executive summary environmental …admis.hp.nic.in/himachal/hpridc/exsumm.pdfexecutive summary...

Himachal Pradesh State Roads Project (HPSHP) Environmental screening Report

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS FOR SCREENING AND SCOPING

1. INTRODUCTION

As a part of feasibility, an environmental screening and scoping study has been carried out for 1675 km of project roads. The entire study is reported in two volumes. Volume 1 has eight chapters with Chapter 8 as the findings and recommendations. This Chapter 10 is essentially the abstract of the study findings and recommendations. Nevertheless a summary of other chapters is also included to understand the steps taken to achieve the findings and recommendations. The volume 2 of the screening and scoping report is all relevant supporting appendices that also include the recent Government of India MOEF Gazette notification on environmental clearance and corridor specific details of public consultations.

2. ENVIRONMENTAL SCREENING AND SCOPING STUDIES

The environmental and social screening Report (ESR) is being prepared to establish the environmental sensitivity of the project roads under consideration. Therefore essentially environmental screening studies will help to prioritise the sub projects of the Himachal State Roads Project (HSRP) according to the priorities with the time required to plan and implement the projects. Study will also establish the boundaries of the further studies required (scoping) based on the proximity to ecologically sensitive and environmentally sensitive areas. The feasibility study (that includes environmental screening also) will identify approximately 800km of high priority roads, which will be subjected to detailed design and associated studies in two or more phases. The first set of 413 kms of road constitute phase 1 (both batch 1 and 2) has been identified by the State Government to include in the project. This 413 km of roads is part of the final 800 km of roads that have been identified as a part of the Feasibility study.

3. OBJECTIVES OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCREENING STUDY

As a part of the feasibility studies, this Environmental Screening Report (ESR) report has been prepared to submit to World Bank and the Public Works Department.

The objectives of the feasibility and environmental screening studies are:

To relate the proposed works with identification and prioritisation of environmental and social issues

This identification and prioritisation will provide useful information/input for assessing technical, economic, and financial feasibility of the project as well as the recommendations for modification in preliminary project design

To Identify Valued Ecosystem Components (VEC) and corridor specific major environmental issues

The VEC is defined as Social or Bio-physical component, which is of value (for any reason) in a project influenced area

The broad objectives of the EA process during the project preparation phase will be to achieve the following objectives:

• To establish priority roads based on the environmental screening studies • To establish the environmental baseline in the study area, and to identify any significant

environmental issues; • To assess these impacts and provide for early measures to address the adverse impacts by the

provision of the requisite avoidance, mitigation and compensation measures; • To integrate the environmental issues in the project planning and design;

Louis Berger Group Inc. 1


• To develop appropriate management plans for implementing, monitoring and reporting of the environmental mitigation and enhancement measures suggested.

In order to achieve these objectives, adequate physical ground surveys and other studies have been carried out along the project roads to identify Valued Eco-system Components (VEC) and corridor specific significant environmental issues (SEI). The project roads that will be taken up as a priority in various phases of the project should consider the findings of the ‘Environmental screening and scoping’ to plan and implement the projects in a phased manner for obtaining various clearances and approvals from the Central and State agencies.

4. METHODOLOGY The methodology consists of:

• Reconnaissance survey for getting an idea about the environmental issues in the region

End Dec 05-Jan 06

• Study all information related to the project that includes Terms of Reference.

Janury 2006

• Preparation of a Project summary from all available information February and revised in March 2006

• Continuous documentation of the prevailing environmental issues and the various related issues from Press as well as other sources (also required for stake holder workshop to be conducted at a later stage). Collection of secondary data from secondary sources such as published reports, text books and maps ,and other similar reports and from web pages

Jan- September 2006

• Collection of primary data by surveys Jan-Sept 2006 • Carry out stake holder community consultation together with surveys Do • Analysis of environmental screening data Sept-Oct 06 • Preparation of a screening matrix October 06 • Ranking of project corridors Oct 06 • Screening and Scoping Oct 06 • Recommendations Oct 06

The steps mentioned above have been followed through identification of relevant environmental sub parameters in biological, physical and social environment. The identified sub parameters have been assigned weightages and each project corridor has been assessed based on evaluation criteria evolved using the baseline data. The environmental parameters identified and the total score allocated have been given below in table E-1.

TABLE E-1 WEIGHTAGE ASSISIGNED FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PARAMETERS

S L N O

E N V I R O N M E N T A L S C R E E N I N G P A R A M E T E R S W E I G H T A G E A S S I G N E D

1 Physical environment

1. Slope stability issues 2. Debris disposal /Materials resources 3. Water resources 4. Soil erosion 5. Pollution (air/water/Noise)

20 3 6 3 3 5



2 Bio environment /Ecological environment

1. Number of trees within the ROW 2. Wildlife /nesting places/mod holes and other habitats 3. Forests (DPF & UPF) 4. Reserved Forests (RFs) 5. National parks and sanctuaries 6. Wetlands

60 5 10

10 15 15

3 Socio economic Environment

1. Drinking water sources 2. Schools/hospitals/college 3. Cultural properties such as Temples/shrines and other religious

And archaeological monuments and properties 4. Residential properties

20 5 5 5 5

5. APPLICABLE LEGAL, POLICIES AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAME WORK 5.1 Country requirements Lists of all most important applicable GOI regulations are provided in the Table E-2. Most relevant details are provided in the following paragraphs.

TABLE E-2 SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE REGULATIONS

A P P L I C A B L E GO I P O L I C I E S & R E G U L A T I O N S Y E A R O B J E C T I V E R E A S O N F O R

A P P L I C A B I L I T Y Environmental (protection) Act

1986 To protect and improve overall environment Environment in general

Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) notification: 1994

2002 Requirement of Environmental impact Assessment

Direct

Air (prevention and control of pollution) Act

1974 To control air pollution by controlling emission and air pollutants according to prescribed standards

Air pollution

Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act and Cess Act of 1977

1974 To control water pollution by controlling emission & Water pollutants as per the prescribed standards

Water pollution

Indian Forest act 1980 Protection of forests Forests The Wildlife (protection) Act 1972 Protection of Wildlife Wildlife Ancient Monuments and Archaeological sites & Remains Act

1958 Conservation of Cultural and Historical remains found in India

Archaeological remains

The Land Acquisition Act 1894 & 1989

Set out rule for acquisition of land by Government. Land acquisition

Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) rules 2000

2001 Noise pollution regulation and controls Control of Noise pollution

Public liability insurance Act 1991 Assessment of hazardous materials and accident hazards Health and safety

Biological Diversity Act 2000 disclosure of species survey or collection activities to the National Biodiversity Authority Biodiversity

EIA notification 2006 2006 For impact assessment of infrastructural projects

Environmental clearance

International Environmental regulations in which India is a signatory

International environmental issues such as emission of green house gases

Global environmental issues

With the very recent Gazette GOI notification of September 14 of this year, on environmental clearance, the State Highways are in general classified as Category B projects, however as earlier all eco-sensitive roads are category A projects that require mandatory central clearance. In fact category B



projects are also reviewed by MOEF by constituting a State level Environmental Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA). Besides this there are several other environmental requirements of the State and central sect oral and cross sect oral laws, rules and regulations. 5.1 World Bank Environmental Requirements Four out of ten World Bank safeguard polices are triggered by this project. Therefore implementation of the project in tune with these triggered safeguard polices are important. Scoping for this part has been provided at the end of the recommendations.

5.2 Environmental Clearance requirements The State level clearances are required prior to the Government of India (GOI) clearance. The GOI clearance is to be obtained prior to the World Bank Approval. Details are provided in Table E-3.

TABLE E-3 ENVIRONMENTAL APPROVALS AND CLEARANCES REQUIRED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION PHASE

EN V . ISSUES

MOEF F O R C A T E G O R Y

A P R O J E C T S

PCB & SE IAA

STATE FOREST

DEPT

WILDL IFE DEPT

WB PHED & WATER

R ESO UR CES DEPT

L O C A L B O D I E S

Forest Yes for the forest land requirements

Yes Forest clearance , approval for road side tree cutting

and land requirements

Clearance from Wildlife

warden

Approval as per OP

4.01,4.04,

No No

Wildlife Yes Yes Clearance required

Clearance required

Approval as per OP

4.01,4.04

No No

Environment

Yes EIA/EMP required

YES No No Approval as per OP 4.01

No No

Air/water/noise related

No Yes, According to water noise & Air Act

No No Approval as per OP 4.01

No No

Water (impacts as

well as construction requirement

s)

No Yes No No Approval as per OP 4.01

Drinking water resources/Water for

construction,

Yes

Debris disposal

No Yes No No Approval as per OP 4.01

For disposal sites

Land acquisitions

and rehabilitatio

n

Yes (RAP required)

Yes For Forest land No Approval under OP 4.20 4.11 and 4.30

No Yes ( e.g.

parking areas)

If the cost of the Bypasses considered in this project are more than INR 1000 million (100 Crores), such bypasses would be considered as a new project and there fore require environmental clearances as per the recent September 14 MOEF notification.



6. BASE LINE ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS Due to the project location in a fragile environmental back ground, most of the basic environmental parameters were explained using available thematic maps. In all cases an overlay of the 43 project corridors over the respective thematic maps were used to establish the various baseline parameters. Further the Valued ecosystem components have been segregated for the project.

6.1 Valued Ecosystem components The Valued Environmental Components (VEC) are defined as social or Bio physical component of an environment which is of value (for any reason) in a Project Influenced Area (PIA). Project influenced area in the case of road project is a zone covering seven km on both sides from the centre line of the project road. Some of the environmental components do have impacts to as far as seven kms. This could be water pollution or air pollution that can be carried out to far way distances. In yet some other cases, this is even more as in the case of wildlife, debris disposal and for material sources. Based on the various studies of consultants, the following VECs have been identified in this project. Physical environment

• Disposal of debris /materials resources • Slope stability issues • Water resources (Surface and Ground water) • Soil erosion • Air/water /Noise pollution

Bio environment /Ecological environment

• Number of trees within the ROW • Wildlife /nesting places/mod holes and other habitats • Forests (DPF & UPF) • Reserved Forests (RFs) • National parks and sanctuaries • Wetlands

Socio Economic Environment

• Drinking water sources • Schools/hospitals/college (declared silence zones) • Cultural properties such as temples/shrines and other religious and Archaeological monuments and properties • Residential properties • Commercial properties • Tourism locations

The stake holder consultations have been used to collect information on the screening criteria’s mentioned above. Table E-4 Summary of the Issues raised, during the consultations



Main issues raised during project specific consultations • Provision for new parking areas

• Public comfort station

• Rain shelter

• Bus bays

• Bypasses and realignments

• Drainage

• Street lights

• Road should be more safe for the road users

• Road side tree planting

• Boundary wall to separate from the traffic corridor for schools

• Provision for Noise reduction for silence zones

• Affected temples should be properly compensated

• Develop valley view locations

• Retaining walls

• Breast walls

• Foot path

• Speed breakers

• Sign boards

• Crash barriers/parapet

• Dust control

• Proper compensation should be paid to the PAPs

• Water for Constrution is not available for many roads-consider alternatives

• Wildlife presence in many corridors

• Monkey menace

• Trees should be planted

• Minimise tree cutting

Appendix 6.5 of the Environmental screening Report is the complete corridor wise descriptions of the consultations and the main issues. Table E-5 to E-8 are the baseline characteristics of the 43 project corridors. Since these tables are important and lengthy these are attached at the end of the chapter but not as appendices. Similarly the tables E-9 to E-14relating to biological and socio economic environment are also provided at the end of the Chapter.

6.2 Biodiversity concerns The physical field surveys coupled with institutional consultations and local community consultations revealed several important biodiversity concerns along the project road. Most important consultations are with that of MOEF (Himalayan Research institute, Shimla), DFOs and forest range officers. Secondary information from reports (e.g Status of environment in HP March 2000) are also available to understand the issue. To resolve this conflict, it will be required to carry out a study with the help of a wildlife/forestry expert in order to streamline what the highways project can contribute to the wildlife traffic conflict along the project roads. Such an attempt is expected to bring in some earmarked budgetary provisions for wildlife conservation. The consultant’s team during various engineering, environmental and social surveys has spotted considerable faunal presence along the project roads. These include but not limited to the following: Leopard, Monkeys, Mongoose, Flying Squirrel, Indian shag, Peacock, Jingle Murga, Pheasants, Middle egrets , Snake, Lizard, Owl, Vulture, Spotted deer, Langur and Jackal.

7 Environmental impact Evaluation

Based on the Valued Ecosystem Components using the methodology adopted the environmental screening weight age matrix has been prepared and provided as Table E-15(A-3 sheet). Similarly a qualitative approach has been carried out and this is provided in Table E-16 (a) to (c). The result of the qualitative approach is provided using colour codes in 10.17.



Table E-16 Qualitative impact of various environmental attributes (a) Bio-Environment

BIO-ENVIRONMENT Corridor No Features Category

1 More no. of trees(3514) Medium 2 More no. of trees(4367) , 26.5 km Protected Forests Medium 3 Data not Available High 4 No reserved forests, Less Protected Forests Low 5 Naina Devi sanctuary, Govindsagar sanctuary, 5 km protected forests High 6 24 Km reserved forests, no Protected Forests, no sanctuary High 7 23 Km protected forests Medium 8 38 km reserved forests, Simbalwara Sanctuary Very High 9 16 km protected forests Medium

10 Data not Available High 11 Data not Available High 12 2 Sanctuaries Nainadevi sanctuary and 1 wetland, protected forests Very High 13 3 km reserved forests, Pongdam wetland Medium 14 Data not Available Medium 15 Reserved Forests, Pongdam sanctuary, wetland, Protected Forests Very High 16 Data not Available High 17 1 km protected forests, no reserved forests or sanctuaries Low 18 9 km reserved forests, 2 km protected forests, Pongdam wetland High 19 15 km protected forests Medium 20 11 km reserved forests, no protected forests or sanctuaries High 21 6 km reserved forests, More no. of trees High 22 very less protected forests Low 23 very less protected forests Low 24 15 km reserved forests High 25 5 km protected forests, Shikaridevi sanctuary, more no. of trees High 26 8 km protected forest, Govindsagar wetland Medium 27 1Sanctuary- Pong Dam sanctuary , Reserved Forests, 2024 Trees Very High 28 31 km Reserved forests, 14 km protected forests High 29 No Protected or reserved Forests Low 30 24 km Reserved forests, Chail sanctuary, Protected Forests Medium 31 4.5 km protected forests High 32 5 km Reserved forests, Protected Forests High 33 Data not Available High 34 Data not Available High 35 Data not Available High 36 Data not Available High 37 28 km Reserved forests, 2 km Protected Forests High 38 12 km Reserved forests, Shilli sanctuary, 2 km Protected Forests Very High 39 Data not Available High 40 Data not Available High 41 4 km protected forests Medium 42 7 km protected forests Medium 43 Data not Available Low



(b) Physical environment Physical environment

Corridor No Features Category

1 more waste disposal sites, Sutlej river, more water bodies High 2 less no. of waste disposal sites, 2 rivers, 2 ponds Medium 3 Data not Available High 4 more waste disposal sites , Sutlej river, not prone to soil erosion Medium 5 Very less waste disposal areas, Sutlej river Medium 6 Very less no. of waste disposal sites, Jejuna, Markanda rivers, Highly erosion prone area High 7 Less no. of waste disposal sites, Sutlej river, less no. of water bodies, erosion prone Medium 8 waste disposal site less, Jamuna river, 5 streams , more erosion prone, seismicity high High

9 Less waste disposal sites, Less water resources, no erosion, High seismicity

Medium 10 Data not Available High 11 Data not Available High 12 waste disposal areas very less, Sutlej river, 2 lakes, seismicity high High 13 More water bodies, Beas river, 4 streams, 2 ponds, erosion less, seismicity high High 14 Data not Available Medium

15 Waste disposal sites less, More water resources (Beas river, 3 streams), earthquake very high, less erosion Very High

16 Waste disposal sites less, Less no. of water bodies, Erosion very less Medium 17 Waste disposal sites less, Less no. of water bodies, Erosion very less Medium 18 Waste disposal sites less, Less no. of water bodies (Beas river, 4 pond), Erosion very less Medium 19 More waste disposal sites , More water bodies, High erosion, high seismicity Very High

20 Less no. of waste disposal areas, More no. of water bodies (Markanda river), Highly prone to erosion, Medium

21 Less no. of waste disposal areas, More no. of water bodies (Markanda, 1 stream), Less erosion, Seismicity high Medium

22 Less no. of waste disposal areas, More no. of water bodies (Sutlej, 3 Streams), Less erosion, Seismicity high Low

23 Less no. of waste disposal areas, More no. of water bodies, Less erosion, Seismicity high Low 24 more waste disposal sites , Less erosion, less water bodies High 25 Waste disposal sites less, Beas river, 6 streams, not prone to erosion, Seismicity high Medium

26 Less waste disposal sites, less water bodies (Sutlej, 1 stream), Seismicity high, very little erosion Low

27 Less waste disposal sites, Less water bodies (Beas river), Not prone to erosion, High Seismicity Medium

28 Waste disposal sites less, Water resources more (Sutlej river), High prone to erosion, high Seismicity High

29 Waste disposal sites less, Water resources less, High prone to erosion, high Seismicity Low

30 more waste disposal sites , more water bodies (Jamuna river, 6 streams), Not erosion prone, high Seismicity Very High

31 More waste disposal sites ,Bear river, 3 Major streams, high erosion prone and high Seismicity Very High

32 more waste disposal sites Medium 33 Data not Available High 34 Data not Available High 35 Data not Available High 36 Data not Available High

37 Less waste disposal sites, More water resources (Sutlej, Beas, 3 streams) ,High erosion, High Seismicity High




38 More waste disposal sites, More water bodies (Jamuna, 8 streams), High erosion prone Very High 39 Data not Available High 40 Data not Available High 41 Less waste disposal areas, less water bodies (Sutlej river), less erosion prone Low 42 Less waste disposal areas, less water bodies (Sutlej river), less erosion prone Low 43 Data not Available Low

(c) Socio –Economic Environment Socio Economic Environment


1 98 drinking water sources, 15 cultural properties, access to many tourist locations Medium 2 More no. (74) cultural properties, Lathiani and govindsagar tourist places High 3 Data not Available High 4 Nalagarh Fort Medium 5 Naina devi temple High 6 3 tourist location, Kwgdhar temple and gurudwara at nahan Medium 7 Machyal lake, 2 temples Medium 8 Paonta sahib gurudwara, Bhuddhist monastery, sirmouri taal Archaeological site Very High

9 Katoch Mahal Palace Archeological site, sankat Morchan temple at sujanpur, 62 other temples , sujanpur tourist site Very High

10 Data not Available High 11 Data not Available High 12 Naina Devi temple , naina devi, Bkhakra tourist locations Very High 13 Paonta sahib gurudwara, Bhuddhist monastery, sirmouri taal Archaeological site High 14 Data not Available Medium

15 Managar Forts, 4 major tourist locations, Mata Balamukhi temple, Nag Mandir, Shiv cave, 116 drinking water sources, Very High

16 Kotla fort, Data not Available High 17 Kandrour bridge asias' highest Medium 18 Chintpurni and Sheetal matha temples, 17 temples, 6 sensitive zones, industial area High 19 Major industrial area, 3 forts, 6 sensitive zones High 20 Fossil park at near Kala Amb medium 21 Trilokpur tourist place Medium 22 cement plant at Dehni Low 23 Sl. No major structures Low 24 2 major temples,3 major tourist locations, sulphur hot water spring at Tattapani Very High 25 Chai chowk tourist place High 26 Access to Baba Balak nath temple near Barsar Medium 27 Haripur heritage site, Guler Fort, 3 tourist places Very High 28 Archaeological site at Virat, Hatkoti mata temple , 3 tourist places Very High 29 No major structures Low 30 Chail Palace, Sidh Baba Temple, 3 tourist places High 31 Bajaura Temple (ASI site), 2 tourist places High 32 Sainj old place, two tourist locations Medium 33 Data not Available High 34 Data not Available High 35 Data not Available High 36 Data not Available High



Corridor Features Category No 37 2 temples, 2 tourist locations, Larji and Jalori pass, Sainj Palace Medium 38 Sainj palace, Balag Shiv temple Medium 39 Data not Available High 40 Data not Available High 41 Lathiani bridge and Govindsagar lake tourist places Medium 42 Govindsagar lake tourist place Medium 43 Data not Available Low

The table-E-17 shows the result of the final qualitative assessment of various environmental tributes. All roads with high scores on ecological impacts are high. Table E-17 Final Qualitative assessment of the Environmental Impacts

Environmental Impact Analysis Corridor

No Bio Environment Socio-Economic Environment Physical Environment RESULT

1 Medium Medium High MEDIUM 2 Medium High Medium MEDIUM 3 High High High HIGH 4 Low Medium Medium MEDIUM 5 High High Medium HIGH 6 High Medium High HIGH 7 Medium Medium Medium MEDIUM 8 Very High Very High High VERY HIGH 9 Medium Very High Medium HIGH 10 High High High HIGH 11 High High High HIGH 12 Very High Very High High VERY HIGH 13 Medium High High HIGH 14 Medium Medium Medium MEDIUM 15 Very High Very High Very High VERY HIGH 16 High High Medium HIGH 17 Low Medium Medium MEDIUM 18 High High Medium HIGH 19 Medium High Very High HIGH 20 High Medium Medium HIGH 21 High Medium Medium MEDIUM 22 Low Low Low LOW 23 Low Low Low LOW 24 High Very High High VERY HIGH 25 High High Medium HIGH 26 Medium Medium Low MEDIUM 27 Very High Very High Medium VERY HIGH 28 High Very High High VERY HIGH 29 Low Low Low LOW 30 Medium High Very High VERY HIGH 31 High High Very High VERY HIGH 32 High Medium Medium MEDIUM 33 High High High HIGH 34 High High High HIGH 35 High High High HIGH



36 High High High HIGH 37 High Medium High HIGH 38 Very High Medium Very High VERY HIGH 39 High High High HIGH 40 High High High HIGH 41 Medium Medium Low MEDIUM 42 Medium Medium Low MEDIUM 43 Low Low Low LOW

8 SCREENING STUDY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

8.1 Summary of the screening Results The Table E-18 provides the over all screening study findings such as score of project routes, ranking and priority from environmental perspective.



Table E-18 Ranking of project routes from environmental considerations

Corridor No. Corridor name Weightage Sensitivity

Rank Priority based on

Environmental angle

1 Mehatpur Una Mubarikpur Daulatpur H.P. boundary Road (Section Una to Amb) 42.5 9

28

2 Una Aghar Barsar Jahu Bhambla Mandi-upto Ner Chowk road* 43 7 30

3 Gaggal Chetru Dharamshala Mcleodganj (Section Gaggal to Dharamshala) 8 30

8

4 Shimla -Kunihar Ramshehar Nalagarh Ghanoli (from Nalagarh to HP Boundary) 30 19

24

5 Naina Devi Kaula Da Toba 22 23 13

6 Kumarhatti-Sarahan-Nahan (Dosarka) 34 14 12

7 Jogindernagar Sarkaghat Ghumarwin Road (except NH 70 section) 34 14 32

8 Lal Dhank Paonta Rajban Hatkoti (Section LalDhank to Shillai except NH) 40.5 10

22

9 Hamirpur Sujanpur Tihra Thural Maranda 37 12 5

10 Dharamshal Dadh Palampur Holta Chadihar Sandhol (Section Dharamshala to Palampur) 8 30

6

11 Dadh Malan 8 30 16

12 Swarghat Naina Devi Bhakra (Section Kanchimore to Bhakra) 42.5 9 2

13 Kaloha Pragpur Daliara Dadasibba Sansarpur (Section Kaloha to Nehranpukhar) 52.5 3

15

14 Damtal Kandrori Indora Khatiar 40.5 10 17

15 Mubarikpur Dehra Ranital Kotla road (Section Dehra to Ranital and Ranital to Kotla) 63 1

18

16 Ranital Kotla road (Section Dehra to Ranital and Ranital to Kotla) 14 27 21

17 Bamta Kandrour 4 31 40

18 Bharwain Chintpurni Kandrori Damtal (Section Bharwain to Sansarpur Terrace) 40 11

9

19 Shallaghat Arki Kunihar Barotiwala 30 19 10

20 Markanda (Khajurna) bridge Suketi park Kala Amb Trilokpur 34.5 13 34

21 Kala Amb Trilokpur 47.5 5 11

22 Panjera Bharatgarh 31.5 16 41

23 Panjera Dehni 22.5 22 42

24 Shimla Tattapani Mandi (Section Dhalli to Tatapani) 24 21 3

25 Chail chowk Gohar Pandoh (Section Dadour to Gohar) 34.5 13 31

26 Barsar Deothsidh (Section Barsar to Shahtalia) 42.5 9 23

27 Jawalamukhi Dehra Jawali Raja-ka-Talab (Section Dehra to Raja-ka-Talab) 56 2

20

28 Theog Kothkhai Hatkoti Rohroo 43 8 19

29 Rohroo Chirgaon Sandhasu 17 24 43

30 Kufri Chail Kandaghat 51 4 7

31 Mandi Kataula Bajaura 34.5 13 14

32 Sanij Chopal Nerwa Shallu (Section Sanij to Chopal). 28 20 35

33 Bhawarna Lambagaon Jaisinghpur 34 14 36

34 Nurpur Lahru Tunnuhatti 30.5 18 25

35 Shahpur Sihunta Chowari Jot Chamba Bharmour (Section Draman to Chowari) 31 17

39

36 Banikhet Dalhousie Khajjiar (Section Banikhet to Dalhousie) 16.5 25 4

37 Sainj Anni Banjar Aut (Section Sainj to Jalori and Aut to Banjar) 45 6 29

38 Chailla Sainj Neripul Yashwantnagar Ochhghat Kumarhatti 32 15 33

39 Kullu Nagar Manali (Left Bank) 40.5 10 1

40 Ghatasni -Bhubhu -Jot Kullu 11 28 38

41 Approach to proposed Lathiani bridge 9 29 26

42 Swarghat -Bilaspur via Jagatkhana(New alignment) 15 26 37

43 Dharampur -Kasauli 37 12 27



8.2 Major issues identified The overall geographic project setting is in a fragile environment especially with regards to eco-sensitivity. Nevertheless except three road corridors, all project roads are the existing roads and their improvement also may not result in an immediate or in near future significant increase in traffic. Even then if the widening option is from single lane to double lane, this should be considered as a major improvement proposal affecting the fragile hill slopes and other environmental components. Major Biodiversity issues that has identified are the following; • Although there are declared wildlife sanctuaries and National parks; wildlife presence is found in all

forest categories therefore in almost all areas of the HP. There are no physical barriers /boundaries available for wildlife.

• None of Wildlife sanctuaries have accurate maps to determine the boundary with respect to the project corridors

• Categorisation of the forests to PF (DPF & UPF) does not mean any thing relating to wildlife presence or absence

• Therefore in Himachal Pradesh the classification of RF as eco-sensitive and PF as not eco-sensitive is false and void. All Indian states cannot be seen with one eye as the legal eco-sensitivity of RF alone in HP is found un-acceptable in the case of HP.

• All PF and in many cases the private forests are also eco-sensitive in reality

• Even with moderate population, the pressure on the forest resources (biodiversity issues) are increasing leading to many floral and faunal species classified as endangered.

• Data relating to the road traffic-wildlife conflict leading to death of the wildlife is not available or such incidence could be rare.

• Since the Himachal has six million populations, they need earmarked areas for infrastructure development. To avoid conflict with the developmental requirement and the wildlife conservation practical and implementable strategies need to be formulated and implemented.

• Wildlife –human interface is a prevailing environmental issue in HP. (Ref: Forest Dept Website). There are many cases of compensation by the Government to the victims.

• Leopard menace is reported in the State Environmental report 2000 as a serious issue

• Traffic –monkey conflict is a prevailing issue in the State

• Excellent surface condition of the Project roads after completion could lead to very high rate of road accidents.

• Design speed of 50 to 80 kph will not be observed by the traffic communities. For such design speeds the normal speed would be some thing around 80 -100kph leading to high rate of accidents including wildlife.

• Surveys of India Maps are not available for many roads. For few roads these are partially available

• Population density is too low, therefore all isolated areas with trees are visually similar to forest

Other issues are the following

• Considerable forest land would be required for widening and strengthening of project roads

• Impact of flora and fauna including cutting of large number of trees during construction and Operation



• Impact on the drinking water sources and water bodies

• Stabilisation of slopes and the debris disposal would be a major issue

• Vehicular pollution during construction

• Drainage related issues

• Impacts on silence zones such as schools and, hospitals

• Direct impact on the community resources such as buildings and shops

• There are heavy control on the crushers in the old Himachal areas

8.3 Major Environmental screening findings The major findings of this screening study area the following; • The HPSRP is a category A project by World Bank categorisation

• Includes both category A and B sub projects of GOI based on the legally defined eco sensitive areas.

• Project influenced area of all roads are rich in floral and faunal diversity.

• HP has considerable area of mono crop type forests/Forest Plantations (Pine forest, Deodar forests etc are two examples)

• Wildlife issues together with forestry issues are the most important issue identified.

• In principle, most of the forest areas regardless of its status are ecologically sensitive with its floral and faunal diversity. At the same time the PF areas are by its present classification are legally not eco-sensitive

• Almost 90% of the ecological impacts are in the operational phase. This makes the importance of a joint approach by forestry and road sector for sustainable development of the region.

• Reasons for less fatality could be due to three factors. 1) most of the vehicle are running at very low speed 2) Since the ambient noise level is very low, the noise of approaching vehicles are very loudly heard from afar. 3) The splashing lights of the slow moving vehicles along the winding Himalayan roads.

• Leopard menace and monkey menace and other wildlife crop damage (mostly by wild pig) issues are the visible part of a larger issue. There are cases of lifting of domestic animals form the villages.

• Hardly any difference with the private and forest land in many locations. Local people even call private forest for areas under private ownership.

• None of the Project corridor falls within 7 kms distance of two National parks of the State.

• Ten road corridors (corridor no 5, 8, 12, 15, 25, 27, 30, 36, 38 & 39) out of 43 were found to be located within one or more of wildlife sanctuaries (Table E-19). All these Corridors require GOI-MOEF Clearance.

• 14 corridors (6, 8, 13, 15, 18, 20, 21, 24, 27, 28, 30, 32, 37 and 38) out of 43 have Reserved Forests with in the 14 km impact corridors. These are the most eco-sensitive corridors. All these corridors are Category A and require GOI -MOEF clearance.

• Eight corridors out of 43 corridors (2, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 26, 27, 39) have Wet lands in the near by areas.

• Careful surveys are required to locate bird nesting places ( e.g. Una- Amb and Una – Nerchowk such locations have been already identified)



Table E-19 is the list of most eco sensitive corridors as it is located adjacent to the Wildlife sanctuaries.

Table E-19 List of corridors that is adjacent to the Wildlife sanctuaries Corridor No. Corridor name Name of Sanctuaries Area (sq. Km) 5 Naina Devi Kaula Da Toba Naina Devi and Govind sagar

sanctuary(11.20 km within 7 km range) Naina devi sanctuary-123 Govind sagar sanctuary 100

8 Lal Dhank Paonta Rajban Hatkoti (Section LalDhank to Shillai except NH)

Simbalwara Sanctuary (7 Km Range) 19

12 Swarghat Naina Devi Bhakra (Section Kanchimore to Bhakra)

Naina Devi And Govind Sagar Sanctuary(11.80 Km Within 7 Km Range)

Naina devi sanctuary-123 Govind sagar sanctuary -100

15 Mubarikpur Dehra Ranital Kotla road (Section Dehra to Ranital and Ranital to Kotla)

Pong Dam Sanctuary(20.55 Km Within 7 Km Range)

307

25 Chail chowk Gohar Pandoh (Section Dadour to Gohar)

Shikari Devi Sanctuary(3 Km Road Within 7 Km Range)

72

27 Jawalamukhi Dehra Jawali Raja-ka-Talab (Section Dehra to Raja-ka-Talab)

Pong Dam Sanctuary, Maharanapratap Sanctuary(18.82 Km Of Road Within 7 Km Range In Pong Dam Sanctuary)

Pong Dam- 307

30 Kufri Chail Kandaghat Chail Wildlife Sanctuary(11.82 Km Within 7 Km Range )

109

36 Banikhet Dalhousie Khajjiar (Section Banikhet to Dalhousie)

Kalatop Khajjiar Sanctuary, 69

38 Chailla Sainj Neripul Yashwantnagar Ochhghat Kumarhatti

Shilli Sanctuary 2

39 Kullu Nagar Manali (Left Bank) Manali Sanctuary, (6.18 Km Within 7 Km Range) Kais Sanctuary(4.3 Km Within 7 Km Range)

Manali-32, Kais-14

8.4 Findings from consultations • Consultation with local forest officials also indicated the presence of wildlife around the project roads.

Local community consultation also indicate the presence of wildlife all around the project roads

• Most of the people were not happy with the road infrastructure

• They need improvement of the roads, parking areas, rain shelters, minimum impact to land and properties

• Forest officials informed that heavy machinery should not be used in Forest areas

• Proper traffic management required to avoid high noise levels along the forest areas

• For monkey menace, awareness programmes shall be conducted to avoid feeding of monkeys along the road

• After construction, maintenance of the road should be carried out

• Local institutions are willing to accommodate the debris disposal in almost all cases

• Boundary wall and a gate should be provided to schools to avoid accidents

8.5 Recommendations 8.5.1 General recommendations • With regards to Biodiversity issues, a well coordinated effort monitored by a central agency could be a

very healthy set up for the sustainable development.

• A marginal increase of width from Single lane to intermediate lane or to simple heavy maintenance with



safety precautions such as lining and signing, safety barricading in all unsafe locations and proper drainage with general EMP measures would be more acceptable to have least impact on the environment. This could be true with the projected traffic scenario also.

• The environmental assessment has to be carried out so as to meet the requirements of the World Bank and GOI MOEF.

• Detailed surveys with the help of the design drawings need to be carried out as a part of the EA process and for the EIA/EMP documents

• Biodiversity Impact assessment should be taken up for all project roads irrespective of its legal settings

• Only strengthening treatment is recommended for roads which are near to Wildlife sanctuaries

• Public consultation should be given high weight age to include the requirements of the local communities. This should be an integral part so as to address the community concerns, enhance project benefits, and to ensure transparency.

• Widening should be concentric as far as possible with adjustments at places (side widening options to left or right) to minimise or to reduce or to avoid the environmental and social impacts

• Representative environmental monitoring shall be conducted at selected locations to establish bench marks

• Comprehensive contractual, design, and budgetary provisions have to be made in contract specific EMPs of construction packages for avoidance, minimisation, management or enhancement of various environmental components likely to be impacted due to widening and other road works

• A working effective systematic supervision and monitoring mechanism need to be developed as a part of environmental management to ensure compliance of the designed environmental protection plans, adoption of corrective measures when and where ever required to make the measures environmentally sustainable

• Environmental enhancement measures such as rain shelters, parking areas and enhancement of cultural properties along each corridors need to be integrated with the road widening and improvement component as well as the road strengthening component. The community concerns need to be addressed in this regard by proper dialogue with the local communities.

• Highway design should consider all consultation outputs as provided in the consultation section and its Appendices.

• Institutional strengthening of PWD/HPRIDC needs to be taken along with the project for managing, monitoring and supervising environmental concerns.

• All institutional arrangements including training requirements and modules for the project needs to be identified and developed as a part of the EA Process

• All Environmental clearances as explained in Chapter 3 of ESR should be in place for the construction phase.

8.5.2 The impact management matrix The impact management matrix for identified impacts has provided Table E-20.



Table E-20: Impact Management Matrix S. No. Environmental attribute Mitigation measure 1 BIO Environment The emphasis will be to minimize the biodiversity impacts. This needs to be taken care of during planning and execution stage. Adequate mitigation measures will be required to compensate for any adverse impact

(a) Wild life (a) Adequate measures to be incorporated in highway design at locations of Wildlife crossings for all 43 corridors after comprehensive and detailed Biodiversity Impact assessment (BIA) studies. This also includes avifauna and their nesting places. Numerous nesting places have been identified along the Mehatpur-Una- Amb and Una- Nerchowk both on trees as well as in the mud holes.

(b) Reserve/ Protected Forest (b) Avoidance and minimal impact on the forest areas to be

planned and designed under the project.

(c) Compensatory plantation is needed as per Forest act. NPV cost needs to be paid to the forest department according to the Supreme court Order.

(c) Sanctuaries (d) Management and mitigation measures needed to

minimize wildlife crossings at sanctuaries close to project routes. The details shall be provided in the EA report and necessary engineering designs and plans should be provided in the EMP reports.

(d) Impact on trees (e) Trees should be saved through proper alignment planning

and engineering design.

(f) Compensatory Plantation to be taken up for the floral cover that will be lost due to the project.

(e) Trees with platforms (g) Trees with platform constructed need to avoid as far as possible. If required to cut community consultations should be carried out at the respective locations. The alignment should be finalized in such a way that trees on at least one side can be saved.

2 Physical Environment Most of the adverse impacts on Physical environment can be managed/mitigated through good construction management, for which suitable measures need to be built into the EMP.

(a) Debris disposal and Material Source (a) After the construction use, remaining excavated material from the hill ward side widening should be properly disposed of in as per a debris disposal plan. All haul roads should be properly maintained. The vehicle carrying construction materials should be covered.

(b) Soil erosion (b) Design needs to consider soil erosion protection measures. The details and site specific measures will be suggested in the EIA/EMP.

(c) Drainage (c) Highway design needs to take into consideration for provision of drainage particularly in settlements, areas prone to submergence and in other areas where road will be raised.



(d) Noise levels (d) No construction work during night time should be allowed in habitations, reserved forest and near the wildlife areas and sanctuaries. All construction machinery should be maintained to minimize noise generation. Workers working in high noise zones should be provided protective measures. Noise mitigation measures need to be provided at noise sensitive receptors.

(e) Water bodies (e)Mitigation measures to avoid spillage of debris into water bodies and pollution during construction needs to be developed during the EMP. Similarly measures to prevent disposal of construction waste near water bodies needs to be indicated in EMP.

(f0 Air Quality (f) During construction, control on dust generation is needed. All construction machinery should conform to accepted emission norms. During operation adequate plantation needs to be developed in the Row.

3 Socio-Economic environment Most of the likely impacts on Socio economic environment need to be managed through proper design, relocation plans and public consultation.

(a) School/Hospital/Colleges (b) Drinking water sources (C) Other Common Property Resources (CPRs)

(a) School, hospital and colleges in COI may be impacted. Highway design should explore possibility to save these as far as possible. In case these need to be relocated, then new construction should be completed prior to the demolition of the structure. Also measures to prevent noise pollution and ensure safety of children and other road users need to be looked into.

(b) Since most of the drinking water sources will be impacted especially along the widening corridors, these shall not be demolished until permanent alternative source of drinking water is provided to the local communities. No water source should be demolished with out the consent of the local communities (c)Same as explained in (a) above.

(d) Residential and commercial Properties (c) Same as explained in (a) above. SA and RAP will address the issue

8.5.3 Corridor specific recommendations

a. The beautiful Kulu- Manali project road needs to include in the widening and strengthening programme. This is a very important road from the tourism point of view

b. The Theog –Rohru should provide some additional space for the seasonal Cauliflower marketing place at Chainage 6 along the project road Theog

c. Una- Amb road should have vibration resistant design at the Archaeological structure Gurudwara at Chainage 18.000

d. Una- Nerchowk road The bird nesting places along Una Nerchowk and Una-Amb road shall be avoided

e. Theog-Rohru road-Vibration resistant design for the Archaeological monument at Rohru f. In all snow fall corridors, critical locations should be provided with safety measures. There shall

be signboards showing the expected length of snowfall affected sections in the beginning and end of the project roads (These corridors are 24,31,32,36,37, and 39)

g. Dehra- Raja ka Talab- If widening takes place along this road, some of the PAPs are very much concerned that they have been once rehabilitated for the Bird Sanctuary. This needs to be considered during the widening option.



h. Lal Dhank- Shillai- There area numerous quarries and crushers near Sataun located along the project road. Severe dust problem and noise problem have been identified along the corridor. During the construction period this needs to be considered

i. Hamirpur-Maranda- Narbadeshwar temple in the central list of Archaeological structures is located within ten metre of the project corridor at Sujanpur-Tira. This needs to be taken in to consideration while improving the road.

j. Sainj-Jalori pass - along this section, for about six km stretch after Luhri, the road is located immediately adjacent to the river course of Satluj. The local people informed that every year the section is washed away. Therefore they need a bypass at this location. This road is also prone to cloud burst.

k. Sanij- Jalori, Draman- Chowari and Nurpur-Tunhatti (three Corridors) – These are prone to severe land slides at specific locations. Along Draman-Chowari after Lahru for 3-4 kms and in Nurpur-Tunhatti after Sanjha Nalla for 3-4 kms are the specific location.

8.6 Positive impacts of the project The project will give significant economic benefits to the State. Better connectivity will ease the otherwise difficult nature of the hilly terrain. Proper implementation with international best practices would lead to a sustainable development objective of the country. The project will generate direct and indirect employment to the local people of the State. The indirect benefits include savings in vehicle operating costs. Since the project is spread all over the State, people of all parts of Himachal pradesh will reap the benefits. All environmental enhancement measures such as the rain shelters, parking areas, planting of trees and cultural property rehabilitation will also benefit the communities. Over all road safety situation will be improved, although there will be an increase in road traffic accidents immediately after implementation of the project. Participation of the local bodies and the local communities will bring in a new sense of owner ship at local levels. The various levels of consultation by the environmental and social team also made the people aware that they have a role to playing the infrastructural development.

8.7 Scoping for Project Environmental Assessment 8.7.1 Scoping according to WB Guidelines From the initial screening and assessment, Web has classified the project in to category A from the Environmental angle. Category A projects requires a comprehensive EIA and an implement table EMP according to the WB Guide lines. There are ten operational policies out of which four have been triggered by the project implementation. Further WB Clearance for the overall Programme will be is obtained, provided that:

• Feasibility studies and environmental screening studies are carried out • Followed by detailed design and project-level environmental documentation when necessary

and • Provides assurance that the environmental issues will be properly addressed in the subsequent

phases of the Programme, and • All other feasibility, design, mitigation plans and financial responsibility requirements are

acceptable. • All other State level and National level permissions, clearances and approvals are obtained in a

timely and phased manner.

8.7.2 Scoping as per the country laws



As per the requirement of Government of India and that of Himachal Pradesh the project has to follow all procedures and legal requirements as provided in Chapter 3. Except the project Corridors listed in Table E-21, all project roads would require MOEF clearance, as these roads passes through eco-sensitive zones. This consideration is based on the fact that there are extensive Reserved Forests (which are legally eco-sensitive) present with the 14 km impact corridor of these corridors. All the corridors listed in Table 10. 21 are also near to extensive forest areas. Although by location and nature these are truly eco-sensitive roads, these roads do not come under the category A as per the legal definition of the country laws.

Table E-21 Category B projects according to the Sept 14, 2006 MOEF notification

Corridor No. Corridor name Name of Protected and unclassified Forests

Length (Km)

1 Mehatpur Una Mubarikpur Daulatpur H.P. boundary Road (Section Una to Amb) DPF Avenue trees

2

Una- Aghar Barsar Jahu Bhambla Mandi-upto Ner Chowk road*

kariara PF, Solasinghi & Biambi PF, Kanura PF, Pariala PF, satrukha PF, Jatunda PF, Thana PF, Bakro PF, Karer PF, Humal PF, Jhirdari PF, Badiana PF, Sidhkot PF, Gobarta PF, Dola PF, Lakwan Pf, Bagh PF, Pipli PF 26.5

4 Shimla Kunihar Ramshehar Nalagarh Ghanoli (from Nalagarh to HP Boundary) Palasi PF, Khol Nalagad PF 1.5

7

Jogindernagar Sarkaghat Ghumarwin Road (except NH 70 section)

Taridhar PF, Tiun Khas PF, Bhaion PF, Talokpur PF, Sarkhagha PF,Siuri PF, Baburi Dhar PF, Draman PF, Palon PF, Jol PF, Lanhnga PF, Dharampur PF, Tiun Khas PF 23.5

9

Hamirpur Sujanpur Tihra Thural Maranda Chanyarah PF, Sawarian Pf, Dhar Chabutra PF, Jihn PF, Balak Rupi PF, Thathin PF, Bichhwal PF, Sanba PF 16

17 Bamta Kandrour Jaleda PF 1

19 Shallaghat Arki Kunihar Barotiwala Ghaakru PF, Seri PF, Sharon PF, Kangu PF, Dawas

PF, Raikot PF, Alobara PF 15 22 Panjera Bharatgarh Hatra PF, Raipur Pf, Himmatpur Pf 2.5 23 Panjera Dehni Aduwal PF 1 26 Barsar Deothsidh (Section Barsar to Shahtalia) Cheli satrukha PF, , sasal PF, Ektarwan PF 8 31 Mandi Kataula Bajaura Gandhar PF, Tandi PF, Nera PF 4.5 33 Bhawarna Lambagaon Jaisinghpur Ban Mandoo PF, 5 41 Approach to proposed Lathiani bridge Pariala PF 4

42 Swarghat Bilaspur via Jagatkhana(New alignment) Ghaneri PF, Thunj PF, Darbathi PF 7

All roads for which Forest data is not available are provided in Table E-22 The SOI maps are not available for these project roads. All of these maps come under the restricted category. To be on the safer side and also due to the eco-sensitive nature of the HP, all these project roads are at present considered as Category A as per the September 14 2006 MOEF Gazette notification. This consideration will remain and valid until such data is made available to the consultants.

Table E-22 Assumed Category A projects according to the Sept 14, 2006 MOEF notification (For which the ecological data on reserved forests are not available)

Corridor No Corridor Name Restricted Maps

3 Gaggal- Chetru- Dharamshala- Mcleodganj SOI Sheets missing

10 Dharamshal Dadh Palampur Holta Chadihar Sandhol SOI Sheets missing (53 D/8)



11 Dadh Malan SOI Sheets missing 14 Damtal Kandrori Indora Khatiar SOI Sheets missing (53 D/8) 16 Ranital Kotla road SOI Sheets missing 53(D/1) 34 Nurpur Lahru Tunnuhatti SOI Sheets missing (53 D/12) 35 Draman Chowri SOI Sheets missing 40 Ghatasni Bhubhu Jot Kullu SOI Sheets missing

There are many other clearances and permissions to be obtained from various authorities from other angles (Utility shifting for example does not come under the purview of the Environment). Table E-23 provides the summary of clearance requirements as anticipated to day.

Table E-23 Time required for obtaining important clearances Sl No

Types of Clearance Project stage Responsibility Approx. Time required

1 NOC from HP PCB Pre-construction HPRIDC/PWD 2-3 months 2 Environmental clearance from

MOEF do do 3-4 months

3 Forest clearance do do 6-8 months

4 ‘Consents to establish’ and ‘Consent to Operate’ under air and water act

During construction Respective contractors of different packages

2-3 months

5 Explosive license for storing fuel oil, lubricants, Diesel etc at Construction camp from Chief controller of explosive Chandigarh

Construction stage do 2-3 months

8.7.3 Scoping based on the Civil construction works As described in previous Chapters, the project has about 1675 kms. It is not possible and not required to widen all roads from the EIRR point of view. Therefore the State Government has considered 800kms for widening and strengthening and the rest for strengthening only. For widening, land acquisition will be required depending up on the scope of widening (800 km) and for strengthening no additional land acquisition would be necessary under the project. Widening and strengthening will involve land acquisition, loss of properties, loss of agricultural land, displacement of people, large scale felling of trees. The anticipated environmental and social impacts would be very high in this case. In the case of strengthening of roads, the impacts are very limited without any land acquisition with very little or no impact to road side structures and properties. There will be limited tree cutting requirements. Construction of new alignments such as realignments and bypasses however will involve major impacts as most of the time the entire land will be new.

a) Road widening and strengthening (with land acquisition)

This involves widening from single and intermediate lanes to 2 lane. New bypasses and realignment if required

Major anticipated impacts Land acquisition and resettlement of people Tree felling on both sides of the project road Forest land acquisition and impacts to eco-sensitive areas including legally not defined

areas like PF General construction impacts like air water and noise pollution



Impacts on road side environmental features like schools, hospitals, temples, cultural and heritage sites

b) Strengthening only (without land acquisition)

This will involve widening if the land is already available, other wise the existing road will be strengthened, drainage will be improved, and safety will be improved. Major anticipated Impacts

No land acquisition Minimum tree felling General impact like dust and noise during construction Little or no impacts to schools, hospitals, temples etc. No impact to Archaeological sites and monuments

8.7.4 Scoping for EA process From the ecological point of view, a comprehensive EIA document with an implement able contract wise EMPs would be required for all project roads irrespective of the legal setting of the project roads and its proximity to sensitive areas. All project roads that are near to eco-sensitve areas will be category A and will require GOI MOEF environmental clearance. The summary of the Scoping for EA process is provided in Table E-24.

Table E-24. Summary of scoping for EA, EMP and other studies Issues /Criteria Matching improvement proposal Level of further EA

Land acquisition Tree felling on both sides Direct impact on Drinking

water sources Direct impact on schools,

hospitals, temples etc RF or sanctuary within 7 kms

on either side Wildlife crossings Biodiversity issues

Up gradation with land acquisition Full EA Full EMP Contract specific EMPs BIA and or wild life management plan

No land acquisition Limited tree felling on both

sides RF or sanctuary beyond 7

kms (a)Biodiversity issues/ wildlife related issues

Up gradation without land acquisition Full EA Full EMP Corridor specific EMPs Sectoral BIA plan/ Wild life management plan

Note: (a) Above is based on the fact that some wildlife issues including avifauna and their nesting places or Biodiversity issues are there in all 43 corridors. 8.7.5 Scoping of major issues identified under screening Scoping of all major issues that have been identified under screening is provided in the Table E-25



Table E-25 Scoping of major issues identified under screening Area Project activities Potential impacts Action under EA Bio environment Felling of road side trees

Flora and fauna issues Biodiversity impact Loss of trees on the road

sides Poaching of wild animals

and felling of trees by construction work force

Compensatory tree planting plan for every trees removed as per the GOI –MOEF requirements

A very strong EMP to tackle all the issues during construction phase that includes prohibition of establishment of construction camps in Forest areas

Land environment Site clearing Construction of embankments Excavation of hill side for widening Construction of bridges & Structures Constriction debris Construction camps/plants

Change in land scape Change in drainage

pattern Use of borrow and quarry

materials Landslides and de-

stabilisation of slopes Dumping of excess

materials excavated from the hill ward side

Secondary and primary data collection

Impact identification and mitigation measures

Debris disposal plan and material stacking plan

Borrow and quarry area management plans

Management plan for establishing of Construction camps, hot mix plants, WMM plants etc.

Social environment

Additional land acquisition Recruitment of labour

force Procurement of

construction materials Faster and efficient

movement of traffic

Eviction from houses and properties

Employment opportunities

Trade opportunities Saving of fuel time Reduction of

accidents

Socio-economic surveys Impact identification and

mitigation measures Resettlement Action plan R& R plan LA plan

Water environment

Construction water requirements

Waste water from construction sites and camps

Siltation of water bodies

Stress on water resources

Jamming of natural springs and origin of new springs

Water pollution in various ways.

Primary and secondary data collection

Impact identification and mitigation measures

Health and Safety Faster movement of traffic Crash barriers ,

barricades Hill side excavation of

materials Valley side construction of

labour force Use of explosives for

excavation Safety during construction

of bridges Safety during Snow fall

season

Vehicular accidents Safety of personnel

working for the project

Improvement of road junctions Compulsory use of PPE as per

the EMP Lining and Signing and crash

barriers Parking areas Rain shelters Sign boards for the snow

affected stretches

Air environment Excavation back filling and hauling activities

Vehicular operations Dust nuisance

Fugitive dust Vehicular emission Vehicular noise and

vibrations

Secondary data collection Impact identification and

mitigation measures Ambient air quality monitoring Noise monitoring Management plan for

Construction plants



TABLE E-5

GEOMORPHIC AND RELIEF CHARACTERISTICS OF THE STUDY CORRIDORS C O R R I D O R

N O L O C A T I O N /D I S T R I C T PH Y S I O G R A P H I C A N D

T O P O G R A P H I C C O N D I T I O N S O F T H E P R O J E C T R O A D S

R E L I E F C H A R A C T E R I S T I C S (H E I G H T I N M E T E R S

A B O V E M E A N S E A L E V E L ) 1 Una Plane 300-600 2 Una,Hamirpur And

Mandi plane and rolling 300-3000

3 Shimla Rolling 600-3000 4 Solan Plane 300-600 5 Bilaspur Rolling 300-600 6 Solan And Shimla Rolling 300-1350 7 Mandi, Hamirpur And

Bilaspur Rolling 300-3000 8 Sirmour plane and hilly 300-1350 9 Hamirpur, Kangra Rolling 600-1350 10 Kangra Plane and hilly 1800-3000 11 Kangra Plane 1800-3000 12 Bilaspur plane and rolling 300-600 13 Kangra Plane 300-600 14 Kangra Plane 300-900 15 Kangra Plane 300-900 16 Kangra Plane 300-900 17 Bilaspur Rolling 600-900 18 Una And Kangra plane and rolling 600-900 19 Solan Plane 300-900 20 Sirmour plane and rolling 300-600 21 Sirmour Plane 300-600 22 Solan Plane 300-600 23 Solan Plane 300-600 24 Shimla, Mandi Rolling 600-3000 25 Mandi Rolling 600-3000 26 Hamirpur, Bilaspur Plane 300-900 27 Kangra plane and rolling 300-600 28 Shimla Hilly 1350-3000 29 Shimla Hilly 300-4500 30 Shimla, Solan Hilly 1350-3000 31 Mandi, Kullu Hilly 600-1350 32 Shimla Hilly 1800-3000 33 Kangra, Plane 600-1350 34 Kangra, Chamba Rolling 600-1350 35 Kangra, Chamba Rolling 900-3000 36 Chamba Hilly 900-1350 37 Kullu, Mandi,Shimla Hilly 900-3000 38 Shimla, Solan Rolling 900-1800 39 Kullu Rolling 1350-1800 40 Kullu Rolling 1350-3000 41 Una Rolling 600-900 42 Bilaspur Rolling 300-600 43 Solan Rolling 900-1350



Table E-16 Corridor wise Rainfall and general wind Characteristic in the region. C O R R I D O R

N O L O C A T I O N / D I S T R I C I T

R A I N F A L L M M

WI N D R E L I E F C H A R A C T E R I S T I C

1 Una 1000-1400 wind moderate damage risk zone

2 Una,Hamirpur And Mandi

1000-1800 Do

3 Kangra 1800-2600 4 Solan 1000-1400 mm Do 5 Bilaspur Do 6 Solan And Shimla 1000- 1800 mm Do 7 Mandi, Hamirpur

And Bilaspur Do Do

8

Sirmour

Do wind high damage risk zone and wind moderate damage

risk zone 9 Hamirpur, Kangra

1400- 1800 mm wind moderate damage risk

zone 10 Kangra 11 Kangra 12 Bilaspur 1000-1400 mm Do 13 Kangra Do Do 14 Kangra Do Do 15 Kangra 1800-2600 mm Do 16 Kangra 2200-2600 mm Do 17 Bilaspur 18 Una And Kangra 1000-1400 mm Do 19 Solan Do Do 20 Sirmour Do Do 21 Sirmour Do wind high damage risk zone 22

Solan Do wind moderate damage risk

zone 23 Solan Do Do 24 Shimla, Mandi Do Do 25 Mandi Do Do 26 Hamirpur, Bilaspur Do Do 27 Kangra Do Do 28 Shimla 1400-1800 mm Do 29 Shimla 1000-1400 mm Do 30 Shimla, Solan Do Do 31 Mandi, Kullu 1000-1800 mm Do 32 Shimla 1000-1400 mm Do 33 Kangra, 1400-1800 mm Do 34 Kangra, Chamba 1000-1800 mm Do 35 Kangra, Chamba 1800-2600 mm Do 36 Chamba 1000-1400 mm Do 37 Kullu, Mandi,Shimla Do Do 38 Shimla, Solan Do Do 39 Kullu Do Do 40 Kullu & Mandi 41 Bilaspur 42 Bilaspur 43 Solan Do Do



TABLE E-6 GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE STUDY CORRIDORS

C O R R I D O R N O

L O C A T I O N / D I S T R I C T G E O L O G I C C H A R A C T E R I S T I C S

SE I S M I C C H A R A C T E R I S T I C S

1 Una Shiwalik earthquake very high damage zone

2 Una,Hamirpur And Mandi Shiwalik Do 3 Kangra Shiwalik And Murrec Series 4 Solan Shiwalik earthquake high damage

risk zone 5 Bilaspur Shiwalik 6 Solan And Shimla Mandhati-Chandpur Groups Do 7 Mandi, Hamirpur And Bilaspur

Murrec Series earthquake very high

damage risk zone 8

Sirmour

Shiwalik, Mandhati-Chandpur Groups, Shali-Deoban And Largi Groups

earthquake high damage risk zone

9 Hamirpur, Kangra Shiwalik

earthquake very high damage zone

10 Kangra Murrec Series And Jutogh Group

11 Kangar Murrec Series 12

Bilaspur Shiwalik earthquake high damage

risk zone 13

Kangra Shiwalik earthquake very high

damage risk zone 14 Kangra Shiwalik Do 15 Kangra Shiwalik Do 16 Kangra Shiwalik Do 17 Bilaspur Murrec Series 18 Una And Kangra Alluvium And Shiwalik Do 19

Solan Shimla Group And Shiwalik earthquake high damage

risk zone 20 Sirmour Murrec Series Do 21 Sirmour Murrec Series Do 22 Solan Shiwalik Do 23 Solan Shiwalik Do 24

Shimla, Mandi

Granites, Jutogh Group And Shali Deoban And Largi

Groups

Do

25 Mandi Jutogh Group

earthquake very high damage risk zone

26 Hamirpur, Bilaspur Shiwalik Do 27 Kangra Shiwalik Do 28

Shimla Jutogh Group earthquake high damage

risk zone 29 Shimla Jutogh Group Do 30 Shimla, Solan Shimla Group Do 31

Mandi, Kullu Jutogh Group Andmandhati

Chandpur Group earthquake very high

damage risk zone 32

Shimla Jutogh Group earthquake high damage

risk zone 33

Kangra, Shiwalik And Murrec Series earthquake very high

damage risk zone 34 Kangra, Chamba Shiwalik And Granite Do 35

Kangra, Chamba Shiwalik And Granite earthquake very high

damage risk zone 36 Chamba Granite Do



C O R R I D O R L O C A T I O N / D I S T R I C T G E O L O G I C SE I S M I C N O C H A R A C T E R I S T I C S C H A R A C T E R I S T I C S

37

Kullu, Mandi,Shimla

Nagthat Group, Muth Quartzite Manikaran

Quartzite And Mandhati Chandpur Group

Do

38 Shimla, Solan Jutogh Group, Shimla Group

earthquake high damage risk zone

39 Kullu Jutogh And Granites

earthquake very high damage risk zone

40 Kullu& Mandi Jutogh 41 Bilaspur Shiwalik 42 Bilaspur Murrec Series 43

Solan Shimla Group earthquake high damage

risk zone

TABLE E-7 EROSION AND OTHER NATURAL CALAMITIES

CORRIDOR NO LOCATION/ DISTRICT EROSION LANDSLIDE /LAND SLIPS ETC

FLOODING

1 Una not prone to erosion No area 2 Una,Hamirpur And

Mandi very little 1 area 1 location

3 4 Solan not prone to erosion No area 5 6 Solan And Shimla very prone to erosion 31 areas 7 Mandi, Hamirpur

And Bilaspur prone to erosion 29 areas

8

Sirmour prone to erosion 13 areas, many mines

along the road 9 Hamirpur, Kangra not prone to erosion No area 1 location 10 11 12 Bilaspur prone to erosion 14 areas 13 Kangra not prone to erosion No area 14 Kangra very little 2 areas

15, 16 Kangra very little 6 areas 17 18

Una And Kangra not prone to erosion No area 5 dry rivers (no

bridge) 19 Solan prone to erosion 27 areas 20

Sirmour very little 3 areas 1 (river without

bridge) 21 Sirmour not prone to erosion No area 22 Solan not prone to erosion No area 23 Solan not prone to erosion No area 24 Shimla, Mandi not prone to erosion No area 25 Mandi not prone to erosion No area 26 Hamirpur, Bilaspur very little 2 areas 27 Kangra not prone to erosion No area 28 Shimla very prone to erosion 33 areas 1 location 29 Shimla prone to erosion 12 areas 1 location 30 Shimla, Solan not prone to erosion No area 31 Mandi, Kullu very prone to erosion 34 areas 32 Shimla very little 3 areas 33 Kangra, very little 3 areas



CORRIDOR NO LOCATION/ DISTRICT EROSION LANDSLIDE /LAND SLIPS FLOODING ETC

34 Kangra, Chamba prone to erosion 25 areas 35 Kangra, Chamba prone to erosion 23 areas 36 Chamba not prone to erosion No area 37

Kullu, Mandi,Shimla very prone to erosion 31 areas Cloud burst prone

area, 5 point 38 Shimla, Solan very prone to erosion 51 areas 39 Kullu very little 10 areas 40 Kulu and Mandi 41 42 Bilaspur 43 Solan very little 3 areas

TABLE E-8

PROXIMITY TO WATER RESOURCES CORRIDOR NO RIVER BASIN MAJOR RIVERS STREAMS /NALAS ETC SNOW FALL AREA

1 sutlej 22 2 ponds None 2 sutlej,Beas 32 2 ponds None 3 Beas None 4 sutlej None 5 sutlej None 6 Jamuna,

Markanda None

7 sutlej 17 None 8

Jamuna Giri, Neda Gangtoli 5 streams, purad, 1 pond

None

9 Beas 3 rivers, beas 5 streams, nagni None 10 Beas None 11 Beas None 12 sutlej 2 lake None 13 Beas 4 stream. 2 ponds None 14 Beas 3 ponds None 15 Beas

7 river,

21 stream, totak, banj nala, khakhod nala, guj,

None

16 Beas None 17 Beas None 18 Beas 4 ponds None 19 sutlej 17 stream None 20

Markanda 6 river, markanda, Kheri

None

21 Markanda 1 river 1 stream, 1 pond None 22 sutlej 3 stream None 23 sutlej 4 stream, 1 pond None 24 sutlej Dhalli, Mashobra,Naldehra 25 Beas 1 river 6 stream None 26 Sutlej 1 stream None 27

Beas 2 river, haripur 18 stream, amlehar, 6 ponds

None

28 sutlej 40 river, giri, pabbar Most Of The Route 29 Jamuna Most Of The Route 30 Jamuna 6 stream Kufri And Chail 31 Beas

3 rivers, uhl

16 springs, rala, raksh, shegli, kataula,chhad, Bajaur And Adjoining Areas



CORRIDOR NO RIVER BASIN MAJOR RIVERS STREAMS /NALAS ETC SNOW FALL AREA

batheri, dulchi 32 Beas 2 rivers, giri 1 spring 80% Of The Route 33 Beas 6 rivers, haroti,

maand 3 springs None

34 Beas, Ravi 5 rivers, chakki, jabbar, shabadra

9 springs, sanjha nala, huwardi,

None

35 Beas 11 rivers, sarali, chanhal, thulel,dadman

5 streams, sirli, suked, khola, surki nala,

None

36 Ravi Most Of The Route 37 sutlej, beas

25 rivers, beas, sutlej

27 streams, tirthan, flela nala, jalori khad, shamshar, sainj nala Jalori, Aani, Etc

38 Jamuna 19 rivers, giri 8 streams 39

Beas 5 rivers, beas 8 streams, lran kelo nala, kanoli nala, Most Of The Route

40 Beas None 41 Sutlej None 42 sutlej None 43 Sutlej, jamuna None

TABLE E-9

PROXIMITY TO NATIONAL PARKS AND WILDLIFE SANCTUARIES CORRIDOR NO NATIONAL

PARKS SANCTUARIES RESERVED FORESTS OTHER FORESTS

1 Nil Nil 2 Nil Nil 59.5 3 Nil Nil 1.6 4 Nil Nil 5 Nil Naina Devi And Govind Sagar

Sanctuary(11.20 Km Within 7 Km Range)

6 Nil Nil 59 km 7 Nil Nil 24 km 8 Nil Nil 21.60 km 9 Nil Nil 10 Nil Nil 11 Nil Nil 12 Nil Naina Devi And Govind Sagar

Sanctuary11.80 Km Within 7 Km Range) 28.5

13 Nil Nil 0.48 km 14 Nil Nil 12.5 15 Nil Pong Dam Sanctuary(20.55

Km Within 7 Km Range) 43 16 Nil Nil 17 Nil Nil 18 Nil Nil 17.5 19 Nil Nil 24.4 20 Nil Nil 1.50 km 21 Nil Nil 6 km 22 Nil Nil 23 Nil Nil 24 Nil Nil 4.8 25 Nil Shikari Devi Sanctuary(3 Km 3.2



CORRIDOR NO NATIONAL PARKS

SANCTUARIES RESERVED FORESTS OTHER FORESTS

Road Within 7 Km Range) 26 Nil 6 km 27 Nil Pong Dam Sanctuary,

Maharanapratap Sanctuary(18.82 Km Of Road Within 7 Km Range In Pong Dam Sanctuary) 44 km

28 Nil Nil 42 km 29 Nil Nil 30 Nil Chail Wildlife Sanctuary(11.82

Km Within 7 Km Range ) 27 31 Nil Nil 6.4 32 Nil Nil 3 km 2.4 33 Nil Nil 18 km 34 Nil Nil 25.5 km 35 Nil Nil 28.5 km 36 Nil Kalatop Khajjiar Sanctuary, 6 km 37 Nil Nil 38 Nil Shilli Sanctuary 6.72 km 39 Nil Manali Sanctuary, (6.18 Km

Within 7 Km Range) Kais Sanctuary(4.3 Km Within 7 Km Range) 9.5

40 Nil Nil 41 Nil Nil 42 Nil Nil 43 Nil Nil 1.53 km

TABLE E-10

PROXIMITY TO WETLANDS C O R R I D O R N O .

D I S T R I C T S

R O A D L E N G T H (K M)

N E A R E S T WE T L A N D S

D I S T A N C E F R O M T H E R O A D T O W E T L A N D A T

T H E N E A R E S T L O C A T I O N 1 Una 32.2 None Within 7 kms 2 Una,Hamirpur

and mandi 126.27

Rewalser lake, Govindsagar lake Within 7 kms

3 12.515 None 4 Solan 11.285 None 5 12.22 None 6 solan and

shimla 78 None

7 mandi, hamirpur and

bilaspur

82.98 None

8 Sirmour 74.94 None 9 hamirpur,

kangra 58.99 None

10 None 11 4 None 12 Bilaspur 37 Govindsagar lake Within 7 kms 13 Kangra 11.2 Pong Dam Within 7 kms 14 Kangra 52 Pong Dam Within 7 kms 15 Kangra 20.5 Pong Dam Within 7 kms 16 Kangra 39.182 None 17 6.66 None



C O R R I D O R N O .

D I S T R I C T S

R O A D L E N G T H (K M)

N E A R E S T WE T L A N D S

D I S T A N C E F R O M T H E R O A D T O W E T L A N D A T

T H E N E A R E S T L O C A T I O N 18 una and

kangra 32.56 Pong Dam Within 7 kms

19 Solan 80.4 None 20 Sirmour 15.13 None 21 Sirmour 6.37 None 22 Solan 4.66 None 23 Solan 9 None 24 shimla, mandi 46 None 25 Mandi 20.325 None 26 hamirpur,

bilaspur 11.3 Govind sagar lake Within 7 kms

27 Kangra 75.14 Pong Dam Within 7 kms 28 Shimla 80.37 None 29 Shimla 27 None 30 shimla, solan 57 None 31 mandi, kullu 51 None 32 Shimla 47 None 33 kangra, 26.645 None 34 kangra,

chamba 42.19 None

35 kangra,

chamba 53.4 None

36 Chamba 6.205 None 37 kullu,

mandi,shimla 72 None

38 shimla, solan 86.32 None 39 Kullu 39.375 Beas river (raison and katrain) Within 7 kms 40 66.57 None 41 4 None 42 20.375 None 43 Solan 10.5 None

TABLE E-11

DRINKING WATER SOURCES ALONG THE FEASIBILITY CORRIDORS CORRIDOR NO WELLS HAND PUMPS SPRINGS SHALLOW TUBE

WELLS PWS

1 8 9 42 38 2 13 60 11 112 3 4 2 6 1 9 5 6 46 22 17 7 10 41 22 60 8 25 7 35 9 46 7 63 10 11 12 8 11 13 7



CORRIDOR NO WELLS HAND PUMPS SPRINGS SHALLOW TUBE WELLS

PWS

14 9 15 50 15, 16 6 63 10 37 17 18 8 13 19 19 1 23 20 1 6 6 21 1 11 22 3 2 2 23 2 3 2 12 24 8 11 25 6 3 40 26 12 1 19 27 8 33 47 28, 29 1 26 29 31 30 8 14 31 21 12 29 32 5 5 13 33 1 21 1 55 34 22 4 25 35 29 12 33 36 4 1 37 39 6 28 38 7 19 8 39 8 56 40 41 42 43 6 8

TABLE E-12 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION IN RELATION TO POLLUTION (AIR /WATER AND NOISE)

Corridor No Population Air quality Water quality Noise Quality

1 High High high High 2 Medium medium medium Medium 3 4 Medium medium medium Medium 5 6 High High high High 7 High High high High 8 High High high High 9 Medium medium medium Medium 10 11 12 Medium medium medium Medium 13 Low Low low Low 14 medium high Medium

15,16 Low Low low Low



17 18 Medium medium medium Medium 19 High High high High 20 Low Low medium Low 21 Low Low medium Low 22 23 Low Low medium Low 24 Medium medium medium Medium 25 Low Low low Low 26 Low Low low Low 27 High High high High 28 High High high High 29 Low Low low Low 30 Medium medium medium Medium 31 Low Low low Low 32 Medium medium medium Medium 33 Low Low low Low 34 Medium medium medium Medium 35 Medium medium medium Medium 36 Low Low low Low 37 Medium medium medium Medium 38 High High high High 39 Medium medium medium Medium 40 Medium medium medium Medium 41 42 Low Low low Low 43 Low Low low Low

TABLE E-13 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES ALONG THE PROJECT ROAD

CORRIDOR

NO ARCHAEOLOGICAL

SITES/MONUMENTS AND WORLD HERITAGE SITES

IMPORTANT TEMPLES AND OTHER WORSHIP PLACES

NO OF CULTURAL PROPERTIES FRO SURVEY DATA

1 Pirniga Mazar The Old Gurudwara At Una

Town Is Also Of 17 Th Centuray

Ashtbhuj Mata Temple Near Una, Vishwakarma Temple

15

2 Rawalsar Lake 74 3 1 4 6 5 0 6 Kwagdhar,Gurudwara At Nahan 6 7 Basahi, Machhyal,Nabahi Devi 34

8 Sirmouri Tal(ASI) Paonta Sahib Gurudwara, Budhist

Monastruy 22

9 Narbedshwar Temple And Katoch Mahal At Sujanpur

Gauri Shankar, Murli Manohar And Sankat Mochan Temple At Sujanpur 62

10 0 11 0 12 Mata Naina Devi Temple 10 13 Paragpur Heritage Village Channo Sidh Temple 14 14 37

15, 16 Maangarh Fort; Kotla Fort Mata Baglamukhi Temple, Naag Mandir, Shiva Cave At Trilokpur 39

17 0



CORRIDOR NO

ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES/MONUMENTS AND WORLD

HERITAGE SITES

IMPORTANT TEMPLES AND OTHER WORSHIP PLACES

NO OF CULTURAL PROPERTIES FRO SURVEY DATA

18 Sheetla Mata And Chintpurni Mata

Temple 21

19 Arki Palace And Forts At Arki,

Subathu And Kuthar 9 20 4 21 3 22 2 23 9

24 Durga Mata Temple At Mashobra, Nag

Temple At Naldehra 7 25 15 26 Baba Balaknath Temple 7

27 Fort At Guler, Haripur Heritage Site(State) 40

28 Archaeological Site At Virat

Near Hatkoti Hatkoti Mata Temple 18 ( 28 & 29) 29 30 Chail P[Alace Sidh Baba Temple At Chail 5

31 Bisheshwar Temple At

Bajaura (ASI) 13 32 Old Palace At Sainj Lankarvir Templ At Chaupal 8 33 46 34 Brijraj Temple At Nurpur 21 35 Temple At Nadholi 31 36 Nag Temple At Banikhet, 1 37 Temple At Shamshar And At Behna 20 38 Shiva Temple At Balag 12

39 Hidimba Mata Temple Monastry At Karadsu, Manu Rishi And

Vashisht Temple Near Manali 16 40 - 41 - 42 - 43 Hanuman Temple At Kasauli 7

TABLE E-14 TOURISM AND ALL OTHER RELATED ASPECTS

CORRIDOR

NO IMPORTANT TOURIST

LOCATIONS PILGRIMAGE SITES WILDLIFE SANCTUARIES

FOREST AND RELATED ASPECTS

HOT SPRINGS/WATER BODIES OF TOURIST SIGNIFICANCE



CORRIDOR NO

IMPORTANT TOURIST LOCATIONS

PILGRIMAGE SITES WILDLIFE SANCTUARIES FOREST AND RELATED


ASPECTS 1 Ashtbhuj Mata Temple

Near Una None None

2 Lathiani, Govindsagar Rawalsar Lake Una Gurudwara

None Rewalser Lake, Govindsagar Lake

3 Nalagarh Fort None None None

4 None None None

5 Naina Devi Naina Devi Temple Naina Devi Sanctuary Govindsagar Sanctuary

None

6 Nahan, Renuka Lake None None None

7 Macchyal Lake Machyal None None

8 Paonta Sahib, Sirmori Taal

Paonta Sahib Gurudwara,

Simbalwara Sanctuary None

9 Sujanpur Gauri Shankar, Murli Manohar

None None

10 None None

11 Chamunda Devi Chamunda Mata Temple

None None

12 Naina Devi, Bhakra Mata Naina Devi Temple

Naina Devi Sanctuary Govindsagar Sanctuary

Govindsagar Lake

13 Paragpur Heritage Site, Channo Sidh Temple

Channo Sidh Temple None Pong Dam

14 Damsite None None Pong Dam

15 Trilokpur, Dehra Bankhandi, Maangarh

Mata Baglamukhi Temple,

Pong Dam Sanctuary Pong Dam

16 Trilokpur, Dehra Bankhandi, Maangarh

Mata Baglamukhi Temple

None None

17 Kandrour Bridge None None None

18 Chintpurni Sheetla Mata And Chintpurni Mata Temple

None Pong Dam

19 Arki, Subathu, Kuthar None None None

20 Fossil Park At Suketi None None None

21 Trilokpur None None None

22 Nil None None None

23 Nil None None None

24 Mashobara, Naldhera, Tattapani

None None Hot Water Spring (Sulphur)

25 Chail Chowk None Shikari Devi Sanctuary None

26 Lathiani Baba Balaknath Temple None Govind Sagar Lake

27 Guler, Haripur, None Pong Dam Sanctuary, Pong Dam

28 Khara Patthar, Hatkoti

Hatkoti Mata Temple None None



CORRIDOR NO

IMPORTANT TOURIST LOCATIONS

PILGRIMAGE SITES WILDLIFE SANCTUARIES FOREST AND RELATED


ASPECTS 29 None None None

30 Chail, Kufri, None Chail Wildlife Sanctuary None

31 Mandi, Bajoura None None None

32 Sainj Old Palace, Chopal

None None None

33 Jaisinghpur None None None

34 Nurpur Fort Brij Raj Temple None None

35 Nadholi None None None

36 Delhousie, Banikhet None Kalatop Khajjiar Sanctuary, None

37 Larji, Jalori Pass, Good Valley View

None None None

38 Sainj Palace Shiva Temple At Balag Shilli Sanctuary None

39 Kullu, Naggar, Manali Monastry At Karadsu, Hidimba Temple Manu Rishi And Vashisht Temple Near Manali

Manali Sanctuary, Kais Sanctuary

Beas River (Raison And Katrain) Hot Water Spring At Vashisht And Ramshilla (Kullu)

40 Kullu None

41 Govindsagar Lake None

42 Govindsagar Lake None

43 Kasauli Hill Station Hanuman Temple At Kasauli

None


executive summary environmental …admis.hp.nic.in/himachal/hpridc/exsumm.pdfexecutive summary...

Documents