Bharat Rakshak

Lilo wrote:What i dont understand is how come at the peak season of a above average monsoon, a river water dispute flares up between these two states?

A detailed & worthy writeup on the issue's background...
https://www.quora.com/Can-anyone-write- ... Tamil-Nadu

Now coming to the oft repeated solution of creating local irrigation potential & funding sustainable irrigation practices ....

Does anyone know the amount being spent on freebies in both states?
1) TN takes the cake here - totally useless freebies to buy votes Tv sets,Laptops,grinders,TVS scooties and what not.Can any one contrast the cost of these freebies to the amount spent on funding drip irrigation sytems for the water sucking sugarcane crops of TN?
2)Loan waivers - All major agricultural states of south indulge in this farce - especially congress dominated states.Most recently the congress govt in KN gave a loan waiver to farmers(major portion going to big farmers having congi patronage) in October 2015.

.

I dont see any clamor for such water storage projects as much as i see for freebies & other useless issues in these states .
Vaigai is parched in the South TN - and folks there are diverted on emotional tamil eelam issues.
North KN is parched and there people are diverted on emotional KN-Maha language issues.All the time their elites make merry in Chennai & Bangalore respectively - diverting water to these over industrialized cities.

Why is there no industrial center worth its name in North KN or in South TN.Why is this regional disparity not an electoral issue.?
Why is there no demand for joining Kaveri to Vaigai and then on to Krishna & Godavari Mahanadi along the eastern coast?
Is it because there is no national party in these states which can raise above each state's chauvinistic insular concerns?

Its high time the emotional people of these states currently making all the noise ask their respective politicians in power what they have done to create water storage potential in the water scarce areas of these states.

Added later:
Also center should bring the states together to roll out a monsoon performance indexed MSP varying geographically as per monsoon performance in say 127 Agro zones of the country.
If an agroclimatic zone is predicted to be raindeficient (by a cutoff date in beginning of the monsoon) reduce the MSP for water sucking crops like rice & sugarcane in that year for that zone & incentivize water conserving crops like pulses or other cashcrops that year in that zone.

First of all we need to know how and from where this 740 TMC ft. is generated. How do we arrive at that figure? In simple terms, 270 TMC ft. which Karnataka is allocated plus 192 TMC ft. which it has to ensure to Tamil Nadu, comes to 462 TMC ft. This is the quantum of water, which, according to the tribunal, is the yield from the river within Karnataka annually. So out of 462 TMC ft. Karnataka has to give 192 TMC ft to Tamil Nadu.

While Tamil Nadu gets this 192 TMC ft. from Karnataka, how it manages to use 419 TMC ft. is the next puzzle. The simple answer is 419 minus 192 – which is 227 TMC ft. – is what Tamil Nadu generates from its own catchment areas within the state. If Karnataka and Tamil Nadu’s yield comes to 689 TMC ft (462+227), Kerala contributes 51 TMC ft., of which it keeps 30 while 21 TMC ft is reserved for Puducherry (7) and environmental purposes (14).

The sum and substance of it all is that while Karnataka contributes 462 TMC ft. it is allowed to use 270 TMC ft., Tamil Nadu which contributes 227 TMC ft. gets 419 TMC ft. and Kerala which contributes 51 TMC ft. is allowed to use 30 TMC ft.

On the face of it, it certainly seems like a major injustice to Karnataka, no doubt. How did this happen? The answer to this lies in history, which we cannot re-write now. It so happened that rulers like the Cholas, who ruled that part of the country, which is now Tamil Nadu and where the river flows, had the foresight to build reservoirs and check dams in the tenth century and later, to utilise the water for irrigation. On the other hand the rulers of Mysore built their first major reservoir, K.R.Sagar only in 1934.

Tamil Nadu farmers therefore had the early advantage, and when the agreements in 1894 and 1924 were signed, already over 15 to 20 lakh acres or even more was already under irrigation in that state. Karnataka in 1924 was claiming only 6.5 lakhs acres and at present it has managed to irrigate only about 15 lakh acres. This meant that about 80% of the annual yield from Cauvery was being utilised by Tamil Nadu farmers, even upto 1974, when Karnataka terminated the 1924 agreement.

With the mix of historical advantage blended with foresight as well as what is known as prescriptive right, Tamil Nadu naturally enjoys a greater share. It cannot be anyone’s argument that those who have been enjoying the water all these years should now be denied it. But going by the 1924 agreement, Tamil Nadu’s share, which was over 80%, has now come down to 57% and Karnataka, which was using about 16%, now gets 37%.

So is the award an injustice to Karnataka? Yes, it is, but more for historical reasons than a conscious act perpetrated by the tribunal in 2007. Should Karnataka accept it without protest? No, because there are certain aspects to the award which need clarification and modification, which Karnataka through a special leave petition sought from the Supreme Court in 2007 itself. In fact even Tamil Nadu and Kerala have filed similar petitions – as these two states were also not fully happy with the award – which till now, unfortunately, have not been adjudicated.

Where did the tribunal get its numbers from?

Even as politicians and some sections of the media indulge in competitive parochialism based less on facts and more on emotions, one needs to look at this issue as objectively as is possible. Is the final award unfair to Karnataka? This is an obvious question that has been dogging the minds of all fair-minded citizens in the state and outside.

Going by cold statistics, which is what ultimately has by and large played a major role in the tribunal’s final award, we get some answers.

Take for instance one of the major objections of Karnataka to the final award, which even the state’s legal and technical teams have endorsed. That is about the monthly allocation made, especially in the first four months of the water year, June to September, by the tribunal. The allocations are June 10 TMC ft, July 34 TMC ft, August 50 TMC ft and September 40 TMC ft. These allocations are seen to be worrisome, as Karnataka, which is served to a large extent only by the south west monsoons, which start in June, may find itself in a quandary if the rains are not normal or fail in any year.

This problem occurred even before the tribunal award, especially in 2002-02 and 2003-04, when successive failures of the monsoon created a major problem. And again in 2012 and this year, we have faced similar problems, leading to the Supreme Court directing Karnataka to release 10,000 cusecs per day for 10 days, triggering protests in Karnataka.

Given this problem, why did the tribunal decide to allocate 134 TMC ft. for these four months? The answer lies in the figures which Karnataka itself had presented before it. According to the state’s own data, during the 16 years before 2007, Karnataka had released on an average 134.18 TMC ft. during those four months, to Tamil Nadu, measured at Biligundlu. No wonder the tribunal took the average and allocated it monthly.

The stress of distress

So the conclusion from this is that in a normal year there would be no difficulty for Karnataka to release the quantum of water, which the tribunal has allocated. The problem comes only in distress years like in 2002-03 and 2003-04 and again in 2012 and now in 2016. So what should the distress sharing formula be?

A lot has been said about the formula. In fact, the entire dispute between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu is mainly about what is to be done in a distress year. However, what one has to understand is that the mandated method of sharing distress is exactly what Karnataka’s experts, from both its legal and irrigation departments, had been demanding before the tribunal.

The final award points out that during distress, there has to be a pro-rata sharing of water, which on the face of it means, depending on the water availability, reducing the share to all of the states as per the percentage share allocated to them. This is what Tamil Nadu wanted. However, a careful reading of the award indicates that it has gone beyond mechanical reduction and has suggested a liberal approach wherein the regulatory body (to be set up) will have to consider the entire basin flows, including the impact of the northeast monsoon, before deciding. This is exactly what Karnataka wanted. So where is the problem here?

But yet, there is a strong feeling that the allocation for the first four months needs to be reduced so that Karnataka’s burden is lessened and it can provide for its own farmers. There is also an argument that the tribunal has gone by the 1924 parameters in allocating the water for these four months when Karnataka’s needs were limited. This is an issue worth challenging, though how far Karnataka may be able to convince the Supreme Court is a moot point, considering the cold statistics.

However, one issue which the tribunal has over-looked, and which has been challenged, is the fact that Tamil Nadu has plenty of ground water resources, which Karnataka hardly has. Tamil Nadu, according to an expert body’s conservative estimate, has anywhere in the region of 20 TMC ft. of ground water. If this had been taken into account, the burden on Karnataka would have been reduced.

Another important point which emanates from the final award is the stress on better water management. Both states have been found wanting in this regard, and this is something which needs to be taken up on a war footing. Tamil Nadu, especially, has to improve as it grows two paddy crops which are water intensive, and the techniques which continue to be adopted do not help in conserving water.

So it is time that both states get down to the task of improving water management techniques and crop patterns. Karnataka, in the meanwhile, would do well to start planning for an additional reservoir at Mekedatu to utilise the surplus water, generate power and ensure water supply to Bangalore and Greater Bangalore, without wasting time.

Meanwhile, a final figure to put the issue in a perspective. In the 16-year period between 1991-92 and 2006-07, the average annual flow at Biligundlu was 255 TMC ft. In five of these years, the flow was over 350 TMC ft.

All that the tribunal’s final award asks Karnataka to ensure is 192 TMC ft. annually.

It is evident from the figures of the flows from Karnataka to Tamil Nadu since the award of the tribunal in 2007, that only in 2012, was the annual flow less than what the tribunal awarded. In 2012-13 it was just 100.45 MC ft. as against the required 192 TMC Ft.

It’s another matter that during the period June-August for the past seven years, including 2016, the flows from Karnataka have been less than the 94 TMC ft. awarded by the tribunal.– except for three years 2007-08, 2013-14 and 2014-15. And it is these months of shortage, when Karnataka has not been able to fulfil it obligations due to weak early monsoons, which creates demand from Tamil Nadu and hesitation from Karnataka. As the annual flows show, ultimately Tamil Nadu usually gets more water than has been prescribed by the Tribunal annually. But, sadly, politicians on both sides don’t want to let go an opportunity to make a hue and cry, whenever they get an opportunity.

csubash wrote:Rivers are national assets & Karnataka can't call it as its own.

prashanth wrote:

csubash wrote:Rivers are national assets & Karnataka can't call it as its own.

The bolded part is an extremely unfair accusation against people of KA. Neither any politician nor any pro-kannada organization has made a statement to that effect. Please edit your post.

SwamyG wrote:Desalination is probably one of the best way forward. Desalination by crazy amounts, TN needs to think really big. Like desalinating water from the sea and using that to hydrate the existing (and new) canals.

Desalination is probably one of the best way forward. Desalination by crazy amounts, TN needs to think really big. Like desalinating water from the sea and using that to hydrate the existing (and new) canals.

Aditya_V wrote:What about Karnataka Every kannada Like Ragini dwidedi- Cauvery is Ours why will we give any water unless we have a surplus. Many Kannadigas have on social media have stated that we can give beggars something only if our plate is full, i.e TN are beggars.

The very fact that Bengaluru is drawing 80% ts water from Cauvery and not from any of its lakes or making use of Bengaluru's good rainfall by keeping soem encroachment free lakes, or using pipelines from North Karnataka's resovoirs like Bhadravati to draw some drinking water, it looks like Karnataka Govt seems to think Cauvery water going into TN is a waste and needs to be utilised to the last drop.

"255-A Provision of Rain Water Harvesting Structure.
-
(1) In every building owned or occupied by the
Government or a statutory body or a company or an
institution owned or controlled by the Government, rain
water harvesting structure shall be provided by the
Government or by such statutory body or company or
other institution, as the case may be, in such manner
and within such time as may be prescribed.
(2) Subject to the provisions
of sub-section (1), every
owner or occupier of a building shall provide rain water
harvesting structure in the building in such manner and
within such period as may be prescribed.
Explanation
.-
Where a building is owned or occupied by
more than one person, every such person shall be liable
under this sub-section.
(3) Where the rain water harvesting structure is not
provided as required under sub-section (2), the
Commissioner or any person authorised by him in this
behalf may, after giving notice to the owner or occupier
of the building, cause rain water harvesting structure to
be provided in such building and recover the cost of
such provision along with t
he incidental expense thereof
in the same manner as property tax.
(4) Notwithstanding any action taken under sub-section
(3), where the owner or occupier of the building fails to
provide the rain water harvesting structure in the building
before the date as may be prescribed, the water supply
connection provided to such building shall be
disconnected till rain water harvesting structure is
provided.

Chennai has fresh water reservoirs/lakes namely Poondi, Sholavaram, Red Hills, Chembarambakkam, Veeranam to cater the daily needs of water for chennai area.

Chennai receives most of its water from Poondi Lake (3,231 Mcft), Sholavaram Lake (881 Mcft), Red Hills Lake (3,300 Mcft) and Chembarambakkam Lake (3,645 Mcft).

Chennai has Reverse osmosis plants namely at Velachery, Nochikuppam, Kasimedu, and Ayodhyakuppam. It takes raw Brackish water from bore wells, stores in tanks and then it purifies before supply.

prashanth wrote:Statements of an actress or someone in social media cannot be used as a strawman to paint tar on all kannadigas.

prashanth wrote: WRT Bengaluru's lakes, as putnanja has said, there is not enough water to fulfill the needs of a vast city.

arshyam wrote:As for "progressive TN not doing anything", here are some facts:

arshyam wrote:Of course, the above pertains to Chennai, but in the context of Bengaluru's water needs, it is important to compare apples to apples. There are things both cities can learn from each other, Chennai can learn about source segregation of waste, and Bengaluru can learn about water recharge and efficient usage. With the current parochial politics, not much hope though.

arshyam wrote:P.S. I hope people pay heed to Venkaiah Naidu's considered statement on TV.

arshyam wrote:I would think reservoirs could be built relatively easy compared to coastal plain topography. They may not help immediately, but will payoff in the long term. Have such options been explored in the past? Again, just curious, trying to understand the issue fully.

prashanth wrote:

Aditya_V wrote:What about Karnataka Every kannada Like Ragini dwidedi- Cauvery is Ours why will we give any water unless we have a surplus. Many Kannadigas have on social media have stated that we can give beggars something only if our plate is full, i.e TN are beggars.

The very fact that Bengaluru is drawing 80% ts water from Cauvery and not from any of its lakes or making use of Bengaluru's good rainfall by keeping soem encroachment free lakes, or using pipelines from North Karnataka's resovoirs like Bhadravati to draw some drinking water, it looks like Karnataka Govt seems to think Cauvery water going into TN is a waste and needs to be utilised to the last drop.

Statements of an actress or someone in social media cannot be used as a strawman to paint tar on all kannadigas. WRT Bengaluru's lakes, as putnanja has said, there is not enough water to fulfill the needs of a vast city. And Northern KA is even more arid than the south.
On the contrary, TN has enough water stored in Mettur dam (80 ft and counting), plus it gets more during NE monsoon rains. Why not wait till they experience real shortage and then make genuine demands? What happens if there is good rainfall in TN during NE monsoon and there is surplus water?

prashanth wrote:

Aditya_V wrote:What about Karnataka Every kannada Like Ragini dwidedi- Cauvery is Ours why will we give any water unless we have a surplus. Many Kannadigas have on social media have stated that we can give beggars something only if our plate is full, i.e TN are beggars.

The very fact that Bengaluru is drawing 80% ts water from Cauvery and not from any of its lakes or making use of Bengaluru's good rainfall by keeping soem encroachment free lakes, or using pipelines from North Karnataka's resovoirs like Bhadravati to draw some drinking water, it looks like Karnataka Govt seems to think Cauvery water going into TN is a waste and needs to be utilised to the last drop.

Statements of an actress or someone in social media cannot be used as a strawman to paint tar on all kannadigas. WRT Bengaluru's lakes, as putnanja has said, there is not enough water to fulfill the needs of a vast city. And Northern KA is even more arid than the south.
On the contrary, TN has enough water stored in Mettur dam (80 ft and counting), plus it gets more during NE monsoon rains. Why not wait till they experience real shortage and then make genuine demands? What happens if there is good rainfall in TN during NE monsoon and there is surplus water?

TKiran wrote:I have been observing the cauvery water dispute for a long time. One constant has been that whenever the issue flares up, the sufferers have been common Tamil people in Bangalore.

Tamils in Bangalore have been the target of Kannada chauvinists. But always there would be calls for both the Tamils and Kannadigas for restraint. There are hardly any Kannadigas in Tamilnadu, but 30% of population in Bangalore is Tamil.

My sympathy for Tamils of Bangalore, Kerala.

The Cauvery river basin is a water-deficient one. With a total average annual run-off of 790 tmcft, the total demanded quantity of water is 1,135 tmcft. This implies that whatever may be the method of ‘justice’, there is bound to be a shortfall.
The water utilisation level at the Cauvery basin is the highest among all rivers in the country. As much as 90 percent of the basin had been exploited by the early 1990s. Thereafter, it was all about limited water availability, multiple user, increased agricultural activity and diverted land use shrinking the basin further.
........

The Cauvery conflict involves ‘re-sharing of a resource that is already being fully utilised.’ The solution demands a different approach and a new pattern in thinking. Some of this has been repeatedly tried but rarely discussed in the mainstream.
With the history of the dispute crossing 100 years, the list of ecological and scientific solutions has been longer.

Untangling the Cauvery Dispute: Manage Demand, Not Supply
Create an additional storage reservoir to store overflows from a healthy monsoon year to a drought year.
Transfer of water from the Godavari river and from the west flowing coastal rivers of Karnataka into the Cauvery basin.
The states in dispute tailor their agricultural economy i.e. drop one crop season. Reduce cultivation of water guzzling crops like paddy and sugarcane. Sugarcane crops and liquor factories demand water. Growing less sugarcane and more food crops along Karnataka can solve the crisis to a great extent.
Let Neerkattis, the traditional water managers find a solution. A Neerkatti is a traditional water expert.With no political authority, he has community-driven administrative power. Water managers still play crucial roles in states like Uttarakhand.
Stop managing rivers as per the colonial agreements. Water be brought in the Concurrent list of legislative subjects from the State list, so that the disputes can be decided upon by the Centre and not just the state governments.
In 1924, in a settlement, Tamil Nadu got a bigger share of water, since in the colonial times, it was the most significant and the leading agricultural state. But Karnataka and it’s start-up capital Bengaluru has seen a manifold increase in its water consumption in the last few decades. Now it demands more water and there is no way the right can be settled.
The only way forward is to let nature take precedence over politics.

https://www.thequint.com/environment/20 ... management

mnag wrote:

Fully agree. Sympathies to kannadigas who were subject to hooliganism on Monday in TN, Pondicherry. Throughout this crisis, both these people will face hard times. Goondas on both sides hold innocent people hostage during such crisis

Hope it starts raining soon

Karnataka upstream and Tamil Nadu downstream have over utilised water and both have large extent of the command area.

If you look back, you will see that the command area in Karnataka was around 300,000 to 400,000 acres initially while in Tamil Nadu, it was around 1.7 million to 1.8 million acres.

Today, the command area in Karnataka is over 2 million acres whereas in Tamil Nadu the irrigation command area has come down to 1.3 million acres.

The Kuruvai crop is virtually wiped out now (In TN). Even the samba crop, which coincides with the northeast monsoon, is becoming doubtful in the delta.

Coming face-to-face and talking is the only solution.

When people meet and talk, they become more humane.

I guarantee that when farmers of both states meet face-to-face and talk, there will not be any violence. They understand each other.

It was Tamil Nadu farmers (at the Cauvery Family meetings) who spoke of giving drinking water to Bangalore when the Mandya farmers in Karnataka opposed the idea.

I have seen this camaraderie with my own eyes.

I strongly feel that whether it's a good year or a bad year, both sides should share water.

Karnataka cannot use the Cauvery river as a drainage river, that is, releasing water only when the reservoir is full. This attitude should change.
Similarly, Tamil Nadu also cannot say we have used so much water for thousands of years and so we want that much now.

While the cadres of Tamizhaga Vaazhurimai Katchi (TVK) were staging a spirited demonstration at Gandhi Road, Kancheepuram on Monday against the attack on Tamils in Karnataka, a car with Karnataka registration happened to pass through.

Inside the car was a couple with a small child. Sensing the mood of the crowd, which was visibly upset with the treatment meted out to some Tamils in Karnataka, the driver, with folded hands, pleaded for safe passage.

To his surprise, the demonstrators obliged and let them go without much ado.

TKiran wrote:

mnag wrote:

Fully agree. Sympathies to kannadigas who were subject to hooliganism on Monday in TN, Pondicherry. Throughout this crisis, both these people will face hard times. Goondas on both sides hold innocent people hostage during such crisis

Hope it starts raining soon

Mnag ji, if you had fully agreed with me you would not have made the bolded statement.

vina wrote:

TKiran wrote:
Mnag ji, if you had fully agreed with me you would not have made the bolded statement.

And why not ? Bashing up drivers of minibuses in Rameshwaram, vandalizing their buses , stripping them to their undies and making them swear on camera that Kaveri is for Tamilians alone is rank thuggery and those on the receiving end deserve all sympathy.

Come on, fire bombing Woodlands in Radhakrishnan Salai ? Why ? And what about this ? Protestors belonging to the Naam Tamilar Katchi Party in Tamil Nadu vandalised a bus from Karnataka and thrashed the driver for information on if he was ferrying Kannadiga passengers in his bus on Monday.

.
.
.

.
.
Following the sporadic violence, police escorted some vehicles bearing Karnataka registration numbers out of Tamil Nadu. Five tourist vehicles bound for Karnataka were escorted from Rameswaram to Bengaluru by armed police in a convoy on Monday evening.

Escort provided
Police said the vehicles — a tourist bus, two cars and two motorbikes (one with Tamil Nadu registration) — were escorted by the respective district and city police en route Bengaluru.

“An officer in the rank of Inspector was present in the team that piloted the convoy,” a police officer said. Similarly, KSRTC buses were escorted to a safe place in Madurai. “Otherwise, these buses are parked along the roadside,” a police officer said.

TKiran wrote:

mnag wrote:

Fully agree. Sympathies to kannadigas who were subject to hooliganism on Monday in TN, Pondicherry. Throughout this crisis, both these people will face hard times. Goondas on both sides hold innocent people hostage during such crisis

Hope it starts raining soon

Mnag ji, if you had fully agreed with me you would not have made the bolded statement.

prashanth wrote: What is your intent sir? That whatever happened to the victim is justified?

TKiran wrote:Respected vinaji, what an irony, you are a Tambram, living in Bangalore, Kerala for the reason of great weather, supporting the Kannada chauvinists, you sure are living in 80's.

Times have changed, smell the kumbakonam digidi kaappi please, I can give many more anecdotal evidence of what Kannadigas did to Tamils in 1992, but I have painstakingly collected some data, to analyze the problem. The data may not be provable because I collected the data from Karnataka state government officials, only by mouth.

Here's the analysis of the data that I collected. Bangalore, Kerala is at the very bottom end of Karnataka state, 50 km to North or 70km to East you get Andhra, 10 km to South you get Tamilnadu. In 70's hosur was as big and industrialized as Bangalore, in fact, Bangalore was nothing but BEL and HAL and HMT, but nothing else. Coming to the data, Hosur was 50% Telugu naidu(who spoke Tamil), and 20% Telugu Reddy (who spoke Kannada) in early 70's, naidu's because of shere numbers pushed the Reddy's towards Bangalore, and Reddy's literally migrated to Bangalore, and become land owners and increasingly thuggish. Though equal number of naidu's also migrated to Bangalore, they were not successful as land owners, they settled in between Hosur and Bangalore. In those days more than 50% population of Bangalore was Tamils. So the main competition to Reddy s was Tamils but Tamils mainly depended on entrepreneurship than land owning and were reluctant to part away with their lands, as their lands were also useful for their entrepreneurship.

1991-92 was God given chance for the Reddy's to instigate violence against Tamils through bangarappa. There was mass migration of Tamils of Bangalore, Kerala towards Coimbatore in those days due to terror instilled into them.

By 2000 Reddy's realized that Bangalore has great potential for exponential growth, whenever opportunity presented, they would provoke the Kannada thugs to terrorize Tamils, today Bangalore has only 25-30% population of Tamils. Kannadigas (in the true sense) have always been marginal players in the real estate business of Bangalore. Bangalore has never been part of Karnataka in the true sense, as it's far removed from the core of Karnataka.

Even today it's the Reddys who instigate the Kannada chauvinists against the Tamils. Your anecdotal experiences are far and few, the core issue is real estate of Bangalore, Kerala.

Believe me there are very few Kannadigas in Bangalore and hardly any Kannadigas in Tamilnadu than what you want us to believe.

TKiran wrote: Prashanth ji, the intent is to say that == doesn't exist. You are not able to catch the signal in the noise, that 'aryavartha', 'dravida', 'Tamil nationalism' etc are all noise and smoke screens, the fire is the real estate of Bangalore.

It is like this, "important few, trivial many" or in statistical terminology, "20-80" rule, while brainstorming.

The intent is to find the root cause.