A story on Hirakud in June-Augst issue of 'Dams, Rivers & Peoples' needs substantial improvement and corrections

[bimal pandia]

Dear elders and friends, 

Pranam !

The magazine ‘Dams, Rivers and Peoples’ definitely commands a lot of respect, at least in the development fraternity. In this June-August issue has taken Hirakud as its cover story. 

But the story ‘Hirakud: 50 mournful years’ gave a shock to me. I am afraid; the article pained me quite a lot. I cannot believe that a story taken by such a magazine - and which relates to a so hot and hugely discussed topic such as Hirakud – can ever be so full of rudimentary errors and ambiguities.  

I have no intention to undermine the authority of the authors. I have just tried to correct or elaborate some issues which I considered as have been wrongly or inadequately covered otherwise may believe that to be correct or stay ill-informed.

Please pardon me for being harsh at places. But a story in such a magazine needs to have more clarity and truthfulness.

Since, I do not wish to burden the readers of the group with a reply which went on lengthening (It would have become more longer, had I covered each errors and each ambiguity), I am posting my reply as a separate attachment. I hope that interested readers will go through the attached document. For additional reference the concerned issue of the said magazine is has also been attached.

Thank you.

With regards

Bimal Prasad Pandia

Water Initiatives Orissa

C/O: Manav Adhikar Seva Samiti (MASS)

Dhanupali, Sambalpur, 768001, Orissa, India

Cell: +91-9438488563

Phone: +91-663-2540043/2540067/2548330

Email: bimal...@gmail.com, waterinitia...@gmail.com

[bimal pandia]

Dear Manoj,

Pranam !

I was not aware that Manas has copied his relies to this group as well. I have already replied to his explanations in the focusorissa group. I found Manas's reply as naive as their article. But Manas is the author. An author may sometimes unknowingly gloss over some mistakes or tend to hold on to his assertions. I didn't expect that from you. You could have given a neutral view. 

I am afraid, probably even you do not know what you intend to say on this topic. Probably you have not gone through the said article properly either. Had you gone through that you would not have said "most of the people discusing and criticising it (Hirakud) are not knowing even the importance, evoluvtion, and its master plan". In fact, what you said here is completely visible and present in the said article. Bikas and Manas's article was overly critical of Hirakud while relying on unconcocted and often incorrect facts and knowledge.   

Though I haven't come in direct contact with you, I know that Bikas and Manas are your erstwhile colleagues. And your appreciation of their work is thus justifiable and expected. But had you have proper and adequate understanding of the topic you would have found the missing links and misrepresentations in the article - and also in Manas's reply - yourself and would have rather corrected or elaborated. We all have experiences of that. A author may sometimes miss or inadvertently gloss over a topic or figures. But a proper friend and guide takes pain to correct the wrongs. I am afraid you didn't but I did.    

I personally know Bikas very well too and appreciate his writings. We all belong to the same school of thought who believe that Hirakud which was just a problem earlier has become a burden now. But we must not exaggerate things so much through inconclusive facts and narrations so that our arguments falls flat in a third person's perception. All my effort was to make Bikas and Manas's article get more solidity while agreeing to their viewpoints.    

This much for now. For your reference please find my replies to Manas's explanations - which I had already sent to focusorissa groups three days ago - attached.  

Thanking you.

With regards

Bimal Prasad Pandia

 

On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 3:36 PM, Dr. Manoj K. Mahapatra <drmano...@gmail.com> wrote:

Thanks Manas

Congrats for a Good Work Done.

You Know Hirakud is a long standing issue since its inception and most of the people discusing and criticising it are not knowing even the importance, evoluvtion, and its master plan.

Yes, I agree, there are some issue like rehabilition, its water management, distribution policy along with the EIA and HIA are not going in principle.

But my friends it never means there is a wrong step backwarrd.

I appreciate the article, and thanks for your clarification to the commentator.

Go ahead.

Manoj

On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 3:01 PM, manas biswal <mkbi...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Bimal,

I extend my heartfelt thanks for the critical appreciation of the article.
We always appreciate critical feedbacks from the readers which substantially
improve our writing skill and feed to our inventory. We thank the critic for
the elaborations and explanations. There are some clarifications which need
to be stated here. There are other parts which will be discussed later. As
the author is now on tour, I am rendering to some of the issues stated. We
work on the same issue and I know you personally. The identical cause for
which we stand united brings us mutual respects for each other's works.

The growing sediment deposition in the reservoir makes it more helpless to
manage flood water. In case of a collapse, that will definitely create
havoc. When the water level goes down the minimum level in a reservoir, the
sedimentation is more likely to get exposed to air. The air trapped inside
the sedimentation is a major threat to the dam. Dams collapse and they
collapse due to various reasons. Experts apprehend that when so much of
water and silt unnaturally accumulate at one place, which may trigger an
earth quake. The Koyna dam is an example when the dam was said to have
increased the vulnerability of earthquake in the area (see
http://www.ecolass.org/Adrienne/Koyna/Koyna_home.htm). Whether or not the
dam increased the vulnerability, it is still debated. But it raised
suspicions about reservoir induced earthquakes. As Hirakud is built upon
zone 3, such suspicions can’t be denied. That is why the example of Koyna
dam was given. The word ‘beach’ is an unintentional mistake.

The author is aware that tail areas too, get irrigation. However, the amount
of water and timing raises concern. But it is a grimy truth that water does
not reach to the end of the canal. 20,000 acres joined the tail. That’s why
it has been written that the fields once irrigated now do not get water and
already become tail area. It is the fields and not the distributary which is
referred to as tail area.

I must congratulate the critic to have an eye for the data. The data in
hectares related to submerged area and area to be irrigated in the delta
region is actually in acres. The irrigation estimation is in the 1953
project report proposal.

The critic assumes that the relation of mismanagement of dam to flood is
clearer in the recent experiences. The statistics given is an account of
flood in the lifetime of the dam. It is for reference and should not be
taken as conclusive proofs. Neither should they be undermined as they show a
trend- a trend of failure in checking small and moderate floods. What
happened in 2008 was hype in media and pointed out the dam as a contributing
factor to the flood. Regarding the rule curve, it revealed two things. The
water level was too high in the pre monsoon time is the first one. The
second one is the contemporary insignificance of the rule curve looking at
the growing sediment deposition and massive inflow induced by climate change
features.

The authors have not goofed up between 0.5 MAF which is equivalent to 0.334
Million M3. Actually the 0.5 allocation to industries is “per annum” which
is wrongly presented as “in the monsoon”. This includes 0.334 MAF and not
Million M3 in the total non monsoon period. One may find the details in
annexure G of the Jaysaleen committee’s report. About affecting irrigation
or power production, mere statement of the report is given. Nowhere in the
report is responsibility of less irrigation fixed upon allocation to
industries, neither it implies. The delivery system is held culprit. One can
only assume from the report that allocation to industries is made while
irrigation suffers, and not at the cost of irrigation.

The water supply to power houses and subsequently to fields in the delta
area depend upon a release from the reservoir, if not completely. That
requires an assured supply of water to power generation units. This assured
or dependable flow from the reservoir is very much unpredicted due to
allocation of water to industries. There is nothing to pose the reservoir
and power generation units as two completely different sources of irrigation
in delta.

The table is drawn as per data arrived at by high level technical committee.
one can find it in the annexure of the report. This is purposefully given to
assure water supply irrigation in the coming years reflecting upon a past
trend. The reservoir capacity to provide water referred in the table is
actually the live storage of the reservoir. Again, it is a government
assumption and as thus, it implies the calculation arrived at by the
authorities.

Thank you again.

Fondly yours,

Manas Kumar Biswal

Regional Centre for Development Cooperation

> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/focusorissa/

<*> Your email settings:
   Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/focusorissa/join
   (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
   mailto:focusoris...@yahoogroups.com
   mailto:focusorissa-...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   focusorissa...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
   http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

--
-----------------------------------------------------
Dr. Manoj Kumar Mahapatra
Ph.D ( Env. Toxicology)
District Malaria Office
District Head Quater Hospital, Kalahandi
Bhawanipatna, Odisha-766001
Cell: +91-94373-31162