Talks may not be able to resolve Mhadei row: Experts

Panaji: An all party meeting convened by chief minister, Laxmikant Parsekar to discuss the Mhadei issue may not achieve much, as the margin for resolution of the dispute through talks is limited or nil, sources said.
Mhadei water disputes tribunal (MWDT) at New Delhi during a hearing on September 1, 2016, had advised the state to hold bipartite talks with Karnataka to resolve the water row amicably.While Goa had rejected the Karnataka proposal for an out-of-court settlement in the past, knowing the implications of such a move, Parsekar had reacted guardedly to the tribunal suggestion.
The talks can be held but the state’s interest will not be compromised, Parsekar had said.
Karnataka had sought before the tribunal, diversion of 7.56 TMC water to its draught-affected areas, but the tribunal had rejected the plea in an interim order.
Hydrology experts have argued that the water of Mhadei river cannot be diverted, as its basin is not a typical Indian river basin, but one with many hotspots of biodiversity and five wildlife sanctuaries apart from its species-rich ecosystem.
A huge quantity of water flowing in Mhadei is required for ecological services and sustaining human life and the region’s biodiversity. Any adverse compromise may jeopardize the state’s water security and expose the 1,400 hectares to the vagaries of climate change, Nandkumar Kamat, a member of a government-appointed expert panel on Mhadei diversion in 1999 said in a petition to Goa government.
“Goa’s freshwater resources may be heavily polluted by intrusion of the sea later in this century,” Kamat said. Kamat had urged Goa government to take decisions in public interest and Goa’s water security. “Karnataka should be asked to abandon Kalsa-Bandura project and there should be a permanent ban on transfer of Mhadei water to Malaprabha river,” he stated in his petition.
Maharashtra government also needs to be stopped from erecting dams in the 75 sq km catchment area of Mhadei’s upper basin, which could hinder flow to Bicholim and Valvonti rivers.
“If Goa fails to convince MDWT on these twin demands then the water security of the state would be in permanent peril,” he states.
Some point out that Karnataka has not used its water resources judiciously and allowing it to divert water would prove disastrous for Goa.
Karnataka’s mismanagement of water had been highlighted before MWDT by Atmaram N S Nadkarni, additional solicitor general of India. Karnataka has increased the sugarcane cultivation tenfold and this is an admitted position of Karnataka in their interrogatories filed before tribunal.
Manifold increase and unplanned growth of industrial profile in Karnataka has also affected water availability, he said.
Nadkarni also pointed out that Karnataka has also not tapped two major tributaries on Malaprabha’s right bank, Bennehalla Nalla and Joul Nalla.