G Rajasekaran | ENS The scheme is irrelevant in most parts of Tamil Nadu. Farm wells are recharged by seepage from the fields; there is no necessity to construct a pit -- C Vaiyapuri CENTRALLY-SPONSORED rain wa- ter harvesting scheme `Artificial Re- charge of Groundwater Through Dug Wells in Hard Rock Areas' (ARDTD- WH) has not fared well in Tamil Nadu and the government is thinking of wrapping up the pilot project. This can have serious implications on the alarmingly low groundwater levels further compounded by urbanisation, which eats up open lands needed for groundwater recharge, say experts. The ambitious project, which com- menced in 2008, had envisioned a huge response, but less than 10 per cent of the farmers who received gov- ernment aid for building ARDTDWH structures actually undertook the work. Tamil Nadu is one of the nine states in which the scheme was imple- mented to recharge hard rock areas. The State was allocated Rs 550 crore under a master plan for artificial re- charge of groundwater. Farmers were given Rs 4,000 in ad- vance as full subsidy towards con- struction of a 16-square feet pit near a well located at a lower gradient. The aim was to recharge the water table itself. The subsidy was deposited di- rectly into the farmer's account through electronic transfer. Ten per cent of the total allocation of funds was given to the authorities for meet- ing administrative costs, for data processing and for creating aware- ness. The scheme is administered by the State and the district-level stand- ing committees. Across Tamil Nadu, 12 lakh wells were targeted to be recharged, out of which 2.31 lakh were enlisted and money released for them. Only 14,000 farmers who received the grant com- pleted the structures, according to officials. As many as 6,000 of the 14,000 recharged wells are in Salem district. Officials claim that this was achieved with only 10 per cent of the working capital released by the NA- BARD. Out of the 40,000 farmers en- listed for the scheme in Salem, 27,000 received a subsidy of Rs 4,000 each. NABARD sources said Namakkal district had fared better than the rest of the districts, with 70 per cent of the funds released there as against an average of 30 per cent. Commenting on the farmers' poor response, C Vaiyapuri, president, United Farmers Association and member district-level standing com- mittee for ARGTDWH, said the scheme was irrelevant in most parts of Tamil Nadu. "Farm wells are re- charged by seepage from the fields; there is no necessity to construct a pit. The pipe connection only dam- ages the parapet wall of the wells, costing farmers more than what they receive for the scheme," he added.