The thermal power plant has major impact of hot water discharge in to nearby creek or into sea on its ecosystem. The baseline for avian biodiversity, marine ecosystem and terrestrial ecosystem has to be assessed before discharging the hot water into sea. We have assessed the terrestrial as well as marine ecosystem for baseline scenario near the thermal power plant in Abdasa taluka, Kutch Gujarat. In the present study, we have focused on terrestrial baseline status of ecological system of surrounding. The findings state that area is not rich in biodiversity but mangrove biodiversity and density may be affected due to the thermal power plant activities.

Keywords: Avian biodiversity, mangrove, hot water discharge, impact, endangered species, thermal power plant

The area in question has one thermal power plant running by Sanghi Industries Limited and one Jetty (walkway accessing the centre of an enclosed water body or structure that projects from the land out into water) structure built in 1994–1995 which is mainly used to Cement and other solid cargo handling by Sanghi Industries Limited. Sanghi Industries Limited is among leading cement manufacturers from Western India.

Water bodies should have the biological and chemical characteristics expected under sustainable conditions. The degree of departure of current vegetation from the potential natural vegetation, or potential natural community has detrimental impact on ecological system of the area. Before detailing the study area, a cursory understanding of the state scenario is important. Biodiversity of this region is largely related to the Thar Desert. Fossiliferous Limestone was found (Nummulites) which were mainly Marine deposits (coin–shaped) in this area. Due to unfavourable meteorological conditions and diverse habitat, a rapid snapshot survey for biological reconnaissance was conducted in this case. Secondly, the activity rhythms of different species differ on a diurnal scale. For instance the rodents dwelling in the sandy tracts of the buffer zone were seen despite being ubiquitous, but leave unmistakable sole imprints of the hind paws on the sand. Such indirect species specific evidences of the animals’ occupancy of the habitat have been considered. With desertic conditions, coastal vicinity, open scrub forest and slight undulating terrain in this region provides a unique ecosystem. The adverse climate and edaphic conditions intermixed with saline open plains and mangrove forests along the coast have turned this desert into an ideal dwelling place for wildlife and birds. Though forest areas are open, scrubby and along the coast they are of saline nature, some of the most endangered and threatened species of animals and birds survive in this area. As the district lies in poor rainfall area it lacks the richer mammalian life, but has the two form of wildlife are terrestrial and avifauna (Figure 1&2).

Figure 1 Jetty Structure.

Figure 2 Thermal power plant.

An ecological survey of the study area was conducted particularly with reference to listing of species and assessment of the existing baseline ecological conditions in the study area. Total 8 hotspots/ villages has been identified in the study area are listed in Table 1. The methodology adopted for the survey is depicted in Table 2.

Kutch bhuj district is forefront in agriculture field. The crops like groundnut, till, bajri etc. are taken in monsoon. The agriculture is rain dependent. No means of major surface water available for crop irrigation. The area falls under agro–climatic zone XIII as per IASRI

http://www.iasri.res.in/agridata/12data/chapter1/db2012tb1_2.pdf.

Floral diversity of the study area

The climatic, edaphic and biotic variations with their complex interrelationship and composition of species, which are adapted to these variations, have resulted in different vegetation cover, characteristic of each region.²⁰ The tree species, herbs, shrubs, climbers and major crops, were documented during this base line study.^21–24

Trees: The dominant trees in the study area are Mangifera indica L (Mango trees) Azadirachta indica (Neem), Plumeria rubra L. (Champa), Babool (Acacia nilotica), Casuarina equisetifolia L. (Casuarina), Dalbergia sisoo L. (Shisham), etc. Total 34 species of trees belong to 17 families are enumerated from the study area (Table 3).

Shrubs and Herbs: Total 21 shrub species belong to 15 families are enumerated from the study area. The dominant shrub community in this area was represented by Prosopis juliflora, Calotropis procera, Cereus peruvianus, Xanthium strumarium L., Abelmoschus manihot L., Hibiscus rosa sinensis L., etc. The shrubs observed in the study area are given in the Table 4 and herbs encountered in the study area are listed in Table 5.

Mangrove: Some part of the study area falls coastal area which is declared as mangrove forest (10.68%), there is Avecenia marina was observed during the study. Four species of mangrove were encountered from the study area were terrestrial mangrove (Table 6).

Cultivated plants in the study area

It is observed that, the different parts of the study area were practicing different crop pattern based on the season and availability of irrigation facility. The rain is the major source of irrigation in this area. The general crop patterns practiced in the study area were Juwar (Sorghum vulgare), Ground nut (Arachis hypogaea) and during monsoon, Wheat (Triticum aestivum) during winter and during summer only Ground nut (Mumphali) were practiced in this region.

Major horticultural crops: Plantation of Chikku (Manilkara zapota), Kela (Musa sp.) Papaya (Carica papaya), Amla (Phyllanthus emblica), Mango trees (Mangifera indica) and Dadam (Punica granatusm) were observed at some localities. Mango trees (Mangifera indica) and Tamarindus trees (Tamarindus indica) were observed adjacent to the residential area and also along the road side at almost all villages. Chikku, Aam, Amla, Limboo and Papaiyo were developed by client in the premises.

Major vegetable corps: The major vegetables grown in the study area were:

1. Bhindi (Abelmoschus escelentus),
2. Brinjal, (Ringana Solanum melongena),
3. Cabbage (Brassica oeraceae),
4. Tomato (Lycopersicon lycopersicum),
5. Guvar (Cyamopsis tetragonoloba),
6. Val (Lablab purpureus),
7. Turia (Luffa acutangula),
8. Karela (Momordica charantia),
9. Drum stick (Sargva) (Moringa oleifera),
10. Amli (Tamarindus indica)
11. Chloi (Vigna unguilata)
12. Pulses: The pulses cultivated in this region were Mag (Vigna acontifolia), Tuver (Cajanus cajan).

Reet Species in the study area

Among the enumerated flora in the study area, none of them were assigned any threat category by Red data book of Indian Plants.^{15–19,21–24}

Faunal biodiversity of the study area

For the documentation of the faunal biodiversity of the study area with respect to birds, reptiles, amphibians, and butterfly species, a baseline survey had been conducted. The common birds observed in the study area are Accipiter badius, Halcyon coromandas, Anhinga melanogaster, Apus apus, Egretta garzetta, Columba livia, Streptopelia orientalis, Anthus campestris, Motacilla cinerea, Motacilla flava, Nectarinia asiatica, Phalacrocorax fuscicollis, Pycnonotus cafer, Limosa limosa, Platalea ajaja, etc. listed in Table 7. The Indian Peafowl was observed which is listed as schedule –I as per IWPA, 1972 and others listed as schedule IV as per IWPA, 1972.

Herpetofauna: In amphibian group, the toads were sighted during the study period. The reptile, Common Garden Lizard, House Gecko and Fan–Throated Lizard, Common rat Snake and were observed in the region is given in the table below (Table 9).

Mammals

Common Mongoose (Herpestes edwardsii), Jungle cat were observed which are protected under schedule II and Nilgai (Boselaphus tragocamelus) is Schedule–III animal as per Wildlife Protection Act 1972. The Squirrel, Indian Porcupine, Hare etc. are protected under schedule IV. The Common House Rat (Rattus rattus) is protected under schedule V (Table 10).

Insect

There is no significant faunal assemblage here except for some insects like Honey Bees (Apis sp.) and Gum leaf Grasshopper (Goniaea australasiae).

Fisheries

Gujarat is the second largest fish producing States in the country only next to West Bengal. Among all the maritime States, Gujarat accounts for a significant share insofar as marine fish production in the country is concerned and stands as the largest marine fish producer. Although, the study area have no major river or any lake, a very few fishes were observed. Some part of study area fall coastal zone, hence marine fishes reported, no fisher man or fishing activity found in the study area (Table 11), (Figure 3–5).

Figure 3 Spotting during primary survey.

Figure 4 Mangrove in the study area.

Figure 5 Marine survey.

REET faunal species

Some of the sighted fauna was given protection by the Indian Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 by including them in different schedules. Among the birds in the study area, Pea fowl (Pavo cristatus) is included in schedule I of Wild life Protection Act (1972), while many other birds are included in schedule IV. Among the reptiles, Indian Cobra (Naja naja), Indian chameleon, Rat snake, Indian Krait and Indian Monitor are provided protection as per Schedule–II of Wild life Protection Act, (1972). Among mammals; Common Mongoose (Herpestes edwardsi), Indian Monitor, Jungle cat are a schedule–II animals. Nilgai (Boselaphus tragocamelus) is protected as Schedule–III animal and hares and 5 stripped squirrels are included in schedule IV of Wild Life Protection act 1972.

The area in question has one thermal power plant running by Sanghi Industries Limited and one Jetty (walkway accessing the centre of an enclosed water body or structure that projects from the land out into water) structure built in 1994–1995 which is mainly used to Cement and other solid cargo handling by Sanghi Industries Limited. Sanghi Industries Limited is among leading cement manufacturers from Western India. Total34 species of trees belong to 17 families are enumerated from the study area. The dominant trees in the study area areMangifera indica L(Mango trees) Azadirachta indica (Neem), Plumeria rubra L. (Champa),Babool (Acacia nilotica), Casuarina equisetifolia L. (Casuarina), Dalbergia sisoo L. (Shisham), etc.Total 21 shrub species belong to 15 families are enumerated from the study area. The dominant shrub community in this area was represented by Prosopis juliflora, Calotropis procera, Cereus peruvianus, Xanthium strumarium L., Abelmoschus manihot L., Hibiscus rosa sinensis L., etc. Some part of the study area falls coastal area which is declared as mangrove forest (10.68%), there is Avecenia marina was observed during the study. Four species of mangrove were encountered from the study area were terrestrial mangrove. The common birds observed in the study area are Accipiter badius, Halcyon coromanda, Anhinga melanogaster, Apus apus, Egretta garzetta, Columba livia, Streptopelia orientalis, Anthus campestris, Motacilla cinerea, Motacilla flava, Nectarinia asiatica, Phalacrocorax fuscicollis, Pycnonotus cafer, Limosa limosa, Platalea ajaja, etc. Common Mongoose (Herpestes edwardsii), Jungle cat were observed which are protected under schedule II and Nilgai (Boselaphus tragocamelus) is Schedule–III animal as per Wildlife Protection Act 1972. The Squirrel, Indian Porcupine, Hare etc. are protected under schedule IV. There is no significant faunal assemblage here except for some insects like Honey Bees (Apis sp.) and Gum leaf Grasshopper (Goniaea australasiae). The study represent that the area in question is not rich in biodiversity, although the marine ecosystem needs to be affected by hot water discharge into sea. Therefore, an urgent need for marine ecosystem management plans to be implemented during operation phase.

None.

Author declares that there is no conflict of interest.

1. Hutto D, Pletsechel SM, Hendrick P. A fixed radius point count method for non–breeding season use. The Auk. 1986;103:593–602.
2. Welsh BHH. Monitoring herpetofauna in woodlands of north western California and south west Oregon: a comparative strategy. AGRIS. 1987.
3. Welsh C, HH Jr, Lind A. The structure of the herpetofaunal assemblage in the Douglas–fir/hardwood forests of northwestern California and south western Oregon. 1991;p. 395–411.
4. Thommpson FID, Davidson IJ, O’ Donnell S. et al. Use of track transects to measure the relative occurrence of some arboreal mammals in uncut forest and regeneration stands. Canadian Journal of Zoology. 2019;67:1816–1823.
5. Allen EL, Engeman R, Krupa H. Evaluation of three relative abundance indices for assessing dingo population. Wildlife Research. 1996;23:197–206.
6. Misra R. Ecology Workbook. Scientific Publishers. 2013; p.31–45.
7. Bentham G, Hooker JD. Genera plantarum. L Reeve and Co., London. 1862.
8. BirdLife International. Threatened Birds of the World. Lynx Edicions and BirdLife International. UK: Barcelona and Cambridge; 2000.
9. BirdLife International. Threatened Birds of the World 2004. CD–ROM. UK: BirdLife International, Cambridge; 2004.
10. BirdLife International. State of the World's Birds 2004–Indicators for our changing world. UK: BirdLife International, Cambridge; 2004.
11. BirdLife International. The BirdLife checklist of the birds of the world, with conservation status and taxonomic sources. 2010.
12. Ahmedullah M, Nayar MP. Endemic Plants of the Indian region. Culcutta: Botanical Survey of India. 1987; p. 147.
13. Anderson T. An enumeration of the Indian species of Acanthaceae. Journal of Linnaean Society. 1867;9: 425–454.
14. Gamble JS. The Flora of Presidency of Madras 2. Culcutta: Botanical Survey of India; 1924; p.743.
15. IUCN. IUCN Red List Categories. Prepared by the IUCN Species Survival Commission. Switzerland: IUCN, Gland; 1994.
16. IUCN. IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria: Version 3.1. IUCN Species Survival Commission. UK: IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge; 2001.
17. IUCN. Guidelines for Application of IUCN Red List Criteria at Regional Levels: Version 3.0. UK: IUCN Species Survival Commission, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge. 2003.
18. IUCN. Red List of Threatened Species. 2008.
19. IUCN. Guidelines for Using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria, version 8.1, Standards and Petitions Subcommittee of the IUCN Species Survival Commission; 2010.
20. Ohasi H. Flora of Eastern Himalaya, Third Report. University Museum of University of Tokyo Bulletin. 1975;8:1–458.
21. Jain S.K. Rare and Endangered Specles: Observation on rare, imperfectly known endemic plants. In the sacred groves of Western Maharashtra. Calcutta: Bot Sur of India; 1983;169–178.
22. Jain SK. Dictionary of Indian folk medicine and ethnobotany. New Delhi: Deep publications. 1991.
23. Jain SK. The Problem of Endangered Species. Concepts, Problems and Solutions. In: Tropical Ecosystems: Ecolosv and Management. In: KP Singh, JS Singh, editors. New Delhi: Iiley Eastern iimited; 1992;69–80.
24. Jain SK, Sastry ARK. Threatened plants of India – A State of the Alf Report. New Delhi: Bot Surv of India; 1980.
25. Jain SK, Sastry ARK. Safeguarding Plant diversity in threatened Natural Habitats. In: Conservation of Threatened Natural Habitats. In: Anthony, V Hall, editors. African nat Sci Prog Report. 1984;92.
26. Kumar Ashok. Butterfly (Lepidoptera: Insecta) Diversity from Different Sites of Jhagadia, Ankleshwar, District–Bharuch, Gujarat. Oct Jour Env Res. 2013;1(1):09–18
27. Kumar Ashok. Environmental Management Plan for Chemical Industries Especially Resin Manufacturing Unit. Oct Jour Env Res. 2014;2(3):262–273.
28. Kumar Ashok, Aggarwal Savita Goyal. Ecology and Biodiversity status of Sachin gidc and its surroundings with Special reference to Conservation measures for Indian Peafowl (Pavo cristatus) schedule –I Bird species. Oct Jour Env Res. 2013;2(1):82–100.
29. Kumar Ashok, Aggarwal Savita Goyal. Study of Common Property Resources (CPR) With Special Reference To Water And Biological Resources At Projected Area Near Village Ninat, Bardoli, District–Surat. Oct Jour Env Res. 2013;1(4):319–331.
30. Kumar Ashok, Srivastava Meena. Diversity of medicinal Plants in Uttarakhand and their conservation Strategy with special reference to Orchids, In: Proceeding of National Conference on Environementla Health: Challaneges and Management. Lucknow: Pt. Deendayal Upadhyay Govt. PG College Rajajipuram. 2012. 139–142.
31. Kumar Ashok, Srivastava Meena, Goyal Savita. The Biodiversity At Sandi Bird Sanctuary, Hardoi With Special Reference to Migratory Birds. Oct Jour Env Res. 2013;1(3):173–181.
32. Oldfield S, Lusty C, MacKinven A. The World List of Threatened Trees. World Conservation Press, Cambridge. 1998.
33. Shendage SM, SR Yadav. Revision of the Genus Barleria (Acanthaceae) in India. Rheedea. 2010;20(2):81–230.