India: Illegal sand dredging threatens wildlife
Posted on Nov 2nd
The nesting beaches of famous Olive Ridley sea turtles on the Orissa coast have eroded due to illegal sand dredging carried out by a major private steel company near the mouth of Mahanadi river.
Wildlife Society of Orissa (WSO) Secretary Biswajit Mohanty alleged that the Essar Steel Orissa Ltd (ESOL), which is proposed to set up a six MTPA steel pellet factory at Paradip along with a 225MW captive power plant, has destroyed the nesting areas of the Olive Ridley, a schedule I species under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, by its dredging activities.
Mr Mohanty said the state government has allowed the world’s largest sea turtle nesting site to be destroyed and demanded the Ministry of Environment and Forest (MoEF) to immediately keep in abeyance the environmental clearance granted to the company in May 2008.
The WSO secretary said the company should be asked to stop work till the completion of the enquiry into violations of CRZ rules, Forest Conservation Act, 1980 and the Environment Protection Act, 1986 and the Wildlife (Protection) Act,1972.
The company, he further said, should be ordered to refill the sand which had been illegally dredged from river Mahanadi so that the turtle nesting beaches of Gahirmatha could be restored.
The MoEF, Mr Mohanty said, should also prosecute the officers who have failed to enforce the CRZ regulations and the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 provisions.
He said as per local reports, at least 12,00,000 c mt of sand has been dredged from the river. Two dredgers were engaged by the Company to excavate sand from Mahanadi to fill up the site.
As the ocean currents flow for eight months of year in a northward direction, such sediment load flushed out from the Mahanadi mouth is deposited on the shores of the marine sanctuary which lies to north of the river mouth.
These soft sediment beaches are prime turtle nesting areas.
However, for the last two years, there has been an unprecedented erosion of the coastline, north of river Mahanadi, Ekakula Pentha and Agarnasi areas all known sea turtle mass nesting sites.
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Vamshadhara_ Mahendra Tanaya Banchao Andolan
Orissa must act to counter Andhra Pradesh initiatives: Rashtriya Odia Yubak Pratisthana
Wednesday, November 03, 2010
Report by Golakha Chandra Das; Bhubaneswar: It was 2 & ½ year back when Odisha Chief Minister Mr. Naveen Patnaik laid foundation for Bansadhara integrated project on river Mahendratanayaa.
It was the project which can cater the needs of water for irrigation, drinking purpose & electricity production for tribal dominated Gajapati & Rayagada district. Even the plan to construct 2 anikatas is also approved by the state technical committee as well as it got administrative approval. But the Odisha government is doing nothing on this since then. Even if the water resource department is under direct control of Chief Minister, still the department only invited tenders for this project & then it halted.
Where as the Andhra Pradesh Government is constructing the dam on its side with full swing. Odisha Government is just sitting silently observing this. It will be harmful to the people of the above 2 districts.
So Rashtriya Odia Yubak Pratisthana on Sunday in a press meet organized at hotel Keshari, Bbsr criticized the state Government for its apathy towards the Mahendratanayaa project. It blamed that Odisha Govt. is neither doing anything to stop Andhra Govt. nor taking the case to court. The ROYP threatened to start a large scale agitation against such attitude of State Govt. if it will not do anything immediately.
Also it suggests 7point charter to state Govt. 1) to apply in Supreme Court against Andhra Govt. which violates 1962 agreement by constructing project at Meliaputa on its side 2) to invite tender for Jalanga Anikata project 3) to construct immediate 2 proposed Anikatas 4) Govt. take the task by own if no one agreed to build the project 5) the task may be handed over to Military Engineering Service 6) to open a division office at Paralakhemundi 7) to fulfill the vacant post at Paralakhemundi subdivision.
Mr. Srikanta Padhy, national chairman, ROYP & convener, Mahendratanayaa Banchao Andolan addresses the journalist friends on this occasion.
Wednesday, November 03, 2010
Report by Golakha Chandra Das; Bhubaneswar: It was 2 & ½ year back when Odisha Chief Minister Mr. Naveen Patnaik laid foundation for Bansadhara integrated project on river Mahendratanayaa.
It was the project which can cater the needs of water for irrigation, drinking purpose & electricity production for tribal dominated Gajapati & Rayagada district. Even the plan to construct 2 anikatas is also approved by the state technical committee as well as it got administrative approval. But the Odisha government is doing nothing on this since then. Even if the water resource department is under direct control of Chief Minister, still the department only invited tenders for this project & then it halted.
Where as the Andhra Pradesh Government is constructing the dam on its side with full swing. Odisha Government is just sitting silently observing this. It will be harmful to the people of the above 2 districts.
So Rashtriya Odia Yubak Pratisthana on Sunday in a press meet organized at hotel Keshari, Bbsr criticized the state Government for its apathy towards the Mahendratanayaa project. It blamed that Odisha Govt. is neither doing anything to stop Andhra Govt. nor taking the case to court. The ROYP threatened to start a large scale agitation against such attitude of State Govt. if it will not do anything immediately.
Also it suggests 7point charter to state Govt. 1) to apply in Supreme Court against Andhra Govt. which violates 1962 agreement by constructing project at Meliaputa on its side 2) to invite tender for Jalanga Anikata project 3) to construct immediate 2 proposed Anikatas 4) Govt. take the task by own if no one agreed to build the project 5) the task may be handed over to Military Engineering Service 6) to open a division office at Paralakhemundi 7) to fulfill the vacant post at Paralakhemundi subdivision.
Mr. Srikanta Padhy, national chairman, ROYP & convener, Mahendratanayaa Banchao Andolan addresses the journalist friends on this occasion.
Polavaram Politics
Orissa to watch AP govt’s action on Polavaram
PTI , The Hindu
Bhubaneswar, November 2, 2010
The Orissa government today said it will maintain a “wait and watch” policy on the controversial Polavaram project following the Centre seeking an explanation from Andhra Pradesh for undertaking work without holding public hearing in areas to be affected in Orissa and Chhattisgarh.
Orissa government, opposing the multi-purpose project since its conception, had earlier refused to hold a discussion with Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister K S Rosaiah.
“A senior Andhra Pradesh official called me yesterday and proposed to hold a discussion on Polavaram issue,” Orissa’s Water Resources Development Secretary Suresh Chandra Mohapatra told reporters adding that the State government is yet to take a decision on the fresh proposal.
As the State government had already moved the Supreme Court opposing the Polavaram project, there was no point in holding talks with Andhra Pradesh, another official said adding Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik, in-charge of water resources development department, will decide on Andhra’s request.
Since the matter is sub-judice, the State government should wait for the Apex Court’s judgement, he said.
When the ruling BJD has launched a State-wide stir against Polavaram project, the State government demanded that law of the land be followed in case of Polavaram.
Orissa government is mainly opposed to design of the proposed dam and alleged violation of forest right act (FRA).
Under the present design, about 50 lakh cusec water would flow through the barrage over river Godavari, submerging a large tract of land in Orissa’s Malkangiri district, Mr. Mohapatra said.
To a query on Andhra government’s proposal of building a 30-km-long embankment along rivers Saberi and Saleru in Malkangiri, Mr. Mohapatra said, “Creation of embankment was not in the original plan. These embankments within Orissa territory could affect discharge of water to River Godavari. As a result, a large area could be inundated.”
It was not in accordance with the law to undertake construction work without making an environment assessment impact of the project, he said, adding there were clear guidelines to hold public hearing in affected areas but Andhra Pradesh government had not done so in Malkangiri district.
As the matter was too complicated, Orissa would like to maintain a wait and watch policy before reacting to the MoEF’s letter to Andhra Pradesh government, he said.
In its letter, the ministry has asked Andhra Pradesh government to give details of the construction status of the dam and also explain why a formal show-cause should not be issued (for not following norms).
PTI , The Hindu
Bhubaneswar, November 2, 2010
The Orissa government today said it will maintain a “wait and watch” policy on the controversial Polavaram project following the Centre seeking an explanation from Andhra Pradesh for undertaking work without holding public hearing in areas to be affected in Orissa and Chhattisgarh.
Orissa government, opposing the multi-purpose project since its conception, had earlier refused to hold a discussion with Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister K S Rosaiah.
“A senior Andhra Pradesh official called me yesterday and proposed to hold a discussion on Polavaram issue,” Orissa’s Water Resources Development Secretary Suresh Chandra Mohapatra told reporters adding that the State government is yet to take a decision on the fresh proposal.
As the State government had already moved the Supreme Court opposing the Polavaram project, there was no point in holding talks with Andhra Pradesh, another official said adding Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik, in-charge of water resources development department, will decide on Andhra’s request.
Since the matter is sub-judice, the State government should wait for the Apex Court’s judgement, he said.
When the ruling BJD has launched a State-wide stir against Polavaram project, the State government demanded that law of the land be followed in case of Polavaram.
Orissa government is mainly opposed to design of the proposed dam and alleged violation of forest right act (FRA).
Under the present design, about 50 lakh cusec water would flow through the barrage over river Godavari, submerging a large tract of land in Orissa’s Malkangiri district, Mr. Mohapatra said.
To a query on Andhra government’s proposal of building a 30-km-long embankment along rivers Saberi and Saleru in Malkangiri, Mr. Mohapatra said, “Creation of embankment was not in the original plan. These embankments within Orissa territory could affect discharge of water to River Godavari. As a result, a large area could be inundated.”
It was not in accordance with the law to undertake construction work without making an environment assessment impact of the project, he said, adding there were clear guidelines to hold public hearing in affected areas but Andhra Pradesh government had not done so in Malkangiri district.
As the matter was too complicated, Orissa would like to maintain a wait and watch policy before reacting to the MoEF’s letter to Andhra Pradesh government, he said.
In its letter, the ministry has asked Andhra Pradesh government to give details of the construction status of the dam and also explain why a formal show-cause should not be issued (for not following norms).
Polavaram Politics
Holes in Polavaram’s great wall
Samar Halarnkar, Hindustan Times
Email Author
November 02, 2010
A 30-km-long, 45-foot-high embankment to stop a river that generates one of the world’s fiercest floods from inundating parts of Orissa and Chhattisgarh is being belatedly questioned by the Centre as it puts on notice one of India’s largest dam projects. The wall escaped attention on Monday when India’s environment boss Jairam Ramesh — smarting from accusations of political bias for cancelling infrastructure in non-Congress states — issued notice to the Polavaram Indira Sagar project in Andhra Pradesh, a state ruled by Ramesh’s own party, the Congress.
The wall, technically an embankment, was one of the ambitious promises made in 2006 by an anxious Andhra Pradesh (AP) government after the Orissa High Court cleared the project on the condition that no people or villages would be displaced in Orissa by the Polavaram dam’s reservoir on the Godavari river and twotributaries.
The project received its final clearance — from the forests division — in September this year.
That clearance is becoming increasingly hard to justify because no studies were done, as environmental laws require, on the land, people and forests the giant embankment would displace. No plans were made for drains and pumps in a cyclone-prone land.
In India there is no reservoir that is restrained by embankments.
In referring to the wall, Monday’s bland notice asked the AP government "why a show-cause notice should not be issued … as work is continuing without getting the environmental clearance amended for additional components like construction of embankments, drainage sluices and pumping arrangements".
"How can anyone now accuse me of bias?" Ramesh, a Congress Member of Parliament from AP, said on Tuesday.
The notice was the first evidence of impartiality from India’s ruling United Progressive Alliance (UPA). Polavaram’s irregular clearances led both Orissa and Chhattisgrah to request Supreme Court intervention in 2007.
Yet, both states say they are not impressed with Ramesh’s recent actions.
"At last the ministry has issued a notice, but it is an eyewash," said Surya Narayan Patro, Orissa revenue minister. "The AP government did all kinds of illegal things to push the project but got clearance after clearance."
"We are not opposed to anyone getting water, but what was the hurry in clearing it (Polavaram) and then issuing notices?" N Baijendra Kumar, principal secretary to the Chhattisgarh chief minister, told Hindustan Times. "We share the concerns of the Orissa government."
Allegations of bias from Orissa and Chhattisgarh — both states that could have objected at least 12 times during the Polavaram clearance but soft-pedalled instead — grew after Ramesh’s environment ministry questioned or cancelled clearances this year to high-profile projects as prestigious to them as Polavaram is to Andhra Pradesh.
First proposed in the 1940s, the 150-foot-high Polavaram dam will submerge a greater area than any other in India today. It is vital, observers say, that Ramesh’s ministry now follows its own laws and rescinds clearances that violated its own procedures.
Here are only some examples relating to Polavaram’s great wall:
When the application to clear Polavaram went to the environment ministry on October 19, 2005, there had been no public hearings as required. The first and only public hearings in four districts of AP were held on October 28, three days after the clearance was given.
The minutes of the Environmental Impact Assessment, a requirement, did not even mention that areas in Orissa and Chhattisgarh would be swamped by the tail end of the reservoir, 150 km from the main dam. Only when the two states protested did AP hastily propose a wall, or embankment, in 2006.
In April 2007, the Central Water Commission (CWC) said it was possible to avoid submergence in Orissa and Chhattisgarh by building embankments. Neither the CWC nor any other agency ever explained how, as required.
In February 2009, the ministry’s Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) first cleared the embankments and then called for an impact assessment and public hearings in Orissa and Chhattisgarh. None of this was done.
"That decision of the EAC was flawed," said Himanshu Thakkar of the South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People, an advocacy group. "How can Ramesh claim (as he did in a letter to Orissa chief minister Naveen Patnaik in August this year) that not a hectare of forest land will be submerged, when he does not even know how much forest and non-forest land will be required (for the embankment)?"
Monday’s notice reminds AP that despite a reminder, there have been no public hearings in neighbouring states and that construction is continuing (the main dam hasn’t started yet but canal-building is in full swing).
Thakkar argues, as do Orissa and Chhattisgarh, that the condition of "no submergence", as outlined in the September 2010 forest clearance and Ramesh’s assurance, is "impossible to adhere to", that these are grounds enough for cancelling forest clearances.
"The conditions under which Polavaram was cleared were absurb," said Harish Behara, the engineer-in-chief of Orissa’s water resources department, arguing that the great Polavaram embankment could be built on the plains, not on hilly land, as AP now proposes.
With so much wrong, who then cleared Polavaram? It was Ramesh’s cabinet colleague, telecom minister A. Raja, whose methods of issuing telecom licences are, similarly, under the Supreme Court’s scrutiny.
(With Priya Ranjan Sahu in Bhubaneswar)
Samar Halarnkar, Hindustan Times
Email Author
November 02, 2010
A 30-km-long, 45-foot-high embankment to stop a river that generates one of the world’s fiercest floods from inundating parts of Orissa and Chhattisgarh is being belatedly questioned by the Centre as it puts on notice one of India’s largest dam projects. The wall escaped attention on Monday when India’s environment boss Jairam Ramesh — smarting from accusations of political bias for cancelling infrastructure in non-Congress states — issued notice to the Polavaram Indira Sagar project in Andhra Pradesh, a state ruled by Ramesh’s own party, the Congress.
The wall, technically an embankment, was one of the ambitious promises made in 2006 by an anxious Andhra Pradesh (AP) government after the Orissa High Court cleared the project on the condition that no people or villages would be displaced in Orissa by the Polavaram dam’s reservoir on the Godavari river and twotributaries.
The project received its final clearance — from the forests division — in September this year.
That clearance is becoming increasingly hard to justify because no studies were done, as environmental laws require, on the land, people and forests the giant embankment would displace. No plans were made for drains and pumps in a cyclone-prone land.
In India there is no reservoir that is restrained by embankments.
In referring to the wall, Monday’s bland notice asked the AP government "why a show-cause notice should not be issued … as work is continuing without getting the environmental clearance amended for additional components like construction of embankments, drainage sluices and pumping arrangements".
"How can anyone now accuse me of bias?" Ramesh, a Congress Member of Parliament from AP, said on Tuesday.
The notice was the first evidence of impartiality from India’s ruling United Progressive Alliance (UPA). Polavaram’s irregular clearances led both Orissa and Chhattisgrah to request Supreme Court intervention in 2007.
Yet, both states say they are not impressed with Ramesh’s recent actions.
"At last the ministry has issued a notice, but it is an eyewash," said Surya Narayan Patro, Orissa revenue minister. "The AP government did all kinds of illegal things to push the project but got clearance after clearance."
"We are not opposed to anyone getting water, but what was the hurry in clearing it (Polavaram) and then issuing notices?" N Baijendra Kumar, principal secretary to the Chhattisgarh chief minister, told Hindustan Times. "We share the concerns of the Orissa government."
Allegations of bias from Orissa and Chhattisgarh — both states that could have objected at least 12 times during the Polavaram clearance but soft-pedalled instead — grew after Ramesh’s environment ministry questioned or cancelled clearances this year to high-profile projects as prestigious to them as Polavaram is to Andhra Pradesh.
First proposed in the 1940s, the 150-foot-high Polavaram dam will submerge a greater area than any other in India today. It is vital, observers say, that Ramesh’s ministry now follows its own laws and rescinds clearances that violated its own procedures.
Here are only some examples relating to Polavaram’s great wall:
When the application to clear Polavaram went to the environment ministry on October 19, 2005, there had been no public hearings as required. The first and only public hearings in four districts of AP were held on October 28, three days after the clearance was given.
The minutes of the Environmental Impact Assessment, a requirement, did not even mention that areas in Orissa and Chhattisgarh would be swamped by the tail end of the reservoir, 150 km from the main dam. Only when the two states protested did AP hastily propose a wall, or embankment, in 2006.
In April 2007, the Central Water Commission (CWC) said it was possible to avoid submergence in Orissa and Chhattisgarh by building embankments. Neither the CWC nor any other agency ever explained how, as required.
In February 2009, the ministry’s Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) first cleared the embankments and then called for an impact assessment and public hearings in Orissa and Chhattisgarh. None of this was done.
"That decision of the EAC was flawed," said Himanshu Thakkar of the South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People, an advocacy group. "How can Ramesh claim (as he did in a letter to Orissa chief minister Naveen Patnaik in August this year) that not a hectare of forest land will be submerged, when he does not even know how much forest and non-forest land will be required (for the embankment)?"
Monday’s notice reminds AP that despite a reminder, there have been no public hearings in neighbouring states and that construction is continuing (the main dam hasn’t started yet but canal-building is in full swing).
Thakkar argues, as do Orissa and Chhattisgarh, that the condition of "no submergence", as outlined in the September 2010 forest clearance and Ramesh’s assurance, is "impossible to adhere to", that these are grounds enough for cancelling forest clearances.
"The conditions under which Polavaram was cleared were absurb," said Harish Behara, the engineer-in-chief of Orissa’s water resources department, arguing that the great Polavaram embankment could be built on the plains, not on hilly land, as AP now proposes.
With so much wrong, who then cleared Polavaram? It was Ramesh’s cabinet colleague, telecom minister A. Raja, whose methods of issuing telecom licences are, similarly, under the Supreme Court’s scrutiny.
(With Priya Ranjan Sahu in Bhubaneswar)
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Inter-state Water Dispute
Respond on Orissa dam, Yerran to CM
November 1st, 2010
DC Correspondent
Srikakulam, Oct. 31: Observing that state government headed by the Chief Minister, Mr K. Rosaiah, must respond to the Bahudi river water dispute, Mr K. Yerrannaidu observed here on Sunday that steps being taken up by the Orissa government to extend the dam would have disastrous results in adjoining Srikakulam.
Addressing members of the media, he said, “On the one hand, the Orissa government and agencies in Orissa have no qualms to objecting to the Polavaram project, However, on the other, they have the guts to construct a 107 foot dam on the river without considering its impact on people of Andhra, and those in Srikakulam in particular.”
He said that this was being done with the perverse intention of denying Andhra farmers their right to the share of water from the river. Mr Naidu said that this would create a crisis in the mandals of Itchapuram, Kaviti and Kanchili.
He said that it was time for state government to respond and urged Mr Rosaiah as well as the minister for major irrigation, Mr Ponnala Lakshmaiah, to respond.
He also urged ministers from the district to pay special attention to this problem and play a role in taking it to the Centre.
November 1st, 2010
DC Correspondent
Srikakulam, Oct. 31: Observing that state government headed by the Chief Minister, Mr K. Rosaiah, must respond to the Bahudi river water dispute, Mr K. Yerrannaidu observed here on Sunday that steps being taken up by the Orissa government to extend the dam would have disastrous results in adjoining Srikakulam.
Addressing members of the media, he said, “On the one hand, the Orissa government and agencies in Orissa have no qualms to objecting to the Polavaram project, However, on the other, they have the guts to construct a 107 foot dam on the river without considering its impact on people of Andhra, and those in Srikakulam in particular.”
He said that this was being done with the perverse intention of denying Andhra farmers their right to the share of water from the river. Mr Naidu said that this would create a crisis in the mandals of Itchapuram, Kaviti and Kanchili.
He said that it was time for state government to respond and urged Mr Rosaiah as well as the minister for major irrigation, Mr Ponnala Lakshmaiah, to respond.
He also urged ministers from the district to pay special attention to this problem and play a role in taking it to the Centre.
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
IWRM Road Map, Orissa :Water Pricing
Orissa going for fixing price for water use
Satyasundar Barik
Under the plan, users could be charged according to the measured volume of water
Water Regulatory Authority is expected to fix the charges
Civil society groups and farmers' organisations are up in arms against the proposal
BHUBANESWAR: Is Orissa proceeding to fix a price for water? This appears to be true going by proposals elaborated in the report of Orissa Integrated Irrigated Agriculture and Water Management Investment Programme (OIIAWMIP ).
One could get fair amount of idea about creation of market for water, identification of civic bodies as water retailers and classification of high value users.
As per the plan, users of water could be charged according to the measured volume of water. It proposes installation of metres for water measurement. It says all water allocations should be quoted in mega litres (ML) for agriculture and industry and kilolitres (KL) for domestic.
“With a common unit of measurement in place, the price will become more transparent,” says the document of Department of Water Resource and Asian Development Bank.
“Water users in Orissa do not yet have access to formal entitlements, much less access to a market or exchange where they can purchase additional rights. Once the safe yield available within a particular river basin or system becomes fully allocated, it will be desirable to establish an exchange where access rights can be traded on a temporary or permanent basis,” the document posted by DoWR on its webpage says.
It goes on to say ideally the exchange should function as a ‘market place' where the access rights can be bought and sold.
“While no one would be forced to sell their access rights, market forces would act through time to bring about efficient outcomes.
The exchange could be operated by DoWR or some reputable third party,” the document says. The OIIAWMIP report talks about earning cash if sellers would be giving up their water access right.
Water Regulatory Authority, which is expected to be in place by March 2012, could be fixing charges for surface and sub surface water used for domestic, agriculture, industrial and other purposes. “This is a dangerous idea. Gradually, access to water will become costlier. Those who have purchasing capacity can access water. When the report was prepared, stakeholders such as politicians, civil society groups, farmers, intellectuals and general water users could have been taken into confidence,” said Achyut Das, member of Odisha Water Forum.
“The proposal has been implemented to a large extent in Maharashtra.
The experience has been bad. The department has mooted pricing of water giving a reason that it would lead to more responsible use. We apprehend people who had traditional rights over water would be made to pay for the use,” said Pranab Ranjan Choudhury, another member of Odisha Water Forum.
Civil society groups and farmers' organisations are up in arms against the proposal. They demanded that the State government must elicit views of all sections of population before deciding on a critical sector like water
IWRM Road Map, Orissa :Water Pricing
Orissa becoming a dry State?
Siba Mohanty First Published : 25 Oct 2010 07:39:41 AM ISTLast Updated : 25 Oct 2010 12:03:40 PM IST
BHUBANESWAR: In the midst of a raging controversy over water diversion for industry, Orissa’s woes are going to worsen. Its rivers will provide for less as the water stress grows in future. If that is not all, the rising pollution will add to its misery, the latest report on water management by Department of Water Resources and Asian Development Bank (ADB) says.
At least three rivers would experience water stress by 2050 even as the per capita availability is going to dwindle.
Calculating the water availability from 11 major river basins, it says that per capita availability will decline by 34 per cent by 2050.
The average surface and ground water potential of the State, currently at 141 billion cubic metre (BCM), would fall by at least 10 per cent to 129 BCM.
“Per capita water availability varies throughout the State according to the relationship between availability and population. As the State’s population is still expanding, per capita supply will decline sharply,” the report said.
With rising population and consequent increase in demand for food and water with growth in mining and industrial activities, the demand for water from various sectors could increase to 55 BCM by 2050, the report indicated.
The water availability decline too points at water stress condition of the rivers. Three rivers __ Baitarani, Rushikulya and Budhabalanga __ will become water stressed. The per capita water availability from Baitarani is going to decline from 1,976 cubic metre to 1,348 cubic metre whereas the drop for Rushikulya will be from 1,341 cubic metre to 1,021 cubic metre. In case of Budhabalanga, it is expected to decline from 1,616 cubic metre to 1412 cubic metre.
Although Orissa possesses 11 per cent of the country’s water resources as against a population of just 4 per cent, it’s challenge remains in the strong seasonality of supply.
Increased demand due to a growing population, economic development as well as rising consumption in upstream states will lead to a decreased inflow and falling availability. Besides, climate change will also be a big factor. “The overall scenario points to increased flood risk and hydrological uncertainty,” it explained.
Availability apart, water quality will pose a major a challenge as the industrialisation makes things worse. The report suggested a bleak situation for at least six major rivers whose water quality rarely meets drinking water standards, thanks to inadequate treatment of the municipal and industrial effluents.
The report paints a grim picture saying the entire stretch of Mahanadi is in a state of slight to moderate pollution. Of the dozen monitoring stations of Mahanadi, all except five show water quality is below acceptable levels.
Siba Mohanty First Published : 25 Oct 2010 07:39:41 AM ISTLast Updated : 25 Oct 2010 12:03:40 PM IST
BHUBANESWAR: In the midst of a raging controversy over water diversion for industry, Orissa’s woes are going to worsen. Its rivers will provide for less as the water stress grows in future. If that is not all, the rising pollution will add to its misery, the latest report on water management by Department of Water Resources and Asian Development Bank (ADB) says.
At least three rivers would experience water stress by 2050 even as the per capita availability is going to dwindle.
Calculating the water availability from 11 major river basins, it says that per capita availability will decline by 34 per cent by 2050.
The average surface and ground water potential of the State, currently at 141 billion cubic metre (BCM), would fall by at least 10 per cent to 129 BCM.
“Per capita water availability varies throughout the State according to the relationship between availability and population. As the State’s population is still expanding, per capita supply will decline sharply,” the report said.
With rising population and consequent increase in demand for food and water with growth in mining and industrial activities, the demand for water from various sectors could increase to 55 BCM by 2050, the report indicated.
The water availability decline too points at water stress condition of the rivers. Three rivers __ Baitarani, Rushikulya and Budhabalanga __ will become water stressed. The per capita water availability from Baitarani is going to decline from 1,976 cubic metre to 1,348 cubic metre whereas the drop for Rushikulya will be from 1,341 cubic metre to 1,021 cubic metre. In case of Budhabalanga, it is expected to decline from 1,616 cubic metre to 1412 cubic metre.
Although Orissa possesses 11 per cent of the country’s water resources as against a population of just 4 per cent, it’s challenge remains in the strong seasonality of supply.
Increased demand due to a growing population, economic development as well as rising consumption in upstream states will lead to a decreased inflow and falling availability. Besides, climate change will also be a big factor. “The overall scenario points to increased flood risk and hydrological uncertainty,” it explained.
Availability apart, water quality will pose a major a challenge as the industrialisation makes things worse. The report suggested a bleak situation for at least six major rivers whose water quality rarely meets drinking water standards, thanks to inadequate treatment of the municipal and industrial effluents.
The report paints a grim picture saying the entire stretch of Mahanadi is in a state of slight to moderate pollution. Of the dozen monitoring stations of Mahanadi, all except five show water quality is below acceptable levels.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)