49086-001: Upper Trishuli 1 Hydroelectric Power Project
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Environmental and Social Impact Assessment Final Report (Part 3) Project Number: 49086-001 June 2018 NEP: Upper Trishuli-1 Hydropower Project Prepared by Environmental Resources Management (ERM) for the Nepal Water & Energy Development Company Pvt. Ltd. And the Asian Development Bank. The environmental and social impact assessment report is a document of the borrower. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of ADB's Board of Directors, Management, or staff, and may be preliminary in nature. In preparing any country program or strategy, financing any project, or by making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area in this document, the Asian Development Bank does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area. Non-Technical Updated Environmental and Social Assessment Summary Report Chapter 6 Upper-Trishuli Hydroelectric Power Project Current Environmental and Social Baseline Conditions Source: ESSA 2014 Figure 6.3-23: Land Use Map for Trishuli Watershed 6.3-32 Non-Technical Updated Environmental and Social Assessment Summary Report Chapter 6 Upper-Trishuli Hydroelectric Power Project Current Environmental and Social Baseline Conditions Source: OCHA 2017, EWF 2017 6.3-33 Non-Technical Updated Environmental and Social Assessment Summary Report Chapter 6 Upper-Trishuli Hydroelectric Power Project Current Environmental and Social Baseline Conditions Figure 6.3-24: Earthquake Landslide Impacted Area in AoI 6.3-34 Non-Technical Updated Environmental and Social Assessment Summary Report Chapter 6 Upper-Trishuli Hydroelectric Power Project Current Environmental and Social Baseline Conditions 6.3.2.1. Agricultural land Use and Ownership In terms of the private land holdings within the Project AoI, the following three land types have been identified: x Bari or un-irrigated upland x Khet or irrigated lowland x Kharbari or marginal land The majority of the households in the AoI (97 percent) reportedly own Bari (un-irrigated) land (see Figure 6.3-25). Only 18 percent of the households in the AoI reported owning Khet (irrigated) land, and 12 percent of the households own Kharbari (marginal) lands. 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% Khet 30% Bari 20% 10% 0% Source: ERM 2015 Figure 6.3-25: Land Ownership amongst PAFs Of the PAFs surveyed (see Table 6.3-9), 86 percent reported to own land categorised as Bari or un-irrigated upland, which is lower quality in terms of fertility. On the other hand, 14 percent of the PAFs (in Gogone, Haku Besi, Mai lung, and Phoolbari) surveyed reported owning irrigated low lands or Khet, which are more fertile and appropriate for rice cultivation. Furthermore, 30 percent of the total PAFs (42 PAFs), primarily from Haku Besi, Phoolbari, and Thanku, also have access to Guthi Land as tenants. 6.3-35 Non-Technical Updated Environmental and Social Assessment Summary Report Chapter 6 Upper-Trishuli Hydroelectric Power Project Current Environmental and Social Baseline Conditions Table 6.3-9: Land Holdings amongst the PAFs Surveyed Average of Total Owned Average of Total Marginalized Small land Tole Names Land (hectare) Leased Land (hectare) Land Owners Owners Budget Farm 0.53 1 1 Crochengba 1.02 1.02 4 Gogane 0.19 0.08 24 2 Haku Besi 0.57 2 7 Haku Tole 0.31 1 1 Mailung 0.23 5 Phoolbari 0.41 0.81 11 8 Pucchhar Tole 0.66 1 Surachet 0.12 3 Thanku 0.11 5 Tiru 0.22 9 Total 0.34 0.50 62 24 Source: ERM 2015 The average size of land holdings per household in the AoI (considering all land types: khet, bari, and kharbari) was 0.91 ha. This average size is slightly higher in the case of the Tamangs (0.92 ha) and lower among Dalit (0.68 ha). Similarly, women-headed households have the greater size of land holding (1.07 ha) compared to men-headed families (0.88 ha). The practice of renting land among the sample households is very limited. The average size of the land holdings per households amongst the PAFs is reported to be 0.34 ha of owned land and 0.50 ha of leased land. Only the Toles Crochengba, Gogane, and Phoolbari reported having leased land. The highest average land holding size was reported to be from the Toles Crochengba, Phoolbari, and Pucchhar, while the lowest land holding sizes were reported from Surachet, Thanku, and Gogane. In terms of the size of the land holdings, 72 percent of the PAFs were reportedly landless or marginalized landowners (0.0 to 0.5 ha) while 28 percent of the landowners were small landowners (0.5 to 2.0 ha). All of these small landowners reported owning Bari land, while 19 percent of the marginalized landowners reported to owning Khet land (irrigated land). It should be noted that in many cases the PAFs included land that has been already transferred to NWEDC for the Project as available land. Therefore, the reported land availability may not be a correct reflection of available land in all the surveyed PAFs. This is especially important in case of Haku Besi, Phoolbari villages, where the land transferred to NWEDC was still available for cultivation, as the access road construction had not started in these places. Especially in case of Gogone, the land ownership effectively does not mean anything as the land is either not available for cultivation or is not safe enough to reach and cultivate. Consultations with the Department of Urban Development & Building Construction at Dhunche suggested that the Government has decided to provide support to landless people who do not have land available for home construction. This support will be in the form of either replacement land or NPR 200,000 for purchasing land. It is understood that most people have chosen to receive the monetary support and then identify land for themselves. Of the 129 PAFs, 21 PAFs purchased land with their compensation amount. The LALRP provides a detailed understanding of how each PAF has utilized the compensation amount 6.3-36 Non-Technical Updated Environmental and Social Assessment Summary Report Chapter 6 Upper-Trishuli Hydroelectric Power Project Current Environmental and Social Baseline Conditions received. Of these 21, 16 PAFs purchased new land post-earthquake [residential plots of land ranging between 1 to 8 anna (0.003 to 0.03 ha)], including land in Batar (seven PAFs), Dhunche (six PAFs), and Betrawati, Ramche, Thade, and Kathmandu (one PAF each). As can be seen from Figure 6.3-26, 59 percent of the PAFs reported the value of land to be high. This high value is due to fact that the land is located in urban areas, such as Dhunche, Betrawati, and Kathmandu. According to the consultations undertaken, a proportion of the 16 PAFs have also purchased land for the purpose of investment, and are presently either not using it (no construction for accommodation or for business) or have leased it. 8% Better 25% CGI sheet trust Same 59% Worse 8% Source: ERM 2017 Figure 6.3-26: Value of Alternative Land Purchased Furthermore, the residents of Haku Besi, Phoolbari, and Thanku who do not have a tenancy certificate to the Guthi land have applied for tenancy and are at various stages of receiving it from the government (see Section 7.5). 6.3.2.2. Dependence on Forest Resources In the pre-earthquake scenario, an important resource for the community in terms of livelihood dependence was the natural resources derived from the forests. Common forest resources and uses include extraction of timber, firewood (household consumption and sale), foraging by livestock, collecting medicinal plants and Non Timber Forest Produce. However, in the post- earthquake scenario, the dependence on natural resources has been reduced to almost negligible due to the loss of access to the forests and the rivers from the IDP camps. The only use of natural resources is by people who have returned to their original settlements. Those living in the IDP camps have replaced natural resources with LPG, solar lighting, and modern medicines. 6.3.3. River Use The Trishuli River in the AoI is used for fishing (sustenance and recreational) by approximately 13 PAF. The river stretch to be affected by the Project was also reported to be used in the pre- 6.3-37 Non-Technical Updated Environmental and Social Assessment Summary Report Chapter 6 Upper-Trishuli Hydroelectric Power Project Current Environmental and Social Baseline Conditions earthquake scenario during the dry season for drinking water and for household needs such as washing of clothes and utensils, and feeding and bathing cattle. Another use of the river was for irrigation purposes. According to the information made available during the complementary baseline, it is understood that irrigation was being used at one location for the four ropani plots of land serving four households. The irrigation system was reported to be an earthen structure with no permanent diversion structure at the intake and was used for the cultivation of paddy during the monsoon. The diversion reach was previously used as a cremation site by eight Dalit households (50 people) from the Haku VDC at the foothill of Hakubesi-Phoolbari, but alternative sites are now reportedly preferred. However, post-earthquake, the dependence of the local community on the river stretch affected by the Project is understood to have become negligible due to the relocation of the community to the IDP camps and the landslides, which have impacted access to the riverbank. In the post- earthquake scenario, none of the 129 PAFs surveyed, reported any fishing activities, although 13 PAFs identified in 2015 could not be located during the site visit in 2017. This is likely to be a temporary situation and there is a possibility that the use of the river may be resumed/initiated once the local community returns to their original villages.