EEnnvviirroonnmmeennttaall MMaannaaggeemmeenntt PPllaann ffoorr tthhee PPrrooppoosseedd IInnddiiaa--BBaasseedd NNeeuuttrriinnoo OObbsseerrvvaattoorryy PPrroojjeecctt aatt SSiinnggaarraa aanndd MMaassiinnaagguuddii ((NNiillggiirriiss))

TTaammiill NNaadduu

Report Submitted to

The Institute of Mathematical Sciences (IMSc) Chennai

By

Care Earth

No 5, 21st Street Thillaiganganagar Chennai 600 061

May, 2008

1

Contents

Part I: Introduction Overview Scope and Objectives of EMP About the INO Project

Part II: The Landscape Information Base and Definitions The Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve Mudumalai WLS Singara and Masinagudi Project Site

Part III: Impact of Hydroelectric Projects on the Landscape Justification Origin and Background of Hydroelectric Projects Temporal and Spatial spread Review of EIA Identified Gaps, Issues and Concerns Effectiveness of Environmental Monitoring and Mitigation Environmental Costs and Social Benefits Effectiveness of Damage Containment and Compensations Lessons Learnt

Part V: Alternate Sites and Landscapes EIA Guidelines Preferred Environmental Conditions Nilgiris Landscape Anaimalai Hills Landscape Palani Hills Landscape Cumbum-Theni Landscape Matrix of Feasibility Analysis Mahendragiri: a viable option?

2

Part VI: Environmental Management Plan Scope General Considerations of EMP Compliance with Biosphere Reserves Program/Mandate Project Elephant Compliance with Government of India Tiger Reserves Guidelines and Regulations Relevance of National Environment Policy & National Wildlife Action Plan Landscape Vulnerability Map Background Information for Monitoring Impacts Crisis Preparedness Environmental Management Committee Environmental Management Fund Strategy for Restoring Wildlife Corridors in the Landscape Environmental Management Plan for Project INO

Part VII: Annexure Framework for Maintaining Environmental Data Schedule for Review Strategy for Mid-way Correction Indicators of Environmental Changes Minutes of Brainstorming Discussion Meetings Photos of alternate sites Sources of Information

3

PPrreeffaaccee

A one-day brainstorming workshop was held at the Institute of Mathematical Sciences (Chennai) on August 20, 2007 to discuss the scope of implementing the India-based Neutrino Observatory (INO) Project within the Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve in Tamil Nadu. Ecologists, wildlife biologists and members of the INO Project team participated in the workshop wherein the likely environmental impacts of the Project and the intrinsic and extrinsic hurdles that would hamper the implementation of the project were reviewed. Basic information about the nature of the Project and the potential environmental impacts was made available to the participants in the form of two documents; India-Based Neutrino Observatory (INO Project Report, INO/2006/01) and the Rapid Environmental Impact Assessment of the India-based Neutrino Observatory Project, Singara, Nilgiris, Tamil Nadu (Report submitted to the Institute of Mathematical Sciences, Chennai by Salim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History (SACON), Coimbatore, 2007). Subsequently, the Institute of Mathematical Sciences (Chennai) sanctioned a four-month study to Care Earth, Chennai on September 27, 2007 vide their letter No. IMSC/F&A/INO/2006/2140. The scope of the study was to prepare the Environment Management Plan for the first phase of the project adopting the following 4 steps:

1. Reviewing pertinent literature on the environment, socio-ecology and biodiversity of the Singara-Masinagudi landscape

2. Collating and reviewing available information on the impact of the PUSHEP in the Singara-Masinagudi landscape

3. Identifying major gaps in knowledge of the possible impacts of development projects in general and INO in particular on the ecology and wildlife and socio-economics of the Singara-Masinagudi landscape and

4. Analysing the above data/information and developing short-term and long-term management measures for the Singara-Masinagudi landscape with specific focus on the movement of elephants and other wildlife.

Standard Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) procedures include a practical assessment, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and an Environmental Management Plan (EMP). Whereas the EIA Report that was submitted by SACON was comprehensive in the assessment, the EIS and EMP were rather weak; EMP being the weakest. The present study therefore focused on strengthening the EIS and preparing a more explicit and comprehensive EMP. The study also took into account the perceptions of the different interest groups such as the local residents and their elected institutions, environmental activists,

4

environmental NGOs, wildlife biologists other than those who were a part of the study team, representatives of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (TNEB) Tamil Nadu Forest Department and other government departments. Further, the study assessed the feasibility of relocating the INO Project elsewhere within Tamil Nadu by visiting possible alternate sites in the Western Ghats. The results of the 4-month study are presented in the current report. For the sake of easy reference and use, the contents have been presented as an Executive Summary followed by seven detailed and inclusive parts: Part I: Introduction (overview, about the INO Project) Part II: The Landscape (Biodiversity and its conservation significance in and around the location of the Project) Part III: Impact of Hydroelectric Projects on the Landscape (The seventy-five year history of habitat alteration and infrastructure development in the landscape) Part IV: Anticipated Environmental Impacts of the INO Project (Both scientific and peoples perceptions) Part V: Alternate Sites and Landscapes (For the sake of preparedness in the event circumstances forbid the INO Project in the proposed location) Part VI: Environmental Management Plan (The detailed EMP and recommended actions specifically focussing on the Singara-Masinagudi landscape) Part VII: Annexure (Photos of alternate sites, modules for monitoring impacts, outcome of meetings, sources of Information) The INO Project is proposed to be located within one of the most significant conservation areas in the world. Besides being home to not less than 5000 elephants, the flagship of the region, the Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve also harbors 60-75% of the 415 tigers that survive in the states of Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Kerala; 20% of which occur in Mudumalai WLS. There are numerous other species of endemic and endangered plants and animals in the Reserve. In the context of the ecological signficance of the Biosphere Reserve, there is little justification as to why the INO Project should choose Singara and Masinagudi as the preferred location. If, however, there are compelling and convincing reasons for pursuing the Project as planned within the Biosphere Reserve, the entire design and operation has to be guided by the very stringent socio-ecological recommendations outlined in the EMP. The Project activities will no doubt be closely monitored by a large segment of the public besides the designated Environment Monitoring Committee and local interest groups. However, the foremost guiding principle needs to be the recognition and respect that the project needs to accord to the ecological sensitivity and vulnerability of the region. Keeping this in view, the EMP has focused on the following pertinent questions:

1. Does the INO Project fit within the mandate of the Biosphere Reserve? 2. Will the project affect threatened biodiversity directly or by reducing the carrying capacity of the

habitats that support it? 3. Will the Project increase the population of the local human residents? 4. Will the Project cause long-term stress to the ecosystem?

5

An interim draft of the EMP was submitted to the Institute of Mathematical Sciences on November 29, 2007. Comments and inputs provided by the INO Project personnel, where relevant and appropriate, were incorporated while finalizing the final report. There is little doubt that the present report details one of the most comprehensive and inclusive Environmental Management Plan that has been prepared for any project in the Western Ghats. Critical review of earlier projects and EIA reports and the INO DPR-I presented in the Executive Summary and the Full Report are in the interest of the Project and without prejudice for any person, institution or agency. It is our sincere hope that the contents of the report guide the INO Project team and all others concerned in taking the right decisions in implementing the Project. We take this opportunity to thank the Director of the Institute of Mathematical Sciences (IMSc), Prof R Balasubramanian for giving us the opportunity to undertake the study and prepare the EMP. We thank Smt Saraswathi Ramaraj (Registrar, IMSc) and Mr V Palani (Accounts Officer, IMSc) for their prompt service and logistic support. The project team of Care Earth places on record its gratitude to the Thiru C K Sreedharan IFS (Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, TNFD) and Dr Thiru Sukhdev IFS (Prinicpal Chief Conservator of Forests and Chief Wildlife Warden, TN) for their support and inputs. Dr Thiru K S Neelakantan IFS (Chief Conservator of Forests, TNFD) and Thiru J Upadhyay IFS (Conservator of Forests, TN) shared with us their views of the Project and clarified specific aspects of the relevant wildlife and forest conservation laws and policies. Thirumathi Jayanti Murali IFS (Head, Land Use and Planning, TN State Planning Commission) provided usefu