Agreements & MOUs - The Ganga: Water Use in the Indian Subcontinent - page 176

The claim of Bangladesh government that Farakka withdrawals by India had
adverse effects on agriculture and forestry was exaggerated, as stated by Ben
Crow. Farakka withdrawals might have enhanced salinity in the Gorai-Madhumati
basin, but salinity intrusion in the Ganga-Padma because of them was negligi-
ble. Increased salinity in the Gorai-Madhumati basin might have affected farm
production, but its adverse effect on the forests in the Sundarbans was doubtful.
Similarly, the navigable depths in the Ganga-Padma and the Gorai-Madhumati
might have reduced somewhat after diversions from Farakka which led to sus-
pension of ferry services, reduction in trade and commerce etc. in southeast
Bangladesh.
The claim of Dhaka that fish haul, especially of hilsa , was reduced substantially
because of Farakka withdrawals, is not based on facts. Fish catch can go down
owing to increase in the catch of matured fishes and of spawns and small fishes,
extensive netting in rivers downstream, pollution of water by industrial and other
wastes, excessive withdrawal of water etc.
Although the effect of Farakka withdrawals on the flow of the Gorai-Madhumati,
increasing salinity, or harming agriculture, industry and other aspects are difficult to
assess correctly, the overall impact of the diversions on the ecology and the environ-
ment of southwest Bangladesh cannot be denied. Shortage of drinking water in the
dry season, spread of various diseases, decrease in fish production etc. might be the
indirect results of withdrawals at Farakka.
There were other direct and indirect effects on the sedimentation pattern of
the Ganga-Padma, which would eventually increase siltation and erosion of the
river-bed and banks, ultimately affect the channel pattern and invite other morpho-
logical changes.
The factors responsible for these adverse effects and to what extent these were
responsible for overall ecological degradation etc. of southwest Bangladesh owing
to withdrawals at Farakka are summarized in Table 10.7.
Table 10.7 shows that there were many other factors for adverse effects on south-
west Bangladesh. Farakka diversion did partly affect and might have accelerated the
effects but other reasons were more prominent too. Had there been no diversion at
Farakka, the adverse effects attributed to it would have occurred, some day, because
of other factors.

Augmentation Schemes Ignored

The 1977 agreement and the two MOUs of 1982 and 1985 could only resolve the
issue of sharing the Ganga flow at Farakka in the lean season between 1977 and
1988. Though these also provided for augmentation of the flow at Farakka, no
solution could be found over this long period, either by the Joint Rivers Commission
(JRC) or by the Joint

Committee of Experts (JCE).
The Article VIII of the 1977 Agreement, inter alia, stated:
The two governments recognize the need to co-operate with each other in finding a solution
to the long-term problem of augmenting the flows of the Ganges during the dry season.

|