Not just Arunachal. A proposed dam has set off protests in Assam and Meghalaya as well

The Kulsi dam is a proposed multipurpose project combining hydropower, irrigation and flood-control aims. It would be built on the Kulsi River at Ukiam, along the Assam-Meghalaya border. The location matters because the river supports farming, fisheries and seasonal water cycles across South Kamrup and West Khasi Hills.

Ukiam is where the Dron, Sree or Khri, and Ghagua hill streams meet. The planned structure would be 62 metres high. Residents say this meeting point and the downstream stretch carry deep cultural memory and oral history for Rabha, Garo, Khasi, Bodo and Adivasi communities.

The project remains opposed by villages in both states. Community groups say construction would alter the river basin and submerge settlements. The detailed project report was handed over in July to Assam Power Generation Corporation Limited, allowing the state to move implementation forward.

The project is planned as a 55 MW hydropower dam with a height of 62 metres. Its estimated cost is Rs 1,454.95 crore. The government’s estimate says around 15 villages would be affected, while independent community assessments place the number at 36 villages on both sides of the border.

The protest platform represents 10 affected villages. Residents of Ukiam, which has about 800 people, say most homes there would be submerged. Sengjan Sangma says all 10 villages could go underwater if the dam is built. The article does not provide a total number of families facing displacement from the Kulsi project.

The scale is disputed because official and community counts differ. The affected settlements include forest and revenue villages inhabited for generations by Rabha, Garo and Khasi families. Their concerns extend beyond homes to farms, forests, fisheries and cultural places across the river basin.

Opposition comes from communities in 10 affected villages, local headmen, Khasi traditional institutions and the Kulsi River Basin Nature and Livelihood Protection Committee. Rabha, Garo, Khasi, Bodo and Adivasi families depend on the river basin and surrounding land. Their livelihoods include farming, fisheries and plantations.

Lopresty Sangma’s 14-member family depends on betel and banana plantations. He says the family has no government jobs and would have nowhere to live or farm if its land disappeared. Residents also fear that a 62-metre dam would submerge homes in Ukiam and other villages.

The opposition is therefore about more than land transfer. Communities say the dam could damage the river’s ecology, disrupt seasonal water cycles and erase cultural memory. Three Khasi village headmen said they would not consent, while the Hima Rambrai opposed damming local rivers in a 2013 resolution.

Government agencies present the Kulsi dam as a multipurpose development project. Its stated benefits are electricity generation, irrigation and flood protection. The Jal Shakti ministry says the project would generate 55 MW of hydropower and provide irrigation benefits across a large agricultural area.

The planned irrigation coverage is 26,000 hectares. The government also says the dam would reduce flood risk. These benefits are linked to storing and managing river water, then using it for power generation and irrigation rather than allowing all water to follow its natural seasonal path.

The estimated project cost is Rs 1,454.95 crore. These official benefits are contested by community groups, which argue that the dam could cause lasting ecological damage across the Kulsi basin. The disagreement is therefore between regional development goals and local concerns over land, livelihoods, river systems and consent.

If the project area is submerged, communities could lose homes, farms, forests and grazing land. Families who depend on agriculture and plantations would face displacement and the loss of the land that supports them. Residents say they would be left with little or nothing to live on.

Ukiam is especially vulnerable. Villagers say the 62-metre structure would submerge most homes there, while Sengjan Sangma says all 10 villages could go underwater. The Kulsi also supports fisheries and seasonal water cycles. The proposed reservoir and altered river flow could therefore affect livelihoods beyond the construction site.

The loss could be cultural as well as economic. The meeting point of the Dron, Sree or Khri, and Ghagua streams holds deep cultural memory and oral history. Community leaders say these impacts could spread from Meghalaya’s hills through the wider basin toward the Brahmaputra.

The source article does not mention Gangetic river dolphins, Chandubi Lake or downstream wetlands, so it provides no documented finding about effects on them. It does state that the Kulsi supports fisheries, agriculture and seasonal water cycles, and that residents fear lasting ecological damage across the basin.

In general, dams change when and how much water moves downstream. That can alter water depth, current speed, sediment movement and fish passage. Such changes may affect river dolphins if they reduce suitable river habitat or prey, and may affect wetlands or lakes if their seasonal inflows change. These are established mechanisms, not findings reported for this project.

A reliable conclusion about dolphins, Chandubi Lake or particular wetlands would require the project’s environmental studies and downstream mapping. The article only records Dinesh Das’s warning that changes could be felt across the basin, from Meghalaya’s hills to the Brahmaputra.

A multipurpose dam holds back river water in a reservoir. Water released through turbines can generate electricity, while managed releases can support irrigation and reduce some flood risks. This is why governments describe such projects as serving several public purposes at once.

The same mechanism changes the river’s natural flow. Instead of moving freely with seasonal rains and dry periods, water is stored and released according to operating decisions. That can alter downstream water levels, timing, sediment movement and conditions for fish. In the Kulsi basin, residents depend on agriculture, fisheries and seasonal water cycles.

These goals can conflict when power and irrigation planning reduces the flows or timing that farms, fish and wetlands need. The proposed Kulsi dam illustrates that tension. The government cites 26,000 hectares of irrigation, 55 MW of power and lower flood risk, while communities warn of ecological damage, submerged villages and lost livelihoods.