WHY KOLHAPUR AND SANGLI BE FORCED TO BE DROWNED BY ALAMATTI DAM BACK WATERS?

WHY  KOLHAPUR AND SANGLI BE FORCED TO BE DROWNED  BY ALAMATTI DAM BACK WATERS?

Prof.T.Shivaji Rao,                      B.E.,MS(Texas)Ph.D(Hon)                 Director, Center for environment,                           GITAM University, Visakhapatnam   http://www.eoearth.org/contributor/Shivaji.rao  http://www.gitam.edu/cos/env/shivajirao.html

Prof.M.Ramesh,                  B.Tech., M.Tech, Ph.D Head, Dept. of Civil Engineering, GITAM University, Visakhapatnam   http://www.gitam.edu/coe/civil/civil.asp

KRISHNA WATER DISPUTES TRIBUNAL REPORT,DECEMBER,2010.

http://www.wrmin.nic.in/writereaddata/linkimages/KWDTReport9718468760.pdf   [Tribunal Report ]
To Know how Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh states failed to answer the specific questions put to them by the Tribunal Members on Alamatti Dam Height increase issue,see pages 597 to 690

This report presents all details about the discussions  between the states and the Tribunal and its decision to increase the height of alamatti dam to 524.25 meters because Maharashtra and andhra pradesh states failed to produce convincing proof of injury to their states in case the height of the Alamatti dam is increased
 MAHARASHTRA APPOINTED A NEW EXPERT TO HANDLE ALAMATTUI CASE:see web:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/pune/Former-state-secys-expertise-to-make-case-stronger/articleshow/7400962.cms 
WHY  KOYNA FLOODS BE BLOCKED FROM NATURALLY ENTERING INTO KRISHNA RIVER BY THE BACK WATERS FROM THE OBSTRUCTION OF ALAMATTI DAM ?
See web site:http://mdmu.maharashtra.gov.in/pdf/Flood/statusreport.pdf    
see page 5 of the Government Report on Flood situation in Maharashtra in 2005 
 Concern over safety of Koyna dam in  Maharashtra and Karnataka

http://www.waterpowermagazine.com/story.asp?sc=2031361

21 September 2005 http://www.flow3d.com/pdfs/tp/wat_env_tp/FloSci-Bib15-03.pdf http://sites.google.com/site/profshivajirao/polavaramdam-3

India’s Koyna dam in the western state of Maharashtra has been subject to some concern over recent weeks. Local media reported cracks appeared above the nearby switchyard in the wake of heavy rains in the western ghats.Exceptionally heavy monsoon rains and the subsequent flooding took a toll of more than 1000 lives across the state and affected around 10M people.

The water level in the Koyna dam reservoir had reached alarming levels when as much as 322mm of rainfall was recorded in the catchment area over 24 hours. The Koyna river takes its source at Mahabaleshwar along with four other rivers (Krishna,Venna,Solshi and Savitri). Mahabaleshwar receives the second highest rainfall in the world. With the 103m high dam in danger of overflowing, authorities took the decision to increase discharge from the 2797Mm³ reservoir to close to 100,000m³/sec. Water resources minister Ajit Pawar quashed rumours of cracks in the Koyna dam itself, which was constructed in 1964, and said it was safe. The issue was also raised in the Indian Parliament. There were, however, minor cracks/landslides reported above the dam's switchyard, some 25km away.
Concerns were also raised by Mr. R.R. Patil, Home Minister, Maharashtra State that neighbouring Karnataka state was in some way responsible for increasing the impact of the floodwaters by failing to release sufficient water from the downstream Almatti dam.
Numerous villages along the Koyna-Krishna river basin already faced submergence and after the Koyna reservoir was forced to release huge quantities of water for fear of being overtopped, it was expected that Alamatti would release similar quantities to prevent water from backing up. However, Maharashtra accused Karnataka of not releasing the promised quantity of water from Alamatti, leading to a worsening of the flood situation for large areas in the Satara, Sangli and Kolhapur Districts. The state authorities had to call in the Army to rescue marooned citizens.
The state government intends to take issue with Karnataka for violating the norms of storage and release of Almatti waters with the inter-state water sharing tribunal.
Perhaps most remarkably, in late June the Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India issued a press release warning that water levels of major hydro reservoirs in southern India had witnessed sharp falls specifically naming Koyna.
http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report_flood-situation-in-sangli-kolhapur-critical_1044835 

http://www.indianexpress.com/oldStory/75449/ 

http://www.hindu.com/2011/02/16/stories/2011021664370700.htm
320 villages in Sangli and kolhapur are likely to be drowned due to back water effects.
But CWC says it calculates back water based upon data given by karnataka and it is a commercial project and hence data will not be furnished by it to others and this has been challenged in CIC who rejected CWC view and wanted information to be given to the public.

 

ALAMATTI DAM BACK WATER CURVE CALCULATIONS
Basics of Back water curve for rivers see the following website:
http://evidence.environment-agency.gov.uk/FCERM/en/FluvialDesignGuide/Chapter7.aspx?pagenum=4 

http://bhujangam.blogspot.com/2011/02/back-water-afflux-theory.html

 TOUGH TASK FOR LAND AQISITION FOR INCREASED HEIGHT OF ALAMATTI DAM
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bangalore/Tribunal-award-govt-has-tough-task-at-hand/articleshow/7198496.cms

WHY Sangli, Kolhapur and Districts  are bound to get flooded by increased Alamatti Dam.?
http://envis.maharashtra.gov.in/envis_data/?q=enrmcnws_jan11 

An Environment Ministry sponsored  Journal warns about the inevitable Back water levels  inundation due to the existing and proposed height of alamatti Dam which will be ultimately raised to 528.8 meters due to the  inefficient handling of the Alamatti dam issue by the officials,engineers and Advocates of Maharashtra and andhra pradesh due to lack of combined efforts of the state parties before the Brajesh kumar Tribunal.Even today,the officials are not involving the independent experts to utilise their knowledge to save the interests of the farmers and farm workers whose productivity is responsible for food supply and for industrial development in all the states.The legislators and Members of parliament are completely kept in darkness about what is happwening so that the people can give their considered opinions to save the interests of the state.Unfortunately,the bureaucrats and engineers are too indifferent to protect public interests as evidenced by the comments made by the tribunal in its report as can be seen from the following web site:
http://www.wseas.us/e-library/transactions/fluid/2010/42-581.pdf  [SURAT  in floods]
TO LEARN BASICS ABOUT BACK WATER CURVE CALCULATIONS ,see  following web site:
http://onlinemanuals.txdot.gov/txdotmanuals/hyd/hyd.pdf
Please study the pages in Chapters 6 and 7 of this  Manual available online from Texas Government,USA
and also the sketches and Diagrams furnished on this web site by the authors

WHY CWC IS NOT GIVING  DATA ON ALAMATTI BACK WATER CURVE AND DAMBRERAK ANALYSIS?

see website:http://www.asianage.com/india/cwc-cic-draw-swords-over-info-979

No guidelines on studying backwater impact of dams: CWC

New Delhi, Feb 15 (PTI) The Central Water Commission has said it has no "principles or guidelines" for conducting study on the assessment of backwater flooding of dams and hydroelectric projects in the country.
Responding to the query of an RTI applicant who sought to know from the Commission the basis on which such studies are done in the country, the Commission said no such principles or guidelines are available with them.
It said the Commission''s role is confined to the computation of backwater levels for specified projects for their given flood water maps.
Backwater studies are important because they bring out possible impact of reservoir on the areas close to upstream which may be flooded because of the construction.
The Commission also refused to share the data about the impact of the controversial Almatti reservoir on the backwater area which was overruled by the Central Information Commission. The transparency panel held that larger public interest would be served in the disclosure of the data and hence it should be provided to the applicant.
In addition to seeking details of principles and guidelines governing the backwater studies, applicant Swarup Bhattacharya had also sought from the CWC a copy of the backwater impact study on the Almatti Dam.
The CWC refused to share information saying it is a commercial document, hence exempted from disclosure under the Right to Information Act.
During the appeal before the CIC, the CWC said since the study was done by them for the Karnataka Government based on data provided by them, the information cannot be disclosed.
"The Commission is also of the view that the sought information is now held by the CWC, since it is a part of the study conducted by the CWC. The data has now become a part of the report of the CWC since it is part of the study...
irrespective of who had supplied it," Information Commissioner Sushma Singh held.
She said the disclosure of the information was in public interest and it should be disclosed.
In a ruling in December last year, the Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal (KWDT) had allowed Karnataka, where the dam is being built, to increase the height of reservoir by five metres.
The increase in dam height has sparked concerns as people living in the 320 villages of backwater area of Kolhapur and Sangli district of Maharashtra feared that there it will result in flooding in their area.

Maharashtrra CM offers Karnataka talks to end Dispute on Alamatti Dam and also Belgaum row :
TIMES NEWS NETWORK
Belgaum:15,Feb.2011: Maharashtra chief minister Prithviraj  Chavan on Sunday [13-2-2011]offered to hold bilateral talks with Karnataka to resolve the 61-year-old Belgaum border dispute involving the two states.He also said hed seek a review of the recent Krishna Water Disputes Tribunals verdict that allows Karnataka to raise the height of the Almatti dam from 519 metre to 524.6 metre.
Chavan said,There is no need to increase the dam height if we manage the water scientifically, he said.He said raising the height is a great threat to villages in the catchment area in Maharashtra.

WHY KARNATAKA STATE IS HELPLESS IN PREVENTING FLOODING OF SANGLI DISTRICT

Irrigation experts told Frontline that both States, especially Maharashtra (by virtue of being the upper riparian), probably stored waters in their dams far in excess of the necessary storage level before the onset of the monsoon. They probably did not wait to build up storage levels slowly as the monsoon progressed fearing the level would come down if the monsoon failed. But with excess rains in the catchment areas in Maharashtra, the States were forced to release water from their dams, which had reached their full reservoir levels (FRLs) thereby aggravating the flood situation.

Even as the people are reeling under the impact of the floods, Maharashtra and Karnataka indulged in a dispute over the release of the Krishna waters. Maharashtra has accused Karnataka of not fulfilling its obligation to release adequate quantities of the Krishna waters from the Almatti dam so that the flood situation and the backwater effect in its inundated southern districts could be brought under control. It even got Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to intervene in the matter.

Karnataka has refused to release 6 lakh cusecs of water from the Almatti dam that Maharashtra has been demanding. On August 5, Karnataka released 4.20 lakh cu against an inflow of 3.57 lakh cu, reducing the water level in the dam to 516.4 metres, as against the FRL of 519.6 m.

Karnataka Chief Minster N. Dharam Singh said the release of 6 lakh cu would inundate 600 villages in Karnataka. But with Maharashtra increasing the outflow from its upstream Koyna dam (3.96 lakh cu was released on August 6) steadily, Karnataka, according to engineers at the Almatti dam site, will also have to increase gradually the outflow to 5 lakh cu. The water discharges from the Almatti dam have already affected over 60 villages in Hungund and Muddebihal taluks of Bagalkot and Bijapur districts.

According to the Water Resources Minister M. Mallikarjun Kharge, Maharashtra was needlessly creating a controversy over the discharge of water from Almatti. His contention is that the villages in Sangli and Kolhapur could not have been affected by the backwaters of the Almatti as they are located at a height of 538 metres above sea level. After all, floods had ravaged villages in both districts in 1964 and 1976, before the dam was constructed. He also claimed that in 2002-03 and 2004, when the dam had reached full storage level, no village in Maharashtra was submerged. Irrigation experts also point out that a joint survey by engineers from both States, which was later cleared by the Central Water Commission (CWC), stated that villages upstream up to and beyond Sangli would not be flooded even when the water level at the Almatti dam reached 524.256 m..See the following article on "DEVASTATION AND DISPUTE" in FRONTLINE  MAGAZINE,Chennai   

.http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2217/stories/20050826006413100.htm

KARNATATAKA MINISTER,KHARGE IS MISLEADING ON FLOODING OF SANGLI, KOLHAPUR  AND SATARA REGIONS

The variation in relief ranges from the pinnacles and high plateaus of the main Sahyadari range having a height over 4500 feet above mean sea level to the subdued basin of the Nira river in Phaltan tahasil, with an average height of about 1700 feet above mean sea level.

http://www.indianetzone.com/46/geography_satara_district.htm
http://tshivajirao.blogspot.com/2011/01/almathi-dam-hazardous.html
https://sites.google.com/site/ayyagaribhujangarao/backwateraffluxtheory

WHY KOLHAPUR, SANGLI AND KARAD CITIES ARE FORCED TO FACE FREQUENT FLOOD DISASTERS DUE TO ALAMATTI DAM

Many cities ,towns and  major Villages that will  face flood havoc  in Karanataka and Maharashtra due to backwater afflux  resulting from increased height of Alamatti dam to 524.26m particularly during vigorous monsoon periods with prolonged depressions and cyclones that get intensified with extended duration  due to global warming impacts.( Recollect the example of flood havoc in Sangli in August 2005  see the following websites

http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2217/stories/20050826006413100.htm

http://saiindia.gov.in/cag/sites/default/files/cag_reports/maharashtra/rep_2006/civilper_chap_5.pdf

Sl. No.	Station	Cum Distance (Km)	Bed Level (m)	Depth (m)	Calculated  Flood Levels with  2 FRL’s  of Alamatti dam		Station levels in M/ Ft. (Google)	Nearby Places likely to be inundated     (Places have been identified from  Google Earth special search and Relief Map of India from the US  website :  http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/ams/india/   since our efforts failed in getting the concerned maps
					(in m/ft)  FRL 519.6m	(in m/ft.) FRL 524.26m
1	Alamatti	0	489	30.6	519.6/1715	524.25/1730	517/1705
2	(Kolhar)	25	491	29	520/1716	524.7/1731	518/1710
3	Badgi	49	494	26.4	520.4/1717	525.3/1733	524/1730
4	Algur	89	498	25	523.2/1726	528.4/1744	527/1740	Algur, Kumbarhalli, Sanal, Chikpadasalgi, Hirepadasalgi
5	Hippargi	117	508	24	532/1755	536.3/1770	529/1744	Hippargi, Shiraguppi, Savadi
6	Darur	142	513	28.2	541.2/1786	546.5/1803	533/1760	Satti, Khawatkop, Shankaratti, Darur, Saptasagar, Shirgur
7	Kudichi	168	514	31.1	545.1/1799	551.4/1820	533/1760	Kudichi, Ainapur, Krishnakittur, UrgarKhurd, Kusanal
8	Diggewadi	181	515	31.8	546.8/1804	553.4/1826	536/1770	Diggewadi, Ingali, Jalalpur, Bhiradi, Chinchali, BavanSoundatti, Nasalpur, Roopnal, Ulegaddiwadi, Ankali
9	(Jugal)	206	518	35.3	553.3/1826	560.6/1850	536/1770	Jugul, Takli, Mangavati
10	Narsobawadi	216	520	34.3	554.3/1829	562.0/1855	535/1766	Bubnal, Kurundwadi, Narsobawadi, Shedsal, Kagvad, Shirdon, Latwadi, Inchalkaranj, Rangoli, Rendal, Pattan Kodoli, Vasagade, Gandhinagar, Tilawani, Kerle, Nagaon, Shiroli, Kolhapur, Wadanage, Rajputwadi, Prayagchikale, Nagdevwadi, Gauwad, Shirati, Kavatheguland, Hasur, Ganeshwadi, Malwadi, Kagvad
11	Ankali	243	525	32.7	557.8/1841	565.5/1866	544/1796	Kanwad, Mhaisal, Kutwad, Ghalwad, Dhavali, Arjunwad, Chichwad, Udgaon, Inam Dhamai, Jaysingpur, Umalwad, Kothali, Daroli, Ankali
12	Sangli	253	528	31.2	559.2/1845	567.0/1871	545/1800	Sangli, Karnal, Kasbe Digraj, Moje Digraj, Bisur, Budhgaon, Kawaji Khotwadi, Vasagade, Navaraswadi, Nandre, Bramhanal, Khatav, Ankalkhop, Nagthane, Shirgaon, Karve, Karad, Viravde

The above standard backwater calculations  based upon standard methods followed by irrigation experts in foreign countries and also in India as presented in the websites on basics of backwater curves.  These calculations show that due to the wrong methods of Krishna water utilisation are prefered by the Karnataka state Government and the Central Government Organisations like the Planning Commission , the Ministry of Water Resources, the Central Water Commission and the Union Ministry of Environemnt and Forests in preference to the right methods of development of Water Resources of the Krishna River as suggested by the former Member of Planning Commission of the Karnataka Government and the Union Government Sri.L.C.Jain who is also an eminent Gandhian environmentalist and economics expert, it is necessary to grasp the spirit behind his considered views on the bad planning of Alamatti dam since the beginning.  He said that 

"the nerve-centre of the lingering river valley disputes has been reflected upon aptly by L C Jain. Said the former member of planning commission, "Fifty years of development planning should teach us that as long as we confine the solutions within interstate parameters, we cannot find sustainable, durable or real solutions. Rigid bureaucracy and the tendency of politicians to play up to imaginary galleries have defied solutions. Unless people on both sides of borders who are going to be affected or benefitted are taken into confidence, the real solutions will continue to elude us."

See website:  
http://bhujangam.blogspot.com/2011/03/alamatti-dam-bundle-of-contradictions.html

 It is a pity that even the Brijesh Kumar Tribunal on Krishna Water Dispute has not been furnished with all the required information and data to make a just apportionment of Krishna river waters on the internationally accepted principles of assessing the harm versus public welfare concept of an irrigation project which is a component of the appropriate equitable distribution of river waters among the basin states.  The state Government experts and the Centrala Governsment experts utterly failed to present their cases to show what injury and what kind of disadvantages willbe faced by the people of Maharahstra and Karnataka to accept the demand of Karnataka to increase the height of Alamatti dam to FRl 524.26m for additional utilisation of 130 TMC of water as accepted by the tribunal for the irrigation purposes of farmers of North Karnataka.  The Maharashtra Government should have presented the injury to their state by producing evidence by presenting the a scientific and tehnical report onbackwater calculations as contained in the following table and this evidence would have prevented the Krishna water tribunal to make an illegal decision by increasing the height of the Alamatti dam.  Similarly the AP State Governsment officials and experts also miserably failed to present evidence before the tribunal that by increasing the height of the Alamatti dam the probability of failure of the dam results in a dam burst disaster that would kill lakhs of human and animal populations downstream of the dam and that there are plenty of chances for the dam to collapse due to one reason or the other.  The dam break analysis report presented by the authors in a few websites could have been prepared by the Andhra Pradesh State Government which got such reports made for the Pulichintala dam and Polavaram dam and now AP state is getting the dam break analysis report prepared for the Nagarjuna Sagar dam.  Both these experts of Andhra Pradesh and Maharashtra also are fully aware of the methologies of calculating the backwater levels and their damaging impacts in the case of Polavaram dam as such back water level calculations were submitted to the Bachawat Tribunal in 1979-80.  Due to the ill-luck of lakhs of farmers of Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh these officials, engineers and advocates of the both the states failed to present similar reports before the Brijesh Kumar Tribunal to enable the tribunal to take the just and the right decisions insteadof the unjust and wrong decisions on determining the height of the Alamatti dam.

For details see the website:

http://tshivajirao.blogspot.com/2011/02/why-sangli-kolhapur-will-be-flooded-by.html

ALMATTI Back water profile Calculations 26-02-2011 (for n=0.05, 45,000 cumecs, 524.25 m  stage near Alamatti dam widths 1500 m)

1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	17
Station	No. Trail	Elv. BL	depth,m	Elv.stage	Width	Area	Discharge	Velocity	Vel.Head	Total H	Length
ALMATTI	0	489	35.25	524.25	1500	52875	45000	0.851064	0.036917	524.2869
A to NH218-1	1	491	34	525	1500	51000	45000	0.882353	0.039681	525.0397	25000
A to NH218-2	2	491	33.70164	524.7016	1500	50552.45	45000	0.890165	0.040387	524.742	25000
NH218	3	491	33.70159	524.7016	1500	50552.39	45000	0.890166	0.040387	524.742	25000
N to Res Approach	1	494	30.74	524.74	1500	46110	45000	0.975927	0.048544	524.7885	24000
N to Res Approach	2	494	31.22982	525.2298	1500	46844.74	45000	0.96062	0.047033	525.2769	24000
A Res approach	3	494	31.23064	525.2306	1500	46845.96	45000	0.960595	0.047031	525.2777	24000
Res App to Algur	1	498	27.27	525.27	1000	27270	45000	1.650165	0.138789	525.4088	40000
Res App to Algur	2	498	28.5408	526.5408	1000	28540.8	45000	1.57669	0.126705	526.6675	40000
Res App to Algur	3	498	30.30966	528.3097	1000	30309.66	45000	1.484675	0.112348	528.422	40000
Algur	4	498	30.35573	528.3557	1000	30355.73	45000	1.482422	0.112007	528.4677	40000
Al to Hippargi	1	508	20.46	528.46	750	15345	45000	2.932551	0.438321	528.8983	28000
Al to Hippargi	2	508	22.43919	530.4392	750	16829.4	45000	2.673893	0.364409	530.8036	28000
Al to Hippargi	3	508	27.4155	535.4155	750	20561.62	45000	2.188543	0.244124	535.6596	28000
Hippargi	4	508	28.30184	536.3018	750	21226.38	45000	2.120003	0.229073	536.5309	28000
Hi to Halyal	1	513	23.53	536.53	500	11765	45000	3.824904	0.745662	537.2757	25000
Hi to Halyal	2	513	25.93306	538.9331	500	12966.53	45000	3.470473	0.613873	539.5469	25000
Hi to Halyal	3	513	32.15623	545.1562	500	16078.12	45000	2.798835	0.39926	545.5555	25000
Halyal	4	513	33.46605	546.466	500	16733.02	45000	2.689293	0.368619	546.8347	25000
Ha to Kudichi	1	514	32.83	546.83	500	16415	45000	2.741395	0.38304	547.213	26000
Ha to Kudichi	2	514	33.03349	547.0335	500	16516.75	45000	2.724508	0.378335	547.4118	26000
Kudichi	4	514	37.4248	551.4248	500	18712.4	45000	2.404822	0.294759	551.7196	26000
Ku to Diggerwadi	1	515	36.72	551.72	500	18360	45000	2.45098	0.306183	552.0262	13000
Ku to Diggerwadi	2	515	33.96069	548.9607	500	16980.34	45000	2.650123	0.357959	549.3186	13000
Old Diggerwadi	3	515	38.43493	553.4349	500	19217.46	45000	2.34162	0.279469	553.7144	13000
Odigg to Shaharpur	1	518	35.71	553.71	500	17855	45000	2.520302	0.323747	554.0337	25000
Odigg to Shaharpur	6	518	41.91382	559.9138	500	20956.91	45000	2.147263	0.235002	560.1488	25000
Shaharpur	7	518	42.6414	560.6414	500	21320.7	45000	2.110625	0.227051	560.8685	25000
Shr to Narsobawadi	1	520	40.86	560.86	500	20430	45000	2.202643	0.24728	561.1073	10000
Shr to Narsobawadi	2	520	38.49415	558.4941	500	19247.07	45000	2.338018	0.27861	558.7728	10000
Narsobawadi	3	520	41.87595	561.876	500	20937.98	45000	2.149205	0.235427	562.1114	10000
Nar to Ankali	1	525	37.11	562.11	500	18555	45000	2.425222	0.299781	562.4098	27000
Nar to Ankali	2	525	38.57211	563.5721	500	19286.06	45000	2.333292	0.277485	563.8496	27000
Ankali	3	525	40.49566	565.4957	500	20247.83	45000	2.22246	0.25175	565.7474	27000
Ank to Sangli	1	528	37.74	565.74	500	18870	45000	2.384738	0.289856	566.0299	10000
Ank to Sangli	2	528	35.62464	563.6246	500	17812.32	45000	2.526341	0.325301	563.9499	10000
Sangli	3	528	39.02538	567.0254	500	19512.69	45000	2.306192	0.271076	567.2965	10000