Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/150043
Title: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION: COMPARATIVE CASE OF KALI GANDAKI 'A' AND MIDDLE MARSYANGDI: HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTS, NEPAL
Authors: PRANAV ACHARYA
Keywords: Dam
environment
impacts
mitigations
vegetation
wildlife
fish
implementation
significance
effectiveness
Issue Date: 2005
Citation: PRANAV ACHARYA (2005). ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION: COMPARATIVE CASE OF KALI GANDAKI 'A' AND MIDDLE MARSYANGDI: HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTS, NEPAL. ScholarBank@NUS Repository.
Abstract: Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is essentially a preventive process by which costly and irreversible mistakes could be easily avoided during the project development and implementation. It serves as an important tool in environmental planning through identification, prediction and evaluation of the possible impacts and mitigations of the development projects. This study examines the effectiveness of the environmental impacts and mitigation in the field of biological environment of a completed (Kali Gandaki 'A' Hydroelectric Project) and an under-construction (Middle Marsyangdi Hydroelectric Project) dam project located in the similar climatic and topographical environments of middle hill region of Nepal. The study is investigated through a qualitative manner and is primarily based on field verification, secondary data and informal discussions with the project authorities and local residents. It is found out that the impacts on vegetation, wildlife and fisheries resources for both the projects are similar. Direct and indirect loss of trees has significant impact on vegetation and there is no major impact on wildlife. Fisheries is the most adversely affected biological parameter in Kali Gandaki 'A' Hydroelectric Project (KG'A'HEP) and the construction of the dam has had harmful impact on the fish population, diversity and habitat. In Middle Marsyangdi Hydroelectric Project (MMHEP) likely impacts on fish are predicted. However, the proposed mitigations for these projects are not consistent and differ even for comparable impacts. Slope stabilization is the effectively implemented mitigation for vegetation loss and erosion control in these projects. Plant nursery establishment and plantation program are also effectively carried out in KG'A'HEP, whereas MMHEP is yet to start these programs. The proposed nature reserve for wildlife mitigation was a failure in KG'A'HEP. MMHEP have no such provision. In KG'A'HEP, fish hatchery and open water stocking program is successfully operating but its effectiveness is hampered due to the non implementation of fish trapping and hauling program. Fish passage structure and riparian release are other mitigations for fish but their effectiveness is questionable. MMHEP does not have the provision for fish hatchery and fish passage structure and apart from riparian release and open water stocking program, habitat management is the additional mitigation proposed for fish. It is necessary to have consistency in mitigations proposed for the dam projects of similar features. The EIA study should not exaggerate the impacts and propose ambitious mitigation measures which are not feasible to the locality. The proposed mitigations, which are dependent on each other, are needed to be implemented simultaneously. Partial implementation reduces the effectiveness of over-all mitigation. Furthermore, effectiveness of already implemented mitigations needs to be documented to facilitate the EIA study for future dam projects.
URI: http://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/150043
Appears in Collections:Master's Theses (Restricted)

Show full item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
EnvPra.pdf15.31 MBAdobe PDF

RESTRICTED

NoneLog In

Page view(s)

22
checked on Sep 18, 2020

Download(s)

4
checked on Sep 18, 2020

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.