This dissertation has been 64—7015 microfilmed exactly as received

GREENWOOD, Ned H, 1932- WATER RESOURCES AND IRRIGATION POTENTIAL OF THE RSFSR.

The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1963 G eography

University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan WATER RESOURCES AND IRRIGATION POTENTIAL OF THE RSFSR

DISSERTATION

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University

By Ned H Greenwood, B .S ., M.S.

The Ohio State University 1963

Approved by

/ j Adviser ' Department of Geography PREFACE

The speech by Premier Khrushchev at Volgagrad on September 17,

1963, indicates that irrigation has been returned to its former promi­ nence, following a period of low emphasis immediately after the death

of Stalin in 1953. Since extensive agricultural programs such as the

New Land scheme have failed to solve permanently the Soviet grain

problems, the latest political tack has been a shift toward intensive

agriculture. An increased use of mineral fertilizer combined with

expansion of irrigation is now viewed by the Premier as the panacea

for uncertain grain harvests. And perhaps there was political and

economic justification for the timing in both the New Land programs

and the apparent emphasis on intensification. This recent change in

high level thinking makes the technical data and its evaluation, as

approached in this study of greater concern than was anticipated a few

short months ago.

The background research and a considerable part of the manuscript

of this dissertation were completed in the period between June 1962

and September 1963. In September 1963 the author was a member of the

U.S. delegation which spent twenty-three days studying irrigation and

reclamation in the Soviet Union. During this period, eight of the

fifteen Soviet republics were visited, including all but three of the

republics in which irrigation is practiced. The insight gained

through observations of Soviet facilities and techniques has added

i i greatly to the author's understanding of existing projects and develop­ ments in expanding irrigated agriculture, and stimulated a great personal interest in the subject.

The preparation of the dissertation entailed the help of a number of persons. The aid give by professors and friends has proven in­ valuable in conducting research and composing the materials. The author desires to express his appreciation to the following persons: to Professor Guy-Harold Smith for his overall supervision and con­

structive criticism as well as his careful attention to format and the

details of physical geography; to Professor Jack R. Villmow for his

advice and criticism, especially in the regional aspects of the study;

to Professor Lawrence A. Hoffman for his critical reading of the draft;

and to his wife for the many hours spent in correcting and typing the

several drafts.

In addition to those directly involved with the preparation of

the dissertation the author is much indebted to Commissioner Floyd E.

Dominy and the Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Department of Interior,

whose sponsorship and selection of delegates included the author,

thereby making possible the study of Soviet irrigation facilities and

techniques under field conditions.

i i i CONTENTS Page PREFACE ...... i i

TABLES...... v i

FIGURES...... v i i i

Chapter I . INTRODUCTION...... 1

I I . THE DEVELOPMENT OF IRRIGATED AGRICULTURE IN THE SOVIET UNION PRIOR TO THE SEVEN-YEAR PLAN...... 1U

Development Prior to the First Five-Year Plan The Decade 1928-1938, and the Initiation of the Five-Year Plans The War Years The Five-Year Plan for Rehabilitation and Development of the National Economy in the Period 1946-1950 The Fifth Five-Year Plan, 1951-1955 The Sixth Five-Year Plan and i t s Abandonment Irrigation Resources of the Soviet Union Prior to the Opening of the Seven-Year Plan

I I I . IRRIGATION IN THE SEVEN-YEAR PLAN, 1959-1965 ...... 46

The Seven-Year Plan Long Range Planning Plan Progress in the RSFSR

IV. LAND RESERVES AND WATER SUPPLY PATTERNS ...... 59

Arable Land Reserves The Influence of Topography upon Irrigation Development Water Supply Patterns

V. IRRIGATION WATER REQUIREMENTS ...... 115

Determining Consumption Water Requirements for Crop Production Regional Water Requirements for Selected Crops in the RSFSR Diversion Requirements.

i v VI. PRODUCTION INCREASE AND ESTIMATED.INPUT REQUIREMENTS OF IRRIGATED AGRICULTURE IN THE RSFSR...... 138

Input Requirements Production Increases Under Irrigation Input-Output Relationships

VII. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 163

The Physical Resources and Water Requirements Economic Aspects of Irrigation Developments Irrigation Planning in the RSFSR and Prospects for Attaining Plan Goals Problems Conclusions

APPENDIXES 175

A. Definition of Terms Used in the Text B. Climatic and Daylight Data Used in Computing Consumptive Use and Supplemental Water Requirements in Table 20

BIBLIOGRAPHY 183

AUTOBIOGRAPHY 190

v TABLES

Table Page

1. Increase of Irrigation Area in the USSR, 1928-1938 «... 21

2. Index of Irrigated Area in the RSFSR, Central Asia, Transcaucasus, and USSR, 1938 and 1951 ...... 25

3® Irrigation and Water Supply Goals for I960 as Outlined in the Draft Directive for the Sixth Five-Year Plan. . . 31

4. Area of Irrigation Networks in the Soviet Union Selected Years, 1913 to 1958 ...... 33

5. The Relationship of Irrigation Network, Utilized Land, and Irrigated Cropland in the Soviet Union as Shown in Official Publications, Selected Years, 1950 to 1957. • ♦ 35

6. The Relationship of Irrigated Cropland and Irrigation Net By Union Republic, 1957 ...... 36

7. Percent of Irrigation Network by Region, Selected Years, 1913 to 1958 ...... 37

8. Index of Area of Irrigated in 1958 ...... 40

9. Ir rig a te d Areas by Crop-Types, 1957 ...... 43

10. Comparative Investments in the USSR, Showing Water Economy, A g ricu ltu re, and T otal Investm ent, S elected Years, 1918 to 1958 ...... 44

11. Planned Increase of New Irrigation Development in the USSR, 1959 to 1965 ...... 48

12. Lands Brought under Irrigation in the USSR and RSFSR, 1946—i 960 «.o«».o...... 09000000.0 56

13. Ir rig a te d Land in the USSR According to the Source of Irrigation Water, 1956 ...... 95

14. Average Discharge and Runoff of the Volga Basin ..... 97

15. The Percent of Seasonal Discharge for the Lower Volga and the Athuba Distributary, 1958 ...... 100

vi 16. Discharge Characteristics of Selected Rivers of the North Caucasus ...... 103

17. Discharge Characteristics of the Don R iver ...... 105

18. Average Discharge of Selected Rivers in the Altay Area of West S i b e r i a ...... I l l

19. The Average Surface Flow of Major Streams in the Less Humid Areas of the RSFSR ...... 114

20. Estimated Consumptive Water-Requirements for Irrigated Crops in the RSFSR, 1961 ...... 126

21. Average Water Requirements for Crops in the i-iajor Irrigated Regions of the RSFSR ...... 134

22. Representative Yields of Irrigated and Nonirrigated Crops in the Major Irrigated Regions of the RSFSR. . . . 151

23. Gross Value of Increased Production in Field Crops Due to Irrigation in the RSFSR...... 152

24. Gross Value of Increased Production in Vegetable Crops Under Irrigation in the RSFSR ...... 154

25. Net Value of Increased Production of Field Crops under Irrigation in the RSFSR ...... 156

26. Net Value of Increased Production of Vegetable Crops under Irrigation in the RSFSR ...... 158

27. Percent of Agricultural Crops Grown on Irrigated Lands in the RSFSR, 1957 and F u t u r e ...... 160

28. Labor Requirements in Irrigation, Soviet Union and the United States ...... 162

v ii FIGURES

Figure Page

1. Major Irrigated Sectors of the Soviet Union . . 7

2. Irrigated Regions of the RSFSR ...... 9

3. Irrigation Networks and Zones of Potential Irrigation Development of the RSFSR ...... 34

4. Area of Irrigation Networks in the Soviet Union, 1913-1958 ...... 38

5. Index of Increase in Area of Irrigation Network, . 1949-1958 ...... 39

6. Ir rig a tio n Networks in Subhumid USSR, Selected Years, 1938-1958 ...... 42

7. Index to Topographic Maps, Figures 8-18 ...... 62

8. Topographic Map of the Don Delta ...... 65

9. Topographic Map of the Confluence of the Don and Medveditsa Rivers ...... 68

10. Topographic Map of the Kuban Rice Area ...... 70

11. Topographic Map of the Stavropol Steppes...... 72

12. Topographic Map of Groznyy Foothill Valleys ...... 75

13. Topographic Map of the Terek River Valley in Central Dagestan ...... 78

14. Topographic Map of Minusinsk Basin...... 80

15. Topographic Map of the Selenga River Valley ...... 83

16. Topographic Map of the Barguzin River Valley...... 85

17. Topographic liap of the Volga Valley near Dubovka ...... 88

18. Topographic Map of the Volga Delta ...... 91

19. Rivers of the Subhumid Zones of the European RSFSR } Important in Irrigation Development ...... 93 v i i i 20. Rivers of the Subhumid Zones of Siberia, Important in Irrigation Development ...... 94

21. Consumptive Requirements of Water for the North Caucasus and Volga Irrigation Regions May-September ...... 121

22. Supplemental Water Requirements for the North Caucasus and Volga Irrigation Regions, May-September ...... 122

23. Consumptive Use Requirements of Water for the Irrigated Regions of East Sibera, May-September ...... 123

24. Supplemental Water Requirements for the Irrigated Regions of East Siberia ...... 124

ix CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

The physical resources of the RSFSR-*- are so vast that it is d iffi­ cult to comprehend the significant handicap placed on her agriculture by the combined influences of aridity and unfavorable temperature factors. Throughout the entire area of this vast republic the factor of continentality and the blocking effect of high mountain ranges in moisture-bearing storm tracks has placed its most fertile areas under the influence of climatic conditions ranging from subhumid to arid.

However, these same climatic influences that are so harmful to moisture fertility help to produce the combination of rich soils and warm temperatures which respond well to the application of supplemental water for crop production. It has only been since the last decades of the nineteenth century that irrigation has been practiced in the RSFSR, yet it has increased the versatility as well as the productivity of her agriculture. Irrigated lands now provide for the cultivation of all types of vegetables, mid-latitude fruits, grapes, potatoes, alfalfa, perennial grasses, small grains, rice, and countless speciality crops in the steppes and deserts of the North Caucasus and Volga regions of

Southeast RSFSR. In the Buryat ASSR, Tuva Autonomous Oblast, and

-*-The RSFSR, Russian Soviet Federated Socialist Republic, the largest and most important of the republics comprising the Soviet Union. The textual references w ill use the short form. 1 Krasnoyarsk Kray of East Siberia, irrigation is used in the production of forage,^ small grains, ana potatoes primarily as a support function for stock-raising. Around the larger metropolitian areas numerous large market-garden sovkhozy (statefarms) have been established which depend upon sprinkler irrigation for vegetable production. These are of particular importance around Magnitogorsk and in the Moscow Oblast.

In the Soviet Union as a whole there is a functional dichotomy between irrigation in the subtropics and irrigation in the middle latitudes, Soviet agricultural policy has always favored the pro­ duction of cotton and other high-value technical crops in the republics of Central Asia and the Transcaucasus over the developments in the

RSFSR, Ukrainian 3SR, and Moldavian SSR. Yet the Soviet leaders have realized the value of irrigation in the less arid lands and have en­ couraged it, though not with the degree of financial support evidenced in the subtropical desert region.

The author has approached the study of irrigation resources and development in the Russian mid-latitudes by concentrating on the situ­ ation as it obtains in the RSFSR. As the leading Soviet republic in mid-latitude irrigation, the RSFSR is well suited as a political unit for a study of this type.

At present the lack of research on the mid-latitude irrigation in

tne Soviet Union indicated a need for a concentrated study in this

%he term forage as used in this paper will cover coarse animal feeds, whether harvested and stored such as fodder and hay, or grazed by animals, as in irrigated pastures. area. At the same time a recent study of irrigation development in

Central Asia has provided considerable insight into developments of a subtropical nature.^

Objective of the Project

The principal objective of this study is to provide an evaluation of the situation that exists in irrigated agriculture and water supply in the Soviet mid-latitudes as they have developed in the RSFSR. In addition it is hoped that the systematic research will provide a scale by which Soviet plans for future development in mid-latitude irrigation may be measured.

Plan of Approach

The plan of approach was formulated around the basic problems of measuring water requirements and evaluating existing physical and economic potential. The general aspects of the study fall into four

logical units for planning purposes, as presented in the paragraph

outline given below with reference to the resulting chapters.

1. The objectives and plan of the study.—An introductory section

serves to present the objectives and plan of study. It also outlines

the location of the various regions discussed in the text (Chapter I).

2. The historical overview.—The historical overview is drawn to

provide a background for understanding the development of mid-latitude

^Robert A. Lewis, "A Geographic Appraisal of Irrigation Agri­ culture in Soviet Central Asia" (unpublished Master's thesis, Columbian College, George Washington University, 1959)- irrigated agriculture in the R3FSR and to show its integral relation­ ship to the greater Soviet Union. Secondly, it provides for the examination of expansion goals set by the Seven-Year Plan as they per­ tain to irrigation developments. And finally, it provides the limits within which the analytical study will be developed, as determined by the goals of the Seven-Year Plan (Chapters II and III).

3. The analytical unit of study.—To provide a simplified approach, the physical basis of irrigation development has been divided into a study of land and water potential and an estimation of water require­ ments for plant consumption in the non-humid regions of the RSFSR

(Chapters IV and V).

The second sector of the analytical unit deals with the economic basis of irrigation development and w ill discuss the factors of input and output of irrigated agriculture at its present stage of development in the RSFSR (Chapter VI).

4. Summary and conclusion.—The final unit of study w ill combine the physical and economic factors of irrigation to provide an analysis of mid-latitude irrigation as developed in the RSFSR. From the synthe­ sis thus obtained, the basis for evaluating Soviet plans for future developments in these regions w ill emerge.

Methods of Approach

The previously discussed objectives of evaluation and measurement will govern the methods used in the following chapters. For the histori­

cal aspects the approach is one of searching numerous sources to obtain the most reliable data possible. In this respect the reports of study groups, historical economics, and Soviet encyclopedias were most use­ ful. However, the difficulty of finding Russian periodicals published before 1940 places a severe limitation upon that source in studying the earlier developments .

The source materials for the study of the Seven-Year Plan were found primarily in the Soviet newspapers and periodicals. The use of radio broadcasts as reported by the Monitoring Service of the British

Broadcasting Corporation were also of value. These sources provide our best reports on the plenary sessions of the Central Committee and lesser groups which deal with water resource developments.

Moving to the physical aspects of irrigation development brings a new tenor to the methodology. The emphasis is changed to measuring the physical resources and requirements for irrigation development in the specific areas under consideration. There is little need for lengthy discussion of the areal quantities which could restrict irri­ gation development in some areas, since it is the consensus of the

Soviet and Western observers that the potential of good land in the

RSFSR at present is still large enough that only areas with better soils and favorable topographic characteristics need be selected for new developments. For this reason the author w ill concentrate most of tne discussion of resource potential around the water supply s itu a tio n .

The statistical data to be used for the evaluation of the water

supply potential comes from the Soviet series, Gidrologicheskiy

Ezhegodnik, which are similar to the Water Supply Papers published by

the United States Geological Survey. Additional data ware found in such technical journals as Gidrotekhnika i Melioratsiya and in the works of individual hydrologists. These sources provided the basis for estimating the water supply potentials contained in Chapter 4.

In the second part of the physical resource evaluation, estima­ tion of irrigation water requirements, is found the fundamental re­ search problem of this dissertation. Here the Blaney-Criddle SystenA of estimating water requirements was selected to provide an evaluation of water requirements. This system was adopted after considering the climatic data available and the quality of the desired results.

The economic considerations of Chapter VI and the final con­ clusions hinge upon the measurement of water requirements, existing resources, and the output required to develop the potential to the level envisioned by Soviet planning.

Areal Scope of the Study

The areal scope of this study is not rigid but adjusts to the

general format as outlined above. In Chapters II and III the entire

Soviet Union is considered to provide a historical and planning back­

ground for developments in the RSFSR. For the overall considerations

the Soviet Union has been arbitrarily divided into four irrigation

sectors, (l) Central Asia, (2) Transcaucasus, (3) RSFSR, and (4) Ukraine-

Moldavia. In this division the first two sectors fall in the category

of subtropical irrigation and the last two in mid-latitude irrigation

(F ig . 1 ).

^An explanation of the Blaney-Criddle System is found on page 116 in f r a . 10 c NORTH SEA N O. R W A cV-, c

V** -"SA EAST ■■ SHIER/A X

\ l . A / ’TEV

KARA SEA SEA

MOSCOW

60 s /•; ,-i

-Saratov K uy.byshev H ( BLACK O K H O T S K N O R T H \ \ ~ Chelyabinsk \s CAUCASUS V s } \ - . AstrakhajA j r-J

o O m s k TURKEY Krasnoyarsk^ Novosibirsk/^V K h a b a ro v sk

BURYAT,

CHINA d iv o sto k MONGOLIA SE -I... 'OF R A N ; p a s

I : "1 C e n tra l A sia [ 1 RSFSR CHINA i 1 Trans Caucasus I I Ukraine-Moldi AFGHANISTAN

5 0 0

500 1000 Kilometers

Major Irrigated Sectors of the Soviet Union The later chapters, which concentrate on the RSFSR, have an areal scope limited to that Republic. For this part of the study, three divisions of major irrigation development have been formulated as follows: (1) North Caucasus, (2) Volga, and (3) East Siberia (Fig, 2).

The North Caucasus coincides with the economic region of the same name as distinquished by the Soviets.^ it includes the political units of Rostov Oblast, Krasnodar Kray, Stavropol Kray, Kalmyk ASSR, Dagestan

ASSR, Checheno-Ingush ASSR, Kabardino-Balkar ASSR, and Severo-Osetin

ASSR.

The North Caucasus Irrigation Region was subdivided into five units as follows: (1) Rostov, which coincides with the Rostov Oblast;

(2) Krasnodar with Krasnodar Kray; (3) Stavropol with Stavropol Kray;

(4) Groznyy which contains Checheno-Ingush ASSR, Kabardino-Balkar ASSR, and Severo-Osetin ASSR; and (5) Makhachkala which contains the Kalmyk and Dagestan ASSR's.

The Volga irrigation area covers the Soviet economic regions of the Middle and Lower Volga. The subdivisions of Astrakhan and Volgagrad coincide with the corresponding oblast units, but the Kuybyshev Sub­ division contains the oblasts of Kuybyshev and Ul'yanovsk.

In East Siberia four irrigation subregions were selected: (l)

K rasnoyarsk, which covers p o rtio n s of Krasnoyarsk Kray and Tuva Autonomous

Oblast, (2) Irkutsk, which encompasses a small portion of Irkutsk Oblast

^"Economic Councils Grouped in 17 Major Regions," Current Digest of the Soviet Press. Vol. XIII (November 8, 1961), pp. 16-17. , , a ^a $ k a ( U n i t e d k i n g d o m s’O R T H „ SE A r & f ' k { N d ,R W A jW , V > FEDERAV,^J»ENL>t> REPUBLlCX)E3v^ri. ..X ^ \ _ *»E8S>* E A S T f , H A h 'r.X T S ) GERMANS hAST SIRKRIA ,\ * - " 1 FINLAND/ T'

KARA HRRIRG L - i — v

> MOSCOW

\

, 4 r „ ' v b y sh e v VOLGA c SE .1 ,...•• NORT h V a Chelyabinsk ^CAUfi^N^Hs

V 1 O m sk TURKEY ) Krasnoyarsk ^ \ A ITA Y SRJY N o v o sib ir EAST SIB E-iRfpl A KRAY ) K h a b a ro v sk IRAQ IRKUTSK A UAL I \ SEA \ p / " KRASNOFARsk'^ vN /- lrku,s CHfTA ^ /. BURYAT PRIAAORSKIY V> 1 > v - ^ o KRAY

\ Balkhash j - " '- ■ .J \ - ' V, } MO N G O LI A A - \ CHINA ^ ' IRAN f\ >}

| | Major regions of irrigation /CHINA AFGHANISTAN C ..1 . [ ~] Potential regions of irrigation

500 1000 Miles PAKISTAN Jammu \ 1000 Kilometers

Irrigated Regions of the RSFSR 10 just west of Lake Baykal, (3) Chita, which covers the southern portion of the Chita Oblast, and (4) Buryat which covers portions of the

Buryat ASSR,

In addition to the three irrigation regions discussed above, two important regions of potential development will be considered for their water-supply potential. The area of the Altay Kray, which lies along the Favlodar Oblast in West Siberia, and the basin of the Ussuri River in the central part of Primorskiy Kray are considered by the Soviets to be the best areas for extensive development outside the three major regions of the RSFSR considered above.^

Availability and Quality of Data

Before undertaking the study, there was some concern about the availability and reliability of data from which to work. However, these have proven to be only minor problems. In the area of water supply and measurement of irrigation requirements, the statistical data have been readily, available and apparently of rather high quality.

Some problems were encountered in selecting data for use in computing input and output relationships since much of the available information was for individual areas and may or may not reflect an average situ­ ation. In such cases the author has tried to select the materials that gave the best coverage. And finally, the monetary values have changed

^Atlas Sel1skogo Khozyaystva SSSR (Moscow: Glavnoe Upravlenie Geodezii i Kartografii Ministerstva Geologii i Okhani Nedr SSSR, I960), pp. 98-99. 11 so often that comparable data had to be computed. For this purpose the constant prices of July 1, 1955 were selected and adjusted to the 1961 rate of exchange.

At the initiation of the study, the lack of field data appeared to be a serious limitation due to the problem of actual substantiation of application techniques, conveyance and storage facilities, reclamation measures, and related matters. However, before completing the study the author spent nearly a month (August 31 to September 23, 1963) in the

Soviet Union as a member of the United States Delegation for the Study of the Mechanization of Irrigation and Reclamation. This period was spent in field work with freedom to observe and discuss a broad sampling of projects including the storage facilities, conveyance structures, field techniques, and crop responses of such. It is felt that this experience has provided a much needed insight of Soviet irrigation developments and is reflected in a great personal interest in the su b je c t.

Definitions and Relationships

The fields of irrigation and water resources have numerous terms and relationships which require some definition; to this is added the complicating factor of Russian terms which are necessary to the study, but sometimes lack a clear connotation in Ekiglish equivalents. For these reasons an Appendix of terms and definitions has been added to this work.7 For each abstruse term, a brief definition accompanies

7 See Appendix A, p. 175. 12 its first textual appearance. Conversion data for various measurements used in the text are also included in the same Appendix.

In addition to the basic problem of terms, certain statistical relationships are used in the Soviet Union which are foreign to water resource and irrigation terminology in the United States and require a brief explanation. Most common of these relationships are the Russian

concepts of irrigation net, utilized land, and land regularly irrigated for crop production. The Russian concept of irrigation net refers to all lands so situated that they could be supplied with water from exist­

ing conveyance and distribution systems. The utilized land refers to

all lands which are cultivated either by irrigation or dry-farming methods and including lands which are irrigated only in years of ex­

cessive runoff. Irrigated croplands, sometimes poorly translated as

watered lands, are those lands which receive water every year for crop

production and form the heart of irrigated agriculture. Statistical

relationships of these categories remain rather constant from year to

y ear. From 1950 to 1958 th e u tiliz e d land averaged 80 percent of the

irrigation networks, and irrigated croplands averaged 64 percent of the

irrigation networks in the entire Soviet Union,

Another development of Russian irrigation, referred to as estuary

g irrigation, has no real counterpart in modem irrigation practices of

the United States, although its basic principles are practiced by some

of the southwestern Indians.^ Estuary irrigation is primarily a form

%ee Appendix A, p. 176.

^The Hopi and Zuni tribes practice a similar form of water conser­ vation using small retention dams. 13

of snow retention and runoff catchments used to hold water in areas of natural meadows or seeded hay. The effect is similar to pre-irrigation which recharges the soil moisture and allows fast growing fodder to be

cut for storage. Much of the hay lands of the Transvolga and East

Siberia are utilized in this manner.

The Russians also include the system of supplying livestock water

to grazing lands in the general category of irrigation.^ However,

this is not of basic interest to this work and will be mentioned only

incidentally to the general discussion.

1(^See, estuary irrigation in Appendix A, p. 176. CHAPTER I I

THE DEVELOPMENT OF IRRIGATED AGRICULTURE IN THE SOVIET UNION PRIOR TO THE SEVEN-YEAR PLAN

Development Prior to the First Five-Year Plan

Irrigation has been practiced in Central Asia since very ancient times, having attained considerable development more than a thousand years ago in the areas where waters from the Hindu-Kush, Tien Shan, and Pamir mountain groups made possible the cultivation of the arid lands to the north. The conquest of Central Asia by the tsars in 1865 provided the contact with "hydraulic society"**- which was to have im­ portant influences upon expanding Russian agriculture „

Irrigated agriculture was well developed in Imperial Russia prior to 1900. In 1880, the Minister of Domains (interior) sent an expedition to study the irrigation works and potential of southern Russia.^ Mean­ while, the concept of supplemental irrigation was developing in the

subhumid areas of European Russia, The drought of 1891, especially

severe in the Samara Region on the Volga, resulted in a government appropriation of 450,000 rubles for irrigation in 1892, Between 1892 and 1902 research and development were progressing in the Voronezh,

JThe economic concepts of Oriental "hydraulic society" have been developed by Karl A. Wittfogel in his book Oriental Despotism (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1957 )> P« 2 ,

O J. Jilinsky, Direction de 1* Hydraulique Agricole, Travaux Agricoles Hydrotechniques an Russie (7 Pts.; S,-Petersbourg: XI Congres International de Navigation, 1908), Pt. 3, pp. 13-26, 14 15 Ekatherinoslav (Dnepropetrovsk), Kherson, Poltava and Chernigov areas.

Public irrigation works were built in the Tula and Voronezh provinces folloitfing the dry years of 1905-1906. Other areas receiving supple­ mental irrigation included the Tambov, Don (Krasnodar), Kharkov, Saratov, and Penza provinces. An eastward expansion of irrigation followed the influx of immigrants into Siberia, with the extension of the Trans-

Siberian Railway in 1894. Hydro-technical works were established to irrigate the Ishim Steppes, and other developments soon followed.

Prior to the revolution a sizable acreage was devoted to the pro­ duction of cotton, particularly in Turkestan where the government was concerned with expanding the producing area. In 1908 some 2,841,500 hectares of land were irrigated in what is now Central Asia. This land was especially concentrated in the provinces of Syr Dar'ya, Samarkand, and Fergana where 1,966,500 hectares were irrigated, with cotton being

grown on more than 1.6 m illio n h e c ta re s.^ At th is time the ir r ig a te d area in the TrainsCaucasus probably exceeded 500 thousand hectares, with

cotton as the most important crop.

By 1913, irrigation development in Imperial Russia had reached its peak with a total irrigation network exceeding 4.1 million hectares

(Table 4). The main concentration was in Central Asia. However, the

Transcaucasus had an important net of 850,000 hectares, and European

Russia had a beginning with 132,000 hectares.

Irrigated agriculture declined considerably during the war period

from 1913 to 1918. The upkeep of re s e rv o irs and can al systems was

^Ib id . , P t. 4? p. 9. 16 neglected and many hectares of reclaimed land reverted to saline and waterlogged conditions.

By the mid 1920's the irrigated agriculture had recovered from the effects of the Civil Y/ar and expanded beyond the 1913 level. Supple­ mental irrigation had also increased rapidly in European Russia. The irrigated area reached 250 thousand hectares in RSFSR and was expanded to 50 thousand hectares in the Ukrainian SSR.

The Decade 1928-1938. and the Initiation of the Five-Year Plans

Probably the most far-reaching event in the history of Soviet

agriculture was the collectivization of peasant farming, beginning with

the major drive of 1928. Collectivization of agriculture was used by

the Soviets to provide much of the capital required by the broad eco­

nomic programs initiated under the Stalin Five-Year Plans. It also

allowed a greater control over peasant economic activity in accordance

with accepted socialist doctrine. Official communist statements refer

to collectivization as the "profound Revolution"^ of which Jasny says,

"in retrospect, the periods after the first two revolutions appear 5 almost as previews of the real drama."

^■Commission of the Central Committee of the CPSU (Bolsheviks), History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks) (Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing House, 1943), pp. 291-293.

%aum Jasny refers to the widespread famine of 1932 as the "man made famine;" see, e.g., his book, The Socialized Agriculture of the USSR (Stanford, C alif.: Stanford University Press, 1949), p. 30. 17

The First Five-Year Plan of National-Economic Construction, 1928-1932

The concern of the irrigation sector of the first Five-Year Plan was concentrated heavily on the Soviet desire to become self-sufficient in cotton production. As early as 1928, cotton production occupied most of Soviet irrigated area. The real basis for irrigation in 1928 was 4,290,000 hectares of which same 3,200,000 hectares were concen­ trated in the cotton producing areas of Central Asia and another L 790,000 hectares were in the Transcaucasus. This concentration of existing development in lands well suited for cotton production was

fortunate from the viewpoint of the Soviet planners. The in itial Plan

called for an additional 1,398,000 hectares to be irrigated within the

plan period. Lands to be added to the irrigation network in the first

Five-Year period included

Central Asia 835,000 hectares

Transcaucasus 279,000 hectares

Other Regions 284,000 hectares

Substantial progress was made toward fulfilling the 1928-1932 plan, 8 with an increase of 1,140,000 hectares being realized. The extension

^Lazar Volin, A Survey of Soviet Russian Agriculture, U.S. Dept, of Agriculture Monograph No. 5 (W ashington:U.S. Government Printing Office, 1951), p. 105. 7 Gosudarstoennya Planovya Komissiya, Pyatiletniy Plan Narodno- Khozyaystvenogo Stroitel1stva SSSR (Vol. II, Pt. 1, Moscow: Izdatel*- stvo Planovoe Khozyaystvo, 1930),pp. 375-379.

®Jasny, op.cit. , p. 483. 18

of irrigated, cotton lands was quite rapid between 1928 and 1932, al­ though a considerable portion of these lands was acquired primarily at the expense of grain. Expansion of the cotton sovkhozy (state farms)

occured mainly on the newly irrigated l a n d s , 9 whereas the kolkhozy

(collective farms) tended to be concentrated more heavily in the older

la n d s.

From all indications, the economic effects of collectivization was less severe on irrigated farms than in other sectors of agri­

culture.^1 Taken as a unit the irrigated sector of Soviet agriculture

was quite sucessful during the in itial Five-Year Period.

The Second Five-Year Plan, 1933-1937

The first draft, of the Second Five-Year Plan (1933-1937) was

approved by the Seventeenth Party Congress in January, 1934® This plan

called for the addition of 1,012,200 hectares of irrigated land of

which $70,200 were in large scale projects, exclusively for Central Asia

and the Transcaucasus, 135,000 in smaller new projects and 307,000 in

rehabilitation projects.^- Later plan revisions may have reduced the

basic goal to 944,000 hectares.-^

^Ibid., p. 192.

■^Cotton growers were aided in maintaining their irrigation systems as well as receiving grain and fertilizer at favorable prices. For the 1928-1932 period 6.5 percent of the agricultural investment was for irrigation development, while in 1925 only 3®8 percent of the cultivated plowland was under irrigation, see Jasny, pp. 221 and 786.

•^•Proekt Vtorogo Pyatiletnego Plana Razvitiya Harodnogo Khozyaystva SSSiR (1933-37). Supplement (Moscow: Gosplan, 1934), pp. 122-123.

Great Soviet Encyclopedia, 1935 e d ., Vol. XXIX, pp. 273-274® The irrigation sector of the Soviet agricultural plan liras more successful than the other segments of the plan. It was essentially fulfilled with Central Asia increasing from roughly 3,400,000 hectares to 4,200,000 hectares.-^ In other regions of the country increases were small to negligible.

Investments in irrigation during the second plan period were slightly larger than in the previous period, but the percentage of overall agricultural investment by the state was smaller, dropping from

6.5 percent in the 1928-1932 period to 5.0 percent in the 1933-1937 period.^ Investments by the kolkhozy for the latter period xvere 86,8 percent as great as those made by the state. Kolkhoz investment in irrigated areas was used primarily for distribution canals and irri­ gation systems, whereas, the state investments were concentrated on storage and major distribution systems.

Summary of th e Decade 1928-1938

It has been estimated that in 1938 the irrigated, cropped, plow- land in the USSR was 6,167,000 hectares, distributed as follows:^

Region Hectares

Transcaucasus 1,081,000 Central Asia 4,198,000 RSFSR 770,000 Ukrainian SSR 118,000

Jasny states that this increase is from 3.4 to 5.1 million hec­ tares. For comparative figures; see Jasny, p. 483 and Volin, p. 105.

•^Klreat Soviet Encyclopedia, 1935 ed», Vol. XXIX, p. 274; and 1937 ed., Vol. XXXI, p. 394. ^Burdiashvili, "The Office of Irrigation," Sotisialisticheskoye Sel'Skoye Khozyaystvo, Vol. X (August, 1939), p. 100. 20

Shaumyan^ for the same year estimated the total area under irrigation to be 5.1 million hectares, out of a total network covering 9 million hectares.^ In any case, irrigated agriculture in Soviet Russia was well established in 1938 with a sizable increase over 1928 (Table 1).

However, agricult viral output in general did not exceed the pre- collectivization level until 1937. The favored situation of irrigated over non-irrigated agriculture was the result of substantial government aid. Here Soviet interests in reducing imports, paralleled the eco­ nomic policies of Imperial Russia, This is evidenced in the fact that inedible crops, mainly cotton comprised 40 percent of the additional

1938 acreage.-^

It is significant that while the Soviets were emphasizing non­ edible crops in the arid areas of Central Asia and the Transcaucasus, with rapid urbanization there was a growing recogiition of the need for greater production of feed and food crops in sub-humid regions, especi­

ally the RSFSR. The use of supplemental irrigation as well as total dependent systems expanded in this decade. In a ll areas of irrigation, substantial investments provided a basis for significant progress.

Unfinished projects.—Apparently the Five-Year Plans covering the

1928-1938 decade were essentially fulfilled as scheduled. However, at

Shaumyan "C ertain Ir rig a tio n Problem s," S o tsia listic h esk o y e Sel'Skoye Khozyaystvo, Vol. XI (August-September, 1940), p. 55.

-^Tsentral'noye Statisticheskoye Upravleniye pri Sovete Ministrov SSR, Sel* skoye Khozyaystvo SSSR. Statisticheskiy Sbomik (Moscow: Gosstatizdat TsSU SSSR, I960), p. 259. " Id Jasny, op.cit. a p. 33. least one large inter-phase project planned for the Kamyshin Area on the Volga was suspended. In May 1932, the government prescribed the construction of a large project which would provide for the increase of

4.0 to 4.3 million irrigated hectares by 1938.^ The practicality of such a scheme was doubtful, considering th a t such expansion would, have increased the irrigated area in the RSFSR to equal the combined networks of Central Asia and the Trans Caucasus.

TABLE 1

INCREASE OF IRRIGATED AREA IN THE USSR, 1928-1938

(In Thousands of Hectares)

Region 1928 1938 Percent Increase 1928-38

RSFSR 250.0 768.7 207.5

Central Asia 3,200.0 4,182.0 30.7

Transcaucasus 790.0 1,045.5 32.3

Other Areas 50.0 53.8 7 .6

USSR (Total) 4,290.0 6,150.0 40.3

Source: The data given in this table are taken from Volin and differ slightly from those quoted in the foregoing paragraph, see Volin, p. 105.

T9 'The exact status of the planned irrigation project for Kamyshin on the Volga is not clear. Apparently it was never directly associated with the First Five-Year Plan, but created by a governmental order of 1932. 22

Work on the in itial project was never started and in 1938 the plan was changed to provide 1.0 to 1.2 million hectares by 1947. A combi- nation of war and political reasons prevented the accomplishment of the l a t t e r . ^

The War Years

The Third Five-Year Plan, 1938-1942

The Third Five-Year Plan was approved in the spring of 1939. The adoption of this plan followed the new program for crop rotation and moistvire-conserving practices drawn up in October 1938 following the severe drought of that year.

L ater, on October 27, 1938, the government approved a scheme fo r a series of irrigation projects to be built in Orenburg, Kuybyshev, 21 Saratov, and Stalingrad oblasts and in the Volga-German ASSR. The plan was to raise the irrigated area to 135,000 hectares by 1941, and was designed to replace the greatly curtailed Volga projects. In addition to the Volga projects, the overall plan finally approved in

1939 called for an additional 608,000 hectare expansion in the Trans- caucasus and Central A s i a .22

Although the Soviets were not actively engaged in the war with

Germany until mid-1941, war plans and preparations hindered the

20b . Erlikhman, "Hydroenergetic Regions in the USSR and USA," Planovoye Khozyaystvo (August, 1938), p. 56.

2"4he Volga-German ASSR was abolished in 1941, its territory being divided between the Saratov and Stalingrad Oblasts.

22 Jasny, op.cit. . pp. 41 and 483. development of the scheduled projects, and it is doubtful that any

substantial progress was realized. Apparently no official data were

published on the achievements in irrigated agriculture during the third

plan period.

The 1942-1945 Period

World War II was largely responsible for the ineffectiveness of

the Third Five-Year Plan as well as the curtailment of further develop­

ment plans for irrigated agriculture between 1942 and 1945* During

this period, large areas of irrigated land were abandoned. Poor manage­

ment caused many areas to re v e rt to swamp, and s a lin iz a tio n took thousands

of hectares out of production. Many areas of good land were also un­

utilized, In Uzbek SSR alone, an estimated 460,000 hectares of irrigable

land were id le in 1945 o ^

The German occupation of Western USSR between 1941 and 1943 effec­

tively blocked the use of large areas of irrigated land in the Ukrainian

SSR, the North Caucasus, the Central Chernozem, and to a lesser extent

the Lower Volga. Irrigation facilities in these areas suffered during

the occupation and were not renovated as rapidly as might have been

expected. In all, the level of irrigated agriculture in 1945 was below

th a t of 1 9 leaving the new Five-Year Plan with a considerable handi­

cap from the outset.

^ Zakon o Pyatiletnem Plane Vosstanovleniya i Razvitiya Narodnogo Khozyaystva SSSR na1946-1950 gg. (Moscow: Gosplan, 1946), S ec IV, p a r . 4 5 . 24

The Five-Year Plan for Rehabilitation and. Development of the National Economy in the Period 1946-1950

The re-establishment of planning periods following the war pro­ vided irrigated agriculture with an outline for the restoration of irrigation systems which had been damaged and destroyed during the war.

Major reconstruction was required throughout much of Moldavian SSR,

Ukrainian SSR, North Caucasus and to a lesser extent in the Central

Chernozem Region.^ In addition to extensive reconstruction the plan called for an increase of 656,000 hectares of new irrigated lands.^

This would enlarge the area of irrigated cropped-plowland by roughly

870,000 hectares between 1946 and 1950.

Revisions of the primary plan followed shortly due to the extensive droughts of 1946.^ A re-evaluation of the basic programs of the period resulted in the decree of 1947, which called for an increase of 1.4 million irrigated hectares.

The provisions established in the plan outline of 1946 were easily fulfilled, and it is reasonable to assume that the objectives of the

1947 decree were e s s e n tia lly com plete. Table 2 shows th e ir r ig a te d area

of the Soviet Union increased by 61.2 percent between 1938 and 1951.

However, it must be realized that total area increases are not always an accurate gauge of the actual situation. Agricultural planners were

^ S . Demidov "New Advances in Soviet Irrigation Farming," Planovoye Khozyaystvo. Vol. XXVII (October,1950), pp. 28-41.

^Jasny, op.cit., p. 484.

2%his drought was especially severe in the sub-humid areas of the RSFSR. See A. N. K ostiakov, R azvitiye Orosheniya v SSSR (Moscow: Pravda, 1951), P« 15. 25 plagued with the problem of large areas of unutilized land within the irrigation networks. Also of significance is the fact that the per­

centage of expansion in irrigated land for the RSFSR during this period

was smaller than that in either Central Asia or the Transcaucasus.

This is partially accounted for by the greater effort required for

reconstructing wartime damage in the areas of German occupation.

TABLE 2

INDEX. OF IRRIGATED AREA IN THE RSFSR, CENTRAL ASIA, TRANSCAUCASUS, AND USSR, 1938 AND 1951

(1938 = 100.0 percent)

Region 1938 1951

RSFSR 100.0 153.0

Central Asia 100.0 160.0

Transcaucasus 100.0 182.0

USSR (Total) 100.0 161.2

Source: V olin, p. 105 and I . G. Glukhov "Oroshenie Podzemnim: Vodami," Gidrotekhnika i Melioratsiya. Vol. VII (September, 1956), p. 21.

In addition to the five-year plans several long-range plans were

formulated during the 1946-1950 period and w ill be considered separately.

These had little effect on short-term developments being more concerned

with physical problems. 26

The Transformation of Nature

In October 1948, an ambitious program for drought prevention and water conservation was established.2^ This program, generally referred to as the Stalin Transformation of Nature Plan, consisted of two major phases*28 xhe first phase planned for afforestation and water conser­ vation in the southern portion of European Russia. The second phase proposed the southward diversion of Siberian rivers for irrigation and stabilization of water levels in the Aral and Caspian seas.

Planners had anticipated a decrease in evaporation loss from ground surfaces, reservoirs, and canals in the southern RSFSR through the use of shelter belts designed to reduce the force of wind over 29 these areas. it was hoped that the afforestation would also help retain the snow cover for longer periods, thereby, holding soil moisture at a higher level during the early part of the growing season. Local amelioration was to be aided by constructing numerous farm ponds and

small lakes especially in the Central Chernozem Region.

The second phase was even more pretentious than the first. Never­ theless, certain aspects may still be under tentative consideration,

^ Izvestia, October 24, 1948, p. 1. no ^Demidov, op.cit.. p. 6.

29This was not the first attempt by the Russians to construct shelter belts. The government order of July 31, 1931 called for 2-3 million hectares of forest to be planted in cut-over, burned-over, and waste lands for the preservation of watersheds. An additional 390,000 hectares of shelter belts were to be set out between 1932 and 1938; see Jasny, op.cit*. p. 489. 27 although construction investments are probably prohibitive at present.30

Both parts of the plan were long range in aspect, scheduled for com­ pletion between 1955 and 1965. However, the program of afforestation was abandoned by the mid-1950's.

The Mew Irrigation System

A series of plans initiated near the end of the fourth plan period may have provided a turning point in Soviet irrigation. Government decrees authorized model projects for the Worth Caucasus, Lower and 31 Middle Volga Valley, southern Ukraine, and Turkmenistan. These pro­ jects, to be completed by the late 1950's, would make substantial contributions to the agricultural economy of the southern RSFSR and

Central Asia.

Closely correlated with the development schemes was the proposal of a new irrigation system. The major tenets of the new system in­ cluded leveling irrigation plots, increasing the size of plots, and converting permanent irrigation canals to temporary ditches . ^ The

Soviets felt that its advantages lay in more effective utilization of machinery on larger fields and increased irrigation efficiency through reduced water losses. The system would continue to utilize the same trunk canals and distribution laterals, while the temporary ditches would be used for only one growing season.

3%ote the reference to the Ob Diversion Plan infra, p. 53.

•^Izvestia, August 31, 1950, p. 1, and September 12, 1950, p. 1.

-^Demidov, op.cit. , p. 6. 28

The new system was scheduled for use on 4.3 million hectares by

1959.^ By 1953 a total of 407.7 thousand hectares had been converted to this system of crop production. The plan was basically sound with the possibility of a major benefit to be realized by reducing the highly inefficient labor practices of Soviet irrigationists. The major difficulty seems to have been the lack of investment for machinery of the type needed for land preparation and canalization. This forced workers to use plows and spades for construction that should have been accomplished with large earth-moving equipment.

Conversion to the new system was never completed, but i t provided a better understanding of the problems found in effective utilization of water. It is probable that the future may see the broad appli­ cation of progressive techniques, based on concepts gained from this system. It should be understood that the system itself had many faults, but it did represent the first substantial effort to improve on irri­ gation methods developed by the inhabitants of Central Asia several centuries ago.

The Fifth Five-Year Plan, 1951-1955

The Fifth Five-Year Plan (1951-55) s like the preceding five-year plan, was concerned with three main facets of agriculture development: farm electrification, increased mechanization, and drought control.

Drought control was to be achieved through a combination of irrigation

-^Izvestia, August 18, 1950, p. 1. development and shelter-belt planting. An important portion of the reforestation was to be accomplished during the plan period 1951-1955, while the long-range plan of 6.15 million hectares of afforestation was scheduled for completion by 1965®'^

The plan outlined by the Nineteenth Party Congress called for an increase of 30 to 35 percent in irrigated area.-^ This would be an in­ crease of 1,880,000 to 2,196,000 hectares, which would place the total irrigated land between 8,157,000 and 8,471,000 hectares. Other sources state the planned increase at 1,890,000 and 2,205,000 hectares.^

Goals set by the plan were not achieved. Official Soviet data show an increase of only 12.1 percent .37 Irrigation development seemed to have stagnated during this period. After the death of Stalin, the new government launched a vast program of plowing new lands (heavily concentrated around Tselinograd,Kazakh SSR), accompanied by the su­ spension of shelterbelt planting and curtailment of the more grandiose irrigation schemes, concentrating on more feasible and less costly programs.

•^Regional Economic Atlas of the USSR (London: Oxford University Press, 1956), p. 33.

"Directives of the 19th Congress CPSU and Tasks of the Water Economy,n Gidrotekhnika i M olioratsiya, Vol. IV (November, 1952), pp. 3 -12.

3^1. Shipinskiy, "Great Plan for the Development of the People’s Economy," Voprosy Ekonomiki, Vol. V (October, 1952), pp. 56- 68 .

-^l’sentral’noye Statisticheskoye pri Sovete Ministrov SSSR, p. 259* 30

The Sixth Five-Year Plan and its Abandonment

The irrigation development envisioned by the Sixth Five-Year Plan

(1956-1960) was quite unrealistic in the light of previous experience.

The general proposal was to expand the area of irrigated land by 2.1 million hectares^® from a base of 7.1 million hectares in a period of five years. Table 3 outlines the regional aspects of the plan. By

1958 the overextension of the general economic plan was realized and it was abandoned in favor of a seven-year plan, in which irrigation development goals were more r e a l i s t i c . The downward m odification of irrigation goals is more in keeping with the existing potential and investment program.

The possible outcome of the discarded plan may be of interest in evaluating the situation that existed at the beginning of the new plan.

Interpolated figures based on the 1959 irrigation net give an expected total of 7.9 million hectares, or 1.3 million hectares short of the i 9 6 0 g o a l .39 jf this goal were prorated over the five-year period, the

1959 total should have been 8.8 million hectares rather than the 7.9 million hectares given above. Therefore, it is estimated that the irrigation program planned for completion in i 960 would have reached only 41.6 percent of schedule at the end of 1959.

3%. D. Brechnev and I. A. Minkevich, Achievements of Agricultural Science in the USSR, trans. Robert Farkash and Marc Paenson (Jerusalem: The Israel Program for Scientific Translations, 1961), p. 106.

39xhis interpolation is based on the ratio of watered land to irrigation networks as evidenced by the period between 1950 and 1957 . For this period the ratio of watered land to irrigation net was always between 63.01 and 65.07 percent. 31

TABLE 3

IRRIGATION AND WATER 5UPPIY GOALS FOR I960 AS OUTLINED IN THE DRAFT DIRECTIVE FOR THE SIXTH FIVE-YEAR PLaN

(In Hectares)

Republic New Irrigated Land to be Added

RSFSR . 25S,OOOa Uzbek SSR 325,000 Kazakh SSR 214,000 Kirghiz SSR 115,000 Turkmen SSR 205,000 Tadzhik SSR 89,000 Azerbaydzhan SSR 125,000 Georgian SSR 40,000 Armenian SSR 39,000 Ukrainian SSR 146,000 Moldavian SSR ———-

USSR (T otal) 1 ,3 0 0 ,ooob

aAn additional 225,000 hectares were to be prepared for estuary irrigation.

Whis total which was supplied by the Draft Directive for new irrigated lands is less than the sum of the column but the difference is not enough to account for the additional 800,000 hectares of recon­ struction under consideration. It is assumed that the distinction between new irrigation development and reconstruction was not clear in the individual republics.

Source: "Draft Directives of the 20th Congress of the CPSU," Sel1skoye Khozyaystvo (Moscow), January 15, 1956, pp. 5-6. 32

Irrigation Resources of the Soviet Union Prior to the Opening of the Seven-Year Plan

The area under irrigation networks at the end of 1958 was

12,280,OCX) hectares,^ of which 65.1 percent was actually irrigated for crop production. This would place the irrigated cropland at

7,812,000 hectares or 4 percent of the total sown area.

The information contained in Table 4 relies on official Soviet data where possible, otherwise, comparable data were usedo^ These data are for the overall irrigation net and should not be construed as land actually receiving water. Tables 5 -7 should be helpful in

evaluating the material in Table 4, as they are indicative of the re­

lationships used in recent years by Soviet statisticians. Figure 1

gives a graphic representation of the irrigation situation that obtained

in the Soviet Union in 1958.

Thus far we have considered irrigation as used in the production

of crops. In addition the Soviets have a program of providing water to

pasture lands in arid and semiarid zones. This program was designed to

increase the efficiency of grazing techniques in areas of marginal

production, primarily through developing wells, erecting windmills, and

piping water to remote areas for livestock consumption. In 1959,

^USSR National Committee on Irrigation and Drainage, Irrigation Development in the Soviet Union from 1949 to 1959 (Moscow: Giprovodhoz, i 960 )', p. 7.

^"Less comparable data for years given in Table 4 and comparable data for some years not listed may be found in the following sources: (1) Glukhov, p. 21, (2) Tsentral'noe Statist!cheskoe Upravlenie pri Sovete Ministrov SSSR, p. 259, (3) Sotsialisticheskoye Zemledlye. September 23, 1952, pp. 2-3, (4) Santini, p. 5. tab le 4

AREA OF IRRIGATION NETWORKS IN THE SOVIET UNION SELECTED YEARS, 1913 TO 195 8

(In Thousands of Hectares)

R ep u b lic 1913 1928 1938 1949 1955 1958

RSFSR 132 250 769 1,083 1,487 1,588 Uzbek SSR 1,599 1,784 2,477 2,806 2,883 Kazakh SSR 696 984 2,018 2,068 3,346 K ir g iz SSR 434 738 966 1,140 1,145 Turkmen SSR 307 369 698 707 721 T adzhik SSR 173 308 389 421 425 A zerbaydzhan SSR 620 677 1,223 1,576 1,580 Georgian SSR 132 200 255 307 320 Armenian SSR 97 169 208 210 213 Ukrainian SSR * 50 126 147 220 226 M oldavian SSR ■ i t ■ i f # 14 30 30

USSR (T o ta l) 4,190 4,290a 6,150 9,478 10,967 12,282

aData on individual republics in Central Asia and the Transcaucasus are not available for 1928, but the total network for central Asia was 3.2 million hectares and .79 million for the Transcaucasus.

’'Negligible. Note: The information in this table was taken from the following sources: (l) M. M, Davydov, Velikoye Gidrotekhicheskoye Stroitel'stvo v SSSR, (Moscow: Pravda, 1951), p. 4, (2) Volin, p« 105, (3 ) USSR National Committee on Irrigation and Drainage, p. 7, and (4) Tsentral'noye Statisticheskoye Upravleniye pri Sovete Ministrov SSSR, Sel1skoye Khozyaystvo SSSR, p. 259. ~ a l a ? k a " IGNITED KINGDOM \JV SEA

SWEDEN

EAST ..SWER1AS ISO \ /C .S E A FINLAND •SAV1

1I.APTEY

KARA

K ie v MOSCOV^-

S a ra to y OF

40 \ \ T U R k^Y I 3 Krasnoyarsk 1 Novosibirsk^

Khabarovsk '

C h ita

7 "

\ r I ^ tk c ^ C i Balkhash i Vladivostok f" \ C H I N A M O N G O LI A OF IRAN / A P A .V Major irrigation networks

CHINA Minor irrigation networks AFGHANISTAN Area of potential irrigation \ 6 0 5C0 lO'.O Kilometers 120

Irrigation Networks and Zones of Potential Irrigation Development of the RSFSR 35

TABLE 5

THE RELATIONSHIP OF IRRIGATION NETWORK, UTILIZED LAND, AND IRRIGATED CROPLAND IN THE SOVIET UNION AS SHOWN IN OFFICIAL PUBLICATIONS, SELECTED YEARS 1950-1957

(In Thousands of Hectares)

C ategory3 1950 1953 1955 1957

Irrigation Network 9,701 10,669 10,967 11,080

U t iliz e d Land 7,383 8,677 9,249 9,325

Irrigated Cropland 6,275 6,723 7,046 7,210

aThese categories are discussed in the introductory chapter of th is work.

Source: Tsentral'noe Statistiche skoye Upravleniye pri Sovete M inistrov SSSR, S e l1 skoye Khozyaystvo SSSR, p. 258. approximately 150 million hectares were receiving water for this purpose, of -which 127.5 million hectares were in Central Asia and 19.9 million in

RSFSR.42

Comparative Development of the Ma.jor Irrigated Regions

The arbitrary division of Soviet irrigation into four regions as

previously outlined (Chap. 1) will be used for a comparative study of

the situation that existed just prior to the Seven-Year Plan. A series

of charts and tables are used to illustrate the overall situation as

42S. V. Zasukhin and V. M. Mel'nikov, "Urgent Problems in the Development of the Water Economy," Gidrotekhnika i M elioratsiya, Vol. XI (November 1959), p. 7. 36 well as significant inter-regional changes since just prior to the

Revolution of 1917. An increasing rate of expansion is readily apparent in Figure 2. The beginning was slow, showing an in itial decline then a more rapid growth in the mid-1920's following the revolution. Whereas

TABLE 6

THE RELATIONSHIP OF IRRIGATED CROPLAND AND IRRIGATION NET BY UNION REPUBLIC, 1957a

(In Thousands of Hectares)

Republic Irrigated Cropland Irrigation Net

RSFSR 819 1,482 Uzbek SSR 2,282 2,888 Kazakh SSR 1,054 2,054 K ir g iz SSR 823 1,145 Turkmen SSR 389 721 T adzhik SSR 344 425 A zerbaydzhan SSR 884 1,580 G eorgian SSR 231 320 Armenian SSR 183 213 Ukrainian SSR 168 223 M oldavian SSR 23 30

USSR (T o ta l) 7,210 11,080

aThe information for 1957 is the latest complete breakdown by Union Republics which the author has been able to find.

Source: Atlas Sel1skogo Khozyaystva SSSR, p. 99.

a number of brief fluctuations altered the short-range conditions,

World War I I may have caused the most sizable change in trend, though

this is not shown in Figure 1 because of the lack of accurate data

covering th a t p erio d . The ra p id in crease between 1957 and 1958 shown 37

TABLE 7

PERCENT OF IRRIGATION NETWORK BY REGION, SELECTED YEARS, 1913-1958

Region 1913 1928 1938 1949 1955 1958

RSFSR 3.2 5.8 13.0 11.4 13.6 12.9

Central Asia 76.6 74.5 68.0 69,1 65.1 67.7

Transcaucasus 20.2 18.4 17.0 17.8 19.1 17.2

Ukraine -Moldavia ------1.3 2.0 1.7 2.2 2 .2

USSR (Total) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Source: Table 5 • for the USSR is the reflection of the situation recorded in Central

Asia. This increase was mostly in the realm of animal grazing in the southeast portion of the Kazakh SSR where estuary irrigation was used to improve grazing lands.^ The Kazakhs irrigated 2,055,000 hectares in

1957 primarily for crop production, but in 1958, 3,146,000 were reported.

The increase disclosed by these latter figures has had little effect on cropping practices, being for the most part little better than uncon­ trolled flooding by the rivers themselves. Figure 3 shows Kazakh SSR with an increase of 55.9 percent over the period from 1949 to 1958, but for the period 1949 to 1957 the increase was only 1,8 percent. The logical assumption is that the increase was largely one of reporting policy, as related to estuary irrigation.

43USSR National Committee on Irrigation and Drainage, p. 11. 38

AREA OF IRRIGATION NETWORKS IN SOVIET UNION 1913-1958

12

10

USSR

8

Central Asia

6

4

2 Transcaucasus

V RSFSR

kroine-Moldavia

1910 1920 1930 1940 1960

F ig. 4 INDEX OF INCREASE IN AREA OF IRRIGATION NETWORK, 1949-1958

Percent Increase

RSFSR 46.6%

U zbek SSR 16.4%

K azakh SSR 55.9%

Kirzhiz SSR 18.5%

Turkmen SSR 3.3%

Tadzhik SSR 9.2%

A zerb ay d zh an SSR 29.2%

G eo rg ian SSR 25.5%

A rm enian SSR § 2.4%

U krainian SSR 53.7%

M oldavian SSR 114.3%

USSR (total) 29.6%

Calculated from Table 4 40

TABLE 8

INDEX OF AREA OF IRRIGATED NETWORK IN 1958

(1938 = 100 percent)

Republic Change

RSFSR 206.5 Uzbek SSR 161.6 Kazakh SSR 319.7 K irgiz SSR 155.1 Turkmen SSR 195.4 Tadzhik SSR 152.0 Azerbaydzhan SSR 233.6 Georgian SSR 160.0 Armenian SSR 126.0 Ukrainian SSR 200.0 Moldavian SSR No Base

USSR (T otal) 199.7

Source: Table 5.

The Less Arid Regions

The increasing importance of irrigation in semiarid and subhumid zones of the USSR indicates the need for concentrated research in these areas. The arbitrary division between the RSFSR and the Ukraine-

Moldavia Area (Fig. 2) is largely one for study purposes, since the evaluation in Chapters IV, V, and VI is concerned with the RSFSR ex­ clusively. The dominant position of the RSFSR in irrigating the less arid lands is indicated in Figure 4. Continued growth of irrigation networks is likely, because of great potential and the planned rapid expansion of supplemental as well as conventional irrigation for the production of established crops. In contrast the agricultural areas of 41 the Transcaucasus and Central Asia are located in desert regions and are used primarily in the production of subtropical crops.

The Use of Ir rig a tio n in Crop Production

The importance of irrigation to crop production in the Soviet Union is much greater than its 4 percent of the sown acreage suggests. Irri­ gation is practiced on over 20 percent of all kolkhozy and sovkhozy.

Certain crops are highly dependent upon irrigation as indicated by the following:^4 Cro£ Percent Irrigated Cotton 100 Rice 1 0 0 A lfa lfa 30 V egetables 24 Orchards and Vineyards 18

Since the mid-1950's cotton has been grown wholly in the Transcaucasus and Central Asia, whereas the other major irrigated crops are grown in all areas to some extent, being oriented toward local consumption, with irrigated orchards being significant in the North Caucasus and supple­ mental irrigation for general farming in the Central Chernozem areas.

Irrigation Investments, 1918-1958

Water economy investments between 1918 and 1958 amounted to 3.6 billion rubles (July 1, 1955 constant prices) of which an estimated

80.0 percent was devoted to irrigation projects.^ The importance of

^Zasukhin, op.cit., p. 7.

^The irrigation sector of the water economy received 77.8 percent of 1952-1958 investment, see the article "0 Dal'neyshem Ukreplenii Ekonomiki Kolkhozov" by V. Khlebnikov in Voprosy Eknomiki, Vol. XV (July, 1962), pp. 49-57. 42

IRRIGATION NETWORKS IN SUBHUMID USSR,

SELECTED YEARS, 193 8 -1 9 5 8

1600

RSFSR

M oldavian SSR

Ukrainian SSR 1400

1200

1000

80 0

600

400

200

1 9 3 8 1949 1955 1 9 5 8

Source: Table 4

F ig . 6

I 43 TABLE 9

IRRIGATED AREA OF USSR BT CROP-TYPSS, 1957

Crop Area in Hectares Percent of Total

Technical crops 2,298,000 31.9 G rains 1,808,000 25.1 Feed Crops 1,219*000 16.9 Vegetables, Melons and Potatoes 470,000 6.5 Orchards and Vineyards 468,000 6.5 Farmsteads3, 442,000 6.1 H aylands 261,000 3 .6 P a stu r e s 182,000 2.5 Fallow lands 62,000 .9

T o ta l 7,210,000 100.0

aThe farmstead may well be the most productive of all categories listed, in that it contains the private plots of the individual peasants.

Source: Atlas Sel1skogo Khozyaystva SSSR.p. 99* irrigated cotton in the national economy influenced the rate of in­ vestment in water resources in the early years of Soviet administration.

During the first decade after the revolution, investments in the water economy were 18.4 percent of the agricultural total, whereas, the share of sown area occupied by irrigated crops was less than 3.9 percent. By

1958 the investment was reduced to 7.5 percent (Table 10), but the area with an irrigation net had increased to 6.2 percent of the sown area.

One reason for this decrease in state investment may be found in the

growing importance of kolkhoz investment in agriculture. For the years

1952 through 1958, 13.0 percent of the investment in irrigation TABLE 10

C024PARATIVE INVESTMENT IN THE USSR, SHOWING WATER ECONOMY, AGRICULTURE, AND TOTAL INVESTMENT, SELECTED YEARS, 1918 TO 1958

(In Millions of Rubles, Based on Constant Prices of July 1, 1955)

Period T o tal T otal T o tal Percent of Water Percent of Soviet Productive Agricultural Investment in Economy Agricultural Investm ent Investment3- Investm ent Agriculture Investm ent Investment in Water Economy

1918 - 1927 4,087 1,699 125 7 .4 23 18.4 1928 - 1932 7,423 7,021 1,196 17.0 113 9.4 1933 - 1937 16,811 16,163 2,120 13.1 241 11.4 1938 - 1941 17,593 16,418 2,008 12.2 321 16.0 1941 ~ 1946 17,754 16,037 1,724 10.8 168 9.7 1946 - 1950 41,940 38,025 5,385 14.2 585 10.9 1951 - 1955 79,165 73,914 12,270 16.6 1,192 9.7 1956 22,902 21,387 4,024 18.8 259 6.4 1957 25,830 23,780 4,203 17.6 294 7.0 1958 30,012 27,358 4,741 17.3 357 7.5

1918 - 1958 263,521 241,802 37,796 15.6 3,553 9.4

aTotal productive investment is derived by subtracting the private investment for housing from the total investment.

^This period ended on 30 June 1941 and the next period began on 1 July 1941® Source: Tsentral'noye Statisticheskoye Upravleniye Ministrov SSSR, Kapital'noye Stroitel1stvo v SSSR: S ta tis tic h e s k iy Sbornik (Moscow; G o sstatizd at TsSU SSSR, 1961, pp. 39-40, 56-57* and 156-159® 45 iL construction was supplied by the kolkhozy. It has been the practice of the government to provide initial surveys for irrigation projects as well as construction of the main storage and distribution systems.

The kolkhoz must pay for distribution systems on the individual farm, whereas the sovkhoz is completely state subsidized.

The trend of governmental investment in irrigation appears to be in the process of upswing after reaching a low of 7.0 percent of the agricultural investment in 1957. The added emphasis on irrigation proposed by the Seven-Year Plan would help to force investments upward with the rapidly expanding base of irrigation networks.

^USSR National Committee on Irrigation and Drainage, p. 29. CHAPTER III

THE SEVEN-YEAR PLAN, 1959-1965

The Seven-Year Plan

The development of the Seven-Year Plan by the Soviet Union repre­ sents in many ways a realistic approach to the varied problems confront­ ing the economic development of that nation. The agricultural sector in particular needed a downward modification of product procurement rates levied by the government. The abandonment of the Sixth Five-Year

Plan was an attempt by the Soviets to adjust to the changing needs of the economy. The new plan was formulated with lower and more nearly attainable goals. Even with the conversion to the new plan it was anticipated that irrigation would provide an important access to in­ creased production, though the proposed expansion for 1965 was smaller than that previously envisioned for I960 under the abandoned plan.

The analysis of irrigation and water resources in the RSFSR w ill be based upon the bounds set by the Seven-Year Plan and its subsequent

modifications. The vast potential for irrigation development makes it

desirable for such a study to concentrate heavily on those areas xvhich

the Soviets have indicated they plan to develop.^-

At present there are over 12.3 million hectares of land under the

irrigation networks of the Soviet Union. Planned expansion during the

•*-As indicated in the introductory chapter, the Soviets are pushing the development of Central Asia because of the great potential for cotton production. 46 47 seven-year period ending in 1965 w ill increase this area by 1,9 million hectares of newly developed lands a listing of new irrigation planned for the union republics is shown in Table 11, A total addition of 3*6 million hectares will undergo irrigation, but part of this will consti- r 1 tute lands which have previously been irrigated or for some other reason cannot be classified as gains in new arable lands. There is consider­ able evidence that Soviet agriculturalists are stepping up the develop­ ment of irrigation and will probably exceed the original estimate established for I 965 P

The basic plan of economic development for 1959-1965 was adopted on November 12, 1958. In his report to the Party Congress, Chairman

Khrushchev stated that the goal of agricultural output for the Seven-

Year period, including the irrigation sector is a gross increase of 70

percent above the 1958 production. This would require an annual in­

crease of 7.9 percent, compared with 11 percent under the abandoned

plan.^- To facilitate this increase, the state planned to invest 15 million rubles and expects the kolkhozy to invest an estimated 35

billion rubles in agriculture.^ The agriculture sector will comprise

2 Stroitel'naya Gazeta, January 27, 1961, p. 2.

%adio Tass (In English) January 9, 1961, Summary of World Broad­ casts, Pt. I, USSR, Weekly Supplement, No. 92 (Caversham Park, fhgland: Monitoring Service of the British Broadcasting Corporation), January 13, 1961, Section B, pp. 17-18.

^Targets of the Seven-Year Plan for Soviet Economy. 1959-1965 (London: Soviet Booklets, 1958), p. 3o.

^Pravda, November 14, 1958, pp. 1-9. 48

TABLE 11

PLANNED INCREASE OF NEW IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE USSR, 1959-1965

(In Hectares)

Republic Planned Increase of New Irrigation by 1965

RSFSR 300,000

Uzbek SSR 500,000

Kazakh SSR 200,000

Kirghiz SSR 110,000

Turkmen SSR 155,000

Tadzhik SSR 150,000

Azerbaydzhan SSR 185,000

Georgian SSR 35,000

Armenian SSR 37,000

Ukrainian SSR 150,000

Moldavian SSR 40,000

T o tal l,9 0 0 ,0 0 0 a

^The figures for planned increase have been verified in other sources, however, the difference of 38,000 hectares between the sum of the column and the given total is not explained and perhaps lies outside the republics listed®

Source: I. T® Vovechenko, "Water Economy Construction During the Seven-Year Period 1959-1965," Gidrotekhnika i M elioratsiya, XI (February, 1959)3 PP. 7-13. 49 slightly less than 15 percent of the state investment in the total economy. Judging from earlier investments, the irrigation sector should receive between 7 and 9 percent of the agricultural investment. In­ creased production from irrigated agriculture was viewed as a means of attaining an important portion of the planned growth. Therefore, it is logical that an increase in the agriculture investment would have great influence on increasing irrigation development.

Indications of changes in irrigation goals became somewhat ex­ plicit with the meeting of the Plenary Session of the Central Committee,1

January 17, 1961.^ On February 25? 1961, Correspondent Ivan Artemov, commenting on this meeting, stated that

The Seven-Xear Year Plan originally envisaged an extension of the area under irrigation by 1, 900,000 hectares, but it is clear that irrigation can be expanded even further due to the considerable over fulfillment of the industrial Seven-Xear Plan targets in 1959 and I960 and the prospect that these targets w ill also be exceeded in the years to come. As a result, the state will obtain additional finance of the order of R. 15,000,000,000 to R. 20, 000,000,000, New Currency.^

If the additional investment is made available, the government may be able to surpass the original goals for irrigation construction of the seven-year period and make significant progress on long range objectives.

^The idea of change was at least formulated at the conference on ir r ig a tio n held in Moscow on December 28, I960. 7 Pravda, January 21, 1961, pp. 1-5.

C> Radio Tass (In English), February 25, 1961, Summary of World Broadcasts Pt. 1, USSR, Weekly Supplement, No. 99 (Caversham Park, England: Monitoring Service of the British Broadcasting Corporation), March 3 , 1961, Section B, pp. 11-12, 50

Long-Range Planning

Long-range planning for water resource development in the Soviet

Union is largely related to the natural handicaps imposed by the physical geography of its particular landmass. The problems of continentality, aridity, interior drainage, and adverse stream patterns are all factors influencing their long-range objectives. As a result, Soviet planners have generally faced problems in correlating the economic goals of their short run plans with the more basic problems affecting long-range ob­ jectives. 9 ar. Khrushchev's speech at the Central Committee, Plenary

Session on Agriculture, January 17, 1961, separated these functions in irrigated agriculture.^

For the most part, long-range plans for develbping water resources in the Soviet Union are quite nebulous, some being associated with schemes to bring quantities of water from Siberian rivers to make fertile the deserts of the south. Similar plans have considered diverting water from north flowing rivers of European Russia into the Volga Basin. The latter will be considered as it has an important bearing upon the long- range objectives of the RSFSR and the related problem of the Caspian water balance. The problem of the Caspian water balance is basic to the understanding of development potential as considered in Chapter V.

g A degree of the problem in plan-correlation was found in the separation of short range (Gosplan) and long range planning (Gosekonom- sovet) functions at a level just below the Council of Ministers, Currently short-range planning is under sovnarkhoz (Council of National Econony) and long-range planning is under Gosplan.

~^The Current Digest of the Soviet Press, Vol. XIII (March 15, 1961), pp. 5-7. 51

Long-Range Objectives of the RSFSR

The Water Supplies Committee of the RSFSR Council of Mini star’s views the seven-year objectives as merging into the long-range goals, which call for 6,500,000 hectares of irrigated land in the RSFSR by

I960. The committee also hopes to provide water for some 18 million hectares of grazing land.^

Major projects are now under construction in Rostov Oblast,

Stavropol Kray, and along the Kuban River area of Krasnodar Kray. A project preparation is also under way along the Middle and Lower Volga

V alley. The 1965 goals fo r the S iberian Areas and Prim orskiy Kray i f achieved w ill do much to heighten the prospects of long-term objectives.

P ro ject p rep aratio n s under way along th e Middle and Lower Volga V alley

are mostly in conjunction with the new hydroelectric developments. The

areas of greatest productive potential in the RSFSR lie in, or near the

Volga basin; therefore, the water balance of the Volga-Caspian System has become the single largest problem in achieving the plan objectives

of 1980 and may have a limited effect on the current Seven-Year Plan.

The Problem of Caspian W ater-Balance

For centuries the inhabitants of the Caspian Littorals have ob­

served cyclic fluctuations in the level of the Caspian Sea. Records

11 According to Konstantine Kornev, Chairman of RSFSR Council of Ministers' Water Supplies Committee, as reported by Radio Tass (In English) January 9, 1961, Summary of World Broadcasts, Pt. 1, USSR. Weekly Supplement. No. 92 (Caversham Park, Ehgland: Monitoring Service of the British Broadcasting Corporation), January 13 f 1961, Section B, pp. 17-18. 52 dating back as far as the sixteenth century show wide variance in water level and consequently sea area. 1 9 It reached the highest stage in recent centuries about 1805, climaxing a major upward fluctuation which began in the 1720’s. By 1830, the level had dropped to a more moderate range, showing subdued fluctuation until 1930. However, since 1930 the level has fallen sharply and reached the lowest point yet recorded, resulting in a number of adverse economic situations. The fishing, transportation, and chemical industries have been greatly affected, generating governmental pressure to maintain a higher rate of inflow from the feeder rivers.

In the late 1940's atmospheric precipitation was estimated to contribute some 69 million acre feet of water to the Caspian each year, being about equal to the discharge of all contributing rivers except the Volga, which contributed approximately 210 million acre feet. The yearly loss due to surface evaporation was about 344 million acre feet.^2

Continued increase of consumptive use for irrigation combined with great­

er evaporation from newly created reservoirs, and diversions for water transport have depleted the runoff contributed by the rivers and the water level has continued to fall. In 1951 the surface of the Caspian was 31 meters below mean sea level; by 1961 this had dropped to 32 m eters.

12 B. A. Apollov, "Problem1 Kaspiysogo Morya," Priroda, Vol. XLVI (April, 1957), PP. 17-26.

^ Economic Geography of the USSR, Edited by S.S. Balzak, V. F. Vasyutin, and Ya. G. Feigin. Translated by R. M. Hankin (NewYork: The Macmillan Co., 1952), p. 35. Concern over continued depletion of the Caspian Sea resulted in the formulations of numerous remedial plans. The most feasible plan was built around the possibility of diverting the Pechora and Vychegda rivers into the Caspian Sea via the Kama and Volga rivers. Other plans considered, include bringing water from the Ob River to the Caspian Sea via the Aral Sea, and constructing a barrage across the Caspian to maintain a higher water level in the northern sections of the sea.

It is probable that the Soviet Union has been able to retard sub­ stantially the rate of water level decline through rigid controls on consumptive use combined with a greater volume of runoff from the Volga

Basin since 1948. These measures have only temporary value; conse­ quently the principal concern is supplementing river flow to raise the

Caspian level and provide for increasing consumptive usage. Toward this end, the proposed diversion of the Pechora and Vychegda rivers to the Volga Basin would provide the easiest and most logical solution considered in their long range planning.

The Pechora-Vychegda-Kama scheme.—The Soviet Water Regulation

Institute is planning to change the Arctic flow of the Pechora and

Vychegda rivers so that they will contribute to the water balance of the Volga Basin and Caspian Sea. The Soviets hope to be able to com­ plete the project within seven years.^ A "Committee for Water

Supplies" has been created under the RSFSR Council of Ministers to work out the details of the plan. As a result the committee chairman,

•^Kansen Uutiset (Helsinki), February 25, p. 11. 54

Konstantin Kornev, hopes to be able to accelerate the extension of irrigation systems in the North Caucasus, Trans-Volga, and Volga-Akhtuba catchment areas. From this expansion it is hoped to obtain a yearly increment (implied for the 20 year plan period) of 1.25 million tons of co m , .6 million tons of rice, 4 .3 million tons of vegetables and po^ tatoes, as well as important increases in meat, milk, fruit, and grapes.

Concurrently a comprehensive twenty year scheme for water conservation and utilization was being formulated. IS

Additional water derived from this source should amount to forty or fifty cubic kilometers (32-40 million acre feet) per year.^ This

supplemental water will be equal to the irreversible losses in the

Caspian Basin envisioned for the next twenty years.^

It is of interest to note that the timber resources of the proposed reservoir sites for this diversion are being harvested in preparation

for the inundation. An estimated 75 million cubic meters of timber

should be saved from these sites. IB

^ R ad io Moscow, May 16, 1961,

~^The Current Digest of the Soviet Press, Vol. IX (May 1, 1961), p .33,

"^G. A. Russo, "The Problem of Rational Utilization of the flow of Northern Rivers," Gidrotekhnicheskoye Stroitel 1stvo. Vol. XXXI (July, 1961 ), pp. 11-16. 18 Radio T ass, November 17, 1962, Summary of World B roadcasts Pt» 1 USSR, Weekly Supplement, No. 189 TCaversham Park, England: Moni­ toring Service of the British Broadcasting Corporation), November 23, 1962, Section B, p. 12. Plan Progress in the RSFSR

At the initiation of the Seven-Year Plan, the RSFSR had 1,588,000 hectares of land under irrigation networks, and sizable developments in

progress. The major irrigation construction activity in 1959 was

centered in the North Caucasus where three large irrigation systems were

under development, which would give a completion potential for irri­

gating 368 thousand hectares. By the end of the year over 120 thousand

hectares of this potential were developed.^ Meanwhile new developments

in the Volga Valley were for the most part in the formative stage.

The effectiveness of resource utilization by the RSFSR was far less

satisfactory than construction progress. In 1959* it was planned to

irrigate 1,130,000 hectares of the more than 1.5 million hectare network,

but in practice only 800 thousand hectares were actually irrigated for

crop production.^ Table 12 gives an indication of relative expansion

in the USSR and the RSFSR. It is of interest that up to 1957 the ex­

pansion in irrigation in the RSFSR comprised 40 percent or more of total

USSR development; however in 1958 this dropped to 17.9 percent and has

remained in the range of 17 to 19 percent since then. This sharp de­

cline in the position of the RSFSR reflected an increasing emphasis on

cotton production in Central Asia. However, in 1961 shortages of irri­

gation water were experienced in the cotton producing areas of Central

"^USSR National Committee on Irrigation and Drainage, p. 17.

20S. V. Zasukhin, op.cit.. pp. 3-8. 56 pi 22 Asia, primarily Uzbekistan SSR, and Azerbaydzhan SSR. The drought condition continued into 1962 with the shortage of water becoming more acute as river flow dropped below the 1961 level.

TABLE 12

LANDS BROUGHT UNDER IRRIGATION IN THE USSR AND RSFSR, 1946-1960

(In Thousands of Hectares)

Period USSR RSFSR

4th Five-Year Plan 455 183 5th Five-Year Plan 740 300 1956 110 44 1957 102 48 1958 168 30 1959 180 34 I960 193 35

Total 1946-1960 1,948 674

Note: This table considers only land actually receiving irriga­ tion water and not the overall network.

Source: K apital'noye S t r o i t e l 1stvo v SSSR, p. 240

The RSFSR has continued to be plagued with the perennial problem

of the Caspian water balance, but seemed to fare better than Central

21Sh. R. Rashidov, F ir s t S ecretary of th e Uzbekistan Communist Party Central Committee, "Speech at the 22nd CPSU Congress, October 19, 1961, Moscow," Pravda, October 20, 1961, p. 6. oo V, Yu. Akhundov, F ir s t S ecretary of the Azerbaydzhan Communist Party Central Committee, "Speech at the 22nd CPSU Congress, October 20, 1961, Moscow," Pravda, October 21, 1961, p. 5. Asia and the Transcaucasus in the last two years. In 1961 the North

Caucasus had 770 thousand hectares under irrigation with another 320 thousand hectares planned by 1965•2^ The North Caucasus developments comprize an estimated 65 to 70 percent of the irrigation works of the

RSFSR.24

By the end of the 1962 water-season^ the North Caucasus had a-

chieved more toward 1965 plan goals for irrigation than any other region of the RSFSR. Developments in the Central Chernozem were limited to small projects primarily concerned with agroclimatic measures design­

ed to retard runoff and increase soil moisture. Little information is

available on progress in Siberia and the Far East; however, it may be

assumed that no spectacular developments were achieved. And as men­

tioned before, new developments in the Volga areas were for the most

part s till in the planning stage. Consequently, the North Caucasus

contains the more progressive irrigation developments of the RSFSR.

Soviet achievement pronouncements claim that the 1962 increase of

irrigated area in the RSFSR was 50 percent greater than in 1961. This

^ Sovetskaya Rossiya. February 2, 1961, pp. 1-2.

^ T n 1956 about 60 percent of a c tu a lly ir r ig a te d land and 47 per­ cent of the total networks of the RSFSR were in the North Caucasus, see S. L. Mirkin, Vodnyye M elioratsii v SSSR i Puti ikh Razvitiya (Moscow: I a d a te l' stvo AkademLi Nauk SSSR, i 960 ) , pp. 65 and 263. ^O rdinarily the water-season or water-year ends with the comple­ tion of crop irrigation in the early autumn and the new season begins with the period of storage when streamflow is utilized in filling reservoirs for the following year. 58 would mean that the development of newly irrigated lands in the first four years of the Seven-Year Plan totaled approximately 156 thousand h e c ta re s .

26 Radio Tass (In English), November 10, 1962, Summary of World Broadcasts, Pt. 1, USSR, Weekly Supplement, No. 181, (Caversham, Park, England: Monitoring Service of the British Broadcasting Corporation), November 16, 1962, S ection B, p. 7 . CHAPTER IV

LAI® RESERVES AND WATER SUPPLY PATTERNS

Arable Land Reserves

The total land reserves of the Soviet Union are extremely large, exceeding those of any other nation. However, the effectiveness of these reserves is somewhat less impressive, being reduced by the in­

fluence of low temperatures and aridity, with less than 10 percent of the total area arable. High yield and high value crops in the Soviet

Union are primarily localized by temperature requirements which confine them to the more arid regions. This combination of low temperatures and aridity places irrigation high among the methods of intensification

open to the Soviet Union for expanding output. Irrigation thus provides

the means by which large areas of Soviet land potential may be brought

into production.

Land reserves suitable for irrigation development from surface

stream flow have been estimated by the Soviets to exceed 50 million

hectares, providing a potential area of development nearly four times as

large as existing networks.-*- Regional distribution of this potential

amounts to 36 million hectares in Central Asia, 9 million in the RSFSR,2

-*"Mirkin, o p .c it. , p. 46. 2 More recently the Soviets have estimated that the potential for the RSFSR is between 11 and 12 million hectares, see Radio Tass (in English) November 10, 1962, Summary of World Broadcasts. Weekly Supple­ ment, No. 181 (Caversham, England: Monitoring Service of the British B roadcasting C orporation), November 19, 1962, Section B, p. 7. 59 3.7 million in the Ukraine-Moldavia Area, and 1,8 million in the 3 Transcaucasus.

The 9-milHon hectare potential Tor the RSFSR considered by this source is condined to the North Caucasus and the Lower Volga Area, ignoring the large potential of Fast Siberia where an additional 338-

400 thousand hectares are suitable for irrigation.^ Additional pro­ duction reserves exist outside the regions of major irrigation 5 development, where supplemental irrigation may often be used. How­ ever, due to the far greater demands on agricultural production in the areas first considered, proportional emphasis w ill likely be placed upon their development.

The Influence of Topography Upon Irrigation Development

The quality of the RSFSR land reserves may be better understood through an examination of landform types in the areas of existing and proposed irrigation developments.^1 To provide the geomorphological

3 ^USSR National Committee on Irrigation and Drainage, p. 25.

firkin, op.cit., p. 285.

"’The Soviet agricultural atlas, Atlas Sel’skogo Khoayaystva SSSR, shows potential along the Altay-Pavlodar Border Area of West Siberia and in the Primorisky Kray: however, these areas are rather unimportant when compared with the arid areas of Southeastern European-RSFSR and East Siberia. The North Caucasus alone is estimated to have 32 million hectares of agricultural land of which more than half are extremely fertile plowiand.

^The use of geomorphology as a basis for land resource assessment continues to expand with the increasing demand for world food supplies. For example see Arid Zone Research, Guide Book to Research Data for Arid Zone Development (F rankfurt: UNESCO, 1957 ), pp. 51-65. ” 61 detail necessary for such an examination, several sections from topo­ graphic sheets^ are included with this discussion. The selection of these sections was predicated upon dominant landforms in the particular region under discussion. The units of relief considered here, fall into two broad categories.9 xhe smaller units (tracts) are those dominated by lithology such as a cuesta or vale, whereas, in the larger units (sections), the dominance of a "single physiographic process or relationship to a base level"^ limits the areal extent.

The importance of "physiographic tracts" or "sections" go beyond the apparent topographic suitability for irrigation development as there is marked tendency in arid zones for pedological, ecological, and hydrological patterns to conform with the dominating geomorphology.

Squally important, however, is a local zonation of climatic influence which would otherwise be relatively uniform over large areas.

7 'The best topographic coverage available to the author xs repre­ sented by the Army Map Service Series N501, 1:250,000 and Series 1301 1:1,000,000. The entire arid zone of the RSFSR was examined and the representative sections are shown in Figures 7-16. The complete topographic sheets from which these sections were selected may be found in most university libraries, therefore, the reference number is included with the figure. Each map section shown here represents an area of approximately 840 square miles or 218,000 hectares. One square inch represents 15.6 square miles or 4,040 hectares.

%he major regions of irrigation development were discussed on pp. 9-12, supra. ^The twro categories discussed here compare to the "tract" (200- 500 square miles) and the "section" (2,000-40,000 square miles) as formulated by D. L. Linton "Delimitation of Morphological Regions," London Essays in Geography (London: Longmans, Green, 1951)? PP« 199- 217. Linton's system has a scale of Landform regions covering seven magnitudes of which the "tract" and "section" form the 3rd and 4th categories.

•^Arid Zone Research, p. 53. X

Krasnoyarsk

/ FiSUre M

Fig. 7.—Index to topographic maps, figures 8-18 O' Rostov irrigation region.—Wiereas irrigation has been practiced for generations in the steppes bordering the Caspian, its expansion into the lower valley of the Don is a development of recent decades.

In 1962 approximately 37*000 hectares were utilized, being located, for the most part in two concentrations of major irrigation networks. Both concentrations are in the valley of the lower Don River, with the most important near the city of Rostov.

The network concentration south of Rostov has been primarily developed on the Quaternary alluvium 11 which makes up the floodplain of the Don River (Fig. 8). Lesser extensions of this concentration are located in the Tertiary sediments upon which the city of Rostov is situated and to the south of the floodplain, on Pliestocene marine- deposits which were elevated with the emergence of this portion of the

Russian platform. The relief of the southern section is not so gentle as the floodplain due to moderate runoff dissection.

The lower valley of the Don may be classified as a physiographic

section. This classification is based upon the existence of several

lithological types under the dominance of a single physiographic

process. Figure 8 suggests that the present erosional process is one

of advanced valley widening.

As the physiographic section is representative of the land base

for major irrigation developments, so the phyiographic tract forms the

■^The surface geology and dating discussed here are taken from "the Geological Map of the USSR" accompanying D. V. Nalivkin, The Geology of the USSR (New York: Pergamon Press, I960). 64

Fig. 8.—Topographic Map of the Don Delta (Army Map Service, series N503* No, NL 37-2, Rostov-Na-Donu, Scale: 1:250,000, Contour interval: 10 meters, Boundary references: 47° 00' N., 47° 19' N,, 39° 10' S., 39° 55' E.)« An important concentration of irrigation networks is located in the area adjacent to Rostov-Na-Donu immediately south of the river. Although no good sources are available showing the canal networks, the approximate location of the Azov Canal - the master supply system of the region can be seen to the east of Bataysk. Most of the irrigated lands are located to the west of this terminal, around Bataysh and Koysug and extending to the Sea of Azov. 65

F i f i . 8 66 base for most small developments. Many small developments are located in the river valleys of northern Rostov Oblast. This region is characterized by moderate relief in the north, much of which was stream cut into the southeastern outliers of the Central Russian Upland. The relief decreases to the south with a transition to the Don Steppes.

Figure 9 illustrates topography characteristic of the middle river valleys. In these valleys the irrigation development is confined to the alluvium of the valley bottoms. The alluvium of these valleys is of Quaternary age cut from Pleistocene deposits in the valleys to the north. To the south the Don River swings against Cretaceous materials as does the Khopper River along its west bank.

Krasnodar irrigation region.—The irrigated regions of Krasnodar

Kray are situated in the swampy plain adjacent to the lower Kuban

River. This plain extends northward across the floodlands bordering the Sea of Azov and is traversed by a number of distributaries and lagoon features. The soils of the area are developed upon delta and floodplain alluvium of Recent age. The major problem imposed by the topography is the difficulty of draining the irrigated lands (Fig. 10).

Stavropol irrigation region.—Irrigation is widely scattered in the Stavropol region, but no development can yet be considered as major. However, the large Pravo-Yegorlyk-Canal serves the steppes

shown in Figure 11, and a great potential exists in that locality.

These broad steppes cover much of the northern and eastern portions of

Stravopol Kray extending to the Stavropol Uplands (foothills of the

Caucasus; in the central regions. The physiographic section is one of uniform topography cut on stream-deposited materials of Tertiary 67

Fig. 9«—Topographic Map of the Confluence of the Don and Medveditsa Rivers (Army Map Service, Series N501, Wo. NM 38-7, Frolovo, Scale: 1:250,000, Contour interval: 10 meters, Boundary references: 49° 27' N., 49° 48' N., 42° 14' E., 43° 03* E.). I r r i ­ gation development in this region is characterized by very small plots mixed with nonirrigated farming and dependent upon individual farm development. This type of operation is more closely related to agriculture in the Central Chernozems than to the vast reclamation of the broad steppes of the Rostov Oblast. ochilfwye

O gol’skiy

'a^A AV Bobn ivskly

F ig. 9 69

Fig. 10.—Topography of the Kuban Rice Area (Army Map Service, Series N501, No. NL 37-8, Krasnodar, Scale: 1:250,000, Contour interval: 10 meters, Boundary references: 45° 00' N., 45° 31* N., 38° 00' E., 38° 29' E.). The major irrigation networks of Krasnodar Kray are lo cated in the area shown on th is map. The canal system shown here serves the lands of the Kuban Rice System, K alinin Rayon and the Petrovsko-Anastasyevskaya System, Slavyan Rayon. These two systems cover more than 36,000 hectares of development. Linni \8tarodzherenyei K u ritfi a G r y a d

Sbfeyotfcp'cta O tr j& o y y

-•" Bricky*

lim na

g a n o v i c h

( Brickyard ^ j heitebliyevskava WAV RASNOA^iMEYSKOYE nISMaJtlEO - p P e r v o m a

3

iw a Lirnah K m iltk

V /’4 . Dairy farm K u lik V K u b r t i o s t r /gj 7 T.rudoo«Jjlig •«. 11 / 7 KcHcurTa I / X ' ^.^Zavgorodniy . .Kf i z k i y Brickyard

v y a n s k a y a v C h i g r i n a •• '—•,^^ & ;^ >Turkovskiy (L-

T ik h o v s k iy ■1 K ra sr olasylliy Vfotjayfr .^fukhoddl'nyy Krawyy 1 ^ VgfbtioyerKpvskiy M a V e v s k

r o v i k j y

P /0 I I j5H^S?^LJ''oits' | N 1 Yasnaya PolfanaY i-r' (, «R. r^°- J riror/i ^ 9 J gpl'aiyS-kW Pervyy

. G a r k u s h F e d o r o v s k p - — Liman Gnihw <37 - Gniioij \ Dair ^ farm . ______uvichinskiy AO , Oboloijskiy -fvLi/nanfta/akshet'sh \ a - s \ j 4 ^ bofg"opo^v&^, Soke a g u m K r a s n y y Yevseyevskiy adnreyevskiy •!*' - i: S a d o v o y x^r

M ingrel skaya. k h a w o y s Litnan Komgrot'sfbiy '

Fig. 10 71

Fig. 11.—Topographic Map of the Stavropol Steppes (Army Flap Service, Series N501, No. NL 38-7, Petrovskoye, Scale; 1:250,000 Contour interval: 10 meters, Boundary references: 45° 35' N., 45° 56' N., 42° 29’ E., 43° 121 E.). The Pravo-Yegorlyk Canal brings water to this area from the Yegorlyk River. The canal terminates at the often dry course of the Kalaus River near the village of Derbetovka. ^^Burukihun

7/jX ocherzhin$kiy

Rums | ' ___ I ^ K rasn y y K undul'

Limai IPATOVO

Ruins N, iv sk iy

» S o fiy o y k a ^ r- + - I <

^Chernomorskiy " *208 UspenowskJy ^N ^Shturpilovka Zolotarevka^^y^ yf ||M« e lioX ra ts iy H a T , i' j T J \. ^ - I I A v^shoy BarkhanchakJ ^ ;o y e , U-_ V e rk h n iy N Nizhniy Bark lanchak Novyy Mojkovski " " j V e s e l y y 4- 73

(Miocene) and Quaternary (Pleistocene) age. The lands adjacent to the

Kalaus River are on Tertiary materials and in this figure only a small portion along the north was formed on Quaternary materials.

Groznyy irrigation region.—Even though the Grozny Region

(Kabardino-Balkar, Severo-Osetin, and Checheno-Ingush ASSR's) utilizes some 145*000 hectares of irrigated land, there are no major irrigation developments. The more important regional developments are located in northern Karbardino-Balkar along the border of Stavropol Kray and in northeastern Checheno-Ingush bordering Dagestan ASSR. A minor portion of the latter is shown in Figure 12. For the most part these develop­ ments are located in the foothill valleys of the North Caucasus. The influence of mountain topography is readily apparent on this map. The surface geology of the region is quite complex, but with Quaternary

(Pleistocene) alluvium being dominant in the valleys. The Khrebet

Arak spur, near the center of the figure, is composed of materials of

Tertiary age, being younger than the Jurassic materials of the Caucasus proper.

Makhackala irrigation region.—Large irrigation developments of the Makhachkala Irrigation Region (Dagestan ASSR and Kalmyk ASSR) are primarily concentrated in the floodplain between the Sulak and Terek rivers near the Agrakhanskiy Bay of the Caspian Sea. Here developments are similar to those of the Lower Don. It is estimated that over 70 percent of the irrigated lands of the region are concentrated on the floodplain at an elevation of less than 100 meters. Three irrigation projects alone account for 108,000 hectares as follows: (l) Dzeizhins- kogo Canal - 37,000 hectares, (2) Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya Canal - 74

Fig. 12.—Topographic Map of Groznyy Foothill Valleys (Army Map S ervice, S eries N501, No. NK 38-2, Groznyy, Scale 1:250,000, Contour interval: 20 meters, Boundary references: 43° 21* N., 43° 52' N., 44° 00’ E., 44° 29' S.). The degree of development in these valleys is greater than in the broad steppes to the north. This is due to the proximity of irrigation water and a more favorable precipitation regime existing near the mountains. Only the dis­ persion of suitable land prevents the existence of major developments in this region. Proletorskly, Balfrabpchiy

5-lArkhomkiy

/jTu»kayev\ • t jQ

— .4-1 ! Domont'ycyskly ORLUKH1N ^ rEMNYV I , Erisfovskiy < bayeya STAVROPOL’SKlYl i t . I I 1 r 1 SEVERO-OSETINSKAYA 1 jStantsiy/PfM A besei • Stanlsiyj Yekatwinogradskiyi S E M E N JIIPUR prokhladwyy i | - u 0 ' -L«. / ! Stantsiya Chenoyar^kaya

t^inpgradskoW\ ^^henoyars Stantsiya Pavlodol (

I ^ I S [ » k i |

j ,j\ | Pavlodol’skaya | S a rsk iy \f M KJI I J K * * U ro zh a w i *—M $ ^ if c - P J Novxxjjofmskaya Stantsiya fiaksan a a y e v x j . Vln e refcsk o /e ia>omld|y<>

Lyubski rm o y ik p y fcways Stantsiya// N33Jy®V*4 4V /\-. i /

m i

•.Vladimirovskiyj I i j -

NJzhrtiy AJroojh

¥ T a m b b v tk

a v c Deyskoye Y ^ r k h n i) A kbash pW erkhmy Kiirp /^\®ivMurtazovo W "vS^Pa

W / s \ \ Beloglinskiy

.tsiya U j M k i y ^ i j

,\\\W

Sfand-Dort"- ’immty&SToi

w

F ig . 12 76 12 41,000 hectares and (3) Samur-Derbert Canal - 30,000 hectares. The topography of the region is illustrated in Figure 13 which shows the lands served by the Dzerzhinskiy Canal.

Other developments of moderate size are located in low elevations of the Pre-Caspian Steppes, Kalmyk ASSR, and in southern Dagestan.

The smaller units, however, are located in the middle river valleys along the edge of the Caucasus. These river-valley developments tend to serve small interfarm units or single farms located in level bottom lan d s.

East Siberia

Of an estimated 227 thousand hectares of irrigation development in East Siberia some 87 thousand hectares are in the Krasnoyarsk Region and 114 thousand in the Buryat Region. The rem aining 26 thousand hectares are widely scattered throughout the Chita and Irkutsk regions.

Representative topographic sections are included for the two larger regions. The typical river-valley developments are widely distributed throughout East Siberia (Figures 14 and 15).

Krasnoyarsk irrigation region.—Irrigation works are located in many of the river valleys around the Minusinsk Basin (Fig. 14) and extending southward along the Yenisey River. The Minusinsk Basin is an enlarged river valley which developed at the junctions of the

Abakan and Tuba rivers with the Yenisey. This basin has sometimes

12 M irkin, op.cit♦, p. 241. 77

Fig. 13.—Topographic Map ox the Terek River Valley in Central Dagestan (Army Map Service, Series N501, No. NK 38-3 , Khasavyurt, Scale: 1:250,000, Contour interval: 10 meters, Boundary references: 43° 21' N,, 43° 41' N., 46° 18' S., 46° 59' 3.). This map represents 218.000 hectares of land in the central region of the Sulak-Terek Floodplain. The large canal - Imeni Dzerzhinskogo - irrigates some 37.000 hectares. The absolute relief in this 840 square miles is not much more than twenty meters. ;jem bu

f). Cl^yal-Tyub Stantsiya s|aro^dkowskiy

M u z h i \

e m if -G i

B o b a - Y u Khomomat*Yi

u l- k u ta n

o m e- Ty » W r

Y a n b l-Y u H /Novo-Voskr

C h a l a n d o r ;UhmWYur1

^jJpiGrebens karysh-Kutan

ntsiya ovskaya I ji B udennyy^^ ■Jf^^ShelRowkaya ,» K a m y s p -K u ta n ) 0 ' L/Sholkoi ' f A bra

^Chogar-O tar /w,,7/ rubochev/V _" /jTKho,'lfe*! j / 7 ^ KJrpich-Kutan U th -T w b ©

- - "-S>N K a d w * O l 'io i

K o j a m a y

bdrasJhit-Otar ^ y y PdrtizaK T&

YazykovkrtS ot'-Yurt1111,1 K \ ^

F ig . 13 79

Fig. 14.—Topographic Map of Minusinsk Basin (Army Map Service, Series 1301, No. NN 46, Abakan, Scale: 1:1,000,000, Contour interval: 500 meters, Boundary references: 52° 23' N., 54° 23' N., 90° 28' E., 92° 45* E.). The Minusinsk Basin has a considerable area of land suitable for irrigation development. Even at an average elevation of 4800 feet a number of grain and forage crops can be produced. Irri­ gation in this region serves to increase both the yield and dependa­ bility. This map represents an area of approximately 13,450 square miles or 3,483,550 hectares. One square inch is equal to 64,510 h e c ta re s. 80

Z n a m e n k a l .t„-N .0Novo!.vin;n^ 0 _ o( snnya Idr

ktirr/3y*a / e r l Mai

Abakar\jpPerev

shaya ■ A / / y Y erba ✓ W^ 'gOLINDEYKA\ S) t j M oiseyevk

' | atbktip Kakashkir } M e tik h o FJ^nachev A K• A n £ ^ Q £ '//i ^N i 1 -'Wfl7j»*rt**if~i'r,:i,. cl'ni| •^M aovopokLtXk.v 0 ! / C ^ j f Diillovo | W 0 <'*S; V. . ,?/ V\ r\ /. ■> B6Pb RlttU C\ 4fAlek$erevly \ \ __ * w ° { x 3 ? ^ 8 9 0 9 0 o N O v W n n o v k a /J £ / \ \ JIA—klRLllfH______\ RA KSKKH-KAYA Stro^anovtST^ 0 if a , - S A R A j Vers^fta-Bidzh \ Q/Listvyar.c ur(;anchiki

Kras^iy Yar M okho; Shatabolino Berg?5>skoyt '*4 ' U ^ — PotrosHilovo T30R O D \, «?i\ ’ Tv v —■—Fefry14 friyzya C 7 \ ! U^^iA8AKAlfjJ otr oilskoyef*

^CH^aNOCTOKSK^ --••tielyy Y 1 P a i r re riy , \ ^ = 3 s 'C i ^Malaya Shosh,no V^^ocherjjin,o \ Lar .J rpclam ^korf^wtiori/ St,it p.1 s s *< \ Z herl yaT dijlus U Jzh Sjlalft/arni / K olm ak MINUSINSI s TA>rr si

V&&- h n y b ^W rkhniy Bol^ar N X .F e rfy O ubenskoye T ro yo kc iyaya Koy.a.. Doi Sm irnov myHKilKano r s h a n o y skijski

Nizhmy Sueluk Z h e b la k h ty ^ 0\ ( „ b a JNovodjOita KtfTache z ra k o v HENSKOYE ’ / 'tljy /jbakap no^nyihai\m\Jh SALT 4 3 o re v YcPMAKGVSKOYc',

Krasnoye Oftro _ v X/ SaysS'skiyy ^ / 0| <^-Us.f •H.-' Kaly ^ / /■ * ^Ij7lanc5in« ' iy

^^9^>^o'ornenny Fila^etikha^ \ _,•» V n T^" (___^

N tirn a ^ N a v o k u r K u n e r^ \ 4R^h9^ tf t mil)

V /ifltef i-b lw & rv k ^ edTwava Sb

P ash k in c

F ig . 14 81 been described as a plateau due to an elevation which averages 1500 meters. The relatively flat valley floor has developed on continental deposits of Carboniferious and Devonian age. There is little alluvium in these broad valleys, consequently the soils (Ordinary and Southern

Chernozems) have for the most part developed directly on the materials into which the valleys have been cut.

Buryat irrigation region.—The most important and representative of the remaining irrigated areas of East Siberia are characterized by developments in Buryat ASSR. In the south, irrigation developments are situated in the typical river valleys of the Selenga and its tributaries. The only developments in the north are associated with

Barguzin Valley.

The river valleys of southern Buryat are typically cut into andieht crystalline rock and show mature profile development. Only in the small areas where moderate valley widening occurs has irrigation been developed. Gray Forest soils dominate the river valleys of this

section (Fig. 15).

The Barguzin Valley differs greatly from the valleys of the

Selenga. Its broad, poorly drained lands have formed in the valley fill

occurring in the graben valley. This valley is related geologically

to the parallel graben which contains lake Baykal (Fig. 16). The soils

range from Gray Forest soils in the North to Dark Chestnut and Leached

Chernozems to the south. 82

Fig. 15.—Topographic Map of the Selenga River Valley (Army Map Service, Series N503, Ho, NM 48-3» Ulan-Ude, Scale: 1:250,000, Contour interval: 50 meters, Boundary references: 51° 26' N., 51 57' N., 107° 12' S., 107° 46' E.). Most of the irrigation develop­ ment in the area represented in this figure is located on the cleared area west and southwest of Ulan-Ude. The surface geology consists primarily of materials of Cretaceous age. North of the city, the Selenga has cut a gorge through shield materials of Pre-Cabrian age. East of the city the Uda River has deposited Quaternary alluvium along the valley sides. 83

/> 7 ' s ■ i m

# 'p < l$ - r ^ . p . *57 V/ } X '?£v e \v - Ml' ■ / / / SisiX // \* 7 \ v CXX \ v - , - 7 ' - , \ Stantytfya Xal t: -A * I / ' ^ FK ShlnystjB^p? * > T \i T 't ^ y y * A ■&r~' ^ v x i : i 7 /9\W V $S#^ifca!$* «U!»k«re.r ~ -\ I 1,J. • ./ S.’ t}') V\" n '_ ,'ch.mi pasrToyarovbA^v. ^.Nigonskiye- I— ------1 ’ V ~v ' Z-^7- JHhuyHf, ■ •.-.7 : TH \ y /i,»7 - \ r I*/, 1 KhoVayskiye - a x

y v - No

v ; Stantsi: (Aptrr - J

-AK\°2 A i : V V ^ sVonreTen^C o A f e # X !i . £( ) ,-lsH. • !'* ' \ C (V & W < z .-! L_x_l_. ■* ■- s., --• > ,7 ~ r ~ WC^ - 7 ~ c v J7 ; 7'>■ -fv 'Af rpfe^\ii W ' 4LAX 7 /y : v \W > W X f ' s.: ■I- s I Gv'V'' 7 >i ' V ^ - A ' t A D w > / Y Y v liT^7 W j 3 ^ j X j A Kt b^ X va i ^ £ £ * ■ > ?/> j s . " S - . ( . - I r T i j y ~ 1 ~y c • ,-*> V. /t-jfvi^siC*7"'^ \c'?{ ~V .. wty.Vi/■«■>■. / / _ ^ y A J

! v^\ /; t ^vyAJo; V j ' C \ r i x- ;■C- X ^ ^ L I ' ' (\ 'V <7p%i9v ^ / 'eiMl ^ w . y r ii'\ 5/ - X'^' V / ' - ' i C c P ' 1 V ^ ' L l V A ' /■’ ’ _/'■ y (Cz?i /r k^ 1 (. ■\V W i v , , ^

. . --1 ‘A ^ _ —' ,— — , > ■ ., /_ / V x ..Tlestersivo GOfiA/CZIARpASAN7 4— \ Kutjitn/ta '\ \ IV ■■ v —-— \ I \ I V ! f 1 / 'AChurch, \ % > / ; ^ \/3L:W. / / A / / ' .•> /~ ir a . ^ Watermill" / A y ■ Ao > yy\tpS6tt^'- / ^ y ■ ,j C F ig. 15 84

Fig. 16.—Topographic Map of the Barguzin River Valley (Army Map S ervice, S eries 1301, No. NN 49 , Chita, Scale: 1:1,000,000, Contour interval: 300 meters, Boundary references: 53 13' N., 55° 15' N., 108° 50' S., Ill0 20' E.). The main valley of the Barguzin River is filled with alluvium of Quaternary age which was deposited in the old graben valley. The graben itself was formed in ancient crystalline rock mostly of Pre-Cambrian age. In the geo­ logic past a lake filled this valley, the remnants of which are evi­ dent in the low swampy areas. 85

Mys Orgokon

TompaxT Mys Om agacban Goryachmkaya Guba

Guba iAmnundafcan

Mys J f o t o r mOdCQMififc IE Shudm-Nofcon

Bolsodey Guba Turkukit Mys Pong on '

M uzhw ay Guba Irinda

Mys Mys Bol'sh >ya Kosa Urbikan

M ys Malaya Guba It Yakshakan

sjto/’snoy Cbcfymsbanyy Mys Kebab/ 5 L/ She! bo

gnasay

Mys Cbem yy Syrzavod Razgon 2 Mys Valukan

Winter quarters 1 +

Bi/Wifa Sosn 0

Winter quarter

Winter quarter

nilgana ie Izgolov'ye L

OTC

v orets

V Mak RGUZIfstt

Fig. 16 Volgagrad irrigation region.—The most representative examples of the small irrigation projects along the Volga are located between

Saratov and Volgagrad. Of the projects utilizing waters directly from the Volga mainstream, the greater number are situated on the high right

bank rather than in the flat lands of the near Trans-Volga. Figure 17

shows a typical section of the river, with the high right bank cut in

Tertiary (Paleocene and iSocene) materials. The immediate floodplain

is of Recent alluvium and the bordering steppes are marine sediments

of Pleistocene age.

The soils on the right bank are solonized Dark Chestnuts with

Solonetz developed in local areas. The floodplain immediately to the

east of the river has typically azonal alluvial soils. Solonetz soils

from the only other important group in the area shown by Figure 17.

The topographic situation shown in Figure 17 is typical of north­

ern and central Volga developments. The high right bank and low

steppes to the east extend from the vicinity of Kuybyshev (the northern

limit of typical Volga irrigation development) to Volgagrad. Only in

the floodplains of the Volga-Aktuba and in tne Volga delta does this

pattern change essentially.

Astrakhan irrigation region.—The almost featureless lands of the

Volga Delta stand in sharp contrast to the typically high right bank

above Volgagrad. The natural flatness and close proximity to water

resources make possible the irrigation of small areas; however, the

poorly consolidated materials of the recently deposited delta-plains

and extensive drainage problems in the lands of marine sediment have 87

F ig , 1 7 ,—Topographic Map of the Volga V alley near Dubovka (Army flap Service, Series N501, No. Nil 38-8, Dubovka, Scale: 1:250,000, Contour interval: 10 meters, Boundary references 49° 39’ N., 50° 00' N., 45° 04' S., 45° 50* E.) The orchards situated on the high right-bank near Karavainka are supplied with mechani­ cally lifted water from the Volga. These orchards are well situated on Dark Chestnut soils with good drainage. The potential for small projects is good here, but larger projects would have to be placed in the flat Steppes to the east where complicating factors such as poor drainage and salt accumulation may present serious problems. lonoy^/* Bol shevik a Kosa

Komsomolets r Q . Komsomolets Velikiy' O ktyab ol sh ev ik T j a lo v\ k a Solorfushino Korns smolets \ KomsomoletS(

Kom sorr Stepnovskiy Komsomolets

hcn ek o v k Put’ H’lcha Velikiy Oktyc b r ’

O le y n ik o v 33 Put II icha ^Velikiy Oktyabr Lenm ets

O le y n ik o v Leninets

Leninets Reid station 0 hukhohestovko

/ Field station

nnikov ipovkq^>» R o zd o l B o g a ty re v SUUlOfl

S h v etso v A e k s a n a to

O le y n ik o v ovaya Balka K o v alev Kirovc k Shaporalov J O le y n ik o v

S o ly a n k a " J N e d o g r e y

• 32 \ : ' Gryanchenko

.-7 [J Z y g a la v K o lo b e rd i Onopriyenko %

s O le y n ik o v * B a b e n k o • A ^ e s h e t jy o k o v

\ ^kfl®ld station \

\ . 3 S ' 3 - , x Kovq e n k o Shay . K o sten o

Bykova Yevtushenko K urakin J u s h c h e n k o S h a p o v a lo v ax ax F ig . 17 apparently limited, the size of irrigation developments. The area shown in Figure 18 contains lands which are depositional feature resulting from recent deltaic action of the Volga River and the somewhat older marine deposits (Quaternary-Recent) exposed with the recession of the

Caspian Sea.

The soil development on the delta are azonal alluvial soils of little profile development. In the poorly drained marine deposits,

Meadow Steppe soils have developed. These latter soils reflect depression features and stagnant drainage associated with the marine sediments. Salinity poses a major problem due to a constantly high water table. Irrigation water must be lifted mechanically; however, the slight elevations involved requires a smaller energy outlay per unit of water than in other regions of the Volga.

Water Supply Patterns

With the increasing demands upon the production potential of

Soviet lands, the surface stream patterns have become increasingly important. Seven watershed areas supply virtually all the surface water used for irrigation in the RSFSR0 Of these watersheds, only those feeding the Volga contribute significantly to a major stream, yet the RSFSR has within its boundaries five of the major river systems of the world. Under present technology it is economically unfeasible to utilize any significant amount of this great potential for irrigation purposes except in the case of tne Volga. Irrigation development in the immediate future, therefore, must depend to a great extent upon less favorable watersheds. 90

Fig. 18.—Topographic Map of the Volga Delta (Army Map Service, Series N501, No. NL 38-9* Kaspiyskiy, Scale: 1:250,000, Contour interval: 10 meters, Boundary references: 45° 22' N., 45° 54' N., 47° 21' E., 47° 51' S.). Examples of small irrigation developments in the Volga Delta are found near the villages of Semenovskiy and Ryzhkovo. These orchards are situated on Meadow Steppe Soils, typical of the marine sediments, however, the orchards near Vyshka are on deltaic alluvial soils. 91

w n B uluni

V e n d o i

^/^^O avntovskiy Porvyy

Winei Dranzherei ^AFedbrov*k'aV<

Govriloyxkiy Trot ^itfrufety^ 'Wmen Gurhunm / fl’m e n ’

(O y O ji^ v B ol'shaya v Chada Wmen' Mulau/Chadl

rM'-men'-Gyunkharo \Uj_y===^==£Sa‘_ R a k u s h a ■ 3 y j K r a s o

,ICmeh‘ Malyy Rusrtixf

Itm efiC B u kTuT ie fm d

J c h 'y a ^ o s c

Xft'm en' KhorhatU • Field slatibh

.M alaya Khargafa

O xtrov Poporochnyy Sol ie sh k a ^

’•^K o s ljc in '^ T S . •Y e n k o k ~ {5 ByronnyyO^Vl

JVakhromeyevo

*Razbugor'yo A

O n u * h

" " ko y a K ° ‘ °

E m e g d y u d

E rk n -A m y n

> D g m a ldzhilin-To|gan*Ummn s. /^Rums"7 S h o rp n g /

le k s y u d

I d r a n g a

F ig. 18 92

Watersheds

The importance of good watersheds is greatly increased in an area of unpredictable precipitation as in the irrigated areas of the RSFSR.

For example, the low-elevation watersheds of the Valdai Hills and

Sevemyye Uraly which are the principal contributors to the Upper Volga are highly responsive to unseasonable temperatures and rainfall result­ ing in a more erratic discharge pattern than found in Central Asia where glacial watersheds control the regimes of the Amu Dar'ya and Syr

Dar'ya Rivers. The high watersheds of Central Asia, located in the

Pamir and Tien Shan mountains, have reliable discharge patterns governed by seasonal temperature changes. The maximum discharge comes in the summer months when irrigation needs are greatest, whereas the Volga maximum is generally in May or early June, placing it well ahead of maximum water needs.

The North Caucasus watersheds are somewhat more reliable than the

Volga due to the control factor of elevation; however, the narrow width of the northern slopes make them inferior to the watersheds of the

Pamirs and Tien Shans in reliability and their total volume of runoff is less than the Volga watersheds. The seasonal effectiveness of these watersheds is not proportional to the demand upon them, consequently

storage facilities and other conservency measures are increasingly im p o rtan t.

Table 13 provides data on the comparative dependence of various

irrigation regions in the USSR upon surface and underground waters.

For the most part surface waters have greater importance than under

ground sources in supplying the irrigation needs of Soviet Union. Only ^5 93 Rivers of the Subhumid Zones of the European RSFSR, Important in Irrigation Development ^

5 5

c>0

Don

SEA OF AZOV

BLACK S E

T U RK E Y 4 0 —

F ig. 19 85. \90 95 ^"^100, , j ~'' ■' \ 10 ; n o 115 Rivers of the Subhumid Zones of Siberia; " Important in Irrigation Development

O iLenfft

■\ Irk u tsk

O

MONGOLIA CHINA CHINA 100 105 110 1 1 5

'O ■p- TABLE 13

IRRIGATED LAND IN THE USSR ACCORDING TO THE SOURCE OF IRRIGATION WATER, 1956

(Area in Thousands of Hectares)

Republic Percent of Total Area of Irrigation Surface Water Total Irrigated by Underground I r rig a te d Networks Water, Springs, Wells, etc. January, 1956 Area Percent Area Percent

RSFSR 13 1,487.4 949.9 80.5 229.2 19.5 Uzbek SSR 25 2,805.8 2,369.1 94.5 139.9 5.5 Kazakh SSR 20 2,607.9 1,848.1 89.6 213.5 10.4 Kirghiz SSR 10 1,139.8 974.9 96.6 34.9 3 .4 Turkmen SSR 6 706.7 642.9 91.7 57.9 8.3 Tadzhik SSR 4 420.8 367.9 94.0 23.9 6.0 Azerbaydzhan SSR 14 1,575.5 1,127.9 80.2 280.4 19.8 Georgian SSR 3 306.7 266.4 93.0 20.3 7.0 Armenian SSR 2 209.8 163.2 81.5 37.6 18.5 Ukrainian SSR 2 219.6 56.9 37.9 92.7 62.1 Moldavian SSR 1 26.8 4 .6 26.8 12.4 73.2

USSR (T otal) 100 10,966.7 8,773.8 88.5 1,142.8 11.5

Note: The table gives a total of 10,966,700 hectares for the USSR in 1956; however, if estuary irrigation were added, the total would be 12,374,000 hectares under networks.

Source: Glukhov, pp. 20-30. (Based upon Central Statistical Administration Data) vO v r t 96 in th e U krainian 3SE and i-loMavian 33R has underground pumpage reached significant proportions. If the 80,5 percent of irrigated land supplied by surface flow in the RSFSR is indicative of future require­ ments, the demands upon the presently utilized watersheds w ill become increasingly greater.

Water Resources of The Volga Basin

The Volga is the largest river in European Russia, having a total length of 3,688 kilometers, and draining an area of 1,380,000 square kilometers. 13^ The major contributing surfaces of the Volga are located in the river basins of the Kama, the Oka, and the Upper Volga. The

Kama is the most important tributary, providing an average flow of

3,760 cubic meters per second, or more than the combined flow of the

Oka and th e Upper Volga (Table 14).

The gradient of the Upper Volga is slight, being only .00024^ from its source to Kalinin. The Oka has a correspondingly low gradient, averaging .00011 throughout its course. These low gradients in the headwater regions are the result of modest elevations in the watershed.

The highly seasonal distribution of discharge is related to the low elevations of the watershed which provide lower retention qualities than the higher mountain areas. Two stations, Kalinin in the upper

^L. K. Davidov, Gidrografiya SSSR, Pt. II (Leningrad: Izdatel1 stvo Leningradskogo Yuibersiteta, 1955), P<> 154.

"^Gradients are expressed as a decimal fraction. For example the .00024 recorded here would represent the vertical distance which the stream bed changes in one unit of horizontal distance, in this case being equal to 1.27 feet per mile. TABLE 14

AVERAGE DISCHARGE AND RUNOFF OF THE VOLGA BASIN

Basin Sector Area Discharge Runoff (Square Kilometers) (Cubic Meters per Second) (Liter per Second per Square Kilometer)

Sector Cumulative Sector Cumulative Sector Cumulative

Upper Volga 233,700 233,700 1,710 1,710 7.3 7.3

Oka 245,000 478,700 1,230 2,940 5.0 6.2

Oka-Kama 172,400 651,100 850 3,790 4.9 5.8

Kama 521,700 1,172,800 3,760 7,550 7.2 6.4

Kama-Volgagrad 181,200 1,354,000 600 8,150a 3 .2 6 .1 0 Volgagrad Estuary 26,000 1,380,000 1 8,000 ----- 5.8

aThis gives a cumulative value equal to 257 cubic kilometers per year which is consistent with the 269.5 cubic kilometers quoted by Giprovodkhoz (State Institute for the Design and Planning of Water Resources and Melioration Development) as the total discharge of the Southeast RSFSR. See Mirkin, p. 88.

Source: L. K. Davidov, p. 162.

vO -0 98 basin and Volgagrad in the lower basin, are indicative of this signifi- cant discharge pattern:^

Spring Summer Autumn Winter

K alinin 58%' 11% 21% 1 0 $ Volgagrad 62$ 14$ 15% 9%

The high runoff during the spring is the result of accumulated snow- cover which tends to be released in a relatively short period of time

as the ifarming temperatures of May and June are combined with ample

spring rains. Yearly water losses from filtration in the Volga Basin

above Kuybyshev Gauge have been estimated to be 6,0 cubic kilometers.

A total loss of 18,0 cubic kilometers per year will probably increase

to 29-25 cubic kilometers within the next 15 to 20 years. At present

roughly 50 percent of the filtration losses return to surface flow in 1 the lower basin. °

A summer rainfall maximum is normal for the Upper Volga Basin;

however, the effective runoff for the summer months declines with in­

creasing temperature and decreasing soil moisture conditions,

A higher concentration of agricultural lands in the Oka Basin

than in the Upper Volga and Kama Basins shows the effect of agrotechni-

cal measures for retardation of runoff in the spring months and is

15 ^In the Soviet Union, the division of seasons for hydrographic purpose is as follows: Spring, March-June; Summer, July-August; Autumn, September-November; and Winter, December-February,

^A . V. Chapiyigin, The Question of Inter-Basin, Water-Bconomical Ties (Moscow, Academy of Sciences o f the USSR, 1956), tra n s . R. V. Kassell (Washington: Headquarters, Department of the Army, Office of the AGSI), pp. 41-42. 99 accentuated by slightly lower rainfall.; conversely the opposite effect of more cleared land tends to minimize the retention qualities through a more rapid runoff immediately following precipitation. An optimum

condition would provide for the continual release of precipitated moisture, particularly underground flow, throughout the irrigation

season. A more desirable pattern is f ound in the Upper Volga, as evidenced in better yearly distribution of discharge at Kalinin than

at Volgagrad . ^

Forest cover in the principal watersheds varies with the degree

of agricultural utilization. The Oka Basin has considerably less

forest cover than the other areas of the major watershed with roughly

26 p ercen t. The more n o rth e rly s itu a tio n of the Kama has had le ss

agricultural development, consequently some 57 percent of the basin

surface is under forest cover. The Upper Volga itself is in an inter­

mediate position with 48 percent under forest.-^

The lower basin of the Volga has decreasing value as a contribut­

ing surface. For example the sector between the Kama confluence and

Volgagrad contributes only 312 liters per second per square kilometer

^ I t should be noted that summer season consists of only two months whereas the other seasons are three and four months in duration. (See footnote 1, p. 79.) The apparent increased value of summer flow at Volgagrad (14 percent compared to 11 percent at Kalinin) is the result of time involving a greater distance down stream and con­ sequently a later date for spring maximum.

A. A. Sokolov, Al'bom Gidrograficheskikh Kharakteristik Rechnykh Basseynov Yevropeskoy T erritorii SSSR (Leningrad; Gidrometeorologiche- skoe Izdatel'stvo, 1955), pp. 19-22. 100 and the Volgagrad sector contributes nothing in an average year (Table

14). The seasonal discharge pattern evidenced in the long-term mean is readily apparent i'or the lower basin in 1958. Table 15 provides great­ er detail on the situation that obtained at the time.

Table 15

111]!: PERCENT OP SEASONAL DISCHARGE FOR THE LOWER VOLGA AND THE a THUBA DISTRIBUTARY, 1958

Gage Location Spring Summer Autumn W inter

Volga, above Kazan 62.0 9.8 11,9 16.3

Volga, above Volgagrad 62.1 22.3 15.6 ------

Volga, near the Delta 56.3 15.9 14.4 13.4

Athuba, near the Delta 79.8 14.6 2.4 3.2

Source: G. N. Pavlovoy, Gidrologicheskiy Ezhegodnik. 1958g., Tom IV: Bassein Kasiyskogo Morya (Bezkavkaza i Sredney Azii) (Leningrad: Gidrometeorologicheskoe Izdatel'stvo, 1961), pp. 158-159.

The cumulative discharge of the Volga at Volgagrad is approximately

257 billion cubic meters per year. Assuming that the evaporation rate from the Caspian and the water required to maintain a constant level are comparable to 1949 estimates, the Volga would need to contribute nearly 255 billion cubic meters per year to prevent further reduction of the sea level. However, in actuality the Volga contribution to the

Caspian over a seventy year period has averaged 252 billion cubic meters per year, which is the most important factor in the dropping sea 101 level. 19 Consequently at present any major expansion of irrigation in the Southeast RSFSR dependent upon Volga water is highly u n l i k e l y .20

The Water Resources of the North Caucasus

Four rivers of the Worth Caucasus have been selected for dis­ cussion purpose based on their importance in the water balance of this region. These rivers (1) Kuban, (2) Terek, (3) Sulak, and (4) Kuma — have a combined basin area that covers 33.4 percent of the North

Caucasus. These rivers combined with the Don River form the only important xvater sources in this region, providing an estimated 85 per­

cent or more of surface flow available for irrigation (Table 16),

Kuban River.—The most important stream flowing out of the North

Caucasus is the Kuban River. It has a significant water potential,

and a degree of development has already occurred along its lower

reaches. The average runoff of the Kuban River-Basin is 5.9 liters

per second per square kilometer, resulting in an annual discharge of

400 cubic meters per second at Krasnodar, but decreasing to 360 at the

mouth.The discharge at Krasnodar is distributed as follows:

spring 47 percent, summer 23 percent, autumn 15 percent, and winter 15

p e rc e n t.

19 Chaplyigin, op.cit., p. 9. 20 The problem of the Volga-Caspian water balance was discussed in some detail, supra, pp. 63-67.

21The Kuban looses roughly 10 percent of i t s flow due to i r r i ­ gation diversion, primarily in the Krasnodar Section. 102

The gradient of the upper river, above the Nevinnomissk Station, is .00610, being characteristic of the mountainous section, whereas the po overall gradient is only .00060. '

Terek River.—The watershed of the Terek River is the most efficient of the four streams under consideration. In the headwaters above the Kazbek Station the average runoff is 26.9 liters per second per square kilometer. For the entire basin, the averages is 8.0 liters per second per square kilometer, compared to 5.9 for the Kuban Basin.

The effect of elevation upon this watershed is important, being re­ flected in source of runoff at the Kazbek Station as follows: glaciers and high mountain snowfields provide 37 percent, snow 11 percent, rain

21 percent, and underground flow 31 percent. At the same station the percent of seasonal distribution of discharge is, spring 37, summer 34* autumn 20, and winter 9. The high gradient of the Upper Terek is also conducive to efficient runoff. Average gradients for various sections of the river are as follows: 23

Upper .022 - .040 Middle .0015 - .0003 Lower .00060 - .00090

Sulak River.—Because of favorable agricultural lands along the lower course of the Sulak, irrigation resources here had significant development. In 1955, some 30 percent of the river flow above Kazi-

Yart was diverted for irrigation purposes. However, an important potential s till exists which could be readily developed.

22 L. K. Davidov, op.cit. , pp. 263-287.

23Ibid. , pp. 275-278. 103

TABLE 16

DISCHARGE CHARACTERISTICS OF SELECTED RIVERS OF THE NORTH CAUCASUS

River Length Basin Area Discharge in Cubic (Kilometers) (Square Meters per second Kilometers) Average Maximum Minimum

Kuban 900 61,530 400a 2,035 15

Terek 591 43,710 342b 1,995 98

Sulak 150 13,370 178 1,450 23

Kuma 592 25,510 13 ------

T otal 2,233 144,120 933° ------

The discharge figures given for the Kuban are taken at Krasnodar rather than near the mouth where the average drops to 360 cubic meters per second due to irrigation diversions.

•j^ The Terek average was taken at a station where better figures were available although the average discharge at the mouth is greater, being 350 cubic meters per second.

cThe Giprovodkhoz (All Union Research Institute For Land and Water Development) gives an accumulation of 59*1 cubic kilometers per year or about twice as much as this rate would yield. However, when combined with the flow of the Don, an average accumulation of 57.7 cubic kilo­ meters per year would result, giving a valid correspondence.

Source: L. K. Davidov, pp. 263-287.

The runoff from Sulak Basin is greater than either the Kurna or

Terek basins with an average of 13.6 liters per second per square

kilometer. The major source of runoff is from glaciers and eternal 104 snows which give a favorable discharge pattern.'^1' Here the higher use seasons receive 73 percent of the annual discharge.

Season Percent of flow

Spring 43 Summer 30 Autumn 20 W inter 7

The average gradient of the upper course is .uG70 with extremes as great as .0385. The lower course gradient drops to an average of

.00010.

Kuma River.—The value of the Kuma watershed is rather small when compared with the other rivers discussed in this section. Its regime differs significantly due to the lower elevation of its watershed and lack of glacier-fed tributaries. The highest discharge is in April, with spring flow being 54 percent of the yearly total.

Streams of th e North Caucasus Steppes. —Numerous sm aller stream s have their origin in the steppes that lie north of the high Caucasus.

Their discharge is for the most part intermittent and contribute very little to irrigation needs, borne of the larger stream-beds, such as the Xegorlyk and oal, are being utilized in conjunction with canaliza­ tion to convey water diverted from other sources to the area of

consumption. The value of the contributing surface of the these

steppe watersheds is extremely small, out local amelioration and minor

reservoir construction has allowed the utilization of part of this

sporadic runoff.

% bid., pp. 287-289. Water resources of the Don River.—The water resources of the Don

River are essentially tied to the water balance of the North Caucasus, and is considered jointly eventhough its watersheds are located in the

Central Chernozem area and are influenced by the agroclimatic measures practiced there. The Don is the second most important stream carrying water into the arid zones of southeast RSFSR; however, its flow is less than one-tenth of the Volga. The watersheds of the Don are smaller and

less i*rell situated than those of the Volga, being located on the drier

slopes of the Central Russian Uplands. The annual runnoff in both the

Volga and Don basins correlates with precipitation, decreasing uniform­

ly from north to south with the decreasing moisture conditions.^

TABLE 17

DISCHARGE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DON RIVER

(In Cubic Meters per Second)

S tation Average Maxi mum Minimum

Li ski 262 11,178 45

Kazanskaya 346 7,550 43

Kihovanskiy 546 10,560 39

Kalach-na-Donu 674 14,000 77

Mouth 900 ------

Source: L. K. Davidov, p. 132.

■'D. L. Sokolovsky, River Runoff. Excerpts translated by L. G. Robbins for the United States Navy, Hydrographic Office, Technical Services Branch, Division of Oceanography, Washington, D.C., 1956. (Leningrad: Gidrometeorologicheskoe Izdatel1stvo, 1952), p. 5« The average gradient of the Don from its source to Voronezh is

.00096 and from Vorenezh to Kalach-na-Donu is .00025. These gentle gradients reflect the low elevations of these uplands, yet the climatic controls are such that 60-70 percent of the streamflow is fed by snow- melt, 30 percent by underground sources and only 10 percent by direct rainfall. The effect of forest cover is also slight, as only 4.7 percent of the basin is under forest.2^ The combined effect of these factors produces an erratic discharge pattern, with spring receiving

77 percent, summer 6 percent, autumn 8 percent, and winter 9 percent of the y early flow . The uneven flow of the Don i s p a r tia lly compen­ sated for by large down-river storage facilities such as the Tsimlyansk 2f> R eservoir.

The basin of the Don has a total area of 422,500 square kilometers and a length of 1967 kilometers. Its major tributaries are the

Voronezh, Khoper, Medveditsa and Donets rivers. The Donets is less important to the RSFSR than to the Ukranian SSR, although some minor projects along its lower course are In the North Caucasus Region.

Irrigation is practiced in the valleys of all the tributaries, but its

pZ L. K. Davidov, op.cit., p. 127.

27'Sokolov, op.cit. , pp. 1 7 -1 S . pci The creation of the Volga Don Canal has also altered the discharge pattern of these important rivers contributing a maximum of 250 cubic meters per second to the water balance of the lower Don. 107 greatest development is found along the lower river in Rostov and 29 Volgagrad oblasts.

Water Resources of East Siberia

Krasnoyarsk-Tuva irrigation subregion.—The irrigation potential of southern Krasnoyarsk Kray is found in the river valleys, around

Abakan and Minusinsk on the Yenisey. The Tuva Oblast potential is primarily in the valleys of Bol'shoy Yenisey and Malen'kiy Yenisey.

Therefore, much of the runoff above Krasnoyarsk could be utilized effectively. The average discharge at Krasnoyarsk is 3*350 cubic meters per second with a percent of yearly distribution as follows: 10 sp rin g 49* summer 27, autumn 20* and winter 4.

The runoff ratio for the basin down to Krasnoyarsk is favorable, with 9.4 liters per second per square kilometer. The basin at this point covers an area of 353*200 square kilometers.

Water resources of the Buryat ASSR.—The Selenga and Barguzin rivers provide all the water for potential as well as developed irri­ gated agriculture south of Lake Baykal. The basin of the Selenga has

29 Supplemental irrigation tecimiques are better developed in the upper portion of the Don Basin than in any other region of the RSFSR. Here certain measures are taken to conserve soil moisture. The Soviets estimate that the efficient use of presently lost moisture through run­ off in the Central Chemozen Area would yield between 600 and 700 cubic meters of water per hectare per year. They feel that full development of this potential would yield 30 percent as much grain per hectare as irrigated land. From a speech by D. I. Sheherbakov* Moscow Radio, November 11, 1962. -^L. K. Davidov, op.cit. , p. 402. 108 an area of 446,900 square kilometers and the river flows for 745 kilo­ meters. The runoff averages 2.1 liters per square kilometer giving a discharge of 950 cubic meters per second. Its discharge pattern is partially governed by the high watersheds of the Hangay Mountains of

Mongolia, consequently the greatest volume of flow comes in the summer months with 42 percent of the yearly average. Spring has 29, autumn 26, and w inter 3 percent

The Barguzin River is 387 kilometers long, draining a basin of

21,220 square kilometers. Its discharge is 127 cubic meters per second giving a runoff of 5.9 liters per second per square kilometer. 32

Nearly all the development potential as well as presently irrigated lands lie in the upper basin, above the Bikin Tributary. The basin above Bikin comprises between 60 and 70 percent of the total area, and contains most of the important watersheds. A conservative estim ate^ 33 of discharge in this upper section would be 65 percent of the total giving a usable resource of some 1300 cubic meters per second.

Water resources of Irkutsk and Chita irrigation subregions.—Fewer stream-flow data for those subregions are available than for other areas examined. The headwaters of the Lena River provide for most of the irrigation in the Irkutsk developments, however, the first gauging

station of the Lena is near its confluence with the Kirenga River more

-^Ibid. , pp. 420-422.

32Ibid., pp. 422-423.

^This estimate is made upon an strict areal basis, not consider­ ing the greater productivity of the contributing surface of the upper b a sin . 109 than 300 kilometers downstream from the important irrigated areas. In the Chita Subregion the Ingoda River, primary source of irrigation water, like the upper Lena does not have a gauging station, conse­ quently no direct data are available. In both regions, however, there is adequate water supply, as precipitation is sufficient in the water­ sheds and potential evapotranspiration is rather low for an irrigated reg io n . 34 ^

Water Resources in the Areas of Potential Development

Water resources of the Altay area.—The Soviets feel that a great potential for irrigated agriculture exists in the Altay section of

Western Siberia near the border of Pavlodar Oblast. Although no firm estimates are given, the Atlas Sel'skdgo Khozyaystva SSR gives a most optimistic impression. The water supply for this region would depend primarily upon the Irtysh River above Omsk, although, several smaller streams also nay be utilized (Table 18). The basin of the Irtysh above

Omsk; has an area of 303 thousand square kilometers ^ The quality of this watershed is relatively poor, producing only 3.3 liters of runoff per second per square kilometer. The upper tributary, Kara Irtysh, which provide a major portion of the stream flow, has its origin along the Sinkiag-Mongolian Border and acquires most of its water before entering Soviet territory.

qi Atlas Sel'skogo Khozyaystva SSSR. pp. 32-33. 35 P. S. Kuzin, Rezhim Rek Yuzhnykh Rayonov Zapodnoy S i b i r i , Sevemogo i Tsentral'nogo Kazakhstana (Leningrad: Gidrometeorologishe- skoye Izdatel' stvo,' 1953), pp. 356-357. 110

Scattered irrigation developments also exist throughout the up­

lands of southeast Altay Kray, utilizing water from small streams of the upper Ob Basin. Apparently little potential exists for expansion,

due to the lack of level land, suitable for development.

Water resources of Primorskiy Kray.—Potential irrigation develop­ ments in the Far Bast are limited to the upper basin of the Ussuri

River in Primorskiy Kray. The discharge from the entire basin averages

2,000 cubic meters per second. The 588 miles of river drain an area of

187 thousand square kilometers.

Water Purity

The quality of irrigation water has a direct bearing upon salinity

problems associated with irrigated agriculture. The discussion of

water supply patterns in the preceeding paragraphs has considered most

of the important physical aspects as they pertain to the individual

watersheds, but did not touch upon the problem of impurities. The

degrees of water purity has an important bearing upon the utility and

longevity of irrigated land; however, the complexity of the inter­

relationship of soil and water is so great that little more than pass­

ing reference can be made in this study. '

A number of impurities can make waters unsuitable for application,

but a high concentration of sodium salts is one of most important

indices of unsuitable irrigation water. The toxic nature of these

salts and its deleterious effects upon soil structure make them the

prime destroyers of fertility in irrigated lands.

•^L. K. Davidov, op.cit., p. 508. I l l

TABLE 18

AVERAGE DISCHARGE OF SELECTED RIVERS IN THE ALTAY AREA OF WEST. SIBERIA

(in Cubic Meters per Second)

River Period of Record Spring Summer Autumn W inter Year

Irty sh 1936-1950 1,470.0 1,376.0 735.0 346.3 998.0 (at Omsk)

Charish 1948-1950 329.1 168.5 99.5 35.8 208.0 (lower gage)

Alei 1936-1950 77.3 15.0 11.3 5.3 35.8 (lower gage)

Kulunda 1936-1950 15.1 3.7 1.4 .4 6.1 (lower gage)

Bur la 1950 9.0 1.4 .6 0 3 .8 (middle gage)

Karasuk 1950 2.2 .2 .1 0 - (upper gage)

Chulim 1932-1941 11.7 3.4 1.3 .7 5.0 (lower gage)

Total 2,286.1 1,568.2 882.5 388.9 1,256.7

Source: Kuzin, pp. 329-459.

In general the dominant impurities of the surface waters in western RSFSR are of the hydrocarbonate class (HCO-j) with the concen­ tration of sulfates (SO^) increasing in the lower areas. In the middle and lower Volga, to tal mineralization of the water averages between

220-300 milligrams per lite r in summer and 270-400 in winter. 112

Hydrocarbonates predominate in all seasons, but with increasing sulfate

concentrations in the lower reaches. 37 The rivers of the Worth Caucasus

and Don Basin have a similar pattern of impurities, with concentrations

increasing downstream under the influence of greater aridity. Higher

concentrations of impurties exist in the lower reaches of the Kuma and

other small rivers crossing large areas of steppe. Consequently,

greater care is required in utilizing these waters.

The purity of surface flow in the watersheds of Siberia and the

Far East present few problems because of their dependence in large part

on mountain glaciers and close proximity to the headwaters. Host

observers visiting the RSFSR feel that there is a generally favorable

ratio of calcium to sodium in most surface waters.

Summary

The Soviets have estimated that 40 to 50 million hectares of land

in the RSFSR are so situated that they could benefit from the application

of irrigation water. In order to supply this large area, the surface

flow of seven watershed areas could be utilized in the immediate future

and in the long run perhaps the great potential of other river basins

may be diverted to serve the needs of the arid lands. Table 19 gives

a digest of the major water resources that can readily serve the

potential xdiich the Soviets say can be developed in the RSFSR. How­

ever, it must be realized that irrigation is not the only economic

need which has a claim upon these waters. The conflict of interest

37Ibid., pp. 167-168. 113 having greatest effect upon irrigation potential is tied with the fall­ ing level of the Caspian Sea. It should be emphasized that the water resource figures given in Table 19 are not comprehensive, but represent the major potential, having been selected because of their long range dependability for a permanent irrigated agriculture.

In evaluating the water-resource potential that could be developed within the Seven-Year Plan period, the Volga has little to offer.

Its waters are held closely by other considerations such as power generation, inland waterways, and the maintenance of the Caspian balance, consequently the possibility of further expansion of consump­ tive use for irrigation in the Seven-Year Plan is doubtful. In the area of the lov/er Don, a conflict of interest with hydroelectric power generation also exists; however, the water gained from the Volga via the Volga-Don Canal has partly compensated for this problem. In the other watersheds under consideration, it is probable that developments for irrigation purposes could approach the limits of their potential, with conveyance loss being the most significant detractor.

The longer range plan which envisions the diversion of the Vycheyda and Pechora Rivers into Volga may well alter this situation in the next six or seven years. The Soviets are becoming increasingly confident in this project and are apparently willing to concentrate the resources necessary to accomplish this task. TABLE 19

THE AVERAGE SURFACE FLOW OF MAJOR STREAMS IN LESS HUMID AREAS, RSFSR

(in Cubic Meters per Second)

Watershed Area Average Annual Discharge

V olga 8,150

East Siberia 4,427

North Caucasus (Including the Don) 1,833

Primorskiy Kray (Far East) 1,300

Altay Area (West Siberia) 1,257

T o ta l 16,967s

Note: No attempt has been made to evaluate the effect of con­ sumptive diversion on stream flow as the discharge of most streams is taken from the long term mean, and the effect of diversions would be s lig h t.

aThis is approximately 535 cubic kilometers which compares favorably with the 555.6 cubic kilometers of mean discharge of rivers in semiarid and arid zones of the RSFSR, see Mirkin, p. 43.

Source: Tables 13-17. CHAPTER V

IRRIGATION WATER REQUIREMENTS

Determining Consumptive Water-Requirements for Crop Production

Increasing precision in the art of irrigation has required the development of accurate methods for computing the consumptive water- requirement for crop production under a variety of clim atic conditions.

Consumptive-use depends upon the basic factors of evaporation and tran­ spiration in the plant cover; therefore, its estimation is an attempt to analyze these factors using data that are readily available. At present the more practical systems of estimating consumptive use are based upon temperature and rainfall records that are available for much of the earth's surface. Such a system requires techniques ivhich are widely effective, yet specific enough to be used in planning individual projects where only basic factors of climatic conditions are known. The actual measurement of consumptive use in large areas is extremely difficult and expensive; therefore, even in the irri­ gated regions of United States methods of estimation based upon clim atic records are used with satisfactory results.

The Blaney-Criddle system

Of the important methods devised to measure potential evapotran- spiraticn, the Blaney-Criddle system is perhaps the best suited for the problem at hand. This system has been used extensively throughout

115 116

North America and elsewhere in studying irrigation developments. The results have proven satisfactory, and the simplicity of the system allows its utilization in any area where the basic information on mean temperature and precipitation is available. The system was devised specifically for irrigation purposes and is applicable to individual crop needs. The development of the Blaney-Criddle system through re­ search in widely differing areas has served to increase its utility as well as provide a basis for beneficial analog studies.

The consumptive-use formula.—The basic formula developed by

Blaney and Griddle states that the consumptive-use (U) is the result of the consumptive-use coefficient (K) multiplied by the consumptive-use factor (F) which gives the water requirement for satisfactory plant

growth in inches, hence U = KF. The consumptive-use coefficient (K) is an empirical value derived from numerous field observations whereas the

consumptive-use factor (F) is the sum of monthly consumptive-use factors (f) through the irrigation season.^ The monthly factor (f) is

the result of the monthly mean temperature (t) multiplied by the percent

of daylight hours (p) and divided by 100.^ The basic formula for (f) is txp expressed mathematically as f = X qq ;

"Siarry F. Blaney and Wayne D. Griddle, Determining Water-Require- ments in Irrigated Areas from Climatological and Irrigation Data (Washington:U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil ConservationService, 1950), p. 15. 2 The percent of daylight hours is derived from astronomical tables of daylight duration based on latitude. 117

The consumptive-use data for crop production derived by this formula considers the water, from all sources, required to satisfy the conditions necessary for good plant development throughout the growing season.^ Thus the basic formula, U = KF, is an attempt to estimate the total water requirement of a specific crop grown under given conditions of temperature and sunlight.

The second consideration in evaluating water needs is the e~ stablishment of supplemental requirements, i.e ., water to be supplied through irrigation. This phase of the problem is solved by subtracting the water received from precipitation (R) from the total consumptive- use requirements.^- The formula is simply U - R being the sum of monthly

c . precipitation for the irrigation season.

Irrigation season.—The computation of total consumptive use requires a knowledge of the vegetative period of the crop under

This assumes that "sufficient water is applies at the proper time to maintain good growing conditions." Blaney and Criddle, op.cit. , p . 17. ^■Precipitation received during the growing season is the principal factor that alters supplemental requirements, however, irrigation water requirements are also altered by conditions of soil moisture and ground water. The contribution of soil moisture generally alters the amount required for the initial irrigation or the need for pre-planting irri­ gation as the case may be, but it adds little in the periods of great­ est demand. The contribution of ground water may alter materially the supple­ mental requirements in small areas, but in most instances, the water table is either naturally low or else drainage facilities have been incorporated which tend to lower it below the effective root zone of the crop. If the high water-table is caused by irrigation, the time period between applications may be extended somexdiat, however, the overall demand by the crop upon the supplemental source is not be­ lieved to be materially reduced. ^Blaney and Criddle, op.cit. , p. 21. 118 consideration. Planting and harvesting dates provide the most accurate measure for annual crops. However, perennial crops such as alfalfa, grasses, and orchards generally require some water throughout the frost free period although at decreasing rates toward the end of the growing season.

z Estimative Systems Used by the Soviets

Soil Scientists and hydro.logists of the Soviet Union have developed a number of systems for estimating the consumptive water re­ quirements in irrigated lands. The most widely used and adaptable of these are based upon intensity of evaporation, similar to the Blaney-

Criddle method. Other less practical techniques depend upon lengthy field measurements and consequently are little utilized.

Two important systems used in the USSR w ill be considered briefly.

In 1956 a system was advocated by h. II. Ivanov suggesting a moisture- need coefficient based upon the relationship of annual precipitation, evaporation, monthly temperatures, and percent of air saturation.^

This system appears to be Sound from a physical basis, but lacks

^The United S tates exchange study group on "S oil and Water Use" while in the ministry of Agriculture in Moscow were given a formula used in estimating the water-consumptive-use requirements of crops, of which they said, "The formula appeared complicated and included a number of variables that could not be adequately defined." See their report: Soil Conservation Service, Soil and Water Use in the Soviet Union, Report of a Technical Study Group, Soil Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture (Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1959 ), p. 41. 7 N. N. Ivanov, "The Climatic Characteristics of Eurasia," Scientific Papers of the Leningrad Pedagogical Institute imeni Gertsen, Vol. 116, 1956, pp. 103-158. “ sufficient recorded data for practical purposes; the same problem has prevented a wide usage of the Pennman system fo r determ ining evapo- tran spiration.^

A second system developed by D. I. Shashko in 1958 is more widely accepted and works well in conjunction with the Blaney-Criddle Formula.

The Shashko system? uses an index based upon the ratio of precipitation and water consumption to evaporation. The latter is determined by the field measurement of green mass development in the crop. The major draw back of this system lies in the expense and time involved in the large number of field observations required for adquate coverage.

However, a limited number of well distributed observations could give an important supplement to a basic Blaney-Criddle investigation of crop requirements.

Regional Water Requirements for Selected Crops in the RSFSR

The estimation of regional water requirements in this section is based upon the Blaney-Criddle f omnia, and attempts to measure crop needs in the important irrigated regions of the RSFSR. Limited data were available which allowed the author to run comparative studies on small areas to check the data in Table 20. The Russian study which

provided the comparative data utilized the Blaney-Criddle method with

% . L. Pennman, ’’Estimating Evaporation" Transactions, American Geophysical Union, Vol. XXkVII (February, 1956), pp. 43-50.

^D. I. Shashko, "Agroclimatic Division of the USSR into Regions According to Supply of Warmth and Moisture for Plants," Problems of Agroclimatic Regionality in the USSR (Moscow: USSR Ministry of Agriculture, 1958) 120 an adjustment for spring moisture reserves computed by the Shashko sy stem .^ 1

The author feels that an adjustment for spring moisture reserves is superfluous, as the effect upon the total requirements of the growing season for most crops is negligible, however, it will be of significance in determining the beginning of the irrigation season.

The more important considerations are those of total water require­ ments for the growing seaso under the land-crop relationship to be utilized. Consequently the function of the Blaney-Criddle System in this study depends upon the correlation of land base and crop patterns.

If Soviet claims are plausable, some 2.0 to 2.5 million hectares of land were under irrigation networks in the RSFSR in 1962. However, judging from past indications, it is probable that less than 65 percent of the total network was used for actual crop production through the application of irrigation.

Consumptive-use and supplemental water requirements for the major irrigated regions of the RSFSR are shoxim. in Figures 21 through 24.

These data are determined for a five-month vegetative period, and in

effect represents the formula U = KF, where K is equal to 1,0. In

■^The Blaney-Criddle system provides no compensation for soil- m oisture reserves which may accumulate prior to the consumptive-use period. The Russians consider this factor to be a shortcoming of the system (see Mirkin, p. 29). No doubt this is a valid though minor criticism; however, it could be readily adjusted in the irrigation techniques of an individual project and reflected in the diversion requirement. The Russians should have no problem utilizing this small amount of extra moisture, considering their poor utilization of land under existing irrigation systems. 121

Consumptive-Use Requirements of Water for the" ^ 6 North Caucasus and Volga Irrigation r 60_____ . y ^ Regions, May-September ; V ! O ’" / (>n inches)

K a z a n

Saratov^/" S V O lr'G V

E G IrP N

K Volgograd

R o sto v

NORXH CAUCASUS SEA 3 4 Astrakhan ir r ig a t io n REGION A Z O V J &

4'«<*on\ K rasn od ar i r v p Stavropol

G roznyy BLACK SEA

T U R:K E Y

IRAN' F ig, 21 122

Supplemental Water-Requirements for the North Caucasus and Volga Irrigation Regions, May-September in inches),

Saratov 4+ ^rb Lf’G IRRLGAT

/ Volgograd // \F'

R ostov

NOMH CAUCASUS < Astrakhan

A Z O V j ft

K rasn od ar S ta v ro p o l

roznyy b l a c k SEA

T U RiK E Y

IRAN F ig . 22 > 3 2 ■ CHINA •30 115 MONGOLIA •29 ftarvUde : 3 0 i; no ^ / ' ids 8 2 Irkutsk ^ . . iei y

(in inches) x 30 / East Siberia, May-September ; (j~KrzSn0yarsk

29 ' 2 9 S5 S5 '.5 ‘'-''“' ' 3 0 Consumptive-Use Requirements of Water for the Irrigated Regions of CHINA

Fig. 23 i:o Supplemental Water-Requirements for the Irrigated \ Regions of East Siberia % (in inches)

Ab>

22

.20

Irkutsk ,24 ,'U la n U d e

201

MONGOLIA CHINA CHINA

H £ 125 effect this is an expression of the evapotranspiration factor. Map coverage is limited to the North Caucasus, Volga, and East Siberia, as these areas contain 93 percent of the irrigation networks and 96 percent of the actually irrigated land of the RSFSR. The concentration of irrigated land in these regions are as follows 1 "1

Region Percent of Network Percent of Actually ______Irrigated land

North Caucasus 52 58

East S ib e ria 28 27

Volga 13 11

T otal 93 96

Greater details of consumptive use for specific crops grown under

irrigation in the major regions are given in Table 20. The proportion

of land under specific crops was based upon 1957 and planned expansion

data.^ The area of actual irrigation in specific regions was estimated

by applying the overall growth rate, roughly 6 percent in the RSFSR

between 1957 and 1961, to specific regions.

Table 20 was constructed to provide a basis for estimating the

water requirements for irrigation in the RSFSR under present development.

It indicates that approximately 2.7 billion cubic meters of water would

have been required to irrigate over 800 thousand hectares in RSFSR

developed by 1961. This would give an average application rate of

Based on 1957 data, see Mirkin, op.cit., p. 68. 12 Mirkin, op.cit. . pp. 262-263. o PO c+ a Pr Oq O H- ft a s o p CD a CD Ixi Cr W*-3 £• Cft H3 Cfi Ft pa P tAja c+ a o c r ft p CD ►s ci CD c<- a o a o Oq £h o o < H- Oj 'o p c : o p B h-1 a % M < t?Q C/5 < 0 p c *=. Jc’ cn < O CD < a H - a p CD 0 0 o q CD g ffg _ cm ~ « p r a a O Hi CD S' M CD • a *-3 c + fc'** $ M C + P t? i 15 p ft pa P c r 15 p . Q O' I CD p CO a h % p a fe* w p a o f t 0 ) CD ts S £ a P w 1cS—t Pd K Ir rig a tio n td 0 5 O' V i 'j i VDO' ft- O' UHJ1 O 05 O' oeason h 3 ra Cr- 04 t o I O o o PC t o 0 5 WW n U t o 0 5 05 05 05 to 05 *i H -J ft- ft- 1_j 00 C» 05 0 5 0 5 “O |—* "03 Consumptive-U se • ft H- M -O -O ft~ ON-p- P -P 05 W W UlVjJ 05 05 F actor P 3 cr Pi S' f? ne I-1 tu • » Consumptive-Use CO c - O 'OvO-O O' t o O ' n C n O O ' -U O ' c* f t - O O ON-ft- o O 0 5 O O ' O ft- O0 Coefficient CD o B pd c 05 05 H IP H M OJ 05 fo H ,tO O n O O N) ViUl O to to O ' 0 5 Consumptive-Use • • ft ft o ft 0 • © 0 • « • M H Oi 05 05 nO O O ' H 05 ft- on O O ' Requirement (Inches) W H CO (O to H t o t o H PC no o-- o K3 no no O ' H H 0 5 t o O 0 5 Supplemental • © • « » • « ft & NOU O OVtO On O 05 ft- 05 ft- -ft- Requirement (Inches)

M NO Area of Actual O' to to I—1 H ■p- s 0 5 ft~ 05 H ft- H O - J nO Irrigation • • o • o o 9 ft ft ft ft • » o o o o o o o o o o o o o (Thousand Hectares,)

H ft~ H IO £ --o t o H H O' Irrigation O H o n o n no O H o n H o n 05 0 5 f t - O ft ft • © H -ft" M onn JH OJ ft- Onn O ~0 on -0 Requirements (Million Cubic Meters) 9ZZ Table 20—Continued CD O P3 CD O: & ►J c. p o H- 8 H" P ‘O CM oq (Thousand Hectares) (M illion Cubic Meters) Coefficient Supplemental Irrigation Irrigation Season (Months) Consumptive-Use Area of Actual Irrigation Consumptive-Use Consumptive-Use Requirement (inches) Requirements F actor Requirement (Inches) j n CO o ro O' \_0 NO V P CD P- p - S \*o

O *1 a CD ■< (D CD CD p )q O j ?o Oo ! --0 -O --0 ! h o n n 03 O H JO H ro O'O'O O' O NO 03 ? 0 o o o o o 03 on K P; 0 3 0 3 CX3 OU) OU) H O ... O ' Oo J—i ON • o 0 • • a , « • • • -O 03 0 3 0 3 0 3- 0 3 V 03 p- -O 1-3 0 3 1-1 0 3 p ~ N O N O

p 03 8 o . H 1-1 £ P S' H Q

H *3 o 4 CO -CO 0 CD O 0 3 O Oi O B 03 H p JO JO NO e a • ® o o 0 3 0 3 0 3 JO 0 3 - 3 0 3 (-1 P - P~ NO P - 0 3 -O 03 03 -O oq p. h! O o CD p " p ►J p . s - p S cd * H H C> • 0 0 0 -0 03 03 -0 O O • • ttvO Oo o ; 0 3 0 3 0 3 0 p- 3 o vn vji vn NO -O -O C<3

cn cr P 4 i f 5 P O fc* 03 P P Q |5" h H

143.0 i - O - '3 *3 o CD 03 H 03 ro ro -P- H H o -o p 0 0 0 o o • 0 3 1-1 M K On On H £- VjJ JO JO VjJ n -P“ O' 03 VO ■P- ■P- -P- ■fn -OCQ-VIV^ -OCQ-VIV^ o CO

oo 41.0

a O 03 *■* O g p r *5 P ^ 0 u 03 P- $ 28.0 91.0 O O < j 03 CO H H s < p- H- CD P H H CO- CO CO- 0 0s- O' 'o3 \J3 \J3 O CD o o • • • onon Vn 03 O'-O O' O ' O' -p- -o ro V 0 3 O 18.0 81.4 (Total North Caucasus) - 501,0 1,700,6 IZT Table 20—-Continued o C/3 O CO o CD H- a C3 w zs g- •o CR S3- (Thousand Hectares) (M illion Cubic Meters) Supplemental Area of A ctual Irrigation Requirements Consumptive-Use Irrigation Coefficient Consumptive-Use Requirement (Inches) IrrigationSeason (Months) Consumptive-Use Requirement (Inches) Factor

CD tH cd c+ Go cr CD o CD £ £ s- P H- a H- p PC p » *1 !V P o hrj p 0 ro o n OQ O p ■ P■ voi n 0 cr 0 c+ P H to < OQ CT n O OMO MO ro ro ro ro m cr qs cr o P P- O O H H H H H H o to -a00 00 p o o o o to H vn H O b p H CQ CO s*0 VjJ> P- .... O • • . . o • o • © « ...... -d —d ■—-3 1—* ■—-3 —d -d p p -0! -0! O'-a -0! -0! H -oi -oi M CD pr o H p g" c+ ►s 0 ro OQ ON q cr 0 c+ 0to 0 0 P - 0 3 O

H P O O o o o o to ♦T- p: • • . . © • • H -OJ H o o o • o • H H 'mo • • • - O • HHW • • -0 -d P -d -0 VO p- p- P - P - H p~- pP p~- p p p- vo

O P c+* 0 **3 ro I—< —-3 OQ 3

cr cn <; 0 0 C + P 0 ( f t • O -V3 —O to & p o o o OOP • r o ro ro ro o o o o r o r o o ... » O o ... - 0 3 - 0 p N VO U> VO NO NO MO CO n p - V O Vo VO VO VO Vo

n n o p 0 o ZT H- c<- P h f—^ no OP O n 0 cr HHH 0 w CD C + P < ( f t - o O'­ ci o cn H- O' O O' er) o - p - • H H H H co ao on p o p . . o . e o • r o r o to o o o P PP v n vrt - — J - 0 3 Q • • » —0 -0 3 VTl NO NO p P P VjO U> o U> VjO

(Total East S i b e r i a ) - 237*0 476.4 8TT «=i o H & era (D p

> < 03 CD o P ct- ►S £ S P & CD era O era 4 < H- P P. 8

HO H„.- O ! < l»* 19? r*3 Tfj o < 03 03 03 *) o < ►S CD p- g O s CD P 4 CD o o oq CD 5 03 O CKJ CD B&I S o era vs cr § H ■ CD a H> P O H j p ( - J p CD o P H c+ 0 Hera H H c+* 9 H P Pot) *01 P o CD H P 9 ^ ® P. cr Q p* cr < a p cn CDI CD CD CD >-i H "I H 20—Continued Table CD P3 CD 1 ro P CD P- CD ST 3 £ £ • CD 0) CD 3 6 6 6 Irrigation vn era •£- Vo o-' V n V n VJl VJl VJD CjO Ul cn \J3 Season (Months)

VO VO fO fO VD VO VO VO fyj Vo VO V0 Vo VO M VO VO Vo Ccensumptive-Use ■P'OJ'O W 0} 4^ 4> -J |_i -<2 -O VO VO VO H VO VO VO • • • o 0 «•««•• 0 9 0 0 9 0 0 Factor v£> —0 — 3 -£~~ -~4 to to —0 'O -VI -—3 H H H O I—1 H H

O' to -0 -Cl -3 CO 00- -O Vn -Cl —3 0} 0-0 0*0-0 Consumptive-U se OO-trCD 0 \0 CNf- ® O o -o rof-4- ro o Coefficient

M W H K) W WVD H M N3 W M M H M H M 43- Vo vn era vO U O M CDP O' W » N O H 'CD VO Consumptive-Use ■f- to O 043- vO 43~ -P~ to '-O £~ to CO Vn O fo Do fo Requirement (Inches)

to to VO H to H tO M H H M H to H H H H H H O VO -P p O) 0 -3 lu O H u> M Oi H U) H w Supplemental Vo (-> -O VD Vo O H H W O H 00 4>- H voO 00 CO CO Requirement (Inches)

J—.i Area of Actual H M f- 03 H H H M p io 0 9 0 0 * • • • 0 0 9 * Irrigation 00 -P" O to |—> ■£“ O vO 4> vO O UOOPMMO (Thousand Hectares)

H H 4> H H H O ) H 00 Irrigation £—O -O vn so ro oO o o o'on H VTl Vo 4> -01 iv> oo 9 9 9 0 9 • 0 - 0 9 9 © 0 0 0 0 9 Requirements VOHH^N) o cr- h o £— o io £*• o> o ->a o v o (M illion Cubic Meters) 621 Tabla 20—Continued.

CO J0h CD p 0 CO 0 JG 0 o Region Subregion Crop CO a) fl) p 9 o w m M I-1 P •H XX g > G> cj o cn p P i 0 0 P 2 C 0 0 p :> p £ £ o o •H •H fl)G P P o £ o •H -P P P 0 -< o X* P a a, o •H P 0 o a5 s s 1 P U * rj bfl G a ^ •H 0 O ctf CO o P o 3 tkO 0 .h 3 h cn CO + 3 COCn fr5•P O U cd G o G a> Q) X2 & §*£ u 0 O tij o o ^ E-« H 03 *■—' H CO CO Ex, CO s> CO o i EH w

Kuybychev Vegetables 5 32.6 .70 22.8 17.5 11.5 51.1 Orchards 5 32.6 .58 18.9 13.6 2.4 8.3 Small Grains 3 21.3 .74 15.8 12.3 1.0 3 .1 .Misc. 5 32.6 .70 22.8 17.5 .7 3 .1

Total Volga ——— ------92.0 416.6

T o tal ------830.0 2,673.6

aSee Table 5, Appendix B for months of irrigating season. The season for all crops begin approxi­ mately the same time, but the length is determined by the growth requirements of the specific crop.

Appendix B, p. 179 contains the basic climatic and latitude data used in computing the consumptive- use factors and the supplemental requirements. c The consumptive-use coefficients were selected on the basis of work done in analogous areas of North America and correlated with Soviet data where possible. The analogs used were based on the work of Dr. D, Gale Johnson and adapted by the author for the purposes of irrigation. See D. Gale Johnson, "Climatic and Crop Analogies for the Soviet Union, A Study of the Possibilities of Increasing Grain Yields" (Chicago: The University of Chicago, Office of Agricultural economics, Research Paper No. 5716, t> December 16, 1957), Pt. 2, pp. 7-8. ° Table 20—Continued.

^Supplemental requirements were computed by subtracting the total precipitation during the irrigation season (as shown in Appendix B, Table 4.) from the consumptive-use requirements.

Note: This table was condensed from original twenty-column work sheets to facilitate a concise presentation of the more pertinent data. The regional divisions used here coincides with the administra­ tive units used by the Soviets; however, the subregions were selected because of irrigation development and may or may not coincide with one or more secondary political-divisions.

£ H 132

3,221 cubic meters per hectare which correlates rather well with the average application figures of 3,000 cubic meters per hectare given by the Soviets for the North Caucasus. 13 From this information the average water requirements for crops in the major irrigated regions were derived (Table 21).

Diversion Requirements

The diversion requirements of an irrigation system is the rate at which water must be diverted from direct stream flow or released from reservoir storage to satisfy the irrigation requirements of crops. In the Soviet Union, diversion requirements are computed in two stages,

similar to the techniques used in the United States.

Diversion requirements are based upon the irrigation need of an

individual field and are computed through the efficiences of the

various stages in the system. Thus the farm or headgate requirement is found by dividing the field irrigation need by the farm efficiency.

In the Soviet Union farm efficiency ranges between 60 and 80 percent,-^

although recent claims are as high as 85 percent.^ Using the median

efficiency rate of 70 percent and the application rate of 3,221 cubic

meters per hectare, the average headgate requirement for the RSFSR

13 Mirkin, op.c it., p. 43.

’^’Ib i d ., p. 148.

15Agricultural Research Service, Soil Salinity and Irrigation in the Soviet Union, Report of a technical Study Group, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Dept, of Agriculture (Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1959), pp. 10-U. 133 would, be 1,601 cubic meters per hectare, for a total of 4.0 billion cubic meters per year (3.8 billion in the three major regions).

Thus, losses due to poor irrigation techniques and farm canal lo sses amount to 20-40 percent of the water delivered at the headgate.

This would waste between 800 million and 1.6 billion cubic meters per year in RSFSR.

The second efficiency consideration is in the water conveyance system. Accurate measurements of seepage and evaporation losses in conveyance systems is a difficult task; consequently, only crude estimates can be given for such losses in RSFSR. It is estimated by

Soviet engineers that conveyance losses for the entire Soviet Union may be 50 percent or more of the diverted flow.-*-6 Thus it would re­ quire the diversion of approximately 8 - 9 billion cubic meters of water per year to satisfy the irrigation requirements of land actually irrigated in the RSFSR.

Irrigation Techniques

The rise of modem irrigated agriculture has probably reached its highest achievement in the development of sound application techniques.

And in the refinement of application techniques lie the basis of

V. M. Mel'nikov, "Improving Irrigation Systems" Gidrotekhnika i Melioratsiya, Vol. XI (January, 1959)* pp. 29-30. 134

TABLE 21

AVERAGE WATER REQUIREMENTS FOR CROPS IN THE MAJOR IRRIGATED REGIONS OF THE RSFSR

(Cubic Meters per Hectare)

Requirement Requirement Region Crop Based on as Estimated A uthor's by Carlo Computation S an tin i

North Caucasus Small Grains 2,639 2, 000- 2,400 Sunflowers3, 5,700 2,200 Vegetables 3,046 2,300-3,600 Orchards and Vineyards 2,942 3,000 Rice 6,729 ------

East Siberia Small Grains 2,387 Forage 1,969 Potatoes 2,270 ------

Volga Small Grains 3,600 3,100-4,000 Forage 5,000 4,400 Sunflower 6,000 2,200-4,200 V egetables 4,679 3,600-6,800 Sugar Beets 3,800 2,600-6,800 Orchards 3,731 3,000-6,800

aThe disparity between the sunflower consumptive-requirements computed by the author and those given by Santini are not satisfactorily- explained. The author feels the sunflower grown for oil content has a requirement similar to field corn, which would make Santini's figures too low. However, no field data have been found to support either case.

Note: The author's figures were computed from Table 20, Santini's figures were taken from his report, Irrigation by Canals and Sprinklers (Geneva: Economic Commission for Europe, Committee on Agricultural Problems, Working Party on Mechanization of Agriculture AGRl/MECH/21), p. 23. permanent irrigated agriculture. It is in this area of development that the Soviets appear to lag behind Western nations.-*-7

The proper application of water is subject to a great number of variables. The climatic factors have previously been discussed and were considered in their broad regional application. Although the effect of microclimatic phenomena may condition individual locations, more important to field application techniques are the factors of soil, slope, drainage and salinity. To the irrigator these factors are expressed as permeability, saturation, field capacity, wilting point, available moisture, rate of application, soluble salts, etc. IB

Application rates and times as well as field efficiency are primarily governed by the soil characteristics and crop patterns of individual fields, whereas the total consumptive-use for the irriga­ tion season is closely tied with the climatic factors.

Techniques in the RSFSR

Furrow irrigation is the most common method of water application used in the North Caucasus and Volga regions. Its development is tied to the importance of v eg etab les, o rchards, and o th er row crops grown in these regions. Flooding is utilized for the production of rice

17A. N. Askochenskiy feels that irrigation rates and methods are the most important problems facing irrigated farming in the Soviet Union today, see his article "Rezhimy i Sposoby Poliva Vazhneyshie Voprosy Oroshaemogo Zemledeliya," Vestnik Sel1 skohozyaystvennoy Nauki, Vol. II (April, 1961), p. 120. 18 A glossary of irrigation terms is included in Appendix A, p. 175«. 136 along the Kuban River in Krasnodar Oblast. The importance of border- flooding increases in the eastern portions of the North Caucasus and

Trans-Volga where broadcast crops, mostly small grains, have greater importance. Irrigation in East Siberia is mostly flooding, utilizing border-flooding for small grains, and wild flooding and estuary irri­ gation for the production of forage.

Sprinkling is quite limited with less than 25 thousand hectares

in the North Caucasus and Volga and Practically none in East Siberia.

It should be noted that highly specialized truck farming based mainly

on sprinkler irrigation has developed in Moscow Oblast and in the

Southern Urals near Magnitogorsk. However, these areas are insignifi­

cant in the overall development of irrigated agriculture.

Irrigation techniques in the Soviet Union tend to over-water most

soils. In the North Caucasus and Volga Regions, soils range from

Chernozem through Chestnut and Brown Desert-Steppe soils, with some

areas of unconsolidated materials in the Transvolga and Nogay Steppe.^

Solonetz soils tend to occur or develop extensively in the Chestnut

soils and in the delta aluvium. The Volga Region contains a major

portion of Solonetz soils of the USSR; consequently the problem of

proper utilization is most urgent on these lands.^

^ Atlas Sel'skogo Khozyaystva SSR, pp. 50-51.

20 Agricultural Research Service, p. 7. In all regions, salinity and swamp development tend to increase with the age of the irrigation developments. For this reason, the

RSFSR tends to have fewer problems than the older developments in

Central Asia. Nevertheless, the practice of over-irrigation is the

most serious problem of conservation of irrigated land in the RSFSR.

In addition to salinity and waterlogging this practice wastes valuable

water which could have been utilized for production in unwatered

fields. In the North Caucasus alone an estimated 299 thousand hec­

tares of land lying within the irrigation networks were not utilized

in 1957, of which some 11,500 hectares were out of production because

of salinity and problems of swamp development. In the Volga region

99.500 hectares were unutilized with salinity problems on 5,300 hec­

tares. For East Siberia 197,300 hectares were unutilized but only

4 .5 0 0 hectares had salinity and bog problems.21

?~L Mirkin, op.cit., pp. 68 and 126. CHAPTER VI

PRODUCTION INCREASES AND ESTIMATED INPUT REQUIREMENTS OF IRRIGATED AGRICULTURE IN THE RSFSR

The broad physical aspects of water resource development in the

RSFSR have been considered in the previous chapters, using universally adaptable techniques of measurement to evaluate the physical potential of its water and land resources, but the final consideration in irriga­ tion development is found in the economic factors. The resource

potential of both land and water in the RSFSR is adequate for the

developments envisioned by the Seven-Year Plan and longer range plans if the Soviets are willing to apply the investments required for such

development. The final considerations, therefore, revolve about the

required level of investments and the relationship of input to output

in the aspirations of the Soviet leaders. For this reason it is useful

to separate the function of mid-latitude irrigation from that of the

subtropical.

The development of mid-latitude irrigation is generally tied with

the overall handicap imposed upon agriculture by low investment rates

under early economic plans and a continued lack of incentives for proper

utilization of farm capacities, Consequently, the RSFSR has not re­

sponded as fully to capital input in irrigation as the republics of

Central Asia where the production of cotton under subtropical conditions

has received a degree of state interest analogous to many industrial

developments. Hovirever, investments by the state and kolkhozy in the 13S mid-latitudes irrigation have provided for important expansion in the physical facilities, although the utilization of existing networks has been poor. These problems may be better understood through a discussion of input-output relationships.

The stucfy of input-output relationships involves the use of Soviet statistics, consequently creating obvious problems in evaluation. The most basic problem for Western scholars is in the acquisition of appropriate statistics. Although many data are available, in many instances the most applicable statistical data have not been published by the Soviets. In addition it is necessary to question the validity or accuracy of the data since the Soviets have admitted the existence of widespread manipulation of statistics by officials at the various administrative levels. ' Finally the exact meaning of many of their

statistics is open to question since the Soviets frequently fail to give a clear definition of the terms used in their statistics.

Input Requirements

The separation of the input costs in irrigation is in many ways an

artificial cleavage, yet it provides an understanding of the problem

not otherwise obtainable. The cost of water is the first input to be

considered and includes the costs of constructing storage, diversion,

and conveyance systems. The second input, operational costs, entails

the application of the water including labor and the use of special ma­

chinery such as sprinklers and maintenance of irrigation systems

■^Maintenance of larg e in ter-k o lk h o z canals could p o ssib ly be con­ sidered a part of water cost, however for the purposes of this study it is included with cleaning under operational costs. 140

Water Costa

The large volume of construction required for modern irrigation systems is reflected in the unit costs of development in the Soviet

Union,, Between 1952 and 1958 the average investment required to develop a hectare of actually irrigated land was 980 rubles (new curren­ cy).^ Mirkin estimates that these costs range between 300 and 1,000 rubles.-^ Other sources state that the costs are frequently over 1,500 per hectare.^ In the larger projects, as in the Golodnaya Steppe of

Central Asia, costs may run as high as 2,000 rubles per hectare.^

It is unclear whether or not the Soviets consider investment costs directly in computing the value placed on diverted water; however, most evidence indicates that there is no strict correlation. Therefore, the computation of water costs comparable with those in the United States would have little meaning because of the differences in water cost allo­ cation and land rent under the two economic systems. A good evidence of this difference is the Soviet practice of including numerous auxiliary items in the costs of irrigation development.

The author has found no direct data on Soviet methodology for computing water costs (repayments) from the construction investments.

2 Computed from Zasukhin, o p .c it. , pp. 3-8.

^Mirkin, op.cit. , p. 7.

^G. Raskin, "Kapital’nye Vlozheniya v Sel'skoe Khozyaystvo i Ischislenie Effektivnosti," Yoprosy Ekonomisky, Vol. XIV (July, 1961), p . 126. ^K. K. Shubladze, "Irrigation and Watering of Land in the USSR and Prospects for Development," Gidrotekhnilca i M elioratsiya, Vol. XIII (October, 1961), p. 10. 141 However, a percentage breakdown of labor expenditure for construction and auxiliary items for irrigation indicate that nearly half of the irrigation development costs were used for auxliary construction, which should have been separated from water costs. For example between 1956 and I960, 175*5 million rubles (new currency) worth of work was expended for irrigation development in the USSR. The importance of auxiliary costs may be seen in a percentage breakdown of these investments.^

Expenditure Percent

Water Management C onstruction 56.1$ Residential Construction 27.4 Road C onstruction 6.7 Related Industrial Construction 6.2 Other 3*6

During the first two years of the Seven-Year Plan, the Soviet Union made the following investments in the water economy:^

Year Investment

1959 393 m illio n rubles

1960 453 m illio n ru b les

Approximately 80 percent of these funds were allocated for irrigation investm ent. The t o t a l w ater economy investm ent rep resen ted 7*75 and

8.73 percent of the total productive investment in agriculture for the respective years. This falls short of the investment rate required to utilize 20 billion rubles for irrigation development in the 1959-1965 period envisioned by the Seven-Year Plan.®

Shubladze, op.cit., p. 6. 7 For source, see Table 10, supra, p. 54.

^Zasukhin, op.cit. , pp. 3-8. A good measure of investment utilization in irrigation under any economic system should be reflected in water costs. In 1959 the Russians estimated the minimum cost^ of irrigation water to be .0035 rubles (new currency) per cubic m eter.^ At this price it is assumed that adjust­ ments were made to compensate for auxiliary expenditures and that the average repayment period did not exceed ten years. The author feels that this is a reasonable figure,^ therefore it will be used for com­ puting basic input requirements. This ruble value probably reflects more closely a true valuation of economic returns from irrigation developments than do the data on total investments given above.

Operational Costs

For simplication the operational costs have been divided into maintenance costs, application costs, and mechanization costs,

TO Maintenance costs. —The preparation of a farm for irrigation may

be considered a maintenance cost. The basic function consists of field

leveling, canal cleaning, and the repair of water-management structures.

Most of the water-management preparations are made by the farm workers

9 The cost figure given here reflects the value of the investments required for irrigation construction and maintenance costs. In reality no charges are made for the water delivered to the farms.

■^P. I. Denisov and K. K. Shubladze, "For Better Irrigation Practices Gidrotekhnika i Melioratsiya. Vol. XI (January, 1959), p. 9.

"^Denisov and Shubladze give repayment periods ranging from four to ten years, Ibid. . p. 18. 12 It is estimated that irrigation upkeep costs for the Soviet Union are over 700 m illio n new ru b les per y e ar. See "Toward B etter U tiliz a ­ tion of Irrigated Lands" Gidrotekhnika i Melioratsiya. Vol. XI (June, 1959), PP. 3-5. 143 in the off season and consequently add little to the overall labor force

requirements as they are conducted during the slack season. The Soviets

appear to be advancing in the use of mechanized canal cleaning. They

claim that the cleaning of inter-kolkhoz distribution canals is 80 to

85 percent mechanized and that 30 to 35 percent of individual farm net-

works and drainage systems are cleaned mechanically. 13J Silt deposition

in canals averages thirteen cubic meters per year for each hectare

irrigated and requires an average labor output of three man-days per

irrigated hectare for removal.^ It is estimated that canal cleaning

comprises 40 percent of the operating costs in the average irrigation

system, maintenance of water-management structures 10 percent, and

maintenance of transport systems 5 percent.^ The total maintenance

cost would be approximately 55 percent of the operating costs.

Application costs.—The close relationship of application cost and

agricultural labor-productivity has been of interest to Soviet econo­

mists, consequently a fair amount of information is available on this

subject. The norms of labor productivity provided by Soviet sources

give average expenditures of 1 - 2 man-days per watering per hectare

without auxiliary equipment. These requirements were reduced to .67 -

1.0 man-days with the use of siphon tubes to .20 - .33 man-days with

pipes, which is comparable to labor expenditures required for sprinkling

13Zasukhin, op.cit. , pp. 3-8.

■^Mirkin, op.cit., p. 64.

^Ibid., p. 67. 144 16 systems. The data were based on application rates of 600 - 800 cubic meters per hectare in gravity flow systems and 400 cubic meters per hectare in mechanized irrigation.

Other sources give higher labor requirements per hectare for canal irrigation of different crops throughout the season in the Volga Valley as follows: 17 '

Crop Cultivation Irrigation

Small grains 2.7 man-days 2.4 man-days Corn 6.0 4 .8 Grass 3.5 2.4 V egetables 80.0 9.0 Orchards 85.0 3.6

It is significant that the percentage increase of labor requirement for irrigation is highest in the low value crops; for example, small grains require an 88.9 percent increase in labor, whereas high value crops like vegetables and fruits require 11.2 and 4.2 percent increases re­ spectively. Similar data were given for the North Caucasus where the

Rostov Scientific Research Institute of Agricultural Economics calcu­ lated the labor requirements for intensively grown vegetable and orchard crops to be 80-90 working days with an additional requirement of 15 percent for irrigation.-*-^

These data justify the increasing emphasis given to irrigating vegetables and fruit crops in the RSFSR as a means of increasing labor

^Ibid., p. 436.

17Ibid., p. 437. 1A Ibid., pp. 442 and 504. 145 productivity and intensification of overall production. Mirkin feels that an increase in yield of 10-15 percent will justify the additional

requirements of labor for irrigation of intensively grown crops.^

The use of sprinkling rather than stream application reduces labor

requirements by 1-2 working days per hectare for most crops notwith­

standing the additional number of applications required. However,

sprinkling is not practiced widely in the RSFSR and consequently does

not significantly alter the overall labor productivity.

At present irrigated agriculture is very i\rasteful of labor. For

example, the Tsimlyanskiy Irrigation System in Rostov Oblast, which was

designed for canal watering of 120 thousand hectares, under full u tili­

zation would require at least 12-14 thousand irrigators daily during the

growing season. It is estimated that the use of sprinkler irrigation

would reduce labor requirements to 3-3.5 thousand workers. It should

be noted that only 68.9 thousand of the 120 thousand hectares in the

project were irrigated in 1955 and 35.1 thousand in 1957. Labor short­

age was the major cause of this poor utilization, as the water supply

was adequate and irrigation structures were in proper working order.20

On farms using canal watering, labor expenditure comprises nearly

100 percent of application costs. Only in sprinkling developments and

areas using gated pipe or siphons is this percentage reduced signifi­

cantly. Therefore in the RSFSR, where only .4 percent of irrigation

19Ibid., p. 246.

20Denisov* op.cit, , p. 11, 146 21 application is by sprinkling, labor expenditures correspond with the application costs. Application costs normally comprise some 25 percent Op of the total operational costs for irrigation.

Mechanization costs.—Machinery in irrigated agriculture is best utilized by the Soviets in cleaning major canals and has helped to re­ duce the labor requirement in that area. Individual farm canals, how­ ever, are as yet largely cleaned with hand labor. Mechanization of application has had quite limited development in the RSFSR, although the

Russians realize the economic advantage to be gained in this manner.

For example hand irrigation of grain in the Volga Valley requires 5.6 man-days per hectare for the season compared to 2.45 man-days per hec­ tare under sprinkling.

The second large out-lay for mechanization is in the area of pump-

lifted waters for irrigation purposes. This operation is widespread in

the Volga region and to a lesser extent in the flatlands of the North

Caucasus near the Don River. These projects require an average of

forty-seven hydraulic units for each thousand hectares of irrigated

land. The exact percentage of the total operating costs expended for mechanization is not known, however, mechanization combined with small

incidental costs comprise approximately 20 percent of total operating

c o sts .

Total operating costs for irrigation.—There is little agreement

in Soviet sources as to the costs involved in operating irrigation

21 Mirkin, op.cit., p. 10. 22 Ibid., p. 67. 147 systems, therefore, the author, using the best corresponding data, has estimated the operating costs for irrigating various crops as follows: 23

Crop Operating Costs, Rubles per Hectare per Year

Small Grains 28 Corn and Sunflower 45 Orchards and Vineyards 50 Potatoes 50 Sugar Beets 67 V egetables 106

These cost estimates are based upon a direct relationship of labor re- pi quirements to total operating costs in irrigation and assume a gravity flow system. For crops requiring high labor expenditures these estimates are probably high, with the reverse being true for the lower labor-intensive crops. However, any attempt to weight these figures would only complicate the situation without adding to the accuracy.

Total input requirements

Denisov and Shubladze have computed the irrigation input require­ ments for the Soviet Union, dividing them between capital investments and operating costs. From these computations they derive a total capital investment requirement for irrigation projects ranging between

470 rubles per hectare for sprinkled grain and 1,793 rubles per hectare

23 Application costs, which are primarily labor expenditure, account for most of the variation in the operating costs for irrigation. The Soviets place a value of 3 rubles per man-day as wages for irrigation. See Denisov and Shubladze, p. 17. A number of labor requirement figures were quoted by Mirkin, from which the author was able to draw infor­ mation upon which to base estimates given above. See Mirkin, pp. 104- 140 and 242-247. 24 The component costs of irrigation operation are given above. supra, pp. 142-146* for canal watered cotton. These capital investments include the cost of auxiliary functions required to service the farm units as well as con­ struction cost of irrigation systems. However, the investments in construction and maintenance are better reflected in the computed cost figure of .0035 rubles per cubic meter given above.Overall water costs based on the latter figure range from 8 rubles per hectare for potatoes to 20 - 21 rubles per hectare for sunflower. Annual operating costs in the RSFSR range from 23 rubles per hectare for wheat to 106 rubles per hectare for most vegetables. (Tables 25 and 26). The total irrigation costs, calculated by combining the water costs and the operating costs, are between 37 and 122 rubles per hectare for wheat and vegetables respectively (Tables 25 and 26).

Production Increases Under Irrigation

For data on expected output under irrigated agriculture, past re­ sults provide an indication of possible results under new developments.

As mentioned in the introductory statement of this chapter, a number of problems are involved in the use of Soviet data. The yield and conse­ quently the production increases presented in the following sections of this study are believed to overstate somewhat the benefits to be derived from irrigation since Soviet agricultural officials probably have pre­ sented those yield data which emphasize the value of irrigation. These yields for the most part were obtained at expermential stations or model farms and are not indicative of results that could be expected from broad application of irrigation in the RSFSR.

Supra, p. 142. 149

It is impossible to ascertain specific trends in yield response to irrigation for all crops using the available information. However, indicator crops give a fair representation of basic trends. Generally a greater yield response is observable in high value crops than in small grain and fodder. For example, in the North Caucasus small grain yields have increased less than 85 percent with the application of irrigation, except in the Makhachkala Region where extremely dry con­ ditions provide a low base from which to compare. In contrast sun­ flower yields for the entire region increased 222 percent and corn gave p/1 a similar response with a 227 percent increase. The most valuable crops, fruits and vegetables, vary greatly in response and must be discussed individually. The following yield data indicate why fruits and vegetables covered 46.1 percent of the irrigated area in Rostov,

Krasnodar, and Stavropol Oblasts in 1961:^

Crop Unirrigated Yield Irrigated Yield

Carrots 176 centners/hectare 344 centners/hectare Apples 197 281 Grapes 38 87

Fruit crops often do not respond as well to irrigation as vegetables because their deep root structure allows them to tap the groundwater resources more effectively; consequently they are less dependent on

supplemental water than shallow rooted vegetables.

Mirkin, op.cit. , pp. 250-252.

27I b id . , p . 127. In the Volga region the yield of vegetable crops averages 109-141 centners per hectare;2® however, under controlled conditions of irri­

gation, early cabbage yields 300-430, late cabbage 700, tomatoes 500-

700, cucumbers 500-600 and onions 150-200 centners2^ per hectare. Under

general farm conditions, irrigation produces average yields of 300-800

centners per hectare of cabbage, 310-460 of tomatoes, 200-400 of

cucumbers. Potatoes yields under irrigation were 200-300 centners per 30 hectare. Yield responses of other field crops are considered in

Table 22.

Output valuation.—The value of production increase due to irri­

gation was computed by drawing from the selected yield data discussed

above and applying the Soviet purchase rates of 1955 and 1958 (Table

23). The ruble value thus obtained reflects the gross increase due irri­

gation only, and does not account for the added benefit obtained from

the increased fertilizer applications which often accompany irrigation

development. These data may not represent actual conditions, but they

provide an insight into the economics of irrigation from a Soviet point

of view.

The procurement prices of 1955 were selected because most of the

input investments and maintenance costs used here were based upon the

prices of July 1, 1955 and adjusted to the 1961 rate of exchange. The

^Tsentral'noye Statisticheskoye Upravleniye pri RSFSR, Narodnoye Khozyaystvo RSFSR v I960 godu. Statisticheskiy Yezhegodnik (Moscow: Gosstatizdat TsSU SSSR, 1961), pp. 217-218, and 248.

2?A centner is equal to 220.46 pounds.

^®Mirkin, op.cit., p. 221. 151

TABLE 22

REPRESENTATIVE YIELDS OF IRRIGATED AND NONIRRIGATED CROPS IN THE MAJOR IRRIGATED REGIONS OF THE RSFSR

(Centners per Hectare)

Region Crop Yield Yield Usual Unirrigated Irrig a te d Increase (P ercent)

North Caucasus W inter Wheat 4 -4 6 20 - 50 64 - 66

Spring Wheat 10 - 16 38 - 43 100 -150

Sunflower 3 -1 5 10-22 100 -150

Potatoes 54 132 240

Grapes 38 - 50 87 -200 100 -300

Forage 50 - 55 100 -110 100

East Siberia Wheat 8-16 15 - 40 90 -100

Forage 19 26 - 28 35 - 40

P otatoes 54 - 63 107 -193 200

Volga Wheat 10 - 17 22-32 150

Sunflower 10 20 - 25 100 -120

P otatoes 42 -120 198 -311 150 -375

Sugar Beets 83 401 -6 2 0 400

Forage 24 50 110

Note: Calculated from Mirkin, pp. 218-287 and Tsentral'noye Statisticheskoye Upravleniye pri RSFSR, pp. 207-247. 152

TABLE 23

GROSS VALUE OF INCREASED PRODUCTION IN FIELD CROPS DUE TO IRRIGATION IN THE RSFSR

Region Crop (Rubles per (Rubles per (Centners per Gross Gross Increase Procurement Centner) Prices 1958 Value of Average Average Yield Increase Hectare) Hectare) i

North Caucasus Wheat 15 7 .0 105

Sunflower 14 17.2-17.6 241-246

Potatoes 77 4 .0 308

Hay 53 2 .2 - 3 .0 117-159

East Siberia Wheat 18 7 .8 - 8.5 140-153

Hay 8 2 .2 - 3 .0 18- 24

Potatoes 59 4 .0 236

Volga Wheat 17 8.3 141

Sunflower 13 20.3 264

Potatoes 169 4 .0 676

Sugar Beets 328 3 .4 1,115

Hay 27 2 .2 - 3.0 59- 81

Note: These data are based upon Tables 20 and 22, and Glavnoye Planovo-Ekonomicheskoye Upravleniye M inisterstva Sel'skogo Khozyaystva RSFSR, Vsesouznyy Nauchno-Issledovatel1skiy In stitu t Ekonomiki Sel'skogo Khozyaystva, Sbomik Spravochnykh Materialov Dlya Kolkhozov (Moscow: Gosudarstvennoye Izdatel'stvo Sel' skokhozyaystvennoy Literatury, 1959) pp. 494 - 5 0 4 . 153

1958 prices were used because of the good coverage and apparent accuracy of available procurement prices in that year. And finally an adjustment ratio of ruble change between 1955 and 1958 prices is used in the discussion of input-output relationships (Table 25)®

The listing of regions in Table 23 is necessary not only to permit examination of the yield variation, but also to show the sliding scale

of purchase prices paid by the Soviets in various regions of the

country.

Table 24 shows the increased production of certain vegetable crops.

These are considered separately as they were taken from Central Cherno­

zem data; nevertheless, these data are comparable to those of the Volga

and North Caucasus where many of the physiographic and climatic factors

are similar. These data were used because those of the major irrigated

regions under consideration were fragmentary and did not include a non­

irrigated base for comparative purposes.

Comparable data were found for only two fruit crops, grapes and

apples, which is unfortunate as the greatest value increases are found

in the fruit and vine sectors. Apple yields in the North Caucasus

responded with increases on the order 84 centners per hectare with pro­

curement prices ranging from 18-35 rubles per centner. Grapes in the

same region gave an additional yield of 99 centners per hectare and

sold to the state for 28-60 rubles per centner. The gross increase from

irrigation was 2,772 and 5,940 rubles per hectare respectively. 30

-^These figures were computed from data in Mirkin, p. 127, Glavnoye Planovo-Ekonomicheskoye Upravleniye M inisterstva Sel'skogo Khozyaystva RSFSR, Vsesouznyy Nauchno-Issledovatel'skiy Institut Ekonomiki Sel'skogo Khozyaystva, pp. 503-506. 154

TABLE 24

GROSS VALUE OF INCREASED PRODUCTION IN VEGETABLE CROPS UNDER IRRIGATION IN THE RSFSR

Crop Yield Increase Purchase Price Value of Gross from irrigation (Rubles per Increase (Rubles (Centners per Centner) per Hectare) H ectare)

Early Cabbage 234 3.0 702

Late Cabbage 148 3.0 444

Tomatoes 94a 7.5 705

Cucumbers 61 6.5 397

Onions 107 14.0 1,498

tomatoes vary greatly in response. For example, an increase of 438 centners per hectare was recorded at the Orel testing station.

Note: This is based upon data from the Central Chernozem Region, where conditions are comparable to much of the Volga and North Caucasus.

Source: Mirkin, p. 107, Glavnoye Planovo-Ekonomicheskoye Upravleniye M inisterstva Sel*skogo Khozyaystva RSFSR, Vsesouznyy Nauchno-Issledovatel1skiy Institut Ekonomiki Sel'skogo Khozyaystva, pp. 494-504.

Input-Output Relationships

In most Western nations input-output relationships are established by methods involving price and income policies developed by the individual nation. Therefore to be properly understood, the relation­ ships derived in this study must be judged against the background of the economic policies of that nation. A cost-price relationship al­ though not completely satisfactory for irrigation development in the 155

Soviet Union will serve to give a comparative relationship. This re­ lationship will be based upon figures which the Soviets have released.

Further evaluation will consider the labor productivity as it relates to water supply development. This is essentially a modified sector approach, which separates irrigated agriculture from general agriculture and compares the economic returns.

The relationship of input-output in the following tables is ex­ pressed as net value increase and may be utilized to compare yield response of different crops to irrigation. Tables 25 and 26 separate net values from the gross production increases realized from irri­ gation development under conditions of acreage and yields that were obtained in I960, Price data in these tables are adjustments from 1958 to 1955 prices to provide a comparable base. The net increase is expressed in prices of July 1, 1955 adjusted to the 1961 rate of ex­ change which is often used by the Soviets themselves.33"

The economics of irrigation.—Tables 25 and 26 have considered input-output relationships for most of the important crops grown under irrigation in the RSFSR. The net values of increased production range from 51 rubles per hectare in wheat to 578 rubles per hectare in sugar beets. Yet even wheat, with the smallest net increase of value returned, would require a 3 2 .7 percent larger operating cost to produce an equal amount of grain under dry-farm conditions in the irrigated regions of th e RSFSR.32

31 Tsentral'noye Statistieheskoye Upravleniye pri Sovete Ministrov SSSR, Kapital'noye S troitel1 stvo v SSSR, p. 9« 32 Computed from gross income and operating co sts shown fo r can al watered and unirrigated grains in Table 26. t?J 3 o P 0 W 1 *r C+ ct- W P Oqp H-CO O H- O' P £ s *1 o H- p P cn wC

I Co 03 •x) c o t s O & o o’ P c+ p c+ p O o H j P P p pj P >-i •XI c+ c+ s - c+ H c+ o O O O *c M § P P => S CD CO w p O > CO

K3 H ro vo O ' -p- vo £ o £ g P- M O' 0 CO H vn Gross Increase o 1 I C3 H (Rubles per Hectare, C3 vn £ O vo On 1958 Prices) H p M § § Adjustment Ratio M3H CO p - K> O' $ p- -J -<3 (1955-1958) H M o' (O I O vn fe* vo H H V) CO § -p- P £ O CO TJ o £ P ax Vi O 00 Gross Increase 00 v!o (1955 Prices) & P *■C fo M

w Minimum Water Costs H £ 00 00 00 'O (Rubles per Hectare, 1955 P rices) Hs O

P- vn M Vi -p- Operating Costs vn fo & O CO o Vt OJ (Rubles per Hectare, 1955 P rices) copa ►xi CQ CN P- vn VO V! O vo Total Irrigation O' H 00 O' a x Vi -a Costs (Rubles per hectare, 1955 Prices)

-V 3 Vn 00 £ vn p - ~0 VO fO S3 H H I I Net Increase S’vo £ (Rubles per Hectare -a 1955 Prices) 9 ST TABLE 2 5 .—-Continued

to © CO (0 w a> o> o © p U o u r-f & © cd 53 © X! LA Region Crop ■P 0 o -P ■P -p 3 L A V •rH o o co O § o « O' © © -P ID • rt -■— ' |— | co Ed k 35 -P© 03© © m © o ^ I d - ~ h LA cd x> l a o o LA •o Ca o c n 3 L A

Potatoes 676 .47 318 8 50 58 260

Sugar Beets 1,115 .59 658 13 67 80 578

aSee Table 23.

Computed from Tsentral'noye Statisticheskoye Upravleniye pri Sovete I-'Iinistrov SSSR, Sel* skoye Khozyaystvo SSSR. p. 117.

GBased upon the Soviet Water Cost figure of .0035 rubles per cubic meter multiplied by the normal requirement of the crop.

dc*Supra, p. 139.

eTotal production cost is computed by adding the minimum water costs to the operating costs.

Note: This table is based on 1960-1961 yields and acreage, but the prices are of July 1, 1955 , adjusted to 1961 rubles. £ -3 TABLE 26

WET VALUE OF INCREASED PRODUCTION OF VEGETABLE CROPS UNDER IRRIGATION IN THE RSFSR

CO 0V pW *v 0 CO 0 0 u u OO SH

■ fn £1 UA cd -Q ia LA CA O On C 3 m q> 3 tr\ -P 3 lA -p d i a SH « On "d h rH ■3 « O' &.CU ON O tt, o ® P3 ON C5 w H C5 w S •— ' rH O —» rH E~l rH 3 n -" H

Early Cabbage 702 .47 330 10.7--16.4 106 116-122 208-214

Late Cabbage 444 ii 209 n II it it tt 87- 93

Tomatoes 7 05 ii 331 It It u it tt 209-215

Cucumbers 397 ii 187 It tt tt it ti 65- 71

aThis is based upon the relationship of procurement prices in potatoes as the statistical handbook does not give price relationships for individual vegetable crops, therefore the relationship for potatoes was used: See Tsentral'noye Statisticheskoye Upravleniye pri Sovete Ministrov SSSR, Sel1skoye Khozyaystvo SSSR, p . 117..

Note: The data used in computing this table were found in Mirkin, pp. 106-108. 159

More important, however, to Soviet agriculture is the use of irri­ gation to produce those crops which have temperature requirements that favor their efficient growth in the more arid zones. In Central Asia and the Transcaucasus, these crops are represented by cotton, tobacco, and numerous subtropical plants. In the RSFSR, the crops requiring favorable temperature regimes are primarily such crops as tomatoes, fruits, grapes, rice, corn, and sunflowers. Rice is 100 percent irri­ gated in the RSFSR and certain other crops respond so well that long- range plans emphasize a sliift in future production percentages as shown in Table 27,

Irrigation and labor productivity,—Irrigation may be viewed as a method of increasing labor productivity in agriculture both through an expansion of irrigation networks and through better labor practices on existing irrigation facilities. From the Soviet point of view irri­ gation in the less arid lands, principally the RSFSR is economically acceptable primarily as a means of increasing labor productivity. In other words, its purpose is to expand agricultural output at a more rapid rate than the required increase in labor expenditure.

The Soviets have published information on the effect of irrigation on labor productivity in Voronezh Oblast, In this oblast labor pro­ ductivity reportedly increased 1.5 to 3.0 times through the use of irri­ gation. Apparently no records were kept of change in the labor efficiency of the irrigating process itself. It has been estimated by the Soviets that an increase in labor expenditure of 11-20 percent on irrigated crop production increases yield by 25-40 percent or more in the RSFSR. 33

Mirkin, op.cit. , p. 444. 160

TABLE 27

PERCENT OF AGRICULTURAL CROPS GROWN ON IRRIGATED LANDS IN THE RSFSR, 1957 AND FUTURE

C ro p Percent in 1957 Percent in Future

Industrial Crops .3 1.9

G ra in s .3 .3

Corn — 2.5

R ice 100.0 100.0

V e g e ta b le s 2.4 47.2

P o ta to e s — 4 .1

F o d d e r .3 1.3

O rc h a rd s 10.7 19.3

T o ta l .7 2.0

Source: Mirkin, p. 262-263.

Though it is an expressed aim of the RSFSR to increase labor pro­ ductivity through the expansion of irrigation, the great economic benefit to be realized from better labor utilization in existing systems has not been completely ignored. The principal approach to this problem considered by the Soviets is that of mechanization, primarily through the use of sprinklers. For example K. K. Shubladze (Head of the Water

o j It is estimated that efficient sprinkler irrigation may reduce the water requirement for irrigation by as much as 20 percent. See Santini, p. 22. 161

Supplies Inspectorate, USSR Ministry of Agriculture) estimates that 50 thousand man-days are expended each year for irrigation in the Soviet

Union, of which less than 2 percent is used in sprinkling. Between 35 and 38 thousand man-days are used in applying the water, consequently the proper application of sprinkling and other mechanical techniques of application could easily reduce the labor requirement by 15-20 thousand man-days per y e a r

With the concern over labor productivity and irrigation in the

Soviet Union it is significant that the rates of labor application for sprinkling reported by the Soviets are below those of the United States

(Table 28). This probably has caused them to place greater faith in sprinkling as a conservator of labor than is actually warranted. This is supported by observations of American visitors who feel that labor

costs on irrigation projects in the Soviet Union as a whole are con­

siderably higher than in the United States. The Soviets tend to layout their fields for the most effective use of farm machinery rather than 36 for efficient utilization of irrigation water.

The factor of dependable yield.'—Yield dependability in semiarid

areas is of great significance in crop production. In the less humid

zones of the RSFSR the production of grains and other extensively

cultivated crops at a moderately high yield can be expected only once

in every five or six years. In most cases this factor can be augumented

by the application of one or two irrigations per year. This factor

35 Shubladze, op.cit. , p. 9. 36 Soil Conservation Service, p. 40. 162 was reflected in the thinking of Nikita Khrushchev when he said:

In allocating additional funds for the development of agriculture, we should set ourselves the goal of creating conditions to make possible farming that is not dependent on nature's whims. Agricultural production should be so organized that every year and under any climatic condition it guarantees our obtaining the food needed to satisfy the people's requirements. How can this be achieved, in practical terms? In our view, until we learn to control the weather, the most reliable means for obtaining dependable harvest is the irrigation and watering of millions of hectares of la n d .37

TABLE 28

LABOR REQUIREMENTS IN IRRIGATION, SOVIET UNION AND THE UNITED STATES

(Man-Hoursa per Hectare)

Crop Soviet Union United S ta te s

Corn 12 43

P asture 10 32

Cotton 50 50

aMan-hours were converted from Soviet man-days which are claimed to be comparable with the eight-hour day of the United States. Note: The corn and pasture figures for the Soviet Union were recorded in the Volga Region and the cotton figure is average for all cotton gro\idng republics. The United States data are based on work at the Mississippi State College using small and medium sprinklers. Source: Denisov and Shubladze, p. 16, Mirkin, p. 437, and United States Department of Agriculture, Water, Yearbook of Agriculture, 1955 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office; 1955), p. 255-

37 From Mr. Khrushchev's speech to the Party Plenary Session of the Party Central Committee, January 17, 1961, as recorded in the Current Digest of the Soviet Press, Vol. IX (March 15, 1961), p. 5« CHAPTER VII

SIMiARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The development of irrigated agriculture in the Russian mid- latitudes, since its techniques were borrowed from Central Asia in the closing decades of the nineteenth century, has been characterized by- periods of sporadic growth and decline. Yet today, the less arid zones

of the RSFSR contain well over 15 percent of the area covered by irri­ gation networks in the Soviet Union. The republic derives a variety of benefits from irrigation, with one of the most important being a higher degree of dependability of agricultural production than is

possible with dry-land farming techniques. Irrigation in RSFSR has

suffered from the low priority of agriculture in the allocation of re­

sources and from the fact that expected gains from investments in irri­

gation have been larger in Central Asia and the Transcaucasus than in

the RSFSR.

The Physical Resources and Water Requirements

A brief resume of the resource potential of the RSFSR as researched

in this study indicates that from an overall potential of land suitable

for irrigation development consisting of some 9-12 million hectares,^

less than 1.3 million hectares are presently under irrigation networks.

'''Supra, p. 73.

163 164

Additional expansion goals set by the Seven-Year Plan call for an in­ crease of only 300 thousand hectares of new development. In other words, in extending new development within the Seven-Year Plan, the RSFSR may select only the best lands for development.

Readily available water supplies in the less humid zones of the

RSFSR average some 535 cubic kilometers per year2 of which an estimated minimum of 70 percent could be utilized.

Consumptive-use requirements for water in this zone at the I960 level of development were 2.7 billion cubic meters (2.7 cubic kilometers) used on an area of approximately 830 thousand hectares of actually irri­ gated land.^- The average application requirement was 3,221 cubic meters per hectare. Using a median application-efficiency rate of 70 percent and a conveyance loss of 50 percent^ it would require a total diversion of approximately 8-9 billion cubic meters (8-9 cubic kilometers) of water per year to satisfy the current irrigation requirements of the

RSFSR. Thus in I960, irrigation diversions in the RSFSR required less than 1.7 percent of the readily available stream flow of the less humid zones.

The most important irrigation resources of the RSFSR are found in the North Caucasus. This region alone with its surface water resources of 57.8 cubic kilometers per year could provide for a maximum irrigation development of 5.7 million hectares under the present rate of

^Computed from Table 19.

■^The Soviets often use the figure of 70 percent in evaluating the development potential of the subhumid lands. ^See Table 20. ^Mel'nikov, op.cit., pp. 29-30. 165 consumption, assuming no competition for water resources.^ A reasonable potential for actual development would probably be less than 50 percent of the Tnmrimum estimate given above. However, even at this smaller rate, a potential of 2.8 million hectares of land could be irrigated where at present less than 600 thousand hectares are actually under irri­ g a tio n .

Similar computations for East Siberia and the regions of potential development would show similar patterns of favorable water-resources; however, their development in the remaining years of the Seven-Year Plan is likely to be rather limited. One justification for expansion of irrigated agriculture in this area is the need to help fill the food requirements of the local population, as this is presently a deficit food region. Since these areas are quite distant from the major popu­ lation centers of the Soviet Union, commercial production of market- garden crops for shipment to these centers would appear to be uneco­ nomical, particularly in view of the more favorable temperature regimes in the North Caucasus and Volga regions and the proximity of these regions to the major urban centers.

In the Volga Region the problem is somewhat different with a water

supply insufficient to meet the present demands made upon it. Here

diversions for hydroelectric developments, transport canals, industrial

£ This assumes an average water requirement of 3*,554 cubic meters, a headgate requirement of 5,077 cubic meters, and a diversion require­ ment of 10,154 cubic meters per hectare. These figures were computed from Tables 18 and 19. 166 uses, and irrigation combined with the economic desirability of main­ taining the present level of the Caspian Sea, have placed an extreme requirement upon the Volga waters. Consequently, there is almost no possibility of expanding irrigated agriculture in the Seven-Year Plan, though a number of official statements have been made concerning planned 7 development.

Economic Aspects of I r r ig a tio n Development

Irrigation Inputs

In the seven years between 1952 and 1959, 700 million rubles (new

currency) were spent on irrigation construction in the Soviet Union.

This investment served to increase the irrigation networks by 1.1 million hectares and the area of actual irrigation by approximately 715 & thousand hectares. Thus an average investment of 979 rubles were re­

quired to develop each hectare of land brought under actual irrigation

during this period.

From these limited data, it is impossible to compute a repayment

r a te or cost of w ater fig u re; however, in 1959 a minimum w ater-co st

estimate of .0035 rubles per cuoic meter was supplied by the Soviets.

It is assumed that this figure was computed for amortization periods of

3-10 years which are commonly used by the Soviets

7 Though conditions in the Volga appear dim fo r the Seven-Year Plan, it should be emphasized that if the Soviets complete the Pechora- Vychegda Diversion in the years immediately following the completion of the plan, vast changes in the irrigation potential could occur, supra, pp. 65-67.

Zasukhin, op.cit., p. 3.

^Supra, 140-141. 167

The total cost of diverting water in the RSFSR at the I960 level of development would have been approximately 31.5 million rubles, based on the water cost of .0035 rubles per cubic meter. The water costs for a number of crops have been computed on a yearly basis using the data given above.^ These costs range from 6.9 rubles per hectare for wheat to 21.0 rubles per hectare for sunflowers, and provide the basis for computing total inputs. In this case total input requirements for irrigated agriculture are found by combining ^^ater costs and operating expenses. For the RSFSR, inputs range from 36 to 122 rubles for wheat and market vegetables respectively, 11

Bconomic Returns from Irrigation

Most crops respond well to irrigation with gross value increases of as little as 88 rubles per hectare for wheat to 658 rubles for sugar b e e ts. 12 The n et value in c re ase s fo r the same crops were 51 and 578 rubles per hectare respectively.

To the Soviets, the effect of irrigation upon agricultural labor productivity is of vital concern. Even though irrigated agriculture is labor intensive,-^ its overall effect has been to increase labor

■^See Tables 25-26.

i:LIb id .

1 2 Ibxd.tv, 13 In 1958 only 3.5 percent of the total cultivated area was under irrigation, but some 15 percent of the total production costs were required in this sector, of xvhich the jaajor outlay was in labor costs. See Zasukhin, p. 3. 168 productivity. In mid-latitude irrigation labor productivity is generally increased 2-3 times in vegetable production, 1.5-2 for sugar beets, and

.33-.75 for grains.1^

With these general values of irrigation returns in mind, it is more meaningful to review the position of planning and examine the prospect for attaining plan goals.

Irrigation Planning in the RSFSR and Prospects for Attaining Plan Goals

The RSFSR is now more than half way through its Seven-Year Plan period. The plan goals for irrigation were listed as 300 thousand hectares of newly developed lands and approximately 270 thousand hec- tares requiring limited development. 15 The author estimates that at the end of 1962, the Repuolic had expanded its new development by a minimum of 157 thousand h e c ta r e s ,^ bringing the to ta l network to a t least 1,745,000 hectares. It is possible that developments in 1961

increased more rapidly than estimated. If such were the case it is

possible that by the end of 1962 new construction was on schedule (173 thousand hectares) as outlined by the planned goals; however, it is

■^liirkin, op.cit., p. 216.

15Soviet statements are not explicit concerning these additional lands th a t require lim ited development. However i t i s assumed th a t they are unutilized areas within existing networks that will be added to the actually irrigated area or abandoned areas that will be reclaim ed.

^This is based on data for 1959 and I960 contained in Tsentral' noye Statisticheskoye Upravleniye pri Sovete Ministrov SSSR, Kapital1 noye Stroitel1stvo v SSSR, p. 175 , and assumes that the rate of in­ crease for 1961 was constant, then increasing as claimed for 1962 by Radio Tass Nov. 10, 1962. 169 most unlikely that any extension was realized, beyond the original goals as envisioned by the Plenary Session of the Central Committee on

January 17, 1961.

The additional 270 thousand hectares requiring limited development have been largely ignored in Soviet statements. Consequently, it is impossible to measure progress made in this sector. It is assumed that progress here is quite desirable for Soviet agriculture as high return per ruble invested would be realized. The development could be accomplished without the high costs of new diversion or primary con­ veyance construction. At present, the investment requirements for developing these lands are only about 25 percent of that required for I rt new developments.

Allocation and Investment In Irrigation Construction

The Soviet investment rates for irrigation allocated by the Seven-

Year Plan totaled 2 billion rubles which would have resulted in a yearly 19 investment rate of 285.7 million rubles. However, the release of investm ents from other secto rs of th e economy in the f i r s t two years of of the plan period, provided funds exceeding the original proposal.

Investments of 393 million rubles in 1959 and 453 million in I960 were used in irrigation development in the Soviet Union, of which 81 and 92

17Supra, p. 60. 18 Mirkin, op.cit. , p. 64. 19 Including both State and kolkoz investments, see S. V. Zasukhin, P • 3 • 170 20 million for the respective years were spent in the RSFSR. These additional funds provided an in itial boost which apparently kept the fulfillment of planned construction on schedule through the first half of the plan period.

Implementation

In the first two years of the Seven-Year Plan (1959-1960) 173 million rubles were invested in the irrigated agriculture of the RSFSR.

From this investment, the republic reported the completion of 69 thousand hectares of new development. This would have placed the completion of their new-development 5.5 percent behind schedule in spite of investments considerably above plan level. However, it is possible that more funds were used in developing unutilized lands in existing networks than was anticipated and that money may have been tied-up in large projects not yet complete, but which would add considerable potential for later years.

There is some evidence that the latter assumption may be valid in

light of Soviet claims that new irrigation increases for 1962 were 50

greater than in 1961.^ Apparently the 1961 rate of increase was

comparable with that of the two previous years.

Problems

Numerous problems beset irrigation development in the RSFSR, most

of which are common to both m id-latitude and sem itropical developments.

^Tsentral'noye Statisticheskoye Upravleniye pri Ministrov SSSR, Itapital'noye Stroitel1 stvo v SSSR, p. 161.

21Supra, pp. 70-71. 171

The most serious problems are related to the inefficient utilization of existing developments. 22 For example, in 1958 the RSFSR had scheduled to irrigate 1,089,000 hectares but in practice less than 700,000 hec­ tares were irrigated,^ In 1959 it was planned to irrigate 1,130,000 hectares, but in practice only 800,000 hectares were irrigated.^

Closely correlated with the problems of organization is the general lack of proper measuring devices and poor application control tech­ niques. Apparently a great deal of water and labor are wasted for these reasons. The cumulative effect is a poor utilization of existing facilities and wasteful techniques over much of the land under irriga­ tio n .

Conclusion

In the final consideration, it is possible that the construction

of the physical facilities called for by the Seven-Year Plan will be

completed or nearly completed on schedule, facilitating a water supply

for an additional 300 thousand hectares of new development and an

expansion of 270 thousand hectares within existing networks. This would

make it theoretically possible to irrigate a total cropland of

1,370,000 - 1,380,000 hectares in the RSFSR. The major part of this

increased development w ill occur in the North Caucasus as the best

1957 a total of 3.9 million hectares of the irrigation network in the Soviet Union was not watered for the following reasons: Lack of water - 2,274,000 hectares, Organizational problems, disrepair of systems, lack of labor force, etc. - 852,000, poor conditions of reclamation - 251,000, and other causes - 493,000 hectares, see P. I. Denisov, pp. 7-8.

23^"Toward Better Utilization of Irrigated Lands," pp. 3-5.

^Zasukhin, op.cit., p. 5. 172 combination of land, potential, water resources, and accessibility are available in that region. On the other hand, the Volga region has a good combination of land reserves and accessibility, but the degree of utilization of Volga waters precludes any significant expansion for irrigation purposes. In East Siberia and the regions of potential development in the Altay Kray and Primorskiy Kray, the distance from population centers and less favorable temperature regimes w ill limit the economic returns from new developments in these regions. Irrigated agriculture in such areas functions primarily as a support of the live­ stock industry and to aid in supplying the local requirements of grains, potatoes, and some root vegetables.

A sharp contrast exists between the progress in the constructing of physical facilities for irrigation and the realization of signifi­ cant increases in agricultural output through effective utilization of existing facilities. This disparity appears to be the greatest problem for irrigated agriculture in the RSFSR. The continued emphasis in planning on the construction of new network facilities, often to the exclusion of advocating the proper utilization of existing facilities, has tended to increase the existing disparity-.

The final resume of irrigation in the RSFSR has shown that the land and water resource base of arid zones of that republic are more than adequate to serve in facilitating the developments envisioned by the

Seven-Year Plan and with proper application would undoubtedly go a long way in establishing a firm footing for important aspects of the 20-year

plan. In addition to the favorable physical resource base there is

every reason to believe that the economics of irrigation should justify 173 its use throughout much of the arid zone. let it is most improbable that the production level w ill even approach the goals called for in the

Seven-Year Plan. Further expansion of irrigation in the RSFSR would provide a welcome addition to the production of agricultural commodities in such a way as to improve substantially the quality of the diet of the

Russian people. And periiaps the single most important benefit would be the increase of yield dependability.

Why then has the utilization of irrigation continued to lag in the mid-latitudes? No doubt a great deal of blame lies with the poor in­ centives offered to those who work the land, however, this problem it­ self, is apparently rooted in a basic lack of understanding between traditional communism and the rural population. This appears in the attitudes of the Soviet leaders themselves, who traditionally have been unable or unwilling to understand the peasant and the land that he works.

Such shortcomings are readily apparent in the limited success of attain­ ing production goals, even though the physical facilities for irrigation application are more than adequate. The implementation of proper field techniques and improvement of labor productivity seem to be a most

elusive goal in mid-latitude agriculture. And how does this affect the

RSFSR? At present it appears that the physical facilities for irriga­

tion in the RSFSR w ill continue to receive considerable benefit from

investments due to the continuing interest in irrigation development in

the Soviet Union general, even though the highest priority is given to

the subtropical republics of Central Asia and the Transcaucasus. At

the opposite extreme, irrigated agriculture in the RSFSR has close ties

with traditional Russian farming and as such is bound by the inertia of the system. Therefore, barring a reversal in present policy, there is every indication that the next decade or so w ill find mid-latitude irrigated agriculture in the RSFSR developing at a rate somewhere be­ tween the high-incentive systems of Central Asia and the traditional agriculture of Soviet Russia. APPENDIX A

DEFINITION OF TERMS U3SD IN THE TEXT

Agroclimatic measures: Techniques of tillage and runoff retention

designed to increase the soil moisture reserves in subhumid lands.

Application rate: The rate at which water is applied to the soil. For

optimum irrigation this implies the use of the maximum nonerosive

head.

Application techniques: The method used in bringing water to the land.

The most common techniques include furrow irrigation, border flood­

ing, sprinkling, etc. These broad techniques should be adjusted

to the characteristics of individual fields.

Available moisture: The moisture which a plant can withdraw from the

soil, expressed as inches per foot. This is generally divided

between total available moisture and readily available moisture.

Readily available moisture is usually about one half of the

t o t a l .

Centner: A weight measure used in the metric system equal to one-

tenth of a metric ton or 220.46 pounds.

Consumptive use: The total xvater used by a plant for vegetative growth

and transpiration. In computing consumptive use in irrigation the

water lost from the soil in which the plant grows is included.

Consumptive use coefficient: A term used in the Blaney-Criddle formula

for determining irrigation requirements. This coefficient is an

175 empirical value developed from numerous studies which measured the

water requirements and climatic data.

Consumptive-use factor: A term used in the Blaney-Criddle formula for

determining irrigation requirements. It measures the effect of

temperature and daylight hours on the water requirements of plants.

Contributing surface: A watershed or portion of a watershed which

contributes runoff to a surface stream.

Conveyance efficiency: The proportion of diverted waters which reaches

the farm headgate.

Diversion requirements: The amount of water that must be diverted

from a stream or released from storage to satisfy the crop needs and

cover the losses entailed in conveyance and application.

Estuary irrigation: An English translation of the Russian word

"limannoe" which refers to an irrigation practice utilizing spring

runoff in bottom lands through retention devices. Used primarily

for production of fodder and forage crops. This differs from the

Russian terms "oroshenie" which compares with our use of the word

irrigation and "obvodnenie" which refers to the supplying of

livestock water to steppe and desert rangelands.

Field Capacity: The moisture remaining in the soil after the period of

rapid drainage (2-3 days) following irrigation. The level is

dependent upon both the texture and structure of the soil.

Field efficiency; The proportion of water used by the plant as related

to the total water applied.

Gradient: An expression of a change in vertical distance per unit of

horizontal distance. Used here in reference to the stream channel and expressed as a decimal fraction. Headgate requirement: The water that must be delivered to the farm to

cover the plant needs and the losses incurred in application.

Hectare: A metric unit of area, equal to 10,000 square meters or

2.471 acres.

Irrigation season: The period during which the plant requires supple­

mental water. In dryer regions it usually covers the vegetative

period of the plant or the frost free period in the case of

perrennial plants.

Kolkhoz: A Soviet collective farm.

Permeability: A characteristic of the soil which determines the rate

at which water can flow through pore spaces when under a force

such as hydraulic gradient.

Runoff: That portion of precipitation which flows over the ground

surface and contributes directly to surface stream flow, ex­

pressed here as liters per second per square kilometer.

Solonetz soils: A type of soil which includes many of the alkali soils.

It is characterized by a light-colored leached layer usually under­

lain by clay hardpan.

Sovkhoz: A Soviet farm owned and managed by the state.

Subhumid zone: As used in this work refers to those areas which

normally have sufficient water for agriculture, but which on

occasional years are subject to disastrous droughts. In the

Soviet Union this zone is often characterized by a forest-steppe

vegetation.

Supplemental irrigation: The practice of applying supplemental waters

to crops in regions which ordinarily produce crops without 178

Irrigation. Generally applies to the subhumid zones, being well

developed in Central Chernozem areas and with lesser usage in the

North Caucasus and East Siberia.

Supplemental water requirement: The amount of water, over and above

precipitation, required by a plant for normal vegetative functions.

Wilting point: The point at which the water requirements for plant

function cannot be satisfied from the moisture available in the

s o il. APPENDIX B

CLIMATIC AND DAYLIGHT DATA USED IN COMPUTING CONSUMPTIVE USE AND SUPPLEMENTAL WATER REQUIREMENTS IN TABLE 20

TABLE 1

DURATION OF DAYLIGHT HOURS BY MONTH

(Percent of Annual)

Region L atitude Daylight Hours Subregion MJ J A s 0

North Caucasus Rostov 48 10.53 10.71 10.80 9.89 8.44 7.51 Krasnodar 46 10.39 10.54 10.64 9.79 8.42 7.58 Stavropol 46 10.39 10.54 10.64 9.79 8.42 7.58 Groznyy 44 10.26 10.38 10.49 9.70 8.41 7.6 3 Makhachkala 44 10.26 10.38 10.49 9.70 8.41 7.63

East Siberia Krasnoyarsk 54 10.98 11.36 11.50 10.41 8.47 7 .2 6 Irk u tsk 52 10.83 11.14 11.21 10.20 8.45 7.35 Chita 52 10.83 11.14 11.21 10.20 8.45 7.35 Buryat 52 10.83 11.14 11.21 10.20 8.45 7.35

Volga Saratov 52 10.83 11.14 11.21 10.20 8.45 7.35 Volgagrad 48 10.53 10.71 10.81 9.89 8.44 7.51 Astrakhan 46 10.39 10.54 10.64 9.79 8.42 7.58 Kuybychev 52 10.83 11.34 11.21 10.20 8.45 7.35

Source: Smithsonian Institution, "Duration of Daylight," Meteorological Tables, prepared by Robert J. List (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Special Collections, 1951), pp. 506-512.

179 180

TABLE 2

MEAN MONTHLY TEMPERATURE

(Degrees Fahrenheit)

Region Subregion Temperature3,

MJ JA s 0

North Caucasus Rostov 60 69 73 72 61 50

Krasnodar 62 69 74 74 65 53

Stavropol 63 70 73 75 59 50

Groznyy 63 70 73 75 59 52

Makhachkala 64 73 73 77 61 54

East Siberia Krasnoyarsk 50 62 66 63 50 34

Irk u tsk 44 57 61 59 46 32

C hita 48 61 66 61 47 33

Buryat 46 60 66 61 48 33

Volga Saratov 57 66 72 66 57 41

Volgagrad 61 69 75 73 60 46

Astrakhan 64 72 77 74 62 50

Kuybychev 58 65 69 67 54 40

aConverted from world temperature data compiled by the Air Weather Service. 181

TABLE 3

MONTHLY CONSUMPTIVE USE FACTORS

Region Subregion Consumptive Use Factor

M J J A S 0

North Caucasus Rostov 6.32 7.39 7.88 7.12 5.15 3.76

Krasnodar 6.44 7.27 7.87 7.24 5.47 4.02

Stavropol 6.35 7.38 7.77 7.34 4.97 3.79

Groznyy 6 .46 7.27 7.66 7.28 4.96 3.97

Makhachkala 6.57 7.58 7.66 7.47 5.13 4.12

East Siberia Krasnoyarsk 5.49 7.03 7.59 6.56 4.24 2.47

Irk u tsk 4.77 6.35 6.84 6.02 3.89 2.35

Chita 5.20 6.80 7.40 6.22 3.97 2.43

Buryat 4.98 6.68 7.40 6.22 4.07 2.43

Volga Saratov 6.17 7.35 8.07 6.73 4.82 3.04

Volgagrad 6.42 7.39 8.11 7.22 5.06 3.45

Astrakhan 6.65 7.59 8.19 '7 .2 4 5.22 3.79

Kuybyshev 6.28 7.24 7.73 6.83 4.56 2.94

Note: The monthly consumptive use factor (f) is developed in the Blaney-Criddle formula to compute consumptive use factor (F). For further explanation see supra, p. 116. 182

TABLE 4

MEAN MONTHLY PRECIPITATION

(Inches)

Region Subregion R a ih fa lla

M J J A s 0

North Caucasus Rostov 1.3 1.9 2.4 2.2 1.2 1.3

Krasnodar 1.5 2.0 2.9 1.7 2.7 2.3

Stavropol 1.8 2.0 2.4 1 .6 1.5 .9

Groznyy 2.2 3.0 2.1 1.5 1.2 1 .1

Makhachkala 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.2 1.9 1 .8

East Siberia Krasnoyarsk 1.2 2.2 2.1 2.6 1.2 .8

Irk u tsk 1.5 2.2 3.5 3 .1 1.7 .8

C hita 1.1 2.0 3.7 3.7 1.4 .4

Buryat .4 .6 1.8 2.6 1.3 .3

Volga Saratov 1.4 1.7 1.6 1 .4 1.3 1 .2

Volgagrad 1.1 2.0 .8 .8 .6 1.0

Astrakhan .6 .9 • 5 .5 .6 .5

Kuybyo’nev 1.1 1.1 1.3 .6 1.2 1 .1

aConverted from world precipitation data compiled by the Air Weather Service. BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS

Atlas Sel'skogo Khozyaystva SSSR. Moscow: Glavnoe Upravlenie Geodezii i Kartografii Ministerstva Geologii i Okhani Nedr SSSR, I960.

Brechnev, D. D. and Minkevich, I. A. Achievements of Agricultural Science in the USSR. Translated by Robert Farkash and Marc Paenson. Jerusalem: The Israel Program for Scientific Translations, 1961.

Chaplyigin, A. V. The Question of Inter-Basin Water-Economical Ties. Translated by R. V. Kassell for the Headquarters Department of the Army, Office of the ACSI, Washington. Moscow: Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1956.

Commission of the Central Committee of the CPSU (Bolsheviks). History of the Communist P a rty of th e Soviet Union (B olsheviks). Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing House, 1943.

Davydov, L. K. Gidrografiya SSSR. P. II. Leningrad: Izdatel'stvo Leningradskogo Ynibersiteta, 1955.

Davydov, M. M. Velikoye Gidrotekhnicheskoye S troitel1stvo v SSSR. Moscow: Pravda, 1951.

Economic Geography of the USSR. Edited by S. S. Balzak, V. F. Vasyutin, and Ya. G. Feigin. Translated by R. M. Haakin, New York: The Macmillan C o., 1952.

Gavrilov, A. M. and Popov, I. V. Gidrologiya i Harodoye Khozyaystvo. Leningrad: Gimiz, I960.

Glavnoye Planovo-Ekonomicheskoye Upravleniye M inisterstva Sel'skogo Khozyaystva RSFSR, Vsesouznyy Nauchno-Issledovatel1skiy Institut Ekonomiki Sel'skogo Khozyaystva, Sbornik Spravochnykh Materialov Dlya Kolkhozov„ Moscow: Gosudarstvennoye Izdatel'stvo Sel'skokhozyaystvennoy Literatury, 1959.

Gosudarstoennaya Planovya Komissiya. Pyatiletniy Plan Narodno-Khozyay- stvenogo Stroitel1stva SSSR. Vol. II. Pt. 1. Moscow: Izdatel'stvo Planovoe Khozyaystvo, 1930.

183 184

Great Soviet Encyclopedia. 1935 ed., Vols.XXIX and XXXI.

Kostiakov, A, N. Razvitiye Orosheniya v SSSR. Moscow: Pravda, 1951.

Kuzin, P. S. Rezhim Rek Yuzhykh Rayonov Zapodnoy S ibiri, Sevemogo i Tsentral'nogo Kazakhstana. Leningrad: Gidrometeorologish- eskoye Izdatel'stvo, 1953.

Mr kin, S. L. Vodnyye M elioratsii v SSSR i Puti ikh Razvitiya. Moscow: Iz d a te l' stvo Al-cademii Kauk SSSR, I960.

Pavlovoy, G. N, Gidrologicheskiy Ezhegodnik. 1958g. Tom IV: Bassein Kasiyskogo Morya (Bezkavkaza i Spredney Azii). Leningrad: Gidrometeorologicheskoe Izdatel'stvo, 1961.

Proekt Vtorogo Pyatiletnego Plana Razvitya Narodnogo Khozyaystva SSSR (1933-1937). Moscow: Gosplan, 1934.

Sokolov, A. A. Al'bom Gidrograficheskikh Kharakteristik Rechnykh Basseynov Yerropeyskoy Territorii SSSR. Leningrad: Gidro­ meteorologicheskoe Izdatel'stvo, 1955.

Sokolovsky, D. L. River Runoff. Excerpts translated by L. G. Robbins for the United States Navy, Hydrographic Office, Technical Services Branch, Division of Oceanography, Washington, D,C., 1956. Leningrad: Gidrometeorologichesko Izdatel'stvo, 1952.

Suslov, S. P. Physical Geography of Asiatic Russia. Translated by Noah D. Gershevsky and edited by Joseph S. Williams, San Francisco: W. H. Freeman and C o., 1961.

T argets of the Seven-Year Plan fo r Soviet Economy, 1959-1965. (Based upon the Theses of N. S. Khrushchov's Report to the 21st Congress of the Communist Party o f the Soviet Union as published in Pravda on November 14, 1958). London: Soviet Booklets, 1958.

Tsentral'noye Statisticheskoye Upravleniye pri Sovete Ministrov RSFSR. Narodnoye Khozyaystvo RSFSR v I960 godu. Statisticheskiy Yezhegodnik. Moscow: G ostatizdat TsSU SSSR, 1961.

Tsentral'noye Statisticheskoye Upravleniye pri Sovete Ministrov SSSR. Kapital'no.ye Stroitel'stvo V SSSR: Statisticheskiy Sbomik. Moscow: G osstatizdat TsSU SSSR, 1961. ~

Tsentral'noye Statisticheskoye Upravleniye pri Sovete Ministrov SSSR. Narodnoy Khozyaystvo SSSR v 1961 godu. Statisticheskiy Yezhegodnik. Moscow: Gosstatizdat TsSU SSSR, 1962. 185

Tsentral'noye Statisticheskoye Upravleniye pri Sovete M inistrov SSSR. Sel'sko.ye Khozyaystvo SSSR. Statisticheskiy Sbornik. Moscow: Gosstatizdat TsSU SSSR, 19o0.

USSR National Committee on Irrigation and Drainage. Irrigation Development in the Soviet Union from 1949 to 1959. Moscow: Giprovodhoz, i 960 .

Zakon o Pyatiletnem Plane Vosstanovleniya i Razvitiya Narodnogo Khozyaystva SSSR na 1946-1950 gg. Moscow: Gosplan, 1946.

ARTICLES AND PERIODICALS

Akhundov, V. Yu., F ir s t S ecretary of the Uzbekistan Communist P a rty Central Committee, "Speech at the 22nd CPSU Congress, October 20, 1961, Moscow," Pravda, October 21, 1961, p. 5°

Apollov, B. A. "Problem 1 Kaspiysogo Morya," Priroda, Vol. XLVI (April, 1957), p p . 17- 26.

Askochenskiy, A. N. "Rezhimy i Sposoby Poliva Vazhneyshie Voprosy Oroshaemogo Zemledeliya," Vestnik Sal1skokhozyaystvennoy Nauki, Vol. VI (April, 1961), pp. 120-125.

Boguslavskii, V. "Hydrotechnical Construction in Siberia," Sel'skoye Khozyaystvo Sibiri, Vol. VII (July, 1961), pp. 38-42.

Burdiashvili, I. "The Office of Irrigation," Sotsialisticheskoye Sel1skoye Khozyaystvo, Vol. X (August, 1939)} P P . 100-105.

Demidov, S. "New Advances in Soviet Irrigation Farming," Planovo.ye Khozyaystvo, Vol. XXVII (October, 1950), pp. 28-41.

Denisov, P. I., and Shubladze, K. K. "For Better Irrigation Practices," Gidrotekhnika i Melioratsiya, Vol. XI (January, 1959), pp. 7-19.

"Directives of the 19th Congress CPSU and Tasks of the Water Economy," Gidrotekhnika i M elioratsiya, Vol. IV (November, 1952), pp. 3-12.

Dmitriyev, V. S. "Certain Questions in the Development of Irrigation in the Transvolga Area," Zemledeliya, Vol. XXIV (October, 1962), pp. 16- 28 ,

"Draft Directives of the 20th Congress of the CPSU." Sel1skoye Khozyaystvo (Moscow), January 15, 1956, pp, 5-6.

Erlikhman, B. "Hydroenergetic Regions in the USSR and USA," Planovoye Khozyaystvo, Vol. XV (August, 1938), pp. 46-63. 186

Glukhov, I. G. "Oroshenie Podzeranimi Vodami," Gidrotekhnika i Meliorat­ siya, Vol. VIII (September, 1956), pp. 20-30.

Izvestia. 1948-1963.

Khlebnikov, V. "0 Dal'neyshem Ukreplenii Ekonomiki Kolkhozov," Voprosy Ekonomiki, Vol. XV (July, 1962), pp. 49-57.

Knyazev, A. M. "Water-Supplying Construction within the Seven-Year Plan in the North Caucasus," Sel1skoye Khozyaystvo Severnogo Kavkaza, Vol. IV (March, 1961), pp. 68-70.

Kostin, I. S., and Solov'ev, V. A. "Presowing, Abundant Watering is the Best Method of Irrigation for the Transvolga Area." Vestnik Sel1skokhozyaystvennoy Nauki, Vol. Ill (August, 1962), pp. 99-102.

Kruznilin, I. P. "Growing Sunflowers on Irrigated Lands of the Rostov Region," Zemledelie, Vol. XXIV (April, 1962), pp. 40-45.

Kryukov, V. V. "Irrigation of com in the Volga Area with the Use of the Volgagrad Reservoir," Gidrotekhnika i M elioratsiya, Vol. XIII (December, 1961), pp. 11-20.

Mar, N, "Pechora and Volga will join their waters," Nauka i Zhizn, Vol. XXVIII (September, I 96 I), pp. 44-47,

Mel'nikov, V. M. "Improving Irrigation Systems," Gidrotekhnika i Melioratsiya. Vol. XI (January, 1959), pp. 29-30.

Mikhailov, M. N. "Norms and Dates for Watering Agricultural Crops in the Rostov Region," Dostizheniia Nauk i Peredovogo Opyta v Sel'skom Khozyaystve. Vol. I I (May, 1952), pp. 39-44.

Mosienko, H. "Irrigation in the Altay in the Past," Sel'skoye Khozyaystvo S i b i r i , Vol. V (May, 1959 ), pp. 83-84.

Obchinnikov, A. "Economic Effectiveness of Capital Investment in Irrigation," Voprosy Ekonomiki, Vol. X (June, 1957 ), pp. 65-73.

Pravda. 1958-1963.

Raskin, G. "Kapital'nye Vlozheniya v Sel'skoe Khozyaystvo i Ischislenie Effektivnosti," Voprosy Ekonomiki, Vol. XIV (July, 1961), pp. 119-126.

Rashidov, Sh. R,, First Secretary of the Uzbekistan Communist Party Central Committee, "Speech at the 22nd CPSU Congress, October 19, 1961, Moscow," Pravda, October 20, 1961, p. 6. 187

Russo, G. A. "The Problem of Rational Utilization of the Flow of Northern Rivers," Gidrotekhnicheskoye Strotel'stvo, Vol. XXXI (July, 1961), pp. 11-16.

Shaumyan, V. "Certain Irrigation Problems," Sotsialistecheskoye Sel1skoye Khozyaystvo, Vol. XI (August-Septeiuber, 1940), pp. 54-66.

Shipinskiy, I. "Great Plan for the Development of the People’s Economy," Voprosy Ekonomiki, Vol. V (October, 1952), pp. 56-68.

Shubladze, K. K. "Irrigation and Watering of Land in the USSR and Prospects for Development," Gidrotekhnika i M elioratsiya. Vol. XIII (October, 1961), pp. 3-12.

Sotsialisticheskoye Zemledie. September 23, 1952, pp. 2-3.

Sovetskaya Rossiya. February 2, 1961, pp. 1-2.

Stroitel'naya Gazetay. January 27, 1961, p. 2.

"Toward Better Utilization of Irrigated Lands,” Gidrotekhnika i Melioratsiya, Vol. XI (June, 1959), pp. 3-5.

Vovechenko, I. T. "Water Economy Construction during the Seven-Year Period 1959-1965," Gidrotekhnika i M elioratsiya, Vol. XI (February, 1959), pp. 7-13.

"Work Begins on Turning those Rivers Round," Soviet Weekly (London), July 5, 1962, p. 5.

Yavorskiy, 0., and Boguslavskiy, P. "Development of Irrigation in the Krasnoyarsk Territory," Sel1skoye Khozyaystvo Sibiri, Vol. VII (December, 1961), pp. 60- 62.

Zasukhin, S. V., and Mel'nikov, V. M. "Some Urgent Problems in the Development of the Water Economy," Gidrotekhnika i Meloratsiya. Vol. XI (November, 1959), pp. 3-8.

Zubrik, K. M. "Transformations in the Lower Reaches of the Volga," Priroda, Vol. L (July, 1961), pp. 69-72.

NON-SOVIET SOURCE MATERIALS

BOOKS

Blaney, Harry F. and Criddle, Wayne D. Determining Water Requirements in Irrigated Areas from Climatological and Irrigation Data. Washington, D.C.: United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, 1950. 188

ECE/FAO Secretariat of the Agricultural Division of the Economic Commission for Europe. Prices of Agricultural Products and Fertilizers in Europe 196l/62l Geneva: United Nations Publications, 1963.

Israelsen, Orson W. Irrigation Principles and Practices. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 195

Jasny, Naum. The Socialized agriculture of the USSR. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press,1949.

J ilin s k y , J . Travaux Agricoles Hydrotechniques en Russie. 7 Pts. S.-Petersbourg: XI Congress International de Navigation, 1908.

Regional Economic Atlas of the USSR. London: Oxford University Press,

~

Smithsonian Institution. World Weather Records, 1931-1940° Washing­ ton, D.C.: Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, 1947.

Smithsonian Institution. Smithsonian Meteorological Tables. 6th ed. revised. Prepared by Robert J. List. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Special Collection, 1951.

Volin, Lazar. A Survey of Soviet Russian Agriculture. Washington, D.C.: United States Department of Agriculture, 1951.

United States Department of Agriculture. Water, Yearbook of Agri­ culture , 1955. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1955.

W ittfogel, Karl A. Oriental Despotism. New Haven: Yale University P r e s s , 1957.

ARTICLES AND PERIODICALS

Current Digest of the Soviet Press. 1956-1963.

"Economic Councils Grouped in 17 Major Regions,” Current Digest of the Soviet Press, Vol. XIII (November 8, 1961), p p . 16-17.

Halkias, N. A., Veihmeyer, F. J., and Hendrickson, A. H. "Determining Water Needs for Crops from Climatic Data,” Hilgardia: A J o u r n a l o f A g r i c u lt u r a l S c ie n c e , V o l. XXIV (D ecem ber, 1955), p p . 207-233.

Kan sen Uutiset (H elsinki), February 25, 1961.

Lewis, Robert A. "Irrigation Potential of Soviet Central A sia,” Annals of the Association of American Geographers, Vol. Ill (M arch, 1962), p p . 99-1141 189

L'vovich, M. I., et. a l. "The Water Balance of the USSR and its Pro­ spects of Transformation," Soviet Geography- Review and Translation. Vol. Ill (December," 1962), p p . 12-25.

New York Times. 1960-1962.

Penman, H. L. "Estimating Evaporation," Transactions, American Geophysical Union. Vol. XXXVII (February, 1956), pp. 43-50.

Shishkin, N. I. "On the Diversion of the Vychegda and Pechora Rivers to the Basin of the Volga," Soviet Geography. Review and T ran sla tio n , Vol. I l l (May, 1962), pp. 46-57. ”

Summary of World Broadcasts, Pt. 1. Weekly Supplement. Numbers 97-202. Caversham Park, England: Monitoring Service of the British Broadcasting Corporation, 1961-1963.

REPORTS

Agricultural Research Service. Soil Salinity and Irrigation in the Soviet Union. Report of a Technical Study Group. Washington, D.C.: United States Department of Agriculture, 1962.

Santini, Carlo. Irrigation by Canals and Sprinklers. A Report Prepared for the Economic Commission for Europe, Committee on Agri­ cultural Problems, Working Party on Mechanization of Agriculture. Geneva, 1 9 6 1 .

Soil Conservation Service. Soil and Water Use in the Soviet Union. Report of a Technical Study Group, Washington, D.C.: United States Department of Agriculture, 1959.

Spencer, John N. Report of Executive Council Meeting, International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage, Moscow, Russia-August, pp. 2-12, 1961.

UNPUBLISHED MATERIAL

Air Weather Service, Climatic Center USAF. Unpublished records of world clim atic data compiled and processed by the clim atic c e n t e r .

Johnson, D. Gale. "Climatic and Crop Analogies for the Soviet Union: A Study of the Possibilities of increasing Grain Yields." The University of Chicago, Office of Agricultural Economics Re­ search, Paper No. 57l6j December 16, 1957. (Mimeographed)

Lewis, Robert Allen. "A Geographic Appraisal of Irrigation Agriculture in Soviet Central Asia." Unpublished M aster's Thesis, Columbian College, George Washington U niversity, 1959. AUTOBIOGRAPHY

I, Ned Greenwood, was born in Sagar, Arizona, October 19, 1932.

I received my secondary education at Round V alley High School in Eagar,

Arizona. My undergraduate training was at Brigham Young University at

Provo, Utah, where I also received a Master of Science degree in I960.

In September, I960, I was offered an appointment as Graduate Assistant

in the Geography Department of Ohio State University, and later served

as Assistant Instructor in the same department, while completing the

requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy degree. In June, 1962, I

accepted a position as a Geographer with the United States Department

of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service.

190