INTRODUCTION TO LOWER BARI DOAB CANAL (LBDC)

COMMAND
 Introduction

The Lower Bari Doab Canal (LBDC) with a total length of 201 km off-takes from the Ravi River at
Balloki Barrage, about 75 km south west of Lahore. It was constructed during 190613 and commissioned
in 1922.
Most of the water reaching the LBDC is from River Jehlum and River Chenab via a link canal.
It serves a gross area of 740,358 hectares (1,830,245 acres) and a cultivable command area of 675,668
hectares (1,669,609 acres) in the province of Punjab-Pakistan.
The LBDC which is now almost hundred years old has deteriorated and become inefficient in delivering
optimal water supplies for agriculture. The system requires rehabilitation and upgrading to restore the
capacity and improve performance. With cooperation of Asian Development Bank (ADB), Irrigation
Department (ID), Government of the Punjab has launched Lower Bari Doab Canal Improvement Project
(LBDCIP) at a cost of Rs. 17,176 million initially over 2006-2013 (7 years) period. The project cost was
revised in 2011 as Rs. 29,833 million and the loan closing date for the project was extended by the Asian
Development Bank up to September 2015 accordingly.
Lower Bari Doab Canal (LBDC) off-takes from Balloki Barrage shown in figure.1 which is located
southwest of Lahore at a distance of about 65 km .Balloki Barrage was constructed during 1911-13 and
LBDC was commissioned in 1914. The Balloki Sulemanki (BS) Link Canal was constructed in 1967
under Indus Basin Treaty that off-takes from Balloki Barrage. LBDC and BS Link feed about 23% of
irrigated area of Punjab. The LBDC serves a cultivable command area of about 1.7 million acres in
Districts Kasur, Okara, Sahiwal and Khanewal. Approximately 275,000 farm families in the LBDC
command derive their livelihoods directly from crops grown over the command area including wheat,
rice, maize, cotton, sugarcane, fodder, flowers, vegetables, and citrus and other orchard crops. LBDC is
an important and progressive agriculture area in Punjab and offers significant potential for increased
productivity. Balloki Barrage component of LBDCPI will improve / increase the flood flow capacity by
development of detailed designs and execution of civil works for rehabilitation and upgradation of
Balloki Barrage, LBDC head regulator and BS link canal head regulator and as well as construction of
a spillway and associated road bridges to further mitigate flood risks and damages.
 EVALUATION OF THE EXISTING WATER PRODUCTIVITY IN THE LOWER
BARI DOAB CANAL (LBDC) COMMAND – A CASE STUDY

A study was conducted in the command area of the Lower Bari Doab Canal to evaluate the existing water
productivity situation. Primary information was collected through a specially designed questionnaire from two
secondary irrigation canals –Jandraka, located at the head reach of the doab (the area between two rivers) and 15-
L, located at its tail. Six watercourses of Jandraka and seven of 15-L were selected for the study. At each
watercourse, six farmers were interviewed, two each from the head, middle and tail. At Jandraka, the average yields
for wheat, rice, sugarcane and spring maize were found to be 2,884, 2,606, 49,912 and 6,443 kg/ha, respectively,
whereas the average water productivities were 0.73, 0.08, 2.01 and 0.54 kg/m 3, respectively. At 15L, the average
yield for wheat, cotton, sugarcane and spring maize were found to be 3,096, 2,056, 49,400 and 8,854 kg/ha,
respectively, whereas the water productivities were 0.65, 0.33, 1.08 and 0.80 kg/m 3, respectively. Except for spring
maize, the gap between the average yield and the potential yield at both distributaries was more than 50%, whereas
the gap between the average and potential water productivity was more than 70%. Hence, there is a vast scope to
increase the crops yield and the water productivity by adopting proper management of water and non-water inputs.
Keywords: Crop yield, irrigation scheduling, groundwater, crop zoning

INTRODUCTION
5600 m3 to about 1200 m3 from 1951 to 2003 and it will
Irrigated agriculture is the largest user of freshwater further reduce to about 1000 m3 by the year 2010. The
resources in the world, withdrawing about 69% of the present overall shortfall of 11% will increase to 31% by
freshwater and approximately 56% of the worldirrigated the year 2025 (GOP, 2001). The shortfall can be met
area is in Asia (Cai and Rosegrant, 2003; Dawe, 2005). either by constructing new storage reservoirs or by
Freshwater however, is becoming increasingly scarce in improving the efficiency of the existing water use
the world, in general and in Asia in particular. In many practices. Both are equally important however, the
Asian countries, the per capita water availability has construction of new storage reservoirs requires huge
decreased by 40 to 60% from 1955 to 1990 and is financial investment along with other constraints such
expected to decline further by 1554% over the next 35 as: limited availability of potential sites, population
years (Gleick, 1993). The widening gap between water displacement, environmental, and socio-political issues.
demand and supply requires more efforts to find Therefore, proper management of existing water
productive use of this resource (Doogers et al., 2000). resources appears to be an immediate option. Under the
The Indus Basin of Pakistan has the largest contiguous present water scarcity conditions, it becomes even more
irrigation system in the world. The system comprises the important to use water judiciously and increase the water
Indus river and its major tributaries, 3 major storage productivity (Bouman and Toung, 2001; Molden et al.,
reservoirs (Tarbela, Mangla and Chashma), 23 2001; Hussain et al., 2007). For proper management of
barrages/headworks, 12 link canals and 45 canal the available water resources, the knowledge of the
commands (Tarar, 1999). The average annual inflow existing conditions is very important (Lorite et al., 2004).
from the Indus river system is about 163 x 109 m3 with The present study has, therefore, been conducted in the
84% of it occurring in the monsoon from June to August, LBDC command of the Indus Basin to identify the
while only 16% from September to May (GOP, 2001). problems and constraints affecting the water
Groundwater is another major source of water productivity.
supplementing over 60% of the surface inflows.
However, the water resources of Pakistan, both surface MATERIALS ANS METHODS
and groundwater, have become insufficient to meet
growing demands of irrigated agriculture sector (GOP, Description of the study area: The study area is
2001). The per capita water availability has reduced from located in the Bari Doab (the area between the rivers
Ravi and Sutlej) and comprises the command of LBDC
(Fig. 1). The area is a part of the vast stretch of alluvial Data collection: In the LBDC command, two secondary
deposits developed by the tributaries of the Indus river irrigation canals called distributaries were selected, i.e.
over centuries. The parent material is of mixed Jandraka, located at the head of LBDC having a total
calcareous alluvium derived from a variety of rocks command area of 9551 ha, and 15-L, located at its tail
during the Pleistocene period. The general slope of the with a command area of 47368 ha. The number of
area is mild towards the south-west direction, while the watercourses at Jandraka and 15-L were 71 and 295,
average slope ranges from 1:4,000 to 1:10,000. The respectively with average farm size of 3.67 and 6.76 ha,
area, predominantly agricultural, lies at an elevation of respectively. At Jandraka, six watercourses (tertiary
130 to 190 m above the mean sea level. The present irrigation canals), two each at the head, middle and tail
sanctioned discharge of LBDC is 279 m3/sec with a of the distributary were selected. Again on each
command area of over 0.74 million ha (NESPAK, 2005). watercourse, six farms, two each at head middle and tail
reach of the watercourse were selected. Similarly, at 15-
L, seven watercourses, two at the head, three at the
middle and two at the tail end of the distributary were
selected. The selection of the farms at each watercourse
was made in the similar fashion as that mentioned
above. Hence, a total of 78 farms were surveyed during
the study. The information regarding field irrigation
application practices at these farms were collected
through structured interviews. The water input was
calculated based on the sanctioned discharge, number
of irrigations and time of irrigation to a particular area.
The rainfall and the potential evapotranspiration (ETo)
data were collected from the nearest Meteorological
Station at Lahore, located at about 90 km from Jandraka
and Multan, located at about 70 km from 15-L (Fig. 2-3).
Fig.1. Location map of the study area Lahore Multan

Texturally, the soils of the area are 70% medium (loam 200
and silt loam), 20% moderately coarse (sandy loam and 180
fine-sandy loam), 4% coarse (sandy and sandy loam) 160
and 3% moderately fine (sandy-clay loam and silty-clay 140
loam). The remaining 3% area is occupied by 120
miscellaneous land types. The soils of the area are 100
inherently low in organic matter and available 80
60
phosphorus.
40
Temperature varies along the length of the doab,
20
increasing towards the west. The mean maximum
0
temperature ranges between 32-36ºC. The average
JanFebMarAprMayJun JulAugSepOctNovDec
annual rainfall also varies gradually from about 350 mm
in the east to 200 mm in the west, most of which falls in
the monsoon i.e. in the months of July and August Fig.2. Mean monthly precipitation (mm)
(NESPAK, 2005). The winter precipitation sometimes Evaluation of existing water productivity in LBDC
occurs due to cyclonic storms from the south west. The command
winter season is mild to cold and extends from
November to March. Wheat, rice, maize, sugarcane, and
cotton are the predominant crops of the area (Table 1).
 Lahore Multan water input to rice was 2,936 mm (76% higher) against
12
the potential crop water requirement of 710 mm and the
10 average water input to sugarcane was also very high
i.e. more than 4,000 mm (60% more) against its
8 potential water requirements of 1,604 mm. Hukkeri and
Sharma (1980) also reported that field water input to
6
rice during crop growth might be more than 3,000 mm.
4 It has been estimated that in rice fields, the seepage
and percolation accounts for 50-80% of the total water
2 input to the field, therefore, most of the water saving
techniques concentrate on reduction of these flows
0
(Sharma, 1989). The rice and sugarcane are not
Jan FebMarAprMayJun Jul AugSep OctNovDec
commonly grown at the command area of 15-L
distributary, most probably due to shortage of canal
Fig.3. Potential evaportranspiration in the study water supplies and deep groundwater. The lack of
area farmer’s knowledge about proper irrigation scheduling
is therefore, a major constraint in efficient use of
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION irrigation water.

Water application practices: The field data indicates Crop yields: The crop yields depend upon a number of
that lack of knowledge about when to irrigate and how factors such as crop variety, quality of seed, seed rate,
much water to apply is the main factor causing low crop land preparation, sowing method, irrigation application
water productivity. The farmers keep on applying water, (quantity, timing of irrigation, duration frequency, etc.)
even if the crops do not need water. Particularly, they fertilizer applicator, etc. The crop yields are low at both
apply tremendous amount of water to maize, the distributaries (Table 3 and 5). The wheat and
sugarcane, and rice crops (Tables 2-5). There was sugarcane yields were not statistically different at
however, a lot of variation in water application practices Jandraka and 15-L distributaries. The average wheat
among the watercourses and between the yield was 6-12% higher than the national average yield
distributaries. Moreover, there was no systematic trend and was 54-58% lower than its potential yield. The
found in water applications at head, middle and tails as average yield of cotton seed was 65% higher than the
it depends on the individual farmer and the water national average and 52% less than the potential yield.
available to him. At 15-L distributary, the farmers However, the maize yield was significantly higher (at 5%
applied 15% more water to wheat crop than at significance level) at 15-L than at Jandraka distributary.
Jandraka distributary, mostly by pumping groundwater. The average yield of maize at both distributaries was 54-
However, such increased application of water could 66% higher than national average and was 4-30% less
only increase the yield by 7%. The average water input than the potential yield. Hybrid varieties of maize are
to wheat crop at Jandraka distributary was 35% more mostly grown in the area and show high potential of
than its potential water requirements (278 mm) and maize yield in the country. These varieties under
was about 44% more at 15-L. For maize on an average, optimum conditions (temperature, soil, fertilizer and
the farmers of Jandraka distributary applied 38% more water), can yield up to a maximum of 9,880 kg/ha
water and obtained 27% less yield than those of 15-L. (OFWM, 1997), about three times more than the
The more application of water at Jandraka distributary synthetic maize varieties. Therefore, the quality of seed
may be due to more availability of water as it is located is very important to get higher yields and productivity.
at the head of the LBDC. The average water input to The sugarcane yield was almost the same as the
maize crop was 70 and 52% higher than its potential national average and was 59% lower than its potential.
water requirements at Jandraka and 15-L The rice yield was 19% higher than the national average
distributaries, respectively. The cotton is commonly yield and was 50% less than the potential yield.
grown at the 15-L due to its salt tolerance and of Therefore, there is considerable scope to increase the
relatively high return value. The average water input to crops yield.
cotton (805 mm) was only 4% higher than its potential
water requirements of 777 mm (Table 1). The average
 METHODOLOGY FOR PERFORMANCE Data collection and analysis
ASSESSMENT
Distribution costs
Many researchers, like Cakmak et al. (2010), Grusse
et al. (2009), Kuscu (2009), Pavlov et al. (2006) and In this research, all the costs are expressed in "US
Bos et al. (2005) have documented various indicators Dollars (US$) /1000 m3/year". Production costs are
for evaluation of the performance of a canal system. expressed in "US$/ha". To determine the costs of
To assess the performance of the LJC system, the water distribution, the Lower Jhelum Canal
indicators defined by Pavlov et al. (2006) and Grusse
et al. (2009) have been adopted. In depth economic System was divided into the canal segments, called
analysis of the system has been made using these divisions. These divisions represent the main and
indicators. In depth study at distributary level, Farooka secondary canal system. The data were collected for
Distributary was selected as a sample. Farooka each division in terms of operation and maintenance (O
Distributary has a discharge of 3.0 m3/s; its CCA is & M) and establishment costs to estimate the costs of
13,608 ha and it has 59 outlets. Various indicators distribution per unit water volume for each segment. The
used in this paper are defined as follows: distribution costs for all the divisions were combined to
obtain the distribution cost of the entire Lower Jhelum
Recovery cost ratio (RCR): Recovery cost ratio is the Canal System. This gives the total expenditures for the
ratio of cost of recovery in form of abiana collected water delivery through the main secondary and minor
from farmers to the distribution cost. canals up to the farm gate. It is expressed as:

Economic delivery efficiency (EDE): The economic n n

delivery efficiency is the ratio between the operation
and maintenance cost (O&M) and the distribution cost Distribution cost =∑Co(i) +∑Ce(i) (1)
(D). i=1 i=1
Where n is the number of segments/divisions, C o(i) is
Relative water cost (RWC): The relative water cost is the actual O&M expenditures for ith canal segment and
the ratio between the total irrigation cost (I) and total Ce(i) is the actual establishment cost for ith canal
production cost (P). The cost of irrigation water has a segment.
very important role from the farmer's perspective. This
indicator shows the share of irrigation cost in the total
production cost of a certain crop. Total production cost
includes the cost of irrigation, land preparation,
fertilizer, pesticide, seed and labour etc.

Relative farm irrigation (RFI) cost: The relative farm

irrigation cost is the ratio between on-farm irrigation
cost and total irrigation cost. High values of RFI show
that there is potential for the reduction of on-farm
irrigation cost.

Benefit cost ratio (BCR): The benefit cost ratio is the

ratio between irrigation benefits and irrigation costs.

Delivery performance ratio (DPR): The delivery

performance ratio of an outlet is the ratio between the
observed discharge and target discharge (design
discharge).
Water productivity: Water productivity is defined as
the physical or economic out put per unit of water Lack of crop zoning: Due to lack of crop zoning,
application. Due to relatively low yields and high highwater demanding crops such as sugarcane and
application of water, the rice are being grown without considering the soil type,
water productivity of all crops in the command area water availability and climate. The high
was very low (Table 6). The water productivity of wheat waterdemanding crops should therefore, be restricted
and sugarcane was not significantly different at both to specific zones of high rainfall and water availability.
the distributaries. However, maize water productivity Particularly, rice should only be grown on
was significantly different (at 5% significance level), at heavytextured soils and in areas of high rainfall.
both the distributaries. The water productivity of Moreover, the areas under rice and sugarcane
wheat, cotton, and spring maize were about 70, 40 cultivation need to be rationalized. Short duration, low-
and 6879% less than their potentials. In the irrigated water demanding and high-value crops should be
farmland of China, the water productivity of winter introduced in the water-scared areas.
wheat and spring maize were found to be 1.32 and
1.70 kg/m3, respectively (Duan and Zhang, 2000). The Cost of water: The canal water is being supplied at a
water productivity of sugarcane was 73-86% less than flat rate of $5.56/ha/year (1 US$ = Rs. 60). Fifty percent
its potential. Singh et al. (2007) obtained mean water rebate on water charges is provided to the farmers of the
productivity of 7.1 kg/m3 and 6.3 kg/m3 for plant and tail reach of the distributary. However, charges incurred
rotten sugarcane crops, respectively in a field trial in on groundwater pumping are about $2.27/hr for a diesel
the northern India. The average water productivity for engine operated well and about $5.83/hr for a tractor
rice, however, was particularly very low and it was operated well, respectively. As almost 7 hrs are required
about 90% lower than its potential. The low water to irrigate one hectare, therefore, the cost of pumped
productivity of rice was due to lack of knowledge about water with a diesel engine becomes $16/ha, and that for
irrigation scheduling, soil texture and poor water a tractor operated well $40/ha. It shows a huge
management practices. Jehangir et al. (2007) in a field difference in cost of canal and tubewell water and low
study, found water productivity of rice and wheat as cost of surface water is therefore, a main cause of low
0.23 and 1.48 kg/m3, respectively. Since rice is grown water productivity. The cost of water has a direct impact
in standing water resulting in more evaporation than on net return and the increasing cost of diesel is
other crops, therefore, its water productivity is becoming a big issue.
relatively lower than the other crops (Dawe, 2005).
Passioura (2006) reported upper limit of water Small and fragmented land holdings: Small land
productivity of well-managed, disease free, and water holding is a major issue affecting the water availability.
limited cereal crops as 2.0 kg/m3. Therefore, the water Average farm size was found to be 3.67 ha and 6.76 ha
productivity of these crops can be increased at Jandraka and 15-L, respectively. As the small farmers
substantially by improving the water management are relatively poor and illiterate therefore, they do not
practices. have resources for proper inputs. They normally grow
Table 7 shows the average yield and water productivity wheat and fodder, the food for themselves and their
at the two distributaries as well as the yield and the animals.
water productivity gap. Except for spring maize, the Fragmented land is another issue (Table 8). A number of
gap between the average yield at the two distributaries farmers have fragmented land holdings, even on a single
and the potential yield was more than 50%, and the watercourse. For example, Mr. Sarwar, Village No. 30
gap between the average water productivity and GD, owns 10.5 ha of land at watercourse No. 30,730 TF,
potential water productivity was more than 70%. whereas his 2.8, 3.2, 1.0, 1.4, and 2 ha are located at
Therefore, with the proper management of water and Square No. 32/34, 41, 45, 48, and 51, respectively. This
non-water inputs, the existing crop yields can be creates problems in managing land for irrigation,
doubled with the same quantity of water. This would ploughing, sowing and harvesting etc. particularly,
provide food security in the country and also in the irrigation to such lands is a big issue because a farmer
region. has to irrigate his field at different places, and at different
times of the day.
Causes of low water productivity: Based on the field
survey, review of the secondary data and discussions Traditional irrigation systems: Despite enormous
with the multidisciplinary professionals, the following losses in the irrigation system and reduced surface
are the major causes of the low water productivity: water supplies, the farmers are still using highly
inefficient and obsolete methods of irrigation. Moreover,
the fields are not precisely leveled. Basin irrigation with
broad casting is the predominant method of irrigation.
Sugarcane is normally grown in furrows and later on the
beds of the furrows are ploughed to remove the weeds.
The furrows are stretched due to ploughing. At the end
of a year, there are hardly any furrows left. Cotton is
mostly sown by drilling. Hoeing is done after each
irrigation resulting in loss of water, requiring more time
of irrigation during the subsequent irrigation. Hybrid
maize is a dominant Rabi crop and is grown on furrow
beds and ridges. The beds are quite large with wide and
deep furrows like channels. The beds vary from 55 to 80
cm and furrows from 65-70 cm. The depth of furrows
varies from 20-24 cm and the plant to plant distance from
15 to 25 cm.

Improper irrigation scheduling: Proper irrigation

scheduling helps when to irrigate and how much water
to apply in each irrigation event. In Pakistan however,
farmers normally over irrigate their fields due to (i) lack
of proper knowledge about irrigation scheduling, and (ii)
with the intention to get more yield, whereas more water
applications result in low water productivity. Moreover,
over irrigation leaches the nutrients out of the root zone
and decreases the crop yield and the net income (Ashraf
et al., 2001). Over irrigation also contributes to
waterlogging and groundwater pollution.

CONCLUSIONS

In the Indus basin of Pakistan, the crops yields and water

productivity are far less than their potentials. At Jandraka
distributary, the average yields of wheat, rice,
sugarcane, and spring maize were 2,884, 2,606, 49,912
and 6,443 kg/ha, respectively, whereas their average
water productivities were 0.73, 0.08, 2.01 and 0.54
kg/m3, respectively. At 15-L distributary, the average
yields of wheat, cotton, sugarcane and spring maize
were 3,096, 2,056, 49,400 and 8,854 kg/ha, respectively,
and their water productivities were 0.65, 0.33, 1.08 and
0.80 kg/m3, respectively. Except spring maize, the yield
gap for the major crops was more than 50%. The
average water input to wheat, cotton, rice, sugarcane
and maize (spring) was 35-44, 3.5, 76, 60 and 52-70%
more than their potential water requirements,
respectively. Except for cotton, the water productivity
gap was more than 70%. Therefore, there is a vast
scope to increase the crops yield and the water
productivity in the Indus basin.