Methodologies for ecological baselines and prediction of impacts on

biodiversity resources

Dr. Asha Rajvanshi

ar@wii.gov.in

Senior Reader and Faculty In-charge, EIA Cell,

Wildlife Institute of India, INDIA

IAIA 06 Pre-meeting training course - Stavanger, Norway

Impact Identification

Determining what is good and bad about the proposed development ?

Impact is defined as a value

judgment on the importance of a

change measured through varied

parameters and indicators

Impacts on healthGlobal warming effects Air and water pollution, toxicity Respiratory effects

Impacts on agricultural systemCrop yieldsIrrigation demands

Impacts on forestForest productivity, composition Geographic rangeChange in habitat quality

Impacts on water resourcesChange in water tableChange in water qualityChanges in population of wetland birds

Impacts on coastal areasBeach erosionInundation of coastal land, reduction in coastal habitat

Species and wildlife habitatsLoss of habitat and speciesShift in ecological zones

A window into the future

Impact prediction

Formal methods standardized as guides/tool kits

Adhoc methods developed according to the situation

EIA methods

1. Briefing, Consultation and Workshops

2. Checklists

3. Matrices

4. Networks

5. Overlays

6. Other specialized biodiversity or habitat suitability models

7. Computer aided methods

Impact Assessment Procedures

A variety of methods varying in complexity and characteristics

All share the common basis of an index of environmental factors or development activities

Simple checklists

Descriptive checklists

Questionnaire checklists

Weighting-scaling checklists

Checklists

Provide assessor with a list of factors to be considered, but no information provided on:

Simple checklists

Used as aide memoir to identify impacts

Can provide structure to initial part of scoping stage

specific data needs

methods of assessing importance of impacts

ways of measuring change to environmental factors

Noise Impacts Construction Phase

I. Noise impacts x

A. Public health

B. Land use

II. Air quality impacts x

A. Public health

B. Land use

III. Water quality impacts x

A. Groundwater

I. Flow and water-table alteration

2. Interaction with surface drainage

B. Surface water

I. Shoreline and bottom alteration

2 Effects of filling and dredging

3. Drainage and flood characteristics

more.

Simple checklists of Potential Impacts of the construction phase of the Transportation Project

Noise Impacts Construction Phase

C. Quality aspects

I. Effect of effluent loadings .

2. Implication of other actions, such as

a. Disturbance of benthic layers

b. Alteration of currents

c. Changes in flow regime

d. Saline intrusion in groundwater

3. Land use

4. Public health

IV. Soil erosion impacts x

A. Economic and land use

B. Pollution and siltation

V. Ecological impacts x

A. Flora

B. Fauna (other than humans)

Wildlife x x x xEndangered Species xNatural Vegetation x x xExotic Vegetation xGrading x x x xSoil Characteristics x x xNatural Drainage xForest Productivity x x x xNoise x xSurface Paving xRecreation x x xAir Quality x xxVisual Disruption xOpen Space x x x xHealth and Safety x x x xEconomic Values x x xPublic Facilities x x x x(Including schools)Public Services x x xConfirmity to Regional Plans x x x

N

o

E

f

f

e

c

t

s

P

o

s

i

t

i

v

e

e

f

f

e

c

t

N

e

g

a

t

i

v

e

e

f

f

e

c

t

B

e

n

e

f

i

c

i

a

l

A

d

v

e

r

s

e

P

r

o

b

l

e

m

a

t

i

c

S

h

o

r

t

-

t

e

r

m

L

o

n

g

-

t

e

r

m

R

e

v

e

r

s

i

b

l

e

I

r

r

e

v

e

r

s

i

b

l

e

Environmental Areas

Descriptive checklist

Limitations It only recognises impact - ? Quantitative information - nil

Will the project lead to impacts on herbivores species

Yes No Not known

Will the project involve submergence of critical habitats of endangered species

Will the project lead to acid mine drainage into a wetlands

Will the removal of some tree species during forest clearance for reservoir significantly effect the fodder resources for elephants

Part of a questionnaire checklist

Yes No Not known

Yes No Not known

Comparatively simple method

Not necessarily project specific

Once established, can be used in many different situations

Benefits of checklists

It only recognises impact and provides no quantitative information

Can never be considered as definite or complete

Do not help to identify secondary/higher order impacts

Tend to compartmentalise

Problems with checklists

Two dimensional version of a checklist

Attempts to identify interactions between development actions on one axis and environmental parameters on the other

Variety of forms available

Interaction matrices

Developed by United States Geological Survey 1971

100 actions x 88 environmental items

IMPACT - identified at the interaction between the above

Impacts can be identified:

Leopold matrix

by signs:

qualitatively: good, moderate, high

quantitatively: absolute/relative (NOT OBJECTIVE)

Impacts can be POSITIVE or NEGATIVE

MI

Actions causing impactE

n

v

i

r

o

n

m

e

n

t

a

l

i

t

e

m

s

Magnitude

Leopold interaction matrix

meaning of x/y: x = Relative magnitudey = Relative importance

a,b,c, are activities

A,B,Care environmental parameters

Leopold matrix

etc.

2/24/67/24/52/3D

3/61/15/59/78/87/2C

3/34/94/81/10B

3/78/52/1A

etc.gfedcba

Part 1 : Project Actions

A. Modification of Regime

a) Exotic flora or fauna introduction

b) Biological controls

c) Modification of habitat

d) Alternation of ground cover

e) Alternation of ground-water hydrology

f) Alternation of drainage

g) River control and flow codification

h) Canalization

i) Irrigation

j) Weather modification

k) Burning

l) Surface or paving

m) Noise and vibration

B. Land transformation and constructiona) Urbanizationb) Industrial sites and buildingsc) Airportsd) Highways and bridgese) Roads and trailsf) Railroadsg) Cables and liftsh) Transmission lines, pipelines, and

corridorsi) Barriers, including fencingj) Channel dredging and straighteningk) Channel revetmentsl) Canalsm) Dams and impoundmentsn) Piers, seawalls, marinas & sea terminalso) Offshore structuresp) Recreational structuresq) Blasting and drillingr) Cut and fills) Tunnels and underground structures

The Leopold Matrix (Leopold et al., 1971). Part 1 Lists the Project Actions (Arranged Horizontally in the Matrix); Part 2 Lists the Environmental Characteristics and Conditions (Arranged Vertically in the Matrix)

C. Resource Extraction

a) Blasting and drilling

b) Surface excavation

c) Sub-surface excavation and retorting

d) Well drilling and fluid removal

e) Dredging

f) Clear cutting and other lumbering

g) Commercial fishing and hunting

D. Processinga) Farmingb) Ranching and grazingc) Food lotsd) Dairyinge) Energy generationf) Mineral processingg) Metallurgical industryh) Chemical industryi) Textile industryj) Automobile and aircraftk) Oil refiningl) Foodm) Lumberingn) Pulp and papero) Product storage

E. Land Alteration

a) Erosion control and terracing

b) Mine sealing and waste control

c) Strip mining rehabilitation

d) Landscaping

e) Harbour dredging

f) Marsh fill and drainage

F. Resource Renewal

a) Reforestation

b) Wildlife stocking and management

c) Ground-water recharge

d) Fertilization application

e) Waste recycling

G. Changes in Traffic

a) Railway

b) Automobile

c) Trucking

d) Shipping

e) Aircraft

f) River and canal traffic

g) Pleasure boating

h) Trails

i) Cables and lifts

j) Communication

k) Pipeline

H. Waste Emplacement and Treatment

a) Ocean dumping

b) Landfill

c) Emplacement of tailings, spoil, and overburden

d) Underground storage

e) Junk disposal

f) Oil-well flooding

g) Deep-well emplacement

h) Cooling-water discharge

i) Municipal waste discharge including spray irrigation

j) Liquid effluent discharge

k) Stabilization and oxidation ponds

l) Septic tanks, commercial & domestic

m) Stack and exhaust emission

n) Spent lubricants

I. Chemical Treatment

a) Fertilization

b) Chemical deicing of highways, etc.

c) Chemical stabilization of soil

d) Weed control

e) Insect control (pesticides)

J. Accidents

a) Explosions

b) Spills and leaks

c) Operational failure

Others

a)

b)

Leopold matrix

Matrices

Magnitude matrix

Time dependent matrix

Weighted matrix

Advantages of matrices

Easily modified, so many varieties have been developed and used

Relationships between development and environment made explicit

Can present a summary of anticipated impacts in an easily understood format

Can also be useful in scoping

Suggested matrix for impact determination

Disadvantages of matrices

Fail to identify potential secondary or tertiary impacts

May not provide an objective method for comparing impact magnitudes or importance

Networks

Means of establishing the causal chain of impacts

Offers a three dimensional approach to identifying impacts

Can be limited by minimal information on technical aspects

Can be visually complicated

Project ActivitiesPrimary Secondary Tertiary

C

o

m

p

o

n

e

n

t

s

o

f

A

c

t

i

v

i

t

i

e

s

Impacts

Conceptual model of impact

networks.

Networks High order linkages between causes and effects

Ca

u

s

a

l

f

a

c

t

o

r

s

S

e

w

a

g

e

s

y

s

t

e

m

M

a

c

a

d

a

m

i

z

e

d

s

u

r

f

a

c

e

s

E

x

c

a

v

a

t

i

o

n

T

r

e

e

r

e

m

o

v

a

l

Uses High-

density

apartments

Play areas

Parking areas

Removal of

topsoil

Pollution of

ground-water

Increased

surface runoff

Initial

conditions

Decreased

fertility

Degradation of

water-supply

Flooding

Death

of flora

Health

hazard

Gullying

+ erosion

Possible adverse impacts

Consequent

conditions

Third

order

effects

Landscape

gardening

Planting of

shrubs

Building

code

Corrective

actionsControl

mechanisms

A portion of Sorensons network used to display the possible consequences of various forms of land use (Sorenson, 1971)

Major land use type Residential

Identifies direct and indirect impacts

Deforestation & Loss of Biodiversity

Selective Cutting of trees for

Curio Wood

Demand for

Curios Increased

Erosion of Gorge

Access Paths

More Rafting

Licenses

River Bank Erosion

Water

Pollution

Wave

Effects

Riparian Vegetation

Reduced

River Bank & Island

Development

More Jetties &

Boat Licenses

Overgrazing Around

Water Holes

Loss of Habitat

CHANGING QUALITY OF LIFE FOR WILDLIFE

Oily discharges

from boats etc.

Increased Incidents

between Wildlife & People

Changes in

Animal Behaviour

Too small an area for animal numbers

Constriction of wildlife

movements

More Fences/

Enclosures

Expansion of Hotels/Camps

& Tourist Facilities

Increased Visitor Numbers

Visual

Impacts

Loss of Natural

Wilderness Value

Harassment

of wildlife

Disturbance of wildlife

Increasing noise levels

More Aircraft Flying Over

Falls & Town

More

Motor Vehicles

New Road & Bridge

CHANGING QUALITY OF TOURISM

Demand for Low-spending

Tourism Increases

More Direct

International Flights

Airport Upgrading

Improved Border

Facilities

Increased customs co-operation

Improved Road Links

Source: UNEP, 2002

Fisheries Water quality

Fish

Aquatic

macrophyte

Dissolved

oxygenAlgae

Nitrogen and phosphorus

concentration in water

Vegetation

buffer

Soil

Reduction in

fertilizer application

Application of

inorganic fertilizer

Network diagram of the causal chain that begins with application of inorganic fertilizers

Composite

Ecological sites

Historic sites

Visual

Health

Settlements

Noise

Severance

Water

Overlays

Advantages: Easy to understand, good display method and good siting tool

Disadvantages: Address only direct impact,

Schematic representation of Map Overlay procedures that enable delineation of most preferred road alignment (Route A) option to avoid sensitive habitats (core area of Tiger Reserve shown in grey scale) and sites of animal distribution (represented by dots)

Benefits of overlays

Conceptually simple

Provide clear presentation

Highly versatile

Appropriate for assessing impacts occurring on large areas (impacts of hydropower project on regional hydrology, landscape level impacts)

Can predict geographical location of impacts

Very useful in developing site for alternatives

Limitations

Setting boundaries of certain parameters is difficult leading to distorted information

0 102 4 6 8

NET IMPACT

Predicted Condition

Without Project

Predicted Condition With

Project10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Target Years

H

a

b

i

t

a

t

U

n

i

t

s

Habitat Suitability Index Models

Methods of analysis of impacts

Professional judgement

Quantitative mathematical models

Experiments, indices and models

Case studies

Soundness of predictions based on professional judgement

Emission of gases from stacks were expected to have deleterious

effects on plant life

The impact on the aquatic system was expected to be small

The water fluctuation resulting from the project may seriously

affect nesting and feeding grounds of water birds

Amphibians and reptiles inhabiting wetland areas would be

adversely affected by Narmada Project

Terrestrial fauna were expected to be negatively affected

through direct loss of habitat to submergence

Pipeline along the Great Indian Bustard habitat will have serious

impact on GIB breeding

Determine impact significance

Evolve criteria for assessing impact characteristics

Criteria for identifying impact significance

Duration of project related actions

Location of project site

Urgency and quickness with which the natural systems might deteriorate

Degree of irreversible damage to natural resource base and resource quality

Ecological significance criteria

Reduction in species

Habitat depletion or fragmentation

Threatened, rare and endangered species

Impairment of ecological function Disruption of food chain

Decline in species population

Alteration in predator-prey relationship

Determination of significance of negative impacts

Developing a matrix using importance value criteria for determining conservation value of habitats and species

Scaling impact assessment

Adding dimensions to impacts

631435Total score

100011Mammals (Dolphin)

110110Migratory Birds

100001Crocodiles

110101Turtles

211212Fishes

GangesHaroharKiulAjoyDamodarRupnarayan

Major riversAquatic fauna

Score:Fish: 1=10 Spp. Turtle: 0=Absent, 1=Present

Migratory: 0=Absent, 1=Presentwater fowl

Aquatic : 0=Absent, 1=Presentmammals

Scoring for wildlife values

27611311124163225Total

2

5

5

5

10

2

1

1

1

1

1

5

0

5*

0

1

1

0

1

0

1

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

2

5

0

5

0

2

1

0

1

0

1

0

0

5

10

1

0

0

1

1

2

5

5

0

10

2

1

1

0

1

0

5

5

5

10

Fishes

Turtles

Crocodiles

Migratory waterfowl

Aquatic mammal (Dolphin)

Wild-life value with CSF

Wild-life value score

Wild-life value with CSF

Wild-life value score

Wild-life value with CSF

Wild-life value score

Wild-life value with CSF

Wild-life value score

Wild-life value with CSF

Wild-life value score

Wild-life value with CSF

Wild-life value score

GangesHaroharKiulAjoyDamodarRupnarayanCSF values

Faunal groups

* Baer's pochard sighting

Scale for conservation significance

Dimensions of disturbances

Dimensions of impact

Impact prediction is ultimately dependent on

Probability of risk

Predictability of an event or a trend

Predicting impacts on biodiversity is difficult but not impossible!