The Hindu : Front Page : Verdict: unsatisfactory, but less so

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Tuesday, Feb 06, 2007
ePaper

Front Page

Front Page

Verdict: unsatisfactory, but less so

Parvathi Menon

In years of distress the allocated shares will be proportionately reduced

Bangalore: Although it falls short of Karnataka's demands and expectations — as indeed it does of Tamil Nadu's — the final award of the Cauvery Water Dispute Tribunal appears to have offered a fair deal to the State than the interim award of 1991. The initial panic that was created following television channel reports that 419 tmcft of water was to be released to Tamil Nadu gave way to immense relief when it came to be known that the State would only have to release 192 tmcft to its neighbour.

The Government has said that it will make known its stand on Tuesday after an all-party meeting.

The final award states that Karnataka has to release 192 tmcft at Biligundlu on the border, whereas according to the interim award, 205 tmcft was the realisation at Mettur further downstream. The quantum of water generated between the two measuring stations was calculated by the tribunal at 25 tmcft — and this was a perennial source of disagreement between the two States.

In Karnataka's understanding, it only had to release 180 tmcft at Biligundlu. With the final award stating that flows between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu will be measured at Biligundlu, there will be no disagreement between the States on the actual releases. Indeed, in the last 16 years it is only in four years, from between 2001-2002 and 2004-2005 that Karnataka released less than 192 tmcft of water. These were years of severe drought.

There is a marginal increase in the monthly water release quota from Karnataka in the dry months of January to May compared with the releases prescribed in the interim award.

On the positive side, the final award places no cap on the extent of irrigated area in Karnataka.

The interim award had capped the extent of irrigation at 11.2 lakh acres, a restriction that Karnataka felt was a major injustice. In the final award, 270 tmcft is the State's requirement for a range of purposes, including irrigation.

The assessors report had stated that the extent of irrigated land in Karnataka's Cauvery basin is 18 lakh acres. Now, the State can presumably extend its irrigated area depending upon the additional availability of water in the basin after releasing Tamil Nadu's share.

The third aspect of the final award that Karnataka will stand to gain from is the distress-sharing formula. The final award says that in years of distress the allocated shares will be proportionately reduced. In other words, distress too will be shared proportionately.

Karnataka in its arguments before the tribunal has long held that Tamil Nadu was not utilising the huge groundwater potential of its delta. The allocation of 419 tmcft of water to Tamil Nadu, of which Karnataka need only provide 192 tmcft, implies recognition by the tribunal of the groundwater reserves in the delta.

Although some farmers' organisations and pro-Kannada groups have called for a bandh on February 8, the political response from the coalition Government is still cautious with leaders unwilling to commit themselves until they read the fine print of the award. This is certainly not a repeat of the events of 1991 — either in the terms of the award or in the popular response to it.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Front Page