discuss the intiatives taken by the government to manage and organize supplies of canal water for fair distribution to farmers.
Answers
Answer:
exactly what we have to write can u explain me
Answer:
Explanation:
The introduction of permanent irrigation facilities should result in change from traditional rainfed agriculture - often at subsistence level - to commercial agriculture. This substantial change is unlikely to be accomplished unless the following conditions are met:
a. the water is distributed at the appropriate time and equitably by the physical system;
b. the farm has the necessary physical conditions to receive the water and use it efficiently; and, above all:
c. the farmer knows how much water to apply and when, and is familiar with the practices of irrigated agriculture.
A timely and equitable distribution of the water is not found as often as desirable. The main systems, many irrigation schemes have serious deficiencies in the so called 'tertiary canal system' or 'watercourses' from which originate large water losses and uneven distribution. The rehabilitation of these canals together with an improvement in their O&M can bring substantial benefits in terms of greater water availability and better distribution. Most of the rehabilitation work can be done by the farmers or with their cooperation, but some technical guidance and supervision are needed. The establishment of suitable organizational arrangements for the proper O&M of these systems or courses is usually most difficult and time-consuming.
On-farm development work is frequently left to the farmers' initiative and is his own responsibility. However, in most cases, this is not a simple undertaking that can be carried out without any financial and technical help. If this happens, the result is often that farms are poorly prepared to apply the irrigation water which leads to severe water wastage and low crop production.
Last but not least is the question of the farmer's knowledge or experience in irrigated agriculture. The path to irrigated agriculture, for a farmer who has practiced rainfed farming all his life, can be long and financially painful, if he is left to his own devices and to the "trial and error" method of learning. The process can be shortened and made less hazardous if a suitable irrigation technology is available (but this may require some applied research trials) and it can be transferred to the farmer's field.
For reasons of uniformity and simplicity, this chapter has been entitled "Irrigation Assistance Service" giving, perhaps, the idea that there is always a Service or Unit at the scheme level to undertake any assistance necessary for the farmer to make full use of the irrigation water. Although this is the thesis advocated in many instances, it is not always desirable or possible. The different organizational patterns for this assistance, as well as their main characteristics, are discussed below.
Irrigation assistance at the farm level is a relatively new approach (with one or two decades of existence) and few countries have attempted it. The observations made in the text are the result of a brief exposure to some of these experiences and therefore tend to be of a more general nature than those of former chapters. A much deeper study of the subject is needed to establish more conclusive recommendations and suggestions.
7.1 Planning for the irrigation assistance
The establishment of an Irrigation Assistance Service in any of its possible organizational forms is not a traditional element of the management of an irrigation scheme and therefore the first step in planning its implementation is to demonstrate that there is a need for it. The best way to do this is to carry out detailed studies to determine the deficiencies in the irrigation schemes, their origins and possible solutions.
Once the problems have been properly identified, the corrective measures can be costed and the possible benefits more easily evaluated. For instance, the PLAMEPA (On-farm Improvement Plan) of Mexico identified that 350000 farmers needed assistance and that physical improvements were needed over 1.5 million hectares; based on these data the cost of the programmed was estimated at US$ 770 million for a duration of 7 years; the farmers' benefits were expected to increase by US$ 840 million/year. The preparation of the Plan took several years but it was financially attractive and funding was not difficult to obtain.
This example illustrates two important points: the necessity for investment in serious studies and surveys, and the need to demonstrate the programmer's financial attractiveness - evidenced not only by the Mexican experience, but corroborated by similar undertakings in Pakistan, Indonesia and elsewhere.
Hope it helps!!!