2.7 Socio economic- Indicators for Assessment
The selection of the indicators that has been used to judge project achievements is
important and most critical for carrying out the assessment. Appropriate indicators were
chosen, to assess for (i) revealing the nature and rate of change that has occurred or
appears to be occurring, (ii) enabling progress to be compared with the planned targets,
(iii) assisting in input-output and cost-benefit analysis. However, additional consideration
about indicators for assessment would also be taken into account.
Appropriate indicators for assessing a project have been determined at the design or early
implementation stage so that arrangements can be made to collect the necessary data.
The main criterion for these indicators are that they be sensitive to project-induced
changes and be measurable without the need for continuous, complex observations of
large samples. Just because an indicator such as income seems singularly appropriate
does not necessarily mean it can easily be measured.
Assessment would not and cannot always depend on quantitative indicators. Quantitative
indicators cannot be constructed for a number of vital consequences. Moreover, the
purpose of assessment is to generate in-depth understanding and not mechanically to
report progress or the lack of it. Qualitative indicators were also used to evaluate social
consequences in particular. Indicators of peoples participation or the changing role of
II-13
women require such sociological studies and reporting techniques as key informants,
unstructured interviews, and participant observation.
Specific socio-economic indicators include: (i) household demographics inducing

education levels of individuals and household social status ( caste) and religion,(ii) crop
production and crop yields, (iii) cropping patterns and cropping intensity,(iv) use of
irrigation and drainage facilities, (v) ownership of wells and pumps, (vi) use of inputs
(fertilizer, seeds, pesticides etc) and amount used. For pesticides information would also
be collected on the awareness of safe use of pesticides, knowledge of pre-harvest
intervals and awareness of banned pesticides, (vii) adoption of water saving technologies,
(viii) payment of water charges, (ix) occupations of household members, (x) household
incomes (farm and non-farm), (xi) household asset ownership, (xii) level of investments
in farm equipment and on-farm improvements, (xiii) land ownership, (xiv) credit and
indebtedness, (xv) land markets-land values and transactions, (xvi) access to extension,
(xvii) access to marketing, (xviii) input and output prices, (xix) employment, (xx)
migration, (xxi) ownership of livestock, (xxii) stall feeding of livestock, (xxiii)
participation in fisheries related activities, (xxiv) participation in WUAs, (xxv)
Participation in Self Help Groups and (xxvi) incidence of waterborne diseases.
2.8 WUA Village Level - Indicators for assessment
These include: (i) access to infrastructure (including roads, schools, hospital, credit
institutions, markets and agricultural processing centers) in the village, (ii) village
demographics including fraction of population belonging to different social groups
(castes) and religions (iii) farm size distribution of households in the village (number of
landless, number of small farmers, number of medium farmers, number of large farmers)
(iv) area cultivated by season (v) area irrigated by source (vi) number of WUAs and the
level of participation in WUAs (vii) participation of SC/ST/OBC in WUA (viii)
participation of SC/ST/OBC in the WUA Executive Committee (ix) whether WUA is
II-14
headed by a women/SC/ST/OBC (x) views on irrigation service delivery (xi) awareness

of water entitlements (xii) extent of encroachment in the WUA (xiii) number of Water
Users Associations participating in:(a) planning works up to the minor level , (b) in
collecting water charges and (c) taking responsibility for O&M for minors of canal
systems (xiv) input and output prices (xv) migration (xvi) farm wages (xvii) number and
types of agro-enterprises/non-farm enterprises (xviii) types of disputes on water sharing
and how they are resolved (xix) water quality of both drinking and irrigation water. (xx)
Common diseases in the community (xxi) existence of Self Help Groups (xxii) public
health indicators: (a) prevailing water related diseases and (b) the incidence of these
diseases (xxiii) depth of the groundwater table and variation in levels, waterlogging and
salinity (xxiv) census of cultural property in the village.
2.9 Indicators for assessment - Maintenance Performance & Cost Recovery:
As regards improving service delivery in NSS operation, following indicators will be

analyzed for Kharif 2008 and Rabi 2009:
i) Actual dates of opening and closing season wise
ii) Variation of flows in the main canal, head regulator, branches and distributaries
as their ratio of planned discharge to actual discharge.
iii) Volume of water received at the major/ branches, heads as a ratio of water
discharged at the main canal head
iv) Volume of water received at the branches/ majors as a ratio of volume of water
released at the selected branch canal
v) Canal conveyance losses between to cross regulators
vi) Conveyance efficiencies of left and right canals and on selected distributaries
experimental results
vii) Variation of discharge zone wise
Indicators of maintenance and performance include:
II-15
i) Number of Slips in canal

ii) Lining damages
iii) Bed siltation
iv) Expenditure on work charged establishment
v) Maintenance per Hectare & percentage in excess of GO
vi) Budget allocation
vii) Response to farmers and WUAs complaints
viii) Suggestions to improve departmental performance
ix) Efforts on better water service delivery
2.10 Indicators for assessment - Departmental
Institutional Aspects
These include (i) staffing levels and skill mix of the irrigation department, (ii) assessment
and collection of water charges and (iii) capital and O&M expenditures.
Engineering Parameters
These include planned Storage (ii) Actual Storage (iii) Planned command area (iv) Actual
command area (v) Actual irrigated area (vi) Water delivery efficiency (vii) Water use
efficiency at scheme level (viii) Water use efficiency at distributaries level (ix) Water use
efficiency at WUA level
Environmental Aspects
How to intensify agriculture while balancing the demands on the natural resource base
and avoiding adverse environmental consequences has become a central question in
assuring project effectiveness. As experience has shown, the range of possible
environmental consequences of a project is wide given the complex and often subtle
nature of ecological systems and linkage. Likely Indicators may be (i) maintaining soil
productivity (for example, soil quality etc.), (ii) water resources management (for
example, water quality for irrigation and long term drainage and flood mitigation
II-16
measures.), (iii) land use management (for example, conversion of critical natural areas to
other uses, area devoted to food crops and cash crops), (iv) fertilizer and pesticide
application (contamination of soils and water, human health problems, and disturbance of
nature crop-predator balances), (v) assurance of human livelihood (access to natural
resources, involuntary resettlement, and protection of vulnerable ethnic minorities),(iv)
incidence of environmentally related disease (spread of disease, creation of new vector
habitats, and methods of control),
At the project design stage the potential impact of the planned activities is identified and
the risks are weighted. Special consideration would be given to the new socioeconomic
and environmental conditions likely to be produced. On existing farmland, for example,
the mix of new crops proposed by the project can influence farming practices or food
self-sufficiency. In addition, it can increase the susceptibility of crops to pest attacks,
droughts, or other environmental hazards. Attention should not be confined to land under
cultivation, but should extend to surrounding watersheds, wetlands, and other natural
areas. The management of these unique resources is within the scope of project
activities, for they are often critical to the sustainability of agriculture as well as to local
populations that may depend heavily on them for water, fuel, food, and timber.
2.11 Sampling for Soil quality and Pesticides residues through physical measurements
and laboratory testing
In addition to the data collected through the surveys some data were collected through
actual physical measurements. This includes baseline data pertaining to soil quality and
pesticide residues. Soil samples were tested for 300 plots (2 per WUA). Soil tests were
carried out for organic matter, N, P, K and major macro and micro nutrients. GPS
readings of the plots from where the soil samples were collected were recorded such that
the same could be mapped. The pesticide residues along with GPS readings were
similarly collected from 150 plots (1 per WUA) to measure their existing level with
II-17
respect to permissible levels. The residue tests were focused on horticultural crops where
heavy pesticide usage is more common. Records also kept on the particular crop, the
location of the plot, and the results of the tests.
II-18
CHAPTER - 3
SOCIO-ECONOMIC PROFILE OF HOUSEHOLDS
3.1 INTRODUCTION
Irrigation projects are the cutting edge of development. These projects contribute in
higher agriculture and allied outputs leading to higher income generation, better
possession of agricultural assets, creation of efficient employment opportunities, thus
increasing overall household income as well as economy in the command area. It is in
this context the World Bank aided Andhra Pradesh Water Sector Improvement Project
aimed to increase the productivity of irrigated agriculture as well as the household
income of command area of Nagarjuna Sagar Scheme. The details on the project area and
control are discussed in previous chapters. The Baseline Survey is expected to collect and
assess the information that will aide in project planning as well as provide a basis for
monitoring and evaluating the impact of the APWSIP. Hence, the present chapter is
mainly focussed on varied dimensions of socio-economic parameters of selected sample
households both in project and non-project areas for eliciting the needed information. The
socio-economic features such as classification of sample households, literacy,
employment status, migration, asset position, biotic potential, income, consumption
expenditure, level of indebtedness etc. are discussed for both command and control areas
zone wise and reach wise in the following heads.
Demographic Features
Asset Possession
Consumption Expenditure
Income Pattern
Indebtedness and savings
3.2 DEMOGRAPHIC FEATURES
3.2.1 Household Distribution
The selected households are classified into landless, small (0-5 acres), medium (5-10
acres) and large size groups (>10 acres) based on the land holding reach wise and canal
wise. The details are presented in Table 3.1.
III-1
A perusal of the table indicates that around 30% of the sample constitute landless
category. The major component being the small farmers (around 40%) followed by
medium (around 25%) and large size category (around 6%) in the command area. Almost
the similar pattern has been observed in control area where 28% fall in the category of
landless. It can be seen that small and medium farmers together form around 65% of the
total farmers in the project area. The details of the distribution of households according to
zone, reach, and land holding size for right and left canal systems are furnished in
Annexure III.1.
3.2.2 Male Headed Farmers

The gender wise breakup of the households heads indicate that male headed households
constitute nearly 93% among all reaches in the study region representing male
domination in the study region (Table 3.2). Among the size classes female headed
families were more in landless group (around 17%) and only 2% female headed were
noticed in case of large farmers. It means in the command area majority of the decisions
will be taken up by male in consultation with female members. Similar observations are
noticed in control areas (for details refer Annexure III.2). There is no much significant
difference between command and non-command areas even among the zones and the
reaches.
3.2.3 Gender wise distribution
Further the total population was divided almost equally into male and female and the
same are shown in Table 3.3. Table 3.3 reveals that the male population constitute around
54% in the command area which is higher than female population. Similar trend is
observed in control area also. The canal system wise, zone wise, reach wise and land
holding size wise details are furnished in Annexure III.3 and III.4.
III-2
3.2.4 Male to Female ratio
It is evident from the table 3.4 that ratio of male to female is 1.16 in command area while
the same in non-command area is 1.20. The pattern is almost similar in all the reaches and
size classes except in few cases of left bank canal system.
3.2.5 Average House hold size
It may be interesting to note from the Table 3.5 that average size of the house hold in
project area is around 3.6 while the same in non-project area is around 3.5. Only in case
of large category of farmers the average size of family is slightly more than 4.
3.2.6 Composition of Social Groups
An examination of the Table 3.6 reveals that the majority of the sample farmers belong to
forward castes followed by BC, SC and ST. About 22 percent of the total population
constitute SC and ST category. About 40 percent of farmers include forward castes in the
command area while in control area BC households represent nearly 35%.
The details of zone wise, reach wise and land holding size for both left and right bank
canal systems are presented in Annexure III.5 and III.6.
3.2.7 Migration Pattern
It is observed from the Table 3.7 that the migration in the project area constitute 3.21%
while the same in non-project area is 2.88%. This indicates that farmers in the study
region are not in the habit of migrating to other places in search of better employment due
to the existence of NREGS program being implemented in the project area. However, the
percentage of migration is considered to be negligible because of assured irrigation. More
than 4 % of migration was noticed in zone 2 of the right bank canal and zone 1 of the left
bank canal system in the selected area during the study period as these zones considered
III-3
to be backward areas and the farmers including the landless beneficiaries migrate to
nearby town/ cities.
3.2.8 Literacy Levels
A look at the level of literacy of households indicates that around 69% are literates and
only 31% are illiterates in the command area which is a good sign for implementation of
any developmental program in this region (Table 3.8). It means it is easy to convince the
farmers regarding the implementation of the project with proper motivation and technical
orientation through rendering training programs etc. In control area too the literates are
around 61 percent and illiteracy is around 39 percent. Among the literates in the project
area 27% had primary education and 16 percent studied up to middle school. Only 1% in
command area and non-project area reach the level of professional/ technical education.
The illiteracy showed a decreasing trend as the level of size holding increases. The details
of literacy level according to zone, reach and holding size for both the canal systems are
furnished in Annexure III.7 and III.8.
3.2.9 Occupation Structure/ Employment Status
A classification of households according to their occupation structure (Table 3.9) shows

that around 55 percent are engaged in farming activities in the project area followed by
agricultural labour (20.78%) and non agriculture (3.74%). Still 19.41% of the farmers are
either un-employed or not in labour force in the study region. A little more percent of
farmers (23.68%) in the non-command area are found in the other category. As a whole it
is the farming sector that accommodates the majority of the work force, both in project
and non-project area. The details are available in Annexure III.9 and III.10.
III-4
3.3 ASSET POSITIONS
The asset position of farmers in the command and non-command areas has been studied,
as it highlights both the economic status and progressiveness of the farmers under
different sub-heads.
a) Agricultural implements
b) Consumer durables
c) Living conditions
d) Biotic potential
3.3.1 Agricultural Implements
The details of agricultural implements owned by the different categories of the farmers
are shown in Table 3.10 and Annexure III.11 and III.12. It is evident that a large majority
of the farmers do not possess much agricultural assets for cultivation purpose in the study
area, as it requires significant investment which naturally is beyond the reach of small
farmers and to some extent medium farmers. The costly assets such as tractor pump sets,
seed drills, thrashers, cultivators and harvesters are rarely seen in the asset profile of
small farmers. The medium and large farmers belonging to head reach have a better share
in these assets compared to middle and tail end groups. Majority of farmers possess
wooden ploughs and sprayers for controlling the pests. Dusters are insignificant in the
study region. The respondents from middle and tail end regions in all the zones of NSP
possess pump sets to the extent of 0.07 and 0.09 per house hold which will be used for
pumping canal water in scarcity period. It is pertinent to note that in the surveyed area
even landless beneficiaries possess tractors for hiring purpose. Almost similar trend has
been observed in possession of agricultural implements in control area. As the farmers
are largely progressive in the command area, the mechanisation in agriculture is gaining
importance as it reduces the cost of production.
III-5
3.3.2 Consumer Durables
Majority of the households in the command area and non-command area possess either
TV or radio in their houses (Table 3.11). Mobile or telephone is observed in almost each
household. Only four wheelers are observed in large farmers while two wheelers are
common in all categories of head, middle and tail end farmers. There are no much
significant differences among the control area in possession of consumer durables. The
details are furnished in Annexure III.13 and III.14.
3.3.3 Living Conditions
Asset holding of a house is also an index of their economic status. An examination of

Table 3.12 indicate that more than 50% (51.11%) of households have pucca houses,
around 28% live in semi pucca houses and remaining 21% possess kutcha house while in
control area more than 52% have pucca houses, around 34% live in semi pucca houses
and only 13% reside in kutcha houses. Among the land holding size categories more than
80% large farmers belong to head, middle and tail end reaches possess pucca houses
followed by medium (70%), small (48%) and landless (32%) groups. It is evident that
majority of farmers live in pucca houses both in project and non project areas as the study
area is a progressive region. Moreover, the sample selected for control area are mostly
from neighbouring areas which have been covered by Krishna delta areas where absolute
irrigation facilities are available. The details are furnished in Annexure III.15 and III.16.
3.3.4 BIOTIC POTENTIAL
The biotic potential of study area, one of the important indices of economic status implies
the extent of diversification of agriculture towards practicing allied activities of
agriculture. As practicing farming alone is highly risk oriented in lieu of complete
dependence on natural factors, the farming systems approach assumes greater
importance. This is because, it stabilises the annual income of the farmers avoid risks and
uncertainties of practicing agri-business alone, provides more number of man days of
III-6
employment in a year. Keeping in view of the significance of practicing allied enterprises

in sustaining the farmers in farm business, the biotic potential of the households in the
study region was studied and the details are presented through Table 3.13 and Annexure
III.17 and III.18 for both command and control areas.
It is evident from the table that almost every house hold in the project region possesses
one buffalo which is a significant factor to earn additional income. The number of
households having goats, cows and bulls are insignificant. However to some extent the
farmers possess poultry in their backyards. The possession of cows is found among small
and medium categories of all the zones of left bank canal system. There is no much
difference among the project and non-project respondents in having biotic potential in the
study area.
3.4 INCOME STATUS
Income of an individual is an important indicator to assess the economic status. However

lot of problems are involved in collecting and estimating the house hold incomes in the
study region. Care has been taken while collecting data on various sources to arrive the
exact income in spite of limitations and the same are presented in Table 3.14 to 3.16 and
Annexure III.19 to III.22.
3.4.1 Sources of Income
Agricultural income form the major source of total income for the farmers having land as
a primary sector, where as the landless group agriculture/ casual labour constitute pre-
dominant source (Table 3.14). As a whole agriculture crop production constitutes around
62% of the total annual income followed by agriculture/ casual labour income (13%) and
other sources of income (around 11%).
In the study region, income from dairying is about 7%. The proportion of income under
different sources at different reaches for various size holding of different zones is more or
III-7
less similar during the study period in the project area. Almost similar trend is observed
with crop production (around 39.48%) and dairying (around 11%) in the control area.
The percent of income from agriculture increases with increase in size of holding
contrary to the income from agriculture/ casual labour where it decreases with the
increase in size of holding even at different reaches and different zones.
3.4.2 Annual Income per house hold
The data as per household annual income show that among the size holdings, as we are
aware landless has lowest income (Rs 46020.0) and the large size farmers have the
highest income (Rs 92664.0). It may be pointed out that the landless and small category
derives considerable income from sources like casual manual labour (Annexure III.20) in
addition to farming. This indicates that the subsistence nature of their cultivation and the
fact that they cannot make a living by farming alone and have engaged in multiple
activities like casual labour, dairying and other non-agricultural activities. The large
farmers also supplement their farm income by engaging in various activities. Almost a
similar pattern i.e. not much variations was observed in non-project area also.
3.4.3 Per-Capita Annual Income
It is observed from Table 3.16 that overall per capita income of the respondents from
crop production increases with the increase in the available water in all the zones i.e. the
head reach farmers deriving more income (Rs 7252.0) then middle (Rs 6266.0) and tail
end (Rs 5005.0) reaches. The per capita income from agriculture casual labour varies
with landless having Rs 6147.0 to meagre Rs 475.0 with large farmers. In the study
region it is pertinent to note that the medium farmers are also engaged in NREGS works.
The proportion of income under different sources from different categories at different
reaches of different zones is more or less followed same pattern in the project area. There
is no much variation among the per capita annual incomes of non-project and project
areas.
III-8
3.5 CONSUMPTION EXPENDITURE
The expenditure pattern otherwise standard of living is another index of socio-economic

status of households which could be a more reliable proxy for estimating income of a
family. The details of consumption expenditure in percentages and per household
expenditure are shown in Table 3.17 and 3.18 as well as through Annexure III.23 to
III.24.
An examination of Table 3.17 indicates that among the expenditure items the amount
spent on food is the single largest item in all the groups of farmers irrespective of reaches
and zones. Further considerable percentage of amount was spent towards medical
treatment (12.39%) and education (11.48%). This shows that the respondents in the
project area irrespective of their size of holding, reaches and zones are health and
education conscious which is progressive good social indicator for better living.
Moreover beneficiaries in the region are progressive. The overall average expenditure
spent on social functions of each household like marriages, festivals etc. was found to be
another major item (Rs 5335.0) invariably in all the classes, reaches and zones (Table
3.18). It is evident that even at lower levels of income and moreover at the cost of
essential food consumption the respondents incur expenditure to follow tradition and
conventions in the study area. Similarly in the case of non-command area more or less
similar pattern exists with almost 50% of the total consumption expenditure going for
food consumption, 11.17% for education, 11.54% for health and 9.46% towards social
functions.
III-9
3.6 CREDIT/ LOAN
Generally a farmer requires credit for meeting investment credit needs (mostly for
agriculture and allied activities), short term credit for crop production and also some
additional credit to satisfy the consumption and social needs essentials for family
sustenance. In a normal situation a farmer tries to balance the following equation to
support his livelihood on a sustainable basis.
Short term credit availed for crop production and consumption purpose + income from
farm activity + income from other sources repayment of principal and interest + cash
required meeting the expenses of the family.
Keeping this in view an attempt has been made to study the credit borrowed for different
purposes, sources of credit and repayment pattern of the respondents in the NSP area and
the same are furnished in Tables 3.19 to 3.21 and also Annexure III.25 and Annexure
III.27. The base line data indicates that overall the beneficiaries have borrowed loan for
agriculture purpose alone to the extent of 48.27% of the total loan. Further the table
reveals that considerable percentage of loan was borrowed for education (4.87%) and
health purpose (3. 10%). The farmers in the study area are utilising the credit even for
education purpose also.
The major source of credit is through commercial banks (41.55%) followed by Co-
operative societies (34.12%). In spite of so many efforts of state and central govt. still
there exists money lenders in the study area and around 6.65% of credit has been
borrowed from money lenders. The source of credit varies with the active functioning of
commercial banks, co-operative societies and money lenders availability to the
beneficiaries in different zones and reaches in the project area. In control area majority of
the farmers opted for bank loan and about 22% are depending on money lenders for their
credit.
III-10
Overall repayment pattern in the study area as well as non-project area is very poor as
observed from table 3.21 covering all the classes, reaches and zones. This might be due to
reschedule of loans every year or they may be utilising the realised incomes for some
other purposes like purchase of implements or land etc.
3.7 SAVINGS
Savings is also one of the important economic indices to measure the social status of an
individual. In the present study an attempt has been made to estimate the savings of farm
households during the study period and the same are indicated in Table 3.22 and 3.23 and
Annexure III.28 to III.30.
It can be seen from table 3.22 that there is considerable savings per household in head
reaches of medium and large farmer category in the study area. But landless and small
farmer category shows almost zero or negligible savings. This meagre savings, farmers
may be utilising for repayment of interest and a part of principle amount. The savings
varied from almost zero in case of landless to Rs 10000.26 per house hold for a large
farmer (Table 3.22). Almost similar trend is noticed in control area.
The per capita savings ranged from zero to Rs 2462.65 with an overall average of Rs
1050.33 in the command area while the same in non-command area is Rs.91.76 (Table
3.23).
III-11
Table 3.1 Distribution of Households according to Zone, canal reaches and land
holding size
Zone Reach
Landless Small Medium Large Overall
% % % % %
Right Bank Canal System
Zone-I Head 28.88 42.96 22.74 5.42 100
Middle 28.23 47.23 20.58 3.96 100
Tail 29.70 33.66 30.69 5.94 100
average 28.79 42.66 23.66 4.90 100
Zone-II Head 30.67 43.28 20.17 5.88 100
Middle 28.00 44.00 23.56 4.44 100
Tail 30.28 35.32 26.61 7.80 100
average 29.66 40.97 23.35 6.02 100
Left Bank Canal System
Zone-I Head 29.15 33.67 30.15 7.04 100
Middle 30.94 35.97 21.58 11.51 100
Tail 27.93 32.96 35.75 3.35 100
average 29.21 34.04 29.79 6.96 100
Zone-II Head 25.38 45.69 23.86 5.08 100
Middle 29.56 40.25 20.75 9.43 100
Tail 29.17 25.83 35.83 9.17 100
average 27.73 38.87 25.84 7.56 100
Zone-III Head 30.50 36.17 31.21 2.13 100
Middle 31.45 42.77 20.75 5.03 100
Tail 30.15 35.68 26.63 7.54 100
average 30.66 38.08 26.05 5.21 100
Total(Left + Right)
Head 28.90 40.87 24.90 5.32 100
Middle 29.22 43.36 21.39 6.03 100
Tail 29.52 33.33 30.50 6.64 100
Project Area 29.20 39.46 25.37 5.97 100
Control Area 28.30 36.05 28.70 6.94 100
Source: Baseline Survey Data (2008-09)
Distribution of Households - Overall

50
43
41
39
40 Landless
36
33
30 31
29 29 29 28 29
30 Small
25 25
%
21
20 Medium
10 6 7 6 7
Large
5
0
Head Middle Tail Project Area Control Area
III-12
Table 3.2 Distribution of Male Headed Households according to Zone, canal
reaches and land holding size
Zone Reach
% % % % %

Zone-I Head 85.00 96.64 98.41 93.33 93.50
Middle 85.98 96.65 93.59 100.00 93.14
Tail 93.33 95.59 100.00 100.00 96.53
average 87.45 96.45 97.04 97.62 94.06
Zone-II Head 83.56 97.09 97.92 100.00 93.28
Middle 88.89 96.97 100.00 100.00 95.56
Tail 77.27 100.00 100.00 94.12 92.66
average 83.17 97.85 99.37 97.56 93.83
Zone-I Head 86.21 91.04 95.00 85.71 90.45
Middle 76.74 82.00 93.33 100.00 84.89
Tail 72.00 89.83 92.19 100.00 86.03
average 78.81 88.07 93.51 94.44 87.43
Zone-II Head 82.00 98.89 97.87 100.00 94.42
Middle 82.98 98.44 96.97 100.00 93.71
Tail 74.29 100.00 97.67 100.00 91.67
average 80.30 98.92 97.56 100.00 93.49
Zone-III Head 86.05 96.08 100.00 100.00 94.33
Middle 88.00 94.12 96.97 100.00 93.08
Tail 78.33 95.77 94.34 100.00 90.45
average 83.66 95.26 96.92 100.00 92.38
Total(Left +
Right)
Head 84.54 96.28 97.71 94.64 93.16
Middle 85.16 95.00 96.04 100.00 92.65
Tail 79.70 96.08 96.79 98.36 91.61
Project Area 83.28 95.74 96.88 97.79 92.51
Cotrol Area 85.85 94.26 96.05 96.15 92.52
Distribution of Male Headed Households - Overall

110
105
100
100 98 98
97 98
Landless
96 96 96 97 96 96 96
95 95 94
95 93 93 93 93
92
Small
90 86
85 85
83
85 Medium
%
80
80
Large
75
70 Overall
65
60
Head Middle Tail Project Area Cotrol Area
III-13
Table 3.3 Genderwise Distribution of Total Population according to Zone, canal reaches and land holding size
(Percentage)
Zone Reach Size Groups Overall
Landless Small Medium Large
Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Total
Zone-I Head 45.63 54.37 47.28 52.72 45.54 54.46 50.00 50.00 46.53 53.47 100.00
Middle 45.64 54.36 45.67 54.33 44.16 55.84 46.55 53.45 45.38 54.62 100.00
Tail 43.63 56.37 44.54 55.46 44.59 55.41 44.44 55.56 44.29 55.71 100.00
average 45.13 54.87 45.97 54.03 44.71 55.29 46.90 53.10 45.47 54.53 100.00
Zone-II Head 44.96 55.04 45.43 54.57 46.19 53.81 46.97 53.03 45.59 54.41 100.00
Middle 45.79 54.21 43.27 56.73 44.39 55.61 48.48 51.52 44.46 55.54 100.00
Tail 49.45 50.55 46.43 53.57 44.98 55.02 48.05 51.95 46.83 53.17 100.00
average 46.53 53.47 44.98 55.02 45.18 54.82 47.73 52.27 45.63 54.37 100.00
Zone-I Head 49.43 50.57 45.35 54.65 42.73 57.27 45.59 54.41 45.53 54.47 100.00
Middle 52.45 47.55 50.80 49.20 47.06 52.94 47.54 52.46 50.10 49.90 100.00
Tail 45.24 54.76 44.00 56.00 43.51 56.49 57.14 42.86 44.56 55.44 100.00
average 48.87 51.13 46.42 53.58 43.84 56.16 48.00 52.00 46.40 53.60 100.00
Zone-II Head 52.35 47.65 47.25 52.75 47.64 52.36 48.39 51.61 48.60 51.40 100.00
Middle 40.41 59.59 41.28 58.72 43.31 56.69 42.31 57.69 41.61 58.39 100.00
Tail 41.53 58.47 42.62 57.38 43.23 56.77 50.00 50.00 43.40 56.60 100.00
average 45.04 54.96 44.13 55.87 45.03 54.97 46.67 53.33 44.82 55.18 100.00
Zone-III Head 48.98 51.02 46.67 53.33 45.03 54.97 45.45 54.55 46.76 53.24 100.00
Middle 51.43 48.57 45.32 54.68 46.27 53.73 52.50 47.50 47.73 52.27 100.00
Tail 46.61 53.39 46.21 53.79 47.39 52.61 52.56 47.44 47.27 52.73 100.00
average 48.80 51.20 46.01 53.99 46.36 53.64 51.94 48.06 47.28 52.72 100.00
Total(Left + Right)
Head 47.68 52.32 46.39 53.61 45.35 54.65 47.25 52.75 46.50 53.50 100.00
Middle 46.87 53.13 45.06 54.94 44.78 55.22 47.13 52.87 45.63 54.37 100.00
Tail 45.58 54.42 45.10 54.90 44.84 55.16 49.82 50.18 45.52 54.48 100.00
Project Area 46.74 53.26 45.54 54.46 44.99 55.01 48.16 51.84 45.89 54.11 100.00
Control Area 46.90 53.10 45.42 54.58 46.34 53.66 43.48 56.52 45.93 54.07 100.00
Genderwise Distribution of Total Population
Project Area Control Area

60
54 55
55 54
53
52
50 48
47
46 46
45
45
%
40
Landless
35
30
Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male
III-14
Table 3.4 Male toFemale Ratio of Total Population according
to Zone, canal reaches and land holding size
Zone Reach Size Groups

Zone-I Head 1.19 1.12 1.20 1.00 1.13
Middle 1.19 1.19 1.26 1.15 1.20
Tail 1.29 1.25 1.24 1.25 1.26
average 1.22 1.18 1.24 1.13 1.19
Zone-II Head 1.22 1.20 1.16 1.13 1.18
Middle 1.18 1.31 1.25 1.06 1.20
Tail 1.02 1.15 1.22 1.08 1.12
average 1.15 1.22 1.21 1.10 1.17
Zone-I Head 1.02 1.21 1.34 1.19 1.19
Middle 0.91 0.97 1.13 1.10 1.03
Tail 1.21 1.27 1.30 0.75 1.13
average 1.05 1.15 1.28 1.08 1.14
Zone-II Head 0.91 1.12 1.10 1.07 1.05
Middle 1.47 1.42 1.31 1.36 1.39
Tail 1.41 1.35 1.31 1.00 1.27
average 1.22 1.27 1.22 1.14 1.21
Zone-III Head 1.04 1.14 1.22 1.20 1.15
Middle 0.94 1.21 1.16 0.90 1.05
Tail 1.15 1.16 1.11 0.90 1.08
average 1.05 1.17 1.16 0.93 1.08
Total(Left + Right)
Head 1.10 1.16 1.21 1.12 1.14
Middle 1.13 1.22 1.23 1.12 1.18
Tail 1.19 1.22 1.23 1.01 1.16
Project Area 1.14 1.20 1.22 1.08 1.16
Cotrol Area 1.13 1.20 1.16 1.30 1.20
Male to Female Ratio
1.5
1.30
1.22
1.20
1.16
1.20 1.21
1.14
1.20
1.16 1.16 1.14
1.08
1.13 1.12
1.10
1.0
1.23
1.22
1.19
1.16
1.01
0.5
III-15
Table 3.5 Average Household Size of Total Population according to
Zone, canal reaches and land holding size
Zone Reach Size Groups
Right Bank
Zone-I Head 3.29 3.39 3.38 2.80 3.33
Middle 3.21 3.35 3.51 3.87 3.37
Tail 3.40 3.50 3.73 3.75 3.55
average 3.28 3.39 3.54 3.45 3.40
Zone-II Head 3.26 3.83 4.10 4.71 3.76
Middle 3.40 3.45 3.53 3.30 3.45
Tail 2.76 3.64 4.29 4.53 3.61
average 3.14 3.64 3.98 4.29 3.61
Left Bank Canal
Zone-I Head 3.00 3.85 3.78 4.86 3.65
Middle 3.33 3.74 3.40 3.81 3.55
Tail 3.36 3.81 3.73 3.50 3.65
average 3.21 3.81 3.69 4.17 3.62
Zone-II Head 2.98 3.03 4.06 3.10 3.27
Middle 3.11 3.67 3.85 3.47 3.52
Tail 3.37 3.94 3.60 4.73 3.73
average 3.13 3.41 3.85 3.75 3.47
Zone-III Head 3.42 3.82 3.89 3.67 3.72
Middle 3.50 3.93 4.06 5.00 3.87
Tail 3.68 3.90 4.34 5.20 4.05
average 3.55 3.89 4.12 4.96 3.90
Total(Left +
Head 3.19 3.54 3.81 3.89 3.53
Middle 3.30 3.55 3.63 3.81 3.51
Tail 3.30 3.73 3.94 4.48 3.72
Project Area 3.26 3.59 3.81 4.06 3.58
Cotrol Area 3.23 3.51 3.65 3.76 3.49
Average Household Size of Total Population
4.5
4.06
3.81
4.0 3.89
3.81 3.76
3.59
3.58
3.65
3.54 3.51 3.53 3.49
3.26
3.5
3.19 3.23
4.48
3.94
3.0
3.73
3.72
3.30
2.5
2.0
III-16
Table 3.6 Distribution of Social Group according to Zone and canal reaches
(Percentages)
Zone Reach Overall
BC SC ST Others Total

Zone-I Head 33.21 15.16 5.78 45.85 100.00
Middle 28.23 11.87 4.49 55.41 100.00
Tail 31.68 19.31 4.46 44.55 100.00
average 30.65 14.69 4.90 49.77 100.00
Zone-II Head 37.82 15.97 8.40 37.82 100.00
Middle 35.56 12.44 5.78 46.22 100.00
Tail 31.65 13.30 5.96 49.08 100.00
average 35.10 13.95 6.75 44.20 100.00
Zone-I Head 47.74 17.09 6.03 29.15 100.00
Middle 35.97 18.71 10.07 35.25 100.00
Tail 41.90 23.46 7.82 26.82 100.00
average 42.55 19.73 7.74 29.98 100.00
Zone-II Head 37.56 17.77 14.72 29.95 100.00
Middle 37.74 18.87 13.21 30.19 100.00
Tail 36.67 8.33 8.33 46.67 100.00
average 37.39 15.76 12.61 34.24 100.00
Zone-III Head 34.04 14.18 6.38 45.39 100.00
Middle 42.77 15.72 5.66 35.85 100.00
Tail 45.73 18.09 4.52 31.66 100.00
Total 41.48 16.23 5.41 36.87 100.00
Total(Left +
Head 37.93 16.06 8.17 37.83 100.00
Middle 34.40 14.51 6.97 44.11 100.00
Tail 37.36 16.99 5.99 39.65 100.00
Project Area 36.52 15.80 7.09 40.58 100.00
Cotrol Area 35.05 16.96 8.08 39.92 100.00
Distribution of Social Group
BC SC ST Others
50
44.1
40.6
39.9
45
39.7
37.8
40 37.9 37.4 36.5

34.4 35.0
35
30
%
25
20
15
10
8.2
8.1
7.0
6.0
7.1
5
III-17
Table 3.7 Pattern of migration in selected households according to
Zone and canal reaches (Percentages)
Overall
Zone Reach
Male Female Total

Zone-I Head 1.12 0.81 1.93
Middle 1.63 0.96 2.59
Tail 2.14 1.23 3.37
average 1.63 1.00 2.63
Zone-II Head 2.35 2.01 4.36
Middle 2.13 2.02 4.15
Tail 2.95 2.25 5.20
average 2.48 2.09 4.57
Zone-I Head 1.69 1.55 3.24
Middle 2.20 2.81 5.01
Tail 2.46 2.32 4.78
average 2.12 2.23 4.34
Zone-II Head 1.05 0.00 1.05
Middle 1.36 0.54 1.90
Tail 1.95 0.22 2.17
average 1.45 0.25 1.71
Zone-III Head 1.76 1.48 3.24
Middle 1.65 1.79 3.44
Tail 1.23 0.56 1.79
average 1.55 1.28 2.82
Total(Left + Right)
Head 1.59 1.17 2.76
Middle 1.79 1.62 3.42
Tail 2.15 1.32 3.46
Project Area 1.84 1.37 3.21
Cotrol Area 1.72 1.16 2.88
Table 3.8 Distribution of Literacy Level of households according to Zone and canal
Zone Reach
Overall
Total
y
Primary
Undergra
Graduate
nal/
duate
Secondar
Professio
Illiterate
Technical
Middle
Right Bank
Zone-I Head 31.56 28.85 17.03 12.15 5.97 3.47 0.98 100.00
Middle 28.92 35.58 16.07 10.42 6.58 1.96 0.47 100.00
Tail 23.26 31.62 18.94 13.09 8.22 4.18 0.70 100.00
average 28.36 32.48 17.08 11.63 6.79 2.98 0.69 100.00
Zone-II Head 30.84 25.36 19.11 11.73 7.26 3.35 2.35 100.00
Middle 38.14 26.03 12.76 10.44 6.70 3.99 1.93 100.00
Tail 40.10 22.34 12.44 9.64 7.61 4.31 3.55 100.00
average 36.11 24.60 14.97 10.65 7.20 3.86 2.60 100.00
Left Bank Canal
Zone-I Head 23.11 26.96 14.03 16.92 9.22 6.19 3.58 100.00
Middle 29.01 27.18 14.20 14.20 6.49 6.09 2.84 100.00
Tail 29.86 28.48 15.93 12.40 7.96 4.75 0.61 100.00
average 27.02 27.55 14.74 14.63 8.06 5.66 2.35 100.00
Zone-II Head 27.33 19.88 18.63 17.24 12.42 3.73 0.78 100.00
Middle 29.46 24.29 14.11 18.21 9.82 3.39 0.71 100.00
Tail 38.26 23.71 12.75 10.96 7.16 5.59 1.57 100.00
average 31.01 22.41 15.51 15.87 10.12 4.12 0.97 100.00
Zone-III Head 34.54 27.86 15.08 12.40 6.87 3.05 0.19 100.00
Middle 35.88 24.19 15.42 13.47 6.01 4.22 0.81 100.00
Tail 33.87 24.69 19.60 11.04 5.09 3.60 2.11 100.00
average 34.69 25.39 17.06 12.18 5.86 3.65 1.18 100.00
Total(Left +
Head 29.42 25.94 16.95 13.90 8.16 3.96 1.67 100.00
Middle 32.09 28.89 14.73 12.60 6.99 3.52 1.18 100.00
Tail 32.88 26.20 16.21 11.40 7.15 4.37 1.79 100.00
Project Area 31.42 27.04 15.95 12.67 7.44 3.94 1.54 100.00
Cotrol Area 38.95 23.26 15.04 11.25 6.79 3.56 1.15 100.00
Distribution of Literacy Level of households

40
31.4
30 27.0 Project Area Cotrol Area
% HH
20 16.0
12.7
10 7.4
3.9
1.5
0
III-18
Table 3.9Distribution of Occupation of households according to Zone and canal
reaches (Percentage)
Zone Reach Overall
Agril.
Agricultur
Others
Total
Farming
/Casual
e
Labour
Regularly
Non-
Employed
Zone-I Head 64.97 3.47 0.54 24.95 6.07 100.00
Middle 65.36 2.51 0.31 23.90 7.92 100.00
Tail 62.53 2.51 0.28 23.12 11.56 100.00
average 64.54 2.81 0.38 24.04 8.23 100.00
Zone-II Head 65.14 0.78 0.11 23.58 10.39 100.00
Middle 48.97 4.77 5.28 19.33 21.65 100.00
Tail 57.36 7.36 1.40 17.13 16.75 100.00
average 57.54 4.15 2.16 20.17 15.98 100.00

Zone-I Head 48.97 5.91 1.79 22.42 20.91 100.00
Middle 46.86 6.09 1.62 21.91 23.53 100.00
Tail 44.56 10.72 1.38 16.85 26.49 100.00
average 46.88 7.63 1.60 20.34 23.55 100.00
Zone-II Head 65.06 2.64 0.78 21.89 9.63 100.00
Middle 59.11 2.50 0.71 18.75 18.93 100.00
Tail 51.01 4.47 0.45 18.57 25.50 100.00
average 59.24 3.09 0.67 19.93 17.08 100.00
Zone-III Head 49.62 0.57 0.19 20.23 29.39 100.00
Middle 46.92 0.81 0.32 21.75 30.19 100.00
Tail 33.25 2.48 0.25 13.28 50.74 100.00
average 41.98 1.44 0.26 17.83 38.49 100.00
Total(Left + Right)
Head 59.73 2.75 0.67 22.93 13.93 100.00
Middle 55.50 3.17 1.59 21.55 18.19 100.00
Tail 49.47 5.45 0.76 17.61 26.70 100.00
Project Area 55.05 3.74 1.01 20.78 19.41 100.00
Cotrol Area 48.46 3.33 0.77 23.76 23.68 100.00

Distribution of Occupation of households

70
60
55.0
Project Area Cotrol Area
50
40
% HH
30
20.8 19.4
20
10
3.7
1.0
0
Farming Non-Agriculture Regularly Employed Agril. /Casual Labour Others
III-19
Table 3.10 Agriculture Implements Position of households according to Zone and canal reaches - per
households
Zone Reach Overall
Cultivator
Pumpsets
plough
Harvester
Seed drill
Dusters
s
Wooden
Others
Sprayers
Thresher
Tractor
Right Bank
Zone-I Head 0.08 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.01
Middle 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.02
Tail 0.08 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.06 0.26 0.00 0.02
average 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.25 0.00 0.02
Zone-II Head 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.03 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.01
Middle 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.10
Tail 0.10 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.06
average 0.07 0.05 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.06
Left Bank Canal
Zone-I Head 0.12 0.11 0.00 0.08 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.01 0.18
Middle 0.09 0.10 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.10
Tail 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.25 0.16 0.01 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.42
average 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.13 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.24
Zone-II Head 0.16 0.16 0.00 0.20 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.39 0.00 0.21
Middle 0.08 0.13 0.00 0.18 0.09 0.01 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.35
Tail 0.07 0.05 0.02 0.22 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.92
average 0.11 0.12 0.00 0.20 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.43
Zone-III Head 0.06 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.00 0.11 0.26 0.00 0.00
Middle 0.06 0.03 0.01 0.14 0.04 0.00 0.03 0.22 0.00 0.06
Tail 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.09 0.07 0.00 0.00
average 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.05 0.04 0.00 0.08 0.17 0.00 0.02
Total(Left +
Head 0.09 0.07 0.00 0.06 0.04 0.00 0.02 0.20 0.00 0.08
Middle 0.07 0.06 0.00 0.07 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.10
Tail 0.07 0.03 0.00 0.09 0.05 0.00 0.03 0.15 0.00 0.22
Project Area 0.08 0.05 0.00 0.08 0.04 0.00 0.02 0.18 0.00 0.13
Control Area 0.08 0.07 0.00 0.15 0.07 0.00 0.02 0.20 0.00 0.15
Agriculture Implements Position of households

0.25
0.20

0.20 0.18
0.15
0.15
Ave per HH
0.15 0.13
0.10
0.08
0.07
0.07
0.08 0.08
0.05
0.04
0.05
0.02
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00
III-20
Table 3.11 Possession of per households consumer durables according to
Zone and canal reaches (No.)
Zone Reach Overall
or
TV
Watch
Four
Radio
Refrigerat
Motorcycl
mobiles
wheelers
Zone-I Head 0.66 0.04 0.10 0.87 0.14 0.00 0.95
Middle 0.70 0.03 0.04 0.95 0.17 0.00 0.73
Tail 0.62 0.04 0.06 0.71 0.16 0.00 0.73
Total 0.67 0.04 0.06 0.87 0.16 0.00 0.80
Zone-II Head 0.75 0.03 0.06 0.77 0.17 0.00 0.84
Middle 0.69 0.03 0.07 0.89 0.17 0.00 0.62
Tail 0.80 0.04 0.13 1.17 0.23 0.02 0.57
Total 0.75 0.03 0.09 0.94 0.19 0.01 0.68
Left Bank Canal
Zone-I Head 0.84 0.06 0.14 1.29 0.21 0.01 0.90
Middle 0.76 0.07 0.10 1.22 0.19 0.01 0.93
Tail 0.81 0.06 0.09 1.08 0.13 0.01 0.65
Total 0.81 0.06 0.11 1.20 0.18 0.01 0.82
Zone-II Head 1.06 0.05 0.07 0.60 0.14 0.02 0.74
Middle 0.97 0.05 0.08 0.57 0.13 0.01 0.57
Tail 0.79 0.12 0.12 1.30 0.25 0.02 0.54
Total 0.94 0.07 0.09 0.76 0.16 0.01 0.63
Zone-III Head 0.74 0.02 0.08 0.90 0.21 0.01 0.35
Middle 0.76 0.09 0.10 0.93 0.21 0.03 0.63
Tail 0.79 0.02 0.11 0.93 0.24 0.03 0.46
Total 0.77 0.04 0.10 0.92 0.22 0.02 0.48
Total(Left +
Head 0.69 0.04 0.09 0.88 0.17 0.01 0.80
Middle 0.70 0.05 0.07 0.91 0.18 0.01 0.69
Tail 0.76 0.05 0.10 1.02 0.20 0.01 0.59
Project Area 0.71 0.05 0.09 0.93 0.18 0.01 0.70
Control Area 0.72 0.06 0.11 0.85 0.21 0.01 0.69
Household Assests Position of households

1.25
1.00 0.93
Project Area
0.85
Control Area
0.72
0.69
0.71
Ave per HH
0.75 0.70
0.50
0.21
0.25 0.18
0.11
0.06
0.09
0.01
0.05
0.01
0.00
III-21
Table 3.12 Living conditions of selected households according to Zone and
canal reaches (Percent)
Zone Reach Overall
Semi
Total
pucca
Pucca
Kutcha
Zone-I Head 49.82 26.35 23.83 100.00
Middle 57.52 21.11 21.37 100.00
Tail 56.93 19.80 23.27 100.00
average 54.90 22.49 22.61 100.00
Zone-II Head 51.68 21.01 27.31 100.00
Middle 52.00 16.89 31.11 100.00
Tail 50.92 22.02 27.06 100.00
average 51.54 19.97 28.49 100.00
Zone-I Head 42.93 36.36 20.71 100.00
Middle 38.41 38.41 23.19 100.00
Tail 46.93 34.64 18.44 100.00
average 43.11 36.31 20.58 100.00
Zone-II Head 36.55 58.88 4.57 100.00
Middle 42.24 43.48 14.29 100.00
Tail 52.10 31.93 15.97 100.00
average 42.35 46.96 10.69 100.00
Zone-III Head 70.21 10.64 19.15 100.00
Middle 64.15 23.90 11.95 100.00
Tail 51.00 20.50 28.50 100.00
average 60.60 18.80 20.60 100.00
Total(Left + Right)
Head 49.19 31.02 19.79 100.00
Middle 52.54 26.27 21.19 100.00
Tail 51.63 24.95 23.42 100.00
Project Area 51.11 27.52 21.38 100.00
Control Area 52.14 34.38 13.48 100.00
Living conditions of selected households
70
Pucca Semi pucca Kutcha
60
52.5 51.6 51.1 52.1
49.2
50
%
40
30
23.4
21.4
21.2
19.8
20
13.5
10
III-22
Table 3.13 Distribution of Livestock according to Zone and canal reaches (Per HHs)
Zone Reach Overall
Poultry
Cows
Sheep
Bullock
Goats
s
Buffalo
Zone-I Head 1.05 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 1.03
Middle 0.97 0.01 0.01 0.05 0.00 1.28
Tail 1.07 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.78
average 1.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.00 1.08
Zone-II Head 0.46 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.52
Middle 0.96 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.22 1.40
Tail 0.57 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.60 0.00
average 0.66 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.26 0.64
Zone-I Head 1.08 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.00 2.34
Middle 0.69 0.15 0.08 0.22 0.58 0.00
Tail 0.49 0.15 0.25 0.00 0.39 0.41
average 0.77 0.13 0.15 0.10 0.29 1.04
Zone-II Head 1.11 0.16 0.06 0.00 0.25 1.91
Middle 1.02 0.06 0.08 0.00 0.16 1.22
Tail 1.13 0.09 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.52
average 1.09 0.11 0.06 0.00 0.16 1.33
Zone-III Head 1.20 0.06 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.60
Middle 0.91 0.05 0.06 0.09 0.28 0.42
Tail 0.78 0.03 0.04 0.00 0.35 0.07
average 0.94 0.04 0.05 0.03 0.23 0.33
Total(Left + Right)
Head 0.96 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.05 1.27
Middle 0.93 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.19 1.00
Tail 0.78 0.05 0.07 0.00 0.29 0.33
Project Area 0.89 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.17 0.89
Control Area 0.76 0.06 0.09 0.07 0.53 0.77
Distribution of Livestock
1.00
0.89 0.89
0.77
Project Area
0.76
Control Area
0.53
Ave per HH
0.50
0.17
0.09
0.07
0.06
0.05 0.05
0.03
0.00
Buffalo Cows Bullocks Goats Sheep Poultry
III-23
Table 3.14 Sources of Total Income according to Zone and canal
Right Bank Overall
Zone Reach Agriculture Total
Dairying
sources
from
Income
other
Farming
al
Non
agricultur
labour
Zone-I Head 38.85 10.75 26.34 2.72 21.34 100

Middle 36.12 13.71 27.65 6.46 16.06 100
Tail 33.78 15.67 28.32 6.52 15.72 100
average 36.58 13.09 27.33 5.16 17.84 100
Zone-II Head 39.86 8.11 24.10 6.18 21.75 100
Middle 36.95 9.21 22.55 7.74 23.55 100
Tail 31.91 7.60 25.75 10.17 27.33 100
average 36.66 8.34 24.04 7.82 23.78 100
Zone-I Head 39.16 7.74 25.44 6.03 21.62 100
Middle 39.20 9.64 24.46 7.47 19.86 100
Tail 35.90 10.18 28.01 10.04 18.37 100
average 38.15 9.00 25.99 7.66 20.15 100
Zone-II Head 39.95 7.13 24.39 7.80 20.72 100
Middle 39.28 8.61 25.83 7.48 18.79 100
Tail 35.95 7.96 26.76 9.80 23.42 100
average 38.85 7.81 25.39 8.13 20.40 100
Zone-III Head 36.93 10.89 23.54 6.45 22.20 100
Middle 35.43 14.27 21.74 8.65 19.81 100
Tail 35.07 14.13 20.86 9.78 19.53 100
average 35.74 13.19 21.95 8.42 20.42 100
Total(Left +
Head 39.14 9.04 24.65 5.80 21.36 100
Middle 37.12 11.22 24.63 7.63 19.53 100
Tail 34.44 11.16 26.14 9.28 20.84 100
Project Area 37.11 10.38 25.05 7.42 20.45 100
Control Area 39.48 10.55 12.73 18.02 19.23 100
Distribution of Total Income of Households
80
70
60
50
39 39
37
%
40
34
26
30 25 25
21
21 20 19
18
20
13
11
9 10 11
9
6 7
10
0
Farming Dairying Agriculture labour Non agricultural Income from other
sources
III-24
Table 3.15 Sources of Per Household Annual Income according to Zone
and canal reaches (Rs.)
Right Bank Overall

Canal System
Zone Reach Agriculture Total
Dairying
other sources
Farming
Non agricultural
Income from
labour
Zone-I Head 26622.8 7367.44 18049.9 1865.41 14625.6 68531.2

Middle 22479.6 8533.34 17205 4020.16 9995.87 62234
Tail 19329.6 8968.64 16205.8 3729.38 8995.97 57229.4
average 23075.6 8259.42 17242.5 3256.05 11255.1 63088.8
Zone-II Head 25865.4 5263.98 15637.6 4010.56 14113.4 64891
Middle 22060.9 5498.96 13464.8 4622.72 14061.6 59709
Tail 16360.5 3895.13 13202.8 5213.1 14010.7 51269.3
average 21565.7 4903.42 14140.3 4597.77 13988.6 58818.4
Left Bank Canal
System
Zone-I Head 25314 5002.96 16445.3 3897.03 13976 64635.3
Middle 22031.3 5417.43 13744.1 4199.29 11162.9 56195.3
Tail 18887.3 5355.11 14735.2 5281.19 9666.45 52606.8
average 22206.3 5236.32 15126.9 4457.53 11727.6 58201.5
Zone-II Head 26482.1 4724.98 16171.1 5173.1 13738.2 66289.4
Middle 24055.2 5273.73 15819.4 4582.19 11504.9 61235.3
Tail 19081.5 4225.41 14204.3 5199.09 12431.6 53075.3
average 23805.7 4782.34 15557.8 4982.27 12496.5 61269.9
Zone-III Head 23207.9 6844.24 14795 4051.38 13950.9 62849.4
Middle 20497.3 8253 12576 5003.39 11463 57854.7
Tail 19837.9 7992.5 11801.9 5532.41 11047.5 56568.9
average 21000.3 7751.04 12894.3 4945.36 12000.3 58753.2
Total(Left +
Head 25588.5 5910.64 16116.8 3790.86 13963.9 65370.7
Middle 21976.9 6640.4 14582.1 4515.71 11560 59200.9
Tail 18601.6 6026.35 14117 5009.18 11252.3 54006.5
Project Area 22225.7 6218.16 15002.2 4443.14 12250.1 59892.9
Cotrol Area 23105.6 6173.27 7449.68 10545.6 11253 58527.1
III-25
Table 3.16 Sources of Per Capita Annual Income according to Zone and canal
reaches (Rs.)
Right Bank Overall

Canal System
Zone Reach Total Agriculture Total
Dairying
sources
other
from
Income
Non
Farming
al
agricultur
labour
Zone-I Head 42373 7998 2213 5423 560 4394 20589

Middle 25362 6677 2535 5110 1194 2969 18485
Tail 24194 5438 2523 4559 1049 2531 16101
average 29927 6790 2430 5073 958 3312 18563
Zone-II Head 22554 6878 1400 4158 1066 3753 17256
Middle 27448 6397 1594 3904 1340 4077 17313
Tail 18492 4526 1078 3653 1442 3876 14184
average 21694 5972 1358 3916 1273 3874 16289
Left Bank Canal
System
Zone-I Head 20473 6929 1369 4502 1067 3826 17692
Middle 22391 6212 1527 3875 1184 3147 15844
Tail 22098 5177 1468 4039 1448 2650 14421
average 21480 6130 1445 4175 1230 3237 16065
Zone-II Head 36371 8101 1445 4947 1582 4203 20278
Middle 26487 6830 1497 4492 1301 3267 17386
Tail 16999 5123 1134 3813 1396 3337 14248
average 25102 6863 1379 4485 1436 3603 17665
Zone-III Head 25487 6245 1842 3981 1090 3754 16912
Middle 17343 5291 2130 3246 1291 2959 14933
Tail 15259 4898 1973 2914 1366 2728 13967
average 16777 5385 1988 3306 1268 3077 15066
Total(Left +
Head 27261 7252 1675 4568 1074 3957 18526
Middle 23740 6266 1893 4158 1288 3296 16880
Tail 18391 5005 1621 3798 1348 3027 14530
Project Area 22819 6212 1738 4193 1242 3424 16739
Cotrol Area 23799 6622 1769 2135 3022 3225 16773
III-26
Table 3.17 Pattern of Annual Consumption Expenditure according to Zone and
canal reaches (Percentages)
Right Bank Overall
Canal System
Zone Reach
Education
Functions
Food items
Treatment
Social
Clothing &
Others
Total
Medical
footwear
Zone-I Head 49.37 6.69 11.17 11.87 8.65 12.26 100.00
Middle 48.65 7.06 10.47 11.63 10.75 11.43 100.00
Tail 49.14 6.85 11.15 12.14 9.05 11.67 100.00
average 48.94 6.83 10.93 11.90 9.61 11.79 100.00
Zone-II Head 49.15 7.34 12.13 11.78 8.78 10.82 100.00
Middle 49.41 6.80 10.52 12.97 8.73 11.57 100.00
Tail 48.85 6.98 11.61 12.12 9.81 10.64 100.00
average 49.24 7.08 11.37 12.29 9.07 10.95 100.00
Left Bank Canal
System
Zone-I Head 48.70 7.86 11.56 12.49 8.56 10.84 100.00
Middle 49.82 6.21 10.44 12.51 9.68 11.33 100.00
Tail 48.46 6.79 11.21 12.27 10.45 10.81 100.00
average 48.62 6.96 11.20 12.44 9.79 10.98 100.00
Zone-II Head 47.47 7.57 11.23 13.03 9.53 11.17 100.00
Middle 46.67 7.08 12.49 12.30 10.79 10.67 100.00
Tail 47.76 8.08 12.77 12.48 9.27 9.63 100.00
average 47.40 7.53 12.21 12.68 9.63 10.55 100.00
Zone-III Head 49.32 7.41 12.70 12.61 7.26 10.70 100.00
Middle 49.39 6.95 10.69 12.93 9.36 10.68 100.00
Tail 48.29 7.39 11.74 12.42 10.47 9.69 100.00
average 49.07 7.28 11.70 12.62 8.96 10.36 100.00
Total(Left +
Head 48.80 7.37 11.76 12.35 8.56 11.16 100.00
Middle 48.79 6.82 10.92 12.47 9.86 11.14 100.00
Tail 48.50 7.22 11.70 12.29 9.81 10.49 100.00
Project Area 48.66 7.14 11.48 12.39 9.41 10.93 100.00
Cotrol Area 49.99 7.50 11.17 11.54 9.46 10.36 100.00
Distribution of Annual Consumption Expenditure
60
49 50
48
49
50 Head Middle Tail Project Area Control Area
40
30
%
20
12
12 12 12
12
12 11 11 11
10
11 10
10
9 9 9
10 7 7 7
7
0
Food items Clothing & Education Medical Social Others
footwear Treatment Functions
III-27
Table 3.18 Pattern of Per Household Annual Consumption Expenditure
according to Zone and canal reaches (Rs.)
Right Bank Overall

Zone Reach
Total
&
Treatment
Others
items
footwear
Food
Clothing
Functions
Education
Social
Medical
Zone-I Head 30956.72 3921.94 6391.59 7006.26 5614.71 7960.66 61851.89
Middle 28497.64 3704.63 5280.17 6351.18 6323.39 7209.50 57366.50
Tail 28813.78 3732.15 5988.02 6669.68 5390.65 7167.73 57762.01
average 29365.40 3744.33 5835.46 6671.52 5840.65 7450.32 58907.69
Zone-II Head 29983.71 4434.23 6501.58 6801.00 5123.70 6702.87 59547.10
Middle 30038.36 3915.07 5970.47 7757.99 5384.89 7249.18 60315.96
Tail 24385.63 3173.79 5126.91 6099.09 4735.34 5477.75 48998.52
average 28226.32 3815.86 5863.75 6906.49 5125.29 6486.59 56424.30
Left Bank Canal
Zone-I Head 29435.14 4342.27 6035.72 7428.96 5087.16 6508.81 58838.06
Middle 26575.41 3439.15 5570.16 6692.55 5672.79 6057.19 54007.25
Tail 19495.88 2842.20 4872.23 4929.26 4206.82 4308.43 40654.82
average 27418.41 3761.53 5677.71 6940.70 5608.22 6180.61 55587.18
Zone-II Head 30347.20 4256.91 5921.18 7970.79 5798.95 7007.55 61302.58
Middle 29598.47 3960.57 6504.17 7667.29 6529.89 6705.89 60966.27
Tail 26419.21 3898.97 5911.90 6863.32 4855.68 5428.70 53377.77
average 29169.76 4076.68 6229.77 7632.85 5626.10 6457.29 59192.46
Zone-III Head 30118.14 3949.96 6428.00 7320.46 4403.64 6784.60 59004.80
Middle 28330.93 3668.42 5305.84 7255.02 5654.83 6284.34 56499.38
Tail 27246.81 3699.28 5273.54 6819.31 5599.81 5710.04 54348.79
average 28443.53 3773.08 5653.05 7093.23 5156.34 6230.46 56349.69
Total(Left +
Head 30186.52 4166.03 6254.40 7312.84 5146.14 6983.84 60049.77
Middle 27746.42 3570.63 5469.72 6907.97 5694.07 6514.16 55902.98
Tail 25625.32 3442.75 5288.44 6380.53 5035.71 5734.73 51507.47
Project Area 28007.55 3738.80 5697.43 6914.83 5334.72 6441.42 56134.75
Cotrol Area 28995.40 4213.52 5831.77 6997.69 5448.31 6235.86 57722.53
III-28
Table 3.19 Percentage of Farmers borrowing loan for different purposes according to
Zone and canal reaches
Right Bank Canal Overall
System
Zone Reach Agriculture Education Health Functions Others Total
Zone-I Head 45.53 5.69 2.44 1.63 44.72 100.00

Middle 53.59 2.76 3.31 1.66 38.67 100.00
Tail 44.25 6.19 3.54 8.85 37.17 100.00
average 48.68 4.56 3.12 3.60 40.05 100.00
Zone-II Head 33.70 1.09 4.35 3.26 57.61 100.00
Middle 45.83 2.08 0.69 6.25 45.14 100.00
Tail 39.39 12.12 1.01 3.03 44.44 100.00
average 40.60 4.78 1.79 4.48 48.36 100.00
Left Bank Canal
System
Zone-I Head 50.00 8.73 3.97 5.56 31.75 100.00
Middle 48.19 7.23 4.82 7.23 32.53 100.00
Tail 52.63 5.26 3.76 9.02 29.32 100.00
average 50.58 7.02 4.09 7.31 30.99 100.00
Zone-II Head 47.06 2.61 3.92 4.58 41.83 100.00
Middle 39.60 3.96 2.97 1.98 51.49 100.00
Tail 45.90 4.92 3.28 11.48 34.43 100.00
average 44.44 3.49 3.49 5.08 43.49 100.00
Zone-III Head 56.41 1.28 3.85 5.13 33.33 100.00
Middle 48.53 4.41 2.94 7.35 36.76 100.00
Tail 72.73 6.82 2.27 5.68 12.50 100.00
average 60.26 4.27 2.99 5.98 26.50 100.00
Total(Left + Right)
Head 46.50 4.20 3.67 4.02 41.61 100.00

Middle 47.83 3.64 2.77 4.33 41.42 100.00
Tail 50.81 7.09 2.83 7.49 31.78 100.00
Project Area 48.27 4.87 3.10 5.17 38.59 100.00
Control Area 52.45 4.54 4.81 2.99 35.21 100.00
Farmers Purpose of borrowing

60
52
51
48
50 47 Head Middle Tail Project Area Control Area
42
39
40 35
32
%
30
20
10
7
7
4 5 5 4 5 4 5
3 3
3
0
Agriculture Education Health Functions Others
III-29
Table 3.20 Different Sources of Credit (Percentages)
Right Bank Canal System Overall
Zone Reach Commerc Pvt Bank Coop Friends Money Total
ial Bank Society Lender Loan
Zone-I Head 31.08 0.28 40.56 6.83 21.25 100.00

Middle 25.02 1.10 48.05 7.55 18.27 100.00
Tail 20.81 4.95 54.61 6.71 12.92 100.00
average 25.44 2.34 48.07 6.97 17.18 100.00
Zone-II Head 78.39 2.33 10.13 7.67 1.49 100.00
Middle 48.54 2.79 31.91 15.24 1.52 100.00
Tail 42.98 1.14 27.09 24.00 4.80 100.00
average 59.29 2.28 22.31 13.97 2.16 100.00
Zone-I Head 78.92 9.28 0.59 9.61 1.60 100.00
Middle 66.16 13.73 8.79 6.26 5.06 100.00
Tail 71.98 13.51 1.69 7.41 5.40 100.00
average 72.23 12.01 4.16 7.77 3.83 100.00
Zone-II Head 20.52 13.85 49.89 12.28 3.47 100.00
Middle 11.69 18.28 53.21 12.41 4.41 100.00
Tail 11.36 4.30 68.30 12.02 4.02 100.00
average 16.80 13.73 53.39 12.28 3.81 100.00
Zone-III Head 10.51 17.76 60.11 2.38 9.24 100.00
Middle 8.05 19.43 57.65 11.26 3.61 100.00
Tail 60.50 0.04 37.19 2.27 0.00 100.00
average 20.27 14.48 54.81 4.39 6.04 100.00
Total (Left + Right)
Head 44.22 8.82 32.09 8.13 6.75 100.00
Middle 39.62 9.53 34.18 10.61 6.07 100.00
Tail 39.28 5.29 37.78 10.39 7.26 100.00
Project Area 41.55 8.21 34.12 9.47 6.65 100.00
Cotrol Area 33.47 18.18 14.33 12.15 21.87 100.00
Farmers Source of borrowing
80
Head Middle
60
Tail Project Area
44 Control Area
42
39
38
40 33 34
32
%
22
18
20 14
12
10
9 8 8 9
7 7
7
5
0
Commercial Pvt Bank Coop Society Friends Money Lender
Bank
III-30
Table 3.21 Repayment Pattern of Loan
Right Bank Landless Small Medium Large Overall
Zone System
Canal Reach Total Repay Out Total Repaym Out Total Repay Out Total Repay Out Total Repay Outstanding
Loan ment standing Loan ent standing Loan ment standing Loan ment standing Loan ment
Zone-I Head 100 4.05 95.95 100.00 1.44 98.56 100.00 0.62 99.38 100.00 0.50 99.50 100.00 1.17 98.83
Middle 100 3.32 96.68 100.00 2.59 97.41 100.00 5.30 94.70 100.00 1.72 98.28 100.00 3.40 96.60
Tail 100 1.36 98.64 100.00 3.00 97.00 100.00 0.75 99.25 100.00 1.89 98.11 100.00 1.86 98.14
average 100 2.68 97.32 100.00 2.37 97.63 100.00 1.69 98.31 100.00 1.10 98.90 100.00 2.02 97.98
Zone-II Head 100 2.44 97.56 100.00 1.12 98.88 100.00 0.87 99.13 100.00 0.62 99.38 100.00 1.15 98.85
Middle 100 2.24 97.76 100.00 2.04 97.96 100.00 1.14 98.86 100.00 1.18 98.82 100.00 1.75 98.25
Tail 100 3.33 96.67 100.00 2.22 97.78 100.00 1.59 98.41 100.00 0.91 99.09 100.00 2.00 98.00
average 100 2.59 97.41 100.00 1.71 98.29 100.00 1.09 98.91 100.00 0.94 99.06 100.00 1.56 98.44
Left Bank Canal
System
Zone-I Head 100 7.91 92.09 100.00 2.49 97.51 100.00 0.88 99.12 100.00 0.87 99.13 100.00 1.56 98.44
Middle 100 4.85 95.15 100.00 1.76 98.24 100.00 0.55 99.45 100.00 0.45 99.55 100.00 1.05 98.95
Tail 100 2.49 97.51 100.00 2.89 97.11 100.00 2.05 97.95 100.00 1.82 98.18 100.00 2.40 97.60
average 100 4.39 95.61 100.00 2.32 97.68 100.00 0.98 99.02 100.00 0.74 99.26 100.00 1.53 98.47
Zone-II Head 100 12.84 87.16 100.00 2.76 97.24 100.00 1.52 98.48 100.00 0.58 99.42 100.00 2.38 97.62
Middle 100 14.52 85.48 100.00 1.95 98.05 100.00 1.04 98.96 100.00 0.52 99.48 100.00 2.22 97.78
Tail 100 6.83 93.17 100.00 5.59 94.41 100.00 1.37 98.63 100.00 1.13 98.87 100.00 2.81 97.19
average 100 12.43 87.57 100.00 2.82 97.18 100.00 1.33 98.67 100.00 0.63 99.37 100.00 2.39 97.61
Zone-III Head 100 3.48 96.52 100.00 3.12 96.88 100.00 1.97 98.03 100.00 0.15 99.85 100.00 1.50 98.50
Middle 100 1.98 98.02 100.00 5.00 95.00 100.00 0.89 99.11 100.00 2.85 97.15 100.00 2.24 97.76
Tail 100 1.32 98.68 100.00 23.56 76.44 100.00 5.04 94.96 100.00 0.55 99.45 100.00 3.47 96.53
average 100 2.21 97.79 100.00 5.28 94.72 100.00 1.99 98.01 100.00 0.49 99.51 100.00 2.08 97.92
Total(Left +
HeadRight) 100 6.20 93.80 100.00 2.01 97.99 100.00 1.08 98.92 100.00 0.48 99.52 100.00 1.60 98.40
Middle 100 4.37 95.63 100.00 2.24 97.76 100.00 1.71 98.29 100.00 0.87 99.13 100.00 1.97 98.03
Tail 100 2.74 97.26 100.00 3.58 96.42 100.00 1.49 98.51 100.00 1.00 99.00 100.00 2.29 97.71
Project Area 100 4.52 95.48 100.00 2.45 97.55 100.00 1.37 98.63 100.00 0.71 99.29 100.00 1.88 98.12
Cotrol Area 100 2.00 98.00 100.00 0.00 100.00 100.00 0.00 100.00 100.00 0.00 100.00 100.00 0.14 99.86
III-31
III-31
Table 3.22 Annual Savings Per HHs according to Zone, land holding size and
canal reaches (Rs.)
Right Bank Landless Small Medium Large Overall
Zone Reach
Zone-I Head -1432.13 7999.17 12000.15 17120.00 6679.20

Middle -2236.24 6001.15 10003.84 15318.62 4868.09
Tail -2439.63 3239.96 -532.17
average -2025.21 5535.81 7568.02 12510.93 4181.41
Zone-II Head -1541.29 5935.00 10774.56 18281.43 5344.16
Middle -2168.24 -607.11
Tail -2329.12 8480.27 9223.31 2270.32
average -1994.23 2191.06 6346.13 10066.74 2393.89
Left Bank Canal
Zone-I Head -1637.38 6999.19 9956.79 13019.00 5797.24
Middle -1920.65 8089.38 9003.00 2188.07
Tail -2123.87 -593.26
average -1879.14 2664.46 5455.12 9064.28 2614.31
Zone-II Head -1347.66 5994.36 7769.94 14503.25 4986.44
Middle -1845.63 8635.00 269.06
Tail -1989.32 3033.74 -302.13
average -1695.10 2916.17 2969.00 8553.57 2077.42
Zone-III Head -2031.43 2999.65 9799.03 15098.57 3844.57
Middle -2239.29 1854.99 4004.50 8646.04 1355.29
Tail -2332.52 1571.85 6879.58 7032.27 2219.86
average -2217.43 2056.43 7137.88 8459.54 2403.46
Total(Left +
Head -1597.98 5985.47 10060.10 15604.45 5320.88
Middle -2082.01 3928.07 7365.91 10400.67 3298.01
Tail -2242.89 1571.85 7679.92 4435.32 2499.01
Project Area -1965.01 4064.92 8398.16 10000.26 3758.12
Control Area -2013.94 1345.21 2002.34 4543.36 805.09
Savings Per Household
35000
30000
25000
20000
%
15000
10000
10000 8398
4065 3758
5000
0
III-32
Table 3.23 Per Capita Annual Savings of Household according to Zone, land holding size and canal
Reaches (Rs.)
Right Bank Canal Landless Small Medium Large Total

ZoneSystem
Reach
Zone-I Head -435.63 2356.19 3549.34 6114.29 2006.66

Middle -695.57 1790.34 2847.81 3961.71 1445.93
Tail -717.54 863.99 -149.72
average -616.80 1631.33 2139.71 3623.85 1230.33
Zone-II Head -472.75 1551.54 2625.27 3877.88 1421.13
Middle -638.31
Tail -844.63 1975.32 2036.32 628.08
average -635.39 601.68 1594.05 2345.09 662.97
Left Bank Canal
System
Zone-I Head -545.79 1817.62 2631.75 2680.38 1586.87
Middle -577.54 2379.23 2361.44 616.92
Tail -632.10
average -585.05 699.92 1479.03 2175.43 721.62
Zone-II Head -452.23 1976.16 1911.98 4678.47 1525.36
Middle -594.14 2490.87 76.39
Tail -590.05 641.75 -81.11
average -541.78 856.34 772.07 2280.95 598.94
Zone-III Head -594.23 784.52 2521.39 4117.79 1034.51
Middle -639.80 472.43 986.18 1729.21 349.82
Tail -633.26 402.89 1585.30 1352.36 548.08
average -624.80 528.72 1734.44 1705.02 616.30
Total(Left + Right) Command
Head -500.29 1688.81 2638.38 4008.48 1507.96
Middle -631.53 1107.85 2029.20 2728.04 940.39
Tail -680.65 421.18 1947.81 991.04 672.36
Project Area -602.58 1131.41 2206.42 2462.65 1050.33
Cotrol Area -623.75 548.76 1208.46 91.76
III-33
CHAPTER 4
AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES
4.0 GENERAL
Having studied the socio-economic characteristics of the respondents in the study

region it would be worthwhile to analyse how these parameters would be useful in
fulfilling the stated objectives of the project in increasing productivity thus
augmenting income from agriculture and allied activities by using water efficiently.
Keeping this in view an attempt has been made to this chapter to assess the existing
situation in the command area with regard to agriculture and allied activities duly
comparing with non-project area which will form the basis for future evaluation and
comparison.
4.1 INTRODUCTION
Andhra Pradesh is predominantly an agricultural state. About 73% of the population

resides in rural areas and is engaged in agriculture as per 2001 census. The economy
of the state, especially of rural masses, is dependent on agriculture. Important
activities of agriculture include crop production, livestock, fisheries, forestry and
pisciculture. Crop production in the state is mostly rain fed and less than half of the
gross cropped area is irrigated.
Andhra Pradesh is endowed with fertile cultivable land, long growing season,
favourable climatic conditions to grow wide range of crops and ample sunshine, but
rainfall is erratic and uncertain. Water is life line for crop production and its
availability can bring perceptible change in agricultural scenario in the state.
Development of irrigation infrastructure through NSP can lead to improvement in

agriculture from subsistence to modern in nature. At present the economic condition
of the farmers is such that they cannot adopt high-input, high-risk cropping system.
Adoption of modern techniques of agriculture is required to bring necessary
improvement in productivity and economic condition of the farmers. Due to limited
irrigation facility about two third of the gross cropping area is occupied by kharif
crops which can be grown as rain fed. The area of Rabi crops is restricted by
IV-1
irrigation and it can be grown only where irrigation is available. This scenario can be
drastically altered with development of irrigation infrastructure where area under rabi
crops, cash crops and fruits and vegetables can be increased. Then farmers income
can be augmented through cash crops, horticultural crops, spices etc.
Livestock is providing substantial income to the farmers and generating 7% to the

state GSDP. Cow breeds are mostly local to produce draught animals and produce
very little milk. Fodder is always in short supply because farmers grow food crop in
most of the farmland and very little and neglected area with low fertility is available
for fodder crop.
4.2 AGRO-CLIMATE
Climate is most important factor affecting type of crops and their productivity in a
particular region. The command area of NSP comprises district of Nalagonda,
Krishna, Prakasam, Khammam and Guntur of Andhra Pradesh state. This region falls
under semi- arid climate which receives rainfall about 600 to 875 mm per annum.
Out of total annual rainfall about 70-75 % is received during rainy season in the
months from June to September. The remaining 25-30% rain is almost equally
received in winter and summer seasons. The state experiences maximum temperature
ranges from 41 to 43o C in the month of May and minimum temperatures ranging
form 11 to 16 o C during December to January.
4.3 CROPS
Agriculture is the most important occupation in NSP and paddy is the main food crop
produced. The principal crops grown in the delta are rice, black gram, green gram,
groundnut, sugarcane, cotton, maize, and turmeric, vegetables like chillies, tomatoes
and fruits like mango, banana, and citrus.
4.4 DATA ANALYSIS
Both primary and secondary data were collected from published and unpublished
sources as per pre-tested questionnaires from the respondents in the study region both
in command and non-command regions. The data thus collected were analysed canal
system wise (left and right), zone wise (zone 1 and 2 in right command; zone 1, 2 and
IV-2
3 in left command), reach wise (head, middle and tail) as well as land holding wise
(small, medium and large) for easy interpretation and understanding the existing
situation in the command area under the following sub heads:
Classification of land holdings

Land holding details
Sources of irrigation
Awareness and adoption of technologies
Area under different crops
Average yield of important crops
Average cost of cultivation of different important crops
Horticulture
Live Stock Development
Fisheries
Access to Marketing
Soil nutrients and Pesticides
4.4.1 CLASSIFICATION OF LAND HOLDINGS
The land holdings are classified into small, medium and large based on the land
holding size, reach wise, zone wise, and canal wise. The total number of respondents
was 2146 out of which small farmers constitute around 56% followed by medium
(36%) and large farmers (8%). Care has been taken to include the farmers more or
less proportion in head, middle and tail end reaches (refer annexure IV.1). The
distribution of land holdings according to canal, zone, reach wise are presented in
Table 4.1. There is no significant variation in proportion of size of land holdings for
control group compared to command area.
IV-3
4.4.2 LAND HOLDING DETAILS
The land holding particulars of the farmers including owned, leased in and leased out
along with fallow plus waste land including area outside command etc. particulars are
furnished in Table 4.2 and annexure IV.2, IV.3 and IV.4. As seen from the table a
system of both leased in and leased out are existing in all the groups in the command
area more pre-dominantly in large followed by medium farmers. Fallow and waste
lands are also noticed in the command area due to absentee land-lordism or financial
problems or not suitable for cultivation or non-availability of sufficient water.
4.4.3 CROPPING INTENSITY
It is clear from the Table 4.3 that cropping intensity was around 130% in command
area while the same in non-project area was 109% which indicates farmers in the
project area are cultivating more than one crop during the year duly and efficiently
utilising the water available in the canal. Among the groups, the cropping intensity
was more in medium size group (around 136%) compared to other groups. According
to reaches as we know the better utilisation of water was found in head region with
more than 134%.
4.4.4 AVERAGE SIZE OF LAND HOLDING
It is observed from table 4.4 that average size of holding for small farmers in project
area is 2.58 Acres (1.04 ha), for medium 6.49 Acres (2.62 ha) and for large 14.01
Acres (5.67 ha). While the same for control groups are 1.23 acres (0.496 ha), 5.28
acres (2.14 ha) and 14.64 acres (5.92 ha) respectively with an overall average size of
holding in command area is 5 acres i.e.2.02 ha ((Table 4.4 and annexure IV.5).
4.5 SOURCES OF IRRIGATION
A perusal of Table 4.5 indicates that overall 78.23% at head, 74.15% at middle and
64.36% at tail reach together constituting 72.28% receiving canal irrigation in project
area. The tail end farmers of zone 1 of left bank canal have irrigation potential up to
80%. The crops are also being cultivated through wells/ tube wells and tanks to an
extent of 1.57% and 4.65% respectively. In the command area it is most common that
the farmers resort to conjunctive use of both surface and groundwater for irrigation
IV-4
purposes to reduce the water logging on one side and also to save the crop during the
crop growth at times of lean period of irrigation from tube wells, bore wells, pot
irrigation, dug well etc. Size group wise details are available in annexure IV.6 and
IV.7.
4.6 AWARENESS AND ADOPTION OF TECHNOLOGY
There have been concerted efforts both by state and central Government in
dissemination and adoption of technology in agriculture and allied programs. Yet
there are some gaps in adoption of technologies despite the primary objective of green
revolution is to bring greater awareness and improve agriculture practices for various
crops and convince the producer the same in order to achieve higher productivity
which is the main objective of the present project. During the Base line survey an
attempt was made to collect the status of the selected sample of farmers in awareness
as well as practices. The most common improved practices (18 numbers) are listed out
and the number of farmers practicing them was collected and the same are indicated
in Table 4.6 and annexure IV.8.
As perceived by the farmers the percentage of adoption pattern is comparatively low

to awareness level. Over all the farmers in the study region are well aware of the
suitable high yielding varieties (71%) and almost equal percentage are in the process
of adoption (69%). Farmer perception on organic manures, water management and
I.N.M are to the tune of around little more than 20% and adoption level is below 15%.
The awareness and adoption level on pre-harvest management, post-harvest
management, bio-pesticides, bio-fertilizer and banned pesticides are very low. This
should be advocated properly among the farming community in order to increase the
productivity of crops thus reaping incomes.
4.7 CROPPING PATTERN
The main crop seasons are Kharif, rabi and summer in the command area. Generally
in the project area rice based cropping systems are predominant as rice is grown
extensively during Kharif season, while green gram, black gram and maize / ground
nut are grown in rice fallows during Rabi with residual moisture and one or two life
IV-5
saving irrigations. Apart from these, cotton and chillies are important commercial
crops grown in rain fed areas (Table 4.7). Under Right canal Bank system in zone 2
paddy crop is grown during Rabi instead of Kharif season in some areas due to non
availability / untimely release of water. The pre dominant cropping systems that are
existing in the study region are:
Paddy fallow
Paddy - paddy
Fallow paddy
Paddy black gram
Paddy ground nut / sesamum
Green gram paddy
Paddy maize
Chillies
Cotton
Sugarcane
Paddy green manure / fodder Jowar
Similar cropping pattern is more or less followed in all the zones, at head reaches by
different size of farmer holdings. Almost similar pattern is observed in non project
area also.
4.8 AREA UNDER DIFFERENT CROPS
In the study area a number of crops are grown. Among them only five important crops
that are cultivated extensively are considered for the present study as per terms of
reference. Accordingly the pre dominant crops grown in the project area is paddy
(72%). Another cereal crop grown is maize (2.35%) followed by black gram (2.3%)
which is a pulse crop (Table 4.8 and Annexure IV.9 and IV.10). The commercial
crops like cotton and chillies together constitute around 16.71% of the total area.
Fodder crops are grown in zone 1 of the right bank canal system and also in the zone
2of the left bank canal system as a fodder to the live stock. Almost similar pattern was
observed in non project area where the percentage of area under paddy is around 69.
IV-6
4.9 YIELD OF IMPORTANT CROPS
The per hectare average yield of important crops season wise are presented in Table
4.9. It is clear that kharif paddy yield is less than Rabi yields in zone 1 of right bank
where as in other zones it is vice versa. This could be due to cold temperature in Rabi
or excess moisture or non release of sufficient water. More over the study period
2008-09 is considered to be the good year for the agricultural crops. The productivity
of maize is more in Rabi season compared to kharif in all the groups, reaches and
zones.
The average yields of seed cotton and chillies are 2080 Kgs/ha and 2312 Kgs/ha
respectively which are slightly less than the control area. Even the maize yields of
control farmers are also higher compared to their counter part because of excessive
moisture or temporary water logging in command area due to receipt of excessive rain
water.
4.10 AVERAGE COSTS AND RETURNS
The average cost of cultivation in terms of actual costs expenses which the farmers
are genuinely and necessarily spending on cultivation of crops, has been arrived at by
taking in to account the expenditures made on operational activities like field
preparation, sowing, inter cultivation, application of fertilizers and pesticides,
irrigation, harvesting etc., and the cost of material (manure, seed, fertilizer, pesticides
etc) purchased by the farmers. Hence in the present study, only operational costs have
been considered to arrive at the average cost of cultivation. Similarly to arrive the
gross returns only minimum support price (MSP) for the year 2008-09 was considered
(productivity of main product x M.S.P = Gross return). The average cost and returns
per acre for important crops of the region are worked out and presented through tables
4.10 through 4.15 and the zone wise, reach wise and canal wise for all the size groups
are furnished in Annexure IV.11 to IV.16.
IV-7
(i) Paddy :
As seen from the Table 4.10 the overall average cost of cultivation of paddy in
the study area is Rs. 9577.22 and the same in control area is slightly higher
i.e., Rs. 9785.21. However, the average yields are more in command area than
the control area because of adoption of improved technology and availability
of water. The benefit cost ratio for paddy in project area is 1.08 while the
same in non-project area is 0.9. This means paddy is remunerative crop in the
command area.
(ii) Seed Cotton

Seed cotton is the most important commercial crop which is extensively grown
during Kharif season in the project area in all the zones. An interesting point
here is the B/C ratio of the seed cotton in non-project area (1.33) is more than
the command area (1.17). This might be due to excessive moisture available in
the soils during the study period. More over the cost of cultivation in control
area is less compared to project area. The productivity of cotton in project area
is 8.0 qtls/acre while the same in control area is 6.53 quintals/ acre i.e. (Table
4.11 and annexure IV.12)
(iii) Chillies
Chillies, a vegetable crop, is another important commercial crop being grown
in the project area by all size groups of farmers. The per acre operational cost
of small farmers are almost on par with medium and large size farmers (Table
4.12). Another striking feature is the per acre productivity of farmers
belonging to the head reaches of all the size groups are higher followed by
middle and tail end groups (Annexure IV.13). The overall benefit cost ratio is
more in project area (0.98) than the non-project area (0.71) because of the
yields of control area are less compared to the command area. This is due to
canal water availability during lean periods.
IV-8
(iv) Groundnut
The oil seed crop is grown both in the Kharif and Rabi season of the command
area. The per acre average productivity ranges from 6.03 quintals in zone 1 of
the right canal to 6.98 quintals of zone 3 of the left bank canal. However the
B/C ratio in all the three zones of left canal is higher compared to the two
zones in the right bank canal (Table 4.13 and Annexure IV.14)
(v) Black Gram

Generally black gram is grown in rice fallow areas in the study region with
residual moisture with less cost of cultivation. The operational cost per acre is
more or less similar in all size groups and also in all the zones. Even in control
area also the operational cost, main product and B/C ratio are on par with
command area (Table 4.14 and annexure IV.15). The B/C ratio for black gram
is more (3.09) when compared to other crops being grown in the region. This is
a short duration crop and necessarily does not require fertilisers and pesticides.
(vi) Maize
This is another important crop which is increasing its spread in most of the
command area and replacing traditional crops in some areas. The overall
operational cost is decreasing with the decrease in water availability. This
implies the head reach farmers incur more expenditure than other groups.
Accordingly the yields and B/C ratio are following the same pattern (Table
4.15 and annexure IV.16). During the study period the MSP of maize was
lower than the prevailing price. However, in the present study gross income
was calculated based on MSP only for all the crops.
(vii) Horticulture
The Horticulture activities aim to promote diversification and cropping intensity, and
improve the water use efficiency, production, productivity and profitability of
horticultural crops with the main focus on vegetables in the NSS command.
IV-9
In the State of Andhra Pradesh, horticulture is a significant contributor to the economy

for its encompassing benefits not only in the agriculture sector per se but for its wider
applications and benefits in improving the rural livelihoods through improved
nutrition, sustainable farming, employment generation, etc. Horticulture is considered
a vital component in the NSS IAID. Horticulture crops covering wide variety of fruits,
vegetables, spices, medicinal and aromatic plants, floriculture, mushrooms, plantation
crops and oil palm provide means for diversification of land use for improving
productivity, financial returns, nutritional security, increasing employment
opportunities, and provides raw materials for processing industries.
The major horticultural crops grown in the command of the NSS are sweet oranges,
mango, chilly, turmeric and vegetables.
Overall the demand for fruits and vegetables in AP is growing, between 1996 and
2002, the consumption of dry fruits, fresh fruits and vegetables recorded a compound
annual growth rate of 19 percent, 12 percent and 11 percent respectively, as against 6
percent observed in respect of edible oils, pulses, milk and milk products and 7
percent in respect of cereals (AP state focus paper, NABARD). The Government of
Andhra Pradesh has been emphasizing horticulture development and a number of
programs have been implemented resulting in the generation of higher incomes in the
rural areas, improving the quality of life in villages and creates gainful employment
opportunities on a self sustaining basis.
The crop diversification towards horticulture crops viz. chilies, fruits and
vegetables has been analyzed crop wise, canal wise and zone wise and are
shown through Table 4.16 (a) to 4.16 (o). The increase in extent of areas under
Chilies, fruits and vegetables is on the increase towards middle and tail reaches
due to variation in availability of water towards tail end reaches.
(viii) Livestock Development

Livestock plays an important role in the Nagarjunasagar command area in
supporting the livelihood systems of rural families. It is estimated that there
are 24.79 lakh bovines in the project area. Buffaloes constitute 82% of the
bovine population indicating the importance given to dairy farming and 5.4
IV-10
lakh bovines are high yielders, amounting to 22% of its population. More than
60 percent of the dairy bovines are owned by small, marginal farmers and
landless labourers in the command area. High productive animals are mostly
in the command area and the low productive animals are in tail ends and
uplands. Calf mortality rates are expected to be reduced from a 20% to 5%
following the project interventions. This will result in 22,000 incremental
crossbred cows in the project area and annual incremental benefits of Rs. 121
million. Sheep are predominant in upland villages of the mandals in the project
area. In addition, goats and village poultry contribute a lot to the rural
economy. The distribution of livestock in the NSS command area is listed in
Table 4.17.
(ix) Fisheries
Fisheries is an important economic activity in the state of Andhra Pradesh and

its contribution to GDP is 2.36% (2005-06). It is providing employment to
about 14 lakh families (contributing 40% of Indias fisheries export) and
providing high protein dietary source to India. These fisheries activities
address the PDO by increasing the non-farm household incomes in the
command area. The productivity of fisheries in NSP reservoir is as under:
Fish Productivity
NSP Reservoir
S. No. Average Potential Annual Average
yield yield Production annual income
in T of fishermen
in Rs
1 40 kg/ha 119 kg/ha 2193 Rs. 41000/-
Source: Fisheries department, AP
Increase in the productivity of fisheries due to improved stocking practices in

reservoir (covering 38,000 ha) and minor irrigation tanks (covering 26,000 ha)
are the main benefits that are quantified. It is assumed that productivity in
reservoir will increase from 40 kg/ha to 150 kg/ha while productivity in minor
irrigation tanks will increase from 187 kg/ha to 500 kg/ha. These assumptions
are based on data from ongoing state fisheries department schemes and other
IV-11
published sources. Assuming a 50% success rate the project investment in

fisheries would result in incremental benefits of Rs. 156 million per year.
(x) Access to Marketing

Farmers often face a problem in realising remunerative prices for their
produce. The farm producers rarely have the capacity to hold the produce
waiting for a better price due to shortage of working capital and pressing
demand for money to meet day to day domestic expenditures. Further as a
farmer or single individual he has no bargaining power to demand a better
price as he has no access to better marketing facilities like pre and post
management practices. Therefore, the farmer especially marginal or small
resorts to distress sale.
(xi) Value Chain

Today agro-marketing is becoming as important as production of agricultural
commodities. The challenge lies in developing a holistic approach, addressing
production to consumption (value chain) with a higher priority among others
to post harvest processing, quality management, nutrition issues etc. Analysis
of supply chain system for high value crops such as vegetables is important for
improving market efficiency and increasing producers as well as consumers
surplus. Generally producers share in consumers rupee varies inversely with
the length of the marketing channel. The main purpose is to document,
describe and analyse the existing and practicing value chain in case of
agricultural products which are augmenting the farm business income in the
study area at the time of base line period.
4.11 SOIL NUTRIENTS AND PESTICIDES
Three hundred samples were analysed for soil nutrients and one hundred fifty samples
were analysed for pesticides in the WUAs. The nutrients included total nitrogen,
phosphorus, potassium and total organic matter. The pesticides included Aldrin,
Deildrin, Endrin and DDT. The abstract details of soil analysis are presented in Table
4.18. The detailed soil analysis reports are presented in annexure IV.17 to IV.21
IV-12
The available nitrogen status was low in majority of soils. The average values ranged
between 106 - 122.7 mg/ Kg. Considering the soil test values there is a need to apply
adequate nitrogen fertilisers to maintain high level of productivity.
The average values of phosphorus indicate that majority of soils are medium to high.
The average values ranged between 15.52 23.99 mg/Kg. There is a build up of
phosphorus due to continuous application of phosphorus fertiliser. In future
phosphorus fertiliser should be applied on the basis of soil test values. Farmers can
reduce the cost of production by adoption of site specific nutrients management. In
the present study soil samples were collected in each WUA along with GPS co-
ordinates. This will help in monitoring the phosphorus status in command area.
The average available potassium (K2O) status was higher in all the zones ranging
between 138.97 170.63 mg/ Kg. Farmers may be advised to apply potassium
fertilisers only when the available potassium status is low. The blanket application of
potassium will increase the cost of production without any increase in crop yield. Just
like phosphorus site specific nutrient management is highly essential for NSP
command area.
The organic matter status is also low to medium. There is a need to adopt integrated
nutrient management in the command area. Application of organic manures along
with chemical fertilisers is highly useful in improving the soil physical properties and
micro-nutrient status of soils.
Pesticides residue analysis results are shown in Annexure IV.17 to IV.21. The
pesticide values of all samples were found in safe limit.
IV-13
Table 4.1 Distribution of Percentage operational holdings according to size classes,
Zone Reach
Small Medium Large Overall
% % % %
Right Bank Canal System Distribution of Farm Households - Left Bank
Zone-I Head 60.41 31.98 7.61 100.00 80
Middle 65.81 28.68 5.51 100.00 66
62 61
Tail 47.89 43.66 8.45 100.00 60 60 58 Small
60
Average 59.90 33.22 6.87 100.00 48
51
Zone-II Head 62.42 29.09 8.48 100.00 44

38
40 Medium
%
Middle 61.11 32.72 6.17 100.00 32 33 33 33
29 29
Tail 50.66 38.16 11.18 100.00
Average 58.25 33.19 8.56 100.00 20
11 Large
Left Bank Canal System 8
6
8 7 8
6
9
Zone-I Head 47.52 42.55 9.93 100.00 0

Middle 52.08 31.25 16.67 100.00 Head Middle Tail Average Head Middle Tail Average
Tail 45.74 49.61 4.65 100.00
Zone and Reach
Average 48.09 42.08 9.84 100.00
Zone-II Head 61.22 31.97 6.80 100.00
Middle 57.14 29.46 13.39 100.00
Distribution of Farm Households -Right Bank
Tail 36.47 50.59 12.94 100.00 80
Average 53.78 35.76 10.47 100.00 61 62
Zone-III Head 52.04 44.90 3.06 100.00 57 Small

60 52
54
52
55
50 51 51
48 48
Middle 62.39 30.28 7.34 100.00 43
46
42
45
38
Tail 51.08 38.13 10.79 100.00 40 36 36
38
%
31 32
29 30 Medium
Average 54.91 37.57 7.51 100.00
Total(Left + Right) 20 17
13 13
10 10 10 11
Head 57.49 35.03 7.49 100.00 5
7 7 8
Large
3
Middle 61.25 30.23 8.52 100.00 0
Tail 47.30 43.28 9.43 100.00
Tail
Tail
Tail
Average
Average
Average
Middle
Middle
Middle
Head
Head
Head
Project Area 55.73 35.83 8.43 100.00
Control Area 50.28 40.04 9.68 100.00
Zone and Reach
Distribution of Farm Households - Overall

80
61
57 Small
60 56
50
47
43
40
40 35 36 Medium
%
30
20 Large
9 9 8 10
7
0
Zone and Reach
IV-14
Table 4.2 Distribution of operational holding according to Zone and canal reaches
(Acres) - Per Households
Zone Reach Overall
command
problems
+
more than
oils
outside
Leased in
cultivable
cropped
Leased
Owned
Gross
sown
Total
once
Area
area
area
land
Net
out
Zone-I Head 2.88 0.14 0.10 2.92 0.96 1.87 0.75 2.63
Distribution of Landuse Pattern
Middle 2.65 0.03 0.08 2.60 0.66 1.91 0.59 2.51
Tail 3.63 0.05 0.14 3.54 0.88 2.55 0.83 3.38 4.5
Average 2.96 0.07 0.10 2.92 0.81 2.05 0.70 2.75 4.0
3.55 3.53
Zone-II Head 3.47 0.02 0.12 3.37 0.97 2.30 0.78 3.08 3.5 3.21 3.29 3.23
3.13
Middle 3.20 0.20 0.04 3.35 0.84 2.45 0.57 3.02 3.0 2.82
Area, Acres
2.52 2.53
Tail 3.62 0.30 0.08 3.84 1.06 2.68 0.66 3.34 2.5 2.28
Average 3.43 0.17 0.08 3.51 0.95 2.47 0.67 3.14

2.0
Left Bank Canal System 1.5
Zone-I Head 3.76 0.20 0.16 3.81 1.15 2.58 1.02 3.60 0.84
1.0 0.69 0.74 0.76
Middle 3.75 0.30 0.17 3.88 0.93 2.82 0.93 3.75
0.5 0.30
Tail 3.74 0.06 0.26 3.54 0.72 2.53 0.78 3.30
0.0
Average 3.75 0.18 0.20 3.73 0.94 2.62 0.91 3.54
Zone-II Head 3.74 0.03 0.00 3.77 1.13 2.49 0.99 3.49 Owned land Leased in
Middle 4.19 0.35 0.15 4.40 0.96 3.33 0.92 4.25 Leased out Total
Tail 4.17 0.13 0.13 4.18 0.52 3.64 0.81 4.45 outside command + problemsoils Net cultivable area
Area sown more than once Gross cropped area
Average 4.00 0.16 0.08 4.08 0.92 3.02 0.92 3.94
Zone-III Head 3.15 0.20 0.38 2.96 0.45 2.36 0.68 3.05
Middle 3.60 0.47 0.23 3.84 0.60 2.99 0.67 3.66
Tail 3.69 0.37 0.01 4.06 0.96 3.00 0.64 3.64
Average 3.51 0.35 0.18 3.68 0.70 2.81 0.66 3.48
Total(Left +
Right)
Head 3.38 0.11 0.13 3.35 0.96 2.28 0.84 3.13
Middle 3.28 0.22 0.12 3.38 0.77 2.52 0.69 3.21
Tail 3.73 0.19 0.12 3.81 0.86 2.82 0.74 3.55
Project Area 3.45 0.17 0.12 3.50 0.86 2.53 0.76 3.29
Cotrol Area 3.80 0.31 0.24 3.88 0.46 3.23 0.30 3.53
IV-15
Table 4.3 Cropping Intensity according to Zone, land holding size and canal Reaches
Net cultivable
Net cultivable
Net cultivable
Net cultivable
Cropped area
Cropped area
Cropped area
Cropped area
area in acres
area in acres
area in acres
area in acres
Cropping
Cropping
Cropping
Cropping
intensity
intensity
intensity
intensity
in acres
in acres
in acres
in acres
Zone Reach
Gross
Gross
Gross
Gross
Zone-I Head 148 180 121.62 242 366 151.24 128.3 181.3 141.31 518.3 727.3 140.32
Middle 277 318 114.80 325 454 139.69 122.4 177.4 144.93 724.4 949.4 131.06
Tail 143 158 110.49 255 371.5 145.69 118 154 130.51 516 683.5 132.46
Average 568 656 115.49 822 1191.5 144.95 368.7 512.7 139.06 1758.7 2360.2 134.20
Zone-II Head 188 244 129.79 227 317 139.65 133.15 172.15 129.29 548.15 733.15 133.75
Middle 184 209 113.59 259.5 327.5 126.20 107.3 143.3 133.55 550.8 679.8 123.42
Tail 193 223 115.54 254 331 130.31 137.6 174.6 126.89 584.6 728.6 124.63
Average 565 676 119.65 740.5 975.5 131.74 378.05 490.05 129.63 1683.55 2141.55 127.20
Zone-I Head 150 184 122.67 232.2 333.2 143.50 130.5 198.5 152.11 512.7 715.7 139.59
Middle 84 107 127.38 149.2 204.2 136.86 159 210 132.08 392.2 521.2 132.89
Tail 121 146 120.66 267 360 134.83 64.2 85.2 132.71 452.2 591.2 130.74
Average 355 437 123.10 648.4 897.4 138.40 353.7 493.7 139.58 1357.1 1828.1 134.71
Zone-II Head 181 237 130.94 231.5 339.5 146.65 78.6 110.1 140.08 491.1 686.6 139.81
Middle 209 240 114.83 184.5 246 133.33 136.45 190.45 139.57 529.95 676.45 127.64
Tail 88 107 121.59 232 285 122.84 116.75 141.5 121.20 436.75 533.5 122.15
Average 478 584 122.18 648 870.5 134.34 331.8 442.05 133.23 1457.8 1896.55 130.10
Zone-III Head 111 132 118.92 185 251 135.68 37.4 46.4 124.06 333.4 429.4 128.79
Middle 162 190 117.28 207.5 272.5 131.33 105.37 119.37 113.29 474.87 581.87 122.53
Tail 170 201 118.24 265.5 336.5 126.74 160.52 186.84 116.40 596.02 724.34 121.53
Average 443 523 118.06 658 860 130.70 303.29 352.61 116.26 1404.29 1735.61 123.59
Total(Left + Right)
Head 778 977 125.58 1117.7 1606.7 143.75 507.95 708.45 139.47 2403.65 3292.15 136.96
Middle 916 1064 116.16 1125.7 1504.2 133.62 630.52 840.52 133.31 2672.22 3408.72 127.56
Tail 715 835 116.78 1273.5 1684 132.23 597.07 742.14 124.30 2585.57 3261.14 126.13
Project Area 2409 2876 119.39 3516.9 4794.9 136.34 1735.54 2291.11 132.01 7661.44 9962.01 130.03
Cotrol Area 1650 1772 107.39 1937.4 2140.4 110.48 1256.53 1377.53 109.63 4843.93 5289.93 109.21
Source: Baseline Survey (2008-09)
Cropping Intensity
200

144
139
150
136
134
133
137
132
132
130
126
124
128 126
119
117
116
110
110
107
109
100
%
50
0
IV-16
Table 4.4 Average size of holding according to Zone, Canal reaches
and land holding size (Acres)
Zone Reach
avg size
avg size
avg size
avg size
Zone-I Head 1.78 6.27 13.49 4.11
Middle 1.76 5.88 14.06 3.62
Tail 2.32 6.06 15.08 5.04
Average 1.87 6.06 14.15 4.11
Zone-II Head 2.76 7.26 12.05 4.86
Middle 2.28 6.71 17.31 4.66
Tail 2.96 6.59 13.31 5.50
Average 2.65 6.83 13.85 4.99
Zone-I Head 2.97 5.77 15.14 5.37
Middle 2.58 6.71 13.03 5.61
Tail 3.15 5.69 14.05 4.92
Average 2.92 5.92 14.02 5.27
Zone-II Head 2.84 7.13 15.09 5.05
Middle 3.33 8.35 14.03 6.24
Tail 3.32 5.98 12.89 5.90
Average 3.09 7.05 13.98 5.65
Zone-III Head 2.37 5.70 15.13 4.26
Middle 3.09 8.50 15.06 5.61
Tail 3.46 6.84 13.29 5.81
Average 3.04 6.88 14.05 5.31
Total(Left + Right)
Head 2.49 6.40 13.92 4.72
Middle 2.38 6.92 14.43 4.78
Tail 3.01 6.22 13.65 5.40
Project Area 2.58 6.49 14.01 4.94
Cotrol Area 1.23 5.28 14.64 4.15
Source: Baseline Survey (2008-09)
Average Holding Size

18
16
14.43 14.64
13.92 14.01
13.65
14
12
Area, Acres
10
6.92
6.49
6.40
8
6.22
5.40
5.28
4.94
4.78
4.72
4.15
6
3.01
2.58
2.49
2.38
4
1.23
0
IV-17
Table 4.5 Distribution of Sources of Irrigation according to Zone and
canal reaches (Percentages)
Right Bank Overall
Canal System
Zone Reach
area
well
Canal
Tank
Rainfed
other area
Total
Well/Tube
Zone-I Head 84.69 2.30 2.84 1.22 8.94 100.00
Middle 80.29 3.50 3.27 0.96 11.98 100.00
Tail 68.76 5.99 3.22 2.19 19.83 100.00
Average 78.42 3.82 3.12 1.40 13.24 100.00
Zone-II Head 87.77 2.93 3.51 1.26 4.52 100.00
Middle 82.01 4.64 4.04 1.12 8.19 100.00
Tail 65.03 8.05 2.99 1.60 22.32 100.00
Average 78.01 5.26 3.49 1.34 11.90 100.00
Left Bank Canal
System
Zone-I Head 91.85 2.30 2.21 1.27 2.37 100.00
Middle 88.39 4.98 3.65 2.01 0.97 100.00
Tail 79.45 7.81 2.68 3.26 6.79 100.00
Average 86.81 4.86 2.77 2.13 3.43 100.00
Zone-II Head 53.49 3.63 3.57 1.46 37.86 100.00
Middle 55.21 4.30 4.28 1.32 34.89 100.00
Tail 42.20 6.95 3.23 3.37 44.25 100.00
Average 51.19 4.73 3.74 1.90 38.44 100.00
Zone-III Head 66.63 9.71 7.65 4.92 11.09 100.00
Middle 63.64 10.53 7.08 2.37 16.38 100.00
Tail 61.68 10.28 6.66 1.72 19.66 100.00
Average 63.46 10.23 7.02 2.67 16.62 100.00
Total(Left +
Right)
Head 78.23 3.60 3.58 1.73 12.86 100.00
Middle 74.15 5.31 4.33 1.46 14.74 100.00
Tail 64.36 7.94 3.87 2.31 21.53 100.00
Project Area 72.28 5.61 3.93 1.83 16.35 100.00
Cotrol Area 64.97 1.57 4.65 18.14 10.67 100.00
Distribution of Source of Irrigation
100
Canal Well/Tube well Tank Rainfed area other area
90
78.2
74.1
72.3
80
65.0
64.4
70
Area, Acres
60
50
40
30
21.5
18.1
16.4
14.7
12.9
20
10.7
7.9
5.6
5.3
3.6
2.3
10
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
3.58 4.33 3.87 3.93 4.65
0
IV-18
Table 4.6 Awarness and Adoption of Technology in the Command and Control area
Small Medium Large Overall Control
S. No. Particulars of technology Awarness Adoption Awarness Adoption Awarness Adoption Awarness Adoption Awarness Adoption
% tage % tage % tage % tage % tage % tage % tage % tage % tage % tage
1 Suitable high yielding varities 66 65 76 73 82 82 70.92 69.30 60 58
2 Seed rate 38 36 42 40 75 71 42.53 40.39 32 26
3 Timely sowing 37 33 45 42 65 62 42.20 38.67 36 31
4 Cultural practices 42 40 46 46 71 71 45.86 44.76 38 31
5 Organic manures 25 17 22 18 30 22 24.35 17.78 21 15
6 Vermi compost 12 8 14 9 21 12 13.45 8.70 9 7
7 Crop rotation 46 2 55 3 62 3 50.57 2.44 44 32
8 Water Saving Technologis 23 5 28 8 31 8 25.46 6.33 21 15
9 Nursery management 18 6 24 11 32 14 21.32 8.47 17 11
10 I. N. M. 22 19 36 36 39 39 28.45 26.78 22 13
11 I.P.M. 20 18 32 32 34 34 25.47 24.37 16 8
12 Soil testing 45 29 56 41 66 52 50.70 35.24 41 28
13 Pre harvest management 8 3 17 11 21 14 12.29 6.79 7 3
14 Post harvest management 8 3 17 11 21 15 12.34 6.88 7 3
15 Bio pesticides 6 2 14 6 21 8 10.14 3.94 6 2
16 Bio fertiliser 6 2 14 6 20 8 10.06 3.94 5 2
17 Banned pesticides 4 6 12 2 6.80 0.17 2 2
18 Improved machinery 12 8 21 18 35 30 17.14 13.44 11 5
Source: Secendoary data from published reports of ANGRAU, PRA and FGD Techniques
Awarness and Adoption of Technology in the Command and Control

80 area
71
69
70
60
51
Awarness
51
50 Adoption
35
40
%
30
20
10
2
0
Suitable high yielding varities
Post harvest management

Pre harvest management
Improved machinery
Water Saving Technologis
Bio fertiliser
Banned pesticides
Cultural practices
Nursery management
Organic manures
Seed rate
Vermi compost
Soil testing
Crop rotation
I. N. M.
Timely sowing
I.P.M.
Bio pesticides
IV-19
Table 4.7 Predominant Cropping Pattern in the Command and Control area
Zone Reach
Command (Size groups)
Kharif Rabi

Zone-I Head Paddy Paddy
Paddy Black gram
Paddy Sesamum
Paddy
Cotton
Chillies
Paddy Groundnut
Middle Paddy Paddy
Paddy Black gram
Paddy
Cotton
Tail Paddy Black gram
Paddy
Cotton
Chillies
Maize Maize
fodder crops
Zone-II Head Paddy Paddy
Paddy Black gram
Paddy Sesamum
Fallow Paddy
Cotton
Chillies
middle Paddy Groundnut
Paddy Paddy
Paddy Black gram
Fallow Paddy
Cotton
Paddy Bengal Gram
Red gram
Chillies
Maize Maize
Tail Paddy Groundnut
Paddy Paddy
Paddy Black gram
Fallow Paddy
Cotton
Castor
Chillies
Maize Maize
IV-20
Zone-I Head Paddy Paddy
Green gram Paddy
Jowar
Chillies
Cotton
Castor
Maize
Middle Paddy Paddy
Paddy Maize
Paddy
Cotton
Chillies
Tail Paddy Paddy
Paddy Maize
Castor
Jowar
Green gram
Zone-II Head Paddy Paddy
Cotton Chillies
Maize
Jowar
Sugarcane
Middle Green gram
Black gram
Paddy -
Paddy Black gram
Paddy Chillies
Cotton
Tail Ground nut Ground nut
Paddy -
Paddy Black gram
Paddy Chillies
Cotton
Zone-III Head Paddy Paddy
Paddy
Paddy Black gram
Green gram Black gram
Chillies
Groundnut
Sugarcane
Middle Paddy Ground nut
Paddy
Paddy Black gram
Chillies
Cotton
Tail Paddy
Paddy Black gram
Green gram Groundnut
Chillies
Control Paddy Paddy
Paddy Black gram
Green gram Groundnut
Paddy
Cotton
Chillies
Paddy Groundnut
IV-20
Table 4.8 Area under different Crops according to Zone, and canal reaches (Percentage)
Right Bank Overall

Canal System
Zone Reach
area
Gross
Others
Black
Fooder
Cropped
Crop
gram
Paddy
Maize
Cotton
Chilliess
Zone-I Head 78.50 2.18 8.53 3.02 1.86 1.55 4.36 100.00
Middle 77.43 1.95 8.58 3.16 1.82 1.70 5.34 100.00
Tail 76.13 2.27 8.18 2.85 2.75 1.52 6.30 100.00
Average 77.36 2.13 8.43 3.01 2.15 1.66 5.27 100.00
Zone-II Head 76.67 2.34 8.38 5.34 2.30 - 4.98 100.00
Middle 76.67 2.12 8.16 5.25 3.11 - 4.70 100.00
Tail 74.30 1.92 8.35 4.72 3.13 - 7.58 100.00
Average 75.88 2.13 8.30 5.10 2.84 - 5.75 100.00
Left Bank Canal
System
Zone-I Head 76.52 1.07 14.38 3.12 1.05 1.38 2.48 100.00
Middle 75.62 1.82 13.26 3.31 1.06 1.12 3.80 100.00
Tail 73.63 2.34 12.95 2.58 2.08 1.13 5.29 100.00
Average 75.26 1.74 13.53 3.00 1.40 1.21 3.86 100.00
Zone-II Head 72.93 3.07 14.95 4.08 2.49 1.36 1.11 100.00
Middle 72.93 4.14 14.29 3.55 2.20 1.25 1.63 100.00
Tail 71.91 2.12 14.00 3.16 2.42 1.24 5.14 100.00
Average 72.59 3.11 14.41 3.61 2.37 1.29 2.61 100.00
Zone-III Head 61.93 1.98 14.41 3.17 3.18 - 15.32 100.00
Middle 59.73 1.62 14.39 1.24 3.17 - 19.84 100.00
Tail 56.57 3.32 14.17 2.75 3.25 - 19.94 100.00
Average 59.41 2.30 14.32 2.39 3.20 - 18.37 100.00
Total(Left +
Right)
Head 74.32 2.14 11.70 3.79 2.07 0.92 5.07 100.00
Middle 73.08 2.35 11.24 3.37 2.25 0.88 6.84 100.00
Tail 70.04 2.41 11.34 3.22 2.73 0.73 9.53 100.00
Project Area 72.49 2.30 11.42 3.46 2.35 0.84 7.14 100.00
Cotrol Area 69.28 2.27 9.12 2.00 3.47 13.86 100.00
Distribution of Source of Irrigation
100
Paddy Black gram Cotton Chilliess Maize Fooder Crop Others
90
74.3
73.1
72.5
70.0
80
69.3
70
Area, Acres
60
50
40
30
20
11.70 11.24 11.34 11.42
9.12
3.8
3.5
3.4
3.2
2.4
10
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.1
2.0
3.5
2.7
2.3
2.2
2.1
0
IV-22
Table 4.9 Average Yield of Important crops according to Zone, canal reaches (Kgs/Ha)-
Seasonwise
Zone Reach Kharif Crop Rabi Crop
Seed
Blackgra
Maize
Chillies
Maize
Paddy
Paddy
m
Kharif
Rabi
t
cotton
Groundnu
Average Yield of Important crops
6
Right Bank Canal System Head Middle Tail Total
Zone-I Head 4593.40 3735.40 2532.51 2070.89 4390.44 6199.56 1700.34 1141.99 5 5 4.7
5
Middle 4252.86 3604.43 2311.05 2023.88 4044.49 5846.59 1574.08 1018.09 4 4.3 4 4.4
4
Tail 4042.32 3437.87 2170.20 1939.80 3921.51 5898.49 1544.43 924.19 4 4
3
Average 4296.19 3592.57 2337.92 2011.52 4118.81 5981.55 1606.28 1028.09 3.3
Ton/Ha
3
Zone-II Head 5117.74 3629.14 2367.42 2273.52 4987.16 4003.16 1709.99 951.37 3
2 2 2.3
Middle 4860.86 3270.84 2273.40 2194.33 4683.01 4151.43 1779.18 911.83 2 2 2.1
Tail 4493.03 3173.46 2219.04 2068.30 3911.37 3854.90 1551.84 832.76 2 2 2 1.7
Average 4823.88 3357.81 2286.62 2178.72 4527.18 4003.16 1680.34 898.65 1 1 0.9
1
Zone-I Head 4863.22 3439.84 2293.29 2016.41 5446.39 4005.63 1798.95 889.59
0
Middle 4784.14 3041.55 2186.03 2006.52 5247.96 3585.55 1759.41 842.64
Kharif Paddy
Chillies
Seed cotton
Rabi Paddy
Blackgram
Maize
Maize
Groundnut
Tail 4714.84 3014.37 2139.96 1878.03 4924.40 2977.66 1685.28 783.33
Average 4787.40 3165.25 2206.43 1966.99 5206.25 3522.95 1747.88 838.52
Zone-II Head 5325.31 3534.30 2552.75 2191.86 5450.43 4573.98 1742.12 904.42
Middle 5099.44 3389.98 2419.78 2144.90 5015.52 4015.52 1779.18 851.29
Tail 4822.68 3006.26 2310.47 2112.78 4183.08 4077.30 1677.87 820.40
Average 5082.48 3310.18 2427.67 2149.85 4883.01 4222.27 1733.06 858.70
Zone-III Head 4769.32 3390.98 2360.00 2228.63 3830.19 4571.51 1932.39 939.01 Average Yield of Important crops
Middle 4554.33 3236.77 2325.88 2023.82 2711.21 4020.46 1774.24 869.82
5 4.7
4.5
Tail 4438.07 2952.60 2223.98 1984.28 1595.31 3956.21 1794.01 835.23 4.3
5
Average 4587.24 3193.45 2303.29 2078.91 2712.24 4182.73 1833.55 881.35 4
3.3
Total(Left + Right) 4
3
Ton/Ha
Head 4933.80 3545.93 2421.19 2156.26 4820.92 4670.77 1776.76 965.28 2.3
3 2.1
Middle 4710.33 3308.71 2303.23 2078.69 4340.44 4323.91 1733.22 898.73 2 1.7
Tail 4502.19 3116.91 2212.73 1996.64 3707.13 4152.91 1650.69 839.18 2
0.9
Overall 4715.44 3323.85 2312.38 2077.20 4289.50 4382.53 1720.22 901.06 1
1
Right Bank Canal 4560.035 3475.19 2312.27 2095.12 4322.997 4992.355 1643.312 963.3704 0
System Kharif Maize Chillies Seed cotton Rabi Paddy Maize Groundnut Blackgram
Left Bank Canal 4819.039 3222.961 2312.46 2065.248 4267.165 3975.981 1771.496 859.5269 Paddy
System
Project Area 4689.537 3349.076 2312.365 2080.184 4295.081 4484.168 1707.404 911.4487
IV-23
Table 4.10 Per Acre Average Costs and Returns of Paddy Crop according to Zone
and canal reaches
Zone Reach overall
Gross
(Rs.)
(Rs.)
(Rs.)
Net
(Rs.)
al cost
Product
Product
Main
Main
BC Ratio
(Qtls)
Operation
returns
returns
Per Acre Benefit Cost Ratio of Paddy
1.5
Zone-I Head 10087.11 19.52 20106.44 20506.44 10419.33 6199.56 1700.34 1.10
1141.99 1.07 1.07 1.08
Middle 9738.16 17.98 18521.37 18921.37 9183.21 0.94 1.0 0.90
Tail 9552.49 17.21 17725.43 18125.43 8572.94 0.90
Ratio
Average 9807.52 18.30 18847.45 19247.45 9439.93 0.96
Zone-II Head 9576.75 19.41 19990.30 20390.30 10813.55 1.14 0.5
Middle 9197.43 18.71 19268.12 19668.12 10470.69 1.14
Tail 8926.45 17.99 18531.06 18931.06 10004.61 1.13
Average 9242.10 18.72 19283.00 19683.00 10440.89 1.14 0.0
Left Bank Canal System Head Middle Tail Project Area Control
Zone-I Head 9522.33 19.72 20315.98 20715.98 11193.66 1.18
Middle 9352.46 19.25 19828.79 20228.79 10876.33 1.17
Per Acre Average Costs and Returns of Paddy
Tail 8727.75 18.62 19178.97 19578.97 10851.22 1.25
Average 9197.71 19.21 19787.44 20187.44 10989.73 1.20 30000
Zone-II Head 10136.91 20.46 21072.40 21472.40 11335.49 1.12 Gross returns (Rs.) Operational cost (Rs.) Net returns (Rs.)
Middle 10028.58 20.12 20726.27 21126.27 11097.69 1.11 25000
Tail 9514.71 18.92 19482.87 19882.87 10368.17 1.09 20,662
19,861 19,868
Amount, Rs
20000 19,075 18,539
Average 9947.90 19.97 20566.94 20966.94 11019.05 1.11
Zone-III Head 9916.24 19.11 19685.82 20085.82 10169.58 1.03
10,816
10,290
10,246
Middle 9735.14 18.48 19036.48 19436.48 9701.34 1.00 15000
9,846
9,819
9,614
9,577
9,256
Tail 9586.38 17.98 18520.22 18920.22 9333.84 0.97
10000
Average 9726.67 18.46 19013.00 19413.00 9686.32 1.00
Total(Left + Right)
5000
Head 9846.36 19.67 20262.33 20662.33 10815.97 1.10
Head Middle Tail Project Area Control
Middle 9614.30 18.89 19460.69 19860.69 10246.39 1.07
Tail 9255.63 18.13 18675.05 19075.05 9819.42 1.07
Project Area 9577.22 18.90 19467.69 19867.69 10290.47 1.08
Control 9785.21 17.61 18139.18 18539.18 8753.98 0.90
IV-24
Table 4.11Per Acre Average Costs and Returns of Seed Cotton Crop according
to Zone and canal reaches
Zone Reach Overall
Gross
(Rs.)
(Rs.)
Net
(Rs.)
al cost
Product
Product
Main
Main
BC Ratio
(Qtls)
Operation
returns
returns
Per Acre Benefit Cost Ratio of Seed Cotton
1.5
1.33
Right Bank Canal System 1.18 1.17 1.15 1.17
Zone-I Head 11769.62 8.36 25091.42 25211.42 13441.80 1.14 1700.34 1141.99
Middle 11408.12 8.40 25191.73 25311.73 13903.61 1.22 1.0
Tail 10983.75 7.78 23325.63 23445.63 12461.89 1.14
Ratio
Average 11426.05 8.24 24725.70 24845.70 13419.65 1.17
Zone-II Head 12282.15 8.73 26176.36 26296.36 14014.21 1.14 0.5
Middle 11834.18 8.19 24579.26 24699.26 12865.08 1.09
Tail 11375.78 8.36 25066.18 25186.18 13810.40 1.21
Average 11843.03 8.43 25283.92 25403.92 13560.90 1.15 0.0
Left Bank Canal System Head Middle Tail Project Area Control
Zone-I Head 11094.40 8.01 24038.30 24158.30 13063.89 1.18
Middle 10777.07 7.56 22672.50 22792.50 12015.43 1.12
Tail 10552.46 7.20 21606.98 21726.98 11174.52 1.06 Per Acre Average Costs and Returns of Seed Cotton
Average 10820.16 7.61 22823.11 22943.11 12122.96 1.12
Zone-II Head 35000
10785.84 8.29 24860.00 24980.00 14194.16 1.32
Middle 10583.77 8.15 24448.66 24568.66 13984.89 1.32 Gross returns (Rs.) Operational cost Irrigable area Net returns (Rs.)
30000
Tail 10333.71 7.85 23553.18 23673.18 13339.46 1.29 24,883 24,039 23,268 24,076
Average 10608.33 8.13 24403.17 24523.17 13914.83 1.31 25000
Amount, Rs
Zone-III Head 11402.05 8.04 24115.71 24235.71 12833.66 1.12 19,703
20000
13,439
12,947
12,957
11051.65 7.66 22993.76 23113.76 12062.11 1.09
12,457
Middle
11,444
11,228
11,119
11,092
10,812
Tail 10882.65 7.48 22441.94 22561.94 11679.29 1.07 15000
8,474
Average 11096.63 7.70 23114.62 23234.62 12137.99 1.09
10000
Total(Left + Right)
Head 11443.92 8.25 24762.75 24882.75 13438.84 1.18 5000
Middle 11091.81 7.97 23919.24 24039.24 12947.43 1.17 Head Middle Tail Project Area Control
Tail 10811.74 7.72 23148.35 23268.35 12456.61 1.15
Project Area 11118.52 7.99 23955.82 24075.82 12957.30 1.17
Control 8474.41 6.53 19582.79 19702.79 11228.38 1.33
IV-25
Table 4.12 Per Acre Average Costs and Returns of Chillies Crop according to
Zone Reach Overall
Gross
(Rs.)
(Rs.)
Net
(Rs.)
al cost
Product
Product
Main
Main
BC Ratio
(Qtls)
Operation
returns
returns
Per Acre Benefit Cost Ratio of Chillies
1700.34
1.03
Zone-I Head 16461.77 9.92 34724.80 34724.80 18263.03 6199.56 1141.99 0.97 0.98
1.0 0.93
Middle 16109.84 8.87 31046.67 31046.67 14936.83 0.93
Tail 15959.94 8.46 29613.94 29613.94 13654.00 0.85 0.71
Ratio
Average 16188.48 9.11 31899.61 31899.61 15711.13 0.97
Zone-II Head 16016.36 9.56 33450.24 33450.24 17433.89 1.09 0.5
Middle 15736.66 9.18 32135.83 32135.83 16399.17 1.04
Tail 15356.86 8.95 31337.89 31337.89 15981.04 1.04
Average 15712.49 9.24 32335.40 32335.40 16622.91 1.06
0.0
Zone-I Head 15764.93 9.24 32338.51 32338.51 16573.58 1.05
Middle 15571.12 8.78 30720.52 30720.52 15149.41 0.97
Tail 15182.44 8.54 29900.31 29900.31 14717.87 0.97
Average 15508.79 8.87 31054.75 31054.75 15545.96 1.00 Per Acre Average Costs and Returns of Chillies
Zone-II Head 17041.75 9.97 34881.90 34881.90 17840.16 1.05
Middle 16625.00 9.51 33293.44 33293.44 16668.44 1.00 45000
Tail 16455.80 9.27 32438.82 32438.82 15983.02 0.97 40000 Gross returns (Rs.) Operational cost Irrigable area Net returns (Rs.)
Average 16761.28 9.65 33761.06 33761.06 16999.78 1.01
33,793
Zone-III Head 35000 32,061 32,322
17986.60 9.58 33514.64 33514.64 15528.04 0.86 30,920
Amount, Rs
Middle 17541.30 9.47 33129.27 33129.27 15587.96 0.89 30000
Tail 17418.95 9.02 31578.06 31578.06 14159.11 0.81 24,276
25000
17,125
16,667
Average
16,365
16,321
17618.27 9.32 32615.25 32615.25 14996.97 0.85
16,067
15,958
15,739
14,852
14,161
20000
Total(Left + Right)
10,114
Head 16667.40 9.66 33792.61 33792.61 17125.21 1.03 15000
Middle 16321.45 9.16 32060.78 32060.78 15739.33 0.97
10000
Tail 16067.40 8.83 30919.79 30919.79 14852.39 0.93
Project Area 16364.65 9.23 32322.24 32322.24 15957.60 0.98 5000
Control 14161.36 6.94 24275.53 24275.53 10114.17 0.71
IV-26
Table 4.13 Per Acre Average Costs and Returns of Groundnut Crop according to Zone and canal reaches
Zone Reach Overall

Per Acre Benefit Cost Ratio of Groundnut
returns
Net
returns
(Qtls)
Operation
Gross
(Rs.)
(Rs.)
(Rs.)
BC Ratio
al cost
Product
Product
Main
Main
Right Bank Canal System 1.0 0.90 0.89 0.91 0.91
Zone-I Head 7805.37 6.34 13323.38 13543.38 5738.01 6199.56 1141.99
Middle 7477.43 6.00 12597.45 12817.45 5340.03 0.71 0.69
Ratio
Tail 7221.98 5.66 11878.31 12098.31 4876.33 0.67
Average 7523.79 6.03 12664.37 12884.37 5360.58 0.71 0.5
Zone-II Head 8007.09 6.65 13964.11 14184.11 6177.02 0.77

Middle 7645.44 6.53 13709.89 13929.89 6284.44 0.82
Tail 7341.14 6.29 13217.57 13437.57 6096.42 0.83
0.0
Average 7673.45 6.50 13641.23 13861.23 6187.78 0.81
Zone-I Head 7225.56 6.67 14013.55 14233.55 7007.99 0.97
Middle 7037.28 6.45 13545.44 13765.44 6728.15 0.96
Per Acre Average Costs and Returns of Groundnut
Tail 6577.19 6.12 12853.14 13073.14 6495.95 0.99
Average 6947.65 6.42 13481.77 13701.77 6754.12 0.97 20000
Zone-II Head 7477.17 6.94 14566.29 14786.29 7309.11 0.98 Gross returns (Rs.) Operational cost Irrigable area Net returns (Rs.)
Middle 7207.93 6.57 13794.38 14014.38 6806.44 0.94
Tail 6958.42 6.28 13187.31 13407.31 6448.89 0.93 15000 14,418
13,835 13,899
Amount, Rs
13,328
Average 7261.33 6.65 13974.23 14194.23 6932.90 0.95
Zone-III Head 7510.68 7.23 15187.50 15407.50 7896.82 1.05
Middle 7203.75 6.96 14612.34 14832.34 7628.59 1.06
7,607
10000
7,311
7,310
6,989
6,811
6,786
6,589
6,524
Tail 6831.07 6.83 14340.13 14560.13 7729.06 1.13
6,339
Average 7140.97 6.98 14665.89 14885.89 7744.92 1.09
Total(Left + Right) 5000
Head 7606.78 6.76 14197.81 14417.81 6811.03 0.90 Head Middle Tail Project Area Control
Middle 7311.34 6.48 13615.32 13835.32 6523.98 0.89
Tail 6989.04 6.24 13108.19 13328.19 6339.14 0.91
Project Area 7310.33 6.51 13679.05 13899.05 6588.72 0.91
Control 6786.03 5.36 11246.11 11466.11 4680.08 0.69
IV-27
Table 4.14 Per Acre Average Costs and Returns of Blackgram Crop
according to Zone and canal reaches
Zone Reach Overall
Gross
(Rs.)
(Rs.)
Net
(Rs.)
al cost
Product
Product
Main
Main
BC Ratio
(Qtls)
Operation
returns
returns
Per Acre Benefit Cost Ratio of Black gram
4.0
Right Bank Canal System 3.5 3.21 3.17 3.09 3.07
Zone-I Head 2389.43 4.34 10936.93 11056.93 8667.50 6199.56 1700.34 1141.99 3.02
3.0
Middle 2267.02 3.97 10010.51 10130.51 7863.50 3.48
Tail 2189.36 3.64 9168.19 9288.19 7098.82 3.26 2.5
Ratio
Average 2288.44 4.01 10113.45 10233.45 7945.01 3.48 2.0
Zone-II Head 2232.01 3.73 9391.66 9511.66 7279.64 3.27 1.5
Middle 2137.73 3.55 8943.51 9063.51 6925.78 3.24 1.0
Tail 2114.89 3.27 8232.94 8352.94 6238.05 2.95
0.5
Average 1980.99 3.22 8125.96 8235.87 6254.88 2.89
0.0
Zone-I Head 2153.18 3.53 8894.71 9014.71 6861.52 3.18
Middle 2046.80 3.32 8362.20 8482.20 6435.40 3.14
Tail 1985.35 3.16 7965.15 8085.15 6099.80 3.07
Per Acre Average Costs and Returns of Black gram
Average 2066.13 3.34 8427.40 8547.40 6481.28 3.13
Zone-II Head 2252.86 3.50 8819.14 8939.14 6686.28 2.97 13000
Middle 2144.47 3.35 8453.70 8573.70 6429.23 3.00
Gross returns (Rs.) Operational cost Irrigable area Net returns (Rs.)
Tail 2133.10 3.22 8125.67 8245.67 6112.56 2.87 11000
Average 2187.98 3.38 8528.81 8648.81 6460.83 2.95 9,540
8,934 8,860
Zone-III Head 2294.22 3.62 9115.71 9235.71 6941.50 3.02 9000 8,446 8,547
7,275
Amount, Rs
6,791
6,721
6,445
6,343
Middle 2124.78 3.33 8391.14 8511.14 6386.36 3.00
Tail 2096.30 3.26 8202.69 8322.69 6226.39 2.97 7000
Average 2161.33 3.38 8520.66 8640.66 6479.33 3.00

5000
Total(Left + Right)
2,265
2,143
2,139
2,103
2,102
Head 2265.02 3.74 9420.19 9540.19 7275.17 3.21
3000
Middle 2142.79 3.50 8814.22 8934.22 6791.43 3.17
Tail 2102.57 3.30 8325.99 8445.99 6343.42 3.02 1000
Project Area 2139.08 3.47 8741.95 8860.08 6721.00 3.09 Head Middle Tail Project Area Control
Control 2102.39 3.34 8427.36 8547.36 6444.97 3.07
IV-28
Table 4.15 Per Acre Average Costs and Returns of Maize Crop according to
Zone Reach Overall
Per Acre Benefit Cost Ratio of Maize
Gross
(Rs.)
(Rs.)
Net
(Rs.)
al cost
Product
Product
Main
Main
BC Ratio
(Qtls)
Operation
returns
returns
1.5
Right Bank Canal System 1.09 1.06

1.06 1.03
Zone-I Head 7259.58 17.47 14672.92 14842.92 7583.34 6199.56 1700.34 1141.99
1.0 0.89
Middle 6899.20 16.23 13636.38 13806.38 6907.18 1.00
Ratio
Tail 6689.80 15.59 13091.81 13261.81 6572.02 0.98
Average 6966.73 16.48 13844.02 14014.02 7047.30 1.01
0.5
Zone-II Head 6894.39 16.65 13983.66 14153.66 7259.27 1.06
Middle 6656.26 15.96 13402.51 13572.51 6916.25 1.04
Tail 6527.60 15.12 12697.43 12867.43 6339.83 0.97
Average 6697.46 15.93 13378.96 13548.96 6851.50 1.02 0.0
Zone-I Head 6305.80 16.09 13519.11 13689.11 7383.32 1.17
Middle 6167.79 15.34 12881.40 13051.40 6883.61 1.12
Tail 5862.85 15.15 12724.70 12894.70 7031.85 1.20 Per Acre Average Costs and Returns of Maize
Average 6113.48 15.56 13071.85 13241.85 7128.37 1.17
20000
Zone-II Head 6903.03 16.53 13884.00 14054.00 7150.97 1.04
Gross returns (Rs.) Operational cost Irrigable area Net returns (Rs.)
Middle 6727.98 16.14 13561.05 13731.05 7003.07 1.04
Tail 6509.80 15.18 12752.29 12922.29 6412.48 0.99
15000 14,188
Average
Amount, Rs
6748.87 16.07 13499.22 13669.22 6920.34 1.02 13,515 13,550
12,928
Zone-III Head 6708.69 16.75 14073.86 14243.86 7535.16 1.12 12,033
Middle 6495.21 15.76 13240.79 13410.79 6915.58 1.06
Tail 6319.46 15.00 12600.06 12770.06 6450.60 1.02 10000
7,377
6,958
6,933
6,811
6,592
6,582
6,548
6,381
6,372
Average 6485.07 15.74 13219.34 13389.34 6904.27 1.06
5,660
Total(Left + Right)
Head 6810.89 16.69 14017.57 14187.57 7376.67 1.09 5000
Middle 6581.69 15.89 13345.08 13515.08 6933.39 1.06 Head Middle Tail Project Area Control
Tail 6380.80 15.19 12758.36 12928.36 6547.56 1.03
Project Area 6592.31 15.93 13380.23 13550.23 6957.93 1.06
Control 6372.28 14.12 11862.76 12032.76 5660.48 0.89
IV-29
Table-4.16(a-c)
Season wise Horticulture Crop Area for selecteted crops for 2008-09
of Left canal Zone -1
Table-4.16(a)
Area in hec
Mandal Chillies Fruit & Vegetables
K R K R
Head Reach
Anumula 426 0 1922 17
Chilkoor 0 0 79 0
Garedepalli 0 0 176 0
Kodad 170 0 1921 67
Miryalaguda 14 0 452 14
Nadigudem 31 0 1108 3
Nereducharla 375 0 444 0
Nidamanoor 57 0 1539 16
Tripuraram 39 8 1783 30
Table-4.16(b)
Middle Reach
Chilkoor 0 0 79 0
Damarcherla 859 0 270 0
Huzurnagar 0 0 155 0
Mellacheruv 1639 0 216 0
Nidamanoor 57 0 1539 16
Table-4.16(c)
Tail Reach
Damarcherla 859 0 270 0
Matampalli 529 0 63 0
Mellacheruv 1639 0 216 0
Nereducharla 375 0 444 0
IV-30
Table-4.16(d-f)
of Left canal Zone -2
Table-4.16(d)
Area in hec
K R K R
Head Reach
Chintakani 903 0 446 0
Enkoor 936 0 263 60
Kalluru 182 0 1656 0
Khammam (U) 2297 0 752 21
Khammam( R ) 1673 0 999 219
Konijerla 1330 0 285 10
Mudigonda 1321 0 630 0
Thallada 905 0 1405 7
Jaggaiahpet 609 0 633 107
Table-4.16(e)
Middle Reach
Kalluru 182 0 1656 0
Konijerla 1330 0 285 10
Madhira 759 0 674 65
Mudigonda 1321 0 630 0
Wyra 291 0 478 15
Gampalagudem 1000 0 1602 4
Nandigama 567 0 560 57
Vatsavai 1602 0 492 10
Table-4.16(f)
Tail Reach
Madhira 759 0 674 65
Thallada 905 0 1405 7
Wyra 291 0 478 15

Chandralpadu 902 0 141 8
Jaggaiahpet 609 0 633 107
IV-31
Table-4.16(g-i)
Season wise Horticulture Crop Area for selecteted crops for 2008-
09 of Left canal Zone -3
Table-4.16(g)
Area in hec
K R K R
Head Reach
Akonduru 245 0 5189 72
Agiripalli 0 0 10083 43
Bapulapadu 0 6 1823 631
Musunuru 0 91 3092 441
Reddigudem 49 0 7482 209
Tiruvuru 66 0 2286 25
Vissannapet 0 42 8660 30
Table-4.16(h)
Middle Reach
yerrupalem 292 0 1611 21
G.Konduru 613 0 3740 329
Gampalagudem 1000 0 1602 4
Musunuru 0 91 3092 441
Mylavaram 20 27 5616 80
Veerullapadu 294 0 389 101
Table-4.16(i)
Tail Reach
Akonduru 245 0 5189 72
Agiripalli 0 0 10083 43
Bapulapadu 0 6 1823 631
Gannavaram 0 36 2113 119
Ibrahimpatnam 14 0 434 165
KanchiKacherla 287 0 255 22

Unguturu 0 0 225 0
Vijyawada Rural 0 22 2143 119
IV-32
Table-4.16(j-l)
of Right canal Zone -1
Table-4.16(j)
Area in hec
K R K R
Head Reach
Macherla 2793 0 200 116
Madikonduru 2618 0 103 27
Muppalla 720 0 11 8
Narasaraopet 842 0 208 0
Phiragipuram 1187 0 268 0
Rentachintala 2886 0 77 0
Rompicherla 615 0 6 0
Sattenapalle 3411 0 56 78
Tadikonda 2091 500 223 150
Addanki 85 141 281 101
Ballikurava 93 0 249 0
Santhamangaluru 867 0 100 0
Table-4.16(k)
Middle Reach
Dachepalli 2966 0 0 0
Gurazala 4848 0 0 0
Pariti padu 1358 92 48 5
Pedakurapadu 3390 0 10 17
Rentachintala 2886 0 77 0
Savalyapuram 59 0 75 0
Addanki 85 141 281 101
Table-4.16(l)
Tail Reach
Amaravathi 1846 0 173 31
Gurazala 4848 0 0 0
Krosuru 1552 0 75 13
Machavaram 2734 0 150 0
Nakirekallu 300 0 66 0
Padanandipadu 882 200 52 0
vinukonda 222 340 602 0
Addanki 85 141 281 101
Santhanuthalapadu 4 15 96 52
Table-4.16(m-o)
of Right canal Zone -2
Table-4.16(m)
Area in hec
K R K R
Head Reach
Chimakurthi 150 20 341 100
Darsi 158 93 270 48
Inkollu 102 548 5 0
Martur 186 283 671 0
Tallur 100 44 366 75
Tripurantakam 619 280 1071 30
Table-4.16(n)
Middle Reach
Nuzendla 170 605 36 0
Addanki 85 141 281 101
Chimakurthi 150 20 341 100
Inkollu 102 548 5 0
J Pangaluru 140 152 106 40
Mundlamur 175 185 322 10
Tallur 100 44 366 75
Table-4.16(o)
Tail Reach
Nuzendla 170 605 36 0
Inkollu 102 548 5 0
Karamchedu 10 429 0 0
Korisapadu 140 188 170 89
Kothapatnam 0 53 341 0
Mundlamur 175 185 322 10
IV-34
Table 4.17
Livestock numbers (lakh) in the project districts
District Mandals Cattle Buffalo Sheep Goat
Guntur 36 0.73 5.90 5.69 1.80
Khammam 16 1.35 3.29 2.35 1.92
Krishna 23 0.68 4.55 2.84 1.36
Nalgonda 16 1.36 2.20 3.66 2.04
Prakasam 25 0.41 4.32 4.49 1.45
Total 116 4.53 20.26 19.03 8.57
IV-35
Table 4.18
Soil Nutrient Parameters/ Indicator values Zone & reach wise
Left Canal
Zone-I
S.No. Reach Nitrogen (mg/kg) Phosphorus (mg/kg) Potassium (mg/kg) Organic Matter (%)
Max Ave Min Max Ave Min Max Ave Min Max Ave Min
1 H 118.10 106.50 92.70 21.88 23.99 13.30 170.75 138.97 16.50 0.76 0.63 0.51
2 M 124.45 111.33 83.81 23.86 18.65 10.00 180.90 159.55 122.90 0.79 0.61 0.42
3 T 133.34 114.40 80.00 22.54 19.35 15.28 175.10 148.59 16.50 0.79 0.68 0.53
Zone-II
1 H 116.83 101.01 52.10 18.58 16.33 2.80 157.70 146.32 92.60 0.61 0.49 0.35
2 M 119.37 110.40 102.86 20.23 18.51 16.27 164.95 152.77 146.10 0.62 0.48 0.42
3 T 119.37 108.93 91.43 21.55 19.20 16.27 157.70 152.87 149.00 0.62 0.54 0.43
Zone-III
1 H 111.75 103.11 81.27 18.58 15.52 10.00 160.60 142.33 133.05 0.53 0.47 0.41
2 M 147.13 118.64 90.16 29.80 19.46 11.32 193.95 157.60 120.00 0.60 0.49 0.41
3 T 126.99 106.43 91.43 21.22 17.95 15.94 162.05 148.41 134.50 0.60 0.51 0.46
Right Canal
Zone-I
1 H 135.88 117.86 86.35 24.52 19.33 10.66 178.00 159.07 131.16 0.64 0.56 0.41
2 M 134.61 115.70 90.16 23.86 19.37 13.30 176.55 157.73 125.80 0.72 0.55 0.41
3 T 130.80 112.98 86.35 23.53 19.18 13.30 176.55 156.65 125.80 0.66 0.53 0.42
Zone-II
1 H 137.15 122.39 114.29 26.17 20.46 16.60 179.45 167.11 150.45 0.64 0.56 0.47
2 M 142.23 122.97 109.21 24.52 20.73 16.60 192.50 169.20 147.55 0.67 0.55 0.46
3 T 134.61 120.34 93.97 25.18 20.86 15.94 188.15 170.63 116.40 0.63 0.49 0.43
Nitrogen Phosphorous (mg/kg) Potassium

Category (mg/kg) (mg/kg)
Low < 112 < 10 < 64
Medium 112 - 224 10 - 20 64 - 128
High >22.4 > 20 > 128
Note: Pesticides observed in the soil for all the samples are in Safe limits
IV-36
Chapter -5
ACESSES TO IRRIGATION AND IRRIGATION SERVICE DELIVERY
5.1 Introduction
The Nagarjuna Sagar Project consists of a masonry dam with a height of 124.6m and a
length of 1449.6m. It is flanked by earthen embankments on either side of lengths
853.3m and 2560.3m on right and left sides respectively. It has a catchment area 215185
km2 up to the dam site. The reservoir gross capacity is 11540.94Mcm. It has two canals.
On the right side the Jawahar Canal runs for a length of 203 Km with a command area of
4, 75,465 ha and includes 5342 kms of branch canals and distributaries. The Left Canal
namely Lal Bahadur runs for a length of 179 km irrigating 4, 19,806 ha with a length of
772km of branch canals and distributaries.
5.2 Access to Irrigation

The Nagarjuna Sagar Project has been receiving water in the later part of July since the
construction of new reservoirs upstream of the river in Karnataka at Alamatti and
Narayanpur. As a result, water releases downstream of these new reservoirs will be only
after they get filled. Therefore in general the water reaches NSP late in July or early
August. During the year 2008-09, considered for baseline survey both the left and Right
canals were opened on 13th August 2008 and closed on 23rd April 2009. In view of this
fact efficient crop and water management was taken up as main task of the Project
Engineers during 2008-09 to save the cropping system. The total volume of water
allocated was 3731.64 MCM to each canal during 2008-09. However the actual releases
were 5341.05 MCM to the Left Canal for both seasons (Kharif 1.99 L Ha and Rabi 2.29
L Ha) and 6047.24 MCM to the Right Canal for both seasons (Kharif 4.05 L Ha and
Rabi 1.87 L Ha).
V-1
During the field visits by the Consultants to Miryalguda and Tekulapalli circles on the
left Canal, the information sought in the survey (formats C &D of questionnaire) was
discussed and recorded from officials and staff to gather information at scheme and
departmental level. The observations are also discussed in chapter 9. In general the
Irrigation projects are planned for I.D Crops in 2/3 length of the Canal in head reach and
Wet Crops in the 1/3 length in the tail end. But the situation now in the field is tending
towards vice-versa and hence the need for project authorities is to discourage this
situation for effective irrigation water management and to achieve maximization of crop
production per unit volume of water and minimize the scope for increase of waterlogged
areas in the ensuing time periods. The irrigated areas, yield and production of important
crops during Kharif and Rabi season and district wise are indicated in Tables 5.1 through
5.5. The yields of the crops are better in Rabi season than in Kharif season. The yield in
tail end reach circle of both canals are seen better than the head reaches because farmers
manage crops under shortage of irrigation water supplies and thereby optimize crop water
requirements to sustain agricultural production in tail end reaches. The tail end farmers
also practice conjunctive use of surface/ groundwater and are less prone to water logging.
5.3 Equity of Irrigation water distribution
The equity of distribution of water has been worked out for the year 2008-09 in all the
zones on both Right and Left main canals randomly selecting D.Cs, WUAs at Head,
Middle and Tail regions, so that the equity performance can be analyzed in detail. This
study has been done for both Rabi and Kharif crops. The equity parameter thus calculated
in MCM/ Ha units has been shown in Tables 5.6 to 5.17. The equity for the Left canal
during Kharif season varies from 0.0087 MCM/ Ha at Head reach; 0.011 MCM/ Ha at
Middle reach and 0.0089 MCM/ Ha at Tail reach, clearly indicating that the equity in the
Middle reach is better. In the Left canal Rabi season the equity varies from 0.0015 MCM/
Ha at Head reach; 0.0071 MCM/ Ha at the Middle reach and 0.0093 MCM/ Ha at the Tail
reach. This clearly shows that the equity improves form Head reach to Tail reach. The
V-2
equity for the Right canal during Rabi season varies from 0.0056 MCM/ Ha at Head
reach; 0.0092 MCM/ Ha at Middle reach and 0.0077 MCM/ Ha at Tail reach. This also
clearly indicates that there is improvement of equity form Head reach to Tail reach and is
more or less closer at Middle and Tail reach. The equity for the Right canal during Kharif
varies from 0.011 MCM/ Ha at Head reach to 0.007 MCM/ Ha at Middle reach and 0.008
MCM/ Ha at Tail reach. This clearly indicates that equity declines from Head reach to
Middle and Tail reaches.
5.4 Water use efficiencies

Water use efficiency is an indicator of the amount of water applied and the corresponding
return in yield as output. So, it not only gives an idea of yield per unit water applied but
also indicates where to control this water to make its better use, especially in water scarce
areas or arid areas. The water use efficiency in the Right and Left canal command has
been estimated as 128.9 Ha /MCM and 136.0 Ha /MCM respectively. Thus, overall water
use efficiency for the project i.e. NSS command can be estimated as 132.5 Ha/MCM.
The field officers and staff attributed the reason for appreciable production towards the
tail end reaches, due to the fact that the farmers are going for optimal use of water, and
prefer to ID Crops, due to shortage of water. The department is also going for intermittent
irrigation at tail end reaches in the Ongole irrigation circle for better water regulation.
On-and-Off system is being practiced so that farmers use water efficiently duly using
ground water when the canal is closed. The Ground Water Department is monitoring
ground water levels in the project area and is encouraging farmers to go for conjunctive
use of surface and ground water wherever ground water table is at reasonable depth.
The Water use efficiency - canal wise, D.C wise, WUA wise and Season wise is indicated
in Tables 5.18 through 5.21. The water use efficiency of both the canals left and canals
decrease in both seasons Kharif and Rabi from Head reach to Tail reach. The water use
efficiency is reciprocal of equity. However, it is seen that during Kharif under Right canal
V-3
water use efficiency (WUE) increases form Head reach to Tail reach. The yield for unit
of Irrigation water supplied of Rice and Groundnut for both seasons of Kharif and Rabi
district wise based on the crop production data given in district statistical publication is
given in the following Table 5.22
5.5 Water Delivery Efficiencies
The water delivery efficiencies of both left and right canal systems have been computed
using weighted average method and are given in Table 5.23. This depends on the canal
losses at any point. The overall project efficiency is 32.67%.
5.6 Pasture development
The pasture development is indicated in Tables 5.24 (a) to (o). The pasture development
was analyzed reach wise and varies from one to four percent of the total command area in
all the zones of both Left and Right canals. These have to be further increased to cater to
the needs of cattle development.
5.7 Irrigation Service Delivery
There is a separate Command Area Development Department (CADA) to look after the
command area activities. Complaints are mostly from tail end where water is not reaching
due to losses in the system in view of lack of adequate maintenance due to paucity of
funds. However departmental officers are attending to farmers complaints as and when
received on all working days. Even on holidays arrangements are made to attend to
complaints. In Ongole circle every Monday is declared as grievances day and all offices
are open from 10-30 am to 1-00 pm to attend to farmers complaints. All field officers are
made responsible to attend to farmers complaints on any day and any time. All officers
are directed to visit the field areas as frequently as possible. Supply of irrigation water is
based on water availability as far as possible on irrigation schedules. Generally shortage
is faced at the tail end areas and during Rabi season. In some areas if water is saved in
Kharif then the same is supplied to Rabi at 5 to 6 intermittent irrigations to the extent
V-4
possible. Kutcha distributor and field channels involve considerable losses. Regular
cleaning of canals, taking penal action on irrigation offences are some of measures
department is taking with the cooperation of WUAs.
WUAs are cooperating in planning of irrigation system, water charges collection and
management of water distribution. Dam safety measures are being looked after by state
dam safety organization, concerned Chief Engineers and project staff.
5.8 Strength and capacity Building- Farmers organizations
Water and Land Management and Training and Research Institute (WALAMTARI) was
established in the year 1983 for imparting training to the functionaries of Irrigation and
Agriculture departments. WALAMTARI is located amidst a cluster of National and State
Level academic, Training and Research Institute at Hyderabad (State Capital of A.P). It is
acting as a nodal organization for all HRD activities for the development of WUO under
the major and all types of Irrigation projects. The target groups include (i) WUOS (ii)
I&CAD Agriculture dept. and (iii) Members of NGOs. The activities of this Institute
include designing and conducting suitable programs with appropriate methods such as
class room trainings, workshops, seminars, sadassus (meetings) to the above target
groups for their capacity building. Other than the development of social and HR skills,
the training helps the members of WUOs in understanding amendments to the APFMIS
ACT 1997.
Training methodology include
Seminars / Workshops
Study tours within / outside the states / country
Training of trainers under lab-to-land policy
V-5
5.9 Strengthening the Department
Nagarjuna Sagar Project is under the administrative control of Chief Engineer assisted by
three Deputy Chief Engineers, 6 Superintending Engineers and 21 Executive Engineers.
Organization chart of NSP can be seen at Table 5.25. The department is having shortage
of technical manpower particularly in the cadres of Deputy Executive Engineers,
Executive Engineers and Superintending Engineers. It is observed that many officers are
holding additional charges of about 1 or 2 posts either in the subordinate cadre or higher
level. Recruitment process has been taken up for Assistant Executive Engineer cadre in
the recent years. The department has taken up recruitment of AEEs from Mechanical,
Electrical, and Agricultural engineering branches. Further all these newly recruited
engineers have been given Induction Training comprising of field practice and class room
sessions. The lectures have been arranged on various subjects by concerned experts. Thus
there is every need for reorganizing the department to improve the efficiency in all the
cadres and reorganizing the structure of the department.
Officers of all cadres need refresher courses at regular intervals at State, National and
International institutes of excellence for periodic updating of their skills and knowledge
base. Almost all dams are having both Mechanical and civil components but are short of
experts at site. Further workshop facilities are quiet inadequate to meet challenges of
repairs, fabrication, erection and operation.
5.10 Nagarjuna Sagar System Operational Performances
The operational performances of both the canals have been evaluated indicator wise for
component A (Engineering parameters) in Annexure-V.1. The results have been
summarized circle/ canal wise in Table 5.26
Both the Left and Right canals were opened on 13th August 2008 and closed on 23 April
2009. The canals were continuously run during Kharif and Rabi seasons. The Kharif
V-6
season is assumed normally up to December 15th 2008 and Rabi season continuing from
December 16th 2008 till closure of the canals. The ratio of actual discharge to planned
discharge varies from 0.34 to 1.06 in the Left main canal and 0.20 to 1.00 on the Right
main canal. The percentage of average volume of water received at majors & branch
canals to that of released at canal Head ranges from 0.11 to 40.68 in the left main canal
and 0.03 to 27.95 in the right canal respectively.
V-7
Table-5.1 Table-5.2 Table-5.3
Nagarjuna Sagar Lal Bahadur (LEFT) Canal

Nagarjuna Sagar Lal Bahadur (LEFT) Canal Nagarjuna Sagar Lal Bahadur (LEFT) Canal
command Area, Production and yield per
command Area, Production and yield per Hectare command Area, Production and yield per Hectare
Hectare
2008-09 2008-09 2008-09
Name of Crop Area (in Yield per Name of Crop Area (in 1000 Yield per Hect Name of Crop Area (in 1000 Yield per Hect
1000 Hects) Hect (in Kgs) Hects) (in Kgs) Hects) (in Kgs)
Nalgonda Khammam Krishna

Rice (K) 108 3111 Rice (K) 65 3018 Rice (K) 76 3503
Rice ( R ) 88 3258 Rice (R) 30 3229 Rice ( R ) 24.5 3878
Jowar (K) 1.86 680 Maize (K) 10 5059 Jowar (K)

Jowar( R ) - 389 Maize (R) 10 6269 Jowar ( R ) 0.085 4719
Maize (K) - 1481 Ground Nut (K) 0.09 1376 Maize (K) 3.71 4932
Maize ( R ) - 5350 Ground Nut (R) 2 1611 Maize ( R ) 16.61 8469
Ground Nut (K) 3 867 Green gram (K) 11 392 Ground Nut (K) 2.98 2875
Ground Nut ( R ) 2 1107 Green gram (R) 0.6 1026 Ground Nut ( R ) 2.69 2109
Chilies (K) 3 2800 Chilies (K) 6.27 324
Chilies(R) - 3935 Chilies ( R ) 0.22 985

Green Gram (K) 4 457 Green Gram (K) 9.9 236
Green gram (R) - - Green Gram (R) 0.71 590
Table-5.4 Table-5.5
Nagarjuna Sagar Jawahar(Right) Canal

Nagarjuna Sagar Jawahar(Right) Canal
command Area, Production and yield per
command Area, Production and yield per Hectare
Hectare
2008-09 2008-09
Name of Crop Area (in Yield per Name of Crop Area (in 1000 Yield per Hect
1000 Hects) Hect (in Kgs) Hects) (in Kgs)
Guntur Prakasam
Rice (K) 80.21 3408 Rice (K) 35 3537
Rice ( R ) 27.1 3654 Rice ( R ) 52 3733
Jowar (K) Jowar (K)

Jowar ( R ) 0.3 6976 Jowar ( R ) 2189
Maize (K) 0.1 3217 Maize (K) 2 4444

Maize ( R ) 4.23 9952 Maize (R )
Ground Nut (K) Ground Nut (K) 2 91
Ground Nut ( R ) 1.03 1197 Ground Nut(R ) 2 2412

Chilies (K) 40.66 4996 Chilies (K) 6 2551
Chilies ( R ) 1.74 3530 Chilies ( R ) 3 6052

Green Gram (K) 0.05
Green Gram (R) 1.89 609
V-8
Table 5.6
Nagarjuna Sagar Base Line Survey - Equity of Water Distribution
Name of the Project : Nagarjunasagar Project - Left Canal - khariff - Year 2008-09
Water Area Irrigated (ha) Equity
Notified Command Area(ha) Equity
Zone DC D.C. WUA Name of the Used for
No. No. Name No. WUA Irrigation
(M.cum/ (M.cum/
ha) Localised Non-Localised Total
M.cum ha)
Wet ID Total Wet ID Wet ID Wet ID Total
3 Kondapavuluru
NelakondapalliEdara
3 6 Koduru
8 Jakkampudi
4 Chimiryala 1698.381 1698.381 11.956 0.0070 1364.3725 14.1700 1378.5425 0.0000 1378.5425 0.0087
I 9 8 Channaram 1357.490 1357.490 10.444 0.0077 1194.3320 10.1215 1204.4534 0.0000 1204.4534 0.0087
10 Nelakondapalli 1672.065 1672.065 12.628 0.0076 1441.2955 4.0486 1445.3441 0.0000 1445.3441 0.0087
3 Gubbagurthi 935.223 195.951 1131.174 5.197 0.0046 281.7814 564.3725 10.5263 118.2186 292.3077 682.5911 974.8988 0.0053
Tallada
12 6 Annarugudem 560.729 1193.927 1754.656 8.467 0.0048 1377.3279 276.9231 62.3482 29.1498 1439.6761 306.0729 1745.7490 0.0049
9 Mallaram 415.385 653.846 1069.231 4.229 0.0040 422.6721 30.7692 21.4575 21.0526 444.1296 51.8219 495.9514 0.0085
2 Vemulanarva 458.300 189.879 648.178 3.220 0.0050 165.9919 202.4291 165.9919 202.4291 368.4211 0.0087
Vatsavai
16 5 Madupalli 371.255 1124.696 1495.951 2.212 0.0015 8.0972 246.1538 8.0972 246.1538 254.2510 0.0087
7 Jonnalagadda 1075.709 764.372 1840.081 0.000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
2 Mellacheruvu-2 1186.640 1186.640 12.281 0.0103 246.9636 862.7530 246.9636 862.7530 1109.7166 0.0111
Chintriyala
II 19 4 Dondapadu 2132.794 2132.794 19.645 0.0092 11.7409 1763.5628 11.7409 1763.5628 1775.3036 0.0111
Raghunadhapale
6
m
995.951 995.951 10.618 0.0107 959.5142 0.0000 959.5142 959.5142 0.0111
2 Chintalapadu-I 548.178 897.976 1446.154 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Mattapally Chillepally Wazeerabad-2Eturu
22 5 Gudimetla-II 682.186 740.081 1422.267 5.593 0.0039 141.2955 423.8866 141.2955 423.8866 565.1822 0.0099
7 Chandarlapadu 614.170 1228.745 1842.915 3.113 0.0017 171.6599 651.8219 171.6599 651.8219 823.4818 0.0038
1 Borraipalem 1086.640 1086.640 17.160 0.0158 1117.6761 1117.6761 0.0000 1117.6761 0.0154
26 3 Kallepally 1347.773 1347.773 5.552 0.0041 361.6478 397.2389 361.6478 397.2389 758.8866 0.0073
5 Dameracharla 1404.858 1404.858 0.466 0.0003 30.3644 340.0810 30.3644 340.0810 370.4453 0.0013
3 Dacharam 1360.324 1360.324 21.282 0.0156 1184.6154 1184.6154 0.0000 1184.6154 0.0180
III 29 6 Ponugodu 1650.202 1650.202 12.863 0.0078 1476.5182 1476.5182 0.0000 1476.5182 0.0087
9 Ravaniguda 1256.680 1256.680 9.837 0.0078 1041.2955 1041.2955 0.0000 1041.2955 0.0094
1 Mella cheruvu-1 2362.348 2362.348 16.621 0.0070 1947.3684 360.3239 263.1579 2210.5263 360.3239 2570.8502 0.0065
31 3 Mattampally 2342.105 2342.105 11.911 0.0051 1342.9150 1342.9150 0.0000 1342.9150 0.0089
5 Peddaveedu 2217.814 2217.814 7.036 0.0032 793.5223 793.5223 0.0000 793.5223 0.0089
V-9
Table 5.7
NagarjunaSagar Base Line Survey - Equity of Water Distribution
Name of the Project : Nagarjunasagar Project - Left Canal - Rabi - Year 2008-09
Water Area Irrigated (ha)
Name of the Notified Command Area (ha) Equity
Zone DC D.C. WUA Used for Equity
WUA with (M.cum/
No. No. Name No. Irrigation Localised Non-Localised Total (M.cum/ha)
Code No. ha)
M.cum
3 Kondapavuluru 830.76923 830.76923 0.73 0.0009 477.73279 0 477.732794 477.732794 0.0015
Edara
3 6 Koduru 1065.9919 1065.9919 1.99 0.0019 1065.9919 0 1065.9919 1065.9919 0.0019

Nelakondapalli
8 Jakkampudi 1326.7206 1326.7206 0.0000 708.50202 0 708.502024 708.502024 0.0000

4 Chimiryala 1698.3806 1698.3806 5.04 0.0030 1257.4899 6.0729 1263.5628 0 1263.56275 0.0040
I 9 8 Channaram 1357.4899 1357.4899 4.172 0.0031 1042.5101 2.0243 1044.5344 0 1044.53441 0.0040
10 Nelakondapalli 1672.0648 1672.0648 5.264 0.0031 1315.7895 3.2389 1319.0283 0 1319.02834 0.0040
3 Gubbagurthi 935.22267 195.95142 1131.1741 1.36 0.0012 27.125506 29.959514 27.125506 29.9595142 57.0850202 0.0239
Tallada
12 6 Annarugudem 560.72874 1193.9271 1754.6559 2.42 0.0014 599.19028 57.894737 599.19028 57.8947368 657.08502 0.0037
9 Mallaram 415.38462 653.84615 1069.2308 1.75 0.0016 436.43725 436.43725 0 436.437247 0.0040
2 Vemulanarva 458.2996 189.87854 648.17814 1.93 0.0030 0 485.82996 0 485.82996 485.82996 0.0040
Vatsavai
16 5 Madupalli 371.25506 1124.6964 1495.9514 2.74 0.0018 0 688.25911 0 688.259109 688.259109 0.0040
7 Jonnalagadda 1075.7085 764.37247 1840.081 0.00 0.0000 0 0 0 0 0
Maellacheruvu- 1186.6397 0.0052
2 1186.6397 6.13 862.75304 0 862.753036 862.753036 0.0071
Chintriyala
2
19 4 Dondapadu 2132.7935 2132.7935 9.81 0.0046 1763.5628 0 1763.56275 1763.56275 0.0056
II Raghunadhapa
6 995.95142 995.95142 5.31 0.0053 959.51417 0 959.51417 959.51417
lem 0.0055
2 Chintalapadu-I 548.17814 897.97571 1446.1538 0.0000 0 0 0

Chillepally Wazeerabad-2 Eturu
22 5 Gudimetla-II 682.18623 740.08097 1422.2672 6.73148 0.0047 511.33603 0 511.336032 511.336032 0.0132
7 Chandarlapadu 614.17004 1228.7449 1842.915 4.5514 0.0025 345.74899 0 345.748988 345.748988

0.0132
1 Chillapur 1114.5749 1114.5749 18.06616 0.0162 1114.5749 341.296 1455.8704 0 1455.87045 0.0124
26 3 Chinthapally 870.8502 870.8502 8.4462 0.0097 685.82996 685.82996 0 685.82996 0.0123
5 Nandhipadu 1059.5142 1059.5142 5.02684 0.0047 1018.6235 1018.6235 0 1018.62348 0.0049
3 Dacharam 1360.3239 1360.3239 12.10 0.0089 1123.8866 1123.8866 0 1123.88664 0.0108
III 29 6 Ponugodu 1650.2024 1650.2024 6.89 0.0042 1377.3279 1377.3279 0 1377.32794 0.0050
9 Ravaniguda 1256.6802 1256.6802 5.78 0.0046 914.17004 914.17004 0 914.17004 0.0063
Mella cheruvu-
0.0073
Mattapally
1 2362.3482 2362.3482 17.23652 1479.7571 236.842 1716.5992 0 1716.59919

1 0.0100
31
3 Mattampally 2342.1053 2342.1053 8.2362 0.0035 882.18623 882.18623 0 882.186235 0.0093
5 Peddaveedu 2217.8138 2217.8138 0.0000 0 0 0
V-10
Table 5.8
NagarjunaSagar Base Line Survey - Equity of Water Distribution
Name of the Project : Nagarjunasagar Project - Right Canal - Rabi - Year 2008-09
Notified Command Area
Zone DC DC WUA Name of the WUA Used for Equity Equity
(ha)
No. No. Name No. with Code No. Irrigation (M.cum/ha) Localised (M.cum/ha)
Wet ID Total M.cum Wet ID Total
1 Pedapalem 363 548 911.336 4.76 0.0052 146.96356 697.16599 844.1296 0.0056
Chammaru
4 3 Chamarru 454 1053 1506.883 7.3724 0.0049 1396.7611 1396.761 0.0053
5 Chintapalli LIS 221 793 1014.17 5.40148 0.0053 970.04049 970.0405 0.0056
0.0000
Dronadula
2 Ddaggupadu 115 768.83 884.2105 NIL NIL

I 12 4 Kodavalivaripalem 827 197.98 1024.696 0.0000 NIL NIL
6 Swarna-1 964 610.59 1574.559 0.0000 NIL NIL
Kesanapalli
1 Chintapalli 332 1282 1613.36 9.85992 0.0061 1074.4939 1074.494 0.0092

20 3 Janapadu 489 973 1462.348 10.01168 0.0068 1217.8138 1217.814 0.0082
5 Gundlapalli-I 319 1143 1462.348 9.04456 0.0062 1152.2267 1152.227 0.0078
Santhanutha Pedanandi Medikondur
2 Ndurupadu 329 1000 1328.745 4.088 0.0031 80.97166 210.52632 291.498 0.0140
27 5 Siripuram 528 702 1229.96 4.704 0.0038 0
u
8 Narukullapadu I 186 185.83 1.176 0.0063 0

3 Jaladi 764 601 1365.182 10.5 0.0077 763.96761 601.21457 1365.182 0.0077
padu
II 35 7 Vangipuram II 572 0 572.0648 4.396 0.0077 572.06478 0 572.0648 0.0077

10 Kommuru II 966 0 965.587 265.028 0.2745 60.728745 904.8583 965.587 0.2745
1 Errajerla 1199.9 481.53 1681.47 -- -- -- --

lapadu-2
43 3 Valluru-1 208.26 1113.9 1322.113 0 0 0 0 0
5 Ethamukkala 992.56 0 992.5628 0 0 0 0 0
V-11
Table 5.9
Name of the Project : Nagarjunasagar Project - Right Canal - khariff - Year 2008-09
Area Irrigated (ha)

Water Used Equity
Zone DC D.C. WUA Name of the WUA Notified Command Area (ha) Equity
for Irrigation (M.cum/h
No. No. Name No. with Code No. Localised Non-Localised Total (M.cum/ha)
M.cum a)
Chammaru
1 Pedapalem 363 548 911 10.08 0.011 213 698 213 698 911 0.011
4 3 Chamarru 454 1053 1507 15.71 0.010 12 1487 12 1487 1500 0.010
5 Chintapalli LIS 221 793 1014 10.44 0.010 1014 0 1014 1014 0.010
Ddaggupadu
2 115 769 884 2.18 0.002 20 839 20 839 860
(24170302) 0.003
Dronadula
Kodavalivaripalem(
12 4 827 198 1025 3.33 0.003 124 883 124 883 1007
I 24170305) 0.003
Swarna-1
6 964 611 1575 5.89 0.004 587 972 587 972 1559
(24170303) 0.004
0.006
Santhanuthalapadu-2 Pedanandipadu Medikonduru Kesanapalli
1 Chintapalli 332 1282 1613 10.35 869 578 87 45 956 622 1578 0.007
20 3 Janapadu 489 973 1462 10.38 0.007 1105 67 10 1105 77 1182 0.009
5 Gundlapalli-I 319 1143 1462 9.48 0.006 1300 73 5 1300 78 1377 0.007
2 Ndurupadu 329 1000 1329 7.06 0.005 329 1000 66 249 396 1249 1644 0.004
27 5 Siripuram 528 702 1230 6.19 0.005 252 702 370 252 1072 1324 0.005
8 Narukullapadu I 186 189 375 1.54 0.004 4 189 198 4 388 392 0.004
3 Jaladi 764 601 1365 11.17 0.008 764 601 68 764 669 1433
0.008
35 7 Vangipuram II 572 0 572 4.56 0.008 572 0 572 0 572 0.008
II
10 Kommuru II 966 0 966 7.53 0.008 61 905 61 905 966 0.008
1 Errajerla, 24090304 1200 482 1681 2.10 0.001 61 688 61 688 749
0.003
43 3 Valluru-1 24090401 208 1114 1322 0.32 0.000 8 65 0 0 8 65 73

0.004
Ethamukkala-1,
5 993 0 993 0.00 0.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
24090403
V-12
Table 5.10
Name of the Project : Nagarjunasagar Project -Right Canal - Rabi - Year 2008-09
Water Used Area Irrigated (ha)

Notified Command Area (ha) Equity
Name of the for Equity
Zone Sl.No (M.cum/ha
D.Cs Irrigation Localised Non-Localised Total (M.cum/ha)
)
M.cum
4 Chammaru 1660 3422 5082 26 0.0052 147 4676 0 0 147 4676 4823 0.0055
I 12 Dronadula 4436 5188 9624 0.00 0.0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
20 Kesanapalli 2436 4899 7335 50 0.0068 5262 0 0 0 5262 0 5262 0.0095
27 Medikonduru 3406 6840 10245 37 0.0036 202 580 0 0 202 580 783 0.0474
Pedanandipa
II 35 9395 2174 11569 90 0.0078 6525 3511 0 61 6525 3572 10096 0.0089
du
Santhanuthal
43 6079 2355 8434 0.00 0.0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
apadu-2
Table 5.11

Name of the for Equity
Zone DC No. (M.cum/ha
D.Cs Irrigation Localised Non-Localised Total (M.cum/ha)
)
M.cum
4 Chammaru 1660 3422 5082 53 0.0104 226 4784 0 0 226 4784 5011 0.0106
I 12 Dronadula 4436 5188 9624 33.18 0.0034 2923 6571 0 0 2923 6571 9494 0.0035
20 Kesanapalli 2436 4899 7335 52 0.0071 4936 1665 208 191 5143 1856 7000 0.0074
27 Medikonduru 3406 6840 10245 54 0.0053 2002 6840 218 2728 2219 9568 11787 0.0046
Pedanandipa
II 35 9395 2174 11569 101 0.0087 7519 4052 32 83 7552 4136 11687 0.0086
du
Santhanuthal
43 6079 2355 8434 4.01 0.0005 69 1081 0 0 69 1081 1150 0.0035
apadu-2
V-13
Table 5.12
Used for Equity
Zone DC No. Name of the D.Cs (M.cum/
Irrigation Localised Non-Localised Total (M.cum/ha)
ha)
M.cum
3 Edara 0 10794 10794 13.94 0.0013 0 8294 0 0 0 8294 8294 0.0017
I 9 Nelakondapally 17943 0 17943 54.52 0.0030 13619 0 78 0 13697 0 13697 0.0040
12 Tallada 6937 6041 12978 16.74 0.0013 2001 464 2001 464 2465 0.0068
16 Vatsavai 3545 6487 10032 15.46 0.0015 0 3870 0 0 0 3870 3870 0.0040
II 19 Chintriayala 12921 0 12921 64.37 0.0050 174 10314 0 0 174 10314 10488 0.0061
22 Eturu Major II 3994 7658 11652 26.02 0.0022 0 1977 0 0 0 1977 1977 0.0132
26 Wazeerabad-2 8498 0 8498 41.91 0.0049 3977 1909 0 0 3977 1909 5886 0.0071
III 29 Chillepally 13567 0 13567 78.66 0.0058 9933 0 0 0 9933 0 9933 0.0079
31 Mattapally 10277 0 10277 43.62 0.0042 4306 0 237 0 4543 0 4543 0.0096
Table 5.13
Used for Equity
Zone DC No. Name of the D.Cs (M.cum/
Irrigation Localised Non-Localised Total (M.cum/ha)
ha)
M.cum
3 Edara 0 10794 10794 0.0000 0 0 0
I 9 Nelakondapally 17943 0 17943 134.57 0.0075 15370 0 123 0 15493 0 15493 0.0087
12 Tallada 6937 6041 12978 52.00 0.0040 4670 3815 512 671 5182 4487 9669 0.0054
16 Vatsavai 3545 6487 10032 26.21 0.0026 389 2647 0 0 389 2647 3036 0.0086
II 19 Chintriayala 12921 0 12921 113.20 0.0088 610 10314 0 0 610 10314 10924 0.0104
22 Eturu Major II 3994 7658 11652 23.67 0.0020 488 2979 0 0 488 2979 3467 0.0068
26 Wazeerabad-2 8498 0 8498 63.62 0.0075 4427 1505 0 0 4427 1505 5932 0.0107
III 29 Chillepally 13567 0 13567 142.27 0.0105 11467 0 0 0 11467 0 11467 0.0124
31 Mattapally 10277 0 10277 55.00 0.0054 6274 360 263 0 6538 360 6898 0.0080
V-14
Table 5.14
Notified Command Area Equity
Zone DC D.C. WUA for Equity (M.cum/
Name of the WUA (M.cum/
No. No. Name No. Irrigation Localised Non-Localised Total ha)
ha)
M.cum
Chillepally Chintriyala Nelakondapalli
4 Chimiryala 1698.381 1698.381 11.956 0.0070 1364.3725 14.1700 1378.5425 0.0000 1378.5425 0.0087
I 9 8 Channaram 1357.490 1357.490 10.444 0.0077 1194.3320 10.1215 1204.4534 0.0000 1204.4534 0.0087
10 Nelakondapalli 1672.065 1672.065 12.628 0.0076 1441.2955 4.0486 1445.3441 0.0000 1445.3441 0.0087
2 Mellacheruvu-2 1186.640 1186.640 12.281 0.0103 246.9636 862.7530 246.9636 862.7530 1109.7166 0.0111
II 19 4 Dondapadu 2132.794 2132.794 19.645 0.0092 11.7409 1763.5628 11.7409 1763.5628 1775.3036 0.0111
6 Raghunadhapalem 995.951 995.951 10.618 0.0107 959.5142 0.0000 959.5142 959.5142 0.0111
3 Dacharam 1360.324 1360.324 21.282 0.0156 1184.6154 1184.6154 0.0000 1184.6154 0.0180
III 29 6 Ponugodu 1650.202 1650.202 12.863 0.0078 1476.5182 1476.5182 0.0000 1476.5182 0.0087
9 Ravaniguda 1256.680 1256.680 9.837 0.0078 1041.2955 1041.2955 0.0000 1041.2955 0.0094
Table 5.15
Zone DC D.C. WUA Name of the WUA for
(M.cum/ Equity (M.cum/ha)
No. No. Name No. with Code No. Irrigation Localised Non-Localised Total
ha)
M.cum
Nelakondapalli
4 Chimiryala 1698.381 1698.381 5.040 0.0030 1257.4899 6.0729 1263.5628 0.0000 1263.5628 0.0040
I 9 8 Channaram 1357.490 1357.490 4.172 0.0031 1042.5101 2.0243 1044.5344 0.0000 1044.5344 0.0040
10 Nelakondapalli 1672.065 1672.065 5.264 0.0031 1315.7895 3.2389 1319.0283 0.0000 1319.0283 0.0040
0.0052 0.0071
Chintriyala
2 Maellacheruvu-2 1186.640 1186.640 6.132 862.7530 0.0000 862.7530 862.7530

II 19
4 Dondapadu 2132.794 2132.794 9.814 0.0046 1763.5628 0.0000 1763.5628 1763.5628 0.0056
0.0089 0.0108
Chillepally
3 Dacharam 1360.324 1360.324 12.103 1123.8866 1123.8866 0.0000 1123.8866

III 29 6 Ponugodu 1650.202 1650.202 6.887 0.0042 1377.3279 1377.3279 0.0000 1377.3279 0.0050
9 Ravaniguda 1256.680 1256.680 5.785 0.0046 914.1700 914.1700 0.0000 914.1700 0.0063
V-15
Table 5.16
Notified Command Area Equity Equity
Zone DC D.C. WUA Name of the WUA Used for
(ha) (M.cum/ (M.cum/
No. No. Name No. with Code No. Irrigation Localised
ha) ha)
Ddaggupadu
2 115 769 884 2.18 0.002 20 839 860
0.003
Dronadula
(24170302)
Kodavalivaripalem(
I 12 4 827 198 1025 3.33 0.003 124 883 1007
0.003
24170305)
Swarna-1
6 964 611 1575 5.89 0.004 587 972 1559
0.004
(24170303)
0.008 0.008
Pedanand
3 Jaladi 764 601 1365 11.17 764 601 1433

ipadu
II 35 7 Vangipuram II 572 0 572 4.56 0.008 572 0 572 0.008

10 Kommuru II 966 0 966 7.53 0.008 61 905 966 0.008
Table 5.17
Name of the Project : Nagarjunasagar Project - Right Canal - Rabi - Year 2008-09
Notified Command Area Equity Equity
Zone DC D.C.N WUA Name of the WUA Used for
(ha) (M.cum/ (M.cum/
No. No. ame No. with Code No. Irrigation Localised
ha) ha)
2 Ddaggupadu 115 768.83 884.21 0.0000 NIL NIL
Dronadula
6 Swarna-1 964 610.59 1574.6 0.0000 NIL NIL

0.0077 0.0077
Pedanandipad
3 Jaladi 764 601 1365.2 10.5 764 601.21 1365.2
II 35 7 Vangipuram II 572 0 572.06 4.396 0.0077 572.1 0 572.06 0.0077

u
10 Kommuru II 966 0 965.59 265.028 0.2745 60.73 904.86 965.59 0.2745
V-16
Table 5.18
Nagarjuna Sagar Base Line Survey - Water User Efficiencies
Name of the Project : Nagarjuna Sagar Project (LEFT) Khariff Year 2008-09
Water
Area Irrigated (ha)
Zone DC D.C. WUA Notified Command Area(ha) Used for WUE in WUE in
Name of the WUA
No. No. Name No. Irrigation (Ha/MCM) Localised Non-Localised Total (Ha/MCM)
Wet ID Total M.cum Wet ID Wet ID Wet ID Total
3 Kondapavuluru
Edara
3
Nelakondapalli
6 Koduru
8 Jakkampudi
4 Chimiryala 1698.381 1698.381 11.956 142.0526 1364.3725 14.1700 1378.5425 0.0000 1378.5425 115.3013
9 8 Channaram 1357.490 1357.490 10.444 129.9780 1194.3320 10.1215 1204.4534 0.0000 1204.4534 115.3249
I
10 Nelakondapalli 1672.065 1672.065 12.628 132.4093 1441.2955 4.0486 1445.3441 0.0000 1445.3441 114.4555
3 Gubbagurthi 935.223 195.951 1131.174 5.197 217.6674 281.7814 564.3725 10.5263 118.2186 292.3077 682.5911 974.8988 187.5960
Tallada
12
6 Annarugudem 560.729 1193.927 1754.656 8.467 207.2298 1377.3279 276.9231 62.3482 29.1498 1439.6761 306.0729 1745.7490 206.1778
9 Mallaram 415.385 653.846 1069.231 4.229 252.8593 422.6721 30.7692 21.4575 21.0526 444.1296 51.8219 495.9514 117.2861
2 Vemulanarva 458.300 189.879 648.178 3.220 201.2976 165.9919 202.4291 165.9919 202.4291 368.4211 114.4165
Vatsavai
16 5 Madupalli 371.255 1124.696 1495.951 2.212 676.2891 8.0972 246.1538 8.0972 246.1538 254.2510 114.9417
7 Jonnalagadda 1075.709 764.372 1840.081 0.000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Chintriyala
2 Mellacheruvu-2 1186.640 1186.640 12.281 96.6256 246.9636 862.7530 246.9636 862.7530 1109.7166 90.3619
II 19 4 Dondapadu 2132.794 2132.794 19.645 108.5678 11.7409 1763.5628 11.7409 1763.5628 1775.3036 90.3702
2 Chintalapadu-I 548.178 897.976 1446.154 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Eturu
22 5 Gudimetla-II 682.186 740.081 1422.267 5.593 254.3069 141.2955 423.8866 141.2955 423.8866 565.1822 101.0568
7 Chandarlapadu 614.170 1228.745 1842.915 3.113 592.0517 171.6599 651.8219 171.6599 651.8219 823.4818 264.5504
Chillepally Wazeerabad-2
1 Borraipalem 1086.640 1086.640 17.160 63.3227 1117.6761 1117.6761 0.0000 1117.6761 65.1313
26
3 Kallepally 1347.773 1347.773 5.552 242.7371 361.6478 397.2389 361.6478 397.2389 758.8866 136.6772
5 Dameracharla 1404.858 1404.858 0.466 3017.0481 30.3644 340.0810 30.3644 340.0810 370.4453 795.5617
3 Dacharam 1360.324 1360.324 21.282 63.9199 1184.6154 1184.6154 0.0000 1184.6154 55.6636
III
29 6 Ponugodu 1650.202 1650.202 12.863 128.2942 1476.5182 1476.5182 0.0000 1476.5182 114.7912
9 Ravaniguda 1256.680 1256.680 9.837 127.7509 1041.2955 1041.2955 0.0000 1041.2955 105.8554
1 Mella cheruvu-1 2362.348 2362.348 16.621 142.1320 1947.3684 360.3239 263.1579 2210.5263 360.3239 2570.8502 154.6767
Mattapally
31 3 Mattampally 2342.105 2342.105 11.911 196.6351 1342.9150 1342.9150 0.0000 1342.9150 112.7465
5 Peddaveedu 2217.814 2217.814 7.036 315.1915 793.5223 793.5223 0.0000 793.5223 112.7739
V-17
Table 5.19
Name of theProject Nagarjuna Sagar Project (LEFT) Rabi Year 2008-09
Zone DC D.C. WUA Name of the WUA Notified Command Area (ha) Used for WUE in WUE in
No. No. Name No. with Code No. Irrigation (Ha/MCM) Localised Non-Localised Total (Ha/MCM)
M.cum Total
Wet ID Total Wet ID Wet ID Wet ID
3 Kondapavuluru 830.7692 830.76923 0.73 1141.1665 477.73279 0 477.732794 477.7327935 656.2264
NelakondapalliEdara
3 6 Koduru 1065.992 1065.9919 1.99 536.2132 1065.9919 0 1065.9919 1065.991903 536.2132

8 Jakkampudi 1326.721 1326.7206 0.0000 708.50202 0 708.502024 708.5020243 0.0000
4 Chimiryala 1698.3806 1698.3806 5.04 336.9803 1257.49 6.0729 1263.56275 0 1263.562753 250.7069
I 9 8 Channaram 1357.4899 1357.4899 4.172 325.3811 1042.51 2.0243 1044.53441 0 1044.534413 250.3678
10 Nelakondapalli 1672.0648 1672.0648 5.264 317.6415 1315.789 3.2389 1319.02834 0 1319.02834 250.5753
3 Gubbagurthi 935.22267 195.9514 1131.1741 1.36 830.5731 27.12551 29.959514 27.1255061 29.9595142 57.08502024 41.9151
Tallada
12 6 Annarugudem 560.72874 1193.927 1754.6559 2.42 725.3042 599.1903 57.894737 599.190283 57.8947368 657.0850202 271.6125
9 Mallaram 415.38462 653.8462 1069.2308 1.75 612.1644 436.4372 436.437247 0 436.437247 249.8725
2 Vemulanarva 458.2996 189.8785 648.17814 1.93 335.4959 0 485.82996 0 485.82996 485.8299595 251.4648
Chintriyala Vatsavai
16 5 Madupalli 371.25506 1124.696 1495.9514 2.74 545.1718 0 688.25911 0 688.259109 688.2591093 250.8233
7 Jonnalagadda 1075.7085 764.3725 1840.081 0.00 0.0000 0 0 0 0 0
2 Maellacheruvu-2 1186.6397 1186.6397 6.13 193.5159 862.75304 0 862.753036 862.7530364 140.6968
II 19 4 Dondapadu 2132.7935 2132.7935 9.81 217.3215 1763.5628 0 1763.56275 1763.562753 179.6987
6 Raghunadhapalem 995.95142 995.95142 5.31 187.6039 959.51417 0 959.51417 959.51417 180.7403
2 Chintalapadu-I 548.17814 897.9757 1446.1538 0.0000 0 0 0
Mattapally Chillepally Wazeerabad-2Eturu
22 5 Gudimetla-II 682.18623 740.081 1422.2672 6.73148 211.2860 511.33603 0 511.336032 511.3360324 75.9619
7 Chandarlapadu 614.17004 1228.745 1842.915 4.5514 404.9117 345.74899 0 345.748988 345.7489879 75.9654
1 Chillapur 1114.5749 1114.5749 18.06616 61.6941 1114.575 341.296 1455.87045 0 1455.870445 80.5855
26 3 Chinthapally 870.8502 870.8502 8.4462 103.1056 685.83 685.82996 0 685.8299595 81.1998
5 Nandhipadu 1059.5142 1059.5142 5.02684 210.7714 1018.623 1018.62348 0 1018.623482 202.6369
3 Dacharam 1360.3239 1360.3239 12.10 112.3930 1123.887 1123.88664 0 1123.88664 92.8580
III 29 6 Ponugodu 1650.2024 1650.2024 6.89 239.5959 1377.328 1377.32794 0 1377.327935 199.9768
9 Ravaniguda 1256.6802 1256.6802 5.78 217.2488 914.17 914.17004 0 914.1700405 158.0373
1 Mella cheruvu-1 2362.3482 2362.3482 17.23652 137.0548 1479.757 236.842 1716.59919 0 1716.59919 99.5908
31 3 Mattampally 2342.1053 2342.1053 8.2362 284.3672 882.1862 882.186235 0 882.1862348 107.1108
5 Peddaveedu 2217.8138 2217.8138 0.0000 0 0 0
V-18
Table 5.20
Name of theProject Nagarjuna Sagar Project (RIGHT) Rabi Year 2008-09
Name of the Water Used for Area Irrigated (ha)
Zone DC Notified Command Area (ha) WUE in WUE in
D.C.Name WUA No. WUA with Code Irrigation Localised
No. No. (Ha/MCM) (Ha/MCM)
No. Wet ID Total M.cum Wet ID Total
191.4571 177.3381
Chammaru
1 Pedapalem 363 548 911.3360324 4.76 146.9635628 697.1659919 844.1295547
4 3 Chamarru 454 1053 1506.882591 7.3724 204.3951 1396.761134 1396.761134 189.4581
5 Chintapalli LIS 221 793 1014.17004 5.40148 187.7578 970.0404858 970.0404858 179.5879
2 Ddaggupadu 115 768.83 884.2105263 0.0000 NIL NIL
Dronadula
6 Swarna-1 964 610.59 1574.558704 0.0000 NIL NIL

Kesanapalli
1 Chintapalli 332 1282 1613.360324 9.85992 163.6281 1074.493927 1074.493927 108.9759

20 3 Janapadu 489 973 1462.348178 10.01168 146.0642 1217.813765 1217.813765 121.6393
5 Gundlapalli-I 319 1143 1462.348178 9.04456 161.6826 1152.226721 1152.226721 127.3944
Santhanutha Pedanandip Medikondur
2 Ndurupadu 329 1000 1328.744939 4.088 325.0355 80.97165992 210.5263158 291.4979757 71.3058
27 5 Siripuram 528 702 1229.959514 4.704 261.4710 0
u
8 Narukullapadu I 186 185.8299595 1.176 158.0187 0

3 Jaladi 764 601 1365.182186 10.5 130.0174 763.9676113 601.2145749 1365.182186 130.0174
adu
II 35 7 Vangipuram II 572 0 572.0647773 4.396 130.1330 572.0647773 0 572.0647773 130.1330

10 Kommuru II 966 0 965.5870445 265.028 3.6433 60.72874494 904.8582996 965.5870445 3.6433
1 Errajerla 1199.94332 481.5263158 1681.469636 -- -- -- --
lapadu-2
43 3 Valluru-1 208.2550607 1113.8583 1322.11336 0 0 0 0 0

5 Ethamukkala 992.562753 0 992.562753 0 0 0 0 0
Table 5.21
Name of the Project Nagarjuna Sagar Project (RIGHT) Khariff Year 2008-09
Name of the Water Used for Area Irrigated (ha)

Zone DC Notified Command Area (ha) WUE in WUE in
D.C. Name WUA No. WUA with Code Irrigation Localised Non-Localised Total
No. No. (Ha/MCM) (Ha/MCM)
No. Wet ID Total M.cum Wet ID Wet ID Wet ID Total
90.410
Chammaru
1 Pedapalem 363 548 911 10.08 213 698 213 698 911 90.370
4 3 Chamarru 454 1053 1507 15.71 95.931 12 1487 12 1487 1500 95.467
5 Chintapalli LIS 221 793 1014 10.44 97.106 1014 0 1014 1014 97.106
Ddaggupadu
2 115 769 884 2.18 405.378 20 839 20 839 860
(24170302) 394.056
Dronadula
Kodavalivaripalem
I 12 4 827 198 1025 3.33 307.532 124 883 124 883 1007
(24170305) 302.186
Swarna-1
6 964 611 1575 5.89 267.527 587 972 587 972 1559
(24170303) 264.902
Kesanapalli
1 Chintapalli 332 1282 1613 10.35 155.924 869 578 87 45 956 622 1578 152.520
20 3 Janapadu 489 973 1462 10.38 140.860 1105 67 10 1105 77 1182 113.874
5 Gundlapalli-I 319 1143 1462 9.48 154.275 1300 73 5 1300 78 1377 145.306
Santhanuthalapadu- Pedanandip Medikondur
2 Ndurupadu 329 1000 1329 7.06 188.314 329 1000 66 249 396 1249 1644 233.012
27 5 Siripuram 528 702 1230 6.19 198.765 252 702 370 252 1072 1324 214.010
u
8 Narukullapadu I 186 189 375 1.54 243.704 4 189 198 4 388 392 254.482
3 Jaladi 764 601 1365 11.17 122.197 764 601 68 764 669 1433 128.285
adu
35 7 Vangipuram II 572 0 572 4.56 125.343 572 0 572 0 572 125.343

II
10 Kommuru II 966 0 966 7.53 128.198 61 905 61 905 966 128.198
Errajerla,
1 1200 482 1681 2.10 800.700 61 688 61 688 749
24090304 356.661
Valluru-1
43 3 208 1114 1322 0.32 0.000 8 65 0 0 8 65 73
2
24090401 229.917
Ethamukkala-1,
5 993 0 993 0.00 0.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
24090403
V-19
Table 5.22
Output per unit of Irrigation water supply (Kgs/cum )
Crop Season Nalgonda Khammam Krishna Left Guntur Prakasham Right Project wise
Canal Canal average
Average Average
Rice Kharif 0.26 0.25 0.26 0.26 0.28 0.30 0.29 0.27
Rabi 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.29
Ground Kharif 0.17 0.28 0.40 0.28 0.58 -- -- --

nut
Rabi 0.32 0.32 0.17 0.27 0.24 0.48 0.36 0.32
Table 5.23
Water Delivery Efficiency
The efficiency of various canals are as given below
Sl.No System NSLC% NSRC%
1 Main canal 89.78 82.20
2 Distributory / Direct Major 80.47 80.34
3 Minors 67.33 77.23
4 Sub Minors 71.28 61.20
5 Entire System 34.67 31.21
6 Project 32.67%
V-20
Table 5.24(a)
Land use pattern 2008-09 of Mandals under study for Left

canal Head Reach of Zone 1
% to respective Land use pattern 2008-09 of Mandals under study for Left canal Head
Reach of Zone 1
geographical
S.No Category 2008-09 area
Forests
1 Total Geographical Area 203548 100

Barren and uncultivable land
2 Forests 7678 4
Land put to non agricultural uses
4%
3 Barren and uncultivable land 18651 9 9%
cultivable waste
Land put to non agricultural
4 uses 16029 8 8%
2%
Permanent pastures and other
3%
grazing lands
5 cultivable waste 3688 2 1%
53%
Permanent pastures and other 9% Land under miscellaneous tree crops
& groves not included in net area
6 grazing lands 5340 3 sown
Land under miscellaneous tree 11% Current fallows
crops & groves not included in
7 net area sown 1698 1
Other fallow lands
8 Current fallows 19197 9

Net area sown
9 Other fallow lands 22025 11
10 Net area sown 108408 53
V-21
Table 5.24(b)
Land use pattern 2008-09 of Mandals under study for Left canal
Middle Reach of Zone 1
Land use pattern 2008-09 of Mandals under study for Left canal Middle
Reach of Zone 1
% to respective Forests
S.No Category 2008-09 geographical area

2 Forests 14413 10 Land put to non agricultural

10% uses
3 Barren and uncultivable land 21564 14

cultivable waste
14%
Land put to non agricultural 41%
4 uses 15175 10
grazing lands
Permanent pastures and other Land under miscellaneous tree

6 grazing lands 3722 2 1% net area sown
Land under miscellaneous tree 9% 1% 3%
11%
crops & groves not included in Current fallows
Other fallow lands

9 Other fallow lands 16282 11 Net area sown
V-22
Land under miscellaneous tree

V-22
Table 5.24( c)
Land use pattern 2008-09 of Mandals under study for Left

canal Tail Reach of Zone 1
Land use pattern 2008-09 of Mandals under study for Left canal Tail Reach
% to respective of Zone 1
geographical
Forests

2 Forests 23553 16
Land put to non agricultural cultivable waste
4 uses 14379 10 35%
17% Permanent pastures and other grazing

5 cultivable waste 1672 1 lands

Land under miscellaneous tree crops &
6 grazing lands 3851 3 groves not included in net area sown
10%
Land under miscellaneous tree 9%
crops & groves not included in 8% Current fallows
7 net area sown 1222 1 1%
1%
3%
Other fallow lands
Net area sown

V-23
09 of Mandals under study for Left canal Tail Reach
Permanent pastures and other grazing
Land under miscellaneous tree crops &

groves not included in net area sown
V-23
Table5.24(d)
Land use Pattern 2008-09 of Mandals under study for Left canal
Land use Pattern 2008-09 of Mandals under study for Left canal Head
Head Reach of Zone 2 Reach of Zone 2
Forests
% to respective

2 Forests 19741 10
10%
6% cultivable waste
4 Land put to non agricultural uses 26323 13 Permanent pastures and other
13% grazing lands
5 cultivable waste 2179 1

59% Land under miscellaneous tree
4% 1% crops & groves not included in net
Permanent pastures and other area sown
6 grazing lands 7694 4 4% 1%
Land under miscellaneous tree Current fallows
crops & groves not included in 2%
Other fallow lands

Net area sown
V-24
Table 5.24(e)
Landuse pattern 2008-09 of Mandals under study for Left canal

Landuse pattern 2008-09 of Mandals under study for Left canal Middle Reach of
% to respective Zone 2
geographical
Forests

2 Forests 8451 5
5% Land put to non agricultural uses
Land put to non agricultural 13% cultivable waste

4 uses 21031 13
2%
Permanent pastures and other grazing lands
1%
Permanent pastures and other 4%
64%
6 grazing lands 7128 4 Land under miscellaneous tree crops & groves not
included in net area sown
Land under miscellaneous tree 3%

Current fallows
8 Current fallows 6330 4 Other fallow lands
V-25
Table 5.24(f)
Tail Reach of Zone 2
Land use Pattern 2008-09 of Mandals under study for Left canal Tail Reach
% to respective of Zone 2
geographical
S.No Category 2008-09 area Forests

2 Forests 6669 5
4% Land put to non agricultural uses
5%
cultivable waste
15%
4 uses 18637 15
1% grazing lands
1%
Permanent pastures and other 65% Land under miscellaneous tree
6 grazing lands 3391 3 3% crops & groves not included in
3% net area sown
Other fallow lands

V-26
Table 5.24(g)
Head Reach of Zone 3
Land use Pattern 2008-09 of Mandals under study for Left canal Head Reach of Zone 3
% to respective
geographical
1 Total Geographical Area 147322 100 Barren and uncultivable land
2 Forests 13506 9 Land put to non agricultural uses
9% 4%
cultivable waste
4 uses 15107 10 10%
grazing lands
2% Land under miscellaneous tree crops
Permanent pastures and other 63% & groves not included in net area
6 grazing lands 2418 2 3% 1% sown
Land under miscellaneous tree 4% Current fallows
Other fallow lands

Net area sown
V-27
Table 5.24(h)
Land use Pattern 2008-09 of Mandals under study for Left canal Middle Reach of Zone 3
% to respective
geographical Forests

2 Forests 21521 16 Land put to non agricultural uses

cultivable waste

4 uses 15035 11
grazing lands
11%
55%
Permanent pastures and other crops & groves not included in net
6 grazing lands 1594 1 3% area sown
Land under miscellaneous tree 5% 1% Current fallows

crops & groves not included in 4% 1%
Other fallow lands

Net area sown
V-28
Table 5.24 (i)
Land Use Pattern 2008-09 of Mandals under study for Left

canal Tail Reach of Zone 3 Land Use Pattern 2008-09 of Mandals under study for Left canal Tail Reach of
Zone 3
% to respective
Forests
geographical


2 Forests 19334 11
11%
3 Barren and uncultivable land 7430 4 cultivable waste
4%
4 uses 24207 14 Permanent pastures and other
14% grazing lands

Permanent pastures and other 2% crops & groves not included in net
area sown
6 grazing lands 2214 1 5% 1% 1%
Other fallow lands

Net area sown
V-29
Table- 5.24(j)
Land Use pattern 2008-09 of Mandals under study for Right

Land use pattern2008-09 of Mandals under study for Right canal Head
% to
Reach of Zone 1
respective
geographica Forests
S.No Category 2008-09 l area
1 Total Geographical Area Barren and uncultivable land

262048 100
2 Forests 6% Land put to non agricultural uses

16076 6 5%
cultivable waste
3 Barren and uncultivable land
13998 5 10%
Land put to non agricultural Permanent pastures and other
4 grazing lands
uses 25709 10 4%
5 cultivable waste 3% crops & groves not included in net
11683 4 area sown
58%
Permanent pastures and other Current fallows
6 3%
grazing lands 7995 3 6%
Land under miscellaneous tree Other fallow lands
7 crops & groves not included in 5%
net area sown 6576 3
Net area sown
8 Current fallows
15210 6
V-30
Table 5.24(k)
Land Use Pattern 2008-09 of Mandals under study for Right canal
Land Use Pattern 2008-09 of Mandals under study for Right canal Middle
Reach of Zone 1
% to respective
S.No Category 2008-09 geographical area Forests

2 Forests 10214 6
6% Land put to non agricultural
uses
5%
cultivable waste
4 uses 17706 10
2% Permanent pastures and
other grazing lands
3% Land under miscellaneous
Permanent pastures and other tree crops & groves not
6 grazing lands 5612 3 4% included in net area sown
65%
Other fallow lands

Net area sown

V-31
Table 5.24(l)
Land Use Pattern 2008-09 of Mandals under study for Right canal Tail
Reach of Zone 1
Land Use Pattern 2008-09 of Mandals under study for
Right canal Tail Reach of Zone 1
% to respective
S.No Category 2008-09 geographical area Forests

uses

4%
8% cultivable waste
4 Land put to non agricultural uses 24731 11

11% Permanent pastures and other
grazing lands
4%
58% 3% Land under miscellaneous tree
Permanent pastures and other crops & groves not included in
8% 1% net area sown
6 grazing lands 7641 3
crops & groves not included in net
7 area sown 3401 1 3%
Other fallow lands
Net area sown

V-32
Table5.24(m)
Land Use Pattern 2008-09 of Mandals under study for Right

% to respective Land Use Pattern 2008-09 of Mandals under study for Right canal Head
geographical Reach of Zone 2
Forests

2 Forests 5570 3

9%
cultivable waste
4 uses 18288 11
11%
5 cultivable waste 6243 4 grazing lands
4%
Permanent pastures and other 52% 2% Land under miscellaneous tree
6 grazing lands 3572 2 0% crops & groves not included in net
Land under miscellaneous tree 11% area sown
7 net area sown 643 0 8%
Other fallow lands
Net area sown
V-33
Table 5.24(n)
Land Use Pattern 2008-09 of Mandals under study for Right
canal Middle Reach of Zone 2
Land Use Pattern 2008-09 of Mandals under study for Right canal Middle
Reach of Zone 2
% to respective
geographical
2 Forests 6469 3 3%
uses
cultivable waste
4 uses 20792 10 10% Permanent pastures and
other grazing lands
50%
5 cultivable waste 12955 6 6% Land under miscellaneous
Permanent pastures and tree crops & groves not
2% included in net area sown
6 other grazing lands 4188 2 Current fallows
Land under miscellaneous 3%
10%
tree crops & groves not Other fallow lands
7 included in net area sown 5164 3 7%
Net area sown
V-34
Table 5.24(o)
Land Use Pattern 2008-09 of Mandals under study for Right Land Use Pattern 2008-09 of Mandals under study for Right canal Tail Reach of Zone 2
canal Tail Reach of Zone 2
% to respective Forests

1%
9% uses
3 Barren and uncultivable land 14726 9 cultivable waste

11%
4 uses 16619 11 Permanent pastures and other
grazing lands
6%
1% crops & groves not included in
Permanent pastures and 4% net area sown
6 other grazing lands 1965 1
Land under miscellaneous Current fallows
tree crops & groves not 10%
7 included in net area sown 5716 4
6% Other fallow lands

Net area sown
V-35
Table 5.25
ORGANIZATIONAL CHART OF NAGARJUNASAGAR PROJECT
CHIEF ENGINEER
NS PROJECT
HILL COLONY
SE DAM CIRCLE SE O&M SE O&M SE QC & QA CIRCLE SE NSRC SE

MIRYALGUDA TEKULAPALLI FOR NSP NUZVID L.GUNTLA ONGOLE
EE DMD NSC DIV O&M O&M O&M NSC DIV 25 QC & I O&M MON O&M NSC DIV.
HILL COLONY M.GUDA M.GUDA T.PALLI NUZVIDU NUZVIDU MYLAVRM L.GNTLA DGNTLA ADDNKI ONGLO
L
O&M O&M O&M& O&M
O&M MON QC & I C.KURTHY
J.PET S.PALLI SIFT V.KON
KALLUR TPALLI VINUKONDA
O&M W&M O&M

MACHERLA L.GUNTLA DARSI
V-36
Table-5.26
Summary of Engineering Parametes( Component A) of NSP
NS Left Canal NS Right Canal
Miryalaguda Circle Tekullapalli Circle Lingamguntla Circle Ongole circle
S.No. Maintanance Indicator K R K R K R K R
1 Canals opening & closing date 13.8.08, 23.4.09 13.8.08, 23.4.09 13.8.08, 23.4.09 13.8.08, 23.4.09
Taken for Analysis Till Dec 15th From Dec16th Till Dec 15th From Dec16th Till Dec 15th From Dec16th Till Dec 15th From Dec16th
2 Ratio of Actual discharge to planned discharge
0.35-1.50 0.34-1.06 0.37-0.65 0.28-0.64 0.42-1.04 0.2-0.94 0.58-1.07 0.31-1.00

Main canal
- - 0.05-3.8 0.16-2.61 0.29-1.65 0.25-0.91 0.45-0.79 0.43-0.96

Branch canal
3 % of Average Volume of water received at majors / Branches and released at canal head
0.011%-40.68% 0.011%-38.68% 0.03%-17.28% 0.031%-13.48% 0.03%-21.95% 0.03%-27.86% 0.06% - 2.61% 0.04% - 2.53%
Main canal
- - 0.058%-33.67% 0.045%-32.34% 0.04%-31.4% 0.04%-31.76% - -

Branch canal
4 WUA Ratio of water discharged to planned
0.535 0.360 0.419 0.352 0.470 0.290 0.672 0.524

H
0.142 0.090 0.126 0.137 0.15 0.14 0.093 0.090

M
0.140 0.089 0.115 0.095 0.12 0.08 0.034 0.033

T
V-37
CHAPTER-6
ACCESS TO RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE

6.1 General
Accessibility in terms of WUAs, in terms of distances (Km) of various infrastructure

facilities obtained from primary data under left and right canal, Zone wise and reach
wise is shown in table 6.1. These include parameters such as market for selling produce,
Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Animal husbandry, Agro Industries, Primary health centre,
railway station, public water tap, bus stand, banks/ co-operative societies, pucca road,
telephone, post office, milk collection centre, flour mill and oil mills facilities.
Table 6.1
Indicators of Access to Infrastructure of WUA's Zone & Reach wise
Average distance in Kilometers of villages within a WUA Zone and Reach wise from Basic Infrastructure facilities
Canal Right canal Left canal
Zone Zone-1 Zone-2 Zone-1 Zone-2 Zone-3
Reach H M T H M T H M T H M T H M T
Market for selling produce

Max.
15.125 14.15 15.6 15 14.6 16 14.55 15 14 15.1 13.8 15.75 14.7 14.3 16.6
Min.
1.25 2.6 2.7 2.5 2.8 3.00 2.20 2.60 2.40 2.10 1.90 1.87 3.00 2.50 2.40
Krishi Vigyan Kendra
Max.
18.2 17.1 15.6 16.325 16.725 17.75 17.7 16.6 17.4 16.2 16.75 15.7 18.25 17.7 16.75
Min.
0.825 1.25 1.375 0.675 0.975 1 2.25 2.55 2.75 3.05 2.7 2.4 3.05 2.6 2.45
Animal Husbandry Centers
Max.
9.75 10.25 9.9 10.4 9.85 9.6 12.4 12.55 12.5 11.2 11.4 12.25 11.3 11.9 12.45
Min.
0.8 0.7 0.775 0.5 0.25 0.9 3.6 2.7 3.05 1.6 1.7 1.25 1.05 1.2 0.95
VI-1

Public Water supply tap
Max.
6.05 5.7 5.4 4.45 3.35 3.9 5.25 5.75 6.05 5.85 6.25 6.7 5.75 6.2 5.9
Min.
0.75 0.55 0.6 0.75 0.95 1 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.55 0.5 1.2 1.05 0.7 0.55
Bus Stop
Max.
9.45 7.25 8.8 5.4 5.6 7.9 5.4 5.25 5.6 6.1 6.75 6.45 7.1 5.4 0.675
Min.
0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.45 0.5 0.4
Commercial Bank/Govt.Bank
Max.
12.7 14.2 10.25 13.8 12.4 14.45 17 17.55 17.4 18.25 18.2 18.05 18.4 18.35 18.1
Min.
0.3 0.325 0.375 0.4 0.375 0.39 0.45 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.445 0.475 0.5 0.495 0.5
Pucca Road/Tar Road
Max.
11.25 13.25 12.05 12.05 14.7 13.75 9.9 10.25 10.5 6.75 7.85 9.3 9.9 12.35 11.25
Min.
0.75 0.85 0.39 0.5 0.9 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.75 0.9 1 0.7 0.85 0.9
Credit society
Max.
15.1 16.55 15.05 14.9 15 15.5 17.75 17.25 18.25 12.8 13.9 15.4 14.9 13.8 13.35
Min.
1.05 1.2 1 1.4 1.2 1.3 0.99 0.995 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
Self Help group
Max.
11 10 11 11 2.5 7.5 37.5 3 14 7.5 6 11.5 10 8.5 8.5
Min.
1 0.5 0.5 2 1.5 1 1 0.5 0.5 5 5 5 4 5 1
High School
Max.
7.5 6 4.5 3.5 2.5 6.5 2.5 2.5 5 10 7.5 6 5 2.5 5
Min.
0.5 0.5 1.5 0.5 0.5 0.25 0.25 0.25 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 0.5 0.5
VI-2
Police station
Max.
9.25 8.95 10.25 9.8 9.25 9.9 16.75 17.4 14.75 15.05 16.55 15.25 15.8 14.45 14.85
Min.
0.7 0.6 0.45 0.5 0.375 0.4 1.55 1.6 1.25 1.4 1.35 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.35
Agro Industries
Max.
17.05 17.25 18.25 17.7 16.9 17.9 15.25 16.7 17.4 16.05 16.25 15.75 16.85 15.75 17.25
Min.
0.6 0.55 0.75 0.9 0.7 0.85 1.2 1.4 1.7 1.75 1.3 1.35 1.2 1.05 1.45
Primary Health Centre
Max.
12.25 11.3 14.2 13.8 13.45 13.9 9.45 10.75 11.2 11.7 10.2 10.4 11.2 11.05 10.7
Min.
0.6 0.7 0.9 0.55 0.6 0.75 1.2 1.25 1.4 1.3 1.35 1.45 1.5 1.35 1.45
Railway Station
Max.
20.25 20.95 21.25 24.45 23.75 23.35 20.1 20.75 23.25 22.95 23.9 20.6 24.95 24.45 22.85
Min.
1.7 1.4 1.35 1.75 1.05 1.2 0.85 0.9 0.95 1.2 1.75 2.4 4.05 4.75 6.2
Cooperative Bank
Max.
9.25 9.6 9.95 10 9.35 9.7 8.2 7.75 8 7.75 9.1 7.1 9.1 9.8 9.6
Min.
0.75 0.95 1 0.5 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.55 0.65 0.55 0.5 0.5 0.45
Gramin Bank
Max.
10.2 12.55 13.7 12.25 12.55 11.8 11.25 10.9 11.8 9.75 10.25 10.75 10.8 11.2 10.4
Min.
0.15 0.2 0.25 0.225 0.215 0.25 0.5 0.5 0.45 0.25 0.35 0.15 0.2 0.15 0.1
VI-3
Post office
Max.
10 9.9 9.95 10.05 9.85 9.9 10.05 10 9.95 9.25 9.75 8.75 9.9 10.2 10.35
Min.
1.05 1 1.25 1.35 0.95 1 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.55 0.45 0.5
Primary School
Max.
7.5 7.5 5 5 5 5.5 0 1.5 5 4 3 7.5 7.5 6.5 4.5
Min.
0.5 0.5 2.5 5 1.5 1 0 0.5 1.5 1.5 2 2 7.5 1.5 0.5
Public Telephone
Max.
7.25 7.95 7.5 7.85 7.1 7.45 1.5 1.45 1.55 7.25 8.05 7.7 7.5 7.45 7.6
Min.
0.5 0.5 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.485 1.5 1.2 1.4 2.95 3 2.7 2.95 3.05 3
Note: H, M, T corresponds to head, middle and tail reach respectively
VI-4
CHAPTER 7
WATER USERS ASSOCIATION
7.1 INTRODUCTION
The present study is focused at the status and functioning of farmers organisations in achieving
the set goals and objectives of participating irrigation management for undertaking rehabilitation,
maintenance of the irrigation infrastructure and implementation of irrigation distribution to ensure
equity, adequacy and timeliness in supplies of precious irrigation waters to each and every
holding from head reach to the tail reach for sustained crop production and improved production
and productivity in the existing irrigation commands. It is in this context, the baseline study
focused attention on creating a profile of water users associations for understanding the primary
characteristics of the WUAs and the current functioning as well as recording of the baseline key
performance parameters/indicators designed for the project monitoring and evaluation system.
Further, the data on performance indicators was cross checked with available secondary data and
also through focussed group discussions in order to elicit reliable information as far as possible.
The details are discussed here under:
Participation of members and their social status.
Participation in meetings
Functioning and water tax
O & M plan
Water management
Audit
7.2 PARTICIPATION OF MEMBERS AND THEIR SOCIAL STATUS
7.2.1 Number and members of WUAs

As already pointed out in methodology chapter, 150 WUAs out of 672 were selected randomly
comprising of 76 in right bank canal system and 74 in left bank canal duly covering all the zones
and water reaches (Table 7.1). In left canal command area around 89% of WUAs have command
area more than 1000ha while in right command the same is to the extent of 64% (Table-7.2) and
the remaining WUAs have less than 1000ha under command.
VII-1
7.2.2 Social Status

A perusal of Table 7.3 reveals that around 6% belong to ST and 15% of SC, together around 21%
members was included in WUAs. Hence, it is clear that due representation has been provided to
farmers belonging to weakest sections as members of WUA. Nearly 50% of the members of
WUA belong to forward community in the study region.
7.2.3 Social Status of Elected Members:-

As per APFMIS act each WUA should constitute 12 executive members. The baseline study
covered 150 WUAs in NSP command area. According to this there should be around 1800
members. As observed from the Table 7.4 (a) there are 728 elected members in the executive
committee in different cadres comprising of SC, ST and OBC castes as per survey data and the
remaining 1072 members belonging to either forward community or some vacancies in WUAs.
Hence there is proper representation of SC (8%), ST (6%) and OBC (26.4%) members in WUA
executive committees of command area (Table 7.4 (b)).
7.2.4 Participation of Executive committee headed by SC/ST/OBC/OC of WUA:

There is 1.28% and 1.44% representation of SC & ST respectively as the head of the executive
committee of WUAs (Table 7.5). A little over 4% constitute WUAs headed by OBC category in
the NSP. The participation of these categories are to be enhanced in future and see that due
representation has to be provided to female members.
7.3 MEETINGS
General body meetings are proposed to be conducted twice in a year before the crop seasons i.e.,
kharif and rabi season as per the APFMIS Act besides conducting monthly management
committee meetings. The main purpose of meetings are to create a platform for the members to
share their concerns, building consensus on critical issues, solving problems and developing a
common and shared understanding between governing body and its members. The date, time and
place of meeting to be conducted are to be informed to all the members well in advance in
addition to official members in order to have transparency in all the issues including details of
expenditure.
VII-2
7.3.1 Management Committee meetings
The base line analysis is aimed at understanding the regularity of meetings of WUA managing
committee (MC). As per APFMIS Act, the management committee meetings have to be
conducted every month regularly in the presence of at least 1/3rd of the total members. It can be
seen from Table 7.6 that overall around 23% of WUAs in NSP are conducting less than 6 MC
meetings in a year . The percentages of WUAs conducting less than 6 meetings in a year is more
in right command (28.95%) compared to left command (17.57%). About 4% and 14% of WUAs
are conducting MC meetings as per APFMIS Act in right and left command of NSP respectively.
Overall only 9% of WUAs in NSP command is conducting the meetings as per APFMIS Act.
7.3.2 General body meetings

At least one-third of farmers (quorum) under WUA must attend general body. Perusal of Table
7.7 reveals that 14% of WUAs are not conducting meeting at all. 7.33% of WUAs are conducting
meeting once in 6 month i.e. 2 meetings in a year with quorum (i.e. participation of at least 1/3rd
of the total members) and 78.67% of WUAS are conducting only one meeting in a year with less
than 40% of attendance.
7.3.3 Transparency
The main objective of APFMIS Act is to maintain transparency in conducting the MC and GB
meetings by informing the details of expenses to all WUA members through maintaining minutes
of meeting, cashbooks, records on works carried out, farmers details, wall writings, social audit
boards, community halls etc. It is in this context the data was collected and analysed. It is
apparent from the Table 7.8 that only 22.5% WUAs have been following regular procedures to
maintain transparency and majorities are not transparent in informing the expenses to the fellow
farmers.
7.4 FUNCTIONING OF WUAs

The functioning of WUA can be judged by its water use efficiency, Area under Rabi, collection of
water tax, and mobilisation of additional resources.
VII-3
7.4.1 Water Use Efficiency

It is evident from Table 7.9 that about 14% of WUAs in NSP command area is having poor water
use efficiency i.e. less than 71.46 ha per MCM. The water use efficiency is observed low in 5% of
WUAs in left command and 23% of WUAs in right command. The reason towards poor water use
efficiency in these WUAs can be claimed as growing of water intensive crops like paddy/
improper distribution and scheduling of water.
7.4.2 Area under second crop i.e. Rabi

If additional water is available then area may also be cultivated during Rabi Season thus
enhancing the cropping intensity. Table 7.10 reveals that 50-85% of the allotted area is being used
for growing second crop i.e. rabi crop in about 23% of WUAs in NSP command, while only 10%
of WUAs are utilising more than 85% of area allotted to them towards rabi cropping.
7.4.3 Collection of Water Tax/ Charges

Preparation of water tax demand schedule and collection of regular water charges is another vital
function of WUAs. One of the important responsibilities of Managing Committee members is to
assist village secretary in collecting water charges. It is the prime duty of each member of WUA
to pay water tax for both Kharif and Rabi seasons as per the demand assessment. This is a major
source of fund for improvement of canal system.
7.4.3.1 Water taxes and joint azmoish

Water taxes/charges form one of the major financial resources for canal management. The
revenue department, Govt. of A.P. is the authorized body for water tax assessment and collection
under the APFMIS Act. Overall 55% of WUAs of NSP are collecting water charges at the rate of
below 50%. Collection of water charges is below 50% in 32.43% of WUAs in left canal
command while the same has been observed in 77.63% WUAs of right canal command of NSP.
Table 7.12 reveals that joint azmoish which is made a mandatory for collection of water tax is
being carried out effectively in only 4% of WUAs of NSP command. This is being practiced
properly in 6.76% of WUAs in left bank command system of NSP area while only 1.32% of
WUAs in right canal command is practicing the same.
VII-4
7.4.4 Mobilisation of additional resources

In order to maintain and manage the canal system, the WUA have to mobilise additional
resources. WUAs can collect contribution from their members. They can also raise income from
properties within the system such as auction of usufruct of trees, rent on irrigation properties, etc.
Other funds as received from the Central Government as management subsidy or calamity relief
would also contribute to its resources. It can be seen from Table 7.13 that the fund generation
from additional resources can be considered as poor in 69% of WUAs in NSP. The condition is
worst in WUAs of right canal command (81.58% of WUAs) while 56.76% of WUAs in left canal
are not generating any income from additional resources.
7.5 OPERATION AND MAINTAINANCE (O&M) PLAN:

This is one of the essential functions of WUA institution for proper functioning of WUA in
command area. This is analysed in the following manner.
Maintenance of records.
Water release schedule/ water budgeting.
Warabandi implementation.
Adequacy of water to tail end areas.
Conflicts/Disputes resolution.
O & M Works.
7.5.1 Maintenance of records:
According to APFMIS act the following minimum records have to be maintained by each WUA.
Update copy of APFMIS act
Relevant specified Maps
Statement of the assets and liabilities.
Minutes book
Books of accounts indicating receipts and payments
Books of accounts indicating purchase and sales.
Measurement register
Copies of audit reports and enquiry reports
Other records and documents prescribed from time to time.
Further the act indicates that these records and registers should be made available to members of
the association and also for inspection to any authorised officer by government.
VII-5
Table 7.14 indicates that around 9% of WUAs in the NSP command area is not maintaining
proper records. However, 42.53% WUAs maintain the records but not updating regularly. This is
somewhat better in left bank canal compared to right bank canal system. Regular maintenance
and updating of records is observed in 12% WUAs of NSP command area.
7.5.2 Water release schedule/ water budgeting:
On examination of Table 7.15 it is found that majority of WUAs (86%) have not prepared water
release schedule as per the act. There is no formal practice of water assessment and release of
water before the season. About 50% of WUAs are not releasing water as per plan and also not
intimating the same to the farmers. Majority of the farmers are not satisfied with the regular
release of water as per FGD.
7.5.3 Warabandi implementation
It is seen from table 7.16 that around 47% of WUAs in NSP command have not prepared
Warabandi schedule for proper distribution of water. In around 5% WUAs water is released as
per availability in the canal. Only about 27 percent of WUAs have released water as per planned
dates. Further probing with farmers in the group discussions it was revealed that majority are not
getting water according to Warabandi.
7.5.4 Adequacy of Water received by Tail End Farmers
At the time of survey, information was also collected from the tail end group of farmers regarding
their issues/ problems through group discussions and the same was confirmed with published
secondary data. It is evident from the table 7.17 that around 22% of WUAs tail end farmers are
not receiving any water for crop cultivation, the problem is more in zone 3 of left bank canal
system followed by zone 2 of the same canal. Adequate water is being utilised by zone 1 of right
and left bank canals systems in NSP area.
VII-6
7.5.5 Conflict Resolution

During the survey it was noticed that the conflict resolution after formation of WUAs in the
command area is reported to have been improved and there appears to be limited number of
conflicts in water distribution. The formation of WUAs in the study region has immensely
contributed in resolving the conflicts in water distribution as expressed by the members (table
7.18). Yet, there are around 9% of WUAs have disputes which are to be resolved in due course
of time which is meagre. This indicates that after formation of WUAs in NSP area contributed a
lot in solving the conflicts/ disputes and shows a collective shared agreement and understanding
among the WUA members.
7.5.6 Operation and Repair works

The details are presented in table 7.19 which reveals around 15 percent of WUAs of NSP
command area have prepared O&M plan and fully implemented before commencement of rainy
season by the WUA members alone with estimated budget. In about 50 percent of WUAs, O& M
plan was prepared with the assistance of irrigation department and implemented by WUA
members. Only in left bank canal system of tail end areas of zone 2 and zone 3, O&M plans
neither prepared nor implemented (2%).
7.6 WATER MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

This includes innovations in water management, water sharing, conjunctive use, water audit,
collective action, cropping practices like SRI, Irrigated dry, Horticulture crops etc. The data on
these aspects have been summarised in table 7.20. Perusal of Table 7.20 reveals that there is no
discussions about the water management innovation practices in about 43% WUAs, hence these
practices are not implemented in these WUAs of NSP command due to lack of knowledge. Only
around 5% WUAs have discussed about water management practices and adopted the same.
7.7 AUDIT
Financial audit is reported to have been made in WUAs. It is evident from Table 7.21 that
accounts are not regularly audited in majority WUAs in the study region. The percentage of
WUAs record not audited varies from 29.17 (zone 1 of left bank canal) to 70.83 (zone 1 of right
bank canal system) indicating a great lapse on the part of concerned WUAs. The overall
VII-7
percentage of WUAs record audited in WUAs is not even 50%, it is only 47%. Only in zone 1 of
right and left bank canal system, percent of WUAs carrying out account auditing is about 60%.
7.8 PERFORMANCE OF DISTRIBUTORY COMMITTEE
The performance of Distributory Committee (D.Cs), prevailing in NSP area is analysed circle
wise and canal system wise. The typical structure of D.Cs is as follows:
President
Members of the Distributory Committee
All the Presidents of a WUAs under the jurisdiction of a distributory

committee (DC)
As already indicated, Nagarjuna Sagar command area has two canal systems i.e. right and left
canal. Again in each canal system, there are two circles functioning with head quarters at
Lingampally and Ongole for right canal system and Miryalaguda and Tekullapally for left canal
system. The secondary data was collected circle wise on important parameters and presented in
Table 7.22.
In the command area there are 80 DCs, 48 in right canal and 32 in left canal system, comprising
of 404 WUAs in right and 268 in left thus totalling to 672 WUAs. The percentage of total
irrigated area (including ID) to localized ayacut during khariff ranged from 31.74 to 98.81. The
highest being in right bank canal system under Lingamguntla circle. This is due to the availability
of water in the canal coupled with receipt of very good rains during the base year. In Miryalaguda
circle the percentage of total irrigated area to localized ayacut is more than 80 in both the seasons.
Similarly the percentage of tax collected over the demand assessed varies from 0 to 74.67%.
Water tax was not at all collected in Ongole circle of right bank canal system. The tax collection
however during Rabi season in all the circles was very poor. Care must be taken to improve the
VII-8
tax collection according to the Act which will be utilized by the WUA or DC concerned for O&
M works pertaining to same WUA. Training programmes may be conducted in the command area
in order to create awareness on the importance of water tax payment which in turn 69% will be
plough back to the concerned WUA (50%), DC (15%) and PC(14%) works and a total of 16% to
administration purpose at different levels. Further, the amount earmarked for administration can
be utilized for administrative expenses, water management and incidental charges etc by the
farmers organizations alone. These things have to be brought to the notice of farmers for prompt
payment of water tax. The unauthorized area under cultivation in NSP command area is more in
right bank canal system compared to left bank canal system.
VII-9
Table 7.1 List of Selected WUAs as per actual field survey according to canal, Zone
and reaches
Zone Head Middle Tail Overall
No. No. No. No. %
Zone-I
14 17 10 41 27.33
Zone-II
14 12 9 35 23.33
Total 28 29 19 76 50.67
Zone-I
10 6 8 24 16.00
Zone-II
10 7 7 24 16.00
Zone-III
7 9 10 26 17.33
Total 27 22 25 74 49.33
Grand Total 55 51 44 150
%
36.67 34.00 29.33 100.00
Table 7.2 Size Category of WUAs according to Area (ha)

Area in hectares No. of WUAs
Right canal Left Canal Total Ayacut AVG Ayacut
<500 32 0 32 10174 317.94
500-750 40 4 44 27938 634.95
750-1000 75 26 101 90538 896.42
>1000 257 238 495 690636 1395.22
Total (number) 404 268 672 819286
Total (percentage) 60% 40%
VII-10
Table 7.3 Distribution of members in WUAs according to social group and canal, Zone and reaches (%)

Zone Landless Small Medium Large Overall
ST SC OBC Others Total ST SC OBC Others Total ST SC OBC Others Total ST SC OBC Others Total ST SC OBC Others Total
Zone-I
Head 15.0 31.1 35.0 18.9 100.0 1.6 9.7 23.7 65.0 100.0 0.0 0.4 44.3 55.2 100.0 0.0 2.2 21.5 76.3 100.0 6.5 16.7 29.6 47.2 100.0
Middle 13.4 43.8 31.0 11.8 100.0 3.2 9.6 24.4 62.8 100.0 0.3 0.7 42.1 56.9 100.0 0.5 0.3 26.9 72.3 100.0 6.5 20.7 29.4 43.4 100.0
Tail 16.5 29.4 37.0 17.1 100.0 3.4 8.6 22.5 65.5 100.0 0.2 0.6 27.2 71.9 100.0 0.0 0.0 10.9 89.1 100.0 7.6 14.8 28.0 49.6 100.0
Average 15.0 34.7 34.4 15.9 100.0 2.8 9.3 23.5 64.4 100.0 0.2 0.6 37.9 61.4 100.0 0.2 0.8 19.8 79.2 100.0 6.8 17.4 29.0 46.8 100.0
Zone-II
Head 2.4 8.9 85.8 2.9 100.0 2.3 15.6 23.9 58.1 100.0 1.7 3.7 45.8 48.9 100.0 0.0 0.5 7.5 92.0 100.0 2.3 11.4 55.1 31.2 100.0
Middle 13.7 44.0 27.3 15.0 100.0 2.2 14.4 23.4 60.1 100.0 0.0 3.6 31.2 65.1 100.0 0.0 1.6 44.3 54.1 100.0 3.8 17.2 27.5 51.6 100.0
Tail 16.0 38.9 38.1 7.0 100.0 4.0 21.1 13.8 61.1 100.0 1.9 13.5 30.9 53.7 100.0 0.0 0.7 23.0 76.3 100.0 5.1 21.7 18.7 54.5 100.0
Average 10.7 30.6 50.4 8.3 100.0 2.8 17.0 20.4 59.8 100.0 1.2 6.9 36.0 55.9 100.0 0.0 0.9 24.9 74.1 100.0 3.7 16.8 33.8 45.8 100.0

Zone-I
Head 7.6 40.1 41.0 11.4 100.0 8.6 11.4 26.1 53.9 100.0 13.4 12.3 32.1 42.1 100.0 4.9 0.6 28.4 66.1 100.0 9.2 14.6 29.2 47.0 100.0
Middle 28.7 33.8 32.0 5.5 100.0 7.0 4.7 30.7 57.7 100.0 4.3 11.1 73.7 10.9 100.0 5.7 0.0 29.0 65.4 100.0 10.0 10.1 37.3 42.6 100.0
Tail 6.0 77.7 9.8 6.5 100.0 17.4 9.1 17.7 55.9 100.0 32.2 2.1 32.4 33.3 100.0 11.5 0.0 22.6 65.9 100.0 15.4 31.7 17.5 35.4 100.0
Average 14.1 50.5 27.6 7.8 100.0 11.0 8.4 24.8 55.8 100.0 16.6 8.5 46.0 28.8 100.0 7.3 0.2 26.7 65.8 100.0 11.5 18.8 28.0 41.7 100.0
Zone-II
Head 12.6 43.4 29.0 15.1 100.0 3.7 12.2 21.8 62.3 100.0 4.7 7.1 39.1 49.1 100.0 3.2 3.4 27.8 65.5 100.0 4.7 14.8 24.4 56.1 100.0
Middle 7.2 34.7 42.4 15.7 100.0 1.4 10.4 23.3 64.8 100.0 6.5 3.2 27.5 62.7 100.0 12.2 3.7 37.8 46.3 100.0 3.1 11.0 26.0 60.0 100.0
Tail 7.4 52.0 31.4 9.1 100.0 2.1 1.6 11.9 84.4 100.0 0.0 0.4 76.8 22.8 100.0 0.0 0.0 40.5 59.5 100.0 2.2 3.2 14.2 80.4 100.0
Average 9.1 43.4 34.2 13.3 100.0 2.4 8.1 19.0 70.5 100.0 3.7 3.6 47.8 44.9 100.0 5.1 2.4 35.4 57.1 100.0 3.3 9.6 21.5 65.5 100.0
Zone-III
Head 21.2 45.1 14.2 19.5 100.0 0.7 0.9 10.1 88.3 100.0 9.4 10.3 34.2 46.1 100.0 10.7 6.4 26.7 56.1 100.0 2.5 3.2 13.4 80.9 100.0
Middle 1.4 32.3 43.0 23.3 100.0 0.1 4.0 3.0 93.0 100.0 0.0 3.4 5.6 91.0 100.0 0.0 1.2 1.8 96.9 100.0 0.2 6.7 7.1 86.0 100.0
Tail 5.3 31.0 48.8 14.9 100.0 0.2 1.5 7.3 91.0 100.0 0.5 3.5 10.1 85.9 100.0
Average 5.0 32.8 43.4 18.8 100.0 0.3 2.0 6.8 90.9 100.0 7.0 8.6 27.0 57.3 100.0 5.7 4.0 15.1 75.1 100.0 0.9 4.3 10.1 84.7 100.0
Overall 10.7 32.1 46.9 10.3 100.0 4.0 9.7 20.9 65.4 100.0 6.0 5.4 41.8 46.8 100.0 2.9 1.2 28.8 67.2 100.0 5.9 14.8 30.2 49.1 100.0
VII-11
Table 7.4 (a) Participation of SC/ST/OBC in WUA Executive Committee
Zone SC ST OBC Others Total
Zone-I
Head 15 1 52 100 168
Middle 15 8 73 108 204
Tail 15 3 37 65 120
Total 45 12 162 273 492
Zone-II
Head 15 7 30 116 168
Middle 4 23 117 144
Tail 6 0 19 83 108
Total 25 7 72 316 420

Zone-I
Head 2 12 37 69 120
Middle 5 11 24 32 72
Tail 2 40 22 32 96
Total 9 63 83 133 288
Zone-II
Head 12 3 26 79 120
Middle 7 2 26 49 84
Tail 10 33 41 84
Total 29 5 85 169 288

Zone-III
Head 8 4 21 51 84
Middle 13 2 19 74 108
Tail 15 15 34 56 120
Total 36 21 74 181 312
Grand Total (number)
144 108 476 1072 1800
Canal Social Status SC ST OBC Others Total

Right Canal 70 19 234 589 912
Left Canal 74 89 242 483 888
Overall Command 144 108 476 1072 1800
VII-12
Table 7.4 (b) Participation of SC/ST/OBC in WUA Executive Committee (Percentage)

Zone SC ST OBC Others Total
Zone-I
Head 8.93 0.60 30.95 59.52 100.00
Middle 7.35 3.92 35.78 52.94 100.00
Tail 12.50 2.50 30.83 54.17 100.00
Total 9.15 2.44 32.93 55.49 100.00
Zone-II
Head 8.93 4.17 17.86 69.05 100.00
Middle 2.78 0.00 15.97 81.25 100.00
Tail 5.56 0.00 17.59 76.85 100.00
Total 5.95 1.67 17.14 75.24 100.00

Zone-I
Head 1.67 10.00 30.83 57.50 100.00
Middle 6.94 15.28 33.33 44.44 100.00
Tail 2.08 41.67 22.92 33.33 100.00
Total 3.13 21.88 28.82 46.18 100.00
Zone-II
Head 10.00 2.50 21.67 65.83 100.00
Middle 8.33 2.38 30.95 58.33 100.00
Tail 11.90 0.00 39.29 48.81 100.00
Total 10.07 1.74 29.51 58.68 100.00

Zone-III
Head 9.52 4.76 25.00 60.71 100.00
Middle 12.04 1.85 17.59 68.52 100.00

Tail 12.50 12.50 28.33 46.67 100.00
Total 11.54 6.73 23.72 58.01 100.00
Canal Social Status SC ST OBC Others Total

Right Canal 7.68 2.08 25.66 64.58 100.00
Left Canal 8.33 10.02 27.25 54.39 100.00
Overall Command 8.00 6.00 26.44 59.56 100.00
VII-13
Table 7.5 Participation of WUA headed by SC/ST/OBC/OC in WUAs according
to canal, Zone and reaches (Surveyed WUA)
Zone SC ST OBC OC Total
Zone-I
Head 1 4 9 14
Middle 3 8 6 17
Tail 2 3 5 10
Total 2 4 15 20 41
Zone-II
Head 1 2 10 1 14
Middle 8 4 12
Tail 1 5 2 1 9
Total 2 7 20 6 35

Zone-I
Head 5 2 1 2 10
Middle 2 2 1 1 6
Tail 3 1 2 2 8
Total 10 5 4 5 24
Zone-II
Head 3 1 2 4 10
Middle 1 2 3 1 7
Tail 3 1 3 7
Total 4 6 6 8 24
Zone-III
Head 1 1 5 7
Middle 1 1 7 9
Tail 2 2 6 10
Total 0 4 4 18 26
Grand Total 18 26 49 57 150
VII-14
Table 7.6 Management Committee meetings (Percentages of WUAs)
Zone
Bad Average Good Excellent Total
Zone-I
Head 21.43 50.00 28.57 0.00 100
Middle 17.65 52.94 23.53 5.88 100
Tail 30.00 50.00 20.00 0.00 100
Average 21.95 51.22 24.39 2.44 100
Zone-II
Head 42.86 35.71 14.29 7.14 100
Middle 41.67 50.00 0.00 8.33 100
Tail 22.22 77.78 0.00 0.00 100
Average 37.14 51.43 5.71 5.71 100
Zone-I
Head 20.00 20.00 30.00 30.00 100
Middle 16.67 50.00 16.67 16.67 100
Tail 12.50 50.00 37.50 0.00 100
Average 16.67 37.50 29.17 16.67 100
Zone-II
Head 30.00 30.00 30.00 10.00 100
Middle 42.86 57.14 0.00 0.00 100
Tail 14.29 28.57 57.14 0.00 100
Average 29.17 37.50 29.17 4.17 100
Zone-III
Head 0.00 57.14 28.57 14.29 100
Middle 0.00 11.11 44.44 44.44 100
Tail 20.00 40.00 40.00 0.00 100
Average 7.69 34.62 38.46 19.23 100
overall 23.33 44.00 24.00 8.67 100

Right canal 28.95 51.32 15.79 3.95 100.00
Left canal 17.57 36.49 32.43 13.51 100.00
overall 23.26 43.90 24.11 8.73 100.00
Note: Bad : represents meetings conducted less than 6 regularly
Average: represents meeting conducted more than 6 and < 9
Good: meetings conducted > 9 and < 12
Excellent: meeting conducted 12
VII-15
Table 7.7 General body meetings conducted (Percentages of WUAs)

Zone 1 2 3 Total
Zone-I
Head 0 100 0 100
Middle 0 100 0 100
Tail 0 100 0 100
Total 0 100 0 100
Zone-II
Head 14.29 78.57 7.14 100
Middle 25.00 66.67 8.33 100
Tail 11.11 88.89 100
Total 17.14 77.14 5.71 100
Zone-I
Head 10.00 90.00 0.00 100.00
Middle 50.00 16.67 33.33 100.00
Tail 12.50 75.00 12.50 100.00
Total 20.83 66.67 12.50 100.00
Zone-II
Head 10.00 70.00 20.00 100.00
Middle 14.29 85.71 0.00 100.00
Tail 14.29 57.14 28.57 100.00
Total 12.50 70.83 16.67 100.00
Zone-III
Head 57.14 42.86 0.00 100.00
Middle 0.00 88.89 11.11 100.00
Tail 30.00 60.00 10.00 100.00
Total 26.92 65.38 7.69 100.00
Grand Total 14.00 78.67 7.33 100.00
1 2 3 Total
Right canal 7.89 89.47 2.63 100.00
Left canal 20.27 67.57 12.16 100.00
overall 14.00 78.67 7.33 100.00
Note:
1 : no meeting in the year
2: less than one meeting in a year with less attendence
3: Once in 6 month with quorum
VII-16
Table 7.8 Transparency - Information to all Members (Wall paintings, Social Audit
etc.,) (Percentages of WUAs)
Zone Bad Average Good Excellent Total
Zone-I
Head 7.14 71.43 21.43 0.00 100.00
Middle 0.00 76.47 23.53 0.00 100.00
Tail 10.00 70.00 20.00 0.00 100.00
Average 4.88 73.17 21.95 0.00 100.00
Zone-II
Head 7.14 64.29 21.43 7.14 100.00
Middle 41.67 33.33 8.33 16.67 100.00
Tail 22.22 66.67 11.11 0.00 100.00
Average 22.86 54.29 14.29 8.57 100.00
Zone-I
Head 20.00 50.00 20.00 10.00 100.00
Middle 0.00 83.33 0.00 16.67 100.00
Tail 0.00 50.00 37.50 12.50 100.00
Average 8.33 58.33 20.83 12.50 100.00
Zone-II
Head 20.00 50.00 10.00 20.00 100.00
Middle 14.29 71.43 14.29 0.00 100.00
Tail 14.29 57.14 0.00 28.57 100.00
Total 16.67 58.33 8.33 16.67 100.00
Zone-III
Head 14.29 71.43 14.29 0.00 100.00
Middle 11.11 77.78 11.11 0.00 100.00
Tail 30.00 40.00 20.00 10.00 100.00
Average 19.23 61.54 15.38 3.85 100.00
Overall 14.00 62.00 16.67 7.33 100.00
Right canal 12.28 63.16 19.30 5.26 100.00
Left canal 14.29 65.31 12.24 8.16 100.00
overall 13.28 64.23 15.77 6.71 100.00
expenditure details
Average - Knowledge to only M.C. Members
Good - Communication through wall paintings
Excellent - Informining at the time of General body meeting and also writing the expenditure on social Audit board
VII-17
Table 7.9 Water Use Efficiency (Percentages of WUAs)

Zone-I
Head 14.29 71.43 7.14 7.14 100.00
Middle 0.00 47.06 29.41 23.53 100.00
Tail 10.00 40.00 40.00 10.00 100.00
Average 7.32 53.66 24.39 0.00 100.00
Zone-II
Head 7.14 57.14 35.71 0.00 100.00
Middle 0.00 75.00 25.00 0.00 100.00
Tail 0.00 77.78 22.22 0.00 100.00
Average 2.86 68.57 28.57 0.00 100.00
Zone-I
Head 50.00 40.00 10.00 0.00 100.00
Middle 16.67 50.00 0.00 33.33 100.00
Tail 12.50 62.50 25.00 0.00 100.00
Total 29.17 50.00 12.50 0.00 100.00
Zone-II
Head 20.00 40.00 40.00 0.00 100.00
Middle 14.29 71.43 0.00 14.29 100.00
Tail 28.57 57.14 0.00 14.29 100.00
Average 20.83 54.17 16.67 8.33 100.00
Zone-III
Head 14.29 28.57 28.57 28.57 100.00
Middle 22.22 66.67 11.11 0.00 100.00
Tail 20.00 70.00 0.00 10.00 100.00
Average 19.23 57.69 11.54 11.54 100.00
overall 14.00 57.33 20.00 3.33 100.00

Right canal 5.26 60.53 26.32 7.89 100.00
Left canal 22.97 54.05 13.51 9.46 100.00
overall 14.12 57.29 19.91 8.68 100.00
Note : Bad < 71.46 ha per mcm
Average - >71.46nd < 114.33 ha per mcm
Good - >114.33 and < 142.91 ha per mcm
Excellent - > 142.91 ha per mcm
VII-18
Table 7.10 Area under Second crop (Percentages of WUAs)
Zone-I
Head 42.86 35.71 14.29 7.14 100.00
Middle 41.18 29.41 23.53 5.88 100.00
Tail 40.00 40.00 10.00 10.00 100.00
Average 41.46 34.15 17.07 7.32 100.00
Zone-II
Head 50.00 42.86 7.14 0.00 100.00
Middle 50.00 33.33 8.33 8.33 100.00
Tail 44.44 55.56 0.00 0.00 100.00
Average 48.57 42.86 5.71 2.86 100.00
Zone-I
Head 0.00 0.00 30.00 70.00 100.00
Middle 0.00 0.00 83.33 16.67 100.00
Tail 0.00 37.50 50.00 12.50 100.00
Average 0.00 12.50 50.00 37.50 100.00
Zone-II
Head 30.00 50.00 10.00 10.00 100.00
Middle 42.86 28.57 28.57 0.00 100.00
Tail 14.29 14.29 71.43 0.00 100.00
Average 29.17 33.33 33.33 4.17 100.00
Zone-III
Head 42.86 28.57 28.57 0.00 100.00
Middle 77.78 11.11 11.11 0.00 100.00
Tail 60.00 10.00 20.00 10.00 100.00
Average 61.54 15.38 19.23 3.85 100.00
overall 38.00 29.33 22.67 10.00 100.00

Right canal 44.74 38.16 11.84 5.26 100.00
Left canal 31.08 20.27 33.78 14.86 100.00
overall 38.00 29.33 22.67 10.00 100.00
Note: Bad - rabi area less than 25% of the alloted area
Average - rabi area in between 25 - 50 % of the alloted area
Good - rabi area in between 50 - 85 % of the alloted area
Excellent - rabi area > 85%
VII-19
Table 7.11 Water Tax collection (Percentages of WUAs)
Zone-I
Head 64.29 28.57 7.14 0.00 100.00
Middle 76.47 5.88 17.65 0.00 100.00
Tail 80.00 10.00 10.00 0.00 100.00
Average 73.17 14.63 12.20 0.00 100.00
Zone-II
Head 78.57 14.29 7.14 0.00 100.00
Middle 83.33 8.33 0.00 8.33 100.00
Tail 88.89 11.11 0.00 0.00 100.00
Average 82.86 11.43 2.86 2.86 100.00
Zone-I
Head 10.00 20.00 60.00 10.00 100.00
Middle 0.00 33.33 33.33 33.33 100.00
Tail 37.50 37.50 25.00 0.00 100.00
Average 16.67 29.17 41.67 12.50 100.00
Zone-II
Head 20.00 70.00 10.00 0.00 100.00
Middle 14.29 57.14 28.57 0.00 100.00
Tail 71.43 28.57 0.00 0.00 100.00
Average 33.33 54.17 12.50 0.00 100.00
Zone-III
Head 71.43 28.57 0.00 0.00 100.00
Middle 11.11 88.89 0.00 0.00 100.00
Tail 60.00 40.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
Average 46.15 53.85 0.00 0.00 100.00
overall 55.33 29.33 12.67 2.67 100.00

Right canal 77.63 13.16 7.89 1.32 100.00
Left canal 32.43 45.95 17.57 4.05 100.00
overall 55.03 29.55 12.73 2.68 100.00
Note : Bad - < 50%
Average - > 50% and < 75%
Good - > 75% and < 90%
Excellent - 90%
VII-20
Table 7.12 Joint azmoish (Percentages of WUAs)

Zone-I
Head 14.29 57.14 28.57 0.00 100.00
Middle 17.65 52.94 29.41 0.00 100.00
Tail 0.00 80.00 20.00 0.00 100.00
Average 12.20 60.98 26.83 0.00 100.00
Zone-II
Head 21.43 64.29 14.29 0.00 100.00
Middle 50.00 25.00 16.67 8.33 100.00
Tail 33.33 44.44 22.22 0.00 100.00
Average 34.29 45.71 17.14 2.86 100.00
Zone-I
Head 10.00 40.00 40.00 10.00 100.00
Middle 0.00 33.33 66.67 0.00 100.00
Tail 25.00 25.00 37.50 12.50 100.00
Average 12.50 33.33 45.83 8.33 100.00
Zone-II
Head 10.00 40.00 50.00 0.00 100.00
Middle 14.29 42.86 42.86 0.00 100.00
Tail 28.57 42.86 14.29 14.29 100.00
Average 16.67 41.67 37.50 4.17 100.00
Zone-III
Head 28.57 57.14 14.29 0.00 100.00
Middle 33.33 33.33 22.22 11.11 100.00
Tail 30.00 40.00 20.00 10.00 100.00
Average 30.77 42.31 19.23 7.69 100.00
overall 21.33 46.67 28.00 4.00 100.00

Right canal 22.37 53.95 22.37 1.32 100.00
Left canal 20.27 39.19 33.78 6.76 100.00
overall 21.32 46.57 28.08 4.04 100.00
VII-21
Table 7.13 Additional resources mobilisation (Percentages of WUAs)

Zone-I
Head 71.43 21.43 7.14 0.00 100.00
Middle 82.35 17.65 0.00 0.00 100.00
Tail 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
Average 82.93 14.63 2.44 0.00 100.00
Zone-II
Head 71.43 21.43 7.14 0.00 100.00
Middle 83.33 16.67 0.00 0.00 100.00
Tail 88.89 0.00 11.11 0.00 100.00
Average 80.00 14.29 5.71 0.00 100.00
Zone-I
Head 70.00 20.00 10.00 0.00 100.00
Middle 66.67 16.67 16.67 0.00 100.00
Tail 75.00 25.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
Average 70.83 20.83 8.33 0.00 100.00
Zone-II
Head 50.00 40.00 10.00 0.00 100.00
Middle 71.43 14.29 14.29 0.00 100.00
Tail 57.14 28.57 0.00 14.29 100.00
Average 58.33 29.17 8.33 4.17 100.00
Zone-III
Head 57.14 42.86 0.00 0.00 100.00
Middle 11.11 66.67 11.11 11.11 100.00
Tail 60.00 40.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
Average 42.31 50.00 3.85 3.85 100.00
overall 69.33 24.00 5.33 1.33 100.00

Right canal 81.58 14.47 3.95 0.00 100.00
Left canal 56.76 33.78 6.76 2.70 100.00
overall 69.17 24.13 5.35 1.35 100.00
Note : Bad - No income from additional resources
Average - < 20% from additional resources
Good - > 20 and 50% from additional resources
Excellent - > 50% from additional resources
VII-22
Table 7.14 Maintenance of Records (Percentages of WUAs)

Zone-I
Head 0.00 35.71 50.00 14.29 100.00
Middle 5.88 47.06 29.41 17.65 100.00
Tail 0.00 30.00 70.00 0.00 100.00
Average 2.44 39.02 46.34 12.20 100.00
Zone-II
Head 7.14 85.71 7.14 0.00 100.00
Middle 0.00 58.33 41.67 0.00 100.00
Tail 11.11 55.56 33.33 0.00 100.00
Average 5.71 68.57 25.71 0.00 100.00
Zone-I
Head 30.00 30.00 30.00 10.00 100.00
Middle 16.67 33.33 33.33 16.67 100.00
Tail 0.00 50.00 37.50 12.50 100.00
Average 16.67 37.50 33.33 12.50 100.00
Zone-II
Head 10.00 30.00 40.00 20.00 100.00
Middle 14.29 42.86 42.86 0.00 100.00
Tail 42.86 42.86 0.00 14.29 100.00
Average 20.83 37.50 29.17 12.50 100.00
Zone-III
Head 0.00 28.57 28.57 42.86 100.00
Middle 0.00 44.44 44.44 11.11 100.00
Tail 10.00 0.00 60.00 30.00 100.00
Average 3.85 23.08 46.15 26.92 100.00
overall 8.67 42.67 36.67 12.00 100.00

Right canal 3.95 52.63 36.84 6.58 100.00
Left canal 13.51 32.43 36.49 17.57 100.00
overall 8.73 42.53 36.66 12.07 100.00
Note : Bad - No record maintance
Average - Oftenly record
Good - Records maintaining but not updating
Excellent - Records mainting and updating regularly
VII-23
Table 7.15 Water release schedule (Percentages of WUAs)
Zone-I
Head 0.00 57.14 21.43 21.43 100.00
Middle 0.00 47.06 35.29 17.65 100.00
Tail 0.00 30.00 60.00 10.00 100.00
Average 0.00 46.34 36.59 17.07 100.00
Zone-II
Head 7.14 42.86 35.71 14.29 100.00
Middle 25.00 16.67 58.33 0.00 100.00
Tail 11.11 33.33 55.56 0.00 100.00
Average 14.29 31.43 48.57 5.71 100.00
Zone-I
Head 0.00 40.00 50.00 10.00 100.00
Middle 0.00 16.67 16.67 66.67 100.00
Tail 12.50 62.50 0.00 25.00 100.00
Average 4.17 41.67 25.00 29.17 100.00
Zone-II
Head 10.00 50.00 30.00 10.00 100.00
Middle 0.00 57.14 42.86 0.00 100.00
Tail 14.29 42.86 14.29 28.57 100.00
Average 8.33 50.00 29.17 12.50 100.00
Zone-III
Head 14.29 42.86 42.86 0.00 100.00
Middle 22.22 33.33 22.22 22.22 100.00
Tail 20.00 60.00 20.00 0.00 100.00
Average 19.23 46.15 26.92 7.69 100.00
overall 8.67 42.67 34.67 14.00 100.00

Right canal 6.58 39.47 42.11 11.84 100.00
Left canal 10.81 45.95 27.03 16.22 100.00
overall 8.69 42.71 34.57 14.03 100.00
Note: Bad - No water release plan and not informed to farmers
Average - Informed the water release plan and adopted only 50%
Good - Informed the water release plan and adopted difference of 15% only
Excellent - Informed and practiced 100% water release plan
VII-24
VII-24
Table 7.16 Warabandi implementation (Percentages of WUAs)
Zone-I
Head 14.29 50.00 14.29 21.43 100.00
Middle 0.00 41.18 17.65 41.18 100.00
Tail 0.00 20.00 50.00 30.00 100.00
Average 4.88 39.02 24.39 31.71 100.00
Zone-II
Head 0.00 35.71 42.86 21.43 100.00
Middle 0.00 25.00 16.67 58.33 100.00
Tail 0.00 22.22 55.56 22.22 100.00
Average 0.00 28.57 37.14 34.29 100.00
Zone-I
Head 0.00 50.00 30.00 20.00 100.00
Middle 0.00 16.67 33.33 50.00 100.00
Tail 0.00 37.50 0.00 62.50 100.00
Average 0.00 37.50 20.83 41.67 100.00
Zone-II
Head 20.00 40.00 10.00 30.00 100.00
Middle 0.00 57.14 42.86 0.00 100.00
Tail 0.00 42.86 42.86 14.29 100.00
Average 8.33 45.83 29.17 16.67 100.00
Zone-III
Head 14.29 71.43 14.29 0.00 100.00
Middle 11.11 55.56 33.33 0.00 100.00
Tail 10.00 70.00 10.00 10.00 100.00
Average 11.54 65.38 19.23 3.85 100.00
overall 4.67 42.00 26.67 26.67 100.00

Right canal 2.63 34.21 30.26 32.89 100.00
Left canal 6.76 50.00 22.97 20.27 100.00
overall 4.69 42.11 26.62 26.58 100.00
Note: Bad - Water release upto the extent of availability of water
Average - Water release depending an adjustability
Good - Preparation of water release plan and adopting now and then
Excellent - Preparation and sticking to the dates of water release plan
VII-25
Table 7.17 Tail end issues & adequacy of water received by the tail ends
(Percentages of WUAs)
Zone-I
Head 7.14 28.57 21.43 42.86 100.00
Middle 11.76 23.53 23.53 41.18 100.00
Tail 10.00 40.00 10.00 40.00 100.00
Average 9.76 29.27 19.51 41.46 100.00
Zone-II
Head 21.43 42.86 28.57 7.14 100.00
Middle 8.33 58.33 25.00 8.33 100.00
Tail 22.22 44.44 22.22 11.11 100.00
Average 17.14 48.57 25.71 8.57 100.00
Zone-I
Head 0.00 40.00 20.00 40.00 100.00
Middle 0.00 50.00 33.33 16.67 100.00
Tail 12.50 12.50 37.50 37.50 100.00
Average 4.17 33.33 29.17 33.33 100.00
Zone-II
Head 40.00 30.00 20.00 10.00 100.00
Middle 28.57 42.86 14.29 0.00 100.00
Tail 14.29 42.86 28.57 14.29 100.00
Average 29.17 37.50 20.83 8.33 100.00
Zone-III
Head 42.86 57.14 0.00 0.00 100.00
Middle 77.78 11.11 11.11 0.00 100.00
Tail 50.00 20.00 20.00 0.00 100.00
Average 57.69 26.92 11.54 0.00 100.00
overall 22.00 35.33 21.33 20.00 100.00

Right canal 13.16 38.16 22.37 26.32 100.00
Left canal 31.08 32.43 20.27 13.51 100.00
overall 22.12 35.30 21.32 19.91 100.00
Note: Bad- Non-availability or not sufficient water availability to be identified tail end farmers
Average - Availability of water to tail end farmers to the extent of 51 to 75%
Good - Availability of water to tail end farmers to the extent of 75 to 90%
Excellent - Availability of water to tail end farmers is > 90%
VII-26
Table 7.18 Conflict resolution (Percentages of WUAs)
Zone-I
Head 7.14 14.29 35.71 42.86 100.00
Middle 5.88 11.76 47.06 35.29 100.00
Tail 0.00 10.00 50.00 40.00 100.00
Average 4.88 12.20 43.90 39.02 100.00
Zone-II
Head 0.00 35.71 35.71 28.57 100.00
Middle 0.00 0.00 41.67 58.33 100.00
Tail 11.11 22.22 44.44 22.22 100.00
Average 2.86 20.00 40.00 37.14 100.00
Zone-I
Head 0.00 40.00 0.00 60.00 100.00
Middle 0.00 33.33 16.67 50.00 100.00
Tail 0.00 25.00 62.50 12.50 100.00
Average 0.00 33.33 25.00 41.67 100.00
Zone-II
Head 0.00 50.00 40.00 10.00 100.00
Middle 14.29 28.57 28.57 28.57 100.00
Tail 42.86 0.00 28.57 28.57 100.00
Average 16.67 29.17 33.33 20.83 100.00
Zone-III
Head 14.29 14.29 42.86 28.57 100.00
Middle 33.33 22.22 33.33 11.11 100.00
Tail 20.00 40.00 10.00 30.00 100.00
Average 23.08 26.92 26.92 23.08 100.00
overall 8.67 22.67 35.33 33.33 100.00

Right canal 3.95 15.79 42.11 38.16 100.00
Left canal 13.51 29.73 28.38 28.38 100.00
overall 8.73 22.76 35.24 33.27 100.00
Note: Bad - Conflicts are there but not solved
Average - Conflicts are there but negotiations have started but not solved
Good - Conflicts are there but negotiations have started and solved to some extent
Excellent - no disputes if any M.C. will solve
VII-27
Table 7.19 O&M works (Percentages of WUAs)
Zone
Zone-I
Head 0.00 21.43 78.57 0.00 100.00
Middle 0.00 29.41 41.18 29.41 100.00
Tail 0.00 20.00 40.00 40.00 100.00
Average 0.00 24.39 53.66 21.95 100.00
Zone-II
Head 0.00 28.57 57.14 14.29 100.00
Middle 0.00 50.00 41.67 8.33 100.00
Tail 0.00 44.44 44.44 11.11 100.00
Average 0.00 40.00 48.57 11.43 100.00
Zone-I
Head 0.00 50.00 30.00 20.00 100.00
Middle 0.00 50.00 50.00 0.00 100.00
Tail 0.00 50.00 50.00 0.00 100.00
Average 0.00 50.00 41.67 8.33 100.00
Zone-II
Head 0.00 20.00 80.00 0.00 100.00
Middle 0.00 14.29 71.43 14.29 100.00
Tail 14.29 28.57 28.57 28.57 100.00
Average 4.17 20.83 62.50 12.50 100.00
Zone-III
Head 0.00 28.57 57.14 14.29 100.00
Middle 0.00 33.33 44.44 22.22 100.00
Tail 20.00 30.00 40.00 10.00 100.00
Average 7.69 30.77 46.15 15.38 100.00
overall 2.00 32.67 50.67 14.67 100.00

Right canal 0.00 31.58 51.32 17.11 100.00
Left canal 4.05 33.78 50.00 12.16 100.00
overall 2.03 32.68 50.66 14.63 100.00
Note: Bad - no plan and no work
Average - No plan but works completed
Good - Plan prepared through irrigation department an implemented through WUA
Excellent - WUA prepared the plan and implemented before rainy season
VII-28
VII-28
Table 7.20 Innovations in water management, water
sharing,Conjunctive use, Water Audit, Collective action,Cropping
practices(SRI, ID,Horti) etc., (Percentages of WUAs)

Zone-I
Head 57.14 35.71 7.14 0.00 100.00
Middle 64.71 23.53 5.88 5.88 100.00
Tail 60.00 30.00 10.00 0.00 100.00
Average 60.98 29.27 7.32 2.44 100.00
Zone-II
Head 42.86 42.86 14.29 0.00 100.00
Middle 75.00 25.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
Tail 77.78 22.22 0.00 0.00 100.00
Average 62.86 31.43 5.71 0.00 100.00
Zone-I
Head 10.00 30.00 20.00 40.00 100.00
Middle 0.00 66.67 16.67 16.67 100.00
Tail 37.50 12.50 50.00 0.00 100.00
Average 16.67 33.33 29.17 20.83 100.00
Zone-II
Head 40.00 50.00 10.00 0.00 100.00
Middle 28.57 71.43 0.00 0.00 100.00
Tail 28.57 28.57 28.57 14.29 100.00
Average 33.33 50.00 12.50 4.17 100.00
Zone-III
Head 0.00 42.86 57.14 0.00 100.00
Middle 22.22 22.22 44.44 11.11 100.00
Tail 40.00 50.00 10.00 0.00 100.00
Average 23.08 38.46 34.62 3.85 100.00
overall 43.33 35.33 16.00 5.33 100.00

Right canal 61.84 30.26 6.58 1.32 100.00
Left canal 24.32 40.54 25.68 9.46 100.00
overall 43.08 35.40 16.13 5.39 100.00
Note : Bad - No discussions and no implementation
Average - Discussed and started implementing
Good - Discussed and followed 50%
Excellent - Discussed and followed/adopted 100%
VII-29
Table 7.21 Opinion on Financial Account audited in WUAs according to canal, Zone and reaches (%)

Zone
Head Middle Tail Total
Yes NO Total Yes NO Total Yes NO Total Yes NO Total

Zone-I
50.00 50.00 100 70.59 29.41 100 60.00 40.00 100 60.98 39.02 100
Zone-II
28.57 71.43 100 16.67 83.33 100 22.22 77.78 100 22.86 77.14 100

Zone-I
70.00 30.00 100 83.33 16.67 100 62.50 37.50 100 70.83 29.17 100
Zone-II
40.00 60.00 100 42.86 57.14 100 42.86 57.14 100 41.67 58.33 100
Zone-III
42.86 57.14 100 44.44 55.56 100 40.00 60.00 100 42.31 57.69 100
Overall
45.45 54.55 100 50.98 49.02 100 45.45 54.55 100 47.33 52.67 100
VII-30
7.22 Performances of Distributory Committees in NSP Command Area
Canal/circle Circle No. of No. of DCs Localised Total % Un Tax Tax % tax
WUAs Ayacut irrigated Total authorize Demand collected collecte
(lakh area irrigate d area (Rs.In (Rs.in d to
acres) including d area (acres) crores) Crores) demand
ID crop to assessed
(lakh localize
acres) d area
Right bank canal system
Circle-I K 259 30 6.73 6.65 98.81 48570 9.64 2.77 28.73

Lingamguntla
R 6.73 1.98 2.94 11066 2.60 0.03 1.15
Circle-II K 145 18 3.30 3.13 94.85 18818 3.60 - -

Ongole
R - - - - - - -
Left bank canal system
Circle-I K 107 13 3.72 2.99 80.38 5.25 3.92 74.67

Miryalaguda
R 3.67 2.99 81.47 4.13 0.11 2.66
Circle-II K 161 19 5.45 1.73 31.74 2.79 1.36 48.75
Tekulapally
R 5.45 2.60 47.71 3929 3.15 0.003 0.10
VII-1
CHAPTER-8
ENGINEERING FEATURES OF NSP
8.1 PROJECT IN BRIEF
8.1.1 Dam Portion
Nagaarjunsagar Project , which was completed in 1960, comprises a 4.86 km long and
124.663 m high composite dam at 160 34 23 N and 790 18 47 E across Krishna river near
Nandikonda village in Nalgonda district of Andhra Pradesh . Out of the 4.86 km length of
dam, 1.45 km of dam is masonry portion. The spillway of the dam has 26 crest gates of size
17.716 m x 13.41m. The project intercepts a catchment area of about 215185 sq km. The
reservoir formed by the construction of dam has a water spread area of 286 sq km at full
reservoir level (FRL) of 179.832 m. This is the largest manmade lake in the world. The gross
and live storage capacities of Nagarjuna Sagar reservoir are 408.24 TMC and 240 TMC
respectively. The spillway design flood adopted for design is 42476 Cumecs. The deepest
foundation level and average river bed level are 59.741 m and 74.676 m respectively. The
maximum base width is 97.536 m while the top width is 8.534 m.
8.1.2 Canal System
NS project has both Right and Left Bank Canal System. The length of right bank canal is
203 km while that of the left main canal is 179 km. The maximum bed width of right and left
main canal are 73.51 m 28.96 m, respectively. The maximum discharge in these canals is
311.5 Cumecs. The outlet sill level of both canals is kept at 149.05 m. The main canal has
nine vents of size 9.355 m x 4.575 m and the left main canal has three vents of size 3.05 m
x7.62 m . The Total length of branches and distributaries of right and left canal are 5342 km
and 7722 km respectively. The length field channels of right canal and left canal are 14400
km and 9654 km, respectively. The net irrigable area under the right bank canal system is
4.75 lakh ha, while that under the left canal system is 4.20 lakh ha. The salient feature of the
project is given in Table 8.1.
8.1.3 Districts and Extent of Area Benefited in Each District by the Project
8-1
The districts benefited by the project are; Nalgonda, Krishna, Khammam, Prakasham, and
Guntur . The ayacut contemplated district wise is given below:
The Ayacut Contemplated District-wise (Area in ha.)

Canal Benefited District
System Nalgonda Krishna Khammam Prakasham Guntur
NSRC - - 191100 284365
NSLC 150957 150980 92679
Area Localized (Area in ha.)

Canal Benefited District
System Nalgonda Krishna Khammam Prakasham Guntur
NSRC - - 179000 274000
NSLC 150957 150980 92679
8.2 COMMAND AREA DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

Command Area Development Programme was launched by Govt. of India in 1974-75 with the
objective of improving the utilization of irrigation potential created and optimizing agriculture
production and productivity from irrigated agriculture by integrating all functions related with
it. Andhra Pradesh Govt. took advantage of this programme by getting the NSP under the
purview of scheme in 1974-75; the project was withdrawn from the purview of scheme in
2003-04 by which time the potential created (PC) was almost completely utilized (PC=
867x1000 ha., Potential Utilized (PU)= 857*1000 ha.) under the programme. Since it is
mandatory for the state government to introduce Participatory Irrigation Management in
maintaining irrigation systems, the Andhra Pradesh irrigation act has been framed / amended
incorporating the PIM in the act. The Andhra Pradesh Irrigation Department made efforts and
had developed ayacut under the canal systems.
Irrigation Potential Created
8-2
Canal System Irrigation Potential Created
NSRC 4.75 lakh ha.

NSLC 4.20 lakh ha.
The Salient Features of Nagarjuna Sagar Canal System are mentioned below:
Salient Features of Nagarjuna Sagar Canal System
S.No Particulars Right Canal Left canal

.
1 Length of Main Canal 203 km (126 miles) 179 km (111miles)
2 Maximum Bed wdth 73.51 mt (241 ft) 28.96 mt (95 ft)
3 Depth of the Flow 3.78 mt (12.4 ft) 6.71 mt (22 ft)
(Head reach)
4 Maximum Discharge 311.5 Cumec 311.5 Cumec (11000
(11000 Cusec) Cusec)
5 Head Regulator
(a) Sill Level 149.05 mt (489 ft) 149.05 mt (489 ft)
(b) Vent way 3.05 m x4.575 m 3.05 m x 7.62 m
6 Length of Branches and 5342 kms 7722 kms
Distributories
7 Length of Field 14400 kms 9654 kms
Channels
8 Net Irrigated area 4.75 lakh ha. 4.20 Lakh ha
8.3 ADMISTRATIVE SETUP FOR MANAGEMENT OF NAGAARJUNASAGAR

PROJECT
Organization for managing the Nagarjuna Sagar Project is headed by a Chief Engineer, who
is assisted by Dy. Chief Engineers and other supporting officers /staff.
8.3.1 Irrigation Water Regulation Policy for Kharif
8-3
The Government of Andhra Pradesh has laid down comprehensive irrigation water
regulation policy for kharif which is reviewed every year depending upon the status of
reservoir level, anticipated inflows and past experiences. The sample water regulator policy
for Kharif adopted in the year 2008 is as follows:
8.3.1.1 Comprehensive Kharif Water Policy for N S Left and Right Canals for the Year 2008
Nagarjunasagar Left Canal Zoning of Ayacut ( in Lakhs Acres)
Zone Blocks Covered Wet ID Total

I 1 to 15 (Including Palair ) 3.44 .061 4.05
II 16 to 21/7 1.72 2.34 4.06
III 21/8 to 21/10B 0 2.10 2.10
Total 5.16 5.05 10.21
Nagarjunasagar Right Canal Zoning of Ayacut
(Ayacut in Lakhs Acres)

Zone Blocks Covered Wet ID Total
I 1 to 10 (11 Pt) Addanki Branch canal 2.40 3.95 6.35
upto M. 33-2-358
II 11(Pt) Addanki Branch canal below M. 1.98 2.85 4.83
33-2-358 to tail end Block No: 11A to 22
Total 4.38 6.80 11.18
The same zoning pattern was followed in the year 2007.
8.3.1.2 Date of opening & closing of canals under various zones
The date of opening of NSLBC & NSJC is 13.8.2008 for Zone-I and 1.9.2008 for Zone-II
with cut-off dates for Wet crops as 12.01.2009 for Zone-I and 25.01.2009 for Zone-II and to
commence supplies for I.D. Crops from 1.11.2008 for all zones and close the distributaries
on 28.2.2009. However, wetting may be allowed for ID crops in zone-I, if required from
1.10.2008.
The ayacut for which water is released for zone-I and zone-II areas and proposed releases for
zone-II areas under are as indicated below
8-4
Nagarjuna Sagar Left Canal
(In Lakhs Ha)
Zone Blocks Date of Wet ID Total Remarks

Covered Commencement of
Releases
I 1 to 15 13.08.2008 3.44 .061 4.05
Continuous supply for wet
crops from 13.8.2008 to
12.1.2009 with weekly one
day off (Only short and
medium duration varieties
of paddy are to be grown)
and intermittent supplies to
I.D. crops from 1.10.2008 to
15.1.2009.
II 16 to 21/7 1.09.2008 1.72 2.34 4.06
Continuous supply from
1.9.2008 to 25.1.2009 for
wet crops with weekly one
day off and intermittent
supplies for I.D. crops from
1.11.2008 to 28.2.2009.
III 21/8 to 01.11.2008 0 2.10 2.10
Intermittent supplies from
21/10B 1.11.2008 to 28.2.2009 for
raising I.D. crops only.
Total 5.16 5.05 10.21
Nagarjuna Sagar Right Canal:
Zone Blocks Covered Date of Wet ID Total Remarks

Commencem
ent of
Releases
I 1 to 10 11 Pt ABC 13.08.2008 2.40 3.95 6.35
Continuous and required
upto M 33-2-358 flow of water from
13.8.2008 to 12.1.2009
for wet crops with
weekly one day off.
Intermittent flows from
1.11.2008 to 28.2.2009.
Supply of water to
Blocks 1 to 3 complete
8-5
wet Blocks will be

completely stopped after
12.1.2008. Supply of
water for exclusively I.D.
Majors and Minors will
be started from 1.11.2008
on On and Off basis
and will be completely
cut off by 28.2.2009.
II 11 (Pt) 11A to 22 1.09.2008 1.98 2.85 4.83
Continuous and required
flow of water from
1.9.2008 to
25.1.2009.Intermittent
flows from 1.1.2009 to
28.2.2009. Supply for
exclusively I.D. Majors
and Minors starts from
1.11.2008 on On and
Off basis and will be
completely cut off by
28.2.2009.
Total 4.38 6.80 11.18
In the event of long dry spells, it is proposed to give life saving wettings for ID crops, earlier than
contemplated in consultation with the officials concerned. The above ayacut, dates for opening and
closing of canals may please be tentatively approved and notified.
8.3.1.3 Cropping Pattern
The cropping pattern agreed to be adopted during Kharif 2008 season is strictly in
accordance with the localization.
8.3.2 Ayacut Development under Right and Left Canals of Nagarjuna Sagar Project
8-6
The irrigation department made considerable effort in developing the canal systems for
deriving the benefit from the system to the extent possible within the various inherent
constraints. The development of ayacut under both left and right canal systems of Nagarjuna
Sagar project commencing from 1967-68 to 2007 -08 is given as Table 8.2 & 8.3.
8-7
Table 8.1
SALIENT FEATURES OF NAGARJUNA SAGAR DAM
LOCATION
Latitude : 160 34 23 N
Longitude : 79 0 18 47 E
HYDROLOGY
Catchments area above dam site : 215,185 sq km (83,083 sq miles)
Maximum Annual rain fall in the : 35 (889 mm)
catchments
Design Flood : 42,476 cumec (15,00,000 cusec)
RESERVOIR
F.R.L Full Reservoir Level : + 179.95 m (+590.0 ft)
M.W.L - Maximum Water Level : + 181.10 m (+594.0 ft)
Minimum Draw Down Level : + 155.45 m (+ 510.0 ft)
Gross Storage capacity at EL (590 ft) : 408.24 TMC
Dead Storage Capacity at EL(510 ft) : 207 TMC
Live Storage Capacity : 200 TMC (5663.4 Mcm)
MASONRY DAM
Total length of dam : 1,450 m (4,756 ft)
Spillway : 471 m (1,545 ft.)
Length of NOF including power dam : 978.713 m (3,211 ft.)
Max. Height of dam above river bed : 124.660 m (409 ft.)
Max. Base width of dam : 97.536 m (320 ft.)
Top width of Dam : 8.534 m (28 ft)

Overall with of road way @ top : :9.373mt
Deepest Foundation Level : : +59.741 mt
Average river bed level : : +74.67659 mt
8-8
Average height above foundation level : 110.33 m (362 ft.)

Width of dam at average foundation level : 86.56 m (284 ft.)
EL. : +243 ft
SPILLWAY
Crest gates : 26 Nos. of size
13.72 m x 13.41 m (45 ft. x 44 ft.)
Type of crest gates : Radial
Crest level : 166.42 m (+546.0 ft.)
Top of crest gates : 17.82 (+590.0 ft.)
Pier thickness : 4.572 m (15.0 ft.)
Energy dissipation : Flip bucket
Top of Masonry dam above M.S.L. : + 184.40 m (+605.0 ft.)
Chute sluices 137.16 m
8-9
Right Canal Head sluice 9 vents of size 10ft x 15ft with sill @
+489 ft (+ 149.047 mt)
Left Canal Head Sluice 3 vents of size 3.05 m x 7.62 m (10 ft. x
25 ft.) with sill at + 149.047 m (+489.0
ft.)
EARTH DAM
Length (a) Left Earth Dam 2,560.32 m (8,400 ft.)
Length (b) Right Earth Dam 853.44 m (2,800 ft.)
(c) Total Length 3,413.76 m (11,200 ft.)
Maximum height of dam above average 26.06 m (85.50 ft.)

foundation level
Top level of dam + 185.928 m (+610.0ft.)

Top width at road level 9.30 m (30.50 ft.)
Type of section Zoned earth fill
POWER GENERATION
Penstocks (8 Nos.) 4.88 m (16 ft.) dia.
Central line elevation + 123.40 m (+405.0 ft)
Power units 1 No. conventional 110 MW capacity
7 Nos. reversible 100 MW capacity
8-10
MDDL : 154.23 m (506 ft.) for conventional

150.88 m (495 ft.) for reversible
Discharging capacity : 133.09 Cumecs (4,700 Cusecs) of
conventional 121.76 Cumecs (4,300
Cusecs) for reversible
RIGHT CANAL POWER HOUSE
Sluice : 3 Nos. 4.57 m x 11.58 m (15 ft. x 38 ft.)
Units : 3 Nos. (Conventional)
Capacity : 30 MW each
Discharge capacity : 141.56 Cumecs (5,000 Cusecs) each
LEFT CANAL POWER HOUSE :

Units : 2 Nos. (conventional)
Capacity : 30 MW each
8-11
Table 8.2
STATEMENT SHOWING YEAR WISE AYACUT DEVELOPMENT UNDER NAGARJUNASAGAR LEFT CANAL
(AYACUT IN LAKHS ACRES)
Kharif Rabi Total of the year Water Duty

Utsed TMC/lakh
Year Wet ID Total Wet ID Total Wet ID Total TMC acres
1967-68 0.14 0.35 0.49 0.05 0.04 0.09 0.2 0.38 0.58 77.18 198.94
1968-69 0.6 0.26 0.86 0.72 0.12 0.84 1.32 0.38 1.7 129.65 85.61
1969-70 1.11 0.22 1.33 0.83 0.33 1.16 1.94 0.55 2.49 129.68 58.61
1970-71 1.19 0.13 1.32 1.1 0.56 1.66 2.29 0.69 2.98 127.93 48.59
1971-72 2.08 0.38 2.46 1.39 1.15 2.54 3.47 1.57 5.04 124.74 29.3
1972-73 2.1 0.3 2.4 1.39 0.85 2.24 3.5 1.15 4.65 114.52 28.12
1973-74 2.39 0.29 2.68 1.88 0.65 2.53 4.27 0.94 5.21 119.11 25.13
1974-75 2.17 0.04 2.21 1.95 0.6 2.55 4.12 0.64 4.76 148.65 33.47
1975-76 2.52 0.08 2.6 2.12 0.58 2.7 4.64 0.66 5.3 148.9 29.95
1976-77 2.51 0.28 2.79 0.19 1.27 1.46 2.71 1.55 4.26 98.12 28.18
1977-78 2.87 0.34 3.21 3.26 0.35 3.61 6.13 0.69 6.82 165.25 25.53
1978-79 3.21 0.51 3.72 0.93 1.05 1.98 4.14 1.57 5.71 141.62 28.75
1979-80 2.82 0.08 2.9 1.17 1.23 2.4 3.99 1.31 5.3 191.16 41.17
1980-81 3.54 0.15 3.69 0 0 0 3.54 0.15 3.69 127.46 35.27
1981-82 3.4 0.36 3.76 0 0 0 3.4 0.36 3.76 119.17 33.34
1982-83 3.26 1.04 4.3 0.32 0.09 0.41 3.57 1.13 4.7 155.45 37.57
1983-84 3.81 2.5 6.31 0.39 0.13 0.52 4.21 1.25 5.46 157.21 32.53
1984-85 3.76 2.5 6.26 0.98 1.48 2.46 4.74 3.98 8.72 210.5 31.28
1985-86 4.57 2.42 6.99 0 0 0 4.57 2.42 6.99 169.21 29.27
1986-67 4.42 2.99 7.41 0 0 0 4.42 2.99 7.41 197.02 33.92
1987-88 3.48 4.83 8.31 0.07 1.79 1.86 3.48 6.61 10.09 153.46 22.6
1988-89 4.69 3.33 8.02 0.68 1.95 2.63 5.36 5.28 10.64 204.68 25.57
1989-90 4.51 3.76 8.27 0.55 2.23 2.78 5.05 5.99 11.04 211.44 26.27
1990-91 4.07 3.99 8.06 0.67 1.9 2.57 4.74 5.89 10.63 217.89 28.34
1991-92 3.91 3.94 7.85 0.24 1.9 2.14 4.15 5.84 9.99 183.73 25.98
1992-93 3.83 4.2 8.03 2.16 0.75 2.91 5.99 4.95 10.94 216.91 25.63
1993-94 4.05 3.85 7.9 1.75 1.03 2.78 5.8 4.88 10.68 231.58 28.11
1994-95 4.51 3.52 8.03 2.12 0.75 2.87 6.63 4.27 10.9 210.18 23.97
1995-96 2.89 4.36 7.25 0.18 0.98 1.16 3.07 5.35 8.42 138.24 24.08
1996-97 3.99 3.74 7.73 1.75 0.5 2.25 5.74 4.23 9.97 204.23 26.01
1997-98 3.98 3.83 7.81 0.05 1.26 1.31 3.98 5.09 9.07 169.24 25.94
1998-99 4.28 3.71 7.99 3.09 1.07 4.16 7.38 4.78 12.16 232.94 23.86
1999-00 5.16 4.37 9.53 0.26 2.25 2.51 5.42 6.62 12.04 178.61 20.45
2000-01 4.66 3.86 8.52 0.79 0.27 1.06 5.45 4.13 9.58 181.58 24.17
2001-02 4.06 3.79 7.85 0.05 1.31 1.36 4.11 5.1 9.21 145.96 21.92
2002-03 0.51 0 0.51 0 0 0 0.51 0 0.51 22.26 44.08
2003-04 0 4.52 4.52 0 3.11 3.11 0 7.63 7.63 20.49 5.37
2004-05 2.41 5.41 7.82 1.5 0 1.5 3.1 5.41 8.51 143.48 21.69
2005-06 4.3 4.39 8.69 3.59 0.18 3.77 7.89 4.57 12.46 216.4 21.27
2006-07 4.4 4.23 8.63 2.53 0.47 3 6.93 4.7 11.63 222.54 23.98
2007-08 4.52 3.93 8.45 2.99 0.56 3.55 7.51 4.49 12 219.35 22.49
VIII-11
Table 8.3
STATEMENT SHOWING YEAR WISE AYACUT DEVELOPMENT UNDER NAGARJUNASAGAR RIGHT CANAL
(AYACUT IN LAKHS ACRES)

Water Utsed Duty
Kharif Rabi Total of the year
TMC TMC/lakh
acres
Year Wet ID Total Wet ID Total Wet ID Total
1967-68 0.26 0.98 1.24 0 00 0 0 0.26 0 98 1.24 71.78 95.95
1968-69 0.86 2.58 3.44 0 0 0 0.86 2.58 3.44 117.17 54 58
1969-70 2.09 3.23 5.33 0 0 00 0 2.09 3.23 5.33 122.19 32 95
1970-71 2.02 2.51 4.53 0 0 0 2.02 2.51 4.53 136.44 41.65
1971-72 2.41 2.98 5.39 0 0 0 2.41 2.98 5.39 141.56 36.27
1972-73 2.33 2.75 5.08 0 40 1.51 1.91 2 73 4 26 6 98 119 30 24 57
1973-74 2.71 3 07 5.78 0.32 1.06 1.93 3.03 4 14' 7.17 14039 2752
1974-75 3.1 2.64 5.74 0.94 1.28 2.22 4.05 3.92 7.97 188.86 31 45
1975-76 3.35 2.35 5.7 0.44 1.94 2.37 3.79 4.28 8.07 167 85 28 31
1976-77 3.56 2.75 6.32 0.23 0.33 0.57 3.8 3.09 6.88 130.52 24 45
1977-78 3.67 2.69 6.36 0.77 0.67 1.44 4.43 3.36 7.8 211.33 34 56
1978-79 3.97 270 6.66 0 37 0.47 0.84 4.34 3.16 7.50. 168.22 28.4
1979-80 4.2 2.25 6.45 0 76 0 84 1 60 4.96 3.09 8.05 206.77 31 78
1980-81 4.6 2.79 7.39 0 37 1.25 1.62 4.97 4 04 9 01 204.01 29 18
1981-82 4.82 2.97 7.79 0.03 1.6 1.63 4.84 457 9 42 188.87 26 .49
1982-83 4.68 3 71 839 3 1.32 1.35 4.71 5.03 9 74 195 59 27.07
1983-84 5.05 4.25 9.31 0 00 2.68 2.68 5.05 6 93 11.98 184.95 21.71
1984-85 4.68 4.82 9.5 0.03 2.01 2.04 4 71 6.83 11.53 210.88 25.97
1985-86 3.92 6.16 10.08 0 0 0 3.92 6.16 10.08 169.17 24.17
1986-67 4.43 5.29 9.71 0 0 0 4.43 5.29 9.71 194.94 27.58
1987-88 205 7 .41 9.46 0 0 0 2.05 7.41 9.46 150.81 26.21
1988-89 4.76 5.35 10.11 0.15 2.22 2 37 491 7.57 12.47 206.72 23 79
1989-90 4.85 4.61 9.46 0.09 2 37 2.46 4.94 6.98 11.92 178.28 21.15
1990-91 4.66 4.54 9.2 0.05 2 46 2.51 4 71 7 11.71 188 74 22 99
1991-92 4.66 4.52 9.18 0 0 00 0 4.66 4.52 9.18 15638 22.61
1992-93 4.35 4 92 9.27 0 31 2 07 2.38 4.66 6.99 11.65 19851 24 34
1993-94 4.5 4.53 9.03 0.14 1.64 1.78 4.64 6.16 10.81 208.3 26 96
1994-95 4.66 4.66 9.33 0.19 1.4 1.59 4.85 6.07 10.91 209.5 26.58
1995-96 4.01 6.54 10.55 0 0 0 4.01 6.54 10.55 165.85 22.78
1996-97 4.67 7.16 11.82 0 0 0 4.67 7.16 11.82 194 37 23.58
1997-98 5.07 5.46 10.53 0 0 0 5.07 5.46 10.53 216.73 27 78
1998-99 5.31 5.82 11.13 0.56 0.64 1.2 5.87 6.46 12.33 230.36 25.31
1999-00 5.56 5.28 10.84 0.04 0 49 0.52 5.59 5.77 1 1.36 201.19 23.73
2000-01 5.33 5.25 10.58 0 0 0 5.33 5.25 10.58 201.87 25.39
2001-02 5.77 5 08 10 85 0 00 0 0 5.77 5.08 10.85 178.88 21.53
2002-03 0.22 1.98 2.2 0 0 0 0.22 1.98 98 23.27 1923
2003-04 0 5.62 5 62 0 2 88 2.88 0 8.5 8.5 28 63 6 74
2004-05 4.11 6 37 10 48 0 0 0 411 6 37 10.48 158 17 21.68
2005-06 6.03 4.9 10.93 0.85 19 1.04 6.88 5.09 11.97 216 03 22.92
2006-07 5.43 5.23 1066 0.65 0.32 0.97 6.08 5.55 11.63 236.65 26.73
2007-08 4.96 552, 10.48 0.67 0.44 1.11 5.63 5.96 11.59 229 31 26.63
Note: The last column indicates water utilised in TMC per one Iakh acres
VIII-12
CHAPTER -9
MAINTENANCE PERFORMANCE AND COST RECOVERY
9.1 System Maintenance under APFMIS Act 11 of 1997
The Government of Andhra Pradesh by enacting Andhra Pradesh Farmers Management

of Irrigation System (APFMIS) ACT 11 of 1997 transferred management of irrigation
system to a three tier system namely Water User Association (WUA) at grass root level,
Distributary Committees (DC) at distributary level and Project Committees (PC) at
project level to manage their irrigation systems. Earlier the Irrigation Department was
operating and maintaining the system independently. The Act has been revised as and
when required based on the feedback. Govt. of Andhra Pradesh vide G.O.Ms.No.46,
Irrigation & Command Area Development in (General IV) department, dt.24.02.07, and
issued clear instructions in respect of following:
1. Normal Operation and Maintenance Works,

2. Deferred maintenance Works
3. Original Works
4. System Diagnosis for maintenance works
5. Prioritizing Works
6. Preparation of estimates
7. Administrative Approval
8. Technical Clearance
9. Manner to taking up Works
10. Maintenance and adherence to the designed Hydraulic particulars
11. Limitation on Works.
12. Publication of list of works to be taken up
13. Freedom to add other funds or extra contributions
14. Proof of Works done
15. Payment for the Works done
16. Quality control
IX- 1
9.2 System Maintenance Performance
The maintenance budget and irrigation service indicators have been analyzed under
Component B, Annexure IX.1 and are discussed in the following paragraphs.
Indicator 1: The percentage of slips that occurred in the left canal is around 7.64 of the
length of the canal. On the right main canal the percentage of slips are around 9.89 of the
length of the canal. Lining is proposed in the entire left canal reach. The damages to
lining on the right canal are less than 0.2% of the length of the canal. As per the data
obtained from the field offices, the bed silt is about 7 cm in depth in the left main canal
and 2.83Sq.mts in terms of C/S area. For the right main canal the silted C/S area is
around 1-2.5 sq.mts from 15.58 km to 55.32 kms. The seepage loss has been about from
10 Cumec / million square meters in main canals, 5 Cumec/ million square meters in
branches and distributaries and 4 Cumec / million square meters in majors and minors.
9.3 Maintenance cost and budget
Indicator 2: Maintenance cost per kilometer length of left main canal is Rs 9.57 lacs and
that of right main canal is Rs 6.80 lacs.
Indicator 3: Maintenance cost per hectare of command area works out to Rs 388.64 for
left canal and Rs 292.82 for right canal.
Indicator 4: The provision made for the work charged establishment as against the total
budget provided for work charged establishment and works is 26.25% for NS dam;
7.88% for left canal and 7.89% for right canal. The expenditure incurred is around 64%
of the above allotted budget.
Indicator 5: Actual area irrigated as percentage of planned area season wise is as follows.
Under Left canal 80.64% during Kharif and 38.48 % during Rabi and for Right canal
96.20% during Kharif and 16.81 % during Rabi is irrigated. On an average 88.84 %
during Kharif and 27.09% during Rabi is irrigated for the two seasons of combined
ayacut.
Indicator 6: The actual area irrigated as percentage of planned areas under WUAs: In
general percentages show decline in actual area irrigated against planned area from Head
IX- 2
reach to Tail reach. For Left canal during Kharif season the above percentages range
from 55 to 15. During Rabi the range is from 40% - 10%. Similarly for Right canal the
range for Kharif is 50% to 10% and during Rabi 30% to 10%.
9.4 System Maintenance Performance and cost recovery
The system performance was analyzed based on the information gathered on survey
formats C & D (questionnaire) from the field and is given in Tables 9.1 and 9.2.
The percentage of water charges collection (including arrears) in the Miryalaguda circle
which is in the head reach of left canal is about 55.34 and in Tekulapalli circle in the tail
reach of left canal is about 11.82. The percentage of water charges collection in Lingam
guntla circle is about 41.72 which is in the head reach and collection in the Ongole circle
is ZERO.
FUNDS FLOW: (1) Plough back funds: The system is providing WUAs plough back
funds to the extent of water charges collected by Revenue Department. On receipt of the
information on water charges collected by Revenue Department, the works proposed by
WUA will be prioritized and sanctioned by Irrigation Department to the extent of water
charges collected by the Revenue Department. (2) Deferred maintenance grant: Earlier
the deferred maintenance was provided by the Govt. on the basis of ayacut extent at fixed
amount per acre, but subsequently this fund is being provided on the basis of emergency
and priority. (3) Special funds: Special funds which would be based on priority basis. The
above mentioned tables clearly show that collection of water charges in the tail end is
poor. Similarly the arrears in Miryalaguda circle, which is in the head reach of left canal
water charges collection is about Rs. 300 Lacs, and in Tekulapalli circle, the tail end
reach of the Left canal is about Rs. 515lacs. This clearly indicates that pending of
collection is high in tail reach of Left Canal. In Lingam guntla circle which is the head
reach of right canal the arrears is about Rs. 947.66 Lacs. and the arrears in Ongole circle
which is on the tail end is about Rs. 2577 Lacs. This shows that arrears pending are high
in tail reaches of both the canals. In view of this fact that arrears are mounting, revenue
recovery is poor and maintenance fund is inadequate. The cost recovery as per Mandal
records is given in Table 9.3.
IX- 3
9.5 Institutional changes
At the moment it is observed that there is a wide shortage of officers particularly in the
middle cadre form Deputy Executive Engineer to Superintending Engineer level.
Irrigation system needs a good skill, mix of civil, electrical, IT, mechanical and
agricultural engineers. But, in the existing system, majority of the staff are civil
engineers, only 10% are mechanical engineers. The Engineers need to update with
appropriate technologies relating to SCADA and DSS for monitoring and operational
purposes.
The department has recruited engineers recently in large numbers in the cadre of
Assistant Executive Engineers from the above disciplines in an appropriate proportion.
Further all these newly recruited engineers have been given induction training at
WALAMTARI. This will definitely improve the needed skill mix to manage the projects.
In due course this will also improve the strength of officers in higher cadres. There is
every need to enhance different training programs for various cadres of officers at
WALAMTARI to provide the officers opportunities to update their knowledge and skills.
The training coordinators appointed and posted in the irrigation circles after getting
trained at WALAMTARI on the techniques to work for capacity building of farmers
organizations at different levels are functioning well. The Water User Association under
the guidance and training by the training coordinators are managing the water for
effective agricultural production particularly when the water is in shortage. They are also
cooperating with the Irrigation department in water sharing during distress periods. The
Ground Water Department needs to be more effective in spreading concepts of
conjunctive use of surface and ground water for increasing productivity and reducing
water logging conditions. Krishi Vigyan Kendras need to help in spreading organic
farming. Market tie up for farm produce and crop insurance are very essential for
sustaining agricultural production.
9.6 List of Indicators
Important indicators showing general performance of the system are given in table 9.4.
IX- 4
9.1 Ccontd.
Table-9.1
Nagarjuna Sagar Project Base Line Survey 2010-2011 Abstract of Scheme level survey data covering
Left Canal( Miryalguda, Tekulapalli), & Right Canal ( Lingumguntla and Ongole circle ) for the year 2008-2009.
Item Left Canal Right Canal

S.No.
1 Miryalaguda Circle Tekulapalli LingamGuntla circle Ongole circle
Irrigation water Charges
Demand
Arrears (LRs.) 300 515 947.66 2577

Current (LRs.) 965 289 530.62 530.24
Total (LRs.) 1265 804 1478.28 3107.24
Collected (LRs.) 700 95 616.67 Nil
Balance 565 709 861.62 3107.24
% Collection 55.34 11.82 41.72 0
Annual maintenance (LRs.) 520.48 1481 1196 227.1 (catB)
Distributry wise Annual mainatanace (Lrs.) 40 (13 Nos) 77.95 (19 Nos) 40 (30 nos.) 12.62 (18 Nos)
WUA wise (LRs.) 4.9 (106 Nos) 9.14 (162 Nos) 4.62 (259) 1.56 (145 Nos)
2
Revenue
Who collects Revenue Dept Revenue Dept Revenue Dept Revenue Dept
Suggestions to improve collection Better I & CAD, WUAs and TC ` Suggested that members of TC and Revenue and Irrigation department need reconciliation on area supplied with
Members are consulted while collecting WUAs may be involved in the Irrigation water and revenue collected.
water tax. collection process of water tax by Revenue department is providing information on revenue collected villages wise
revenue department and not WUAs wise in Ongole Circle leading to difficulty to assess the WUAs
wise data to decide flow back fund.
Revenue department needs to associate WUAs and TC members during water
rates collection.
Better revenue collected, demand and arrears are put on line so that data is
transparent. But now WUAs are approaching revenue department to get plough
back amount for getting works approved by Irrigation department.
Better revenue is collected farmer wise identified with survey Nos details, so
that the WUAs flow back fund can be easily identified.
3 Water releases
Allocated Mcm 1865.82 1865.82 1865.82 1865.82
released Mcm 2670.53 2670.53 3024 3024
Canal delivery efficiency 34.67 34.67 31.21 31.21
IX-7
9.1 Ccontd.
4
Distribution efficiency
Yes, with the cooperation of the

No, due to canal system losses and over
members of WUAs and TC No, Only about 75% of aycut is receiving water due to low efficiency of canal
Fulfilling farmers demand use of water in the head reach is causing No
members, adjustment of water is system .
difficulty in supplying water to tail ends
made amicably between the farmers
Suggestions to improve canal efficiency To Reduce canal looses and supply water Modernization of the Canal System modernization of the canal system is Can be resolved only through modernization of Canal system.
to Tail ends, modernization of the system is the need of the hour. the need of the hour
is the need of the hour.
whether Farmers using water efficiently No No No No
5
Water logging and salinity
% Area effected by salinity 2% 2% 1% 1%
Area effected by water logging 28980 ha 13990 ha
% Area under Organic farming Nil Nil Nil Nil
6
Crops yield Kgs per hec
Rice (K/R) 3111/3258 3018/3229 3408/3654 3537/3733
Jowar (K/R) 680/389 No Jowar nil/6976 -/2189
Ground Nut (K/R) 867/1107 31376/611 2875/1197 91/2412

Chilles (K/R) 2800/3935 No Crop 4996/3530 2551/6052
Green Gram(K/R) 457/No 392/1026 236/609 Nil
Maize 1481/5350 5059/6269 3217/9952 4444/-
7
Efficiency
Water use efficiency (hec/Mcm) 136 128.9
Water delivery efficiency(%) 34.67 31.21
IX-7
9.1 Ccontd.
8 Reservoir data
Planned Storage Reservoir (Mcm) 11540.94
Actual Storage reservoir Mcm 11540.94

Designed Irrigated area, Lha 4.2 4.75
Actual Area Irrigated 2008-09 (k) Lha 1.99 4.05
Actual Area Irrigated 2008-09 ( R ) Lha 2.29 1.87
Live Storage (Mcm) 5663.4
Drinking water (Mcm) 550
Net Live Storage(Mcm) 5113
IX-7
9.2 Contd
Table - 9.2
Nagarjuna Sagar Project Base Line Survey 2010-2011 Abstract of Department level survey data covering Left Canal( Miryalguda, Tekulapalli), & Right Canal ( Lingumguntla and Ongole circle ) for the year 2008-2009.
Lal Bahadur (left canal) Jawahar (Right) canal

S.No.
Item Miryalaguda Circle Tekulapalli Circle Lingamguntla circle Ongole circle
1 Responsible Department for Irrigation Irrigation & Command area development Department
2 Has State CAD Yes
Budget act adequacy Just Enough to run the system Managing for emergency and priority works Managing with deferred maintainance & flow Managing with deferred maintainenace funds
satisfactorily back funds to the extent available on priority only. Since no flow back or special funds are
3 basis available for the year 2009-10. Even deferred
maintainance is also not available
Does the dept Carry out O& M to improve Yes, Maintenance of existing Channels Yes,Maintenance of existing canals. Yes,Maintanenance of existing channels. Yes,Maintanance of existing channels
Irrigation facilities
4
Supplying water as per demand? No, Supply only for Kharrif. Water supply No,Supply only for drinking water in No,restricting the ayacut based on the availability In kharif 25% of ayacut is short of water. No
varies for Head/Middle/Tail summer. Water varies from Head/Middle of water in Kharif in consultation with WUA's Summer/Rabi crop. Supply varies from
5 /Tail and Irrigation advisory Board (IAB) Head/Middle/Tail
Is there any Complaints on water supply and Yes, From Tail end reaches for Yes,try to redrass grievance amicably with Yes,being attended as and when complaints and Yes,due to shortage of water in the tail
what is the mechanism to resolve that the regulation. the coperation of WUA's and TC members problems araised. end.Managing the system with farmers
6
department evolved
Has the department made any improvement Yes, releasing grants for deferred No, particularly in tail end reaches. High No,remote areas are not covered.But attending Yes,regular maintainance of canals to the extent
in providing Irrigation facilities to all maintainance and capital works as per level lands have lifts regular maintanenace to improve water supply of funds availability on priorty
farmers necessity
7 Officer for listing complaints All officers All officers All officers All officers
Visit to Area of Irrigation and No.of times Periodical visits are made as per necessity Any time as & when required Almost daily on working days.on holidays As and when needed.
8 necessary arrangements are made.
Any date for complaints Any time Always on any day Always Every Monday is grievances day at all offices
9 from 10.30A.M to 1.00 P.M
Any time fixed for listening complaints,How All the time All the time All the time All the time
many times?
Problems faced by department in supplying Inadequate water . Supply not in time Yes, due to inadequate water. If water In Rabi if water available Shortage of water. Practically No water
10 Water during Rabi and Summer available water supply to rabi crop.
IX-10
9.2 Contd
Supply of Irrigation Water as and when As per schedule As per schedule As per schedule As per schedule
11 required
Reasons for inadequate supply K,R,H.W Aging of infrastructure, falling away from Aging of infrastructure, falling away from Aging of infrastructure, falling away from Aging of infrastructure, falling away from
designed cropping pattern, unauthorised designed cropping pattern, unauthorised designed cropping pattern, unauthorised designed cropping pattern, unauthorised
irrigation, water logging, need for change irrigation, water logging, need for change in irrigation, water logging, need for change in irrigation, water logging, need for change in
12 in modus operandi to levying water use modus operandi to levying water use charges, modus operandi to levying water use charges, modus operandi to levying water use charges,
charges, inadequate capacity building of inadequate capacity building of stake inadequate capacity building of stake holders. inadequate capacity building of stake holders.
stake holders. holders.
What action department proposes to increase Modernisation of infrastructure, capacity Modernisation of infrastructure, capacity Modernisation of infrastructure, capacity Modernisation of infrastructure, capacity
WUE buliding, resorting to ID crops specially in buliding, resorting to ID crops specially in buliding, resorting to ID crops specially in head buliding, resorting to ID crops specially in head
head reaches, reclamation of damaged and head reaches, reclamation of damaged and reaches, reclamation of damaged and due to water reaches, reclamation of damaged and due to water
due to water logging. due to water logging. logging. logging.
WUE at canal & distributary head 5.45 LAcre per 56 Tmc or 88 hec/Mcm 6 acres/Mcft & 8 acres /Mcft. Note: WUE 10Acres/Mcft varies from 8 at head and 12 at tail. 8 Acre /Mcft, Varies from 6Acres at head to 12
increase towards tail end due to less water 10 acres /Mcft at distributory acres at tail.
use and adoption of ID crops.Varies from 11-
12 acres/Mcft. As a matter of fact design of
13 project system is for 2/3rd ID at head and
1/3rd head at tail . This process is getting
changed
Redrassal of Deficiencies Modernisation of infrastructure, capacity Modernisation of infrastructure, capacity Modernisation of infrastructure, capacity Modernisation of infrastructure, capacity
buliding, resorting to ID crops specially in buliding, resorting to ID crops specially in buliding, resorting to ID crops specially in head buliding, resorting to ID crops specially in head
head reaches, reclamation of damaged and head reaches, reclamation of damaged and reaches, reclamation of damaged and due to water reaches, reclamation of damaged and due to water
15
due to water logging. due to water logging. logging. logging.
Measures to prevent wastage of canal water Regular cleaning of channels,Penal action Regular cleaning of Irrigation channels.Penal Regular cleaning of Irrigation channels. Regular cleaning of Irrigation Channels, Filing
16 against unfair practices action Police complaints on unfair practices.
Can Department say with confidence that To a larger extent To a larger extent To a larger extent To a larger extent
17 the farmers are happy
Irrigation water availability on Scheduled One Continuous during Kharif and One One in each season, Either Continuous once in Kharif . Intermittent in Rabi one continuous for wet crop, 3-6 wettings for ID
date continuous or Intermittent supply during Continuous/Intermittent depending on water if water available crops. According to water availability
18
rabi to the extent water available avilability
whether Farmers Cooperate in the O&M of Yes Yes Yes Yes

19
canals
Is the system maintained properly Maintained to the extent feasible Maintained to the extent feasible depending Maintained to the extent feasible depending on Maintained to the extent feasible depending on
20 depending on funds on funds funds funds
Cooperation of WUA's
21
a. Planning Yes Yes Yes Yes
b. Water charges collection Yes Yes Yes Yes
c. O& M of Minor system Yes Yes Yes Yes
IX-10
9.2 Contd
d. WUA participation Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory
Actual maintenance cost at WUA level 4.9 lakhs 9.14 lakhs 4.62 lakhs 1.56 lakhs
23
Actual maintenance cost at Distributary level 40 lakhs 77.95 lakhs 40 lakhs 1.56 lakhs
24
Dam Safety measures Dam safety Inspection organisation and Dam safety Inspection organisation and Dam safety Inspection organisation and Dam safety Inspection organisation and
25
concerned CE's supervise and monitor the concerned CE's supervise and monitor the concerned CE's supervise and monitor the dam concerned CE's supervise and monitor the dam
dam periodically dam periodically periodically periodically
IX-10
Table 9.3
Water Tax- Mandal wise 2008-2009
(Rs. In Lakhs)
Prakasam
S.No Mandal Demand Collection Balance
1 Addanki 165.27 1.93 163.34
2 Ballikurava 302.58 4.72 297.86
3 Chimakurthi 68.44 1.88 66.56
4 Darsi 199.55 2.54 197.01
5 Inkollu 202.94 0 202.94
6 J Pangaluru 227.24 3.86 223.38
7 Karamchedu 464.11 1.72 462.39
8 Korisapadu 49.51 0 49.51
9 Kothapatnam 54.59 0 54.59
10 Martur 316.08 2.91 313.17
11 Mundlamur 189.12 0 189.12
12 Santhanuthalapadu
13 Santhamangaluru 503.64 8.82 494.82
14 Tallur 105.09 1.97 103.12
15 Tripurantakam 54.12 0 54.12
Guntur
1 Amaravathi 2.65 2.65 0
2 Atchanpet 6.62 6.23 0.39
3 Ballamkonda 30.37 4.67 25.7
4 Dachepalli 24.18 16.13 8.05
5 Gurazala 95.4 37.29 58.11
6 Krosuru 30.65 15.19 15.46
7 Macherla 10 10 10
8 Machavaram 13.03 6.71 6.32
9 Madikonduru 20.34 15.39 15.49
10 Muppalla 132.65 22.87 109.78
11 Narasaraopet 85.63 26.12 59.51
12 Nakirekallu 59.51 37.48 22.03
13 Nuzendla 60.41 14.36 46.05
14 Pariti padu 2.79 2.76 0.03
15 Pedakurapadu 9.14 8.18 0.96
16 Padanandipadu 3.6 1.99 1.61
17 Phiragipuram 30.6 29.46 1.14
1X-13
Table 9.3 contd.
18 Rentachintala 27.93 21.01 6.92
19 Rompicherla 241.7 43.14 198.56
20 Sattenapalle 76.71 57.2 19.51
21 Savalyapuram 111.12 23.81 87.31
22 Tadikonda 6.5 6.5 0
23 vinukonda 17.17 16.27 0.9
Krishna
1 Agiripalli 8.04 2.82 5.22
2 Akonduru 3.93 3.3 0.63
3 Bapulapadu 152.17 34.57 117.6
4 Chandralpadu 1.41 2.3 -0.89
5 G.Konduru 7.59 3.2 4.32
6 Gampalagudem 6.41 7.88 -1.47
7 Gannavaram 75.93 33.63 42.3
8 Ibrahimpatnam 11.68 5.04 6.64
9 Jaggaiahpet 38.1 12.36 25.74
10 KanchiKacherla 1.37 1.86 -0.49
11 Musunuru 6.3 3.32 2.98
12 Mylavaram 2.27 5.13 -2.86
13 Nandigama 12.65 6.97 5.68
14 Reddigudem 35.97 2.99 32.98
15 Tiruvuru 33.51 20.87 12.64
16 Unguturu 155.24 47.39 107.85
17 Vatsavai 39.89 8.04 31.85
18 Veerullapadu 1.24 1.24 0
19 Vijyawada Rural 19.49 5.92 13.57
20 Vissannapet 8.44 3.9 4.54
Nalgonda
1 Anumula 35.84 9.1 26.74
2 Chilkoor 217.24 48.87 168.37
3 Damarcherla 23.02 8.11 14.91
4 Garedepalli 72.99 19.24 53.75
5 Huzurnagar 55.12 16.58 38.54
6 Kodad 237.07 43.07 194
7 Matampalli 17.31 2.24 15.07
8 Mellacheruv 87.58 15.61 71.97
9 Miryalaguda 95.61 35.45 60.61
1X-13
Table 9.3 contd.
10 Munugala 8.96 4.19 4.77
11 Nadigudem 56.53 11.82 44.71
12 Nereducharla 72.65 20 52.65
13 Nidamanoor 35.92 8.22 27.7
14 Tripuraram 37.7 9.57 28.13
15 vemulapalle 18.74 8.39 10.35
Khammam
1 Chintakani 9.11 14.25 -5.14
2 Enkoor 11.46 5.43 6.03
3 Kalluru 38.06 11.28 26.78
4 Khammam (U) 0.004 2.05 -2.05
5 Khammam( R ) 3.92 1.45 2.47
6 Konijerla 38.93 4 34.93
7 Madhira 5.36 1.17 4.19
8 Mudigonda 21.35 3.14 148.21
9 Nelakondapally 57.71 7.2 50.51
10 Thallada 41.83 7.19 34.64
11 Wyra 12.92 3.34 9.58
12 yerrupalem 6.16 0.75 5.41
1X-13
Table 9.4
Nagarjuna Sagar Project Base Line Survey
LIST OF INDICATORS for the year 2008 09
S.no ENGINEERING PARAMETERS: Status as on 2008 - 09

1 Planned Storage 11540.94 Mcm
2 Actual Storage 11540.94 Mcm
Left Canal Right Canal
3 Planned command area 4.08 LHa 4.52 LHa
4 Actual command area (Designed) 4.20 Lha 4.75 LHa
5 Actual Irrigation area (Kharif + Rabi) 4.28 LHa 5.92 LHa
a.) Left canal (2.29 LHa K, 1.99 LHa R)
b.) Right canal (4.05 LHa K. 1.87 LHa R)
6 Water delivery efficiency 35% 32%
7 Water use efficiency at scheme level 136 Ha/Cumec 128.9 Ha/Cumec
8 Water use efficiency at distributary level 7 Acers/Mcft 6 Acers/Mcft
9 Water use efficiency at WUA level 8 Acers/Mcft 7 Acers/Mcft
ENVIRONMENTAL
1 Area effected by salinity (May 2008) 38100 Ha 2,04,700 Ha
2 Area effected by water logging (Sep 2008) 28,980 Ha 92,885 Ha

3 Depth of ground water table (safe >3m) (Sep 2008) 3,11,220 Ha 2,43,994 Ha
MAINTENANCE PERFORMANCE & COST RECOVERY:
1 Actual maintenance costs at scheme level (Lacs) 2001.48 1423.1

2 Arrears of Irrigation water charges (Rs. Lacs) 815 3524.66
3 Demand (Assessment) (Lacs) 1254 1060.86
4 Collection of water charges (Rs.Lacs) 795 616.67
5 % Recovery (Current year) 63.40 58.13
6 Total outstanding balance (Lacs.) 1274 3968.86
INSTITUTIONAL:
1 Staffing levels and skill mix of the Irrigation Department This is discussed under section 9.5
2 % Assessment and collection of water charges 63.64 58.16
3 Capital and O & M expenditures (Rs Lacs) 2001.48 1423.1
IX-14
CHAPTER-10
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES IN SAMPLE SCHEMES
10.1 INTRODUCTION
The operation of irrigation water supply systems affects the environmental performance
of irrigated agriculture. Systems that deliver water continuously or in a fixed schedule
are less efficient and/or limit management options available for irrigators compared to
on-demand water delivery operations. The operation and management of irrigation
water delivery systems must include proper monitoring and reduction of seepage and
other water losses in the system, particularly if they are a significant component of
recharge of raising water tables. The combination of low water quality supply and
raising water tables will eventually lead to water logging and salinization, threatening
the sustainability of existing irrigation systems besides promoting poor hygiene
conditions. Proper attention to the quality and amount of irrigation return flows is very
important to identifying and mitigating possible adverse environmental impacts on
receiving waters.
10.2 OBJECTIVE
The main objective of the present environmental study in the NSS irrigated command
is to assess the environmental impacts of Nagarjuna Sagar Scheme and arrive at
relevant environmental indicators to serve as baseline indicators for future monitoring
and evaluation of the project and for corrective action, if any. The environmental issues
related to surface and groundwater is discussed. The Baseline Survey proposed under
NSS has the following environmental aspects to be studied;
i) Public health indicators in terms of water borne diseases, rate of such incidence
and other environmental hazards;
ii) Pollution due to increased use of fertilizers and pesticides in the irrigation
command on soil and water (covered under chapter 4 of this document);
X-1
iii) Water quality in terms of human consumption and irrigation;
iv) Potential of ground water, increase in the water logged areas due to increase in
water table, development of salinity in the soils.
v) Any other environmental aspects.
10.3 ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS
Water logging and salinity are chief environmental factors. Water logging and salinity
situations depend on topography, prevailing soil conditions and land use practices
(especially paddy). Polluted water is a major cause of human disease. According to the
World Health Organization, as many as four million children die every year as a result of
diarrhea caused by water-borne infection. The bacteria most commonly found in polluted
water are coli forms excreted by humans. Surface runoff and improperly designed rural
sanitary and irrigation facilities contribute to this problem
The use of untreated (or poorly treated) human wastewater for irrigation purposes
contributes to direct contamination of food. In many developing countries there is little or
no treatment of municipal sewage, yet urban wastewater is increasingly being used for
irrigation. The most common water borne diseases associated with contaminated
irrigation waters are cholera, typhoid, ascariasis, amoebiasis, giardiasis, and entero
invasive E. Coli. Crops that are most affected with spread of these diseases are ground
crops that are eaten raw such as cabbage, lettuce, strawberries, etc.
10.3.1 Public health indicators
Environmental hazards on public health can be divided into two broad categories,
namely:
i) Inadequate access to basic needs namely clean and protected drinking water, pure air,
clean and protected food, shelter and fuel;
X-2
ii) Exposure to health hazards in the environment which include biological agents like
micro-organisms, insects and parasites which contribute to the burden of infectious
diseases.
The biological agents become more pronounced and significant in irrigation project areas
as water is the main source for their breeding as well as causing infection. Considering
the irrigation projects vis a vis diseases, there are two groups of water related diseases,
namely, the water based and the water related vector borne which are the most
important and prevalent in the project area. Biological agents are implicated in most of
the gastro-enteritis diseases, respiratory diseases and malaria.
Polluted water is a major cause of human disease. According to the World Health
Organization, as many as 4 million children die every year as a result of diarrhea caused
by water-borne infection. The bacteria most commonly found in polluted water are coli
forms excreted by humans. Surface runoff and improperly designed rural sanitary
facilities contribute to this problem. The use of untreated (or poorly treated) human
wastewater for irrigation purposes contributes to direct contamination of food. In many
developing countries there is little or no treatment of municipal sewage, yet urban
wastewater is increasingly being used for irrigation. The most common water borne
diseases associated with contaminated irrigation waters are cholera, typhoid, ascariasis,
amoebiasis, giardiasis, and entero invasive E. Coli. Crops that are most affected with
spread of these diseases are ground crops that are eaten raw such as cabbage, lettuce,
strawberries, etc.
The primary data collected from survey for various water borne diseases in three reaches
of five zones covering the NSS system are given in table 10.1 below:
X-3
Table 10.1 Public health Indicators (2008-09)
No. of cases of different water borne diseases reported within a WUA ( Zone and Reach wise)

Cholera 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Typhoid 17 12 3 0 19 0 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dysentery 21 12 0 0 15 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hepatitis 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jaundice 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0
Worm Infection
Diseases 0 5 0 0 7 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0
Polio 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Gastroentrities 0 1 9 0 12 0 13 11 11 0 12 7 2 0 9
TB 3 7 0 2 0 0 8 9 5 4 4 2 0 3 0
Note: H, M, T represent head, middle and tail reaches of the canal
The incidence of cholera, polio and hepatitis in right and left canal command areas of
NSS seems to be negligible. Only 1 case of polio has been noticed in tail reach of zone 2
of right canal command area and 5 case of hepatitis in head reach of zone-1 of right canal.
Organised Campaigns during the last one decade for immunization has also resulted in
the check of some diseases like polio, hepatitis etc. However there is significant number
of gastroenteritis cases and need to be checked.
10.3.2 Groundwater Monitoring and spatial Mapping and Zonation
Groundwater is monitored by state and central groundwater departments. The monitoring

involves open wells and piezometers at varying depth mostly during pre and post monsoon
seasons. The Water depth is measured as level (with respect to MSL) and depth to water table
(DTWL). The coordinates of each of these wells are located on the map and are plotted as
spot values for DTWL and MSL before arriving at contours. The same is repeated for water
quality parameters after sampling and testing in laboratories. These procedures help in
X-4
arriving at maps of water logged, salinity, and fluoride prone areas as various zones. The
water logging and salinity definitions are as below:
Water logging definition
S. No Depth of water table (m) Status

1 0- 2 Water logged
2 2- 3 Prone to water logging
3 >3 Safe
Salinity definition
S. No EC values Status
1 <750 Good
2 750 - 1500 Safe
3 1500 - 2250 Permissible
4 2250 -3000 Poor
5 >3000 Unsuitable
10.3.3 Water Logging
Water logging usually results from topography, overuse and/or poor management of
irrigation water. Lining and covering of water conduits from the storage dams to the
point of delivery improves water usage and at the same time reduces the risk of a rise in
the water-table in many irrigated areas. Water logging in general promotes salinity and
reduces productivity.
Water logging for the year 2008 in space is typically for left bank canals for pre and post
monsoon seasons are presented in figures 10.1 to 10.2 using GIS and covers full
X-5
geographical area under the command. The extent of water logging with respect to total
irrigated area is also presented in tables 10.2 through 10.5 below. The specific mandals
affected by water logging is indicated in the above mentioned figures. However it is
important to note that water logging seen during post monsoon season is partly due to
rain and partly due to paddy requirement.
Table 10.2 Water logging in left Canal Command Pre monsoon season (Jul 2008)
S. No Depth of water table (m) Status Total Irri. Percentage
Area (Ha) of total area
1 0- 2 Water logged 42000 10
2 2 -3 Prone to water logging 88200 21
3 >3 Safe 289800 69
Source: State Groundwater department report (2008)
Table 10.3 Water logging in left Canal Command Post-monsoon season (Sept 2008)
1 0- 2 Water logged 28980 6.9
2 2- 3 Prone to water logging 79800 19
3 >3 Safe 311220 74.1
X-6
Table 10.4 Water logging in Right Canal Command Pre monsoon season (Mar 2008)
1 0- 2 Water logged 13990 3
2 2- 3 Prone to water logging 38087 8
3 >3 Safe 422923 89
Table 10.5 Water logging in Right Canal Command Post-monsoon season (2008)
S. No Depth of water table (m) Status Total Irri. Area Percentage
(Ha) of total area
1 0- 2 Water logged 92885 20
2 2-3 Prone to water 138621 29
logging
3 >3 Safe 243494 51
Table 10.2 and table 10.4 reveals that during pre and post monsoon season the percentage
of water logged area in left canal command is 10% and 6.9 % respectively, while the
percentage of area prone to water logging in left command is 21% and 19% respectively.
Similarly for the right command area the water logged areas for pre and post monsoon
season are 3% and 20% respectively while the areas prone to water logging are 8% and
29% respectively. Therefore the right canal is relatively less water logged during pre-
monsoon while the reverse is true for post monsoon season. There could be number of
reasons for this situation depending on topography, soils conditions and land use
practices. Other reasons include amount of rainfall, paddy cultivation besides seepage
from canals. Some of the solutions include lining damaged canals, drainage of water
logged conditions and changing cropping pattern.
X-7
10.3.4 Salinity
All irrigation water contains dissolved salts derived as it passes over and through the
land, and rain water also contains some salts. With rising groundwater table salinity
adversely affects the crops. Often salinity is measured in terms of electrical conductivity
(EC).
EC values of the areas in left and right canal command of NSS for year 2008 have been
provided by the State ground water board for pre and post monsoon conditions. These EC
values have been plotted on the left and right canal command area map so as to develop
an EC contour map of the left and right canal command area separately with the help of
GIS. From analysis of these maps (based on EC contour values for a particular area) areas
have been identified for their salinity status/suitability. A typical map is presented in
figures from 10.3. The specific mandals affected by salinity is also indicated in the above
mentioned figures.
Data from the above explained maps are extracted to explain the status of areas under left
and right canal as good/safe/permissible/poor/unsuitable towards salinity. Total
geographical area in sq. km. and percent area of left and right canal command falling in
various categories of salinity conditions for pre monsoon season are given in tables 10.6
and 10.7 below.
X-8
Table 10.6
Salinity (EC) prone areas in Left canal Command- Pre-monsoon (2008)
S. No EC values Status Total Area Percentage of
(Km2) area
1 <750 Good 795 8.4
2 750 - 1500 Safe 3617 38.4
3 1500 - 2250 Permissible 3107 33.0
4 2250 -3000 Poor 1148 12.2
5 >3000 Unsuitable 381 4.0
Table 10.7
Salinity (EC) prone areas in Right canal Command - Pre-monsoon (2008)
S. No EC values Status Total Area (Km2) Percentage
of area
1 <750 Good 83 0.9
2 750 - 1500 Safe 1589 16.9
3 1500 - 2250 Permissible 3454 36.6
4 2250 -3000 Poor 2251 23.9
5 >3000 Unsuitable 2047 21.7
It can be seen from above tables 10.6 and 10.7 that percentage of area under left canal
command having limit for saline condition as good, safe and permissible is 8.4 %, 38.4 %
and 33.0 % respectively i.e. approximately 79.8 % of area of left canal command is in no
threat of salinity. However, percentage of area under right canal command having limit
for saline condition as good, safe and permissible is only 0.9 %, 16.9 % and 36.6 %
respectively. i.e. approximately 45.6 % of area of right canal command is poor/unsuitable
X-9
in respect of saline condition of the area. Therefore this issue needs to be addressed by
using appropriate agricultural practices.
10.3.5 Fluoride
The quantity of fluoride in water for drinking or irrigation purposes needs to be in desired
limits both in terms of upper and lower limits. However these limits have been found to
be exceeding especially in Nalgonda and Guntur districts. The groundwater fluoride data
was spatially plotted using GIS for the right and left bank canal command areas and are
depicted in figures 10.4 and 10.5. The spatial extent in form of percentage of area of left
and right canal is presented in tables 10.8 and 10.9. Even though the spatial extent is
small these need to be addressed especially in Nalgonda and Guntur districts.
Table 10.8
Fluoride prone areas in Left canal Command - Pre-monsoon (2008)
S. No Fluoride values Status Total Area Percentage of
(mg/l) (Km2) area
1 0.1 0.6 Low 8751 97.4
2 0.6 1.5 Medium 207 2.3
3 1.5 3.0 High 26 0.3
Table 10.9
Fluoride prone areas in Right Canal Command - Pre-monsoon (2008)
S. No Fluoride values Status Total Area Percentage of
(mg/l) (Km2) area
1 0.1 0.6 Low 8895 94.4
2 0.6 1.5 Medium 442 4.7
3 1.5 3.0 High 87 0.9
Source: CGWB (www.cgwb.gov.in)
X-10
10.4 GROUNDWATER QUALITY
The General groundwater quality in the NSP command area is presented in table 10.10
through 10.14 district wise for various mandals/ villages for the year 2008. CGWB data
pertaining to general parameters is presented. There is a wide variation in SAR and RSC
of the groundwater. The SAR values less than 10 can be used for irrigation with moderate
dilution from canal water. SAR (10 18) can be used with dilution. SAR in Gujral
Mandal is high and can be used only with dilution. Over all SAR values are low in other
mandals of right canal and so are RSC values.
The quality of water is good in zone 2 of right command area except Kothapatnam
Mandal of Prakasam district. The quality of groundwater in good in left command area
except the mandals of kanchikacherla, vissannapeta of Krishna district and Thallada of
Khammam district. Good quality of groundwater in command area is due to recharge of
groundwater by irrigation in command area. However the quality of groundwater is not so
good in non-command areas for the year under consideration. The quality of groundwater
in general is good especially due to the fact that the year (2008-09) is wet year.
Nevertheless conjunctive use of groundwater and canal water must be encouraged to the
farmers.
The ground water in Nalgonda district is found to be suitable for domestic and irrigation
purpose. The general range of Electrical conductivity is between 1300 and 8400 micro
Seimen/cm. However it was found that Fluoride concentration is more than permissible
limits of 1.5 mg/l in the South Western part of Nalgonda district covering the mandals of
Deverkonda, Gundlapalem, Chandampet, Chintaplly, Nampally, Gurrampode, Kanagal,
Chandur, Marriguda, Munugode, Narayanpur and Narketpally. The quality of
groundwater is brackish in the command area in eastern part of the district. In the north-
west parts of the district, the fluoride concentration is found to be excessive in isolated
X-11
patches. So far, 346 villages, are afflicted by Fluoride problem being highest in Nalgonda
followed by Nampally and Chintapally mandals.
The groundwater quality in Khammam and Krishna districts in general is suitable for
both domestic and irrigation purposes. The electrical conductivity ranges between 400
and 5500 micro Siemens/ cm at 250C. The nitrate content in the ground water is beyond
permissible limits in some pockets of canal command areas. However, high fluoride
content is not much spatially and is marginally exceeding the permissible limit of 1.5
mg/l exists in ground waters of 131villages, distributed among 9 mandals.
The quality of ground water in Prakasam district in the phreatic aquifer indicating alkaline
nature with Ph value in the district varying from 7.6 to 8.5. About 80% of the ground water
samples fall in the pH range of 8 and above and are within maximum permissible limits of
drinking water standards of WHO and ISI. The electrical conductivity value ranges from 520
to 7000 mS /cm. at 25C. Higher natural value of E.C. as seen at Ongole, Uppugunduru,
Addanki and along the coast at Podili and Darisi areas in the Northern part of the district. In
the 40% of the district the electrical conductivity values are less than 1700m/c.m. The
chloride concentration in ground water increases the alkalinity in waters and chloride
concentration upto 250 mg/litre is desirable though it is permissible up to 1000 mg/litre for
drinking purpose. The chloride concentration in the phreatic aquifer ranges from 28 to 1305
mg/liter. The chemical pollution by way of applying nitrogenousfertilizers in the agricultural
sector is the root cause of high nitrate pollution in groundwater. The presence of high nitrate
in drinking water causes infantile methino-globinema in children and few adults leading to
impure blood formation. Areas around Kadva-kunduru, Uppugunduru, Venkaiahpalem
Kandukuru and Ulvapadu along the coastal region and isolated pockets near Darsi,
Pasupugallu in the North central area, Pedda Alvalapadu and C.S.Puram in the southern parts
show high nitrates in the ground water. The high fluoride concentration is seen in the North
central and western parts of the district as seen around Donakonda, Chandaluru, Malakonda,
Venkaiahpalem, Santamagaluru and Dornala villages in the district where the fluoride content
is more than 1.5 mg/litre.
X-12
The ground water in Guntur district is generally fresh and potable. The groundwater
temperature generally varies from 22C to 28C. The suitability of groundwater largely varies
from area to area both for domestic and irrigation purposes. In most of the areas, the ground
water is devoid of carbonate. In the district, the hydrogen ion concentration (pH) varies from
7.67 to 9.0, indicating the alkaline nature of ground water. Calcium together with magnesium
and carbonates impart the property of hardness to water. The concentration of calcium and
magnesium in ground water is within the permissible limits for domestic use. The sodium
concentration is important in classifying the irrigation water and in the district, its
concentration when examined in the form of Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR), most of the
areas cover under irrigation water class fall under medium to high Sodium Hazard category
i.e. most of the irrigation water fall between C3-S1 and C4-S3 class with Sodium Adsorption
Ratio of less than 25%. The general concentration of bicarbonate varies from 200 to 400
ppm.
Table 10.10 Nalgonda District (2008)

SULP CARB BICAR
NITRA HAT ONAT BONAT CHLOR FLUORI
SITENAME MG PH TE K E EC TDS CA NA E E IDE DE SAR RSC
Chennamnenpall
i1 13.42 7.66 12 14 67 1735 42 327 0 756 124 2.74 11.25 9.19
Peddavoora 13.41 7.8 7 16 50 1340 32 239 0 555 106 2.72 8.95 6.4
Nidamanuru 32.91 7.33 198 16 125 2310 72 382 0 561 284 9.36 2.89
Kalamacheruvu-
PZ 152.33 7.19 192 7 221 2910 104 225 0 384 475 0.16 3.29 -11.43
T hungapadu 30.52 7.6 149 59 324 4470 104 805 0 866 723 1.67 17.85 6.49
Kondrapolu 114.37 7.23 1085 547 660 8400 381 943 0 470 1560 0.12 10.88 -20.72
Huzurnagar 58.81 7.09 155 4 144 2240 178 184 0 366 355 0.55 3.06 -7.72
Kodad-new 25.62 7.26 21 117 82 1575 74 159 0 567 145 0.45 4.06 3.49
Munagala 86.4 7.47 43 109 82 2015 70 138 0 598 248 0.71 2.61 -0.8
Nalgonda1 66.1 7.42 226 20 230 3460 176 428 0 726 461 2.98 6.98 -2.32
Kethupally 56.09 7.06 14 17 48 1580 138 92 0 549 202 1.02 1.67 -2.5
Adlur-PZ 63.64 7.13 12 3 96 2515 152 276 0 555 464 0.4 4.74 -3.72
A.ramannagude
m 70.63 7 55 2 44 1285 104 37 0 458 110 0.56 0.69 -3.49
Pochampalli 102.31 7.04 254 1 312 4265 457 230 0 378 851 2.53 -25.02
X-13
Table 10.11 Khammam district (2008)

SULP CARB BICAR
Yerupalem 167.84 8 279 4940 68 580 8.6 -17.2
Yerupalem 167.84 8 300 279 470 4940 68 580 0 433 978 0.92 8.6 -10.1
Konijarla 229 7.31 760 27 125 5550 376 420 0 378 1248 0.55 4.21 -31.4
Kallur1 77.92 7.52 0 2 250 2430 96 310 0 232 553 0.46 5.7 -7.4
T allampad 45.02 7.81 75 31 46 1140 34 145 0 305 177 0.43 3.84 -0.4
Sitarampuram 14.68 7.56 60 19 46 740 76 40 0 122 117 0.31 1.1 -3
Dhammapeta 21.96 7.48 15 12 25 735 66 43 0 232 96 0.34 1.17 -1.3
Annarugudem 55.96 8.5 140 3 134 2990 32 565 60 647 468 0.97 13.96 6.4
Nayakangudem1 43.81 8.12 0 3 38 830 34 95 0 397 67 1.4 2.54 1.21

Yedulla
Bayyaram 62.04 7.62 38 1.4 122 1405 38 205 0 427 202 0.58 4.77 0
Yedulla
Bayyaram 32.86 8.32 5 4 70 1136 30 205 6 378 163 0.91 6.15 2.2
Vinayakapuram 1.24 7.63 1 140 18 8 0.49 -1
Vinayakapuram 1.24 7.63 14 1 1.9 140 18 8 0 49 18 0.06 0.49 -0.2
Aspaka 54.77 7.83 160 9 62 1280 52 130 0 281 156 0.72 3 -2.49
Jagannathapura
m 19.48 8.02 0 52 34 840 26 111 0 281 131 0.3 4.01 1.71
Garla 29.29 7.32 270 2 82 1440 90 172 0 153 202 0.27 4.03 -4.39
Sujatanagaram 165.33 7.86 2210
Sujatanagaram 111.94 7.86 90 8 53 2210 80 205 0 403 461 0.51 3.47 -6.6
Kottagudem 15.88 7.82 18 4 31 688 62 65 0 256 74 0.24 1.91 -0.2
Kukkunur 68.08 8.44 125 134 1135 24 134 152 0.78 -2.6
Nehrunagar 49.89 8.25 85 2 0 1198 38 140 0 317 195 0.7 3.52 -0.8
Kesavapuram 136.24 7.5 250 9 0 1970 74 120 0 305 401 0.31 1.91 -9.9
Gandhampally(S
antulalpod) 30.48 7.3 160 19 24 1040 72 90 0 49 216 0.03 2.24 -5.3
Yellanadu 24.34 8.2 4.7 3.7 20 560 24 58 0 220 62 0.358 1.99 0.41
Yellanadu 12.23 8.16 65 28 22 660 64 40 0 110 110 0.16 1.2 -2.4
Sampathnagar 40.12 7.94 11 3.8 572 0 207 85 0.39 0.09
Sanjeeva Reddy
Palem 14.61 8.73 15 1 36 1410 18 290 48 586 82 1.63 12.31
T hotapally 64.49 7.62 170 12 110 1600 50 190 0 293 227 0.85 4.19 -3
Lakshmipuram 58.41 7.68 130 3 41 1010 44 90 0 207 145 0.42 2.09 -3.61
Edugarallapalli 30.41 8.36 8 4 29 1930 18 440 6 970 199 3.5 14.68 12.7
Sarivela 38.93 8.24 0 2 4.3 414 22 23 0 275 14 0 0.68 0.21
Mothugundam 26.8 7.45 13 4 12 540 46 49 0 299 43 0.24 1.42 0.4
Dummagudem 18.27 8.17 1.6 4 18 495 30 48 0 214 43 0.51 1.7 0.51
Ashwapuram 23.12 9.31 0 8 53 827 16 110 42 195 71 1.5 4.12 1.9
Parnasala1 25.58 7.7 37 53 34 716 38 55 0 305 50 0.28 1.69 1
Manuguru 72.97 8.37 23 3 307 2727 28 505 42 519 454 1.1 11.42 2.51
T egad 58.4 7.86 5 209 62 1490 40 70 0 519 177 0.14 1.65 1.71
Edira 68.11 7.98 100 7 43 1280 30 160 0 464 145 0.61 3.69 0.51
Venkatapuram2 46.26 F 100 13 46 1390 52 170 0 214 280 1.04 4.13 -2.89
Pragallapalle 45.09 7.6 35 44 67 1350 90 85 0 153 294 0.37 1.83 -5.69
X-14
Table 10.12 Guntur District (2008)

SULP CARB BICAR
NITRA HAT ONAT BONAT CHLOR F LUORI
Nijampat nam 48.69 8.86 205 199 125 3200 56 430 42 586 475 0.09 10.14 4.2
Motupalem 71.79 7.8 152 5.9 192 1760 52 202 0 134 291 0.06 4.26 -6.3
Pallapatla 42.59 8.38 32 15 130 2160 34 310 6 183 429 0.24 8.36 -2
Vinukonda 165.41 8.19 453 21 125 3960 64 480 0 250 837 1.42 7.2 -12.7
Varagami 25.59 8.74 43 299 192 2325 48 230 24 512 277 0.17 6.67 4.69
Ponnur(old) 72.99 8.89 120 279 413 4650 38 720 36 781 766 0.09 15.76 6.1
Chilkaluripet-1 36.49 8.45 115 38 192 2195 20 370 12 260 362 0.25 11.38 0.66
Velpur 26.77 8.41 0 15 40 510 22 35 6 171 43 1.17 1.19 -0.3
Pratt ipadu 294.35 8.09 471 24 494 6990 132 899 0 146 1744 0.71 9.97 -28.41
Moolpur1 31.64 8.67 10 5.1 89 1490 26 251 12 354 227 0.38 7.82 2.3
Chebrolu 25.56 8.9 52 195 120 1660 28 185 24 366 209 0.56 6.08 3.3
Ipur 48.66 8.75 6.8 8.1 89 920 28 90 12 232 103 0.84 2.38 -1.2
Rompicherla 71.83 8.17 229 35 317 3290 88 451 0 140 670 2.03 8.64 -8.01
Narasaraopet 70.55 8.71 153 13 115 1930 32 251 12 262 326 0.83 5.68 -2.71
Vadlamudi 23.16 8.45 0 10.9 43 900 48 100 12 232 135 0.65 2.97 -0.1
Pirangipuram 93.7 8.04 229 160 72 2460 78 190 0 207 539 1.6 3.43 -8.21
Guntur 183.75 7.78 60 4.7 240 4850 150 540 0 159 1333 0.87 6.99 -19.99
Sekuru 40.14 9 25 273 269 2240 16 230 30 360 277 0.2 6.99 2.8
Sirigiripadu-alt 75.57 8.08 276 239 278 3180 160 230 0 98 610 0.29 3.75 -12.59
Ungutur 37.73 8.76 4.3 101 89 1545 34 166 9 421 195 0.16 4.66 2.4
Medikondur 24.34 8.31 3.1 17 36 525 20 46 0 183 50 0.38 1.63 0
Nekarikallu 110.67 8.74 73 2 173 2250 36 240 18 311 390 1.87 4.47 -5.2
Mandadi 14.64 8.39 204 460 226 3050 46 435 12 238 762 0.49 14.3 0.8
Guttikonda 49.87 8.73 161 351 89 2750 26 276 24 531 425 0.35 7.31 4.1
Mangalagiri 42.58 8.89 178 66 187 2310 30 350 18 250 355 0.37 9.63 -0.3
Karampudi1 18.29 8.45 54 66 72 1040 48 99 6 262 106 0.78 3.08 0.59
Kondamodu 30.42 8.3 11 3.9 34 640 22 65 6 183 78 0.67 2.11 -0.4
Rentapalle 62.08 8.38 248 7 106 1670 66 150 6 116 223 1.09 3.18 -6.3
Rentapalle 38.92 8.87 1.9 10 62 1290 14 200 18 336 184 0.45 6.23 2.21
Pisapadu 160.52 8.74 505 140 538 6520 40 1001 18 464 1205 2.92 15.79 -7
Bellamkonda 97.88 7.68 549 659 226 7040 520 299 0 98 1702 0.21 3.15 -32.39
Chintala T anda 88.85 7.99 248 9 130 2110 92 173 0 122 376 1.25 3.09 -9.9
Anjaneyapuram 30.41 8.6 32 51 168 1270 14 175 12 281 99 1.19 6.02 1.81
Krosur 107.02 8.57 270 64 355 4885 36 780 12 348 993 1.26 14.74 -4.5
Rentachintala 58.45 8.65 155 479 480 4215 80 460 12 403 744 0.27 9.54 -1.79
T ummurukot a 12.2 8.16 6.2 4.7 86 670 34 85 0 159 60 0.57 3.18 -0.09
Gurzala 36.5 8.44 410 2095 24 154 4.62 -4.2
Zupudi 27.99 8.36 17 3.9 72 685 26 69 6 140 74 0.43 2.24 -1.11
Utukuru 116.76 8.18 214 106 134 2630 48 220 0 153 539 1.5 3.91 -9.49
Murjampadu 52.29 8.68 67 60 158 1770 12 251 24 256 273 1.95 6.98 0.1
Dachepalle 14.66 7.63 50 17 197 1470 56 210 0 92 245 0.51 6.46 -2.49
Srinagar 37.74 8.2 1.9 3.1 154 1630 46 216 0 214 273 0.9 5.72 -1.89
X-15
Table 10.13 Krishna District (2008)

SULP CARB BICAR
Challapalli 31.71 8.25 15 7 94 1686 82 235 0 439 280 0.25 5.59 0.49
Sult an nagar 73 8.14 22 62 187 2784 48 410 0 415 567 0.25 8.7 -1.6
Movva 18.29 8.13 3.5 8 38 694 48 74 0 275 67 0.52 2.31 0.61
Balliparru 164.19 8.45 5.2 21 1152 6689 66 1140 6 354 1276 0.3 17.11 -10.8
Pamarru 45.02 8.25 1.7 3 94 1220 30 175 0 403 142 0.3 4.72 1.4
Munjuluru 64.56 8.68 108 27 187 2268 110 260 12 378 369 0.1 4.87 -4.2
Bantumilli1 82.83 8.16 146 80 139 3230 136 420 0 714 581 0.1 7.01 -1.9
Kopparagudem 166.64 7.97 110 27 413 4100 78 520 0 281 936 0.16 7.63 -12.99
Mudinepalli 35.31 8.25 1.4 3 86 1236 48 170 0 287 195 0.35 4.54 -0.6
Gudivada 121.66 7.91 8.1 16 854 5030 80 880 0 397 993 0.23 14.47 -7.49
Kaikaluru1 31.69 8.25 120 21 86 2040 66 340 0 592 277 0.36 8.61 3.8
Pedda Autapalli 116.8 8.01 8.8 2 106 3240 80 430 0 354 851 0.46 7.17 -7.8
Ibrahimpatnam 72.98 8.2 7.6 29 110 2340 32 350 0 580 383 0.29 7.81 1.91
K.cherla-alt 272.49 8.22 4 15 3120 16000 152 3385 0 567 3651 2 38.02 -20.71
Mailavaram 52.27 8.56 0.1 82 1300 6 281 216 0.5 0.51
Nuzivedu 45.06 7.85 116 47 158 1610 64 210 0 226 269 0.35 4.92 -3.2
Kummarkunt la 115.52 8.25 189 3 110 2130 26 240 0 415 308 1.1 4.49 -4
Vissannapet 87.53 8.64 3654
Vissannapet 77.82 8.64 64 17 254 3654 16 680 12 939 539 1.2 15.59 8.59
Gopalapuram 91.22 8.38 50 6 74 2320 34 355 6 702 383 1.7 7.2 2.51
Gopalapuram 121.57 8.23 220 173 3490 0 506 652 0.6 -1.71
Gampalagudem 77.89 8.23 220 249 173 3490 72 420 0 506 652 0.6 8.17 -1.71
Garikapadu 55.98 8.25 100 72 132 1580 52 170 0 378 202 0.78 3.9 -1
Kakarla 8.55 8.25 8.5 12 7.2 679 32 115 0 311 71 1.66 4.66 2.8
T iruvur 161.73 8.2 60 4 72 2235 38 210 0 464 482 0.7 3.31 -7.6
X-16
Table 10.14 Prakasam District (2008)

SULP CARB BICAR
Bot la Gudur 99.75 7.76 181 21 113 2250 56 253 0 831 298 1.49 4.69 2.62
Malakonda 49.89 8.02 76 18 47 1270 40 140 0 336 174 1.66 3.49 -0.59
Voletivaripalem 76.62 8.21 145 5.9 40 925 30 30 0 262 64 0.92 0.66 -3.51
Komarolu 30.43 7.8 19 25 43 1150 32 155 0 397 131 0.72 4.71 2.41
K.agraharam1 37.73 8.04 45 0.8 25 960 38 105 0 409 53 1.08 2.89 1.7
T angut ur 160.58 7.57 203 42 571 5730 96 879 0 427 1241 0.28 12.75 -11
Giddaluru 29.23 7.9 25 7.8 18 850 48 80 0 342 74 1.05 2.25 0.81
Kanigiri 82.77 7.98 45 5.9 53 2170 88 239 0 519 397 4.65 4.39 -2.69
Kotta Patnam 34.14 8.14 122 0.8 165 3280 80 598 0 85 922 0.31 14.11 -5.41
Sant anutalapadu 7 8.13 0 3.9 18 600 36 80 0 256 50 0.3 3.2 1.82
Ongole-new 34.09 8.04 17 67 54 1150 46 110 0 384 131 0.45 3 1.19
T urumella 155.73 7.45 342 86 240 4085 104 460 0 482 794 0.36 6.67 -10.1
Vemulapadu 36.5 8.04 20 29 15 1060 26 129 0 494 64 2.17 3.83 3.8
T allamalla 20.69 8.19 2 5.9 17 580 18 70 0 281 28 2.31 2.67 2.01
Podili 29.22 8.14 48 300 89 2250 40 239 0 817 227 8.19 7.01 8.99
Vellampalli 29.2 8.21 38 6.6 586 3330 16 690 0 763 284 2.64 23.73 9.31
Uppugundur 92.55 7.39 218 85 47 2950 128 300 0 366 663 0.69 4.93 -8
Kadavakuduru 107.02 8.15 81 32 290 3500 32 559 0 561 674 2.28 10.66 -1.21
Kadavakuduru 102.31 8.04 930 600 304 5440 160 520 0 476 893 0.07 7.9 -8.6
Chandalur 27.98 8.15 115 90 50 1490 16 220 0 512 124 2.06 7.69 5.29
Darsi-new 31.66 7.99 283 500 212 3070 46 299 0 732 340 1.41 8.31 7.1
Donakonda 160.56 7.88 0 7.8 315 3300 80 360 0 415 695 1.72 5.34 -10.4
Addanki-new 26.82 7.93 14 4.7 86 1200 60 155 0 427 106 0.87 4.18 1.8
Chirala 19.61 7.84 109 56 80 1800 134 190 0 500 227 0.16 4.06 -0.1
Muppavaram 35.33 7.89 18 6.6 74 980 66 80 0 366 71 0.94 1.98 -0.2
Vengaiahpalem 4.91 8.18 30 82 111 2000 40 363 0 775 170 2.41 14.41 10.3
Gollapalli 60.86 7.7 155 6.6 135 1900 60 250 0 281 319 1.12 5.44 -3.39
Gutt alaumadivr
m 64.49 7.98 413 2 538 7050 52 1400 0 1000 1305 2.25 30.64 8.49
Rajupalem 10.98 8.11 0 2.7 25 520 30 65 0 214 43 1.1 2.58 1.11
X-17
CHAPTER 11
BASELINE INDICATORS
A) SOCIO-ECONOMIC INDICATORS (Abstract summary)

1)Household Demographics
a) Household demographics caste, education levels and Religion (percentages)
Caste BC SC ST Others Total

(population
percentage)
Right canal 32.87 14.32 5.83 46.98 100
Project
Left Canal 40.48 17.24 8.58 33.70 100
Overall
Command 36.52 15.8 7.09 40.58 100
Control 35.05 16.96 11.35 36.64 100
b) Literacy levels
Education Illiterate Primary Middle Second Under Gradu Profession Total

(population ary Graduate ate al/
percentage) Technical
Project
Right canal 32.24 28.54 16.02 11.14 6.99 3.42 1.64 100
Left Canal 30.90 25.12 15.77 14.23 8.01 4.48 1.50 100
Overall 31.42 27.04 15.95 12.67 7.44 3.94 1.54 100
Command
Control 38.95 23.26 15.04 11.25 6.79 3.56 1.15 100
c) Religion
Religion
(Percentages of
Household) Hindu Muslim Christian Others Grand Total
Project
Right Canal 93.63 2.53 3.83 0.00 100

Left Canal 96.51 2.14 1.27 0.07 100
Overall
Command 95.05 2.34 2.57 0.03 100
Control 97.80 0.87 1.34 0.00 100
XI-1
2) Crop Yield (Kgs/ ha)
Canal Kharif Rabi
Paddy Maize Chillies Seed Paddy Maize Groundnut Blackgram

Cotton
Right Canal 4560 3475 2312 2095 4323 4992 1643 963
Left Canal 4819 3223 2312 2065 4267 3976 1771 860
Overall 4689.5 3349 2312 2080 4295 4484 1707 911.5
3) Cropping Intensity (percentage)
Cropping
Project Intensity
Right Canal 130.70
Left Canal 129.47
Overall Command 130.03
Control Area 109.21
4) Use of Irrigation (percentages)
Source Canal Well/Tube Tank Rain other Total

well fed area
Project area
Right
Canal 78.22 4.54 3.31 1.37 12.57 100
Left Canal 67.15 6.61 4.51 2.23 19.50 100
Overall
Command 72.28 5.61 3.93 1.83 16.35 100
Control 64.97 1.57 4.65 18.14 10.67 100
XI-2
5) Water logging Area (%)
Status Waterlogged Prone to water Safe

(less than 2m) logging (more
(between 2- than 3m)
Pre - 3m)
monsoon Left 10 21 69
Project
Canal
Right 3 8 89
Canal
Left 6.9 19 74.1
Post - Canal
monsoon Right 20 29 51
Canal
6) Ownership of wells and pumps (per HHs)
Own Tap Community Hand Well Tube

Tap Pump well
Right Canal 0.48 0.38 0.15 0.01 0.02

Left Canal 0.50 0.42 0.08 0.05 0.03
Overall
Command 0.49 0.40 0.12 0.03 0.02
Control 0.50 0.39 0.14 0.05 0.12
7) Use of Inputs (Fertilisers, seeds, pesticides)

S. No. Particulars of technology Awareness Adoption Awareness Adoption
% tage % tage % tage % tage
1 Suitable high yielding 70.92 69.30 60 58
varieties
2 Seed rate 42.53 40.39 32 26
3 Timely sowing 42.20 38.67 36 31
4 Cultural practices 45.86 44.76 38 31
5 Organic manures 24.35 17.78 21 15
6 Vermi compost 13.45 8.70 9 7
7 Bio pesticides 10.14 3.94 6 2
8 Bio fertiliser 10.06 3.94 5 2
9 Banned pesticides 6.80 0.17 2 2
10 Improved machinery 17.14 13.44 11 5
XI-3
8) Adoption of Water Saving technology

S. No. Particulars of technology Awareness Adoption Awareness Adoption
% tage % tage % tage % tage
1 Water Saving Technologies 25.46 6.33 21 15
9) Payment of Water Charges
Sl. Kharif paddy per acre Rs. 200/-

No.
I.D. Crop per acre Rs. 100/-
Do fasal i.e. Sugarcane Rs. 350/
Fish rearing Rs. 500/
10) Occupation of household members in Percentages
Occupation Farming Non- Regularly Agril. Others Total

Agriculture Employed /Casual
Project Labour
Right 61.04 3.48 1.27 22.11 12.11 100
Canal
Left Canal 49.37 4.05 0.84 19.37 26.37 100
Overall 55.05 3.74 1.01 20.78 19.41 100
Command
Control 48.46 3.33 0.77 23.76 23.68 100
11) House hold incomes (Farm and nonfarm) in Percentages
Income Farming Dairying Agriculture Non Income Total

labour agricultur from
al other
Project
sources
Right Canal 36.62 10.71 25.69 6.49 20.81 100
Left Canal 37.58 10.00 24.44 8.07 20.32 100
Overall
Command 37.11 10.38 25.05 7.42 20.45 100
Control 39.48 10.55 12.73 18.02 19.23 100
XI-4
12) House hold asset ownership (Per Household)
Asset TV Radio Refrigerator Watch Motorcycle Four mobiles

wheelers
Project
Right Canal 0.71 0.03 0.07 0.90 0.17 0.00 0.74

Left Canal 0.84 0.06 0.10 0.96 0.19 0.01 0.65
Overall
Command 0.71 0.05 0.09 0.93 0.18 0.01 0.70
Control 0.72 0.06 0.11 0.85 0.21 0.01 0.69
13) Farm equipment and on farm equipment and on farm improvement (Per Household)
Equipment
Harvesters
Cultivator
Pump sets
Seed drill
Thresher
Sprayers
Wooden
Tractor
Dusters
plough
Others
Project
Right Canal 0.07 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.15 0.00 0.04
Left Canal 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.13 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.21 0.00 0.23
Overall 0.08 0.05 0.00 0.08 0.04 0.00 0.02 0.18 0.00 0.13
Command
Control 0.08 0.07 0.00 0.15 0.07 0.00 0.02 0.20 0.00 0.15
14) Land ownership and tenurial arrangements (Acres) Per household
Owned land Leased in Leased out Total

Project
Right Canal
3.19 0.12 0.09 3.22
Left Canal
3.75 0.23 0.15 3.83
Overall Command
3.45 0.17 0.12 3.50
Control
3.80 0.31 0.24 3.88
XI-5
15) Credit and indebtedness

a) Percentage of Farmers borrowing loan for different purposes
Purpose Agriculture Education Health Functions Others Total

Project
Right Canal
44.64 4.67 2.45 4.04 44.20 100
Left Canal
51.76 4.93 3.53 6.12 33.66 100
Overall
Command
48.27 4.87 3.10 5.17 38.59 100
Control 52.45 4.54 4.81 2.99 35.21 100
b) Percentage of total loan taken from different sources
Source of Commercial Pvt. Co-op Friends Money Total

Credit Bank Bank Society Lender Loan
(Percentage)
Project
Right Canal 42.36 2.31 35.19 10.47 9.67 100

Left Canal 36.43 13.41 37.45 8.15 4.56 100
Overall
Command 41.55 8.21 34.12 9.47 6.65 100
Control 33.47 18.18 14.33 12.75 21.87 100
16) Access to extension
Farmers in NSP area are utilising the extension services from Department of
Agriculture, ANGRAU, WALAMTARI, KVK both private and public, Mass media,
Print media, Print media etc. for latest technical know-how for crop improvement thus
increase in incomes.
17) Access to marketing
Different existing marketing channels have been identified in the study area for
paddy, maize, cotton and chillies and presented in the form of flow diagrams.
XI-6
18) Input and output prises (Rs.)
Seed
Chillies Groundnut Black gram
Paddy Maize Cotton
Operatio Market Operation Market Opera Marke Operational Marke Operatio Marke Operation Marke
nal cost Price al cost Price tional t Price cost t Price nal cost t Price al cost t Price
cost
Right 9524 1030 6832 840 11634 3000 15950 3500 7598 2100 2134 2520
canal
Left 9624 1030 6449 840 10841 3000 16629 3500 7116 2100 2138 2520
canal
overall 9577 1030 6592 840 11118 3000 16364 3500 7310 2100 2139 2520
comm
and
Contro 9785 1030 6372 840 8474 3000 14161 3500 6786 2100 2102 2520
l
19) Migration (Percentage)
Male/Female Male Female Total

Project
Right Canal 2.05 1.55 3.60

Left Canal 1.71 1.25 2.96
Overall 1.84 1.37 3.21
Command
Control 1.72 1.16 2.88
20) Ownership of livestock (Per HHs)
Livestock Buffalo Cows Bullocks Goats Sheep Poultry

Project
Right Canal 0.84 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.13 0.86

Left Canal 0.93 0.10 0.08 0.04 0.23 0.90
Overall
Command 0.89 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.17 0.89
Control 0.76 0.06 0.09 0.07 0.53 0.77
XI-7
21) Stall feeding of livestock
The area under fodder crop is very less in the NSP command. However, paddy
straw is being used for stall feeding of live stock. This is one of the areas where
the project has to concentrate in raising the fodder crops for stall feeding.
XI-8
B) WUA & VILLAGE LEVEL INDICATORS
1) Access to infra structure facilities
Average Max/ Min distances in Kilometres of villages within WUA Zones (H, M, T)
from Basic Infrastructure facilities
Market for Krishi Animal Public Water Bus Stop Commercial

selling Vigyan Husbandry supply tap Bank/Govt.Bank
produce Kendra Centers
Right Left Right Left Right Left Right Left Right Left Right Left
canal canal canal canal canal canal canal canal canal canal canal canal
Max. 11 14 11 16 9.2 11 5 5 9 7 13 18
Min. 1.9 2.1 1.1 0.9 0.4 1.3 0.6 0.5 0.25 0.4 0.3 0.4
Pucca Credit Self Help group High School Gramin Bank Public
Road/Tar society Telephone
Road
Right Left Right Left Right Left Right Left Right Left Right Left
Max. 11 11 14 12 10 11 4 7 12 11 7 7
Min. 0.4 0.5 1.1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.25 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.5 1.2
Post office Primary Police station Agro Primary Health Railway Cooperative
School Industries Centre Station Bank
Right Left Right Left Right canal Left canal Right Left Right Left Right Left Right Left
Max. 10 10 5 4 9 11 12 13 8 7 20 20.2 9 7
Min. 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.4 1.2 0.6 1 0.6 1.1 1 0.9 0.5 0.5
XI-9
2) Demographics WUA wise (members of WUAs Percentage)
ST SC OBC Others Total

Social Status
Canal
5.3 17.1 31.4 46.3 100.0
Right Canal
5.3 10.9 19.9 64.0 100.0
Left Canal
3) Number of WUAs and the level of participation in WUAS
Percentages of WUA

Right canal 8.57 66.59 21.99 2.86 100.00
Left canal 15.78 44.44 27.61 12.17 100.00
4) Participation of SC/ ST/ OBC in the WUA executive committee (percentages)
Social Status SC ST OBC Others Total

Canal
Right Canal 7.68 2.08 25.66 64.58 100

Left Canal 8.33 10.02 27.25 54.39 100
Overall
Command 8.00 6.00 26.44 59.56 100
5) Whether WUA is headed by a Woman/ SC/ ST/ OBC in executive committee

(number)
Canal SC ST OBC OC Total

Right canal 4 11 35 26 76
Left canal 14 15 14 31 74
6) Views on Irrigation service delivery
The General view involves modernisation of existing main lined canal system by
repairing the slips along various reaches. Specific recommendation includes
XI-10
promoting volumetric basis of irrigation water distribution by installing flow

meters, improving water use efficiency and water charges recovery. The other
aspects need attention include conjunctive use of surface and ground water increase
of ID crops and efficient functioning and suitably empowering WUA committee.
7) Awareness of water entitlements (Warabandi implementation)

(percentages of WUA)

Right canal 2.63 34.21 30.26 32.89 100
Left canal 6.76 50.00 22.97 20.27 100
overall 4.69 42.11 26.62 26.58 100
8) Extent of water entitlements(water release schedule) (percentages of WUA)

Right canal 6.58 39.47 42.11 11.84 100
Left canal 10.81 49.95 27.03 16.22 100
overall 8.69 42.71 34.57 14.03 100
9) Number of WUA participating in: (Percentages)
a) Planning works to the minor level/ Taking responsibility of O & M

Right canal 0.00 31.58 51.32 17.11 100
Left canal 4.05 33.78 50.00 12.16 100
overall 2.03 32.68 50.66 14.63 100
b) In collecting water charges (percentages of WUA)

Right canal 77.63 13.16 7.89 1.32 100
Left canal 32.43 45.95 17.57 4.05 100
overall 55.03 29.55 12.73 2.68 100
XI-11
10) Types of disputes on water sharing and how they are resolved(conflict resolution)
(Percentages of WUA)

Right canal 3.95 15.79 42.11 38.16 100
Left canal 13.51 29.73 28.38 28.38 100
overall 8.73 22.76 35.24 33.27 100
11) Depth of Groundwater table and variation in levels (percentages of Irrigated area)
Status less than 2m between 2-3m > 3m

Left 10 21 69
Pre -
Canal
monsoon
Right 3 8 89
Project
Canal
Left 7 19 74
Post - Canal
monsoon Right 20 29 51
Canal
XI-12
C) Scheme Level and Department Level Indicators
S.no ENGINEERING PARAMETERS: Status as on 2008 - 09

1 Planned Storage 11540.94 Mcm
2 Actual Storage 11540.94 Mcm
Left Canal Right Canal
3 Planned command area 4.08 LHa 4.52 LHa
4 Actual command area (Designed) 4.20 Lha 4.75 LHa
5 Actual Irrigation area (Kharif + Rabi) 4.28 LHa 5.92 LHa
a.) Left canal (2.29 LHa K, 1.99 LHa R)
b.) Right canal (4.05 LHa K. 1.87 LHa R)
6 Water delivery efficiency 35% 32%
7 Water use efficiency at scheme level 136 Ha/Cumec 128.9 Ha/Cumec
8 Water use efficiency at distributary level 7 Acers/Mcft 6 Acers/Mcft
9 Water use efficiency at WUA level 8 Acers/Mcft 7 Acers/Mcft
ENVIRONMENTAL
1 Area effected by salinity (May 2008) 38100 Ha 2,04,700 Ha
2 Area effected by water logging (Sep 2008) 28,980 Ha 92,885 Ha

3 Depth of ground water table (safe >3m) (Sep 2008) 3,11,220 Ha 2,43,994 Ha
MAINTENANCE PERFORMANCE & COST
RECOVERY:
1 Actual maintenance costs at scheme level (Lacs) 2001.48 1423.1
2 Arrears of Irrigation water charges (Rs. Lacs) 815 3524.66
3 Demand (Assessment) (Lacs) 1254 1060.86
4 Collection of water charges (Rs.Lacs) 795 616.67
5 % Recovery (Current year) 63.40 58.13
6 Total outstanding balance (Lacs.) 1274 3968.86
INSTITUTIONAL:
1 Staffing levels and skill mix of the Irrigation This is discussed under section 9.5
Department
XI-13
2 % Assessment and collection of water charges 63.64 58.16

3 Capital and O & M expenditures (Rs Lacs) 2001.48 1423.1
XI-14
SYSTEM PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
(1) Water required as a ratio of total water available. (Since 2008-09 happens to be a
good year)
(132 (R)+132(L)+17(Losses)) / (189.93 (L)+213.91(R) ) = 69.58 or 70%
(2) Crop yield as a ratio of Irrigation water delivered to field.(Kg / Cumec )
Crop Season LC RC
Rice Khariff 0.25 0.27
Rabi 0.27 0.29
Ground Khariff 0.13 -
Nut Rabi 0.27 0.32
(a) WATER AUDIT

Indicator
Availability of water in the reservoir. - 408.24TMC
Percentage of actual evaporation to live storage:- 1% to 2%
Evaporation of gross utilization:-
(189.93(L)+213.91(R))2/100 = 8TMC
Water use pattern: Continuous Supply uniform to all crops
Water use efficiency (Acres/Mcft or Hec/Mcm):-
1. 136 Ha/MCM (Left Canal).
2. 128.9 Ha/MCM (Right Canal).
Percentage of water remained unutilized to maximum live
storage.
1. [(408.24 403.84) / 408.24] 100 = 1.07%
(b )BENCHMARK INDICATORS
1. Annual Irrigation water supply per unit of Irrigation Area.
1. 189.93/(1.99+2.29) =44.37TMC/Lac Ha.- LC

2. 213.91/(4.05+1.87)=36.14TMC/Lac Ha RC
XI-15
2. Potential created and area irrigated.
LC RC
Potential 4.20 lac ha 4.75 Lac ha
created
Area 1.99 lac ha(K) 4.05 lac ha(K)
irrigated 2.29 lac ha(R) 1.87 lac ha(R)
3. Out put per unit Irrigation area, LC and RC separately.(Average of the zones
on each canal)
Crop Season LC RC
Rice Khariff 3064.5 Kg/ha 3472.5 Kg/ha
Rabi 3243.5 Kg/ha 3693.5 Kg/ha
Ground Nut Khariff 1121.5 Kg/ha 1483 Kg/ha
Rabi 1359 Kg/ha 1804.5 Kg/ha
4. Out put per unit of Irrigation water supply. : -
Crop Season LC RC
Rice Khariff 0.25 Kg/cum 0.27 Kg/Cum
Rabi 0.27 Kg/cum 0.29 Kg/Cum
Ground Khariff - Kg/
Nut 0.13 Kg/cum Kg/Cum
Rabi 0.27 Kg/Cum 0.32 Kg/Cum
5. Total O and M cost per unit area.

1. (3424.58) / (4.86+5.11) =Rs.343.48 /Ha
6. Total O and M cost per unit of water supply.

1. (3424.58) / 5869 + 6047 = Rs. 0.29 / Mcum.
XI-16
7. Revenue per unit water supply.-
LC RC
0.02Rs/Cum or 21366 0.017Rs/cum or 17543
Rs/Mcm Rs/Mcum)
(* demands/water supply)
8. Water use Charges collection per hectare.
LC RC
795/1254 = 63.34% 616.67/1060.86 = 58.16%
9. Man days per O and M per unit area. =343/150=2 man days
(Assuming average man day costRs. 150 /-)
10. Total daily measured rainfall over Irrigation area for the year 2008-09
1. 875.40mm - LC
2. 988.97mm RC
11. Environmental aspects

(a) Land damage Index
water logged + saline effected area
Total C.C.A
1. (28980+ 8400)/420000 = 0.089 LC

2. (13990+4750)/475000 =0.040 RC
12. Water quality: Dealt in chapter on environment.
XI-17
CHAPTER 12
CONCLUSIONS
The base line study was carried out with the primary objective of improving the existing
irrigation system so as to increase the agricultural productivity on a sustainable basis and
strengthen the states institutional capacity for multisectoral planning, crop intensification &
diversification, development and management of the water resources in the NSS. The
APWSIP had chosen NSP for modernisation project. The scope of the study involved
undertaking a baseline survey study involving four components with base year as 2008-09.
The sampled data was assumed to be random, unbiased and representative of the NSP. The
parameters included socio-economic conditions prevailing in the command and adjacent non-
command (control) areas, effectiveness of WUA (Water User Associations), irrigation service
delivery and departmental aspects relating to water regulation, O&M and revenue collection.
These were quantified in the form of various indicators/ parameters for planning and impact
evaluation on a later date. Following conclusions may be drawn from the present study:
The socio-economic indicators were primarily analysed by comparing the project (NSP) with
adjacent non-project areas based on sampled data to evaluate the impact of irrigated
agriculture by evaluating general standard of living conditions. The socio-economic
indicators included averages size of land holding, composition of social strata, gender ratio,
income levels, income sources, literacy levels, household assets, agricultural implements,
biotic potential, credit/ loan, savings and consumption patterns. These are discussed in detail
in chapter 3.
About 23% of surveyed population belonged to SC/ST while BC included 36%. Nearly 70%
were literates and illiteracy showed a decreasing trend as the level of size of holding
increased. Average land holding varied from 3.2 to 3.4 Acres (own land) in the project area
compared to 3.8 in adjacent non-command areas, while the tenuerial lands were found to be
much less (approximately 0.25 acres). The average size of family in project and non project
areas were found to be 3.5 and 3.6 respectively with gender distribution slightly tilted
towards females (54%).
XII-1
Farming was found to be practiced as main source income (40%) both in command and non-
command areas. Income of individual households varied from Rs 46,020 (landless) to Rs
92,664 (large farmer) from farming activities. It may however be noted that landless and
small category farmers derive additional income from casual manual labour work. For
example this includes income from livestock such as buffalo which is available in every
household. Migration levels for want of job/ work were found to be negligible both in
command and non command areas (< 3%).
The cropping intensity, for various crops in command area (about 130%) is higher relative to
non-command (109%) areas due to availability of water. The cropping yields for left and
right canal command areas are approximately the same. The overall command yields for
Kharif paddy, Maize, Chillies and seed cotton were found to be 4689.5, 3349, 2312, and 2080
Kgs/ ha. Similarly the yields for Rabi paddy, maize, groundnut and Black gram were 4295,
4484, 1707 and 911.5 Kgs/ha respectively. The crop yields per unit area could be enhanced as
the soil conditions are conducive by improving fertiliser/ pesticide inputs and improved
irrigation service delivery. The fertiliser and pesticide inputs were found to be well within
limits, except that DDT needs to be banned. However the fertiliser/ pesticide input has to be
area specific after undertaking laboratory tests. Since the farmers have alternative sources of
irrigation (tube wells/ open wells) they should adopt conjunctive use of surface and ground
water. This will sustain the groundwater levels, salinity and environment in general. The
occupation of farming was found to higher in command area relative to non-command area
for obvious reasons.
Access to rural infrastructure in the command areas are very good and are discussed in detail
in chapter 6. This includes access to market for selling farmer produce, Krishi Vigyan
Kendras, police station, bus stations, banks, roads, SHG, schools, telephone, post office and
primary health services. The basic amenities were found to be well within the reach of most
resident farmers. The primary health centres were found to be effective as the number of
water borne diseases were not high except in the case of gastroenteritis.
A key functioning of water delivery system is controlled by Water User Associations

(WUAs) formed in AP under the APFMIS act and has direct impact on socio-economic
XII-2
conditions in the project area. Data from 150 WUAs were analysed. Since WUAs play a
self-governing role, efficient WUAs can promote better socio-economic conditions through
efficient utilisation of irrigation via conjunctive use of surface/ groundwater, increased
cropping intensity and higher productivity. The representation of membership among
backward castes, SC and ST is significant as seen from the indicators mentioned in chapter
11. The executive committees members also have a significant representation (about 37%).
However, the representation of women in these committees is extremely low (actual data not
available from CADA sources).
In the command area there are two PCs, 80 DCs (48 in right and 32 in left canal) and 672
WUAs (404 in right and 268 in left canal). The percentage of total irrigated area (including
ID) to localised ayacut during kharif ranged from 31.7 to 98.8 the highest being in the right
bank canal under Lingumguntla circle. This is due to availability of water in the canal
coupled with receipt of very good rains during the base year (2008-09). In Miryalguda circle
the % of total irrigated area to localised ayacut is About 80 in both seasons. The general
awareness about Warabandi system and their entitlements (share of water) among WUAs is
average (42%), good (26%) to excellent (27). The tax collection during Rabi season in all
circles is however poor more so in the Ongole circle where the revenue collection is virtually
zero. In terms of WUAs the cost recovery is poor (56%), average (29%), good (12.5%) and
excellent (3%) from the primary sampled data. The role of WUAs for resolving conflicts for
found to be range from poor (8%), average (23%), good (36%), and excellent (33%).
Therefore there is a clear need to introduce training programs on the importance of water tax
collection among farmers for managing irrigation system on a sustainable basis.
Environmental aspects relating to water logging and salinity are most important in any
irrigated command area as they are often linked with health issues besides agricultural
productivity. On an average the water logged area in the project during pre-monsoon is 7%
while in the post-monsoon season the figure is about 13%. The salinity during pre-monsoon
season for left canal and right canal which is unsuitable (EC > 2250) is about 16% and 44%
respectively. In general right canal shows more water logging and salinity and these issues
need to be addressed. Groundwater quality in general is good in the command area both for
drinking and irrigation. However fluoride levels in parts of Nalgonda, Khammam and Guntur
XII-3
are a matter of concern for public health. Conjunctive use of canal/ surface and groundwater
especially in the tail end reaches need to be encouraged. Artificial recharge for dilution of
fluoride levels and conserving groundwater levels at appropriate locations need to be
examined for implementation.
The modernization of the total system will help to improve the operation of the canal system
with minimized losses so that water reaches to the tail end reaches. The relevant parameters
include overall water delivery efficiency (32.67%), water use efficiency at scheme level
(132.5 Ha/ M cum), and Water use efficiency at WUA level (7.5 Acres / Mcft). The total cost
recovery is a serious matter of concern (outstanding balance for RBC at Rs 39.68 Crores and
LBC at Rs 12.7 Crores), besides mounting O&M expenditure.
Volumetric basis of Irrigation water distribution and installing Flow Measurement Devices
need to be taken up on priority to improve Irrigation Water Management and Water Use
Efficiency. This will help monitor the canal flows for the benefit of tail end farmers. The
entire canal system from the dam point should be monitored using SCADA (supervisory
control and data acquisition system) along with a DSS (decision support system) for
regulating and managing flows to meet the demand/ supply on Warabandi and volumetric
basis.
The system of two third head reaches ID crop and wet crop in one third reach in Tail end, as
planned for the system, needs to be restored. Some of the upland reaches in the command
area need to be covered under lift Irrigation and conjunctive use schemes for sustainability.
Remote and fragmented areas need special attention of the department to supply water with
the cooperation of WUAs, TC members and farmers by encouraging water saving techniques
in the upper reach either by adopting pressure irrigation system, going for ID crops,
conjunctive use of surface and ground water and micro-irrigation techniques.
XII-4

Base Report of Irr For Management

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Base Report of Irr For Management

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

ANDHRA PRADESH WATER SECTOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT

(MODERNAIZATION OF NAGARJUNSAGAR PROJECT)

BASELINE SURVEY REPORT

PROJECT PREPARATION AND MANAGEMENT UNIT

APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY II - 1

2.8 WUA Village Level Indicators for Assessment II - 13

Table 7.4 (b) Participation of SC/ST/OBC in WUA Executive Committee (Percentage)

Table 10.12 Guntur District (2008)

Figure 1.2 Right Canal Zones in Project Area

Figure 10.3 EC Contour Map of NSLC Command Area 2008

holding and canal reaches (Percent)

ANDHRA PRADESH WATER SECTOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT

Important indicators as per the baseline survey report:

Conveyance Efficiency at Scheme level

Cropping intensity in NSP Command for the year 2008-09

Recovery of water charges for the year 2008-09

Paddy Cotton Chilies Groundnut Maize

733407.4 115540.3 45123.43 28328.608 23775.8

Sl.No Name of the crop Yield

1.1 THE PROJECT

1.2 ANDHRA PRADESH WATER SECTOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT

1.3 THE PROJECT OBJECTIVES

1.4 RATIONALE AND CONTEXT

1.5 PROJECT LOCATION

Figure1.1: Left Canal Zones in Project Area

Figure 1.2: Right Canal Zones in Project Area

1.6 PROFILE OF PROJECT DISTRICTS

Five districts of the state of Andhra Pradesh namely Nalgonda, Khammam,

1.7 LIMITATIONS OF STUDY

In project implementation, progress towards objectives is measured by the achievement

The socio-economic indicators involved parameters such as literacy, income etc.;

2.2 METHODOLOGY AND ANALYSIS

2.2.1 Socio-Economic Survey

Planning Base Line Survey

Stages in planning the base line survey activities included:

- Concepts and definitions used

- Definition of eligible respondents - which types of members of the population are

Farmer Identity / Household Characteristics

Ownership and Use of Land

Agricultural Practices and Income

2.2.2 WUAs and Village level Survey

2.2.3 Scheme level and departmental survey

Engineering/ Environmental parameters

2.3 Survey Design

2.4 Sample Design Criteria

2.4.1 Data Collection of household data:

Zone Right bank canal Left bank canal

Ayacut Right Canal System (37 WUAs in each Zone)

2.5 Techniques of Data Collection:

Four questionnaires were prepared A entitled as household survey questionnaires meant

2.6 Processing and Analysis of primary data and quality control

2.7 Socio economic- Indicators for Assessment

Specific socio-economic indicators include: (i) household demographics inducing

2.8 WUA Village Level - Indicators for assessment

headed by a women/SC/ST/OBC (x) views on irrigation service delivery (xi) awareness

2.9 Indicators for assessment - Maintenance Performance & Cost Recovery:

As regards improving service delivery in NSS operation, following indicators will be

Indicators of maintenance and performance include:

i) Number of Slips in canal

2.10 Indicators for assessment - Departmental

SOCIO-ECONOMIC PROFILE OF HOUSEHOLDS

3.2.2 Male Headed Farmers

3.2.3 Gender wise distribution