Kosi Barrage: Farakka Mahakali Ganga

Kosi Barrage Originates autonomous region of Tibet Total catchment area 92,538 km 2 : Tibet 30%, Nepal 50%, India 20% Travels 729 km before joining the Ganges at Kurusela Avg. annual yield 50 billion m 3 Hydropower potential 22,000 MW Two peculiar characteristics Carries huge amount of silt, sand and debris Westward moving i.e. in last 250 years moved westward 112 km Kosi is called Saptakosi where Sunkosi, Arun, Tamor, Dudhkosi, Likhu, Tamakosi, and Indrawati tributaries

Sorrow of Bihar Like Huang Ho river of China Kosi Project 1946 Dr. Khosala’s team water expert from India Build big concrete dam near Baraha chhetra of Nepal to control the floods Signed in 25 th April 1954 between the government of India and Nepal

Kosi Terms Construction of Barrage, Headworks and other appurtenant works about 3 miles upstream of Hanuman Nagar town on Kosi with afflux and flood banks and canals within territories of Nepal. Purpose: Flood control, irrigation, generation of Hydroelectric power and prevention of erosion of Nepal.

16 Clauses and sub-clauses of Kosi treaty Many unequal arrangements which caused many hues and cries against it. Clause 4(i) has not mentioned Nepal’s right to withdraw water from Kosi for irrigation or for any other purposes or from its tributaries Clause 5(i) spelt for indefinite period of ownership of Nepalese project land by India Clause 9(ii) of the treaty states that threatened condition of barrage or erosion of the structure on account of the river, the officer of the project may restrict public traffic under intimation of government of Nepal Nepal has to provide land, timber, sand, stone and other construction materials free of cost It also clearly mentions in the treaty clause 7 that no charges of custom duty of any kind during construction and subsequent maintenance of the project In fact, Nepal has contributed the same amount as much as India i.e land and other necessary facilites to construct the barrage whereas India agreed to construct the barrage, headwork and other connected works at the cost of India

Agreed to construct a barrage 3 miles upstream of Hanuman nagar town Location of the dam from original Baraha chhetra to Hanuman nagar Initial agreements 783 feet high dam, 6.9 million acre feet of water, barrage at Chatara and canals for irrigation of 38.4 lakhs acres in Nepal and Bihar, desilation and improved drainage, 90,000 kw of hydroelectricity

“Bandh Bannu purwa Kosi bharat ko dukha thiyo, yojana pachi nepal ko dukha bhaeko cha” Shastra Dutta Panta The malasies is all the more unmistakable where India exercise control over water supply as say in the Kosi and Gandak project, the water supply becomes irregular because the structures geared to Nepal are not properly maintained. The priority always goes to supplying water to the Indian Canal System particularly in the lean season the Nepalese farmers are very much left high and dry” Aditya Man Shrestha Fear of India: India wants to control the floods of Kosi river and other way India wants to provide little water to Nepalese people Expected to irrigate 740,000 hectare and 312,000 hectare area by the eastern and western canals A hydropower unit to generate 20 MW utilizing a drop was constructed in the eastern main canal Inundation canal was also built at chatara to irrigate a gross area of 86,000 hectare in Nepal.

Nepal provided 225 square km of fertile land of Terai, 10 lakhs cubic feet of timber, uncountable stones and sands, elephants, communication facilities, fuel energy of wood up to the project to 30,000 labourers free of cost More than that Nepal does not have any rights to levy any custom duty during construction, future maintenance of the barrage and other related work according to the Clause 7 of the treaty. More benefitial to India in terms of flood control, irrigation facilities, navigation uses and domestic and drinking water Less advantageous to Nepal: Acknowledged by Indian academics also very late. Disadvantageous situation of Nepal: Nepalese expert did not study the project properly, hasty decisions were taken, treaty was signed in an unstable government of Matrika Prasad Koirala, Zero sum outcome to Nepal Nepalese see these agreements as an instance of loss of sovereignty as the clauses in the original agreement gave Indian exclusive control over the project installation and over the water allocation. Rishikesh Shah said,” Nepal and India have been at fault as they had been at the time of Kosi and Gandak project. Nepali Congress govt. was called seller of country.

Nepal’s critical situation is equally responsible for the least benefits of the Kosi project crores cash contribution from India, however Nepal contributed more than 42.5 crore in the form of land, stone, sand, timber, labourers etc. India offered Devighat hydropower for appeasing Nepal as a compensation of Kosi project

“ Kosi agreement turned out to be a one sided collaboration at the cost of poor Nepal. ………… does not at all give the impression that two sovereign states had signed it. ………… as if a provincial authority was signing an agreement with the central authority”. Aditya Man Shrestha Kosi project irrigation of 87,000 hectares of Nepali Land, Indian land 2 million hectares

Control of the barrage bridge was given to India. The bridge connects vital link between eastern and other parts of Nepal. Construction and properties of the Project belong to India Communication facilities used freely by India whereas these were not open to the Nepalese side. Administrative power also taken by India Fishing rights up to two miles

Positive aspect article 10 of the treaty. Free and unrestricted navigation in the Kosi river. Has not been implemented on the grounds of technical problems.

Amendments to the treaty in Article 4,5 and16. Article 4(i) HMG has the right to withdraw water for irrigation and power generation from Kosi or its tributaries. Article 5 (i) Leasing of the land for 199 years instead of unlimited at a nominal rate. Reiterated in Article 16.

Eastern Canal 612,500 hectare and Western Canal 356,610 ha of land of India Nepal irrigated land is negligible. 50% of electricity from any power house located 10 mile radius Cost involved (need to pay) Very unreliable and poor quality electricity supply. Irrigation project handed over to Nepal. Frequent repair and maintenance of the project through the World Bank three time using loan and one time grant to correct the mistakes Chatra Irrigation project- More irrigation facility Not effective, seepage due to poor quality, hampers the irrigation 13,800 ha of land in Saptri district, 11.4 cumecs of water from Kosi

Solely dependent on the whims of the Indian authority. Lean season, it is not available Get enough water at the time of rainy season. What a treaty!!!