Delhi’s Dream Dam Drums up Development Debate 2

Yes, the question remains. What is the need of this project? And then, there is a bigger question that begs serious debate. Is it necessary to submerge 775 hectares of Forest Land, including 49 hectares of Renuka Wildlife Sanctuary for quenching Delhi’s thirst?

Environmental activists are up in arms against the concept of inundating a large tract of rich forest bio-diversity, including portion of a wildlife sanctuary, to fulfill the water needs of a far away metropolis.

A serious poser here is: Why is it that the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report in such cases is always suspect? People in the proposed submergence area are not just suspicious but also are a worried lot, for the EIA report is full of misleading things. For instance, a protected wetland in the vicinity – Renuka Lake is a Ramsar declared international wetland. The EIA does not even mention it.

Another factor to show that the authorities have not taken a holistic approach is the winter migration by the Gujjars. They come down to the lower reaches in winters and use the riverbed along with hundreds of cattle/livestock. Where would they go when there is a reservoir round the year?

The people fighting the ‘lost cause’ ask: “Wazirabad barrage (Delhi) already has the capacity to hold that much water which they plan to impound here at Renuka Dam. So what is the need of a dam here?” Numerous flora, aquatic fauna and terrestrial fauna would be affected due to the 24-kms long reservoir. The terrestrial fauna includes as many as 96 species of butterflies, 107 species of birds, 10 species of mammals, six species of reptiles and 15 species of fishes from the impact zone of the project.

The local community is totally against the dam. They claim the authorities have not taken any cognizance of the fact that all villages in the submergence area have passed a resolution against the dam at their gram sabhas. Consultation with gram sabhas is an important part of National Resettlement and Rehabilitation (R&R) policy. And it is clear that this rule has been violated.

Back to the same question, “Do we really need this?”

He recalled the Performance Audit of Water Management Systems in Delhi (Report on Delhi government published in 2008), which says: “The distribution losses in Delhi were as high as 40 per cent of total water supply, which was significantly more than the acceptable norms of 15 per cent prescribed by the Ministry of Urban Development.”

He recalled the Performance Audit of Water Management Systems in Delhi (Report on Delhi government published in 2008), which says: “The distribution losses in Delhi were as high as 40 per cent of total water supply, which was significantly more than the acceptable norms of 15 per cent prescribed by the Ministry of Urban Development."

Describing the Renuka Dam project in Himachal Pradesh for providing water to Delhi akin to a new tank atop a neighbour’s house to compensate leaking pipes in your house, environmentalist are opposing the Rs 2,700 crore – the cost may increase – project. Once when I had a discussion on the topic with Himanshu Thakkar, coordinator of the South Asia Network on Dams, River and People, he criticized it as a “massive dam to fill leaking buckets.”

Over the years, the water utility has shown some improvements but the fact remains that Delhi denizens already get more than the conventional per capita per day prescription. At 230 litres per capita per day, Delhiites get much more than what most European nations provide: only 150 litres water per capita per day. However, Delhi Jal Board says distribution losses are much less, at only about 20-25 per cent. The figure appears high because most of it is non-revenue distribution like free water supply.

So it turns out that Delhi’s problem is not shortage but mismanagement. But then, no ‘options assessment’ was ever done to arrive at a proper solution to meet the increasing demand.

The National Green Tribunal hearing will commence next week and the fate would be clear in days to come.

Delhi’s Dream Dam Drums up Development Debate

Metropolises are known to be parasites, suckers for natural resources of its neighbourhood. But perhaps for the first time in India, one state in need of water has paid upfront to build a storage facility for itself in another state. Delhi would set the precedent if Renuka dam in Sirmaur district of Himachal Pradesh is built.

The ‘development at what cost’ debate has taken a new turn here. Planners say it will augment Delhi’s water needs; environmentalists argue it will submerge about 775 hectares – or more – of rich natural forest, not to mention human habitation.

The project envisages a 40 MW Hydel power project with a 148 metres high dam to impound the waters of Giri, a tributary of Yamuna, about 350 kms north of Delhi. The plan is to allow storage and transportation of 23 cumecs of water to Delhi nine months a year. Delhi government has already paid Rs 210 crore of the estimated cost Rs 2,700 crore (July 2008 cost) to the project authorities – Himachal Pradesh Power Corporation Ltd (HPPCL). The project is however now declared as a national project.

Himachal Pradesh, Delhi, Uttar Pradesh and Haryana had signed an agreement in 1994 for the Renuka dam project. Experts inform – and authorities deny – that Rajasthan had not signed the agreement then, making it null and void from day one. But now, Rajasthan is demanding share in power and Haryana too has ambitions for water share.

Even as the proposal awaits forest clearance, activists are up in arms against the project that will submerge 775 hectares of Forest, including 49 hectares of Renuka Wildlife Sanctuary on the left bank of river Giri. They are also worried about a nearby protected wetland – Renuka lake, a Ramsar site (under the International Ramsar Convention). Further 650 families from 54 settlements (34 revenue villages) would be affected partially or fully due to the 24-kms long reservoir.

After relevant studies, 34 revenue villages were marked for inescapably certificates, paving the way for land acquisition by the revenue department. However, the very process of land acquisition has been challenged. The National Green Tribunal (NGT) has stayed the land acquisition process after it was pointed out that the project has got no forest clearance and the environmental clearance is faulty.

As happens with remote tribal areas or hilly areas, people woke up to the threat of submergence pretty late. About 3-4 years ago, Renuka Bandh Sangharsh Samiti was formed and the volunteers went from village to village to spread awareness. The move was imperative because the authorities had invoked section 17 (4) of the Land Acquisition Act (the emergency clause as it is known) even when there was no physical/violent resistance.

Innocent people from remote areas are a perplexed lot. When I had visited the area in 2009, I visited several villages in the submergence area. I distinctly remember 70-year-old Jalmo Devi. Sitting in front of her kuchcha house in Tikri village on the banks of the Giri river, she had asked, “Why do they need to displace us for Delhi? Kya yahan ke insaano ki keemat nahi hai? (Don’t the people here have any value?)”

A straight-forward question. I clearly had no answer. After all, I was representing Delhi’s ‘every greedy’ population, ready to usurp anybody for its own good.

The Resettlement and Rehabilitation (R&R) policy is skewed too. The Himachal Pradesh government has made no claim to give land in lieu of land. The problems with displacement are many. But one is common to all tribal areas, hilly areas and remote forest areas.

The ‘content’ people get almost everything from their land and surroundings. They hardly buy anything from markets. Except may be salt and sugar and occasionally some fancy grocery item. Their fertile soil yields rest everything. But when their land is gone, they will have to buy everything. There are as many as 650 families set to be directly affected, as dam waters will inundate their houses and/or agriculture/forest land.

The question remains. What makes it necessary to spend Rs 2,700 crore for construction of the dam? Are there no alternatives for Delhi’s drinking water need? It will cost much less if the Delhi Jal Board decides to replace its old leaking pipes, which amount to 40 per cent of transmission losses.