Comparative Status of Biodiversity and Conservation Issues of Some InlandConservation Issues of Some Inland

Wetlands in Gujarat

Ketan Tatu, Ph.D. (India, USA), ( , )Senior Scientist

&C. N. Pandey, IFS

Director

GEER Foundation, Gandhinagar, Gujarat, India

About GEER Foundation• Gujarat Ecological Education & Research (GEER) Foundation

[Director- C.N. Pandey, IFS]…An autonomous organization[Director C.N. Pandey, IFS]…An autonomous organization established by Gujarat State Government in 1982.

• Dedicated to Ecological Research and Education in Gujarat state d I diand India.

• Winner of Rajiv Gandhi Award for Wildlife Conservation-2006.

• Lead Institute for Kachchh Biosphere Project (MoEF, UNESCO).

• Nodal agency for wetland studies in western India (MoEF).Nodal agency for wetland studies in western India (MoEF).

• Current (Ongoing) Research Projects– Pollination Biology of Mangroves in Gulf of Kachchhgy g– Status of corals (growth & recruitment) in Gulf of Kachchh– Study of Wetlands in Gujarat – Status survey of Dugong in India– Ecological study on Chhari Dhandh wetland (Kachchh)– Status survey of heronries in Gujarat state– Status, Distribution and Habitat Survey of Indian Bustard (Guj.)

Introduction• Gujarat (20° 1’– 24° 7’ N and 68° 4’ – 74° 4’ E),

– the westernmost state of India – richly endowed with coastal and inland wetlands

• Inland wetlands (2,092 sq. km area)– Freshwater lakes,

Irrigation reservoirs– Irrigation reservoirs, – Village ponds, – Country-side ponds, y p ,– Rice-fields, – Waterlogged areas,

M h d– Marshes and swamps

Introduction• Natural lakes and man-made reservoirs have

– large open water areas, – longer water retention, – greater diversity of habitat components & human

use.

Th t ll t bi ti f• They present excellent combination of wilderness and socio-economic aspects due to

habitat diversity– habitat diversity,– avian diversity,

plant diversities– plant diversities, – varied human uses.

Introduction• GEER Foundation has been engaged in inland &

coastal wetlands studies since over a decadecoastal wetlands studies since over a decade.

• The inland wetlands that have been studied/areThe inland wetlands that have been studied/are being studied are either natural lakes or man-made reservoirs.

• This presentation focuses on biodiversity status and conservation issues of some of them which are located in different geographical regions of Gujarat.

Study Area((Selected Wetlands & Their Geographical Regions in Gujarat)

• Nalsarovar Lake: N. Gujarat & SaurashtraNalsarovar Lake: N. Gujarat & Saurashtra

• Thol-taalav: North GujaratThol-taalav: North Gujarat

• Nava talaav: Saurashtra• Nava-talaav: Saurashtra

• Khijadiya lakes: Saurashtra• Khijadiya lakes: Saurashtra

Chh i dh dh K h hh ( i )• Chhari-dhandh: Kachchh (ongoing)

Study Area11. Nalsarovar Lake (Ahmedabad & Surendrangar dist. of N.

Gujarat & Saurashtra regions)

• GEER Foundation conducted the study from 1994 to 1998.

Located bet een 22° 78’ N to 22° 96’ N lat 71° 92’E to 72° 64’ E• Located between 22° 78’ N to 22° 96’ N lat., 71° 92’E to 72° 64’ E long.

• Located in semi arid lands of Ahmedabad and Surendranagar• Located in semi-arid lands of Ahmedabad and Surendranagar districts.

• At the distance of about 65 km from Ahmedabad city• At the distance of about 65 km from Ahmedabad city.

• A natural, shallow, freshwater lake (maximum depth of about 1.5-2 m).1.5 2 m).

Study Area - Nalsarovar (Cont.)

• Area (open water spread, shoreline and reed-bed) is large-170 sq kmlarge 170 sq. km.

• Average area under submergence in winter season is 60 sq kmsq. km.

• Area of Nalsarovar Bird Sanctuary is 120 sq. km.

• One of the 8 national wetland sites of conservation significance in Gujarat state.

Ketan Tatu Ketan Tatu

Study Area2 Thol-taalav (Mehsana district North Gujarat)2. Thol-taalav (Mehsana district, North Gujarat)

• Located between 23° 15’ and 23° 30 N’ lat. & 72° 30’ to 72° 45’ ocated bet ee 3 5 a d 3 30 at & 30 to 5long.

• Located at the distance of 25 km northwest of Ahmedabad city.

• A man-made reservoir for irrigation; built during the Gaekwad d tdynasty.

• A bird sanctuary since November 1988 with an area of 6.99 sq km )sq. km.).

• Also a national wetland site of the country.

• the water depth varied from 0.22 m in (in March) to 1.35 m (in September).

Ketan Tatu

A View of Thol-talaav

Study Area3 Khij di l k3. Khijadiya lakes(Jamnagar district, Saurashtra)

• GEER Foundation conducted the study from 1999 to 2001.

• Located at 22° 31’ 27” N lat. & 70° 07’ 17” long.

• At the distance of 12 km northeast of Jamnagar city.

• A group of three shallow, freshwater lakes and extensive marshesA group of three shallow, freshwater lakes and extensive marshes on the South shore of the Gulf of Kachchh.

• The area (about 605 ha) covering 3 freshwater lakes was declared as ildlif t i t t i M N b 1981a wildlife sanctuary in two stages in May, November 1981

• The area of Marine Sanctuary in Gulf of Kachchh constitutes the boundary towards Gulf of Kachchhboundary towards Gulf of Kachchh

• It is a site of conservation significance from Gujarat state

A View of Khijadiya-lakes

Study Area

4. Nava-talaav (Surendranagar district, Saurashtra)

• GEER Foundation had taken up the study on this wetland as a part of study of Wild Ass Sanct. LRK from 1997 to 1999.

• Located at 23°13’N lat. and 71° 44’ E long.

• At the distance of about 50 km north of Surendranagar city.

• This is a shallow, semi-natural, man-modified big reservoir at the fringe area of Little Rann of Kachchh.

• Area- 2 sq. km; maximum depth ≥s 3 m as per local farmers.

• A prioritized wetlands (with biodiversity rank 2) from Gujarat state inA prioritized wetlands (with biodiversity rank 2) from Gujarat state in the SACON’s ‘Inland Wetlands of India-Conservation Atlas’

Study AreaChh i dh dh5. Chhari-dhandh (Kachchh district, Kachchh)

• Study is ongoing in this large seasonal wetland in Banni grasslandsStudy is ongoing in this large seasonal wetland in Banni grasslands

• Chhari (meaning salt affected and Dhand = shallow wetland).

• Situated 80 km south-west of Bhuj and 30 km from Nakhtrana town in Kachchh, near the village Fulay.

• The maximum depth of Chhari Dhand is 1 5 2 m in the centre and• The maximum depth of Chhari-Dhand is 1.5-2 m in the centre and on the water chhanels (Jugal Kishore Tiwari, pers. comm.).

• It is declared as a Community Conservation Reserve by the state y yforest department in June 2008.

• Also included as one of the potential Ramsar Sites from Gujarat state in the SACON’s Atlas of Inland Wetlandsstate in the SACON’s Atlas of Inland Wetlands.

Pelicans at Chhari-dhandh

MethodologyAvian Diversity

– Monthly visits, each of 3-5 days, were made to each y , y ,wetland by a team made of a senior ornithologist and at least 2 research students.

– In large wetlands such as Nalsarovar and Chhari-dhandh, boats were used for bird study,dhandh, boats were used for bird study,

– At smaller wetlands like Thol-talaav, Khijadiya-lakes, and Nava-talaav, birds studied from multiple points located along the shore.

Methodology-Avian DiversityMethodology Avian Diversity– Waterbirds were identified using g

pairs of 8X40 binoculars and 20-60 X spotting scopes.

– For identification of waterbirds, standard field guides were used and field data were recorded inand field data were recorded in data sheets developed in advance. Population for key species was estimated usingspecies was estimated using point count method. (direct count or estimate using bloack method)method)

Methodologygy

Macrophytic Plant Diversity

– Macrophytic plants were collected and identified with the help of standard literatureidentified with the help of standard literature on flora of Gujarat.

– Herbarium sheets were prepared and/or digital pictures were taken for majority the plantspictures were taken for majority the plants surveyed.

MethodologyOther Taxa

– At Nalsarovar, Thol-talaav, Nava-talaav and Khijadiya-lakes algae were collected, preserved and identified later in the laboratory using standard literat reliterature.

– Fish inventory was carried out at Nalsarovar, Thol, N t l d Khij di i t d d lit tNava-talaav, and Khijadiya using standard literature.

– At Nalsarovar and Thol, macro-invertebrates also ,were collected and identified either in situ or in the laboratory using standard pertinent literature

(At Chhari dhandh, though the work is still in progress, these taxa are being surveyed).

Results & DiscussionResults & Discussion

Avian Diverstiy

Results & Discussion• Avian diversity - Comparative Account

– At Nal about 130 wetland-dependent/ waterbird species were– At Nal, about 130 wetland-dependent/ waterbird species were recorded (i.e.,58.8% of all the bird species recorded at the site).

– At Thol, about 100 species of waterbirds (66.6% of all birdAt Thol, about 100 species of waterbirds (66.6% of all bird species) were recorded

– Khijadiya lakes and Nava-talaav have supported 117 species of j y pp pwaterbirds (62% of all bird species) and 63 species of waterbird species (71% of all the bird species) respectively

– Though Work at Chhari-dhandh is still in progress, yet about 60 species of waterbirds recorded

– Thus, it is understood that Nalsarovar lake had maximum waterbird species richness

Results & Discussion• Though Khijadiya has supported lesser species

richness compared to Nal the difference is notrichness compared to Nal, the difference is not huge (i.e., 130 spp. at Nal vs. 117 spp. at Khijadiya)

• Not much difference in waterbird species richness of Thol-talaav and Khijadiya wetlands (i.e., 100 and o o ta aa a d jad ya et a ds ( e , 00 a d117 waterbird species respectively).

• Nava talaav has considerably lower species richness (63) as compared to Nal, Thol, Khijadiya.

Results & DiscussionMigratory species comparison:

• Nalsarovar lake supported 50 migratory waterbird spp.;

• Thol-talaav supported 30 migratory spp.;

• Khijadiya supported 42 migratory spp.;

N t l t d 30 t bi d i d• Nava-talaav supported 30 waterbird species; and

• Chhari-dhandh supported 25 migratory spp• Chhari-dhandh supported 25 migratory spp.

Results and DiscussionTh t d i ( IUCN R d Li t)• Threatened species (as per IUCN Red List)

– At Nal, eight species of theatened birds at Nalsarovar (Spotbilled Pelican, Oriental Darter, Ferruginous Duck Osprey Indian Sarus CraneFerruginous Duck, Osprey, Indian Sarus Crane, Lesser Flamingo, Painted Stork and Oriental White Ibis)

– At Khijadia too, eight species of threatened bi d d d (O i t l D t P i t dbirds were recorded (Oriental Darter, Painted Stork, Black-necked Stork, Oriental White Ibis, Lesser Flamingo, Pallas’s Fish Eagle, Osprey esse a go, a as s s ag e, Osp eyand Indian Skimmer);

Results and Discussion

• Threatened species (as per IUCN Red List)– Similarly at Thol eight species of threatened birdsSimilarly at Thol eight species of threatened birds

were recorded (Indian Sarus Crane, Sociable Lapwing, Black-bellied Tern, Oriental Darter, Oriental White Ibis Painted Stork Greater Spotted Eagle andWhite Ibis, Painted Stork, Greater Spotted Eagle and Ferruginous Duck)

– Threatened species (n = 4) at Nava-talaav included Painted Stork, Oriental White Ibis, Lesser Flamingo and Greater Spotted Eagleand Greater Spotted Eagle

– Five species of threatened species are recorded atFive species of threatened species are recorded at Chhari Dhandh

Macrophytic Plant Diversity

Results and DiscussionC ti A t f M h ti Pl t• Comparative Account of Macrophytic Plant Diversity

– At Nal, a total of 29 aquatic macrophytes were recorded (submerged & emergent);recorded (submerged & emergent);

– Nal has the most luxuriant growth of submergedNal has the most luxuriant growth of submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) mainly consisting of Naias sp. and Chara sp.

– Thol-talaav had supported not more than 10 species of aquatic/semi aquatic macrophytesspecies of aquatic/semi-aquatic macrophytes (poor species diversity as compared to Nal’s)

Results and Discussion

• Macrophytic Plant Diversity (Cont.)

– Khijadiya-lakes had about 12 species of hydrophytes indicating second highesthydrophytes, indicating second-highest macrophytis diverstiy

– Nava talaav had limited number (i.e., 4) of species of macrophytes

– At Chhari-dhandh about 4 species of macrophytes have been recorded till now (study is still inhave been recorded till now (study is still in progress).

Results & Discussion( C )(Macrophytes Cont.)

– Among submerged species, Hydrilla and g g p , yChara were found to be present in all the wetlands whose studies are completed.

– Among emergent macrophytes, Typha angustata, Scirpus spp. Cyperus spp and I f d t tIpomoea carnea were found to occur at almost all the wetlands.

– Among the aquatic creepers, Ipomea aquatica was found present at all the wetlandswetlands.

Results & DiscussionResults & Discussion

Microphytic Plant DiversityMicrophytic Plant Diversity

Results & Discussion• Nalsarovar was richly endowed with algal flora as a total of

48 species of algae of Cynophyceae, Bacillariophyceae, Chlorophyceae & Euglinophyceae familiesChlorophyceae & Euglinophyceae families.

• Only 4 genera were recorded each at Khijadiya (i.e., Chara,Only 4 genera were recorded each at Khijadiya (i.e., Chara, Nitella, Spirogyra and Oscillatoria ) and Thol-talaav (i.e., Coscinodiscus., Rhizosolenia., Gyrosigma., and Navicula.).

• At Nava-talaav, 8 genera of algae/phytoplankton were recorded.recorded.

• At Chhari-dhandh, 14 genera belonging to Chlorophyceae,. Cynophyceae, Characeae and Bacillariophyceae families (Yamini Verma of GEER Foundation, pers. comm.).

Results & DiscussionResults & Discussion

Other Taxa

Results & DiscussionM i t b t• Macro-invertebrates– Nal: 13 species of aquatic insects and 16 species of mollusks.

– Thol-talaav: 3 species of aquatic insects and 2 species of mollusks.

– Nava-talaav and Chhari-dhandh: 4 and 2 species of wetland-dependent insects were recorded respectively At Nava-talaav 4dependent insects were recorded respectively. At Nava-talaav 4 species of mollusks also were recorded.

• FishFish– 19 species of fish at Nalsarovar,

– 5 species of fish and 4 species of shrimps at Khijadiya lakes.

– In Thol-talaav and Nava-talaav wetlands 4 and 6 species of fish were recorded respectively.

– At Chhari-dhandh, preliminary investigation through interviews of local fishermen has revealed the occurrence of 5 species of fish.

Results & Discussion

Habitat Diversity & Quality

Results & Discussion

• Nalsarovar has maximum habitat diversity as there were 4 habitat/micro-habitat components

– open water area, h– shore,

– islets, and – emergent aquatic vegetation cover)– emergent aquatic vegetation cover)

– Total habitat diversity of Thol-talaav is 4 y(i.e., open water area, islets, limited shore area, swamp-like Acacia growth)

Results & DiscussionHabitat Diversity & QualityHabitat Diversity & Quality

(Cont.)

• There are 3 main habitat components in freshwater lakes of Khijadiya, i.e. emergent aquatic veg. cover, Nymphaea-choked water spread and swamp like scrubby growthwater-spread and swamp-like scrubby growth.

• Nava-talaav has 3 main habitat components (i.e., open water area, shore area, emergent vegetation cover)

• Chhari is a predominantly a shallow open water area though• Chhari is a predominantly a shallow open water area, though shore area with/ without emergent aquatic vegetation exists making the habitat diversity of Chhari to be 2.

Nymphaea-choked Waterspread of Khijadiya lake

Results & Discussion

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation(SAV)

Results & Discussion-SAV• Open water area of Nalsarovar and Chhari-dhandh

has luxuriant growth of submerged aquatic t tivegetation

• Submerged plants (macro-algae and angiosperms) g p ( g g p )like Naias, Nitella and Chara mainly contributed to the growth of SAV in Nalsarovar and Chhari-dhandh

• Though SAV is known to perform a variety of ecological functions in a wetland ecosystem

– its perpetuity might have caused some undesirable impact in a shallow inland wetlands such as Nalsarovarsuch as Nalsarovar

Floating mat of dead SAV

Results & Discussion-SAV

– Death and decay of SAV occurred regularly d t i t d ti f i (th t i ftdue to associated aquatic fungi (that is often epiphytic on SAV) and other microbes

– Death of SAV resulted in the formation of large, brown coloured floating mats of decaying SAVbrown coloured, floating mats of decaying SAV on the water surface that can be referred to as floating mats or floating scum or ‘sudds’floating mats or floating scum or sudds

– Floating mats of dead SAV might causeFloating mats of dead SAV might cause following effects:

Results & Discussion-SAVResults & Discussion SAV• reduced habitat availability for swimming y g

waterbirds preferring open water for foraging activity (e.g., ducks, geese, cormorants coots grebes)cormorants, coots, grebes)

• hindered light penetration to certain extent g pand thus might be affecting photosynthesis process in the submerged plants underneath the dead floating matunderneath the dead floating mat

• Not good from recreation point of view as it g pobstructs open water and appears like dry barren land from distance

Other Conservation Issues• Nalsarovar

– Over-grazing of emergent and submerged aquatic vegetation by buffaloes

– Disturbance to birdlife from non-oriented and non-ecoDisturbance to birdlife from non oriented and non eco friendly urban tourists

– Fishing, spread of Prosopis juliflora on the shore

• Thol-talaav

– Conflicts over water-use arising from dual management by Forest Department and Irrigation Department Cultivation in the basin dredging oil drilling by ONGC– Cultivation in the basin, dredging, oil drilling by ONGC and pending settlement issues

Other Conservation Issues• Khijadiya lakes

- Unauthorized withdrawal of water by local farmers for irrigation leading to reduction of water level during peakirrigation leading to reduction of water level during peak wintering season

- Unauthorized grazing in the sanctuary area, salinity ingress due to the lakes’ vicinity to the sea coast/g ysalt-work areas

- Invasion of Prosopis juliflora

• Nava-talaav– Extensive harvesting/grazing of emergent marshy

t tivegetation, – extensive fishing by local people &– extensive withdrawal of water using diesel engines for

irrigationirrigation

Conclusions• Irrespective of the locations of the wetlands in different

geographical regions of Gujarat state, the wetlands considered have good to excellent value as waterbirdconsidered have good to excellent value as waterbird habitats.

Nalsaro ar lake is certainl the best etland from the• Nalsarovar lake is certainly the best wetland from the view point of biodiversity considering its highest habitat, waterbird, floral, ichthyofaunal diversities.

• From the view point of waterbird species diversity, Khijadiya wetland seems to be the second-most rich wetland followed by Thol Chaari dhandh and Navawetland followed by Thol, Chaari-dhandh and Nava-talaav.

Nalsarovar and Chhari dhandh (in North Gujarat and• Nalsarovar and Chhari-dhandh (in North Gujarat and Kachchh regions respectively) have luxuriant growth of SAV as compared to the other wetlands

AcknowledgementsAcknowledgements

• The presenter is very thankful to Mr. C. N. Pandey, IFS, Director, Gujarat Ecological Education and Research (GEER) Foundation for his encouragement and support.(GEER) Foundation for his encouragement and support.

• Thanks to various researchers, especially, Ms. Janki T li f th h d k i th fi ld d i ffi fTeli for the hard work in the field and in office for various study projects.

• Thanks to Dr. Ramachandra and Lake 2008 committee at IISc for giving this opportunity of presentation.

Thanks…!!!