management effectiveness assessment for wetlands conservation and its application in harike wetland,...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Management Effectiveness Assessment for Wetlands Conservation and its Application in Harike
Wetland, Punjab, India
Summer internship presentation at WETLANDS INTERNATIONAL- MEGHA GUPTA
- M.Sc. NRM 2nd year
ObjectiveIts specific objectives are as follows:• To map the relevance of protected area categories for
wetlands.• To track management effectiveness assessment of protected
areas.• To compare and contrast different management effectiveness
tracking tools.• Application of METT in one Ramsar site i.e. Harike Wetland,
Punjab for a superior comprehension of wetland administration in India.
• Objective was achieved using GEF software, review of literature and information accessible on the web.
2
IUCN- The World Conservation Union defines PROTECTED AREA as: land and/or sea especially dedicated to the protection and maintenance of
biological diversity, and of natural and associated cultural resources, and managed through legal , other effective means, in six categories:
Ia; 5.00% Ib; 1.00%
II; 4.00%
III; 20.00%
IV; 27.00%
V; 6.00%
VI; 4.00%
no IUCN cate-gory;
33.00%
Ia• Strict Nature Reserve• Ex: Wetlands located within
core area of National Parks
Ib • Wildnerness area• Ex:High altitude wetlands
II• National Park• Ex: Kanwar Lake Bird
Sanctuary, Bihar
III • Natural monument or feature
IV• Habitat/Species Area
Management• Ex: Wetlands important for the
perspective of species habitat
V• Protected landscape/
Seascape• Ex: Coral Reefs
VI• Protected Area with sustainable
use of natural resources• Ex: Most compatible with wise
use approaches
Source: Google
What is a wetland?
According to Ramsar Convention of Wetland Treaty, Wetlands are areas of marsh, fen, peatland or water, whether natural or artificial, permanent or temporary, with water that is static or flowing, fresh, brackish or salt, including areas of marine water the depth of which at low tide does not exceed six metres.
Wetlands are thelink between the land and the water. They are transition zones where the flow of water, the cycling of nutrients, and the energy of the sun meet to produce a unique ecosystem characterized by hydrology, soils, and vegetation
An intergovernmental treaty - embodies the commitments of its member countries to plan for the "wise use", or sustainable use, of all of the wetlands in their territories.
What are the ecological functions (services) and resource values that
wetlands provide?
Wetlands provide fundamental ecological services and are regulators of water regimes and sources of biodiversity at all levels - species, genetic and ecosystem. Wetlands constitute a resource of great economic, scientific, cultural, and recreational value for the community. Wetlands play a vital role in climate change adaptation and mitigation. Progressive encroachment on, and loss of, wetlands cause serious and sometimes irreparable environmental damage to the provision of ecosystem services. Wetlands should be restored and rehabilitated, whenever possible. Wetlands should be conserved by ensuring their wise use
Model of Human-InducedImpacts on Wetlands
IncreasedWater
IncreasedNutrients Increased
DisturbanceNaturalWetland
DecreasedDisturbance
DecreasedNutrients
DecreasedWater
Drainage
Flood control leading to reduced spring siltation
Fire suppression, Flood control, Water level stabilization
Eutrophication, Siltation
Burning, Reservoir construction, Off-road vehicles
Flooding impeding natural drainage
History of Management Effectiveness Assessment Paul Sarasin in 1910 proposed a committee to establish WCPA A commission on National Parks was established in 1960 when an
international community asked IUCN to take responsibility of preparing a world list of National Parks.
In 1984, the list by IUCN-CNPPA described inadequate management resources, human encroachment, change in water regime, adjacent land development etc
The World Bank/WWF Alliance for Forest Conservation and Sustainable Use (‘the Alliance’) was formed in April 1998, in response to the depletion of the world’s forest biodiversity and of forest-based goods and services essential for sustainable development.
Debate on nomenclature and how to classify or categorize protected areas were discussed in 1st conference on National Parks, Seattle.
2nd conference on National Parks held in Yellowstone, USA addresses the confusion between national park and nature reserve where issues like management effectiveness and financial support raised.
8
WCPA Framework
9
Context •focuses on status of threats & vulnerability of protected areas
Planning •includes legislation and policy, system design and management planning
Input •assesses resources
Process •contains efficiency and appropriateness
Output •provides results of management action, services and products
Outcome •reveals effects of management in relation to objectives.
Target of The World Bank/WWF Alliance
As part of its work programme the Alliance set a target relating to management effectiveness of forest protected areas:
75 million hectares of existing forest protected
areas under improved management to achieve conservation and development outcomes by 2010.
To evaluate progress towards this target the Alliance published in 2003 a simple site-level Tracking Tool to facilitate reporting on management effectiveness of protected areas within WWF and World Bank projects.
10
Status Of Protected Areas
Protected areas grew dramatically over the time period. As per 2016 Wildlife Database Cell, current status is as follows:
11
No. Total area (Km2)
Coverage % of country
National Parks 103 40500.13 1.23
Wildlife Sanctuary 537 118005.3 3.59
Conservation reserves
67 2349.38 0.07
Community reserves
26 46.93 0.001
Protected Areas 733 160901.4 4.89Source: National Wildlife Database Cell, Wildlife Institute of India
Need for Management Effectiveness Assessment
Governments, funding agencies and stakeholders who were to benefit from protected areas need to evaluate whether results are proportionate with the efforts and resources being spent.
So, they required information on management effectiveness
12
Different Tracking Tools Assessing Management Effectiveness of Wildlife Protected Areas published in 1999 is
based on surveying a questionnaire all over India. Strength: Development of a species gap analysis. Weakness: Ensuring the completion of such lengthy questionnaire and authentication of data
received. Rapid Assessment and Prioritization of Protected Area Management (RAPPAM)
published in 2003 by WWF, based on scorecard questionnaire which gives broad level comparison that can be used to develop multiple site level management criteria.
Strength: Covers network of protected areas in one assessment and allows identification of threats and management issues across group of protected areas.
Weakness: Does not provide detailed, site level adaptive management guidance to protected area managers.
IUCN (WCPA Marine) and WWF jointly formed the MPS management effectiveness initiative in 2000; surveyed and refine between 2001 to 2003 and finally published in 2004 sponsored by NOAA and the Packard Foundation.
Strength: It provides detailed guidance applicable to many different marine protected environments and provides advice on designing, applying and analysing the system
Weakness: It is not a complete set of indicators or ‘ready-to-apply’ tool as it emphasises the need for communication and application of results to adaptive management
13
METT After surveying in many countries, the Alliance published in 2003, Management
Effectiveness Tracking Tool (METT), globally applicable generic system to facilitate reporting on management effectiveness of protected areas within WWF and World Bank projects to track progress over time rather than to compare sites.
Strength: Simple and rapid assessment system that provide a baseline on management effectiveness and outlines the critical information about issues that need to be addressed as a priority.
Weakness: The assessments produced are relatively superficial and do not cover all aspects of management. It cannot compare different sites.
METT consist of 30 questions - each with a four point scale (0,1,2 and 3). The scale allows officials to choose whether the situation is acceptable or not.
Generally 0 is equivalent to no or negligible progress, 1 is some progress; 2 is quite good but has room for improvement; 3 is approaching optimum situation.
It is important to spend sufficient time in assessing each aspect of management and reviewing the existing monitoring results.
At the time of repeated assessment, some of the same protected area managers and experts should be involved to ensure the consistency in data.
14
Different Tracking Tools RAPPmap published in 2003 by same participants as of
RAPPAM. The only difference is it uses satellite imagery to assess the site
Strength: Add spatial element to the analysis. Generally confined to type of threat identified in RAPPAM
Weakness: It requires skilled professionals to operate it
R-METT is published in 2015 by The Ramsar Convention is used to evaluate management effectiveness for ramsar sites. A different tool is designed for ramsar sites as it itself is a diverse ecosystem.
15
16
Harike wetland of Punjab,
India
Harike Wetland Area: 4,100 ha (Kapurthala, Tarn Taran and Ferozepur
Districts) Area under water: 2850 ha o Avifauna : 360 species (74
species of migratory birds) Important Migratory Birds: Rudy Shelduck, Northern
Pintail, Common Teal, Mallard, Gadwall, Eurasian Wigeon, Northern Shoveler, Pochards (Red Crested, Common and Tued)
60 indigenous species of fish, 7 species of turtles, 4 species of snakes, 6 taxa of amphibians, 189 taxa of invertebrates reported
Threatened species – Schedule 1 species : 4 species of turtle (Kachuga tecta, K. smithii, Trionyx gangecus and Geoclemys hamiltonii ) – IUCN Red List: Smooth Indian oer
Major Flora: Acacia , Dalbergia, Delonix, Salix, Syzygium, Zizyphus, Ipomoea, Cyprus, etc. and medicinal plants like Withania somnifera, Adhatoda vesica, Boerhavia di usa, etc. ff
Major Threats: Weed growth(Eichhornia crassipes), siltaon and encroachment o First sighng of dolphin reported from Harike wetland (Beas river) in December, 2007.
Important Bird Area (IBA) site of Bombay Natural History Society (BNHS) and Wildlife Sanctuary (nofied by Govt. of Punjab)
Major Threats to Harike Siltation leading to shrinkage of wetland area Inflow of pesticide and fertilizer as runoff from
agricultural fields Accidental outflow of pollutants from industries Lack of appreciation & cooperation: Treated as
free goods of nature ignoring the wetland values and functions.
Habitat destruction & degradation Environmental pollution & climate change Unsustainable developmental model and
urbanization Infestation of invasive alien species and weed
growth Lack of coordination amongst concerned line
departments
17
Restoration Measures Conservation measures were initiated in Harike
Wetland in 1987-88 Include survey, mapping and plantation Various soil conservation measures results in
substantial increase in land value Water pollution results in infestation of water
hyacinth
18
Major initiatives undertaken
a) Establishment of Protected Area Network of 345 sq.km consisting 13 wildlife sanctuaries, 2 zoological parks, 3 deer parks and 2 community reserves(first in India) for conservation of wild flora and fauna
b) Launching of “Green Punjab Mission (2012-2020)” to increase forest cover in the state to 15% at an annual cost of Rs 180 crore
Diversification of agriculture to reduce area under paddy from 22.5 Lakh ha (2012-13) to 8.5 lakh ha in 2017-18 and promote culvation of basmati, cotton, maize, sugarcane, pulses, fodder, fruit & vegetable and agroforestry proposed.
19
Department of Forests & Wildlife Preservation, Punjab
Department of Agriculture, Punjab
a) Setting up of Biodiversity Management Committees(BMCs) & Technical Support Groups(TSGs) in all 22 districts and 33 village levels BMCs in biodiversity rich areas • Preparation of Districts level People Biodiversity Register`s (PBRs) initiated in 12 districts to document biodiversity & associated traditional knowledge
b) Identification of threatened flora ( 8 species) and fauna ( 5 species) of state
c) Identification of 3 potential Biodiversity Heritage sites along with other biodiversity rich areas
d) Capacity building and training of BMCs/TSGs members in all districts e) Conducted 4 special projects/studies with the financial support of
National Biodiversity Authority, UNESCO and Govt. of Punjabf) Outreach activities a) Preparation of Strategy and Action plan for Conservation of Biodiversity
in Punjab b) Conducted comprehensive study “Biodiversity in the Shivalik Ecosystem
of Punjab” c) Conservation and management of wetlands d) Identification and documentation of key species e) Setting up of wetland Interpretation Centres highlighting biodiversity at
Harike, Kanjli, Ropar and Nangal
20
Punjab Biodiversity Board (PBB)
Punjab State Council for Science & Technology (PSCST)
METT in Harike Wetland The objective of catalyzing sustainability of protected area
systems was achieved by using GEF-3, GEF-4, GEF-5. Datasheet 1 shows the details of the assessment and basic
information about the site. The Datasheet 2 provided numerous threats of Harike
wetland. As per the assessment,
It was found to have high annual and perennial non- timber crop cultivation, threats to wetland due to high usage of water of dams, increase in invasive plants/ weed, pollution caused due to heavy discharge of household sewage and urban wastewater, industrial, mining and military effluents, garbage and solid waste. Geographical events such as high amount of erosion and siltation, climate change due to temperature extremes.
21
There were medium threat to habitats and species associated with non- consumptive use of biological resources from recreational activities and tourism, agricultural and forestry effluents, climate change, loss of cultural link, traditional knowledge and management practices. Assessment form includes partial management, needs improvement in design, medium enforcement of law. There are considerable survey but not directed towards the need of protected area.
Budget management is poor and constraints effectiveness, education and awareness is low for management. There is no direct involvement of local communities, protected system are partially effective in resource use. 2
2
Conclusion Ecological studies of Harike have shown that it is
eutrophic in character. Soil, water and biotic communities exhibited degraded conditions along Sutlej especially during winter when ingress of water within that side was less. Beas zone although comparatively in good condition, has also started degrading.
There are 30 questions in the assessment form which depicts need for better management and follow up action on threats faced by wetlands. The total score was found to be 48
It outlines the paucity of funds, training and community engagement.
Strict management plan and implementation is required for Harike Wetland
23
Bibliography Hockings, M., 2006. Evaluating Effectiveness: A framework for
assessing management effectiveness of protected areas. IUCN Leverington, F., Hockings, M. and Costa, K.L., 2008. Management
effectiveness evaluation in protected areas: a global study. World Commission on Protected Areas.
Ervin, J., 2003. Rapid assessment of protected area management effectiveness in four countries. BioScience, 53(9), pp.833-841.
Management effectiveness tracking tool by WWF; Reporting progress at protected area sites: second edition 2007
Moza, U. and Mishra, D.N., Current Status of Harike Wetland Visa Visa its Ecology and Fishery. In Proceedings of Taal2007: The 12th World Lake Conference (Vol. 1470, p. 1476).
Tiwana, N.S., Neelima, J., Saxena, S.K. and Sharma, V., 2008. Conservation of Ramsar sites in Punjab. In Proceedings of Taal2007: The 12th World Lake Conference (Vol. 1463, p. 1469).
24
THANKYOU !
25