Watershed Management

Watershed is a geo-hydrological unit area in which

water drains from various slopes to a common point
and is considered as an appropriate physical unit for
natural resources evaluation, planning and
management. Watershed management implies the
rational utilization of land and water resources for
optimum production with minimum hazard to
natural environment (Bhat, 1989). The concept of
watershed management is involves accurate and
timely monitoring of natural resources using
available latest technologies. This approach aim at
proper utilization of land and water resources,
protecting land against all forms of deterioration,
and monitoring and maintaining soil health, on site
conservation of water, proper management of local
drainage and sediment reduction and increasing
productivity from all land uses through suitable land
use planning.
 Examine the picture careful
Since watershed management involves decision-making for efficient utilization of
natural resources, a multidisciplinary approach is essential. Watershed management is
the processes of formulation and carrying out a course of action involving modification
of the natural system of watershed to achieve specified objectives befitting to the local
needs. These include optimum production with minimum hazard to natural resources
and assured economic benefits. It also helps in restore the fragile geo-ecological balance
at micro level through adoption of various conservation measures.

Watershed management implies the wise use of land, water and vegetation of a
watershed to obtain optimum production with minimum hazard to the natural resources.
The basic objective of watershed management is to solve the problems of soil and water
not in terms of anyone resource but on the basis that all the resources are interdependent
and must therefore, be considered together. Watershed management aims to improve
the standard of living of common man by increasing his earning capacity through
offering all facilities required for optimum production.

• Utilizing the land and water resources

according to their capabilities to support
agriculture and allied activities.
• Maintaining adequate vegetative cover on
the soil for controlling soil erosion, mainly
during rainy season.
• Conserving maximum possible rainwater
through rainwater harvesting by contour
farming and water harvesting structures and
storing it in ponds for future use.
• Preventing erosion in gullies and increasing
ground water recharge by putting a nullah
bunds and gully plugs at suitable intervals.

The watershed management implies, the

judicious use of all the resources i.e. land,
water, vegetation in an area for providing an
answer to alleviate drought, moderate floods,
prevent soil erosion, improve water availability
and increase food, fodder, fuel and fiber on
 sustained basis. Watershed to achieve maximum production with
minimum hazard to the natural resources and for the well being of people. The
management should be carried out on the watershed basis. The task of watershed
management includes the treatment of land by using most suitable biological and
engineering measures in such a manner that, the management work must be economic
and socially acceptable

Concept of Watershed
1. Watershed is a geo hydrological unit or piece of land that drain at a common
point.
2. A watershed is defined as any spatial area from which rain or irrigation water
is collected and drained through a common point.
3. The watershed and drainage basin are synonymous term indicating an area
surrounded by a ridge line that is drained through a single outlet.

Principles of Watershed Management

The main principles of watershed management based on resource conservation,
resource generation and resource utilization are:
• Utilizing the land based on its capability
• Protecting fertile top soil
• Minimizing silting up of tanks, reservoirs and lower fertile lands
• Protecting vegetative cover throughout the year
• In situ conservation of rain water
• Safe diversion of gullies and construction of check dams for in creasing ground water
recharge
• In creasing cropping intensity through inter and sequence cropping.
• Alternate land use systems for efficient use of marginal lands.
• Water harvesting for supplemental irrigation.
• - Maximizing farm income through agricultural related activities such as dairy, poultry,
sheep, and goat forming.
• - Improving infrastructural facilities for storage, transport and agricultural marketing,
• - Improving socio - economic status of farmers

Objectives of Watershed Management

• Objectives in watershed development

• The main objectives in watershed development is to promote the economic
 development of the village community, which is directly or indirectly depend
on the land and water resources of the watershed through: -
• (a) Optimum utilization of available resources that will mitigate adverse
effects of drought and prevents ecological degradation.
• (b) Bring more marginal and other wastelands under use to enhance the
productivity of each parcel of land unit thus enhancing employment generation
and other economic development at grass root level.
• (c) Restoration of degraded eco-systems at the watershed level through
sustains community participation.

• The term watershed management is nearly synonymous with soil and water
conservation with the difference that emphasis is on flood protection and sediment
control besides maximizing crop production.
• The basic objective of watershed management is thus is thus meeting the problems of
land and water use, not in terms of any one resource but on the basis that all the
resources are interdependent and must, therefore, be considered together.
• The watershed aims, ultimately, at improving standards of living of common people in
the basin by increasing their earning capacity, by offering facilities such as electricity,
drinking water, irrigation water, freedom from fears of floods, droughts etc.
• The overall objectives of watershed development programmers may be outlined as:
• Recognition of watersheds as a unit for development and efficient use of land
according their land capabilities for production,
• Flood control through small multipurpose reservoirs and other water storage structures
at the head water of streams and in problem areas,
• Adequate water supply for domestic, agricultural and industrial needs.
• Abatement of organic, inorganic and soil pollution,
• Efficient use of natural resources for improving agriculture and allied occupation so as
to improve socio-economic conditions of the local residents, and
• Expansion of recreation facilities such as picnic and camping sites.

Interlinking of Rivers
The joining of rivers has been in circulation since 1880s onwards. More than 125 years
back, Sir Arthur Cotton drew the outline of a systematic project to connect the major
rivers of India. The basic purpose of this project was to serve navigation from Assam
to Bombay and especially to Southern India tracts. Cotton strongly advocated for the
inter-linking of rivers or transport of goods through waterways. Cotton gave second
place to the development of railway lines. He proved by statistics that it is cheaper to
transport material by water routes than by land. This river linking, visualized by Cotton
was not taken up except in areas where he operated. No further development took place
in this direction till 1970s when the learned engineer and irrigation Minister in Nehru's
Cabinet, K. L. Rao mooted his proposal of a “National Water Grid”. According to Rao,
there are fourteen major rivers in India, each with a catchment area of 20,000 sq. km
and above. Together these rivers yield 85 per cent of the total water in India. By inter-
linking these major rivers, water can be transferred from areas of surplus availability to
areas of deficient supply. For this purpose Rao divided the entire country in four zones
and calculated water potential as well as cultivable area falling in each zone.

UNDP Mission on National Water Grid

Taking into account the unprecedented size of the scheme, the complexity, magnitude
and costs involved, it was thought to be pertinent to consult international experts before
undertaking any further investigations on the National Water Grid. This advice was
specially sought on three counts:

1. Feasibility of the scheme based on the preliminary studies done so far;

2. Evaluation of socio-economic benefits of the scheme on a rational basis; and
3. Further studies, surveys and investigations needed to be undertaken.

Subsequently, UNDP was requested to examine National Water Grid. A team of experts
from United Nations visited India first in December 1971 and again in March 1972 and
submitted its report the same year, endorsing the concept of the National Water Grid.
It stated:

“India’s national economy in its development and growth will be confronted with the
problem of increasing scarcity of water within the next thirty years. From basic
compilation of further water demands and water yields, it becomes evident that by the
year 2000 or so, the National Water Grid will be a vital necessity. No time should be
lost to start the very complex and difficult investigations today so that plans will be
matured and prepared in due time and the facilities will become operational when the
need will have come."

But this endorsement of UNDP came with a word of caution too - "Adequate funds
should be allocated. Thorough investigations of water yields and demands of technical
features and of low-cost power for pumping is needed to determine the economic
feasibility of the projects." So, even in 1972 the three crucial constraints in building a
National Water Grid were identified as funds, power and the actual water yields.

In the late seventies, yet another grandiose proposal of 'garland canal' was put forward
by Dinshaw J. Dastur. As a pilot, Dastur flew over the Delhi-Kathmandu route and
observed Himalayan rivers. He felt that the waters flowing from the Himalayan
Mountains can be collected by a canal at a high level and taken down the entire country
for irrigation.

National Perspective Plan

National Water Development Agency (NWDA), Ministry of Water Resources
(MOWR), GOI, finally came out with its ‘National Perspective for Water Resources
Development’ in August 1980.

The outline of this perspective plan comprises two main components:

1. Himalayan Rivers Development

2. Peninsular Rivers Development

1. The Himalayan Rivers Development (HRD)

The HRD envisages construction of storage reservoirs on the main Ganga and
Brahmputra revisers and their principal tributaries alongwith inter-linking canal system
to transfer surplus flows of the eastern tributaries of the Ganga to the West, apart from
the linking of the main Brahmaputra with the Ganga. It is claimed that it will provide
40,000 cusecs to Kolkata Port and would provide navigational facility throughout the
country. This scheme will benefit not only the states in Brahmaputra-Ganga basin but
also northern and western India.

2. Peninsular Rivers Development (PRD)

The PRD is divided in four major parts.
Part I. Interlinking of Mahanadi-Godavari-Krishna-Pennar-Cauvery
Amongst these Peninsular rivers, Mahanadi and Godavari are identified as water
surplus rivers while the remaining three Krishna, Pennar and Cauvery rivers are water
deficient rivers. It contemplated a net diversion of 15 MAF from Mahanadi-Godavari
to Krishna basin. Further links and uses have been identified as:
a. 6 MAF of Mahanadi water to coastal Orissa
b. Mahanadi - Godavari Link along East Coast, no lift
c. Godavari-Krishna Link, from Polavaram to Vijaywada, Inchampalli to Pulichintala,
Inchampalli to Nagarjunsagar and Wainganga to Srisailam.
d. Inchampalli-Nagarjunsagar Link involving a lift of 360 ft.
e. Wainganga-Srisailam Link involving a lift of 400 ft for 9 MAF water, to be utilized
for irrigation in Rayalseema and Nagarjunasagar command
f. Wainganga-Srisailam
Part II. Interlinking of west flowing rivers, north of Mumbai and south of Tapi.
Part III. Ken-Chambal Link
Part IV. Diversion of West flowing rivers

The Present Framework

After the Supreme Court direction in November 2002, the government has indeed acted
fast, by constituting a three member Task Force, headed by a former Union Minister
and the other two members are former secretaries of MOWR, GOI. This Task Force
will supervise the overall implementation and management of inter-basin water transfer
as well as coordinate in political, financial and technical aspects of the issue. The first
major challenge before the Task Force is to submit the final blue-print of the project by
2006, as per the government's commitment made to the Supreme Court. For this
purpose, a team of 250 engineers and technocrats with National Water Development
Agency is made responsible for carrying out 30 feasibility studies, field surveys and
investigations.

Inter Basin Water Transfer Proposal

Much before the Supreme Court's direction in November, 2002, the National Water
Development Agency came out with the present framework of inter-basin water transfer
proposals in October 2001. It is a modified National Perspective Plan August 1980)
wherein few alterations and additions have been induced. One major addition is in the
Himalayan component where construction of storage reservoirs on major tributaries of
Brahmputra and Ganga is sought in India, Nepal and Bhutan, along with interlinking
canal systems. It is for the purpose of transferring surplus flows of the eastern tributaries
of Ganga to the west, apart from the linking of main Brahmputra and its tributaries with
the Ganga and Ganga with Mahanadi.

Under this newly proposed inter-basin water transfer plan, 30 links have been
identified. Out of these 14 lie in the Himalayan component and 16 in the Peninsular
component. These links are:

I. The Himalayan Component

1. Brahmaputra-Ganga (MSTG-Manas-Sankosh-Tista-Ganga) 2. Kosi-Ghaghra 3.
Gandak-Ganga
4. Ghaghra-Yamuna 5. Sarda-Yamuna 6. Yamuna-Rajasthan 7. Rajasthan-Sabarmati
8. Chunar-Son Barrage 9. Son dam-Southern tributaries of Ganga 10. Ganga-Damodar-
Subernerekha
11. Subernerekha-Mahanadi 12. Kosi-Mechi 13. Farakka-Sundarbans 14. Brahmputra-
Ganga (JTF-ALTO Jogigopa-Tista-Farakka-Alternative)

II. The Peninsular Component

1. Mahanadi (Manibhadra)- Godavari (Dowlaiswaram) 2. Godavari (lnchampalli Low
Dam)-Krishna (Nagarjunsagar Tali Pond) 3. Godavari (Inchampalli)- Krishna
(Nagarjunsagar) 4. Godavari (Inchampalli)- Krishna (Vijaywada) 5. Krishna
(Almatti)- Pennar 6. Krishna (Srisailam)- Pennar
7. Krishna (Nagarjunsagar)- Pennar (Somasila) 8. Pennar (Somasila)- Cauvery (Grand
Anicut)
9. Cauvery (Kattalai)- Vaigai-Gundar 10. Ken-Betwa 11. Parbati-Kalisindh-Chambal
12. Par-Tapi-Narmada 13. Damanganga-Pinjal 14. Bedti-Varda 15. Netravati-
Hemavati 16. Pamba-Achankovil-Vaipar

In October-November 2002, during the proceedings of this case, the Apex Court
inquired about the feasibility of linking rivers in the country. The then Attorney General
Soli Sorabji put forward the argument that it is not cost-effective as it involves an
expenditure of Rs.70,000 crores. The Apex Court was not amused with this line of
argument and dismissed it by pointing out that the centre has been writing off thousands
of crores of loans as 'non-performing assets’. The Apex Court directed the government
for an acceleration of 'linking the rivers'. In its rejoinder, the government replied that it
could link Peninsular rivers by 2035 and the Himalayan rivers by 2043, after which
presumably, the two networks could be integrated. In its response, the Supreme Court
further directed the government to complete this project within 10 years. Eventually the
government gave its commitment to complete this task by 2016.

Regarding this Supreme Court directive, former Secretary, Ministry of Water

Resources, Government of India, Ramaswamy Iyer, says-"With respect, one wishes that
the learned judges had undertaken a more careful study of the subject before deciding
to issue directives. Fortunately these are interim directions".

Limitations
Let us look at the ground realities regarding these assumptions. The first assumptions
of surplus flow available in the river Brahmaputra does not guarantee the continued
surplus flow in the future too, as this aspect will be primarily governed by the future
river utilization plan by China, in whose territory 1625 km of the river flows. And
indeed China too has some very ambitious plans whereby it aims to divert 40 per cent
of water from the Brahamptra to its arid in the very near future.

In an identical manner, availability of surplus flow in the Ganga in future will be

governed by several environmental processes like global climatic change of which
increase in global temperature is an integral part. This is triggering a chain reaction of
glacial melting, leading eventually to sea level rise. Therefore, a casual approach that
discards environmental parameters, especially when massive funds are involved, may
create more problems than it may solve. The health of the Himalayan Ecosystem will
play a crucial role in the availability of water flow in the Ganga in future.

Under the proposed scheme of things, it is envisaged to create storage structures in

Nepal and Bhutan. How realistic this assumption is, especially in the case of Nepal, has
to be considered. For this purpose, it is very important to analyse India's water sharing
arrangements with Nepal in the past in somewhat greater detail. There are more than
20 water and power sharing agreements between India and Nepal. Since the inception
of the very first so-called 'Treaty by Correspondence' in 1920s, Nepal has had
grievances over the implementation of the projects, which have multiplied with every
newly emerging bilateral water sharing arrangement. On the other hand, construction
of storage facilities in Bhutan should not pose any problem as the two nations have
maintained a very good relationship.

Similarly, the objections of Bangladesh cannot be simply dismissed as there is a

likelihood that such river-linking may adversely affect the existing water sharing
arrangement at the Farakka Barrage. So far, the Farakka Treaty has by and large failed
to satisfy any of the riparian nations and a brief analysis of the Farakka Treaty and its
implementation is also necessary to grasp the problem in its totality.