Tamilnadu, being a lower riparian state had to fight for its survival from all the higher riparian states like Karnataka. Karnataka being the upper riparian state enjoys all the advantages like
1. letting less quantity of water than the allocated share by Supreme court and Tribunal
2. built a 75 miles artificial channel to divert water to more areas in the southern part of the state in additon to naturally flowing ~100 mile long river
3. keeps its dams always full and during south west monsoon which bring heavy rainfall in Cauvery's water catchment area(Western ghats), it opens up its dams suddenly flooding the entire heavily cultivated plains of TN's cauvery plains.
3. it built 12 smaller dams in addititon to KRS and Kabini but obtained permission only for 2 dams from Tamilnadu. TN didn't raise issues regarding this.
4. It consumes 8 tmcft for Bangalore water supply project from Cauvery whereas it objects to 1.4 tmcft of Hogenakkal drinking water project to water starved Dharmapuri and Krishnagiri districts(even after permiting in exchange with Bangalore project in 1998)
5. letting violence against innocent tamils whenever an issue crops up.
6. misinforming people that Karnataka is the looser in the battle.
Guys, this project will not affect Karantaka's farmers' interests but are opposing only for the sake of doing it.
In the entire episode, TN has always approached these issues legally and not fought in streets
RE:Disadvantage!!!
by vijay on Apr 09, 2008 06:34 AM Permalink
you are right, TN acts like cultured and KN acts like uncultured wild peoples... why KN never belive in legal system...they always come to street and hurting the minorities in their state... KN simply killing our unity and putting fire on our Bharath matha.. plz realize...
RE:Disadvantage!!!
by Manjunath Srikantiah on Apr 09, 2008 10:23 PM Permalink
TN being lower reprarian state asks for 427 tmc and gets it.
Karnataka being the upper reprarian state asks for 407 tmc and get only 287 tmc.
Tamilnadu builds a dam(mettur dam) which is 120 ft and can store upto 94tmc,while it objects to karnataka building KRS and with the british might reduces its hight to store about 49 tmc.
TN wants Karnataka to honour an agreement which ended in 1970.
TN cannot live out of Karnataka's pocket.Karnataka needs 408 tmc ft of water and would take it.
RE:RE:Disadvantage!!!
by Manjunath Srikantiah on Apr 09, 2008 10:29 PM Permalink
You cannot succeed in twisting arms(including the legan one) as you want,always.
It has always been the case that lower reprarian states get less world over.This is the only case where the lower reprarian state is getting more and this would be fought by kannadigas tooth and nail. We need not learn peace from people who have killed thousands in Srilanka. We need not learn peace from people who killed Rajiv Gandhi. We need not learn peace from people who have created trouble in Malaysia.
RE:Disadvantage!!!
by saigeetha jagannathan on Apr 10, 2008 12:36 PM Permalink
Everyone will accept that any project that an upper riparian state tries to implement will naturally affect the farmers of lower riparian state and not the vice versa. Thatswhy TN has always been a keen observer of all the projects that are carried out across Karnataka's part of Cauvery. You must know the regulations and parameters while building a huge reservoir. You cannot build it anywhere and everywhere. A huge reservoir needs to be built at the lap of a semi circular mountain range which acts as a storage dish. The size of a reservor is primarily determined by the circumference of the submerged land sheltered by the range. Mettur's capacity is due to that advantage of being sheltered by Shervaroyan hills, a meeting place of Eastern ghats and a part of western ghats. This may not be the case with KRS. Hence dont blame TN for everything that is not in Karnataka's favour.
RE:RE:Disadvantage!!!
by saigeetha jagannathan on Apr 10, 2008 01:07 PM Permalink
Morover, if you add up the total capcity of KRS, Kabini and 12 smaller dams, certainly it will be much more than that of Mettur. Infact, mettur capacity will not in any way affect karnataka but the capacities of all karnataka's dams will certainly affect Tamilnadu. Think logically.
RE:Disadvantage!!!
by veera kannadiga on Apr 12, 2008 08:04 AM Permalink
you tamilians have no other work to do.Blaming only Karnataka.Go and do some useful work which will be helpful for the country. Karuna terrorist should be hanged first.
RE:Disadvantage!!!
by saigeetha jagannathan on Apr 10, 2008 09:28 AM Permalink
Mr. Manjunath, Water cannot be equally shared as the extent of cultivated land in both these states vary enormously. Remember 1/3rd cauvery flows in Karnataka whereas 2/3rd of it flows in Tamilnadu. Geographically, the total area cultivated around cauvery in Tamilnadu is twice as that Karnataka. So it is awared more share. Despite of being awarded more share on basis of the extent of cultivated land, Tamilnadu is denied the allocated share by karnataka every year. Karnataka is trying to increase its agricultural land even made an artificial channel but Tamilnadu is only trying to protect the already cultivated.
Dont mix up things like Rajiv Gandhi assasination, Srilankan violence with this issue. If you want, I can argue with you regarding these issues seperately. These issues are totally different and be specific. Its Karnataka that is acting as big brother and twisting its arms every time an issue crops up by attacking innocent people and spew venom.
RE:Disadvantage!!!
by saigeetha jagannathan on Apr 10, 2008 12:19 PM Permalink
Cauvery flows about ~100 mile naturally in KN state and 72 mile artificial channel that KN govt built to divert water to more areas. But cauvery flows in ~320 miles inside Tamilnadu. Which state needs more water logically?. Lands in TN's cauvery basin are being cultivated for more than 2 millennia whereas Karnataka is trying to divert water to more far off districts artificially by building more than 12 dams. Tamilnadu is only fighting to get the legal share. You will not be satisfied even if you let the whole river flow in KN alone. Then you can think of the disaster which will submerge the southern part of KN entirely.
RE:Disadvantage!!!
by Subramanian kumar on Apr 10, 2008 12:50 PM Permalink
It was not a problem between tamil - malay, but the problem was between hindu - malay. The root cause of the problems involve indirect domination of muslim majority malay government. The people who wever beaten up is not just tamils, but all hindus (including hindi people). Because tamils are more in numbers, many people in this forum twist it without even knowing what happened there just for abusing tamils. On the other hand, Rajivs fate has no relationship with tamil nadu except being the execution place. You could see that many hundreds of TN tamil people died in that blast. Its a vengence shown by sri lankan tamils violence party in return to some political act supported by rajiv with SL govt. Anyway, Rajiv is also caught in so many controversies like Bofers, and hence doesnt need to be treated like M.K.Gandhi or Nehru. He has done several major faults and reeped back. TN has no relationship to that.
RE:Disadvantage!!!
by saigeetha jagannathan on Apr 10, 2008 01:04 PM Permalink
I completely agree with you Mr.Subramanian kumar. Most of the people in this forum argue without checking the true nature of any issue and vehemently mix everything up to abuse.
RE:Disadvantage!!!
by Manjunath Srikantiah on Apr 10, 2008 03:49 PM Permalink
Point number 1: Length of the river does not include artificial channels.(Whether miles or Kms,the distance does not change).From Talakaveri to Hogenakal,the river Kaveri travels 320 KMs and this distance does not include the 116kms of an artificial channel that takes the water to Mandya from Madadkatte.Even a simple calculation of distances would show you that.
Point number 2: If you have a certain cultivated land,you cannot restrict others to the cultivated land that they have,they should be allowed to cultivate as much as they can(using the legitimate water resources that they should get).
Point Number 3 : The legitimate water resources are calculated using the yield,where Karnataka scores over Tamil Nadu(53% to 32%).
RE:RE:Disadvantage!!!
by saigeetha jagannathan on Apr 10, 2008 04:02 PM Permalink
Mr. Manjunath, May I know from which source have you taken the numbers. Remember I have not taken into account the length of each river root in cauvery delta for easy visualization.
RE:Disadvantage!!!
by saigeetha jagannathan on Apr 10, 2008 03:49 PM Permalink
If we take the case of Ganges, West Bengal and Bangladesh are the highest beneficiaries of the river as it spreads the world's largest delta in these regions. If we go by your argument about yield, then Uttaranchal and Uttar Pradesh have more yields than West Bengal. So will you argue that Bengal should do less agriculture than the other states in gangetic plains. Of course, these types of problems never arise in case of Ganges as it is a perennial river. I put forth this argument to support my view that yield is least considered in sharing water.
RE:RE:Disadvantage!!!
by saigeetha jagannathan on Apr 10, 2008 04:21 PM Permalink
Mr.Manjunath, We are not preventing you from doing agriculture. At the same time, you too cannot say that TN should close down most of its agricultural land as I have already pointed out that these lands are being cultivated for more than a millennia and people of about 10 districts rely on Cauvery's water. Tamilnadu is not increasing its cultivated land while Karnataka is doing that despite the 1942 agreement.
RE:Disadvantage!!!
by Manjunath Srikantiah on Apr 10, 2008 08:41 PM Permalink
Yield is the only basis on which water is shared world over and logically so,as the water that the state produces is being utilised by the state.As I said you cannot live out of other's pocket.You cannot say that since you have more money than I have give it to me as my need is more.It is upto the person to give the excess money.If the other person does not agree,you cannot force him to give it.When I have a need,I utilise it.Does your neighbour give you money because he has less need for it and you have more need for it ? Uttaranchal may be giving it as it does not have a need right now(and there is never shortage of water over there) and when its needs increase,it would certainly do so.
RE:Disadvantage!!!
by Manjunath Srikantiah on Apr 10, 2008 05:29 PM Permalink
The agreement ended in the year 1974.So there is no question of that agreement being valid
RE:Disadvantage!!!
by saigeetha jagannathan on Apr 10, 2008 03:26 PM Permalink
Mr.Manjunath, The total length of Cauvery river is itself 475 miles. Kindly check the units. I am talking in miles and you are talking in kilometers. Morover, 320 kms that you have mentioned include a 116 km(72 miles) artificial channel. So naturally cauvery flows for a length of ~204 kms whereas it flows in 416 kms (as you have mentioned) naturally in Tamilnadu. Morover, its the extent of cultivated land that is taken into account. In this case, tamilnadu's extent of cultivated land is much more that of Karnataka. I am sure yield is least considered as naturally it would be higher for the place it originates (common for all rivers). Its only the amount of usage that is primarily taken into consideration. I again stress that any project including increasing the dam's height will certainly affect the lower riparian states and NOT the vice versa. Morover, why dont you take into consideration 12 dams that Karnataka built along with KRS and Kabini. If we include all the dams, the amount of stored water will be much more than that of mettur. I wish to point out that Mettur reservoir(though huge one) is never full except during south west monsoon when KN releases the excess water to avoid flooding. Have you ever seen cauvery basin in Tamilnadu, Mr. Manjunath?.
Kaveri river's length in Karnataka is 320KM and in Tamil Nadu about 416 KM.Total length of the river being 765KM,it covers 41% of the total length in karnataka and not 33% as you have indicated in your post,and it covers 54% in tamil nadu and not 66% as you claim.Even if you go by the logic of length,karnataka should have got more water than what has been allocated(nearly 330 tmc).
Moreover worldover,it is not the lenght that matters,it is the yield that is taken into consideration.The yield from Karnataka of the total yield of around 800tmc is 435tmc(which is 53%) and from Tamil Nadu,252tmc(which is 32%) and from Kerala 113tmc(which is 14.3%).So Karnataka should logically get around 410 tmc ft and Tamil nadu around 260ft.
Coming back to KRS dam and other dam's capacity,total storage in Karnataka does not even cross 60tmc ft.Hence your argument that Karnataka's storage capacity for Kaveri Water is more is not at all correct.
Coming to the KRS dam's original capacity.It was originally planned by Karnataka to hold around 90 tmc ft of water.It was designed by Sir M Vishweshvariah one of the most respected engineers of the era,but Tamilians backed by Britishers blocked it.It was not the technical infeasibility that made the dam height to be reduced to the current height.
As for as the violence is concerned,tamilians torched a KSRTC bus in Hosur(last week) and other charges of violence against them(as indicated by me) sticks including killin
RE:Disadvantage!!!
by Manjunath Srikantiah on Apr 10, 2008 09:20 PM Permalink
Yediyurappa has every right to say that he opposes a project.It is not that only tamilians have a right to oppose something.Yediyurappa has every right to say that,as the island in Hogenakkal does not belong to Tamil Nadu alone and Tamil Nadu has not disclosed as to where it wants to have the project done.For your benefit Hogennakal in kannada means "the stone from where smoke comes".Hogennakal is the border.If Karunanidhi can be adamant and arrogant why can't Yediyurappa and the rest of kannadigas be ?
RE:Disadvantage!!!
by saigeetha jagannathan on Apr 10, 2008 03:38 PM Permalink
Regarding Violence, all these years Tamilnadu has always taken a legal way of fighting whereas constantly Tamils and their properties were attacked in KN. There should be a limit. Even this time, Tamilnadu never reacted first (mind Yediyurappa started it ahead of elections in KN) when KN opposed the drinking water project for flourosis affected Dharmapuri and Krishnagiri district people (this project will not affect KN in any way and it was allowed in exchange with Bangalore water supply project in 1998). But it is only after tamils were attacked again in Bangalore. I am not supporting goons on both sides but a mutual understanding in this issue can be achieved only when minorities in any state are allowed to live peacefully.
RE:Disadvantage!!!
by Ashok Shet on Apr 11, 2008 11:16 PM Permalink
Hats up Mannjunath you told the truth. This so called culture people have beaten a innocent Bus Driver from KN and also beaten piligramages (including ladies and children)from KN who have come to visit Temple in TN. This shows their Culture.
