Context

• The Cauvery water-sharing issue between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu has flared up again, despite the Supreme Court giving its verdict on the 200-year-old dispute in 2018.
• The trigger this time is the poor rainfall in the river’s catchment area in Karnataka.

A Background of Cauvery Water Dispute

• Pre-Independence Dispute
  • The dispute originated for the first-time way back in 1892 at the time of Britishers between the Presidency of Madras and Princely state of Mysore.
  • In 1924 Mysore and Madras reached an agreement which will be valid for 50 years.
• Post-Independence Dispute
  • The agreement signed between Presidency of Madras and Princely state of Mysore ended in 1974.
  • Since 1974, Karnataka started diverting water into its four newly made reservoirs, without the consent of Tamil Nadu. This resulted in dispute in post independent India.

SC Verdict on Cauvery Water Dispute

• Clear Division of the Quantity of Water Between TN and Karnataka
  • The SC in 2018 granted an additional share of 14.75 TMC of water to Karnataka and reduced the Tamil Nadu share by the same amount.
  • The additional share given to Karnataka was for drinking water in south Karnataka.
  • This means, out of the 740 TMC of Cauvery water to be shared every year, the SC awarded 404.25 TMC to Tamil Nadu, 284.75 TMC to Karnataka, 30 TMC to Kerala.
  • The court awarded 7 TMC to Puducherry and 14 TMC for environment protection and wastage into the sea.
• Formation of CWMA (Cauvery Water Management Authority)
  • The SC also ordered the creation of the CWMA and the Cauvery Water Regulatory Committee (CWRC) to adjudicate disputes between the states within the framework of the final court orders.
  • The CWMA is a largely apolitical authority created under the aegis of the Union water resources ministry.
  • It is the central agency that now regulates the dispute between the two states.

Reason Behind the Current Dispute

• The contention of political parties in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu is that the SC order of 2018 has spelt out the water-sharing norms only for a normal monsoon year and not a distress year.
• Monsson situation in the current season is turning out to be deficient with rainfall over 30 per cent below normal.
• The rainfall in August and September, out of the four months of monsoon that began in June, has been the lowest in the last 123 years for Karnataka.

 How Has the Current Crisis Evolved?

• Karnataka’s Decision to Release Less Water
  • Under the 2018 SC verdict, Karnataka is supposed to release 123.14 TMC of water to Tamil Nadu between June and September.
  • Karnataka should release a total of 45.95 TMC of water in August and 36.76 TMC in September in a normal monsoon season.
  • This year, Karnataka had released only 40 TMC of water till September 23, citing a distress situation in the state.
• Tamil Nadu’s Approach to CWMA
  • In August, Tamil Nadu approached the CWMA to ensure normal supplies.
  • The CWRC, a recommendatory mechanism under the CWMA, then observed that the rainfall in the Cauvery basin in Karnataka was deficient by 26 per cent (by early August).
  • The committee also observed that Karnataka had only released 30.252 TMC of water from June 1 to August 28, as opposed to the stipulated 80.451 TMC in a normal year.
• CWMA Order
  • Based on the committee’s recommendations, the CWMA initially ordered the release of about 13 TMC of water for 15 days at the rate of 12,000 cusecs per day even as Tamil Nadu sought 25,000 cusecs per day.
  • The CWRC and the CWMA reviewed the monsoon situation again and reduced the quantum of release from Karnataka to 5,000 cusecs per day, while Tamil Nadu sought 12,000 cusecs.
• SC Order on CWMA’s Decision
  • Both Tamil Nadu and Karnataka also approached the SC to challenge the CWMA orders, but it upheld the release of 5,000 cusecs until September 26.
  • The Karnataka government has said it will adhere to the SC order till September 26 and then reconsider the situation.

What are Karnataka’s Contentions?

• Dependency on South West Monsoon
  • Karnataka has argued that Tamil Nadu will receive a large chunk of its rainfall in the retreating northeast monsoon between October and November, whereas Karnataka receives its main rainfall in the southwest monsoon months from June to September.
  • The protesters argue that water is being released to Tamil Nadu even as the southwest monsoon draws to a close and storage levels are very low in the Cauvery basin reservoirs in Karnataka.
  • The Cauvery is the main source of drinking water for the city of Bengaluru and for the irrigation of farmland in the Mandya region of the state.
• Implementation of the Mekedatu Check Dam Project:
  • The Karnataka government is also seeking implementation of the Mekedatu check dam project on the Cauvery.
  • This will facilitate drinking water storage for Bengaluru and for release of excess water to Tamil Nadu in crisis situations like the present one.

The Storage Situation in the Cauvery Basin Reservoirs in Karnataka

• The four reservoirs in the Cauvery basin; Krishna Raja Sagar, Kabini, Hemavathy, and Harangi were at half their storage levels as of September 23.
• There was a total of 51.1 TMC of water in these reservoirs, as against a total storage capacity of 104.5 TMC.
• According to the Karnataka government, the state will need a total of 112 TMC of water (79 TMC for irrigating standing crops and 33 TMC to supply drinking water to Bengaluru) till June 2024.
• With the southwest monsoon winding up in Karnataka, the remaining water in the Cauvery basin reservoirs must be conserved for drinking water and irrigation purposes, the Karnataka government has argued.

Is the Current Crisis Unprecedented?

• The current Cauvery water crisis is like the crises seen in 1991, 2002, 2012, and 2016.
• The difference is that this one has come after the final resolution of the dispute by the SC in 2018.
• Also, in the past, protests over the Cauvery issue have resulted in violence, on account of mainstream political parties trying to gain currency among the electorate by taking up chauvinistic positions.
• In recent years, however, politicians in Karnataka have struck a more conciliatory note.
• As farmers in Mandya cultivating less water-intensive crops and new generations moving away from agriculture, the Cauvery issue is not considered as emotive as it was three decades ago.

Conclusion

• Cauvery, also known as the ‘Dakshina Ganga’ has been considered as the economic backbone of the states through which it flows, making its impact felt most strongly in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu.
• While the contest for Cauvery can be traced back to the 11th century AD, modern-day Tamil Nadu and Karnataka have been at loggerheads over the Cauvery water sharing mechanism.
• The emphasis on regional strategy must be abandoned by the states since cooperation and coordination are true solutions, not the conflict.