Koskulana Mini Hydropower Plant in Sinharaja Strict Buffer Zone

WaterLanka  Jan-Mar,2016

This report is based on a recent visit made to the Northern Buffer Zone of the Sinharaja World Heritage Site and a comprehensive analysis of Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) Report on Koskulana Mini Hydropower Project (KMHP) submitted to the Central Environmental Authority (CEA) by Waste Management Water Power (Pvt) Ltd. Although the IEE report is subjected to a painstaking analysis, this article highlights only the potential negative impacts of construction and operation of KMHP on ecological and social aspects and how people go against ethics and morals to make money.

SINHARAJA WORLD HERITAGE SITE

Project site in the Sinharaja buffer zone

The Koskulana mini hydropower project, which is under construction is supposed to generate 0.60 MW of electricity by diverting the Koskulana River flowing along the northern border of the Sinharaja World Heritage Site at Hupugoda Grama Niladhari Division (80⁰ 27’ 23” 62 E; 6⁰ 25’ 09” 70 N) in the Kalawana Divisional Secretariat. The project includes the construction of a concrete weir (2.5x 12 x 2.0 cubic meters), 86 m long headrace channel, a forebay, and a powerhouse with 29 m long tailrace channel. Water will convey from the forebay to the powerhouse via 265 m long penstock while after generation of electricity water will be released back to the Koskulana River through 29 m long tailrace channel. The project has calculated 2.54 m3/sec as the design flow to generate electricity and 0.1 m3/sec as the environmental flow to maintain the aquatic fauna and flora downstream of the powerhouse.

Accordingly, the weir releases only 3.9 % of the design flow as the environment flow, which has occurred only once over the last thirty years. Further, the river stretch from the proposed weir site to the tailrace outfall is about 450 m and it lies on the strict buffer zone of the Sinharaja World Heritage Site. The left bank (LB) of this river stretch has thick riparian vegetation with valuable trees endemic to Sri Lanka while the right bank (RB) with steep slopes has been subjected to different land use including scattered human settlements. The river gradient varies from 400 m to 300 m above mean sea level between the proposed weir site and the tailrace outfall and this river stretch is characterized by typical pools and riffles and isolated boulders with a moderate cascade towards downstream. These charterers of the stream stretch with clear water are evident for rich aquatic biodiversity including the abundance of native and endemic fishes.

According to the IEE report, IEE team has examined hydrology, geomorphology, flora and fauna and socio-economic status of the project area, up to 500 m upstream of the proposed weir site, 500 m downstream of tail race outfall and 100 m wide stretch along the Koskulana River banks including the mainstream of the river for the same length.

Existing environment The IEE report describes the general features of the project area to some extent but never state that the project area is exclusively within the buffer zone of the Sinharaja Rain Forest. The report also states that due to the high gradient of the river after the diversion point, construction of a 2.5 m high weir would not create any emergency situation like  flooding, which is incorrect. Most of the statements given under this section on biological environment are misleading and incorrect to a greater extent and deliberately hides some important information.

The IEE report includes only four fish species in the study area of which one species is endemic. The IEE team has found only four species, but there are five species in the detail faunal list namely Long Finned Eel. Giant Danio, Carveri Rasbora, Stone Sucker, and Mahseer. According to published literature, there are 26 freshwater fishes in the Kalu Ganga basin of which seventeen are endemic and the Kukule Ganga is a type habitat for several endemic species according to expert fish ecologists in the country.

The ecologist in the IEE team, a Botany special graduate is neither academically qualified nor competent to investigate aquatic fauna and flora in stream ecosystems, because a person with botany background cannot examine stream ecosystems for its fauna which is the most important ecological part as far as the mini hydropower projects are concerned

According to the IEE report, there are no river users along the river bank within the proposed project area, which is incorrect. There are many houses beyond the proposed weir on both sides of the river bank. People explore theses streams for gems and also to catch fish. Most of these houses are susceptible for flooding as the 2.5 m high weir is built. It should be considered the flood levels occurred beyond the proposed weir on the 7th December 2015 following heavy rains.

Soil erosion: The IEE report victimizes the upstream inhabitants for soil erosion rather than the devastating activities taking place during the construction phase as shown below. There will be an unprecedented soil erosion and subsequent sediment load into the stream due to the construction of the weir, excavation for headrace channel, forebay and powerhouse and other infrastructure development activities such as the construction of access roads. The soil erosion resulting from construction of power projects cannot be compared with minor agriculture activities. The main problem with soil erosion is not increased turbidity, but the elimination of microhabitats and spawning grounds of fish due to sediment deposition and also aquatic organisms will be affected by smothering.

It is apparent that Koskulana mini hydropower project results in every negative environmental impact that inherent to most of the mini hydropower projects and some are site-specific social impacts. But the case is site-specific and critical being located bordering the Sinharaja World Heritage Site within the strict buffer zone. All responsible government agencies have given approval for the project forwarding their own justifications. The District Forest Officer of Ratnapura has categorically denied their responsibility for the buffer zone of the Sinharaja World Heritage Site. Nevertheless, the available information reveals that the buffer zones of forest reserves must be protected by the Forest Department. Besides, the ecologist of the IEE team is neither qualified nor competent to conduct an IEE of this nature as mentioned before. Because IEE/EIA teams of hydropower projects must comprise a stream ecologist with a proven knowledge on freshwater fishes.

Further, acceptance of the IEE report by the CEA is questionable as two of the four team members including the team leader have not certified their commitment. The most critical environmental problem of the construction and operation of mini hydropower projects in mountain streams are endemic fishes evolved for millions of years. Sri Lanka is ranked as one of the biodiversity hotspots because of her endemic fish fauna and other species endemic to the country. None of the designated Project Approving Agencies (viz., NBRO, FD, ID, NWSDB, GSMB, CCD, CEA, and CEB) are not capable of evaluating this aspect by themselves due to non-availability subject specialists. Further, 0.60 MW electricity can be generated by a solar PV panel without causing any devastating environmental damage.

The total length of the affected stream stretches (ASS) in the Kukule Ganga including the Kukule major hydropower project is 12.39 km of which 8.18 km have resulted from Kukule Ganga major hydro dam, which generates 80 MW whereas about 4.5 km stream stretches have been destroyed from six mini hydropower plants, which generate only 10.50 MW. This indicates that mini hydropower projects destroy more stream habitats than major hydropower projects. This is true for all other major river basins such as Mahaweli, Kelani, Kalu, and Walawe with respect to the development of mini hydropower projects. Hill streams are the type habitats of endemic fishes and the tributaries of the Kukule Ganga sub-watershed area also rich in endemic fishes evolved for millions of years, There is tangible evidence to show that the fish fauna in mountain streams in Sri Lanka is declining due to the construction and operation of hydropower plants.

It is obvious that about 12.0 km of river water of the Kukuke River sub-watershed flow through conduits without contributing to plant growth while decreasing soil properties. This value for the Mahaweli and Kelani Rivers are about 100 km and 89 km respectively. This will certainly affect the propagation of riparian vegetation cover and stability of the overburden of the landscape. These ecological impacts are not addressed in developing countries including Sri Lanka when mini hydropower plants are proposed and engineers do not understand the gravity of the problem whereas entrepreneurs do not care about the environment.

The negative effects of incorrect and unacceptable operations of mini hydropower plants in Sri Lanka on endemic fish fauna as a result of habitat alteration and elimination are inevitable. The evidence is there for declining and vanishing of endemic fishes from hill streams over the last two decades with escalating small hydropower development. Construction of mini hydropower in the areas of sensitive vegetations such as Sinharaja World Heritage Site will certainly affect the propagation riverine vegetation and their sustainability.

2015 Madura De Silva Nandika Hapuarachchi Thilak Jayaratne

Zoogeography of freshwater ichthyofauna of Sri Lanka is poorly understood although many new species are reported after the publication of Pethiyagoda’s text on Freshwater Fishes of Sri Lanka published in 1991. Several new genera of freshwater fishes were described (e.g. Dawkinsia Pethia) while introducing sixteen new cyprinids (viz., Dawkinsia singhala, Dawkinsia srilankensis Devario pathirana, Laubuca insularis, Laubuca ruhuna, Laubuca varuna, Pethia banduala, Pethia reval, Puntius kamalika, Puntius kelumi, Rasbora armitagei, Rasbora naggisi, Rasbora wilpita, Rasboroides rohani, Systomus asoka, Systomus martenstyni) and two gobids Schismatogobius deraniyagalai and Stiphodon martenstyni). This has lead to a great confusion among most of the local and international scientists those who study freshwater fishes and their biology. Most of the hill stream fishes endemic to Sri Lanka had been described by early workers (Axelrod, 1972; Bleeker, 1863; Bloch & Schneider, 1801; Day, 1888; Deraniyagala, 1929, 1930, 1937, 1952,1956; Günther, 1861,1964,1868; Hamilton, 1822; Jordan & Starks, 1917; Meinken, 1957, 1966; Steindachner, 1892).

De Silva, Hapuarachchi and Jayaratne (2015) compiled freshwater ichthyofauna of Sri Lanka in a similar manner to Pethiyagoda’s publication together with most of the newly described species after Pethiyagoda (1991). They included four cyprinids under sub-family Barbinae (e.g., Devario Sp Altus, Devario Sp Natalei, and Devario Sp Processus and Systomus Sp. Richmondi) without having species authorships. They also vaguely described the type habitats or localities, breeding potentials of newly described species and the sampling methods during their surveys were not correctly described. Further, these authors did not include Puntius chola (Hamilton, 1822) and Garra philipsi (Deraniyagala, 1933) in their compilation. Several cyprinids widely distributed in Sri Lanka such as, Puntius filamanetosus and P. sarana that have been re-described as new species by different authors without mentioning their former identities. It should be noted that Batuwita et al. (2013) described Rasboroides rohani from Walawe River basin which was not found by the extensive survey conducted over eight years (2007-2014) on Sri Lankan freshwater fishes by the Wildlife Conservation Society of Galle. “Sri Lankan Freshwater Fishes” which also highlights many brackish water species and several marine fishes has deliberately ignored most of the worked published in peer-reviewed journals after Deraniyagala (1952) and Munro (1955) on fish taxonomy and biology. An unprecedented attempt has made to highlight only a few people as great ichthyologists in the world, of which some of them were specimen suppliers to foreign laboratories and museums. This compilation with full of excellent photographs is lacking literal integrity and academic clarity. Besides, this compilation has reviewed by two non-subject specialists. In addition, there is no evidence for proper proofreading, the most important part with respect to standard publication. Nevertheless, the collective effort of this group of armatures to be appreciated to a greater extent, because of their time and dedication. But, perhaps, non-professional guidance has led to several shortcomings. The sponsorship of the Nations Trust Bank should be respected and valued because their willingness and commitment to conserving nature. Further, the price of the book is extraordinarily high, perhaps due to its printing cost and capital investment but it has limited the circulation among the laymen who are really keen about freshwater fishes of Sri Lanka as nature lovers.

Mining 100 sq km Seabed has no Effect on Environment

Port City Project

Supplementary EIA report (SEIA), opened for the public comments in December 2015 by the Coast Conservation Department states that dredging 65 million cubic meter sand from the west coast of Sri Lanka to reclaim 269 ha land area of the suspended Port City Project (PCP) has no significant negative impact on ecological and social environment. Forty-five-member SEIA team representing National Aquatic Resources Research Development Agency (NARA), Geological Survey and Mines Bureau (GSMB), University of Moratuwa (UoM), Lanka Hydraulic Institute Ltd. (LHI), Central Engineering Consultancy Bureau (CECB), has submitted a 357 page SEIA report to the Coast Conservation and Coastal Zone Managements Department., the Project Approving Agency (PAA).

Proposed mining sites; yellow, Site I; Blue Site II

There are ample number of examples to show that heavy industries such as boat manufacturing, port development, off-shore oil extraction have resulted in the depletion of fish stocks. Coral communities are the most sensitive aquatic biota with respect to seabed mining and land reclamation for port development. Corals are sensitive tochanges in environmental parameters such as temperatures, salinity, depth, current velocity and direction, suspended solids, tidal fluctuations etc. The impact of turbidity on larval settlements of Indo-Pacific coral, Pocilopora damicornis in Polhengoda reef has been shown. Turbidity is an aggregate property of water, which results from mechanical disturbance of seabed and by dumping dredged materials back to the seabed. Experimental evidence suggests that suspended particles move over greater area due to oceanic currents when the seabed is disturbed. It has been demonstrated that increased turbidity and siltation in the coastal zone are among the most potential threats to coral reef communities and associated reef fishes. Proposed sand mining activities will certainly affect the reefs located in the vicinity of proposed sand mining area (viz., Kalapugala, Godagala, Hiriya, Thambalagala, Galmathgala, Galmaga and Watiyagala) in turn fish populations in the area because herbivorous fish are the vital links in the food chains in the reef ecosystems.

The western border of the Negombo lagoon along the west coast from Uswetakeiyawa to Pitipana is the narrowest coastal margin of the lagoon ecosystems, which is less than 1 km wide at certain stretches for example at Basiyawatte village. This stretch is very susceptible for severe erosion if the seabed is mined for the extraction of sand creating 2-3 m deep crater spread over 100 km2 in the near shore area. This situation may be more aggravated by predicted weather changes associated with global climate change.

A recent study conducted on the impact of sea level rises on marine mouth of the Negombo lagoon concluded that a vast area of the lagoon periphery will be inundated within the next 50 years. Lack of sufficient knowledge and understanding and engineering biased development projects have lead the promotion of the development projects this nature. Further, politically motivated engineering biased SEIA team has made a enormous attempt to justify and convince the establishment of PCP by comparing with other development projects of similar nature, for example Palm Island in Dubai, Rotterdam Port and industrial area, Hong Kong Chek Lap Kok airport etc.

Nevertheless, environmental settings and socio-economic conditions of those projects are quite different from CPC. On the basis of the understanding that there will be a significant negative impact of sand mining in the west coast on fishing community from Uswetakeiyawa to Pitipana whose livelihood depends on this coastal resource. The SEIA has proposed to give rupees 500 million to the fishing community as a compensation for lost resources, which is Rs 4.15 per day per person if assumed 10 years will take to recover the environmental damage. Nevertheless, recovery should be very slow since there is no sufficient amount of land based sediment transport into the sea from this stretch.

The Negombo lagoon is a large silt trap of the Attanagalu Oya basin and northward littoral transport from the Kelani River estuary is not very strong due to weak coastal current. Similar situation occurs with respect to sediment transport via Ma Oya basin. This has lead to poor beach nourishment and progressive coastal erosion in west coast. The report does not discuss the impacts on Negombo lagoon fishery as a result of proposed sand mining in near shore area assuming that there is no recruitment of fish and shrimp between the lagoon and coastal areas. It is a pity that NARA scientists have shown the importance of larval recruitment and juvenile migration of shrimp on lagoon shrimp fishery, the most economic return of the Negombo Lagoon, the most productive brackish water body of the country.

The SEIA also states that there are no fishing grounds in the vicinity of PCP area but fisher communities operate only from Mutual/Mattakkuliya and Dehiwala. As fishing is not allowed in the vicinity of Colombo Harbour due to security reasons one cannot say that fisheries resources are not available that particular area. Of course, fisheries potential of this area may be relatively low due to poor natural naturalness of the area. Many groups of environmentalists and individual scientists complaint against many discrepancies, procedural irregularities, and misleading statements in this SEIA. The SEIA report includes many diagrams produced using data generated by tank experiments and subsequently coupled with complicated mathematical models although no attempts have been made to collect very basic information but extremely important with respect to marine ecosystems.

Aqua- 2015, Fisheries and Aquaculture Forum

Blue Revolution: Challenging New Frontiers though value addition Uwa Wellassa University (11, December 2015) The organizing committee of the above forum invited several key subject specialists to deliver lectures on marine resources, shellfish and fin-fish processing, management of aquatic resources, eco-toxicity, novel approaches in fresh and brackish water aquaculture, feeds and nutrients in the aquaculture industry and ornamental fish industry. Subsequently, presentations were opened for panel discussions.

Speakers of the Session I were; Dr. D.C.T. Dissanayake (USJP) Mr. S. Thayaparan (King Aqua Services) Mr. Samantha Gunasekara (Former SLC) Prof. E.I.L. Silva (WRST) Mr. B.K.K.K. Jinadara (NARA) and lectures were delivered by; Ms. J.M. Asoka (NAQDA) Prof. M.P.K.S.K. De Silva (Uni.Ruhuna) Dr. K.R. Gamage (Uni. Ruhuna) Dr. D.H.N. Munasinghe (Uni. Ruhuna) and Mr. Kapila Tissera (Aquatic Bio-Resources) during the Session II. . Session I and II were chaired by Dr. S.C. Jayamanne and Dr.D.K.D.D. Jayasena respectively. Both sessions were followed by very fruitful panel discussions with active participation of undergraduate students.