Premium
This is an archive article published on October 24, 2002

A row that flows on and on

This battle has lasted 28 years, risen or fallen in pitch with every tmc ft, involved two states, seen riots and baffled the Supreme Court&#...

.

This battle has lasted 28 years, risen or fallen in pitch with every tmc ft, involved two states, seen riots and baffled the Supreme Court’s best minds. And to think of it, the river that runs through it all, the Cauvery, is known as Dakshin Ganga and is revered as one of the seven sacred rivers of the country, celebrated in the South’s music, poetry, literature and folklore, and lined with ancient temples along its banks.

Of course, these days it is the region’s most celebrated dispute. On one side is a mercurial Jayalalithaa eager to demonstrate her ‘Tamilness’. On the other, Karnataka Chief Minister S M Krishna, eager to not offend his state’s farmers and willing to risk the Supreme Court’s ire. And in the middle are Tamil Nadu farmers, once owners of land in one of the most fertile delta regions of the country, now struggling to even raise one crop a year. Once exporters of rice to other states, now importing the same from Kerala and Andhra Pradesh.

Cauvery rises in the Western Ghats at a height of 1,340 m and flows over a length of 800 km through Karnataka and Tamil Nadu before joining the sea. Out of its drainage area of 81,155 sq km, 3.3 per cent lies in Kerala, 41.2 per cent in Karnataka and 55.5 per cent in Tamil Nadu.

Since 1974, when an agreement between the erstwhile Madras Presidency and the then Mysore kingdom expired, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu have been locked in a fierce battle over their share of the Cauvery waters. Karnataka leaders argue that the 1924 agreement—which was arrived at when Mysore was only a principality and Tamil Nadu a part of the Madras Presidency under the direct rule of the British—is loaded heavily against their state.

Story continues below this ad

But now the roles are reversed. Being the upper riparian state, Karnataka is calling the shots, and letting Tamil Nadu know it. Since the ’50s, it has been constructing a number of dams across Cauvery (allowing it to store more and more water) and has expanded its ayacut (the extent of land under irrigation) dramatically. The ayacut has risen slowly and steadily from very small quantities in the pre-Independence days to 11 lakh acres, and is said to be moving towards the 20-lakh mark. All this allows Karnataka to deny water to its neighbour. While in times of plenty, water that cannot be held naturally flows into Tamil Nadu, when the rain gods fail, sparks fly.

‘‘We’ve to save our own standing crops before we think of releasing any water for use by Tamil Nadu farmers,’’ Karnataka leaders declare repeatedly.

They also use the excuse that Tamil Nadu paddy farmers utilise and waste a lot of water. But the truth is that sugarcane, cultivated extensively in Karnataka’s Mandya region that falls in the Cauvery delta area, is an even more water-intensive crop.

However, Tamil Nadu’s hands aren’t clean either. If anything, it led from the front in bringing in more and more land under Cauvery water irrigation and still has more ayacut than Karnataka. As some Kannadigas point out, in the 1960s and 1970s, the Tamil Nadu government violated the 1924 agreement and expanded the irrigated area from around 16 lakh to 28 lakh acres. Some even go so far as to say that ‘‘the illegal expansion and appropriation of Cauvery waters were nothing but a fraud on Karnataka, and have been the root cause of the problem’’.

Story continues below this ad

The Cauvery River Water Disputes Tribunal set up by the Centre did hand down an interim award a decade ago, ruling that Tamil Nadu get at least 205 tmc ft of water every year, even laying down weekly schedules of release by Karnataka. A ‘distress-sharing’ formula was also worked out by the tribunal.

But nothing seems to work. Tamil Nadu, which once used to draw 500 tmc ft of water allowing farmers in its delta region to grow three paddy crops a year, is hardly happy with the tribunal’s award. That is, when it gets the 205 tmc ft promised. It has seen its ayacut come down drastically by over 12 lakh acres while Karnataka’s crawls upwards.

However, politicians too have to share the blame for the high passions over the issue in the two states, which prevent any resolution. If Jayalalithaa’s confrontationist style doesn’t go down well with Kannadigas, former Karnataka chief minister S. Bangarappa is believed to have encouraged the anti-Tamil violence that the state saw in the wake of an interim award of the tribunal in 1991.

In the current tangle, the Supreme Court first directed release of 1.25 tmc ft of water to Tamil Nadu, but added that the Cauvery River Authority (CRA) was free to reduce the quantum taking into account ground realities. The CRA almost halved the amount but Krishna, who seemed to play ball in the beginning and even released some water, was forced on the backfoot by the fury of his farmers. Incidentally, he himself hails from the Cauvery delta area of Mandya and the farmers’ agitation is led by his local Congress rival, Madhe Gowda.

Story continues below this ad

No one knows how the Supreme Court will ensure that its orders are implemented, and the Centre itself is reluctant to get into hot waters. But what is certain is that in the meantime, the famed Thanjavur district, which covers a major portion of the Cauvery delta in Tamil Nadu and which was once hailed as the granary of the state, is fast turning into a barren swath.

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement