200 likes | 571 Views
Indigenous Irrigation Organisation in South Bihar. Presented by: Ranjan Kumar Mishra(36) Vivek Kumar(60). Different methods of irrigation :. Canal Pond Dams Wells Sprinkler Drip Others. Ahar and Pynes. Ahars:- Reservoir Major embankment across the line of the drainage.
E N D
Indigenous Irrigation Organisation in South Bihar. Presented by: Ranjan Kumar Mishra(36) Vivek Kumar(60)
Different methods of irrigation: • Canal • Pond • Dams • Wells • Sprinkler • Drip • Others .
Ahar and Pynes Ahars:- • Reservoir • Major embankment across the line of the drainage. • Two sides of embankments running backwards up to the line of the drainage gradually losing their heights because of the gradient of the surface.
Ahar and Pynes • Pyne is the local name for the diversion channels . • Pynes are artificial channels constructed to utilise river water in agricultural fields. • Most Pynes flow within 10 km of a river and their length is not more than 20 km.
Ahar and Pynes • During first two decades in Bihar :- • 35% of 2.5 mha of cropped land was irrigated by this system. • 3% of 3 mha in north Bihar. • Now :- • Today the area irrigated is 12% of all irrigated sources.
Reasons of decline • Abolition of the Zamindari system. • A large number of alternatives in the form of new canal schemes and tube wells.
Distribution of water. • Equitable distribution of water. • Water is first stored in the Ahars. • Excess of water which is available is equally distributed. • At the time of scarcity, water is distributed from the Ahars.
People’s Participation • In making the pynes before irrigating. • Maintaining the pynes during the irrigation. • Desilting the pynes and the ahar. • For operational works and vigilance.
Case of village SABATO. • Two land rights activists, Members of the Institute for Research and Action (IRA). Sarita and Mahesh Kant, were brutally killed on 24 January 2004 in Gaya, Bihar State . • Sarita and Mahesh mobilized the community of Fatehpur to revive an old 45-km canal system on the Bihar-Jharkhand border.
Cost and Sustainability • Quiet low. • Rs 500 to Rs 1000 as compared to Rs 5000 for canal irrigation. • Local materials used in making the embankments. • Exists since centuries as it uses the excess water also. • Mode of storage helps in preventing the flood.
Advantages • Mobilisation of local resources. • Utilising human resources. • Cost is quiet low. • Utilises the rain water which would have otherwise gone waste. • Could be more advantageous if integrated with new diversion schemes.
References: • 1. Sengupta, N. 1991. “Traditional type of organization” in Managing Common Property, SAGE Publishers, New Delhi /Newbury Park/ London: 107-109. • 2. Sengupta, N. 1993. "Storage Works" in User-Friendly Irrigation Designs, • SAGE Publishers, New Delhi /Newbury Park/ London: 46-47, 88,132. • 3. Sengupta, N. 1996. "The Indigenous Irrigation Organisation in South Bihar" in B.C. Barah (ed), Traditional Water Harvesting Systems - An Ecological Economic Survey, New Age International Publishers, New Delhi: 175.
Google References: • 1. Tanner, E.L. 1919. Final Report on the Survey and Settlement Operations in the District of Gaya, 1911-1918. Bihar and Orissa Government, Patna. • 2. Water Harvesting Systems: Traditional Systems. www.rainwaterharvesting.org. • 3.www.indiawaterportal.org/arghyam/rainwaterharvesting.htm. • 4.www.actionaid.org/asia/355_2_514.html -