07.05.2013 Views

INFORMATION DOCUMENT - DWA Home Page

INFORMATION DOCUMENT - DWA Home Page

INFORMATION DOCUMENT - DWA Home Page

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

PROVISIONAL LIST<br />

OF AUTHORITIES<br />

AND IAPS<br />

NATIONAL AUTHORITIES<br />

❏ Government of Lesotho<br />

❏ Ministry of Natural Resources<br />

❏ National Environmental<br />

Secretariat<br />

❏ Ministry of Finance<br />

❏ South Africa<br />

❏ Department of Water Affairs &<br />

Forestry<br />

TRADITIONAL AUTHORITIES<br />

❏ Principal Chiefs of Lesotho (24)<br />

and their community development<br />

representatives<br />

AFFECTED COMMUNITIES<br />

❏ Some 8,300 households in 338<br />

villages in a 5-km wide corridor on<br />

either side of the affected river<br />

reaches, incorporating IFR Sites 1,<br />

2, 3 and 7.<br />

LENDERS/ DONORS<br />

❏ World Bank<br />

❏ European Investment Bank<br />

❏ Development Bank of South Africa<br />

OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES<br />

❏ Lesotho Council of NGOs<br />

❏ NGOs/civic organizations/<br />

individuals in Lesotho and South<br />

Africa<br />

❏ International NGOs<br />

Should you feel strongly that any<br />

particular organizations should be<br />

made aware of this project, please<br />

do not hesitate to contact us and<br />

give us their contact details (without<br />

their contact details we will not be<br />

able to involve them, due to the tight<br />

program).<br />

Implications for IFR Policy<br />

Mitigation by flow releases: Overall<br />

❏ The Minimum Degradation scenario was always a hypothetical option, since<br />

design limitations in the dams prevent the releases being made which might achieve<br />

it. It is not, therefore, an option that can be considered for operational purposes.<br />

It has, however, been useful as a scenario against which to compare the other<br />

scenarios.<br />

Katse Releases<br />

❏ The IFR studies show that the design limitations on Katse do not allow much<br />

flexibility of release regime and that all three possible scenarios are predicted to<br />

result in “Severe” overall ecological impacts in reaches immediately downstream<br />

of the dam (Site 2).<br />

❏ The Matsoku rating of “Severe” overall impact under all three scenarios is<br />

heavily skewed by the probable extinction of one species from this river, namely<br />

the Maloti minnow. If the Maloti minnow is taken out of the equation, then<br />

Matsoku’s 600 l/s release regime will allow the downstream ecosystem to be<br />

maintained in a reasonable condition, since it will have 40% of MAR available<br />

to it. Recognizing the importance of the species, LHDA will implement a program<br />

to establish the Maloti minnow in other Lesotho rivers.<br />

Mohale Releases<br />

❏ Because of its more flexible release structures and mechanisms, Mohale Dam<br />

holds the greater potential for manipulating releases to meet river health targets<br />

in the Senqunyane River.<br />

❏ Because there is a considerable population living downstream of the Mohale<br />

Dam, important gains in water quality and maintaining riparian vegetation - an<br />

important resource - would result from even moderately increased flows. The<br />

Mohale impacts are predicted to reduce rapidly downstream due to inflows from<br />

tributaries.<br />

Compensation<br />

❏ The degree of uncertainty in predictions/ estimates of potential losses to<br />

communities means that monitoring of socio-economic status and biophysical<br />

status of riverine ecosystems will be of paramount importance in an adaptive<br />

management system.<br />

❏ The geographic extent of measurable impacts on the Population at Risk can be<br />

limited to river reaches represented by IFR Sites 1, 2, 3 and 7. This is the area to<br />

which, it is proposed, the IFR Policy’s compensation programs will apply. Monitoring<br />

will nonetheless extend to reaches 4, 5, 6 and 8 in order to confirm the moderate<br />

or negligable levels of impact predicted for these reaches.<br />

❏ Different principles of compensation and/or mitigation are required for downstream<br />

rivers (compared with upstream of the structures) because of the different nature<br />

of the impacts. The following principles are proposed:<br />

❏ Taking account of national socio-economic trends, communities will not be<br />

worse off after Policy implementation<br />

❏ Compensation will be based on resources affected or lost, not on resources used,<br />

and will generally be directed at communities, not at individuals;<br />

❏ Compensation will be for demonstrated losses, and both direct compensation<br />

(based on replacement of lost resources) and indirect compensation/ mitigation<br />

(other programs) will be considered.<br />

10

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!