GREATER THAL CANAL - A MIS-ADVENTURE
House No. 10, Street 17, F-8/3 Islamabad
Phone: 92-51-2264689, 2282954
www.actionaidpakistan.org
Introduction:
The Greater Thal Canal was approved by the Executive Committee of the
National Economic Council (ECNEC) in its meeting held on 28th February 2002. The
cost of the canal was estimated at Rs 28 billion. The completion period is seven
years comprising five years for Phase-I and two years for Phase-II, completion
date has been set at 30 June 2008. This may be because of the fact that the
project started a year before its approval by ECNEC.
The project announcement has been taken very alarmingly by different sections of
the society. Even the major partners of the government in water resources
development such as World Bank raised several questions on the viability of the
project. The people of the province of Sindh are asking for the legitimacy of
the project, while independent experts have questioned the social acceptance,
environmental sustainability, economic viability and technical feasibility of
the project. Local communities in Greater Thal Area are skeptical about the
outcome of 60-90 day canal project. This document provides a few critical
thoughts on Greater Thal Canal Project.
Salient Features of the Greater Thal Canal
| Off-taking point and source | RD 180+222 of Chashma Jhelum Link Canal |
| Design Discharge at Head | 8500 Cusecs |
| Water Allowance | 3.88/1000 acres |
| Calculated irrigation efficiency | 39.2 percent |
| Length of Irrigation Channels | 1475 Miles |
| No. of Branch Canals | Four (Mankera, Chaubara, Dhingana and Nurpur) |
| No. of Distributaries | 65 |
| No. of Minors | 29 |
| No. of outlets | 2741 |
| Structures | 137 Head and Cross Regulators, 127 Fall Structures, 546 Road
Bridges |
| Completion time | 8 years |
| CCA | 1.5345 Million Acres |
| GCA | 1.918 Million Acres |
| Land with sand dunes | 40 percent of CCA |
| Cost at 2001 price level | Rs. 27,965 Million |
| Annual Recurring Cost | Rs. 144.06 million |
Project Objectives:
The project aims at irrigated agriculture development of 1.5345 million acres
CCA in eastern part of the Thal Doab, which falls within the boundaries of
Bhakker, Layyah, Khushab and Jhang districts. Under the Water Accord,
allocations have been made for the Project for Kharif season only, in addition
to which surplus flood flows may also be available during monsoon. At the
ultimate development of the project the annual crop production with perennial
irrigation is estimated as 3,647, 660 tonnes. Till the time perennial supplies
are available, the project can be run with Kharif supplies augmented by surplus
flood flows for which the annual crop production will be 1,927,540 tones.
However, if supplies are limited to allocations only, total crop production will
be 1,602,247 tones only.
It is estimated that net agriculture benefits for perennial irrigation would
increase from Rs. 91.14 million in the first year after commissioning of
Stage-I, to Rs. 8,255.04 million at full development. If the project is
commissioned for Kharif supply and augmented by surplus flood flows, benefits
will increase from Rs. 38.11 million in the first year to Rs. 4900.59 million at
full development. With supplies limited to allocations only ultimate benefits
will be Rs. 4072.92 million. The project will not only result in an increase in
farm income but also the opportunities for labor will increase which will bring
prosperity to the people in the project area and thus reduce drift of people to
other areas for work.
Location
The GTC area falls within the boundaries of Bhakker, Layyah, Khushab and
Jhang districts. The northern extremity of the project area is near AdhiKot
where a head regulator for GTC has already been constructed at RD 180+222 of the
Chashma- Jhelum Link Canal (C-J link). About 14 miles south of AdhiKot the
project area boundary spreads out westward up to Jhamat shumali near Dullewala
town and eastward upto Bullo village on the bank of river Jhelum. On the west,
the project area is bounded by the command boundary of the existing Thal Canal
system and on the east by the Plain of Jhelum River from Bullo village to Gul
Imam village near Atharan Hazari. From this point onwards the eastern boundary
of the project area follows the western of Rangpur canal command. Eastern and
Western boundaries of the project area meet in the south about five miles north
of Rangpur town.
Main features of Project Area
According to PC –1 about 40% of the area is undulating, having sand dunes,
which can be leveled and brought under irrigation. The soils of the area are
predominantly coarse and moderately coarse textured and are generally free of
salinity and alkalinity. The average rainfall in the project area is around 10
inches per year. Population of the project area is quite sparse and is estimated
to be about 570,000 at present, which is spread over an area of about 3500 sq.
miles. The main occupations of the inhabitants are agriculture and cattle
grazing. Since 1980’s there is an extensive cultivation of gram as a cash crop.
The 1992 ground water survey indicates that on western periphery of the project
area depth to water table is 10-20 ft which increases eastwards and the ground
water table on the eastern side is as deep as 50 ft.
The ground water development in the project area started in the 1960’s.
However extensive development took place after 1980 to meet the growing water
requirements for irrigated agriculture. Discharge of existing tube wells in the
project area varies from 0.5 cusecs to more than 1.50 cusecs with an average of
1.1 cusecs. The growth rate of tube wells in the project area has been estimated
to be about 17 percent per annum from 1980 to 1992; where as over all growth
rate in the Punjab province is around 6 percent.
The 55% of project area land comprises well to moderately suited soils for
most of the crops whereas about 35% is poorly suited for irrigated agriculture.
The remaining 10% is not suited for growing of crops. The statistics indicate
that the number of farms in farm size 1-12.5 acres, 12.5-25 acres, and 25.0-50.0
acres and above 50 acres comes to 47, 27, 18 and 8 percent respectively and
these farms cover 15%, 24%, 28% and 33% of the project CCA. There are three most
common land tenure systems i.e. owner operated farms, owner-cum-tenant operated
farms and tenant operated farms. In the project area the distribution of the
farms under these three categories comes to 59%, 24% and 17% respectively.
The project documents proclaim that natural vegetation is minimal. But the
area is gifted with a rich bio-diversity. One can find natural vegetation even
without rainy season, however after rain it is like a green carpet. All the
Rakhs have a rich biodiversity and housing numerous species of wildlife.
Ten Reasons to Oppose Greater Thal Canal Project
1. Loopholes in National Decision Making Process
There are certain defined decision making rules for any scheme of national
interest. Following key flaws have been identified in case of GTC, those
indicate the violation of rules and non-transparency in national decision-making
process. Project was initiated:
Without prior preparation of relevant project documents such as PC-1,
feasibility studies, environmental Impact assessment.
Without prior approval of executive committee of the National Economic
Council (ECNEC)
Without prior certification from the Indus River System Authority (IRSA)- a
mandatory formality for any new irrigation project under the 1991 Water
Accord.
Without properly discussing the issues, which rose in Central Development
Working Party (CDWP) meeting of February 8,2002.
Without properly assessing the availability of flood supplies for a 60-90
days for a non-perennial canal.
Without considering the criterion of any upstream development work, and
concerns and rights of lower riparian.
Without proper consultation with relevant stakeholders both governmental
and non-governmental and local population as they have a lot of apprehensions
ranging from social, environmental to technical and political nature.
2. No water to feed existing canals
Several independent experts are agreeing that there is no enough water
available in the system for making this huge investment. Following table shows
that the Mean availability of water is 138.72 MAF, Maximum 186 .79 MAF and
Minimum 97.74 MAF. While the criterion three out of 5 year’s probability the
availability of water is 133.05 MAF and four out of 5 years (80% probability) is
124.32 MAF.
|
Water allocation under Water Apportionment Accord 1991 |
114.4 MAF |
|
Average system losses (1940-98) |
12.9 MAF |
|
India’s authorized uses on western rivers (unutilized
|
4.8 MAF |
|
Outflow to sea (Water Accord Clause –7) |
10 MAF |
|
Afghanistan’s share of Kabul River |
8 MAF |
|
To raise Mangla’s capacity |
3.0 MAF |
|
LBOD Requirement |
2.2 |
|
Total requirement for IBIS |
155.3 MAF |
|
Shortage: 155.3(IBIS req:)-138.72 available (Mean) |
16.58 MAF |
The water available in the system on an average is 138.72 MAF, the system
requirement is calculated 155.3 MAF, thus there is a shortage of 16.58 MAF as
mentioned in the table above.
Keeping in view of above table and the criterion for any new project, the
availability of water is 124 (four out of five years criterion) and 133 for
(three out of five years) criterion, but the water already required for the
system is 155.3 MAF and shortage is 16.58 MAF. It is quite clear on both of the
criteria that the average availability of water in the system is not enough to
meet existing requirements, rather it is short, that’s why the provinces are
already facing the shortages and huge reduction in outflow to downstream Kotri
to check sea intrusion. In this situation how new canals will be fed, while old
ones are dry?
3. Technically Non-Feasible
The GTC command area is very fragile ecosystem. The area is covered with sand
dunes; keeping in view the peculiar topography and current ecosystem situation,
following problems are most likely to occur:
Movement of sand dunes will create silt problem in main canal,
distributaries and water courses
Due to uneven topography, it will be hard to irrigate the command area
gravitationally; huge cost will be required to level the sand dunes.
The seepage losses will be high due to sandy soil
This project has been conceived on the assumption of availability of
floodwater, and the floodwater is available in every 5th year, rest of
the years the canal will run without the assumed flood water
The rains/flood water is very erratic, thus will create several problems
including unreliable supply, in that situation farmers might lose the
investment in hope of flood water
Equitable distribution of water will be key management challenge,
previous experience in irrigated areas shows the persistent problem of tail
shortage, in the case of GTC this will be more serious problem as supplies
are just for 60-90 days.
The farmers of this area are not acquainted with irrigated agriculture,
so the proper on farm water application will be another challenge.
4. Financially unsound and economically unviable
Pakistan is a capital scarce country; in such a situation the
capital-intensive projects should be very carefully studied. There are several
serious financial/economic concerns of the experts on GTC including:
Given the sandy nature of soils, the estimated Economic Rate of Return
(ERR) for Thal Canal (18%) appears overly optimistic.
The project would add substantial burden to the already strained O&M
budget. For example, estimated annual O&M cost is Rs 141 million.
Project will require heavy investment in command area development which
has not been included in the project cost
There is a higher probability that canal will run for 60-90 days flood
water, does the huge investment of Rs. 28 billion justify for three months
of water?
Several costs of the project has been either not included or
underestimated such as private cost of future waterlogging & salinity,
colonization & command area development, loss of livelihood, disruption of
existing infrastructure, displacement and resettlement. If we add up all
these costs, the internal rate of return will be adjusted downward, which
has already been reduced to 15.7% by Central Development Working Party (CDWP)
against 18% calculated by WAPDA.
The results of economic analysis show that the project under
non-perennial water supplies is economically unviable and is sensitive to
normal benefit reduction or cost over-run.
5. Environmental Costs are high
The project documents do not recognize the negative environmental
consequences, but independent experts and local communities have shown several
serious apprehensions regarding alteration in entire landscape of the area. Most
imperative environmental issues are:
The canal seepage will cause waterlogging and salinity, thus reduce land
productivity. Similar to Chashma Jhelum Link Canal, which has degraded vast
tracts of land in same area.
Canals passing through the sandy terrain are likely to lose more water in
seepage than that passing through lands with relatively finer material. The
existing Thal Canal and Muzzafargarh Canal system have already shown this
trend.
The canal irrigated farming will require considerable changes in land use
and agricultural methods. The canal will replace the existing
environmentally sustainable and organic farming with resource-intensive
commercial agriculture and the use of chemical fertilizer & pesticide will
increase in the area.
The project area predominantly comprises sand dunes; to bring maximum
land under cultivation sand dunes will have to be leveled. However,
according to local knowledge leveling of sand dunes will disturb the
composition of soil layers, which can cause loss of soil fertility not only
in sand dunes but also in pattis (depressions).
The intensive irrigated agriculture will pose serious threat to local
flora and fauna, which are already under pressure after 1980’s due to
cultivation of grams. The elimination of plants will affect the wild life in
the area.
The canal will lead to conversion of existing wastelands, which are
presently used as pastures for animals, into agricultural land. This change
in land use pattern will not only affect in terms of habitat loss,
elimination of flora and fauna but in many ways lead to land degradation.
6. Elimination of Rakhs and Colonization
Almost each Mauza in Thal used to have a separate Rakh, according to
local communities these Rakhs (common grazing land) were developed during
British era. The landowners of that particular area contributed the land to
establish a common grazing area called Rakh. These Rakhs were
established on thousands of acres of such land and people have been using it as
a common grazing area for entire village/Mauza. For the last couple of decades,
under colonization of Thal the property of local owners (Rakh) have been
allotted to influential people on political grounds. Thus this planned resource
grabbing policy has generated inequity in control of assets.
Local people are quite skeptical after the bad colonization experience of
existing Thal canal. Out of total 24 rakhs in two tehsils (13 in Mankera
and 11 in Choubara), seven rakhs in Mankera and two in Choubara have already
been allotted while two rakhs in Choubara— Rakh Nawan Kot Jadeed, around
60 percent of which has already been allotted, and Rakh Shergarh— is under the
process of allotment under the Punjab government’s recent scheme of land for
landless tenants. There are total 15 un-allotted rakhs in both tehsils
(six in Mankera and nine in Choubara), which are under the management of the
Forest Department.
Under seven different allotment schemes, including Bhair Paal
(sheep-rearing), Sale (Auction), Colonization, Prime Minster and Governor House,
38,958 acres were at different times from 1960s to 1990s have been allotted to
3,207 allotees in Rakh Mankera, Rakh Hyderabad, Rakh Dhingana,
Rakh Gal Kala, Rakh Ganwhar Wala, Rakh Mauj Garh, Rakh Mahni
and Circle 67/ML. However, Circle 67/ML, where 9,868 acres under different
schemes were allotted, is under the command area of existing Thal Canal.
According to unofficial sources, an overwhelming majority of the beneficiaries
of these schemes are other than local people.
162,913 acres land of nine Rakhs of taluka Choubara and Mankera have
been already allotted without consulting local people who have been earning
their livelihood from these Rakhs. The same quantity of land still exists
under Rakhs and local people have a doubt that this will also be allotted
to people other than them.
The Rakhs are playing very important economic and environmental role
in the area of Greater Thal. These are not only common grazing places and
supporting livelihood of local communities but are key element in ecological
balance, as other vegetation has been cleared to grow grams. The alteration in
these areas will affect badly on the number of livestock, forests coverage and
flora & fauna, which in turn will put pressure on limited livelihood resources
of communities.
7. Improper Land Acquisitions and Inadequate Compensation
Similar to other mega development projects, GTC also requires land for right
of way. The communities have as usual reservations regarding the process of land
acquisition and compensation. Following issues have been so far identified:
There are a number of tube wells and farmers are lifting water for
irrigation. There is a year round irrigation in Thal now. Besides tube well
irrigation farmers are growing grams on retained soil moisture after rain.
But in official record the land is even not recognized as “barani”
(rain-fed). The official land classification for GTC area is “banjar
Qadeem” (chronic barren) which has lower rates than Barani.
Several hundred small farmers will just get peanut as compensation of
land, on which they are growing very valuable cash crop (gram) or using tube
well water to grow fodder and some times cotton and rice too.
According to official figures half of the farmers are owner cultivators.
In case if the GTC encroaches their entire land they will lose their single
source of livelihood and will just receive the compensation with the rate of
“banjar Qadeem”
The landowners of Mauza Paluwaan are getting Rs. 40,000/per acres,
while the market rate for the buyer of outside community is Rs. 80,000/acre.
8. How Greater Thal Supports Sustainable Livelihood?
The current livelihood pattern which is being practiced for generations
proved sustainable and catered the needs of local population as well as
contributed to national economy in the areas of livestock production, gram etc.
The simple rural way of life in Thal is not mixed with the idea of market
consumerism, heavy mechanizations and modernization. The majority of people are
happy with this style of life. Their food pattern is compatible with local
available resources. The main features of current livelihood are:
Natural vegetation, common grazing land called Rakhs and wildlife
Balanced use of bio-diversity which supports wildlife and humans
Cattle grazing and use of livestock production as a mean of cash income
Barani agriculture
Small scale subsistence agriculture through tube wells
To some extent use of forest trees to support cash income in severe need
About a quarter century ago the trend of gram cultivation has increased
The current cropping is entirely organic without any use of fertilizer and
pesticide
The canal irrigation will alter this entire pattern of livelihood. The
remaining bushes will be cleared to grow cash crops, space for cattle grazing
will be substantially reduced, and the fertilizer & pesticides will be
introduced to boost the production. This change in livelihood would generate
inequalities because:
Most likely local poor communities would lose right to land and
mechanization will negatively affect the agriculture labor.
The poor and vulnerable people will lose right to commons (Rakhs)
for cattle grazing
The private property rights will be exercised on land thus restricting
livestock mobility
The alteration in ecosystem will no more support vegetation, bio-diversity
and wild life, essential livelihood resources for the poor communities
Gradually the process will marginalize some people and make others richer
9. Un-accounted Social Disruptions
Migration
The pastoral patterns of in- and out-migration continued in Thal till the
execution of Thal Canal project in 1950s. Due to restriction on animal mobility
after the introduction of canal in western part of Thal and expansion of barani
agriculture followed by change in land tenure in eastern Thal in 1960s, the
patterns of pastoral migration got seriously affected. With the implementation
of the Greater Thal project, large-scale migration is likely to take place from
outside Thal. Local population has apprehensions regarding migration:
A large number of landowners, who sought lands in past but never settled,
along with new agricultural entrepreneurs, they will rush to the area to
settle down.
With the influx of this population, a number of new large and small
settlements are expected to develop.
This migration will change the demographic balance of the area and migrants
will be more politically powerful
The powerful people or groups when settled in Thal will use the political
clout and gradually encroach upon the resources of local people
The population transition due to migration will create a tension between
local people and migrants.
The entire lifestyle of Thal will change due to the substantial presence of
migrants, because they will bring their own values and traditions to the area.
Litigation/conflicts
The use of common land, culture of trust and vastness are key features of the
current social relations in the area of Greater Thal. These traditions have
never allowed the conflict on petty issues and litigation is very minimal. In
this era of violence and conflict the people of Greater Thal are living
peacefully. The police case or murder is big news in this area. Though this
peaceful culture has several advantages and has cemented the social ties. The
property rights avenue is very complex and weak. The land records, records of
Rakhs and other common resources are unclear. The canal irrigation and migration
may affect this peaceful relationship in several ways. There is a fear that:
The vague land rights and improper record will create several problems
which might lead to litigation
The obscure onsite marking of land, dearth of maps will cause conflict and
police interventions
The right of water, tail shortages, outlet tampering will further create
tension and also litigation, similar to other irrigated areas
The people will rush to revenue or irrigation department to obtain the
records and there is risk to manipulation of record, given the corruption
level in Pakistan.
Gender
Women and men have different roles to play, different interests to protect
and different situations to face. Any alteration and development project must
take into account these realities, but most of the projects in Pakistan are
gender blind and has widened rather than narrowed the gender gap. Greater Thal
Canal will affect and redefine the gender roles in following way:
The migration of outside population to Greater Thal Area would affect the
current living style in which women mobility is not restricted; this will
curtail the freedom of women.
The increased mobility of population, canal and revenue officials will
disturb the privacy of several villages where people live without any outer
house barrier or wall.
The shrinkage of common grazing land, reduction in livestock, clearing
remaining forests will affect overall family livelihood resources, thus
reduced income will have different distributional effects on men and women.
The costs of all adverse environmental effects including future
waterlogging and salinity, loss of biodiversity will be inequitably
distributed among men and women
The scarcity of fire wood due to the loss of existing forests will increase
women’s workload
The current status of common land when transformed into private property,
most probably men will control it, thus deny the women right to assets which
are being enjoyed in common property regime.
The reshuffling of assets and economic structures from pastoral and
subsistence agriculture to commercial agriculture and mechanization will bring
different effects for men and women, most likely will widen the gender gap.
10. Why to Irrigate Thal and undoing the beautiful work of nature
According to local folk wisdom and intellectuals the formation of Greater
Thal Area is a beautiful work of nature and it took thousand of year to complete
it. It has its own peculiar features and ecology. If you are ecologist,
conservationist, livelihood expert or activists of social justices, there is a
question to ask:
Why to irrigate Thal, Do Pakistan really needs to irrigate every inch of
available land?
Why to undo the thousand years beautiful work of nature?
These are not just poetic words but have taken into account the ecological
services these areas provide and the life they support. In addition, this
beautiful area is not just beautiful due to sand dunes and vegetation, but it
has supported and still supports the human beings with growing population
pressure without compromising sustainability. The natural balance among humans,
bio-diversity and wildlife, which is still intact to some extent are essential
element of this eco-system. What are the solutions and alternatives to maintain
this vital eco-system and achieving the livelihood and development needs of the
area without providing canal irrigation?
Following are few alternative thoughts:
Converting the entire Great Thal Area and similar areas including
Cholistan and Thar Desert into natural conservation sites
Promoting the existing economic production patterns into agro-pastoral
mode of economy
Promoting livestock production by introducing new breeds and proper
management
Promoting tourism in these areas by building restaurants and launching
publicity campaign
Subsidizing tube wells and maintaining the wise use of ground water
Proper marketing of livestock as well as agriculture products especially
grams
Promotion of small scale industry which could add value in dairy
products, agriculture and livestock (for example milk packing, production of
cheese & butter, packing of grams, processing of raw hides & skins etc)
Plantation of local species of trees and subsidizing communities till the
production of trees (10-15 years)
Investing the portion of proposed Rs. 28 billion money into education,
health and other social services
Establishing livestock dry land and forest research centers.
__19 Auguat 2004
Posted on Sindh-Politics@yahoogroups.com
List subscribe: sindh-politics-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Dear Friends
Here is one latest report on the development of Greater Thal Canal (GTC) compiled by ActionAid Pakista. ActionAid is one the reputable NGO working in advocacy, research and community based interventions and work. This report is an open challenge for civil society of Pakistan to look at the un-constitutional and illegal construction of Thal Canal and draw some strategies to move forward.How the local population and the indigenous culture, values, identification, displacement and other tragedies are happening, this report speaks by itself.
Regards
Zulfiqar Halepoto
