The BJP led National Democratic Alliance presented a united face at a ‘Maha Rally’ in Ludhiana on 10 May. The alliance presented as many as eight chief ministers on the same platform and brought leaders of Gorkha Janmukti Morcha from Darjeeling, Telengana Rashtra Samiti (TRS) leader K Chandrashekhar Rao and Assam Gana Parishad (AGP) on the same platform.
The five-hour rally, held in scorching heat, lasted from 11 am to 4 pm and barring the star attraction Narendra Modi, all other leaders sat through the speeches. As many as four chief ministers present at the rally, of Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh and Chhattisgarh, were left out in the cold and did not get a chance to address the rally.
Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar said centre had asked Bihar to return the Rs 1000 crore flood relief fund, while Modi accused the centre of obstructing linking of river waters.
Chander Mohan Patowari, chief of Asom Gana Parishad, Narendra Modi and even Advani spoke of linking all national rivers for water sharing and taking national water resource to each farmer of the country. This caused lot of embarrassment to Punjab Chief Minister Prakash Singh Badal, who has declared that Punjab has not a single drop of water to be shared with Haryana or Rajasthan.
Thursday, 14 May 2009
Saturday, 18 April 2009
Regressive Steps of National Water Mission?
At a civil society meeting on the National Water Mission (NWM) of India's National Action Plan on Climate Change in the conference room of Church of North India, New Delhi. The meeting was organized by the Indian Network on Ethics in Climate Change (INECC) on April 18, 2009 to comprehend the reasons for the autocratic and non-transparent drafting of the document without any democratic engagement with the citizen groups.
It appears to the Union Water Resources Ministry that the entire wisdom of the citizens rests with three organisations namely: The Energy Resources Institute, International Water Management Institute and Centre for Science and Environment, which have failed to note that climate change creates a compelling logic for conservation measures and policy reversals which the Ministry is incapable of undertaking and its beyond its mandate. It is noteworthy that even the National River Conservation Directorate and the recent Ganga River Basin Authority is under the Union Ministry of Environment & Forests. Continuing its unhealthy legacy of bulldozing rivers, flood plains, forests, biodiversity, natural drainage etc, it is not inconsistent that even ministries such as Union Ministry of Panchayats have not been deemed relevant for engagement, let alone citizens.
The Prime Minister unveiled the National Action Plan for Climate Change on June 30, 2008 wherein eight missions including National Water Mission were launched. Other missions include (a) National Solar Mission, (b) National Mission for Enhanced Energy Efficiency, (c) National Mission on Sustainable Habitat, (d) National Mission for Sustaining the Himalayan Eco-system, (e) National Mission for a Green India, (f) National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture, and (g) National Mission on Strategic Knowledge for Climate Change.
Second volume of the National Water Mission document notes that Climate change in IPCC usage refers to any change in climate over time, whether due to natural variability or as a result of human activity. This usage differs from that of UNFCCC, which defines climate change as, “a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods”.
This Report is formed for the Sub-committee on Policy and Institutional Framework as established by the High Level Steering Committee of the National Water Mission headed by Secretary (Water Resources). The Report does not take any position about the causes and certainty of the climate change. However, the possible range of effects on Water Sector is culled out from other expert opinions. On this basis, the possible mitigative
measures and the new strategies required for such mitigative measures are outlined and the programmes.
The High Level Steering Committee of the National Water Mission has set-up six Sub-Committees as follows:
• Policy and Institutional Framework
• Surface Water Management
• Ground Water Management
• Domestic and Industrial Water Management
• Efficient Use of Water for various Purposes
• Basin Level Planning and Management
The Policy and Institutional Framework Sub-Committee has to deal with the issues brought out by the other five Sub-Committees and then discuss the policy related issues. This would also include institutional and legal issues, regulatory structures, entailment and pricing, etc. The Surface Water Management Sub-Committee also deals with a large number of issues with considerable overlaps with the coverage of the other four Sub-
Committees. The Sub-Committees on Ground Water Management, Domestic and Industrial Water Management, Efficient use of Water for various purposes and Basin level management, deal with more pinpointed issues.
First volume of the National Water Mission document identifies the strategies and methodologies in respect of (a) Assessment of Impact of Climate Change; (b) Changes in Policy, Practices and Institutional Framework; (c) Measures for Mitigation; as well as (d) Measures for Adaptations. Appropriate monitoring and evaluation mechanism have also been proposed.
Outlining the objectives of Water Mission in the National Action Plan for Climate Change, it says, “A National Water Mission will be mounted to ensure integrated water resource management helping to conserve water, minimize wastage and ensure more equitable distribution both across and within states. The Mission will take into account the provisions of the National Water Policy and develop a framework to optimize water use by increasing water use efficiency by 20% through regulatory mechanisms with differential entitlements and pricing. It will seek to ensure that a considerable share of the water needs of urban areas are met through recycling of waste water, and ensuring that the water requirements of coastal cities with inadequate alternative sources of water are met through adoption of new and appropriate technologies such as low temperature desalination technologies that allow for the use of ocean water. The National Water Policy would be revisited in consultation with States to ensure basin level management strategies to deal with variability in rainfall and river flows due to climate change. This will include enhanced storage both above and below ground, rainwater harvesting, coupled with equitable and efficient management structures. The Mission will seek to develop new regulatory structures, combined with appropriate entitlements and pricing. It will seek to optimize the efficiency of existing irrigation systems, including rehabilitation of systems that have been run down and also expand irrigation, where feasible, with a special effort to increase storage capacity. Incentive structures will be designed to promote water neutral of water positive technologies, recharging of underground water sources and adoption of large scale irrigation programmes which rely on sprinklers, drip irrigation and ridge and furrow irrigation.”
It also describes the procedure for implementation of the Mission saying: “These National Missions will be institutionalized by respective ministries and will be organized through inter-sectoral groups which include in addition to related Ministries, Ministry of Finance and the Planning Commission, experts from industry, academia and civil society. The institutional structure would vary depending on the task to be addressed by the Mission and will include providing the opportunity to compete on the best management model.
Each Mission will be tasked to evolve specific objectives spanning the remaining years of the 11th Plan and the 12th Plan period 2012-2013 to 2016- 2017. Where the resource requirements of the Mission call for an enhancement of the allocation in the 11th Plan, this will be suitable considered, keeping in mind the overall resources position and the scope for re-prioritization.
Comprehensive Mission documents detailing objectives, strategies, plan of action, timelines and monitoring and evaluation criteria would be developed and submitted to the Prime Minister’s Council on Climate change by December 2008. The council will also periodically review the progress of these Missions.
State Governments would be requested to set up Monitoring Committee under the Chairmanship of the Principal Secretary / Secretary in charge of Water Resources. The State Government would also be requested to create Climate Change Cell at appropriate level. In case of States with considerable potential for water resources development, the cell should be headed by an officer in the grade of Chief Engineer whereas in smaller States, it would be headed by a Superintending Engineer.
Draft Comprehensive Mission Documents for National Water Mission under National Action Plan on Climate Change are available on the website of Union Ministry Water Resources.
The two volume report of NWM is available on the following URLs on the website of Ministry of Water Resources:
:
Draft Comprehensive Mission Documents for National Water Mission - Volume I
Draft Comprehensive Mission Documents for National Water Mission - Volume II
While the a civil society view of the above document has been published categorically asserting that the document “lacks proper perspective, urgency and sincerity” because only lip-service has been paid to conservation of wetlands, ground water recharge, irrigation efficiency along with big dams, interlinking of rivers. Efforts are underway to seek its complete rewriting because its approach is fundamentally flawed. Overall, it ends promoting business as usual.
It appears to the Union Water Resources Ministry that the entire wisdom of the citizens rests with three organisations namely: The Energy Resources Institute, International Water Management Institute and Centre for Science and Environment, which have failed to note that climate change creates a compelling logic for conservation measures and policy reversals which the Ministry is incapable of undertaking and its beyond its mandate. It is noteworthy that even the National River Conservation Directorate and the recent Ganga River Basin Authority is under the Union Ministry of Environment & Forests. Continuing its unhealthy legacy of bulldozing rivers, flood plains, forests, biodiversity, natural drainage etc, it is not inconsistent that even ministries such as Union Ministry of Panchayats have not been deemed relevant for engagement, let alone citizens.
The Prime Minister unveiled the National Action Plan for Climate Change on June 30, 2008 wherein eight missions including National Water Mission were launched. Other missions include (a) National Solar Mission, (b) National Mission for Enhanced Energy Efficiency, (c) National Mission on Sustainable Habitat, (d) National Mission for Sustaining the Himalayan Eco-system, (e) National Mission for a Green India, (f) National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture, and (g) National Mission on Strategic Knowledge for Climate Change.
Second volume of the National Water Mission document notes that Climate change in IPCC usage refers to any change in climate over time, whether due to natural variability or as a result of human activity. This usage differs from that of UNFCCC, which defines climate change as, “a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods”.
This Report is formed for the Sub-committee on Policy and Institutional Framework as established by the High Level Steering Committee of the National Water Mission headed by Secretary (Water Resources). The Report does not take any position about the causes and certainty of the climate change. However, the possible range of effects on Water Sector is culled out from other expert opinions. On this basis, the possible mitigative
measures and the new strategies required for such mitigative measures are outlined and the programmes.
The High Level Steering Committee of the National Water Mission has set-up six Sub-Committees as follows:
• Policy and Institutional Framework
• Surface Water Management
• Ground Water Management
• Domestic and Industrial Water Management
• Efficient Use of Water for various Purposes
• Basin Level Planning and Management
The Policy and Institutional Framework Sub-Committee has to deal with the issues brought out by the other five Sub-Committees and then discuss the policy related issues. This would also include institutional and legal issues, regulatory structures, entailment and pricing, etc. The Surface Water Management Sub-Committee also deals with a large number of issues with considerable overlaps with the coverage of the other four Sub-
Committees. The Sub-Committees on Ground Water Management, Domestic and Industrial Water Management, Efficient use of Water for various purposes and Basin level management, deal with more pinpointed issues.
First volume of the National Water Mission document identifies the strategies and methodologies in respect of (a) Assessment of Impact of Climate Change; (b) Changes in Policy, Practices and Institutional Framework; (c) Measures for Mitigation; as well as (d) Measures for Adaptations. Appropriate monitoring and evaluation mechanism have also been proposed.
Outlining the objectives of Water Mission in the National Action Plan for Climate Change, it says, “A National Water Mission will be mounted to ensure integrated water resource management helping to conserve water, minimize wastage and ensure more equitable distribution both across and within states. The Mission will take into account the provisions of the National Water Policy and develop a framework to optimize water use by increasing water use efficiency by 20% through regulatory mechanisms with differential entitlements and pricing. It will seek to ensure that a considerable share of the water needs of urban areas are met through recycling of waste water, and ensuring that the water requirements of coastal cities with inadequate alternative sources of water are met through adoption of new and appropriate technologies such as low temperature desalination technologies that allow for the use of ocean water. The National Water Policy would be revisited in consultation with States to ensure basin level management strategies to deal with variability in rainfall and river flows due to climate change. This will include enhanced storage both above and below ground, rainwater harvesting, coupled with equitable and efficient management structures. The Mission will seek to develop new regulatory structures, combined with appropriate entitlements and pricing. It will seek to optimize the efficiency of existing irrigation systems, including rehabilitation of systems that have been run down and also expand irrigation, where feasible, with a special effort to increase storage capacity. Incentive structures will be designed to promote water neutral of water positive technologies, recharging of underground water sources and adoption of large scale irrigation programmes which rely on sprinklers, drip irrigation and ridge and furrow irrigation.”
It also describes the procedure for implementation of the Mission saying: “These National Missions will be institutionalized by respective ministries and will be organized through inter-sectoral groups which include in addition to related Ministries, Ministry of Finance and the Planning Commission, experts from industry, academia and civil society. The institutional structure would vary depending on the task to be addressed by the Mission and will include providing the opportunity to compete on the best management model.
Each Mission will be tasked to evolve specific objectives spanning the remaining years of the 11th Plan and the 12th Plan period 2012-2013 to 2016- 2017. Where the resource requirements of the Mission call for an enhancement of the allocation in the 11th Plan, this will be suitable considered, keeping in mind the overall resources position and the scope for re-prioritization.
Comprehensive Mission documents detailing objectives, strategies, plan of action, timelines and monitoring and evaluation criteria would be developed and submitted to the Prime Minister’s Council on Climate change by December 2008. The council will also periodically review the progress of these Missions.
State Governments would be requested to set up Monitoring Committee under the Chairmanship of the Principal Secretary / Secretary in charge of Water Resources. The State Government would also be requested to create Climate Change Cell at appropriate level. In case of States with considerable potential for water resources development, the cell should be headed by an officer in the grade of Chief Engineer whereas in smaller States, it would be headed by a Superintending Engineer.
Draft Comprehensive Mission Documents for National Water Mission under National Action Plan on Climate Change are available on the website of Union Ministry Water Resources.
The two volume report of NWM is available on the following URLs on the website of Ministry of Water Resources:
:
Draft Comprehensive Mission Documents for National Water Mission - Volume I
Draft Comprehensive Mission Documents for National Water Mission - Volume II
While the a civil society view of the above document has been published categorically asserting that the document “lacks proper perspective, urgency and sincerity” because only lip-service has been paid to conservation of wetlands, ground water recharge, irrigation efficiency along with big dams, interlinking of rivers. Efforts are underway to seek its complete rewriting because its approach is fundamentally flawed. Overall, it ends promoting business as usual.
Tuesday, 6 January 2009
What are the biggest threats to Ganga basin?
Initiating a structured discussion on the Ganga river basin-covering parts of Nepal, India, Tibet and Bangladesh- wherein approximately one in twelve people in the world live, WaterWatch invites considered submission of 400/500 words from a holistic perspective to comprehend and articulate the crisis that has emerged from the current fragmented and fractured approach of the governments, academia, civil society and corporations of commerce and religion.
Being a moderated discussion, participants are expected to stay focused around the lead questions:
What is Ganga River Basin approach? Does it apply to only 79% of Ganga basin, which is in India? Will it include 13 % of Ganga basin that is in Nepal, 4 % in Bangaldesh and 4 % in Tibet? What is its relationship with the river systems and with the composite Ganga-Brahmputra-Meghna basin and its consequences?
How does it affect the policies of Industry, Power, Agriculture, Urban Development, Health and Environment by the central government, the governments of eleven states (Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, NCT of Delhi, Rajasthan, Uttranchal, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal), the neighboring countries and industry bodies like CII/FICCI/ASSOCHEM/PHCCI?
What is the relevance of Ganga River basin approach when the river channel has been amputated from the flood plains besides the amputation of the river channel itself?
Will the Third Phase of Ganga Action Plan (GAP) or the proposed the Ganga River Basin Authority which is to consider its formation in a meeting likely to be held on January 15 and its proposed river basin approach affect the quality of surface water, ground water and the survival of natural flow of the rivers in the basin? (The GAP-I which was to be completed by March 1990 was extended till March, 2000 when it was declared complete but Phase I of the Plan is not yet fully complete and GAP-II which was to be completed in 2001 was extended till December 2008. This too remains incomplete)
What is the meaning of the official ceremonial and ornamental status being accorded to Ganga just prior to the upcoming parliamentary elections?
Which among the following are the biggest threats to Ganga basin?
a. National Interlinking of Rivers project of NDA & UPA,
b. UP’s Ganga Expressway project,
c. Uttarakhand’s Bhairon Ghati, Loharinag-Pala, Pala Maneri and Maneri Bhali hydro-projects
d. Some 191 heavily polluting industries in the Ganga basin states
e. West Bengal’s Farraka Barrage
f. Bihar’s Interlinking of Rivers project or Kosi High Dam
g. Pollution from “Religious” Activities
h. Corporate funding of political parties
i. Co-opted NGOs
What is required is not yet another Authority but genuine basin approach to overcome these threats.
Given the significance of the discussions, general submissions to the list will be held back (only most important submissions will get posted).
Being a moderated discussion, participants are expected to stay focused around the lead questions:
What is Ganga River Basin approach? Does it apply to only 79% of Ganga basin, which is in India? Will it include 13 % of Ganga basin that is in Nepal, 4 % in Bangaldesh and 4 % in Tibet? What is its relationship with the river systems and with the composite Ganga-Brahmputra-Meghna basin and its consequences?
How does it affect the policies of Industry, Power, Agriculture, Urban Development, Health and Environment by the central government, the governments of eleven states (Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, NCT of Delhi, Rajasthan, Uttranchal, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal), the neighboring countries and industry bodies like CII/FICCI/ASSOCHEM/PHCCI?
What is the relevance of Ganga River basin approach when the river channel has been amputated from the flood plains besides the amputation of the river channel itself?
Will the Third Phase of Ganga Action Plan (GAP) or the proposed the Ganga River Basin Authority which is to consider its formation in a meeting likely to be held on January 15 and its proposed river basin approach affect the quality of surface water, ground water and the survival of natural flow of the rivers in the basin? (The GAP-I which was to be completed by March 1990 was extended till March, 2000 when it was declared complete but Phase I of the Plan is not yet fully complete and GAP-II which was to be completed in 2001 was extended till December 2008. This too remains incomplete)
What is the meaning of the official ceremonial and ornamental status being accorded to Ganga just prior to the upcoming parliamentary elections?
Which among the following are the biggest threats to Ganga basin?
a. National Interlinking of Rivers project of NDA & UPA,
b. UP’s Ganga Expressway project,
c. Uttarakhand’s Bhairon Ghati, Loharinag-Pala, Pala Maneri and Maneri Bhali hydro-projects
d. Some 191 heavily polluting industries in the Ganga basin states
e. West Bengal’s Farraka Barrage
f. Bihar’s Interlinking of Rivers project or Kosi High Dam
g. Pollution from “Religious” Activities
h. Corporate funding of political parties
i. Co-opted NGOs
What is required is not yet another Authority but genuine basin approach to overcome these threats.
Given the significance of the discussions, general submissions to the list will be held back (only most important submissions will get posted).
Tuesday, 23 December 2008
Drainage Crisis of Kosi
Abstract: Kosi is an international river and all interventions must show utmost sensitivity that does not bring a bad name to our country. The onus is the central government to avoid a situation, which makes North Bihar a case study for mismanagement of rivers. It has emerged from the field study undertaken by a Fact Finding Team that a list of "what not to do in Kosi basin" must be prepared before relying on the suggestions of retired or serving officials. Why Kosi has been flowing at a level higher than its adjoining mainland is a statement on the poverty of common sense. The reduced cross-section of the river due to embankments was expected to facilitate the dredging of its bed. Instead, the Kosi offloaded silt into the river and raised the level of its bed. That the Kosi is among one of the highest silt-laden rivers in the country makes matters worse. Had the river been free to meander, it would have deposited fertile silt, collected from the slopes of Mount Everest and Kanchenjunga, across the plains of north Bihar. But that was not to be, as most of the silt carried over the years lies trapped between river banks, reducing the stream flow on the one hand and making the embankments vulnerable to breach on the other. People of Kosi basin are victims of development and the arrogance of governmental knowledge that are used to scare common people into silence and submission by their declarations such as "I Know the facts". All proponents of “solution” must be made to solve the drainage crisis and adopt Ganga basin approach before undertaking any further intervention.
Introduction
Kosi is one of the major tributaries of Ganga synonymous with the history, culture of not only Mithila but whole of the Indian sub-continent. One cannot think of the Indian sub-continent without thinking about Ramayana (Sita) and Mahabharata (Karna). Ramayana and Mahabharata cannot be even imagined in the absence of Mithila. The structural solutions have already distorted the landscape of the Kosi-Mithila region, structural solutions like Kosi High Dam would turn out to be a monument of foolishness for generations to come. Like the villains of embankment proposal, all the kosi high dam proponents must be identified and dealt with by something like a Kosi Parliament.
Nearly 33.55 lakh people in five districts of north Bihar were affected by the devastation caused by the Kosi deluge due to the breach in the embankment at Kusaha in Nepal on August 18.
After Tamil Nadu, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, Bihar too is initiating the misplaced project of linking rivers even as it is being predicted that "Ganga would soon become a seasonal river-flooded in monsoons and dry in the summers." Out of the 30 links in the controversial National Interlinking of Rivers project that includes 14 links in the Himalayan component, 6 river-link canals are directly related to Bihar. It is noteworthy that quite like Tamil Nadu, Bihar too is proposing its linking of rivers projects as independent of the national project. Unmindful of the global ecological changes and river basin approach Uttar Pradesh has already launched Ganga Expressway Project in 2007 to construct a 1047 km access controlled eight-laned expressway running along the Ganga river to provide connectivity and as a flood control measure although the catastrophe brought about by such measures is quite evident.
Continuing the same trend, Bijendra Prasad Yadav, Bihar's Water Resources Development Minister informed the Bihar Legislative Council on 4, December, 2008 that inter-linking of rivers could rid the state of perennial problems of flood and drought. Replying to a special debate on drought like situation prevailing in many districts of south Bihar, Yadav said "unless and until rivers are inter-linked the twin problems can not be solved." Yadav said the inter-linking of Bihar rivers would cost more than Rs 4,000 crore. Stating that 26 percent area of the state are drought-hit, Yadav informed the Vidhan Parishad that the state did not have any reservoir which was crucial for irrigation. It was either in Nepal or in Uttar Pradesh. Replying to a debate on perennial problem of flood in the state he referred to the devastation caused by the Kosi deluge and the probe by judicial commission underway.
The Centre has constituted a high level committee, consisting of three representatives of the Centre, two from Nepal and five from Bihar government, for the repair and maintenance of the embankment.
In the aftermath of Kosi deluge, such ecologically disastrous engineering projects have been dismissed as a "solution". Most recently, even 'development' advocates like Suman K Bery, Director General of New Delhi-based National Council of Applied Economic Research advised the governments to forgo its mega public private partnership projects and concentrate on strengthening the existing infrastructures in the light of the crash of US and the European markets as a response to the upheavals in the world economy.
Sterile Discourses
At a talk and a day long Panel Discussion in Patna on "Kusaha Breach and Thereafter", heated exchanges between pro-"Kosi high dam" engineers and proponents of "living with floods" ended with an apparent conclusion that high dams & embankments are less of an engineering interventions and more of a political intervention. On 17 October, on the eve of two months of the Kosi breach, the talk was delivered by Dr Dinesh Kumar Mishra, a well known voice of sanity with regard to Kosi crisis. Failure of dams as flood control structures has been demonstrated in Orissa, Gujarat, Maharasthra and Jharkhand.
A white paper was demanded, while sharing the Hindi version of the Fact Finding Report on Kosi “Kosi “Pralay”: Bhayaavah Aapada Abhi Baaki Hai” sought accountability of Kosi High Level Committee (KHLC) and provide a remedy for the drainage crisis in North Bihar as was promised by the UPA government's Common Minimum Programme. All the activities of KHLC should be put in suspension till the time their liability is fixed and Justice Rajesh Balia Judicial Commission of inquiry set up on September 9, 2008 is completed. The commission’s recommendations must not meet the fate of several dozens of committees and it must recommend criminal charges against acts of omission and commission.
It is noteworthy that Union Water Resources Department Secretary, in a letter to the Bihar Irrigation Secretary on September 24, 2008 has questioned the locus standi of the judicial commission. The letter read: “The Kosi agreement is a bilateral agreement between two sovereign states, India and Nepal, and Bihar is not a party to either 1954 or the 1966 agreement. ”Water and Power Consultation Services, a central government’s public sector undertaking has provided technical inputs to the Bihar government on possible ways to plug the breach at Kusaha in Nepal.
Participants included victims of embankments who expressed their anguish at the Delhi, Kathmandu and Patna centric deliberations and decision making. They called for a movement against Kosi High Dam, embankments and changing the current course of Kosi.
Amid news reports that Kosi's course will be restored by December 15 and the breach would be plugged by March 31, 2009 citing Kosi Breach Closure Advisory Technical Committee chairman Nilendu Sanyal and Ganga Flood Control Commission chairman R C Jha on 14 October, 2008 to finalise modalities on plugging the breach, some participants were opposed to the repair of the breach in Kusaha. Government must hear the views of these people before undertaking repair works.
Meanwhile, central government has sanctioned Rs 40 crore for the project and Bihar Cabinet has sanctioned Rs 197 crore. Bihar Water Resources Minister Bijendra Yadav has said tenders for the breach closure have been invited and bidding will take place after October 21.
Proposed "Sapta Kosi Multi Purpose Project" claims to irrigate 68,450 hectares in Nepal and provide remedy for drought-prone areas measuring 1,520,000 hectares in India. It is claimed that alongwith irrigation and flood control, about 3,500 MW of electrical power would also be generated from water stored in the 269-meter-high reservoir. According to a preliminary impact study, the proposed high dam will displace 75,000 people from about 79 Village Development Committees (VDCs) in nine districts of Nepal alone. About 111 settlements in the 79 VDCs, sprawling over the banks of the Sun Kosi, Tamor, and Arun rivers, will be totally submerged, while 47 settlements will face partial submergence, and 138 will become fractionally submerged.
Opinions available in public domain say, "If the dam is going to cause such upheaval, can the crops produced from the 68,450 hectares of irrigated land in Nepal compensate for this huge loss?" argued the bimonthly magazine, Pro Public/Good Governance, in its report. Estimated losses in the North Bihar are yet to be ascertained. Earlier, the meeting of the Indo-Nepal Joint Committee on Water Resources in Kathmandu on October 2, 2008 agreed to expedite work on preparation of the Detailed Project Report (DPR) on Saptkosi High Dam on the Kosi. Both sides reiterated their commitment to expediting the work on preparation of the DPR of Saptkosi High Dam project during the meeting which concluded on Wednesday in Kathmandu. Nepal assured full administrative support and security to Indian engineers.
After the breach, on August 18-19, 2008 Nepal government had said that Kosi treaty is a "historic blunder" but Nepal government's inconsistent and ambiguous position now on the Kosi High Dam proposal based on the same treaty must be exposed in the Nepali parliament and media.
The Worst is Still to Come
In order to save Kosi region from an ecological and human disaster, Nepali and Indian legislators must take a categorical position based on a referendum on Kosi.
On August 19, 2008, the chairman of the Expert Committee on the Implementation
of recommendations of Rashtriya Barh Ayog, R Rangachari said, “It is my
impression that not much has been done to implement the suggestions made by the
committee’s report.” Rangachari was on the Prime Minister’s Task Force on Flood
Control in 2004.
The National Common Minimum Programme (CMP) of the Government of India made a
solemn pledge to the people of the country in 2004 to undertake “Long-pending
schemes in specific states that have national significance, like flood control
and drainage in North Bihar.” Despite acknowledging the problem, it is shocking
that neither the Central nor Bihar Government conducts any survey to assess the
effect of flood control measures on the socio-economic conditions of society.
On August 20, 2008, after the breach in the embankment at Kusaha in the Kosi
region, Nepalese Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal `Prachanda’, took stock of
the post-calamity situation in the Kosi region and said “Kosi agreement was a
historic blunder. The people are suffering due to this”. The agreement had led
to the construction of embankments and proposals for a high dam.
Following an aerial survey of the flood affected areas of Bihar, the Indian
Prime Minister on August 28, 2008, termed the flood crisis as “a national
calamity”. More than four years have passed since the Indian Prime Minister made
the promise in the CMP. Now, in August 2008 he declared, “A high-level team
would be set up to coordinate matters with the Government of Nepal.” He also
promised protective structures and technical assistance to state government to
prevent further deterioration in the embankments. Such dangling of carrots and
providing band-aid remedies are horribly insincere and it has been going on for
over 60 years.
Bihar’s floods in August 2008 caused the eighth breach in the embankments.
According to the Bihar Government’s own reports, last year 48 lakh people in 22
districts were in need of assistance due to floods. Clearly, it is not the
extent, but the unpredictable intensity of the crisis that makes it a
catastrophe. The primary function of floodwater is to drain out excess water. It
has not been allowed to perform its functions due to engineering interventions.
Hundreds of reports prepared by Commissions of all ilks are gathering dust. At
most, they become election campaign tools. The Commission should recommend
fixing charges of criminal neglect against the members of the Kosi High-Level
Committee, who waited for the calamity despite having information that could
have led to timely evacuation of the people.
The drainage problem has failed to alter the policy regime of the country that
favours structural solutions regardless of the natural drainage it may impede.
Proposals like a high dam on the Kosi are as good as jumping from the frying pan
into the fire, if the experience with embankments is anything to go by. Even
when one chooses to ignore the changing morphology of the river, the estimated
lifespan of a dam and embankment being 25 and 37 years respectively, underlines
the transitory nature of the technocentric interventions. The Union Ministry of
Water Resources misled the Rajya Sabha on March 11, 2008 claiming, “Government
has taken various steps in the direction of water management to stop the flood
in north Bihar coming from the rivers of Nepal.” There has been no significant
shift in the way the Kosi issue was perceived in the 1950s and in 2008.
The issue of the Kosi High Dam, first raised in 1948, has been sold to the
victims as one of the ‘permanent’ solutions to recurring floods. Ironically,
embankments as temporary solutions have become reasonably permanent whereas the
‘permanent’ solution has remained elusive. What is ‘permanent’ and how permanent
is ‘permanence’? It must be acknowledged now that there is a condemnable
insincerity in proposing multi-purpose high dams for flood control, because the
dams are proposed to tap the hydropower potential. Is it not clear that when the
multipurpose — flood control, irrigation and power — dam is talked about, the
real motive of the proposal in question is ignored? Clearly, political parties
hold a stake in such power projects that make them little concernend with the
masses struggling to remain afloat. A few days ago, Nepalese Prime Minister,
Prachanda, conveyed his affirmation for the hydel power project in a meeting
with Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar.
Conclusion
There is a compelling logic behind seeking immediate review of the Indo- Nepal
Kosi Treaty that created the rationale for embankments and dams. Continuing with
it would amount to flogging a dead horse. The congestion in North Bihar and
Nepal is a problem of permanent water-logging that has remained overlooked for
several decades. Floods, earthquakes, hurricanes or tsunamis cannot be
controlled. But the catastrophe they cause can be predicted, anticipated and
prevented. Drainage of the river must remain sacrosanct, besides timely
evacuation of human and animal population and the establishment of robust public
health systems.
Given its distinct geo-morphological features and complicated hydrological
characters, the Kosi is one of the Himalayan rivers that is yet to be
understood in its entirety. It is high time that policy makers gave up their
outdated ‘conquest over nature’ paradigm. We have to learn to live with the
floods, only this time, in far more readiness.
Ecological and futuristic vision based state interventions must treat natural flow of rivers as sacrosanct and natural habitats must not be tampered with, which we must maintain if we want life to exist on Earth. Instead of a gigantic dam, what is needed is a gigantic network of very small scale water management schemes, including a vast network of small dams in Himalayas.
The author is a member of the Fact Finding Mission on Kosi.
Introduction
Kosi is one of the major tributaries of Ganga synonymous with the history, culture of not only Mithila but whole of the Indian sub-continent. One cannot think of the Indian sub-continent without thinking about Ramayana (Sita) and Mahabharata (Karna). Ramayana and Mahabharata cannot be even imagined in the absence of Mithila. The structural solutions have already distorted the landscape of the Kosi-Mithila region, structural solutions like Kosi High Dam would turn out to be a monument of foolishness for generations to come. Like the villains of embankment proposal, all the kosi high dam proponents must be identified and dealt with by something like a Kosi Parliament.
Nearly 33.55 lakh people in five districts of north Bihar were affected by the devastation caused by the Kosi deluge due to the breach in the embankment at Kusaha in Nepal on August 18.
After Tamil Nadu, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, Bihar too is initiating the misplaced project of linking rivers even as it is being predicted that "Ganga would soon become a seasonal river-flooded in monsoons and dry in the summers." Out of the 30 links in the controversial National Interlinking of Rivers project that includes 14 links in the Himalayan component, 6 river-link canals are directly related to Bihar. It is noteworthy that quite like Tamil Nadu, Bihar too is proposing its linking of rivers projects as independent of the national project. Unmindful of the global ecological changes and river basin approach Uttar Pradesh has already launched Ganga Expressway Project in 2007 to construct a 1047 km access controlled eight-laned expressway running along the Ganga river to provide connectivity and as a flood control measure although the catastrophe brought about by such measures is quite evident.
Continuing the same trend, Bijendra Prasad Yadav, Bihar's Water Resources Development Minister informed the Bihar Legislative Council on 4, December, 2008 that inter-linking of rivers could rid the state of perennial problems of flood and drought. Replying to a special debate on drought like situation prevailing in many districts of south Bihar, Yadav said "unless and until rivers are inter-linked the twin problems can not be solved." Yadav said the inter-linking of Bihar rivers would cost more than Rs 4,000 crore. Stating that 26 percent area of the state are drought-hit, Yadav informed the Vidhan Parishad that the state did not have any reservoir which was crucial for irrigation. It was either in Nepal or in Uttar Pradesh. Replying to a debate on perennial problem of flood in the state he referred to the devastation caused by the Kosi deluge and the probe by judicial commission underway.
The Centre has constituted a high level committee, consisting of three representatives of the Centre, two from Nepal and five from Bihar government, for the repair and maintenance of the embankment.
In the aftermath of Kosi deluge, such ecologically disastrous engineering projects have been dismissed as a "solution". Most recently, even 'development' advocates like Suman K Bery, Director General of New Delhi-based National Council of Applied Economic Research advised the governments to forgo its mega public private partnership projects and concentrate on strengthening the existing infrastructures in the light of the crash of US and the European markets as a response to the upheavals in the world economy.
Sterile Discourses
At a talk and a day long Panel Discussion in Patna on "Kusaha Breach and Thereafter", heated exchanges between pro-"Kosi high dam" engineers and proponents of "living with floods" ended with an apparent conclusion that high dams & embankments are less of an engineering interventions and more of a political intervention. On 17 October, on the eve of two months of the Kosi breach, the talk was delivered by Dr Dinesh Kumar Mishra, a well known voice of sanity with regard to Kosi crisis. Failure of dams as flood control structures has been demonstrated in Orissa, Gujarat, Maharasthra and Jharkhand.
A white paper was demanded, while sharing the Hindi version of the Fact Finding Report on Kosi “Kosi “Pralay”: Bhayaavah Aapada Abhi Baaki Hai” sought accountability of Kosi High Level Committee (KHLC) and provide a remedy for the drainage crisis in North Bihar as was promised by the UPA government's Common Minimum Programme. All the activities of KHLC should be put in suspension till the time their liability is fixed and Justice Rajesh Balia Judicial Commission of inquiry set up on September 9, 2008 is completed. The commission’s recommendations must not meet the fate of several dozens of committees and it must recommend criminal charges against acts of omission and commission.
It is noteworthy that Union Water Resources Department Secretary, in a letter to the Bihar Irrigation Secretary on September 24, 2008 has questioned the locus standi of the judicial commission. The letter read: “The Kosi agreement is a bilateral agreement between two sovereign states, India and Nepal, and Bihar is not a party to either 1954 or the 1966 agreement. ”Water and Power Consultation Services, a central government’s public sector undertaking has provided technical inputs to the Bihar government on possible ways to plug the breach at Kusaha in Nepal.
Participants included victims of embankments who expressed their anguish at the Delhi, Kathmandu and Patna centric deliberations and decision making. They called for a movement against Kosi High Dam, embankments and changing the current course of Kosi.
Amid news reports that Kosi's course will be restored by December 15 and the breach would be plugged by March 31, 2009 citing Kosi Breach Closure Advisory Technical Committee chairman Nilendu Sanyal and Ganga Flood Control Commission chairman R C Jha on 14 October, 2008 to finalise modalities on plugging the breach, some participants were opposed to the repair of the breach in Kusaha. Government must hear the views of these people before undertaking repair works.
Meanwhile, central government has sanctioned Rs 40 crore for the project and Bihar Cabinet has sanctioned Rs 197 crore. Bihar Water Resources Minister Bijendra Yadav has said tenders for the breach closure have been invited and bidding will take place after October 21.
Proposed "Sapta Kosi Multi Purpose Project" claims to irrigate 68,450 hectares in Nepal and provide remedy for drought-prone areas measuring 1,520,000 hectares in India. It is claimed that alongwith irrigation and flood control, about 3,500 MW of electrical power would also be generated from water stored in the 269-meter-high reservoir. According to a preliminary impact study, the proposed high dam will displace 75,000 people from about 79 Village Development Committees (VDCs) in nine districts of Nepal alone. About 111 settlements in the 79 VDCs, sprawling over the banks of the Sun Kosi, Tamor, and Arun rivers, will be totally submerged, while 47 settlements will face partial submergence, and 138 will become fractionally submerged.
Opinions available in public domain say, "If the dam is going to cause such upheaval, can the crops produced from the 68,450 hectares of irrigated land in Nepal compensate for this huge loss?" argued the bimonthly magazine, Pro Public/Good Governance, in its report. Estimated losses in the North Bihar are yet to be ascertained. Earlier, the meeting of the Indo-Nepal Joint Committee on Water Resources in Kathmandu on October 2, 2008 agreed to expedite work on preparation of the Detailed Project Report (DPR) on Saptkosi High Dam on the Kosi. Both sides reiterated their commitment to expediting the work on preparation of the DPR of Saptkosi High Dam project during the meeting which concluded on Wednesday in Kathmandu. Nepal assured full administrative support and security to Indian engineers.
After the breach, on August 18-19, 2008 Nepal government had said that Kosi treaty is a "historic blunder" but Nepal government's inconsistent and ambiguous position now on the Kosi High Dam proposal based on the same treaty must be exposed in the Nepali parliament and media.
The Worst is Still to Come
In order to save Kosi region from an ecological and human disaster, Nepali and Indian legislators must take a categorical position based on a referendum on Kosi.
On August 19, 2008, the chairman of the Expert Committee on the Implementation
of recommendations of Rashtriya Barh Ayog, R Rangachari said, “It is my
impression that not much has been done to implement the suggestions made by the
committee’s report.” Rangachari was on the Prime Minister’s Task Force on Flood
Control in 2004.
The National Common Minimum Programme (CMP) of the Government of India made a
solemn pledge to the people of the country in 2004 to undertake “Long-pending
schemes in specific states that have national significance, like flood control
and drainage in North Bihar.” Despite acknowledging the problem, it is shocking
that neither the Central nor Bihar Government conducts any survey to assess the
effect of flood control measures on the socio-economic conditions of society.
On August 20, 2008, after the breach in the embankment at Kusaha in the Kosi
region, Nepalese Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal `Prachanda’, took stock of
the post-calamity situation in the Kosi region and said “Kosi agreement was a
historic blunder. The people are suffering due to this”. The agreement had led
to the construction of embankments and proposals for a high dam.
Following an aerial survey of the flood affected areas of Bihar, the Indian
Prime Minister on August 28, 2008, termed the flood crisis as “a national
calamity”. More than four years have passed since the Indian Prime Minister made
the promise in the CMP. Now, in August 2008 he declared, “A high-level team
would be set up to coordinate matters with the Government of Nepal.” He also
promised protective structures and technical assistance to state government to
prevent further deterioration in the embankments. Such dangling of carrots and
providing band-aid remedies are horribly insincere and it has been going on for
over 60 years.
Bihar’s floods in August 2008 caused the eighth breach in the embankments.
According to the Bihar Government’s own reports, last year 48 lakh people in 22
districts were in need of assistance due to floods. Clearly, it is not the
extent, but the unpredictable intensity of the crisis that makes it a
catastrophe. The primary function of floodwater is to drain out excess water. It
has not been allowed to perform its functions due to engineering interventions.
Hundreds of reports prepared by Commissions of all ilks are gathering dust. At
most, they become election campaign tools. The Commission should recommend
fixing charges of criminal neglect against the members of the Kosi High-Level
Committee, who waited for the calamity despite having information that could
have led to timely evacuation of the people.
The drainage problem has failed to alter the policy regime of the country that
favours structural solutions regardless of the natural drainage it may impede.
Proposals like a high dam on the Kosi are as good as jumping from the frying pan
into the fire, if the experience with embankments is anything to go by. Even
when one chooses to ignore the changing morphology of the river, the estimated
lifespan of a dam and embankment being 25 and 37 years respectively, underlines
the transitory nature of the technocentric interventions. The Union Ministry of
Water Resources misled the Rajya Sabha on March 11, 2008 claiming, “Government
has taken various steps in the direction of water management to stop the flood
in north Bihar coming from the rivers of Nepal.” There has been no significant
shift in the way the Kosi issue was perceived in the 1950s and in 2008.
The issue of the Kosi High Dam, first raised in 1948, has been sold to the
victims as one of the ‘permanent’ solutions to recurring floods. Ironically,
embankments as temporary solutions have become reasonably permanent whereas the
‘permanent’ solution has remained elusive. What is ‘permanent’ and how permanent
is ‘permanence’? It must be acknowledged now that there is a condemnable
insincerity in proposing multi-purpose high dams for flood control, because the
dams are proposed to tap the hydropower potential. Is it not clear that when the
multipurpose — flood control, irrigation and power — dam is talked about, the
real motive of the proposal in question is ignored? Clearly, political parties
hold a stake in such power projects that make them little concernend with the
masses struggling to remain afloat. A few days ago, Nepalese Prime Minister,
Prachanda, conveyed his affirmation for the hydel power project in a meeting
with Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar.
Conclusion
There is a compelling logic behind seeking immediate review of the Indo- Nepal
Kosi Treaty that created the rationale for embankments and dams. Continuing with
it would amount to flogging a dead horse. The congestion in North Bihar and
Nepal is a problem of permanent water-logging that has remained overlooked for
several decades. Floods, earthquakes, hurricanes or tsunamis cannot be
controlled. But the catastrophe they cause can be predicted, anticipated and
prevented. Drainage of the river must remain sacrosanct, besides timely
evacuation of human and animal population and the establishment of robust public
health systems.
Given its distinct geo-morphological features and complicated hydrological
characters, the Kosi is one of the Himalayan rivers that is yet to be
understood in its entirety. It is high time that policy makers gave up their
outdated ‘conquest over nature’ paradigm. We have to learn to live with the
floods, only this time, in far more readiness.
Ecological and futuristic vision based state interventions must treat natural flow of rivers as sacrosanct and natural habitats must not be tampered with, which we must maintain if we want life to exist on Earth. Instead of a gigantic dam, what is needed is a gigantic network of very small scale water management schemes, including a vast network of small dams in Himalayas.
The author is a member of the Fact Finding Mission on Kosi.
Thursday, 11 December 2008
Misplaced Interlinking of Bihar rivers project
After Tamil Nadu, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, Bihar too is initiating the misplaced project of linking rivers even as it is being predicted that "Ganga would soon become a seasonal river-flooded in monsoons and dry in the summers."
Out of the 30 links in the National Interlinking of Rivers project that includes 14 links in the Himalayan component, 6 river-link canals are directly related to Bihar. It is noteworthy that quite like Tamil Nadu, Bihar too is proposing its linking of rivers projects as independent of the national project.
States like Kerala, West Bengal and Punjab have rejected such projects. Neighboring countries Nepal and Bangladesh too has rejected Interlinking of Rivers projects in the past.
Unmindful of the global ecological changes and river basin approach Uttar Pradesh has already launched Ganga Expressway Project in 2007 to construct a 1047 km access controlled eight-laned expressway running along the Ganga river to provide connectivity and as a flood control measure although the catastrophe brought about by such measures is quite evident.
Continuing the same trend, Bijendra Prasad Yadav, Bihar's Water Resources Development Minister informed the Bihar Legislative Council on 4, December that inter-linking of rivers could rid the state of perennial problems of flood and drought. Replying to a special debate on drought like situation prevailing in many districts of south Bihar, Yadav said "unless and until rivers are inter-linked the twin problems can not be solved." Yadav said the inter-linking of Bihar rivers would cost more than Rs 4,000 crore.
Stating that 26 percent area of the state are drought-hit, Yadav informed the Vidhan Parishad that the state did not have any reservoir which was crucial for irrigation. It was either in Nepal or in Uttar Pradesh.
Replying to a debate on perennial problem of flood in the state referred to the devastation caused by the Kosi deluge and the probe by judicial commission underway.
Nearly 33.55 lakh people in five districts of north Bihar were affected by the devastation caused by the Kosi deluge due to the breach in the embankment at Kusaha in Nepal on August 18.
The Centre has constituted a high level committee, consisting of three representatives of the Centre, two from Nepal and five from Bihar government, for the repair and maintenance of the embankment.
He said the state did not have any reservoir which was crucial for irrigation. It was either in Nepal or in Uttar Pradesh.
He informed the House that about 33.55 lakh people in five districts were affected by the Kosi deluge.
Earlier, on 25 November, 2008 the Supreme Court sought a detailed status report from the government on the implementation of five river-linking projects in southern, western and central India.
A bench headed by Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan asked the central government to apprise it of the latest developments on the projects by the fourth week of January.
The bench, which also included Justice P. Sathasivam and Justice J.M. Panchal, also asked Maharashtra and Gujarat to apprise the court of the reasons for the delay in signing a treaty between the two states for interlinking the Par, Tapti, Narmada, Daman Ganga and Pinjal rivers.
The bench also asked Tamil Nadu and Kerala to apprise the court of their differences in linking three rivers - Pamba, Achankoli and Vaippar - in their regions.
The apex court is seized of the issue since the very inception of the concept by erstwhile National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government in 2000.
Supreme Court had taken cognizance of the issue on its own and has been monitoring the implementation of the project since then.
It had been seeking status reports from the central government and various government agencies besides the state governments on river-linking and issuing directions to them to expedite the project.
The bench sought to examine the progress in implementing the five projects.
Besides examining the projects in Maharashtra, Gujarat, Tamil Nadu and Kerala, the other projects that the court sought to examine include those of interlinking the Ken and Betwa rivers in Madhya Pradesh.
The court also examined the progress in linking the Parbati, Kali Sindhu and Chambal rivers in Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan.
The fifth project that the court sought to examine related to the interlinking of the Godavari and Krishna rivers involving Orissa, Chhattisgarh, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Puducherry.
A workshop was inaugurated by Nitish Kumar, Bihar Chief Minister to decide Bihar's stand the issue in May 2006 at Water and Land Management Institute, Phulwarisharif, Patna and to discuss the Impact of National Plan of Inter Linking of rivers on Bihar and suggestions of Bihar State.
In the aftermath of Kosi deluge, such ecologically disastrous engineering projects have been dismissed as a "solution".
Notably, as Union Finance Minister even P Chidambaram and later Jairam Ramesh dismissed the economic viability of the project.
Most recently, even 'development' advocates like Suman K Bery, Director General of New Delhi-based National Council of Applied Economic Research advised the governments to forgo its mega PPP (public private partnership) projects and concentrate on strengthening the existing infrastructures in the light of the crash of US and the European markets as a response to the upheavals in the world economy.
Chief Ministers of Bihar, Tamil Nadu, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh seem to live in their own make believe world of past and remain allergic to ecological and futuristic vision based state interventions.
P.S:
Date:On 25/11/2008 the Supreme Court bench of HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. SATHASIVAM and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.M. PANCHAL passed the following order.
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Ranjit Kumar,Sr.Adv.(A.C.)
Mr. Nikhil Nayyar,Adv.
Mr. Sudarsh Menon,Adv.
For Respondent(s)
Mr. Sanjay R. Hegde,Adv.
Mr. Aruneshwar Gupta,Adv.
Mr. Chandra Prakash Pandey,Adv.
Mr. Guntur Prabhakar,Adv.
Mrs Manik Karanjawala,Adv.
Mr. Naresh K. Sharma,Adv.
Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv.
Mr. Ashok K. Mahajan,Adv.
Mr. R. Ayyam Perumal,Adv.
Mr. K.R. Sasiprabhu,Adv.
Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv.
Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee,Adv.
Mrs.D. Bharathi Reddy,Adv.
Mr. B.S. Banthia,Adv.
for State of Manipur Mr.Khwairakpam Nobin Singh,Adv.
for Nagaland Mr. Edward,Adv.
Mr. Rituraj Biswas,Adv.
for W.B. Mr. T.C.Sharma,Adv.
Ms. Neelam,Adv.
Mr. Kishan Datta,Adv.
for Chhattisgarh Ms. Suparna Srivastava,Adv.
Mr. Neeraj Gupta,Adv.
Mr. R.S.Sharma,Adv.
for T.N. Mr. G.Umapathy,Adv.
Mr. R.Needumaran,Adv.
for Punjab & Mr. R.S.Suri,Adv.
Delhi Jal Board Mr. Neel Kamal,Adv.
for NCRP Board Mrs.Sheil Sethi,Adv.
for Assam Ms. Riku Sarma,Adv.for
M/s. Corporate Law Group
for Tripura Mr. Gopal Singh,Adv.
Mr. Manish Kumar,Adv.
Mr. Rituraj Biswas,Adv.
for Bihar Mr. Gopal Singh,Adv.
Mr. Manish Kumar,Adv.
for Gujarat Mrs. H.Wahi,Adv.
Ms. Pinky Behra,Adv.
Ms. K.Enatali Sema,Adv.
Mr. Somnath,Adv.
for Maharashtra Mr. Sanjay V.Kharde,Adv.
Ms. Asha G.Nair,Adv.
for Goa Ms. A.Subhashini,Adv.
Ms. Aruna Mathur,Adv.
Mr. Atulesh Kumar,Adv.for
M/s. Arputham Aruna & Co.
Mr. G.Umapathy,Adv.
Mr. Rakesh Sharma,Adv.
for Urban Devpt. Ms. Pinky Anand,Sr.Adv.
Mr. D.N.Goburdhan,Adv.
Ms. Geeta Luthra,Adv.
for Mizoram Mr. K.N.Madhusoodhanan,Adv.
Mr. R.Sathish,Adv.
Mr. G.E.Vahanvati,S.G.I.
Mr. Navin Prakash,Adv.
for U.P. Mr. S.N.Pandey,Adv.
Mr. Anil Kr. Jha,Adv.
for Kerala Mr. P.V.Dinesh,Adv.
Ms. Sindhu T.P.,Adv.
Mr. Rajesh Srivastava,Adv.
Mr. Kamlendra Mishra,Adv.
Ms. Sumita Hazarika,Adv.
UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
ORDER
Union of India is directed to file a status report indicating the Bar chart also.
State of Maharashtra also seeks time to get the instructions as
regards the signing of MOU.
State of Tamil Nadu and State of Kerala may file their affidavits.
List the matters in the fourth week of January, 2009.
[SUMAN WADHWA] [VEERA VERMA]
COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
Out of the 30 links in the National Interlinking of Rivers project that includes 14 links in the Himalayan component, 6 river-link canals are directly related to Bihar. It is noteworthy that quite like Tamil Nadu, Bihar too is proposing its linking of rivers projects as independent of the national project.
States like Kerala, West Bengal and Punjab have rejected such projects. Neighboring countries Nepal and Bangladesh too has rejected Interlinking of Rivers projects in the past.
Unmindful of the global ecological changes and river basin approach Uttar Pradesh has already launched Ganga Expressway Project in 2007 to construct a 1047 km access controlled eight-laned expressway running along the Ganga river to provide connectivity and as a flood control measure although the catastrophe brought about by such measures is quite evident.
Continuing the same trend, Bijendra Prasad Yadav, Bihar's Water Resources Development Minister informed the Bihar Legislative Council on 4, December that inter-linking of rivers could rid the state of perennial problems of flood and drought. Replying to a special debate on drought like situation prevailing in many districts of south Bihar, Yadav said "unless and until rivers are inter-linked the twin problems can not be solved." Yadav said the inter-linking of Bihar rivers would cost more than Rs 4,000 crore.
Stating that 26 percent area of the state are drought-hit, Yadav informed the Vidhan Parishad that the state did not have any reservoir which was crucial for irrigation. It was either in Nepal or in Uttar Pradesh.
Replying to a debate on perennial problem of flood in the state referred to the devastation caused by the Kosi deluge and the probe by judicial commission underway.
Nearly 33.55 lakh people in five districts of north Bihar were affected by the devastation caused by the Kosi deluge due to the breach in the embankment at Kusaha in Nepal on August 18.
The Centre has constituted a high level committee, consisting of three representatives of the Centre, two from Nepal and five from Bihar government, for the repair and maintenance of the embankment.
He said the state did not have any reservoir which was crucial for irrigation. It was either in Nepal or in Uttar Pradesh.
He informed the House that about 33.55 lakh people in five districts were affected by the Kosi deluge.
Earlier, on 25 November, 2008 the Supreme Court sought a detailed status report from the government on the implementation of five river-linking projects in southern, western and central India.
A bench headed by Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan asked the central government to apprise it of the latest developments on the projects by the fourth week of January.
The bench, which also included Justice P. Sathasivam and Justice J.M. Panchal, also asked Maharashtra and Gujarat to apprise the court of the reasons for the delay in signing a treaty between the two states for interlinking the Par, Tapti, Narmada, Daman Ganga and Pinjal rivers.
The bench also asked Tamil Nadu and Kerala to apprise the court of their differences in linking three rivers - Pamba, Achankoli and Vaippar - in their regions.
The apex court is seized of the issue since the very inception of the concept by erstwhile National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government in 2000.
Supreme Court had taken cognizance of the issue on its own and has been monitoring the implementation of the project since then.
It had been seeking status reports from the central government and various government agencies besides the state governments on river-linking and issuing directions to them to expedite the project.
The bench sought to examine the progress in implementing the five projects.
Besides examining the projects in Maharashtra, Gujarat, Tamil Nadu and Kerala, the other projects that the court sought to examine include those of interlinking the Ken and Betwa rivers in Madhya Pradesh.
The court also examined the progress in linking the Parbati, Kali Sindhu and Chambal rivers in Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan.
The fifth project that the court sought to examine related to the interlinking of the Godavari and Krishna rivers involving Orissa, Chhattisgarh, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Puducherry.
A workshop was inaugurated by Nitish Kumar, Bihar Chief Minister to decide Bihar's stand the issue in May 2006 at Water and Land Management Institute, Phulwarisharif, Patna and to discuss the Impact of National Plan of Inter Linking of rivers on Bihar and suggestions of Bihar State.
In the aftermath of Kosi deluge, such ecologically disastrous engineering projects have been dismissed as a "solution".
Notably, as Union Finance Minister even P Chidambaram and later Jairam Ramesh dismissed the economic viability of the project.
Most recently, even 'development' advocates like Suman K Bery, Director General of New Delhi-based National Council of Applied Economic Research advised the governments to forgo its mega PPP (public private partnership) projects and concentrate on strengthening the existing infrastructures in the light of the crash of US and the European markets as a response to the upheavals in the world economy.
Chief Ministers of Bihar, Tamil Nadu, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh seem to live in their own make believe world of past and remain allergic to ecological and futuristic vision based state interventions.
P.S:
Date:On 25/11/2008 the Supreme Court bench of HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. SATHASIVAM and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.M. PANCHAL passed the following order.
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Ranjit Kumar,Sr.Adv.(A.C.)
Mr. Nikhil Nayyar,Adv.
Mr. Sudarsh Menon,Adv.
For Respondent(s)
Mr. Sanjay R. Hegde,Adv.
Mr. Aruneshwar Gupta,Adv.
Mr. Chandra Prakash Pandey,Adv.
Mr. Guntur Prabhakar,Adv.
Mrs Manik Karanjawala,Adv.
Mr. Naresh K. Sharma,Adv.
Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv.
Mr. Ashok K. Mahajan,Adv.
Mr. R. Ayyam Perumal,Adv.
Mr. K.R. Sasiprabhu,Adv.
Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv.
Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee,Adv.
Mrs.D. Bharathi Reddy,Adv.
Mr. B.S. Banthia,Adv.
for State of Manipur Mr.Khwairakpam Nobin Singh,Adv.
for Nagaland Mr. Edward,Adv.
Mr. Rituraj Biswas,Adv.
for W.B. Mr. T.C.Sharma,Adv.
Ms. Neelam,Adv.
Mr. Kishan Datta,Adv.
for Chhattisgarh Ms. Suparna Srivastava,Adv.
Mr. Neeraj Gupta,Adv.
Mr. R.S.Sharma,Adv.
for T.N. Mr. G.Umapathy,Adv.
Mr. R.Needumaran,Adv.
for Punjab & Mr. R.S.Suri,Adv.
Delhi Jal Board Mr. Neel Kamal,Adv.
for NCRP Board Mrs.Sheil Sethi,Adv.
for Assam Ms. Riku Sarma,Adv.for
M/s. Corporate Law Group
for Tripura Mr. Gopal Singh,Adv.
Mr. Manish Kumar,Adv.
Mr. Rituraj Biswas,Adv.
for Bihar Mr. Gopal Singh,Adv.
Mr. Manish Kumar,Adv.
for Gujarat Mrs. H.Wahi,Adv.
Ms. Pinky Behra,Adv.
Ms. K.Enatali Sema,Adv.
Mr. Somnath,Adv.
for Maharashtra Mr. Sanjay V.Kharde,Adv.
Ms. Asha G.Nair,Adv.
for Goa Ms. A.Subhashini,Adv.
Ms. Aruna Mathur,Adv.
Mr. Atulesh Kumar,Adv.for
M/s. Arputham Aruna & Co.
Mr. G.Umapathy,Adv.
Mr. Rakesh Sharma,Adv.
for Urban Devpt. Ms. Pinky Anand,Sr.Adv.
Mr. D.N.Goburdhan,Adv.
Ms. Geeta Luthra,Adv.
for Mizoram Mr. K.N.Madhusoodhanan,Adv.
Mr. R.Sathish,Adv.
Mr. G.E.Vahanvati,S.G.I.
Mr. Navin Prakash,Adv.
for U.P. Mr. S.N.Pandey,Adv.
Mr. Anil Kr. Jha,Adv.
for Kerala Mr. P.V.Dinesh,Adv.
Ms. Sindhu T.P.,Adv.
Mr. Rajesh Srivastava,Adv.
Mr. Kamlendra Mishra,Adv.
Ms. Sumita Hazarika,Adv.
UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
ORDER
Union of India is directed to file a status report indicating the Bar chart also.
State of Maharashtra also seeks time to get the instructions as
regards the signing of MOU.
State of Tamil Nadu and State of Kerala may file their affidavits.
List the matters in the fourth week of January, 2009.
[SUMAN WADHWA] [VEERA VERMA]
COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
Friday, 31 October 2008
Wetlands in Crisis
Representatives of 158 nations have converged in Changwon, South Gyongsang province of South Korea for eight days, from October 27 to November 4, 2008 to discuss ways to save the world's wetlands.
Wetlands were regarded simply as useless areas when countries concentrated on land development. But they came to recognize the value of wetlands--the immensely important asset of mankind—and the Ramsar Convention was eventually created. The conference is held every three years on alternating continents. The international treaty was adopted in the Iranian city of Ramsar in 1971 to protect wetlands for water birds. South Korea joined the convention in 1997.
The Ramsar Convention is an intergovernmental treaty for the conservation and use of wetlands. Ramsar Convention refers to the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) serves as Depositary for the Convention, but the Ramsar Convention is not part of the United Nations and UNESCO system of environment conventions and agreements.
The 10th Meeting of the Convention that is underway is deliberating under a theme ‘Healthy Wetlands, Healthy People'.
Under the Ramsar Convention a wide variety of natural and human-made habitat types, ranging from rivers to coral reefs, can be classified as wetlands. Wetlands include swamps, marshes, billabongs, lakes, salt marshes, mudflats, mangroves, coral reefs, fens, peat bogs, or bodies of water - whether natural or artificial, permanent or temporary. Water within these areas can be static or flowing; fresh, brackish or saline; and can include inland rivers and coastal or marine water to a depth of six meters at low tide. There are even underground wetlands.
Countries that joined the convention had agreed to protect the ecological character of listed sites, include wetland conservation within their national land-use planning and also establish nature reserves on wetlands and promote wetland training.
In India, wetlands are distributed in all the biogeographic regions and exhibit significant ecological diversity, primarily because of the variability in climate, geology, habitat and topography. Wetlands provide a multitude of services, including water purification and regulation of flows, fisheries, habitats for plants, animals and micro-organisms, opportunities for recreation and tourism, and so
forth
The Ramsar Convention came into force in 1975; there are 157 Contracting Parties. In all, 1,704 wetland sites have been designated as Ramsar sites, with a total area of 152 million hectares.
India became a Contracting Party to the Convention in October 1981, and designated the Chilika Lake (Orissa) and the Keoladeo National Park (Rajasthan) as its first two Ramsar sites. Four additional sites were designated in 1990: Sambhar Lake (Rajasthan), Loktak Lake (Manipur), Harike Lake (Punjab), and Wular Lake (Jammu & Kashmir). In 2000, the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India, identified 13 new wetlands and designated them as Ramsar sites. The decision came in the wake of the announcement by the Government at the 7th Conference of the Parties to the Ramsar Convention (COP7) held at San Jose (Costa Rica) in May 1999. In 2005, six more sites were designated as Ramsar Sites. At present, 25 wetlands have been designated as Ramsar sites in India.
However, these 25 Ramsar sites do not represent even a fraction of the diversity of wetland habitats existing in the country. In India, the Ministry of Environment & Forests (MoEF) is the nodal agency for implementing the conservation programme on wetlands, mangroves and coral reefs.
Started in the 1980s, the programme is guided by a National Committee on Wetlands, Mangroves and Coral Reefs, constituted to advise the government on appropriate policies and programmes for the conservation of these ecosystems, to suggest specific sites for conservation action, and to identify research and training priorities. Several wetland sites in the country have been selected on a priority basis for conservation and management action, financial support for which is being extended by the Ministry.
Ten biogeographic zones have been identified in India: Trans-Himalaya, Himalaya, Semi-arid, Desert, Gangetic Plain, Deccan, Western Ghats, North-east, Coasts and Islands.
Among other palces, the Gangetic plain is one of the most fertile regions of the world, with a nearly 3,000 year history of human occupation. This region is famous for its flood plain wetlands — results of copious rainfall in the Gangetic Plain and also in the Himalaya from where most of the rivers originate. Large areas areannually flooded and when the flood recedes, it leaves low-lying areas under water. These wetlands are extremely productive in terms of vegetation biomass and avian diversity.
Some of the most important wetland Important Bird Areas (IBAs) and potential Ramsar Sites are found in this region with significant populations of waterfowl. Sultanpur in Gurgaon, Bhindawas in Rohtak, Patna jheel in Etah, Lakh-Bahosi in Farrukhabad, Saman in Mainpuri, Sandi in Hardoi, Kawar in Begusarai and Nawabganj in Unnao, are some of the more spectacular wetlands for migratory waterfowl in winter.
The marshes and wetlands of the Gangetic drainage system show a long history of stability in the geological sense.
The flood plains of the Brahmaputra and the marshes and swamps in the hills of north-east India and the Himalayan foothills are important for humans and biodiversity. The Brahmaputra Valley, with its high rainfall and numerous rivers provide wintering grounds to large congregations of waterbirds.
Most of these waterbirds are migratory while some are resident and breed in this region. The wetlands of this region support a number of threatened species; a number of IBAs and potential Ramsar Sites have been identified in this region.
The coastal areas of India perhaps form the most neglected biogeographic zone of India, mainly because they do not have charismatic species such as the Tiger and the Rhinoceros.
The existing Ramsar site list of 25 sites in India clearly proves that all the biogeographical regions of India are not properly represented, and some of the potential sites are missing, e.g. many important sites in the Gangetic Plain, North-east, Semi-Arid, Desert and Deccan.
Under the Important Bird Areas Programme of the BNHS and BirdLife International has prepared a list of additional 135 wetlands which are potential Ramsar Sites. It has identified potential Ramsar Sites mainly based on their biodiversity values, which was the original aim of the Ramsar Convention.
It is hoped that many of these potential sites will be considered by the Government of India under the Ramsar Convention.
Note:The above compilation is based on Ramsar Convention's website and an editorial of Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, 104(2), May-Aug 2007
Wetlands were regarded simply as useless areas when countries concentrated on land development. But they came to recognize the value of wetlands--the immensely important asset of mankind—and the Ramsar Convention was eventually created. The conference is held every three years on alternating continents. The international treaty was adopted in the Iranian city of Ramsar in 1971 to protect wetlands for water birds. South Korea joined the convention in 1997.
The Ramsar Convention is an intergovernmental treaty for the conservation and use of wetlands. Ramsar Convention refers to the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) serves as Depositary for the Convention, but the Ramsar Convention is not part of the United Nations and UNESCO system of environment conventions and agreements.
The 10th Meeting of the Convention that is underway is deliberating under a theme ‘Healthy Wetlands, Healthy People'.
Under the Ramsar Convention a wide variety of natural and human-made habitat types, ranging from rivers to coral reefs, can be classified as wetlands. Wetlands include swamps, marshes, billabongs, lakes, salt marshes, mudflats, mangroves, coral reefs, fens, peat bogs, or bodies of water - whether natural or artificial, permanent or temporary. Water within these areas can be static or flowing; fresh, brackish or saline; and can include inland rivers and coastal or marine water to a depth of six meters at low tide. There are even underground wetlands.
Countries that joined the convention had agreed to protect the ecological character of listed sites, include wetland conservation within their national land-use planning and also establish nature reserves on wetlands and promote wetland training.
In India, wetlands are distributed in all the biogeographic regions and exhibit significant ecological diversity, primarily because of the variability in climate, geology, habitat and topography. Wetlands provide a multitude of services, including water purification and regulation of flows, fisheries, habitats for plants, animals and micro-organisms, opportunities for recreation and tourism, and so
forth
The Ramsar Convention came into force in 1975; there are 157 Contracting Parties. In all, 1,704 wetland sites have been designated as Ramsar sites, with a total area of 152 million hectares.
India became a Contracting Party to the Convention in October 1981, and designated the Chilika Lake (Orissa) and the Keoladeo National Park (Rajasthan) as its first two Ramsar sites. Four additional sites were designated in 1990: Sambhar Lake (Rajasthan), Loktak Lake (Manipur), Harike Lake (Punjab), and Wular Lake (Jammu & Kashmir). In 2000, the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India, identified 13 new wetlands and designated them as Ramsar sites. The decision came in the wake of the announcement by the Government at the 7th Conference of the Parties to the Ramsar Convention (COP7) held at San Jose (Costa Rica) in May 1999. In 2005, six more sites were designated as Ramsar Sites. At present, 25 wetlands have been designated as Ramsar sites in India.
However, these 25 Ramsar sites do not represent even a fraction of the diversity of wetland habitats existing in the country. In India, the Ministry of Environment & Forests (MoEF) is the nodal agency for implementing the conservation programme on wetlands, mangroves and coral reefs.
Started in the 1980s, the programme is guided by a National Committee on Wetlands, Mangroves and Coral Reefs, constituted to advise the government on appropriate policies and programmes for the conservation of these ecosystems, to suggest specific sites for conservation action, and to identify research and training priorities. Several wetland sites in the country have been selected on a priority basis for conservation and management action, financial support for which is being extended by the Ministry.
Ten biogeographic zones have been identified in India: Trans-Himalaya, Himalaya, Semi-arid, Desert, Gangetic Plain, Deccan, Western Ghats, North-east, Coasts and Islands.
Among other palces, the Gangetic plain is one of the most fertile regions of the world, with a nearly 3,000 year history of human occupation. This region is famous for its flood plain wetlands — results of copious rainfall in the Gangetic Plain and also in the Himalaya from where most of the rivers originate. Large areas areannually flooded and when the flood recedes, it leaves low-lying areas under water. These wetlands are extremely productive in terms of vegetation biomass and avian diversity.
Some of the most important wetland Important Bird Areas (IBAs) and potential Ramsar Sites are found in this region with significant populations of waterfowl. Sultanpur in Gurgaon, Bhindawas in Rohtak, Patna jheel in Etah, Lakh-Bahosi in Farrukhabad, Saman in Mainpuri, Sandi in Hardoi, Kawar in Begusarai and Nawabganj in Unnao, are some of the more spectacular wetlands for migratory waterfowl in winter.
The marshes and wetlands of the Gangetic drainage system show a long history of stability in the geological sense.
The flood plains of the Brahmaputra and the marshes and swamps in the hills of north-east India and the Himalayan foothills are important for humans and biodiversity. The Brahmaputra Valley, with its high rainfall and numerous rivers provide wintering grounds to large congregations of waterbirds.
Most of these waterbirds are migratory while some are resident and breed in this region. The wetlands of this region support a number of threatened species; a number of IBAs and potential Ramsar Sites have been identified in this region.
The coastal areas of India perhaps form the most neglected biogeographic zone of India, mainly because they do not have charismatic species such as the Tiger and the Rhinoceros.
The existing Ramsar site list of 25 sites in India clearly proves that all the biogeographical regions of India are not properly represented, and some of the potential sites are missing, e.g. many important sites in the Gangetic Plain, North-east, Semi-Arid, Desert and Deccan.
Under the Important Bird Areas Programme of the BNHS and BirdLife International has prepared a list of additional 135 wetlands which are potential Ramsar Sites. It has identified potential Ramsar Sites mainly based on their biodiversity values, which was the original aim of the Ramsar Convention.
It is hoped that many of these potential sites will be considered by the Government of India under the Ramsar Convention.
Note:The above compilation is based on Ramsar Convention's website and an editorial of Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, 104(2), May-Aug 2007
Wednesday, 6 August 2008
WaterWatch seeks democratic solutions for water
WaterWatch opposes surrendering any right to regulate water supplies to WTO, mega projects like Interlinking of Rivers (ILR) in South Asia, Three Gorges Dam, South-to-North Water Diversion in China and Initiative for Integration of Regional Infrastructure in South America (IIRSA) because they uproot people, forests, wildlife, biodiversity and cause global warming.
In 1955, India had more than 5,000 cubic meters of freshwater per person. By 2013, it is expected to fall below 1,700 cubic meters, to be deemed in "water stress" by 2025, it could fall below 1,000 cubic meters, for it to be considred in "water scarcity." Dam projects such as those in Narmada valley would submerge hundreds of villages with impunity.
WaterWatch is concerned about depleting water resources, wastewater and displacement. Liquid waste discharged by domestic residences, commercial properties industry, and/or agriculture. In India, the Report of the National Commission, which says, "Himalayan river linking component is not feasible" melting glaciers make it unpredictable and "there is no imperative necessity for massive water transfer" in the Peninsular river component.
Projects like ILR in South Asia and IIRSA in South America mean rewriting the geography despite massive protest. The tyranny of International Financial Institutions has divorced policy making from reality.
In 1955, India had more than 5,000 cubic meters of freshwater per person. By 2013, it is expected to fall below 1,700 cubic meters, to be deemed in "water stress" by 2025, it could fall below 1,000 cubic meters, for it to be considred in "water scarcity." Dam projects such as those in Narmada valley would submerge hundreds of villages with impunity.
WaterWatch is concerned about depleting water resources, wastewater and displacement. Liquid waste discharged by domestic residences, commercial properties industry, and/or agriculture. In India, the Report of the National Commission, which says, "Himalayan river linking component is not feasible" melting glaciers make it unpredictable and "there is no imperative necessity for massive water transfer" in the Peninsular river component.
Projects like ILR in South Asia and IIRSA in South America mean rewriting the geography despite massive protest. The tyranny of International Financial Institutions has divorced policy making from reality.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)