IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE AND HUMAN INTERVENTIONS ON

LOWER INDUS BASIN

Khero Zarif 1
Memon Mansoor 2
Bakhshal Lashari3

ABSTRACT

The Lower Indus Basin represents almost 100 percent of the population of Sindh
province of Pakistan. It provides water supply to irrigated agriculture (83%), ecology
(10%) and domestic and industries (7%) of the province. During the last four to five
decades, the changing hydrological behavior at Lower Indus Basin has been noticed. In
order to evaluate behavioral change affecting water inflows, sediment flushing, water
level rise in floodplain and lag time, the relevant data were collected from the Irrigation
Department from 1961 to 2011.

The mass curve developed has shown that the average annual inflows from 1961 to 1999
were 88 million acre feet (MAF) whereas from 1999-2011 it decreased to 51 MAF. These
variations in water flows have caused low water and land productivity in irrigated areas
of the province. The flow duration curve derived from the data has indicated that 100% of
the water supply to canals occurred 25% of the time and 80% of the supply occurred 68%
of the time. Further, the supply to irrigation canals from 1961-1999 (human interventions
era) ranged between 53 - 95 percent and from 2000-2011(human interventions era and
climate change) was between 48- 76 percent of the design water requirement.

River morphology is dependent on river flows and sediment transport. The sediment
sluicing flow factor (i.e., ratio of downstream flow to canal withdrawal at diversion
barrages) of the last 50 years was calculated between 0.18-1.54 against design operating
requirement of 2. This huge variation has caused shoal formations in all three barrages of
Lower Indus Basin. This changing river morphology has resulted in high flood levels
along the river embankments and extended lag time from 6 days to 22 days from Sukkur
Barrage to Kotri Barrage.

Study concluded that any future interventions should be linked with water availability
and climate change effect, thus, there is a dire need to assess water balance in the Indus
Basin to protect existing irrigated agriculture of Lower Indus Basin.

INTRODUCTION

1
Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department Government of Sindh, Pakistan, zarifkhero@gmail.com
2
Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department Government of Sindh, Pakistan, memonmansoor4@gmail.com
3
Professor, Institute of Water Resources Engineering and Management, Mehran University of Engineering
and Technology Jamshoro, Sindh Pakistan email: bakhshall@yahoo.com

1
2 Seventh International Conference on Irrigation and Drainage

The irrigation system of Lower Indus Basin covers the command areas of three barrages
(Gudu-Sukkur-Kotri) and the coastal area which makes up about 83% of the total arable
land of the province. The Indus River Basin hosts a major network of rivers flowing
between India, Pakistan, China, and Afghanistan. It is comprised of six shared rivers:
Indus, Jhelum, Chenab, Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej [Lower Indus Report (1965), Bashir A.
Malik (2005), Dr Nazir Ahmed (1993), The World Bank Report (2005)]. Region-wise and
the Country-wise distribution of the land in the Basin is depicted in Figure 2.

Indus River

Tarbela Jhelum River

Reservoir

Warsak
Dam Kabul River Chenab River
Mangla
Reservoir Marala
Kala Bagh Reservoir Barrage
(Proposed) Jinnah
Barrage
Khanki
Kurram River Rasul Barrage
Chasma Barrage
Reservoir Qadirabad

Thal Sulemanki
Gomal River Reservoir
(Proposed) Barrage

Islam
Barrage
Taunsa
Barrage

Guddu
Barrage

Sukkur
Barrage

Sehwan Reservoir

Lower Indus Basin

(Proposed)
Kotri
Barrage

Arabian Sea

Figure1: Indus Basin Irrigation System

Pakistan possesses a number of rivers which are tributaries to the Indus. Five main rivers
joining its eastern side are the Jhelum, Chenab, Ravi, Beas and Sutlej beside three minor
rivers the Soan, Harrow and Siran draining certain sub-mountainous areas. A number of
comparatively small rivers join the Indus on the west side. The biggest is the Kabul with
its main tributaries, the Swat, Panjkora and Kunar. Kurran, Gomal, Kohat Tai, Tank and
several other small streams also join on the right side of the Indus [Appraisal of Flood
Management Systems in Pakistan Volume – I&II (1975)]
 USCID will add header here 3

Figure 2: Details of Catchments Area of Indus River System (source: Dr Nazir Ahmed
1993)

The total catchment area of the Indus Basin is approximately 1,165,500 km2 upto the sea
and 761,000 km2 upto Sukkur Barrage. The catchment area lies 56% in Pakistan, 7% in
India, 19% in Jammu & Kashmir, 8% in Afghanistan and 10% in Tibet China.
The upper portion of the Indus is fed by snow and glacial melt waters and converges in
the Punjab region of Pakistan with the five other rivers in the system. The Lower Indus
Basin (LIB) starts just above the Gudu Barrage, the first barrage of Sindh Province, and
terminates at the Arabian Sea. It stretches to some 500 km in the southwest to the Arabian
Sea, and in the south-east to the border with India in the Rann of Kutch.
The climate of Sindh can simply be described as arid and hot and its average annual rain
fall does not exceed 260mm except the rain 2011 which exceeded 1400 mm

Lower Indus Basin System (Gudu-Sea) consists of 3 barrages and 14 irrigation canals
which divert about 48 million acre-feet (59 billion cubic meters) of water annually to
irrigate 14.391 million acres (5.8 million hectares) of land [Operation & Maintenance
Manual (1995)]. To control the river floods 1325 miles of Flood Protective
Embankments and 133 miles of Left Bank Outfall Drains (L.B.O.D) are constructed in
Sindh province.

Indus Waters Treaty 1960: About 33 million acre-feet of water or the complete run-off of
the eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas and Sutlej Rivers) was agreed for the exclusive use of
India. The average annual flow of the Indus basin is narrated in Table 2.. To feed the
Sutlej Valley Project which was debarred from the water right from its original source,
the Treaty provides construction of replacement works to divert the water of Western
rivers to affected areas which includes construction of 2 reservoirs of aggregate storage
capacity of 10 MAF and 9 inter-river links as shown in Table 1 (a&b).
4 Seventh International Conference on Irrigation and Drainage

Table 1(a): Interventions on Indus Basin (Pakistan)

Intervention/ Year of Initial Capacity Intervention/ Year of Initial Capacity

Change Construction (Cusec) Change Construction (Cusec)

Pre-Indus Basin Treaty IWT-1960 Projects Post Treaty Project (continue)

Haveli Project 1939 11,000 Taunsa – Panjnad 1962 12000

Thal Canal 1955 7,500 Chashma – Jhelum 1971 21700
Marala Ravi Link 1956 22,000 Barrages
Taunsa Barrage 1958 36,501 Sidhnai 1965 14100
Projects Completed under Indus Basin Project
Marala 1968 38500
(IWT 1960)
Link Canals Qadirabad 1967 18600
Trimmu – Sidhnai 1965 11000 Rasul 1967 24300
Sidhnai – Mailsi 1965 10100 Chashma 1971 26700
L.Storage in
Mailsi – Bahawal 1965 3900 Dams
MAF
Rasul – Qadirabad 1967 19000 Mangla 1967 4.542 MAF
Qadirabad – Balloki 1967 18600 Tarbela 1976 7.3 MAF

L.C.C Feeder 1967 4100 Chashma – Barrage 1971 0.87 MAF

Baloki – Sulemanki
1967 6500 Gomal Zam Dam 2012 1.14
II

Table 1(b): Interventions on Indus Basin (India)

INDUS JHELUM CHENAB TOTAL

RIVER
Under- Under- Under- Under-
Completed Completed Completed Completed
Const Const Const Const
NO OF
12 4 17 6 16 4 45 14
STRUCTURES
H.P INSTALLED
CAPACITY 100 19.25 1,025.18 369.5 1557.99 1,033 2,683 1,422
(MW)
G.STORAGE
43,305 0 6,764.15 14,881 617,759 66,641.33 667,828 81,522
(Acre-Feet)

This human intervention ultimately affected the water availability to the Lower Indus
Basin. To ensure the parity of distribution of the remnant waters of the Western rivers the
Water Apportionment Accord 1991 was signed by the chief executives of all provinces
and agreed on the water distribution as shown in Table 3.
 USCID will add header here 5

Table 2: Average Annual River Flows of Indus Basin (Source: IWT-1960)

Table 3: Water Apportionment Accord 1991

WATER APPORTIONMENT ACCORD 1991 PROVINCIAL SHARES
(Million acre-feet)
ALLOCATION
PROVINCE
Kharif Rabi Total
PUNJAB 37.07 18.87 55.94
SINDH 33.9 14.82 48.72
NWFP (A) 3.48 2.3 5.78
(B) 1.8 1.2 3.0
BALUCHISTAN 2.85 1.02 3.87
TOTAL 77.34 37.01 114.35
+ + +
1.8 1.2 3.0

The Indus System is largely fed by the snow and glaciers of the Himalayas, Karakoram
and the Hindokush ranges of Tibet, Jammu, Kashmir and the northern areas of Pakistan.
The flow of the river is determined by the seasons. It diminishes greatly in winter, while
flooding its banks in the monsoon months from July to September.

The peak stream flows in July in Upper Indus Basin (UIB) constitutes 32% glacier melt
40% snow melt and 28% rain water which causes major floods in the Basin. The
combination of UIB flow and the synchronization of peaks from Western and Eastern
rivers cause extremely high floods in the Lower Indus Basin.
6 Seventh International Conference on Irrigation and Drainage

Data collection and analysis

In order to perform the statistical analysis of the data, the main provincial data collection
and processing station of the Sukkur Barrage were selected. From the Sukkur Barrage
about 60% of the total demand for agriculture and 80% water supply for the urban areas
of the Lower Indus Basin is diverted. The barrage is located on the Indus River near the
cities of Sukkur and Rohri about 500 km north of Karachi in the upper Sindh area. The
geographical coordinates of the barrage are 68o 50' 53" E and 27o 40' 50" N. Two more
barrages on the Indus River within the Lower Indus Basin, Gudu and Kotri, are located
respectively about 160 km upstream and 380 km downstream of Sukkur Barrage. The
Sukkur Barrage is one of the major structures in irrigation system of Pakistan.

In various countries, guidelines have been formulated for planning of river valley projects
for different purposes. For example, according to the practice in India, irrigation projects
are planned using 75% dependable flow. Hydropower and drinking water projects are
planned with 90% to 100% dependable flows, respectively. The 90% dependability
percentage is also used as a measure of groundwater contribution to stream flow. This
same value can also be used as measure of run-of-the-river hydropower potential (S.K
Jain & V.P Singh, 2003, A. Gustard, A. Bullock and J. M. Dixon 1992, Walter J. Hickel,
1969).

According to Alam (2001), the total quantity of sediment transported annually to the sea
by rivers of the world is about 2x1010 tons or about 13.5 km3 in terms of volume. Of the
total, the Indus River contributes only 480x106 tons into the sea (Holeman 1968).
Assuming that all this sediment enters into the reservoirs of the world, it would take
about 481 years to fill up the estimated 6500 km3 of the storage volume available. The
sediment deposits were also found to raise the bed elevations and flood levels in the
Yellow River. The accumulation of sediments is one of the principal factors that threaten
the longevity of river valley projects.

In order to assess dependable flows, the analysis of the available stream flow data was
conducted for the period of 1961-2011. Empirical frequency distributions (flow duration
curves) of the river and the off taking canals of Sukkur Barrage are prepared to check the
variability of stream flow. To assess the consistency of available flows and the effect of
interventions, the mass curve is prepared to check the existing and under planning water
resources projects in upper Indus Basin. Analysis envisages the effects of the river
regulation, flood control and the sediment load deposition at the barrages and along the
River in the Lower Indus Basin. (HIS, Hydrological Project India- July, 2000).
 USCID will add header here 7

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Water Flow Extremes

Figure 3. Annual Extreme Floods at Sukkur

Figure 3 describes the extreme flood events from 1932 to 2011. As per flood magnitude
classification described by the Irrigation Department, Government of Sindh and), the
flood trends from 1932 to 2011 (80 years) shown in (Table 4). From the data it is
observed that the difference between the minimum flood peaks (170,000 Cfs in 2000 and
121,000 Cfs in 2004) and the maximum flood peak (1,200,000 Cfs in 1976), is
approximately seven to ten times. This large difference between the minimum and
maximum annual discharges reflects the unpredictable nature of the hydrological
condition/variation and behaviors of the Indus River.

Table 4. Flood Magnitude Classification by Irrigation Department

Number of Percentage
Threshold of floods occurring
Flood Severity
Discharge (cfs) between 1932
and 2011
Super Flood Q>900,000 12 15%
Very High Flood 700,000<Q<=900,000 13 16%
High Flood 500,000<Q<=700,000 32 40%
Medium Flood 350,000<Q<500,000 11 14%
Low Flood 200,000<Q<=350,000 9 11%
Normal Flood Q < = 200,000 3 4%
8 Seventh International Conference on Irrigation and Drainage

Figure 4: Mass Curve of Monthly Flows at Sukkur Barrage, 1961-2011

Figure 4 describes the cumulative monthly total flows versus time. The average annual
inflows which were 88 MAF/year up to 1999, has dropped to 51 MAF in the last 13
years. This indicates matured effect of the interventions in upper Indus Basin and the
change in climate.

The reduction in flow and human intervention have caused the sediment deposition along
the River bed from Gudu to the Sea. Subsequently the River morphology has changed
which causes low flow velocity and high flood level along the River. This is one of the
major reasons of extended lag time from average 6 days (medium to high flood) to 17
days (very high to super flood) from Sukkur Barrage to Kotri during the flood time
(Figure 5). Overtopping of the flood embankment during 2010 floods on the right side
downstream of Gudu Barrage is one such example that caused enormous damages to
human life, infrastructure and socio economics of the province of Sindh.
 USCID will add header here 9

Figure 5. Lag Time of the Peaks between Sukkur & Kotri Barrages

Flow variability and system performance

Max Canal Demand 97600 cfs

Min. Canal Demand 35,100 cfs

30% 67%

Figure 6: Duration Curve of Daily Flows at Sukkur Barrage, 1961-2011

Figure 6 states the variability of river flows for the last 50 years (1961-2011). The data
analysis indicates that the availability of maximum canal demand (Kharif-97,600 Cfs)
remained available only for 30 percent of the time and minimum canal demand (Rabi-
35,100 Cfs) was available for the period of 67 percent time. The curve trend also
10 Seventh International Conference on Irrigation and Drainage

indicates that the low flows prevail for longer times as compared to the flows equal to or
higher than the 100% demand. The causes of this reduction in the flows are the human
intervention (combined effect of the implementation of Indus Water Treaty 1960, post
treaty works) and climate change effects.

The reduction of flows in the River is causing operational and management problems for
the canals taking off from barrages in Sindh.

Figure 7. Flow Duration Curve of Sukkur Barrage Canals

The water demand and supply were assessed and are shown in Figure 7. The data analysis
expresses that 100% demand of the canals of Sukkur Barrage during last of 50 years
(1961-2011) is met only for 25% of time, whereas, the 80% demand of the canals is
available only for 68% of time. Thus, the water availability scenario is found below the
standard operating requirement for the canal and barrage operations. This phenomenon is
causing irreparable damage to crops, canal regime and the overall economy of Lower
Indus Basin. Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA) stated that during
shortage periods, the canals should not be stressed beyond 80% of their requirement, as
yields are significantly affected beyond this point (Report of the Technical Committee on
Water Resources, 2005). Table 5 describes the supply to irrigation canals from 1961-
1999 (human interventions era) was ranging between 53 - 95 percent and from 2000-
2011(human interventions era and climate change) was between 48- 76 percent of design
water requirement.
 USCID will add header here 11

Table 5. Average Monthly Demand and Supply to Canals of Sukkur and Kotri Barrages

Water Supplied Through Canals

Average Average of 1961-1999 Average of 2000-2011
Monthly
Month Water Water
Demand % of % of
(MAF) Supplied Supplied
Demand Demand
(MAF) (MAF)
January 0.71 0.62 87.32 0.34 47.89
February 1.88 1.51 80.32 1.18 62.77
March 1.77 1.57 88.70 1.18 66.67
April 2.427 1.48 60.99 1.26 51.92
May 3.470 1.98 57.06 2 57.64
June 5.253 2.8 53.30 2.82 53.68
July 5.602 3.2 57.12 3.35 59.80
August 4.831 3.14 64.99 2.99 61.89
September 4.950 2.65 53.54 2.72 54.95
October 3.277 2.21 67.43 1.94 59.20
November 1.91 1.83 95.81 1.45 75.92
December 1.81 1.65 91.16 1.28 70.72
Annual 37.890 24.640 71.479 22.510 60.25

Figures 8(a&b) also describe the unpredictable behaviors of the water availability during
the crucial cropping periods for the last eleven (11) years.

Figure 8 (a): Canal withdrawal and Water Allocation (1991) of Sukkur Barrage, 2000-
2006
12 Seventh International Conference on Irrigation and Drainage

Figure 8 (b): Canal withdrawal and Water Allocation (1991) of Sukkur Barrage, 2007-
2011

The Figures 8 (a) & (b) explain that the water withdrawals of the Sukkur Barrage Canals
show that the flow is less in all the years than the water demand. It has been observed that
the shortages of water has largely influenced the water distribution that includes
water equity, reliability and water use efficiency. The distribution in the canal commands
is also managed through rotations which have resulted in low yield of major crops
causing socio-economic problems in the province.

Sediment sluicing

The sluicing of sediments becomes successful, when discharge through barrage is 2 times
the discharge of diversion canals (USBR, 1967: Design Standards No.3 Canals and
Related Structures). The sediment sluicing flow factor (i.e., ratio of downstream flow to
canal withdrawal at diversion barrages) of last 50 years was calculated between 0.18-1.54
against design operating requirement of 2 (Table 6). This huge variation has caused shoal
formations in all three barrages of Lower Indus Basin.
 USCID will add header here 13

Table 6: Sediment Sluicing Factor at Sukkur Barrage, 1961-2011

Period 1961-2011 Period 2001-2011

Average
Average
Diverted Average Ratio of Average Ratio of
Diverted
Month flows Downstream flows / Downstream flows /
flows into
into the flows Diverted flows Diverted
the Canals
Canals (MAF) Flows (MAF) Flows
(MAF)
(MAF)
January 0.62 0.80 1.29 0.34 0.52 1.54
February 1.48 0.34 0.23 1.18 0.31 0.27
March 1.56 0.64 0.41 1.18 0.57 0.48
April 1.48 1.46 0.98 1.26 0.82 0.65
May 2.04 2.81 1.38 2.24 1.32 0.59
June 2.87 5.32 1.85 3.13 2.82 0.90
July 3.20 12.90 4.03 3.35 5.99 1.79
August 3.14 20.06 6.39 2.99 11.53 3.86
September 2.65 9.11 3.44 2.72 4.29 1.58
October 2.21 1.59 0.72 1.94 0.92 0.47
November 1.83 0.36 0.20 1.45 0.39 0.27
December 1.65 0.29 0.18 1.28 0.27 0.22

This situation becomes worse in Rabi season, when the ratio of canal diversion flows and
river downstream flow drops to as low as 0.18.

CONCLUSIONS

Flood flow pattern of the last 80 years shows that low to medium floods have been
dominating, and that the super floods and high flood patterns were occasional and of low
duration. The water availability assessed through mass curve clearly describes that from
1961-1999, the water availability was 88 MAF/year which further reduced to 51 MAF
from 1999-2011. These two periods clearly indicate that the human interventions and
climate change have significantly influenced the reduction of flow in the Lower Indus
Basin System. This reduction is not only causing the management problems but also the
destabilization of the canal regime.

The river flows variability assessed through flow duration curve indicates that the water
availability at Lower Indus Basin System significantly varies. This fluctuation/variability
affects crop sowing, crop water need and alive the ecosystem of Lower Indus Basin and
the delta. The last 50 years of data of the canal withdrawals have shown that the full
supply (100% of demand) was available to the canals only 25% of the time and the
availability of 80% of demand, which is the minimum required canal supply to keep
running the canal, was 68% of the time. These two extremes show that the crops do not
get the required amount of water when needed. This variability affects water use
efficiency, water equity and reliability of the system. Thus, the rotation is the only option
for the engineers to run the canals.
14 Seventh International Conference on Irrigation and Drainage

The sediment sluicing flow factor (i.e., ratio of downstream flow to canal withdrawal at
diversion barrages) of the last 50 years ranged from a minimum 0.18 to a maximum 1.54
which is always less than 2.0. This has been one of the major causes of shoal formations
in all three barrages of Lower Indus Basin. Consequently, high flood levels along the
river embankments occurred and travel time of high floods extended from Sukkur
Barrage to the sea, which resulted in huge loss of infrastructure and livelihood of the
people especially in year 2010 flood.

Study concluded that any future interventions should be linked with water availability
and climate change effects, thus, there is a dire need to assess water balance in the Indus
Basin to protect existing irrigated agriculture and eco system and the delta of Lower
Indus Basin.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Authors are highly thankful to the Department of Irrigation Government of Sindh for
financial support required to present this paper in the international conference. Mr. M
Ibrahim Samoon, regional Director ACE Karachi for extending technical help and Mr.
Abdul Aziz soomro incharge Sukkur Barrage control room in collecting comparable and
dependable data for analysis to complete this paper.

REFERENCES

1. A. Gustard, A. Bullock and J. M. Dixon December (1992), Report No. 108, Low
flow estimation in the United Kingdom, Institute of Hydrology Wallingford, U.K
2. Alam, S. (2001), A critical evaluation of sedimentation management design
practice. Hydropower and Dams, Issue One, 54-59
3. An overview & Note on Hydrological Information System, Hydrological Project
India- July, 2000.
4. Appraisal of Flood Management Systems in Pakistan Volume – I (1975), "Flood
Forecasting & Flood Warning Systems, October 1975.
5. Appraisal of Flood Management Systems in Pakistan Volume – II (1976)
"Existing Flood Control Structures & Recommendations for a Planning
Programme, January 1976.
6. Bashir A. Malik (2005), Indus Water Treaty in Retrospect
7. Dr Nazir Ahmed (1993),Water Resources of Pakistan printed by Miraj Din press,
Lahore Sept 1993
8. Lower Indus Report (1965), Physical Resources by Hunting Technical Services
Ltd. and Sir M. Macdonald & Partners, 1965.
9. Operation & Maintenance Manual (1995): Irrigation Department Government of
Sindh Volume 1 & 2, 1995
10. Report of the Technical Committee on Water Resources (2005)
11. S.K Jain & V.P Singh (2003), Developments in Water Science (ELSEVIER)
12. Water Accord (1991), Apportionment of Waters of Indus River System between
the Provinces of Pakistan - Agreement 1991.
 USCID will add header here 15

13. USBR, 1967: Design Standards No.3 Canals and Related Structures
14. Walter J. Hickel (1969), Manual of Hydrology: Part 2. Low-Flow Techniques.
Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1542-A.
15. World Bank Report (2005), Pakistan's Water Economy Running Dry, draft of
June 2005.
16. Working Paper No. 48 Flood Protection - Lower Indus Region Study for Right
Bank Master Plan - December 1990.