sign in sign up
<<
Home , Evaporation pond, Groundwater flow, SahysMod, Water table

Article Evaporation : A Viable Option for the Management of Shallow Saline Waterlogged Areas

Lagudu Surinaidu 1,*, Mogali Jayaraja Nandan 1, Sanmugam Prathapar 2, Velidi Venkata Surya Gurunadha Rao 1 and Natarajan Rajmohan 3 1 CSIR—National Geophysical Research Institute (CSIR-NGRI), Hyderabad 500007, India; [email protected] (M.J.N.); [email protected] (V.V.S.G.R.) 2 International Water Management Institute (IWMI), Colombo 2075, Sri Lanka; [email protected] 3 International Water Management Institute (IWMI), NASC Complex, DPS Marg, New Delhi 110012, India; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] or [email protected]; Tel.: +91-40-2701-2598

Academic Editor: Luca Brocca Received: 16 April 2016; Accepted: 29 July 2016; Published: 9 August 2016 Abstract: The province of Punjab is the main food basket of India. In recent years, many regions of Punjab are facing acute waterlogging problems and increased secondary , which have negative impacts on of the nation. In particular, these problems are more pronounced in the Muktsar district of Punjab. The observed groundwater levels trend between 2005 and 2011 implies that groundwater levels are coming towards the land surface at the rate of 0.5 m/year in Lambi and Malout blocks. In this study, a groundwater flow model was constructed using MODFLOW to understand the groundwater table dynamics and to test the groundwater evaporation ponds to draw down the groundwater levels in the waterlogging areas of Muktsar district. The predicted flow model results indicate that groundwater levels could be depleted at the rate of 0.3 m/year between 2012 and 2018 after the construction of Groundwater Evaporation Ponds (GEP). In addition, the constructed ponds can be used for aquaculture that generates additional income. The proposed GEP method may be a promising tool and suitable for the reduction of waterlogging in any region if there is no proper surface , and also for enhancement of agricultural production that improves the social and economic status of the farming community.

Keywords: MODFLOW; groundwater evaporation ponds; waterlogging; Muktsar; Punjab

1. Introduction For the last two decades, the degradation of land and due to increased population and extensive change has been challenging the future agriculture sustainability of India [??? ]. Degradation of water resources, increased salinity and waterlogging problems have been widely reported as a major threat to sustainable agricultural production. The and waterlogging are two major burning issues in the irrigated lands, and these problems are more pronounced in arid regions of India [?? ]. The salinity and waterlogged areas are increasing every year due to increased secondary salinization. Most of the affected areas and shallow conditions are located in northwestern India, Ganges old alluvial plains, and dry moisture regions in the western part of India [?? ]. Highly fertile and productive land of about 2.8 million hectares in the Indo-Ganges alluvial plains in Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pardesh, Delhi, Bihar and Rajasthan states are gradually becoming unproductive due to waterlogging and secondary salinization [? ]. In India, Punjab state comprises only about 1.5% of the geographical area (5.04 Mha). However, in terms of agricultural production and development, it is the most advanced state, and agriculture

Hydrology 2016, 3, 30; doi:10.3390/hydrology3030030 www.mdpi.com/journal/hydrology Hydrology 2016, 3, 30 2 of ?? Hydrology 2016, 3, 30 2 of 12

In India, Punjab state comprises only about 1.5% of the geographical area (5.04 Mha). However, contributes nearly 39% of the state GDP [? ]. Punjab is intensively cultivated and contributes a large in terms of agricultural production and development, it is the most advanced state, and agriculture share in the food grain basket of India (55% of and 42% of to total India production) [? contributes nearly 39% of the state GDP [1]. Punjab is intensively cultivated and contributes a large ]. After the green revolution, extensive agriculture development has been achieved through the share in the food grain basket of India (55% of wheat and 42% of rice to total India production) [9]. introductionAfter the ofgreen tube revolution, and canalextensive agriculture in the development Punjab province. has been The introductionachieved through of the the canal networkintroduction in the of southwestern tube wells and Punjab canal irrigation and non-exploitation in the Punjab province. of its native The brackish introduction groundwater of the canal has resultednetwork in thein the rise southwestern of the water Punjab table, and waterlogging non‐exploitation and salinityof its native problems brackish [?? groundwater]. In contrast has to southwesternresulted in andthe centralrise of the parts, water over table, utilization waterlogging of the resources and salinity has problems declined the[10,11]. water In table contrast to critical to levelssouthwestern (more than and 10 m)central [?? parts,]. It shows over utilization a negative of impact the resources on agriculture has declined production, the water national table to food securitycritical and levels livelihoods (more than of small-scale 10 m) [12,13]. agricultural It shows farmers a negative in the impact Punjab on [? ].agriculture Hence, proper production, planning andnational management food security is necessary and livelihoods to improve of small the hydrology‐scale agricultural and soil farmers conditions in the in Punjab water [3]. logged Hence, areas of Punjab.proper planning Therefore, and the management main objective is necessary of this study to improve is to understand the hydrology the and groundwater soil conditions dynamics in andwater to provide logged feasible areas of solutions Punjab. toTherefore, manage the soilmain salinity objective and of waterlogging this study is through to understand groundwater the modelinggroundwater studies. dynamics This study and concentrates to provide onfeasible the southwestern solutions to partmanage of Punjab the soil province salinity to reduceand thewaterlogging waterlogging through problem groundwater through a modeling new innovative studies. This approach study concentrates called “groundwater on the southwestern evaporation part of Punjab province to reduce the waterlogging problem through a new innovative approach ponds (GEP)”. This approach was theoretically tested through an intensive data-driven numerical called “groundwater evaporation ponds (GEP)”. This approach was theoretically tested through an modeling tool in the Muktsar district, where salinity and waterlogging are major constraints for intensive data‐driven numerical modeling tool in the Muktsar district, where salinity and sustainable agriculture production. waterlogging are major constraints for sustainable agriculture production. 2. Description of the Study Area 2. Description of the Study Area TheThe Muktsar Muktsar district district of of Punjab Punjab is is bounded bounded by the states states of of Rajasthan Rajasthan and and Haryana Haryana in the in the south, south, FirozpurFirozpur district district in in the the west, west, FaridkotFaridkot district district in in the the north, north, and and Bathinda Bathinda district district on the on eastern the easternside ˝ 1 ˝ 1 ˝ 1 ˝ 1 side(Figure (Figure 1).?? The). The District District lies liesbetween between 30°69 30′ and69 29°87and 29′ north87 northlatitude latitude and 74°21 and′ 74and21 74°86and′ east 74 86 2 eastlongitude longitude and and covers covers an anarea area of 2615 of 2615 km2 km. The. Thedistrict district has been has beendivided divided into four into blocks four blocksfor foradministrative administrative purposes, purposes, namely namely Kotbhai, Kotbhai, Lambi, Lambi, Malout Malout and Muktsar and Muktsar [14], and [? is], home and isfor home 0.903 for 0.903million million people people as per as the per 2011 the census, 2011 census, and 90% and of the 90% people of the depends people on depends agriculture on [15]. agriculture The major [? ]. Thecrops major in the area in the are areagram, are wheat, gram, , wheat, millets, barley, cotton millets, and cotton mustard. and There mustard. are no There are flowing no rivers flowingthrough through the district; the district; however, however, the area the is area drained is drained by extensive by extensive canal networks canal networks drawn drawnfrom the from theSirhind Sirhind feeder feeder channel. channel. In Inthis this district, district, irrigation irrigation water water requirements requirements are mainly are mainlybalanced balanced by canal by 2 2 canalnetworks. networks. In the In total the totalarea (2615 area (2615km ), 2240 km2 ),km 2240 is irrigated km2 is irrigated by the canals by the [14]. canals The [topography? ]. The topography of this of thisdistrict district is flat is with flat with an average an average elevation elevation of 200 of m 200 amsl m and amsl slopes and slopes gently gentlytowards towards the south the and south southwest. The Muktsar district experiences the dry sub humid climate with annual average rainfall and southwest. The Muktsar district experiences the dry sub humid climate with annual average 380 mm, of which 79% fall during monsoon from June to September [1]. rainfall 380 mm, of which 79% fall during monsoon from June to September [? ].

Figure 1. Location of the Muktsar district and targeted observation wells for the calibration (the x- and y-axes are in m). Hydrology 2016, 3, 30 3 of ??

Hydrogeological Conditions The study region mainly consists of the Quaternary alluvium, which belongs to the Indus system. The area is underlain by unconsolidated formation comprising sand, silt and clays with varying proportions. The bore hole lithologs, collected at several locations in the Muktsar district, explain that alluvium thickness of about 416 m deposited in the area and below that Nagaur clay stone occurs [? ]. The groundwater in this region occurs in unconfined to confined aquifer conditions and is generally saline except at local patches with wide spatial variation, which is mainly depending upon the source of irrigation. Almost the entire district is facing a waterlogging problem. In this district, irrigation water demand is balanced by both surface water (96%) through canal networks of the two major canals—Sirhind feeder and Rajasthan feeder—and on tube wells (4%). The depth of the tube wells ranges from 22 to 55 mbgl. The total number of electric and diesel operated tube wells in this district are 10,086 and 16,518, respectively. During 1997, groundwater levels are varied from 2 to 5 mbgl except a few places in the east of Kotbhai and Muktsarblocks, where groundwater levels were >5 mbgl. However, the long-term groundwater level data, from 1997 to 2006, indicated a 1.94 m to 3.87 m rise in groundwater level at all locations. In contrast, in a few places at Muktsar and Bhamma blocks, groundwater levels declined about 1.2 m in the same duration [? ]. The average groundwater level depths range from 3.2 mbgl in 2005 to 0.8 mbgl in 2011 in Malout and Lambi blocks. Likewise, it ranges from 2.97 mbgl (2005) to 2.15 mbgl (2011) at the Kotbhai block. The groundwater development in the district is within the safe levels of exploitation ranging from 53% to 74% of development.

3. Methodology

3.1. Data Collection and Analysis Groundwater levels data from 2005 to 2011 were collected from GOI online data [? ] and data was collected from CSIR–National Geophysical Research Institute (NGRI), Hyderabad, India. was estimated using water level fluctuation method [? ] using the following relation:

Groundwater recharge “ Dh ˆ Sy ˆ Area (1) where Dh are changes in groundwater level, and Sy is specific yield. The groundwater pumping was estimated based on a number of wells and pumping rates that include shallow and deep tube wells [? ].

3.2. Groundwater Modeling The groundwater flow model was constructed with help of existing hydrogeology data and geophysical information using finite difference based on the numerical modeling program USGS MODFLOW 2005 with VISUAL MODFLOW 2011.1 graphical interface of Waterloo Hydrologic, Canada [? ]. VISUAL MODFLOW is successfully utilized by many researchers to quantify and predict the groundwater resources in different geological environments [????????? ]. MODFLOW can simulate steady and transient state groundwater flow conditions [? ]. It is a finite difference based numerical modeling program that approximates the following equation:

B2h B2h B2h Bh K ` K ` K “ S ´ R (2) x Bx2 y By2 z Bz2 S Bt where Kx, Ky and Kz are tensors. Ss is specific storage, and R is source or sink that is intrinsically positive and defines the volume of inflow into the system per unit volume of the aquifer per unit time. Hydrology 2016, 3, 30 4 of ??

3.3. Aquifer Conceptualization The purpose of building a conceptual model is to simplify the field problem and organize the associated field data so that the system can be analyzed more readily [? ]. The conceptualization includes synthesis and framing up of data pertaining to geology, hydrogeology, hydrology and meteorology in the area. The subsurface of the Mukstsar district has been conceptualized as two-layer aquifer systems with a total thickness of 140 m. The first layer thickness varies from 15 to 25 m followed by the second layer with a thickness of 80–120 m based on hydrogeophysical investigations and bore lithologs [? ]. The spatial resolution of grid cells in the model domain is 500 m2, and, along the 2 , it is 125 m .

3.4. Boundary Conditions and Aquifer Parameters The estimated recharge, using a water level fluctuation method four times in a year from 2005 to 2011, is simulated as a recharge boundary condition with a recharge package in the model. The total number of stress periods is 28 with four stress periods per year. The lateral inflow/outflow to or from the area is simulated as a constant head boundary condition along the northeast and western boundaries of the area, which matches with groundwater heads (Figure ??). The groundwater pumping was simulated with well package with pumping rate varying from 300–500 m3/day based on well census data and field investigations [? ]. The total number of pumping wells simulated in the model is 250. The Rajasthan and Sirhind feeder canals contribute to the groundwater system, as they are perennial unlined canals. These canals are simulated as a river boundary condition with an appropriate width and depth (Figure ??). Groundwater evaporation was simulated in the model with (ET) package and assumed 0.5 m is extinction depth with 100 mm/year evaporation. The aquifer properties were obtained from previous studies and published literature in the area [?? ]. The average aquifer permeability for first and second layers are simulated as 2 m/day and 14 m/day, respectively. In addition, specific storage (Ss) and specific yield (Sy) of the first and second layers are considered as 0.0005 and 10% and 0.005 and 15%, respectively, in the groundwater flow model.

4. Results

4.1. Calibration and Validation of the Model The Muktsar area is simulated as a two-layer aquifer model based on the available hdyrogeologic data (Figure ??). The groundwater flow model was calibrated in the transient conditions. Initially, the groundwater flow was calibrated under a steady state condition for June 2005, and then it ran in transient conditions from 2005 to 2008. For steady state calibration, 28 observation wells are used. Out of 28 wells, 12 reliable wells distributed over the model domain are considered for transient calibration. The flow model was calibrated by manual adjustment of conductivity, specific yield and specific storage within a range of observed values until a best fit was obtained between observed and simulated water levels. The root mean square error (RMSE) and normalized root mean square error (NRMSE) were considered for model calibration. The conductivity of the first and second layers are increased to 20% and 15%, respectively, in the initial value and specific yields are reduced to 8% and 13% from 10% to 15%, respectively. At the end of the model calibration, the RMSE error is 0.9 m and the NRMSE is 5% at the conductivity of first layer is 2.5 m/day and the second layer is 16.5 m/day (Figure ??). The calibrated model has been validated from 2009 to 2011, and it was observed that there is no considerable change in RMSE and NRMSE. The spatially distributed computed and observed heads indicated that the model obtained a reasonable compromise between observed and computed groundwater heads during both calibration and validation periods (Figure ??). The computed water level contouring along with velocity vectors represents the predominant groundwater flow pattern Hydrology 2016, 3, 30 5 of 12 Hydrology 2016,, 3, 30 55 of of 12?? central and eastern parts (Figure 4). The velocity vectors also indicated that some localized flows central and eastern parts (Figure 4). The velocity vectors also indicated that some localized flows weretowards due the to heavy west from groundwater the central withdrawals and eastern (Figure parts (Figure 4). ??). The velocity vectors also indicated were due to heavy groundwater withdrawals (Figure 4). that some localized flows were due to heavy groundwater withdrawals (Figure ??).

FigureFigure 2. AquiferAquifer subsurface subsurface conceptualization conceptualization with aquifer conductivity ( x‐ -and y‐-axesaxes are in m). Figure 2. Aquifer subsurface conceptualization with aquifer conductivity (x‐ and y‐axes are in m).

Figure 3. SpatiallySpatially distributed observed observed and computed heads during calibration (2005–2008) and Figure 3. Spatially distributed observed and computed heads during calibration (2005–2008) and validation (2009–2011). validation (2009–2011). HydrologyHydrology 20162016, 3, 30, 3 , 30 6 of ??6 of 12

Figure 4. Computed groundwater contours and velocity in the Muktsar district (x- and y-axes are Figure 4. Computed groundwater contours and velocity in the Muktsar district (x‐ and y‐axes are in m). in m).

4.2. Groundwater4.2. Groundwater Evaporation Evaporation Ponds Ponds and and Its Its Impact Impact on GroundwaterGroundwater Levels Levels The Themodel model initially initially has has been been calibrated calibrated for for 2005 2005 in in steady steady statestate condition,condition, and and then then it ranit ran in in a transienta transient condition, condition, and andhence hence the the year year 2005 2005 is is excluded excluded inin the the water . balance. The The groundwater groundwater balancebalance without without GEPs GEPs for for the the entire entire area area from from 2006 2006 to to 2011 2011 indicates indicates thatthat net net inflow inflow to to the the aquifer aquifer is 97.9 ismm 97.93 and mm 3netand outflow net outflow 148.9 148.9 mm mm3 with3 with a anet net loss loss of of 51 mmmm3.3. The The river river leakage leakage is 10 is mm 10 3mmand3 and groundwatergroundwater evaporation evaporation is 5.9 is 5.9 mm mm3 (Table3 (Table 1).?? GEPs). GEPs are are small small excavated excavated pits/ponds pits/ponds in in the the land land with 2 a depthwith of a 1.5 depth m with of 1.5 an m withaerial an spread aerial spreadof 6000 of m 60002 in the m inmodel. the model. However, However, the depth the depth and and area area should be selectedshould bebased selected on local based hydrogeological on local hydrogeological and water and watertable conditions. table conditions. Generally, Generally, groundwater groundwater from from shallow water table areas continuously discharges through bare soil evaporation. However, shallow water table areas continuously discharges through bare soil evaporation. However, bare soil bare soil evaporation rates are usually less than 10% of the potential evaporation rate. If a GEP is evaporation rates are usually less than 10% of the potential evaporation rate. If a GEP is constructed at constructed at the lowest position of a zone, it will increase the evaporation rate, which is the lowestequal to position the potential of a discharge evaporation zone, rate. it The will suitable increase plantation the evaporation around those rate, pondswhich may is equal further to the potentialincrease evaporation evapotranspiration rate. The and alsosuitable create plantation a good around in thethose area. ponds The conceptual may further diagram increase of evapotranspirationthe groundwater and evaporation also create a is good presented ecosystem in Figure in?? the. These area. conceptual The conceptual GEPs were diagram simulated of the groundwaterin the groundwater evaporation flow modelpond is at appropriatepresented in locations, Figure and5. These the flow conceptual model was GEPs well calibrated were simulated before in the groundwatertesting the GEPs flow in themodel area at through appropriate the model. locations, and the flow model was well calibrated before testing the GEPs in the area through the model. Table 1. Groundwater balance in million (mm3) for the Muktsar district between 2006–2011 and Table 1. Groundwater balance in million (mm3) for the Muktsar district between 2006–2011 and 2011–2018. 2011–2018.

In Flow Out Flow In Flow Out Flow River Inflow River Outflow Total Total Net Recharge RiverLeakage Inflowfrom LeakageRiver from OutflowPumping ET InflowTotal Pum OutflowTotalLoss Net Recharge LeakageIn Northeastfrom OutLeakageNorthwest from ET 2006–2011 86 10 1.9 97.9Inflow 4.00 26 113ping 5.9 148.9Outflow´51 Loss In Northeast Out Northwest 2011–2018 86 11 4(1.5 ˆ) 101 2 35(16 #) 113.5 6.5(0.6 *) 157 ´56 2006– ˆ Inflows86 from Groundwater10 Evaporation1.9 Ponds97.9 (GEPs),4.00 * Groundwater26 evaporation113 due5.9 to increased148.9 −51 2011 Evapotranspiration (ET) around GEPs, # Groundwater inflows into the GEPs.

2011– 113. 6.5(0 86 11 4(1.5 ^) 101 2 35(16 #) 157 −56 2018 5 .6 *)

^ Inflows from Groundwater Evaporation Ponds (GEPs), * Groundwater evaporation due to increased Evapotranspiration (ET) around GEPs, # Groundwater inflows into the GEPs. Hydrology 2016, 3, 30 7 of 12 Hydrology 2016, 3, 30 7 of ?? Hydrology 2016, 3, 30 7 of 12

Figure 5. Conceptual representation of groundwater evaporation pond in the shallow saline

environment. Figure 5.5.Conceptual Conceptual representation representation of groundwater of groundwater evaporation evaporation pond in thepond shallow in the saline shallow environment. saline environment.Then, the well ‐calibrated is used to predict the role of GEP on the groundwaterThen, the levels well-calibrated in the study groundwater site. The suitable model discharge is used tozones predict are selected the role in of the GEP model on the to Then, the well‐calibrated groundwater model is used to predict the role of GEP on the groundwatersimulate the GEP levels based in the on study computed site. groundwater The suitable dischargeflow direction zones through are selected groundwater in the model velocity to groundwater levels in the study site. The suitable discharge zones are selected in the model to simulatevectors in the the GEP flow based model on (refer computed to Figure groundwater 4). GEPs were flow considered direction through at three groundwater locations in the velocity most simulate the GEP based on computed groundwater flow direction through groundwater velocity vectorsdownstream in the part flow of model discharge (refer areas. to Figure The GEPs??). GEPsare simulated were considered in the model at three at the locations depth of in 2 them below most vectors in the flow model (refer to Figure 4). GEPs2 were considered at three locations in the most downstreamthe ground surface part of with discharge an aerial areas. spread The GEPsof 6000 are m simulated, where critical in the groundwater model at the depth depth of is 2<1.5 m below mbgl downstream part of discharge areas. The GEPs are simulated in the model at the depth of 2 m below the(Figure ground 6). It surface is assumed with anthat aerial ET of spread this study of 6000 site m is2 ,75% where higher critical than groundwater the normal depthET, and is the <1.5 model mbgl the ground surface with an aerial spread of 6000 m2, where critical groundwater depth is <1.5 mbgl (Figurewas simulated??). It is assumedwith an ET that package ET of this with study 175 site mm/year is 75% higher and 1 than m extinction the normal depth ET, and in thethe model GEP area was (Figure 6). It is assumed that ET of this study site is 75% higher than the normal ET, and the model simulated(Figure 6). with an ET package with 175 mm/year and 1 m extinction depth in the GEP area (Figure ??). was simulated with an ET package with 175 mm/year and 1 m extinction depth in the GEP area (Figure 6).

Figure 6. Location of the groundwater evaporation ponds in the study area (x- and y-axes are in m). Figure 6. Location of the groundwater evaporation ponds in the study area (x‐ and y‐axes are in m).

TheFigure groundwater 6. Location of balance the groundwater with GEPs evaporation indicated ponds that net in the inflowinflow study intoarea the(x‐ and groundwater y‐axes are in aquifer m). is 101 mm33. The river leakage is 11 mm33, and net inflowsinflows fromfrom thethe northeastnortheast isis 44 mmmm33.. Of this,this, 1.51.5 mmmm33 The groundwater balance with GEPs indicated that net inflow into the groundwater aquifer is3. is coming from GEPs toto thethe aquifer.aquifer. However, the groundwater inflowsinflows into the GEPs isis 16 mmmm3. 101 mm3. The river leakage is 11 mm3, and net inflows from the northeast is 4 mm3. Of this, 1.5 mm3 is coming from GEPs to the aquifer. However, the groundwater inflows into the GEPs is 16 mm3. Hydrology 2016, 3, 30 8 of 12 Hydrology 2016, 3, 30 8 of ?? Groundwater evaporation is 6.5 mm3 (Table 1). The net loss from 2011 to 2018 is 56 mm3, which is 10.6%Groundwater higher than evaporation without isGEPs. 6.5 mm The3 increased(Table ??). net The loss net due loss to from GEPs 2011 is 5 to mm 20183, and is 56 this mm impact3, which has is 10.6%been observed higher than in project without groundwater GEPs. The increasedlevels around net lossGEPs. due to GEPs is 5 mm3, and this impact has beenThe observed projected in project groundwater groundwater levels levels are observed around GEPs.at four selected observation wells, namely M1, M2, M3The and projected M4, located groundwater at 5000 m, levels 2500 are m, observed 1000 m and at four 6000 selected m, respectively, observation from wells, the evaporation namely M1, pondsM2, M3 (Figures and M4, 6 locatedand 7). atIt 5000is assumed m, 2500 that m, 1000groundwater m and 6000 evaporation m, respectively, ponds from were the constructed evaporation in 2012,ponds and (???? the). It influence is assumed was that observed groundwater from evaporation2012 and will ponds be observed were constructed to the end in 2012,of 2018. and The the projectedinfluence wasgroundwater observed fromlevels 2012 with and these will ponds be observed indicated to the that end average of 2018. groundwater The projected levels groundwater would declinelevels with by 2 these m at pondsthe end indicated of 2018 with that averagereference groundwater to 2011 (Figure levels 7). wouldThe zone decline of influence by 2 m atin thedepletion end of of2018 groundwater with reference levels to 2011 due (Figure to the?? ).ponds The zone may of influencevary depending in depletion on ofgroundwater groundwater velocity levels due and to hydrogeologicthe ponds may characteristics vary depending in on the groundwater area. velocity and hydrogeologic characteristics in the area.

Figure 7. ObservedObserved and and projected projected groundwater levels in the Muktsar district.

5. Discussion Discussion The groundwater levels are very shallow throughout the Muktsar district varying from <1 m to >5 mbgl. mbgl. In In particular, particular, high high saline saline groundwater groundwater with a a shallow shallow water water table table is is observed observed in in the the Malout, Malout, Kotbhai and Lambi blocks, which is <1.5 mbgl, and observations revealed that groundwater levels were in an increasing trend fromfrom 20052005 toto 20112011 withwith 0.50.5 m/year.m/year. Due Due to the poor drainage and less consumption of of groundwater groundwater resources, resources, water water levels levels are are continuously continuously increasing increasing in inthe the study study site. site. In addition,In addition, the the saline saline soils are are reducing reducing the the infiltration capacity capacity and and creating creating waterlogging waterlogging problems problems in thein the area. area. Generally, Generally, water water from from this this type type of of shallow shallow water water table table and and saline saline waterlogged areas continuously dischargedischarge through through bare bare soil soil evaporation. evaporation. However, However, bare soilbare evaporation soil evaporation rates are rates usually are usuallyless than less 10% than of the 10% potential of the potential evaporation evaporation rate. The rate. landscape The landscape functions functions as a discharge as a discharge area when area the whenwater tablethe water is within table a criticalis within depth a critical below depth the soil below surface, the where soil surface, capillary where rise causes capillary groundwater rise causes to groundwaterbe drawn to the to be surface. drawn This to the depth surface. is a functionThis depth of is soil a function type, but of is soil typically type, but on theis typically order of on 1.5 the m. orderIf a GEP of 1.5 is constructedm. If a GEP atis constructed the lowest position at the lowest of a discharge position of zone, a discharge groundwater zone, groundwater will flow into will the flowpond into and the water pond will and evaporate water will at evaporate the potential at the evaporation potential evaporation rate rather thanrate rather at the than much at lower the much rate lowerfrom bare rate soil. from The bare potential soil. The evaporation potential rateevaporation is significantly rate is greater significantly than the greater average than annual the average rainfall, annualwhich will rainfall, lower which the water will lower level within the water the level GEP. within Moreover, the GEP. the groundwater Moreover, the level groundwater in the surrounding level in theareas surrounding will go down areas due will to inducedgo down groundwater due to induced flow groundwater towards GEP. flow towards GEP. Hydrology 2016, 3, 30 9 of 12 Hydrology 2016, 3, 30 9 of 12 Hydrology 2016, 3, 30 9 of ?? The model results indicated that construction of GEP is able to deplete the groundwater levels. FigureThe 8 modeland Figure results 9 indicatedshows that that the construction area influenced of GEP by is ablethe GEPto deplete and thethe areagroundwater of water levels. level depletionFigure 8The andwill model Figurebe increased results 9 shows indicated over that time that the constructionfrom area 2012 influenced to of 2018 GEP isbyaround able the to GEPthe deplete ponds and the the groundwaterwith area reference of water levels. to 2011level groundwaterdepletion???? shows will levels. thatbe increased the Figure area influenced 8 over indicated time by thethatfrom GEP GEP1, 2012 and toGEP2 the 2018 area and around of waterGEP3 levelthe was ponds depletionable to with deplete will reference be increasedgroundwater to 2011 levelsgroundwaterover about time 1 fromlevels. m in 2012 the Figure toarea 2018 8 covering indicated around the of that ponds128,000 GEP1, with m GEP22, reference 210,500 and m toGEP32 2011 and was groundwater 170,000 able tom 2deplete, levels.respectively, groundwater Figure ??at the indicated that GEP1, GEP2 and GEP3 was able to deplete groundwater levels about 1 m in the area endlevels of about2012, and1 m 512,000in the area m2, covering208,000 m of2 and128,000 138,000 m2, 210,500m2 at the m 2end and of 170,000 2013, respectively.m2, respectively, The GEP1at the covering of 128,000 m2, 210,500 m2 and 170,000 m2, respectively, at the end of 2012, and 512,000 m2, andend GEP2of 2012, together and 512,000 was able m2 ,to 208,000 deplete m groundwater2 and 138,000 levelm2 at 1 them inend the of area 2013, of respectively.1106,500 m2, andThe GEP3GEP1 208,000 m2 and 138,000 m2 at the end of 2013, respectively. The GEP1 and GEP2 together was able to and GEP2 together was able to deplete groundwater2 level 1 m in the area of 1106,500 m2, and GEP3 depleteddeplete the groundwater water level level2 m in 1 m the in area the area of 275,000 of 1106,500 m by m2 the, and end GEP3 of 2015. depleted At the the end water of level 2018, 2 mthe in three 2 2 pondsdepletedthe together area the of water 275,000 may level deplete m2 by2 m the thein end the water of area 2015. level of At 275,000 2 the m endin mthe ofby 2018, area the theof end 1,802,500 three of 2015. ponds m At together (Figure the end may 9). of deplete2018, the the three 2 pondswater together level 2 may m in deplete the area ofthe 1,802,500 water level m2 (Figure 2 m in?? the). area of 1,802,500 m (Figure 9).

Figure 8. Groundwater level depletion at the end of 2011 and 2013 due to GEP with reference to 2011 waterFigureFigure levels 8. Groundwater 8. (xGroundwater‐ and y‐axes level are level depletion in depletion m). at atthe the end end of of 2011 2012 and and 2013 2013 due due to to GEP GEP with with reference reference to 2011 water2011 levels water (x levels‐ and (yx‐-axes and yare-axes in arem). in m).

Figure 9. Groundwater level depletion at the end of 2015 and 2018 due to GEP with reference to Figure 9. Groundwater level depletion at the end of 2015 and 2018 due to GEP with reference to 2011 2011 water levels (x- and y-axes are in m). waterFigure levels 9. Groundwater (x‐ and y‐axes level are depletion in m). at the end of 2015 and 2018 due to GEP with reference to 2011 water levels (x‐ and y‐axes are in m). In addition, loosening of the soil of the abandoned lands around the sub-surface evaporation In addition, loosening of the soil of the abandoned lands around the sub‐surface evaporation pond and addition of gypsum to dispersed soils will improve soil structure and increase . pondIn and addition, addition loosening of gypsum of theto dispersedsoil of the soils abandoned will improve lands soilaround structure the sub and‐surface increase evaporation leaching. The continuous process may help to improve the soil structure and also deplete groundwater levels to pond and addition of gypsum to dispersed soils will improve soil structure and increase leaching. The avoidcontinuous waterlogging process conditions. may help Theto improve GEPs not the only soil will structure help in depleting and also the deplete groundwater groundwater levels to levels toThe avoid controlcontinuous waterlogging the water process logging conditions. may but help also toThe provide improve GEPs an not opportunity the only soil structurewill for help additional andin depleting also income deplete the by utilizing groundwatergroundwater them for levelslevels toto controlavoidaquaculture. waterlogging the water It is logging highly conditions. suggested but also The thatprovide GEPs community annot opportunity only based will aquaculture help for inadditional depleting will be income beneficial. the groundwater by utilizing levelsthem forto control aquaculture. the water It is logginghighly suggested but also provide that community an opportunity based foraquaculture additional will income be beneficial. by utilizing them for aquaculture.The size of It GEPis highly depends suggested on thatthe communitysaline waterlogged based aquaculture area and will also be dependsbeneficial. on local hydrogeologicThe size conditions.of GEP depends It is necessary on the to salinemonitor waterlogged the temporal area changes and ofalso soil dependssalinity and on depth local ofhydrogeologic the water table. conditions. The proper It is necessary functioning to monitor of GEP the needs temporal good changesmaintenance of soil to salinity avoid andany depthalgal of the water table. The proper functioning of GEP needs good maintenance to avoid any algal Hydrology 2016, 3, 30 10 of ??

The size of GEP depends on the saline waterlogged area and also depends on local hydrogeologic conditions. It is necessary to monitor the temporal changes of soil salinity and depth of the water table. The proper functioning of GEP needs good maintenance to avoid any algal growth and outbreaks in the pond along with maintenance of vegetation. The GEP can be helpful in reduction of salt exports from the site to water courses and improvement of the biodiversity in the surrounding area indirectly. It will increase the productivity of saline and waterlogged areas sustainably. The concept will be highly suitable in areas where the land is relatively flat but with gentle undulation, shallow water table (ď1.5 m), soil with moderate hydraulic conductivity, poor access to natural or constructed drainage under saline water table conditions, which is not desirable for discharge to the , and an annual evaporative demand far exceeding annual rainfall around discharge zones. Overall, modeling results highlighted that GEP is a reliable option to reduce waterlogging and recover productive agricultural land, if there is no proper surface drainage in the site.

6. Conclusions In the Muktsar district, the waterlogging and salinity conditions are mostly prevailing in the Malout, Kotbhia and Lambi blocks. The groundwater levels are very shallow and vary between <1 m and 6 m, and groundwater levels are increased towards the land surface about 0.5 m/year between 2005 and 2011. A groundwater flow model was used to test the new innovative approach, called a groundwater evaporation pond (GEP), to reduce waterlogging in the study site. Model simulation was carried out from 2012 to 2018 with GEP. Model results revealed that construction of GEP will deplete the groundwater levels about 2 m by the end of 2018, which will indirectly help to reduce the waterlogging and also help with the management of salinity problems in the study area. Furthermore, GEP will be useful for aquaculture, and the proper management of aquaculture in the GEP can generate additional income that will improve the socio–economic and livelihood status in the area. This is only a conceptual idea, and it has to be tested at the field level. The methodology could be adopted in a similar kind of hydrogeology and shallow saline waterlogged areas. However, the limitation of the GEP approach is in identifying the suitable place for construction of the GEP, which requires proper knowledge about the hydrogeology of the area.

Acknowledgments: The authors are thankful to the Central Groundwater Board (CGWB), Southern Region–Hyderabad for providing hydrogeology and groundwater data and the International Water Management Institute (IWMI), India, for providing time for the present research work in the project “Ganges Aquifer Management for Ecosystem Services (GAMES)”. We would like to thank the director of the CSIR–National Geophysical Research Institute (NGRI), Hyderabad for his kind permission to publish this paper. Author Contributions: The idea of this study was conceived by Sanmugam Prataphar and Lagudu Surinaidu. Groundwater modeling was carried out by Lagudu Surinaidu and data interpretation, literature review and manuscript preparation was jointly done by Lagudu Surinaidu, Velidi Venkata Surya Gurunadha Rao, Mogali Jayaraja Nandan, and Natrajaj Rajamohan. Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interests.

Abbreviations The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript: GEP Groundwater Evaporation Ponds RMSE Root Mean Square Error NRMSE Normalized Root Mean Square Error Hydrology 2016, 3, 30 11 of ??

References

1. Gurunadha Rao, V.V.S.; Sankaran, S.; Prakash, B.A.; Yadaiah, P.; Mahesh Kumar, K.; Chandrasekhar, S.V.N. Groundwater Quality, Hydrogeological, Geophysical and Groundwater Flow Modeling Studies in Muktsar District, Punjab. Available online: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web& cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwiLq66VxKnOAhVHVywKHWtTDlIQFggcMAA&url=%68%74%74%70%3a%2f% 2f%32%30%32%2e%31%35%39%2e%32%32%33%2e%32%35%33%3a%39%30%2f%44%53%54%2f%64% 73%74%50%44%46%2f%49%4e%52%4d%5f%31%34%34%5f%31%2e%70%64%66&usg=AFQjCNFe4Y- 8XxuKlt4eO6kFMK86hgGj4Q&sig2=r3bdTKn8DanALIzFRkN_9w&bvm=bv.128617741,d.bGg&cad=rja (accessed on 29 July 2016). 2. Kumar, M.D. Food Security and Sustainable Agriculture in India: The Water Management Challenge; International Water Management Institute (Working Paper60): Colombo, Sri Lanka, 2003; ISBN: 92-9090-521-2. 3. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). The State of the World’s Land and Water Resources for Food and Agriculture (SOLAW)—Managing Systems at Risk; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome, Italy; Earthscan: London, UK, 2011. 4. Singh, A.; Panda, S. Integrated salt and water balance modeling for the management of waterlogging and salinization, I: Validation of Sahysmod. J. Irrig. Drain Eng. 2012, 138, 955–963. [CrossRef] 5. Jain, S.K.; Agarwal, P.K.; Singh, V.P. Problems related to water resources management in India. In Hydrology and Water Resources of India; Water Science and Technology Library: Berlin, Germany, 2007; Volume 57, pp. 871–936. 6. Mandal, A.K.; Sharma, R.C. Delineation and characterization of waterlogged salt affected soils in IGNP using remote sensing and GIS. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sens. 2011, 39, 39–50. [CrossRef] 7. Singh, A. Estimating long-term regional groundwater recharge for the evaluation of potential solution alternatives to waterlogging and salinization. J. Hydrol. 2011, 406, 245–255. [CrossRef] 8. Pathak, P.S. Agro forestry: A tool for arresting land degradation. Indian Farming 2000, 49, 15–19. 9. Planning Commission. Report of the High Level Expert Group on Waterlogging in Punjab, Planning Commission, Government of India. 2013. Available online: http://planningcommission.gov. in/reports/genrep/rep_waterpunjab2702.pdf (accessed on June 2014). 10. Sharma, K. Land degradation in India with special reference to Punjab. J. Agric. Phys. 2001, 1, 80–81. 11. Vashisht, A.K. Status of water resources in Punjab and its management strategies. J. Indian Water Res. Soc. 2008, 28, 1–8. 12. Surinaidu, L.; Mahesh, J.; Padalu, G.; Rajesh, R.; Acharya, P.S.; Saram, V.S.; Guruanadha Rao, V.V.S. Geophysical studies for assessment of Groundwater potential in Old Amrtisar, Jalandhar, Ludhiana and Muktsar districts, Punjab. Environ. Monit. Assess 2010.[CrossRef] 13. Mandal, A.K.; Sharma, R.C. Computerization database on salt affected soils of Haryana state. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sens. 2005, 33, 447–455. 14. Central Groundwater Board (CGWB). Groundwater Information Booklet Muktsardistrict, Punjab; Government of India North Western Region: Chandigarh, India, 2007. 15. Government of India (GOI). Census Data of India. Available online: http://censusindia.gov.in (accessed on 29 July 2013). 16. Government of India (GOI). Groundwater Information System. Available online: http://www.india-wris. nrsc.gov.in/wris.html (accessed on 21 April 2013). 17. Groundwater Resources Estimation (GEC) Methodology. Ministry of Water Resources; Government of India: New Delh, India, 2009; pp. 1–107. 18. Waterloo Hydrologic. Visual MODFLOW Version 2011.1 User Manual; Waterloo Hydrologic Inc.: Waterloo, ON, Canada, 2011. 19. Anderson, M.P.; Woessner, W.W. Applied Groundwater Modeling-Simulation of Flow and Advective Transport; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2002; p. 341. 20. Tamma Rao, G.; Gurunadha Rao, V.V.S.; Ranganadhan, K.; Surinaidu, L.; Mahesh, J.; Ramesh, G. Assessment of groundwater contamination from a Hazardous dumpsite in Ranipet, Tamilnadu, India. Hydrogeol. J. 2011, 19, 1587–1598. Hydrology 2016, 3, 30 12 of ??

21. Surinaidu, L.; Mutuwatte, L.; Amarasinghe, U.A.; Jain, S.K.; Kumar, S.; Singh, S.; Ghosh, N.C. Reviving Ganges Water Machine: Accelerating surface and groundwater interactions in the case of Ramganga sub-basin. J. Hydrol. 2016.[CrossRef] 22. Surinaidu, L.; Gurunadha Rao, V.V.S.; Nandan, M.J.; Yugraj, Y. Hydrogeological and numerical modelling studies to solve the groundwater seepage problems in the underground . J. Indian Geophys. Union 2015, 9, 422–432. 23. Surinaidu, L.; Gurunadha Rao, V.V.S.; Rajendra Prasad, P.; Mahesh, J.; Thamma Rao, G.; Sarma, V.S. Assessment of possibility of salt water intrusion in the Central Godavari Delta, region, Southern India. Reg. Environ. Chang. J. 2014.[CrossRef] 24. Surinaidu, L.; Gurunadha Rao, V.V.S.; Srinivasa Rao, N.; Srinu, S. Hydrogeological and numerical modeling for estimating groundwater inflows into the Coal Mines to designoptimal pumping, Andhra Pradesh, India. Water Res. Ind. 2014.[CrossRef] 25. Surinaidu, L.; Gurunadha Rao, V.V.S.; Ramesh, G. Assessment of groundwaterinflows into Kuteshwar Limestone Mines through flow modeling study, Madhya Pradesh, India. Arab J. Geosci. 2013, 6, 1153–1161. [CrossRef] 26. Surinaidu, L.; Bacon, C.G.D.; Pavelic, P. Agricultural groundwater management in the Upper Bhima Basin: Current status and future scenarios. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2013, 17, 507–517. [CrossRef] 27. Varalakshmi, V.; Venkateswara Rao, B.; Surinaidu, L.; Tejaswi, M. GroundwaterFlow Modelling of a Hard Rock Aquifer—A case study. J. Hydrol. Eng. 2014, 19, 877–886. [CrossRef]

© 2016 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).