Rajat Banerji | June, 2002

Concerted efforts by a group of determined citizens lead to closure of a viscose factory that was befouling the Bhavani River in Tamil Nadu.

The Bhavani is an unusual river.

Born amid the brooks of Kerala's Silent Valley and the dales of Niligiri hills in South India, it has a short run of only 217 km before joining the River Cauvery.

	Water and troubles aplenty at Bhavani River

It isn't often that a river is sourced in dense green jungles. Even rarer is civil action toward polluters that has given the waterway a possible new lease on life.

This perennial river shares the fate of most Indian rivers. 90 per cent of its waters are abstracted for various uses: industry, agriculture and households. This river irrigates 99,700 hectares. Five municipalities draw 20 million litres daily (mld). Another 125 mld is diverted into the neighbouring Noyyal basin. An additional 21 town panchayats (councils) and 523 villages depend on the Bhavani for their water supplies.

The basin has an average length of 138 km, with an average width of 57 km. The Bhavani basin constitutes 7.58 per cent of the Cauvery basin. No less than 15 lakes and dams dot the Nilgiri hills, each withholding the monsoons deluge, only release it in dribs and drabs for the remainder of the year.

Polluter must pay
Industrial pollution has held centre stage. South India Viscose (SIV) at Sirumugai has been the target for one and all. Though there are various other industries upstream, STV has been blamed for virtually all contaminants in the Bhavani.

Set up in 1961 to produce wood pulp from eucalyptus, it gradually moved into production of a variety of products such as rayon-grade wood pulp, viscose staple fibre (VSF) and rayon filament yarn. Using 59 mld of water, it returned 41 mld to the river. Though SIV had invested around Rs 70 crores (about US 20 million dollars) in effluent treatment, as far as the local populace was concerned, the damage had been done. The polluter had to pay.

SIV Plant at Sirumugai

Moreover, the 1997 Greenpeace report "The Stranger" held SIV responsible for releasing complex effluents into the river. While admitting that the toxicity of these compounds was relatively poorly understood, it concluded that some chemical traces, such as nonylphenols, had the potential of interfering with hormonal systems. Referring to the use of effluents for irrigation, the report concluded that "No consideration appears to have been given to the long-term accumulation of persistent organic pollutants."

People power
The crisis reached a boil in the 90s. The protein content of grain grown in the basin had fallen. Groundnut production had slumped. The fish catch in the downstream Bhavanisagar dam had fallen, despite the presence of a hatchery. The Stranger notes that people from 11 villages had to abandon cultivation and take up stone cutting for a living.

Thus was formed the Bhavani River Protection Joint Council. Between 1994 and 2001, it spearheaded a people's movement against pollution. They held demonstrations in the affected cities and villages, roused local authorities from their slumber and when push came to shove, foisted the issue into the electoral campaigns of local politicians. Signature campaigns were the order of the day. "We made it a point that pollution of the Bhavani was an issue in every village and town," says Dr. Sathiasundari, President of the Council.

	Bhavani Sagar Dam

A series of public interest litigations saw SIV with its back to the wall. If it managed to convince the courts of its good intentions by installing effluent treatment facilities, a fresh case would then put a halt to the proceedings. In 1998, the Supreme Court had permitted SIV to operate its plants "Subject to satisfying inland water standards prescribed by the pollution control board."

Speaking to www.cleanganga.com in May 2002, Sathiasundari added that while the colourless liquids were allowed to be let out into the river, SIV had been given the go-ahead to use other treated effluents on agricultural lands. Thus, a 10-mile-long pipeline was laid to irrigate 300 acres of agricultural lands of Pettikottai and Chettipalayam villages.

Even this move was resisted. Finally, the pipeline was laid with the assistance of the police, who apparently had to resort to force to hold back the crowds. When the "treated" water reached the two villages, when the local people protested. Water in 20 wells became foul smelling: crop in the fields were damaged, they claimed. They finally resorted to the last refuge of the citizen, by filing a lawsuit.

This veritable onslaught by civil society has ensured that this polluter has paid the highest price: closure. Had the industry been more sensitive to community needs, the outcome might have been different.

This entire episode offers lessons for other river basins. If there is a polluter in your neighbourhood, you can go after him. If he doesn't clean up his act, you can go to court.

Either he cleans up his acts, or face closure.


Rajat Banerji is the managing editor of www.cleanganga.com