{"id":50681,"date":"2016-01-02T06:04:20","date_gmt":"2016-01-02T13:04:20","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/?p=50681"},"modified":"2016-01-02T06:04:39","modified_gmt":"2016-01-02T13:04:39","slug":"koskulana-mini-hydropower-plant-in-sinharaja-strict-buffer-zone","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/2016\/01\/02\/koskulana-mini-hydropower-plant-in-sinharaja-strict-buffer-zone\/","title":{"rendered":"Koskulana Mini Hydropower Plant in Sinharaja Strict Buffer Zone"},"content":{"rendered":"

WaterLanka \u00a0Jan-Mar,2016<\/em><\/h2>\n

This report is based on a recent visit made to the Northern\u00a0Buffer Zone of the Sinharaja World Heritage Site and a\u00a0comprehensive analysis of Initial Environmental\u00a0Examination (IEE) Report on Koskulana Mini\u00a0Hydropower Project (KMHP) submitted to the Central
\nEnvironmental Authority (CEA) by Waste Management\u00a0Water Power (Pvt) Ltd. Although the IEE report is\u00a0subjected to a painstaking analysis, this article
\nhighlights only the potential negative impacts of\u00a0construction and operation of KMHP on ecological and\u00a0social aspects and how people go against ethics and morals\u00a0to make money.<\/p>\n

SINHARAJA WORLD HERITAGE SITE<\/p>\n

\"sinharaja1\"
\nProject site in the Sinharaja buffer zone<\/p>\n

The Koskulana mini hydropower project, which is under\u00a0construction is supposed to generate 0.60 MW of\u00a0electricity by diverting the Koskulana River flowing\u00a0along the northern border of the Sinharaja World Heritage\u00a0Site at Hupugoda Grama Niladhari Division (80\u2070 27\u2019 23\u201d
\n62 E; 6\u2070 25\u2019 09\u201d 70 N) in the Kalawana Divisional\u00a0Secretariat. The project includes the construction of a\u00a0concrete weir (2.5x 12 x 2.0 cubic meters), 86 m long
\nheadrace channel, a forebay, and a powerhouse with 29 m\u00a0long tailrace channel. Water will convey from the forebay\u00a0to the powerhouse via 265 m long penstock while after\u00a0generation of electricity water will be released back to the\u00a0Koskulana River through 29 m long tailrace channel.\u00a0The project has calculated 2.54 m3\/sec as the design flow to\u00a0generate electricity and 0.1 m3\/sec as the environmental\u00a0flow to maintain the aquatic fauna and flora downstream of\u00a0the powerhouse.<\/p>\n

Accordingly, the weir releases only 3.9 %\u00a0of the design flow as the environment flow, which has\u00a0occurred only once over the last thirty years. Further, the\u00a0river stretch from the proposed weir site to the tailrace\u00a0outfall is about 450 m and it lies on the strict buffer zone\u00a0of the Sinharaja World Heritage Site. The left bank (LB) of\u00a0this river stretch has thick riparian vegetation with valuable\u00a0trees endemic to Sri Lanka while the right bank (RB) with\u00a0steep slopes has been subjected to different land use\u00a0including scattered human settlements. The river gradient\u00a0varies from 400 m to 300 m above mean sea level\u00a0between the proposed weir site and the tailrace outfall and\u00a0this river stretch is characterized by typical pools and\u00a0riffles and isolated boulders with a moderate cascade\u00a0towards downstream. These charterers of the stream stretch\u00a0with clear water are evident for rich aquatic biodiversity\u00a0including the abundance of native and endemic fishes.<\/p>\n

According to the IEE report, IEE team has examined\u00a0hydrology, geomorphology, flora and fauna and socio-economic\u00a0status of the project area, up to 500 m upstream\u00a0of the proposed weir site, 500 m downstream of tail race\u00a0outfall and 100 m wide stretch along the Koskulana River\u00a0banks including the mainstream of the river for the same\u00a0length.<\/p>\n

Existing environment
\nThe IEE report describes the general features of the project\u00a0area to some extent but never state that the project area is\u00a0exclusively within the buffer zone of the Sinharaja Rain\u00a0Forest. The report also states that due to the high gradient\u00a0of the river after the diversion point, construction of a 2.5\u00a0m high weir would not create any emergency situation like \u00a0flooding, which is incorrect. Most of the statements given\u00a0under this section on biological environment are misleading\u00a0and incorrect to a greater extent and deliberately hides\u00a0some important information.<\/p>\n

The IEE report includes only four fish species in the study\u00a0area of which one species is endemic. The IEE team has\u00a0found only four species, but there are five species in the\u00a0detail faunal list namely Long Finned Eel. Giant Danio,\u00a0Carveri Rasbora, Stone Sucker, and Mahseer. According to\u00a0published literature, there are 26 freshwater fishes in the\u00a0Kalu Ganga basin of which seventeen are endemic and the\u00a0Kukule Ganga is a type habitat for several endemic\u00a0species according to expert fish ecologists in the country.<\/p>\n

The ecologist in the IEE team, a Botany special graduate\u00a0is neither academically qualified nor competent to\u00a0investigate aquatic fauna and flora in stream ecosystems,\u00a0because a person with botany background cannot\u00a0examine stream ecosystems for its fauna which is the\u00a0most important ecological part as far as the mini\u00a0hydropower projects are concerned<\/p>\n

\"Rainforest02\"<\/p>\n

Mining the Koskulana River bed for weir construction<\/p>\n

According to the IEE report, there are no river users along\u00a0the river bank within the proposed project area, which is\u00a0incorrect. There are many houses beyond the proposed\u00a0weir on both sides of the river bank. People explore theses\u00a0streams for gems and also to catch fish. Most of these\u00a0houses are susceptible for flooding as the 2.5 m high weir is\u00a0built. It should be considered the flood levels occurred\u00a0beyond the proposed weir on the 7th December 2015\u00a0following heavy rains.<\/p>\n

Soil erosion: The IEE report victimizes the upstream\u00a0inhabitants for soil erosion rather than the devastating\u00a0activities taking place during the construction phase as\u00a0shown below. There will be an unprecedented soil erosion\u00a0and subsequent sediment load into the stream due to the\u00a0construction of the weir, excavation for headrace channel,\u00a0forebay and powerhouse and other infrastructure\u00a0development activities such as the construction of access\u00a0roads. The soil erosion resulting from construction of\u00a0power projects cannot be compared with minor agriculture\u00a0activities. The main problem with soil erosion is not\u00a0increased turbidity, but the elimination of microhabitats and\u00a0spawning grounds of fish due to sediment deposition and\u00a0also aquatic organisms will be affected by smothering.<\/p>\n

\"Rainforest03\"<\/p>\n

Excavation near the border of Sinharaja Rain Forest<\/p>\n

It is apparent that Koskulana mini hydropower project\u00a0results in every negative environmental impact that
\ninherent to most of the mini hydropower projects and some\u00a0are site-specific social impacts. But the case is site-specific\u00a0and critical being located bordering the Sinharaja World\u00a0Heritage Site within the strict buffer zone. All responsible\u00a0government agencies have given approval for the project\u00a0forwarding their own justifications. The District Forest\u00a0Officer of Ratnapura has categorically denied their\u00a0responsibility for the buffer zone of the Sinharaja World\u00a0Heritage Site. Nevertheless, the available information\u00a0reveals that the buffer zones of forest reserves must be\u00a0protected by the Forest Department.\u00a0Besides, the ecologist of the IEE team is neither qualified\u00a0nor competent to conduct an IEE of this nature as\u00a0mentioned before. Because IEE\/EIA teams of hydropower\u00a0projects must comprise a stream ecologist with a proven\u00a0knowledge on freshwater fishes. Further, acceptance of the\u00a0IEE report by the CEA is questionable as two of the four
\nteam members including the team leader have not certified\u00a0their commitment. The most critical environmental\u00a0problem of the construction and operation of mini\u00a0hydropower projects in mountain streams are endemic\u00a0fishes evolved for millions of years. Sri Lanka is ranked as\u00a0one of the biodiversity hotspots because of her endemic\u00a0fish fauna and other species endemic to the country. None\u00a0of the designated Project Approving Agencies (viz.,\u00a0NBRO, FD, ID, NWSDB, GSMB, CCD, CEA, and CEB)\u00a0are not capable of evaluating this aspect by themselves due\u00a0to non-availability subject specialists. Further, 0.60 MW\u00a0electricity can be generated by a solar PV panel without\u00a0causing any devastating environmental damage.<\/p>\n

The total length of the affected stream stretches (ASS) in\u00a0the Kukule Ganga including the Kukule major hydropower\u00a0project is 12.39 km of which 8.18 km have resulted from\u00a0Kukule Ganga major hydro dam, which generates 80 MW\u00a0whereas about 4.5 km stream stretches have been\u00a0destroyed from six mini hydropower plants, which generate\u00a0only 10.50 MW. This indicates that mini hydropower\u00a0projects destroy more stream habitats than major\u00a0hydropower projects. This is true for all other major river\u00a0basins such as Mahaweli, Kelani, Kalu, and Walawe with\u00a0respect to the development of mini hydropower projects.\u00a0Hill streams are the type habitats of endemic fishes and\u00a0the tributaries of the Kukule Ganga sub-watershed area also\u00a0rich in endemic fishes evolved for millions of years, There
\nis tangible evidence to show that the fish fauna in\u00a0mountain streams in Sri Lanka is declining due to the\u00a0construction and operation of hydropower plants.
\nIt is obvious that about 12.0 km of river water of the\u00a0Kukuke River sub-watershed flow through conduits\u00a0without contributing to plant growth while decreasing soil\u00a0properties. This value for the Mahaweli and Kelani Rivers\u00a0are about 100 km and 89 km respectively. This will\u00a0certainly affect the propagation of riparian vegetation\u00a0cover and stability of the overburden of the landscape.\u00a0These ecological impacts are not addressed in developing\u00a0countries including Sri Lanka when mini hydropower\u00a0plants are proposed and engineers do not understand the\u00a0gravity of the problem whereas entrepreneurs do not care\u00a0about the environment.
\nThe negative effects of incorrect and unacceptable\u00a0operations of mini hydropower plants in Sri Lanka on\u00a0endemic fish fauna as a result of habitat alteration and
\nelimination are inevitable. The evidence is there for\u00a0declining and vanishing of endemic fishes from hill\u00a0streams over the last two decades with escalating small
\nhydropower development. Construction of mini\u00a0hydropower in the areas of sensitive vegetations such as\u00a0Sinharaja World Heritage Site will certainly affect the propagation riverine vegetation and their sustainability.<\/p>\n

2015 Madura De Silva Nandika Hapuarachchi Thilak Jayaratne<\/p>\n

Zoogeography of freshwater ichthyofauna of Sri Lanka is poorly understood although many new species are reported after the publication of Pethiyagoda\u2019s 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; G\u00fcnther, 1861,1964,1868; Hamilton, 1822; Jordan & Starks, 1917; Meinken, 1957, 1966; Steindachner, 1892).<\/p>\n

De Silva, Hapuarachchi and Jayaratne (2015) compiled freshwater ichthyofauna of Sri Lanka in a similar manner to Pethiyagoda\u2019s 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\u201d 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.<\/p>\n

Mining 100 sq km Seabed has no Effect on Environment
\nPort City Project<\/p>\n

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).
\nProposed mining sites; yellow, Site I; Blue Site II<\/p>\n

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.<\/p>\n

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.<\/p>\n

Aqua- 2015, Fisheries and Aquaculture Forum
\nBlue 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.<\/p>\n

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. The overall programme of Aqua-<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

WaterLanka \u00a0Jan-Mar,2016 This report is based on a recent visit made to the Northern\u00a0Buffer Zone of the Sinharaja World Heritage Site and a\u00a0comprehensive analysis of Initial Environmental\u00a0Examination (IEE) Report on Koskulana Mini\u00a0Hydropower Project (KMHP) submitted to the Central Environmental Authority (CEA) by Waste Management\u00a0Water Power (Pvt) Ltd. Although the IEE report is\u00a0subjected to a painstaking […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[12],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-50681","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-forum"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/50681","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=50681"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/50681\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=50681"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=50681"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=50681"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}