The Hype, Hypocrisy and reality of Mumbai River Anthem

March 8, 2018March 9, 2018 SANDRPLeave a comment

Above: Dahisar river inside SGNP Photo Aslam Saiyad

Guest Blog by Aslam Saiyad

While documenting the work of the River March organisation[i], whose goal was to rejuvenate Mumbai’s rivers, I came across Adivasi communities who lived inside the Sanjay Gandhi National Park (SGNP). I noticed some children standing in school uniforms a few kilometers inside the park. They were getting ready to go to a school which was 7km away. And it surprised me because people living in one of the world’s richest municipalities didn’t have a basic mode of transportation to go to school. Continue reading “The Hype, Hypocrisy and reality of Mumbai River Anthem” →

Mithi · Mumbai

Anthems alone don’t save rivers: Treat sewage & create room for the rivers

March 8, 2018March 8, 2018 SANDRPLeave a comment

Above: Mithi River at Bandra-Kurla Complex; Photo by Nidhi Jamwal

Guest blog by Nidhi Jamwal

The four rivers of Mumbai —- Mithi, Oshiwara, Dahisar and Poisar —- now have an anthem of their own. Released recently by T-Series and Leelaa, the music video, “Mumbai River Anthem”, has already created uproar in the state Assembly, as it features the state chief minister (CM), Devendra Fadnavis; the state finance minister, Sudhir Mungantiwar; Mumbai civic commissioner, Ajoy Mehta; and the city police commissioner, Datta Padsalgikar lip-syncing and striking poses to urge Mumbaikars to come together to save the rivers. The anthem also features Amruta Fadnavis, wife of the chief minster, who, along with Sonu Nigam, a playback singer, has sung the song. While celebration of rivers is welcome, when not accompanied by necessary actions to improve the pathetic state of Mumbai’s rivers, it sounds like hypocrisy. Continue reading “Anthems alone don’t save rivers: Treat sewage & create room for the rivers” →

Dams · Mumbai · Urban Water Sector

Are Large Dams a Smart option for cities?

March 4, 2016March 4, 2016 SANDRP2 Comments

Above: Polluted, encroached and neglected water sources of Mumbai Source: visualwhiplash.com

The total dependency of urban areas on dams in faraway regions is a fairly recent phenomenon. Till the middle of nineteenth century, even important urban centers like Mumbai, Bangalore and Chennai used local water sources like shallow wells, tanks and rivers to quench the thirst of a concentrated population. British administration pushed dam building and long distance transfers in many cities like Mumbai. While dam building did quench the thirst of a growing population, and some of it spurred from acute water crisis like in the case of Mumbai in 1845, distant water sources and dams were instrumental in cutting the connection of the local residents with their water sources, which were revered and well maintained till then. In no time, wells in Mumbai were reclaimed, tanks in Chennai and Bangalore were encroached and Boalies and wetlands of Delhi disappeared. Urban centres became hopelessly dependent on large dams, away from the cities. Water supply and sanitation became someone else’s responsibility. The vestiges of a more independent water management can still be seen lying defunct and dilapidated in form of wells and tanks like Banganga in Mumbai, water channels of Pune, several tanks of Bangalore, Nugambakkam Lake of Chennai, Baolis of Delhi, etc.

Mumbai: Mumbai currently receives a supply of 3,750 MLD (million litres per day), while its usage is around 2,400 MLD. However, the requirement is projected as 4,200 MLD by officials and media based on an inflated figure of 240 liters per capita per day – used to justify construction of new dams. The requirement is projected to reach 6,680 MLD by 2041.

The Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) has proposed 4 dams to increase the water supply to Mumbai. Two of the proposed dams are the Gargai and Pinjal dams which are awaiting clearances. The dams are together expected to submerge 17 villages and 2850 ha forest land in a predominantly tribal region, with many areas falling under Schedule 5 of the Constitution. All the tribals from the affected villages are strongly against the project. More than 12 dams in close proximity are in various stages of construction in the same region and no cumulative impact assessment or even options assessment has been conducted so far. The Gargai and Pinjal dams will cost about Rs 16,000 crore and take 8 years for construction. They are expected to supply 440 and 865 MLD respectively to Mumbai. Read more about the projects here.

mumbai1 — Watersupply lines for Mumbai Source: footage.framepool.com

The other proposed dams are part of the Damanganga-Pinjal river linking project which is being pushed by the union water resources ministry. The Union water resources minister Uma Bharati announced that the project is to be a national project, making it eligible for 90% funding from the Centre. The project is expected to cost around Rs 800 crore. It includes construction of a dam on the Damanganga River in Nashik district close to the Gujarat border and another dam across Vagh river in Mokhada taluka, Thane district. It proposes to direct surplus water from the Damanganga River in Gujarat via the 2 reservoirs to the Pinjal reservoir which is to be constructed by the BMC. The project is expected to bring 2,450 MLD to Mumbai.

The project has been stalled as of Feb 2016 as the Gujarat government wants a greater share of water from the Tapi River in return for increased share of water to supply to Mumbai. Maharashtra is already facing regional disputes over water in water starved Nashik, Ahmednagar and Marathwada. The Chief Minister had to promise the Assembly in March 2015 that “not a drop of water from Maharashtra will go to Gujarat”. Activists have objected that these regions would be adversely affected by the river linking project. The river linking proposals are already creating new conflicts.

Bangalore: To meet the growing demands of Bangalore city, Karnataka has proposed two dam projects across Cauvery near Mekedatu, in Kanakapura taluka in Ramanagaram district. The project is expected to help the state store 48 TMC (thousand million cubic feet) of water. Mekedatu is located about 110 km from Bangalore.

bangalore_2355878f — Near the site of Mekedatu Dam Source: The Hindu

In the March 2015 budget of Karnataka, the chief minister proposed preparing a detailed project report (DPR) for the project and Rs 25 crore was allotted for the same triggering a new round of conflict over sharing Cauvery water with Tamil Nadu.

Tamil Nadu says that the project is in violation of the final award of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal. Tamil Nadu adopted a resolution urging the Centre to stop Karnataka from going ahead with the project and a bandh was observed. It has also moved the Supreme Court arguing that the reservoirs would result in ‘impounding of the flows’ of Tamil Nadu.

However Karnataka claims that the dams are within the rights of Karnataka and that the project would act as a balancing reservoir and harness water otherwise flowing into the sea. The CM informed that his government was committed to implementing the Mekedatu dam project and it would face the issue legally. Similar show of political will in preserving wetlands of Bangalore city and implementing steps for water conservation would go far in improving water security of the city.

On June 18, 2015, the Karnataka Water Resources minister said that the Mekedatu project was being expedited and the DPR for the implementation of the project will be readied within three months (as opposed to the usual period of one year). The projects would be right in the middle of the Cauvery Wildlife Sanctuary. About 2,500 acres of forest area will be submerged. As the project is for potable purpose, it does not require environment clearance from the ministry of environment and forests (MoEF).

Hyderabad: Hyderabad is going to draw drinking water from Yellampally barrage in Adilabad district on the Godavari River. It is an ambitious project for the Telangana government bringing approximately 680 MLD of water to the city of Hyderabad. While the Godavari flows toward Eastern Ghats before draining into the Bay of Bengal, Hyderabad is located in another river basin, namely Krishna basin. Such water transfers can have many impacts, including floods and land sliding. A 186 km long pipeline would route the water from the Yellampally barrage.

Delhi: The Renuka dam project was proposed on the Giri River, a tributary of Yamuna, in Sirmaur district of Himachal Pradesh in 2008. The project was expected to supply 1,240 MLD water to Delhi and its surrounding areas.

Protests against Renuka Dam Source: SANDRP Partners

After a prolonged controversy, the National Green Tribunal (NGT) on Feb 2, 2016 passed judgement in a case challenging the environmental clearance to the Renuka project, basically since Supreme Court in an earlier case had made some remarks about the project, as one can see from reading of the NGT order. The tribunal took grounds of national importance of the project and amount already spent on the project to allow it. Under the UPA government, the then environment minister Jairam Ramesh denied forest clearance to the project saying that the national capital should first fix its water distribution losses of over 45 %. “Delhi must learn to use the tougher options that are available. It cannot be a parasite on the rest of the country”, he said. The project is yet to receive forest clearance.

The NGT declined to stall the land acquisition proceedings for the dam by the State government since the Centre had declared the project as one of “national importance”. To execute the project, Himachal has acquired about 2,950 ha, including private agricultural and forest land despite protests of the locals. The state claimed that until Oct 2015, the Centre had not released any money to compensate farmers whose plots were taken over. 90% of the funding of the project is to be borne by the Centre as the project was declared a national project.

The project has been delayed for lack of clearances, support and funds. The total project cost which was initially estimated at Rs 3498.86 crore as in March, 2009 is likely to go beyond Rs 5,200 crore with delay in the execution of the project. In Nov 2015, Delhi Water Minister declared at India Rivers Day function that Delhi does not need water from Renuka dam, but very strangely, neither Delhi govt filed an affidavit to that effect before NGT, nor did NGT take cognizance of this public stand of Delhi Government.

Srinagar: Protests erupted in Chadoora area of Kashmir’s Budgam district on Dec 18, 2015 against a proposed water supply scheme sourced from Doodh Ganga River for Srinagar. People from twin constituencies of Chrar-e-Sharief and Chadoora fear the scheme will dry up half-a-dozen water supply schemes, already fed on Doodh Ganga. The protestors were worried that the projects would deprive them of irrigation and drinking water and also put them under risk of flooding. The protesters alleged that they had approached the officials to put forth their reservations, but nobody heeded their concerns.

dudhganga — Dudh Ganga River Source: triphills.com

The executive agency, Jammu and Kashmir Economic Reconstruction Agency (ERA) claimed that the scheme will benefit 3.5 lakh people and that there are no risks associated with it. The ERA said that more than Rs. 10 crore had been invested by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and that the state would lose out future investment from ADB if Dhoodhganga water scheme were stopped.

Hundreds of protestors held demonstrations for a week. The protesters allegedly clashed with government forces while the forces retaliated by firing teargas shells and pepper gas. After days of massive protests and clashes, on Dec 24, 2015, the Jammu and Kashmir Government ordered temporary suspension of the work on the scheme.

Big dams come at a huge social and environmental cost. Recurring costs of repair and maintenance are so much that they far outweigh the benefits. Urban areas can and should explore low cost local solutions and conserve water than solely rely on dams. Recent happenings bear witness to the drawbacks of building dams to supply water to cities.

Drought of 2015-16: As of Jan 2016, water levels are already very low in dams at many places across the country because of deficient rains in 2015. Water usage has to be rationed until the monsoons. Even in such times, urban usage is often not regulated and urban water supply is prioritized and comes at the cost of irrigation water for agriculture.

As of Jan 2016, reservoir levels in Gujarat are at a 10 year low. Rains last year were 23% less than normal and the state’s 202 reservoirs have only 24% usable water as compared to the usual 48% around this time of the year. The CM has declared that the water would only be used for drinking purposes for the next 5 months and no water would be spared for agriculture until monsoons. In Porbandar town, water is provided once a week in several areas. Two main reservoirs that provide water to the area may go dry in a month. Drinking water crisis is expected to hit Saurashtra and Kutch badly.

The depletion of water table at the Lower Manair Dam on the Godavari basin in Karimanagar district, Telangana raised alarm in Jan 2016 as the reservoir provides drinking water to Karimnagar, Warangal and other places located close to the reservoir. The drought in the region has cast concerns over availability of drinking water for the coming summer season.

Water levels, as of late Feb 2016 have hit a record low in reservoirs on Krishna and Cauvery Rivers threatening drinking water supply to Bengaluru and other places in Karnataka, Telangana and Andhra Pradesh. Reservoirs in the Krishna basin have never been in such bad shape. The worst hit is Tungabhadra dam which has a storage capacity of 100.86 TMC while the available water at present is a mere 9.23 TMC. Cities like Hubli-Dharwad are getting water once in eight days, owing to the alarmingly low level in Malaprabha dam in Krishna basin. Farmers have been alerted in both Krishna and Cauvery basins that there will be no water release for irrigation, this summer. Despite the austerity measure, meeting drinking water needs will be difficult until monsoons fill up the reservoirs. Storage as of late Feb 2016 in the KRS reservoir supplying water from the Cauvery River is only 18.69 TMC compared to last year’s level of 32.84 TMC. While 2 TMC is dead storage (water which cannot be utilised), another 2 TMC of water will be lost due to evaporation over the next five months. Bengaluru alone requires 1.5 TMC water every month.

With no rainfall in the latter part of Jan 2016 and release of water for irrigation, storage in the Vaigai reservoir in Theni district, Tamil Nadu is fast depleting and has slipped below 50 feet (maximum level is 71 feet). The Vaigai dam provides drinking water to Madurai and it is anticipated that shortages might be experienced during April-May 2016.

Prior to the monsoons in 2015, it was reported that Panvel was facing massive water cuts for 4 months, until rains came in the end of June 2015, as the Dehrang dam, the city’s primary source of water had dried up. The dam was constructed in 1964 and at present the city has a population over 1.11 lakh.

Reliance of urban areas solely on dam based water supply exposes them to seasonal shortages. As the summers are becoming hotter, longer and drier, dams lose greater amount of water to evaporation. Climate change is changing the rainfall pattern and has increased occurrences of intensely heavy rainfall and prolonged periods of drought. Dams also increase risk of flooding during heavy rains.

Flooding: More than 1,500 people, including 500 people from Ahmedabad city, were evacuated due to sudden floods in the Sabarmati River after water was released from the Dharoi dam in Mehsana district, Gujarat, on July 30, 2015. Sabarmati water level dramatically rose after huge volume of water was released into the river from the dam due to heavy rainfall in the catchment.

sabarmatifloods — Sabarmati Floods Source: Indian Express

Flooding is frequently seen during heavy rains when the rivers are already overflowing and surplus water also has to be released from dams. During 2015 monsoons, flooding also occurred in West Bengal after release of water from the Damodar Valley project and in Punjab after authorities opened the flood gates of the Pong dam in Himachal Pradesh.

The floods in Chennai in Dec 2015 were made worse by negligent operation of the Chembarambakkam reservoir in the outskirts of the city. Meteorological agencies had predicted heavy rains and advised the PWD and other bureaucrats to bring down the water level in the reservoir. However the proposal to release water was caught in bureaucratic red tape. From Nov 24 to Nov 30, when the city experienced little rainfall, outflow from the reservoir was limited, while storage levels were maintained at 85-88%. Orders to open the Chembarambakkam sluice gates were received only after the city was pounded with rain and the reservoir started overflowing. On Dec 1, following heavy rainfall, approximately 29,000 cusecs (cubic feet per second) was released in a short span of time into the already constricted Adyar River and into the waterlogged city. Much of the flooding and subsequent waterlogging was a consequence of these outflows and water level in many areas went up even after the rains stopped.

Accumulation of silt is another recurring problem with dams. The dam’s storage capacity reduces with silt accumulation. Removal of silt is economically unviable – desilting a dam might be as expensive as constructing multiple new dams. However, the structure itself is endangered due to silt accumulation – necessitating removal or increasing the storage level of the dam. Deterioration over time of material used to build the dam also necessitates repair.

Khadakwasla dam which had 4 TMC storage capacity and supplied water to 80,000 Punekars when it was constructed, was left with 2 TMC water storage capacity as of June 2015.

Environmental NGOs and socially aware groups have been working on desilting the dam removing a lakh truckloads of silt in the last 3 years. The Temghar, Panshet dams in Pune are also prone to loss of capacity from silting. While periodic silting by civic agencies is called for, it is also observed that the reason behind increased silting is deforestation and catchment destruction. An environmentalist working on Khadakwasla explained that over time the area around the dam has lost its green cover leading to a rise in the rate of silting.

The Central Water Commission (CWC) with assistance from the World Bank has initiated the Dam Rehabilitation and Improvement Project (DRIP) at an estimated cost of Rs. 2100 crore and progress was reviewed on Feb 10, 2016. The project across seven states of India (Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Uttarakhand, and Jharkhand) targets rehabilitation of about 225 dam projects and preparatory activities have been completed for 207 dams in collaboration with states.

Land acquisition and rehabilitation: The Thumbe vented dam on the Nethravati River is the primary source of water for Mangalore city. A new dam is being constructed at Thumbe to increase the height of stored water from present 4m to 7m. An estimated 386 acre of additional land would be submerged if water is stored up to that level. The construction of the new dam has been almost completed and the process of land acquisition would be initiated soon. Strangely, the process of land acquisition is being initiated when the dam is almost completed.

In Jan. 2016, it was reported that Pune district has at least 800 pending cases of rehabilitation for the dam-affected that the district aims to clear during the year. The district has 25 dams. Besides rehabilitation and compensation, provision of civic amenities and basic infrastructure is also pending.

The rehabilitation process is often fraught with corruption. For instance, in the case of rehabilitation of Narmada dam oustees, activists have claimed that thousands of oustees have faced serious corruption in the rehabilitation process, thereby depriving them of their rights and rehabilitation benefits. The soon to be released report of the Jha Commission set up by the Madhya Pradesh HC to investigate corruption in the rehabilitation process is expected to reveal misappropriation to the tune of Rs 1,000 to 1,500 crore.

The recently reported issues related to dams reveal that they are an inefficient approach to urban water supply. Dams come at a high cost and the final expenditure is almost always in excess of what is predicted at the outset. Dam building also offers potential for embezzlement of huge amounts of money. Maintenance is again an expensive affair and is indispensable as they could otherwise lead to major disasters. They come at a huge social and environmental cost submerging agricultural lands, villages, forests and habitats of other species often against the will of the people they displace whose livelihoods are lost and life is altered permanently. Diversion of water is also at the cost of competing local demands for irrigation and domestic use. The burdens and benefits of such projects are distributed inequitably and cleave along the urban-rural, rich-poor social divide.

There is little appreciation of the huge costs involved and there is no incentive to conserve water among urban residents who are beneficiaries of the project. Often there is also lack of information regarding shortages on the supply side. Urban water supply can benefit more at lower costs and greater reliability from developing better water managing techniques such as rainwater harvesting, conserving and developing aquifers, protecting local water bodies and rivers, treated and recycling sewage and recharging groundwater. Groundwater is a much better storage option in times of drought, as it is not lost by evaporation. These require way less infrastructure and work along with nature than destroy it. However making sustainable use of groundwater requires disciplined planning and might not present chances for corruption that major dam projects do. It is sincerely hoped that the planners make this paradigm shift sooner than later.

Unless all available low cost and low impact options are exhausted, Dams are not water smart, climate smart or economically smart option for urban areas. Such projects should not be part of smart cities scheme.

Anuradha uv.anuradha@gmail.com, SANDRP

Maharashtra · Mumbai

Water Smart Mumbai is possible without river links and big dams! Open Letter to CM Devendra Fadnavis

January 13, 2015January 16, 2015 SANDRP3 Comments

Above: Forested Valley, now lost forever for the Middle Vaitarna Dam Photo: Parineeta Dandekar

Respected Chief Minister,

At the outset we congratulate you for leading some progressive changes in the Water Resources Department of the State. These include decisions about continuing only with those dam projects which are more than 75% complete[1], appointment of independent people with a clean image like Shri. H.T. Mendhegiri as CADA Chief Secretary, changing norms of Economic Survey Report[2], stating that only hoarding water will not be counted towards increase in irrigation potential, etc. Continue reading “Water Smart Mumbai is possible without river links and big dams! Open Letter to CM Devendra Fadnavis” →

Ganga · Mithi · Mumbai · Narmada · Sabarmati

Riverfront Development in India: Cosmetic make up on deep wounds

September 17, 2014September 17, 2014 SANDRP7 Comments

There is a rush of riverfront development schemes in India. We have heard of Sabarmati Riverfront development being drummed many times, followed by the proposed rejuvenation of Ganga, supposedly on the lines of Sabarmati.

What does Riverfront Development entail? Is it River Restoration? Are the millions of rupees spent on Riverfront Development schemes justified? Will it help in saving our damaged rivers?

A cursory glance at the existing river restoration/ improvement/beautification schemes indicates that the discourse revolves mainly around recreational and commercial activities. It is more about real estate than river. Activities that are promoted on the riverfronts typically include promenades, boat trips, shopping, petty shops, restaurants, theme parks, walk ways and even parking lots in the encroached river bed.

Pioneering project in Riverfront Development was claimed to be the Sabarmati Riverfront Development project of Ahmedabad city which was supposed to be designed based on riverfronts of Thames in London and Seine in Paris. The project which began as an urban development project is lately being pushed as a role model for many urban rivers in India. This kind of riverfront development essentially changes the ecological and social scape of the river transforming it into an urban commercial space rather than a natural, social, cultural, ecological landscape. Is it wise to go for this kind of development on riverfronts? What does it do to the river ecosystem, its hydrological cycle? What does it do to the downstream of river? These questions need to be explored before accepting the current model of riverfront development as replicable or laudable.

Reclaim and beautify!

Most of the currently ongoing projects lay a heavy emphasis on beautification of rivers. Riverfronts are treated as extension of urban spaces and are often conceived as ‘vibrant’, ‘throbbing’ or ‘breathing’ spaces by the designers. Concrete Wall Embankments, reclamation of the riverine floodplains and commercialization of the reclaimed land are the innate components of these projects. Quick glimpse at various Riverfront Development Projects confirms this.

Sabarmati Riverfront Development Project

Sabarmati Riverfront Development Project of Ahmedabad city which is presented as a pioneer in urban transformation[1] has been proposed by Environmental Planning Collaborative (EPC), an Ahmedabad-based urban planning consultancy firm, in 1997 and envisaged to develop a stretch of 10.4 km of the banks on both sides of the river by creating concrete embankment walls on both banks with walkways. A Special Purpose Vehicle called the Sabarmati Riverfront Development Corporation Ltd. (SRFDCL) was formed in the same year for implementation of the project. The financial cost of the initiative was estimated to be in the range of around INR 11520 million[2]. Around two thirds of this amount has already been spent.

Construction of the project started in 2005. The project sought to develop the riverfront on either side of the Sabarmati for 10.4 kms by constructing embankments and roads, laying water supply lines and trunk sewers, building pumping stations, and developing gardens and promenades[3]. Mainstay of the project was the sale of riverfront property. Land along the 10.4 km stretch on both the banks was reclaimed by constructing retaining walls of height ranging from 4 to 6m[4]. 21% of the 185 ha of reclaimed land which was developed by concretizing the river bank[5] was sold to private developers for commercial purpose.[6] Activities hosted on this reclaimed land were recreational and commercial activities like restaurants, shops, waterfront settlements, gardens, walkways, amusement parks, golf course, water sports and some for public purpose like roads etc. The sale of reclaimed land created by the project is expected to cover the full cost of the project. Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (AMC) claims that the after the project “river has added vibrancy to the urban landscape of Ahmadabad with its open spaces, walkways, well-designed gardens along with activities which contribute to economic growth.”[7]

Even though the project has been modeled as “best practice” by several financing institutions[8], it has also drawn severe criticism for poor rehabilitation of the displaced (rehabilitation happened only after High Court orders following a public interest petition) disrupting the nexus of shelter, livelihood and services of urban poor, lack of transparency in the execution and for tampering with the carrying capacity of the river. No Environment Impact Assessment of the project has been conducted nor any credible public consultation process held.

Sabarmati channel has been uniformly narrowed to 275 metres during the riverfront development project, when naturally average width of the channel was 382 metres and the narrowest cross-section was 330 metres[9]. In this attempt of “pinching the river”[10], the original character of the river is changed completely from seasonally flowing river to an impounded tank illegally taking water from Narmada Canal[11]. River banks have been treated as land that is wasted on which value could be created by reclaiming and not as seasonal ecological systems with floodplains as an integral part of its flows (Baviskar 2011). Seasonality of the river is destroyed and fauna and avi fauna on edges have been damaged. No thought has been given for protection, sustenance or enhancement of the riverine ecosystem. The water that is now impounded in this stretch is not even Sabarmati river water, but Narmada River Water, on which the city of Ahmedabad or Sabarmati has no right, it’s the water meant for drought prone areas of Kutch, Saurashtra and North Gujarat.

The River Sabarmati itself was a perennial river till the Dharoi Dam in the upstream stopped all water at least in non Monsoon months, making the river dry. The stretch flowing through Ahmedabad was carrying the mostly untreated sewage of Ahmedabad city and toxic effluents from the City and district industries.

In the name of Sabarmati River front development, no cleaning of the river has happened, the project has only transferred the water from both banks to the river downstream from Vasna barrage, which is situated downstream from the city. The Vasna barrage stops and stores the water released from Narmada Main Canal that crosses the river about 10.4 km upstream from the barrage. Thus this 10.4 km stretch of the river now holds the Narmada water and huge losses from the stretch are losses for the drought prone areas.

The reclaimed land and the narrowing of the channel have been tampering with the carrying capacity of the river. The project was stalled during August 2006 to March 2007 due to heavy floods[12]. Prior to the floods, the river’s maximum carrying capacity was calculated at 4.75 lakh cusecs on basis of the rainfall over last 100 years[13]. The floods however proved the calculation wrong. National Institute of Hydrology (NIH) and Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee (IITR) were asked to re-evaluate the project design, in the light of the river’s carrying capacity, and see whether the execution of the project would damage the river’s ecology[14]. Report by the NIH, Roorkee in 2007 said “the calculations did not take into account any simultaneous rainfall over the entire catchment area”[15]. This means that the carrying capacity was based only on the water flow from the Dharoi Dam (which is upstream of Ahmedabad City) and not from other places in the river’s catchment until Ahmedabad that also contribute to the volume of water in the Sabarmati. This report states that the riverfront development is “not a flood control scheme”, and that the municipal corporation will have to work out other measures to meet the impending challenge of floods.

The project is also heavily criticized for the poor rehabilitation of the evicted slum population. Large scale eviction was being carried out in an utmost non-transparent manner. A public interest litigation (PIL) was filed in the Gujarat High Court by Sabarmati Nagarik Adhikar Manch (SNAM) or Sabarmati Citizens Rights Forum, supported by several other non-governmental organisations (NGOs) to ensure that the rehabilitation plan was shared with them and to bring transparency to the process. According to the high court orders, at least 11,000 affected families were to be rehabilitated and resettled by AMC. Demolition drive went on without ensuring rehabilitation. Over 3,000 people have moved to a marshland in the outskirts of city with negligible compensation, little & infrequent access to drinking water and minimal sanitation facilities[16].

“The ecology of the river is being transformed to satisfy the commercial greed of a select few,” said Darshni Mahadevia of CEPT, expressing concerns about riverfront ‘beautification’[17].

The project that has converted the Sabarmati River into an urban space by reclaiming nearly 200 ha of land and has sustained by borrowing water from Narmada Canal today is claimed to be a role model for many riverfront development projects in the country. Should this model really be replicated? Many of the rivers like Yamuna, Ganga, Mithi, Brahmaputra etc. that are being ‘developed’, have had a flood history which is being ignored in the process. With having no regards to the hazards of floods, several riverfront projects are being pushed across the country by different government agencies.

The fact that even after a Riverfront Development Project, Water Quality of Sabarmati downstream the Vasna Barrage is extremely poor and the cosmetic treatment of flowing water stretch at Ahmedabad is actually water from Narmada, which was promised for the drought hit regions of Kutch and Saurashtra, highlights the contradictory and superficial nature of such Riverfront development schemes.

Yamuna Riverfront Development inspired from Sabarmati Model

Recently the newly elected BJP led Central Government sent a team of bureaucrats to Gujarat to study the feasibility of replicating the successful model of the Sabarmati Riverfront Development Project for cleaning the Yamuna[18]. Despite the concerns about flooding of Yamuna, the team is exploring ways of replicating Sabarmati Model. In 2009, the Sheila Dikshit administration was also planning channelizing the Yamuna and putting up a waterfront like Paris and London with recreational facilities, parking lots and promenades etc[19].

Reclamation of the floodplains to create a concrete riverfront, like in Ahmedabad, could be ecologically unsound and even dangerous for Delhi that is already extremely vulnerable to floods[20]. The sediment load in Yamuna is very high. The non-channelized river rises by over four metres during peak monsoon flooding[21]. Risk of flooding will increase multifold for a channelized river. The Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change last year put Delhi among three world cities at high risk of floods. Tokyo and Shanghai are the two other cities.

An expert committee appointed by the Ministry of Environment & Forests (MoEF) to examine the Yamuna River Front Development Scheme of the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) recommended that DDA should scrap its ambitious plan for developing recreational facilities, parking lots and promenades. [22] The committee was formed following order from National Green Tribunal which was drawn in response to a petition filed by activists and Yamuna Jiye Abhiyaan convener Manoj Misra.[23] The committee pointed out that recreational spots located in active floodplain areas would kill the river and cause floods in the city. About the Sabarmati Model Being followed, CR Babu, Chair of the committee said: “There is no Sabarmati river. It’s stagnant water with concrete walls on two sides. The floodplains have been concretized to make pathways and real estate projects. It cannot be replicated for our Yamuna”.

The committee report says the Yamuna Riverfront Development scheme will reduce the river’s flood-carrying capacity and increase flooding and pollution and it recommended a ban on developmental activity in the river’s Zone ‘O’ and its active floodplains on the Uttar Pradesh side. It also said that a 52-km stretch of the Yamuna in Delhi and Uttar Pradesh be declared a ‘conservation zone’ as restoring the river’s ecological functions is heavily dependent on the environmental flow through this stretch, particularly in the lean season.

Manoj Misra of Yamuna Jiye Abhiyan, dismisses the Sabarmati solution saying “We cannot call it a Sabarmati model… It’s like a mirage created for a brief stretch. Let’s be clear about it. If the Delhi bureaucrats have gone there to learn from the Gujarat model, it’s up to them to figure out if it can be implemented. I cannot call the Sabarmati project a river rejuvenation project – it’s more of a real estate project… That is not advisable for Delhi.” [24]

Another important aspect which does not feature at all during the talks of Yamuna Riverfront Development is the massive displacement that will take place. Over a dozen unauthorised colonies are located on the riverbed. These colonies which have been in existence for over 40 years will have to be uprooted which again may lead to Sabarmati like situation where urban poor are brushed aside to serve interests of real estate developers and urban middle class.[25]

City of Noida on the other hand has decided to go ahead with the Rs 200 crore Yamuna Riverfront Development Project that Greater Noida Authority (GNA) has been planning[26]. The project involves developing recreational facilities like parks, Yoga centres, picnic spots and sports centres, polo grounds, golf course etc. on Hindon and Yamuna floodplains. Officials from GNA claim that these facilities will be for recreational purpose and will be developed without disrupting the natural flow of Yamuna. Here again the project has nothing to do with sustaining, cleaning, rejuvenation of the river.

Ganga cannot be ‘developed’ as Sabarmati

Prime Minister Narendra Modi made a promise during his election campaign in Varanasi to clean up Ganga.[27] The National Ganga River Basin Authority (NGRBA) was shifted from the environment ministry to the water resources ministry.[28] New name for the Ministry of Water Resources is Ministry of Water Resources, River Development and Ganga Rejuvenation. Uma Bharati was assigned with this specially created ministry for cleaning Ganga by the PM. “If Sabarmati can be cleaned, all other rivers can also be made better.” print media has quoted Uma Bharati.[29] Ms Uma Bharati seems to have no idea that Sabarmati has NOT been cleaned, the Sabarmati project just transferred the polluted water downstream of the 10.4 km stretch. Can Sabarmati Model be replicated at Ganga? Even if it is replicated, will it help the cause or river or river rejuvenation? The answer is clearly a BIG NO. A number of apprehensions have been raised in this regard. “The so-called Sabarmati model won’t work for the Ganga. The Sabarmati has neither been cleaned nor rejuvenated,” Openindia News quotes Himanshu Thakkar, environmentalist and coordinator of SANDRP[30]. He further points out that
Sabarmati Model survives on water from Narmada canal in the stretch of 10.4 km which flows through the Ahmedabad city. This is not possible in case of Ganga.

Priority for the river rejuvenation is restoring its water quality, freshwater flow and not riverbank beautification. More than Rs. 5,000 crore (some estimates this figure to be over Rs 20 000 crores) has been spent on cleaning the Ganga in the past 28 years. The Ganga Action Plan was launched in 1986 and was in 1994 extended to the Yamuna, Gomti and other tributaries of the Ganga. The second phase of the Ganga Action Plan was launched in 2000 and NGRBA was created in 2009.[31] The plan however has not achieved what it set out to achieve. Water quality for Ganga River has been declining and is unfit even for irrigation or bathing. Potable use is out of question. The count of harmful organisms, including hazardous faecal bacteria, at many locations is more than 100 times the limit set by the government. The water’s biochemical oxygen content, which is vital for the survival of aquatic wildlife, has dipped drastically.[32] Any “cosmetic treatments”[33] will not work for Ganga, like they have not worked for Sabarmati.

Several Riverfront Development Projects springing up across nation

While there are experts opposing replication of Sabarmati Riverfront Project on Ganga and Yamuna River, there are several other riverfront projects which are inspired by the Sabarmati Project and which are being pushed without any kind of studies or impact assessment. Their possible impacts on the riverine ecology, flood patterns, downstream areas etc. are going unchecked.

Brahmaputra Riverfront Development Project: Another “multi-dimensional environment improvement and urban rejuvenation project” that is set to come up with plans for reclaimed river banks is on Brahmaputra River in Guwahati[34]. While on one hand the city is struggling to cope up with the flood prone nature of the Brahmaputra River, State Government of Assam plans to take up an ambitious project to develop the city riverfront named ‘Brahmaputra Riverfront Development Project’ under the Assam Infrastructure Financing Authority. The riverfront project will be implemented by the Guwahati Metropolitan Development Authority (GMDA) in phases[35]. Foundation of the beautification project was laid by the Chief Minister Tarun Gogoi in February 2013. The project plans to achieve maximum possible reclamation[36].While the plan talks of revitalization of the river ecology and Strengthening of riverbanks through soil bio engineering it has several urban features on its agenda like promenade, Ghats, Plazas and Parks; buildings, conference facilities, Parking lots, ferry terminals, Bus and para transport stops, Urban utilities and drainage, Improved infrastructure for floating restaurants, Public amenities; Dhobi Ghats, etc.[37]

Will such a huge real estate development leave any room for river or its revitalization?

Tendency to flood is an important feature of River Brahmaputra. The river also has one of the highest sediment loads in the world. Every year during the successive floods, most of the areas in the valley of Assam remain submerged for a considerable numbers of days causing wide spread damages. In a phenomenon as recent as June 27, 2014 Guwahati experienced heavy downpour for 15 hours, setting off flash floods[38]. Half of the city was submerged under flood water. The authorities blamed illegal encroachments on watersheds across the state capital for the flash floods, which had choked the natural outlets for the gushing water. National Institute of Hydrology (NIH), Roorkee; upon being requested by the GMDA; is carrying out a study which includes river shifting analysis for studying stability of the river banks, flow variations to determine the perennial water depth, estimate of floods of various return periods for design of river embankments, estimate of water surface profiles employing hydro-dynamic river flow model and design parameters for river embankments[39]. The Bramhaputra Riverfront Development Project however has been inaugurated even before the requisite studies have been completed.

Gomti Riverfront Development Project in Lucknow: The project by the Lucknow Development Authority is based on the Sabarmati Riverfront Model. It plans to “beautify” Gomti River between Gomti Barrage and Bridge on Bye-pass road connecting Lucknow-Hardoi road and Lucknow-Sitapur road, a length of about 15 Km. According to the Technical Bid Document released by the Lucknow Development Authority, the Riverfront Project has no component of water treatment or river restoration, but is a landscape-based development project, which will also look at “reclaiming” the river banks for activities like shops, entertainment area, promenades, etc. The inspiration for the project swings from Thames Rivefront in London, to Sabarmati in Gujarat, depending on the political party in power.[40]

In all this discussion, there is no mention of maintaining adequate flow in Gomti, treating sewage, conserving its floodplains, or any other ecological angles.

River Improvement and Restoration are also about real estate!

For many government agencies, ironically, not just river beautification, but the idea of river improvement and restoration is also about channelizing rivers and providing recreational facilities.

Pune Rivefront Project: Pune Municipal Corporation, the Pune city also known for chronically polluting Mula and Mutha rivers that flow through the heart of the city, has sanctioned a River Improvement Project, under the aegis of JNNURM (Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission). The Project envisages channelizing the river, introducing barrages to maintain water levels, development of riparian zone as entertainment and shopping groups, even Parking lots, introducing navigation in the river etc. There are several issues with this “improvement” project. Firstly, it is not planned according to the once in a hundred years flood in Pune, it plans to constrict the river further, thus encroaching the riverbed. Creation of stagnant pools through barrages will result in backwater effect on the many nallahs that join the river. These Nallahs routinely flood in rainy season and additional backwater in these nallahs will worsen the situation further. The project does not say a word about treating water quality, but envisages to build drainage lines inside the riverbed and carry the sewage out of Pune city limits. This hardly qualifies as river rejuvenation or restoration. A case has been filed against this project in National Green Tribunal.

Goda Park (Godavari Riverfront Project) in Nashik, Maharashtra: Godavari emerging from the Brahmagiri Hills in Nashik is famed not only for being one of the longest rivers in India, but also because Kumbh Mela is held on its banks every 12 years in Nashik. Nashik and Trimbakeshwar have had no dearth of funding for cleaning Godavari. They have received funds from the National River Conservation Directorate as well as JNNURM. Despite this, Godavari is extremely filthy in Nashik. Ignoring the pressing issues of water quality, Nashik Municipal Corporation and a specific political party have been hankering after beatification of Godavari’s banks. In fact, the project has been handed over to Reliance Foundation by the Nashik Municipal Corporation[41] without any public consultations or discussions. As per reports, the components of this 13.5 kms long project will be laser shows, musical fountains, rope-way, multi-purpose meeting hall, garden, water sports, canteen, etc.[42]

In the meantime, there are several court orders against Nashik Municipal Corporation pending about severe water pollution in the River including Ram Kund where holy dip on Kumbh Mela is supposed to be taken.

Mithi Riverfront Development: Stretch of 18 km of Mithi River flows through city of Mumbai. Course of Mithi has been modified throughout the city to host range of activities.[43] On 26 July 2005, the river flooded some of the most densely populated areas claiming nearly 1000 lives[44].

After these catastrophic floods, the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) and Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) made a plan to “restore” the river. BMC and MMRDA’s definition of restoration involves desilting, beautification and building of a retaining wall. Stretch of 4.5 km of the total six km stretch of the river that falls within MMRDA’s jurisdiction is covered with mangroves. MMRDA has planned to beautify the stretch of remaining 1.5 km (10 Ha) which lies right amidst mangroves by developing a promenade. MMRDA plans developing this project on a PPP (Public Private Partnership) basis. Interestingly, the Mukesh Ambani-led Reliance Foundation and Standard Chartered bank have been selected for this project.[45]

As per the Coastal Zone Management Plan (CZMP) of the area, the proposed Mithi Riverfront Development Project falls in Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) II and III. The proposal was presented to CRZ authority in its 82^nd meeting on 10^th June, 2013[46]. CRZ authority has not allowed any reclamation or construction activities in this stretch. For Widening, lengthening & reconstruction of the existing bridge CRZ has referred the proposal to MoEF and asked MMRDA to take prior permission of High Court if the proposal involves destruction of mangroves[47].

Observer Research Foundation, a private, not for profit organization (funded by Reliance India[48]) from Mumbai has come up with a study that recommends a 21-point programme for reclaiming the Mithi, envisaging a single and unbroken river-park corridor spanning across the entire 18-km length of the Mithi with dedicated bicycle tracks, gardens, amphitheatres, sports and recreation.[49]

Riverfront Development is NOT River Restoration

As is evident, the riverfront projects discussed above are essentially river bank beautification & Real Estate Development projects and not helping restoration of the river. The projects aim at comodifying rivers to develop urban scapes. Such riverfront development changes the essential character of the river. Stream channelization and alteration of shoreline disconnects the river stretch from adjacent ecosystems and leads to risks of habitat degradation, changes in the flow regime and siltation[50].

While the water of the rivers flows in the natural landscapes, there are many processes that are happening. Sediments are carried, fertile land is created along the banks, river channel is widened, flooding, deposition of sediments during flooding, cleansing of river etc.[51] However the urban rivers are alienated from this natural landscape to such an extent that the rivers are reduced to merely nallas carrying city’s sewage and filth.

Flow, connectivity and flood are fundamental characteristics of rivers and rivers need space for that. If these are violated the river water spreads uncontrolled through the habitation causing catastrophic events like Mithi Flooding.

Creating more room for rivers

While Indian cities are busy replicating Riverfronts of Thames and Seine, there are some remarkable projects going on in some other countries which actually talk of giving more room to the rivers during floods. They are trying to restore the river and not beautify, concretize, channelise or encroach on it.

In the Netherlands, such an integrated approach has been adopted for ‘Room for the River Program’[52]. The program is currently being implemented in the Dutch Rhine River Basin of the country.

The programme started in 2006 is scheduled to be completed by 2015. The objectives of the programme are improving safety against flooding of riverine areas of Rivers Rhine and Meuse by increasing the discharge capacity and improving of spatial quality of the riverine area.

At 39 locations, measures will be taken to give the river space to flood safely through flood bypasses, excavation of flood plains, dike relocation and lowering of groynes etc. Moreover, the measures will be designed in such a way that they improve the quality of the immediate surroundings.

While Room for the River programme focuses on flood management in sustainable way, Yolo Bypass is another unique initiative aimed at keeping intact the benefits to the ecosystem without causing a negative impact on water supply[53]. The Yolo Bypass is a flood bypass in the Sacramento Valley located in Yolo and Solano Counties of California State in USA. The primary function of the bypass is flood damage reduction. It is a designated floodway that encompasses 60,000 acres in eastern Yolo County between the cities of Davis and Sacramento. All the properties within the bypass are subject to a flood easement that allows the state to flood the land for public safety and ecological benefit.

Conclusion

Riverfront of Thames in London and Seine in Paris are often cited as successful models of riverfront development in India. However, the ecological as well as social setting of Indian rivers and the challenges that we face are significantly different from these foreign models. A Blind replication will only be wastage of public funds and degradation of the rivers further. Riverfront development projects across the country seem to be alienated from the river, and talk only about its urban banks, trying to achieve cosmetic changes on deeper wounds by encroachment and real estate development on the belly of the rivers. The need of the hour is river rejuvenation and not river FRONT development. Let us hope that we see central place for rivers in all these projects. Moreover, there is neither any social or environmental impact assessment, nor any regulation or democratic participatory decision making process. Such projects will only be at the cost of the poor, the environment, future generation and to short term benefits of real estate developers and a section of urban middle class.

Amruta Pradhan, SANDRP (With Inputs from Himanshu Thakkar & Parineeta Dandekar)

amrutapradhan@gmail.com

An edited version of this article has been published at: http://indiatogether.org/gujarat-sabarmati-riverfront-development-model-for-ganga-yamuna-environment

END NOTES:

[1] http://www.egovamc.com/SRFDCL/SRFDCL.pdf

[2] http://www.egovamc.com/SRFDCL/SRFDCL.pdf

[3] http://www.frontline.in/static/html/fl2802/stories/20110128280208500.htm

[4] http://www.frontline.in/static/html/fl2802/stories/20110128280208500.htm

[5]http://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/amc-bets-on-huge-returns-from-riverfront-property-sale-114032000894_1.html

[6] http://indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/file/Sabarmati%20Riverfront.pdf

[7] http://www.egovamc.com/SRFDCL/SRFDCL.pdf

[8] http://indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/file/Sabarmati%20Riverfront.pdf

[9] http://www.downtoearth.org.in/node/5786

[10] http://www.frontline.in/static/html/fl2802/stories/20110128280208500.htm

[11] http://landscapeindiapbb.wordpress.com/2013/10/30/riverfront-development-ahmedabad/

[12] http://www.downtoearth.org.in/node/5786

[13] http://archive.indianexpress.com/news/flood-control-in-sabarmati-a-challenge-for-amc/654704/

[14] http://www.downtoearth.org.in/node/5786

[15] http://archive.indianexpress.com/news/flood-control-in-sabarmati-a-challenge-for-amc/654704/

[16] http://indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/file/Sabarmati%20Riverfront.pdf

[17] http://www.downtoearth.org.in/node/5786

[18] http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/Delhi-babu-all-praise-for-Sabarmati-plan/articleshow/36363896.cms

[19] http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/Scientist-cautions-against-riverfront-plan/articleshow/38500711.cms

[20]http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/River-experts-say-Sabarmati-no-model-for-Yamuna/articleshow/36222968.cms

[21] http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/Scientist-cautions-against-riverfront-plan/articleshow/38500711.cms

[22]http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/Scientist-opposes-Sabarmati-model-says-reclaiming-floodplain-not-a-good-idea-for-Yamuna/articleshow/36679502.cms

[23] http://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/Yamuna-Action-Plan-Soon-Promises-MoEF/2013/12/19/article1953318.ece,

http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/Yamuna%20River%20Front%20NGT%2018Dec2013.pdf

[24]http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/River-experts-say-Sabarmati-no-model-for-Yamuna/articleshow/36222968.cms

[25] http://www.asianage.com/delhi/illegal-colonies-near-river-may-be-shifted-946

[26] http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/noida/Twin-cities-to-go-ahead-with-riverfront-project/articleshow/34845006.cms

[27] http://indianexpress.com/article/india/politics/modi-assigns-task-of-cleaning-ganga-to-uma-bharti/,

http://www.firstpost.com/politics/cleaning-up-the-ganga-yamuna-why-modi-must-forget-sabarmati-model-1560939.html

[28]http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/clean-up-act-superbody-headed-by-pm-modi-to-drive-mission-ganga/article1-1253158.aspx

[29] http://www.firstpost.com/politics/cleaning-up-the-ganga-yamuna-why-modi-must-forget-sabarmati-model-1560939.html

[30] http://news.oneindia.in/india/sabarmati-model-not-enough-for-ganga-1478033.html

[31] http://news.oneindia.in/india/sabarmati-model-not-enough-for-ganga-1478033.html

[32] http://www.business-standard.com/article/opinion/rejuvenating-a-river-114052801804_1.html

[33] http://www.business-standard.com/article/opinion/rejuvenating-a-river-114052801804_1.html

[34] http://www.assamtribune.com/scripts/detailsnew.asp?id=aug3113/city05

[35] http://guwahatilife.blogspot.in/2011/02/cm-lays-foundation-of-beautification-of.html

[36] http://www.assamtribune.com/scripts/detailsnew.asp?id=aug3113/city05

[37] http://www.psda.in/guwahati.asp

[38] http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/flash-floods-in-guwahati-seven-dead-in-last-15-hours-548974

[39] http://www.assamtribune.com/scripts/detailsnew.asp?id=aug3113/city05

[40]http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/lucknow/Lucknow-Development-Authority-to-get-new-blueprint-of-Gomti-riverfront-development-project/articleshow/19687344.cms

http://m.financialexpress.com/news/akhilesh-wants-london-eye-in-lucknow/975999/

[41] http://www.reliancefoundation.org/urban_renewal.html

[42]http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2013-09-20/news/42252355_1_goda-park-project-reliance-foundation-mns-chief-raj-thackeray

[43] The Mumbai airport has its domestic and international terminals, and its cargo complex along the Mithi River. There are five major railway stations along the Mithi River including Mahim and Bandra on the western line andSion, Chunnabhatti and Kurla on the central line. The upcoming V ersova-Andheri-Ghatkopar corridor of the Mumbai Metro project that also crosses over the Mithi River has two stations planned along the Mithi River at Marol and Saki Naka. There are also several bus stops located close to the river all along its banks.

(Source: http://orfonline.org/cms/sites/orfonline/modules/report/ReportDetail.html?cmaid=23400&mmacmaid=23401)

[44] http://orfonline.org/cms/sites/orfonline/modules/report/ReportDetail.html?cmaid=23400&mmacmaid=23401

[45] http://indianexpress.com/article/cities/mumbai/beautification-plans-of-mithi-river-promenade-stuck-over-crz-norms/

[46] https://mczma.maharashtra.gov.in/pdf/MCZMA_MoM82.pdf

[47] The proposal was cleared subject to compliance of following conditions

(i) The proposed construction should be carried out strictly as per the provisions of CRZ Notification, 2011 (as amended from time to time) and guidelines/ clarifications given by MoEF time to time.

(ii) Disposal of debris during construction phase should be as per MSW (M&H) rules. 2000.

(iii) Tidal flow of river should not be obstructed.

(iv) The project proponent should obtain prior High Court permission, if the proposal involves destruction of mangroves or construction falls with 50 nil buffer zone.

(v) All other required permissions from different statutory authorities should be obtained prior to commencement of work

[48] http://www.rediff.com/news/report/najeeb-jung-the-man-who-may-run-delhi/20131213.htm

[49]http://www.indiawaterportal.org/sites/indiawaterportal.org/files/why_mumbai_must_reclaim_its_mithi_gautam_kirtane_orf_2011.pdf

[50] http://water.epa.gov/type/wetlands/restore/principles.cfm

[51] Nature Conservation by Ketki Ghate, Manasi Karandikar

[52] http://www.downtoearth.org.in/node/5786

[53] http://www.americanrivers.org/initiative/floods/projects/yolo-bypass-and-the-fremont-weir/

Mumbai · Narmada · Western Ghats

Crisis in India’s Urban Water Sector

February 28, 2014 SANDRPLeave a comment

More than 50 people including tribal groups, social activists, water experts, ecologists and wildlife experts, academics came together for a brainstorming workshop about Dams coming up for Mumbai Region. The meeting was organized by South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People, Shramik Mukti Sangathana, and Jalbiradari.

Seetaram Shelar of YUVA at Meeting on Dams round Mumbai Photo: SANDRP

About 12 dams are planned or are under construction to satisfy the increasing thirst of the Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR). All of these dams fall in eco-sensitive region of the Western Ghats. They will together submerge more than 22,000 hectares of land, including nearly 7000 hectares of forests, lakhs of trees and more than 750 hectares of Tansa Sanctuary. They will affect a minimum of 100,000 tribals who depend on the forests and their ancestral lands for livelihoods. These dams include Kalu, Shai, Balganga, Susari, Khargihill, Bhugad, Pinjal, Gargai, Middle Vaitarna, Barvi and Poshir, among others. These are in addition to the dams already constructed for MMR water supply.

Tribals and other affected groups of Thane and Raigad region have been strongly opposing these projects. Most people in Mumbai seem unaware of their struggles or impacts of these projects.

Most of these dams are escaping the social and environmental impact assessments and management plans, environment clearance requirements, environmental monitoring or public consultations due to blunders in environmental impact assessment notification of Sept 2006, which excludes domestic and industrial water supply projects from environmental clearance process. It signifies the environmental illiteracy of the officials and ministers at the Union Ministry of Environment and Forests. In spite of repeated letters, and acknowledging that this makes no sense, they have refused to change it.

Local protest against Pinjal Dam near Jawhar which can submereg 11 villages and 2000 hectares fo forests Photo: SANDRP — Local protest against Pinjal Dam near Jawhar which can submereg 11 villages and 2000 hectares of forests Photo: SANDRP

MMR has not done any sort of options assessment before pushing these projects and cursory review show that many options exist. At the city or Region level, there is no shortfall in water supply currently and the existing problems are due to inequitable, non-transparent, non-participatory and wasteful water governance in MMR. Municipal corporations under the MMR which are pushing new dams do not treat even 15% of their sewage. Bhiwandi Nizampur & Vasai Virar Corp do not treat ANY of their sewage. The Mumbai Region has no estimate of its rainwater harvesting potential, and there is little effective action in this direction despite high rainfall. Water supply and distribution losses are over 30%. Local water sources like rivers, lakes and wells are being destroyed by pollution and encroachments. There is no interest in democratizing governance of MMR water sector.

The meeting resolution urged the MMR region to address these issues first, which would lead to sustainable water supply to the city and suburbs. Konkan Irrigation Department which is constructing most of these projects has violated several laws related to tribal and forest rights, environment, forests and resettlement and has been mostly favoring a single contractor, illegally.

The meeting also strongly urged the MMRDA, MCGM, Municipal Corporations of MMR, Maharashtra government, Union Ministry of environment and forests, Maharashtra Forest Department, National Board of Wildlife and all others concerned to ensure that following steps are taken up urgently and in a credible way:

Þ Undertake thorough options assessment for Mumbai’s (and also for other cities of MMR) water needs which includes groundwater recharge and sustainable use, protect and use local water sources, rainwater harvesting, sewage treatment and reuse, plug leakages, improve water supply efficiency, take up systematic demand side management measures etc.;

Þ Undertake Environmental and Social impact assessments for all the dams coming up for Mumbai Region;

Þ Take immediate action against KIDC for violating multiple laws while bulldozing ahead with projects and MMRDA for funding projects in the absence of clearances;

Þ Respect people’s protests and Gram Sabha resolutions against displacement, deforestation and their refusal to give permission for these projects;

Þ Take strong penal action against the officers and the contractors who have displaced Adivasis illegally;

Þ Not resume any work or planning for any project before the above is done, stop work on projects in the meantime;

Þ Change the EIA notification to ensure that all large dams are included for environment clearance, public hearings and EIA requirements;

Þ Immediately institute a credible Cumulative Impact Assessment of the projects already constructed and advanced in implementation;

Þ Institutionalize decentralized, democratic governance of water sector in MMR from bottom to top.

Forests in the Western Ghats are Mumbai’s and MMR’s lungs. They are the watersheds of rivers and water sources like Tansa and Bhatsa and naturally purify Mumbai’s & MMR’s drinking water. Rich tribal culture of Thane and Raigad is a shared heritage of Mumbai and we have no right to displace the tribals or destroy their livelihoods. This destruction in Mumbai’s backyard must be stopped.

However, Mumbai and MMR are not the only urban areas guilty of destroying the environment, forests, biodiversity and livelihoods of lakhs of poor people. Delhi, already having more per capita water than European cities like Paris, Amsterdam or Bonn, is asking for Renuka, Lakhwar and Kishau dams in upstream Yamuna basin, while destroying the YamunaRiver for all downstream areas. Ahmedabad is using water from the Sardar Sarovar Narmada dam that was meant for the people of Kutch and Saurashtra and which has led to displacement of over two lakh people. Jaipur is taking water from Bisalpur dam. Farmers for whom it was made are not getting the water and some lost their lives in police firing, while demanding that water. Massive diversion of Nethrawathi water is proposed for Bangalore and other areas, destroying the pristine Western Ghats forests. 3 farmers died in police firing near Pune when a huge farmers rally was protesting against diversion of water from Pawna Dam to the Corporation of Pimpri-Chinchwad.

Headwaters of Netravathi and Gundia threatened by Yettinahole Diversion Photo: Parineeta Dandekar, SANDRP

As Planning Commission member Dr Mihir Shah recently wrote, the 12^th Five Year Plan proposes paradigm shift in Urban sector sector: “Each city must consider, as the first source of supply, its local waterbodies. Therefore, cities must only get funds for water projects, when they have accounted for the water supply from local waterbodies and have protected these waterbodies and their catchments. This precondition will force protection and build the infrastructure, which will supply locally and then take back sewage also locally.”

The trouble with this urban water sector reform agenda is that close to two years into the 12^th Plan, we still do not see it being implemented anywhere. We do not see any roadmap for its implementation. And yet the UPA government continues to fund solutions catering to only long distance supply-side measures like big dam projects for urban areas under the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission. In fact, of the first Rs 60 000 crores sanctioned for JNNURM, about 70% was for urban water sector, but do we see any progress in democratisation or even improvement of Urban Water Governance?

The hope lies with clean, transparent and participatory governance. Let us hope we see some change in this direction.

Himanshu Thakkar (ht.sandrp@gmail.com), Parineeta Dandekar (parineeta.dandekar@gmail.com), SANDRP

A slightly edited version of this has appeared in Civil Society http://www.civilsocietyonline.com/pages/Details.aspx?480

Maharashtra · Mumbai · Western Ghats

Pathetic state of rehabilitation at the “State-of-the-Art” Middle Vaitarna Dam

February 12, 2014February 12, 2014 SANDRPLeave a comment

Middle Vaitarna Dam across the west flowing Vaitarna River near Mumbai is supposed to be a state-of-the-art technological feat. It’s a 102 meters tall concrete dam, the second tallest in Maharashtra. It was built with an what is claimed to be innovative mix of cement and fly ash from Eklahere Thermal Power Plant. The dam is also claimed to be completed in a record time. Additional Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM), Mr. Jalota claims that Middle Vaitarna was completed in 15.5 months out of the total project duration of 42 months. This speed is supposed to be ninth fastest globally for RCC Dams[i].

Middle Vaitarna Project Photo with thanks from mmmhydropower.blogspot.com

The project was partly funded by the Jawarharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM). When fully functional, the dam will be supplying 455 MLD (Million Liters per Day) water to MCGM (Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai), one of the biggest Municipal Corporations of the world.

So many exceptional performances claimed for one dam!

One would expect the similar concern for efficiency and speed while dealing with rehabilitation and resettlement of project affected population.

The project submerged over 3473 hectares of land (8581 acres land) including over 634 hectares forests (1566 acres forest). It also affected about 8 villages and several adivasi padas in the region. Of these, only 35 families who lost their homes were rehabilitated in a colony near the project site of Kochale village.

A visit to the rehabilitation colony in 2012 and in January 2014 where the project affected families moved in last year reveals:

Extremely poor construction quality. Just one year after families moved in, roofs of one of the houses collapsed. Human injury was narrowly avoided.

Resettlement Colony of the Middle Vaitarna Dam. Photo: Amit Tillu

Almost all of the homes are chronically leaking.

There is no drinking water supply to this colony. The main supply tank does not get water. So no taps are working.

Middle Vaitarna Colony Photo: Amit Tillu

There is no water in the toilets. Site-in-charge and contractor orders a tanker when they feel like.
Common electric connections are defunct: Contractor took away the meters. No electricity at Hospital, Temple and Community Hall.
No Doctor has been appointed at the hospital. It’s an empty building.

Middle Vaitarna resettlement colony Photo: Amit Tillu

Completely disillusioned by these houses, many affected people have built separate mud and thatch houses next to the ‘Sarkari’ homes.

What is the state of other Project affected people?

The affected people from Kochale, Karegaon, Vihigaon have received paltry compensation sums at Rs. 28000 per hectare for cultivated land. This is much lower than per hectare compensation given to the Forest Department for trees lost.

Smr Sangeeta Vare from Kochale village, struggling to get a project affected certificate Photo: Parineeta Dandekar — Smt. Sangeeta Vare from Kochale village, struggling to get a project affected certificate Photo: Parineeta Dandekar

Project affected were told that one member from each affected family will get a government job. Land acquisition for Middle Vaitarna has been done under the article 52 A of the Maharashtra Land Acquisition Act, which includes provisions for ‘Urgent’ land acquisition. Special Land Acquisition officer promised that action will be taken about securing some jobs. After a long follow up, none of the project affected have received jobs. Requests for recommendations for temporary jobs at the dam site have also been denied.

Regarding “Project Affected” Certificate (Government Resolution 21 Jan 1980): According to the Maharashtra Project Affected Persons Rehabilitation Act 1999, it is the duty of the Collector “to issue a certificate to a person who is nominated by the project affected person for being employed against the quota reserved for the nominees of the affected persons”.

None of the PAs from Middle Vaitarna have received these Certificates, even after repeated and expensive follow up with a number of agencies.

When they contacted the Tahasildar, they were given a list of 12 documents that they have to compile in order to get this Certificate.

These documents include certificates from 4 other officials.

Considering the fact that all the Project affected persons of Middle Vaitarna Project are financially vulnerable tribals, with minimum education and considering that this small number of population is bearing the brunt of displacement and loss of livelihood for a mega city, they could have been helped with in this task.

In the case of Bhatsa Dam near Middle Vaitarna, the same conditions prevails for over 35 years. Project affected have not received full compensation, have not been given project affected certificates or any jobs.

The state of rehabilitation and resettlement for the claimed state of art dam seems dismal to say the least. More than 12 dams are coming up around Mumbai Metropolitan Region for drinking water supply. These will together affect more than one lakh tribals and over 7000 hectares of forest.

(https://sandrp.wordpress.com/2013/12/20/dams-in-tribal-areas-of-western-ghats-for-water-supply-to-mumbai-why-are-they-unjustified/)

Rehabilitation and resettlement at Middle Vaitarna is a sign of how these issues will be treated in these dams. We hope this is proved wrong.

– Parineeta Dandekar (parineeta.dandekar@gmail.com) and Amit Tillu (amittillu@gmail.com), Nashik

Women fetching water from far off sources even as Middle Vaitarna is close by. Photo: Parineeta Dandekar

[i] http://archive.indianexpress.com/news/fast-feat-middle-vaitarna-is-ninth-quickest-built-rcc-dam-in-world/952572/