Integrated Regional Environmental Plan - GANJAM-2041

02

COMPARISON OF THE REGIONAL PLANS PARAMETERS REGIONAL PLAN GOA 2021

REGIONAL PLAN COIMBATORE 2038

REGIONAL PLAN KOLLAM 2021

NORTH QUEENSLAND REGIOANL PLAN 2021

To achieve planned development of the district through optimum utilization of resources, both natural and man made, ensuring conservation of environment.

Provides a vision to take NQ region forward in the next 25 years: thrives as a diverse, livable, progressive region in the tropics, set around emerging capital of North Australia.

Location

Vision

‘More vibrant and prosperous Goa’ while at the same time preserving Goa’s fragile ecosystem.

Sustainable Economic Development with the focus on Economic growth engines.

Participatory Approach Involvement of People, local government, NGOs etc.

Approach

Delineation of regions

Proposals

Environment Proposals

Context

 2 Talukas - eco zone, micro industrial zone (Canacona and Pernem).  6 Talukas - forests, mining and water resources (Quepem, Ponda, Sattari, Bicholim, Sanguem and Dharbandora).  4 Talukas – coastal zone (Bardez, Tiswadi, Mormogao and Salcete).

Proposed Service and manufacturing industries to ODP Areas, Export Promotion Zone (EPZ), CRZ eastern half of district. Promote wind and solar areas, Tourism, Affordable Housing, TPS power generation alongside service and Schemes, Open Spaces, Conservation Areas. manufacturing industries.

Vision

Regional goals Delivery of Plans

 Zone A : natural forest land use is concentrated, no activity that causes deforestation permitted.  Zone B : intensive agricultural and animal husbandry activity area  Zone C : agriculture and allied activities dominating over urban activities.  Zone D : urban activities are dominating over rural activities.  Zone E : major water bodies within the district, environmentally sensitive zone.  Zone F : existing municipal areas and those LSGIs

Identifies Local government areas within North Queensland region 1. Hinchinbrrok 2. Palm Island 3. Charters Towers 4. Townsville 5. Burdekin

Development of self sufficiency and enhancement of agriculture, fisheries, animal husbandry, industries, watershed development, conservation of natural resources.

A leading economy, rich and natural environment, A safe, connected and efficient mobility, livable and sustainable communities

The Eco zones to protect maximum green Planning for communities and sustainable Regulate the changing land use in the environment Developing environment aspects of the district and cover from development pressures and management of culture and natural resources. and thus is the significance of Transition zone. envisages control measures in and around the preparation and implementation of the Providing guidance on appropriate environmental and environmentally sensitive areas critical area plans for eco tourism hot spots built form outcomes for new development. .

Unique Features

12 Regional Plans for each Taluks.

INTEGRATED REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN- GANJAM 2041

Identification of thrust of Each Sub Region

Sanitation and Health Infrastructure

CRITICAL REVIEW OF REGIONAL PLANS

‘Health check up’ of NQ Regional plan and outcomes will be displayed on Queensland Website.

Deena Harikrishna | Natukula Mounika Dept. of Planning | MEPM | III Sem | Batch 2020-22

CHANGE IN LULC & BUILT-UP SPRAWL

LULC Map 2011

OBJECTIVES

LULC Map 2021

4% 4% 8%

To assess spatial & temporal changes occurred in the district over a particular period and to identify the reasons behind these changes.

34%

To evaluate the status of ecosystem, driver of its impacts, its effects on the environment, habitat and migration patterns for mapping out ecologically sensitive areas to develop a conservation plan.

50%

11

LULC Change Map 2011-2021

4% 3%

37%

10 %

46%

To understand the temporal variation of forest based on typology, cover, canopy density etc. and prepare a Eco sensitivity zoning map to identify the sensitive areas in the district.

To understand the existing biodiversity of the district and assess the eco sensitivity of the Chilika lake and Turtle Nesting Site To develop an analytical framework for identifying the developable and conservable land in the district in order to maintain the balance between development and nature.

METHODOGY

PREDICTION OF BUILT-UP SPRAWL Spatio-temporal Settlement growth modelling (2011-2041) of

Built-Up In 2011

Built-Up In 2021

OBSERVATIONS Built-Up In 2041  The dominant land uses in district are

Ganjam District has been prepared to understand Settlemenent growth paradigm

Agriculture

and

Forest

covering

almost 80% of the district.  It indicates the district economy is mostly dependent on the primary activity,

getting

its

income

from

Agricultural and Forest produce.  Over the decade, it is evident that there is increase in forest land by 2.5%.  There is decrease observed in barren land indicating use of land for various

other purpose.  The Built-up Area(2011) – 649 sq.km

INTEGRATED REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN- GANJAM 2041

Built-up Area(2021) – 827 sq.km

LULC & BIODIVERSITY

Built-up Area(2041) – 917 sq.km

settlements

areas

increased a lot over the years.

Deena Harikrishna | Puloma Dept. of Planning | MEPM | III Sem | Batch 2020-22

haven’t

12

FOREST & ECO-SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT FOREST CANOPY DENSITY

FORESTS Ganjam has 26.27% of forest cover.

BLOCKWISE FOREST AREA

CHANGE MAP OF FOREST CANOPY DENSITY(2009-2019)

Canopy Density 2009

Legends-Forest Change

Canopy Density 2019

80%

2009

60%

19% of Total Forest Area belongs to MDF & 13% Very Dense Forest OF 2% 8%

0%

FOREST COVER

(% Of G.A. – 22.69%) TOTAL FOREST COVER

2156 SQ.KM. FOREST AREA

2000 1500 1000

80%

500

Legends

0

(% Of G.A. – 26.27%)

Observations:

2019

YEAR 2019

1862 SQ.KM. FOREST AREA

2500

2009

YEAR 2009

TOTAL FOREST COVER

FOREST(BASED ON ADMINISTRATION) Classification of Forest Reserve Forest Protected Forest Un Demarcated Unclassified Forest Other Forest Total

Area (Sq.km.)

1485.80 143.63 1167.35 80.0 352.47 3149.9

11 Area in % 3% %

36%

46% 4%

Source: Author

Dense forest canopy density - 70%

25%

Moderate dense canopy density- 41% to 70% Open forest canopy density - 10% to 40%

Source: District Handbook, 2018

ECO SENSITIVE ZONE

5%

23%

2009 39%

FOREST FIRE MAP

Area Comparison Table(Sq.Km.)

7%

G.A.

Year

2019 42%

8206 8206

2009 2019 Net Change

31%

27%

 Increase in forest cover due to activities like plantation and conservations.  Decrease in scrub area due to Development activities.

Very Dense Moderately Forest Dense Forest 163 969 195 1096 32 127

Open Forest 730 865 135

ASSESSMENT OF ECO-SENSITIVITY(WEIGHTED SCORE)

2019

60% 40% 20% 0%

Total 1862 2156 294

Scrub

Aska Chatrapur Hinjilicut Kabisuryanagar Purushottampur Kangeilunda Sheragada Khallikote Digapahandi Bellaguntha Chikiti Ganjam Kukudakhandi Sanakhemundi Beguniapada Polasara Buguda Dharakote Jagannathprasad Patrapur Surada Bhanjarnagar

66%

20%

Moderately Dense Forest Open Forest

Aska Chatrapur Hinjilicut Kabisuryanagar Purushottampur Kangeilunda Digapahandi Khallikote Sheragada Bellaguntha Chikiti Sanakhemundi Ganjam Kukudakhandi Polasara Beguniapada Buguda Dharakote Jagannathprasad Patrapur Bhanjarnagar Surada

11%

40%

841 648 -193

ECO-SENSITIVITY ZONING FOR FORESTS ESZ I ESZ II ESZ III Chilika

Special Breeding Site

Source: Pronab Sen Committee Report

PARAMETERS & SCORING LOGIC

Source: Odisha Forest Fire Report 2019

Species Richness Map

BLOCK WISE ECO-SENSITIVE AREA

INTEGRATED REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN- GANJAM 2041

LULC & BIODIVERSITY

Surada

Sheragada

Sanakhemundi

Rangeilunda

Purushottampur

Polasara

Patrapur

Kukudakhandi

Khallikote

Kabisuryanaga r

Jagannathpras ad

Hinjilicut

Ganjam

Digapahandi

Dharakote

Chikiti

Chatrapur

Buguda

Bhanjanagar

Bellaguntha

Beginiapada

Asika

400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0

Eco Sensitive Zone Level Index

ESZ I(High) >0.7

ESZ II(Medium) 0.40-0.69

ESZ III(Low) 0-0.39

Deena Harikrishna | Puloma Dept. of Planning | MEPM | III Sem | Batch 2020-22

BIODIVERSITY ASSESSMENT

BIODIVERSITY ASSESSMENT OF FOREST AREAS

CHILIKA LAKE Chilika Lake is one of the hotspots of biodiversity in Ganjam.  It is the largest wintering ground for migratory water-fowl found anywhere on the Indian subcontinent  Chilika 4 types of crocodiles,24 types of mammals, 37 types of reptiles and amphibians are seen.  Some rare, vulnerable and endangered species listed in the IUCN Red List of threatened animals inhabit the Lake area.Like Irrawady dolphins, Barakudia limbless skink, Fishing cat, White bellied Sea eagle, White spoonbill, Osprey and Spoon billed sandpiper.

FAUNA    

12 27 153 161 169 192 212 213 268 287 387 394 412 457 464

Low Diversity (0-150 of species count)

Barhgarhi RF Hukuma RF Malati RF Karaohul RF Rambha RF Jagnnathprasd RF

47 135 191 213 489 571

Paralakhemundi Sub Division

Pakirhi RF Rambha RF Athagarha PF Karaohul RF Kriamba RF Hukuma RF Barhgarhi RF Ragarha RF Barhgarhi RF

Medium Diversity (151350 of species count)

High Diversity (>350 of species count)

Low Diversity (0-150 of species count) Medium Diversity (151350 of species count) High Diversity (>350 of species count)

37 56 67 187 329 351 432 476

Medium Diversity (151350 of species count)

287

Medium Diversity (151350 of species count)

Low Diversity (0-150 of species count)

High Diversity (>350 of species count)

Forest Name

No of Rare Species

Athagarha PF Gaida RF Kriamba RF Ramapalli RF Mayuranancha RF Barhgarhi RF Banamari RF Ambilijhar RF Karakhol RF Nakoi Block PF Rushimal RF Tumba RF Sandabhuja RF Tangiri RF Singraju RF

0 0 0 0 3 6 11 12 12 14 37 39 41 46 48

Barhgarhi RF Malati RF Hukuma RF

0 12 15

Karaohul RF

16

Jagnnathprasd RF Rambha RF

47 54

Athagarha PF Rambha RF Pakirhi RF Karaohul RF Kriamba RF Hukuma RF Barhgarhi RF Ragarha RF

0 0 5 28 33 36 39 49

Paralakhemundi Sub Division

Barhgarhi RF

0

BIODIVERSITY ASSESSMENT OF CHILLIKA LAKE

Sensitivity

Low Sensitivity (0-15 of rare species count)

Division

Forest Name

No of Endangered Species

Berhampur Forest Sub Division

Mayuranancha RF Athagarha PF Barhgarhi RF Kriamba RF Gaida RF Ramapalli RF Banamari RF Karakhol RF Ambilijhar RF Nakoi Block PF Tangiri RF Rushimal RF Sandabhuja RF Tumba RF Singraju RF

Division

Ambilijhar RF Athagarha PF Barhgarhi RF Kriamba RF Nakoi Block PF Mayuranancha RF Gaida RF Banamari RF Karakhol RF Ramapalli RF Tumba RF Rushimal RF Sandabhuja RF Tangiri RF Singraju RF

0 0 0 0 0 2 9 12 12 15 23 27 29 36 39

Barhgarhi RF Hukuma RF Malati RF Rambha RF

0 0 0 0

Karaohul RF

18

Jagnnathprasd RF

39

Hukuma RF Karaohul RF Pakirhi RF Ragarha RF Rambha RF Athagarha PF Kriamba RF

0 0 0 0 0 5 15

Low Sensitivity (0-15 of Endangered species count)

18

Medium Sensitivity (1630 of Endangered species count)

11

Low Sensitivity (0-15 of Endangered species count)

High Sensitivity (>35 of rare species count)

Low Sensitivity (0-15 of rare species count) Medium Sensitivity (1635 of rare species count) High Sensitivity (>35 of rare species count) Low Sensitivity (0-15 of rare species count) Medium Sensitivity (1635 of rare species count) High Sensitivity (>35 of rare species count) Low Sensitivity (0-15 of rare species count)

Ghumsur North Forest Division

Diversity of species

Ghumsur South Forest Division

No of Species

Ghumsur North Forest Division

Forest Name

3. Endangered Species

Berhampur Forest Sub Division

 The floral diversity of the hill includes 642 species of flowering plants which is 35% of the flora of Orissa.  It is rich with medicinal plants and orchids.  The hilly terrain, endowed with dense tropical semi-evergreen forests, composes a unique ecological marvel in harbouring the genetic diversity.

Division

Ghumsur South Forest Division

FLORA

2. Rarity of Species

Berhampur Forest Sub Division

 The forest of Mahendragiri hills falls mainly under (a) Tropical moist deciduous & (b) Tropical dry deciduous type.  The vegetation can be classified broadly into four types as Sal Forest, Mixed Deciduous Forest, Scrub Forest & Grasslands.  Mahendragiri may be recognised as a biosphere reserve as well as a heritage site.  All kinds of eco-development activities including eco-tourism, tourism would be allowed in the periphery as well as the transition zones.

1. Species Diversity

Ghumsur North Forest Division

MAHENDRAGIRI HILLS

Ghumsur South Forest Division

MAJOR BIODIVERSITY HOTSPOTS OF GANJAM

13

Barhgarhi RF

Paralakhemundi Sub Division

Barhgarhi RF

Sensitivity

Low Sensitivity (0-15 of Endangered species count)

Medium Sensitivity (1630 of Endangered species count) High Sensitivity (>30 of Endangered species Low Sensitivity (0-15 of Endangered species count) Medium Sensitivity (1630 of Endangered High Sensitivity (>30 of Endangered species count)

BIODIVERSITY ASSESSMENT OF SPECIAL BREEDING SITE

FAUNA

- 800 species of fauna

24 mammalian species were reported.

37 species of reptiles and amphibians are also reported.

“Tiger Crab” is the most important species and occurs in greater nos.

The Irrawaddy Dolphin is the flagship species of chilika lake & only 2 lagoons in the world are home to this species .

ENDANGERED SPECIES

PARAMETERS

Species Diversity

NO OF SPECIES

652

Dolphin Habitat Rarity of Species

42

SPECIES AT RISK Endangered Species

36

Historical Significance

126

SENSITIVITY HIGH(<150=low,151 350=medium,>350 =high) HIGH (<15=low,1635=medium,>350= high) HIGH (<15=low,1530=medium,>30=hi gh) HIGH (<50=low,51100=medium,>100 =high)

ES Zone

PARAMETERS Species Diversity

Rarity of Species

An overall 726 species of flowering plants belonging to 496 genera and 120 families. This represents about one–fourth of the vascular plant species of the Odisha state with 2900 species.

Aquatic Vegetation 1.

2.

3.

Emergent Submerged Floating forms

Source: Chilika: an Integrated planning framework for wise use, 2012

INTEGRATED REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN- GANJAM 2041

Source: http://odishawildlife.org/.html,http://www.wildlife.odisha.gov.in/, https://www.downtoearth.org.in.

Lakhs of endangered Olive Ridley turtles flocked the Rushikulya river mouth for their annual mass nesting in Odisha’s Ganjam district.

Odisha is the largest mass nesting site for Oliver Ridleys in the world.

 



2

LOW(<150=low,151350=medium,>350= high)

1

LOW (<15=low,1635=medium,>350=h igh)

Endangered Species

1

Historical Significance

1

ES Zone

ES - III

LOW(<15=low,1530=medium,>30=hi gh) LOW (<50=low,51100=medium,>100= high)

ISSUES OF THE ECO SENSITIVITY ZONES

Improved Forest Extent and Condition on forest lands and tree cover which were recognized as Reserve Forest Areas.

Higher allocations, investment, insurance and incentives for better forest management.

Chilika Lake is the largest brackish water lake with estuarine character that sprawls along the east coast of India. Also this lake is a highly productive ecosystem, with rich fishery resources.

LULC & BIODIVERSITY

SENSITIVITY

ES - I

POTENTIAL OF THE ECO SENSITIVITY ZONES

FLORA

NO OF SPECIES

  

Many of the existing Protected Areas have already undergone tremendous development in close vicinity to their boundaries.

Areas with forest fire spark human-wildlife conflict.

Especially Elephants, wild boars have started coming out of forests on fire.

Freshwater flow from streams and rivers turned the Chilika into a freshwater lake. Invasive freshwater weeds proliferated silt by rivers made the lake even shallower.

Deena Harikrishna | Puloma Dept. of Planning | MEPM | III Sem | Batch 2020-22

14

LAND SUITABILITY ASSESSMENT LOGIC Proximity To Eco-sensitive Area

Land Suitability Logic Analysis

Proximity To Roads

Proximity To Urban Settlement

Land Suitability For Development No Rank Evaluation Factors Development Zone

Moderately Suitable

Most Suitable

Weightage

500-1000m. 1000-1500 m.

>1500 m.

20.90%

Least Suitable

1

Proximity To EcoSensitive Area

0-500 m.

2

Proximity To Roads

-

>1000 m.

500-1000 m.

0-500 m.

19.80%

3

Proximity To Urban Settlements

-

>1500 m.

1000-1500 m.

0-1000 m.

17.50%

Hazard Vulnerable Area -

Most Vulnerable

Moderately Vulnerable

Least Vulnerable

14.80%

5

Proximity To Waterbodies

0-200 m.

200-500 m.

500-1000 m.

>1000 m.

11.20%

6

Groundwater Depth

-

>14m.

<2 m.

2-14 m.

6.20%

7

Proximity To Existing Industries

-

<500 m.

500-1500 m.

>1500 m.

3.90%

-

Laterite, Red Loamy

3.20%

15-25%

0-15%

2.50%

4

Hazard Vulnerable Area

8

Soil type

-

Medium Black Soil

9

Slope

-

>25%

Proximity To Waterbodies

Groundwater Depth

Source: CGWD Report 2019-20)

Proximity To Industries

Soil Type

Slope

Inferences  The Reserve forests are coming under eco sensitive areas and they are marked as no development zone. The north and the west part of the district is thus unsuitable for any kind of urban development.  There are good no. of national highways and state highways that have bifurcated the district in smaller parts but some areas near the eastern part and some parts of the southern area have no road connectivity and is found unsuitable.  The no of settlements in the district are pretty less and concentrated on certain areas.  Area near the coastal zone are prone to hazards and thus not suitable for further development.

Source: DEM File

INTEGRATED REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN- GANJAM 2041

LULC & BIODIVERSITY

Deena Harikrishna | Puloma Dept. of Planning | MEPM | III Sem | Batch 2020-22

Development & Non- Development Zone

Parameters

Land Suitability & Developable Area Distribution

 Proximity To Eco-Sensitive Area  Proximity To Roads  Proximity To Settlements

Sl. No.

Block

 Distance From Hazard Vulnerable Area

1

 Proximity To Waterbodies  Groundwater Depth  Proximity To Existing Industries  Presence of Barren Land  Soil type

 Slope Development Zone I (Most Suitable) Development Zone II (Moderately Suitable) Development Zone III (Least Suitable) No Development Zone

6% 30% 23%

41%

Activity

Development Zone I(Most Suitable)

Development Zone II(Moderately Suitable)

Development Zone III(Least Suitable)

No Development Zone

Settlements

High Density

Medium Density

Low Density

Restricted

Industry

Household Industries

Large & Medium industries

MSME

Restricted

Tourism

Agricultural markets, Agricultural markets, storage storage godowns and milk godowns and milk chilling chilling plants plants Eco tourism, amusement Art & Crafts Museum park

INTEGRATED REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN- GANJAM 2041

2 3 4 3 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

Development No Development Development Zone Development Zone I(Most Zone III(Least II(Moderately Zone Suitable) Suitable) Suitable) Sqkm.

Sqkm.

Sqkm.

Sqkm.

Asika Beguniapada (Kodala) Bellaguntha Bhanjanagar Buguda Chhatrapur Chikiti Dharakote Digapahandi Ganjam Hinjilicut Jagannathprasad

45.42

120.83

18.05

19.77

27.57

21.44

205.47

13.60

16.00 16.00 7.65 27.64 30.23 19.63 30.11 1.56 12.84 0.00

71.22 41.56 95.35 179.07 57.70 23.83 155.40 8.91 155.11 108.02

103.29 232.80 242.75 40.74 152.81 404.92 213.14 122.23 0.00 187.76

30.92 464.43 80.95 0.00 30.97 17.48 108.73 108.60 0.00 533.83

Kavisurjyanagar Khalikote Kukudakhandi Patrapur Polasara Purusottampur Rangeilunda (Kanisi) Sanakhemundi Seragada Surada

50.40 2.01 10.28 19.05 48.35 14.19

72.98 9.67 115.32 77.75 120.30 203.59

39.61 208.11 83.96 279.75 214.40 17.45

6.67 206.04 85.86 183.59 22.34 17.53

33.21

84.86

157.69

0.02

35.89 36.44 8.00

109.51 91.89 39.13

189.90 59.78 319.17

11.06 0.00 643.45

492.27

1963.44

3493.78

2885.84

Total Area

Summary Sheet For Development Zone

Permissible & Non-Permissible Activity In The Development Zone

Agriculture

38

Animal Husbandry

Home stay tourism in restricted manner

Agro Forestry

Restricted

Total No Of GP

988

Development Zone I Development Zone Development Zone II III

145

346

324

No Development Zone

173

Inferences  The Developable Zone I doe snot have lots of area and is mostly concentrated on the middle part of the district.  The Development Zone III is mostly located near the forests and eco sensitive areas.

DEVELOPABLE LAND

Deena Harikrishna | Puloma Dept. of Planning | MEPM | III Sem | Batch 2020-22

COASTAL REGULATION ZONING

PROPOSAL 1: Permissible & non-permissible activities along the CRZ I, CRZ II, CRZ III & CRZ IV

43

PROPOSED COASTAL REGULATION ZONE

“

1

1 2

2

ISSUES IN GP’s IN TERMS OF VULNERABILITY Coastal Composite Disaster Composite Gram Panchayat Vulnerability Vulnerability Agastinuagam Boxipalli Ekasingi Indraklhai Kaimuhapur Kalampur Kalipalli Kanamana Karapalli Katuru Keluapalli Narayanpur Phulta Podapadar Ralibandha Ramagad Sasanapadar Sunapur

LULC change

Most vulnerable GPs are Boxipalli,Phulta,Podapadar& Ramagad.

MAJOR CAUSE OF VULNERABILITY

1. Shoreline erosion hazardous storms

3

and

BENEFITS OF CRZ PROPOSAL The coastline is a national heritage and in order to sustain it for future generations, sustainable management of coastal resources and defense is essential.

Rate of change in shoreline and extreme events are affected the coastal GPs. 2. Eutrophication Inputs of nutrients to coastal areas from waste treatment facilities, nonpoint sources in watersheds, port, vessels.

3. Hydrologic & Hydrodynamic Disruption

3

The hydrology of watersheds has been significantly altered due to landscape changes, consumptive water uses, etc.

COASTAL REGULATION ZONING WITH ZONE GUIDELINES

Permissible and nonpermissible land uses along the CRZ I, CRZ II, CRZ III and CRZ IV To Demarcate the permitted and nonpermitted activities in accordance to Coastal Regulation Zone.

Erosion Containment To Demarcate the portions or areas of GPs where measures to protect the shoreline from Erosion and flooding is needed and measures are provided for the same.

INTEGRATED REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN- GANJAM 2041

Marine Ecosystem Conservation

Zone

Description

Permissible Activities

CRZ I A

Eco-sensitive areas

Eco-tourism (nature trails, tree huts, etc.); Public utilities (pipelines, transmission lines, etc.) in mangrove buffer

CRZ I B CRZ II

To demarcate the zones where conservation and restoration of the marine species is needed and give the solutions.

• Maximize the benefits provided for a variety of activities including industry, agriculture, recreation and fisheries • Minimize conflicts and harmful effects of activities upon each other, resources and the environment • Promote linkages between sectoral activities • Guide coastal area development in an ecologically sustainable fashion.

CRZ III A

CRZ III B

Foreshore facilities (ports, etc.); Defense projects; Road on stilts; Erosion control measures; Power by non-conventional Inter-tidal areas energy sources and associated facilities; Storage of non-hazardous cargo; Hatchery and natural fish drying; Waste treatment facilities; Storm water drains; Salt harvesting, Desalination plants and associated facilities; Weather radar Areas which have developed Building construction on landward side of existing road; Development of vacant plots in designated areas for up to or close to shore construction of beach resorts or hotels or tourism development projects; Temporary tourism facilities Areas with population density Within NDZ: Agriculture, horticulture, gardens, pastures, parks, playfields and forestry; Construction of dispensaries, <2161 sq. km schools, public rain shelter, community toilets, bridges, roads, provision of facilities for water supply, drainage, sewerage, crematoria, cemeteries and electric sub-station; Construction of units or auxiliary thereto for domestic sewage, treatment and disposal; Facilities required for local fishing communities; Temporary tourism facilities; Mining of atomic minerals Areas with population density Beyond NDZ: Construction of public rain shelters, community toilets, water supply drainage, sewerage, >2161 sq. km roads, bridges, etc.; Limestone mining; Development of airports in wastelands and non-arable lands

CRZ IV A

12 nautical miles from the LTL

CRZ IV B

Tidal influences waterbodies

Traditional fishing and allied activities; Exploration and extraction of oil, natural gas and atomic minerals; Pipelines, conveying systems including transmission lines; Construction of memorials or monuments

COASTAL CONTAINMENT & REJUVENATION - I

Deena Harikrishna | Sakshi Bajpai | Urbi Mondal Dept. of Planning | MEPM | III Sem | Batch 2020-22

EROSION CONTAINMENT & MARINE ECOSYSTEM CONSERVATION PROPOSAL 2 : Erosion Containment Shoreline (2011 and 2021)

Division-d5

d1 d2

D1 D2 D3

d3 d4 d5 d6

d7 d8 d9 d10

Total Area of Erosion

18.5 sqkm

D4

Issues in Division

d11

Erosion, Flood and Cyclone Vulnerable GP

Sills and Edging

D5

Breakwater, Erosion, Accretion, Flood and Revetment & Cyclone Vulnerable GP Mangrove

D6

Accretion, Flood and Cyclone Mangrove Vulnerable GP plantation & sills

Location:

• • • • • • •

whaling, entanglement in fishing gear (by-catch), climate change, ship strikes, toxic contamination, oil and gas development and habitat degradation.

Sector IPrayagi to Rushikulya Mouth.

D7 D8

Erosion, Flood and Cyclone Vulnerable GP

Sills and Edging

D9

Erosion

D10

Erosion, Flood and Cyclone Vulnerable GP

Sills and Edging

Sector IIIGopalpur Mouth to Markundi Mouth.

Erosion, Accretion

Breakwater and Mangrove plantation

Sector IVMarkundi Mouth to Bahuda Mouth.

D12

Accretion

INTEGRATED REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN- GANJAM 2041

Sectors with Cetacean species

Implementation of Conservation Strategies 1. Promoting responsible fishing practices, also taking into account food chain impacts and other fisheries interactions, and enforce existing regulations for sustainable ecosystem management.

2. Develop and promote the use of guidelines for eliminating the discard of waste for fishing operations.

3. Developing region-wide whale and dolphin watching guidelines or a code of conduct and ensuring socio-economic benefits of whale and dolphin watching reach local communities.

2. COASTLINE RESTORATION BY REMOVING INVASIVE SPECIES. Species Found in study area: Impacts on native species:

GOALS FOR COASTAL FLOOD AND CYCLONE MANAGEMENT • Construct defenses seaward of the coast • Adapting vertically by elevating land and buildings • Crisis Relief • Cyclone warning Systems • Evacuation Routes • Mangrove Plantation

LEGEND

Mangrove plantation

Typical Section Showing Solution for ‘d11’

Mid Term Goals

Sector IIRushikulya Mouth to Gopalpur Mouth.

Breakwater

Typical Section Showing Solution for ‘d5’

• Optimising the use of natural resources • Creating awareness amongst the people as well as the authorities • Holding the line typically involves shoreline hardening techniques, seawalls, groynes, detached breakwaters, and revetments.

• Evacuation Vehicles

Bottle nose dolphin (Tursiops aduncus), Hump back dolphins (Sousa chinensis), Porpoise (Neophocaena phocaenoides), Spinner dolphins (Stenella longirostris) were counted and found in the shallow water areas of the coast during high tides to collect food.

Sills and Edging

Division-d11

Short Term Goals

• • • •

Erosion, Flood and Cyclone Vulnerable GP

D11

d12

Sills and Edging

Accretion, Flood and Cyclone Mangrove Vulnerable GP plantation & sills

Total Area of Accretion

33.6 sqkm

Proposals

Erosion, Accretion, Flood and Breakwater and Cyclone Vulnerable GP Revetment Erosion, Flood and Cyclone Vulnerable GP

PROPOSAL 3 : Marine Ecosystem Conservation

1. CONSERVATION OF CETACEAN SPECIES NEAR COASTLINE Species Found in study area: Threatened By:

Proposals for the divisions Division

44

Long Term Goals • Besides constructing seawalls, other hard structures may be constructed • Safe shelters • Hazard proof housing – Resistant housing • Local Cooperative Relief • Land use strategy

• Zebra mussel • Water Chestnut • Lionfish

• Outcompeting for food & space, • Impenetrable floating mats of vegetation & voracious predators.

Location:

LEGEND Areas with Invasive species

COASTAL CONTAINMENT & REJUVENATION - II

Proposed Control Mechanisms: • Encourage native diseases and/or parasites that affect the invasive population.

• Apply biological control, using alien parasites or diseases.

• Apply biological control, using alien consumers (predators or grazers).

• Apply genetic approaches that affect only the invasive.

Deena Harikrishna | Sakshi Bajpai | Urbi Mondal Dept. of Planning | MEPM | III Sem | Batch 2020-22

CONSERVATION OF CHILLIKA LAKE

55

PROPOSAL-1 : Conservation of Chillika Lake

MAJOR ISSUES IDENTIFIED FROM ANALYSIS 1. Inappropriate Development of settlements lead to loss of agricultural land.

LOCATION:

LEGEND

Key map

Chillika Lake

3. Decrease in scrub forest area due to development activities.

4. Poaching of wild animals & entry of public into forest areas.

STEPS INVOLVED:

Permissible & Non permissible activities in Eco sensitivity Zones

STRUCTURAL

NON-STRUCTURAL

5. Invasive fresh water weeds proliferated in the Chillika lake.

6. Overexploitation of commercial fishes in the Chillika lake.

 Creating a native plant buffer strip.

PROPOSALS FOR THE ISSUES IDENTIFIED

 Restricting Nonnative & Invasive Species

 Policy level strategy for proper harvesting of aquatic goods.

1. CREATING NATIVE PLANT BUFFER STRIP AROUND THE LAKE. Action Plan: Number of Individuals to be planted for every 5m.

Implementation Plan :

B. 18 km of shoreline

A. 23 km of outer channel

PHASE 1: Zone A1,C2.

AREAS OF PROPOSALS

PHASE 2: Zone B1,A2.

LEGEND

PHASE 3: Zone C1,D2.

Chillika Lake Reforestation LEGEND Afforestation Wildlife Sanctuary

23 km of Outer channel Total : 4600 Individuals

Native Plant Buffer Strip of 41 Km

2. RESTRICTING NON-NATIVE & INVASIVE SPECIES FROM THE LAKE. Control Mechanisms

Effective on plants, particularly on foliage and rhizome

Can lead to impacts on other biota as glyphosate is not species specific

i. Fishing by any method is prohibited in months of June to august in the year as it is the prominent breeding season for most of the fishes.

b) Mechanical control / physical control (cutting / mowing the stands to below water level (particularly during summer when water levels are lower)

As most of the food • Expensive, high reserves are stored in manpower the upper portion of requirement. plants, can knock down the growth • Possibility of regrowth from rhizome fragments.

ii. Capture of Khainga, Kabla, Bhekti below 150mm size and prawn like Bagda and Chapra varieties below 100mm size by any means is prohibited throughout the year.

c) Controlled burning

Can greatly reduce the biomass, which can allow other species to germinate

Burning is not species specific and can be dangerous

Can create incentives for local communities to participate in management

Need to have regulations in place for perverse incentives

Areas with Phragmites Karka

INTEGRATED REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN- GANJAM 2041

Negative implications

3. POLICY LEVEL STRATEGY FOR PROPER HARVESTING OF AQUATIC GOODS.

a) Chemical control (treating with glyphosate product)

d) Harvesting and economic use

LEGEND

Positive implications

18 km of Shoreline Total : 3600 Individuals

PHASE 4: Zone D1,B2.

BIODIVERSITY PROPOSALS

iii. Fishing is completely prohibited in the outer channel of Chilika lake during the months between December and January. iv. No fishing by means of net shall be allowed in the outer channel throughout the year. v. Training programs for fishery extension officers, officers of marine science department and fish cultivation are also to be imparted here.

Deena Harikrishna | Puloma Dept. of Planning | MEPM | III Sem | Batch 2020-22

56

AFFORESTATION & REFORESTATION STRATEGY Land Converted to Barren Land

Forest Land to Scrub Forest

Reclamation Through Reforestation

Forest Land to Open Forest

 Raygarh RF and Karakhol Rf falls mainly under (a) Tropical moist deciduous & (b) Tropical dry deciduous type.

1%

35 % 64%

 36. 09 Sq. Km forest Land converted to barren land can be claimed by planning

 The vegetation can be classified broadly into four types as Sal Forest, Mixed Deciduous Forest, Scrub Forest & Grasslands.

Agroforestry It sequesters carbon in vegetation and soil, produces wood, serving as substitute for similar products that are unsustainably harvested from natural forests.

Air Quality

Water Quality

Lower Needs for Fertilization and Irrigation Biodiversity Conservation Extra income for Farmers

Area for Land Reclamation Actual Area Reclaimed

Area Reclaimed As Per Calculation Reforestation Area Afforestation Area

Area in SQ Km

CD Blocks

Afforestation

Asika Beginiapada Bellaguntha Bhanjanagar Buguda Chatrapur Chikiti Dharakote Digapahandi Ganjam Hinjilicut Jagannathprasa d Kabisuryanagar Khallikote Kukudakhandi Patrapur Polasara Purushottampur Rangeilunda Sanakhemundi Sheragada Surada Total

8.4 5.02 11.34 5.6 1.98 0.03 0.14 3.48 0.57 0.3

5.33 0.03 1.14 1.02 3.07 3.17 0.02 0.02 1.22 0.22 36.39 88.49

Area in SQ Km

Reforestatio Grassland n

9.71 25.91 28.75 89.6 62.53 7.94 11.07 10.92 26.65 14.57 2.1 208.09 4.1 60.93 20.17 45.88 53.93 27.9 1.71 5.29 8.99 13.55 740.28

Integration of trees on farms and in the agricultural landscape

0.02 0.08 0.07 0.28 0.11 0.02 0.02 0.08 0.04 0.02

CD Blocks

0.81 1.28 0.42 4.69 1.66 0.07 0.67 0.49 0.14

Hinjilicut 0.14 0.01 0.04 0.03 0.16 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.55 1.74

2.31 10.21 7.24 57.63 32.95 2.67 5.44 5.58 19.29 11.77

0.004 0.001 0.003 0.158 0.012

Sal

1.1

Jagannathprasad Kabisuryanagar Khallikote Kukudakhandi Patrapur Polasara Purushottampur Rangeilunda Sanakhemundi Sheraguda Surada

4.91 0.04 1.53 1.50 1.25 2.05 0.14 0.05 0.05 0.05 31.31

184.27 1.27 45.02 11.55 32.90 33.70 10.45 1.2 2.02 2.99 4.28

0.071 0.002 0.015 0.014 0.087 0.002 0.002

Total Area

53.11

485.84

0.75

0.001 0.360

20 m

5m

INTEGRATED REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN- GANJAM 2041

Mango

Bamboo

0.007 0.006 0.010

A Sample Calculation For No Of Trees

20 m

Vegetation Type for Reforestation

Afforestation Reforestation Grassland

Asika Beguniapada Bellaguntha Bhanjarnagar Buguda Chatrapur Chikiti Dharakote Digapahandi Ganjam

Vegetables, oilseeds, and pulses are now also produced as part of the new management protocol for the reclaimed land, which emphasizes a cereal to noncereal rotation.

Tree

C/C Distance

Nos. Of Saplings In 1 Sq.km.

Nos. Of Saplings Required

Sal tree

5m

40,000

60,75,200

Arjuna Tree

15 m

4,500

6,83,500

Arjun

Sisoo Scrub Forest PROHIBITED & NON PERMISSIBLE ACTIVITIES IN ESA PROHIBITED

REGULATED

PERMITTED

•Commercial Mining •Setting of saw mills •Setting of Industries causing pollution •Commercial use of Firewood •Establishment of major hydroelectric projects.

•Use or production of any hazardous substance.

•Undertaking activities related to tourism by over flying by any air craft, hot air balloons etc.

•Discharge of effluents and soil waste in natural water bodies or terrestrial area.

•Felling of trees •Establishment of Hotels and Resorts •Drastic change of agriculture systems •Commercial use of natural water resources including ground water harvesting.

•Erection of electric cables.

•Fencing of premises of hotels and lodges.

•Use of polythene bags by shopkeepers.

•Widening of roads.

•Movement of vehicular traffic at night.

•Introduction of exotic spiciness.

•Protection of hill slopes and river banks.

•Sign boards and hoardings

•Ongoing agriculture and horticulture practices by local communities.

•Rain water harvesting.

•Organic farming.

•Use of renewable energy sources.

•Adoption of green technology for all activities.

•Vegetative fencing.

•Cottage industries including village artisans.

•Environmental Awareness •Skill Development •Agro Forestry •Community Nature Reserves

Source: www.agrifarming.in Source: MoEFCC

BIODIVERSITY PROPOSALS

Deena Harikrishna | Puloma Dept. of Planning | MEPM | III Sem | Batch 2020-22

SANCTUARIES

Schematic section of Sanctuary

PROPOSAL-5 : Wildlife Preservation in Forest Areas AREAS WITH MORE NUMBER OF ENDANGERED SPECIES

57

AREAS TO BE PROPOSED AS WILDLIFE SANCTUARY IN FOREST AREAS 1. Jagannathprasad RF 2. Barhgarha RF

LEGEND Forest Areas with more number of endangered species Forest Areas

3. Tangiri RF 4. Singraju RF.

DETAILED PROPOSAL OF JAGANNATHPRASAD RF SANCTUARY Aim of this Proposed Sanctuary 1) To serve as a major habitat for Bengal tigers and Wild Elephant which support 35-40 tigers and 100-120 elephants in the region.

2) To improve the habitat by replacing teak with miscellaneous forests and eradication of weeds.

3) To increase the protection of the area against poaching/habitat destruction by bringing it under the PA network.

4) To provide better livelihood options for people dependent on the area through ecotourism, participation in management of the area, ecodevelopment activities through increased funding and relocation to better areas where possible.

5) To conserve the rivers for irrigated agriculture, which results in very significant economic benefit.

Economic benefits to the local people: 1. Direct Benefits - Hiring by forest Department.

2. Indirect Benefits - Opportunities in Guided tours.

- Local Entrepreneurs.

AREA DESCRIPTION The area selection has been done with the following considerations: • Most importantly to have a holistic approach and protect all parts of the landscape which are extensively used by mega-fauna.

• The selected area should be possible to establish a viable breeding population of tigers.

• The areas near human habitations will be buffer area for the sanctuary.

• The areas having rights of villagers are not included in the sanctuary.

• Natural boundaries are emphasized by selecting core and buffer areas along the proposed beat boundaries.

Division of beats which are included in the proposal.

Total area of Jagannathprasad RF : 327.44 sq.km.

Area considered for sanctuary proposal : 106.45 sq.km.

Beat Name 1. Gayaganda 2. Jadadhara 3. Jhirpada 4. Kadaligada 5.Tarasingi Proposed facilities in the sanctuary zone-wise 1. Captive breeding zone for Elephants and Tigers.

2. Heronry zone of the State for Open-billed Storks.

Area 12.16 sq.km 22.64 sq.km 13.69 sq.km 12.16 sq.km 20.18 sq.km

Eco-Sensitivity Zone I

Buffer

2

Buffer

Buffer

Eco-Sensitivity Zone II

1 Buffer

3. Largest pool zone for housing Gharials and Hippopotamus.

4. Tiger Safari.

INTEGRATED REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN- GANJAM 2041

Eco-Sensitivity Zones

Core Area : 61.32 sq.km Buffer Area : 45.13 sq.km

Core

PROPOSAL-6 : Enhancement action needed for Eco-sensitivity Zones

3

4

Eco-Sensitivity Zone III

BIODIVERSITY PROPOSALS

Forest Areas

Low Scored Parameters

Enhancement Actions needed

Captive breeding of animals, propagation of plants from seeds Tangiri RF Species Diversity or cuttings, artificial propagation of plants, etc.

Enhancing degraded or restoring missing habitats and Mayuranancha RF Forest Fire ecosystem functions; dealing with pollution.

Controlling and/or preventing invasive and/or other Jagannathprasad Rarity of Species problematic plants, animals, and pathogens.

Setting harvest quotas, trade regulations for specific Proximity to Ambilijhar RF populations of aquatic species, regulation of trade in nonHighway timber forest products, etc.

Historical Promoting Ecotourism, non-timber forest product harvesting Karaohul RF Significance etc.

Proximity to Restricting people from tribally owned hunting grounds, Pakhiri RF Highway communal protected areas, etc Proximity to Erecting fences near areas of settlements, training park staff, Hukuma RF Highway control of poachers, etc Protecting biodiversity out of its native habitats, gene-banking, Ramapalli RF Endangered Species cryopreservation, etc.

Deena Harikrishna | Puloma Dept. of Planning | MEPM | III Sem | Batch 2020-22