1. What scientific method was used to arrive at this decision? If the decision arrived at was solely based on %u2018oral hearing%u2019 from both parties, it is very unscientific. 2. Did the tribunal or any other independent body collect data scientifically, analyze that and arrive at this decision? If yes, what were those findings? Where can one find the details? 3. As an Engineer (not a Civil Engineer, though), I feel that there should have been some scientific data collection and analysis on the following lines, especially since this issue has been tearing the communities apart for over a decade a. Annual rain fall in the upper and lower Kaveri river basin for the last ten years b. Average monthly water levels for the last ten years in all or key water dams in the region c. The effect of water levels in each or key canals on crops/harvest d. Direct economic impact of higher or lower water levels to the farmers in each or key regions e. Any other pertinent data which the %u2018real%u2019 scientists and engineers in the tribunal or independent panel deem necessary
If this data is available anywhere, please provide a link. If not, stop arguing about how much each state or region should be entitled to, because without scientific data it is meaningless to argue.
And, for crying out loud, stop comparing the Kaveri issue with sharing of other rivers in the north: Almost all of them are %u2018born%u2019 in the Himalayas or other colder regions, which doesn%u2019t get affected drastically by rain fall. The agriculture in southern states of India is dependent on rainfall to a larger extent.
Also, STOP using this issue for blaming Kannadigas for everything %u2013 from Belgaum issue to what not. I can point out the shortcomings in each and every one of you, your regions and states. It is not the time or the place to debate.
