EVALUATION OF GROUNDWATER RESOURCES AND ESTIMATION OF STAGE OF GROUNDWATER DEVELOPMENT IN A BASIN – A CASE STUDY

IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE

Irrig. and Drain. 61: 129–139 (2012)

Published online 8 April 2011 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/ird.628

EVALUATION OF GROUNDWATER RESOURCES AND ESTIMATION OF STAGE OFGROUNDWATER DEVELOPMENT IN A BASIN – A CASE STUDY†

G. N. PRADEEP KUMAR* AND P. SRINIVAS

Department of Civil Engineering, S.V.U. College of Engineering, Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati, A.P., India

ABSTRACT

Rapid industrial development, urbanization and increase in agricultural production have led to freshwater shortage in manyparts of the world. For sustainable development of water resources, it is imperative to make quantitative estimations of theavailable water resources. The study area, the Kurmapalli Vagu Basin, is located in the semi‐arid tropics of the Deccan Plateauand is a chronic drought‐prone, backward and endemic fluoride area. Hence evaluation of groundwater resources and stage ofgroundwater development of the Kurmapalli Vagu Basin was carried out utilizing remote sensing and geographicalinformation system techniques in conjunction with conventional methods. The arithmetic average method was used tocompute the total quantity of water from precipitation received by the basin. The groundwater resources were evaluated basedon Groundwater Resource Estimation Committee norms. Groundwater recharge from rainfall, canals, return flow of irrigation,minor irrigation tanks and water conservation structures were also estimated. The total groundwater recharge and annualutilizable groundwater resources from various sources were computed. The net annual groundwater draft was estimated basedon the number and type of wells and unit draft. The groundwater balance of the basin works out to be 1.95 MCM. The stage ofgroundwater development for the Kurmapalli Vagu Basin as on date works out to be 80.6% which falls in the semi‐criticalcategory. Suggestions have been made for proper augmentation of groundwater resources. Further, to ensure sustainabledevelopment of the basin water‐harvesting structures have been proposed. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

key words: groundwater; thematic maps; groundwater recharge; groundwater draft; groundwater development

Received 11 October 2009; Revised 6 December 2010; Accepted 8 December 2010

RÉSUMÉ

Le développement industriel rapide, l’urbanisation et l’augmentation de la production agricole ont conduit à la pénurie d’eaudouce dans de nombreuses régions du monde. Pour le développement durable des ressources en eau, il est impératif de faireune estimation quantitative des ressources en eau disponibles. Le bassin de Kurmapalli Vagu se trouve sur le plateau duDeccan, une zone tropicale semi‐aride, aux sécheresses chroniques, et caractérisée par la présence endémique de fluorures.C’est pourquoi l’estimation des ressources en eaux souterraines et leur niveau d’exploitation a été réalisée en utilisant latélédétection et des systèmes d’information géographique, en liaison avec les méthodes conventionnelles. La méthode de lamoyenne arithmétique est utilisée pour calculer la quantité totale d’eau de précipitation reçue par le bassin. Les ressources eneaux souterraines sont évaluées selon les normes du comité d’évaluation des ressources en eaux souterraines. La recharge deseaux souterraines provenant de diverses sources a été calculée (précipitations, fuites des canaux et de systèmes d’irrigation,pertes des bassins de stockage). Le prélèvement net annuel a été estimé sur la base du recensement des puits et des forages. Leniveau d’exploitation des eaux souterraines pour Kurmapalli Vagu bassin est de 80.6%, soit un niveau qualifié de semi‐critique. Des suggestions ont été faites pour améliorer la situation du bassin en installant des bassins d’infiltration. Copyright ©2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

mots clés: eaux souterraines; cartes thématiques; recharge des eaux souterraines; prélèvement dans les eaux souterraines; exploitation des eaux souterraines

* Correspondence to: Dr. G. N. Pradeep Kumar, Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, S.V.U. College of Engineering, Sri Venkateswara University,Tirupati – 517 502, Andhra Pradesh, India. E‐mail: [email protected]†Evaluation des ressources en eaux souterrainex. Etude de cas du bassin Vagu Kurmapalli dans l’Andhra Pradesh, Inde.

Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

130 G. N. PRADEEP KUMAR AND P. SRINIVAS

INTRODUCTION

Water plays an important role in the economic growth of anation, particularly in a country like India, which has apredominantly agriculture‐dependent economy. Indiscrimi-nate exploitation of surface and subsurface water has led tosevere water scarcity and environmental degradation. Thespatial–temporal variation in rainfall has further aggravated theproblem. To meet the challenges of scarcity, rising demandand depletion of groundwater levels, water resources shouldbe planned, developed and managed in an efficient manner.Groundwater is the major source for various purposes in bothurban and rural areas. Depletion of resources leads todeclaration of some areas as dark blocks, where the depth ofthe water table is greater than 300m. It has, therefore, becomenecessary to quantify the annual replenishment of groundwaterreserves. The prime objective of this study was to assess thegroundwater resources and stage of groundwater development

Figure 1. Location map of K


of the Kurmapalli Vagu Basin. Satish Chandra and Saksena(1975), Adhikari and Chittaranjan (1990), Athavale et al.(1992), Sudhishri and Patnaik (2002), Kumar and Seethapathi(2002), Rao and Ramasastri (2000), Madhuri S. Rishi (2007),Rao (2007) and Srinivas et al. (2009) carried out groundwaterbalance studies and quantified groundwater resources. Elkadiet al. (1994), Shahid et al. (2000) and Boutt et al. (2001)carried out groundwater modelling through the use of ageographic information system (GIS). Naga Rajani et al.(2006) used remote sensing and GIS techniques for ground-water exploration and identification of artificial recharge sites.Sharma (2002) and Vijaya Sarada (2005) made an attempt tomodel the groundwater recharge process in a hard rock region.

In the present study IRS P6 – LISS III and IRS 1D – PANmerged remote sensing data acquired on 27 April 2008,geocoded at the scale of 1 : 50 000 and Survey of India (SOI)toposheet nos. 56 L/9, 56 L/13 were used for preparation ofvarious thematic maps such as base, drainage, geology,

urmapalli Vagu Basin

Irrig. and Drain. 61: 129–139 (2012)

131EVALUATION OF GROUNDWATER RESOURCES IN A BASIN

geomorphology, slope, soil, drainage density, hydrogeomor-phology and land use/land cover. Each parameter ofthe thematic map was again allotted different weightagedepending on its influence on the occurrence of groundwater.For example, in the slope thematic map, flatter slopes weregiven higher weightage, as they enhance the chances ofgroundwater occurring. Similar treatment was given to all thethematic maps. However, land use/land cover, soil and slopemaps were prepared in an Arc GIS environment. Groundwaterbalance studies were carried out adopting GroundwaterResource Estimation Committee (GEC) recommendations.

Figure 2. Base map of Ku


These studies would be useful for overall development of thebasin on a sustainable basis.

STUDY AREA

The Kurmapalli Vagu Basin is located about 55 km south‐east of Hyderabad (Figure 1). It lies between 78°40′–78°50′45″ E longitude and 16°50′–17°0′ N latitude. The arealextent of the Kurmapalli Vagu Basin is 108.09 km2, ofwhich 91.19 km2 is Chintapalli mandal in Nalgonda District,14.22 km2 Yacharam mandal in Ranga Reddy District and

rmapalli Vagu Basin

Irrig. and Drain. 61: 129–139 (2012)


2.68 km2 Madgul mandal of Mahabubnagar District ofAndhra Pradesh. The basin forms a part of semi‐arid tropicsof the Deccan Plateau and the area is chronically drought‐prone and backward. It also suffers from endemic fluorosisdue to high fluoride concentration in the groundwater. It ismainly drained by the Kurmapalli Vagu which originates1.5 km from Kishanpalli village in Ranga Reddy District.Average annual rainfall of the basin is 560mm. Most of thesurface runoff flows southeastward, forming an uppercatchment. There are a few tanks across these drainages,however most of these remain dry. The base map of theKurmapalli Vagu Basin is shown as Figure 2.

Figure 3. Soil map of Kur


ESTIMATION OF GROUNDWATER BALANCEOF KURMAPALLI VAGU BASIN

The groundwater resources were evaluated based on theGEC recommendations (Central Groundwater Board, 1997).The various parameters involved in groundwater resourceestimation were computed as follows.

Groundwater recharge from rainfall

Groundwater recharge into a basin from rainfall wasestimated from the known values of average annual rainfallover that basin and infiltration characteristics of the soils.

mapalli Vagu Basin

Irrig. and Drain. 61: 129–139 (2012)


Rainfall data of the Kurmapalli Vagu Basin were collected forthe five rain gauge stations surrounding the study area, namelyChintapalli, Nampalli, Marriguda, Madgul and Yacharam, fora period of 20 years (1988–2008) from the Bureau ofEconomics and Statistics Department, Hyderabad. The totalquantity of water received by the basin from precipitation wascalculated using the arithmetic average method. The averageannual rainfall computed for the entire basin was 560mmwhich was considered for groundwater resources estimation.

The soils of the basin were mapped using IRS P6 – LISSIII and IRS 1D – PAN merged remote sensing data coupledwith fieldwork. The soil units were delineated and utilizedfor computation of groundwater recharge from precipita-tion. The basin was categorized into 12 soil mapping unitsand their spatial distribution is shown in Figure 3. The legendfor the soil map is shown in Figure 4. The groundwater

Figure 4. Legend for soil map o


recharge for different soil units was computed by assigningdifferent infiltration rates to each soil unit as suggested bythe GEC.

The groundwater recharge from rainfall is tabulated inTable I. Groundwater recharge into the Kurmapalli VaguBasin due to rainfall = 575 ha m = 5.75 million cubicmetres (MCM).

Groundwater recharge from canals

The details of canals flowing in the study area werecollected from the offices of MRO Chintapalli, Madgul andYacharam mandals. As there were no canals flowingthrough the basin, the quantity of groundwater rechargedue to canals was zero. Groundwater recharge from canalsin the Kurmapalli Vagu Basin = 0 MCM.

f Kurmapalli Vagu Basin

Irrig. and Drain. 61: 129–139 (2012)

Table I. Groundwater recharge from rainfall of the Kurmapalli Vagu Basin

Soil type Area (ha) Average annual rainfall (m) Rainfall infiltration rate (%) Groundwater recharge (ha m)

SU 1 1 573.24 0.56 10 88.10SU 2 160.08 0.56 12 10.75SU 3 228.29 0.56 8 10.23SU 4 379.37 0.56 5 10.62SU 5 4 153.46 0.56 8 186.07SU 6 2 376.82 0.56 11 146.41SU 7 338.25 0.56 5 9.47SU 8 450.21 0.56 8 20.16SU 9 995.23 0.56 15 83.59SU 10 98.83 0.56 10 5.53SU 11 51.22 0.56 9 2.58SU 12 45.83 0.56 6 1.53

Total 575

Table II. Details of various crops grown in the Kurmapalli Vagu Basin

Sl. no Crop season Type of crop Crop area (ha) Irrigation requirement (m) Total volume of water required for irrigation (ha m)

1 Kharif Paddy 397 0.9 357.32 Kharif Sweet orange 25 0.3 7.53 Kharif Mango 72 0.3 21.64 Kharif Redgram 55 0.4 225 Kharif Sorghum 75 0.4 306 Rabi Paddy 356 0.9 320.47 Rabi Sunflower 74 0.4 29.68 Rabi Horsegram 47 0.25 11.89 Rabi Vegetables 32 0.4 12.810 Rabi Groundnut 46 0.6 27.6Total 841

Table III. Details of minor irrigation tanks in the Kurmapalli Vagu Basin

Sl. no. Location of the tank near the village Area (ha) Average depth (m) Volume of water impounded (ha m)

1 Varkal 5.94 2.0 11.882 Vinjamur 1.4 2.0 2.83 Vinjamur 2.38 2.0 4.764 Kurmapalli 1.97 2.0 3.945 Saireddigudem 3.56 1.0 3.566 Badvanagudem 25.52 4.0 102.087 Gollapalli 2.35 1.0 2.358 Gollapalli 6.68 2.0 13.369 Takkallapalli 6.62 2.0 13.2410 Polepalli 2.52 1.0 2.5211 Kishanpalli 0.85 1.0 0.85Total 162


Groundwater recharge due to return flow of irrigation

The details of various crops grown in the study areawere collected from the offices of MRO Chintapalli,Madgul and Yacharam mandals. The crop details and the


total volume of water required for irrigation are shown inTable II.

Recharge due to return flow of irrigation was computedtaking the seepage factor as 35% as per GEC norms and wasequal to 841 × 0.35 = 294 ha m= 2.94 MCM.

Irrig. and Drain. 61: 129–139 (2012)

Table IV. Details of water conservation structures in the Kurmapalli Vagu Basin

Sl. no Name of the village Water spread area (ha) Average depth (m) Volume of water impounded (ha m)

1 Kishanpalli 3 1.5 4.52 Kishanpalli 1.5 3 4.53 Kishanpalli 5 4 204 Kishanpalli 3 1 35 Kishanpalli 1 1.5 1.56 Kishanpalli 1 3 37 Godkondla 1 2.5 2.58 Godkondla 5 4.5 22.59 Godkondla 1.5 1 1.510 Godkondla 5 2 1011 Polepalli 1 1.5 1.512 Polepalli 10 4.5 4513 Polepalli 0.5 1.5 0.7514 Polepalli 2 2.5 515 Polepalli 1.5 2 316 Polepalli 1 1.5 1.517 Polepalli 1.5 3 4.518 Polepalli 2.5 3.5 8.7519 Polepalli 1.5 1.5 2.2520 Polepalli 1.5 1 1.521 Polepalli 7.5 3 22.522 Madanapuram 1 2.5 2.523 Madanapuram 1.5 2 324 Madanapuram 1.5 3.5 5.2525 Madanapuram 1 2.5 2.526 Sakali Seripalli 2.5 2 527 Sakali Seripalli 1.5 1 1.528 Sakali Seripalli 1 1.5 1.529 Takkallapalli 2 2.5 530 Takkallapalli 1 3 331 Ummapur 0.5 1 0.532 Ummapur 2 2 433 Ummapur 12.5 4 5034 Ummapur 1.5 1.5 2.2535 Ummapur 3 4 1236 Ummapur 1.5 3 4.537 Gollapalli 3 3.5 10.538 Gollapalli 5 4.5 22.539 Gollapalli 2.5 2.5 6.2540 Gollapalli 0.5 1 0.541 Saireddiguda 5 1.5 7.542 Saireddiguda 1 1.5 1.543 Saireddiguda 1.5 1.5 2.2544 Kurmapalli 10 4 4045 Kurmapalli 2.5 3 7.546 Kurmapalli 2.5 3.5 8.7547 Kurmapalli 3 3.5 10.548 Kurmapalli 1 1.5 1.549 Kurmapalli 1.5 2 350 Kurmapalli 2 3 651 Kurmapalli 3 3 952 Vinjamur 12.5 3.5 43.7553 Vinjamur 3 3 954 Vinjamur 1 3 355 Vinjamur 3 2 656 Vinjamur 2.5 2 557 Vinjamur 1.5 2.5 3.75

(Continues)


Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Irrig. and Drain. 61: 129–139 (2012)

Table IV. (Continued)

Sl. no Name of the village Water spread area (ha) Average depth (m) Volume of water impounded (ha m)

58 Vinjamur 1.5 2 359 Vinjamur 1 1.75 1.7560 Vinjamur 2.5 3.5 8.7561 Vinjamur 2.5 3 7.562 Vinjamur 3 4 1263 Varkal 5 3.5 17.564 Varkal 4 2.5 1065 Varkal 3 1.5 4.566 Varkal 1.5 3 4.567 Varkal 3 2 668 Varkal 2 3 669 Varkal 5 3 1570 Varkal 2 2 4

Total 580


Groundwater recharge from minor irrigation tanks

The details of minor irrigation tanks were collected fromthe offices of MRO Chintapalli, Madgul and Yacharammandals. The volume of water impounded was computedand tabulated in Table III.

Since most of the tanks were irrigation tanks and havingred gravelly soils below the tank bed, a seepage factor of 15%was considered as per GEC norms and groundwater rechargefrom minor irrigation tank was 162 × 0.15 = 24.3 ha m= 0.24MCM.

Groundwater recharge from waterconservation structures

The details of water conservation structures wereobtained from the offices of MRO Chintapalli, Madguland Yacharam mandals. The details of the water conserva-tion structures are given in Table IV.

Considering a seepage factor for water conservationstructures as 0.5 as per GEC norms, the groundwaterrecharge computed was 580 × 0.5 = 290 ha m= 2.9 MCM.

Table V. Details of wells in the Kurmapalli Vagu Basin

Sl. no. Type ofwell

No. ofwells

Draft per well peryear (MCM)

Gross draft(MCM)

1 Dug wells 215 0.0065 1.42 Bore wells 783 0.013 10.2Total 11.6

ESTIMATION OF TOTALGROUNDWATER RECHARGE

The total annual groundwater recharge for the basin =groundwater recharge due to rainfall (5.75 MCM) +groundwater recharge from canals (0 MCM) + groundwaterrecharge due to return flow of irrigation (2.94 MCM) +groundwater recharge from minor irrigation tanks(0.24MCM) + groundwater recharge from water conserva-tion structures (2.9MCM) = 11.83MCM.

As per GEC norms, annual utilizable groundwaterresources are 85% of total annual groundwater resources =11.83 × 0.85 = 10.05MCM. Therefore annual utilizablegroundwater resources = 10.05MCM.


ESTIMATION OF TOTALGROUNDWATER DRAFT

Knowing annual groundwater draft is essential to assess thestatus of a basin in terms of categorization and for proposingsuitable water‐harvesting structures. Estimation of ground-water draft requires the number and type of wells and unitdraft. The details of dug wells and bore wells which arepresent in various places in and around the study area werecollected from the Rural Water Supply (RWS) wing of thePanchayati Raj Department, Nalgonda District. The infor-mation on the type of well and their number was collectedfrom the field and the unit draft was taken as per GECnorms. The groundwater draft was calculated and presentedin Table V.

Thus the gross annual groundwater draft was worked outto be 11.6MCM. The net annual groundwater draft wasestimated at 70% of the gross annual draft as recommendedby GEC. Net annual groundwater draft = 11.6 × 0.70 = 8.1MCM. Therefore net annual groundwater draft = 8.1 MCM.

COMPUTATION OF GROUNDWATER BALANCE

The groundwater balance is the difference between theannual utilizable groundwater resources and the net annualgroundwater draft. Groundwater balance = 10.05 − 8.1 =1.95 MCM. Therefore the groundwater balance of theKurmapalli Vagu Basin is 1.95 MCM.

Irrig. and Drain. 61: 129–139 (2012)


ESTIMATION OF STAGE OFGROUNDWATER DEVELOPMENT

The groundwater assessment unit was categorized intodifferent categories – safe, semi‐critical, critical and over-exploited – based on groundwater resources available andgroundwater draft. The various categories are:

Co

• safe – groundwater development is <70%;• semi‐ critical – groundwater development is 70–90%;• critical – groundwater development is 90–100%;• overexploited – groundwater development is >100%.

Figure 5. Recommended water‐harvesting str

pyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The category of the Kurmapalli Vagu Basin was evaluatedby following the methodology suggested by GEC.

Stage of groundwater development

The stage of groundwater development was calculatedusing the formula:

uctures

Annual net groundwater draftAnnual utilizable groundwater resources

� 100

¼ 8:1=10:05ð Þ�100¼ 80:6%

Therefore, as on date, the stage of the Kurmapalli VaguBasin is semi‐critical.

map of Kurmapalli Vagu Basin

Irrig. and Drain. 61: 129–139 (2012)


Stage of groundwater development at the end offifth year

Real time planning necessitates periodic monitoring ofgroundwater resources at regular intervals. As perGECnorms,it was computed by adopting the yearly increase of rate ofgroundwater draft as 0.5. For example, the stage of ground-water development at the end of the fifth year was calculated as

Copy

Net groundwater draft at the end of fifth yearAnnual utilizable groundwater resources

� 100

Net groundwater draft at the end of fifth year= Annual net draft × (1 + 5 × 0.5/100) = 8.1(1+5×

0.5/100) = 8.3 MCM

The stage of groundwater development at the end of fifthyear = (8.3 /10.05) × 100 = 82.6%.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The average annual rainfall received by the Kurmapalli VaguBasin was computed as 560mm. The groundwater rechargefor different soil units was computed by assigning differentinfiltration rates to each soil type as per GEC norms. The totalgroundwater recharge due to rainfall was 5.75 MCM. Thereturn seepage from irrigation fields worked out to 2.94MCM,while seepage from the existing minor irrigation tanks was0.24 MCM and the return seepage from water conservationstructures worked out to be 2.9 MCM. The total estimatedannual groundwater recharge in the Kurmapalli Vagu Basinwas 11.8 MCM. The annual utilizable groundwater resourcesat 85% of the total annual groundwater resources was 10.05MCM. The gross annual groundwater draft worked out to be11.6 MCM. The net annual groundwater draft computed was8.1 MCM. The groundwater balance, which is the differencebetween the annual utilizable groundwater resources and thenet annual groundwater draft, was worked out to be 1.95MCM. The stage of groundwater development as on date was80.6% and that at the end of fifth year was worked out to be82.6% which was categorized as in the semi‐critical zone.

The stage of groundwater development is about 80%,indicating the semi‐critical nature of the basin’s condition.Intensive groundwater development will lead to a criticalsituation and the problem will manifest itself in the form ofdeclining groundwater levels, shortage of supply, salinewater encroachment and increase in incidence of fluoride,iron, salinity, etc. The available groundwater resourcesshould be used carefully, and a balance is to be maintainedbetween recharge and extraction. Use of groundwatershould therefore be well planned.

right © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The following points need consideration for sustainablemanagement of groundwater resources:

• groundwater basins used to provide drinking watersupplies should be protected from depletion by otheruses as well as from contamination;

• in drought‐prone areas, certain groundwater basinsshould be earmarked for drinking purposes only;

• groundwater extraction for cultivation of paddy shouldbe controlled.

As the basin falls in the semi‐critical zone, it wassuggested that caution be exercised when developing thegroundwater in future. There is scope for taking up a largenumber of water‐harvesting structures such as check dams,percolation tanks and subsurface dykes which wererecommended as shown in Figure 5 to ensure sustainabledevelopment of the area under study.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors are grateful to Dr K.V. Rao, Senior Scientist,CRIDA, for his valuable advice and suggestions. The authorssincerely acknowledge and would like to place on recordthe support and encouragement given by Dr B.V. Rao,Professor, C.W.R., JNTU. The authors would like to thankDr T.S. Brahmanada Chary, Joint Director, Panchayati RajEngineering Dept. and Dr G. Sudharshan, Scientist‐D,CGWB, for providing the necessary data used in this study.

REFERENCES

Adhikari RN, Chittaranjan S. 1990. Estimation of water balance and otherhydrological components for treated watershed. Hydrology Journal13(4): 67–75.

Athavale RN, Rangarajan R, Muralidharan D. 1992. Measurement ofnatural recharge in India. Journal of Geological Society of India 39(3):235–244.

Boutt DF, Hyndman DW, Pijanowski BC, Long DT. 2001. Identifyingpotential land use‐derived solute sources to stream baseflow usinggroundwater models and GIS. Groundwater 39(1): 24–34.

Central Groundwater Board. 1997 Groundwater Resource EstimationMethodology. Report of the Groundwater Resource Estimation Committee,Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India: New Delhi, India.

Elkadi AI, Oloufa AA, Eltahan AA, Malik HU. 1994. Use of a geographicinformation system in site‐specific groundwater modeling. Groundwater32(4): 617–625.

Kumar CP, Seethapathi PV. 2002. Assessment of natural groundwaterrecharge in Upper Ganga Canal Command Area. Journal of AppliedHydrology, Association of Hydrologists of India XV(4): 13–20.

Madhuri S. Rishi. 2007. Evaluation of groundwater resource of FaridabadDistrict, Haryana, India. Indian Journal of Environment and EcoPlanning 14(3): 427–436.

Naga Rajani KV, Swamy MV, Venkateswara Rao B. 2006. Estimation ofgroundwater resources – case study of Kurmapalli Watershed in

Irrig. and Drain. 61: 129–139 (2012)


Nalgonda and Ranga Reddy Districts of Andhra Pradesh. In Proceedingsof the ICHWAM‐2006, conducted by CWR, IST and JNTU, Hyderabad,vol. 1; 118–126.

Rao KV. 2007. Rainfall–runoff and Groundwater Dynamics in Semi‐AridRegions. Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture AnnualReport for 2006–07. Hyderabad, India. 27.

Rao SVN, Ramasastri KS. 2000. Estimation of groundwater draft andrecharge in coastal aquifers using field data. ISH Journal of HydraulicEngineering 6(2): 176–183.

Satish Chandra, Saksena RS. 1975. Water balance study for estimation ofgroundwater resources. Journal of Irrigation and Power 32(4): 443–449.

Shahid S, Nath SK, Roy J. 2000. Groundwater potential modeling in a softrock area using a GIS. International Journal of Remote Sensing 21(9):1919–1924.


Sharma KD. 2002. Modelling groundwater recharge processes in hard rock.In Proceedings of International Conference on Sustainable Developmentand Management of Groundwater Resources in Semi‐Arid Region withSpecial Reference to Hard Rock (IGC 2002), Dindigul, Tamil Nadu,India; 175–181.

Srinivas K, Hemanth K, Venkatesh K, Phanindra MNV. 2009. Estimationof groundwater resources and evaluation of stage of groundwaterdevelopment of Kurmapalli Vagu Basin in A.P. BTech thesis, A.N.University, Guntur.

Sudhishri S, Patnaik US. 2002. Analysis of water balance forKokriguda watershed. Journal of Applied Hydrology XVII(2 and 3):34–39.

Vijaya Sarada ST. 2005. Analysis of groundwater levels in the upper Musicatchment. MTech thesis, J.N.T. University, Hyderabad; 145.

Irrig. and Drain. 61: 129–139 (2012)

Documents

EVALUATION OF GROUNDWATER RESOURCES AND ESTIMATION OF STAGE OF GROUNDWATER DEVELOPMENT IN A BASIN – A CASE STUDY