International Journal of Agricultural

Science and Research (IJASR)

ISSN(P): 2250-0057; ISSN(E): 2321-0087
Vol. 5, Issue 3, Jun 2015, 193-198
TJPRC Pvt. Ltd.

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF FARM PONDS IN TUNGABHADRA

PROJECT COMMAND AREA OF KARANATAKA, INDIA
VENU B. N1, RAVI SIMHA L2 & VENKATARAMANA REDDY V.3
1,2

Department of Agricultural Economics, College of Agriculture, UAS, Bangalore, Karnataka, India

3

ICRISAT, Patancheru, Hyderabad, Telangana, India

ABSTRACT
Farm ponds add value to farming activities through the means of water supply to domestic and as well as for
livestock. It serves irrigation facilities to growing crops and supporting for raising of fishes. Even though TBP
(Tungabhadra Project) command area is a canal fed, release of canal water varies with the onset on monsoon rains and
water level in TB dam. Hence, it is very problematic for paddy growing farmers for raising paddy nursery before release of
canal water and for drinking water for animals and human beings after the closer of canal water during months of
April-June. In this situation there is a need to bring out pros and cons of farm ponds. Cost, returns, and economic viability
for small, medium and large farmers with and without farm ponds are presented for Tungabhadra region of Karnataka. IRR
are 14, 18 and 19 respectively. Average total cost per pond is between Rs. 685201 to Rs. 2076406. Total net income is
higher in case of large pond farmers with Rs. 15.45 lakh compared to 1.75 lakh farmers without farm pond. Results of the
study revealed that farm ponds generated an additional income and employment through different utilities. Therefore,
farmers may be encouraged to construct farm ponds based their requirement and availability of resources. These results
have implications for regional comparative advantage of crop production as well as incentive for adoption of new
technologies in convention ponds.

KEYWORDS: Farm Pond, Utilities of Farm Pond, Investment, Economic Viability

INTRODUCTION
Agriculture being major occupation in India provides employment for 58 per cent of the countrys population.
In India about 97 mha irrigational potential of has been created, out of which only 82 mha has been utilized, the gap of 18
per cent exists between irrigation potential created and utilized. In case of Karnataka, a gap of 12 per cent is estimated
between irrigation potential created (4 mha) and utilized (3.6 mha). This gap might be due to lack of proper planning and
management of storage structures like dams, leakage through gates, conveyance system and at farmers level. This gap can
be encountered by proper planning and economic management of scarce resources at all levels, may be at management
level and at farmers level by involving them in management.
Management of Scarce Water Resources
Water utilization can be well planned and utilized efficiently and economically by different technologies of
irrigation (drip and sprinkler irrigation), proper management of gates and dams, lining of canals and harvesting water in
structures like farm ponds, tanks, nala bunds and so on. Farm ponds are one of the key players in water harvesting, storing
and utilizing stored water efficiently.

www.tjprc.org

[email protected]

194

Venu B. N, Ravi Simha L & Venkataramana Reddy V.

Farm ponds are the water harvesting structures constructed to store water whenever there is an ample availability
of water, thus, stored water is used further when there is shortage of water. These ponds are used for many purposes
including: irrigation, flood control, collecting sediment, watering livestock, recreation, sources of domestic water, rural fire
control, and fish production.
Canal Water Use Efficiency in TBP Area
Conveyance efficiency of TB high level command area is 81 % and TB low level canal is 72 %. Whereas, overall
water use efficiency of TB high level canal is 47 % and low level canal is 32 % as per the report by working group on
Major and Medium Irrigation and Command area development, submitted to Ministry of Water Resources, Govt. of India
in the month of November, 2011. This is due to leakage of water from gates, canals and wastage of water at field level.
Need for the Study
Even though the TBP command area is canal fed, farm ponds play pivotal role in Karnataka. Canal water in TBP
area is released in the month of July after monsoon rains and rise in the water level in Tungabhadra dam. Paddy being
predominant crop in TBP command area, if farmers start raising paddy nursery after release of canal water, transplanting
will be delayed to August-September. So, farmers use farm pond water stored during the previous year to raise paddy
nursery in the month of June for kharif crop. By the time water is released into canals, paddy seedlings will be ready for
transplanting. Hence, farmers construct farm ponds and store available canal water during July to March after meeting
irrigation needs of the crop. Thus, stored water is also used for rabi/summer crop after canal water is closed in the month
of March- April. In the mean time few farmers release fish fingerlings into farm pond in the month of August-September
and will be harvested in the month of March-April when water level in the pond goes down. After canal water is closed,
availability of water for drinking is problematic condition in the villages of TBP command area, farm ponds becomes one
of the main source of drinking water for both human beings and animals. Some farmers grow horticulture crops on the
embankments of the farm pond.
Some people argue that storage of canal water by head and middle reach farmers makes it non-available at tail end
farmers. There are other apprehensions such as seepage of water from farm pond, salinity, etc. Under such circumstances,
it is necessary to examine these issues critically to through light on merits, demerits, strategy for farm pond water
utilization in Tungabhadra Project area.
In this regard, the attempt has been made in this study to study the pattern of usage of farm ponds, their impact on
production and farmers income, and their effects on soil and water availability at tail ends.

METHODOLOGY
The study was conducted in Tungabhadra left bank canal command area. A multistage purposive sampling
technique was used for selection of sample farmers. The sampling size comprises of 53 farmers with farm pond were
selected purposively based on the availability of farm ponds with farm families. For comparison, 30 farmers without farm
ponds neighboring to farmers with farm ponds were choosen.
Analytical tools like Cost concepts, amortization, compounding, BC ratio, payback period, IRR and Net Present
value were employed in the study.

Impact Factor (JCC): 4.7987

NAAS Rating: 3.53

195

Economic Analysis of Farm Ponds in Tungabhadra

Project Command Area of Karnataka, India

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Utilization Pattern of Farm Ponds
The farm ponds in TBP area were being used for raising paddy nursery (79.25 %), followed by protective
irrigation to paddy (77.36 %) and for drinking water for animals (56.60 %) and human beings (37.74 %). Similar pattern of
utilization was observed in case of small and large sized farm ponds. An opinion survey revealed that the canal water
generally released during July after onset of monsoon and raising water level in Tungabhadra dam as seen over the last two
decades. Farmers have started construction of the farm ponds in their own fields to store the canal water before its closer
and use it for paddy nursery raising. Later on, some of the innovative farmers started aquaculture in such farm ponds to
make use of the water available in farm ponds. When canal closes around March/April every year, the availability of
drinking water in majority of the villages all along the canal command area was a problematic situation. The farm pond
became the source of drinking water for both human beings as well as animals especially during summer from April to
June. The farmers having farm ponds were also found using the farm pond water for protective irrigation especially to
paddy whenever there is a breach of the canal, early closer of the canal than the announced date, dry spells, etc. It is worth
noting that many farmers have planted horticulture crops like mango, banana, coconut, sapota, drumstick, lime, karipathi,
flower plants etc. on the embankments of the farm ponds which uses the pond water (Table 1). Thus, the farm pond water
was used effectively for diversified activities.
Table 1: Distribution of Ponds Based on their Use for Different Purposes
Sl.
No.

Purpose

Raising of paddy nursery

Rearing of Inland fisheries

Paddy

Hybrid
jowar
3

Protective
irrigation
to

Cotton

Small
(N=24)
No.
%
23
95.83
(54.76)
13
54.17
(59.09)
22
91.67
(53.66)
01
4.17
(07.14)
01
4.17
(16.67)

Horticult
ure
crops
10
(Mango,
(76.92)
Banana,
Coconut,
Sapota)
Drinking Water for Human
07
4
beings
(35.00)
Drinking
Water
for
14
5
Animals
(46.67)
6
Total
24
Note: Figures in parenthesis are percentages

41.67

29.17
58.33
100

Size of Pond
Medium
Large
(N=17)
(N=12)
No.
%
No.
%
09
10
52.94
83.33
(21.43)
(23.81)
05
04
29.41
33.33
(22.73)
(18.18)
09
10
52.94
83.33
(21.95)
(24.39)
10
03
58.82
25.00
(71.43)
(21.43)
03
02
17.65
16.67
(50.00)
(33.33)

Aggregate
(N=53)
No.
%
42
79.25
(100)
22
41.51
(100)
41
77.36
(100)
14
26.42
(100)
06
11.32
(100)

01
(07.69)

13
(100)

10
(50.00)
11
(36.67)
17

5.88

58.82
64.71
100

02
(15.38)

03
(15.00)
5
(16.67)
12

16.67

25.00
41.67
100

20
(100)
30
(100)
53

24.53

37.74
56.60
100

Impact of Farm Ponds on Income and Employment

As presented in Table 2, inland commercial fish rearing in farm ponds contributed 48.48 per cent to the total net
income of the farm families having farm ponds, followed by paddy (28.82 %) and horticulture crops (7.64 %). Whereas, in

www.tjprc.org

[email protected]

196

Venu B. N, Ravi Simha L & Venkataramana Reddy V.

case of income of farm families having no farm pond, paddy contributed major share (71.43 %) followed by cotton
(18.86 %) and hybrid jowar (9.71 %). However, total net income of farm families having farm pond (Rs.7.46 lakhs) was
significantly higher by more than three times (326 %) as compared to income of farmers having no farm pond (Rs. 1.75
lakhs). More than 60 per cent of net income was contributed by non-crop activities such as rising paddy nursery, fishery
and horticulture crops in farmers with farm ponds in TBP area. The increase in income among farmers having farm pond
and using the pond water as protective irrigation in case of hybrid jowar (223 %), paddy (72 %), and cotton (48.48 %) was
found to be significant over farmers having no farm ponds. The farm pond water might have acted as a safety measure in
protecting the crop under unforeseen water stress situation like long dry spells, breach of the canal, early closer of canal,
inadequate flow of canal water, etc. Anonymous (2009) reported an additional income of ` 30,000 by rearing fish in farm
pond. Thus, it strengthens our earlier conclusion that farm ponds would provide an opportunity for diversification of crops
and increase in income which would withstand risk of crop loss.
Table 2: Net Income from Different Sources for
Which Pond Water is Used (`Lakh/Pond/Year)

The employment generated among farmers having farm ponds was considerably higher (29.07 %) than those
having no farm pond in TBP area (Table 3). The change in employment generated with farm ponds over without farm
ponds was higher from paddy nursery raising (733 %) followed by paddy cultivation (44.76 %) with protective irrigation
and cotton (33.45 %). Generally, canal water was not available for paddy nursery raising in the month of June for farmers
having no farm pond. However, the share of the different activities in total employment generated in with farm pond
indicated that paddy (43.04 %) contributed highest share followed by jowar (31.25 %) and cotton (22.14 %). There was no
employment generated from horticulture crops since no farmer was growing horticulture crops under no farm pond
situation.
Table 3: Employment Generation from Different Utilities of Pond (Man-Days/Pond)

Note: Figures in parenthesis are percentages

Impact Factor (JCC): 4.7987

NAAS Rating: 3.53

197

Economic Analysis of Farm Ponds in Tungabhadra

Project Command Area of Karnataka, India

Returns to Investment and Viability of Farm Ponds

On an average, the total cost of establishment of farm pond accounted to ` 11,08,710 per pond out of which the
cost on lifting soil (` 6,96,147) by using tractors formed major share (63.39 %), followed by cost on digging with earth
movers (26.84 %), pump set cost (6.49 %), fencing (2.74 %), etc. Similar pattern of cost on establishment of farm ponds
was noticed in all sizes namely small, medium and large (Table 4). Soil thus available from digging was used to spread on
the other parts of land of the farm which were affected by salinity. In view of the depth of the pond of about 15 to 20 feet
below ground level, there was no free gravitational flow of water, hence, pump sets were installed to pump water from
farm pond into the field. Fencing (ordinary barbed wire to power fence) around the farm pond was done to protect the pond
from animals stepping on embankments of the farm pond.

Figure 1: Establishment Cost of Farm Ponds of Different Sizes in TBP Area

The estimates of investment feasibility analysis also indicated the viability of investment in different sizes of the
farm ponds in TBP area. The higher net present value (Rs. 11, 12,506) with positive and more than one. Benefit cost ratio
(1:1.35) of more than one, payback period of 6 years and internal rate of returns (18 %) of more than the bank interest rate.
From the result, it could be comfortably concluded that the investment in the construction of farm ponds in TBP area which
are used for different purposes was economically viable. Panda (2009) also reported economic viability of investment in
construction of farm ponds. Hence, it is suggested to encourage the farmers to go for different sizes of farm ponds
depending upon their landholding and requirement of water for different purposes and to earn sustainable income.
Table 4: Estimates of Investment Feasibility in Different Sizes of Farm Ponds
Size of pond
Small
Medium
Large
Aggregate
1
NPV (` lakh)
3.06
17.07
22.94
11.12
2
BCR
1.10
2.02
1.42
1.35
3
PBP (Years)
7
4
5
6
4
IRR (%)
14
18
19
18
Note: Assuming economic life span of farm ponds for 15 years and discount rate at 12 per cent
Sl. No.

www.tjprc.org

Particulars

[email protected]

198

Venu B. N, Ravi Simha L & Venkataramana Reddy V.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Farm ponds in TBP command area are constructed for multi-purposes which provide additional income and
sustainability to farmers in addition to reducing the crop loss due to unforeseen uncertainties like water shortages.
Therefore, farmers may be encouraged to construct different sizes of farm ponds across different locations of command
area as micro balancing reservoirs by providing financial assistance or incentives to the farmers. Similarly, there is a need
to create awareness among farm pond holding farmers about judicious use of farm pond water for different purposes like
raising paddy nursery, aquaculture, growing of horticulture crops on embankments so that higher sustainable income made
available to the farm family.

REFERENCES
1.

Anonymous, (2011). Major and medium irrigation and command area development, Ministry of Water Resources,
Government of India.

2.

Hangaragi, S. S, (2011). Rain water harvesting in India for sustainable development: A conceptual study.
Southern Economist journal, 50, 24-25.

3.

Panda, S. N, (2009). Optimum sizing of on farm reservoir for various cropping system in rainfed uplands of
eastern India. Proc. Nation. Workshop cum brain storming, Central Research Institute for Dry land Agriculture,
Hyderabad, p. 60-66.

4.

Ravi simha, L. (2012). Economic analysis of investment on farm ponds in Tungabhadra project command area
(unpublished MSc thesis). University of agricultural sciences Raichur, India.

Impact Factor (JCC): 4.7987

NAAS Rating: 3.53