1

Management Effectiveness Assessment for Wetlands Conservation and its Application in Harike

Wetland, Punjab, India

Summer internship presentation at WETLANDS INTERNATIONAL- MEGHA GUPTA

- M.Sc. NRM 2nd year

ObjectiveIts specific objectives are as follows:• To map the relevance of protected area categories for

wetlands.• To track management effectiveness assessment of protected

areas.• To compare and contrast different management effectiveness

tracking tools.• Application of METT in one Ramsar site i.e. Harike Wetland,

Punjab for a superior comprehension of wetland administration in India.

• Objective was achieved using GEF software, review of literature and information accessible on the web.

2

IUCN- The World Conservation Union defines PROTECTED AREA as: land and/or sea especially dedicated to the protection and maintenance of

biological diversity, and of natural and associated cultural resources, and managed through legal , other effective means, in six categories:

Ia; 5.00% Ib; 1.00%

II; 4.00%

III; 20.00%

IV; 27.00%

V; 6.00%

VI; 4.00%

no IUCN cate-gory;

33.00%

Ia• Strict Nature Reserve• Ex: Wetlands located within

core area of National Parks

Ib • Wildnerness area• Ex:High altitude wetlands

II• National Park• Ex: Kanwar Lake Bird

Sanctuary, Bihar

III • Natural monument or feature

IV• Habitat/Species Area

Management• Ex: Wetlands important for the

perspective of species habitat

V• Protected landscape/

Seascape• Ex: Coral Reefs

VI• Protected Area with sustainable

use of natural resources• Ex: Most compatible with wise

use approaches

Source: Google

What is a wetland?

According to Ramsar Convention of Wetland Treaty, Wetlands are areas of marsh, fen, peatland or water, whether natural or artificial, permanent or temporary, with water that is static or flowing, fresh, brackish or salt, including areas of marine water the depth of which at low tide does not exceed six metres.

Wetlands are thelink between the land and the water. They are transition zones where the flow of water, the cycling of nutrients, and the energy of the sun meet to produce a unique ecosystem characterized by hydrology, soils, and vegetation

An intergovernmental treaty - embodies the commitments of its member countries to plan for the "wise use", or sustainable use, of all of the wetlands in their territories.

What are the ecological functions (services) and resource values that

wetlands provide?

Wetlands provide fundamental ecological services and are regulators of water regimes and sources of biodiversity at all levels - species, genetic and ecosystem. Wetlands constitute a resource of great economic, scientific, cultural, and recreational value for the community. Wetlands play a vital role in climate change adaptation and mitigation. Progressive encroachment on, and loss of, wetlands cause serious and sometimes irreparable environmental damage to the provision of ecosystem services. Wetlands should be restored and rehabilitated, whenever possible. Wetlands should be conserved by ensuring their wise use

Model of Human-InducedImpacts on Wetlands

IncreasedWater

IncreasedNutrients Increased

DisturbanceNaturalWetland

DecreasedDisturbance

DecreasedNutrients

DecreasedWater

Drainage

Flood control leading to reduced spring siltation

Fire suppression, Flood control, Water level stabilization

Eutrophication, Siltation

Burning, Reservoir construction, Off-road vehicles

Flooding impeding natural drainage

History of Management Effectiveness Assessment Paul Sarasin in 1910 proposed a committee to establish WCPA A commission on National Parks was established in 1960 when an

international community asked IUCN to take responsibility of preparing a world list of National Parks.

In 1984, the list by IUCN-CNPPA described inadequate management resources, human encroachment, change in water regime, adjacent land development etc

The World Bank/WWF Alliance for Forest Conservation and Sustainable Use (‘the Alliance’) was formed in April 1998, in response to the depletion of the world’s forest biodiversity and of forest-based goods and services essential for sustainable development.

Debate on nomenclature and how to classify or categorize protected areas were discussed in 1st conference on National Parks, Seattle.

2nd conference on National Parks held in Yellowstone, USA addresses the confusion between national park and nature reserve where issues like management effectiveness and financial support raised.

8

WCPA Framework

9

Context •focuses on status of threats & vulnerability of protected areas

Planning •includes legislation and policy, system design and management planning

Input •assesses resources

Process •contains efficiency and appropriateness

Output •provides results of management action, services and products

Outcome •reveals effects of management in relation to objectives.

Target of The World Bank/WWF Alliance

As part of its work programme the Alliance set a target relating to management effectiveness of forest protected areas:

75 million hectares of existing forest protected

areas under improved management to achieve conservation and development outcomes by 2010.

To evaluate progress towards this target the Alliance published in 2003 a simple site-level Tracking Tool to facilitate reporting on management effectiveness of protected areas within WWF and World Bank projects.

10

Status Of Protected Areas

Protected areas grew dramatically over the time period. As per 2016 Wildlife Database Cell, current status is as follows:

11

No. Total area (Km2)

Coverage % of country

National Parks 103 40500.13 1.23

Wildlife Sanctuary 537 118005.3 3.59

Conservation reserves

67 2349.38 0.07

Community reserves

26 46.93 0.001

Protected Areas 733 160901.4 4.89Source: National Wildlife Database Cell, Wildlife Institute of India

Need for Management Effectiveness Assessment

Governments, funding agencies and stakeholders who were to benefit from protected areas need to evaluate whether results are proportionate with the efforts and resources being spent.

So, they required information on management effectiveness

12

Different Tracking Tools Assessing Management Effectiveness of Wildlife Protected Areas published in 1999 is

based on surveying a questionnaire all over India. Strength: Development of a species gap analysis. Weakness: Ensuring the completion of such lengthy questionnaire and authentication of data

received. Rapid Assessment and Prioritization of Protected Area Management (RAPPAM)

published in 2003 by WWF, based on scorecard questionnaire which gives broad level comparison that can be used to develop multiple site level management criteria.

Strength: Covers network of protected areas in one assessment and allows identification of threats and management issues across group of protected areas.

Weakness: Does not provide detailed, site level adaptive management guidance to protected area managers.

IUCN (WCPA Marine) and WWF jointly formed the MPS management effectiveness initiative in 2000; surveyed and refine between 2001 to 2003 and finally published in 2004 sponsored by NOAA and the Packard Foundation.

Strength: It provides detailed guidance applicable to many different marine protected environments and provides advice on designing, applying and analysing the system

Weakness: It is not a complete set of indicators or ‘ready-to-apply’ tool as it emphasises the need for communication and application of results to adaptive management

13

METT After surveying in many countries, the Alliance published in 2003, Management

Effectiveness Tracking Tool (METT), globally applicable generic system to facilitate reporting on management effectiveness of protected areas within WWF and World Bank projects to track progress over time rather than to compare sites.

Strength: Simple and rapid assessment system that provide a baseline on management effectiveness and outlines the critical information about issues that need to be addressed as a priority.

Weakness: The assessments produced are relatively superficial and do not cover all aspects of management. It cannot compare different sites.

METT consist of 30 questions - each with a four point scale (0,1,2 and 3). The scale allows officials to choose whether the situation is acceptable or not.

Generally 0 is equivalent to no or negligible progress, 1 is some progress; 2 is quite good but has room for improvement; 3 is approaching optimum situation.

It is important to spend sufficient time in assessing each aspect of management and reviewing the existing monitoring results.

At the time of repeated assessment, some of the same protected area managers and experts should be involved to ensure the consistency in data.

14

Different Tracking Tools RAPPmap published in 2003 by same participants as of

RAPPAM. The only difference is it uses satellite imagery to assess the site

Strength: Add spatial element to the analysis. Generally confined to type of threat identified in RAPPAM

Weakness: It requires skilled professionals to operate it

R-METT is published in 2015 by The Ramsar Convention is used to evaluate management effectiveness for ramsar sites. A different tool is designed for ramsar sites as it itself is a diverse ecosystem.

15

16

Harike wetland of Punjab,

India

Harike Wetland Area: 4,100 ha (Kapurthala, Tarn Taran and Ferozepur

Districts) Area under water: 2850 ha o Avifauna : 360 species (74

species of migratory birds) Important Migratory Birds: Rudy Shelduck, Northern

Pintail, Common Teal, Mallard, Gadwall, Eurasian Wigeon, Northern Shoveler, Pochards (Red Crested, Common and Tued)

60 indigenous species of fish, 7 species of turtles, 4 species of snakes, 6 taxa of amphibians, 189 taxa of invertebrates reported

Threatened species – Schedule 1 species : 4 species of turtle (Kachuga tecta, K. smithii, Trionyx gangecus and Geoclemys hamiltonii ) – IUCN Red List: Smooth Indian oer

Major Flora: Acacia , Dalbergia, Delonix, Salix, Syzygium, Zizyphus, Ipomoea, Cyprus, etc. and medicinal plants like Withania somnifera, Adhatoda vesica, Boerhavia di usa, etc. ff

Major Threats: Weed growth(Eichhornia crassipes), siltaon and encroachment o First sighng of dolphin reported from Harike wetland (Beas river) in December, 2007.

Important Bird Area (IBA) site of Bombay Natural History Society (BNHS) and Wildlife Sanctuary (nofied by Govt. of Punjab)

Major Threats to Harike Siltation leading to shrinkage of wetland area Inflow of pesticide and fertilizer as runoff from

agricultural fields Accidental outflow of pollutants from industries Lack of appreciation & cooperation: Treated as

free goods of nature ignoring the wetland values and functions.

Habitat destruction & degradation Environmental pollution & climate change Unsustainable developmental model and

urbanization Infestation of invasive alien species and weed

growth Lack of coordination amongst concerned line

departments

17

Restoration Measures Conservation measures were initiated in Harike

Wetland in 1987-88 Include survey, mapping and plantation Various soil conservation measures results in

substantial increase in land value Water pollution results in infestation of water

hyacinth

18

Major initiatives undertaken

a) Establishment of Protected Area Network of 345 sq.km consisting 13 wildlife sanctuaries, 2 zoological parks, 3 deer parks and 2 community reserves(first in India) for conservation of wild flora and fauna

b) Launching of “Green Punjab Mission (2012-2020)” to increase forest cover in the state to 15% at an annual cost of Rs 180 crore

Diversification of agriculture to reduce area under paddy from 22.5 Lakh ha (2012-13) to 8.5 lakh ha in 2017-18 and promote culvation of basmati, cotton, maize, sugarcane, pulses, fodder, fruit & vegetable and agroforestry proposed.

19

Department of Forests & Wildlife Preservation, Punjab

Department of Agriculture, Punjab

a) Setting up of Biodiversity Management Committees(BMCs) & Technical Support Groups(TSGs) in all 22 districts and 33 village levels BMCs in biodiversity rich areas • Preparation of Districts level People Biodiversity Register`s (PBRs) initiated in 12 districts to document biodiversity & associated traditional knowledge

b) Identification of threatened flora ( 8 species) and fauna ( 5 species) of state

c) Identification of 3 potential Biodiversity Heritage sites along with other biodiversity rich areas

d) Capacity building and training of BMCs/TSGs members in all districts e) Conducted 4 special projects/studies with the financial support of

National Biodiversity Authority, UNESCO and Govt. of Punjabf) Outreach activities a) Preparation of Strategy and Action plan for Conservation of Biodiversity

in Punjab b) Conducted comprehensive study “Biodiversity in the Shivalik Ecosystem

of Punjab” c) Conservation and management of wetlands d) Identification and documentation of key species e) Setting up of wetland Interpretation Centres highlighting biodiversity at

Harike, Kanjli, Ropar and Nangal

20

Punjab Biodiversity Board (PBB)

Punjab State Council for Science & Technology (PSCST)

METT in Harike Wetland The objective of catalyzing sustainability of protected area

systems was achieved by using GEF-3, GEF-4, GEF-5. Datasheet 1 shows the details of the assessment and basic

information about the site. The Datasheet 2 provided numerous threats of Harike

wetland. As per the assessment,

It was found to have high annual and perennial non- timber crop cultivation, threats to wetland due to high usage of water of dams, increase in invasive plants/ weed, pollution caused due to heavy discharge of household sewage and urban wastewater, industrial, mining and military effluents, garbage and solid waste. Geographical events such as high amount of erosion and siltation, climate change due to temperature extremes.

21

There were medium threat to habitats and species associated with non- consumptive use of biological resources from recreational activities and tourism, agricultural and forestry effluents, climate change, loss of cultural link, traditional knowledge and management practices. Assessment form includes partial management, needs improvement in design, medium enforcement of law. There are considerable survey but not directed towards the need of protected area.

Budget management is poor and constraints effectiveness, education and awareness is low for management. There is no direct involvement of local communities, protected system are partially effective in resource use. 2

2

Conclusion Ecological studies of Harike have shown that it is

eutrophic in character. Soil, water and biotic communities exhibited degraded conditions along Sutlej especially during winter when ingress of water within that side was less. Beas zone although comparatively in good condition, has also started degrading.

There are 30 questions in the assessment form which depicts need for better management and follow up action on threats faced by wetlands. The total score was found to be 48

It outlines the paucity of funds, training and community engagement.

Strict management plan and implementation is required for Harike Wetland

23

Bibliography Hockings, M., 2006. Evaluating Effectiveness: A framework for

assessing management effectiveness of protected areas. IUCN Leverington, F., Hockings, M. and Costa, K.L., 2008. Management

effectiveness evaluation in protected areas: a global study. World Commission on Protected Areas.

Ervin, J., 2003. Rapid assessment of protected area management effectiveness in four countries. BioScience, 53(9), pp.833-841.

Management effectiveness tracking tool by WWF; Reporting progress at protected area sites: second edition 2007

Moza, U. and Mishra, D.N., Current Status of Harike Wetland Visa Visa its Ecology and Fishery. In Proceedings of Taal2007: The 12th World Lake Conference (Vol. 1470, p. 1476).

Tiwana, N.S., Neelima, J., Saxena, S.K. and Sharma, V., 2008. Conservation of Ramsar sites in Punjab. In Proceedings of Taal2007: The 12th World Lake Conference (Vol. 1463, p. 1469).

24

THANKYOU !

25