economics of on-farm development - Institute for Social and ...

seasons. But. in reality. only second and third crops are irrigated and the first crop
mostly rainfed. But it is erroneously taken as irrigated, thus giving a higher irrigation
ratio for paddy. This becomes more evident from the specific cropping pattern
envisaged under the Peechi and Malamupuzha schemes (table 5.11).
Table 511 . : E nVlsage d croppine pattern in the Peechi and Malam puzha irrigation projects
Malampuzha Irrigation
Peechi Irrigation Project#
Name <strong>of</strong> project
ProjectS
Area (ha.) (%) share Area (ha.j (%) share
New land to be irrigated 5668.02 30.63 15384.62 41.55
Converting single crop to
double crop 1336.G3 7.23 15384.62 41.55
Supplementing the needs <strong>of</strong>
double crop lands 3805.67 20.57 Nil Nil
Single crop land to be triple
cropped 7692.31 41.57 5447.36 14.71
Perennial crops Nil Nil 809.72 2.19
Total 18502.03 100.00 37026.32 100.00
Source.· # GOK. 1967; $ Malampuzha Project Report.
The table shows that gross area anticipated to be irrigated by the irrigation
projects is taken as actual irrigated area. While the entire irrigation potential is
meant for paddy in the Peechi project. about 2 per cent <strong>of</strong> the ayacut <strong>of</strong> the
l\1alampuzha project is expected to be brought under perennial crops. The ayacut
expected to be brought under irrigation during summer (third crop) is about 42 per
cent in the Peechi project. whereas. it is below 15 per cent in the Malampuzha
project.
The increase in area under coconut and banana as observed at the state level
(table 5.6) as well as the higher percentage <strong>of</strong> irrigated area under coconut as
reported from the completed irrigation projects (table 5.10) cannot be considered as
a pure irrigation effect, because. tht: existing institutional mechanisms at the project
level do not have provisions for irrigating such crops. The irrigation <strong>of</strong> these crops
165