Cauvery Verdict
A week back (on 5th February, 2007) he three-member Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal headed by Justice N P Singh gave its verdict. In the much-awaited final verdict after almost 17 years of hearings, the Tribunal allocated 419 tmc ft of the Cauvery river water annually to Tamil Nadu, 270 tmc ft to Karnataka, 30 tmc ft to Kerala and 7 tmc ft to Pondicherry.
This is a verdict that has left me baffled. It’s a known fact that both Karnataka and Tamil Nadu need more water if they are to continue with the rate at which the land under irrigation has been growing. Unfortunately, its also a known fact that increasing the land under irrigation does not increase the amount of water that the river can provide. Both states have been bringing in more are under irrigation (and TN has been the fastest), as that has been the yardstick that the tribunal has looked at while awarding the share of water to states.
The verdict means that tomorrow if Tamil Nadu brings a few thousand hectares of land under irrigation, it can again demand another tribunal and demand yet more water. Sure there will be some camera footages of dried crops (see these crops dried because we did not get more water from Karnataka), all the while the fact that these are areas that were added so that you can get more water will never find a mention.
Both states will want to increase the area under irrigation; but while human greed knows no bounds, the quantum of water available is limited. Under these circumstances, the tribunal could not have given an order that satisfies everyone, the least it could have done was to give an order that at least had some semblance to justice being done to everyone concerned.
The present order is (unfortunately) heavily skewed in favor of Tamil Nadu (looks like the footages of dry crops had an effect after all). Tamil Nadu gets 57.7% (419 TMC ft) of water while having only 36.9% (12,790 km2) of drought area in Basin and contributing only 31.8% (252 TMC ft) of water to the river. Karnataka on the other hand contributes 53.8% (425 TMC ft) of water and despite having 63.1% (21,870 km2) of drought area in the basin, gets only 37.2% (270 TMC ft) of water.
Human greed knows no bounds, and left to themselves both the states will try to increase the area under irrigation to crazy levels and then one of them will end up moving the tribunal alleging that its crops are drying because there is no water. A good solution might be to consider the length of the river in each state and award a share in proportion to that, or look at the contribution each state makes. The present formula that depends on the area under irrigation is a flawed one, and will only lead to another round of fight when each state takes the area under irrigation to unsustainable levels (yet again)
Reminds me of what my friend Po (She is from Coorg, Karnataka - the place where the river Kaveri originates) told me a few days back “The place where she (the river) originates, people don’t have enough water and looks like everyone else wants more water”. Well Po, looks like Tamil Nadu has managed to deny you the right to water, maybe time to get used to it.
Posted under: Thoughts
Tagged with: Cauvery, Dispute, final, Kaveri, Tribunal, verdict, Water
February 13th, 2007 at 13:46:27
Karnataka should get most of the water. If something remains others are welcome to use it. Isn’t Cauvery river originiating in Karnataka?
February 13th, 2007 at 14:43:01
slashdot, I said the verdict is flawed, but that does not mean that Kaveri belongs only to Karnataka.
Btw, Tamil Nadu contributes almost 32% of water in the river, so it too has a right - and hope you accept that :)
February 13th, 2007 at 21:52:21
Kill kill kill! Burn burn burn! Rape rape rape! until you get the decision in your favor. Who cares about sharing and being nice and accepting a verdict and unity in diversity bullshit?
May 10th, 2007 at 12:05:18
Cauvery water dispute – tribunal award
by
Mr. V.S.SARMA, Retired C.E. W.R.D.(M.P.)
1. Introduction
1.1 In river water disputes, the concerned states always stick to one sided argument from their side only. Every state feels that they are denied justice by other states and their share of water is robbed by other states. What ever any state may say, only natural justice prevails. Un-natural awards cannot be got enforced upon. Unless the parties claiming injustice done to them, consider the problem carefully, and on an equitable manner, and try for a reasonable solution, they only suffer and suffering will aggravate day by day. These facts are discussed with reference to Cauvery water dispute and tribunal award in the following paras. This will give guideline to other river water disputes as well.
2. Some facts about Cauvery river basin and Tribunal award
2.1 Total drainage area of Cauvery basin - 81,115 Sq.Km.
2.2 50% dependable annual surface flow 740 TMC (Thousand Million Cu.ft.)
2.3 Cauvery Tribunal award to various states
(i) Karnataka 270 TMC
(ii) Tamil Nadu 419 TMC
(iii) Kerala 30 TMC
(iv) Pondicherry 7 TMC
————–
Total 726 TMC
————-
( Source: Deccan Chronicle dated 6-2-2007)
14 TMC of water was left without award. But, the award made a mention that Karnataka should ensure delivering 192 TMC of water to Tamil Nadu on its border on a monthly and 10 daily basis as under ( in TMC):
June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb March Apr May
10 34 50 40 22 15 08 03 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5
It is not known from where this 192 TMC of water will come.
a) If the above 192 TMC is not from Karnataka’s share of 270 TMC, Cauvery should have 270 + 192 = 462 TMC of water generated in Karnataka state with 42 % drainage area and rest of the 58 % drainage area will generate 278 TMC of water only.
b) If the above 192 TMC is from Karnataka’s share of 270 TMC, then Karnataka will be left with 270 – 192 = 78 TMC, for its use and Tamil Nadu will get 419 + 192 = 611 TMC for its use.
c) Both the above situations are not practical and there must be some fallacy. The fallacy cannot be solved unless the detailed 1000 page award is read.
3. Some more technical data on Cauvery River in respect of various states:
3.1 Drainage Area in Square Km and Annual Rain fall in Cm.
Details Karnataka Tamil Nadu Kerala Source of data
1. Drainage Area 34,273 (42%) 44,016 (52%) 2886 (6%) Survey of India Map
2.Annual Rainfall 60 75 – 100
(say, 85 ) 75 Rain fall Isohytes Map, 1994 of CBIP
3.2 Based on the geographical area proportions the following will be the contributions of water generated by each state to the 740 TMC surface flow into Cauvery river basin.
(i) Karnataka 740 x 0.42 = 311 TMC
(ii) Tamil Nadu 740 x 0.52 = 385 TMC
(iii) Kerala 740 x 0.06 = 44 TMC
—————————–
TOTAL 740 TMC
——————————
3.3 In the above calculations, if rainfall is also included, the following will be the picture, on pro-rata basis:
(i) Karnataka 0.42 x 60 = 25.2 740 x 25.2 / 73.9 = 253 TMC
(ii) Tamil Nadu 0.52 x 85 = 44.2 740 x 44.2 / 73.9 = 443 TMC
(iii) Kerala 0.06 x 75 = 4.5 740 x 4.5 / 73.9 = 44 TMC
——————-
TOTAL 740 TMC
——————-
3.4 Now, let us compare the details of para 3.3 & 3.2 with para 2.3 and try to give the picture as under (all the Figures are in TMC).
State Yield as per para 3.3 Yield as per para 3.2 Tribunal award Less (-)
More (+) compared to column 3 Percentage less or more compared to column 3
1. Karnataka 253 311 270 - 41 - 13.2%
2.Tamil Nadu 443 385 419 +34 +9.0%
3. Kerala 44 44 30 -14 -32.2%
4.Pondicherry – 7 +7
Total 740 740 726
IRRIGATION MAP OF INDIA 1994 CBIP Publication, Map No.18
In the above table, (a) if we compare column 4 with column 2, Karnataka is not to give any water to Tamil Nadu. Tribunal award is allotting to Tamil Nadu and Kerala less water than their contributions.
(b)If we compare column 4 with column 3, Karnataka is giving 13.2% of its share of contribution to down stream areas as down stream riparian right and Tamil Nadu is getting 9% water in excess of its contribution.
3.5 In fact out of rainfall coming on ground part of it is utilized by crops and plants, part of it evaporates, part of it percolates to sub-surface and rest of it goes as surface flow, going into sea through rivers. This surface flow is conserved in reservoirs for supplementing the crops by irrigation and other water uses. Hence, irrigation water requirement is inversely proportional to rainfall. Accordingly, if we calculate the irrigation water requirement of Karnataka and Kerala assuming the requirement of Tamil Nadu as 1, will be as under:
State Annual Rainfall Additional water required for irrigation
(i) Karnataka 60 cm 85/60 = 1.42
(ii) Tamil Nadu 85 cm 85/85 = 1.00
(iii) Kerala 75 cm 85/75 = 1.13
4. Some more details of above states with respect to land use for cultivation:
4.1 Total State
State Total Geographical area (1000 Ha) Sown / cultivated area ( 1000 Ha) % of sown area to total area Irrigated area (1000 Ha) % of irrigated area to sown area
(i) Karnataka 19,179 10,501 54% 2,092 19%
(ii) Tamil Nadu 13,006 5,547 42% 2,375 42%
(iii) Kerala 3,886 2,213 56% 317 14%
Source: 1994 Irrigation MAP Of CBIP
4.2 In Cavery River Basin
State Total Drainage Area (Sq.Km.) Irrigated Area
(Acres
Sq.Km. ) % of Irrigated Area on drainage area Sown area % of irrigated area to sown area
Percentage Area (Sq.Km.)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
(i) Karnataka 34,273 11,20,000
4,534 13% 42.2% 14,463 31%
(ii) Tamil Nadu 44,016 28,00,000
11,336 25% 47.3% 20,820 54%
(iii) Kerala 2,886 marginal – 39.6% 1,134 —
Source: Column 2, 3 & 5 are from Deccan Chronicle dated 21/9/2002 and rest are computed for comparison
4.3 In case the upper Karnataka state is to be benefited by their Projects in their state only, they have to construct projects at least 15-20 Km above the border. that means, the waters in this free drainage are of 15-20 Km ( about 10%) and regeneration water in this area have to go down in any case whether Karnataka likes it or not. Hence, it is not justified on the part of down stream states to claim that Karnataka is holding their water and that Karnataka should not build dams on the upstream.
INDEX
4.4 The upstream states can hold the unlimited water available in their drainage area only by constructing dams. Since their dams are costly and time consuming their construction in Karnataka was delayed. During this period, the downstream states were utilizing the unused waters of the upstream states by constructing cheap Anicuts and barrages which were constructed in a short time. This does not mean that these downstream states have a right on that water except a small part of about 10-15 % as downstream riparian right at the best as a bonus.
4.5 Every state would like to increase the percentage of irrigated area of their state. In Cauvery river basin, Karnataka could develop 31% irrigated area, against 54% in Tamil Nadu. Tamil Nadu state is taking advantage, at this stage, of less percentage of irrigated area in Karnataka. What will happen if Karnataka develops percentage of irrigated area up to 54% as that of Tamil Nadu? Which tribunal and Supreme Court can help Tamil Nadu?
4.6 It is high time, that Tamil Nadu should make changes in cropping pattern and water planning out of the entire water available from their drainage area and about 10-15 % of their riparian right of the unused water of Karnataka as a bonus. Otherwise, Tamil Nadu will suffer more and more, day by day. Karnataka with their limited 60 Cm of annual rainfall in their drainage area of Cauvery, Tamil Nadu will have water only after Karnataka fulfill their requirements. We have already seen how Karnataka State Government, by their natural justice has defied the orders of Cauvery Tribunal and Supreme Court and advices of the President and Prime Minister. They will be doing the same in future also on the pretext of public interest.
5.0 Conclusion
5.1 The readers may analyze the above facts and decide who were given justice and who were done injustice by Cauvery Tribunal.
5.2 On the above subject, if any reader has any doubts, they may contact the author at the following address for clarifications, if any.
Mr. V.S.SARMA
Retired C.E. W.R.D.(M.P.)
71, Ashok Colony, Kapra,
ECIL Post,
Hyderabad – 500062.
Ph: 040-2712 6188.