Any body can write a simple critic. May I know who is Himanshu Thakkar ? Just to clarify how he qualifies for giving solution. Please don't forget, the tribunal ran for 17 years. Do you expect people die for another 17 years ?
RE:Any body can comment
by Lucifer Sam on Feb 07, 2007 12:04 PM Permalink
shows how well you read the article. If you'd read till the end instead of starting to shake and rattle and roll frothing in the mouth with anger, you'd have read this line : The author is the founder of the NGO -- South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers & People
RE:Any body can comment
by Sant kumar on Feb 07, 2007 03:54 AM Permalink
It is really well thought article ...Do u have any knowledge on this? ...Simply don't bark ....
RE:Any body can comment
by Indian Fool on Feb 07, 2007 07:27 AM Permalink
You are even less qualifies than tribunal and Himanshu Thakkar. Go and do your work crazy fan-boy.
RE:Value of tamilians life in Karnataka -1991 cauvery Riot
by Ram on Feb 07, 2007 03:06 AM Permalink
Dude, i appreciate your concern.. but the way you are heading is wrong.. you are a fanatic person without any thinking.. you say we should share.. definitely KA has shared more than it can .. Talk to any tamil in bangalore. he never wants to go back to your Tamil nadu... did you ever try to know why. you say if something happens in bosnia tamils are killed in bangalore.. are you out of your mind...please dont cook up stories... Also you said the tamilnadu shares hydroelectric power with karnatka.. for you information.. tamilnadu sells the power to karnataka not shares.. there is lot of difference in it.. Dont worry tamils in bangalore are all safe and live happily without any dumheads like you....
RE:RE:Value of tamilians life in Karnataka -1991 cauvery Riot
by K Ramanathan on Feb 07, 2007 03:27 AM Permalink
When the SC announced the ruling, why do Karnataka people have to kill Tamils living in their state. There are lakhs of Kannadigas living in TN and none of them are going back. The good news for TN is even though its a victim of water politics by Karnataka and even when Tamils were massacred in Bangalore, very little reaction happened in TN and I am proud to say Tamils protecte dthe Kannadigas living in TN setting a fine examle of humanity, as opposed to rowdyism by Karnataka.4Q35Z
RE:RE:RE:Value of tamilians life in Karnataka -1991 cauvery Riot
by illusion of me on Feb 07, 2007 03:39 AM Permalink
what are you guys talking about. if tam,ilians are living amongst us in kar, they vud no longer be tamilians. they are one among us. please do not propogate such false accusations against kar. 15-20% of the population in bengalur was tamils. so in 1992-1994, why were only 11 of them killed, which is a meager .0004%. there must be something which vud have gone wrong. an earlier grudge manifesting itself into this. killing or harming another human being is not in our blood, unlike veerappan or Sivarasan or Shubha or any of those tamil liberation tigers.
RE:RE:RE:RE:Value of tamilians life in Karnataka -1991 cauvery Riot
by on Feb 07, 2007 03:56 AM Permalink
Wah wah... Nice argument there... Only 11 people???? Only 0.0004%???? Sorry for using harsh language but imagine if your mother is one of them. Just only 1 person... less than 0.00000001% of world population... And regarding Veerapan and sivarasan... I agree they are terrorists... I am not going to defend them like you did to the murderers of 1991 riot. Please refrain from generalizing statements like " not in our blood" etc... this is a civilized society you know.
RE:RE:Value of tamilians life in Karnataka -1991 cauvery Riot
by Palanisamy on Feb 07, 2007 03:27 AM Permalink
Ram-ji! The software industries and the weather ARE the MAIN reasons tamils don't want to go back! (Madras is too HOT for very many people!!) NOT because of your hospitality per se!!! I think Hazel has stretched it a bit far but I think Hazel wants to point out that for every small trouble with TN (or for that matter with anybody) there are some people who target tamilians! That's all!! But the verdict is a pretty fair one EXCEPT that it should include Karnataka's concern when there is distress (bad monsoon season). It's not possible to reach that 419TMC figure every year! If there is no rain, obviously Karnataka can not be expected to fulfill that! That should be the ONLY concern for Karnataka! The reason these politicians shout and making a scene it to play with the sentiments of people and get their votes!! That's all! It's easy during an year like the last year. It's going to difficult in a draght year. I think that should be addressed!! Then it would be a fair enough verdict. How's that? Fair, don't you think?
RE:RE:RE:Value of tamilians life in Karnataka -1991 cauvery Riot
by Ram on Feb 07, 2007 05:08 AM Permalink
palani-ji, good that you are understanding the real problem..... so when there is distress it has to be solved amicabaly with the farmers involved not allowing the judiciary or the rogue politicians... Take it easy dude you are admitting now that the judgement is not fair... Thanks Ram
RE:RE:RE:RE:Value of tamilians life in Karnataka -1991 cauvery Riot
by Mahesh S on Feb 07, 2007 11:49 AM Permalink
for ur kind info SC has not done any ruling.. it shows the level of ur understandings and knowledege... go and brush up first... if u are so proud of TN then plz ask ur people to go back to ur state and stop blaming Kar.
RE:RE:Value of tamilians life in Karnataka -1991 cauvery Riot
by Sant kumar on Feb 07, 2007 03:40 AM Permalink
Please write as responsible citizen ...Simply don't cut the crap ....
RE:RE:RE:Value of tamilians life in Karnataka -1991 cauvery Riot
by NATARAJAN AKUMAR on Feb 07, 2007 03:53 AM Permalink
Whatever happens.... Let the Tamilians act with high dignity and humanity which is our heritage. thats what our ancestors taught us. At any point of time we should stand by our rich culture and handle things in the way it shud be handled. In short we shud be Tamilians for ever.
RE:RE:RE:RE:Value of tamilians life in Karnataka -1991 cauvery Riot
by Narendra Kulkarni on Feb 07, 2007 09:46 AM Permalink
You want to be Tamilian and not a Indian, What a Irony.
RE:RE:RE:RE:Value of tamilians life in Karnataka -1991 cauvery Riot
by Prasanna Veerabhadraiah on Feb 07, 2007 04:17 PM Permalink
This is precisely, why India inspite of achieving so much success in IT & other areas cannot become a developed country because every tamilian thinks of himself, inspite of what others offer them.
I agree with the author that for more equitable distribution we need to look at micro level. We need to erase the state lines from the map. We have to break the Cauvery river basin into small units and analyze the water availability in each unit ( River water and ground water) and calculate the water requirement for that unit. This way we can deal with water practically - free from emotions.
The author first declares that "Karnataka has been able to release more than the stipulated amount in 11 of the last 15 years', then slyly adds 'Some problems could arise as the award now stipulates monthly release figures.' This shows clearly that the author knows well but hides the fact that Karnataka didn't share water when water was needed for irrigation but was releasing water mostly during monsoon season when their reservoirs were full - basically using TN as a drainage canal. In any dispute like this, each side will have some justifications, arguments and counter-arguments. The fact that this author presents all the justifications of one side and conviniently forgets the other side shows that he is biased and has a motive.
Earlier today Rediff put up an in-house erroneous and biased article written by a novice and now publishes another biased article written by an unknown NGO guest. When will Rediff be fair and balanced?
RE:Biased Article - Quoting impractical or unrelated ideas to prove a point
by Suresh Kumar on Feb 07, 2007 05:05 AM Permalink
I agree. Rediff should give out the more details about the author so that his views (which, evidently, are quite one-sided) are situated well. Because he's talking about an issue in which he's likely to favour or oppose an alread y conflicting states it's essentail to know: Where does he work from? What is his background? What are his key achievements?
RE:RE:Biased Article - Quoting impractical or unrelated ideas to prove a point
by Mahesh S on Feb 07, 2007 11:55 AM Permalink
the people who gave the verdict must first give more details of the reasons for such a unrealistic verdict which is clearly TN sided.
RE:RE:Biased Article - Quoting impractical or unrelated ideas to prove a point
by on Feb 07, 2007 02:48 AM Permalink
Hahaha.... classic example of quoting out of context... By saying "the author knows well", he means he knows well of the fact that karnataka manipulated the system... BTW: where did you learn boneheaded? Its obvious that learning that word and using it in a sentence saturated all your gray cells... Go sleep
The author makes correct assessment in the sense Karnataka is denied justice by the Tribunal. TN has been awarded greater amount of water even though they don't deserve it. As it has been noted, over the last 15-20 years, K'taka has been giving more water to TN than any tribunal or court orders mandated. But no one challenges the dubious TN claims that it is getting less. Secondly, TN also increased the cultivation land by several lakh hectares in the past 5 years even though there is shortage of water. This is a case of crying baby receiving more attention. The tribunal verdict should be challenged and further redressal provided to Karnataka.
RE:Karnataka denied justice.
by on Feb 07, 2007 02:18 AM Permalink
Do you have any creditable source for the this claim that T.N increased its Basin area in last 5 years? If I remember correctly, it's Karnataka which frantically increased its Basin area during the period from 1974 to till now even though its illegal.
RE:Karnataka denied justice.
by Palanisamy on Feb 07, 2007 03:00 AM Permalink
Mr.Manjunath, you got the fact wrong sir! It's not TN but Karnataka which has increased (and still increasing) the basin area in alarming rate even after the 1968 agreement. I think the ONLY verdict Karnataka would be happy to abide by would be that whatever is in excess will be send to TN and the farmers @TN can use that much!!! So sweet! Palanisamy
RE:RE:Karnataka denied justice.
by manjunath Lakshmipathy on Feb 07, 2007 03:21 AM Permalink
Sir, I have to confirm the stats around the 1968 agreement. I will do that. However, you cannot deny past instances when water was released to save crops in TN around october/november timeframe after the monsoon rains stopped. At no time K'taka said that it will only give the excess water. The only plea K'taka made was that during summer it can not fulfil the quota of water despatch due to poor inflow of into Cauvery basin. This is a valid point. But the Tribunal, time and again, ignored this plea and enforced strigent demands of K'taka.
RE:RE:RE:Karnataka denied justice.
by HelloIndia on Feb 07, 2007 09:48 AM Permalink
Ha Palaniswamy, You talk about all agreements did you guys honoured never when it is acceptable then you accepted. Only Tamilnadu increased the cultivation land. You guys expect water even there is no water for drinking even at Zero level but you need water for cultivation. That is the irony of Indian politics.
it seems like Karanataka will only be happy if no water was given to TN, Kerala or Puducherry. Is that what Karnataka wants. How do you expect the Indian economy to grow if we cannot share. The commission only asks to release 192tmc of water. How much do you want to release?
Water is a commodity that we share even with Bangladesh and Pakistan. Can we ever tell another country that we cannot share water because even during drought times, we have shared water. Everyone takes a hit during drought. It is the same for the southern state. Now I want you to think and tell me, how much water do you want to release to TN, Kerala and Puducherry. if it is 0%, then you need to build a dam so you can flood yourself during heavy rain season. Is that what you want?
RE:Dear brother
by ramaswamy subramanian on Feb 08, 2007 10:51 AM Permalink
building a dam is alos not possible for them as already kabini etc., dams have been constructed with the permission of TN. These people talk about rights for sharing of water. Before pointing one finger on others first they should know that four fingers are pointing on them. If a CM of the state wont uphold the order of SC how can we expect an ordinary citizen of karnataka to act without any biaz. It is their culture.
RE:Dear brother
by Mahesh S on Feb 07, 2007 12:00 PM Permalink
you better think of ur state fist and try to analyse the reason for such poor law and order condition and why people like u leave ur state and spoil and blame other states. u dont belong here and you dont understand people's problem or the sentiments involved. dont comment without knowing the facts.
RE:Dear brother
by HelloIndia on Feb 07, 2007 09:55 AM Permalink
Hello Big brother!!, you know it should be equal sharing during distress time. But TN will not agree for that during draught also they expect water, during that time there won't be water even for drinking purpose. But TN expects to relaese the water for cultivation. You don't know all these thing far away in UP. They always talk about rights not for sharing at the time of distress. You too should understand that before commenting.
I guess the annual release of 192 TMC by KA was arrived at right calculations and not any political lobbying. But is this release on all years? (I mean drought years too?) Being the home of Mathematical geniuses (India), 192 TMC per year may have been arrived correctly. Also due to political/skewed up Indian mind, it may be incorrect too. But, from my limited knowledge of numbers, it comes out that KA should release135 TMC per yr.
My calculations: For the sake of simplicity, removed Kerala and Pondicherry.
Assuming, basin area in TN is 43 SqKm (57%) and KA is 33 SqKm (43%) and water collected by TN is 250 TMC and KA is 425 TMC. (Total of 675). TN should get 385 TMC (57% of 675) and KA should get 290 TMC (43% of 675). Since TN is collecting only 250 (because of the upper dams- kabini, KRS, etc.), it should get (385-250) which is 135 TMC. And KA is collecting more 425 (instead of 290), it should release 425-290=135 TMC. This, only if 675 TMC is collected in a given year. If it is less or more then 675 TMC, it should be proportionate. Both regions should be proportionately drought or flooded. Ofcourse, both parties may argue on these numbers. But is it rocket science to get the actual numbers from the area? We know where the river flows and just get the catchments area around the river? Ofcourse, there may be other subtleties to these calculations. I am open to change these numbers.
RE:Rocket Science!?
by kumar on Feb 07, 2007 01:54 AM Permalink
your calculation ir right except for one thing. the 250 that TN collects does not serve the upper western portion of TN because the rain and collection is downstream. When you taken this into account and make it more accurate, the number comes closer to 192. In fact, this number of 192 is less than what Karnataka has been releasing all this time of 205. Karnataka should be happy because now they release less than in 2005, etc. TN should be happy because now, they can plan their agri industry better.
When there is drought, everybody takes a percentage hit. In otherwords, if water is 10% less overall, then TN gets 10% less, Kar 10% less, etc.
This is actually a disadvantage for north western TN. So for example, if Kar gets 270tmc of rain (this is a drought) and TN get 419 in lower easter portion. Then the commission says that TN has enought water, hence Kar can keep 270tmc. This means that upper western region of TN gets no water as neither Kar will release water or TN can pump water to north western region of TN. At the end, no matter what Indians suffer.
I am neither from TN or Kar but interested in the scientific method. This commission was also called by Karnataka and agreed by TN. They both have the right to appeal but must abide by the ruling until the appeal is successful and not make this into an inter-ethnic war.
RE:RE:Rocket Science!?
by Prakash Gomathinayagam on Feb 07, 2007 02:51 AM Permalink
The key is releasing waters during summer. KA release 205 tmc, out of which mostly were on rainy season Tamil nadu could not use that much water and mostly ends up in the sea. In fact that has caused lot of damages to the crops. [ you might guess why can't TN store those waters ? but limitage of Dam storage restricts that ].
so the key in the tribunal's award is sharing-of-water during needy times. I think it is much better. TN is not getting more water than before, but it can get more water during summer and can plan better than before.
RE:Rocket Science!?
by Mahesh S on Feb 07, 2007 12:02 PM Permalink
posting again !! RE:RE:Rocket Science!? by mj on Feb 07, 2007 02:49 AM | Hide message Interested in scientific method? eh. Well then, consider this. Tamil Nadu has nearly 100 tmc worth of ground water sources the it has not touched while Ktaka has next to nothing. 2/3rd of the basin area in Ktaka is drought prone whereas only 1/4th of the basin area in TN is drought prone. So Ktaka has even more pressing need for water for irrigation. And then distress sharing. How convenient of you to say take the 'average distress'. So, do you mean if there is a 50% shortfall in rainfall in Karnataka to 10% shortfall in TN, Ktaka still has release water as if its only facing 30% shortfall? And then, apart from the ground water sources in TN, who is to count the North East monsoon that feeds the Kaveri in TN but not in Ktaka. Ktaka only has one monsoon season. TN has two. So that is all the more reason for Ktaka to store water for pre and post monsoon periods. Finally, TN's numero uno argument all along has been that, even though they've developed 28 lakh acres against the letter and spirit of the past agreements, they should be given amnesty simply because cutting off supplies to the 'illegaly' expanded portions would mean rendering millions jobless. This is a patently silly, absurd and atrocious argument. It is neither Ktaka's moral obligation nor legal binding that it has to feed every sq inch of TN's millions of acres. These figures sum it up: Karnataka irrigates 11.2 lakh acres and one crop per year TN irrigates 28 lakh acres and upto three crops a year.
Like Gandhi says, "There's enough for everyone's need, not for someone's greed". Shame on wretched tamilians and their politicians. No wonder with all the water and everything they're still a cursed and wretched lot.
RE:Author is heavily Biased
by JM on Feb 07, 2007 07:06 AM Permalink
Sea Man, why dont you educate the readers which part of Himanshu's writing is crap and why?
Guyz, All said and done this judgement will be accepted by both the parties only if questions from unsatisfied party are answered completely. You cant drag its history of water sharing, narrow mindedness etc or other party's sufferings in the past into the debate. As any common citizen will only think in terms of the ratio of the water to the catchment/basin area. You need to answer them and educate them, which politician's never would do.
A river which runs through many states belong to all those states - and so it should be shared among all those states without hurting each other. I think this verdict does that to a large extent - becuase Karnataka always played foul when it comes to sharing the water. (If Karnataka thinks that Cauvery BELONGS ONLY to Karnataka then, NOT even a DROP of water should come out of the state - even when the monsoon pours down and the whole of Karnataka is under water! Can Karnataka do that? That's why it belongs to Tamil Nadu as much as it belongs to Karanataka! I do not know when Karnataka will get that?!!) I think if you go through the history of this dispute, you will understand that the reason behind this VERDICT is due to the fact that DEPENDENCY of use of Cauvery water is the TN basin is HUGE (as they started using the water first). This may not be a perfect verdict but it is a VERY FAIR verdict! So learn to accept it and move on!
RE:I think This is FAIR!
by JM on Feb 07, 2007 01:27 AM Permalink
The resaon the dispute is not solved even after al these years is because all states overestimate their demands and everyone argues with the scientific proof. And if one of these states is not satisfied with the verdict, they threaten to break away from the Indian Union itself! Himanshu Thakkar is an expert and has provided scientific proof why the verdict is flawed. How can a "expert" tribunal not consider the facts of the groundwater and
If there is drought in the catchment areas in Karnataka, is Tamil Nadu still entitled to 490 tmc water? The verdict is not only unfair, it is very seriously falwed!
RE:RE:I think This is FAIR!
by Palanisamy on Feb 07, 2007 01:48 AM Permalink
I think this "EXPERT" forgot to tell us that where that GROUND WATER COMES from?!!!! If there is no water in the river then there is no GROUND WATER buddy! Mr. Himanshu is not considering that at all!!! (If this expert has considered everything in such a quick time, do you think the tribunal which sat for a RECORD 17 YEARS would have ignored many facts?!!!!)
RE:RE:RE:I think This is FAIR!
by JM on Feb 07, 2007 07:12 AM Permalink
P-swamy, rivers contribute to ground water but the majority of the share of ground water is not attributed to rivers. It comes from rainfall and accumulates ove rthe years.
So watertables of Tamilnadu is not because of Karnataka releasing Cauvery water!
Even if you argue against it and say watertables of Tamilnadu, you are killing your own argument.
As someone mentioned you guys have 17 years distress because you are uneducated and do not look at scientific facts.
RE:RE:I think This is FAIR!
by Bal on Feb 07, 2007 02:32 AM Permalink
'If there is drought in the catchment areas in Karnataka' - The tribunal verdict tells that the water should be shared based on the same ratio even during a distress year. It doesnt say that TN should get 419 TMC every year. Know the facts and then say something.
RE:I think This is FAIR!
by Ram on Feb 07, 2007 02:14 AM Permalink
Whatever you think is Fair ?.. think beyond.. the article is really good and clearly says what has to be looked in. Nice facts Thakkar. I appreciate it.
RE:RE:RE:I think This is FAIR!
by Ram on Feb 07, 2007 04:03 AM Permalink
Palani-sir, you might be knowing "justice delayed is justice denied" all through the 17years , the tribunal was taking into account only the 1892 and 1924 aggrement and not the ground water issue. This was the one of the argument from karnataka ..along with this TN has never tried to remove the silt from the canals,passages and check dams which is a problem for not storing water ... I really appreciate the farmers from both the states who discussed these issues but so called tribunal never took any note from them other than the old agreements.. All the times judiciary is not right...
RE:RE:RE:RE:I think This is FAIR!
by on Feb 07, 2007 06:31 AM Permalink
was surprised to see so many messages...wasnt aware that this can catch sooo much attn..more than 20% of water which stays within kar is used by tams..so far all those freaks unless they are karunanidhi's or jaya's sons,,, take it easy and accept reality.
