Full page fax print - India Environment Portal

2.4 Does the site safeguards the threatened biodiversity values?
Assessment criteria
Condition Category* (Tick ü) Remarks
Sites does not safeguard the threatened
Potentially rich habitats of number of key
Poor
biodiversity values.
elements are out side PA i.e. Sarus crane and
Sites safeguards a few threatened
otters , Vultures , heronries etc. Large number of
Fair
biodiversity values.
floral / faunal elements of relevance are
Sites safeguards a large number of
being protected but not documented. Partnership
Good ü
threatened biodiversity values.
with Academic Institutions in vicinity
Sites safeguards all threatened
recommended.
Very good
biodiversity values.
2.5 Are stakeholders given an opportunity to participate in planning?
Assessment criteria
Condition Category* (Tick ü) Remarks
Little, if any opportunity for stakeholder
Though there were no provisions earlier ,new
Poor ü
participation in planning.
amendments provide scope for consultations.
Stakeholders participate in some planning. Fair
CWLW to ensure better participation of local
Stakeholders participate in most planning
stake holders.
Good
processes.
Stakeholders routinely and systematically
Very good
participate in all planning processes.
2.6 Are habitat restoration programmes systematically planned and monitored?
Assessment criteria
Condition Category* (Tick ü) Remarks
Habitat restoration programmes are
Water shortage considered as a limiting factor
Poor
entirely adhoc.
and suitable measures taken
Limited planning and monitoring
programmes are in place for habitat
Fair
restoration.
Habitat restoration programmes are
generally well planned and monitored.
Good ü
Habitat restoration programmes are
thoroughly planned and monitored.
Very good
*Score: Poor: 2.5; Fair: 5; Good: 7.5; Very Good: 10
Navegaon National Park (Maharashtra)
| 228