This is my hope for Bengaluru, not a scientific study or a fully worked-out plan. The costs, buffer widths and restoration ideas here are things I want us to explore, not proven answers.
I remember muddy water when it rained heavily. I was about nine years old then, and the canal was full of water. That is the last time I remember seeing it as real water, albeit muddy. This is a childhood memory; it does not mean the water was clean or safe.
When I see what we call Kengeri Mori now, I feel sad. What if we had acted in time and saved it? I want someone to come into power who sees it, takes the time, spends the money and works towards making it a river again. Restore its natural soil route and remove concrete wherever that is possible and safe.
An IISc study from 2017 described untreated sewage, industrial waste and garbage dumping as problems in the Vrishabhavathi valley. It recommended local sewage treatment, wetlands and regular water-quality checks. That gives some background to this hope. It is an older study, not a report on the river’s condition today or proof that every part of my idea will work. [1]
I started with a question: could the Vrishabhavathi have been for Bengaluru what the Chao Phraya is for Bangkok? I do not know whether that comparison works in terms of size, water flow or geography. But I would like our river to be something people care about and want to spend time near.
I would call it Vrishabhavathi Hole — ಹೊಳೆ. That is the name I would like to see us use, and the river I hope we can recover.
My worry is that even if we restore it, people will throw garbage into the water again. We see people coming in cars to dump garbage. The reasons are familiar: the collectors do not come when they are home, they have work or different shifts. Those problems need solutions, but throwing waste into a public place cannot be the solution.
Being educated does not automatically mean having civic sense. This frustrates me. We want good surroundings, but some of us will not make arrangements for our own waste. Reliable collection is needed, and so is responsibility from people.
I think strict implementation matters. Fines, cameras at dumping spots and barriers where needed could help. There should be proper ways to hand over waste too. We need to make it possible to do the right thing and act when people keep dumping anyway.
I would want pollution control and restoration work to move side by side. Stop sewage and industrial waste from entering untreated, while experts study which stretches can be restored and how. I would like work in more than one stretch, if that can be done safely. I would want flood risk, water quality and contaminated soil checked before removing concrete. I do not know enough to say where it can safely be taken out.
How much space does the river need? I asked whether 50 metres would be enough or whether we need 75 metres. I do not have that answer. These are questions, not a claim about the legal rule or the right width everywhere. People who understand the river, flooding and the land need to work that out.
Where people have to move to give the river space, we should compensate them fairly and help them relocate. I want the river restored, but people should not just be left without somewhere to go.
And yes, people will have to deal with some inconvenience. We want a good life, so we have to compromise for a good step. That does not mean accepting careless work or endless disruption. It means being willing to support work that takes time, if it is planned properly and we can see what is happening.
I even wonder whether Karnataka could arrange ₹40,000 crore over time if a properly studied plan needed that much. That is not my estimate of the cost, or a claim that the money is already available. I am asking whether we can take an investment of that scale seriously for our water and our future. We would also have to pay to keep the river and treatment systems working afterwards.
I want a combination of experts, ecologists, a strong political leader and independent people who will question the work. Someone like Prakash Belawadi comes to mind as an example of a public voice; I am not suggesting he has agreed to this idea. We need people who can do the work and people who will keep asking whether it is being done properly.
For me, political resistance and public apathy are both big hurdles. We cannot ask for a clean river and then keep throwing waste into it. We cannot keep putting off difficult decisions either.
I do not know how much of this is possible. I am not claiming that restoring this river alone will solve Bengaluru’s water problems. But I want us to find out what can be done and then actually do it.
A water-stable city is a rich city by itself. That is my hope for Bengaluru.