Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar

Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural University popularly known as HAU, is one of Asia's biggest agricultural universities, located at Hisar in the Indian state of Haryana. It is named after India's seventh Prime Minister, Chaudhary Charan Singh. It is a leader in agricultural research in India and contributed significantly to Green Revolution and White Revolution in India in the 1960s and 70s. It has a very large campus and has several research centres throughout the state. It won the Indian Council of Agricultural Research's Award for the Best Institute in 1997. HAU was initially a campus of Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. After the formation of Haryana in 1966, it became an autonomous institution on February 2, 1970 through a Presidential Ordinance, later ratified as Haryana and Punjab Agricultural Universities Act, 1970, passed by the Lok Sabha on March 29, 1970. A. L. Fletcher, the first Vice-Chancellor of the university, was instrumental in its initial growth.

Browse

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • ThesisItemOpen Access
    Rain water harvesting in rural and urban families of Haryana
    (CCSHAU, 2014) Bhutani, Anshul; Sehgal, Binoo
    Water is an essential natural resource for sustaining life and environment. The available water resources are under pressure due to increasing demands and the time is not far when water, which we have always thought to be available in abundance and free gift of nature, will become a scarce commodity. Conservation and preservation of water resources is urgently required to be done. Hence, the present study attempts to access the knowledge and perception regarding rain water harvesting and its utilization technologies among the urban and rural respondents. Training on RWH and its utilization technologies was also provided by setting up of a demonstration unit. The study was conducted in four phases. In phase I, survey was done on 150 urban and rural women respondents each to study the knowledge regarding rain water harvesting and its utilization technologies. In phase II, demonstration unit was set up on RWH and its utilization technologies. In phase III, training was imparted to thirty interested women respondents each from urban and rural areas on rain water harvesting and its utilization technologies. In phase IV, strategies were formulated for the propagation of these technologies. Results reveal that urban families were found to be consuming more quantity of water in all the household activities as compared to rural families as urban localities received water supply for 2 hours or less twice a day while in contrast to this rural areas received it for 1 hour or less once a day or on alternate day. Maximum water was consumed for flushing (178.3±41.8 litres) in urban localities and for bathing (61.5±26.3 litres) in rural areas. Nearly half of the respondents (52.3%) had awareness about rain water harvesting technology. No awareness with regard to the two rain water utilization technologies i.e. double-walled pot and pitcher irrigation was found among the respondents as these were new to the respondents. Rain water harvesting structure was got constructed outside the back gate of College of Home Science, CCSHAU, Hisar to collect rain water from one suitable roof of the college building. Volume of the tank is 1800 cu. ft and capacity of the tank to store rainwater is 50,958 litres. Two rain water utilization technologies i.e. double-walled pot and pitcher irrigation were selected for the study and demonstration unit of these were set up in the enclosure of Domestic Farm Unit, Deptt. of FRM, COHS, CCSHAU, Hisar. One year old flowering plant, Tabernaemontana divaricata (Crape Jasmine) was undertaken for the study. Least amount of water (19.5 litres) was consumed by the plant in the treatment T4 (Double-walled pot with mulch and cardboard ring). The water saving through this treatment came out to be maximum i.e. 34.7 per cent as compared to control (Tc). The total amount of water consumed by the plant planted through Pitcher Irrigation was 33.1 litres whereas the total amount of water consumed by the plant planted through conventional method (control) was 61.8 liters and the water saving through Pitcher Irrigation came out to be 46.4 per cent. With regard to knowledge of respondents, it was found that maximum gain in knowledge was for ‘working’ of rain water harvesting among both urban (93.7%) and rural (96.4%) respondents. Regarding double-walled pot, mean score on different components ranged from 3.6 – 10.9 among urban respondents and 3.0-10.7 among rural respondents after imparting training. Their knowledge level was recorded as high as 23.4 (urban respondents) and 23.3 (rural respondents) for ‘construction’ and ‘working’ of pitcher irrigation. Training changed the attitude of the respondents towards rain water harvesting technology from favourable to most favourable for majority of the urban and rural respondent. It changed from least favourable to most favourable for majority of urban and rural respondents for double-walled pot and pitcher irrigation. In totality, 81.7 per cent respondents attained high level of symbolic adoption for rain water harvesting, 66.7 per cent respondents for double-walled pot and 75.0 per cent for pitcher irrigation. Overall acceptability of the urban respondents regarding rain water harvesting was 81.6 per cent, for double-walled pot it was 88.1 per cent and for pitcher irrigation it was 64.8 per cent. Overall acceptability of the rural respondents regarding RWH was 82.1 per cent, for double-walled pot was 59.8 per cent and for pitcher irrigation was 87.1 per cent. Strategies were finally formulated on the basis of findings of the study and comprised of awareness generation by educational institutions, extension functionaries and media and action to be taken by legislative formulation.