Latest news with #CentralWaterCommission
The Wire
11 hours ago
- Politics
- The Wire
Indus Treaty: Can India Stop All the Water?
Environment Biksham Gujja Jun 05 2025 Not unless it builds large dams spending billions of dollars; till then, the threat to do so could end up helping Pakistan and hurting India. India has always acted in a responsible manner as an upper riparian state, ambassador Parvathaneni Harish told a UN meeting on 'Protecting Water in Armed Conflict – Protecting Civilian Lives' on May 23, days after the Narendra Modi government announced that the Indus Water Treaty was being held in abeyance in response to the Pahalgam terror attack. Harish, India's permanent representative to the UN, made the point that Pakistan had violated the treaty's Preamble, which speaks of 'a spirit of goodwill and friendship'. More than 20,000 civilians had died over the years because of terrorism, he told the UN Security Council Arria Formula meeting organised by the permanent mission of Slovenia, voicing India's frustration. Pakistan had obstructed every move of India to repair and replace infrastructure that is old and is preventing 'full utilisation of legitimate rights by India', the ambassador said, and added that terrorists had even attacked the Tulbul navigation project, endangering the safety of the project and the lives of civilians. At the same forum, Pakistan's representative Saima Saleem alleged that India is 'impeding the flow of rivers that serve as a lifeline for the 240 million people of Pakistan. Water is life and not a weapon of war'. On May 22, Prime Minister Narendra Modi had iterated at a public meeting in Rajasthan that ' Pakistan will not get water from rivers over which India has rights '. Before that, external affairs minister S. Jaishankar had said the 'Indus Waters Treaty will be held in abeyance until Pakistan stops cross-border terrorism'. The decision to hold the treaty in abeyance was taken right after the April 22 terrorist attack in which 26 people were killed. The water resources minister said steps would be taken to 'ensure that not even a drop of water from the Indus river goes to Pakistan'. India is also preparing a 'comprehensive plan to control and halt the flow of the western rivers', the chairman of the Central Water Commission, Kushvinder Vohra, was quoted as saying. The abeyance of the Indus Water Treaty is already an international issue and Pakistan is likely to use it to the fullest extent for its propaganda and to deflect from any discussion on terrorism. This article examines the practicality of India's stated intention of stopping water from the Indus basin. Transboundary rivers At least 286 rivers basins in the world are shared by more than one country, and more than 150 countries have shared river basins. It is estimated that shared or transboundary river basins make up about 42% of the land area globally and 54% of the total global river discharge. More than 3 billion people live within the catchments of these basins. Most of the 286 shared river basins are governed by some agreements, treaties and conventions to share water, maintain water quality and share the benefits such as hydroelectricity production. Most are also at the centre of conflicts or disagreements. India shares river basins with more than half a dozen countries. About a dozen rivers are shared with countries both upstream and downstream of India. Also read: The Indus and Ganges-Brahmaputra Basins Are Drying Up Faster Than We'd Like Indus Water Treaty The Indus Water Treaty is somewhat different among the river basin agreements for two reasons. The treaty comes out of a bitter and unresolved territorial conflict that dates back to the Partition of India in 1947, and, as a result of this, it is not a typical water sharing agreement but a division of the rivers. Under the treaty, three western rivers – Jhelum, Chenab and Indus – have been allocated to Pakistan. India is allowed only the 'non-consumptive use' of the water from these western rivers flowing through its territory. This includes domestic use, navigation, flood control and hydroelectricity generation, so long as the water is returned to the river system with minimal loss through seepage or evaporation. India is not allowed to construct any dams to store water from the western rivers or disturb their flow. The eastern rivers – Ravi, Beas and Sutlej – have been allocated to India, which has total control over their flow until they enter Pakistan. India can use every drop of water from these three rivers within its territory and is not required to leave any water downstream for Pakistan. In other words, India would not be in violation of the treaty if it were to block the entire flow of the eastern rivers into Pakistan. Indus basin The Indus basin is an area of 1.14 million sq km spread across four countries – Pakistan, India, China and Afghanistan. The population is estimated to be around 320 million in 2025, and is projected to touch 380 million by 2050. Of the 320 million, about 110 million (35%) live in India, and 195 million (61%) in Pakistan. The remaining 4% of the population is in Afghanistan. The population in China is negligible. Close to 80% of Pakistan's total population and 8% of India's population lives within the Indus basin. The total average annual surface water availability of the basin is about 239 billion cubic metres (BCM). Of this, the estimated average flow from the eastern rivers is 73.3 BCM, over which India has total rights under the treaty. Not all of this water can be utilised for various natural reasons, leaving about 46 BCM that is utilisable. India uses as much of the water as it needs to and has the capacity to store 16.3 BCM. Water that is left over, flows into Pakistan. While it is legal for India to stop the flow of this water into Pakistan, it does not have the storage capacity to be able to do so. The average water available from the western rivers is 165 BCM. Under the treaty, Pakistan has complete rights over all this water and India is not allowed to divert or store it. Is it possible to stop the water from the western rivers? The Government of India report on Indus, which is publicly available, states that 'the average water resource potential of the Indus basin is 73 BCM (billion cubic metres). According to the assessment, the total utilisable surface water resource in the basin is 46 BCM' and the current 'live storage capacity of the completed projects is 16.3 BCM'. These figures mentioned are with reference to the water from the eastern rivers, which are allocated to India. In order to store all the utilisable water, India would need storage capacity for about 30 BCM more. Of the 16.3 BCM existing storage capacity, the Bhakra Nangal dam accounts for about 9.8 BCM. In other words, India would need to build at least three dams as big as Bhakra Nangal if it wants to store all the water. The estimated cost to build one dam of that size now would be at least $5 billion. In order to stop the western rivers, India would need to build storage capacity to hold about 40 BCM. This is the quantity of water which flows from Indian territory to Pakistan from these western rivers. Given the terrain through which the western rivers flow and other factors, such as availability of land, the cost of building a dam to store their water would be several times higher. To store all the water from the western rivers in India, assuming this is even possible given the nature of terrain, it could go up to $100 billion. So, this would be the cost of stopping every 'drop of water flowing into Pakistan from the Indus Live system' as articulated by the water resources minister. Implications India, during its recent military action, announced that the Pakistani military establishment had not been targeted during the air strikes. This means India is clear that its actions are aimed only at terrorists and their infrastructure, not the Pakistani people. But as a first response, even before the military action, India announced its decision to keep the Indus Water Treaty in abeyance, which will impact 90% of the people in the country. Such a threat had been issued from the very highest level about a decade ago, in 2016, too, but nothing actually happened on the ground then and even after. The Indian government might have issued the threats with the domestic audience in mind, but these are helping the Pakistan government to muster its own domestic support. Millions of Pakistanis might actually believe that India has already stopped the water, just as many Indians are believing that Pakistan has been punished by stopping the water. The delegations India has been sending 'for diplomatic outreach on India-Pakistan conflict' to talk to key partners and to the UN might have a tough time explaining the decision to hold the treaty in abeyance. Pakistan is likely to use all possible forums to divert the focus from terrorism to water sharing. This would also put the World Bank in a difficult situation as and when Pakistan approaches them formally with a complaint. The World Bank president, in an interview, said that an expert committee or court of arbitration has to be set up when a country complains about any violation of the treaty's provisions. The original treaty set up a trust fund to pay for the process of scrutiny by independent experts and the court of arbitration. Pakistan is waiting for the right time to complain. Conclusion The strategy to stop the flow of Indus water might actually end up damaging India's interests in several ways: Pakistan knows that India cannot stop the water until it builds several dams, but it will use the threat to galvanise its population to rally behind its own actions, including support to terrorism. Any future drought or floods in that country might be blamed on India, with the Pakistan government spreading propaganda that India stopped the water or released it at the wrong time. Most important, internationally, India will be seen as a country acting without responsibility because a threat to stop water from an international river basin is a very sensitive issue. Within the country, the government could lose credibility if Indians realise that Pakistan is getting the water as before. India is also a downstream country, and could face issues in the future if it abandons the Indus treaty. Therefore, India would do better to use tools other than the Indus waters to force Pakistan to stop supporting terrorism. Empty threats of blocking Pakistan's water might end up actually helping the Pakistan government in its domestic propaganda and its international campaign against India, diverting the focus away from terrorism. Dr. Biksham Gujja is global water policy expert. Former head of water programme and policy at WWF International, Switzerland also worked with ICRISAT and UN agencies. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
The Wire
16 hours ago
- Politics
- The Wire
Fresh Row Erupts Between Telangana, Andhra Pradesh Over Godavari-Banakacherla Project
A fresh river water dispute has rocked the neighbouring Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, with the latter taking steps to implement an ambitious project to link the Godavari river basin with Penna via Krishna. The project is aimed at providing drinking and irrigation water to the drought hit Rayalaseema region of Andhra Pradesh. The Andhra Pradesh government has already submitted the pre-feasibility report (PFR) on what is now called 'Godavari - Banakacherla project' to the Central Water Commission (CWC). The CWC has asked the state to furnish a detailed project report (DPR). Union coal minister and Bharatiya Janata Party state president G. Kishan Reddy said that while the Union government has not taken any decision on the PFR submitted by Andhra Pradesh, it has asked for a DPR. The development has raised alarm in Telangana. The state has urged the Union Ministry of Environment and Forest to reject Andhra Pradesh's request to grant terms of reference (ToR) for environmental clearance at the next meeting of the Expert Appraisal Committee on river valley projects. Telangana chief minister A. Revanth Reddy also called an all-party meeting of Members of Parliament on Wednesday (June 18) to seek suggestions on mounting pressure on the Union government to halt the project. He also rushed to New Delhi to meet the Jal Shakti Minister C.R. Patil to convey the concerns of his government. Why Telangana is opposing the Godavari-Banakacherla project Telangana's concerns stem from fears that the project could deprive it of a sizeable amount of water from its share in the Godavari. However, the Andhra Pradesh government, represented by its water resources minister Nimmala Rama Naidu, argued that as the tail-end state of the river, it was entitled to exploit its floodwaters without cap before runoff into the sea. Naidu said that this in no way affected the water allocation of upper riparian states, including Telangana. Andhra Pradesh chief minister N. Chandrababu Naidu had also been advocating that the state would use 105 flood days in a year to divert about 2,000 million cubic feet (2 TMC feet) of water every day, aggregating to about 200 TMC feet annually. He said that interlinking of rivers was the only solution to address the problem of drought in Rayalaseema. On the other hand, Telangana claimed that the project violated the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, which governed all emerging disputes between the sibling states when they were separated in 2014. It also said the project went against the award of the Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal. The project aimed to divert water from the Polavaram multipurpose project on the Godavari to the Krishna basin using the canal network of Nargarjunasagar and Srisailam reservoirs situated on the Krishna. The canal water was proposed to be stored in a major reservoir in Bollapalli village of Guntur district in the Krishna basin for onward supply to the head regulator of Banakacherla project in Penna basin's Rayalaseema. The Godavari-Banakacherla project was conceived by the earlier Telugu Desam Party (TDP) regime led by Naidu in 2018. It was called the "Godavari-Penna" river linking scheme at the time. After the party lost power in 2019, the new Y.S. Jaganmohan Reddy government renamed it as the Palnadu Drought Mitigation Project and even invited tenders. The governments proposed the project to tap maximum surplus water available in the Godavari as projects in the Krishna basin – Srisailam and Nagarjunasagar – were unable meet Rayalaseema's requirements. An estimated 3,000 TMC feet flood water went untapped and flowed into the sea every year. However, the governments failed to execute the project due to frequent inter-state issues. These issues were so far mainly concerned with the Krishna basin as Telangana was advocating for a higher share of water based on its larger catchment area within the basin. It proposed a share of 70% but, as an interim arrangement, a 66-34 split between Andhra Pradesh (512 TMC ft) and Telangana (299 TMC ft) was agreed upon between the two states post-bifurcation. The Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal-II has been asked to adjudicate the water share afresh. The two states did not have major issues in the Godavari basin until now, barring the impact of the Polavaram project on villages of Telangana. However, the Godavari-Banakacherla project has opened a new chapter in their strained relationship over river waters, with both sides firm on their respective stands. Reddy blames Chandrasekhar Rao for current impasse Reddy, who chaired the all party meeting of MPs, warned Naidu that he should not hope to get clearances for the project because on account of Reddy's considerable clout in the Union government."The Telangana government will complain to every authority in the clearances chain to stall the project. If needed, the government will also approach the Supreme Court," he said. At a media conference later, Reddy demanded that Naidu give blanket approval to all projects proposed by Telangana in the Godavari basin to utilise its allotted 968 TMC ft. Andhra Pradesh is entitled to 518 TMC ft in the river. He blamed his predecessor K. Chandrasekhar Rao for the current impasse and released a video clipping of Rao expressing his liberal stand towards diversion of the Godavari water to Rayalaseema. "It was Rao who first proposed the idea". The Bharat Rashtra Samiti (BRS) MP V. Ravichandra staged a walkout at the meeting saying the chief minister falsely attributed the Godavari-Banakacherla project to Rao. In fact, Rao only suggested diversion of the Godavari water to the Krishna basin through Nagarjunasagar and Srisailam without naming any specific project. Reddy also released the minutes of a meeting of the Apex Council on river water disputes between the two states that was attended by Rao and Naidu in the presence of then Union Minister for Water Resources Uma Bharati on September 21, 2016. Rao was quoted as telling the meeting that "for the existing, ongoing and proposed projects in both the states of Krishna river, more than 1,000 TMC ft of water is required. On the other hand, more than 3,000 TMC ft is going waste into sea every year in Godavari river." Hence, he emphasised that as water is available, it has to be decided how best it can be utilised properly. He stressed the need for developing understanding between the two states by sitting together and amicably settling the issues. Reddy also said that he and Naidu's successor, Y.S. Jaganmohan Reddy, met four times to discuss the shifting of the Godavari water to Rayalaseema. He warned that the Godavari-Banakacherla project was not merely for 200 TMC ft but an additional 100 TMC ft. "Pumpsets are getting ready now for 200 TMC ft but they will also be kept in reserve for an additional 100 TMC ft", he remarked. On the disclosures of Rao and his erstwhile cabinet colleagues, T. Harish Rao and Eatala Rajender, to the judicial commission probing irregularities in Kaleswaram project on Godavari, Reddy said that they lied before the panel about the project having cabinet approval. "There was never an approval for the project in the 96 times that the cabinet headed by Rao met". "Minutes of all cabinet meetings would be submitted to the commission before June 30," he added. Reddy's claim that Chandrashekhar Rao had agreed to the Godavari-Banakacherla project was rebutted by Harish Rao, irrigation minister in the BRS regime. Harish Rao said that Reddy had selectively quoted one para from the minutes of the Apex Council meeting to mislead the public. He released a subsequent para of the minutes which read "[Chandrasekhar Rao] raised objection over the Expert Committee constituted by Government of India to address the issues of diversion of water from Godavari to Krishna river between the two States without prior consultation of Telangana". 'Water interests of Telangana will be affected' In a letter to current irrigation minister N. Uttam Kumar Reddy, Harish Rao reminded that any project in the two states had to be taken up with the prior permission of the Godavari or Krishna River Management Boards and the Apex Council as per the State Reorganisation Act. But the Andhra Pradesh government neither took permission nor communicated the decision to Telangana. He said the water interests of Telangana would be severely affected if Andhra Pradesh diverted 200 TMC ft from the Godavari even before the former exhausted its full share of 968 TMC ft. When the Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal was reconstituted to look into water allocations for the states, t was directed to base its evaluation on the depleted flow of the river. Harish Rao also said that three of Telangana's projects were pending clearance with the Union government. If the Union government cleared Godavari-Banakacherla project ahead of permissions for Telangana's projects, the state's interests would be severely jeopardised. Uttam Kumar Reddy wrote a letter to Union Minister for Environment and Forest Bhupender Yadav, urging the government to reject the ToR sought by Andhra Pradesh for the project as the state had deviated from the proposal in both the Krishna and Godavari river basins. It enlarged the scope of several components of Polavaram project in violation of the permission granted by water disputes tribunal. The Union government issued a 'stop work' order due to extensive changes to project proposals but it was kept in abeyance by several extensions, most recently till July 2, 2026. This allowed the work to continue despite objections raised not only by Telangana but also Odisha and Chhattisgarh. He pointed out that Andhra Pradesh planned to use the so-called flood water for the Godavari-Banakacherla project but the CWC guidelines suggested that flood water was not officially defined, measured or allocated for use by any state on an inter-state river, including the Godavari. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
Hans India
3 days ago
- Politics
- Hans India
Banakacherla project will be as per Centre's rules: Nimmala
Vijayawada: Water resources minister Nimmala Ramanaidu made it clear that the state government will secure all necessary permissions from the Central government for the Polavaram-Banakacherla project, which aims to divert 200 tmc ft of Godavari floodwater to the drought-prone Rayalaseema region. He emphasised the Andhra Pradesh's right to construct the project to address water scarcity in Rayalaseema, with all approvals sought from the Central government. Responding to allegations from some Telangana leaders that Andhra Pradesh is violating Central Water Commission rules by planning the project without permission, Ramanaidu clarified that a preliminary report has already been submitted to the Central government, which approved the preparation of the Detailed Project Report (DPR). The minister dismissed claims that the project would harm Telangana, noting that Andhra Pradesh, located downstream, cannot adversely affect upstream Telangana. Addressing the media at the Secretariat on Tuesday, Ramanaidu outlined the project's three phases: the first from Polavaram to Prakasam Barrage using gravity flow, the second from Prakasam Barrage to Bollapalli Reservoir, and the third from Bollapalli to Banakacherla in Kurnool district, utilising two lift irrigation schemes. He pointed out that of the 3,000 tmc ft of Godavari water flowing into the sea annually, the project proposes to divert only 200 tmc ft to transform Rayalaseema, one of India's most backward regions, into a prosperous 'Ratanala Seema.' Ramanaidu refuted Telangana leaders' claims of potential losses, accusing them of making politically motivated allegations. He stressed that the project uses only floodwater released into the sea during the rainy season, ensuring no injustice to Telangana. He also underscored the importance of river-linking projects, citing former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee's vision, and noted that the Krishna river, with lower water availability than the Godavari, underscores the need for such initiatives. The minister reiterated that Andhra Pradesh, which bears the brunt of Godavari floods, has the right to utilise floodwaters to meet Rayalaseema's water needs. He added that Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu envisions prosperity for both Telugu states through projects like Polavaram-Banakacherla, urging other states not to object to this critical initiative.
The Hindu
3 days ago
- Politics
- The Hindu
Telangana's allegations on Godavari-Banakacherla project are politically motivated, says Andhra Pradesh Water Resources Minister Ramanaidu
Andhra Pradesh Water Resources Minister Nimmala Ramanaidu has refuted the allegations surrounding the Godavari-Banakacherla project, describing them as 'politically motivated attacks' driven by Telangana's internal dynamics rather than legitimate technical concerns. Addressing the media at the Secretariat on Tuesday, Mr. Ramanaidu said certain political elements in Telangana were using the project as a tool to score brownie points. 'The criticisms are not based on facts or technical details. Allegations are being made solely for political mileage,' he said, asserting that the Andhra Pradesh government was following all legal and procedural norms for the project's implementation. Colossal wastage 'The project is aimed at utilising 200 tmc ft of the 3,000 tmc ft of the Godavari floodwaters that go waste into the sea every year. For over 50 years, lakhs of cusecs have been draining into the Bay of Bengal. The project aims at putting those resources to productive use,' he asserted. The project had been structured in three segments — Polavaram to Prakasam Barrage; Prakasam Barrage to Bollapalli Reservoir, and Bollapalli to Banakacherla, he said. 'A preliminary report has already been submitted to the Central Water Commission (CWC), and a Detailed Project Report (DPR) will be submitted once the preliminary report is approved,' Mr. Ramanaidu said. Countering accusations of 'water robbery' made by the Telangana leaders, Mr. Ramanaidu said, 'Andhra Pradesh is using only the surplus floodwaters that flow into Andhra Pradesh after the needs of the upper riparian States are met. As a lower riparian State, we are only claiming what is rightfully ours. No other State is being harmed,' he insisted. 'Even in the years of low rainfall, as much as 3,000 to 7,000 tmc ft of water flows unused into the ocean. This is national wastage, and we're trying to correct it with a scientific and lawful approach,' the Minister said. 'Double standards' Accusing the Telangana Government of adopting double standards on the issue, Mr. Ramanaidu pointed out that several projects, including those initiated by former Chief Minister K. Chandrashekar Rao (KCR), did not have proper environmental or technical clearances. 'The Sitarama Lift Scheme received formal permission recently after completion of 75% of the project's work,' he observed. Several irrigation projects in Telangana had been initiated, or completed, without proper clearances, he alleged. 'Projects that are nearly complete still lack formal approval. Yet, they raise objections about our DPR, which is being submitted as per due process,' he said. 'Andhra Pradesh has no intention of blocking Telangana's projects. Chief Minister N. Chandrababu Naidu has never supported such obstructionism. We want cooperative federalism between the two Telugu States,' he made it clear.
Time of India
12-06-2025
- General
- Time of India
How a river dies: Thenpennai, Tamil Nadu's Second-Longest River, Is Killing Crops, Fish, And Is Too Polluted To Use
Centuries ago, it was celebrated in Sangam literature, depicted as flourishing with lush vegetation along its banks. It was worshipped too, with temples built along its banks. Today, the 497 km Thenpennai, Tamil Nadu's second-longest river after the Cauvery, flows frothy and foul. "It used to nourish our fields," says farmer K Mariappan. "Now it kills our crop." He recalls how his father and grandfather harvested an abundance of groundnuts thanks to the clean waters of Thenpennai. "Now, crops wilt when irrigated with the polluted water. A decade ago, I harvested 300 quintals of cabbage per acre. Now it's down to 140. Even that's hard with the chemical foam." Like the Cauvery, the Thenpennai is an interstate river, rising from the Chennakesava Hills in Karnataka's Chikkaballapur district and winding its way through Bengaluru's industrial corridors before entering Tamil Nadu near Hosur. In Tamil Nadu, it passes through Krishnagiri, Dharmapuri, Tiruvannamalai, Villupuram, and Cuddalore, its watershed spanning nearly 3,700 sq km. In Krishnagiri, the Kelavarapalli dam supports nearly 8,000 acres of farmland. Further downstream, the older Krishnagiri Reservoir Project provides water to more than 9,000 acres across 16 villages in Krishnagiri. For most of the year, the river runs dry, flowing only during the monsoons. When it does, it raises the water table and replenishes tanks and reservoirs. But, say farmers, over the past few years, when water is released from Kelavarapalli dam, it is full of effluents that inundate farmland, with the foam sometimes reaching as high as the branches of trees. Tests have found high levels of industrial pollutants, including detergents and chemicals that reduce dissolved oxygen and harm aquatic life. In May 2024, Thenpennai foamed white with toxic froth, and farmers in Krishnagiri urged the state govt and district administration to tackle the problem. A month later, on June 9, a 15-member team from the Central Water Commission arrived at Kelavarapalli dam to assess the damage. "They took water samples," says Poomozhi, an environmentalist from Salem. "But no action has been taken." He says a Central Pollution Control Board inspection in 2020 found the pollution was due to untreated effluents from Bengaluru-based industries. "The committee recommended restoring Bellandur and Varthur lakes, but nothing has been done." Each day, 30 million litres are drawn from the river by the Hosur municipal corporation for drinking water, and another 13 million litres supply SIPCOT industries. The Sathanur Dam, at Tiruvannamalai, with a capacity of 7.3 TMCFT, is the largest on the river. As a result, much of Bengaluru's sewage reaches Thenpennai via Bellandur, Varthur, and other channels. Tests revealed coliform levels ranging from 2.42 lakh to 19,863 MPN/100 ml, far above the permissible 2,500 MPN/100 ml for bathing. "How can villagers be expected to drink this water?" says Poomozhi. A few years ago, researchers from IIT Madras identified high concentrations of emerging contaminants in the Cauvery, detecting 15 pharmaceutical pollutants, including anti-inflammatories (like ibuprofen), stimulants (such as caffeine), antidepressants, and antibiotics. Some of these were found at levels several times higher than in other rivers across India. The river was also contaminated with plastics and heavy metals. The study recommended regular monitoring and upgrades to wastewater treatment systems to curb the pollution. Last month, Krishnagiri collector C Dinesh Kumar inspected the site and assured residents that the state would approach the National Green Tribunal (NGT). "Steps are being taken to form a committee for evaluating the river and the nearby industries." But farmers say they've lost hope and fear the Thenpennai is headed the way of the Noyyal, a tributary of Cauvery that was choked by effluents from textile dyeing units in Tirupur. Once a vital water source for Coimbatore, the Noyyal is now often described as a "gutter" clogged with plastics and sewage.
