It has been established that inefficient and irrational management of Cauvery's water is the root cause of this protracted struggle. To compound matters, governments have failed to explore any other source of water. "Modern concepts of water management in a river basin are based on the conjunctive use of surface water, groundwater and rainfall to support crop water requirement," says Mahapatra. Ironically, the track record of the basin states points towards a completely different approach.
Karnataka, for instance, has invested heavily in large dams on the Cauvery to meet its growing water needs. Between 1938 and 1983, it set up as many as 15 gigantic irrigation projects on the river (see graph: Irrigation development in Cauvery basin ). To make things worse, there has been no let-up in construction of new structures. The total land under irrigation in the state has thus increased exponentially in the last 50 years.
Is there a viable alternative? "Yes," says Madan Gopal, a senior government official in Karnataka. "At least 11,000 traditional water harvesting structures such as tanks and ponds exist in the state's river basin. Most of these have silted up and dried, as the local farming communities which maintained and used them earlier have stopped doing so." If the government makes a serious attempt, these structures can be revived and used to trap rainwater that now flows into the sea. They could serve as additional storage facilities, easing the pressure when the monsoons play truant.
Interestingly, more than 60 per cent of traditional structures in Karnataka are sited in the southern plateau region. This includes the districts of Mandya, Hassan and Mysore -- the state's largest producers of water-intensive cash crops such as sugarcane and rice. "The scope for restoring traditional structures and building such new small-scale storage facilities should be carefully considered while determining the river water sharing pattern," says K V Raju, senior academician with Bangalore-based Institute for Social and Economic Change.
The Cauvery Monitoring Committee's report has lent weight to the experts' stand. The panel, headed by A K Goswami, secretary, Union ministry of water resources, recently submitted the document to the sc and Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee. It described the water storage position of Karnataka as "very poor". The state is "depending on only one source -- canal water supply", said the report and laid emphasis on the urgent need to "explore other possibilities".
The verdict is, therefore, unanimous. Both the state governments must refocus their strategy, and look beyond water-guzzling cash crops and large dams if the Cauvery is to be salvaged.
So far as alternatives are concerned, several feasible solutions have been suggested. "First of all, only one crop of rice should be grown under irrigation in a year in Karnataka as well as tn. Further, it should ensure maximum support of rainfall," proposes Mahapatra. In other words, while the period of rice cultivation should be limited to June-July and October-November in Karnataka, tn should stick to an August-September and December-January schedule. This should be combined with a second short duration of dryland crops such as soyabean and maize. And these must not depend on surface irrigation.
Such a course correction will, however, have a bearing on the water level in the river basin only when the governments agree to tap other sources of water. "Greater exploitation of groundwater and optimal conservation of rainwater are important to nurse the ailing Cauvery back to health," says Guhan.
The big imponderable, of course, is whether the ruling parties will be able to convince the farming community, which wields considerable clout in tn and Karnataka. "Stakeholders have to be involved in the decision-making process," says Reddy and adds, "They should be presented with hard evidence analysed by scientists about the dismal water situation and alarming soil health."
S Janakarajan, associate professor, mids, goes a step further. He feels that a direct dialogue between stakeholders is the only way out. "They may fight initially but once they are given a lucid picture, they will jointly try to work towards a solution ," he says optimistically.
"A panel representing all user groups in the two states -- not just farmers but also urban consumers and the industry -- should be formed. This body should be empowered to formulate the future strategy to manage and share water," feels Raju adding: "State governments must agree to accept the verdict reached by the group."
This is possible if the mandarins in Bangalore and Chennai so desire. We may then witness the long-awaited final act of the Cauvery drama. Indeed, the ending may yet be a happy one.
With inputs from J Saravanan in Chennai
SEASON-WISE RICE PRODUCTIVITY PER UNIT OF WATER IN CAUVERY DELTA | ||||||
Crop season (number of days) | Average yield in kilogram (kg) per hectare | Estimated net irrigation requirement in millimetres (mm) | Productivity of rice in kg per mm of water use | Irrigation water use in mm per day | ||
80-81 to 82-83 | 87-88 to 89-90 | 80-81 to 82-83 | 87-88 to 89-90 | |||
Kuruvai (105) | 2959 | 3732 | 792 | 1.51 | 1.91 | 7.54 |
Samba (163) | 1800 | 3115 | 634 | 1.15 | 1.99 | 3.89 |
Thaladi (143) | 1746 | 3082 | 577 | 1.23 | 2.16 | 4.03 |
Note: Figures reveal that the
water use efficiency of samba is much higher than that of kuruvai. Source: I C Mahapatra 1993, statement submitted to Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal, September 1993, p 23. |