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
