Agricultural water use survey

Transcription

1 AWASH RIVER BASIN WATER AUDIT (ARBWA) PROJECT Background report Agricultural water use survey

2 REPORT INFORMATIONS Title Background report: Agricultural water use survey Date November 2012 Author(s) Yibeltal Tiruneh

3 Coping with Water Scarcity-the Role of Agriculture Developing a Water Audit for Awash Basin With Emphasis on Agricultural Water Management GCP/INT/072/ITA FINAL REPORT PART 1: AGRICULTURAL WATER USE SURVEY Yibeltal Tiruneh November 2012

4 ii Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... IV 1. INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND SCOPE AND STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT PREPARATORY WORKS INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT AND APPROACH FOR THE SURVEY SURVEY GUIDELINE AND QUESTIONNAIRE DISTRIBUTION OF GPS TRAINING ON CONDUCTING THE SURVEY SELECTION OF THE SURVEYORS THE TRAINING CONDUCTING AND MONITORING THE SURVEY CONDUCTING THE SURVEY MONITORING THE SURVEY DATA QUALITY IRRIGATED AREA AND CULTIVATED CROPS REPORTED AND SURVEYED AREAS UNDER IRRIGATION IRRIGATED AREAS BY OWNERSHIP AND REGION IRRIGATED AREAS BY TYPOLOGY, WATER ABSTRACTION AND IRRIGATION SYSTEMS FACTORS FOR REDUCTION OF ACTUAL IRRIGATED AREAS IRRIGATED AREAS BY SUB-BASIN AND REGION IRRIGATED CROPS AND CROPPING INTENSITY BENEFICIARIES OF COMMUNITY IRRIGATION SCHEMES LIVESTOCK DATA AREAS TREATED WITH SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED TIMING OF THE SURVEY LOGISTICS OTHER PROBLEMS LESSONS LEARNED CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CONCLUSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS Need for Accurate Information Issues that need to be Addressed to Improve Irrigation Performance Annexes Annex 1: List of Irrigated Crops Annex 2: Map of surveyed irrigation schemes Annex 3: Agricultural Water Use Survey Guideline Annex 4: Questionnaire Annex 5: Training Presentations Annex 6: Selected training photographs

5 iii Acronyms ABA AWMISET BoA DPPD DSA FAO GPS ha HCS LoA MoA MoWE NMA PMTF US WH WUA Awash Basin Authority Agricultural Water Management Information system of Ethiopia Bureau of Agriculture Disaster Prevention and Preparedness Department Daily subsistence Allowance Food and Agriculture Organization Global Positioning System Hectare Harerge Catholic Secretariat Letter of Agreement Ministry of Agriculture Ministry of Water and Energy National Meteorology Agency Proejct Management Task Force Upstream Water Harvesting Water User Association

6 iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY While information on agricultural water use is essential to know the status of water use and the level of efficiency to make appropriate plans on improving water management for better water productivity, such information is lacking in Ethiopia. Even, cultivated area under different forms of agricultural water management is not accurately known. Therefore, agricultural water use survey is one of the major outputs of the Water Audit Project. Accordingly, a survey on irrigated area was carried out in six regions falling in Awash Basin. A methodology developed by FAO under the project Strengthening the national water monitoring capacity with emphasis on agricultural water use was revised and used in the survey. The methodology included a guideline covering objectives and technical aspects of the survey (measurements and calculation examples), the basin map showing agro-ecology, sub-basins and woredas. A questionnaire containing locations of irrigation schemes (administrative, hydrologic and geography), irrigated area and status, water sources, management, cropping pattern, environment and socioeconomics was prepared. Livestock as also included in the questionnaire. The survey was conducted by 162 surveyors and 23 zone supervisors (all government staff) who were trained by the project team on the use of the guideline and conducting the survey. The survey was also overseen by the project team and focal persons from regional agriculture and water bureaus. The survey covered 2,166 irrigation schemes of all types with 2058 of them having irrigated area of 2.5 ha and above. The survey indicated that a total of 170,043 ha of land were equipped for irrigation about 67.7% of which is owned by communities. The balance is owned by public (13.6%), commercial farms (18.6%) and individual holdings (0.1%). The irrigated area includes about 9,558 ha of land irrigated by different water harvesting systems. Actually irrigated area is about 159,533 ha or 93.5% of the equipped area. Reduction of actual irrigated area is observed in 753 irrigation schemes. The main factors for the reductions are structural damages (13.5%), water shortage due to natural flow reduction and upstream abstractions (45.6%), combination of the two factors (8.9%), and unidentified problems (32%). The corresponding proportions in community-managed irrigation schemes are 14.2, 47.9, 8.4, 0.9 and 28.7 percent. In terms of the effect on irrigated area of community irrigation schemes, the reduction of area ranges from 11.8% due to unidentified factors to 28.2% due to natural flow reduction, and from 18% due to a combined effect of upstream users and canal damage to 30.8% due to a combined effect of natural flow reduction and canal damage. The survey also showed that community-owned modern irrigation schemes are more affected than the traditional (informal) irrigation schemes with respective reduction of irrigated area by about 58.8 and 55.8 percent. According to the survey, only 109 irrigation schemes or 6.2% of the total irrigation schemes are organized into irrigation cooperatives and legal entity but only 4.9% of the beneficiaries are members of these cooperatives. The reason for this low membership could be voluntary membership. Other irrigation schemes are managed by informal water committees or water user organizations. The main objective of the irrigation cooperatives is to access credits and inputs and for product marketing where us irrigation scheme management is the main objective of the water user association of traditional water committee in which membership is mandatory.

7 v The survey has identified a serious skill gap among the irrigation extension service provides who are assigned for conducting the survey. Although they were trained in how to conduct the survey and seemed capable to do so, the survey result showed that they really lack the required level of technical skills. The survey also included livestock population by type as information on livestock water use is required for water balance study. Although area treated with different soil and water conservation measures does not have direct relevance to water use assessment, it was included to complete the agricultural water management database established in Accordingly, about million ha of land was found to have been treated with different biological and physical soil and water conservation measures including area closure. The main recommendations include the following: As accurate and up-to-date information is vital for making appropriate decisions, the initiative of conducting agricultural water use should be scaled up to cover the entire country One of the major bottlenecks for low water productivity is inadequate institutional and technical capacity. Therefore, there is need to develop and implement capacity building programme in agricultural water management at all levels; Irrigation performance assessment has not been carried out in an integrated manner. As this assessment is vital to identify the constraints and propose solutions for improving agricultural water management, it is recommended assess irrigation performance for all types of irrigation schemes. This requires identification of performance indicators and preparation of guideline for conducting the assessment. Many irrigation schemes are observed to face water shortages causing upstream and downstream problems. These problems should be prevented and solved through developing appropriate instruments such as capacity building to enable proper assessment of water resources and making appropriate plan and mechanism that prevents diversions within a certain distance between the upstream and downstream irrigation schemes. Because of lack of standard design guideline in the country, designs of irrigation schemes are varied and this poses difficulties in identifying the causes of failures, rehabilitation requirements and other. Therefore, it is recommended to have standard guidelines for irrigation study and designs as well as management of irrigation schemes; As irrigation management requires joint action, due attention should be given to organizing and strengthening the beneficiary communities.

8 6 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background Food security is inextricably linked with water security. Irrigation is recognized as a means to substantially increase agricultural productivity and improve food security. Accordingly, irrigated agriculture is aggressively promoted and expanded but often without proper planning and quantification of the available water resources. For this reason, there is potential alarming problem of water shortage which calls for preparedness to deal with the shortage by making the right decisions and formulate strategies on water resources development and utilization. These decisions and strategies can only be made based on the accurate and timely information on the status of water resources and utilization. While agricultural water resources management is extremely important, existing information on the status of water availability and agricultural water withdrawal is often poor. Even areas equipped for irrigation and actually irrigated areas are often crude estimates based on various, often incorrect, sources. Agricultural water withdrawals are often lacking. Data on irrigated areas are taken from design documents for modern or formal irrigation schemes, without taking into account the actual area equipped or irrigated in the scheme but data on informal irrigation is neither has reference to be made nor is an estimate usually based on local units. The information thus collected may not show the right picture of irrigated agriculture and its contribution to food security at national level. The Federal Government of Ethiopia has been promoting water resources development for different uses including irrigation, hydropower generation and domestic supply as well as for industrial use. Irrigated agriculture is expanding through the construction of small scale irrigation projects and rainwater harvesting systems at community and household levels. The Growth and Transformation Plan (GTP) of the country gives high priority to irrigated agriculture and natural resources management to ensure sustainable food production and food security. However, water resources planning and management without adequately knowing the available fresh water resources and how it is used constrain proper planning of the scarce water resource and possibly cause conflicts because decisions maybe skewed. The government has recognized the need for accurate and up-to-date water-related information and data on a system that is easily retrievable and usable as a prerequisite for sustainable water resources development for agriculture and other purposes. The essentiality of monitoring the advancements in water resources management for appropriate decision-making and political commitment is widely acknowledged with a view of improving water management and coping with increasing water scarcity. In view of this, in response to the request of the Government of Ethiopia for support, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO),has implemented the project Coping with Water Scarcity the role of agriculture, Developing Awash Water Audit funded by the Government of Italy. This two-year project has been implemented for Awash Basin which is the most intensively developed in the country and where most irrigation schemes are concentrated. Issues of economic development in the Awash Basin have often narrowly focused on the need to develop a physical potential. Agricultural development in the basin is playing an important role

9 7 in supplying agricultural products mainly cotton and sugar cane to the industry sector and has a substantial impact on the basin s water balance. Water scarcity is becoming a serious issue in the basin 1.2 Scope and Structure of the Report One of the project outputs is assessment of the sectoral water uses with emphasis on agricultural water use. Therefore, this report documents on the basin-wide survey conducted by the project. The survey has collected quantitative information on the current situation of irrigated areas, irrigated crops, and livestock as well as areas treated with different natural resources management measures. This Report provides details on the methodology for conducting irrigation schemes and the outputs of the survey and it is structured have six sections. Section 1: Introduction giving general background about the survey and its scope while Section 2 describes the preparatory works for conducting the survey. Sections 3, 4 and 5 provide information on how the training of surveyors and conducting the survey were carried out and data quality respectively. Analysis and outputs of the survey are explained in sections 6 to 7 while problems encountered are listed in Section 9. Lessons learned are given in Section 10 while conclusions and recommendations are provided in section 11. Map of surveyed irrigation schemes, survey guideline, questionnaire, training presentations and selected training photos are given in Annexes 1 to 5.

10 8 2. PREPARATORY WORKS 2.1 Institutional Arrangement and Approach for the Survey While the project is managed by National Coordinator Supported by FAO Project Officer, a seven-member Project Management Task Force (PMTF) was established to guide project implementation. The members of the PMTF include Ministry of Water and Energy (MoWE), Ministry of Agriculture (MoA), FAO, National Meteorology Agency (NMA) and Awash Basin Authority (ABA) was established. On its first meeting, the PMTF agreed to carry out agricultural water use survey by the regions in order to enable capacity building, ensure ownership and the integration of data collection with the regular extension system. Following this, the project team made discussions with the relevant regional and zone agriculture and water bureaus of falling in Awash Basin about the project and modality of its implementation. The regions and zones were found to be very keen to undertake the survey in order to solve the problem of inconsistency in reporting on irrigated areas and production use which has never been reported. In the discussions, Amhara and Oromia Regions, Dire Dawa and Addis Ababa City Administrations were found to be capacble of undertaking the survey in their respective regions. In terms of institutional involvement, different approaches were proposed. The Amhara Region decided to carry out the survey by the Bureau of Agriculture (BoA) while Oromia Region and Dire Dawa opted for carrying out the survey by both bureaus with the water bureaus taking the lead. Furthermore, it was agreed that the Dire Dawa Water Bureau would support the survey in Shinile zone of Somali Region. As there is no water bureau in Addis Ababa, the Urban Agriculture Office of Addis Ababa conducted the survey. The information on the extent and location of irrigation schemes as well as accessibility showed that the volume of work was more than expected. Accordingly, the estimated time and budget for the survey was found to be inadequate. The findings of the discussions with the regions were further discussed in the second meeting of the PMTF and consensus was reached on the following. The regions to be advised to assign adequate surveyors from each woreda and release the surveyors from other activities during the survey and to provide them the required support. Considering the inadequate capacity of Afar Pastoral and Water Bureaus, ABA to carry out the survey in Afar Region. ABA further pledged to finance the survey in Afar, Dire Dawa and Somali Region. Further discussions were then made with relevant Amhara, Oromia and Addis Ababa bureaus, Letters of Agreement (LoA) containing detail survey activities, share of responsibilities, budget and timeframe were prepared and signed between the FAO and these three parties. FAO released advance budgets to the partners as per their respective LoAs.. All the partners have followed the same approach in handling logistic requirements in such a way that the Amhara and Oromia partners transferred the advance budget to the zones which

11 9 disbursed directly to the surveyors without involving the woreda offices. This arrangement is plausibly believed to reduce the time that would have been lost in transactions with the woreda offices and would make the surveyors accountable to higher level technical expertise due to direct reporting and thus enable timely data quality check as payments were based on work volume and quality but it limited the involvement of the woredas for future ownership. This was later on solved during monitoring visits of the project team and regional focal persons by making the data collectors to report to the respective woredas offices including woreda administrations. 2.2 Survey Guideline and Questionnaire A questionnaire which was prepared under the project in 2009 was revised to facilitate easier filling and data entry. The questionnaire is divided into four parts: Irrigation schemes including and above 2.5 ha per irrigation scheme Improved rainwater agriculture 1 with areas less than 2.5 ha per system Livestock population by type Soil and water conservation The types of irrigation data in the questionnaire include the following: Location (geographical, hydrological and administrative locations) Sources of water for irrigation Irrigations systems and cultivated areas Environment and health Investment and irrigation scheme management Status of the irrigation schemes Socioeconomics (beneficiaries by gender, type of organizations for water management) Cropping patterns for al irrigated crops with areas and production The improved water harvesting component has similar items except geographical location, environment and health, investment, operation and maintenance cost, scheme management and status of irrigation systems because different systems are aggregated together and only functional systems are reported. Livestock component covers only livestock population by type. Though information on soil and water conservation does not have direct relationship with irrigation and water balance analysis it was retained in order to complete the Database, Agricultural Water Management Information system of Ethiopia (AWMISET) established in Improved rainwater agriculture in this survey comprises rainwater harvesting, spate irrigation, pump irrigation using surface and ground water all with irrigated areas below 2.5 ha per system.

12 10 The questionnaire is designed in such a way that information and data on irrigation schemes are collected at scheme level while data on improved rainwater agriculture, livestock and soil and water conservation data are collected at woreda level disaggregated by sub-basin. A guideline for conducting the survey and filling the questionnaire which was prepared for the AWMISET was refined. The contents of the guideline include: Types of data to be collected; Steps to be followed for conducting the survey; Definition of terms; Methods of estimating areas and converting local measuring units into standard units; Considerations in the preparation of preparing cropping patterns; Methods of estimating crop and irrigation water requirements; Method of flow measurement; Map of Awash Basin showing sub-basins (newly delineated in this project), woredas and agro-ecology zones (including woreda towns and major roads) to enable easily locating irrigation sites. GPS operation 2.3 Distribution of GPS Spatial data of irrigation schemes is of high importance for mapping the schemes and estimating irrigation water requirements. For this, GPS is required. Accordingly, 66 GPS were purchased and distributed to Amhara zone agriculture offices (32), Oromia Water, Mines and Energy Bureau (31), and Addis Ababa Urban Agriculture (2). The Dire Dawa and Awash Basin Authority used their own.

13 11 3. TRAINING ON CONDUCTING THE SURVEY 3.1 Selection of the Surveyors The surveyors were selected from woredas while supervisors were from zones and regional bureaus. One question could be raised regarding the possible bias if data is to be collected by the surveyors in their respective woredas. The following reasons were considered in favour of conducting the survey in a woreda by its own extension staff. The knowledge of the surveyors in the woreda eases the survey because familiarity with the areas (locations and accessibility of the irrigation schemes) facilitates access to means of transport and the farmers/communities for discussions. This also avoids the need for a second person to serve as guidance which in turn minimizes cost, and saves time thus making the survey cost-effective. The lessons in the pilot baseline survey by Amhara and Oromia regions two years ago indicated that the differences between reported and surveyed areas under irrigation clearly indicate that the survey was unbiased. Some of the errors reported were due to limited knowledge and experience rather than bias. The surveyors have to be well trained and advised to avoid any bias for the sake of right decision-making that could be only done based on accurate data. The survey was timely as it coincided with the government s concern for data quality. Therefore, everybody at all levels was responsible for collecting and reporting quality data. Accordingly, a total of 162 surveyors were selected for the survey as shown in Table 1 below. The number of participants varied from 7 in Addis Ababa to 42 in Amhara (North Shoa). Participation of women in the training and survey is about is 6.7% (Amhara), 10% (Oromia and 21.7% (Dire Dawa) with the average participation being about 10%. In terms of education background and experience, the surveyors have at least diplomas in agriculture or natural resources management but their experience in irrigation is limited. Some surveyors who have been exposed to irrigated agriculture do lack technical skills in irrigation while others with irrigation background have not been exposed to irrigated agriculture. Considering the locations of irrigation schemes and difficult terrain, and for ensuring the effectiveness of the training, it was decided to conduct the training in four training centers at tne towns of Amahra Region while in Oromia the training conducted in two zone towns. Other trainings were organized in Addis Ababa and Dire Dawa towns.

14 12 Table 1: Number of Surveyors by Region and Zone Zone No of Participants Region Zone Woredas Total Ladies Amhara Region Region BoA 1 1 North Shoa Oromia Zone South Wello North Wello Amhara subtotal Oromia Region Regional bureaus 2 2 South, West Oromia and Finfine Special Zones East Oromia and Arsi zones Oromia Subtotal Dire Dawa* Shinile (Somali Region) 5 5 ABA (as trainer) Dire Dawa Addis Ababa Total participants * DPPD and HCS also participated in the training 3.2 The Training As explained above, the training was organized in eight centers. The guideline and questionnaires were distributed to the participants during registration. The training was participatory and strategically sequenced to enable easy understanding. The contents of the training the following: General Objective of agricultural water use survey General guidelines on the survey (contents and use of the guideline) Filling the questionnaire Types of Information and definitions of terms related to irrigated agriculture Measurement of areas and calculations Estimation of water abstractions for irrigation (gravity and pump) Preparation of cropping patterns Estimation of irrigation water requirements including use of FAO-CROWAT 8.0 GPS operation

15 13 The methodology of the training included PowerPoint presentations supported by flip charts wherever elaborations are required. Local data made available by the participants by zone or woreda were used for elaborations of calculations. The participants were very enthusiastic and active in the training bringing technical and management issues of irrigation in the discussions. In all the training centers, the participants raised practical issues dealing with technical and institutional aspects of irrigated agriculture that extended the discussions beyond the survey into irrigation scheme management. The training on GPS operation was preceded by the distribution of Garmin-72H GPS. Illustrative presentations on GPS operations were followed by hands-on exercises outside the training rooms until the trainees fully understood the use of the GPS. The training was provided by experts from FAO, MoWE and Amhara BoA. The heads of Zone Agriculture offices in the case of Amhara and regional representatives of agriculture and water bureaus in the case of Oromia and Dire Dawa have opened and closed the training sessions giving instructions to surveyors on overcoming the challenges they face, paying attention to quality data and completing the survey within the planned time frame. The soft copies of guideline, questionnaire and presentations were also given to the zones and some woredas which have computer and related facilities. Contact addresses of the FAO and regional coordinators were also given the surveyors for any assistance during the survey.

16 14 4. CONDUCTING AND MONITORING THE SURVEY 4.1 Conducting the Survey The zones were responsible for preparing copies of questionnaires to the surveyors. North Shoa Agriculture Office was preparing and coping during the training to enable distant woredas collect the questionnaires upon completion of the training. The zones also officially instructed the woredas to release the surveyors from their regular activities. Having prepared logistics the surveyors started their assignment in their respective woredas. The survey started in Amhara in May 2011 and was completed in January 2012 as shown in Table 2. It was completed in Amhara, Oromia and Addis Ababa as planned while the survey was unduly delayed in others due to management changes in Awash Basin Authority and Dire Dawa Water Bureau which diverted institutional focus away from the survey. Table 1: Period of Agricultural Water Use Survey Region Survey period (2011) Remark Addis Ababa July-Mid August Amhara May-Mid August Correction of some data was extended to January 2012 Oromia May- July Correction of some data was extended to December 2011 Dire Dawa and August- January 2012 Delay due to change of management Somali Afar November-February Delay due to change of management 2012 and engagement in other urgent activities 4.2 Monitoring the Survey The survey in all regions was monitored at different levels with different frequency of field checks: the zones more frequently visiting the survey than the regions. The zone coordinators travelled to the survey woredas and monitored the survey observing the progress of work, checking data quality and solving any problems that cropped up during the survey. Because of vast coverage of the survey, the regional coordinators and project team could not monitor the survey in all the woredas. Therefore, monitoring was limited to some reperesntative woredas and where problems were reported. The team checked all the completed questionnaires in the visited woredas visited and found that 13% of the completed questionnaires had some errors in Amhara Region. Having explained the causes of the errors, techniques and care to be take not to repeat the mistakes, the monitoring team advised zone and woreda surveyors to redo the incorrectly filled questionnaires. The water and agriculture bureaus of Oromia region were entrusted to monitor the survey. The survey was also monitored by telephone. Each surveyor who had access to telephone survey

17 15 used to call the surveyors particularly to FAO Officer who prepared the survey instruments training any time they encounter problems. The Officer had solved the technical problems right at the time of call while non-technical problems were solved after discussing with the relevant regional bureaus and zone and woreda offices. This was very effective means of monitoring and elaborations of issues that cropped up. The main issues and technical problems that were raised during the survey include the following: Which area to consider in the questionnaire when the measured irrigated area differs from the area already reported by woredas; Delay of budget releases for DSA or perdiem and other expenses; Knowingly or unknowingly changing of GPS set-up (from WSG84 to other, degree to UTM, and other units) or how to set up another GPS; Area measurement using GPS when the equipment does not show size of irrigated area after traversing the irrigation scheme; Logistics problems; and Lack of support to the surveyors in some woredas and assigning the surveyors to other assignments due to lack of awareness in some woredas The non-technical problems were solved by telephone discussions with heads and/or deputy heads of relevant zone and woreda agriculture offices and woreda administrators who have not adequately supported the surveys or who resisted releasing the surveyors from other activities. Some of the issues were solved during the monitoring visits in which face to face discussions were made with relevant officials. Accordingly, some woreda officials facilitated means of transport for the surveyors to distant irrigation schemes and assigned additional staff to speed up the survey. Therefore the monitoring visit was very fruitful in raising the awareness among local officials and get support for the survey.

18 16 5. DATA QUALITY As explained in Section 4 above, some errors were identified during monitoring visits and those questionnaires with incorrect data were returned to the surveyors to be refilled. The sources of errors were identified and how to rectify such problems were re-explained to the surveyors and zone supervisors and this improved the quality of data. Similarly, some errors were identified during data analysis and mapping. Accordingly, about14% of the completed questionnaires was found to have the following errors: Geographical coordinates: About 6% of the completed questionnaires were found to have wrong coordinates. The error may have been caused by rounding of coordinates to one or two decimal places. The irrigation schemes are closely located to each other and their geographical coordinates do differ by a third or fourth decimal places, so rounding off coordinates to one or two decimal places brings two or more irrigation schemes to the same location in mapping. The same is true for water sources and irrigated areas. Wrong coordinates is also caused by use of GPS with wrongly set up, reading locations before the GPS gets the required number of satellites; and error in writing the data in the questionnaire. Difference between total actual irrigated area and areas under different crops (12%). Normally the sums of areas under different crops in a particular month should be equal to or less than actual irrigated area but in some cases, the sums of areas covered by different crops are greater than actual irrigated areas. One of the sources of errors could be double counting of cropping areas in different seasons while the second possible reason could be technical error in measuring. Irrigation scheme without name: Some surveyors overlooked the names of irrigation schemes while others purposely left out names of irrigation schemes in situations where kebele and irrigation schemes have the same name. Such irrigation schemes constituted about 1.6% of totally surveyed irrigation schemes. In the absence of irrigation name, data entry in Agricultural Water Management Information System of Ethiopia (AWMISET) is impossible because the name of an irrigation scheme is mandatory field for data entry. Ownership-community and public: Some surveyors considered public as to mean people and they used public instead of community for community owned irrigation schemes. Production Statistics: The survey was carried out after harvest and it was difficult to get accurate data on production due either to lack of measurement at the level of the farmers or their reluctance to give accurate information. This has an effect on quality of production statistics and therefore the production data need to be taken cautiously.

19 17 6. IRRIGATED AREA AND CULTIVATED CROPS 6.1 Reported and Surveyed Areas under Irrigation Areas under any form of agricultural water management in Ethiopia have not been accurately known. The MoA s irrigation figures depend on the reports of woredas. There is often either over-reporting or under-reporting of irrigated areas. It was attempted to collect information on irrigated areas and number of irrigation schemes from the regions and zones to compare reported figures on irrigated areas with survey results. However, it was found difficult to get reasonably accurate data for two reasons. Firstly, reporting has been by administrative set up whereas information is collected by hydrological unit (basin or sub-basin) and this was difficult in situations where one woreda or zone falls in two basins or sub-basins. Secondly, the information from the regions or zones does not indicate the size of irrigated area per scheme while the survey considered the irrigation schemes with irrigated areas of 2.5 ha and above per scheme although some irrigation schemes included in the survey have areas as small as 0.02 ha (108 irrigation schemes have areas below 2.5 ha and cover a total area of 152 ha). Therefore, the comparison between reported area and survey results (Table 2) is made based on the crude information and it has to be taken carefully. While data was expected to be collected from about approximately 1,786 irrigation schemes the survey covered 2,166 irrigation schemes of all scales. Reporting of irrigated areas by extension agents is concerned mainly with community irrigation schemes. Public and commercial farms are often overlooked. Accordingly, the irrigated area under community irrigation schemes was about 118,460 ha. The inclusion of public and commercial farm such as Amibara, Metehara, Merti and Wonji farm enterprises and other commercial farms in Gewane and Amibara and Burimodaytu woredas in Afar would have increased the reportedly irrigated area to 171,336 ha. Moreover, as reported figures on irrigated area under water harvesting schemes are not available, it is assumed that the survey result which is 9,558 ha is considered to be valid. Adding this area to the above brings the total reportedly irrigated area in Awash Basin to about 180,894 ha. The survey has indicated that a total of about 160,485 ha under 2,166 irrigation schemes was equipped for irrigation and adding the area under water harvesting systems to this figure brings the total equipped area to 170,043 ha which is about 93% of the reportedly irrigated area (see Table 2). The table also shows that actual irrigated area is about 159,533 ha or 93.8% of the area equipped for irrigation. Reasons for the discrepancy between equipped and actual irrigated areas are explained in Section 6.4. About 65 and 79 percent of the equipped areas are actually irrigated in Dire Dawa and Addis Ababa respectively whereas more than 90% of the equipped area is actually irrigated in other regions. It should be noted that there are both expansions and reductions of irrigated areas. For example, actual irrigated areas of 13 modern irrigation schemes are by more than 69% of the areas equipped for irrigation with the expanded area varying from about 0.7% to 272.2%. Area

20 18 expansions are also observed in many traditional irrigation schemes but because there are no structural differences in the original and expanded area, the expanded areas are treated as equipped area in which case the equipped and actual irrigated areas are equal. In modern irrigation schemes, the equipped area was determined based on technical assessment of the water supply and land resources during design. Therefore, additional areas brought under irrigation by simply extending the canals are considered as expansions. Area expansion occurs wherever the topography permits gravity flow. New diversion schemes are also being constructed on same river within a short distance of downstream or upstream of another existing irrigation schemes without considering the adequacy of the available water supply. Due to this, water shortage is increasingly becoming a serious problem in many irrigation schemes and this forced to extend irrigation intervals sometimes by more than 150% of the optimum interval. This shortage combined with inefficient irrigation practices would have obviously reduced yields. As explained above, there has been over or under-reporting of irrigated area due to the following reasons: Woreda reports are not in most cases based on actual measurements but estimates made on the basis of number of beneficiaries and applying a thumb rule of 0.25 ha of irrigated area per household. This is mainly in Amhara Region. Reporting of cropped areas (double or triple cropping) instead of physical area under irrigation. Non-functional or semi-functional irrigation schemes are reported as if they are functional and this could be attributed to lack of monitoring. Private commercial farms particularly in Afar are registered by woredas with a certain hectare of land but actual irrigated areas are often more than the registered figures because land is leased by clans without involving the woredas. The areas under modern small scale irrigation schemes are taken from design documents but actually irrigated areas could be less than the areas indicated in the design documents due to shortage of water and/or structural damage, or the construction might have not covered the designed area. Actual irrigated areas could also be more than the constructed areas due to expansion if topographic conditions permit. The situation of irrigated areas under informal ( traditional ) irrigation schemes is even more difficult. There is no reference document for referencing the irrigated areas but woreda reports or estimates were used for comparison. The same reason holds true for areas under other forms of agricultural water management or rainwater harvesting systems (spate irrigation, flood recession, wetland irrigation and areas irrigated under household water harvesting systems such as water storage systems and ponds). The areas irrigated under these water harvesting systems have been reported based on the number of the systems but not based on the actual area irrigated.

21 19 Gubalafto and Kobo woredas in Amhara Region have used the opportunity created by the project to conduct the survey in their respective entire woredas including the parts falling in Denakil Basin. Accordingly, 96 irrigation schemes with total equipped and actually irrigated areas of 6,023 and 5,791 ha respectively have been covered in the survey. Table 2: Comparison of Reported and Surveyed Irrigated Areas in Awash River Basin Region Reported/estimated by Zones/Regions Survey of 2010 Number Actual Number Equipp Actual of irrigated of ed area irrigated schemes* area (ha) schemes (ha) area (ha) Actual irrigated area as % of reported area Actual irrigated area as % of equipped area Addis Ababa Afar 65 24, ,096 50, Amhara 1,074 a 73, ,050 33, Oromya , ,458 68, Dire Dawa 20 a 1, ,716 1, Somali 16 6, ,485 5, Total 1, , , , * Approximated number 6.2 Irrigated Areas by Ownership and Region The irrigated area is categorized by ownership as shown in Table 3. These include community, public, commercial and individual farms. Individual farms are those irrigation schemes developed by one person and the category is created simply to indicate that they are not owned or managed by groups. These farms could be owned either by rural farmers or commercial investors who do not have legal registration status and usually cultivate areas not exceeding 2 ha. As the Table shows, about 68.6% of the irrigated area is community-owned with commercial and public enterprises taking 17 and 14.3 percent respectively. The irrigated area under individual holding is only 0.1%. Regional shares of community-owned irrigations schemes are 91.4% (Addis Ababa) 53.8% (Afar), 99.1% (Amhara), 57.4% (Oromya) and 93.5% (Somali). Afar has been normally known as the region of high concentration of public and commercial farms with negligible community-managed irrigation schemes. The survey has showed that more than 27,000 ha are irrigated by community mainly in Asayita and Afambo woredas.

22 20 Table 3: Actual Irrigated Area by Ownership (ha) Region Community Individual Public Commercial farm Total % f Community irrigated area Addis Ababa Afar 28,405 9,983 12,146 50, Amhara 30, , Oromya 28, ,447 3,468 61, Dire Dawa 1,121 1, Somali 5, , WH 9,558 9, Total 109, ,809 27, ,533 % Irrigated Areas by Typology, Water Abstraction and Irrigation Systems Irrigated areas are classified by different agricultural water management systems as shown in Tables 4 and 5. Areas irrigated under modern and traditional (informal) irrigation schemes constitute about 93.2% (59.3% of modern and 33.9% of traditional) of the total equipped area and 92.8 (59.9% of modern and 32.9% of traditional) of actual irrigated areas respectively. The irrigated areas under partial water control systems such as spate, wetland, flood recession and other household level water harvesting systems are 6.7 and 7.1 percent of equipped and actual irrigated areas respectively. Actual irrigated areas under modern and traditional irrigation schemes are 94.8 and 91 percent respectively. The reduction of irrigated area under traditional irrigation schemes indicates the more vulnerability of traditional irrigation schemes to any risk such as structural damage. Table 4: Total Equipped and Actual Irrigated Area by Typology (ha) Irrigation Typology Equipped % Actual % Irrigated areas as area Irrigated Area % equipped area Modern 100, , Traditional (informal) 57, , Equipped wetland irrigation Equipped spate irrigation 1, , Non-equipped wetland Areas below 2.5 ha 9, , Total 170, , Considering community-managed irrigation schemes (Table 5), equipped area under modern and traditional irrigation schemes is about 90.1% (41.3% of modern and 48.8% of traditional) and reduced to 89.5% (42.4% of modern and 47.1% of traditional) of actual irrigated area. The corresponding equipped and actual irrigated areas under other agricultural water management systems is about 9.9 and o 10.5 percent respectively.

23 21 Table 5: Community-Owned Equipped and Actual Irrigated Area by Typology (ha) Irrigation Typology Equipped area % Actual Irrigated % Irrigated areas as % Area equipped area Modern 47, , Traditional (informal) 56, , Equipped wetland irrigation Equipped spate irrigation 1, , Non-equipped wetland Areas below 2.5 ha 9, , Total 116, , Water is abstracted from different sources such as rivers, springs, ground water and dams. The irrigated area is categorized by type of water abstraction method as shown in Table 6. Accordingly, about 68.41% of the area is irrigated from run-of-river and spring diversions followed by use of motor pumps (30.56%) and dams (1.02%). The balance is irrigated by human powered systems such as treadle pumps and bucket lifting. Table 7 shows that about 97.3% of the area under irrigation has surface irrigation system with sprinkler and drip systems being 1.9 and 0.8 percent respectively. The share of the sprinkler system is mainly in the Wonji sugar cane plantation. Areas irrigated under water harvesting systems are given in Table 8. Such systems are found only in Amhara and Oromya Regions. Half of the area in this category is irrigated by river diversion or pumping from rivers and springs and are mainly individual holding. These are included in this category due only to their sizes (below 2.5 ha). More than 32% of the area in this category is irrigated by household level water storage systems such as ponds and underground storage systems indicating the widespread adoption of these systems. Table 6: Irrigated Area by Method of Water Abstraction (ha) Region Dam Diversion Motor pump Treadle pump Total Addis Ababa Afar 33,912 16,964 50,875 Amhara ,508 2, ,779 Oromya 1,375 33,773 26,497 60,271 Dire Dawa 1, ,121 Somali 5,210 5,210 Total 1, ,605 45, ,975 % Note: Area under water harvesting systems is not included

24 22 Table 7: Actual Irrigated Area by Type of Irrigation System (ha) Region Surface Sprinkler Drip/localized Total Addis Ababa Afar 50,875 50,875 Amhara 33, ,826 Oromya 64,142 2,914 1,255 68,311 Dire Dawa 1, ,121 Somali 5,210 5,210 Total 155,246 2,970 1, ,533 % Table 8: Actual Area Irrigated by Household Water Harvesting Systems (ha) Method of water abstraction Amhara Oromya Total % Water stored in ponds , Household water storage , Non-equipped spate Non-equipped wetland Flood recession , Other methods* , Total 2,892 6,666 9, Factors for Reduction of Actual Irrigated Areas As explained above, actual irrigated is less than the area equipped for irrigation. Table 9 shows the reasons for this discrepancy and only those irrigation schemes with actual irrigated areas less than equipped areas are included in the table. Accordingly, 753 irrigation schemes have been affected by one or combination of the indicated problems. Actual irrigated area is about 80.5% of the equipped area when all the 753 irrigation schemes are considered (reduction of 19.5%). Damages of irrigation structures caused reduction of irrigated area by about 27% in 102 irrigation schemes while water shortage affected 343 irrigation schemes reducing irrigated areas by about 22%. The combined effect of water shortage and damages on irrigation structures affected 128 irrigation schemes causing reduction of irrigated area by 27.6%. There are also other factors that had affected 241 irrigation schemes causing reduction of irrigated area by about 12%. Reduction of irrigated area is observed mainly in community irrigation schemes where structural damage is the most critical problem. The effects of the above problems on community-owned irrigation schemes have been assessed as shown in Table 10. Structural damage has affected 99 irrigation schemes causing reduction of irrigated area by 30.6% while water shortage caused 16.3% of area reduction in 236 irrigations schemes. The combined effect of water shortage and structural damage reduced irrigated area by about 21.8% of the equipped area in 65 irrigation schemes while other problems reduced irrigated area by 23% in 201 irrigation schemes with the overall reduction being about 23.4%.

25 23 Table 9: Factors Affecting Irrigated Area Factors for Reduction of irrigated area No of Equipped Actual Irrigated schemes Area (ha) Area (ha) % % Damage on headwork , Damage on canal , Subtotal Natural flow reduction , Water shortage due to upstream users , Subtotal Natural flow reduction and damage on canal , Natural flow reduction and damage on headwork Subtotal Upstream users and damage on canal Upstream users and damage on headwork Subtotal Others Total ,915 36, Table 10: Factors Affecting Irrigated Area in Community-owned Irrigation Schemes Reasons No of Equipped Actual Irrigated Schemes Area (ha) area (ha) % Damage on headwork 49 6,319 4, Damage on canal 50 3,260 2, Subtotal 99 9,465 6, Natural flow reduction 178 5,505 3, Water shortage due to upstream users 158 8,932 7, Subtotal ,737 11, Natural flow reduction & damage on canal 37 1, Natural flow reduction and damage on headwork Subtotal 59 2,350 1, Upstream users and damage on headwork Upstream users and damage on canal Subtotal Others Total ,478 25, % The water shortage due to upstream users indicates an increasing need for irrigated agriculture in response to the erratic rainfall, need for income diversification and increased demand for food due to increasing population. Inadequate water resources assessment coupled with poor consideration of potential users upstream and downstream of an irrigation scheme could be another reason particularly for modern irrigation schemes. This is observed in some irrigation schemes where new river diversion schemes are constructed without properly assessing the effect on existing downstream irrigation beneficiaries, or without considering the potential upstream users. Expanding of an existing irrigation scheme by upstream users also reduces the release for downstream users.

26 24 The reason for natural flow reduction is obviously land degradation associated with high intensity rainfall with a combined effect of denying opportunity time for water infiltration and recharge of groundwater thus reducing base flows of rivers and springs. The survey showed that about 5,320 ha of irrigated land has been either abandoned due to salinity or salinized but still in use; about 1,390 is waterlogged and about 4,700 ha has been eroded due to mismanagement such as canal breaching and taking water along steep slopes. Table 11 shows the effects of the above problems analyzed by irrigation typology. On average, equipped wetland is more affected with reduced area by about 64.3% followed by traditional irrigation (34.3%) and modern irrigation (24.9%). Individual analysis indicates that damage on irrigation network is the main cause for reducing irrigated area by about 30.7% (modern) and 30% (traditional). The damage of headworks or diversion structures causes reduction of irrigated area by about 22.2% (modern) and 40.3% (traditional. The area reduced due to water shortage is 25.5% (traditional) and 11.5% (modern) while the combined factors have reduced the areas by 36.3% (traditional) and 22.8% (modern). Other factors reduced the areas by 23.2% (traditional) and 21.3% (modern). When all the factors are considered together, modern irrigation schemes are more affected with area reduction by about 58.8% than traditional ones with reduction of about 55.8%. Table 11: Comparison of Equipped and Actual Irrigated Area of Community Irrigation schemes by Typology Reasons Modern irrigation Traditional Irrigation Equipped area Irrigated area Reduction (%) Equipped area Irrigate d area Reduction (%) Damage on headwork 5,653 4, Damage on canal 2,545 1, Effect of Structural factors 8,198 6, , Natural flow reduction ,887 3, Water shortage due to upstream users 4,342 3, ,890 3, Effect of water shortage 4,939 4, ,777 7, Natural flow reduction and damage on canal Natural flow reduction and damage on headwork Upstream users and damage on headwork Upstream users and damage on canal Effect of combined factors 1, , Other ,930 4, % 29,509 12, ,387 13, Irrigated Areas by Sub-basin and Region Water balance analysis can be made by administrative or hydrological unit depending on the need for planning. In this project, the planning unit is considered to be hydrological unit. Accordingly, irrigated areas are summarized by sub-basins as shown in Tables 12 and 13. In other sub-basins, equipped and actual irrigated areas vary from 706 and 524 in Logiya sub-basin

27 25 to 39,333 and ha in Awash-Awash sub-basin where Wonji and Metehara sugar plantations are located. Table 12: Irrigated Area by Sub-Basin Basin Area Equipped Area Actual Irrigated % Sub-basin (km 2 ) (ha) Area (ha) Akaki 1, Ankober 1, Ataye 1, Awadi 1, Awash Adaitu 7, Awash Awash 8, Awash Haledebi 3, Awash Kunture 4, Awash Terminal 8, Awash US_Koka 3, Awash-Arba US 1, Borkena 3, Cheleka_Gewis 2, Eastern Catchment-01 45, Kebena 1, Keleta-Werenso 1, Kesem 3, Logiya 3, Mile 5, Mojo 2, Najeso-Gera 3, Total 115, Irrigated Crops and Cropping Intensity Actual irrigated area is also categorized by irrigated crops as shown in Table 13. The dominant crops irrigated in Awash Basins are vegetables and cereals covering 31.3 and 28.7 percent of the total cropped area. The third and fourth dominant crop groups are cotton (14.6%) and sugar cane (11.5%) followed by fruits (6.2%), stimulants (3.3%) and root crops (3%). Pulses and flowers constitute about 1.2 and 0.5 percent of the total cropped area respectively. In the analysis of cropping pattern in community irrigation schemes including water harvesting systems, vegetables and cereals are found to dominate the cropping pattern with about 42.4 and 39.4 percent of the total cropped area respectively. They are followed by stimulant crops (4.6%), root crops (4.1%), fruits (3.8%) and cotton (2.2%). Maize and onion occupy about 33.9 and 26.8 percent of total cropped area respectively with corresponding proportions of about 84.1 and 64.8 percent of the areas under cereals and vegetables respectively.

28 26 Table 13: (a) Irrigation Intensity by Major Crop Groups Cultivated in Awash Basin Crop Group Area % Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Cereals Vegetables Pulses Root Crops Cotton Oil Crops Fruits Sugar cane Spices Grasses Stimulants Flowers Total cropped area Irrigated Area Irrigation intensity = Table 14: (b) Proportions of Major Crop Groups Cultivated in Awash Basin Crop Group Community Irrigation Schemes Total Irrigation Schemes Cropped Area (ha) % Cropped Area (ha) % Cereals Vegetables Pulses Root Crops Cotton Oil Crops Fruits Sugar cane Spices Grasses Stimulants Flowers Total Irrigation intensity for the total irrigated area varies from a minimum of 99% in Awash Haledebi sub-basin to 209% in Najeso-Gera sub-basin with the overall intensity being about 118% as shown in Table 14. The corresponding intensity of community irrigation schemes varies from about 88.1% in Awash Adaitu to 210% in Awash Awash Sub-basin while the overall average is about 124%. This lower irrigation intensity is attributed to many factors. The first reason is that

29 27 about 37% of the area is under mono-cropping of cotton, sugar cane, fruit trees and stimulants (chat and coffee) while the second factor is growing long-cycle crops in the highlands of the basin (Awash Kunture, Akaki, Significant part of Ankober, Kebena and Kesem sub-basins). Table 15: Annual Cropping Intensity by Sub-basin Sub-basin Total Irrigated and cropped areas Community schemes Irrigated Area Cropped Area % Irrigated Area Cropped Area % Akaki Ankober Ataye Awadi Awash Adaitu Awash Awash Awash Haledebi Awash Kunture Awash Terminal Awash US_Koka Awash Arba US Borkena Cheleka_Gewis Eastern Catchment Kebena Keleta-Werenso Kesem Logiya Mile Mojo Najeso-Gera Total Beneficiaries of Community Irrigation Schemes As it was explained in section 2 above, some socioeconomic information was collected as shown in Table 15. However, many questionnaires did not provide number of actual beneficiaries for traditional irrigation schemes. Hence, the number of actual beneficiaries was estimated based on the average landholding size calculated from those irrigation schemes with beneficiary numbers. The average landholding size of irrigated area for 1615 irrigation schemes was found to be 0.32 ha per household. However, the thumb rule of 0.25 ha per household was used for modern irrigation scheme and 0.35 for all other irrigation schemes.

30 28 Accordingly, a total of 253,320 households (200,599 households using irrigation schemes and 52,721 practicing water harvesting systems) are involved in irrigated agriculture. Women constitute about 38.4% of the total irrigation beneficiaries. Women s involvement in irrigation and water harvesting is about 36.5% and 45.4% respectively. The beneficiaries of only 109 irrigation schemes or 6.2% of the total irrigation schemes are organized under irrigation cooperatives and registered. About 27% or 471 irrigation schemes have informal water user organizations such as traditional water committees and water user associations (WUA) They don t have legal entity because legal registration is only possible for irrigation cooperatives as per the government s policy. The members of these community organizations are only about 12.3% of the total irrigation beneficiaries split into 4.9, 4.4 and 2.9 percent in irrigation cooperatives, traditional water committees and WUA respectively. As irrigation requires joint action, lack of or weak community organization has an impact on irrigation performance. Women participation in executive committees is about 11% of the total membership of executive committees. Table 16: Beneficiaries and Organizations Description Total Male Female % of Women Irrigation beneficiary households 200, ,331 73,268 Water harvesting beneficiary households 52,721 28,772 23,949 Total number of households 253, ,103 97,217 Total irrigation schemes organized 580 Member in 109 irrigation cooperatives 12,479 Member in 412 traditional water committees 11,128 Members in 59 water user associations 7,425 Members of executive committees

31 29 7. LIVESTOCK DATA The purpose of collecting this information is for estimating livestock water demand. The collection of livestock data was carried out similar to data on water harvesting by disaggregating kebele data by sub-basin. Livestock population data was also collected from secondary sources where the entire woredas fall within one sub-basin. More than 150 questionnaires were filled with livestock data and these were summarized by the sub-basins as shown in Table 16. The Eastern Catchment- 01 where feed and water shortage is the highest hosts the largest livestock population followed by Mile and Awash Haledebi subbasins. Table 17: Livestock population by Sub-basin Sub-Basin Cattle Equines Camel Sheep Goat Poultry Akaki 132,091 33,779 51,786 22, ,577 Ankober 95,115 15,841 4,235 47,540 82,200 21,832 Ataye 22,807 2, ,893 3,283 7,630 Awadi 23,088 8,909 2,301 6,721 19,631 15,180 Awash Adaitu 35, ,240 50, ,524 Awash Awash 68,851 14,777 9,143 46,626 98,812 46,740 Awash Haledebi 417,876 20,243 93, , ,997 38,494 Awash Kunture 367,523 79, , , ,560 Awash Terminal 333,082 13,221 83, , ,417 1,042 Awash US_Koka 31,508 1,887 18,487 17,334 19,076 Awash-Arba US 63,512 33,315 1,572 36,193 41,757 56,179 Borkena 211,556 29,192 24, , , ,758 Cheleka_Gewis 101,631 12,208 9,200 19,371 53,041 63,043 Eastern Catchment-01 1,639, , ,009 1,299, ,939 17,500 Kebena 192,536 29,757 2,546 45,653 78,359 84,160 Keleta-Worenso 321,416 89,712 33, , , ,839 Kesem 172,359 83,103 13,717 91, , ,720 Logiya 29,946 9,433 51,034 89, , Mile 916,371 43, , , , ,039 Mojo 79,744 35,280 39,291 12,360 65,101 Najeso-Gera 90,768 19,097 18,841 79, ,534 61,010 Total 5,346, , ,166 4,609,687 4,319,769 1,977,559

32 30 8. AREAS TREATED WITH SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES There was a long debate on the relevance of area treated with soil and water conservation measures on agricultural water use. Considering the indirect relationship that area treated with such measures would increase water yields from wells, springs and rivers due to increased infiltration, it was agreed to include it in the survey and in the AWMISET database. Therefore, information on area treated with natural resources management (NRM) measures was collected. The measures are categorized into four: physical measures (structures such as bunds, checkdams and terraces), biological measures (grass strips, agro-forestry and plantations on degraded lands), combined measures and area closure. The information was to be collected by major land use types at sub-basin level but that not done as expected because of lack of information. Instead, total area treated with the different NRM measures was collected. The data was collected mainly from secondary sources but the data collectors tried to estimate the treated areas by observation and measurements wherever possible. As shown in Table 17, a total of about million hectares of land was reportedly treated with physical, biological or a combination of these measures out of which more than 834,000 ha of degraded land has been protected from human and livestock interferences by the end of Out of the total treated area about 70.6% is in Oromia, 26.5% in Amhara and 2.9% in Dire Dawa. The treated area is grouped by sub-basin as shown in Table 18. Accordingly, about 59% of the treated area is in Awash US_Koka Sub-basin, 9.5% in Borkena, 9% in Awash Awash, 8.6% in Mille and 3.7% in Cheleka-Gewis. Area closure is over half of the area under NRM measures followed by 24.4% and 17.1 percent under combined and physical measures respectively. Biological treatment of degraded area is the least implemented measure covering about 4.1%. Tables 17 and 18 also show that about 2,900 ha of non-irrigated land area reportedly drained with traditional drainage systems. Table 18: Area Treated with Soil and Water Conservation Measures by Region (ha) Physical Biological Combined Area Total % Drained Region measures measures measures Closure Area area* Addis Ababa Amhara 213,745 40,664 91,800 60, , ,664 Dire Dawa 8, ,205 3,761 44, Oromya 41,055 22, , ,959 1,083, Total 262,843 63, , ,368 1,534,314 2,901 % * Non-irrigated area drained with artificial traditional drainage systems

33 31 Table 19: Area Treated with Soil and Water Conservation Measures (ha) Sub-Basin Physical Conservation Biological Conservations Combined Measures Area Closure Total Treated Area Drained Area Akaki 5,074 5,404 6, , Ankober , ,419 Ataye Awadi 4,507 2, ,721 10,577 Awash Adaitu Awash Awash 27,243 10,919 17,315 82, ,917 Awash Haledebi Awash Kunture ,292 2 Awash Terminal Awash US_Koka , , , Awash-Arba US 1,696 5,089 5,450 1,507 13,741 Borkena 70,105 10,604 33,648 31, ,207 1,028 Cheleka_Gewis 31,837 6,609 6,534 11,409 56,389 Eastern Catchment-01 8, ,205 3,761 44,099 Kebena 7,691 2,402 8,696 1,912 20, Keleta-Worenso Kesem 7, , ,308 Logiya Mile 82,605 13,768 27,126 7, , Mojo 6, ,231 Najeso-Gera 9,203 4,732 5,615 4,307 23,856 Total 262,843 63, , ,368 1,534,314 2,901

34 32 9. PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED 9.1 Timing of the Survey It was planned to conduct the agricultural water use survey from February to April/May 2011 but delivery of GPS by international supplier and custom clearance took more than 4 months and this pushed the survey to start in May/June, the onset of the rainy season. This had affected the survey by aggravating accessibility of the irrigation schemes particularly traditional (informal) irrigation schemes. 9.2 Logistics June to August is the period of peak agricultural activities in which the extension staffs are busy in monitoring and guiding agricultural operations. There was also nationwide campaign in natural resources management to the end of June. All these required and competed for vehicles which the woredas are always in short supply. Hence, the surveyors had to travel more than 20 km on foot. Traveling such a distance in rain and wet road condition does not only take time but also undoubtedly causes exhaustion of the surveyors thus having an impact on timely completion of the survey. This might also have a negative effect on data quality. 9.3 Other Problems Area Measurement In some situations, canals traverse villages or rugged areas supplying water to non-contiguous farm plots. Such configuration of irrigated areas posed difficulties in measuring irrigated areas. Fencing of farm plots had also an effect on accessibility of areas for measurement. Another technical problem was traversing along the boundary of the irrigation scheme to measure the area. When traverse is not closed, the GPS does not give the area measure and this necessitated to re-traverse thus taking long time in one site. Capacity constraint Although the surveyors were trained in conducting the survey, some surveyors could not fill the questionnaire appropriately until they were given additional elaboration on the techniques during the monitoring visits. Some trained surveyors left their organization and the woredas had to replace them. This necessitated re-doing the survey in one to two woredas particularly in North Shoa of Amhara Region. Limited support to surveyors In a few woredas of Amhara and Oromia Regions, the heads of agriculture offices could not only facilitate transport for the surveyors but also resisted releasing them for the survey merely due to lack of awareness and the need of the surveyors for other urgent agricultural activities. This had

35 33 initially affected the progress of the survey but the problem was solved through discussion with higher officials at region, zone and woreda levels during monitoring visits. Reluctance for giving information There was resistance from private investors to provide information or to give the right information particularly in cotton farms in Afar and flower farms in Oromia. This has an impact on data quality. Change of Management There were changes in the management of ABA and Water, Mines and Energy Bureau of Dire Dawa City Administration. The changes were associated with a change of focus. This coupled with shortage of vehicles, the survey in Afar and Dire Dawa was unduly delayed affecting the follow-up activities such data entry and analysis. This has excessively affected timely conducting water balance studies.

36 LESSONS LEARNED A number of lessons were learned from the agricultural water survey. Need for more awareness creation on the importance of good quality and up-to-date data: Discussions with stakeholders on the project in general and the survey in particular was limited to region and zone levels. As information on rural activities depends on the woredas and the survey was to be carried out by woreda staff, awareness raising sessions should have included the woreda stakeholders by participating them in the training at zones or through organizing an appropriate forum. This would have enabled the woredas to properly plan their human and logistics requirements and actively support the surveyors. There is still a need to create awareness on the need for accurate and up-to-date data for proper decision making. Need for proper planning: Forced by the delayed delivery of GPS, the survey was started towards the onset of the rainy season when agricultural activities are at peak. The survey was planned with the assumption that the woredas supported by zones would avail the required logistics but due to shortage of vehicles and motor bikes which was worsened by parallel campaign for natural resources management and other extension activities, the surveyors had to travel long distance by foot and this coupled wet road conditions delayed the survey. Therefore, future planning of similar surveys need to make proper estimates of survey requirements and timing of the survey. Testing the Methodology: Following the training, the surveyors directly started their assignment in order to speed up the survey before the onset of the rainy season. Hence, the training did not include testing the methodology due to delayed commencement of the survey and high logistics requirements. Had there been field exercise on sample irrigation schemes, the observed problems and redoing the survey in some woredas would have been avoided. Capacity building: Some of the extension agents have little theoretical irrigation background but almost all of them do lack the practical aspects of agricultural water management. While this training enabled them to appreciate the various technical and nontechnical aspects of irrigation, the survey exercise indicates the need for extensive capacity building programme at zone and woreda levels to water productivity through improve irrigation water management for saving water and increasing production in sustainably way.

37 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 11.1 Conclusions Given the different challenges, the agricultural water use survey has managed to achieve the intended objectives of laying a foundation for collecting and analysis of agricultural water management information. The survey has also managed to involve the relevant government stakeholders at all levels including resources mobilization and this is a great achievement by itself. While constrained by human and logistic problems, the woreda agriculture and water offices had managed to collect the required information, although there were marked differences among the woredas in terms of appreciating the importance of the work and giving due attention. The agricultural water use survey contributed to improving the capacity of those involved in the survey, enabled government at different levels to appreciate the need for quality data on agricultural water management for informed decision-making, and motivated them to scale up the survey. The replication of the methodology by Oromia Region and the plan for it in Amhara Region is a concrete example for this and is great achievement of the project Recommendations Need for Accurate Information While good quality and up-to-date information enables to make appropriate decisions that guide sustainable and equitable water resources development and management, poorly informed decisions will cause otherwise. Therefore, it is strongly recommended that collection and analysis of up-to-date data as a basis for policy-making, working out strategy, planning and implementation should be given equal attention as that of implementation of programmes and projects. Hence, there is a need for more awareness creation on the issue. To cope with water scarcity, the existing situation of agricultural water management should be well known and for this, the developed methodology for agricultural water use survey and analysis has to be scaled up to other basins of Ethiopia through undertaking an extensive capacity building programme. Monitoring agricultural water management should be an integral part of extension activities and relevant information should be collected and reported seasonally or annually. This will also enable to improve quality of data on water harvesting systems that are currently aggregately reported.

38 36 In order to reduce the load of centralized data management, data processing should be carried out at zone or woreda levels and this requires extensive capacity building Issues that need to be Addressed to Improve Irrigation Performance The survey has showed a number of issues that need to be addressed. The following are the main ones. Irrigation Infrastructure 1. One of the major factors limiting irrigated area is structural damage. Therefore, rehabilitation of the existing irrigation schemes should be give due attention in order to improve water productivity and crop production. 2. According to the survey, irrigated area in traditional irrigation schemes is more affected by structural damage than modern irrigation schemes while overall factors are considered, modern irrigation scheme are more affected. This has to be further investigated. Software aspect of community irrigation 3. The majority of community irrigation schemes lack user organizations while those existing are either weak or do not have legal registration thus affecting proper irrigation scheme management and input-output marketing. As irrigation requires joint action, strengthening and establishing water user association should be considered as a priority action to improve irrigation performance. 4. This project showed high skill gap in irrigation extension. While most of the woredas have irrigation extension staff at woreda and kebele levels, they do lack the required skills like developing cropping patterns, estimating crop water requirements and preparing irrigation scheduling as well as irrigation scheme management. This problem is also observed at zone levels. Therefore, there is a need to implement a capacity building programme if irrigation performance is to be improved and significantly contribute to food security enhancement. 5. Although not directly assessed from the survey, one of the problems constraining productivity of irrigated agriculture is lack of agricultural inputs for irrigation particularly during dry seasons. This needs due attention. Water Abstraction 6. The effect of upstream water abstraction on downstream users needs due attention. Everyone has the right to use water in the vicinity but the question to be answered are: a) Who will be given the priority, the downstream users who have already an irrigation system or the upstream new users who will obviously deprive the downstream users if the water supply is inadequate for both groups?

39 37 b) How far should water abstraction is allowed from a river upstream of the already existing irrigation scheme? 7. Guidelines a) The main purpose of this survey is to assess agricultural water use which is estimated based on climate data, cropping patterns and actual irrigated area. What is equally important and remains unknown is the knowledge on water abstraction for irrigation due to lack of water measuring facilities. There should be a guideline that enforces the incorporation of water measuring facilities as an integral part of irrigation infrastructure. b) The performance of irrigation in Ethiopia is not known because performance assessment has not been conducted, if conducted, that did not cover the complete range of technical and socioeconomic aspects of performance assessment. Therefore, assessment of irrigation performance of all scales of irrigation schemes should be given equal attention as construction of irrigation schemes. Three tasks are required for this: determining performance indicators, preparing guideline and conducting the assessment c) There are no standard design manuals for irrigation schemes. The existing manuals are neither exhaustive nor technically sound. They need to be reviewed and updated to make them standard design manuals for the country.

40 38 Annex 1: Cropping Pattern Crops Area (ha) % % within the crop group Crops Area (ha) % 1) Cereals ) Oil Crops % within the crop group Wheat Sesame Rice Niger seed Barley Flax Maize ) Fruits Sorghum Banana Teff Papaya ) Vegetables Orange Onion Citron Tomato Lemon Carrot Apple Cabbage Avocado Pepper Mango Swiss chard Menderin Lettuce Grape Garlic Guava Radish Passion fruits Water melon Strawberries Other Vegetables Enset ) Pulses Pelargonium Chickpeas ) Sugar cane Beans ) Spices Pea Fenugreek Lentils Spices Groundnuts Mint Mungbean Herbs Haricot Bean ) Grasses Horse bean 11) Stimulants ) Root Crops Coffee Potato Gesho Sweet potato Chat Beet roots Tobacco Other root crops ) Flowers ) Cotton Total

41 Annex 2 39

42 Annex 3 GUIDELINE FOR MONITORING AGRICULTURAL WATER USE Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Prepared in May 2010 Revised in March 2011 Yibeltal Tiruneh, Irrigation Engineer Adds Ababa Ethiopia

43 i Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION PURPOSE OF MONITORING WATER USE TYPE OF DATA AND SOURCES OF INFORMATION GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURES TYPES OF QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF COMPLETING THE FORMAT DEFINITIONS OF VARIABLES CROPPING PATTERNS OF IRRIGATED CROPS Cropping Patterns Estimating Areas covered by each crop Crop Production AGRICULTURAL WATER USE Crop Production Livestock OTHER RELEVANT DATA DATA ON IMPROVED RAINWATER AGRICULTURE AND SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DATA ON SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION... 5 APPENDIX 1: CROP COEFFICIENT (KC)... 6 APPENDIX 2: LIST OF WOREDAS IN AWASH BASIN AND WOREDA CODES... 7 APPENDIX 3: LIST OF MAJOR ETHIOPIAN AGRO-ECOLOGICAL ZONES APPENDIX 4: LIST OF SUB-BASINS OF AWASH BASIN... 11

44 1 1. INTRODUCTION A lot of efforts are being undertaken in water resources development and improved water management for different purposes and environmental benefits. However, information on water use for different purposes remains unknown. Irrigation policymakers and managers need information on the irrigation performance at various scales to devise appropriate water management strategies, in particular, considering declining water availability, further threats from climate change, and continually rising population and food demand. In practice it is often difficult to access sufficient water supply and use data to determine crop water consumption and irrigation performance. However, area developed under traditional and modern irrigation systems and performance of the different irrigation systems are also unknown. Lack of such information poses difficulties in proper planning and development of water-based programs and projects. It is therefore imperative to monitor irrigation performance and water use for agriculture and other purposes. The purpose of this manual is to provide guidelines for collecting and reporting data on agricultural water management (irrigated area, water use and other relevant information) and is prepared primarily for extension agents involved in irrigated and improved rainwater agriculture as well as in natural resources management. It provides guidelines for the completion of the data collection FORMAT and serves especially to: initialize the assessment of existing irrigations schemes; assist in planning and implementing sound data collection; standardize reporting methods and techniques, enabling later comparison of data and results from different reports, projects, river basins and regions 2. PURPOSE OF MONITORING WATER USE While the main purpose of monitoring agricultural water management practices is to know the status of irrigated agriculture and agricultural water use to enable informed-decision making, data collection and reporting has the following specific objectives: To have geo-referenced information of existing irrigation schemes to enable preparation of GIS-based information system; To study the existing conditions of irrigation practices, water management, cropping patterns, and cropping intensities in the project area; To investigate the physical conditions of irrigation systems, and water distribution; To study the socio-economic conditions of the current water users of the irrigation schemes; and To help plan irrigation system improvement interventions Information is very important for formulation of policy, development of strategies and undertaking appropriate interventions. Hence, an ultimate effort needs to be made to collect the correct data. One has to avoid guessing or estimating quantitative data unless there is a solid ground and experience that enable making such estimates. A question for which there is no correct information should be answered by NA (Not available).

45 2 3. TYPE OF DATA AND SOURCES OF INFORMATION The information and data to be collected are categorized into three parts: 1. Conventional irrigation schemes including small scale, medium and large scale schemes. The information includes irrigated area, crops grown and production, water use and relevant socioeconomic, environmental and health information for each irrigation scheme over 2.5 ha 2. Improved rainwater agriculture or water harvesting: irrigated area, crops grown and water use (aggregate of all micro-scale irrigated areas) 3. Soil and water conservation: Areas treated with different soil and water conservation measures As the types of data vary, so do the data sources. The main information sources are irrigation users, kebeles, woreda agriculture offices, river basin authorities and field observations. Users include irrigation cooperatives, individual users/farmers and investors/managers. The selection depends on the ease and reliability of the information to be collected. Information obtained from documents, users or woredas should be verified by field observation. 4. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS 4.1 Data Collection Procedures Data can be collected by a team of experts established for the purpose and woreda extension staff or development agents. a) Data collection to be conducted by external team organized for the purpose i) First explain the purpose of the survey for the Woreda Agriculture Office ii) Give a copy of the FORMAT for the woreda office iii) Take a list of traditional and modern irrigation schemes in the woreda including nonfunctional schemes equipped for irrigation iv) Get information on distances of the schemes and their accessibility conditions v) Plan the field survey in consultation with the woreda relevant staff vi) Ask the woreda office to assign staff to guide and facilitate the survey vii) In the field, first meet the kebele administration office or irrigation users cooperative (if the latter exists) and explain the purpose of your being there and your plan viii) Ask for help in arranging a meeting with the beneficiaries of top, middle and tail plots of the irrigation system. Do not insist the time and place but try to convince them ix) Discuss and decide on which one to undertake first: observing the irrigation system or holding the meeting with the farmers x) In the meeting with the beneficiaries: Sit down in a suitable shady place or possibly in kebele office Make sure that everyone is comforted

46 3 Begin with traditional greetings in the local manner and extend your thanks for their coming to the meeting Introduce yourself and let the farmers introduce themselves Explain why you are there and explain the purpose of the survey but do not imply promises. State that you are there to know about the irrigation scheme, learn and mean it. Inform them that you can visit the irrigation system. The beneficiaries commonly elaborate on problems seeking any sort of assistance. Hence, advise them to avoid length explanations of the problems and to answer specific to the questions so that you can release them for their work. xi) Having completed the questions, observe the irrigation system with the beneficiaries and take necessary measurements/estimates to validate the information from the beneficiaries. If irrigation system observation is conducted before the meeting, you may raise additional questions based on the field observation. b) Data to be collected by extension staff/development agent If data is collected by the extension staff/development agent, there is a possibility that previous knowledge and recorded data about the irrigation scheme can be used in completing the FORMAT. But some data could still be collected from the beneficiaries. In both cases care should be taken to avoid bias. The FORMAT will enable the extension staff/development agents to record the type of data for next year reporting while they are doing their regular activities. Therefore, the woredas and the development agents should be monitor the irrigation performance based on the parameters listed in the FORMAT. In completing the FORMAT due consideration should be given to the following: All the blank spaces should be completed or all the questions should be answered subject to data availability The information (both text and figures) should be clearly typed Avoid use of abbreviations that are not indicated in the FORMAT Do not use pencils 4.2 Types of Questions and Responses There are three types of question: Blank space and tables: The tables and the blank spaces should be properly filled with appropriate data. Yes/No-questions: coded with Yes =1 and No=2 Choice-based questions: These are coded with numbers.

47 4 For choice-based questions including Yes/No, tick marks should be put in the boxes corresponding to the number of the answer. As one question may have more than one answer, it is possible to provide appropriate answers by making tick marks on the boxes. Some of the questions are repeated in different context. Therefore, care has to be taken to ensure the correctness and reliability of the data. 5. TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF COMPLETING THE FORMAT 5.1 Definitions of Variables River basin: This refers to major river basins such as Awash, Abbay, Tekeleze, etc. Sub-basin: This refers to hydrologic areas drained by tributaries to the river basins Catchment: This refers to hydrologic areas drained by small streams Total estimated potential area: This is the area than can be developed for irrigation. Water availability and topography as well as suitability for cultivation with good soil are the main criteria for estimating irrigation potential. Total area equipped for irrigation: This is the area for which irrigation structures are constructed and includes modern and traditional irrigation schemes of all scales (small, medium and large scale irrigation schemes) as well as equipped spate and wetlands irrigation systems (Figure 1). It may be greater than, equal to or less than the estimated irrigable area. Actually irrigated area (physical): This is part or whole equipped area that is currently irrigated and cropped. It can be equal to the area equipped for irrigation (covered by irrigation structure/system) or less than the area equipped for irrigation. Harvested irrigated area: This is the irrigated area from which crops are harvested. Some crops on part of the irrigated area may not ripen or may be damaged by different factors including shortage of water, flood damage caused by untimely rainfall, pest, etc. Therefore, the harvested area may be smaller than actually irrigated area. Equipped wetlands: This include cultivated wetland and inland valley bottoms, which have been equipped with water control structures for irrigation and drainage (intake, canals, etc.) and areas along rivers, where cultivation occurs making use of water from receding floods and where structures have been built to retain the receding water Spate irrigation: This can also be referred to as floodwater harvesting and has two types: (1) floodwater harvesting within streambeds and (2) floodwater diversion, where the floods - or spates - from the seasonal rivers are diverted into adjacent embanked fields for direct application. Figure 1 shows the category of areas under irrigation.

48 5 Figure 1: Categories of Area under Agricultural Water Management Area under agricultural water management Area equipped for irrigation Area with other forms of agricultural water management Area equipped for full control Equipped wetlands and flood recession Spate irrigation Non-equipped cultivated wetlands Non-equipped flood recession Surface Sprinkler Localized Equipped wetlands and inland valley bottoms Equipped recession flood In Ethiopia context, the irrigation schemes are grouped into the following: Traditional irrigation: These irrigation schemes are constructed by self-help program of farmers on their own initiatives with the water sources mainly involving springs and river diversions constructed from local materials. The headwork structures are so weak to withstand small floods and hence are washed away frequently. The canal consists of mainly earthen canals without structures for distribution which is made simply by mud and stones. Modern irrigation: These are irrigation schemes with all types of water sources and irrigation structures involving concrete, masonry and gabion works constructed based on professional designs and with complete or nearly complete canal networks. These are financed and constructed with external support such as government, NGO and others. Small scale: Irrigation schemes with irrigated areas up to 200 ha. Medium scale: Irrigation schemes with irrigated areas above 200 ha and up to 3000 ha. Large scale: Irrigation schemes with irrigated areas above 3000 ha. Considering ownership, irrigated areas are categorized into three:

49 6 Public Irrigation Schemes: These comprise medium and large-scale irrigation schemes with areas owned and run by government enterprises Community irrigation schemes: These include all irrigated areas owned and managed by the farmers. They can be traditional or modern irrigation schemes Commercial farms: These include all irrigated areas owned and managed by private investors or farm enterprises for commercial purpose. Individual farm: This includes irrigated farm that is owned by a one farmer or household and can be with modern or traditional irrigation structures 5.2 Cropping Patterns of Irrigated Crops Cropping Patterns Data on cropping patterns for irrigated crops should be collected using Tables 1 of the FORMAT in Annex 4. The Table consists of columns for crops, area covered by each crop, planting and harvesting months, production data, actual irrigation water use and estimated irrigation water requirements. Cropping patterns can be indicated with horizontal bars from the planting date to harvest date. They can also be presented in tables indicating the planting and harvesting dates. Considering the fact that one crop may be planted twice or three times per year, one crop with a suffix of numbers is indicated two or three times in the Table. The cropping pattern with suffix number one should be given for the first production season which is the beginning of European Year. If a crop is planted in the last quarter of the year and is about to be harvested in the first month of the following year, the suffix number should be 2 or 3 depending whether a type of crop is planted twice or three times in that particular year. Suppose onion is planted three times in an irrigation scheme with planting in October, January and May. The onion that is planted in January should be reported as Onion 1 and those in May and October plantings should be reported as Onion 2 and Onion 3 respectively Estimating Areas covered by each crop While the total area equipped for irrigation is known, actually irrigated area in any cropping season is estimated. Areas of individual holdings are not also accurately known because land allocation or distribution was not made by based on scientific measures. Moreover, a farmer allocates his/her plot to different crops and no measurement is involved. Therefore, it is difficult to estimate areas covered by each crop. The farmers use local estimating measures such as timad, kert, and others and the sizes of these local measures are different depending on the localities. Usually one timad/kert is considered to be equivalent to a quarter of one hectare. However, the size of one timad/kert differs from one area to another depending on workability of soil and locality. Therefore, one has to measure different fields and calibrate the local measure either in terms of linear measure (m) or equivalent area (ha).

50 7 Example Suppose a plot of land is estimated to be 2 timad/kert and one timad/kert is equivalent to 0.25 ha. Then the area is Area (A) = 0.25 ha x 2 = 0.5 ha Suppose one timad /kert measures 45 m by 45 m. A = 45 m x 45 m = 2025 m 2 Convert the area estimated into hectare by dividing the estimated area in m 2 by 10, m A ha ha 2 10,000m Therefore, 2 timads = 2 x = ha If the plot measures 55 m by 55 m A = 55 m x 55 m = 3025 m 2 Then the area of the plot is m A 2x ha ha 2 10,000m Once, the local measure is calibrated in such manner, then collect information from the irrigation users on areas they planted for each crop. It is hoped that the development agents record cropping patterns, areas covered by each crop and time of planting. In such cases, areas occupied by each crops will be entered in Table 1 and the total cropped area will simply be the sum of all the areas allocated for different crops. The summation of the areas covered by each crop in any season should be less than or equal to the area actually irrigated in a specific season. If the sum of areas under each crop in a particular season is more than the area actually irrigated in the same season the data should be checked. Example Consider an irrigation scheme of 45 ha equipped with an irrigation structure. Assume actually irrigated areas in three planting seasons are 37, 40 and 44 hectares. If four crops are grown in the irrigation scheme the cropping pattern and areas under each crop are shown in Table 1 and Figure 1.

51 8 Table 20: Cropping pattern and production of irrigated crops Crop Type Area (ha) Yield Planting and Water Use (MCM) Irrigations Harvesting Months (qts/ha) S1 S2 S3 Planting Harvesting IWR Actual use Interval Number A) Cereals 1. Maize 1 20 January May 2. Maize 2 10 June November 3. Wheat 1 10 June October 4. Wheat 2 15 January May B) Vegetables 5. Onion 1 5 January April 6. Onion 2 15 May August 7. Onion 3 16 September December 8. Tomato 1 2 January April 9. Tomato 2 3 September December Total Irrigation 269% II= 100 x Total Cropped area in different planting seasons per year (At) =100 x ( ) intensity Equipped or Actually Irrigated Area 45 Note: S1, S2 and S3 are seasons 1, 2 and 3. Figure 1: Cropping pattern and production of irrigated crops Crop J F M A M J J A S O N D Maize 1 20 Maize 2 10 Wheat 1 15 Wheat 2 10 Onion 1 5 Onion 2 15 Onion 3 16 Tomato 1 2 Tomato 2 3 Total Crop Production Knowledge on crop yields (production quantity per unit of land) is very important not because it measures productivity of land but also helps to determine the type of interventions to improve

52 9 land or soil productivity. Farmers do not measure the quantity of harvests from their plots. Hence, crop yields from farmers plots are in most cases estimate. Therefore, production quantity of each crop should be measured or estimated and the total quantity should be reported in the appropriate column of the FORMAT. As yield will be affected by type of management and water availability as well as input use, the extension agents can measure crop yields based on two level of stratification. The first is the location of plots at the top, middle and tail of the irrigation system while the second is at farmers level (plots of different farmers within the same location of the irrigation systems). Average yields of the different crops will be estimated and reported in the appropriate column of Table 1 in the reporting FORMAT. If the FORMAT is to be completed by the external body, measurement will not be carried out. Instead, information will be collected from randomly selected irrigation users whose plots are located at the top, middle and tail of the irrigation system. 5.3 Agricultural Water Use Crop Production Irrigation Water Requirement Agricultural water withdrawal remains unknown in Ethiopia except in some large scale irrigation schemes due to lack of follow measuring devices with the irrigation system. Crop and irrigation water requirements are estimated from climatic data for modern irrigation schemes. However, actual water withdrawal or water applied to crops often deviates from the estimate due to either excess or shortage of water. On the other hand water use should be known in order to determine the level of depletion of renewable fresh water resources and water productivity. But in the absence of water measuring facilities we need to resort to using empirical method to estimate agricultural water use from climatic data and crop properties. Crop water requirement depends on climatic factors, crop type and growing stages of the crops. Four types of growth stages are generally considered. If actual water uses or irrigation water requirements are not included in the filled FORMAT s these have to be estimated. The estimate can be made for each irrigation scheme which is tedious and time consuming. Alternatively, the irrigation schemes can be categorized based on their agro-ecology setting and cropping patterns as provided in the filled FORMAT. That means average cropping patterns will be prepared for representative agro-ecology zones based on the MoA recent classification (Annex 2). These zones will be considered homogeneous in terms of types of irrigated crops grown, crop calendar, cropping intensity and gross irrigation efficiency. The cropping pattern proposed for the agro-ecological zone should be viewed as representative of an average rather than a typical irrigation scheme. To facilitate this categorization, a toll is included in the database which requires entering the cropping pattern data and agro-ecology. The tool generates cropping patterns with proportions of area under each crop in percentage. Table 21: Crop growing Stages

53 10 Growing Stages Initial stage Crop development Mid-season Late Descriptions Germination and early growth, little of the soil (less than 10%) is covered with crop. Up to when the crop achieves full ground cover From full cover is achieved to maturity, when leaves start to discolor or fall off. Flowering and fruit setting occurs during this phase. From mid-season until harvest. Therefore, the methodology for estimating irrigation water requirement combines information on irrigated area, cropping patterns, crop coefficients, and climate data to produce an estimate of net irrigation water requirement. Calculation procedure for crop evapotranspiration (ETc) consists of: 1. Select the type of crops to be grown; 2. Establish planting dates; 3. Identify the crop growth stages and determine their lengths; 4. Select kc values from Table 7 for each growing stage; 5. Adjust the selected k c values for frequency of wetting or climatic conditions during the stage; 6. Construct the crop coefficient curve (allowing one to determine k c values for any period during the growing period); Plot kc values at midpoints of growing periods and connect them; Construct a curve by connecting straight line segments through each of the four growth stages Read kc values for any period during the growing stage 7. Calculate ET c as the product of ET o and k c Crops vary in their nature of growth, that some crops take short time to mature like peas, while others need long time (cotton). In the same manner, some crops need more water at full maturity than other onions. Hence, the amount of water required by each crop varies daily and seasonally.

54 11 Determination of irrigation cropping pattern zone per river basin Crop Coefficient Kc (m) Monthly Cropping Intensity CI(m) Computation of crop water requirements per unit area Max(0, (Kc(m) x ETo(m)-Pe(m)) x CI(m) Area under irrigation Reference ETo (m) Monthly IWR by crop by cropping pattern per river sub-basin Apply efficiencies Effective rainfall Pe (m) = 0.6P-10 (P<=70) = 0.8P-24 (P>70) Annual IWR per river basin Figure 2 : Schematic Representation of Computing IWR Irrigation water requirements can be computed based on the following formula: IWRn (m) = max( 0, ( (Kc(m) ETo(m)) - ETa(m) ) ) A CI(m) Where: IWRn = Net Irrigation water requirements to cover crop evapotranspiration Kc = Crop coefficient ETo = Reference evapotranspiration (mm)per month ETa = Actual evapotranspiration (mm) A = Actual irrigated area (without considering double cropping) CI = Cropping intensity m = Monthly time step of the calculation. Estimation of ETa requires conducting water balance study for a river basin using soil-water balance model for which time series hydrological and meteorological data and soils data as well as geo-referenced spatial data are needed. Because these data are lacking, irrigation water requirements will be estimated using the following formula: IWRn(m) = max( 0, ( Kc(m) ETo(m) - Pe(m) ) A CI(m) Where Pe is effective rainfall (mm) estimated from the following

55 12 Pe = 0.6P-10 for P<=70 = 0.8P-24 for P>70 Where P=monthly rainfall in mm Efficiency factor has to be applied to the net irrigation water requirement to take into account the conveyance, distribution and application losses. It will not be wise to apply one efficiency factor at national level because irrigation efficiencies do vary according to socioeconomic conditions, type of soils, irrigation system and availability of water. Therefore, different efficiency values have to be applied to each agro-ecology zone. As shortage of water supply is prevalent in most of the irrigation schemes, crop demands may not be met or there may be excess irrigation. Hence, estimated irrigation water requirements cannot be equated to actual water withdrawal. Therefore, irrigation efficiency (E) in the range of must be applied depending on the irrigation system. Irrigation water requirement is then obtained through the following equation: IWRn IWRg E Where IWRg = gross irrigation water requirement IWRn = irrigation requirement and E = irrigation efficiency for a given type of irrigation system Example: Calculation of ETc for Onion in Sewir Irrigation Scheme- North Shewa, Amhara Table 22: Crop data Crop Planting date Harvesting date Soil type Onion 15 September 30 December clay Table 23: ETo for Shewa Robit Month S O N D ETo (mm/day) Rainfall (mm) Step 1: Determine growth stages of the crops (column 2) of Annex 1 Step 2: Indicate ETo Values with Growth Stages (Column 3) ETo for Onion during initial and development stages: ETo = 15 x x 4.7 = 97 mm and ETo = 25 x x 4 = mm Step 3: Select Kc values from Table 4 for each growing stage (column 4)

56 13 Step 4: Estimate Net irrigation water requirement (NIWR) NIWR = ETc effective Rainfall (Pe) All the rain that fall is not beneficial to plant growth. Some is lost to evaporation, percolation and runoff. Hence, only effective rainfall is considered in estimating irrigation water requirement. Effective rainfall is estimated as follows: Pe = 0.8P-24 for P > 75 mm/month Pe = 0.6P-10 for P <75 mm/month Pe = dependable effective rainfall P = monthly mean rainfall Step 4: Estimate Gross Irrigation Water Requirement (GIWR) The gross irrigation requirements account for losses of water incurred in canals and application to the field. This is expressed in terms of efficiencies when calculating gross irrigation requirements from net irrigation requirements as shown below: NIWR Gross irrigation water depth (GIR) = Where, E = Irrigation efficiency E The following irrigation efficiencies can be applied depending on the irrigation system (surface, sprinkler and localized/drip) and local irrigation practices for surface irrigation system (furrow, border, basin and wild flooding). Table 24: Typical Irrigation Efficiencies for Different Irrigation Systems Description % 1. Surface irrigation System Sprinkler efficiency Drip/localized irrigation efficiency 90-95

57 14 Table 25: Kc values for different Growth Stages of Onion Growth Stages Crop Calculation Initial stage Crop development Mid-season Late season Total stage stage stage Duration (days) Months 15 Sept-5 Oct 6 Oct-25 Nov 26 Nov-15 Dec Dec Kc values ETo (mm) ETc (mm) Kc x ETo P (mm) Pe (mm) 0.6P-10 or P-24 NIWR (mm) ETC-Pe GIWR (mm) NIWR/E E=efficiency of 50% is considered. Volume of GIWR for 1 ha for one season = Tot x Area (ha) x = 10A x Tot m = 10 x 1 x 663 m 3 = 6,630 m 3 This should be multiplied by the total irrigated area planted with onion. Similarly, GIWR should be calculated from for all planted crops for each season. For example, 4 crops are planted in one season and 5 crops in a second season, the total water taken from the water sources or irrigation water withdrawal (IWW) for one year is the sum of GIWRs of all crops: IWW = GIWR11 + GIWR12 + GIWR13 + GIWR14 + GIWR21 + GIWR22 + GIWR23 + GIWR24 + GIWR25 Where, GIWR11, GIWR12, GIWR13 and GIWR14 are GIWR for each crop in season one GIWR21, GIWR22, GIWR23, GIWR24 and GIWR25 are GIWR for each crop in season two If irrigation is applied before planting, that has to be added to the above gross irrigation water requirement. This can be estimated using one of the following methods if these parameters can be estimated based on canal measurements explained in Section below. V pr 3. 6QT OR V pr 10AD Where, V pr = Volume of water applied before irrigation (m 3 ) Q= Canal discharge (l/s) T= duration of irrigation (hrs) A= Irrigated area (ha) D= depth of irrigation (mm)

58 15 Similar to irrigation water requirements, irrigation scheduling is also determined for modern irrigation schemes during design. However, actual irrigation intervals and durations of irrigation as well as quantity of water applied per irrigation per crop are different from the recommended parameters. Irrigation frequency is set and adopted based on local experience and water availability similar to traditional schemes. Therefore, irrigation intervals and number of irrigations per crop should be reported for each growing season in order to enable reasonable adjustment of reported irrigation water requirements. For this, the extension agents and the farmers should record irrigation intervals and total number of irrigations for each crop for each growing season. Pump irrigation For pump irrigation water use can be estimated as follows: Record the pump discharge (Q) is known and duration of pump operation per day (T) Record the duration (T) the pump is operated per day and number of days (N) the pump was operated during the cropping season. V p 3. 6 Q T N p Where, V p = Volume of water applied before irrigation (m 3 ) Q p = pump discharge (l/s) T= duration of irrigation (hrs) N=Number of days the pump was operated If discharge and duration per day vary, the volume of water can be estimated by summing daily volume of water pumped. N Vp 3.6 i1 Q i T i Q i = pump discharge (l/s) in each day T= duration of irrigation per day (hrs) Estimating Canal Discharge It is obvious that none of the small scale irrigation schemes have flow measuring structures incorporated with irrigation structures. Hence, it is difficult to estimate the amount of water abstraction and flows in different canals and into irrigation plots. On the other hand, the amount of water used for irrigation should be estimated. In the absence of any measuring device, we need to resort to a method that does not require structure/device for measurement. The simplest technique is float method which is familiar for most of development agents with agricultural, civil and hydraulic engineering background. While the method is a quick and cheap to estimate discharge in a canal, it is not very accurate and errors of at least 10% can be expected.

59 16 The method consists of estimating the average flow velocity, and measuring the area of the cross-section, called the wetted cross-section. The discharge can be calculated by the following formula: Q = VA Where: Q = discharge in m 3 /s; V = average flow velocity in m/s; and A = area in m 2 of the wetted cross-section. If one wants to know the discharge in l/s instead of m 3 /s, multiply it by 1,000 as follows Q = 1,000 x VA a) Average Flow Velocity To estimate the average flow velocity, the flow velocity of the water at the surface, the surface velocity, Vs, is first determined. The surface velocity is determined as follow: Select a straight and uniform canal reach, measure it as shown in the Figure below and mark the starting and ending points Place the floating object in the centre of a canal at the upstream mark, and record the time take by the float to reach the downstream mark. Repeat the measurement a least three times to avoid mistakes. Record the lengths and times in the appropriate FORMAT as show in the table (the table enables measurements at three different canal reaches) Take Average values of the time records Estimate the surface velocity (Vs) by dividing reach length by average time (Vs= L/T) Because surface velocity is faster than flow velocities at depths, average velocity can be estimated by multiplying surface velocity by a factor k. For most earthen irrigation canals this reduction factor, k is about while 0.9 is appropriate for lined canal. Average velocity, V=kVs Figure 3: Measuring the surface flow velocity

60 1 b) Calculating area of the wetted Cross-Section and discharge Earth canals have trapezoidal cross section. Steps for calculating the wetted cross section of the trapezoidal section Measure the bottom (B) and top (T) widths of the canal and depth (D) of flow at the selected canal reach as shown in the figure below. Take different measurements at different cross sections within the selected canal reach and calculate average figures by dividing the records by the number of measurement in each case Calculate the area of the wetted cross-section (A) by the formula: A B T D 2 B, T and D represent bottom width, top width and depth of the canals as shown in Figure 4. Figure 4: Canal Dimensions

61 2 Table 26: FORMAT for recording measurements (three different canal reaches) Description Long. Lat. Long. Lat. Long. Lat. Location of reaches Lengths of canal reaches (L) L1 L2 L3 Time taken for float to travel through T1 T2 T3 T1 T2 T3 T1 T2 T3 the reach length Average time (T= (T1+T2+T3)/3) Surface flow velocity (Vs=L/T) Average flow velocity (V=kVs) Discharge ( Q= VA) Record the number of hours per day and the number of days this flow continued and then multiply discharge by total seconds. Example 1 If the measured discharge is 0.50 m 3 /s and it continued flowing for 5 days, the volume of water is calculated as follows: Number of seconds per day = 24 hours x 60 minutes x 60 seconds = seconds Volume = Q T = 0.5 m 3 /s x 5 days x seconds = 216,000 m 3 If the same flow continued for the growing season of about 4 months, the total water taken from the water source will be as follows: Volume = 0.5 m 3 /s x 120 days x seconds = 518,400 m 3. Example 2 Discharge measurement can be made in the main canal just downstream of the intake at least two times in a month for the whole duration of the irrigation season. Irrigation is practiced for nine months in a year with the following calculated monthly average discharges. Months Average discharge of 9 months Average monthly l/s or discharge (l/s): m 3 /s Irrigation duration per day: 16 hours Estimated water abstraction is calculated as below: Volume = Q T = m 3 /s x 9 months x 30 days x 16 hours x 3600 seconds = 1,791,590 m 3 This calculated figure can be reported as 1,791.6 in 000 m 3 units Livestock Livestock water use per head varies with type of animal, differing climates and differing animalhusbandry practices. However, to avoid the complexities, it is proposed to have an average consumption

62 rate irrespective of agro-ecology setting. Therefore, it is best to collect information on types and number of animals from each catchment or sub-basin or kebele/woreda that falls with a catchment, sub-basin or basin. The ranges of daily water requirements of animals are listed in Table 8. Table 27: Livestock Water Consumption Rates No Type of Animal Water Consumption Rate per head per day ( liters) 1. Cattle Sheep and goats Equine (horse, mule, donkey) Camel Poultry Livestock water use can be estimated using the following formula Annual Livestock Water Demand = days x Consumption rate x Number of livestock 3

63 4 5.4 Other Relevant Data The monitoring of irrigation performance will not be limited to irrigated area and water use but it also needs to cover other relevant information required for complete monitoring of the status of the irrigation schemes aimed at improving the performance. These include the data on: Difference between equipped and irrigated areas: Actually irrigated areas are often less than the equipped areas due to a number of reasons including unforeseen upstream abstraction, natural reduction of river flow, excessive water losses, damage of irrigation infrastructure and others. Hence, it is very important to know the reason for discrepancy between equipped and actually irrigated areas. Status of irrigation schemes: an irrigation scheme could be functional, semi-functional or nonfunctional due to system failure, water shortage or any other reasons or a combination of these. If all the equipped area is irrigated as designed, the irrigation scheme is considered to be fully functional. If part of the irrigation scheme is irrigated due to structural failure or water shortage or any other reason, it can be considered as semi-functional. If irrigation is not practiced at all, the irrigation scheme is nonfunctional. Semi-functionality or non-functionality of an irrigation scheme can be explained by the difference between the equipped and actually irrigated areas. If no area is actually irrigated, the irrigation scheme is non-functional. If actually irrigated area is less than the equipped area, the irrigation system is semi-functional. Hence, possible reasons can be drying of water source, structural damage, siltation of dams or any other. Water management: This refers to water distribution within the irrigation systems, irrigation scheduling (irrigation interval, how much to apply and duration) and responsible body for water distribution. This is also related to how irrigation users are organized for equitable water distribution and cropping plans (cropping pattern and calendar). Measures taken by the farmers to cope with water shortage are part of the water management. Operation and maintenance: Operation of an irrigation scheme is simply opening and closing of intake and canal gates for water distribution while maintenance includes planning for maintenance, cost and source of funding. The questions are self-explanatory to answering. Socioeconomics: Information on number of planned/initial and actual beneficiaries by gender water users organizations, members of executive committee by gender and basis of water charges. These data can easily be found from the users organizations (if these exist) or in the discussion from the beneficiaries and woreda agriculture and rural development offices. Environmental and health: The information on these is very valuable for devising and taking measures to solve the problems. Therefore, one should monitor whether an observed environmental and health problem is related irrigation. Ready-made data on area abandoned due to salinity, waterlogged area due to excess irrigation, eroded area due to improper irrigation and area encroached by flood or riverbank erosion are not available. These have to be estimated based on field observations/measurements: - Estimate or measure the length and width of the affected area by measuring tape or pacing. - If the area affected is irregular, divide the area into regular sections (rectangle and triangle).

64 - If an area under consideration is a long strip with different widths along its length, take some measurements at critical sections and calculate average value of the width. Then multiply the length by the average width. The calculated area should be converted to hectare by dividing it by 10,000. Areas of regular sections Data on Improved Rainwater Agriculture and Soil and Water Conservation Improved Rainwater Agriculture includes micro-catchment and macro-catchment water harvesting systems. In this category, areas using communal and individual ponds, household water harvesting facilities including roof and land catchment sources as well as hand dug wells are considered. Household level water harvesting systems use different irrigation application systems such as surface, sprinkler and drip. Therefore, information on area irrigated by each type of system and water source should be collected. The tables in the data collection FORMAT are simple to be completed provided data are available. 5.6 Data on Soil and Water Conservation Information on this is not related to agricultural water use. But treatment of degraded lands with different soil and water conservation measures is very important for conservation of water resources. Therefore, data on areas treated with different soil and water conservation measures should be collected. The measures are categorized into four: physical measures (structures such different types of bunds, checkdams and terraces), biological measures (grass strips, agro-forestry, and plantations for the purpose of conservation of degraded lands), combined measures and area closure. The information need to be collected by major land use types and catchment level. If data is not available by category, an aggregate data should be inserted in Both Measures column and remark should be given.

65 6 Appendix 1: Crop Coefficient (Kc) Crops Initial Crop Midseason Late & harvest Depth of Root system (cm) Depletion level (%) development Cereals Barely 0.3 (15) (65) 0.25 (40) Maize 0.40 (20) (40) 0.75 (30) Milet 0.3 (20) (55) 0.3 (35) Sorghum 0.35 (20) (40) 0.65 (30) Teff Wheat 0.35 (15) (65) 0.70 (40) Vegetables Beet roots 0.5 (25) (25) 0.95 (10) Cabbage 0.45 (20) (60) 0.90 (15) Carrot 0.45 (20) (30) 0.90 (20) Cucumber Garlic Lettuce 0.45 (20) (15) 0.90 (10) Onion 0.50 (20) (20) 0.85 (10) Pepper 0.35 (30) (40) 0.90 (20) Sugar beet 0.45 (25) ( (60) 0.80 (45) Swiss chard 0.4 (20) (30) 0.75 (110) Tomato 0.45 (25) (40) 0.80 (25) Pulses Bean (dry) 0.35 (20) (40) 0.90 (20) Groundnut 0.45 (25) (50) 0.75 (20) Pea 0.45 (20) (35) 1.05 (15) Lentil Chick pea 0.4 (20) (30) 0.35 (15) Mung bean 0.4 (20) (30) 0.35 (15) Root crops Potato 0.45 (25) (30) 0.75 (20) Sweet Potato 0.5 (20) (60) 0.65 (40) Cotton 0.45 (30) (55) 0.75(45) Grass 1 (10) (35) 0.75 (35) Alfalfa Permanent Young Mature Banana Citrus Date palm Mango Mango Papaya Sugar cane Guava Tringo Coffee Chat 1.05 (25) (80) 0.7 (10) Hops 0.3 (25) (80) 0.85 (10) Source: FAO I & D paper 24 (1977) and I & D 33 (1979)

66 7 Appendix 2: List of Woredas in Awash Basin and Woreda Codes Region Zones Woreda Woreda Code Area_Sqkm Somali Region Shinile Ayisha Somali Region Shinile Erer Somali Region Shinile Shinile Somali Region Shinile Dembel Somali Region Shinile Deder Somali Region Jijiga Awuber Somali Region Shinile Meiso Somali Region Jijiga Jijiga Dire Dawa Dire Dawa Dire Dawa Addis Ababa Akaki Kaliti Akaki Kaliti Addis Ababa Nefas Silk Lafto Nefas Silk Lafto Addis Ababa Kolfe Keraniyo Kolfe Keraniyo Addis Ababa Gulele Gulele Addis Ababa Lideta Lideta Addis Ababa Kirikors Kirikors Addis Ababa Arada Arada Addis Ababa Addis Ketema Addis Ketema Addis Ababa Yeka Yeka Addis Ababa Bole Bole Oromiya West Shewa Jeldu Oromiya West Shewa Dendi Oromiya West Shewa Ejerie Oromiya West Shewa Welmera Oromiya West Shewa Adea Berga Oromiya West Shewa Holetea Town Oromiya North Shewa Kimbibit Oromiya North Shewa Bereh Oromiya North Shewa Sulullta Oromiya North Shewa Jido Oromiya North Shewa Aleiltu Oromiya North Shewa Sendafa Town Oromiya East Shewa Fentale Oromiya East Shewa Boset Oromiya East Shewa Adama Oromiya East Shewa Lomme Oromiya East Shewa Gimbichu Oromiya East Shewa Adea Oromiya East Shewa Dugda Oromiya East Shewa Bishoftu Town Oromiya East Shewa Bora Oromiya East Shewa Liben Oromiya East Shewa Akaki

67 8 Region Zones Woreda Woreda Code Area_Sqkm Oromiya Arsi Merti Oromiya Arsi Aseko Oromiya Arsi Gololcha Oromiya Arsi Jeju Oromiya Arsi Dodota Oromiya Arsi Zeway Dugda Oromiya Arsi Hitosa Oromiya Arsi Sude Oromiya Arsi Robe Oromiya Arsi Tena Oromiya Arsi Digeluna Tijo Oromiya Arsi Tiyo Oromiya Arsi Guna Oromiya Arsi Sire Oromiya Arsi Ludehetosa Oromiya Arsi Deksis Oromiya West Hararge Meiso Oromiya West Hararge Doba Oromiya West Hararge Tulo Oromiya West Hararge Chiro Town Oromiya West Hararge Anchar Oromiya West Hararge Guba Qoricha Oromiya West Hararge Habro Oromiya West Hararge Daro Lebu Oromiya West Hararge Quni Oromiya West Hararge Gemechis Oromiya West Hararge Chiro Zuriya Oromiya East Hararge Kombolicha Oromiya East Hararge Jarso Oromiya East Hararge Haromaya Oromiya East Hararge Qersa Oromiya East Hararge Meta Oromiya East Hararge Goro Gutu Oromiya East Hararge Deder Oromiya East Hararge Chinakesen Oromiya South West Shewa Wonchi Oromiya South West Shewa Weliso Oromiya South West Shewa Dawo Oromiya South West Shewa Ilu Oromiya South West Shewa Sebeta Hawas Oromiya South West Shewa Kersana Malima Oromiya South West Shewa Tole Oromiya South West Shewa Becho

68 9 Region Zones Woreda Woreda Code Area_Sqkm Oromiya South West Shewa Seden Sodo Oromiya South West Shewa Sodo Dacha Oromiya South West Shewa Sebeta Town Oromiya Adama Special Zone Adama Town Oromiya Burayu Special Zone Burayu Afar Zone 01 Dubti Afar Zone 01 Elidar Afar Zone 01 Afambo Afar Zone 01 Mile Afar Zone 01 Chefera Afar Zone 03 Amibara Afar Zone 03 Awash Fentale Afar Zone 03 Gewane Afar Zone 03 Dulecha Afar Zone 03 Bure Modayitu Afar Zone 03 Argoba Liyu Afar Zone 04 Awura Afar Zone 04 Ewa Afar Zone 05 Telalak Afar Zone 05 Semurobina Gelalo Afar Zone 05 Dewe Afar Zone 05 Dalifagi Afar Zone 05 Hadeleala Afar Zone01 Salty Lake Amahara North Shewa Ankober Amahara Oromiya Special Zone Artuma Fursi Amahara South Wello Alibuko Amahara South Wello Ambasel Amahara North Shewa Angolelana Tera Amahara North Shewa Antsokiya Gemza Amahara Argoba Special Zone Argoba Amahara North Shewa Asagert Amahara North Shewa Basona Werana Amahara Oromiya Special Zone Bati Amahara North Shewa Berehet Amahara Oromiya Special Zone Dawa Chefa Amahara South Wello Desse Town Amahara South Wello Desse Zuriya Amahara Oromiya Special Zone Dawa Harewa Amahara North Shewa Gishe Amahara North Wello Guba Lafto Amahara North Wello Harbu Amahara North Shewa Hagere Mariam

69 10 Region Zones Woreda Woreda Code Area_Sqkm Amahara North Shewa Insarona Wayu Amahara Oromiya Special Zone Jile Timuga Amahara South Wello Kalu Amahara Oromiya Special Zone Kemise Town Amahara North Shewa Kewet Amahara South Wello Kombolcha Town Amahara South Wello Kutaber Amahara North Shewa Menz Gera Meder Amahara North Shewe Menz Mama Mider Amahara North Shewa Minjar Shenkora Amahara North Shewa Tama Ber Amahara South Wello Tehuledere Amahara South Wello Wereilu Amahara South Wello Werebabo Amahara North Shewa Yifrarana Gidin Afar Zone 01 Asyita

70 Appendix 3: List of Major Ethiopian Agro-Ecological Zones Designation Description Designation Description A1 Hot arid lowland plains M5 Cold moist sub-afro-alpine to afro-alpine A2 Warm arid lowland plains M6 Very cold moist sub-afro-alpine to afro-alpine A3 Tepid arid mid highlands SH1 Hot sub-humid lowlands SA1 Hot semi-arid lowlands SH2 Warm sub-humid lowlands SA2 Warm semi-arid lowlands SH3 Tepid sub-humid mid highlands SA3 Tepid semi-arid mid highlands SH4 Cool sub-humid mid highlands SM1 Hot sub-moist lowlands SH5 Cold sub-humid sub-afro-alpine to afro-alpine SM2 Warm sub-moist lowlands SH6 Very cold sub-humid sub-afro alpine to afro-alpine SM3 Tepid sub-moist mid highlands H2 Warm humid lowlands SM4 Cool sub-moist mid highlands H3 Tepid humid mid highlands SM5 Cold sub-moist mid highlands H4 Cool humid mid highlands SM6 Very cold sub-moist mid highlands H5 Cold humid sub-afro-alpine to afro-alpine M1 Hot moist lowlands H6 Very cold humid sub-afro-alpine M2 Warm moist lowlands PH1 Hot per-humid lowlands M3 Tepid moist mid highlands PH2 Warm Per-humid lowlands M4 Cool moist mid highlands PH3 Tepid Per-humid mid highland 11 Appendix 4: List of Sub-Basins of Awash Basin Name Area_Sq.km Name Area_Sqkm Awash US_Koka Keleta-Werenso Borkena Awash-Arba US Mile Ankober Logiya Najeso -Gera Cheleka_Gewis Awash Kunture Ataye Awash Awash Awadi Awash Haledebi Kebena Awash Terminal Kesem Eastern Catchment Akaki Awash Adaitu Mojo

71 1 Annex 4: Questionnaire Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) AGRICULTURAL WATER USE DATA COLLECTION FORM A) Irrigation Scheme B) Improved Rainwater Agriculture C) Livestock Population by Type and Water Use D) Soil and Water Conservation Measures January 2011 Addis Ababa Ethiopia

72 FORMAT FOR REPORTING AGRICULTURAL WATER USE FOR EACH IRRIGATION SCHEME (For areas including 2.5 ha and above) Name of Reporter: Reporting Year: No Data Variables I Location of Irrigation Scheme 1. Name of irrigation Site: 2. Administrative Location a) Region: b) Zone: c) Woreda: d) Kebele e) Rural/Urban setting: 1=Rural 2= Urban/Peri-urban Administrative Location a) Region: b) Zone: c) Woreda: d) Kebele: e) Rural/Urban setting: 1=Rural 2= Urban/Peri-urban 3. Geographic coordinates a) Water abstraction site (diversion, dam, or pumping sites) Latitude/North: degree (decimal) Longitude/East: degree (decimal) Altitude : (meter above sea level) b) Center of irrigated/command area: Latitude/North: degree (decimal) Longitude/East: degree (decimal) Altitude : (meter above sea level) 4. Hydrological Location a) River Basin: b) Sub-Basin: c) Catchment: 5. Agro-ecology (designation): II Water Source 6. Source of Water Surface water: 1=river 2= dam 3= pond 4= natural lake Groundwater: 5= hand-dug well 6= shallow well 7=deep well 8= spring 9= reuse of agricultural drainage water 10= others 7. Name of water source: 8. Method of water abstraction: 1=diversion 2= dam 3= motor pump 4= Human powered pump 5 Other (specify) III Irrigation System and Command Area 9. Irrigation system: 1=surface 2=sprinkler 3= drip/localized 1

73 No Data Variables Typology of irrigation scheme: 1= Traditional 2 =Modern 3=Equipped spate 4= Equipped wetland 5=Non-equipped wetland 6=Non-equipped flood recession 11. Area irrigated during the reporting year a) Area equipped for irrigation (ha): b) Actually irrigated area (ha): c) Harvested area (ha): 12. If actual irrigated area is less than equipped area, what are the reasons? 1= Damage on headwork 2= Damage on canal 3 = Natural flow reduction 4=Shortage of water due to upstream users 5=headwork damage and water shortage 6=canal damage and water shortage 7= other 13. Irrigated area equipped with drainage system (ha) 14. Water used for irrigation a) Actual water withdrawal, if measured ( 000 m 3 ): IV b) Calculated water abstraction at the intake ( 000 m 3 ): c) Estimated irrigation water requirement ( 000 m 3 ): Environment and Health Information 15. Environmental Problems: a) Area salinized and still cultivated (ha): b) Area salinized and abandoned (ha): c) Waterlogged area (ha); d) Eroded area due to irrigation (ha): 16. What health problems have been observed since irrigation started? 1=Malaria epidemic 2=Bilharzias 3 =other (specify): 17. Number of people affected by water-related diseases: V Investment and Irrigation Scheme Management 18. Name of funding agency: 19. Name of implementing agency: 20. Year when: a) construction was started: b) construction was completed: c) first irrigation started: 21. Investment and operation costs a) construction cost: Birr (US$ ) b) average annual operation cost: Birr US$ ) c) average annual maintenance cost: Birr (US$ ) 2

74 No Data Variables Who covers maintenance cost: 1 = Users annual water charge 2 = Users contribute at system failure 3 = Users annual water charge and Region/Woreda 4 = Users contribution and Region/Woreda 5 = others VI Present Status of irrigation scheme 23. What is the current status of irrigation scheme? 1=Functional 2=Semi-functional 3=Non-functional 24. Ownership of the scheme: 1 = public 2= community 3 = Commercial farm 4=Individual VII Socioeconomics 25. Beneficiary Households a) Number of planned or Initial beneficiaries: b) Number of actual beneficiaries (households): c) Actual number of male beneficiaries (households): d) Actual number of female beneficiaries (households): 26. Type of irrigation organization for the management of the irrigation scheme: 1=Irrigation cooperative 2=Water users association 3=Traditional water committee 4=Not organized 27. If organized: a) name of water user organization: b) number of organization members: c) number of Executive members by gender Male: Female: 28. Priority of access to irrigation water 1= crop type 2= crop symptom 3=male 4=female 5= (other specify): 29. If beneficiaries pay, basis of annual charge: 1=Only irrigated area 2= Crop type and area 3=Fixed rate by all users msal = meter above sea level 3

75 4 30. Cropping patterns and production Table 1: Irrigated Agriculture: Cropping pattern and production of irrigated crops Crop Type A) Cereals 1. Maize 1 2. Maize 2 3. Wheat 1 4. Wheat 2 5. Sorghum 1 6. Sorghum 2 7. Rice 1 8. Rice 2 9. Barley B) Vegetables 10. Onion Onion Onion Garlic Garlic Tomato Tomato Carrot Carrot Cabbage Cabbage Pepper Pepper Lettuce 24. Swiss chard Swiss chard Other vegetables Other vegetables 2 C) Pulses 28. Beans Beans Pea Pea Chickpeas Chickpeas Groundnuts Groundnuts Lentil Lentil 2 D) Roots crops 38. Potato Potato Sweet potato Sweet potato Beet roots 1 Irrigated Area (ha) Production (qt) Planting and Harvesting Months Water Use ( 000 m 3 ) J F M A M J J A S O N D Actual IWR

76 5 Crop Type 43. Beet roots Other root crops E) Fiber crops 45. Cotton Cotton 2 F) Oil crops 47. Niger seed 48. Flax seed 49. Sesame Sesame 2 G) Permanent Crops 51. Banana 52. Papaya 53. Citrus 54. Mango 55. Avocado 56. Coffee 57. Tea 58. Sugar cane 59. Flowers 60. Grasses/Pasture Irrigated Area (ha) Production (qt) Planting and Harvesting Months Water Use ( 000 m 3 ) J F M A M J J A S O N D Actual IWR Water Use IWR ( 000 m 3 ) Average monthly discharge (l/s)* Water withdrawal ( 000 m 3 ) Total IWR = Irrigation water requirement 000 m 3 = in thousands of cubic meters qts= quintals ha=hectare * Only for water sources with continuous flow during the months in which irrigation is practiced NB: The 12 months total withdrawal should be equal to the figure in Question 17a or 17b. The total IWR should be the value given in question 17c

77 6 Part B: Area Developed under Improved Rainwater Agriculture (Aggregate of Irrigated Areas below 2.5 ha by Sub-basin) I. Location Data 1. River Basin: 2. Sub-Basin: 3. Region: 4. Zone: 5. Woreda: II. Improved Rainwater Agriculture (Water Harvesting) 6. Area irrigated under improved rainwater agriculture Type of water harvesting system a) Water harvested in ponds b) Spate irrigation c) Wetland irrigation d) Flood recession e) Water harvested in household water storage systems f) Others Total irrigated area (ha) Total harvested area (ha) Irrigated Area (ha) Agricultural water use ( 000 m 3 ) Actual use (if Estimated irrigation water measured) requirement (IWR)

78 7 7. Area irrigated under improved rainwater agriculture by type of system and water abstraction Description a) Area irrigated by type of Irrigation system Surface irrigation Ha Sprinkler irrigation Localized/drip irrigation Total area b) Area irrigated by water source Surface water Ground water Total area c) Area irrigated by water abstraction method Gravity Pump Total area Note: The total area under 6, 7a, 7b and 7c should be equal. 8. Beneficiary households a) Total beneficiaries: b) Male beneficiaries: c) Female beneficiaries:

79 8 9. Crops grown under water harvesting systems Crop Vegetables 1. Onion 1 2. Onion 2 3. Tomato 1 4. Tomato 2 5. Cabbage 1 6. Cabbage 2 7. Kale 8. Carrot 1 9. Carrot Pepper Pepper 2 Irrigated Area (ha) Production (qt) Cropping calendar Water use ( 000 m 3 ) J F M A M J J A S O N D Actual IWR 12. Other vegetables 2 Root crops 13. Beet roots 14. Potato Potato Sweet potato 17. Groundnut Fruits 18. Papaya 19. Banana Water Use IWR ( 000 m 3 ) Average monthly discharge (l/s) Water withdrawal ( 000 m 3 ) Total

80 9 Part C: Water Consumption by Type of Livestock by Sub-basin 1. Region: 2. Zone: 3. Woreda: 4. River Basin: 5. Sub-Basin: 6. Number and Type of Livestock Type of Livestock 1. Cattle Livestock Number 2. Equine Horse Mule Donkey 3. Camel 4. Sheep 5. Goat 6. Poultry Total

81 10 Part D: Area Treated with Different Soil and Water Conservation Measures (By Sub-basin) 1. River Basin: 2. Sub-basin: 3. Region: 4. Zone: 5. Woreda: 6. Area treated with different soil and water conservation measures by land use type (If soil conservation measures are not available by land use, give total area in the last row) Land Use Catchment area (ha) Area treated with different types of conservation measures (ha) Cultivated land Grazing land Hillsides Wasteland Total Total Catchme nt Area Part of catchment that requires treatment Physical measures 7 Non-irrigated land that is drained (ha): Biological measures Both measures Area closure Total

82 11 Annex 5: Training Presentations Agricultural Water Use Guideline

83 12 Who should collect data? Survey by External Team Survey by Extension staff Advantages Disadvantages 1. Unbiased information 1. Familiarity with the environment 2. Maybe timely delivery due to sole 2. Previous knowledge of the assignment information 3. Low resources requirements 1. Unfamiliarity with the areas 2. Requires guides from extension staff 3. High logistics requirements 4. Experience to understand the local saying Capacity building 1. Possibility of bias 2. Maybe absence or limited discussion with beneficiaries due to previous knowledge 3.

84 13

85 14

86 15

87 16 V p 3.6 N i1 QT i i

88 17

89 18

90 19 Crop J F M A M J J A S O N D Maize 1 40 Maize 2 10 Wheat 1 15 Wheat 2 10 Onion 1 25 Onion 2 25 Onion 3 20 Tomato 1 2 Tomato 2 15 Total

91 20

92 21 Crop Onion Planting date 1 December Harvesting date 2 March Soil type Silty loam Growth Stage Duration (days) Kcs Initial Crop devleopment 45 - Mid season Late season Mont h ETo (mm/day) Rainfall (mm) Pe( mm) J F M A M J J A S O N D

93 22

94 23

95 24

96 25

97 26

98 Annex 6: Selected training photographs 27

99 28

100 29