Publication No.

299

INTERNATIONAL WATERLOGGING AND SALINITY

RESEARCH INSTITUTE (IWASRI), LAHORE

GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT
(RECHARGE POTENTIAL AND GOVERNANCE)

Surface Water and Groundwater Nexus:

Groundwater Management Options for
Indus Basin Irrigation System

Groundwater elevation (m)

180
170
One Century
Groundwater Behavior
in Bari Doab

160
150
140
130
120
1910

1930

1950 1970
One Century

PAKISTAN
WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
February, 2014

1990

2010

Publication No. 299

INTERNATIONAL WATERLOGGING AND SALINITY

RESEARCH INSTITUTE (IWASRI), LAHORE

GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT
(RECHARGE POTENTIAL AND GOVERNANCE)

Surface Water and Groundwater Nexus:

Groundwater Management Options for
Indus Basin Irrigation System
by
Dr. Muhammad Basharat
Addl. Director (basharatm@hotmail.com)
Dilbar Hassan
Addl. Senior Research Officer
Engr. Akbar Ali Bajkani
Director General
and
Syed Javed Sultan
Director

PAKISTAN
WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
February, 2014
i

CONTENTS

CONTENTS ................................................................................................................... i
LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................... iv
LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................... vii
ABBREVIATIONS .......................................................................................................x
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................... xiii
1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................1
1.1. Background .....................................................................................................1
1.2. Indus Basin Irrigation System and its Design .................................................4
1.3. Water Resources ..............................................................................................7
1.4. Groundwater in General ................................................................................10
1.5. Changing Groundwater Regime in Pakistan .................................................11
1.6. Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM)......................................13
2. LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................15
2.1. Irrigation System Performance Assessment ..................................................16
2.2. International Experiences in Groundwater Management ..............................17
2.2.1. India ....................................................................................................... 18
2.2.2. Bangkok, Thailand ................................................................................. 21
2.2.3. China ...................................................................................................... 22
2.2.4. Netherlands ............................................................................................ 22
2.2.5. Australia ................................................................................................. 22
2.2.6. Spain ...................................................................................................... 23
2.2.7. Water sector reforms in Mexico ............................................................ 23
2.2.8. Pakistan .................................................................................................. 24
2.3. Highlights of Management Approaches Abroad .......................................... 24
2.4. Approaches for Sustainable Groundwater Management ...............................25

2.5. Expected Climate Change and its Impact on Surface and Groundwater
Availability and Demand ..............................................................................26
2.5.1 Climate change and hydrologic variability ............................................ 26
2.5.2 Possible impacts on the Indus Basin ...................................................... 28
2.5.3. The importance of groundwater in a changing climate ......................... 29
3. MATERIALS AND METHODS ............................................................................30
3.1. Identification of Critical Groundwater Areas................................................30
3.2. Crop consumptive use demand .....................................................................31
3.3. Effective Rainfall ..........................................................................................32
3.4. Spatial Variation in Irrigation Demand .........................................................32
3.5. Present Water Allocations and its Impact on Groundwater ..........................34
3.6. Linking Waterlogging, Groundwater Quality and Surface salinity in
Sindh .............................................................................................................34
3.7. Irrigation-Drainage and Waterlogging-Salinity Nexus in Sindh ..................36
4. CURRENT GROUNDWATER STATUS AND ITS MANAGEMENT IN
THE INDUS PLAIN ..............................................................................................37
4.1. Groundwater Aquifers ...................................................................................38
4.2. Groundwater Quality .....................................................................................39
4.2.1. The Punjab plains ................................................................................... 40
4.2.1. Sindh ...................................................................................................... 45
4.3. Spatial and Temporal Variation in Groundwater Behavior over IBIS
during the Last Decade .................................................................................46
4.4. Comparison of Groundwater Depth Distribution amongst Regions in
IBIS ...............................................................................................................52
4.5. Groundwater Depletion and its Causes in Bari Doab ...................................56
4.6. Lahore - a Case study of Urban Groundwater Management .........................57
4.7. Institutional Setup .........................................................................................60
5. IRRATIONAL WATER SUPPLY AND DEMAND ACROSS PUNJAB ............63
5.1. Irrigation Demand and Supply Inequity ........................................................63
5.1.1 Crop consumptive use, irrigation demand index and canal supplies ..... 64
5.2. Existing Canal Water Allocations .................................................................67
5.3. Recharge Inequity .........................................................................................68
ii

5.4. Present Water Allocations and its Impact on Groundwater ..........................70

5.4.1 Irrigation system distribution inequity ................................................... 73
5.4.2 Watercourse command distribution inequity ......................................... 73
5.4.3 Groundwater demand and supply inequity ............................................ 74
5.5. Emerging Groundwater Behavior Waterlogging and Depletion ................75
6. IRRIGATION-DRAINAGE AND WATERLOGGING-SALINITY ISSUES
IN LOWER INDUS AND THEIR POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS ..............................78
6.1. Operation and Maintenance Conditions of Sindh Irrigation and
Drainage System ...........................................................................................79
6.2. Waterlogging and Salinity distribution in Lower Indus ................................92
6.2.1. Depth to watertable in Lower Indus....................................................... 92
6.2.2 Waterlogging situation during drought period in Lower Indus ............. 94
6.2.3 Groundwater quality in Lower Indus ..................................................... 98
6.3. Lessons from Surface Salinity in IBIS as Surveyed During 2001-03. ........103
6.4. Impact of Drought in Over Irrigated Areas of Lower Indus .......................105
6.5. Irrigation Water Allocations in Lower Indus ..............................................109
7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...............................................112
7.1. Groundwater Regulation Potential ..............................................................114
7.2. Surface Water and Groundwater Nexus and Conjunctive Management.....114
7.3. Management Issues .....................................................................................114
7.4. Important Conclusions and Recommendations ...........................................116
7.5. Recommended Action Points for Punjab ....................................................118
7.6. Recommended Action Points for Lower Indus (Sindh and Balochistan) ...119
REFERENCES ..........................................................................................................120
Annexure A: Canal head withdrawals (MAF) for canal irrigation systems in
Sindh and Balochistan (source: H&WM, WAPDA, Wapda
House, Lahore) ...................................................................................126

iii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1: Population growth, water availability and demand for Pakistan. ................3
Figure 1.2 Geographical area and population distribution in Pakistan (Source:
ECPAK, 2011). .........................................................................................5
Figure 1.3: Irrigated Areas of the Indus Basin Irrigation System. .................................6
Figure 1.4: Annual average escapages below Kotri based on 1976-2000 data are
37.8 MAF and based on 1976-2011 are 30.70 MAF. .............................10
Figure 1.5: Changing groundwater levels in LBDC command, in response to
irrigation inception and current over pumping (Basharat and Tariq,
2013a). ....................................................................................................12
Figure 1.6: Variation of annual normal rainfall in Pakistan (PMD, 2010). .................13
Figure 2.1: Degree to which aquifers important for farming are under stress
(Gleeson et al. 2012). ..............................................................................18
Figure 4.1: Groundwater Quality in Chaj Doab, during 2002-03. ...............................41
Figure 4.2: Groundwater Quality in Rechna Doab, during 2002-03. ..........................42
Figure 4.3: Groundwater quality in Bari Doab, during 2002-03. ................................43
Figure 4.4: Groundwater salinity profile for the strip from Raiwind to middle of
Okara and Sahiwal. .................................................................................44
Figure 4.5: Depth to watertable status in IBIS during June 2000. ...............................47
Figure 4.6: Depth to watertable status in IBIS during June 2001. ...............................48
Figure 4.7: Depth to watertable status in IBIS during June 2002. ...............................49
Figure 4.8: Depth to watertable status in IBIS during October 2002. .........................50
Figure 4.9: Exponential growth of tubewells in Punjab, showing acute shortage
of canal supplies in the province. ............................................................50
Figure 4.10: Depth to watertable in IBIS, during June 2012. ......................................52
Figure 4.11: Surface salinity in IBIS, as surveyed during 2003-04. ............................53
Figure 4.12: Areas under different DTW (October 2002) in Punjab and KP. .............53
Figure 4.13: Comparison of DTW amongst the provinces (June, 2011). ....................55
Figure 4.14: Comparison of DTW amongst regions of KP, as on June, 2011.............55
Figure 4.15: Comparison of DTW amongst regions of Punjab province (June,
2012). ......................................................................................................55
Figure 4.16: Depth to watertable position in Bari Doab (June 2012). .........................56

iv

Figure 4.17: Desiccation of Ravi River in 2000, after the completion of Thein
Dam, above Madhopur headworks. ........................................................58
Figure 4.18: Groundwater level trends in Lahore city (2003 2011). ........................59
Figure 4.19: Groundwater elevation contours (m), 2009, (deep depression under
Lahore city, and irrigation network of CBDC Command.......................60
Figure 5.1: Increasing aridity shown by met stations across the command. ................63
Figure 5.2: Increasing ETo in downstream direction of IBIS in Punjab (PMD,
2006). ......................................................................................................64
Figure 5.3: Cotton crop consumptive use requirement for selected canal
commands. ..............................................................................................64
Figure 5.4: Rice (left) and Wheat (right) crop consumptive use requirement for
selected canal commands. .......................................................................65
Figure 5.5: IDIp and average canal supplies on annual basis. ......................................65
Figure 5.6: IDIa and average canal supplies during Kharif season. .............................66
Figure 5.7: IDIa and average canal supplies during Rabi season. ................................66
Figure 5.8: IDIa, average annual canal supplies and CI. ..............................................67
Figure 5.9a: Comparison of WAA allocations and 2001-09 supplies, during
Kharif. .....................................................................................................68
Figure 5.9b: Comparison of WAA allocations and 2001-09 supplies, during
Rabi. ........................................................................................................68
Figure 5.10: Map showing rivers, perennial and non-perennial channels in
Punjab. ....................................................................................................69
Figure 5.11: Depth to watertable, October 1977 (Ahmad, 1995). ...............................71
Figure 5.12: Depth to watertable, June 1978 (Ahmad, 1995). .....................................72
Figure 5.13: Canal and groundwater usage along four selected watercourses
(Basharat 2012). ......................................................................................74
Figure 5.14: Depth to watertable hydrographs for Bari Doab canal commands. ........77
Figure 5.15: Depth to watertable hydrographs for canal commands other than
Bari Doab. ...............................................................................................77
Figure 6.1: Patchy wheat crop near Mirpur Khas, due to waterlogging and
salinity. ....................................................................................................80
Figure 6.2: Almost fully choked drain, crossing Sanghar-Mirpur Khas road
(left), Waterlogged and barren/saline lands (right) in another area
along Sanghar-Mirpur Khas road............................................................81
Figure 6.3: Two different fields showing good stand of Banana, along
Nawabshah to Qazi Ahmad road. ...........................................................81
v

Figure 6.4: A view of functioning Scavenger well, with 15 HP motor (35 km

along Nawabshah to Sanghar road): left, fresh delivery, 1.5 cfs,
bore depth 100; right, saline delivery, 0.5 cfs, bore depth 220 ............82
Figure 6.5: EKTD Project showing poorly maintained sumps, drains, standing
water, as well as, well established date palm trees, in areas with
balanced. .................................................................................................83
Figure 6.6: A view of Mancher lake (left) and water treatment plant with RO
technology (right)....................................................................................84
Figure 6.7: Agriculture land with patchy wheat crop, due to waterlogging and
salinity (along Dadu-Johi road). .............................................................85
Figure 6.8: Enormous waterlogged areas with standing water along Dadu to KN
Shah road (December 12, 2013). ............................................................85
Figure 6.9: Johi branch canal upstream (left) and downstream view (right), at a
road X-ing, the channel is not in its proper section at many of the
places.......................................................................................................86
Figure 6.10: KN Shah drain pumping station (L) for occasional pumping into
Khuda waha (R), otherwise KN Shah drain discharges into MNV
drain. Even close to the drain outlet, a vast area was observed with
standing water, thus other areas are also waterlogged due to
blockage of surface water. ......................................................................86
Figure 6.11: Zero Point of Miro Khan drain: (left) Super structure over the
MNV drain and gates to Hamal lake; (right) Mirokhan outfall gates
to: MNV drain (L) and Hamal Lake (R). Here many of the farmers
use drain water for irrigation, locally called abadi. ..............................86
Figure 6.12: Waterlogged and saline lands between KN Shah, Mehar and Hamal
Lake (NW and Rice commands). ............................................................87
Figure 6.13: Vast areas around Miro Khan drain: (R) with standing water; or
without wheat crop due to very wet soils................................................88
Figure 6.14: Standing Water in areas of Khanpur, Ghuspur and Kandhkot
(Guddu right bank command). ................................................................89
Figure 6.15: First 2-pics:- Sindh Feeder crossing Shikarpur-Kandhkot road,
crossing is oblique and de-routing the channel, due to lack of
proper annual maintenance. Second 2-Pics:- Unerwah X-regulator
at RD-29, flow is only hitting at two extreme left gates. Third 2Pics, Unerwah irrigation channel, in much poor condition. ...................90
Figure 6.16: Farmers use their full authority to divert (or otherwise) water to
their self-designed outlets. The upper right picture is a special
example of gigantic outlet in discharge that was closed with

vi

bushes, thus irrigation department has almost lost the control over
distribution of the irrigation water. .........................................................91
Figure 6.17: Poor germination of wheat crop (left), due to more than optimum
moisture content; SCARP tubewell, KKP-20 in operating condition
(right), a good stand of wheat crop due to proper drainage and
timely sowing of wheat crop. ..................................................................91
Figure 6.18: Percentage areas under different depth to watertable in Lower
Indus, as on October 2011. .....................................................................92
Figure 6.19: Depth to watertable in Lower Indus (October, 2011). ............................93
Figure 6.20: Depth to watertable in Lower Indus, June 2001......................................94
Figure 6.21: Depth to watertable in Lower Indus, October, 2001. ..............................95
Figure 6.22: Depth to watertable in Lower Indus, June, 2002. ....................................96
Figure 6.23: Depth to watertable in Lower Indus, October, 2002. ..............................97
Figure 6.24: Deep groundwater quality in Lower Indus (Qureshi et al., 2004). ..........99
Figure 6.25: Percent area under different groundwater quality ranges in Guddu
and Sukkur commands ............................................................................99
Figure 6.26: Groundwater quality (TDS) in Lower Indus (2001-03). .......................100
Figure 6.27: Shallow groundwater quality (SMO data) in Lower Indus (Oct,
2010). ....................................................................................................102
Figure 6.28: Comparison of surface salinity in Punjab for the periods: 1979-81
and 2001-03 ..........................................................................................104
Figure 6.29: Comparison of surface salinity in Lower Indus (Sindh-Balochistan)
for the periods: 1979-81 and 2001-03. ..................................................104
Figure 6.30: Surface salinity in in Lower Indus, as observed during 2002-03. .........106
Figure 6.31: Annual average water supplies in Ratto Dero Branch (Saeed et al.,
2009). ....................................................................................................108
Figure 6.32: Pre-Monsoon DTW in SMO Observation Well No. LS-78, in the
command of Jalbani Distributary (Saeed et al., 2009). .........................108
Figure 6.33: Pre-Monsoon area under different DTW in North West canal
command (Saeed et al., 2009). ..............................................................109
Figure 6.34: Cropped area (%) during Rabi, Kharif and Yearly basis in the
command of Jalbani Distributary (Saeed et al., 2009). .........................109
Figure 6.35: Comparison of canal water supplies amongst the irrigation systems
in Sindh. ................................................................................................111
Figure 7.1: Proposed stepwise approach for groundwater management in IBIS. ......113

vii

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1: Geographical areas of Pakistan (Source: ECPAK, 2011). .........................4
Table 1.2: Surface water allocation in WAA of 1991 and irrigated area on
provincial basis. ..........................................................................................5
Table 1.3: Annual average flows (MCM) to Indus River and its tributaries
(Ahmad et al., 2012) ...................................................................................8
Table 1.4: Western River Inflows (MCM) at Rim Station (1976-77 to 2008-09). ........8
Table 1.5: Eastern Rivers Inflows (MCM) at Rim Station (1976-77 to 2008-09). ........8
Table 1.6: Annual Inflows (MCM) to IBIS at Rim Stations (1976-77 to 200809). ..............................................................................................................9
Table 1.7: Annual canal withdrawals (MAF) for post-Tarbela period (1976-77
to 2006-07 (data source: H&WM, WAPDA). ............................................9
Table 3.1: Classification for calculating areas under different depths to
watertable in IBIS. ....................................................................................31
Table 3.2: Thirty years normal and effective rainfall at various locations in
Punjab. ......................................................................................................33
Table 3.3: Criteria of Surface Salinity Survey .............................................................36
Table 3.4: Limits and field observation indices for each category of surface
salinity. .....................................................................................................36
Table 4.1: Doab wise area under different DTW zones, as on October 2002. ............54
Table 5.1: Annual average flows (MAF) in Ravi and Sutlej Rivers for different
periods. .....................................................................................................70
Table 6.1: Existing drainage facilities, up to June, 2001 (WRPO and IWASRI,
2004). ........................................................................................................79
Table 6.2: Areas (000 acres and %) under different DTW, as on October, 2011,
in Lower Indus (Sindh-Balochistan) ........................................................93
Table 6.3: Area under different depth to watertable ranges in Lower Indus, June
2001. .........................................................................................................95
Table 6.4: Area under different depth to watertable ranges in Lower Indus,
October 2001. ...........................................................................................96
Table 6.5: Area under different DTW ranges in Lower Indus, June, 2002. ................97
Table 6.6: Area under different DTW ranges in Lower Indus, October, 2002. ...........98
Table 6.7: Shallow groundwater quality in Lower Indus (October, 2010). ...............101
Table 6.8: Temporal and spatial comparison of surface salinity in IBIS...................103
viii

Table 6.9: Areas (ha) and percentage under different surface salinity classes in
Lower Indus. ...........................................................................................105
Table 6.10: GCA and CCA of irrigation system in Lower Indus (source: Sindh
Irrigation Department and IWMI (1998). ...............................................110
Table 6.11: Monthly canal water supply in terms depth (mm) over the CCA of
irrigation systems (source: H&WM) and monthly normal of ETo at
Rohri and Tando Jam (source: PMD).....................................................111

ix

ABBREVIATIONS
AJK
amsl
BCM
CCA
CGWA
CGWB
CI
Cu
DLR
dS/m
DTW
EPA
ETc
ETo
FESS
FGW

FOs
ft
GB
GCA
GIS
GSII
H&WM
ha
IBIS
ID
IDI
IDIa
IDIp
IDW
IPCC
IRSA
IWASRI
IWMI
IWT
Kc
Km
KP
LBDC
LBOD
LCC

Azad Jammu and Kashmir

Above Mean Sea Level
Billion Cubic Meter
Cultureable Command Area
Central Groundwater Authority
Central Groundwater Board
Cropping Intensity
Consumptive Use
Directorate of Land Reclamation
Desi Siemens per meter
Depth to Water Table
Environmental Protection Agency
Crop Evapotranspiration Requirement
Reference Crop Evapotranspiration
Fordwah Eastern Sadiqia South
Fresh Groundwater
Farmers Organizations
feet
Gilgit Baltistan
Gross Command Area
Geographic Information System
Groundwater Sustainability Infrastructure Index
Hydrology and Water Management
Hectare
Indus Basin Irrigation System
Irrigation Demand
Irrigation Demand Index
Actual Irrigation Demand Index
Potential Irrigation Demand Index
Inverse Distance Weighting
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Indus River System Authority
International Waterlogging and Salinity Research Institute
International Water Management Institute
Indus Water Treaty
Crop Coefficient
Kilometer
Khyber Pakhtoonkhwah
Lower Bari Doab Canal
Left Bank Outfall Drain
Lower Chenab Canal
x

LIP
LJC
lpcd
Mac
MAF
MCM
MGD
Mha
MNV
MR
NGO
OFWM
PCRWR
PET
PHED
PID
PMD
ppm
PPSGDP
RBOD
RO
RS
RSC
S1
S2
S3
S4
SAR
SCARP
SGW
SMO
SUPARCO
TDS
UJC
UNDP
WAA
WAPDA
WASA
WRPO

Lower Indus Project

Lower Jhelum Canal
Liters per Capita per Day
Million Acre
Million Acre Feet
Million Cubic Meters
Million Gallons per Day
Million Hectare
Main Nara Valley
Marala Ravi
Non Governmental Organization
On-Farm Water Management
Pakistan Council of Research in Water Resources
Potential Evapotranspiration
Public Health Engineering Department
Provincial Irrigation Department
Pakistan Meteorological Department
Parts per million
Punjab Private Sector Groundwater Development Project
Right Bank Outfall Drain
Reverse Osmosis
Remote Sensing
Residual Sodium Carbonate
Non Saline
Slightly Saline
Moderately Saline
Strongly Salinity
Sodium Adsorption Ratio
Salinity Control and Reclamation Project
Saline Groundwater
SCARPs Monitoring Organization
Space and Upper Atmospheric Research Commission
Total Dissolved Solids
Upper Jhelum Canal
United Nations Development Program
Water Apportionment Accord
Water and Power Development Authority
Water and Sanitation Agency
Water Resources Planning Organization

xi

FOREWORD
Groundwater in some of the areas of Indus Basin Irrigation System (IBIS) is under
increasing threat from over-exploitation, pollution and lack of any management to
match water demands and supplies with the natural resource base. The IBIS design
and its management are totally oriented towards canal water management only,
leaving groundwater development at the sole discretion of individuals. In some of the
areas, groundwater pumping is higher than its recharge, resulting in unprecedented
groundwater depletion, whereas in other areas, waterlogging salinity problems persist
since long.
The groundwater situation in Pakistan, particularly in Punjab Province, is
becoming successively critical, due to increasing demand for irrigation, industrial and
domestic uses. A few aquifers, like in lower and central parts of Bari Doab, Lahore,
Rawalpindi/Islamabad and Quetta, have exhausted their available groundwater
development potential: which was created over a long period, with the inception of
irrigation systems; or recharged by rainfall, before the extensive population growth. It
is a paradox that such a vast and highly valuable resource, which is likely to become
even more important as climate change increasingly affects surface water sources, is
being so neglected by Federal and Provincial governments and the community at a
time, when interest and support for the water sector as a whole, is at an all-time high.
Almost an anarchy situation is prevailing in groundwater development in almost all
rural and urban centers and irrigated agriculture areas; covering almost all of Punjab,
Khyber Pakhtoonkhwah, and rain-fed areas of Baluchistan, whereas waterlogging and
salinity has affected major portions of canal commands in Sindh province and causing
cropping intensities and yields to be far less than the potential, particularly in the right
bank canals of Guddu and Sukkur Barrages.
The Ministry of Water and Power, Government of Pakistan, directed IWASRI
to carryout Groundwater Management (Recharge Potential and Governance) study,
under the PC-II (2009-13). The main objective of the study was to analyze the issue of
groundwater management and suggest appropriate and pragmatic policy options for
implementation by the government. Under the study, IWASRI published its first
report Irrigation System Issues and Groundwater Governance in 2011, addressing
the issues of canal irrigation management related to groundwater management. The
current report has further tried to provide innovative solutions for groundwater
management, for critical areas in IBIS, by addressing, irrigation demand and supply,
groundwater depth and quality, and changes in recharge sources over time.
The study concludes that adopting rational surface water management
approach will not only eliminate groundwater mining in overstressed areas; but will
also help minimize waterlogging and root zone salinity, especially in higher rainfall
areas and/or with more than required canal supplies. Efforts of the authors are highly
appreciated, which they deployed even with scarce available human and financial
resources.
(Engr. Akbar Ali Bajkani)
Director General, IWASRI
xii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The summary describes the study background, brief description of the tasks carried
out, issues and options for groundwater management in Pakistan, and the
recommendations arising out of the present work.
Background: Pakistan has an established system of water sharing and water rights for
agriculture in Indus Basin Irrigation System (IBIS), which has some aspects of good
practice, but this has remained essentially unchanged since the countrys birth. In the
past few decades, groundwater has been the single most important resource for
increasing agricultural production, particularly in the upper Indus Plain. This means,
with the passage of time, the sustainability of agriculture, especially in the Punjab
province is linked to the sustainability of groundwater resources, which is suffering
differently, i.e. at locations with waterlogging or with unprecedented mining of the
resource. Continuous improvement in the performance of irrigated agriculture can be
approached by revisiting policies on management and allocation of both the surface
water and groundwater, because provisions for increasing water supply to the canals
are limited.
In some of the areas of IBIS, groundwater pumping is higher than its recharge,
resulting in unprecedented groundwater depletion. Letting this mining continue, these
farmers will have to bear an irreversible loss due to increasing pumping costs and
groundwater quality deterioration, especially salt water up-coning in saline areas.
Analysis of groundwater depth and quality data is being routinely collected by
SCARPs Monitoring Organization (SMO) for the areas served by IBIS; and IWASRI
conducts in-depth GIS-based data analysis for identification and extent of areas with
varying salt contents and depths to groundwater. Under the Groundwater
Management (Recharge Potential and Governance) study, IWASRI has carried out
in-depth analysis of waterlogging and groundwater depletion issues, in consideration
of irrigation water demand and supply for various irrigation units, especially for the
provinces of Punjab and Sindh.
Groundwater Mining and Waterlogging Causes and Way Out:
According to depth to watertable (DTW) position in IBIS, for June 2011, 20%
irrigated area of Punjab province is facing groundwater depletion i.e. having DTW
more than 12m. On the other hand, 99.5% area in Lower Indus (Sindh & Balochistan)
falls within 4.5m depth, out of this 53.7% falls in waterlogged category i.e. within
1.5m, depth to groundwater.
In Sindh, the non-perennial canals are suffering the most from this twin
menace of waterlogging and salinity. These non-perennial areas receive more than
required supplies in the Kharif season, thus, the watertable rises significantly, which
also acts as secondary menace for sowing of Rabi crops, particularly the wheat. At the
onset of the Rabi season, fields are with standing water or more than the optimum
moisture contents for seed germination, also salinity rises towards the surface due to
bare land evaporation. Thus, many of the lands offer only one cropping. Rice Canal is
xiii

one of the prominent examples of such a phenomenon, where the watertable

fluctuates between 1-3 meters during Kharif and Rabi. This annual cycle of rise and
fall of watertable brings the salts to the upper soil strata
In Punjab, most of the depleted area falls within the lower and central parts of
the Bari Doab, i.e. 65.4% area of the Bari Doab was highly depleted (DTW > 12m) in
June 2012, whereas in Bahawalpur and Rechna Doabs, 10.9 and 7.8%, respectively,
was in depleted class. Further distribution of depleted areas in Bari Doab is towards
Sutlej River and towards the center of the Doab. In reality, groundwater is even
deeper in central part of the Doab, i.e. along the course of old Sukh-Beas River. Based
on groundwater levels of 2002 and 2012, it is estimated that 23.3 BCM (18.9 MAF)
volume of groundwater has been depleted from the aquifer under Bari Doab in this 10
years duration, which is equivalent to a groundwater mining of 2.33 BCM (1.89
MAF) per year.
There are various reasons for rapid groundwater depletion in the lower and
central parts of the Bari Doab, the most prominent is the re-routing of various
tributary flows of the Indus river system as a result of the IWT of 1960, and in return
due to non-availability of environmental flows in these rivers. The second major
reason is the continuation of chronic irrational distribution (one century old system,
designed in stages) of surface supplies amongst the irrigation units called canal
commands. And the third contributing factor is the increasing crop water demands
due to increasing cropping intensities, as a result of increasing population and ensuing
food demands. Thus, farmers in the area are constrained by water scarcity and
unprecedented groundwater depletion rates, resulting in intense competition between
different water users for this scarce water resource. Obviously, the poor are being
affected the most, because of increasing tubewell development and pumping costs,
creating socio-economic imbalance and environmental degradation. Especially,
threatening those farmers, where underlying groundwater is marginal or hazardous.
Thus, unprecedented groundwater depletion in the area is emerging as a new
challenge for water managers, farmers and other stakeholders in the irrigation sector,
particularly the policy makers.
The solution to rapid groundwater depletion in certain areas and simultaneous
waterlogging in some other areas lies in increasing the water use efficiency of the
IBIS. Moving towards this efficient food production will require more efficient
management and consumption of freshwater resources, employing the integrated
water resources management (IWRM) approach at national, provincial and canal
command level. This management will require better quantitative tools (modeling,
RS/GIS etc.) and understanding of irrigation water management, than are practiced
now in the country. Instead of a narrow focus on surface and groundwater in isolation,
rainfall should be taken as the ultimate source of water that can be managed together
with canal water. Surface water allocations to different irrigation units in IBIS, being
more than a century old, now demands canal supplies to be integrated with
groundwater resources and annual normal rainfall (being also the sources for
xiv

groundwater recharge), and a more robust conjunctive use of canal and ground water,
at least dictated by well-planned canal supplies, forcing farmers for groundwater
pumping to the tune where it avoids groundwater depletion and waterlogging. This is
particularly important, because the future of millions of poor farmers is linked to the
improvement in response reactions of the system, with the passage of time.
The factors to be integrated are: groundwater depth (specifically waterlogging
and groundwater mining) and quality, natural recharge from adjoining rivers, annual
normal rainfall patterns, variation in crop water demand, cropping pattern and
intensities, and revision of the century-old perennial and non-perennial allocations.
Particularly, farmers at tail-end of watercourse commands are getting far less than
their counterparts at head-ends, Therefore, Warabandi time (weekly watercourse
flow rotation in watercourse command) allocations amongst the farmers, at
watercourse level, need to be rationalized in head-tail end perspective for
consideration of seepage losses, along the watercourse length.
Now, it is well established that water re-allocation both locally (watercourse
level) and throughout the system as a whole, or at least on provincial level will be prerequisite for initiating any groundwater management activity. Re-distributing the
canal water, in relative proportion to the evapotranspiration demand, amongst various
irrigation units and further equitable distribution at farm level, will pave the way for
any best fit of restrictions (if needed) on groundwater pumping in highly depleted
areas. Adopting rational surface water management approach will lead to efficient
conjunctive use of canal and groundwater. This will not only eliminate groundwater
mining in overstressed areas, but will also help minimize waterlogging, especially in
higher rainfall areas or with higher canal supplies.
In IBIS, only canal water is managed by the Irrigation and Power Department (IPD)
of the respective provinces, ignoring the needs for groundwater management and
thereby its long-term sustainability. Canal water management too is based on century
old approach, where water demand was less by manifolds, and groundwater
contribution was negligible in irrigated areas. Although, contribution of groundwater
in meeting crop water requirement has surpassed canal water, no amendments have
been adopted in canal water management. Groundwater is only scantly studied by
various federal and provincial institutions regarding its quality, waterlogging and,
nowadays, depletion. The Canal and Drainage Act (1873) confers extensive powers
on the Provincial Government, acting through the Canal Officer of the IPD, in relation
to the control of surface irrigation, flood protection, and drainage. But, no such
powers or essence exists in IPD, whereby long-term sustainability of irrigated
agriculture can be assured, particularly regarding groundwater resources
sustainability.
Conclusions and Recommendations: Following are the specific conclusions and
recommendations of the study.
Legislation at national and provincial levels is the first and foremost
requirement for enhancing equity of surface and ground water supply and
xv

rationalizing the available water resources. The legislation would further pave
the way for groundwater management in critical areas, with the provision of
better governance environment;

Chronic perennial/non-perennial allocations being continued without any

logic, even after the improved water supply patterns with the operation of
Tarbela and Mangla reservoirs, need to be re-evaluated. Examples are: huge
canal supplies to Rice canal during Kharif, creating flooding conditions,
therefore, big loss to potential yields during Rabi; similarly, non-perennial
allocation to Mailsi canal and desiccation of adjoining Sutlej River is creating
groundwater mining there, and farmers are forced to pump saline groundwater,
with increasing salinity.

The allocation of river water amongst different canal commands in Punjab

province has no rationale. Fresh assessment of cropping patterns and
intensities, and the corresponding crop water requirement, along with existing
allocations, is strongly recommended for rationalizing canal water allocations.
For the purpose, a technical commission in each of the provinces should be
formulated with the mandate to finalize recommendations on canal command
basis keeping in view cropping pattern and intensities, potential
evapotranspiration and irrigation demand, groundwater depth and quality,
annual normal rainfall etc.

Based on the analysis presented in this report, it is strongly recommended that

(a) supplies to Upper Jhelum and Muzaffargarh canal commands be reduced
and (b) correspondingly, supplies to Pakpattan, Mailsi and Sidhnai commands
be increased.

Similarly, in Sindh province, a few canals, e.g. Rice and Kalri are being
supplied with much higher canal water, thus major parts of the command areas
remained flooded or waterlogged, just at the onset of Rabi season. The farmers
are unable to cultivate in Rabi, especially the wheat crop, resultantly, the
cropping intensities are much less than the actual potential.

Non-beneficial evaporation in Sindh, due to waterlogging conditions

prevailing over about 50% of the area is a major challenge in enhancing water
productivity in the province. This can be taken up by provision of reduced
irrigation supplies matching with demand and increased groundwater drainage
(for irrigation or otherwise), to provide cushion for storage of irrigation
leakages and excess rainfall. Thus, rainfall flooding as observed in 2011 on
left of Indus River in Sindh could be avoided. This groundwater buffer can be
very efficiently utilized by deep and shallow skimming wells, depending upon
the thickness of fresh groundwater.

Practical demonstration to the farmers regarding possibility of growing paddy

with less water and thereby provide optimum moisture content for Rabi crops,
especially the wheat crop is the need of the hour. This will help in changing
the mindset of the farmer regarding misconception of rice crop over irrigation.
xvi

Before moving towards farm level groundwater management, equity of

surface water availability should be ensured, especially at farm gate. In
watercourse commands, allocate less time at head and more towards tail reach,
thus, creating a sense of equal delivery of irrigation water at farm gate;

There is an urgent need to utilize recharge potential in river beds of Sutlej and
Sukh-Beas by diverting surplus supplies during the Kharif season. There
should be proper planning and implementation for utilizing such recharge
potential during wet years. For this purpose, provision of environmental flows
for eastern rivers under the umbrella of the IWT of 1960 with India may also
be taken up;

For improving groundwater situation in Punjab and increased provision of

demand based supply to the irrigation systems in Sindh, construction of mega
reservoirs should be the first priority for the country; and

In order to avoid non-reversible pollution and mining of groundwater

resources under Lahore, it is recommended that about 0.5 MAF surface water
may be allocated from Indus Basin Irrigation System, for water supply and
additional recharge to the aquifer under Lahore. Also, flat rate billing be
replaced with metered water supply. Otherwise, continuity of current situation
would prove to be big disaster, especially for future generations of this ever
expanding mega city.

It is expected that groundwater depletion situation in the lower and central

parts of the Bari doab would be reverted after rational allocation of surface water at
Punjab scale and diverting flood flows in to the Sukh-Beas channel for groundwater
recharge. Even if the aforementioned interventions could not improve water balance
in the area, then some holistic approaches might be needed. There can be many such
interventions, improving the water use efficiency i.e. distributary/minor and
watercourse improvement/lining, tunnel farming etc. As a last resort, controlling
cropping patterns and intensities according to the available water resources in the area
is recommended. Given the overall governance situation in the country, this is
considered to be the easily implementable groundwater governance option for
controlling the depleting groundwater levels in any area.

xvii

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Like all over the World, groundwater has become the most important source for
agricultural, domestic as well as industrial consumption, in Pakistan. It is the
groundwater that has contributed more than the surface water for the increased water
requirements almost in every water use sector in the last 30-40 years. Thus, the
sustainability of groundwater resources so for, has played the key role in overall
development of the country. It is a unique resource, widely available, providing
security against cyclical droughts and yet closely linked to surface water resources
and the hydrological cycle. Its reliable supply, good quality and suitable temperature,
relative turbidity and pollution free, minimal evaporation losses, and low cost of
development are attributes making groundwater more attractive. With rapid growth in
population, urbanization, industrialization and competition for economic
development, groundwater resource has become vulnerable to extreme depletion and
degradation. For an effective, efficient and sustainable groundwater resources
development and management, the planners and decision makers have future
challenges to assess the inextricable logical linkages between water policies and
ethical consideration. Groundwater being a hidden resource is often developed
without proper understanding of its occurrence in time and space; this is especially
true for developing countries where governments do not own this precious resource.
Thus, groundwater management on scientific lines under the auspices of the
governments is the key for sustainability of this vital resource.

1.1.

Background

Pakistan is an agrarian country where irrigation is used on 75% of agricultural

land, mainly in Indus Basin. Like many other developing countries in South Asia,
agriculture in Pakistan is heavily dependent on groundwater irrigation for
sustainability of current crop production levels. Because, canal irrigation systems do
not provide farmers with adequate water or enough control over irrigation deliveries,
majority of them have turned to groundwater as a sole or supplemental source of
irrigation. Sale and purchase of groundwater through informal water markets offer
other farmers the opportunity to use groundwater particularly by non-owners of
private tubewells. The factors affecting private tubewell development and the
emergence of groundwater markets are complex and interlinked (PIES, 2001)
including physical, economic and social factors. The increase in private tubewells has
increased the total water availability for crop production and also provided with on
demand control over irrigation supplies at farm level. This increased supplement to
canal water is at stake due to over development and quality deterioration in many of
the irrigated areas of Indus Basin, particularly the Punjab Province is facing
1

unprecedented groundwater depletion rates (NESPAK/SGI, 1991; PPSGDP, 2000;

Basharat, 2012; Basharat and Tariq, 2013. Shah (2006) said Sustaining the massive
welfare gains groundwater development has created without ruining the resource is a
key water challenge facing the world today.
The water stored in the aquifer can be compared to money kept in a current
account of bank. If you withdraw money at a faster rate than you deposit new money
you will eventually start having account-supply problems. Pumping water out of the
aquifer faster than it is replenished over the long-term causes similar problems. The
volume of groundwater in storage is decreasing in many areas of the country in
response to pumping. Groundwater depletion is primarily caused by sustained
groundwater pumping over and above the natural recharge. Some of the emerging
negative effects of groundwater depletion in water stressed areas of the Punjab are:
drying up of wells
deterioration of groundwater quality; and
increasing pumping costs
Human economic activities and population growth have led to a sharp
decrease in per capita water availability, as well as decrease in surface runoff and
lowering of groundwater level in many parts of the world. In Pakistan three water
reservoirs were constructed i.e. Tarbela, Mangla and Chashma with a total live
storage of 16.29 MAF. Due to silting up, their capacity has reduced to 11.47 MAF in
2010 and is estimated to further reduce to 10.70 MAF in year 2020 (PILDAT, 2011).
Also in Pakistan, canal irrigation is supply-driven with inadequate releases from
Tarbela, Mangla dams & Chashma reservoir to prevent fluctuations in natural river
flows. Canal water available to meet consumptive use requirements is the diversion
quantities reduced by conveyance and application efficiencies of about 46%. Major
portion of these losses joins the aquifer, which is developed by the users without any
management intervention by the government at local or basin scale. Much of our
irrigation infrastructure is lacking in proper repair and maintenance; also the system is
not financially sustainable. Water productivity is low as well, compared to other
countries; crop yields both per cubic meter and per hectare are low. All the
aforementioned facts demand innovative measures to augment and conserve our
already under stress water resources.
According to Pakistan National Water Policy Strategy of 2002, prepared by
Ministry of Water and Power, the surface water availability in Indus Basin varies
from 138 MAF to 145 MAF, while 3.8 MAF is available outside Indus Basin.
PILDAT (2011) has compared the water requirements in Pakistan for the year 2025
with that in 2003. Over the time an increase of 28%, 110% and 118% in the sectors of
i) Agriculture (at farm gate), ii) municipal and rural water supply, sanitation and
environment and iii) Industry respectively. Whereas, an over all increase 34.3 % in
this period was projected (PILDAT, 2011).

450

160

400

140

350

120

300

Annual Volume (MAF)

180

100

250
Live Storage (MAF)

80

200

Total Water Demand (MAF)

60

150

Surface and GW availability

(MAF)
Population (million)

40

100

2049

2047

2045

2043

2041

2039

2037

2035

2033

2031

2029

2027

2025

2023

2021

2019

0
2017

0
2015

50
2013

20
2011

Population (million)

The country is moving from a water-stressed region to a water-scarce region

and is continuously approaching the low level limits of its water resources. Present
per capita water availability has touched the figure of 1000 m3 per year in 2010 as
projected by Briscoe et al. (2005), due to gradual increase in population @2.03% per
annum (World Population Day, 2011). With this population growth rate, it takes about
34 years to double, thus causing additional stress on available water resources in the
country. Pakistan has the highest population growth rate in the world and each family
here in the country has 3.4 children on average. It is likely to double in the next 34
years, making Pakistan 4th most populous country of the world; whereas land area
will remain the same rather will be reduced due to residential plans. Irshad et al.
(2012) has projected water requirements for Pakistan as 141.6 MAF for the year 2030.
Based on this projected water requirement, population growth rate of 2.03% per
annum (World Population Day, 2011), Figure 1.1 shows trends of population growth,
total water demand, surface and groundwater availability (assuming that DiamerBhasha dam will be ready in 2021).

Year

Figure 1.1: Population growth, water availability and demand for Pakistan.

Knowledge of crop water requirement is necessary in planning and operating

an irrigation system as large as IBIS. With respect to the agriculture sector, having
only meager options for expansion in land or water resources in the country, there is a
need to focus on increasing the efficiency of existing land and water resources based
on rational allocation of scarce water resources. Within this context, the report
examines how the ways of sharing and using irrigation remained the same while the
realities of water availability, groundwater regime and river flow conditions have
changed, causing huge strain on the groundwater conditions in some of the areas in
3

Punjab. Many of the countries all over the world are moving towards groundwater
management. But the groundwater management principles cannot be universally
applicable, due to site specific surface water management infrastructure and
regulation, hydrogeologic conditions and socio-economic setup. How we can pave the
way towards pragmatic groundwater management in IBIS is not an easy question to
answer. Therefore, Issues and possibilities of groundwater management in IBIS, with
particular emphasis on its sustainability, are the ultimate objective of this report.

1.2.

Indus Basin Irrigation System and its Design

Pakistan consists of four provinces and measures about 79.6 million hectares,
as given in Table 1.1 and shown in Figure 1.2, out of the total, 22 million ha are
cultivated. Out of this cultivated area 19.6 million ha are irrigated (Agricultural
Statistics of Pakistan, 20092010). Major crops are wheat, rice, cotton, maize and
sugarcane, which together occupy about 63% of the total cropped area (Alam et al.,
2000). The irrigation system was initially designed with the objective of bringing as
much land under canal command as possible, with the objective of providing
settlement opportunities. The designed annual cropping intensities were generally
kept low, at 60 to 80 percent (Jurriens and Mollinga 1996). According to the latest
agro-economic farm survey carried out in 2010-11, encompassing 200 watercourses
spread all over the IBIS, the cropping intensities increased from 129% in 1988 to
172% in 2011 (Mirza and Latif, 2012). This is due to gradual increase in population
@2.03% per annum (World Population Day, 2011).
Table 1.1: Geographical areas of Pakistan (Source: ECPAK, 2011).
Province/Area
Pakistan
(Including GB & AJK)
AJK
GB
FATA
KP
Islamabad
Punjab
Sindh
BTN
Pakistan
(Excluding GB & AJK)

Area

(Sq. Km)
881,891

(Mha)
88.19

(Sq. mi)
340,645

(Mac)
217.90

100

13,297
72,496
27,220
74,521
906
205,347
140,914
347,190
796,094

1.33
7.25
2.72
7.45
0.09
20.54
14.09
34.72
79.61

5,136
28,003
10,514
28,785
350
79,319
54,429
134,108
307,505

3.29
17.91
6.72
18.41
0.22
50.74
34.82
85.79
196.70

1.5
8.2
3.1
8.4
0.1
23.3
16.0
39.4
90.3

IBIS consists of Indus River; itself falling ultimately to Arabian Sea, whereas
its other tributaries are Kabul, Jhelum, Chenab, Ravi, Beas and Sutlej (for the later
three rivers, India has full rights under IWT of 1960). For river water storage and
4

diversion, the IBIS comprises of three major reservoirs, 16 barrages, 2 head-works, 2

siphons across major rivers, 12 inter river link canals, 44 canal irrigation systems,
called canal commands (23 in Punjab, 14 in Sindh, 5 in KP and 2 in Baluchistan). The
aggregate length of the canal water distribution system (main, distributary and minor
channels) is about 56,073 km, and more than 107,000 km of watercourses, conveying
water to farmers fields. Irrigated areas under IBIS are shown in Figure 1.3.
MAP OF PAKISTAN
GEOGRAPHICAL AREA OF PAKISTAN

72,496
8.2%

13,297
1.5%

906
0.1%
205,347
23.3%

27,220
3.1%

140,910
16%
347,190
39.4%
74,521
8.4%

Islamabad
BTN

Punjab
FATA

Sindh
GB

KPK
AJK

Figure 1.2 Geographical area and population distribution in Pakistan (Source:

ECPAK, 2011).
Table 1.2 shows the share of each province from the available river flows in
IBIS as agreed upon in the Water Apportionment Accord of 1991. Area irrigated from
canal and wells is also given in Table 1.2. MacDonald et al. (1990) estimated that
79% of the area in Punjab and 29% of that of Sindh have groundwater that is suitable
for irrigation. Therefore, keeping in view increasing water demands, varying
groundwater depth and quality in irrigated areas, conjunctive use of surface and
subsurface reservoirs, needs to be pursued much more systematically than in the past.
Mara and Duloy (1984) suggested that large gains in agricultural production and
employment are possible, given more efficient policies as well as allocation and
management of surface and ground water resources.
Table 1.2: Surface water allocation in WAA of 1991 and irrigated area on provincial
basis.
Water Allocation (MAF) Irrigated area
(Mha)
Province
Kharif Rabi Total
Punjab
37.07 18.87 55.94
15.09
Sindh
33.94 14.82 48.76
5.18
KP
5.28
3.50
8.78
0.85
Baluchistan 2.85
1.02
3.87
0.399
Total 79.14 38.21 117.35
21.52

Figure 1.3: Irrigated Areas of the Indus Basin Irrigation System.

Water is delivered to farms through outlets (mogas). Within a watercourse
command (an area ranging from 200 to 700 acres), farmers receive water in
proportion to their land holding. The entire discharge of the watercourse is given to
one farm for a specified period, on a seven day rotation schedule called warabandi.
Due to its age, overuse, and deferred maintenance, the delivery efficiency of the canal
system is low. On average, delivery efficiency ranges from 35 to 50% from the canal
head to the root zone, with maximum losses occurring in the watercourses. As a
result, less water is available for crops, and problems of waterlogging and salinity
have been the result. According to the 2011 data collected by SMO, it is estimated
that 22.8% of irrigated land on the Indus plain is affected by waterlogging and
salinization.
The surface irrigation supply system is extremely rigid, providing water on a
rotational (warabandi) basis and limiting intensive cultivation to 75%. As a result,
under-irrigation is quite normal. Nonetheless, farmers tend to make rational choices at
the farm level, opting for allocation efficiency across crops, rather than yield
enhancements. At the field level, there is considerable scope for improving irrigation
methods. Improved irrigation notwithstanding, the timeliness of water supply is a key
to maximizing efficiency. Water should be available to farmers during sowing,
sprouting, and grain development. The Warabandi system precludes such timeliness.
6

Over time, the canal irrigation system has caused the watertable in the Indus basin to
rise by an average of 15m. This has raised concern over waterlogging. Waterlogging
is a condition whereby the soil is saturated to the extent that common plants fail to
grow, or their growth and yields are adversely affected by poor aeration of the root
zone. There has also been great concern over the salt balance in the Indus basin. In the
absence of good drainage, surface evaporation occurs and results in salt deposition. In
fact, some 10.8 million tons of salt are added to the system each year.
However, as long as they remain below the reach of crops and trees, they do
little harm. When salts are mobilized, either through a rising watertable (waterlogged
areas of Sindh) or pumping of saline groundwater (saline areas of Punjab), they
become a problem. The scope for finding additional water in Pakistan is limited.
Surface water supplies are fixed, whereas additional groundwater potential has been
almost fully utilized, where it was available. In other words, presently available
groundwater potential lies in areas where it cannot be utilized without proper drainage
as pre-condition. Groundwater resources have been heavily exploited in Pakistan in
the past three to four decades. Groundwater has made increased acreage under crops
and higher cropping intensities possible. The exploitation of groundwater can be
attributed to the inadequacy of canal water resources, as well as the variability of
rainfall and high runoff during the monsoon season. About one million tube wells are
located throughout various irrigated parts of the country. These tubewells pump about
65 BCM groundwater, annually.

1.3.

Water Resources

The main source of water in Pakistan is the Indus River system. The system resembles
a funnel, with a number of water sources at the top that converge into a single river
that flows into the Arabian Sea, east of Karachi. The average annual inflow of the
western and eastern rivers and their tributaries at the rim stations is 180 BCM (146.01
million acre-feet, MAF). The Indus River and its five major tributaries form one of
the worlds largest contiguous irrigation systems. The Indus basin irrigation network
in Pakistan stretches over an area of 22.14 Mha. Based on the Indus Water Treaty
(IWT) of 1960 with India, Pakistan was allocated the flow of three western rivers
(Indus, Jhelum and Chenab), with occasional spills from the Sutlej and Ravi rivers.
The network has three major reservoirs: the Tarbela, Mangla, and Chashma. It also
includes 19 barrages or headworks, 12 link canals, 43 canal commands, and over
107,000 watercourses. Irrigation developments over the past 150 years have resulted
in very large diversions of water. The three reservoirs are losing their storage capacity
due to sedimentation.
The flows of the Indus and its tributaries vary widely from year to year and
within the year, as given in Table 1.3, for different periods. Post Tarbela (1976-77 to
2008-09) annual average inflows at Rim Stations for eastern and western rivers, and
total flows are also given in Tables 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6, respectively (source: H&WM).
7

The construction of two mega storages (Mangla and Tarbela) and inter river link
canals compensated the allocation of three eastern rivers to India, as result of IWT of
1960. It also helped the operation of the IBIS in an integrated and improved manner,
with greater control and enhanced river water utilization. Consequently, the canal
head withdrawals in the Indus increased to 124.6 BCM just after the Tarbela Dam and
reached the peak of 133.2 BCM in 1979. Thereafter, canal withdrawals then stagnated
at this level up to 1989-90 and have now declined to around 125.8 BCM due to
reduction in reservoir capacities caused by progressive sedimentation.

Table 1.3: Annual average flows (BCM) to Indus River and its tributaries (Ahmad et
al., 2012)
Annual average flows (BCM)
1922-61 1985-95 2000-09
Kabul
32.1
28.9
23.3
Indus
114.7
77.3
100.3
Jhelum
28.4
32.8
22.8
Chenab
32.1
33.9
27.8
1
Ravi
8.6
6.2
1.4
1
Sutlej
17.3
4.4
0.5
Annual total 233.1
183.5
176.0
River

Table 1.4: Western River Inflows (BCM) at Rim Station (1976-77 to 2008-09).
Indus at Kalabagh Jhelum at Mangla Chenab at Marala
Kharif Rabi Total Kharif Rabi Total Kharif Rabi Total Kharif
Average 92.10 18.85 110.94 21.55 6.39 27.95 26.59 5.87 32.48 140.25
Maximum 114.89 25.77 138.38 31.06 9.49 39.47 33.87 8.09 40.32 174.58
Minimum 68.37 13.15 81.88 10.11 2.81 14.62 18.38 3.37 23.31 98.50
Scale

Total
Rabi Total
31.12 171.36
43.35 212.29
20.43 119.81

Table 1.5: Eastern Rivers Inflows (BCM) at Rim Station (1976-77 to 2008-09).
Ravi at Balloki
Sutlej at Sulemanki
Total
Kharif Rabi Total Kharif Rabi Total Kharif Rabi Total
Average
4.13 1.21 5.34
2.60 0.63 3.24
6.75 1.84 8.59
Maximum 12.15 3.42 13.63 11.83 4.42 13.10 20.74 7.80 24.63
Minimum
0.48 0.11 0.83
0.00 0.01 0.02
0.48 0.20 1.02
Scale

Under the IWT of 1960, India was entitled to the exclusive use of three eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas and Sutlej),
while the western rivers (Chenab, Jhelum and Indus) were earmarked for use by Pakistan. A system consisting of 2
storage dams, 8 inter-river link canals and 6 barrages was constructed as replacement works under the Treaty to
transfer water from western rivers to canal systems, which were dependent on the eastern rivers.

Table 1.6: Annual Inflows (BCM) to IBIS at Rim Stations (1976-77 to 2008-09).
Scale
Average
Maximum
Minimum

Kharif
147.00
195.32
98.98

Rabi
32.96
51.14
20.62

Total
179.95
236.92
120.84

Pakistans economy largely depends on agriculture. Its 22 million hectares land is

irrigated by canals and tubewells. Average annual water availability for canal
withdrawals had progressively increased from 67 to 105 MAF between the years 1947
and 1976 to meet ever growing demand. This increase was achieved with the
construction of water reservoirs at Chashma, Mangla and Tarbela (total live storage
=16.29 MAF). After completion of Tarbela reservoir, in 1976 there has not been any
further increase in canal withdrawals although the population has continued to grow.
On the other hand gross capacity of Tarbela, Mangla and Chashma reservoirs has
depleted by 4.37 MAF (28%) by the year 2012. The process of sedimentation will
continue and it is estimated that the gross storage loss would reach to 5.82 MAF
(37%) by 2025 (Ahmad, 2012). In the current scenario (post Tarbela), annual average
(1976-77 to 2008-09) inflow to IBIS at Rim Stations is about 147.0 MAF. Annual
average canal withdrawals from 1976-77 to 2006-07 are 101.5 MAF (Table 1.7). The
major part of this difference goes to Arabia Sea, without any management, and minor
part can be attributed to river losses, which too are variable along different reaches
due to difference in river water surface and surrounding groundwater elevations. The
releases below Kotri barrage are highly uncertain (Figure 1.4), depending upon
wetness or dryness of monsoon season. Therefore, the flow regime in the Indus River
downstream of the Kotri Barrage during the post-Tarbela period had not been
sufficient for environmental sustainability in the lower reaches of the river and the
delta.
Table 1.7: Annual canal withdrawals (MAF) for post-Tarbela period (1976-77 to
2006-07 (data source: H&WM, WAPDA).
7677

7778

7879

7980

8081

8182

8283

8384

8485

8586

8687

8788

8889

8990

9091

9192

96.8 102.7 96.7 105.1 107.4 101.9 103.3 100.5 101.1 96.4 105.9 109.1 105.1 102.1 109.8 109.5
9293

9394

9495

9596

9697

9798

9899

9900

0001

0102

0203

0304

0405

0506

0607

100.9 107.6 94.5 102.4 111.1 103.1 110.7 106.7 86.2 79.6 93.4 103.1 87.8 106.5 99.7

100.0

91.8

Annual flows below Kotri (MAF)

90.0

81.5

80.6

80.0
70.0

69.1

Annual average flows (1976-2011)= 30.70 MAF

62.8

60.0
45.9

50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0

30.4 29.8

33.8

54.5

53.3

52.9

45.4

42.3

35.2
29.6

26.9

20.1

29.1
20.8

17.5 17.2
9.7

11.0

20.2
8.8

24.5
21.7
15.8

1.92.4 0.3
0.8

0.0

8.4
5.4
4.1

Years

Figure 1.4: Annual average escapages below Kotri based on 1976-2000 data are 37.8
MAF and based on 1976-2011 are 30.70 MAF.
The impact of expected climate change on water resources must also be kept in mind.
Therefore, the context of new infrastructure that has to be designed to respond or
adapt to an increasing demand for water for drinking, sanitation purposes, and power
generation. For example, consider Karachi, the only major coastal city in Pakistan,
and secondly, the Lahore, being capital of Punjab is expanding rapidly. Obviously,
this is leading to increased water demands and stress on available fresh groundwater
resources is increasing. The salinity in Karachi and the Indus delta is already very
high. In 1991, 45% of the rural population and 80% of the urban population had
access to safe drinking water. In the future, there is likely to be decreased access for
both rural and urban populations, because rates of urbanization exceed the capability
of services to cope with the growing demand. At the same time, quality of
groundwater is deteriorating. Increasing water deficits will cause inter-sectorial
competition and tensions among productive sectors. Higher pricing or rationing
options are likely to generate cost increases or production losses. Such problems are
likely to be exacerbated by provincial water allocation decisions, which will be
politically driven and thus not lead to optimal water utilization.

1.4.

Groundwater in General

Groundwater is the water located beneath the earth's surface in soil pore spaces and in
the fractures of rock formations. A unit of rock or an unconsolidated deposit is called
an aquifer when it can yield a usable quantity of water. The depth at which soil pore
spaces or fractures and voids in rock become completely saturated with water is called
the watertable. Groundwater is recharged from, and eventually flows to the surface
naturally; natural discharge often occurs at springs and seeps, and can from oases or
10

wetlands. Also, groundwater is often withdrawn for agricultural, municipal and

industrial use by constructing and operating extraction wells. Sustainable groundwater
resources management will require available surface water allocation and aquifer
management plans that clearly integrate groundwater and surface water systems. This
will require more sensitive and accurate surface water availability, and aquifer water
balance, to develop management plans which recognize the long timeframes of
aquifer and surface water interaction.
For proper groundwater management in the country, it is a pre-requisite to
acknowledge the importance of groundwater and its role in the current scenario of
overall water cycle in Pakistan. Important components of this strategy can be to:

1.5.

Improve our knowledge of groundwater and surface water connectivity, with

significantly connected irrigation systems (as the IBIS is often called the
biggest contiguous system in the world) to be managed as one integrated
resource;
Complete the return of currently over-allocated or overused irrigation systems
to environmentally sustainable levels of recharge and extraction rates; and
Improve understanding of sustainable extraction rates and regimes, and develop
common approaches to achieving sustainability.

Changing Groundwater Regime in Pakistan

Currently, surface water in Pakistan is managed at federal and provincial scales,

leaving groundwater at sole discretion of end users. Keeping in view the increasing
water demands, especially the groundwater, sustainable management of groundwater
resources is imperative to the agricultural, industrial, urban, rural and environmental
viability of the country. Such management requires not only a robust scientific basis
but also ongoing monitoring and re-assessment of surface water allocations to
different irrigation systems, water levels, and groundwater quality. This re-assessment
can point out any flaws in current water management approaches, which are based on
more than century old status and knowledge of the irrigation system.
The cropping intensity was 102.8, 110.5 and 121.7% during 1960, 1972 and
1980, respectively (Ahmad, 1995), and now operating at about 172% (Mirza and
Latif, 2012) and even higher in certain areas. As a result, groundwater mining due to
higher abstraction rates as compared to the corresponding recharge is well reported in
the literature (NESPAK/SGI, 1991; Steenbergen and Olienmans, 1997; Basharat and
Tariq, 2013a; Cheema et al., 2013). It means the underground reservoir that was
recharged by the newly built irrigation system with low cropping intensities is now
being overexploited due to increased cropping intensity, as shown in Figure 1.5, for
LBDC command. The average rate of groundwater rise was 23.5 cm/year for these six
observation wells. The period from 1987 to 2008 indicates a depletion rate of 31.4
cm/year, i.e. an even faster depletion than its aforementioned rise. With dramatic
increase in the intensity of groundwater exploitation in the last three decades, the
11

policy landscape for Pakistan has changed i.e. the main policy issues now relate to
environmental sustainability and welfare (Steenbergen and Olienmans, 1997). Thus,
it is important to avoid declining groundwater tables and deteriorating groundwater
quality in fresh groundwater areas, and also to ensure equal access to this increasingly
important natural resource.
The gravity of drop in aquifer levels, as seen presently in some of the canal
commands in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtoonkhwah (KP) has proved that irrigators are
now facing increased cost of pumping and in some areas, have to upgrade the
pumping plant to cope with higher lifts. The time when groundwater may become out
of reach of small/poor farmers is fast approaching. According to Punjab Private
Sector Groundwater Development Project (PPSGDP, 2000), the areas with deeper
groundwater levels are generally located in tail reaches of the canal system. Basharat
and Tariq (2013) proved that towards tail ends there is relatively increasing shortfall
between crop water requirement and irrigation water supply in comparison to head
reaches. The reason being that spatial climate variability within the irrigation system
in the Indus basin has created differential variations in rainfall and as a result, in
irrigation water demand. Basharat and Ali (2012) pointed out a depletion rate of 0.55
m per year for the lower part of Bari Doab in contrary to stable groundwater levels in
the upper part. Shah (2006) mentioned this as a key challenge by saying sustaining
the massive welfare gains, groundwater development has created without ruining the
resource is a key water challenge facing the world today. Thus, the policy landscape
for Pakistan has changed, i.e. the main policy issue is to ensure equal access to this
increasingly important natural resource.

180
rise @ cm/yr
170

Groundwater elevation (m)

19.5
32.9

fall @ cm/yr

CL_VIII/2

14.3
27.1

CL_VIII/4

160
CL_XII/4

26.4

150

35.1
CL_XVII/2

140
130

13.7

59.4

22.4

26.2
25.9

25.7

NPLX/15

NPLX/17

average @ 23.5 aveergae @31.4

120
1910

1930

1950

1970

1990

2010

One centuray
Figure 1.5: Changing groundwater levels in LBDC command, in response to irrigation
inception and current over pumping (Basharat and Tariq, 2013a).
12

1.6.

Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM)

Generally groundwater potential for irrigation use in IBIS diminishes over the
alluvial aquifers in downstream direction. The reasons are two fold, i.e. either the
groundwater is highly mineralized for use or the depth to groundwater increases from
head to tail of canal commands. On the other hand, demand for supplemental
irrigation supplies increases towards south in downstream direction of canal systems
in IBIS. The reason being that climate becomes more arid in this direction. Although
solar radiation, wind and temperature, all affect evapotranspiration demand, rainfall is
often the most important determinant of irrigation demand. Mean annual precipitation
ranges from about 100 mm in parts of Lower Indus Plain to over 1000 mm near the
foothills in the Upper Indus Plain (Figure 1.6). On the other hand, lake evaporation
increases in north-south direction from 1270 mm at Peshawar to 2800 mm at Thatta
(Ahmad, 1982).
Investments to strengthen institutional capacity are critical for improving
governance. Groundwater is a highly decentralized resource often developed by
private initiative, thus its management and protection will not be effective without
social (user and polluter) participation. But, both Federal and Provincial governments
has to play a central role as resource guardian.

Figure 1.6: Variation of annual normal rainfall in Pakistan (PMD, 2010).

Economically efficient food production will require more efficient
management and consumption of freshwater resources employing IWRM principle at
13

national, provincial and canal command level. That management will require better
quantitative tools and understandings than are practiced now. Quantification of water
demand and supply requires tools that determine the spatial structure of water
requirement and availability, especially groundwater over large areas. These tools are
currently available for handling and analyzing spatial data. Thinking differently about
water is essential, instead of a narrow focus on surface and groundwater in isolation,
view rain as the ultimate source of water that can be managed together with canal
water for most optimal production levels at the system level. This is vital for food
security, environmental sustainability, minimizing extra energy consumption on
groundwater pumping from deeper depths and poverty alleviation, particularly the
condition of millions of poor is linked to the improvement in response reactions of the
system with passage of time. In this regard IWMI and Global Water Partnership
(2005) has very rightly concluded that by considering groundwater availability and
quality when allocating surface water, water managers could improve the equity,
sustainability and productivity of irrigated systems. Basharat (2011) examined
critically, all the irrigation system operation and management issues in IBIS, which
have severely caused inequity in groundwater demand and supply, at the farm level.

14

CDAPTER - 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
By 2030, the world economy is projected to double, and the world population is
expected to increase by one-third (Gurria 2009). To feed these people, crop
production should be increased by 33%. This demand will increase the agricultural
sectors pressure on water resources. To support the changing lifestyle of people,
pressure on water resources from energy production and industries will also increase.
The pressure on water resources is exacerbated by the continued deterioration of
freshwater quality. The pollution of water from both agricultural fields and industrial
areas also affects water resources. Climate change is expected to worsen the problem
of water availability. Many countries or regions are facing increasing competition for
water resources among domestic, industrial, and agricultural usesor between users
and environmental needs. The agricultural sector needs particular attention, as it
accounts for approximately 70% of the water used worldwide, whereas in Pakistan it
accounts for about 97%.
Overexploitation of groundwater has been reported in many parts of the world.
For example, the water level of the aquifers in India has been receding (Chawla et al.
2010). Las Vegas, Beijing, Bangkok and Manila are all suffering from severe water
shortages because of the overexploitation of groundwater at different rates (World
Water Day, 1998). Some parts of Bangladesh are experiencing a similar problem. For
example, in Dhaka city, over-extraction has caused the watertable to fall by as much
as 40 m in some places (Sarkar and Ali 2009). In most parts of the country, farmers
have been forced to replace their suction mode pumps with submersible pumps
because of the continuous decline in groundwater levels. Over-extraction issues are
also reported for some parts of Sri Lanka (Villholth and Rajasooriyar 2010), China
(Yin et al. 2011), Pakistan (Qureshi et al. 2010), and Spain (Molina et al. 2011).
According to Molden et al. (2010), there is a considerable scope for improving
water productivity of crop, livestock and fisheries at field through to basin scale.
Deficit irrigation is one of the practices used to achieve increased production; others
include water harvesting, supplemental irrigation, precision irrigation techniques and
soil-water conservation practices. Authors further claim that maximum improvement
is possible in areas of physical water scarcity where competition for water is high,
such as falling groundwater tables, and river desiccation. Geerts and Raes (2009)
confirm that deficit irrigation is successful in increasing water productivity for various
crops without causing severe yield reductions. The Indus Basin Irrigation System
(IBIS) is already designed on the concept of deficit irrigation. This deficit is met by
groundwater pumping by farmers, as and when required due to deficit in canal
supplies, especially in Punjab where groundwater is mostly fresh, however, marginal
to hazardous in areas away from the rivers is also common. Population growth is
particularly high in Pakistan (2.03% per annum, World Population Day, 2011). This
15

means that the country has an additional challenge of increasing crop production for
expected increase in population.

2.1.

Irrigation System Performance Assessment

In Pakistan, the water allowance within any canal command is based on

achieving equity in conveying canal water, but difference in crop water requirement
along with groundwater availability and rainfall variation has not been considered in
irrigation system design. Furthermore, the recharge to groundwater varies across any
canal command due to proximity difference to line sources of recharge such as main
canals and the rivers. According to Basharat (2012), many researchers and engineers
(Abernethy, 1986; Oad & McCornick, 1989; Bos & Nugteren, 1990; Molden & Gates,
1990; Murray Rust & Snellen, 1993; Merrey et al. 1994; Bos, 1997; Malano &
Burton, 2001 and Bos et al., 2005) have tried to devise performance indicators to
permit better comparison of irrigation systems with respect to the intended objectives.
To account for water use from both surface and groundwater, various new irrigation
performance indicators have also been developed e.g. depleted fraction by Molden et
al. (1998). Ahmad et al. (2009) has concluded through remote sensing analysis of
actual evapotranspiration (ETa) in Rechna Doab Irrigation System in Punjab,
Pakistan, that the adequacy and reliability of combined surface water and
groundwater deliveries decline towards the tails of the canal and towards the central
and downstream parts of the Doab. Accordingly, the authors have suggested
enhancing the overall system productivity through changed water allocation for long
term perspectives. A good indicator points out what current performance of the
irrigation system is, and what further management measures need to be adopted to
improve it further. There can be many such parameters, for example, irrigation system
can be judged on the basis of the following indicators, i.e.:
The actual volume of water delivered, VA, determined from monitoring data of
actual flows;
The Volume that irrigation operators intend to supply, VI , determined from
irrigation allocations; and
The volume of water required for irrigation i.e. irrigation demand, VR,
determined from actual crop water requirement of the area.
The three terms defined above are related as shown below (Clemmens and Bos,
1990);
(2.1)

The ratio VI/VR is a measure of how well the intended operation matches with
the crop water requirement. The ratio VA/VI is a measure of the irrigation systems
performance according to the designed operations. The first term VA/VR is a measure
of overall irrigation system performance i.e. the actual volume delivered divided by
16

the required. The term is able to differentiate the relative amount of extra (or
insufficient) water delivered. Therefore, the IBIS needs to be re-assessed, thus,
highlighting where there is more irrigation deficit and where less.
If the groundwater depletion is allowed to continue as such, the result could be
a serious threat to the ecology and sustainability of current production levels, which is
vital for the nations food security. Therefore, necessary measures should be taken to
sustain water resources and thereby agricultural production. Demand-side
management of water and the development of alternative surface water sources seem
to be viable strategies for the area. These strategies could be employed to reduce
pressure on groundwater and thus maintain the sustainability of the resource.

2.2.

International Experiences in Groundwater Management

Groundwater depletion is a global issue in general, due to its rapid development for
agricultural and municipal consumptions. However, the severity of the situation is not
the same everywhere; rather the most populous areas are severely affected by
groundwater depletion due to increasing demands on the groundwater resources.
Across the world, human civilizations depend largely on tapping vast groundwater
reservoirs, which have been stored for up to thousands of years in sand, clay and rock
deep underground. These massive aquifers which in some cases stretch across
multiple states and country borders provide water for drinking and crop irrigation,
as well as to support ecosystems such as forests and fisheries.
Yet in most of the worlds major agricultural regions, including the Central Valley in
California, the Nile delta region of Egypt, and the Indus and Upper Ganges in
Pakistan and India, groundwater demand exceeds their natural recharge. This
overuse is leading to decreased groundwater availability for both drinking water and
growing food, says Tom Gleeson, a hydrogeologist at McGill University in
Montreal, Quebec (Figure 2.1). But Gleeson adds that there is at least one significant
source of hope. As much as 99% of the fresh, unfrozen water on the planet is
groundwater. Its this huge reservoir that we have the potential to manage
sustainably, he says. If we choose to. Already, different countries and regions tried
to manage groundwater in different ways, depending upon their capacity and severity
of the situation, as discussed in the following sections.

17

Figure 2.1: Degree to which aquifers important for farming are under stress (Gleeson
et al. 2012).
2.2.1. India
Groundwater and its proper use assume great significance for a country like India.
India being a big country is facing different challenges in different areas, so the
government has area specific approaches, suitable to the local conditions.
The fall in watertable in Indian Punjab has been also a serious issue.
According to Singh (2009) one of the main reasons for it has been the early
transplanting of rice (before mid-June), which means severe withdrawal of
groundwater, as the monsoon is still far away, temperatures are very high and evapotranspiration rate is maximum. While an array of interventions are likely to be needed
in the longer run to reduce groundwater use to sustainable limits, certain technical
demand-management interventions related to paddy-rice cultivation (far-and-away the
largest consumer of groundwater resources) were identified in India and that were
implemented immediately to good effect. In 2008, a state government ordinance was
issued prohibiting transplanting of paddy rice until June 10the onset of monsoonal
rain and 3540 days later than normal. Agronomists identified that evaporation rates
from paddy during this period were very high and there was potential for making real
water savings by eliminating essentially non-beneficial evaporation totaling more than
90mm. While this change did not necessarily impact on crop yields, it presented some
complications for farmers in terms of labor availability for planting seedlings. Thus,
Indian Punjab government checked groundwater depletion by imposing the Punjab
preservation of sub-soil water Act, 2009, and scanty measures for improving the
water use efficiency and allocation of surface water to different regions in the state
had been the main causes.
On the initiative of the Punjab State Farmers Commission, The Punjab
Preservation of Sub Soil Water Act (not to sow paddy nursery before May 10 and
not to transplant paddy before June 10) was promulgated as an Ordinance in 2008 and
18

encouraged by the response, it has been changed into an Act in March 2009.
According to Singh (2009), based on time series and experimental data on
transplanting pattern, water requirements of rice, rainfall, monsoon recharge,
groundwater behavior and rice area, it was estimated that the fall in watertable can be
checked by about 30 cm, which is about 65 per cent of the long-term falling rate, by
delaying the transplanting with the effective implementation of the Act.
The expected water resource saving was equivalent to 5065 percent of the
groundwater overdraft and that of electrical energy statewide amounted to 175 million
kWh. The measure was highly successful because a) there was limited farmer
resistance because yields were not negatively impacted; b) compliance was more than
95 percent because any violations were highly visible and severely sanctioned (fine of
$200/ha plus uprooting of crop); and c) once a critical mass agreed to delay
transplanting, farmers who did not comply also faced an increased threat of pest
infestation. Additional measures also were considered such as laser-leveling of fields,
soil-moisture based irrigation timing for winter wheat, and shorter-duration rice
varieties (with 15 days less gestation). These measures were all aimed at increasing
crop-water productivity and reducing non-beneficial evaporation so as to eliminate the
current groundwater irrigation overdraft.
Legislation: In its effort to control and regulate the development of groundwater,
India started its efforts since 1970 in the form of Model Bill. The Indian constitution
provision stipulates water as a state subject. Persuasion is being made with state
governments/union territories (UTs) for inclusion of roof-top rainwater harvesting in
building bye-laws, also nine states have already made it mandatory for special
category of buildings. In two states, namely Gujarat and Maharashtra, the bill has
been passed but not enacted. Action on the model bill has been initiated in 16
states/UTs. In urban areas, the Government of India has amended building bye-laws
and made rainwater harvesting, as a means of artificial recharge, mandatory. So far,
Tamil Nadu, Delhi, Haryana have taken action. Other states are in the process of
amending the building bye-laws to make rainwater harvesting mandatory in the
special class of buildings (Mehta 2006 and Romani 2006).
Many states in India have yet to legislate on the regulation and management of
groundwater. The few states that have legislation in this area, have done so, by
adopting (with some modifications) the model groundwater bill. The basic scheme of
the model bill is to provide for the establishment of a groundwater authority under the
direct control of the government. The authority is given the right to notify areas where
it is deemed necessary to regulate the use of groundwater. The final decision is taken
by the respective state government. Wells need to be registered even in non-notified
areas. Decisions of the authority in granting or denying permits are based on a number
of factors which include technical factors such as the availability of groundwater, the
quantity and quality of water to be drawn and the spacing between groundwater
structures. The states that have adopted legislation that specifically focuses on
groundwater include Goa, Himachal Pradesh, Kerala, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal.
19

They differ in their coverage since some apply only to notified areas while other apply
to all groundwater (Philippe, 2010). Central Groundwater Board (CGWB) has been
established in India since 1997, in order to cope with the situation of alarming
groundwater decline. The main object of constitution of CGWB is the urgent need for
regulating the indiscriminate boring and withdrawal of groundwater in the country.
No groundwater development is done without prior approval of CGWB. In case of
violations, the state governments have been advised to seal the tubewell or even seize
the drilling equipment.
Recharging efforts: The first line of defense is to augment the available
groundwater. Experience of many NGOs as well as pilot studies on artificial recharge
at the behest of the Indian CGWB have shown positive results (Government of India,
2007). In an effort to counter the falling watertables, Indias CGWB developed a
national blueprint for groundwater recharge in the country which aims at recharging
surplus runoff of about 36.4 BCM (29.5 MAF) in an area of about 450,000 sq km
identified in various parts of the country experiencing a sharp decline in groundwater
levels (Villholth, 2006).
Concern regarding the looming crisis has been mounting in the government,
and in 2005 the Planning Commission constituted an expert group to review the issue
of groundwater management and suggest appropriate policy directions (Government
of India, 2007). The World Banks Water Resources Assistance Strategy for India
(World Bank, 2005) also emphasized groundwater overexploitation as a critical water
sector challenge for India, and advocated developing pragmatic solutions instead of
continuing the failed command and control approaches. CGWB has encouraged
constructing cost efficient structures to a number of individuals eager to take up
rainwater harvesting to arrest the declining groundwater levels.
In Delhi, the depth to bed rock ranges from 25 to 42 m at most of the places
whereas at very few places, it goes up to 145 m, so the aquifer is shallow. Therefore,
with the rapid population growth, the groundwater supplies are not sustainable.
Therefore, though Delhi receives normal rainfall of 611.8mm in 27 rainy days, most
of which is going waste as runoff of about 193MCM. It is estimated that the total
recharge from rainwater harvesting structures for entire NCT, Delhi is 1390 ha.M
(13.9 MCM). The task force constituted for implementation of rainwater harvesting
schemes in government buildings, colonies and parks has estimated that about 2.9
MCM rainfall recharge will take place, from the rooftop rainwater harvesting
structures constructed in Government buildings in NCT, Delhi during normal
monsoon in a year. This will facilitate additional rise in groundwater level to the tune
of 0.5 m in alluvium areas and about 1.0 m in hard rock areas (NCT Delhi recharge
proposal
available
at
http://www.greensystems.net/images/Dr.Sharma%20NCR%20Planning%20board%2
0proposal.pdf).
Management efforts: Andhra Pradesh is one of several states underlain by hard-rock
aquifers that have suffered considerable depletion of groundwater, largely for
20

irrigation use, in recent decades. The Andhra Pradesh Farmer-Managed Groundwater

Systems Project (APFAMGS) has adopted a novel approach to the problem. The core
concept of APFAMGS is that sustainable management of groundwater is feasible only
if users understand its occurrence, cycle, and limited availability. To achieve this end,
the project has engaged farmers in data collection and analysis, building their
understanding of the dynamics and status of groundwater in the local aquifers. Even
farmers with limited literacy skills have demonstrated their ability to collect and
analyze rainfall and groundwater data, estimate and regulate their annual water use
based on planned cropping patterns, and increase their knowledge of improved
agricultural practices through attendance at farmer water schools (at which a third of
the facilitators are women). The project does not offer any incentives in the form of
cash or subsidies to the farmers: the assumption is that access to scientific data and
knowledge will enable farmers to make appropriate choices and decisions regarding
the use of groundwater resources. The core organizational component of the project is
the groundwater management committee, a village-level community-based institution
comprising all groundwater users in a community. The committees are in turn
grouped into hydrological units. Data gathered through hydrological monitoring of
rainfall and groundwater levels are used to estimate the crop water budget, which is
an aquifer-level assessment of the quantity of water required for the proposed Rabi
(winter) planting. Awareness of this statistic has become one of the essential variables
that farmers take into account when making their cropping decisions for the coming
season (World Bank, 2010).
Regulation: The Honble High Court of Kerala in the matter of Perumatty Grama
Panchayat vs. State of Kerala also known as the landmark Coca- Cola Case decided
on the issue of the excessive exploitation of groundwater as Groundwater is a
national wealth and it belongs to the entire society---. The State as a trustee is under
a legal duty to protect the natural resources. These resources meant for public use
cannot be converted into private ownership---. (Shankar et al., 2011). As regards
groundwater regulation, specifically depletion, the Supreme Court of India has passed
several orders in 1996, where under, it has issued directions to the Government of
India for setting up of Central Ground Water Authority (CGWA) under the
Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and to declare it as an authority under the
Environment Protection Act and delegate powers under the said Act to the CGWA for
the purposes of regulation and control of groundwater development. The Honble
Court further directed that the CGWA should regulate indiscriminate boring and
withdrawal of groundwater in the country and issue necessary directions with a view
to preserving and protecting the groundwater.
2.2.2.

Bangkok, Thailand

Greater Bangkok witnessed widespread exploitation of groundwater starting in the

1950s, and by 1980 the abstractions had reached a point where there was evidence of
significant land subsidence damaging urban infrastructure and concerns regarding
aquifer sea intrusion. The initial approach taken by the Metropolitan Waterworks
21

Authority was to eliminate the utilitys abstraction in favor of surface water sources,
but the increased domestic, commercial, and industrial tariffs for public water supply
triggered a massive increase in the drilling of private wells, whose total abstraction
reached over 2,000 million liters per day (818 cfs) in the late 1990s. Measures such as
banning water well drilling in critical areas and licensing and charging for metered or
estimated groundwater abstractions were introduced, but took some years to be
implemented. During 19952005 even stronger measures were introduced and
implemented (including raising groundwater use charges and more aggressive
application of sanctions on well drilling, supported by public awareness campaigns) to
constrain groundwater abstraction within environmentally tolerable limits. Total
abstraction was reduced from 2,700 million liters per day in the year 2000 to 1,500
million liters per day in the year 2005, and land subsidence was also significantly
reduced. Political protest by users in some districts was addressed by allowing well
users to continue using their wells conjunctively for the period up to their next license
renewal (up to 10 years) and to retain their wells as a backup supply for 15 years,
provided they were adequately metered and open to inspection (World Bank, 2010).
2.2.3.

China

The situation in China concerning groundwater seems to comply with riparian 2 rights
doctrine to some extent, especially for rural region, allowing anyone who has the right
to use land to get access to the groundwater to use it. The free occupancy system
supports the legal basis for this action, since it regulates that drawing water for family
use, livestock drinking, emergency use or few demands for irrigation do not need
permits. This leaves a kind of misperception: the groundwater rights are attached to
land use right. Due to this there is no other rational principle to restrict groundwater
abuse, the way groundwater rights adheres to the land use right has become a kind
of regulation established by usage (Tianduowa, 2009).
2.2.4.

Netherlands

In the Netherlands the regulations related to groundwater roughly fall into two
categories. First, related to the protection of the groundwater against pollution.
Second and more relevant in this context is related to the groundwater use. The
permits for the use of groundwater are a matter for the provinces in the Netherlands
(together with the water boards) according to article 11 of the Dutch Groundwater
Law (Dutch government, 2009). Below a certain quantity no registration and permit is
needed. Above this quantity registration with the provincial authorities is required.
2.2.5.

Australia

Australia has implemented the following reforms for successful groundwater

management:

Riparian rights doctrine is that any person who owns and occupies land on the bank of a
natural stream acquires water use rights which are commonly known as riparian rights by
virtue of the occupation of that land.
22

State has power and replaced the common law riparian rule and groundwater
ownership rule (land owner owns water and can use all he likes) with licensing
system, soon as agriculture provoked conflict;

Land and water not tied together anymore since 1994, which has created
flexibility and retirement of some land from irrigation;

Facilitated water markets and revisions of water allocation amounts; and

Environmental allocations worked out first and the remaining water is the
consumptive pool.

2.2.6.

Spain

Spain, like many parts of the world, until 1985, bestowed private property rights over
groundwater resources. However, the 1985 Water Act in response to intensive
groundwater use changed the rules of the game. For one, groundwater was taken away
from the private domain and ownership rights bestowed upon the state. Second, river
basin management agencies were given a role in managing groundwater, and finally,
they were also vested with the power to grant permits for groundwater use that started
after 1985. It also gave authority to the river basin agencies to declare an aquifer as
overexploited, and once it was so declared, to formulate an aquifer management plan
for recovery of the aquifer. Some features of such a plan were the reduction in volume
of withdrawals or rejection of new applications for wells. In addition, all users of the
aquifer were required to organize themselves into groundwater user associations in
order to encourage user participation. So far, some 16 aquifers have been declared
totally or partly overexploited (Hernandez-Mora et al. 2003), while such user
associations have been formed in only five and implemented in only two aquifer
areas. Further amendments to the act were made in 1999 and 2001, which emphasized
the role of the groundwater users in aquifer management.
2.2.7.

Water sector reforms in Mexico

Perhaps no other country has reformed its water laws as extensively as Mexico has
since 1992. By the law of the Nations Waters of 1992, water was declared as a
national property and it became mandatory for existing users to legitimizing their
rights through procuring water concessions. The National Water Commission (CNA)
was entrusted with the responsibility of registering water user associations, set up a
regulatory structure to enforce and monitor their concessions granted and also to
collect a volumetric fee from all users, except small-scale irrigators. Aquifer
Management Councils (COTAS) were promoted by CNA as user organization aimed
at managing groundwater. Response to the reforms so far has been mixed at best. The
large industrial and commercial water users have been quick to apply for concession
and pay water fees. However, the real challenge has been registering water rights of
the agricultural users, who withdraw at least 80% of total volumes withdrawn, and
monitor their withdrawals. Among the agricultural users, the tube-well owners have
responded to the law quite positively and have applied for water concessions. The
major reason for such compliance has been the carrot of subsidized electricity that
23

has been promised to tube-well owners who regularize their connection through
registration of the wells with the CNA. This shows that farmers respond well to direct
economic incentives. Monitoring of actual extraction has proved more intractable.
2.2.8. Pakistan
The issue of groundwater management is multidimensional, related to reliable
assessment of available water, its supply and scope for augmentation, distribution,
reuse/recycling, its existing depletion, pollution, and its protection from depletion and
degradation. However, like surface water resource management, not much concerted
efforts have been made for management of the hidden complex underground water
resources in Pakistan. Rather, the groundwater has been developed without
considering it long-term impact on its sustainability in terms of quantity and quality.
Moreover, it had been wrongly deemed, like there is no link between groundwater and
surface water. That is why groundwater is being developed in isolation to surface
water, both by the government (mostly in metropolitan cities e.g. Lahore) and about
one million private users, mostly concentrated in agriculture areas of the Punjab
province.
2.3.

Highlights of Management Approaches Abroad

All over the world, groundwater has long been treated as an infinite resource that can
be endlessly exploited. The idea that groundwater, though a common good, belongs to
the overlying landowner has shaped thinking about water, even in the developed
world. Only after this resource has been overexploited and polluted do governments
and users begin to worry about managing its use. Attempts to allocate groundwater
and manage these entitlements in a sustainable manner have achieved only limited
success and still pose a major challenge to the water sector. According to Janakarajan
(2000) the important measure would be to separate the right to groundwater use from
land ownership titles. In other words, it is necessary to define property rights in
groundwater so that all existing ambiguities are removed. Spain & Mexico reformed
their water laws to make groundwater a national property. However, their success in
getting water rights of agricultural users registered has been insignificant.
According to Shah (2006), sustaining the massive welfare gains groundwater
development has created without ruining the resource, is a key water challenge facing
the world today. He has quoted that demand restriction has also been tried through
combination of pricing, legislative and regulatory action, licensing and permits, and
by specifying property rights, direct regulation worked better in countries with a hard
state, as in Iran, which imposed an effective ban on new tubewells in 1/3rd of its
central plains, or Russia which has banned the use of groundwater for irrigation to
protect it for domestic uses.

24

2.4.

Approaches for Sustainable Groundwater Management

International experiences, and experience within India, give insight into the
instruments available for groundwater management. This can be categorized as
follows:
Rainwater harvesting: In many dry regions the revival of historical water harvesting
techniques and recharge is now being considered as a possible way of alleviating
water scarcity (Prinz, 1996). The term rain water harvesting is understood to mean the
collection of surface runoff and its use for irrigated crop production under dry and
arid site conditions. Physical structures are built to retain runoff and encourage
infiltration to groundwater.
Where cities overlie hard-rock aquifers (for example Rawalpindi and
Islamabd) this can lead to severe depletion and pollution of the groundwater body, the
same is being observed in these twin cities. Even cities above the extensive alluvial
aquifers (Lahore) are finding the underlying watertables inexorably declining. For
such cities a balanced policy dovetailing both surface water and groundwater supply
and recharge enhancement will need to be developed, under the auspices of
empowered and well-organized regulatory agencies. In rural areas, techniques of
artificial recharge by modification of natural movement of water through suitable
rerouting such as dry river beds (Sukh-Beas) and drains during wet season can be
feasible.
Groundwater Governance and regulation: The first step in groundwater
governance is adequate and high-quality information, not only hydrogeological, but
also socio-economic as well. In many instances, such information is missing or more
possibly not accessible in the public domain due to unwillingness of the governments
departments (especially the data) to share it with the general public. Effective
regulation becomes extremely difficult when there are very large numbers of small
users. Pricing measures, including volumetric charges, taxes, and user fees, can act as
incentives to conservation and more efficient allocation of water resources, provided
they address concerns of equity and affordability to the poor. Such measures can only
be successful for a small numbers of severely threatened resource users.
Demand-side measures: Demand side measures aim to reduce consumptive
groundwater use, for example through an increase in water tariffs and converting to
volumetric billing system in urban settings, or reducing crop water requirements and
non-beneficial evapotranspiration from fields in agricultural areas. In this regard
following important experiences are worth sharing:

Punjab states prohibition on transplanting of paddy rice until June 10 to avoid

high evaporation rates has successfully resulted in water saving by eliminating
essentially non-beneficial evaporation. But groundwater abstraction decreased
in this case because there were no other significant agricultural water
demands. It would be very detrimental to reduce seepage by lining irrigation
canals because these water losses help recharge the aquifers;
25

Improving groundwater governance would provide options for climate change

adaptation: the synergy between groundwater governance improvement and
adaptation to climate change has been highlighted in a recent World Bank
study on climate change;

Projects in pilot aquifers in the Indo-Gangetic Plain show that both in rural
(Punjab paddy fields) and urban (Lucknow City) environments, it is
worthwhile to move from spontaneous or incidental to more planned
conjunctive use, for both coping with climate change and reducing
waterlogging, salinization, and other groundwater quality threats. But, to be
successful, planned conjunctive use requires better characterization of
underlying aquifers, institutional strengthening and coordination, and raising
awareness among farmers and municipal engineers.

Community management of groundwater: Community groundwater management

refers not to a specific instrument but to a means of implementing management
interventions. The key is that the resource user community (instead of the state) is the
primary custodian of groundwater and is charged with implementing management
measures. Hence, community groundwater management can involve any mix of
instruments, including regulation, property rights, and pricing. Some well-publicized
examples of successful community self-regulation have occurred in India but have
often been dependent on the influence of a charismatic leader. While communitybased management of groundwater is clearly a promising approach in India, global
experience offers few models of community management that might be applicable in
the sub-continent setting, and a homegrown solution will undoubtedly be needed.
Integrated use of surface and groundwater: Rainfall is a renewable, natural
resource but limited in amount and variable in distribution over space and time. The
surface waters from rivers, which are canalized, supplement it and the two together
constitute the total available water resource. Similarly, the crop water requirement is
spatially variable (Basharat and Tariq, 2013) increasing in downstream direction of
the IBIS. The waterlogged areas in canals command offer scope for groundwater
development by lowering the watertable up to 3-6 m. Thus additional water for
irrigation can be saved for use elsewhere and induced deeper watertable in these areas
will help in rainfall recharge that will help in improvement of soil and water quality.
Therefore, rationalizing canal water allocations can help to improve the groundwater
situation both in waterlogged and depleted areas.
2.5.

Expected Climate Change and its Impact on Surface and Groundwater

Availability and Demand

2.5.1 Climate change and hydrologic variability

Climate change is an altered state of the climate that can be identified by change in
the mean and/or variability of its properties and that persist for an extended period,
typically decades or longer (Bates et al., 2008). It may be due to natural internal
processes or external forces, or to persistent anthropogenic changes in the
26

composition of the atmosphere or in land use (IPCC, 2007). Over the past 150 years,
global mean temperatures have increased with the rate of warming accelerated in the
past 25 to 50 years. It is considered very likely that this change is largely attributed to
anthropogenic influences (in particular increased CO2 concentrations from burning of
fossil fuels), and that global warming will continue in the future (IPCC, 2007).
The Earths climate is projected to become warmer and more variable.
Increased global temperatures are projected to affect the hydrologic cycle, leading to
changes in precipitation patterns and increases in the intensity and frequency of
extreme events; reduced snow cover and widespread melting of ice; rising sea levels;
and changes in soil moisture, runoff and groundwater recharge. Increased evaporation
and the risk of flooding and drought could adversely affect security of water supply,
particularly surface water. Due to these pressures, as well as global population
growth, demand for groundwater is likely to increase (World Bank, 2010).
Natural processes as well as anthropogenic activities have been responsible for
large-scale land degradation in Pakistan. Wind and water erosion, waterlogging,
salinity/sodicity, excessive groundwater depletion, flooding, and loss of organic
matter and biodiversity are major problems in Pakistan. Pakistan, like many other
Third World countries, is a society in transition from an agricultural-based economy
to a little modern industrial economy. This transformation of Pakistans economy has
been accompanied by high population growth, a rapid rate of urbanization, urban
infrastructure degradation, environmentally damaging agricultural and industrial
practices, inefficient energy use, high biomass consumption, and deforestation. These
factors are also likely to increase Pakistans vulnerability to climate change.
However, it is important to distinguish the impacts generated by socioeconomic processes from those attributed exclusively to climate change. In particular,
there is a need to develop a sense of the relative importance of climatic and nonclimatic factors. This is especially important when considering adaptation strategies.
It can be presumed that such vulnerability will establish the pattern of adaptive
responses, and that climate change will either reinforce or mitigate the intensity of
such adaptations, without altering the basic patterns.
The most dominant climate drivers for water availability are precipitation,
temperature and evaporative demand (determined by net radiation at the ground,
atmospheric humidity and wind speed, and temperature). Temperature is particularly
important in snow-dominated basins and in coastal areas.
Climate change affects groundwater recharge rates (i.e., the renewable
groundwater resources) and depths of groundwater tables. As groundwater both
changes into and is recharged from surface water, impacts of surface water flow
regimes are expected to affect groundwater. Increased precipitation variability may
decrease groundwater recharge in humid areas because more frequent heavy
precipitation events may result in the infiltration capacity of the soil being exceeded
more often. In semi-arid and arid areas, however, increased precipitation variability
may increase groundwater recharge, because only high-intensity rainfalls are able to
27

infiltrate fast enough before evaporating, and alluvial aquifers are recharged mainly
by inundations due to floods. According to CICERO (2000), a combination of
increased river flows and increased flood plain pressures suggests that flood hazards
could be one of the most serious problems associated with climate change. Higher
temperatures and increased variability of precipitation would, in general, lead to
increased irrigation water demand, even if the total precipitation during the growing
season remains the same.
2.5.2 Possible impacts on the Indus Basin
The current total water storage in the Indus River system remains insufficient, and it
is likely that the problem will become more acute in the future under carious climatic
scenarios, particularly if temperature increases are coupled with a decrease in
precipitation. Even if there is an increase in precipitation, the benefits will not be
realized unless the storage capacity of the system is increased. The irrigation
distribution system has a capacity of 199 MAF, and releases from the system are
between 122.12 BCM (99 MAF) and 134.45 BCM (109 MAF). Annual inflows, range
from approximately 123.35 BCM (100 MAF) to 222.03 BCM (180 MAF). Both the
outflows and losses from the system increase with increased inflows. This means,
increased runoff cannot be fully utilized unless there is adequate infrastructure to
capture and store the extra water. In other words, the capacity of the system is
constrained by storage spaces. Increased precipitation will not necessarily lead to
increased water use if water cannot be controlled in both space and time. The capacity
of the Indus River System is constrained by storage space (CICERO, 2000).
A preliminary examination of current conditions and future possibilities in
regard to increasing water demand trends (as projected in Figure 1.1) suggests that the
presently large supply and demand imbalances are likely to increase over time. This
suggests that vulnerability to climate change may increase in Pakistan. To date, water
managers have typically assumed that the natural resource base is reasonably constant
over the medium term and, therefore, that past hydrological experience provides a
good guide to future conditions. Improvement to agricultural and irrigation
infrastructures are urgently needed in the following sectors:
Irrigation water demand and supply management ;
Groundwater management;
Irrigation systems and their efficiency;
Use/storage of rain and snow water;
Information exchange system on new technologies at national as well as
regional and international levels;
Access by fishers and farmers to timely weather forecasts (rainfall and
temperature);
Recycling and reuse of municipal wastewater e.g., Lahore;
Reduction of water wastage and leakage and use of market-oriented approaches
to reduce wastage, e.g. volume based billing;
Rational Surface water management for increased water use efficiency.
28

IWRM can be an instrument to explore adaptation measures to climate change in

Pakistan. The need to rationalize surface water allocations has been discussed in detail
in this report; this can be one of the most important approaches which can be deeply
worked upon for increasing the existing water use efficiency. Other successful
integrated water management strategies include: capturing societys views, reshaping
planning processes, coordinating land and water resources management, recognizing
water quantity and quality linkages, conjunctive use of surface water and
groundwater, protecting and restoring natural systems, and including consideration of
climate change. In addition, integrated strategies explicitly address impediments to the
flow of information. A fully integrated approach is not always needed but, rather, the
appropriate scale for integration will depend on the extent to which it facilitates
effective action in response to specific needs (Moench et al., 2003). In particular, an
integrated approach to water management could help to resolve conflicts between
competing water users and increasing water use efficiency.
2.5.3. The importance of groundwater in a changing climate
The Earths climate is projected to become warmer and more variable in the wake of
climate change. According to climate change researchers, increased global
temperatures are projected to affect the hydrologic cycle, leading to changes in
precipitation patterns and increases in the intensity and frequency of extreme events;
reduced snow cover and widespread melting of ice; rising sea levels; and changes in
soil moisture, runoff and groundwater recharge. Increased evaporation and the risk of
flooding and drought could adversely affect security of water supply, particularly
surface water. Due to these pressures, as well as global population growth, demand
for groundwater is likely to further increase.
Relative to surface water, aquifers have the capacity to store large volumes of
water and are naturally buffered against seasonal changes in temperature and rainfall.
They provide a significant opportunity to store excess water during high rainfall
periods, to reduce evaporative losses and to protect water quality. Nevertheless,
tapping the groundwater storage opportunity to its full potential, using the available
surface and rainfall patterns is still a big challenge, even for developed countries. The
major fault lies in that, these opportunities have received little attention, in part
because groundwater was often poorly understood and managed in the past.
Effective, long term adaptation to climate change and hydrologic variability
requires measures which protect or enhance groundwater recharge and manage water
demand. Adaptation to climate change cant be separated from actions to improve
management and governance of water reserves (e.g. education and training,
information resources, research and development, governance and institutions).

29

CHAPTER 3
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Keeping in view the broader spectrum of water management at IBIS scale, as
discussed earlier, contemporary comparison of areas with groundwater depletion and
waterlogging conditions was necessary. This would help to point out underlying
reasons and the processes causing the aforementioned disaster like situation,
adversely affecting the crop yields and ultimately the local and macro level economics
of the agriculture in Pakistan.
Therefore, first of all, over all waterlogging and groundwater depletion
situation was compared amongst the provinces, covering all the irrigated areas of
IBIS. Then, Punjab province has been analyzed intensively and extensively, regarding
spatial variation in groundwater depth and quality. A havoc kind of situation observed
in Bari Doab, directed the need to review crop water requirement and water
availability situation across Punjab for finding any possible reasons for unprecedented
groundwater depletion.
Further, in this context, the pragmatic approaches that could make incremental
improvements largely within the existing institutional framework and set up have
been studied and developed. Even for these proposed management changes, building
political support for gradual and realistic institutional improvements at higher levels
by first demonstrating successful interventions at the local/pilot level. For these
interventions, any major scientific understanding of hydrogeological controls is not
required. Management measures to address intensive abstraction problems can be
classified in terms of supply-side engineering and demand-side interventions, and the
management instruments as macro-policy adjustments, regulatory provisions, and
community participation and education. These issues have also been discussed further
stabilizing groundwater levels in critically depleted areas.

3.1.

Identification of Critical Groundwater Areas

There are varying conditions regarding depth and quality of groundwater in different
areas of the Indus Basin Irrigation System. This is especially true when comparing
groundwater depth and quality conditions on provincial basis. So, groundwater
situation was compared amongst the provinces using depth to watertable data (DTW)
collected by SCARPs Monitoring Organization (SMO). Percentage area under
different DTW classes was compared for comparison amongst the provinces.
Further DTW comparison was made for different regions amongst the
provinces, this was done for KP and Punjab in order to identify areas critically
affected by unprecedented groundwater depletion. Before this, SCARPs Monitoring
Organization (SMO) classified depth to watertable (DTW) with the purpose of
30

highlighting the waterlogged areas only, the last class showing the area having depth
to watertable more than 6 meter. Due to unprecedented groundwater depletion rates,
particularly in Punjab and KP provinces, the classification has been revised as given
in Table 3.1, with the additional purpose of highlighting depleted areas/aquifers in
IBIS. DTW contours were prepared in GIS and areas under different classes were
calculated on regional basis e.g. Doabs. Results of area under different DTW classes
were prepared and compared amongst the provinces and regions.
In the following methodology and discussions, crop water demand and supply
calculations are based on canal command units and the spatially variable parameters
e.g. rainfall and ETo refer to the center of command areas. Very few of the canal
commands were not considered in the analysis due to their smaller size or nonavailability of data (e.g. Qaim and DG Khan Canals, respectively).
Table 3.1: Classification for calculating areas under different depths to watertable in
IBIS.
DTW (m)
0 - 0.9
0.9 - 1.5
1.5 - 3
3-6

3.2.

Classified as
Disastrous
Waterlogged
Likely to be waterlogged
Normal (optimal)

DTW (m)
6-9
9 - 13
13 - 18
> 18

Classified as
Normal (sub-optimal)
Likely to be depleted
Depleted
Highly depleted

Crop consumptive use demand

Water requirement of a crop is the amount of water required for raising a successful
crop in its growing season, and this can be supplied to the crops by rainfall, irrigation,
or by a combination of both. Expressed as depth of water, it consists of water lost as
evaporation from bare surface (field), water transpired and metabolically used. The
term, potential evapotranspiration (PET) denotes the highest rate of
evapotranspiration (ET) by a short and actively growing crop or vegetation with
abundant foliage completely shading the ground surface and abundant supply of soil
water under a given climate. It integrates the evaporating demand of the atmosphere
and refers to the maximum water loss from the crop field (Majumdar, 2004). The crop
water requirement in an area mainly depends upon:

the climate; in a sunny and hot climate crops need more water per day than in a
cloudy and cool climate
the crop type; crops like maize or sugarcane need more water than crops like
millet or sorghum

To compute the crop consumptive use requirement for various canal

commands, reference crop evapotranspiration and crop coefficient approach was
adopted. Meteorological stations with long term records are operated by Pakistan
Meteorological Department (PMD) at Rawalpindi, Jhelum, Sargodha, Lahore,
Faisalabad, Multan, DI Khan and Khanpur. ETo (mm/day) calculated by the PMD
31

using 30 years normal data of these stations by applying Blanney-Criddle method

(PMD, 2006) was used and further interpolated to find corresponding ETo values for
center of the respective canal commands. This was done using inverse distance
weighting (IDW) interpolation as given by the Eq. (3.1).

(3.1)

Where: Zp = interpolated value at the desired location; Zi = parameter value at the

known point; Wi = weight assigned to the known location, and n = no of sample
points.
The weighting function Wi is based on distance (d) between center of canal
command under consideration and the meteorological stations as given by Eq. (3.2).
(3.2)
Using the above interpolated values of ETo, the crop consumptive use
requirement (ETc) for each crop in a canal command was calculated by multiplying
crop coefficient, Kc (PARC, 1982; FAO, 1998) of the particular crop with the
respective ETo during the month based on 10 daily cropping calendar as given by the
following equation:
(3.3)

3.3.

Effective Rainfall

Rainfall is an important parameter both for crop consumptive use and

groundwater recharge in any irrigated area. For finding normal seasonal rainfall for
each of the canal commands, a similar approach using the equations (1 & 2) was
applied to thirty years (1971-2000) average rainfall (data source PMD) as given in
Table 3.2. Adnan and Khan (2009) have compared different methods for finding
effective rainfall and recommended PET/Precipitation ratio method being suitable for
preliminary planning and most effective than the others almost throughout the
country. These effective rainfall percentages were used for calculating normal
effective rainfall for different stations, as given in Table 3.2.

3.4.

Spatial Variation in Irrigation Demand

Irrigation demand increases successively for canal commands lying towards south as
compared to the north of irrigation system. In Punjab, there is mixed cropping pattern,
therefore seasonal irrigation demand in any canal command depends upon the
cropping pattern and intensity of crops, and severity of the climate in the area. The
irrigation demand (ID) was calculated for each canal command by subtracting the
32

effective rainfall from the crop consumptive use requirement for the period (Kharif,
Rabi and annual). Thus, ID can be taken as a guideline for representing the amount of
artificial irrigation required in consideration to annual normal rainfall amount
fulfilling the crop water requirement. ID was represented in two different ways i.e.
potential irrigation demand (IDp) and actual irrigation demand (IDa). IDp reflects the
potential irrigation demand (mm) for reference crop, whereas the IDa reflects the
actual irrigation demand (mm) per acre, in the respective canal command with its
prevailing cropping pattern and annual normal effective rainfall. This was done to
avoid the impact of cropping intensity variation on total crop water requirement.
Table 3.2: Thirty years normal and effective rainfall at various locations in Punjab.
City
Bahawalnagar
Bahawalpur
Faisalabad
Jhelum
Lahore
Multan
Mianwali
Sargodha
Sialkot
Khanpur
DI khan

Normal rainfall (mm)

Kharif
Rabi
(April to September) (October to March)
155.40
49.10
143.81
41.30
315.15
71.35
706.35
219.23
559.82
127.64
163.82
52.12
427.76
166.09
369.75
110.78
823.82
202.71
76.70
20.60
197.20
79.60

Effective rainfall (%)

Kharif

Rabi

0.92
0.90
0.82
0.42
0.48
0.90
0.80
0.80
0.50
0.93
0.95

0.92
0.95
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.92
0.90
0.90
0.88
0.97
0.90

The IDa is a comparative guiding index for how much we need to artificially
supply from the available river water resources to the competing canal commands.
Groundwater is a byproduct of both the rainfall and canal supplies and is already
being pumped for supplementing short canal supplies all over the Punjab, therefore
was not taken into account for meeting the ID in any canal command. The IDp is
calculated by subtracting effective rainfall from the potential crop water requirement,
both for Kharif and Rabi seasons as given in equation (3.4). The IDa is calculated as
shown by the equations (3.5).
(3.4)

(3.5)

Where: Wc is the crop weighting factor calculated based on the area of the respective
crop divided by the total cropped area in Kharif or Rabi season as given in equation
(3.6).
33

(3.6)
Where, A1 is the area of individual crop for which Wc is being calculated and
A1+A2+A3+A4 is the sum of all the cropped area in the canal command during the
period under consideration. These areas are based on average cropping intensities data
(Kharif 1998 to Rabi 2002-03) of each crop grown in the canal commands as reported
by DLR (2004).

3.5.

Present Water Allocations and its Impact on Groundwater

Consumptive use of crops can be estimated for any specified period e.g. daily,
seasonal or peak period consumptive use. In IBIS evaluation of water demand and
supply is usually done on seasonal basis (Kharif and Rabi). Therefore, an estimate of
seasonal consumptive use (Cu) is a must for evaluating the existing rational in canal
water supplies to different canal commands. The canal supplies were expressed as
depth of water over the cultureable command area (CCA). Water allocations of the
1991 accord were also compared with the annual average supplies during the period
2001-09 for Kharif and Rabi seasons, so as to see any changes in the supply pattern
with passage of time.
Areas under different depth to watertable (DTW) zones were compared based
on the DTW monitoring of post monsoon 2002. In addition, groundwater level
hydrographs were prepared for selected observation wells for each canal command, in
order to assess the groundwater behavior in response to prevailing canal water
allocations in different canal commands. Surface and groundwater balance for Lower
Bari Doab Canal (LBDC) command was given in detail by Basharat (2011), and now,
groundwater storage depletion from the Bari Doab was estimated based on watertable
depth data of 2002 and 2012.

3.6.

Linking Waterlogging, Groundwater Quality and Surface salinity in

Sindh

Continuous seepage and deep percolation to the adjoining lands from the unlined
irrigation canals network, improper field irrigation practices, unleveled fields, flat
topography and lack of natural drainage, have all contributed in the development of
waterlogging over some of the areas of the Punjab and a major portion of Sindh. The
importance of salinity monitoring surveys is beyond any doubt. This not only helps in
the evaluation of the impact and effectiveness of the projects but also help future
planning. A number of organizations were established for monitoring of these
projects. Salinity and water logging vitally affects Pakistans agricultural economy. Its
data furnishes important base for formulation of any reclamation and development
plan. The information is also pertinent for assessment and fixation of production
targets. It therefore, needs, to be given due weightage, while formulating any
34

development/rehabilitation plan, just as other data regarding meteorology, water

resources, availability of seeds, fertilizers and insecticides is deemed essential. In
order to obtain the current situation/status of soil salinity in Indus Plain, a Soil
Salinity Surveys in the irrigated areas of Indus Plain was planned and executed by
WAPDA, under National Drainage Program (NDP). SMO and IWASRI together
executed the monitoring and GIS work, respectively.
Under this NDP funded project, IWASRI carried out various studies, and
mapping, including: surface and profile salinity, soil texture, groundwater depth and
quality, land use, in whole of the IBIS. This huge data was collected by SMO, and
particularly, surface salinity was monitored with the help of printed maps of SPOT
images. IWASRI mapped this chunk of information from the field and images, using
various GIS software. The information is more reliable, accurate and easily
accessible, and therefore, was used to correlate with each other for better assessment
of implications of existing state of irrigation and drainage system in Sindh. The
surface salinity has been categorized into four classes S1, S2, S3 and S4 according to
level of salinity. A substantial volume of data on the parameters such as watertable,
salinity status, profile salinity, landform and climate, etc. had been collected in the
past. Following maps were developed during the project:
Depth to watertable;
Surface salinity;
Profile salinity;
Soil textural groups;
Landform;
Land use; and
Temporal analysis of salinity variation using 1977-79 Maps.
The objectives of this salinity survey were as under:
i.
ii.

Identify the soil salinity status in Indus Plain using GIS & Remote Sensing
technique;
Study spatial variation of salinity over time and evaluate the causes of salinity.

Data Collection: For this project 136, SPOT multi spectral images were acquired
from SUPARCO and were processed for preliminary field survey and preparation of
database and maps. The hardcopy prints of satellite images on 1: 50000 Scale were
provided for field survey by SMO. During field survey the salinity patches and linear
features were marked on these prints. The processed images were verified in the field.
During field verification phase, surface and profile salinity, soil texture, land use and
other spatial and non-spatial aspects related to land and water were collected and
information management system for Indus Basin Irrigation System (IBIS) was
developed.
Criteria of Surface Salinity Survey: Four categories namely, non-saline (S1),
slightly saline (S2), moderately saline (S3), and strongly saline (S4) were recognized
and mapped. The criteria for classification of surface salinity categories are according

35

to Soil Survey Manual Agriculture Hand book No. 18 (Soil Survey Division Staff,
1993) and are given in Tables 3.3 and 3.4

Table 3.3: Criteria of Surface Salinity Survey

Soil Class
Non Saline
Slightly Saline
Moderately Saline
Strongly Saline

Mapping Symbol
S1
S2
S3
S4

ECe (dS/m) at 25 0C
Less than 4
4 8
8 15
More than 15

Salt ( % )
Less than 0.2
0.2 0.5
0.5 1.0
More than 1.0

Table 3.4: Limits and field observation indices for each category of surface salinity.
Non-saline (S1)
Slightly Saline (S2)
Moderately Saline (S3)
Strongly Saline (S4)

3.7.

No visible salts, plant growth is apparently not affected by

salinity/sodicity.
25% of the soil surface is affected by patchy salinity. Plant
growth is slightly in patches.
Salts visible, on 25-75% of soil surface. Crop growth is in
poor to very poor condition.
The area is abandoned and barren thick salt crust/puff is
visible on surface. This type of salinity may generally
support presence of very highly salt tolerant plant species.

Irrigation-Drainage and Waterlogging-Salinity Nexus in Sindh

It has been said in literature, since long, that Irrigation and Drainage are
complementary. Meaning that provision of irrigation without drainage is not
sustainable for long-term, the same has been observed in Pakistan all over the IBIS.
Even in Punjab, maximum areas were waterlogged till 1960s, just after about 50 years
after the inception of weir controlled irrigation. There were the efforts by the
government in the form of SCARP tubewells, and thereafter, the pumping by private
tubewells for irrigation. These joint efforts lead to the eradication of waterlogging and
surface salinity in areas in which irrigation supplies got matched with crop water
requirement, along with increasing groundwater use in conjunction with canal water.
But, the conditions in Sindh could not turn better, rather the situation
deteriorated, particularly, after commissioning of Magla and Tarbela Dams, due to
higher canal supplies than before. The current situation in Lower Indus plain is now
assessed with respect to groundwater depth and quality, irrigation water allocations
and drainage requirements.

36

CHAPTER - 4
CURRENT GROUNDWATER STATUS AND ITS MANAGEMENT
IN THE INDUS PLAIN
Pakistan, still being developing country and equipped with weakened water research,
development and management institutions, is considerably lagging behind in
converting the existing knowledge base into state of-the-art implementable
management policy. In the past, the cushion that groundwater provided during the
drought (1999 to 2002) could not be replenished. No groundwater management or
regulation regime is in force, both for urban and rural areas. Similarly, there is no
regulation of water consumed by cities or industries at large.
Presently, in Pakistan groundwater is an open access common property natural
resource and any one can bore a well and pump water till his satisfaction without any
limit. In many of the irrigated areas of Punjab, and non-irrigated (barani) areas of
Punjab and Baluchistan, groundwater extraction has exceeded annual natural recharge
and groundwater levels are going down and down. On the other hand, there are also
areas which are waterlogged. Farmers lying at the tail of the canal commands are
facing with depleting groundwater levels, forcing them to lower their pump sumps
every four to five years or totally converting to turbine technology, for long-term
sustainability of the same as compared to centrifugal pumps. Thus, use of
groundwater depends solely at the economic condition of the individual farmers.
Thus, the poors and non-owners are suffering the most, by not pumping water or
purchasing at high costs and affording conveyance losses from the tubewell to their
own field.
Rise in watertable in areas, where its use is restricted due to quality
considerations, or excess supply, leading to spread of salinity problems, are a matter
of increasing concern (e.g. saline areas of LCC command and majority areas in Lower
Indus). The major impact of marginal and saline groundwater is in the form of low
cropping intensity and very minimal pumping of groundwater by the farmers, thus
causing waterlogging of the areas. These specific issues demand proper drainage and
optimal use of groundwater resources for which strategic planning and
implementation, with a good understanding of issues involved is required. The role of
farmers, the primary users of groundwater, and who are also directly affected, is very
critical and can have far reaching impact. The regulatory policy regimes and
institutional structures for achieving the goals are as necessary as are the availability
and acceptance of alternate technologies, cropping and farming practices.
In addition, there is lack of expert professionals, to carry out, detailed
assessment of irrigation water management, and groundwater resources, in different
irrigation units of the country. The situation is so bleak that at present not a single
water conservation program can be seen in a big and well educated area of Lahore,
37

with depleting groundwater resources. No regulation even of the municipal sector

consisting of WASA, private housing societies, industry and individual users. The
institutions concerned are yet to fully realize that successful water resources
management requires a long term planning process.

4.1.

Groundwater Aquifers

The areas of Pakistan where groundwater is known to be available can be divided into
the following regions:
i)
The Indus Plain
ii)
The Pothowar Plateau
iii)
The Valleys and Plains of KP
iv)
The Valleys and Plateaus of Balochistan
v)
Hard Rock Aquifers, Quetta and Kalat
vi)
The Deserts of Cholistan, Tharparkar and Kharan
Groundwater investigations in many of these areas had already been carried out
in1950s, 1960s, and thereafter. While in other areas investigations have yet to be
carried out. A description of the groundwater aquifers found in the Indus Plain and
Pothowar Plateau is given below.
The Indus Plain is a vast land mass stretching from the foothills of the
Himalayan mountains to the Arabian Sea over a distance of about 1600 km (1000
mile). It has an area of 21 Mha (52 MA). The Indus Plain has flat slopes, of the order
of one third of a meter per kilometer (one ft per mile), in the northern fringe reducing
to only 0.20 meters per kilometer (half feet per mile) and even less near to the sea.
The Indus enters Sindh province at an elevation of 75 m (246 ft) above mean sea level
(amsl). The level of flood pain falls southwards at an average rate of 12.5 cm/km
(eight inches/mile). It means natural slope is less as compared to Punjab, where it is
about 27 cm/km.
The mean annual rainfall in the Indus Plain varies from about 90 cm at
Sialkot, at the foot-hills, to less than 20 cm, at Jacobabad in upper Sindh. Indus Plain
is the main agricultural area of the country having a gross canal command areas of
over 18 Mha out of which about 12 Mha receives year round (perennial) surface
irrigation supplies and about 6 Mha receive only seasonal surface irrigation supplies.
The alluvial aquifer was saturated with water almost up to the ground surface and
forms one of the biggest groundwater reservoir in the world.
Essentially the whole of the Indus Plain is underlain by deep, mostly, over
300m (1000 feet), deposits of unconsolidated and highly permeable alluvium
deposited by river Indus and its tributaries in a subsiding tectonic depression lying
between the Himalayas and contiguous mountain ranges and Plateau. The bulk of the
alluvium consists primarily of fine to medium sand, silt and clay. Coarse sand and
gravel, however, are not uncommon, particularly near to the mountainous borders of
38

the plain. Fine grained deposits of low permeability (silts and clays) generally are
discontinuous so that sands, making up 65 to 75 percent of the alluvium in most areas
serve as a unified and highly transmissive aquifer. Irregularly shaped nodules
(Kankar) occur in certain zones of the fine sand and silt beds formed by the
cementation of the alluvial particles with secondary calcium carbonate.
During the hydrogeologic investigations carried out in 1950s and 1960s, in the
Indus Plain 3322 test holes were drilled, 1587 tubewells were installed and 856
pumping test were carried out (Unites States Department of the Interior, 1967;
WAPDA, 1980a; WAPDA, 1980b). The results of these investigations show that the
characteristics of the Indus Plain aquifers vary substantially from place to place.
However, overall averages can provide a general impression of aquifer management
potential. Average specific yield is about 19 percent for Punjab aquifers and 13
percent for Sindh aquifers. Lateral hydraulic conductivity averages about 84 m/day
(0.0032 ft/second) in Punjab and 29 m/day (0.0011 ft/second) in Sindh. Anisotropy
ratios average about 55:1 in the Punjab and 30:1 in Sindh (Ahmad, 1995).
These characteristics broadly indicate a high yielding aquifer with substantial
storage capacity. Large capacity tubewells yielding 4 to 5 cusecs can be developed
practically anywhere in the northern zone. In the southern zone, sufficient percentage
of sand is available in the northern part and high capacity wells can be developed. The
alluvium however, becomes more clayey southward towards the deltaic region of
Indus, as southern Nara and Kotri barrage commands. The Indus Plain is the biggest
source of groundwater in Pakistan.
4.2. Groundwater Quality
As a hypothesis for the formation of the Indus alluvial plain, a picture of a large river
system, with an extensive delta, advancing into the ocean has been suggested. In
geologic times the deposition of sediments took place in sea water. The sea water
further concentrated due to high rates of evaporation in the arid / semi-arid climate of
Pakistan. As the alluvial plains built up, water from the rivers flows into the soil and
joins the groundwater. In addition, percolation occurs from floods that overtop the
river banks. Owing to the slope of the land towards the sea there is a general downvalley movement of groundwater and although this movement is slow, of the order of
1-2 km per 100 years (Basharat and Tariq, 2013a), it cause appreciable effect over
geologic times. The down valley flow pushes the sea-water behind by the advancing
delta, back to the sea, except for pockets trapped by obstructing rock ridges in the
basement.
Almost every year in the past, the river was high, the land was flooded and
drained off again when the flood passed. Thus, evaporation occurs from the waste
soils and salt is deposited in them. When the next flood arrives the salts are redissolved and pass down to join the groundwater. Since the groundwater is slowly
flowing down the valley, it picks up more and more salts as it advances. In addition
39

the groundwater reacts with aquifer material and picks up salts from this source also.
It would therefore be expected that from source to outfall, in an alluvial river valley
system, there would be an increase in groundwater salinity. This is observed to be the
case in the Indus Plain. Super-imposed on this overall groundwater pattern are the
areas of comparatively fresh water associated with direct seepage from the rivers.
Besides this, the percolation of fresh water occurs from rainfall and also from the
irrigation system which keeps on increasing with the spread of the irrigation system.
As a result of this process fresh groundwater in the Indus Plain is found to be
underlain with saline groundwater, the layers of fresh groundwater being thick near to
the rivers and other sources of recharge and of almost negligible thickness in areas
where recharge is small, in comparison to current groundwater pumping. Fresh water
is therefore found up to considerable depths in wide belts paralleling the major rivers.
Saline groundwater occurs down gradient from sources of recharge particularly in the
central parts of the Doabs. Gradual increase in mineralization is found to occur with
depth and distance from sources of recharge. In the Lower Indus Plain, the Indus
flows on a ridge and there is a general groundwater flow away from the river and
wide area of fresh groundwater is associated with this flow. Fresh groundwater can
also be found under some of the recently abandoned river course in the meander flood
plain. A further and very significant recent addition to the total groundwater complex
is due to the advent of barrage commanded irrigation. During the past 100 years
seepage from canals and deep percolation from irrigated fields have made substantial
contributions to the groundwater.
During the course of the groundwater investigations described earlier,
groundwater samples were collected from various test holes at various depths and
were analyzed in the laboratory, for making qualitative and quantitative assessment of
the groundwater storage in the aquifer. Besides a large number of samples of shallow
groundwater were also collected from open wells in each area and the same were also
analyzed in the laboratory so that the quality of shallow groundwater may also be
determined. A brief description of the quality of groundwater in different Doabs,
plains, regions, plateaus and valleys in various provinces of the country, as
determined from the hydrogeological investigations carried out in those areas, is given
below.
4.2.1. The Punjab plains
The quality of groundwater in the Indus Plains varies widely, both spatially and with
depth and is related to the pattern of groundwater movement in the aquifer. Areas
subject to heavier rainfall and consequently greater recharge, in KP and the upper
parts of Punjab, are underlain with waters of low mineralization. Similarly recharge
occurring from the main rivers and canals has resulted in the development of wide and
deep belts of relatively fresh groundwater along them. In Punjab 23% of the area has
hazardous groundwater quality, while it is 78% in Sindh (Haider, 2000). The
groundwater quality varies from 0.3 dS/m to 4.6 dS/m in the Punjab province. The
40

water quality is fit to marginally fit, for agriculture in upper and central Punjab
(except at few locations, mostly in the centers of Doabs) but in lower Punjab deep
groundwater quality is unfit for agriculture purposes, at majority of the places. Here
irrigation is possible only by mixing groundwater with the canal water.
Chaj Doab: An extensive fresh groundwater zone exists in the upper north-eastern
part of Chaj Doab and along the present and abandoned flood plains of the Chenab
river. In this area fresh water was found up to a depth of 1000 ft. The area receives an
average rainfall of 45 cm per year. The extent of fresh water zone along river Chenab
is greater in the north (about 20 mile) than in the south (about 6 mile and less).
Extensive fresh water zone along river Jhelum is restricted to the area between
Malakwal and Rasul, and to the north and south of Sahiwal in the south. In the central
part of the Doab, impermeable deposits in the vicinity of Jhelum river have restricted
the fresh recharge. Along the abandoned courses of Jhelum river fresh water is found
locally up to 100 to 250 ft depth. Generally the salinity increases with depth and
exceeds 30,000 ppm near to the base of the aquifer in the vicinity of the buried ridge.
Groundwater quality of the samples obtained from pumping sources in area is shown
in Figure 4.1.

Figure 4.1: Groundwater Quality in Chaj Doab, during 2002-03.

41

Rechna Doab: Fresh water occurs in a 15 to 20 mile width, along the flood plains of
Chenab and Ravi rivers in the northern part up to a depth of 1000 ft. In the lower part
of the Doab this width is considerably reduced. Upper Rechna is the largest fresh
groundwater reservoir which extends from Sheikhupura, Khangah Dogran to the
border of Jammu and Kashmir (Figure 4.2). In most of this area the salinity is less
than 500 ppm. Saline groundwater is found in the central and lower parts of the Doab.
Highly saline zone is restricted to central Doab and contains water of 10,000 to
18,000 ppm, near Shorkot Road. In this area the degree of mineralization is
remarkably uniform from about 100 ft to 1100 ft. In Upper Rechna comparison of
shallow and deep water quality indicates that at places, water quality at shallow
depths is inferior to the quality of deep waters. However, in Lower Rechna, shallow
water quality is better than deep groundwater quality due to seepage from irrigation
system.

Figure 4.2: Groundwater Quality in Rechna Doab, during 2002-03.

Bari Doab: Because of less favorable recharge conditions zones of fresh water are
less extensive than Rechna Doab. Within about 20 miles south west of Lahore, the
average annual rainfall is about 35 cm per year and diminishes to less than 25 cm per
year, in lower parts of the Doab. It seems that steep escarpments of the terraces have
prevented the movement of meandering streams in the Doab and restricted recharge
from Ravi and Beas rivers. Fresh water in the upper part of the Doab is restricted to a
relatively small area extending easterly and south westerly from Lahore to the border.
Other fresh water zones are confined to flood plains of Sutlej and Ravi rivers. A wide
42

belt of fresh water is found along the abandoned flood plains of lower Ravi and
Chenab rivers between Mian Channu and Multan. Groundwater quality of the samples
obtained from pumping sources in the area is shown in Figure 4.3. Saline zone in
upper part of Bari Doab is in the area of terraces between Raiwind and Okara/Sahiwal
where groundwater of up to 1000 to 10,000 ppm is found and the groundwater quality
varies with depth (Figure 4.4). Groundwater in central lower Doab is also saline and
ranges from 5000 to 10000 ppm. Here salinity increases with depth between the upper
and lower saline zones, groundwater is mineralized to variable degree. In this area
fresh water zones can be attributed to recharge from rivers, particularly Beas River,
which formerly flowed through this area.

Figure 4.3: Groundwater quality in Bari Doab, during 2002-03.

43

Depth from NSL

(m)
Depth from NSL Depth from NSL Depth from NSL
(m)
(m)
(m)
Depth from NSL
(m)

2000

TDS (ppm)

4000

6000

20.4-26.5

8000

10000

BR 8

82.3-88.4
102.7-108.8

2000

4000

6000

67.0-73.2

8000

10000

BR_122

100.6-106.7

134.1-140.2
229.5-237.7 0

2000

4000

6000

20.1-26.2

8000

10000

BR_21

59.7-65.8

114.0-120.1

25.9-32.0
53.6-59.7
78.6-84.7
117.9-124.1
167.6-173.7 0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

BR_123

2000

4000

6000

26.8-32.9
53.6-59.7
80.5-86.7
108.5-114.6
162.8-168.9

8000

10000

BR_124

Figure 4.4: Groundwater salinity profile for the strip from Raiwind to middle of Okara
and Sahiwal.
Bahawalpur Area: In this area groundwater having TDS less than 1000 ppm is
generally found in a narrow belt of 5 to 10 mile wide along the river and also along
the major canals. In Rahim Yar Khan District the belt of fresh groundwater is wider,
up to 15 to 20 mile, and it occurs at depths up to and at some places beyond 450 ft. In
a test hole in the south of Bahawalpur fresh, water is found between 300 and 800 ft
depth, although at shallow depth it is of poor quality. Away from the flood plain there
is essentially a desert environment and deeper groundwater is highly mineralized
having TDS of over 5000 ppm.
Thal Doab: The groundwater gradient in the pre-irrigation period was south easterly
from river Indus to the interior of Thal Doab. It is for this reason that fresh water zone
paralleling the Indus River extends up to a depth of 1500 ft, or even more in the
western Thal Doab, except in the extreme southern part. Locally fresh water is
overlain with more saline water to depths of 300 to 400 ft. Fresh water zone attains its
greatest width near Mankera and may actually extend across Thal Doab to Jhelum
river. Near Mankera fresh ware of 500 to 800 ppm has been found at depths up to
1042 ft. In this Doab fresh water adjacent to Jhelum and Chenab rivers is considerably
narrow and near Girot it extends westwards for only 5 miles.
Depth of fresh water is up to 1000 ft near to the flood plains of Jhelum and
Chenab. Saline groundwater found in the lower central part of the Doab is located
within the low lying areas of the abandoned flood plains of the Indus and Chenab
rivers. This may explain the existence of generally lower salinities (4000 to 6000
44

ppm) in these areas. Vertical extent of these zones has not been explored below a
depth of 500 ft but there are indications of increasing salinities with depth. Most
highly saline groundwater (10,000 to 13,000 ppm) is found in an isolated zone
between Girot and Adhi Kot in the northern part of the Doab. However, on the north
of this area the quality of groundwater improves and TDS content rarely exceeds 1000
to 1500 ppm.
Dera Ghazi Khan Area: Fresh groundwater having TDS content from 450 to 1100
ppm up to a depth of 500 ft is found in a belt adjoining rivers Indus from Shadan
Lund to Mithan Kot, maximum width being 14 miles near village Ghati. Another
patch of fresh groundwater is found west of Retra in the northern part. In the north
western part of the quality of groundwater improves with depth. Highly saline
groundwater is found in the southern part of Dera Ghazi Khan Canal command from
Rajanpur to Kashmore in Sindh, the salinity of groundwater increases with depth.
FGW is found only in pockets and that too at very shallow depths. Groundwater of
9000 to 17000 ppm TDS has been found in this area.
4.2.1. Sindh
In Sindh the river is the main source of fresh groundwater existing mainly on its left
bank. The fresh groundwater on the right side of the Indus lies in a narrow strip. The
depth of fresh groundwater decreases with distance from the river. In Sindh, 28% of
the area has fresh groundwater suitable for drinking and irrigation purposes. There is a
very wide range of groundwater quality distribution in Sindh i.e. 0.5 dS/m to 7.1
dS/m. The native groundwater of the Lower Indus Plain is very saline being of marine
origin.
During the course of hydrogeologic investigations carried out by Lower Indus
Project, a number of bore holes 100 to 1,300 feet in depth, were drilled in Guddu,
Sukkur and Kotri Barrage commands to determine the quality of groundwater and its
horizontal and vertical variation.
The general pattern of groundwater distribution in the Lower Indus Plains is
one of good quality water immediately adjacent to the river with increasing salinity
away from the river. A lesser quantity of good quality water is available on the right
bank of the river than on the left. This is due to the proximity of limestone hills on the
right bank and to the poor aquifers associated with piedmont plains. Another feature
of importance is the complete absence of usable groundwater in the deltaic area, south
of Hyderabad, except in some shallow pockets in the fairly recently abandoned river
beds of the Gaja command. Some of the most saline groundwater of the region is
found in the delta where the water samples with salinities twice as high as sea-water
have been obtained. Throughout the region the salinity of groundwater increases with
depth and no case has been recorded where saline water overlies fresh water. A brief
discussion of the groundwater quality in the commands of Guddu, Sukkur and Kotri
Barrages are gives below:

45

Guddu Barrage: In the Guddu Barrage command, Lower Indus Project (LIP) drilled
about 52 bore holes on the right and left banks (WAPDA, 1966). Bore holes drilled on
the right bank of Indus river showed good quality water at shallow depths and that too
near the river. As the distance increases away from the river, the water quality even at
shallower depths worsens along with deeper bad quality water. On the left side of the
River, most of the area of Ghotki canal command is fresh.
Sukkur Barrage: In Sukkur Barrage command, LIP drilled 38 test holes on the right
bank of Indus River (WAPDA, 1966). The behavior of water quality is not altogether
un-expected because of the reason of the proximity of limestone hills. Good quality
groundwater is available near the Indus River and that too at a shallow depth. LIP
drilled about 119 test holes on the left bank of Indus River in Sukkur Command. Here
the water quality is good throughout, in the holes located near the protection bund of
the Indus river. Water quality is good throughout up to 350 feet depth generally but it
worsens with distance away from the river. The Indus river acts as the main source of
recharge.
Kotri Command: LIP drilled about 49 test holes in Kotri command. This is deltaic
area and groundwater quality throughout is so bad, that at places the TDS content is
twice the TDS of Sea water. The reason for this high salinity of groundwater is the
presence of high water tables and concentration of salts because of high rates of
evaporation. Only pockets of fresh water are found in Kotri command, which is due to
the recently abandoned flood courses of Gaja River. The Lower Indus alluvium is
saturated with groundwater, often to within a few feet of ground surface. The quality
of this water varies a great deal, both vertically and horizontally. According to Ahmad
(1995), there are many sites, where shallow useable groundwater exists.

4.3.

Spatial and Temporal Variation in Groundwater Behavior over IBIS

during the Last Decade

Until recently water resource development mainly focused on diverting water from
rivers channels to where and when it was needed most, a supply-side management
based on fragmented approach i.e. without integration of other parameters of
importance. Nowadays the potential of diverting surplus river flows has nearly
exhausted and there are signs that surface water resource availability is dwindling.
This is due to decreasing online storage, population increase and larger per capita
water use with passage of time. Until a few decades earlier, in addition to surface
water utilization, increased groundwater use provided a big boom for meeting
additional water requirements. The exploitation of groundwater, mostly by private
farmers, has brought numerous environmental and economic benefits to the
agriculture sector in Pakistan. Share of groundwater is now almost half of all crop
water requirements in the irrigated environment, especially in Punjab. Consequently,
some of the areas in Punjab, started showing excessive depletion at the onset of
drought period (1998-2002). The depth to groundwater was maximum in majority of
46

Bari Doab, in June 2000, as shown in Figure 4.5. Thus, it was the start of 21st century
which gave birth to a number of adverse interactions, such as abnormal lowering of
watertable, increase in energy cost for pumping deeper groundwater and potential
lateral migration of saline water into sweet water zones leading to groundwater
quality problems.

Figure 4.5: Depth to watertable status in IBIS during June 2000.

Actually, in Punjab province, canal supplies are far less than actual crop water
requirement. In areas where, this gap in water demand and canal supplies along with
rainfall is higher, groundwater pumping is more than the recharge. Therefore, mining
of the resource is taking place continuously, in addition to its ill impact on the
economic conditions of the farmers. Strength of groundwater irrigation lies in its
ready access; which otherwise is not possible with canal supplies being supply driven
and turn bound system. Therefore, it is not surprising that contribution of groundwater
irrigation towards crop yields has now surpassed canal water in Punjab, and the area
with watertable depth more than 6.0 m continuously expanded during drought as
shown in Figures 4.6, 4.7 and 4.8, for June 2001, June 2002 and October 2002. On the
47

other hand, waterlogging conditions prevailed in some of the other areas in Punjab
and Sindh-Balochistan irrigated areas. This successively increasing supplement to
canal water in these overstressed areas is considered to be at risk due to overdevelopment and quality-deterioration in some of the irrigated areas of Punjab
(NESPAK/SGI.1991; Steenbergen & Oliemans, 1997; Halcrow, 2006; Basharat and
Tariq, 2013a).

Figure 4.6: Depth to watertable status in IBIS during June 2001.

48

Before inception of irrigation systems in the basin, the groundwater table varied
between 20-30 m. Recharge from earthen canals and irrigated fields resulted in a
significant rising of the watertable in certain locations. Acute shortage of irrigation
water, due to increasing population and cropping intensities, urged the farmers to
exploit groundwater reservoirs. Number of tube wells in Punjab increased
exponentially (Figure 4.9) from 334099 in 1992-93 to 1009097 in 2009-10
(Agricultural Statistics of Pakistan, 2011) resulting in lowering of the watertable in
areas with less canal supplies, e.g. Bari Doab.

Figure 4.7: Depth to watertable status in IBIS during June 2002.

49

Figure 4.8: Depth to watertable status in IBIS during October 2002.

Figure 4.9: Exponential growth of tubewells in Punjab, showing acute shortage of

canal supplies in the province.
50

An article (by Ex Member (Water), WAPDA, from Balochistan) titled

Pakistans groundwater reservoir and its sustainability3 states that the groundwater
development potential in Punjab, Sindh, KP and Baluchistan are 42.75, 18.0, 3.11 and
1.21 MAF, respectively. In Sindh province, only about 4 MAF groundwater is being
pumped annually, in contrast to the potential, as mentioned above, this is due to the
absence of conjunctive use environment in the Lower Indus. On the other hand, the
groundwater pumping in Punjab has surpassed the groundwater development
potential, especially in Bari Doab. Therefore, the lower and central parts of the Bari
Doab are continuous under groundwater mining and the maximum groundwater depth
has gone beyond 20 m, and the maximum area of the Doab is under more than 12 m
watertable depth (Figure 4.10)
Because of the gentle slopes of the Indus Plain, the accumulating groundwater
rose up to and above the ground surface in intensely irrigated areas resulting in water
logging and the soils became salinized because of the accumulation of salts in the
upper soil layers due to evaporation of water from the watertable. This began to effect
crops production. To control the problem of Water logging and Salinity, GOP took up
the construction of Salinity Control and Reclamation Projects (SCARPs) in 1960. In
these projects a large number of irrigation and drainage tubewells were installed. Up
to 2005, some 12,746 irrigation tubewells, 361 scavenger tubewells and 3,843
drainage tubewells were installed, 14,621 Km (9,087 miles) of surface drains were
constructed. 12,612 Km long tile drains have been laid out in 157,832 hectares
(390,000 acres) of irrigated field. These facilities provided sub-surface drainage
facilities to a gross area 7.86 Mha (19.43 Mac). However, as mentioned earlier, owing
to intense irrigation supplies in Lower Indus and absence of conjunctive environment
in the area, watertable could not be brought down to optimum levels and the
waterlogging remained at its highest. The groundwater depletion and waterlogging
conditions have also shown their other significant impacts in the form of changes in
surface salinity, as shown in Figure 4.11, which shows maximum surface salinity in
Sindh as compared to Punjab.

Muhammad Amin, a former Member (Water), WAPDA (available at:

http://www.watertech.cn/English/amin.pdf)
51

Figure 4.10: Depth to watertable in IBIS, during June 2012.

4.4.

Comparison of Groundwater Depth Distribution amongst Regions in

IBIS

Areas under different DTW classes in Upper Indus Plain, for the year 2002
(October), is shown in Figure 4.12, even after four years drought period (1999-2002),
some areas of canal commands in Punjab (UJC, LJC, FESS and Muzaffargarh) and
substantial tracts of agricultural lands in Sindh were waterlogged. With regards to
depletion, 33.4% of the area of Bari Doab was having DTW of more than 12m below
ground surface. Whereas, in Rechna Doab and Bahawalpur, only 0.7% and 4.2% area,
respectively was under this category, as given in Table 4.1.
52

Figure 4.11: Surface salinity in IBIS, as surveyed during 2003-04.

Figure 4.12: Areas under different DTW (October 2002) in Punjab and KP.
53

Table 4.1: Doab wise area under different DTW zones, as on October 2002.
Doab/area

Area (000 Ha) under different depth zones (cm)

0-100 100-150 150-300 300-450 450-600 600-1200 > 1200
Thal
43.0
84.2 351.5 386.6 466.0
261.2
0.0
D.G Khan
19.8
17.3
78.8 117.6 141.0
33.5
0.0
Chaj
2.5
15.1 182.8 300.8 288.3
203.0
0.0
Rechna
3.7
10.7 101.7 462.1 763.2 1066.7 17.7
Bari
0.2
0.5
14.9
95.3 233.9 1516.2 935.3
SCARP-6
1.9
6.4
66.6 208.0 149.5
223.7
0.0
Bahawalpur 10.8
85.1 143.1 169.2 389.6
250.1 46.4

Recent DTW situation for June 2011, amongst the provinces is compared in
Figure 4.13. Twenty percent irrigated area of Punjab and 22% in KP province is
having depth to watertable more than 12 m. Whereas, 99.5% area of IBIS in Sindh
and Balochistan falls within 4.5m DTW, out of this 53.7% falls in waterlogged
category i.e. within 1.5m DTW.
Comparison of areas under different DTW classes amongst the regions in KP
province for June 2011 is shown in Figure 4.14. In Bannu and DI Khan Regions,
52.3% and 27.6%, respectively, falls in DTW category of more than 12 m. Whereas,
in Mardan only 6.1% falls in this depleted class. However, almost whole of the Bannu
area and depleted areas in DI Khan lie outside of Indus Command.
Comparison of areas under different DTW classes amongst the regions in
Punjab is shown in Figure 4.15, for June 2012. In Bari Doab, 65.4% area is highly
depleted (DTW > 12m), whereas in Bahawalpur and Rechna Doabs, 10.9 and 7.8%,
respectively, falls in depleted class. According to the DTW map of Bari Doab (Figure
4.16), depth to groundwater successively increases towards downstream of the
irrigation system. According to the new classification, highly depleted area (DTW >
13m), falls in lower part of the Doab, its further distribution is towards Sutlej river
and towards the center of the Doab. In reality, groundwater is deeper in central part of
the Doab, i.e. along the course of old Sukh-Beas River, which is now disconnected
from its head waters (in Indian part) and completely dry.
Thus, Sukh-Beas acts as a border line for tails of Sidhnai and Mailsi irrigation
systems (on right and left sides, respectively of the dry river bed) causing less seepage
and more pumping in this area due to inequitable supplies towards tails of these
systems, along with less density and discharge of distribution channels in this
direction. This deeper depth to groundwater in central part of the depleted portion of
Doab is not so apparent in the map; the reason being the less density of observation
network towards the center of the Doab due to wells being dry as a result of
groundwater depletion. Also, groundwater quality deterioration is taking place in this
central part of the Doab due to groundwater depletion and consumption of upper fresh
water layer.

54

50
45

Punjab

43

39

KPK

40

Sindh/Balochistan

Area (%)

35
30

22

25
20

25

25

20

20
17

16

14

22

15

11
7

10

2 2

0
0-90

90 - 150

150 - 300 300 - 450 450 - 600 600 - 1200

DTW Range (cm)

>1200

Figure 4.13: Comparison of DTW amongst the provinces (June, 2011).

100

0.0

6.1

90

27.6

80

52.3

Area (%)

70

99.0

60
50

64.9
Depleted (> 1200)
Normal (150-1200)
Waterlogged (0-150)

93.5

40
30

47.2

20
10
0

7.5

1.0
Peshawar

0.4
Mardan

0.5
Bannu

DI Khan
Region

Figure 4.14: Comparison of DTW amongst regions of KP, as on June, 2011.

100

0.1

0.2

0.0

7.8

90

10.9

2.0

80
65.4

Area (%)

70
60
50 96.9
40

98.3

91.7

84.2

85.8

Depleted (> 1200)

30

Normal (150-1200)

20

Waterlogged (0-150)

10
0

98.1

34.4
3.1
Thal

1.7
Chaj

0.6
Rechna

0.2
Bari
Region

12.2
4.8
1.7
DG Khan Bhawal Pur Rahimyar
Khan

Figure 4.15: Comparison of DTW amongst regions of Punjab province (June, 2012).
55

4.5.

Groundwater Depletion and its Causes in Bari Doab

Depth to watertable data analysis has shown that 59.2% area of Bari Doab is having
depth to watertable more than 13m, as on June 2012 (Figure 4.16). Based on
groundwater levels of 2002 and 2012, it is estimated that 18.9 MAF volume of
groundwater has been depleted from the aquifer under Bari Doab in these 10 years
duration, which is equivalent to about 2 MAF of groundwater depletion per year in
the area. If the current groundwater depletion trend is allowed to continue as such, the
result could be a serious threat to the ecology and sustainability of current production
levels, which is vital for the nations food security. Another, relatively severe impact
of groundwater depletion is the quality deterioration of groundwater being pumped by
the farmers, particularly in centers of the Doabs (especially Bari Doab, Figure 4.3),
where deeper groundwater is having higher salt contents as compared to shallow
groundwater seeped after inception of the irrigation system.

Figure 4.16: Depth to watertable position in Bari Doab (June 2012).

Design of Indus Basin Irrigation System (IBIS) is more than a century old.
Water allowances and canal water distributions responded to increasing crop water
requirements in southward direction, e.g. higher water allowance in Sindh as
compared to Punjab. But within a province, the canal water supplies do not address
56

the issue of difference in irrigation demand. The consequence is unprecedented

groundwater depletion in Bari Doab and Waterlogging in certain other canal
commands. After the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) of 1960, gradually reduced flows,
and ultimate desiccation of eastern rivers have also contributed towards falling
groundwater levels of adjoining aquifers. In this report, water allocations in Water
Apportionment Accord (WAA) of 1991, annual average canal water diversions, and
irrigation demand were compared for canal commands in Punjab, as discussed in the
next chapter. The analysis proved enough evidences in the favor of allocating more
water to the area, in order to avoid this excessive groundwater depletion trend caused
century old irrational allocations amongst the different canal commands in Punjab.
4.6.

Lahore - a Case study of Urban Groundwater Management

Lahore is the capital of the Pakistani province of Punjab and the second
largest and metropolitan city in the country. It is ranked 25th in the most populated
urban areas in the world and the 8th largest city within the Organization of Islamic
Cooperation. Lahore has expanded almost double area-wise in the last 12 to 15 years.
According to the 1998 population census, there were 6318745 persons, and the
population density was 3565.9 persons per km2. During 1998, urban population was
69.1% and rural population was 41.7 % literate. During 2007-08, physical access to
drinking water within the dwelling was available to 98% and improved sources for
drinking water sources were used by 99% of the residents (Punjab Development
Statistics, 2012). The estimated population of Lahore district (including rural
population) is 8.83 million as on 31-12-2011 (Government of Punjab, 2011), while
84% of the population resides in Metropolitan city area (Government of Pakistan,
2011).
The groundwater sustainability situation in Lahore is no more different, when
compared with other big cities in Asia and elsewhere. The area slopes towards the
south and south-west, at average gradient of 1in 3000. Basharat (2014) carried out
groundwater sustainability evaluation of the aquifer under Lahore, under the project
Enhancing the groundwater management capacity in Asian cities through the
development and application of groundwater sustainability index (GSII) in the context
of global change funded by Asia Pacific Network for nine Asian cities. According
to the draft report (to be finalized in July 2014), groundwater is rapidly depleting
because of unprecedented groundwater abstraction in comparison to the natural
recharge, which is decreasing both in quantity and quality, with passage of time. This
is so because of lack of strategic planning and property rights over water usage, and
an absence of regulation to assign these rights. However, not a single concrete step
has yet been taken by the government, to ensure long-term sustainability of the
aquifer under Lahore. In 2010, there were about 467 tubewells operated by WASA.
Including all other consumers i.e. cantonment board area, private housing societies,
industries and individual groundwater users, total groundwater withdrawal is of the
order of 1300 cfs. With this groundwater withdrawal, annually pumped groundwater
volume is 1161 MCM (0.94 MAF), this is gigantic volume. WASA is supplying about
57

333 lpcd water (Iftikhar, 2007) to the areas served. Using this water consumption rate
and population of 8.83 million in Lahore District; total annual water consumption
comes out to be 1093 MCM (0.885 MAF).
The biggest setback due to the loss of water use of one of the three eastern
rivers (Ravi), as result of IWT of 1960 with India, is being faced by the Punjab
Provinces capital city, the Lahore. Once it was a one of the major sources of recharge
to the underlying aquifer. Construction of Thein Dam, on the river Ravi at Thein for
water and energy supply by India has severely reduced Ravi flows (Figure 4.17) and
the recharge to groundwater in and around the city of Lahore. Thein dam across the
river Ravi in India was completed in about 2000. This dam is 160m high and is about
20 km upstream of Madhopur Barrage. The live storage is reported as 1.90MAF (2.34
BCM). The dam is having significant impacts on the flood hydrology in the medium
term particularly in River reach along the Lahore city, although these may be
progressively reduced by long term sediment build-up in the reservoir. It is pertinent
to note that the dam is having a pronounced impact on attenuating floods and this may
explain why no substantial floods have been observed at Balloki barrage since 1997.
This has been particularly observed, even during the high intensity monsoons, after
completion of the Thein Dam, i.e. only a maximum discharge of 30-40 thousands
cusecs was observed in the Ravi River. Future floods which can pass along the Lahore
reach will be either flood from the Ravis tributaries downstream of Thein dam or a
flood which exceeds the available capacity of the reservoir. That means except these
flood events, no regular flows of appreciable amount are expected in the reach except
that of Marala Ravi (MR) link releases from Marala Barrage.

12

Ravi inflows (MAF)

10
8
6
4
2
61-62
63-64
65-66
67-68
69-70
71-72
73-74
75-76
77-78
79-80
81-82
83-84
85-86
87-88
89-90
91-92
93-94
95-96
97-98
99-00
01-02
03-04
05-06
07-08
09-10
11-12

Year

Figure 4.17: Desiccation of Ravi River in 2000, after the completion of Thein Dam,
above Madhopur headworks.
58

Presently, static groundwater level in Lahore varies from 20 to 45 m below

ground level in 2009. Deep tubewells, about 467 by WASA, with their capacities
varying from 1.5 to 4 cusec, along with the others installed by private industries,
housing societies and individuals are pumping groundwater to their full satisfaction.
The subsequent development of groundwater levels at selected representative
tubewells in Lahore by WASA for the years 2003-11 is shown in Figure 4.18. The
only bar being felt is the electricity burden, which too is borne by the WASA and
societies, whereas the individual household normally pays at flat rate, thus no
economic feeling regarding over use of this precious resource. Therefore, the Lahore
aquifer is under stress, regulation and monitoring of quality and potential is need of
the day for assuring sustainability of this precious resources.

Windsor Park Ichra

Jaurey Pull
Mustafabad

Depth to watertable (m), from NSL

-10

Mehmood Booti - I
Farakhbad
Disposal Shahdara

-20

Gulistan Colony
Walton

-30

Patiala Ground
Govt. House
Nishtar Colony
Old - Chungi Amar
Sadhoo
A - II Block
Township

-40

Khizer Abad
Mosque
(Samanabad)
Ravi Block
Twonship

-50

-60

Figure 4.18: Groundwater level trends in Lahore city (2003 2011).

To visualize the present groundwater flow directions, the depth to watertable

data in and around the Lahore city for 2009 was converted to groundwater level
elevations and contour of the same were drawn, as shown in Figure 4.19. The map
shows a big depression (about 36m, within a radius of 25 km) under the Lahore city
caused by intensive pumping from, and lack of recharge, to the aquifer. As shown by
arrows representing groundwater flow directions, the groundwater is flowing from all
the sides towards urban areas of Lahore. According to the groundwater elevation
contour map, the area around Raiwind, with high salinity groundwater (about 9000
ppm, discussed in next section), is lying at higher elevation and behaving as a
59

groundwater divide. Depth to groundwater is rapidly increasing in the urban area, due
to urban area expansion and increasing use of the groundwater by the population and
industries. Thus, with further groundwater depletion in Lahore city, an increasing area
would be contributing to replenish the cone of depression in the center. Therefore,
there are likely chances of saline intrusion, from the saline groundwater in Raiwind
area, towards fresh groundwater in Lahore city.

Figure 4.19: Groundwater elevation contours (m), 2009, (deep depression under
Lahore city, and irrigation network of CBDC Command.

4.7.

Institutional Setup

Agencies mainly responsible for water management for different purposes in the
country are:

Indus River System Authority (IRSA): a federal organization, established

under the IRSA Act of 1992 in the wake of inter-provincial
Water Apportionment Accord (WAA) of 1991. The main mandate of IRSA is

60

to supervise the distribution of the Indus River flows, in accordance with the
WAA 1991.
Water and Power development Authority (WAPDA): A federal agency for
planning, development and management of surface water resources of the
country.
Provincial Irrigation Departments (PIDs): are responsible for distribution of
irrigation water and maintenance of irrigation and drainage system in the
provinces.
Water and Sanitation Agency (WASA); a sub-department of urban
Development Authoritys, responsible for water supply and sewerage services,
in different cities.
Public Health Engineering Department is responsible for planning and
execution of small scale schemes for potable water supply to towns and
villages (groundwater source only).
There are various other research and monitoring organizations, working at
federal and provincial levels, for the surface and groundwater resources in the
country. These include, PCRWR, IWASRI, SMO and DLR.

Government management of the irrigation system does not extend beyond the main
distribution channels. In effect, the efficiency and effectiveness of water management
relies on the way farmers use the system. The capacity of state groundwater
institutions need to be developed to ensure that they can perform the key functions of
providing information and technical support, enabling community management, and
enforcing regulatory measures where necessary and applicable. The present water
crisis is mainly a crisis of governance as declared by the Global Water Partnership
(2000). Vertical and horizontal coordination needs to be strengthened and the
divisions of the responsibilities between the institutions need to be clearer and well
defined. Currently SMO, DLR IWASRI and PCRWR are mainly involved in
monitoring and research regarding groundwater. But, gravity of the situation is that
there are no coordinated efforts, in this regard, even in priority research areas. Even,
the data sharing involves too many and difficult steps to conclude. Specifically
groundwater monitoring together by SMO and DLR in Punjab is a clear duplication
and wastage of meager resources. Many concentrated efforts/measures would be
required for capacity building of these central and provincial agencies, dealing with
groundwater.
With continuously declining water levels, sustainability of irrigation practice
is in doubt, e.g. in southern parts of Bari Doab, and barani areas of Punjab and
Balochistan. Moreover, waterlogging and salinity are continuously at alarming levels
in Lower Indus Plain. The climate change is further expected to gear up all these
affects, with strong implications for water and agriculture now and for the future.
Fresh canal water is expected to increase in value in the face of population growth,
gradual aquifer depletion and groundwater salinity increase. Overcoming future
challenges will require clarity on water rights, surface and groundwater, and water to
61

be treated as an economic good. A multipronged integrated approach with a wellconceived mix of professional, technical administrative and legal steps with
community participation for ensuring sustainable management of groundwater
resources is a must for the times to come. Strategic steps needed with respect to
strategic sustainability of groundwater resources are as follows:

Resolution of these problems both surface and groundwater requires strong

political will and support, a public education and information program, and
user involvement. Therefore, coordination between different research and
development organizations need to be enhanced, along with the involvement
of end user of groundwater

Groundwater management is becoming more and more a must in developing

countries to forestall overexploitation and to foster sustainable use of the water
resources. Nevertheless, sound management of groundwater requires an
efficient institutional and regulatory framework, which only the full
commitment of the government can ensure;

The role of farmers, the primary users of groundwater and who are also
directly affected is very critical and can have far reaching impact, therefore
needs to be mobilized and involved in monitoring of groundwater depth and
quality.

There is dire need to establish a central groundwater authority at federal level

with the mandate for policy and planning, and provincial bodies with
implementation and regulation roles;

Long term strategies like formulation of a national water law and regulatory
framework on groundwater abstraction, construction of small and large storage
reservoirs; and

Role of Federal and provincial institutes e.g. PCRWR and IWASRI, SMO be
amended accordingly. These organizations under the federal government can
take up the lead role but with proper mandate issued under some legislation.
Provincial (such as DLR) and district level departments having links at the
stakeholder level should take the role of involving local community in
groundwater management.

62

CHAPTER 5
IRRATIONAL WATER SUPPLY AND DEMAND ACROSS
PUNJAB

5.1.

Irrigation Demand and Supply Inequity

Aridity of the climate increases rapidly, in head to tail direction across the
canal commands, especially in central and upper Punjab, as shown in Figure 1.6 and
5.1. According to Basharat (2012), annual normal rainfall varies from 713 mm for
Lahore in the north-east, to 209 mm for Multan in the south-west, and the ETo
difference is 177 mm between the two stations (Figure 5.1), thus, a drastic spatial
climate variability in the area. Therefore, crop water requirement increases
continuously in the downstream direction of the irrigation systems in Punjab. This is
apparent in Figure 5.2, where, the annual ETo is successively increasing in
downstream direction of the irrigation system. The Upper Jhelum Canal (UJC) has a
minimum ETo of 1617mm, whereas the Panjnad canal having a maximum ETo of
1877mm. Thus, a maximum difference of 260mm from north to south of Punjab is
causing higher crop consumptive use requirement in this direction.

1850

Rainfall
700

1800

ETo

600

1750

500
1700

400
1650

300
1600

200

Annual normal ETo (mm)

Annual normal (1971-2000) rainfall (mm)

800

1550

100

1500

0
Lahore

Faisalabad

Multan

Figure 5.1: Increasing aridity shown by met stations across the command.

63

Annual normal (1971-2000) ETo

(mm/year)

1900
1850
1800
1750
1700
1650
1600
1550
1500
1450

Figure 5.2: Increasing ETo in downstream direction of IBIS in Punjab (PMD, 2006).
5.1.1 Crop consumptive use, irrigation demand index and canal supplies

ETc of Cotton (mm)

Figures 5.3 and 5.4 show monthly crop consumptive use (mm), for cotton, rice
and wheat crops for LJC, LBDC, Mailsi, Thal and Panjnad canal commands. Seasonal
crop consumptive use was 155, 219 and 28.4 mm higher in Panjnad as compared to
UJC command for cotton, rice and wheat crops, respectively. Comparison of annual
potential irrigation demand index (IDIp) is shown in Figure 5.5 for all canal
commands in Punjab. The IDIp continuously increases in downstream direction of the
IBIS in Punjab i.e. the minimum is 1167 mm and maximum 1785 mm for UJC and
Panjnad canal commands, respectively. In general, the IDIp is minimum for upper
parts of Chaj, Rechna and Bari Doabs, and increases for downstream areas of these
Doabs. Furthermore, the IDIp is substantially higher for lower parts of Thal and Bari
Doab, and for Abbasia and Panjnad canal commands. From Figure 5.5, it is inferred
that there is no correspondingly increasing trend in canal supplies to increasing IDIp,
except that of less annual supplies for some of the upper canal commands e.g.
UCC/BRBD.
300
275
250
225
200
175
150
125
100
75
50
25
0

LJC
LBDC
MAILSI
PANJAD
THAL

M A M

J J A S
MONTHS

Figure 5.3: Cotton crop consumptive use requirement for selected canal commands.
64

300
275
250
225
200
175
150
125
100
75
50
25
0

125

LJC

LJC

LBDC

100

ETc of Wheat (mm)

ETc of Rice (mm)

MAILSI
PANJNAD
THAL

LBDC
MAILSI
PANJAD

75

THAL
50

25

0
J

Momths (July to June)

Months

Figure 5.4: Rice (left) and Wheat (right) crop consumptive use requirement for
selected canal commands.
The IDIa, (actual irrigation demand index, depending upon prevailing cropping
pattern and intensities) is compared for the canal commands on Kharif, Rabi and
annual basis as shown in Figures 5.6, 5.7 and 5.8, along with corresponding canal
supplies. The variation in IDIa is 722 mm and 252 mm for Kharif and Rabi seasons,
whereas on annual basis the difference is 794 mm in north south direction of the
irrigation system. As shown in Figure 5.6, canal supply is maximum for Muzaffargarh
and minimum for UCC and LJC commands in Kharif. While during the Rabi season,
canal supply is maximum for UJC, Eastern Sadiqia and LBDC commands. On the
other hand, the annual canal supply is maximum for Muzaffargarh (849 mm), then
Eastern Sadiqia (843mm), and UJC (816mm). Cropping intensity (CI) is also plotted
in Figure 5.8, based on the DLR (2004) data; it is maximum for Mailsi (171.2%), then
Pakpattan (167.5%), LBDC (159%) and Panjnad (149.4%) commands.
Depth of water (mm) over CCA

2000
1800

Annual IDIp

1600

Canal Supply

1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0

Canal

Figure 5.5: IDIp and average canal supplies on annual basis.

65

Depth of water (mm) over CCA

1200
1100
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0

Kharif IDIa
Canal Supply

Canals

Figure 5.6: IDIa and average canal supplies during Kharif season.
700
Depth of water (mm) over CCA

Rabi IDIa
600
Rabi Canal Supply
500
400
300
200
100
0

Canals

Figure 5.7: IDIa and average canal supplies during Rabi season.

66

Depth of water (mm) over CCA

1800
1600

180

Annual IDIa
Annual Canal Supply

160

Annual CI (%)

140

1400

120

1200

100

1000
80

800

60

600
400

40

200

20

Cropping Intensity (%)

2000

Canals

Figure 5.8: IDIa, average annual canal supplies and CI.

As shown in Figures 5.5 to 5.8, the annual supplies were maximum for
Muzaffargarh, Eastern Sadiqia, UJC, Rangpur and LBDC (descending order) canal
commands. Further, less supply was available to UCC, Pakpattan, LJC, upper and
lower Depalpur, LCC and CBDC in ascending order. This does not show any
correspondence regarding higher supplies for commands with higher crop water
demands. Instead, higher supplies were diverted to UJC, the command with low crop
water requirement and cropping intensity. For Pakpattan canal system, cropping
intensity is maximum, and canal supplies are less than all other canal commands
except the UCC. Similarly, there is big gap between IDIa and annual canal supplies
for Sidhnai and Mailsi commands. Thus, the major reason for excessive groundwater
depletion in lower parts of Bari Doab is relatively less canal supplies in contrary to
larger irrigation demand.

5.2.

Existing Canal Water Allocations

The record of actual average system uses for the period 1977-82 has formed
the basis for sharing the water of Indus river system between the provinces and
provided regulation pattern for allocation to the individual irrigation units during
Kharif and Rabi. Figure 5.9a and 5.9b show the comparison of WAA allocations with
that of actual releases during the period 2001-09 for Kharif and Rabi seasons,
respectively. It can be inferred that during the last decade, Kharif supplies are
comparable (98%) to the WAA allocations, but Rabi supplies are considerably less
i.e. 70.25% of WAA. Such a large %age reduction in Rabi supplies is in
67

correspondence to the reduction in online storage capacity in the IBIS (about 25%
depleted due to sedimentation in in Tarbela, Mangla and Chashma reservoirs).

4.0
WAA Allocation
2001-09 Avg. Supplies

Kharif volume (MAF)

3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0

Canals

Figure 5.9a: Comparison of WAA allocations and 2001-09 supplies, during Kharif.

Rabi volume (MAF)

3.5
3.0
WAA Allocation
2001-09 Avg. Supplies

2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0

Canals

Figure 5.9b: Comparison of WAA allocations and 2001-09 supplies, during Rabi.
5.3.

Recharge Inequity

The data of Ravi and Sutlej flows for three different periods is given in Table 5.1: i)
40 years before IWT (1960) i.e. 1922-61, ii) 22 years after completion of IWT works
i.e. 1977 to 1999, and iii) the latest 11 years i.e. 2000-2011. According to flow
changes in Ravi and Sutlej, the impact of IWT has emerged with vigor in the last
decade when India has developed the capacity to divert almost all the flows of both
the Ravi and Sutlej rivers. Thus, the strong need for environmental flows for the
eastern rivers could be realized now. Most of the channels along the Sutlej River are
68

non-perennial (Figure 5.10), since the inception of the irrigation system, on the basis
that there had been sufficient groundwater recharge contribution from the river.
Changing of Sutlej river regime to about no flow conditions has also substantially
contributed towards lack of recharge and thud, groundwater depletion in the area.
In the selection of perennial and non-perennial areas, beside the insufficiency
of river water many other factors, particularly the nature of soil formation, depth to
groundwater, surface salinity etc. were kept in view (Ahmad, 1993). A considerable
increase in canal diversions was observed during the post-Mangla and post-Tarbela
periods. Of this, obviously the major increase was in the Rabi season. Irrespective of
the changes in surface water availability and the associated flow patterns, the
allocation system remained rigid and did not show any flexibility. Particularly, the
perennial and non-perennial allocations have been rigid in contrary to emerging
groundwater depletion behavior.

Figure 5.10: Map showing rivers, perennial and non-perennial channels in Punjab.
69

Table 5.1: Annual average flows (MAF) in Ravi and Sutlej Rivers for different
periods.
Ravi
Sutlej
1922-1961 1976-1999 2000-2011 1922-1961 1976-1999 2000-2011
7.0
5.51
1.20
14.0
3.51
0.78

5.4.

Present Water Allocations and its Impact on Groundwater

Due to data availability limitations for assessment of irrigation system

performance using the aforementioned definitions, IDI and annual canal supplies were
compared for different irrigation units in Punjab. Similarly, there are issues regarding
system operation e.g. canal water distribution inequity at distributaries and minor
level. Another well-known inequity is being faced by the tail end farmers at
watercourse command level. Yet, another important parameter is the natural recharge
to groundwater due to proximity to recharge sources e.g. rivers and main canals. Yet,
another important parameter is the water allocation in the form of perennial and nonperennial canal supplies. All these parameters result in variation in groundwater
demand and availability (different depths to groundwater). These anomalies were
analysed and discussed based on primary and secondary data, as well as with
reference to the work already done from literature.
Before the introduction of irrigation in Bari Doab, the watertable was about 30
m below ground level. With canal supplies, the watertable had been gradually raised,
waterlogging only appeared towards the North of the Bari Doab, where there is more
annual rainfall, e.g. near Lahore. Other areas, particularly towards lower and central
parts of the Bari doab, had never been waterlogged. On the other hand most of the
areas in other Doabs had been facing waterlogging, so much so, even now when Bari
Doab is facing consistent groundwater depletion, some of the areas in other canal
commands are still waterlogged. The point regarding unequal watertable conditions in
the past (October 1977 and June 1978) is apparent in the Figures 5.11 and 5.12,
respectively. Thus, it is proved that irrigation water allocations had no rational, since
the inception of the irrigation system.

70

Figure 5.11: Depth to watertable, October 1977 (Ahmad, 1995).

71

Figure 5.12: Depth to watertable, June 1978 (Ahmad, 1995).

72

5.4.1 Irrigation system distribution inequity

In IBIS, the inequity of water distribution among water users located at head,
middle and tail reaches, particularly at secondary (distributaries and minors) and
tertiary (watercourse) level irrigation channels, has been reported by many researchers
(Bhutta & Van Der Velde, 1992; Van Der Velde, 1991; Kuper & Kijne, 1992; Latif &
Sarwar, 1994; Habib & Kuper, 1996; Khepar et al., 2000). PPSGDP (2000) pointed
out that the deeper depths of groundwater towards tail of canal systems. The fact that
farmers located at upper reaches of the irrigation canals get higher income and it
progressively decreases downstream along all main, secondary and tertiary irrigation
canals has also been highlighted by Latif (2007), and Latif and Ahmad (2009). The
difference in income was attributed to larger use of groundwater towards the tail
reaches of the irrigation channels incurring higher costs to the farmers. The difference
has been attributed only to lower recharge to groundwater from inequitably available
canal water and higher discharge in the form of groundwater pumping towards tail
reaches of the canals. However, the effect of climatic variability in the form of
decreasing rainfall and increasing crop water requirements from head to tail at main
canal command level has been overlooked, as pointed out by Basharat and Tariq
(2013a) for LBDC command.
5.4.2 Watercourse command distribution inequity
Canal water availability and the resulting groundwater pumping by the farmers
along the length of the watercourse, (water depth per unit area) for one complete year
(2008-09) in LBDC command is shown in Figure 5.13 (Basharat, 2012a). It is clear
that the role of groundwater increases quite rapidly towards tail of the watercourse. In
head and upper middle parts of the watercourses, the contribution of canal water is
higher than groundwater. In lower-middle and tail reaches of the watercourse,
groundwater contribution is considerably higher than canal water. Accordingly, at the
tail reach of the watercourse, contribution from canal water ranges from 38 to 75%
and groundwater 112 to 173% of that at the head of the watercourse. Thus, farmers
lying in the tail reach of the watercourses are forced to relatively depend much on
groundwater, which is due to seepage losses along the watercourse. In general, when
compared on individual basis, tail-end farmers receive 30 to 70% less canal water, as
compared to their counterparts on the head end of the watercourse. This fact has
already been well reported, recommending a variable time allocation (Warabandi
system) depending upon seepage quantum in the distribution channels (Latif and
Sarwar, 1994; Bandragoda and Saeed-ur-Rehamn, 1995)

73

100
Head

Water usage at field (cm)

90

Upper middle

80

Lower middle

70

Tail

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Canal

Tubewell

26030R/1R

Canal

Tubewell

31200L/5L

Canal

Tubewell

60750R/1R-12L

Canal

Tubewell

60630R/2L-10R

Watercourse number haed to tail of LBDC command

Figure 5.13: Canal and groundwater usage along four selected watercourses (Basharat
2012).
5.4.3 Groundwater demand and supply inequity
Unprecedented groundwater depletion in lower part of the Bari Doab is creating
enormous problems for the farming community, especially the economic burden due
to very high installation and pumping costs on account of increasing groundwater
demand. Presently, tubewell installation cost in the area has crossed one million
rupees. Thus, the variation in depth and quality of groundwater across the canal
commands in IBIS has created an anomaly in the total water availability to the
farmers and farmers income (Latif, 2007).
Cost per cubic meter of groundwater pumped increases about 3.5 times as the
depth to watertable drops from 6 to 21 m from head to tail in LBDC command
(Basharat, 2012b). Similarly, Qureshi and Akhtar (2003) points out that the cost of
installing tubewell in areas where watertable depth is more than 24 meters is 7 times
higher as compared to those areas where watertable depth is around 6 meters. Due to
such extra ordinary cost differences regarding groundwater pumping, farmers suffer
to different extent depending upon the location (whether at head/middle/tail) of main
canal and/or watercourse.
Ensuing impact of groundwater depletion has often been observed in the from
of groundwater quality deterioration. Baghar and Rasoul (2010) has highlighted the
increase in groundwater salinity with declining groundwater levels in Iran and pointed
out that saline intrusion due to declining groundwater is a major factor in increasing
the salinity. Based on long term groundwater quality data, travel time calculations and
74

MODPATH runs with Groundwater Vistas, Basharat and Tariq (2013b) proved that
lateral saline intrusion plays only a minor role in saline intrusion. It is the depletion of
upper fresh layer (from irrigation leakages) and up-coning of underlying saline water
due to over pumping which plays a major role in groundwater quality deterioration.
Thus, irrigation water inequity is widening with passage of time (Smith, 2004).

5.5.

Emerging Groundwater Behavior Waterlogging and Depletion

The Indus Basin represents an extensive groundwater aquifer covering a gross

command area of 16.2 million ha. The watertable was well below the surface and the
aquifer was in a state of hydrological equilibrium before the development of the canal
irrigation system. The recharge to aquifer from rivers and rainfall was balanced by
outflow (mostly in the form of open wells) and crop evapotranspiration. When the
canal irrigation system was introduced, percolation to the aquifer increased in
irrigated areas, resulting in the twin menaces of waterlogging and salinity, particularly
in areas where the canal water supply and resulting groundwater recharge was higher
than discharge. Resultantly, investments in drainage have been significant in Pakistan
during the decades of 70s to early 90s, but waterlogging still affects large tracts of
land. Even after four years drought period (1999-2002), substantial tracts of
agricultural lands mostly in northern parts of the irrigation system (UJC, upper parts
of LJC) with higher canal supplies and annual rainfall were waterlogged. Similarly,
canal commands with higher IDIa but with higher canal supplies and low cropping
intensity were also waterlogged as shown in Figure 4.12 for canal commands of
Muzaffargarh and Eastern Sadiqia commands. The Figure (4.12) depicts the
distribution of DTW zones in Indus Plain during post-monsoon 2002. Area/doab wise
DTW results were presented in Table 4.1. In Bari Doab 33.4% of the area was having
DTW more than 12m below ground surface. On the other hand, In Rechna Doab and
Bahawalpur (tail area of Panjnad) only 0.7% and 4.2% area, respectively, was under this
category. Groundwater depletion situation has been well documented in the literature
that the excessive pumping by private tubewells has led to mining of the aquifer as
reported by many (NESPAK/SGI, 1991; PPSGDP, 2000; Basharat and Tariq, 2013).
The variation in canal supplies and increasing irrigation demand towards the south are
jointly impacting the underground recharge, demands on groundwater pumping and
then ultimately the depth to groundwater.
Figure 5.14 shows the gravity of groundwater depletion rates for lower parts
of the Bari Doab in the groundwater level hydrographs for selected observation wells.
The groundwater depletion as shown by the hydrographs for LBDC, Pakpattan,
Sidhnai and Mailsi canal commands ranges from 16 to 36 cm/year for the period 1987
to 2009. While the depletion rates for the period from 2000 to 2009 range from 16 to
55 cm/year for these wells. Maximum depth to watertable (October 2010) reported by
Directorate of Land Reclamation (DLR) is 23.9 m (78.5 ft), observed in Kehror Pacca
Tehsil of Lodhran District. The situation as seen presently in the area has proved that
irrigators are now facing increased cost of pumping and in some areas, have to
75

upgrade the pumping plant to cope with higher lifts. In the area, the time is fast
approaching that groundwater may become out of the reach of small/poor farmers.
According to Punjab Private Sector Groundwater Development Project (PPSGDP,
2000), these areas with deeper groundwater levels, are generally located in tail
reaches of the canal system. In this regard Basharat and Tariq (2013a) have pointed
out that in these water stressed area, lateral saline intrusion is not a major issue due to
very slow groundwater movement, but in areas with saline groundwater lying below
the upper layer of irrigation leaked fresh water, mobilization of deeper saline water is
taking place as a result of pumping by the farmers.
In fact, much of the groundwater that is pumped by the farmers is actually a
byproduct of canal irrigation systems at various levels and annual rainfall. Spatial
climate variability within the irrigation system in Indus Basin has created differential
variations in rainfall and as a result, in irrigation water demand. Basharat and Tariq
(2013) highlighted the impact of spatial climate variability on irrigated hydrology in
LBDC irrigation system lying in middle of Bari Doab. In head-tail end direction,
annual rainfall decreases towards tail (212 mm) as compared to head (472 mm), in
contrary, annual gross and net crop water requirement at tail end are 10.2 and 25.2%
higher, respectively as compared to head end. Ignoring this spatial climate variability,
canal supplies are equitably distributed in LBDC irrigation system. According to
Basharat (2012a), lower half of the canal command is facing acute groundwater
mining problem and consequently farmers have to incur three to four times cost of
pumping than if the depth to groundwater had been within 3 to 10 m from land
surface. Also, in upper part of the Bari Doab (CBDC irrigation system), there are no
signs of extra ordinary groundwater depletion and it can be attributed to relatively
more rainfall in the area. Figure 5.15 shows groundwater hydrographs for selected
observation wells in all other areas than the Bari Doab, this shows that the
groundwater levels are mostly stable except lower parts of Panjnad canal command.

76

CL XX UB/6 (CBDC)
CL-XI LB/2-A (LBDC)
CL-XII LB/4 (LBDC)
CL-XIX LB/1 (Pakpatan)
CL-XXV LB/1 (Sidhnai)
N-15 (Mailsi)

87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12

Depth to Watertable (cm)

0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700

Years (June & October)

Figure 5.14: Depth to watertable hydrographs for Bari Doab canal commands.

0
100
200
Depth to Watertable (cm)

300
400
500
600
700
800
900

1000
1100
1200

47/6 (UCC)
28/10 (LCC)
CL-VI/9 (UJC)
W-180 (LJC)
SJ-185 (LJC)
KA_309 (M/Garh)
XL/8/122 (Panjnad)
108/257( Panjnad)
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12

1300
Years (June & October)

Figure 5.15: Depth to watertable hydrographs for canal commands other than Bari
Doab.

77

CHAPTER - 6
IRRIGATION-DRAINAGE AND WATERLOGGING-SALINITY
ISSUES IN LOWER INDUS AND THEIR POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS
Sindh is the second largest province of Pakistan. The Indus River irrigates major
portion of Sindh and a very small part of Balochistan province is irrigated with Pat
Feeder Canal from Guddu Barrage and Kirthar Branch from North West Canal offtaking from Sukkur Barrage. The total gross command area (GCA) of the Lower
Indus is 5.92 Mha with cultureable command area (CCA) of 5.43 Mha. The major
field crops sown in Sindh are wheat, cotton, rice, and sugarcane, which utilize 68
percent of the total cropped area. Sindh also produces horticulture crops: mangoes,
bananas, dates, and chillies. To irrigate command area, 48.76 MAF of surface water,
is allocated which is provided through network of irrigation system; however, the
availability is normally 10-12% less than this amount. Groundwater use is about 4-5
MAF, which is unregulated and unplanned, however groundwater has considerably
higher potential but it is unexplored, due to ample availability of canal water.
The Indus enters Sindh province at an elevation of 75 m (246 ft) above mean
sea level (amsl). The level of flood pain falls southwards at an average rate of 12.5
cm/km (eight inches/mile). The river lies on a slight ridge, which slopes away in
lateral direction up to Larkana, thus it has influent behavior and loses water to the
underlying aquifer.

Water availability: Sindh relies almost entirely on the water of the River Indus,
because almost 70 % of the area is underlain with saline groundwater, however,
shallow groundwater with variable thickness has developed due to leakage from the
irrigation system. But, only about 4-5 MAF of groundwater is pumped, when there is
shortage of canal water supplies in the system. The fact that IBIS has only small
online storage, thus due to non-utilization of groundwater storage, it can be said that
irrigation system is supply based. Sindh has a diversion capacity of 90 MAF; but as
per Water Accord 1991, Sindhs share is 48.76 MAF. However, post Tarbela, actual
diversions to Lower Indus are around 43 and 2 MAF, for Sindh and Balochistan,
respectively. Data analyses have shown that almost 50% of the cultureable command
area does not have drainage facilities (Table 6.1). The present surface drainage
density is usually not more than 3-7 m/ha which leaves much of the land without a
drainage system, therefore water logging permanently exists.

78

Table 6.1: Existing drainage facilities, up to June, 2001 (WRPO and IWASRI, 2004).
Province

Gross
Area
(Ma)

CCA
(Ma)

Punjab
Sindh
NWFP
Balochistan
Total

10.357
6.732
0.884
0.177
18.150

9.220
5.710
0.884
0.161
15.793

Surface
Subsurface Drainage
Drains
Tubewells
Interceptor Tile Drainage
(km) FGW
(Numbers)
Drains
SGW ScW*
Length Area (Ma)
(km)
(km) GCA CCA
3402 8065 1985
6
2810 0.235 0.164
9031 4190 1587 361
154
2046 0.105 0.089
971
491
7756 0.658 0.137
322
13726 12746 3572 361
160
12612 0.998 0.390

* ScW Scavenger wells

6.1.

Operation and Maintenance Conditions of Sindh Irrigation and Drainage

System

Agriculture sector is the mainstay of Sindh's economy contributing to livelihood of

rural community. Agriculture in Sindh depends on irrigation network, which is badly
deteriorated, starting from the barrages till the outlets, the last point in the jurisdiction
of the department. Despite the largest irrigation diversion capacity of about networks
in the world, Sindh is either facing shortage of irrigation water due to silting up of
Mangla and Tarbela reservoir and inequitable water distribution due to poor
maintenance of the irrigation infrastructure, causing loss of control on water
distribution in the irrigation system. Despite huge development and M&R budget in
billions, the irrigation infrastructure in Sindh including barrages, head regulators,
cross regulators, bunds and embankments are in shabby conditions requiring attention
of irrigation managers and all concerned. Drains are choked. The collection of water
charges is less than 40 percent of the target. The irrigation bungalows are abandoned;
field offices are inactive, officers do not have interest in system rehabilitation and
maintenance and major portion of the M&R budget leaks in the form of corruption at
various levels and sale of water and rent seeking has become a norm. Floods are
frequent and destroy agriculture, played havoc with people. There is need for
restructuring and capacity building of irrigation department; otherwise things would
worse with passage of time.
A field tour was conducted in irrigated areas of Sindh (December 8-15, 2014),
with the objectives to get apprised about the irrigation-drainage system, and
waterlogging and salinity issues in the area. In this visit, parts of left bank outfall
drain (LBOD) project i.e. Mirpur Khas, Sanghar and Nawabshah were visited. After
that Manchar lake, Hamal lake and right bank outfall drain (RBOD) system, in areas
of Dadu, Khairpur Nathan Shah and Miro khan were visited. On the second last day
East Khairpur Drainage project was visited, and on the last day, parts of Guddu right
command i.e. Shikarpur Ghuspur and Kandh kot areas were visited.
The main purpose of this long field visit was to observe the actual
performance of both the irrigation and drainage systems. At the same time,
waterlogging status and crop conditions were observed, also images of the important
79

features were taken for building of concepts and future reference. The timing of the
visit was also important, as it was wheat sowing time just ended, and one could
observe the impact of waterlogged conditions on wheat crop. As the waterlogging
maximally affects sowing and germination of wheat crop; if the watertable is high and
consequently surface and profile salinity levels become high due capillary action and
upward movement of dissolved salts, especially in saline groundwater areas. The
impact of such conditions is very much exposed in Figure 6.1: big patches are without
wheat germination.

Figure 6.1: Patchy wheat crop near Mirpur Khas, due to waterlogging and salinity.
Surface and Tubewell Drainage in Nawabshah: In the area from Mirpur Khas to
Sanghar, not a single drainage tubewell was observed as functioning. Many of them
are almost abandoned, with transformer and mains wire stolen. A big mistake in the
placement of the tubewells was that the tubewell sites were selected on a regular grid.
Thus, a greater potential was there for theft of the installed equipment, as compared to
if the tubewell housing would have been near the farmer dwellings. Surface drains
were observed with poor operation and maintenance conditions, as result, many of the
fertile lands have been abandoned (Figure 6.2), in contrast farm lands with little
higher surface elevation are having good crop stand (Figure 6.3).
LBOD Before rehabilitation of LBOD, there were 189 scavenger wells in
Nawabshah, each consisting of 1.5 cfs, fresh water pumping for irrigation and 2.5 cfs
saline water pumping for drainage (Figure 6.4 shows one of the wells). During last
80

PPP government on special efforts by President of Pakistan, Asif Ali Zardari, a

rehabilitation program for 32 tubewells was planned. However, only 18 tubewells
have been rehabilitated. Twenty three new tubewells for saline pumping, and three
tubewells for pumping water from depressions to surface drains were also installed, as
part of rehabilitation program in Nawabshah. Most of these wells have been selected
with political favoritism. With this rehabilitation program, waterlogging conditions in
the area have improved. Before taking up the rehabilitation program, a field survey
was carried out , during which it was observed that 5% of the wells only were in
working condition, whereas the rest were non-functional (information from a subengineer of Irrigation Department in Nawabshah).

Figure 6.2: Almost fully choked drain, crossing Sanghar-Mirpur Khas road (left),
Waterlogged and barren/saline lands (right) in another area along
Sanghar-Mirpur Khas road.

Figure 6.3: Two different fields showing good stand of Banana, along Nawabshah to
Qazi Ahmad road.

81

Figure 6.4: A view of functioning Scavenger well, with 15 HP motor (35 km along
Nawabshah to Sanghar road): left, fresh delivery, 1.5 cfs, bore depth 100;
right, saline delivery, 0.5 cfs, bore depth 220

East Khairpur Tile Drainage Project: Areas where tile drainage sumps are not
working, crops health expose of the poor drainage conditions in the area (Figure 6.5).
According to the sub-engineer (irrigation department) some of the canals e.g. Sathio
canal and Mirwah have surplus water. However, there is lack of irrigation water for
tail-end farmers of Pantin minor. During 1995, Tile Drainage Division area was
handed over to Tubewell Division. Four tile drain sumps were visited during this visit,
out of a total of 45 sumps. According to the Sub-engineer, 22 out 45 tile drainage
sumps are working, which altogether have 34 cusecs (cfs) design pumping capacity.
However, their actual pumping is far less than this design capacity. The most
important of the reasons is lack of proper maintenance of pumps, many of them have
broken/corroded delivery pipes. The other important reason for low performance is
choking of collector and lateral lines, and therefore, the areas even close to pump
sumps were observed with standing water and surface salinity. All these factors show
lack of proper water management in the area regarding: firstly, when and how much
to apply irrigation water; secondly, at what depth to maintain groundwater level, so
that it can avoid waterlogging and salinity.

82

Figure 6.5: EKTD Project showing poorly maintained sumps, drains, standing water,
as well as, well established date palm trees, in areas with balanced.

83

Sukkur (Right) Command Area: Most of the area on right side of the Indus has
high groundwater salinity, therefore, salts in surface water entering into Hamal and
Manchar lakes is also salty. Particularly, people living in and around Manchar lake
are facing drinking water and health problems. Government has started a program of
providing salt treatment plants for the public, one such plant installed Manchar lake is
shown in Figure 6.6. The incoming water to the treatment plants has TDS of about
1900 ppm, whereas reject water has a TDS of about 7000 ppm. There are about
twelve treatment plants near Manchar Lake, some of them are working.
During low flows with an average discharge of about 200 cfs, the water
quality of MNV drain shoots up to 10,000 ppm. A treatment plant is currently in
planning design stage, will be constructed with an inflow of 50 cfs and an outflow of
40 cfs for irrigation and 2 million gallons per day (MGD) for drinking water supply
for Dadu city and Johi town. The plant will use pallet reactor (Australian technology),
the planned site area is 25 acres. The construction will be started under the
supervision of WAPDA. Five such projects are in planning stage for construction at
Rs. 2.5 billion (2010 cost). Calcium (Ca) and Magnesium (Mg) will be by product for
selling, which will recover about 50-60% cost of the project.

Figure 6.6: A view of Mancher lake (left) and water treatment plant with RO
technology (right).
Operation and maintenance condition of the irrigation and system, waterlogging and
salinity of the area on the right side of the Sukkur command are shown in Figures 6.7
to 6.13, explanation notes are also given with the figure captions. In summary, vast
area was observed with standing water in the fields, farmers land lying just along the
main drains was without the drainage. Thus, sowing of the wheat crop was not
possible at all, giving rise to low cropping intensities.

84

Figure 6.7: Agriculture land with patchy wheat crop, due to waterlogging and salinity
(along Dadu-Johi road).

Figure 6.8: Enormous waterlogged areas with standing water along Dadu to KN Shah
road (December 12, 2013).

85

Figure 6.9: Johi branch canal upstream (left) and downstream view (right), at a road
X-ing, the channel is not in its proper section at many of the places.

Figure 6.10: KN Shah drain pumping station (L) for occasional pumping into Khuda
waha (R), otherwise KN Shah drain discharges into MNV drain. Even
close to the drain outlet, a vast area was observed with standing water,
thus other areas are also waterlogged due to blockage of surface water.

Figure 6.11: Zero Point of Miro Khan drain: (left) Super structure over the MNV
drain and gates to Hamal lake; (right) Mirokhan outfall gates to: MNV

86

drain (L) and Hamal Lake (R). Here many of the farmers use drain water
for irrigation, locally called abadi.

Figure 6.12: Waterlogged and saline lands between KN Shah, Mehar and Hamal Lake
(NW and Rice commands).

87

Figure 6.13: Vast areas around Miro Khan drain: (R) with standing water; or without
wheat crop due to very wet soils.
Guddu (Right Command): Mostly right of way of the irrigation canals are without
plantation. Irrigation channels from smallest to largest capacity have lost their regime,
section and profile (Figure 6.14 and 6.15). Farmers are habitual to control the flow of
the irrigation channel passing nearby their outlet (Figure 6.16). As, it is clearly
evident from the images captured, that farmers are managing the irrigation system
themselves, at least for the smaller channels where they plug the irrigation channel
easily and divert all flows to their outlets when the channels are not flowing with full
capacity. Similarly, during no or low crop water requirements, farmers plug their
outlets and pass all the discharge to downstream areas. So this shows the helm of
affairs of the Sindh Irrigation Department, which is allowing deterioration of the
irrigation and drainage system, possibly to its maximum possible.
At least a very simple solution can be adopted for fresh groundwater areas, i.e.
based upon crop water requirement, and keeping an allowance for groundwater
pumping by the farmers themselves (fresh groundwater irrigation in Kandhkot area
shown in Figure 6.17), these areas should be allocated less canal water, as is being
done now. This will surely reclaim a lot of waterlogged lands in the area, so will help
to improve economy of the area. Farmers will be able to grow both Rabi and Kharif
crops. Otherwise, at present, cropping intensity is low due to vast areas with standing
water, and during Rabi season wheat crop cultivation is not possible due extra
ordinary moisture contents, even in areas without standing water.
Farmers use their full authority to divert (or otherwise) water to their selfdesigned outlet. The outlet shown in the upper right picture is a special example of
gigantic size (discharge) that was closed with bushes, thus irrigation department has
almost lost the control over the irrigation management infrastructure. It was heard
from an irrigation engineer, in a training workshop held in February 2014, that during
the rehabilitation of Ghotki irrigation system, irrigation officials were unable to fix
the outlet with a discharge of two cusecs, and the donor agency (World Bank) allowed
it to fix it with a discharge of six cusecs. This shows the almost absence of irrigation
officials and officers from their assigned duties according to the charter. The extent of
corruption is such of high level that the system condition looks like it has never been
88

maintained. One official told that the commission in the rehabilitation expenditure is
of the order of 80-90%.

Figure 6.14: Standing Water in areas of Khanpur, Ghuspur and Kandhkot (Guddu
right bank command).

89

Figure 6.15: First 2-pics:- Sindh Feeder crossing Shikarpur-Kandhkot road, crossing
is oblique and de-routing the channel, due to lack of proper annual
maintenance. Second 2-Pics:- Unerwah X-regulator at RD-29, flow is
only hitting at two extreme left gates. Third 2-Pics, Unerwah irrigation
channel, in much poor condition.

90

Figure 6.16: Farmers use their full authority to divert (or otherwise) water to their
self-designed outlets. The upper right picture is a special example of
gigantic outlet in discharge that was closed with bushes, thus irrigation
department has almost lost the control over distribution of the irrigation
water.

Figure 6.17: Poor germination of wheat crop (left), due to more than optimum
moisture content; SCARP tubewell, KKP-20 in operating condition
(right), a good stand of wheat crop due to proper drainage and timely
sowing of wheat crop.
91

6.2.

Waterlogging and Salinity distribution in Lower Indus

A further non-sustainable practice in Lower Indus, which is important here due to its
connection with groundwater, is soil salinization. It is caused by too shallow
groundwater levels. If in arid climates, the groundwater table rises (e.g. due to excess
irrigation and lack of natural drainage) within 2 to 3 m from the ground surface,
evaporation of groundwater through capillary rise starts. These dissolved salts
precipitate and accumulate in the topsoil, finally leading to infertility of the land. In
regions of IBIS, with very small surface gradients and little permeable soil, this
problem is at large, because about 70 % irrigated area of Sindh is underlain with
saline groundwater. Similar problems of soil salinity are being faced by Iraq, Egypt,
Australia, USA, and China, to mention only a few. As groundwater cannot be
renewed artificially on a large scale, nor it can be flushed out for salts removal,
therefore, sustainable management of this resource is vital.
6.2.1. Depth to watertable in Lower Indus
The data collected by SMO, WAPDA, for October 2011, was analyzed in ArcMap,
for evaluation of areas under different watertable depth ranges. The results obtained
are shown in Figures 6.18 in graphical format and Figure 6.19 in map format, area
falling under different DTW is also given in Table 6.2. According to the results, 36%
area is with flooding conditions or within a depth to watertable of 1.0 m, and another
33.6% area is having watertable within the range of 1.0 to 1.5 m. Thus, in an area of
about 69.6% root zone is at least waterlogged. This means, only about 30.4% area was
without waterlogged conditions, during October, 2011. The waterlogging conditions
in the area remain more or less, the same every year, except before monsoon, due to
less canal supplies during Rabi season. Thus, one can well imagine about the alarming
conditions for cultivation of Rabi crops. Consequently, cropping intensities varies
from 116.7% in Sindh Cotton Wheat zone (SCWS) to 234.0% in Punjab Sugarcane
Wheat zone (PSW ) (Mirza and Latif, 2012), i.e. cropping intensity is almost half in
Sindh as compared to Punjab.
40
35
Area (%age)

30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0 1.0

1.0 1.5

1.5 3.0 3.0 4.5

4.5 -6.0
Depth to watertable (m)

6.0 12

> 12

Figure 6.18: Percentage areas under different depth to watertable in Lower Indus, as
on October 2011.
92

Table 6.2: Areas (000 acres and %) under different DTW, as on October, 2011, in
Lower Indus (Sindh-Balochistan)
0 1.0 m 1.0 1.5 m 1.5 3.0 m 3.0 4.5 m 4.5 -6.0 m 6.0 12 m > 12 m
Area %

Area %

Area %

Area %

5412 36.0 5051 33.6 3186 21.21 831

Area %

Area %

5.54 238 1.58 300 1.99

Figure 6.19: Depth to watertable in Lower Indus (October, 2011).

93

Area %
3

0.02

6.2.2 Waterlogging situation during drought period in Lower Indus

Drought prevailed for four years (1998-2002) in Indus Basin, response of irrigation
and drainage in Lower Indus is important in that context. Therefore the areas under
waterlogging were mapped afresh from the GIS work of IWASRI in 2000-2004. The
DTW maps for June 2001, October 2001, June 2002 and October 2002 are shown in
Figure 6.20 to 6.23 and given in Tables 6.3, 6.4, 6.5 and 6.6, respectively.

Figure 6.20: Depth to watertable in Lower Indus, June 2001.

94

Table 6.3: Area under different depth to watertable ranges in Lower Indus, June 2001.
Depth Range of Watertable (cm. below NSL)
Area (000 ha) 0-100 100-150 150-300 300-450 450-600 600-1200 > 1200

11

28

3007

2021

379

Figure 6.21: Depth to watertable in Lower Indus, October, 2001.

95

321

Table 6.4: Area under different depth to watertable ranges in Lower Indus, October
2001.
Depth Range of Watertable (cm. below NSL)
Area
0-100 100-150 150-300 300-450 450-600 600-1200 > 1200
(000 ha)

1422

1326

1653

782

293

287

Figure 6.22: Depth to watertable in Lower Indus, June, 2002.

96

Table 6.5: Area under different DTW ranges in Lower Indus, June, 2002.
Area (000 ha)

Depth Range of Watertable (cm. below NSL)

0-100 100-150 150-300 300-450 450-600 600-1200 > 1200

359
227
2200
1923
562
492
10

Figure 6.23: Depth to watertable in Lower Indus, October, 2002.

97

Table 6.6: Area under different DTW ranges in Lower Indus, October, 2002.
Depth Range of Watertable (cm. below NSL)
Area
0-100 100-150 150-300 300-450 450-600 600-1200 > 1200
(000 ha)

362

226

2190

1929

561

494

10

6.2.3 Groundwater quality in Lower Indus

Groundwater quality is a major issue in Lower Indus area, affecting crop germination
and yields over much of the area. The only detailed and dependable information in
this regard was collected during the course of hydrogeologic investigations carried out
by Lower Indus Project, a number of bore holes 100 to 1,300 feet in depth, were
drilled in Guddu, Sukkur and Kotri Barrage commands to determine the quality of
groundwater and its horizontal and vertical variation.
The general pattern of groundwater distribution in the Lower Indus Plains is
one of good quality water immediately adjacent to the river with increasing salinity
away from the river. A lesser quantity of good quality of water is available on the
right bank of the river than on the left. This is due to the proximity of limestone hills
on the right bank and to the poor aquifers associated with piedmont plains. Another
feature of importance is the complete absence of usable groundwater in the deltaic
area, south of Hyderabad, except in some shallow pockets in the fairly recently
abandoned river beds of the Gaja command. Some of the most saline groundwater of
the region is found in the delta where samples with salinities twice as high as seawater have been obtained. Throughout the region the salinity of groundwater
increases with depth and no case could be recorded where saline water overlies fresh
water. Based on the depth wise electrical conductivity, carried out under the Lower
Indus Project in 1960s, groundwater quality is shown in Figure 6.24. According to
this map, good quality groundwater is only available along the Indus River, on both
sides. Percentage areas under different groundwater quality range (ppm), as given by
Ahmad (1995, Table 5.17, p.6.41) are shown in Figure 6.25.
Based on the groundwater samples collected from groundwater sources in use
of the public, during 2001-03, the map partially covering the Lower Indus, is shown
in Figure 6.26.

98

Figure 6.24: Deep groundwater quality in Lower Indus (Qureshi et al., 2004).
90
80

< 750 ppm

70

750 - 1500 ppm

% Area

60

> 1500 ppm

50
40
30
20
10
0
Guddu (left)

Guddu (right)

Sukkur (left)

Sukkur (right)

Figure 6.25: Percent area under different groundwater quality ranges in Guddu and
Sukkur commands

99

Figure 6.26: Groundwater quality (TDS) in Lower Indus (2001-03).

SMO, WAPDA has started regular monitoring of groundwater quality from the
tubewells and hand pumps. The data for October 2010 was mapped in to useable
marginal and hazardous classes with EC (dS/m) as 0-1500, 1500-3000 and > 3000,
respectively. The results are given in Table 6.7 and shown in Figure 6.27. According
to the results 46.77% of the area in Sindh is declared as useable and 40.92% as
marginal and only 12.31 % as hazardous (Table 6.7). These results show little higher
fresh groundwater in Sindh, as it is well established that about 30 % area has useable
groundwater quality. The discrepancy lies in the fact that the samples collected by
SMO, are mostly from shallow sources. Sampling staff had the instructions to collect
groundwater samples from hand pumps, where tubewells do not exist. Regarding
100

hand-pumps, mostly the people install them, where there is fresh water lens, or just
near the irrigation canal. Also the hand-pumps would be shallow, may 20 to 30 ft.
A major discrepancy in this map seems to be in Nara canal, particularly in
Khairpur and Sanghar areas, where there is maximum surface salinity. Naturally,
shallow groundwater quality should have been poor in areas with maximum surface
salinity, but this is not the case in many areas in this map, including Nara command
areas. In case of Nara canal command, the groundwater quality is useable over an area
of 80.86%, marginal in 15.61% and hazardous in 3.53. The reason of major portion of
the command exhibiting fresh groundwater quality lies in the fact that out 237 total
groundwater samples, 198 were taken from hand-pumps and only 39 samples were
from tubewells. Similarly, for the Pat feeder command, only fifteen samples were
taken and all of them from hand-pumps (depicted 96.6% as fresh and 3.4% as
marginal). Thus, the groundwater quality depicted in Figure 6.27, represents mostly
the upper 3 to 6 m (of the aquifer, which is recharged from the irrigation leakages, and
thus not representative of the aquifer which could be exploited with tubewells.
However, there are areas where, groundwater quality is fresh and fresh to marginal up
to a depth of 25 to 30 m. This shallow groundwater layer can be exploited by
installing specifically designed skimming wells, depending upon the depth wise
distribution of groundwater quality. This kind of groundwater development would
require a detail and specifically design groundwater quality survey in irrigated areas
of Lower Indus.
Table 6.7: Shallow groundwater quality in Lower Indus (October, 2010).
Useable

Marginal

Hazardous

[EC(S/cm) < 1500]

[EC (S/cm): 1500 to

2700]

[EC(S/cm) > 2700]

Area
6974295

%age
46.77

Area
6280965

%age
40.92

101

Area
1771105

%age
12.31

Figure 6.27: Shallow groundwater quality (SMO data) in Lower Indus (Oct, 2010).
102

6.3.

Lessons from Surface Salinity in IBIS as Surveyed During 2001-03.

This section is limited to the analysis and comparison of surface salinity survey 20012003 of the four provinces with the previous survey conducted in 1979-81. The
surface salinity has been categorized into four classes S1, S2, S3 and S4, according to
level of salinity. The comparison of two surveys shows a remarkable improvement in
S2, S3 and S4 categories in Punjab, which have been converted into non-saline areas,
i.e. non-saline areas increased from 86% in 1978-79 to 93% 2001-03. Comparison is
also given in Table 6.8 and Figures 6.28 and 6.29.
On the other hand, areas under S2 and S3 in Sindh-Balochistan has increased
from 1979-81 to 2001-03. Also, the non-saline area has decreased from 54% in the
previous survey to 49% in 2001-03. Thus, in Sindh province deterioration has been
noticed in almost all categories, and the salt affected area has increased. One of the
most obvious reasons for this contrasting behavior, in changes in surface salinity, in
Punjab and Lower Indus, is lowering of watertable in Punjab. On the other hand,
increased waterlogging conditions in Lower Indus, particularly after the provision of
higher canal supplies after commissioning of Mangla and Tarbela Dams, and the
absence of conjunctive use of canal and groundwater leading to lack of drainage in the
root zone, had been the major factors for increase in surface salinity. The latest
available surface salinity survey (2001-03) results for Lower Indus are given in Table
6.9 and shown in Figure 6.30.
Table 6.8: Temporal and spatial comparison of surface salinity in IBIS.
Area Surveyed 1978-79 (million acres)
NonSaline

Slightly
Saline

Moderately
Saline

Strongly
Saline

Area

NWFP

1.3

0.1

0.0

0.0

1.5

Punjab

21.5

1.8

1.1

0.7

25.1

Sindh Balochistan

8.0

2.7

1.5

2.5

14.7

Total

30.9

4.6

2.6

3.3

41.3

Province

Area Surveyed 2001-03 (million acres)

NWFP

1.10

0.01

0.02

0.01

1.14

Punjab

24.18

0.95

0.46

0.40

25.99

Sindh Balochistan

7.32

3.04

1.49

3.08

14.94

Total

32.61

4.00

1.96

3.49

42.07

103

Strongly Saline

1.6
3

Moderately Saline

1.8
4

Punjab 2001-03
Punjab1979-81

3.7
7

Slightly Saline
Non-Saline

86
0

20

40

60

80

93
100

AREA (PERCENT)
Figure 6.28: Comparison of surface salinity in Punjab for the periods: 1979-81 and
2001-03

20.6
17

Strongly Saline

Sindh Balochistan 2001-03

Sindh Balochistan 1979-81

10
10

Moderately Saline

20.4
19

Slightly Saline

49

Non-Saline
0

20

40

54
60

80

100

AREA (PERCENT)
Figure 6.29: Comparison of surface salinity in Lower Indus (Sindh-Balochistan) for
the periods: 1979-81 and 2001-03.
Agricultural land environmental issues i.e. salinity, pollution, waterlogging and water
scarcity are potential threats to sustainable use of land and water in the country.
Waterlogged and saline conditions are not static but change with time as groundwater
table changes due to changes in irrigation, wet or dry season. Monitoring of soil surface
conditions is therefore, essential for the management of productive lands and the
environment. There is an urgent need to evolve a strategy for the effective
management and utilization of land and water resources in the country. To meet this
requirement we need authentic and accurate spatial and non-spatial information about
these resources. For management of these resources traditional approach is to use
computational process as decision support tools. With the introduction of GIS and
remote sensing technologies emphasis has been diverted from traditional data analysis
104

techniques to spatial data analysis. However, with passage of time, such capabilities
in IWASRI, as these were in 2000-2005, have been shrunk badly. Therefore, such a
large contiguous Indus Basin Irrigation System needs robust application of these
technologies, for understanding the phenomenons going under changing irrigation
supplies, along with supplementing groundwater supplies, in long and short term
scenarios. Therefore, strengthening of such institutions, both at Federal and Provincial
levels is the first and foremost requirement of the irrigation sector.
Table 6.9: Areas (ha) and percentage under different surface salinity classes in Lower
Indus.
Canal Command
Pat Feeder
Desert
North West
Begari Sindh Feeder
Rice
Dadu
Ghotki
Khairpur West
Khairpur East
Rohri North
Rohri South
Nara
Fuleli
Lined Channel
Kalari
Pinyari
Total area (ha)

6.4.

S1
132132
57617
158398
184216
88039
155505
326660
107241
143401
339946
367470
329999
16921
70787
154940
143529
2776800

Area (ha)
S2
S3
S4
90015 31115
10827
51702 25847
52943
73845 70246
103420
98485 70921
125659
62571 51803
41196
35655 24406
27989
24722 10719
36601
7036
3725
3904
34826 14340
12291
147962 28360
46770
113284 40643
101615
229570 103503
321298
12026
6138
10871
62081 36286
46215
36964 27143
71322
74928 20506
158286
1155673 565703 1171207

Total
264089
188109
405909
479282
243609
243555
398702
121907
204858
563038
623012
984370
45956
215369
290369
397250
5669383

S1
50.0
30.6
39.0
38.4
36.1
63.8
81.9
88.0
70.0
60.4
59.0
33.5
36.8
32.9
53.4
36.1
49.0

Percentage
S2 S3
34.1 11.8
27.5 13.7
18.2 17.3
20.5 14.8
25.7 21.3
14.6 10.0
6.2 2.7
5.8 3.1
17.0 7.0
26.3 5.0
18.2 6.5
23.3 10.5
26.2 13.4
28.8 16.8
12.7 9.3
18.9 5.2
20.4 10.0

S4
4.1
28.1
25.5
26.2
16.9
11.5
9.2
3.2
6.0
8.3
16.3
32.6
23.7
21.5
24.6
39.8
20.7

Impact of Drought in Over Irrigated Areas of Lower Indus

A drought period persisted in Pakistan for four years from 1999 to 2002 which
affected the agriculture in the country. IWASRI conducted a study in IBIS to find out
the extent of drought and its impact on canal supplies, crop production and
groundwater levels (Saeed et al., 2009). Six canal commands were selected for the
study. Two canals each in provinces of Punjab and Sindh and one canal each in KP
and Balochistan were selected. Further, a total of 10 distributaries were selected for
study from these selected canals. Field data were collected and analyzed for Satiana
and Khikhi distributaries of Upper Gugera Branch Canal, Dinga and Lower Sardar
Wah distributaries of Muzaffargarh Canal in the province of Punjab, San Minor and
Chann Badhani distributary of Rohri Canal system, Nasser Distributary of Warah
Branch, Jalbani Distributary of Rattodero Branch falling in the North West Canal
system in the Province of Sindh and Dumb Distributary of Khirther Branch in the
Province of Balochistan, Kot Hafiz Distributary of CRBC in the Province of KP. The
results from the study for Jalbani distributary of Rattodero Branch falling in the North
West Canal system in the Province of Sindh, are presented here under.
105

Figure 6.30: Surface salinity in in Lower Indus, as observed during 2002-03.

106

Annual average supplies data of North West Canal, Warah Branch, Rattodero Branch,
Khirther Branch, Nasser Disty. of Warah Branch, Jalbani Disty. of Rattodero Branch
falling in the North West Canal system in the Province of Sindh, Dumb Disty. of
Khirther Branch in the Province of Baluchistan was collected and analyzed for the
historical mean of the water supplies and drought period mean i.e. from 1999 to 2002.
There is 2-9% decrease in water supplies during drought in these branches and
distributaries of North West Canal except Khirther Branch, which has 4%, increased
water supplies due to continuous extra supplies for domestic purpose because ground
watertable is brackish in the area. Annual average water supplies, in Ratto Dero
Branch, and pre-monsoon DTW, in SMO Observation Well No. LS-78 in Command
of Jalbani Distributary (off-takiing from Rato Dero Branch) are shown in Figures 6.31
and 6.32, respectively, which shows that there was decrease in water supplies, along
with increase in depth to watertable during drought period, as compared to the normal
historical period.
Groundwater quality of the command area is good for irrigation as reported by
the farmers during field visit but they do not feel need of tubewells installation for
crops irrigation in the command area of this distributry. Therefore the farmers have
not installed tubewells in the area. As shown in Figure 6.33, waterlogged area
successively vanished towards the end of drought (2002 and 2003), in North West
Canal. Consequently, percent cropped area in Jalbani distribuary, also increased
successively, towards the end of drought period (Figure 6.34).
Saeed et al. (2009) concluded that:

Area under different crops, like wheat, rice, cotton and sugarcane was
increased by 0.8%, 6%, 4% and 6%, respectively during drought period (199902) as compared to before drought period (1989-98).

The crop yield (based on agricultural statistics of Pakistan, 2005) of wheat,

rice cotton and sugarcane crop yields were increased by 18%, 15%, 9% and
4%, respectively during drought period (1999-02) as compared to before
drought period (1989-98).

Watertable depth increased from 1-3 meter during drought (1999-02) as

compared with before drought period.

107

0.045

MAF/year

0.040

0.035

0.030

0.025

0.020
2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

1993

1992

1991

Years

Figure 6.31: Annual average water supplies in Ratto Dero Branch (Saeed et al., 2009).

NSL
0.00

WT Depth (m)

-0.50
-1.00
-1.50
-2.00
-2.50
2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

Years

Figure 6.32:

Pre-Monsoon DTW in SMO Observation Well No. LS-78, in the

command of Jalbani Distributary (Saeed et al., 2009).

108

Area

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

1993

1992

1991

1990

1989

1988

1987

1986

1985

1984

1983

1982

1981

Years

0-150 cm

150-300 cm

>300 cm

Figure 6.33: Pre-Monsoon area under different DTW in North West canal command
(Saeed et al., 2009).
80
70

CCA (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
199596

199697

199798

199899

199900

200001

200102

200203

200304

200405

200506

200607

200708

Years

Rabi

Kharif

Yearly Cropped Area

Figure 6.34: Cropped area (%) during Rabi, Kharif and Yearly basis in the command
of Jalbani Distributary (Saeed et al., 2009).
6.5.

Irrigation Water Allocations in Lower Indus

In order to check the reasons for flooded lands and waterlogging conditions (as
elaborated earlier) canal water supplies to all the irrigation systems in the Lower
Indus Plain (Sindh and Balochistan) were analyzed, with the purpose to check
whether these canal supplies are coherent or not when compared with the CCA.
Therefore, Kharif and Rabi canal water supplies were divided by the CCA (Table
6.10) of respective canal commands. The depth of water (mm) over the CCA is given
in Table 6.11 and shown in Figure 6.35, for comparison purpose. Accordingly, the
Rice and Kalri commands are getting the maximum canal supplies. Annual average
supplies to Rice command is 1723 mm, whereas the annual reference crop
evapotranspiration at Rohri is 1931.4 mm (Kharif: 1226.4 and Rabi:705.0 mm).
109

Consequently, less use of groundwater and absence of any provision for

groundwater drainage in Sindh do not allow building up of fresh groundwater buffer
and, therefore conjunctive management of canal and groundwater is not possible in
the current circumstances. Thus, high canal supplies and irrigation system
malfunctioning (tail-enders getting less or even no supplies in certain area) are a
major explanation for the extensive waterlogging in Sindh Province, particularly, even
slightly low lying areas filling fast. In the year 1999, about 38.5 % of the irrigated area
was waterlogged, steeply rising from 1959 when it stood at 12.4%. Waterlogging is
causing a range of problems. Despite low cropping intensities, it causes reduced farm
yields, and at the same time creates public health problems, due to the difficulty of
developing rural sanitation facilities in waterlogged areas.
The non-perennial canals are suffering the most from this twin menace of
waterlogging and salinity. These non-perennial areas receive more than required
supplies in the Kharif season, thus, the watertable rises significantly, which also acts
as secondary menace for sowing of Rabi crops, particularly the wheat. At the onset of
the Rabi season, fields are with standing water or more than the optimum moisture
contents for seed germination, also salinity rises towards the surface due to bare land
evaporation. Thus, many of the lands offer only one cropping. Rice Canal is one of
the prominent examples of such a phenomenon, where the watertable fluctuates
between 1-3 meters during Kharif and Rabi. This annual cycle of rise and fall of
watertable brings the salts to the upper soil strata.
After the commissioning of the Tarbela and Mangla Dams, about 24% more
water available was made available for irrigation, thereafter some non-perennial areas
were converted officially or unofficially to perennial. The problems in the perennial
channels in Sindh are different from the non-perennial channels. Here salinity is
concentrated on areas with deficient surface water supplies, where there is not enough
water for leaching salts. This often concerns the tail reaches of the channels.
Table 6.10: GCA and CCA of irrigation system in Lower Indus (source: Sindh
Irrigation Department and IWMI (1998).
Canal
Begari Sindh feeder
Desert Pat Feeder
Ghotki Feeder
Dadu Canal
Khairpur East feeder
Khairpur West Feeder
Nara Canal
North West Canal (+Kirthar)
Rice Canal
Rhori Canal
Akram Wah (Lined Channel)
Fuleli Canal
Kalri Begar Feeder
Pinyari Feeder

GCA (acres)
1081942
1051717
1011118
601918
559977
405737
2581336
1108897
528357
2725745
517682
1003100
643688
804526

CCA (acres)
1001910
1046971
851539
557212
373666
399346
2273251
1066226
486670
2594889
491516
920847
592232
777181
110

FSD (cfs)
14764
13275
8490
5200
1938
1894
12875
9450
10658
14100
3714
15026
9100
13626

Table 6.11: Monthly canal water supply in terms depth (mm) over the CCA of
irrigation systems (source: H&WM) and monthly normal of ETo at Rohri
and Tando Jam (source: PMD).
Canal System

Apr

May Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan

Feb

Mar

Kharif Rabi Ann

Desert Pat Fdr*

9.2

40.2 161.8 168.7 141.8 130.9

56.3

35.0

34.8

51.1

30.0

28.0

652.7 235.2

887.9

BS Fdr

0.2

29.1 209.2 286.9 195.2 159.9

41.7

5.7

5.2

52.5

8.1

2.5

880.6 115.7

996.3

GHOTKI

1.6

72.1 169.5 163.3 168.6 163.1 121.2

67.7

37.7

71.4

34.6

42.6

738.3 375.2 1113.5

NW Canal

16.4

32.4 102.5 132.9 117.9 105.0

81.9

57.2

58.5

25.6

59.8

55.6

507.1 338.6

80.3 384.8 416.9 358.2 324.3 130.9

4.2

4.8

5.0

4.2

845.6

Rice

4.4

Dadu

33.1

53.9 120.0 158.7 141.2 129.3

99.7

78.1

74.8

28.6

74.1

71.3

636.2 426.6 1062.8

Khairpur (W)

68.6

79.3

83.2

77.3

76.4

22.7

57.6

65.7

497.5 382.9

Khairpur (E)

85.8 102.2 106.1 112.4 111.7 115.3 114.8 102.2 100.5

26.7

75.7

82.6

633.6 502.4 1136.0

Rohri

75.3

88.6

89.7

95.2

94.2

98.0

89.4

78.3

78.6

21.5

69.4

74.8

541.0 412.0

953.1

Nara

76.0

87.4

88.5

91.3

85.6

89.1

85.8

75.8

71.9

22.5

62.6

66.5

518.0 385.2

903.1

Kalri

67.5

90.9 166.7 209.0 188.3 204.6 155.2

90.4

54.5

80.6

65.8

50.4

927.0 496.9 1423.9

Lined

61.4

80.5

78.7

81.7

73.8

60.7

38.5

37.2

47.3

43.2

493.5 300.6

794.1

Fuleli

18.2

56.1 117.5 140.6 106.6

89.1

61.1

34.3

19.4

25.2

25.9

15.9

528.1 181.8

709.8

Pinyari

25.0

80.2 169.9 205.2 158.5 131.1

87.8

47.2

26.1

37.4

35.0

21.6

770.0 255.2 1025.2

180.0 226.3 237.0 198.4 207.7 177.0 179.8 129.0

83.7

80.6

92.4 139.5 1226.4 705.0 1931.4

ETo-Rohri

84.6

97.7

86.9

93.4

85.7

92.4

5.2 1568.8 154.4 1723.2

880.4

ETo-TandoJam 192.0 246.0 255.0 159.0 129.0 210.0 186.0 144.0 117.0 111.0 114.0 153.0 1191.0 825.0 2016.0

* Fdr: Feeder
1800

Canal Water Depth (mm) over the CCA

1800
1600

Kharif

1600
Kharif

Rabi
1400

1400
Annual

Rabi

1200
Eto (mm)

1200

1000

1000

800

800
600

600

400

400

200

200

Canal Command

Figure 6.35: Comparison of canal water supplies amongst the irrigation systems in
Sindh.

111

CHAPTER - 7
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
It is concluded that improving agriculture productivity is lying in promoting efficient
and environmentally sound water management practices. Increasing water
productivity gaining more crop yield and value per unit of water is an effective
means of intensifying agricultural production and reducing waterlogging and
groundwater mining, simultaneously. Unfortunately this huge system of irrigated
agriculture has not provided designed set objectives of poverty reduction. This has
been due to lack of coordinated water resources research and its implementation for
irrigation management, poor long-term water policies, and especially poor operation
and maintenance of the irrigation system in Sindh. A major portion of groundwater
balance in Sindh goes to non-beneficial evaporation, which can be usefully exploited
with well-planned conjunctive use of surface and groundwater.
This report explicitly concludes that the current problems with excessive
mining of groundwater and simultaneous waterlogging in some other areas in IBIS
can be overcome, if the Governments concentrates more and more on rational surface
water management (RSWM) at all levels: Indus Basin, provincial, canal command
and watercourse levels. In the proposed scenario, there will not be any efforts needed
to regulate and control groundwater; if surface water is judiciously distributed,
because there are clear net benefits in this approach. Otherwise, implementation of
demand management or groundwater governance strategy is not considered practical,
keeping in view large number of groundwater users and the current poor overall
governance in the country.
However, implementation of rational surface water management is also not so
easy it will require a major technical input from the concerned irrigation and water
related institutions working at federal and provincial level. Concerned water
management agencies will need to adopt major cultural shift from engineering based
supply approaches to water resources management and protection approaches. All this
will require a completely different approach to groundwater management in Pakistan,
as outlined in Figure 7.1.
The report has demonstrated the need, and provided an outline of how this
could be achieved by initially working with rationalizing water allocations: across the
sectors (e.g. transfers from agriculture to municipal), amongst and within the canal
command, this can further pave the way for additional thinking (if needed), regarding
legal and administrative framework and developing a parallel track of governance
reforms for the future. While the way forward can be envisaged from this analysis,
putting it into practice will require a major commitment from the Federal and
Provincial governments. All the possibilities and non-possibilities for improving
surface and ground water management in IBIS are conclusively discussed on the
following pages.
112

IBIS
Irrigation Demand and Supply
Assessment Across and Amongst
Sectors e.g. Domestic, Agriculture,
Provinces and below Kotri etc.

Punjab + KPK

Sind + Baluchistan

Irrigation Demand and Supply

Assessment amongst Canal
Commands

Irrigation Demand and Supply

Assessment amongst Canal
Commands

Rationalize
Water
Allocations

Compare Different Irrigation Units

in terms of Water Demand, Supply
& Groundwater Conditions

Rationalize
Water
Allocations

Select Areas in
need of GW
Management

Study in detail available water resources

i.e. surface, groundwater and rainfall and
crop water requirement along with other
uses

Try a combination of most suitable

interventions e.g. recharge, control on
cropping pattern and intensity

Re-evaluate the impact of interventions and readjust according to groundwater response

observed over the years

Figure 7.1: Proposed stepwise approach for groundwater management in IBIS.

113

7.1.

Groundwater Regulation Potential

Above one million of tubewells (mostly in Punjab) have been installed for
groundwater pumping for irrigation in Pakistan, mainly drilled, operated, and
maintained by farmers themselves. Also there is the scant institutional capacity, both
at Federal and Provincial level with respect to hydro-geological assessment, level and
extent of data base regarding tubewells and above all the law enforcement capacity
for any future regulation in this regard. Therefore, it cannot currently be expected that
both, the users and the government can contribute toward groundwater management
mechanisms and costs. However, with the condition of assured surplus electricity
provision in the country, enforcement can be bit easily taken up if all the tubewells are
converted on electricity, which seems to be impossible within near future.
7.2.

Surface Water and Groundwater Nexus and Conjunctive Management

Farmers groundwater pumping requirement obviously depends on canal supplies, i.e.

a farmer with enough canal supplies has to depend very minimally on groundwater
and vice versa. Such impacts of natural rainfall are also obvious on groundwater
pumping requirement. Thus, groundwater pumping and its management needs,
depend wholly or partially on annual normal rainfall and available canal supplies.
Currently conjunctive management of canal and groundwater is already being done at
farm level, without involvement or even the policy direction from the government.
However, conjunctive water management can better accrue the benefits when system
administrators control ground and surface water simultaneously: at the watercourse,
canal command and basin levels to optimize productivity, maintain equity, and
environmental sustainability. This control on surface water can induce an indirect
control on groundwater, thus avoid long-term waterlogging and groundwater
depletion. Such planning is needed at IBIS, provincial (especially Punjab) and canal
and watercourse command levels, to raise crop water productivity by reducing misuse
of water, where rainfall and canal water have higher combined availability. It would
be too suicidal if groundwater mismanagement is allowed to further continue.
7.3.

Management Issues

A major part of Punjabs agricultural success has been based upon the use of
groundwater for irrigation, using about million tubewells. The consequences of this
massive and uncontrolled development of groundwater is that the watertable has been
in continuous decline, with depletion rates currently in the range 0.350.5 m/year in
the lower and central parts of the Bari Doab, except in the down gradient saline
groundwater zones and areas with plenty of canal supplies.
The present study focused at devising a sustainable groundwater management
policy and mechanism that can be applied in typical irrigation environment of IBIS.
At the same time, this management policy would have to particularly defend the water
rights of farmers lying at tail ends of canal commands and watercourses; these
farmers are suffering shortage of both the canal and groundwater. There are certainly
diverse issues in canal water management, two of them are of critical importance: i)
114

particularly, the inequity of canal water distribution which is affected by virtue of

technical, maintenance and operational flaws, ii) the inequity of water distribution
along the watercourse by virtue of its design since the system inception. These two
types of inequities ultimately govern the groundwater pumping requirement of the
farmers. And necessarily, these groundwater pumping demands ultimately impact the
individual farmers and regional groundwater reservoir balance, positively or
negatively, depending upon the surface water availability.
The impact of the re-routing various tributary flows of Indus river system as a
result of IWT of 1960 has emerged now for lower parts of Bari Doab due to nonavailability of environmental flows. The other major reason is inequitable distribution
of canal supplies in relative terms, as well as increasing crop water demands due to
increasing cropping intensity. Currently, lower parts of Bari Doab are constrained by
water scarcity and unprecedented groundwater depletion rates, thus resulting in
intense competition among different water users for scarce water resources,
particularly the groundwater. The result is over development of groundwater beyond
its potential, creating socio-economic imbalance and environmental degradation. It is
emerging as a new challenge for water managers, farmers and other stakeholders in
the irrigation sector, particularly the policy makers.
Groundwater storage depletion is resulting in mounting cumulative pumping
costs for farmers, who are being confronted with the need to move from low-cost
water wells to deeper tubewells with electric submersible pumps, resulting in adverse
impacts on those farming the small land holdings. Another, relatively severe impact of
groundwater depletion is the quality deterioration of groundwater being pumped by
the farmers, particularly in centers of the Doabs in Punjab, where deeper groundwater
is having higher slat contents as compared to shallow groundwater seeped after
inception of the irrigation system. So, there is need to restrict increasing groundwater
use to the extent of its recharge.
The government has taken many steps regarding surface water management,
both in Sindh and Punjab, especially canal and watercourse lining. Now, after every
few years of operation, it is essential to closely monitor the aquifer water-level
response and to check that the extent of changes in groundwater balance. While, the
percent of the irrigation water supply derived from tubewells is much different in both
the provinces, i.e. the recharge to groundwater is reduced by lining in Punjab, but the
situation is different in Sindh. The component of seepage reduced by engineering
measures (such as canal lining) in Sindh should have been with the intention of
diverting water to demands in other areas. This could have resulted in a two prong
positive impact i.e. reduction in waterlogging and salinity and release of water for
acute shortage areas e.g. desert or below Kotri river reaches.
In IBIS only canal water is managed by Irrigation and Power Department of
the respective provinces, ignoring the needs for groundwater management.
Groundwater is only scantly studied by various federal and provincial institutions
regarding its quality, waterlogging and now a day for depletion, if any. The Canal and
115

Drainage Act (1873) confers extensive powers on the Provincial Government through,
acting through the Canal Officer of the Irrigation and Power Department, in relation
to the control of surface irrigation, flood protection, and drainage. But, no such
powers or essence exist in the irrigation department whereby the groundwater mining
or saline intrusion can be checked for long-term sustainability of agriculture
production.
7.4.

Important Conclusions and Recommendations

Following are the specific findings of this research:

Investments in drainage have been significant in Pakistan during the decades

of 70s to early 90s, waterlogging still affects large tracts of land: especially the
intense waterlogging and salinity in Sindh, also there are waterlogged areas in
Punjab (though to lesser extent in Punjab). Even after four years drought
period (1999-2002): substantial tracts of agricultural lands (mostly in UJC,
upper parts of LJC) were waterlogged; similarly, areas with higher irrigation
demand, but with higher canal supplies and low cropping intensity in Punjab
were also waterlogged, e.g. Muzaffargarh canal command.

Also, in spite of 12-25% reduction in canal supplies in IBIS, during drought

period of 1999-2002, the area under different crops and the crop yields
increased as compared to before drought period. It was particularly, due to
reduction in waterlogging in Sindh, during the drought.

Increasing deficit between groundwater recharge and extraction by tubewells

is causing groundwater depletion to the tune of 0.15-0.55 m per year in central
and lower parts of Bari Doab. Due to shortage of canal supplies, on whole Bari
Doab basis, a groundwater mining of 2.33 BCM (1.89 MAF) per year is going
on. Whereas groundwater levels are relatively stable in rest of the irrigated
areas of the Punjab province.

The allocation of river water to different canal commands both in Punjab and
Sindh provinces has no rationale. Similarly, declaration of perennial and nonperennial areas has become outdated due to many of the changes in the past
(about 40 years), e.g. changing depth to groundwater and desiccation of
eastern rivers and provision of additional canal supplies after the Mangla and
Tarbela Dams;

Absence of environmental flows particularly in Sutlej and Ravi Rivers is

adding towards groundwater depletion in Bari Doab. Therefore, IWT of 1960
with India has been only partially successful, without the provision of
environmental flows;

Online surface storage loss, due to sedimentation of Tarbela and Mangla, is

causing shortage of Rabi supplies to the tune of 30% in comparison to WAA
allocations. It has also contributed to overall groundwater depletion in Punjab;

Non-beneficial evaporation in Sindh, due to waterlogging conditions

prevailing over about 50% of the area is a major challenge in enhancing water
116

productivity in the province. This can be taken up by provision of irrigation

supplies matching with demand and increased groundwater drainage, to
provide cushion for storage of irrigation leakages and excess rainfall. Thus,
rainfall flooding as observed in 2011 on left of Indus River in Sindh could be
avoided. This groundwater buffer can be very efficiently utilized by deep and
shallow skimming wells, in areas with deep fresh groundwater and also areas
having shallow lenses of fresh groundwater, respectively.

Presently, PIDs are managing canal water leaving groundwater as if it is

isolated to the aforementioned primary source in irrigated areas. Allocating
canal water in a way so as to achieve combined equity of canal and
groundwater is the most prudent way forward, for controlling groundwater
abstraction and improved farmer behaviour towards efficient use of both the
canal and groundwater. This can further pave the way towards proper
groundwater management and control of aquifer mining. The task at a first
instance seems to be simple but needs a comprehensive change in thinking
towards managing the resources both in terms of institutional as well technical
details and skills required for effective management;

In order to avoid non-reversible pollution and mining of groundwater

resources under Lahore, it is recommended about 0.5 MAF surface water may
be allocated from Indus Basin Irrigation System, for water supply and
additional recharge to the aquifer. Otherwise, continuity of current situation
would prove to be big disaster, especially for future generations of this mega
city;

In order to avoid non-reversible pollution and mining of groundwater

resources under Lahore, it is recommended that about 0.5 MAF surface water
may be allocated from Indus Basin Irrigation System, for water supply and
additional recharge to the aquifer under Lahore. Also, flat rate billing be
replaced with metered water supply. Otherwise, continuity of current situation
would prove to be big disaster, especially for future generations of this ever
expanding mega city.

Fresh assessment of cropping patterns and intensities and the corresponding

crop water requirement along with existing allocations is the first and foremost
requirement for rationalizing canal water allocations;

For improving groundwater situation in Punjab and demand based supply to

farmers in Sindh, construction of mega reservoirs should be the first priority
for the country.
At watercourse level revising the watercourse allocation time along the length
of the watercourse in consideration of seepage losses should be first step
towards equitably allocating canal and groundwater amongst the farmers;
Canal water duty may be established in consideration of spatial variability of
climatic parameters (rainfall and ET) within and amongst the canal commands
at different levels i.e. IBIS, provincial and canal command level;

117

Detailed mapping of groundwater depth and quality after every 10 years at

canal command level (especially in Lower Indus) and its sharing with farming
community is recommended for taking farmers onboard for management of
this precious resource;

Even after the improved water supply patterns with the operation of Tarbela
and Mangla reservoirs, chronic perennial/non-perennial allocations being
continued without any logic, need to be re-evaluated. Examples are: huge
canal supplies to Rice canal during Kharif, creating flooding conditions,
therefore, big loss to potential yields during Rabi; similarly, non-perennial
allocation to Mailsi canal and desiccation of adjoining Sutlej River is creating
groundwater mining there, and farmers are forced to pump saline groundwater,
with increasing salinity.

7.5.

Recommended Action Points for Punjab

Evolve a groundwater recharge strategy for depleted irrigated and barani areas
separately that can contribute through various kinds of recharge measures.
There is an urgent need to utilize recharge potential in river beds of Sutlej and
Sukh-Beas by diverting surplus supplies during Kharif season, particularly
there should be proper planning and implementation for utilizing such
recharge potential during wet years. For the purpose, provision of
environmental flows for eastern rivers under the umbrella of IWT of 1960
with India may be taken up;

Water withdrawal can be reduced by partly diversifying to low water-requiring

crops, and employing water saving production technologies at a field scale.
Large-scale adoption of rice-wheat system has been a major factor in overexploitation of groundwater due to high ET requirements. In kharif, rice may
be replaced with maize, pulses and oilseeds; whereas wheat may be replaced
with oilseeds and gram;

To minimize waterlogging and groundwater depletion, a very detailed

assessment of crop water requirement, cropping pattern and intensities, along
with existing allocations is recommended for optimal canal water distribution
amongst and within canal commands. However, based on the present analysis
it is strongly recommended that: a) Supplies to UJC and Muzaffargarh canal
commands may be reduced and; b) Correspondingly supplies to Pakpattan and
Sidhnai commands may be increased;

During canal water re-allocation, depleting saline groundwater areas within

the Doabs (e.g. lower central part of the Bari Doab) be given little higher canal
supplies as compared to adjoining fresh groundwater areas; and

118

7.6.

Mandatory rain water harvesting in new larger constructions in relevant urban

areas, as well as there is need to amend policy on design of road surfaces and
infrastructure to enhance groundwater recharge.

Recommended Action Points for Lower Indus (Sindh and Balochistan)

Assessment of optimum groundwater development potential for different areas

in Lower Indus is required. This can help in eradication of waterlogging and
provide buffer for beneficial storage of irrigation and excess rainfall leakages.

For the accomplishment of the above task, a fresh survey of depth wise
groundwater quality is urgently needed to ascertain and enact conjunctive
water management potential in the province. Rethink on drainage
coefficient/requirement for different areas and redesign/rehabilitate drainage
system to provide 8-10 ft cushion for avoiding waterlogging and providing
excess rainfall storage, to avoid rainfall flooding, as observed in 2011.

Fresh assessment of crop water demand, simultaneously keeping in view the

drainage quantum and groundwater use potential needs to be accomplished for
each canal command in Sindh, as the groundwater quality varies drastically in
different areas. This would help in promoting conjunctive use of canal and
groundwater. Further steps will be needed as under:
o Reallocation/Rationalization of canal water supplies
o In irrigated areas with deep fresh groundwater-canal supplies be
reduced;
o In areas with shallow fresh groundwater, skimming wells need to be
promoted;

Practical demonstration to the farmers regarding possibility of growing paddy

with less water and thereby provide optimum moisture content for Rabi crops,
especially the wheat crop is the need of the hour. This will help in changing
the mindset of the farmer regarding misconception of over irrigation;

Irrigation and drainage infrastructure improvement including rehabilitation of

irrigation channels profile and sections according to the design.

Eradication of corruption in operation and maintenance of the irrigation and

drainage system and thereby improve the equity of water distribution to the
farmers; and

For achieving the last two objectives, capacity building of the irrigation
department, both technical and managerial, along with feeling the
responsibility of the job is necessary. For this, overall improvement in
governance in the province is a first and foremost requirement. Otherwise
achieving the end goal cannot even be imagined.

119

REFERENCES
Adnan S., Khan A.H., 2009. Effective rainfall for irrigated agriculture plains of
Pakistan, Pakistan Journal of Meteorology. Vol 6 (11): 61-72.
Agricultural Statistics of Pakistan, 2011. Agricultural Statistics of Pakistan. 2009
2010, Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Food, Agriculture & Livestock,
Islamabad, Pakistan.
Ahmad I., Sufi A.B. and Hussain T., 2012. Water resources of Pakistan. Pakistan
Engineering Congress paper No.711.
Ahmad N. 1993. Water resources of Pakistan and their utilization.61-B/2, Gulberg-3,
Lahore.
Ahmad N., 1982. An estimate of water loss by evaporation in Pakistan. Irrigation
Drainage and Flood Control Research Council, Planning and Coordination Cell,
106-C/2, Gulberg-III, Lahore.
Ahmad N., 1995. Groundwater Resources of Pakistan (Revised), 16B/2 Gulberg-III,
Lahore.
Ahmed M.D., Turral H. and Nazeer A., 2009. Diagnosing irrigation performance and
water productivity through satellite remote sensing and secondary data in a large
irrigation system of Pakistan. Agricultural Water Management 98 (2009) 551-564.
Alam S.M., Khan M.A. and Ansari R., 2000. Water crisis in Pakistan agriculture; how
to manage scientifically? Economist 2000;27
Baghar R.M. and Rasoul M., 2010. Effect of groundwater table decline on
groundwater quality in sirjan watershed. The Arabian Journal for Science and
Engineering, Volume 35, Number 1B. (2010) pp. 197-210.
Basharat M. and Ali S.U., 2012. Spatial variation in water supply and demand across
canal commands in Punjab: evaluation of existing water allocations. In
International Conference on Water, Food, Energy and Environment nexus:
Solutions and adaptation under changing climate, April 4-5, 2012, CEWRE, UET
Lahore.
Basharat M. and Tariq A.R., 2013. Spatial climatic variability and its impact on
irrigated hydrology in a canal command. Arabian Journal for Science and
Engineering, Vol. 38(3), pp: 507-522, doi: 10.1007/s13369-012-0336-9.
Basharat M. and Tariq AR., 2013a. Long term groundwater quality and saline
intrusion assessment in an irrigated environment: a case study of the aquifer under
LBDC irrigation system. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage (ISSN:1531-0361),
doi:10.1002/ird.1738.
Basharat M., 2011. Irrigation system management issues and groundwater
governance, under the study Groundwater management (Recharge Potential and
Governance. IWASRI-WAPDA publication No. 295, Lahore.
Basharat M., 2012. Integration of canal and groundwater to improve cost and quality
equity of irrigation water in a canal command. PhD thesis. Centre of Excellence in
Water Resources Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology,
Lahore, Pakistan.
120

Basharat M., 2012a. Spatial and temporal appraisal of groundwater depth and quality
in LBDC command-issues and options. Pakistan Journal of Engineering and
Applied Sciences Volume 11, July 2012, pp14-29.
Basharat M., 2014. Draft report on Groundwater environment and evaluation of
long-term sustainability of the aquifer under Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan; under the
project Enhancing the groundwater management capacity in Asian cities through
the development and application of groundwater sustainability index (GSII) in the
context of global change funded by Asia Pacific Network for nine Asian cities.
Bates B.C., Kundzewicz Z.W., Wu S. and Palutikof J.P. (Eds), 2008. Climate change
and water. Technical Paper of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,
IPCC Secretariat, Geneva, 210 pp.
Bhutta M.N., Van Der Velde, E.J., 1992. Equity of water distribution along
secondary canals in Punjab, Pakistan, Irrigation and Drainage Systems, 6:161177.
Briscoe J., Usman Q., Manuel C., Pervaiz A. and Don B., 2005. Pakistans water
economy is running dryPakistan water strategy paper (Draft). Washington, DC:
World Bank.
Chawla J.K., Khepar S.D., Sondhi S.K., Yadav A.K., 2010. Assessment of long-term
groundwater behavior in Punjab, India. Water Int 35(1):6377
Cheema, M.J.M., Immerzeel W.W. and Bastiaanssen W.G.M., 2013. Spatial
quantification of groundwater abstraction in the Irrigated Indus Basin. Ground
Water. doi: 10.1111/gwat.12027.
CICERO, 2000. Developing Strategies for Climate Change: The UNEP Country
Studies on Climate Change Impacts and Adaptations Assessment. Editor: Karen
O.Brien. United Nations Environment Programme, University of Oslo Center for
International Climate and Environmental Research Oslo.
Clemmens A.J., Bos M.G., 1990. Statistical methods for irrigation system delivery
performance evaluation. Irrigation and Drainage Systems, 4:345-365.
DLR, 2004. Water allowance of all canals of upper Indus Basin Irrigation System:
The current status. Directorate of Land Reclamation, Punjab Irrigation and Power
Department, Canal Bank, Mughalpura, Lahore.
Dutch Government, 2009. Groundwater Law, Law of 22 May 1981, Stb 1981, 392
(since amended).
ECPAK, 2011. Handbook on Water Statistics of Pakistan Volume II (Annex A to
C) prepared under: Water Sector Capacity Building and Advisory Services Project
(WCAP) by Euro consult Pakistan (Pvt.) Ltd., 46-K-1, Model Town, Lahore,
Pakistan.
Geerts S., Raes D., 2009. Deficit irrigation as an on-farm strategy to maximize crop
water productivity in dry areas (Review), Agricultural Water Management, 96(9),
pp.1275-1284.
Gleeson T., Wada Y., Bierkens M.F.P. and Van Beek L.P.H., 2012. Water balance of
global aquifers revealed by groundwater footprint. Available at
http://www.engr.scu.edu/~emaurer/classes/ceng139_groundwater/handouts/gleeso
n_groundwater_footprint_nature_2012.pdf, assessed on July 12, 2013.

121

Global Water Partnership, 2000. Integrated water resources management. TAC

background papers No. 4. Stockholm: GWP Secretariat.
Government of India, 2007. GROUND water management and ownership, Report of
the expert group to the Planning Commission, Government of India New Delhi.
Government of Punjab, 2011. Statistical pocket book of the Punjab, 2011. Bureau of
Statistics,
Government
of
the
Punjab,
Lahore:
available
at
http://www.bos.gop.pk/?q=system/files/Statistical_poket_book_2011.pdf.
Gurria A., 2009. Sustainably managing water: challenges and responses. Water Int
34(4):396401
Habib Z. and Kuper M., 1996. Performance assessment of the water distribution in
the Chishtian sub-division at the main canal level. Proceeding of the National
Conference on Managing Irrigation for Environmentally Sustainable Agriculture
in Pakistan, Islamabad.
Haider G., 2000. Proceedings of the international conference on regional groundwater
management, October, 9-11, Islamabad, Pakistan.
Hernandez-Mora N, Martinez Cortina L, Fornes J., 2003. Intensive groundwater use
in Spain. In: Llamas MR, Custodio E (eds) Intensive use of groundwater:
challenges and opportunities. Balkema, The Netherlands.
Iftikhar P., 2007. Presentation on the initiative taken in WASA Lahore regarding
benchmarking of UWSS Water.
IPCC, 2007. Summary for policymakers. In Climate Change 2007: The Physical
Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report
of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, S. Solomon, D. Qin, M.
Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.).
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York.
IWMI and Global Water Partnership, 2005. Water Policy briefing, Issue 13, Reducing
poverty through integrated use of groundwater and surface water. Available at
www.iwmi.org/waterpolicybriefing.
Janakarajan S., 2000. Competition, conflicts and crisis An example of degraded
groundwater regimes and feckless governance in south India. Global Water
Partnership, Proceedings of Regional Groundwater Management Seminar,
October 9-11, 2000 Islamabad.
Jurriens R. and Mollinga P.P., 1996. Scarcity by design: protective irrigation in India
and Pakistan. ICID Journal. 45(2) (1996) pp: 31-53.
Khepar. S.D., Gulati, H.S., Yadav, A.K. and Brar, T.P.S. 2000. A model for equitable
distribution of canal water, Irrigation Science, 19:191-197.
Kuper M. and Kijne J.W., 1992. Irrigation management in the Fordwah Branch
command area. Southeast Punjab, Pakistan. Advances in IIMIs Research 1992:
International Irrigation Management Institute: Colombo.1-24.
Latif M. and Ahmad M.Z., 2009. Groundwater and soil salinity variations in a canal
command area in Pakistan. Irrigation and Drainage, 58 (4):456-468. DOI
10.1002/ird.417.
Latif M. and Sarwar S., 1994. Proposal for equitable water allocation for rotational
irrigation in Pakistan. Irrigation and Drainage Systems 8: 35-48.

122

Latif M., 2007. Spatial productivity along a canal irrigation system in Pakistan.
Journal of Irrigation and Drainage, 56 (5):509-521. DOI 10.1002/ird. 320.
MacDonald M. and partners., 1990. Water Sector Investment Planning Study, Vol. 1.
1990, Government of Pakistan, Harza Engineering International and National
Engineering Services of Pakistan.
Majumdar D.K., 2004. Irrigation water management: principals and practices.
Prentice-Hall of India Private Limited, M-97, Connaught Circus, New Delhi110001; ISBN-81-203-1729-7.
Mara G.T. and Duloy J.H., 1984. Modelling efficient water allocation in a conjunctive
use regime: the Indus Basin of Pakistan. Water Resour. Res.;20:14891498.
Mehta M. 2006. Status of Groundwater and Policy Issues for its Sustainable
Development in India. In: Proceedings of IWMI- ITP- NIH International
Workshop on Creating Synergy between Groundwater Research and
Management in South and Southeast Asia February 8-9, 2005, Roorkee, India.
Mirza GM and Latif M., 2012. Assessment of current agro-economic conditions in
Indus Basin of Pakistan. In proceedings of International conference on Water,
Energy, Environment and Food Nexus: Solutions and Adaptations under
Changing Climate.
Moench M., Dixit A., Janakarajan M., Rathore S. and Mudrakartha S., 2003. The
fluid mosaic, water governance in the context of variability, uncertainty and
change. Nepal Water Conservation Foundation, Kathmandu, and the Institute for
Social and Environmental Transition, Boulder, Colorado, USA.
Molden D., Sakthivadivel R., Perry C.J., Fraiture D. and Kloezen W.H., 1998.
Indicators for comparing performance of irrigated agricultural systems. Research
Report 20. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute.
Molden, D., Oweis, T., Steduto, P., Bindraban, P., Hanjra, M.A., and Kijne, J., 2010.
Improving agricultural water productivity: Between optimism and caution.
Agricultural Water Management, 97(4), pp. 528-535.
Molina J., Garca-Arstegui J.L., Bromley J and Benavente J., 2011. Integrated
assessment of the European WFD implementation in extremely overexploited
aquifers through participatory modelling. Water Resour Manage.
doi:10.1007/s11269-011-9859-1
NESPAK/SGI, 1991. Contribution of private tubewells in the development of water
potential. National Engineering Services of Pakistan and Special Group Inc.,
Lahore, prepared for Planning and Development Division, Ministry of Planning
and Development, Islamabad.
Philippe C., 2010. Groundwater Regulation Need For Further Reforms, IELRC
working paper 2010 01 (http://www.ielrc.org/content/w1001.pdf, accessed on
January 18, 2012).
PIES, 2001. Punjab private sector groundwater development project Final project
impact evaluation report. MM Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd. In association with Mott
MacDonald Limited.
PILDAT, 2011. Inter-provincial water issues in Pakistan. Pakistan Institute of
Legislative Development and Transparency (PILDAT), 7th, 9th Avenue, F-8/1,
Islamabad, Pakistan.

123

PMD, 2006. Agrometeorological Bulletins of Pakistan for 2006, published by

National Agromet Centre of Pakistan Meteorological Department, Islamabad.
PMD,
2010.
Pakistan
Meteorological
Department
website:
http://www.pakmet.com.pk/cdpc/Pakistan_mean_rainfall.pdf, accessed on June
20, 2010).
PPSGDP, 2000. Consultants, Draft Technical Report No. 45, Groundwater
management and regulation in Punjab, Punjab Private Sector Groundwater
Development Project, Groundwater Regulatory Framework Team, Project
Management Unit, Irrigation and Power Department, Government of Punjab.
Prinz D., Oweis T. and Oberle A., 1996. Rainwater Harvesting for Dry Land
Agriculture - Developing a Methodology Based on Remote Sensing and GIS.
Accessed
on
Jan
04,
2012.
(lada.virtualcentre.org/eims/download.asp?pub_id=93866&app=0).
Qureshi A.S., Asghar M.N., Ahmad S. and Masih I., 2004. Sustaining crop production
under saline groundwater conditions: A case study from Pakistan. Australian
Journal of Agricultural Sciences. Vol. 54(2): 421-431.
Qureshi A.S., McCornick P.G., Sarwar A., Sharma B.R., 2010. Challenges and
prospects of sustainable groundwater management in the Indus Basin, Pakistan.
Water Resour Manage 24:15511569.
Qureshi, A.S. and Akhtar M., 2003. Effect of electricity pricing policies on
groundwater management in Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Water Resources
7(2):19.
Romani S., 2006. Central Groundwater Authority-Past Experience and Future
Strategies for Regulating the Development and Utilization of Groundwater in
India. In: Proceedings of IWMI- ITP- NIH International Workshop on Creating
Synergy between Groundwater Research and Management in South and Southeast
Asia February 8-9, 2005, Roorkee, India.
Saeed M., Khan N.M., Rafiq M. and Bhutta M.N., 2009. Change In Waterlogging
Due To Drought In The Indus Basin And Its Impact On Crop Yields. IWASRI
Report 280.
Sarkar A.A. and Ali M.H., 2009. Water-table dynamics of Dhaka city and its longterm trend analysis using the MAKESENS model. Water Int 34(3):373382
Shah T., 2006. Groundwater and human development: challenges and opportunities in
livelihoods and environments. Proceedings of IWMI-ITP-NIH International
Workshop on 'Creating Synergy between Groundwater Research and Management
in South and Southeast Asia' 8-9 February 2005, India.
Shankar P.S.V., Kulkarni H. and Karishnan S., 2011. Indias Groundwater Challenge
and the Way Forward. Economic and political weekly. Vol XLVI No.2.
Singh K., 2009. Act to Save Groundwater in Punjab: Its Impact on Water Table,
Electricity Subsidy and Environment. Agricultural Economics Research Review.
Vol. 22, 2009, pp 365-386. Accessed on June 21, 2013 at:
http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/57482/2/6-Karam-Singh.pdf.
Smith L.E.D., 2004. Assessment of the contribution of irrigation to poverty reduction
and sustainable livelihoods. International Journal of Water Resources
Development, 20(2), pp.243257.

124

Soil Survey Division Staff, 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S.
Department of Agriculture Handbook 18.
Steenbergen Van F. and Olienmans W., 1997. Groundwater resources management in
Pakistan, In: ILRI Workshop: Groundwater Management: sharing responsibilities
for an open access resource, proceedings of the Wageningen Water Workshop.
Tianduowa Z., 2009. Integrated Water Resources Management Based on Water Right
Institution, M.Sc. Thesis, ITC.
Unites States Department of the Interior, 1967. Geological Survey, Water Supply
Paper 1608-H, Plate 6.
Van Der Velde EJ., 1991. Performance assessment in a large irrigation system in
Pakistan: Opportunities for improvement at the distributary level, In: FAO.
Improved irrigation system performance for sustainable agriculture. Proceedings
of the Regional Workshop, 22-26 October, Bangkok, Thailand. Rome; FAO.
pp.93-111.
Villholth K.G., 2006. Integrating Science into Groundwater Management Decisions.
In; Proceedings of IWMI- ITP- NIH International Workshop on Creating
Synergy between Groundwater Research and Management in South and Southeast
Asia February 8-9, 2005, Roorkee, India.
Villholth K.G., Rajasooriyar L.D., 2010. Groundwater resources and management
challenges in Sri Lankaan overview. Water Resour Manage 24:14891513
WAPDA, 1966. Lower Indus Project, Part One and Two. Hunting Technical Services
Ltd. Sir M. Macdonald and Partners.
WAPDA, 1980a. Lower Rechna remaining project report (SCARP V). Volume I and
II Publication No. 27.
WAPDA, 1980b. Hydrogeological Data of Bari Doab, Volume-1, Basic Data Release
No. 1 by Directorate General of Hydrolgeology, WAPDA, Lahore, 1980.
World Bank, 2005. Water Rights and Entitlements by Don Blackmore and Faizul
Hasan; Background Paper # 6 Country Water Resources Assistance Strategy.
World Bank, 2010. Deep Wells and Prudence: Towards Pragmatic Action for
Addressing Groundwater Overexploitation in India. Accessed from
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INDIAEXTN/Resources/2955831268190137195/DeepWellsGroundWaterMarch2010. accessed on January 12,
2012.
World Population Day, 2011. Prime Minister Yousal Raza Gilanis address on World
Population Day on July 11, 2011, available http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistannews-newspaper-daily-english-online/Politics/11-Jul-2011/High-populationgrowth-rate-undermining-economic-progress-Gilani (accessed on July 14, 2011).
World
Water
Day,
1998.
Groundwater:
the
invisible
resource.
http://www.worldwaterday.org/wwday/1998/. Accessed 21 Feb. 2011
WRPO and IWASRI, 2004. Master Drainage Plan of Pakistan - Drainage Vision
2025, pre-feasibility. WPADA, Lahore
Yin D., Shu L., Chen X., Wang Z. and Mohammed M.E., 2011. Assessment of
sustainable yield of karst water in Huaibei, China. Water Resources Management
25:287300.

125

Annexure A: Canal head withdrawals (MAF) for canal irrigation systems in Sindh
and Balochistan (source: H&WM, WAPDA, Wapda House, Lahore)
CANAL

Apr

May

Jun

July

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan

Feb

Mar Kharif Rabi

Ann

1977
Pat Feeder

0.027 0.040 0.036 0.071 0.063 0.044 0.067 0.059 0.081 0.091 0.087 0.057 0.280 0.443 0.723

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.000 0.376 0.519 0.396 0.377 0.187 0.012 0.000 0.058 0.000 0.000 1.667 0.256 1.923

Begari

0.020 0.095 0.079 0.951 0.704 0.521 0.160 0.000 0.000 0.069 0.000 0.000 2.370 0.229 2.599

Ghotki

0.024 0.208 0.359 0.384 0.513 0.484 0.416 0.160 0.079 0.242 0.153 0.162 1.972 1.212 3.184

North West

0.048 0.057 0.323 0.530 0.372 0.304 0.329 0.185 0.173 0.024 0.131 0.155 1.634 0.997 2.630

Rice

0.000 0.087 0.563 0.622 0.402 0.371 0.149 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.045 0.149 2.194

Dadu

0.075 0.061 0.170 0.297 0.271 0.254 0.204 0.153 0.170 0.057 0.145 0.139 1.128 0.868 1.996

Khairpur West

0.114 0.135 0.151 0.166 0.180 0.166 0.160 0.147 0.137 0.047 0.127 0.115 0.912 0.733 1.645

Khairpur East

0.089 0.099 0.095 0.105 0.101 0.117 0.129 0.089 0.089 0.036 0.089 0.097 0.606 0.529 1.135

Rohri

0.656 0.765 0.751 0.778 0.856 0.872 0.777 0.733 0.777 0.305 0.751 0.709 4.678 4.052 8.730

Kirthar

0.065 0.048 0.038 0.037 0.052 0.051 0.049 0.046 0.049 0.055 0.057 0.042 0.291 0.296 0.588

Nara

0.466 0.579 0.551 0.527 0.603 0.622 0.573 0.541 0.547 0.212 0.515 0.529 3.348 2.917 6.265

Kalri

0.089 0.111 0.264 0.198 0.374 0.394 0.329 0.234 0.115 0.156 0.103 0.093 1.430 1.030 2.460

Lined Channel

0.139 0.172 0.170 0.127 0.172 0.125 0.117 0.093 0.073 0.057 0.095 0.109 0.905 0.544 1.449

Fuleli

0.016 0.218 0.549 0.438 0.460 0.339 0.269 0.153 0.075 0.137 0.005 0.075 2.020 0.714 2.734

Pinyari

0.000 0.153 0.359 0.367 0.404 0.297 0.216 0.101 0.053 0.079 0.002 0.071 1.580 0.522 2.102

Pat Feeder

0.057 0.028 0.038 0.098 0.096 0.063 0.071 0.085 0.091 0.085 0.081 0.051 0.380 0.465 0.845

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.083 0.446 0.272 0.285 0.368 0.216 0.030 0.000 0.130 0.000 0.000 1.454 0.376 1.830

Begari

0.000 0.199 0.677 0.991 0.471 0.487 0.250 0.000 0.024 0.110 0.032 0.000 2.826 0.416 3.242

Ghotki

0.065 0.287 0.425 0.138 0.377 0.437 0.485 0.291 0.111 0.274 0.158 0.281 1.729 1.600 3.329

North West

0.018 0.075 0.312 0.268 0.242 0.250 0.238 0.140 0.138 0.025 0.139 0.084 1.164 0.763 1.927

Rice

0.000 0.135 0.609 0.299 0.335 0.347 0.111 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.725 0.111 1.836

Dadu

0.088 0.096 0.190 0.214 0.211 0.251 0.197 0.110 0.132 0.068 0.137 0.138 1.050 0.782 1.832

Khairpur West

0.090 0.106 0.114 0.070 0.088 0.100 0.104 0.100 0.106 0.036 0.068 0.082 0.568 0.496 1.064

Khairpur East

0.126 0.165 0.163 0.086 0.124 0.166 0.160 0.154 0.148 0.042 0.100 0.112 0.830 0.716 1.546

Rohri

0.636 0.791 0.730 0.583 0.624 0.776 0.746 0.690 0.746 0.282 0.720 0.787 4.140 3.971 8.111

Kirthar

0.073 0.050 0.046 0.032 0.046 0.055 0.059 0.057 0.068 0.059 0.051 0.051 0.301 0.346 0.646

Nara

0.507 0.613 0.513 0.321 0.489 0.573 0.547 0.503 0.549 0.175 0.439 0.437 3.016 2.650 5.666

Kalri

0.094 0.176 0.299 0.249 0.000 0.154 0.206 0.112 0.139 0.105 0.098 0.106 0.972 0.766 1.738

Lined Channel

0.134 0.177 0.179 0.147 0.132 0.162 0.124 0.092 0.074 0.062 0.096 0.120 0.931 0.568 1.499

Fuleli

0.072 0.294 0.632 0.454 0.263 0.373 0.222 0.142 0.110 0.127 0.116 0.125 2.088 0.842 2.930

Pinyari

0.056 0.184 0.431 0.428 0.392 0.333 0.177 0.120 0.078 0.048 0.104 0.098 1.824 0.625 2.449

1978

1979
Pat Feeder

0.065 0.072 0.034 0.109 0.121 0.123 0.077 0.093 0.096 0.080 0.061 0.055 0.523 0.463 0.986

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.000 0.440 0.575 0.333 0.394 0.157 0.024 0.000 0.063 0.000 0.018 1.743 0.261 2.004

Begari

0.000 0.063 0.782 0.620 0.713 0.614 0.190 0.000 0.024 0.212 0.000 0.000 2.792 0.426 3.218

Ghotki

0.028 0.309 0.418 0.468 0.466 0.472 0.454 0.299 0.123 0.303 0.018 0.139 2.161 1.336 3.497

North West

0.091 0.125 0.356 0.298 0.287 0.305 0.297 0.198 0.207 0.081 0.190 0.134 1.462 1.107 2.569

Rice

0.217 0.137 0.129 0.007 0.122 0.113 0.166 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.725 0.166 0.891

Dadu

0.083 0.079 0.210 0.341 0.279 0.254 0.192 0.135 0.145 0.061 0.154 0.139 1.246 0.826 2.072

Khairpur West

0.081 0.097 0.099 0.127 0.113 0.105 0.115 0.111 0.115 0.026 0.087 0.089 0.622 0.543 1.165

Khairpur East

0.109 0.147 0.141 0.170 0.172 0.172 0.153 0.141 0.153 0.036 0.107 0.113 0.911 0.703 1.614

Rohri

0.723 0.850 0.801 0.664 0.799 0.846 0.781 0.684 0.729 0.281 0.688 0.735 4.683 3.898 8.581

Kirthar

0.065 0.040 0.036 0.027 0.020 0.038 0.047 0.044 0.055 0.062 0.061 0.055 0.225 0.322 0.547

Nara

0.499 0.584 0.457 0.660 0.618 0.620 0.577 0.477 0.503 0.142 0.374 0.454 3.438 2.527 5.965

Kalri

0.026 0.174 0.305 0.402 0.319 0.440 0.295 0.119 0.097 0.147 0.061 0.020 1.666 0.739 2.405

Lined Channel

0.141 0.196 0.194 0.218 0.099 0.157 0.139 0.093 0.056 0.071 0.081 0.075 1.005 0.515 1.520

126

CANAL

Apr

May

Jun

July

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan

Feb

Mar Kharif Rabi

Ann

Fuleli

0.057 0.406 0.704 0.817 0.291 0.421 0.325 0.154 0.071 0.170 0.063 0.016 2.696 0.799 3.495

Pinyari

0.145 0.198 0.381 0.614 0.377 0.361 0.238 0.123 0.063 0.135 0.057 0.012 2.076 0.628 2.704

Pat Feeder

0.077 0.065 0.067 0.056 0.074 0.093 0.120 0.075 0.101 0.133 0.124 0.044 0.432 0.596 1.028

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.010 0.393 0.595 0.453 0.411 0.178 0.008 0.010 0.070 0.022 0.000 1.861 0.287 2.148

Begari

0.000 0.067 0.725 1.242 0.777 0.631 0.198 0.000 0.002 0.189 0.000 0.000 3.442 0.389 3.832

Ghotki

0.008 0.343 0.413 0.515 0.526 0.482 0.425 0.216 0.120 0.256 0.075 0.135 2.287 1.227 3.513

North West

0.076 0.049 0.335 0.508 0.452 0.365 0.199 0.117 0.150 0.013 0.147 0.117 1.785 0.742 2.527

Rice

0.000 0.144 0.649 0.631 0.522 0.454 0.180 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.400 0.180 2.580

Dadu

0.089 0.088 0.220 0.330 0.289 0.274 0.200 0.315 0.154 0.054 0.158 0.149 1.289 1.028 2.317

Khairpur West

0.093 0.107 0.111 0.119 0.118 0.125 0.123 0.105 0.117 0.029 0.098 0.096 0.673 0.568 1.241

Khairpur East

0.117 0.146 0.155 0.166 0.167 0.181 0.168 0.133 0.143 0.037 0.117 0.117 0.931 0.715 1.646

Rohri

0.688 0.841 0.829 0.890 0.920 0.879 0.814 0.704 0.769 0.261 0.718 0.749 5.047 4.015 9.062

Kirthar

0.027 0.066 0.034 0.039 0.030 0.061 0.052 0.048 0.041 0.055 0.053 0.040 0.256 0.288 0.544

Nara

0.637 0.681 0.672 0.752 0.804 0.768 0.708 0.651 0.660 0.224 0.526 0.553 4.313 3.321 7.634

Kalri

0.135 0.166 0.377 0.438 0.431 0.468 0.269 0.093 0.067 0.168 0.184 0.100 2.015 0.882 2.897

Lined Channel

0.081 0.117 0.181 0.183 0.177 0.196 0.153 0.103 0.066 0.059 0.106 0.080 0.936 0.568 1.503

Fuleli

0.214 0.392 0.690 0.644 0.548 0.524 0.346 0.123 0.058 0.193 0.225 0.107 3.011 1.051 4.062

Pinyari

0.107 0.199 0.448 0.572 0.477 0.393 0.237 0.077 0.024 0.101 0.077 0.018 2.196 0.534 2.730

1980

1981
Pat Feeder

0.089 0.090 0.083 0.094 0.131 0.115 0.119 0.101 0.115 0.113 0.087 0.081 0.602 0.616 1.218

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.000 0.391 0.482 0.404 0.427 0.170 0.024 0.000 0.034 0.000 0.000 1.704 0.228 1.932

Begari

0.000 0.093 0.758 1.105 0.720 0.611 0.125 0.006 0.006 0.129 0.002 0.000 3.287 0.269 3.556

Ghotki

0.000 0.229 0.452 0.339 0.432 0.442 0.321 0.167 0.063 0.235 0.014 0.120 1.894 0.920 2.814

North West

0.070 0.082 0.276 0.377 0.309 0.318 0.209 0.127 0.124 0.003 0.123 0.130 1.431 0.716 2.147

Rice

0.000 0.119 0.617 0.550 0.427 0.442 0.149 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.155 0.149 2.304

Dadu

0.103 0.102 0.185 0.298 0.259 0.272 0.200 0.155 0.156 0.054 0.148 0.137 1.218 0.849 2.067

Khairpur West

0.102 0.113 0.109 0.097 0.102 0.119 0.117 0.113 0.121 0.026 0.090 0.079 0.642 0.546 1.188

Khairpur East

0.117 0.146 0.159 0.152 0.135 0.171 0.168 0.161 0.166 0.039 0.120 0.110 0.880 0.764 1.643

Rohri

0.732 0.864 0.833 0.858 0.917 0.865 0.831 0.750 0.768 0.219 0.697 0.777 5.068 4.042 9.110

Kirthar

0.050 0.029 0.030 0.062 0.036 0.044 0.058 0.061 0.056 0.064 0.055 0.055 0.249 0.349 0.598

Nara

0.637 0.683 0.666 0.714 0.720 0.726 0.708 0.613 0.648 0.219 0.583 0.558 4.145 3.329 7.474

Kalri

0.093 0.133 0.315 0.411 0.224 0.426 0.210 0.115 0.040 0.182 0.092 0.084 1.603 0.721 2.324

Lined Channel

0.149 0.183 0.181 0.155 0.114 0.147 0.120 0.073 0.059 0.074 0.077 0.078 0.928 0.482 1.409

Fuleli

0.036 0.482 0.740 0.539 0.400 0.387 0.233 0.141 0.052 0.183 0.081 0.097 2.583 0.787 3.369

Pinyari

0.000 0.239 0.486 0.522 0.397 0.345 0.186 0.107 0.012 0.135 0.062 0.049 1.989 0.550 2.539
1982

Pat Feeder

0.057 0.096 0.091 0.090 0.095 0.103 0.103 0.105 0.100 0.104 0.090 0.069 0.532 0.571 1.103

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.000 0.439 0.503 0.358 0.278 0.098 0.000 0.000 0.015 0.000 0.024 1.577 0.137 1.714

Begari

0.000 0.080 0.739 0.999 0.627 0.502 0.140 0.006 0.048 0.040 0.004 0.000 2.946 0.237 3.183

Ghotki

0.000 0.184 0.444 0.472 0.450 0.413 0.352 0.117 0.135 0.058 0.083 0.099 1.963 0.844 2.806

North West

0.014 0.095 0.282 0.448 0.449 0.316 0.242 0.161 0.084 0.146 0.119 0.136 1.603 0.888 2.491

Rice

0.000 0.123 0.609 0.727 0.429 0.393 0.149 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.281 0.149 2.430

Dadu

0.097 0.092 0.204 0.303 0.287 0.228 0.212 0.149 0.099 0.117 0.132 0.164 1.212 0.873 2.084

Khairpur West

0.099 0.110 0.117 0.127 0.118 0.123 0.131 0.119 0.075 0.065 0.085 0.098 0.695 0.574 1.269

Khairpur East

0.109 0.144 0.153 0.166 0.157 0.153 0.168 0.149 0.095 0.088 0.113 0.129 0.881 0.741 1.622

Rohri

0.728 0.810 0.772 0.847 0.876 0.877 0.847 0.718 0.494 0.518 0.692 0.770 4.909 4.039 8.948

Kirthar

0.048 0.037 0.038 0.035 0.016 0.050 0.062 0.046 0.047 0.048 0.045 0.053 0.222 0.300 0.522

Nara

0.643 0.693 0.688 0.757 0.785 0.734 0.709 0.637 0.381 0.422 0.546 0.587 4.299 3.281 7.580

Kalri

0.179 0.151 0.294 0.498 0.464 0.274 0.245 0.093 0.083 0.192 0.119 0.024 1.858 0.756 2.614

Lined Channel

0.151 0.176 0.149 0.181 0.152 0.115 0.143 0.097 0.081 0.086 0.072 0.067 0.923 0.546 1.468

127

CANAL

Apr

May

Jun

July

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan

Feb

Mar Kharif Rabi

Ann

Fuleli

0.022 0.389 0.692 0.726 0.596 0.484 0.366 0.123 0.146 0.194 0.121 0.004 2.909 0.954 3.864

Pinyari

0.010 0.191 0.407 0.593 0.536 0.349 0.234 0.060 0.061 0.101 0.052 0.016 2.085 0.524 2.609

Pat Feeder

0.069 0.063 0.061 0.071 0.074 0.089 0.108 0.113 0.110 0.108 0.093 0.105 0.427 0.637 1.064

Desert Feeder

0.009 0.000 0.462 0.562 0.402 0.327 0.095 0.022 0.000 0.037 0.015 0.015 1.763 0.185 1.948

Begari

0.000 0.069 0.703 1.138 0.588 0.764 0.109 0.006 0.006 0.118 0.006 0.000 3.261 0.245 3.506

Ghotki

0.012 0.162 0.446 0.472 0.437 0.415 0.287 0.151 0.122 0.178 0.091 0.157 1.944 0.986 2.929

North West

0.034 0.053 0.300 0.412 0.330 0.288 0.248 0.165 0.195 0.051 0.190 0.184 1.417 1.033 2.450

Rice

0.000 0.126 0.613 0.572 0.367 0.333 0.151 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.012 0.151 2.162

Dadu

0.071 0.076 0.202 0.302 0.246 0.186 0.208 0.163 0.170 0.060 0.168 0.162 1.083 0.930 2.014

Khairpur West

0.089 0.109 0.115 0.113 0.096 0.093 0.111 0.105 0.111 0.027 0.098 0.109 0.615 0.560 1.175

Khairpur East

0.103 0.146 0.153 0.156 0.141 0.143 0.164 0.155 0.160 0.030 0.134 0.162 0.841 0.804 1.646

Rohri

0.690 0.812 0.805 0.869 0.891 0.871 0.845 0.774 0.801 0.264 0.712 0.779 4.938 4.175 9.113

Kirthar

0.053 0.042 0.018 0.037 0.054 0.050 0.045 0.044 0.036 0.049 0.045 0.063 0.253 0.283 0.536

Nara

0.623 0.683 0.690 0.744 0.689 0.649 0.698 0.619 0.631 0.190 0.556 0.621 4.077 3.316 7.393

Kalri

0.137 0.160 0.361 0.520 0.310 0.452 0.221 0.137 0.106 0.176 0.111 0.181 1.940 0.931 2.871

Lined Channel

0.097 0.165 0.200 0.151 0.098 0.113 0.104 0.103 0.077 0.069 0.096 0.092 0.824 0.542 1.367

Fuleli

0.175 0.520 0.893 0.633 0.334 0.276 0.219 0.206 0.136 0.162 0.179 0.021 2.830 0.923 3.753

Pinyari

0.117 0.255 0.530 0.572 0.346 0.214 0.170 0.153 0.090 0.112 0.116 0.013 2.033 0.653 2.685

1983

1984
Pat Feeder

0.073 0.086 0.077 0.088 0.078 0.085 0.114 0.087 0.092 0.114 0.119 0.101 0.487 0.627 1.114

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.000 0.423 0.501 0.371 0.302 0.137 0.000 0.000 0.067 0.000 0.000 1.596 0.204 1.800

Begari

0.000 0.028 0.822 1.083 0.451 0.373 0.132 0.010 0.006 0.183 0.006 0.006 2.757 0.342 3.099

Ghotki

0.000 0.164 0.448 0.384 0.451 0.417 0.456 0.321 0.146 0.182 0.000 0.028 1.864 1.134 2.997

North West

0.028 0.061 0.274 0.506 0.439 0.314 0.262 0.171 0.191 0.043 0.178 0.103 1.621 0.948 2.569

Rice

0.000 0.186 0.567 0.661 0.493 0.389 0.125 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.295 0.125 2.420

Dadu

0.052 0.078 0.198 0.305 0.260 0.204 0.187 0.131 0.131 0.046 0.178 0.119 1.097 0.792 1.889

Khairpur West

0.101 0.104 0.111 0.119 0.113 0.103 0.113 0.109 0.115 0.027 0.096 0.091 0.651 0.551 1.202

Khairpur East

0.141 0.162 0.157 0.158 0.160 0.153 0.164 0.155 0.160 0.037 0.144 0.131 0.930 0.791 1.721

Rohri

0.690 0.798 0.784 0.864 0.815 0.908 0.798 0.716 0.757 0.189 0.710 0.693 4.859 3.862 8.721

Kirthar

0.055 0.039 0.057 0.029 0.022 0.050 0.062 0.051 0.041 0.056 0.059 0.061 0.252 0.330 0.582

Nara

0.601 0.674 0.659 0.736 0.635 0.692 0.655 0.577 0.576 0.172 0.541 0.530 3.997 3.051 7.047

Kalri

0.194 0.120 0.250 0.543 0.325 0.502 0.298 0.147 0.105 0.214 0.038 0.016 1.934 0.818 2.752

Lined Channel

0.101 0.095 0.117 0.169 0.091 0.119 0.115 0.103 0.079 0.063 0.069 0.066 0.692 0.494 1.186

Fuleli

0.248 0.393 0.581 0.685 0.297 0.341 0.264 0.200 0.129 0.140 0.107 0.030 2.545 0.870 3.415

Pinyari

0.113 0.160 0.311 0.583 0.378 0.363 0.263 0.175 0.134 0.189 0.062 0.010 1.908 0.832 2.740
1985

Pat Feeder

0.083 0.070 0.067 0.079 0.074 0.077 0.091 0.091 0.081 0.081 0.094 0.093 0.451 0.530 0.981

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.000 0.343 0.473 0.389 0.262 0.067 0.000 0.000 0.084 0.000 0.000 1.467 0.151 1.619

Begari

0.000 0.009 0.830 1.130 0.956 0.651 0.183 0.000 0.000 0.107 0.000 0.000 3.575 0.290 3.865

Ghotki

0.000 0.046 0.425 0.322 0.531 0.454 0.357 0.117 0.066 0.160 0.008 0.050 1.777 0.758 2.535

North West

0.010 0.000 0.254 0.442 0.505 0.353 0.290 0.129 0.119 0.053 0.151 0.092 1.564 0.834 2.398

Rice

0.000 0.043 0.506 0.593 0.515 0.407 0.226 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.063 0.226 2.289

Dadu

0.044 0.043 0.183 0.261 0.271 0.220 0.195 0.125 0.139 0.055 0.145 0.135 1.021 0.794 1.815

Khairpur West

0.062 0.050 0.103 0.091 0.107 0.097 0.100 0.095 0.102 0.049 0.092 0.072 0.509 0.511 1.019

Khairpur East

0.123 0.080 0.147 0.145 0.154 0.147 0.160 0.153 0.156 0.040 0.104 0.068 0.796 0.680 1.476

Rohri

0.625 0.680 0.726 0.839 0.906 0.905 0.810 0.724 0.783 0.174 0.685 0.681 4.680 3.856 8.536

Kirthar

0.053 0.046 0.044 0.046 0.028 0.051 0.058 0.061 0.060 0.058 0.061 0.057 0.267 0.354 0.622

Nara

0.551 0.609 0.655 0.706 0.768 0.793 0.685 0.659 0.650 0.194 0.551 0.520 4.082 3.259 7.341

Kalri

0.002 0.091 0.212 0.366 0.517 0.387 0.309 0.075 0.036 0.112 0.076 0.030 1.576 0.638 2.214

Lined Channel

0.046 0.049 0.085 0.136 0.177 0.153 0.153 0.073 0.028 0.042 0.038 0.037 0.647 0.371 1.018

128

CANAL

Apr

May

Jun

July

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan

Feb

Mar Kharif Rabi

Ann

Fuleli

0.000 0.114 0.405 0.573 0.506 0.484 0.483 0.089 0.013 0.224 0.056 0.000 2.082 0.863 2.946

Pinyari

0.000 0.053 0.278 0.413 0.437 0.347 0.342 0.069 0.008 0.139 0.034 0.000 1.527 0.593 2.120

Pat Feeder

0.089 0.083 0.085 0.094 0.087 0.097 0.092 0.113 0.112 0.114 0.111 0.113 0.535 0.654 1.188

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.048 0.494 0.433 0.218 0.333 0.085 0.000 0.000 0.058 0.000 0.000 1.527 0.143 1.670

Begari

0.000 0.050 0.511 1.089 0.498 0.502 0.117 0.000 0.002 0.147 0.000 0.000 2.650 0.266 2.916

Ghotki

0.000 0.240 0.385 0.535 0.301 0.468 0.332 0.177 0.046 0.202 0.030 0.128 1.929 0.913 2.842

North West

0.006 0.049 0.337 0.514 0.441 0.395 0.337 0.262 0.163 0.046 0.209 0.153 1.742 1.170 2.912

Rice

0.000 0.103 0.573 0.694 0.471 0.425 0.143 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.266 0.143 2.409

Dadu

0.058 0.066 0.194 0.324 0.275 0.260 0.211 0.171 0.150 0.072 0.165 0.147 1.177 0.915 2.092

Khairpur West

0.091 0.105 0.097 0.117 0.093 0.113 0.119 0.105 0.115 0.023 0.090 0.100 0.615 0.551 1.166

Khairpur East

0.089 0.098 0.095 0.160 0.146 0.141 0.149 0.137 0.148 0.038 0.111 0.108 0.730 0.690 1.420

Rohri

0.714 0.822 0.786 0.878 0.882 0.887 0.759 0.672 0.765 0.199 0.712 0.794 4.967 3.901 8.869

Kirthar

0.063 0.058 0.048 0.050 0.026 0.051 0.058 0.057 0.051 0.051 0.056 0.057 0.296 0.330 0.626

Nara

0.609 0.685 0.682 0.752 0.739 0.789 0.749 0.663 0.639 0.169 0.484 0.566 4.257 3.270 7.527

Kalri

0.121 0.237 0.252 0.503 0.509 0.520 0.329 0.157 0.033 0.070 0.122 0.115 2.141 0.826 2.967

Lined Channel

0.052 0.093 0.145 0.190 0.169 0.185 0.161 0.103 0.048 0.033 0.052 0.049 0.834 0.447 1.280

Fuleli

0.169 0.469 0.645 0.819 0.440 0.555 0.293 0.058 0.006 0.074 0.108 0.079 3.097 0.617 3.714

Pinyari

0.050 0.205 0.385 0.578 0.438 0.438 0.211 0.034 0.000 0.060 0.090 0.060 2.094 0.455 2.549

1986

1987
Pat Feeder

0.073 0.045 0.075 0.071 0.077 0.119 0.128 0.109 0.108 0.102 0.120 0.133 0.460 0.699 1.158

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.195 0.645 0.535 0.477 0.318 0.057 0.000 0.000 0.110 0.000 0.000 2.169 0.167 2.336

Begari

0.000 0.050 0.070 1.132 0.934 0.587 0.127 0.000 0.015 0.244 0.000 0.000 2.773 0.386 3.159

Ghotki

0.000 0.260 0.450 0.491 0.548 0.440 0.385 0.254 0.097 0.151 0.135 0.016 2.189 1.038 3.227

North West

0.008 0.086 0.383 0.507 0.480 0.341 0.220 0.133 0.124 0.091 0.175 0.133 1.805 0.876 2.681

Rice

0.000 0.150 0.688 0.608 0.544 0.419 0.123 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.409 0.123 2.532

Dadu

0.056 0.107 0.226 0.317 0.282 0.234 0.149 0.113 0.104 0.064 0.138 0.120 1.222 0.689 1.911

Khairpur West

0.097 0.103 0.107 0.132 0.148 0.377 0.133 0.109 0.106 0.043 0.110 0.105 0.963 0.606 1.568

Khairpur East

0.089 0.100 0.107 0.175 0.197 0.175 0.172 0.137 0.137 0.060 0.138 0.135 0.842 0.779 1.622

Rohri

0.712 0.791 0.787 0.913 0.961 0.922 0.830 0.738 0.733 0.210 0.745 0.788 5.087 4.045 9.133

Kirthar

0.059 0.036 0.048 0.042 0.034 0.048 0.058 0.055 0.054 0.058 0.053 0.061 0.266 0.339 0.604

Nara

0.599 0.654 0.676 0.765 0.787 0.778 0.751 0.678 0.621 0.198 0.525 0.557 4.259 3.332 7.590

Kalri

0.272 0.225 0.306 0.501 0.535 0.464 0.391 0.186 0.040 0.133 0.052 0.114 2.303 0.916 3.218

Lined Channel

0.155 0.180 0.177 0.185 0.176 0.163 0.147 0.113 0.048 0.055 0.038 0.049 1.035 0.450 1.485

Fuleli

0.139 0.419 0.823 0.848 0.795 0.524 0.372 0.161 0.050 0.135 0.035 0.050 3.547 0.801 4.349

Pinyari

0.056 0.197 0.468 0.616 0.620 0.409 0.305 0.177 0.042 0.109 0.022 0.028 2.365 0.683 3.049
1988

Pat Feeder

0.093 0.096 0.073 0.081 0.108 0.127 0.116 0.135 0.110 0.104 0.101 0.113 0.578 0.678 1.256

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.154 0.627 0.518 0.232 0.371 0.042 0.000 0.000 0.143 0.000 0.000 1.902 0.184 2.086

Begari

0.000 0.226 0.996 1.207 0.414 0.454 0.016 0.000 0.000 0.370 0.000 0.000 3.297 0.386 3.683

Ghotki

0.000 0.324 0.484 0.388 0.307 0.442 0.365 0.258 0.129 0.202 0.219 0.152 1.945 1.323 3.268

North West

0.000 0.095 0.429 0.520 0.364 0.324 0.231 0.185 0.206 0.046 0.207 0.189 1.731 1.063 2.794

Rice

0.000 0.198 0.688 0.485 0.402 0.400 0.038 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.174 0.038 2.212

Dadu

0.030 0.141 0.234 0.293 0.251 0.238 0.202 0.179 0.187 0.067 0.156 0.153 1.187 0.944 2.131

Khairpur West

0.105 0.115 0.129 0.141 0.124 0.141 0.143 0.139 0.143 0.031 0.102 0.113 0.755 0.671 1.425

Khairpur East

0.137 0.150 0.153 0.184 0.148 0.157 0.164 0.157 0.156 0.037 0.124 0.135 0.928 0.773 1.701

Rohri

0.738 0.822 0.817 0.897 0.868 0.974 0.894 0.851 0.893 0.255 0.711 0.788 5.116 4.391 9.507

Kirthar

0.061 0.058 0.048 0.024 0.050 0.051 0.053 0.051 0.046 0.051 0.054 0.063 0.291 0.319 0.611

Nara

0.653 0.683 0.696 0.684 0.379 0.577 0.549 0.520 0.498 0.161 0.485 0.554 3.671 2.767 6.437

Kalri

0.089 0.283 0.448 0.500 0.415 0.442 0.259 0.226 0.170 0.216 0.113 0.070 2.178 1.053 3.231

Lined Channel

0.050 0.138 0.177 0.154 0.109 0.161 0.129 0.113 0.083 0.082 0.087 0.072 0.787 0.564 1.352

129

CANAL

Apr

May

Jun

July

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan

Feb

Mar Kharif Rabi

Ann

Fuleli

0.198 0.586 0.839 0.629 0.241 0.432 0.255 0.226 0.124 0.211 0.180 0.161 2.926 1.157 4.083

Pinyari

0.060 0.247 0.514 0.494 0.182 0.204 0.207 0.196 0.124 0.128 0.137 0.046 1.700 0.839 2.538

Pat Feeder

0.055 0.037 0.051 0.095 0.091 0.105 0.133 0.125 0.124 0.128 0.118 0.111 0.435 0.738 1.174

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.141 0.491 0.300 0.194 0.244 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.046 0.000 0.000 1.369 0.046 1.415

Begari

0.000 0.225 1.061 1.007 0.413 0.453 0.016 0.000 0.017 0.369 0.000 0.000 3.160 0.403 3.562

Ghotki

0.000 0.326 0.483 0.387 0.306 0.442 0.364 0.257 0.128 0.202 0.218 0.151 1.944 1.320 3.264

North West

0.000 0.076 0.362 0.426 0.302 0.255 0.197 0.141 0.239 0.021 0.158 0.151 1.422 0.906 2.327

Rice

0.000 0.198 0.687 0.485 0.402 0.400 0.038 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.171 0.038 2.208

Dadu

0.030 0.140 0.234 0.293 0.250 0.238 0.202 0.178 0.186 0.067 0.156 0.153 1.184 0.942 2.127

Khairpur West

0.105 0.115 0.129 0.141 0.124 0.141 0.143 0.139 0.143 0.031 0.101 0.112 0.753 0.669 1.422

Khairpur East

0.137 0.149 0.152 0.184 0.148 0.156 0.164 0.156 0.155 0.037 0.124 0.135 0.926 0.771 1.697

Rohri

0.737 0.821 0.816 0.895 0.866 0.972 0.893 0.849 0.891 0.254 0.709 0.786 5.107 4.383 9.489

Kirthar

0.055 0.037 0.044 0.037 0.042 0.050 0.058 0.048 0.043 0.055 0.057 0.055 0.263 0.316 0.579

Nara

0.651 0.681 0.695 0.682 0.378 0.576 0.548 0.519 0.497 0.161 0.484 0.553 3.664 2.762 6.425

Kalri

0.089 0.282 0.447 0.500 0.414 0.442 0.258 0.226 0.169 0.216 0.112 0.070 2.174 1.051 3.225

Lined Channel

0.050 0.138 0.176 0.153 0.109 0.160 0.128 0.113 0.082 0.082 0.087 0.071 0.786 0.563 1.349

Fuleli

0.198 0.585 0.838 0.628 0.241 0.432 0.255 0.226 0.124 0.210 0.179 0.161 2.920 1.154 4.075

Pinyari

0.059 0.203 0.513 0.493 0.182 0.204 0.207 0.196 0.124 0.128 0.137 0.046 1.653 0.837 2.490

1989

1990
Pat Feeder

0.059 0.059 0.063 0.073 0.069 0.085 0.111 0.111 0.115 0.101 0.107 0.079 0.409 0.623 1.033

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.000 0.457 0.258 0.357 0.236 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.021 0.000 0.000 1.307 0.021 1.328

Begari

0.000 0.039 0.885 1.030 0.796 0.550 0.075 0.000 0.017 0.228 0.000 0.000 3.300 0.321 3.621

Ghotki

0.000 0.112 0.545 0.296 0.473 0.459 0.369 0.188 0.090 0.253 0.109 0.182 1.885 1.192 3.077

North West

0.034 0.042 0.345 0.429 0.260 0.267 0.170 0.109 0.138 0.024 0.124 0.052 1.376 0.617 1.993

Rice

0.000 0.101 0.592 0.520 0.367 0.432 0.176 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.011 0.176 2.187

Dadu

0.133 0.127 0.206 0.238 0.242 0.257 0.206 0.156 0.161 0.078 0.138 0.141 1.203 0.881 2.084

Khairpur West

0.105 0.108 0.111 0.091 0.146 0.111 0.106 0.101 0.104 0.025 0.077 0.114 0.671 0.527 1.198

Khairpur East

0.141 0.141 0.145 0.131 0.148 0.154 0.130 0.123 0.129 0.033 0.107 0.125 0.859 0.646 1.505

Rohri

0.707 0.806 0.792 0.750 0.816 0.792 0.757 0.669 0.706 0.224 0.629 0.678 4.663 3.663 8.326

Kirthar

0.040 0.041 0.028 0.021 0.028 0.032 0.048 0.042 0.032 0.036 0.038 0.028 0.188 0.223 0.411

Nara

0.539 0.625 0.653 0.584 0.578 0.618 0.611 0.568 0.573 0.166 0.465 0.505 3.596 2.888 6.483

Kalri

0.210 0.105 0.354 0.386 0.429 0.426 0.442 0.208 0.087 0.212 0.124 0.102 1.910 1.175 3.085

Lined Channel

0.131 0.067 0.145 0.116 0.109 0.133 0.104 0.081 0.055 0.067 0.062 0.057 0.701 0.425 1.126

Fuleli

0.236 0.297 0.731 0.626 0.290 0.386 0.319 0.152 0.093 0.172 0.125 0.139 2.565 1.001 3.566

Pinyari

0.099 0.199 0.422 0.439 0.332 0.323 0.263 0.149 0.091 0.116 0.102 0.132 1.813 0.851 2.664
1991

Pat Feeder

0.000 0.063 0.089 0.190 0.184 0.186 0.135 0.115 0.077 0.061 0.061 0.078 0.712 0.528 1.241

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.108 0.545 0.467 0.349 0.279 0.034 0.008 0.002 0.186 0.004 0.000 1.748 0.233 1.981

Begari

0.000 0.108 0.545 0.467 0.350 0.279 0.034 0.008 0.002 0.186 0.004 0.000 1.748 0.233 1.981

Ghotki

0.000 0.156 1.034 1.077 0.765 0.582 0.036 0.000 0.000 0.377 0.000 0.000 3.614 0.413 4.027

North West

0.000 0.112 0.386 0.497 0.448 0.354 0.249 0.208 0.240 0.111 0.208 0.259 1.797 1.276 3.072

Rice

0.000 0.112 0.386 0.497 0.448 0.352 0.250 0.208 0.240 0.112 0.208 0.259 1.795 1.276 3.071

Dadu

0.000 0.040 0.590 0.633 0.518 0.418 0.168 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.200 0.168 2.368

Khairpur West

0.113 0.127 0.123 0.131 0.125 0.117 0.114 0.111 0.117 0.023 0.097 0.117 0.735 0.578 1.314

Khairpur East

0.121 0.141 0.137 0.164 0.172 0.156 0.151 0.133 0.139 0.023 0.108 0.119 0.891 0.672 1.563

Rohri

0.624 0.763 0.796 0.887 0.662 0.853 0.780 0.701 0.743 0.134 0.651 0.688 4.586 3.695 8.280

Kirthar

0.000 0.025 0.059 0.072 0.068 0.055 0.060 0.057 0.061 0.023 0.054 0.051 0.280 0.306 0.586

Nara

0.564 0.651 0.634 0.682 0.446 0.570 0.643 0.602 0.579 0.101 0.503 0.472 3.547 2.900 6.446

Kalri

0.279 0.084 0.250 0.425 0.466 0.428 0.326 0.218 0.169 0.236 0.170 0.155 1.932 1.274 3.206

Lined Channel

0.135 0.130 0.172 0.149 0.097 0.085 0.106 0.101 0.069 0.049 0.080 0.098 0.768 0.503 1.271

130

CANAL

Apr

May

Jun

July

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan

Feb

Mar Kharif Rabi

Ann

Fuleli

0.162 0.494 0.804 0.759 0.350 0.269 0.196 0.240 0.182 0.161 0.231 0.177 2.838 1.187 4.025

Pinyari

0.016 0.261 0.479 0.565 0.342 0.259 0.212 0.192 0.142 0.122 0.187 0.203 1.922 1.058 2.980

Pat Feeder

0.000 0.067 0.156 0.190 0.190 0.178 0.139 0.133 0.083 0.090 0.024 0.096 0.782 0.565 1.347

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.120 0.511 0.363 0.356 0.299 0.062 0.024 0.018 0.130 0.020 0.008 1.650 0.262 1.912

Begari

0.000 0.159 1.168 1.050 0.779 0.614 0.048 0.000 0.000 0.386 0.000 0.000 3.770 0.433 4.203

Ghotki

0.000 0.218 0.471 0.427 0.550 0.436 0.284 0.216 0.134 0.161 0.122 0.166 2.102 1.083 3.184

North West

0.067 0.105 0.351 0.515 0.501 0.436 0.356 0.236 0.200 0.066 0.138 0.218 1.974 1.214 3.189

Rice

0.000 0.109 0.600 0.687 0.574 0.444 0.154 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.413 0.154 2.567

Dadu

0.085 0.114 0.214 0.313 0.297 0.242 0.169 0.125 0.121 0.018 0.161 0.165 1.264 0.758 2.022

Khairpur West

0.111 0.119 0.123 0.139 0.141 0.131 0.118 0.087 0.090 0.147 0.061 0.112 0.763 0.616 1.379

Khairpur East

0.111 0.139 0.158 0.176 0.182 0.176 0.163 0.141 0.147 0.107 0.074 0.135 0.943 0.767 1.710

Rohri

0.687 0.821 0.818 0.940 0.997 0.954 0.844 0.745 0.782 0.129 0.704 0.795 5.217 3.998 9.215

Kirthar

0.016 0.015 0.057 0.070 0.076 0.069 0.049 0.059 0.061 0.010 0.023 0.040 0.304 0.242 0.546

Nara

0.592 0.682 0.699 0.815 0.854 0.855 0.781 0.685 0.656 0.107 0.504 0.644 4.497 3.377 7.874

Kalri

0.133 0.111 0.370 0.433 0.485 0.517 0.339 0.208 0.092 0.248 0.219 0.194 2.048 1.301 3.349

Lined Channel

0.135 0.170 0.168 0.149 0.154 0.119 0.125 0.121 0.050 0.047 0.083 0.089 0.894 0.515 1.409

Fuleli

0.137 0.506 0.802 0.758 0.690 0.418 0.297 0.301 0.146 0.175 0.211 0.145 3.311 1.274 4.585

Pinyari

0.000 0.277 0.483 0.538 0.492 0.305 0.251 0.216 0.152 0.132 0.172 0.123 2.095 1.045 3.140

1992

1993
Pat Feeder

0.000 0.048 0.131 0.188 0.130 0.174 0.149 0.128 0.151 0.131 0.135 0.095 0.671 0.789 1.460

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.095 0.505 0.342 0.241 0.248 0.085 0.010 0.010 0.029 0.022 0.002 1.431 0.158 1.589

Begari

0.000 0.121 0.984 0.992 0.475 0.447 0.122 0.031 0.035 0.192 0.040 0.000 3.019 0.420 3.439

Ghotki

0.000 0.128 0.525 0.520 0.369 0.392 0.305 0.148 0.161 0.195 0.199 0.174 1.934 1.182 3.116

North West

0.030 0.048 0.257 0.436 0.255 0.293 0.204 0.182 0.201 0.066 0.198 0.207 1.319 1.058 2.377

Rice

0.000 0.124 0.685 0.807 0.433 0.612 0.375 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.661 0.375 3.036

Dadu

0.127 0.156 0.232 0.296 0.147 0.222 0.161 0.141 0.164 0.036 0.175 0.176 1.180 0.853 2.033

Khairpur West

0.097 0.129 0.127 0.133 0.041 0.113 0.103 0.119 0.117 0.010 0.094 0.115 0.640 0.558 1.198

Khairpur East

0.117 0.147 0.145 0.157 0.026 0.075 0.111 0.129 0.129 0.020 0.080 0.119 0.667 0.588 1.255

Rohri

0.687 0.865 0.907 0.947 0.100 0.572 0.717 0.696 0.734 0.176 0.603 0.746 4.078 3.672 7.750

Kirthar

0.000 0.031 0.061 0.080 0.058 0.069 0.029 0.040 0.047 0.014 0.048 0.034 0.299 0.212 0.511

Nara

0.616 0.745 0.756 0.749 0.206 0.461 0.562 0.577 0.522 0.081 0.449 0.518 3.533 2.709 6.242

Kalri

0.101 0.245 0.368 0.420 0.163 0.440 0.300 0.262 0.139 0.217 0.146 0.176 1.737 1.240 2.977

Lined Channel

0.149 0.184 0.176 0.110 0.038 0.077 0.080 0.086 0.054 0.038 0.095 0.096 0.734 0.449 1.183

Fuleli

0.291 0.608 0.832 0.526 0.042 0.198 0.234 0.276 0.165 0.126 0.253 0.243 2.497 1.297 3.794

Pinyari

0.208 0.323 0.491 0.417 0.093 0.234 0.225 0.225 0.145 0.128 0.204 0.161 1.766 1.088 2.854
1994

Pat Feeder

0.000 0.091 0.168 0.187 0.196 0.190 0.137 0.125 0.128 0.084 0.078 0.082 0.832 0.634 1.466

Desert Feeder

0.004 0.036 0.414 0.428 0.425 0.210 0.034 0.014 0.008 0.124 0.004 0.006 1.517 0.190 1.707

Begari

0.004 0.083 0.869 1.050 0.975 0.614 0.172 0.000 0.000 0.294 0.000 0.000 3.595 0.466 4.061

Ghotki

0.000 0.126 0.527 0.369 0.595 0.442 0.336 0.152 0.085 0.253 0.050 0.030 2.059 0.906 2.965

North West

0.050 0.160 0.307 0.350 0.344 0.297 0.245 0.188 0.162 0.098 0.182 0.178 1.508 1.053 2.561

Rice

0.000 0.189 0.665 0.751 0.775 0.669 0.302 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.049 0.302 3.351

Dadu

0.139 0.132 0.236 0.299 0.294 0.267 0.206 0.161 0.147 0.044 0.124 0.145 1.367 0.827 2.194

Khairpur West

0.117 0.131 0.135 0.138 0.164 0.150 0.137 0.125 0.108 0.020 0.070 0.098 0.835 0.558 1.393

Khairpur East

0.115 0.135 0.133 0.138 0.178 0.166 0.164 0.151 0.128 0.022 0.092 0.118 0.865 0.675 1.540

Rohri

0.719 0.897 0.911 0.885 1.047 1.000 0.919 0.758 0.718 0.167 0.533 0.679 5.459 3.774 9.233

Kirthar

0.004 0.025 0.051 0.074 0.080 0.071 0.053 0.060 0.050 0.023 0.036 0.030 0.305 0.252 0.557

Nara

0.552 0.634 0.675 0.630 0.758 0.764 0.715 0.646 0.556 0.116 0.388 0.476 4.013 2.897 6.910

Kalri

0.236 0.165 0.246 0.404 0.459 0.475 0.296 0.217 0.107 0.262 0.225 0.039 1.985 1.146 3.131

Lined Channel

0.099 0.156 0.154 0.096 0.155 0.139 0.131 0.116 0.058 0.092 0.112 0.059 0.799 0.568 1.367

131

CANAL

Apr

May

Jun

July

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan

Feb

Mar Kharif Rabi

Ann

Fuleli

0.329 0.654 0.830 0.642 0.686 0.432 0.285 0.141 0.011 0.134 0.135 0.036 3.573 0.742 4.315

Pinyari

0.051 0.295 0.487 0.503 0.527 0.368 0.249 0.137 0.009 0.120 0.108 0.045 2.231 0.668 2.899

Pat Feeder

0.000 0.060 0.133 0.158 0.045 0.103 0.106 0.060 0.106 0.027 0.082 0.082 0.499 0.463 0.962

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.054 0.477 0.334 0.113 0.143 0.030 0.004 0.000 0.108 0.019 0.004 1.121 0.165 1.286

Begari

0.000 0.007 0.705 1.002 0.392 0.341 0.234 0.002 0.000 0.170 0.124 0.000 2.447 0.530 2.977

Ghotki

0.000 0.120 0.509 0.240 0.234 0.240 0.290 0.133 0.064 0.153 0.091 0.223 1.343 0.954 2.297

North West

0.004 0.085 0.382 0.323 0.242 0.249 0.262 0.175 0.134 0.038 0.146 0.136 1.285 0.892 2.177

Rice

0.000 0.083 0.677 0.543 0.315 0.214 0.141 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.832 0.141 1.973

Dadu

0.099 0.126 0.230 0.256 0.178 0.123 0.163 0.139 0.130 0.049 0.178 0.166 1.012 0.825 1.837

Khairpur West

0.095 0.113 0.119 0.073 0.072 0.073 0.129 0.121 0.106 0.023 0.068 0.098 0.545 0.545 1.090

Khairpur East

0.133 0.151 0.147 0.082 0.076 0.061 0.137 0.121 0.128 0.025 0.082 0.112 0.650 0.605 1.255

Rohri

0.653 0.780 0.776 0.683 0.512 0.283 0.666 0.628 0.606 0.148 0.514 0.688 3.687 3.250 6.937

Kirthar

0.000 0.004 0.046 0.059 0.025 0.032 0.043 0.041 0.047 0.002 0.036 0.030 0.166 0.199 0.365

Nara

0.572 0.668 0.715 0.527 0.380 0.242 0.533 0.518 0.482 0.113 0.449 0.541 3.104 2.636 5.740

Kalri

0.139 0.216 0.406 0.178 0.054 0.154 0.307 0.233 0.219 0.162 0.219 0.215 1.147 1.355 2.502

Lined Channel

0.089 0.097 0.164 0.106 0.057 0.036 0.086 0.082 0.071 0.055 0.089 0.115 0.549 0.498 1.047

Fuleli

0.067 0.288 0.806 0.519 0.134 0.012 0.171 0.207 0.187 0.130 0.204 0.208 1.826 1.107 2.933

Pinyari

0.135 0.189 0.507 0.396 0.118 0.040 0.183 0.203 0.148 0.084 0.148 0.170 1.385 0.936 2.321

1995

1996
Pat Feeder

0.000 0.050 0.131 0.143 0.171 0.170 0.099 0.083 0.081 0.071 0.082 0.073 0.665 0.489 1.154

Desert Feeder

0.002 0.061 0.386 0.318 0.244 0.315 0.051 0.006 0.000 0.071 0.032 0.000 1.326 0.160 1.486

Begari

0.000 0.017 0.734 0.767 0.570 0.681 0.242 0.000 0.000 0.159 0.150 0.000 2.769 0.551 3.320

Ghotki

0.004 0.198 0.455 0.277 0.284 0.392 0.265 0.166 0.096 0.188 0.090 0.136 1.610 0.941 2.551

North West

0.000 0.072 0.283 0.262 0.305 0.269 0.218 0.194 0.212 0.084 0.204 0.242 1.191 1.154 2.345

Rice

0.000 0.082 0.659 0.627 0.584 0.626 0.297 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.578 0.297 2.875

Dadu

0.127 0.100 0.218 0.214 0.205 0.194 0.161 0.139 0.149 0.044 0.138 0.129 1.058 0.760 1.818

Khairpur West

0.085 0.111 0.113 0.071 0.101 0.125 0.106 0.121 0.127 0.060 0.082 0.090 0.606 0.586 1.192

Khairpur East

0.097 0.121 0.113 0.084 0.156 0.166 0.170 0.174 0.174 0.040 0.085 0.102 0.737 0.745 1.482

Rohri

0.610 0.762 0.774 0.631 0.944 1.004 0.892 0.728 0.779 0.135 0.598 0.697 4.725 3.829 8.554

Kirthar

0.000 0.017 0.055 0.066 0.082 0.073 0.028 0.032 0.024 0.010 0.037 0.032 0.293 0.163 0.456

Nara

0.574 0.641 0.634 0.472 0.554 0.630 0.615 0.568 0.583 0.157 0.425 0.577 3.505 2.925 6.430

Kalri

0.212 0.212 0.372 0.305 0.399 0.444 0.349 0.232 0.181 0.225 0.201 0.086 1.944 1.274 3.218

Lined Channel

0.160 0.180 0.178 0.127 0.154 0.147 0.120 0.100 0.081 0.076 0.097 0.068 0.946 0.542 1.488

Fuleli

0.139 0.479 0.790 0.541 0.605 0.495 0.294 0.288 0.222 0.080 0.243 0.113 3.049 1.240 4.289

Pinyari

0.044 0.276 0.475 0.457 0.528 0.422 0.271 0.229 0.174 0.065 0.175 0.108 2.202 1.022 3.224
1997

Pat Feeder

0.000 0.075 0.192 0.249 0.229 0.158 0.081 0.044 0.042 0.031 0.034 0.057 0.903 0.289 1.192

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.078 0.406 0.364 0.415 0.400 0.046 0.040 0.033 0.214 0.062 0.017 1.663 0.412 2.075

Begari

0.000 0.136 1.026 0.999 0.869 0.756 0.158 0.000 0.000 0.267 0.083 0.000 3.785 0.509 4.294

Ghotki

0.000 0.279 0.436 0.642 0.579 0.436 0.315 0.222 0.180 0.226 0.130 0.113 2.372 1.186 3.558

North West

0.099 0.033 0.291 0.376 0.356 0.343 0.324 0.259 0.262 0.114 0.256 0.192 1.498 1.407 2.905

Rice

0.000 0.035 0.695 0.855 0.810 0.762 0.477 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.157 0.477 3.634

Dadu

0.022 0.129 0.259 0.317 0.311 0.291 0.230 0.190 0.197 0.086 0.189 0.132 1.329 1.024 2.353

Khairpur West

0.101 0.110 0.111 0.139 0.133 0.113 0.119 0.117 0.125 0.024 0.084 0.063 0.707 0.532 1.239

Khairpur East

0.101 0.117 0.105 0.127 0.133 0.113 0.129 0.103 0.121 0.039 0.097 0.072 0.696 0.561 1.257

Rohri

0.703 0.819 0.820 0.949 1.067 1.016 0.849 0.719 0.691 0.112 0.622 0.596 5.374 3.589 8.963

Kirthar

0.000 0.000 0.085 0.117 0.114 0.099 0.031 0.036 0.047 0.014 0.039 0.026 0.415 0.193 0.608

Nara

0.574 0.614 0.596 0.670 0.702 0.683 0.648 0.598 0.562 0.197 0.435 0.469 3.839 2.909 6.748

Kalri

0.188 0.290 0.378 0.444 0.460 0.451 0.391 0.224 0.147 0.146 0.214 0.060 2.211 1.182 3.393

Lined Channel

0.147 0.165 0.180 0.156 0.155 0.137 0.135 0.113 0.058 0.067 0.083 0.049 0.940 0.505 1.445

132

CANAL

Apr

May

Jun

July

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan

Feb

Mar Kharif Rabi

Ann

Fuleli

0.178 0.630 0.808 0.729 0.711 0.477 0.339 0.184 0.091 0.177 0.195 0.009 3.533 0.995 4.528

Pinyari

0.111 0.339 0.564 0.586 0.550 0.382 0.277 0.160 0.119 0.159 0.157 0.009 2.532 0.881 3.413

Pat Feeder

0.000 0.056 0.129 0.216 0.215 0.170 0.101 0.095 0.071 0.073 0.088 0.076 0.786 0.504 1.290

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.111 0.440 0.391 0.311 0.301 0.040 0.010 0.024 0.113 0.015 0.004 1.554 0.206 1.760

Begari

0.000 0.172 0.434 0.480 0.550 0.461 0.267 0.257 0.148 0.239 0.114 0.102 2.097 1.127 3.224

Ghotki

0.000 0.172 0.434 0.480 0.550 0.461 0.267 0.257 0.148 0.239 0.114 0.102 2.097 1.127 3.224

North West

0.137 0.017 0.251 0.371 0.337 0.283 0.223 0.154 0.214 0.118 0.170 0.155 1.396 1.034 2.430

Rice

0.000 0.129 0.687 0.834 0.768 0.665 0.207 0.000 0.000 0.135 0.000 0.000 3.083 0.342 3.425

Dadu

0.111 0.099 0.222 0.292 0.286 0.259 0.187 0.162 0.174 0.067 0.178 0.170 1.269 0.938 2.207

Khairpur West

0.081 0.098 0.105 0.118 0.118 0.133 0.087 0.097 0.110 0.020 0.053 0.095 0.653 0.462 1.115

Khairpur East

0.083 0.108 0.113 0.129 0.127 0.131 0.114 0.103 0.109 0.025 0.073 0.107 0.691 0.531 1.222

Rohri

0.657 0.765 0.770 0.886 0.879 0.956 0.823 0.764 0.787 0.135 0.588 0.714 4.913 3.811 8.724

Kirthar

0.000 0.002 0.067 0.113 0.110 0.105 0.054 0.026 0.031 0.013 0.044 0.043 0.397 0.211 0.608

Nara

0.535 0.585 0.596 0.637 0.646 0.649 0.614 0.562 0.571 0.181 0.475 0.516 3.648 2.919 6.567

Kalri

0.143 0.246 0.218 0.442 0.432 0.444 0.359 0.232 0.109 0.169 0.079 0.086 1.925 1.034 2.959

Lined Channel

0.099 0.172 0.135 0.170 0.146 0.131 0.104 0.123 0.078 0.088 0.085 0.074 0.853 0.552 1.405

Fuleli

0.030 0.603 0.695 0.827 0.590 0.447 0.222 0.188 0.066 0.059 0.056 0.061 3.192 0.652 3.844

Pinyari

0.107 0.365 0.408 0.593 0.496 0.360 0.237 0.216 0.085 0.090 0.073 0.052 2.329 0.753 3.082

1998

1999
Pat Feeder

0.000 0.067 0.238 0.368 0.364 0.299 0.120 0.162 0.189 0.123 0.087 0.123 1.336 0.804 2.140

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.122 0.406 0.231 0.258 0.206 0.055 0.006 0.019 0.159 0.027 0.000 1.223 0.266 1.489

Begari

0.000 0.344 0.471 0.542 0.612 0.503 0.458 0.255 0.175 0.205 0.253 0.150 2.472 1.496 3.968

Ghotki

0.000 0.344 0.471 0.542 0.512 0.503 0.458 0.255 0.175 0.205 0.253 0.150 2.372 1.496 3.868

North West

0.028 0.163 0.321 0.450 0.304 0.232 0.142 0.079 0.152 0.054 0.199 0.215 1.498 0.841 2.339

Rice

0.000 0.240 0.766 0.789 0.773 0.606 0.361 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.174 0.361 3.535

Dadu

0.018 0.165 0.255 0.295 0.285 0.261 0.189 0.150 0.166 0.082 0.186 0.176 1.279 0.949 2.228

Khairpur West

0.113 0.123 0.125 0.131 0.137 0.125 0.110 0.105 0.092 0.023 0.064 0.103 0.754 0.497 1.251

Khairpur East

0.111 0.139 0.139 0.126 0.153 0.152 0.157 0.145 0.145 0.035 0.102 0.117 0.820 0.701 1.521

Rohri

0.693 0.833 0.845 0.899 1.057 0.948 0.818 0.711 0.722 0.209 0.643 0.704 5.275 3.807 9.082

Kirthar

0.000 0.017 0.081 0.020 0.147 0.113 0.071 0.050 0.076 0.029 0.064 0.062 0.378 0.352 0.730

Nara

0.576 0.632 0.622 0.616 0.747 0.663 0.624 0.554 0.544 0.149 0.479 0.495 3.856 2.845 6.701

Kalri

0.111 0.285 0.412 0.439 0.466 0.440 0.287 0.192 0.159 0.144 0.196 0.108 2.153 1.086 3.239

Lined Channel

0.075 0.180 0.182 0.164 0.166 0.149 0.098 0.111 0.091 0.076 0.105 0.077 0.916 0.558 1.474

Fuleli

0.077 0.295 0.843 0.662 0.660 0.352 0.167 0.057 0.016 0.127 0.203 0.081 2.889 0.651 3.540

Pinyari

0.095 0.279 0.576 0.499 0.535 0.376 0.228 0.075 0.012 0.145 0.206 0.058 2.360 0.724 3.084
2000

Pat Feeder

0.000 0.111 0.297 0.368 0.278 0.315 0.179 0.129 0.153 0.115 0.081 0.073 1.369 0.730 2.099

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.135 0.356 0.294 0.151 0.172 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.032 0.004 0.007 1.108 0.045 1.153

Begari

0.000 0.211 0.998 1.035 0.515 0.517 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.102 0.002 0.000 3.276 0.104 3.380

Ghotki

0.000 0.217 0.564 0.712 0.444 0.568 0.376 0.192 0.094 0.121 0.076 0.120 2.505 0.979 3.484

North West

0.073 0.144 0.337 0.358 0.303 0.275 0.192 0.137 0.143 0.051 0.184 0.182 1.490 0.889 2.379

Rice

0.000 0.221 0.820 0.825 0.761 0.697 0.263 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.324 0.263 3.587

Dadu

0.032 0.106 0.261 0.300 0.287 0.267 0.204 0.164 0.169 0.027 0.104 0.143 1.253 0.811 2.064

Khairpur West

0.111 0.119 0.119 0.133 0.117 0.115 0.104 0.099 0.098 0.008 0.044 0.075 0.714 0.428 1.142

Khairpur East

0.123 0.129 0.131 0.143 0.124 0.143 0.131 0.123 0.111 0.008 0.072 0.083 0.793 0.528 1.321

Rohri

0.729 0.746 0.826 0.881 0.910 0.881 0.748 0.600 0.599 0.135 0.523 0.569 4.973 3.174 8.147

Kirthar

0.000 0.027 0.069 0.121 0.147 0.117 0.056 0.042 0.053 0.012 0.044 0.036 0.481 0.243 0.724

Nara

0.584 0.634 0.649 0.699 0.685 0.691 0.647 0.541 0.520 0.215 0.431 0.398 3.942 2.752 6.694

Kalri

0.099 0.260 0.447 0.461 0.444 0.451 0.345 0.154 0.110 0.138 0.102 0.075 2.162 0.924 3.086

Lined Channel

0.053 0.075 0.170 0.184 0.178 0.168 0.129 0.113 0.071 0.085 0.079 0.039 0.828 0.516 1.344

133

CANAL

Apr

May

Jun

July

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan

Feb

Mar Kharif Rabi

Ann

Fuleli

0.053 0.338 0.723 0.841 0.626 0.509 0.153 0.085 0.078 0.119 0.075 0.000 3.090 0.510 3.600

Pinyari

0.008 0.271 0.509 0.622 0.593 0.418 0.186 0.067 0.000 0.080 0.046 0.000 2.421 0.379 2.800

Pat Feeder

0.000 0.058 0.234 0.366 0.372 0.267 0.178 0.115 0.106 0.089 0.095 0.079 1.297 0.662 1.959

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.086 0.230 0.387 0.331 0.190 0.034 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.010 0.004 1.224 0.050 1.274

Begari

0.000 0.089 0.447 1.004 0.898 0.513 0.144 0.000 0.000 0.032 0.000 0.000 2.951 0.176 3.127

Ghotki

0.000 0.204 0.406 0.536 0.588 0.521 0.352 0.160 0.069 0.121 0.038 0.049 2.255 0.789 3.044

North West

0.016 0.086 0.016 0.241 0.245 0.178 0.132 0.095 0.062 0.036 0.068 0.078 0.782 0.471 1.253

Rice

0.000 0.065 0.453 0.790 0.828 0.677 0.326 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.813 0.326 3.139

Dadu

0.012 0.067 0.162 0.247 0.272 0.216 0.210 0.147 0.090 0.031 0.059 0.065 0.976 0.602 1.578

Khairpur West

0.071 0.105 0.075 0.111 0.119 0.095 0.088 0.069 0.049 0.008 0.020 0.022 0.576 0.256 0.832

Khairpur East

0.081 0.109 0.069 0.105 0.123 0.111 0.100 0.077 0.053 0.012 0.031 0.032 0.598 0.305 0.903

Rohri

0.509 0.638 0.491 0.752 0.837 0.677 0.672 0.430 0.280 0.095 0.243 0.240 3.904 1.960 5.864

Kirthar

0.000 0.025 0.053 0.068 0.103 0.095 0.077 0.034 0.043 0.012 0.033 0.026 0.344 0.225 0.569

Nara

0.426 0.550 0.444 0.639 0.661 0.531 0.646 0.420 0.258 0.084 0.214 0.181 3.251 1.803 5.054

Kalri

0.103 0.101 0.212 0.350 0.448 0.390 0.307 0.147 0.054 0.041 0.048 0.043 1.604 0.640 2.244

Lined Channel

0.055 0.055 0.101 0.138 0.159 0.101 0.101 0.053 0.040 0.029 0.021 0.027 0.609 0.271 0.880

Fuleli

0.063 0.110 0.410 0.679 0.667 0.394 0.383 0.081 0.028 0.023 0.045 0.025 2.323 0.585 2.908

Pinyari

0.038 0.062 0.275 0.487 0.517 0.295 0.274 0.034 0.010 0.009 0.006 0.014 1.674 0.347 2.021

2001

2002
Pat Feeder

0.000 0.126 0.303 0.399 0.368 0.283 0.093 0.125 0.148 0.109 0.111 0.113 1.479 0.698 2.177

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.037 0.303 0.322 0.301 0.206 0.064 0.002 0.006 0.021 0.012 0.016 1.169 0.120 1.289

Begari

0.000 0.000 0.440 0.956 0.816 0.541 0.103 0.000 0.000 0.026 0.000 0.000 2.752 0.129 2.880

Ghotki

0.000 0.152 0.406 0.330 0.516 0.529 0.162 0.104 0.063 0.114 0.055 0.065 1.933 0.565 2.498

North West

0.000 0.089 0.246 0.305 0.276 0.226 0.219 0.099 0.063 0.027 0.101 0.071 1.142 0.581 1.723

Rice

0.000 0.000 0.444 0.810 0.859 0.713 0.197 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.825 0.197 3.022

Dadu

0.000 0.080 0.154 0.255 0.276 0.257 0.158 0.096 0.076 0.021 0.075 0.050 1.023 0.475 1.498

Khairpur West

0.040 0.053 0.109 0.090 0.107 0.103 0.069 0.053 0.043 0.005 0.020 0.028 0.502 0.218 0.720

Khairpur East

0.053 0.051 0.113 0.101 0.121 0.125 0.100 0.065 0.038 0.009 0.032 0.024 0.564 0.268 0.832

Rohri

0.339 0.385 0.507 0.621 0.722 0.727 0.465 0.361 0.284 0.044 0.226 0.180 3.299 1.560 4.859

Kirthar

0.000 0.058 0.067 0.099 0.123 0.099 0.037 0.043 0.043 0.013 0.044 0.028 0.446 0.207 0.652

Nara

0.309 0.427 0.638 0.682 0.795 0.689 0.472 0.365 0.300 0.080 0.232 0.204 3.539 1.652 5.192

Kalri

0.073 0.059 0.190 0.346 0.356 0.249 0.242 0.216 0.063 0.055 0.042 0.028 1.275 0.645 1.920

Lined Channel

0.044 0.052 0.115 0.136 0.150 0.121 0.076 0.059 0.018 0.021 0.016 0.020 0.617 0.209 0.826

Fuleli

0.008 0.047 0.309 0.583 0.616 0.499 0.190 0.054 0.010 0.000 0.040 0.032 2.062 0.326 2.388

Pinyari

0.004 0.013 0.307 0.540 0.592 0.469 0.169 0.008 0.014 0.000 0.012 0.000 1.925 0.203 2.128
2003

Pat Feeder

0.000 0.122 0.315 0.409 0.399 0.321 0.103 0.129 0.153 0.123 0.120 0.095 1.566 0.723 2.289

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.050 0.321 0.308 0.175 0.200 0.046 0.008 0.008 0.029 0.000 0.034 1.053 0.124 1.178

Begari

0.000 0.000 0.323 0.989 0.788 0.517 0.096 0.000 0.000 0.025 0.000 0.000 2.617 0.120 2.737

Ghotki

0.000 0.214 0.489 0.438 0.525 0.543 0.241 0.139 0.076 0.173 0.105 0.131 2.208 0.865 3.073

North West

0.000 0.047 0.249 0.396 0.303 0.257 0.228 0.089 0.101 0.031 0.128 0.182 1.253 0.758 2.011

Rice

0.000 0.046 0.608 0.885 0.737 0.719 0.145 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.994 0.145 3.138

Dadu

0.000 0.089 0.184 0.258 0.188 0.204 0.131 0.115 0.123 0.031 0.092 0.143 0.924 0.634 1.558

Khairpur West

0.042 0.064 0.091 0.097 0.093 0.103 0.084 0.061 0.057 0.010 0.042 0.062 0.490 0.316 0.806

Khairpur East

0.055 0.080 0.111 0.133 0.088 0.131 0.100 0.071 0.067 0.004 0.041 0.087 0.598 0.370 0.968

Rohri

0.420 0.421 0.640 0.819 0.555 0.859 0.574 0.453 0.474 0.063 0.259 0.473 3.714 2.296 6.010

Kirthar

0.000 0.019 0.063 0.117 0.109 0.129 0.031 0.050 0.049 0.010 0.038 0.027 0.438 0.205 0.642

Nara

0.554 0.479 0.689 0.872 0.745 0.871 0.610 0.426 0.430 0.081 0.287 0.524 4.210 2.359 6.569

Kalri

0.077 0.084 0.291 0.448 0.360 0.412 0.240 0.083 0.083 0.060 0.086 0.077 1.672 0.629 2.301

Lined Channel

0.044 0.067 0.131 0.207 0.155 0.160 0.121 0.097 0.058 0.040 0.052 0.049 0.764 0.417 1.181

134

CANAL

Apr

May

Jun

July

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan

Feb

Mar Kharif Rabi

Ann

Fuleli

0.053 0.051 0.566 0.958 0.722 0.735 0.219 0.097 0.010 0.024 0.024 0.036 3.085 0.410 3.495

Pinyari

0.087 0.053 0.360 0.663 0.468 0.541 0.157 0.032 0.006 0.004 0.004 0.017 2.172 0.220 2.392

Pat Feeder

0.000 0.104 0.301 0.246 0.353 0.283 0.092 0.089 0.153 0.123 0.113 0.077 1.287 0.648 1.934

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.078 0.343 0.248 0.235 0.224 0.133 0.040 0.004 0.069 0.006 0.056 1.127 0.307 1.434

Begari

0.000 0.099 0.754 0.642 0.539 0.527 0.069 0.000 0.000 0.098 0.000 0.000 2.560 0.167 2.727

Ghotki

0.000 0.230 0.499 0.348 0.562 0.537 0.424 0.190 0.122 0.193 0.099 0.089 2.175 1.118 3.293

North West

0.000 0.108 0.319 0.294 0.255 0.273 0.270 0.113 0.136 0.072 0.202 0.168 1.248 0.960 2.208

Rice

0.000 0.203 0.754 0.752 0.716 0.715 0.180 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.140 0.180 3.320

Dadu

0.061 0.152 0.208 0.202 0.186 0.194 0.139 0.127 0.131 0.050 0.121 0.104 1.003 0.672 1.675

Khairpur West

0.069 0.092 0.101 0.068 0.091 0.089 0.082 0.069 0.074 0.021 0.061 0.051 0.510 0.357 0.868

Khairpur East

0.091 0.114 0.119 0.088 0.132 0.137 0.137 0.097 0.096 0.015 0.080 0.059 0.681 0.484 1.165

Rohri

0.584 0.691 0.792 0.613 0.724 0.944 0.761 0.592 0.590 0.131 0.547 0.344 4.349 2.966 7.314

Kirthar

0.000 0.021 0.087 0.100 0.125 0.085 0.031 0.030 0.035 0.012 0.031 0.020 0.419 0.158 0.577

Nara

0.645 0.829 0.857 0.583 0.637 0.883 0.773 0.576 0.576 0.202 0.553 0.334 4.435 3.014 7.449

Kalri

0.149 0.202 0.366 0.364 0.263 0.396 0.403 0.238 0.086 0.185 0.183 0.034 1.740 1.128 2.869

Lined Channel

0.083 0.102 0.154 0.099 0.031 0.121 0.145 0.129 0.054 0.069 0.096 0.036 0.590 0.529 1.119

Fuleli

0.166 0.179 0.782 0.592 0.179 0.602 0.409 0.034 0.014 0.038 0.071 0.063 2.501 0.630 3.130

Pinyari

0.077 0.049 0.449 0.390 0.132 0.337 0.219 0.024 0.014 0.028 0.042 0.049 1.434 0.376 1.811

2004

2005
Pat Feeder

0.000 0.105 0.323 0.409 0.403 0.297 0.103 0.129 0.151 0.071 0.059 0.050 1.537 0.564 2.101

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.076 0.248 0.293 0.203 0.149 0.053 0.006 0.006 0.066 0.000 0.013 0.968 0.144 1.112

Begari

0.000 0.033 0.562 0.843 0.577 0.368 0.038 0.000 0.000 0.124 0.004 0.000 2.384 0.166 2.550

Ghotki

0.000 0.101 0.321 0.508 0.478 0.293 0.279 0.139 0.071 0.124 0.057 0.145 1.701 0.815 2.515

North West

0.000 0.077 0.226 0.364 0.310 0.257 0.198 0.105 0.094 0.024 0.144 0.136 1.235 0.701 1.936

Rice

0.000 0.054 0.533 0.935 0.877 0.665 0.349 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.064 0.349 3.414

Dadu

0.000 0.085 0.156 0.235 0.208 0.162 0.141 0.109 0.098 0.017 0.089 0.110 0.847 0.564 1.411

Khairpur West

0.055 0.064 0.085 0.119 0.104 0.083 0.051 0.051 0.047 0.004 0.044 0.063 0.510 0.260 0.770

Khairpur East

0.067 0.080 0.103 0.131 0.120 0.099 0.064 0.069 0.063 0.002 0.065 0.080 0.601 0.343 0.944

Rohri

0.434 0.543 0.626 0.836 0.720 0.602 0.460 0.457 0.382 0.024 0.402 0.501 3.760 2.226 5.986

Kirthar

0.000 0.024 0.071 0.117 0.122 0.093 0.031 0.048 0.039 0.004 0.024 0.012 0.427 0.157 0.584

Nara

0.438 0.524 0.677 0.885 0.738 0.665 0.451 0.461 0.388 0.150 0.510 0.632 3.927 2.593 6.520

Kalri

0.048 0.093 0.301 0.428 0.373 0.347 0.223 0.162 0.061 0.112 0.128 0.256 1.589 0.942 2.532

Lined Channel

0.044 0.068 0.135 0.156 0.129 0.127 0.084 0.071 0.036 0.037 0.062 0.111 0.657 0.401 1.058

Fuleli

0.016 0.069 0.539 0.959 0.726 0.446 0.167 0.065 0.034 0.100 0.055 0.128 2.755 0.550 3.304

Pinyari

0.004 0.009 0.257 0.619 0.499 0.348 0.125 0.016 0.000 0.092 0.006 0.078 1.736 0.317 2.053
2006

Pat Feeder

0.000 0.083 0.317 0.403 0.314 0.285 0.094 0.119 0.084 0.137 0.104 0.074 1.402 0.612 2.014

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.025 0.356 0.344 0.229 0.283 0.093 0.004 0.017 0.133 0.020 0.022 1.238 0.289 1.527

Begari

0.000 0.033 0.590 0.920 0.535 0.424 0.099 0.000 0.000 0.181 0.000 0.000 2.502 0.280 2.782

Ghotki

0.000 0.137 0.449 0.533 0.348 0.475 0.416 0.230 0.169 0.252 0.152 0.147 1.942 1.366 3.308

North West

0.008 0.109 0.335 0.391 0.294 0.303 0.191 0.111 0.140 0.052 0.190 0.146 1.440 0.830 2.270

Rice

0.000 0.133 0.760 0.968 0.810 0.836 0.250 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.507 0.250 3.757

Dadu

0.008 0.047 0.188 0.242 0.179 0.194 0.128 0.113 0.111 0.052 0.108 0.082 0.858 0.595 1.453

Khairpur West

0.069 0.090 0.089 0.102 0.055 0.089 0.075 0.067 0.070 0.021 0.059 0.054 0.495 0.346 0.841

Khairpur East

0.073 0.119 0.117 0.121 0.079 0.127 0.110 0.097 0.090 0.023 0.081 0.062 0.636 0.464 1.099

Rohri

0.449 0.651 0.671 0.702 0.360 0.527 0.557 0.475 0.464 0.134 0.467 0.383 3.360 2.480 5.841

Kirthar

0.000 0.020 0.089 0.109 0.110 0.111 0.034 0.022 0.014 0.006 0.017 0.018 0.438 0.112 0.550

Nara

0.446 0.819 0.877 0.878 0.405 0.410 0.746 0.667 0.620 0.211 0.634 0.553 3.834 3.431 7.266

Kalri

0.069 0.123 0.434 0.355 0.192 0.170 0.283 0.154 0.149 0.047 0.141 0.202 1.344 0.978 2.321

Lined Channel

0.030 0.059 0.178 0.146 0.042 0.083 0.132 0.091 0.072 0.026 0.071 0.080 0.538 0.471 1.009

135

CANAL

Apr

May

Jun

July

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan

Feb

Mar Kharif Rabi

Ann

Fuleli

0.042 0.176 0.744 0.659 0.190 0.263 0.418 0.246 0.127 0.090 0.206 0.149 2.074 1.236 3.310

Pinyari

0.020 0.116 0.455 0.444 0.198 0.242 0.229 0.131 0.130 0.077 0.145 0.026 1.475 0.738 2.213

Pat Feeder

0.000 0.090 0.297 0.251 0.094 0.279 0.091 0.115 0.136 0.106 0.099 0.121 1.011 0.668 1.680

Desert Feeder

0.000 0.119 0.354 0.373 0.520 0.281 0.090 0.022 0.014 0.125 0.006 0.002 1.647 0.259 1.907

Begari

0.000 0.065 0.630 0.775 0.590 0.497 0.133 0.000 0.000 0.149 0.000 0.000 2.556 0.281 2.837

Ghotki

0.000 0.057 0.503 0.578 0.587 0.513 0.326 0.190 0.102 0.196 0.050 0.049 2.237 0.913 3.150

North West

0.046 0.118 0.303 0.295 0.374 0.277 0.249 0.154 0.158 0.091 0.159 0.171 1.413 0.982 2.395

Rice

0.000 0.302 0.762 0.828 0.865 0.756 0.283 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.513 0.283 3.796

Dadu

0.026 0.074 0.176 0.227 0.213 0.184 0.143 0.119 0.110 0.044 0.104 0.088 0.900 0.607 1.507

Khairpur West

0.081 0.098 0.083 0.086 0.096 0.081 0.084 0.067 0.065 0.012 0.055 0.049 0.526 0.333 0.859

Khairpur East

0.101 0.131 0.107 0.130 0.157 0.131 0.111 0.087 0.086 0.017 0.049 0.036 0.757 0.386 1.142

Rohri

0.588 0.743 0.681 0.683 0.760 0.717 0.660 0.572 0.497 0.083 0.324 0.229 4.172 2.365 6.537

Kirthar

0.000 0.036 0.079 0.083 0.023 0.089 0.034 0.022 0.024 0.009 0.017 0.018 0.309 0.125 0.434

Nara

0.808 0.977 0.760 0.697 0.851 0.820 0.681 0.529 0.510 0.180 0.443 0.320 4.913 2.662 7.575

Kalri

0.178 0.286 0.295 0.330 0.254 0.327 0.288 0.143 0.070 0.109 0.163 0.076 1.670 0.848 2.518

Lined Channel

0.154 0.166 0.119 0.115 0.088 0.095 0.078 0.113 0.056 0.065 0.083 0.047 0.738 0.442 1.179

Fuleli

0.135 0.628 0.584 0.782 0.505 0.634 0.400 0.051 0.000 0.041 0.022 0.014 3.266 0.528 3.795

Pinyari

0.103 0.482 0.418 0.618 0.354 0.388 0.192 0.034 0.000 0.043 0.020 0.002 2.363 0.290 2.653

2007

136