a study on disastur management system of assam
Answers
Answer:
One of the main causes of impoverishment of the rural areas of Assam has been the recurrent floods which result in the degradation of agricultural soil, loss of life and property and great suffering to the affected people. Several waves of flood every year leave behind great damage beside much misery and suffering.1 What is more reprehensible is the trend towards galloping increase in the damages caused in each succeeding year. In one of the worst floods in living memory in 1998 the level of submergence crossed all previous records. Out of Assam’s then existing 23 districts as many as 21 were affected in the most devastating flood which caused the death of 105 persons, loss of 7814 cattle-heads, demolition of 30399 houses and complete destruction of standing crops on 288900 hectares of fertile land. The requirement of fund for relief, restoration and rehabilitation was put at Rs.1000 crores in a memorandum submitted by the Government of Assam (GoA) to the Government of India (GoI). The annual damages have increased since then. In his Memorandum submitted to the Prime Minister on November 21, 2004, the Assam Chief Minister stated that the damage due to flood during 2004 was tremendous. It affected a population of 1,30,00,000. A total of 491 people were killed. The loss of cattle was estimated at 65,000. More than 6 lakh houses were damaged. The damage to crops, properties, buildings and public infrastructure, such as bridges, roads and embankments amounted to Rs.2,400 crores in terms of money. GoI’s assistance that year was the highest – Rs.557 crores.
Those on the margin of existence suffer more during the flood havoc. Many of these people, specially the youth, join the insurgent outfits because they become unemployed and have no other income to fall back upon. Insurgency causes great damages to the economy which further impoverishes the common man. This vicious cycle has struck Assam and the state has been unable to break the cycle or get out of the quagmire.2
Various local organizations as well as the state government have been demanding, for a long time, that Assam’s floods should be recognized as a national problem. It is believed that if that was done Assam would have got all central assistance for structural flood control measures as grant. At present Assam is getting the major portion of such assistance as loan. During the financial years from 1974-75 to 1999-2000, for example, Assam got a total of Rs.401.03 crores as central assistance for structural measures out of which Rs.390.94 crores was in the shape of loans and only Rs.10.09 crores as grants. GoA has been demanding waiving of repayment of the loans. But GoI has not agreed. Since this issue has not been resolved it has remained as a sore point in the relations between GoA and GoI. In his Memorandum to the Prime Minister cited above, the Assam Chief Minister reiterated that “the tackling of floods and erosion in Assam may be treated as a national problem funded entirely by the Government of India. The Brahmaputra Board, which has failed to make any impact, may be revamped”.
The local media play up this problem from time to time. Different public organizations, including student unions, agitate over this issue which vitiate the political atmosphere and give a boost to insurgency.3 In addition and as distinct from the structural flood control measures, Assam gets large amounts form GoI out of the Calamity Relief Fund. In fact, 75 percent of the annual expenditure on non-structural calamity relief is given to the states by GoI on fulfillment of certain conditions and as recommended by the succeeding Finance Commissions. Even these amounts are not considered adequate against the huge annual damages.
Attention has been paid to prevention of floods and for rescue, relief and rehabilitation of the victims only after independence. Earlier, the British Indian Government more or less ignored this problem. Since 1954, prevention of flood has been attempted through certain structural measures such as construction of embankments, dykes and river training. During this period, a total of 4448 kilometres of embankments, 629 of protection and anti-erosion works, 85 major sluices and 850 kilometres of drainage channels have been constructed in the state with the hope of controlling floods. Non-structural measures for rescue, relief and rehabilitation have been codified and put on a systematic basis.
Explanation: