Sethusamudram Canal History & Facts

Sethusamudram Canal History & Facts

Hindus believe that the stretch of limestone shoals between Dhanushkodi near Rameshwaram in Southern India and Mannar in Northwest Sri Lanka are the remains of an ancient bridge built by Lord Rama, as described in the holy epic, Ramayana.
Recent NASA satellite images show clear pictures of a broken bridge under the ocean floor. The heritage of the bridge and the story of Lord Rama are extremely sacred to Hindus.
The ocean floor between India and Sri Lanka near the Mannar coast is very shallow and is not navigable. It does not allow ships to pass. This means that. India does not have a continuous navigational channel linking the east and west coasts. Ships coming from India's west and heading to Bangladesh or Indian ports on the east coast have to go around Sri Lanka because the waterway in the sea dividing the two countries is shallow.
Therefore, the Government of India has proposed the dredging of the sea to create a shipping canal to save up to 780 km of sailing distance and 30 hours of sailing time for ships plying between the east and west coasts of India.
Indian officials say the canal, which is called the Sethusamudram project, will also boost the national economy besides speeding up the movement of Indian Navy and Coast Guard vessels as well.
Hindu groups say this may be true but such economic progress cannot be at the expense of Ram Sethu, as they refer to Adam's Bridge, located at the southern end of the Sethusamudram project.
This is where an estimated 48 million cubic metres of silt will be removed over the next two years.
The construction of the canal immediately led to wide protests in India by Hindu leaders. Several holy men have gathered together to launch a campaign of protest.
In March 2007, over ten Hindu umbrella organizations from around the world joined together to launch the Save Ram Sethu Campaign (Ram Sethu Bachao Andolan) to increase the profile of the issue amongst the international communities.
The campaign hopes to convince the Government of India to reconsider the construction of the canal as it will hurt religious sentiments of millions of Hindus and also pose a great risk to the environment of the region and the livelihood of local fishermen.


Environmental implications of the Sethusamudram project Effect on marine life

Though there has been a demand from various quarters for the implementation of the project, there is also opposition to it from environmentalists. They point out that the dredging of the Palk Strait and the Gulf of Mannar could affect the ecology of the zone by changing currents, which could:
· cause changes in temperature, salinity, turbidity and flow of nutrients
· cause oil spills from ship and other marine pollution to reach the coastal areas and specifically the sensitive ecosystems of the Gulf of Mannar
· lead to higher tides and to more energetic waves, and hence to coastal erosion.
· affect the local sea temperature and thereby alter the pattern of sea-breezes and hence affect rainfall patterns.
They also point out that dredging the canal could stir up the dust and toxins that lie beneath the sea bed, affecting marine life. The emptying of bilge water from ships traveling through the hitherto impassable areas could disperse invasive species through the ecosystems of the area.
These effects could endanger precious marine species and wealth. The Gulf of Mannar has 3,600 species of plants and animals and is India's biologically richest coastal region. Mammal species which abound in the area are sperm whales, dolphins and dugongs. The Gulf of Mannar is especially known for its corals: the portion in Indian territorial waters has 117 species of corals, belonging to 37 genera. Associated with these ecosystems are many varieties of fish and crustaceans. Marine life on the Sri Lankan side, which is better protected, is even richer. The Bar Reef off the Kalpitiya peninsular alone has 156 species of coral and 283 of fish; there are two other coral reef systems around Mannar and Jaffna. There are extensive banks of oysters, as well as Indian Chank and Sea Cucumbers, especially in the seas adjacent to Mannar. The pearl fisheries south of Mannar, which inspired Georges Bizet's opera Les Pêcheurs de Perles, have not been productive for many years, indicating the fragility of these ecosystems in the face of overfishing and of relatively minor changes in the habitat.
The Indian government has conducted various environmental studies which ignore some of the above issues by claiming that such issues have already been addressed. Nevertheless, the fundamental environmentalist objections based on facts remain:
· the Environmental Impact Assessment carried out by the Indian government was done by a body inexperienced in projects of this nature, was insufficiently detailed and did not consult with all the stakeholders, which included the government and people on the southern side of the proposed project,
· no proper survey has been carried out of the sea bed to be dredged, and
· no proper scientific modelling of the effects of the project has been carried out.
After environmental objections were made in Sri Lanka, the Indian government belatedly decided to carry out modelling, but this had not been done before clearance was given for the project. A modelling exercise carried out by Sri Lanka's National Aquatic Resources Research and Development Agency (NARA) indicated that the project would increase the water flow from the Bay of Bengal to the Gulf of Mannar, disturbing the inland water balance as well as the eco-systems in the Gulf. [1] There have also been judicial observations against this project
[2]. Fishing and livelihood
On July 2, 2005, the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh unveiled the Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project amidst protests from fishermen and environmentalists. Nearly 600 were arrested. The fishermen protested because they feared that the dredging would deepen the sea waters and prevent them from venturing into deep sea (which is currently shallow), where their livelihoods lie.
Legendary
Some claim that this land bridge is the site of the famous Rama's Bridge, making it a historical, religious and cultural monument of great significance. For this reason, many, including chief ministers of states[3], oppose the project.
Several claims and estimates have been made regarding the age of Rama's bridge and its relation to the Indian epic Ramayana.
a)Rama's bridge is 3,500 years old: CRS {Source: Indian Express}: "Ramasamy explains that the land/beaches were formed between Ramanathapuram and Pamban because of the long shore drifting currents which moved in an anti-clockwise direction in the north and clockwise direction in the south of Rameswaram and Talaimannar about 3,500 years ago. ... But as the carbon dating of the beaches roughly matches the dates of Ramayana, its link to the epic needs to be explored, he adds.
"[4] b) NASA Images Find 1,750,000 Year Old Man-Made Bridge {Source: [HindustanTimes-http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_81164,0003.htm (DeadLink)], Reported by PTI}: "The bridge's unique curvature and composition by age reveals that it is man made. The legends as well as Archeological studies reveal that the first signs of human inhabitants in Sri Lanka date back to the a primitive age, about 1,750,000 years ago and the bridge's age is also almost equivalent.


Inconsistencies in the NEERI Environmental Impact Assessment
(Extracts from article by V Sundaram)
Sethusamudram Shipping Canal in its present form is scientifically inconsistent and technically indefensible for the following reasons:
1) According to Dr Ramesh, NEERI Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), the study that gives the SSCP, its scientific legitimacy, has ignored the studies available on the sedimentation pattern of Palk Bay completely and has not fixed the exact locations wherein the dredged material would be dumped - these studies are crucial for the economic and technical survival of project, as they will give us an idea of how much sediment should be dredged each season and also prepare us for a study that will tell us where the dumped sediments will move every season.
2) Subsurface geology has been studied only for the 20 kilo meter stretch of the canal in the Adam's Bridge area. Nothing is known about the subsurface geology of the Palk Strait region. Considering the fact that the canal's length will be 54.2 km; if the sub surface turns out to be rocky, the cost of the project will go up many folds, and the effect of blasting these rocks would cause serious damages to the Palk Bay environment. This was clearly stated in the Technical Feasibility Report prepared by NEERI only to be politically ignored at the time of political sanction of SSCP.
3) The historical cyclone data for this region from the years 1860 to 2000 clearly indicate that cyclones cross this region and its neighborhood once in every four years. Historically we have enough data to show that all these cyclones have caused severe erosion of the coastal stretch in the nearby areas from time to time by dumping the eroded material in Palk Bay and Adam's Bridge area. NEERI's EIA has not taken note of this natural phenomenon at all.
4) Indomer's 'Hydrodynamic Modeling Study for SSCP' has also ignored the issue of the impact of cyclones on the canal completely. Thus, we do not know, what will happen to the canal in scientific terms during the period of cyclones.
5) Tsunami computer simulation models by Professor Steven N Ward of University of California, Professor Aditya Riyadi of Pusat Penelitian Kelautan Insitut Teknologi, Bandung, Indonesia, WI-Delft Hydraulics, Netherlands and DHI Software, USA and Indomer-Alkyon have described graphically the way tsunami waves attacked Palk Bay on 26 December, 2004. It is against all this background that the International Tsunami Expert Professor Tad S Murty chose to warn the Prime Minister's Office on 30 January, 2005 about the possible negative and dangerous impact of SSCP during the times of future tsunamis. The PMO instead of referring the matter to the NEERI who were the official consultants of the Government of India, chose to refer the matter directly to the Office of the Chairman of Tuticorin Port Trust. He gave his final reply to the 14 vital points raised by the PMO on 8 March 2005 only on 30 June 2005. Then in a kind of sudden swoop operation the de jure Prime Minister and the de facto Prime Minister of Italian vintage air dashed to Madurai on 2 July 2005, to lay a solid foundation for the destruction of coastal life in Southern Tamilnadu.
The NEERI had undertaken their EIA of SSCP long before Tsunami hit parts of Tamilnadu and Kerala in December 2004. A preliminary tsunami impact assessment report prepared by the Zoological Survey of India for the Union Ministry of Environment and Forests in early 2005 clearly concluded that the tsunami that hit the Tamilnadu and Andaman and Nicobar coasts in 2004 had irrevocably altered the marine ecology of the Bay of Bengal region. No public authority connected with SSCP has taken note of this report.
When the SSCP was about to be launched in July 2005, Dr C P Rajendran of the Centre for Earth Science Studies in Thiruvananthapuram, a Paleo-Seismologist and one of India's top geologists gave a timely warning to the effect that the SSCP should be put on hold. Giving detailed technical reasons, he concluded: 'Sethusamudram, as the name suggests, is the part of an ocean that is being constantly bridged by natural sedimentation processes, and the nature has been at this work for hundreds of thousands of years. By implementing this project, we are disturbing these processes. The project lacks technical, scientific and economic credibility, and is another disaster in the making. All the objections raised by me will remain valid until these issues are resolved by an independent group of experts'.

Legal and planning issues

(Extracts from an article by V Sundaram, Retd IAS Officer)
In 2002, Tuticorin Port Trust appointed NEERI as consultants for carrying out Rapid & Comprehensive Environment Impact Assessment Studies along with assessing Techno-economic viability of the project. The objective of the study was to obtain Environmental Approvals from the concerned local, state, and central government authorities. The terms of Reference issued by TPT to NEERI comprised of two sections viz. Techno-economic viability & other related to Environment Impact Assessment.
In the latter half of 2002, NEERI presented a report on the status of the marine environment which was established by drawing on the data collected during the IEE in 1998. The data presented for the Marine Environment covered the Physico-chemical and biological status. The assessment covered the marine water and sediment. The analysis given for the various marine environmental components was laudable and confirmed the biodiversity richness of the Gulf of Mannar and Palk Bay.
NEERI completed its work long before South India was struck by tsunami in December 2004. All the Geologists, Earth Scientists, Oceanographers, Marine Biologists and other Ocean Scientists are categorically of the view that the marine environment in Palk Bay and Gulf of Mannar was radically altered and transformed after the tsunami. The evaluation report prepared by NEERI in the light of field data collected or observed before the tsunami in December 2004, cannot form the correct basis for according final sanction for the Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project (SSCP).
What is interesting to note is that sixteen (16) detailed queries were raised by PMO (Prime Minister's Office) on 8 March 2005 on various aspects relating to the environment impact, viability, dredging and other repercussions following tsunami in December 2004. These queries were sent to the Office of the Chairman, Tuticorin Port Trust on March 8 2005. The Tuticorin Port Trust, perhaps sent its detailed reply to the PMOs Office only on 30 June, 2005 (this is the date on which the information was posted on the government website by Tuticorin Port Trust.)
The People of India in general and the people living in the costal areas of Southern Tamilnadu and more particularly the fishermen, have a fundamental right to raise the following public issues before the Government of India:
1) Why did the PMOs Office refer the matter only to the Office of the Chairman of Tuticorin Port Trust and not to Government of India agencies like NEERI and several others for further detailed study, analysis and report? Was not the PMOs Office aware of the unprecedented damage caused by the tsunami disaster in South India in December 2004? It is strange that Tuticorin Port Trust was asked to respond to PMO's queries. The correct agency should have been NEERI under the agreement entered into between Govt. of India and NEERI.
2) Did the Office of the Chairman of the Tutcorin Port Trust refer the matter to the NEERI for its detailed analysis and comments in the light of the new environment and field situation created by the tsunami in December 2004? There is no indication if NEERI was asked to review its 2004 environmental impact analysis taking note of the post- tsunami field situation in December 2004.
3) The Office of the Chairman Of the Tuticorin Port Trust sent their final reply to the PMOs Office only on 30 June 2005. The timing of the response by Tuticorin Port Trust is significant. After two days, the SSCP (Sethusamudram Canal Project) was inaugurated by the de jure Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh and the de facto Prime Minister Sonia Gandhi who air dashed to Madurai for the inauguration on July 2 2005.The people of India have smelt a rat in this sequence of stage managed events to cover up many shady facts relating to the SSCP.
The haste with which Tuticorn Port Trust was asked to respond to PMO's queries raises serious questions on the violation of the due process instituted by the Government in conducting an unbiased and objective evolution by a competent agency. The competence of Tuticorin Port Trust in answering all the 14 queries raised by PMO is unclear. This violation of due process raises serious questions on the viability of the entire project.
The answers of the Tuticorin Port Trust which formed the basis for inaugurating the project on 2 July, 2005 were apparently prepared by a private company, Dr P Chandramohan of Indomer Hydraulics Pvt. Ltd., Chennai. The possible conflict of interests in engaging a potential contractor/consultant in making such an evaluation is a matter of serious public concern impacting on the impartiality and objectivity of the answers provided on the serious issues raised by the PMO in March 2005.


Historical Timeline

Treta Yuga (Hindu timelini)
Lord Rama constructs a bridge between India and Sri Lanka
1900s (exact year?)
British rename the Ramasethu bridge as 'Adam's Bridge'
1860 - 1922
As many as nine proposals were made for cutting a Ship Channel across the narrow strip of land to connect the Gulf of Mannar and the Palk Bay with the object of providing a short-cut for ocean-going ships plying between the West Coast of India and the East Coast
1956
Sethusamudram Project Committee formed to contemplate a 26 feet canal dig at the mainland at Rameshwaram at a cost of Rs 210 million
1967
Nagendra Singh Committee Report recommends a 30 feet canal at an alternate site near the Rameshwaram Island Crossing at a cost of Rs 370 million
1981
Laksminarayana Committee Report recommends construction of two channels called the south and north channels and also construction of a lock in the land portion connecting both the channels across the 'K' alignment near Dhanushkodi at a cost of Rs 2820 million
1996
Pallavan Transport Consultance Service Report recommends a number of infrastrucral facilities to be constructed in addition to the canal. These included locks, flotilla, harbour tugs, navigational aids, jetties, shore facilities, dispatch vessels, slipways and buildings
1997
Ministry of Surface Transport appoints Tuticorin Port Trust as Nodal Agency
1997
Ministry of Surface Transport appoints the National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI) to draft an Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) Report. The study recommended a canal cutting the Pamban Island, east of Kothandaramasamy temple, which it claimed will cause least damage to the biota and the environment
2004
Tuticorin Port Trust engages M/s. L & T-Ramboll Consulting Engineers, Chennai for preparation of a Detailed Project Report. The report claimed to establish the financial viability of the Project.
2005
Formal inauguration of the Sethusamudram project
2006
Commencement of dredging work at Ramasethu and Palk Strait
2006
Hindu leaders in India meet President of India to lodge protest against destruction of Ramasethu
February 2007
Shankaracharya of Puri and other Hindu leaders meet in the holy town of Vrindavana to launch a national campaign
March 2007
Hindu organizations from ten countries around the world launch the 'Save Ramasethu Campaign' (Ramasethu Bachao Andolan)
Sethusamudram Project Timeline
No.
Milestones
Target Date
1
Registration of Sethusamudram Corporation Ltd.
*06.12.2004
2
Submission of DPR to the Ministry
*01.03.2005
3
Appraisal by F.I. arranger
31/05/2005
4
Financial closure
30/06/2005
5
Launching of Sethusamudram Corporation Limited Web Site
30/06/2005
6
Inauguration of Sethusamudram Project
02/07/2005
7
Approval of the competent authority
0 week
8
Pre-qualification and tender process (for dredging)
12 weeks
9
Award of work
16 weeks
10
Mobilisation of Dredging equipment and pre-dredge survey
24 weeks
11
Commencement of dredging at Adams bridge area and Palk strait area
24 weeks
12
Preparation of designs, drawings and tender documents for onshore facilities
26 weeks
13
Preparation of tender documents for procurement of Navigational aids, Port crafts
38 weeks
14
Call of tenders, pre-qualification process for procurement of Navigational aids and Port crafts & on shore facilities
50 weeks
15
Award of work for on shore facilities
56 weeks
16
Placing of supply orders for procurement of Navigational aids and Port crafts
62 weeks
17
Completion of procurement of Navigational aids and Port crafts
148 weeks
18
Completion of Service Jetties and Navigational towers
160 weeks
19
Completion of dredging work
166 weeks
20
Post dredging survey
168 weeks
21
Installation of VTMS
168 weeks
22
Commencement of Trials/ Tests
172 weeks
23
Commencement of Channel Operation
180 weeks