Eco-system Health in the Flood and Waterlogged

Region of Saryu Par Plain, Uttar Pradesh

1993-94
Prepared by
Rahul Sen

For
South South Solidarity
New Delhi

EcosystemHealthintheFloodandWaterloggedRegionofSaryuParPlain

India:TheFloodProneCountry

FloodsareamajorcauseofhumanmiseryinIndiaeveryyearmakingittheworstfloodaffected
countryintheworldafterBangladesh.Statisticsdisplaybetween1953and1987some50,374
people died in floods, an average of about 1,500 deaths annually. During the same period,
floodsaffectedanaverageof7.66mhaarea,destroyedcropsinover3.51mhaland,affected
31.84millionpeople,damaged1.2millionhouses,killed0.1millioncattleandcauseddamaged
tocrops,housesandpublicpropertyworthRs.768croresperyear(Table1).

Flood damages in India have been steadily increasing during this period. The average flood
affectedpopulationperyearincreasedfromabout16millioninthe1950sto43millioninthe
1970s and 53 million in the 1980s. This is a faster rate of increase than the natural rate of
increaseofthetotalpopulationofthecountry.Atthesametimetheaverageannualdamageto
crops,housesandpublicpropertyrosefromRs60croresduring1950stoRs2,307croresper
yearduringthe1980s,a38timesincrease.Theaverageannualcropdamagesaloneincreased
fromRs45croresinthe1950stoRs935croresinthe1980s(Table2).

The most clinching evidence of flood having increased as a phenomenon in India comes,
however,fromtheincreaseinthefloodaffectedareasitself.Theannualaveragefloodaffected
areainthe1950swas6.48mhawhichincreasedtoover9.0mhainthe1980s,demonstrating
thegrowingfloodpronenessofthecountry.

TheRashtriyaBarhAyog,setin1976,estimatesthatthefloodproneareainIndiahasgoneup
from25mhaduringthe1960sto40mhain1978revealingarapidincreaseinfloodproneness
injustoveradecade.

Themostflood prone basinsidentifiedarethoseofthe GangaandtheBrahmaputrainUttar

Pradesh, Bihar, West Bengal and Assam followed by Baitarni, Brahmani and Subarnarekha
basins in Orissa. Floods are also experienced in Andhra Pradesh, Rajasthan, Haryana and
Gujaratincreasinglysince1976areasnotusuallyaffectedearlier(Table3)(Map1).

The RBA, in their investigation, did not find any evidence of increase in rainfall during this
periodandfoundthecauseofincreasedfloodpronenessinhumanfactors:

deforestation;

siltation

drainagecongestioncausedbybadlyplannedconstructionofbridges,roads,railway
tracksandotherdevelopmentalactivities;

reductionininfiltrationbecauseofincreasedoccupationoflandbyindustriesandlarge
scaleurbanisation;and

constructionofembankmentsalongrivers.

Floodsare,however,notnewtoIndia.Thepracticeofbuildingfloodprotectionembankments
along rivers is an ancient one in the Godavari, Krishna and Cauvery deltas and in the Indo
Gangetic plains. However, nationwide flood protection programmes began only after
independence.

When the British left, there were some 5,280 km of embankments along different rivers, of
which3,500kmwereintheSundarbansinWestBengaland1,209kmalongtheMahanadiin
Orissa,providingprotectiontoatotalofabout3mha.Notenoughattentionwaspaidtoflood
protection and control measures by the colonial administration although a number of
committeeswereappointedfromtimetotimeinAssam(1929,1934and1947),Bihar(1926)
and West Bengal (1922) whose recommendations were rarely implemented except for the
constructionofembankments.

Thefirstplan(1951),afterindependence,decidedtomoveawayfromembankmentsandput
morefaithinlargedamstostorefloodwaters.Damswereconceivedonthefloodpronerivers
ofDamodar,MahanadiandKosi.Butevenbeforetheplanwashalfover,theideaofadamon
theKosiatBarahkshetrainNepalhadtobeshelvedduetothelukewarmattitudeofNepalese
governmentanditsproximitytoanactiveseismiczone.Asaresult,stressonceagainshiftedto
embankments, especially in North Bihar, while dams were constructed on the Damodar and
Mahanadi.

1954experiencedaspateofseverefloodsoneoftheworstinthecountry.Allnorthernrivers
flooded simultaneously and led to enormous devastation across Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, West
BengalandAssam.Asadirectconsequenceofthisathreephasedprogrammewasproposed.
During the immediate phase, which was to extend over a period of two years, protection of
certaintownsandconstructionofembankmentsinareasrequiringurgentattentionweretobe
undertaken.Simultaneously,scientificandeconomicinvestigationsweretobeundertakenfor
short term measures, which would begin with the second plan. These measures involved the
building of more embankments, channels improvements, raising of villages and protection of
towns. The long term phase involved the construction of dams and additional embankments
wherevernecessary.Centralandstatefloodcontrolboardsweresetupinordertoimplement
the programme. The state governments were given the key responsibility to undertake flood
controlmeasures.

Hence, flood control measures have rarely gone beyond the construction of dams and
embankments. Between 1954 and 1978, 10,821 km long embankments had been built. By
1987,thisfigurehadgoneupto14,511km(Table4).Numerousrivershavehadlongstretches
embankedonbothbanks.Bythemid1970s,northBiharriverslikeBurhiGandhakhad317km
long embankments on its left bank and 312 km on its right bank; Kosi had a total length of
embankmentsof246km;andBagmatisome333kmby1987,4,448kmlongembankmentshad
beenbuiltintheBrahmaputraandBarakvalleysofAssam.Some459townsand4,701villages
had been protected across the country and 28,036 km of drainage channels constructed.
Overall,atotalareaof13.37mhahadbeenprotectedascomparedto9.99mhain1978and
2

about3mhain1950.MeanwhilethetotalexpenditureonfloodcontrolincreasedfromRs13.2
croresintheFirstPlan(19511956)toRs786.8croresintheSixthPlan(198085)andanoutlay
ofRs947.4croresintheSeventhPlan(198590)(Table5).Floodcontroloutlayhasgenerally
fluctuatedbetween0.64and1.08percentofthetotalfiveyearplanoutlays.

In addition, the government has spent vast sums on constructing dams. By 1986, 256 dams
(withaheightof15mandabove)hadbeenbuiltand154morewereunderconstruction.Only
about30odddamshavebeenconstructedintheIndoGangeticandBrahmaputravalleysthe
mostfloodproneregionsinIndia.Another15oddmajordamsareunderconstructioninthese
areas(Table6).

However, both embankments and dams have major adverse impacts which not only lead to
theirfailureasfloodcontrolmeasuresbutoftenworsenthefloodsituation.Thisisrecognized
byboththegovernmentcommittee(1957)andtheNationalCommissiononIrrigation(1972).
Theproblemswithembankmentsare:
i. theyobstructfreedrainageoflandoutsidetheembankmentsintotheriver;
ii. thevalleystorageisreducedandconsequentlythefloodlevelsintheembankedreaches
rise;
iii. the flood levels in the upper reaches also rise and this leads to demands for the
extensionoftheembankments;
iv.
floods of higher stage and consequently higher damage potential are transferred to
unprotectedareasdownstream;
v.
embankments are also liable to failure and when they fail, the damage can be much
greaterthaniftherewerenoembankments;
vi.
preventthedepositionoffertilizingsiltonlandssubjecttofloodinundation.

Atthesametime,theproblemswithdamsandreservoirswerealsorecognized.Theseare:
i. evenmoderatedflowsthatreservoirsreleaseintotheriverexceeditscarryingcapacity;
ii. theycannotchecktherunofffromthecatchmentbelowthereservoir.
iii. conflicting objectives of multipurpose dams compromise their flood control potential
i.e. while flood control demands that the reservoirs be kept empty to arrest any
oncomingflood,irrigationandpowergenerationdemandsthatthereservoirbekeptas
fullaspossible.

The RBA (1976) had in its report also noted the problem with the existing flood control
measures and recommended alternate programmes, although there were no major new
methodsinthem.Theseincluded:
i. needforriverdiversionschemes;
ii. channelimprovements;
iii. soilconservationprogrammes;
iv.
flood plain zoning and prevention of encroachment upon drainage channels and
occupationoffloodplains;
v.
adjustmentincroppingpattern;
3

vi.
raisingofvillagesabovefloodlevels;
vii.
protectionofnaturalwaterdetentionbasinslikelakesandswamps;
viii.
disasterpreparednessthroughbetterfloodwarningsystem;
ix. afforestationinthecatchmentareas;and
x. protectionofnaturaldrainagesystemfromundueobstruction.

This entire exercise was presented by RBA as the policy of `living with the floods.' This,
however,hasneverbeenacceptedasthefloodcontrolprogrammeforthecountrywhichhas
relied solely on embankments and dams with disastrous results. Yet this integrated flood
controlprogrammeremainstheonlyreallyworkablefloodcontrolprogrammeforthecountry.
However, such a programme can work only when taken up as a micro or regional watershed
management programme with an integrated flood control and environmenteconomic
developmental objective. And for this each individual watershed zone needs to be studied
comprehensively to understand the cause and nature of flood occurring there along with its
environmentalsocioeconomicandhealthfallout.

UttarPradesh:TheFloodProneState

On the basis of total area prone to floods, Uttar Pradesh is considered the most floodprone
state in India ahead of Bihar, Assam and West Bengal, the other floodprone states in the
GangaBrahmaputrabasins(Table7)(Map2).

Table7:FloodpronestatesinGangaBrahmaputrabasins(maximumareaaffected(mha)

States
195359
196069
197079
198088
Assam
3.15
3.15
3.15
3.82
Bihar
2.50
2.50
4.26
4.26
UttarPradesh
4.13
4.13
7.34
7.34
WestBengal
2.65
2.65
3.08
3.77
India
18.94
22.96
43.46
58.51

Nearly twothird of the 63 districts of Uttar Pradesh are found flood hit every year, with the
affectedarearangingfrom0.58mhain1987(leastfloodaffectedyearinlastdecade)to5.85
mha in 1980 (the most floodaffected year in last decade) (Table 8). To control these floods
measures like embankments and dams have been constructed. These are especially on the
mountainous rivers of Bhagirathi, Alaknanda, Gandhak, and Rapti which bring down huge
quantities of silt and water causing floods in the plains and on the plain rivers of Ganga,
Jamuna, and Ghaghara to prevent these floods from occurring. The total length of
embankmentsinUttarPradeshin1987was1711kmandthenumberofdamsconstructedand
underconstructionwereboth7,respectively.YetthefloodprobleminUttarPradeshremains
andisprogressivelygrowingoverthedecades.

EasternUttarPradesh:FloodandWaterLoggedRegion

AgroclimaticallyeasternUttarPradeshhasthreedistinctareas:
i.
thenortheasterndistricts,
ii.
centralplainsdistricts,and
iii.
theVindhyanregiondistrict.

These districts are generally categorized as the upper Ganga and middle Ganga plains. These
districtsAllahabad,SultanpurandPratapgarhcomeunderupperGangaplains.Theremaining
is included in middle Ganga plains. Among the latter, Bahraich, Basti, Deoria, Gonda and
Gorakhpur form a homogenous region the northeastern plains or the Saryu Par plains. (In
1989theGorakhpurdistrictwasdividedintotwodistrictsGorakhpurandMaharajganjandthe
BastidistrictintotwodistrictsBastiandSiddhartanagar)Azamgarh,Balia,Faizabad,Ghazipur,
Jaunpur and Varanasi along with the three upper Ganga plain districts are called the central
plaindistricts.MirzapurdistrictistheonlydistrictundertheVindhyaregion.

Whilemostofthesedistrictsarefloodaffected,thefivedistrictsoftheSaryuParplainisthe
mostfloodproneareaofUttarPradesh(Map3).Alongside,thisregionisalsoanextensively
canalledagroregionofthestatewiththetwomajorcanalsystemsbeingtheSaryucanaland
the Gandhak canal systems. These canals along with the floodproneness of the area are
leadingtoamajorproblemofwaterlogging,especiallyduetosurfacewaterseepage.Andthis
twinphenomenonfloodandwaterloggingconstitutesamajorenvironmentalprobleminthe
region with vast adverse ecological and socioeconomic fallouts. Further, since any flood
controlmeasurestakeninthisregionmustalsocontentwiththewaterloggingproblem,which
is in conjunctive relationship with floods, a comprehensive ecological developmental
understanding of the nature and cause of the two is a necessary prerequisite to any
interventionactionplanned.

TheSaryuParPlains

TheSaryuParplainregionofUttarPradeshisthemostdenselypopulatedareainthestate.It
extendsoveranareaof33,270sqkm,whichconstitutesabout9.57percentofthetotalland
areaofUttarPradesh.Itis260kmfromeasttowestand160kmfromnorthtosouthwithan
averagealtitudeof85m,whichvariesfromalow65minDeoriatoahigh165minBahraich.
The average gradient of the plain is 20 cm per km. The region includes the five districts of
Bahraich, Gonda, Basti, Gorakhpur and Deoria (now also Maharajganj and Siddharthanagar),
whichformahomogenousecological,socialanddemographicunit.

Physiography

The plain has been formed in a geosynclinal trough filled with alluvium from the Himalayan
rivers.Hydrogeologicallyitcanbecategorizedintothreedistrictzones:

i.TheTerai:ImmediatelybelowtheSiwalikouterhillsandskirtingthem,thereisaday,boulder
strewntractofBhabar(porousland)wherethebulkofthemoisturecontributedbytherainfall
andthesmallhillstreamsisabsorbedintheloosetalus.Thistractisfollowedbyalowmarshy
stretch of land where the water absorbed by the porous soils of the Bhabar reappears by
symphonic influence and which is conspicuous by the `ubiquitous' presence of water. It is
infestedatplaceswithneeds,tallgrassesandshrubforests,markedbyhighwatertableand
fertilethoughhighlyleachedsoilswithexcessivemoistureandhighclayfactor.Thisisknownas
theTerai(moistorwetland).

ii.TheBangar:ThesecompriseoftheolderalluviumdepositsoftheHimalayanriverswiththeir
surfaceborderedbyanumberofriversanddrainagechannelsdividingthetractintoaseriesof
fertileplains.

iii.TheKhadar:TheseareformedbytheredepositionoftheBangarsoilsubjecttotheerosive
actionoftheriversandischaracterisedbyasandysoil.
The Bangar and Khadar constitute the alluvial soil of the flood plains of this region. This
alluviumreachesadepthof3,000matsomeplacesandthinsgraduallyfromeasttowest.The
neweralluviumdeposits(Khadar)formthefloodplains,adjacenttotherivers.Inconsistency,
thesoilsrangefromdriftsandtoloams,andfromfinesiltstostiffdays.Occasionalfeaturesof
thealluvialsoilsarethepresenceof`hardpans'atcertainlevelsinthesoilprofile,causedby
infiltrating silica or calcareous matter, and the presence of `kankar.' Occurrence of `pans'
impedesthepenetrationofplantrootsandaffectsthepercolationofwater.

Soil

Themainsoilsoccurringinthisregionare:
i. `Bhat'soils,generallylowlyingandsandyloamintexturewithahighlimecontent;
ii. `Bangar' soils varying from loam to sandy loam with a low time content and slightly
alkalinetoslightlyacidicinreaction;and
iii. `Doab'soilnearriverbanks.

Climate

The region is tropical and is characterized by hot summers and fairly cold winters. While
maximum summer temperatures vary in the range of 43450C in May and June, the winter
temperaturecangodownto340CinJanuary.Theyearisbroadlydividedintothreedistinct
seasons:
i. thecoldseasonfromOctobertoFebruary,
ii. thesummerfromMarchtomidJune,and
iii. themonsoonfrommidJunetoSeptember.

Mostoftherainfall(about86%)occursduringthemonsoonorkharifperiodandabout6%in
winter. The average annual rainfall is about 1208 mm. though the coefficient of variation is
veryhigh.

During the monsoon and the post monsoon seasons the relative humidity is high ranging
between70and85percent.Inthewintermonthshumiditydecreasesandinsummertheairis
comparativelydrier.Inthesouthwestmonsoonseasonheavilycloudedskiesprevail,exceptin
winter when the region is affected by passing western disturbances and the skies become
heavilycloudedorovercastforshortspellsoftwoorthreedaysatatime.

Winds are generally light, slightly sharpening in the late summer and southwest monsoon
months. Winds are mainly from the west in cold season. During the rest of the year clear or
lightly clouded skies prevail, except in winter when the region is affected by passing western
disturbancesandtheskiesbecomeheavilycloudedorovercastforshortspellsoftwoorthree
daysatatime.

Duringtheearlypartofthesummereasterliesbegintoblow,butthewesterliespredominate.
Easterliesandnortheasterliesprevailinlatesummerandmonsoonseasons.InOctober,winds
arelightwithlargeproportionofcalmsandthedirectionsaremainlywest,northwestoreast.
Occasional thunderstorms occur in late summer and monsoon months. In association with
spellsofbadweatherduetothepassageofwesterndisturbances,especiallyinthelatterpart
of the winter season, some thunderstorms accompanied with hail occasionally occur. In the
northernpartsoftheregionfogsoccuroccasionallyduringthecoldseason.

WaterResources

Theregionisrichinwaterresources.Severalmajorriversflowthroughtheregionandbeneath
the ground lies hidden blessings of rich aquifers. Alone with this the region also receives a
heavy annual rainfall and is provided with an elaborate canal system crisscrossing the entire
region.

Drainage

Drainagelinesholdaparticularsignificanceintheregion.Notonlydotheyprovideredeeming
topographicbreaksinthegeneralflatnessoftheplainandprovidesubregionalorevenlocal
uniqueness and individuality to the different areas, but they also govern to great extent, the
humanoccupancyofland,particularlytheagriculturallandandsettlements.

The whole of the alluvial tract is a network of rivers and numerous streams which drain the
areaandfollowitsgeneralslope.Theybelongtothreedrainagesystemsviz.,theGhagharain
thewest,theRaptiinthecentreandthelittleandgreatGandhakintheeast,allofwhichform
ultimatelyapartofthegreatGangeticsystem(Map4).

The Ghaghara and its tributaries form the western most drainage system. The Ghaghara
assumes its name from the point where it is joined by the river Dahawar, above which it is
known by the name of Kauriala river. The Kauriala issues from the mountains of Nepal and
enterstheareaatitsextremenorthwesterncorner.ItreceivesthewatersofGirwaandsome
other hill torrents. The tortuous course of Sarju and a few others also join the Ghaghra. The
Kauriala and the Girwa frequently change their course and their channels are dotted with
numerousislands.

TheprincipaldrainagelineoftheregionistheRaptiwhichistherecipientofallthedrainageof
theareaextendingfromtheeasternpartoftheNanparaTahsiloftheBahraichdistrictinthe
westtotheMaharajganjTahsiloftheGorakhpurdistrictintheeast.Risinginthemountainsof
Nepal, the river enters the region in Bahraich district and the flows in a very sinuous and
tortuouscourseinthesouthandsoutheasterndirectionthroughGondaandBastidistricts.Its
channelsisasuccessionofloopsandsharpbends,someofwhichafterbeingcutofffromthe
main stream are in the form of deserted channels. The Kain and the Bhakla are the main
effluentsoftheriverRaptiintheBahraichdistrict,whichinturnarefedbynumerousstreams.

Anotherveryimportantand,perhaps,makingthelargestsubsystemoftheRaptiriversystem
istheBurhiRapti.ItmakesitsfirstappearancenearthewesternborderofGondadistrictand
flowsinaneasterlydirectionroughlyparalleltothemainriveruptoapointoffewkilometres
aheadfromitsjunctionwithArrahinBastidistrict,whenceitbendstowardssoutheasttomeet
theriverRaptiabout12kmeastofBasti.Thepointofjunctionisatalltimesliabletochange,
depending especially on the action of the Banganga, and it is now believed that the former
courseoftheBurhiRaptiisnowadoptedbythemainstream.Allalongitslengthisseenamaze
of`Nankhans'oroldchannelsgenerallyofahorseshoeshape,similartothesealongtheRapti.

Particularly in the Gonda district, the northern tributaries of the Burhi Rapti are extremely
numerous, all of which bear a general resemblance to one another being hill torrents, with
boulderstream beds, mostly disappearing in the dry season, but being transformed into
rushing rivers and causing much damage to the land in the neighbourhood and frequently
coveringthefieldswithadepositofbarrensandduringrains.IntheBastidistrict,thenorthern
streamsjoiningBurhiRaptiareArrah,Chhagirha,Ghurai,AwindaorAnndhi,Sarohiandseveral
others whose channels are seldom well defined, especially as they approach the Burhi Rapti
andinmanyplacesthedesertedbedshaveformedintomarshesandlakes.TheParasiandSikri
join in on the right bank. The river Bangangais of considerable dimension, which rises in the
Nepal Tarai and flowing in a south and southeast direction and unites with Burhi Rapti. The
point of junction is subject to change as the result of the heavy floods brought down by the
streams.

ThecountrytotheeastofBangangaisdrainedbyanotherseriesofhillstreamswhichareno
lessperplexingintheirramificationsandconstantliabilitytochange.Jamuwarisoneofthem.It
isfedbyanumberofsmallstreamsandfallintotheriverKumhra,afewkmsouthofthetown
of Nangarh. The latter flows through the town of Uska to join the Rapti. Ghungi is another
8

tributary of Kumhra, which forms boundary between the Basti and Gorakhpur districts. The
unitedwatersoftheGhunghiandtheKumhragenerallygobythenameofDhamelawhichis
merelyanoldchanneloftheRaptiandwhichafteracourseofabout16kmintheBastidistrict
rejoinstheoriginalbedoftheRapti.ThenextaffluentoftheRaptiistheRohinwhichalsoissues
fromNepalandflowsthroughtheregion.

The little and great Gandak drainage system drains the easternmost part of the region. The
greatGandakisthestreamofthefirstmagnitude.OnitsentryintotheIndianterritory,thebed
is stony and the water is cold and clear with a very rapid current. Its effluents are
inconsiderable, but even in the hot weather, its volume is immense. The little Gandak
representsanoldchannelofthegreatGandak.ItalsooriginatesinNepalandtakesasoutherly
courseintheregiondrainingitsextremenortheastcorner.Forthegreaterpartoftheyearitis
inaninsignificantstream(Table9).

Theregionaboundsinlakesandjhilswhicharegenerallyformedbytheactionoftheriversin
changing their beds and thus represent the deserted channels horseshoeshaped, while in
othercases,theyaredeepnaturaldepressionsinwhichthesurfacedrainagecollectswithout
finding an adequate outlet. There are temporary swamps and jhils which become extensive
duringrainsandremainshallowmarshesorevenarablelandinthedryseason.

Thenaturaldrainageoftheregionisfarfromperfectinmostoftheseparts,especiallyinthe
basinsofRapti,BurhiRaptiandtheireffluents.Extensiveinundationsoccurduringtherainsand
a large area is submerged, particularly along the courses of the rivers. These inundations are
stillmoreseriouswhere,sometimes,theriverschangetheircoursesandwherebytherushof
water,fertileclaysoilisapttobeoverlaidwithadepositofbarrensand.

The main cause of the defective drainage of the region is not far to seek. The streams are
marked by their meandering courses, especially, in the upper reaches, duplicate or even
triplicatechannelsandoxbowlakes,obstructcrossdrainage,andexcessivecrosssectiondue
tofluctuatingregimeoutflowsobtainingbetweenyearsofnormalandabnormalrainfall.

AlongtheDundwarangesinthenorthernpartoftheBahraichandGondadistricts,thegradient
ofthehilltorrentsisabruptlyreducedwiththeresultthattheydepositthedebristransported
bythemtothefoothillsintheshapeofalluvialfanswhichtogetherpresentanappearanceofa
rollingplain.IntheTaraitheriverchannelsareformedindepressionsbelowthegenerallevelof
the country. Thus with the excessive slope in the upper reaches of the streams and poor
tenacity of the soils in the Tarai, the channels fail to accommodate the excessive volume of
water. Consequently, with the carvingin of the banks and sitting up of the river bed, the
streamsoverflowtheirbanksandcarveoutnewcourses.Suchphenomenonisverycommonin
theentireregion(Table10).

Groundwater

Groundwater in this region occurs under both unconfirmed and confirmed conditions.
Groundwaterisavailableunderunconfirmedconditionsinclayeyandsandyaquifersuptothe
deathof50m.Confirmedgroundwateroccursinsandygravelbedsatdepthsexceeding50m.
Someofthewellsfedbyconfinedaquifersareartesian.

Broadly speaking, the watertable in the region is very high, particularly so during the rainy
seasonandtherealproblemofthetractisnotsurfacedrainage,butsubsoildrainage.However
therearelargelocalandsubregionalvariationsinit(Map5).

Thespringlevelisfoundatthelowestdepthinthenorthernslopesandundulatingforestclad
tract. It is generally between 6 and 10 m and at some places even more than 20 m, as in
Bankatwa,SuhelwaandPipraforestrangesofGondadistrictwhereitisbetween20to30m.
Sloppy elevated ground causing speedy runoff and less absorption of water, absence of
irrigationchannelsetc.aresomeofthefactorswhichmaybeheldresponsibleforsuchalow
watertableinthisarea.

In the upland region of the Bahraich district, the watertable is generally found at a greater
depththan5mreachingaslowas10to15mintheMihipurwaforestrange.Intheuplandtract
ofGorakhpurandDeoriadistrictandinthealluvialflatsoftheBastidistrict,thedepthofwater
tablegenerallyrangesbetween4and8m,beinggreaterinthewelldraineduplandareasand
lesserintheareasofdefectivedrainageandinthosewithcanalirrigationwheretheseepage
fromthecanalwatercourseshasbeenresponsibleforsuchariseinthewatertable.

In the riverine tracts and in the gently rolling illdrained areas lying south of the undulating
forestbeltintheGondaandBahraichdistrictsandalongthenorthernborderintheBastiand
Gorakhpurdistricts,thewatertaleiscomparativelyhigher.Itgenerallyrangesbetween2and4
m. Defective drainage with impeded runoff, inundation or waterlogging are some of the
factorswhichareresponsibleforhighwatertableintheriverinetracts.Thehighwatertableof
the illdrained low lying areas may be ascribed to these factors and the symphonic influence
thatmakesthewaterabsorbedbytheBhabarsoilstoreappearhere(Table11).

Withthereclamationofthelowmarshyandswampylandsinfestedwithneedsandtallgrasses
and with an improvement in the drainage conditions in the Tarai, there undoubtedly has
occurredaslightfallinthewatertableincertainpartsofthetracts,buttheareaswherethe
canalirrigationhasbeenintroducedorwherebundsanddamshavebeenconstructedacross
the streams or which are low lying with defective drainage, the watertable has risen in the
past.SeepagefromcanalwatercoursesisplayingagreathavocintheGandakCommandarea
oftheregion.

Thewatertablechangesconsiderablywiththechangeoftheseasonalso.Itrisesintherainy
season coming very near to the surface, rather reaching it and lowers down in the summer
10

season.Thisfluctuationinwatertableiscloselyrelatedwiththerainfallwhichisanimportant
sourceofsubsoilwater.Intheriverinetract,theGandakcommandareaandinthelowlying
areas of the north where watertable is already high, the rise ranges between 0.4 and 2 m.
Although the rise is within 2 m in these areas, it is very significant because watertable here
within4mfromthesurface.Itmaybementionedherethatalongthenorthernborderinthe
GondaandBahraichdistrictsandnorthwesternborderoftheBastidistrictandintheupland
areas,itrangesbetween2and3m.Herethewatertableisalreadyatagreaterdepthandthis
riseinitisnotasharmfulasinthecaseoftheformerareas.

Rainfall

The region enjoys a moderately heavy rainfall because of the proximity to the mountain hills
whichvirtuallyguidethewestwardcourseofthemonsooncurrentsfromtheBayofBengaland
alsoactasprecipitationagent.Thepatchesofforestsjoinhandswiththehillsandaugmenta
furtherincreaseinprecipitation.Assuchtherainfallgenerallydecreasesfromeasttowestand
fromnorthtosouth.TheannualrainfallatPharendais1585.06mm,atNaugarh1458.74mm,
at Balrampur 1301 mm and at Naupara 1185.06 mm. Here it may be noted that although
Padrauna is situated further east, it receives only 1268.31 mm of rainfall which is much less
thanthatofPharendaandNaugarh.Ifweexaminethenorthsouthtrend,weseethatgenerally
the rainfalldecreases from north to south, viz., Maharajganj receives1295.77 mm of rainfall,
while Hata receives only 1166.71 mm of rainfall. Pharenda is the exception, which, tough, is
situatedafewkmtowardssouthwest,receivesmorerainfall.Thisanomalymaybeascribedto
thepatchesofforestsanddensevegetationcoverinthispart(Table12).

Rainfallintheregionisnotonlyunevenlydistributedinspacebutalsointimeandtheselatter
variations have far reaching consequences. The annual variability is sufficiently high. At the
samestation,thetotalincidenceofrainfallinsomeyearsisfarabovethemeanandinsome
years far below. There is great variation in the amount of annual rainfall from place to place
withintheregionwith hardlyayearseeninwhichauniformrainfallhasbeenreceivedatall
stations.

Thecoefficientofvariability,whichisthestandarddeviationexpressedasapercentageofthe
meanrainfall,forsomestationsintheregionisgiveninTable13.Thecoefficientofvariability
ofannualrainfallvariesfrom20.99percent(Maharajganj)to44.18percent(Domariaganj).If
Domariaganjisexcluded,whichisanextremecase,thevariabilityatallthestationsisfoundup
to26.73percent,whichhasfarreachingconsequences.

Ifweanalyzethespatialdistributionpatternofthecoefficientofvariabilityintheregion,we
find that generally there exists an adverse relationship between the total amount of annual
rainfallandtheamountofvariability,i.e.highertheaverageannualrainfall,theloweristheco
efficientofvariabilityviz.atHatawhichreceivesthelowestrainfall,thevariabilityis26.26,at
Nauparawith1185.06mmofrainfall,itis25.19;atPadraunawith1268.31mmofrainfallitis
25.27;whileitis23.72percentatNaugarhwhichreceivesanannualaveragerainfallof1458.77
11

mm; it is 20.99 per cent of Maharajganj which receives 1295.77 mm rainfall. However, some
except to this relationship exists as Domariaganj which receives an average annual rainfall of
1310.10mmhasavariabilityof44.18andPharendawithanannualaveragerainfallof1585.84
mmhasavariabilityof26.23.

Fromthestandpointofagriculturaloperations,theseasonalandmonthlyvariabilityofrainfall,
particularlyinthewetmonsoonmonths,ismoresignificantthantheannualvariability,foreven
a subnormal rainfall, if well distributed produces a good yield. As a matter of fact, timely
distributionismoreimportantthantheannualtotal.Table13showsthecoefficientofmonthly
variabilityofsomestationsintheregionforthemonthsofthemonsoonseason.

ThecoefficientofvariabilityistheleastinthemonthsofJulyandAugustwhicharetherainiest
monthsoftheyear.InJulyitrangesbetween37.02and52.50andinAugustbetween46.72and
62.18 per cent. Next come the months of June and September with almost equal amount of
monthlyrainfalls.Inthesemonths,thefiguresofvariabilityvaryfrom49.77to72.85and52.18
to92.44percent.ItisthemaximuminthemonthofOctober,i.e.between94.27and147.67
percent.Thisisthemonthreceivingthelowestrainfallinthemonsoonseason.

Canals

This region has benefited significantly from canal irrigation since independence although the
qualityofirrigationmaynotbegood.Asaresultofdevelopmentofcanalirrigationandprivate
investmentsinwellsinadditiontostatetubewellssinceindependence,nearly60percentof
theNSAisirrigated.Themaincanalsystemsintheregionare:

i.GandakCanalSystem:TheprojectisajointventureofUttarPradeshandBihar.Itcomprises
abarrage(builtbytheBiharGovernment)acrosstheGandakinNepalnearBhaisalotanabout
17.7kmnorthofUttarPradeshNepalborder.ThestateofUttarPradeshconstructedthemain
westernGandakcanalinUttarPradeshfromM.116toM.815295alongwithitsdistribution
system.TheheaddischargeofthemainWesternGandakcanalis439.6cumecsandtheshare
of Uttar Pradesh is about 20301 cumecs. The canal is lined alone the entire 113 km reach in
Uttar Pradesh to prevent loss by seepage and water logging through a possible rise of the
watertable.

The project irrigates 0.32 million ha annually in the districts of Deoria and Gorakhpur. The
length of the distribution system in Uttar Pradesh is about 3075 km which irrigates 21
developmentblocksofDeoriaand12blocksofGorakhpurdistricts.

ii.SaryuCanal:ThecanalwasbuilttofulfilirrigationneedsofthedistrictsBahraich,Gondaand
Basti.ThecanaldirectsthewatersofriverGhaghara,SaryuandRaptiforirrigationthrougha
numberofchannels,eachbranchbeingabout100kmlong.Thetotaldischargeofthecanalis
estimated at 360 cumecs. The canal was built by constructing a barrage across at Katarnia in
Bahraichandirrigatedabout0.6millionha.
12


iii.BanGangaCanal:LocatedinSidarthnagarandBastidistrictsthecanalisbuiltbymakinga
barrageonBanGangariver.Thetotalcapacityofthecanalis2226.1cumecsbuttheactualflow
throughthemaincanalisonly7.35cumecs.

iv.RohinCanal:Thecanalisbuiltbyconstructingabarrageabout7.2kmbelowtheIndoNepal
borderonriverRohin.Thetotalflowthroughthemaincanalis3.06cumecs.

BesidesthesetherearesomeverysmallcanalslikeKuano,Bakhiraetc.intheregion.

Lack of proper maintenance and lack of cemented lining of the distribution channels have
causedexcessiveseepageofwaterraisingthegroundwatertableandincreasedsalinity.Large
areas adjacent to the canals have become permanently water logged affecting agriculture.
Thesehavebeenworsenedbyuncontrolledandexcessiveinputofwaterinagriculturalfieldfor
irrigation.TheextentoftheproblemcanbegaugedbytheseepagelevelsfromGandakCanal.It
was estimated by the Irrigation Department of Uttar Pradesh that in Gandak Command Area
beforethecommissioningofGandakcanalthewatertablevariedbetween2to5minMayand
between1to3minOctober.However,within4yearsofcommissioningofthecanalin1976,
about7.5percentareaofthecanalcommandarea(0.33millionha)registeredanincreasein
water table by 2m, and the remaining from 0.5 to 1.5m. The seriousness of the problem has
now made the Gandak Control Authority to earmark Rs 160 million for drainage of seepage
water with an ambitious plan to install 2000 pumps to pump the water back into the canal.
However,thatthesemeasureshavenothadmucheffectonthewaterseepagefromthecanal
can be judged from the water table rise in the canal command area between 19721985 as
shownforsomerecordingwellsinTable14.

ProblemofFloodsinSaryuParPlain

Frequent occurrence of floods is one of the major ecological hazards faced by people in this
region.Theseverefloodzoneintheregionhasaspringlevelgradientlessthan0.10m/kmand
themajorriversinthisregionflowintheirmaturestagewithintensivemeandering.Floodsare,
hence, severe as the river valleys are flat and the rivers have moderately high depositional
tendencies.Floodsintheregionarecausedbybothmajorandminorrivers.Theriverswhich
causefloodsandthedistrictswhichareaffectedbythesefloodsareasfollows:
i. RaptiinDeoria,Basti,Gonda,BahraichandGorakhpur.
ii. GhagharainDeoria,Gorakhpur,Basti,GondaandBahraich.
iii. GandakinDeoriaandGorakhpur.

About23percentofthenetcroppedareaintheregionisaffectedbythefloodsannually,while
thetotalaffectedlandisabout5564.23sqkm(Table15)(Map6).

ThecourseofGhagharahasbeenchangingintheuppernorthernpartfromeasttowestandin
middlefromnorthtosouth.In1781,theriverwasflowingnearsouthwestatsomedistance
13

fromBahraj(GorakhpurDeoria)buttheriverchangeditswayin1851and1906towardsthe
southandagainin197172itmovednorthtoflowthroughBahrajagain.Gandakisalsofamous
for changing its course and it moved from its 186465 east course to it present west course.
Raptihasameanderingcourseandhasalargenumberoflakes,pondsandotherwaterbodies
leftbehindtomarkitschangingcourse.Thesetwocharacteristicsoftheriverdepositionaland
changingcoursehaveresultedinhugeinundationsintheregionduringmonsoonwhenheavy
rainfallshaveincreasedtheflowthroughtheseriversovertheirdrainagecapacity.Theextent
of these floods in Gorakhpur and Deoria, for the last decade, is represented in Table 16 and
Table17,respectively.

Alargenumberofdevelopmentalactivitieslikeroads,railwaylines,humansettlements,canals
etc and flood control embankments have caused adverse changes in the natural drainage
situation, which was already insufficient in withdrawing the inundation water quickly, further
compounding the flood condition canals have contributed to water logging which has also
worsened the flood condition. Extensive embankments along the rivers have reduced the
normalfloodplainrestrictingtheflowchanneldrastically.Thishasraisedtheflowlevelswithin
the drainage channel increasing the runoff velocity. Often when the water pressure on the
embankmentsincrease,especiallyduringmonsoons,theembankmentsbreachorevencollapse
causing flash floods of high intensity. This changed nature of floods with the false sense of
securitycreatedbyembankmentsresultingintheincreasedoccupationofthefloodplainshas
worsenedthefloodconditionintheregionwithincreaseddamageandlosses.

Amajorfactorcontributingtowardstheworseningfloodconditionontheregionisthepattern
andsystemoflanduseintheHimalayanregion,especiallyintheuppercatchmentareaofthe
rivers draining the Saryu Par plain. These directly affect the sedimentation and siltation
potential of the rivers, which are influenced by the deforestation and increased soil erosion
occurring in the mountains. However, these processes are not yet very well studied and
understoodandarehencenotconsideredindetailinthepresentstudy.

TheProblemofWaterlogginginSaryuParPlain

Though the topography and geohydrological condition of the regionhave contributed to the
stagnation of water and making of water logging condition, it is generally acknowledged that
the introduction of irrigation canal systems has worsened the water logging problem of the
region.Seepagefromthecanalsystem,includingthewatercoursesandfieldchannels,isnot
theonlyfactorwhichleadstoariseinthewatertablehere.Deeppercolationfromtheirrigated
area, often as a result of overirrigation also contributes to it. Heavy precipitation and flood
resultinginprolongedinundationarealsocausingariseinthewatertablewhichisnotallowed
toflowoutbecauseofdrainagecongestionandlowdraftrates.

Table18showstheextentofwaterloggedareainthedistrictsofGorakhpurandDeoriainthe
years1971and1991(1971isbeforetheGandakcanalwascommissioned).Theincreaseinthe
twodistrictshavebeen205and198percent,respectively,whichconstitutesanincreasefrom
14

2.46percentofthetotalareaofthetwodistrictsbeingwaterloggedin1971to9.03percentin
1991.

Observations made from 1973 to 1985 show that the water table rise in 9.3 per cent of the
observationwellshasbeen3mandabove;in24.6percentofthewellsitis2mandin65per
centofthewellsitis1m.here.

Duringthelastdecade(198191)thewatertableinGorakhpurdistricthasrisenonanaverage
by 0.36 m and in Deoria district by 0.63 m (Government figures) although independent
estimatesputthevaluetoatleast10timesthis(Map7&8).Onthewesternpartoftheregion
also,waterloggingisincreasing,thoughtoalowermagnitude.IntheareaoftheSaryucanal
(GondaandBastidistrict)watertablerisevariesfrom0.70mto4.65m.

Thatthefloodconditionsandincreasedwaterloggingoftheareahaveaconjunctiveimpacton
the ecology and agriculture of the region is quite clear (Table 19). However, the nature and
extent of their interrelationship still needs investigation, especially to plan a developmental
intervention to control the worsening condition and design an effective water use and
managementsystemfortheregion.

AgricultureandIrrigation

Muchofthelandintheregioniscultivated.Only2percentofthelandisclassifiedasgarden
land and less than one per cent of the land is used for pasture. Area under forests is also
minimal except for a few districts. Between 4 and 12 per cent of the land is left fallow and
nearly10percentofthelandisusedfornonagriculturalpurposes.Morethan70percentof
thelandiscultivated.Ofthiscroppedlandmorethan50percentiscroppedmorethanonce.
Cropsarecultivatedinthreeseasons:Kharif,RabiandZaid(thehotseason)(Table20).

Intheregion,intheperiod198586to198788,nearly50.4percentofthenetsownarea(NSA)
issownmorethanonceandcroppingintensityworksouttobeabout150percent.Thecropsin
kharifaccountfor53.2percentofthegrosscroppedarea(GCA)whiletheshareofrabicrops
was45percentofGCA.Thecroppingpatternisdominatedbyfoodgrains(morethan90per
cent of GCA). Less than 5 per cent of the GCA is devoted to sugarcane cultivation and zaid
accountsforlessthan15.6percentoftheGCA.

Paddyissowninmorethan72.8percentofthelandsowninkharifintheregion.Jowar,bajra
andmaize,whicharethemainrainfedcerealsinkharifaccountforlessthan10.8percentof
thekharifareaintheregion.Wheatandbarleyarethedominantrabicrops65.6percentofthe
rabi area. Considerable area is under both, simultaneously, wheat and mustard. Pulses are
growninkharifandrabiwhileoilseedsaccountforasmallportionoftheGCA(Table21).

15

Nearly49percentofthenetsownareaintheregionisirrigated.Thoughthismayseemhigh
comparedtotherestofthecountry,itislowerthanthatinwesternUttarPradesh.Irrigationis
generallyrestrictedtoonlyoneseason(rabi).Irrigationintensityis109.4percent(Table22).

ItshouldbenotedthatforirrigationinGorakhpurandDeoria(mostcanalirrigateddistrictsin
the region) canals account for only 25.35 and 44.48 per cent, respectively while the
groundwateraccountforabout64and52percent,respectively.Knowingthehighwatertable
problemoftheregion,thequestionthatarisesiswhatwasthenecessityofcanalirrigationin
theregionconsideringthelowfractionofthegroundwaterrechargeutilized,whichstandsat
27percentfortheentireregion(Table23).

EasternUttarPradeshischaracterizedbyhighpopulationdensity,lowpercapitaincome,low
agricultural productivity and sluggish adoption of technology. The region has conditions to
sustain longterm agricultural growth soils are rich, manpower abundant, average rainfall is
fairlyhighandgroundwaterisabundant.

Nearly50percentofthenetcroppedareahasirrigationfacilities.Asignificantportionofthe
area planted in kharif is not irrigated. Irrigation is restricted to only the rabi season. Canal
irrigationsystemsbuiltsinceindependencehasfailedtobecomereliableirrigationsources.The
introductionofcanalirrigation,creditedwithinducingdynamisminthemorearidwest,hashad
lessdesirableeffectsonthisregion.Apartfromnotdevelopingintoassuredirrigationsources,
canals have exacerbated ecological problems in an area with little slope, traditionally high
groundwatertableandproblemofsoilsalinity.Canal,roadandrailwayconstructionhavealso
contributedtopoordrainage.Inaddition,manyriverswhichprovideabundantsurfacewater
alsodamagecropsasmuchas15%ofthenetcroppedareaisravagedbyfloodseveryyear.
Thereistoomuchmoistureinthegroundandcropsareoftensubjectedtoinundation.Thelow
productivityofcropinspiteofthefertilityofthesoilmaybelinkedtothisissue.Ontheother
hand,groundwatercanprovidereliableirrigationandimproveddrainage.Thereispotentialto
extract abundant groundwater flow at low costs for increasing agricultural productivity and
drainage in the region. However, the creation of drainage requires collective efforts. The
benefit of conjunctive use in the form of vertical drainage cannot be realized by individuals.
Individuals decision on the use of ground water will not therefore, bebased on returns from
irrigation alone. Where drainage is poor and it is desirable to increase groundwater use,
individualsmaynotbemotivatedtodosobecauseofcostfactor.Inpoordrainageacrosssuch
as Saryu Par Plain, excess use of surface irrigation imposes external costs while groundwater
hasexternaldrainagebenefits.Butfarmers'choiceofwhichsourcetouseisdrivenbyprivate
costsandbenefits.Surfaceirrigationisprovidedintheregionatarelativelylowcostcompared
togroundwater.Hencefarmersprefertouseitwhenavailable.Oneoftheeffectivewaysof
creating incentive for conjunctive use is to limit canal water supplies. These decisions should
emergefromlocalisedplanswhichincludeamixof:
i. controlledsupplyofcanalwater,
ii. investmentinsurfacedrainage,and
16

iii.

enhancement of capacity to exploit groundwater to meet irrigation and drainage

requirements.

Suchplanningisnotfeasiblewiththeexistingadministrativestructureswherenumerousbodies
are independently engaged in implementing the related irrigation sources. Localized planning
canbebestdonethroughorganizationsofbeneficiaries.HowtheStatecanreorganizeitselfto
workcollaborativelywiththebeneficiariesisachallenge.

Thoughinrecentyearstherehasbeensizableprivateinvestmentintubewells,lessthan27per
cent of the area irrigated receives water from groundwater sources. New investments being
madetoextractgroundwaterareprimarilyintubewells;oldwellsfittedwithtraditionallifts
are being discarded. Groundwater, though more expensive than canal, is used extensively to
irrigate rabi or perennial crops. Private wells account for the bulk of the groundwater use
thoughthestatehasbeenapioneerinestablishingpublictubewells.However,inabilityofthe
state to effectively manage public tube wells has dampened further investment in them. The
development and utilization of ground water, therefore, is driven by private returns to
groundwater investments assuming reasonable access to credit for potential investors is
available.Atypicalfarmerinthisregionhaslessthan1haofland,75percentofthemhave
holdingsmallerthan0.5ha.Theestimatedinternalrateofreturnfromwellinvestmentona1
hafarminGorakhpurisaslowas18percent.

Theselowreturnsprimarilyarisefromexistingecologicalconditions.Thedemandforirrigation,
whichisdeterminedbycropwaterrequirements,islowintheregionleadingtolowcapacity
utilization.Landholdingisamajordeterminantofwhetherafarmerownsawell.Theminimum
landholdingatwhichtheownershipiseffectiveisabout0.7hainGorakhpur.Investmentsare
morefeasibleforlargerfarmersfortheirabilitytomusterresources.

Atthesametime,waterlogging,poordrainageconditionsandexposuretofloodsdiscourage
irrigationinvestmentandadoptionofimprovedcroppingpractices.Farmer'sperceptionoflow
waterrequirementsofcropsisalsoanotherfactor.Thisisevidentfromthefactthatthosewho
irrigate provide less than the recommended number of irrigation, though they over irrigate
whentheydo.Themajorityofthefarmersgiveonly1or2irrigationforbothpaddyandwheat
in Gorakhpur. Low cropping intensity, reluctant irrigation of kharif crops and application of
smallnumbersofirrigationsresultinlowutilisationofwellcapacity.Dieselpoweredwellsand
tubewells,whichaccountforbulkofthegroundwaterirrigationintheregionwereusedforless
than 200 hours in a year. In Gorakhpur wells are used for less than 100 hours in a year.
Croppingintensityintheregionisonlyaround150percentandevenamongthewellownersis
lessthan200percent.Thereispracticallynocultivationduringthehotseason(Table24).

Asaconsequence,onlyabout32000wellsareinusealthoughthetotalwellsintheregionare
morethanalakh.80percentofthesewellsarenotfittedwithelectricordieselmotors.Water
isextractedbythetraditionalliftsusinghumanandanimallabour.Asthelabourrequirement
17

and the time required for irrigating a unit area are higher in the case of traditional lifts, the
grossareairrigatedperwellisonlyabout1hacomparedto5.17hafortubewellsintheregion.

Theextentofuseofwellshasalsodeclinedintheregion.Areairrigatedbywellsdeclinedto6
percent by1990 from 100 percent in 1950. The loss in area irrigatedby open well and other
sourcesintheregionwasmorethan50percentofthegainintheareairrigatedbycanalsand
tubewells.Asaresulttherehasbeenaqualitativechangeinirrigationsourcesintheregion.
Changesinaquiferconditionsasaresultofintroductionofcanalirrigation,greateravailability
of alternative sources of irrigation, and changes in opportunity costs of labour used in water
extractionaresomeofthereasonforthedeclineinwelluse.

Thecombinedimpactofthechangeinirrigationpatternintheregionfromwelltocanaland
the conditions of flood and waterlogging has been highly hazardous to the ecology and
agricultureoftheregionsubjectingthepeoplelivingheretohighlevelsofecostressadversely
affectingtheirproductivityandwellbeingi.e.,theirecosystemhealth.

EcoStressinFloodProneandWaterLoggedArea

Hence,inthisregionfloodingandwaterloggingarethetwomajorecologicalstressespeople
are subject to while they directly affect the agricultural productivity in an adverse manner,
relatedfalloutsareexperiencedinothersocioeconomicandhealthaspectscompromisingthe
productivityandwellbeingofthepeoplelivinghere.

i. Land utilization: Risk of flooding and water logging caused damages have brought about
declining kharif land utilization, thereby reducing kharif production. The steady decline is
evidentfromthetrendoflandutilisation,underGandakriverprojectarea(Table25).

Table25:LandutilizationforkharifcropbydecadesinGandakriverprojectarea

Landcultivated(ha)
Year
1951
214585
1961
168474
1971
100721
1981
68419

ThepictureissimilarinthetwoblocksofRudrapurandSukrauli,notedforbeingfloodprone
andwaterlogged.ThelandunderkharifcultivationinRudrapurblockhasreducedfrom11,500
ha in 1983 to 10,800 ha in 1987 while the figures for Sukrauli are 12,300 and 11,400
respectively for the same time period. Barhalganj, another chronically floodprone block, is
experiencingstagnationwithrespecttolandunderkharifcropwithadeclineingrosscropped
areafrom20,300hain1981to19,400hain1990.

18

ii.ReducedProduction:Reducedproductionoffoodcropswhichcomprisesofover90%ofthe
kharifcrop,hasposedoneminentthreattofoodsecurityintheregion.Thedecliningcropped
area and the falling crop productivity in the region is the main cause for this. Flooding and
waterlogginghasresultedinlowerlevelsofyieldperhainthisregionincomparisontowhole
ofUttarPradeshandmuchlowerthanPunjab(Table26).

Table26:Comparisonofyields(19851988)(Tonnes/ha)

Crops
EastU.P.(SaryuParPlain)
U.P.
Punjab
Rice
1.28
1.39
3.22
Wheat
1.74
1.96
3.34
Barley
1.10
1.45
2.17
Jowar
0.96
1.0
Bajra
1.03
0.80
1.01
Maize
0.95
1.10
1.72
Cereals
1.44
3.3
Pulses
0.91
0.77
Foodgrains
1.37
1.48
3.11
Oilseeds
0.44
0.93

This falling productivity is best reflected in the declining ability of the cultivators to sustain
themselvesthroughselfgrowncrops.Inastudyoffloodandwaterloggedvillagesitwasfound
thatwhileonly16.6percentofthefarmers,mostlybigfarmers,couldsustainthemselvesfrom
theircropsforthewholeyear,morethan68.8percentofthecultivatorshadfoodforlessthan
6 months. These entire household constituted of land less labourers and small/marginal
farmers(Table27).

iii. Income and Wealth: Concentration of wealth in a few hands and wide disparity is a
characteristicoftheregion.Duetotheexploitativemoneylendingpracticesandresultingland
leasingandalienationpovertyisbecominggraverintheregion,furtherimpoverishingthepoor.
Thisisevidentfromthepreponderanceofsmall/marginalfarmersandlandlesslabourerswho
comprisemorethanfourfifthoftheagriculturaloccupationalcategoryintheregion.

Thelevelofincomeandwealth(agriculturalassets)inthestudyvillageclearlydemonstratethis
dismalsituationofpoverty.Inthewaterloggingandfloodeffectedvillageswhilehouseholds
withassetsmorethanRs.100,000/isonly5.5percentwhilethosebelowRs.25,000/isover
48percent(Table28).Similarlyforincomeonly3percentofthehouseholdshaveanannual
incomeexceedingRs15,000/whilethoselessthanRs10,000/are82percent(Table29).

iv. Food Consumption Pattern: A direct consequence of the declining agricultural productivity
and associated enhanced poverty has been a change in the food consumption pattern. The
staple grain in this region is wheat followed by rice which is consumed at levels higher than
recommended. However, pulses, milk and milk products, flesh foods, vegetables and oil and
19

fats are all consumed at levels much lower than recommended (Table 30). From this it is
evident that while the carbohydrate consumption is normal among the people the intake of
protein, fat and vitamins is deficient leading to both malnutrition and nutritional deficiency
diseases.

The nutritional status of children below the age of 5 reflects this condition of malnutrition
prevalentintheregionverywell.Thestudyshowsthattheextentanddegreeofmalnutritionin
the flood/waterlogged village are greater than those in the nonflooded/nonwaterlogged
villages.Malnutritionofmoderateandseveretypestakentogetherconstitutes30percentin
theformerwhileonly17percentinthelatter(Table31).

Agewise severe malnutrition is observed most in the age group 12 years and moderate
malnutritionintheagegroupof24years(Table31).Sexwisefemalesexhibithigherlevelsof
moderate and severe malnutrition in comparison to males indicating the neglect of girl child
(Table 32). Occupational categorywise, the children of marginal farmers have highest
magnitudeofmalnutritionfollowedbylandlesslabourers(Table33).

v.MorbidityPattern:ThemorbiditypatterninthefloodaffectedblockofBarhalganj(Table34)
and waterlogged block of Sukrauli (Table 35) indicate the preponderance of vector borne
diseases and nutritional deficiency diseases. An agewise division of the morbidity pattern
showsveryhighratesamongchildrenbelowtheage6years(38.33percent)andoldpeople(18
percent)(Table36).

vi.EnvironmentalSanitation:Unsafedrinkingwatercausedbycontaminationofdrinkingwater
sourcesisamajorproblemtosanitationandhygienehere.Foodandwaterbornediseasesis
centraltothehealthproblemintheregioncoupledwithnutritionaldeficiencies.Handpumps
andtubewellsarethepredominantsourceofdrinkingwaterintheregion.However,theriseof
watertableandassociatedlossofnaturalfiltrationofthegroundwaterbythesoilhasrendered
much of it unsafe. The shallow levels subject it to surface contamination also, especially in
sugarmillareas.

On the other hand, accumulated water stagnating over 5 to 6 months provides a fertile
breeding ground for mosquitoes and other disease vectors. Diseases like malaria, Japanese
Encephalitis, Falaria, Gastrointestinal disorders proliferate. Freefloating wastes in the flood
waterandtheirsubsequentdepositioninstagnatingwatersdeterioratethemicroenvironment
oftheregionpromotingdiseaseincidence.

Indiscreteexcreta disposal in the absence of proper sewerage systemcontaminate the water

sources through seepage promoting diseases like jaundice, typhoid, cholera, dysentery,
diarrhoea,etc.Unhealthyhousingstructureswithpoorventilationandlightingonlycompound
the situation. The habit of keeping domestic animals, especially cattle and pigs, within the
residential area is a major contribute of diseases, especially Japanese encephalitis. Many
20

unhygienicfeeding,cleaningandlivingwaysareultimatelysignificantcontributorstothehigh
ratesofdiseasesintheregionwhichheavilycompromisethehealthofpeoplehere.

EcosystemHealthinFloodProneandWaterLoggedAreas

Lossofproductivityandincreasingweakeningprocessesarethemajorindicatorsofdecreasing
ecosystem health of a community. Weakening processes are caused by insecure livelihood,
poor living conditions and the general increase in poverty represented by lowering levels of
foodintakeandfallingincomeandwealthamongpeople.Highlevelsofanaemia,malnutrition
and frequent occurrence of malaria and other vectorborne diseases also represent this
process.Alltheseprocesseshavebeenoccurringintheregionwithincreasingrateshowinga
progressivedeclineoftheproductivityandwellbeingofthepeoplelivingintheregion.

Themostvulnerablesectionsofthesocietyherearethefollowing:
i.
The marginal farmers along with the landless labourers who have the lowest food
intakerates,lowincomeandhighlevelsofmalnutritionamongtheirchildren.
ii.
Infants and children below the age group of 6 years as shown by nutritional and
morbiditylevels.

iii.
Sexwise,itisthewomenwhoaretheworsevictims,especiallythegirlchild(ageless
than6years)andpregnantandlactatingmothers.

CopingMechanismandSurvivalStrategy

Tomigratetheirhardshippeopleofthisregionhaveadoptedsomesurvivalstrategies,although
theydonotreallysolvetheecostressesfaced.Theseare:

i.Indebtedness:Tosurviveunderlowincomeandfoodinsecuritymanypeoplehavetakenloans
from both institutional and noninstitutional sources. While the big farmers have taken loans
chieflyfrominstitutionalsourceslikecommercialorcooperativebanks,marginalfarmersand
landlesslabourersborrowmostlyfromprivatemoneylenders.Nearlyhalfthemarginal/small
farmershaveoutstandingloans.

ii. Migration: Reduced opportunity for employment, especially for landless labourers and
unfavourable wage structure have caused increasing migration of people from here to
Gorakhpur and Deoria city, and even distant places like Bombay, Ludhiana, Calcutta, etc. in
searchofwork(Table37).

21

Table1:FlooddamagesinIndiaduring1953to1987

Year

Area
affected

Popu
lation
affected

Damagetocrops

Area

Value

Nos.

(mha)

(Rs
crore)

(m)

(mha)

(m)

Damagetohouses

Cattle
lost

Human
lives
lost

Value

Nos.

Nos.

(Rs
crore)

(m)

Damage
to
public
utilities

Total
damage
to
crops,
houses
&
public
utilities

(Rs
crore)

(Rs
crore)

1953

2.29

24.28

0.93

42.08

0.27

7.42

0.05

37

2.90

52.40

1954

76.49

12.92

2.61

40.52

0.20

6.56

0.02

279

10.16

57.24

1955

9.44

25.27

5.31

77.80

1.70

20.95

0.07

865

3.98

102.73

1956

9.24

14.57

1.11

44.44

0.73

8.05

0.02

462

1.15

53.64

1957

4.86

6.76

0.45

14.12

0.32

4.98

0.01

352

4.28

23.38

1958

6.26

10.98

1.40

38.28

0.38

3.90

0.02

389

1.80

43.97

1959

5.77

14.52

1.54

56.76

0.65

9.42

0.07

619

20.02

86.20

1960

7.53

8.35

2.27

42.55

0.61

14.31

0.01

510

6.32

63.17

1961

6.56

9.26

1.97

24.04

0.53

0.89

0.02

1374

6.44

31.37

1962

6.12

15.46

3.39

83.18

0.51

10.66

0.04

348

1.06

94.89

1963

3.49

10.93

2.05

30.17

0.42

3.70

0.00

432

2.75

34.62

1964

4.90

13.78

2.49

56.87

0.26

4.59

0.00

690

5.15

66.61

1965

1.46

3.61

0.27

5.87

0.11

0.20

0.01

79

1.07

7.13

1966

4.74

14.40

2.16

80.15

0.22

2.54

0.01

180

5.74

88.43

1967

7.12

20.46

3.27

133.31

0.57

14.26

0.01

355

7.86

155.43

1968

7.15

21.17

2.62

144.61

0.68

41.11

0.13

3497

25.37

211.09

1969

6.20

33.22

2.91

281.89

1.27

54.42

0.27

1408

68.11

404.43

1970

8.46

31.83

4.91

162.78

1.43

48.61

0.02

1076

76.44

287.83

1971

13.25

59.74

6.24

423.13

2.43

80.24

0.01

994

129.11

632.48

1972

4.10

26.69

2.45

98.56

0.90

12.46

0.06

544

47.17

158.19

1973

11.79

64.08

3.73

428.03

0.87

52.48

0.26

1349

88.49

569.00

1974

6.70

29.45

3.33

411.64

0.75

72.43

0.02

387

84.94

569.01

1975

6.17

31.36

3.85

271.49

0.80

34.09

0.02

686

166.05

471.63

1976

11.91

50.46

6.04

595.03

1.75

92.16

0.08

1373

201.50

888.68

1977

11.46

49.43

6.84

720.61

1.66

152.29

0.56

11316

328.95

1201.84

1978

17.53

70.45

9.96

911.08

3.51

167.57

0.24

3396

376.10

1454.76

1979

3.99

19.52

2.17

169.97

1.33

210.61

0.62

3637

233.63

614.21

22

Year

Area
affected

Popu
lation
affected

Damagetocrops

Area

Value

Nos.

(mha)

(Rs
crore)

(m)

(mha)

(m)

Damagetohouses

Cattle
lost

Human
lives
lost

Value

Nos.

Nos.

(Rs
crore)

(m)

Damage
to
public
utilities

Total
damage
to
crops,
houses
&
public
utilities

(Rs
crore)

(Rs
crore)

1980

11.46

54.12

5.55

366.37

2.53

170.85

0.06

1913

303.28

840.50

1981

6.02

32.49

3.27

524.56

0.91

159.63

0.09

1376

512.31

1196.51

1982

8.87

56.01

5.00

589.40

2.40

383.87

0.25

1573

671.61

1644.87

1983

9.02

61.03

3.29

1285.85

2.39

332.33

0.15

2378

873.43

2491.60

1984

10.71

54.55

5.19

906.09

1.76

181.31

0.14

1661

818.16

1905.56

1985

8.38

59.59

4.65

1425.37

2.45

583.86

0.04

1804

2050.03

4059.25

1986

8.81

55.52

4.58

1231.58

2.05

534.41

0.06

1200

1982.54

3748.52

1987

8.88

48.34

4.94

1154.64

2.92

464.49

0.13

1835

950.59

2569.72

Worst

17.53

70.45

9.96

1425.37

3.51

583.86

0.62

11316

2050.03

4059.25

(1978)

(1978)

(1978)

(1985)

(1978)

(1985)

(1979)

(1977)

(1985)

(1985)

7.66

31.84

3.51

367.79

1.21

112.62

0.10

1439

287.67

768.08

Year
Annual
Average

Table2:Decadaltrendsinfloodaffectedpopulation,areaanddamages

Decade

Average
annual
area
affected
by
floods
(mha)

Averageannualcropareaaffected

Actual
(mha)

%of
total
area
affected
by
floods
(%)

%of
country's
netsown
area
(%)

Averageannual
floodaffected
population
Actual
(m)

%of
total
populat
ion
(%)

Averageannualcropdamages

Average
annual
totalflood
damages
(Rscrore)

Actual
(Rs
crore)

%oftotal
flood
damages
(%)

1950s(195359)

6.86

2.08

30.32

1.60

17.50

4.41

62.33

45.48

73

1960s(196069)

5.86

2.47

42.15

1.80

15.45

3.25

104.14

77.68

75

1970s(197079)

11.19

5.55

49.60

3.99

43.35

7.18

674.09

419.06

62

1980s(198084)

16.57

6.91

41.70

4.90

53.01

7.26

1590.43

713.95

45

23

Table3:FloodProneAreaofIndia

Maximumfloodareaaffected

States
195359
(mha)
AndhraPradesh

195369
(mha)

195379
(mha)

195384
(mha)

1.39

1.45

5.98

5.98

Neg

Neg

Assam

3.15

3.15

3.15

3.15

Bihar

2.50

2.50

4.26

4.26

Gujarat

1.39

1.39

1.39

3.04

Haryana

0.34

0.36

1.00

1.00

HimachalPradesh

0.23

0.23

0.23

0.23

JammuandKashmir

0.08

0.08

0.08

0.08

0.01

0.20

0.26

Kerala

0.29

2.00

2.00

2.00

MadhyaPradesh

0.26

0.26

5.17

5.17

Maharastra

0.23

0.23

0.74

1.13

Manipur

0.01

0.08

0.08

0.08

Meghalaya

0.02

0.54

Mizoram

Neg

Neg

Nagaland

Neg

Orissa

1.20

1.40

2.97

9.00

Punjab

0.99

1.73

1.73

1.73

Rajasthan

0.03

0.53

3.26

3.26

Neg

0.02

TamilNadu

0.03

0.45

0.45

5.66

Tripura

0.04

0.33

0.33

1.50

UttarPradesh

4.13

4.13

7.34

7.34

WestBengal

2.65

2.65

3.08

3.08

18.94

22.96

43.96

58.51

ArunachalPradesh

Goa

Karnataka

Sikkim

FloodProneArea

24

Table4:LengthofEmbankments

States

Lengthofembankments
From1954to1984(km)

AndhraPradesh

UptoMarch1987(km)

AreaprotecteduptoMarch
19871(mha)

405

507

1.00

Assam

4145

4448

1.56

Bihar

2355

2756

1.87

Gujarat

208

408

0.43

Haryana

396

578

1.70

HimachalPradesh

58

0.01

JammuandKashmir

56

0.06

Karnataka

Neg

44

92

0.03

15

Neg

26

26

Neg

127

279

0.08

45

106

0.09

Orissa

370

1007

0.46

Punjab

821

1047

2.66

82

141

0.04

Sikkim

TamilNadu

35

0.08

39

114

0.03

UttarPradesh

1174

1711

1.42

WestBengal

515

974

1.75

60

83

0.08

61

0.01

108212

14511

13.36

Goa,DamanandDiu

Kerala
MadhyaPradesh
Maharastra
Manipur
Meghalaya

Rajasthan

Tripura

Delhi
Pondicherry
AllIndia

Area protected by all measures, including drainage channels and protection of towns and villages.

25

Table5:FloodControlExpenditure

Planperiod

Expenditure(Rscrore)

Cumulativeareaprotected
(mha)

Firstplan

(195456)

13.21

1.00

Secondplan

(195661)

48.06

3.24

Thirdplan

(196166)

82.09

5.43

Annualplan

(196669)

41.96

5.83

Fourthplan

(196974)

162.04

8.04

Fifthplan

(197478)

298.60

9.98

Annualplan

(197880)

329.96

11.21

Sixthplan

(198085)

786.85

13.01

Seventhplan(outlay)

(198590)

947.39

14.10

2 An additional 6000 km of embankments had been built before 1954 (RBA).

26

Table6:Statewisedistributionoflargedamson31.12.1986

States

Numberofdams
Completed

AndhraPradesh

Underconstruction
24

18

ArunachalPradesh

Assam

Bihar

Goa

51

35

Haryana

HimachalPradesh

JammuandKashmir

Karnataka

13

14

Kerala

23

13

10

50

33

Manipur

Meghalaya

Mizoram

Nagaland

Orissa

Punjab

Rajasthan

Sikkim

51

Tripura

UttarPradesh

WestBengal

Gujarat

MadhyaPradesh
Maharastra

TamilNadu

27

TABLE".I
Magnitude of Flood and Waterlogging in U.P.
------------.
District

Land

Total No.

Number aHected

Total land

63

46

294.41

(100%)

(73.01%)

63

33

(100%)

(52.38%)

63

44

(100%)

(69.84%)

63

56

(100%)

(88.88%)

63

39

(100%)

(61.90%)

63

55

(100%)

(97.30%)

63

45

(100%)

(71.43%)

63

09

(100%)

(14.28%)

63

46

(100%)

(73.01%)

63

25 '

(100%)
(39.68%)
---- --- -_._-----.--------_ ... _--_.-.-_._--

Population

Loss of properties
(Value in Crore Rs.)

Total

Affected

11.09

NA

790.67

11.09

NA

286.38

11.47

NA

585.65

38.60

11.71

1.55

754.00

(13.11%)

(100%)

(13.24%)

16.68

11.95

0.67

(5.66%)

(100%)

(5.61%)

AreaaHected
58.57
(19.89%)

294.41

29.91
(10.16%)

294.41

55.38
(18.81%)

294.41

294.41
294.41

294.41

40.28

12.19

1.96

(13.68%)

(100%)

(16.08%)

10.34

12.45

0.59

(3.51%)

(100%)

(4.74%)

5.81

12.71

0.38

(1.97%)

(100%)

(2.99%)

294.41
294.41
294.41

31.76

12.98

1.82

(10.79%)

(100%)

(14.02%)

10.03

13.25

0.48

(3.41%)

(100%)

(3.62%)

28

262.15

1216.26

NA
NA
NA
NA

Table9:RiversinSaryuParPlain

River

Length(km)

Ghaghara

DrainageinIndia(sqkm)

AverageAnnualFlow
(millioncum)

1080

57,647

94,400

Gandak

630

7,620

52,200

BurhiGandak

Table10:SiltationValueofRiversinSaryuParPlain

320

10,150

7,100

Rapti

Month

Siltvaluesinppm(meanofdailyrecord)

Saryuriver

Raptiriver

Ghagharariver

Gandakriver

July

2160

1568

1560

August

2328

2620

2638

September

2723

4656

3809

October
3011
3265
3259

Table11:Percentofareawithdifferentdepthsofwatertask(premonsoon)inSaryuParPlain

Districts

Percentofareawithdepthtowatertable(premonsoon)inmetres
01

12

25

510

1015

>15

Bahraich

0.97

1.94

75.73

19.42

1.94

Basti

82.93

17.07

Deoria

6.06

81.82

12.12

Gonda

1.02

90.52

8.16

Gorakhpur

1.98

1.0

82.17

14.85

29

Table12:AverageAnnualRainfallinSaryuParPlain

Districts

Rainfallinmms

Bahraich

1148

Basti

1267

Deoria

1143

Gonda

1138

Gorakhpur

Table13:Coefficientofmonthlyandannualvariability

1352

Stations

Months
June
%
underline+

July
%
underline+

August
%
underline+

Sept.
%
underline+

Oct.
%
underline+

Annual

underline+

Nanpara(81years)

65.30

41.89

50.24

63.99

126.32

25

Baltampur(25years)

56.16

52.50

50.81

52.18

94.27

21

Domariaganj(81years)

68.02

52.45

62.18

92.44

147.67

44

Bansi(81years)

72.85

49.47

46.12

61.62

134.19

26

Naugath(33years)

53.12

47.45

46.94

57.13

100.90

23

Pharenda(47years)

59.90

31.02

48.00

58.04

107.63

26.

Maharajganj(87years)

49.77

46.38

49.33

54.44

115.93

20.

Padrauna(81years)

65.75

46.45

51.99

57.33

113.26

25.

Hata(87years)

55.63

45.81

46.93

64.25

113.81

26.2

30

Table14:PremonsoonandpostmonsoondepthofgroundwatertaskintheGandakcommandarea

Magnitudeofgroundwaterlevelriseinmeterduring14years(197285)

NameofRecording
Station

1972
Premonsoon

1985
Postmonsoon

Premonsoon

Postmonsoon

DistrictGorakhpur
Chargawan

3.48

2.70

3.38

1.18

Nichlaul

2.51

0.84

2.11

0.21

Paniyara

3.52

2.65

3.42

1.27

Siswa

3.46

1.28

2.78

0.88

Bishunpura

3.63

2.52

3.88

1.86

RampurKasahna

3.30

1.79

3.00

1.05

Tamkuli

3.73

1.71

2.85

1.81

Deoria

3.93

2.97

2.84

1.14

Patheredewa

5.32

4.31

2.57

0.10

GauriBazar

3.27

2.17

2.46

0.27

Hata

2.79

1.00

1.14

0.65

Kasia

3.84

2.91

3.66

0.23

1.64

2.81

0.56

DistrictDeoria

Padrauna
3.01

Table15:AveragefloodaffectedareainSaryuParPlain(198190)

Districts
Bahraich

No.ofyrsaffected198190

Averageareaaffected

PercentofNSAaffected

168.609

37.58

Basti

10

113.236

19.98

Deoria

10

48.742

11.43

Gonda

151.307

30.94

Gorakhpur

74.529

15.19

31

TABLE
Table
Particulars of Damage

19130

Number of village affected

1,210 .

showing

magnitude
1981

of flood

\~

damage

in the study

1984

1985

District
1986

Gorakhpur
1988

1989

1,825

1,154

374

852

852

1,098

6,67,001

9,37,670

7,98,467

96,799

7,84,165

5,10,465

9,91,436

NA

3,07,231

1,36,828

22,504

90,434

92,832

2,38,034

Cropped area affected (Hect.)

75,182

1,22,892

78,170

13,048

73,706

54,162

1,65,575

Damageto house

57,292

32,740

1,840

21,074

18,251

37,498

5.82

8.76

3.66

NA

NA

3.29

10.60

NA

NA

22

11

05

24

12

NA

04

01

41

20

12

Population affected
Area affected (Hect.)

Value in damage (in Rs Crare)

Loss of lives (Human)
Loss of lives (Cattle)

NA
-"-----._--------

32

I
:~~1
-.~

:~~~.,f~~I'~~ ~~~\-..:I~~'.t;

~
',"

-i:

.~;.!

i; ,",..~ ':1.:.:\!: -.!.li<,L~ ;,'

."',

:<~.~
..:: -:

":.;..,: " ',:. </!'

. , ;~
.' : :;'.f'r. ',;~

'( ::."

r "'. I'j;;~'il
i." jJt:,V~~:n):t::;-~. :"J't:~~~~~}$.'/1.~

TABL~,'7
Table

showing

magnitude

of flood

damage

in the study

District

Deoria

Particulars of Damage

1980

Number of villages affected

1,818

673

833

237

1,113

576

847

10,00,414

1,70,505

4,36,451

2,14,019

7,26,890

3,02,455

4,76,975

NA

NA

1,23,807

39,447

1,10,579

53,428

58,717

1,06,870

48,781

78,059

NA

96,556

44,313

NA

16,204

1,170

1,250

NA

8,528

955

NA

12.50

1.43

NA

NA

18.93

11,12

NA

NA

NA

08

NA

75

18

NA

NA

NA

06

NA

59

02

NA

Population affected
Area affected (Hect.)
Cropped area affected (Hect.)
Damage of Houses
Value of damage (in Rs. Cram)
Loss of lives (Human)
Loss of lives (Cattle

1981

1986

1987

33

1988

1989

1990

4,76,975

Table18:WaterlogginginGorakhpurandDeoriadistrict

District

Totalarea
(ha)

Waterloggedarea
1971
Area(ha)

1991
%oftotal
area

Area(ha)

%increase
%oftotal
area

Gorakhpur

633560

16836

2.66

68266

10.77

30.5

Deoria

443539

9745

2.2

29058

6.55

2.18

Total
1077099
26581 2.46
97324 9.03

Table19:AreaestimatesoffloodinundationandsurfacewaterlogginginSaryuParPlainbasedonIndianRemoteSensing
SatelliteImages(September,1988)

NameofRiverBasin

Completely/PartiallyInundatedArea
(ha)

SurfaceWaterloggedincludinghigh
soilmoistureare(ha)

Rapti

87,746.21

30,056.09

Rohin

5,519.98

Ami

21,597.83

ChotiGandak

16,756.86

8,088.26

GreatGandak

60,602.09

7,417.78

341,113.29

151,540.54

Ghaghara

Total
533,336.26
197,102.67

Table20:CroppingintensityandseasonaldistributionofgrosscroppedareainSaryuParPlain(198586to198788)

District

Net
sown
area(ha)

%NSA
sown
more
than
once

Gross
cropped
area

%GCAin
Rabi

%GCAin
kharif

%GCAin
summer

%GCAin
sugarcane

Cropping
intensity
(%)

Bahraich

448694

57

677224

43

56

1.13

0.01

151

Basti

566865

47

835290

45

53

1.24

0.06

147

Deoria

426603

48

625966

43

54

2.74

0.73

147

Gonda

489044

58

768239

47

52

0.76

0.41

157

Gorakhpur

490696

48

719630

47

51

1.92

0.07

147

34


Table21:AverageofcropsasfractionofaggregatecroppedareainSaryuParPlain(198586to198788)

District

Paddyin
kharif

Milletin
kharif

Wheatin
Rabi

Pulsein
GCA

F.grainsin
GCA

Oilseedsin
GCA

Cashcrops
inGCA

Bahraich

0.59

0.29

0.50

0.14

0.92

0.03

0.02

Basti

0.81

0.08

0.67

0.08

0.91

0.01

0.04

Deoria

0.69

0.04

0.70

0.04

0.84

0.01

0.12

Gonda

0.74

0.16

0.61

0.12

0.92

0.03

0.04

Gorakhpur
0.81
0.02
0.80
0.07
0.92

Table22:IrrigationintensityandsourcesofirrigationinSaryuParPlain(198586to198788)

0.03

0.03

District

Net
irrigated
are(ha)

%NSA
irrigated
%

Gross
irrigated
area(ha)

Irrigation
intensity
%

Percentgrossirrigatedareairrigatedfromdifferent
sources
Canals

Bahraich

Tube
wells

Wells

Ponds&
others

99617

0.22

703136

103.53

17.31

73.46

1.64

7.59

Basti

356851

0.63

357848

100.28

4.86

72.50

9.36

13.28

Deoria

252372

0.59

317912

125.97

44.48

44.05

7.62

3.86

Gonda

201610

0.41

217388

107.83

0.62

90.86

3.65

4.87

25.35

54.32

9.44

10.89

Gorakhpur
304610
0.62

Table23:GroundwaterutilisationinSaryuParPlain(198586to198788)

District

Netrecharge(H.M.)

Netdraft(H.M.)

Fractionofrechargeutilised

Bahraich

155332

34446

0.22

Basti

276760

77202

0.28

Deoria

197934

57395

0.29

Gonda

200752

65577

0.33

Gorakhpur

310346

72450

0.23

35

Table24:TubewellsandwellsinSaryuParPlain

Districts

ShallowTubewells
STWin
use

Wells

Fraction
recharged

Fractionin
rabi

GIA/STW
ha

Wellsin
use

Fraction
recharged

Fractionin
rabi

GIA/well
HA

Bahraich

25844

0.04

0.61

3.17

2818

0.19

0.70

1.06

Basti

63099

0.06

0.58

4.26

12216

0.10

0.54

1.02

Deoria

21836

0.05

0.52

9.96

7560

0.28

0.55

1.12

Gonda

56548

0.03

0.73

4.21

3815

0.37

0.67

0.84

Gorakhpur

58527

0.05

0.65

4.24

5628

0.06

0.69

0.75

36

]
.~"";";!.~:

TABLE-~1
Villagewise

of Households

by self produce cereals subsistence

No Produce

<3

3-6

6-9

9-12

Subedamagar

02

09

07

07

02

03

Patwania

03

11

06

04

04

02

Rampur

06

14

04

02

03

01

Sub Total

11
(12.22%)

34
(37.77%)

17
(18.88%)

13
(14.44%)

09
(10.00%)

06
(6.66%)

Harijana

08
(26.66%)

05
(16.66%)

02
(6.66%)

04
(13.33%)

04
(13.33%)

07
(23.33%)

Total

19
(15.83%)

39
(32.50%)

19
(15.83%)

17
(14.16%)

13
(10.83%)

13
(10.83%)

Village

-,

Distribution

_ _--_ ..----_._--------_._,
..

.- ..

- .... --~--.--

37

>12

Table28:Villagewisedistributionofstudyhouseholdsbyvalueofagriculturalassets(movable)(Rs.1000)

Village

<10

1025

2550

50100

>100

Total

Subedarnagar

06

07

10

04

03

30

Patwania

09

07

07

05

02

30

Rampur

09

06

08

07

00

30

SubTotal

24
(26.66%)

20
(22.22%)

25
(27.77%)

16
(17.77%)

05
(5.55%)

90
(100%)

Harijana

07
(23.33%)

05
(16.66%)

08
(26.66%)

07
(23.33%)

03
(10.00%)

30
(100%)

Total

31
(25.93%)

25
(20.83%)

33
(27.50%)

23
(19.16%)

08
(6.66%)

120
(100%)

38

.rr=:

TABLE:~~
Villagewise Distribution of Study Households by Income
Village

> 15,000

10,000-15,000

7,500-10,000

5,000-7,500

3,500-5,000

<3,500

Subedamagar

02
(6.66%)

03
(10.0%)

20
(66.66%)

02
(6.66%)

01
(3.33%)

02
(6.66%)

Patwania

01
(3.33%)

06
(20.00%)

19
(63.33%)

03
(10.0%)

(0.00%)

01
(3.33%)

04
(13.33%)

17
(56.66%)

06
(20.00%)

02
(6.66%)

01
(3.33%)

Rampur

(0.00%)

-------------------------------------------------------03
(3.33%)

13
(14.44%)

56
(62.22%)

11
(12.22%)

03
(3.33%)

04
(4.44%)

Harijana

05
(16.66%)

04
(13.33%)

07
(23.33%)

08
(26.66%)

02
(6.66%)

04
(13.33%)

Total

08
(6.66%)

17
(14.16%)

63
(52.50%)

19
(15.83%)

05
(4.16%)

- 08
(6.66%)

Sub Total

--------~-----------------------------------------------

39

TABLE"~'O
Villagewise

Food Consumption

Level (Gms./ConsumptionJUniVDay)

Cereals

Pulses

Milk and Milk

Products

Subedarnagar

545

32

60

2.

Patwania

525

22

3.

Ramur

510

4.

Harijana

485

S.No.

Village

1.

Recommended Level

400
-----_.

__ ._----

Vegetables

Oil and fat

12

130

21

47

24

167

17

18

52

13

142

09

30

71

10

198

12

70

200

250

35

40

Flesh Food

:~!I~~J~'i:,l.:':';':,'"::\,;:'{;,/::~-~,.r".~.<
.., ,,

"

'~...' .

Village

, "."

....

~~.'" ,<.~',~i'!'.t\:.'',~"",;'~~:.,'
...

Age Groupwise
S.Na.

; ..,~; .! . ~..;..\'".

.. " " 'TABLt b',;, "

Children 5) by NutritionStatus

-~

,~.

.~

:\,; t~~:;if,.i.;'V:~':":'i:2b:i;i;);;E;i;~~

(Weight for age)

Age

Normal

Grade I

Grade II

Grade III

Grade IV

<1

07(58.33%)

03(25.00%)

02(16.67%)

00(0.00%)

00(0.00%)

12(100%)

1-2

11(34.37%)

12(37.50%)

04(12.50%)

03(9.37%)

02(6.25%)

32(100%)

2-3

05(20.83%)

08(33,33%)

10(41.66%)

00(0.00%)

01 (4.17%)

24(100%)

3-4

10(45.45%)

07(31.81%)

04(18.18%)

01 (4.54%)

00(0.00%)

22(100%)

4-5

08(40.00%)

06(30.00%)

04(20.00%)

02(10.00%)

00(0.00%)

20(100%)

SubTotal

41 (37,27%)

36(32.73%)

24(21.82%)

06(5.45%)

03(2.73%)

110(100%)

<1

05(100%)

00(0,00%)

00(0.00%)

00(0.00%)

00(0.00%)

05(100%)

1- 2

07(50.00%)

03(21.42%)

02(14.28%)

01 (7.14%)

01 (7.14%)

14(100%)

2-3

05(55.56%)

04(44.44%)

00(0.00%)

00(0.00%)

00(0.00%)

09(100%)

3-4

06(46.15%)

03(23.07%)

04(30.77%)

00(0.00%)

00(0.00%)

13(100%)

4-5

04(66,66%)

02(33.33%)

00(0.00%)

00(0.00%)

00(0.00%)

06(100%)

SubTotal

27(57.4~%)

12(25.53%)

06(12.76%)

01 (2.12%)

01 (2.12%)

47(100%)

Total

68(43.31%)

48(30.57%)

30(19.10%)

07(4.45%)

02(2.54%)

157(100%)

Total

1.

c
0

N
2.

T
R
0
L

-------------------------------------------------------Range (for grade): (Weight in kg.)

Year

Grade I

Gradell

Grade III

Grade IV

6.85- 7.75

6.00-6.85

4.95-6.00

<4.95

8.75-10.00

7.50-8.75

6.20-7.50

<6.20

10.25-11.60

8.75-10.25

7.25-8.75

<7.25

4.

11.50 -13.20

9.85 -11.50

8.259.85

<8.25

'5

12.80-14.75

11.00-12.80

9.20-11.00

<9.20

I,

41
1
I,

':"".':',.

,,';;~:::;~:ji~;~~lf'
.~'.,.".: ,,;:,7- ":< .~~:<:.-:'" -- .'

".

-;

"

~ .: '/

~ ," ;

;.~.,

... ~~.'...

-~
..
t.,

.~".

f~.

.,

' ~~"

'.

"

,"1'

:TABLE '"3;~::.'.. "~ .. ; . "

,'., ...

-,'.

"', .

~ ";.

."

,' ..

6.:"J;,<,
It"

.'{ ".r

','

1~

., )).,.....:."

"~"I. .','/.t"'/' .
:,,\1 .,...

I\'~

.1.-

,.

:~lj'~?:.:;:~;
..:~:::,.!~~>{:~;:~~.:;.

Sexwise Distribution of Children 5) by Nutrition Status

(Weight for Age)
S. No.

Sex

Nonnal

Gradel

Grade II

Grade III

Grade IV

Total

Male

32(44.44%)

24 (33.33%)

12(16.67%)

04(5.56%)

00 (0.00%)

72(100%)

Female

09(23.68%)

12 (31.57%)

12 (31.57%)

02 (5.26%) .

03(7.89%)

38(100%)

SubTotal

41(37.27%)

36(32.73%)

24(21.82%)

06(5.45%)

03(2.73%)

110(100%)_

N
T

Male

24(77.42%)

05(16.13%)

02 (6.45%)

00(0.00%)

00(0.00%)

31 (100%)

R
0

Female

03 (18.75%)

07 (43.75%)

04(25.00%)

01 (6.25%)

01 (6.25%)

16(100%)

Village

1.

D
Y

___________________________________

-4.

c
0
2.

T
Total

-------------------------------------Sub Total

27(57.45%)

12(25.53%)

06(12.76%)

01 (2.12%)

01 (2.12%)

47 (!OO%)

68(43.31%)

48(30.57%)

30 (19.1 0%)

07(4.45%)

04 (2.54%)

157(100%)

42
, 'i

~:.
~t~
~uf~.iii.
;.~~~ :..;~',.,.;; ~~, -. ..

. ~.?>'".,,::,."; .

-, -: a" ~

''1::..;;.,,: ' .

"~::.' -::i
I'~:t~I~:;:~':~/~t~~~'~~::\~'~
\'.l I
_. t':

c , ;'~.

:~.r.. ,'
t

f .

. ;~).~.
:'~>":~:,~.

J.

........\~....~:~>:~.~.~.::~:..~.:,~... .:

--

'y.'..

').,-!:

':":TA'

~LE.':IIf.. '3~ .

.., ...
:.,iJ ..U '..

"'., ....
;

....

4,.\ .... :" -. '

/.

,.;~ ~ . '~'/;:'

..

oi. . '.

',. ',..... "~.,:,

fA.

",.
'~.'

I,

:.,,,....
~ '."~ ....

'

,.....

~~.'f'"',
...t:" ~.'!~~t.~.\lti:L1-;~
\::; ...
,,'~.:a.:~""';'~:lt
.
v,

!~

:.i.~./~;.::.~;~).:::.;:.:.)::;;2~~
,r

.1 .. '.. ' .". i'} ..: .:.;.:i\.:

-."'...,'/' ~..J';.!,.", .... ;~' .i:,..~..
: ~t};;:;~ ...;.::'I,~:,,;!
.. . .

Occupational Categorywise Distribution of Children 5) by Nutritional Status

S. No.

Occupational category

Normal

Gradel

Grade"

Grade III

Grade IV

Total

1.

BF

03 (75.00%)

01 (25.00%)

00(0.00%)

00(0.00%)

00(0.00%)

04(100%)

2.

SF

07(77.78%)

02 (22.22%)

00(0.00%)

00(0.00%)

00(0.00%)

09 (100%)

3.

MF

24 (32.43%)

24(32.43%)

18(24.32%)

05(6.75%)

03(4.05%)

74 (100%)

4.

LL

03(25.00%)

06(50.00%)

03(25.00%)

00(0.00%)

00 (0.00%)

12 (100%)

5.

RAlOthers

04 (36.36%)

03(27.27%)

03(27.27%)

01 (9.09%)

00(0.00%)

11 (100%)

-----------------------------------------------Sub Total
41 (37.27%)
36(32.73%)
24 (21.82%)
06(5.45%)
03(2.73%)
110(100%)

-------------------------------------------------------C
0

1.

N
T

2.

R
0

08 (61.53%)

05 (38.46%)

00(0.00%)

00(0.00%)

00(0.00%)

13(100%)

SF

05(45.45%)

03 (27.27%)

03 (27.27%)

00 (0.00%)

00(0.00%)

11 (100%)

3.

MF

04 (66.66%)

01 (16.68%) .

00(0.00%)

01 (16.68%)

00(0.00%)

~6(100%)

4.

LL

02(25.00%)

02 (25.00%)

03 (37.50%)

00(0.00%)

01 (12.50%)

08(100%)

5.

RAlOthers

08(88.89%)

01 (11.11%)

00(0.00%)

00(0.00%)

00(0.00%)

09(100%)

,BF

-----------------------------------------------27 (57.44%)
SubTotal
12 (25.53%)
06(12.76%)
01 (2.12%)
01 (2.12%)
47(100%)
-------------------------------------------------------Total

68(43.31%)

48(30.57%)

43

30 (19.1 0%)

07(4.45%)

04(2.54%)

157 (100%)

. &.

R;/['-:":'

TABLE ~Lt
Case Study:

Morbidity

Diseases

Pattern by Years

Numberof Cases

1978

-1979

1982

1983

1988

1989

1990

1991

Fever

1130

1045

217

837

167

215

1036

1245

Dysentry/
Diarrhoea

1200

2600

345

542

2600

2130

1236

3600

Hookworm

1025

45

26

20

1265

685

30

NA

1350

258

25

360

NA

2436

652

200

175

435

310

1500

NA

273

445

1500

2125

1300

536

Influenza

120

NA

168

277

178

170

NA

NA

Cough

325

1500

1350

625

1110

70

342

- NA

Eye

1500

3200

2321

1245

NA

NA

1520

NA

Ear

1000

1260

1167

1530

1625

1060

NA

160

NA

210

227

215

1375

165

NA

4825

3310

2500

1765

1036

310

25

NA

218

104

NA

NA

NA

NA

1000

NA

3064

3747

2500

1235

3400

1350

Hydrasil
Asthama/
Respiratory
Tonsil

Teeth
Skeleton
Pheumonia
Mensutral
NO : Source

Pile, Il~rhalg~nj.

44
.1

:i

Table35:Morbiditypatternbymonths

Diseases

Aug.91

Sept.91

Oct.91

Nov.91

Dec.91

Jan.92

Feb.92

May92

June92

July92

Tuberculosis

08

04

02

01

05

01

02

02

Entericfever

45

21

35

19

19

04

03

11

35

119

Influenza

365

461

645

213

309

211

214

219

221

Dysentery

421

543

295

311

249

149

206

209

415

318

15

429

388

563

428

446

267

269

374

618

372

Encephalitis
Others

45

Table36:Morbiditypatternbyvillagecategory/agegroup

Age

Gastrointestinal

Cardio
vascular

Respiratory

Diarrhoea

Dysentery

Others

Asthma

TB

Fever

Others

<1

03

02

02

16

19

07

09

6
14

06

02

14
45

04

14

03

>
45

01

01

10

<1

01

16

02

6
14

Nervous

Skeleton

Skin

Eyes
&
Ears

Others

Total

Headache

JE

Paralyse

Others

11
(5.69%)

01

01

01

16

63
(32.64%)

07

01

01

09

27
(13.98%)

02

05

03

03

03

01

05

03

01

08

57
(29.53%)

04

03

04

01

05

03

01

01

01

35
(18.13%)

01

02
(3.50%)

03

01

06

12
(21.05%)

01

01

06

08
(14.03%)

14
48

03

01

06

03

01

02

03

19
(33.33%)

>
48

02

03

05

01

02

01

02

16
(28.07%)

Study

Control

46

TABLE,' '"37
Villagewise
__ .i ___

Village

.___

~___

Distribution

of Households

Reporting

Migration

by Caste

and Reasons

of Migration

...... _._

Total 1-11-1

HH reporting/
ed migration/ed.

-SC

Caste

Reasons

Be

OC

Total

Lacko!
Employment

Higher
wage

Others

Subedarnagar

105
(100%)

52
(49.52%)

16
(30.76%)

25
(48.07%)

11
(21.15%)

52
(100%)

19
(36.53%)

28
(53.84%)

05
(9.61%)

Patwania

126
(100%)

43
(34.12%)

18
(41.86%)

16
(37.20%)

09
(20.93%)

43
(100%)

18
(41.86%)

21
(48.83%)

02
(4.65%)

Rampur
(Two Harnlet)

130
(100%)

36
(27.69%)

18
(50.50%)

09
(25.00%)

09
(25.00%)

36
(100%)

20
(55.55%)

16
(44.44%)

02
(5.55%)

-------------------------------------------------------Sub Total

361
(100%)

131
(36.28%)

52
(39.69%)

50
(38.16%)

29
(22.13%)

131
(100%)

57
(43.51%)

65
(49.61%)

09
(6.87%)

-----------------'----------------------------------------Harijana

Total

101
(100%)

42
(41.58%)

20
(47.61%)

12
(28.57%)

10
(23.80%)

42
(100%)

10
(23.80%)

26
(61.90%)

462
(100%)

173
(37.44%)

72
(41.61%)

62
(35.83%)

39
(22.54%)

173
(100%)

67 .

91
(52.60%)

47

(38.72%)

06
(14.28%)

15
(8.67%)

MAP

Fiood prone areas

48

: t-Y .'.
"~'.

~,\:'~.)::""-( -',
"
) .. ,'_'

.:t'
CI)

.;'

'-

\\".',;

..

..;;.,.

I:

.... -,

"p . _.

H I,N
A
<,TJ BET '>: ...,....,

C
\

oJ....

...\
"

...::.:-

'J

','

-l\

<1

),

'

I'

MJ\P

'--l
J

~ J .'

.,G MM<T

a.

UTTAR

PRADESH'

'F>

,(~.

~,..:.,L...-.J '.\ f....__.. ) .~

.

,. .~~:,. ,....~:.

..r._.-j

,,',,'

'

'Q4J
./ '-'~' ;;
C',.""o,,/I
~'q' I..r'

.... ":'i--';/'~';~:;G;;#~f;
" ~'. ''''':"'',

....,

FLOODS

j'

AREA LIABLE TO

,(I

IMPORTANT FLOOD P~~;~~TJON

SCALE
Ie

III1

10

(0

WORKS"\~',
,,'
" \ \ _.< ~_
~.

IL

"~~'c.;:,~

HOlT

...f~;,,'!Y

'~~
..\:~;J~(~~)f,
.....
''"-:",'.~.+;;
'". J( X .-)).
..-.!

<P'"

',.
.

F+3

--

'i<~~ \,>'

:,PLATE

.,.ug.,." ,ft.

.'~ "';':' .~...~~o;

A,

';l:.'

<
~

. :..

:::

~~?
,-fl

'':.: "~.-.;

"

):ii:~

"-

1-

8:\~?~
'~f.t35\:

::,::;~,

.;

)..

,i

"1

,,-,'

..
0 Euil!'-

i ... .r~

"'/

1-

.\i-:"'..,... ,-",--...:.
.\

'

,-",-',

'

'~"""+-

"'/

~c:,

-,:-

t?;1'~
"7~'-

,1:f
:~~1::~:.

y.

\).0

-:.':.,

\).

REFERENCES
L INTERNATIONAL

a.

S TAT

'

eASED UPO/I SURVEY OF INOlA MAP WITH THE PERWISSION Cf'

SURVEYOR GENERAL OF INOI A.
GOVf:RHMENT OF INOlA CoPY RIGHT 1962.

THE

\\

\
r:

:,....,
, .

BOUNOARY

E"

3. AREA LlA6LE

_
TO A..OOOS
AS

~ EMOANKWENrs

,7

I" "!RCHI96S
__

TOWN PR OlECTlON

._._
,,;~'::')

4- DAM

."-

"ORKS

PROPOSED'
--

0 R A I Ns

,I

49

._-_...

[4

caiU i

1 41

4J

MtIAoo;WW._

-,

\V'\A.? '"3

~.'.,.....,t"".~"....

"-;...-....
".,,....... "....
~.v.r-v t'"..' .
""-//!'O.. ."\'-l1'\'I!lI~
'jr(1)'l,J:.;;-.,o ..." .'.:.p;..~'''''r.''':.<. 1;;;::f''i'Y;I.";;.".,\.~/:~)~.O;!,.:ir.!",~.1t{~
... :7",' ,
~:St~,.~t.t ~;-'i~;f.;t
,t ~. ~::;:-:., I"~ ~~\'t:,~~'~:\)1;i1tWti;~'~!.i~:,~
.rj;,.~t'.,..'~I,J;~
(.~i:". '!U:\
.,.....'....,

..

"~t" _.:':'

.
;t.:2
nII;.'/~"p~Jt~
.'
-

~~.;;:.~"'~~~:~.~':L.
:/.:.;~\~,!~:,'..:~~~\l!it:U'~"'J~(;:~'l~::-11'

t~~l-?;:..:1.
.~:'"~n
.~.;f'')'-'1.,..~,"''t
.,<~i. ,,,,,,"1-(;F-M'.-;:>

'.

!i

.-..

..,

r 0 NAND

LO CAT

EXT E N r
~y

"

"

<,

'.

~':\i- \
" ",\',

,"

\-,

r-

''"'

/(

...
',. ",",'

o""j
i"

o '~_.~
->
','

<,

01511/11-: I

It; .,'

()

1",

r .:.:

~~

.,.~ ~!"

.!i '. I .. f

.. - .1 ____

',1\

,; 1 :, I
q,

f .\

ti

.,

~. "".-

._ ..

.'
:-~1-"~
.. _"'-'"

~. I

\,

-"0""

'/.."!-J. -

.J

- (

f I -6"-0"",
v'.

.
( ,OOMA

,
n')"-"""

"'

~7e'

...~

f'
'r"-/"
r'. i:')! H/

-:

A../

"

"'uGARH

,..".
I

'

....'

V."

r~"[f:(S'l.['

'~~r26.'

------

..

RIAGAN.y,-./

0);

.
.::.,_
:--,GONO.""
_~
c.
y
~'-.....:

..'
\."

~ .' ~_-

<, ~

lA

~G'"J
<,

..

__

.'

..

'

<,

--

'. "

.
S-\" \

"

HA"ENO'

.../
..
I,

'"

"r' ~'

./

..'
OJlAKItPUn....

./
)
A (I
""lll.\!!'

.~
~.~""

.'

,(,I,".(
I

~". ;,

...;li
<;

.!

.,

.,.,.

<i

._ .~...

, __ J

I
'\

__

;: .","AuNI'
rt:

~) \.

.'

_._-

50

'
" .1\, . .

-<

'.,/

.'-:--'-

5A

.......,

---_.

'.

r. r:

~:..'-'- ~
~

I
I

+.
.. .

.
-~ '-.J

,1I

.'

_____
~.:,#'1
........

('1 .

,J

".

"!
"M1"" .....,
...,- .<.1<":"N

~.....

it "'

.\1 .,

\ .. "','.'

'

I,-",'

..'

~I

'r

'I

I
.

-___

.-:--I -.:

..
v

-, ,J"<,

'f

-~

HAT
.\_

<,
r" ..J

: .M.'N

1,1. :. ;1 "
f

,.
/

r---;X- .

':\..'

,..'.1G')'"

.
<,

.,

(C'

A NJ

~' .'

. ., r> :

(~'r'-'
:'..
.~

'\)
..

.rl' _ ,

I v'-. r....'
I
-r:-'-"'""J '
r: 'H
" '-'0
.A SIlt '.A
l--'~"'''
.

"'-

...

',l,

H,

,~~I, .. :'. ,
I.

( ..
'.

L rdl'

".

AHEA

'- I . '.

'

~t" .

,I

.1 -, . :

~I .!.

-'

ly

:~ t

l~ I

.,t' :,,:,

(.'

..
-c,

".," H.'

:;'

__....~

, . "
III

~-

~--~

,'."

'

t< A I~,'

\.

INOf

~',

:\'.
.. '
~

-,)

- --- -"

<,../

}~.

r- .'),,....

. ~_
c, _.".

v \\.,

,r
.,,,'\/

1. '.\
\,'

~ ".

"STU(

,,"

/~

, "

\' .,I
-~. :;.-

..

, ~'

.-- J ., <,

0.. \

i I

1\

-.;'. 1:

0)

~___

.....

_ 17

<:

F. <,

.:

J..-.'0-..

..-. --_

...

T"

n.

~
.(

}:

- c::

<w
-'

....
~....-.
<:

a:c..

<w
:::>

<

~<..:>
>Z

-<
c:::
"'C

<

~I

)!
o
~

o
"

1
:r::

~7

.
-

51

~'.

:.:

..

.:

Q..

::>
LL

':<

.....J
.

~:k::~

Q:

.':;~

1.::>

>

!
!

1=:4

X.

0,

:I:
Q

CL
UJ

~~::~

..:~1;

..r

~Q: co

'-",.
-.~

,....=.

" ., t'\

o
z
::>

;~j'~'u
.- ..~~

~'iP;,:",;.,-,
;;;;?{;,
1II!J.;~,~l._C:>~
. ~~.:.,.

--'-i

.. . ...
...
.. .. .
. : : : :*: .. :

...
...
. . . ..
..
: : : : -: : : . )

,fill

!U:r(I~/J :

\.

. . . . .. (;.
:::::r:.,;...

-4

CD

CD

! 'N ~ ~
~>< -=~ ~m[](]'
Qd UJ:
:

~__J:~

"r,

..
52

"~r

...

'.

. .. ~~. o ..

~ .

'..
~

_.; "-'-:o .~_ .. , .:

MAP.6

SAIItYV '-A"

rLOOO

;;;....,"~::.:t\.,.....~

";~~.f"

;.~ ,":,~".""""''-''.~.~.'''-''')h'.

~..,.

,v-rrCT[O

AR[A

...". ..

lUSUAL

FLOOD-AREAS

iZlOCCASIONAl

r-

FLOOD-AREAS

?
FLOOD

AFFECTED

AREAS
j': ~~-:.

53

'r...

'"
KM.

5p

.f~r~~~~~~~S~?~j~~=': ..
-~
..
~;::
r

...

.- ...

\V\A?

:.

-,

~
i
~

!
"i-

I
I

,
-2i::l,~/.

"

-v

n.lOI:....' ~--

LE:Gc/'lO

1_26.,5 ...

I, DIST~ICT
2.0fsnUCT

BOUNQA;{'l'

H.G...

el

r. TEHSIL

H.C...

L,

RivERS

...~

S. C,l..HALS
6. S-;'Ai~

--<

TUGE'-;(EL'..S

!-----+-------~-----~:__-----~----.
~.
os's' 7"
&j'JO'
ajo LS'
a"
64' :5'
a4'::'3' I~""

16':'7_"
8j~7' S\"

FiG.~

G..!.~~u~i(

CO~~MANO

A~'; 0 S iA T c: T u

AR=:A S~O't'Jl~~G

a E 'N E L.L S .

54

QR~!~JAG::S

,C~i~~LS

- - ."-::....-.-.

55