¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦
ENVIS Technical Report 91,   April 2015
ENVIRONMENTAL FLOW ASSESSMENT IN YETTINAHOLE:
WHERE IS 24 TMC TO DIVERT?
1Energy & Wetlands Research Group, Centre for Ecological Sciences, 2Centre for Sustainable Technologies (astra),
3Centre for infrastructure, Sustainable Transportation and Urban Planning [CiSTUP], Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, Karnataka, 560 012, India.
E Mail: cestvr@ces.iisc.ernet.in; vinay@ces.iisc.ernet.in; bharath@ces.iisc.ernet.in, Tel: 91-080-22933099, 2293 3503 extn 101, 107, 113
Executive Summary

Western Ghats are the mountain ranges extending from southern tip of India (Tamil nadu – Kanyakumari) to Gujarat. These mountain ranges are rich in biodiversity with diverse and endemic flora and fauna, and is birth place to numerous perennial rivers namely Netravathi, Sita, Sharavathi, Aghanashini, Krishna, Cauvery, etc. The Western Ghats hill ranges forms an important watershed for the entire peninsular India, being the source of 37 west flowing rivers and three major east flowing rivers and their numerous tributaries. The stretch of Central Western Ghats of Karnataka, from 12°N to 14°N, from Kodagu district to the south of Uttara Kannada district, and covering the Western portions of Hassan, Chikmagalur and Shimoga districts, is exceptionally rich in flora and fauna. Whereas the elevation from 400 m to 800 m, is covered with evergreen to semi-evergreen climax forests and their various stages of degradation, especially around human habitations, the higher altitudes, rising up to 1700 m, are covered with evergreen forests especially along stream courses and rich grasslands in between. This portion of Karnataka Western Ghats is extremely important for agriculture and horticultural crops. Whereas the rice fields in valleys are irrigated with numerous perennial streams from forested hill-slopes the undulating landscape is used to great extent for growing precious cash crops, especially coffee and cardamom. Black pepper, ginger, arecanut, coconut, rubber are notable crops here, in addition to various fruit trees and vegetables. Some of the higher altitudes are under cultivation of tea. Conservation and sustainable management of central Western Ghats are extremely important from the point of productivity, revenue generation, employment potential and subsistence.

Forests in the Western Ghats along with the soil characteristics and precipitation plays a major role in storing water during monsoon, and releases to the streams during post monsoon periods catering to the needs of the dependent biota including humans. Some of these undisturbed/unaltered natural flow conditions in rivers and streams have proved their value with presence of very rich and diverse species, which also has helped in sustaining the livelihood of dependent populations. The undisturbed flow conditions meeting the ecological and social needs are referred to as ecological flow / environmental flow.

Environmental/Ecological Flow is defined as “Minimum flow of water maintained in a water body (river, lake, etc.) sustaining ecosystem functions”. Understanding environmental flow is important in order to evaluate and understand the role of  the water body in catering to the ecological and social (people, agriculture and horticulture, etc.) needs in a sustained and balanced way. The maximum capacity up to which water as a resource catering all demands of the dependent biota is referred as carrying capacity of water resource. The carrying capacity refers to the maximum number of activities (biological, developmental, agricultural, and industrial, population) that is supported over a period of time in the habitat without damaging the:

  • Existing quality of life,
  • Balance of resources, ecology and productivity of the ecosystem.

Ecological Carrying Capacity provides physical limits as the maximum rate of resource usage and discharge of waste that can be sustained for economic development in the region. This provides theoretical basis with practical relevance for the sustainable development of a region. Carrying capacity of a river basin refers to the maximum amount  of  water  available  naturally  as stream  flow,  soil  moisture  etc.,  to  meet  ecological  and social  (domestic,  irrigation  and  livestock)  demands  in  a  river  basin.
Environmental flow assessment of Yettinaholé river has been carried out based on the analysis of land use dynamics (using remote sensing data), meteorological data (rainfall, temperature, etc. from IMD, Pune),  hydrological data (from gauged streams) apart from field investigations to quantify water yield in a catchment.

Yettinaholé catchment extend from 12044’N to 12058’N Latitude and 75037’E to 75047’E longitude encompassing total area of 179.68 km2. The terrain is undulating with altitude varying from 666 m above MSL to 1292 m above MSL leading to higher density of stream network. Geologically, rock types consists of Gneiss, the soils are loamy ranging from sandy loamy to clay loamy. Soils in the region are fertile and highly permeable, hence allowing the precipitated water to percolate easily into the subsurface recharging ground water and storing water in the sub surfaces and hence keeping the water source perennial to the catchment and the downstream users during and post monsoon.
Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Limited, Government of Karnataka has proposed to divert and store the water to meet the needs of the water scares regions: Kaduru, Arsikere, Tipturu, Chikkanayakanahalli, Gubbi, Madhugiri, T.G.Halli, Ramnagara, Gouribidnuru, Nelamangala, Hesaraghatta, Doddaballapura, Hoskote, Devanahalli, Chikkaballapura, Gudibande, Bagepalli, Chintamani, Srinivasapura, Sidlaghatta, Maluru, Kolar, Mulbaglu and Bangarpete at an estimated cost of 12,912 crores. The proposed weirs have overall catchment area of 176 sq.km with evergreen forests dominating the catchment to an extent of 45.05%, followed by agriculture plantations (coconut/arecanut) about 29.25% and grass lands about 24.06%. The presence of these thick evergreen forests and grass lands in the catchment are responsible for higher infiltration and perennial streams. Any anthropogenic activities involving large scale land cover changes would affect the hydrology of the river basin affecting the dependent biota. The region’s ecological and economic importance is evident from

  • Yettinaholé and its immediate neighboring catchments falls under the Ecological Sensitive Zone 1 (ESZ 1) (HLWG report of Western Ghats conservation, http://envfor.nic.in/sites/default/files/HLWG-Report-Part-1_0.pdf) and as per the recommendations of the working group there shall be strictly no developmental activities.
  • The region is vulnerable and prone to frequent human animal conflict (Elephant Human conflict) as per the Karnataka Elephant Task Force (KETF: (i) http://envfor.nic.in/content/report-karnataka-elephant-task-force-submitted-honourable-high-court-karnataka?theme=moef_high, (ii) http://www.atree.org/sites/ default/files/KETF%20Final%20Report%20SCREEN%20RES.pdf#page=14&zoom=auto,-12,418), and any alterations in the elephant corridors would enhance human animal conflicts threatening the survival of elephants.

The catchments receive annual rainfall of 3000 – 4500 mm (Department of Statistics, Government of Karnataka). Water yield in the catchment computed for each of sub-catchments based on the current land use and other related hydrological parameters using empirical method. The total runoff yield from the catchments is estimated to be 9.55 TMC in contrast to the estimated 24TMC in the DPR (detailed Project report prepared by Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Limited, Government of Karnataka) or 22 TMC (as per KPC: Karanataka Power Corporation). The inflated values of water yield in the catchment would only lead to the failure of water diversion scheme similar to Telugu Ganga Project. Implementation of the project would affect the livelihood of dependent population (current users in Yettinaholé catchment) and would not benefit the likely beneficiaries in arid regions of Karnataka.   


Highlights of the current analysis are:

Water yield in Yettinholé catchment:

9.55 TMC

Domestic, crop water, livestock water demand:

5.84 TMC

Environmental flow to be maintained (to sustain ecosystems):

2.86 TMC

Yettinaholé diversion project if implemented will not help either the residents of arid regions in Karnataka (Chikballapur, Kolar, Tumkur) or local people in Gundia river basin. Residents of Yettinaholé catchment would be deprived of their right for water, while people in the arid regions would only get to see dry canals, etc. Implementation of Yettinaholé project would lead to water scarcity in Hassan and Mangalore, and will not benefit Chikkballapur, Kolar, etc. Livelihood of Yettinaholé and Gundia catchment would be affected severely due to lowered agricultural and fisheries yield similar to the residents of Nellore district with the implementation of  Telugu-Ganga project. The project if implemented deprives the local people their right to water under Article 21 of the constitution of India

In India, the constitutional right to access to water can be drawn from the right to food, the right to clean environment and the right to health, all of which have been protected under the broad rubric of the Right to Life guaranteed under Article 21 of the constitution. In addition to article 21, Article 39 (b) of the directive principles of state policy (DPSP), which the Constitution declares to be non-justiciable, recognizes the principle of equal access to the material resources of the community. Article 39 (b) mandates that ‘the State shall, in particular, direct its policy towards securing that the ownership and control of the material resources of the community are so distributed as best to subserve the common good.’

The precautionary principle articulated in the constitution prescribes that: (i) the environmental measures taken by the state and the statutory authorities must anticipate, prevent and attack the causes of environmental degradation; (ii) that where there are threats of serious and irreversible damage, lack of scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for posting measures to prevent environmental degradation; and (iii) that the ‘onus of proof’ is on the actor or the project proponent to show that his action is environmentally benign.
“The constitutional and statutory provisions protect a person’s right to fresh air, clean water and pollution-free environment, but the source of the right is the inalienable common law right of clean environment.”
(Hon’ble Supreme Court’s observation in Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum (n 7) at pg. 661)

Gundia River is formed by the streams namely Yettinaholé and Kempholé to which the streams Kadumaneholé and Hongadahallé join in the course. The Gundia catchment region is surrounded Hemavathi river water-shed on its right, Barapole river catchment on its left and Netravathi River on downstream side. The Gundia catchment comes under influence of the South-west monsoon in months of June to September.  This region harbours nearly 36% of plant species, 87% of amphibians, and 41% of fishes, which are endemic to Western Ghats. The presence of four critically endangered and 14 endangered animal species in the region further emphasises the need for conservation of this region on priority as it provides a unique habitat and ecological niche (http://wgbis.ces.iisc.ernet.in/biodiversity/pubs/ces_tr/TR122/summary.htm).

The Gundia river basin in central Western Ghats, ‘hottest hotspot’ with a repository of biological wealth of rare kind, both in its aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems and indicates strongly the need for adoption of holistic eco-system management for conservation of particularly the rare and endemic fauna of the Western Ghats. The premium should be on conservation of the remaining evergreen and semi-evergreen forests, which are vital for the water security (perenniality of streams) and food security (sustenance of biodiversity). Through appropriate management there still exists a chance to restore the lost natural evergreen to semi-evergreen forests. The region is Ecologically Sensitive as it fulfills the criteria of Eco-sensitive region as per sub‑section (1) with clause (v) of sub‑section (2) of section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (29 of 1986), such as

  • Species based criteria:
  • The presence of  high endemic, rare and endangered species of flora and fauna
  • Centre of evolution of domesticated species

TAXA

SPECIES

STATUS AS PER WILDLIFE PROTECTION ACT (1972)

Birds

Anthracoceros coronatus (Boddaert)

Schedule - I

 

Buceros bicornis (L.)

Schedule - I

 

Pavo cristatus (L.)

Schedule - I

 

Gallus sonneratti Temminck

Schedule - II

Reptiles

Varnus bengalensis (Daudin)

Schedule – I

 

Python molurus (L.)

Schedule - I

 

Naja naja (L.)

Schedule - II

 

Ophiophagus hannah (Cantor)

Schedule - II

 

Ptyas mucosus (L.)

Schedule - II

 

Xenochrophis piscator (Scheidner)

Schedule - II

 

Atretium schistosum (Daudin)

Schedule - II

 

Daboia russelii  (Shaw & Nodder)

Schedule - II

Mammals

Elephas maximus (L.)

Schedule - I

 

Loris lydekkerianus (Cabrera)

Schedule - I

 

Manis crassicaudata (Gray)

Schedule - I

 

Petinomys fuscocapillus (Jerdon)

Schedule - I

 

Panthera tigris (L.)

Schedule - I

 

Macaca silenus (L.)

Schedule - I

 

Bos gaurus (H. Smith)

Schedule - I

 

Panthera pardus (L.)

Schedule - I

 

Tragulus meminna (Erxleben)

Schedule - I

 

Macaca radiata (E. Geoffroy)

Schedule - II

 

Melursus ursinus (Shaw)

Schedule - II

 

Herpestes edwardsi (E. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire)

Schedule - II

 

Presbytis entellus (Prater)

Schedule - II

 

Felis chaus (Schreber)

Schedule - II

 

Ratufa indica indica (Erxleben)

Schedule - II

Butterflies

Hypolimnas misippus (L.)

Schedule - I

 

Lampides boeticus (L.)

Schedule - II

 

Appias albina (Boisduval)

Schedule - II

  • The ecosystem-based criteria
  • migra­tory species,
  • specialised habitats,
  • special breeding site/area, areas with intrinsically low resilience,

 

Gundia River Basin


Habitat for endangered, endemic species – Presence of Schedule I fauna of INDIAN WILDLIFE PROTECTION ACT (1972)

Part of Mysore Elephant Reserve

Part of Elephant Migratory Corridors: These corridors also facilitate multi mega species (tiger, leopard, and gaur) movement. Hence should be given high priority and efforts should be made to jointly secure these corridors along with National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA).

  • Presence of sacred groves and sacred water sources
  •  Geomorphological features – origin of Kumaradhara, Yettinaholé and Kempholé to which the streams Kadumaneholé and Hongadahallé join in the course and form Gundia river

 

Thus the Gundia River basin is Ecologically Sensitive as per permissible norms of the Government of India:

ECO-SENSITIVENESS OF THE REGION

PERMISSIBLE LAW

This region is declared as ‘Eco-sensitive Region’ as it is very rich in biodiversity and is a high centre of endemism with 36% of plant species, 87% of amphibians and 41% of fishes present in this region. This region also harbours endangered species like Elephants, Threatened species like Slender Loris, Grey headed bulbul and Malabar pied Hornbill. Presence of Lion Tailed Macaque which acts as a flagship species for rainforests also signifies the ecological importance of this region.

As per sub-section (1) with clause (v) of sub-section (2) of section 3 of the Environment (Protection)
Act, 1986 (29 of 1986) and clause (d) of sub-rule (3) of rule 5 of the Environment (Protection)
Rules, 1986

Mammals like Slender Loris, Elephant, Leopard cat, Tiger, Lion Tailed Macaque and Gaur present in this region are listed under Schedule-I of WPA (1972) which signifies highest level of legal protection is assigned for them. Whereas, mammals like Jungle cat, Asian Palm civet and Brown Palm civet are included in Schedule-II signifying second highest level of priority assigned for them.

Schedule-I, II and III animals under Indian Wildlife Protection Act (1972)

According to a Gazetted notification by the Karnataka State Govt. this region forms a part of the designated Mysore Elephant Reserve. The Mysore Elephant Reserve was notified by the Karnataka Government in November, 2002 (Vide GO FEE 231 FWL 2000, 25/11/2002). It covers the total area of 6,724 sq.km. The Bisle Reserve Forest of Gundia Basin, vide the said GO, constitutes a vital part of the Mysore Elephant Reserve. It covers an area of 3,339 ha (Survey number I and II – Bisle Reserve forest).

Section 36-A of The Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972as amended by The wildlife (Protection) Amendment Act, 2002

Considering the ecological significance and rich biodiversity, this region is Eco-sensitive region as per sub‑section (1) with clause (v) of sub‑section (2) of section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (29 of 1986) and clause (d) of sub‑rule (3) of rule 5 of the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986 in concurrence with the provisions of the Indian Forests Act, 1927 (16 of 1927) and Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 (69 of 1980) the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 (53 of 1972). This is imperative to prevent the erosion of Biodiversity, Ecology and associated Hydrology.

Short sighted developmental  projects in ecologically sensitive regions poses a serious threat to the ecology and biodiversity of the area, which affects the sustenance of natural resources. The submergence of forest region and other associated activities will cause habitat fragmentation and shrinkage. This will ultimately enhance the Human – Animal conflicts in this region. The large scale land cover changes will affect the hydrology, biodiversity and ecology. The proposed project is ecologically unsound and economically unviable because of the following reasons (http://wgbis.ces.iisc.ernet.in/biodiversity/pubs/ces_tr/TR122/summary.htm):

  • The implementation of the project will cause large scale land cover changes in the region.
  • The proposed project would alter the hydrologic regime affecting the local ecology, biodiversity and more importantly livelihood of people in the region
  • The proposed project would cause habitat fragmentation and shrinkage resulting in enhanced Human - Animal conflicts.
  • The forests are ecologically and economically beneficial to humans. The economic value of the region is higher (> 200 Billion Rs.) and emphasise the need for conservation to sustain livelihood of dependent population.

Considering these, the proposed project would be ecologically and economically unviable as it would weaken the food and water security of the region. It is necessary to take note of deliberate attempt in indicating higher water yield and drop the proposal (Yettinaholé diversion project). This would save the state from spending unnecessarily on the project which is bound to fail due to lack of water.
The proposed Yettinaholé diversion project also violates National Water Policy (2012), Govt. of India, Ministry of Water Resources:


Planning, development and management of water resources need to be governed by national perspectives on an integrated and environmentally sound basis, keeping in view the human, social and economic needs. Pg.5, Section 1.3 (i).

Proposed in the ecologically sensitive region threatening the sustenance of natural resources while eroding rich repository of biological resources

Water is essential for sustenance of eco-system, and therefore, ecological needs should be given due consideration. Pg.5, Section 1.3(vii).

Water yield in the catchment is 9.5 TMC
Water demand in the catchment is 5.84 TMC
Environmental flow to be maintained  2.84 TMC

All the elements of the water cycle, i.e., evapotranspiration, precipitation, runoff, river, lakes, soil moisture, and ground water, sea, etc., are interdependent and the basic hydrological unit is the river basin, which should be considered as the basic unit for planning. Pg.5, Section 1.3(viii).

We have used rainfall data of 100+ years to understand the spatial and temporal patterns of variability. Rainfall in the catchments vary from 3500 mm to 4000 mm. Based on field data (stream gauging) and quantified water yield using empirical relationship indicate the water yield of 9.55TMC in Yettinaholé  catchment.  Validation is done with the gauged data at Kadumane holé (of 2009 to  2012), where water discharge is 0.813TMC compared to the estimated value of 0.702 TMC (86% accuracy).

Based on these approaches, water yield is only 9.5 TMC (proponents of Yettinaholé diversion project claim yield of 24 TMC without considering spatial variability of rainfall in the catchment, hydrological losses, water demand in the catchment for subsistence agriculture and horticulture, minimum environmental flow to be maintained to sustain the ecosystem functions)

The Centre, the States and the local bodies (governance institutions) must ensure access to a minimum quantity of potable water for essential health and hygiene to all its citizens, available within easy reach of the household. Pg.9, Section 3.1.

Water yield in the catchment is sufficient to meet the ecological and anthropogenic demand (domestic, agriculture, Horticulture, etc.)

Ecological needs of the river should be determined recognizing that the natural river flows are characterized by low or no flows, small floods (freshets), large floods, etc., and should accommodate developmental needs. A portion of river flows should be kept aside to meet ecological needs ensuring that the low and high flow releases are proportional to the natural flow regime, including base flow contribution in the low flow season through regulated ground water use. Pg.9, Section 3.2.

Environmental flow to be maintained  2.84 TMC
Water demand in the catchment is 5.84 TMC
Water yield in the catchment is 9.5 TMC
(sufficient to meet the current demand in the catchment)
Estimate by us using the water balance approach takes into consideration various parameters, such as precipitation (100 years), evapotranspiration, land use characteristics, runoff, topography, crop rotation, population, livestock, etc.

After meeting the minimum quantity of water required for survival of human beings and ecosystem, water must be used as an economic good with higher priority towards basic livelihood support to the poor and ensuring national food security. Pg.9, Section 3.3.

Proponents of Yettinaholé diversion project claim the yield of 24 TMC without considering spatial variability of rainfall in the catchment, hydrological losses, water demand in the catchment for subsistence agriculture and horticulture, minimum environmental flow to be maintained to sustain the ecosystem functions

Community should be sensitized and encouraged to adapt to utilization of water as per local availability of waters. Community based water management should be institutionalized and strengthened. Pg.9, Section 3.5.

More importantly the government agencies (decision makers – politicians, bureaucrats, and local stakeholders) needs understanding of the functioning of aquatic ecosystems.
The proposed project would be ecologically and economically unviable as it would weaken the food and water security of the region. It is necessary to revisit the proposal (Yettinaholé diversion project) and bring out the anomaly in the computation of water yield and save the state from spending unnecessarily on the project which is bound to fail due to lack of water.

Preservation of river corridors, water bodies and infrastructure should be undertaken in a planned manner through community participation. The storage capacities of water bodies and water courses and/or associated wetlands, the flood plains, ecological buffer and areas required for specific aesthetic recreational and/or social needs may be managed to the extent possible in an integrated manner to balance the flooding, environment and social issues. Pg.17-18, Section 8.1.

Implementation of the project (Yettinaholé diversion project) affects aquatic ecosystems in the region with the associated terrestrial ecosystems

Environmental needs of aquatic eco-system, wet lands and embanked flood plains need to be recognized and taken into consideration while planning. Pg.18, Section 8.3.

Water yield in the catchment is sufficient to meet the ecological and anthropogenic demand (domestic, agriculture, Horticulture, etc.)
Environmental flow to be maintained  2.84 TMC
Water demand in the catchment is 5.84 TMC
Water yield in the catchment is 9.5 TMC
(But, the proponent of Yettinaholé diversion project claim the yield of 24 TMC without considering spatial variability of rainfall in the catchment, hydrological losses, water demand in the catchment for subsistence agriculture and horticulture, minimum environmental flow to be maintained to sustain the ecosystem functions).

Optimum development river valleys ensuring scientific planning of land and water resources taking basin/sub-basin as unit with unified perspectives of water in all its forms (including precipitation, soil moisture, ground and surface water) and ensuring holistic and balanced development of both the catchment and the command areas. Pg.7, Section 2.3.

The proposed project lacks holistic and balanced development approach, evident from an overestimate of water yield in the catchment and also ignoring social and ecological demand in the catchment.

Execution of the project would lead to deprivation of water in Yettinaholé  catchment affecting the livelihood to people apart from affecting local ecology and biodiversity. The proponents of Yettinaholé diversion project should understand the failure of Telugu-ganga project, affecting the regional  economy and hydrology. The project has not benefitted planned beneficiaries but has deprived the districts in riparian state their right for water. Considering these, the proposed project would be ecologically and economically unviable as it would weaken the food and water security of the region. It is necessary to revisit the proposal (Yettinaholé diversion project) and bring out the anomaly in the computation of water yield and save the state from spending unnecessarily on the project which is bound to fail due to lack of water.
The sustainable option to meet the water requirements of arid regions in Karnataka is through (i) decentralized water harvesting (through tanks, ponds, lakes, etc.), (ii) rejuvenation or restoration of existing lakes/ponds, (iii) reuse of waste water, (iv) recharging groundwater resources, (v) planting native species of  grasses and tree species in the catchment (to enhance percolation of water in the catchment), (vi) implementation of soil and water conservation through micro-watershed approaches. Implementation of these location specific approaches would cost much less compared to the proposed project, which if implemented would help the section of the society involved in decision making, construction and implementation of the project.

 

Telugu Ganga Project” – Lessons from failure

Telugu Ganga Project also known as Krishna Water Supply Project, is one of the major project that was executed during 1977 – 2006. The objective of the project was to utilize water from Krishna and Pennar rivers to:

  1. Provide 15 TMC of water to Chennai city (later amended as 12 TMC).
  2. Irrigate 2,32,702 hectares of drought prone areas of Kurnool, Chittoor and Cuddapah districts of Rayalseema and uplands of Nellore district in Andhra Pradesh    (nptel.ac.in)

Water is diverted from Srisailam reservoir, Andhra Pradesh to Poondi reservoir, Tamil Nadu for a distance over 406 km through series of interlinked lined canals and reservoirs, namely  SriSailam, Velugondu, Somasila, Kandaleru and Poondi reservoir, Figure 1 depicts line diagram of the Project

Figure  1: Telugu Ganga Project Scheme (Source: nptel.ac.in)

Figure  2: pumping of water from the canal


In 1983,  the quantum of water was reduced to 12 TMC, accounting the seepage and evaporation losses. Between 2002 and 2006 the lining works of the main canal in between Kandaleru and Poondi reservoirs to enhance the canal flows and arrest the seepage losses (part of Sri Satya Sai Ganga Canal Project). Reduction in seepage led to drying of neighboring farm lands forcing farmers to pump water from the canal (Figure 2).   

Telugu-Ganga: Bungling of numbers to suit certain lobby (Treachery of Public Money) 

  1. According to the agreement, each of the three riparian states were to contribute 5 TMC of water annually, for a total supply of 15 TMC. This number was revised down to 12 TMC in 1983 after accounting seepage and evaporation loses.
  1. Maximum quantity - supply of water to Chennai city in 2006 was 3.7 TMC.
  1. The government records show that the highest water released since 1996 was 5 TMC in the year 2000-2001.

  1. Nellore farmers can now grow only one crop compared to three crops per year (before TG)
  1. Krishna River basin itself is facing severe scarcity in rainfall and lower catchment yield due to land cover changes

The project has failed in catering sufficient drinking water to the people of Chennai evident from the government records which highlights supply of only 5TMC (against assured 15 or 12 TMC, i.e., only 35% of the total planned supply).  The implementation of the project has adversely affected farmers in Nellore district who were cultivating  multiple crops (2 to 3 crops) are now struggle to  grow even one season crop. Figure 3 depicts the series of developments from the day of inauguration in the early 90’s to 2010’s.

The sustainable option to meet the water requirements of arid regions in Karnataka is through (i) decentralized water harvesting (through tanks, ponds, lakes, etc.), (ii) rejuvenation or restoration of existing lakes/ponds, (iii) reuse of waste water, (iv) recharging groundwater resources, (v) planting native species of  grasses and tree species in the catchment (to enhance percolation of water in the catchment), (vi) implementation of soil and water conservation through micro-watershed approaches. Implementation of these location specific approaches would cost much less compared to the proposed project, which if implemented would help the section of the society involved in decision making, construction and implementation of the project.

 

E-mail     |     Sahyadri     |     ENVIS     |     GRASS     |     Energy     |     CES     |     CST     |     CiSTUP     |     IISc     |     E-mail