This April was the hottest-ever, and indications point to the worst-ever summer. Reservoir water levels are at rock-bottom at the start of summer, with dire predictions of worse days to come for rural and urban people. Due to this drought that has hit most of India, an estimated 300 million people are migrating. One can only wonder why this on-going tragedy does not make it to the front pages of newspapers.
The callousness of many leaders towards this national crisis is revealed by their finding time to congratulate themselves, celebrate their “achievements” at public expense, and grant themselves raises in their own salaries, but not finding time to visit people in drought-hit areas. The Supreme Court had to goad state and Central governments to commence action to provide water to thirsty populations.
Water-based conflicts within and between the societies of rural and urban areas have happened earlier, but the scale of conflicts could be more intense and widespread in 2016. There are several important aspects to the water issue, but only two major aspects are addressed here; the governance involved in urban water supply, and the “solution” of interlinking rivers (ILR).
There are conflicting reports in the media. Some officials say that it is possible to tide over urban scarcity, and others say that conditions will get worse, while politicians and grandly pass orders to the officials to “ensure that drinking water supply is not interrupted”.
Most people get water for a few hours once in a few days. While some get water daily, their maids wash cars and drive-ways with a hose. When a water pipe bursts (constructed with inferior materials and/or poor workmanship due to corrupt practices), the water supply authority reacts tardily, and millions of litres of precious water is lost. Even as thous-ands line up with pots at street water taps, the better-off purchase water from tankers operated by a water-tanker mafia.
Public announcements calling for water conservation are rare. They politely call upon citizens to cooperate and use water carefully. The reason for politeness of tone and request for cooperation in a desperate situation is clear evidence of weak governance stemming from systemic corruption. Public determination to handle the worsening situation is essential, to find a viable course of action.
When sources of water fail, focus needs to shift from demand-driven supply augmentation to managing available water through realistic demand management. Some of its essential itemised facets are:
a) Improve system efficiency including planning distribution and delivery, infrastructure and renewals, electrical energy costs, personnel training; b) Revise tariff with steep rates for high consumption; c) Enforce existing by-laws regarding functioning of meters, illegal connections and unpaid bills, with penal action against defaulters; d) Address system water-loss and assure minimum supply timings; e) Periodic public programmes for awareness; f) Use GIS and MIS for realising revenue.
The ILR project estimated in 2002 to cost at least Rs 5,60,000 crore seeks to link 30 major rivers with 37 mega canals, involving acquiring an estimated 6,00,000 hectares of land, for mass-transfer of flood water from “water-surplus” areas to drought-prone “water-deficit” areas, to simultaneously relieve flood and drought. While the proposal appears attractive, it has serious inconsistencies, only the most important of which are outlined here.
River Ganga’s four-month flood flow of 50,000 cumecs (cubic metre per second) can be relieved of a negligible 2,000-cumecs by a 100m wide, 10m deep mega-canal starting at 60m above MSL (mean sea level) near Bhagalpur. This 2,000 cumecs cannot flow by gravity to reach the higher drought-prone areas of the Deccan plateau. Further, during Ganga’s 5,280 cumecs eight-month lean flow, transfer of 2,000 cumecs (38%) will be strongly resisted by people who need the water around Bhagalpur.
Thus, neither flood nor drought can get relief. The system will have questionable utility during monsoon, and be useless in the dry season, making it economically unviable. The argument of mass transfer of water from “water-surplus” to “water-deficit” areas is fundamentally flawed.
Water disputes
The promotion of water-sharing through plans of dams and canals to interlink rivers, by quoting the mandate of the Supreme Court, will not slake the thirst for water for drinking or agriculture. There are several unresolved inter-state water disputes before tribunals, indicating that water-sharing between states is problematic.
Even between districts within the same state, water disputes have been bulldozed by governments, leaving water-starved populations sullen and disillusioned. In the context of national water stress, pressing ILR can only lead to more social unrest and political instability.
Every State needs and wants water and they are loathe to part with water. During dire water shortages, local compulsions will predominate over all else. Enforcement of the writ of governments, whether due to their own political expediency or their being forced by superior courts of law, can only be by use of police force. Resorting to such strong-arm measures with regard to water will indicate that governance has failed. Indeed, in Latur, police have been posted near water sources to protect the water and ensure that people do not “steal” water!
The present water situation is at best sub-critical. Only efforts to holistically understand the problems can provide genuine relief in the present, and allow transition to a future of certainly lowered water availability. The ILR project is a systemically flawed macro “solution”. The examples of the SYL Canal and the Cauvery water dispute should be enough indication of ILR’s political pitfalls.
In a warming globe, India’s on-going water-crisis is predicted to repeat itself. We have entered the era of the consequences of thoughtless supply-side management practices. The urgent need is for socially sensitive, economically viable demand-side water management.
Failing to build effective water management structures for democratic water governance processes will risk violent social situations. Political leaders need to firmly steer a course away from impending chaos and disaster, by initiating country-wide local water conservation and management.
(The writer, a retired Major General, is with People's Union for Civil Liberties)