IN the Cauvery delta districts in Tamil Nadu, hope matched apprehension even as farmers welcomed the Tribunal's final award. There would be enough water for cultivation if the award is implemented properly, said many of them, while some took the view that since the quantum of water was less than that allocated in the interim award not much would change on the ground. A common concern was the protests in Karnataka.
Karnataka should respect the award and implement it, said P. Selvaraj who owns two acres of land (1 acre = 0.4 hectare) at Okkanadu Keelaiyur village in Thanjavur district. He gave the thumbs up to the award, but admitted that there may be practical difficulties in implementing it. R. Selvaraj of the same village, said the 419 tmc ft allotted to Tamil Nadu was not sufficient. He added that the 192 tmc ft to be given by Karnataka was less than the interim award of 205 tmc ft. "Water will not reach the tail-end areas with this quantum," he said.
S. Kaliyaperumal of Soorakottai near Thanjavur hopes to get a continuous supply of water as a result of the "fair and good" final award. Assured water is also the main concern of Vasantha and Navamani, farm labourers of Soorakottai who do not know anything about the award. "We don't read the papers. If we get farm work we are happy. For that we need water for cultivation. If that is assured we are also happy," they said.
Only such a guarantee will give farmers the confidence to plough on. "The award was good, but only when it is implemented we can get the benefit," said R. Sivashanmugham of Arunthavapuram village in Tiruvarur district.
"We are bound to accept the Tribunal's verdict," said K.A. Venkataraman, a farmer of Alankudi Mahajanam village near Lalgudi. He believes that the award has not brought much gain to Tamil Nadu's farmers and has a piece of advice for farmers in Karnataka: "Realise the merits of the award in your favour and do not resort to any agitation."
The interpretations that farmers have got so far have come mostly from politicians. The award raised hopes initially but the differing analyses by rival politicians confused farmers, especially about the supply to Kerala, said A. Nagarajan, a horticulturist of Puliyur village.
N. Rajagopal of Tirumangalam village in Tiruchi district said the agitations in Karnataka were an indication that the State would not discharge water during the crucial June-August period and when the monsoon failed.
K. Vairamani of Komakudi village thinks the monthly schedule of discharge can be one way of ensuring that water is released. He said: "Every June posed a challenge, causing uncertainty about farming activity and anxiety over water availability. But the schedule of month-wise discharge has created a ray of hope."
G. Srinivasan in Thanjavur and M. Balaganessin in Tiruchi
COMMents
COMMents
SHARE