CHANDRAKANTH, M. G.RAVEESHA, S.2017-02-252017-02-252009-09-24Th-9518http://krishikosh.egranth.ac.in/handle/1/5810002516This study dealing with the Economic Appraisal Of Investment on Irrigation Well Farms and Welfare Implications In Hard Rock Areas of Karnataka, is a modest attempt towards resource economic evaluation of the groundwater recharge in Tiptur taluk, Tumkur district of Karnataka during 2008-09. For field work, 35 sample farmers each were drawn from three situations (i) farmers owning irrigation wells in the command area of system irrigation tank (GWTI), (ii) farmers owning irrigation wells in the command area of canal irrigation (GWCI), and (iii) farmers owning irrigation wells in the command area outside irrigation tanks and irrigation canals or groundwater under sole irrigation (GWSI). The major ground water irrigated crops were Coconut, Paddy, Arecanut, Coconut + Arecanut, Banana, Tomato, Brinjal and Okra. The gross irrigated area was the highest for Coconut forming 44 percent in GWTI, 55 percent in GWCI and 58 percent in GWSI. More than 70 percent of the gross cropped area is devoted to perennial crops like Coconut and Arecanut, an indicator of farmers’ coping mechanism to groundwater scarcity. The proportion of well failure was highest in GWSI (45 per cent) followed by GWTI (20 per cent) and GWCI (19 per cent). The age and ground water yield of bore wells is 10.00 years and 2016 GPH in GWTI, 10.95 years and 1877 GPH in GWCI and 7.42 years and 904 GPH in GWSI respectively. Accordingly the annual Externality cost was Rs. 957 in GWTI, Rs 863 in GWCI, and Rs. 3226 in GWSI. The net return per acre, net return per functioning well and net return per rupee of irrigation water were Rs.12210, Rs.96979, Rs. 17.79 in GWTI, Rs.10912, Rs. 77190, Rs. 20.60 in GWCI, and Rs. 9292, Rs.57665, Rs.6.41 in GWSI. The incremental net return per acre in GWTI and GWCI has been positive and statistically significant for all the sample farmers over GWSI. The average depth 471 feet, nominal investment Rs. 75063, real investment Rs. 7396 , real cost per acre inch of water Rs. 49.46, and real investment per acre of gross irrigated area of working wells Rs. 1947 for GWSI are higher over GWTI by 75, 52, 16, 81 and 53 per cent respectively. The average water extraction per working well is higher in GWTI over GWSI by 53 per cent. Thus the GWTI farmers have increased the irrigated area per well compared to GWSI farmers. The technology and institutions have both played a significant role in economic impact of groundwater. Accordingly the real cost of groundwater well has been falling and currently hovers around Rs. 16 per foot of depth or the real cost per acre inch of water has fallen down from Rs. 31.82 per acre inch in 1986 to Rs. 14.65 per acre inch during 2008. The study apparently points to the contribution of system tank irrigation and canal irrigation which has economically outperformed that of sole well irrigation. The cost of groundwater (net return) per acre inch in GWTI, are Rs. 34 (Rs. 365), in GWCI are Rs. 44.46 (Rs. 449) and GWSI are 113 (Rs. 547. Thus presence of surface water recharge substantially reduces the economic cost of groundwater for irrigation and substantially improves the net farm incomes to Rs. 10.73 per acre inch for GWTI, Rs. 10.1 per acre inch for GWCI and Rs. 4.84 per acre inch for GWSI.ennullThesis