POSCO war zone - Farmers oppose plan to supply Hansua River water
The proposal of the Orissa government to supply surplus water from Hansua River to POSCO India's proposed mega steel plant at Paradip has drawn flak from the farmers who have decided to protest this move of the government.
The activists of Nab Nirman Krushak Sangthan conducted a meeting at Redhua near Paradip while hundreds of farmers joined rallies to protest the move of the state government to supply water for the POSCO project.
The farmer’s leaders like Akshaya Kumar, Soren Rout, Rashmiranjan Swain and others delivered speeches on the occasion. They stated that Hansua is not a river but a drainage channel whose catchment’s area from Kandarpur to Erasama is 278 square miles.
Local farmers have alleged that majority of farmers of Birdi, Raghunathpur, Jagatsinghpur, Tirtol, Erasama and Balikuda have been cultivating their vegetable crops, sunflower, groundnuts, mustard, paddy and other crops by availing water from different bases of the Hansua channel.
Farmers also use the water from this channel for the transplantation of paddy crops during the Kharif season in the event of scanty rainfall and delay in supply of irrigated water through canal.
The farmers have been using lift irrigation points to pump out water from this channel to supply water for agricultural purposes. The farmers' leaders stated that nearly 35,000 ha of paddy crops of Jagatsinghpur district are getting waterlogged during the rainy season due to non release of rain water as river creeks and the Jatadhari river mouth have been choked.
Steps will be taken to renovate river creeks and to dredge Hansua channel and Jatadhari River mouth to release water so water logging would be averted properly, said Assistant engineer of Erasama Kisoher Chandra Patra.
They added that the supply of water to POSCO through a barrage will result in water stagnation and will have serious consequences on livelihood patterns of people besides damaging the road communication infrastructure.
Out of 17,806 hectares, 5003 hectares are irrigated land in Erasama area and the rest lands are non-irrigated. Hundreds of farmers use the water of this river during rabi and kharif seasons through lift irrigation points.
After supply of water to POSCO, the base of this river will be dried and farmers will be deprived of pumping out water from Hansua to irrigate non irrigated lands.
Zilla parishad member cum President of Ersama Ba Simiti, Sarada Jena “For the sake of one company (Posco), thousands of people cannot suffer and their livelihood patterns must not be disturbed. We apprehend the people of the particular areas would not tolerate this and there might be agitations and mass movements in the district of Jagatsinghpur.”
Monday, September 27, 2010
Sunday, September 26, 2010
Posco Water
Locals oppose plan to draw water from Haunsua river for Posco
Published: Sunday, Sep 26, 2010, 13:34 IST
Place: Bhubaneswar | Agency: PTI
With the Orissa government mulling supply of water to Posco's proposed mega steel mill near Paradip from an alternative place, local people and some outfits demanded a fresh public hearing.
Faced with stiff opposition from farmers and different political parties, the state government had asked Posco to consider a proposal of drawing water from Hansua river instead of getting it from Jobra barrage near Cuttack.
Farmers under the banner of Nab Nirman Krushak Sangathan also held a meeting near Paradip to unitedly oppose the state government's move to allow Posco to draw water from Hansua river.
Though Hansua was basically a drainage channel whose catchment area was spread over 278 square miles in both Cuttack and Jagatsinghpur districts.
"Majority of farmers in Jagatsinghpur district meet their water requirement from Hansua. Farmers often use pump sets to lift water from Hansua," Zilla Parishad president Sarada Jena said.
Water resources secretary Suresh Chandra Mohapatra, however, said the state government had asked Posco to consider a proposal of lifting water from Hansua river after building a barrage on it.
"Posco will be allowed to preserve water of Hansua river and use it," he said.
While Posco was yet to respond to the state government's proposal, the South Korean company had earlier rejected idea of drawing water from certain rivers in Jagatsinghpur on the plea that most of the water sources in the district was saline.
"We urge upon the government to conduct a fresh Environment Impact Assessment study for the projects impacts on the ecology," Water Initiative of Orissa (WIO) said.
"In the MoU signed between the company and the state government, water is a separate sub-project and hence any change in the water use would need a fresh EIA and environmental clearance after due public hearing at both places from where the government plans to give water to POSCO," WIO's convenor Ranjan Panda said.
Published: Sunday, Sep 26, 2010, 13:34 IST
Place: Bhubaneswar | Agency: PTI
With the Orissa government mulling supply of water to Posco's proposed mega steel mill near Paradip from an alternative place, local people and some outfits demanded a fresh public hearing.
Faced with stiff opposition from farmers and different political parties, the state government had asked Posco to consider a proposal of drawing water from Hansua river instead of getting it from Jobra barrage near Cuttack.
Farmers under the banner of Nab Nirman Krushak Sangathan also held a meeting near Paradip to unitedly oppose the state government's move to allow Posco to draw water from Hansua river.
Though Hansua was basically a drainage channel whose catchment area was spread over 278 square miles in both Cuttack and Jagatsinghpur districts.
"Majority of farmers in Jagatsinghpur district meet their water requirement from Hansua. Farmers often use pump sets to lift water from Hansua," Zilla Parishad president Sarada Jena said.
Water resources secretary Suresh Chandra Mohapatra, however, said the state government had asked Posco to consider a proposal of lifting water from Hansua river after building a barrage on it.
"Posco will be allowed to preserve water of Hansua river and use it," he said.
While Posco was yet to respond to the state government's proposal, the South Korean company had earlier rejected idea of drawing water from certain rivers in Jagatsinghpur on the plea that most of the water sources in the district was saline.
"We urge upon the government to conduct a fresh Environment Impact Assessment study for the projects impacts on the ecology," Water Initiative of Orissa (WIO) said.
"In the MoU signed between the company and the state government, water is a separate sub-project and hence any change in the water use would need a fresh EIA and environmental clearance after due public hearing at both places from where the government plans to give water to POSCO," WIO's convenor Ranjan Panda said.
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Shifting attention: POSCO going for Hansua leaving the Mahanadi
Our Mr Secretary, WRD (plz read the following news) is also falling trap to the same 'river water going to sea is a waste' beief, that our Ministers have earlier fallen to. Kudos to their advisors, married to this 'engineering paradigm'! They have been successful in perpetuating and implanting this dangerously wrong beief in the minds of decision makers. This shows the urgent need of carrying out damage control awareness and sensitization campaign among our beuraucrats and politcians on the understanding of our rivers in entirety and the implications of environmental flow.
At the same time, it is also difficult to understand, how a barrage downstream will solve the problems of waterlogging in Hansua, as the Secretary has put it. Civil society must also seek to know the basis of calculation which claims 'excess' water in Hansua.
Mahanadi Banchao Andolan, being a movement to safeguard the interests of communities and river, in stead of welcoming this move, must ask for a detailed assessment of impact of this barrage on lives and livelihoods the communities and farmers in Hansua sub-basin.
Orissa Govt asks Posco to consider alternative water source
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Report by Orissa Diary correspondent; Jagatsinghpur: After the Meena Gupta Committee visit the Proposed Posco site and held discussions with officials on water linkage to the steel mill, the state government is now evaluating alternative source of water for Posco.
The state government which confronted widespread protest from Mahanadi Banchao Andolan committee is now contemplating alternate water source to Posco and has initiated a survey in this regard.
In 2006, the water resources department had granted permission to Posco to draw water from Jobra barrage. With MoEF inquiring the ecological impact on the river and its surroundings, the government is now planning to ask Posco to draw water from Hansua river in Jagatsinghpur which is 7 km away from the proposed site.The government would ask Posco to build a barrage on Hansua river to hold water for its industrial use. The river which flows through four blocks of the district culminates at Jatadhari basin near the captive port site.
The farmers in the area have expressed concerns over drawing of water for the project as they depend on the river water for irrigation purposes.
The Secretary of Water Resources Department Suresh Mohapatra said that the excess water of Hansua river would be properly utilised instead being discharged to the sea, it could also help local farmers by avoiding a regular water logging over 10,000 to 15,000 hectare of agricultural field in Jagatsinghpur district.
The leaders of Mahanadi Banchao Andolan committee has welcomed the decision of state government to provide alternate source of water to Posco rather than providing water from river Mahanadi.
At the same time, it is also difficult to understand, how a barrage downstream will solve the problems of waterlogging in Hansua, as the Secretary has put it. Civil society must also seek to know the basis of calculation which claims 'excess' water in Hansua.
Mahanadi Banchao Andolan, being a movement to safeguard the interests of communities and river, in stead of welcoming this move, must ask for a detailed assessment of impact of this barrage on lives and livelihoods the communities and farmers in Hansua sub-basin.
Orissa Govt asks Posco to consider alternative water source
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Report by Orissa Diary correspondent; Jagatsinghpur: After the Meena Gupta Committee visit the Proposed Posco site and held discussions with officials on water linkage to the steel mill, the state government is now evaluating alternative source of water for Posco.
The state government which confronted widespread protest from Mahanadi Banchao Andolan committee is now contemplating alternate water source to Posco and has initiated a survey in this regard.
In 2006, the water resources department had granted permission to Posco to draw water from Jobra barrage. With MoEF inquiring the ecological impact on the river and its surroundings, the government is now planning to ask Posco to draw water from Hansua river in Jagatsinghpur which is 7 km away from the proposed site.The government would ask Posco to build a barrage on Hansua river to hold water for its industrial use. The river which flows through four blocks of the district culminates at Jatadhari basin near the captive port site.
The farmers in the area have expressed concerns over drawing of water for the project as they depend on the river water for irrigation purposes.
The Secretary of Water Resources Department Suresh Mohapatra said that the excess water of Hansua river would be properly utilised instead being discharged to the sea, it could also help local farmers by avoiding a regular water logging over 10,000 to 15,000 hectare of agricultural field in Jagatsinghpur district.
The leaders of Mahanadi Banchao Andolan committee has welcomed the decision of state government to provide alternate source of water to Posco rather than providing water from river Mahanadi.
Friday, September 24, 2010
BIS Certification Mandatory for Packaged Drinking Water
No person is authorised to manufacture, sell or exhibit for sale, packaged drinking water and packaged mineral water except under Bureau of Indian Standards Certification Mark.
As per the Quality Control Order issued under Prevention of Food Adulteration (PFA) Rules, 1955, Bureau of Indian Standards has formulated the following Indian Standards which provide quality norms for packaged water:
i) IS 14543:2004 Packaged drinking water (other than natural mineral water) (First Revision)
ii) IS 13428: 2005 Packaged natural mineral water (Second Revision)
There are 18 BIS licensees engaged in production of Packaged Natural Mineral Water, 2354 licensees producing Packaged Drinking Water through Reverse Osmosis, and 633 licensees bottling Packaged Drinking Water drawing water from natural resources.
Implementation of the PFA Act and Rules framed under the Act is the responsibility of State Governments and Union Territory Administrations. BIS also undertakes periodic surveillance inspection and testing of samples from the market for maintaining the quality of the products of its licensees as per the prescribed Indian Standards.
MP:SB:CP: mineral water (23.9.2010)
No person is authorised to manufacture, sell or exhibit for sale, packaged drinking water and packaged mineral water except under Bureau of Indian Standards Certification Mark.
As per the Quality Control Order issued under Prevention of Food Adulteration (PFA) Rules, 1955, Bureau of Indian Standards has formulated the following Indian Standards which provide quality norms for packaged water:
i) IS 14543:2004 Packaged drinking water (other than natural mineral water) (First Revision)
ii) IS 13428: 2005 Packaged natural mineral water (Second Revision)
There are 18 BIS licensees engaged in production of Packaged Natural Mineral Water, 2354 licensees producing Packaged Drinking Water through Reverse Osmosis, and 633 licensees bottling Packaged Drinking Water drawing water from natural resources.
Implementation of the PFA Act and Rules framed under the Act is the responsibility of State Governments and Union Territory Administrations. BIS also undertakes periodic surveillance inspection and testing of samples from the market for maintaining the quality of the products of its licensees as per the prescribed Indian Standards.
MP:SB:CP: mineral water (23.9.2010)
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Polavaram Politics
Orissa BJP seeks details of threat from Andhra dam
2010-09-21 15:20:00
Bhubaneswar, Sep 21 (IANS) Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) activists Tuesday staged a rally in Orissa demanding details of possible damage due to the Polavaram dam project on the Godavari river in Andhra Pradesh, recently approved by the central government.
Carrying posters and banners, activists of the party's youth unit marched in Bhubaneswar from their office near Ram Mandir square to Raj Bhavan, the official residence of Governor M.C. Bhandare, police said.
They shouted slogans against the state government led by Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik and the central government led by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, a police official said.
'Arjun Sethi, a leader of the Biju Janata Dal (BJD) was the union minister in charge of central water resources from 2000-04 and he should have scrapped the project at that time. Now the same BJD is opposing the project but only after the centre scrapped the mining project of Vedanta,' a protest leader said.
'Both the state and central governments have not done any assessment about the possible damage the project will cause in Orissa,' former state BJP president Suresh Pujari said.
'The state and central governments should come out with a white paper on the project detailing the possible damage,' he said.
'If the government continues with the project, we will take this agitation to other parts of the state,' he said.
According to the Andhra Pradesh government, the Rs.10,150-crore Polavaram irrigation project will provide drinking water to 2.85 million people, produce 960 MW of power and give industry 23,500 million cubic feet of water.
The union environment and forests ministry gave the final clearance in July for diversion of 3,731.07 hectares of forest land for the project on the condition that no submergence of forest land should take place in Orissa and Chhattisgarh.
The project, first envisioned by the British rulers in 1941 has, however, been facing opposition for decades from local residents who fear displacement, a concern shared by residents in Orissa and Chhattisgarh.
2010-09-21 15:20:00
Bhubaneswar, Sep 21 (IANS) Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) activists Tuesday staged a rally in Orissa demanding details of possible damage due to the Polavaram dam project on the Godavari river in Andhra Pradesh, recently approved by the central government.
Carrying posters and banners, activists of the party's youth unit marched in Bhubaneswar from their office near Ram Mandir square to Raj Bhavan, the official residence of Governor M.C. Bhandare, police said.
They shouted slogans against the state government led by Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik and the central government led by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, a police official said.
'Arjun Sethi, a leader of the Biju Janata Dal (BJD) was the union minister in charge of central water resources from 2000-04 and he should have scrapped the project at that time. Now the same BJD is opposing the project but only after the centre scrapped the mining project of Vedanta,' a protest leader said.
'Both the state and central governments have not done any assessment about the possible damage the project will cause in Orissa,' former state BJP president Suresh Pujari said.
'The state and central governments should come out with a white paper on the project detailing the possible damage,' he said.
'If the government continues with the project, we will take this agitation to other parts of the state,' he said.
According to the Andhra Pradesh government, the Rs.10,150-crore Polavaram irrigation project will provide drinking water to 2.85 million people, produce 960 MW of power and give industry 23,500 million cubic feet of water.
The union environment and forests ministry gave the final clearance in July for diversion of 3,731.07 hectares of forest land for the project on the condition that no submergence of forest land should take place in Orissa and Chhattisgarh.
The project, first envisioned by the British rulers in 1941 has, however, been facing opposition for decades from local residents who fear displacement, a concern shared by residents in Orissa and Chhattisgarh.
Salinity rise in water driving crocs to stray from habitats
PTI, Sep 21, 2010, 10.57am IST
KENDRAPARA (Orissa): Rising salinity in the waters of the Bhitarkanika river system is driving crocodiles towards other water bodies close to human habitation.
The recent killing of a woman by a crocodile at a village bordering Bhitarkanika wildlife sanctuary has brought into sharp focus the increasing forays by the reptiles into rivers and water bodies in thickly populated areas.
The straying of crocodiles away from their habitats was earlier attributed to scarcity of food in the sanctuary, especially during monsoon months, but now wildlife experts have said extreme salinity in the Bhitarkanika river was the reason.
"The reptiles were never earlier sighted at villages surrounding the Bhitarkanika sanctuary," Manoj Kumar Mohapatra, divisional forest officer, Rajnagar mangrove (wildlife) forest division, said.
The Bhitarkanika river system, home to about 2,000 estuarine crocodiles, is now undergoing a hyper-salinity process not conducive to their habitation, Mohapatra said.
He said the crocodile attacks on humans mostly take place during new moon and full moon periods when their habitation corridors get hyper saline.
PTI, Sep 21, 2010, 10.57am IST
KENDRAPARA (Orissa): Rising salinity in the waters of the Bhitarkanika river system is driving crocodiles towards other water bodies close to human habitation.
The recent killing of a woman by a crocodile at a village bordering Bhitarkanika wildlife sanctuary has brought into sharp focus the increasing forays by the reptiles into rivers and water bodies in thickly populated areas.
The straying of crocodiles away from their habitats was earlier attributed to scarcity of food in the sanctuary, especially during monsoon months, but now wildlife experts have said extreme salinity in the Bhitarkanika river was the reason.
"The reptiles were never earlier sighted at villages surrounding the Bhitarkanika sanctuary," Manoj Kumar Mohapatra, divisional forest officer, Rajnagar mangrove (wildlife) forest division, said.
The Bhitarkanika river system, home to about 2,000 estuarine crocodiles, is now undergoing a hyper-salinity process not conducive to their habitation, Mohapatra said.
He said the crocodile attacks on humans mostly take place during new moon and full moon periods when their habitation corridors get hyper saline.
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
Brutang
No rethink on green nod to Orissa irrigation project: Ramesh
Press Trust Of India
New Delhi, September 15, 2010
Even as Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh has maintained that there is no rethink over the green nod to Brutanga irrigation project proposed in Orissa, sources said it is under the scanner of the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA). "Wildlife in Satkosia tiger sanctuary would be under
threat due to the proposed project. NTCA member secretary Rajesh Gopal would soon visit the sanctuary to study the impact it would have on the wildlife particularly movement of elephants and tigers," sources in the ministry said.
When asked, though Ramesh said that the project has received first phase clearance at the Forest Appraisal Committee last month, he, however, admitted that there are some minor issues to be sorted out.
"But, I categorically say that there is no rethinking over the project which would help lakhs of farmers and villagers in the state," he said.
The project is aimed at providing irrigation in 50,000 hectares of cultivable land in Nayagarh district.
Ramesh said the order granting forest clearance includes a large number of conditions intended to safeguard the wildlife, such as building overpasses to allow elephants to cross the canal.
However, local NGOs and wildlife activists have been up in arms against the nod to the project, saying it would affect movement of elephants across river Brutanga, on which a reservoir will be build submerging 1,500 hectares of land.
The FAC had met again last week expressing reservation over its impact on the wildlife as well as a huge chunk of tribal population, which would be displaced due to the project.
Sources say that further action in the proposed project would depend on the view taken by Gopal, head of the NTCA, which oversees Project Tiger in the country.
Press Trust Of India
New Delhi, September 15, 2010
Even as Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh has maintained that there is no rethink over the green nod to Brutanga irrigation project proposed in Orissa, sources said it is under the scanner of the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA). "Wildlife in Satkosia tiger sanctuary would be under
threat due to the proposed project. NTCA member secretary Rajesh Gopal would soon visit the sanctuary to study the impact it would have on the wildlife particularly movement of elephants and tigers," sources in the ministry said.
When asked, though Ramesh said that the project has received first phase clearance at the Forest Appraisal Committee last month, he, however, admitted that there are some minor issues to be sorted out.
"But, I categorically say that there is no rethinking over the project which would help lakhs of farmers and villagers in the state," he said.
The project is aimed at providing irrigation in 50,000 hectares of cultivable land in Nayagarh district.
Ramesh said the order granting forest clearance includes a large number of conditions intended to safeguard the wildlife, such as building overpasses to allow elephants to cross the canal.
However, local NGOs and wildlife activists have been up in arms against the nod to the project, saying it would affect movement of elephants across river Brutanga, on which a reservoir will be build submerging 1,500 hectares of land.
The FAC had met again last week expressing reservation over its impact on the wildlife as well as a huge chunk of tribal population, which would be displaced due to the project.
Sources say that further action in the proposed project would depend on the view taken by Gopal, head of the NTCA, which oversees Project Tiger in the country.
Sunday, September 12, 2010
Polavaram
Polavaram issue at bAiThak kHanA
Posted by: "sudarsan das" in E-group Agamiorissa
Sat Sep 11, 2010 11:14 pm (PDT)
Dear All
As planned, the bAiThaK kHanA of Agami Odisha organised the consultation on Polavaram on 11th September at Ekamra Hatt.
Consultation had about thirty five participants comprising NGOs, media, activists, and elected representatives. Shri Sudarsan Das explained the weekly dialogue series that Agami Odisha has been organising on varied issues of concern to the state to examine the alternatives and and chalk out ways and mean of building public opinion in favour policies and programmes in the interest of the state. Polavaram issue has been taken up for this week, he explained as the problem is becoming serious with growing pressures to accord national status to the dam.
He introduced guest speaker Shri M Bharath Bhushan of Aranyika, a inter-state network of NGOs on environment and tribal development, and his work related to Polavaram dam as an activist with field studies on the impact of the dam way back in 1992 and his contribution to Aranyika's publication titled “Myth and Reality of
Polavaram Dam' highlighting the truth of the benefits and underestimated losses, as well his documentaries films on the Koyas tribe and Polavaram dam.
Bharath Bhushan explained that the Polavaram dam has evoked public wrath from the
beginning, especially from late Eighties when various sanghatans in the state of Andhra Pradesh and environment groups in the country have also questioned the rationale. There was a regional meet of the Koya tribal village heads of the three states in March 1995 that made fervent appeal to the chief ministers of the three states to withdraw Polavaram dam. Resistance to Polavaram dam, he said, is not new. The Polavaram Dam is national disaster as the promised benefits are only on paper and highly exaggerated, while the losses which are irreversible due to ecological destruction and displacement of people in large scale are many times higher than what is being told to the clearance authorities. The benefits are shaky, for instance, the irrigation benefits are claimed to be initially 7.21 lakh acres as
per the Environment Impact Assessment and Environment Management Plan (EIA & EMP) prepared by Agricultural Finance Corporation Ltd in September 2005 that was submitted to the authorities for obtaining clearance, Now there are claims of 23.21 lakh acres how that is possible and if the revised irrigation benefits are true how approval given to different design is valid, he asked. While the truth is that
Polavaram dam would be irrigate additionally only 42,000 acres as after deducting the extent of land that is lost forever under submergence and canals and 5.47 lakh acres which is already under irrigation or in progress under Tatipudi, Pushakara and several other irrigation projects. Similarly the Central Electricity Authority has
declared that power generation claims of 960 MW is unrealistic as there is feasibility for only 460 MW. Other serious issues of concern are the displacement of around 3 lakh population. Displacement and ecological implications are not confined to state borders as the Dantewada disturbance has resulted in about 30,000 people moving to AP according to the National Commission for Protection for Child
Rights in November 2007. Whether there is submergence or embankment in Orissa and Chattisgarh the large scale displacement of adivasis in AP and the uphill migration of the adivasis would be national disaster.
Prof K B Das of Utkal University remarked that all mega projects are only adding to the loot of resources for the private gains and the proposed benefits of the projects are not real or only short term. He cited examples of the Hirakud, Indravati dams and added that the displaced people are yet to be rehabilitated in many cases. He wondered how the Polavaram dam would be different when it is of much larger scale and being designed without public consent. Other participants who spoke on the occasion include Mr Braja Kishore Tripathy, former Union Minister, Mr
Lalit Mohan Patnaik, Mr Akshya Das, Mr Tushar Kanta, Mr Deba Parija, Priyadarshi Mishra, Mr Dayanidhi Sahu etc.
Participants remarked that presentations by the speakers and the discussion has brought to light several dimensions of the dam and the rapid modifications in the scope and design that are not widely known to the people in any state. The whole issue is treated as a matter of concern to technical experts and those in power to be act indiscriminately while the adverse implications of the ill designed project are to be faced by the adivasis and the people. Secrecy and myths of the technical
things are only coming into light in bits and pieces when one committee after the other finds lacunae in some component or the other. The participants opined that the project should be stalled immediately to have a national debate on the project in its totality and public debate is needed whether the dam serves any purpose at
all, whether its social ecological costs are worth the project, whether the corrective measures in the form of R&R and Environment Management Plan are sound etc
Issues that emerged for reflection include the following:
Polavaram issue is a national tragedy with significant direct implications to the state and the response from Odisha has to be above party affiliations
There is urgent need to undertake a comprehensive assessment of the social, ecological, and related problems due to the Polavaram dam
Public awareness and mobilisation has to be strengthened to inform the affected people and the varied sections in the state about the true picture of the
Polavaram dam
A state level convention has to be organised at the earliest to build public
awareness on the issue. The convention should invite speakers comprising experts and activists from three states and other parts of the country
--------------------------------------------
Sudarsan Das
Managing Trustee & Secretary
Human Development Foundation (HDF)
M-4, Samant Vihar, Mancheswar Rly. Colony
Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar.
Email: sudarsan_d@yahoo.com
Posted by: "sudarsan das" in E-group Agamiorissa
Sat Sep 11, 2010 11:14 pm (PDT)
Dear All
As planned, the bAiThaK kHanA of Agami Odisha organised the consultation on Polavaram on 11th September at Ekamra Hatt.
Consultation had about thirty five participants comprising NGOs, media, activists, and elected representatives. Shri Sudarsan Das explained the weekly dialogue series that Agami Odisha has been organising on varied issues of concern to the state to examine the alternatives and and chalk out ways and mean of building public opinion in favour policies and programmes in the interest of the state. Polavaram issue has been taken up for this week, he explained as the problem is becoming serious with growing pressures to accord national status to the dam.
He introduced guest speaker Shri M Bharath Bhushan of Aranyika, a inter-state network of NGOs on environment and tribal development, and his work related to Polavaram dam as an activist with field studies on the impact of the dam way back in 1992 and his contribution to Aranyika's publication titled “Myth and Reality of
Polavaram Dam' highlighting the truth of the benefits and underestimated losses, as well his documentaries films on the Koyas tribe and Polavaram dam.
Bharath Bhushan explained that the Polavaram dam has evoked public wrath from the
beginning, especially from late Eighties when various sanghatans in the state of Andhra Pradesh and environment groups in the country have also questioned the rationale. There was a regional meet of the Koya tribal village heads of the three states in March 1995 that made fervent appeal to the chief ministers of the three states to withdraw Polavaram dam. Resistance to Polavaram dam, he said, is not new. The Polavaram Dam is national disaster as the promised benefits are only on paper and highly exaggerated, while the losses which are irreversible due to ecological destruction and displacement of people in large scale are many times higher than what is being told to the clearance authorities. The benefits are shaky, for instance, the irrigation benefits are claimed to be initially 7.21 lakh acres as
per the Environment Impact Assessment and Environment Management Plan (EIA & EMP) prepared by Agricultural Finance Corporation Ltd in September 2005 that was submitted to the authorities for obtaining clearance, Now there are claims of 23.21 lakh acres how that is possible and if the revised irrigation benefits are true how approval given to different design is valid, he asked. While the truth is that
Polavaram dam would be irrigate additionally only 42,000 acres as after deducting the extent of land that is lost forever under submergence and canals and 5.47 lakh acres which is already under irrigation or in progress under Tatipudi, Pushakara and several other irrigation projects. Similarly the Central Electricity Authority has
declared that power generation claims of 960 MW is unrealistic as there is feasibility for only 460 MW. Other serious issues of concern are the displacement of around 3 lakh population. Displacement and ecological implications are not confined to state borders as the Dantewada disturbance has resulted in about 30,000 people moving to AP according to the National Commission for Protection for Child
Rights in November 2007. Whether there is submergence or embankment in Orissa and Chattisgarh the large scale displacement of adivasis in AP and the uphill migration of the adivasis would be national disaster.
Prof K B Das of Utkal University remarked that all mega projects are only adding to the loot of resources for the private gains and the proposed benefits of the projects are not real or only short term. He cited examples of the Hirakud, Indravati dams and added that the displaced people are yet to be rehabilitated in many cases. He wondered how the Polavaram dam would be different when it is of much larger scale and being designed without public consent. Other participants who spoke on the occasion include Mr Braja Kishore Tripathy, former Union Minister, Mr
Lalit Mohan Patnaik, Mr Akshya Das, Mr Tushar Kanta, Mr Deba Parija, Priyadarshi Mishra, Mr Dayanidhi Sahu etc.
Participants remarked that presentations by the speakers and the discussion has brought to light several dimensions of the dam and the rapid modifications in the scope and design that are not widely known to the people in any state. The whole issue is treated as a matter of concern to technical experts and those in power to be act indiscriminately while the adverse implications of the ill designed project are to be faced by the adivasis and the people. Secrecy and myths of the technical
things are only coming into light in bits and pieces when one committee after the other finds lacunae in some component or the other. The participants opined that the project should be stalled immediately to have a national debate on the project in its totality and public debate is needed whether the dam serves any purpose at
all, whether its social ecological costs are worth the project, whether the corrective measures in the form of R&R and Environment Management Plan are sound etc
Issues that emerged for reflection include the following:
Polavaram issue is a national tragedy with significant direct implications to the state and the response from Odisha has to be above party affiliations
There is urgent need to undertake a comprehensive assessment of the social, ecological, and related problems due to the Polavaram dam
Public awareness and mobilisation has to be strengthened to inform the affected people and the varied sections in the state about the true picture of the
Polavaram dam
A state level convention has to be organised at the earliest to build public
awareness on the issue. The convention should invite speakers comprising experts and activists from three states and other parts of the country
--------------------------------------------
Sudarsan Das
Managing Trustee & Secretary
Human Development Foundation (HDF)
M-4, Samant Vihar, Mancheswar Rly. Colony
Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar.
Email: sudarsan_d@yahoo.com
Surviving on contaminated water, Orissa villagers hit by cholera
2010-09-11 18:50:00
Villagers in Orissa's Rayagada district have come under the grip of cholera, as their region lacks a safe and hygienic source of drinking water.
These villagers are very poor and helpless. They are compelled to take drinking water from river and ponds for their daily life.
As the water is contaminated, the water-borne disease is spreading rapidly in the district and has affected many people.
"We don't have any source of safe drinking water. We don't have any bore-well water, hence we have to depend on dirty rivers and pond water, and due to this unhygienic water we are falling ill," said Paranga Majhi, a local.
Meanwhile, State Health Department claims to have already started undertaking measures to counter the cholera outbreak.
"Government is taking all steps possible and a team of doctors has been dispersed. Paramedical team has also been dispersed from outside the district. Senior health officers of the health department have also been deployed there and are making all sets of arrangements to see that all patients areas (have) been given proper treatment and timely treatment," said Prasanna Acharaya, the State Health Minister.
Areas like Bissam Cuttak, Kasipur, Kalyasinghpur, Gudari, Jaganathpura and Jameidipur in the Rayagad district have been hit by Cholera.
Till now Cholera has taken lives of almost 87 people in Orissa. By Sarada Lahangir (ANI)
2010-09-11 18:50:00
Villagers in Orissa's Rayagada district have come under the grip of cholera, as their region lacks a safe and hygienic source of drinking water.
These villagers are very poor and helpless. They are compelled to take drinking water from river and ponds for their daily life.
As the water is contaminated, the water-borne disease is spreading rapidly in the district and has affected many people.
"We don't have any source of safe drinking water. We don't have any bore-well water, hence we have to depend on dirty rivers and pond water, and due to this unhygienic water we are falling ill," said Paranga Majhi, a local.
Meanwhile, State Health Department claims to have already started undertaking measures to counter the cholera outbreak.
"Government is taking all steps possible and a team of doctors has been dispersed. Paramedical team has also been dispersed from outside the district. Senior health officers of the health department have also been deployed there and are making all sets of arrangements to see that all patients areas (have) been given proper treatment and timely treatment," said Prasanna Acharaya, the State Health Minister.
Areas like Bissam Cuttak, Kasipur, Kalyasinghpur, Gudari, Jaganathpura and Jameidipur in the Rayagad district have been hit by Cholera.
Till now Cholera has taken lives of almost 87 people in Orissa. By Sarada Lahangir (ANI)
Saturday, September 11, 2010
Centre rethinking clearance granted to Orissa's Brutanga irrigation project?
Priscilla Jebaraj
The Union government is reportedly having second thoughts about the forest clearance granted to the Brutanga irrigation project in Nayagarh district of Orissa, largely due to concerns over the submergence of a key elephant corridor.
The project was discussed again by the Forest Advisory Committee on Friday, according to sources at the meeting. They suggested that protests against the submergence of the elephant corridor and the possible adverse impact on local wildlife and tribal communities were discussed.
Interestingly, the original clearance for the project was announced on the same day of the release of the Project Elephant task force report, which had emphasised the importance of safeguarding elephant corridors. That was also the day Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh rejected the forest clearance for Vedanta Aluminium's controversial Niyamgiri mine.
Centre not biased
In fact, the Brutanga project, which the Environment Ministry considered and approved over a span of just six months, has been Mr. Ramesh's poster boy case to prove that the Centre is not biased against Orissa. In the wake of decisions against the Vedanta and Posco, Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik had complained that the Ministry was prejudiced against his non-Congress government.
In response, Mr. Ramesh has been emphasising that while his Ministry cleared the Brutanga project in a jiffy, the State government took 10 years to apply for a clearance, implying that it did not care about its own farmers, but only about large corporate projects.
Now it appears that the Ministry may be rethinking the project it cleared at such speed.
“The Brutanga project will destroy the route regularly used by elephants,” says Shivaji Naik, an activist with the Wild Orissa NGO, which has been campaigning against the project.
The Ministry's order granting forest clearance included a large number of conditions intended to safeguard the wildlife, such as building overpasses to allow elephants to cross the canal.
However, Mr. Naik cites wildlife experts who say that the construction of artificial barriers has not proved to be a feasible solution for elephant movement in the country.
The NGO says the proposed submergence area falls adjacent to the Baisipalli Wildlife Sanctuary. A study team found that both the submergence area and the canal that will connect the Brutanga and Kuanria Reservoirs are being regularly used by elephants during their transit across the Mahanadi each summer.
“If the elephants' pathway is blocked, they would not be able to mix and breed with populations on both sides of the river, affecting genetic balance. The corridor is also used by tigers, sambar and many birds, says the Wild Orissa.
Water scarcity
Mr. Naik also warns that since Brutanga is not a perennial river, the project would cause water scarcity in the Baisipalli Wildlife Sanctuary and in the tribal villages dotting the forests of the region. With elephants confused by the blocking of their traditional route, there would be a danger of more man-animal conflicts, he says.
Priscilla Jebaraj
The Union government is reportedly having second thoughts about the forest clearance granted to the Brutanga irrigation project in Nayagarh district of Orissa, largely due to concerns over the submergence of a key elephant corridor.
The project was discussed again by the Forest Advisory Committee on Friday, according to sources at the meeting. They suggested that protests against the submergence of the elephant corridor and the possible adverse impact on local wildlife and tribal communities were discussed.
Interestingly, the original clearance for the project was announced on the same day of the release of the Project Elephant task force report, which had emphasised the importance of safeguarding elephant corridors. That was also the day Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh rejected the forest clearance for Vedanta Aluminium's controversial Niyamgiri mine.
Centre not biased
In fact, the Brutanga project, which the Environment Ministry considered and approved over a span of just six months, has been Mr. Ramesh's poster boy case to prove that the Centre is not biased against Orissa. In the wake of decisions against the Vedanta and Posco, Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik had complained that the Ministry was prejudiced against his non-Congress government.
In response, Mr. Ramesh has been emphasising that while his Ministry cleared the Brutanga project in a jiffy, the State government took 10 years to apply for a clearance, implying that it did not care about its own farmers, but only about large corporate projects.
Now it appears that the Ministry may be rethinking the project it cleared at such speed.
“The Brutanga project will destroy the route regularly used by elephants,” says Shivaji Naik, an activist with the Wild Orissa NGO, which has been campaigning against the project.
The Ministry's order granting forest clearance included a large number of conditions intended to safeguard the wildlife, such as building overpasses to allow elephants to cross the canal.
However, Mr. Naik cites wildlife experts who say that the construction of artificial barriers has not proved to be a feasible solution for elephant movement in the country.
The NGO says the proposed submergence area falls adjacent to the Baisipalli Wildlife Sanctuary. A study team found that both the submergence area and the canal that will connect the Brutanga and Kuanria Reservoirs are being regularly used by elephants during their transit across the Mahanadi each summer.
“If the elephants' pathway is blocked, they would not be able to mix and breed with populations on both sides of the river, affecting genetic balance. The corridor is also used by tigers, sambar and many birds, says the Wild Orissa.
Water scarcity
Mr. Naik also warns that since Brutanga is not a perennial river, the project would cause water scarcity in the Baisipalli Wildlife Sanctuary and in the tribal villages dotting the forests of the region. With elephants confused by the blocking of their traditional route, there would be a danger of more man-animal conflicts, he says.
Friday, September 10, 2010
Vansadhara tribunal to start hearing form Nov 23
Thursday, September 09, 2010
Report by Jyoti Prakash; Bhubaneswar: Vansadhara water distribution tribunal will start its hearing from next November 23. Before that the tribunal today ordered both Orissa and Andhra Pradesh to submit their respective views within 6 weeks. On the other hand, status quo will be maintained on construction of Katraguda barrage on the river Vansadhara till further orders.
The tribunal headed by Justice B.N Agrawal today called a meeting of both the states who are fighting over the water sharing of Vansadhara to present their views in New Delhi. Orissa water resources Secretary Suresh Mohapatra represented the state where as Andhra was represented by its Water Resources minister Ponnala Lakshmaiah and the irrigation engineers.
The dispute between Orissa and AP began in the early 90s when the latter attempted to construct the Neredi barrage on Vansadhara river, 16 km from Gunpur town in Orissa’s Rayagada district. Objections raised by Orissa prevented the then AP government from going ahead with the construction. However, AP went ahead and built the Gotta barrage across the river.
Vansadhara, one of the six major rivers of Orissa, originates from the Durgakangar hills (Lingaraj hills) of the Eastern Ghats in Kalahandi district. The 230 km-Long River runs through Orissa (150 km) and Andhra Pradesh before merging into the Bay of Bengal at Kalingapatnam in Andhra. Its catchments area is spread over 1,400 sq km in Orissa and 300 sq km in Andhra Pradesh.
Andhra has even constructed second phase of Gotta barrage despite Orissa’s protest. Now, the problem is with the construction of Katraguda barrage on Vansadhara.
Thursday, September 09, 2010
Report by Jyoti Prakash; Bhubaneswar: Vansadhara water distribution tribunal will start its hearing from next November 23. Before that the tribunal today ordered both Orissa and Andhra Pradesh to submit their respective views within 6 weeks. On the other hand, status quo will be maintained on construction of Katraguda barrage on the river Vansadhara till further orders.
The tribunal headed by Justice B.N Agrawal today called a meeting of both the states who are fighting over the water sharing of Vansadhara to present their views in New Delhi. Orissa water resources Secretary Suresh Mohapatra represented the state where as Andhra was represented by its Water Resources minister Ponnala Lakshmaiah and the irrigation engineers.
The dispute between Orissa and AP began in the early 90s when the latter attempted to construct the Neredi barrage on Vansadhara river, 16 km from Gunpur town in Orissa’s Rayagada district. Objections raised by Orissa prevented the then AP government from going ahead with the construction. However, AP went ahead and built the Gotta barrage across the river.
Vansadhara, one of the six major rivers of Orissa, originates from the Durgakangar hills (Lingaraj hills) of the Eastern Ghats in Kalahandi district. The 230 km-Long River runs through Orissa (150 km) and Andhra Pradesh before merging into the Bay of Bengal at Kalingapatnam in Andhra. Its catchments area is spread over 1,400 sq km in Orissa and 300 sq km in Andhra Pradesh.
Andhra has even constructed second phase of Gotta barrage despite Orissa’s protest. Now, the problem is with the construction of Katraguda barrage on Vansadhara.
Thursday, September 9, 2010
Artists protest Polavaram
Students stage street play against Orissa dam project
Bhubaneswar, Sep.8 (ANI): Students of a college here, staged a street play to protest the rupees 100 billion-Polavaram Indira Sagar dam project on River Godavari.
They claimed that a huge number of villages would be submerged in water if the dam is built in southern Andhra Pradesh state.
"We protest Polavaram today because, due to the Polavaram (project), Orissa is facing a lot of problems. So, we artists want to tell that the Polavaram project should not happen. The problem that will be caused to the tribal people due to this project, who will be responsible for that? We should ask this question to the central government and to the Andhra Pradesh government as well. This project should be shut down. We are protesting it," Bijay Kumar, a performer said on Tuesday.
Locals urged the centre and the state governments to shut down the project.
"We are staging this play to make the people of Orissa aware that they should also protest this project. We the people and our government should jointly urge the central government to stop this," said Arun Palore, another performer.
At least 25 tribal villages and a large chunk of the forest area would be inundated, they said. By Sarda Lahangir (ANI)
Bhubaneswar, Sep.8 (ANI): Students of a college here, staged a street play to protest the rupees 100 billion-Polavaram Indira Sagar dam project on River Godavari.
They claimed that a huge number of villages would be submerged in water if the dam is built in southern Andhra Pradesh state.
"We protest Polavaram today because, due to the Polavaram (project), Orissa is facing a lot of problems. So, we artists want to tell that the Polavaram project should not happen. The problem that will be caused to the tribal people due to this project, who will be responsible for that? We should ask this question to the central government and to the Andhra Pradesh government as well. This project should be shut down. We are protesting it," Bijay Kumar, a performer said on Tuesday.
Locals urged the centre and the state governments to shut down the project.
"We are staging this play to make the people of Orissa aware that they should also protest this project. We the people and our government should jointly urge the central government to stop this," said Arun Palore, another performer.
At least 25 tribal villages and a large chunk of the forest area would be inundated, they said. By Sarda Lahangir (ANI)
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Polavaram
Godavari: The New Narmada?
Will Polavaram be another ecocide zone? Not if we apply the Vedanta logic to it.
Godavari Flow Chart
* 80 TMC of water diverted to river Krishna. Water supply to Visakhapatnam. Drinking water to 540 villages.
* Will irrigate 2.91 lakh hectares. Power generation: 960 MW
* Full reservoir Level: 151 feet, total cost: about Rs 17,800 crore
* Clearance from MoEF in July 2010
* Environmentalists and rights activists say the dam could inundate parts of AP, Orissa and Chhattisgarh, swamp 280 villages. It will displace two lakh people, mostly tribals.
***
The Polavaram dam across the river Godavari has been a dream project for several governments in Andhra Pradesh. Most of them had to let it stay at that—a dream. An ambitious project which envisages harnessing the river’s surplus water that otherwise flows into the sea (80 thousand million cubic feet is also diverted annually to the Krishna river), the Polavaram dam has been in the conceptual stage since 1943. It was only when Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy took charge and accorded irrigation topmost priority that the dam’s construction was taken up as part of the Jalayagnam programme.
Christened the Indira Sagar Polavaram project, the 151-ft-high dam will have a gross storage capacity of 194.6 TMC and a power generation capacity of 960 MW. However, the dam has remained controversial from the word go. One of the major issues is the massive submergence of forest and cultivated land it will entail in Khammam, the west and east Godavari districts, Chhattisgarh and Orissa. Up to 40,138 hectares will be affected, uprooting a population of two lakh, many of them primitive tribal groups and adivasis. In all, 280 villages would be hit. Besides, reserve forests and a part of the Papikonda wildlife sanctuary would cease to exist. However, regardless of all this, the Union ministry of environment and forests (MOEF) cleared the proposal for diversion of 3,731.07 hectares of forest land for the Indira Sagar project in July 2010. While the AP government celebrates it as an achievement, tribal activists and environmentalists see red.
Madhusudhan N., who runs ngo Yakshi and works for tribal rights, says the logic which the Saxena committee report used to nullify Vedanta’s project in Orissa should apply here as well. “The MOEF’s clearance is based on the assurance by the AP government that there are no forest rights to be settled under the Scheduled Tribes and Other Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Right) Act, 2006, in the project area. The fact is that several tribals like Koyas and Konda Reddies have been living here for long. Their cultural ecosystems, their territorial rights to forest resources need to be recognised. In other words, they cannot be evicted. The AP government has obviously misled the Centre on these facts.”
S. Jeevan Kumar, president, Human Rights Forum, calls the dam a hugely destructive project. “Tribals and Dalits,” he says, “will account for 65 per cent of the displaced. The natural resources, cultural systems, traditional knowledge of these people are closely tied to the land they inhabit. With no forest, the existence of these communities will become untenable. Another condition for the MOEF’s clearance is that the consent of gram sabhas (village councils) has to be obtained. Not a single gram sabha has given its consent so far. The Centre cannot apply the Forest Rights Act, 2006, selectively only in Orissa and ignore it in AP.” Both the Orissa and Chhattisgarh governments have gone to the Supreme Court seeking a stay on the dam.
Hind Site Work on the main canal
Irrigation and environment expert Prof T. Shivaji Rao says the dam is being built by blindly ignoring aspects like climate change and global warming. “Over the years, the intensity and duration of storms in the Godavari are going to increase by 20-30 per cent. The AP government cannot alter nature.” He points out that the National Institute of Hydrology, Roorkee, had in 1999 said the maximum flood inflow in the Godavari could be 60 lakh cusecs. The Central Water Commission (CWC) was only slightly more conservative: it put the figure at 50 lakh cusecs in September 2006. “Even if one were to take CWC’s figure, the Polavaram dam would be a ticking time-bomb during floods,” says Shivaji Rao.
Union Nations consultant for Asian irrigation projects, T. Hanumantha Rao, while factoring in these climate change facts, had suggested an alternative to the Polavaram dam in the form of three barrages at Polavaram, between Bhadrachalam and Konavaram and across the Sabari river close to the Orissa border. The AP government ruled out his proposals. “They were technically unviable,” says irrigation minister Ponnala Laxmaiah. Hanumantha Rao says that he has never been against the Polavaram project but these barrages might just present a solution and work out cheaper than the current cost of Rs 17,728.20 crore and will generate more power (1,038 MW).
Both Shivaji Rao and Hanumantha Rao point out that earthen dams are prone to breaches. Since the soil foundation at Polavaram is of clay and sand, a concrete dam is unviable. Other major rivers in the world which have lesser peak flood discharges than Godavari, such as the Yangtze in China, the Mississippi in the US or the Volga in Russia, do not have earthen dams at locations where such high flood flow conditions occur. The Indira Sagar project is located almost at the end of the river where the peak discharge occurs.
Shivaji Rao points out: “In October 2009, the Krishna river saw unprecedented floods, more than 2.7 times the normal flow, and Kurnool was submerged for days together. And there is no dam out there. If such a situation occurs in the Godavari and the Polavaram dam is built, then a breach is almost certain. The maximum flood inflow would be 90 lakh cusecs. Imagine a tsunami of 200 TMC of dam water breaking across the Godavari delta. Overnight, 45 lakh people would have a watery grave.”
Irrigation officials in the government dismiss these theories as alarmist and say that the benefits of the Polavaram dam are too many to be ignored. Irrigation minister Laxmaiah says that the objections by Orissa and Chhattisgarh have no relevance since they are signatories to the 1976 Bachawat Award on the Krishna waters. “We have obtained all the clearances and are offering a compensation package of more than Rs 600 crore for the two states. We are offering the best rehabilitation and relief packages in the country,” says Laxmaiah. “In fact, we invited Medha Patkar about four years back to assess the R&R package and she found it to be good. The government has also taken the suggestions of the World Water Forum.” Do the people have a say, that is the moot question.
Will Polavaram be another ecocide zone? Not if we apply the Vedanta logic to it.
Godavari Flow Chart
* 80 TMC of water diverted to river Krishna. Water supply to Visakhapatnam. Drinking water to 540 villages.
* Will irrigate 2.91 lakh hectares. Power generation: 960 MW
* Full reservoir Level: 151 feet, total cost: about Rs 17,800 crore
* Clearance from MoEF in July 2010
* Environmentalists and rights activists say the dam could inundate parts of AP, Orissa and Chhattisgarh, swamp 280 villages. It will displace two lakh people, mostly tribals.
***
The Polavaram dam across the river Godavari has been a dream project for several governments in Andhra Pradesh. Most of them had to let it stay at that—a dream. An ambitious project which envisages harnessing the river’s surplus water that otherwise flows into the sea (80 thousand million cubic feet is also diverted annually to the Krishna river), the Polavaram dam has been in the conceptual stage since 1943. It was only when Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy took charge and accorded irrigation topmost priority that the dam’s construction was taken up as part of the Jalayagnam programme.
Christened the Indira Sagar Polavaram project, the 151-ft-high dam will have a gross storage capacity of 194.6 TMC and a power generation capacity of 960 MW. However, the dam has remained controversial from the word go. One of the major issues is the massive submergence of forest and cultivated land it will entail in Khammam, the west and east Godavari districts, Chhattisgarh and Orissa. Up to 40,138 hectares will be affected, uprooting a population of two lakh, many of them primitive tribal groups and adivasis. In all, 280 villages would be hit. Besides, reserve forests and a part of the Papikonda wildlife sanctuary would cease to exist. However, regardless of all this, the Union ministry of environment and forests (MOEF) cleared the proposal for diversion of 3,731.07 hectares of forest land for the Indira Sagar project in July 2010. While the AP government celebrates it as an achievement, tribal activists and environmentalists see red.
Madhusudhan N., who runs ngo Yakshi and works for tribal rights, says the logic which the Saxena committee report used to nullify Vedanta’s project in Orissa should apply here as well. “The MOEF’s clearance is based on the assurance by the AP government that there are no forest rights to be settled under the Scheduled Tribes and Other Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Right) Act, 2006, in the project area. The fact is that several tribals like Koyas and Konda Reddies have been living here for long. Their cultural ecosystems, their territorial rights to forest resources need to be recognised. In other words, they cannot be evicted. The AP government has obviously misled the Centre on these facts.”
S. Jeevan Kumar, president, Human Rights Forum, calls the dam a hugely destructive project. “Tribals and Dalits,” he says, “will account for 65 per cent of the displaced. The natural resources, cultural systems, traditional knowledge of these people are closely tied to the land they inhabit. With no forest, the existence of these communities will become untenable. Another condition for the MOEF’s clearance is that the consent of gram sabhas (village councils) has to be obtained. Not a single gram sabha has given its consent so far. The Centre cannot apply the Forest Rights Act, 2006, selectively only in Orissa and ignore it in AP.” Both the Orissa and Chhattisgarh governments have gone to the Supreme Court seeking a stay on the dam.
Hind Site Work on the main canal
Irrigation and environment expert Prof T. Shivaji Rao says the dam is being built by blindly ignoring aspects like climate change and global warming. “Over the years, the intensity and duration of storms in the Godavari are going to increase by 20-30 per cent. The AP government cannot alter nature.” He points out that the National Institute of Hydrology, Roorkee, had in 1999 said the maximum flood inflow in the Godavari could be 60 lakh cusecs. The Central Water Commission (CWC) was only slightly more conservative: it put the figure at 50 lakh cusecs in September 2006. “Even if one were to take CWC’s figure, the Polavaram dam would be a ticking time-bomb during floods,” says Shivaji Rao.
Union Nations consultant for Asian irrigation projects, T. Hanumantha Rao, while factoring in these climate change facts, had suggested an alternative to the Polavaram dam in the form of three barrages at Polavaram, between Bhadrachalam and Konavaram and across the Sabari river close to the Orissa border. The AP government ruled out his proposals. “They were technically unviable,” says irrigation minister Ponnala Laxmaiah. Hanumantha Rao says that he has never been against the Polavaram project but these barrages might just present a solution and work out cheaper than the current cost of Rs 17,728.20 crore and will generate more power (1,038 MW).
Both Shivaji Rao and Hanumantha Rao point out that earthen dams are prone to breaches. Since the soil foundation at Polavaram is of clay and sand, a concrete dam is unviable. Other major rivers in the world which have lesser peak flood discharges than Godavari, such as the Yangtze in China, the Mississippi in the US or the Volga in Russia, do not have earthen dams at locations where such high flood flow conditions occur. The Indira Sagar project is located almost at the end of the river where the peak discharge occurs.
Shivaji Rao points out: “In October 2009, the Krishna river saw unprecedented floods, more than 2.7 times the normal flow, and Kurnool was submerged for days together. And there is no dam out there. If such a situation occurs in the Godavari and the Polavaram dam is built, then a breach is almost certain. The maximum flood inflow would be 90 lakh cusecs. Imagine a tsunami of 200 TMC of dam water breaking across the Godavari delta. Overnight, 45 lakh people would have a watery grave.”
Irrigation officials in the government dismiss these theories as alarmist and say that the benefits of the Polavaram dam are too many to be ignored. Irrigation minister Laxmaiah says that the objections by Orissa and Chhattisgarh have no relevance since they are signatories to the 1976 Bachawat Award on the Krishna waters. “We have obtained all the clearances and are offering a compensation package of more than Rs 600 crore for the two states. We are offering the best rehabilitation and relief packages in the country,” says Laxmaiah. “In fact, we invited Medha Patkar about four years back to assess the R&R package and she found it to be good. The government has also taken the suggestions of the World Water Forum.” Do the people have a say, that is the moot question.
Sunday, September 5, 2010
Polavaram Politics
Final approval for Polavaram project erroneous: Orissa
J. Venkatesan
Deliberate act to render suit infructuous
NEW DELHI: The Orissa government moved the Supreme Court on Saturday seeking a stay on the final approval granted by the Union Environment and Forests Ministry for the Indira Sagar (Polavaram) Project in Andhra Pradesh, and a direction for status quo.
On Wednesday, the Centre, in response to Orissa's suit, justified the grant of clearance for execution of the project. It said protection against submergence had been provided and allayed Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik's apprehensions.
Conditions same
In its fresh application, Orissa argued that the conditions stipulated in the approval letter were similar to the one issued in 2009 for grant of in-principle approval. When the 2009 approval was still pending in court, the grant of the final approval on the same conditions would amount to overreaching the Supreme Court's orders and interference in its proceedings.
Assailing the Centre for granting approval without informing Orissa, the application pointed out that the project on an inter-State river was fraught with the serious consequences of submergence of, and an adverse environmental impact on, the territories of Orissa. Mr. Patnaik had written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the Ministry seeking withdrawal of the clearance granted on July 28. In its reply, the Ministry said clearance was granted after “due care of the issues raised” was taken.
Wrong assumption
Drawing a distinction between the original and revised proposals, the application said Orissa entered into the 1980 agreement with Andhra Pradesh based on the maximum backwater level of 174.22 feet for a maximum discharge of 36 lakh cusecs, as put forth by Andhra Pradesh.
However, as per the Andhra Pradesh government's application to the Environment Ministry, the backwater would go up to 182 feet for a discharge of 36 lakh cusecs. Therefore, the most fundamental assumption of fact on which the agreement had been entered into turned out to be wrong.
Furthermore, Andhra Pradesh should have executed the Inchampalli joint project first, so that the design flood at Polavaram could have been drastically reduced to 36 lakh cusecs or lower.
The Inchampalli project was not executed though the agreement had been made in 1975.
In the absence of the revised reservoir operation schedule, due to the change in the design flood, in consultation with the co-basin States of Chhattisgarh and Orissa, the permission and approval granted by the Union Ministry was erroneous and liable to be quashed. The grant of approval was a deliberate act to render the suit infructuous, the application said.
J. Venkatesan
Deliberate act to render suit infructuous
NEW DELHI: The Orissa government moved the Supreme Court on Saturday seeking a stay on the final approval granted by the Union Environment and Forests Ministry for the Indira Sagar (Polavaram) Project in Andhra Pradesh, and a direction for status quo.
On Wednesday, the Centre, in response to Orissa's suit, justified the grant of clearance for execution of the project. It said protection against submergence had been provided and allayed Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik's apprehensions.
Conditions same
In its fresh application, Orissa argued that the conditions stipulated in the approval letter were similar to the one issued in 2009 for grant of in-principle approval. When the 2009 approval was still pending in court, the grant of the final approval on the same conditions would amount to overreaching the Supreme Court's orders and interference in its proceedings.
Assailing the Centre for granting approval without informing Orissa, the application pointed out that the project on an inter-State river was fraught with the serious consequences of submergence of, and an adverse environmental impact on, the territories of Orissa. Mr. Patnaik had written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the Ministry seeking withdrawal of the clearance granted on July 28. In its reply, the Ministry said clearance was granted after “due care of the issues raised” was taken.
Wrong assumption
Drawing a distinction between the original and revised proposals, the application said Orissa entered into the 1980 agreement with Andhra Pradesh based on the maximum backwater level of 174.22 feet for a maximum discharge of 36 lakh cusecs, as put forth by Andhra Pradesh.
However, as per the Andhra Pradesh government's application to the Environment Ministry, the backwater would go up to 182 feet for a discharge of 36 lakh cusecs. Therefore, the most fundamental assumption of fact on which the agreement had been entered into turned out to be wrong.
Furthermore, Andhra Pradesh should have executed the Inchampalli joint project first, so that the design flood at Polavaram could have been drastically reduced to 36 lakh cusecs or lower.
The Inchampalli project was not executed though the agreement had been made in 1975.
In the absence of the revised reservoir operation schedule, due to the change in the design flood, in consultation with the co-basin States of Chhattisgarh and Orissa, the permission and approval granted by the Union Ministry was erroneous and liable to be quashed. The grant of approval was a deliberate act to render the suit infructuous, the application said.
Polavaram Politics
Orissa moves SC over Polavaram
BS Reporter / Bhubaneswar September 06, 2010, 0:49 IST
Continuing its protest over the Rs 10,000-crore Polavaram power project on the Godavari river in neighbouring Andhra Pradesh, the Orissa government has filed a petition in the Supreme Court opposing the Centre’s decision to give an environmental nod for the controversial project.
“In our petition in the Supreme Court, we have demanded the cancellation of the environmental clearance given to the project by the Union Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) to the Polavaram project. The state government has argued as to how the ministry could give the clearance when a case related to the project is already pending in the apex court,” Suresh Mohapatra, secretary (water resources), told Business Standard. According to state government estimates, the project was likely to submerge 2119.38 hectares of land in the Naxalite-affected tribal areas of Malkangiri district.
The Orissa government had first moved the Supreme Court after MoEF had given its interim approval for the project in 2008.
Now, it has sought a declaration that Andhra Pradesh had no right or entitlement to undertake or proceed with the project on the Godavari river. It has also stated that embankments were not permanent solutions to effectively contain submergence during floods.
The Orissa government has also accused the Central Water Commission of not furnishing any details before approving the project.
The filing of the petition in the apex court comes on the heels of Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik’s statement that Orissa would continue to oppose the Polavaram project, owing to its concerns of submergence of tribal villages and forest land.
BS Reporter / Bhubaneswar September 06, 2010, 0:49 IST
Continuing its protest over the Rs 10,000-crore Polavaram power project on the Godavari river in neighbouring Andhra Pradesh, the Orissa government has filed a petition in the Supreme Court opposing the Centre’s decision to give an environmental nod for the controversial project.
“In our petition in the Supreme Court, we have demanded the cancellation of the environmental clearance given to the project by the Union Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) to the Polavaram project. The state government has argued as to how the ministry could give the clearance when a case related to the project is already pending in the apex court,” Suresh Mohapatra, secretary (water resources), told Business Standard. According to state government estimates, the project was likely to submerge 2119.38 hectares of land in the Naxalite-affected tribal areas of Malkangiri district.
The Orissa government had first moved the Supreme Court after MoEF had given its interim approval for the project in 2008.
Now, it has sought a declaration that Andhra Pradesh had no right or entitlement to undertake or proceed with the project on the Godavari river. It has also stated that embankments were not permanent solutions to effectively contain submergence during floods.
The Orissa government has also accused the Central Water Commission of not furnishing any details before approving the project.
The filing of the petition in the apex court comes on the heels of Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik’s statement that Orissa would continue to oppose the Polavaram project, owing to its concerns of submergence of tribal villages and forest land.
Friday, September 3, 2010
SANDRP on Polavaram
Sept 2 2010
From:
Himanshu Thakkar
South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers & People,�
c/o 86-D, AD block, Shalimar Bagh,
Delhi,�himanshuthakkar@iitbombay.org, ht.sandrp@gmail.com�www.sandrp.in
Ph: 27484655/ 9968242798 9968242798
To: Shri Jairam Ramesh
Union Minister of State for Env and Forests (IC), New Delhi
Respected Sir,
I have just seen your letter dated Aug 18, 2010 to�Orissa�Chief�Minister on the aboves subject, uploaded yesterday on MEF website.�
1. Your letter says that the Forest Clearance has been given to the Polavaram Project on July 28, 2010 is subject to the condition, "... no submergence and displacement of people including STs take place in Orissa and Chhattisgarh...". However, this condition is in complete contradiction with the environment clearance given by your ministry on Oct 25, 2005, which says in para 2, "Total 1,93,35 persons are likely to be affected by this project, out of that 1,75,275 persons in Andhra Pradesh and 6,316 persons from Orissa and 11,766 are from Chattisgarh."�It is clear the condition of no submergence and displacement on Orissa and Chhattisgarh, stated in your letter, in the Tribal Development Ministry's condition, and in the forest clearance letter is in complete contradiction with the environment clearance given by you. One of them have to be cancelled due to this contradiction, we would like to know, which one would be cancelled.�
2. This condition of no submergence or displacement in Orissa or Chhattisgarh is based on the proposal to construct embankments along the respective rivers in Orissa and Chhattisgarh. However, the proposal to construct these embankments was not part of the project that was given clearance by your ministry on Oct 25, 2005. This change in scope of the project came to light when the project went for CWC clearance (given on 23.01.2009 following flawed in principle forest clearance given by your ministry on Dec 26, 2008). Following letter from MEF, the Govt of AP applied for concurrence of the MEF for building embankments on 29.01.2009. The issue came up for discussion in the meeting of EAC of River Valley committee on Feb 16-17, 2009. Prior to this EAC meeting, we had sent a detailed letter on 13.02.2009 to the EAC, explaining the implications of the proposal, lack of EIA or public consultation process, how this changes the scope of the project and so on, the same is attached. It is clear from details of this letter that hundred of ha of land would be required in Orissa and Chhattisgarh for the building of embankments, for mining of materials for building of embankments, for leaving land on the banks of the river on both sides, for building approach road, for building cross drainage channels and so on. A very large portion of this land would be forest land and it would also imply displacement of the people and their livelihoods. This itself is sufficient ground to show that MOTA condition, Orissa HC condition, your condition and FC condition of no submergence and displacement in Orissa and Chhattisgarh is impossible to adhere to, and this should again be sufficient ground to cancel both the priliminary and final FC given by your minister.�
3. After the EAC meeting of Feb 16-17 2009, the EAC decided on this issue, "The EAC therefore directed the project proponent to initiate suitable action requesting the appropriate authorities in Orissa & Chattisgarh for conducting public hearings in the respective states of Chattisgarh & Orissa in respect of embankment proposal and report back to the committee."�I am attaching the minutes of this EAC meeting for ready reference. This decision of the EAC implies that the project needs fresh clearance for this component and since project without this component would violate the various legal norms and conditions the project also cannot go ahead without that. However, the project is yet to take these steps and if it were to take this steps it would violate your conditions of no submergence and displacement in Orissa and Chhattisgarh. It is clear that your condition of no submergence and displacement in Orissa and Chhattisgarh is impossible to adhere to and hence the FC of the project has to be cancelled.�
4. Here we would like to add that the EAC decision in Feb 16-17 2009 meeting was flawed since it is clear that this was changing the scope of the project cleared earlier. So EAC should also have asked that the earlier EC be cancelled till this decision is followed.�
5. The Forest clearance given by your ministry, incidentally, has a condition, namely no (x), which says, "The project authority shall maintain flow of water in the down-stream course of river equal to the normal flow of water existing in pre-dam condition". I am at a loss to understand if this condition is to be adhered to (and I assume it needs to be adhered to all round the year, in all years, since there are no qualifications in the condition), how can the dam be built or operated at all? It seems there has not been sufficient application of mind while according �the final FC dated 28.7.2010, which is sufficient reason for its cancellation.�
These objections to the final FC and narration of the contradictions in your letter actually gives an opportunity to revisit the project �and look for better options in achieving the irrigation and water supply in project areas. Hope you will take necessary steps in that direction after cancelling the flawed Environment clearance of Oct 25, 2005 (which was also quashed by NEAA in Dec 2007) and the forest clearances of Dec 26, 2008 and July 28, 2010.�
I would be happy to explain these issues if necessary and will look forward to your early response.�
Thanking you,
Himanshu Thakkar
From:
Himanshu Thakkar
South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers & People,�
c/o 86-D, AD block, Shalimar Bagh,
Delhi,�himanshuthakkar@iitbombay.org, ht.sandrp@gmail.com�www.sandrp.in
Ph: 27484655/ 9968242798 9968242798
To: Shri Jairam Ramesh
Union Minister of State for Env and Forests (IC), New Delhi
Respected Sir,
I have just seen your letter dated Aug 18, 2010 to�Orissa�Chief�Minister on the aboves subject, uploaded yesterday on MEF website.�
1. Your letter says that the Forest Clearance has been given to the Polavaram Project on July 28, 2010 is subject to the condition, "... no submergence and displacement of people including STs take place in Orissa and Chhattisgarh...". However, this condition is in complete contradiction with the environment clearance given by your ministry on Oct 25, 2005, which says in para 2, "Total 1,93,35 persons are likely to be affected by this project, out of that 1,75,275 persons in Andhra Pradesh and 6,316 persons from Orissa and 11,766 are from Chattisgarh."�It is clear the condition of no submergence and displacement on Orissa and Chhattisgarh, stated in your letter, in the Tribal Development Ministry's condition, and in the forest clearance letter is in complete contradiction with the environment clearance given by you. One of them have to be cancelled due to this contradiction, we would like to know, which one would be cancelled.�
2. This condition of no submergence or displacement in Orissa or Chhattisgarh is based on the proposal to construct embankments along the respective rivers in Orissa and Chhattisgarh. However, the proposal to construct these embankments was not part of the project that was given clearance by your ministry on Oct 25, 2005. This change in scope of the project came to light when the project went for CWC clearance (given on 23.01.2009 following flawed in principle forest clearance given by your ministry on Dec 26, 2008). Following letter from MEF, the Govt of AP applied for concurrence of the MEF for building embankments on 29.01.2009. The issue came up for discussion in the meeting of EAC of River Valley committee on Feb 16-17, 2009. Prior to this EAC meeting, we had sent a detailed letter on 13.02.2009 to the EAC, explaining the implications of the proposal, lack of EIA or public consultation process, how this changes the scope of the project and so on, the same is attached. It is clear from details of this letter that hundred of ha of land would be required in Orissa and Chhattisgarh for the building of embankments, for mining of materials for building of embankments, for leaving land on the banks of the river on both sides, for building approach road, for building cross drainage channels and so on. A very large portion of this land would be forest land and it would also imply displacement of the people and their livelihoods. This itself is sufficient ground to show that MOTA condition, Orissa HC condition, your condition and FC condition of no submergence and displacement in Orissa and Chhattisgarh is impossible to adhere to, and this should again be sufficient ground to cancel both the priliminary and final FC given by your minister.�
3. After the EAC meeting of Feb 16-17 2009, the EAC decided on this issue, "The EAC therefore directed the project proponent to initiate suitable action requesting the appropriate authorities in Orissa & Chattisgarh for conducting public hearings in the respective states of Chattisgarh & Orissa in respect of embankment proposal and report back to the committee."�I am attaching the minutes of this EAC meeting for ready reference. This decision of the EAC implies that the project needs fresh clearance for this component and since project without this component would violate the various legal norms and conditions the project also cannot go ahead without that. However, the project is yet to take these steps and if it were to take this steps it would violate your conditions of no submergence and displacement in Orissa and Chhattisgarh. It is clear that your condition of no submergence and displacement in Orissa and Chhattisgarh is impossible to adhere to and hence the FC of the project has to be cancelled.�
4. Here we would like to add that the EAC decision in Feb 16-17 2009 meeting was flawed since it is clear that this was changing the scope of the project cleared earlier. So EAC should also have asked that the earlier EC be cancelled till this decision is followed.�
5. The Forest clearance given by your ministry, incidentally, has a condition, namely no (x), which says, "The project authority shall maintain flow of water in the down-stream course of river equal to the normal flow of water existing in pre-dam condition". I am at a loss to understand if this condition is to be adhered to (and I assume it needs to be adhered to all round the year, in all years, since there are no qualifications in the condition), how can the dam be built or operated at all? It seems there has not been sufficient application of mind while according �the final FC dated 28.7.2010, which is sufficient reason for its cancellation.�
These objections to the final FC and narration of the contradictions in your letter actually gives an opportunity to revisit the project �and look for better options in achieving the irrigation and water supply in project areas. Hope you will take necessary steps in that direction after cancelling the flawed Environment clearance of Oct 25, 2005 (which was also quashed by NEAA in Dec 2007) and the forest clearances of Dec 26, 2008 and July 28, 2010.�
I would be happy to explain these issues if necessary and will look forward to your early response.�
Thanking you,
Himanshu Thakkar
Polavaram Politics
Centre allays Orissa's fears over Polavaram project
J. Venkatesan
Affidavit justifies go-ahead for A.P. irrigation project
A.P. will build embankments with drainage arrangements
Embankments are not permanent solutions: Orissa
New Delhi: The Centre has justified in the Supreme Court the grant of clearance for the Polavaram project in Andhra Pradesh, and said protection against submergence would be ensured.
In its response to the suit filed by Orissa seeking suspension of work on the Polavaram Indira Sagar Project, the Central Water Commission (CWC), in its affidavit filed on Wednesday, said the final award of the Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal in 1980 had settled all issues of submergence.
The Centre noted that the Environment and Forests Ministry had accepted the project proposal in January 2009, asking Andhra Pradesh to ensure that there was no submergence of any habitation or forest area in Orissa and Chhattisgarh. Andhra Pradesh would construct embankments with adequate drainage arrangements to prevent submergence from backwater effect as well as reservoir submergence and consequent displacement of people in the two neighbouring States.
Multipurpose
The Centre said the Polavaram project was conceived as a multipurpose scheme providing irrigation to 4.36 lakh hectares, water supply to towns and villages en route, and generating hydel power with an installed capacity of 960 MW. The project envisaged construction of an earth-cum-rockfill dam. It fulfilled the criteria for being called a national project, and investment clearance was given by the Planning Commission in February 2009.
Allaying Orissa's fears of submergence due to floods, the Centre said the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) estimated for the project was 1, 41,435 cumecs (about 50 lakh cusecs) was in order. The proposed spillway was capable was disposing of the PMF, and dam safety had been checked for this condition.
The Centre said Andhra Pradesh had been asked to furnish a confirmation report that there was no change in the number of project-affected Scheduled Tribe families from what was reported at the time of clearance of the Relief and Rehabilitation Plan, and that all protective steps had been taken to prevent submergence.
‘No details from CWC'
In its suit, Orissa had sought a declaration that Andhra Pradesh had no right or entitlement to undertake or proceed with the Polavaram project on the Godavari. It faulted the CWC for not furnishing any detail before approving the project. Embankments were not permanent solutions to effectively contain submergence during floods.
Also, the extent of submergence due to design flood (which had been revised to 50 lakh cusecs from the original 36 lakh cusecs by the CWC itself) and the backwater effect along the Sabari and Sileru limbs (flowing through Orissa territory into the Godavari in Andhra Pradesh) had been finalised by the CWC without estimating the flood contributions from these limbs separately by following any rational procedure or acceptable norm, Orissa said. It said the project was likely to submerge 2119.38 hectares of land in Naxalite-affected tribal areas of Malkangiri district.
J. Venkatesan
Affidavit justifies go-ahead for A.P. irrigation project
A.P. will build embankments with drainage arrangements
Embankments are not permanent solutions: Orissa
New Delhi: The Centre has justified in the Supreme Court the grant of clearance for the Polavaram project in Andhra Pradesh, and said protection against submergence would be ensured.
In its response to the suit filed by Orissa seeking suspension of work on the Polavaram Indira Sagar Project, the Central Water Commission (CWC), in its affidavit filed on Wednesday, said the final award of the Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal in 1980 had settled all issues of submergence.
The Centre noted that the Environment and Forests Ministry had accepted the project proposal in January 2009, asking Andhra Pradesh to ensure that there was no submergence of any habitation or forest area in Orissa and Chhattisgarh. Andhra Pradesh would construct embankments with adequate drainage arrangements to prevent submergence from backwater effect as well as reservoir submergence and consequent displacement of people in the two neighbouring States.
Multipurpose
The Centre said the Polavaram project was conceived as a multipurpose scheme providing irrigation to 4.36 lakh hectares, water supply to towns and villages en route, and generating hydel power with an installed capacity of 960 MW. The project envisaged construction of an earth-cum-rockfill dam. It fulfilled the criteria for being called a national project, and investment clearance was given by the Planning Commission in February 2009.
Allaying Orissa's fears of submergence due to floods, the Centre said the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) estimated for the project was 1, 41,435 cumecs (about 50 lakh cusecs) was in order. The proposed spillway was capable was disposing of the PMF, and dam safety had been checked for this condition.
The Centre said Andhra Pradesh had been asked to furnish a confirmation report that there was no change in the number of project-affected Scheduled Tribe families from what was reported at the time of clearance of the Relief and Rehabilitation Plan, and that all protective steps had been taken to prevent submergence.
‘No details from CWC'
In its suit, Orissa had sought a declaration that Andhra Pradesh had no right or entitlement to undertake or proceed with the Polavaram project on the Godavari. It faulted the CWC for not furnishing any detail before approving the project. Embankments were not permanent solutions to effectively contain submergence during floods.
Also, the extent of submergence due to design flood (which had been revised to 50 lakh cusecs from the original 36 lakh cusecs by the CWC itself) and the backwater effect along the Sabari and Sileru limbs (flowing through Orissa territory into the Godavari in Andhra Pradesh) had been finalised by the CWC without estimating the flood contributions from these limbs separately by following any rational procedure or acceptable norm, Orissa said. It said the project was likely to submerge 2119.38 hectares of land in Naxalite-affected tribal areas of Malkangiri district.
Thursday, September 2, 2010
State's ‘attitude' on river waters flayed
Staff Reporter
BHUBANESWAR: The Southern Orissa Development Council (SODC), a people's forum, here on Wednesday launched a scathing attack on the State government for its alleged indifferent approach to utlising river water.
The criticism came in wake of possibility of submergence of more than 20 villages in Orissa by Polavaram project of Andhra Pradesh. Addressing a press conference here, Dayanidhi Sahoo, president of SODC, said successive governments in Orissa had failed to realise potential of rivers passing through southern districts and as a result Andhra Pradesh was planning project after project using runoff water from Orissa rivers, it said.
SODC demanded establishment of Water Resource Development Authority for Rushikulya, Vanshadhara, Nagabali, Kolab and Indravati rivers.
“River Godavari in Andrha Pradesh is enriched by water from the rivers like Machakund, Sileru, Potteru, Saptadhara-Kolab-Saveri which originate from mountains of Koraput.
Had Orissa government been serious on protesting against Polavaram project, it should have started irrigation projects the upstream,” the SODC president said.
Now the State was facing imminent threat of getting affected by Indira Sagar project at Polavaram. “Under present circumstances, leaders irrespective of party lines should get united and oppose the project,” he said.
Similarly, although Indravati was flowing in many parts of Nabrangpur district, agriculture there remained dependant on rain, Mr. Sahoo said. He said the Orissa government was not focusing its attention on preventing water from flowing into Andhra Pradesh and Chhattisgarh.
Situation was similar on rivers such as Mahendratanaya, Jhanjavati and Vanshadhara, Mr. Sahoo sai.d
Staff Reporter
BHUBANESWAR: The Southern Orissa Development Council (SODC), a people's forum, here on Wednesday launched a scathing attack on the State government for its alleged indifferent approach to utlising river water.
The criticism came in wake of possibility of submergence of more than 20 villages in Orissa by Polavaram project of Andhra Pradesh. Addressing a press conference here, Dayanidhi Sahoo, president of SODC, said successive governments in Orissa had failed to realise potential of rivers passing through southern districts and as a result Andhra Pradesh was planning project after project using runoff water from Orissa rivers, it said.
SODC demanded establishment of Water Resource Development Authority for Rushikulya, Vanshadhara, Nagabali, Kolab and Indravati rivers.
“River Godavari in Andrha Pradesh is enriched by water from the rivers like Machakund, Sileru, Potteru, Saptadhara-Kolab-Saveri which originate from mountains of Koraput.
Had Orissa government been serious on protesting against Polavaram project, it should have started irrigation projects the upstream,” the SODC president said.
Now the State was facing imminent threat of getting affected by Indira Sagar project at Polavaram. “Under present circumstances, leaders irrespective of party lines should get united and oppose the project,” he said.
Similarly, although Indravati was flowing in many parts of Nabrangpur district, agriculture there remained dependant on rain, Mr. Sahoo said. He said the Orissa government was not focusing its attention on preventing water from flowing into Andhra Pradesh and Chhattisgarh.
Situation was similar on rivers such as Mahendratanaya, Jhanjavati and Vanshadhara, Mr. Sahoo sai.d
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
'Flooding' Investments
Traditionally unheard of, flood has become a regular feature in these rivers, thanks to our river managers and decision makers. These man-made floods are the result of diversion of Indravati water, which after power production, flows to the narrow-channel of the Hati, subsequently draining to the Tel. It is a fact that it is the water of Indravati that is causing flash floods in these rivers of late.
The arrogance and shortsightedness of the mainstream river management paradigm is clearly evident in this example, where at one point, investment is made to cause flood (by diverting water) and then further investment is justified at another point to control flood. Is it a sheer coincidence that while both the interventions suit engineers, contractors and politicians, it is the people who suffer - be it the downstream inhabitants of Indravati suffering from water exclusion or the communities in the river banks of Hati, Tel and Udanti facing flash floods.
Who are our rivers for any way?
Floods: River embankments to be strengthened
Express News Service
First Published : 31 Aug 2010 08:57:30 AM IST
Last Updated :
BHUBANESWAR: The State Government has decided to strengthen the embankment of the Tel, the Hati and the Udanti rivers to deal with the flash floods in Kalahandi and Nabarangpur districts.
The total length of the embankments is 54 km. Official sources said that ` 90 crore would be required for strengthening the embankments. A decision was taken to request National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD) for financial assistance to implement the project.
A decision to this effect was taken at a high-level meeting presided over by Revenue and Disaster Management Minister Surjya Narayan Patro at the Secretariat today.
For strengthening of embankment at vulnerable points ` 3 crore will be needed out of which the Water Resources Department will provide ` 1 crore and ` 2 crore will be made available by the Revenue Department. Apart from strengthening of the embankments, the submergible culvert near Junagarh over the Hati river on NH-201 will be replaced by a high-level bridge. The project will be undertaken by the Works Department.
Among others, Secretaries of Rural Development, Water Resources, Revenue and senior officials were present.
The arrogance and shortsightedness of the mainstream river management paradigm is clearly evident in this example, where at one point, investment is made to cause flood (by diverting water) and then further investment is justified at another point to control flood. Is it a sheer coincidence that while both the interventions suit engineers, contractors and politicians, it is the people who suffer - be it the downstream inhabitants of Indravati suffering from water exclusion or the communities in the river banks of Hati, Tel and Udanti facing flash floods.
Who are our rivers for any way?
Floods: River embankments to be strengthened
Express News Service
First Published : 31 Aug 2010 08:57:30 AM IST
Last Updated :
BHUBANESWAR: The State Government has decided to strengthen the embankment of the Tel, the Hati and the Udanti rivers to deal with the flash floods in Kalahandi and Nabarangpur districts.
The total length of the embankments is 54 km. Official sources said that ` 90 crore would be required for strengthening the embankments. A decision was taken to request National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD) for financial assistance to implement the project.
A decision to this effect was taken at a high-level meeting presided over by Revenue and Disaster Management Minister Surjya Narayan Patro at the Secretariat today.
For strengthening of embankment at vulnerable points ` 3 crore will be needed out of which the Water Resources Department will provide ` 1 crore and ` 2 crore will be made available by the Revenue Department. Apart from strengthening of the embankments, the submergible culvert near Junagarh over the Hati river on NH-201 will be replaced by a high-level bridge. The project will be undertaken by the Works Department.
Among others, Secretaries of Rural Development, Water Resources, Revenue and senior officials were present.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)