Dcha Title Ii Environmental Compliance Facesheet for Drc Ffp Adra Irrigation Environmental Assessment

Home , Bacopa crenata, Brown twinspot, Crowned bullfrog, Itombwe Mountains, Lake Tanganyika sardine

DCHA TITLE II ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE FACESHEET FOR DRC FFP ADRA IRRIGATION ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

PROGRAM AND ACTIVITY DATA: DCHA Office: Food for Peace (FFP), USAID Development Food Assistance Program

Sponsoring US Organization: Adventist Development and Relief Agency (ADRA)

Program Name: JENGA II, FFP-A-11-00006

Country/Region: Democratic Republic of Congo / Central Africa

Life of Activity: FY2011 – FY2015 Amount of Federal Grant: $59,470,177

Governing IEE: BEO_DCHA_FFP_DRC_ADRA_IEE (2011-2015), Positive Determination per 22 CFR 216.3(2)(a)(iii)

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS: The Scoping Statement and ADRA DRC Irrigation Environmental Assessment (EA) was developed by an external consultancy (“the EA Team”) to analyze the potential environmental and social impacts with development of mitigation measures for the proposed development of secondary and tertiary irrigation canals within the South Kivu and Katanga Provinces in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) south of Goma in the North Kivu Province, under a Positive Determination classification, per 22 CFR 216.3(2)(a)(iii).

Proposed Site Kibungu, S. Kivu Province - Rehabilitation of existing irrigation catchment and canal to restore Nyamutiri plain’s irrigation water supply. Proposed canals will reach an estimated 880 hectares in this plain and are planned to follow topographic contour lines to ensure efficacy of gravity-based irrigation and the primary canal will be integrated with secondary and (potentially) tertiary canals as deemed by a qualified engineer. (Sites located between Uvira City and Bukavu, South Kivu Province.)

Proposed Site Katanga Province - Development of both irrigation and drainage canals to both reduce risk in flood prone areas and irrigate high ground to improve Kenya Plain’s agricultural production. The primary irrigation and drainage canals would provide irrigated water supply to an estimated 8750 hectares in the Kenya plain, and would be integrated with a system of secondary and, possibly, lower level canals to irrigate and drain individual plots. (Sites located near Baraka, in South Kivu Province and/or North Katanga.)

[Note: The total length of proposed irrigation and drainage canals at Kibungu and Katanga has not been finalized, and will depend on a topographic survey and the final design capacity of the proposed canals based on hydrographic modeling.]

As Implementing Partner, ADRA shall ensure implementation of the Kibungu and Katanga projects pursuant to the EMMPs developed in the EA for each of Kibungu (Table 3-13, page 78) and Katanga (Table 4-14, page 140). To accomplish this effectively, each of the project sites will require assessment of technical feasibility by a qualified engineer with topographic mapping at an appropriate scale to gauge full extent of project. The engineer’s review will also include an assessment of the local community’s capacity to manage potential future irrigation and/or drainage needs which will both be used to inform overall project design and level of responsibility appropriate for the given community.

What follows is the DCHA BEO Environmental Threshold Decision (ETD). The ETD provides a summary of, and a subsequent discussion and rationale for, the DCHA BEO’s conditions for approval for the DRC FFP ADRA EA.

DCHA TITLE II ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE FACESHEET FOR DRC FFP ADRA IRRIGATION ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

PROGRAM AND ACTIVITY DATA: DCHA Office: Food for Peace (FFP), USAID Development Food Assistance Program

Sponsoring US Organization: Adventist Development and Relief Agency (ADRA)

Program Name: JENGA II, FFP-A-11-00006

Country/Region: Democratic Republic of Congo / Central Africa

Life of Activity: FY2011 – FY2015 Amount of Federal Grant: $59,470,177

Governing IEE: BEO_DCHA_FFP_DRC_ADRA_IEE (2011-2015), Positive Determination per 22 CFR 216.3(2)(a)(iii)

This Environmental Threshold Decision (ETD) from the DCHA Bureau Environmental Officer (BEO) is to inform that the subject Environmental Assessment (EA) has received Approval with Conditions on TBD (pending final BEO/DCHA clearance) .

Summary: On the whole, the EA satisfactorily identified potential environmental and social impacts while proposing effective mitigation measures for this approximately 4,000 hectare irrigation project under the FFP ADRA JENGA FFP-A-11-00006 grant. The BEO commends ADRA and Sun Mountain International (consultant) for preparing this important body of work which provides new GIS topographic mapping information for insecure regions of the Eastern DRC along Lake Tanganyika that are subject to periodic localized conflict outbreaks, including during the fieldwork which necessitated the EA technical team crossing the border due to avoid militant movements.

The EA methodology included an analysis of technical criteria (i.e., hydrology, topography, soil, flora, fauna) and public stakeholder consultations (i.e., project beneficiaries, universities, local municipal managers) that considered gender, age, and community structure. The EA provided important input to the project design process for the ADRA’s irrigation program, by refining technical hydrological feasibility considerations as well as the understanding and incorporation of stakeholder demand for rehabilitated irrigation structures.

However, the BEO has identified 3 conditions as part of EA approval by USAID. While these conditions are not required prior to BEO/DCHA approval, they must be reported upon in the Environmental Status Report (ESR) for Year 1 of the program.

Summary of BEO Conditions (3):

Condition 1: A qualified engineer must be hired, or used, to determine detailed dimensions, siting, and directionality of secondary and, as necessary, tertiary canals. Understanding that the conflict environment present in Eastern DRC may create challenges in procuring qualified staff, it should be emphasized the irrigation and drainage component of project implementation should be delayed until qualified experts are hired and/or available.

Condition 2: In support of Kahlim Hanna’s (USAID irrigation engineer FSO) recommendation, ensure that a local conflict specialist is consulted in identifying and prioritizing the risks due to social conflict dynamics and regional management structures. Without both sound engineering and localized conflict sensitivity, the irrigation goods and services delivered by this project will be likely to fail.

Condition 3: The recommended, but not required, mitigation measures for Consequence 37 must be included as required actions, and part of the EMMP. Mitigation for Consequence 59 must be required if dike rehabilitation is identified as a component of the irrigation scheme.

Additionally, with respect for the recent and ongoing outbreaks of conflict in the project area and any potential risk that being associated with this project may cause for local individuals, the names of those who engaged in the public consultations during the EA have been removed from Appendix B from the publically available version of this document. In their stead, the total number of total public consultations and the regions in which they occurred is listed.

Detailed Description of BEO Technical Conditions (3):

Issue 1: While EA provides comprehensive analysis at the more coarse 1:50,000 scale, effective program design and implementation will require use of additional detailed topographic and hydrologic assessments at finer scales relevant to secondary and, if applicable, tertiary canals by qualified engineer.

Discussion: Scarcity of available information for design specifics of the proposed irrigation schemes -at the finer geographic scale- limited the ability of the EA to fully tailor environmental mitigation and monitoring measures to project design. Finer scaled data is required to safely assess upstream and downstream available and utilization of these shared water resources. Without this information at the appropriate scale, which is relevant for farmer beneficiary decision making, the irrigation schemes can not be accurately developed, and would be guesswork, based upon localized knowledge without a systemic understanding of the regional water flow availability. Numerous global examples demonstrate that conflict-affected regions are

typically subject to poor social cohesion and limited historical knowledge of complex water provisioning systems such as aqueducts, canals, etc.

As described broadly in the EMMP: “The final system design should be prepared by a qualified irrigation and drainage engineer, supported by a topographer, based on hydrographic model, and should include a clear design that defines the extent of irrigated fields, the layout, geometry, size and placement of all levels of canal necessary for a fully functioning system.”

As a project site example, the EA’s discussion of the Kibungu project site ( between Uvira and Bukavu cities) alternatives, recommends the following actions for alternatives 6, 7, and 8 related to up- and downstream effects and hydrographic modelling. “A) The engineering design team should evaluate the feasibility [of canal placement] in a catchment further downstream on the Munyovwe, and B) localized catchment volumes and canal capacity should be determined based on hydrographic modeling, to ensure users downstream of the catchment will not be affected. This study should encompass the Munyovwe River basin.” Alternatives 14, 15, and 16 come with the recommendation to “Identify existing uses of the Makindwe and Kabwiba Rivers, and calculate their discharge through hydrographic modeling.”

As another project site example, the EA’s discussion of the Kitanga project site alternatives, called for the following actions related to issues of the finer scale for both topographic and hydrographic modeling:

1. “Assess topography in relation to the water level of Lake Tanganyika to determine whether it is feasible to drain flood zones by gravity (i.e. verify that flooded areas are above the water level of the lake) using simple canals. Topographic information available at a scale of 1:50:000 (not appropriate for design) indicates that the majority of the Kenya Plain is indeed above Lake Level and that gravity-based drainage will be feasible. This must be verified by a detailed topographic assessment.”

2. “Determine whether it is possible to drain water from flooded areas for use in gravity-fed irrigation (Alternative 21), or to capture water from an upstream river (Alternative 23 – more likely) through a topographic assessment.

3. Determine the capacity of the drainage network and individual canals based on expected flood levels (established by hydrographic modeling), regardless of the feasible alternative.

4. Base irrigation catchment volumes on hydrographic modeling to determine sustainable catchment levels. Given the excess water on the Kenya Plain, impacts to downstream users are not expected even if a large volume of water is diverted from the Mutambala and/or Luhe Rivers. Hydrographic modeling should assess whether flood waters could be a reliable source of irrigation water.”

5. “Detailed hydrographic modeling of both proposed systems. The irrigation system’s runoff will depend on the effectiveness of water management; however, for the purposes of modeling,

irrigation runoff should be calculated based on expected values in the absence of any human water management.”

6. “The length and type of canals should be determined based on a specific engineering study, which be based on maximum flow and calculated scour velocities, based on hydrographic modeling and an engineering assessment.”

7. “A topographical assessment to evaluate whether gravity-based drainage is sufficient, or whether the flooded area is too close to lake level. As previously stated, topographic information available at a scale of 1:50:000 (not appropriate for design) indicates that the majority of the Kenya Plain is indeed above Lake Level and that gravity-based drainage is feasible. A detailed topographic assessment can confirm project feasibility.”

If resources and data are available, the SOW for engineer should include Level of Effort (LOE) engagement with the ADRA Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) toolkit being developed by Sun Mountain International consultants.

Conditions: Approval of the Environmental Assessment by BEO/DCHA is conditional on ADRA’s hiring, or use, of a qualified engineer to develop design and siting of irrigation including mapping for secondary, and as necessary, tertiary canals based upon finer scale topographic and hydrographic modeling to ensure that the proposed gravity-fed irrigation schemes are designed in a sustainable manner.

Issue 2: Risks associated with recent conflict in Eastern DRC are insufficiently considered, including the potential for lingering ethnic tensions and difficulty reconciling potential land use and/or water use issues as a result.

Discussion: The Environmental Assessment both acknowledges and accounts for the potential risk associated with Eastern DRC as an area only recently removed from significant conflict. Conflict and risks extend along multiple vectors including ethnicity and access to resources.

The proposed project sites are areas that have seen significant population turnover both during, and after, the recent conflict. As the project poses the potential to introduce significant alterations to crop yields, land use, and water use based on siting, dimensions, and directionality of irrigation channels, the approach informing project design must consider not only physical/technical feasibility of project design (i.e. hydrological and topographical support as discussed in Issue 1) but also the social feasibility of the ultimately proposed project design.

Conditions: An expert in localized conflict sensitivities must be hired and engaged as part of the core irrigation design and siting scheme to ensure the process results in minimization of negative social impacts, especially those that could flare lingering tensions connected to the recent conflict.

Issue 3: Consequence 37 and (conditionally) consequence 59 must be considered impacts requiring mitigation measures, rather than as recommended actions as the costs associated with requirement are nominal enough to outweigh the potential cost of no mitigation measures being implemented. The rationale for consequences 31 and 72 having recommended actions, rather than required, currently lacks key supporting elements; these areas should be more fully developed.

Discussion: The EA’s methodology quantified the significance (on a scale of 1 [low] to 5 [high] significance) of anticipated positive and negative environmental and social impacts. Screened first through this quantification and then by qualitative review, impacts or “consequences” that met certain criteria were deemed of minor enough risk to be excluded from the EMMP, and thus not require mitigation measures.

Generally, this method effectively isolated most-significant impacts and limited required actions as determined by EMMP to those most-significant impacts; this is an important step in prioritizing negative impact mitigation against the reality of resource constraints. However, consequences 37 and 59, which were deemed less significant,still necessitate required mitigation measures, rather than the recommended actions currently provided by the EA. For Consequence 59 this requirement is conditional on the inclusion of Katanga dike rehabilitation being identified as a component of the irrigation scheme.

Discussion for each consequence is provided below:

• Consequence 37 - Road Opening (Kibungu) o The recommended action includes language stating “if heavy machinery is needed, no specific road should be opened to avoid long term impacts.” This should be included in the EMMP as a required mitigation measure associated with irrigation construction. While this exact language is not used in discussion of Consequence 78 - Road Construction (Katanga), the same EMMP requirement should be developed for the Katanga EMMP.

• Consequence 59 - Dike Failure (Katanga) o IF dike rehabilitation is determined a requisite part of the Katanga irrigation scheme, then the EMMP should include measures to ensure the dikes are constructed to allow for subsidence; on the other hand, if dike rehabilitation or construction remains a project alternative or general alternative/complement to the irrigation scheme, design, and construction then it is appropriate to leave this as a recommended action.

Additionally, consequences 31 and 72 address the potential impacts associated with induced migration. Given conflict sensitivities and relatively low risk of induced migration occurring,

Sun Mountain opted to emphasize educating community members and affected parties on land use rights rather than tailoring mitigation measures directly toward risks associated with induced migration. However, the full extent of this rationale is not included in the EA. This rationale should be included in the discussion explaining recommended action for consequences 31 and 72 in Annex E of the EA.

Conditions: Mitigation measures associated with anticipated impacts for consequence 37 must be changed from recommended to required. Mitigation for consequence 59 must be required if dike rehabilitation is identified as a component of the irrigation scheme. The rationale for consequences 31 and 72 having recommended actions, rather than required, must be more fully articulated in the associated text in Annex E.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ADRA DRC Jenga Jamaa II Project FFP-A-11-00006 PROPOSED IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE ACTIVITIES SOUTH KIVU PROVINCE, D.R. CONGO Revised January 2013

Assessment prepared for ADRA by Sun Mountain International

This Environmental Assessment was prepared by Sun Mountain International under contract to the

DISCLAIMER The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development, the United States Government, or ADRA International.

Table of Contents 1 Executive Summary ...... 6 1.1.1 Kibungu ...... 6 1.1.2 Katanga ...... 7 1.1.3 Assessment Structure ...... 7 2 Introduction ...... 8 2.1 EA Team ...... 10 2.2 Report Structure ...... 11 2.3 Limitations ...... 12 2.4 Methodology ...... 13 2.5 Regulatory Framework ...... 13 2.5.1 USAID 22 Code of Federal Regulations 216 ...... 13 2.5.2 US Government - Foreign Assistance Act, Part I ...... 13 2.5.3 Government of DRC ...... 14 2.6 Scoping Results ...... 15 3 Kibungu...... 18 3.1 Purpose and Need ...... 18 3.2 Proposed Actions ...... 18 3.3 Affected Environment ...... 22 3.3.1 The Physical Environment ...... 22 3.3.2 The Biological Environment ...... 41 3.3.3 The Human Environment ...... 47 3.4 Alternatives Analysis ...... 57 3.4.1 Methodology ...... 57 3.4.2 No action alternative ...... 58 3.4.3 Proposed Project Alternatives ...... 58 3.5 Potential Social and Environmental Consequences ...... 61 3.5.1 Methodology ...... 61 3.5.2 Assessment of Environmental Consequences ...... 63 3.5.3 Evaluation of Preferred Project Alternative ...... 76 3.6 Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plan ...... 76 4 Katanga ...... 89

i EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

4.1 Purpose and Need ...... 89 4.2 Proposed Actions ...... 89 4.3 Affected Environment ...... 93 4.3.1 The Physical Environment ...... 93 4.3.2 The Biological Environment ...... 106 4.3.3 The Human Environment ...... 112 4.4 Alternatives Analysis ...... 119 4.4.1 Methodology ...... 119 4.4.2 No Action Alternative ...... 120 4.4.3 Proposed Project Alternatives ...... 120 4.5 Potential Social and Environmental Consequences ...... 125 4.5.1 Methodology ...... 125 4.5.2 Assessment of Environmental Consequences ...... 125 4.5.3 Evaluation of Preferred Project Alternative ...... 138 4.6 Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plan ...... 138 4.7 Annex A - Technical Data ...... 155 4.7.1 Afrixalus wittei (Laurent, 1941) ...... 169 4.7.2 Afrixalus wittei (Laurent, 1941) ...... 180 4.8 Annex B - List of Interviewees and Focus Group Participants ...... 184 4.9 Annex C - Bibliography ...... 186 4.10 Annex D - Detailed Methodologies ...... 191 4.10.1 Hydrology ...... 191 4.10.2 Soils ...... 191 4.10.3 Biology ...... 192 4.10.4 Socioeconomic ...... 192 4.10.5 Agriculture ...... 193 4.10.6 GIS ...... 193 4.11 Annex E - Evaluation of Acceptable Social and Environmental Consequences ...... 195 4.12 Annex F - Terms of Reference and Sun Mountain Work Strategy ...... 202 1. USAID Terms of Reference ...... 202 2. Sun Mountain EA Work Strategy ...... 219 Introduction ...... 219 Background ...... 219

ii EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Deliverables ...... 221 Methodology ...... 222 4.13 Annex G - Contributors...... 234 4.14 Annex H - Photographs ...... 236

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 2-1 INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROTOCOLS, AGREEMENTS AND TREATIES RATIFIED BY THE DRC ...... 14 TABLE 3-1 WATER QUALITY LABORATORY SAMPLE RESULTS ANALYZED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF KINSHASA SCIENCE FACULTY LABORATORY ...... 33 TABLE 3-2 IN SITU SOIL SAMPLE RESULTS, KIBUNGU ...... 38 TABLE 3-3 SOIL QUALITY LABORATORY SAMPLE RESULTS ...... 40 TABLE 3-4 FLORA IUCN CONSERVATION STATUS (2012) ...... 45 TABLE 3-5 FLORISTIC RICHNESS BY HABITAT AT KIBUNGU ...... 46 TABLE 3-6 NUMBER OF SPECIES BY FAUNA CLASS ...... 46 TABLE 3-7 FAUNA SPECIES DIVERSITY BY VEGETATION TYPE ...... 46 TABLE 3-8 IUCN CONSERVATION STATUS OF FAUNA AT KIBUNGU (2012) ...... 47 TABLE 3-9 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT ACTIVITY ...... 59 TABLE 3-10 POSSIBLE POSITIVE CONSEQUENCES AT KIBUNGU ...... 63 TABLE 3-11 POTENTIAL NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES AT KIBUNGU ...... 65 TABLE 3-12 UNCERTAIN CONSEQUENCES AT KIBUNGU ...... 76 TABLE 3-13 ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION AND MONITORING PLAN FOR PROPOSED IRRIGATION CANAL CONSTRUCTION AND REHABILITATION AT KIBUNGU ...... 78 TABLE 4-1 WATER QUALITY LABORATORY SAMPLE RESULTS ANALYZED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF KINSHASA SCIENCE FACULTY LABORATORY ...... 101 TABLE 4-2 IN SITU SOIL SAMPLE RESULTS, KATANGA ...... 102 TABLE 4-3 SOIL QUALITY LABORATORY SAMPLE RESULTS ...... 105 TABLE 4-4 IUCN CONSERVATION STATUS OF FLORA (2012) ...... 110 TABLE 4-5 FLORISTIC RICHNESS BY HABITAT AT KATANGA...... 110 TABLE 4-6 NUMBER OF SPECIES BY FAUNA CLASS...... 110 TABLE 4-7 FAUNA SPECIES DIVERSITY BY VEGETATION TYPE ...... 111 TABLE 4-8 IUCN CONSERVATION STATUS OF FAUNA AT KATANGA...... 111 TABLE 4-9 THREATENED SPECIES PRESENT IN THE MOUNT KABOBO IMPORTANT BIRD AREA ...... 111 TABLE 4-10 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT ACTIVITY, KATANGA ...... 121 TABLE 4-11 POTENTIAL POSITIVE CONSEQUENCES AT KATANGA ...... 126 TABLE 4-12 POTENTIAL NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES AT KATANGA ...... 128 TABLE 4-13 UNCERTAIN CONSEQUENCES AT KATANGA ...... 137 TABLE 4-14 ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION AND MONITORING PLAN FOR PROPOSED IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE CANAL CONSTRUCTION AND REHABILITATION AT KATANGA ...... 140

iii EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

LIST OF MAPS

MAP 2-1 GENERAL LOCATION ...... 9 MAP 3-1 KIBUNGU GENERAL LOCATION ...... 20 MAP 3-2 PRELIMINARY IDENTIFICATION OF PROPOSED IRRIGATION AREA ...... 21 MAP 3-3 REGIONAL TOPOGRAPHY ...... 23 MAP 3-4 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OF KIBUNGU ...... 24 MAP 3-5 TOPOGRAPHIC GRADIENT AT KIBUNGU ...... 25 MAP 3-6 REGIONAL PRECIPITATION ...... 27 MAP 3-7 REGIONAL TEMPERATURE ...... 28 MAP 3-8 SURFACE WATER RUNOFF AT KIBUNGU ...... 30 MAP 3-9 FLOOD ZONES MAP OF KIBUNGU ...... 32 MAP 3-10 SEISMIC ACTIVITY ...... 35 MAP 3-11 REGIONAL GEOLOGY ...... 36 MAP 3-12 REGIONAL SOIL TYPES ...... 37 MAP 3-13 REGIONAL VEGETATION ...... 42 MAP 3-14 VEGETATION COVER AT KIBUNGU ...... 43 MAP 3-15 REGIONAL POLITICAL MAP...... 48 MAP 4-1 KATANGA GENERAL LOCATION ...... 91 MAP 4-2 PRELIMINARY IDENTIFICATION OF PROPOSED IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE AREAS ...... 92 MAP 4-3 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OF KATANGA ...... 94 MAP 4-4 TOPOGRAPHIC GRADIENT AT KATANGA ...... 95 MAP 4-5 SURFACE WATER RUNOFF AT KATANGA ...... 98 MAP 4-6 FLOOD ZONES MAP OF KATANGA ...... 100 MAP 4-7 VEGETATION COVER AT KATANGA ...... 107

LIST OF PHOTOS PHOTO 1 VIEW THE BACKGROUND OF THE SHRUB SAVANNAH AT THE CONFLUENCE MUNYOVWE AND LEZA...... 41 PHOTO 2 GALLERY FOREST MUCH DEGRADED OBSERVED ALONG MUNYOVWE RIVER...... 44 PHOTO 3 FALLOW OBSERVED AT KIBUNGU ...... 45 PHOTO 4 VIEW OF THE WOODLAND NEAR THE VILLAGE SIMBI ...... 106 PHOTO 5 THE AQUATIC GRASSLAND NEAR KITETE SITE...... 108 PHOTO 6 THE SEMI-AQUATIC GRASSLAND ALONG MUTAMBALA RIVER ...... 109 PHOTO 7 RIPARIAN SHRUB FORMATION DOMINATED BY AESCHYNOMENE ELAPHROXYLON, NEAR THE MOUTH OF MUTAMBALA RIVER. . 109

LIST OF GRAPHS

GRAPH 3-1 AVERAGE MONTHLY TEMPERATURE, BUKAVU STATION, 1961 - 1989 ...... 26 GRAPH 3-2 AVERAGE MONTHLY PRECIPITATION, BUKAVU STATION, 1961 - 1989 ...... 29 GRAPH 4-1 AVERAGE MONTHLY TEMPERATURES, KALEMIE STATION 1952-1986 ...... 96 GRAPH 4-2 AVERAGE MONTHLY PRECIPITATION, KALEMIE STATION 1952 - 1986 ...... 97

iv EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

LIST OF ACRONYMS

°C Degrees Celsius 22 CFR 216 USAID Environmental Regulations CEC Cation Exchange Capacity DRC Democratic Republic of the Congo DFAP Development Food Assistance Program EA Environmental Assessment EMMP Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plan FAA Foreign Assistance Act ADRA Adventist Development and Relief Agency FSFM Food Security Monitoring System HAZ Height for Age Z-Score (measure of stunting) IBA Important Bird Area IDP Internally Displaced Person IEE Initial Environmental Examination IPM Integrated Pest Management IUCN International Union for the Conservation of Nature Ha. Hectare km Kilometers m Meters m3 Cubic meters mm Millimeters NGO Non Governmental Organization SMTN Sun Mountain International STI Sexually Transmitted Infection USAID United States Agency for International Development WHO World Health Organization

v EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

1 Executive Summary

The present Environmental Assessment (EA) has been prepared by Sun Mountain International (SMTN) under contract to the Adventist Development and Relief Agency (ADRA), Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), in accordance with USAID environmental regulations 22 C.F.R. 216.

It evaluates proposed irrigation and drainage construction and rehabilitation activities at two sites in eastern DRC. These activities are planned as part of larger Title II-supported integrated efforts by ADRA to improve food security in the target areas. The two proposed sites are:

 Kibungu, midway between Uvira City and Bukavu, in South Kivu Province: irrigation project.  Katanga, near Baraka, in South Kivu Province: irrigation and drainage project.

A third site, Kasakwa, was eliminated based on an initial needs assessment through a small focus group. A fourth site on the Ubwari Peninsula was eliminated due to security concerns and inaccessibility.

The two main limitations faced were incomplete project design information and limited fieldwork time.

In accordance with the terms of reference prepared by USAID, it was decided to initiate a scoping exercise and immediately follow with the full EA work in the field. The proposed project is intended to improve food security through increased agricultural production, achieved through irrigation and drainage. To most effectively and sustainably increase production, the proposed activity responds to the specific needs of the local communities at both sites, as presented below.

1.1.1 Kibungu

Needs The top five needs identified through public consultation at Kibungu, in no order are:

 Irrigate rice paddies via the improvement of the existing Munyovwe irrigation canal.  Increase potable water access.  Increase household land access.  Provide chemical fertilizers to rice producers and train them in their use.  Help rice producers to sell directly to wholesalers to reduce the losses they usually suffer from selling to intermediaries.

The first and third bullets are a strong indication that the proposed activity responds to an urgent community need. Specifically, the participants in the public consultation indicated that irrigation is necessary to increase production to meet food security, given smaller plot sizes.

Proposed actions The proposed activity at Kibungu is to rehabilitate an existing irrigation catchment and canal to restore the supply of irrigation water in the Nyamutiri plain. The Nyamutiri plain currently has rain-fed rice production, but water supply is insufficient, particularly during the dry season.

ADRA will work with local community organization(s) to promote system sustainability through community management. Food for Work (FFW) labor will be used to dig earthen canals for both irrigation and drainage, with oversight by at least one qualified topographer and at least one qualified engineer.

6 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Irrigation will be gravity fed from a river catchment, and the proposed canals will follow topographic contour lines along the high ground of the target irrigation area. The primary canal will be integrated with a system of secondary and, possibly, lower level canals to irrigated individual plots.

The total length of canals to be rehabilitated at this site has not been finalized, and will depend on a topographic survey and the final design capacity of the proposed canals based on hydrographic modeling.

1.1.2 Katanga

Needs The top four needs identified through public consultation at Katanga, in no order are:

 Drain the marsh down and upstream of Mutambala Bridge.  Residents of the village of Mwandiga 3 indicated that they have no land locally and need access to land for cultivation.  Improve potable water access.  Create a health facility in Kokya and/or Kitete.

The first bullet is a strong indication that the proposed activity responds to a key community need. Specifically, flood prone areas are often left fallow during the rainy season due to the risk that flooding will destroy crops and result in a lost investment. Furthermore, farmers report that flooding reduces soil fertility.

Proposed actions ADRA proposes both irrigation and drainage canal construction at Katanga. The proposed activity combines the drainage of flood prone areas with the irrigation of high ground to improve agricultural production on the Kenya Plain.

Both irrigation and drainage canals will work by force of gravity, and the primary irrigation and drainage canals will be integrated with a system of secondary and, possibly, lower level canals to irrigate and drain individual plots.

The total length of proposed irrigation and drainage canals at Katanga has not been finalized, and will depend on a topographic survey and the final design capacity of the proposed canals based on hydrographic modeling.

1.1.3 Assessment Structure

Baseline – Detailed physical, biological and socioeconomic baseline information are presented for each site.

Alternatives Assessment - A number of alternatives for each site were identified based on the unique baseline characteristics, potential social and environmental consequences, and expected feasibility.

Evaluation of Social and Environmental Consequences – Positive, negative and uncertain impacts of the project alternative for each site were identified and assessed. The net consequence of the preferred project alternative for both projects is clearly beneficial, due to the critical need of addressing food security. This is

7 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

not achieved by the "no action" alternatives. Furthermore, no major irreversible impacts or threats to high conservation value ecosystems were identified.

Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plan – Mandatory measures to prevent or mitigate expected project risks and negative impacts, and increase the expected benefit are established for each site.

2 Introduction

The present Environmental Assessment (EA) has been prepared by Sun Mountain International (SMTN) on behalf of the Adventist Development and Relief Agency (ADRA), Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), in accordance with USAID environmental regulations 22 C.F.R. 216.

It evaluates proposed irrigation and drainage construction and rehabilitation activities at two sites in Eastern DRC. These activities are planned as part of larger Title II-supported integrated efforts by ADRA to improve food security in the target areas. The two proposed sites at the time of study are:

 Kibungu, midway between Uvira City and Bukavu, in South Kivu Province: irrigation project.  Katanga, near Baraka, in South Kivu Province: irrigation and drainage project.

Map 2-1 presents the location of these two sites in Eastern DRC.

The Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) conducted for this project indicated that proposed irrigation and drainage activities had a significant potential for negative impacts on the environment. As a result, each set of activities were given positive determinations, meaning that a full environmental review was required before implementation using Title II assistance could be approved.

Despite the positive determination, the irrigation and drainage activities have the potential to significantly reduce food insecurity in the target areas. As a result, USAID and ADRA agreed that, pursuant to 22 C.R.F. 216, an Environmental Assessment (EA) would be commissioned to define specific impacts, which could arise from the planned assistance and identify measures that could mitigate or avoid these impacts. In accordance with the terms of reference prepared by USAID, it was decided to initiate a scoping exercise and immediately follow with the full EA work in the field1.

Throughout the EA process, SMTN maintained close contact with ADRA, the USAID DRC MEO, and USAID Washington BEO and DCHA FFP staff as appropriate to discuss project options and priorities to ensure that the EA is consistent with project planning and resources. In addition to these conversations, SMTN prepared a preliminary report of findings and recommendations, which identified several project alternatives. ADRA reviewed this report and provided feedback.

1 There is often a gap between the scoping and full EA to allow for review and consultations on the scoping issues. In this case, the scoping review took place in the field as the first step in the more detailed EA work to expedite the EA process and minimize program delays.

8 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Map 2-1 General Location

9 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

2.1 EA Team

The fieldwork and analysis for the EA was conducted by a multidisciplinary team of Congolese and International Specialists to ensure a thorough analysis of the different socioeconomic and environmental components of the proposed activity. The project team included:

Project Manager: Daniel Griswold Mr. Griswold is Sun Mountain’s Social and Environmental Assessment Coordinator. He has a degree in international development and has worked as a specialist or manager on more than twenty social and environmental assessments in Ecuador, Mongolia, Albania, Peru and Libya. Mr. Griswold has also managed environmental projects, health and safety compliance, monitoring and reporting to donors and government.

Risk Assessment Specialist: Diego Vallejo Mr. Vallejo is Sun Mountain’s Senior Risk and Emergency Manager. He has twenty years of professional experience in risk assessment, risk management, emergency response and emergency system design working at the community, municipal, provincial and national level, as well as with numerous organizations and companies.

Ecologist: Anthony Kikufi Mr. Kikufi has a M.Sc. in Biology/Phytoecology and a B.Sc. in Biology/Ecology and is currently Head of Works in the Department of Biology at the University of Kinshasa and Vice-coordinator of the Network of Herbaria of the DRC. He has also been a consultant in botany, phytoecology and plant ecology for various organizations for the past ten years.

Ecotoxicologist: Dr Dieudonne Musibono Dr. Musibono has a PhD in Aquatic Ecotoxicology and Environmental Assessment, as well as a M.Sc. in Environmental Management and Environmental Engineering. He is currently head of the Environmental Sciences Department of the University of Kinshasa and National Coordinator of UNEP. He has been a consultant in many environmental projects in the DRC and other African countries. Dr. Musibono did not participate in fieldwork for this EA, but provided technical support and oversight of the biological sections of the report.

Environmental Specialist: Jasmine Sathiagnanan Ms. Sathiagnanan has a M.Sc. in Environmental Impact Assessment, Auditing and Management Systems and B.Sc. in Environmental Science. She has several years of experience undertaking environmental impact assessments in Zimbabwe for large mining and agricultural projects. She also has several years of experience in the humanitarian sector in emergency coordination, as well as rebuilding after disasters in Sri Lanka.

Environmental Engineer and Agronomist: Christophe Mangongo Mr. Mangongo has diplomas in Agriculture, Agronomy and Environmental Engineering and has training by the World Bank on environmental and social impact assessment. He has 9 years’ experience as a provincial coordinator with SENSASEM (Service National de Semences) and was involved in conducting needs assessments and planning expansion in agricultural production to meet additional needs through improved agricultural practices, and natural resource management.

10 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

conflict prevention and management. He has 15 years of experience in camp management, logistics and emergency coordination, prior to which he was a part-time university lecturer and secondary school teacher.

Hydrologist: Guy Munsayongo Mr. Munsayongo has degrees in Chemistry and Hydrology and has been working with the Congolese Association for the Environment for 18 years. He has experience in planning and evaluation projects related to water supply, hygiene, irrigation, as well as assistance in environmental and social impact studies.

Geologist: Frederic Makoka Mwanza Mr. Makoka has a degree in Geology and has been a Senior Assistantship and Researcher at the Earth Sciences Department, University of Kinshasa for 15 years. He has also many years of experience in the mining field undertaking geochemical exploration, pedogeochemical and sediment sampling, structural mapping and modeling.

Geographer: Antonio Semanate Mr. Semanate is a geographic engineer specialized in sustainable development with 12 years of professional experience in GIS for environmental assessment. He has managed teams of GIS specialists for projects in 11 countries in Europe, Asia, Africa, the Middle East, Latin America and the USA. He has developed techniques for land use and vegetation classification in many ecosystems, multi-temporal land-use and geomorphic change studies, 3D modeling and viewshed analysis for project siting and design, satellite image acquisition from providers, digital image processing, field data control, and spatial data management.

2.2 Report Structure

The Environmental Assessment is intended to serve as a tool to decide whether the proposed action is justified or whether the potential negative impacts outweigh the expected benefit.

This structure of analysis is organized by the two locations where activities are currently planned (Kibungu and Katanga) to make it easier for staff responsible for a particular site to read and focus on information relevant to each site.

The analysis of the proposed activity is structured as follows:

 Limitations  Regulatory Framework  Methodology  Scoping Results  Kibungu Site Specific Assessment o Purpose and Need o Regulatory Framework o Proposed Action o Affected Environment o Alternatives Analysis o Social and Environmental Consequences o Environmental Management and Mitigation Plan  Katanga Site Specific Assessment o Purpose and Need o Regulatory Framework o Proposed Action

11 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

o Affected Environment o Alternatives Analysis o Social and Environmental Consequences o Environmental Management and Mitigation Plan  Annex A – Technical Information  Annex B – List of Interviewees  Annex C – Bibliography  Annex D – Detailed Methodologies  Annex E – Evaluation of Acceptable Social and Environmental Consequences  Annex F – Terms of Reference  Annex G – Summary of Team Members  Annex H – Photographs

This structure varies from the traditional USAID format by presenting the affected environment before the alternatives analysis. This is because the location of the projects was available during the EA, but a detailed description of the proposed engineering action was not. The Alternatives analysis evaluates the detailed design options based on their social, environmental, technical and economic feasibility; for this reason, it is important to present the description of the affected environment before the alternatives analysis.

The consequences of the preferred alternatives are then evaluated in the following section and measures to prevent, mitigate, or compensate for negative consequences are identified as possible. Measures to improve positive consequences are also identified where possible with a reasonable level of effort or resources.

The management and mitigation measures identified through this exercise form the basis of the environmental management and mitigation plan (EMMP) in the following section. The management actions established by the EMMP are obligatory and must be implemented as part of the preferred alternative action (the no action alternative is not preferred after analysis). 2.3 Limitations

Incomplete design information – The final route and design for the proposed irrigation and drainage activities had not been finalized at the time of publication of this EA. This affords an opportunity to ensure that environmental criteria and mitigation measures are included in the project design based on the results of the EA. This is often more difficult when EAs evaluate final designs. This variation from standard EA procedures is judged by the SMTN team to have not adversely affected the assessment. However, it does present two important limitations. First, detailed environmental baseline information often collected for design and useful in environmental assessment, such as seasonal hydrological measurements, were not available. This information can be estimated based on available sources, but the level of detail is not the same. Second, the evaluation of environmental consequences cannot evaluate detailed designs, but rather general alternatives. The EA can be revised and amended once the engineering studies and designs are finalized; this would not be expected to significantly alter the EA, including the environmental consequences and EMMP sections from their present form.

Limited time for fieldwork – The amount of time to conduct fieldwork at the project’s sites was limited, and this was exacerbated at Katanga where fieldwork by some team members was cut short by insecurity and armed conflict in the project area. This limited the amount of biological baseline information that could be collected as detailed biological baseline collection can require several weeks of fieldwork to conduct detailed species identification. Field visits were long enough, however, to identify habitats and conservation value based on indicator species. Social baseline collection was also partially limited by the limited length of fieldwork as some stakeholders could not be located for interviews during the several days spent at the 12 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

different sites. However, a sufficient number of stakeholders were interviewed or participated in focus groups to allow for a good understanding of the existing socioeconomic conditions at each site.

Inaccessible project location – A third project location was proposed but could not be visited by the field assessment team due to inaccessibility and security concerns. The proposed area is located approximately 6 km to the southeast of the Kenya Plain at the junction of the Ubwari Peninsula and mainland. The target area is located at the south end of the inlet of Lake Tanganyika that is formed by the Ubwari Peninsula, and the proposed activity seeks to drain wetlands bordering the inlet to expand agricultural production in several villages in this area. Parts of the target area are accessible by boat, but most villages are a several kilometer hike on foot from the shore and cannot be visited in one day. Boat access is generally possible, although there is a risk of piracy. Irregular armed groups, particularly the Mai Mai Yukutumba, are active throughout the area, however, so access on foot is considered to be too dangerous as it would be necessary to spend the night in one of the villages. Due to these limitations, this site was not included in the field assessment.

Project site eliminated from consideration – A potential site for irrigation and/or drainage activities was proposed at the Kasakwa Locality, in the Basikalangwa groupement. Local residents and the chief of Kasakwa locality indicated during a small group discussion that there are no existing problems regarding land access, drainage or irrigation. Furthermore, the number of households that would directly benefit from an irrigation or drainage project was reported by the chief to be 281. In the light of these initial findings, ADRA chose to eliminate the Kasakwa Locality from detailed assessment.

Potential future sites – The proposed ADRA irrigation and drainage activities include both rehabilitation and new construction of a total of 90km of irrigation canals and 120km of drainage canals over three fiscal years. Two target sites were evaluated as part of the EA, including Kibungu and Katanga. The proposed activities at each of these sites are described in more detail below. It is possible that additional sites will be identified by ADRA in the future, and that works at these sites will be part of the three year target of 90km of irrigation and 120km of drainage canals. The present EA is not intended to cover activities at unidentified sites, unless an addendum covering the additional site is prepared and approved.

2.4 Methodology

Methodologies are presented in each section. Detailed Methodologies are presented in Annex D. 2.5 Regulatory Framework

2.5.1 USAID 22 Code of Federal Regulations 216

The Code of Federal Regulations (22 CFR 216)7 requires an environmental regulation for any action funded by the U.S. Government which receives a “Positive Threshold Decision”, a term which means that the action has been determined to have a significant effect on the environment. According to 22 CFR 216.6, the EA should describe the project purpose and underlying need, the alternatives including the proposed action, the affected environment, environmental consequence, and means to mitigate adverse environmental impacts.

2.5.2 US Government - Foreign Assistance Act, Part I

13 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

2.5.2.1 Section 117

Section 117 of the Foreign Assistance Act (FAA) establishes in subsection (b) establishes that “Special efforts shall be made to maintain and where possible to restore the land, vegetation, water, wildlife, and other resources upon which depend economic growth and human well-being, especially of the poor.” 2.5.2.2 Section 119

Section 119 of the FAA establishes, among other requirements, that “the preservation of animal and plant species through the regulation of the hunting and trade in endangered species, through limitations on the pollution of natural ecosystems, and through the protection of wildlife habitats should be an important objective of the United States development assistance”.

2.5.3 Government of DRC

Environmental governance in the DRC is overseen by the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Tourism. The major environmental legislation in DRC applicable to the proposed project includes:

 The Constitution (May 2005)  The Environmental Protection Law (July 19, 2012), which is currently in the process of being codified  The Forest Code (22 August, 2002)  The Nature Conservation Law (22 August 1969)

The Congolese Constitution establishes the right to environmental quality for all people in the DRC (article 53).

The Environmental Protection Law was in the process of being codified at time of fieldwork, but already establishes several important conditions. An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is required for agricultural development, infrastructure or exploitation activities, among others. Other important requirements established by this law include:  Activities that harm the environment are prohibited within protected areas  All activities that present potential risks to the environment or population shall be audited  All activities that present potential risks to the environment should conduct public consultation  At the conclusion of extractive activities, the project proponent must restore the site in accordance with a social and environmental management plan

The government of DRC has established the Congolese Study Group for the Environment to review all EIAs in accordance with this law. In practice, however, the requirements and standards for EIAs are still being developed and the CSGE does not review most EIAs.

The Forest Code and Nature Conservation Law establish the legal foundation to establish different classes of protected areas and protect forest resources.

Table 2-1 summarizes the international environmental protocols, agreements and treaties that have been ratified by the DRC.

Table 2-1 International Environmental Protocols, Agreements and Treaties Ratified by the DRC

14 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Date of Ratification by Convention the DRC African Convention on the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources 13-Nov-76 Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat 15-Sep-94 (RAMSAR) Convention concerning the Protection of World Cultural and Natural Heritage 17-Dec-75 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (Bonn Convention) 9/5/1994 Vienna Convention on the Protection of the Ozone Layer; the Protocols of London and 15-Sep-94 Montreal United Nations Convention on Climate Change 8-Dec-94 Convention on Biological Diversity 15-Sep-94 Convention on the Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their management 15-Sep-94 (Bamako Convention) International Tropical Timber Agreement 20-Nov-90 United Nations convention on the Law of the Sea 17-Feb-89 Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes 16-Oct-75 Convention relative to the Preservation of Fauna and Flora in their Natural State Not Known Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage 17-Dec-72 Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) 18-Oct-76 The Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals 15-Sep-94 Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POP) 23-Mar-05 Phytosanitary Convention for Africa South of the Sahara 21-Sep-62 The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes 15-Sep-94 and their Disposal

2.6 Scoping Results

In accordance with the terms of reference prepared by USAID, it was decided to initiate a scoping exercise and immediately follow with the full EA work in the field2. A preliminary list of scoping issues was shared with ADRA and USAID for review on May 15, 2012. The formal Scoping Statement was submitted on August 12, 2012, and USAID did not provide any further comments.

The scoping process involved the following elements:

1. A review of key documents, including project proposals, terms of reference prepared by USAID/DRC, area maps, scoping results from the fieldwork for proposed ADRA irrigation and drainage activities3, similar past EAs for lessons learned, and other applicable documents.  Consultation with USAID/DRC and USAID/Washington staff; key ADRA project staff; DRC government officials, traditional local leaders and local residents.  Field visits to proposed and potential project site locations at Kibungu, Katanga and Fizi. The bulk of the scoping document was prepared based on scoping results from fieldwork for proposed ADRA irrigation and drainage activities. The document was updated based on visits to the Katanga and Kibungu sites. The first day of the assessment at each site identified sensitive and high conservation value ecosystems and important socioeconomic locations for more detailed evaluation during subsequent days.

2 There is often a gap between the scoping and full EA to allow for review and consultations on the scoping issues. In this case, the scoping review took place in the field as the first step in the more detailed EA work to expedite the EA process and minimize program delays. 3 Fieldwork for the present EA was combined with fieldwork for proposed Food for the Hungry (FH) irrigation and drainage activities based on the mutual agreement of USAID, FH and ADRA; fieldwork for ADRA immediately followed the assessment of the ADRA sites and was based on scoping work conducted during the assessment of the ADRA sites.

15 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

 Interviews with local farmers and residents and focus groups with a diverse sample of local stakeholders and beneficiaries.  Participatory mapping of the proposed areas for irrigation and drainage.  A list of preliminary scoping results was shared with ADRA and USAID staff at the conclusion of the field visit to ensure that all appropriate topics had been considered.

During the scoping work, the SMTN team focused on discussions with ADRA and USAID staff to clarify project objectives and plans and discuss preliminary findings. Environmental assessments of past irrigation projects were considered during preparation of scoping issues and development of the work strategy for the full EAs.

The Scoping process identified a range of significant issues to be addressed in the EA as listed below. Given that the assessment covers two project sites, these are meant to be considered on a case by case basis at each specific proposed activity site.

1. Irrigation and Drainage Activity Design 2. Benefits of Irrigation or Drainage 3. Community Involvement 4. Community Preferences 5. Inclusiveness 6. Post Conflict Transition 7. Conflict: Land Access 8. Gender and Age of Workers and Worker Conditions 9. Natural Hazards: Landslides, Floods and Erosion 10. Disaster Management Plans and Response 11. Land Tenure 12. Population Changes and Resettlement (formal and informal/planned and unplanned) 13. Disease Vectors and Water Borne Health Impacts 14. Access to Adequate Potable Water 15. Impacts on Groundwater and Surface Water Quality 16. Hydrological Changes 17. Water Catchment Sustainability 18. Water Pollution 19. Downstream Impacts – Change in Water Flows, Quantity and Availability, Changes in Hazard Impacts 20. Irrigation Methods 21. Scale and Impact of Engineered Structures 22. Canal and Drainage System Safety 23. Road Construction or Repairs 24. Disposition of Spoils from Rehabbed Canals or New Drainage System 25. Impact of Construction and Repairs: Temporary Increase in Personnel, Equipment, Resource Use 26. Change of Land Use, Clearing of Land, Loss of Habitat 27. De-vegetation: Increased Demand for Fuel and Construction Wood and Grass Due to Increased Income or Other Changes 28. Impacts to Important Flora, Fauna and Habitats 29. Conflict with Wildlife 30. Parks, Natural Reserves, Area of Specific Natural Resource Value 31. Seeds: Source and Sustainability of Supply 32. Impact of Increased Agricultural Production 33. Impact on Livestock Management 34. Increased Crop and Animal Pests 16 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

35. Impacts to Soil Quality 36. Disposal of Crop Processing Waste 37. Education of Children and Community Members 38. Archaeology, Burial Grounds, Effects on Cultural and Historical Heritage Sites 39. System Sustainability: Staffing, Management Systems and Resources 40. Management of EMMP Actions: Staff and Funds

17 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

3 Kibungu

3.1 Purpose and Need

The target site for irrigation and drainage is located in the South Kivu Province, which presents alarming food insecurity statistics.

As identified by the Title II project proposal, “in all of the DRC, South Kivu has the highest percentage of households with poor food utilization. Of children under five, 55% are stunted, 30% are underweight, and 12% are wasted. South Kivu also has the lowest proportion of household food from own consumption, and the greatest from purchase.” 4

Furthermore, in South Kivu, women of reproductive age are by far the most stunted in the nation, with 18.2% less than 145cm tall [cf. 4.0% nationally] and have the highest rates of severe anemia at 4.3%, almost four times the national average of 1.1%.5 In addition, 7.4 percent of infants are born weighing less than 2.5 kg, making low birth weights a serious problem.

The proposed project is intended to improve food security through increased agricultural production. To most effectively and sustainably increase production, the proposed activity responds to the specific needs of local communities:

The top five needs expressed by the local population, as identified through public consultation and in no order are:

 Irrigate rice paddies via the improvement of the Munyovwe canal. Ideally, water should reach the vast Nyamutiri plain where the majority of rice production is currently located.  Increase potable water access. There are only 2 tap stands in the entire Kibungu area  Increase household land access. Demographic pressure has reduced access from 1/8 to 1/16 ha per household in some cases.  Provide chemical fertilizers to rice producers and train them in their use.  Help rice producers to sell directly to wholesalers to reduce the losses they usually suffer from selling to intermediaries.

3.2 Proposed Actions

The present section presents the description of proposed project actions, designed to meet the purpose and need. Where the proposed action may be achieved by more than one alternative, the preferred alternative is not presented in this section. Instead, the alternatives are presented and assessed in section 3.4.

4 Jenga II, Title II Multi-Year Assistance Program for Democratic Republic of Congo , June 2011 5 DHS 2007

18 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

The proposed activity at Kibungu is to rehabilitate an existing irrigation catchment and canal to restore the supply of irrigation water in the Nyamutiri plain. The Nyamutiri plain currently has rain-fed rice production, but water supply is insufficient, particularly during the dry season. Farmers indicated during interviews that without irrigation, rice can be harvested every six months, while with irrigation it is possible to harvest after only four months.

The target catchment that the activity proposes to rehabilitate is located in Kibungu village and diverts water from the Munyovwe River (see Map 3-1and Map 3-2). The target irrigation canal for rehabilitation is called the Munyovwe canal. The catchment location is located on the slopes of the Bulaga and Lemera Mountains, and the canal descends to the east, parallel to the Kibungu – Bwegera road, past the village of Mbogwe before crossing to the to the north side of the road at the beginning (south end) of the Nyamutiri plain between Mbogwe and Bukeye villages. The canal reaches the plain approximately 3.5 km downstream of the catchment and runs dry prior to reaching the plain.

The Nyamutiri Plain is located at the base of the Bulaga and Lemera mountains, and is one in a series of descending plains that mark the beginning of the Ruzizi Plain6. The land in the plain is divided among households from five villages, including Kibungu, Mbogwe, Bukeye, Katumba and Nyamutiri. Satellite imagery indicates that irrigable area of the Nyamutiri plain is approximately 879 Ha. in size (see Map 3-2). A topographic assessment is needed to confirm the total irrigable area based on the proposed irrigation technology. An alternative or possible additional site is the Bulaga Plain, located above the Nyamutiri Plain.

Irrigation will be gravity fed, and the proposed canals will follow topographic contour lines along the high ground of the target irrigation area. The final route needs to be confirmed by a topographer to determine whether the proposed gravity based principal canal is possible in the entire target area, or whether pumps would be required to irrigate part of the plain.

Food for Work labor will be used to dig earthen canals, with oversight by at least one qualified topographer and at least one qualified engineer. The canals will be mostly earthen, although stones may be used to prevent erosion at strategic locations, such as curves and steep drops in elevation. Dikes may be built on either side of the canal to ensure a uniform depth and width, without altering the slope of the canal bottom.

Canal design will avoid sharp curves to reduce the need for stone lining to prevent erosion, and drops will be designed as best as possible to prevent flow velocity from significantly increasing. The exact gradient and curve angles will be determined by a specific engineering study. The need for sediment traps will also be evaluated as part of the final design. A limited number of cement structures may be needed to reduce the likelihood of erosion and increased flow velocity, as evaluated in more detail as part of the alternatives assessment.

The primary canal will be integrated with a system of secondary and, possibly, lower level canals to irrigated individual plots. The system of secondary and lower level canals, (the latter depending on whether they are included in the final work plan), will be constructed using Food for Work labor, overseen by a qualified topographer and engineer.

6 The Ruzizi Plain encompasses the area stretching from the Itombwe Mountains in Eastern Congo to the western mountains of Burundi. The Ruzizi Plain is formed by the Ruzizi River Basin as it flows to Lake Tanganyika, and encompasses a number of smaller plains and rolling hills, including the Nyamutiri Plain.

19 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Map 3-1 Kibungu General Location

20 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Map 3-2 Preliminary Identification of Proposed Irrigation Area

21 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

A potential supplementary catchment was identified during public consultations, which would provide water to the Nakamombo Plain, which is located above and drains directly to the Nyamutiri Plain. There is an existing irrigation system in the Nakamombo Plain, but the available water is not sufficient to irrigate the entire plain. The potential supplementary catchment would build a new canal from the Kabwiba and Kakenge Rivers to the Nakamombo Plain to increase the available supply of irrigation water.

The Kabwiba and Kakenge Rivers are tributaries of the Munyovwe River above the existing catchment that the project proposes to rehabilitate, and diverting water from these two rivers may decrease the water available for catchment to irrigate the Nyamutiri Plain. Therefore, the potential supplementary catchment alternative must be evaluated in more detail once a hydrographic model of the site is completed.

ADRA will work with local community organization(s) to train farmers on how to distribute water to individual plots through flood irrigation, and following coordinated water use schedules. ADRA will also promote system sustainability by promoting community management; a key component of this strategy will be for ADRA to train users and local community organization(s) on how to maintain the system without external support.

3.3 Affected Environment

3.3.1 The Physical Environment

3.3.1.1 Topography and Geomorphology

The proposed Kibungu project is located in eastern DRC on the western flank of the East African Rift, approximately 140 km apart. Map 3-3 presents the regional topography in the area. The target irrigation area is located in the foothills of the Mitumba Mountains where they reach the Ruzizi Plain, mid way between Lake Tanganyika and Lake Kivu. The rugged foothills quickly give way to relatively flat, rolling hills on the Ruzizi Plain (see Map 3-4and Map 3-5, which present the topography and slope gradient).

22 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Map 3-3 Regional Topography

23 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Map 3-4 Topographic Map of Kibungu

24 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Map 3-5 Topographic Gradient at Kibungu

25 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

3.3.1.2 Climate

The climate of South Kivu province is characterized by a rainy season, a dry season, and often a short transitional period between the two. The rainy season is characterized by a humid tropical climate, while the dry season is more of a moderate temperate climate. Rainfall and temperature vary with altitude, with higher rainfall and lower temperatures at higher altitudes. Map 3-6 presents the average monthly precipitation in the region, while Map 3-7 presents the average monthly temperature in the region.

Detailed precipitation and temperature data are available for Bukavu, which is located approximately 50 km north of Kibungu, but at slightly higher altitude.

Significant data gaps are present in these records, probably due to poor record keeping and equipment damage, but average values give a good idea of seasonal variations in temperature and rainfall. Full tables of historical precipitation and temperature data are presented in Annex A.

3.3.1.2.1 Temperature

Average monthly temperature at Kibungu (altitude 900 – 1050m) is similar to the Bukavu station (altitude 1612m), although it is warmer due to the lower elevation. Temperature does not vary greatly, although it is typically hottest during August and September, while it is coolest during November and December. Average monthly temperatures at Bukavu vary slightly from 18.3°C to 19.6°C, and are usually two to three degrees warmer at Kibungu (see Graph 3-1).

Graph 3-1 Average Monthly Temperature, Bukavu Station, 1961 - 1989

Source: Agence Nationale de Météorologie et de Télécommunication par Satellite (Mettelsat).

Excluding reported temperature from September 1973 to August 1974, which appears to present an error of 8-10°C per month, as well as outliers from October 1987 and March 1983, which presented similar apparent error margins, the lowest recorded monthly temperature at Bukavu was 16.9 and the highest recorded monthly temperature was 21.2°C.

26 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Map 3-6 Regional Precipitation

27 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Map 3-7 Regional Temperature

28 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

3.3.1.2.2 Precipitation

Kibungu is located in the Ruzizi plain, and the site has a microclimate with a tendency towards dryness and with low rainfall (± 1,000 mm / year). Rainfall is typically greater at higher elevations.

Kibungu, like Bukavu, present a dry and rainy season, with a short transitional phase between them. The dry season in the region normally lasts from June to August and generally corresponds to the warmest months of the year. Average monthly rainfall during the dry season at Bukavu varies from 7.0 to 39.7 millimeters. Many years report one or more months without any precipitation at all during the dry season, especially in July (see Graph 3-2).

Graph 3-2 Average Monthly Precipitation, Bukavu Station, 1961 - 1989

Source : Agence Nationale de Météorologie et de Télécommunication par Satellite (Mettelsat).

The rainy season normally lasts from October to April, and average monthly precipitation at Bukavu varies between 137.1 and 189.9 mm. November is by far the wettest month on average. September and May are transitional months, with average rainfall of 93.1 and 84.7 mm, respectively. The wettest month on record (1961 – 1989) had a total rainfall of 430.5mm. Rainfall at Kibungu is normally slightly lower than at Bukavu, where average annual rainfall is 1319 mm, above the average of 1000 mm on the Ruzizi plain.

3.3.1.3 Hydrology

The major river that passes through the proposed Kibungu project area is the Munyovwe River, which is fed by a number of tributaries from the upstream to downstream end of the project area. The Munyovwe flows from the mountains to the west, before reaching the Ruzizi River downstream of the project, which

29 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

eventually drains to Lake Tanganyika, within the Congo River Basin. Map 3-8 presents the model of surface water runoff at Kibungu, based on monthly precipitation values, topography and vegetation cover7. Map 3-8 Surface Water Runoff at Kibungu

7 The surface water runoff map of Kibungu is based on GIS models with a significant margin of error due the limited scale of base map information and a lack of daily rainfall data. It is not appropriate for use in design.

30 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

The two nearest upstream tributaries of the proposed project catchment are the Kalubye and Kabwiba Rivers, which flow from the mountains nearby and have limited flow. Downstream of the proposed catchment, the Leza River, a larger tributary, joins the Munyovwe River, which eventually merges with the Mukindwe River downstream of the target irrigation area. The Ruzizi River is located approximately 8 km downstream of this intersection.

The Munyovwe River is the proposed catchment source for irrigation, and its discharge at the proposed catchment site was measured to be 2.87m3/s on April 30, 2012. This volume was greater downstream at Nyamutiri village, where discharge was measured to be 3.7 m3/s on May 1, 2012. The measurement point at Nyamutiri village is located upstream of much of the target irrigation area. No hydrographic modeling data was available at the time of study to provide daily seasonal variations in discharge, although these respond to seasonal changes in rainfall. Map 3-9 presents the flood zones at Kibungu based on average monthly precipitation, surface water runoff and topography8

A second canal, called the Kakamba Canal, deviates water from the Munyovwe River approximately 500 meters downstream of Nyamutiri village. This canal provides irrigation water to farmland on the Kabuga Plain, to the east of the Munyovwe River.

The Kakenge, a small stream to the east of the Munyovwe River is totally diverted for irrigation before it reaches the Munyovwe. This stream and rainfall are used for flood rice irrigation on the Nakamombo Plain to the East of Mbogwe Village.

The hydrogeological system of the study area is dominated by the alluvial groundwater of the Munyovwe River, with a groundwater table that is only a few meters deep. Because the groundwater is hydrologically connected to the surface water, it is affected by changes in surface water quality and volume, including rivers, irrigated areas and rainfall.

8 The flood zones map of Kibungu is based on GIS models with a significant margin of error due the limited scale of base map information and a lack of daily rainfall data. It is not appropriate for use in design.

31 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Map 3-9 Flood Zones Map of Kibungu

32 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

3.3.1.4 Water Quality

Samples were collected from five sources at Kibungu and analyzed by the University of Kinshasa’s Science Faculty Laboratory. Table 3-1 presents the water quality results. The tested water quality results indicate that the water at Kibungu is generally acceptable for irrigation, based on FAO guidelines. Elevated potassium levels are not expected to be detrimental and may actually improve yields.

The pH of the analyzed waters are slightly acid (pH <7), although the laboratory measurement of pH at the upstream location on the Mutambala River (UWA1-3) is lower than the laboratory measurement of pH downstream, and the in situ result. It is important to further monitor the pH at this location to verify these results

The proportion DCO/DBO5˂2 indicates that the effluent is biodegradable. This indicates that the water is well mineralized (Table 3). In short, the presence of the COD and the BOD5 is tolerable and has no major impact on the environmental assessment.

There was no evidence or report of upstream mining at Kibungu, and heavy metals were not evaluated. Electric Conductivity (EC) is low and in conformity with World Health Organization norms, which indicates that the waters are not highly mineralized.

Table 3-1 Water Quality Laboratory Sample Results Analyzed by the University of Kinshasa Science Faculty Laboratory

Potable Munyovwe River Water Munyovwe River, Potable Kakenge (Proposed Tap in Nyamutiri Water River Parameter Unit FAO** Catchment) Kibungu Village Tap Village UWA UWA UWA UWA UWA 14- 1-3 4-6 7-9 12-13 16 pH (lab) pH 6.0-8.5 5.5 6.5 7.0 6.5 6.5 pH (in situ) pH 6.0-8.5 6.4 6.6 6.7 6.6 6.8 Conductivity uS/cm 0-3000 52.0 50.0 230.0 47.0 40.0 Total Suspended mg/l - 68.0 71.0 42.0 38.0 52.0 Solids (TSS) Nitrate; NO3- mg/l 0-10 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 mg/l - 12.4 12.9 13.4 12.4 13.9 Calcium; Ca++ me/l 0-20 0.620 0.645 0.670 0.618 0.695 mg/l - 2.5 2.6 2.3 1.0 2.7 Magnesium; Mg++ me/l 0-5 0.205 0.217 0.189 0.086 0.221 mg/l - 2.0 2.0 1.8 1.7 3.3 Sodium; Na+ me/l 0-40 0.088 0.088 0.079 0.075 0.143 Sodium Absorption ratio Varies * 0.137 0.134 0.121 0.126 0.211 Ration (SAR) mg/l - 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 Chloride; Cl- me/l 0-30 0.000 0.001 0.009 0.000 0.001 mg/l - 12.0 14.0 7.0 12.0 20.0 Sulfate; (SO4)2- me/l 0-20 0.250 0.292 0.146 0.250 0.417 Phosphate; (PO4)3- mg/l - 4.7 1.2 2.3 2.3 2.3 Ammonium; NH4+ mg/l - 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.5 Potassium; K+ mg/l 0-2 2.5 4.0 6.9 1.6 3.5 Boron; B+ mg/l ------Cadmium; Cd++ ug/l ------Aluminum; Al3+ mg/l ------Cyanide; CN- mg/l ------33 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Potable Munyovwe River Water Munyovwe River, Potable Kakenge (Proposed Tap in Nyamutiri Water River Parameter Unit FAO** Catchment) Kibungu Village Tap Village UWA UWA UWA UWA UWA 14- 1-3 4-6 7-9 12-13 16 Chromium Cr6+ mg/l ------Copper; Cu2+ mg/l ------Iron; Fe3+ mg/l ------Manganese; Mn++ mg/l ------Lead; Pb3+ ug/l ------Chemical Oxygen mg/l - 43.2 38.4 46.9 48.3 52.1 Demand (COD) Biological Oxygen mg/l - 26.4 24.3 28.1 26.8 34.4 Demand (BOD5) * When SAR is between 0 and 3, and Conductivity is less than 700 uS/cm, there is normally no restriction on water use for irrigation, including both surface and sprinkler irrigation ** Usual range in irrigation water, as established in the FAO publication Water Quality for Agriculture. None of the elements tested present restrictions on use based on the FAO’s guidelines for interpretations of water quality for irrigation

3.3.1.5 Seismicity The eastern border of the DRC is located along the Albertine Rift, where the Somali Plate (East Africa) is splitting away from the African Continent. Seismic activity in the area is characterized by hypocenters which are less than 10km in depth. Nevertheless, the seismic hazard throughout the region is only considered to be medium by the World Health Organization (WHO). Map 3-10 presents the map of historical seismic events in the region. This classification is consistent with the United States Geological Survey (USGS), which rates seismic hazard along the Albertine Rift, including the proposed project area, to have a peak ground acceleration of 1.6 m/s2 (10% probability of exceedance over 50 years), a moderate seismic hazard rating9.

9 USGS (2012). Africa Seismic Hazard Map. Accessed January, 2013: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/world/africa/gshap.php

34 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Map 3-10 Seismic Activity

35 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

3.3.1.6 Soils

The proposed Kibungu site includes slight slopes and plains characterized by eluvial and colluvial deposits, while alluvial deposits are found on the Ruzizi Plain. The soils in the area may be linked to the Mwenga-Kamituga volcanic province, which is located near the project area. Map 3-11 presents the regional geology and Map 3-12 presents the regional soil types.

Map 3-11 Regional Geology

36 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Map 3-12 Regional Soil Types

37 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

The following table presents the in situ characterization of soil samples. The location of these samples is presented in Map 3-4.

Table 3-2 In Situ Soil Sample Results, Kibungu

Station or N° Longitude Latitude Altitude Descriptions Sample East South (meters) Capture point in the River Munyovwe, canalization in ENE Proposed direction (downstream); width of the canal: 1m. Gully canal with 28°58’46,6’’ 02°57’44,2’’ 1088 Catchment banks that are destroyed in some places, which causes erosion and the deposit of sediments in the canal. At Munyovwe River sample, made of boulders and peddles composed approximately of quartz, feldspars and muscovite, of a size > 1 mm, deposited by 40 m from the 28°58’46,1’’ 02°57’47,4’’ 1033 gravity and originating from disaggregated metamorphic rocks. The capture point: River Munyovwe is torrential, with a pH between 6 and 7 and a Sample USL 01 flow of N 30° in direction SE. Homogeneous, very pliable clay-loam soil, very humid, of a black USL 02 (rice color (humic, presence of trees such as palms, mangos, guavas, and 28°58’46,8’’ 02°57’31,5’’ 1024 field) a few grass species that are common in humid terrain); the sample has been taken at a depth of approximately 15 cm. USL 03 A&B 28°59’01,4’’ 02°56’31,1’’ 989 Near canal road crossing, where canal has run dry. Boulders, peddles and gross sand of the drained river, toward N USL 04 & 28°58’04,6’’ 02°57’06,8’’ 1065 130°, in the rice field. Taken at the source of the Kakenge, which Sample USL 04 flows N50° toward NE, at the foot of a hill. USL 05 28°58’27,8’’ 02°56’57,6’’ 1031 Sand deposited by flooding in rice field. USL 06 & end of the canal on 28°58’58,2’’ 02°56’17,2’’ 977 Silt build up at the end of the existing irrigation canal. the plain Horizon A: humidified sand for the first ten meters, dark with USL 07 28°58’57,4’’ 02°56’11,6’’ 982 presence of plant roots and mud; depth: 12 cm. Horizon B: drier and darker sand. Upstream from the capture point of the River Munyovwe, river USL 08 29°00’02,8’’ 02°55’39,1’’ 948 sample with much gravel deposited by the river. Horizon A: medium-sized sand, brownish, likely originating from the rocks of the surrounding hills; depth of 44 cm; USL 09 28°58’25,5’’ 02°57’01,7’’ 1031 Horizon B: loamy dark and very pliable, with the presence of plant roots and groundwater already at a depth of 50 cm. Horizon A: black sand, powdery, at the foot of a low hill; depth of USL 10 (dried- the sample taking; 12 cm. up canal close 28°59’35,9’’ 02°55’55,4’’ 960 Horizon B: brown, dry and slightly clayey sand, collected at over 12 to the village of cm of depth. The canal is oriented N125°, going around a hill, and Nyamutiri) directing itself towards N30° further downstream. Confluence of the Leza and Munyovwe Rivers; the Leza is a USL 11 28°59’48,7’’ 02°56’24,6’’ 960 tributary of the Munyovwe and has a higher sediment load based on visual inspection. The Leza stream flows in the direction N30°.

The soils at Kibungu generally present a sandy to sandy-clayey texture, which contributes to light soils with high permeability that are easy to cultivate. Soil humidity varies with the weather conditions, but the soil generally has a medium water-retention capacity due to the presence of organic matter.

The soil types present at Kibungu, based on the USDA classification system, include:

1. Histosols: organic soils (only the first 10 centimeters deep, with a little bit of humus and root remnants): the alluvial, eluvial or colluvial soils that have been referred to above. 2. Oxisols: extremely humid horizons of sandy soils on granites, shales, and quartzites. 3. Ultisols and alfisols: sandy horizons, at depth and at surface, respectively 4. Entisols: young, largely hydromorphic soils.

38 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Soil chemical parameters indicate that the soils are generally well suited to agriculture, although it is acidic in places (See Table 3-3). The pH of the samples varies between 4.12 and 6.24, including half (4 of 8 samples) that were highly acid (below a pH of 5.0) 10. There is a general risk of acidification, and the highly acid soils may need liming agents to cultivate vegetable and cereal crops, as determined by an agronomist in order to improve their fertility. The natural risk of salinization is considered to be low, although salts may build up in recycled rice paddy irrigation water.

Evidence of chemical weathering was observed, which is an indicator of leaching. This chemical process eliminates most of the substrate bases (Na, k, Ca, Mg) and reduces the soil pH (this is consistent with the pH of soil samples), reducing fertility. The B horizon was observed to have a brown color, which can be attributed to the iron oxides that are characteristic of ferralitic alteration.

The soils are largely comprised of very fine sandy elements, and so are very pliable, ventilated and porous at the surface; as a consequence they are well drained. This characteristic is important from the agronomic point of view because it contributes to a hydrological equilibrium in the soil that is well suited to crop and plant growth. There are low levels of organic matter content in the soil at this site.

10 Mallouhi’s classification (1997) distinguishes between distinctively acidic soils (5.0 7.8) for most crops.

39 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Table 3-3 Soil Quality Laboratory Sample Results

pH Carbon Nitrogen P O Exchangeable pH 2 5 Aluminum Cation Exchange Sample Code and H O (%) (%) (ppm) Exchangeable Bases Acidity 2 H O (meq/100g) Capacity Location (CREN 2 (CREN- (CREN- (CREN- (meq/100g) (meq/100g) (UKPL) (CREN-K) (meq/100g) -K) K) K) K)*** (CREN-K)

40 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

3.3.2 The Biological Environment

Flora and fauna present in the area were identified through direct observation of the landscape physiognomy followed by transect walks, literature review, and interviews with local residents.

Indicator species were identified during field visits, and detailed species lists were developed based on secondary sources with records of species observed in the identified habitats.

3.3.2.1 Flora

Kibungu presents five types of vegetation: Shrub savannah, Aquatic Grassland, Semi Aquatic Grasslands, Gallery Forest and fallows (see Map 3-14). Regionally, there is little forest left (see Map 3-13).

Shrub savannah

This plant formation is open forest and very degraded with shrubs under 7m high (see Photo 1). Certain floristic species indicative of degradation caused by human activity were found.

The upper stratum is dominated by shrubs such as: Combretum psidioides, Brachystegia spiciformis and Acacia nilotica. The herbaceous layer contains plants prone to bush fires during the dry season and include characteristics species such as: Andropogon spp, Urochloa ruziziensis and Tephrosia nana.

Photo 1 View the background of the Shrub savannah at the confluence Munyovwe and Leza.

The human degradation of this habitat includes cutting shrubs for use in construction and to produce charcoal and firewood. Given the level of degradation, the conservation value of this vegetation type is considered to be low.

41 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Map 3-13 Regional Vegetation

42 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Map 3-14 Vegetation Cover at Kibungu

43 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Gallery forest

Gallery forest is normally composed of trees that grow alongside streams, but in Kibungu, this formation is much degraded and is only found near some rivers and streams.

It consists of three layers: the top layer, which has species such as Acacia polyacantha, Anthocleista liebrechtsiana and Milicia excelsa; the middle stratum, which includes species such as Bridelia ripicola, Harungana madagascariensis and Macaranga schweinfurthii; and the lowest layer, which is dominated by Anchomanes difformis, Urena lobata, Setaria megaphylla and Scleria verrucosa.

Photo 2 Gallery Forest much degraded observed along Munyovwe River.

Gallery forest (see Photo 2) can be important in reducing stream erosion and, thereby, downstream sediment loads. However, it continues to be degraded by wood cutting (trees and shrubs) for construction, firewood and charcoal production. The conservation value of this vegetation type is considered medium, but its current value for fauna is considered to be low given the level of degradation.

Aquatic grasslands

These are water bodies with shallow depths, e.g. ponds, which have fixed or floating grasses. Typical species include Azolla pinnata, Pistia stratiotes, Eichhornia crassipes and Nymphaea lotus. These are most often found as part of fish ponds.

Aquatic grasslands in natural rivers support few species directly, and have a relatively low conservation value. Human activities such as washing and bathing have long contributed to the contamination of this habitat, further reducing is current conservation value.

Semi-aquatic grasslands

Semi-aquatic grasslands are found at Kibungu in valleys that are poorly drained and can be flooded temporarily or permanently. They are also found in a limited number of areas along rivers, where they form a transition between the aquatic and terrestrial ecosystem. Some of the species noted were Phragmites mauritianus, Pennisetum purpureum and Echinochloa pyramidalis.

44 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Almost all areas of semi-aquatic grasslands at Kibungu present strong human pressure and presence; this includes most areas of rice cultivation. Natural semi-aquatic grassland is limited in area. This vegetation type is likely important for some bird, amphibian and reptiles species, and possibly insects that are important for pollination in natural and agro-ecosystems. Given the level of existing human impacts, the current conservation value of this habitat is medium to low.

Fallows

Fallows present a distinct vegetation type that is a result of the mix of crops and fallow or ruderal environments. This vegetation type colonizes cleared backgrounds, crops and abandoned areas with frequent human presence (see Photo 3). Common species include Tithonia diversifolia, Mimosa invisa, Cleome spinosa, Sesamum radiatum and Cyperus spp.

Photo 3 Fallow observed at Kibungu

Fallows by their nature are not natural habitats and have little conservation value from a biological perspective. Their value in agricultural production and crop rotation is not considered in the biological assessment of this vegetation type.

Conservation Status and Species Diversity

A total of 170 species of flora from 51 families were recorded at Kibungu based on direct observation, interviews with local residents, and secondary sources. The majority of species have not been evaluated by the IUCN or are not of concern, but one Near Threatened species was identified (see Table 3-4). The full list of species recorded at Kibungu is presented in Annex A.

Table 3-4 Flora IUCN Conservation Status (2012)

Categories Number of species Percent (%) of Total Not Evaluated (NE) 164 96.5 Least Concern (LC) 4 2.3 Data Deficient (DD) 1 0.6 Near threatened (NT) 1 0.6 Total 170 100 45 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

The Near Threatened species identified at Kibungu, Milicia exelsa (Iroko), was observed near the proposed irrigation catchment.

Species diversity by habitat type is presented in Table 3-5.

Table 3-5 Floristic Richness by Habitat at Kibungu

Categories Numbers of species* Percent (%) of Total Shrub savannah (Ss) 44 25.9 Aquatic grassland (Ag) 8 4.7 Semi-aquatic grassland (Sag) 51 30.0 Gallery forest (Gf) 8 4.7 Fallows (Fa) 67 39.4 Total 170 - * Some species are found in more than one habitat type, which is why the total is 170, not 178

Fallows, semi-aquatic grasslands and shrub savannah present a greater species diversity, while gallery forest and aquatic grassland present low species diversity. This is due to the fact that there is very strong human pressure on ecosystems in Kibungu.

3.3.2.2 Fauna

A total of 46 fauna species were identified at Kibungu based on direct observation, informant interviews, a bush meat survey in local markets, and secondary sources based on ecosystem and habitat type. This includes spanning 6 classes, 13 orders and 27 families. This wildlife has been grouped into classes and orders as presented in Table 3-6.

The list of amphibians was established according to the Amphibian Species of the World (2012); that of reptiles was established by referring to The Reptile Database (2012); the fish list follows Fishbase; and the list of birds is established according to BirdLife international (2012).

Table 3-6 Number of Species by Fauna Class

Classes Numbers of species Percent (%) of Total Amphibians (Amphibian) 11 23.9 Reptiles (Reptilia) 6 13.0 Ray-finned Fish (Actinopterygii) 6 13.0 Lobe-finned Fish (Sarcopterygii) 1 2.2 Birds (Aves) 20 43.5 Mammals (Mammalia) 2 4.3 Total 46 100

Birds represent the highest percentage of Kibungu’s wildlife (43.5%), followed by amphibians (23.9%). Mammals are poorly represented and fish and reptile diversity is limited.

Table 3-7 Fauna Species Diversity by Vegetation Type

Habitats Species Number* Percent (%) of Total Species Identified at Kibungu Aquatic grassland (Ag) 19 41.3 Semi-aquatic grassland (Sag) 16 34.8 Shrub savanna (SS) 5 10.9 Gallery forest (Gf) 17 37.0 46 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Fallows (Fa) ND** ND Total 46 - ND = No Data * Some species are found in more than one habitat type, which is why the total is 46, not 57. **Fallows are likely home to rodents, reptiles and amphibians, and provide forage for birds and mammals but are not a natural habitat and information on species diversity was not available

Aquatic grasslands, semi-aquatic grasslands and gallery forest present a rather even distribution of species diversity, and represent the majority of natural fauna at Kibungu. Shrub Savanna has relatively low species diversity.

No vulnerable species were recorded or observed at Kibungu, likely because local habitats are largely degraded and have a low conservation value. Only semi-aquatic grassland is considered to have a moderate conservation value. Given human pressure, sensitive species are not expected to be present either. Table 3-8 presents the IUCN categories of Kibungu’s Wildlife.

Table 3-8 IUCN Conservation Status of Fauna at Kibungu (2012)

Categories Number of Species Percent (%) of Tot al Not Evaluated (NE) 9 19.6 Least Concern (LC) 36 78.3 Data Deficient (DD) 1 2.2 Total 46 100

The Kibungu site is located just to the northeast of the Itombwe Mountains Important Bird area, which provides habitat to the vulnerable species Papyrus Yellow Warbler (Chloropeta gracilirostris).

3.3.3 The Human Environment

The proposed Kibungu irrigation site is located in rural South Kivu Province (see Map 3-1 and Map 3-15). Agriculture is the economic mainstay, and has been affected by significant population growth and a corresponding increase in resource use pressure in recent years.

South Kivu is isolated from western DRC, including the capital Kinshasa as a result of poor transportation infrastructure and long distances. Nevertheless, there is extensive regional trade with other areas in eastern DRC and neighboring countries including Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi, Tanzania and even Zambia. This region has a history of insecurity, particularly South Kivu over the past two decades, which has been plagued by armed groups from the area, as well as Rwanda and Burundi.

47 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Map 3-15 Regional Political Map

48 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

The proposed Kibungu project locations in the Nyamutiri and possibly Bulaga plain, located at the base of the Bulaga and Lemera Mountains, belong to residents of the following five villages based on customary rights: Kibungu, Mbogwe, Bukeye, Katumba and Nyamutiri. These communities are located in the Lemera Groupement, which is part of the Bafulero Chiefdom, Uvira Territory, South Kivu Province.

The area is located approximately 45 minutes drive north of the city of Uvira along National Route 5, a paved road that passes just east of the target area. The actual Kibungu area is accessible by a dirt track that meets the national route at the town of Bwegera.

Uvira territory forms the international border of DRC with Burundi and Rwanda to the east. The Kibungu site is located only a short distance from the border with Burundi, which is demarcated by the Ruzizi River.

The present baseline description refers to the project site, including all five villages, as simply “Kibungu”. However, the Kibungu project area encompasses two health zones, Kibungu and Nyamutiri, and when data refers to a health zone, this is clearly identified.

3.3.3.1 Administrative Structure

The government administrative structure in the DRC is organized in six administrative levels including, from largest to smallest (regional to local): Province, District, Territory, Chefferie (chiefdom; collectivity when there is no chiefdom in the area), Groupement, and village.

Each territory has an Administrator who is seconded with two Assistant Administrators. In large territories, the Administrator is often supported by a secondary post called “Postes d’encadrement administratifs” that are directly under the leadership of Resident Territory Administrator (in French Administrateur du territoire Assistant).

The government administrative structure is maintained in parallel to traditional authorities. Each territory or collectivity is ruled by the King (Mwami). He is the guardian of the tradition and the transfer of this leadership goes from father to son. Though they in theory depend upon the Territory Administrator, these traditional leaders still keep quite a good level of independence.

The groupement is the next level of traditional and government administration, and each groupement is headed by a traditional chief of district, in addition to the government administrator. The chief of each groupement directly or indirectly comes from the King’s family and should have some form of blood relation to the chief. Each district is composed of many villages that are each managed by the village chief that is nominated and/or removed by the district chief following the King’s consideration.

In South Kivu province, including the Kibungu project site, all collectivities are chiefdoms. Traditional leaders are very respected and considered by their subjects as power and tradition holders.

3.3.3.2 Demographics

3.3.3.2.1 Population

The five villages in the Kibungu area are part of two health zones, Kibungu and Nyamutiri. The population of the Nyamutiri health zone is approximately 2500 people, while the population of the Kibungu health zone is approximately 6,000 people. The average family size is 5-6 people per household.

49 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

The population of the project area was relatively stable until 1994, when a period of regional conflict began, one that continues till today. The displacement of populations by fighting in recent years (see conflict section, below) has contributed to a massive influx of people to the Kibungu health zone, where the current population (6,000) is estimated to have roughly tripled in the past seven years.

Displacement has affected the Nyamutiri health zone differently, resulting in the displacement of approximately 2000 people after attacks by ethnic Banyamulenge militia in 2002. The displaced population largely fled to Luberizi and Bwegera. Fighting between Congolese regular army and the FDLR (ex-Rwandan militias), however, drove a similar number of people from the villages of Rudaga and Iganga to settle in Nyamutiri, resulting in a similar population size to that before 2002.

The population of the five villages in the Kibungu project area is approximately 90- 95% ethnic Bafulero. The other ethnic groups present in the area are the Bavira and Barundi. The community of Bwegera bordering the project area to the east is, conversely, comprised of a majority of ethnic Barundi residents, while ethnic Banyamulenge live in the mountains above the project area, past the town of Lemera.

The Barundi and Banyamulenge speak Kinyarwanda as their primary language, although the majority also speak Swahili, the primary language of the Bafulero. This contributes to ethnic tensions, including the opinion of some Bafulero that the Barundi are Tutsi outsiders from Burundi, across the Ruzizi River. The Banyamulenge are also considered outsiders from Rwanda by many people in eastern DRC.

Despite ethnic differences, the vast majority Bafulero, Bavira, Barundi and Banyamulenge residents are Pentecostal Christians (members of the Eighth Central African Community of Pentecostal Churches; 8ème CEPAC - Communauté des Eglises de Pentecôte en Afrique Centrale or 8th Pentecostal Church).

3.3.3.2.2 Health

There is one public health center at Kibungu which includes a maternity ward, and one private health center called Katwamuhungu. A generic consultation at the private health center costs 2,000 Congolese Francs (approximately $2.25 USD).

The public health center is fairly large and led by a Head Nurse. It can provide basic medicines, but charges patients for them. More serious cases are referred to the hospital in Lemera, which has a limited number of specialties. When the hospital in Lemera does not offer the required specialty, patients are referred to larger hospitals in the cities of Uvira, Bukavu, or Bujumbura, the latter located in Burundi.

Despite the presence of public and private health centers, some local residents also seek treatment through traditional methods or faith-based healing, due to the costs of modern health care and medicine. Patients do normally seek maternity care at formal health facilities, which is technically a legal requirement.

Health problems reported by the Head Nurse at Kibungu in order of importance include: malaria, gastro- enteritis, parasitosis (including bilharziasis), acute respiratory infections and malnutrition. It is important to note that the second and third maladies are water borne diseases, while malaria is a vector-borne disease. Gastro enteritis and parasitosis are also likely indicators of poor hygiene and limited access to potable water sources. In fact, local residents report that when the three potable water tap stands do not meet demand, residents drink water from the Munyovwe River. It is important to note that Uvira Territory is classified as a cholera pandemic area, also most likely due to limited potable water access and poor hygiene.

50 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

PROSANI, a charitable organization subsidizes the local public health center with anti-malarial treatment. However, the public health center is having difficulty covering operating costs, possibly due to competition with the private health post.

3.3.3.2.3 Education

School attendance in South Kivu presents very low levels for both primary and secondary school. Statistics from 2003 for South Kivu indicate that only 42.1% of girls are registered for primary school, while only 31.2% actually attend secondary school. Boys present slightly higher enrolment levels (53.5%) than girls (46.7%) in South Kivu Province12. This may be due in part to school fees. Participation in agriculture or other economic activities is not necessarily a cause, since many students work outside of school hours to meet household responsibilities.

There are two primary schools that serve the five communities at Kibungu. The same buildings are used for secondary school in the afternoon, due to a lack of space. While these schools are public, students must pay monthly fees of 1,300 Francs (approximately $1.50 USD) per month for primary school, and 3,000 – 3,500 FC (approximately $3.50 – 4.00 USD) for secondary school. The distance from the furthest household to one of the two schools is estimated to be no more than 2 km.

3.3.3.3 Infrastructure and Services

Infrastructure at Kibungu is very limited. There is no electricity and very few individuals have generators or solar panels that they charge people to use. For example, it normally costs approximately 100 Francs (approximately $0.11 USD) to charge a phone.

Fuel is expensive, so the primary energy source for cooking is wood, cut from trees and shrubs in the surrounding habitats. Candles and lamps are typically used for lighting at night. The lack of a reliable energy source limits potential technology applications, such as electric rice processors.

Most families at Kibungu have a latrine for human waste, although many of them are in a poor state of repair. Families without latrines typically use latrine pits, as defecation in open areas is uncommon. There is no management system for non-recyclable solid waste, which is most commonly burned. Only the health center has an incinerator. Agricultural waste is recycled for use as manure when possible, used to feed livestock (organic waste), or burned if it has no potential use.

Mobile phone network coverage is extremely weak in Kibungu, and people have to move to specific spots to access the network. However, there are community radios across South Kivu Province that help to spread news. Each territory has at least one radio that mainly informs on community development programs and human rights issues. Very little is broadcasted regarding national and international matters. Rumor also plays a major role in the circulation of information. Rumor has been cited as the source of most of pre-emptive internal displacements.

Transportation options are limited, and most people rely on walking for personal mobility. Motorcycles are another option, but are too expensive for most occasions. Regional travel is possible on buses and vans that travel along National Route 5 between Kamanyola and Uvira, making stops at Bwegera. It is possible to hire them to drive to Kibungu, although this is normally too expensive.

12 2003 ministry of education statistics, in : Monographie de la province du Sud-Kivu, 48-52.

51 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Goods are commonly transported by foot or bicycle down to Bwegera, where they are sold to trucks passing on the national road. Women more commonly work carrying goods by foot. The road to Kibungu is passable, and on market days, trucks come from Bukavu and Uvira with manufactured goods to sell and purchase agricultural produce to bring back to the city.

Water for drinking, cooking and washing in the villages of the Kibungu project area is available from three community taps. However, there are periods of water scarcity when available water is not sufficient for the local population, and it is rare for any family to have access to more than 20 liters of potable water per day for all domestic uses, including drinking, cooking, washing and bathing. Furthermore, the community has a limited number of storage containers to take advantage of periods of high flow. As a result, residents are often forced to drink from the Munyovwe River and commonly use it for washing and bathing. This increases the risks of contact with water borne diseases.

The only available water for domestic animals is leftover water from washing, so many animals drink from the Munyovwe Canal and fish ponds near the villages.

3.3.3.4 Land Tenure

The constitution of the DRC establishes that the national government owns all land. In practice, there is no clear division between the authority of government administrators and traditional chiefs, so land tenure in traditional chiefdoms is normally managed in accordance with customary institutions.

It is possible to obtain formal land use rights from the national government, but these are granted in the form of a 25 year, renewable land tenure contract (contrat d’amphytéose) through the Ministry of Land Affairs. Traditionally, it is necessary to offer the traditional chief a form of compensation when seeking a government land tenure contract to prevent his opposition.

Land tenure in the Kibungu health zone has been reduced from approximately 1/8th Ha. per family ten years ago, to an average of 1/16th Ha. per family at present, due to population growth. These 25m by 25m plots are frequently rented to sharecroppers for an average of $80 per harvest. The Nyamutiri health zone, on the other hand, does not present the same land use pressure and most families have access to a quarter hectare or more of land.

3.3.3.5 Economic Activities

Agriculture, including subsistence crops and livestock but with a heavy focus on rice cultivation, is the dominant economic activity at Kibungu; approximately 80-90% of population works in agriculture as their primary economic activity. It is important to note that children play an important role in planting seeds for rice cultivation, as their small hands are better adapted to this work.

Petty trade in agricultural and manufactured goods and micro-businesses, are the next most significant occupations, although they are much less common than work in agriculture. Charcoal production and firewood collecting are other supplementary forms of income.

3.3.3.5.1 Agriculture and Animal Husbandry

52 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Agricultural production in South Kivu has been affected by years of conflict and insecurity, which has contributed to population movements, neglect of agricultural infrastructure, and increased population pressure in some locations.

Increased population caused by displaced persons has caused a decrease in average household plot size in many areas, resulting in a loss of crop diversity and intensified production through reduced fallow periods.

Damages to infrastructure have hurt access to markets, although the region currently has acceptable road connections with the cities of Uvira and Bukavu. However, many factories that processed agricultural produce have also been destroyed during the years of conflict, which lead to the collapse of the cotton and sugar cane market13.

Furthermore, the crisis of governability has contributed to a lack of good quality seeds. Despite recent government efforts to improve the regional seed supply14, most farmers still use low quality seeds that they save from previous harvests or buy at local markets. Furthermore, as of 2005 there were only 107 agricultural technicians in the region for 426,369 farm households, a ration of approximately 1 technician for every 4000 households; the government target is to have 1 technician for every 400 households, a figure ten times that of the technicians presently available.15

Cultivation is the main economic activity in the project area, followed by fish farming and animal husbandry. Agriculture is dominated by rice production for sale, supplemented by subsistence farming in non-irrigated areas including principally cassava, sweet potato, corn and market gardening. Rice cultivation is common year round in irrigated areas, while food crop cultivation is dominant during the rainy season in non-irrigated areas.

Pisciculture is another important activity in the project area, while small scale animal husbandry is not uncommon in the target communities as a secondary income source. On the other hand, the communities neighboring the project area to the east (across the Munyovwe River), such as Bwegera Village, are primarily pastoralists with limited cultivation.

Cultivation

Irrigated rice is the dominant crop year round, including during the dry season, and typically yields three crops per year. It is a cash crop and the preferred crop on most farms because there is a strong market demand regionally, and it delivers the highest income by surface area. Income from rice cultivation is high enough for families to purchase more produce at local markets than they could normally grow themselves. Food crops grown in the highlands above the project area are widely available at local markets. Plots in non-irrigated areas are generally destined to market gardening during the dry season.

The dry season in the Kibungu region is from June to August, with moderate rainfall in May and September. The rainy season lasts the rest of the year. Local farmers indicated that the agricultural calendar has two main seasons, including agricultural season A between September to February and the agricultural season B between March and May. The dry season is the agricultural season C.

13 Monographie de la Province du Sud-Kivu. Unité de Pilotage du Processes DSRP, 2005. 14 Ibid. 15 Ibid.

53 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Soil and climate conditions in the area are largely favorable to agriculture, yet production remains largely subsistent (income from cash crops goes mainly to purchase foodstuffs). Subsistence agriculture is based on crop rotation using slash-and-burn techniques or shifting to natural fallows. Production is principally limited to small plots of cleared grassland or former agricultural areas.

Irrigated rice cultivation currently includes the Nakamombo plain, which is located above and drains to the Nyamutiri Plain, and the Nyamutiri Plain itself. The Nakamombo plain is irrigated by water from the Kakenge River. Water used in irrigation on the Nakamombo plain is limited and runs dry before reaching the Nyamutiri plain, which principally relies on rainfall. Indeed, lower parts of the Nakamombo plain are also not normally irrigated, as water is not sufficient.

The Munyovwe canal, which is targeted for rehabilitation by the proposed project, is also used to irrigate a limited area along the road between Kibungu and Mbogwe villages. Water from this canal is also used for fish farming in this area, which places significant stress on downstream irrigation capacity. It should be noted that the existing Munyovwe canal is earthen, and the irrigation system currently is not functioning very well because of canal bank erosion and canal silting, causing localized flooding. The silting, combined with the high catchment volumes by upstream users, causes the canal to run dry before reaching the upper end of the Nyamutiri Plain during much of the year.

Rain-irrigated rice normally can be harvested after a period of six months, whereas irrigated rice with appropriate drainage can often be harvested after only 4 months, and can grown year round.

Cassava and other food crops are cultivated throughout the project area, but their productivity is low. This low yield is due to the gradual impoverishment of the soil, the use of poor quality seeds, poor farming practices (little technical support from outside institutions), premature harvesting, as well as attack by fungal and viral diseases (the mosaic virus decimated several fields in 2006, and cigar-end disease has caused significant losses in banana production). The repeatedly low yields of cassava cultivation have contributed to what local farmers describe as a preference for rice cultivation. Monoculture of rice has developed in irrigated areas because the market has been strong throughout recent years, despite the fact that the price is set by buyers. Proper crop rotation practices are important to preserve soil fertility, particularly in areas where cassava is grown, as cassava is known to rapidly deplete soil fertility.

Local irrigation techniques are limited to gravity fed systems using water from the Munyovwe and Kakenge Rivers. Irrigated rice paddies are separated by small dikes in descending terraces that allow water to be recycled.

Some farmers use chemical fertilizers both on food crops (rice) and on market garden crops. Pesticide use is rare. The main fertilizers used include: DAP, urea and NPK. The use of chemical fertilizers is justified by the loss of soil fertility due primarily to an agricultural overexploitation of the soil.

Agricultural production is generally based on non-mechanized labor, with participation by all family members, using rudimentary techniques and simple tools such as machetes and hoes. Some of the plains in the Kibungu area are flat enough for tractors or large machinery, but there is currently no mechanized agriculture, and land is tilled manually.

Pisciculture

The second leading productive activity in the project area is pisciculture. This mainly includes tilapia farming of nilotica and macrochir tilapia. Local residents estimate that there are approximately 250 fish ponds in the Kibungu area that generally vary between 25mx25m and 35m × 35m in area.

54 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

The fish are fed mainly with herbs, the skins of tubers, cow and pig dung as well as rice bran (locally produced by the mill belonging to the local hospital and managed by the NGO CEPAC16). Local residents do not report significant problems with diseases or other problems that could affect fish production.

The fish farmers are organized in a committee that deals with problems related to fish farming. Spawning ponds have existed since colonial times, and are managed by the customary chief.

Animal Husbandry

Some residents in the Kibungu project area practice small-scale animal husbandry, but this is not a primary source of income. They may provide an important supplement to household diet by producing eggs, milk and meat.

Livestock includes goats, pigs, poultry (roosters, chicken, ducks and pigeons) and cows. Livestock is used for many purposes including subsistence, sale (both as a primary and secondary income source), and for use in trade or gifts (dowry, reception of guests, payment of school fees, etc).

Livestock in the area are local breeds that are rarely interbred to improve genetic makeup, and most animals receive no basic veterinary care. Animals are normally allowed to roam freely and must forage to find food and water, often within villages near households. Nutritional supplements and shelter are not normally provided for these animals.

The pastoralists near the project area (ethnic Barundi), on the other hand, have large herds of cattle that graze on the plains to the east of the Leza River. However, cattle sometimes enter fields owned by the residents of the Kibungu project area (ethnic Bafulero), causing crop damage. This is not particularly common, but is a source of land use conflict.

3.3.3.6 Social Organization

Social organization at Kibungu is strongly influenced by traditional customs and ethnic ties. As a result, it is very important to include or consult with traditional chiefs in proposed social initiatives and organizations.

Social organization outside of the traditional administrative structure lead by local chiefs is limited. Local residents indicated that management of the Munyovwe canal is disorganized and ineffective. The irrigation system has been built or rehabilitated on three past occasions, which is an indicator that these efforts have only been successful for a limited number of years before the system falls back into disrepair. The effectiveness of the system is further compromised by disorderly and unplanned deviations made by individuals along the canal route to fill rice paddies and fish ponds. Livestock are permitted to drink from the canal, contributing to bank erosion and likely contaminating water through contact and feces.

When asked why the local community has not organized to better maintain the system, one interviewee indicated that that is the function of the numerous NGOs and other donors working in the area.

Management of the existing potable water system serving the villages in the Kibungu area is also problematic. Despite a monthly contribution of 300 Francs (approximately $0.33 USD) to system

16 The complete name of this NGO could not be verified.

55 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

management, wells and pumps installed by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) do not always function properly.

A local producers' association at Kibungu charges all members a monthly fee, but leaders could not explain any concrete benefits provided by this association, other than the fact that they have learned from past development projects that donors are more likely to fund projects if the local community is already organized.

3.3.3.7 Conflict and Insecurity

3.3.3.7.1 Insecurity

Eastern DRC has been affected by longstanding insecurity, and both project sites are located in areas that have been affected at one time or another. Regional conflict became widespread in the aftermath of the Rwandan genocide and ethnic conflicts in Burundi, which caused refugees and militias from these countries to enter the DRC. Conflict quickly spread to include Uvira and Fizi territories, and violent attacks on populations caused many residents of both territories to flee their homes.

Many fled to other parts of eastern DRC and became internally displaced people, while others fled to Burundi and Tanzania as refugees. Since then, a number of militia groups have been active in Uvira and Fizi territories, as well as the Congolese regular army. Ethnic conflict has proliferated in the region, resulting in serious ethnic tensions that can give way to violent conflict with little warning.

Fighting over power sharing in Burundi has also been frequent since Burundian President Melchior Ndadaye was assassinated in October 2003, and displacement of Burundian citizens across the Ruzizi River into DRC near Kibungu is not uncommon.

Insecurity has important demographic and economic impacts, as populations flee from one location to another, infrastructure is degraded and crops and animals are lost. The failure of the state has also seriously eroded governmental and traditional institutions and even social norms in these areas.

3.3.3.7.2 Social Conflict

Population growth at Kibungu has contributed to increasing land use pressure in Kibungu Village, while this has not been the case in other local villages, including Nyamutiri. Local residents indicated that the traditional chief responded to land use pressure in the past by expanding the agricultural frontier, but that this is no longer a good option because only marginal lands remain. Land use pressure in Kibungu Village has been managed to date without significant conflict by dividing plots to provide each household with access to land. However, local residents clearly indicated that there is no

There is a somewhat latent land use conflict, as perceived by the Bafulero, with the neighboring ethnic Barundi pastoralists. Bafulero report that cows owned by Barundi from the villages of Luberizi and Bwegera have eaten crops without compensation for the owners. This has been limited to minor disputes, but population growth and increasing land-use pressure suggest that land conflict between these two ethnic groups may increase in the future. At the regional level ethnic conflict has led to violence, including assassinations of leaders and clashes between militias from rival ethnic groups. Bafulero interviewees expressed that grievances over land disputes have not been addressed over fear that Barundi pastoralists are armed.

56 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

No major armed violence was reported in the project area. However, the near total absence of Barundi families from the villages of the project area reflects the distrust among many Bafulero towards the Barundi.

Local women also report that they sometimes fight over access to water at potable water taps due to water shortages. Local pastors are often sought for assistance in mediating these and other intra-ethnic disputes.

3.3.3.8 Archaeology and Cultural Resources

No archaeological or important cultural resources were identified in the target intervention areas at Kibungu. Local burial traditions normally dictate that the deceased be buried on the family plot, normally behind the family house, and relatives are expected to know where these graves are located.

Churches and markets are the main cultural spaces in both areas. Residents normally attend church on Sundays or for special events such as wedding ceremonies. The market day or days for each local market is well established.

3.4 Alternatives Analysis

The present section evaluates alternatives to the proposed action. These alternatives are identified based on a preliminary analysis of major socioeconomic and environmental impacts, their technical and economic feasibility, and applicability to community needs as identified in section 3.1 (Purpose and Need).

A detailed description of the proposed action was not completed prior to the EA, but strategic objectives and resource limitations are known. The analysis of the alternatives does not, therefore, present a detailed proposed action, but rather considers the alternatives for each aspect of the project separately. The preferred action alternative is identified by determining the preferred alternative for each aspect separately.

Accordingly, the analysis is divided into two sub-sections:

 No action alternative: This section evaluates the effect of no action on the identified community need, including major impacts.  Alternatives to the proposed action: This section evaluates alternative strategies and designs for different components of the proposed action in order to determine the preferred action alternative. Where the preferred action alternative is not immediately clear, the socioeconomic and environmental impacts of the alternatives in question are evaluated in the following section (3.5).

In a number of cases, final engineering design information is needed to determine the best option. This information will be completed as part of the formal design process, which will be conducted in accordance with the requirements established by the present EA. The information required for the final design is detailed in this section.

3.4.1 Methodology

57 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

The action alternatives for each project component are considered on an individual basis, in order to identify the best combination of alternatives to maximize positive impacts and minimize negative impacts using available resources and capacity. They are excluded or identified as preferred, as follows:

 Exclude: Alternatives that are not feasible, that do not respond to community needs, or which would result in unacceptable impacts are excluded from further consideration. In these cases, the other alternative is considered to be the preferred action.

 Preferred: When more than one alternative is considered feasible, responds to community needs and has a clear, positive impact, the preferred alternative will be selected based on a cost-benefit analysis. When two or more alternatives meet these three criteria and are complementary, the preferred alternative may be a combination of the different alternatives.

This combination of preferred alternatives for each component, as identified through this process, is holistically considered to be the “preferred action alternative”.

The following section (3.5) evaluates the socioeconomic and environmental consequences of the preferred action alternative identified below. This option is considered to be better than the no option alternative if the positive consequences outweigh any negative externalities.

3.4.2 No action alternative

The” no action alternative” will not address existing and growing food insecurity in the target beneficiary population, which, given recent population expansion, would result in continued and growing land and resource use pressure and shrinking household plot sizes.

Feasible alternative strategies to improve agricultural production include improved seed varieties, integrated pest management, and organic fertilizers. These are complementary actions, already planned by ADRA as part of the DFAP, and do not replace the proposed project because they do not replace the role of reliable water sources to target areas, a major obstacle to increased agricultural productivity and expansion. Access to water for irrigation was ranked as a major concern by local farmers and would not be address by the no action alternative.

Negative environmental impacts associated with the proposed irrigation system would be avoided, but other harmful environmental practices such as slash-and-burn farming may continue on a wider scale under the no action alternative, as residents seek to increase production by expanding the cultivated area instead of intensifying production techniques. A lack of crop diversity and disproportionate reliance on rice cropping would likely continue, which increases vulnerability to pests affecting rice crops.

3.4.3 Proposed Project Alternatives

The present section presents the analysis of alternative designs and strategies to achieve the proposed action. This assessment is presented in Table 3-9.

58 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Table 3-9 Alternatives to the Project Activity

Information Required for Decision - Exclude/ Preferred Alternative Evaluation of Feasibility, Relevance to Identified Need, and Impact Final Decision Alternative 1. ADRA Build Only Primary Canals, or: Preferred Alternative: 2 – Build  Canal length and type should be determined based on a specific 2. ADRA Build Primary, - all canals necessary for a engineering study. Secondary and Tertiary functioning system Canals Preferred Alternative: 5 – The use of liner may be minimized as possible, but should be determined based on maximum flow velocities and calculated scour velocities, as determined by 3. Build Canals with a specific engineering study Cement or Synthetic  The budget does not contemplate using cement or liner Calculate scour velocity and Liner  Cement and liner can prevent erosion, limiting maintenance It would be preferable that liners expected flows under varying 4. Build Compacted Soil requirements are not needed, and therefore meteorological conditions. This Canals without liner, or:  canal geometry should be Stones may be obtained from small borrow pits for a limited number should include a 20 year storm. 5. Use liner as necessary properly sized. If, however, of erosion-prone locations at significantly lower cost than cement, based on a specific liner or lining the full length of the canals with stone design calculations show that a engineering study liner is needed, and funds are not available, then the project should consider being scaled back or limited in scope to ensure that the area that is built is properly built to ensure durability, stability and erosion control.  The canal from the existing catchment runs dry before reaching the  The engineering design Nyamutiri Plain because it is eroded and floods, but over-use by team should evaluate the Alternative 8 is preferred so long upstream users is likely another key factor feasibility of a catchment as existing water uses along the 6. Rehabilitate the existing  Topographic information and satellite imagery indicates that the further downstream on the existing canal and by downstream catchment, or: Munyovwe River parallels the existing canal (proposed for Munyovwe users are not adversely affected. If 7. Build a new catchment rehabilitation) until it reaches the Nyamutiri Plain; it may be easier to  Catchment volumes and these existing users are affected, downstream near the start build a short canal from the Munyovwe River near the beginning of canal capacity should be they should be included in the of the Nyamutiri Plain the Nyamutiri Plain (downstream of the current catchment), than to determined based on consultation process for the final 8. Rehabilitate the existing rehabilitate the existing canal over a longer distance. hydrographic modeling, to project design decisions to ensure catchment and canal and  that their interests and existing build a second catchment Alternative 8 (if sufficient water is deemed available) would ensure ensure users downstream of the catchment will not be activities are respected and not and new canal that users between Kibungu and Mbogwe villages can still depend on a rehabilitated irrigation system, while providing an alternative affected. This study should adversely affected (see EMMP, source for the Nyamutiri Plain to prevent users upstream of the plain encompass the Munyovwe participation requirement). from capturing a disproportionate share. River basin 9. ADRA administers  The project is intended to be self-sustaining, so Alternative 9 is - Preferred Alternative: Promote 59 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Information Required for Decision - Exclude/ Preferred Alternative Evaluation of Feasibility, Relevance to Identified Need, and Impact Final Decision Alternative irrigation system discarded. Alternatives 10 and 11 10. Train community to  Government technical management capacity and resources are simultaneously manage system limited, so community management is considered to be essential. 11. Promote government  Government involvement may assist project’s long term management of irrigation sustainability despite limited capacity and resources system  The project budget does not include materials for improved irrigation technologies at the moment. Exclude: drip irrigation or other 12. Develop system  Water saving technologies may significantly increase yield of crops improved technology (alternative compatible with flood other than rice, although this will depend on crop type and available 11) unless additional funding is irrigation, or: water (as determined by hydrographic modeling). made available and community 13. Develop system  Local residents have limited resources to invest in and maintain - members indicate that they have compatible with drip improved irrigation technology; required resources may not be sufficient resources to maintain a irrigation or other readily available on local markets. more technologically-complex improved irrigation  system technology Gravity based irrigation is not expected to allow for sufficient water pressure for drip irrigation without investment in pumps (see Preferred alternative: 12 alternative 17) and/or water towers.  It may be easier to irrigate parts of the Nyamutiri Plain from the Makindwe River which forms the northern edge of the plain. This could help reduce the likelihood that upstream users capture a disproportionate share of water, and also simplify the engineering by 14. Rely on Munyovwe reducing the distance from the catchment to the northern parts of the River as Irrigation Source plain.  Identify existing uses of the The preferred alternative should 15. Use groundwater as  The Kabwiba River may help to irrigate parts of the Nakamombo Makindwe and Kabwiba be identified based on irrigation source Plain that are currently dry, and which cannot be easily irrigated by Rivers, and calculate their hydrographic modeling and a 16. Use other irrigation canals from the Munyovwe River. The Kabwiba River is a tributary discharge through review of existing uses of the source, such as the of the Munyovwe River upstream of the catchment, and so hydrographic modeling. alternative water sources. Makindwe or Kabwiba sustainable catchment levels should be based on hydrographic Rivers modeling and downstream user needs.  Groundwater resources have not been quantified and are used as a potable water source in the area. Technologies such as KickStart Pumps were not included in the budget nor the scope of the EA. 17. Pump water to reach areas above main  The project area lacks electricity; fuel is costly and scarce. irrigation canals  Eolic, solar and other off-the-grid energy sources for pumps are not Exclude Alternative 17 due to 18. Develop a gravity fed budgeted and prone to disrepair; thus, they are not considered - lack of reliable energy source irrigation system that sustainable given the local community’s limited capacity to replace follows topographic parts and invest in their maintenance and repair. contour lines

60 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

3.5 Potential Social and Environmental Consequences

The analysis in the present section will predict the significance and likelihood of the potential benefits and negative impacts of the proposed activity. Identifying negative impacts is critical to developing mitigation measures and determining which impacts cannot be prevented or mitigated, as established in the Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (EMMP).

3.5.1 Methodology

Each potential social and environmental consequence is evaluated using the parameters defined below. This evaluation is based on a comparison of baseline conditions and the expected results of proposed project activities.

This analysis evaluates the direct, indirect and cumulative consequences, including indirect results of changes in land use and the cumulative impacts to downstream water quality. More than one consequence may affect the same or similar component, but are always evaluated separately due to differences in the following parameters and potential mitigation measures.

1. Nature: Measures whether the consequence is positive (+), negative (-) or neutral (N) in comparison with expected conditions under the no project alternative. Positive means that the net consequence will be beneficial; negative means the net consequence will be harmful; and neutral means that the consequence does not result in net benefit or harm, compared with the no project alternative. Neutral consequences may often reduce the positive benefit of the proposed activity, without causing net harm compared to the no project alternative. As such, it may be possible to mitigate or prevent neutral consequences to increase the expected project benefit, 2. Probability: Measures the likelihood that the consequence will occur, based on available information and expected activities. This is categorized as very low (1) if the likelihood is between 0 and 10%; low (2) if the likelihood is between 10 and 30%; medium (3) if the likelihood is between 30 and 70%; high (4) if the likelihood is between 70 and 99%, or; certain if it is 100% guaranteed to occur (5). Consequences that are certain to occur represent project impacts, whereas the remaining consequences represent risks or benefits that may or may not occur. 3. Intensity: Intensity measures the severity or benefit of the consequence, based on the degree to which a consequence will change conditions, in comparison with the expected baseline conditions if it occurs (for project components, baseline conditions are considered those at the moment construction is completed). The intensity is classified as very high (5) when the impact completely or nearly completely changes existing conditions; high (4) when a significant change in existing conditions is expected; medium (3) when moderate chance is expected in comparison to existing conditions, low (2) when limited change to existing conditions is expected, or very low (1) when almost no change is expected compared to existing conditions. 4. Location: Measures the area expected to be affected by the direct or indirect consequence of the proposed activity. For risks, location refers to the area that is expected to be impacted should it occur. Where this area associated with the consequence may vary depending on circumstances, this is classified as the area associated with the consequence under average conditions (not extreme events). In case where consequences are social, the location is considered to be the geographical area where individuals are exposed to the consequence or which contributes to the consequence. When the consequence affects an area, this is classified as very limited (1) for consequences that affect less than five Ha.; limited (2) when 5 to 25Ha. are affected; moderate (3) when the 25 to 500 Ha. are affected; extensive (4) when 500 to 10,000 Ha. are affected, and; very extensive (5) when more than 10,000 Ha. are affected. The classification for consequences to

61 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

linear areas, including roads, rivers, streams and canals (including primary, secondary, tertiary and quaternary) is similar: very limited (1) for consequences that affect less than 50 m of waterway; limited (2) when 50 to 500 m are affected; moderate (3) when the 500m to 5 km. are affected; extensive (4) when 5 km to 50km are affected; and very extensive (5) when more than 50km are affected. The location of water quality impacts are assessed in terms of direct and indirect impacts, not cumulative downstream impacts. Where cumulative impacts are expected, the intensity is increased by 1. 5. Frequency: Measures how often the consequence is expected to occur. This is categorized as very low (1) if it is expected to occur no more than once every 25 years; low if it is expected to occur at least once every 25 years, but not more than once every five years (2); medium (3) if it is expected to occur at least once every five years, but not more than once per six months; high (4) if it is expected to occur more than once every six months, but not more than once per month, or; very high if it is expected to occur at least once per month or to be ongoing (5). Consequences that are intended to be seasonal are classified based only on their frequency during the target season. Where the probability is not certain, the frequency is based on the expected frequency if the risk comes to fruition. Frequency does not consider forces external to the project which may result in the same consequence as the project with a different frequency. 6. Duration: Duration measures the probable length of the consequence each time it occurs – the end of a consequence is defined as the point in time when conditions prior to the consequence are effectively restored without human intervention. Where management measures are proposed, duration lasts until the established management measures are expected to correct the impact. Duration is considered to be very short (1) for consequences that last less than one week; short (2) for consequences that last one week to three months; moderate (3) for impacts that last three months to 2.5 years; long (4) for impacts that last 2.5 to 25 years, and; very long (5) for impacts that last 25 years or longer 7. Total Significance: This is measured by calculating the average of criteria 3-6.Total significance is considered to be very low if the average is between 1.0 and 1.7; low if the average is between 1.8 and 2.5; moderate if the average is between 2.6 and 3.4; high if the average is between 3.5 and 4.2; and very high if the average is 4.3 or higher. Total significance is based on an average weight, as management and mitigation planned is proposed based on average conditions, not extreme events. The monitoring component will help to identify cases where the consequences exceed the expected conditions, and additional management and/or mitigation measures are required.

In order to ensure that more significant consequences receive more emphasis in the EMMP, the least significant impacts, which are considered to be acceptable, are eliminated from further evaluation and are not included in the EMMP. These consequences are included in Annex E with recommended management measures. This annex serves as a best practice reference if additional resources are deemed to be available, and to facilitate adaptive management if monitoring and evaluation demonstrates that the significance of these impacts is greater than expected.

Consequences may be considered to be acceptable if they meet these criteria 1. Consequence does not disproportionately affect vulnerable groups; 2. Consequence does not directly affect human wellbeing or social cohesion; 3. Total significance is equal to or less than 3.0; 4. Total significance is equal to or less than 3.5 and the consequence is difficult to mitigate at a reasonable cost or level of effort. This consideration is particularly important if the intensity is low.

62 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Consequences that meet these criteria, but which are important to construction and design requirements are included. The management for these criteria will only apply during construction and rehabilitation, and so, do not imply a long term cost or level or effort.

Once the potential consequences have been identified and classified using the criteria above, the total acceptability of the environmental consequences of the proposed action is evaluated (section 3.5.3).

3.5.2 Assessment of Environmental Consequences

3.5.2.1 Positive Consequences

Table 3-10 summarizes the potential positive consequences at Kibungu, and is followed by a detailed qualitative evaluation of these consequences.

Table 3-10 Possible Positive Consequences at Kibungu

No. Consequences Probability Intensity Location Frequency Duration Total Significance 1 Increased reliability and volume of agricultural water supply 5 3 3 5 4 3.8 2 Increased land access and expanded area under agricultural production and pisciculture 5 4 3 5 4 4.0 3 Positive change in net agricultural incomes and employment 4 3 4 5 4 4.0 4 Increased household food security 4 4 4 5 4 4.3 5 Opportunity to rotate production and facilitate soil regeneration 2 2 2 4 4 3.0 6 Temporary employment and income for food– – Food for Work 5 2 4 1 2 2.3 7 Improvements to health, education and living conditions 4 4 4 5 4 4.3

Consequence 1 – Increased Reliability and Volume of Agricultural Water Supply The proposed irrigation system will rehabilitate the existing catchment and irrigation canal that divert water from the Munyovwe River to irrigate areas currently watered only by rainfall. Irrigation water will provide a more reliable water source and increased volume than is currently afforded by rainfall. This will allow farmers in the target irrigation area to better meet higher crop water needs and to reduce the risk of crop loss during periods of low rainfall. This benefit may decline if the system is not properly maintained or falls into disrepair, but is expected to be sustainably maintained as long as the irrigation infrastructure is maintained and upstream and downstream water use remains stable.

Natural discharge fluctuations (seasonal and daily) in the Munyovwe River mean that the supply may not always be sufficient, particularly for crops with high irrigation needs. This can be mitigated by developing a water use schedule that accounts for variations in flow, and by identifying crops that can be cultivated with expected available water resources. Local residents expressed a very strong interest in expanding rice production, but the feasibility and appropriateness of expanding rice production will need to be determined based on available water, and threats to crop diversity (see below). Water use schedules should be developed with participation of downstream users, as evaluated in more detail below.

Consequence 2: Increased Land Access, Agricultural Production and Pisciculture Expanding irrigation at Kibungu using gravity fed canals will allow for farmers to cultivate and increased area. A significant part of the Nyamutiri and Nakamombo Plains are currently not cultivated due 63 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

specifically to water shortage (this is not the same as the sub-par production in other areas with limited or unreliable water supply). In particular, the Nyamutiri Plain is widely abandoned, where over half of the residents of the area villages have land title. The irrigation system is expected to bring these abandoned lands back into production. The irrigation system may not provide enough water to meet the irrigation requirements for all possible crops (such as rice) and possible pisciculture uses, so it is important that crop planning and water use schedules match crop water needs with available resources, as evaluated by consequence 19.

The combined area estimated to benefit from improved gravity-based irrigation through the proposed activity, including both consequences 1 and 2, is estimated to be approximately 879 Ha. based on site topography (see Map 3-2). Therefore, the combined benefit of consequences 1 and 2, given an average plot size of ¼ Ha. (local residents expect it may actually be closer to 1/10th of a hectare for families that currently have 1/16th of a hectare, but the estimate of 1/4th offers a more conservative estimate of the number of expected beneficiary families) is expected a benefit a total of approximately 3516 households. However, this estimate may be high, as many areas within the area identified based on topography may not actually be appropriate for agriculture. Nevertheless, this proposed project likely has the potential to benefit 2500 households, or 12,500 – 15,000 people, or the majority of the local population. This is contingent upon adequate water supply, which is likely to be the greatest challenge the project faces, unless irrigation water is also diverted from the Mukindwe River.

This benefit may decline if the system is not properly maintained or falls into disrepair, but is expected to continue as long as the drainage infrastructure is maintained. The EMMP establishes maintenance measures for the drainage system, as evaluated below. Furthermore, yields in areas of acidic soils (pH <5.0) may not be greatly improved unless liming agents are applied to the soils to raise the pH slightly. Moderately fast acting liming agents are recommended in areas where pH is only slightly more acidic than 5.0, as established in the EMMP.

Consequence 3 – Positive Change in Net Agricultural Production, Incomes and Employment Increase increased yield per Ha. in areas that currently have insufficient irrigation, as well as renewed production in abandoned areas will allow farm households in the target area to increase net annual production. This will increased cash income if families choose to cultivate cash crops (relative to market prices), or household food income if families choose to cultivate subsistence crops. Rice paddies are the most profitable crops and are nearly the only crops cultivated in irrigated areas, so it is expected that farmers will seek to expand rice production (the risks that expanded rice production pose to crop diversity are evaluated below).An increase in rice production is not expected to significantly alter market prices, as demand is strong regionally (this risk is evaluated in more detail below).

Increased production may also create secondary employment opportunities, such as transporting goods to regional markets. Hydrographic modeling is needed to determine whether sustainable catchment levels will allow for expanded cultivation during the dry season and to what extent production can be sustainably expanded during the wet season. Even if production does not significantly expand during the dry season, however, cash income from the rainy season may be saved for use during the dry season. Increased production of cash crops may also generate long term increases in farm laborer positions, including children, who are often hired for rice planting because their small hands are better suited to the task (the risk of increased child labor is evaluated below).

Consequence 4 – Increased Household Food Security Household food access will benefit from increased subsistence production and purchasing power from cash crops. If positive changes to agricultural income are seasonal, impacts to household food security may still be felt year round, as households may save income from periods of high production to purchase crops during periods of low production. Improved household food access and purchasing power will 64 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

benefit food security, which heavily relies on local agricultural production. Food access may suffer if market prices for cash crops drop significantly (particularly if production is not diversified), lowering seasonal income, but is likely to be higher in most seasons as a result of the proposed activity. The risks associated with market prices are evaluated separately below.

Consequence 5 – Opportunity to Rotate Production and Facilitate Soil Regeneration Due to the extreme land use pressure in Kibungu, farmers currently feel they cannot afford to leave fields fallow for even one season, as they have no alternative income source. Irrigating more land would increase land access as discussed above, and would offer a choice to households to implement crop rotation and fallow periods that and allow the soil to regenerate. The significance is considered to be low, however, because none of the interviewed farmers indicated he or she would apply soil regeneration if he or she had increased landholdings.

Consequence 6 – Temporary Employment and Food Income – Food for Work The proposed project will provide temporary employment through food for work (FFW), which will temporarily increase food income. One unskilled laborer from the community is expected to complete 1-3 cubic meters of excavation per day depending on individual capacity and soil type.

The total length of canals to be constructed will depend on the final engineering design; each kilometer of primary canal is expected to require approximately 333 – 1000 person days (based on a 1 square meter cross section of the canal), while secondary and tertiary canals will likely require fewer person days per kilometer. The estimate for the canal dimensions (cross section) is preliminary, however, and this estimate should not be used for budgeting purposes.

Consequence 7 – Improvements to Health, Education and Living Conditions Increased household food security and incomes are expected to improve human health, wellbeing and education through access (purchasing power) to medical care, medicines, clothing, education and improved shelter. Women interviewed in indicated that their husbands buy them clothing after harvest, for example. Monthly school fees to pay teachers are an important barrier to education, one which would be reduced with increased disposable income. Generally, with larger and/or more frequent harvests, disposable income for health, education and living conditions is expected to increase.

3.5.2.2 Negative Consequences

Table 3-11 summarizes the possible negative consequences at Kibungu and is followed by a detailed qualitative evaluation of impacts with greater significance (highlighted in bold). Annex E presents the acceptable consequences in more detail, including recommended mitigation measures.

Table 3-11 Potential Negative Consequences at Kibungu

Consequences No. (Bold Highlight Identifies Key Consequences Included in the EMMP) Probability Intensity Location Frequency Duration Total Significance 8 Adverse Impacts to Downstream Users 2 3 4 5 4 4.0 9 Degradation and Loss of Natural Terrestrial Habitats 3 1 3 1 4 2.3 10 Generation and Disposal of Agricultural Waste 5 2 3 5 4 3.5 11 Increased Slash and Burn and Risk of Wildfire 2 1 3 4 4 3.0 12 Increase in Agricultural Pests 2 2 3 1 4 2.5 13 Invasive Species in Natural Terrestrial Ecosystems 2 3 2 1 5 2.8 65 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Consequences No. (Bold Highlight Identifies Key Consequences Included in the EMMP) Probability Intensity Location Frequency Duration Total Significance 14 Contamination of Natural Aquatic Habitats by Agricultural Runoff 3 2 3 5 3 3.3 15 Invasive Aquatic Species 1 3 3 2 3 2.8 16 Erosion and Nutrient Loss in Irrigated Areas 3 2 4 5 3 3.5 17 Canal Erosion and Sedimentation 5 3 3 3 4 3.3 18 Dike Failure 3 2 3 3 2 2.5 Increased Use of Agricultural Inputs and Alteration of Soil Profiles and Composition 2 3 4 5 4 4.0 19 in Irrigated Areas Crop Loss and Alteration of Soil Composition because of Poor Irrigation Water 4 3 4 3 3 3.3 20 Management 21 Water Loss to Evaporation 5 1 3 5 4 3.3 22 Lack of Crop Diversity 5 2 4 5 4 3.8 23 Project - Related Changes to Local Market Prices 3 3 5 3 3 3.5 24 Impacts to Human Health Caused by Contaminated Irrigation Water 3 2 4 5 2 3.3 25 Increase in Water Borne Disease Vectors 4 3 5 5 4 4.3 26 Impacts to Livestock Health 3 2 4 5 2 3.3 27 Human or Animal Drowning 1 5 4 1 5 3.8 28 Accidents and Health Problems During Construction 4 2 4 4 2 3.0 29 Worker or Bystander Death during Construction 1 5 4 1 5 3.8 30 Water Use Disputes 4 4 1 4 2 2.8 31 Induced Migration 4 3 4 1 4 3.0 32 Increased Social Stratification 3 3 4 1 4 3.0 33 Urbanization 2 2 2 1 4 2.3 34 Impacts to Riverbed Habitat due to Mining Prohibited: No Impact 35 Earth Movement, Borrow Pits and Quarries 3 2 1 2 4 2.3 36 Systemic Failures 1 5 4 1 5 3.8 37 Road Opening 2 2 2 1 4 2.3 38 Poor Community Management 3 3 4 5 4 4.0 39 Risk of Increased Child Labor 4 2 4 1 4 2.8

Consequence 8 – Adverse Impacts to Downstream Users and Ecological Functions The proposed project will divert part of the Munyovwe River, and possibly the Mukindwe River, to irrigate the project’s target area on the Nyamutiri Plain. It may also divert water from the Kabwiba and Kakenge River to increase the irrigated area on the Bulaga and Nakamombo Plains. If too much water is diverted from any of these sources, downstream users may be adversely affected and may suffer reduced yields or crop loss.

In the case of the Munyovwe River, there is a canal that diverts water from the river approximately 500 meters downstream of the village of Nyamutiri. This canal runs to the east and provides water for cropland and pasture for livestock on Kabuga Plain, located on the south east bank of the Munyovwe.

The potential diversion of the Mukindwe River was not originally proposed, but may increase the effectiveness of the project by increasing the volume of water available for irrigation. The Mukindwe discharges into the large Ruzizi River shortly downstream of the possible project-developed catchment. Nevertheless it is important that should this alternative be deemed feasible based on hydrographic modeling, downstream uses should be identified and considered when determining the sustainable catchment.

66 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Finally, if the Kabwiba and or Kakenge Rivers are diverted to expand irrigation on the Bulaga and Nakamombo Plains, downstream impacts to the Munyovwe River should be assessed, as these two Rivers are tributaries of the Munyovwe immediately before the proposed catchment.

Sustainable catchment should ensure that human uses downstream are not adversely affected, including during periods of low flow. Sustainable catchment should not adversely affect other downstream water uses. This can be determined based on hydrographic modeling of discharge, including seasonal and daily variations in discharge, as well as identifying the volume of water used for downstream activities.

Furthermore, sustainable catchment should not significantly affect the ecological functions and environmental flow of the River downstream. To avoid impacts to environmental flow, hydrographic modeling should determine environmental flow and ensure that irrigation catchment will not significantly alter discharge during periods of low and high flow.

To prevent impacts to human uses and ecological functions downstream, catchment volume should be adjusted in accordance with variations in river flow. Catchment should be null when river discharge is at its lowest possible level (as determined by hydrographic modeling). The catchment volume should then increase proportionally to the increase in overall river discharge. This factor should ensure that downstream uses are not adversely affected.

To do this, the catchment should be built (or rehabilitated) in such a way that it automatically regulates catchment volume as river discharge varies. A proportional increase in catchment as river discharge increases may be achieved by designing the catchment in the shape of a “V” or “U” so that catchment volume decreases by a greater factor than overall river discharge.

Downstream users within the system may also be affected if upstream users divert too much water to their individual plots. Impacts to these downstream users within the irrigation system can be prevented by ensuring that water use schedules are clearly established and enforceable.

A qualified agronomist should train and assist users to develop such a schedule. Furthermore, system design should make it difficult for upstream users to unfairly divert excess water. This may be accomplished by undersizing the dimensions of secondary and tertiary canals to prevent excess catchment.

The various requirements to prevent adverse impacts to downstream users are included in the EMMP.

Consequence 10 – Generation and Disposal of Agricultural Waste Increase agricultural production will also lead to increases in agricultural waste generated by agricultural inputs and at harvest time. Chemical input use is very limited at present, but farmers report doubling production with chemical inputs, signaling a potential future increase in use. Local farmers may choose to burn waste, which has localized impacts on soil quality, creates the potential for wildfires, and negatively impacts localized air quality. Fumes from waste burning may also contribute to respiratory problems and, in the case of chemical waste from inputs such as pesticide sacks, additional health problems if inhaled.

Organic agricultural waste can be managed and used for positive impact by promoting composting programs. These programs can be effective in reducing the incentive to burn agricultural waste while benefiting soil fertility and crop yield. The EMMP establishes measures to promote composting in the community by training farmers in small scale composting techniques. Training will include demonstrations and hands on training. The focus will be limited to basic composting techniques, however, as formal training in alternative farming techniques requires a level of effort and resources that would be disproportionate to the expected significance of this impact.

67 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Rice production is a major focus of the project, however, and the husk leftover after de-hulling rice is difficult to compost because it takes a long time to fully degrade. Rice husk can also be used as a biofuel, which produces ash as a byproduct. Ashes may be composted or directly applied to agricultural soils. Partial decomposition without burning is also possible through composting programs, and should still be promoted. Vermiculture has been shown to speed up decomposition, although local capacity and resources are not expected to be sufficient to develop and manage vermiculture without a specific, concerted effort. Such a level of effort would be disproportionate to the expected impact, so this is not considered an appropriate mitigation measure for the current project. Nevertheless, future DFAP and other assistance projects in the area should consider promoting vermiculture if rice production levels remain high. The requirement to promote composting (without vermiculture) is established by the EMMP.

Consequence 14 – Contamination of Natural Aquatic Habitats by Agricultural Runoff Runoff from irrigated areas may change water quality in the Munyovwe and Mukindwe Rivers due to the presence of materials such as high sediment loads, chemicals and nutrients that can contribute to an unbalance of the ecosystem and food chains. Chemicals used in fertilizers and pesticides may pollute downstream water sources, and may be toxic for aquatic and riparian flora and fauna.

The Munyovwe River merges with the Mukindwe River and then flows into the much larger Ruzizi River just downstream of the target irrigation area, and water quality changes are expected to be of limited significance Ruzizi River due to its larger flow, although it would contribute to cumulative impacts in the Ruzizi River and Lake Tanganyika.

Agricultural runoff can be largely prevented by training farmers to apply only the minimum required water for the target surface area, so that there is no excess water at the downstream end. Furthermore, maintaining plots with a gradient of no more than 3% can prevent erosion that contributes to higher sediment and nutrient loads in runoff (minimum gradient should be 0.5% to prevent waterlogging). These management measures are presented in the EMMP.

Contaminated water that does reach the downstream end of the irrigation system, due to poor irrigation water management or stormwater, can be partially purified before it is discharged to the downstream environment. This can be achieved by creating vetiver-lined canals to channel the water to a discharge point. Vetiver (Vetiveria zizanioides) is a grass species known to purify water by absorbing important percentages many heavy metals (particularly iron and manganese), nitrogen and phosphorous. Vetiver also has an extensive root system can also be used throughout the irrigation system to prevent erosion. USAID has successfully used vetiver for erosion control in the DRC and determined that it is non-invasive18.

Proper management of agricultural inputs is also important to reducing the likelihood of contaminated agricultural runoff. ADRA has identified integrated pest management (IPM) as a strategy to reduce the use of harmful agricultural inputs, as IPM promotes non-chemical, organic alternatives. ADRA already plans to promote IPM, and this activity is included in the approved IEE for the ADRA DFAP.

Consequence 16 – Erosion and Nutrient Loss in Irrigated Areas Excessive application of irrigation water and poor gradient management on individual plots may lead to excess runoff, contributing to topsoil erosion and nutrient loss. This could contribute to a loss in long term fertility of the soil. Eolic erosion is possible during extended dry periods if fields are left fallow, but this is not expected to be common.

18 USAID DRC, web page. Vetiver Grass Solves Major Erosion in Congo. http://africastories.usaid.gov/search_details.cfm?storyID=476&countryID=5§orID=0&yearID=6

68 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

There is a low risk of erosion in much of the area, given that the target plains have a slight slope. However, the target irrigation area does descend gradually and there are areas of steeper slope that may be more erosion prone (see Map 3-5).

The mitigation measures established to prevent the contamination of natural aquatic habitats will largely mitigate the risk of erosion and nutrient loss at Kibungu by limiting runoff from individual plots and throughout the system. Farmers may also reduce runoff by planting hedgerows (vetiver or other hearty perennials with strong root systems) and/or small dikes along topographic contour lines to promote slope stability and reduce runoff. Local residents already use small dikes to separate rice paddies and further training is not considered to be necessary. Finally, when land is plowed, it should be plowed along (rather than against) topographic contour lines to help reduce runoff. These measures are established in the EMMP.

Consequence 17: Canal Erosion and Sedimentation The proposed irrigation project will built with primarily unlined irrigation canals; lined canals will only be built in areas where erosion risk is high, as determined by an engineering study. Flowing water may erode the earthen canals over time, even in areas with limited flow velocity, causing downstream sediment buildup. Sediment buildup in the canals may create blockages and bottlenecks, leading to localized flooding and water scarcity for downstream users of the irrigation system, reducing overall system yield (as measured in agricultural production). This impact is considered to be neutral compared with the no project alternative because it mainly impacts / reduces the expected positive benefits, but does not represent negative change in existing conditions.

Canal erosion can be limited by planting vetiver or bamboo along canal banks to reduce erosion. Stones and other locally available forms of liner may be used to line canal walls at curves and other strategic points where erosion is more likely. The canal route should avoid sharp drops or curves to the extent practical, to reduce flow velocity and the risk of erosion, but should also be sufficient to limit the likelihood of stagnation, sedimentation and blockage. Sediment traps may be appropriate if the risk of sedimentation is determined to be high in certain locations. The dimensions and slope of the canal should be determined based on the expected flow, in order to reduce the likelihood that water levels drop so low they become stagnant. Finally, it may be appropriate to build velocity breaks at the bottom of steep drops, to reduce the risk of erosion downstream. This will be determined by the final engineering study. These measures are established by the EMMP.

Consequence 19 – Increased Use of Agricultural Inputs and Alteration of Soil Profiles and Composition in Irrigated Areas Poor drainage of irrigation water from individual plots may lead to salinization, toxicity, acidification, and/or alkalinization of the soil as the result of the accumulation of irrigation water and agricultural inputs. These impacts adversely affect soil fertility. Poor drainage could be caused by the sedimentation of canals downstream of the plot, preventing water from effectively evacuating. It could also be the result of plot gradients that are too low (flat) to facilitate effective drainage. Saline content in irrigation water may contribute to this salinization, while chemical inputs such as fertilizers and pesticides may contribute to the buildup of toxic substances such as ammonium and sulfur.

The potential alternative or complementary irrigation water sources include the Mukindwe, Kalubye and Kabwiba Rivers. These Rivers were not identified as proposed sources at time of fieldwork and no water sample was collected. The water quality of these Rivers should be analyzed if they are included in project design, to determine whether they may contribute to salinization or other alteration of soil profiles. This requirement is established by the EMMP.

69 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Fertilizer, pesticide and other agricultural input use may increase as a result of the higher potential return on investment associated with the proposed irrigation system. As previously mentioned, local farmers report that they doubled their yield when they applied chemical inputs. However, in the long run such inputs may contribute to the buildup of toxic chemicals and other components such as nitrogen, which can contribute to acidification of the soil in the long term. Changes to soil profiles may affect crop yield as certain crops are more or less tolerant of saline, acidic and alkaline soils. Local farmers do report a lack of knowledge about how to use pesticides, so training in the risks associated with chemical inputs may help prevent farmers from adapting these inputs. This requirement is established by the EMMP.

Farmers did note that there is a shortage of organic fertilizer in the area. Training in the production of organic fertilizer may help further reduce the likelihood that local farmers use chemical fertilizers, but only if the costs and efforts required to produce organic fertilizer are minimal. This is noted as a recommended action, but is not included in the required actions in the EMMP, given the significant effort involved in training in organic fertilizer production, and the fact that increased use of chemical inputs may occur even in the absence of the project.

The build-up of toxic chemicals is best prevented by assuring proper drainage and by reducing their use. Poor drainage can be avoided with appropriate plot and canal gradient, and maintenance to prevent sedimentation and blockages in irrigation canals. The measures established to prevent agricultural runoff establish recommended gradients, which will help to ensure plots are adequately drained to reduce the risk of salinization, acidification, alkalinization, and toxicity. These measures are established by the EMMP, as described above. Impacts to soils can also be mitigated by promoting IPM as planned as part of the DFAP. Finally, Soil quality monitoring is important to allow for adaptive management in case soil quality is negatively altered despite mitigation measures. This requirement is established by the EMMP.

Consequence 20 – Crop Loss and Alteration of Soil Composition because of Poor Irrigation Water Management Improperly irrigated areas may receive too much or receive too little water for crop needs, resulting in reduced yield or crop loss. Too much water may also contribute to leaching and the alteration of soil profiles, potentially resulting in salinization, acidification, alkalinization and toxicity. The EMMP establishes measure to educate farmers in crop water needs (see above), water use scheduling, and appropriate management of the irrigation system to provide required amounts of water.

Consequence 22 – Lack of Crop Diversity Irrigation at Kibungu is almost exclusively used to grow rice, which is by far the most lucrative cash crop. Income from rice production is sufficient to allow households to purchase more food at market than they could grow in a plot of the same dimensions as a rice paddy. Local residents clearly expressed that they are interested in irrigation so that they can expand rice production. However, this poses the continued risk of a lack of crop diversity, which increases vulnerability to pests and crop disease, as well as boom and bust cycles in market prices for rice. Furthermore, rice production benefits men more than women and children, as cash income is not shared within the household in the same manner that subsistence crops are shared, despite the fact that all family members are involved in rice production.

This risk and resulting vulnerability can be reduced by training local farmers in the risks associated with poor crop diversity, complemented by training in a number of alternative recommended crop varieties, based on the soil, climate and water supply characteristics at the site. ADRA should seek to promote improved crops varieties (compared with those commonly cultivated in the region), as long as they are locally available and affordable. ADRA may combine this with its planned support for seed production as part of the DFAP, an activity that is already approved under the existing DFAP IEE.

70 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

ADRA should support a local farmers association that can coordinate production to promote diversity and act as a social safety net (through shared returns) if certain crops fail. Such an association could function simultaneously as a water users association, which should be established for the present project (see consequence 78). It is important that such an association have real management capacity, and not be a nominal association intended only to channel support.

It may, nevertheless, be difficult to promote diversification if alternative crops do not produce similar levels of income at similar levels of effort. This would not necessarily reflect a decline in crop diversity given that the baseline is very limited production (the net impact would be close to neutral), but would negatively impact the potential project benefits to food security.

Consequence 23 – Project – Related Changes to Local Market Prices Increased production of certain crops, especially rice which is the major cash crop in the area, may reduce their prices on the local market by increasing supply, while simultaneously leading to a higher demand and, therefore, cost of agricultural inputs (namely seeds – chemical inputs are uncommon).

Increased cost for agricultural inputs is likely to be limited to seeds, as chemical inputs are not commonly used. If use of chemical inputs increases with increased production, this is likely to be an indicator that market prices are high enough to support more expensive purchases of agricultural inputs.

Irrigation may, however, allow farmers to stagger rice production, so that harvests are conducted at different times of the year. This would lower the likelihood of price decreases by avoiding flooding the market during specified harvest seasons. In fact, the major buyer in the region is the Bralima beer brewery in Bukavu, which purchases rice throughout the region and has year-round production. Increased production at Kibungu may not significantly alter regional prices given this constant demand.

Changes to market prices can also be limited by increased production of a more diverse array of crops, as promoted above. Furthermore, the local market at Lemera, near Kibungu, attracts buyers from Bukavu and Uvira, and increased production is not expected to significantly affect demand.

Consequence 24: Impacts to Human Health Caused by Contaminated Irrigation Water Fertilizer and pesticide use is uncommon, although it may increase as a result of the proposed project, particularly as incomes rise. Toxins found in pesticides and/or fertilizers can have significant affects on human health if inhaled, improperly handled or ingested through food and/or water sources affected by pesticides. Furthermore, the presence of livestock near the existing canal is an indication that there will be livestock interaction with the proposed irrigation system that may contribute to the buildup of fecal coliforms and other contamination generated by their waste.

The sources of contamination may affect human health, given that potable water sources in the area do not always meet existing population needs, particularly during the dry season, and in the event of induced migration, this would be exacerbated. Instead, households often collect water from rivers and the existing irrigation canal.

At Kibungu, when families use water from the Munyovwe Canal, they collect the water near the catchment where contamination from agricultural inputs is unlikely. It is possible that residents of communities downstream of the catchment such as Mbogwe, Bukeye and Nyamutiri Villages will use the canal as a source for drinking, cooking and washing.

The risks to human health can be reduced by training local community in the health risks of agricultural inputs and water borne disease. This should be conducted as part of the training in proper application of these inputs, as established above. It is also advisable to monitor arsenic and fecal coliform values given 71 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

the potential severity of the presence of these parameters if any local residents use the irrigation system as a potable water source, despite the planned trainings. These recommendations are included in the EMMP.

Consequence 25 – Increase in Water Borne Disease Vectors Flood irrigation practices at Kibungu for rice cultivation involve vast areas of standing water that is recycled (to downstream plots) very slowly. Furthermore, the proposed activity will develop canals of slow moving water that may become nearly stagnant in areas, particularly in secondary and tertiary canals that are poorly maintained and may become clogged or develop an uneven gradient. The proposed irrigation project is designed to support flood irrigation and may indirectly contribute to an increase in the localized areas of stagnant water. Stagnant water may become a breeding ground for insects and contribute to insect borne disease vectors such as malaria. If water from the irrigation system is used for drinking, cooking or washing, it may contribute to the spread of bilharzia and other health effects such as gastro-enteritis from contact with or the ingestion of water contaminated by agricultural inputs. This is a distinct possibility, given that existing potable water sources do not meet demand.

The existing irrigated area already contributes to disease vectors, and the cumulative impact of the proposed project is not likely to significantly increase the risk of water borne disease. Still, a greater number of local residents may come into contact with irrigation water, and vectors may become more common near the southern half of Kibungu village, which is located away from the existing irrigated area.

The risks associated with human-water contact, drinking, cooking and washing can be reduced by educating the community in the health risks associated with these activities. This training should recommend sanitary measures to reduce the overall likelihood of exposure to water borne disease vectors. The use of vetiver to line irrigation canals and prevent erosion, as established above, will also help to partially reduce the risk of contaminated drinking water. These measures are established by the EMMP.

Consequence 27 – Human or Animal Drowning The capacity of the proposed irrigation canals has not yet been finalized, but primary canals are expected to be of limited width and depth, and with a limited velocity for most of their length due to the predominantly flat topography. This reduces but does not eliminate the drowning risk for small children and animals, who may be tempted to try to cross canals due to their limited size.

While this risk is not considered likely, local community members should be warned of these risks at trainings related to the agricultural system, and by addressing children directly while they are at school. Drowning risk during canal maintenance can be reduced by blocking the catchment to drain the canal during this activity. Furthermore, it is important to build simple canal crossings at strategic points where canal width or flow velocity would otherwise make it difficult to safely cross. These measures are established by the EMMP.

Consequence 28 – Accidents and Health Problems during Construction Construction will be conducted using unskilled labor. Workers and bystanders will be at risk for a number of health and safety factors such as heat stroke; partial burial by canal wall collapse; being struck by tools such as shovels and hoes; respiratory problems due to dust and any chemical inputs such as cement for the catchment; transportation accidents; as well as minor injuries such as ankle sprains.

The risk of accident or health problems can be reduced by establishing clear operating procedures to prevent exposure to risky situations, and by hiring only individuals of healthy age (as defined by the economically active population in DRC) with no history of heart or respiratory problems and no other apparent health problems that could limit their ability to perform the planned work activities. Qualified individuals should be hired to oversee construction and train all workers in the risks associated with their tasks prior to commencing work. Training should also include safety measures, which should then be 72 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

enforced throughout construction. Best practice indicates that workers should not carry more than 23kg or one third their body-weight, whichever is less. Construction areas should be clearly identified to prevent bystanders from entering a construction area and being injured. These measures are established by the EMMP.

Consequence 29 – Worker or Bystander Death during Construction Lethal accidents during construction are considered to be highly unlikely under most circumstances. The risk of health problems such as stroke or heart attack may be increased by strenuous exercise, particularly on hot sunny days. Accidents during worker transportation may cause death, as may involve heavy machinery used for construction alongside laborers. Excavations are expected to be of limited depth on fairly flat ground, so risk of total burial by slope collapse or falls from heights are not expected.

The risk of death can be reduced by establishing clear operating procedures to prevent exposure to risky situations, and by hiring only individuals of healthy age (as defined by the economically active population in DRC) with no history of heart or respiratory problems and no other apparent health problems that could limit their ability to perform the planned work activities. Qualified individuals should be hired to oversee construction and train all workers in the risks associated with their tasks prior to commencing work. Training should also include safety measures, which should then be enforced throughout construction. Best practice indicates that workers should not carry more than 23kg or one third their body-weight, whichever is less. Construction areas should be clearly identified to prevent bystanders from entering a construction area and being killed. These measures are established by the EMMP.

Consequence 30 – Water Use Disputes The supply of irrigation water is limited and may be a source of conflict if certain users try to capture more than their equitable share of water. Local residents reported that during the dry season, some people make deviations from the main canal to their rice paddies and fish ponds. This negatively affects downstream users who receive less water than upstream users as a result of these deviations. This has led to water use disputes between users in the past, contributing to divisions and conflict within the community.

Water use disputes can be prevented by establishing clear water use schedules prior to planting, so that all users have clear expectations about how much water they can expect to receive, and how their use will be affected by potential periods of low rainfall. Community water use schedules should be developed with the guidance of a qualified agronomist, who can help to identify the crops best suited to available water supply and soil type. These schedules should be monitored to ensure that all users comply with them, and that they are adjusted as necessary in response to deviations in the expected available water supply. It is important to help improve the capacity of the local water users association to independently develop and enforce water use schedules, and resolve conflicts that may arise through local solutions, not solutions developed by ADRA (see consequence 8). It may also be appropriate to work with local pastors to promote their participation in management committees precisely because of their apparent position as neutral parties.

A simple gauging station included as part of the catchment structure can help the local community easily monitor variations in catchment volume. This is easiest to develop by building part of the catchment to include a cement structure of uniform width, with markings at various heights to determine the cross section of the water (width and depth, which gives an area in square meters), so that only velocity (meters per second) must be measured to determine discharge (cubic meters per second).

A further mitigation option is to develop a second catchment downstream on the Munyovwe River, near the upstream end of the Nyamutiri Plain, to prevent upstream users from capturing a disproportionate share of irrigation water before it even reaches the plain. If this option is selected, the existing canal may 73 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

also be rehabilitated, although with a reduced capacity that only serves users above the Nyamutiri Plain. This is recommended, but will depend on the feasibility of this alternative.

Consequence 32 – Increase Social Stratification Increased social stratification may occur if local elites, namely traditional chiefs and government administrators, capture benefits by giving themselves and their allies the prime land that benefits from the project. Land owners may also benefit disproportionately if they increase rent to capture increased production. Both of these possibilities are discussed in more detail below.

Traditional leaders have great control and influence in local land tenure and distribution. The national legal system, on the other hand, provides few land tenure protections. Local elites may therefore benefit disproportionately from the proposed irrigation project by capturing disproportionate land tenure rights in the target area. This is not considered to be very likely, given that the proposed target area is already used for agriculture, which establishes a precedent for land distribution that the traditional chief cannot easily alter.

The migratory influx has contributed to a decreased from 8 households to 16 households per Ha. in the village of Kibungu. The original owners have met the rising demand for land by selling, renting or sharecropping part of their land. With the increased productivity (as a result of irrigation), landowners may increase rents or the production shares they receive in areas where production is currently limited by insufficient water. This may allow them to capture the major economic benefits of the project. Sharecroppers and renters would not necessarily be worse off, but would not capture the benefits of increased production. Renters and sharecroppers are generally more prone to food insecurity and are economically more vulnerable.

The extent of this impact may be mitigated by the recovery of abandoned areas, which will increase the land available for rent. The degree of this impact (increased rents) will depend on whether there is induced migration (see below) to the area as a result of the project, which would mean that demand for land by renters remains high, despite increases in the area under production. This potential impact can be mitigated by discouraging induced migration, and solidifying the land use rights of renters and sharecroppers through customary institutions prior to implementing the project.

However, Land tenure in the DRC is governed by local custom and it will be difficult to assure that land tenure rights under existing rent and sharecropping agreement are maintained, as there is no effective legal mechanism to do so. Local chiefs and landholders may not try to capture all benefit from increased production, but it is difficult to ensure that this happens. Increased rents and shares owed may also affect rental and sharecropping agreements in nearby areas, although this is not considered to be likely, particularly given that the neighboring, ethnic Barundi communities are largely pastoralist.

Consequence 34 – Impacts to Riverbed Habitat due to Mining Stones from riverbeds are commonly mined for use in construction, and riverbed mining negatively impacts aquatic and semi-aquatic habitat, particularly benthic populations. This practice is prohibited for the proposed project. Small borrow pits may be used if necessary, as their impact is less significant (see below). 74 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Consequence 35 – Earth Movement, Borrow Pits and Quarries Earth movement during canal construction is expected to be limited. The majority of excavated earth will come from the proposed route and should be used to develop dikes along canals or distributed in the surrounding agricultural areas, eliminating the need for disposal offsite. Soil redistributed in agricultural areas should be topsoil when possible and, if necessary, soil from deeper layers should be spread out to avoid dumping significant quantities of soil from deeper, less fertile soil horizons in the same area. Cut and fill techniques can help ensure that canal depth is matched to dike height.

Borrow pits and quarries may be used on a small scale if necessary to obtain rocks to line canals at areas with significant erosion potential such as curves and steep drops. Any borrow pits or quarries need for the project should be established in environmentally degraded areas with flat gradients (less than 3%) and away from urban areas and important pedestrian transit routes. They should be limited in depth and have sloped sides to reduce the likelihood of collapse, as determined by a qualified expert. Once the required material (likely to be stone) is acquired they should be refilled to avoid the accumulation of stagnant water and/or creation of a fall or drowning hazard for pedestrians and animals. Material excavated from canal construction may be appropriate to fill in borrow pits. Borrow and quarries pits should not exceed 15m by 15m in size, or 3m in depth, to avoid significant environmental impacts. Any deep excavation should be clearly identified and cordoned off.

Consequence 36 – Systemic Failures The construction of the irrigation canal is intended to increased agricultural activity by supplying water to areas with agricultural potential. This is expected to lead to increased investment of time and resources in agriculture. If the system fails to properly irrigate and/or drain the target area, however, crops may be lost.

This risk is best reduced by hiring a qualified engineer and topographer to develop the final design for the proposed project, based on a hydrographic model of the area. A qualified resident engineer should oversee construction, assisted by a topographer and other specialists as needed, to ensure the design is correctly implemented. These requirements are established by the EMMP.

Consequence 38 – Poor Community Management Good community management is important to promote the sustainability of the proposed irrigation project. The system may fall into disrepair if system users are not collaborative or do not coordinate management and maintenance.

Therefore, ADRA must work with the community to determine if an existing or new organization will be responsible for system maintenance. The existing community associations at Kibungu have not demonstrated the ability to maintain the irrigation system after past projects. If ADRA works with one of these organizations, it will be necessary to train the members in both organizational and technical management capacity. If a new organization is formed for this purpose, it is likely to require even more training and capacity building support.

To assist the community management organization in developing technical and management capacity, ADRA also provide technical management assistance when the community management organization cannot resolve a problem on its own. This assistance should decrease during the life of the DFAP, as ADRA should focus on building independent management capacity, not simply providing solutions.

3.5.2.3 Uncertain Consequences

75 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

There are two uncertain consequences at Kibungu (see Table 3-12). However, the expected significance of these impacts is not considered to warrant more detailed evaluation or management efforts, in accordance with the methodology established at the beginning of the section.

Table 3-12 Uncertain Consequences at Kibungu

Consequences No. (Bold Highlight Identifies Key Consequences Included in the EMMP) Probability Intensity Location Frequency Duration Total Significance 40 Changes to Nutritional Diversity of Local Diet 3 3 4 1 4 3.0 Expansion of the Agricultural Frontier Outside of the Project Area as an Indirect 41 1 2 3 1 4 2.5 Consequence

3.5.3 Evaluation of Preferred Project Alternative

The quantitative methodology used to evaluate the significance of the positive and negative impacts is helpful to identify which consequences are more critical than others (i.e. have a higher total significance). This assessment, however, places an important emphasis on identifying potential negative consequences in order to establish mitigation measures, while indirect positive impacts are more difficult to identify and specify. A comparison on the basis of the number of impacts can, therefore, be misleading. Furthermore, the quantitative valuation of the impacts is limited to a fixed scale, which is informative in quickly comparing impacts, but does not adequately reflect the importance and significance of the positive benefits in alleviating food security.

The net consequence of the preferred project alternative for the proposed activity at Kibungu is clearly beneficial, due to the critical need of addressing land use pressure to promote food security. This is not achieved by the "no action" alternative. Furthermore, no major irreversible impacts or threats to high conservation value ecosystems were identified. Adverse risks such as the potential or human drowning or working death are considered to be acceptable due to their low probability and the potential to mitigate them.

It is important, nevertheless, to prevent and mitigate as many negative consequences as is practical given available resources and the existing risk level. The following section (3.6) establishes these measures.

3.6 Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plan

The Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plan, or EMMP, establishes the measures to prevent or mitigate expected project risks and adverse impacts, and increase the expected benefit. Given the nature of the project, no compensation measures are proposed.

The EMMP for irrigation and drainage activities is structured as follows:

76 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

 Monitoring frequency  Monitoring indicator  Monitoring method  Responsible person(s) – those responsible for implementing and/or mitigating the mitigation measure  A cost indication for the required measure

Some of the monitoring indicators established by the EMMP measure the extent to which irrigation and drainage system users adopt recommended mitigation measures as a result of the trainings required by the EMMP. Total and correct adoption of these recommended measures by all users is not likely to occur right away, although ADRA should seek high rates of implementation. Furthermore, no graduated performance targets are established, but ADRA should seek continuous improvement throughout the life of the DFAP.

When monitoring shows the mitigation measures have not been successfully achieved, or that there is room for further improvement, the annual Environmental Status Report (ESR) should identify possible reasons that mitigation measures have not been successful and propose strategies to improve their application in following years.

A number of mitigation measures include training requirements, but it may often be possible to cover multiple training topics in session, to avoid organizing multiple trainings and generating participant fatigue.

The level of effort for different training and other management requirements varies according to how complex the training topic is or mitigation action is, as well as the total significance of the potential impact. This is intended to ensure that management and mitigation actions emphasize the major potential consequences.

The ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Coordinator and Monitoring and Evaluation Officer are the principal parties responsible for implementing and monitoring the mitigation measures established by the EMMP. However, the ADRA Agriculture, ADRA Water and Sanitation Supervisor, and qualified engineers hired to oversee construction also have some responsibilities for implementing the EMMP.

The following table establishes the required mitigation and monitoring measures to be implemented as part of the proposed irrigation canal construction and rehabilitation activities at Kibungu.

77 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Table 3-13 Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for Proposed Irrigation Canal Construction and Rehabilitation at Kibungu

Responsible Impact Mitigation Activities Monitoring frequency Monitoring Indicators Monitoring Method Cost Indication persons An engineering design may The final system design should be cost between $10,000 and prepared by a qualified irrigation and Verify that these three $40,000 per site. A qualified irrigation engineer drainage engineer, supported by a products are complete has prepared and signed the topographer, based on hydrographic ADRA A qualified topographer can final design. A detailed model, and should include a clear Verify the topographic Irrigation and be hired for $1000 - $3000 Prior to Construction topographic assessment and design that defines the extent of assessment report and Drainage per month. hydrographic model have been irrigated fields, the layout, geometry, hydrographic model Coordinator prepared and used to develop size and placement of all levels of are complete; A hydrographic model may the design. canal necessary for a fully cost between $1000 and functioning system. $5000 depending on the level of detail of available. Attendance records, The local community should be At least 10 intended video, official written ADRA consulted in a participatory fashion beneficiaries from each village approval signed by Irrigation and and agree to the proposed design Prior to Construction are consulted in a participatory recognized local Staff time Drainage General Requirements, based before any construction or fashion regarding the proposed leaders, such as Coordinator on issues noted as part of the rehabilitation activities begin. design and activity villages chiefs and alternatives assessment and elders lack of existing design If the project is to be handed off to ADRA At least 5 residents from each Attendance records, information the producer groups for completion, Irrigation and Prior to Construction beneficiary village have course outlines and there should be a clear full design in Drainage received training; didactic material place, defining irrigated areas, canal Coordinator routes, and canal dimensions, in order A qualified topographer can to ensure even distribution, be hired for $1000 - $3000 reasonable flow rates and easier per month: weekly rates may maintenance and control of the vary. system. A local management

association should be trained to ADRA Monthly During Visual inspections by a Qualified hydraulic and civil successfully build and implement all The system is built to Irrigation and Construction; quarterly qualified engineer and engineers charge $2500-3000 design and management requirements specifications Drainage thereafter topographer per month: weekly rates may through an intensive training program Coordinator vary for at least 10 local residents representing diverse social groups, including a total of at least 40 hours instruction by qualified topographers and irrigation and drainage engineers. Consequence 8: Adverse The project should identify an At least 15 men and 15 women Training attendance ADRA An agronomist can be hired Quarterly Impacts to Downstream existing or newly formed community per village trained in water use lists Irrigation and monthly for $1500 – 3000

78 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Responsible Impact Mitigation Activities Monitoring frequency Monitoring Indicators Monitoring Method Cost Indication persons Users and Ecological water users association and scheduling Drainage depending on experience if Functions; Consequence 30, management committee and train it to Monthly during the first Informal discussions Coordinator; ADRA agronomists are not Residents report water Water use Conflict manage the irrigation system. This three growing seasons; with a limited number ADRA M&E available to provide frequent availability meets expectations committee should include men and Quarterly thereafter of local residents Officer training and ongoing women from all user communities, technical support; and should offer a position to the local chief. Informal discussions require A qualified agronomist should train only staff time. and assist water users and water association leaders to develop water use schedules that account for potential seasonal and daily variation in flow by identifying optimal crops under different conditions of water availability, including drier periods. This should focus on ensuring that the rights of all users are equitably respected, including downstream users. Monthly during the first Residents report that water use Informal discussions drowing season, scheduling is participatory and with a limited number Conflict resolution measures should Quarterly thereafter includes all social groups of local residents be discussed with the community as a part of this training, but should focus on helping the community to build upon its own conflict resolution strategies. This training should be conducted prior to each growing season, and should be supported by technical assistance until a technically sound water use schedule is developed. Each additional training should seek to include past participants to build upon lessons learned and continue developing local capacity. Consequence 8, Adverse The irrigation catchment should be The catchment is planned as Impacts to Downstream designed based on variations in river After Construction; Catchment exists and is in good part of the design and this is Visual Inspection ADRA Users and Ecological discharge predicted by hydrographic Quarterly thereafter condition not expected to result in Irrigation and Functions modeling data. Catchment should be additional expenditure Drainage Consequence 8, Adverse designed to be null when river The catchment design Visual inspection; A hydrographic model may Before Construction; Coordinator Impacts to Downstream discharge is at its lowest level. The automatically regulates the hydrographic modeling cost between $1000 and After Construction Users and Ecological catchment volume should then amount of water diverted based results and $5000 depending on the level 79 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Responsible Impact Mitigation Activities Monitoring frequency Monitoring Indicators Monitoring Method Cost Indication persons Functions increase proportionally to the increase on river discharge, based on documentation of of detail of available; in overall river discharge. hydrographic modeling and downstream uses downstream uses. This is Identification of downstream This factor should ensure that confirmed by a hydraulic uses and design review only downstream uses are not adversely engineer. requires staff time. affected (based on the identification of downstream uses). A proportional A hydraulic engineer can be increase in catchment as river hired for approximately discharge increases may be achieved $3000 a month. by designing the catchment in the shape of a “V” or “U” so that catchment volume decreases by a greater factor than overall river discharge. This station should be designed by a hydraulic engineer. The irrigation system design should prevent upstream users from unfairly diverting extra water. This may be Consequence 8, Adverse The final design narrative ADRA accomplished by Undersizing the Impacts to Downstream details measures to prevent Review final design Irrigation and dimensions of secondary and tertiary Before Construction Staff time Users and Ecological unfair catchment by upstream narrative Drainage canals so that they only serve a Functions users Coordinator limited number of plots, to prevent excess catchment by users throughout the system. Prior to completion of the At least 7 men and 7 women rehabilitated and ADRA from each village participate in Participant attendance Staff time and basic expanded irrigation Agriculture hands-on training in basic lists materials for training Train local farmers in small-scale system; Quarterly Coordinator composting techniques Consequence 10, Generation composting techniques, with a thereafter and Disposal of Agricultural particular focus on rice hulls. This ADRA Annual Household surveys Waste should include at least one hands-on Irrigation and are normally conducted as Percent of local farmers who Household Survey of a training per year in each village. Drainage part of M&E for the DFAP Annual report composting the majority Representative Sample Coordinator; and are not expected to of their waste of Local Farmers ADRA M&E represent an additional Director expenditure; Consequence 14, Train local farmers to develop and An agronomist can be hired Contamination of Natural maintain plot gradients between 0.5% Prior to completion of the At least 7 men and 7 women monthly for $1500 – 3000 Aquatic Habitats by and 3% to prevent excessive runoff or rehabilitated and from each village participate in ADRA depending on experience if Participant attendance Agricultural Runoff; water-logging. This should include expanded irrigation hands-on training in how to Agriculture ADRA agronomists are not lists Consequence 19, Alteration hands-on training in how to develop system; Quarterly develop and maintain Coordinator available to provide frequent of Soil Profiles and and maintain such plot gradients. This thereafter appropriate plot gradient training and ongoing Composition in Irrigated training should be led by a qualified technical support; 80 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Responsible Impact Mitigation Activities Monitoring frequency Monitoring Indicators Monitoring Method Cost Indication persons Areas; Consequence 20, agronomist Annual Household surveys Household Survey of a Crop Loss and Alteration of ADRA are normally conducted as Representative Sample Soil Composition because of Percent of users who report Irrigation and part of M&E for the DFAP of Local Farmers; Poor Irrigation Water establishing plots with the Drainage and are not expected to Annual Visual Inspections to Management recommended gradients in the Coordinator; represent an additional check for the presence target irrigation area ADRA M&E expenditure; of plots with Steep Director Site inspections require staff Gradients time; no monetary costs As part of construction, line all canals in the irrigation system with vetiver Consequence 14, (Vetiveria zizanioides) to prevent Contamination of Natural erosion and to help treat runoff water All primary canals are lined Visual inspections of a Monthly during ADRA Aquatic Habitats by by absorbing polluting substances that with vetiver that has taken root; representative area, Staff time; Construction; Quarterly Agriculture Agricultural Runoff; may be present such as heavy metals, large secondary and tertiary documented with Cost of vetiver seeds thereafter Supervisor Consequence 16, Erosion nitrogen, phosphorus and e-coli. canals are also lined photos and Nutrient Loss in Canal banks and dikes should be fully Irrigated Areas; covered by vegetation with no Consequence 17, Canal significant gaps. Erosion; Consequence 25, At least 7 men and 7 women Increase in Water Borne Train farmers how to maintain vetiver At the conclusion of ADRA from each village participate in Participant attendance Disease Vectors over the long term. This should be construction, Quarterly Agriculture Staff time hands-on training in basic lists conducted by a qualified agronomist thereafter Coordinator vetiver management and should include hands on training At least 15 men and 15 women During the First Growing ADRA from each village participate in Participant attendance Season; Quarterly Agriculture Staff time hands-on training in irrigation lists thereafter Coordinator water management Train local farmers to regulate Consequence 20, Crop Loss Household Survey of a irrigation water application so that Annual Household surveys and Alteration of Soil Representative Sample they only apply the amount required ADRA are normally conducted as Composition because of of Local Farmers; to meet crop needs. This should Irrigation and part of M&E for the DFAP Poor Irrigation Water Percent of farmers who report Visual Inspections to prevent both water shortages and Drainage and are not expected to Management Annual water-logging or water check for the presence runoff of excess water. Coordinator; represent an additional shortages on their plots of water-logging or ADRA M&E expenditure; crops/soils showing Director Site inspections require staff signs of insufficient time; no monetary costs water Consequence 16, Erosion A qualified agronomist should train Upon completion of the At least 7 men and 7 women and Nutrient Loss in farmers to establish hedgerows using rehabilitated and ADRA from each village participate in Participant attendance Irrigated Areas; This will vetiver or other native, perennial expanded irrigation Agriculture Staff time and cost of vetiver hands-on training in basic lists also help mitigate plants with a strong root system along system; Quarterly Coordinator vetiver management Consequence 14, topographic contour lines in the thereafter Contamination of Natural irrigated area to promote slope Quarterly Percent of Farmers who report Visual Inspections to ADRA Site inspections require staff 81 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Responsible Impact Mitigation Activities Monitoring frequency Monitoring Indicators Monitoring Method Cost Indication persons Aquatic Habitats by stability and reduce runoff. In areas of using hedgerows or dikes (in check whether Irrigation and time; no monetary costs Agricultural Runoff rice cultivation, this support should areas with rice paddies) along hedgerows and dikes Drainage include small dikes in addition to topographic contour lines to have been correctly Coordinator; hedgerows. This effort should focus reduce erosion established and ADRA M&E on areas with a slope of more than maintained Director 5%. Plants used for hedgerows should not be transplanted from any natural habitats. ADRA should provide vetiver to farmers in areas where hedgerows are appropriate, and provide hands on training in establishing hedgerows and dikes. The following design guidelines These elements are included in should be implemented: canal route canal design by a qualified Review of Design Prior should avoid sharp curves and sharp Prior to Construction engineer based on a specific to Construction by a drops, to the extent practical, to engineering study and Qualified Engineer reduce risk of water caused erosion. hydrological model The final design should seek to use very slight gradients, so that water velocity is limited without creating significant risk of sedimentation and blockage; the ideal gradient is 0.05%, although steeper or flatter gradients ADRA may be warranted depending on Irrigation and Consequence 17, Canal Qualified hydraulic and civil topography. Where steep gradients Drainage Erosion; Ongoing During engineers charge $2500-3000 are required due to topography, it Coordinator; Construction; Canal construction is overseen Visual Inspections per month may be appropriate to line the canal Qualified by a qualified engineer to During and After with stone or another material, and Engineer Final Review at the ensure it meets design Construction by a establish velocity breaks once the Conclusion of specifications Qualified Engineer gradient decreases again. Sediment Construction traps may be appropriate if the risk of sedimentation is determined to be high in certain locations. The dimensions and slope of the canal should be determined based on the expected flow, to reduce the likelihood that water levels drop so low they become stagnant Consequence 19, Alteration Collect water quality samples for Interpretation of Water quality complies with ADRA of soil profiles and laboratory analysis from any surface Prior to project laboratory analysis $400 USD for lab analysis the FAO standards for Agriculture composition in irrigated catchment sources not sampled as construction activities results by a qualified and staff time irrigation water quality Coordinator areas part of the environmental assessment. project agronomist 82 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Responsible Impact Mitigation Activities Monitoring frequency Monitoring Indicators Monitoring Method Cost Indication persons A qualified agronomist should assess the sample results to determine if the source is suitable for use in irrigation, based on the FAO standards for irrigation water quality. Once prior to the Train local farmers in integrated pest rehabilitation and At least 7 men and 7 women ADRA Participant attendance Staff time and cost of IPM management (IPM) for soil quality construction of the from each village participate in Agriculture lists inputs management and pest control. system; hands-on IPM training Coordinator Quarterly thereafter. Collect three soil samples in each target irrigation area for laboratory analysis to identify any changes to soil composition and allow for Soil quality results (same Laboratory analysis ADRA adaptive management. A qualified Annual indicators as used for EA and interpretation by a Agriculture $450 and staff time agronomist should evaluate soil baseline analysis) qualified agronomist Coordinator quality results to identify any impacts compared with baseline conditions, and determine necessary corrective actions. Train farmers in the risks associated At least 15 men and 15 women with poor crop diversity and link this from each beneficiary village with hands-on training in alternative attend theoretical trainings ADRA Participant attendance crop varieties recommended by a covering crop diversity that are Agriculture Staff time lists qualified agronomist based on soil, combined with hands-on Coordinator water and other environmental training in alternative crop conditions at the site. Recommended production. crops promoted through training should be selected based on Once prior to the Consequence 22, Lack of community input and interest, and rehabilitation and Crop Diversity; ADRA may promote their seed construction of the Consequence 23, Changes to production as approved under the system; Market Prices DFAP IEE. All recommended crop Quarterly thereafter Informal conversations varieties should be commonly Majority of Families report ADRA with matriarchs of available in the region at affordable maintaining plots with crops Agriculture Staff time agricultural households prices, and known not to pose a threat other than rice Coordinator in each village as invasive species.

The ADRA DFAP IEE lists a number of approved alternative crop varieties that will be promoted as part of integrated pest management training, 83 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Responsible Impact Mitigation Activities Monitoring frequency Monitoring Indicators Monitoring Method Cost Indication persons some of which may be appropriate alternatives to rice production at Kibungu. Alternative crops may not have the same cash earning potential, so training should focus on other benefits such as increased nutritional diversity and resilience to pests. Test a water samples from the irrigation catchment and downstream discharge points to test for the ADRA Water Consequence 24, Impacts to Quarterly during the first Yes/No values exceed drinking In Situ or laboratory Less than $250, will depend presence of arsenic or fecal coliforms and sanitation Human Health year; Annually thereafter water limits? analysis on testing method; staff time to verify whether water is within supervisor World Health Organization limits for drinking water. Train the community in the health risks, posed by water borne disease vectors and water contamination, and associated with human-water contact, drinking cooking, and washing. This training should recommend sanitary measures to reduce exposure to water Once at the beginning of At least 25 men and 25 women Consequence 25, Water Participant attendance ADRA Health Staff time; no monetary borne disease vectors. Training construction activities; from each village participate in Borne Disease Vectors lists Coordinator costs should include participatory exercises Quarterly thereafter training to develop practical understanding and skills in sanitary practices. Training in the health risks of agricultural inputs may be combined or aligned with proposed training in IPM as part of the DFAP support. Build simple canal crossings at strategic points where canal width would otherwise make it difficult for Visual Inspections a child to safely cross. Crossings Crossings are in good condition documented with ADRA should be level, at least 0.5 m wide, and comply with design Upon completion; photos. Test of ability Irrigation and Staff time, limited FFW, and made of materials in good condition, recommendations. Crossings Consequence 26, Human or Quarterly thereafter to support weight to Drainage cost of material for bridges and able to withstand the weight of are located at strategic Animal Drowning identify any weak Coordinator large adults. They should be built pedestrian transit points. areas. using food for work so that local residents learn how to build and maintain them. Warn local residents of the risks At least 25 men and 25 women Participant attendance ADRA Staff time; no monetary Quarterly associated of human or animal per village attend trainings lists Irrigation and costs 84 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Responsible Impact Mitigation Activities Monitoring frequency Monitoring Indicators Monitoring Method Cost Indication persons drowning during community trainings Drainage and recommend measures to reduce Coordinator; this risk during maintenance ADRA Health activities. Socialize this risk to local Coordinator children through age-appropriate material presented to children present at school. Only individuals of healthy age (as ADRA Staff time; possibly cost of All individuals hired through Record of health defined by the economically active Irrigation and nurse if no agreement is FFW meet requirements as screening for all population in DRC) with no history of Prior to Construction, Drainage reached with local health determined during a health workers, including heart or respiratory problems and no During Construction Coordinator; center. A Nurse is expected screening at the local health their age, and any other apparent health problems should ADRA Health to charge $1000 – 2500 a center or by a project nurse known health problems be hired for FFW Coordinator month. Credentials of ADRA Qualified Construction Irrigation and Qualified individuals should be hired Qualified individuals are hired Managers Drainage Qualified hydraulic and civil to oversee construction and train all Prior to Construction, Coordinator engineers in the region workers in the risks and safety During Construction Records of worker ADRA typically charge $2500-3000 measures associated with their tasks Workers receive appropriate training, detailing Irrigation and per month prior to commencing work. training topics covered Drainage Consequence 28 - Accidents Coordinator and Health Problems during ADRA Clear operating procedures and safety Construction; Consequence Copy of Operating Irrigation and Staff time; no monetary measures, including (but not limited 29, Worker or Bystander Procedures Drainage costs to) maximum weight loads per Death during Construction Coordinator person, should be established and Operating procedures are During Construction Visual Inspection of enforced during all work activities. developed and implemented ADRA health and safety This includes a maximum weight of Irrigation and Staff time; no monetary conditions at worksite, 23kg or one third of the person’s Drainage costs documented with body weight, whichever is lower. Coordinator photos Construction areas should be clearly identified with warning signs and barriers (such as caution tape) ADRA Visual inspection depending on the type of activity Warning signs are clearly Irrigation and During Construction documented with Staff time; cost of signage. (such as warning for areas of deep posted Drainage photos excavation). Warning signs should be Coordinator posted in French and the local language. Build a gauging station as part of ADRA This is part of catchment Visual inspection Consequence 30, Water Use catchment to allow the community to Yes/No gauging station is built Irrigation and design, and is not expected to During Construction documented with Disputes easily monitor variations in catchment as part of catchment Drainage include additional photos volume and adjust water use Coordinator, expenditure 85 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Responsible Impact Mitigation Activities Monitoring frequency Monitoring Indicators Monitoring Method Cost Indication persons schedules accordingly Qualified Resident Engineer ADRA should negotiate land access Copies of negotiated and use rights prior to beginning agreements or minutes ADRA It may be appropriate to hire rehabilitation and construction work. ADRA has conducted good of meetings if Irrigation and a qualified mediator; cost is Negotiations should include Prior to Construction faith negotiations to establish agreements are Drainage uncertain but likely to cost participation by the local chiefs and land access and use agreements informal; Photos of Coordinator $2000 - 5000 all social groups to promote the participatory equitable distribution of expected negotiations benefits. This should include good Consequence 32, Increased faith efforts to negotiate land access Social Stratification for vulnerable households, but no cash payments should be made to Informal conversations avoid creating perverse incentives. Local residents report that Quarterly after with local farmers, ADRA M&E This will also allow community negotiated agreements are Staff Time construction particularly from Officer members to collectively pressure for respected vulnerable groups equal distribution of benefits by the local chief, in accordance with traditional customs and forms of accountability. ADRA Consequence 34 - Impacts to Visual inspection Mining construction material from During Construction, Yes/No riverbed mining has Irrigation and Riverbed Habitat due to shows no evidence of Staff time; no monetary cost riverbeds is prohibited After Construction occurred Drainage Mining riverbed mining Coordinator Excess soils from earth movement not used to build dikes (cut and fill) Visual Inspections should be used to fill in borrow pits, During and After or otherwise spread out in agricultural During Construction; Soil is deposited in appropriate Construction by a areas (,taking care to spread out this After Construction areas, not in natural habitats Qualified Engineer, soil and avoid dumping significant documented with ADRA quantities of soil from deeper, less photos Irrigation and Qualified hydraulic and civil Consequence 35 - Earth fertile profiles in the same area). Drainage engineers in the region Movement, Borrow Pits and Borrow Pits needed for construction Coordinator, typically charge $2500-3000 Quarries material should not exceed 15m by Qualified per month 15m in size or be deeper than 3m Visual inspection of Resident when possible. The sides of such pits these sites by a Engineer Borrow pits meet these design should be sloped to the degree During Construction Qualified Engineer, requirements necessary to reduce the likelihood of documented with collapse or fatal falls from heights, as photos determined by a qualified engineer. They should be located away from 86 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Responsible Impact Mitigation Activities Monitoring frequency Monitoring Indicators Monitoring Method Cost Indication persons urban areas at locations where the environment has already been degraded by human activity, and the slope gradient is 3% or less. Any deep excavation should be clearly identified and cordoned off. Borrow pits should be promptly and Visual inspection of completely filled in with soil these sites by a excavated during canal construction During Construction; Borrow pits are correctly Qualified Engineer, to avoid creating long term hazards After Construction remediated documented with for humans and animals, or photos accumulations of standing water ADRA The project should not establish any Yes/No the project only Certificate of During Construction; Irrigation and Staff time; cost is for quarries, and material should only be obtained material from authorization for After Construction Drainage materials, not mitigation purchased from authorized quarries authorized quarries source quarries Coordinator The final design of the project should Qualified hydraulic and civil be developed by a qualified engineer Credentials of engineers in the region Prior to Construction Qualified individuals are hired and topographer, based on a detailed Qualified Individuals typically charge $2500-3000 ADRA hydrographic model per month; Topographers Consequence 36, Systemic Irrigation and typically charge $2000-2500. Failure Construction should be overseen by a A qualified engineer is resident Record of contract of Drainage A detailed resident engineer, assisted by a throughout construction, with the resident engineer Coordinator During Construction hydrographic model is topographer or other specialists on an support from assistants as and assistants on an as expected to cost between as needed basis needed needed basis $1500 and $5000 Develop a training program Certificate of ADRA (multiple trainings) for the participation by 5 core Irrigation and Quarterly local water users association, members of proposed Drainage Train members of community water including at least 5 people who water management Coordinator users associations or another participate in the full program. committee association in system maintenance ADRA and provide technical assistance as At least 15 men and 15 women Training Attendance Irrigation and needed, with a focus on building from each village participate in List Drainage Consequence 38, Poor independent capacity instead of training. Coordinator Staff time Community Management providing solutions. Training for the Visual inspections or local water users associations should the irrigation system to ADRA be hands on and include at least 5 Yes/No physical condition of determine its state of Irrigation and individuals who participate in a the infrastructure is acceptable repair or degradation, Drainage training program throughout the first documented with Coordinator year of the project. photos Yes/No the water users Informal conversations ADRA

association successfully with local residents Irrigation and 87 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Responsible Impact Mitigation Activities Monitoring frequency Monitoring Indicators Monitoring Method Cost Indication persons organizes maintenance indicate that Drainage activities without external maintenance has been Coordinator assistance organized and managed

88 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

4 Katanga

4.1 Purpose and Need

The target site for irrigation and drainage is located in the South Kivu Province, which presents alarming food insecurity statistics.

Furthermore, in South Kivu, women of reproductive age are by far the most stunted in the nation, with 18.2% less than 145cm tall [cf. 4.0% nationally] and have the highest rates of severe anemia at 4.3%, almost four times the national average of 1.1%.20 In addition, 7.4 percent of infants are born weighing less than 2.5 kg, making low birth weights a serious problem.

The top four needs expressed by the population, as identified through public consultation and in no order are:

 Drain the marsh down and upstream of Mutambala Bridge. This should start by deviating the Mukera River upstream where gold mines are located  Residents of the village of Mwandiga 3, who area mostly returned refugees and internally displaced villagers who were not accepted back or could not return to their communities of origin, indicated that they have no land locally and need access to land for cultivation.  Improve potable water access  Create a health facility in Kokya and/or Kitete, which is an isolated area, so that local residents do not have to travel to the health center in Katanga when they need medical attention.

19 Jenga II, Title II Multi-Year Assistance Program for Democratic Republic of Congo , June 2011 20 DHS 2007

89 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

ADRA proposes both irrigation and drainage canal construction at Katanga. The proposed activity combines the drainage of flood prone areas with the irrigation of high ground to improve agricultural production on the Kenya Plain (See Map 4-1and Map 4-2).

The Kenya Plain extends into Lake Tanganyika at the base of the Fizi – Baraka Mountains where the relatively large Mutambala River flows into the lake. It has the shape of a River Delta, although the Mutambala does not divide into many branches as is typical of a river delta.

A previous project channeled the Mutambala River between two large dikes to drain the plain for agriculture. The Mutambala, however, frequently overflows the dike banks and floods the surrounding areas. Drainage canals will be built to evacuate water from this flood zone directly to Lake Tanganyika.

Conversely, higher grounds on the plain to the north of the Mutambala suffer from water shortages during periods of low rainfall and may be targeted for irrigation. The proposed irrigation water catchment will be located at a catchment site on the Mutambala or Luhe River at an upstream location that allows for gravity-based irrigation, or using water drained from flood zones. The proposed canals will follow topographic contour lines along the high ground from the catchment to the target irrigation area, and will then connect with a network of secondary and, possibly tertiary canals that will also be developed in accordance with the topographic contour lines. The feasibility of using the Mutambala or Luhe as a catchment source for gravity-based irrigation is evaluated in the alternatives assessment, and must be confirmed by a topographic survey.

90 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Map 4-1 Katanga General Location

91 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Map 4-2 Preliminary Identification of Proposed Irrigation and Drainage Areas

92 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Food for Work (FFW) labor will be used to dig earthen canals for both irrigation and drainage, with oversight by at least one qualified topographer and at least one qualified engineer. The canals will be mostly earthen, although stones or cement may be used to prevent erosion at strategic locations, such as curves and steep drops in elevation. Dikes may be built on either side of the canal to ensure a uniform depth and width, without altering the slope of the canal bottom.

Canal design will work by force of gravity and will avoid sharp curves to reduce the need for stone lining to prevent erosion, and drops will be designed as best as possible to prevent flow velocity from significantly increasing, by building velocity breaks if necessary. The final canal slope and routes will be determined by a specific engineering study. A limited number of cement structures may be needed to regulate flow velocity, as evaluated in more detail as part of the alternatives assessment.

The primary irrigation and drainage canals will be integrated with a system of secondary and, possibly, lower level canals to irrigate and drain individual plots. The system of secondary and lower level canals (the latter depending on whether they are included in the final work plan), will be constructed using Food for Work labor, overseen by a qualified topographer and engineer.

ADRA will work with local community organization(s) to promote system sustainability through community management; a key component of this strategy will be for ADRA to train users and local community organization(s) on how to maintain the system without external support. Training for irrigation canals will include training users to distribute water to individual plots through flood irrigation, and following coordinated water use schedules. Training for drainage canals will include training users on how to manage water balance to avoid excessive or insufficient drainage.

4.3 Affected Environment

4.3.1 The Physical Environment

4.3.1.1 Topography and Geomorphology

The proposed Katanga project is located in eastern DRC on the western flank of the East African Rift, approximately 140 km apart. Map 3-3 presents the regional topography in the area.

The proposed irrigation and drainage activities target the vast Kenya Plain on the shores of Lake Tanganyika just to the south of the city of Baraka in Fizi Territory. The Kenya plain juts into an inlet of Lake Tanganyika formed by the Ubwari Peninsula. The Kenya Plain quickly gives way to the foothills of the Mitumba Mountains to the west of the project area (see Map 4-3and Map 4-4, which present the topography and slope gradient).

93 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Map 4-3 Topographic Map of Katanga

94 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Map 4-4 Topographic Gradient at Katanga

95 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

4.3.1.2 Climate

Detailed precipitation and temperature data are available for Kalemie and Bukavu. Kalemie is located in Katanga province, approximately 180 km south of the proposed Katanga project site, at a similar altitude. Bukavu is located approximately 190 km north of Katanga, but at higher altitude.

4.3.1.2.1 Temperature

Temperatures at the Katanga site are similar to those at Kalemie, also located on the shore of Lake Tanganyika 180 km to the south, although interpolated data from Worldclimb indicates that temperatures may even be one or two degrees warmer at Katanga than at Kalemie. The area has a relatively temperate climate; average monthly temperatures at the Kalemie station normally vary between 21.2°C and 23.9°C. The coolest and warmest average monthly temperatures on record are 19.7°C and 25.4°C, respectively. Temperature varies mainly with altitude, decreasing in the mountains to the west of Lake Tanganyika above the Katanga project area.

The coolest months are June to August, while September and October are the warmest. Temperatures are fairly stable for the remainder of the year. Graph 4-1 presents the average monthly temperatures for the Kalemie Station. Recent meteorological data is not available.

Graph 4-1 Average Monthly Temperatures, Kalemie Station 1952-1986

Source : Agence Nationale de Météorologie et de Télécommunication par Satellite (Mettelsat).

4.3.1.2.2 Precipitation

96 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

The Katanga site has two seasons: the dry season which lasts three months between June and September; and the rainy season, which lasts for the rest of the year.

The dry season is characterized by high temperatures and scarce rainfall that allows cultivation in many areas that are flooded during the rainy season. The rainy season has high rainfall.

The dry season lasts from June to September and generally corresponds to more temperate temperatures. Many years report one or more months without any precipitation at all during the dry season. Average monthly rainfall during this season at Kalemie varies from 4.4 to 21.6 millimeters, and rainfall is similar in the low-lying areas of the Katanga site. Rainfall is normally slightly higher in the mountains to the west that drain to the project site (see Graph 4-2).

Graph 4-2 Average Monthly Precipitation, Kalemie Station 1952 - 1986

Source : Agence Nationale de Météorologie et de Télécommunication par Satellite (Mettelsat).

The rainy season at Kalemie and in the area of the Katanga site normally lasts from November to April. Average monthly precipitation during this season at Kalemie varies between 99.7 and 183.6 mm. October and May are transitional months, with average rainfall of 73.1 and 65.1 mm, respectively. The wettest month on record (1952 – 1986) had a total rainfall of 409.5mm. Rainfall at Katanga is expected to be similar to Kalemie, which is at a similar altitude and is also located on the shore of Lake Tanganyika.

4.3.1.3 Hydrology

The proposed Katanga project is located on the Kenya Plain, an alluvial plain at the mouth of the Mutambala River, where it discharges into Lake Tanganyika. The Mutambala is large and is the only river that discharges into this plain 21 , although several tributaries drain into the Mutambala just upstream of the plain, including the Luhe River from the North and the Mukera River from the South. Map 4-5 presents the model of surface water runoff at Kibungu, based on monthly precipitation values, topography and vegetation cover22.

21 Like most of the watercourses in the Eastern province of the DRC, the Mutambala River has its source in the mountains to the east of Lake Tanganyika, ands flow mostly westward until it flows into the lake. 22 The surface water runoff map of Katanga is based on GIS models with a significant margin of error due the limited scale of base map information and a lack of daily rainfall data. It is not appropriate for use in design.

97 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Map 4-5 Surface Water Runoff at Katanga

98 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

The Mutambala has historically flooded many parts of the flat Kenya plain, prejudicing agricultural production by drowning crops. A previous project built a dike on both banks of the river in an effort to prevent flooding, but the dike does not effectively prevent flooding. This is likely because the dike is in disrepair and has many sharp turns that likely aggravate this problem, but a detailed engineering assessment to confirm this could not be completed.

The discharge of the Mutambala River at the start of the plain was measured to be 47.34 m3/s (at FWA1-3). The real discharge may be larger, as aquatic grassland surrounds the main channel at this point. Map 4-6 presents the flood zones at Kibungu based on average monthly precipitation, surface water runoff and topography23

Part of the Kenya plain to the north of the Mutambala, however, does not normally flood and actually suffers from a lack of water, as no streams or rivers pass through the area.

The hydro-geological system of the River Mutambala is dominated by the alluvial groundwater of Lake Tanganyika, with groundwater located at only a few meters depth on much of the Kenya Plain. Because the groundwater is hydrologically connected to the surface water, it is affected by changes in surface water quality and volume, including rivers, flooded and irrigated areas, and rainfall.

23 The flood zones map of Katanga is based on GIS models with a significant margin of error due the limited scale of base map information and a lack of daily rainfall data. It is not appropriate for use in design.

99 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Map 4-6 Flood Zones Map of Katanga

100 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

4.3.1.4 Water Quality

Samples were collected from three sources at Katanga and analyzed by the University of Kinshasa’s Science Faculty Laboratory. Table 4-1 presents the water quality results. The tested water quality results indicate that the water at Katanga is generally acceptable for irrigation, based on FAO guidelines. Elevated potassium levels are not expected to be detrimental and may actually improve yields.

Heavy metals were investigated at Katanga due to significant mining activity upstream, and were found to be elevated at levels above recommended norms for human consumption. Upstream mining activities do not include processing and extracting minerals from ore and mercury and cyanide are not reported to be used. Instead, ore is normally transported elsewhere to be ground and processed.

The proportion DCO/DBO5˂2 indicates that the effluent is biodegradable. This indicates that the water is well mineralized. In short, the presence of the COD and the BOD5 is tolerable and has no major impact on the environmental assessment.

The pH of the analyzed waters are primarily acid (pH <7); heavy metals24 dissolve very well in acid water (low pH) and allows for a significant reduction of the heavy metal toxicity of the water environment. Furthermore, Electric Conductivity (EC) is low and in conformity with World Health Organization norms, which indicates that the waters are not highly mineralized.

Table 4-1 Water Quality Laboratory Sample Results Analyzed by the University of Kinshasa Science Faculty Laboratory

Mutambala River Mutambala River Luhe River Upstream Parameter Unit FAO** FWA FWA FWA 1-3 4-6 7-9 pH (lab) pH 6.0-8.5 6.0 6.0 6.0 pH (in situ) pH 6.0-8.5 6.3 7.2 7.2 Conductivity uS/cm 0-3000 133.0 123.0 123.0 Total Suspended mg/l - 66.0 38.0 38.0 Solids (TSS) Nitrate; NO3- mg/l 0-10 0.4 0.1 0.1 mg/l - 15.5 11.6 11.6 Calcium; Ca++ me/l 0-20 0.775 0.580 0.580 mg/l - 3.4 2.7 2.7 Magnesium; Mg++ me/l 0-5 0.283 0.228 0.228 mg/l - 3.1 1.4 1.4 Sodium; Na+ me/l 0-40 0.134 0.063 0.063 Sodium Absorption ratio Varies * 0.184 0.099 0.099 Ration (SAR) mg/l - 0.3 0.1 0.1 Chloride; Cl- me/l 0-30 0.007 0.004 0.004 mg/l - 38.0 12.0 12.0 Sulfate; (SO4)2- me/l 0-20 0.792 0.250 0.250 Phosphate; (PO4)3- mg/l - 2.5 3.5 3.5 Ammonium; NH4+ mg/l - 0.2 0.3 0.3 Potassium; K+ mg/l 0-2 5.3 2.8 2.8 Boron; B+ mg/l - 0.14 0.13 0.16 Cadmium; Cd++ ug/l - 0.08 1.08 0.16 Aluminum; Al3+ mg/l - 0.400 0.860 0.295

24 Physical-chemical quality and the chemistry of surface waters: general framework Fiche 2 Brussels Institute for Environmental Management / Observatory of Environmental Data

101 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Mutambala River Mutambala River Luhe River Upstream Parameter Unit FAO** FWA FWA FWA 1-3 4-6 7-9 Cyanide; CN- mg/l - 0.001 0.001 0.001 Chromium Cr6+ mg/l - 0.50 0.78 0.35 Copper; Cu2+ mg/l - 0.54 0.57 0.52 Iron; Fe3+ mg/l - 1.30 1.79 0.19 Manganese; Mn++ mg/l - 1.3 5.3 1.2 Lead; Pb3+ ug/l - 0.02 1.51 0.14 Chemical Oxygen mg/l - 62.8 72.6 34.1 Demand (COD) Biological Oxygen mg/l - 48.5 51.8 22.6 Demand (BOD5) * When SAR is between 0 and 3, and Conductivity is less than 700 uS/cm, there is normally no restriction on water use for irrigation, including both surface and sprinkler irrigation ** Usual range in irrigation water, as established in the FAO publication Water Quality for Agriculture. None of the elements tested present restrictions on use based on the FAO’s guidelines for interpretations of water quality for irrigation

4.3.1.5 Seismicity

The eastern border of the DRC is located along the Albertine Rift, where the Somali Plate (East Africa) is splitting away from the African Continent. Seismic activity in the area is characterized by hypocenters which are less than 10km in depth. Nevertheless, the seismic hazard throughout the region is only considered to be medium by the World Health Organization (WHO). Map 3-10 presents the map of historical seismic events in the region. This classification is consistent with the United States Geological Survey (USGS), which rates seismic hazard along the Albertine Rift, including the proposed project area, to have a peak ground acceleration of 1.6 m/s2 (10% probability of exceedance over 50 years), a very moderate seismic hazard rating25.

4.3.1.6 Soils

The Kenya Plain is located on the western side of the Congolese East African Rift, with the presence of eluvial and colluvial deposits (Lepersonne, 1974). Map 3-11 presents the regional geology and Map 3-12 presents the regional soil types.

Table 4-2 presents the in situ characterization of soil samples. The location of these samples is presented in Map 4-3.

Table 4-2 In Situ Soil Sample Results, Katanga

Station or N° Longitude Latitude Altitude Descriptions Sample East South (meters) FSL 01 (Ridge Outcrop of an altered, whitish grey granite, with coarse grit, overlooking 29°03’38,5’’ 04°08’13,6’’ 1067 with abundant orthoclase; it is intrusive in the metamorphic the Kenya rock. Plain) FSL 02 Sediment bearing river with a very strong flow, brown color. (Bridge over There is a gold exploitation in one of the upstream tributaries, 29°02’47,0’’ 04°12’06,1’’ 786 the called the Mukera; downstream, there is a completely flooded Mutambala) zone. River sand: brown color, quite well sorted, sediment bearing FSL 03 (River ND – Upstream of Project Area until upstream (at ± 7 km) gold exploitation. Sample collected Mukera) after rainfall.

25 USGS (2012). Africa Seismic Hazard Map. Accessed January, 2013: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/world/africa/gshap.php

102 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Station or N° Longitude Latitude Altitude Descriptions Sample East South (meters) Horizon A: fine, humic, dark and powdery sand, likely originating from the modification of the rock (gneiss) outcrop in the hills above the plain; sample collected at a depth of 10 FSL 04 & FSL 29°04’56,2’’ 04°09’03,4’’ 780 cm; 04A&04B Horizon B: clayey-loamy whitish soil, pliable when humid, compact when dry, in the hamlet of Mwandiga II. Sample taken at a depth of 15 cm. Horizon A: fine and humic sand, collected at a depth of 11 cm; Horizon B: fine, clearer and slightly loamy sand, really FSL 05 & FSL forming a transition zone with the underlying sand. Layer: 30 29°04’26,3’’ 04°08’56,0’’ 802 05 A & B cm; Horizon C: coarse beach sand, similar to the sand found nearby the lake, yellowish brown, on a depth of over 42 cm. FSL 06 & FSL On the axis of the villages Katanga and Simbi, outcrop of 29°01’45,9’’ 04°19’52,2’’ 800 06 A & B highly foliated gneiss (Plan of foliation N10°/55°ESE). River sand carried by the River Luhe (tributary on the left side FSL 07 29°02’53,8’’ 04°11’22,6’’ 790 of the River Mutambala), consisting of badly sorted peddles. Quartz minerals, feldspars. Horizon A: fine, powdery, dry, dark and humic at a depth of 50 FSL 08 & TSL cm; 29°02’44,6’’ 04°11’16,3’’ 799 08 A & B Horizon B: brownish, dry and non-pliable soil at a depth of over 50 cm. Alongside the coast of Lake Tanganyika, presence of grass and tree species typical of flooded terrains; at certain locations emerged terrains can be found at the lakeside (this is the case FSL 09 29°05’53,5’’ 04°06’22,8’’ 776 of the village of Kitete situated at E 29°05’30,7’’ ; S 04°14’16,6’’; 766 m). The water of the lake is brown, turbid and sediment bearing in this area where the River Mutambala joins the lake. Horizon A: sandy-lumpy, dark, little pliable loam, a layer at a FSL 10 & TSL depth of 12 cm; 29°05’31,6’’ 04°14’16,3’’ 771 10 A&B Horizon B: loamy, fine and brown sand, with reddish nuances (from goethite?), at a depth of over 12 cm. FSL 11 & TSL Horizon A: sandy, black, lumpy and dry loam, until a depth of 11 A&B (to the 33 cm; east of the Horizon B: brown and dry sand, layer of 18 cm; 29°05’18,7’’ 04°14’16,9’’ 776 village of Horizon C: clayey-loamy, dark grey, pliable and humidified Kitete, in a soil, at a depth of over 51 cm. Presence of water at a depth of manioc field) 60 cm. Horizon A: very fine, black, very pliable and very humic sand, collected at a depth of 14 cm; FSL 12 & TSL ND – Sample located approximately Horizon B: medium to coarse sand, brown, similar to the sand 12 A&B 200 m east of sample FSL 04. of the lake, very humidified (presence of water at a depth of over 40 cm). Not possible to determine the profile as a result of excessive water in the pits.

The soils at Katanga present a sandy to clayey-loamy texture with quite distinct and horizons, given their colors, structures and natures. The majority of soils in the A horizon are sandy and generally more loamy than sandy at depth. Fairly permeable at the surface, the soils are prone to drying out and forming a hard layer below A horizon with low permeability. As a result the soils have a strong water retention capacity, which contributes to flooding in poorly drained areas.

The soil types present at Katanga, based on the USDA classification system, include:

1. Histosols: organic soils (only the first 10 centimeters deep, with a little bit of humus and root remnants): the alluvial, eluvial or colluvial soils that have been referred to above. 2. Oxisols: extremely humid horizons, sandy and ferralitic soils on granites, shales, and quartzites. 3. Ultisols and alfisols: sandy horizons, deep and at surface level, respectively: originating from alteration or phenomena linked to the evaporation of salts; 4. Entisols: young, largely hydromorphic soils. 103 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Table 4-3 presents the soil quality results for Katanga. The pH in the study area varied from highly acid (3.85) to alkaline (7.67) 26. Five of the fourteen samples are highly acid, one is alkaline, one is slightly acidic, and the remaining samples are moderately acidic.

There is a general risk of acidification, and the highly acid soils may need liming agents to cultivate vegetable and cereal crops, as determined by an agronomist in order to improve their fertility.

The natural risk of salinization is considered to be low, although salts may build up in flood zones that do not drain quickly. The alkaline sample may be an outlier, but a qualified agronomist should evaluate crop health to determine whether alkaline pH needs to be addressed in certain areas.

The soils of Katanga near the village of Mwandiga are hydromorphic and present very distinct horizons, as distinguished by their color, structure and nature. This is largely caused by the leaching of elements likely comprised of mostly clays, iron oxides, salts and silica with the filtration of water. Evidence of chemical weathering (ferralitic alteration), a result of leaching, was observed (kaolinite) in this area. This chemical process eliminates most of the substrate bases (Na, K, Ca, Mg) and reduces the soil pH (this is consistent with the low pH of five soil samples), reducing fertility.

Laboratory analysis indicates stable calcium levels that are favorable for humus to bond equally with clays.

The soils at Katanga are generally fertile, if not very permeable, and are suitable to ligneous (e.g. coffee, oil palm, cacao, tea, cinchona) and non-ligneous crops (such as food staples and vegetables). Proper crop rotation practices are important to preserve soil fertility, particularly in areas where cassava is grown, as cassava is known to rapidly deplete soil fertility.

26 Mallouhi’s classification (1997) distinguishes between distinctively acidic soils (5.0 7.8) for most crops.

104 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Table 4-3 Soil Quality Laboratory Sample Results

Ca2+ Mg2+ K+ Na+ (CREN- (UKPL) K) (CREN-K) (UKPL)

8 FSL 6.24 ND 0.167 0.35 405 0.25 17.083 4.971 ND ND ND ND 1.00 03** 9 FSL 04A 5.82 5.54 2.833 0.56 538 0.25 18.567 4.982 0.19 0.14 ND 3.88 0.25 10 FSL 04B 5.45 ND 1.167 0.21 354 0.25 17.742 3.976 ND ND 18.06 ND 0.25 11 FSL 05A 5.09 ND 2.000 0.14 506 0.25 18.930 5.531 ND ND ND ND 0.25 12 FSL 05B 5.05 ND 1.167 0.07 287 0.25 16.784 3.774 ND ND ND ND 1.00 13 FSL 05C 5.05 ND 0.833 0.21 474 0.25 15.120 4.193 ND ND ND ND 0.50 14 Katanga FSL 08A 6.24 ND 5.333 ND 292 0.50 16.803 3.798 ND ND ND ND 0.25 15 FSL 08B 5.02 5.70 2.333 0.21 365 0.25 18.764 4.332 0.26 0.09 ND 4.08 0.25 16 FSL 09A 4.88 ND 6.667 0.35 560 0.25 17.030 4.173 ND ND ND ND 0.75 17 FSL 9B 4.90 ND 2.000 0.07 414 0.25 16.000 3.479 ND ND ND ND 0.25 18 FSL 10A 4.65 ND 14.833 0.7 310 0.25 17.823 3.786 ND ND ND ND 0.75 19 FSL 10B 3.85 ND 1.000 0.14 207 0.25 18.012 3.737 ND ND ND ND 0.75 20 FSL 10C 4.24 ND 1.000 0.28 490 0.25 18.041 4.430 ND ND 18.06 ND 3.25 21 FSL 11A 7.67 ND 4.667 0.35 375 0.50 14.069 4.322 ND ND ND ND 0.50 Note : CEC = Cation Exchange Capacity CREN-K: Atomic Energy Commission General, Regional Nuclear Studies Center, Kinshasa, Radioagronomic Department, Department of Soil Chemistry laboratory* UKPL : University of Kinshasa Pedology Lab * CREN-K reanalyzed all CEC values and results of the second analysis were not consistent with the first analysis. Holding time for Samples Conducted by the UKPL lab was over six months, as these were conducted after the first samples analyzed by CREN-K were released with evidence of erroneous results. Soil quality data should be reanalyzed to confirm all results. **This was misreported as USL 01B in the previous draft ***Phosporous results appear to be incorrect, and should be confirmed by continued soil sampling during the project

105 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

4.3.2 The Biological Environment

Flora and fauna present in the area were identified through direct observation of the landscape physiognomy followed by transect walks, literature review, and interviews with local residents.

Indicator species were identified during field visits, and detailed species lists were developed based on secondary sources with records of species observed in the identified habitats.

4.3.2.1 Flora

The vegetation of Katanga presents a mix of four main habitat types, including woodlands, aquatic grasslands, semi-aquatic grasslands, and riparian shrub communities (see Map 4-7). There are some forests regionally, although in the project area they are only found in the surrounding highlands (see Map 3-13).

Woodlands

Miombo woodlands were observed in the highlands overlooking the Mutambala plain along the Simbi road. Woodlands habitats are considered those tree formations whose tree tops are touching or almost touching throughout the majority of their extension, as in Photo 4.

Three main vegetation strata were identified in the woodland vegetation at Katanga, including: (i) the upper layer dominated by Brachystegia speciformis, Sterculia tragacantha and Brachystegia boehemii; (ii) middle stratum dominated by Uapaca kirkiana, Annona senegalensis and Bridelia scleuroneura; and (iii) the lower layer characterized by Cissus fassoglenis, Bidens oligoflora and Andopogon spp.

Photo 4 View of the woodland near the village Simbi

The woodland habitat near Katanga has been degraded by human activities such as woodcutting for firewood and charcoal production, as well as slash and burn agriculture. It is, however, the only forest in the Katanga area and the woodland cover is still fairly extensive and provides important habitat to terrestrial fauna, as detailed below. Therefore conservation value of the forest is medium to high, given its continued value to terrestrial fauna and extensive coverage.

106 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Map 4-7 Vegetation Cover at Katanga

107 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Aquatic grasslands

Aquatic grasslands are characterized by floating herbaceous plants found mostly in the quiet coves of Lake Tanganyika and flooded areas near the lake or the Mutambala River (Photo 5). Some of the characteristic species include Eichhornia crassipes, Nymphaea lotus, Azolla pinnata, Pistia stratiotes, Hydrilla verticillata, and Potamogeton schweinfurthii.

Photo 5 The Aquatic grassland near Kitete site

This wetland habitat is limited in area, and provides habitat to birds, fish and amphibians. Aquatic grassland species can float easily from area to another, and therefore has a degree of resilience to low intensity, frequency, and localized degradation. This habitat is not an important breeding or feeding ground for most bird of fish species, but its conservation value is estimated to be medium, in the absence of a more detailed assessment of fish, bird and other species that may rely on it. This habitat is frequently found near the intersection of rivers with Lake Tanganyika.

Semi -aquatic grassland

The semi-aquatic grasslands observed at the Katanga site are herbaceous formations established in floodplains of the Kenya Plain, near the Mutambala River. Their floristic composition shows a dominance of species of the families Cyperaceae and Poaceae (Photo 6). Some of the characteristics species include Phragmites mauritianus, Cyperus papyrus and Echinochloa pyramidalis.

108 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Photo 6 The Semi-aquatic grassland along Mutambala River

Semi-aquatic grassland is more extensive at Katanga than aquatic grassland and is very common, found in many areas near Lake Tanganyika and the Mutambala River on the Kenya Plain. It provides habitat to fauna including birds, fish, reptiles and amphibians, and likely to insects that are important to the local natural and agro-ecosystems through services such as pollination. Semi-aquatic grasslands, more than aquatic grasslands, also provide important water purification services, by trapping sediment and reducing erosion and sediment load, and through chemical fixation by species from the Echinochloa, Cyperus and Poaceae families.

Riparian shrub community This is a plant community found on Lake Tanganyika predominantly near the mouths of the Mutambala River (which has 2 main distributaries). It is characterized mostly by Aeschynomene elaphroxylon, a species that forms large stands that can be difficult to pass through on foot (see Photo 7).

Photo 7 Riparian shrub formation dominated by Aeschynomene elaphroxylon, near the mouth of Mutambala River.

The riparian shrub community is an important habitat for fish from Lake Tanganyika, which use it for both spawning and feeding. It is also home to a number of bird, amphibian and reptile species. Some fish species that spawn in this habitat are important for their economic value to local fishing communities that rely on them for food. The shrubs also help to prevent the erosion of the shore by Lake Tanganyika, although local residents cut the shrubs in some places to use in construction and for firewood. 109 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Conservation Status and Species Diversity

The IUCN conservation status of the majority of the 222 species identified at Katanga has not yet been evaluated. No flora species listed as threatened were identified (see Table 4-4). The full list of 222 flora species, including their habitat and IUCN conservation status is presented in Annex A.

Table 4-4 IUCN Conservation Status of Flora (2012)

Categories Number Percent (%) of Total Not Evaluated (NE) 207 94.3 Least Concern (LC) 14 6.3 Data Deficient (DD) 1 0.4 Total 222 100

The ecosystem with the greatest species diversity is the semi-aquatic grassland, which has far more species than any other ecosystem. The Miombo woodlands also present a significant number of species, while aquatic grassland and riparian shrub communities have a limited number of identified species (see Table 4-5).

Table 4-5 Floristic Richness by Habitat at Katanga

Ecosystems Number of species Percent (%) of Total Aquatic grassland (Ag) 15 6.8 Semi-aquatic grassland (Sag) 124 55.9 Riparian shrub community (Rs) 11 4.9 Woodlands (Wl) 72 32.4 Total 222 100

4.3.2.2 Fauna

A total of 65 fauna species were identified at Katanga based on direct observation, informant interviews, a bush meat survey in local markets, and secondary sources based on ecosystem and habitat type. This includes spanning 7 classes, 15 orders and 38 families. This wildlife has been grouped into classes and orders as presented in Table 4-6.

Table 4-6 Number of Species by Fauna Class.

Classes Numbers of species Percent (%) of Total Amphibians (Amphibian) 14 21.5 Reptiles (Reptilia) 9 14 Ray-finned Fish (Actinopterygii) 14 21.5 Lobe-finned Fish (Sarcopterygii) 1 1.5 Birds (Aves) 21 32 Mammals (Mammalia) 5 8 Snails and Slugs (Gasteropoda) 1 1.5 Total 65 100

110 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Birds and fish at Katanga present the greatest species diversity. The presence of mammals is more limited, which is consistent with the reports of a decline or disappearance of populations of large mammals in the area.

One fish species of economic importance for fishing is Lates niloticus, the Nile Perch, which lives in Lake Tanganyika, but reproduces in wetland areas such as aquatic grassland and riparian shrub vegetation.

The semi-aquatic grasslands account for the greatest diversity of fauna species at Katanga and are therefore ecosystems of high ecological value (see Table 4-7. Species diversity is lower in the remaining three ecosystems, which present similar levels of diversity.

Table 4-7 Fauna Species Diversity by Vegetation Type

Habitats Species Number* Percent (%) of Total Aquatic grassland (Ag) 14 21.5 Semi-aquatic grassland (Sag) 27 41.5 Riparian shrub community (Rs) 19 29.2 Woodlands (Wl) 19 29.2 Total number of species 65 - * Some species are found in more than one habitat type, which is why the total is 65, not 79

The majority of fauna species at Katanga are not listed or of concern. However one fish species, Lates mariae (the Bigeye Lates), is listed as vulnerable (VU). This fish species typically spawns in aquatic grasslands near the shore, or in open water (see Table 4-8).

Table 4-8 IUCN Conservation Status of Fauna at Katanga

Categories Number of Species Percent (%) of Total Not Evaluated (NE) 13 20 Least Concern (LC) 50 77 Data Deficient (DD) 1 1.5 Vulnerable (VU) 1 1.5 Total 65 100

The Katanga site is located at the intersection of two Important Bird Areas. The first is the Itombwe Mountains IBA, which provides habitat to the vulnerable species Papyrus Yellow Warbler (Chloropeta gracilirostris). Katanga is located at the southernmost end of this IBA.

The other IBA, Mount Kabobo, is located in the mountains directly to the south of the Katanga area, and provides habitat to three threatened bird species, as presented in the following table.

Table 4-9 Threatened Species present in the Mount Kabobo Important Bird Area

Bird Species IUCN Status Prionops alberti (Yellow-crested Helmet-shrike) Vulnerable Cryptospiza shelleyi (Shelley's Crimson-wing) Vulnerable Kupeornis rufocinctus (Red-collared Mountain-babbler) Near threatened Source: Bird Life International, 2012.

111 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

4.3.3 The Human Environment

The proposed Katanga irrigation and drainage site is located in rural South Kivu Province (see Map 4-1 and Map 3-15). Agriculture is the economic mainstay, while fishing is important in some villages on Lake Tanganyika.

The proposed project targets the large Kenya Plain, which extends over approximately 3000 Ha. A number of villages are located on or bordering the plain, including Katanga, Kenya, Bumba, Kokya, Simbi and Kitete in the floodplain, and Mwandiga 1, Mwandiga 2 and Mwandiga 3 in the target irrigation area. All these villages are part of the Balala-Sud groupement, which is part of the Baraka chiefdom, located in Fizi Territory, South Kivu Province. The project is located in the three health zones of Katanga, Malinde and Simbi. Katanga village is located just 15 minutes from the city of Baraka by road.

Fizi territory marks the international border with Burundi and Tanzania to the east, and with Katanga Province to the South. Despite having the same name, the Katanga site is located in South Kivu Province and not Katanga Province.

4.3.3.1 Administrative Structure

In South Kivu province, including the Katanga project site, all collectivities are chiefdoms. Traditional leaders are very respected and considered by their subjects as power and tradition holders.

4.3.3.2 Demographics

112 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

4.3.3.2.1 Population

The villages in the Katanga province area are located within the Katanga health area, with the exception of the villages of Malinde and Simbi. The Katanga health area has a total population of approximately 12,000 people, while the villages of Malinde and Simbi have populations of approximately 800 and 600 people, respectively. The average household size is 5-6 people per household.

This area has not experienced significant migration trends in recent years, with the exception of the village of Mwandiga 3, which is almost uniformly comprised of refugees and internally displaced people, who have returned to Fizi Territory but have been unable to return to their homes of origin. In many cases this has been because they found that their land and houses had been appropriated by others, or that they were not welcomed by their families and communities.

The population of the different villages in the Katanga project area, including that of the village of Mwandiga 3, is nearly uniformly Babembe. Approximately half of the population is Catholic, while the other half is Protestant.

4.3.3.2.2 Health

There is one public health center in Katanga Village, lead by a Head Nurse, which serves the entire project area. There is one private health center in Kitete village, which is not registered with the government.

The public health center in Katanga Village is comparatively large, receives support from MSF (Médecins Sans Frontières - Doctors Without Borders), and health care is provided free of charge. More serious cases are referred to the hospital in Baraka, which in turn refers even more serious cases to Uvira or Bukavu.

The Head Nurse reported that the leading causes of morbidity, in order of importance are: malaria, diarrhea (bloody, cholera and typhoid), acute respiratory infections and malnutrition. The first two diseases are indicative of water and vector-borne diseases, and are also likely indicators of poor hygiene and limited access to potable water sources. In fact, access to potable water and proper latrines is limited, and residents report that it is common to drink water from the Mutambala River. It is important to note that Fizi Territory is classified as a cholera pandemic area, also most likely due to limited potable water access and poor hygiene.

Despite the presence of public health centers, some local residents also seek treatment through traditional methods or faith-based healing, due to the costs of modern health care and medicine, or difficulty in reaching the local health center. Patients do normally seek maternity care at formal health facilities, which is technically a legal requirement.

4.3.3.2.3 Education

113 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

than girls (46.7%) in South Kivu Province28. This may be due in part to school fees. Participation in agriculture or other economic activities is not necessarily a cause, since many students work outside of school hours to meet household responsibilities.

4.3.3.2.4 Katanga

Access to primary and secondary school is available in Katanga and along the main road, but is difficult for residents of communities in the wetland areas of the Kenya Plain where there is no school. School fees in the Katanga area are 2,000 Francs (approximately $2.25 USD) per month for primary school and 5,000 – 6,000 Francs (approximately $5.50 - 6.75 USD) for secondary school.

4.3.3.3 Infrastructure and Services

Infrastructure at Katanga is very limited. There is no electricity and very few individuals have generators or solar panels that they charge people to use. For example, it normally costs approximately 500 Francs (approximately $0.55 USD) to attend a local movie screening.

Most families at Katanga have a latrine for human waste, although many of them are in a poor state of repair. Families without latrines typically use latrine pits, as defecation in open areas is uncommon. The water table is fairly shallow in many areas, and latrines or pits are often only dug one or two meters deep given the high water table.

There is no management system for non-recyclable solid waste, which is most commonly burned. Only the health center has an incinerator. Agricultural waste is recycled for use in manure, when possible, used to feed livestock (organic waste), or burned if it has no potential use.

There are five wells to serve the population of Katanga, but they do not provide enough water for even the basic potable water needs of much of the population. Local residents therefore resort to drinking water from the Mutambala and Luhe Rivers, despite the fact that they are aware that the water quality there is poor. This contact increases the risks of contact with water that may carry water borne diseases. Water is not normally boiled or treated, despite this knowledge, possibly due to the cost of cooking fuel (firewood). Water from Lake Tanganyika is used in lieu of wells in wetland areas on the Kenya Plain. Rivers and the Lake are also commonly used for washing and bathing. Local residents reported that the River Luhe was diverted in the past and used as a potable water source in Katanga village, but the river is no longer diverted.

Mobile phone network coverage does not exist in Katanga. However, there are community radios across South Kivu Province that help to spread news. Each territory has at least one radio that mainly informs on community development programs and human rights issues. Very little is broadcasted regarding national and international matters. Rumor also plays a major role in the circulation of information. Rumor has been cited as the source of most of pre-emptive internal displacements.

28 2003 ministry of education statistics, in : Monographie de la province du Sud-Kivu, 48-52.

114 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Goods are commonly transported to the main road, where they are sold to trucks passing on the national road. Women more commonly work carrying goods by foot. The road to Katanga is passable, and on market days, trucks come from cities such as Baraka with manufactured goods to sell and purchase agricultural produce to bring back to the city.

4.3.3.4 Land Tenure

The vast majority of residents at Katanga have access to land through customary institutions and land use pressure is limited. Most households have access to between one quarter hectare and one hectare that they can farm. The notable exceptions are the residents of Mwandiga 3, who are not originally from the area.

Even areas that are currently flooded and are not in agricultural production have traditional owners who may claim land tenure rights if the area is drained.

Residents can rent a 25m by 25m plot of land for one harvest at a price of 3,000 to 5,000 francs (approximately $3.50 to 5.50$). Land belongs to the Katanga district chief, who makes the final decision about whether to rent land.

The majority of residents from the village of Mwandiga 3 have no local agricultural landholdings and cannot afford to rent land. Instead, the majority walk to plots in highland areas near villages such as Mulongwe, Sebele, Kafulo, Fizi and Lukongo, which are located about 20 to 35km away. These plots are generally located in remote locations, often on agriculturally marginal land.

Due to the distance from Mwandiga 3, either the husband or wife generally travels for weeks at a time to the location of the agricultural plot, while the other stays with the children. Wives are more often responsible for traveling to the family’s lands, which exposes them to rape. If the entire family goes to work on the fields, for example during the harvest, they are exposed to thefts from their houses.

4.3.3.5 Economic Activities

The dominant economic activity at Katanga is agriculture, which includes a mix of subsistence and cash crop agriculture. All households have access to plots of land typically between one quarter hectare and one hectare, and 80 - 90% of the population works in agriculture as primary economic activity. The villages of Kitete and Kokya are an exception to this, where fishing is an important economic activity.

The remaining economic activities include mining (upstream of the Kenya Plain) and small businesses and petty trade. Firewood is sometimes sold, although normally it is cut for household needs only.

Due to the lack of other alternatives, agriculture is the dominant economic activity despite the fact that production near the Mutambala River has been negatively affected by recurrent flooding. Flood prone 115 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

areas, however, are normally left to fallow due to the risk of investing in agricultural inputs and time, only to lose crops to flooding.

4.3.3.5.1 Agriculture and Animal Husbandry

Furthermore, the crisis of governability has contributed to a lack of good quality seeds. Despite recent government efforts to improve the regional seed supply30, most farmers still use low quality seeds that they save from previous harvests or buy at local markets. Furthermore, as of 2005 there were only 107 agricultural technicians in the region for 426,369 farm households, a ration of approximately 1 technician for every 4000 households; the government target is to have 1 technician for every 400 households, a figure ten times that of the technicians presently available.31

Agriculture at Katanga is dominated by crop cultivation, with limited animal husbandry. The preferred crops vary across the Kenya Plain, particularly between flood zones and higher grounds that often suffer from water shortages. Furthermore, many vulnerable households have no land in the area and cultivate plots commonly located 20 to 35 km away.

Cultivation

Agricultural production at Katanga developed during the Colonial era, when Belgians acquired land from the local Babembe King to cultivate cotton fields. Belgians created plots of 500m by 40m and gave them to members of the Balala ethnic group to exploit, and then purchased the cotton that was produced. When the population could not meet the demand for labor, the Belgians gave land to people from as far away as Uvira and Fizi.

The Belgians divided each plot into five 100m by 40m plots to allow for a four year fallow period (five year rotation ) to allow the soil to recover.

Today, cultivation on the Kenya Plain varies between flood-prone areas and areas that are not flood- prone. Flood prone areas can be irrigated during the dry season, but are not typically cultivated during the rainy season (November – April) due to the risk of crop loss to flooding by the Mutambala River and Lake Tanganyika.

29 Monographie de la Province du Sud-Kivu. Unité de Pilotage du Processes DSRP, 2005. 30 Ibid. 31 Ibid.

116 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

In flood zones, oil palm, banana, and coffee are cultivated, as are food crops including cassava, corn, bean, taro, sugar cane, and market gardening crops such as tomato, cabbage, eggplant, amaranth, red onion, leek and celery. Food crops are dominant during the rainy season in areas that do not flood. The main food crops include corn, peanut, beans and rice. Market gardening is also practiced on a more limited scale. Market gardening is the main agricultural activity during the dry season.

Production is largely for subsistence, as cash crops are mostly used to buy foodstuffs. Agriculture is based on crop rotation using slash-and-burn techniques or shifting to natural fallows. Production is principally limited to small plots (less than one Ha.) of cleared savannah or former agricultural areas.

Farmers use both chemical fertilizers and pesticides on both food crops and market gardening crops. The main fertilizers used include: DAP, urea and NPK. Major pesticides used include the insecticide thiodan durciban and fungicides including dithan, ridomil, and cupravit. Interviews indicate that local farmers do not apply these agricultural inputs in accordance with recommended standards. The three major crop diseases reported are the cassava and banana mosaic virus, as well as the "cigar end" disease that affects bananas.

Agricultural production is generally based on non-mechanized labor, with participation by all family members, using rudimentary techniques and simple tools such as machetes and hoes. Mechanized agriculture is possible in the non flooded parts of the Kenya Plain, but at present land is tilled manually.

Animal Husbandry

Animal husbandry is practiced on a small scale, and families typically have a small number of animals including goats, pigs, poultry (rooster, chicken, ducks and pigeons) and cows. Pastoral communities are located in the highlands of Fizi Territory, but not in the project area.

4.3.3.6 Social Organization

Social organization at Katanga is strongly influenced by traditional customs and ethnic ties. As a result, it is very important to include or consult with traditional chiefs in proposed social initiatives and organizations.

A Katanga, there is a local water users committee that manages potable water taps built by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). The committee charges users 200 Francs per household for maintenance, but interviewees indicated that the committee is not active enough to properly maintain the system.

4.3.3.7 Conflict and Insecurity

4.3.3.7.1 Insecurity

117 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

4.3.3.7.2 Social Conflict

A large area by the Mutambala River was affected by severe flooding between 2000 and 2002, and many farmers left the area as productive agricultural lands were lost to flooding and wetlands. When the floodwaters dropped again, many of those farmers who remained extended their plots into the area that had been abandoned, breeding land tenure conflict with the previous users. This land tenure conflict persists to date. Traditionally, the Katanga district chief is responsible for distributing land in the different villages and for resolving these conflicts, as land tenure is based on customary institutions with no legal title.

The arrival of returned refugees and internally displaced peoples to the Katanga area, specifically Mwandiga 3 has also generated land use pressure. The United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) was able to negotiate land use rights for these populations to build houses and small gardens, but not to obtain agricultural land. The residents of Mwandiga 3 are outsiders from many different ethnic groups, and have little leverage to seek landholdings locally. The village and district chiefs have declined to allocate this land to the residents of Mwandiga 3 unless they agree to pay rent, which many residents cannot afford or feel is too high.

There are strong ethnic tensions between the ethnic Babembe, including the vast majority of the population in the Katanga project area, and the Banyamulenge, who live in the highlands of Fizi. As a result, there is very little social contact between these two groups.

4.3.3.8 Archaeology and Cultural Resources

No archaeological or important cultural resources were identified in the target intervention areas at Katanga. Local burial traditions normally dictate that the deceased be buried on the family plot, normally behind the family house, and relatives are expected to know where these graves are located.

118 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Churches are markets are the main cultural spaces in both areas. Residents normally attend church on Sundays or for special events such as wedding ceremonies. The market day or days for each local market is well established. 4.4 Alternatives Analysis

Accordingly, the analysis is divided into two sub-sections:

4.4.1 Methodology

This combination of preferred alternatives for each component, as identified through this process, is holistically considered to be the “preferred action alternative”.

119 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

The following section (4.5) evaluates the socioeconomic and environmental consequences of the preferred action alternative identified below. This option is considered to be better than the no option alternative if the positive consequences outweigh any negative externalities.

4.4.2 No Action Alternative

The” no action alternative” will not address existing food insecurity in the target beneficiary population. It would mean that farmers with land holdings in flood-prone areas are still vulnerable to crop damage and loss, and productivity in other areas from irrigation or drainage.

Alternative strategies to improve agricultural production are feasible, such as improved seed varieties, integrated pest management, organic fertilizers. These are complementary actions, already planned by ADRA, and do not replace the proposed project because they do not remove excess water from target areas, a major obstacle to increased productivity and expansion of agriculture. Local residents ranked flood-preventing drainage as a primary concern; irrigation of high ground was also considered beneficial though it was given lower priority. The aforementioned alternatives would not effectively address flooding in the target area or the lack of irrigation in areas of high ground.

Negative environmental impacts associated with the proposed drainage system, such as the drainage of aquatic and semi-aquatic grasslands would be avoided, but it is possible to preserve parts of these ecosystems to maintain their major ecosystem functions.

4.4.3 Proposed Project Alternatives

The present section presents the analysis of alternative designs and strategies to achieve the proposed action. This assessment is presented in Table 4-10.

The proposed project includes a combination of drainage and irrigation activities. There are a number of alternative designs for irrigation and drainage, as well as options to integrate both activities. These alternatives are presented in recognition of the fact that the feasibility of the different alternatives must be confirmed by a topographic, hydrographic and engineering assessment.

Where detailed assessment of the socioeconomic and environmental impacts is required to identify the preferred, feasible alternative, this is noted and a requirement is established in the EMMP to ensure the design process considers the potential alternatives.

120 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Table 4-10 Alternatives to the Project Activity, Katanga

Evaluation of Feasibility, Relevance to Alternative Information Required for Final Decision Decision - Exclude/Preferred Alternative Identified Need, and Impact  Complex engineering structures will likely be necessary to drain the entire plain; success is unlikely with available resources. The  Assess topography in relation to the water existing dike on both banks of the Mutambala level of Lake Tanganyika to determine is a massive engineering project and has whether it is feasible to drain flood zones 19. ADRA drain the failed to prevent flooding (although it has by gravity (i.e. verify that flooded areas are entire flooded shifted the flooded area somewhat to the above the water level of the lake) using Alternative 20 is the preferred alternative based on area on the south). Therefore, Alternative 19 is expected simple canals. Topographic information environmental criteria. The EMMP establishes a Kenya Plain to be costly and not likely to be very feasible available at a scale of 1:50:000 (not requirement to protect some areas of semi-aquatic 20. ADRA drain with food for labor. appropriate for design) indicates that the grassland and riparian vegetation. only parts of the  Semi aquatic grasslands have medium majority of the Kenya Plain is indeed flooded areas importance, and serve as water purification above Lake Level and that gravity-based and probably pollination of the agro- drainage will be feasible. This must be ecosystem; an area of this ecosystem should verified by a detailed topographic be maintained, particularly near the assessment. Mutambala River and shore of Lake Tanganyika.  Gravity –fed irrigation possible if water from the Mutambala or Luhe Rivers is diverted  Determine whether it is possible to drain upstream of the Kenya Plain and carried by water from flooded areas for use in gravity- 21. Drain floodwater canals to target irrigation areas, or if water fed irrigation (Alternative 21), or to capture for use in Exclude Alternative 22 due to lack of reliable from flood zones is drained to target water from an upstream river (Alternative irrigation energy source. irrigation areas (alternative 23). 23 – more likely) through a topographic elsewhere on the  Non-irrigated areas are expected to be mostly assessment. plain by force of The feasibility of Alternatives 21 and 23 needs to at a higher elevation (even if the difference is  Determine the capacity of the drainage gravity be determined based on a topographic assessment, slight); draining water and using it for network and individual canals based on 22. Pump water to hydrographic model and engineering design. irrigation by force of gravity (Alternative 21) expected flood levels (established by irrigate high is unlikely. It may be possible to use drainage hydrographic modeling), regardless of the ground and drain Alternatives 21 and 23 have similar impacts on the water for irrigation if pumps are installed feasible alternative. low ground target area, and both may pass through urban (alternative 22).This is not considered to be  23. Develop a Base irrigation catchment volumes on areas, so the two are not differentiated in the feasible, however, in light of the lack of gravity-fed hydrographic modeling to determine assessment of environmental consequences. electricity or cheap, reliable fuel sources. irrigation system sustainable catchment levels. Given the Catchment volumes for Alternative 23 may affect  Flood water is unlikely to be a reliable source based on a canal excess water on the Kenya Plain, impacts downstream uses (although this is unlikely given from an of irrigation water (Alternative 21 and 22), to downstream users are not expected even the Mutambala River’s large discharge); and this but this needs to be confirmed by upstream river if a large volume of water is diverted from potential impact is considered in the assessment of hydrographic modeling. (Mutambala or the Mutambala and/or Luhe Rivers. environmental consequences.  Luhe) Eolic, solar and other off--grid energy Hydrographic modeling should assess sources for pumps are not budgeted and whether flood waters could be a reliable prone to disrepair; thus, they are not source of irrigation water. considered sustainable given the local 121 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Evaluation of Feasibility, Relevance to Alternative Information Required for Final Decision Decision - Exclude/Preferred Alternative Identified Need, and Impact community’s limited capacity to obtain replacement parts and invest in their maintenance and repair (Alternative 22). If irrigation is promoted using an upstream catchment  It may be possible to integrate drainage of an there are two major irrigation system with drainage of flood alternatives: zones. However, hydrographic modeling is  Detailed hydrographic modeling of both Alternative 24 is preferred only if the effectiveness needed to determine whether runoff from 24. Integrate the proposed systems. The irrigation system’s of the drainage system to drain flood zones will irrigation would overwhelm the drainage drainage of the runoff will depend on the effectiveness of not be affected by integration of the systems. system and reduce its effectiveness in irrigation system water management; however, for the draining flood zones. In that case, the with the canal purposes of modeling, irrigation runoff If Alternative 24 is not feasible, Alternative 25 drainage network will need greater capacity, network should be calculated based on expected should be implemented in accordance with the or the irrigation network must be drained established to values in the absence of any human water requirement to protect some areas of semi-aquatic separately. drain flooded management. grassland, as discussed in alternative 20.  Flood water may not be a reliable source of areas. Or; irrigation water. This needs to be confirmed 25. Develop separate canals to drain by hydrographic modeling. the irrigation network The following alternative applies to both irrigation and drainage networks:  Secondary, tertiary and possibly even quaternary canal networks are expected to be  The length and type of canals should be 26. ADRA Design necessary. Their design and location should determined based on a specific engineering and Build Only be determined by an expert to ensure that Alternative 27 is the preferred alternative – Design study, which be based on maximum flow Primary Canals, each canal and the entire system function and build all canals necessary for a functioning and calculated scour velocities, based on or: correctly. Local residents do not have this system hydrographic modeling and an engineering 27. ADRA Design capacity, and even with training they are no assessment. - and Build all expected to have sufficient expertise to levels of canal maximize design efficiency. necessary for a functioning system The following  The budget does not contemplate using Preferred Alternative: 30 – The use of liner may be alternative applies to cement or liner minimized as possible, but should be determined both irrigation and  Cement and liner can prevent erosion, - based on maximum flow velocities and calculated drainage networks: limiting maintenance requirements scour velocities, as determined by a specific  Stones may be obtained from small borrow engineering study. 28. Build Canals pits for a limited number of erosion-prone 122 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Evaluation of Feasibility, Relevance to Alternative Information Required for Final Decision Decision - Exclude/Preferred Alternative Identified Need, and Impact with Cement or locations at significantly lower cost than Synthetic Liner cement, liner or lining the full length of the 29. Build canals with stone Compacted Soil Canals without liner, or: 30. Use liner as necessary based on a specific engineering study The following alternative applies only to drainage  The existing dike on both banks of the networks: Mutambala River has many sharp curves,

resulting in erosion in many places. An 31. Repair Dike engineering study will determine whether Along the repairing and possibly improving the dike Mutambala  A topographical assessment to evaluate Exclude Alternative 31; complex engineering could effectively prevent flooding on the River whether gravity-based drainage is sufficient, projects are not possible with budgets based Kenya Plain. As discussed in alternatives 19 32. Focus on or whether the flooded area is too close to largely on food for work. and 20, this is not expected to be feasible developing lake level. As previously stated, topographic with available resources. The area could also canals to drain information available at a scale of 1:50:000 Preferred alternative: Alternative 32. Topography be effectively drained with a simpler water when the (not appropriate for design) indicates that the at 1:50,000 scale and interviews indicates that (cheaper and more sustainable) approach Mutambala majority of the Kenya Plain is indeed above most flooding is a result of the Mutambala River, using gravity based canals. River Floods Lake Level and that gravity-based drainage is except near the lake Tanganyika shoreline. Such  Canals built to drain flood water from the 33. Focus on feasible. A detailed topographic assessment canals are likely to address most flooding that Mutambala River to Lake Tanganyika can preventing can confirm project feasibility. could be associated with the Lake as well. help drain water back toward the lake if the flooding near Lake contributes to flooding, depending on Lake Tanganyika, by topography (this design would therefore likely be effective for both alternatives 32 developing and 33). drainage canals that drain back toward the lake. The following  The project is intended to be self-sustaining, alternative applies to so Alternative 34 is discarded. both irrigation and  Limited government technical management Preferred Alternative: Promote alternatives 35 and drainage networks: capacity and resources render community - 36 simultaneously management essential. 34. ADRA  Government involvement may assist long administer the term sustainability despite limited capacity 123 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Evaluation of Feasibility, Relevance to Alternative Information Required for Final Decision Decision - Exclude/Preferred Alternative Identified Need, and Impact system and resources 35. Train community to manage system 36. Promote government management of system Preferred Alternative: 39 – The use of liner may be 37. Build Canals minimized as possible, but should be determined with Cement or based on maximum flow velocities and calculated  The budget does not contemplate using Synthetic Liner scour velocities, as determined by a specific cement or liner 38. Build engineering study.  Cement and liner can prevent erosion, Compacted Soil Calculate scour velocity and expected flows limiting maintenance requirements Canals without under varying meteorological conditions. This It would be preferable that liners are not needed,  liner, or: Stones may be obtained from small borrow should include a 20 year storm. and therefore canal geometry should be properly 39. Use liner as pits for a limited number of erosion-prone sized. If, however, design calculations show that a necessary based locations at significantly lower cost than liner is needed, and funds are not available, then on a specific cement, liner or lining the full length of the the project should consider being scaled back or engineering canals with stone limited in scope to ensure that the area that is built study is properly built to ensure durability, stability and erosion control.

124 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

4.5 Potential Social and Environmental Consequences

4.5.1 Methodology

Each potential social and environmental consequence is evaluated using the parameters defined in section 3.5.1, including nature, probability, intensity, location, frequency, duration, and total significance, which are rated on a scale of 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest).

This evaluation is based on a comparison of baseline conditions and the expected results of proposed project activities.

4.5.2 Assessment of Environmental Consequences

4.5.2.1 Positive Consequences

125 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Table 4-11 summarizes the potential positive consequences at Katanga, and is followed by a detailed qualitative evaluation of these consequences.

Table 4-11 Potential Positive Consequences at Katanga

No. Consequences Probability Intensity Location Frequency Duration Total Significance 42 Increased Agricultural Production and Access to Arable Land 5 3 4 5 4 4.0 43 Positive Change in Net Agricultural Incomes and Employment 4 3 4 5 4 4.0 44 Increased Household Food Security 4 4 4 5 4 4.3 45 Opportunity to rotate production and facilitate soil regeneration 2 2 4 4 4 3.5 46 Temporary Employment and Food Income – Food for Work 5 2 4 1 2 2.3 47 Reduced Flood Risk 4 4 4 5 4 4.3 48 Reduced Presence of Water Borne Disease Vectors 4 3 4 5 4 4.0 49 Improvements to Health, Education and Living Conditions 4 3 4 5 4 4.0

Consequence 42: Increased Agricultural Production and Access to Arable Land The proposed drainage and irrigation activities in Katanga are expected to increase both agricultural production levels and access to arable land. Drainage will increase production by reducing the risk of flooding and subsequent crop loss. Irrigation will allow the cultivation of crops with greater water needs, such as rice, in agricultural areas currently reliant on rainfall and subject to drought during the dry season.

The target drainage area was cultivated in the past, when the dike along the Mutambala River was still functioning properly – it was reportedly very fertile and productive, and the proposed drainage activity would return it to cultivation. These fields were rotated between cotton production, food crop cultivation and fallow. Similarly, the target irrigation area is reported to have produced good maize yields in the past, even in the absence of irrigation to meet optimal crop water needs.

The proposed activity will reclaim a large productive area (this needs to be confirmed based on the final design, but is likely 1000 – 3000 Ha.) of the Kenya Plain, which totals an estimated 8735 Ha., through drainage, and increase production in another large area through irrigation. Certain areas of the Kenya Plain’s natural habitat should be preserved, as discussed below. Based on an average plot size of 0.5 Ha, the project will benefit approximately 2000 – 6000 households, or 12,000 to 36,000 people, as long as the drainage infrastructure is maintained, according to measures detailed in the EMMP. Furthermore, yields in areas of acidic soils (pH <5.0) may not be greatly improved unless liming agents are applied to the soils to slightly raise the pH. Moderately fast acting liming agents are recommended in areas where pH is only slightly more acidic than 5.0.

Consequence 43 – Positive Change in Net Household Incomes Increase agricultural yield per Ha. and increased access to arable land enables farm households in the target area to increase net annual production, increasing cash income for families cultivating cash crops (relative to market prices), or household food income for families cultivating subsistence crops. Increased production may also create secondary employment opportunities, such as transporting goods to regional markets.

Hydrographic modeling can determine whether sustainable catchment levels will allow for expanded cultivation in target irrigation areas during the dry season and the extent to which irrigation can be 126 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

sustainably expanded during the wet season. If dry season production does not significantly expand, drainage will also help expand production during the rainy season. Income from either season may be saved for the use during the other season. Hydrographic modeling can determine which areas can be reliably drained or irrigated, and which areas cannot be reliably drained or irrigated by force of gravity.

Returned refugees living in the village of Mwandiga 3 are among the most vulnerable residents of the project area, and could benefit from land use rights in the plain. However, the local chief has refused to grant them land without payment. We recommend that ADRA promote land access for these residents as part of project negotiations, in order to increase benefit to vulnerable persons, thereby also enabling residents, particularly the women, to farm at plots closer to their homes, and avoid walking 20 – 35 km and risking assault and rape.

The EMMP establishes a non-binding recommendation that ADRA seek to negotiate land access for these residents as a priority, based on political feasibility.

Consequence 44 – Increased Household Food Security Increased subsistence production and purchasing power from cash crops is expected to benefit household food access. Farmers growing cash crops, or a mix of cash and subsistence crops, can use income from cash crops to purchase food from the market during the dry season. If market prices for cash crops drop significantly, income falls and food access may suffer, but income is likely to be higher in most seasons as a result of the proposed activity. Conversely, increased local supply and lower prices improve food security for vulnerable families. The risks associated with market prices are evaluated separately below.

Food security may be threatened by a loss of crop diversity as a result of the project (evaluated separately below); the EMMP details crop diversity promotion measures to avoid to market fluctuations and crop disease (see below).

Consequence 45 – Opportunity to rotate production and facilitate soil regeneration Limited land use pressure at Katanga greater access to arable land will increase the likelihood that farmers will rotate crops and leave parts of their fields fallow, given farmers indication that they understand the benefits of crop rotation and fallow from historical practices on the plain.

Consequence 46 – Temporary Employment and Food Income – Food for Work The proposed project will provide temporary employment and increased food income, because this is a food for work (FFW) project. One unskilled laborer from the community is expected to complete 1-3 cubic meters of excavation per day depending on individual capacity and soil type.

Consequence 47 – Reduced Flood Risk The proposed drainage system will be designed to prevent flooding under average precipitation regimes, thereby reducing the threat of crop loss, and physical danger to floodplain residents and infrastructure. The system may be unable to prevent flooding during some extreme events, but likely to successfully drain the area under almost all circumstances.

The proposed project is expected to last for no more than 20 years, given probable advances in local technology and infrastructure (such as electricity) that will make gravity-based drainage and irrigation 127 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

systems obsolete, and given the possibility that the system will fall into disrepair due to poor management or regional insecurity within the next 20 years (the current dike system for the Mutambala River is in a state of partial disrepair, for example). Therefore, the drainage system should be designed to withstand a 20 year rainfall event. Final project design will determine precise drainage capacity.

If properly designed and maintained, with the above mentioned capacity for drainage, the project’s net impact is expected to significantly reduce flood risk from both rainfall and river swells, eliminating the risk of crop loss in flood zones.

Consequence 48 – Reduced Presence of Water Borne Disease Vectors Stagnant and standing water are often breeding grounds for insects and contributes to insect borne disease vectors such as malaria. Standing water used for drinking, cooking or washing could contribute to the spread of cholera and health effects from the ingestion of water contaminated by agricultural inputs. Human contact with drainage water may also contribute to parasite–borne disease vectors such bilharzia. The proposed drainage and irrigation canals may create some areas of stagnant water due to sedimentation and poor maintenance, but the net impact with drainage will be to reduce the amount of standing water. The presence of disease vectors is, therefore, expected to be reduced. Nevertheless, a greater number of local residents may come into contact with standing water, as agricultural activity in the flood plain becomes more common.

The risks associated with human-water contact, drinking, cooking and washing can be reduced by:  Educating the community in the health risks associated with these activities.  Recommending sanitary measures to reduce the overall likelihood of exposure to water borne disease vectors.  Lining irrigation and drainage canals with vetiver to prevent erosion, as described for below in more detail, will also help to partially reduce the risk of Cholera, because vetiver can absorb e- coli that cause Cholera.

These measures are considered below and established by the EMMP.

Consequence 49 – Improvements to Health, Education and Living Conditions Increased household food security and incomes are expected to improve human health, wellbeing and education through access (purchasing power) to medical care, medicines, clothing, education and improved shelter. Women indicated that their husbands buy them clothing after harvest, for example. Increased disposable income can also go toward monthly school fees to pay teachers. Generally, increased annual disposable income for health and education and contributes to improved living conditions.

While net benefits to human health are expected, monitoring arsenic and fecal coliform values (as described in more detail below) is still advisable, given the potential severity of the presence of these parameters if local residents use the irrigation system as a potable water source.

4.5.2.2 Negative Consequences

Table 4-12 summarizes the possible negative consequences at Katanga and is followed by a detailed qualitative evaluation of impacts with greater significance (highlighted in bold). Annex E presents the acceptable consequences in more detail, including recommended mitigation measures.

Table 4-12 Potential Negative Consequences at Katanga

128 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Consequences No. (Bold Highlight Identifies Key Consequences Included in the EMMP) Probability Intensity Location Frequency Duration Total Significance 50 Degradation and Loss of Natural Terrestrial Habitats 3 3 4 1 5 3.3 51 Generation and Disposal of Agricultural Waste 5 2 4 5 4 3.8 52 Increased Slash and Burn and Risk of Wildfire 2 1 3 4 4 3.0 53 Increase in Agricultural Pests 2 2 4 1 4 2.8 54 Invasive Species in Natural Terrestrial Ecosystems 2 2 2 1 5 2.5 55 Contamination of Natural Aquatic Habitats by Agricultural Runoff 3 3 3 5 3 3.5 56 Invasive Aquatic Species 1 3 3 2 3 2.8 57 Erosion and Nutrient Loss in Irrigated Areas 2 2 3 5 3 3.3 58 Canal Erosion and Sedimentation 4 3 4 3 3 3.3 59 Dike Failure 3 2 3 3 2 2.5 Increased Use of Agricultural Inputs and Alteration of Soil Profiles and 60 2 3 4 5 4 4.0 Composition in Irrigated Areas Crop Loss and Alteration of Soil Composition because of Poor Irrigation Water 61 3 2 4 3 3 3.0 Management 62 Water Loss to Evaporation 5 1 3 5 4 3.3 63 Loss of Crop Diversity 3 2 4 5 4 3.8 64 Project - Related Changes to Market Prices 3 2 5 3 3 3.3 Impacts to Human Health Caused by Contaminated Irrigation and Drainage 65 3 2 4 5 2 3.3 Water 66 Impacts to Livestock Health 3 2 4 5 2 3.3 67 Human or Animal Drowning 1 5 4 1 5 3.8 68 Accidents and Health Problems During Construction 4 2 4 4 2 3.0 69 Worker or Bystander Death during Construction 1 5 4 1 5 3.8 70 Water Use Disputes 4 4 1 4 2 2.8 71 Water Drainage Disputes 4 3 1 4 2 2.5 72 Induced Migration 4 3 4 1 3 2.8 73 Increased Social Stratification 3 3 4 1 4 3.0 74 Urbanization 2 2 2 1 4 2.3 75 Impacts to Riverbed Habitat due to Mining Prohibited: No Impact 76 Earth Movement, Borrow Pits and Quarries 3 2 1 2 4 2.3 77 Systemic Failures 1 5 4 1 5 3.8 78 Road Opening 2 2 3 1 4 2.5 79 Poor Community Management 3 3 4 5 4 4.0 80 Catchment and Drainage Impacts to Ecological Functions 5 1 4 5 4 3.5

Consequence 50: Degradation and Loss of Natural Terrestrial Habitats The target area for drainage includes two vegetation types with medium conservation value; semi-aquatic grassland and riparian shrubs. Given that the project is located at the intersection of two important Bird areas, the project should seek to conserve functioning areas of these ecosystems. Miombo woodlands near the project area have high conservation value, but will not be affected by proposed project activities.

A 40 meter buffer of semi aquatic grasslands should be conserved from land use change (to agriculture) along the Mutambala River (the River splits into two main branches on the Kenya plane, which flow separately to lake Tanganyika), due to their water purification benefits and likely pollination benefits to surrounding agro-ecosystems. They may, however, be drained and cleared in areas away from the Mutambala and its distributaries, given that they are common in the region. Aquatic grassland in the area is unlikely to be significantly affected by the project, as it is mostly found in open water and channels, including the main branch of the Mutambala River and Lake Tanganyika.

129 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Natural riparian habitat should be left intact to the greatest extent possible within 40 meters of the shore of Lake Tanganyika. Drainage canals passing through this vegetation en route to the lake should be minimized to avoid disturbing this vegetation, because it is important to shoreline stability and fish spawning and feeding. Additionally, drainage and irrigation canal routes should be away from buffer zones, to prevent farmers from expanding the canals into buffer zones at a later date. Canals nearest this zone should have limited capacity to prevent farmers from extending them into buffer zones at a later date.

Finally, it is important to educate local residents, including both farmers and fishermen, in the likely ecosystem value of these ecosystems for pollination and fish spawning. It may be appropriate to support a community fishing reserve in Lake Tanganyika areas bordering the best conserved natural habitat.

Consequence 51 – Generation and Disposal of Agricultural Waste Increased agricultural production will also increase agricultural waste generated at harvest time by agricultural inputs. Local farmers may burn waste, which can generate impacts to soil fertility, creates the potential for wildfires, and negatively impacts localized air quality. Fumes from waste burning may also contribute to respiratory problems and, in the case of chemical waste from inputs such as pesticide sacks, additional health problems if inhaled.

Nevertheless, Katanga’s agricultural waste is expected to be mostly organic waste generated in limited quantities. Composting programs can reduce agricultural waste burning incentives while benefiting soil fertility and crop yield.

Consequence 55 – Contamination of Natural Aquatic Habitats by Agricultural Runoff The expansion of agriculture in newly irrigated and drained areas will produce agricultural runoff that will enter these systems and drain downstream, and eventually flow to Lake Tanganyika. Agricultural runoff may include sediment, chemicals (e.g. fertilizers and pesticides) and nutrients, and this contamination may be toxic for some aquatic and riparian flora and fauna, thereby contributing to an imbalanced aquatic ecosystem and food chains. Individually, the system will not produce enough runoff to affect the lake, but cumulatively, this impact could imbalance the ecosystem and food chains; in turn, the lake drains into the Congo River Basin, which may also be affected by this cumulative impact.

Agricultural runoff from irrigation can be prevented by training farmers to apply only the minimum required volume of water for the target surface area, so that there is no excess water at the downstream end. Furthermore, maintaining plots with a maximum gradient of 3% can prevent erosion that contributes to higher sediment and nutrient loads in runoff (ideally, minimum/flattest plot gradient should be 0.5% to prevent waterlogging). These training measures are presented in the EMMP.

The drainage system by definition evacuates water from the target area, so preventing agricultural runoff will be difficult. However, agricultural runoff contamination can be reduced by lining canals with vetiver (Vetiveria zizanioides), a grass species known to purify water by absorbing important percentages many heavy metals (particularly iron and manganese), nitrogen and phosphorous. Vetiver’s extensive root system can also be used throughout the irrigation system to prevent erosion and, thereby, reduce sedimentation. If drainage water is used for irrigation, its’ water quality should be tested prior to the construction phase to ensure that it is appropriate for irrigative use.

Properly managing agricultural inputs is also important to reducing the likelihood of contaminated agricultural runoff. ADRA has identified integrated pest management (IPM) as a strategy to reduce the use of harmful agricultural inputs, as IPM promotes non-chemical, organic alternatives. ADRA already plans to promote IPM, and this activity is included in the approved IEE for the ADRA DFAP. Trainings

130 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

should also include an explanation of the potential risks that chemical inputs being used in the area pose to human health through direct exposure or through ingestion of contaminated produce and water.

Aquatic grassland, semi-aquatic grassland and riparian shrubs (both downstream habitats) could all be affected by contamination. Given that these habitats have medium conservation value, the drainage routes should avoid passing through or draining to these habitats as much possible. This is possible by draining water from both flooded areas and irrigation runoff to Lake Tanganyika via a limited number of discharge canals.

Consequence 57 – Erosion and Nutrient Loss in Agricultural Areas

A number of factors may contribute to erosion and nutrient loss, as presented in the following table Erosion is not expected to be a significant concern given the generally flat topography of the entire Kenya Plain, but flooding has been known to carry of topsoil in the past and reduce soil fertility (through nutrient loss to floodwaters). There is a risk, therefore, that periods of significant rainfall and poor gradient management on individual plots may lead to excess runoff, contributing to topsoil erosion and nutrient loss. If erosion is extensive (which is unlikely), it could contribute to a loss in long term fertility of the soil that could be restored only in the medium to long term.

Eolic erosion is possible during the dry season, but is not expected to lead to significant topsoil loss unless soil is left denuded. This risk can be lowered by training farmers in the importance of promoting some form of vegetation cover on fallow fields, particularly during the dry season. This measure is established by the EMMP.

While significant water erosion is not considered to be likely, it may be further mitigated by teaching local farmers to use appropriate plot gradients (ideally, no more than 3%), properly maintaining drainage canals, and by using of vegetation rows to stabilize soil. The EMMP establishes the measures to promote proper gradient management and reduce erosion risk in the target irrigation and drainage area.

Consequence 58: Canal Erosion and Sedimentation The proposed drainage and irrigation activities will build with primarily unlined irrigation canals; lined canals will only be built in areas where erosion risk is high, as determined by an engineering study. Flowing water may erode the earthen canals over time, causing downstream sediment buildup. Sediment buildup in both irrigation and drainage canals may create blockages and bottlenecks, leading to localized flooding and reducing overall system yield (as measured in agricultural production). The generally flat gradient in the target area reduces the risk of erosion, but increases the likelihood of flooding as a result of sedimentation.

Canal erosion can be limited by planting vetiver or bamboo along canal banks to reduce erosion. Stones and other locally available forms of liner may be used to line canal walls at curves and other strategic points where erosion is more likely. The canal route should avoid sharp drops or curves to the extent practical, to reduce flow velocity and the risk of erosion, but should also be sufficient to limit the likelihood of stagnation, sedimentation and blockage. Sediment traps may be appropriate if the risk of sedimentation is determined to be high in certain locations. The dimensions and slope of the canal should be determined based on the expected flow, in order to reduce the likelihood that water levels drop so low that they become stagnant. Finally, it may be appropriate to build velocity breaks at the bottom of steep drops, to reduce the risk of erosion downstream. This would most likely be applicable if an irrigation catchment is developed upstream and water must travel from the catchment to target irrigation area. This will be determined by the final engineering study. These measures are established by the EMMP.

131 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Consequence 60 – Increased Use of Agricultural Inputs and Alteration of Soil Profiles and Composition in Irrigation and Drainage Areas Poor drainage from individual plots may lead to toxicity, acidification, and/or alkalinization of the soil, negatively impacting soil fertility. The chemicals and elements that contribute to changes in soil profiles may be found in irrigation water and agricultural inputs. Poor maintenance of drainage canals (for both irrigation and drainage areas) may lead them to become blocked and stop draining effectively, causing stagnant water in agricultural areas and buildup of the chemicals in the soil. Changes to soil profiles may affect crop yield as certain crops are more or less tolerant of saline, acidic and alkaline soils.

Fertilizer, pesticide and other agricultural input use may increase as a result of increased access to arable land, higher income, and the higher potential return on investment in areas that benefit from irrigation or drainage. This may contribute to the buildup of toxic chemicals and other components such as nitrogen, which can contribute to acidification of the soil in the long term. There is a risk of salinization due to the generally flat topography in the project area.

The build-up of toxic chemicals is best prevented by assuring proper drainage and by reducing their use. Poor drainage can be avoided with appropriate plot and canal gradient, and maintenance to prevent sedimentation and blockages in drainage canals. The measures established to prevent agricultural runoff establish recommended gradients, which will help to ensure plots are adequately drained to reduce the risk of salinization, acidification, alkalinization, and/or toxicity (depending on the inputs that could be used). These measures are established by the EMMP, as described previously. Impacts to soils can also be mitigated by promoting IPM as established by the approved DFAP IEE. Finally, soil and water quality monitoring is important to allow for adaptive management in case soil quality is negatively altered despite mitigation measures. This requirement is also established by the EMMP.

Consequence 61 – Crop Loss and Alteration of Soil Composition because of Poor Irrigation and Drainage System Management Improperly irrigated or drained areas may receive too much or receive too little water for crop needs, resulting in reduced yield or crop loss. Too much water may also contribute to leaching and alter soil profiles, potentially causing salinization, acidification, alkalinization and toxicity. The EMMP establishes measure to educate farmers in crop water needs (see above), water use scheduling, and appropriate management of the irrigation and drainage system to provide required amounts of water.

Excessive drainage is fairly easy to regulate by ensuring that all drainage from a plot passes through one point, which may be blocked. Flooding (insufficient drainage), on the other hand, may be caused by downstream blockages or inability to handle all of the discharge from upstream drainage. If this does occur, it can be quickly corrected through canal maintenance by a well organized committee. Poor canal gradient management will also increase the risk of sedimentation and blockages. Community management is discussed in more detail in consequence 78.

Furthermore, a qualified topographer can support the initial development of these canals, to help ensure that the canal routes are compatible with appropriate gradient management in surrounding plots. This design measure should be included in the final design, which is established as part of the first criteria of the EMMP.

Consequence 63 – Loss of Crop Diversity Irrigation allows farmers to cultivate crops with higher water needs, and potentially also greater returns. It is possible that crop diversity will be lost if a large percentage of farmers disproportionately cultivate a limited number of cash crops with high yields and neglect less profitable subsistence crops. This poses the risk of a lack of crop diversity, which increases vulnerability to pests and crop disease, as well as market boom and bust cycles. Furthermore, cash crop production typically benefits men more than women and 132 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

children (even though all family members are involved in production), as cash income is not shared within the household in the same manner as subsistence crops are shared.

This risk and resulting vulnerability of both these possibilities can be reduced by training local farmers in the risks associated with poor crop diversity and the benefits of crop rotation, complemented by training in a number of alternative recommended crop varieties, based on the soil, climate and water supply characteristics at the site. Local residents report that crop rotation worked in the past, and so may be likely to adopt this practice in the target irrigation and drainage areas. ADRA should seek to promote a variety of improved crops varieties (compared with those commonly cultivated in the region), as long as they are locally available and affordable. ADRA may combine this with its planned support for seed production as part of the DFAP, an activity that is already approved under the existing DFAP IEE.

ADRA should support a local farmers association that can coordinate production to promote diversity and act as a social safety net (through shared returns) if certain crops fail. Such an association could function simultaneously as a water users association, which is should be established for the present project (see consequence 78). It is important that such an association have real management capacity, and not be a nominal association intended only to channel support.

Consequence 64 – Project – Generated Changes to Market Prices The Kenya Plain makes important contributions to regional yield, so increased production at Katanga may significantly increase the local supply of agricultural produce. This may lower prices at local markets, while increasing the cost of inputs. This could help improve food security for vulnerable households without access to their own land, who depend on purchasing food for subsistence needs at market. Price changes are expected to be limited, given that the proposed area is located on the main north south road in the province, and it is possible to sell food to regional markets and purchase inputs.

Furthermore, crop diversity, as promoted in consequence 62, can partially mitigate potential changes to market prices. In particular, ADRA should also evaluate whether production can be diversified to include cash crops that can be sold regionally, to avoid flooding the local market. Poor road conditions limit potential to sell produce in the neighboring Katanga Province (to the south), while international trade may be complicated by cumbersome trade policy. Therefore, regional production should focus on agricultural products in demand within the DRC, such as the cities of Uvira and Bukavu. ADRA should identify and promote such crop varieties and products, so long as the seeds it promotes are locally available.

Consequence 65: Impacts to Human Health Caused by Agricultural Inputs and Contaminated Irrigation and Drainage Water, Including Water Borne Disease Vectors Fertilizer and pesticide use is uncommon, although it may increase as a result of the proposed project, particularly as incomes rise. Toxins found in pesticides and/or fertilizers can have significant affects on human health if inhaled, improperly handled or ingested through food and/or water sources affected by pesticides. Furthermore, given that local potable water sources are insufficient for communities on and bordering the Kenya Plain, irrigation and drainage water may be used for drinking, cooking, washing and wading. If this water is contaminated, it may contribute to a number of health problems, including water borne disease (although the overall risk of water borne disease is expected to decrease as evaluated above).

The risks to human health can be reduced by: 133 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

 Training local community in the health and environmental risks of agricultural inputs  Integrated training in IPM, as already proposed by ADRA)  Building irrigation and drainage canals away from population centers, to the extent possible without sacrificing sound engineering design.

The proposed project is expected to reduce the risk of water borne disease vectors in the Kenya Plain (see consequence 47), but may increase this risk in areas near irrigation and drainage canals. It is therefore important to train the community in the health risks posed by water borne disease vectors in addition to the topics mentioned previously.

Consequence 67 – Human or Animal Drowning Primary canals are expected to be of limited width and depth, and with a limited velocity due to the relatively flat topography, low and of limited depth, thereby reducing the drowning risk for small children and animals.

While this risk is not considered very likely, local community members should be warned of these risks at trainings related to the agricultural system, and by addressing children directly while they are at school. Drowning risk during irrigation canal maintenance can be reduced by blocking the catchment to drain the canal during this activity. Drowning risk during drainage canal maintenance can be reduced by conducting maintenance during dry periods when there is no flooding or minimal flooding. Furthermore, it is important to build simple canal crossings at strategic points where canal width would otherwise make it difficult to safely cross. Crossings should not facilitate access to previously inaccessible areas of natural vegetation that are meant to be preserved by the project. These measures are established by the EMMP.

Consequence 68 – Accidents and Health Problems during Construction Construction will be conducted using unskilled labor. Workers and bystanders will be at risk for a number of health and safety factors such as heat stroke; partial burial by canal wall collapse; being struck by tools such as shovels and hoes; respiratory problems due to dust and any chemical inputs such as cement for the catchment; transportation accidents; as well as minor injuries such as ankle sprains.

The risk of accident or health problems can be reduced by establishing clear operating procedures to prevent exposure to risky situations, and by hiring only individuals of healthy age (as defined by the economically active population in DRC) with no history of heart or respiratory problems and no other apparent health problems that could limit their ability to perform the planned work activities. Qualified individuals should be hired to oversee construction and train all workers in the risks associated with their tasks prior to commencing work. Best practice indicates that workers should not carry more than 23kg or one third their body-weight, whichever is less. Construction areas should be clearly identified to prevent bystanders from entering a construction area and being injured. These measures are established by the EMMP.

Consequence 69 – Worker or Bystander Death during Construction Lethal accidents during construction are highly unlikely under most circumstances, though workers may die in accidents involving heavy machinery for construction, burial by a collapsing slope, or falls from heights. However, excavations of limited depth and on mostly flat ground are expected to make the latter unlikely. The risk of death can be reduced by:  Establishing clear operating procedures to prevent exposure to risky situations  Hiring only those individuals of healthy age (as defined by the economically active population in DRC) with no history of heart or respiratory problems and no other apparent health problems that could limit their ability to perform the planned work activities.

134 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

 Hiring qualified individuals to oversee construction and train all workers in the risks associated with their tasks prior to commencing work.  Including safety measures in training, and enforcing them throughout construction.  Limiting the weight workers carry to 23kg or less, or one third of their body-weight, whichever is lower.  Clearly identifying construction areas, to prevent bystanders from entering and being killed in a construction area.  Compliance with medical criteria should be based on an evaluation by a medical professional from the local health center or a qualified medical professional hired by the project.

Consequence 70 – Water Use Disputes Sustainable catchment levels32 and canal capacity determine the maximum possible supply of irrigation water. Water use may cause conflict if certain users near the irrigation catchment try to capture more than their equitable share of water, negatively affecting downstream users receiving less water than upstream users, and may thereby contribute to divisions and conflict within the community.

Water use disputes can be prevented by:  Establishing clear water use schedules prior to planting, so that all users have clear expectations about how much water they can expect to receive, and how their use will be affected by potential periods of low rainfall.  Monitoring community water use schedules to ensure that all users comply with them  Adjusting community water use schedules as necessary in response to deviations in the expected available water supply.  Improving the capacity of the local water users association to independently develop and enforce water use schedules, and resolve conflicts that may arise through local solutions, not solutions developed by ADRA.  Including a simple gauging station as part of the catchment structure can help the local community easily monitor variations in catchment volume. This can be accomplished by building part of the catchment to include a cement structure of uniform width, with markings at various heights to determine the cross section of the water (width and depth, which gives an area in square meters), so that only velocity (meters per second) must be measured to determine discharge (cubic meters per second).  Undersizing the dimensions of secondary and tertiary canals to prevent excess catchment by users throughout the system.

Consequence 71 – Water Drainage Disputes Secondary, tertiary and lower levels of drainage canal routes may be a source of disputes during the rainy season if the system is poorly designed and or maintained, causing flooding on individual plots.

This risk can be reduced by:  Establishing primary drainage canals at regular intervals (determined based on hydrographic modeling), so that distances from individual plots to the main drainage canal are limited.  Including all necessary levels of canal for a properly functioning system in ADRA’s engineering design, to assist local farmers in developing effective drainage routes.  Clearly establishing drainage routes prior to planting, including responsibilities for building and maintaining the different canals that connect with the main drainage canal.

32 This applies for both possible irrigation catchment alternatives; flood water or upstream catchment from the Luhe or Mutambala Rivers.

135 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

 Clarifying the risks to different farmers along the canal routes, as well as their rights and the obligations of other users to help prevent flooding on downstream plots.  Developing community capacity to manage drainage collectively and resolve potential disputes. Improving the capacity of a community association to independently develop and enforce drainage plans, and resolve conflicts that may arise through organic local solutions, not-ADRA sponsored solutions.

Consequence 73 – Increased Social Stratification Traditional leaders have great control and influence in local land tenure and distribution. The national legal system, on the other hand, provides few land tenure protections. Though unlikely, local elites (namely traditional chiefs and government administrators) may benefit disproportionately from the proposed irrigation project by capturing disproportionate land tenure rights in the target area for themselves and their allies, establishing a precedent for land distribution that the traditional chief cannot easily alter, and increasing social stratification. While land use is established on most of the plain, former owners of areas that have since been flooded (largely as a result of the dikes built for the Mutambala River) may be faced with competing claims for these areas if they are recovered.

Increased productivity (as a result of irrigation and drainage) may also incentivize landowners (including the village chief) to increase rents and charge sharecroppers higher shares, which may allow landowners to capture the major economic benefits of the project, away from the more economically vulnerable sharecroppers and renters.. In this way they can capture project benefits instead of renters and sharecroppers who are normally more vulnerable economically. This will not result in a net negative impact, but will limit the potential project benefits.

The risks that local leaders and elites, as well as landholders, will disproportionately benefit can be reduced by ensuring that the expected benefits are communicated to the community at large, including renters and sharecroppers, so that community members can collectively pressure for the equitable distribution of benefits in accordance with traditional customs. In fact, land use rights should be negotiated prior to implementing the project with participation of all social groups, to promote the equitable distribution of expected benefits. In particular, ADRA should seek in good faith to negotiate land access for vulnerable households that currently do not have a plot of land as part of any negotiations to implement an irrigation or drainage project. It is not recommended that ADRA pay for land use access on behalf of local residents as this precedent could create perverse incentives for the local chief.

Consequence 75 – Impact of Mining on Riverbed Habitat Riverbed stones are commonly mined for use in construction, negatively impacting aquatic and semi- aquatic habitat, particularly benthic populations. The proposed project prohibits riverbed mining; small borrow pits may be used if necessary, as their impact is less significant (see below).

Consequence 76 – Earth Movement, Borrow Pits and Quarries Limited earth movement is expected during canal construction. Most of the excavated earth will come from the proposed route and should be used to develop dikes along canals or distributed in the surrounding agricultural areas, eliminating the need for offsite disposal. Soil redistributed in agricultural areas should be topsoil when possible and, if necessary, soil from deeper layers should be spread out to avoid dumping significant quantities of soil from deeper, less fertile soil horizons in the same area. Cut and fill techniques can help ensure that canal depth is matched to dike height.

sloped sides to reduce the likelihood of collapse, as determined by a qualified expert. Once the required material (likely to be stone) is acquired they should be promptly refilled to avoid the accumulation of stagnant water and/or creation of a fall or drowning hazard for pedestrians and animals. Material excavated from canal construction may be appropriate to fill in borrow pits. Borrow and quarries pits should not exceed 15m by 15m in size, or 3m in depth when possible, to avoid significant environmental impacts. Any deep excavation should be clearly identified and cordoned off until they are refilled.

No quarries should be developed by the project, and material should only be purchased from authorized quarries if needed.

Consequence 77 – Systemic Failures Drainage canal construction is intended to increase agricultural activity by draining excess water from areas with agricultural potential. Similarly, construction of the irrigation canal is intended to increase agricultural activity by supplying water to areas with agricultural potential, and to lead to increased investment of time and resources in agriculture. If the system fails to properly irrigate and/or drain the target area, however, crops may be lost.

This risk of systemic failure for both irrigation and drainage is best reduced by hiring a qualified engineer and topographer to develop the final design for the proposed project, based on a hydrographic model of the area. A qualified resident engineer should oversee construction, assisted by a topographer and other specialists as needed, to ensure the design is correctly implemented. These requirements are established by the EMMP.

Consequence 79 – Poor Community Management Good community management will help promote the sustainability of the proposed drainage project. The system may fall into disrepair if system users are not collaborative or do not coordinate management and maintenance. ADRA must work with the community to determine if an existing or new organization will be responsible for system maintenance. No community organizations were identified during fieldwork, but may be present in the area. Any new or existing organization would need to be trained to develop both organizational and technical management capacity. If a new organization, it is likely to require even more training and capacity building support.

To assist the community management organization in developing technical and management capacity, ADRA should also provide technical management assistance when the community organization cannot resolve a problem on its own. This assistance should decrease throughout the length of the DFAP, as ADRA should focus on building independent management capacity, rather than simply providing solutions. The EMMP establishes measures to promote successful community management.

4.5.2.3 Uncertain Consequences

There are two uncertain consequences at Katanga (see Table 4-13). However, the expected significance of these impacts is not considered to warrant more detailed evaluation or management efforts, in accordance with the methodology established at the beginning of the section.

Table 4-13 Uncertain Consequences at Katanga

137 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

No. Consequences Probability Intensity Location Frequency Duration Total Significance 81 Changes to Nutritional Diversity of Local Diet 3 3 4 1 4 3.0 82 Expansion of the Agricultural Frontier Outside of the Project Area 1 2 3 1 4 2.5

4.5.3 Evaluation of Preferred Project Alternative

The net consequence of the preferred project alternative for the proposed activity at Katanga is clearly beneficial, due to the critical need of addressing land use pressure to promote food security. This is not achieved by the "no action" alternative. Furthermore, no major irreversible impacts or threats to high conservation value ecosystems were identified. Adverse risks such as the potential or human drowning or working death are considered to be acceptable due to their low probability and the potential to mitigate them.

The EMMP for irrigation and drainage activities is structured as follows:

 Social or environmental consequence – the risk or impact that is to be mitigated. This is identified using the numeration established in the Environmental Consequences Section. Many mitigation measures address more than one consequence.  Mitigation measures required to prevent or mitigate the consequence  Monitoring frequency  Monitoring indicator  Monitoring method  Responsible person(s) – those responsible for implementing and/or mitigating the mitigation measure  A cost indication for the required measure

EMMP. Total and correct adoption of these recommended measures by all users is not likely to occur right away, although ADRA should seek high rates of implementation. Furthermore, no graduated performance targets are established, but ADRA should seek continuous improvement throughout the life of the DFAP.

The following table establishes the required mitigation and monitoring measures to be implemented as part of the proposed irrigation canal construction activities at Katanga.

139 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo, FFP-A-11-00006

Table 4-14 Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for Proposed Irrigation and Drainage Canal Construction and Rehabilitation at Katanga

Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Responsible Impact Mitigation Activities Cost Indication frequency Indicators Method persons The final system design ADRA An engineering design should be prepared by a Irrigation and may cost between Verify that these qualified irrigation and A qualified irrigation Drainage $10,000 and $40,000 per three products are drainage engineer, and drainage engineer Coordinator; site. complete supported by a has prepared and Qualified

topographer, based on signed the final design. topographer; A qualified topographer Verify the hydrographic model, and A detailed topographic Qualified can be hired for $1000 - Prior to Construction topographic should include a clear assessment and Irrigation and $3000 per month. assessment report design that defines the hydrographic model Drainage and hydrographic extent of irrigated fields, have been prepared and Engineer; A hydrographic model model are the layout, geometry, size used to develop the Qualified may cost between $1000 complete; and placement of all levels design. Hydraulic and $5000 depending on

of canal necessary for a Modeling the level of detail of fully functioning system. Specialist available. The local community Attendance should be consulted in a At least 10 intended records, video, participatory fashion and beneficiaries from each official written ADRA General Requirements, agree to the proposed village are consulted in approval signed by Irrigation and based on issues noted as Prior to Construction Staff time design before any a participatory fashion recognized local Drainage part of the alternatives construction or regarding the proposed leaders, such as Coordinator assessment and lack of rehabilitation activities design and activity villages chiefs and existing design begin. elders information If the project is to be At least 5 residents Attendance ADRA handed off to the producer from each beneficiary records, course Irrigation and Prior to Construction groups for completion, village have received outlines and Drainage there should be a clear full training; didactic material Coordinator design in place, defining A qualified topographer irrigated areas, canal can be hired for $1000 - routes, and canal $3000 per month: weekly dimensions, in order to rates may vary. ensure even distribution, Visual inspections ADRA reasonable flow rates and Monthly During Qualified hydraulic and The system is built to by a qualified Irrigation and easier maintenance and Construction; civil engineers charge specifications engineer and Drainage control of the system. A Quarterly thereafter $2500-3000 per month: topographer Coordinator local management weekly rates may vary association should be trained to successfully build and implement all design and management

140 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Responsible Impact Mitigation Activities Cost Indication frequency Indicators Method persons requirements through an intensive training program for at least 10 local residents representing diverse social groups, including a total of at least 40 hours instruction by qualified topographers and irrigation and drainage engineers. Conserve natural semi aquatic grasslands along the Mutambala River (40 meter buffer) through project design. Drainage and irrigation canal routes should be away from buffer zones, to prevent farmers from expanding the canals into buffer zones at a later ADRA date. Canals nearest buffer Review final Irrigation and zones should have limited system design, Final system design Drainage Qualified hydraulic and capacity to prevent their Prior to Construction; including routes incorporates the Coordinator; civil engineers in the extension. During Construction; and capacity of required mitigation Qualified region typically charge Consequence 49: After Construction irrigation and measures Irrigation and $2500-3000 per month Degradation and Loss of Conserve natural riparian drainage canals; Drainage Natural Terrestrial habitat within 40 meters of Visual Inspections Engineer Habitats the shore of Lake Tanganyika. Drainage canals passing through this vegetation en route to the lake should be minimized to avoid disturbing this vegetation, because it is important to shoreline stability and fish spawning and feeding. Educate local residents in At least 7 men and 7 the likely value of the Prior to Construction; ADRA women from each Participant Staff time and basic ecosystem services from After Construction; Agriculture village participate in attendance lists materials for training these two habitats Quarterly thereafter Coordinator training (specifically, pollination

141 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Responsible Impact Mitigation Activities Cost Indication frequency Indicators Method persons and fish spawning) that benefit local agricultural and fisheries production. Training should occur prior to beginning construction and be repeated annually during the DFAP. At least 7 men and 7 Prior to completion of women from each ADRA the irrigation and village participate in Participant Staff time and basic Train local farmers in Agriculture drainage system; hands-on training in attendance lists materials for training small-scale composting Coordinator quarterly thereafter basic composting techniques, with a Consequence 50, techniques particular focus on rice Generation and Disposal Annual Household hulls. This should include ADRA of Agricultural Waste surveys are normally at least one hands-on Percent of local Household Survey Irrigation and conducted as part of training per year in each farmers who report of a Representative Drainage Annual M&E for the DFAP and village. composting the Sample of Local Coordinator; are not expected to majority of their waste Farmers ADRA M&E represent an additional Officer expenditure; Consequence 54, An agronomist can be Contamination of At least 7 men and 7 hired monthly for $1500 Natural Aquatic Prior to completion of women from each – 3000 depending on Train local farmers to Habitats by Agricultural the rehabilitated and village participate in ADRA experience if ADRA develop and maintain plot Participant Runoff; Consequence expanded irrigation hands-on training in Agriculture agronomists are not gradients between 0.5% attendance lists 59, Increased use of and drainage system; how to develop and Coordinator available to provide and 3% when possible to Agricultural Inputs and quarterly thereafter maintain appropriate frequent training and prevent excessive runoff or Alteration of Soil plot gradient ongoing technical water-logging. This should Profiles and support; include hands-on training Composition in Irrigated in how to develop and There is visual and Drained Areas; ADRA maintain such plot evidence that plots in Consequence 60, Crop Irrigation and gradients. This training the target irrigation and Site inspections Loss and Alteration of Drainage should be led by a qualified Quarterly drainage areas are Visual Inspections require staff time; no Soil Composition Coordinator; agronomist applying the monetary costs because of Poor ADRA M&E recommended Irrigation and Drainage Director techniques Water Management Consequence 54, As part of construction, All primary canals are Visual inspections Contamination of line all canals in the Monthly during lined with vetiver that ADRA of a representative Staff time; Natural Aquatic irrigation and drainage Construction; has taken root; large Agriculture area, documented Cost of vetiver seeds Habitats by Agricultural system with vetiver Quarterly thereafter secondary and tertiary Supervisor with photos Runoff; Consequence (Vetiveria zizanioides) to canals are also lined

142 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Responsible Impact Mitigation Activities Cost Indication frequency Indicators Method persons 57, Canal Erosion prevent erosion and to help treat runoff water by absorbing polluting substances that may be present such as heavy metals, nitrogen, phosphorus and e-coli. Canal banks and dikes should be fully covered by vegetation with no significant gaps.

At least 7 men and 7 Train farmers how to At the conclusion of women from each maintain vetiver over the ADRA construction, three village participate in Participant long term. This should be Agriculture Staff time months quarterly hands-on training in attendance lists conducted by a qualified Coordinator thereafter basic vetiver agronomist and should management include hands on training At least 15 men and 15 Consequence 56, women from each Erosion and Nutrient During the First village participate in ADRA Participant Loss in Agricultural Growing Season; hands-on training in Agriculture Staff time attendance lists Areas; Consequence 59, Quarterly thereafter irrigation and/or Coordinator Train local farmers to Increased use of drainage water regulate irrigation water agricultural inputs and management application and drainage alteration of soil profiles Household Survey management so that they Annual Household and composition in of a Representative only apply or drain the surveys are normally irrigated and drained Sample of Local amount required to meet ADRA conducted as part of areas; Consequence 60, Farmers; Visual crop needs. This should Percent of farmers who Irrigation and M&E for the DFAP and Crop Loss and Inspections to limit both water shortages report water-logging or Drainage are not expected to Alteration of Soil Annually check for the and runoff of excess water. water shortages on Coordinator; represent an additional Composition because of presence of water- their plots ADRA M&E expenditure; Poor Irrigation and logging or Director Site inspections Drainage Water crops/soils require staff time; no Management showing signs of monetary costs insufficient water Consequence 57, Canal The following design These elements are ADRA Erosion; Consequence guidelines should be included in canal Review of Design Irrigation and Qualified hydraulic and 59, Increased use of implemented: canal route design by a qualified Prior to Drainage Prior to Construction civil engineers charge agricultural inputs and should avoid sharp curves engineer based on a Construction by a Coordinator; $2500-3000 per month alteration of soil profiles and sharp drops, to the specific engineering Qualified Engineer Qualified and composition in extent practical, to reduce study and hydrological Engineer

143 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Responsible Impact Mitigation Activities Cost Indication frequency Indicators Method persons irrigated and drained risk of water caused model areas; Consequence 60, erosion. The final design Crop Loss and should seek to use very Alteration of Soil slight gradients, so that Composition because of water velocity is limited Poor Irrigation and without creating significant Drainage Water risk of sedimentation and Management blockage; the ideal gradient is 0.05%, although steeper or flatter gradients may be warranted depending on topography. Where steep gradients are required due to topography, it may be Ongoing During Canal construction is appropriate to line the Construction; Visual Inspections overseen by a qualified canal with stone or another During and After engineer to ensure it material, and establish Final Review at the Construction by a meets design velocity breaks once the Conclusion of Qualified Engineer specifications gradient decreases again. Construction Sediment traps may be appropriate if the risk of sedimentation is determined to be high in certain locations. The dimensions and slope of the canal should be determined based on the expected flow, to reduce the likelihood that water levels drop so low they become stagnant Consequence 59, Collect water quality Increased use of samples for laboratory agricultural inputs and analysis from any surface alteration of soil profiles catchment sources not Interpretation of and composition in identified and sampled as Water quality complies laboratory analysis ADRA irrigated and drained part of the environmental Prior to project with the FAO standards $400 USD for lab results by a Agriculture areas; Consequence 60, assessment. A qualified construction activities for irrigation water analysis and staff time qualified project Coordinator Crop Loss and agronomist should assess quality agronomist Alteration of Soil the sample results to Composition because of determine if the source is Poor Irrigation and suitable for use in Drainage Water irrigation, based on the

144 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Responsible Impact Mitigation Activities Cost Indication frequency Indicators Method persons Management FAO standards for irrigation water quality. Train local farmers in Once prior to the At least 7 men and 7 integrated pest rehabilitation and ADRA women from each Participant Staff time and cost of management (IPM) for soil construction of the Agriculture village participate in attendance lists IPM inputs quality management and system; Coordinator hands-on IPM training pest control. Quarterly thereafter. Collect three soil samples in each target irrigation or drainage area for laboratory analysis to identify any changes to soil composition Laboratory and allow for adaptive Soil quality results analysis and ADRA management. A qualified (same indicators as Annual interpretation by a Agriculture $450 and staff time agronomist should evaluate used for EA baseline qualified Coordinator soil quality results to analysis) agronomist identify any impacts compared with baseline conditions, and determine necessary corrective actions. Support a local farmers association that can coordinate production to promote diversity and act Staff time; potentially as a social safety net A farmers association material support as (through shared returns) if exists and; Yes/No the appropriate (equipment) Once prior to the certain crops fail. Such an farmers association ADRA to develop the rehabilitation and Informal Consequence 62, Lack association could function seeks to coordinate Irrigation and management and construction of the conversations with of Crop Diversity simultaneously as a water production Drainage technical capacity of this system; local farmers users association. It is (demonstrates Coordinator organization. Such Quarterly thereafter important that such an independent support is not expected to association have real management capacity) exceed $1000 - $3000 management capacity, and annually. not be a nominal association intended only to channel donor support. Consequence 62, Lack Train farmers (including Once prior to the At least 15 men and 15 of Crop Diversity; members of a farmers rehabilitation and women from each ADRA Participant Consequence 63, association and non construction of the beneficiary village Agriculture Staff time attendance lists Changes to Market members) in the risks system; attend theoretical Coordinator Prices associated with poor crop Quarterly thereafter trainings covering crop

145 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Responsible Impact Mitigation Activities Cost Indication frequency Indicators Method persons diversity and link this with diversity that are hands-on training in combined with hands- alternative crop varieties on training in recommended by a alternative crop qualified agronomist based production. on soil, water and other environmental conditions at the site. Recommended crops promoted through training should be selected based on community input and interest, and ADRA may promote their seed production as approved under the DFAP IEE. All recommended crop varieties should be commonly available in the region at affordable prices, and known not to pose a threat as invasive species. Informal

Majority of Families conversations with The ADRA DFAP IEE lists ADRA report maintaining matriarchs of a number of approved Agriculture Staff time plots with a variety of agricultural alternative crop varieties Coordinator crops households in each that will be promoted as village part of integrated pest management training, some of which may be appropriate for production at Katanga. Alternative crops may not have the same cash earning potential, so training should focus on other benefits such as increased nutritional diversity and resilience to pests. Promoted crop varieties should be based on locally available seeds and market demand. Consequence 64, Test a water samples from Once every three Yes/No values exceed In Situ or ADRA Water Less than $250, will

146 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Responsible Impact Mitigation Activities Cost Indication frequency Indicators Method persons Impacts to Human the irrigation catchment months during the drinking water limits? laboratory analysis and sanitation depend on testing Health and downstream irrigation first year of the supervisor method; staff time and drainage discharge proposed irrigation points to test for the and/or drainage presence of arsenic or fecal activity; coliforms to verify whether Annually thereafter water is within World Health Organization limits for drinking water. Train the community in the health risks, posed by water borne disease vectors and water contamination, and associated with human- water contact, drinking cooking, and washing. This training should recommend sanitary measures to reduce Once at the beginning exposure to water borne of construction At least 25 men and 25 disease vectors. Training activities; once more women from each Participant ADRA Health Staff time; no monetary should include six months after village participate in attendance lists Coordinator costs participatory exercises to completing training develop practical construction activities understanding and skills in sanitary practices. Training in the health risks of agricultural inputs may be combined or aligned with proposed training in IPM as part of the DFAP support. Build simple canal crossings at strategic points where canal width would Crossings are in good Visual Inspections otherwise make it difficult condition and comply documented with ADRA Consequence 66, for a child to safely cross. with design Staff time, limited FFW, Upon completion; photos. Test of Irrigation and Human or Animal Crossings should be level, recommendations. and cost of material for Quarterly thereafter ability to support Drainage Drowning at least 0.5 m wide, made Crossings are located at bridges weight to identify Coordinator of materials in good strategic pedestrian any weak areas. condition, and able to transit points. withstand the weight of large adults. They should

147 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Responsible Impact Mitigation Activities Cost Indication frequency Indicators Method persons be built using food for work so that local residents learn how to build and maintain them. Crossings should not facilitate access to previously inaccessible areas of natural vegetation that are meant to be preserved by the project. Warn local residents of the risks associated of human or animal drowning during community trainings and ADRA recommend measures to Irrigation and At least 25 men and 25 reduce this risk during Participant Drainage Staff time; no monetary Quarterly women per village maintenance activities. attendance lists Coordinator; costs attend trainings Socialize this risk to local ADRA Health children through age- Coordinator appropriate material presented to children present at school. Only individuals of healthy All individuals hired age (as defined by the through FFW meet Record of health ADRA Staff time; possibly cost economically active requirements as screening for all Irrigation and of nurse if no agreement population in DRC) with Prior to Construction, determined during a workers, including Drainage is reached with local no history of heart or Monthly During health screening at the their age, and any Coordinator; health center. A Nurse is respiratory problems and Construction local health center or known health ADRA Health expected to charge $1000 no other apparent health by a medical problems Coordinator – 2500 a month. Consequence 67 - problems should be hired professional hired by Accidents and Health for FFW the project Problems during Credentials of ADRA Construction; Qualified individuals Qualified individuals Qualified Irrigation and Consequence 68, should be hired to oversee are hired Construction Drainage Qualified hydraulic and Worker or Bystander construction and train all Prior to Construction, Managers Coordinator civil engineers in the Death during workers in the risks and Monthly During Records of worker ADRA region typically charge Construction safety measures associated Construction Workers receive training, detailing Irrigation and $2500-3000 per month with their tasks prior to appropriate training topics covered Drainage commencing work. Coordinator Clear operating procedures ADRA Operating procedures and safety measures, Monthly During Copy of Operating Irrigation and Staff time; no monetary are developed and including (but not limited Construction Procedures Drainage costs implemented to) maximum weight loads Coordinator

148 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Responsible Impact Mitigation Activities Cost Indication frequency Indicators Method persons per person, should be Visual Inspection established and enforced of health and safety ADRA during all work activities. conditions at Irrigation and Staff time; no monetary This includes a maximum worksite, Drainage costs weight of 23kg or one third documented with Coordinator of the person’s body photos weight, whichever is lower. Construction areas should be clearly identified with warning signs and barriers (such as caution tape) ADRA Visual inspection depending on the type of Monthly During Warning signs are Irrigation and Staff time; cost of documented with activity (such as warning Construction clearly posted Drainage signage. photos for areas of deep Coordinator excavation). Warning signs should be posted in French and the local language. The project should identify At least 15 men and 15 an existing or newly women per village Training Quarterly formed community water trained in water use attendance lists users association and scheduling management committee Monthly during the Informal Residents report water and train it to manage the first three growing discussions with a availability meets irrigation and drainage seasons; quarterly limited number of expectations An agronomist can be system. This committee thereafter local residents hired monthly for $1500 should include men and – 3000 depending on women from all user ADRA experience if ADRA communities, and should Consequence 69, Water Irrigation and agronomists are not offer a position to the local Use Disputes; Drainage available to provide chief. Consequence 70, Water Coordinator; frequent training and A qualified agronomist Drainage Disputes ADRA M&E ongoing technical should train and assist Quarterly, timed to Residents report that Informal Officer support; water users and water occur prior to the start water use scheduling is discussions with a association leaders to of each major participatory and limited number of Informal discussions develop water use growing season includes all social local residents require only staff time. schedules for the irrigation during the first year groups system that account for potential seasonal and daily variation in flow by identifying optimal crops under different conditions of water availability,

149 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Responsible Impact Mitigation Activities Cost Indication frequency Indicators Method persons including drier periods. This should focus on ensuring that the rights of all users are equitably respected, including downstream users.

Conflict resolution measures should be discussed with the community as a part of this training, but should focus on helping the community to build upon its own conflict resolution strategies. This training should be conducted prior to each growing season, and should be supported by technical assistance until a technically sound water use schedule is developed. Each additional training should seek to include past participants to build upon lessons learned and continue developing local capacity. Build a gauging station as ADRA part of any irrigation Irrigation and catchment to allow the This is part of catchment Yes/No gauging station Visual inspection Drainage community to easily design, and is not During Construction is built as part of documented with Coordinator, monitor variations in expected to include catchment photos Qualified catchment volume and additional expenditure Resident adjust water use schedules Engineer accordingly The irrigation system The final design design should prevent ADRA narrative details upstream users from Review final Irrigation and Before Construction measures to prevent Staff time unfairly diverting extra design narrative Drainage unfair catchment by water. This may be Coordinator upstream users accomplished by

150 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Responsible Impact Mitigation Activities Cost Indication frequency Indicators Method persons Undersizing the dimensions of secondary and tertiary canals so that they only serve a limited number of plots, to prevent excess catchment by users throughout the system. Establish drainage canals at regular intervals, so that distances from individual The final design is The final design meets plots to the main canal are signed by an these criteria as limited; include all engineer who determined by a necessary levels of canal affirms that it qualified engineer ADRA for a properly functioning meets these criteria Irrigation and system as part of the Drainage Qualified hydraulic and engineering design. Consequence 70, Water Coordinator; civil engineers in the The routes for drainage Before Construction Drainage Disputes Yes/No the routes are Qualified region typically charge canals are clearly established through a Irrigation and $2500-3000 per month established before planning participatory process Drainage through a participatory Participant lists including at least 5 Engineer process, and and/or photos of male and 5 female responsibilities for their participatory delegates from each construction and planning community with land maintenance are clearly tenure in the project established by a capable area water users association. ADRA should negotiate Copies of land access and use rights negotiated prior to beginning agreements or It may be appropriate to ADRA has conducted ADRA rehabilitation and minutes of hire a qualified mediator; good faith negotiations Irrigation and construction work. Prior to Construction meetings if cost is uncertain but to establish land access Drainage Negotiations should agreements are likely to cost $2000 - and use agreements Coordinator include participation by the informal; Photos of 5000 Consequence 72, local chiefs and all social participatory Increased Social groups to promote the negotiations Stratification equitable distribution of expected benefits. This Informal Local residents report should include good faith conversations with Quarterly after that negotiated ADRA M&E efforts to negotiate land local farmers, Staff Time construction agreements are Officer access for vulnerable particularly from respected households, but no cash vulnerable groups payments should be made

151 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Responsible Impact Mitigation Activities Cost Indication frequency Indicators Method persons to avoid creating perverse incentives. This will also allow community members to collectively pressure for equal distribution of benefits by the local chief, in accordance with traditional customs and forms of accountability. ADRA Consequence 74 - Mining construction Prior to Construction, Visual inspection Yes/No riverbed Irrigation and Staff time; no monetary Impacts to Riverbed material from riverbeds is During Construction, shows no evidence mining has occurred Drainage cost Habitat due to Mining prohibited After Construction of riverbed mining Coordinator Excess soils from earth movement not used to build dikes (cut and fill) should be used to fill in Visual Inspections borrow pits, or otherwise During Construction; During and After Soil is deposited in spread out in agricultural Quarterly After Construction by a appropriate areas, not areas (,taking care to Construction until all Qualified Engineer, in natural habitats spread out this soil and soil is disposed of. documented with avoid dumping significant photos quantities of soil from deeper, less fertile profiles in the same area). ADRA Borrow Pits needed for Irrigation and Qualified hydraulic and Consequence 75 - Earth construction material Drainage civil engineers in the Movement, Borrow Pits should not exceed 15m by Coordinator, region typically charge and Quarries 15m in size or be deeper Qualified $2500-3000 per month than 3m when possible. Resident The sides of such pits Engineer should be sloped to the Visual inspection degree necessary to reduce Borrow pits and/or of these sites by a the likelihood of collapse During Construction quarries meet these Qualified Engineer, or fatal falls from heights, design requirements documented with as determined by a photos qualified engineer. They should be located away from urban areas at locations where the environment has already been degraded by human

152 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Responsible Impact Mitigation Activities Cost Indication frequency Indicators Method persons activity, and the slope gradient is 3% or less. Any deep excavation should be clearly identified and cordoned off. Borrow pits should be promptly and completely Visual inspection filled in with soil excavated During Construction; of these sites by a during canal construction Borrow pits are Quarterly after Qualified Engineer, to avoid creating long term correctly remediated Construction documented with hazards for humans and photos animals, or accumulations of standing water The project should not Yes/No the project ADRA establish any quarries, and During Construction; Certificate of only obtained material Irrigation and Staff time; cost is for material should only be Quarterly after authorization for from authorized Drainage materials, not mitigation purchased from authorized Construction source quarries quarries Coordinator quarries The final design of the irrigation and drainage Qualified hydraulic and project should be Credentials of Qualified individuals civil engineers in the developed by a qualified Prior to Construction Qualified are hired region typically charge engineer and topographer, Individuals ADRA $2500-3000 per month; based on a detailed Consequence 76, Irrigation and Topographers typically hydrographic model Systemic Failure Drainage charge $2000-2500. Construction should be A qualified engineer is Record of contract Coordinator A detailed overseen by a resident resident throughout of the resident hydrographic model is engineer, assisted by a During Construction construction, with engineer and expected to cost between topographer or other support from assistants assistants on an as $1500 and $5000 specialists on an as needed as needed needed basis basis Train members of Develop a training Certificate of community water users program (multiple participation by 5 ADRA associations or another trainings) for the local core members of Irrigation and association in system Quarterly water users association, proposed water Drainage Consequence 78, Poor maintenance and provide including at least 5 management Coordinator Community technical assistance as people who participate committee Staff time Management needed, with a focus on in the full program. building independent At least 15 men and 15 ADRA capacity instead of women from each Training Irrigation and Quarterly providing solutions. village participate in Attendance List Drainage Training for the local water training. Coordinator

153 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Responsible Impact Mitigation Activities Cost Indication frequency Indicators Method persons users associations should Visual inspections be hands on and include at of the irrigation least 5 individuals who and/or drainage Yes/No physical ADRA participate in a training system to condition of the Irrigation and program throughout the determine its state infrastructure is Drainage first year of the project. of repair or acceptable Coordinator degradation, documented with photos Quarterly Yes/No physical condition of the Informal infrastructure conversations with acceptable ADRA local residents Yes/No the water Irrigation and indicate that users association Drainage maintenance has successfully organizes Coordinator been organized and maintenance activities managed without external assistance

154 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

4.7 Annex A - Technical Data

Table 1 Monthly Rainfall in Millimeters (mm) Kalemie Station Longitude: 29° 11' E; Latitude: 05° 53' S and Altitude: 818 m Year J F M A M J J A S O N D Monthly Average 1952 76.5 76.9 74.0 319.5 133.8 39.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 43.9 151.1 137.1 87.7 1953 76.3 170.7 143.2 26.2 19.7 2.0 15.1 45.1 78.7 120.3 154.1 77.4 1954 37.2 7.5 29.4 110.4 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.6 7.8 134.7 141.8 47.9 1955 144.0 37.0 183.6 145.8 189.6 119.4 1.8 0.0 0.0 101.3 18.4 109.6 87.5 1956 198.1 83.0 149.1 236.3 159.5 13.2 0.0 27.8 36.3 56.9 172.5 231.9 113.7 1957 163.7 130.1 148.3 222.7 165.9 0.0 1.0 0.0 43.9 99.3 86.9 322.5 115.4 1958 186.0 89.3 180.9 124.5 22.9 6.7 0.0 4.7 1.8 9.3 140.7 103.4 72.5 1959 67.5 54.2 74.1 173.4 31.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 108.4 47.2 152.0 155.8 72.0 1960 83.0 101.5 175.9 325.6 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.7 58.7 194.9 167.7 92.7 1961 153.4 252.7 246.6 218.4 1.1 8.6 0.3 125.9 1962 91.7 183.1 167.7 221.8 95.4 2.4 0.0 59.8 8.9 95.8 146.1 233.1 108.8 1963 134.7 131.6 164.4 121.9 31.2 0.4 0.0 0.0 42.4 9.7 300.4 185.4 93.5 1964 190.7 103.1 93.1 96.5 47.3 22.7 186.1 108.6 106.0 1965 85.1 49.6 199.1 177.4 127.8 1966 1967 353.8 135.0 244.4 1968 53.7 288.4 212.0 169.9 29.3 33.6 0.0 12.5 138.9 229.9 116.8 1969 141.2 124.2 77.0 137.2 186.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 93.8 226.7 211.7 100.1 1970 85.2 97.9 409.5 329.8 3.0 1.8 6.8 17.3 19.2 92.1 106.7 199.7 114.1 1971 97.6 8.4 151.1 239.1 36.2 0.0 0.0 5.0 38.8 87.3 210.3 188.6 88.5 1972 254.7 81.9 104.9 172.7 46.3 1.5 0.0 13.8 0.0 57.3 155.4 135.9 85.4 1973 111.0 120.1 154.9 89.6 108.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.9 88.8 372.0 169.6 101.8 1974 130.5 134.6 88.6 156.6 191.2 0.0 73.0 0.0 14.5 103.8 195.3 113.4 100.1 1975 89.0 25.9 110.2 138.5 101.4 0.7 25.0 1.0 30.4 39.2 150.2 98.4 67.5 1976 210.9 151.6 203.5 80.3 0.0 0.0 13.5 0.0 53.7 89.3 83.1 80.5 1977 1978 74.6 81.3 156.7 277.9 7.5 29.7 0.2 0.0 7.4 71.4 189.7 186.6 90.3 1979 338.5 97.9 82.9 389.0 38.4 5.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 87.7 115.5 166.7 110.2 1980 68.9 89.3 54.2 66.8 69.9 0.0 0.0 2.0 31.6 60.2 133.5 200.4 64.7 1981 101.1 128.2 145.3 154.0 101.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.2 28.9 94.3 80.2 70.0 1982 33.8 68.0 45.2 112.9 134.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.8 95.1 171.6 80.1 63.5 1983 84.1 102.2 24.5 0.0 0.0 7.2 5.0 70.5 12.5 96.6 40.3 1984 21.3 40.0 77.5 199.8 19.7 0.0 0.0 51.2 1985 9.1 0.0 0.0 3.3 52.9 97.5 139.4 43.2 1986 27.3 19.3 47.3 114.4 52.1 Average 114.6 137.5 137.5 73.1 73.1 4.4 4.4 21.6 21.6 158.3 158.3 91.3 92.2 Source: METTELSAT, 2012

Table 2 Monthly Rainfall in Millimeters (mm) Bukavu Station Longitude: 28° 51'; Latitude: 02°31' S and Altitude: 1612 m Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Monthly Average 1961 143.2 292.2 198.6 171.6 57.4 7.4 2.4 0.2 104.4 180.6 170.9 147.1 123.0 1962 96.7 155.7 209.7 127.8 96.2 46.5 0.0 0.0 53.7 123.9 108.6 134.3 96.1 1963 125.3 81.2 199.4 175.2 82.8 36.6 1.3 3.8 85.2 53.4 177.1 187.6 100.7

155 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 2 Monthly Rainfall in Millimeters (mm) Bukavu Station Longitude: 28° 51'; Latitude: 02°31' S and Altitude: 1612 m Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Monthly Average 1964 178.8 156.4 120.4 100.7 34.5 28.4 6.4 41.2 25.1 165.4 230.3 134.0 101.8 1965 59.3 149.8 164.3 231.6 48.8 5.6 0.0 24.1 99.6 105.8 150.0 218.9 104.8 1966 140.8 230.9 155.7 178.1 66.6 14.4 0.0 54.1 124.1 104.7 124.0 113.1 108.9 1967 148.7 123.1 134.4 179.4 183.6 24.4 132.3 1968 67.3 185.7 208.1 199.3 90.9 34.4 4.8 2.9 91.0 193.3 149.7 235.0 121.9 1969 225.1 122.5 100.3 78.2 89.9 0.0 0.0 2.8 60.0 173.8 200.9 142.2 99.6 1970 119.7 177.2 162.0 126.1 57.2 15.2 63.3 56.9 68.5 98.3 217.1 203.7 113.8 1971 142.2 167.3 106.3 169.4 136.8 13.4 10.3 44.7 52.3 120.4 253.4 195.0 117.6 1972 118.7 153.9 204.2 87.3 90.5 43.4 0.0 31.2 118.3 161.5 237.3 165.3 117.6 1973 188.2 82.2 80.1 170.8 93.5 3.4 0.2 0.0 233.8 92.5 211.9 111.2 105.7 1974 153.3 119.2 174.3 100.2 92.1 28.3 19.3 0.0 78.5 117.0 155.4 114.9 96.0 1975 147.6 169.5 99.0 112.4 73.8 6.7 3.0 8.7 136.7 140.0 150.8 107.9 96.3 1976 62.5 137.2 92.8 145.9 66.2 31.3 0.9 46.0 55.4 98.9 219.0 188.4 95.4 1977 176.0 125.6 191.5 194.3 59.2 140.5 41.8 147.3 38.0 99.1 241.6 169.5 135.4 1978 92.6 151.6 96.1 154.0 74.0 20.3 0.0 134.0 99.6 145.2 212.3 283.4 121.9 1979 221.2 83.9 231.4 174.8 177.2 32.0 0.2 7.8 33.8 209.0 159.6 97.2 119.0 1980 143.6 120.6 167.8 95.4 165.2 20.8 0.4 1.7 126.3 171.4 211.9 187.1 117.7 1981 171.2 132.7 66.2 190.6 78.8 6.7 0.9 72.2 136.3 138.4 170.2 159.2 110.3 1982 191.0 121.6 77.8 114.3 102.6 17.4 0.1 10.5 128.0 193.0 221.7 145.9 110.3 1983 84.1 149.9 173.8 160.4 58.7 16.7 0.0 67.5 91.6 155.8 172.5 185.8 109.7 1984 109.9 120.9 178.5 137.8 30.2 0.0 21.9 26.3 28.4 107.9 224.9 131.0 93.1 1985 134.5 90.6 214.2 254.4 41.7 27.3 15.8 10.1 105.0 126.0 174.1 203.8 116.5 1986 108.6 430.5 342.2 375.9 89.4 13.5 1.3 0.0 95.1 106.0 97.3 94.9 146.2 1987 102.3 111.3 192.1 110.4 191.6 10.2 0.0 11.7 141.6 181.6 .223.4 200.0 113.9 1988 197.1 189.3 182.0 160.4 61.2 3.0 3.6 121.1 160.4 186.3 266.5 98.3 135.8 1989 130.3 97.2 190.6 47.8 67.9 16.6 0.0 79.6 269.6 120.1 150.6 124.0 107.9 1990 162.8 273.1 150.1 108.9 31.8 4.6 0.0 14.8 98.7 117.4 205.7 178.8 112.2 1991 93.3 70.2 42.5 17.5 234.5 65.8 161.4 96.7 77.5 95.5 1992 97.4 196.5 136.3 89.5 135.1 40.8 0.0 0.0 42.8 208.8 198.6 95.6 103.5 1993 138.4 138.1 176.4 117.9 88.2 4.9 0.0 81.4 67.5 34.0 105.8 237.8 99.2 1994 150.6 152.7 110.1 153.7 73.9 3.1 0.0 54.7 92.4 156.1 264.7 163.8 114.7 1995 133.5 74.0 169.1 80.5 71.8 104.3 0.0 0.0 80.0 91.0 159.8 111.9 89.7 1996 126.8 80.4 105.0 81.1 22.2 15.0 0.0 19.7 31.7 68.7 55.1 1997 18.2 77.1 114.5 38.4 1.3 0.0 19.7 36.2 268.8 187.3 176.2 85.2 1998 155.7 168.7 185.4 134.9 56.8 24.7 1.8 6.5 186.4 176.8 137.7 181.5 118.1 1999 224.9 21.3 206.8 159.9 41.8 0.0 0.0 183.2 80.9 120.0 326.8 133.6 124.9 2000 83.9 84.2 284.4 108.5 165.8 11.0 8.0 0.0 32.2 140.6 362.0 267.0 129.0 2001 250.0 125.0 293.0 5.6 116.0 0.0 72.9 3.5 144.4 181.4 149.7 182.6 127.0 2002 238.8 177.7 37.1 40.4 49.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 54.6 159.4 171.8 184.3 92.8 2003 230.0 131.9 139.3 154.9 202.9 0.0 0.0 42.2 55.8 237.2 169.0 133.9 124.8 2004 95.2 49.3 14.7 18.6 2.6 10.4 0.8 27.4 Average 143.3 142.3 158.1 137.1 84.7 21.1 7.0 39.7 93.1 142.6 189.9 161.1 110.0 Source: METTELSAT, 2012

156 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 3 Average Daily Temperatures in Degrees Celsius (oC) Kalemie Station Longitude: 29° 11' E; Latitude: 05° 53' S and Altitude: 818 m Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Monthly Average 1953 23.0 23.3 23.2 23.6 23.7 21.7 21.5 22.3 23.5 24.2 23.6 23.5 23.1 1954 23.3 24.0 24.0 23.0 22.9 21.3 20.8 22.5 24.1 25.4 23.2 22.9 23.1 1955 23.0 23.2 23.5 23.5 23.2 21.6 21.4 21.9 23.8 24.4 23.4 22.7 23.0 1956 22.1 23.0 23.3 23.2 22.4 21.5 21.3 21.9 23.4 24.2 22.9 22.1 22.6 1957 22.4 22.9 22.9 22.7 22.8 21.3 20.7 22.1 23.8 24.3 24.0 22.7 22.7 1958 23.2 23.6 23.5 23.6 22.2 21.6 20.2 22.6 23.6 24.3 23.5 23.0 22.9 1959 23.5 23.3 23.3 23.3 23.0 22.0 21.5 23.1 23.9 23.7 22.8 22.9 23.0 1960 23.2 22.9 22.8 22.6 22.5 22.0 21.1 21.9 24.1 24.1 22.8 23.0 22.8 1961 1962 22.4 22.5 22.6 23.0 22.1 21.7 21.5 22.6 23.2 23.4 22.1 22.4 22.5 1963 22.4 22.9 23.3 23.3 23.3 21.2 21.5 21.8 23.4 24.4 22.1 22.8 22.7 1964 22.8 23.3 23.5 23.5 23.4 23.2 22.2 22.4 23.0 1965 22.7 23.2 22.8 22.9 22.9 1966 1967 1968 23.2 23.1 22.8 22.5 20.7 20.3 20.9 23.8 22.5 22.2 1969 22.6 22.7 23.3 23.3 23.1 21.5 21.1 22.2 23.5 23.5 22.4 22.7 22.7 1970 22.8 23.2 22.8 22.9 22.8 21.4 21.5 22.1 23.5 23.1 22.6 22.0 22.6 1971 23.1 22.3 22.5 21.8 23.1 20.3 21.2 21.3 23.0 22.5 22.4 21.7 22.1 1972 22.4 22.5 22.5 23.0 23.1 22.0 21.3 22.1 24.3 24.1 23.9 23.5 22.9 1973 23.9 24.3 24.0 23.9 23.2 21.4 20.5 22.5 24.2 24.0 22.7 22.4 23.1 1974 22.8 23.3 22.7 22.4 21.9 21.6 21.8 22.9 24.5 23.0 22.7 22.7 1975 20.2 21.3 23.4 23.0 23.2 21.4 21.5 23.3 22.8 22.8 22.5 22.3 1976 22.6 22.8 22.8 21.6 20.8 21.8 23.7 24.0 22.7 22.7 22.6 1977 22.9 23.0 23.3 22.6 23.1 21.7 21.2 22.4 23.8 22.4 22.7 22.6 1978 23.4 23.4 22.8 23.0 22.9 22.3 20.9 22.4 24.1 23.7 20.5 22.5 22.7 1979 23.0 23.1 23.2 22.8 23.0 21.0 20.9 21.9 23.6 24.0 23.0 22.8 22.7 1980 23.2 23.2 23.4 23.5 23.3 21.7 21.8 22.5 24.1 23.6 22.9 23.3 23.0 1981 23.3 23.4 23.4 23.4 23.3 22.0 21.1 22.9 23.8 24.4 23.5 22.9 23.1 1982 1983 23.8 24.1 24.1 23.2 22.6 23.5 24.3 24.2 23.4 23.7 1984 23.3 23.6 23.7 24.1 23.2 22.5 22.1 23.2 1985 23.4 19.7 22.9 24.2 23.9 22.8 1986 23.0 23.4 23.0 22.9 23.1 Average 22.9 23.1 23.2 23.1 23.0 21.7 21.2 22.2 23.6 23.9 22.8 22.7 22.8 Source: METTELSAT, 2012

157 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 4 Average Daily Temperatures in Degrees Celsius (oC) Bukavu Station Longitude: 28° 51'; Latitude: 02°31' S and Altitude: 1612 m Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Monthly Average 1961 18.9 17.4 18.7 18.9 19.7 19.2 18.7 19.8 19.5 18.6 17.6 18.2 18.7 1962 18.4 19.0 18.6 18.4 18.6 18.9 18.7 18.5 18.9 18.8 17.8 18.6 18.6 1963 18.2 18.5 18.2 18.6 18.9 18.3 18.9 19.5 20.0 19.9 18.1 18.2 18.7 1964 19.4 18.6 18.8 18.2 18.9 18.9 19.8 18.9 19.8 18.6 18.0 17.8 18.8 1965 19.2 18.6 18.6 18.5 18.7 19.1 19.2 19.8 19.5 19.9 18.3 18.7 19.0 1966 18.8 18.7 18.6 18.1 18.8 18.0 18.8 19.5 19.1 18.9 18.4 18.4 18.7 1967 18.7 18.4 18.8 19.6 18.7 18.8 1968 17.6 18.4 18.2 18.8 18.5 18.5 18.5 19.3 19.9 19.0 17.6 18.3 18.5 1969 18.8 19.0 19.3 19.3 19.2 19.1 19.0 19.8 19.8 19.2 18.2 18.8 19.1 1970 18.8 19.3 19.0 18.8 19.0 19.0 18.8 18.6 19.9 19.9 18.6 18.1 19.0 1971 18.8 17.9 18.5 18.4 17.6 18.1 18.1 19.1 18.8 18.8 17.8 17.2 18.2 1972 18.2 18.2 18.7 18.5 18.6 18.5 18.0 19.1 19.7 19.8 19.0 18.6 18.7 1973 19.6 20.0 19.0 18.6 18.8 19.0 18.8 20.0 11.5* 11.4* 10.6* 10.6* 19.2 1974 10.9* 10.9* 11.1* 10.7* 10.8* 11.1* 10.5* 12.1* 19.4 19.7 18.3 17.7 18.7 1975 17.9 18.3 18.6 19.5 18.9 18.5 18.3 19.1 18.7 18.4 19.0 18.0 18.6 1976 18.9 17.8 18.6 18.4 18.8 18.3 18.5 19.3 19.5 19.6 18.3 18.4 18.7 1977 18.7 18.8 18.8 18.9 19.3 19.0 18.7 19.0 20.0 20.1 18.1 18.9 19.0 1978 19.0 19.2 18.8 19.0 19.0 18.9 19.1 19.6 19.9 19.4 18.1 18.4 19.0 1979 18.9 19.1 19.5 18.9 18.8 18.6 18.6 20.3 21.2 20.0 18.8 18.5 19.2 1980 19.6 19.3 19.2 19.3 19.2 19.0 18.8 20.1 20.6 19.8 18.0 18.4 19.2 1981 18.9 19.2 18.9 19.3 19.2 19.2 19.2 19.4 19.0 19.1 1982 19.0 19.1 17.9 19.1 19.2 19.0 18.9 20.1 20.3 19.0 18.5 19.3 19.1 1983 19.9 19.2 11.5* 19.5 1984 1985 19.4 19.3 19.5 18.9 18.8 19.4 19.3 19.3 18.4 18.1 19.0 1986 19.1 19.0 18.6 18.8 19.0 18.7 18.5 20.6 20.2 19.7 18.3 18.5 19.1 1987 19.4 18.6 19.2 19.7 19.4 19.2 19.8 20.5 19.5 11.1* 19.5 19.5 19.4 1988 19.2 19.4 19.2 17.6 18.9 19.4 19.2 16.9 18.1 18.6 1989 19.4 -1.4* 18.8 19.0 18.7 18.7 18.4 19.5 19.3 18.7 19.1 18.9 Average* 18.9 18.7 18.7 18.8 18.9 18.8 18.8 19.5 19.6 19.3 18.3 18.4 18.9 *Values listed in red with an asterisk (*) are have been discarded as clear outliers (indicative of faulty measurements) and are not included in the calculations of averages. Source: METTELSAT, 2012.

158 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 5 Soil Quality Laboratory Sample Results pH Carbon Nitrogen P O Exchangeable pH 2 5 Aluminum Cation Exchange Sample Code and H O (%) (%) (%o) Exchangeable Bases Acidity 2 H O (meq/100g) Capacity Location (CREN 2 (CREN- (CREN- (CREN- (meq/100g) (meq/100g) (UKPL) (CREN-K) (meq/100g) -K) K) K) K)*** (CREN-K)

Ca2+ Mg2+ K+ Na+ (CREN- (UKPL) K) (CREN-K) (UKPL) 1 Kibungu USL 01 5.51 ND 2.167 0.07 301 0.25 15.113 3.439 ND ND 23.1 ND 0.25 2 USL 02 4.12 4.26 6.833 0,56 425 0.25 18.715 3.978 0.026 0.017 ND 2.96 1.75 3 USL 07A 5.33 ND 6.833 0.56 315 0.25 16.675 3.069 ND ND 17.99 ND 0.50 4 USL 09A 5.93 ND 1.833 ND 416 0.25 17.891 4.987 ND ND ND ND 0.25 5 USL09B 4.73 ND 6.167 0.21 460 0.25 18.763 4.996 ND ND ND ND 0.75 6 USL 10A 4.57 ND 3.500 0.7 474 0.25 17.237 4.734 ND ND ND ND 0.50 7 USL10B 4.78 ND 1.167 0.14 419 0.25 16.940 4.349 ND ND ND ND 0.25 8 FSL 6.24 ND 0.167 0.35 405 0.25 17.083 4.971 ND ND ND ND 1.00 03** 9 FSL 04A 5.82 5.54 2.833 0.56 538 0.25 18.567 4.982 0.19 0.14 ND 3.88 0.25 10 FSL 04B 5.45 ND 1.167 0.21 354 0.25 17.742 3.976 ND ND 18.06 ND 0.25 11 FSL 05A 5.09 ND 2.000 0.14 506 0.25 18.930 5.531 ND ND ND ND 0.25 12 FSL 05B 5.05 ND 1.167 0.07 287 0.25 16.784 3.774 ND ND ND ND 1.00 13 FSL 05C 5.05 ND 0.833 0.21 474 0.25 15.120 4.193 ND ND ND ND 0.50 14 Katanga FSL 08A 6.24 ND 5.333 ND 292 0.50 16.803 3.798 ND ND ND ND 0.25 15 FSL 08B 5.02 5.70 2.333 0.21 365 0.25 18.764 4.332 0.26 0.09 ND 4.08 0.25 16 FSL 09A 4.88 ND 6.667 0.35 560 0.25 17.030 4.173 ND ND ND ND 0.75 17 FSL 9B 4.90 ND 2.000 0.07 414 0.25 16.000 3.479 ND ND ND ND 0.25 18 FSL 10A 4.65 ND 14.833 0.7 310 0.25 17.823 3.786 ND ND ND ND 0.75 19 FSL 10B 3.85 ND 1.000 0.14 207 0.25 18.012 3.737 ND ND ND ND 0.75 20 FSL 10C 4.24 ND 1.000 0.28 490 0.25 18.041 4.430 ND ND 18.06 ND 3.25 21 FSL 11A 7.67 ND 4.667 0.35 375 0.50 14.069 4.322 ND ND ND ND 0.50 Note: CEC = Cation Exchange Capacity CREN-K: Atomic Energy Commission General, Regional Nuclear Studies Center, Kinshasa, Radioagronomic Department, Department of Soil Chemistry laboratory* UKPL : University of Kinshasa Pedology Lab * CREN-K reanalyzed all CEC values and results of the second analysis were not consistent with the first analysis. Holding time for Samples Conducted by the UKPL lab was over six months, as these were conducted after the first samples analyzed by CREN-K were released with evidence of erroneous results. Soil quality data should be reanalyzed to confirm all results. **This was misreported as USL 01B in the previous draft ***Phosporous results appear to be incorrect, and should be confirmed by continued soil sampling during the project

159 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 6 Water Quality Laboratory Sample Results Analyzed by the University of Kinshasa Science Faculty Laboratory

Munyovwe Munyovwe River, River Tap – Kibungu Kakenge Potable Water Mutambala Mutambala Nyamutiri Luhe River FAO* (Proposed Village River Tap River River Upstream Parameter Unit Village * Catchment)

KIBUNGU KIBUNGU KIBUNGU KIBUNGU KIBUNGU KATANGA KATANGA KATANGA UWA 1-3 UWA 4-6 UWA 7-9 UWA 12-13 UWA 14-16 FWA 1-3 FWA 4-6 FWA7-9 pH (lab) pH 6.0-8.5 5.5 6.5 7.0 6.5 6.5 6.0 6.0 6.0 pH (in situ) pH 6.0-8.5 6.4 6.6 6.7 6.6 6.8 6.3 7.2 7.2 uS/c Conductivity 0-3000 52.0 50.0 230.0 47.0 40.0 133.0 123.0 123.0 m Total Suspended Solids mg/l - 68.0 71.0 42.0 38.0 52.0 66.0 38.0 38.0 (TSS) Nitrate; NO3- mg/l 0-10 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.1 mg/l - 12.4 12.9 13.4 12.4 13.9 15.5 11.6 11.6 Calcium; Ca++ me/l 0-20 0.620 0.645 0.670 0.618 0.695 0.775 0.580 0.580 mg/l - 2.5 2.6 2.3 1.0 2.7 3.4 2.7 2.7 Magnesium; Mg++ me/l 0-5 0.205 0.217 0.189 0.086 0.221 0.283 0.228 0.228 mg/l - 2.0 2.0 1.8 1.7 3.3 3.1 1.4 1.4 Sodium; Na+ me/l 0-40 0.088 0.088 0.079 0.075 0.143 0.134 0.063 0.063 Sodium Absorption Ration Varies ratio 0.137 0.134 0.121 0.126 0.211 0.184 0.099 0.099 (SAR) * mg/l - 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.1 Chloride; Cl- me/l 0-30 0.000 0.001 0.009 0.000 0.001 0.007 0.004 0.004 mg/l - 12.0 14.0 7.0 12.0 20.0 38.0 12.0 12.0 Sulfate; (SO4)2- me/l 0-20 0.250 0.292 0.146 0.250 0.417 0.792 0.250 0.250 Phosphate; (PO4)3- mg/l - 4.7 1.2 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.5 3.5 3.5 Ammonium; NH4+ mg/l - 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.3 Potassium; K+ mg/l 0-2 2.5 4.0 6.9 1.6 3.5 5.3 2.8 2.8 Boron; B+ mg/l ------0.14 0.13 0.16 Cadmium; Cd++ ug/l ------0.08 1.08 0.16 Aluminum; Al3+ mg/l ------0.400 0.860 0.295 Cyanide; CN- mg/l ------0.001 0.001 0.001 Chromium Cr6+ mg/l ------0.50 0.78 0.35 Copper; Cu2+ mg/l ------0.54 0.57 0.52 Iron; Fe3+ mg/l ------1.30 1.79 0.19 Manganese; Mn++ mg/l ------1.3 5.3 1.2 Lead; Pb3+ ug/l ------0.02 1.51 0.14 Chemical Oxygen Demand mg/l - 43.2 38.4 46.9 48.3 52.1 62.8 72.6 34.1 (COD) Biological Oxygen mg/l - 26.4 24.3 28.1 26.8 34.4 48.5 51.8 22.6 Demand (BOD5) 160 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 6 Water Quality Laboratory Sample Results Analyzed by the University of Kinshasa Science Faculty Laboratory

Munyovwe Munyovwe River, River Tap – Kibungu Kakenge Potable Water Mutambala Mutambala Nyamutiri Luhe River FAO* (Proposed Village River Tap River River Upstream Parameter Unit Village * Catchment)

KIBUNGU KIBUNGU KIBUNGU KIBUNGU KIBUNGU KATANGA KATANGA KATANGA UWA 1-3 UWA 4-6 UWA 7-9 UWA 12-13 UWA 14-16 FWA 1-3 FWA 4-6 FWA7-9 * When SAR is between 0 and 3, and Conductivity is less than 700 uS/cm, there is normally no restriction on water use for irrigation, including both surface and sprinkler irrigation. ** Usual range in irrigation water, as established in the FAO publication Water Quality for Agriculture. None of the elements tested present restrictions on use based on the FAO’s guidelines for interpretations of water quality for irrigation Source: Sun Mountain International, 2012.

161 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 7 Kibungu Flora List Ecosystem* Status IUCN (2012) Species Common Names Ss Ag Sag Gf Fa 1. Acanthaceae (3) Asystasia 162xcels162ca (L.) T.Anderson - + NE Nelsonia canescens (Lam.) Spreng. - + NE Justicia flava (Vahl) Vahl - + NE 2. Amaranthaceae (3) Achyranthes aspera L. + NE Amaranthus hybridus L. Libondwe*, Lenga lenga*, Mutchitcha* + NE Celosia trigyna L. Kisandi* + NE 3. Anacardiaceae (1) Mangifera indica L. Embe* + DD 4. Apiaceae (1) Centella asiatica (L.) Urb. - + NE 5. Apocynaceae (1) Cascabela thevetia (L.) Lippold + NE Syn. Thevetia peruviana (Pers.) K.Schum. 6. Araceae (4) Anchomanes difformis (Bl.) Engl. + NE Colocasia esculenta (L.) Schott - + NE Pistia stratiotes L. + NE Xanthosoma sagittifolium (L.) Schott Matekere* + NE Syn. Xanthosoma mafaffa Schott 7. Arecaceae (2) Elaeis guineensis Jacq. Muti ya Ngazi* + NE Raphia sp. + NE 8. Asparagaceae (1) Asparagus flagellaris (Kunth) Baker - + NE A. abyssinicus Hochst. Ex A.Rich. 9. Asteraceae (13) Acmella uliginosa (Sw.) Cass. - + LC Ageratum conyzoides L. + NE Aspilia kotschyi (Sch.Bip.) Oliv. Mayani ya ba kalulu* + NE Bidens pilosa L. - + NE Crassocephalum crepidioides (Benth.) S.Moore + NE 162 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 7 Kibungu Flora List Ecosystem* Status IUCN (2012) Species Common Names Ss Ag Sag Gf Fa Syn. Gynura crepidioides Benth. Eclipta prostrata (L.) L.M + NE Syn. Eclipta alba (L.) Hassk. Emilia abyssinica (Sch.Bip. ex A.Rich.) C.Jeffrey var. Abyssinica + NE Syn. Senecio abyssinicus Sch.Bip. ex A.Rich. Erigeron trilobus (Decne.) Boiss. + NE Syn. Conyza stricta Willd. Erlangea misera (O. & H.) S.Moore + NE

Gymnanthemum amygdalinum (Delile) Sch.Bip. ex Walp. + NE Syn. Vernonia amygdalina Delile

Helichrysum luteoalbum (L.) Rchb. + NE Tithonia diversifolia (Hemsl.) A.Gray Tithonia + NE Vernonia colorata (Willd.) Drake - + NE 10. Basalminaceae (2) Impatiens irvingii Hook.f. + NE Impatiens filicornu Hook.f. - + NE 11. Ceratophyllaceae (1) Ceratophyllum demersum L. + LC 12. Cleomaceae (1) Cleome spinosa Jacq. + NE 13. Clusiaceae (1) Symphonia globulifera L.f. + NE 14. Combretaceae (3) Combretum collinum Fresen. + NE Combretum nigricans Lepr. Ex Guill. & Perr. + NE Combretum psidioides Welw. + NE 15. Commelinaceae (3) Aneilema aequinoctiale (P.Beauv.) G.Don - + NE Commelina africana L. + NE Commelina diffusa Burm.f. - + NE 16. Convolvulaceae (2) Ipomoea aquatica Forssk. + NE Merremia aegyptia (L.) Urb. + NE 163 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 7 Kibungu Flora List Ecosystem* Status IUCN (2012) Species Common Names Ss Ag Sag Gf Fa 17. Costaceae (1) Costus phyllocephalus K.Schum. + NE 18. Cyperaceae (16) Cyperus esculentus L. + NE Cyperus margaritaceus Vahl + NE Cyperus sphacelatus Rottb. + NE Fimbristylis littoralis Gand. Lesser Fimbristylis + LC Fimbristylis splendida C.B.Clarke + NE Fuirena umbellata Rottb. - + NE Kyllinga bulbosa P.Beauv. - + NE Kyllinga erecta Schumach. - + NE Kyllinga nigritiana C. B. Clarke - + NE Kyllinga pumila Michx. - + NE Lipocarpha chinensis (Osb.) Kern - + NE Mariscus alternifolius Vahl + NE Mariscus cylindristachyus Steud. + NE Pycreus flavescens (L.) P.Beauv. ex Rchb. + NE Rhynchospora corymbosa (L.) Britt. - + NE Scleria verrucosa Willd. - + NE 19. Euphorbiaceae (5) Acalypha ornata Hochst. Ex A. Rich. + NE Acalypha brachiata C.Krauss + NE Syn. Acalypha petiolaris Hochst. Ex C.Krauss Alchornea cordifola (Schumach. & Thonn.) Müll. Arg. + + + NE Euphorbia trigona Mill. + NE Manihot esculenta Crantz Muhoko* + + NE 20. Fabaceae (19) Abrus precatorius L. Maïkin* + NE Acacia nilotica (L.) Willd. Ex Delile Egyptian thorn + NE Acacia polyacantha Willd Whitethorn + NE Aeschynomene sensitiva Sw. + NE Arachis hypogaea L. Kalanga* + NE Brachystegia spiciformis Benth. Muombo* + NE 164 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 7 Kibungu Flora List Ecosystem* Status IUCN (2012) Species Common Names Ss Ag Sag Gf Fa Brachystegia boehmii Taub. Muombo* + NE Chamaecrista kirkii ( Oliv.) standley + NE Crotalaria retusa L. + NE Desmodium adscendens (Sw.) DC. + NE Desmodium tortuosum (Sw.) DC. + NE Desmodium velutinum (Willd.) DC. + NE Dichrostachys cinerea (L.) W. Wight & Arn. Sicklebush + NE Eriosema psoraleoides (Lam.) G.Don. + NE Mimosa pigra L. Giant Sensitive Tree + NE Mimosa diplotricha C.Wright ex Sauvalle Giant sensitive plant + NE Syn. Mimosa invisa Mart. Ex Colla Leucaena leucocephala (Lam.) de Wit White Leadtree + NE Tephrosia nana Kotschy ex Schweinf. + NE Syn. Tephrosia barbigera Welw. Ex Baker Vigna heterophylla A.Rich. - + NE Syn. Vigna ambacensis Welw. Ex Baker 21. Hypericaceae (1) Harungana madagascariensis Lam. Ex Poir. Haronga + NE 22. Lamiaceae (3) Hyptis suaveolens Poit. - + NE Lantana montevidensis (Spreng) Briq Creeping lantana + NE Vitex madiensis Oliv. + NE 23. Lauraceae (1) Persea americana Mill. Avocado + NE 24. Linderniaceae (1) Lindernia diffusa (L.) Wettst. - + NE 25. Lycopodiaceae (1) Lycopodiella cernua (L.) Pic.Serm. + NE Syn. Lycopodium cernuum L. 26. Malvaceae (9) Corchorus olitorius L. + NE Hibiscus asper Hook. F. Bush Roselle + NE Sida acuta Burm. F. + NE Sida cordifolia L. - + NE 165 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 7 Kibungu Flora List Ecosystem* Status IUCN (2012) Species Common Names Ss Ag Sag Gf Fa Sida rhombifolia L. + NE Sterculia subviolacea K.Schum. - + NE Sterculia quinqueloba (Garcke) K.Schum. + NE Urena lobata L. Ngaingai ya bungu* + NE Waltheria indica L. + NE 27. Marantaceae (1) Thalia geniculata L. + NE 28. Marsileaceae (1) Marsilea minuta L. Water clover + LC 29. Melastomataceae (2) Heterotis rotundifolia (Sm.) Jacq.-Fél - + NE Syn.Dissotis rotundifolia (Sm.) Triana Tristemma mauritianum J.F.Gmel. + NE 30. Molluginaceae (2) Glynus oppositifolia (L.) A. DC. + NE Mollugo nudicaulis Lam. - + NE 31. Moraceae (1) Milicia 166xcels (Welw.) C.C. Berg Iroko + NT Syn. Chlorophora 166xcels (Welw.) Benth. 32. Musaceae (2) Musa paradisiaca L. Ndizi*, Mabughuru* + NE Musa sapientum L. Bitika* + NE 33. Nephrolepidaceae (1) Nephrolepis biserrata (Sw.) Schott + NE 34. Nymphaeaceae (2) Nymphaea lotus L. + + NE Nymphaea maculata Schumach. & Thonn. + NE 35. Onagraceae (4) Ludwigia abyssinica A.Rich. + NE Ludwigia adscendens subsp. Diffusa (Forssk.) P.H.Raven + + NE Syn. Ludwigia stolonifera (Guill. & Perr.) P.H.Raven Ludwigia leptocarpa (Nutt.) H.Hara + NE Ludwigia stenorraphe (Brenan) H.Hara + NE

166 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 7 Kibungu Flora List Ecosystem* Status IUCN (2012) Species Common Names Ss Ag Sag Gf Fa 36. Orobranchaceae (2) Striga asiatica (L.) O. Kuntze - + NE Striga hermontica (Del.) Benth. - + NE 37. Oxalidaceae (1) Biophytum petersianum Klotzsch + NE 38. Passifloraceae (1) Passiflora foetida L. Khonzo* + NE 39. Pedaliaceae (1) Sesamum radiatum Schumach. & Thonn. + NE 40. Phyllanthaceae (4) Antidesma venosum E. Mey. Ex Tul. + NE Bridelia ripicola J. Léonard + NE Phyllanthus muellerianus (O.Ktze.) Exell - + + NE Phyllanthus urinaria L. + NE 41. Plantagynaceae (2) Bacopa crenata (P.Beauv.) Hepper - + NE Scoparia dulcis L. - + NE 42. Poaceae (32) Andropogon canaliculatus Schumach. + NE Andropogon schirensis Hochst. Ex A. Rich. + NE Bambusa vulgaris Schrad. Ex J.C.Wendl. Milonge* + NE Centotheca lappacea (L.) Desv. - + NE Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. - + NE Digitaria horizontalis Willd. + NE Digitaria leptorhachis (Pilg.) Stapf + NE syn. Digitaria polybotrya Stapf Diheteropogon amplectens (Nees) Clayton var. amplectens + NE Echinochloa pyramidalis (Lam.) Hutch. & Chase - + NE Echinochloa stagnina (Retz.) P.Beauv. - + NE Eleusine indica (L.) Gaertn. Mabamba* + NE Eragrostis ciliaris (L.) R.Br. + NE Heteropogon contortus (L.) P.Beauv. ex Roem. & Schult. + NE Hyparrhenia diplandra (Hack.) Stapf + NE 167 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 7 Kibungu Flora List Ecosystem* Status IUCN (2012) Species Common Names Ss Ag Sag Gf Fa Hyparrhenia familiaris (Steud.) Stapf + NE Imperata cylindrica (L.) Raeusch. + NE Leersia hexandra Sw. - + NE Loudetia simplex L. + NE Melinis amethystea (Franch.) Zizka + NE Oryza sativa L. Mupunga*, Mutshele* + NE Panicum maximum Jacq. Mipelembe* + NE Panicum parvifolium Lam. + NE Pennisetum polystachion (L.) Schult. + NE Pennisetum purpureum Schumach Matete* + + NE Phacelurus gabonensis (Steud.) Clayton - + NE Phragmites mauritianus Kunth Matete* NE Schizachyrium platyphyllum (Franch.) Stapf + + NE Schizachyrium sanguineum (Retz.) Alston + NE Setaria megaphylla (Steud.) T.Durand & Schinz + NE Sporobulus pyramidalis (Steud.) P. Beauv. - + NE Trachypogon spicatus (L.f.) Ktze + NE Urochloa ruziziensis (R. Germ. & C.M. Evrard) Crins + + NE Syn. Brachiaria ruziziensis R. Germ. & C.M. Evrard Zea mays L. + NE 43. Polygonaceae (1) Persicaria senegalensis (Meisn.) Soják - + NE Syn. Polygonum senegalense Meissn. 44. Pontederiaceae (1) Eichhornia crassipes (Mart.) Solms Common Water Hyacinth + NE 45. Rubiaceae (3) Mitracarpus hirtus (L.) DC. + NE Syn. Mitracarpus scaber Zucc. Ex Schult. & Schult.f. Oldenlandia corymbosa L. + NE Stipularia africana P.Beauv. + NE 46. Rutaceae (2) Citrus limon (L.) Burm.f. + NE Citrus sinensis (L.) Osbeck + NE

168 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 7 Kibungu Flora List Ecosystem* Status IUCN (2012) Species Common Names Ss Ag Sag Gf Fa 47. Salviniaceae (2) Azolla pinnata R.Br. + NE Salvinia molesta D.S.Mitch. + NE 48. Sphenocleaceae (1) Sphenoclea zeylanica Gaertn. + NE 49. Talinaceae (1) Talinum fruticosum (L.) A. Juss. Bibi + NE Syn. Talinum triangulare (Jacq.) Willd. 50. Thelypteridaceae (1) Cyclosorus gongylodes (Schkruhr) Link + NE 51. Xanthorrhoeaceae (1) Aloe congolensis De Wild. & T.Durand + NE *Ss = Shrub Savannah; Ag = Aquatic Grassland; Sag = Semi-aquatic Grassland; Gg = Gallery Forest; Fa = Fallow

Table 8 Kibungu Fauna List Ecosystem* IUCN Status (2012) Class/Order/Species Common Name Ss Ag Sag Gf Fa CLASS: AMPHIBIA

ORDER: ANURA 1. ARTHROLEPTIDAE (1) Arthroleptis stenodactylus Pfeffer, 1893 Common Squeaker + LC 2. BUFONIDAE (1) Amietophrynus urunguensis Loveridge, 1932 Urungu Toad + DD Syn. Bufo urunguensis Loveridge, 1932 3. HYPEROLIIDAE (3) 4.7.1 Afrixalus wittei (Laurent, 1941) De Witte's spiny reed frog + + LC Hyperolius kivuensis Ahl, 1931 - LC Hyperolius marginatus Peters, 1854 - + LC 4. PIPIDAE (2) Xenopus laevis Daudin, 1802 African clawed frog + + LC Xenopus muelleri (Peters, 1844) Muller's Platanna + LC 169 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 8 Kibungu Fauna List Ecosystem* IUCN Status (2012) Class/Order/Species Common Name Ss Ag Sag Gf Fa 5. PYXICEPHALIDAE (1) Amietia angolensis (Bocage, 1866) Angola River Frog, Common River Frog + + LC Syn. Rana angolensis Bocage, 1866 6. RANIDAE (3) Hoplobatrachus occipitalis (Günther, 1858) Crowned Bullfrog + LC Syn. Rana occipitalis Günther, 1858 Ptychadena anchietae (Bocage, 1868) Plain Grass Frog, Anchieta's Ridged Frog + LC Ptychadena mascareniensis (Dumeril & Bibron, 1841) Mascarene Grassland Frog + LC CLASS : ACTINOPTERYGII

ORDER : PERCIFORMES 7. CICHLIDAE (2) Tilapia rendalli (Boulenger, 1896) Redbreast tilapia + + LC Oreochromis niloticus niloticus (Linnaeus, 1758) Nile Tilapia + + NE CLASS : ACTINOPTERYGII

ORDER : SILURIFORMES 8. CLARIIDAE (2) Clarias batrachus (Linnaeus, 1758) walking catfish, Biloba + + NE Clarias gariepinus (Burchell, 1822) African sharptooth catfish, Singa + + NE 9. CLAROTEIDAE (2) Auchenoglanis occidentalis (Valenciennes, 1840) Giraffe catfish, Bubu + LC Chrysichthys brachynema Boulenger, 1900 Salmontail catfish, Mbane + LC SARCOPTERYGII

ORDER : LEPIDOSIRENIFORMES 10. PROTOPTERIDAE (1) Protopterus aethiopicus Heckel, 1851 Leopard lungfish + NE CLASS : AVES

ORDER : CUCULIFORMES 11. CUCULIDAE (1) Centropus senegalensis (Linnaeus, 1766) The Senegal Coucal + LC CLASS : AVES

ORDER : COLUMBIFORMES 12. COLUMBIDAE (1) Streptopelia semitorquata Ruppel, 1837 Red-eyed Dove, Pigeon ya pori* + LC CLASS : AVES

ORDER : CORACIIFORMES 170 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 8 Kibungu Fauna List Ecosystem* IUCN Status (2012) Class/Order/Species Common Name Ss Ag Sag Gf Fa 13. ALCEDIDAE (3) Alcedo cristata Pallas, 1764 The Malachite Kingfisher + LC Ceryle rudis L. 1758 Pied Kingfisher + LC Halcyon senegalensis L. 1766 Woodland Kingfisher + LC 14. MEROPIDAE (1) Merops pusillus Statius Müller, 1776 Little Bee-eater + LC CLASS : AVES

ORDER : PASSERIFORMES 15. CORVIDAE (1) Corvus albus Statius Muller, 1776 Pied Crow, Kibombo bombo* + LC 16. ESTRILDIDAE (6) Amandava subflava Viellot, 1812 Zebra Waxbill, Orange-breasted Waxbill + + LC Clytospiza monteiri Hartlaub, 1860 Brown Twinspot + LC Estrilda melpoda Viellot, 1817 Orange-cheeked Waxbill + LC Lagonosticta rubricata Lichtenstein, 1823 African Firefinch + + LC Lonchura cucullata (Swainson, 1837) The Bronze Mannikin, Bronze Munia + LC Uraeginthus bengalus L. 1758 Red-cheeked Cordon-bleu + LC 17. PASSERIDAE (1) Passer griseus (Vieillot, 1817) Common Grey-headed Sparrow + LC 18. PLOCEIDAE (2) Quelea erythrops Hartlaub, 1848 Red-headed Quelea + LC Ploceus cucullatus (Müller, 1766) Village Weaver, Jony Jony + LC 19. PYCNONOTIDAE (1) Pycnonotus barbatus (Desfontaines, 1789) The Common Bulbul + + LC CLASS : AVES

ORDER : PELECANIFORMES 20. ARDEIDAE (2) Bubulcus ibis L. 1758 Cattle Egret, Nyange nyange + + LC Egretta garzetta (Linnaeus, 1766) Little Egret + LC CLASS : AVES

ORDER : ANSERIFORMES 21. ANATIDAE (1) Anas capensis (Gmelin, 1789) Cap Teal + LC

171 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 8 Kibungu Fauna List Ecosystem* IUCN Status (2012) Class/Order/Species Common Name Ss Ag Sag Gf Fa CLASS : REPTILIA

ORDER : SQUAMATA 22. COLUBRIDAE (1) Dasypeltis scabra (Linnaeus, 1758) Egg-eating snake + LC 23. ELAPIDAE (2) Naja annulata (Buchholz and Peters, 1876) Banded water cobra, Yele* + + NE Naja nigricollis Reinhardt, 1843 black-necked spitting cobra, Esea mate + NE 24. PYTHONIDAE (1) Python sebae (Gmelin, 1788) African rock python, Satu* + NE 25. VARANIDAE (1) Varanus niloticus (Linnaeus, 1758) River Leguaan, Mbolo* + NE CLASS : REPTILIA

ORDER : TESTUDINES 26. PELOMEDUSIDAE (1) Pelomedusa subrufa (Lacépède, 1788) African helmeted turtle, Ndele* + LC CLASS: MAMMALIA

ORDER: RODENTIA 27. NESOMYIDAE (2) Cricetomys gambianus Waterhouse, 1840 African giant pouched rat + LC Cricetomys kivuensis Lönnberg, 1917 Kivu Giant Pouched Rat + NE *Ss = Shrub Savannah; Ag = Aquatic Grassland; Sag = Semi-aquatic Grassland; Gg = Gallery Forest; Fa = Fallow

172 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 9 List of Katanga Flora Ecosystems* Status Common Species IUCN names Ag Sag Rs Wl (2012) 1. Acanthaceae (4) Asystasia gangetica (L.) T.Anderson - + NE Hygrophila auriculata (Schumach.) Heine + LC Hypoestes aristata (Vahl) Sol. ex Roem. & Schult. var. aristata + LC Syn. Hypoestes verticillaris (L.f.) Sol. ex Roem. & Schult. Justicia flava (Vahl) Vahl - + NE 2. Amaranthaceae (4) Alternanthera sessilis (L.) R.Br. ex DC. Kanshinda + LC Libondwe, Amaranthus hybridus L. Lenga lenga, + NE Mutchitcha Celosia trigyna L. Kisandi + NE Cyathula prostrata (L.) Blume - + NE 3. Anacardiaceae (2) Mangifera indica L. Embe + DD Pseudospondias microcarpa (A.Rich.) Engl. - + NE 4. Annonaceae (1) Annona senegalensis Pers. Mulolo + NE 5. Apiaceae (2) Centella asiatica (L.) Urb. - + NE Steganotaenia araliacea Hochst. + NE 6. Apocynaceae (1) Cascabela thevetia (L.) Lippold + NE Syn. Thevetia peruviana (Pers.) K.Schum. 7. Aponogetonaceae (1) Aponogeton abyssinicus Hochst. ex A.Rich. + NE 8. Araceae (4) Anchomanes difformis (Bl.) Engl. + NE Colocasia esculenta (L.) Schott - + NE Pistia stratiotes L. + LC Xanthosoma sagittifolium (L.) Schott Matekere + NE Syn. Xanthosoma mafaffa Schott 9. Araliaceae (2) Cussonia angolensis (Seem.) Hiern Ikiokio + NE

Schefflera abyssinica (Hochst. ex A.Rich.) Harms + NE Syn. Aralia abyssinica Hochst. ex A.Rich.

10. Arecaceae (2) Elaeis guineensis Jacq. Muti ya Ngazi + NE Hyphaene guineensis Schumach. & Thonn. - + NE 11. Asparagaceae (2) Asparagus flagellaris (Kunth) Baker - + NE Syn. Asparagus abyssinicus Hochst. ex A.Rich. Drimia altissima (L.f.) Ker Gawl. + NE 173 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 9 List of Katanga Flora Ecosystems* Status Common Species IUCN names Ag Sag Rs Wl (2012) 12. Asteraceae (12) Acanthospermum hispidum DC. Mudiata nzau + NE Acmella uliginosa (Sw.) Cass. + LC Syn. Spilanthes uliginosa Sw. Ageratum conyzoides L. + NE Ageratum houstonianum Mill. + NE Crassocephalum rubens (Juss. ex Jacq.) S.Moore + NE Eclipta prostrata (L.) L.M + NE Syn. Eclipta alba (L.) Hassk. Galinsoga parviflora Cav. + NE Gymnanthemum amygdalinum (Delile) Sch.Bip. ex Walp. + NE Syn. Vernonia amygdalina Delile Sonchus oleraceus L. + NE Tithonia diversifolia (Hemsl.) A.Gray Tithonia + NE Vernonia cinerea (L.) Less. + NE Vernonia galamensis (Cass.) Less. + NE 13. Basalminaceae (1) Impatiens irvingii Hook.f. + NE 14. Bignoniaceae (1) Markhamia tomentosa (Benth.) K.Schum. ex Engl. + NE 15. Cannabaceae (1) Trema orientalis (L.) Blume + NE 16. Caricaceae (1) Carica papaya L. + NE 17. Ceratophyll1aceae (1) Ceratophyllum demersum L. Rigid Hornwort + LC 18. Cleomaceae (1) Cleome spinosa Jacq. - + NE 19. Combretaceae (3) Combretum celastroides subsp. laxiflorum (Welw. ex M.A.Lawson) Exell + NE Syn. Combretum laxiflorum Welw. ex M.A.Lawson Combretum psidioides Welw. + NE Terminalia superba Engl. & Diels + NE 20. Commelinaceae (5) Aneilema aequinoctiale (P.Beauv.) G.Don - + NE Commelina diffusa Burm.f. - + LC Cyanotis lanata Benth. - + NE Murdannia nudiflora (L.) Brenan + NE Syn. Commelina nudiflora L. Murdannia simplex (Vahl) Brenan + NE 21. Convolvulaceae (4) Ipomoea aquatica Forssk. + + NE Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam. + NE Ipomoea eriocarpa R.Br. + NE Ipomoea tenuirostris Steud. subsp. tenuirostris + NE Syn. Ipomoea gracilior Rendle

174 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 9 List of Katanga Flora Ecosystems* Status Common Species IUCN names Ag Sag Rs Wl (2012) 22. Cucurbitaceae (2) Coccinia adoensis (A.Rich.) Cogn. + NE Syn. Momordica adoensis A.Rich. Luffa cylindrica (L.) M.J. Roem. + NE 23. Cyperaceae (20) Cyperus alopecuroides Rottb. + NE Cyperus alternifolius L. + NE Cyperus articulatus L. Alele + NE Cyperus dives Del. - + NE Cyperus esculentus L. + NE Cyperus papyrus L. Eko + LC Cyperus sphacelatus Rottb. + NE Fimbristylis complanata (Retz.) Link + LC Fuirena umbellata Rottb. - + NE Kyllinga bulbosa P.Beauv. - + NE Kyllinga nigritiana C. B. Clarke - + NE Kyllinga pumila Michx. - + NE Lipocarpha chinensis (Osb.) Kern - + NE Mariscus alternifolius Vahl Nkamu + NE Mariscus cylindristachyus Steud. + NE Pycreus flavescens (L.) P.Beauv. ex Rchb. Nkamu + NE Pycreus mundtii Nees + NE Rhynchospora corymbosa (L.) Britt. - + NE Scleria melanomphala Kunth - + NE Scleria verrucosa Willd. + NE 24. Dennstaedtiaceae (1) Pteridium aquilinum (L.) Kuhn + NE 25. Euphorbiaceae (6) Acalypha ornata Hochst. ex A. Rich. + NE Alchornea cordifola (Schumach. & Thonn.) Müll. Arg. + NE Jatropha curcas L. + NE Manihot esculenta Crantz Muhoko + NE Macaranga schweinfurthii Pax + NE Manniophyton fulvum Müll.Arg. + NE 26. Fabaceae (24) Acacia hockii De Wild. + NE Acacia nilotica (L.) Willd. ex Delile Akonga + NE Acacia polyacantha Willd Ebombo + NE Aeschynomene elaphroxylon (Guill. & Perr.) Taub. Nkila, Mikila + NE Aeschynomene sensitiva Sw. + NE Albizia adianthifolia (Schum) W.Wight var.adianthifolia + NE Arachis hypogaea L. Kalanga + NE Brachystegia boehmii Taub. + NE Brachystegia spiciformis Benth. + NE Canavalia rosea (Sw.) DC. - + NE Chamaecrista kirkii (Oliv.) Standley + NE 175 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 9 List of Katanga Flora Ecosystems* Status Common Species IUCN names Ag Sag Rs Wl (2012) Crotalaria retusa L. + NE Desmodium tortuosum (Sw.) DC. + NE Nguitima, Desmodium velutinum (Willd.) DC. + NE Dintata Dichrostachys cinerea (L.) W. Wight & Arn. + NE Eriosema psoraleoides (Lam.) G.Don. + NE Erythrina abyssinica Lam. ex DC. + NE Leucaena leucocephala (Lam.) de Wit + NE Mimosa pigra L. + NE Mimosa pudica L. + NE Piliostigma thonningii (Schumach.) Milne-Redh. Efumbe + NE Senna siamea (Lam.) H.S.Irwin & Barneby + NE Syn. Cassia siamea Lam. Tephrosia nana Kotschy ex Schweinf. + NE Syn. Tephrosia barbigera Welw. ex Baker Tylosema fassoglensis (Schweinf.) Torre & Hillc. + NE Syn. Bauhinia fassoglensis Schweinf. Vigna heterophylla A.Rich. - + NE Syn. Vigna ambacensis Welw. ex Baker 27. Gentianaceae (1) Anthocleista liebrechtsiana De Wild. & T.Durand + NE 28. Hydrocharitaceae (3) Hydrilla verticillata (L.f.) Royle Indian Stargrass + LC Ottelia ulvifolia (Planch.) Walp. + NE Vallisneria spiralis L. Tapegrass + LC 29. Hypericaceae (2) Harungana madagascariensis Lam. ex Poir. + NE Psoropermum febrifugum Spach. + NE 30. Lamiaceae (3) Hyptis suaveolens Poit. - + NE Clerodendrum uncinatum Schinz + NE Syn. Kalaharia uncinata (Schinz) Moldenke Lantana montevidensis (Spreng) Briq + NE 31. Lauraceae (2) Cassitha filiformis L. - + NE Persea americana Mill. - + NE 32. Lemnaceae (1) Lemna aequinoctialis Welw. Duckweed + LC Syn. Lemna paucicostata Hegelm. ex Engelm. 33. Linderniaceae (1) Lindernia diffusa (L.) Wettst. - + NE 34. Lygodiaceae (1) Lygodium microphyllum Link + NE 35. Malvaceae (10) Corchorus olitorius L. + NE Hibiscus cannabinus L. + NE Syn. Hibiscus asper Hook. f. Hibiscus mechowii Garcke + NE 176 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 9 List of Katanga Flora Ecosystems* Status Common Species IUCN names Ag Sag Rs Wl (2012) Sida acuta Burm. f. + NE Sida cordifolia L. - + NE Sida rhombifolia L. + NE Sterculia quinqueloba (Garcke) K.Schum. Muzungu pori + NE Sterculia subviolacea K.Schum. - + NE Urena lobata L. + NE Waltheria indica L. + NE 36. Marantaceae (1) Thalia geniculata L. + NE 37 Melastomataceae (3) Dissotis brazzae Cogn. + NE Dissotis thollonii Cogn. ex Büttner + NE Heterotis rotundifolia (Sm.) Jacq.-Fél - + NE Syn.Dissotis rotundifolia (Sm.) Triana 38. Molluginaceae (2) Glynus oppositifolia (L.) A. DC. + NE Mollugo nudicaulis Lam. - + NE 39. Menispermaceae (1) Cissampelos owariensis P.Beauv. - + NE 40. Moraceae (3) Ficus bubuWarb. - + NE Ficus sur Forssk. + NE Ficus vallis-choudae Delile Etu’we + NE 41. Musaceae (2) Ndizi, Musa paradisiaca L. + NE Mabughuru Musa sapientum L. Bitika + NE 42. Myrtaceae (2) Syzygium guineensis (Willd.) DC.subsp. guineense Kikulu, Nkulu + NE Syzygium guineensis (Willd.) DC. subsp. macrocarpum (Engl.) Nkisu + NE F. White 43. Najadaceae (2) Najas horrida A.Braun ex Magnus + NE Holly-leaved Najas marina L. + LC Naiad 44. Nephrolepidaceae (1) Nephrolepis biserrata (Sw.) Schott + NE 45. Nymphaeaceae (1) Nymphaea lotus L. Maba + NE 46. Onagraceae (3) Ludwigia abyssinica A.Rich. + NE Ludwigia adscendens subsp. diffusa (Forssk.) P.H.Raven + NE Syn. Ludwigia stolonifera (Guill. & Perr.) P.H.Raven Ludwigia leptocarpa (Nutt.) H.Hara + NE 47. Orobanchaceae (2) Striga asiatica (L.) O. Kuntze - + NE Striga hermontica (Del.) Benth. - + NE 177 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 9 List of Katanga Flora Ecosystems* Status Common Species IUCN names Ag Sag Rs Wl (2012) 48. Oxalidaceae (1) Biophytum petersianum Klotzsch + NE 49. Passifloraceae (1) Passiflora foetida L. Khonzo + NE 50. Pedaliaceae (1) Sesamum radiatum Schumach. & Thonn. + NE 51. Phyllanthaceae (5) Antidesma venosum E. Mey. ex Tul. + NE Bridelia micrantha (Hochst.) Baill. + NE Bridelia ripicola J. Léonard + NE Bridelia scleroneura Müll.Arg. + NE Phyllanthus muellerianus (O.Ktze.) Exell - + NE 52. Plantaginaceae (2) Bacopa crenata (P.Beauv.) Hepper - + NE Scoparia dulcis L. + NE 53. Poaceae (32) Andropogon canaliculatus Schumach. + NE Andropogon gayanus Kunth + NE Andropogon schirensis Hochst. ex A. Rich. + NE Bambusa vulgaris Schrad. ex J.C.Wendl. Milonge + NE Chloris pilosa Schumach. + NE Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. - + NE Dactyloctenium aegyptium (L.) Willd. + NE Digitaria abyssinica (Hochst. ex A.Rich.) Stapf + NE Diheteropogon amplectens (Nees) Clayton var. amplectens + NE Echinochloa crus-pavonis (Kunth) Schult. + NE Echinochloa pyramidalis (Lam.) Hutch. & Chase - + NE Echinochloa stagnina (Retz.) P.Beauv. - + NE Eleusine indica (L.) Gaertn. + NE Hemarthria natans Stapf + NE Hyparrhenia diplandra (Hack.) Stapf + NE Hyparrhenia familiaris (Steud.) Stapf + NE Imperata cylindrica (L.) Raeusch. + NE Leersia hexandra Sw. - + NE Loudetia arundinacea (Hochst. ex A.Rich.) Steud. + NE Loudetia simplex L. + NE Melinis amethystea (Franch.) Zizka + NE Mupunga, Oryza sativa L. + NE Mutshele Panicum maximum Jacq. + NE Panicum parvifolium Lam. + NE Pennisetum polystachion (L.) Schult. + NE Pennisetum purpureum Schumach Matete + NE Phacelurus gabonensis (Steud.) Clayton - + NE Phragmites mauritianus Kunth Matete NE Rottboellia cochinchinensis (Lour.) Clayton + NE 178 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 9 List of Katanga Flora Ecosystems* Status Common Species IUCN names Ag Sag Rs Wl (2012) Syn. Rottboellia exaltata L.f. non (L.) L.f. Setaria megaphylla (Steud.) T.Durand & Schinz + NE Sporobulus pyramidalis (Steud.) P. Beauv. - + NE Urochloa ruziziensis (R. Germ. & C.M. Evrard) Crins + NE Syn. Brachiaria ruziziensis R. Germ. & C.M. Evrard Zea mays L. + NE 54. Polygonaceae (2) Persicaria senegalensis (Meisn.) Soják - + NE Syn. Polygonum senegalense Meissn. Persicaria setosula (A.Rich.) K.L.Wilson + NE Syn. Polygonum setosulum A.Rich. 55. Pontederiaceae (1) Eichhornia crassipes (Mart. ) Solms + NE 56. Potamogetonaceae (1) Potamogeton schweinfurthii A.Benn. + NE 57. Rubiaceae (3) Mitracarpus hirtus (L.) DC. + NE Syn. Mitracarpus scaber Zucc. Ex Schult. & Schult.f. Oldenlandia corymbosa L. + NE Oldenlandia lancifolia (Schumach.) DC. + NE 58. Rutaceae (1) Citrus limon (L.) Burm.f. + NE 59. Salviniaceae (2) + Azolla pinnata R.Br. + NE Salvinia molesta D.S.Mitch. NE 60. Selaginellaceae (1) Selaginella myosurus (Sw.) Alston + NE 61. Solanaceae (3) Capsicum annuum L. + NE Capsicum frutescens L. + NE Solanum macrocarpon L. + NE 62. Sphenocleaceae (1) Sphenoclea zeylanica Gaertn. + NE 63. Talinaceae (1) Talinum fruticosum (L.) A. Juss. Bibi + NE 64. Thelypteridaceae (1) Cyclosorus gongylodes (Schkruhr) Link + NE 65. Typhaceae (1) Typha latifolia L. + NE 66. Verbenaceae (1) Turkey Tangle Phyla nodiflora (L.) Greene + LC Frogfruit 67. Vitaceae (2) Cissus aralioides (Sw. ex Baker) Planch. + NE Cissus rubiginosa Welw. ex Baker - + NE 68. Zingiberacaea (2) Aframomum alboviolaceum (Ridley) K.Schum. Matungulu + NE 179 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 9 List of Katanga Flora Ecosystems* Status Common Species IUCN names Ag Sag Rs Wl (2012) Zingiber officinalis Roscoe + NE * Ag = Aquatic Grassland; Sag = Semi-aquatic Grassland; Rs = Riparian Shrub Community; Wl = Woodland

Table 10 Katanga Fauna List Ecosystems* IUCN Status Classes/Orders/Species Common Names Ag Sag Rs Wl (2012) CLASS: AMPHIBIA ORDER: ANURA 1. ARTHROLEPTIDAE (1) Arthroleptis stenodactylus Pfeffer, 1893 Common Squeaker + LC 2. BUFONIDAE (1) Amietophrynus urunguensis Loveridge, 1932 Urungu Toad + DD Syn. Bufo urunguensis Loveridge, 1932 3. HYPEROLIIDAE (3) 4.7.2 Afrixalus wittei (Laurent, 1941) De Witte's spiny reed frog + + LC Hyperolius kivuensis Ahl, 1931 - LC Hyperolius marginatus Peters, 1854 - + LC 4. PIPIDAE (2) Xenopus laevis Daudin, 1802 African clawed frog + + LC Xenopus muelleri (Peters, 1844) Muller's Platanna + LC 5. PYXICEPHALIDAE (1) Amietia angolensis (Bocage, 1866) Angola River Frog, Common River Frog + + LC Syn. Rana angolensis Bocage, 1866 6. RANIDAE (6) Hylarana galamensis (Dumeril & Bibron, 1841) Golden-backed frog + + LC Hylarana albolabris (Hallowell, 1856) white-lipped frog + LC Hoplobatrachus occipitalis (Günther, 1858) Crowned Bullfrog + LC Syn. Rana occipitalis Günther, 1858 Ptychadena anchietae (Bocage, 1868) Plain Grass Frog, Anchieta's Ridged Frog + LC Ptychadena mascareniensis (Dumeril & Bibron, 1841) Mascarene Grassland Frog + LC Strongylopus fasciatus (Smith, 1849) Striped stream frog + + LC CLASS : REPTILIA

ORDER : SQUAMATA 7. CHAMAELEONIDAE (1) Chamaeleo gracilis Hallowell, 1844 + NE 8. COLUBRIDAE (1) Dasypeltis scabra (Linnaeus, 1758) Egg-eating snake + LC 9. ELAPIDAE (2) Naja annulata (Buchholz and Peters, 1876) Banded water cobra, Yele + + NE Naja nigricollis Reinhardt, 1843 black-necked spitting cobra, Esea mate + NE 10. PYTHONIDAE (1) Python sebae (Gmelin, 1788) African rock python, Satu + NE 11. VARANIDAE (1) Varanus niloticus (Linnaeus, 1758) River Leguaan, Mbolo*, Samba* + NE 12. VIPERIDAE (1)

180 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 10 Katanga Fauna List Ecosystems* IUCN Status Classes/Orders/Species Common Names Ag Sag Rs Wl (2012) Bitis arietans (Merrem, 1820) Moma* + NE CLASS : REPTILIA

ORDER : TESTUDINES 13. PELOMEDUSIDAE (2) Pelomedusa subrufa (Lacépède, 1788) African helmeted turtle, Ndele* + LC Pelosius subniger ( Lacépède, 1788) + NE CLASS : ACTINOPTERYGII

ORDER : CLUPEIFORMES 14. CLUPEIDAE (2) Lake Tanganyika sardine, Dagaa*, Limnothrissa miodon (Boulenger, 1906) + LC Ndakala* Microthrissa royauxi Boulenger, 1900 Royal sprat + LC CLASS : ACTINOPTERYGII

ORDER : PERCIFORMES 15. CICHLIDAE (2) Tilapia rendalli (Boulenger, 1896) Redbreast tilapia + + LC Oreochromis niloticus niloticus (Linnaeus, 1758) Nile Tilapia + + NE 16. LATIDAE (2) Lates mariae Steindachner,1909 Bigeye Lates + VU Lates niloticus (Linnaeus, 1758) Nile perch + + LC CLASS : ACTINOPTERYGII

ORDER : SILURIFORMES 17. CLARIIDAE (3) Clarias batrachus (Linnaeus, 1758) walking catfish, Biloba + + NE Clarias gariepinus (Burchell, 1822) African sharptooth catfish, Singa* + + NE Heterobranchus longifilis(Valenciennes, 1840) The vundu + LC 18. CLAROTEIDAE (3) Auchenoglanis occidentalis (Valenciennes, 1840) Giraffe catfish, Bubu + LC Chrysichthys brachynema Boulenger, 1900 Salmontail catfish, Mbane * LC Parauchenoglanis punctatus (Boulenger, 1902) + LC 19. MALAPTERURIDAE (1) Malapterurus electricus (Gmelin, 1789) Electric catfish, Nina* + LC 20. MOCHOKIDAE (1) Synodontis congica Poll, 1971 - + LC CLASS : SARCOPTERYGII

ORDER : LEPIDOSIRENIFORMES 21. PROTOPTERIDAE (1) Protopterus aethiopicus Heckel, 1851 Leopard lungfish + NE CLASS : AVES

ORDER : ANSERIFORMES 22. ANATIDAE (1) Anas capensis (Gmelin, 1789) Cap Teal + LC CLASS : AVES

ORDER : BUCEROTIFORMES 23. UPUPIDAE (1) Upupa epops L. 1758 Hoopoe + LC CLASS : AVES ORDER : COLUMBIFORMES

181 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 10 Katanga Fauna List Ecosystems* IUCN Status Classes/Orders/Species Common Names Ag Sag Rs Wl (2012) 24. COLUMBIDAE (3) Streptopelia decipiens (Hartlaub & Finsch, 1870) Mourning Collared Dove + LC Streptopelia semitorquata Ruppel, 1837 Red-eyed Dove + LC Turtur afer (Linnaeus, 1766) Blue-spotted Wood-dove + LC CLASS : AVES

ORDER : CORACIIFORMES 25. ALCEDINIDAE (2) Ceryle rudis L. 1758 Pied Kingfisher + LC Halcyon senegalensis L. 1766 Woodland Kingfisher + LC 26. MEROPIDAE (1) Merops pusillus Statius Müller, 1776 Little Bee-eater + LC CLASS : AVES

ORDER : GRUIFORMES 27. RALLIDAE (1) Porphyrio porphyrio L. 1858 African Purple Swamphen + + LC CLASS : AVES

ORDER : PASSERIFORMES 28. CORVIDAE (1) Corvus albus Statius Muller, 1776 Pied Crow, Kiyombo* + LC 29. ESTRILDIDAE (5) Amandava subflava Viellot, 1812 Zebra Waxbill, Orange-breasted Waxbill + + LC Clytospiza monteiri Hartlaub, 1860 Brown Twinspot + LC Estrilda melpoda Viellot, 1817 Orange-cheeked Waxbill + LC Lagonosticta rubricata Lichtenstein, 1823 African Firefinch + + LC Uraeginthus bengalus L. 1758 Red-cheeked Cordon-bleu + LC 30. PASSERIDAE (1) Passer griseus (Vieillot, 1817) Common Grey-headed Sparrow + LC 31. PLOCEIDAE (2) Quelea erythrops Hartlaub, 1848 Red-headed Quelea + LC Ploceus cucullatus (Müller, 1766) Village Weaver + LC CLASS : AVES

ORDER : PELECANIFORMES 32. ARDEIDAE (2) Bubulcus ibis L. 1758 Cattle Egret, Nyange nyange + + LC Egretta garzetta (Linnaeus, 1766) Little Egret + LC 33. PELECANIDAE (1) Pelecanus onocrotalus Linnaeus, 1758 White Pelican + LC CLASS: MAMMALIA

ORDER: RODENTIA 34. NESOMYIDAE (2) African giant pouched rat, Gambian Cricetomys gambianus Waterhouse, 1840 + LC pouched rat, Mamana mbao* Cricetomys kivuensis Lönnberg, 1917 Kivu Giant Pouched Rat + NE CLASS : ANIMALIA

ORDER : PHOLIDOTA 35. MANIDAE (1) Manis temminckii Smuts, 1832 Ground Pangolin, Temminck's Pangolin + LC 36. SCIURIDAE (1) 182 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Table 10 Katanga Fauna List Ecosystems* IUCN Status Classes/Orders/Species Common Names Ag Sag Rs Wl (2012) Smith's Bush Squirrel , Yellow-footed Paraxerus cepapi (A. Smith) + LC Squirrel 37. THRYONOMYIDAE (1) Thryonomys swinderianus (Temminck, 1827) Greater Cane Rat + LC CLASS: GASTEROPODA

ORDER: STYLOMMATOPHORA 38. ACHATINIDAE (1) Achatina fulica (Férussac, 1821) Giant African land snail + NE * Ag = Aquatic Grassland; Sag = Semi-aquatic Grassland; Rs = Riparian Shrub Community; Wl = Woodland

183 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo 4.8 ANNEX B

With respect for the ongoing conflict in Eastern DRC, the names of the public consultation participants and focus group interviewees are being withheld from the publically available version of the document to ensure they are not put at risk by being associated with this project.

Below, please find listed the total number of public consultation participants in each region during Scoping/Environmental Assessment:

 Kibungu – 55 public consultation participants/focus group interviewees  Katanga – 98 public consultation participants/focus group interviewees

4.9 Annex C - Bibliography

Action contra la Faim – ACF Baraka (2004). Rapport de l’enquete Nutritionnelle. Zone de Sante Fizi, Province du Sud Kivu, April 2004. Action contra la Faim – ACF USA (2007). Rapport de l’enquete Nutritionnelle Anthropometrique. Zone de Sante de Lemera, Province du Sud Kivu, November 2007. ADRA (2011). Jenga II. P.L. 480, Title II Multi-Year Assistance Program for Democratic Republic of Congo. Technical Narrative. Revised Submission I, Jun. 24, 2011. ADRA (2012). Internal Document. DRC MYAP SO1 DRAFT v2. ADRA (2012). Internal Document. DRC MYAP SO2 DRAFT v5. ADRA (2012). Internal Document. DRC MYAP SO3 DRAFT v1. Jenga II. P.L. 480, Title II Multi-Year Assistance Program for Democratic Republic of Congo. Technical Narrative. Revised Submission I, Jun. 24, 2011. African Development Fund and African Development Bank (N.D.) Summary Of The Environmental Impact Assessment- Lower Usutho Irrigation Development Project, Swaziland. Amadji, G. (1999), Cours de pédologie, Faculté des Sciences Agronomiques, Université National du Bénin, Bénin Anderson MUAMBA KAZADI (2008). Contribution à l’étude statistique des débits du fleuve Congo « cas de la station hydrométrique de Kisangani » période 1925-1997. Mémoire inédit, 2ème Génie Hydrologie. I.S.T.A. Batjes, N.H. (2007). SOTER-based soil parameter estimates for Central Africa – DR of Congo, Burundi and Rwanda (SOTWIScaf, ver. 1.0). Report 2007/02, ISRIC – World Soil Information, Wagenining. (http://www.isric.org/isric/webdocs/ISRIC_Report_2007_02.pdf) Berding, F., Van Diepen, C. A., (1982), Notice explicative des cartes d’aptitude culturale de la république populaire du Bénin, Projet d’Agro – Pédologie, Etude N°251, PNUD, FAO, République Populaire du Bénin, 131p. Birdlife International (2002). Important Bird Areas and potential Ramsar Sites in Africa. Democratic Republic of Congo. BirdLife International (2009). Towards and ecologically representative network of protected areas in the Democratic Republic of Congo. BirdLife International (2012). http://www.birdlife.org/ Accessed August, 2012.

Centre National d’Agro-Pédologie (1982), Carte pédologique du Bénin, feuille du centre, ORSTOM, République Populaire du Bénin. Conservatoire et jardin botaniques ville de Genève (2012). Base de données des plantes d'Afrique (version 3.4.0). Conservatoire et Jardin botaniques de la Ville de Genève and South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria. Accessed August, 2012 http://www.ville-ge.ch/musinfo/bd/cjb/africa/ Coulter, G.W. (1991). Lake Tanganyika and its Life. Natural history Museum Publications, Oxford University Press. Dembélé S. (1988). Aménagements hydro-agricoles et riziculture. La situation au Burkina Faso. Rapport technique - FAO, Projet BKF/87/001.

186 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Dembélé Y. (1995). Modélisation de la gestion hydraulique d’une retenue d’irrigation: Application au périmètre rizicole de Mogtédo (Burkina Faso). Thèse de doctorat de l’Ecole Nationale Supérieure Agronomique de Rennes, Juillet 1995, 147 p. + 8 annexes. Dembélé Y. et Ouattara S. (1993). Synthèse du diagnostic agronomique de 1991 à 1993 (Périmètres irrigués de Mogtédo, Itenga, Gorgo, Savili et Dakiri), Rapport provisoire IIMIPMI/BF. El Hadj Oumar Tall, Mamoudou Traoré, Yazon Gnoumou, Peter Bloch (2002). Étude: sur la Problématique Foncière dans les Périmètres Irrigués au Mali, Working Paper, No. 50-F Land Tenure Center University of Wisconsin–Madison, FAO (1990). Gestion des Eaux en Irrigation (Méthodes d'irrigation) Manuel de formation n° 5. Prepared by Brouwer, C., K. Prins, M. Kay and M. Heibloem. Division de la mise en valeur des terres et des eaux, FAO. FAO (1997). Irrigation potential in Africa: A basin approach. Prepared by Frenken, K. in collaboration with Faurès, J-M. 177 p. Faye, Mbaye Mbengue; Sene, Alassane; Sogoba, Chiacka; Keita, Sidy. (2009). Etude d'impact environnemental et social du perimetre de Sabalibougou (zone office du Niger). Vol. 2 of Mali - Fostering Agricultural Productivity Project : environmental social management plan. s.l. ; s.n.. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2009/10/11657293/mali-fostering-agricultural-productivity-project- environmental-social-management-plan-vol-2-4-etude-dimpact-environnemental-social-du-perimetre-de- sabalibougou-zone-office-du-niger Floquet A. et R.L. Mongbo (1998). Des paysans en mal d’alternatives. Dégradation des terres, restructuration de l’espace agraire et urbanisation au bas Bénin. Weikersheim, Margraf Verlag, 190p. Frost, Darrel R. (2011). Amphibian Species of the World: an Online Reference. Version 5.5 (31 January, 2011). Electronic Database accessible at http://research.amnh.org/vz/herpetology/amphibia/ American Museum of Natural History, New York, USA. Froese, R. and D. Pauly. Editors (2012). FishBase.World Wide Web electronic publication. www.fishbase.org, version August, 2012. GS Soil (2012). D4.3 Data Harmonization Best Practice Guidelines. Prepared by Baritz, Hudson, Willer and authors of the GS Soil test cases. ILO (1998). Technical Brief No, 2. Productivity norms for labour-based construction. Nairobi, Kenya. Inspection agricole de territoire d'Uvira (n.d.). Rapport annuel 2010, cellule de production et protection des végétaux, Sud-Kivu, pp 5, 7, 11, 17 and 18 International Rescue Committee (2000). DRCongo mortality survey. ISRIC (2012). ISRIC World Soil Information. Soil and Terrain Database of Central Africa - SOTERCAF http://www.isric.org/data/soil-and-terrain-database-central-africa-sotercaf Accessed July, 2012. ISRIC (2012). ISRIC World Soil Information. SOTER-based soil parameter estimates for Central Africa - DR of Congo, Burundi and Rwanda (ver. 1.0) http://www.isric.org/data/soter-based-soil-parameter-estimates-central-africa- dr-congo-burundi-and-rwanda-ver-10 Accessed July, 2012. IUCN (2007). Red List of Threatened Species, DR Congo IUCN (2012). International Red List of Threatened Species 187 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Jean Marc et Moïse Sanou (n.d.). Les Aménagements Hydro-agricoles en Afrique, Bureau régional pour l’Afrique, FAO Karmann, Marion. (2000). Miombo woodland utilisation by smallholders in Handeni / Tanzania : Strategies for income generation. Keïta A. (1991). Gestion hydraulique du périmètre de Mogtédo : Proposition d’intégration des extensions spontanées. Rapport annuel 1990-91. EIER, EPFL, IIMI. 57p. et annexes. Kelly, John D. (2010). “Seeing Red: Mao Fetishism, Pax Americana, and the Moral Economy of War,” in Anthropology and Global Counterinsurgency, ed. John D. Kelly et al. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 77. Kikufi, B.A. & Lukoki, L.F. (2012). Aperçu de la végétation des sites miniers de Kolwezi au sud Katanga. Revue Congolaise des sciences nucléaires, vol. XXIII n° 1: 21-32.Kinshasa. Lévêque, C. & Paugy, D. (2006). Les poissons des eaux continentales africaines. Diversité, Ecologie, Utilisation par l’homme. IRD Paris. Mallouhi, N. (1997), Interprétations des analyses du sol et principales caractéristiques de certaines substances organiques et du compost, Coopération Française, Programme d’Appui à la Formation Professionnelle des Agronomes, Faculté des Sciences Agronomiques, Université Nationale du Bénin, 20p. Mallouhi (1997) and Yekini (2000). Interprètation des résultats d’analyse de sols à partir des grilles de Mallouhi et Yekini, in: Tossou R., Vodouhè S., Fanou J., Babadankpodji P., Kouévi A., Ahouloukpe H. (2006). Caractéristiques physico – chimiques et aptitudes culturales de sols de la conurbation Abomey – Bohicon. Université Abomey-Calavi, FSA, document de travail Ecocité n°9, www.ecocite.org, 23 p. Mbaye Mbengue Faye: Rapport final sur l’étude d’impact environnemental et social, Projet de Gestion des Eaux Pluviales (PROGEP) au Senegal Michael Pollan (2006). The Omnivore’s Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals. New York: Penguin, pp 99–100. Ministère de l’Agriculture et de la Pêche Maritime, Maroc (2009). Appui au Programme National d’Économie d’Eau d’Irrigation – (PAPNEEI) Plan de Gestion environnemental et Social. Moeys, Julien (2012). The soil texture wizard: R functions for plotting, classifying, transforming and exploring soil data texture. Plumptre, A.J., Behangana, M., Ndomba, E., Davenport, T., Kahindo, C., Kityo, R. Ssegawa, P., Eilu, G., Nkuutu, D. And Owiunji, I. (2003) The Biodiversity of the Albertine Rift. Albertine Rift Technical Reports No. 3 PNUE - Programme des Nations Unies pour l’environnement (2011). Problématique de l’eau en République Démocratique du Congo, défis et Opportunité : rapport technique Programme des Nations Unies pour l’Environnement Programme National Multisectoriel de Lutte contre le Sida (PNMLS) and the Projet d’Appui à la Réhabilitation du Secteur de la Santé (PARSS) (n.d.). Democratic Republic of the Congo. Demographic and Health Survey 2007. Key Findings The Reptile Database (2012). http://reptile-database.reptarium.cz/ Accessed August, 2012. République Démocratique du Congo-Ministère de l’Agriculture C.T.G.R.E.F. Groupement d’Aix-en-Provence Division Irrigation (1979). Evaluation des quantités d’eau nécessaires aux irrigations, RD Congo.

188 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

République Démocratique du Congo- Ministère des Transporte et Voies de Communication, Agence Nationale de Météorologie et de Télédétection par Satellite, METTELSAT (2012). Données pluviométriques et de température. Stations de Bukavu et Kalemi. République Démocratique du Congo-Ministère de la Coopération et du Développement (1991), Sols, In Mémento de l’Agronome, République de France, 1695p. République Démocratique du Congo-Ministère du Plan, Unité de Pilotage du Processus DSRP, Kinshasa / Gombe (2005).- Monographie de la Province du Katanga, Kinshasa, Immeuble SOFIDE. République Démocratique du Congo-Ministère du Plan, Unité de Pilotage du Processus DSRP , Kinshasa / Gombe (2005).- Monographie de la Province du Sud Kivu. Kinshasa, Immeuble SOFIDE. République Démocratique du Congo-ministère de l'Enseignement primaire, secondaire et professionnel (n.d.). Statistiques EPSP Province du Sud-Kivu, 2009-2010 République Démocratique du Congo-Ministère de la santé publique (2011). Inspection provinciale de la santé, Populations des zones de sante par catégories d’âge. Rondeau, G. (2007) Réhabilitation de la Route Nationale 5 Katanga / Sud Kivu (Kasomeno – Uvira) Projet Pro-Routes. Rapport Etude d’impact environnemental et social. Royal Museum for Central Africa (2012). Catalogue of Maps and Digital Data. Royaume du Maroc Société des Autoroutes du Maroc (2006). Etude d’impact sur l’environnement du projet de construction de l’autoroute Fès-Oujda -Résumé non technique. Royaume du Maroc (2009). Plan de Gestion Environnementale et Sociale du Perimetre du Todgha, Version préliminaire. Royaume du Maroc, Agence du partenariat Pour le Progrès, Ministère de l’agriculture et de la Pêche Maritime. (2010). Plan de Gestion Environnementale et Sociale Périmètre de Ben Sellou, Zone 2, Version finale. The Secretariat for the Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar, Iran, 1917). (2012). The list of Wetlands of International Importance. Sys, C. (1976), Principes de classification et d’évaluation des terres pour la république Populaire du Bénin, In Notice explicative des cartes d’aptitude culturale de la République Populaire du Bénin, PNUD/FAO/PAP BEN 78/006. United Nations (2012). Goal 7: Ensure Environmental Sustainability. http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/environ.shtml Accessed July 2012. USAID, Bureau for Africa Office of Sustainable Development (March 2009). Environmental Guidelines for Small-Scale Activities in Africa (EGSSAA). Prepared by The Cadmus Group, Inc. for International Resources Group, Ltd. (IRG) under USAID Africa Bureau’s Environmental Compliance and Management Support (ENCAP) Program USAID, Bureau for Democracy, Conflict and Humanitarian Affairs (Aug 2012). Scoping Statement for Scoping Statement Report Environmental Assessment of Planned Irrigation and Drainage Activities in South Kivu Province, Eastern D.R. Congo. Adventist Development and Relief Agency (ADRA) Title II Project. Prepared by Sun Mountain International for ADRA. USAID (n.d., circa 2009) USAID Country Profile, Property Rights and Resource Governance. Democratic Republic of Congo.

189 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Wafula Mifundu Dieudonné (2011). Activité volcano-séismique dans la région volcanique des Virunga, Branche occidentale du Rift Est Africain et son implication dans la prédiction des éruptions volcaniques. Thèse de Doctorat en Sciences Physiques ; Unikin, Fac. Sc. ; 2000-2011, Inédit. Wellens, J. & M.N Nitcheu (n.d.). Le périmètre irrigué de la Vallée du Kou: Diagnostic des efficiences hydro-agricole & élaboration des calendriers d’irrigation à l’aide de SIMIS (étude de cas). Wellens, J. & N.F. Compaore (2004). Renforcement de la capacité de gestion des ressources en eau dans l’agriculture moyennant des outils de suivi-évaluation, Rapport Annuel No 3 : Décembre 2003- Octobre 2004 Wildlife Conservation Society (2009).Potential Climate Change Impacts in Conservation Landscapes of the Albertine Rift. Prepared by Phillipps, G.P. and Seimon, A. Wildlife Conservation Society (n.d., circa 2009). Climatological Assessment of the Albertine Rift for Conservation Applications. Prepared by Seimon, A. and Phillipps, G.P. Wildlife Conservation Society (2009). Itombwe Massif Conservation project: Delimitation and zoning of the Itombwe Natural Reserve for protection of great apes. Final Report for USFWS Project. Prepared by Plumptre, A.J., Amsini, F., Kujirakwinja, D., Hart, J., Nyembo, B., Vyahavwa, C., Bujo, F., Masanga, A., Matunguru, J., Mwinyihali, R., and Tshombe, R. WorldClim (2012). WorldClim – Global Climate Data. www.worldclim.org. Accessed July, 2012. World Health Organization (2010). Burundi: Seismic Hazard Distribution Map. World Health Organization (2010). Democratic Republic of the Congo Seismic Hazard Distribution Map. World Health Organization, Regional Office for Africa (2012). WHO e-atlas of disaster risk for the Adrica Region, Volume 1. Exposure to natural hazards. http://www.who-eatlas.org/africa/foreword.html Accessed July, 2012. World Resources Institute (2012). Interactive Forest Atlas for Democratic Republic of Congo (Atlas Forestier Interactif de la République Démocratique du Congo). GIS Data/Données. http://www.wri.org/publication/interactive-forest- atlas-democratic-republic-of-congo Accessed July, 2012. Yekini (2000), Cours de chimie et de fertilité du sol, Faculté des Sciences Agronomiques, Université Nationale du Bénin. Zana N. (1977). The Seismicity of the western Rift Valley of Africa and related problems. Doctorat Thesis, Tohoku Univ., Japan, 189p. Zana N. and Hamagushi H. (1978). Some characteristics of Aftershock Sequences inthe Western Rift valley of Africa, Sci. Rep. Tokohu Univ. Ser. 5, Geophysics, Vol.25, N° 2, pp. 55-72. Zana and Tanaka K. (1981). Focal mechanism of major earthquakes in the Western Rift valley of Africa., Tokohu Geophysis. Journal (Sci. Rep. Tokohu Univ. Ser. 5), Vol. 28, N°s 3-4, pp. 119-129. Zana N. (1982). Introduction à la séismicité des Virunga., Rift Ouest Africain, Rapp. Ann., inédit. Zana N., Kamba M., Katsongo S. and Janssen Th. (1989), Recent seismic activity of the Kivu Provionce. Western Rift Valley of Africa, Physics of the earth and Planetary interiors, Elsiever Science Publishers B.V. Amsterdam, 58, 52- 60. Zemke, Nick & Emmet Woods (2009). Rice Husk Ash. California Polytechnic State University.

190 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

4.10 Annex D - Detailed Methodologies

4.10.1 Hydrology

The hydrology methodology was based on consultations, direct observation and in situ and laboratory measurements. Flood zones and runoff were calculated separately using GIS, as presented in the GIS methodology section.

Secondary source review

Existing technical information and planning documents for the project area were identified and reviewed as available. Technical sources were consulted as appropriate to develop design recommendations.

Direct observations and informal interviews with local residents

The water source was evaluated visually to determine the general state and characteristics of the river substrate, bank and riparian vegetation, including evidence of soil erosion and bank degradation; existing uses such as bathing, washing and fishing; as well as visual evidence of water quality such as sediment loads and evidence of contamination. Brief informal interviews were conducted and the topography and land use was also visually evaluated to identify the water source and potential upstream factors influencing water quality, discharge and erosion.

Water samples and discharge measurements

Water samples were collected for laboratory analysis. These samples were transported to Kinshasa for analysis by the University of Kinshasa’s Science Faculty Laboratory. In situ pH measurements were also collected.

River discharge was calculated by measuring the river flow velocity and the cross section area. The Cross section was calculated based on measured river width, and average depth measurements in the cross section. Flow velocity was calculated by measuring the time during which a float traveled a specific distance, in an area of uniform channel width and depth, and surface velocity was corrected to determine overall velocity, by multiplying by a correcting factor based on the specific river characteristics.

4.10.2 Soils

Soil types in the project area were identified through direct observation of the landscape physiognomy, transect walks, in situ soil analysis, laboratory analysis, interviews with local residents, and a review of secondary sources.

Areas of interest for in situ soil analysis were identified based on indicators including landscape physiognomy, geomorphology, exposed soil and geological profiles in the study area, and land use. These characteristics were identified by direct observation, transect walks, and interviews with local residents. The soil survey sought to identify and evaluate the major distinct soil types present in the study area.

In situ soil analysis was conducted by digging sample pits to observe soil horizons to a depth of 30 cm or more. Each horizon was characterized for humidity, material and texture, color and composition, and samples were collected for laboratory analysis to understand soil composition. Soil types were identified based on a comparative analysis of laboratory results and in situ results.

191 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Interviews with local residents also helped to evaluate the soil drainage rates and fertility, which also helped to further confirm soil types. Classifications were also established based on a comparison of field and laboratory results with known regional geological and soil types identified in secondary sources.

4.10.3 Biology

The biology of the project areas was identified and classified based on direct observation of the landscape physiognomy, followed by transect walks, conversations with local residents, market surveys, and a review of secondary sources.

Direct observation, interviews and market surveys helped to identify the presence or absence indicator species and identify terrestrial and aquatic habitats. The species present in the different habitats were then identified based on habitat type and known distribution, as identified through secondary sources.

Conservation status of species was identified based on IUCN and CITES classification, which is presented in detail in appendix XX. Habitat conservation value is based on ecosystems services, the level of conservation or degradation as identified visually and based on species presence, and the presence of similar habitat types regionally.

4.10.4 Socioeconomic

The socioeconomic baseline data collection methodology included a number of rapid assessment techniques, including site visits, interviews with key stakeholders, participatory workshops, participatory mapping exercises, market surveys and a review of secondary sources. Focus group discussions were scheduled after an initial site visit and interviews with key stakeholders to identify key topics for more detailed analysis and to confirm initial findings.

Site Visits – All socioeconomic baseline collection activities were based on initial site visits to better understand the local environment prior to conducting interviews and other participatory data collection techniques. Follow up site visits were conducted as appropriate, to verify of clarify socioeconomic baseline findings.

Interviews – Key informants, including local authorities and farmers among others knowledgeable stakeholders were identified at both sites and interviewed using a semi-structured interview format. The list of interviewees is presented in Annex B. Informal interviews were also conducted with ADRA staff, as appropriate.

Focus Group Discussions – Representative groups of stakeholders from target communities, with significant participation by intended beneficiaries, local authorities and dignitaries participated in focus group discussions. Focus group discussions included one large, formal meeting that included both baseline data collection and public consultation of the project. Smaller focus groups with limited numbers of stakeholders were conducted to evaluate specific topics in more detail, or to gather information from social groups that had limited participation in larger group discussions, particularly women.

Participatory Mapping – Participatory maps of each site were developed working with small groups of local residents with participation by a limited, but diverse group of stakeholders. Participatory mapping was used to identify existing land use and identify areas of greatest interest for environmental field assessment.

Market Surveys – The field assessment team visited local markets to identify available products and prices. This informed evaluations of market access for producers and access to foodstuffs for local consumers, and helped to confirm the principal regional products.

192 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Secondary Data Review – Limited secondary data information was available for project sites, although demographic data was collected principally from secondary sources. Other secondary data review included strategic government planning documents and technical references as relevant.

4.10.5 Agriculture

Agricultural baseline collection was based on these socioeconomic assessment techniques, including unstructured interviews with local farmers and project staff that helped to understand local farming technologies and limitations, concerns and potential impacts of the project. Market surveys helped to identify crops suitable for the regional agro- ecosystem.

Direct observation of agricultural areas and soil quality was also important to evaluating the agricultural potential of the target irrigation area. This was complemented by laboratory soil and water sample analysis, as described in the soil quality, hydrology and water quality data collection methodologies. Laboratory results were compared with international standards and field findings to evaluate agricultural potential at the project sites.

Agricultural baseline collection and evaluation also included a review of secondary sources, including assessments of agriculture in the project region, as well as technical reference documents.

4.10.6 GIS

Objectives

Downscale precipitation data to the scale of the Digital Elevation Model (DEM) to determine the distribution of precipitation according to the effective resolution.

Estimate surface runoff, to obtain referential values of effective rainfall.

Obtain, based on the surface runoff, simulated discharge value that identify referential flooding areas

Methodology

1. To obtain rainfall data by downscaling Worldclim data

1.1 Calculate annual rainfall The WC (Worldclim) values (Hijmans et al 2005) are presented as estimated monthly precipitation values based on an interpolated model that uses SPline as a base, with altitude as a covariable. The annual value is estimated based on the algebraic sum of the monthly rainfall.

1.2 Information extraction according to the area of study

The Extract by Mask modules of the Spatial Analyst extension in ArcGIS were used to extract information, in order to have reduced study areas and reduce the processing time.

1.3 Obtain punctual data and re-interpolation according to the 15m DEM

To obtain rainfall data in grid format with 15m resolution, selected data points were taken from WC, and were used to recalculate the interpolation using the co-kriging method that allows for an altitude covariable, available on the Geostatistical Analyst extension of ArcGIS.

193 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

2. Reclassification of land use to obtain data on the infiltration parameter (curve number) 2.1 The infiltration values are then indirectly determined based on land use, in order to calculate precipitation loss or abstraction in the area. This is calculated with standard values defined by Chow et al (1994).

3. Surface Runoff Calculation

3.1 Surface runoff is calculated using abstraction values calculated based on land use, and the precipitation values using the following formula:

R = (P – Po) 2 / P + 4 Po

Where:

R = Runoff P= Total precipitation Po= Abstraction of precipitation

4. Estimated flow and referential flooding areas

Using runoff values, and assuming that the study areas correspond to closed basins where an average flow can be calculated, and assuming that the average runoff value during the year corresponds to the precipitation intensity value, flow values are established. These flow values are strictly referential and have a margin of error that is too high. Normally flood values would be calculated on flow for different periods (5, 10, 15, 25, 50 and 100 years). However, without these data, flood values were calculated only based on topographic indices and the runoff value.

A height threshold for flood areas is defined in each study area.

Results

The results correspond to:

 Precipitation in GRID format with 15m resolution  Runoff in GRID format with 15m resolution  Flooding in raster and vector format

194 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

4.11 Annex E - Evaluation of Acceptable Social and Environmental Consequences

The present Annex presents the evaluation of potential socio-environmental consequences that are considered to be acceptable based on the total significance of their impact, as evaluated in the main text. These impacts are not considered in the main text in order to ensure that more significant consequences receive more emphasis in the EMMP,

The impacts presented in this annex include recommended management measures, but these are not obligatory or included in the project EMMP. This annex serves as a best practice reference if additional resources are deemed to be available, and to facilitate adaptive management if monitoring and evaluation demonstrates that the significance of these impacts is greater than expected.

1. KIBUNGU

Consequence 9: Degradation and Loss of Natural Terrestrial Habitats The target area for irrigation is largely an agricultural area with isolated trees and little natural habitat. Furthermore, decades of human activities including unsustainable wood cutting, slash and burn agriculture, hunting, among others have highly degraded the surrounding shrub savannah and gallery forest ecosystem. Aquatic and semi-aquatic habitat along rivers is very limited and affected by human activity.

Therefore, the majority of the habitat in the target irrigation area is considered to have low sensitivity and conservation value. However, areas of gallery forest and semi-aquatic grassland, while degraded, should be protected as they are important for conserving natural water catchments and preventing erosions. It may also be beneficial to promote the conservation of trees remaining in the target area, as they promote slope stability and act as wind breaks. Consequences for aquatic habitat are considered separately below.

Consequence 11 – Increased Slash and Burn and Risk of Wildfire Slash and burn is commonly used at Kibungu to clear agricultural areas for planting with limited effort. This practice damages soil fertility and generates localized air quality impacts, but also represents a risk to surrounding plots and ecosystems if a fire runs out of control. Burning agricultural waste poses a similar risk, although on a lesser scale.

The main risk posed by wildfire is to riparian habitat, agroforestry and human wellbeing, as most natural vegetation is degraded. The need for slash and burn in areas of rice cultivation, however, is not common. It would be beneficial to establish community education measures to train the community in alternative land clearing techniques and educate residents in the hazards of waste burning and slash and burn.

Consequence 12 – Increase in Agricultural Pests Increased agricultural pests may included insects and seed eating birds attracted by intensified agriculture and the expanded aquatic habitat provided by the irrigation system. Intensified agriculture may cause rodents populations to increase or be attracted from nearby agricultural and natural ecosystems, such as nearby patches of woodland. However, these consequences are not expected to significantly increase the threat of pests in comparison with the baseline conditions, as the area is already agricultural. Integrated pest management (IPM) may help to reduce the potential increase in agricultural pests.

195 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Consequence 13 – Invasive Species in Natural Terrestrial Ecosystems Invasion by exotic species is considered unlikely, as the proposed irrigation system is not expected to connect any ecosystems that do not already border one another. Populations of rodents, insects and seed eating birds already present in the target area or from nearby ecosystems may expand their range in the target area as a result of the intensification of agriculture, but they are not expected to greatly affect surrounding ecosystems that do not have the same food sources as the target area will have with irrigation.

Exotic plant species are not likely to be introduced in the near future, as very few crop varieties are locally available to local farmers. Proposed ADRA activities to train farmers in seed production have already been evaluated and determined to be a Categorical Exclusion under the approved IEE for the ADRA DFAP.

Consequence 15 - Invasive Aquatic Species Excessive runoff of nitrogen and phosphates used in fertilizers may contribute to eutrophication of downstream water bodies, stimulating, excessive bacterial and plant growth, including algae blooms and invasive plants (for example, hyacinths) that can negatively affect existing flora and fauna due to their high oxygen consumption. This could affect the Munyovwe and Mukindwe Rivers, but these rivers are generally fast moving, which reduces this risk. Furthermore, runoff is expected to be largely diluted and the risk reduced once it joins the Ruzizi River and, later, Lake Tanganyika.

The mitigation measures established to prevent the contamination of natural aquatic habitats will largely mitigate the risk of invasive aquatic species at Kibungu, by reducing runoff and purifying water to remove phosphorous and nitrogen. The risk of invasive aquatic species within the proposed irrigation network can also be mitigated by using vetiver along canals, which will also help to prevent bank erosion.

If eutrophication is a problem, canals can be established at the downstream end of the irrigation system should collect any agricultural runoff before it drains into the Munyovwe or Mukindwe Rivers. If these canals are lined with vetiver, they may help to purify the water before it is finally discharged back into the river at established discharge locations. Best practice would be to include this measure in the initial project design and construction.

Consequence 18 – Dike Failure Soil excavated during canal construction may be used to build up dikes on either side of the proposed canal, reducing the required depth of excavation and need to dispose of excavated soil (see consequence 34 in the main text). However, dikes established along canals may become weakened by erosion and, ultimately, fail. This would cause localized flooding and cut off downstream water supply. Dikes can be rebuilt by users, but it may be difficult for users to quickly restore dike stability.

This risk can be reduced, however, by designing dikes to account and allow for subsidence (when the soil compacts naturally over time, lowering its height), which is recommended as part of the final design. Measures to prevent canal erosion, as established in the main text, are also critical to reduce the risk of dike failure.

Consequence 21 – Water Loss to Evaporation Some irrigation water may be lost to evaporation, but this is not considered to be a significant potential impact. If reservoirs are developed by a future project, it may be appropriate to irrigate at night when there are cooler temperatures, to reduce evaporation. Furthermore, if evaporation prevents water from reaching parts of the

196 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

target irrigation area, it may be appropriate to irrigate these areas at night, when temperatures drop and evaporation is less likely.

Consequence 26: Impacts to Livestock Health Many families in the project area have a limited number of livestock that are allowed to graze relatively freely to find pasturage and water, and may come into contact with the proposed irrigation system. However, livestock are not normally allowed to graze in agricultural areas, and while there are some reports of livestock from neighboring communities grazing in the target area, this is unlikely, particularly during periods of rice cultivation. Furthermore, to reach the target area, these livestock must cross the Munyovwe River, so it is unlikely that they will enter the target project area for watering.

Livestock health may be affected, however, if they drink water contaminated by agricultural runoff. Measures to prevent runoff from reaching and contaminating the irrigation system and downstream rivers are the best option for mitigating potential impacts to livestock health. It would also be beneficial to warn project beneficiaries and downstream residents of these risks prior to implementing the project. This should also be done if water quality monitoring determines that there are impacts to water quality.

Consequence 31 – Induced Migration Kibungu has been a focal point for immigration and emigration in recent years as a result of conflict in the area and region, despite land use pressure. Expanding irrigation will promote increased agricultural productivity, which may result in induced migration as more immigrants seek to cultivate these profitable crops. This should be considered particularly likely given the history of immigration even in periods of significant land use pressure. This will likely be limited to individuals with kinship ties or, at a minimum, ethnic ties to the area.

Should this happen, and should the local residents and chief accept the immigrants, most of the project benefits would be lost with any new migration as pressure on land use will again increase. Prices to rent plots and land speculation may also increase, causing the area to return to levels of food insecurity similar to existing levels. This would not necessarily represent worse conditions, and might even represent improved conditions for the migrants, but would eliminate the positive impact. Furthermore, induced migration may contribute to social conflict between newcomers and existing residents.

Induced migration can be limited by clearly establishing the expectations and limitations of the project when it is presented to the community, so that potential migrants have realistic expectations of how they may benefit or fail to benefit. Furthermore, the community should be involved in the project planning so that community members can collectively pressure the traditional chief to recognize their right to land tenure in accordance with traditional customs.

Consequence 33 – Urbanization Settlement and infrastructure development in the immediate vicinity of the irrigation system is not considered to be likely, as residents live in densely populated villages, and it is uncommon to build houses or infrastructure outside these villages and towns. Furthermore, baseline conditions show that residents of Kibungu Village who have landholdings in the Nyamutiri Plain have not built new houses closer to their plots, which are located near enough that farmers can reach the fields and return home the same day with relative ease.

Consequence 37 – Road Opening

197 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Much of the target irrigation area is not road accessible. Frequent transport and construction with vehicles and heavy machinery would effectively established dirt tracks that may be used in the future. Such roads may contribute to urbanization, pollution and habitat degradation. The target area is, however, relatively close to the existing road and accessible on foot, so vehicle access is not likely necessary. If vehicle access is needed, it should be limited to existing tracks. If heavy machinery is needed, no specific road should be opened to avoid long term impacts.

Consequence 39 – Risk of Increased Child Labor Rice planting at Kibungu is often done by children, either on their household plot, or as paid workers on other plots. However, money earned by children goes to household income. Increased rice production would increase the demand for child labor during planting. This is not expected to significantly affect school attendance, as planting is normally done outside of school hours. The overall impact of the project is expected to benefit food security, which will benefit child wellbeing overall. Nevertheless, this potential impact can be mitigated by promoting children’s welfare and alternative planting techniques.

Consequence 40 – Changes to Nutritional Diversity of Local Diet Increase land access and income may contribute to increased nutrition in the local population. For example, In Nyamutiri, when households have larger plots, women often receive a part to cultivate and can produce household food supplements or earn disposable income not controlled by their husbands. Furthermore, general increases to household income may allow residents to purchase more calories and a more balanced array of foods. Improved nutrition may also improve resistance to diseases, as improved food security is expected to contribute to a stronger immune system.

This benefit is not assured, however, as households may focus on increased rice production, instead of nutritious foods, and may then spend income on savory foods instead of nutritious foods. This impact may be partially mitigated by the measures established to promote crop diversity (see main text).

This risk of reduced nutritional diversity can also be lowered by educating local families on the health benefits of proper nutrition, including recommendations based on locally available food varieties. The training may include the identification of subsistence crops that are important to nutrition, as well as nutritious foods that are available for purchase at local markets by families with disposable income from cash crops and other sources.

Consequence 41 – Expansion of the Agricultural Frontier Outside of the Project Area The proposed project is unlikely to lead expansion of the agricultural frontier, as benefits of irrigation will not be replicable in non-irrigated areas. The existing irrigation canal that serves the Kabuga Plain (across the Munyovwe River to the east of the proposed irrigation area) may be rehabilitated by residents with plots on the Kabuga Plain, but this would not constitute a new activity. However, the Kabuga Plain is used by pastoralists, so rehabilitation for cultivation is not very likely without major demographic shifts (for example population displacement due to armed conflict).

Furthermore, improved production may decrease expansionist pressure caused by baseline conditions of low yields and slash and burn agriculture. Population growth is likely to require additional agricultural expansion eventually, but if anything the project is expected to partially mitigate this risk.

2. KATANGA

198 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Consequence 52 – Increased Slash and Burn and Risk of Wildfire Residents in Katanga commonly use slash and burn to clear agricultural areas for planting with limited effort, which damages soil fertility, generates localized air quality impacts, and represents a risk to surrounding plots and natural habitats if a fire runs out of control.

The risk of wildfire may increase slightly if the target area is successfully drained and agriculture is intensified, and primarily threatens riparian and semi-aquatic habitat, crops and human wellbeing.

This risk can be reduced through community education measures to train the community in alternative land clearing techniques and educate residents in the hazards of waste burning and slash and burn.

Consequence 53 – Increase in Agricultural Pests Agricultural pests may include insects and seed-eating birds attracted by agricultural expansion. While such populations are already present, the dynamic and species composition of these populations may change slightly as existing bird and insect habitat (such as semi-aquatic grassland) is partially replaced by agriculture. This could contribute to an increase in seed-eating birds and insect pests, although since much of the area is already agricultural, this is not a high risk.

Increased agricultural cultivation may also increase other pest populations such as rodents. Pests from surrounding ecosystems may also be attracted by agriculture, but this is an insignificant risk, as the proposed project will be located in an agricultural area that will not connect any ecosystems not already bordering each other.

The IPM activities already planned by ADRA can help to mitigate the risk of an increase in agricultural pests, including strategies to prevent crop loss to insect, bird and rodent related damage.

Consequence 54 – Invasive Species in Natural Terrestrial Ecosystems Invasion by exotic species is considered unlikely, as the proposed drainage system will be geographically limited and would only connect habitats that already border each other. Intensified agriculture may expand populations of rodents, insects and seed eating birds already present in the target area or from nearby habitats, but are unlikely to greatly affect surrounding non-agricultural habitats without the same food sources as the target area.

Exotic plant species are not likely to be introduced in the near future, as few options are locally available. Proposed ADRA activities to increase local capacity to produce seeds are covered by mitigation activities under the previously approved initial environmental examination (IEE) for the Jenga II DFAP.

Consequence 56 – Invasive Aquatic Species Excessive runoff of nitrogen and phosphates used in fertilizers may cause the eutrophication of downstream water bodies, stimulating excessive bacterial and plant growth, including algae blooms and invasive plants (for example, hyacinths) that can negatively affect extant flora and fauna due to their high oxygen consumption.

The mitigation measures established to prevent the contamination of natural aquatic habitats will largely mitigate the risk of invasive aquatic species at Katanga, by reducing runoff and purifying water to remove

199 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

phosphorous and nitrogen. The risk of invasive aquatic species within the proposed irrigation network can also be mitigated by using vetiver along canals, which can help purify water and prevent bank erosion.

If downstream eutrophication is a problem, canals can be established at the downstream end of the irrigation system should collect any agricultural runoff before it drains into Lake Tanganyika. If these canals are lined with vetiver, they may help to purify the water before it is finally discharged back into the lake at established discharge locations. Best practice would be to include this measure in the initial project design and construction.

Consequence 59 – Dike Failure Soil excavated during irrigation and drainage canal construction may be used to build up small dikes on either side of the proposed canal, reducing the required depth of excavation. However, dikes established along canals may become weakened by erosion and, potentially break in some locations, causing localized flooding and possibly crop damage before they can be rebuilt.

This risk can be reduced, however, by designing dikes to account and allow for subsidence (when the soil compacts naturally over time, lowering its height). Measures to prevent canal erosion, as established above, are also critical to reduce the risk of dike failure.

Consequence 62 – Water Loss to Evaporation Some irrigation water may be lost to evaporation, but this is not considered to be a significant potential impact. If evaporation prevents water from reaching parts of the target irrigation area, it may be appropriate to irrigate these areas at night, when temperatures drop and evaporation is less likely.

Consequence 66: Impacts to Livestock Health Livestock in the villages at Katanga are limited in number and mostly kept near villages, but interaction between livestock and the irrigation system is possible. Livestock health may be affected if they drink water contaminated by agricultural runoff.

Few alternative watering sources exist for livestock in the region, so measures to prevent runoff from reaching and contaminating the irrigation system and downstream rivers are the best option for mitigating potential impacts to livestock health. These measures are established in the main text. It would also be beneficial to warn project beneficiaries and downstream residents of these risks prior to implementing the project. This should also be done if water quality monitoring determines that there are impacts to water quality.

Consequence 72 – Induced Migration Arable land expansion may create incentives for induced migration as immigrants seek access to land. However, the chief of the Balala-Sud groupement has shown in the past that he is not willing to give even returned refugees belonging to the local ethnicity enough land to cultivate, so he is unlikely to give land to migrants unless they offer him personal compensation. This is a possibility if yields are high, although the cost of acquiring land will likely discourage many potential migrants.

Induced migration can be limited by clearly establishing the expectations and limitations of the project when presenting it to the community, so potential migrants have realistic expectations of how they may benefit or fail to benefit. Furthermore, the community should also be involved in the project planning so that community

200 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

members can collectively pressure the traditional chief to recognize their right to land tenure in accordance with traditional customs.

Consequence 74 – Urbanization Settlement and infrastructure development in the immediate vicinity of the drainage system is unlikely, since residents live in dense population centers and rarely build houses or infrastructure outside these villages and towns. Draining wetlands on the Kenya Plain may make some of its villages more accessible.

These villages may experience limited growth, but this should not be significant as long as current residents’ land tenure rights are clearly established (see main text, consequence 72). New settlements on or around the Kenya Plain are unlikely as a result of the project, especially if drainage makes the different areas of the Kenya Plain more easily accessible by land routes from other existing settlements. It is possible, however, that migrants from within or outside of the project area settle more densely in existing communities on the Kenya Plain, placing a greater strain on scarce resources, such as drinking water. The likelihood of this can be further reduced by the measures proposed to reduce the risk of induced migration.

Consequence 78 – Road construction Much of the target drainage area is not road accessible. Frequent transport and construction with vehicles and heavy machinery would effectively established dirt tracks that may be used in the future. Such roads may contribute to urbanization, pollution and habitat degradation. The project should seek to avoid using vehicles, particularly in areas where it may open new tracks. There are a number of existing tracks on the Kenya Plain that may be used by vehicles when absolutely necessary, to avoid developing new tracks that could promote induced migration, or tracks that pass through areas of natural vegetation.

Consequence 80 – Catchment and Drainage Impacts to Ecological Functions Semi-aquatic and aquatic grassland provide ecosystem services, such as water purification and habitat for fish spawning and early growth. They are likely also home to fauna and plants that may be important for pollination and the balance of pest populations in the agricultural areas the border. However, these impacts are expected to be limited, given the requirement (established in the main text) to preserve buffer areas with these ecosystems.

Impacts to groundwater from irrigation and drainage are not considered to be significant, as groundwater levels are very shallow due to the level of Lake Tanganyika. Irrigation catchment, if implemented, is not expected to significantly affect hydric balance and other ecosystem functions, given the large flow volume of the Mutambala River.

Consequence 81 – Changes to Nutritional Diversity of Local Diet Irrigation will enable the expansion of cash crops cultivation, due to expected improvements in the volume and reliability of the water supply. This may cause a shift from subsistence agriculture towards cash cropping; as a result, the supply of diverse subsistence crops may decline locally. However, irrigation is also expected to increase yield per Ha. and drainage will increase the area of arable land, so subsistence crop production is likely to stay at current levels or even increase.

Increased subsistence and cash crop production may benefit local nutrition, as families will be able to increase caloric intake through increased production and/or disposable income. If cash crops are cultivated as a

201 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

percentage of household production, this may also improve nutrition by allowing households to purchase more nutritious foods. This benefit is not assured, however, as households may then spend income on savory foods instead of nutritious foods. Efforts to promote crop diversity may help to mitigate this risk.

Consequence 82 – Expansion of the Agricultural Frontier Outside of the Project Area as a Result of the Project Local farmers may seek to expand drainage canals to drain semi-aquatic grassland and riparian shrub communities in buffer zones to be preserved by the project. This risk can be reduced by designing the drainage system in such a way that it is difficult for local residents to expand the network. Unless future expansion is planned in an area outside of these buffer zones, irrigation and drainage system design should not facilitate future expansion.

4.12 Annex F - Terms of Reference and Sun Mountain Work Strategy

The documents presented in this annex are included in their original form, as indicated by the date at the beginning of each document. They have not been edited based on the results of the scoping, as they are included for reference purposes. Project information presented in these documents, including the scope of proposed activities may be outdated. Please refer to the main text of the scoping statement for up-to-date information. 1. USAID Terms of Reference Environmental Impact Assessment for projected Irrigation and drainage programs in North Katanga and South Kivu Provinces of Eastern D.R. Congo

February 2012

1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION.

1.1 Multi-years Programs Background Information.

DRC ranks 176 of 182 countries in the Human Development Ranking with 80% of the population living below the absolute poverty line (less than $1 a day). The infant and under-five mortality rates (U5MR) are among the highest in Sub-Saharan Africa and 502,000 children under five years of age die annually in the DRC. The situation for women is equally bleak. The maternal mortality is 1,300 maternal deaths for every 100,000 live births. On the maternal mortality rate index, DRC ranks 153 out of 181 countries globally.

South Kivu and Katanga Provinces.

These food insecurity statistics are often much worse in the more conflict-affected zones in eastern DRC. While relative security has returned to parts of S. Kivu and nearly all of Katanga, the under-five mortality rates continue to be alarmingly high at 166 and 184 respectively (above the national average of 158). The overall infant mortality rates per 1,000 are respectively 101 and 111 [cf: 97 nationally]. In South Kivu, 50% of children under five years of age suffer from stunting (HAZ<-2) and 31.4% are severely stunted (HAZ<-3). In Katanga, the rates are 43% stunted, and 25.1% severely stunted. Women of reproductive age in South Kivu are by far the most stunted in the nation with 18.2% less than 145cm tall [cf. 4.0% nationally] and have the highest rates of severe anemia at 4.3%, almost four times the national average of 1.1%. Low birth weights also remain a problem with 7.4% and 7.6% of infants in South Kivu and Katanga respectively born weighing less than 2.5kg. 202 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Walungu territory, and Mubumbano health zone (HZ) in particular, were highlighted by provincial PRONANUT and MOH officials as having exceptionally high rates of malnutrition. While surrounding areas have recently received longer-term WASH and food security funding, the Mubumbano HZ has a very limited presence of other development actors. Located on the principal provincial SW road, the entire zone is easily accessible from Bukavu, which is important for both commodity related food for work (FFW) programming, and market -oriented agricultural production strategies. Western portions of this zone were previously part of the ‘breadbasket’ for the province and have possibilities for smallholder land ownership. Connected with its proximity to the main road axis, this is also one of the more stable zones in S. Kivu with very low population displacement statistics over the past two years compared to surrounding areas.

Food Availability: Food production and productivity is constrained by poor quality inputs (degenerated seed varieties), soil infertility, subsistence production (less than ½ hectare) and unsustainable farming practices. Cassava Mosaic Virus (CMV), Banana Bacterial Wilt (BXW) and other plant diseases have also decimated staple crops across these zones. Unjust large-scale land allocation under Mobutu, illegal land acquisition in years of subsequent conflict, and population pressures have left many smallholder farmers without access to arable land. Farmers are often forced into exploitative rent conditions where there is no incentive to invest in or sustainably use the land. As soils became more and more denuded and unproductive, many farmers abandoned their agricultural livelihoods in exchange for short-term strategies such as artisanal mining. As such, there are typically only eight months out of the year with adequate food provisioning for households in these areas.

Food Access: While some investment in infrastructure has been made in the targeted areas, there are very few productive value chains with reestablished market linkages between agricultural producers and consumers. High-potential agricultural zones lack the public or private investment necessary to revitalize these important points of production. As a result of low production in these rural zones, staple food products are even being imported from regional city markets. Agricultural development receives less than 2% of the national budget and agricultural extension services for farmers are practically non-existent. Very few producers work together in groups or cooperatives to demand better sales conditions for their produce, and individual farmers often carry produce themselves to the market or sell at cut-rate prices to traders who purchase directly at the village level. Post-harvest losses also greatly reduce potential farm revenues.

Food utilization: According to the most recent MICS data, 50% and 43% of children are chronically stunted (HAZ<-2), and 21% and 27% are underweight in South Kivu and Katanga respectively. Chronic wasting rates are 11.7% in Kalemie, 13.7% in Walungu and 12% in Mubumbano. Child feeding practices are not adequate for normal development, as evidenced by the low percentages of exclusive breastfeeding (31% and 39% in South Kivu and Katanga, respectively). High levels of maternal and child anemia also indicate food is not being utilized properly: 54% of women aged 15-49 in the EDRC and 71% of children aged 6-59 months are anemic. Besides the lack of adequate food sources and food diversity (the common meal in South Kivu is cassava-based fufu with a simple sauce of cassava leaves), traditional practices and behaviors prevent adequate nutrition of children.

Adherence to Country-Specific Information.

The proposed program will support the strategic objective ‘to reduce food insecurity among chronically food insecure households in the DRC.’ FH will build on successes and lessons learned from its current MYAP and expand in the N. Katanga territories of Kalemie and Moba and the S. Kivu territory of Walungu. The beneficiary population will quadruple from 170,000 to 670,000 with an innovative program design to reach all farmers and mothers of children under two years of age. Through a renewed focus on gender, FH is partnering with Search for Common Ground to use creative participative theater and multi-media approaches to facilitate better understanding and positive action towards changing attitudes and perceptions of women and women’s roles in these communities. In response to massive environmental degradation, FH will scale up its natural resource and land management programming while addressing critical smallholder land ownership issues.

Major agriculture and livelihoods programming strategies will include: intentionally promoting women farmers to equal roles and responsibilities in agricultural programs; increasing smallholder agricultural productivity and production through expanded agricultural extension and improved and disease resistant seed testing and multiplication models; revitalizing agriculturally productive zones; improving storage and value-added processing techniques; and connecting producers into successful value chains through improved market analysis and business skill development. Major health and nutrition programming strategies will include: using an extensive health message dissemination model to transmit social and behavior change messages through community leaders and the media; increasing dietary diversity and food consumption quality at the HH level; strengthening capacity to manage conditions and diseases that exacerbate malnutrition; improving maternal health and nutrition with a focus on pregnant and lactating women; 203 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

enhancing the availability and accessibility to WASH infrastructure and hygiene promotion; and making water treatment products more available through social marketing.

In June 2010, DRC began working on the establishment of a CAADP compact and FH’s proposed interventions will support DRC’s CAADP process as they contribute to CAADP’s four pillars: land and water management, market access, food supply and hunger, and agricultural research. Though DRC is not a selected focus country of the Feed the Future initiative, the proposed program is fully aligned with its goals and objectives. FH aims to ‘accelerate inclusive agricultural sector growth’ and ‘improve nutritional status, especially of women and children’, thus supporting the Feed the Future goal to ‘sustainably reduce hunger and poverty by tackling their root causes and employing proven strategies for achieving large scale and lasting impact.’

ADRA International with ADRA DRC East propose to implement JENGA II, a five-year program with the goal of sustainably reducing food insecurity among vulnerable households in Fizi, Kalehe and Uvira territories of South Kivu, benefitting 258,700 direct beneficiaries with a total program value of $59,470,177. JENGA II has been designed with the experience of our successes and lessons learned from the current MYAP in Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and is informed by assessments commissioned and conducted by TANGO. ADRA augmented this in consultations with communities, local and regional government. ADRA interventions are supported by a range of stakeholders covering the technical sectors. And finally, the program brings to bear the expertise of partners World Vision (WV) – implementers of high impact health and nutrition programs globally and in Eastern DRC – and Johns Hopkins University, Bloomberg School of Public Health (JHSPH) – world leader in health and nutrition research and technical assistance.

Underlying Causes of Food Insecurity.

In DRC almost 46% of children under-5 suffer from chronic malnutrition – a condition that contributes directly to mortality rates of 196/1000. This human impact is the result of the three elements of food insecurity that characterizes the lives of many people in Eastern DRC. Since independence overall agricultural production in DRC has declined, limiting the availability of staple crops such as cassava, maize and plantain. Banana and cassava production has been severely impacted by cassava mosaic disease (CMD) and banana xanthomonas wilt (BXW). Years of armed conflict have displaced the workforce, rendered people landless, and instilled fear of exposed areas such as agricultural land, particularly affecting women and children who are adversely affected by the risk of sexual and gender based violence (SGBV). A generation coming back with the return of relative security is ill-equipped with the knowledge or the tools to return to farming in their new homes. Put simply, food is in short supply.

While 93% of households in DRC have access to land the majority cultivate less than a hectare. Laws are often not upheld to allow women to own land. Insufficient finances, inadequate transport facilities, inadequate storage, unfair taxation and inconsistent price indicators affect producers’ access to markets. The conflict has resulted in the deterioration of roads and irrigation infrastructure. Access to potable water and hygienic human waste is also very restricted. 55% of children under-5 in South Kivu are stunted, while 30% and 12% are underweight and wasted. South Kivu has the highest percentage of households with poor food utilization in the country. It has also the lowest proportion of household food from own consumption, and the greatest from purchase. Malnutrition impacts women also, particularly those of reproductive age (15-49 years), with 39% anemic and 9% suffering from chronic energy deficiency (CED).

1.2 Programs outputs and activities.

A. ADRA. ADRA International with ADRA DRC East received approval from FFP to implement JENGA II, a five-year program with the goal of sustainably reducing food insecurity among vulnerable households in Fizi, Kalehe and Uvira territories of South Kivu, starting with funding from FY 2011. Planned interventions are as follows (SO1: Agriculture, SO2: Health, SO3: Gender):

Strategic Objective 1: Food insecure farming households with increased incomes.

1.1.1.1 1500 Farmer Field School (FFS) organized 1.1.1.2 15000 farmers provided with starter packs (seeds and/or multiplication materials and tools (machetes, hoes etc…) 204 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

1.1.1.3 15000 farmers trained on improved agricultural practices 1.1.1.4 15000 farmers trained on new farming technologies 1.1.1.5 15000 farmers trained on soil management practices 1.1.1.6 Exchange visits and field days to share experiences and techniques for different territories.

1.1.1.7 30 MOA extension technicians trained on improved agricultural practices

1.1.2.1 Farmers with access to formal credit providers

1.1.2.2 Farmers with access to non-traditional credit providers

1.1.3.1: 15000 farmers trained in integrated pest management

1.1.3.2 3,050,000 lineal meters of cassava cuttings distributed

1.1.3.3: 12,000 banana suckers distributed

1.1.4.1 2400 farmers trained on seed production (maiz, beans, groundnuts and rice)

1.1.4.2 80 seed producers groups with certified seeds by SENASEN and INERA

1.1.5.1: 90 km of irrigation canals rehabilitated

1.1.5.2: 120 km of drainage canals built

1.2.1.1 140 farmer business associations organized

1.2.1.2 7000 farmers actively participate in the six promoted agriculture value chains

1.2.1.3: 120 km of feeder roads rehabilitated

1.2.2.1: 15000 farmers trained in collection and use of market information

1.2.2.2: 140 farmer association increased capacity to collect and disseminate market information

1.2.2.3: Weekly radio programs aired to disseminate market information

1.2.2.4: 3 CARGs with improved capacity to collect and disseminate market information

1.2.3.1: 15,000 farmers trained on improved harvest and post-harvest handling techniques/technologies

1.2.3.2: 1000 farmers with improved household storage facilities

1.2.3.3: Six Agricultural Collecting Centers (ACC) established

1.2.4.1: 9600 farmers trained on processing of agricultural products

1.2.4.2: 48 farmer associations engaged with processing opportunities

1.3.1.1: 30 Community Early Warning Systems implemented

1.3.2.1: 3 CARG strengthened

1.3.2.2: 155 CDCs trained on management

1.3.2.3: 3 five-year territory agricultural action plans

1.3.3.1: 9 tree nurseries established 205 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

1.3.3.2: 90,000 trees planted

1.3.3.3: 15000 farmers trained on natural resource management

Strategic objective 2: Improved Health and nutritional status of children under 5.

2.1.1.1: 22,500 PLWs and their HHs provided with PM2A rations

2.1.1.2: PLWS trained in Homestead gardening

2.1.2.1: 1 training package on maternal health and nutrition developed

2.1.2.2: 22,500 PLWs trained on maternal Health and Nutrition through Care groups

2.1.2.3: 32 Community awareness events conducted

2.1.3.1: 118 health facilities' staff skills upgraded

2.2.1.1: 1 IYCF training package developed

2.2.1.2: 45,000 women trained in IYCF through Care Groups

2.2.2.1: 45,000 CU2s and their HHs provided with PM2A rations

2.3.1.1: 118 health facility staff and 1180 RCs trained in IMCI

2.3.1.2: Facilitate access to health services and products

2.3.1.3: 1180 RCs trained in SAM screening

2.3.2.1: 45,000 women trained in management of childhood illnesses

2.3.3.1: 1 WASH training package developed

2.3.3.2: 1180 villages trained on key hygiene messages

2.3.4.1: 45,000 people trained in hand washing practices

2.3.4.3: 150 safe water sources installed

2.3.4.4: Provision of improved sanitation facilities

Strategic Objective 3: Increased women’s empowerment in food insecure households and communities.

3.1.1.1: Women trained in business management skills

3.1.2 Train 2,850 VS&L participants in selection, planning and management of income generating activities.

3.1.1.2: Women trained in IGAs (soap, construction of improved stoves)

3.1.1.3: 155 Women's groups engage in savings activities

3.1.2.1: 4000 households provided with goats (3 goats /HH)

3.1.2.2: Train 4000 households in livestock management

206 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

3.1.3.1: 12 women's groups producing salted dried fish

3.1.3.2: Women's groups processing cassava

3.2.1.1: 240 programs on GBV developed and broadcast

3.2.1.2: 6 Listening Group facilitators trained

3.2.1.3: 30 Listening Groups established/strengthened

3.2.2.1: Community Development Committees trained on GBV prevention and protection

3.2.2.2: Community Development Committees develop GBV prevention and protection Plan

3.3.1.1: 240 gender-related radio programs developed and broadcast

3.3.1.2: 30 Listening Groups established/strengthened

3.3.1.3: 1 FFS and 1 Care Group curriculum incorporate gender-related issues

3.3.1.4: 34 BCC Promoters and 41 Ag Agents trained on gender-related issues

3.4.1.1: Women trained in community leadership

3.4.1.2: Women participating in community leadership

3.4.2.1: Literacy groups formed

3.4.2.2: Women trained in literacy and numeracy skills

3.5.1.1: 3875 Women trained in labor savings skills

Land development activities.

FFP Non-Emergency Food Aid Program irrigation and drainage activities.

Sub-IR1.1.5. Irrigation and drainage facilities improved/built.

To counteract flooding in some parts of the program region, JENGA II will improve and build new irrigation and drainage facilities in and around affected communities. Current programming has successfully increased the land available for cultivation through these activities, and JENGA II will scale-up efforts by constructing 120 km of drainage canals that will make approximately 7,000 hectares available for agriculture use in the Kenya plain, in Fizi territory. To increase the amount of land under irrigation, JENGA II will also rehabilitate 90 km of irrigation canals allowing more than 10,000 families to increase the production of marketable crops.

JENGA II will utilize FFW to carry out construction, through 98,700 FFW beneficiaries over the LOA. FFW recipients will be responsible for manual unskilled labor, overseen by locally hired foremen. All works will be small-scale not requiring heavy machinery. The drainage canals will be an average of 8 km in length and about 1.2 m wide. JENGA II will provide construction materials to build the main infrastructure, while individual HHs will provide inputs to bring water to their homes. To ensure proper 207 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

maintenance is in place, JENGA II will train two people in each community in irrigation maintenance and train farmers in appropriate water management.

In the target area land under cultivation by prospective program beneficiaries is a combination of privately owned and community owned land. Community owned land is generally used on a long term lease basis, where farmers can invest in the land with reasonable assurance that they will be able to continue to use and benefit from those improvements and investments. Farmers benefiting from the irrigation and drainage canals in JENGA II are those using community lands that are managed by the Chief of “Groupement” (community).

To ensure that the land will benefit a larger number of farmers, JENGA II will work in coordination with MOA and the Chief of Groupements (local authority) at territory level to properly identify the farmers that will have the right to cultivate the benefited lands. ADRA has a sound knowledge of the places requiring irrigation canals and recognizes that farmers are already cultivating these lands despite the poor conditions. The program will seek assurances from the local authorities that the community lands will not be sold after farmers after the rehabilitation of the canals. The project will rehabilitate 120 km of drainage canals and 90 km of irrigation canals that will benefit in total more than 14,000 smallholder farmers.

2. DESCRIPTION OF THE ASSIGNMENT.

2.1 Objectives. The environmental impact assessment (EIA)is being carried – out to comply with the USAID Reg. 216 (…Under USAID Reg. 216, irrigation, no matter what the scale, is considered to fall within the “class of actions normally having a significant effect on the environment” (216.2[d]) and therefore requires a formal environmental assessment) and in addition to contribute to the planning of, and make clear recommendations for, the implementation of both the irrigation and drainage activities for the MYAP’s partners in South Kivu and North Katanga sites of Eastern DRC. An EIA is a regulatory requirement for identified activities so as to guide a development (i.e. land development, etc.) to sound environmental performance over its life cycle.

The EIA will address the aims, design, relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, potential impact, sustainability of the irrigation and drainage activities undertaken by FH and ADRA. In addition the EIA will also make appropriate recommendations, including suggestions for site specific mitigation measures.

2.2 Requested services and outputs. The environmental Impact assessment (EIA) must provide a general description of the state of the environment and a more detailed description of the key issues identified during the field work. This process will require careful consideration to ensure adequate geographic and thematic sampling, while remaining practical, relevant and adequate within the available budget and timeframe.

In an overall sense the EIA should contribute effectively to assess: at what scale, where, how and why a given planned interventions will generate, or be subject to, positive and/or negative environmental impacts; as well as determining the magnitude and sensitivity of those impacts at a level of confidence that can be used in management decisions.

The information and data needed to complete the environmental impact assessment will also includes the following questions:

(1) Identify potential environmental negative and positive impact that would derive from both the irrigation and drainage activities in Kalemie, Moba, Walungu, Uvira, Fizi and Kalehe. (2) Ensure that the environmental consequences of the proposed land development (i.e. Irrigation and drainage) are understood and adequately considered in planning. (3) Investigate the available water resources within the catchment area of the designated sites for use in irrigation and drainage farming;

208 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

(4) Assess the current base flow of the river water and precise its suitability to serve a command area of 11,000 hectares in Kalemie, 500 hectares in Moba and another additional 500 – 600 hectares in Walungu; (5) Determine the combined annual water volumes that are potentially available for the irrigation schemes in Kalemie, Moba, Walungu, Uvira and Fizi. (6) Investigate environmentally sensitive issues that needs to be addressed (i.e. Biodiversity, etc.)? (7) Conduct a soil survey to identify the soils that are suitable for irrigation and or drainage. Determine also the potential salinity and sodicity hazards in the programs areas. (8) Draw up a detailed agricultural development plan for the proposed irrigation and drainages sites (9) Conduct an economic analysis for the entire irrigation and drainage proposed sites. We have to understand why the existing irrigation system in Kalemie (11,000 hectares) went into disrepair (likely due to instability and reduction in agricultural production)? There might be many reasons why a colonial system may no longer be sufficient (biophysical- ground/surface water availability, climate variability, reduced ground water recharge). There are various conflict and social constructs that will constrain the expansion of a defunct system in to full production. Are there sufficient water resources to support what may be an expanded agricultural productivity? We need an understanding of the baseline conditions, scale, and objectives of the 5 year irrigation program for agricultural outcomes and flood mitigation as needed.

3. METHODOLOGY. The EIA process will be carried out in three phases:

a) Desk Phase:

Relevant programme documents should be reviewed (i.e. previous baseline reports, annual reports, Monitoring and evaluation reports, appraisal report, the Scheme’s development Working Paper, relevant policies, legislation, District Development Plans and any other appropriate literature), as well as documents describing the physical environment and the socio-economic characteristics of the targeted areas of South Kivu and North Katanga Provinces. On the basis of the information collected the consulting team should:

• Describe the development context.

• Comment on the foreseen challenges/constraints to achieve a complete EIA.

• Comment on the issues and propose a set of assessments questions justifying their relevance.

• Describe the study (environmental) strategy.

b) Field phase:

The EIA team will be allowed a two day field visit after the desk study phase with a view to:

• Familiarizing the Study Team with the on-going activities within the proposed Irrigation Scheme;

• Assessing the existing situation with regard to infrastructure, environment/natural resources management and social issues;

• Conducting preliminary interviews with the key stakeholders including the District officials as well as the farmers and their representatives; and

• Facilitating the verification of information gathered from existing documentation

209 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

The EIA team should:

• Submit its detailed work plan with an indicative list of people to be interviewed, surveys to be undertaken, dates of visit, itinerary, and name of team members in charge. This plan has to be applied in a way that is flexible enough to accommodate for any last-minute difficulties in the field. If any significant deviation from the agreed work plan or schedule is perceived as creating a risk for the quality of the EIA, these should be discussed immediately;

• Hold a briefing meeting with the MYAP’s partners before embarking on field activities.

• Ensure adequate contact and consultation with, and involvement of, the different stakeholders; working closely with the relevant government agencies;

 Carry-out needed sites characterization analysis;  Harmonize data from different sources to allow ready interpretation;  Regular meetings need to be held by the team members to discuss and have a common understanding of the issues before and during report compilation.  • Prepare an Aide Memoire summarizing main findings, conclusions and recommendations; which will be discussed at a debriefing meeting with the MYAP’s partners and the USAID Delegation at the end of the mission;

C) Synthesis phase:

This phase is devoted to the preparation of the draft final report. The consultants will make sure that:

• Their assessments are objective and balanced, affirmations accurate and verifiable, and recommendations realistic.

• When drafting the report, they will acknowledge clearly where enough attention should be focused during the programme implementation phase; If the USAID Delegation considers the draft report of sufficient quality, the report will be circulated internally for comments;

. On the basis of comments expressed the mission team leader will amend and revise the draft report as necessary.

The mission team leader will debrief the MYAP’s partners and produce the final report with clear indication on the analysis of the potential impacts of the proposed irrigation / drainage project on the biophysical and socio-cultural/economic environment; and a Formulation of appropriate mitigation measures and development of an environmental management plan, monitoring plan, and guidelines for capacity building in environmental and social management;

210 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

4. EXPERTS PROFILE. 4.1 Team composition. The team would comprise the following:

1. Team Leader (An Environmentalist) 2. An Agronomist / Farming systems specialist 3. A Biologist (specialized in Eastern Africa botany and zoology) 4. A water Engineer specialized in Irrigation, drainage and Hydrology 5. A Sociologist/Socio - Economist specialized in Community Facilitation 6. A Geologist specialized in soils and hydrogeology

The team will be joined and accompanied by a staff from Food for peace (USAID). The USAID mission environment officer will also accompany the team.

The technical assistance team will consist of two groups of six Key Experts (KE). One of the key experts will be the Team Leader. The Key Experts will be assisted by the pool of junior and senior staff working with both FH and ADRA. The technical assistance team will be collectively responsible for managing the daily activities for all the tasks mentioned in section 2.2. of this Terms of Reference and the preparation of reports and deliverables listed in section 6 below. For the sake of clarity, the Tenderers should also consider the following information during the preparation of their offers and submitting financial reports: Working days:  For international experts travel days from/to country of residence to/from duty station only are considered working days if meetings/work takes place on the same day;  Missions in the country (assignment which requires long and short-term experts to leave the duty station to engage in project- related activities outside the duty station) are considered working days for all experts; Key Expert 1: Team Leader (Environmentalist).

Location: South Kivu and /or North Katanga

Duration of Contract: 45 days

Commencement:

Responsible to: Program Director (FH / ADRA)

Main responsibilities: The overall responsibility of the Team Leader is providing leadership of the environmental impact assessment (EIA) to ensure the team is properly managed, organized and coordinated to enable the team complete the study and in a professional, efficient, effective and timely manner. The Team Leader will facilitate development of technical sound review strategies, timetable and the final report production presentation.

Specific responsibilities

1. Manage and coordinate the team to enable it to fully meet the Terms of Reference provided in this document and ensure that all team members have produced professional, well coordinated, complementary, integrated review in a timely basis;

As such, the Team Leader shall cover, but not exclusively, the following:  Coordinate the study implementation, including liaison with the beneficiaries and the contracting authority;

211 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

 Manage the technical assistance team and draw the team’s schedule of activities and work plans;  Ensure that the study outputs are in accordance with the Terms of Reference and the agreed work plans;  Provide technical assistance for the design and delivery of required services in line with USAID procedures;  Coordinate the technical assistance of the programs staff called upon for short-term assistance;  Define measurable indicators and control procedures for EIA study monitoring and evaluation; Qualifications and skills:  University degree (where a university degree has been awarded on completion of four (4) years study in a university) or thirteen (13) years of professional experience in the fields in Environmental studies or associated fields equivalent, including years and experience as described under General professional experience  Masters Degree would be considered an advantage;  Excellent managerial, administrative and analytical skills;  Fluency in English, both written and spoken;  Working knowledge of French/Swahili language will be considered as advantage. General Experience:  At least eight (8) years, preferably ten (10) years, of general experience;  At least four (4) years of professional experience working with consulting firms and/or institutions of research and higher learning. Specific Professional Experience:  Proven experience as a team leader in at least three (3) EIA studies of more than one (1) month duration.  At least five (5) years working experience in post conflict/transition countries and more specifically in Eastern Africa countries;  Experience as advisor and/or consultant providing policy and technical advice in the area of ecological studies and environmental management.  Experience in designing and implementing capacity building programmes and actions to promote sound environmental protection. Output: A concise report detailing the achievement of the Terms of Reference presented in both hard copy and in Word/Excel on compact disc (CD).

Qualification and experience: An Environmental Studies Specialist with wide experience in implementing Natural Resource Development Projects and conducting project reviews. Minimum qualification of Masters Degree or other internationally recognized qualification.

Key Expert 2: Agronomist specialized in tropical farming systems.

Location: South Kivu and / or North Katanga.

Duration of Contract: 31 Days

Commencement:

Responsibility to: Team Leader

Main Responsibilities.

The agronomist/farming systems specialist shall cover, but not exclusively, the following:

1. Assessment of the proposed crops for irrigation farming and drainage in South Kivu and North Katanga Provinces.; 2. Review the capacity of the MYAP’S partners for irrigated agriculture and drainage land development, and make necessary recommendations for improvements; 3. Project costs and relevance pertaining to the proposed crops and land husbandry practices; 4. Assess the gender involvement in the farming and overall agro-enterprise; 5. Review and provide recommendations with regards to the value chains under development; 6. Describe the regional farming systems; 212 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

7. Make an overall assessment of the projected outcomes with the development of irrigation and drainage agriculture;

Qualifications and skills:  University degree (where a university degree has been awarded on completion of four years study in a university) in the fields of Agronomy/farming systems.  Fluency in English, both written and spoken;  Working knowledge of French/Swahili language will be considered as advantage. General Experience:  A minimum of ten (10) years working experience with tropical agriculture in Africa; Output: Provide the Team Leader with a draft working paper on “Agronomy and farming systems of the programs areas.

Key Expert 3: Biologist specialized in Eastern Africa botany and zoology.

Location: South Kivu and / or North Katanga.

Duration of Contract: 31 days

Commencement:

Responsibility to: Team Leader

Main Responsibilities: Provide baseline survey of the fauna and the flora of the targeted regions. Whenever possible describe the biodiversity of global importance.

Specific Responsibilities

Conduct field surveys and present a detailed account of the existing fauna and flora of the targeted farms/regions in both South Kivu and North Katanga. Wherever possible assess the nearby Forest Resources and mapping of the Natural Resource Base; including:

1. Assess staff knowledge and capacity in participatory natural resource; and 2. Review beneficiary perception.

Output: Provide the Team Leader with a draft report on fauna and flora of the targeted region / areas. in both hard copy and in Word/Excel on CD.

Qualifications and skills:  University degree (where a university degree has been awarded on completion of four years study in a university) in the fields of Biology (Botany/zoology) or nine (9) years of professional experience.  Fluency in English, both written and spoken;  Working knowledge of French/Swahili language will be considered as advantage.

General Experience:  A minimum of ten (10) years working experience research and higher education in Eastern Africa; Key Expert 4: Water Engineer specialized in irrigation, drainage and hydrology.

Location: South Kivu and / or North Katanga.

Duration of Contract: 31 days.

Commencement:

213 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Responsibility to: Team Leader

Main Responsibilities: Provide relevant knowledge in irrigation and drainage schemes development and rehabilitation. With special focus on the hydrology of the targeted areas. Assess the history and the technical background for the abandonment of the Kalemie TABAC irrigation scheme. Check the current management of the established irrigation activities implemented by FH in previous years. Propose some models and design for the development of the proposed irrigation and drainage schemes. Train FH and ADRA staff in basic hydrology measures. Test the salinity of the water to be used for irrigation purpose and assess the risk for salinization and sodicity. A predictable and reliable supply of water is a key element in enhancing the sustainability of irrigation projects.

Specific Responsibilities:

Assess the land suitability for both irrigation and drainage in South Kivu and North Katanga. Study the constraints for the rehabilitation of the old irrigation scheme. And, in addition train FH and ADRA staff in basic hydrology and irrigation/drainage schemes monitoring; including:

1. The establishment of water users association; 2. The Adequacy of institutional and implementation arrangements in place; 3. Adequacy of funds for the irrigation/drainage infrastructure development and maintenance/ rehabilitation; 4. Assess the current river discharges to properly estimate the irrigation commandable area; 5. Carry-out a limited feasibility analysis and propose detailed designs of the required infrastructure; 6. Assessment of the need for gauging stations in the river basins from which water abstraction will take place and the establishment of water rights for the schemes as tools that can facilitate the equitable distribution of water and as an aid to the proper irrigation planning; 7. Discuss the potential for enacting some practices of “participatory irrigation from design to the implementation”;

Qualifications and skills:  University degree (where a university degree has been awarded on completion of four years study in a university) in the fields of water engineer with specialization in irrigation/drainage and practical knowledge of hydrology nine (9) years of professional experience.  Fluency in English, both written and spoken;  Working knowledge of French/Swahili language will be considered as advantage.

General Experience:  A minimum of ten (10) years working experience with research organization and or private development agencies in irrigation/drainage development activities; Output: Provide the Team Leader with a draft report on irrigation and drainage development needs in South Kivu and North Katanga targeted sites, presented in both hard copy and in Word/Excel on CD. And discuss details for the rehabilitation and or establishment of proposed irrigation/drainage schemes.

Key Expert 5: Sociologist/Socio – economist specialized in community facilitation.

Location: South Kivu and / or North Katanga.

Duration of Contract: 31

Commencement:

Responsibility to: Team Leader

Main Responsibilities: The Sociologist will provide relevant expertise in the involvement of low level institution in Project implementation community development, beneficiary targeting, gender and HIV/AIDS mainstreaming of Project activities.

Specific Responsibilities: 214 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

1. Provide data for the socio – economic profile of the targeted regions; 2. review programs’s participatory methodology and approaches to project intervention and their appropriateness and effectiveness for the irrigation and drainage schemes; 3. Assess the extent of involvement of low level institutions in Programs activities; 4. Assess effectiveness of beneficiary targeting and participation; 5. Assess the mainstreaming of gender and HIV/AIDS into Project implementation and review Project relevance in meeting gender needs in the short and long term; 6. Current implementation arrangement in empowering, training farmer groups and individuals to be able to implement and manage irrigation and drainage schemes programs by themselves; 7. Review community type of organizations developed, membership, skills being developed, empowerment, benefits for members and sustainability of activities being undertaken.

Qualifications and skills:

• University degree (where a university degree has been awarded on completion of four years study in a university) in the fields of Sociology/Socio-economy with specialization in rural sociology or nine (9) years of professional experience.

 A Socio-economic specialist with relevant knowledge and experience in stakeholder analysis, beneficiary targeting, gender and HIV/AIDS mainstreaming. Minimum qualification of Masters Degree is required.  Fluency in English, both written and spoken;  Working knowledge of French/Swahili language will be considered as advantage. General Experience:

• A minimum of ten (10) years working experience with research organization and or private development agencies in Eastern Africa;

Output: Provide Team Leader with a draft working paper on socio-economic environment of the targeted areas presented in both hard copy and in Word/Excel on CD.

Key Expert 6: Geologist specialized in Soils and Hydrogeology.

Location: South Kivu and / or North Katanga

Duration of Contract: 31 days

Commencement: TBD

Responsibility to: Team Leader

Main Responsibilities: The Geologist, soils and hydrogeology specialist will help understand the geological provinces and soils types present in targeted sites. Work with the water engineer (irrigation and drainage specialist) to carry-out a minimal soil survey for both irrigation and drainage schemes. Provide an insight in the hydrogeology of the region.

Specific Responsibilities:

1. Review existing documentation and known data on Geology, Soils and Hydrogeology of the programs areas; 2. Contribute to the write up of the physical environment section of the targeted sites (i.e. Geology, Soils, Hydrogeology etc.); 3. Review the information needs of key stakeholders and the flow of information at programs level; 4. Assess the capacity of programs staff in understanding the physical environment of their respective programs;

Qualifications and skills:

• University degree (where a university degree has been awarded on completion of four years study in a university) in the fields of Geology/Physical geography with specialization in Soils and Hydrogeology or nine (9) years of professional experience.

215 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

 Fluency in English, both written and spoken;  Working knowledge of French/Swahili language will be considered as advantage.

General Experience:

• A minimum of ten (10) years working experience with research organization and or private development agencies in Eastern Africa;

Output: Provide Team Leader with a draft working paper on the physical environment in both hard copy and in Word/Excel on CD.

5. LOCATION AND DURATION  Starting period First week of March 2012

 Foreseen finishing period or duration 31 working days (Team leader will have an additional 2 weeks)

 Location(s) of assignment -Eastern DR Congo (South Kivu and North Katanga).

MYAP’s partners activities are implemented in over 6 locations. The EIA will be conducted by two separate groups or consulting firms, one team working with “Food for the Hungry (FH) and visiting Kalemie, Moba and Walungu and, the second team working with Adventist development and relief agency (ADRA) working in Fizi and Uvira districts.

6. REPORTING.

Each of the Team Members/Experts will compile a report covering their thematic/area of expertise, and these reports will be consolidated by the team leader with support from MYAP’s partners when needed. The draft final report will be in English.

7. INFORMATION SOURCES.

The project will provide key background documentation to the team. The major sources of information will include the following:

1. Field Visits (interaction with beneficiaries and implementing agencies) 2. Detailed baseline reports previous and new one; 3. Project Appraisal Report; 4. Project Database/Management information system (MIS); 5. Existing Project Progress Reports; 6. Supervision and thematic monitoring and evaluation Reports; 7. District development reports; 8. Geological and Eco-regions maps of DR Congo; 9. Soils maps wherever available? 10. Climatic database (i.e. FAO aquastat, IWMI weather online database, etc.)

8. Logistics Support.

The consultants will use MYAP’s space, cars, computers, photocopiers, and other needed equipment and supplies.

9. The EIA Timetable.

216 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

The EIA timetable is as follows:

Day 1 Briefing of the consultant.

Day 2 – 5 Visit to the working areas,

Day 6 – 24 Field work, sampling, interviews, in depth consultation,

Day 25 - 28 Write up of first draft and first debriefing to MYAP’s partners.

Day 28 – 31 Report writing

Day 32 – 38 Report consolidation and submission of first final report draft for review.

Day 42 – 45 Review and submission of final revised report.

ANNEX I. Layout, structure of the Final Report

The final report should not be longer than approximately 50 pages. Additional information on overall context, programme or aspects of methodology and analysis should be confined to annexes.

The main sections of the evaluation report are as follows:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.

A tightly-drafted, to-the-point and free-standing Executive Summary is an essential component. It should be short, no more than five pages. It should focus mainly on the key purpose or issues of the EIA, outline the main analytical points, and clearly indicate the main conclusions, findings and specific recommendations. Cross-references should be made to the corresponding page or paragraph numbers in the main text that follows.

INTRODUCTION.

A description of the project/programme and the EIA, providing the reader with sufficient methodological explanations to gauge the credibility of the conclusions and to acknowledge limitations or weaknesses, where relevant.

ANSWERED QUESTIONS / FINDINGS.

A chapter presenting the EIA questions and conclusive answers, together with evidence and reasoning.

DESCRIPTION OF THE BASELINE ENVIRONMENT.

1. Biophysical environment (physical setting, climate, physiography, soils, geology, Biodiversity, hydrology, water availability, etc.) 2. Socio-economic environment (District profiles, population, ethnic groups, settlements patterns and housing, labour force, land ownership and use, education, health, poverty, insecurity and conflict, livelihoods, farming systems, crop growing, livestock keeping, gender issues, HIV/AIDS, Sites of cultural heritage, Existing value chains, Indigenous knowledge, etc.)

ASSESSMENT OF THE IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE POTENTIALS/CONSTRAINTS

1. Old irrigation schemes to be rehabilitated,

2. Proposed new sites for irrigation and drainage development in North Katanga and South Kivu Provinces,

217 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

3. Infrastructure development, monitoring and sustainability.

POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

1. Introduction, 2. Impacts on the biophysical environment (terrestrial habitat alteration, soils, air, wetlands, ground water recharge, river flows, vegetation, agro-biodiversity, etc.) 3. Impacts on health and safety environment (risks of mosquitoes infestation and other water borne diseases, etc.), Impacts on socio-economic environment (Labour demand in the household, Gender issues, Children involvement in farming, etc.)

PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL & SOCIAL MANAGEMENT, MONITORING AND MITIGATION MEASURES Proposed environmental and social management approaches, Monitoring environmental and social performance, Draft environmental monitoring and mitigation plan, etc.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS General conclusions, general recommendations, mitigation, compliance monitoring. Needs for capacity building (i.e. Hydrological basic measurement, Hydrological sampling, water users’ associations, etc.)

ANNEXES TO THE REPORT

The report should include the following annexes:

 The Terms of Reference of the EIA;  The names of the EIA team members and their companies (CVs should be shown, but summarised and limited to one page per person);  Detailed evaluation method including: options taken, difficulties encountered and limitations. Detail of tools and analyses undertaken;  Map of project area, if relevant;  List of persons/organizations consulted;  Literature and documentation consulted;  Photographs; Other technical annexes (e.g. statistical analyses, tables of contents and figures), etc.

218 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

2. Sun Mountain EA Work Strategy Work Strategy for the Preparation of an Environmental Impact Assessment for Adventist Development and Relief Agency (ADRA) Construction and Rehabilitation of Irrigation Infrastructure In South Kivu Province, Democratic Republic of the Congo Prepared by Sun Mountain International 29 March 2012

Introduction

The present work strategy presents the scope for Environmental Assessment (EA) of USAID-supported irrigation canal construction and rehabilitation for the ADRA interventions in the Fizi, Uvira and Kahele territories of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).

The objective of the Environmental Assessment (EA) is to assess the importance of potential environmental impacts and identify mitigation and contingency measures, based on an analysis of environmental and associated social conditions prior to project activities. It will be based on USAID Environmental Procedures (22 CFR 216) and applicable local regulations.

The environmental procedures determined by the EA will be of obligatory application by the principal contractor, subcontractors, and beneficiaries, and must be prepared in accordance with Regulation 216 and DRC environmental regulations, which stipulates that: “the decree on environmental management makes obligation, through its articles 56, 58, 59, to all physical or corporate entities that envision implementing some projects, plans or programs or activities with potential impact on the environment, to conduct an environmental and social assessment at the burden of the concerned institution”.

The EA will evaluate the environmental impact of irrigation and drainage canal construction and rehabilitation, including an analysis of alternatives and cost-benefit analysis; propose means to prevent negative environmental impact and risk whenever possible; develop strategies to manage risk; and propose means to mitigate and monitor unavoidable environmental impacts that are deemed acceptable in light of the program benefits.

USAID will also support FH in constructing and rehabilitating drainage and irrigation systems in the N. Katanga and S. Kivu regions. A separate EA will be prepared for the FH project, but SMTN recommends preparing the FH and ADRA EAs jointly to incorporate economies of scale and increase efficiency.33 Background

The Adventist Development and Relief Agency (ADRA), as part of the USAID Feed the Future/East Africa 2010 Implementation Plan, has developed an integrated strategy directly dedicated to address issues of availability and access to food among vulnerable households and communities in Fizi, Uvira, and Kahele, three target territories in South Kivu province, DRC. As the main livelihood in South Kivu, agriculture presents a great potential not only to increase the availability of food on the table on vulnerable people, but also to increase household income and reduce food insecurity. The overarching strategy of this program is to reduce food insecurity by increasing rural incomes in a sustainable way that integrates increased productivity with strengthened commercialization of agriculture products, in addition to improved community resilience to food security shocks.

33 This draft Work Strategy only covers issues relevant to the EA needed for FH activities. A separate work strategy is being developed to address the specific needs of the ADRA consortia MYAP.

219 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

The construction and rehabilitation of irrigation and drainage facilities in the Fizi and Uvira territories, South Kivu province is an important component of this project. In Fizi, many rivers have been filled with dirt from mining which has raised the river level and caused flooding in those areas. This has heavily affected farmers as the cultivating land available is smaller and farmers’ access to land is reduced. ADRA has successfully addressed this concern by rehabilitating canals through the current JENGA Multi Year Assistance Program (MYAP). The proposed JENGA II MYAP would include the construction of a further 120 km of drainage canals and rehabilitation of approximately 90km of irrigation canals, from river and stream sources.

All work will be on a small-scale without the use of heavy machinery. The canals length and width will be calculated according to the water flow needed for the specific area to be irrigated. Individual households will be responsible for providing their own inputs to bring water to their homes (e.g. pipes). To ensure proper maintenance is in place for canals, JENGA II will train two individuals in each community in irrigation maintenance. In communities where canals are constructed, farmers will also be trained in the appropriate water management.

JENGA II will provide construction materials to build the water catchment structures and project beneficiaries will provide manual labor. A locally hired mason will be hired to oversee the construction process. Food for Work will be provided for beneficiaries that work on irrigation and drainage canals.

Purpose

This EA will identify the most significant positive and negative social and environmental impacts of the proposed project, as well as critical actions to address major environmental issues. The alternatives evaluation and cost-benefit analysis will identify more viable options that maximize positive effects and minimize risk and negative effects.

SMTN will achieve this purpose through and evaluation of climatic conditions, geomorphology and soil characteristics, hydrological basins and discharge, habitat types and sensitivities, existing land and water use practices, demographic, health and economic conditions, social organization, and existing and alternative agricultural practices. Seasonal and long term changes to these and other components will be considered where relevant.

Tasks

The SMTN team will undertake the following principal tasks:

a) Scoping Exercise: Referring to section 216.3 (a) (4) in its entirety, determination of the scope and significance of issues to be analyzed in the Environmental Assessment or Impact Statement, including possible direct and indirect effects of the proposed activities on the environment. This process will include initial field reconnaissance, secondary data review and consultation with relevant stakeholders, and will result in a written “Scoping Statement,” to be submitted to the Mission Environmental Officer (MEO) and the Regional Environmental Advisor (REA) and to be approved by the USAID Bureau for Democracy Conflict and Humanitarian Assessment (DCHA) and/or AFR Bureau Environmental Officer (BEO). The scoping exercise will also review relevant information from USAID, ADRA and other international organizations, as necessary, in other countries where similar activities have been realized, document lessons learned and to benefit from past experiences. The SMTN team will visit the proposed sites pre-selected by ADRA, where the irrigation canals would be built and rehabilitated;

b) Conduct an environmental assessment process of the proposed activities, including scheduling the analysis and production of the EA according to a work plan developed with and approved by ADRA. Collect physical and biological samples in addition to interviews, public consultation and site assessments. It is understood that the EA process will be used to improve project design as possible, and that appropriate public consultation will be 220 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

conducted as part of the process;

c) Write progress reports including activities and main findings during the course of the EA;

d) On an as-needed basis, meet and travel with appropriate ADRA staff and the MEO to review key EA issues for comments and clarifications; to conduct public consultation; to define the DRC institutional framework and national legal requirements; and to discuss strategies for project activities, management procedures and contingency response mechanisms that ensure that the proposed project activities are implemented in compliance with environmental and human health standards, and maximize benefits to the involved communities;

e) Evaluate the potential negative environmental impacts including the definition of the probability, magnitude, location and duration of the potential risks and impacts caused by the USAID financed activities under evaluation;

f) Consider project alternatives that may reduce risk or negative impacts or increase positive impacts, including a cost-benefit analysis of economic, social and environmental conditions.

g) Assess the impacts of canal rehabilitation conducted as part of the previous ADRA Multi Year Assistance Program (MYAP) for lessons learned. Comparable projects in DRC and similar environments elsewhere will also be evaluated for lessons learned.

h) Hold public consultations to ensure a shared vision by all interested parties and reduce the likelihood of conflict during implementation. Public consultations will include intended beneficiaries as well as any other relevant stakeholders; Evaluate the institutional capacity of the ADRA to assess, avoid and adequately mitigate and monitor the environmental impacts generated by the project under considerations;

i) Propose an organizational structure (environmental mitigation and monitoring plan, EMMP) that would be required to implement the EA recommendations, including a tentative budget to cover the cost of implementation; and

j) Provide recommendations on ways to incorporate environmental and risk mitigation and monitoring requisites on all contracts and documentation.

k) Prepare and present an EA that meets USAID and project requirements, using USAID Environmental Procedures section 216.6 as a reference, for approval by the USAID/DCHA and/or AFR BEO;

l) Share findings and recommendations with ADRA, USAID and other institutions that may benefit from the results and recommendations.

Deliverables

1. Prepare and submit a Scoping Statement including a work plan and public consultation process to be approved by the USAID/DCHA and/or AFR BEO, by end week one. ADRA, in coordination with the USAID/DRC Mission Environmental Officer, will review and discuss for approval within two days of submission. The MEO and REA will provide a first review and comment on the Scoping Statement and then pass it on to the BEO for final approval; 2. Submit reports every two weeks that summarize meetings held, information gathered and analysed, advances made, and obstacles regarding the tasks to be carried out; 3. Provide at least one oral briefing at the end of the EA fieldwork, organized by ADRA, regarding progress and challenges identified during fieldwork;

221 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

4. Prepare and submit a draft EA to USAID/DRC MEO and the REA for review and comments no later than 14 weeks after the signing of the contract; after the MEO and REA comment on draft EA, the BEO needs to review and approve the draft EA; 5. Several days prior to completion of the draft EA and final draft EA, orally present (by teleconference) findings and action plans to ADRA and USAID for last minute comments; and 6. Submit a written final draft EA in English (electronically) to satisfy USAID and ADRA approval requirements no later than 16 weeks after the signing of the contract. The contract is not considered fulfilled until the EA is approved by the BEO. The number of physical and digital copies of the report to be produced will be agreed upon with ADRA. The report may be prepared in hard copy and/or translated by SMTN if necessary, at additional cost.

Methodology

Based on the field visits and all other information gathered, the SMTN team will proceed to analyse as a whole all the parameters indicated below and provide the necessary details on every step of the EA.

In collaboration with USAID/DRC, Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Tourism and ADRA, the SMTN will implement the following steps to complete the environmental analysis:

a. Use of previous experience: the SMTN team will analyse and use any national or international experience on similar projects. b. Consideration of environmental documentation: the SMTN team will use any environmental material produced by USAID in the field of interest, environmental guidelines, environmental audit report and any other material available within the Mission in DRC or USAID in general. c. Follow the Scoping Process (216.3(a)(4)) of the USAID Environmental Procedures to identify the significant issues relating to the proposed action and of determining the scope of the issues to be addressed in the EA itself. These issues will be validated or expanded through the scoping process, including consultation with stakeholders and relevant organizations (e.g. ADRA and its partners USAID, local government, etc.). The scoping statement will precede the EA to keep it focused on the significant issues, including:

o A determination of the scope and significance of issues to be analyzed in the EA, including direct and indirect effects of the project on the environment; o Identification and elimination from detailed study of the issues that are not significant or have been covered by earlier environmental review, or approved design considerations, narrowing the discussion of the issues to a brief presentation of why they will not have a significant effect on the environment; o A description of: . proposed variations in the timing of the preparation of environmental analysis, including phasing if appropriate, . variations required in the format of the EA, and . the tentative planning and decision making schedule; and o A description of how the analysis will be conducted and the disciplines that will participate in the analysis; o Evaluation of relevant program documents and other secondary information for baseline information and lessons learned (including as available, but not limited to: existing baseline documents, Project Appraisal Report, Project Database/Management Information System, Existing Project Progress Reports, Supervision and Thematic Monitoring and Evaluation Reports, District Development Reports, Geological, Soil and Eco-Regions Maps of DR Congo, Climate Data).

222 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

d. The EA itself will follow the methodology described in USAID Environmental Procedures under sections 216.6 Environmental Assessment (including purpose, alternatives analysis, affected environment, environmental consequences, an environmental management plan (a table summarizing mitigation and monitoring activities indicating timing, budget, responsible parties and other implementation details).

216.6 (c) EA Content and Form. The Environmental Assessment shall be based upon the scoping statement and shall address the following elements, as appropriate:

(1) Executive Summary. The brief summary of no more than 5 pages shall stress the major conclusions and recommendations, areas of controversy, if any, and the issues to be resolved.

(2) Purpose. The Environmental Assessment shall briefly specify the underlying purpose and need to which the Agency is responding in proposing the alternatives including the proposed action.

(3) Introduction. This chapter will present background information, the principal questions considered by the EA, and the summarized conclusions in answer to these questions. The remain chapters will present the explanation of these findings in more detail.

(4) Description of the Baseline Environment. The Environmental Assessment shall succinctly describe the environment of the area(s) to be affected or created by the alternatives under consideration. The descriptions shall be no longer than is necessary to understand the effects of the alternatives. Data and analyses in the Environmental and Risk Assessment shall be commensurate with the significance of the impact with less important material summarized, consolidated or simply referenced. The baseline description will include the biophysical and socioeconomic environment.

(5) Alternatives Including the Proposed Action. This section should present the environmental impacts of the proposal and its alternatives in comparative form, thereby sharpening the issues and providing a clear basis for choice among options by the decision-maker. This section should explore and evaluate reasonable alternatives and briefly discuss the reasons for eliminating those alternatives which were not included in the detailed study; devote substantial treatment to each alternative considered in detail including the proposed action so that reviewers may evaluate their comparative merits; include the alternative of no action; identify the Agency's preferred alternative or alternatives, if one or more exists; include appropriate mitigation measures not already included in the proposed action or alternatives. A cost-benefit analysis will be conducted as part of the alternatives analysis.

(6) Potential Environmental Consequences. This section forms the analytic basis for the comparisons under paragraph (c) (3) of this section. It will include the environmental impacts and risks related to the application of the alternatives including the proposed action; any adverse effects that cannot be avoided should the proposed action be implemented; the relationship between short-term uses of the environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity; and any irreversible or irretrievable commitments of resources which would be involved in the proposal should it be implemented. It should not duplicate discussions in paragraph (c)(3) of this section. This section of the Environmental Assessment should include discussions of direct effects and their significance; indirect effects and their significance; possible conflicts between the proposed action and land use plans, policies and controls for the areas concerned; energy requirements and conservation potential of various alternatives and mitigation measures; natural or depletable resource requirements and conservation potential of various requirements and mitigation measures; urban quality; historic and cultural resources and the design of the built environment, including the reuse and conservation potential of various alternatives and mitigation measures; and means to mitigate adverse environmental impacts. 223 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

(7) Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Program. The EMMP establishes preventive measures and mitigations for possible impacts and risks associated with the preferred project alternative. The measures established by the EMMP will be requirements that ADRA must follow during project implementation. For this reason, the EMMP also establishes monitoring requirements, standards and schedules to ensure that the measures are properly implemented, evaluated, and updated as necessary.

(8) Conclusions and Recommendations. General conclusions and recommendations not covered by the EMMP.

(9) List of Preparers. The Environmental Assessment shall list the names and qualifications (expertise, experience, professional discipline) of the persons primarily responsible for preparing the Environmental Assessment or significant background papers.

(10) Appendix. The appendix will include: Terms of Reference of the EA; names of the team members with summarized CVs; detailed methodologies, including a description of their limitations; list of individuals and organizations consulted during the evaluation; a bibliography; photographs; technical appendices (statistics, species lists, figures, etc.)

e. Field visits: the SMTN team will visit the proposed locations of irrigation and drainage canal construction and rehabilitation in order to conduct public consultation in relation to the scoping exercise and the EA and to get an overall vision of the social and environmental conditions in these locations. The team will also visit downstream areas that may be affected, and areas where similar projects have already been implemented by ADRA for lessons learned. f. Focus on the implementation of effective environmental mitigation measures, based on the detailed analysis of all available information, public consultation, and the field visits. The SMTN team will focus on the definition of the required environmental activities to prevent, and mitigate any foreseen environmental impact. Such measures must be applicable from the economic and practical point of view, considering the conditions under which they have to be applied. g. Contribution on the design and planning of activities: the SMTN team will provide design recommendations based on an alternatives analysis intended to prevent impacts rather than mitigate them. h. Participative process: the SMTN team with the support of USAID and ADRA, and especially field personnel of ADRA, will develop the consultancy process in a participatory way, promoting as much participation of stakeholders in as many instances and processes as possible and appropriate. i. The EA and its environmental mitigation and monitoring plan (EMMP) will, at a minimum, cover the following issues during the evaluation of impacts. Both direct and indirect impacts must be analysed, as well as cumulative impacts.

 Selection of canal routes;  Management of earth movement and geotechnical stability of canal design;  Identify available water resources and water sources potentially affected by proposed canals, including base flows and sustainable catchment levels;  Existing water uses that may be affected;  Topography and hydrological basins;  Soil characterization and evaluation of suitability to irrigation (i.e. salinity and sodicity hazards)  Erosion potential and risk of landslides;  Climate and potential for extreme weather events (flooding, drought), climate change;  Sources and areas of water contamination, including agricultural runoff, industry, waste dumping;

224 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

 Potential impacts to ecosystem function and biodiversity (through alterations to hydrological system, deforestation associated with increased agricultural productivity, introduction of invasive species, pollution associated with the irrigation system, etc.);  Identification of biologically and culturally sensitive areas that should be avoided during canal construction and rehabilitation;  Secondary impacts and risks to nearby flora and fauna  Reduced crop diversity associated with adoption of new irrigation-based crops;  Traditional economic activities, especially agricultural, livestock and irrigation practices, including identification of motives for decline in agriculture in some areas;  Existing land use, land tenure and water rights customs and potential for water use conflict associated with irrigation system;  Possibility for induced migration and increased resource use pressure;  Potential conflict between different social groups, or within communities and social groups (i.e. land tenure);  Disease vectors and impacts on human health, including use of pesticides;  Benefits to human health (i.e. from nutrition), economy, socioeconomic dynamic  Indirect and downstream impacts of water use, changes in the socioeconomic dynamic  Changes in prices of local goods, cost of living  Sustainability of more intensive agriculture – assess indirect impacts on surrounding land due to increase in agricultural production, use of pesticides, increased road traffic, land use pressure, improved seeds and technologies;  Sustainability of community management of the canals;  Avoidance/preventative and mitigation measures such as: a) Involvement of local authorities, local people and NGOs in the planning and mitigation process through public consultation techniques. b) Recommendations of best management practices;  The safety of the construction workers;  General vulnerability of the implemented system,  Evaluate site design for public safety and cultural acceptance;  The development of a monitoring plan;

Reporting and Communications

Under the overall guidance of the MEO and support from ADRA, SMTN will report to the ADRA Environmental Managers for technical review of the EA. Advanced draft of the report will also be submitted to the MEO, who, in turn, will send it to the REA and the BEO for review and approval.

SMTN will maintain close communication with ADRA, appropriate USAID staff and individuals from other humanitarian organizations. Specific planned communications points include:

1. Hold kickoff meeting with ADRA staff prior to scoping field visit. Cover project details, anticipated challenges and mitigations, existing information and studies. 1. Prepare progress reports for ADRA every two weeks. 2. Meet and discuss the Scoping Statement with ADRA by mid week two. A written scoping statement will be provided for this meeting. 3. Meet with ADRA (may be by teleconference) to present preliminary results and discuss draft tables explaining alternatives for facilities, installations and operations by week five. Strategic outcomes and environmental management plan will also be discussed to guide EA preparation. A written draft of the tables will be provided

225 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

for this presentation. 4. Submit the EA draft to ADRA with a summary presentation by teleconference, week ten. 5. Submit the final EA draft to ADRA and USAID with a summary presentation by teleconference, end of week twelve. 6. Provide technical assistance to ADRA regarding preparations to implement the environmental management and mitigation plan, week twelve. 7. Hold an exit briefing with ADRA and USAID by teleconference, week twelve. 8. Share findings and recommendations with interested institutions that may benefit from lessons learned and other results, week twelve.

Locations

ADRA project office in Uvira and visits to the proposed project locations in N. Katanga and S. Kivu.

Logistics

SMTN will use MYAP space, vehicles, photocopiers, and other needed supplies. Accommodation and transportation will be organized by ADRA.

Specifically, ADRA will provide two vehicles for the duration of the field visit. An ADRA agronomist and M&E specialist will accompany the SMTN EA field team to contribute local knowledge and develop environmental assessment skills.

Roles and Responsibilities

The following matrix shows the members of the SMTN EA team, their respective roles and person-days to contribute to this effort:

Work Effort

Weeks** Specialist Responsibilities* Field Research/ Writing Total

 Provide overall program and TA management  Provide oversight for Environmental Assessment implementation and reporting Team Leader  Lead development, analysis, quality 2 8 10 control and of all submitted written reports, draft and final EA  Principal liaison with ADRA DRC and, if necessary, USAID MEO and REA through ADRA  Lead Author and Editor  Provide environmental sustainability and risk mitigation expertise, evaluate climate change adaptation Risk Management Specialist 2 5 7 factors as relevant.  Close communication with ADRA to incorporate preventive risk and contingency plans into project 226 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Work Effort

Weeks** Specialist Responsibilities* Field Research/ Writing Total

design  Writing  Train MYAP field staff in basic risk assessment methods  Design methodology for focus group discussions, key stakeholder interviews and lead public consultations; provide rural development expertise Environmental Impact and  Lead field data collection, secondary 2 5 7 Socioeconomic Specialist data review and socio-economic analysis  Provide social sustainability and risk mitigation expertise  Cost Benefit Analysis  Writing  Analyze field data and secondary information in intervention areas to determine major health threats and vulnerabilities Health Specialist  Provide input on alternative analysis - 1 1 and potential health impacts associated with each alternative  Provide input into environmental mitigation and monitoring plan generated by the EA  Responsible for field data collection and analysis of water quality, drainage volumes.  Contribute to ecosystems and biodiversity analysis.  Identify regional hydrological basins and sustainable catchment levels, impacts of project water catchment. Hydrologist/ Engineer  Evaluate hydrogeology and 2 3 5 groundwater in collaboration with geologist.  Make routing recommendations.  Research best practice for irrigation and drainage canal systems  Writing  Train MYAP field staff in basic water quality and hydrology field assessment methods  Analyze field data for potential agricultural impacts and provide expert recommendations  Provide expert recommendations for Agronomist 2 1 3 risk management  Analyze local farming systems and potential socio-economic impacts  Assist with alternative analysis  Analyze agronomic water use 227 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Work Effort

Weeks** Specialist Responsibilities* Field Research/ Writing Total

practices to inform water user committee creation, roles and responsibilities  Train MYAP field staff in basic agronomic environmental field assessment methods  Responsible for field data collection and analysis of biological components including ecosystems and biodiversity analysis.  Identify species presence, biologically sensitive areas  Provide biological sustainability and Ecologist /Biologist 2 3 5 risk mitigation expertise  Analyze field data for potential impacts to fisheries and biodiversity  Provide expert recommendations for risk management  Writing  Train MYAP field staff in basic biological field assessment methods  Produce thematic maps for EA, map GIS - 2 2 drainage basins to support hydrological analysis  Collect soil samples and conduct soil survey in representative project areas, in coordination with agronomist.  Work with Hydrologist to understand and map drainages, Geologist groundwater, erosion potential and 2 2 4 make routing and design recommendations.  Prepare geology, soils and geomorphology baseline, contribute to hydrology baseline.  Train Field staff in basic geologic assessment methods * A full description of responsibilities is presented in the terms of reference (MOU) for each specialist.

**Reflects full time work effort of seven day weeks during field work and five day weeks during report preparation. The draft EAs will be prepared within 10 weeks.

Schedule

A preliminary gantt chart is presented below. The time frames may vary depending on whether the FH EA is produced simultaneously to incorporate economies of scale, as suggested by SMTN. Specifically, preparation of the ADRA EA

228 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

draft may be delayed 2 to 4 weeks more than is presented below and in the reporting and communications section above. The start date for the study has not yet been finalized.

229 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Week Number Result Activities Staff 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

1. Identification of proposed action through EA Team and meetings with ADRA ADRA Staff officials, review of secondary information

2. Meet with national government authorities about available EA Field Team environmental and socioeconomic data for the region.

3. Preliminary field reconnaissance of EA Field Team proposes project area.

4. Conduct interviews and consult with local residents and key stakeholders. Carry out preliminary Social Baseline Survey through select family interviews from AFR guidelines with Socioeconomic new inputs and Specialist adaptations. Meet with local and regional government authorities Result 1: about existing water Prepare and uses, planned submit and EA development in the area, Scoping etc. Statement 5. Carry out primary and secondary data collection and analysis through site visits and based on past Environmental Hydrologist/ Assessments of irrigation Engineer, and drainage canal Ecologist/Biologist projects, and best- practice environmental guidelines such as the USAID AFR Guidelines and EGSSAA Guidelines

6. Hold meetings with key ADRA staff to gather and share key project EA Team information and local context (after field data collection)

7. Consult with USAID/DRC MEO, USAID/REA and DCHA and/or AFR BEO regarding planning and EA Team progress, as well as key environmental and social issues as identified by USAID

230 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Week Number Result Activities Staff 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

8. Formation of a planning and decision- making schedule to be EA Team, ADRA included in the Scoping Statement

9. Preparation and approval of the Scoping Statement document, EA Team consult with experts as necessary.

1. Develop/Adapt field data collection tools to cover all environmental EA Field Team concerns/issues identified through the scoping study

2. Workshop with local stakeholders, organized by ADRA, to present EA Field Team scoping results and cover with ADRA issues identified by scoping report.

3. Conduct Environmental and Social Baseline EA Field Team Surveys

4. Follow up meetings with local, regional and Result 2: EA Field Team national government Perform the authorities, as necessary full EA information 5. Meet with ADRA and gathering USAID MEO for process and EA Team with comments, clarifications prepare and ADRA based on field data submit a draft results. to ADRA, USAID/MEO and REA 6. EA team meetings for identification of the EA Team with alternatives to proposed ADRA action, meet with ADRA to discuss

7. Evaluate the potential direct and indirect environmental impacts of establishing resettlement areas including the definition of the magnitude, location and duration of the EA Team potential impacts for Proposed Action and Alternatives to include direct, indirect, and cumulative effects. Consult with experts as necessary.

231 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Week Number Result Activities Staff 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

8. Develop a series of best-practice environmental mitigation measures to include in an EA Team environmental mitigation and monitoring plan (EMMP).

9. Prepare and submit draft EA to ADRA, MEO, EA Team REA and any other relevant authorities

1. Review feedback from MEO and REA and review primary and secondary EA Team sources to strengthen EA content and recommendations

2. Prepare and submit Final EA to ADRA, MEO, EA Team Result 3: REA and any other Submission of relevant authorities final EA draft 3. Translation of final EA executive summary into French, and submit both Translator electronic and hard copies to ADRA and USAID (upon request)

1. Compile and submit progress reports every two weeks. Reports should include SMTN summaries of gathered information, activities achieved and future steps

2. Oral briefing carried out to transfer knowledge of strategic outcomes and EA Team with environmental ADRA management plan to key Result 4: ADRA staff Progress (teleconference) reports, oral briefings and 3. Approximately four follow-up days prior to completion of EA drafts, orally EA Team with present findings and ADRA action plans to ADRA and USAID (teleconference)

4. Environmental technical assistance as EA Team needed. (teleconference)

5. Provide technical guidance to ADRA staff EA Team with on implementation of ADRA environmental management plan as 232 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Week Number Result Activities Staff 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

needed.

6. Share findings and recommendations with EA Team institutions that may benefit.

233 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

4.13 Annex G - Contributors

Sociologist: Augustin Karume Mr. Karume has a M.Sc. in Biology and BA in Economics. He currently leads Rebuild Hope for Africa (RHA) DRC team working in partnership with Columbia University, New York on various surveys and surveillances with FCP (Fonds de Consolidation de la Paix, DRC) on communities capacity building in multiple themes, such as protection of environment, improving food security, gender, good governance, conflict prevention and management. He has 15 years of experience in camp management, logistics and emergency coordination, prior to which he was a part-time university lecturer and secondary school teacher.

Hydrologist: Guy Munsayongo

234 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Mr. Munsayongo has degrees in Chemistry and Hydrology and has been working with the Congolese Association for the Environment for 18 years. He has experience in planning and evaluation projects related to water supply, hygiene, irrigation, as well as assistance in environmental and social impact studies.

235 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

4.14 Annex H - Photographs

Public Consultation Katanga Mapping Exercise at Kibungu

Proposed Catchment for Rehabilitation, Kibungu Rice Cultivation in Flooded Area, Katanga

236 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo

Fish Ponds Nyakamuri Plain Rice Paddys above Kibungu Village

Katanga Landscape: The Kenya Plain seen from the north.

The Mutambala River is located to the south (right of the picture).

Kibungu landscape: The Nyamaturi Plain is located at the base of the mountains and marks the beginning of the Ruzizi plain

237 EA for ADRA Irrigation and Drainage Activities, DR Congo