Seems like sort of a classic debt vs. equity problem. The government obviously cannot deliver on a promise of X amount of water regardless of rainfall. It would make a lot more sense if the rightsholders received a percentage of the inflow. The good thing about the dam is that it can absorb fluctuations on the scale of a few years, but as we see, it can't absorb a decade long decline, and they should reduce allocations proportionately without having to declare an emergency to do it. That way, farmers would have at least a few years to make adjustments.