KARNATAKA - of Planning Commission

Karnataka Human Development Report 2005lakes, rivers, canals and springs, etc. Forty-eightper cent rural households and 78.4 per cent urbanhouseholds access their drinking water fromtaps. In rural areas, however, 22.9 per cent ofhouseholds rely on hand pumps and 15.6 per centon wells while in urban areas; taps constitute thedominant source (Table 7.4).Some important indicators available for sanitationrelate to access to bathroom and latrine facilities.Here, too, the rural–urban difference is marked.While 79.1 per cent urban households had abathroom in the premises, the proportion for ruralareas was 48.1 per cent. While a high 82.5 per centof rural households had no latrines in the premises,only 24.7 per cent urban households did nothave latrines. As many as 44.9 per cent urbanhouseholds had water closets. Both urban and ruralhouseholds were relatively on a par when it cameto drain connectivity for waste water (rural: 31.1per cent; urban: 39.3 per cent), the real differencelies in the fact that 64.6 per cent rural households,by and large, did not have any kind of drainageconnectivity whereas only 19 per cent urbandwellers lacked this facility (Table 7.5).Rural drinking waterKarnataka has been giving high priority to ruraldrinking water over the last two decades. Whilethe national norm stipulates provision of 40 litresper capita per day (lpcd) of safe drinking waterwithin 500 metres of the place of residence,Karnataka has set a target of 55 lpcd.Since the beginning of the 1980s, bore-wellshave been the main basis of water supplyschemes in the state. The policy of the governmentis to provide bore-wells with hand pumps tohabitations with a population of less than 500,mini water supply schemes to habitations with apopulation between 500 and 1,000, and pipedwater supply schemes to habitations with apopulation of more than 1,000. In the last fewyears, the groundwater level is being depletedvery quickly in most districts, resulting in a largenumber of bore-wells drying up. Strategically,drilling new bore-wells is now seen to be lesseffi cient than deepening existing bore-wells toimprove water yields. Surface water sourcesTABLE 7.4Distribution of households by source of drinking water:Karnataka 2001(’000s)Source of water Total Per cent Rural Per cent Urban Per centTap 6025 58.9 3236 48.5 2790 78.4Hand pump 1750 17.1 1530 22.9 220 6.2Tube well 876 8.6 609 9.1 267 7.5Well 1269 12.4 1038 15.6 230 6.5Tank, pond and lake 111 1.1 101 1.5 10 0.3River and canal 112 1.1 105 1.6 7 0.2Spring 31 0.3 28 0.4 2 0.1Any other 58 0.6 28 0.4 31 0.9Source: Registrar General of India, Census 2001, Housing Profi le, Karnataka.TABLE 7.5Number of households with bathroom, latrine and drainage facility:Karnataka 2001(’000s)Sl. No. Type of amenities Total % Rural % Urban %12Total number ofhouseholds 10232 6675 3556No. of households havingbathroom within thepremises 6023 58.9 3208 48.1 2815 79.13Type of latrine withinthe premisesA Pit latrine 1368 13.4 632 9.5 736 20.7B Water closet 1907 18.6 311 4.7 1595 44.9C Other latrine 561 5.5 217 3.3 343 9.7With latrine 3836 37.5 1160 17.5 2674 75.3No latrine 6395 62.5 5513 82.5 881 24.7Type of drainage4 connectivity for wastewater outletA Closed drainage 1766 17.3 285 4.3 1,481 41.6B Open drainage 3475 34.0 2076 31.1 1398 39.3With drainage 5241 51.3 2361 35.4 2879 80.9No drainage 4989 48.7 4312 64.6 677 19.0Source: Registrar General of India, Census 2001; Housing Profi le: Karnataka – Table H-10.are also being explored as an alternative tobore-wells. There has been considerable progressin the provision of rural drinking water in thelast one and a half decades. Currently, there are1,90,716 bore-wells, 22,101 mini water supply161