A. Karimov, IWMI

Current status of the groundwater resources in the irrigated zone of Central Asia

• IWMI ( International Water Management Institute) – one of the 15s center of the CGIAR (Consulting Group for International Agricultural Research)

www.iwmi.org (Colombo, Sri Lanka)

• IWMI has regional center in Tashkent + 99871 – 2370445 a.karimov@cgiar.org / u.kalandarova@cgiar.org

GW study area within Central Asia

Fergana Valley and the Syrdarya midstream

Central Asia

Groundwater use in the Aral Sea basin

House. WU68%

Ind. WU29%

Other3%

KazakhstanGWR = 1.8 km3

GWE = 0.42 km3 HWU11%

IWU14%

Agr. WU76%

KyrgyzstanGWR = 0.86 km3GWE = 0.40 km3

House.WU34%

IWU9%

Agr.WU56%

O1% Tajikistan

GWR = 6.65 km3GWE = 0.99 km3

HWU46%

IWU8%

AWU33%

DW13%

TurkmenistanGWR = 3.36 km3GWE = 0.46 km3

House.WU42%

Ind. WU9%

Agr. WU25%

Drain.W22%

Rangelands1%

Dewatering mines7%

UzbekistanGWR 18.5 km3

GWE = 5.43 km3

GW of the Fergana Valley

Groundwater depths, July 2004The area of the irrigated land with shallow water table

Soil type Fergana Valley

Evaporation from shallow water table on silt loam soils of the

Fergana Valley

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.50

150300450600750900

1050

Water depth, m

mm

/ha

Lysimeter studies ( Ganiev, 1979)

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

0

50

100

150

200

250

SandSandy loamSilt loam

000

‘ га

The area with shallow water

Evaporation from shallow water table

1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5-0.20

-0.05

0.10

0.25

0.40

0.55

0.70RFPolynomial (RF)HDIPolynomial (HDI)LDIPolynomial (LDI)DIPolynomial (DI)FIPolynomial (FI)УГВ, m

GWe.

ET (-

)

Regional GW balance for the Fergana Valley (average for 1992-2004)

Item AverageMm3/yr %

Inflow 1. Irrigation losses 7054 782. Precipitation losses 245 33. Leakage from rivers 1301 144. Underground inflow 1721 19Groundwater inflow 9020 100Discharge1. GW extractiona) For municipal needs 1040 11b) Industry 330 4c) Irrigation 871 10d) Drainage 942 102. Evaporation 944 10

3. Discharge to drainage 4774 53Total discharge 9048 100

Groundwater recovery technologies

Shallow wells:

Deep wells:Boreholes:Depth – 60-100 m

Yield - 15-50 l/sCost - 15,000-25,000 USD

Depth – 25-40 mYield - 2-4 l/sCost - 2,000- 4,000 USD

Depth – 20-30 m Yield - 1-2.5 l/sCost - 300-500 USD

Simple technology of groundwater irrigation at the

pilot small farm in FV

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 20100

1020304050607080 Number of boreholes

2009

2010

IWMI and AWRDC studies

Yield of grapes – 16-25 t/ha Farmer income – 7,000-9,000 USD/haIrrigation rates – 7000-7500 m3/ha

2011-2012 гг

Groundwater irrigation of grapevines – Fergana province – 2011-2012

Deep wells:Depth – 60-100 m Yield - 15-40 l/sCost - 15,000-25,000 USD

Modeling groundwater of the Sokh aquifer

Initial salinity of GW

Hydrogeology conditions of the Northern Tajikistan

Zone GW storages Annual change TDS

Km3Mm3/

yea Mg/l

Zone 1 11.4 23.7 1000-1500

Zone 2 1.7 6.9 1000-1400

Zone 3 8.3 11 800-1500

Zone 4 8.9 14.3 700-1500

Total 30.3 42.1

Zone IZone 2

Zone 3

Zone 4

Groundwater storages

Groundwater extraction in the Sogd province, Tajikistan

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Отб

ор, м

лн м

3

Дренаж Орошение

05000

1000015000

200002500030000

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

Пло

щад

ь, га

С близким залеганием УГВ подверженные засолению

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

Урож

айно

сть,

т/га

хлопок рис

GW extraction in Gafurov district

The area with shallow water

Yield of cotton and rice

Water use in the Samgar lift irrigation zone, Northern

Tajikistan

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 20150123456789

Num

ber o

f new

wel

ls

Shortage of canal water in the Samgar irrigation zone induce farmers move to groundwater irrigation. There is uniform water supply under groundwater irrigation zone and low uniformity under canal irrigation.

Number of new wells in the Samgar zone

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Water witdrawal Karamazarsai Return flow

Flow

, Mm

3/m

o

GW extraction for irrigation and drainage in Rasulev district

Rasulev district

05

10152025303540

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Pum

page

, M M

3

Irrigation

drainage

Groundwater salinity and dephts in the Makhtaral Irrigation project

command area (Kazakhstan)GW salinity GW depths

Dustyk canal: water supply for irrigation

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1988 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007

Wat

er s

uppl

y of

the

Mak

htar

al

dist

rict,

Mm

3/yr

Limit Actual

water supply at MIP level 6400 m3/ha, at field 3360 m3/ha; however, 5500 m3/ha is cotton water demand

Groundwater depths (a) and salinity (b) in the Makhtaral

Irrigation Project command area(% of total irrigated area)

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

1993 1996 1998 2002 2005 2008

0-1

1-2

2-3

3-5

>5

a)

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

1993 1996 1998 2002 2005 2008

>10

5-103-5

1-30-1

b)

Land cover classes from maximum NDVI

Paleo-channels in the Karshi steppeGravel deposits in the profile

Surface failures

Geomorphology change indicates sharp change of the deposits

These are indication of paleo-channelsWater ponds in the depressions

Pritashkent artesian aquifer

The Pritashkent artesian aquifer supplies 40 l/s of mineral water for the sanatoriums and clinics of

Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan

The experience of IWRM in the Fergana Valley

1. Establishing WUAs based on hydrographic principles within both sides > WU Groups/ WU Unions at canal level

2. Joint canal management (Government and WUs)3. Joint non-formal meetings and sharing plans4. Improving water accounting/training/devices/structures5. Improving water productivity/extension-training centers6. Policy support group7. Small river WU governance bodies (at two sides

separately)8. Data exchange and early warning systems9. State support to improving water management10.Legislation

Conclusions: GW in the irrigated zone of the CA is highly

connected with surface flow and irrigation Irrigation water losses form significant amount of

groundwater recharge Widespread shallow groundwater in the irrigated

zone Increasing groundwater use for irrigation will not

increase significantly total water available for agriculture

Groundwater use for agriculture will increase productivities and will bring other socio-economic benefits

Acknowledgements

• OPEC Fund for international development for funding these studies (2006-2013)

• “Water, Land and Environment..” CGIAR project led by IWMI

• National Teams from Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kazakhstan for collaboration

• UNESCO for coordinating TWA studies in CA and inviting to this and other meetings on TWA

Rahmet, Spacibo, Thank You