47296-001: Northwest Region Power Transmission Line Project...Syrdarya TPP – Zafarabad Substation...

Initial Environmental Examination

Supplemental Report – Critical Habitat Assessment Document: Initial Environmental Examination (Draft)

Date: December 2020

Loan 3285-UZB: Northwest Region Power Transmission Line Project:

Syrdarya TPP – Zafarabad Substation

220kV Transmission Line Project

Prepared by the Joint-Stock Company National Electric Grid of Uzbekistan (NEGU) for the Asian

Development Bank (ADB).

The Initial Environmental Examination 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.

Preparing Sustainable Energy

Investment Projects, Regional Energy

Transmission and Dispatch

Enhancement, Uzbekistan

Syrdarya TPP – Zafarabad Substation

220kV Transmission Line Project

Critical Habitat Assessment

Date: December 2020

Prepared by the Joint-Stock Company National Electrical Networks of Uzbekistan (NENU) for Asian Development Bank (ADB), Uzbekistan. The Critical Habitat Assessment 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.

Syrdarya TPP – Zafarabad Substation 220kV Transmission Line Project


2

Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 3

2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................. 3

3. CRITICAL HABITAT REQUIREMENTS ........................................................................................ 4

4. BIODIVERSITY CONTEXT ............................................................................................................ 4

5. CRITICAL HABITAT ...................................................................................................................... 5

6. CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................................... 18

APPENDIX A – CRITERIA 1 DETAILED ASSESSMENTS ................................................................. 19



3

1. Introduction 1. This report provides the findings of the Critical Habitat Screening and scoping process for the proposed Syrdarya TPP, Zafarabad Substation 220kV Transmission Line. It identifies triggers for potential Critical Habitat in the Project Area of Impact (AOI). The assessment has been desk-based and involved a review of data from the Integrated Biodiversity Assessment tool (IBAT) the Project Draft Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) and other reliable data sources 2. The report is compliant with the ADB Safeguard Policy Statement (SPS) 2009. The IFC Guidance Note 6 (GN6) thresholds have also been adopted and build on the ADB SPS. The first stage is Screening during which all protected areas, habitats and species known or likely to be present within 50km of the proposed project alignment are identified, categorized by their nature conservation status and assessed on whether they are or likely to be present in the AoI. The second Scoping stage assesses each relevant ecological receptor against the seven Critical Habitat criteria in accordance with the ADB requirements and supporting IFC thresholds.

2. Project Description 3. The project alignment is illustrated in Figure 1 and comprises 3 components:

Syrdarya TPP – Zafarabad Substation 220kV Transmission Line.

Construction of a new substation in Zafarabad.

Minor upgrades to the existing switchyard in Syrdarya TPP.

4. The Area of Impact for this project is 1km buffer around all project activities.

Figure 1: Project transmission line alignment and substation locations



4

3. Critical Habitat Requirements 5. Critical Habitat (CH) is defined in the ADB Safeguard Policy Statement (SPS) (2009) as a subset of both natural and modified habitat that has high biodiversity value and deserves particular attention. Critical Habitat is based on the following seven criteria: 1) habitat required for the survival of critically endangered or endangered species 2) areas having special significance for endemic or restricted-range species 3) sites that are critical for the survival of migratory species 4) areas supporting globally significant concentrations or numbers of individuals of

congregatory species 5) areas with unique assemblages of species or that are associated with key evolutionary

processes or provide key ecosystem services 6) areas having biodiversity of significant social, economic, or cultural importance to local

communities 6. The SPS also states that CH includes: 7) areas either legally protected or officially proposed for protection, such as areas that meet

the criteria of the World Conservation Union classification, the Ramsar List of Wetlands of International Importance, and the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization’s world natural heritage sites.

7. To help determine if Critical Habitat is present the International Finance Corporation (IFC) Guidance Note (GN) 6 has been adopted throughout this process. IFC GN6 gives specific numerical thresholds that can be applied to the Critical Habitat Requirements set by the ADB SPS. These thresholds are broadly based upon globally standardised numerical thresholds published in IUCN’s A Global Standard for the Identification of Key Biodiversity Areas and Red List Categories and Criteria. The thresholds are indicative and serve as a guideline for decision-making only. There is no universally accepted or automatic formula for making determinations on critical habitat. 8. The first stage of the assessment researches and screens sensitive biodiversity features that may regularly occur in the Project area of influence (AoI). Screening is conducted using the Integrated Biodiversity Assessment Tool (IBAT) which provides data of the biodiversity features present or potentially present within 50km of the Project AoI. The IBAT findings are supplemented with recent and reliable field data, further desk-based study, f0r example, species present in local designated sites, and data gathered for the IEE.

9. An assessment is made into whether each screened species regularly occurs (as per IFC GN6) in the Project AoI and has the potential to meet the ADB SPS criteria. The likelihood of regular occurrence in the AoI is informed by the species’ ecological characteristics including range size, habitat requirements, movement, migratory routes, breeding sites and population distribution.

10. All species that are likely to regularly occur in the AoI, and that have the potential to meet ADB SPS critical habitat criteria, are subject to more detailed analysis to confirm if they trigger Critical Habitat. For certain species an ecologically appropriate area of analysis (AoA) may be required to quantify the importance of the local population.

4. Biodiversity Context



5

11. The project is located to the east of Uzbekistan south of Aydar Lake and north Zaamin National park near the Tajikistan boarder. The landscape through which the alignment passes is mostly flat and dominated by agricultural land. Cotton, wheat, rice, corn, vegetables and fodder crops cover 86% of the Area of Influence (See Figure 2). Landscaped planting including gardens comprises 4% of the AoI. The remaining 10% comprises semi-arid sage-ephemeroid and saltwort-ephemeroid pastures, and sedge saltwort and meadow-marsh areas along the collectors and canals of the Syrdarya river basin.

Figure 2: General environmental conditions of project area

12. The results of the initial screening assessment are presented in Table 1. 461 species that have the potential to be present within 50km of the project.

Table 1: Species present or potentially present within 50km of the proposed route alignment.

Group Critically Endangered

Endangered Vulnerable Near Threatened,

Least Concern, Data Deficient

Total

Birds

1 5 9 263 278

Mammals

0 0 2 63 65

Reptiles

0 0 1 18 19

Amphibians

0 0 0 0 0

Fish

0 0 2 9 11

Invertebrates

0 0 0 34 34

Plants

0 0 0 52 52

Fungi

0 0 1 1 2

Total

1 5 15 440 461

5. Critical Habitat



6

13. Of the total 461 species recorded within the 50km buffer around the Project alignment 21 may meet the ADB SPS critical habitat criterion. Each of the 21 was analysed in greater detail to determine the likelihood of them regularly occurring in the AoI and meeting the IFC GN6 critical habitat thresholds. Where relevant AoA’s were developed to quantify the importance of the local population.

14. Several species were found to meet more than one ADB SPS critical habitat criterion and have been assessed against each relevant criterion. Sensitive ecological receptors were identified as regularly occurring for the following ADB SPS criterion:

Criterion 1 – Critically Endangered and Endangered Species

Criterion 2 – Endemic and Restricted Range Species

Criterion 3 – Migratory and Congregatory Species

15. Results of the analysis for each species are provided and conclusions whether they trigger Critical Habitat are given. No ecological receptors relevant to Criterion 4, 5, 6 or 7 were found to regularly occur in the AoI.

5.1. Critical Habitat Requirement 1 – Critically Endangered and Endangered Species

16. ADB Requirement one for critical habitat is areas required for the survival of critically endangered or endangered species. The corresponding IFC GN(6) guidance for this requirement adds further detail to allow more accurate assessment, and is as follows: a. Areas that support globally important concentrations of an IUCN Red-listed EN or CR

species (≥0.5% of the global population AND ≥ 5 reproductive units GN16 of a CR or EN species).

b. Areas that support globally important concentrations of an IUCN Red-listed Vulnerable (VU) species, the loss of which would result in the change of the IUCN Red List status to EN or CR and meet the thresholds in GN72(a).

c. As appropriate, areas containing important concentrations of a nationally or regionally listed EN or CR species.

5.1.1. Screening

Criterion 1(a) - Globally Endangered and Critically Endangered Species 17. The following 6 globally endangered and critically endangered species were identified as being potentially present within 50km of the route, see Table 2.

Table 2: Endangered and Critically Endangered Species potentially present.

Species name

Common name IUCN Category Taxonomic Class

1. Vanellus gregarius Sociable lapwing CR Aves

2. Aquila nipalensis Steppe eagle EN Aves

3. Falco cherrug Saker falcon EN Aves

4. Haliaeetus leucoryphus Pallas's Fish-eagle EN Aves

5. Neophron percnopterus Egyptian vulture EN Aves

6. Oxyura leucocephala White-headed duck EN Aves

Criterion1(b) – Globally Vulnerable Species



7

The following 15 globally vulnerable species were identified as being potentially present within 50km of the route, see Table 3.

Table 3: Vulnerable Species potentially present.

Species name Common name IUCN Category

Taxonomic Class

1. Cyprinus carpio Wild Common Carp VU Actinopterygii

2. Luciobarbus brachycephalus

Aral Barbel VU Actinopterygii

3. Gazella subgutturosa Goitered Gazelle VU Mammalia

4. Vormela peregusna Marbled Polecat VU Mammalia

5. Anser erythropus Lesser White-fronted Goose VU Aves

6. Marmaronetta angustirostris

Marbled Teal VU Aves

7. Aythya ferina Common Pochard VU Aves

8. Columba eversmanni Yellow-eyed Pigeon VU Aves

9. Streptopelia turtur European Turtle-dove VU Aves

10. Otis tarda Great Bustard VU Aves

11. Clanga Greater Spotted Eagle VU Aves

12. Aquila heliaca Eastern Imperial Eagle VU Aves

13. Chlamydotis macqueenii

Asian Houbara VU Aves

14. Picipes rhizophilus none VU Fungi

15. Testudo Horsfieldii Central Asian Tortoise VU Reptilia

Criterion 1(c) – Nationally endangered species 18. IFC guidance states that as appropriate, areas containing important concentrations of a nationally or regionally listed EN or CR species should be considered for Critical Habitat. These are summarised in National Red Lists. However, in order for a national/regional red list to be relevant to the Critical Habitat criteria it must have adhered to IUCN guidance. Although Uzbekistan has a national red list, it is not considered to be compliant with IUCN guidelines. Criterion 1(c) is thus not applicable for this Critical Habitat Assessment. However, key threatened should be adequately assessed under Criteria 1 (a) and (b).

5.1.2. Screening Results

19. The initial assessment concluded that 2 of the 21 species are not likely to regularly occur in the Project Area of influence and were screened out - Picipes rhizophilus and Gazella subgutturosa. The remaining 19 species have the potential to meet the ADB SPS CH criteria and either regularly occur in the Project Area or, in accordance with the precautionary approach, were assumed to regularly occur. Further details on all 19 species are present in Table 4.

Table 4: Results of the Criteria 1 Screening Critical Habitat Assessment Latin name

Common name

IUCN Category

Comments CH Likelihood

Vanellus gregarius

Sociable lapwing

CR

Potentially in passage only. Although Migratory data suggests their main migration route passes to the west of the project alignment, they could migrate through the area (although this is likely to be rare). No stopover

Not CH under Criterion 1. To be assessed again under another Criterion



8

Latin name

Common name

IUCN Category


locations for this species have been identified in the region, the last local sighting was from Aydar lake around 20 years ago. The region does not support this species but instead individuals may pass over in passage during each migratory season. It is thus more appropriately assessed under criterion 3 (areas critical for the survival of migratory species).

Aquila nipalensis

Steppe eagle

EN

This species breeds to the north in Russia, Mongolia and Kazakhstan and migrates through Uzbekistan to overwintering sites in India, Pakistan, Africa or the Middle East. It is present only in passage in the project area. Steppe Eagle are more appropriately assessed under criterion 3, since a population is not concentrated in the area at any one point in time, but individuals may pass over during each whole migratory season.


Falco cherrug

Saker falcon

EN

Estimated 100-150 breeding pairs in Uzbekistan. Saker falcon are known to breed in the nearby Nuratau range to the west as well as the Turkestan range to the south and have been sighted close to the project AoI. Further Assessments is required.

Potential Critical Habitat Requires Further Analysis/

Haliaeetus leucoryphus

Pallas's Fish-eagle

EN

Usually restricted to wetland when not on migration. 6 adults were reported to overwinter in Tuskan Lake IBA, around 20km north of the AoI, in 2004. The proximity of this site and it’s seeming importance for this very rare species means further assessment is required.

Potential Critical Habitat Requires Further Analysis

Neophron percnopterus

Egyptian vulture

EN

The estimated breeding population in in Uzbekistan rangers between 143 and 140. Egyptian Vulture are known to breed in the nearby Nuratau range to the west as well as the Turkestan range to the south and have been sighted close to the project AoI. Further Assessments is required.

Potential Critical Habitat Requires Further Analysis

Oxyura leucocephala

White-headed duck

EN

Known to overwinter in the Northern Shores of the Aydarkul Lake’ IBA, around 50km from the AoI (8 individuals in 2004). Restricted to wetland when not on migration, and therefore potentially found in the AoI only in passage. Because of this white-headed duck are more appropriately assessed under Criteria 3.




9

Latin name

Common name

IUCN Category


Cyprinus carpio

Wild Common Carp

VU

The native population is widely distributed across the Black, Caspian and Aral Sea basins. This species has also been introduced across the world for food and sport fishing. The project AoI contains just one river, and thus even if it contains a population of common carp it is infeasible that the loss of this single population would result in a change of this species’ IUCN threat status from VU to EN.

Not considered Critical Habitat

Luciobarbus brachycephalus

Aral Barbel

VU

The native population is distributed across the Caspian and Aral Sea basins. The project AoI contains just one river, and thus even if it contains a population of Aral Barbel, it is infeasible that the loss of this single population from one river would result in a change of this species’ IUCN threat status from VU to EN.


Vormela peregusna

Marbled polecat

VU

Primarily associated with steppe habitat but is known to live in cultivated areas, and therefore could be present. Very widespread species across much of Asia and the Middle East. As such, it is infeasible that the loss of a local population would result in a change of this species’ IUCN threat status from VU to EN.


Anser erythropus

Lesser White-fronted Goose

VU

This species is closely associated with waterbodies. It breeds much further north in Arctic Russia and Scandinavia. It is known to winter in Uzbekistan in small numbers as well as migrating through the country. Winter roosting colonies are also formed on large lakes and rivers, or in reedbeds and rushes. 5-15 individuals were recorded to winter in Dalverzin State Forestry and Hunting Management Area IBA on the banks of the Syr Darya river around 20km from the AoI (2006). However, there is an absence of suitable habitat closer than this to the AoI, and thus overwintering birds are very unlikely to regularly occur in the AoI. Therefore, as they are likely only present in passage in the AoI they are more appropriately assessed under Criterion 3.


Marmaronetta angustirostris

Marbled teal

VU

Closely associated with wetlands when breeding and overwintering. Not thought to be present in large local waterbodies, which would provide the best habitat locally, (e.g.

Not CH under Criterion 1. To be assessed again under



10

Latin name

Common name

IUCN Category


Aydar lake) and so regular presence in the AoI is very unlikely. It may pass through the region on migration and so, as this species is likely only present in passage in the AoI, it is more appropriately assessed under Criterion 3.

another Criterion

Aythya ferina

Common pochard

VU

Closely associated with wetlands when breeding and overwintering. Not thought to be present in large local waterbodies, which would provide the best habitat locally, (e.g. Aydar lake) and so regular presence in the AoI is very unlikely. It may pass through the region on migration and so, as this species is likely only present in passage in the AoI, it is more appropriately assessed under Criterion 3.


Streptopelia turtur

European turtle-dove

VU

Potentially present and breeding in the area but very widespread species, minimum population 12 million. As such, it is infeasible that the loss of a local population would result in a change of this species’ IUCN threat status from VU to EN.


Columba eversmanni

Yellow-Eyed Pigeon

VU

Potentially breeds in the area. Uses steppe/semi-desert habitat as well as agricultural areas for feeding. Very little information on this species’ distribution in Uzbekistan, although it has not been recorded in local Important Bird Areas so a large regional population seems unlikely. This species occurs across much of Central Asia and so it is infeasible that the loss of the local population, which is unlikely to be significant, would result in a change of this species IUCN threat status from VU to EN.


Otis tarda Great bustard

VU

Although formerly breeding in Uzbekistan, this species no longer breeds in the country, and is rarely sighted in passage or overwintering1. There are observations of lone females with clutches in the Jizzak region, but there are more than 50 years old. Birds overwintering in the Karatau foothills of Kazakhstan sometimes move into nearby regions including the Jizzak region, but this is thought to be to the northwest of the project AoI. It is very unlikely that this species is regularly found in the


1 Kessler and Smith (2014), The Status of the Great Bustard (Otis tarda tarda) in Central Asia: from the Caspian

Sea to the Altai, Aquila (2014), Vol. 121, p. 115–132



11

Latin name

Common name

IUCN Category


project AoI, and if it is ever present it will be in very low numbers.

Clanga Greater spotted eagle

VU

This species breeds in Russia, Mongolia, Kazakhstan and some of Eastern Europe. Birds are mainly found in passage in Uzbekistan on migration overwintering sites in India, Pakistan or the Middle East. However, they are known to overwinter in the project region, with 3-9 individuals recorded to winter in Dalverzin State Forestry and Hunting Management Area IBA on the banks of the Syr Darya river around 20km from the AoI (2006). Although these individuals might regularly occur in the AoI, the local population is far too small for its loss to result in a change in the IUCN threat rating of this species to EN. Therefore, it is not CH under criterion 1. Nevertheless, Greater spotted eagles are known to migrate through the area and thus this species will also be assessed under criterion 3.


Aquila heliaca

Eastern imperial eagle

VU

This species breeds in Russia, Mongolia, Kazakhstan and some of Eastern Europe. Birds may migrate through Uzbekistan to overwintering sites in India, Pakistan or the Middle East. It is present only in passage in the project area. The Eastern imperial eagle is more appropriately assessed under criterion 3, since a population is not concentrated in the area at any one point in time, but individuals may pass over during each whole migratory season.


Chlamydotis macqueenii

Asian houbara

VU

Breeds in Uzbekistan but not thought to breed in the project area. Tends to breed in steppe or semi-desert habitat rather than agricultural land. Key breeding sites in Uzbekistan are the Kyzyl-Kum desert to the north (which also is an important stop-off on migration) and the Bukhara region to the south-west. The project area does form part of the migratory route for birds migrating to overwintering sites further south, although the major migratory flyway seems to pass to the west of the region.


Testudo Horsfieldii

Central Asian Tortoise

VU

There are records of this species from the region, but they are to the south and to the west of the Project AoI, where the habitat is less modified by agriculture and thus more suitable for this species (Bondarenko and Peregontsev




12

Latin name

Common name

IUCN Category


2017). It is unlikely that this species regularly occurs in the AoI, and if it does it is likely in low numbers, as the region seems of lesser importance than other areas of Uzbekistan. Therefore, it is infeasible that the loss of a local population would result in a change of this species IUCN threat status from VU to EN.

20. Of the 19 species that have the potential to regularly occur in the project AoI 3 have the potential to trigger critical habitat and require further Scoping analysis, 9 do not trigger critical habitat under Criterion 1 but should be assessed again under another Criterion and 7 were confirmed as unlikely to meet the thresholds and have been screen out.

5.1.3. Scoping

21. Critical Habitat thresholds are not met for any of these species. The local population sizes are not deemed large enough to meet the criteria set out in IFC GN6. Full justification of this for each species is detailed in Appendix A. Thus, the project does not trigger Critical Habitat for Criterion 1, see Table 5.

Table 5: Results of the Criteria 1 scoping assessment

Latin name Common name IUCN Category Critical Habitat?

Falco cherrug Saker falcon EN No

Haliaeetus leucoryphus Pallas's Fish-eagle EN No

Neophron percnopterus Egyptian vulture EN No

22. Despite these species not meeting Critical Habitat requirements it is recognised that they are globally threatened, and the Project must ensure the protection of their conservation status at least and no deterioration of it. Mitigation may be needed to prevent net loss for these globally threatened species, particularly the Endangered Saker Falcon and Egyptian Vulture.

5.2. Critical Habitat Requirement 2 – Restricted - range Species

23. ADB Requirement two for critical habitat is areas having special significance for endemic or restricted-range species. The IFC GN(6) defines a terrestrial restricted range species as that with an EOO (Extent of Occurrence) of less than 50,000km2. The Critical habitat threshold this requirement is as follows:

a) Areas that regularly hold ≥10% of the global population size AND ≥10 reproductive units of a species.

24. The IBAT tool was used to identify any species potentially present within 50km of the alignment that was listed by the IUCN as having an EOO of less than 50,000km2. None were found to be present. This is not surprising as Uzbekistan, and central Asia as a whole, does not have high rates of endemism compared to other geographic locations, with the majority of species widely distributed but rare across their range. Therefore, the project area does not contain Critical Habitat under Criterion 2.



13

5.3. Critical Habitat Requirements 3 and 4 – Migratory and Congregatory species

25. ADB requirements 3 and 4 sites that are critical for the survival of migratory species and areas supporting globally significant concentrations or numbers of individuals of congregatory species. 26. The relevant IFC thresholds are:

a) Areas known to sustain, on a cyclical or otherwise regular basis, ≥ 1 percent of the global population of a migratory or congregatory species at any point of the species’ lifecycle.

b) Areas that predictably support ≥10 percent of the global population of a species during periods of environmental stress.

27. Uzbekistan is an important part of the Central Asian Flyway, with a large number of bird species migrating from breeding grounds further North to overwintering sites in Africa, the Middle East Pakistan and India. The flyway in Uzbekistan is broad (hundreds of kilometres wide) and is predominantly situated to the west of the project area as birds avoid the mountains to the east and south (see Figure 3). However, satellite data does show that a number of bird species, including IUCN threatened ones, do migrate through the AoI. In order to assess whether the project area falls within Critical Habitat for Migratory species, the criteria IUCN use to assess Key Biodiversity Areas is referred to. For Migratory corridors the IUCN standard states that ‘along migratory corridors, KBAs should be identified for stop-over or bottleneck sites rather than for the entire corridor’. In the same way, it would be inappropriate to designate the entirety of the broad Central Asian Flyway as Critical Habitat. Instead, areas that represent bottleneck sites or important stopovers should be designated as Critical habitat for Migratory species.

Figure 3: Altitude map and detailed route alignment (units are m above sea level)

5.3.1. Bottleneck sites 28. There is no evidence from either satellite tagging data or topographic/geographic features that the AoI or its broad surrounding is a bottleneck within the broader flyway. Satellite tagging data has been analysed where available, and Figures 4 – 7 show the migration routes of satellite tagged birds for four relevant endangered species. In addition to these selected species satellite data from European cranes and bird ringing data from a range of ducks and geese was also consulted, particularly given the proximity of the Aydar lake, which is known



14

to support large numbers of waterfowl. Taken together they illustrate that the AoI is part of a wider but it is not a key bottleneck for migrating birds. 29. Figure 4 shows the routes taken by 14 migrating steppe eagles (EN). It demonstrates that this species has a broad migratory corridor in the region, with birds mainly skirting the Nuratua range and avoiding the project AoI. It is noted that 4 birds migrated across the proposed Project alignment, as they seem to fly through the pass close to Jizzak between the foothills of the Nuratua and Turkestan ranges.

Figure 4: Steppe Eagle migratory routes. Source: Russian Raptor Research

30. Figure 5 shows the migratory routes of the Asian Houbara a species that both passes through and breeds in Uzbekistan. The key flyways are clearly a hundred kilometres or more further east.



15

Figure 5: Migratory routes of Asian Houbara from breeding sites in Kazakhstan

31. The eastern imperial eagle and greater spotted eagle (Figure 6) use the wider flyway with 4 out of 6 individuals crossing the AoI in at least one year of the satellite study.

Figure 6: Eastern Imperial and Greater spotted Eagle migratory routes, white line (left)

32. Sociable lapwing has a clearly defined migratory route that bottlenecks close to the Turkmenistan and Afghanistan boarder, several hundred kilometres south-east of the Project aera.



16

Figure 7: Sociable Lapwing migratory routes. Red line shows approximate location of the project.

33. For all species researched the migration routes pass over a wide corridor, with different individuals taking different routes, some over the mountains to the east, without any evidence that they pass through a bottleneck site. This is also supported by the general topography, which is fairly uniform and flat, with a few areas of higher relief but no steep valleys or rivers likely to bottleneck species (see Figure 3). There is therefore no indication that the area meets the criteria for KBA designation. Given this, and that it is part of a more extensive flyway of similar importance for a substantial distance, it is not appropriate to consider the Project area to be Critical Habitat for criteria 3 migratory birds.

5.3.2. Stopover sites/ sites supporting congregations 34. The landscape is almost entirely modified agricultural land. Lake Aydar and the associated wetlands are important standing water bodies used as stopovers for migratory waterbirds, but these are all well outside the project AoI. No other standing waterbodies have been identified in the AoI, apart from small artificial ponds, which are surrounded by heavily modified cropland and unlikely to be suitable waterbird habitat. There is no evidence that these are of importance as stop over locations for migratory birds. 35. Some species such as the Houbara bustard are known to stop-off in desert and semi-desert habitat, but this habitat type is not present in or near the AoI. Raptor species may also stopover in the area, but there is no reason to imply this region has a greater abundance of prey than the rest of the broad migration corridor and so it is very unlikely they stop over in significant concentrations. This is supported by the available data, including that from satellite tracking, which includes nothing to suggest that the area is a significant stop-off for any species researched. This is further supported by the fact that the project area does not contain any KBAs or IBAs designated for migratory or congregatory species. The IBA criteria A4 is equivalent to CH Criterion 3a - ‘the site is known or thought to hold congregations of ≥1% of the global population of one or more species on a regular or predictable basis’ and so key stopover locations are often already designated as IBAs. 36. Therefore, the project area does not contain Critical Habitat under Criteria 3 and 4. Nonetheless, the data suggests that the wider area is of importance to migratory species. Transmission line developments in this migratory corridor present a risk to these species and



17

the project should aim to mitigate potential impacts to at least no net loss. They may otherwise have disproportionate effects on the global population.

5.4. Critical Habitat Requirement 5 – Evolutionary processes and Ecosystem services

37. ADB Critical Habitat Requirement 7 is that Critical habitat includes areas with unique assemblages of species or that are associated with key evolutionary processes or provide key ecosystem services. The IFC Guidance note 6 gives some guidance on this, stating that areas associated with key evolutionary processes tend to have high spatial heterogeneity, which can lead to speciation via isolation or divergent evolution or environmental gradients, also known as ecotones, which produce transitional habitat and are associated with the process of speciation. The study area does not fit these criteria and the landscape is almost entirely modified agricultural land. 38. The area is also not thought to provide key ecosystem services. The AoI crosses a single waterway, however, this runs through almost entirely agricultural land rather than natural land and so the area does not act as a water catchment. The project area does not contain Critical Habitat under Criterion 5.

5.5. Critical Habitat Requirement 6 – Community importance

39. ADB Critical Habitat Requirement 6 is that Critical habitat includes areas having biodiversity of significant social, economic, or cultural importance to local communities.

40. No species of significant social, economic or cultural importance have been identified. Therefore, the project area does not contain Critical Habitat under Criterion 6.

5.6. Critical Habitat Requirement 7 – Protected or designated areas

41. ADB Critical Habitat Requirement 7 is that Critical habitat includes areas either legally protected or officially proposed for protection, such as areas that meet the criteria of the World Conservation Union classification, the Ramsar List of Wetlands of International Importance, and the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization’s world natural heritage sites.

42. The Aydar-Arnasay Lakes system is a designated Ramsar site. Its designation is due to both the large number of waterbirds that is supports, during the 2003 international winter waterfowl count some 96,600 birds of 37 species were recorded and due to the presence of threatened species such as Pallas’ fish eagle (EN) and the white-headed duck (EN). At its closest point the Ramsar site is 13km from the project AoI and therefore is not in the Project AoI. However, the species for which the site was designated may move outside. The relevant species have been assessed accordingly under the relevant Criterion, for example any globally threatened species present have been assessed appropriately under Criterion 1. 43. There are 5 Important Bird Areas within 50km of the project, see Figure 8. IBAs do not technically trigger Critical Habitat under ADB guidelines. However, they have been assessed as part of the precautionary approach as they are internationally recognised sites which can support important bird concentrations and/or globally threatened species. All of the IBAs are at least 20km from the project Area of Impact. However, the species for which the sites have been designated may move beyond the IBA boundaries. The relevant species have also assessed under the appropriate Criterion.



18

44. No protected or designated areas occur within the Area of Impact for this project, and thus the project area does not contain Critical Habitat under Criterion 7.

Figure 8: IBAs within 50km of the project AoI

6. Conclusions 45. The proposed Syrdarya to Zafarabad 200kV Transmission Line and Zafarabad Substation Project does not trigger Critical Habitat under ADB requirements. However, internationally endangered species are present and should inform the detailed design of the Project to avoid, reduce, minimise and potentially offset any potential adverse impacts.

46. Egyptian vulture, an endangered species that is in global decline and susceptible to the risks associated with transmission lines are present in numbers close to the IFC GN6 thresholds. Should there be any material increases in local populations, critical habitat may be triggered under ADB SPS Criterion 1. The data used to inform this assessment is ten years old and should be validated and under ADB Safeguard Policy Statement 2009 (SPS) the Project is required to avoid a reduction in the population of any recognised endangered or critically endangered species (no net loss). Therefore, further data collection and monitoring is recommended.

47. The recommended monitoring should focus on the Egyptian vulture but in line with best practice it includes measures to help ensure no net loss of other species that are of particular risk of electrocution and collision, namely saker falcon, steppe eagle and imperial eagle. Monitoring should include long-term research that would allow an adaptive management approach to the species to be adopted. A Biodiversity Action Plan / Species Management Plan should be prepared to help manage and monitor the possible impacts on this species during construction and operation.



19

Appendix A – Criteria 1 detailed assessments

Saker Falcon

The saker falcon is globally categorised as Endangered (IUCN). Its minimum global population is estimated at 12,000 individuals (IUCN). It is relatively widely distributed, occurring across some of Europe and much of Asia, with the key breeding populations situated in China, Mongolia and Russia. It breeds in Uzbekistan and may also be found in passage on migration. Breeding sites are typically in the gorges of the lower and middle sections of mountain ranges, in this case the Turkestan and Nuratau ranges. During the breeding season Saker Falcon avoids settling close to humans.

Resident saker falcon have range sizes of approximately 200km2 (a circle of 15km diameter) on average, based on studies from Hungary (Promer et al. 2018) and Mongolia (Potapov et al. 2000). An AoA was thus designated to include potential breeding locations in the Nuratua range and it’s foothills, with a 15km buffer, taking into account both the records of Saker Falcon in the area and the distribution map (figure A1) provided by the National Action Plan for this species (Kashkarov and Lavento 2011).The AoA does not incorporate the Turkestan range and it’s foothills (thought to contain 2 breeding pairs) because birds nesting in the Turkestan range are thought to be of a separate population (Kashkarov and Lavento 2011), and suitable nesting habitat is further than 15km from the AoI, suggesting birds in this population do not regularly occur in the project AoI. It is to be noted that there is one record of a bird close to the eastern part of the alignment, however it is most likely this was a sighting of a vagrant bird that does not regularly occur there, since it is far from known or optimum breeding habitat.

Figure A1 – Distribution of Saker Falcon in Uzbekistan showing the Nuratua range population close to the project area (Kashkarov and Lavento 2011)

Figure A2- Area of Analysis for the saker falcon, established by incorporating all



20

available information on its distribution and habitat requirements.

The Nuratau range and therefore the AoA is thought to contain 5 Saker Falcon breeding pairs, or around 10 individuals, according to RSPB birdfair surveys (2009-2010). Therefore, the population within the AoA is not thought to represent 0.5% of the global population (minimum 60 individuals) and thus the Project does not trigger critical habitat requirements for the Saker Falcon. However, as the species is present in the area and may interact with the Project at the western end of the alignment, suitable mitigation will be important to prevent net loss of this globally Endangered species.



21

Pallas’s Fish Eagle

Pallas’s fish eagle is closely associated with wetlands, principally large lakes and rivers, where it hunts fish and waterbirds. 6 individuals (more than 0.5% of the global population) were estimated to overwinter in Tuzkan Lake IBA (part of the Aydar lake) in 2004 (Birdlife international) and no more recent data is available. Steele (2010) calculated that the average home range size for overwintering birds was just under 40km2 (a circle of diameter 7km). Therefore, the AoA was set up to incorporate the Tuzkan Lake and a 7km buffer zone, on the basis that birds may occupy home ranges extending out from roosting sites next to the lake.

Figure A3- Area of Analysis for the Pallas’s fish eagle, established by incorporating all available information on its distribution and habitat requirements.

The Project AoI is 18km from the Tuzkan Lake IBA, and thus 11km from the Area of Analysis for the Pallas’s fish eagle. This means that the Pallas’s fish eagle is not thought to regularly occur in the project area and it is unlikely to regularly occur 18km from the Tuzkan lake. It does therefore not meet Critical Habitat Requirements under Criterion 1. However, it is possible that this species occurs irregularly in the project area whilst overwintering, and it may also pass through the project area on its migration to and from the Tuzkan lake IBA. Therefore, suitable mitigation will be important to prevent net loss of this rare and globally endangered species.

Egyptian Vulture The Egyptian Vulture is globally endangered (IUCN). Its minimum global population is estimated at 12,000 individuals (IUCN). It is widely distributed, occurring across some of Europe and much of Asia, but has seen drastic declines across its range. It breeds in Uzbekistan and may also be found in passage on migration. This species is known to scavenge near to human settlements and in agricultural land and has very large home ranges. A study found breeding Egyptian Vultures spend 50% of their time in core home ranges of 900km2 (circle of 34 km diameter), however if 99% of their time was accounted for, they used a much larger range of up to 209,800 km2 (Buechley et al. 2018). An Area of Analysis was set



22

up for the Egyptian vulture incorporating all available information on its distribution and habitat requirements. It includes the two known local breeding sites for this species, the Nuratua and Turkestan ranges, with a 30km buffer extending from the suitable breeding habitat to represent potential travel within home ranges. Unlike for the saker falcon, Egyptian vulture occupy larger home ranges and can occupy habitat more modified by humans, therefore the Nuratua and Turkestan populations are not being treated as distinct. This is backed up by the records of Egyptian Vulture from the area, which seem to show a single continuous population between the two areas. The Area of Assessment includes the project AoI at its western end. It is noted that a distinct population is thought to exist in the Gissar Range (in and around the Gissar State Nature Reserve), which can be seen in figure A3. Records of Egyptian Vulture in the area show that these populations are separated by approximately 60km, and this population is referred to as a separate population in the studies by the Society for the Protection of Birds (Kashkarov and Lavento 2011).

Figure A4 - Area of Analysis for the Egyptian vulture.

The studies conducted by the Society for the Protection of Birds within the framework of the “Birdfair/RSPB” programme in 2009-2010 recorded 6 pairs in the Turkestan range and 12 pairs in the Nuratau mountain, which together form the AoA. It is therefore assumed that that AoA supports approximately 40 individuals (c.19 breeding pairs), although it is acknowledged that the data is ten years old. The population recorded in the Gissar, Turkestan and Zarafshan mountain ranges is assumed to range between 30-50 pairs, although this data is also ten years old and the population is not likely to be regularly present in AoI. The Area of Assessment for the Egyptian vulture is thought to contain 40 individuals. It is therefore unlikely that the AoI supports 0.5% of the global population (60 individuals) of Egyptian vulture, and thus it does not meet Critical Habitat Requirements under Criterion 1. Whilst the data available at the time of assessment concludes that Critical Habitat is not triggered, it is possible that relatively small increases in local populations would lead to a change in classification. Given that the global population is declining, and the species is



23

susceptible to risks associated with transmission lines additional work is required to ensure that the project does not have an adverse impact on this species (no net loss). In accordance with the precautionary approach a Biodiversity Action Plan / Species Management Plan should be prepared to help manage and monitor the possible impacts on this species during construction and operation. As part of this commitment long term field surveys are recommended to allow for an adaptive management approach to adopted.

47296-001: Northwest Region Power Transmission Line Project...Syrdarya TPP – Zafarabad Substation...

Documents

Transcript of 47296-001: Northwest Region Power Transmission Line Project...Syrdarya TPP – Zafarabad Substation...