Chapter 1: introduction

4.3.3.4 Fish Composition of Tamor River

Tamor River is a tributary of Koshi River system in the eastern region of Nepal. Kabeli River is one of the tributaries of Tamor River. Tamor River and its tributaries have a rich diversity of the cold-water fish species. Therefore, the information on the Tamor basin fish is required to effectively design mitigation measures for the fish species in KAHEP. In addition, species composition and the quantity of fish have been rapidly decreasing for the last few years in both Tamor and Kabeli Rivers. This study has 31 reported species above the Kabeli-Tamor confluence (refer table 4.29). Additional samplings are being conducted in Tamor River from monsoon 2013 to have a good baseline data on the fish species diversity. Moreover, concerning the decrease of the fish population in the Tamor basin, a survey of the Koshi barrage effect (located approximately 167 kms downstream from Kabeli) is in progress to verify if this dam has any implications on the long migrating fish species in the Tamor and Kabeli river systems. Refer section 7.5.2, Chapter 7 for discussion on fish diversity of the Tamor river basin.

4.3.3.5 Fis migration obstacles- Koshi Barrage

Koshi Barrage is a flood control sluice across Koshi River in Nepal, near the Nepal–Indian border approximately 167 kms downstream of the Kabeli headwork. It was built between 1958 and 1962 and it has 52 gates. As a consequence of the information given by the local fishermen concerning the decrease of the fish population of Kabeli and Tamor Rivers, an evaluation of the Koshi Barrage effect was carried out in July 2013 by KEL to assess the fish migration from lower Kohsi and upstream to the local Tamor and Kabeli river systems. .Preliminary investigations indicate that the Koshi Barrage might have some considerable effects on the upstream fish migratinton, and thereby might impact the run of the long migratory spawners to Tamor and Kabeli Rivers. In the Barrage, there are two fish ladders that, according to the information provided by the operational staff, had been kept closed for a number of years due to the fish ladders unknown effects and due to unclear fish migration across the dam.

4.3.3.6 Fish Species of Conservation Significance

The IUCN red list of 2012 has listed the following five species reported by KAHEP affected sites (Table 4.39).

Table 4.39: Fish Species of Conservation Significance

S.N	Name of the Fish Species	IUCN Red list Category
1	Tor putitora	EN
2	Schizothorax richardsoni	VU
3	Bagarius yarrelli	NT
4	Neolissochilus hexagonolepis	NT
5	Tor tor	NT

Note: Extinct (EX): No known individuals remaining; Extinct in the Wild (EW): known only to survive in captivity, or as a naturalized population otside its historic range; Critically endangered (CR): Extremely high risk of extinction in the wild; Endangered (EN): High risk of extinction in the wild; Vulnerable (VU): High risk of endangerment in the wild; Near Threatened (NT): Likely to become endangered in the near future, and Least Concern (LC): Lowest risk.

The list includes three reported long distant migrant species, namely Bagarius yarrelli, Tor putitora and Tor tor. However, only one species, Tor putitora, was observed during the sampling period in the project site. Among the mid distance migrant fishes, Schizothorax richardsoni, and Neolissochilus hexagonolepis, observed during the sampling period, are also listed in the IUCN Red list. Of the listed species, Tor putitora is an endangered species and Schizothorax richardsoni a vulnerable species while other species being near threatened species.The IUCN Red list is derived from the overall condition of the global population of individual species. The individual species might be in abundance in a particular region but it can be included in the Red list if its global population is decreasing. The same applies to the Red list of Kabeli species. For example, Asala, which is the most common species in almost all river systems in Nepal, is included in the IUCN Red list as a vulnerable species.

In addition, in a society, not all species recorded in a river have the same value, and normally the species in a river will be managed according to local values. Considering this, when dealing with current hydropower developments in Nepal, it is necessary to address some target species for protection and conservation at every hydropower development site. IUCN Red list species, apart from migratory and locally valuable species, are obviously important species. The Red list should be adopted and referred to while desiging andmitigating strategies associated with the hydropower development. The impacts and mitigation of the water diversion on these species are described in the Chapter 6.

4.3.3.7 Phytoplankton, Zooplankton and Aquatic Insects

4.3.3.7.1 Phytoplankton

Phytoplankton is passively floating microscopic plants with or without chlorophyll. A total of twenty six species of phytoplanktons of four different classes were collected in the sampling station -1; total number of 29 species of four different classes were collected in the sampling station-2 and 26 species of four different classes - in the sampling station- 3. The major classes of phytoplankton recorded in three-sampling stations in the field visit are Bacillariophyceae, Cyanophyceae, Chlorophyceae andXanthophyceae (Table 4.40 and 4.41).

Table 4.40: Total Number of Phytoplankton

SN	Species	Station 1	Station 2	Station 3
A	Bacillariophyceae	14	14	11
B	Cyanophyceae	5	6	5
C	Chlorophyceae	6	7	8
D	Xanthophyceae	1	2	2
	Total	26	29	26

Source: EIA Fish Survey 2010

Table 4.41: Phytoplankton Species Recorded at Different Sampling Stations

SN	Species	Station 1	Station 2	Station 3
A	Bacillariophyceae	14	14	11
1	Fragilaria intermidia	P	P	A
2	Fragilaria capucina	P	P	P
3	Gyrosigma kutzingii	P	P	P
4	Melosira granulata	P	P	P
5	Melosira islandica	A	P	A
6	Synedra ulna	P	P	P
7	Synedra acus	P	A	A
8	Nedium affina	P	A	A
9	Navicula pusila	P	P	P
10	Navicula cuspidata	A	P	P
11	Navicula radiosa	A	P	P
12	Nitzschia palea	P	A	A
13	Cymbella tumida	A	P	P
14	Cymbella cistula	P	P	P
15	Surirella robusta	P	P	A
16	Surirella carponii	A	P	P
17	Amphora ovalis	P	P	A
18	Tabellaria binalis	P	A	A
19	Tabellaria fenestreta	P	A	P
B	Cyanophyceae	5	6	5
20	Microchate tenera	P	P	P
21	Phromidium tenue	P	P	P
22	Oscillatoria princeps	P	P	P
23	Spirulena major	A	P	A
24	Lyngbya limnetica	P	P	P
25	Nostochopsis labatus	P	P	P
C	Chlorophyceae	6	7	8
26	Ulethrix zonata	P	P	P
27	Ulethrix variabilis	P	P	P
28	Spirogyra weberi	A	P	P
29	Spirogyra rhizobrachialis	P	P	P
30	Clostarium sp.	P	P	P
31	Leptosira mediciana	A	P	P
32	Chaetophora incerssata	P	P	P
33	Schizogonium murale	P	A	P
D	Xanthophyceae	1	2	2
34	Tribonema minus	P	P	P
35	Characiopsis sp.	A	P	P

* P- present *A- absent, Source: EIA Fish Survey, 2010

Phytoplankton opulation density in general increases towards the downstream section from the dam site to the de-watered zone (Table 4.42).

Table 4.42: Population Density of Phytoplankton at Different Sampling Stations

SN	Species	Station 1	Station 2	Station 3
A	Bacillariophyceae
1	Fragilaria intermidia	250	150	-
2	Fragilaria capucina	250	400	600
3	Gyrosigma kutzingii	50	100	50
4	Melosira granulata	100	300	250
5	Melosira islandica	-	100	-
6	Synedra ulna	200	100	150
7	Synedra acus	50	-	-
8	Nedium affina	100	-	-
9	Navicula pusila	250	100	150
10	Navicula cuspidata	-	50	100
11	Navicula radiosa	-	100	100
12	Nitzschia palea	50	-	-
13	Cymbella tumida	-	100	150
14	Cymbella cistula	75	150	100
15	Surirella robusta	100	100	-
16	Surirella carponii	-	50	100
17	Amphora ovalis	50	200	-
18	Tabellaria binalis	75	-	-
19	Tabellaria fenestreta	75	-	50
B	Cyanophyceae
20	Microchate tenera	50	200	250
21	Phromidium tenue	50	100	50
22	Oscillatoria princeps	100	75	200
23	Spirulena major	-	100	-
24	Lyngbya limnetica	75	250	150
25	Nostochopsis labatus	50	75	150
C	Chlorophyceae
26	Ulethrix zonata	75	200	350
27	Ulethrix variabilis	50	100	250
28	Spirogyra weberi	-	100	100
29	Spirogyra rhizobrachialis	100	200	275
30	Clostarium sp.	50	100	75
31	Leptosira mediciana	-	50	50
32	Chaetophora incerssata	150	100	200
33	Schizogonium murale	50	-	50
D	Xanthophyceae
34	Tribonema minus	50	125	250
35	Characiopsis sp.	-	50	50

Source: EIA Fish Survey, 2010

4.3.3.7.2 Zooplankton

A total of five species of zooplankton of two different orders were found in the sampling stations of Kabeli River during the field visit. The two orders of zooplankton recorded from the project area were Rotifers and Copepoda (Table 4.43 and 4.44).

Table 4.43: Total Zooplankton Recorded in Different Sampling Stations

SN	Species	Site 1Kha	Site 2 Kha	Site 4 Kha
A	Rotifera	2	1	2
B	Cladocera	1	2	2
	Total	3	3	4

Source: EIA Fish Survey, 2010

Table 4.44: Zooplankton Species Recorded at Different Sampling Stations

SN	Species	Station 1	Station 2	Station 3
A	Rotifera	2	1	2
1	Chromogaster ovalis	P	A	P
2	Monostyla sp.	P	A	A
3	Leane sp.	A	P	P
B	Cladocera	1	2	2
4	Bosmina sp.	P	P	P
5	Ceriodaphina sp.	A	P	P

* P- present *A- absent, Source: EIA Fish Survey, 2010

The population density of the zooplanktons in general increases towards the downstream section from the dam site to the de-watered zone for order Cladocera, whereas pattern for Rotifera is more or less similar (Table 4.45).

Table 4.45: Population Density of Zooplankton at Different Sampling Stations

SN	Species	Station 1	Station 2	Station 3
A	Rotifera
1	Chromogaster ovalis	30	-	30
2	Monostyla sp.	20	-	-
3	Leane sp.	-	20	30
B	Cladocera
4	Bosmina sp.	20	30	40
5	Ceriodaphina sp.	-	40	50

Source: EIA Fish Survey, 2010

4.3.3.7.3 Aquatic Insects

A total of 20 species and five orders of aquatic insects were recorded from three sampling stations during the field visit. The recorded orders are Plecoptera, Ephemeroptera, Hemoptera, Trichopteraand Coleptera (Table 4.46 and 4.47) .The number of orders and species in general increase from the upstream to the downstream side.

Table 4.46: Total Aquatic Insects Recorded in Different Sample Stations

SN	Species	Station 1	Station 2	Station 3
A	Plecoptera	3	4	1
B	Ephemeroptera	5	6	5
C	Hemoptera	1	3	2
D	Trichoptera	1	3	3
E	Coleoptera	-	1	2
	Total	10	13	13

Source: EIA Fish Survey, 2010

Table 4.47: Aquatic Insects Recorded at Different Sampling Stations

SN	Species	Station 1	Station 2	Station 3
A	Plecoptera	3	4	1
1	Isogenus modesta	P	p	p
2	Nemoura erratica	P	P	A
3	Nemoura venosa	P	P	A
4	Pletoperia sp.	A	P	A
B	Ephemeroptera	5	6	5
5	Ephemerella sp.	P	p	A
6	Rhithrogena sp.	P	p	p
7	Iron humeralis sp.	A	p	p
8	Stenonema frontale	P	p	p
9	Baetis sp.	P	A	p
10	Epeorus sp	P	p	p
11	Ameletus sp.	A	p	A
C	Hemoptera	1	3	2
12	Plea striola	A	p	p
13	Notonecta sp.	A	p	p
14	Belostoa sp.	P	p	A
D	Trichoptera	1	3	3
15	Hydropsyche sp.	A	p	p
16	Rhyacophila sp.	P	p	A
17	Hesperophylax sp.	A	p	p
18	Philopotimus sp.	A	A	p
E	Coleoptera		1	2
19	Promoresia sp.	A	p	p
20	Enochrus sp.	A	A	p

* P- present *A- absent, Source: EIA Fish Survey, 2010

4.3.3.8 Trends of Aquatic Fauna and Flora

Studies of aquatic fauna and flora of Kabeli River are not available in the literature. Discussions and interaction with local communities regarding fishes in Kabeli reveals that the area had abundant fishery resources in the past. Fish population in the recent years, according to the local people, is declining due to the use of electric shocks, detonators, and poison to catch the riverine fishes, including damage to the habitats by sand and aggregate mining, road construction and disposal of the road construction spoils. There are adequate legal system to stop these illegal activities, including sand extraction from the river bed, hence the future trends of the aquatic life in Kabeli River are uncertain.

4.4 Kanchanjunga Conservation Area and Tinjure Milke Jaljale Forest

The Kanchenjunga Conservation Area (KCA) is the only officially protected area in the Tamor-Kabeli basin. GoN is in the process of declearing the Tinjure Milke Jaljale (TMJ) forest as a protected forest. The nearest boundary limit of the KAC is about 25 km and of the TMJ is about 10 km aerial distance from the KAHEP development site. Both KAC and TMJ, are in remote mountaneous regions and are accessible by trekking only. Both KAC and TMJ are unlikely to be affected by the KAHEP development.

As part of a Cumulative Impact Assessment, some additional informtion and a discussion on KCA and TMJ are provided in the Chapter 7 of this EIA Report