Dams, Rivers & People - WordPress.com · Dams and related hydrological fluctuations have magnified the impacts of several other aspects detrimental to fisheries like pollution, sedimentation,

Vol 10| Issue 10-11|November-December 2012 Rs15/-

Dams, Rivers & PeopleWorking for water resources development as if democracy, people and environment matter

Dams are a FishyBusiness 1

Box: Experts on FishLadders 5

FAC Violating the FRA 2006 6

Thirsty Rivers, BygoneFishes, Hungry Societies 7

Loksabha Quotes on Ganga 9

How Many Damson Chenab: 11

The Himalayas:High Dam Density 14

Yamuna: National Shame 16

Whitewash of MAHA Scam 18

Maharashtra WaterDisputes 21

Indore Urban Water Study 24

Methane Emission of Dams 26

Inspiring Microhydro 27

Groundwater Mining andSealevel Rise 28

Ganga Water, Carcinogenic 29

Recognizing Rightsof Rivers 30

Book Review: Bagmati 32

Index

T he above was just the mostblatant example of impacts ofdams on fish, an indicator of

riverine health. Impacts of dams onRiverine biodiversity, including fishbiodiversity, have been devastating forIndian Rivers. This has been stressedmany times by fisher folk as well asstudies by Central Inland FisheriesResearch Institute (CIFRI), Central MarineFisheries Research Institute (CMFRI),several universities, independentresearchers, NGOs and even the lastthree Five Year Plans. Dams have beensingled out as the main reason behindfisheries collapse in major rivers likeGanga and its tributaries, Krishna,Mahanadi and Narmada, to name a few.Dams and related hydrologicalfluctuations have magnified theimpacts of several other aspectsdetrimental to fisheries like pollution,sedimentation, wrong fishing practicesand invasion by exotic introduced fishspecies.

Dams have jeopardised the livelihoodand nutritional security of more than10.86 million fisherfolk in India, withoutany compensation, redressal ormitigation. There is no body entrustedwith the protection of aquaticbiodiversity, no separate Ministry forfisheries, no law for protecting fish

diversity (the Fisheries Act, 1897 dealsonly with edible species), no law forprotecting river flows, no law forenabling fish migration, no law forcompensating affected Fisherfolk, to lista few. These are very serious gaps, withimpacts on ecology as well as sociology.

In this scenario, proposals for moredams which will fragment riversfurther and divert flows away from theriver have to be looked at very carefully.Unfortunately, most of the decisionstaken during the meetings of ExpertAppraisal Committee (EAC under theMinistry of Environment and Forestsrecommends environmental clearancesto river valley and hydropowerprojects), and the number of damsreceiving environment clearance atvarious stages, without adequateattention to impact on fish andmitigation measures, is very disturbingand needs to change.

EAC discussions and decisions arebased on EIAs submitted by theproponent and these are routinely of apoor quality. Most of the EIAs severelyunderestimate fish diversity, forexample Environment ImpactAssessment of 200 MW Gundia HEPdone by KPCL which concludes thatthere are ‘no rare or endemic species

DAMS ARE A FISHY BUSINESSIn recent times, fish-loving Bengalis have been a troubled lot. The supply ofcoveted Hilsa or Ilish fish, from Bangladesh has reduced to a trickle. Bangladeshimposed an import ban on Hilsa and the price in Indian markets soared to over1500 Rs/ kilo. Mamta Banerjee actually requested the Centre to intervene andconvince Paschim Banga to send more Ilish to Bengal. Deepa Dasmunshi raisedthis issue first when Bangladesh Leader of Opposition, Khalida Zia visitedPrime Minister in October 2012. And she was told the real reason. Padma, adistributary of Ganga River, famed for Padma Ilish is facing an acute drought-like situation. What was not stated was that Farakka Barrage built on theGanga just before it enters Bangladesh, has been responsible for this and thenear extinction of Hilsa, which once was found much beyond Allahabad.

C o n t a c t :Himanshu Thakkar, ParineetaDandekar, Neena Koshy, Ganesh GaudDams, Rivers and PeopleC/o 86-D, AD Block, Shalimar BaghDelhi - 100 088, India.Ph: + 91 11 2748 4654/[email protected]:www.sandrp.in

Dams, Rivers & People November-December 2012

2

fish species in the river’. Not only doesthe region have endemic fishes, theregion is one of the most important sitesin India for protection of fish diversityas clarified by many studies in theregion including one conducted byIndian Institute of Sciences, Bangalore.And this is just indicative, there arescores of such examples which can bereadily provided.

The EAC needs to lay clear norms forEIAs about fish diversity in the region,dependant livelihoods, communityconserved fish sanctuaries: impact ofdams on all these, in situ mitigationmeasures, including eflows and onlyafter that ex situ measures likehatcheries.

Unfortunately, an analysis of EACdecisions during the past nearly threeyears1 reveals:

1. The EAC has demanded for fishpasses and fish ladders at the time ofrecommending environmentalclearance for only six projects out of157 projects considered by it forclearance at stage I or II. Even in thesix cases, this important condition isnot clearly or strongly worded.

2. The EAC has demanded for fishpasses/fish ladders at the time ofgranting/reconsidering Term ofReferences for only nine projects andeven here, the wording has beenambiguous. For example, in case of 50meters high Mago chu Dam in TawangBasin in Arunachal Pradesh, the EACsays ‘fish pass may be considered’. Orfor 128 MW Jelam Tamak inUttarakhand, it says fish pass ‘may’ beprovided.

3. For scores of dams, fish passes andladders have not at all beenrecommended, though there is a strongreason to do so.

For example, in case of 36 MW Chanju Iproject whose barrage is only 16 metreshigh or 17 MW Chanju II HEP on ChanjuNallah in Himachal Pradesh, the EAC

has not recommended a fish ladder. Ithas simply taken the word of thedeveloper that there are no fish inChanju Nallah. Actually Chanju Nallahand Siul Nalla where the projects willcome up are on the Negative Listprovided by the Himachal PradeshFisheries Department, recommendedfor In situ protection of fish2.

In case of Baspa Barrage, which is onBaspa River, also on the negative list,

the EAC have not recommended aladder though the barrage is just 16meters above river bed.

The EAC must immediately reconsidertheir decisions on Baspa, Chanju I andII projects, reject the projects andrecommend strong punitive measuresagainst the developer, as per the stepsprovided in EIA notification. EAC alsoneeds to take steps to ensure that it doesnot get misled like this in future andtake wrong decisions.

Same is the case with dams in Lahualand SPiti region, famed for its troutfishing. For many dams in EasternHimalayan Biodiversity hotspot, noladders or passes have beenrecommended.

200 MW Gundia Dam coming up onGundia River in Kumaradhara

Netravathi Basin, where just in the pastsix months six new fish species werediscovered3, no fisheries managementplan is in place while recommending avery erroneous environmentalclearance. This region is especiallyimportant for in situ protection of fishbiodiversity and is a freshwater fishbiodiversity hotspot in the WorldHeritage Site of Western Ghats.

In case of Renuka dam on Giri river inHimachal Pradesh, the CentralEmpowered Committee of theSupreme Court and the SupremeCourt itself had directed that fishladder be constructed, but thedeveloper, EIA consultant, the EAC andthe MoEF all ignored that statutorydirection.

The above list is only an indicative list,fish ladders/ passes are notrecommended for most dams at thetime of granting TORs orEnvironmental Clearances (EC).

4. While some dams arerecommended fish ladders or passes,some are not without assigning anyreasons for such inconsistencies.

Decisions of the EAC seem totallyinconsistent, unscientific and erratic.

For example, in case of 50 meters highMago Chu in Arunchal Pradesh, EAChas said fish pass may be considered,but for 42 meters high Dinchang Damthe EAC explicitly said: “The proposalfor providing fish ladder in a 42 m highdam was not appreciated by the EACas fish ladder in high dams is failureeverywhere.”

However, for the same dam, whilereconsidering TOR for revised capacityfrom 90 MW to 360 MW, the EAC says“Committee felt that the issue cannotbe left loose ended for a study. TheProponent needs to agree to provide fishpassage for which the Proponentagreed.” Firstly, EAC needs to ensurethat decisions made one stage are notreversed at another without assigning

21ST NOVEMBER IS OBSERVED ASTHE WORLD FISHERIES DAY

On this occasion, SANDRP made thissubmission to the Ministry of Environmentand Forests, specifically it’s Expert Ap-praisal Committee which sanctioned RiverValley and Hydropower Projects on urgentneed to pay attention to fisheries relatedissues while sanctioning dams.

The submission was endorsed by over20 fisheries scientists, researchers,organisations and activists, including amember from National Board for Wildlife, arenowned Dolphin conservationists andmany authorities of fish diversity.

1 Analysis of decisions from 34th EAC Meeting: Jan 2010 to 61st EAC Meeting: Oct 20122 http://hpfisheries.nic.in/pdf/Negative_list_rivers_etc.pdf3 http://www.deccanherald.com/content/264870/researchers-stumble-species-fish.html (SANDRP’s submission to the EAConFish Diversity

affected by Gundia Dam, October 2012)


34 http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/resources/salmonhatchery/risks.cfm; http://phys.org/news/2012-05-hatchery-fish.html

any reasons. Such lack of consistencyin EAC decisions for same projects butat different stages have been seen inother cases too like the Seli hydroproject on Chenab River in HimachalPradesh. Secondly, the EAC needs todefine fish pass and fish ladder clearlyas in normal parlance, the phrases areinterchangeable and there arenumerous designs for fish passes andladders.

In many countries, including Bhutan,fish ladders are built effectively for highDams. In Bhutan, for the 60 MWKurichhu Dam built by India NHPC, afunctioning fish ladder for GoldenMahseer Migration has been providedand is reported to be working well.

While the EAC has recommended fishladder for some irrigation projects, ithas not done so for many irrigationprojects with comparatively low damson biodiversity rich rivers like Kanhan,near Pench National Park inMaharashtra or Kundalia MajorIrrigation Project on River Kali Sindhin Madhya Pradesh, a tributary of riverChambal, or the Indira Gandhi SagarProject on Wainganga River, which isdestroying the livelihoods of 15000fisherfolk only in the upstream, whilethe downstream impacts are not evenestimated. More than 4 lakh peopledepend on Wainganga River forfisheries alone.

The MoEF and EAC to be consistent inrecommending fish passes and ladders,based on unbiased, scientific studiesand local participation.

5. Hatcheries and Fish Farms areincreasingly being recommended byEAC when impacts of these on riverinebiodiversity are entirely unstudied andunmonitored by MoEF. Wheneffectiveness of these measures is notknown, millions of rupees areallocated for the purpose without anassessment of what happens to themoney.

The mainstay of all FisheriesManagement Plans for hydroelectricprojects seems to be hatcheries,reservoir fisheries and fish farms.However, there has been no studycommissioned by the MoEF orrecommended by the EAC or by anycredible agency to study the impacts ofthese measures on riverine fisheries,livelihoods of local fisherfolk which aredestroyed by the projects or the fishdiversity in the river.

In this process, state fisheriesdepartments are receiving huge sumsof money from the private developersas compensation and for developinghatcheries and fish farms. This seemsto be the main reason for easily-acquired NOCs from State FisheriesDepartments.

In Himachal Pradesh alone,the Department of Fisheriescharges “compensation @ Rs. 0.50 lakhsper MW power capacity and Rs. 0.50 lacs per km from tail race to weir of the project in case of macro projects being envisaged on the run of the river development.” Bajoli HoliProject envisages paying a

compensation of Rs. 97.75 lakhs to thefisheries Department, in addition ofdevelopment charges for farms andhatcheries. Luhri EnvironmentalManagement Plan has an outlay of Rs.346.57 Lakhs for fisheries managementplan, to be paid to fisheries department.No wonder then that the FisheriesDepartments are giving NOCs to mosthydel projects, including those comingup in Negative List of Streams for insitu fish conservation.

What studies are conducted to ascertainthe impact of these farms of riverinefish diversity? The EAC is fast inrubbishing fish ladders for high dams,though the same are being usedworldwide after some seriousresearch. But, the EAC does not seemto have any doubts about the efficacyof Hatcheries and Fish Farms.

However, it has been proved the worldover that hatcheries help only a fewtargeted species (often exotic species)and not the biodiversity of the river. Onthe other hand, fish from hatcheriesmay actually be detrimental to wildriverine fish, as they may carrydiseases4. In India too, hatcheries arebreeding bigger species, commercialvarieties and exotics like exotic carpsand Rainbow Trouts in most of theHimachal Hatcheries. They do not helpfish biodiversity and naturalpopulation restoration, nor are theytargeted to protect indigenous species.They have impact on fish diseases, limitthe gene pool, and affect invaluablebiodiversity. Measures like Hatcheries,fish farms, reservoir fisheries alsochange the ownership of fisheries froma common pool resource to a controlled

Fish Ladder on 60 MW Kuricchu Dam in Bhutan formigration of Golden Mahseer built by Indian NHPCPhoto: drukgreen.bt

Hilsa’s fate hangs in a balance Photo: Travel.outlook.com


4

resource, severely affecting security ofthe people who depend on riverinefisheries for nutrition and livelihoods.

In case hatcheries and fish farms areunavoidable and these and reservoirfisheries are the only option, they canbe set up on the lines of communitymanaged reservoir fisheries like onDimbhe Dam near Pune organised bythe efforts of Shashwat5.

Why is the EAC not recommendingother options like innovative and wellresearched fish ways, fish passages andladders and actual in situ conservationof fish by protected rivers? RiverTirthan in Himachal Pradesh is the onlyexample in India of a River protectedfor its rich fisheries. We urgently needto replicate such initiatives for otherbiodiversity rich rivers and stretchesin all states and all kinds of aquaticecosystems.

6. In situ Conservation of fish andaquatic biodiversity and protection ofrivers needs to be looked at moreseriously. For this, a number thingsneed to be changed like:

a. Environmental flows: The currentnorm of recommending 20% of averagelean season flow in a 90% year, 30% ofaverage monsoon flow and 20-30% offlow for months in transition is toolittle, ad-hoc, unscientific and not river

and species specific. For many fishspecies which need flooding as a cue forspawning and upstream migration,30% of monsoon flows will not help.Project specific, river specific eflowsstudies, based on the ecology andsociology of the river need to beundertaken by independentorganisation, with local participation.State of art methodologies like theBuilding Block Methodology need to beexplored instead of ad hoc, unscientific‘rule of thumb’ methods currentlyadopted. In the absence of e-flows, fishpasses and ladders will have nomeaning.

It has been proved beyond doubt thatfisheries collapse in most of the rivershave occurred due to absence offreshwater flows and spawning cues.Environmental flow allocation toestuaries like Krishna is extremelycrucial. Maintenance of artificial floodshas been practiced in many countriesin Africa which has led toimprovements in fisheries and haveregularized high flow volumes well.These techniques need to be added toyear-round regular maintenance of e-flows.

b. Release of environmental flowsthrough fish passes/ ladders and notturbines: Eflows need to be linked withfish passes. While well researched

innovative designs of fish ladders/passes need to be explored, all the eflowsreleases should take place through thesefish ways and not additional, smallerturbines, as is being done now. It is wellknown that fish face high mortality andinjuries even passing through turbines,so migration is impossible. If assuranceof continuous flow is the concern thenan ungated opening in the dam justbelow the MDDL (minimum DrawDown Level) adequate to assure leanseason eflows should be mandated.

c. Distance between Dams:The currentonslaught of cascade dams onbiodiversity rich rivers like Alaknanda,Bhagirathi, Chenab, Sutlej, Siang,Dibang, Subansiri, Teesta, Tawang,Kameng, Lohit, Netrawathi, Narmada,etc ., will be disastrous to fishbiodiversity. The current norm of EAC(though the EAC does not accept it as anorm, is what is being recommended)of a mere 1 kilometre between twohydropower dams will have veryserious impacts on fish biodiversityand fisheries. This distance should bebased on study of fish and riverinebiodiversity for each river by anindependent credible agency (not EIAconsultants paid by the projectdevelopers without ANY credibleaccountability mechanism) done beforemore than one projects start gettingallocated on any river. The EAC itselfhas stated in its 56th Meeting thatminimum 50% of the river should beleft free flowing. MoEF and EAC needto conduct studies about optimumdistance between two dams, based onthe carrying capacity, ecology andsociology of the basin. This studyshould be done prior to recommendingenvironmental clearances (EC) and notdelinked from ECs.

d. Monitoring and compliance:Monitoring and compliance of actualeflows releases, functioning of fishladders, impacts of hatcheries and fishfarms on diversity and local livelihoodsneeds to conducted by a legallyempowered project specific team with50% participation from localcommunities and civil society groups.

Population of Golden Mahseer is fastly declining due to its fragmentation due to dams andbarrages on rivers that form their natural habitat. Photo: Travel.outlook.com

7 http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-07-10/pune/32617839_1_tribal-farmers-catchment-area-villages


5

e. Exclusion of dams from EIAnotification: The EIA notification of Sept2006 that is currently being followedhas excluded large dams for drinkingand industrial water supply,hydroelectric projects below 25 MWand also control measures likeembankments from its purview. Theassumption that these are benignmeasures with low environmental

impacts (including on fisheries) isclearly wrong. Embankments onBrahmaputra have resulted in declinedcarp fisheries while small hydroprojects in Western Ghats of Karnatakaare seriously damaging invaluable fishbiodiversity and community fishsanctuaries.

The MoEF urgently needs to change thisto include all large dams (as per CWC/ICOLD/ WCD definition), all hydroprojects above 1 MW and allembankment projects for Environmentclearance requirements. This will alsohelp protect fisheries and riverinebiodiversity. The River Regulation Zone(RRZ) Notification needs to bepromulgated to protect riparian

habitats along rivers and dams whichplay a crucial role in fish breeding andpopulations.Many fish are apex feedersin most riverine systems and fishdiversity and abundance, along withvital population processes (migration,recruitment, spawning etc.) indicatethe overall health of the river.Freshwater fisheries, which are an

important component of our richfreshwater biodiversity and a source ofsubsistence for millions of Indians,should be given their due by the MoEF.

This is even more relevant and urgentin the context of climate change whichis leading to major hydrologicalchanges and affecting habitats. Damsare compounding habitat loss leavingno adaptive options for people orbiodiversity alike. Let us hope that theMoEF and EAC together look at in situconservation of fish urgently andseriously and help protect rivers andcommunities in the process.

1. Dr. A.J.T Johnsingh, Eminent

Wild Life Biologist, Member NationalBoard for Wild Life StandingCommittee and Member, National TigerConservation Authority, Kerala,[email protected]. Dr. Sunil K. Choudhary,Principal Coordinator, VikramshilaBiodiversity Research & Education Center,University Dept. of Botany, T.M.BhagalpurUniversity, Bhagalpur,[email protected]. Dr C.P. Shaji, Fisheries Scientist, Kerala,[email protected]. Dr. Prakash Nautiyal , HNBGarhwal University, Dehradun,[email protected]. Dr. R. Rajkumar, Associate Professor,Research and PG Dept. of Zoology,Govt.Victoria College, Palakkad, Kerala,[email protected]. Dr. Nilesh Heda, Fisheries Scientist, KaranjaLad, Washim, Maharashtra,[email protected]. Dr. Shrinivas Badiger, Water, Landand Livelihoods Expert,Karnataka,[email protected]. Dr. Latha Anantha, River Research Centre,Kerala,[email protected]. Dr. Biju Kumar, Associate Professor andHead, Department of Aquatic Biologyand Fisheries University of Kerala,Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala,dr [email protected]. Dr. K.H. Amitha Bachan , ResearchDirector, Western Ghats Hornbill Foundation,AranyakThrissur, Kerala,[email protected]. Nachiket Kelkar, Fisheries Scientist, workon Ganges River Dolphin, NatureConservation Foundation,Karnataka,[email protected]. Panduranga Hegde, Shrishti ,Karnataka,[email protected]. Nisarg Prakash, Otter Expert, NityataFoundation,Karnataka,[email protected]. Ranjan Panda, Water Initiatives Odisharanjan,[email protected]. Jiten Umnam, Citizens Concern for Damsand Development, Manipur ,[email protected]. Committee on the Protection of NaturalResources in Manipur17. Centre for Research and Advocacy Manipur18. Ravindranath, River Basin Friends,Dhemaji, Assam, [email protected]. Shankar Sharma, Power Policy Analyst,Karnataka,[email protected]. Samir Mehta, International Rivers,Mumbai, samir@ inetrnationalrivers.org21.Himanshu Thakkar ([email protected]), Parineeta Dandekar ([email protected]), SANDRP

WHAT EXPERTS SAY ABOUT FISH LADDERS AND PASSESFish ladders/ passes are a controversial topic in India. While the MoEF and EACwould like us to believe that fish ladders do not work for our high dams, ladders formuch higher dams (Ex. Pelton am in Oregon, Kurichhu Dam in Bhutan) exist and havebeen functioning well. SANDRP interviewed several fish and conservation expertsfrom across India and Bhutan about fish ladders and passes. Fisheries Scientistsand Experts are unanimous in asserting that we do not have any studies to back theassumption fish ladders/ passes are ineffective in India. We need more studies forour species as “our fish are not Salmon”.

Nor do we have studies about the functioning, monitoring, management and effi-cacy of the rare few existing fish ladders ( like at Narora Barraga, Hirakud, Harike,older Bhimgouda Barrage, Farraka Barrage, etc.) we have.

Questions to CIFRI solicited a response that MoEF takes fisheries mitigation veryseriously and that CIFRI is working on a report on ladders.

Interestingly, experts were also unanimous in stating that hatcheries should be usedas a last resort, if all in situ mitigation measures fail. In their opinion, hatcheries helponly few commercial species, while loss of original gene pool and indigenousbiodiversity goes unnoticed. Some experts also raised questions about the unac-countable and opaque way of functioning of hatcheries like the Tehri HydropowerDevelopment Corporation's hatchery for Tehri Dam.

Interviewed experts include Dr. Shivakumar from WII, Dr. Prakash Nautiyal fromGarhwal University, Nachiket Kelkar from NCF, Dr. Shyam Bhat from Karnataka Fish-eries Department, WWF India and Karma Choppel from Bhutan Environment Com-mission.

ENDORSED BY

contd on page 10


6

1 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/environment/developmental-issues/Kishore-Chandra-Deo-accusesenvironment-ministry-panel-of-giving-away-forests-in-violation-of-laws/articleshow/17301883.cms

According to the above letter, “Asper the Scheduled Tribes andOther Traditional Forest

Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights)Act, 2006 (Forest Rights Act of 2006),clearance for forest diversion forany project cannot be given withoutrecognition of the rights of thepeople in and around the forests andconsent of the gram sabha for suchdiversion. The Forest AdvisoryCommittee hence should not beconsidering any project proposalsunless there are gram sabha resolutionsfrom the affected villages certifying thatindeed forest rights have beenrecognised and that they are givingconsent for the diversion. This is astatutoryrequire- ment under theForest Rights Act.” In addition, enviro-nment ministry order of August 2009

aligning its processes to the ForestRights Act requires that the FAC seekconsent letters from affected tribals andforest-dwellers before giving overforests to the industry.Despite these strong provisions, thatletter stated that FAC continued to handover forest patches to industry indisregard of the law. "I am anguishedto find that even five years afterenactment of FRA, the statutory FACcontinues blatantly to ignore theexistence of both this law and the 2009order. How is it (the FAC) thencontinuing to ignore people's rights?Why is it misleading both projectproponents and the public intobelieving that these projects are incompliance with the law when theyoften are not? The FAC's abdication ofresponsibility will produce conflict,

“FOREST ADVISORY COMMITTEEBLATANTLY VIOLATING FOREST RIGHTS ACT”

In a very significant letter to the Environment Minister 1dated 21st November 2012, Tribal Affairs Minister KishoreChandr Deo stated that Forest Advisory Committee (FAC) has flouted not only the orders of its nodal ministry but also thelaw of the land by blatantly violating the Forest Rights Act 2006.

MARKETS NOT A SOLUTION FOR AN ECONOMY WHERE 47% OFITS POOR RELY ON THE HARVEST OF NATURAL RESOURCES

47%-89% GDP of India's rural poor comes from natural resources: UN, In a reportpresented at the CBD COP 11 in Hyderabad in October 2012, the United NationsEnvironment Programme (UNEP) analysed income of 352 million poor Indians andfound that 47% of their GDP comes from use of natural resources such as harvestingof forest produce, collecting medicinal herbs from forests and fisheries. The reportestimated that the ecosystem services and other non-marketed goods account forbetween 47% and 89% of the 'GDP of the poor' for India.

Pawan Sukhdev, UNEP's Goodwill Ambassador and team leader of TEEB (The Eco-nomics of ecosystems and Biodiversity) said the markets were not a solution tosocial problems and some cases, they tend, to complicate the matters. "Conven-tional GDP is not relevant to poor as it does not benefit them as much as the rich".India has about 380 million poor, half of whom are dependent on ecosystem servicesfor daily sustainability. Even the Prime Minister said at the CBD that, "Biodiversitybased livelihood options form the basis of rural survival. Living at the periphery ofsubsistence, the poor are the most at risk from biodiversity loss".

At the same time, according to MoEF Press Release, India has diverted 11.44 lakhhectares of forest land, for projects since Forest Conservation Act came into force in1980 for developmental projects. This means an annual average of 35,775 hectares offorest land diverted, we do not know the extent of its impacts on the rural GDP,wellbeing or ecological health. (The Hindustan Times 171012)

harassment, injustice, delays andlitigation. We have already seen severalsuch instances, resulting in eitherviolation of people's rights or in delaysand cancellation of projects."He condemned the FAC's recentpractice of merely including a"condition" that the FRA should becomplied with before final clearance isgiven. This is lip service that thiscommittee has been doing to avoid thelaw. He notes that "this is only addingto the confusion ... project proponentswill be placed in the odd position ofhaving received "in principle" clearanceas well as environmental and otherstatutory clearances, only to be deniedat the very last stage as a result of FRAviolations. This would result either indelay in final clearance, or in Stategovernments and project proponentsseeking to evade the law entirely."He has further said, “We are inagreement that this is a very disturbingscenario as it is a violation of the legaland constitutional rights of ourcountry’s poorest and mostmarginalised citizens. It is alsoresulting in growing conflict, protests,and litigation, and hence in delays indecision making.”Significantly, he stated that the tribalaffairs ministry too should berepresented on the FAC. Asked aboutDeo's letter, Natarajan stated that shehas received the letter and she intendsto reply in detail to reiterate “that weare implementing the FRA stringently.”In the meantime, in the upcoming FACMeeting for Nov 26-27 makes nomention of the FRA or Gram Sabharesolution while considering clearanceto projects. SANDRP and a number oforganisations have written to the MoEFand FAC about this serious andcontinuing farce.


7

THIRSTY RIVERS, BYGONE FISHES, HUNGRY SOCIETIESA young naturalist and fisheries expert writes about the bygone fish and biodiversity of Ganga, which nurtured many in herwake and how dams changed the ecology of the lower and middle Ganga basin beyond recognition.

More than seven decades ago,there used to be afacultative1 clan of monsoonal

fishers in the interfluve region of theGhaghra and Sarjyu rivers in easternUttar Pradesh. They would be involvedotherwise in farming and relatedactivities, but a time would come inSeptember when they would go seekingHilsa, that tasty fish running up thewaters of the Ganges and into theGhaghra River, all the way from WestBengal. The Hilsa Tenualosa ilisha, aclupeid fish species, used to makeannual migrations upriver forspawning in the monsoons, throughoutthe Gangetic rivers. With thatmigration it would not only symbolizean eternal and connected river, but alsothe arrival of a nature-borne delicacyfor poor fisher folk. In the Ghaghrabasin, that delicacy is not even inanybody’s memory now. The Hilsa,except in estuarine Bengal, has becomeextinct almost everywhere today dueto the construction of the Farakkabarrage across the Ganges. This barragewas constructed in 1972-73 andthereafter led to a complete blockade intheir spawning migratory routesupriver, eventuating in a collapse of theonce-viable commercial Hilsa fisheryupstream. That was why I wasastonished on hearing from theGhaghra fishers that the Hilsa rangedso north once. Even British records havenot mentioned the occurrence ofmigrating Hilsa much north ofAllahabad.

The Hilsa is just one tragic example ofmany of its cousins that have met thesame fate because of large dams. Theyellow catfish Mystus menoda used tobe another such sought-after seasonalfishery. Most fishers have not seen the‘Belonda’ as it is locally called, in severalyears. The trend of declines in ‘yellowmigrant catfishes’, irrespective of actual

species, seems to be a mysterious yetcommon feature to all perennial riversof India, from the Cauvery to theHimalayan foothill streams. Enormousdeclines have been noted for Mahseerin the southern region of the Ganges, tothe tune of ‘ecological extinctions’,where these species are not able to

perform their ecological roles or provideresources to fisheries anymore. Giantcatfishes of our rivers, such as theGoonch Bagarius yarrellii, Siloniasilondia and Pangas Pangasiuspangasius that once grew to 200 kilosand above, have been nearly lost too.The freshwater stingray Himanturasephen is now a creature of theimagination. The freshwaterMacrobrachium prawn fishery of themiddle and lower Ganges upstream ofFarakka has breathed its last. Ournative carps, so highly valued by one

and all that eat fish, have showntremendous declines (up to 70%) due todam regulation of river systems.

Fisheries collapse from dams has alsoacted in the reverse order, for speciesthat migrate to the sea to breed andswim upriver to develop as adults. Themost notable of these declines has beenthat of the Anguilla benghalensis eel orthe Bannbir or Bannbouchh in localterms. This eel is not a sensitive animal.

Apart from being a good, powerfulswimmer it can ‘walk’ on flooded ricefields and marshy wet grassland untilit reaches the next water body. It usessurface water connectivity of floodedwetlands by powering itself with largeair sacs. Despite this, fishersthroughout north and central Indiareport that these large eels have nearlyvanished. If even the hardy eel finds nowater, it says everything about the rateat which crucial fish habitats are beingdissipated. Also, dams have seriouslylimited the influx of freshwater thatmaintains estuarine conditions andprocesses. ‘The sea is already at thedoorstep of people near Sonakhali’ saysan old fisher about 30 km inside fromthe Hooghly-Sunderbans delta mouthsat the Bay of Bengal.

Historically important commercialfishes such as the sawfish or the ‘combfish’ or Chiruni Maachh in West Bengal,have become extinct in the estuary. Thisfish was a predatory unique specieswith a side-barbed snout. The increasein salinity of estuaries because of lowfreshwater releases by dams acrossIndia is also leading to destruction ofmangroves and increased coastalerosion. Thus dams have not onlyaffected the fishes but also their homesand nurseries. Seeing the impressivepictures of these unique river giants, oneoften feels a sense of guilt, along withloss. The bygone fishes of the Gangetic

1 Not necessarily fishing, not obligate or restricted to fisheries alone.

Last Hilsa of the dayPhoto: sos-arsenic.net


8

basin serve as painful memory of theundammed past.

It is also difficult to imagine fishes nowas more than food in the public psyche;especially less so as independent,charismatic entities of biodiversity,recognition they immediately deserve.But for the fisher community it is amemory of tastes that heralded aglorious, pristine past. It is folk lore,cuisine and grandfathers’ tales of theirtimes. For the young fisherman it is aborrowed, created experience, feelingthose tastes without never actuallyfeeling them. Being able to eat thesefishes has been a sense of identity, nowstepped over by a distant process ofdestruction.

Fishers who live off the Gangesstrongly feel the pressure of damseverywhere. In north India, ‘Farakka’– the word doesn’t mean a village onthe Bangladesh border anymore, butmeans destruction by dams. The localHindi dialects have borrowed newphraseology: “Farakka hua, tabse hilsatoh bas bhabis (Farakka happened,and then Hilsa exist only in imaginedfuture)”. The same phrase repeats upto the Yamuna River! In my recentstatus survey of Gangetic fisheriesalmost 75-80% of fishers singled out‘Farakka’ as the root cause of all theirmiseries. They actually referred tomultiple barrages built on therespective rivers. But destruction hada common name.

The in-river scarcity of water is notlimited to the loss of fish species alone.Having little water causes a cascadeof effects – the collapse of fisheries (to

the tune of 90% in general, and almost99% for migrant fishes) leads todestructive fishing methods beingadopted in desperation and a boom-and-bust fishery begins. Mosquito netsare set up in the main channels of rivers(which would not withstand the flowof enough water), which causeindiscriminate capture and mortalityof fish eggs and the smallest of juvenilefishes. How will the fish even grow as apopulation if the youngest of their lotdie at the rate of thousands of tonsdaily? Invasive exotic species such asTilapia, Chinese Carps, and (hold yourbreath) Red-Bellied Piranha, are takingcompletely over natural river fisheriesin India by escaping from food fishculture ponds, as they can establishfaster in low flows. Poisoning ofshallow side-channels to capture fishesen masse is another horrible fallout ofnot having much water. The humancapacity to degrade fisheries has onlybeen exacerbated by dams andexcessive, wasteful regulation of water.When the river flow is so impoverished,digging sand or gravel becomes mucheasier. And then there is the threat of

excessive sand mining that causesextreme destruction of alluvialfloodplains and nesting habitats ofseveral turtles, birds and crocodilians.

We are not much behind China in ourfreshwater biodiversity debacle. Chinahas also had very similar species goingalmost extinct in the last 2-3 decades:broadly shads (Clupeids), largecatfishes and sturgeons. The ThreeGorges Dam on the Yangtze River hasconverted this mighty river into a largeopen sewer. Much has been lost in thishuman-made disaster, includingremarkable wild species such as theBaiji or Chinese River Dolphin that aretotally extinct, and the Chinese alligatorand several endemic turtle species thatare now extinct in the wild. It is a for-real forecast of what our species arelikely to face given imminent ‘completedevastations’ of freshwater habitats inthe form of proposals of hundreds ofdams and river interlinking. TheGanges river dolphin, Gharial, soft-shell and Batagur turtles and severalfishes are exact parallels to species thatare only confined to human memorynow in China. The devastation is in our

Dry Ganga downstream Farakka BarragePhoto Courtesy: http://riversandcommunities.wordpress.com/2008/

Anguilla benghalensis eel or the Bannbir or BannbouchhPhoto: Wikimedia Commons


9

face.

When will our dam builders, ministriesof environments, fisheries developersand technocrats wake up? Dams onregulated rivers are supposed toprovide timely releases of water in theriver, as ‘base flows’ or ‘minimumflows’, ‘environmental flows or e-flows’as per seasonal dynamics of pulsedflooding and flowing cycles of the rivers.There has however, been nocommitment at all from the government

or the National Water Policy Draft,2012, (or even the current NWP 2002)on the issue of ‘e-flows’, and of course,no action to maintain flow regimessimilar to natural variation or even tomaintain minimum flows to maintainhydrological continuity. In fact, recentstudies on regulation of tropical riverssuggest that it is not enough to justmaintain minimum or e-flows, butnear-natural, adequate flows arerequired for a multitude of ecosystem

processes and functions apart frommeeting irrigation, hydropower andindustry needs. This is a difficultbalance, but it has been suggested thatit may still be possible to approximatethese needs through regular releasesthat follow seasonal changes in naturalflow regimes. Regular flow releasescould actually entail significant benefitsto local farm and fish-based economies,mostly practiced by marginalizedresource users. Just allowing morewater to flow in the river could be a farmore effective subsidy than other‘intensive’ allocations to theseproducers (e.g. fertilizers or importedgillnets). At the moment, there isvirtually no water in the dry-seasoneven in many large, mountain-fedrivers across the country, as dams havediverted it all away rather wastefullyand cheaply, and there is noaccountability on the rational use ofwater distributed. Wasteful, high-enduse of water by urban areas, industryor hydropower projects is highlysubsidized, whereas it is these uses thatneed to be charged for cross-subsidybenefits to marginal producers directlydependent on the rivers. These carelessallowances have fuelled the pipe dreamof technological capacity that our urbansocieties are still lost in.

If there is not enough water in ourreservoirs and rivers, where is thequestion of mitigation measures forriver fishes to migrate for spawning, asis assumed vehemently for a safeguard?

Fishing in Ganga DeltaPhoto: http://www.realmagick.com/ganges-delta-agriculture-and-fishing/

GANGA, FISH AND FARAKKA IN SOME RECENT PARLIAMENT DEBATE

Shri Prasanta Kumar Majumdar (Revolutionary Socialist Party MP elected from Balurghat, W Bengal) said during a discussionunder Rule 193 on Situation arising out of the threat being posed to the very existence of River Ganga and the Himalayas inLoksabha on Dec 19, 20113, “In my state west Bengal the Farakka dam obstructs the river and the Calcutta port is also in poorcondition. So the Central Government must take steps in this regard. The fishing community of the basin is wholly dependent onGanga. The river Ganga must be preserved in the interest of the fishermen also.”

Bihar’s RJD leader Shri Lalu Prasad Yadav said in the same discussion, “Right from Farakka to Uttar Pradesh lakhs of fishermen livealong both sides of this river but today they are starving and have no work to do. Nobody is there to listen to their grievances.People have disfigured the geography of this nation and have also done a great damage to the rivers.”

Shri Parbodh Panda (CPI MP from Midnapore in W Bengal) during a debate in Loksabha on Ganga River on May 17, 20124 said:“Farakka project is creating problems in many respects. My suggestion is that, fast augmentation of water flow should be done andmost of the dams should be bent and crushed. Steps should be taken against illegal mining. Stringent laws should be made againstpollution causing activities. There should be a re-look at the international and several other agreements. There should also be arelook at the dams, canals and hydro plants. There are several options of providing electricity, but there is no alternate to the riverGanga. So, the Ganga should be protected now.”.


10

2 Citations to studies referred to in this article have been listed in the bibliography.3 http://164.100.47.132/synop/15/IX/Sup+Synopsis-19-12-2011.pdf4 http://164.100.47.132/synop/15/X/Sup+Synopsis-17-05-2012.pdf

For instance, the Farakka fish lifts donot seem to have been of any help, forstudies have been reporting Hilsaextinctions both upstream anddownstream to the tune of 99.9%. If theywere effective even up to a tidbit of whatis claimed, poor fisher people wouldn’thave singled out these extinctions sofirmly. Some other dams in hill-streamsand rivers in the Western Ghats andlower Himalaya have fish ladders thathave been claimed relatively helpful,but there is absolutely no empiricaldemonstration of success available. Forlarge rivers, fish ladders, lifts andpassages have been a total failure ofmitigation. The success of mitigationhas to be assessed at least through thepartial restoration of viable localcommerce based on migrant fishes, notby touting the occasional flood-timecrossover of a handful of fishes toreaches upstream of dams.

Most fish ladders have beencompletely ineffective as the waterlevels are simply too low for fishes tocross over their rungs. Tropical fisheshave different strategies from speciessuch as Salmon that migrate over dampassages in cold-water rivers andstreams. Yet, there is hardly anyresearch on the needs of migratorytropical fish species while planning‘engineering textbook designs’ of theseladders and passes. There are manydesigns, ideas and trials, but what isreally needed is enough flowing water.Furthermore, we need a whole body ofresearch on what ‘our’ fishes actuallyneed, for our fishes are no salmon, andthe rivers are not bursting with rapidsof icy water (our rivers are much biggerforces to reckon with). There has to bethe context of specific address oflivelihoods and biodiversity in damengineering design, mitigationmeasures, through consultations withlocal farmers and fishers about thelevels of water they desire to see in theriver. It does take courage to conductlarge-scale experiments on the effectiveand optimal flow release procedures,but it is needed urgently now if we

have to understand the dynamics ofspecies responses to different flowregimes. Will dam engineers andecologists sit together and conceiveoptions for flow regime ‘creation’ byfixing timely releases? It will be of highvalue and take substantialbureaucratic courage to testexperimentally, through treatmentsand controls with flow regimes forshort time-periods in actual dams.Multiple new practices are beingadopted in many tropical countries inAfrica for the maintenance of artificialflooding to help wetland ricecultivation (IUCN, 2000, www.omvs-

hc.org). Artificial flood maintenancemight be an important temporarysolution to balance provision of enoughwater for replenishment of floodplainsoils and hyporheic recharge.River fisheries have been one of India’smost underperforming productionsectors over the last 3-4 decades. If onehad to clinically investigate thisdecline, it coincides with the period ofmaximum dam building in India. Veryfew reports actually mention that themajor cause of river fishery collapse hasbeen dams, most reports point to riverpollution. But dams have also played arole in massively concentratingpollution effects by reducing thedilution capacity of rivers.States like Andhra Pradesh and WestBengal have become big on commercialcarp production in managed ponds.This has contributed to India becoming

among the largest producers of inlandfreshwater fish in the world, registeringa growth of something like 30-40% ininland fish production just over the last15 years. But such ranking hides a lot ofmiserable facts about riverdegradation. Pond fisheries, due to theirsudden (short-term) economic gains,have cornered all attention of fisheriesdevelopment only to culture ponds andhatcheries. Hatcheries are even beingrecommended for helping fish grow,that could be released back into riversto enhance production. But how willthese fishes live out there in nature,without adequate, clean water andunblocked swim ways? Also, millionsof fishers have no access or capital tostart hatcheries, and continue tosubsist on natural flows. With theironly basis of survival taken away amass exodus of fishing castes has beenoccurring; and eking it out asrickshaw-pullers and constructionlaborers in cities. One could argue thatletting some more water flow in therivers’ natural courses could avertthese severe economic collapses.Besides it will provide social, cultural,environmental, ecological andhydrological benefits, includinggroundwater recharge.

The heavy and criminal discounting ofriver water is going to hit back hard atus one bad day, a fitting price for ourblindness as a society to the everydayimpacts of dams we have right beforeus. In the process of denigrating riverwater, habitats and biodiversity, wewould have sold short the lives ofmillions of Indians. Natural rivercourses with adequate water, are notonly essential for humans, fishes andwildlife, but most critical for thesurvival of rivers themselves. It is saidhow we treat our thirsty rivers is a signof how much we respect our culture andcivilization. A look at the parched rivercourses points to the course our fishwealth has already taken, and ourhuman resources will soon have taken2.

NACHIKET KELKAR([email protected])

contd on page 30

Completely Dry Ganga downstream ofBhimgouda barrage in UttarakhandPhoto: Parineeta Dandekar


11

As things stand now, if all theseprojects are implemented, lessthan 10% of the river can be

seen flowing at all. Dams are beingconstructed bumper to bumper in avery tight sequence, where water fromone hydro project meets notthe river, but reservoir of thenext hydro project in line. Thisconversion of a living riverinto a series of puddles,alternating with drystretches, bypassed by thetunnels has a profound impacton ecology, biodiversity,hydrology, sociology andwater availability of theregion.Himachal is already facing allthese impacts in the Sutlejbasin where scores of projectsare being implemented andwhere Luhri project, fundedby the World Bank, willdestroy the last remaining 50kilometres free flowing stretch of theriver. In the neighbouring state ofUttarakhand which is facing a fatesimilar to Himachal, such cascades onAlaknanda and Bhagirathi Rivers ledto wide protests in the entire country.IIT Roorkie and Wildlife Institute ofIndia were commissioned to conductstudies on the Cumulative Impacts ofhydropower dams on Alaknanda andBhagirathi Basins and the PrimeMinister and Environment Ministerstressed the importance of suchstudies.But no one seems to be bothered aboutChenab. Himachal PradeshGovernment, on the other hand, isaggressively saying that condition ofCumulative Impact Assessment forprojects in Chenab put by the MoEF

should be lifted as “it's unilateral andcontrary to the state's interests". ChiefMinister Shri. Prem Kumar Dhumal, ina letter to Environment MinisterJayanti Natarajan says, "As many as28 hydroelectric projects of combined

generation capacity of 5,800 MW are atan advanced stage of obtaining(Environment Ministry) clearances. Allthese projects are located on theChenab. Such a condition would resultin delaying the execution of theprojects”1. It seems as if the ChiefMinister thinks that interest of thestate lies only in execution ofhydropower projects and nothing else.Services obtained from a River likewater availability, groundwaterrecharge, fishing, irrigation throughsmaller streams, climate regulation,tourism and protection of lands,forests, mountains or biodiversity arenot in the interest of the state andworthless.Even as the entire world is makingefforts to ameliorate impacts of

hydropower dams, when there isburgeoning literature pointing to theimpacts of hydrological fluctuations onecology, when USA has actuallydecommissioned more than 1000 dams,majority of them hydropower projects,

for their impacts on ecology, thePower Secretary of HimachalPradesh, said before a meeting ofExpert Appraisal Committee (EAC)of the MoEF on Cumulative ImpactAssessment study of Chenab that“so far there is no conclusive studyindicating that the Hydropowerprojects have detrimental effects onthe river health”2. This is acompletely wrong and unscientificstatement demonstrating clear biasof the state government for hydelprojects, most of them by privateplayers. And the Expert AppraisalCommittee, whose primary task isto look at environmental impacts ofall major Hydro projects of thecountry and sanction projects based

on the severity of these impacts, did notobject to this statement!Dams on Chenab in Himachal: In theecologically and socially fragile, highlyseismic District of Lahaul and Spiti,more than 20 projects are sanctionedor are under construction.Interestingly, most of these projects arebeing developed by powerful privateplayers like Tata Power, Reliance, DCMSri Ram, Moser Baer and L & T.Impacts: Many of these projects arebeing opposed by locals. Lahaul andSpiti region is a secluded region with apopulation density of less than 2people/ sq kms at places3. The region isdotted with Buddhist Monasteries, isfamed for its peas and potatoes, swiftand scenic rivers and thrivingpopulation of trout fish. 300 MW Gyspa

DAMS ON CHENAB:HOW MANY ARE TOO MANY?

Chenab (Chand Aab), Chandrabhaga, or the Moon River flows for 130 kilometres in Himachal Pradesh, which holds a tinyproportion of the basins catchment area: 7500 sq kms of its total 61000 sq kms. In this tiny area, Himachal Pradesh isconstructing, implementing and planning 49 major hydroelectric projects on Chenab. While other rivers like Sutlej, Beasand Ravi as well as smaller streams and tributaries in Himachal are almost completely dammed or in the process of beingfinished off, Chenab was the last comparatively free flowing, healthy rivers of the State.

Tandi, where Rivers Chandra and Bhaga meet to form theChandrabhaga, or Chenab.Photo Courtesy: Kishore Thakural

1 http://thehimachalnews.com/himachal-asks-for-environment-waivers-on-chenab-river-projects/2 Statement by Shri. Deepak Sanan, 55th Meeting of the Expert Appraisal Committee of the MoEF


12

Project has been facing stiff localopposition because of its submergenceand displacement of more than 100families. The region has very few placesfit for yearlong inhabitation andcultivation making rehabilitation isvery difficult task for c lose knitcommunities. In addition to dams onChenab, dams on Spiti River, tributaryof Sutlej also fall in Lahual & Spitiregion, adding to the unimaginablestress on the vulnerable and highlyseismic region. Nealry all projects fallin seismic zones IV or V.Cumulative Impact Assessment? TheMoEF sanctioned TORs for conductingCumulative Impact Assessment (CIA)of Chenab In February 2012. Verysurprisingly, this critical task has beenentrusted to the Directorate of Energy,Government of Himachal Pradesh. Canthere be an agency with a greaterconflict of interest than the Directorateof Energy to conduct this study? Canwe expect this department, which hasbeen hell bent on damming all flowingrivers, streams and nallahs inHimachal, to conduct this study in anunbiased manner? Even as theDirectorate put out request forproposal for contractors to conduct thisstudy, it did not mention that theconsultant has to be an independentagency with credible track record. Thiswas specifically instructed by the EAC.This seems to be just a beginning of abiased study, heavily favouring hydroprojects.The MoEF on its part, seems to havemeekly accepted Himachal PradeshChief Minister’s demand of delinkingEnvironmental Clearances withCumulative Impact Assessment Studywithout any questions asked. EAC andMoEF have been according clearancesand TORs to projects on Chenab withgreat efficiency. In the last 2 Meetingsin Sept-Oct 2012, the EAC approvedTORs and revised capacities for asmany 6 Projects in Chenab inHimachal, without even mentioningthat recommendations of theCumulative Impacts Assessment Studywill have to be adhered to. As it is, wedo not have a single example of a

project being dropped or modifiedsignificantly after EnvironmentalClearance has been granted. The EACeven finds changing E-flows releasecondition impossible after granting aclearance. So no independent action canbe expected after this delinking.Delinking environmental clearancesfrom CIA study defeats the entirepurpose of undertaking an objectiveCIA. If the assessment of cumulativeimpacts is not going to inform thedecisions, heights, capacities andlengths of Head Race Tunnels for theproject keeping in mind variousaspects of impacts and carryingcapacity, what is the use of thecumulative impact assessment? EACand MoEF should immediately stopconsidering any projects in the basinfor consideration before a credible,independent CIA is completed andassessed in participation with theChenab valley residents and othersconcerned.In addition to this, private projectproponents are ‘revising’ (another termfor increasing) capacities of hydelprojects by leaps and bounds. Thereason given is increased water

availability as indicated in CentralWater Commission’s revisedhydrological studies. Urgent studiesare needed to understand why wateravailability in these regions isincreasing sharply. One of the mostprobable reasons is increased glacialmelt due to Climate Change. This needsto analysed further as it has many farreaching implications on watersecurity and disaster management.This can lead to increased danger ofextreme climate events like thedevastating floods in Leh in 2010 whichtook a toll of over 115 lives. Impacts ofsuch extreme climate events will becompounded by the scores of hydelprojects. Local communities are alsoraising these issues in most of thepublic hearings, without gettingsatisfactory responses.Hydel projects on Chenab in Jammuand Kashmir: As Chenab descendsfrom Himachal and enters Jammu andKashmir, it is dammed by even biggerprojects operating, under constructionor planned. Table 2 below listshydropower projects of close to 9000MW in Chenab basin in Jammu andKashmir, this is not the full list.


13

According to the Central ElectricityAuthority4, Projects totalling 4200 MWare planned in the 12th Five Year Planwhile additional Projects for 2075 MWhave been identified. Some projects areunder consideration for forest andenvironmental clearance like 1200 MWBursar project in Kishtwar district,which requires area 1665 hecatres ofland, including 1077 hectares of Forest,affecting more than 500 families in over14 villages ( Option 2 requires 4593 Haof land!), and the 1200 MW SawalkoteDam will require 1099 ha land,including 600 hectares forest. Some ofthese dams are submerging parts of the

Kishtwar High Altitude National Park.Here again, projects are plannedbumper to bumper, no environmentalmitigation measures like fish passes orladders are included and social impactsappear to be huge, adding to the overallcumulative impacts.Despite of this, no cumulative impactassessment study is beingrecommended of undertaken forChenab basin in Jammu and Kashmir.Cumulative Impact Assessment of theentire Chenab Basin: Chenab presentlyhas more than 70 major hydel projectsin various stages of planning,

construction and operation with acombined capacity of over 13000 MWand this is an under estimate inabsence of full exact figures. This veryhigh density of projects magnifies theirimpacts on all aspects: downstreamhydrology, muck generation anddisposal, cumulative impacts ofsubmergence, resettlement, cumulativeimpacts of loss of forest land anhabitats, impacts on fish like famousChenab Trout by series of high dams,impacts on region’s seismicity, siltdischarge of the river, impact ofblasting and tunnelling, transport androad construction, construction andmanagement of workers camps andcolonies, ambient air quality, disasterrisk, impact on local water sources andgroundwater, cumulative impacts onregion’s waters security, fragilecultural fabric, etc.Cumulative impacts of cascading megahydro projects of all the above issuesare unequivocally huge, irreversibleand negative. Most of the powergenerated in the basin will be going outof the basin, so will be the benefits of

3 http://www.himdhara.org/2012/03/14/leave-the-chenab-alone-lahaul-residents-activists-appeal/4 The 30th meeting of the Standing Committee on Power System Planning of Northern Region, Central Electricity Authority,

December 2011

contd on page 20

HP PowerCorporation Ltd

Partial List of Large Hydro Projects Planned/Under

Implementation in Chenab Basin in Himachal Pradesh

Sl No

HEP CAP

in

MW

District Tributary Length ofHRT (km)

Distancefrom U/sProject

Distancefrom D/sProject

Developer

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

Gyspa 300 Lahaul and

Spiti

Bhaga 14.96

Chattru

Shangling

Miyar

Tandi

Rashil

Seli

Reoli Dugli

Teling

Bardang

Patam

Tinget

Purthi

Sach Khas

Gondhala

Dugar

Khoksar

Total 3173

90

144

380

260

300

81

60

126

94

420

400

130

104

120

44

120

Lahaul and

Spiti

Lahaul and

Spiti

Chandra

Chandra

Chandrabhaga

Chenab

Chenab

Chenab

Chenab

Chamba

Chamba

10.48

7.4

11

9.75 + km

3.5 km

8.5 km

Not

Applicable

Zero

9 km

9 kms3 kms

Zero

Tata Power SNGroup, Norway

DCM Sri Ram

Reliance Power

Moser Baer

ABG Shipyard

Moser Baer

ABG Shipyard

Moser Baer

ABG Shipyard

Reliance Power

Lahaul and

Spiti

Lahaul and

SpitiLahaul and

SpitiLahaul and

Spiti

Lahaul and

Spiti

Lahaul and

Spiti

Lahaul and

Spiti

Lahaul and

SpitiLahaul and

Spiti

Reliance Power

Partial list of large hydropower projectson Chenab in

Jammu and KashmirSl No

Project River

12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

Kirthai I 250 Chenab

Bursar

Pakal DulDul Hasti(Operating)Ratle (GVK)

Total

Capacity

Kirthai II

BagliharI(Operating)

BagliharIISawalkote

Salal(Operating)

Chainani I,II,IIIKiru

Kwar

990

1200/1500

1000390

850

450

450

1200

690

33

600

520

Marusudar

Marusudar

Chenab

Chenab

Chenab

Chenab

Chenab

Chenab

Chenab

Chenab

Chenab

Tributary

8623/8923


14

INDIAN HIMALAYAS MOVING TOWARDS HIGHEST DAM DENSITIES IN THE WORLD

In a ground breaking paper published in May 2012, Conservation Biology entitled 'Potential Effects of Ongoing andProposed Hydropower Development on Terrestrial Biological Diversity in the Indian Himalaya', authors Maharaj Panditand Edward Grumbine, highlight the colossal impacts of maniacal hydro power development in the Himalayas on terrestrialdiversity, forest cover and rates of species extinctions. The authors qualify these findings by saying that they have usedconservative estimates and the actual losses may be much higher than this prediction.

Dams planned and under construction in the Teesta BasinPhoto: SANDRP

The shattering findings of thepaper say that if 292 proposedand under construction dams in

Himalayas (including Jammu andKashmir, Himachal, Uttarakhand,Sikkim, and the remaining North East,which is a huge underestimation, theactual numbers are closer to 400+) arebuilt, then Indian Himalayas wouldhave:

1. The Highest Dam Density in theWorld: Dam density of the region wouldbe: 0.3247/1000 km2, nearly 62 timesgreater than current average globalfigures; the average of 1 dam for every32 km of river channel would be 1.5times higher than figures reported forU.S. rivers.

Sikkim, the most species rich state inthe country would have the highestdensity (4/1000 km2), followed byUttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh(both 1.5/1000 km2). Dam densities inthe Brahmaputra (0.5825/1000 km2),the Indus (0.2895/1000 km2), and theGanga (0.1022/1000 km2) basins wouldbe 110, 55, and 19 times higher,respectively, than the current globalaverage.

Ganga basin would have the highestnumber of dams (1/18 km of riverchannel dammed) in the world,followed by the Brahmaputra (1/35 km)and the Indus (1/36 km).

2. 90% Himalayan valleys affected:Nearly 90% of Indian Himalayanvalleys would be affected by dambuilding and 27% of these dams wouldaffect dense forests. Out of 32 majorriver valleys, 28 would be affected bydam building and nearly 90% of thedams would be located between thesubtropical and temperate zones.

Over the next 13 years, dam-buildingactivity alone, if carried out in already-degraded forests, is predicted to lead tothe extinction of 10 angiosperm and 3vertebrate species. In scenario 2,haphazard dam building resulted inthe loss of 114, 361 ha of forests(including 63,360 ha of dense forests)and in species extinctions doublingover the same period.

By 2100 extinction projections underconservative SAR estimates indicatedthe potential loss of 1505 angiospermsand 274 vertebrates driven by

3. More than 54,000 hectares forest tobe submerged: 54,117 ha of forestswould be submerged and 114,361 hawould be damaged by dam-relatedactivities. Most dams would be locatedin species-rich areas of the Himalaya.

A disproportionately high percentage(90%) of dams would be concentratedin species-rich subtropical andtemperate zones in the IndianHimalaya. Yet at present, due to limitedstudies and little certainty about thelikelihood of all projects being built, itis difficult to quantify precisely the fullextent of ecologicalchanges that mayresult fromproposed dambuilding.

4. Acceleratedspecies extinction:By 2025,deforestation due todam buildingwould likely resultin extinction of 22angiosperm and 7vertebrate taxaprojected. For thisstartling finding,the authors say“We have beencautious with theseprojections. Ourestimates of forestloss from dambuilding are lowerthan thoseprojected by theGOI and weselected the mostc o n s e r v a t i v evalues”


15

background deforestationand dam buildingcombined

Disturbance due to dambuilding would likelyreduce tree species richnessby 35%, tree density by42%, and tree basal cover by30% in dense forests.

“These results, combinedwith relatively weaknational environmentalimpact assessment andimplementation, pointtoward significant loss ofspecies if all proposeddams in the IndianHimalaya are constructed.It is unknown whether thepublic, once informed ofthe consequences, wouldbe willing to choose social goods overecological benefits. This situation isexacerbated by the fact that the GOI hasnever carried out studies of thecountry’s future energy requirementsthat examine alternatives beyondhydropower that may find a reducedneed for so many dams (WWF 2007).And, according to a recent study fromthe Ganga basin, even the assumedsocial benefits of dams may have little

Baspa River Destroyed by the Baspa Dam in Himachal PradeshPhoto: SANDRP Partners

Teesta III Dam in Sikkim Photo : Samir

5 http://www.sandrp.in/hydropower/Pathetic_Cumulative_Impact_Assessment_of_Ganga_Hydro_projects.pdfhttp://sandrp.in/rivers/Lohit_Basin_Study_by_WAPCOS_A_mockery_of_e-flows_and_cumulative_impacts.pdf

scientific basis (Sadoff et al. 2011). Ourresults lend support to these claims, butin India, so far, there remains littleattention paid to ecological evaluationof large-scale development(Bandyopadhyay & Gyawali 1994;Agrawal 2010).”

“EIA regulations in India do makeassessment of biological diversity “acriterion” for project evaluation.However, lack of scientific studies and

poor implementation of EIA processesremain problems, and no projects havebeen rejected because loss of biologicaldiversity has been cited, except in rarecases involving protected areas andflagship species such as the tiger (Singh2006). In addition, there is no legalrequirement in current EIA regulationsfor analyses of cumulative effects, butgiven the density of planned dams onall the major rivers in the study area,our results point toward the need toconsider this standard in hydropowerassessment (Menon & Kohli 2009;Choudhury 2010).”

What makes the findings of this studyeven more disturbing is the fact thatthe authors have severelyunderestimated the number of damscoming up in the Himalayas. They haveconsidered only 292 dams planned orunder construction. Whereas, In reality,the number would be closer to 460dams under construction and planningstages in Jammu and Kashmir,Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand,Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh. Seehttp://sandrp.in/basin_maps/ fordetails and locations of planned, underconstruction and completed dams inthese states.

PARINEETA DANDEKAR


16

THE MYTHThe tale in the 16th century Sanskrithymn, Yamunashtakam, an ode byphilosopher Vallabhacharyadescribes1 the descent of the Yamunariver from its origin in Yamunotri tomeet her beloved Krishna and topurify the world. The hymn praisesher for being the source of all spiritualabilities: it is Yamuna, who being aholder of infinite love andcompassion, can grant us freedomfrom even death, the realm of her elderbrother Yama.The question is who is going to helpthe Yamuna herself from a certaindeath?

YAMUNA RIVER: INDIA’S NATIONAL SHAME

WHY THE APEX COURT COULD NOT IMPROVE MATTERS FOR 18 YEARS?

Continuing plight of Yamuna as it flows through Indian Capital is a matter of National Shame, indicating failure at severallevels. Supreme Court too has been handling this issue for 18 long years. What has it achieved in the process and where doesthe problems lie?

The first thing that strikes youabout the mighty Yamunaflowing through Delhi is that it

is a National Shame. The river that isthe largest tributary of the holy Ganges(in fact at confluence in AllahabadYamuna annually brings more waterthan Ganga brings at that point) hasbeen turned into a sewage drain by theNational Capital. This has been thesituation for decades. The NationalCapital has been unable to treat thesewage it generates and dumps mostlyuntreated and some at best partiallytreated sewage into the river. Suchdumping of untreated and partiallytreated sewage into a river is supposedto be completely illegal according to anumber of laws including the Water

Pollution Control Act of 1974, and theNational Capital has been brazenlyindulging in this illegal act for decades,in full view of all the law enforcing andmonitoring agencies at state and centrallevel. What else one can call this, exceptNational Shame?That the Yamuna River flowingthrough the National Capital has beenturned into drain by Delhi is wellknown now for decades as even theSupreme Court was informed on Nov9, 2012 by a committee appointed bythe Apex Court itself. It signifies failureof the pollution control regime at Delhistate level and at the national levelagain for decades. What is even moretroubling is that the case is before theapex court since 1994 when the court took up the case suo moto, following a

front page headline grabbing newsreport in The Hindustan Times then. Sothe court has been handling this matterfor eighteen long years. What has thecourt achieved in the process?The state of the river has gone worse inthese eighteen years since 1994 whenthe Supreme Court of India took up thecase of pollution in the river. The stateof the river has worsened in terms ofthe Biological Oxygen Demand,Chemical Oxygen Demand, DissolvedOxygen or even the length of stretch ofYamuna that is polluted downstreamfrom Delhi. In every conceivable respectthe state of the river has deterioratedeven as the highest court of Indiamonitored the state of the river.It is not the first time that the court hasbeen told that downstream ofWazirabad barrage in Delhi there is nowater in the river as Delhi takes awayall the water available (at least in 8-9

Goddess Yamuna atop her vehicle tortoise as depicted in Ellora CavesPhoto: blog.naver.com

1 See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamuna#Ancient_literature_and_history for details


17

non monsoon months) in the riverthere for its use. Downstream from theWazirabad barrage there is justsewage of Delhi, mostly untreated asmentioned above. Upstream along theYamuna River, downstream of theHathnikund barrage, as the barragediverts all the water from the river intoWestern and Eastern Yamuna canal, theriver is left dry in 8-9 months of theyear.In fact in January 1998 the SupremeCourt in the ongoing Yamuna caseappointed a High Powered Committee(HPC) “To assess the requirement of aminimum flow in the river Yamuna tofacilitate restoration of the desired riverwater quality”. The committee chairedby the chairman of the Central WaterCommission (CWC) told the court,without any real study that the riverneeds 10 cumecs of water. In the firstplace, the court should have asked theHPC/ CWC to study the needs of theriver at various points along the river.However, the SC, based on aboverecommendation of the HPC orderedlater in 1998 that 10 cumecs of water

should be released for the river all alongthe river stretch all round the year. Thatorder of the Apex court remainsunimplemented till date. The CentralWater Commission, acting like a lobbyfor big dams, has been saying that theriver cannot have water until megadams have been built in the upstream!This is remedy to further kill the river.The CWC has never shown any interestin allowing freshwater flow in any riverany where in India. Even in the case ofYamuna, the CWC has been telling thecourt that minimum flow in the riveris being maintained! For example, asrecorded in the order of the SupremeCourt in IA 17 in WP 537/1992 on13.5.1999, “Mr A D Mohile, Chairman,Central Water Commission stated thatminimum flow in River Yamuna is stillbeing maintained and there is no needto release any further quantity of freshwater in the river.” Nothing can befarther from truth.In fact, making joke of the SC order forrelease of 10 cumecs of water all roundthe year all along the river, the CWChas been repeatedly saying in affidavits

before the SC that Haryana is alreadyreleasing 160 cusecs (4.54 cumecs)water downstream of Hathnikund andanother 140 cusecs (3.9 cumecs) intoNajafgarh drain, which confluencesinto the Yamuna River downstream ofWazirabad barrage, thus making up forthe 10 cumecs! The SC should havetaken the agency to task for completelymisinterpreting and misrepresentingits order. Firstly, these flows cannot beadded as CWC is doing. Out of the 160cusecs released at Hathnikund (even ifthis is released, which in reality is notreleased as there no crediblemonitoring agency to ensure that)almost nothing would reachWazirabad. At Wazirabad, Delhi isalready taking away all freshwater,and no freshwater flows downstreamof Wazirabad in lean season. Secondly,as clearly stated in the order of SC dated13.05.1999, the 4 cumecs that Haryanatransfers to Najafgarh drain is forirrigation purposes in South Delhi. Thisis NOT for ecological needs of the river.In any case to add up such smallquantities released at various points to

contd on page 31

Yamuna, as it emerges from Uttarakhand Photo: Ravindranath


18

Long overdue & much awaitedWhite Paper (WP) on Irrigationin Maharashtra has finally been

issued by Water Resources Department(WRD), Government of Maharashtra(GoM) on 29th Nov 2012. It is availableon WRD’s website(www.mahawrd.org) in Marathilanguage. WP consists of two volumes.Volume-I (129 pages) presents theAchievements & Prospects part.Project-wise details regarding Time &Cost Overrun are given in Volume-II(794 pages). This article is a quick &preliminary response & thus, hasobvious limitations. In-depth analysiswill take some more time. Point-wisebrief comments are only given here.As only to be expected, WP is absolutely

silent about the alleged irrigation scamin Maharashtra. It does not take thecognizance of the reports of variouscommittees [Vadnere, Mendhegiri,Kulkarni, Upase,etc] constituted byWRD, GoM to enquire into the chargesof corruption & irregularities. It keepsmum about the allegations made by RTI(Right to Information) activists,politicians & media. Though the wholeattempt appears to be to not bring any“inconvenient truth” on record, theargument in WP is full of lame excuses& unwarranted, uncalled for &unnecessary explanations.Such excuses for delays and costescalations have already been rejectedby the Comptroller and AuditorGeneral (CAG). Points of investigation

like accuracy of costs, c laims ofescalations, water-availability reportsand violations of Maharashtra PublicManual and other norms have not beenaddressed.“The WP is more like a status report asCM had said and that it is not a whitepaper, a white paper is supposed to bea result of wide consultation with keypeople.But one thing is clear. The usualengineering arrogance is missing &irrigation-bureaucrats are ondefensive. That is a good omen for watersector, to say the least!In order to prove its innocence WRD,GoM in this WP points fingers at otherdepartments / organizations in

WHITE PAPER ON IRRIGATION IN MAHARASHTRA

WHO IS THE MAHARASHTRA GOVT FOOLING?A quick critique of the so called white paper on Rs 75000 crore irrigation scam in Maharashtra. The white paper does notanswer any of the questions raised, including in the SANDRP initiated letter carried in Sept Oct 2012 issue of Dams, Rivers& People. Only an independent investigation will help. This status paper is for bringing Mr Ajit Pawar back into thecabinet and white wash the scam.

Organizational Structure of WRD: WRD, GoM is a top-heavy organization with 3 Cabinet Ministers, 3 Minister of States, 2 Secretaries, 5 ExecutiveDirectors, 2 Director Generals, 21 Chief Engineers & 67 Superintending Engineers.

Expenditure on Establishment: WP is silent about other establishment (Exec Engr to Junior Engr & supporting staff) & total annual expenditureof complete establishment & its percentage as against expenditure on works.

Conflict between Direct Class I officers (Exec Engr and above) & others is one of the reasons of WRD’s poor performance. Powers have beenconcentrated in the hands of Direct Class –I officers & actual experience of work on site, barring exceptions, is mainly with the officers below the rankof Executive Engineers. Indifference towards grass root level functionaries & subordinate engineers has taken its toll.Administrative Approval: Para 3.3 gives information regarding empowerment in respect of Administrative Approval. It suggests that moreautonomy was given to Irrigation Development Corporations on demand from opposition parties & as per Governor’s directives. Alleged misuse ofthat autonomy has, of course, not been discussed.

TABLE1: COMMENTS ON WHITE PAPER ON IRRIGATION IN MAHARASHTRA

Sec 11F of MWRRA Act, 2005: The latest decision of bringing in MWRRA – an independent regulatory authority- in the process of AdministrativeApproval is noteworthy, in absence of any reference to Sec 11F of MWRRA Act, 2005 & Integrated State Water Plan (ISWP). ISWP was supposedto be ready within six months from the date of bringing in force the said Act. MWRRA has been sanctioning projects even in absence of ISWP which,prima facie, appears to be a violation of MWRRA Act.Irrigation Management: Irrigation Status, Water Auditing & Benchmarking reports officially published by WRD don’t substantiate tall claims madein WP.Rapid appraisal of performance of WUAs (including those under MWSIP) recently done by a reputed NGO brings out the sorry state of affairs inrespect of Participatory Irrigation Management. The NGO has sent its report to the authorities & has demanded joint inspection of WUAs. WRD &MWRRA, so far, have not accepted that challenge.

It is claimed that Maharashtra is the only State where the recovery of water tariff is more than Operation & Maintenance expenditure. If WRD doesnot provide adequate funds for M&R (Maintenance & Repair) to all projects, its expenditure will always appear to be less. M & R scenario in the Stateis reflected in the Overall Project Efficiency which is hardly 20-25% as against 41-48% assumed in the design.

Amount of arrears of water tariff is approximately Rs. 1000 Crs. The percentage recovery of irrigation tariff is hardly 12-13% & that of non-irrigationis 45-50%. Can this situation be described as satisfactory?

Reforms in Water Sector: Contrary to the general impression the reality about the so called reforms is as given below:1. Rules have not been framed in respect of Maharashtra Irrigation Act,1976 (MIA 76) even after 36 years.2. No formal decisions have been taken regarding most of the recommendations of Maharashtra Water Irrigation Commission Report,1999


19

COMMENTS ON WHITE PAPER ...TABLE CONTD...3. State Water Policy adopted in 2003 has not been revised after 5 years as was supposed to be done in 2008. Though the priority of water usehas been changed (irrigation now gets second priority instead of industry), it has not been implemented in actual practice.Basin/sub basin-wise development & management of water resources still remains to be done. Issue of regional imbalance is very much alive.

Current controversy regarding release of water for Jayakwadi project from upstream projects speaks volumes about the actual implementation ofwater policy & water laws.MWRRA has virtually become ineffective for all practical purposes because following remains to be implemented even after 7 years of its existence:• Irrigation Development Corps to act as River Basin Agencies & issue water use rights• Preparation of ISWP by State Water Board under the chairmanship of Chief Secretary• Approval of ISWP by State Water Council under the chairmanship of CM• Approval to new projects by MWRRA with reference to ISWP• MWRRA to carry out its legal responsibility towards backward areas & removal of regional imbalance.• Agreements within WUAs & delineation of WUAs for LIS under MWSIP as per MMISF Act,2005.Economic Aspects: This chapter is surprisingly very brief. It deals mainly with various liabilities like balance cost of tenders, land acquisition,resettlement, NPV, etc. Total liability as reported is Rs.31742 Cr. The picture is incomplete due to lack of following information:• Yearwise funds available from all sources (State budget, central assistance, World Bank ,Bonds issued by Irrigation Development Corporations, etc)• Yearwise expenditure done under various heads wrt sources of funds.• Norms & actual cost of potential created in per ha & per M cum terms• Irrigation Development Corporation wise information of 1, 2 & 3 above. (There are complaints that though budget provision is made, funds are notactuallyMERI and Waghad: MERI has successfully used applications of remote sensing in water sector. But the irony is management wing of WRD hasfailed to take advantage of MERI’s work. MERI studied silting in live storage of 44 projects & prepared revised capacity tables. Managementauthority in 41 projects simply did not take cognizance of the study & did “management” & prepared even water audit report without consideringeffects of silting.Waghad project in Nashik district is an exception, the real credit of success story at Waghad goes to WUAs & people’s participation. WRDs’ efforts,if any, to replicate Waghad can hardly be described as sincere. Praise Waghad, showcase it & conveniently forget about its lessons is the strategyadopted by WRD since long.Analysis of time & cost overrun: WRD has given an impressive list of factors (of course, excluding corruption) which according to WRDcontribute in time & cost overrun:1.Statutary Clearance regarding issues related to forest, wild life, environment2. Land acquisition3. ResettlementIncrease in establishment charges4. Inadequate funds5.Time required to prepare detailed designs6. Changes in scope of projects7. Increase in schedule of rates8. Escalation in prices of land9. Increase in royalty charges10 Increase in establishment chargesHowever, starting projects without land or approvals is illegal as per CAG. This comment takes care of many points listed above. It appears thatlack of good governance in WRD has taken its toll. In absence of ISWP, it is free for all & might is right in water sector. Organizational &procedural changes appear to be urgently called for.Important Decisions Taken and Reforms: WRD had to take following decisions which in itself is an indirect admission of charges ofcorruption, irregularities & inordinate delays:1. Land acquisition on priority basis.2. Submit detailed estimate for administrative approval only after carrying out detailed survey, investigation & design3.To initiate process of tendering only after land acquisition4. Not to pay mobilization & machinery advances5. To restrict the use of tender clause-38

Potential created & utilized: WRD is not in a position to conclusively prove on paper that development has really taken place thanks to thenon-measurement of area irrigated. Readers are requested to study the details presented in Reference 2 & 3 in this respect. Scientific evidenceto arrive at certain percentage of increase in area is not available. WRD itself is to be blamed for this situation.

Roadmap for water resources development: There is nothing new in most of the points suggested in this chapter.Maharashtra Water & Irrigation Commission, 1999 had given at least 7 specific recommendations regarding the priority of completion ofongoing / incomplete projects. Those were to be implemented within one decade i.e.by 2009. Nothing has happened.State Planning Board had suggested a way out in 2007. WRD ignored that practical advice.Roadmap suggests that drip irrigation may be made compulsory for perennial crops. There is already a specific provision in this respect inMWRRA Act, 2005. Why that was not brought in force?The fact that WRD had to give a suggestion regarding reduction of financial powers of Irrigation Development Corps speaks volumes.


20

Maharashtra (Public WorksDepartment, Maharashtra JeevanPradhikaran, Maharashtra IndustrialDevelopment Corporation, City andIndustrial Development Corporation,Brihanmumbai MunicipalCorporation) & even uses examplesfrom other States in India (AP,Karnataka, Goa, Gujarat). It claims thatschedule of rates of Maharashtra is onlower side as compared to that of saiddepartments & the States. It also citesexamples of gigantic Lift IrrigationSchemes (LIS) in other States to justifyunviable & controversial LIS inMaharashtra.WP gives lots of procedural detailsregarding project formulation &implementation which the critics,activists & media people already knowvery well. In fact, it is they who havepointed out the violations in theprocedures & have filed petitions in thecourts of law.WP also presents voluminous project-wise data in Volume –II. Its accuracy &hence, credibility has already beenquestioned & a steady flow of reportsbringing out discrepancies have startedappearing in media. Knowledgeable &

generally reliable sources from WRD,GoM confirm the trend & predict a floodof RTI applications in this matter invery near future. Pandora’s Box hasbeen opened.WP presents a roadmap of waterresources development in Chapter -9.It suggests that in order to avoid thinspreading of funds, projects on whichexpenditure incurred is less than 25%may at present be suspended & projectsin advanced stage of completion mayonly be completed on priority basis.This has generated a serious politicalcontroversy. People from backwardregions (Marathwada, Viderbha, etc)feel that this move may further increaseregional imbalance. They complain thatexpenditure incurred is less becauseadequate funds at proper time have notbeen given in the first place. Someanalysts, however, point out that thesaid suggestion is a clever move todivert attention from charges ofcorruption & irregularities.There are also rumors that smartofficers under the guidance of evensmarter politicians have reportedinflated figures of expenditure (greaterthan 25%) in some of the projects to safe

1. WRD, GoM, “White Paper on IrrigationProjects in Maharashtra”, 29th Nov 20122. Pradeep Purandare, “Canal Irrigationin Maharashtra: Present Status”; Dams,Rivers & People, July-Aug 2012. http://sandrp.in/irrigation/status_of_Canal_Irrigation_in_Maharashtra.PDF, http://sandrp.in/drp/July_August_2012.pdf3. Pradeep Purandare, “Water Auditingof Irrigation Projects in Maharashtra: Myth& Reality”; Dams, Rivers & People,Sept-Oct 2012. http://sandrp.in/irrigation/Irrigation_Projects_Audit_Mah_Pradeep_Purandare_Nov2012.pdf, http://sandrp.in/drp/Sept_Oct_2012.pdf

increased revenues, profits,employment and contracts. In Chenabbasin there is the additional issue oflimitations imposed by the Indus watertreaty of 1960 with Pakistan.Although India has been aggressivelypushing for cascade hydropowerprojects in rivers like Lohit, Siang,Kameng, Tawang, Subansiri, Bichome,Teesta and Dibang in North East;Alaknanda, Bhagirathi, Kali inUttarakhand; Sutlej , Ravi, Beas,

guard their interests. Truth may prevailin due course of time through RTI.On this background, an attempt is madein accompanying table to presentcomments on some of the issuesdiscussed in Volume –I of WP. Thecomments are self explanatory &perhaps, speak volumes. It is sincerelyfelt that WRD has lost an opportunityof introspection. Absence of soul-searching makes white paper anexercise in futility.

PRADEEP PURANDARE

Chenab..... contd from page 13

5 http://www.sandrp.in/hydropower/Pathetic_Cumulative_Impact_Assessment_of_Ganga_Hydro_projects.pdfhttp://sandrp.in/rivers/Lohit_Basin_Study_by_WAPCOS_A_mockery_of_e-flows_and_cumulative_impacts.pdf

Yamuna and Chenab in Himachal, allour CIA studies or basin studiestill date (if done at all), have beenroutinely poor and biased5. In rarecases where consultants have showedthe courage and integrity ofrecommending dropping projects, theirreports have been ridiculed and‘saviour ’ committees have beenappointed to look into these reportsagain to make ‘all ills go away’, like theB.K. Chaturvedi Committee which isnow looking at WII Study whichrecommended dropping 24 projectsplanned in the Upper Ganga. The MoEFdecided to dump the recommendationof the Teesta Cumulative Impact Studywhen it said that no projects should bebuilt upstream of Chungthang.It is high time that India takes impactsof cascading mega projects seriously.These rivers are not merely powerproducing channels, they have been

providing and continue to providemillions of other services to the localcommunities and our ecology.Departments and agencies cannotsimply push ahead their own big damagenda at the cost of the environmentand communities, in the absence ofunbiased scientific studies and goodsense.

PARINEETA DANDEKAR

Women’s Protest March against 300 MWGyspa Project in Lahaul Spiti. 2010Photo: viewphotos.org

An indicative list of capacity revision ofprojects in Chenab basin

SlNo

Name InitialCapacity Revised

Capacity

1

2

3

4

Miyar

Gyspa

Dugar

Sach Khas

120 90

170

236

149

300

380

260


21

After Jayakwadi was completedin 1976, numerous medium andlarge dams came up in the

upstream Godavari. Many dams on thePravara and Mula Basins and DarnaDam cluster have been built after the

Jayakwadi Project. These damsintercepted and diverted flows toJayakwadi. All was well in surplus ornormal years, but in the current yearwith deficit rainfall, Maharashtra is on

the threshold of perhaps the worstintra state water protest that it has seen.Jayakwadi supplies drinking water tourban centres of Aurangabad, Paithan

Map indicating projects in Godavari basin in Marathwada region with live storages in MCM as on 26th November 2012

INTRA STATE WATER DISPUTES IN MAHARASHTRASEEDS OF BIGGER PROBLEMS IN FUTURE ALL OVER INDIA?

Reservoir storage levels in Marathwada region of Maharashtra, consisting of 8 districts, are scary. Of the 11 projects, 6projects have a live storage capacity of 0. The huge Jayakwadi Dam on Godavari, which supplies drinking water to 4Municipal Corporations and over 200 villages, has mere 2% live storage as on 26th November 2012. While weak monsoonand upstream dams in Nashik and Ahmednagar districts are to blame for this alarming situation, there is a bigger problemof management at the heart of the issue.


22

and Jalna, Beed, more than 200 villagesand Maharashtra IndustrialDevelopment Corporations (MIDCs)including the 1130 MW Parali ThermalPower Plant. For the past few months,Aurangabad has been facing the worstwater shortages, with water beingsupplied once in three days at times.Government Medical College andhospital had to postpone surgeries dueto water scarcity. The Chief Minister(CM) has made it clear that sufficientwater cannot be supplied to Parali TPP1

and Maharashtra should brace itself tomore power cuts.Poor storage in Jayakwadi was not anovernight situation, nor is it a newsituation. For the last decade, the damhas not been filled to its capacity due toscanty rains and upstream projects.2

Marathwada region has received a poorrainfall and since September 20123,protests started with demands up formore water from the upstream dams4.But no water was released from theupstream regions.However, things went from bad toworse after October as water cutsbecame more and more pronounced inMarathwada. There were increasingprotests in Aurangabad in which allpolitical parties participated,demanding more water releases fromupstream dams. This was vehementlyopposed by upstream Nashik andAhmednagar regions. It was only afterthe Chief Minister intervened and

ordered that 9 TMCwater should bereleased toJayakwadi fromDarna group ofDams (NashikR e g i o n ) ,Bhandardara andNilwande Dam( A h m e d n a g a rregion) and MulaDam (PravaraRiver, Ahmednagarregion) that waterreleases actuallystarted. Asexpected, theannouncement andsubsequent releasesfaced stiff protestsfrom politicalparties and farmersin the upstream. Incase of Mula Damon Pravara River in the drought proneAhmednagar district, farmers groupsdid not allow water release for an entireday and actually stood in the river aswater was released in the river channel,threatening Jal Samarpan 5. Theirrigation department then reluctantlyconceded in making one irrigationrotation through the canals for thisregion. Interestingly, only 1.55 TMCwas released from Darna Dam inNashik region, which is 92% full as of26th November 2012.For water releases within the samestate, tremendous security checks wereput in place. Hundreds of police weredeployed, gates of KT weirs were forcedopened, canals and river banks wereconstantly patrolled to curb lifting andto top it all, the electricity of the regionwas cut off to stop electric pumps of theregion from siphoning off water!Though some people believe this wasneeded, it is indeed shocking andsaddening to see this. There werenumerous protests at places. Water

sharing within a state reached a newlevel of mistrust and hostility.WATER RELEASED TO JAYAKWADI TILL 3RDDECEMBER 2012Whither MWRRA? Lest we forget,Maharashtra gets the distinction ofbeing the first Indian state to havepromulgated the Maharashtra WaterResources Regulatory Authority Act in2005, following which the MWRRAAuthority was formed. This was at thebehest of World Bank under itsMaharashtra Water SectorImprovement Project (MWSIP). TheAuthority was explicitly created in2005 “to meet the pressing need for aninstitutional mechanism to regulate theallocation, management and utilisationof the state's limited water resourcesthrough a participatory approach”6 .Some relevant provisions of theMWRRA Act (2005) include:Section 11: Power, functions and dutiesof the Authority states:to determine the priority of equitable

1. w.wwthehindubusinessline.com/industry-and-economy/economy/water-woes-plague-parli-power-plant-in-maharashtra/article4093497.ece

2. aurangabad.nic.in/htmldocs/District_Vision2020/C.%20Index.pdf3. articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-09-07/pune/33675858_1_major-dams-water-storage-release-water4. articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-09-07/pune/33675858_1_major-dams-water-storage-release-water5. www.afternoondc.in/city-news/marathwada-water-woes-threaten-to-divide-state/article_701516. www.mwrra.org

Sl No

Dam BasinLive StorageCapacityM C M

Live StorageCapacityon 26 Nov 2012%

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

Jayakwadi Godavari

Mazalgaon

Manjara

Purna Yeldari

Lower Terna

SeenaKolegaon

Lower Dudhna

PurnaSiddheshwar

Manar

UpperPenganga

Vishnupuri

Godavari

Godavari

Godavari

Godavari

Bheema

Godavari

Godavari

Godavari

LowerGodavari

Godavari

2171

312

177

809

91

76

242

81

138

964

81

2

0

0

0

0

0

0

9

23

60

77

SlNo

Dam Quantity ofwaterreleased forJayakwadi(TMC)

DistancefromJayakwadiDam (Kms)

1

2

3

4

Mula

Bhandardara

Nilwande

Darna

522.5

2

2.5

1.55

210

170


23

distribution of water available at thewater resource project, sub-basin andriver basin levels during periods ofscarcity;Section 12: General Policies of theAuthority states:“in order to share the distress in theriver basin or sub-basin equitably, thewater stored in the reservoirs in thebasin or sub-basin, as the case may be,shall be controlled by the end ofOctober every year in such way that,the percentage of utilizable water,including kharif use, shall, for allreservoirs approximately be the same”.(Emphasis added.)This has been completely violated in theGodavari basin this year. The MWRRAhas entirely failed in meeting itsexplicitly mandate and most importantsocial role in this regard. Even now, itis not taking any proactive steps to tryand put things in order, to give somesemblance of ‘integrated river basinmanagement’.Ironically, when there were strongprotests in Aurangabad over waterreleases, MWRRA was in Aurangabadholding meetings on water tariffproposals, not on this pressing issue!This is the same institution that is beingput forth as an example to be followedthroughout the country. The StateWater Authority formed under theMWRRA has not had a single meetingsince the formation of the authority!This only goes on to prove the inabilityof imposed from outside, strait jacketedinstitutional structures, working witha top down and unaccountable mannerand with no perspective to take anyequitable, participatory and usefuldecisions.The limited water releases that havehappened till now in Godavari basinfrom dams upstream of Jayakwadihave happened because of ChiefMinister’s orders and not the MWRRAor the Godavari Marathwada IrrigationDevelopment Corporation (which wassupposed to have a water allocationplan for the Godavari basin). This isindeed a very serious issue with farreaching implications. Water scarcitywill intensify in the coming months and

unless basin authorities take timelyand proactive steps, it will not takemuch time for a protest to become amovement. For decisions to be backedby upstream or downstreamcommunities, the composition, themandate and functioning of such anauthority would have to bepartic ipatory, transparent andaccountable. Unfortunately, this is notwhat the MWRRA ever aimed to be.In Krishna basin, similar situation isemerging, where Ujani dam on BhimaRiver, the third largest reservoir ofMaharashtra and lifeline for Solapurcity and numerous villages, has only7% water in live storage as on Nov 26,2012. Similar to the situation inJayakwadi, upstream dams in Puneregion like Temghar, Panshet,Warasgaon and Pawana have storagesranging from 95% to 81%. Here too,there has been a strong opposition fromthe upstream to release water fordownstream users and here tooMWRRA has been unacceptably silent.What makes the situation morealarming in Ujani is the extremely poorwater quality of the water due tountreated sewage from upstream Pune.It seems, in near future, this situationwill get more volatile as here thecompeting users are politicallyinfluential urban areas of Pune andPimpri Chichwad in the upstream andan equally strong and politician-backedsugarcane lobby near the dam. Solapurcity and the Tail Enders of Ujani havebeen suffering historically.In case of both Ujani and Jayakwadi,the dams have huge dead storages, andsome experts, including senior officialsof MWRRA, have argued that the deadstorage can be used for drinking watersupply. But there is no policy ormechanisms to achieve that.Aurangabad Municipal Corporationhas been contemplating installingcommon head works at JayakwadiDam, to utilise the dead storage fromthe dam for drinking water andindustrial purposes.2 According toAurangabad Vision 2020 Document, “InJayakwadi reservoir, the quantity ofwater available between Dam sill level

and level 4 M below sill is 232.53 mm3.It is proposed to have a common headwork for lifting water from the deadstorage of Jayakwadi to ensure all timewater availability for drinking water.”Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran hasestimated the cost of this to be around106 Crores, the scheme is yet to take off.Options like these may have to beexplored in the current situation.Here it may also be noted that GodavariBasin is supposed to be a surplus basinas per the National Water DevelopmentAgency’s calculations. Andhra Pradeshis building huge projects to transferwater from Godavari to Krishna basin.The question is, how such projects aresanctioned when the upstream of thesame basin is in such dire straits. It ishigh time such projects are shelved.Else, in climate change scenario, theywill provide fresh battle grounds forinterstate and intra state conflicts. Samegoes to water allocations to over 71Thermal Power Plants in the Vidarbharegion of Godavari Basin. Ironically,MWRRA has been instrumental inchanging water allocations of irrigationprojects from farmers to Power Plantsin this case. This and the contestedwater tariff seem to the onlycontributions of MWRRA so far.It is now time to show that the statecan and will take strong steps to worktowards equity and deficit sharing.MWRRA has proved its inability indealing with this and it is time for atruly participatory process to emerge.Let us not forget that India’s massivewater infrastructure, the biggest in theworld, has been put up at a huge social,economic and ecological cost.Jayakwadi Dam submerged 118villages and displaced 70000 peoplewhen it was completed in 1976. It is timeto review and reconsider the existence,dimensions, functioning and usefulnessof such dams. And make functioning ofthose existing structures that are foundnecessary, more responsive, efficientand equitable.

PARINEETA DANDEKAR

(This article was published in IndiaTogether.org)


24

The simultaneous attainment offinancial, environmental andsocial sustainability of urban

services is an important requirementof development. Huge investments arebeing made in the improvement ofurban infrastructure and services inIndia. Within urban infrastructure thesupply of water and its disposal afteruse has become one of the mostproblematic aspects of planning andmanagement. Water has to be broughtfrom distant sources and thewastewater needs to be treated beforebeing discharged into natural waterbodies or rivers. In dryland areas whichare physically water scarce andconstitute some 70 per cent of thecountry, the problem becomes evenmore acute as the costs associated withsetting up and running Water Supplyand Sanitation (WSS) services go upexponentially.The situation is particularlyproblematical in Indore which is thelargest city of Madhya Pradesh. Thecity is situated on the dry MalwaPlateau which is naturally water scarcesimilar to most parts of western,northwestern, central & peninsularIndia. The city has a fairly long historyof urban planning from the early 20thcentury providing rich material for astudy: http://www.scribd.com/doc/115030982/Indore-WSS-Critique. Thisstudy is based on a secondary reviewof the documents of the IndoreMunicipal Corp (IMC) and other sourcesand suggests remedial measures. The

study does a detailed analysis of actualexpenditure and revenue of the IMC forfive years to show the extent of theunsustainability of the water supplyand sewerage systems. The mainconclusions and recommendations areas follows:1. The finances of the IMC as a wholeare unsustainable. Property taxeswhich should constitute the majorsource of income because they are aprogressive tax that is borneproportionately more by the moreaffluent citizens, contribute only 11%of the own revenue of the IMC and 9%of the total revenue. The actual percapita property tax revenue in 2006-07was a meagre Rs 131 as against thenational average of Rs 486 and even in2010-11 it was only Rs 225. The debtservice ratio in 2010-11 was 7.1 per centand it is slated to go up even furtheronce the principal payments for theAsian Development Bank (ADB) loanbegin in 2015. This will put furtherpressure on the finances.2. The revenue model of the WaterSupply is on an even moreunsustainable footing. The solid wasteremoval and sewerage sector's financesare in the red. The actual recovery ofcosts through water taxes, charges andstate government grants is only about45%. The collection of water taxes isabout 50% of what the minimumshould be. The major cost item is thatof the electricity bills for pumpingwater up from the Narmada to Indore.Despite the increase in average monthly

water taxes per connection to Rs 225 in2011 the situation has not improved.The electricity bills are slated to go upin future.3. The status of the WSS sector isextremely poor. Non revenue water inthe water supply system is very highdue to leakages and theft. The actualsupply is only 243.5 Million Litres perDay (MLD) against the design of 391MLD. As a consequence the cost of wateris also high. The water supply from theNarmada is the costliest at Rs 17.76 perKilo Litre (KL) while the YashwantSagar and Bilawli supply is the cheapestat Rs 2.25 per KL. The actual averagesupply is 113 litres per capita per day(lpcd) as opposed to the norm of 135lpcd. This too is skewed with 54 per centof the population receiving piped watersupply at 171 lpcd and the rest 46 percent having to rely on standposts, openwells and handpumps for a supply of46 lpcd. The poor IMC supply hasresulted in a proliferation of private andcommercial groundwater supplywhich has seriously depleted theaquifers in Indore. An affordabilityanalysis shows that the recovery of thefull costs of water supply will lead towater taxes constituting 7 per cent ormore of the monthly expenditure of 43per cent of households living above thepoverty line assuming that water willbe supplied free to those living belowit.4. The waste water system is grosslyinadequate and so most of the wastewater is disposed of untreated into the

SUSTAINABILITY AND FINANCIAL VIABILITY OF URBAN WATER IN DRYLAND AREAS

A CASE STUDY OF INDORE CITYThe simultaneous attainment of financial, environmental and social sustainability of urban services is an importantrequirement of development. Huge investments are being made in the improvement of urban infrastructure and services inIndia. Within urban infrastructure the supply of water and its disposal after use has become one of the most problematicaspects of planning and management. Water has to be brought from distant sources and the wastewater needs to be treatedbefore being discharged into natural water bodies or rivers. In dryland areas which are physically water scarce andconstitute some 70 per cent of the country, the problem becomes even more acute as the costs associated with setting up andrunning Water Supply and Sanitation (WSS) services go up exponentially.


25

streams running through the citywhich have unacceptable levels ofbiological oxygen demand (BoD) and arehighly polluted. There is no properstorm water drainage and since thenatural drainages have become blockeddue to construction the city suffersfrom extensive flooding in themonsoons.5. Despite the pre-project review of thewater supply system done by the ADBhaving clearly shown that the currentsupply from the Narmada is financiallyunsustainable no other alternativeswere explored for providing water tothe city. Instead a third phase of theNarmada supply has beenimplemented at a huge cost with theADB loan. Later analysis shows that theinternal economic rate of return (IERR)and the financial internal rate of return(FIRR) calculated at the time of sanctionof the loan on the basis of certainassumptions are grossly inflated. Thiswill push the IMC into a severe resourcecrunch. The ADB it appears, haswilfully manipulated the economic andfinancial data to push through the loanfor the third stage of costly watersupply from the Narmada to benefit bigcompanies which supply and constructcentralised water supply and seweragesystems.6. The poverty pockets in the city whichare home to 27 per cent of thepopulation are very poorly served interms of WSS facilities and given thehigh cost of these services they are notin any position to pay for them. Thespecial projects for the provision ofbasic services to the urban poor underthe ADB, Jawaharlal Nehru UrbanRenewal Mission (JNNURM) andDepartment for InternationalDevelopment (DFID) projects are notbeing implemented properly.On the basis of the above review thefollowing recommendations are beingmade:1. The Governance of the Water sectorneeds to become more transparent,

participatory and accountable, moredemocratic in short. A clearly definedCity water policy needs to be evolvedto begin with.2. A Geographical Information Systemmust be used to map all the propertieswithin the municipal limits and thengrade them according to zones andbuilding quality for determination ofadequate property tax rates. The shareof property taxes must increase to atleast 30% of revenue receipts and theper capita tax realisation should reachRs 700. The tax collection system mustbe improved drastically and penalmeasures taken against defaulters.3. A Proper inventory of the WSSsystems in the city has to be preparedincluding both surface and groundwater and the storm and waste waterdisposal systems. Currently there areradio frequency sensor basedinstruments and computer softwaresto accomplish this quite easily. Onlythen can an authentic water demandand waste water and storm watergeneration scenario be chalked out forplanning of services. Despite cleardirections from the ADB and the CentralGroundwater Authority (CGWA) inthis regard no progress has been madeso far.4. The Water Sustainable UrbanDevelopment (WSUD) principles, whichhave now been recommended by theNational Mission for SustainableHabitat, should be used to design ahybrid ground cum surface watersystem. These principles involverainwater harvesting, groundwaterrecharge, protection of local watersystem, demand side management,curbing wasteful use, penal provisionsfor higher water use, looking foroptions to recycle and reuse treatedwastewater, treating wastewater in adecentralised way and a road map forachieving full recycle. This hybridsystem will be much more sustainablein financial, social and environmentalterms than the wholly centralised

system being used at present. Thecentralised systems should be usedonly where necessary to provideservices to the congested povertypockets where there might not be spaceavailable for decentralised solutions.5. This alternative system would putthe onus on the more affluent citizens,corporations, private commercialestablishments and governmentinstitutions who are in possession of aconsiderable portion of urban land totackle their water supply and wastewater disposal needs in a decentralisedmanner from their own resources. Thiswould then free the IMC resources forprovision of free or subsidised WSSservices to the poor and the lowermiddle class who are not in a positionto pay for them fully. This is somethingthat the ADB, JNNURM and DFID havewilfully ignored so as to favour bigcompanies that set up and runcentralised WSS systems.6. Detailed surveys and design shouldbe carried out to determine the actualbenefit/cost ratio of such an alternativeplan and then compare it with thesurface water only alternative that hasbeen implemented so far. Thisalternative plan should beimplemented forthwith if found moreappropriate.7. The detailed plan for artificialrecharge in the Gambhir and ShipraRiver Basins drawn up the CGWBshould be implemented without anydelay so as to improve the overallavailability of water in the catchmentof Indore city.8. Solar power should be used forpumping the Narmada water supplyand other power needs to the extentcost effective.

RAHUL BANERJEE

(The author is associated withDhas Gramin Vikas Kendra and can becontacted at [email protected])


26

ALTERNATIVES & INNOVATIONS

World Bank’s mischievous Report‘Why 4 C rise should be avoided’ Thereport, prepared by the PostdamInstitute for Climate Change Researchfor World bank deals with observedchanges and impacts of Climate change,Projections for 21st Century with afocus on sea level rise and extremetemperatures and looks at sectoralimpacts on agriculture, waterresources, ecosystems and biodiversityand human health.The report refuses to delve intoindustrialisation, thermal powerplants, dams that have fuelled climatechange, and which have been pushedby World Bank. The report goes on tosay that impact of climate change willbe severe for developing countrieswhich are lacking in adaptivecapacities to cope with these impacts.World Bank has been furthering this byfunding and pushing projects like 4000MW Tata Mundra Project, the RampurHydro project, the Vishnugad PipalkotiHEP or the Luhri HEP, all in India. Thereis not a single word in the report abouthydropower or thermal power plants.It is also surprising of WB publication

even to suggest a rise of about 4 C, whenIPCC talked about need to limit it to 2C.Port cities vulnerable to intensemonsoon climate change andunsustainable growth are leaving citieslike Mumbai and Kolkata increasinglyvulnerable. A report on an ongoingclimate study places Mumbai sixth in alist of 20 port cities worldwide at riskfrom severe storm-surge flooding,damage from high storm winds andrising seas. By 2070, an estimated 11.4million people and assets worth $1.3trillion would be at peril in Mumbaidue to climatic extremes. The study byOrganisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, revealsthat many of the susceptible port citiesare in Asia like Kolkata. Rampantconcretization in global cities is leadingto fluctuations in temperaturesworldwide and shifts in microclimates.These changes are likely to build up intodisastrous scenarios and excessiverainfall. In cities like Mumbai, wherepoor urban planning has left little spacefor water to get absorbed into theground, the impact may be severe. Abig portion of Mumbai is concretized.Solar radiation is absorbed by concrete,

triggering urban heat island effect andextreme weather conditions. OECDstudy in 2010 on flood risks, climatechange and adaptation in Mumbaipredicts a 3.6º Celsius increase in themean temperature in Mumbai by 2070or 2080 as a worst case scenario.The report also points towards patheticadaptation strategies in Indian cities.Large areas of reclaimed land aresituated just above sea level and belowhigh-tide level. This inhibits naturalrunoff of surface water and impacts thecomplex network of drains, rivers,creeks and ponds that channel waterinto the sea. (The Times of India 121112)

Crashed Carbon Credit Market TheCarbon offset credits have fallen to anew all-time low amid oversupply andsigns of a possible ban on some creditsin the European Union system. Theprice of one carbon credit, nearly Euro24 (Rs 1,500) in 2008, was Euro 0.83 inlate November 2012. It has beenreported that many Indian companieshave sold their carbon credits beforeDurban talks (UN Climate ChangeConference, December 2011). AfterDurban, Europe, one of the majorbuyers, put a brake on purchase ofcredits, citing recession and a financialcrisis. Indian firms were holding on tothe remaining credit points with thehope that the market would reboundbut it did not even in Dec 2011. As ofNovember 2011, India had 2,123approved CDM projects. Of these, 738were registered with the UNFCCC.(Business Standard 231112)

Chouka system in Laporiya AnupamMishra’s new book on Chauka system(literally meaning ‘a square courtyard’)of rainwater harvesting from Laporiya,Jaipur district, Rajasthan, Gochar kaPrasad Baantata Laporiya explains thesimplicity and beauty of thesestructures. A chouka system is made outof a series of shallow rectangular dugareas that work together like sponges,collecting rains and passing water fromone chouka to the next. By constructingthe pits at intervals across the slope,runoff is intercepted and retained on thefield until it is absorbed, increasing

CLIMATE CHANGE & WATER

CUMULATIVE IMPACT OF HYDROPOWER GREATER

A paper by scientists Philip Fearnside and Salvador Pueyo in journal Nature ClimateChange dispels the myth that hydropower dams are clean. Authors illustrate differentneglected pathways of methane release from both upstream and downstream ofdams. Reservoir emissions mostly constitute of methane which is about 21 timesmore potent a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide over 100 years.

Siting an example of Brazil, the authors write "Various mathematical errors haveresulted in Brazil’s electrical authorities estimating the magnitude of emissions fromreservoir surfaces at a level of only one-fourth what it should be.” This was also saidby a team of Canadian Researchers regarding dams in Canada recently.

The paper also states that Dams in the tropics have two principle greenhouse gasemissions sources: One-time emissions of "fixed sources" of carbon, which arereleased from soil carbon stocks and dying vegetation when the reservoir is floodedand Methane formed when "renewable sources" of carbon originating from variousinputs of organic matter end up in reservoirs and then decay at the bottom, makingthem into a Methane Factory. Governments are not only promoting hydro projectsfor their supposed benefits in mitigating global warming, but also to take advantageof mitigation funds such as the Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism.

Shattering the “clean-green-sustainable” myth, authors say “These tropical damsare expected to have cumulative emissions greater than those of fossil-fuel plants forseveral decades to come, making them indefensible on the basis of global warmingmitigation”.

CDM HYDRO PROJECTS


27

ground water recharge. Choukas havetransformed the dry wastelandsurrounding Laporiya into grassyvillage common lands perfect forgrazing, multi tired biodiversity.Around 1,600 hectares of new choukashave been built through Gramin VikasNav Yuvak Mandal, Laporiya, a civilsociety organisation. The system hashelped villages around Laporiya inmany ways. Now there is lessmigration, more crop diversity andimproved milk yields. The low budgetinnovation has great applications forall of India’s water scarce areas.SANDRP has visited Laporiya and thissystem finds mention in SANDRP’sReport Water Sector Options for Indiain a Changing Climate. (http://s a n d r p . i n / w t r s e c t /Water_Sector_Options_India_in_Changing_Climate_0312.pdfview?searchterm=Water%20sector%20options)The book by Anupam Mishra can bedownloaded from India Water Portal:http://hindi.indiawaterportal.org/sites/hindi. indiawaterportal.org/files/lapodiya-water-Village3.pdfInspiring micro hydro projects throughsustained , inspiring efforts, IIT-Delhialumnus Yogeshwar Kumar has set upenvironment friendly microhydroelectric plants (capacity below 1MW, most only a few kilo watts) in thehilly regions of Uttarakhand, Kargil,Ladakh, Meghalaya and parts of Orissafor supplying power to households aswell as to set up small enterprises andcreating jobs through his NGOJansamarth. In the past three decades,he has built 15 hydel projects which aremanned and operated by villagers, whouse the power to run rural enterpriseslike flour-mill, oil-mill, sawmill, andwelding workshops. Electricity fromone of the first plants he installed wasalso used for a night school for childrenwho were busy in grazing cattle duringthe day.Kumar has found it difficultimplementing programmes throughgovernment agencies. Thoughgovernment funds for building ofhydel-plants for remote villages in Lehis available, there is no allocation forrepairs and maintenance. He says thereis imperative need to build strong

cooperative units in villages with anemphasis on capacity building in ruralareas.He is now training villagers inoperation and maintenance of powerplants. Their wages are paid fromincome of the plant, which is collectedfrom consumers as per their meterreading. In 2009 Agunda village in Tehridistrict of Uttarakhand opted for a 40KW micro-hydro power plant eventhough the village was going to beconnected to the state grid. Thevillagers find their plant more reliableand which can be repairedimmediately – with their own trainedmanpower - unlike the government linethat takes days.Ironically, the very existence of thisplant, which the villagers want toupgrade to 100 KW, is threatened by anupstream hydel project, the proposed12.5 MW Jhalakoti Hydel Project, by aprivate company. The Agunda projectnot only provides electricity forlighting, wool carding, rice and wheatprocessing, but also irrigates 60-70fields. Similarly, the 22.5 MWBhilanganga Project in the same regionhas led to severe problems for thecommunity including displacement,impacts of blasting, reduced waterflows, etc. (See: SANDRPs comments on12.5 MW Jhalakoti MHPs application forCarbon Credits: http://sandrp.in/c o m m e n t s _ C D M _ H E P s /Objection_to_Jhalakoti_HEP_iin_Uttarakhand_S A N D R P _ s u b m i s s i o n _ t o _ UNFCCC_on_CDM_proposal_June_2012.pdf/view?searchterm=jhalakoti) It isimportant promote and encouragetruly sustainable micro hydel projectlike the ones being set up by YogeshwarKumar, while opposing the green farceof small hydel projects which havesignificant, un-assessed andunaddressed impacts on ecology andsociety.Power of Positive Actions It ispleasantly surprising to see the powerof small, inspired local actions. DevyaniLake, 70 kms from Jaipur in Rajasthannear the famous saline Sambhar Lake,is one such example. Once fondly calledas ‘sab teertho ki naani’ (grandma of allholy waters), the lake has been dry inmost living memory. Government

restoration plans remain resolutely onpaper.In such scenario, a group of youths asdiverse at local Volley ball club, friendsgroups and Khatik Samaj joined handsto see the Devayani lake lotus-filled forthemselves. Overflowing waters fromnearby Sambhar Lake, which wouldhave otherwise affected salt-pans werediverted by digging storage tanks.Water from these two storage tankswas actually pumped into the DevayaniLake, whose water level reached 9 feetin just 7 days. The parched lake is nowbrimming with water and all that itbrings: festivals, celebrations, rising

DAM DRAWDOW NS LEAD TOM ETHANE E M ISSIONS

Research from Washington StateUniversity has revealed thattemperate reservoirs can producesignificant surge in emissions duringdrawdown periods: when the waterlevel in a reservoir drops rapidly,thereby exposing a "drawdown zone"of decayed plants that can be acontinuous source of methane.Researchers found in experiments thatmethane emissions jumped 20 to 36-fold when the water level was drawndown.

While emissions from drawdownregions have long been recognized,this is the first study to actuallydemonstrate and quantify therelationship between water-leveldrawdowns and greenhouse gasreleases that too in temperate regions.With 54000 + dams globally,continuing to overlook reservoirs asa carbon source and treating dams asa "carbon neutral" energy source isno longer a viable option. Accordingto Katy Yan from IR, an important firststep is for governments and dambuilders to recognize that dams havea carbon footprint. Next, countriesmust report their reservoir emissionsin their national greenhouse gasinventories. The IPCC must fast adoptstrong guidelines for this.(International Rivers, WashingtonState University August 2012,International Rivers).


28

GROUNDWATER

ground water levels and good cheer.(The Hindu 281012)The groups had no technical knowledge,no funds, no restoration manuals attheir hand, and their actions may notbe the most refined. But the effort showsthe power of small collective positiveactions. Devyani is now brimming andthe mark of this will remain on theminds of the youth and children of thisarea. Hope comes in small sizes.Small Ponds, Huge benefits Lakholaav,a small pond in Marwar Mundwa townin Nagaur district, Rajasthan is atelling example of communityconservation and benefit sharing. Asponds in other towns have shrunk dueto encroachments and dumping ofgarbage, Lakholaav is providingdrinking water to a population of 15000people, the whole year round. Citizensas well as the municipal committee takeutmost care ensuring cleanliness andefficient management.While groundwater is heavy withfluoride, tap water supply is everyalternate day, making rainwaterharvesting a must. Around 50 per centhomes harvest rain water in a smallunderground structure called tanka.Like Devyani lake, Lakholaav is also agreat social binder and the ghats hostthe entire town during festivals, likeTeej and Dussehra.There is a ban on bathing, washingclothes and entry of animals in thepond. Boards warning against opendefecation within 2 km of its catchmentarea have been erected and there areguards to check activities in this region.Several modifications have been madein Lakholaav's structure over the years.A 3 km long channel has beenconstructed connecting the catchmentarea on a nearby hillock withLakholaav ensuring good water infloweven during weak monsoon as was thecase this year. A natural treatment plantfurther cleanses the inflowing water. Afew years ago when the pond dried updue to drought, the municipalcommittee decided to desilt the pond.Local farmers chipped in with theirtractors and used the fertile soil in theirfields.Though Lakholaav Pond and manysuch tanks, ponds, baavdis, johads,

maybe small, their significance asdecentralised, community managedand eco-friendly water harvestingstructures is immense. They continueto offer the most sustainable options todestructive large dams and canals inIndia. (GOI Monitor 151112)25% German Power grid onrenewables Since 2000, Germany hasconverted 25% of its power grid torenewable energy sources such as solar,wind and biomass. The proportion ofpower from renewable sources keepsrising and is expected to reach 80-100% by 2050. At the same time, Germanyis talking about phasing out its nuclearenergy plants by 2020. (Truthdig Nov15, 2012)If Germany can do it, why can not Indiawith its much larger solar powerpotential? Tamil Nadu is now launchinga program to add 1000 MW solar powereach of next three years and eachdistribution company will be obligedto buy 3% of its power from solarsources, with the percentage going upeach year. This is only happeningthrough projects of over 1 MW, unlikeGermany where it is happeningthrough roof top solar projects. Indiatoo needs to incentivise small, roof topsolar projects.Unfortunately, global investment inrenewable power in first three quartersof 2012 is down to $ 164.2 Billion from $196.4 B last year, largely due to 62%decline in the most polluting countryUS and 29% decline in Europe, bothattributed to economic slow down.(Business Standard Nov 12, 2012)Interesting to see this recent paper fromPrayas Energy Group, Pune on Roof topphoto voltaic (RTPV) solar in India, itsays: "Further, instead of subsidizingRTPV, we propose that tariffs ofcommercial and high-end residentialconsumers should be aligned withthose of RTPV costs, therebyincentivising them to shift to solar orpay higher tariff. Policy should helpcreate an enabling eco-system for RTPVand focus on the removal of proceduralhurdles and other barriers in order tofacilitate the quick adoption anddeployment of RTPV systems. Finally,we believe that such a net-meteringapproach to RTPV promotion is ideally

suited for India, since it is sociallyequitable, economically viable, andenvironmentally sustainable." (http://w w w. p r a y a s p u n e . o r g / p e g /index.php?option=c om_k2&view=item&id=186%3Asolar-rooftop-pv-in-india)California Coalition for decentralisedoptions The California Roundtable onWater and Food Supply, in a new reportFrom Storage to Retention: ExpandingCalifornia's Options for Meeting itsWater Needs, calls for more retentionponds and other small reservoirs onfarms and farmland, moregroundwater storage on private lands,and other overlooked approaches. “Thevalue of working lands in helping tosequester water for later use whileachieving many benefits, such as foodsecurity, flood management and habitatrestoration, represents a critical missedopportunity for improving watersecurity,” the report says. The coalitionhas members affiliated with irrigationdistricts, utilities agencies, USDA, StateWater Resources Control Board, andother public and private interests. Thegroup wants water storage in the stateto become more diversified andinclusive so that the full range ofoptions available — such as canals,small man-made ponds and floodplains— are used to augment the state’sexisting system of large reservoirs. Thereport says more water storage isnecessary because California’s watersupply will diminish due to climatechange factors and population growth.(www.acwa.com 171112)

Groundwater abstraction leading tosea level rise! According to research byUtrecht University and Deltares, Large-scale abstraction of groundwater forirrigation of crops leads to a sea levelrise of 0.8 mm per year, which is aboutone fourth of the current rate of sea levelrise of 3.1 mm per year. From a databaseof the International GroundwaterResources Assessment Centre (IGRAC),scientists extracted country-basedstatistics on groundwater abstraction,combining these statistics withestimates of water demand based onmaps of population density and thelocation of irrigated areas, a global map


29

of groundwater abstraction andrecharge could be derived. Bysubtracting groundwater abstractionfrom groundwater recharge theyarrived at a global map of groundwaterdepletion.The results show that the areas ofgreatest groundwater depletion are inIndia, Pakistan, the US & China. Inthese areas food production and wateruse are unsustainable and seriousproblems are expected. Thehydrologists estimate that from 1960to 2000 global groundwater abstractionhas increased from 312 to 734 km3 peryear and groundwater depletion from126 to 283 km3 per year. Contributionof groundwater depletion to sea levelrise could be calculated as most of thegroundwater released from the aquifersultimately ends up in the world’soceans. This turned out to be 0.8 mmper year, which is a surprisingly largeamount when compared to the currentsea level rise of 3.1 mm per year asestimated by the IPCC. It thus turns outthat almost half of the current sea levelrise can be explained by expansion ofwarming sea water, over one quarterby the melting of glaciers and ice capsand slightly less than one quarter bygroundwater depletion. (DeltaresRelease May 2012)This highlights not only the connectionbetween groundwater abstraction andsea level rise, but more importantly theintricate connections of the globalwater cycle and how impacts ofunsustainable action at one place canhave far reaching and severe impact forthe entire planet. Parts of India isalready abstracting double the amountof groundwater that is being recharged,while depending heavily ongroundwater sector for not onlyirrigation, but urban and ruraldrinking water and industrial needs.

Cumulative Assessment for SHPsdemanded Brazilian court hassuspended construction of smallhydroelectric dams along the ParaguayRiver until their possibleenvironmental impacts have been fullyassessed. Unlike the case in India, in

Brazil environmental impactassessment of small dams is carried out,but prosecutors are saying thatcombined effects of all of the smallhydropower projects together must beevaluated. In Brazil, Small Hydros areupto 30 MW with reservoir area of lessthan 300 Ha.The court ruled that smallhydroelectric plants can causeirreversible damages, by modifying theannual cycles of flooding and droughtin the Pantanal, one of the world’slargest wetland systems. This could inturn affect the 4,000 families whodepend on Pantanal for survival,through tourism, farming and fishing.The Pantanal, a national park, wasdeclared a World Natural Heritage siteby UNESCO in 2000. There are 113 smallhydropower dam projects along theUpper Paraguay River alone, including30 that are already operating, inaddition to 10 larger dams.Experts say that small dams are a hotlydebated in Brazil as their impacts areproportionately larger than those oflarge dams, taking into considerationindicators such as the ratio of areaflooded per kilowatt of electricity, or thenumber of fish species affected perkilowatt. (IPS News 100912).

Ganga: Now a Carcinogenic RiverResearch by the National CancerRegistry Programme (NCRP) under theIndian Council of Medical Researchshows that the Ganga river is now thickwith heavy metals and lethal chemicalsthat cause cancer.The incidence of cancer was found to besome of the highest in the country inareas drained by the Ganga. The worst-hit stretches are east Uttar Pradesh, theflood plains of Bengal and Bihar. Cancerof the gallbladder, kidneys, food pipe,prostate, liver, kidneys, urinarybladder and skin are common in theseparts. These cases are far more commonand frequently found here thanelsewhere in the country, the studysays. Gallbladder cancer cases along theriver course are the second highest inthe world and prostate cancer highestin the country. "This is the consequenceof years of abuse. Over years, industries

along the river have been releasingharmful effluents into the river. Theprocess of disposing of waste has beenarbitrary and unscientific. The riverand those living along its banks arepaying a price for this indiscretion,"Chittaranjan National Cancer Institutedirector Jaideep Biswas said. TheKolkata-based cancer institute is anassociate of the National CancerRegistry Programme. (The Times ofIndia 171012)The Bihar Pollution Control Board hassaid this year on Chhath that Ganga isnot fit for aachman or dip at any of the21 points monitored by it, thebacteriological count is higher thanacceptable everywhere. Will this wakeup the National Ganga River BasinAuthority chaired by the PrimeMinister?

MLAs in Kerala launch drive to saverivers A group of legislators of theKerala United Democratic Front havelaunched a campaign for protecting the44 rivers in the State. The objective ofthe campaign is to prepare a modellegislation that will lead to the settingup of a river basin authority withstatutory powers. The campaign hasbegun from Neyyar inThiruvananthapuram and willconclude at Chandragiri in Kasaragod.The campaign was flagged-off byMedha Patkar. MLAs have planned forinteractive sessions and debates on thebanks of the rivers during thecampaign, bringing together activistsof various river protection committees,social workers, writers, culturalpersonalities, and scientists. (The Hindu131112)Murray Darling basin reserves waterfor Environment In drought proneMurray Darling Basin, 2760 MCM(Million Cubic Meters) water has beenreserved for environmental flows as thebasin plan becomes an act. Already1577 MCM water has been secured thisyear, as compared to 65 MCM in June2009. Most of this water has beensecured by increasing efficiency and notbuying water alone, which was acheaper option. One hurdle remains.The Plan needs to be tabled in

WATER POLLUTION

RIVERS

HYDRO PROJECTS


30

parliament for 15 days, during whichit could be voted down. (ClimateSpectator Australia, 261112)Recognising Rights of Rivers Amovement to advance the rights ofwaterways is happening now aroundthe world, with advocates calling forwater rights for rivers as part of humanright to water.New Zealand recently recognized theWhanganui River (third longest riverin NZ) and its tributaries as a legalentity with rights to exist and flourishas an "integrated, living whole."Guardians will be appointed to overseethe rights of the River pursuant to thisnew legal recognition. The decisionfollows a long court battle initiated bythe Whanganui River iwi, anindigenous community with strongcultural ties to the river. Under thesettlement, the river is regarded as aprotected entity, under an arrangementin which representatives from both theiwi and the national government willserve as legal custodians towards theWhanganui’s best interests. It isrecognised as ‘an integrated, livingwhole’ and will have its rights, just asany corporate entities or companies.Ecuador has similarly taken action toprotect the rights of waterways. Asuccessful 2011 lawsuit over injury toEcuador's Vilcabamba River fromwaste dumping led to the firstimplementation by court the country'sConstitutional provisions recognizingthe rights of nature. Pittsburgh,Pennsylvania similarly has adopted anordinance recognizing that "naturalcommunities and ecosystems,including water systems, possessinalienable and fundamental rights toexist and flourish." In California, SantaMonica's Task Force on theEnvironment approved a proposedSustainability Bill of Rights thatrecognizes the rights of natural systems,including coastal waters. (Tree Hugger060912, The Huffington Post 15x12)Looking at the huge social, cultural,economic and ecological significance ofIndian Rivers in hearts and minds ofmillions of Indians, an overarching

river protection law is an urgent needfor India.

Water discharge: Driver for FishDiversity In a recent paper entitled:Elevation Gradients in Fish Diversityin the Himalaya: Water Discharge Is theKey Driver of Distribution Patterns byJay Bhatt, Kumar Manish and MaharajPandit published in PLoS One Journal(Sept 2012), the authors conclude thatspecies richness of freshwater fish inHimalayan river systems depends onfreshwater flows. Authors collatedtaxonomic and distribution data of fishspecies from 16 Himalayan rivers andcarried out empirical studies onenvironmental drivers and fishdiversity and distribution in the Teestariver along elevation gradients 50–3800m and sought to understand the driversbehind the emerging patterns. Thestudy indicates that water discharge isthe best predictor of fish speciesrichness patterns in the HimalayanRivers and showed a strong linearrelationship of species richness withwater discharge.According to the authors, “Our resultsassume more significance because of theon-going large-scale hydropowerdevelopment in the Himalaya withnearly 300 dams being built acrossthese rivers. The river regulationactivity would result in significantreduction of water discharge andalteration of natural diurnal flows,habitat fragmentation and barriers tofish migration. The cumulative effectsof water withdrawal are known toreduce freshwater biodiversity and leadto extinction of fish. Worryingly, thezones of high species richness andendemism are also the sites ofconcentrated dam building and riverregulation in the Himalaya.”(www.plosone.org)Onslaught of dams in Himalayas willbe disastrous for fish diversity andendemic species. The suggestedmitigation measures come only in formof highly inadequate minimum flowsand artificial, unproven measures like

FISH AND FISHERIES

1. M. Banerjee, A Report on the Impact ofFarakka Barrage on the Human Fabric. Report.World Commission on Dams – ThematicReview. South Asia Network on Dams, Riversand People, New Delhi, India, 1999.2. A.I. Payne and S.A. Temple, ‘River andFloodplain Fisheries in the Ganges Basin. Finalreport R.5485.’ Marine Resources AssessmentGroup Limited, Overseas DevelopmentAdministration, London, 1996.3. K.K. Vass, S.K. Mondal, S. Samanta,V.R.Suresh and P.K. Katiha, ‘The environment andfishery status of the River Ganges’, AquaticEcosystem Health and Management, 13, 2010,385-394.4. S. Turvey, ‘Witness to Extinction: How wefailed to save the Yangtze River Dolphin’.

REERENCES:

Thirsty rivers...contd from page 10

hatcheries and fish farms.Need for River Sanctuaries to ProtectMahseer Madhya Pradesh State Bio-diversity Board has recommendeddeclaring Barna and some other riversas 'fish sanctuaries' to conserve theendangered Mahseer Fish which, onceabundant in Narmada and Taptibasins in MP, is now on the brink ofextinction. To strengthen the gene poolof Mahseer, Biodiversity Board hasrecommended declaring Bandrabhan,Sethani Ghat, Omkerashwar andMaheshwer Ghat of Narmada asBiodiversity Heritage Spots underSection 37 of Biodiversity Act 2002.The state was so rich in Mahseer that,according to experts there were six seedcollection sites around Hoshangabadfrom where seed of Mahseer wascollected and transported throughoutthe country. (The Times of India 111112)Mahseer swims upstream in a river tospawn (lay and fertilise eggs) thismigration route is blocked by dams likeSardar Sarovar, Narmada Sagar,Omkareshwar, Maheshwar, Bargi andTawa which do not have any fishmitigation measures like passes orladders, neither do they releasefreshwater flows in the downstreamfor the river. Dams have been theprimary cause of near extinction ofvarious species of Mahseer in India.


31RNI NO DEL ENG/2003/09562

Oxford University Press, Great ClarendonStreet, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK. 2008.5. J. Bandyopadhyay and S. Perveen, ‘Theinterlinking of Indian rivers: some questionson the scientific, economic and environmentaldimensions of the proposal’. Occasional PaperNo 60, SOAS Water Issues Study Group, Schoolof Oriental and African Studies/King’sCollege, London, U.K.6. N. Kelkar, and J. Krishnaswamy. KeepingRivers Alive. Seminar, 613, 2010, 29-33.7. S. Choudhary, S. Dey, S. Dey, V. Sagar, T.Nair and N. Kelkar, ‘River dolphin distributionin regulated river systems: implications for dry-season flow regimes in the Gangetic basin’,Aquatic Conservation: Marine and FreshwaterEcosystems, 22, 2012, 11-25.8. B.D. Richter and G.A. Thomas, ‘Restoringenvironmental flows by modifying damoperations’, Ecology and Society 12, 2007, 12.9. S.E. Bunn and A.H. Arthington, ‘Basicprinciples and ecological consequences ofaltered flow regimes for aquatic biodiversity’,Environmental Management 30, 2002, 492-507.10. D. Dudgeon, ‘Large-scale hydrologicalchanges in tropical Asia: prospects for riverinebiodiversity.’ Bioscience, 50, 2000, 793–806.11. D. Dudgeon, ‘River rehabilitation forconservation of fish biodiversity inmonsoonal Asia.’ Ecology and Society, 10,2005,15–19.12. A.H. Arthington, S.E. Bunn, N.L. Poffand R.J. Naiman, ‘The challenge of providingenvironmental flow rules to sustain riverecosystems’, Ecological Applications, 16, 2006,1311–1318.

River Yamuna...contd from page 17show that 10 cumecs is released in theriver as per SC order is making amockery of the SC order as the orderwas for the whole stretch of river allround the year.Moreover, Delhi had assured the SC in1998 that by the end of 2000, Delhi willhave adequate capacity to treat all itssewage and after Dec 31 2000, nountreated effluents would flow into theriver from Delhi. That is yet to happen.Delhi today does not sufficient capacityof STPs to treat the sewage it officiallygenerates. Secondly, none of the STPsare functioning at even 50% of thecapacity. Thirdly, Delhi generates muchmore sewage that officially assumeddue to the additional 200-300 MGDgroundwater used within the city. Theclaim that unauthorised colonies are

responsible for thesewage notreaching STPs isc l e a r l yunacceptable, thesecolonies did notspring upovernight. TheDelhi govt, theDelhi Jal Board andthe MEF should bemade answerablefor this situationand all concernedmust be heldaccountable.The HPC’s longterm suggestions of Renuka dam,Kishau Dam, and river linkingproposals are not necessary for Yamunato get freshwater all round the year. Infact, these projects and otherhydropower and dams planned in theYamuna basin are more likely todestroy the river further. The MOU ofUpper Yamuna River Board suggestingthat even the erroneously proposed 10cumecs flow into the river would bepossible only after these big dams onthe Yamuna are built is trying tomislead the Supreme Court and everyone else and is only an instrument ofnon action and attempt to pushunjustifiable projects.What can the SC do? Well there is a lotthat can be done to spare water for theriver, and spare the river from dumpingof untreated sewage and effluents. Alarge number of steps are possibleincluding adoption of more appropriatecropping pattern in Yamuna basin inHaryana and Uttar Pradesh, adoptionof water saving techniques like Systemof Rice Intensification, and incentivesfor organic farming that can help buildup soil capacity to hold moisture. InUrban areas like Delhi and elsewhere,time bound rainwater harvesting plan,groundwater recharge, protection oflocal water bodies, flood plain, ridgeand forests, demand side managementmeasures including avoidingunnecessary and wasteful water usingactivities, ensuring that existingSewage treatment plants work to theiroptimum capacity in quality andquantity of output throughparticipatory and accountable

Yamuna in Delhi Photo: India

governance, ensuring that new STPcapacities are set up in time boundmanner and are decentralised and usebiological treatment methods thatrequire less inputs of power, materialsand land and that make recycle of watereasier at local level, to name just a fewmeasures. All of these are known steps,but the governments have shown nowill to take any of these with therequired seriousness. Only transparentand accountable mechanisms canensure these are actually taken up withrequired seriousness.In an order on January 12, 2011 theAllahabad High Court (in PIL no 4003of 2006 in the matter of Ganga PollutionVs State of UP and Others) has said thatfrom any river, not more than 50% ofavailable water should be diverted andrest should be allowed to remain in theriver. This principle needs to be appliedin case of Yamuna at every location, butparticularly at the Hathnikund andWazirabad barrage.If all this is done and if the dumping ofuntreated sewage and effluents into theriver is stopped, along with otherpractices mentioned above, there is apossibility of rejuvenating the Yamunaalmost immediately. The SupremeCourt seems the only body to ensurethese steps are taken with seriousnessand implemented with of participatorygovernance. The Rs 12000 crore (theestimated amount spent on Yamunacleaning over the last 18 years by allagencies put together) question is, willthis happen?

HIMANSHU THAKKAR

(This article was published in Civil Societyin Dec 2012)


32

Edited, Published, Printed & Owned by Himanshu Thakkar at 86-D, AD Block, Shalimar Bagh, Delhi - 88.Printed at Sun Shine Process, B -103/5, Naraina Indl. Area Phase - I, New Delhi - 110 028

New Publication from SANDRP: Book Review

RIVER BAGMATI: BOUNTIES BECOME A CURSEby Dr D K MishraPublished in: August, 2012Published by: SANDRP and Peoples Science InstitutePages:196 + xii (8.5”x11” size)

Reviewed bySudhirendar Sharma(www.d-sector.org 30 Nov 2012)

The resolute perseverance with which Dinesh Kumar Mishra haschronicled major rivers, flowing through the flood plains of Bihar,during past three decades makes one realise if this civil engineercould have been anything but a ‘river biographer’. Meticulous withdetails, ranging from mythology to hydrology, the narrative weavespeople as victims of hydrological madness. Multiple voices anddivergent perspectives only testify what Voltaire had long said: ‘Theprogress of river to the ocean is not as rapid as that of man to error.’The story of Bagmati is no different!

While the river has preserved its status of a free-flowing drain inNepal, caging it between embankments has forced the river to roaroccasionally in Bihar. Largely unnoticed, the embankments havebreached no less than 58 times over last 35 years. Notable aspect ofthis rather familiar story across major river basins in the sub-continent is that ‘neither have lessons been learnt nor are there any

intentions.’ Not surprising, therefore, that the narrative reflects author’s pain and anguish in equal measures.

Mishra’s relentless documentation on rivers may not have gone unnoticed but it has not been able to capture popularimagination as yet. Bereft of detailed prescription, the diagnostic narrative has seemingly remained restricted toresearchers and academics. Being critical of structural development along river course and the consequences thereof,his books have remained on the periphery of political discourse on flood plain management. Like his previousbiographies, River Bagmatimay not be a game changer yet but has essential elements to challenge history.

One may well argue that the world is not at the tipping point for a change in managing our rivers yet. Should that beso, these river biographies have surely been written ahead of their times. However, the time is not far for the ‘business-as-usual’ scenario of (mis)managing the rivers to transform. It is then that wise, witty, patient, persistent andpersuasive anthology by Dinesh Kumar Mishra will merit serious consideration.

For copies of the book, contact [email protected]/ [email protected]/[email protected]. Price Rs 595/-+ Rs. 60/- (for postage). Pl send a check or demand draft to SANDRP, C/o 86-D, AD Block, Shalimar Bagh, Delhi - 110 088,Ph: 011-2748 4654/55.

Information on other publications of SANDRP could be accessed at sandrp.in/pubindex

RNI No DELENG/2003/09562

Dams, Rivers & People The annual subscription for the DRP is Rs 125/-. Please send a DD in favour of “Dams, Rivers &People”, payable at Delhi, to our address (DRP, c/o 86-D, AD block, Shalimar Bagh, Delhi 110 088). Or, you can send bybank transfer, contact SANDRP for details. Subscriptions can be sent for multiple years at the same rate. The DRP isalso available in electronic versions and can be accessed at www.sandrp.in/drpindex.

Documents

Dams, Rivers & People - WordPress.com · Dams and related hydrological fluctuations have magnified the impacts of several other aspects detrimental to fisheries like pollution, sedimentation,