Agreements & MOUs - The Ganga: Water Use in the Indian Subcontinent - page 174

India refuted these claims, saying that
(a) it is rainwaters that moist soil, not ground water,
(b) salinity did not affect the Padma water,
(c) no adverse effect was noticed in Indian territory below Farakka because of
diversion, and
(d) the experts who visited Bangladesh did not observe any decrease in water for
irrigation.
India also disagreed with the estimated loss on the ground that Bangladesh had
provided no target, or base level, of production, against which such losses can be
calculated. India also remarked that the quality and productivity of Sundari woods
depended on local rainfall and on the depth and spread of the tides. 'The lean sea-
son flows in the Padma cannot reach any part of the Sundarbans and the Farakka
withdrawals cannot thus have harmful effects on forestry in Bangladesh.'
The team concluded that there has indeed been some fall in farm production of
the order of 0.65 million tonnes and that the forests did decline because of increased
salinity. Though the team disagreed with the 'White Paper' of Dhaka on other
counts, it over-estimated the loss of farm production than that given in the White
Paper. The analysis of data was weak and not based on practical considerations. It
was not appropriate to attribute reduced flows in the Gorai-Madhumati to that in
the Ganga-Padma. Siltation in the mouth of the Gorai was a natural phenomenon
which might have reduced the flow in the Gorai-Madhumati, as happened to the
Bhagirathi-Hooghly, the Bhairab-Jalangi and the Mathabhanga-Churni. Therefore,
both the White Paper and the Special Studies reports might have been based on weak
analyses.
Ben Crow stated that as there was rise in salinity in certain areas after diversions
from Farakka, farm production was bound to fall, though it was difficult to quantify
it, owing to unknown factors. Similarly, the flows in the Gorai-Madhumati might
have enhanced salinity in water in the Sundarbans. Therefore, the decline of the
Sundarbans forests could not be due to Farakka diversions.
Regarding navigation, the Bangladesh government claimed that ferry services on
the Ganga, the Gorai-Madhumati etc. were disrupted badly owing to India's with-
drawals at Farakka. As a result, navigation became difficult, or even impossible,
in many rivers of southwest Bangladesh and led to shifting of several ferry termi-
nals. The 'Special Studies' team found that the affected routes were not the most
important but conceded that the Farakka Barrage did have an adverse effect and that
India's diversions of the Ganga water at Farakka did seriously disrupt inland navi-
gation. Commercial navigation also suffered to the extent of 10 million tonne-miles
and Bangladesh did incur a loss of three million taka, or US$ 50,000 (in February,
2009 exchange rate), because of reduced water depths in the Ganga after Farakka
diversions.
Bangladesh claimed that the withdrawals reduced fish yield and haul because of
disturbance of the traditional food chain and inability of fishes to breed and live
in shallow depths and owing to rise in salinity. The Fishery Directorate recorded