The ongoing litigation between the states of Karnataka and Tamilnadu regarding the use of Cauvery water is the biggest challenge to the Indian Federal polity. It relates to the sharing of a renewable yet diminishing natural resource, while the demand for the resource is on the increase. Historically, there had been agreements between the Princely state of Mysore and the Madras presidency. After the expiry of the Agreements by efflux of time and the coming into the force of Cauvery Water Tribunal award, the past agreements are just footnotes in a history text. Now, the Award of the Tribunal made under the Indian constitutional process has the force of law and hence deserves respect.
One should not forget that the final award of the Tribunal was passed on 5 February 2007 . The central Government notified the Award of the Tribunal on Official gazette on February 19, 2013. During this time span, namely between the passing of order by the Tribunal and till date, the monsoon has been reasonable. Despite posturing and occasional parochialism, both the states have been able to live with the award of the Tribunal in a normal monsoon year. In all accounts, admittedly, this is a distress year in terms of the total of failure of monsoon. Karnataka has declared that the drinking water needs of the states, which is suppose to be on a much higher pedestal under the National Water Use Policy, will have precedence over the irrigation needs of the lower riparian states. This position is undeniably correct but only partially. That is why a public spirited global citizen haling from Karnataka, Ms Kiran Majumdar Shaw has filed an impleading application in the Supreme court . The court is yet to rule on her locus to espouse the cause. In this scenario, it is imperative to analyse the factors that have resulted in the state of undeclared war between two states of the Indian Federation.
One should not forget that the final award of the Tribunal was passed on 5 February 2007 . The central Government notified the Award of the Tribunal on Official gazette on February 19, 2013. During this time span, namely between the passing of order by the Tribunal and till date, the monsoon has been reasonable. Despite posturing and occasional parochialism, both the states have been able to live with the award of the Tribunal in a normal monsoon year. In all accounts, admittedly, this is a distress year in terms of the total of failure of monsoon. Karnataka has declared that the drinking water needs of the states, which is suppose to be on a much higher pedestal under the National Water Use Policy, will have precedence over the irrigation needs of the lower riparian states. This position is undeniably correct but only partially. That is why a public spirited global citizen haling from Karnataka, Ms Kiran Majumdar Shaw has filed an impleading application in the Supreme court . The court is yet to rule on her locus to espouse the cause. In this scenario, it is imperative to analyse the factors that have resulted in the state of undeclared war between two states of the Indian Federation.
 |
| Cauvery river Ariel view |
Factor No 1. Increased domestic demand for water.
Undoubtedly the Indian lower middle class and middle class are growing at a phenomenal rate., though there are a lot of people living below the poverty line in India. Today we can reasonably state that the incidence of poverty in the Cauvery Belt is much lower than the Indian average. By and large, even villages in this belt are free of open defecation; and thanks to the Drinking water Projects implemented by all the riparian states, many of them have reasonably good access to protected drinking water. Increasingly these drinking water supply projects sought to cover areas which cannot be natural, geological beneficiaries of river water. (Veeranam waters to Chennai and Cauvery water to Bangalore).
Factor No 2. Increased demand from irrigation needs.
The irrigation map of the Cauvery water basin will show that almost 60% to 70% of the water impounded in Mettur dam and in the other tributaries of Cauvery is used up by the population and less than about 15 to 20% of the total water generated in the Cauvery basin is allowed to reach the sea. In fact the Cauvery Tribunal says all the riparian states has ensure that at least 15 TMC of the total water available in the Cauvery River Basin definitely reaches the sea. This is just 2% of the Total water accruing in the Cauvery basin. The current water use pattern in the basin would ensure even much less water would reach sea.
Factor No 3. Many of the Indian Rivers are dying and Cauvery is no exception to it.
Indian mythology if not history or geography tell us that there was a river Saraswathi originating in the Himalayas and flowing towards present day Gujarat and Rajastan. Now we know for sure that there is no river called Sarawathi notwithstanding the Triveni at Allahabad. Many of the rivers die because they are dammed. For the river to be alive it must be flowing. However, the contemporary trends in irrigation management adopted by USA ,USSR, Egypt, China and India increasingly relied on huge impounding Dams at phenomenal cost . Instead we could rely on many check dams that would cost much less ,without the accompanying problem of dam siltation. In fact excessive diversion of the river waters of Amur has resulted in the total drying up of the inland Caspian sea. Besides, it interferes with the environment in a very big way causing serious problems of endangering anadromous fishes and cathadramic fishes. In fact there is a movement in USA demanding the demolition of the existing dams and/or coming up with scientific spill ways to facilitate the movement of these species. In these circumstances, any further efforts of a riparian state to create increased storage capacity in a river system which is over exploited should not be encouraged. In other words let us not dam all the rivers. To keep the rivers alive, ensure that the rivers are flowing, if not throughout the year at least for a good part of the year. Homo sapiens should recognize that the river water is not only for them but also for all other fauna and flora along the river basin. Let us educate our people that when a river water flows into the ocean it is not a waste. It is a natural gift to the estuarine and marine species living in the river confluence area. If this stops it is no longer a river but only a long cess pool.
Factor no 4. Unscientific inter basin diversion of river waters.
Factor No 3. Many of the Indian Rivers are dying and Cauvery is no exception to it.
Indian mythology if not history or geography tell us that there was a river Saraswathi originating in the Himalayas and flowing towards present day Gujarat and Rajastan. Now we know for sure that there is no river called Sarawathi notwithstanding the Triveni at Allahabad. Many of the rivers die because they are dammed. For the river to be alive it must be flowing. However, the contemporary trends in irrigation management adopted by USA ,USSR, Egypt, China and India increasingly relied on huge impounding Dams at phenomenal cost . Instead we could rely on many check dams that would cost much less ,without the accompanying problem of dam siltation. In fact excessive diversion of the river waters of Amur has resulted in the total drying up of the inland Caspian sea. Besides, it interferes with the environment in a very big way causing serious problems of endangering anadromous fishes and cathadramic fishes. In fact there is a movement in USA demanding the demolition of the existing dams and/or coming up with scientific spill ways to facilitate the movement of these species. In these circumstances, any further efforts of a riparian state to create increased storage capacity in a river system which is over exploited should not be encouraged. In other words let us not dam all the rivers. To keep the rivers alive, ensure that the rivers are flowing, if not throughout the year at least for a good part of the year. Homo sapiens should recognize that the river water is not only for them but also for all other fauna and flora along the river basin. Let us educate our people that when a river water flows into the ocean it is not a waste. It is a natural gift to the estuarine and marine species living in the river confluence area. If this stops it is no longer a river but only a long cess pool.
Factor no 4. Unscientific inter basin diversion of river waters.
All the citizens travelling from Bangalore to Mysore cannot miss the impressive Varuna canal as they enter the city of Mysore. Today it will be interesting to do a social audit of this project. In fact, diversion of water from KRS to Mysore irrigation needs will attract as much hostility from Mandya farmers as the release of water to neighbouring Tamilnadu. This is the natural instinct of self-preservation. Let us recognize that the Cauvery in a good year has just about 800 TMC and hence the average dependable yield of the river can never be more than 650 TMC. The total demand for water for all purposes in the Cauvery region would have already shot beyond 1200 TMC. If we are going to allow further inter basin transfer of water under the guise of increasing domestic need, that will only aggravate the situation substantially.
Factor No 5. Cauvery Management Board: A boon or a bane?
In its recent order, the Supreme court has directed the central government constitute a Cauvery water management Authority within a specific time frame. There are news reports about its probable constitution and likely method of functioning . In many ways, this development will bring a semblance of orderliness in a disastrous situation. Apparently, Karnataka is peeved with the development.Tamilnadu has welcomed it. Populist measures promoted by political considerations have encouraged unviable projects like the Varuna Canal and a demand for yet another dam at Mekadatu, despite objections from Karnataka’s own forest department. The following areas are of utmost concern and require action on war footing.
a) Excessive siltation in all the dams of Cauvery Basin.
It is common knowledge that high siltation has substantially reduced the impounding capacity of the large dams. The rate of siltation in a dam closer to the point of origin will be more than dams in the downstream. There has not been a systemic effort to de-silt most of the Cauvery and its tributaries dams ever since they were constructed. Hopefully the Cauvery Management Authority will focus on this serious problem. Drought year is bad. But it is the best year to de-silt all the dams. Hence the state government and voluntary agencies should give top priority to this. It will also increase the storage capacity of all the existing dams substantially. Hopefully Ms Kiran Mujumdar Shaw will do something about that as well.
b)Discharge of untreated effluents and animal waste in river system.
Occasionally we hear complaints from parochial Tamil cinema artists that the Cauvery water received from Karnataka is highly polluted . Adv Thriuvangadathan Mohan of Madras High court will regretfully admit that the pollution level in the Bhavani and Noyyal and Amaravathi rivers are even more alarming. It is still normal for villagers around the Cauvery belt to discharge untreated domestic sewage into the river system. A professional authority with constitutional status will be in a better position to control the discharge of effluents into a river system much more than political governments that often support people who are themselves responsible for pollution.
c) Climate change and global warming.
It is common knowledge that over a period rainfall and temperature at a given place is not constant. The areas that were hitherto forest in the high ranges are increasingly converted into plantations and put to other horticultural use. Excessive deforestation in the catchment areas has not only reduced the rainfall but also aggravated soil erosion and siltation. River beds having good quality sand are exploited to meet the increased demands from infrastructure industry. Cauvery Water Board if and when constituted will analyse the rainfal data of the last 25 years and decide how far the climate change is going to affect the availability of water resources in the Cauvery catchment area. Most of the data is not publicity available. Very often the data is fudged.
d) Determination of distress year.
In the last ten years, (except 2 years where less than 100TMCs where transferred to Tamilnadu) by and large, the state of Karnataka has allowed more water to flow into Tamilnadu than what has been prescribed by the Tribunal. But the catch lies in the timing of actual release of the water. Usually Karnataka awaits for all its reservoirs to become full. This is a legitimate practice. Cauvery Water tribunal gives them the right. Everyone knows that there are 2 rainy seasons in India and Cauvery catchment area receives rains during both the seasons. It has not been unusual for the deficit of south west monsoon to be compensated by the excess of north east monsoon. What the Tamilnadu is more concerned about is the water release in July August, as at that point of time the precipitation over Tamilnadu Cauvery catchment area is virtually nil. Hence the current claim of Karnataka that water in KRS is only for the drinking water purposes proceeds on an assumption that there will be total failure of Northeast Monsoon. Surely Karnataka can proceed on the data available for the worst Northeast Monsoon season and add the expected precipitation in the failure year to the total water availability. Otherwise, Karnataka would like to claim till October that it is a distress year and once after all the dams are full, release water and claim that they have released more water that what is contemplated under the orders of the Cauvery water Tribunal. While Karnataka's contention that the order of the Tribunal is silent about the apportionment of water during a distress year, the language of the Tribunal order makes it clear that Karnataka should release water only from out of its accruals and not out of accumulation in a previous year. So the determination of distress year is very crucial. This determination cannot be left to any of the riparian states. Cauvery Water Management Authority will be in a better potion to determine whether a particular year is a distress year after consulting with the concerned states.
Factor No 6: Role of other (minor)riparian states.
In the present scenario when you hear of the Cauvery water dispute only 2 states come to your mind. The news report suggest that the Cauvery Water board will have 4 stake holders namely Tamilnadu , Karnataka, Kerala and Union territory of Pondicherry. While Tamilnadu and Karnataka will have 40% each , Kerala will have 15% and Union Territory of Pondicherry the remaining 5%. The position of the other two minor riparian states has hitherto not received significant attention. Traditionally, Kerala is a water rich region and the high ranges border in Karnataka being forest areas in a difficult terrain may not be in a position to use all the waters by itself. Similarly, the demands of the Union Territory of Pondicherry are more environmental than agricultural.On the other hand, both the states of Tamilnadu and Karnataka intend using the Cauvery water for increasing the irrigated area. For the first time, the state of Kerala might be in a position to transfer its share of waters to any of the riparian states for a price. Assuming Kerala is entitled for 50TMC of Cauvery water, every year,which normally accrues within its territory during the peak demand season July -August, can it transfer its share during this season to any of the riparian states through an open and transparent auction? Can the Union territory of Pondicherry demand water from Tamilnadu from and out of its accruals, irrespective of whether Karnataka releases them water or not? If so Union territory of Pondicherry will be better off period commencing with water flow from July onwards ending in May, so that the fishery industry in the Cauvery delta will have a chance to survive in a sustainable way.
What the Riparian states should do?
3. All the riparian states should ensure there is much less wastage of precious water by shifting from primitive flood irrigation methods to modern drip and sprinkler irrigation methods .It might also be worthwhile to consider a change in cropping patterns. But this will involve education of farmers and cooperation between riparian states. ( As of now they are not even talking with each other and the their respective lawyers talk in far off places).
Drip Irrigation
There must be more involvement of non partisan volunteer group and discussions on multiple options rather than relaying only on the stereotype solutions of riparian states, which are normally crass and insensitive to the needs and sensibilities of the other riparian states.
4. State of Karnataka should realise that currently they have another water dispute with yet another neighbouring state. With two other states, Karnataka enjoys reasonably good working relationships in sharing other interstate rivers in pursuant of earlier water Tribunal awards. Conflicts and litigation over scare natural resources are inevitable in any society. Successful Litigators know how to manage their image while pursuing litigations. A democratically elected state in a federal polity cannot consider non compliance of Supreme Court decisions as one of its options. Compliance of court orders should be left to the advice and decision of the legal team than all the elected members of Legislative Assembly or parliament. Political will , however, unanimous it may be, cannot be a ground for disregarding judicial decisions. Hence Karnataka should comply with judicial orders and take up their issues with the proposed Cauvery Management Board than opposing the constitution of the board.
3. All the riparian states should ensure there is much less wastage of precious water by shifting from primitive flood irrigation methods to modern drip and sprinkler irrigation methods .It might also be worthwhile to consider a change in cropping patterns. But this will involve education of farmers and cooperation between riparian states. ( As of now they are not even talking with each other and the their respective lawyers talk in far off places).
Drip Irrigation
Well written article..
ReplyDelete