South India River Water Issues/Disputes

chandrasekaran · Post by **chandrasekaran** » 11 Dec 2011 17:26

Dileep,

From that link its quite clear that TN govt went only by the recommendations of joint meetings with GoK
under CWC to arrive at the decisions to strengthen the dam.

3 In 1979, reports appeared in Kerala Press about the safety of Mulla Periyar Dam. On 25th November, 1979 Chairman, CWC held discussions at Thirvananthapuram regarding strengthening Periyar dam with officers of Irrigation and Electricity, Deptt. of Kerala and PWD of Tamil Nadu. In the meeting, emergency measures to be completed before next monsoon (1980), medium term measures and long-term measures for strengthening of Periyar Dam were decided. One of the emergency measures was to keep the shutters of spillway raised fully to lower the reservoir level to 136 ft.
4. A second meeting under the Chairmanship of Chairman, CWC was held on 29th April 1980 at New Delhi and it was opined that after the completion of emergency and medium term measures in the form of cable anchoring, the water level in the reservoir can be restored up to 145 ft.

In fact all the steps mentioned in the Advt. y'day by TN seems to have been decisions that both governments agreed to.
Now, if GoK can go back and claim victim status, why do you think that TN govt should trust whatever your politicians state in press/public
meets and finance a new Dam ?

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 11 Dec 2011 18:20

It was in 1979 (which is 32 years ago) that the issue came before CWC. Even then, CWC had suggested the strengthening measures as temporary, before the dam is re-built using current technology. Even possible locations were identified for the new dam, but TN went back on that. Yes, the strengthening measures were attempted, but anyone who is not visually challenged can clearly see that they didn't work. That is the problem. In fact, the concrete capping attempt resulted in long cracks in the structure, which came out in the ROV inspection.

CWC is not GOD. They recommended strengthening measures, but after that, TN refused all attempts to conduct inspections on the dam. From whatever is visible outside, the dam is in a terrible shape. If TN is so sure about the safety, why don't they allow independent audits or inspections? We carry the risk, so we should be at least allowed to verify the state, isn't it?

Yes, we agreed for strengthening measures in 1979, but what should we do if we find that they were either not properly executed (cable anchors missing, for example), or did not work? Trust the CWC and the promises of TN?

No, sir! We are NOT willing to trust you with our lived. Sorry!!

Coming back to the question of trust, there is a remarkable difference between the issues.

TN trusting KL to give water: This is very very easy for TN to verify, and litigate if not delivered. Water is always measured when transferred, so no dispute on the actual quantity can happen. Results of non-compliance is also immediately apparent, like lower levels in the receiving tanks.

KL Trusting TN for dam safety: The only way for KL to verify is by inspection, which TN haven't, and still doesn't allow. Results of non-compliance is not immediately apparent. We will know only when dam breaks.

So, you can't equate TN's trust on KL and KL's trust on TN.

Let me repeat two options TN have to instantly diffuse the problem:

TN can instantly defuse the issue by making a 'confidence building measure' such as a full safety audit by KL. If the dam is indeed safe,why not? What do they got to hide?

They can also instantly diffuse the issue by offering to underwrite any damage at a generous level, like Rs 1Cr for lives and Rs 1 Cr for acre of land lost. Absolutely no money spent on that promise!! All it takes is a document signed by the Governor of TN!!

chandrasekaran · Post by **chandrasekaran** » 11 Dec 2011 18:57

7. Hon’ble Minister (WR) convened the Inter-State meeting on 19.5.2000 and as decided in the meeting, an Expert Committee under Member (D&R), CWC with representatives from both States was constituted in June 2000 to study the safety of the dam with respect to strengthening of dam carried out by The Government of Tamil Nadu on the advice of Central Water Commission and advise regarding raising of water level in the reservoir beyond 136 ft as a result of strengthening of dam.

8. The Committee in its report of March, 2001 opined that with the strengthening measures implemented , the water level can be raised from 136 ft. to 142 ft. without endangering safety of the dam. Further raising of water level to 152 ft. will be considered after balance strengthening measures are implemented.

Dileep,

As late as 2001, GoK agreed to raise the water level to 152 feet , so its not as if GoK was sleeping all the time since 1979.
You say CWC is No GOD, I would say the same about whatever expert committee that GoK forms. Again, it IS a matter of trust at the end of the
day. I will go back to my lurker mode.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 11 Dec 2011 20:19

All rhetoric, and you would still come back and say it is all about the 999.

Gee, do you have special talent to read my mind? Wow, see the lack of trust. If you don't trust me, why should I trust you, eh? The hatred towards tamilians is just visible.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 11 Dec 2011 20:23

** Admin Warning **

Folks, if arguments are not going to be decent on either side of the divide, this thread is going to be locked down.

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 11 Dec 2011 21:37

chandrasekaran wrote:
Dileep,
As late as 2001, GoK agreed to raise the water level to 152 feet , so its not as if GoK was sleeping all the time since 1979.
You say CWC is No GOD, I would say the same about whatever expert committee that GoK forms. Again, it IS a matter of trust at the end of the
day. I will go back to my lurker mode.

Nope. The resolution was with opposition from the KL member. He was shouted down (not my words, but his) in the committee. So, claiming that GoK agreed is incorrect.

Yes, there is no trust on either side, and I am sorry to say, there is no action from TN side to build the trust, except repeated reassurances that 'the dam is safe'. That will not do. TN should, to the least, agree to discuss. As of now, they have refused to even have a discussion between babus. It doesn't build trust, does it?

I can list many possible things TN could do expediently to improve KL trust. Show me one thing that KL could do to improve TN trust on KL? Anything TN expects/wants KL to do will need KL to trust TN. Anything KL wants TN to do does not need any trust on KL by TN.

1. Agree to discuss the possibility of building a new dam (even if the end result is a flat NO). You don't need to trust KL to talk to them!!
2. Agree for a safety inspection by KL. After all, it is our lives that are on line. Any amount of inspection can not damage the dam. No need to trust KL there.
3. Agree to underwrite the collateral damage, and claim that as a mark of confidence on their dam. No need to trust KL there either.
4. Avoid stating obvious fallacies, like there are no inhabitation threatened by the downstream. No needf to trust KL there.

The bottom line is, it is upto TN to take action to build trust in KL, not the other way around.

BTW, in respect to SSridhar's call, I shall not, hereafter use the word, or make comparison to Pakiness. I shall also use the abbreviation TN to mean the entity that is the state of Tamil Nadu, and not refer to the Tamil people, or the individuals. I apologize if I hurt anyones feelings.

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 12 Dec 2011 01:13

SaiK wrote:I liked the increase in population and irrigation. But I don't like the attitude of considering the profits and goods for particular zonal benefits. Share everything!

So does Kerala now want to be a rentier state. Do none of the work but get paid handsomely. You have 90% of Periyar water still in your lands. Can TN claim the production from that as well. Is TN allowed to question what you do with that water or is the 10% sent to TN the only issue.

And here I was thinking it wasn't about the water.
-------------------------------------------

Dileep wrote:[..the cost of the dam will be born by us, and the usual amount of water, ie same amount of water that had been taken in the past, will be given to TN.

Who decides what the usual amount is. Right now TN has the right to take 100% if it can. Why would TN negotiate for less.
-------------------------------------------------

Supreme court says dam is safe and that is not enough for Kerala. Claims are made that every review committee has been bought over by TN. Only Kerala's plan for new dam will suffice or else...

Truth is legally Kerala is in the wrong. All this tamasha is to avoid facing that truth.
---------------------------------------

Still a new Dam should be built. It is doubtful TN will give up legal control of new Dam. Political suicide. Kerala is thus trying to get the impossible and stubbornly wants its way. All this frustration is due to that.

Next step is some form of Arbitration or maybe ICJ or threatening to bomb TN. Kerala wants victory to save H &D with people at this point.

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 12 Dec 2011 01:26

Dileep wrote:KL Trusting TN for dam safety: The only way for KL to verify is by inspection, which TN haven't, and still doesn't allow. Results of non-compliance is not immediately apparent. We will know only when dam breaks.

This is incorrect. GoK representatives have examined every inch of the dam numerous times. TN rightly wants some structure to such visits, esp. with neutral observers as well. Every Ram and Rahim politico who wants can not inspect, as numerous such groups have shown up.

For instance.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/states/ker ... 694645.ece

The scanning of upstream side of the Mullaperiyar dam using a remote operated vehicle by the Central Soil and Materials Research Station on directions from the Empowered Committee of the Supreme Court had found serious damage to the masonry structure between 95 to 106 feet from the base of the dam, retired engineer M. Sasidharan who was observer of Kerala during the scanning said in a report to the government.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 12 Dec 2011 02:11

Let me paraphrase what all I have heard here...

There is no trust on the highest Court of the land because one Rajan Pillai episode happened. There is no trust on the CWC cos they are bribed from TN's warchest and they take the hospitality of TN government, which Kerala cant match. There is no trust even in your own politicians who you regularly elect every 5 years or less and there are claims that they can be and will be bought by TN. There is no trust in the 90+% literacy level (that often gets bandied about) to use the right judgment calls to elect the right people who will serve and not loot or cheat. At times, there is no trust on the Central Government either because "they can pass Acts and laws, but we are the ones suffering." Who do you trust then? Cmon, tell me. Even if Ayyappa swami comes down from His tiger and says something, Dileep wont trust Him. Dileep will only trust when the ownership of the new dam is either jointly shared or exclusively owned by Kerala

.

Why should TN talk to Kerala? Ideally, they should. But legally, do they have to? Kerala is talking to the Empowered Panel, TN is talking to the same people, and if there are claims and counter-claims, both can and are made before the Panel. Why should TN accede to mediating with Kerala on a Track-II by talking separately?? Did nt both the governments go on to use the services of the Supreme Court because talking with each other was going nowhere? Did India and pakistan keep talking once the neutral arbitration went to the desk of Raymond Lafitte?? What kinda stooopidity is this? You first claim the other to be paki, and then if the other party says, lets talk before the Courts, you again go and claim the other to be a paki like a self-fulfilling prophesy.

Why should a TN governor put some sign before some compensation document? Kerala has lowered the water level of Idukki. So if there is damage, its going to be between MP and Idukki. Lo and behold, there is damage, post-facto compensation can and will be made all at the same or higher levels you want. Do you think if there is some damage, Manorama or Deepika are going to sit still or wont they be frying fatass' ass in a hot skewer? So what is the need for signing off now? Did we see a sign from the Kerala government on water guarantee except words? If those words are believed at large by the non-nutjobs, why cant you believe a word in the reverse direction too? The bottomline Dileep is: rhetoric is cheap and counter-rhetoric is cheaper.

SSridhar, I know its your administrative prerogative. But let me put my 2cents. While I find paki calls offensive and irritating esp when it comes from someone who can use his knowledge to divorce emotions from ground level cynicism on trust matters and yet does nt, I would be the last person to ask Dileep to stop using the said word. If he has a point to make, he would have made it without the said appellation. There is really nothing for him to apologize to, he has made himself very clear and admin sanction-laden apologies are pointless anyway. If I were to talk for TN, I should say that I am paki and proud. I am sure if someone who is sitting on the other side of the Periyar has to decide on perceived safety vs. Trojan horse, they would choose to become paki too. You can redefine pakiness like being ahead of the curve as hifalutin-ly if you want.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 12 Dec 2011 03:00

Let me throw one more datapoint which I found somewhere else.

Idukki and nearabouts has provided sanctuary for the maoists who want to make/create an agrarian crisis to push their own agendas. On June 22, 2007, Maoist Central Committee member Sande Rajamouli was reportedly arrested in Kollam, though the police deny this ever happened. Then came the arrest of Malla Raji Reddy in December 2007 from Angamaly town in Ernakulam district. This followed Tamil Nadu Maoist secretary Sundaramoorthy’s reported police confession that he had lived in Nedumkandam and other areas of Idukki district for eight months.

According to sources, a meeting of the Maoist Central Committee, held between January 28 and 31, 2007, discussed in detail the organisation’s activities in Kerala. The SWRB resolutions in the meeting, sources said, contained details crucial to Kerala. More important, the directions to the Kerala committee were to continue focussing on the “Tamil Nadu perspective area,” which possibly denotes the borders of Tamil Nadu and Kerala, particularly Wayanad, where there have been earlier reports of Naxalite activity.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 12 Dec 2011 04:43

Theo_Fidel wrote:
SaiK wrote:I liked the increase in population and irrigation. But I don't like the attitude of considering the profits and goods for particular zonal benefits. Share everything!
So does Kerala now want to be a rentier state. Do none of the work but get paid handsomely. You have 90% of Periyar water still in your lands. Can TN claim the production from that as well. Is TN allowed to question what you do with that water or is the 10% sent to TN the only issue.

And here I was thinking it wasn't about the water.

I guess there is always some kind of barter system when it comes to commerce, which is better than fighting for whose rights is it. It is everyone's mother land. agree?

Now, how much TN is willing to barter and how much Kerala is willing to trade is all that needs to be tabled. Water is the problem for the masses and mass production requirement. Water security is needed for all.

TN and Kerala must have a joint strategy to share.. Yes TN can claim, so do Kerala can. Define the boundary and scope [of the problem, and not the State], and get to business. You want to pay me for the mediator role, I am willing.

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 12 Dec 2011 06:21

Theo_Fidel wrote:
Dileep wrote:[..the cost of the dam will be born by us, and the usual amount of water, ie same amount of water that had been taken in the past, will be given to TN.
Who decides what the usual amount is. Right now TN has the right to take 100% if it can. Why would TN negotiate for less.

There are well kept records of amount of water taken by TN for a very long period of the past. The peak and average drain on a monthly basis can easily be calculated from that. No dispute arises on those data.

The fact of the matter is, TN had been understating these numbers, and are not scared to agree to this system. I would even agree to a negotiated increase in the number for the sake of safety.

The easier solution is for TN to share the cost of the dam. Even for that, they should agree to talk first, right?

Supreme court says dam is safe and that is not enough for Kerala. Claims are made that every review committee has been bought over by TN. Only Kerala's plan for new dam will suffice or else...

The strengthening means were shoddily executed, didn't work, and in fact made the situation worse. See the report that says cracks were found during the ROV inspection. STILL, you want us to trust the SC and CWC?

Still a new Dam should be built. It is doubtful TN will give up legal control of new Dam. Political suicide. Kerala is thus trying to get the impossible and stubbornly wants its way. All this frustration is due to that.

Next step is some form of Arbitration or maybe ICJ or threatening to bomb TN. Kerala wants victory to save H &D with people at this point.

No. We are not H&D bound people. We never were, and never will be. In fact, most of the people are going to resign to the fate, give up, and go back to their porotta and beef fries. Many already did. Only the people who are immediately threatened will continue the struggle. TN knows this, and hence part of the the indifference.

TN is welcome to have legal control, if THEY spend the money. It was their responsibility to keep the dam safe, and they screwed up on that. Why can't they come to talks and say they will build a new dam?

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 12 Dec 2011 06:26

Theo_Fidel wrote:
Dileep wrote:KL Trusting TN for dam safety: The only way for KL to verify is by inspection, which TN haven't, and still doesn't allow. Results of non-compliance is not immediately apparent. We will know only when dam breaks.
This is incorrect. GoK representatives have examined every inch of the dam numerous times. TN rightly wants some structure to such visits, esp. with neutral observers as well. Every Ram and Rahim politico who wants can not inspect, as numerous such groups have shown up.

Not true!! TN objected to every form of inspection, including the ROV inspection. It was forced down their throats, so to speak, by the empowered committee.

They had in the past blocked inspection by Navy divers. They have blocked seepage estimation by BARC as part of the current empowered committee inspection. Those are not politicos.

And we are not talking about any Ram/Rahim politicos. It was a committee of MLAs from and appointed by the legislative assembly of Kerala.

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 12 Dec 2011 06:39

Stan_Savljevic wrote:Let me paraphrase what all I have heard here...

There is no trust on the highest Court of the land because one Rajan Pillai episode happened. There is no trust on the CWC cos they are bribed from TN's warchest and they take the hospitality of TN government, which Kerala cant match. There is no trust even in your own politicians who you regularly elect every 5 years or less and there are claims that they can be and will be bought by TN. There is no trust in the 90+% literacy level (that often gets bandied about) to use the right judgment calls to elect the right people who will serve and not loot or cheat. At times, there is no trust on the Central Government either because "they can pass Acts and laws, but we are the ones suffering." Who do you trust then? Cmon, tell me. Even if Ayyappa swami comes down from His tiger and says something, Dileep wont trust Him. Dileep will only trust when the ownership of the new dam is either jointly shared or exclusively owned by Kerala .

Nope. An independent safety inspection with complete transparency would suffice. Would TN agree for that?

Why should TN talk to Kerala? Ideally, they should. But legally, do they have to?

That, my friend, is the problem!! Why hide behind a legality, when the matter is that of life and death to one party? It is criminal indifference!!

Why should a TN governor put some sign before some compensation document? Kerala has lowered the water level of Idukki. So if there is damage, its going to be between MP and Idukki. Lo and behold, there is damage, post-facto compensation can and will be made all at the same or higher levels you want. Do you think if there is some damage, Manorama or Deepika are going to sit still or wont they be frying fatass' ass in a hot skewer? So what is the need for signing off now? Did we see a sign from the Kerala government on water guarantee except words? If those words are believed at large by the non-nutjobs, why cant you believe a word in the reverse direction too? The bottomline Dileep is: rhetoric is cheap and counter-rhetoric is cheaper.

First of all, lowering Idukki level is a desperate safety measure. Idukki is the power lifeline for the state, and we are spending the water we need to store for the summer. Idukki was not built as backup for Mullaperiyar.

Of course you would pay for post facto damage, but that also is going to go through various levels of litigation and arbitration. Remember what Union Carbide ended up paying at Bhopal? A written underwriting will prevent all those, and ensure that proper compensation will be paid expediently.

But that is not the real reason. The real reason is to get TN to share the risk, feel the expediency, and let them to enjoy the sword of Democlese.

And yes, KL is willing to sign whatever form of agreement about the delivery of water, if you agree to the new dam. As it is, there is no need for an agreement, because TN controls the dam and the water delivery.

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 12 Dec 2011 06:41

Stan_Savljevic wrote:Let me throw one more datapoint which I found somewhere else.

Idukki and nearabouts has provided sanctuary for the maoists who want to make/create an agrarian crisis to push their own agendas. On June 22, 2007, Maoist Central Committee member Sande Rajamouli was reportedly arrested in Kollam, though the police deny this ever happened. Then came the arrest of Malla Raji Reddy in December 2007 from Angamaly town in Ernakulam district. This followed Tamil Nadu Maoist secretary Sundaramoorthy’s reported police confession that he had lived in Nedumkandam and other areas of Idukki district for eight months.

According to sources, a meeting of the Maoist Central Committee, held between January 28 and 31, 2007, discussed in detail the organisation’s activities in Kerala. The SWRB resolutions in the meeting, sources said, contained details crucial to Kerala. More important, the directions to the Kerala committee were to continue focussing on the “Tamil Nadu perspective area,” which possibly denotes the borders of Tamil Nadu and Kerala, particularly Wayanad, where there have been earlier reports of Naxalite activity.

What has this to do with the MP issue? I don't get it. I am not SCM, so, if you want to make a point please do it clearly.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 12 Dec 2011 07:00

Dileep wrote: What has this to do with the MP issue? I don't get it. I am not SCM, so, if you want to make a point please do it clearly.

To me, it is kinda looking like different sources are converging on the MP issue. First, there is the Syro-Malabar Church and other Church groups (not to be confused with the KKM Baptists and evangelical outfits), then there is the Nair Service Society, then there are assorted maoist groups which have taken refuge in Idukki district and elsewhere to use some crisis to expand their footprint in KL and TN (the "southern line" as it is called in the maoist material), then there are the various gelf-based emir-backed initiatives such as Dam 999 of Sohan Roy fame. Then there are these conspiracy theories on how the attacks coincide with the Sabarimalai season which makes (credible or not) reports based on allegations of attacks on Sabarimalai pilgrim make me go back and re-read the blog posts to this effect.

And I did nt mention the different political parties each of which has its own agenda and political base. On top of all these vested interests, there are people who are really worried and care, some from within and some from the expat segment. Just pointing out that this is not a 100% crystal-clear agmark gold movement of white revolution. Each person fighting out is in it for something, for some it could be just safety, for some it is an agenda.

habal · Post by **habal** » 12 Dec 2011 08:15

A hypothetical question. If TN was in place of Kerala and owned the dams, water and land, would they have shown Kerala's benevolence until now. What would they have done ? Going by past record in matters concerning it's interests, it's quite clear what their stand would have been.

Secondly since local politics of Kerala has been introduced into this topic. What about the central politics of TN. Baaalu, A. Raja, Maran & Chidambaram (friend, father and philosopher of black money in India).

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 12 Dec 2011 09:34

see, if the dam breaks, there may be sudden loss for Kerala side.. but having known the issue, the loss is minimized by advanced warning [more loss to natural resources]. On the long run, TN is the loser if the dam breaks. So, it is better for them to put money from the 2g coffin to strengthen the dam.

--

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTkk7LGXypg&noredirect=1

fish bone points at TN is shooting themselves in their foot on this issue.

vina · Post by **vina** » 12 Dec 2011 09:55

Dileep wrote:Nope. An independent safety inspection with complete transparency would suffice. Would TN agree for that?

Well, the "empowered committee" of the supreme court is to submit it's report in February 2012 (ie around 2 months from now). I find it very suspicious that this hoopla /circus has been kicked up just when that report is about to be submitted.

Why would Kerala do that , unless it is absolutely certain that it is going to get whacked badly in that report ? I would counsel people to wait and see what the Supreme Court says!

"Why should TN talk to Kerala? Ideally, they should. But legally, do they have to?"
That, my friend, is the problem!! Why hide behind a legality, when the matter is that of life and death to one party? It is criminal indifference!!

IF the Kerala politicos wanted TN to talk, that was very easy. An Interview by Oomen Chandy in a national TV channel (like say Undie TV) that Kerala is fully committed to honoring the 999 year accord as is and a Kerala assembly resolution to that effect, gives a sworn affidavit to the court on that account and ,then went on to say that they are only concerned about the safety of the dam and invite TN to discuss this and address it to assuage the concerns etc, that would be very hard to refuse and it will politically empower an CM in TN to reach out and address concerns. Do that and things will happen. Push Trojan horses, nothing will.

Even if you wrangle about the details on who is to pay what and how this will happen, you can enforce it via court. In fact, any action that TN will take will be fully in compliance with the court orders even now , and the situation in court is that the court is examining just the safety alone and nothing else (like the legality or other wise of the lease etc).

TN too has it's skin in the nose. If the dam is damaged/washed away/collapses for any reason, irrigation in southern TN will stop immediately. There are massive costs economically AND politically if that happens and is not in THEIR interests for the dam to fall. I wonder why the Kerala folks don't realize that and go on and on that TN doesn't care if the dam stays or falls because it is not THEIR lives on the line. Well, it is too, maybe not in physical harm , but serious danger all the same.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 12 Dec 2011 10:29

Dileep, not one drop of water "paki" comments by Vai Ko etc. have a precedent:

R Balakrishna Pillai of the Kerala Congress (B), a founding constituent of the ruling United Democratic Front, once declared in the State Assembly when he was the irrigation minister, “Kerala will not give a drop of water to Tamil Nadu.” The entire House applauded.

http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.com/2011 ... jappa.html
I think it is fair to say that Vai Ko "paki" comment has a match with Balakrishna Pillai "paki" comment, no?! And even more fair to point out that an Assembly applauding at that statement puts the fear of God in TN's eyes, no?! Just saying.... because I dont have a source for that remark made by Sam Rajappa, so I cant verify either way.

And guess what, Balakrishna Pillai was put in a 1 year prison term by the SC for corruption in another one of those irrigation projects. Wonderful...
http://www.hindu.com/fline/fl2805/stori ... 502400.htm
Add to that a couple of Ministerial statements that Kerala has no cash to fund this new dam construction and they will beg, borrow or steal, but construct a new dam. Even more wonderful....

Along this direction, PJ Joseph said that 'he wanted all "Colonial" leases to be rewritten.' Sadly, someone did nt remind him that 1970 when the lease was re-affirmed and an amendment added was not "Colonial" times. The last round of signing was done in 1970, all this Travancore Maharaja signed under duress just goes to the trashcan with that one fact. You cant expect the person sitting opposite you and co-signing a lease to be a sucker, can you? Please tell me, why Kerala signed an amendment in 1970 if so much of the shenanigans happened under duress.

The bonhomie between two Menons (C. Achutha Menon and MGR) laid to some solid amendment-ing, if I have to invent a word. Here is a solution to this mess: some of the non-Tam origin Tams have behaved more Tam than Tam if I should be fair and make a call, so guess what, Mu Ka would be the best bet to bargain this MP crisis with, not JJ

. And Mu Ka has some excellent rapport with VSji. Can we have a brigade of regime change chorus at both ends, please? Already the land grabbing cases are bringing in so much heat that Mu Ka will rub his hands with glee at such a prospect

.

PS: Not to mention that ADMK's bastion is some of the Thevar belt Delta districts, while some of the other districts still bat for INC. DMK may actually be fair in this mess, sad that it has come to me to point that out.

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 12 Dec 2011 11:16

Sam Rajappa used to come on Asianet and make the same fallacies again and again.

Age does not wither a dam. Karikala Chola built Kallanai (Grand Anicut), the world’s oldest dam, across the Cauvery, south of the temple town of Srirangam in Tiruchirapali district, in the second century AD. It is still functional and continues to irrigate about 4,000 sq. km. in the delta region, the granary of Tamil Nadu. The secret of the longevity of Kallanai is its regular maintenance.

See the comparison:

Of course!! Kallanai is is five times wider than it is tall!! What can happen to that?

Also, it is just a diverter. There is no storage behind that dam. It is also built in the plains, so there is no danger of high flow of water.

People are still repeating the same argument that Mullaperiyar is safe because Kallanai is!! Go figure!!

I don't know in what context Balakrishna Pillai made the statement. Given that Sam Rajappa would not mind propagating fallacies, I wouldn't take his words for granted. It is most likely that his words are taken out of context.

Here is another one of his gems:

In the unlikely event of the dam bursting in spite of all these safety measures, the entire water will flow into the Idukki dam, 30 km. downstream. There are no big towns in this short stretch of sparsely populated forest area. Of the two medium-size towns, Kumuli is located at an altitude of 3,350 metres and Elapara 4,850 metres above sea level whereas the Mullaiperiyar reservoir is at an altitude of 2,890 metres. Therefore, the dam is of no threat to its inhabitants.

He totally forgets to mention the town of Vandiperiyar, which lies right on the river. How convenient, isn't it?

And here is the information about the Godavari Anicut

The Godavari anicut or weir was commenced in 1845 for the supply of the canals of the delta at the head of which it stands. The river drains an area of about 15,570 square miles ; the crest of the anicut is at 38 feet above mean sea lerel, and it is situated at about 33 miles from the coast. The length of the crest of the weir, on the line of which the river is divided into four branches, is 3,938 yards. The greatest depth of water which has passed over the weir is 15-25 feet.

So, you are referring to a weir that holds 15-20ft of water, at an elevation of 33 feet above sea level. That is an excellent comparison!!

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 12 Dec 2011 20:03

Dileep wrote:Not true!! TN objected to every form of inspection, including the ROV inspection. It was forced down their throats, so to speak, by the empowered committee.

They had in the past blocked inspection by Navy divers. They have blocked seepage estimation by BARC as part of the current empowered committee inspection. Those are not politicos.

And we are not talking about any Ram/Rahim politicos. It was a committee of MLAs from and appointed by the legislative assembly of Kerala.

How is that possible. TN opposes dam inspection yet every inch of the dam has been examined many many times by Kerala and other representatives. Your words were "TN does not allow inspection". What the...

TN controls the dam. It could have told any committee to take a hike. Why is Kerala demagoging it as 'forced TN to allow inspection'. This sort of weird thinking only complicates the situation. Is it possible that TN only allows properly balanced committees with its own representative present to examine the dam. Random MLA delegations are not proper inspection teams.

habal · Post by **habal** » 12 Dec 2011 20:16

>>Is it possible that TN only allows properly balanced committees with its own representative present to examine the dam.

committees they can put under undue influence.

Bade · Post by **Bade** » 12 Dec 2011 20:24

So TN can have its own representatives and it is fair, but IIT-D and IIT-Roorkee technical reports are all biased. I see more H&D arguments with crutches in legalism. So when did Indian Navy divers or BARC get to be on KL payroll.

The only thing going for TN is the 999 agreement. It is clearly evident in this below.

The dam, which waters several Tamil Nadu districts, is in Kerala but is controlled by the government in Chennai. Protests in Kerala, sparked by fears that the structure is unsafe and may endanger the local population, have prompted counter demonstrations and sporadic attacks on Malayali traders in Tamil Nadu.

Jayalalithaa hopes the Assembly meeting will slow down the protests elsewhere in Tamil Nadu. In a statement today, she said the meeting would “pass a resolution that this state will not give up our rights over Mullaperiyar because of the imaginary threat to safety and security.”

TN House meet on dam

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 12 Dec 2011 21:35

Bade,

The claim was that TN does not allow inspections. Can that be backed up.
-----------------------------------

The new claim is water supply will be based on previous records of use now. 999 lease allows 100% if TN wants it. All this has nothing to do with safety and hence TN's paranoia is inflamed....

-----------------------------------------------

It is not unusual when a inspection for earthquake structures is done (something I'm familiar with) for 4 different groups to come up with 4 different answers. One says condemn, one says no problem, one says some strengthening needed. It is all a function of underlying assumptions. Up to administrators to sort though what is reasonable assumption and what is not and what the compromise best answer is.

Very hard for a lay person to understand the difference between superficial surface damage and structural damage. All function of what is causing the damage. erosion cracks are different from foundation cracks and yet can look very similar.
-------------------------------------

Still new dam should be built due to basic design flaws

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 12 Dec 2011 21:41

Bade, IITD and Roorkee studies were funded by the Kerala department of Irrigation. I posted the grant numbers in one of the pdfs posted in the rehash of this episode. Having a TN representative in a team that makes a visit for inspection and that are ==? What kinda logic is this?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 12 Dec 2011 22:20

q: does it hurt to strengthen the dam immediately, and save lives?

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 12 Dec 2011 22:28

Dileep wrote:Also, it is just a diverter. There is no storage behind that dam. It is also built in the plains, so there is no danger of high flow of water.

This is not true either. As recently as 2005 Cauvery flooded at peak flow of 450,000 Cusecs water. Average flow for 3 days was a more sedate 300,000 cusecs!!! There are stories of a cyclone in the 13th/14th century that triggered a catastrophic flood flow, estimated with modern methods as in 800,000-1.2 million Cusec range!!

It is not a simple water diverter. Its purpose is to raise the level of the cauvery so that the high canal can be supplied with water. It also prevents the Coleroon from fully capturing the Cauvery and permanently diverting the river to the North as it should have done by now.

But it is true that it is a barrage and does not hold a dead pool of water.

Bade · Post by **Bade** » 12 Dec 2011 22:47

Stan_Savljevic wrote:Bade, IITD and Roorkee studies were funded by the Kerala department of Irrigation. I posted the grant numbers in one of the pdfs posted in the rehash of this episode. Having a TN representative in a team that makes a visit for inspection and that are ==? What kinda logic is this?

There is no logic in the 999 year lease term either, but it is legal. Legal does not mean logical.

We have enough precedents to show what is legal need not be logical.

If the TN rep is not paid by TN to keep his job then who is. I do not think IIT faculty are paid by GoKL to do theirs, project funding source withstanding. So let us have an independent team of engineers not from TN or KL and not funded by either to do the job.

But I suspect seeing the Telegraph link I posted, there will be no such thing. I have not so far said whether the dam is safe or not personally, since I cannot make that call. I am only interested to see what holds TN back from refuting the irrational fears of H&D indulging KL politicos and commoners as claimed by many here.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 12 Dec 2011 22:50

legality can change when institutions change. largely, Indian setup and desis accept what is written for firangs.

so, if you are born in karachi before independence, you can't be called paki now.

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 12 Dec 2011 22:54

Bade wrote:There is no logic in the 999 year lease term either, but it is legal. Legal does not mean logical. We have enough precedents to show what is legal need not be logical.

Please explain.

Would you prefer a permenent treaty whereby water is permanently sent to TN with no sunset clause and no review either and no payment. Just dispute resolution. This is the modern practice.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 12 Dec 2011 22:55

Bade wrote: If the TN rep is not paid by TN to keep his job then who is. I do not think IIT faculty are paid by GoKL to do theirs, project funding source withstanding.

Nonsense, the KL representative is paid by his state govt. The TN representative is paid by the TN govt. There are legal experts as well as technical experts from both state governments as well as appointees of the CWC in the empowered panel. On the other hand, the people who were responsible for the report that KL cites paid a part of their own salaries via the sponsored project route with the grant money they got from Kerala. I am pretty sure you have heard of ICSR and the purpose behind it. A high fraction (around 25-50%) of employee paychecks at IITs come from SR route. That is for the moderate to heavy hitters, which these people are. Not the run of the mill poor-istanis or the mega hitters with Bhatnagar credentials. It would be surprising to me if you did nt know this already and need reminding....

So let us have an independent team of engineers not from TN or KL and not funded by either to do the job.

The CWC is an organization that functions as an attached office of the Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India. The people who work there are Central Govt employees, not paid by either the Govt of TN or Govt of KL. Unfortunately, such bodies are anathema to KL and their recommendations are biased (as per statements made here).

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 12 Dec 2011 23:08

Sometimes, it surprises me that India has managed to stay together, with all this tamasha. When things are going good, we all celebrate 'Unity in Diversity' idyai. In troubled times, we go on our own ways.

Bade · Post by **Bade** » 12 Dec 2011 23:24

Theo_Fidel wrote:
Bade wrote:There is no logic in the 999 year lease term either, but it is legal. Legal does not mean logical. We have enough precedents to show what is legal need not be logical.
Please explain.

What does TN and KL expect will happen at the end of the 999 year term. The states may not exist so new reality, periyar does not exist so nothing to bicker about, or TN expects another renewal for 999 years based on the previous 999 usage history. So why not say 99999999999 to the end of the earth history or all eternity. Why did TN not negotiate for that.

Yes, the 999 term is legally binding on the state of KL as of now, and it has to find the means to change that (to address long term safely issues IMO), which clearly KL does not want to do for whatever reasons. Raising current safety issues will not make that happen from TN stance. So why are people in TN huffing and puffing so much. I find a lot of irrational fear on TN side on this issue of water sharing.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 12 Dec 2011 23:29

^^When you only think on differences, you continue on the tamasha. When you consider the similarities, you try to manage to stay together. This is universal, and that is totally fine. This should not be surprising.. is what I am saying.

The problem comes when for every differences trying to come out and say, they don't care a heck for the similarities. Instead of focusing on the core issues, we get totally diverted like this you said, how come we can stay together etc. This is the fundamental problem.. we give up soon to go home and relax, while you don't care a war happens in the street.

The differences are because there is no shared mental model. People are bounded not beyond their homes largely speaking.. and the interconnection is all based on theories rather practical approaches.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 12 Dec 2011 23:34

Bade wrote: or TN expects another renewal for 999 years based on the previous 999 usage history.

Technically, as per the lease terms, the 999 year lease can be extended to another 999 year lease if TN wants

. Or that is my reading of the KL whine profile.

Bade · Post by **Bade** » 13 Dec 2011 02:49

Stan_Savljevic wrote:
Bade wrote: or TN expects another renewal for 999 years based on the previous 999 usage history.
Technically, as per the lease terms, the 999 year lease can be extended to another 999 year lease if TN wants . Or that is my reading of the KL whine profile.

So why is TN afraid of a re-negotiated lease term (not that KL has said so) hypothetically to say even 99 yrs or 9 yrs. It can be renewed till eternity every 99 yrs or 9 years as the case may be using historical use arguments too. See logically there is nothing to be afraid of a reduced lease term, if that is what is causing all this itch on the TN side of the whine brigade. That is why I said there is no logic in this agreement between the Maharaja (under duress cause he took a good 26 years to agree to it) and the British empire, duly rubber stamped under the leadership of the Menons (as you put it) in the '70s

based on mutual trust and nothing else. No exit clause nothing was asked or demanded, right ?

What will KL do with this extra 10% of the water denied to TN as being alleged, use it to drown ourselves.

The irrational fear the other side exhibits is beyond imagination. Does Kerala have any plans to divert the waters for other purposes. Like a bottling plant to sell to B'luru residents fresh mountain water. It would make eminent sense, but it is doubtful that is the long term plan. Water is just another resource, and farming rights just another professional activity. If it helps either side as part of some unwritten trade then it will hold, or else you can just clutch on to the dear 999 agreement and hope for the best, and a rapidly decreasing trust from the Kerala side permanently. It is upto TN to show good faith as neighbours, and not just throw the legal weight around. It will have its own bad karma in goodwill and trust.

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 13 Dec 2011 02:59

Bade wrote:So why is TN afraid of a re-negotiated lease term (not that KL has said so) hypothetically to say even 99 yrs or 9 yrs. It can be renewed till eternity every 99 yrs or 9 years

Bade,

No need for hypotheticals. Such a contract exists. Look up the Parambikulam-Aliyar contract. It does the exact same thing you want. 30 year renewal period.

So how is this contract faring, you ask.

Has not been renewed since 1988 as Kerala wants more guaranteed water. Most likely it will never be renewed, ever now.

Bade · Post by **Bade** » 13 Dec 2011 03:07

Theo, yes this one came up before and geeth as I recall had something to say about it too. Will have to scan back the arguments he made and need to familiarize with that issue. Every watershed area has its own peculiarities. Some parts of Palakkad definitely looks dry, if this has anything to do with KL stand, I do not know and cannot vouch for. Or is it playing hard due to changed scenario in the MPeriyar situation since the bonhomie of the 70's.

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 13 Dec 2011 03:51

Bade wrote: Every watershed area has its own peculiarities. Some parts of Palakkad definitely looks dry, if this has anything to do with KL stand, I do not know and cannot vouch for.

There definitely isn't enough water to go around in that area as well. Water comes from a different watershed so it is a water add to Palakkad. So far TN has ended up with 2/3rds of water and Palakkad with 1/3. The problem is drought years when Palakkad gets cut off at 7.5 TMC. This is not enough to irrigate the full district. For that matter TN gets cut off at 12.5 TMC in those years as well. Someone else may know the full details.