Rapid Ecological Assessment of Impacts of Lower Demwe Hydro-Electric Project on Wildlife Values

Report submitted to the National Board of Wildlife Standing Committee (NBWL-SC)

August 2018

Contents Contents ...... 1 Background ...... 4 Objectives...... 5 Study Area and Methods ...... 6 Zone maps ...... 9 Results ...... 12 Conclusions ...... 16 References ...... 20 Appendix I: Proposal for ‘Geospatial Analysis of Impacts of Lower Demwe Hydro-Electric Project on the Riverine Ecosystem of Lohit Basin, Arunachal Pradesh’ ...... 21 Background ...... 21 Objectives ...... 22 Methods ...... 23 Outcomes ...... 23 Activity timeline of the study ...... 24 Budget of the study...... 25 Annexures ...... 26 Annexure I) Details of the sites visited ...... 26 Annexure II) Glossary and Abbreviations ...... 30 Annexure III) About Lower Demwe HE Project ...... 31 Annexure IV) Chronology of Events pertaining to clearance ...... 33 Annexure V) Literature review ...... 35 Annexure VI) Field Photographs ...... 39 Annexure VII) List of people interacted...... 53 Annexure VIII) List of fishes ...... 57 Annexure IX) List of herpetofauna ...... 58 Annexure X) List of birds ...... 59 Annexure XI) List of mammals ...... 72 Annexure XII) Undertaking by project proponents ...... 76

1 | P a g e

List of tables Table 1. Details of the zones in which the study area is divided (see Map 1) ...... 6 Table 2. Threatened species recorded during the present survey ...... 14 Table 3. Details of the sites visited during the present survey ...... 26 Table 4. Timeline of activities of the study ...... 24 Table 5. Head-wise Budget of the proposed study ...... 25 Table 6. List of people interviewed during the survey ...... 53 Table 7. List of fish species recorded during the survey ...... 57 Table 8. List of reptile and amphibian species recorded during the survey ...... 58 Table 9. List of bird species recorded during the survey ...... 59 Table 10. List of mammal species recorded during the survey (P: primary data, S: secondary data) .. 72

List of Maps Map 1. Study area in Lohit river basin highlighting the survey zones, protected areas and also the proposed HEP sites. (TPRF: Tezu Proposed Reserve Forest, DSNP: Dibru Saikhowa National Park ...... 7 Map 2. Zone 1: From Tiding village (zero point of reservoir) to Parshuram Kund...... 9 Map 3. Zone 2: From Parshuram Kund to Demwe village ...... 9 Map 4. Zone 3: From Demwe village to Alubari bridge ...... 10 Map 5. Zone 4: From Alubari bridge to Dhola-Sadiya bridge ...... 10 Map 6. Zone 5: From Dhola-Sadiya bridge to Lohit mahasangam ...... 11 Map 7. Study area highlighting the locations of signs of important species ...... 13 Map 8. Sighting locations of Ganges river dolphins (Platanista gangetica gangetica) in Zone 4 and 5 ..... 13 Map 9. A potential Tiger corridor (highlighted in green border) through the chaporis of river Lohit.. 15

List of Images

Image 1. Bengal Florican (Houbaropsis bengalensis): Male sighted in Zone 4...... 14 Image 2. Assam Roofed Turtle (Pangshura sylhetensis) sighted at DSNP ...... 14 Image 3. Location of dam site and surrounding habitat ...... 39 Image 4. Dam site and surrounding habitat: ground view ...... 39 Image 5. Surveying the chaporis by crossing streams on foot in zone 1 and 2...... 40

2 | P a g e

Image 6. Surveying on country made hand boat in Zone 3 ...... 41 Image 7. Surveying on country made motor boat in Zone 4 ...... 41 Image 8. Surveying on cruise type motor boat in zone 5...... 41 Image 9. Surveying on speed boat in DSNP ...... 41 Image 10. Top) River Lohit at Tiding, Middle) Plumbeous Water redstart, Bottom) Brown Dipper 42 Image 11 From Zone 2: Top) Grasslands and Trees of Dalbergia sissoo on the chaporis, Bottom right) Large Tree Frog; Bottom left) Flying lizard Draco maculatus ...... 43 Image 12. Cattle grazing on the chaporis of Zone 2 ...... 44 Image 13. Local sand and boulder mining from dry River bed from Zone 3...... 44 Image 14. Upstream migration of stream fishes for spawning in river Lohit (Zone 3) ...... 45 Image 15. Use of gill nets to catch stream fishes of river Lohit in Zone 3 ...... 45 Image 16. Fishes of Lohit: 1) Barilius sp., 2)Cabdio morar, 3) Devario aequipinnatus, 4) Garra sp. 5) Neolissochylus hexgonolepis, 6) Xenentodon cancila...... 46 Image 17. Nest of Streaked Weaver bird found on a chapori from Zone 3 ...... 47 Image 18. The chaporis of Zone 3 representing the mosaic of wet grasslands and semi evergreen forest ...... 47 Image 19. Spotted Litter Skink found on the forest floor in Zone 3 ...... 48 Image 20. Tribal people encountered during the survey in proposed Tezu reserve forest ...... 48 Image 21 Top) Wet grasslands in Maguri beel (Zone 5), Bottom: left)Striated Babbler, right) Nal grass...... 49 Image 22. Cutting of Bombax ceiba trees from the bank of river Lohit in Zone 4 ...... 50 Image 23 Top) Paddyfield Pipit a commonly found on the chaporis of lohit, Bottom: left) Rat snake crossing the river channel, right) Amur falcon (flock of 40 was seen) from Zone 4 ...... 50 Image 24. Top) Bengal Florican single male flushed from a chapori, Bottom) Bengal Florican three individuals fludhed subsequently from the same chapori from Zone 4 ...... 51 Image 25. Left) Elephant tracks found in chaporis in Zone 5. Right) Wild Buffalos sighted in DSNP ...... 52 Image 26. A river channel cutting through the semi evergreen forest in DSNP ...... 52

Disclaimer Maps are prepared in Google-Earth and may vary on ground.

3 | P a g e

Background

River Lohit is one of the three major tributaries of river Brahmaputra. This snow fed river originates at a high altitude glacier in Tibet, flows through the Eastern Himalayan ranges and enters Indian Territory in Kibitho area. Near Parshuram Kund, a pilgrimage site, river Lohit flows out of mountain gorge and meets the plain. The river channel hereafter is highly braided resulting into the formation of numerous riverine islands also locally knows as ‘chaporis’. Due to the melting of glacier, the Lohit river basin experiences a natural flooding during summers (May to September) while has a minimum flow during winter (October to April). During flood season, this region also receives a high rainfall from south-western monsoon adding to its intensity. Every year this flooding alters the geomorphology of the river basin eroding some of the older chaporis and forming new ones elsewhere. As a result, many of the chaporis have tall and wet grasslands as dominant habitat. Many bird species like Bengal Florican (Houbaropsis bengalensis), Black-breasted Parrotbill (Paradoxornis flavirostris), Swamp Prinia (Laticila cinerascens), Marsh Babbler (Pellorneum palustre) etc. are obligate dwellers of such wet grasslands (Chatterjee et al., 2006; Choudhury 2006; Jha et al. 2018; IUCN 2018). Those larger chaporis which do not get completely submerged in floods also have a moist deciduous and semi-evergreen forest along with wet grasslands on the fringes. Such forests may act as potential corridors for the movement of large carnivores like Tiger (Panthera tigris) and Leopard (Panthera pardus) and large herbivores like Elephants (Elephas maximus) and Buffalos (Bubalus arnee) between the adjoining protected areas. On the other hand, the aquatic system of Lohit includes endangered Ganges River Dolphin (Planatnista gangetica gangetica) (Wakid 2009), many species of endangered turtles (Choudhury 1998) and fishes (Kansal & Arora 2012). This system has evolved under an annual flood regime, which is the major driver of this dynamic ecosystem. Annual floods determine the creation, destruction and productivity of the river/chapori ecosystem. The flora and fauna of the aquatic as well as grass-forest mosaic system have special adaptations with respect to their migration, breeding biology and overall community composition in response to the annual flood regime.

Considering its hydro-morphology in the mountain gorges, the upper stretches of Lohit river (as well as upper stretches of rivers Siang and Dibang) are known to have a high hydroelectric potential which is conducive for the harnessing of hydropower by means of building of dams. Although important for development, such projects may have severe impacts on the river ecosystem present in the floodplains including the threatened, grassland obligate species. A careful beforehand study of

4 | P a g e these river basins in terms of ecology and geology needs to be done to identify impacts and the possibility of mitigation measures that could minimize the negative environmental impact of hydroelectric plants, hence assuring a sustainable development. One such hydroelectric project called ‘Lower Demwe HEP’ has been planned near Parshuram Kund region on river Lohit.

The Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) of MoEFCC recommended the environmental clearance (EC) for lower Demwe HE project which was granted on 12 February 2010 by the MoEFCC, Govt. of India. EC was challenged before the Hon’ble Principal Bench of NGT, New Delhi, vide Appeal No.8 of 2011. Hon’ble NGT upheld the environmental clearance granted to the project, vide its order dated 13 January 2015. Stage-I and Stage-II forest clearances were accorded on 1 March 2012 and 3 May 2013 by the MoEFCC. Stage-I and Stage-II forest clearances were challenged in the Hon’ble Principal Bench of NGT, New Delhi as Appeal No.92 of 2013. NGT instructed that Standing Committee of NBWL shall reconsider the issue relating to Demwe Lower HEP Project and pass appropriate orders within a period of six months till that time both Stage I and Stage II clearances stands cancelled. In 48th meeting of the Standing Committee of NBWL dated 27 March 2018, site inspection committee members recommended a comprehensive peer-reviewed study on hydrology and ecology of three seasons by a reputed and neutral scientific / technical organization(s) before according clearance. Standing Committee of NBWL recommended that the WII, Dehradun should carry out a rapid ecological study and submit the report to the Ministry in three months. Consequently, the Standing Committee of NBWL decided to defer the clearance proposal.

Objectives

A WII team conducted a rapid baseline survey in Lohit river basin in likely impacted areas (dam site near Parshuram kund to Dibru Saikhowa National Park as well as 15 km upstream of dam site) during 10 to 30 May 2018, with three objectives viz.

1. Assessment of aquatic life with special reference to Ganges River Dolphin (Platanista gangetica gangetica) in the downstream of the dam site. 2. Assessment of chapories (river islands) of the river Lohit for critically endangered bird Bengal Florican (Houbaropsis bengalensis) and other grassland obligate species. 3. Assessment of forest areas for biodiversity and habitat corridors for large carnivores and herbivores.

5 | P a g e

Study Area and Methods

A total of 137 km river stretch was surveyed during 10 May 2018 to 30 May 2018, by WII team. Since the upstream and downstream areas of the proposed dam have different elevation profile and water currents, survey area was divided in five zones for conducting surveys.

Table 1. Details of the zones in which the study area is divided (see Map 1) Zone ID Distance Start Location End Location covered (km)

Zone 1 15 Near Tidding village (Hayuliang road) Parshuram Kund

Zone 2 7 Parshuram Kund Demwe village

Zone 3 25 Demwe village Alubari bridge

Zone 4 45 Alubari bridge Dhola-Sadiya bridge

Zone 5 45 Dhola-sadiya bridge Lohit Mahasangam

Also the upstream and downstream areas of the proposed dam have different elevation profiles and river hydromorphology, following approaches were used for conducting surveys:

Zone 1. Tidding village to Parshuram kund (submergence zone). This 15 km stretch has elevation of 400 m to 300 m with large boulders, steep slopes inaccessible rocky cliffs. 2km distance from the zero-point of the backwater reservoir was covered by walk. While, 5 km distance upstream of the dam site was surveyed by vehicle through an under construction road on adjoining cliff which runs almost parallel to the river Zone 2. Parshuram kund to Demwe village. A narrow river channel with large boulders and sandbanks bordered by deciduous forest patches on both sides. The main channel starts braiding here creating small chaporis. This zone was surveyed on foot by walking on the sand banks and through the forests. Zone 3. Demwe village to Alubari bridge. This region has high rapid water current. The highly braided channels formed numerous large and small sized chaporis with the large ones

6 | P a g e

having moist deciduous and semi-evergreen forest (some of it is a proposed reserved forest). A country hand-boat was used to cross the rapid channels and move downstream. The forested and grassland occupied chaporis were surveyed on foot. For eastern water channel, the survey was done with a four wheel vehicle via road parallel to river bank. Zone 4. Alubari bridge to Dhola-Sadia bridge. The river channel is more of less single large with few side channels formed because of chaporis. A single and double engine motor boat was used to travel through the channel and survey the chaporis. Zone 5. Dhola-Sadiya bridge to Lohit Mahasangam (Dibru Saikhowa National Park). A small speed boat provided by Forest Department of Dibru Saikhowa NP was used survey through the national park stopping at various forest camps and chaporis and conducting surveys on foot.

Map 1. Study area in Lohit river basin highlighting the survey zones, protected areas and also the proposed HEP sites. (TPRF: Tezu Proposed Reserve Forest, DSNP: Dibru Saikhowa National Park

Chaporis were surveyed especially for the presence of Bengal Florican (Houbaropsis bengalensis) and other associated grassland species. Mammals were searched for their direct sightings as well as indirect signs (tracks, pugmarks, calls, scats and dung) and the same was recorded in

7 | P a g e photographs/audio recordings and GPS co-ordinates were logged. Local people were interviewed regarding the occurrence of wildlife found in the surrounding area. Local forest department staff was also interviewed for the wildlife species use of the area.

For Ganges river dolphin the river stretch from Alubari bridge to Lohit Mahasangam (i.e. Zone 4 and Zone 5) were surveyed on motor boat and surfacing dolphins were counted. A minimum count and their distribution along the Lohit river basin was mapped. The Bengal Florican lives in tall and wet grasslands, which are the major habitats on most of the chaporis on river Lohit. Therefore, many of the possible chaporis were surveyed in morning and evening when floricans are most active, by the team. Observations were carried out from a vantage point when an individual was detected. GPS location, distance and angle from the observer were recorded. Other grassland birds and reptiles were visually identified and confirmed by calls. For indirect signs of mammalian herbivores and carnivores, scaled photographs of tracks, pugmarks, scats, dungs were taken for record. While interviewing the local people, the information regarding wildlife provided by them was confirmed by cross-questioning and photo identification. Mixed photos of concerned species and its relatives were shown to see if the person can identify the one he is claiming.

After the survey, consultative meetings were held with the project proponents in June 2018. The consideration of harmonization of e-flows and peaking operations for its minimal impact on the river ecosystem was discussed in the meetings.

8 | P a g e

Zone maps

Map 2. Zone 1: From Tiding village (zero point of reservoir) to Parshuram Kund.

Map 3. Zone 2: From Parshuram Kund to Demwe village 9 | P a g e

Map 4. Zone 3: From Demwe village to Alubari bridge

Map 5. Zone 4: From Alubari bridge to Dhola-Sadiya bridge

10 | P a g e

Map 6. Zone 5: From Dhola-Sadiya bridge to Lohit mahasangam

11 | P a g e

Results

A total of 44 sites (chapories, wooded forest patches and some parts of river bank – for site-wise details see table number 2) were surveyed and 50 people were interviewed by the team. The biodiversity recorded from the surveyed region include 9 species of Fishes (annexure VII), 10 species of Reptiles (annexure VIII), 151 species of birds (annexure IX) and 24 species of mammals (annexure X). Survey team recorded several critically endangered and endangered species (Ganges River Dolphin, Asiatic Elephant, Hoolock Gibbon Hoolock hoolock, Assam Roofed Turtle Pangshura sylhetensis, Black-breasted Parrotbill Paradoxornis flavirostris, Bengal Florican and White-rumped Vulture Gyps bengaensis.

From documentation provided and meetings with proponents, it was understood that the proposed dam at Lower Demwe will hold live storage of 171.20 MCM (516.38MCM storage at Full Reservoir Level) of water, submerge 11.31km2 of area and generate electricity amounting to 1750MW (EIA report by CISMHE, July 2009). Once the reservoir is filled, the power generation would result from inflow equals outflow of the riverine system. However to be more profitable, the proponents propose to peak daily power production during hours when power is deficient in the grid. This entails storage of water on a daily basis and its maximum release each day in synchrony with peaking needs. This release of maximum water would cause floods on a daily basis – a phenomenon to which the system and its biota have not evolved to adapt to.

The only source population of tigers in this landscape is of Kaziranga Tiger Reserve, Assam. The river system of Brahmaputra and Lohit provide natural conduits for movement corridor for most large mammals including tigers (Map 9) that join the forests of Arunachal Pradesh (Kamlang Tiger Reserve) with Kaziranga Tiger Reserve, Assam. The construction of the Lower DEMWE by itself is not a barrier to this movement corridor as at that point forest connectivity’s abound for animal movement into the vast landscape of Arunachal Pradesh. However, care should be taken that associated linear infrastructure developed for the construction and subsequent maintenance of the HEP should not disrupt the riverine corridor and follow the green mitigation measures to ensure the gene-flow essential to maintain viable populations of elephants, tigers and wild buffalo in the landscape.

12 | P a g e

Map 7. Study area highlighting the locations of signs of important species

Map 8. Sighting locations of Ganges river dolphins (Platanista gangetica gangetica) in Zone 4 and 5

13 | P a g e

Table 2. Threatened species recorded during the present survey Sl. Species Name IUCN WPA Lat. Long. No. Status Schedule 1. Bengal florican (Houbaropsis CR I 27.788210 95.744012 bengalensis) 27.788494 95.767317 2. Ganges River Dolphin (Platanista EN I 27.580332 95.252115 gangetica gangetica) 3. White-backed vulture (Gyps CR I 27.798855 95.571196 bengalensis) 4. Black-breasted Parrotbill VU IV 27.587039 95.397963 (Paradoxornis flavirostris) 5 Asian Elephant (Elephas EN I 27.798855 95.571196 maximus) 6 . Assam Roofed Turtle (Pangshura EN I 27.740293 95.294006 sylhetensis) 7. Hoolock Gibbon (Hoolock EN I 27.861806 96.294127 hoolock) 8. Himalayan Griffon (Gyps NT I 27.798855 95.571196 himalayensis) NT: near threatened, VU: vulnerable, EN: endangered, CR: critically endangered

Image 2. Bengal Florican (Houbaropsis Image 1. Assam Roofed Turtle (Pangshura bengalensis): Male sighted in Zone 4. sylhetensis) sighted at DSNP

14 | P a g e

Map 9. A potential Tiger corridor (highlighted in green border) through the chaporis of river Lohit

15 | P a g e

Conclusions

The hydrological modelling done by WAPCOS is at a very coarse resolution and, with no access to the data, it is not possible to validate the conclusions arrived in their report. In light of this, it is difficult to justify that no inundation of chaporis and low line forests are likely to occur during peaking operations that may be detrimental to aquatic fauna and river biota. Therefore the peaking magnitude is to be determined and an in-depth study on the hydrological aspects is required to assess its impacts. It is understood from the current rapid survey that the daily flooding caused by peaking operations could potentially have the following impacts on aquatic and terrestrial fauna:

1. Possible inundation of grasslands and forested habitats in the Lohit river basin because of flooding caused due to peaking operations. 2. Possible loss of critical habitats e.g. Small River islands which are important for nesting of birds. 3. Due to daily flooding, if water currents are too strong, then it would affect the fishes with respect to their migration, survival of various life stages including eggs, larvae and fries. Strong currents on daily basis would also affect the movement and survival of endangered turtle species. 4. Change in the hydro-morphology of river due to daily flooding will also affect movement and survival of river dolphins and their major food species.

Also the EIA studies done earlier for this project limited themselves to a 10 km radius around the dam site i.e. only 10 km downstream from dam site and were therefore inadequate in documenting the biodiversity and the potential impacts of HEP. During the current survey, survey team recorded several critically endangered and endangered species (listed earlier) as well as wet grassland obligate species from the Lohit river basin and floodplains, many of which were not included in the previous assessment reports (e.g. EIA report for Lower Demwe HEP 2009, WAPCOS 2011). Seasonal natural floods are an important regulatory factor in maintaining this river ecosystem and in turn, the survival of these species. Any alterations in the flow regime may result in its adverse impact on the associated biodiversity. Hence appropriate mitigation is required while constructing the Lower Demwe Hydroelectric Power Plant. Also the threats to chaporis by illegal encroachment and resource

16 | P a g e extraction are detrimental to the rich biodiversity on these islands. The project’s compensatory payment could be well used to rehabilitate these communities from the chaporis and wean them to other livelihoods. A detailed study is therefore needed to provide specific sites and options.

During three consultative meetings with the project proponent (M/S Athena Energy Ventures Pvt. Ltd.), WII team discussed a way ahead. Major impacts were likely to happen in the aquatic realm of the Lohit river ecosystem, due to the peaking mechanism required for the commercial viability of the power plant. WII team is currently not in a position to estimate the amount of damage this circadian flooding of the river would cause. The intensity of the flood and its impact in a region is directly dependent on a) the topography of the riverscape (river basin and surrounding Landscape) there, b) the width of the channel and c) the quantum of the water released at any one time. However, the currently available information on the topography and width of the river channel is not at the desired resolution, to permit an in-depth assessment of the magnitude of the impact of the quantum of water released during peaking operations. To generate this required information, mapping the riverscape using Drone and LIDAR technology in collaboration with IIRS (Indian Institute of Remote Sensing/ NERIST) is necessary.

Once detailed data on the high-resolution elevation model is available, services of Hydrologists and GIS experts will be availed to depict various scenarios resulting with different magnitudes of water released during peaking operations. Simultaneously, a team of aquatic/freshwater biologists will assess the biota associated with the riverscape and its vulnerability to various intensities of the daily periodic flooding. The combination of these two studies would help determine the maximum water that could be released from the dam with minimal impact on the biota and the river island ecosystem and other necessary mitigation measures to further minimize this impact. This study would take a minimum of 2 years of time. A proposal of the same along with the budget is enclosed with the report (Appendix 1). The proponents of the Lower Demwe Hydro Electric Power Plant have given written undertaking that they shall abide the findings of this study, especially regarding the maximum amount of water to be released during peaking operations (Annexure XII).

In the light of the history of this dam site, wherein the submergence zone has been studied and an EIA was approved to give Environmental Clearance (corroborated by Hon’ble NGT), we feel that the creation/ construction of the dam per se would not be critical in undermining the biodiversity values of the region. The submergence zone of the dam is a habitat which is available elsewhere

17 | P a g e within the region and is not critical for the conservation of any known threatened, endangered or critically endangered species’ population. This hydroelectric project is ‘Run of the River (ROR)’ type where, once the reservoir is filled, the power is generated subsequently from the daily inflow of water which is released. Hence, the amount of river flow quanta is not likely to be altered once the dam is filled and power generation is based on an inflow equals outflow regime. The filling of the reservoir should be done while maintaining the minimal water flow downstream so as to ensure least impact on riverscape fauna. Therefore, by adhering to the above conditions, water quantum downstream will not be altered and impacts on the biodiversity would be minimal.

It is also recommended to develop a monitoring mechanism by which the recommendations and guidelines provided from the study would be adhered to, in the form of remote sensors placed in the riverbed at strategic locations that would send an alert signal to the Chief Wildlife Warden or any other competent authority, whenever daily flood levels exceed the maximum flood limits. To ensure that the associated linear infrastructure developed for the construction and maintenance of the HEP does not become a barrier to the occasional movement of large mammals like elephants, wild buffalo and tigers, appropriate mitigation measures in the form of wildlife passages (under and over passes) would need to be constructed.

As a consequence of the dam, the risk of having large amount of water-mass stored in a seismically active zone is obvious, and WII is not competent to assess the safeguards to be taken in this regard. In case of dam collapse or breach due to a seismic activity or any other natural calamity, the impact on the biodiversity as well as human life downstream would be devastating.

Taking into account that construction of dam and associated infrastructure would require time (3 to 4 years), it would be prudent to consider the construction of the dam at this stage and subsequently operate it at natural levels of inflow and outflow to generate power. At the same time the proponents may be strictly restrained from the peaking operations and resulting flooding until the above-mentioned study provides appropriate guidelines to undertake the peaking operations (if any) with minimal impact on the associated biota of the river and river-island ecosystem. Accordingly, the NBWL-SC may consider permitting the construction of dam while controlling the minimum and maximum flow, which would be recommended after the outcomes of the proposed study become available (Appendix 1). The cost of the 2 year study amounting to Rs. 1,84,92,000 (Rupees One Crore Eighty-Four Lakh Ninety-Two Thousand) should be borne by the project proponent. The

18 | P a g e proponent must also give an undertaking to the MoEFCC in writing that they would abide the recommendations of this study and especially those made in the context of peaking operations. All mitigation measures recommended in this study would also be implemented within the specified time period and for which, the proponent would provide the necessary funds.

19 | P a g e

References

 Chatterjee S., Saikia A., Dutta P., Ghosh D., Worah S., (2006). Review of Biodiversity in NorthEast India, Draft for Discussion March 2006. Background paper No. 13. WWF India.  Choudhury, A. (1998). Mammals, birds and reptiles of Dibru-Saikhowa sanctuary, Assam, India. Oryx, 32(3), 192-200.  Choudhury, A. (2006). Birds of Dibru-Saikhowa National Park and Biosphere Reserve, Assam, India. Indian Birds, 2(4), 95-105.  EIA report prepared for 1750 MW Lower Demwe HEP, Arunachal pradesh (2009). Prepared by Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies of Mountains and Hill Environment, University of Delhi, Delhi, September, 2009;  Jha, R. R., Thakuri, J. J., Rahmani, A. R., Dhakal, M., Khongsai, N., Pradhan, N. M. B., Shinde, N., Chauhan, B.K., Talegaonkar, R.K., Barber, I.P. & Buchanan, G. M. (2018). Distribution, movements, and survival of the critically endangered Bengal Florican Houbaropsis bengalensis in India and Nepal. Journal of Ornithology, 1-16.  Kansal, M & Arora, Shilpy. (2012). Biodiversity and present status of freshwater fishes in Lohit river basin of India. The Environmentalist. 32. 10.1007/s10669-011-9372-3.  Rahmani, A.R. (2011). Report of a member of the team for site inspection of the proposed DEMWE Lower Hydroelectric project in Arunachal Pradesh Proposal for construction of 1,750 MW Demwe Lower Hydro Electric Project In Lohit District, Arunachal Pradesh. Pp. 20.  WAPCOS, (2011). Effect of Peaking Power Generation By Siang Lower HEP, Demwe Lower HEP And Dibang Multipurpose HEP On Dibru-Saikhowa National Park, November 2011, WAPCOS ltd, Gurgaon, Haryana.  IUCN, (2018). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2018-1. https://www.iucnredlist.org/ Downloaded on 24 August 2018.

20 | P a g e

Appendix I: Proposal for ‘Geospatial Analysis of Impacts of Lower Demwe Hydro-Electric Project on the Riverine Ecosystem of Lohit Basin, Arunachal Pradesh’ Background

River Lohit is one of the three major tributaries of river Brahmaputra. After entering the Indian Territory at Kibitho area in Arunachal Pradesh, river Lohit meets the floodplains near Prashuram Kund. In the plains, river basin is characterised by the presence of numerous river islands locally called as ‘Chaporis’. These chaporis and river banks harbour unique tall, wet grasslands evolved in the regime of natural annual flood during summers (May to September). Many bird species like Bengal Florican (Houbaropsis bengalensis), Black-breasted Parrotbill (Paradoxornis flavirostris), Swamp Prinia (Laticila cinerascens), Marsh Babbler (Pellorneum palustre) etc. are obligate dwellers of such wet grasslands. The larger chaporis bearing moist deciduous and semi-evergreen forests act as potential corridors for the movement of large carnivores like Tiger (Panthera tigris) and Leopard (Panthera pardus) and large herbivores like Elephants (Elephas maximus) and Buffalos (Bubalus arnee). On the other hand, the aquatic system of Lohit includes endangered Ganges River Dolphin (Planatnista gangetica gangetica), many species of endangered turtles and fishes. This whole aquatic as well as river chapori ecosystem has evolved under the annual flood regime.

Due to its very high hydro-electric potential, river Lohit has been in focus for the construction of hydro-electric power plants, one of them being Lower Demwe HEP. Although beneficial for the overall development, the environmental concerns call for ‘a sustainable development going hand in hand with the wildlife conservation’. After several impact assessment studies challenged in Hon’ble NGT, Standing Committee of NBWL recommended WII to carry out a rapid impact assessment study.

The Lower Demwe HEP is based upon an inflow equals outflow regime. One of the requirements for a profitable power generation is daily peaking operations which will result in the circadian flooding of the river channel downstream. The rapid impact assessment conducted by WII team revealed the presence of several threatened (vulnerable, endangered and critically endangered)

21 | P a g e species of mammals, birds, reptiles as well as fishes many of which were not included in the revious assessment reports. The report by WII also concluded that the seasonal floods are an important regulatory factor in maintaining the river ecosystem and in turn the survival of these species. Any alterations in the flow regime (e.g. the daily flooding proposed by Lower Demwe HEP) may result in its adverse impact on the associated biodiversity. The intensity of the daily flood and its impact in the river ecosystem at a given location is directly dependent on the topography of riverscape and the width of channel present at that location as well as the quantum of water released at that instant. However, due to the unavailability of information on the topography and channel width of the riverscape at a desired resolution, an in-depth assessment cannot be done to recommend the mitigation measure regarding the quantum of water to be released. Hence, a study was recommended to obtain the required information which will aid in modelling the impact of peaking operations on the River biota.

On the basis of ‘Rapid Ecological Assessment of Impacts of Lower Demwe Hydro-Electric Project on Wildlife Values’ conducted by WII, a 2 year study of the hydromorphology and the impact of circadian flooding on the biodiversity in the potential impact zone of Lohit riverscape is required to give appropriate recommendations regarding the maximum amount of water that can be released during peaking operations with minimal impact of the biota and river island ecosystems.

Objectives

The study would have the following major objectives:

1. Documentation and understanding of the biota that is likely to be affected by Lower Demwe HEP, with special emphasis on critically endangered, endangered and threatened species viz. 1)Tiger, 2)Ganges River Dolphin, 3)Asian Elephant, 4)Bengal Florican, 6)Black-breasted Parrotbill, 7)White-rumped Vulture, 8)Assam Roofed Turtle. 2. Mapping of River hydro-morphology (topography and channel width) and its seasonal dynamics at finer resolution. 3. Modelling of the impacts of the intensity of flood at different distances from the dam site to Dibru Saikhowa National Park in the context of peaking operations. 4. Assessing the impact of circadian flooding on different biota and development of a viable plan that will have minimal impact on the conservation of the biota.

22 | P a g e

Methods

A team of biologists (biodiversity experts) will survey the riverscape both intensively and extensively to inventories the biodiversity of the region. The team then will assess the dependencies of the above mentioned threatened species on other forms of life likely to be affected by dam activities (e.g. River dolphins are dependent of fishes and fish spawning is dependent on the natural water flow. Because of dam, fluctuation in flow regime may impact fish breeding ground and in turn the food availability for river dolphins). A team of engineers, GIS experts and hydrologists will map river basin from zero point of water reservoir up to Dibru Saikhowa National Park using Drone/LIDAR technologies to obtain 10-15cm digital resolution of the region. This information will be used by the hydrologists to model the intensity of flooding e.g. force and height of water at different distances from the dam site to Dibru Saikhowa National Park. The biologists and hydrologists then will work together to determine impact of the daily fluctuations of flow and its intensity on the aquatic biota and river island ecosystem.

Outcomes

This study would attempt to bring a balance between development and conservation. It will propose an operational plan including the appropriate recommendations on the maximum quantum of water that can be released during peaking operations (if any) with minimal negative impacts on the river ecosystem. The information obtained on the aquatic biota and river hydromorphology would help in recommending other required mitigation measures, if needed. There are several dams proposed in this river basin and it would be useful to conduct a cumulative environmental impact assessment (CEIA) in this river basin.

23 | P a g e

Activity timeline of the study A tentative timeline of the proposed study is given in Table 4.

Table 3. Timeline of activities of the study Activity 2018-2019 2019-2020 Nov-Jan Feb- May- Aug- Nov- Feb-Apr May- Aug- Apr Jul Oct Jan Jul Nov Recruitment and team composition (including consultants and logistics of surveys and purchases) Field survey for Mapping hydro-morphology and riverine species study Study continues through the floods Modelling and data analysis Preparation of report

24 | P a g e

Budget of the study A head-wise budget of the proposed study is given in Table 5.

Table 4. Head-wise Budget of the proposed study Sr. Amount Year 1 Amount Year 2 Budget Head No. (Rs.) (Rs.) Research biologists (JPF-3, SPF-1, PA- 1 22,08,000 22,08,000 1) 2 Field Assistants @ 12,000 PM x 3 4,32,000 4,32,000 3 Vehicle and Boat (rented) 11,80,000 11,80,000 4 Drone & LIDAR 20,00,000 5,00,000 5 Consultant – Hydrologists 3,00,000 3,00,000 Faculty time six man months per year 6 15,00,000 15,00,000 @ 250000 per month 7 GIS and RS work and imagery 2,50,000 2,50,000 8 Travel 6,00,000 5,00,000 9 Base Camp + Furnishing 2,20,000 1,20,000 10 Contingency 2,00,000 2,00,000 * Sub total 88,90,000 71,90,000 11 Institutional Overhead @15% 13,33,500 10,78,500 * Yearly Total 10,223,500 8,268,500

Rs. 1,84,92,000 Total Cost = Rupees One Crore Eighty-Four Lakh Ninety- Two Thousand

25 | P a g e

Annexures Annexure I) Details of the sites visited

Table 5. Details of the sites visited during the present survey Important Species seen/heard/signs. Site and date State Dominant Sr. GPS coordinates (refer Annexure VIII, visited Habitat No. AS/AP IX, X for scientific names) Yellow-bellied Prinia, Jerdon’s Babbler, Maguri beel - 27°34'26.85"N, Chestnut-caped babbler, 1. AS Wet grassland 10 May 2018 95°22'26.51"E Striated babbler, Water cock, Black bittern, Wild Buffalo Jia Village, Near Black-breasted Parrotbill, 28° 3'58.50"N, 2. Roing - 11 May AP Wet grassland Marsh babbler, Swamp 95°42'45.19"E 2018 Prinia Tezu Nala - 12 27°54'35.03"N, 3. AP Wet grassland May 2018 96° 9'56.75"E

Hawa camp - 13 Semi-evergreen 27°54'59.07"N, 4. AP May 2018 forest 96°19'53.65"E

Dam site, Parshuram Kund River bed 27°52'46.89"N, 5. AP - (boulders), 96°22'18.98"E 13 May 2018

Grassland and Hoolock Gibbon (Call), Chapori 1 - 27°53'11.87"N, 6. AP Dalbergia sissoo Large tree frog, Draco 96°20'25.28"E 14 May 2018 plantation flying lizard

26 | P a g e

Upstream of Dam site till River bed 27°58'22.89"N, 7. AP Brown Dipper Tiding - (boulder) 96°23'47.19"E 15 May 2018 Proposed Udayak Semi-evergreen 27°53'59.93"N, 8. Pass- AP forest 96°23'5.62"E 16 May 2018 Tezu nala to Deciduous forest 27°54'52.52"N, Otter tracks (species 9. Panbari - AP and wet grassland 96°11'9.59"E unidentified) 17 May 2018 Chapori 3 - 17 27°54'39.08"N, 10. AP Wet grassland May 2018 96°11'18.75"E

Chapori 4 - 27°54'27.82"N, 11. AP Wet grassland Otter tracks 17 May 2018 96°12'17.98"E Chapori 5 - 17 27°54'35.33"N, 12. AP Wet grassland Golden Jackal den May 2018 96°12'36.18"E

Forest 1 - Deciduous forest 27°54'46.64"N, Greter Necklaced 13. AP 17 May 2018 (degraded) 96°14'16.82"E Laughingthrush

Tezu Forest- 27°54'13.94"N, 14. AP Deciduous forest Yellow-throated Marten 18 May 2018 96°11'56.61"E

Chidiya Khana - Deciduous & semi- 27°52'44.64"N, 15. AP Spotted litter skink 19 May 2018 evergreen forest 96°12'22.46"E

Chapori 6 - 27°53'50.22"N, 16. AP Wet grassland Streaked Weaver (3 nests) 20 May 2018 96° 8'38.95"E

Chapori 7 - 27°53'48.85"N, Streaked Weaver, 17. AP Wet grassland 20 May 2018 96° 8'14.48"E Droppings of Hare

Chapori 8 - 27°53'10.31"N, 18. AP Wet grassland Hoofmarks of hog deer 20 May 2018 96° 7'24.02"E

Chapori 9 - 27°52'35.96"N, 19. AP Deciduous forest 20 May 2018 96° 6'2.14"E

27 | P a g e

Chapori 10 - 27°52'17.83"N, 20. AP Deciduous forest 20 May 2018 96° 4'14.86"E

Chapori 11 - 27°52'10.03"N, 21. AP Deciduous forest Hoof-marks of hog deer 20 May 2018 96° 4'24.16"E

Chapori 12 - 27°51'42.37"N, 22. AP Wet grassland 20 May 2018 96° 3'20.44"E

Lailiang & Shivaji Deciduous & semi- 27°59'14.12"N, 23. Nagar AP evergreen forest, 96°10'49.90"E 22 May 2018 human habitation

Chapori 13 - Wet grassland 27°49'36.14"N, 24. AP 23 May 2018 (grazed) 95°58'24.97"E Shrubbery Chapori 14 - 27°49'33.06"N, 25. AP dominated by 95°57'51.41"E 23 May 2018 Lantana camara Wet grassland- Chapori 15 - 27°49'33.06"N, 26. AP deciduous forest 95°57'51.41"E 23 May 2018 mosaic

Chapori 16 - 27°49'36.10"N, 27. AP Wet grassland 23 May 2018 95°57'29.59"E

Chapori 17 - Deciduous forest 27°49'8.95"N, 28. AP Feral buffalos 23 May 2018 (degraded) 95°56'29.47"E Wet grassland- Chapori 18 - 27°49'27.71"N, Amur Falcon, Plain 29. AP deciduous forest 95°56'50.47"E Martin, 23 May 2018 mosaic

Chapori 19 - 27°47'51.34"N, 30. AP Wet grassland Graceful Prinia 23 May 2018 95°55'14.03"E

Night camp - Wet grassland & 27°47'59.71"N, 31. AP 24 May 2018 dry river bed 95°48'8.31"E Bhim Chapori 18 Wet grassland & 27°47'25.79"N, White-backed Vulture, 32. - AP deciduous forest 95°45'46.97"E Himalayan Griffon 24 May 2018

28 | P a g e

Chapori 20 - 27°47'18.86"N, Bengal Florican claimed 33. AP Wet grassland 24 May 2018 95°44'29.76"E to be seen by local people

Chapori 21 - 27°47'40.95"N, Bengal Florican (single 34. AP Wet grassland 24 May 2018 95°51'22.85"E male- direct sighting) Bengal Florican (3 males- Chapori 22 - 27°47'57.75"N, 35. AP Wet grassland direct sighting) 24 May 2018 95°48'54.62"E

Grassland 4 - Wet grassland & 27°48'40.21"N, 36. AP 25 May 2018 Tamarix scrub 95°35'28.58"E

Chapori 23 - Wet grassland & 27°48'1.57"N, Bristled Grassbird, 37. AS 25 May 2018 Tamarix scrub 95°34'24.83"E Himalayan Vulture

Chapori 24 - Wet grassland & 27°48'55.41"N, Elephant Tracks, Wild 38. AS 25 May 2018 Tamarix scrub 95°37'27.96"E Buffalo

Chapori 25 - 27°46'24.20"N, 39. AS Wet grassland White-tailed Stonechat 25 May 2018 95°32'57.90"E River dolphin at the Colomi camp - Semi-evergreen 27°37'26.40"N, 40. AS confluence of river Lohit forest 95°19'18.53"E 29 May 2018 and Colmi Nullah Lika Pimau 27°40'13.17"N, 41. Village – AS Village & grazeland 95°19'3.18"E 29 May 2018

Chapori 26 - Wet grassland and 27°41'57.83"N, 42. AS Assam Roofed Turtle 29 May 2018 marshes 95°22'8.54"E

Mailee Camp - Wet grassland and 27°43'55.52"N, 43. AS Feral horses 29 May 2018 marshes 95°24'0.11"E

Paglam – Wet grassland & 27°49'5.42"N, 44. AS 30 May 2018 degraded forest 95°29'38.12"E

29 | P a g e

Annexure II) Glossary and Abbreviations

Glossary 1. Chapori or Char - river island 2. Khuti – Cattle camps on river islands or river banks 3. Project site/Dam site – Lower Demwe HEP 4. Dav – a weapon (big knife with wooden fist) used by ribal people in Assam and Arunachal for self-protection), a type of local machete. 5. Gakhir – milk 6. Guro – cattle 7. Bari – Bagan or garden (Alubari = Potato garden; Pan Bari = Pan garden) 8. Cumecs water – Cubic meters per second 9. Kunda – Timber wood

Abbreviations 1. WII – Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun 2. DSNP – Dibru Saikhowa National Park 3. BRO – Border Roads Organisation 4. DPR – Detailed Project Report 5. PA – Protected area 6. RF – Reserve Forest

30 | P a g e

Annexure III) About Lower Demwe HE Project

DPR highlights (Source – Documents received from project proponent) National Hydroelectric Power Corporation Ltd (NHPC) submitted a Pre-Feasibility Report (PFR) of Demwe HE Project to CEA in February 2004. However before the preparation of PFR by NHPC, The Brahmaputra Board and NEEPCO carried out impact assessments for the development of hydropower projects in Lohit basin. A brief history of these investigations is as below:

A) Investigations carried out by Brahmputra Board (Lohit Dam Project) The Brahmaputra Board initially proposed two alternatives for the construction of a high dam across the river Lohit for flood moderation and generation of 3000 MW hydro power. The first proposal envisages a 250 m high concrete dam across river Lohit at Mompani, where the Lohit river passes through a narrow gorge (Latitude 280-03’, Longitude 960-27’ Elevation 433 MSL). The second alternative proposal was to construct a 269.2 m high rockfill dam located at Hayuliang (Latitude 280-04’-30”, Longitude 960-31’-00”, Elevation 500 MSL).

Although detailed explorations were carried out to establish the feasibility for the construction of earth/ rock fill dam at Hayuliang, based on drill hole data it was concluded that about 80 m thick loose sediments (overburden) are present in the river bed section. Highly porous and sandy nature of these materials may pose serious problems of leakage and settlements of the dam body due to liquefaction of sand layers. In order to avoid the excessive overburden at Hayuliang dam site and submergence of some developed area, the other alternative of constructing a concrete dam at Mompani was thought off. A proposal for Rockfill dam with chute spillway in place of concrete dam was also considered. With this proposal, two tunnels, each of 1.3 km length on right bank and an underground power house was proposed for generation of 3000 MW and geological investigations were carried out.

Subsequently, Brahamputra Board carried out extensive survey and investigations at Mompani for a Concrete Dam with its FRL at EL 570 m in order to reduce submergence area. The Mompani dam site of Brahamputra Board is now located within the allotted reach between EL +579 m and EL +300 m and is being developed by ADPPL as Demwe Upper HE Project, DPR of which is being separately prepared and would be submitted to CEA shortly.

31 | P a g e

B) Investigations carried out by NEEPCO (Demwe H E Project): NEEPCO initially proposed a 65 m high concrete dam across the river Lohit (EL 361m) at Tidding and a surface power house near Timaighat to generate 1000 MW (4 x 250 MW). Subsequently, detailed exploration was carried out to establish the feasibility for the construction of concrete dam. But based on the drill hole data that presented about 40-50 m thick overburden, occurrence of fault at dam site and active seismicity in that region etc., the project authority decided to change the diversion dam into 34 m high barrage at the same location.

Based on barrage, NEEPCO has prepared a DPR of Demwe HE project (8 x 65 MW = 520 MW) in February 1992. This DPR was examined at CEA/CWC and due to some serious technical observations, the same was returned to NEEPCO. Most of the regions of the country are suffering from power shortages leading to irregular and unreliable supply. The problem becomes acute during peak hours. Based on the projections made in the 16th Electric Power Survey, an additional generating capacity of over 100,000 MW needs to be added to ensure “Power on Demand” by 2012.

C) Lower Demwe HEP It is a 1750 MW run-of-the river project on Lohit River in Lohit district of Arunachal Pradesh (at latitude 27° 52’ 48’’ N and longitude 96° 22’ 39” E). The project site is located near Parashsuram Kund, a historically significant pilgrimage site. The project aims to build a concrete gravity dam of 163.12m height above the deepest foundation level (124m height above the riverbed level) with full reservoir level at an elevation of 424.8 m. The project is a joint venture between the Government of Arunachal Pradesh and M/S Athena Energy Ventures Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi to develop Demwe HE Project in one or more schemes in the allotted stretch between elevation EL ±300m and ±589m. The stake of Arunachal Pradesh government in the project is 26% (Source - http://www.athenaenergy.in/demwe.html).

32 | P a g e

Annexure IV) Chronology of Events pertaining to clearance

This section has been sourced from the site inspection committee report 2018 (Report of the National Board of Wildlife Standing Committee on Proposed Demwe Lower Hydroelectric Project, March 2018).

1. The Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) for river valley and hydroelectric projects held meetings on 22.10.2009, 16.11.2009 and 16.12.2009 and finally the environmental clearance was granted on 12.2.2010 by the MoEF, Government of India. 2. The environmental clearance granted on 12.2.2010 was challenged before the Hon’ble Principal Bench of NGT, New Delhi, vide Appeal No.8 of 2011. 3. The Hon’ble NGT upheld the environmental clearance granted to the project, vide its order dated 13 January 2015. 4. The stage-I forest clearance was accorded on 1 March 2012 by the MoEF. 5. The MoEF granted the stage-II forest clearance on 3 May 2013. 6. The Department of Environment & Forests, Government of Arunachal Pradesh vide its Letter No.FOR.199/CONS/2007/Vol-I/3134-40, Itanagar, Dated 26-07-2013 accorded Forest Clearance for diversion of 1415.92 ha of forestland for construction of Demwe Lower Hydroelectric Project in favor of M/s Athena Demwe Power Limited, in Lohit district of Arunachal Pradesh. 7. The stage-I and stage-II forest clearances dated 1.3.2012 and 3.5.2013, respectively were challenged in the Hon’ble Principal Bench of NGT, New Delhi as Appeal No.92 of 2013. 8. The appellant sought to challenge the stage I and stage II Forest Clearance and the consequential order dated 26-07-2013 passed by the Government of Arunachal Pradesh. This Appeal was subsequently transferred to the Southern Zone Bench of the Hon’ble NGT and renumbered as Appeal No.30 of 2015. 9. The judgment delivered on 24th October, 2017 by the Hon’ble NGT (SZ) in the above appeal held that the decision taken by the Standing Committee of NBWL dated 13.12.2011, vide Official Memorandum of MoEF dated 11.2.2012 is not in consonance with the established principles of law and hence the Standing Committee of NBWL shall reconsider

33 | P a g e

the issue relating to Demwe LE Project and pass appropriate orders within a period of six months from the date of judgment. It further directed that until such orders are passed, the impugned forest clearance stage-I dated 1.3.2012 and stage-II dated 3.5.2013 issued by MoEF and the consequential order of the Government of Arunachal Pradesh dated 26.7.2013 relating to the diversion of 1415.92 ha of forestland for the construction of the project stand suspended. 10. Subsequent to this, the Standing Committee of the NBWL considered the issues in its 46th and 47th meetings and appointed a committee for site inspection and submission of detailed report to the Ministry; vide letter no. 6-79/2013 WL (Part), dated 8.2.2018 of the MoEF&CC. 11. The committee members visited the project site during 25-28 February 2018, looked into various aspects of the project vis-à-vis the likely impact of the project on Kamlang Wildlife Sanctuary and wildlife species, and associated habitats and made assessment on the issues raised by the Hon’ble NGT in its order dated 27.10.2017. 12. During 48th meeting dated 27th March 2018, the Standing Committee of NBWL members mentioned that impact study of the project has not been carried by the User Agency and the State Government and therefore, a comprehensive peer-reviewed study on hydrology and ecology of three seasons by a reputed and neutral scientific / technical organization(s) before according clearance. After discussions the Standing Committee decided that the WII, Dehradun to carry out hydrology / ecology study and submit the report to the Ministry in three months. Consequently the Standing Committee decided to defer the proposal.

34 | P a g e

Annexure V) Literature review

In tropical and subtropical regions many riverine species have very limited geographical distributions, and a large proportion of the flora and fauna are unique to individual river systems. For instance, 50 per cent of the fish fauna in the Olifants River in Southern Africa and the Jordan River is endemic, as well as 42 per cent of the fish species in the Red River (Yuan Jiang) that runs through China and Vietnam. Mekong and Yangtze (Chiang Jiang) have endemic species of closely related gastropods (over 100 species per river). Water flow patterns in the Mekong are changing because of on-going rapid hydropower development triggered by economic growth (Piman, et al. 2016).

The North-east India has been identified as India’s ‘future powerhouse’ and at least 168 large hydroelectric projects with a total installed capacity of 63,328 MW (Central Electricity Authority 2001) are proposed for the region. States such as Arunachal Pradesh and Sikkim are at the forefront in the initiative to sign multiple memoranda of understanding/agreement (MoU/MoA) with power developers. Till October 2010, the Government of Arunachal Pradesh had allotted 132 projects to companies in the private and public sectors for a total installed capacity of 40,140.5 MW. The large dams’ juggernaut clearly seems to be the biggest ‘development’ intervention in this ecologically and geologically fragile landscape. Currently 10 large projects are already operational in the region, 11 are under construction, and a substantially larger number are in the process of getting various clearances. Northeast India is also known for its biological and cultural diversity. It is one of the three global biodiversity hotspots that are known from India (www.biodiversityhotspots.org). This region is home to important populations of wildlife species, such as the rhino, elephant, tiger, wild buffalo, pygmy hog, and the Ganges river dolphin. Although encompassing only 8 percent of the country’s geographical area, it houses 21 percent of the Important Bird Areas (IBAs) identified by the Birdlife International and the Bombay Natural History Society.

The concern is what impacts these dams will have on the biodiversity in tropical and subtropical rivers. Investors in hydropower projects may have implemented some measures to prevent and mitigate direct impacts on biodiversity of the surrounding areas. However, there are two major impacts that are generally not mitigated properly viz. Flooding of river channel downstream for

35 | P a g e power generation (peaking operation), blocking and alteration of the flow due to the dams and the loss of forest due to submergence in the reservoir.

Lohit River has drawn the attention of the hydropower developers due to its high hydropower potential. The HEPs are planned in mountain gorges upstream and will create large reservoirs. The alteration of stream flow can affect migratory fishes which need to move upstream in the hills to breed and spawn (Kansal et al. 2012).

Lohit river and its chapories have been designated as Priority-3 grassland site in Arunachal pradesh while Dibrusaikhowa has been designated as Priority-1 grassland site in Assam by WWF India as a part of their Biodiversity Conservation Prioritization Project (1997-2000) (Chatterjee et al., 2006) for conservation which is based on their biological as well as socioeconomic values. Under the same project flood plain of Dibru river (the continuation of Lohit in Assam especially the main channel that flows through Dibru Saikhowa National Park) has been designated as Priority wetland.

For the avi-fauna of the Lohit river, not many focused studies have been done although personal records and observations from different parts of Lohit have been published by Allen (2002)-107 species, Choudhury (2006)-440 species and Gode (2013)-133 species covering Amarpur area of Dibru Saikhowa Biosphere reserve, Dibru Saikhowa National Park and Lohit Valley in Arunachal Pradesh further north respectively. The species number includes historical records. Besides this Chaudhuri in 1998 did a wholistic survey of major faunal diversity of then Dibru Saikhowa Sanctuary where he reorted 313 species of birds and highlighted unusual presence of Sarus Crane and White-bellied Heron also suggesting the region crucial for migratory waterfowls. Choudhury (1998) also reported 35 species of identified mammals excluding bats and small rodents. The mammal list highlights presence of Asiatic Elephants, Wild Buffalos, Sambar, Hog Deer, Barking Deer along with predators like Tiger, Leopard and Clouded Leopard (only once). The arboreal fauna included Malayan Giant squirrel, Pallas’s Squirrel, Irrawaddy Squirrel and primates Hoolock Gibbons and Rhesus Macaques. The Chapories around DSNP also has been known to inhabit unique Feral Horse which is a tourist attraction. The same study also reported Narrow-headed Softshell Turtle, Gangetic Softshell Turtle, Malayan Box Turtle, Brown Roofed Turtle and Assam Roofed Turtle. The same study in 1998 only suggests the ossible extinction of Gharials from the region claiming them to be extremely rare.

36 | P a g e

The southern bank forest of the Lohit river downstream of Parshuram Kund till Tezu has been notified as a distribution range of Eastern Hoolock Gibbon Hoolock hoolock leuconedys in India according to Das et al., (2006).

EIAs of hydropower projects usually include an assessment of the effects of the projects on wildlife in the surrounding areas. They usually conclude that dams have minor effects after the mitigation measures are implemented, so that the hydropower projects can go ahead with construction. (Trong Tu et al. 2013).

References (for Annexure II, III and IV)  Allen, D., (2002). A bird survey of the Amarpur area of the Dibru-Saikhowa Biosphere Reserve, Assam, India. Forktail, 87-92.  Chatterjee S., Saikia A., Dutta P., Ghosh D., Worah S., (2006). Review of Biodiversity in NorthEast India, Draft for Discussion March 2006. Background paper No. 13. WWF India.  Choudhury, A. (1998). Mammals, birds and reptiles of Dibru-Saikhowa sanctuary, Assam, India. Oryx, 32(3), 192-200.  Choudhury, A. (2006). Birds of Dibru-Saikhowa National Park and Biosphere Reserve, Assam, India. Indian Birds, 2(4), 95-105.  Das, J., Biswas, J., Bhattacharjee, P. C., & Mohnot, S. M. (2006). First distribution records of the eastern hoolock gibbon (Hoolock hoolock leuconedys) from India. Zoos’ Print Journal, 21(7), 2316-2320.  EIA report for Lower Demwe HEP (2009). Prepared by Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies of Mountains and Hill Environment, University of Delhi, Delhi, September, 2009;  Gode, N. (2013). Birding in Lohit Valley, Arunachal Pradesh. Indian BIRDS 8 (5): 126-127.  Kansal, M and Arora, S. (2012). Biodiversity and present status of freshwater fishes in Lohit river basin of India. The Environmentalist. 32. 10.1007/s10669-011-9372-3.  Piman, T., Cochrane, T. and Mauricio, A. (2016). Effect of Proposed Large Dams on Water Flows and Hydropower Production in the Sekong, Sesan and Srepok Rivers of the Mekong Basin: Impact of Large Dams in Tributaries of the Mekong. River Research and Applications 32. 10.1002/rra.3045.

37 | P a g e

 Rahmani, A.R. (2011). Report of a member of the team for site inspection of the proposed DEMWE Lower Hydroelectric project in Arunachal Pradesh Proposal for construction of 1,750 MW Demwe Lower Hydro Electric Project In Lohit District, Arunachal Pradesh. Pp. 20.  Kamboj, R.D., Bankhwal, D.P., & Gopi, G.V., (2018). Site inspection report for Lower Demwe HEP. Report of the National Board of Wildlife Standing Committee on Proposed Demwe Lower Hydroelectric Project, March 2018.  Trong Tu, Dao & Le, Tuan & Kim Thai, Le & Dinh Sinh, Tran & Thi Thu Suu, Lam & Thi Khanh, Nguy. (2013). Analysis of Environmental and Social Costs and Risks of Hydropower Dams, with a Case Study of Song Ttanh 2 Hydropower Plant.  WAPCOS (2011). Effect of Peaking Power Generation By Siang Lower HEP, Demwe Lower HEP And Dibang Multipurpose HEP On Dibru-Saikhowa National Park. Pp. 68.  WAPCOS (2016). Carrying Capacity and Cumulative Impact Assessment Studies for HEP on the Tributaries of Lohit River Basin in Arunachal Pradesh, by WAPCOS ltd. August, 2016.  World Commission on Dams (2000). Dams and Development – A new framework for decision making. The Report of the World Commission on Dams. Earthscan, London.

38 | P a g e

Annexure VI) Field Photographs

Image 3. Location of dam site and surrounding habitat

Image 4. Dam site and surrounding habitat: ground view

39 | P a g e

Image 5. Surveying the chaporis by crossing streams on foot in zone 1 and 2.

40 | P a g e

Image 6. Surveying on country made hand boat Image 7. Surveying on country made motor in Zone 3 boat in Zone 4

Image 8. Surveying on cruise type motor boat in Image 9. Surveying on speed boat in DSNP zone 5

41 | P a g e

Image 10. Top) River Lohit at Tiding, Middle) Plumbeous Water redstart, Bottom) Brown Dipper

42 | P a g e

Image 11 From Zone 2: Top) Grasslands and Trees of Dalbergia sissoo on the chaporis, Bottom right) Large Tree Frog; Bottom left) Flying lizard Draco maculatus

43 | P a g e

Image 12. Cattle grazing on the chaporis of Zone 2

Image 13. Local sand and boulder mining from dry River bed from Zone 3.

44 | P a g e

Image 14. Upstream migration of stream fishes for spawning in river Lohit (Zone 3)

Image 15. Use of gill nets to catch stream fishes of river Lohit in Zone 3

45 | P a g e

1 2

3 4

5 6

Image 16. Fishes of Lohit: 1) Barilius sp., 2)Cabdio morar, 3) Devario aequipinnatus, 4) Garra sp. 5) Neolissochylus hexgonolepis, 6) Xenentodon cancila

46 | P a g e

Image 17. Nest of Streaked Weaver bird found on a chapori from Zone 3

Image 18. The chaporis of Zone 3 representing the mosaic of wet grasslands and semi evergreen forest 47 | P a g e

Image 19. Spotted Litter Skink found on the forest floor in Zone 3

Image 20. Tribal people encountered during the survey in proposed Tezu reserve forest 48 | P a g e

Image 21 Top) Wet grasslands in Maguri beel (Zone 5), Bottom: left)Striated Babbler, right) Nal grass

49 | P a g e

Image 22. Cutting of Bombax ceiba trees from the bank of river Lohit in Zone 4

Image 23 Top) Paddyfield Pipit a commonly found on the chaporis of lohit, Bottom: left) Rat snake crossing the river channel, right) Amur falcon (flock of 40 was seen) from Zone 4 50 | P a g e

Image 24. Top) Bengal Florican single male flushed from a chapori, Bottom) Bengal Florican three individuals fludhed subsequently from the same chapori from Zone 4

51 | P a g e

Image 25. Left) Elephant tracks found in chaporis in Zone 5. Right) Wild Buffalos sighted in DSNP

Image 26. A river channel cutting through the semi evergreen forest in DSNP

52 | P a g e

Annexure VII) List of people interacted

Table 6. List of people interviewed during the survey Sr. Name Place Occupation Contact number No. 1. Jeevan Maguri beel Eco-tourism (Kahua eco camp, 8638700342 Nathun gaon)

2. G.B. Pullu Roing Mishmi Hill Nature camp 9862856981

3. Dr. Mark Bertein Jia village, Roing Commander in Indian Navy 7032053708

4. Mr. Deepak Sharma Parshuram Kund HR Manager, Athena HEP project

5. Janal Medi Tidding Daily Wages labour

6. Krishna Hodar Upstream of Standard 3 school student Parshuram kund

7. Shankar Nayak Upstream of Standard 6 school student Parshuram kund

8. Zhua Urag Upstream of Elder person of family Parshuram kund

9. Radha Nayak Upstream of Gavbudha, labour contractor Parshuram kund

10. Param Chetri Tezu river bank Shepherd/cattle grazer

11. Tuleshwar Das Panbari Casual contract staff of FD

12. Khirod Bora Panbari Manzi

13. Rajani Das Panbari Manzi

53 | P a g e

14. Cola Bilai Tezu forest area Mishmi tribal

15. Shri D.S. Manyu Tezu DFO, Tezu

16. Jogin Tamai (belongs Tezu Political Translator, 8974566966 to Digaroo Mishmi Administration, Tezu tribe)

17. Tally Kamsi Tezu Nature lover

18. Bakekho Tamai Tezu Elder person interacted for 8413925453 (belongs to Digaroo getting traditional knowledge Mishmi tribe)

19. Ghankanta Sunwal Bhim Chapori Khuti owner

20. Sanjib Chetri Bhim Chapori Khuti owner

21. Padma Chetri Bhim Chapori Khuti owner

22. Gopal Munda Chapro near Khuti owner 7086576673 Jamukbari

23. Surja Bahadur Chapro near Khuti owner 8472812001 Amarpur

24. Indra Bahadur Chapro near Khuti owner Kanwar Amarpur

25. Shri Mridulkumar Dibru Saikhowa DFO, Tinsukia Dhar

26. Sarbasis Dutta Dibru Saikhowa Researcher, SACON 9038197596

27. Mohandeep Gogoi Dibru Saikhowa Forest Guard, Dibru Saikhowa NP

28. Prafulla Sethia Dibru Saikhowa Villager, Erasuti Gao, Dibru Saikhowa NP

54 | P a g e

29. Shital Yadav Dibru Saikhowa Villager, Erasuti Gao, Dibru Saikhowa NP

30. Lalbihari Sahni Dibru Saikhowa Boat Pilot, Dibru Saikhowa NP

31. Rajkumar Das Dibru Saikhowa Villager, Erasuti Gao, Dibru Saikhowa NP

32. Mrs. Aarti Saha Dibru Saikhowa Teacher, Government Primary School, Erasuti Gao, Dibru Saikhowa NP

33. Rambadan Yadav Dibru Saikhowa Villager, Erasuti Gao, Dibru Saikhowa NP

34. Chandrakant Das Dibru Saikhowa Representative of Aqua Weaves CSR project

35. Jyonil Abedin Dibru Saikhowa Owner of Banashree eco- cottages

36. Kanak Deori Dibru Saikhowa Forester, Colomi Camp, Dibru 8638009698 Saikhowa NP

37. Sadin Sunwal Dibru Saikhowa Forest Guard, Colomi Camp, Dibru Saikhowa NP

38. Anant Tarak Dibru Saikhowa Villager, Lika gao 9101453953

39. Tetera Tate Dibru Saikhowa Khuti Caretaker, Lika gao

40. Mintu Doley Dibru Saikhowa Beat In-charge, IV guest Camp, Dibru Saikhowa NP

41. Utpal Gogoi Dibru Saikhowa Forest staff, IV guest Camp, Dibru Saikhowa NP

42. Bitupon Bora Dibru Saikhowa Forest staff, IV guest Camp, Dibru Saikhowa NP

55 | P a g e

43. Basanta Dahotia Dibru Saikhowa Forest staff, IV guest Camp, Dibru Saikhowa NP

44. Riki Pego Dibru Saikhowa Khuti owner

45. Mari Regon Paglam Khuti owner

46. Sanjay Das Dibru Saikhowa Tourist Operator and local politician

47. Shri Suryakumar Delhi Representative, Athena HEP Prakash project

48. Subhash Debnath Tezu Caretaker, Circuit House, Tezu

56 | P a g e

Annexure VIII) List of fishes

Table 7. List of fish species recorded during the survey Sr. No. Species Scientific Species Common/ name Vernacular Name IUCN status Zone 1 Barilius sp. Baril 1 2 Salmophasia sp. Minnow 1 3 Cabdio morar Morari LC 3 4 Chagunius chagunio Puti LC 3 5 Devario aequipinnatus Chebli LC 3 6 Garra sp. Garra 3 7 Glyptothorax sp. Cat Fish 3 8 Neolissochilus hexagonolepis Pakiranga/Katli/Boka NT 3 9 Pterocryptis sp. CatFish 3 10 Xenentodon cancila Needle Fish/Kokila LC 3 11 Puntius sophore Spot-fin Swamp Barb/Puti LC 3 12 Many species are Tor sp. Mahaseer threatened 3

57 | P a g e

Annexure IX) List of herpetofauna

Table 8. List of reptile and amphibian species recorded during the survey Sr. No. Species Scientific name IUCN status Zone Assam roofed turtle Pangshura sylhetensis Endangered 5 Bengal monitor lizard Varanus bengalensis Least Concern 5 Asian water monitor Varanus salvator Least Concern 3 Oriental garden lizard Calotes versicolor 2,3 Spotted litter Skink Sphenomorphus maculatus Least Concern 3 Monocled cobra Naja kaouthia Least Concern 3 Indian rat snake Ptyas mucosa 4 Giant tree frog Rhacophorus maximus Least Concern 2 skittering frog Euphlyctis sp. Least Concern 4

58 | P a g e

Annexure X) List of birds

Table 9. List of bird species recorded during the survey Sr Species: Common Species: Scientific IUCN WPA Habitat Zone No. Name Name Status schedule Family:

Podicipedidae 1 Little Grebe Tachybaptus ruficollis LC IV Wetland Pool 4 Family:

Pelecanidae 2 Spot-billed Pelican Pelecanus philippensis NT IV River bank 2,3 Family:

Anhingidae 3 Oriental Darter Anhinga melanogaster NT IV River Bank 2,3 Family: Ardeidae

4 Little Egret Egretta garzetta LC IV River Bank 2,3,4 5 Purple Heron Ardea purpurea LC IV River Bank 2,3,4 6 Great Egret Egretta alba LC IV River Bank 3,4 7 Intermediate Egret Egretta intermedia LC IV River bank 3,4 River banks 8 Eastern Cattle Egret Bubulcus coromandus LC IV 2,3,4 and islands Ponds and 9 Indian Pond-heron Ardeola grayii LC IV 2,3,4 river banks 10 Striated Heron Butorides striata LC IV River bank 2,3,4 Ponds and 11 Yellow Bittern Ixobrychus sinensis LC IV 2,3,4 river banks Ponds and 12 Chestnut Bittern Ixobrychus cinnamomeus LC IV 2,3,4 river banks Ponds and 13 Black Bittern Dupetor flavicollis LC IV 4 river banks

59 | P a g e

Family: Ciconiidae

Grassland: 14 Asian Openbill Anastomus oscitans LC IV River banks 2,3,4 and islands Grassland: 15 Black Stork Ciconia nigra LC IV River banks 2 and islands Grassland: 16 Lesser Adjutant Leptoptilos javanicus VU IV River banks 3,4 and islands Family: Anatidae

Lesser Whistling- Ponds and 17 Dendrocygna javanica LC IV 2,3,4 duck river banks

Ponds and 18 Cotton Teal Nettapus coromandelianus LC IV 4 river banks

Indian Spot-billed Ponds and 19 Anas poecilorhyncha LC IV 2,3,4 Duck river banks

Chinese Spot-billed Ponds and 20 Anas zonorhyncha LC IV 4 Duck river banks

Family:

Accipitridae

Oriental Honey- 21 Pernis ptilorhynchus LC I Forest 1,2,3,4 buzzard

Grassland:

22 Black-winged Kite Elanus caeruleus LC I River banks 3,4 and islands

60 | P a g e

Family:

Accipitridae Grassland: White-rumped 23 Gyps bengalensis CR I River banks 2,3,4 Vulture and islands Grassland: 24 Himalayan Vulture Gyps himalayensis NT I River banks 2,3,4 and islands Crested Serpent- 25 Spilornis cheela LC I Forest 1,2,4 eagle Grassland: 26 Shikra Accipiter badius LC I River banks 1,2,3,4 and islands Grassland: Eurasian 27 Accipiter nisus LC I River banks 3 Sparrowhawk and islands Family:

Pandionidae Grassland: 28 Western Osprey Pandion haliaetus LC I River banks 2,3,4 and islands Family: Falconidae

Grassland: 29 Common Kestrel Falco tinnunculus LC I River banks 2 and islands

Grassland: 30 Amur Falcon Falco amurensis LC I River banks 3 and islands

31 Oriental Hobby Falco severus LC I Forest 1

61 | P a g e

Family:

Megapodiidae

32 Red Junglefowl Gallus gallus LC IV Forest 1,2,3,4

Family: Otididae

Grassland: 33 Bengal Florican Houbaropsis bengalensis CR IV River banks 3 and islands Family: Jacanidae

Bronze-winged Ponds and 34 Metopidius indicus LC IV 4 Jacana river banks Family:

Charadriidae

Ponds and 35 Little Ringed Plover Charadrius dubius LC IV 2,3,4 river banks

River side 36 River Lapwing Vanellus duvaucelii NT IV 4 forest

Grassland: 37 Red-wattled Lapwing Vanellus indicus LC IV River banks 2,3,4 and islands Family: Glareolidae

Sandy river 38 Small Pratincole Glareola lactea LC IV 2,3,4 banks

Family: Laridae

Sandy river 39 Common Tern Sterna hirundo LC IV 3,4 banks Sandy river 40 Whiskered Tern Chlidonias hybrida LC IV 3,4 banks

62 | P a g e

Family:

Columbidae 41 Rock Pigeon Columba livia LC IV Forest 2,3,4 Pale-capped 42 Columba punicea VU IV Forest 1,2 Woodpigeon Near 43 Laughing Dove Streptopelia senegalensis LC IV 2,3 settlement Near 44 Spotted Dove Streptopelia chinensis LC IV 2,3,4 settlement 45 Emerald Dove Chalcophaps indica LC IV Forest 2,3,4 Orange-breasted 46 Treron bicinctus LC IV Forest 4 Green-pigeon Yellow-footed 47 Treron phoenicopterus LC IV Forest 4 Green-pigeon Family: Psittacidae

48 Rose-ringed Parakeet Psittacula krameri LC IV Forest 4 Family: Cuculidae

49 Large Hawk-cuckoo Hierococcyx sparverioides LC IV Forest 1,2 Common Hawk- Scrubland on 50 Hierococcyx varius LC IV 2,3,4 cuckoo river bank 51 Indian Cuckoo Cuculus micropterus LC IV Forest 1,2,3,4 52 Common Cuckoo Cuculus canorus LC IV Forest 1 53 Plaintive Cuckoo Cacomantis merulinus LC IV Forest 2,3 54 Drongo-cuckoo Surniculus lugubris LC IV Forest 1,2,3,4 55 Asian Koel Eudynamys scolopaceus LC IV Forest 2,3,4

56 Greater Coucal Centropus sinensis LC IV Forest 3,4

Grassland: 57 Lesser Coucal Centropus bengalensis LC IV River banks 2,3 and islands

63 | P a g e

Family: Tytonidae

Grassland: 58 Common Barn-owl Tyto alba LC IV River banks 4 and islands 59 Brown Hawk-owl Ninox scutulata LC IV Forest 2,3,4 Family: Strigidae

60 Spotted Owlet Athene brama LC IV Forest 2,3,4 Family: Apodidae

Grassland: 61 Needletail Hirundapus sp. LC River banks 2 and islands Family:

Alcedinidae Ponds and 62 Common Kingfisher Alcedo atthis LC IV 2,3,4 river banks

White-throated Ponds and 63 Halcyon smyrnensis LC IV 2,3,4 Kingfisher river banks

Lesser Pied Ponds and 64 Ceryle rudis LC IV 2,3,4 Kingfisher river banks

Family: Meropidae

Grassland: Little Green Bee- 65 Merops orientalis LC River banks 2,3,4 eater and islands

Grassland: 66 Blue-tailed Bee-eater Merops philippinus LC River banks 3

and islands

64 | P a g e

Family: Coraciidae

Coracias benghalensis River side 67 ‘Black-billed’ Roller LC IV 2,3,4 affinis forest Family: Upupidae

River side 68 Common Hoopoe Upupa epops LC 2,3 forest Family:

Capitonidae 69 Great Barbet Megalaima virens LC IV Forest 1 70 Lineated Barbet Megalaima lineata LC IV Forest 1,2,3,4 Golden-throated 71 Megalaima franklinii LC IV Forest 1 Barbet 72 Blue-throated Barbet Megalaima asiatica LC IV Forest 1,2,3,4 Family: Picidae

Grey-capped Pygmy 73 Dendrocopos canicapillus LC IV Forest 2 Woodpecker Fulvous-breasted 74 Dendrocopos macei LC IV Forest 2 Pied Woodpecker

75 Rufous Woodpecker Micropternus brachyurus LC IV Forest 2

76 Lesser Yellownape Picus chlorolophus LC IV Forest 1

77 Greater Yellownape Chrysophlegma flavinucha LC IV Forest 2

Black-rumped 78 Dinopium benghalense LC IV Forest 4 Flameback

Family: Alaudidae

Sandy river 79 Sand Lark Calandrella raytal LC IV 1,2,3,4 banks Grassland: 80 Oriental Skylark Alauda gulgula LC IV River banks 1,2,3,4 and islands

65 | P a g e

Family:

Hirundinidae Grassland: Grey-throated Sand- 81 Riparia chinensis NT River banks 2,3,4 martin and islands Family:

Motacillidae Sandy river 82 White Wagtail Motacilla alba LC IV 1,2,3,4 banks Motacilla citreola Sandy river 83 Citrine Wagtail LC IV 2 banks

Grassland: 84 Paddyfield Pipit Anthus rufulus LC IV River banks 2,3,4 and islands Family:

Campephagidae Grey-chinned 85 Pericrocotus solaris LC IV Forest 1 Minivet Pied Flycatcher- 86 Hemipus picatus LC IV Forest 1 shrike Family:

Pycnonotidae Red-whiskered Scrubland on 87 Pycnonotus jocosus LC IV 1,2,3,4 Bulbul river bank Scrubland on 88 Red-vented Bulbul Pycnonotus cafer LC IV 1,2,3,4 river bank 89 Mountain Bulbul Ixos mcclellandii LC IV Forest 1 Himalayan Black 90 Hypsipetes leucocephalus LC IV Forest 1,2 Bulbul White-throated 91 Alophoixus flaveolus LC IV Forest 1 Bulbul

66 | P a g e

Family: Irenidae

92 Common Iora Aegithina tiphia LC IV Forest 1,2,3 Orange-bellied 93 Chloropsis hardwickii LC IV Forest 1 Leafbird Family: Laniidae

94 Grey-backed Shrike Lanius tephronotus LC IV Forest 1 Family: Cinclidae

Sandy river 95 Brown Dipper Cinclus pallasii LC 1 banks Family:

Muscicapidae Blue Whistling- 96 Myiophonus caeruleus LC IV Forest 1,2 thrush Oriental Magpie- Scrubland on 97 Copsychus saularis LC IV 2,3,4 robin river bank White-rumped 98 Copsychus malabaricus LC IV Forest 1 Shama Plumbeous Water- river bank 99 Rhyacornis fuliginosus LC IV 1 redstart boulders 100 Forktail Enicurus sp. LC IV Forest 1 Grassland: White-tailed 101 Saxicola leucurus LC IV River banks 4 Stonechat and islands Greater Necklaced River side 102 Garrulax pectoralis LC IV 2 Laughingthrush forest Striated 103 Grammatoptila striata LC IV Forest 1 Laughingthrush

1 Rufous-necked Scrubland on 104 Dryonastes ruficollis LC IV Laughingthrush river bank

67 | P a g e

Puff-throated 105 Pellorneum ruficeps LC IV Forest 2,3,4 Babbler 106 Golden Babbler Cyanoderma chrysaea LC IV Forest 2,3 Grassland: 107 Striated Babbler Turdoides earlei LC IV River banks 2,3,4 and islands 108 Striated Yuhina Yuhina castaniceps LC IV Forest 1 109 White-naped Yuhina Yuhina bakeri LC IV Forest 1 Rufous-headed 110 Paradoxornis bakeri LC IV Forest 1 Parrotbill Grassland: 111 Zitting Cisticola Cisticola juncidis LC IV River banks 2,3,4 and islands Grassland: Bright-capped 112 Cisticola exilis LC IV River banks 2,3,4 Cisticola and islands Grassland: 113 Grey-breasted Prinia Prinia hodgsonii LC IV River banks 2,3,4 and islands Grassland: 114 Graceful Prinia Prinia gracilis LC IV River banks 2,3,4 and islands Grassland: 115 Yellow-bellied Prinia Prinia flaviventris LC IV River banks 3,4 and islands Grassland: 116 Plain Prinia Prinia inornata LC IV River banks 2,3,4 and islands Scrubland on 117 Common Tailorbird Orthotomus sutorius LC IV 2,3 river bank 118 Whistler’s Warbler Seicercus whistleri LC IV Forest 1

68 | P a g e

Grey-hooded Phylloscopus 119 LC IV Forest 1 Warbler xanthoschistos Grassland: 120 Striated Grassbird Megalurus palustris LC IV River banks 2,3,4 and islands Ferruginous 121 Muscicapa ferruginea LC IV Forest 2 Flycatcher 122 Verditer Flycatcher Eumyias thalassinus LC IV Forest 1 123 Small Niltava Niltava macgrigoriae LC IV Forest 1 Grey-headed Canary- 124 Culicicapa ceylonensis LC IV Forest 1,2,3,4 flycatcher Asian Paradise 125 Flycatcher Terpsiphone paradisi LC IV Forest 1,2,3

Black-naped Blue 126 Hypothymis azurea LC IV Forest 2 Monarch White-throated 127 Rhipidura albicollis LC IV Forest 1,2,3,4 Fantail

Family: Paridae

Black-spotted Yellow 128 Parus spilonotus LC IV Forest 1 Tit Family: Dicaeidae

Fire-breasted 129 Dicaeum ignipectus LC IV Forest 1 Flowerpecker

Family:

Nectariniidae

130 Crimson Sunbird Aethopyga siparaja LC IV Forest 2

Streaked 131 Arachnothera magna LC IV Forest 1 Spiderhunter

69 | P a g e

Family:

Zosteropidae Scrubland on 132 Oriental White-eye Zosterops palpebrosus LC IV 2,3,4 river bank Family: Estrildidae

White-rumped Scrubland on 133 Lonchura striata LC IV 2 Munia river bank Scrubland on 134 Scaly-breasted Munia Lonchura punctulata LC IV 2 river bank Scrubland on 135 Chestnut Munia Lonchura atricapilla LC IV 2,3,4 river bank Family: Passeridae

Near 136 House Sparrow Passer domesticus LC IV 2,3,4 settlement Eurasian Tree Near 137 Passer montanus LC IV 2,3,4 Sparrow settlement Grassland: 138 Streaked Weaver Ploceus manyar LC IV River banks 2 and islands Grassland: ‘Eastern’ Baya Ploceus philippinus 139 LC IV River banks 2,3 Weaver burmanicus and islands Family: Sturnidae

River side 140 Grey-headed Starling Sturnia malabarica LC IV 2,3 forest Scrubland on 141 Asian Pied Starling Gracupica contra LC IV 2,3,4 river bank Near 142 Common Myna Acridotheres tristis LC IV 2,3,4 settlement River side 143 Jungle Myna Acridotheres fuscus LC IV 2,3,4 forest

70 | P a g e

River side 144 White-vented Myna Acridotheres grandis VU IV 2,3,4 forest River side 145 Common Hill-myna Gracula religiosa LC IV 4 forest Family: Oriolidae

River side 146 Black-headed Oriole Oriolus xanthornus LC IV 1,2,3,4 forest Family: Dicruridae

147 Bronzed Drongo Chaptia aeneus LC IV Greater Racket-tailed River side 148 Dicrurus paradiseus LC IV 2 Drongo forest Family: Corvidae

River side 149 Grey Treepie Dendrocitta formosae LC IV 1,2,3,4 forest River side 150 House Crow Corvus splendens LC IV 1,2,3,4 forest Corvus [macrorhynchos] River side 151 Eastern Jungle Crow LC IV 1,2,3,4 levailantii forest

71 | P a g e

Annexure XI) List of mammals (Primary & secondary data)

Table 10. List of mammal species recorded during the survey (P: primary data, S: secondary data) Sr Commn Name Scientific IUCN WPA P or S Source of Zone Remarks No. Name Information Hylobatidae 1 Western Hoolock EN I P Vocalizations 2,4 Got photo of Hoolock Gibbon hoolock a dead individual from FD Family: Cercopithecidae 2 Rhesus Macaque Macaca mulatta LC I P Direct Sighting 1,2,4 3 Assamese Macaca NT II P and Personal 1,2,4 Macaque assamensis S Communication Direct Sighting 4 Northern Pig- Macaca leonina VU II S Personal 4 tailed Macaque Communication

Family: Elephantidae 5 Asian Elephant Elephan EN I P Sighting of 2,3,4 maximus tracks Family: Cervinae

6 Sambar Rusa unicolor VU III P and hoof marks 2,3,4 Skulls in local S houses

7 Hog Deer Axis porcinus EN III P and hoof marks 2,3,4 Skulls in local S houses

72 | P a g e

Family: Bovidae

8 Wild Buffalo Bubalus arnee EN I P 3,4 Difficult to differentiate from feral ones Family: Suidae 9 Indian Wild Pig Sus scrofa LC I P and Foot marks Roosting sites S Family: Felidae

10 Royal Bengal Panthera tigris EN I S Pers.Comm. 3,4 Not sure, may Tiger be dispersing individuals from Kamlang seen in these regions if it is an active corridor Sr Commn Name Scientific P or S Source of Zone Remarks No. Name Information 11 Common Panthera VU I S Pers.Comm. 1,2,3,4 People claim Leopard pardus that it predates on their cattle and goats often 12 Jungle Cat Felis chaus LC I S Pers.Comm. 1,2,3,4 13 Fishing Cat Prionailurus VU II S Pers.Comm. 2,3,4 A skin in a viverrinus local house Canidae 14 Golden Jackal Canis aureus LC II P Direct Sighting 1,2,3,4 and calls

73 | P a g e

Family: Ursidae

15 Asiatic Black Ursus VU II S Pers.Comm. 1 Local people Bear thibetanus claim that they encounter it occasionally. Skin bags with local people Family: Mustelidae 16 Yellow-throated Martes flavigula LC II P Direct Sighting 1 Marten 17 Otter Possibly Aonyx VU II P and Pers.Comm. 1,2,4 Not sure cinera S Confirmed by about the tracks species are there in PRF near Tezu Family: Leporidae 18 Rusty-tailed Hare Lepus nigricolis LC IV P Pellets found 2,3 Species ruficaudatus claimed based on the known distribution Family: Manidae 19 Chinese Pangolin Manis CR I S Pers. Comm. 1,2 photographs pentadactyla of hunted individuals Family: Hystricidae 20 Himalayan Hystrix LC II P and Pers. Comm. 2 Species Crestless brachyura S Confirmed by claimed based Porcupine Tracks and quill on the known marks distribution

74 | P a g e

Family: Sciuridae 21 Hoary-bellied Callosciurus LC II P Direct Sighting 1,2 Squirrel pygerythrus 22 Pallas's Squirrel Callosciurus LC II P Direct Sighting 2 erythrus Family: Pteropodidae 23 Indian Flying Pteropus LC II P Direct Sighting 2 Fox giganteus Family: Platanistidae 24 South Asian Platanista EN I P Pers. Comm. 3,4 River Dolphin gangetica Confirmed by gangetica Direct sighting

75 | P a g e

Annexure XII) Undertaking by project proponents

76 | P a g e

77 | P a g e

78 | P a g e