No. 91 (November-December 1995) 5

IMAGINE that a jumbo jet is readyto take off with a huge load ofpassengers and cargo. A few of

the passengers discover a time-bombunderneath one of the seats; they thenlook out the window of the plane andsee that one of the wings of the planeis dangling in the air and might fall offat any moment. They inform the otherpassengers, and all leave the plane inpanic. The airline management, insteadof taking the plane off the runway fora thorough security checkup and forrepairs, and then making otherarrangements for the passengers, callin the police, and get many of theagitated passengers beaten up andtheir leaders arrested for creating a lawand order problem. Nevertheless, thepassengers persist in demanding thatthe flight not take off with themaboard. The management then takesaside a few leading protesters, offersthem a free ticket each on a differentplane and some bribe money topretend to board the flight in order tobreak the unity and resolve of theprotestors. Even so, the rest of thepassengers continue sitting on adharna saying that they will not movetill the flight is cancelled and anenquiry ordered into the negligence.They demand a different plane for theirtrip, and that the management send thedefective plane for a thorough check-up. The passengers are, however,forcibly rounded up and loaded ontothe dangerous plane simply becausecancelling the flight would meanhaving to give a refund to thepassengers and consequently wouldresult in financial loss to themanagement.

Such a situation seemsinconceivable. No ordinary airlinemanagement would take such a risk.Even if it did not care about the livesof the passengers, it would not wantto lose the plane in the inevitable crash.

However, what if the managers did notown the planes, but got ownership ofthe planes as well as the airlinecompany by fraud and crookery fromthe investors, and began to help itselfto huge commissions off the books onevery ticket sold while making extra

money by kickback by buying sub-standard, nearly junked planes? Sincethe airline company executivesthemselves do not travel on theseplanes — only the investors do — anddo not pay the insurance costs for harmto the passengers, they consider it

A Himalayan CatastropheThe Controversial Tehri Dam in the Himalayas

Madhu Kishwar

6 MANUSHI

logical to scrimp on everything,including security measures, and donot care if someone plants bombs inthe planes or even steals parts of theengines.

Sounds like a nightmare. And mostpeople would turn around and say, thiscould not possibly happen! Whywould investors willingly hand overtheir money to a bunch of crooks whonot only fleeced them outrageouslybut also behave as if they are notmerely the managers but also theowners of the airline and have noaccountability to the investors. As ithappens, these crooks are able to stayin control by soliciting and obtainingmore and more investments fromgullible people by hiring effectivepropagandists, touts, thugs andhoodlums who alternately cajole andthreaten people into believing thatmanagement is acting in the investors’best interest! And those investorswho don’t succumb are either packedoff to jails or beaten to a pulp ordeclared insane.

If you think that this is an unlikelyscenario, you are sadly mistaken. Ourcountry’s government does exactlywhat I described the airlinemanagement as doing — in fact, worse.It is frequently endangering the livesof not just a few planeloads ofpassengers but of millions of us whofill its coffers with our money througha variety of direct and indirect taxes.Much of the money it takes from us issimply pocketed by our bureaucrats,politicians, and their minions. Thelittle that is spent on projects withsome possible public benefits (RajivGandhi himself admitted that less thanten percent of money meant fordevelopment schemes actually evergets to be spent for “development”)is almost all put into wasteful and ofteneven dangerous schemes. The

controversial Tehri dam project is onesuch example.

A Dangerous DamThe Tehri dam project was first

conceived in 1949 and was sanctionedby the Planning Commission in 1972.It is located in the outer Himalaya inthe Tehri-Garhwal district of UttarPradesh. It is planned to be the fifthhighest dam in the world — 260.5meters high and spread over an areaof 45 square kilometers in theBhagirathi and Bhilangana valleys nearTehri town. The dam, when finished,will completely submerge Tehri townand nearly 100 villages will be totallyor partially submerged. Nearly onelakh persons will be permanentlyuprooted from their homes because ofthe dam. Ever since the dam wassanctioned in 1972, local people havebeen opposing the dam and offeringresistance to its construction. Manyscientists and environmentalists havepointed out the grave risks involvedin building this dam in a highlyearthquake-prone zone. But thegovernment dismisses theseallegations of risk, saying that allthose who oppose the Tehri dam are“anti-development”. That is reallyfudging the issue. If the project isreally going to be beneficial to the

people of this country, thegovernment ought to have noobjection to holding public hearingsand a thorough open review of theproject, so as to allay the fears of thehazards and drawbacks.

This mammoth dam is located in aseismic fault zone — that is to say,this area is earthquake-prone. Between1816 and 1991, the Garhwal region haswitnessed 17 earthquakes, the latestone being the Uttarkashi earthquakeof October 1991. The design of thedam is of 1969 vintage when scientificknowledge and understanding aboutearthquakes (and the plate tectonictheory upon which it is currentlybased) was far more limited.

Even though, over the years, someof the parameters of the project werealtered substantially, there was nochange in the basic design, especiallyin the width of the structure, as thishad already been fixed in 1978 whenwork on the diversion tunnels hadcommenced. This means that the damis dangerously underdesigned. Toclaim the dam is safe without changingthe width of the dam (and completelyrebuilding the diversion tunnels), isillogical. Tearing out and rebuildingthe diversion tunnels, which havebeen operating since their completionin 1986, is economically nonviable, asis building a dam that is 2,000 metersor more in width. Even if that werepossible, there is no guarantee that itwould not collapse in an earthquakeof Magnitude 8 Richter Scale orgreater. The Uttarkashi earthquake of1991 served as a warning that anearthquake could be of longer durationthan has been taken into account bythe project engineers.

In this context, it is noteworthy thatno recognised seismologists havebeen associated with the Tehri project.Dr Vinod Gaur, the only seismologist

Many scientists, therefore,believe that the moun-tains will not be able to

bear the burden of such amammoth structure

With the building of thedam, the river Ganga will

become a dead river.

No. 91 (November-December 1995) 7

of international eminence associatedwith the high level committeeappointed to evaluate the dam,expressed strong reservations aboutthe safety of the dam. Professor JamesBrune, an acknowledged internationalauthority on earthquake rockattenuation, whose formula the Tehriproject engineers claim to have usedin their estimate of the safety of thedam, has gone on record to say thathis formula has been misused and thatif they construct this dam it will be oneof the most unsafe dams in the world.The International Commission onLarge Dams has declared the site“extremely hazardous”. Instead ofproving publicly that anticipated riskshave been covered, the governmentarbitrarily fudged their figures forpolitical convenience rather than carryout experiments to empiricallydetermine and update realisticestimates.

The Himalayan mountains areknown to be young and fragile. Withcontinuous blasting and massivedeforestation, they have become evenmore unstable. Landslides occurfrequently in this region. Manyscientists, therefore, believe that themountains will not be able to bear theburden of such a mammoth structure.Even if the structure withstands theshock, there is every possibility of thefragile mountain slopes giving rise tohuge landslides disgorging into thereservoirs, causing dam failure andmajor floods. Some of the mountainsnear the dam have been assessed bygeological surveyors to be veryunstable without vegetation cover. Incase the dam collapses due to anearthquake or a design fault, thedevastation will be unimaginable. Thehuge reservoir built at such a heightwill be emptied in 22 minutes. Within63 minutes Rishikesh will be under 260meters of water. Soon after Haridwar

will be totally submerged. Bijnor,Meerut, Hapur and Bulandshahar willbe under water within 12 hours. Thusthe dam is potentially dangerous forlarge parts of north-western India, andlarge areas in the Gangetic plains couldbe devastated in the event of a mishap.

The Death of GangaWith the building of the dam, the

river Ganga will become a dead river.Ganga is not just any river; it is aunique symbol of our ancient

civilisation and culture. Ganga waterhas the quality of remaining fresh formany years and is, therefore, part ofmany sacred rituals, including thepouring of a few drops of Ganga jalinto the mouth of a dying person.People come from all over the countryto perform asthi pravah in the Gangaat Haridwar. If the Ganga is made toflow through tunnels dammed at Tehri(and also at Bhaironghati Thala dam)as proposed, this sacred river will losethe quality of freshness and purity itis revered for. Only open, flowing

Photo: RAGHU RAI

8 MANUSHI

water is able to support life, as it getsrejuvenated by contact with anoxygenated atmosphere. When wateris dammed, its quality deteriorates.Water collected in a huge stagnantreservoir 260 meters high cannotoxygenate itself. Fish, water plants,and other aquatic life are also crucialfor keeping the water fresh. But whenwater is made to flow through narrow,closed tunnels, as is inevitable withmega dams, there is no possibility oflife surviving in such waters. Already,the building of the Farakka barrageover Ganga near Calcutta and thebuilding of tunnels to control anddivert Ganga waters at Tehri haveobstructed the movement of fish fromthe sea to the Himalaya during thesummer for laying eggs and their returnto the sea during winter.

In 1807-08, Rapier had observedthat at the Sangam of Devprayag, hehad found five to six foot long fishjumping out of the water to grab atrotis being fed to them by pilgrims.Today, the polluted Ganga has veryfew fish left. Consequently, all effortsto clean up the river with fancy moderntechnology have failed. By the timeGanga reaches the plains, we startpouring so much filth in it, includingsewerage and industrial waste, that itresembles a dirty drain rather than aholy river. Even in the Himalayanmountains, serious environmentalimbalances being created bydeforestation are causing a threat tothe river. Scientists have found thatthe glacier that feeds Ganga isreceding at an alarming pace due tounchecked pollution being created

even in that pristine environment. Ifbig dams such as the one at Tehri arebuilt so high up close to Ganga’s verysource, this river will become a deadriver by the time it reaches Rishikeshand be impossible to clean over therest of its route. Thus, the Tehri damis a major civilisational assault on thepeople of India and not just on thepeople of Tehri who will be uprootedfrom their homes.

Environmental FalloutsThe government claims that it has

reviewed the safety andenvironmental aspects of the dam.However, most of these reviews weredone by those involved in building thedam, those on the payrolls of the dambuilders. Nevertheless, even some ofthe government’s own evaluation

The Many Unsafe Dams in India

A majority of India’s dams are “unsafe by present standards”, according to a leaked internal World Bank memo, theInternational Rivers Network, a non-governmental environmental organisation, has said.

Of the 25 dams surveyed under an ongoing World Bank dam safety project, it said, none had been designed to hold back theamount of water which it was now calculated could enter their reservoirs during heavy storms. Two of these dams could be hitby floods seven times greater than they were built to survive. The dams surveyed, the Network says, include two of India’slargest — Hirakud and Gandhi Sagar.

The author of the memo, Mr William Price of the World Bank’s Asia Technical Division, says that for these dams, theconsequences of a dam failure during a major flood would have to be described with some adjective beyond ‘disastrous’.

The Network said: “The 25 dams assessed by the World Bank team make up less than three percent of the total number ofdams in the four states covered by the project.” The memo reportedly states that the problems found at the 25 dams may be“only the tip of the iceberg”.

The Network continued: “India’s worst dam disaster to date, the failure of the Machhu II dam in 1979, killed at least 2,000people. Machhu II collapsed during a flood which was over twice as strong as that which the dam was built to contain. Mr Pricepoints out that “there is no comparison” between the remote areas downstream of Machhu II and the “highly populated valleys”below Hirakud and Gandhi Sagar, and that the failure of either dam, Hirakud especially, would “dwarf the Machhu disaster”.

“Furthermore, Machhu II was a relatively small dam, 26 metres high. Hirakud is 59 metres high and can hold back 8.1 billioncubic metres of water - 80 times as much as Machhu II. Gandhi Sagar is five metres higher than Hirakud and its reservoir is onlymarginally smaller. Although clearly, hundreds of thousands of people are at risk downstream of the 25 dams surveyed in India,none of the findings of the World Bank team have been made public.”

The Network recalled that the world’s worst-ever dam disaster, in Henan province of China, in August 1975, was caused bythe failure of two dams with a combined capacity of 600 million cubic metres of water. Between 86,000 and 230,000 people werekilled when the dams burst during an exceptionally heavy flood, according to Chinese documents.

The campaign director for the Network said: “The World Bank should insist that inundation maps are published andevacuation plans prepared for all future dams that it funds in India and elsewhere.

Bhagarathi ki Pukar

No. 91 (November-December 1995) 9

committees have expressed gravedoubts about this dam. In February1980, the Environmental AppraisalCommittee appointed by the Ministrygave its verdict:

“Taking into consideration thegeological and social impactsaccompanying the project, the costand benefits expected, and after acareful examination of the informationand data available, the Committee hascome to the unanimous conclusionthat the Tehri project, as proposed,should not be taken up as it does notmerit environmental clearance.” MrsGandhi, the then Prime Minister, askedthat experts should “have another lookin depth” at the Project. In her note tothe Department of Science andTechnology on March 18, 1980,ordering a review of the Project, shewrote: “It seems that large areas ofvery fertile land are being submergedwithout any commensurate gains...these decisions have been taken overa period of time but there is great localdistress and a feeling that contractorsand other such groups will be the maingainers.” The Expert Groupconstituted by the Ministry of Scienceand Technology headed by the lateShri Sunil Roy rejected the Tehri damproject in October 1986. According toT.N. Seshan: “The recommendationwas before Rajiv Gandhi. Gorbachevcame with an offer of aid. There hadto be a project to absorb that aid, aproject gigantic enough to befit theSoviet might. Tehri was ideal.” (SeeT.N. Seshan, An Intimate Story p. 126)After the Soviet aid of Rs 2,000 croreswith Soviet machines and engineerscame to take charge, Tehri dam got anew lease on life and Tehri HydroDevelopment Corporation (THDC)was formed to implement the project.Seshan was against giving clearanceto the Tehri dam when he wasSecretary, Environment in 1987.

The Ministries of Environment andForests have been given scant regardin clearing the Tehri project. TheEnvironmental Appraisal Committeeconstituted by the Ministry ofEnvironment rejected the dam inFebruary1990. The Minister of Statefor Environment recommended itsabandonment in January-February1992. (In 1990, the Ministries ofEnvironment and Forests werepersuaded to grant conditionalclearance because of a deal wherebythe Ministry of Power would give

Rs 300 crore for the greening ofthe Himalayas. Even this smallconditionality has not yet beenhonoured.)

A White ElephantThe Tehri dam project builders

claim that it will irrigate 2.7 lakhhectares of land and generate 1,000MW in Stage I, 1000 MW in Stage II,and 400 in Stage III — a total of 2,400MW of power. However, we know fromprevious government projects that nopower plants built under governmentcontrol ever function as planned.Most of them are run so inefficientlythat they don’t even yield 25 percentof their installed capacity. Manyindependent scientists believe thatunder the best of circumstances, theproject will not generate more than 350MW of power and this pitiful amountof electricity can easily be producedthrough the use of much less invasivetechnology and at much lower costs.Similarly, 2.7 lakh hectares can moreefficiently be irrigated through avariety of medium and small scaleirrigation projects. Tehri dam wasconceived in 1949 when 350 MW ofenergy potential seemed a lot.However, in today’s context to takesuch enormous risks for this amountof electricity is absurd especially

Aftermath of Tehri earthquake 1991

The Tehri dam is a majorcivilisational assault on thepeople of India and not juston the people of Tehri whowill be uprooted from their

homes

10 MANUSHI

considering the economic and humancosts involved.

The government claims that thedam will have a life span of 100 years.The life of the dam is dependent onthe annual rate of sedimentation in thereservoir and the total dead storagecapacity. According to the ReservoirSedimentation Committee Report,1985, there is a big difference betweenthe assumed and the actual rate ofsedimentation. It is well known thatthe Himalayan rivers, especially theBhagirathi, carry an unusually highrate of silt because of glacial factorsand extensive soil erosion due todeforestation. The rate ofsedimentation will certainly keeprising. Thus the actual life span of thedam is not expected to be more than30-40 years. Its life was originallyassessed at over 100 years on thebasis of a figure computed withoutadequate data of siltation of eighthectares/100 square kilometers, butactual silt measuring stations set uplater revealed the rate to be 22hectaremeters/100 square kilometers,which reduced the projected life of thedam by one third. This makes theproject even less viable from a purelyeconomic point of view. The PlanningCommission has laid down that thecost-benefit ratio of any projectshould not be lower than 1:1.50. Evenat 1988 calculations the investmentreturn of 1:0.56 was low. With thesharp continuing escalation in cost,even by its own measures the projectwill soon turn out to be economicallynonviable and indeed a white elephantinstead of a sound investment.

In 1972, the estimated cost of thedam was Rs 197 crore. By 1989, it hadrisen to nearly Rs 3,008 crore. At 1992prices the cost escalated to Rs 5,500crore. By the time it gets seriouslyunder way the cost will have gone upmuch higher without any increase in

benefits. With the actual life span ofthe dam being calculated at no morethan 30-40 years, the astronomicalamount being spent on it represents acriminal squandering of scarce publicfunds.

Who Pays, Who BenefitsThe dam will submerge 4200

hectares of the most fertile flat land inthe Bhagirathi and Bhilangana valleyswithout really benefitting the regionin any way. Tehri Garhwal is amongthe poorest districts in the country.After the dam has outlived itssupposed utility, the entire area willbecome a vast swamp. This projecthas no provision to provide electricityand irrigation to the villages of Tehri-Garhwal. The water is meant forirrigating the sugar cane growing landof western Uttar Pradesh, whichalready has adequate water to irrigateabout 90 percent of its land. This canbe compared to 12 percent irrigationcapacity in the Himalayan villages.Some water will be supplied to Delhiwhere the average per capitaconsumption of water is 250 litres aday as compared to 10 litres a day forthe villagers of Tehri region. Womenin the Himalayan villages have to walkmiles to fetch water from distant riversand disappearing streams, adding agreat deal of burden to their alreadydifficult lives.

The Tehri dam will facilitate amassive water transfer from the

Himalayan region and leave it evendrier than it is now. Already trees arenot growing there because of lack ofmoisture on the mountains due todeforestation and drying up of watersources. Any further destruction ofthe ecology of the Himalayanmountains will be truly disastrous forthe rest of the country because ourecological well-being is tied up withthat of the Himalaya. People likeSunderlal Bahuguna are right indemanding that if the government isserious about “development”, then thepeople of Tehri region should be made“partners” in that development and notsimply sacrificed for the enrichment ofthe already well off. He recommendsthat instead of one risky and giganticproject, power generation fromnumerous schemes along the Gangaand other Himalayan rivers shouldreceive top priority. Though thecapacity of these schemes may in sumbe less than that of the present project,they will have the advantage of beingpermanent, non-invasive andinexpensive. There are favourableconditions in the Himalaya for this.Bahuguna is not off the mark when hesays that these mini and micro hydelschemes would produce enoughpower for local needs, reducing thedrudgery of hill people and helping re-green the Himalaya. Electricitygenerated from the bigger rivers maybe exported. As water is a preciousresource of this region, a royalty of 20percent should be levied on theelectricity exported and this moneydistributed among village panchayatsof the region. This will ensure thatresources from regions inhabited bythe poor are not simply robbed for thebenefit of the already wealthy, and thatthe former are made “partners indevelopment”.

Shoddy RehabilationAs with other similar

“development” projects thegovernment has done very little to

Any further destructionof the ecology of the

Himalayan mountainswill be truly disastrous for

the rest of the countrybecause our ecological

well-being is tied up withthat of the Himalaya

No. 91 (November-December 1995) 11

ensure proper rehabilitation andcompensation for nearly a lakh ofpeople who will be forever uprootedfrom their villages and homes onaccount of the dam, with little hope ofrehabilitation, as no alternative landis available. There is no appreciationof the emotional and psychologicaltrauma caused by forcibly drivingpeople away from their homelandwhere their families have lived forcenturies. The rehabilitation packageis poorly conceived and even moreshabbily implemented. So far therehabilitation funds have been usedup without proper procedures beingfollowed. It is widely alleged thatfunds meant for rehabilitation havebeen used by THDC to give bribes tosome of the leading opponents of thedam so as to divide the resistance

movement, and that many of the localpoliticians (of virtually all politicalparties) have been given big pay-offsto neutralise their opposition.However, no proper survey has beencarried out to determine the number ofpeople requiring rehabilitation, norhas any well worked out rehabilitationpackage been offered to the people.Money has been arbitrarily offeredand given to some people but many

have not even been informed that theirvillages will be submerged. Themanner in which money has beendistributed selectively has only servedthe purpose of dividing the peoplewith a view to breaking the movementrather than as part of a sincere attemptto implement a proper rehabilitationscheme. Most people are likely to beleft destitute after their lands aresnatched away from them. Such bigdams destroy the village communitiesand the hundreds of thousands whoare uprooted are never properlyrehabilitated. The 13,500 oustedfamilies of Pong dam in HimachalPradesh are still homeless. Despite thepowerful anti-Narmada movement, thegovernment has failed to work outproper rehabilitation schemes for allthose who are being ousted in theNarmada valley.

A long shot of Tehri town, Bhagirathi river and the dam site, Photo: RAGHU RAI

The building of megadams facilitates the

legalised robbery of water- the most valuable re-

source of the hill regions

12 MANUSHI

Legalised RobberyWith such a bleak economic

situation, Tehri Garhwal is heavilydependent on its “money ordereconomy”. Men from these hill regionshave to come to the plains to take onmenial jobs because the wealth of

these regions is being exploited byoutsiders and these regions haveremained neglected in terms of evenbasic needs. The three most importantsources of wealth of hill areas areforests, water, and minerals. Thegovernment appropriation of forests

from the village communities hasalready meant large scale continuingplunder of the forest wealth bybureaucrats, contractors andpoliticians who have built fortunescutting trees and selling timber for theconsumption of urban elites in the

The Seismic Gap in the Himalayas

The geological stage for this human drama was set some 180 million years ago, with the breakup of the supercontinent ofGondwanaland. One of Gondwanaland’s fragments was a crustal plate that carried what is now the Indian subcontinent. Overthe next 130 million years, this plate tracked steadily northward, erasing the ocean that then separated India from Eurasia. Theoceanic crust was subducted — forced down into the underlying mantle.

But continental crust is too light and buoyant to be subducted. So when India itself finally bulldozed into Eurasia 50 millionyears ago, it hit a wall. Both continents had to give. On the Eurasian side of the collision zone, the crust was thickened andsqueezed upward, creating the high plateau of Tibet. On the Indian side, a great slab of rock was sheared off the leading edge ofthe subcontinent, along a thrust fault that dipped gently northward towards Eurasia, like a beach towards the sea. As India groundforward the slab was forced back up onto the subcontinent. Eventually that fault became inactive; at that point another“detachment” fault formed underneath and parallel to the first one, and another slab was shoved underneath the first, lifting it up.Over millions of years, those two slabs became the Himalayas.

Today India still piles headlong into Eurasia, and the Himalayas are still under construction. The active detachment fault isaround 1,500 miles long and between 60 and 120 miles wide; from the plains of northern India it dips north underneath themountains. Most of the time the fault is stuck. But every so often, after enough elastic energy has built up in the fault to forcethe blocked continent forward, it slips 30 feet or more all at once. That generates a great earthquake: a quake of magnitude eightor greater.

There have been four such quakes along the detachment fault in just the past 100 years. The quakes — a magnitude 8.7 in1897, in Assam: a magnitude 8 in 1905, in Kangra: a magnitude 8.4 in 1934, in Bihar; and a magnitude 8.7 in 1950, again in Assam— each ruptured a different segment of the fault. But one segment, located between the Kangra and Bihar rupture zones (roughlybetween the longitudes of Kathmandu and Delhi),has been strangely preserved. Between 300 and 500 miles long, it is called theCentral Himalayan seismic gap.

Most seismologists believe quakes are more likely to occur in seismic gaps, where they haven’t occurred recently. If so, theCentral Himalayan gap is more than due. According to the available historical records — mostly Portuguese and English recordsfrom India’s colonial days — it has not had a great quake for at least 300 years. Notes scribbled on some Nepalese religious tractsindicated that a big quake did strike Kathmandu in June 1255. The quake killed one-third of the population of the country,including its king. Assuming it ruptured the detachment fault in the Central gap (which isn’t certain), and assuming it was the lastmajor quake in that segment (ditto), then 740 years’ worth of strain has built up in that gap.

Last year seismologists Roger Bilham of the University of Colorado in Boulder, Roland Burgmann of Stanford, and theircollegues determined the amount of strain in this seismic gap, using the Global Positioning System, a network of satellitesstationed around the globe that can pinpoint, within a fraction of an inch, the distances between receivers on the ground. Theresearchers found that India and Asia are converging at the rate of around eight-tenths of an inch per year. But nearly all thatconvergence is happening between central Nepal and Tibet, in the Himalayas themselves; Nepal and India are barely getting closerat all -- because the detachment fault that separates them is stuck. At the moment, the energy of the continental collision seemsto be going into squeezing the rocks in the mountains; that is, it’s being stored as elastic strain. Someday, says Bilham, the rockswill rebound, and the strain will be released as motion along the fault. If the last quake in the Central gap was indeed in 1255, some50 feet of motion -- eight-tenths of an inch per year times 740 years — has built up and needs to be released.

What would it take to release all that strain? Hundreds of quakes comparable to the magnitude 6.8 temblor that devastatedKobe, Japan, last January, or the magnitude 6.7 that rocked Los Angeles in January 1994 — but if the Central Himalayan gap wereprone to “minor” quakes in such numbers, they would be happening already. It’s far more likely, says Bilham, that the strain willbe uncorked by quakes of magnitude 8 or greater, as has been shown elsewhere on the detachment fault. Bilham estimates thatfour magnitude 8.2 quakes would do the job, or three 8.5’s or a single 8.9. (The energy released by a quake increases by a factorof 30 with each added point in magnitude.)

No. 91 (November-December 1995) 13

plains. Similarly with the mineralwealth. The local people get nothingout of it, yet are forced to suffer theconsequences of irresponsible mining.The building of mega dams facilitatesthe legalised robbery of water — themost valuable resource of the hillregions. This transfer of resourcesfrom the poor regions and people tothe richer regions and people of thecountry is leading to large scalepauperisation of the alreadyvulnerable rural communities andforcing them to join the army ofdestitutes flocking to urban centres insearch of menial jobs.

Why then is the governmentdetermined to go ahead with this dam?Simply because any such mega projectprovides an opportunity for large scalemoney-making, through corruptionand outright loot, by contractors,bureaucrats and politicians. Seshancalled Tehri a “mine of gold” for suchpeople. Many argue in favour of thecontinuance of the project on theground that so much money (nearlyRs 650 crore) that has already beenspent will go to waste. Apart from thefact that the feared risks ought to makemoney an insignificant consideration,we are fortunate that the THDC hasso far been so busy squanderingmoney and bribing people that it hasactually done very little work on thedam. Huge expenditures have beenincurred on maintaining a largewasteful establishment at Delhi,Rishikesh and at new Tehri town.Huge amounts have been spent onpropaganda and publicity. Those whohave bribed officials have been givenhighly inflated amounts ofcompensation while many have beencheated. Moreover, a good part of theexpenditure has gone into building andbroadening roads in the area tofacilitate movement of heavy vehicles,in building a new township of Tehri

(for shifting the people from old Tehritown), complete with houses, officecomplexes and even shoppingcentres. This new township, which isat present unoccupied, can easily beput to alternative uses. Thus not allthe money has gone to waste —except for those vast amounts thathave been gobbled up by politicians,officials and contractors. Many ofthose who have receivedcompensation are willing to return themoney if they are allowed to retain theirland.

Corruption ChargesOf the many serious allegations

regarding corruption, two charges arebeing enquired into by the CBI. Oneinvolves the misuse of funds by theTHDC, by siphoning off the bulk ofthe money and using sub-standardmaterial for building the dam, roadsand other public works. The rate ofcorruption varies from state to state.In Maharashtra it is believed to be inthe 80:20 ratio — that is 80 percent ofthe money is gobbled up by those incharge and only 20 percent is actuallyspent on the projects it is meant for.

In Gujarat it is believed to be 60:40. InUttar Pradesh and most states of theNorth it is likely to be 90:10! Agovernment which cannot build roadscapable of surviving one singlemonsoon in the very capital of Indiacannot be trusted with such a megaproject involving such a heavy risk formillions of people in northern India.The dam will be like the Sword ofDamocles hanging over our heads.

Local ResistanceThe people of Tehri have been

paying a heavy price for resisting thisdam for more than two decades now.They are now worn out anddemoralised from this long drawn outstruggle because, despite theirconcerted efforts, their pleas are beingignored. Since the PlanningCommission first sanctioned Tehri damproject in 1972, there has beencontinued resistance to the buildingof the project. As a result, work couldstart only in 1978, and that too, onlyby the government taking draconian,repressive measures. Armed policetook over Tehri town and a largenumber of people were arrested and

Sunderlal Bahuguna camping at the dame site, Photo: RAGHU RAI

14 MANUSHI

sent off to jails. In response to localprotests, a petition committee ofParliament was constituted in 1978 butit failed to submit its report before thedissolution of Parliament in 1980.When the dam work was revived inthe late 1980s and Bhagirathi waterswere directed into diversion tunnels,the local agitation got activated again.The protesters took hold of the siteand stopped the machines at work.

However, though the work wasoften disrupted, the governmentneither abandoned the project noragreed to the demand that the projectbe subjected to an open andindependent review taking intoconsideration all the environmental,safety and other hazards involved inthe dam. Instead of scientificallyresponding to the various objections,the official response was to go onasserting that the Soviet technologywas fool-proof as the Soviets hadalready built the 300 meter high Nurekdam in a seismic zone. However, theOctober 1991 earthquake of 6.6 M onthe Richter scale reinforced the fearsof people opposed to the dam and theycaptured the dam site and stopped thegigantic earthmovers from carrying onwith their work.

PM’s Repeated BetrayalsAfter 75 days of stalemate, the

protesters were arrested and packedoff to jails. Sunderlal Bahuguna wenton an indefinite fast which lasted 45days. (See Manushi No. 70, May-June1992) The issue was discussed inParliament, blasting on the dam sitewas stopped and the Prime Ministerconsented to get the project reviewed.Bahuguna vowed that he would campon the banks of the Bhagirathi till suchtime as the government actuallyhonoured its promise about anindependent review. After waiting fornearly three and a half years for the

review and when repeated remindersto the government to honour its wordelicited no response while the work onthe dam continued, Bahuguna wascompelled to undertake anotherindefinite fast beginning April 13, 1995,which lasted for 49 days until June 27,1995, seriously imperiling his health.

During this period, concernedcitizens got together in Delhi to formthe Tehri Action Group (TAG) for thepurpose of exercising political andmoral pressure on the concernedministers related to the Tehri damproject to undertake an honest review.We at Manushi are active members ofTAG. On June 5, 1995, the thenEnvironment Minister, Kamal Nath,was gheraoed by members of the TAGdemanding that he take steps to getthe dam stopped since none of theconditions imposed while grantingenvironmental clearance had been metby those in charge of building the dam.Kamal Nath admitted that the projectdid not merit environmental clearanceand assured TAG members that hisministry would forthwith appoint acommittee to go into the question, buthe too did not keep his promise. Wewere able to prevail upon severalMembers of Parliament from variouspolitical parties to meet the PrimeMinister and support the demand fora thorough review. In addition, wewere even able to persuade a fewprominent Congress leaders torequest an independent review.

It was only on the 49th day ofBahuguna’s fast that the Prime Ministerfinally relented and sent Uttar PradeshGovernor Moti Lal Vora as his specialemissary requesting Bahuguna to giveup his fast on the assurance that acomprehensive independent expertreview of the kind being demanded byhim would be carried out. By this time,Bahuguna’s life was in serious dangerand his health seriously impaired. It is

now over six months since thatassurance was given, but the reviewhas not yet been ordered. In themeantime, the Energy Minister evendenied in Parliament that the PrimeMinister had at all made any suchpromise. The stalemate continues.

Need For ReviewThe Tehri dam controversy has

raised several important issuesregarding our system of governance.

It is unfortunate that in ademocracy concerned citizens shouldhave to repeatedly risk their lives,undertaking risky fasts unto death,simply to get their voices heard by oursupposed representatives. Today,there are no set procedures forevaluating the work of variousdevelopment projects to decidewhether they will actually benefitpeople or whether they are only goingto facilitate loot and plunder ofpeople’s resources by thosecontrolling the government machinery.Politicians and bureaucrats should nothave the right to evolve developmentschemes without taking into accountthe interests of the people who inhabitthe areas where the projects arelocated. It is indeed tragic that thedecision regarding a review shouldrest in the hands of the Prime Ministersitting in far away Delhi, who hasneither the expertise nor the capabilityto act as the final authority on thesubject.

Such centralised decision makinghas been the undoing of India. Indiancitizens are denied basic informationregarding the project. Everything isshrouded in secrecy. Much essentialinformation has been withheld fromthe public. For instance, thegovernment is not willing to explainwhat alterations in the dam designhave been incorporated to take intoaccount the earthquake risks. The

No. 91 (November-December 1995) 15

least informed are the citizens of TehriGarhwal. Many villages are not evenaware that they are to be submerged.

On earlier occasions, when pressedfor a review, the governmentappointed its own people along withthose associated with building the damto do a review. That is as absurd as aperson accused of a crime being askedto investigate himself.

In order to crush local resistance,the government has used the standardintimidatory measures such asarresting and jailing people, beatingup protestors, and imposing Section144, which makes any assembly ormeeting in the area illegal; all thoseparticipating in such a meeting can bearrested or attacked by the police. Theconstruction site resembles a policecamp even though the movement

against it has so far used non-violentsatyagraha.

Even Bahuguna has not beenspared physical attacks. On the 42ndday of his fast he was forcibly draggedout of his hut in the middle of the nightin his underwear. The police did notgive him time to wear clothes or takeboiled water with him. He was draggedand brought to Delhi in a bruised,bleeding condition. On the way, inthat weakened condition, he was madeto sit on a bench for hours at Dehradunhelipad without water in the scorchingsummer heat of June. On reachingDelhi, he was dumped in the casualtyward of All India Medical Institute.Then they tried to get the doctors toforce feed him. Bahuguna had alreadygiven an affidavit that force feedingwould kill him since he only used

nature cure methods all his life. TheAIIMS doctors refused thegovernment demand that they forcefeed him. Thereafter, the governmentjust left him dumped in the AIIMScasualty ward which receiveshundreds of severely injured, infectedand diseased patients, thus exposinghim to deadly risks. It was only on thefourth day after they had forciblyremoved him from Tehri that thegovernment agreed to take him backthere.

It is precisely because ourgovernment refuses to heeddemocratic demands of peacefulminded citizens and instead uses suchcrude, high handed methods fordealing with non-violent Satyagrahathat people are beginning to resort toterrorism.

PETITION

2. N.K.P. SalveMinister for Energy42, Poorvi Marg, Vasant ViharNew Delhi

3. Rajesh PilotMinister of State for theEnvironment and Forests10, Akbar Road, New Delhi

1. The Prime MinisterShri Narasimha Rao1 Race Course RoadNew Delhi

We, the undersigned, call upon the government to order an open and comprehensive review of the Tehri dam project by indepen-dent experts of renowned national and international stature. The review should cover the following aspects of the project:

Seismological risksSafety of the proposed structure and whether it is appropriately designed.Threat to holy river GangaEnvironmental hazardsAdverse effects on the local economySociological and cultural falloutsCosts and benefits analysis of the dam over its probable life spanAdequacy of rehabilitation measuresPropriety of the expenditure incurred hithertoEvaluation of comparative benefits to those who are paying the price for this project and others.

Since any damage to the Himalayan region affects the environmental well-being of the entire population of this country, this issueis not merely a local issue, We join the people of Tehri in their demand for stoppage of all work on this dam until an expert honestindependent review is completed, one that is open to full public scrutiny.

NAME: SIGNATURE:ADDRESS:

16 MANUSHI

No democracy can yield simplybecause one man goes on a fast.. Wesimply ask for an open independentreview not dominated by renownedexperts of international calibre from therelevant disciplines. This reviewcommittee should be autonomous andbureaucrats and politicians.

We need to insist that thegovernment follow responsive anddemocratic procedures, that they getuncoerced and informed consent fromthe local people before proceedingwith such projects. As a matter ofcourse, an open public hearing for each

and every proposed project must beheld with all the necessary informationavailable to concerned citizens.Projects should be started only afterthe government has proved its casethat the project will be actuallybeneficial to people of that region andis environmentally safe. For eachproject approved after such a publicprocess, all the local people who areadversely affected should receiveadequate compensation and support,including monetary compensation, inorder to facilitate their satisfactoryrehabilitation. Finally, independent,

autonomous bodies must be allowedto monitor the need for and viabilityof such projects as well as assess thesuitability of the design plans.

We call upon Manushi readers tojoin in the effort to persuade the gov-ernment to order an independent re-view by renowned scientists and pub-lic citizens. Tear out, sign (and obtainadditional signatures if you can) on thepetition printed on page 15, then sendit to the addresses mentioned at thetop. (Please let Manushi know youhave sent them your signed petitionor, better still, send us a photocopy).