This is an emotive myth, a misinformation propagated by critic of the Project to arouse opposition to the dam. 92% of the beneficiary farmers in the State are marginal (holding less than 1 hectare), small (holding 1-2 hectare) and semi-medium (2-4 hectare). Hence the question of benefiting rich farmers does not arise.
Further the project is designed to benefit about 75% of the drought prone areas. And as far as affected population is concerned, tribal people constitute less than half (63223 persons out of 127446).

Total area of forest land which would be submerged at full dam height would be 13385 ha. only and most of them are degraded forest. As against this, compensatory a forestation is being done in equivalent new area, and restoration of degraded forest to fill tree cover in double the area is being done.Against every tree submerged, 78 trees have been already planted. There would be immense environmental benefit of green cover and foliage produced by irrigation. CO2 fixation in the command will be 70 times than in submerged area.

	LANDSAT IRS- 1B Indian Space Research Organization
Close Forest Area   Open Forest Area   Degrated Forest Area   Highly Degrated Forest area Cultivation Grass Growt

And then, consider diversion of forest land due to pressure of population and other reasons - Forest Survey of India (1987) gives following data of diversion of forest land between 1961 to 1980:

In 1981, India’s population was 683 million and in 2000 it is 1 billion. One can imagine the tremendous pressure on the forest land due to increase in population. Every year 1.5 million ha. are estimated being destroyed illegally for fuel and other needs. Construction of Sardar Sarovar Project would help reducing this.

• The economic viability of the SSP has been examined critically by the independent national as well as international experts on many occasions in 
  the past. The first economic appraisal was carried out by the Tata Economic Consultancy Services (TECS) Bombay, which indicated that this project will confer substantially large benefits, much larger than the cost involved, with a benefit cost ratio of 1.84 an IRR of 18.3%, both evaluated at economic price.
    

• The Staff Appraisal Report of the World Bank also estimated the Economic Rate of Return (ERR) at 13% in 1985 they had also carried out sensitivity analysis taking into account various favorable and adverse factors. This analysis provided ERR within a range of 7 to 19%. Even former is considered 
  to be an acceptable rate of return for a project of this type serving a drought prone region in India. 
      

• The World Bank again updated its economic appraisal of SSP in 1990. This clearly indicated that the original ERR of about 12% was still correct. It may be mentioned here that Nitin Desai Committee constituted by GOI considered rate of return of 9% (7% for drought prone area) as acceptable.
     

• The World Bank again undertook economic reappraisal based on 1991-92 price. Results of this exercise have been reported in the Project Completion Report (PCR) prepared by the World Bank in 1995. This exercise paid particular attention to the environmental cost and benefits which might have been committed or underestimated in the original analysis. It estimated ERR 
  or 12.2% which was found to be within the range of acceptable ERR’s for project of this type. The PCR has concluded that the ‘scale of benefits is large, relative to any feasible alternative, with substantial multiplier effect as well.’
    

• The Narmada Planning Group had asked the Ahmedabad based Sardar Patel Institute of Economic and Social Research (SPIESR) to update the economic appraisal earlier made by TECS. This exercise was also done at 1991-92 price. The ERR estimated with three different alternative assumptions of water use efficiency and project cost works out within the range of 16 to 20%. This result should set at rest any doubt about the economic viability of this project.
    

• Agriculture consumes around 43% of the total power in Gujarat State. In absolute terms this works out to be 2700 MW of electricity. It is estimated that around 50% of it (1350 MW) will be saved due to Sardar Sarovar Project by way of surface water irrigation and recharge of groundwater aquifers. Added to this is the production of 1450 MW of power from the Project. In order to have around 2700 MW at the delivery point, a power project of 6000 MW (at 65% PLF and 20-25% Transmission and Distribution losses) is required. The present cost of setting up such a power project at an estimated rate of Rs. 55 million per MW would be Rs. 330 billion (~US $ 8 billion). 
     

• This factor alone would more than compensate the estimated cost of the Project. Added to this will be increase in agricultural income, drinking water, prevention of desertification, effective drought mitigation, prevention of forced migration of millions of people and cattle, flood control etc.

Large Dams in Gujarat: There are 539 large dams in Gujarat. One more large dam in Gujarat is not going to make any difference.
  
As per ICOLD (International Commission on Large Dams) definition there are 541 ‘Large dams’ in Gujarat State. However, the ICOLD definition for ‘Large dams’ includes dams with height greater than 15 m and other smaller dams with height between 10 
to 15 m with certain special design features. The height considered is the height of 
the dam from the lowest foundation level to the crest. The definition of ICOLD deals with the design and safety considerations and therefore as per the ICOLD definition for ‘Large dam’ the list also includes smaller dams of Panchayat with a meager storage capacities of about 1 to 10 Mm3.

Dam having total height above 15 m or storage capacity of even 1 Mm3 is classified as a large dam !
  
It is strange that for the purpose of classification, in addition to the above, the factors like foundation conditions, special design features etc. are also given equal weightage.
Most of the large dams in Gujarat, are nothing but the elder brothers of check dams - lying empty with a very small storage capacity.However, the classification of dams using Planning Commission criteria based on benefit consideration is as under:-

According to the above criteria, out of 541 ‘so called Large dams’ the state has only 21 major projects including Sardar Sarovar. Further, out of these 21 projects only 5 projects viz. Dharoi, Dantiwada, Kadana, Ukai & Sardar Sarovar are of size of national importance. 
  
The storage capacity of Ukai dam alone is around 46% of the total capacity of all the existing dams put together. This means that the rest of the dams have very little i.e. 0.1% average storage capacity. Thus, it can be seen that there are not many Mega Projects in Gujarat. The actual irrigation potential achieved through all the major and medium water resources projects in the State during last 40 years is only 14 million hectares, whereas Sardar Sarovar would alone provide irrigation facilities to 19.24 million hectares. Hence, Sardar Sarovar dam would surely make a lot of difference in tiding over drought conditions prevailing frequently in Gujarat State.
                                      

There are many existing projects which up to year 1975 were designed considering sedimentation rate as per liberal norms prevailing at that time. With availability of observed data, designed siltation rate of these dams were found to be on lower side of the actual observed after its impoundment. Accordingly sedimentation rates were updated and considered in new dams. 

In Sardar Sarovar Dam actual observed silt rate of 5.34 ham/100 km2/Year has been adopted in estimating useful service life of SSP.                                      

Further while designing water resources projects, provision for accumulation of silt is made in working out economic life of projects by providing dead storage pocket so that the live storage does not get hampered. At present, none of the existing dams has silted to a level which can not hold useful storage to meet designed requirements.
As will be evident from the sketch, special provision for silt deposition is made in the reservoir, which is known as ‘DEAD STORAGE’ and is never considered for effective utilisation. Had the reservoir capacity been reduced by silting as claimed by the critics, the dams would have overflown by now.

Decommissioning of dams is not a new event. The earliest removal for which records exist was in 1912. Some of the dams, in some parts of the world, over many decades, has been silted and have turned cost ineffective after having delivered substantial hydropower, irrigation and water supply benefits. Thereafter they are being dismantled. In some cases, retrofitting the dam with fish ladders becomes so expensive that the owner opts to tear down the dam instead. Thus, dismantling of dams is more on economic grounds rather than on ecological considerations. 

Starting from 1912, during last more than eight decades, only 465 dams have been decommissioned in the United States, the year 1998 witnessed the maximum - 29. Against this, 5577 large dams have been constructed during this period (World Register of Dams, 1998). There are 75,187 dams throughout the United States and its territories (National Inventory of Dams, 1995-96).
  
US SCENARIO

US has harnessed almost all of its water resources.
  
Even if we consider the projects under construction and those under consideration, India has harnessed hardly 20% of its surface water resources.
 
Is this example comparable? Let us examine a few cases.
  

• Condit Dam, White Salmon River, Oregon, United States
  The operating license of this 38 m high dam built in 1913, rendered uneconomical at the time of relicensing in 1993 because of the US$30 M requirements for fish ladders etc.With only seven years left in its life, approval of the dam removal agreement is awaited. 
  (International Water Power & Dam Construction, March, 2000)
   

• Scotts Peak Dam, Lake Pedder/Gordon River, Australia
  It is proposed to remove this dam for the reason that the hydropower from Scotts Peak Dam is not needed, since Tasmania has a substantial surplus of generating capacity. 
  (Environmental Defense, www.edf.org)
  

• Edwards Dam, Kennebec River, Maine, United States
  This 24 feet high dam, finished in 1837, is being removed on economic ground. Removal will cost less than installing fish passage measures. 
  (Environmental Defense, www.edf.org)

• Elwha & Glines Canyon Dams, Elwha River, United States
  These dams built in the early 1900’s are proposed to be removed for Salmon and other anadromous fisheries. 
  (Environmental Defense, www.edf.org)

• Ice Harbor, Lower Monumental, Little Goose, Lower Granite Dams, Lower Snake River, Washington, United States
  These four dams, built between 1962 and 1975 are about 33 m high. It is proposed to remove these dams for restoring salmon and steelhead fisheries. 
  (Environmental Defense, www.edf.org)

• Newport No. 11 Dam, Clyde River, Vermont, United States
  This 6 m high dam was built in 1957 and was removed in August, 1996. In 1994, high water washed away the banks along the dam. The removal was recommended as a condition for licensing other dams located on the Clyde River.
  (Environmental Defense, www.edf.org) 

• Elizabeth Macline, Spokesperson, American Rivers, said 
  “We’re not advocating the removal of all dams, only the removal of dams that don’t make sense.” She says that all proposed removals should be evaluated on a case by case basis and that less than 1% of all dams in the US are even under consideration for removal. (Joint Study by American Rivers, Friends of the Earth and Trout Unlimited)