DNA Edit: Choppy Waters

The Supreme Court judgement on Friday that should have resolved the long-standing Cauvery water-sharing dispute may not have succeeded in its objective.

For one, it will further fuel enmity between gainer Karnataka, whose share has gone up by 14.75 TMC, and loser Tamil Nadu. The verdict is a big blow for the lower riparian state since it reduces the quantum that the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal had allocated for Tamil Nadu in 2007.

Number-crunching aside, the bitter point of contention is the competing imperatives of drinking water and agriculture. With Bengaluru’s acute drinking water shortage entering the frame of arguments, the scales of justice have tilted in favour of Karnataka, even as standing crops in some parts of Tamil Nadu face the grim prospect of going thirsty.

On paper, the SC judgement strikes the right note by emphasising that states are custodians and not owners of rivers. But, that’s hardly music to the ears of Tamil farmers who have fought pitched battles with their Kannadiga counterparts over two decades for their ‘rightful’ share.

What the SC judgement should have also taken into account is the lack of water in the river itself, and the way Cauvery has suffered due to massive deforestation in Karnataka and sand mining and industries in Tamil Nadu.

Instead of finding an amicable solution, Cauvery has been allowed to become a hot potato as political parties in both states find the discord ideal to whip up local sentiments. The earlier attempt in 2003 to resolve the conflict through the Cauvery Family initiative was deliberately buried since it lacked political patronage.

A group of farmers, water experts, economists and other stakeholders had drawn up a roadmap wherein irrigation of farmlands would be based on the actual capacity of the river. With the river stretched beyond its means, watering 24 lakh acres in the Cauvery region even in a good year, seems untenable.

Moreover, water-intensive crops like paddy and sugarcane are putting undue strain on current resources. These are issues that neither state was willing to take up. What will likely add to the existing crisis, and perhaps lead the river to death, is the apex court’s decision to allow Tamil Nadu to draw an additional 10 tmcft ‘groundwater’ from a total of 20 tmcft beneath the Cauvery basin.

The time has come for Tamil Nadu to stop banking on Cauvery to meet its agricultural needs. It already has one of the biggest desalination plants in the world to cater to Chennai’s freshwater demands. The state should set up more such plants to use seawater for irrigation.

Karnataka, being land-locked, lacks that advantage. Lastly, Bengaluru’s drinking water crisis is of its own making. The need for real estate due to an ever-growing population has led to natural waterbodies becoming victims of concretisation. Rainwater harvesting, too, has been accorded a low priority. The waters of Cauvery can only offer a short-term solution.