Agreements & MOUs - The Ganga: Water Use in the Indian Subcontinent - page 157

Table 10.3 Average discharge through River Bhagirathi and Ganga downstream (Cumecs)

Period (River Bhagirathi) Period (Ganga downstream)

Year Jan to June March to May Jan to June March to May Remarks

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1975 406 - 406 - - - - - Pre-

Agreement
period

1976 (May - - - - - - -

only) 45% - - - - - -

1977 1015 45% 1001 47% 1220 55% 1160 53%

973 901 46% 1174 55% 1050 54%

1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985

1039
1027
666
928
940
839
923
845

47%
38%
32%
39%
32%
40%
24%
41%

1004
979
516
804
904
689
727
605

48%
39%
36%
39%
40%
39%
40%
39%

1180
1685
1421
1478
2018
1275
2885
1220

53%
62%
68%
61%
68%
60%
76%
59%

1070
1552
910
1252
1374
1068
1089
960

52%
61%
64%
61%
60%
61%
60%
61%

Post
agreement
period

the interest of Calcutta Port. That year, the relevant clause of distress-sharing under
Article II had to be applied, as per agreement, entailing a great sacrifice for India.
Naturally, the improvement which could have occurred near Calcutta Port could not
take place and port facilities declined in all fronts. The actual 10-daily distributions
of water against the agreement quantity in 1980 are shown in Table 10.4.
The original demands of two countries were quite high - 1,132 cumecs for India
and 1,246 cumecs for Bangladesh - but as the lean-season discharge at Farakka
was low, the agreement provided for less discharge in the leanest month of April.
However, the actual availability in 1980 was far below the quantity, given in the
Agreement. Therefore, the available quantity was further reduced which reflected in
Table 10.5.
In 1981, 1983-1984, 1986 and 1988, the available discharge at Farakka in the
lean season was much less than that in the agreement. Thus, it proved to be theo-
retical than practical, though based on 75% availability of prototype data between
1973 and 1984. It also did not envisage that either side was bound by its clauses
to ensure that this quantity would be available in lean season at Farakka. However,
the fact remained that the actual availability of water at Farakka between 1980 and
1989 in most of the years was much less than that in the agreement and therefore,
each country had got its share of this less quantity as per the ratio fixed. This was
the fait accompli and both countries had to share the burden.
As a result, the movement of ships to and from Calcutta port as also the draft in
the Bhagirathi-Hooghly decreased since 1978. At many places on the river - Katwa,
Mayapur, Kalna and Samudragarh - the water went so down that even low-draft
vessels (1.5 m. or so) could not ply in March and April. New char lands formed, fol-
lowing fall in discharge in the lean season. Dredging between Calcutta and Hooghly