Skip to main content

Influence of groundwater recharge in Vaniyar sub-basin, South India: inference to socioeconomic benefits

Abstract

In recent decades, increasing population activities are a complex task throughout the world. The scarcity of water in southern India is high as compared to the global average. Progressive development of the aquifer system by artificial recharging can be considered as a tool for increasing groundwater resource. The water conservation techniques had been used for increasing groundwater storage in the hard rock. ‘This research focuses on estimation of groundwater recharges using empirical model through artificial recharge structures, which plays a major role to enhance recharge. The groundwater recharge by water table fluctuation is estimated in context of recharge structures. It is an important role as sustainable development of groundwater resources. The normal groundwater renews by an annual rainfall varied from 11 to 16%. The total recharge is estimated 173.12 ha m in which the influence by conservation recharge structures varies from 0.34 to 26.33 which indicates the groundwater storage optimal maintained in the Pappireddipatti watershed (total number of structures is 22), whereas Vaniyar sub-basin groundwater recharge is estimated 530.30 ha m (total number of structures is 138). The performance of artificial recharge structures is to reduce extra surface runoff in the watershed. The optimal performances need to maintain for continuous withdrawal of groundwater through natural and artificial recharge structures. An empirical approach is used for the assessment of the recharge from rainfall with reasonable accuracy on the periodic groundwater recharge in the hard rock aquifer. The rainfall based on Thiessen polygon method was prepared by annual fall from three-gauge station in the watershed. The effective depth of precipitation of the rainfall is 915.31 mm. Hence, the recharge rate could be increased in close to suitable recharge site in the watershed. A GIS approach was utilized to incorporate six contributing variables: lithology, land use/land cover, soil types, geomorphology, drainage, and slope. The outcome of benefits showed that around 72% of the evaluation zone is assigned as good to moderate potential groundwater recharge whereas low bring down potential groundwater energize ranges with poor potential groundwater recharge covers 38% in the area. The outcomes demonstrate that the groundwater recharge potential zone is focusing on sustainable groundwater development. Further, there is improved in water level in low recharge area to moderate recharge with respect to rainfall influence at recharge structures. It confirms the interconnection of the aquifer.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20

References

  1. Ala-aho, P., Rossi, P. M., & Klove, B. (2015). Estimation of temporal and spatial variations in groundwater recharge in unconfined sand aquifers using Scots pine inventories. Hydrology and Earth System Science,19, 1961–1976. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-1961-2015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Albhaisi, M., Brendonck, L., & Batelaan, O. (2013). Predicted impacts of land use change on groundwater recharge of the upper Berg catchment, South Africa. Water SA,39(2), 211–220. https://doi.org/10.4314/wsa.v39i2.4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bhaduri, B., Harbor, J., Engel, B. A., & Grove, M. (2000). Assessing watershed-scale, long-term hydrologic impacts of land use change using a GIS-NPS model. Environmental Management,26(6), 643–658.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bhattacharjee formula (1954). Annual report of AICRP on groundwater utilization, 2006–07

  5. Bosch, J. M., & Hewlett, J. D. (1982). A review of catchment experiments to determine the effect of vegetation changes on water yield and evapotranspiration. Journal of Hydrology,55(1/4), 3–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Brown, T. C., Foti, R., & Ramirez, J. A. (2013). Projected freshwater withdrawals in the United States under a changing climate. Water Resources Research,49, 1259–1276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. CGWB. (2009). Detailed guidelines for implementing the ground water estimation. Methodology, Central Ground Water Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India.

  8. Chatterjee, R., & Purohit, R. R. (2009). Estimation of replenishable groundwater resources of India and their status of utilization. Current Science,96(12), 1581–1591.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Chaturvedi, R. S. (1936). A note on the investigation of ground water resources in western districts of Uttar Pradesh. In Annual Report; U.P. Irrigation Research Institute Bahadrabad, India, 1973, pp. 86–122.

  10. Dams, J., Woldeamlak, S. T., & Batelaan, O. (2008). Predicting land-use change and its impact on the groundwater system of the Kleine Nete catchment, Belgium. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences,12, 1369–1385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Dhakate, R., Rao, B., Raju, J., Mahesh, S. Rao, & Sankaran, S. (2013). Integrated approach for identifying suitable sites for rainwater harvesting structures for groundwater augmentation in Basaltic Terrain. Water Resources Management: An International Journal,27(5), 1279–1299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Fetter, C. W. (2001). Applied hydrogeology (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Freeze, A. R., & Cherry, J. A. (1979). Groundwater (pp. 84–387). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Gontia, N. K., & Patil, P. Y. (2012). Assessment of groundwater recharge through rainfall and water harvesting structures in Jamka microwatershed using remote sensing and GIS. Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing,40, 639. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12524-011-0176-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Groundwater Resource Estimation Methodology. (1997). Report of the Groundwater Resource Estimation Committee (GEC). New Delhi: Central Ground Water Board (CGWB), Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Helweg, O. J. (Ed.). (1985). Role of artificial recharge in groundwater basin management. In Artificial recharge of groundwater books, Chapter 2 (pp. 21–33). California State Water Resources Control Board.

  17. Hornbeck, J. W., Adams, M. B., Corbett, E. S., Verry, E. S., & Lynch, J. A. (1993). Long-term impacts of forest treatments on water yield: a summary for northeastern USA. Journal of Hydrology,150(2–4), 323–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Hosseinimarandi, H., Mahdavi, M., Ahmadi, H., Motamedvaziri, B., & Adelpur, A. (2014). Assessment of groundwater quality monitoring network using cluster analysis, Shib-Kuh Plain, Shur watershed, Iran. Journal of Water Resource and Protection,6, 618–624. https://doi.org/10.4236/jwarp.2014.66060.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Jinno, K., Tsutsumi, A., Alkaeed, O., Saita, S., & Berndtsson, R. (2009). Effects of land-use change on groundwater recharge model parameters. Hydrological Sciences Journal,54(2), 300–315. https://doi.org/10.1623/hysj.54.2.300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kumar, C. P., & Seethapathi, P. V. (2002). Assessment of natural ground water recharge in upper Ganga canal command area. Journal of Applied Hydrology,15(4), 13–20.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Leterme, B., & Mallants, D. (2011). Climate and land use change impacts on groundwater recharge. In Models: Repositories of knowledge, Proceedings ModelCARE2011 held at Leipzig, Germany, in September 2011. IAHS Publ. 3XX, 201X.

  22. Loveland, P. J., & Whalley, W. R. (1991). Particle size analysis. In K. A. Smith & C. E. Mullins (Eds.), Soil analysis, physical methods. New York: Marcel Dekker inc.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Narjary, B., Kumar, S., Kamra, S. K., Bundela, D. S., & Sharma, D. K. (2014). Impact of rainfall variability on groundwater resources and opportunities of artificial recharge structure to reduce its exploitation in fresh groundwater zones of Haryana. Current Science,107(8), 1305–1312.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Oke, M. O., Martins, O., Idowu, O., & Aiyelokun, O. (2013). Comparative analysis of empirical formulae used in groundwater recharge in Ogun–Oshun river basins. Journal of Scientific Research & Reports,2(2), 692–710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ott, B., & Uhlenbrook, S. (2004). Quantifying the impact of land-use changes at the event and seasonal time scale a process-oriented catchment model. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences,8(62–78), 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Pandey, V. P., Shrestha, S., Chapagain, S. K., & Kazama, F. (2011). A framework for measuring groundwater sustainability. Environmental Science & Policy,14(4), 396–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Parsa, V. A., Yavari, A., & Nejadi, A. (2016). Spatio-temporal analysis of land use/land cover pattern changes in Arasbaran Biosphere Reserve: Iran. Modeling Earth Systems and Environment,2, 178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40808-016-0227-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Raju, T. S., Agashe, R. M., & Romani, S., (1994). Manual on artificial recharge of ground water. Technical series/Central Ground Water Board. M; no. 3. Central Ground Water Board, Faridabad, 215 pp.

  29. Rao, K. L. (1970). India’s water wealth. Telangana: Orient Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Raposo, J. R., Dafonte, J., & Molinero, J. (2013). Assessing the impact of future climate change on groundwater recharge in Galicia-Costa, Spain. Hydrogeology Journal,21, 459–479. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-012-0922-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Redlich, C. (2010). Check dam impact assessment, Report by Action for Social advancement (ASA). http://www.asaindia.org.

  32. Renganayaki, S. P., & Elango, L. (2013). A review on managed aquifer recharge by check dams: A case study near Chennai, India. ISSN 2319–1163.

  33. Renganayaki, S. P., & Elango, L. (2018). Quantification of groundwater recharge and river bed clogging by daily water level measurements in a check dam. Arabian Journal of Geosciences,11, 174. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-018-3511-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Richard, W. H., & Cook, P. G. (2002). Using groundwater levels to estimate recharge. The Geological Society of America. Hydrogeology Journal, 10, 91–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Robinson, M., Cognard-Plancq, A. L., Cosandey, C., David, J., Durand, P., Fuhrer, H. W., et al. (2003). Studies of the impact of forests on peak flows and base flows: A European perspective. Forest Ecology,186, 85–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Sakthivadivel, R. (2007). The agricultural groundwater revolution: Opportunities and threats to development and the groundwater recharge movement in India. In Comprehensive assessment, Chapter 10 (Vol. 3, pp. 195–210). Wallingford: CABI Publ.

  37. Sashikkumar, M. C., Selvam, S., Lenin Kalyanasundaram, V., & Colins Johnny, J. (2017). GIS based groundwater modeling study to assess the effect of artificial recharge: A case study from Kodaganar river basin, Dindigul District, Tamil Nadu. Journal Geological Society of India,89, 57–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Satheeshkumar, S., Venkateswaran, S., & Kannan, R. (2017). Rainfall-runoff estimation using SCS-CN and GIS approach in the Pappireddipatti watershed of the Vaniyar sub basin, South India. Modeling Earth Systems and Environment,3(1), 24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40808-017-0301-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Sethi, R. R., Kumar, A., & Sharma, S. P. (2009). Quantification of groundwater recharge in a hard rock terrain of Orissa: A case study. Water Science & Technology—WST,60(5), 1319–1326.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Sophocleous, M. (2002). Interactions between groundwater and surface water: The state of the science. Hydrogeology Journal,2002(10), 52–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-001-0170-8.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Stiefel, J. M., Melesse, A. M., McClain, M. E., et al. (2009). Effects of rainwater-harvesting-induced artificial recharge on the groundwater of wells in Rajasthan, India. Hydrogeology Journal,17, 2061. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-009-0491-6.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Tang, Z., Engel, B. A., Pijanowski, B. C., & Lim, K. J. (2005). Forecasting land use change and its environmental impact at a watershed scale. Journal of Environmental Management,76, 35–45.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  43. UPIRI Formula (1954). A report by Uttar Pradesh Irrigation Research Institute, Roorkee (1954), (as follows by Kumar, 1996).

  44. Van Ty, T., Sunada, K., Ichikawa, Y., & Oishi, S. (2012). Scenario-based impact assessment of land use/cover and climate changes on water resources and demand: A case study in the Srepok River Basin, Vietnam Cambodia. Water Resources Management,26, 1387–1407. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-011-9964-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Varni, M., Comas, R., Weinzettel, P., & Dietrich, S. (2013). Application of the water table fluctuation method to characterize groundwater recharge in the Pampa plain, Argentina. Hydrological Sciences Journal,58(7), 1445–1455. https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2013.833663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Venkateswaran, S., Satheeshkumar, S., & Kannan, R. (2016). Land use/land cover change detection and efficacy of artificial recharge structures in Vaniyar Sub Basin of the Ponnaiyar River. South India Using Remote Sensing and GIS Techniques, IJRET. https://doi.org/10.15623/ijret.2016.0530002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. Satheeshkumar.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Satheeshkumar, S., Venkateswaran, S. Influence of groundwater recharge in Vaniyar sub-basin, South India: inference to socioeconomic benefits. Environ Dev Sustain 22, 1211–1239 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-018-0246-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • Water conservation structures
  • Empirical model
  • Water table fluctuation
  • Hard rock
  • Natural recharge and artificial recharge