TURKEY ANATOLIA WATERSHED REHABI Ll'I'A''lON PROJECT REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ENVI'RONMI1ENTAL MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK A Draft Report Prepared by SEMIA ALPAN (National Consultanit) aiid KEITH OPENSHAW (International Consultanit) 27 January 2003 FL COn l1 Contents. Executive Summary ..............................................................2 Acronyms ..............................................................4 A. Introduction .5 B. Project Desciption .5 C. Institutional and Policy Issues .7 D. Baseline In foimationI 8s E. Lessons fr-om Previous Ongoing Projects & Stuises .34 F. Environmiiental Screenic .43 G. Project Environmiental Impacts ............................................................. 56 H. Assessment of Altematives ............................................................. 57 I. Monitoring and Evaluationi Plan ............................................................. 58 J. Environmental Management Plan ............................................................. 77 K. Public Consultationls ............................................................. 93 Annexes ........................................................................... 100 Annex 1. Terms of Reference for the Regional Environmiienital Managemnenit Plan .. 101 Annex 2. Environmenital Screening of Proposed Interventions for AWRP, including the GEF Component, and their likely Environumental Impacts . ............................ 104 Annex 3. Legal Framework .............................................................. 120 Annex 4. Selected Micro-catchments in the AWRP .................................. 125 Annex 5. AWRP-project performance monitoring component . ......................... 145 Annex 6. Field Trip Minutes, Sema Alpan, (National Consultant). July 2002 .............. 149 Annex 7: Environmental Management Plan AWRP .................................. 154 Annex 8. Public Consultations and Disclosures on Environmental Aspects of the AWRP .............................................................. 171 References ............................................................. 175 REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE AWRP. Executive Summary. A regional environmental assessment (REA) was undertaken for the Anatolia Watershed Rehabilitationi Project, wlhose aim is to assess tile milicIo anid milacIo enIviionimleIntal Impacts of tile varlioLs componlents of tile proposed project. The project wx'ill cover 60 micr-o-catclhnilcilts of five principal xvaterslhecis ill tllirteenl provinlces of tile Anatolil area in ceintral Turktey. Tlhe total area of tllese milcro-catclhmiiellts is about 535,000 h1a, buLt project intervenitionis will be confined to approximately 154,000 ha. The principal ri\vers of tlhese five waterslheds are the Seyhani, Ceyharn and Goksu flowving illtO tile Mediterraneani and the Kizilirmak aild Yesilirmlak flowving iito the Black Sea. Various interventionis will be under-taklen il tile forestry, rangelarld aild agricultural sectors, \vitlh tlhe aiimi of rever-sin-g cilviroilmlelital degradationt, by signiFicanitly redcucing erosioI, ililprovinig biodiversity aqid carboii seqUestratioIl aild illtrOdUCilCi or exparic hig elrvirollnlentally friendly farnling practices. InI additionl, as part of tIle project, tllere is a Global Environlmenital Facility (GEF) grarit to improve the xwater quality of tlhe two watersheds flowing into the Black Sea. Its ultimate aim is to reduce excessive eutropilicationi in streams, rivers, ponds, lakes and wetlands that flow to the Black Sea. This will be done throughl improved manure management on farms aind in agro-industries and by demonstrating the appropriate and timely use of fertilizers, especially organic fertilizers, on farms together with improved arable and pastoral practices. The GEF sub- component is confined to four provinces, three of which are part of the main project. However, the lessons learnt from this sub-component will have wider applications throughout the project area and beyond. A brief project description is given followed by an examination of institutional and policy issues. Five different government agencies of four ministries are directly involved in the project at the central and provincial levels and other government bodies such as the State Hydraulic Works and the State Institute of Statistics, as well as local authorities and NGOs have an interest in it. The policy issues covering the project deal with managing the land in a sustainable manner and protecting the biodiversity and waters for future generations. There is a legal framework for forestry and rangelands, but none directly for agriculture or water. However, some agricultural activities and most agro-industries are covered under the environmental act and are subject to initial environmental evaluations or environmental impact assessments. As part of the REA, six micro-catchments were visited and baseline information was gathered about existing conditions and proposed interventions. All of these areas suffer from considerable environmental degradation and the present land use on much of the area is unsustainable, resulting in diminishing returns to the people living there. As part of the project preparation, these and other micro-catchments were visited and preliminary discussions were held with the villagers concerning the level and types of interventions required to reverse this degradation and to improve the standard of living standard. Plans 2 were then drawn up by the villagers, with the help of the various government agencies, to meet the dual goals of improved economic benefits and environmental sustainability. From the baseline information, the environmental problems of these six micro- catchments were examined, together with the solutions as proposed by the villagers. Tlle positive and negative enviro-nmenital effects of the various intervenitionis were examinled. Overall, thie environmental benefits vastly ouLtweigh the drawvbacks, and these latter can be alleviated witlh suitable prescriptions. The problemiis in thc six micro-catclhmiicnits are a microcosnm of the waterslheds as a whole and therefore, these MCs were used as a proxy when undertaking this REA. This proposed project is a follow-up to the East Anatolia Watershed Rehabilitation Project (EAWRP). Thus, several lessons and pointers were learnt from the EAWRP as to the likely environmental impact on1 this proposed project. The overall benefits, both enviroiinmenital and economic, were very positive, but thle scale of the environmenital impacts wvas not monitor-ed unlder thie EAWRP, hence one reasoni for this REA. In order to gauge the impact of the project an environmental screening of all the proposed components and activities was undertaken. In particular, this looked at activities that could have negative and positive impacts. The overall components will result in positive environmental benefits, but some activities may have negative impacts unless precautions are taken to mitigate possible negative influences. A screening matrix was compiled of the important activities and this matrix examined the possible environmental effects of the individual activities and proposed prescriptions to mitigate possible negative effects. The matrix also listed the positive environmental effects of rehabilitation activities in forests and rangelands and through the promotion of appropriate farming practices. As mentioned previously, while experience dictates that the AWRP will have an overwhelming environmental benefit, the scale of this benefit has to be monitored and evaluated. Hence, a monitoring and evaluation (M&E) plan was drawn up as part of an overall M&E programme for the project. This M&E plan devised a strategy to quantify the environmental benefits such as decreased erosion, increased biodiversity and carbon sequestration and improved water quality. Baseline survey and resurvey tables have been compiled for the forestry, rangeland, agricultural and miscellaneous sectors as well as the GEF sub-component. It is proposed to undertake sample surveys of these four sectors in twelve of the 60 watersheds. In addition, surveys will be carried out in the four provinces where the GEF sub-component is taking place. Following these M&E proposals, an environmental management plan (EMP) was compiled, listing the likely environmental impacts and proposing appropriate mitigation measures including monitoring requirements. An action plan was drawn up to enact the EMP. A plan for baseline and resurveys was drawn up and costed together with requirements for training and equipment. The overall cost of assessing the environmental benefits of the project is estimated to be US$ 3.14 to 4.38 million. The benefits from carbon sequestration alone, if traded could be about US$ 4 million after five years and about US$ 13 million after fifteen years. 3 Acronyms AGM General Directorate for Reafforestation and Erosion Control (of MoF) AWRP Anatolian Watershed Rehabilitation Project CCA Chemical control agents (herbicides, insecticides and pesticides) CGS Competitive Grants System Process CKOK Geni. Directorate of Environmnental Pollutioll Preventioni & Conltrol (MoE) DS1 State l-l ydrl auli c Wo\oks EAWRP Easternl Anatol ian Watershed Rehlabilitation Proj ect EIA Environmenltal Impact Assessment EMP Environmenital Managemiienit Plan EU EuL-opean Unioni FAO The Food and Agricultulral Organization of the UN GDNP General Directorate of National Parks, Game and Wildlife (of MoF) GDRS General Directorate of Rul-al Services GEF Global Envir-onmiiienit Facility GIS Geograplic In for-miationi System GMZ Gene Managemenit Zone GPS Global Positioning System ICR Implementation Completion Report (WB document) IEE Initial Enviroinmenital Examination IPM Integrated Pest Management KKGM General Directorate for Protection and Control (of MARA) KPI(s) Key Perfornance Indicator(s) M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MARA Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs MC(s) Micro Catchment(s) MoE Ministry of Environment MoF Ministry of Forestry NGO(s) Non-governmental Organization(s) OVI(s) Objectively Verifiable Indicator(s) PCD Project Concept Document (WB document) PMG Project Management Group PPU Project Preparation Unit REA Regional Environmental Assessment SIS State Institute of Statistics SSAG Special Studies Advisory Group TOR Terms of Reference TUGEM General Directorate for Production and Development (of MARA) WB World Bank 4 Anatolia Watershed Rehabilitation Project: Regional Environmental Assessment. A. Introduction. MuchI of TuLr-key has highlly degradecd ecosystemiis, duc to niatulal and anlitlropogeniic influeLnces, such as cultivation patternis, livestock grazing, ancl deforestationi. These degraded areas cause major- envirounmenital damage and affect the livelihood of the rural population. The Anatolia region in central Turkey is one of the vor-st affected (an poorest) areas in Turkey, thus it has been selected as an area to demonlstrate that ecosystems can be relhabilitated and made sustainable witlh the active participation of the local communities. The project area wvitlhin the Anatolia region lhas 13 provinces and stretches from the Mediterranean to the Black Sea. It covers about 19 million ha1, 24% of Turkey's areas witlh a 1997 populationi of about 11.6 millioni, 40% of whlichi are in ruiral areas. It has five prinlcipal watersheds, namiiely the Seyhan, Ceylhan and Goksu flowing into the Mediterranean and the Kizilirmak and Yesilirmak flowinlg into the Black Sea. B. Project Description. The Anatolia Watershed Rehabilitation Project (AWRP) aims at arresting environmental (and economic) degradation in 60 micro-catchments (MC) of its five watersheds and implement community selected priority interventions to rehabilitate the MCs. The estimated area of the selected MCs is about 535,000 ha out of which 154,000 ha will be the physical implementation area. The AWRP is a follow-up to the recently completed Eastern Anatolia Watershed Rehabilitation Project (EAWRP). The interventions would be chosen from a menu of activities. Selection will be made after MC Development Plans have been prepared by the implementing agencies, in close collaboration with the communities. The implementing agencies are the General Directorate of Forestry (AGM), the General Directorate of Rural Services (GDRS), and the General Directorate of Production and Development (TUGEM) for the MCs. In addition the GEF component is under the control of the General Directorate of Protection and Control (KKGM) in the Ministry of Agriculture (MARA), and the Ministry of Environment (MoE). Project activities will be financed with a World Bank loan, a Global Environmental Facility (GEF) grant and counterpart funds from the Turkish Government. The GEF funds would be used for activities that reduce nutrient loads into water and soil on the watersheds that flow into the Black Sea. This will be done by promoting the use of organic fertilizers on farns, demonstrating environmental friendly farming practices and increasing the monitoring and enforcement implementation capacities of the relevant institutions. The positive experiences from these activities will be promoted in other areas of the project and elsewhere throughout the country and beyond. ' The area of the 13 provinces in the AWRP is 18.8 million ha. However, the watershed boundaries do not necessarily correspond to the provincial areas. 5 The AWRP will include two main components that are of relevance for a Regional Environmental Assessment (REA). 1. Rehabilitation of Degraded Natural Resources. This component would protect degraded areas from further degradation, erosion and nutrient pollution. It would: (i) promote provenI locally adopted vegetative techinologies and meclhaniical structures to coniserve water, reduce soil erosion, anid alleviate fuel/foddcle slhortages; (ii) promiiote appropriate use of marginial agricultural land, (iii) promiiote env\il-onmiiienitally-fliendcily agr-icultur-al practices, (iv) reduce l.and unlder- Fallow by in1troduciLng foocd andc foCderel- legumnes into the crop rotation; and (v) promiiote maniure managemiienit and agro- industry pollutioni control. All these activities slhould have positive benefits on1 the enviroinmenlt, but the scale of the beniefits is as yet unknown, lhenlce the impor-tanice of monitorinig the intervenitionis and evaluatillg the outcoml-es. 2. Incolne Raising Activities. This component would raise rural income througl activities such as small-scale irrigation, farmn ponds, agricLIltur,al productioll Onl terraces, productioll of niclle crops, graftling of \vild fr-uit species, forage prodLuctioii, and bee-keeping. This componient will provide immecliate benefits to beneficiaries, and complemenits Componenit 1, whiclh mainily provides global benefits. Some parts of these intervenitions may result in adverse environmiiienital impacts. Thus, these will be highlighted and mitigation measures will be proposed to counter such impacts. In addition, the project will have the following tlhree components. 3. Strengthening Policy and Regulatory Capacity towards meeting European Union (EU) Environmental Standards. This will reinforce the activities of the above components by ensuring that environmentally friendly interventions are promoted. 4. Awareness Raising, Capacity Building and Replication Strategy. This component will include environmental awareness and the best practices will be promoted throughout the country. 5. Project Management and Support Services. As part of the AWRP, a Regional Environmental Assessment has been undertaken. The REA is a tool to help with and influence the proposed investment strategies and programs. Its primary objective is to present an overview of the major environmental conditions, baseline data, issues and trends in the 13 provinces of the five watersheds in which the project will be working 2. Also, it has provided an analytical framework and comprehensive guidelines to better address environmental concerns through mitigation of adverse environmental impacts in the design, implementation, and monitoring of the menu of possible project interventions mentioned previously: this will be done through an Environmental Screening process. Finally, an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) has been prepared. 2 The 13 Provinces are Adana, Amasya, Corum, Icel [Mercin], Kahramanmaras, Karaman, Kayseri, Konya, Nigde, Osmaniye, Samsun, Sivas, and Tokat. Amasya, Corum and Tokat have both Watershed and GEF initiatives. Samsun only has GEF initiatives. 6 The REA gives a description of the project provinces, as well as the institutional and legislation framework that are linked to the environment. It identifies the major environmental issues in the project provinces, such as water pollution, erosion, and quality of water. It then provides a description of the environmental risks associated with the various project activities, and proposes mitigatin1g measures. It draws on experiences and lessons fromii the East Anatolia Watershed Rehabilitationi Project (EAWRP). Necessary procedures and mechalnismiis for mitigationi, as well as institUtional arranigecrents and accounltability arc described in the E.IP. The cu.1mulativc imipact of proposed project activities is also assessed. All these activities have been or are to be discussed in stakelholder consultation meetings prior to the final draft of the REA. The Termns of Reference for the nationial and international consultanits are given in Anlnex 1. C. lnstitutional and Policy Issues. Instittitionial Issues. The Institutional issues wvill be first described and tlhen policy issues wvill be high-lighted. The govern-ment agencies and other bodies involved in the project are as follows. Ministry of Forestry. The Ministry of Forestry (MoF) is responsible for conservation, development, planning, management and utilization of forest resources. The Ministry targets the conservation and further extension of forested land and responds to the needs of people in terms of forest products as well as recreation. The central organization of the Ministry consists of 3 main service units organized as general directorates (the General Directorate of Afforestation and Erosion Control (AGM), General Directorate of Forest Village Relations (ORKOY) and General Directorate of National Parks and Wild Life (MPG), one affiliated organization (General Directorate of Forestry [OGM]). AGM manages areas designated for reforestation, erosion control and range improvement. MPG is responsible for natural parks, nature reserves, national parks, nature monuments and recreation forest areas. ORKOY is responsible for providing some support to forest communities living within or adjacent to forest areas. OGM manages almost all forest land resources in Turkey, undertaking forest protection works (against fire, illegal cuttings, encroachment, insects and diseases, etc), silvicultural works for forest regeneration and improvement, road construction and maintenance, cadastral surveys, management planning, production and marketing of wood and other forest products. As to the peripheral organization of the ministry, it encompasses 9 regional directorates and 52 conservancies attached to these directorates, 143 local chief engineering and 543 engineering offices, 11 research directorates directly attached to the Ministry and 8 laboratories for soil analysis. 7 Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs. The mandate of the ministry (according to the Government Decree no. 441 in Force of Law) is to ensure the development of rural settlements in line with overall development plans and programs, construct infrast-uctuel- facilities so as to enhlanice crop farming and animlial 1uLIsbandr-y and to deliver public services in agricultural, economic and social fielcls. The ministr-y performs its relaedC duties lilh-oughl its peripIheICIl organizatioIn. TIh peripheral organization of the minlistry consisls of resecarcl institutes, pro\;V1lcial and district directorates, farm-ls and supervisioll ulnits. The minlistry also lhas its agricultural consultillg centl-es in some foreign counltries. The maini service ullits OF the millistry consist of variious general directorates. Eaclh of these Unlits has distinct and specific responsibilities: * General Directorate of Agricultural Productioni and Developmenit (TUGEM). * Gener-al Directorate of Preservation and Contr-ol (KKGM). * General Directorate ofOrganization and Supp)ort (TEDGEN4I). * General Directorate of Agricultural Researclh (TAGEM). * Foreign Relations and European Union Coordination Department (DIATK). * General Directorate of Agrarian Refonr. * General Directorate of Soil Products Office (TMO). * General Directorate of Agricultural Enterprises (TIGEM). * General Directorate of Ataturk Forestry Ranch (AOC). The following are the KITs (State Economic Enterprises) not directly attached but related to the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs: Turkish Sugar Plants Inc. (TSFAS). General Directorate of Enterprises of Tobacco, Tobacco Products, Salt and Alcoholic Beverages (TEKEL). General Directorate of Tea Enterprises (CAYKUR). Fertilizer Industry of Turkey. The "Board for Restructuring and Support in Agriculture" was established in order to coordinate the work carried out by the public institutions. Ministry of Environment. Within the framework of the Legislation on the Environment that lays down principles in relation to the protection and improvement of the environment and its transfer to future generations, the tasks of this ministry include the determination of principles of conservation and utilization in both rural and urban environments; drafting of environmental plans on the basis of development and regional plans so as to ensure the rational utilization of natural resources and make economic decisions compatible with ecological considerations in the context of balanced and sustainable resource utilization and to monitor the implementation of such plans whether developed by the ministry itself or commissioned to other agencies. 8 The Ministry of Environment is engaged in various activities including coordination and information flow in the context of international conventions to which Turkey is a Party including the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, Convention for the Prevention of Desertification, CITES Convention, Bern Convention, Convention on Long Range and Trans-boundary Pollution. The Ministry of Environmiienlt has thl-ee maini scrvice ullits organized as Genel-al Directorates, namiiely Gener-al Directorate of Enivironlmenital Protectioni, General Directorate of Pollution1 Prevention and Control, General Dircctorate of EIA and Planning. Further organs of the ministry include S1 provincial directorates. General Directorate of Rural Services. The General Directorate of Rural Services took its present organizational structure in 19S4 Upon the enactmiienit of Laxv no. 3202. It is an anniex budget legal entity attaclhed to the Office of the PM. Its basic objective is to eliminlate reduLndalncies in services extended to rural areas and to produce more comprelhensive and efficient services. The peripheral organization of the General Directorate consists of Regional Directorates existing in 22 centrally located provinces and 80 Provincial Directorates (a directorate in each administrative province). The General Directorate also has 11 Research Institutes, 5 Machinery-Equipment Directorates, 3 Project Directorates and 2 Training Directorates. The General Directorate of Village Services tries to extend various services to rural areas and settlements including the construction, maintenance and repair of village roads and bridges; village drinking water supply works; construction of various facilities and premises in villages; rural sanitation; facilities relating to the use of surface and groundwater resources and small irrigation ponds. General Directorate of State Hydraulic Works (DSI). The General Directorate of DSI, is not a partner of the project. But it has some major roles in water resources management and it is one of the major beneficiaries of the project. One of the positive impacts of the project is lengthening the lifetime of the dams constructed by DSI in the relevant basins through reduced erosion. Its basic mandate is, in the context of water resources development, to manage surface and groundwater resources of the country, take measures to prevent any damage that may be caused by water and utilize these resources so as to be beneficial to overall development efforts and public welfare. The peripheral organization of the DSI consists of 26 Regional Directorates, branch directorates instituted according to the needs of respective Regional Directorates and Chief Engineering Offices attached to these branch directorates. Major tasks of the DSI include the following: to construct irrigation systems and protective facilities against floods; drain swamps; introduce drainage measures to 9 problematic areas; establish hydraulic power plants; carry out duties assigned under the Law no. 167 to provide drinking, use and industrial water to large cities; rehabilitate rivers and enhance water products in reservoirs; develop projects in relation to various tasks undertaken; examine, approve and supervise drinking water supply and sanitation projects of urbani settlemenits and to cooperate witlh related organiizatiolns and agencies to contr-ol pollutionl inI SU1rface and grouLndwIvater reserves. Village Admhinistrations. According to the 1997 General Census of Population there are 36,699 village settlemenits. The Law No. 442 (dated 1924) on Village Settlemiienlts foresees that villages should be self-sufficienit with respect to some comlllullal works and organizations. The Lawv divides village wor-ks in two parts as compulsory and voluIntary. Compulsor-y \works are those related to health, public wvorks, sanitationi, agriculture and education. Volulntar-y works, on1 the otlier hand, cover the conistr-uctioni or establislhmiienit of suchi commirrunial Facilities as launldries, bathls, miar-ket places and village forests. The existence of many villages on1 high, inclined and rough ter-aill as dispersed ullits independent of each other is one factor hinldering their development. In fact, 71 percent of all villages in TuL-key are located on slopes and hillsides. Almost all villages in Turkey remain out of the scope of sewage networks. Transportation and access are both insufficient in qualitative and quantitative terms. The majority of villages still have no drinking water supply networks. Electricity and communication services need modernizing since frequent interruption pose many problems. The target at present is to ensure that each dwelling unit has its telephone connection. There are also some problems regarding the access to national TV channels. The physical growth of settlement units takes place in an unplanned manner. Constructions are made through traditional methods without any plan and consequently earthquakes still constitute a serious threat. Inadequate consideration of geographical characteristics while determining the administrative units to which individual villages are attached lead to many problems including lack of any connection between a village settlement and its administrative district. There are also problems in the fields of education and health. The problems of forest villages, which constitute about 25 percent (8,977) of all villages, are yet to be solved. Another leading problem is the absence of production-marketing organizations. Irrigation .Unions. The General Directorate of DSI establishes its overall principles and policies in regard to operation and maintenance and delivers its services either directly through its own implementing units or delegates these functions to real and legal entities according to the provisions of the relevant legislation. Under the legislation on the transfer of irrigation facilities to their beneficiaries, the main rule is that it is not the proprietorship, but the operation and maintenance of such facilities 10 that is transferred. Since 1993, organizations formed by beneficiaries and local governments have come to the fore as another way of irrigation management. Small irrigation networks up to the coverage of 2,000 hectares had been gradually transferred to their users. The DSI encouraged participatory approaches by establising T-irigationi Grouips with limited responsibilities in operation anid mainitenaince. As a result of this policy line, irrigation on about 62,000 lhcctarcs of landi \vas tranisferred to various other organizations. Starting fi-om 1993, thc "Acceleratecl Tranisfer Progr-amii" lhas becn effectively implemented in pilot areas selected by the DSl. Transferees by 2000 include, 214 legal village entities, 135 municipalities, 304 UlliOlls and 42 irrigationi cooperatives. The transferee charges a specified annual fee for its irrigation services. This annual fee is determined on the basis of unit land either with respect to specific crops or number of times irrigation occurs regardless of cl-op or by some otlher method. These irrigation organiizatioiis mnay hlave other sources of revenue as wcll includilng subscriptionl fees collected oncc, bantk accoLunts, penalties and doniations. Cooperatives. Mutual assistance, solidarity and cooperation are the underlying principles of a cooperative. Having these in mind, it is observed that the cooperative approach is a part and parcel of the daily life of Turkish people. In fact, the people of Turkey have the rather unique feature of cooperating and joining hands in difficult circumstances without any external pressure. For centuries, Turkish people had displayed internal support and solidarity through various ways including helping others (imece- voluntary joint work for common good) failing in their work for various reasons, keeping common shepherds for their animals or taking over work in rotation, constructing various facilities together, etc. Present cooperatives in Turkey have their roots in these historical tendencies. What follows is a brief account of cooperatives, which may be relevant to the present project and presently active in Turkey. Cooperatives relevant to the project. 1) Agricultural Development Cooperatives. Agricultural development cooperatives are multi-purpose organizations active in various areas. The basic reason for this multi- purpose character of cooperatives is the dominance of a poly-culture in agriculture. In other words, farmers make their living by engaging in different activities. Consequently, inputs needs of the farmer extend over a rather wide range and also the processing or marketing of farm products require different activities. 2) Irrigation Cooperatives. Irrigation cooperatives are organizations established under the Law no. 1163 on Cooperatives. These cooperatives are established to operate small- scale irrigation facilities constructed by the state or to sustain and cover operating expenses of other facilities constructed by farmers themselves. Irrigation cooperatives may, therefore, play an important role in ensuring the rational operation of facilities 11 constructed at large costs. They can be regarded as "service cooperatives" since they try to sustain irrigation services. 3) Agricuiltuiral Credit Cooperatives. Agricultural credit cooperatives presently procure all kinds of agricultural inlpUts and extend themii to tlheir memiibers. In tllis respect, cooperatives regulate the marrket and save farm-ners fioim hlaving to pay extrieimelv 11igl pr-ices flor agricultural linpUts. In cases WhMlere agLricultural credit cooperlatives faill to supply suchI inputs as fertilizers, clhemicals, seecis, agricultulal equipmiient, etc. farm-lers hiave no other choice but procuring them from markets at highier costs. Wheln fuLids of cooperatives are limited, menmbers cannot benefit properly fi-om credit facilities. All these problemas cause a falls in total agricultural oultput. 4) Agr icultural Marketing Cooperatives. Agricultural Marketing Cooperatives and Unions conduct two purclhases as 'routine' and 'SUppOrt.' In normial purchiases, unillons or independent cooperatives determinle and declare the price they will pay for differenit qualities of specific crops. Tlese 'nloor prices' are set before harvesting etc. by consiclerinig domestic and interniationial marklets ancl stocks in lhand. Crops purclhased by cooperatives and uIInioIns are processed and theni sold in clomestic or international markets; if any profit accrues it is distributed to members. Support purclhases, on the othel hand, are based on Article 27 of the Law no. 3186, which states that the Counlcil of Ministers (CoM) or any specific ministry designated by the Council may authorize cooperatives and unions to purchase agricultural products on behalf of the State. Each year the CoM sets and announces floor prices for specific crops and assigns a specific union or unions (except independent cooperatives) the task of purchasing specific crops. The financing of this operation rests with the Agriculture Bank. The law enacted on Agricultural Sales Cooperatives and Unions (ASU) was published in the Official Gazette No. 24081 of 16 June 2000. In order to carry out their activities in an efficient and sustainable manner, the law provides a structure that is both autonomous and financially independent. The Restructuring Board is carrying out studies and making recommendations for cooperatives and unions with a view to restructuring them and ensuring a sustainable structure that will allow these institutions to carry on their activities in line with the principles of economic efficiency and productivity. Operation credits required by cooperatives and unions are provided from the general budget and from the Support and Price Stabilization Fund upon the recommendation of the Restructuring Board. A transition period of four years is foreseen to privatise the ASU. Chambers of Agriculture. Chambers of Agriculture are the professional organizations of farmers. These organizations having public legal entity are based upon the Law no. 6964 passed in 1957. The objectives of the chambers of agriculture include the following: provision of professional services; assisting in the development of the sector of agriculture in all respects and in the implementation of state plans and programs in the field of agriculture; facilitation of professional activities; conservation of professional ethics, solidarity and discipline in the sector of agriculture and improvement of relationships between farmers and the rest of the people as well as farmers themselves. 12 Farmers' Unions and Associations. These are professional unions fonned by farmers with a specific enterprise size to defend and promote their interests. "Village promotioni and upgrading associations" is another category of instituItion existing in almost all villages, thoLugh1 uinde- clifferenit namiles, to respondcl to social and infi-astructUre needs of indivildual villagcs. Beside the institutionis depicted above, the State Institute of Statistics (SIS) is responsible for collecting, processing and disseminating the agricultuLral data. The Turkish Standards Institute sets the standards for sampling, measuring techniqLues, and product quality includinig agricultural activities and goods. Policies. The fuLndamiienltals of Turk-kislh aglricultural policy is determ-inied according to coimmitments stemming from the World Trade Organizationi- Agreemellt on Agriculture, developments in the EU common agricultural policy (CAP) durinig the pre-accessioni period, and finally, developments in international trade. Turkey's VIlitlh. Five-year Development Plan adopted in the year 2000 in the Grand Assembly, comprises agricultural policies to be implemented between 2001-2005. The relevant policies are listed below: * Forests will be operated, preserved and developed within the eco-system approach, in line with the principles of continuity, multi-purpose use, participation, specialization, biodiversity, protection of water and wild life, and improvement of social stabilization, by taking into account the inhabitant conditions, interdependency between sectors, productivity and carrying capacity, forest health and landscaping, eco-tourism, productivity, pollution and factors such as fire, insects, landslides, snow, avalanche, flood, frost and drought. * Regarding areas covered by the forestry regime, with the aim of ensuring site safety, securing effective protection, considering public interest and for the efficiency of investments, land cadastre-limitation activities will be carried out extensively by taking into consideration the protection of the uriity of the forest areas, with priority given to the potential rejuvenation and forestation areas. * Nature Protection Zones, National Parks and similar Protected Zones will be developed and made widespread, with a view to protecting bio-diversity, water and wild life, cultural and esthetical assets, to creating research opportunities concerning the benefits of the forests not yet discovered, to preventing land erosion, landslides and avalanches, and to developing eco-tourism. * Forest, rangeland and water management plans will be reorganized in line with sustainable forestry principles, by considering the needs of the society, various functions of the eco-system, inhabitant inventories including wood and non-wood products and services, management objectives, the areas under protection and wild life and plant species under the threat of extinction. Rejuvenation activities will be carried out without delay, in line with silviculture plans based on natural tree species. * Concerning the construction of buildings, plants, roads, mines, electrical overhead conveyors and similar activities carried out by various institutions, and wood 13 production activities in forest areas, the protection of the land, flora and fauna and care for water quality will be the basic principles and the necessary arrangements will be introduced by improving standards. * With the aim of improving the status of forest farmers, social and agricultural forestry activities that cover oak, acacia, pine trees and similar beneficial species, and the p1roCluCtioll of medical, aromiiatic and decorative planits xv,ill ble stimullated an(ld cnerg,y forests wvill be made widespr-eadl. Thle activities of real and legal entities towards the establishment of private forests wvill be supported. * Forestry research unlits and studies will be designed witlh an awareness of the need to integrate witlh the world aind in a manniier of includin(g issues suclh as land use, biodiversity, envir-onumienital funlctionis, social forestry, poilutioll, greenhlouse effect, acid rain, water and wild life Linder the tlhreat of extinctioni, productioni capacity and car-iage,capacity of the area and of producinig value added and otlher economllic data. Based on thle unliqueLness of the subject, cooperation will be establislhed betwveen researchers, implementinig staff, NGOs and forest farmers. o For the rational use of Tulkey's inlandcl water, thiei- ecological and linillological features will be determinied, and fislh farming activities villi be initiatecd to produLIce species with high economic value that are in lharmiiony with the environmenlt. * The basic target is to establish an organized, hiiglhly competitive and sustainable agricultural sector, which considers the dimensions of economic, social, environmental and international development as a whole. * A Land Use Plan will be prepared by carrying out detailed land studies and preparing maps, by enforcing a Law on the use and protection of the land, by completing land cadastre activities and preparing a land database. * Forests will be managed, operated and preserved within the context of economic, social, environmental and ergonomic criteria, in line with society's requirements for forestry products and services, and within the principles of sustainable forestry, biological diversity, protection of wild life and multilateral use. * In order to prevent disasters such as deforestation, desert-formation, land erosion, flood, landslide and avalanches in Turkey, activities such as forestation, erosion control, meadow improvement and social forestry will be developed and forestation efforts of real and legal entities will be supported. * Priority will be given to alternative combat methods, particularly to the Integrated Pest Management (IPM) methods and biological control methods. * Minimizing the negative environmental impacts of agricultural production will be one of the policy priorities. In addition to the measures that will be taken in this respect, for application of fertilizers, pesticides and irrigation will focus on being natural and environment friendly. Input subsidies for fertilizers and pesticides will gradually be decreased and phased out. In compliance with EU legislation, production of organic (ecological) products that respect plant, animal and human health will be encouraged. * Farmers Register System, Title Deed- Cadastre System, Geographical Information System and Farm Accounting Data Network will be developed. Agricultural Informnation System using the agricultural database will also be set up. Cadastre work in the forestland will also be completed. * The planning and management of participatory projects on all issues, levels and stages related to the agricultural sector will be taken as benchmark. 14 Farming. By the end of 2001, the Government removed fertilizer supports. Direct Income Support for Farmers in 2000, was enforced on 1 March 2000 as a new means of agricultural support with the aim of decreasing the burden of the agricultural sector on the budgetary outlays within the framewoork of the policies of "Restructuring and Support in Agriculture". Thl-oughl this policy, I 1.8 miillioni lha land and 2,189,000 farmers havc becn reg,istered. Accorcding to tlle Communiqu6 for thc Dircct Incomlie SLIPPOrt foI Fan1mers issuecl on 3 I JUly 2002, the limitationi for dlilect supports has bcen incrcased fromz 200 da holdings to 500 da lholdings. Tlherefore, it is expected that the database for the registrations xviii be extended until I October 2002. TuL-key is a signature to the Rotterdam Convenition coverinig the use of chenical control agents (CCM). In compliance with the National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP) of Turkey, the pesticide supports were differentiated according to tlhe toxicity of active gradients of the pesticides with the isstued commulnliques, in order to phasc OuLt the uise of pesticides, which are hazardous for the envionent and huLmnan beinigs.3 The aqua products law (No. 1380 of 1995) gives a list of pesticide concenitrationis allowed in inlanid water bodies. This list is given in Annex 3. There is a guideline on1 products for plhyto- sanitation published by the MARA Gener-al Directorate of Protection and Control (Plant Protection Products 2002, MARA, TISIT, Tstanbul, 2002). Also, there is legislation regulating the certification of pesticides and limitations to their use. These are: * Directive On The Method And Principles Of Registration Of Pesticides And Similar Agents Used For Plant Protection. * Regulation on Labelling of Pesticides. * Instruction on Prospectus for Pesticides. * Instruction for the Toxicological Classification of Pesticides. * Directive on Whole and retail Sales of Agrochemicals. * Directive on Control of Agrochemicals. * Pricing of the Imported or Locally Formulated Products. Legal Framework for Anatolia Watershed Rehabilitation Project. There is neither framework law on agriculture nor on water in Turkey. However, there are framework laws on forestry and environment. The basic legislation on agriculture, forestry and agricultural sector activities in Turkey are listed in Annex 3. 3 The use of following pesticides is banned in Turkey: 2,4,5-T, Aldrin, Binapacryl, Captafol, Chlordane, Chlordimeform, Chlorobenzilate, DDT, Dieldrin, Dinoseb and its salts, HCH (mixed isomers), Heptachlor, Hexachlorobenzane, Lindane, Pentachlorophenol, Hg (Mercury) compounds, Endrin, Leptephos, As (Arsenic) compounds, Fluorodifen, Chlorpropylate, Daminozide (Alar 85), Taxophane, Zineb, Azinphos ethyl, Dibromochlorpropan (DBCP), Methylarsenic (MSMA). From the list of pesticides, which are subject to PIC (Prior Informed Consent) according to the international legislation only some preparatives, which are in compliance with the PIC limitations of the following CCA are not banned, and the rest are either banned or not licensed at all: Monocrotophos, Methamidophos, Phosphamidon, Methyl parathion, Parathion. See also Annex 3. 15 Law No 4342 on Rangelands was put into effect in 1998. The objective of the Law is to regulate designation, land use decisions, usage, conservation, renting, sustainability, management, and allocations to the village and municipal entities of the meadows, range, table, pasture and grasslands, which belong to the public. Law No. 4572 on "Agricultural Sales Cooperatives ancd Unions" (ASC&U) has also beenl enifor-cecl. TlhloLughl this lakW, the prov\isions on-i ASC&-U have bcenl regullaLted, a1 lega.ll frameework has beeni establislhed for tIe restructUrillg process, anid the efficient anid sustainable autonomy and financial independenice of the institutions have been ensuled. The currenit legal fi-ameivwork for forestry issues is the Forestr-y Law. The other laws and regtulationis relevant to the preserit project are listed in Annlex 3. Ther-e are also somle related laws like Law on Land Cadastre, Huntin(g Law, Tourismii Encouragemelnt Lawv, and Law for Protection of Cultural and Natural Assets. Legal Framew^ork for the GEF Componient. The fi-amaework Envir-onmiiienit Act (1982) is thie basis for environmienital legislation. Tlhere are some other environmllental and agricultural legislation relatecd to thle nutlienits andc pollution from agricultural activities. The objective of the Water Pollutioll Control Regulationi (1988) is to mainitaini the quality of surface and under-gr-ound water resouL-ces according to tlheir allocated uses, to ensure best use of water resources, to set the technical and legislative rules for the control of water quality in order to prevent pollutioll in compliance with the economic and social development goals of the country. The provisions related to nutrient pollution control in the Regulation are given in Annex 3. Industrial enterprises are allowed to discharge wastewater to the local sewerage system and to the deep sea, although firms may be required to pre-treat effluent prior to discharge into wastewater treatment plants. Discharge of hazardous substance to water is prohibited. The permitting procedure has been regulated since 1989 after the issuance of the Water Pollution Control Regulation. Principles for discharging effluent to ground and surface waters, and for treating wastewater, are also contained in the regulation. Effluent standards have been set for different types of industries and for the substances that may be discharged, along with basic principles to be followed. Discharge limits of pollutants listed for agro-industries do not include the nutrients. Discharge permits are subject to three-year renewable authorization. They may be refused or withdrawn in order to prevent any adverse environmental impact (e.g. direct discharge in areas, which have been highly polluted). Although the discharge standards are specified for each industrial sub-sector, they are fixed regardless of the receiving body. This means that the limits for pollutant parameters for a specific industrial discharge are the same whether it is discharged into a lake or the Black Sea. For the protection of water for drinking and other purposes, the general principles and protection provisions are given in the Water Pollution Control Regulation (See Annex 3). Effluent discharges must be monitored by the enterprises themselves according to the Water Pollution Control Regulation. The frequency of monitoring is stated in the "discharge permission " which is granted by the Administration for all direct discharges of household and/or industrial wastewaters into water receptor media on the condition of 16 compliance with the principles of the Regulation. According to the Regulation on Water Pollution Control, "the relevant units of MARA shall specify in detail the method of calculating the required amounts of fertilizers and shall conduct inspections regarding their overuse." Nevertheless, the Ministry has rarely practised this yet. The Solid Wastes Contr-ol RCgulationi (1991) reg-ulates collectioni, ti-aispoil-tationi, dlisposal, comrpostinig, inciinerationi, minimllizationi, recycling anid reuse of all kinds of h1ouselhold wastes, \vastes from industrial plants othcr- tlhan lhazardlous \vastes, wastes fromn commercial activities and constructioni debris, as well as rehabilitation of existing disposal sites. The Regulation also consists of an article regarding composting of organic wastes for fields and an article on using treatment plant sludge for agricultural activities. Tolerable limits for nutrients in the receiving water bodics and hazardous substances, whiclh are bannied to be disposed into the productioll zones of aqua products in inlalld water-s and seas are addressed in the Regulation on AqUa-products (1973) (Anniex 3). The recenitly ameneided Environmiental Impact Assessmenlt (EIA) Regulationi (2002) lists the agro-industl-ies and agricultural activities, which are subject to an ETA or an Initial Environmenital Examination (TEE) (see Annlex 3). The Soil Pollution Control Regulation was enacted by end 2001. It aims to regulate all activities, which cause soil pollution and delineate the technical, administrative principles as well as criminal sanctions related to discharging, throwing, leaking of hazardous substances and wastes into soil, use of sludge from industrial and sewage treatment plants and compost on soil. Limits of the heavy metals, sodium, chlorine ion, pesticides, PCBs and some aromatic hydrocarbons in the soil are listed in the Annexes of the regulation. Beside the above-mentioned environmental legislation, there is some agricultural legislation, which is related to nutrient and pesticide use: Inspection of Chemical Fertilizers, Permit Regulation for Pesticides Production, Storage and Sale. The Regulation on Principles of Organic Agriculture and Implementation, endorsed in July 2002, aims at protecting plant, animal and human health by restoring the ecosystem balance. It covers the principles regarding production, processing, packaging, labelling, storing, transportation and marketing of all vegetative, animal and aquatic products. The new sugar legislation adopted by the Turkish Parliament on 4th April. 2001 introduced new arrangements including quotas. In sugar beet cultivation, indirect subsidies mostly in the form of advances to farmers amount to 38%. Turkey's annual sugar harvest produces a surplus of 1 to 1.5 million tonnes, but the chances for exports are rather limited. In Turkey production costs are around US$ 650-700 per tonne while the international price is around US$ 200/t. Thus, the Treasury suffers an annual loss of about US$ 600 million. Beet production is only possible through subsidies and purchase without quotas. Sugar beet is a salt resistant crop thus, cultivation is rational in such regions as Central Anatolia where the soil is mostly saline. However, considering the surplus, sugar beet should not be grown in such fertile areas as Tokat, Carsamba, Bafra, Susurluk and Bursa where alternative crops such as vegetables and fruits can be grown. 17 D. Baseline Information. According to 1997 census total population in the 13 provinces of AWRP is about 11.6 million of wvhichi 60% of the populationi lives in districts and villages (BI Table 1). B1 Tablc I. 1997 Urban and Ru ral Poptilation inl the Project Provinces. Province |Urban Rural Total Urban % Rural % Adana l 1,272,892 409,591 1,682,483 75.6 24.4 Amasya 18 2,978 163,913 346,191 52.8 47.2 Co rmLI 289,629 2S8,558 578,187 50.1 49.9 Icel 955,563 552,669 1,508,232 63.3 36.7 Karaman 131,556 92,747 224,303 58.7 4 1.3 Kayseri 681,791 292,244 974,035 70.0 30.0 Koonya 1,140,016 791,757 1,931,773 59.0 41.0 K. Maras 551,853 456,254 1,008,107 54.7 45.3 Nigde 119,297 196,628 315,925 37.8 62.2 Osmaniiye 298,360 140,012 438,372 68.0 32.0 Samsun 590,399 563,364 1,153,763 51.2 48.8 Sivas 395,461 302,558 698,019 56.7 43.3 Tokat 335,060 360,802 695,862 48.2 51.8 Total 6,944,855 4,610,397 11,555,252 60.0 40.0 Source. SIS, 2000 Agricultural Statistics. Climate. Climatic features in the project area are variable because the area displays different characteristics from Samsun in the Black Sea Region to Adana and Icel provinces in the Mediterranean. In the heart of this zone, dry climatic features prevail, whereas in the coastal areas the climate is mild with increased precipitation. In the AWRP provinces, annual precipitation varies between 325 and 828 mm, with the number of days with precipitation ranging from 75-120, based on many years of data. Snow prevails in the Central Anatolian provinces particularly in spring, and winter but occasionally in autumn. The mean relative humidity is around 60 % with the lowest in Nigde province at 58 %. The highest humidity is in Samsun province with 75 %, closely followed by Icel with 74%. The average temperature in the project area oscillates round 10°C due to climatic diversity; a characteristics of a transition zone. SoiULand Resources. Turkey is not replete in cultivable land. Only 24% of the land (19.3 million ha.) is suitable for arable agriculture (Class I, II or III), partly because the soil is not deep enough: 68% is less than 50 cm deep, and 40% is classified as very shallow, (BI Table 2). Another 9% can only be tilled after taking remedial measures (Class IV and V), while 18 64% cannot be cultivated at all (Class VI, VII, and VIII): 8% is stony-rocky, 7% has drainage problems, and 3% has salinity-alkalinity problems (TOPRAKSU, 1978). BI Table 2. Regional Land Capacity for Agricultural Use (%). AglricltuiLrl-al Landc Classes by Agricultural Region (°/n) Regions I 11 |IL IV V | Vi Vil Vill 1) Aegean 6.28 8.38 7.36 5.81 0.12 14.74 53.50 3.82 2) Mannara 6.52 22.25 17.38 11.27 0.25 14.37 25.99 1.97 3) MediterTanieanl 7.75 6.78 5.69 5.03 0.42 8.72 57.53 8.07 4) East-North 3.81 7.12 9.02 14.02 0.07 17.29 43.00 5.67 5) East-Souitl 8.35 9.13 9.23 8.38 0.19 11.97 48.50 4.24 6) Black Sea 2.96 3.13 5.95 9.55 0.02 13.06 61.50 3.84 7) Central-North 6.62 10.19 12.12 10.94 0.14 15.01 42.37 2.62 8) Central-Easl 4.90 6.31 10.12 8.90 0.08 12.40 54.09 3.20 9) Centr-al-Soutlh 9.61 10.21 13.71 l 11.20 0.61 12.86 37.47 6.64 Source. TOPRAKSU, Tuikiye Arazi Varligi, 1978, Ankara. Erosion is one of the most severe environmenital problems affecting 81% of thc total land surface of Turkey in varying degrees of severity. About 73% of cultivated land including 68% of prime agricultural land (Classes I-IV) is prone to erosion. BI Table 3 shows the degree of erosion in the AWRP and the impacts on the land quality.4 BI Table 3. AWRP: Degree of Erosion in Specific Provinces. Problem Water erosion. (% of soil) Percentage of soil Nil or Med- Very .Nil or Med- Severe Stony Rocky Wet Barren Province Slight ium Severe Adana' 25 13 37 25 13 21 9 6 Amasya 14 40 41 5 38 9 0.8 0.7 Corum 16.6 23.7 47 12.7 35 2 1.5 1 Kahramanmaras 12 20 26 42 26 48.5 1.6 + Kayseri 11 28 34 27 36.5 12 7 5.4 Konya 26 26 15 24 22 3 8 5.6 Mersin 7 10 40 43 47 - 3.7 3 Nigde ' 30.5 29.5 19.5 20.5 26 1.3 13.6 11.7 Samsun 19 28 52 0.4 28.2 2.4 12.3 3.4 Sivas 9 22 30.5 38.5 21.4 1.1 1.2 0.8 Tokat 10 20 47 23 22.7 <0.1 0.4 0.02 Note. 1. Includes Osmaniye. 2. Includes Karaman. 3. Includes Aksaray. * Wind erosion 1% slight, 2% medium,r4% severe. ** Wind erosion 0.2% slight, 3% medium, 4.5% severe. Source. National Action Plan of Turkey for Combating Desertification (Draft). 4 This Table was prepared when there were 67 provinces in Turkey. 19 Stream bank erosion affects 57.1 million ha in Turkey while wind erosion degrades another 466,000 ha. As a result, about one billion tonnes of soil are carried away each year and deposited in lowland areas or deltas. BI Table 4 shows the soil carried away by the rivers in the project area. Bl Table 4. AW-:RP: Estimates of Soil Er-osion . Basin Naimie Precipitationi Average MNonitoring Average soil Total soil Area Flow/yr. station load load per yr. (ki1n2) (1/si km2) (t./km2/yr.) (million t.) Yesili-riiak 36,129 5.1 Carsaimba 1,521 54.9 Kizilirmnak 79,744 2.5 Inozu 923 44.9 Seylhan 20,731 11.1 Uctepe 563 7.S Ceyhan 21,222 10.6 Yenikopru 922 19.6 Karaliacili 648 6.8 Tu rkey 600 500 Sotur-ces. Nationial Enivironmiiiental Actioni Plan 1997. SPO, Anikara. Gunay, Ttia-lnaii. Oi-rmiani Ormansizlasma Toprak Erozyoin 1998. TEMA Vakfi Yayinlari, Istanbul, Tulkey. Much agricultural land is on1 erosion prone steep slopes wlhere agricultural plots have been created through deforestation. The incidenice of severe erosion is also relatively larger in areas where agriculture is practised without any soil conservation measures. Erosion has other negative impacts, such as reducing the life of dams through siltation and the inundation of lowland arable (and urban) areas with coarse materials. Animal husbandry is mostly carried out on grasslands and ranges. According to the Rangeland Act (1998), 21.7 million ha is designated as permanent pasture anid rangeland.5 This figure covers only the rangeland, which are outside forestland. In the 1940s the pastoral area was given as 44.2 million hectares including forest rangeland. Today, this latter area, including its borders, is estimated to be around 1.5 million ha. The decrease in pastures has led to a concurrent increase in arable lands. According to agricultural statistics6 there are 10.7 million cattle and 35.3 million small livestock, 73% of which are sheep as well as many millions of poultry. This translates into 2.03 ha of permanent grassland and pasture per unit of cattle (PUC). When pastureland degradation is considered, the actual 'standard land available for grazing is about 12 million ha or 1.12 ha per PUC. Overgrazing as well as shrinkage in rangelands resulted in loss in fodder productivity and a decrease in meadow species from 26 to 5-6. 7 Forests. Forests cover about 27% of Turkey's surface area. However, according to recent surveys and estimates made by the Ministry of Forestry, productive forests only cover 48%, with 5 "Ulusal Cevre Eylem Plani, Tarim ve Mera Arazilerinin Yonetimi", SPO, Ankara, Mart 1998. 6 "Agricultural Structure 2000", SIS, Ankara, 2001. 7 "Turkiye'nin Cevre Sorunlari '99", TCV, Ankara, Aralik 1998. 20 the remaining 52% being occupied by unproductive and/or degraded areas. BI Table 5 gives the current estimate of forest cover according to broad species categories or types and their productive state. BI Table 5. Forest Area In Turkey. _Units: 000 licctaircs. Forest stlate Hligh forest Coppice Total Fiorest Lanid Conifers Broadleaf Total (%) Productive 6,4S9 1,672 8,161 1,793 9,954 (48) Unproductive 4,587 1,535 6,122 4,637 10,759 (52) Total 11,066 3,207 14,283 6,430 20,713 (100) Sour-ce. Konukcu. iMl Julle 1998. Statistical Profile of Turikisli Forestry, SPO. The forest mix is rich. Forty one percent consist of a nixtLule of five pine species, about 3% lhave fouLr Fi-r species, and 29% have Lip to 20 oak specics. hi addition becchl covcrs 6.4%, oricnital splUcC 1.4% \vith the remiiainingz 19% beinig occul)ied by onc or two species. The anllual sLustainable yield (ann1lual incremiient) is, on average, relatively low - 1.96 m3/lha of stem wood or about 2.5 m3/ha of total above ground volume. About 82% of what is considered productive area is found in high forests. Seventy-two percent of coppice is unproductive. According to the 1997 census, there are 19,020 villages with a total of 7.1 million residents in or near a forest. There are 3,997 forest villages with a population of about one million in the provinces of the Anatolia Watershed Rehabilitation Project. Studies reveal that from 1937 to 1995, as a result of illicit cutting and forest clearing for new farmland, unauthorized settlements and unofficial grazing, two million hectares of forest were converted to farmland and grazing areas etc. (or about ten per cent of all forest land). Although fuelwood consumption decreased by about one half between 1976 and 1999 from 27.8 million m3 to 13.4 million m3, the ratio of unlawful fuelwood cutting increased slightly from 44% in 1976 to 50% in 1999.8 Biodiversity. The diverse climate, geology and soil structure have created a varied vegetative cover, in terms of species composition and characteristics, both spatially (horizontally) and by elevation (vertically). Southeastern Anatolia, the Mediterranean region, the area around the Salt Lake, and the Anatolian Transverse all have special importance in terms of plant varieties. There are three regions in terms of vegetation cover. The first is the "European-Siberian Region" which covers the Black Sea region and the central and northern parts of the Marmara region. Here, plants requiring moisture dominate along with forest trees. Second, is the Aegean-Mediterranean region, here vegetation consists of forest trees plus scrubs and a mixture of scrubs and steppe plants. Lastly is the Iran region where steppe plants dominate. s "Vill. Bes Yillik Kalkinma Plani, Ormancilik Ozel Ibtisas Komisyonu Raporu", DPT, Ankara, Aralik 2001. 21 Turkey contains 75% of the plant species found in Europe. Cherries, apricots, almonds, figs, and tulips all originate in Turkey, as did the domestication of these and other plants. The flora includes many wild relatives of important commercial crops such as wheat, chickpeas, lentils, apples, pears, and pistachios. Among continental countries, Turkey ranks ninltlh in terms of biocdiversity richniiess; over 33% of its flora are endemic. Studies indcicate that ther-c are 163 plant fanilies covering 1,225 types, \11ich in tul-n cover about 9,000 species. Thcse gro\-O naturally and aiboLut onie 1iiird a,re endlemic. Turkey has about 120,000 invertebrates, 472 fish (192 of which are in inlalnd waters), 426 birds, 8 tultles, 49 lizards, 36 snakes, about 20 fi-ogs and 120 mammiiiial species. Populationi increase, overgrazing, allowinc,g goals to enter- forestlands, atmospheric pollution, alien species, climate change, unr,egulated gathering of plant and animllal species, huniting, damage caused by pests, and forest fires all affect the structure of forest ecosystems and threaten biodiversity. The meadowvs and ranige areas are an impor-tanit conmponent of the steppe ecosystem and thley constitute 28% (21,745,000 la) of the land. This fi:gure was 44,300,000 ha in 1935 and 37,800,000 lha in 1950. Meadows have been destroyed by policies that encouragecd these lands to be converted into farmland in order to meet the food demand of a growing population. Today, the total area covered by steppe ecosystems, whichi include meadows and marginal lands unsuitable for fanning, is 28 million ha. The reasons for the destruction of steppe lands and their ecosystems in Anatolia can be listed as follows. High population growth over the last 50 years with a consequent increase in consumption levels, overgrazing in the absence of meadow management, conversion of meadows into farmland, inappropriate agricultural practices, unregulated hunting, stubble burning, pollution, increased soil erosion, highway and dam construction, excessive gathering of plants of high economic value (especially medicinal plants) and poor or improper mining activities. Nutrient Pollution. The Black Sea is the largest anoxic sea in the world and is the sea most isolated from oceans. Today, the Black Sea is under threat from habitat loss, over fishing, pollution caused by sea transportation and land discharges, alien species, and eutrophication. Pollutants carried by rivers flowing into the Black Sea are not caused by agriculture and animal husbandry alone. There are five main sources, although agricultural activities and the resultant application of fertilisers and pesticides comprise the most important components of the pollutant load to the Black Sea. The other sources of pollutants are domestic discharges, industry, solid waste disposal sites and the air.9 Chemical fertilizer demand for agriculture increased from 1,717 tonnes per year in 1995 to 2,207 tonnes per year in 1999. Sixty seven percent of this amount comprises 9. "Black Sea Environmental Priorities Study-Turkey," UNDP, N.Y. 1998. 22 nitrogenous fertilisers (100% N), 29% is phosphate fertilisers (100% P205) and 4% is potash fertilisers (100% K20). Due to (the recently abolished) agricultural subsidies, there was an increase in fertiliser consumption up to 2000. Micro-catch meii ts. As pJrcvloLsly statetd, sixty micro-cattcliibent (NMC) areas were clhoscn fr-omii the miiany hundreds in the five large river systemas comprisinig the Anatolia catclhmiient complcx. These sixty MCs were choseni after discussions with govemmenit departments in Ankara and the regions, representative bodies and the people living in the areas. The MCs were selected as a result of examininag envir-onmental and economic problems and opportunlities and obtaininig the cooperation of the local populationi to participate in the project. Out of the sixty MCs, six were clhosen for examination as part of this REA A preliminary baseline survey was undertaken in July 2002, to assess six (6) micro- catchlmenits in the project. These nicro-catclhments are: Ilyasli (Bafia/Samsun); Baglicadere (Zile/Tokat); Kazova (Tokat); Kabaktepe (Kayseri/Pinarbasi-Sariz); Orcan Stream (Turkogu/Karamararas); and Gogden (Mut). In formationi was collected oln location, population, topography, soils, climate, hydrology, land use, flora and fauLna and environmenital problems. The size of these micro-catchlments ranged from about 5,000 ha to 8,000 ha. And the population of rural areas (excluding towns) varied from 500 to 12,000. All this infonnation is detailed in Annex 4. Below is summary of the existing environmental problems, with proposed solutions that the AWRP have suggested. These problems and possible solutions were discussed during village meeting in all six micro- catchments (Annex 4). The villagers were involved from the start in problem solving and proposing interventions to improve the environment and their well-being. Ilyasli (Bafra/Samsun) MC (Kizilirmak). Environmental Problems. Pollution. In Ilyasli catchment area no observation of significance could be made on any serious pollution problem that may affect Black Sea and Kizilirmak Delta. However, there are at least two sources of pollution: Agricultural and Organic. Agricultural pollution. This is related to chemicals such as agricultural pesticides and fertilizers used in tobacco fields and nurseries. In this area, pesticides and fertilizers are not used in line with any scientific analysis. Organic pollution. Organic pollution comes from dwellings and animal shelters. Each household in the area is engaged in animal husbandry. Every day, manure is taken out of shelters and piled nearby. This practice involves risk of pollution both for soil and water as well as a threat to human health. Water with a high chemical load coming from irrigated plots and intensive horticulture areas of the Delta is discharged partly to wetlands through drainage canals or directly to the Black Sea. 23 Degradation. Erosion. Agricultural plots have been split into smaller parcels as a result of inheritance. Farmers think that contour tilling is uneconomic on such small plots so they plough in the direction of inclination, thus aggravating erosion problems. Since soil wash also increases the amount of soil nutrients carried away in colloids, another side effect is pollutioni and even eutrophlicationi of wetland to the southl of the Delta. Foresi c/ewring. This is prevalent. RoUghl,:y, 60 % of the lolCsL COVeCI iS Calgllnlled or clegracdecl. Apparenitly, tlis defor-estationi accompanied by erosion fLurt-hler- accelcratcs the loss of topsoil and indirectly contributes to pollution. Forests provicde ecological corridors for fauna in the area's micro-catclhnienits. FuL-ther forest clearinlg will obviously end this migratory route and conseqtuenitly the habitat of some animals. Alternatives and Analysis. Some scenarios have been developed to ensure more efficient and sustainable resouLce utilization in the Ilyasli catchment area witlhout damaginig or destroying existing natuLral resources. Priority hias been given to field observations wlheni developing these scenar-ios. Besides the status quo, three different scenarios lhave beeni developed to utilise thlC natuIlal resources in a sustainable manniier. Scenario 1. (Withou0t Project). It is assuLmled the status quo is mainitainied. Negative environmental ilcpacts: * Erosion will increase and there will be a decrease in the soil's water holding capacity. * There will be increases in the load of organic pollutants from domestic and animal wastes and an increase in the negative impacts on other eco-systems in the delta. * Pollution in surface and groundwater resources will seriously threaten the safety of drinking water. Also, there may be increases in the incidence of waterborne diseases. * There will be more frequent and adverse environmental changes in the landscape. * Negative impacts on the flora and fauna of the area. * As farmland expands (from cleared forests), there will be increases in both water consumption and use of chemicals. * Decrease in carbon store and sequestration potential. Positive environmental impacts: No such impacts actually or potentially exist. Scenario 2-a. (With Project). Implementation of a manure management plans, and improved methods of dung storage and use. Negative environmental impacts. * No reduction in soil washed away since forest clearing and uninformed tilling practices continue. * Wash out of nutrients in soil will continue. * There will be more water and chemical consumption as forests cleared for farmland. * The improvement to animal shelters and manure management will not change tobacco and wheat farming practices. As a result, there will be an increased use of insecticides as the immunity of pests increases specially in tobacco cultivation. * Decrease in carbon store and sequestration potential. 24 Positive environmental impacts. * Little, if any, organic animal effluent seepage into surface and groundwater reserves. * Local people will obtain safer water from their wells. * Risk of disease will decrease. v There \vill be less use of chemical fertilizers since maniure is used more efficiently. Scenltario 2-b. (+Scenario 2-a,). A\vareniess buiIcli ng andcl tr-ainiig lbf fararmler-s in practiccs relating to tilling and erosioni control includinig minimuILI tillage; clarity as to o\vnersh-ip from cadastral work in forests; fencing to delineate forests with effective conitrol preventing clearing for farmland; more trees planted outside forest; forests relhabilitated. Alegative environmi en tal impactis. * Increased use of chemicals, especially insecticides as a result of multi-cultivation. Positive environmental imnpacts. * No more newly gained farmland since forest clearance will stop. * Besides the positive impacts of Scenario 2-b, nutrienlt leaching that may negatively affect the Kizilirmak Delta will decrease as a result of declininig sedimentation. * Erosion control and forest protection will enhianice flora and consequenitly faunia is expected to flourish. Enriched biological diversity depends UpoIn the protection of ecologic corridors connecting the area to its neighbouring catchments. * Gradual reduction and reversal of soil deterioration over time. * Increase in biomass production. * Carbon sequestration enhanced due to improved fertilizer management. Scenario 2-c. (+Scenario 2-b). The distinguishing feature of this scenario is that it encourages greenhouse vegetable and strawberry cultivation, both having a potential for development, in line with the principles of integrated farming. In a pilot programme, tomato and cucumber cultivation in greenhouses and irrigation is by the drip system. Negative environmental impacts. * The only negative impact is the pollution load that may emerge from the intensive use of chemicals by not following integrated farming principles. Comparing greenhouse cultivation to tobacco farming, chemical use will be less in the latter. Positive environmental impacts. * In addition to the positive impacts of the other two scenarios, this practice will create the chance of diversifying crop composition. * New opportunities for manure management and vegetable and strawberry cultivation. * The pressure on forests should decrease resulting from market conditions changes. * If revenues increase as a result of alternative crops, farmers may be able to invest more in animal husbandry and the sanitary disposal of pollutants. Conclusion. The Ilyasli catchment area, together with some micro-catchments around it contributes to pollution in the Kizilirmak Delta. This is one of the most important and valuable wetland eco-systems in Turkey. This points to the need for integrated catchment management. Four key processes are manure management, erosion control, forest 25 protection and support for alternative farming. Practices in only one of these will be no solution for natural resource protection in catchments and on a large scale. Also, there is need for market intelligence, environmental training as well as training of trainers. Baglicadere (Zile/Tokat) Micro-catchiiciit (Yesilirmak Basin). Env'ironimenCtal problems. -labitat Destritctioni. In the Baglicadere catclhmenlt, the destructioll of natuLal flora is the Imlost importanit environlmenital p)roblem. Increased habitation, paasture destruLctioni and h1unltillg, resulted in the departuire of the great bustarcl. Its disappearance is an indicator of extremCIe humllani pressure. Anotlher- strikllng inicicator is grassland destruLctioni \vith the 'vide distribUtion and dominance of astragaluLs species (uin-edible to slheep) and tlhe rare presenice of such plants as thyme, wild barley and couchl grass. Also, the shrinking of oak coppices can also be explained by the demanid for fuel and fodder. People state that ther-e is tangible habitat improvement after the banningc of goats froml forests in 1980. These cum11ulative factors of land mismanagemllenet, loss of Rora accompaniied by severe erosion are an environmiiienital disaster. Especially in the nortlherni parts of the catclhmenit, maniy spots on the lills and slopes are barren because of erosion; even the parenit rock is visible in parts. It is meaningless to talk about any ecosystem restoration in these areas. Also, there is need to attach importance to other negative impacts of erosion, both inside and outside of the catchment. Sediment reaches irrigation and drainage canals, increasing the amount of nutrients in these canals and filling them up rapidly. One major problem faced by the State Hydraulic Works (DSI) is the difficulty in operating irrigation systems efficiently because of heavy run off from such catchments as Baglicadere. Alternatives and Analysis. The following are possible scenario activities designed to ensure sustainable utilization of natural resources in Baglicadere MC without any damage to its resources. Scenario 1: (Without project). It is assumed the status quo is maintained. Negative environmental impacts: * Further erosion and decrease in water holding capacity of the soil. * Faster loss of biological diversity and disappearance of wild life habitats. * Change in the landscape parameters. * Loss in the efficiency and productivity of such natural resources as water and land. Positive environmental impacts: No such impact can be inferred. Scenario 2. (With Project). Forestry activities: (rangeland improvement, rehabilitation of forest pastures, soil conservation and afforestation). Activities by Rural Affairs: (2 ponds for farms, 6.5 km long concrete irrigation canal, 7 km long service road, 1 water reservoir, terracing, check dams, walls for protecting stream banks). 26 Negative environmental impacts: * These planned activities involve some risks. One is the introduction of invasive and exotic species during rehabilitation, but attention will be paid to planting native species in forests and rangelands. Another risk is the possible change in the surface- ground wvater balance as a result of irrigation-driven storage of already limited water resouL-ces. Water release fiom i upper areas should be plainnied to account for the water InCds of ccosystems downstream; storage filCiiiIeCS ShOUld bc operatecd accorcingldy. The assessmenit of water requiLellmellts dowvnistreamii can be done by a local consultant. And recommiiendations made accordingly. A buclget is provided for SuChI special studies: (Section J EMP Consultancy Services). * Studies of the area assessed the farming potential of village land and concluded that wvith the exception of 0.3 hectares in Sarac thcr-c is no suitable land for vegetables. Expansioni is only possible through horticultuLre on steep-sloped land, \vhich may accelerate erosion and encourage over-use of water. Positive en7viromnental imiipacts: * Irrigation is best for fruit trees and for pastures. The introduction of walnut and Mahaleb cher-ry has income generatinig potential. Sucil plants may reduce the pressure on forests and increase faimer's participation in conservatioll activities. O Sixteen km of fencing of rangelainds is plannied. In such areas, the best management method may be to wait for natural successioni. One typical proof is the growth of wild barley in place of astragalus. This shows that even with a simple measure like fencing, many plant species may flourish and expand quickly. * Terracing and check dam construction are important in erosion control. But farmers require training in cultivation methods and experiments with alternative crops. Conclusion. Animal husbandry is in steady decline, but it is not be difficult to restore ranges within 10 years with effective rangeland management. It is essential that local people take part in the process so as to adopt and internalise their practices. In sum, accounting for the risks involved in the second scenario, the project will make invaluable contributions to the area and its sustainable resource utilization. Kazova (Tokat) Micro-catchment (Yesilimak Basin). Environmental Problems. There are two major environmental problems: pollution from agricultural activities and sedimentation caused by erosion in the upper parts of the catchment. Agricultural Pollution. There is intensive farming in the area, mainly consisting of vegetable cultivation. Pesticides are also used haphazardly and fertilizer use is not based upon any soil analysis. According to local authority personnel, there are fish deaths in Yesilirmak, especially around Amasya. This usually takes place during sugar production period in Turhal, probably because of a drastic decrease in dissolved oxygen due to organic waste discharges. If the sugar factory fails to introduce a biological treatment facility and necessary measures are not taken to prevent pollution in the Yesilirmak upper reaches, it is inevitable that agricultural and domestic pollutants will have a cumulative 27 effect and create serious pollution problems in the Black Sea. Erosion. Erosion as a problem does not originate in the Kazova micro-catchment. Sediment washed down from unprotected upper catclrnents creates problems in Kazova. Sedimlenits fill and clog the drainage canals. Anotlher- erosioni problemii, according to the regional dlirectorate of DSI, is caulsed by meanders in the Yesilirniaik encourag-,11ing excessIve sedimelLLatioLn. Meanders, in turln, block river ieliabilitationi wvorks. 1-lowever, contrary to this assertioni of the DSI, maniy practices in the \w'orld indicalic thiat mleandller-s play an importanit role in river rehabilitationi. Alternatives and Analysis. Sceli(nrio 1. (J'Vithloult PIo/jecd). It is assulmedl present practices and lhabits are maintainecl. Negative environmental im1pacs. fIntenisive farming, mainily vegetable cultivation, using considerable amounlts of fertilizer-s and pesticides increases pollution in Yesilirmllak. Posilive environmental impacts: No positive actual or potential impacts. Scenairio 2: (Wit/h Project). The following activities are proposed: Promiiotincg the use of organiic fer-tilizers especially animllal dung; encoUtraging soil analyses anld intr-oducinig fertilizer prescriptions based on these analyses; encouraging organic farming and establishinlg integrated agricultural action stations; control of sugar factory effluents.I0 Negative envi .ronmental inmpacts: No negative impacts are anticipated. Positive enivironmiiienital impacts * Reduction of agricultural chemicals mixing with surface and underground water. * Preventing the excessive accumulation of plant nutrients and toxic chemicals in soil. * Organic crop production and protection of insects not harmnful to crops. * Effluent control from sugar factory reducing pollution in the Yesilirmak/Black Sea. * Shelterbelts and riverbank protection all improve the microclimate. Conclusion. Activities envisaged in the Kazova MC should be based upon an integrated approach and the active cooperation of projects and stakeholders from different catchments and areas. The plans for animal shelters along Dazya brook is closely linked to the Kazova MC project. In the Kazova project, the involvement of the DSI and irrigation unions as partners will be useful. An important activity is the initiation of training and awareness programs in rational use of irrigation water, including water saving methods. Providing irrigation demonstrations, devising training activities and organizing study tours is essential. Positive environmental impacts will be forthcoming in the Kazova catchment area and the Yesilirmak River. 10 There is the existing Water Pollution Control Regulation for controlling effluents. The problem is compliance with the laws. This and many other sugar factories are State owned, but because these factories are at the end of their economic life, the government is reluctant to invest in proper treatment plants. The government is the conflicting position of being both the polluter and controller: also the MoE does not have the inspection capacity. Therefore, the problem is mentioned here, but it cannot be solved by the Project. However, the problem is great enough to be the subject of another, independent study. 28 Kabaktepe (Kayseri/Pinarbasi-Sariz) Micro-basin. Environmental Problems. Erosioni. The causes of erosioll in the Kabaktclpc Micro-catchment, result fi-om excessivc fluclwood cutting by local people and niomilads andJ forcst ciczle-inig For aglriCultuaLll land]. In additioni, the melting lsno\v encoUrages slope wash, lcading to gu.ly crosioni. Forest clearinog. The new fields are usually located on relatively steep slopes and lhave thin soils. Vertical tilling leave ruts, some of whliclh turn into gullies. In addition slheet floods on the bare soil tranisports soil to the river basins. OverrgCr7zin1g on1 dlie pasturle al-eas. Overgrazing oni the pastures has bcen practised for ages without interfer-enice and any rehabilitation. Wheni the fine-grained soil onl thle inclined pastures loses its vegetation, the soil is easily reimoved by sheet and gully erosion. Steps were taken to banl nomads and the pasture started to recover, but the ball lhas been reversed. Agreement needs to be made witlh nomads to restore the pastures. Agricultural and Organic Pollution: The former is mainly derived from pesticides and fertilizers used in cereals and fodder fields. Organic pollution is derived from dwellings and from animal manure. In additioni, there is 11o village sewage system. Pit seepage might cause groundwater, and in turn spring water, contaminationi. Alternatives and Analysis. Alternative scenarios have been projected for testing the feasibility of project proposals. Sceniario 1. (Without Project). It is assumed present practices and habits are maintained. Negative environmental impacts: * Erosion will accelerate on newly cleared forest areas as well as on forest pastures. * The pastures will become more infertile and inedible species become abundant. * Farrners keep growing wheat and barley, which are not as productive as fodder. * Farmers keep fallowing, thus exposing soils to erosion. * Villagers will keep harvesting grass once a year, which is insufficient for their own need. As a result, the goats will be fed on forest tree fodder. Positive environmental impacts: * No such impact actually or potentially exists, except the free flowing spring waters feed the natural vegetation in the valleys. Scenario 2. (With Project). Forestry activities: (rangeland improvement, rehabilitation of in-forest pastures, soil conservation and various forestry initiatives). Activities by Rural Affairs: (7 ponds for farms, 15.7 km long concrete irrigation canal, terracing). Agricultural activities: (fallow reduction, fodder crop production, improvement of rangelands outside the forest, environmentally friendly agricultural practices, apiculture). Negative Environmental Impacts. * Soil loss might continue if the farmers do not alter their practices to contour tilling. 29 * Some natural vegetation in valley bottoms might be deprived of enough water. Again, a local consultant could undertake this risk assessment and make recommendations. Money is provided for such studies in the EMP (Section J) * There might be an environmental risk at the northern foot of Kabaktepe hill, whlic]l is subject to landslicles. However two irrigation pondcs aire planined in thlis zone to collect spring water and reduce tile risk. Buit if the Fields, which are located in the laindslide zone, aire irrigated by furroxvs tlicy migilt trigger nexv slides. A SoiLItioll is to use drip or sprinkler irrigationi and tliis xvill bc ccmolistraLtcl. * More fertilizers and pesticides xvill be used because irrigation xvill be expainded. Positive Eli ironineiitcd Impacts. * Erosion xxvill be diminlislhecd since the fields on1 the tipper slopes wili be abandonied. * Tlhe pastuLres will be mor-e fertile and prodLuctive duLe to fertilizer-s and re-vegetation. * Through covering the soil, sheet erosioni by slope waslh will cdecline to a miiilUIlLmum. * Total annual agricultural production will increase due to a decrease in fallow land. * Most fields xvill apply mixecl farming metlhods -xheat/fodder or clhickpea/fodder. * Hybrid seeds will incr-ease yields of grain and fodder, and mainitaini soil stability. * IHybrid trifolium in the newly irr-igated fields will allow tip to tlhree crops per year. * Beekeeping will facilitate biodiversity enr-ichmlienit. * Through improving vegetative cover, carbon (C) sequestration will increase. Orcan Stream (Turkoglu/Karamararas) Micro-catchmenit (Ceylan Basin). Environmental Problems. Degradation. Forest/pasture degradation due to tree cutting, forest clearance and overgrazing are the major environmental problems. Erosion. Severe erosion has resulted from over cutting of fuelwood especially on the southwest part of the micro-catchment. The rock composition also fosters erosion in this section. Thus, slope wash-water induces gully and rill erosion. The other parts of the basin erosion occurs in the unresisting and impermeable Paleozoic rocks. All these areas are planned as 'Forestation for Soil Prevention or for Maquis Rehabilitation.' Alternatives and Analysis. Alternative scenarios examine the enhanced conditions through project implementation. Scenario 1. (Without Project). Assumed that present habits and activities are maintained. Negative environmental impacts: * Erosion will be accelerated in most areas. * Pastures will gradually be unprofitable because of overgrazing. * Degradation of forests will continue. * Microclimate will change unfavourably and wild life habitats will shrink. * Animal husbandry will decline because of insufficient fodder production. * Annual production of cereals and fodder will not increase due to fallow. 30 * Quantity of water resources is likely to decrease. Positive environmental impacts: No actual or potential exist under the present system. Scenario 2. (With Project): Forest activities: (forest and habitat rehabilitation, in 1/3 of the total catchmnenit, pasturelanid rehabilitation, grafting of wild pistachios). Agricultural activities: (decrease in fallow land with alternate farmling; apicultui-re; p romiiotioni of stall feedin; clrip and sprinkler irrigation; promiiotioni of saliiifozin and \'etch). Activities of GDRS: (2 ponds, irrigation ducts and pipes in 690 ha of Filcds). Negaltive impacts. O As irrigated land increased, intensive cultivation mighlt lead to pollutioll. o If no proper irrigation drainagc, likely inicrease in salinationi anid water logging etc. o Cedar and red pines instead of original oaks might change the soil clharacteristics. Positive impacts. o Erosion will be reduced. * Ln habitat rehabilitationi areas, partridge and otlher bird population iVill increase. o Farm trees and shmrbs producinlg various products reduce the pressure oln forests. o Incomie generation thlouglh irTigation expected to reduce the pressure for fuelwood. * C sequestration by woody biomass/grass and by soil increases over time. Turkey feeding by grazing is already done in some villages. Turkey grazing in the fields will diminish burning of stubble; this is an issue on agricultural land. Gogden (Mut) Micro-basin (Goksu Basin). Environmental Problems. The greatest problem in the area is accelerated erosion. More than 90% of the land in the MC is subject to severe erosion. Only about 4% of the river basin is productive forest while 33% is degraded. Pastures constitute about 30% and are severely degraded. Alternatives and Analysis. The following are possible scenarios that can be developed to ensure sustainable utilization of natural resources in Gogden MC without damaging the resources. Scenario 1. (Without Project). It is assumed present practices and habits are maintained. Negative environmental impacts: * Further erosion and decrease in water holding capacity of soil. * Faster loss of biological diversity resulting in the disappearance of wild life habitat. * Loss of fertile soil, change in texture of soil. * Decrease in water resources, (both surface and ground). * Decrease in carbon sequestration potential. * Accelerated siltation in Kayraktepe Dam, located downstream from Goksu River. Positive environmental impacts: No such impacts can be inferred. 31 Scenario 2. (With Project). Forest rehabilitation (cedar and oak), pasture rehabilitation, land reforested for soil conservation. Agricultural initiatives include irrigation, environmentally friendly agricultural practices, i.e. ecological agriculture, pastureland managemenlt, fallow reduction, horticulture, appropriate use of marginal lands, increased silage production, demonstrationis on the introduction of new crops. Negaiive el iviolint,enztal imnpccls:. * Invasive aind exotic species may be introducedc dIuinlg forest anid rangelaind relhabilitation activities. But emplhasis wvill be placecl onl pronlotilig native species. Positive elnvironnmenlal im7pacts: * Erosioni will be reduced due to reforestation and r egenerationi of ralgelalcns. * The pastures will be more fertile and more productive due to fertilizers and re- vegetation. Through re-vegetationi, sheet erosion xviv1 clccliine to a miilni mluml. * Fertile soil loss will be reduced since vegetative cover will prevail yearlong. * Productioll ofsilage will k-eep the livestock in barns insteCCl of grazing asturelanIs. * Irrigated hiybrid trifoliutn wvill give tlhree yearly crops and recluce grazillng pressures. * Improved beekeeping will allow for biodiversity enr-ichmiiienit. * C sequestration will increase both in xvoody plants/gr assland and in soils. The Project will draw up management plans for each micro-catchlmlelnt. Tlle plans for four of the above six MCs that were visited are being complied at present by GDRS and these will be inserted into this document at the end of the main report. These plans are for Bagicadere, Goden, Kabaktepe and Orcan. The above examination of six micro-catchments brings out several environmental issues that are common throughout the area and in other watershed areas in the country. They can act as a guide when tackling the various environmental problems that confront the project team. These issues are summarized below in BI Table 6. BI Table 6. Major Environmental Issues and Proposed Mitigation Measures in the 6 MCs visited by the national Consultant. Issues Causes Effects on Environment Actions or Mitigation Measures Habitat Clearing land for Loss of biodiversity, wind and Reclaiming forest areas through restoration of destruction: agriculture, over cutting water erosion, excess surface ground cover, especially with indigenous tree forests. of trees for fuel, poles water run-off in spring, species, improved management of existing forest and timber, over-grazing diminution of water retention areas, limiting grazing by rotation and exclusion, of farm animals in forest capacity, intermittent stream and where appropriate terracing etc. Determine areas. flow, reduction of carbon production capacity of wood and non-wood sequestration, loss of products and limit off-take to sustainable supply. migration routes for animals. Reclaiming farmed areas on steep slopes or putting them under permanent crops. Increase agricultural productivity through improved rainfed farming and expanded/improved irrigation farming, thus decreasing pressure to clear forests. For irrigation storage in forest areas, plan system and ponds/reservoirs to negate any possible damage. 32 BI Table 6 cont. Major Environmental Issues and Proposed Mitigation Measures in the 6 MCs visited by the national Consultant. Issues Causes Effects on Environment Actions or Mitigation Measures Habitat Clearing land for Loss of biodiversity, wind and Reclaiming restoration areas through restoration Destrulction: agriculture, over cutting water erosioin, excess surface of ground cover, especially by exclusionl of ranigelands. of shLrubs for fuel, over- wvater rui-off in spring, animals with fencinig or other means until area Orazlinc Of Farm ani mials. (dI,,m,liUonl of Waiicr I CICtIM01 rIcClvers. bhLt a o So0IIC linlitCd re-Sccdilln. capacity, intermittent stream Improved maanagemrienit of existing areas, by flow, reducLtioll ol carboni limitilng grazing to carrying capacity and througL sequestratioln. rotation of aniimals. Trainiing & demonstrationi. Reclaiminig farmed areas on steep slopes or putting them utnder permanent crops. For irTigation storage in ranigeland areas, plan system and ponds/reservoirs to negate possible damage. Erosioni at Poor farminwg practices Wind and water erosion, gully Enviroinmenitally friendly farm practices suchI as the farm such as farming on steep formation, loss of topsoil, contour ploughing, miniiiium tillage, correct level. slopes, ploughing up and habitat destruction downl species choice. Puttlllg steep slopes unlder grass or dowiv the hill, poor or stream througlh flooding and perenniiial crops. Drip or sprinkler irrigation used. inappropriate crop inunLdationi with soil, sand andc Providc training and demlonistr-ations. Provide choice, leaving land coarse materials. traininiig and demonstrations in above practices without cover durinlg and in land-use planning. Promote farm visits etc. periods of high precipitation. Furrow irrlgation, especially on slopes. Poorly maintained canals/channels. Incorrect use Poor and variable Excessive CCA in soil and Only use intemationally approved CCAs. Apply of CCA application of CCAs. water can adversely affect correct dosages using suitable dispensers and (pesticides, Some banned CCAs may flora and fauna (including wearing correct clothing. Store CCA in herbicides be used. Poor spraying human beings). This can appropriate places and dispose of containers in and methods and the have a chain reaction on plant recommended ways. Practice altematives to CCA insecticides) inappropriate disposal of and animal life. Residues such as integrated pest management (IPM). CCA containers from excess use on plants and Provide timely training and demonstrations in all animals can affect human the above aspects. health through food chain. Poor spraying methods can affect person applying the CCA. In appropriate disposal can affect the soil and/or surface and ground water. Incorrect use Overuse or incorrect use Ground and surface water Soil testing facilities available for farmers. or overuse of inorganic and organic may contain high levels of N Advice given on the correct application of of fertilizers fertilizers affects ground & P and colloids. High levels fertilizers. The use of organic fertilizers water including well of N in well water may have demonstrated and encouraged. Crop rotations water and surface water. adverse health effects. Lakes with green manure demonstrated. Appropriate and the delta region could fertilizer and application time(s) recommended. suffer from eutrophication. Training given. Irrigation canals could become clogged with waterweeds. 33 BI Table 6cont. Major Environmental Issues and Proposed Mitigation Measures in the 6 MCs visited by the national Consultant. Issues Causes Effects on Environment Actions or Mitigation Measures Organic Poor and inappropriate Seepage of liquid and solid Demonstrate proper storage and disposal of liquid pollutioln storage and disposal of aniiimal xvaste inito streamns, and solid animal wastes. Promote the use of firoll farmlls, solid and liciil malIlie rivers an(l grouri(l \atcr organic fertilizers. Train farmers Try to Cet beefi and cliickeil wasle. In cluICI II ell water. fiinch i to dlemonstratc hbiog:is (dicsitcis ai .1clickci fatteninlg cspeciall) along PollutionI ol Watei bO)I0es, faminis and in beef lb tiLniic2 en tIHpi ses slheds, WMaCteLcotises. leadinlg to cutroplhicationi. chickeni Somc metllane venting enterprises ?Noxious smells at times. Can etc. encourage comm11u.nicable diseases. Pollution Poor or lack of effluelt Affects surface water, leads to Assist MoE in drawing uip plan to enforce existing fiom Agro- conitrol m1easuLes. Little eutrophicationi. Some laNvs. Look for funldinig to recl-ulit anid train MloE industries if any inspectioni of seepage into grounld water. personniiel. Look for souLrces of fuinds to assist (excludLinIg factorics. Non- Noxious smells at tilmes. Call ilildustries to introciLe ettileIlt colitrol iiieastircs. cattle shiecis compilpliance xt thile law. encoUrage commullllnicable and chickcni Effluents discharged illto discascs farlmls). wvater bodlies or dtlimped by roadside. E. Lessons from Previous Oiigoinig Projects & Studies. The present project is built upon lessons from the East Anatolia Watershed Rehabilitation project, (WB Implementation Completion Report [ICR] - March 2002a). This project covered eleven (originally 3) provinces in the upper Euphrates watershed. The specific objectives were to help restore sustainable range, forest and farm activities in 54 selected micro catchment, covering a total of about 400,000 ha. This should lead to reduced soil degradation, erosion and sedimentation in three major reservoirs as well as increasing productivity and income of the people. A participatory approach was used, designed to strengthen farmners' planning and implementation capacity, while improving the responsiveness of rural service agencies to farmers' needs. The expansion of the project enabled the Borrower to test the "Participatory Watershed Management" approach in different socio-economic settings and to expose more provincial agencies to the approach. The total project cost was US$ 77 million with a lifetime of 8 years from July 1993 to September 2001. In addition, there was a sister GEF grant funded project of US$ 5.1 million on the "In-situ Conservation of Genetic Diversity." This commenced in July 1993 and finished in September 1998. It will be discussed separately. From studying the relevant documents and from a consultative meeting held in Malatya in October 2000, the lessons learnt from the EAWRP cover a range of proposals. These are summarized below. 1. A participatory project cannot be target driven. 2. Major government ministries can collaborate effectively in delivering services at the field level. 3. The project should operate in unambiguous legal conditions. 4. Land ownership problems should be solved before the start of intervention. 34 5. Local community participation in the activities (cash and/or in kind) is crucial for the sustainability of the initiative. 6. Design and implementation should build on existing local technology and capacity. 7. A project of this kind needs social and extension skills. S. All stakelholdiers need to be included. 9. One of the best ti-aininlg metlhods for AWRP staff wotld be site visits to EWRP areas to obtainl inlforimlatioIn frloIm pr-ovincial staft aridt beneficiariCs on appropriate prictices. 10. Traininag shIould be tlimiely and appropriate. 11. The project design must ensure that the time allowed for participatory planniing and implemiienitation is sufficient and likely to be efficiently utilized. 12. The project design should be suLclh as to facilitate the inclusion of all necessal-y sources of expertise. 13. Before participatory plannling, social, Financial and technical opportunlities and constraints should be thoroughly identified by the project/provincial staff. 14. Ther-e must be adequate time allowed for an integrated and participatory planninlg process to idenitify environmiiienitally and cost effective practices appropriate to the local circu11stances, i.e. cultural, finiancial, physical and social. 15. Sufficient time should be devoted to tapping indigenous knowledge. 16. Appropriate demonstrations are of primlae importanice for new methods or applications to be introduced at specific locations. 17. Monitoring and evaluation should be sustainable and include data on outcomes. 18. Technical lessons learnt included: - cost-saving innovations in soil conservation and irrigation technology; - rangeland improvement by simple enclosure and protection as compared to mechanical interventions plus re-seeding and fertilizer application; - fruit tree upgrading by grafting rather than planting; and - the need for good seed stock for direct sowing and tree seedling production. From an environmental viewpoint, the goals of the project were to: i) increase the plant cover in forests and rangelands to at least 40% from an estimated 10% so as to decrease soil erosion and reduce siltation in the large reservoirs; ii) improve farming practices, again to reduce erosion and improve soil quality; and iii) make the various land uses more productive and ensure sustainability by at least matching supply to demand. One of the M&E recommendations was to include data on outcomes. Provision was made to monitor water quality, but this was not undertaken. It is therefore of concern that in the World Bank's EAWRPs Staff Appraisal Report (WB 1993) it is stated that "the measurement of secondary benefits in terms of run off, soil loss, stream flows and sediment discharge is beyond the scope of the project at this stage." (Annex 7 Page 1 Paragraph 2). A principal concern when formulating the project was to decrease erosion and therefore the measuring the above indicators should have been of primary importance, for this would point to the degree of success of the project. This new project must monitor the above indicators from the outset in order to determine the scale of the project's success both from an environmental and an economic point of 35 view. Also, the quantities of N and P in soils and water should be measured as well as faecal matter and herbicides/insecticides in water. This is necessary in order to reduce excess quantities of these substances, if any, so as to lessen eutrophication in rivers, lakes and seas, improve the quality of water for drinkinig and other purposes and assist fanners by advising them on the correct application rates for fertilizers etc. Othler aimils of the projeCt alr: 10 put tilC landCI l.ndeCIr its mllOSt CelVirOnmentLll plproprliac LuSC; to incr-ease the proCLuctivity of the forests, farmas andc rang,:,elancli; anid to cusurle that the land and its prodLucts are used sustainiably. Mucl1 of the area in the Anatolia \vatershed has been over-exploited anid some hias been inappropriately converted to arable farlllilng. All tlis has led to decreasinlg returnis and a con0illtlous deteriorationi of the landc. This not only affects the immediate area, but also can and has caused damage to property anld farmland downtstream tlhroughi flash flooding, the washinig away of topsoil and inullldatillg land with coarse material. In order to ensuLe sustainiability, supply and demanid estimates for the differenlt crops shoulcd be uLnder-taken. Wlile the EA\VRP unidertook surveys of the demzanid for fuelwood, poles, timber-, fooc andc feedl, no estimates appear to have beeni mzade of the original growvir- stock and yielcl of trees nor0 the pceformlan-ice of the various tree planting and direct sowing initiatives. Provision was made to undertake suchI measuremnen-ts, but these were not done. Without such indicator-s it is diffictult to judge the sustainability levels for forest products and to propose measures and options to balance demand with supply. The completion report of the EAWRP does indicate the economic returns from the various interventions. Those for arable agriculture are based on crop yields before and after the project's initiatives, where as those in the forestry sector are based on growth models, without any field measurements. Therefore, without actual measurements it is difficult to place much confidence in the results. It can be argued that the project trees will have only been growing for 8 years at most, but measurements could and should be taken and compared to the growth patterns of similar species in other parts of Turkey. From such measurements and comparisons, predictions can be made and then compared to the models. Even though the EAWRP has been handed over to the government, it is strongly recommended that the various interventions are measured periodically and records are kept of removals of wood and non-wood products. This would be of importance to the EAWRP not only to determine the sustainability of trees inside and outside the forest, but also to act as a pointer for the present AWRP. Another point not covered under the EAWRP, but of relevance is carbon sequestration. In the Bank's Project Concept Document (PCD) for the AWRP, (WB. 2001a) it is stated that the proposals "are consistent with the GEF Operation Program 12 'Integrated Ecosystem Management' by reducing threats to biodiversity and promoting carbon sequestration." (Page 4, Paragraph 3). 'In order to measure the quantity of carbon sequestrated by the various initiatives, it is necessary to undertake a baseline survey of organic carbon in biomass and soils at the start of the project and at intervals throughout the project's lifetime and beyond. For trees, this means undertaking inventories at regular intervals and for range and arable lands the yields of grass and crops can be measured. It also means that organic soil carbon should be measured periodically. This 36 information will provide data on the amount of additional organic carbon sequestrated under the different land uses. If it is significant, then the country could include it as an offset measure in their carbon accounting or consider it for carbon trading. In summary, the EAWRP did not undertake sufFicient M & E, especially bascline surveys of existing land use conditions before the project commienlcedc and mioilitorinig the progriess of the valniouLs intel-venltions. This m11ust 110t OCCUr inI tills project. The GEF funided In-sitiu Conservationi of Genetic Divcrsity project in thle East Anatolia Watershed Relhabilitation project area lhad five componenits. 1. Site surveys and inventories of ecosystems to determ-inle suitable habitats and species for gene preservation. 2. Selecting and protecting 'gene managemenlt zones' (GMZ) to presel-ve targeted wild relatives of specific anniual and perennial species. 3. Buildin g a database of existing and generated iniformation anid incor-porating this into a central data management plan. 4. Help form-lulate a 'national plan for in-situ coniservation' of wvild crop relatives and forest genetic resources in their own habitat. 5. Provide institutional strengtheniing to government and allied bodies. The project successfully completed all the five components and 22 GMZ were established and maintained. A GIS centre was fully staffed and equipped, with training given to the staff. The sustainability of such a centre was questioned in the Completion Report (ICR. WB 1999) but the AWRP could and should use the services of this centre. The key lessons that were learnt from this project are as follows. 1. Concerned government agencies must work together if in-situ conservation is to be successful. 2. The local population must be informed about the activities of a GMZ and participate in its management. 3. For technical projects such as this, sufficient and up-to-date training and retraining is a priority. A scientific advisory committee could provide the necessary guidance. 4. The project implementation committee and the inter-ministerial steering committee are effective mechanisms to assist project agencies with limited experiences of working together. 5. Continuity of the task team by the donor and recipient is extremely important. 6. To avoid delays etc. in donor/World Bank procedures, the implementing agency should maintain a core team equipped with the necessary skills. From an environmental viewpoint, the first two points are the most pertinent. In some MCs of the AWRP, there are areas that should be preserved because they: - contain endangered or rare plant species; - are a source of seeds or cuttings from 'superior' or 'plus' plants; - contain landraces that could provide useful genes for crop improvement programs; - have potentially useful species, such as medicinal and herbal plants, that can be managed in-situ or used as a source for ex-situ production; 37 - are part of larger areas that have potential for wildlife conservation and tourism. The local population could identify such 'hotspots' including gene management zones and be involved in their planning and management. AWhIile this 'ill-si/it conservation of g,Clletic diversity' project \vis sulccessful, tlhere wa.ls no mentionl aLbouit its LISCLilluICSs to the siste- EAWRI. Yet one com-nplainit ol the LA\\l RP \vas thIe poor genetic CuLality of muChI seed suLIPpliecl by tic local popula tionI. TFe Ii t-slt' personniel should hiave been able to pinpoillt 'plus trees' and othel- super-ior- plallts aLndC advise the project to collect seeds/cutting fi-rom1 suchI souL-ces or pay a prem-iulll to thle locals that collected seeds fi-om these soulces. ThIis should be purstued ulndeCr the AWRP. Anotlher- on-going project is the GEF II: Biodiversity Conservation and Natul-al ResouLr-ce Managemenlt Project executed by the MoF (GDNP) and the MoE. The goal oftlte project is sustainiable conservationi of biological diver-sity and ecological integrity in selectedi forests, 'wetlands, steppe and alpine ecosystemls thlat are representativc of TUrkeY's fOur major bio-geograplhical zones. The plroject objectives are summllllalrisedi below. * To establish effective, inter-sector, participatory planninlg and sustainiable management of protected areas and natulral resources at four selected biodiversity conservation maniagemenit sites. * To build national and legislative capacity to facilitate replication of these activities. The project activities include monitoring and structuring of biodiversity informationi systems, as well as the integration of biodiversity conservation concerns into forest management plans. The AWRP should be linked to this on-going project in relation to biodiversity inventories at project sites, the integration of biodiversity conservation concerns in the planning stage and gathering baseline information vis-a-vis endemic species and sensitive habitats. Regarding the GEF sub-component, there is an on-going GTZ assisted capacity building project in the MoE. The project is being implemented in Bursa, (an agriculture/industry province) and Mugla (a tourist resort province), to encourage 'a systems approach' in environmental management. Activities related to establishing a structure for pollution prevention, enhancing coordination, developing and implementing environmental monitoring systems, and encouraging public and private sector participation will be supported. The project started in April 2000 and will finish by April 2003. The lessons learnt by the MoE could be of considerable use to the GEF sub-component. Background information was prepared for the AWRP preparation mission (3-17 June 2002). This information consisted of a handbook (WB. 2002b) and statistical data on the proposed MCs by province, a menu of activities, the components of these activities and the cost of each component etc., (WB. 2002c). The handbook included the Project Concept Document (PCD) for the AWRP (WB. 2001a) and the ICR for the EAWRP (WB. 2002a). The ICR for the EAWRP has been dealt with above and will not be discussed further; thus, only the environmental concerns of the PCD will be summarized. 38 The main sector issues relating to the environment are: 1. Degradation of the natural resource base. This has occurred through over-use of the natural resources and the inappropriate use of some areas. In consequence, most land suffers fromi erosion, leading to loss of topsoil, flash flooding, sedimentationl and delteioratlin.1 prOduL1Ctivity fi-omii tile land. Biodivcrcsitv quality and qUantity has tliminishiedl its well as a loss of organic carhon r-oimi tih hiomliassand hlic soils. 2. Intensive ilnput utse fol ci-gicutlturcal pr odutctioni. On somiec farmis, thlerc hias bccn an excessive use of fertilizers and pesticides/lherbicidcs, while soiOIC manure has bccn discarded into water bodies. This has affected ground and river water makilng some drinking water unsafe and causing eutrophication in poonds, streams, rivers, lakes anld ultimately in the delta area of the Black Sea. Again this has led to decreased biodiversity, and polluted drinlkinig and otlher water. 3. Nuttrientflowfironi7 ma7jor watershels to the Black Sea. Apart from overse of organic and inor-ganic fertilizers onl somiec farins and the discarding of organic fer-tilizers into water bodies, a major soturce of clissolved nutrienlts in water bodies flowving into the Black Sea is from agro-industries. Most of thlese indusLLtries do not treat thleir effluellls or treat them inadequately before discharge into streams, but some manure is used as fertilizers on agricullural land etc. However, the application rate is not controlled. In consequence, most of the effluents finish up in water bodies flowing into the Black Sea with the environmental consequences as mentioned above. 4. Iniadequtate policy and r-egulatoly capacity towarcls i)meeting EU stanldardls. Turkey is a candidate country to join the EU, but even if it were not, it should, in its own interests, comply with EU standards. These include complying with the EUs environmental aquis, (especially regarding water quality and waste management and their monitoring) and adopt the Environmental Impact Assessment directive, particularly the nitrates' directive. The PCD indicates that the AWRP will fulfil a number of global environmental objectives namely 'climate change' and 'improved international waters quality through nutrient reduction.' These will occur through appropriate land use, increasing biomass cover, especially tree planting and increased vegetation on rangelands, ecologically sustainable land use, appropriate use of agricultural chemicals and fertilizers and improved livestock/agro-industry practices. Not mentioned, but as important, is biodiversity protection on all land-use classes including agriculture. The PCD states that the monitoring of these environmental indicators should be an integral part of the project. The descriptive and statistical information that was provided with the Preparatory Mission handbook described 38 main activities (WB. 2002c). Some of these activities have several options such as those under agricultural terracing, agronomic package, environmentally friendly agricultural techniques and irrigation. All these options have been screened for their positive, negative and neutral environmental effects. In addition, the environmental effects caused by agro-industries are also examined. These form the basis of environmental screening described in the next section (Section F). 39 The information about agro-industries was obtained from field visits and from a consultants document for the AWRP entitled "Design of Village-level Manure Management and Handling Systems" (J P Metcalfe JuLne 2002). This document specifically refers to the GEF coimponieint. Similaly-lv fourl otlhcr docLumCnl-ts provid\;IedC baLckgrlouLn II Cin Forion For tlhc GE:F complolle-t. These are: W0Yater anid Soil Pollution (i\loE - CKO1K & IAikZA - 1\KGN/l, April 2002); Designi ofWater and Soil Quality Monitoring Systemii (K olonrlaya N., 2002); AgricultuLral Profile, Pollutioni ancl Erosioni Problemils of Corumli, Amilasya andc Tokat Provinices: C Okan & N Durutani trip repol-t inclu1dintg a N'IARA documL1enlt (WB 2001 c); and HLousehold Questionnaire for the GEF Componenit of the Anatolia Basin Project (Surk-al Ltcl, Ankara, May 2002). One conIsultnlllt's ClocuMCelt of significanice to the REA is the repor-t on M/lonitorling anid Evaluatioln for the AWRP (F. M. Ainder-soni and D. Kariatli, Junle 2002). Tills rcport discusses the M&E, requiremiienlts for all the activities in the project area, inclin111g environmiiienital monritorinig, botlh for niicro-catclhmiienits and for the GEF componenits. The primllar-y objective of M&E is to track the perforrmiarnce of project initiatives so as to provide objective evidence of the quantity and quality of implemiienitationi and the imlpact of the Project as a wlhole. The report stresses the importanice of collecting baseline information and listing key performance indicators (KPIs) or objectively verifiable indicators (OVIs) that can be used to judge the impacts of various interventions compared to the baseline data. A distinction is made between outcomes (short-term) and impacts (long-ten-n). For example an outcome could be the planting and establishing 1,000 ha of Pinus nigra on bare land over a period of five years in a single MC. The impacts of such a planting should be the reduction of erosion, improved stream flow, increases in biomass capital and yield, additional carbon sequestration in wood and soil and increased flora and fauna. Several of these impacts may not become fully apparent for several years and up to 50 years for the tree crop, half the nominal rotation age of P. nigra. To quantify the impacts, measurements of all or some of the most important factors should be taken. A baseline survey must be performed at the outset and measurements taken at specified intervals. Because of the long-term nature of this particular intervention, provision has to be made to continue taking measurements beyond the lifetime of the project. In addition, measurements could be taken in other more mature P. nigra stands outside the project so that projections can be made of the likely impact of this intervention over time. This is why it is important to undertake measurements on the interventions in the EAWRP, even though the project has been handed over. Of course, the planting of 1,000 ha of pine may be nullified if, in the same or another MC in the AWRP, a similar area of pine is cut down and converted to pasture or arable agriculture. Therefore, account must be taken of all land use changes, to determine the net changes, remembering that clearing mature stands of trees for other uses may have a greater (negative) impact on say carbon store, even if a similar area is planted. 40 The M&E report recommends that a full-time Evaluation Officer be appointed as well as a Special Studies Advisory Group (SSAG) that will have primary responsibility for the commissioning and conduct of studies concerned with assessment of the AWRPs impact. It also states "The overall GEF program will require staff in each of the four GEF provinces to oversee and manage their M&E activities. These Provincial staff will be backstoppcd at Anlkar-a in the MoE and KKGM by staff fullyv familiar with thie nccds for Žvl&E. Tlhcse Ankara-based groups Will incur support Costs to oversee tlhil Provincial tcams. T-lhc costs of these clefined Ankara and Provin1cial staffs should be identiFied anid allowed for in the Project's budget." These recommnciidations are endor-sed for the REA. It should be stressed that the monitorinig of enviroiinmenltal inidicators are not to be treated any differently fi-om the monitoring of other indicators in the Project, in other words they slhould be viewed as an integral part of the whlole monitorinig process. The report recommenids that at least 2% of the Project's buLdget be set aside for M&E purposes and lists the requirements for suchi a ullit. This is endorsed in this report. The M&E repor-t states that wvhiile micro-catclhmiient plans have bcen standar-dized for AGM, GDRS and TUGEM (and is on compact disc [CD]), the MoE andi KKGM are not yet involvecl to this level of MC planning. It is strongly recommended that the MoE and KKGM personnel are trained in the standardized MC process and that they be fully integrated into the MC teams. Even though the involvement of MoE and KKGM is at present limited to 4 out of the 13 provinces, they slhould become involved in all provinces. After all, the results of the GEF initiatives on the appropriate use of organic fertilizers, soil testing and improved farming practices such as minimum tillage have direct applications on all MCs. Likewise the mapping needs for the GEF component should be similar if not identical to the mapping needs of the AWRP. The report discusses the risks involved in the M&E system. It states: "The newness in Turkey of field-level interventions with an environmental focus has some risks for the Agencies involved. Where possible, these risks must be managed so their effects on overall Project result are minimized. Effective and timely inter-Agency collaboration will be a key way of identifying and addressing problems quickly and efficiently. The M&E system devised to support this work must be an effective tool to aid this collaboration. Aspects of the M&E system concerned with environmental activities will evolve during the Project's implementation. However, any lost opportunities for improving the system when such improvements are indicated will inevitably reduce the impact and learning from the Project. Close collaboration from the beginning of the Project between the staff of the KKGM, MoE and the M&E Unit is a key consideration." It goes on to state "A successful M&E system GEF program will track the interventions sufficiently rigorously to allow favourable results to be taken up by follow-on projects concerned with the same issues. Adequate baselines, input tracking and output, outcome and impact assessments are all required." While this REA lays down baseline and follow-on activities for M&E, they are not rigid and should be modified in the light of field experiences. This is where the advice of the proposed Evaluations Officer and the SSAG may be critical. There are twenty-one (21) 41 recommendations made in the M&E report (Appendix 6). These recommendations are fully endorsed for the REA with the proviso that OVIs for the AWRP, which should have been defined and agreed by all partner Agencies by the end of July 2002, may be modified as a result of this REA. To date (September 2002), no additional OVIs have been submiiitted by partner agencies to tlhose given inl the M&E report Apperndix 2 as examipiles. Therc forc, additiornal OVrs rcqLiICd re O cifioenvironmcntal Nl/&E arC suLgeCStCd inI tlhe N'/[&E plan of this report (Scctioni I). The moniltoring of soil for the hydrogeni iotl coincenltratioln (p)1-1), nitr-ogeln (N) (organic and inoroganic), phIosphor-ous (P), pesticidles, h1erbicides anid fuLngicides is imrportant, especially for farnmers, to cleterm-inle the amounlt Of these substanices in the soil before planting, during the growing season and after harvest. From SuCIh inlformiatioin, it can be determ-inled if surpluLs chemlical are being applied to the land and far-ners can be given advice conceminig the conect.application rates and the frequenicy and timie of application according to the type of crop. If there are excessive chenicals in the soil, some of theimi will find their way into surface and groundwater and thus could affect water tused for drinkinig andc other purposes. Too muchi N & P can cause eutr-oplicaLtioni and adversely affect the flora anid fauna in rivers and seas. One of the tasks unlder the GEF com1ponienit of the AWRP is to monitor the water- and soil for chemicals, dissolved and suspended solids, tul-bidity and colifonm matter, includillg faecal colifonn. Professor Nazif Kolonkaya has prepared a report for the Project onl tile design of water and soil quality monitoring system (Kolonkaya N., 2002). The objectives of the study are: 1. To evaluate the institutional capacity for soil and water monitoring in the Kizilinrak and Yesilirmak waterslheds flowing into the Black Sea. 2. To establish a model to monitor soil and water quality in a selected MC (Suluova MC) of the above watersheds. The results from such a study could then be applied to the remainder of the MCs throughout the AWRP. The cost of such a study is estimated at US$ 1.3 million over a six-year period, with US$ 1.1 million being for laboratory analysis. The cost for laboratory analysis seems high and the time period too long. Soil and water tests have to be undertaken on many MCs during the lifetime of the project (7 years) and therefore, this monitoring initiative may have to be revised. Also, testing for soil organic carbon (C) was excluded from the chemical analysis, as was stream flow from the surface water testing procedure. Measuring soil organic C is an indicator for carbon sequestration and stream flow determination should indicate the success or otherwise of initiatives to improve soil infiltration rates and reduce flash flooding. Simple soil analysis is required for the project to assist farmers regarding fertilizer application, and water monitoring is needed to determine the success of erosion control. The State Hydraulic Works (DSI) should be consulted about existing and proposed monitoring points and procedures in the MCs and rivers of the five watersheds. One monitoring procedure has been described for a project undertaken for DSI by the 42 International Office for Water (Aegean Rivers Integrated Water Resource Use Planning & Management: International Office for Water, Sophia Antipolis, France, March 1999). Again, the extension service of MARA has been consulted about soil testing procedures. Regarding the formulation of this REA, data from the various field trips were used as wVcrc sonic insights obtaincd as a rcsult Of nIcCting With thc beIncfciarics andc thc convci-ncd govCe-r1nnCIt .agncies. The linutes of the eld Trip) LudertaIkeIn inI .1LI1V 1vN() is given inAnincx 6. Addlitionlii infor-mliationi was obtalinect frioi the WB Preparatory Missioni Report, (WB. 2002d), The Forest Sector Review (WB. 2001b) and Towards FAOs Agri-enivir-onmiiienltal Indicators (Sema Alpan-Atamer-, FAO. 2002). F. Environmllenital Screeninlg. There are tllirty-eigllt project componien1ts listed in the AWRPs Statistical Tnformiiation Handbook (WB. 2002c) ancl several of thesc componienits have sub-comiiponienits SLuch as those uLnder- terraciing, anid agronomic package etc. Also, there are some componienits that should be included, but are not, such as the measurement of biomass over time, especially for baseline information: tlis is milost importanit for measuring the environimenital impact of various interventiolns. Again, componients of the GEF sub-project are not included in the Handbook and these are important from a screenillg viewpoint. Within each component/sub-component there are several activities, some of which may result in possible adverse environmental impacts (without mitigation measures), many that. should yield positive environrnental impacts and some that are more or less environmentally neutral, but may be of economic importance. In place of listing all the components and subcomponents and then detailing the activities for each intervention with their possible environmental impacts, all similar components have been grouped together and condensed into eight tables. These tables are given in Annex 2. For each table, interventions (activities) are listed and activities that may result in possible positive and negative environmental impacts are provided. For example, a list is provided of components that may have negative environmental impacts such as road building. It is stated if the individual activity for each component is included under this heading (yes) or excluded (no). Sometimes it may have this activity (perhaps) or it is not applicable (N/A). Annex 2 does not reflect the outcome of the environmental effect, it only states that an activity (say road building) is or is not part of the component menu. Annex 2 is a precursor to environmental screening. It lists all components by activities and the activities that have positive and negative environmental effects are then screened. These are dealt with in this Section. In addition a checklist of interventions to improve productivity is given as well as interventions to increase economic activities. For each of the 8 tables, there is a description of the possible adverse environmental impacts, with a discussion of mitigation measures. Generally, the possible positive environmental impacts are not discussed, as their benefits are self-evident. This is also the case for interventions to improve productivity and economic activities. 43 Therefore, in the following screening matrices only the possible major negative and positive environmental impacts (by project components/sub-components) are listed with a summary of the proposed mitigation measures or their environmental benefits. This is theni discussed for each potential negative or positive environmlienital activity. Sulch a mal-tix, together \vith Annex 2, should lhelp the HQ and field-staff pinpoint the possible InlljOr CleVironm1i1entlal im11pacts and the p)IropoScd mlitigation masrcs to ncgaC idversc imllpacts. It also describes tlhe data collcctioni nlcecleci to v\criFv thc degrec ol impl1;act, hc i positive or niegratiVe, that tle intelven1tioll hals causedC. This is elaborated imiore iully in Section 1 dealing cwith the Monilto-inig ancl Evaluation Plan. However, M&RlE for illiviidLial compoInenlts suchi as roacl buildin1g is unlcdertakeni by indepenIdent bodies eitlher in miniistries or by plrivate firm-ls. This is or should be specified ill tile dOCLIlenIts coverin g specific activities. SM Table 1. AWRP: Environimental Screeniiig Matrix: Road Bulilding. IProject Project Relevant IPotenltial NatIIe, Mfitigation Key Compolnelt Activity Environ- Fielcl Scope & P'roposedl Assumptions (numiiber) menital (Env) Actions Time-framiie Indicators of lPotential Eniv Iimipacts 1000, 1400, Road Negative: Acdlhere to Conitilluous Enfor-ce Constl-uctioll 1500, 1600, building'. Surface and constlrucion1 soil erosion if standards, standlards 1700, 1800? gully erosion, standards, road not built provide applied. ITave 1900? 2300? dust, road especially / maintained maintenance clauses in washout. drainage & properly. budget, re- contract to Positive: alignment, Grass and vegetate road minimize roadsides grass sides of trees along sides quickly. damage. Re- quickly re- roads. Plant road should vegetation of vegetated, shrubs and quickly roadsides, improved trees along stabilize soil, budget for microclimate. roadside to improve regular stabilize soil. environment. maintenance. There are three types of roads to be constructed under the project: a). Service roads by AGM of the MoF. It is proposed to build 170 km of service roads in the project micro-catchments. According to the technical specifications described in the "Unit price list for the activities to be contracted in 2002" by the Department of Study and Project of AGM these are roads at a width of 4 m. in average, without any ditch or sub-grade to be used during implementation and maintenance of the project. They are usually constructed by levelling at the ridges of the terrain. Loose sides are immediately planted (for example with Acacia sp. in Malatya under EAWRP). Explosives and other costly construction techniques are not used. I I Forest roads are not subject to the environmental assessment (EA) process according to present EIA Regulation, but the Regulation is under review by the MoE. Since the Bank's safeguard policy ask for specific EA processes in some cases, the MoE is planning to add a provision to read "If the owner of the project asks to conduct a specific EIA for the project, then the MoE will conduct such an EIA". Therefore, when a specific forest road is to be constructed and if the use of explosives are planned; then Ministry of Forestry may ask the MoE to conduct an EA for this intervention. 44 b). B-type secondaryforest roads by GDF. It is proposed to build 127 km of forest roads in the project areas. The General Directorate of Forestry has published a document for road construction. This gives the technical and administrative specification /conditions for road construction bidding, includinig a format for special provisions and a sample contr-act (Forest Roads, Road Constl-uctioll Worlks, Geri. Dir. of Forestry, Anklara, 1988). Thcse arc roads for ploduction as \ell as rcforestationi activ'itics. They arc conlstr-LuctCCe with the specilficatiolis of 4 il platfo-rm. width plu s I nII ditch width (5 il. Il totall) anl(d n Im suLb-graldC Width, a mlilnImuL11 cur vLeIC radiLus of 10-12 Ill anlld ImaxiMLum11 slopC of 10%. The specifications do not specifically consicder- enlvir-onmeiicnital conccrnis. They shoulcd bc updated, wvith the assistance and approval of MoE, w\ith regard to the use of cxplosives, the preventioni soil erosioni and specifying eartlh moving standards. c). Ser vice roacls for access to irri galion chmainnels/pipes by GDRS. It is proposed to build 64.5 km of sevilce roads in the project micro-catclhmiients. The nuLmber and size of suchi roads are kept at minimiiumii for least-cost considerations. They are used during the constl-uction stage and afterwards for operation and maintenianice. While the specificationis for road building and mainitenianice that are gi\'en in the \ai-ious handbooks are acceptable, a potential negative environmental impact concerns road constructioll. Wheni unidertakinig road constructioll, miiaximumii slopes shotuld not exceed standards set for the soil type and terrain. Culverts should be installed to prevent erosion and bridges built across streams or rivers of a specified width. Where the soil is disturbed through cut and fill, the exposed ground should be re-vegetated quickly to prevent erosion. There should be clauses in the road building contract concemning environmental protection such as no cutting of trees without approval, replacing cut trees with appropriate species, where to dump excavated soil, no use of explosives without approval from MoE, how to maintain a temporary camp etc. Maintenance of roads is important to prevent erosion, rutting and water logging etc. Planting vegetation along the roadside should stabilize the soil and improve the microclimate. 45 SM Table 2. AWRP: Environmental Screening Matrix: Forest and Rangeland (Non-Arable) Ground Prepartion/Terracing. Project Project Relevant Potential Nature, Mitigation Key Component Activity Environ- Field Scope & Proposed Assumptions (ntimber) mental (Env) Actions Time-fiame Inclicators of Potential l_____________ _ En _v Im pacts 1000, 1100, NloLulDlimi_ A!Wjuluiwc. Ad1ewr io ColiflnoUIs F-Lnlorce 1 Cc1tsirctilon 1200, 1300, dceep Init11til SUrface con11StuLCtion1 soil eroSI1n 11' stdlldalis, staIndaILIs 1500, 1600, rippinig, and g,ully staiicla-cls for area rcimiainis provide applied, 1700, 1S00, terracing- erosioni. terracing, ie- degraded aind maintenilance bud,elet ani/or 1900. hiand Posaive vegctate area teriace not budget, re- training for Decreased quickly properly built vegetate area iegular erosion, especially i mainitainied. quickly. maintenlanlce. improved terrace edges. Revegetationi Limit use of inFiltr-ationi, will quickly machillery, increased stabilize soil, limit site grounid cover, improve preparation to improved enrvironmnenit. dry season, microclmate. mu ICilching. GrouLnd preparationi in forest areas, both witlh machiines and by hancd \Nvill cover anl estimated 33,395 hectares. Only hanid ter-aciig will be uLndertaken in forest activities. Mechanical terracing was abolished by the MoF after bad experiences during tlle early stages of the EAWRP. When undertaking ground preparation, including terracing, to reduce erosion, improves degraded forest and range areas and for reforestation, care must be taken not to exacerbate erosion and increase flash flooding. This should be done by first undertaking a classification of soil types depth, slope and rainfall and adhering to prescriptions for [mechanical] and hand terracing according to intemationally acceptable specified criteria in the instructions published by the AGM. (Issues to be Taken into Account in the Erosion Control Activities, Instruction No: 14, Ankara, 1999 and Instructions No. 6, 7 and 8 regarding erosion control activities, in-forest rangeland rehabilitation activities and reforestation activities respectively). These conform to international standards. Deep ripping should only be applied where the soil will benefit from infiltration. However as found under the EAWRP, most rangelands will be improved through enclosure. When the soil is disturbed, the exposed ground should be re-vegetated quickly to prevent erosion and to improve the microclimate. If these initiatives are not carried out or poorly carried out, then there may be soil compaction or continued erosion. Water harvesting should be considered on rangelands to be rehabilitated in order to sustain the vegetative cover and the soil-water balance. On Farm land, ploughing up and down slopes leads to increased erosion. However, many fields are narrow and contour ploughing may not be practical. Alternatives to 'slope' ploughing include minimum tillage and terracing and the planting of perennial crops. It is proposed to carry out ground preparation operations on 1,000 ha. When undertaking ground preparation including terracing to reduce erosion, to improve marginal lands for cultivation and enhance range areas, care must be taken not to exacerbate erosion and increase flash flooding. This should be done by first undertaking a classification of soil types, soil depth, slope and (maximum) rainfall statistics, then adhering to prescriptions 46 for mechanical and hand terracing according to the specified internationally acceptable criteria in the instructions published by the former TOPRAKSU (Guidelines for Terracing, TOPRAKSU, Ankara) and the Technical Specifications for Bidding for Terracing published by GDRS (Ankara-2000). Sl\l Table 3. kNRP: Environnmental ScICeeillg, iNlatr-ix: ArLbIle Grountdc PZcparatio,] -racl i . I'loject l'roject Relevaant Plotenitial Natuie, NIlitigation Key Comiiponienit Activity Envilon- Field Scope P Proposed Assumptions (number) mental (Env) Actions 'ime-fiamiie Indicators of Potential Env Impacts 4000, 4100, Ploughlinig, Negative: For terracing PloughilIg up Enfoice Construction 4200, 6000, drilling, SuLr-ace and adclere to and clowvn terracing standaids 6100,6200, minimum gully erosion. coinstinictioni slope leads to standards, applied for 6400,6600, tillage. Top soil loss standards, conltinluous demonstrate terracing, 6700? 6800? Terracing - Positive. practice erosion and benefit of demonistra- Demonistia- hanid and Decreased contour gullies. If contour tions of tion 6400. mechanical erosion, ploughing terrace not ploughing, improved improved and mi illiiium built properly minimiilum techniiques infiltration, tillage, plug or maintained tillage, througilout fertility gullies and soil loss reduced project area. build-up, re-vegetate continues. fallow and Farmer better soil quickly, Improves soil plantilg of traininig stiucture. especially moisture and perennial provided and terrace edges. friability. crops. farmer participation in planning and execution Deep ripping should only be applied where the soil will benefit from infiltration and clearing should be confined to where trees are to be planted or sown, or where rangeland areas are to be re-seeded. When the soil is disturbed, the exposed ground should be re- vegetated quickly especially at the edges of the terraces to prevent erosion and to improve the microclimate. It was observed in Malatya that planting fruit trees and vegetables on the terraces, while planting either fodder or vines on the slopes increase both the agricultural benefits to the farmers and the environmental benefit of the soil and water balance. If these initiatives are not or poorly carried out, then there may be soil compaction or continued erosion. Demonstration of alternatives to slope ploughing with the appropriate agronomic package, including drip irrigation on terraces, is essential as is farmer participation in the planning and execution of alternatives. Early commitment of farmers should be sought for re-vegetation of terraces, including perennials, immediately after they have been prepared. 47 SM Table 4. AWRP: Environmental Screening Matrix: Gully Rehabilitation. Project Project Relevant Potential Nature/Scope Mitigation Key Component Activity Environ- Field & Timeframe Proposed Asstmptions (number) , mental (Env) Actions of Potential Indicator-s Env Impacts | 1000: 1 100, Gtilly APgot/z;e l,,g,i,ug I'chp111ps somlie Apply Constl LICi on0 1 2007 '500. rciabilita- InitialI a3ctioLnS IuLlics by Initial soil appropi tac suilndirds 1600, i700, tioni. May csILsc icchaiical / loss, buLt plu0gg1ng .appi icd oi S00, 1900. additionial vegetative erosioni soon metlhodology plgging / 2200? 2300? erosioll unltil meanis, contained by & terraciu- terracinIo, 2500? 4000, vegetation iliclldilig gully bank standaids. demiionistia- 4200,6100, established. terracing. protection lRevegetate tios of 6600? Positive: Plug gullies initiatives, witlh grass / improved Demonstra- Decreased quickly, re- pluggirng and pereiniiials. tcclhniques tion 6400. crosion, bank vegetate soon revegetation. Demonistrate throughout protection especially various project area. veg'n cover, witli grass & pltugging Traininlg and fertility perenniiials. technliques. participation build-uLp. essential. Gully plugging, especially at an early stage xvill prevent loss of topsoil and Feertility. The number and frequency of gullies should be well calculatecl in order- to optillmise environmenital benefit and minimize costs. The lessons learnlt from the EAWRP in gully plugging must be transferred and implemented in the AWRP. However, preventioni is better than cure, and gullies can be prevented through appropriate and sufficient vegetation cover, correct land preparation practices, especially for arable farming, reduction of fallow and the use of suitable harvesting methods and equipment. SM Table 5. AWRP: Environmental Screening Matrix: Irrigation, Small Reservoir, Pond Construction and Channel Work. Project Project Relevant Potential Nature/Scope Mitigation Key Component Activity Environ. Field & Timeframe Proposed Assumptions (number) -mental (Env) Actions of Potential Indicators Env Impacts 1400, 1500, Irrigation Negative: Build Perhaps some Apply Construction 2300? 4000, installation, Initial actions concrete and initial soil appropriate standards 4200. building may cause soil canals, loss, but methodology applied for Demonstra- small erosion. May introduce erosion soon for irrigation irrigation, tion 6400. reservoirs, be some tree irrigation contained by and pond ponds etc. ponds less removals in piping where revegetation. building etc. Demonstra- than or path of work. appropriate. Biodiversity Replace tions of equal to 15 Less water Construct improved by removed improved m high, down stream. small ponds / provision of vegetation techniques drinking Positive. reservoirs. watering with grass / throughout points, Better water Realign river points for perennials. project area. dips. River use decreases channel if domestic and Demonstrate Farmer channel erosion. appropriate. wild animals. various training and work. Watering Revegetate Increased soil building participation points /dips especially C. Possible techniques. essential. provided for with grass/ fish farming, animals. perennials. recreation. 48 There should be no major negative environmental effects when building irrigation channels, ponds, small reservoirs and realigning water courses. Reservoir construction is mainly to regulate water flow and provide water balance to the soil since rainfall is very irregular between the seasons. Flooding is expected to be reduced by roughly 40-60%. There may be sonie initial erosioni, but this can be quickly stopped tllrougll re-vegetation. Some of the irrigation and ponrd work etc. \ill be put oui to tenlder. Tllhc-c are internationally acceptable tcchliclal specifications publisschd by GDRS (.\nkalra-2n000) for- smriall irrig,ation damris (Lup to 15 ini ligh). This contains a clauLsC to seek approval ir-omil the state aulorl-ity, i.e. GDRS whenever explosives will be used. Thiere shouLlcd be claLuses in the bicdding cdocuLmlellt concern-1ing environmental protection stuch as no tree cuttilln without approval, replacillg cut trees, re-vegetationi of bare soil, where to duLmlp excavated soil, how to maintain a temporary camip etc. Also, there could be monitoring of the sedimenit load. In addition there shIould be traininlg in water managemenit for the farmers. Water consuLmlption for irrigation can be recduced from I to 0.5 I/sec per ha with drip and sprinkler- irrigation. Loans should be available for drip and sprinkler- iirigationi plus closed channiiel systems. SM Table 6. AWRP: Environmental Screening Matrix: Application of Herbicides, Insecticides and Pesticides. I'roject Project Relevant Potenitial Nature, Mitication Key Componenit Activity Environi- Field Scope & Proposed Asstumptions (number) mental (Env) Actions Time-fi-ame Indicators of Potential Env Impacts 1300 1600? Applica- Negative: Only use May be Enforce use Govemment 1700? 2100? tion of Overapplica- permtitted continual of permitted only allows 2600? 6100, chemical tion and chemicals. build-up of chemicals production! 6200? 6600, control inappropriate Train people potentially only. Provide import of 6700, 6800, agents. use can have in storage, dangerous on-going certified 6900, adverse effect handling, use toxic and training in chemicals. Demonstra- on ground & and disposal hazardous storage, Smuggling tion 6400. river water. of containers. chemicals in handling and controlled. Integrated Can affect Demonstrate water and use to negate Intemational pest people altematives soil if not toxic buildup. handling /use management, spraying or to chemicals controlled. Demonstrate standards (IPM). nearby. such as IPM. . altemative applied. Positive: Use genes of techniques to Farmer Can remove wild varieties chemicals. training and noxious of indigenous Monitor participation weeds and species that ground and essential. control have pest river water. Monitoring harmful resistance. Site sheep budget insects' etc. Appropriate dips to avoid approved. Can kill dosages when contarnina- parasites on treating farm tion of farm animals. animals. groundwater. All farners that use or will use permitted herbicides, insecticides and pesticides on their arable and horticultural crops should have the correct training in storage, handling and use of these chemicals as well as the careful disposal of the containers. Appropriate clothing should be demonstrated. Alternatives to chemicals, such as disease resistant 49 strains (from local wild varieties) and integrated pest management could be demonstrated. Local people may know of natural predators and plants with naturally occurring insecticide properties: such indigenous knowledge should be tapped. The control of ticks and other parasites is importanit in animal husbandry; therefore, the pastoralists slhould be trainied in the liandlling andC use of conti-ol agents. Si\'i [able 7. AVRIP: E nvirolinmenital Scr-cenji \'> MIatrix: Appllicationi of Cheni cal anicl Organic Fcrtilizelrs. Projcct IProject Relevallt Potential Nature. c it .Nogal non Kcv Componienlt Activity Environ- l171id Scope &t Proposed AssuLnIptionlS (number) menital (Env) Actions 'Time-fra me Indicators of Potential Env Impacts 1300, 1500, Use of Negatiive: Test soil for Nlay be P'rovide soil Pioject 2200? 2500? cheiiical Over applica- existing contilnual testing as a provides soil 2600? 6100? and organic tionl and fertilizer buildup ofN service. testing and 6200, 6300, fertilizers, inappropriate contenit and( P in Advise on the advice on 6700 6800, green use can have (7000). waterbodies correct use of fertilizer 6900. m1an1ure, adverse effect Advise increasin-t Fertilizers. application Demonistra- mulclh and on groulnd & farmller on eutroplhica- Encourage rates. Fiinds tioii 6400. nitrogen river water. correct tion in lakes the use of uses for fixing- trees Can affect dosage. andc the Black organic sulrplus and shlrubs drinking Encoura-e Sea Cor rect fcrtilizers, manLur e from on farm, in water. use of application mulch etc. chickeni nurseries Positive: organiic rate can Provide on- farms and etc. Correct use fertilizers, significantly going cattle feeding can increase green reduce N & P training in units. productivity manure, and faecal storage, Provide without agro-forestry matter in handling and storage units affecting species and water bodies. use. for manure surface and mulch. . Encourage and secures groundwater. Demonstrate organic equipment Can also storage and farming. for spreading. increase use of Monitor Farmer sequestration organic soils, ground training and potential in fertilizers. and river participation plants and Supply water. essential. soil. appropriate Approved equipment. M&E budget. On some farms, too many chemical and organic fertilizers are used, but for many small farmers not enough fertilizers are applied to the soil. There is a surplus of manure in some large agro-industrial units, some of which finds its way into water bodies including the Black Sea (SM Table 8). There is a pressing need to reduce the amount of fertilizers finishing up in water bodies by reducing the over application on some fields and halting the disposal of agro-industry surpluses into rivers etc., while at the same time increasing the application rate on farns where too little fertilizers are used. The correct and timely application of fertilizers should help improve the overall yield of farm and horticultural crops. Training should be provided for the use of fertilizers on irrigated land. While chemical fertilizers are easier to handle than organic fertilizers, organic fertilizers will improve the soil texture and water retention capacity. Also 50 growing green manure, fodder crops or agro-forestry (nitrogen-fixing) shrubs and trees should increase the soils mineral content and friability. The latter will provide browse for animals as well. Some of these interventions are not well known and therefore, their demonstration is important, not only for famiers, but also for project staff. In manly arcas, organic frcltilizcrs arc not fLIll) or properll) used andl(i iII somilc are.is, bcILISC Of a lack ofW0ood, dun.I11e is Used for0 COOkilnt an1d h1ea ld.tin. TheC priCe of CheicaClIl fer-tilizet-s hlais inicr-easced rcenitly bccaILIsC suibsidies hiave ori Lr-c bein, removed. Thlerefore, it is an opportuLne inomenit to dlemonistrate the propcr tisc of organic fcrtilizcrs. Tlhis wvill assist in Increasing ag'lricultural productivity, wlilc at the samiic tiimc redLucc pollution in water bodies, especially in wetlands and the Black Sea. SM Table S gives the screeninig matrix for manure managemeent in the project area. SM Table 8. AWRP: Environimenital Screeninig Matrix: Manure Managemnenit of Agro-inidustries. Project Project Relevant Potential Nature, Mitigation Key Componenit Activity Environi- Field Scope & Proposed Assumptionis (number) mental (Env) Actions Time-fiamiie Indicators of Potcntial Einv Impacts Al 1, Al 2, Maniure iVegative: Demonstrate Contlinued & List all Willingnless Al 3, Al 4? maniage- Poor correct increasinig manlure- of agro- ment. management storage, eutrophica- producillg industries to of manure handling and tion levels in industries. comply with from cattle use of rivers, lakes, Demonstrate regulations. and poultry manure. and seas etc. correct and Show agro- has resulted Undertake Groundwater safe storage, industries in dung being surveys of pollution handling and that it can be dumped in Poultry units levels remain use of dung. profitable to water bodies and Cattle high in many Demonstrate use rather and landfills. feeding cases. biogas than dispose Positive: sheds. Draw If manure production? of manure. The proper up plans for management Demonstrate Handling and storage and the disposal plan to farmers' distribution use of dung and use of successful, correct and system can improve manure. then eutro- beneficial use improved. agricultural Undertake phication and of manure. Loans productivity survey of pollution Improve available. & save water potential levels handling & Increase bodies from users of gradually distribution. compliance pollution. manure. decline. Tree planting with and better regulations management on water will provide pollution alternative control and energy to solid waste dung. control. Without proper management of manure, water pollution and eutrophication will persist in the AWRP area. Similarly, without better monitoring of the agro-industries pollution and eutrophication will only be partially solved. Hence the importance of assisting the MoE in tackling the pollution problem from these industries (Screening Matrix 9). 51 SM Table 9. AWRP: Environmental Screening Matrix: Pollution Control of Agro-industries. Project Project Relevant Potential NatLre, Mitigation Key Componienit Activity Environ- Field Scope & IProposed Assumiptiolns (nlUrnber) miental (Env) Actioins Timie-Frarne Indicators ot' I'oreltiall Fnv Illmpa.kcts Al 4, Al 5, P'ollution Negative: H-lelp M\oE Eftluence l'ropose \'Villinriness Al 6, Al 7, conitrol. Mlany a-iro- Undertake polUlt1o1 VIll pi ofltable of agi o- Al S, Al 9, illnLustlies SurVCy Of coitililue uses of in1duistries to Al 10, Al 11 , pollute a-ro- becILusC cffluentS, comiply with Al 12. surface inciustl-iCs to penalties for Advise onl pOllUtionl water. Acdd determiine pollutioll efflucllt lawvs. Agr'o- to cutroplhica- quanitity and very low. treatmncit in(lustries tioii anid quality of IHJowever, EU metlhocls &* slhowvn that it groundwater discharges. application costs. Wlhen can be pollution. Stidy the may force privatising profitable to Positive: potential government state factories use r1athCer Pollution treatment to imlake persuade thani dispose reductionl Wvill anid/or USC of industlries government of Unltr-cated imilprove eff llts. coIIIply with that new effluenlts. environment Devise action pollution owners lhave Increase and comply to comply laws. to comply complianice with laws. with laws. with laws. with regulations on water pollution control and solid waste control. The final table in Annex 2 (Table 8) lists the various agro-industries found in the AWRP area. These industries add to the pollution problems, especially to eutrophication of the Black Sea. By law, these industries should treat all effluents before they are released into water bodies etc. However, some factories were built before the relevant environmental laws were passed. What is more, because of a considerable and ongoing depreciation of the Turkish Lira, the penalties for not complying with the law are meagre. Also many of the factories are state owned and are considered to be above the law. Some of the factories are to be privatised (sugar and pulp/paper). This may be an opportunity for the government to insist on compliance with the pollution laws as a privatisation condition. This is not only in the interest of improving the environment, but bring the factories into compliance with EU directives, an objective of the government. Many of the effluents have actual or potential productive uses. These are listed in Table 8 of Annex 2 along with the environmental effects of the effluents. The project could demonstrate the uses of some effluents, especially animal manure. Also, it could seek the help of donors or other organizations to assist the various agro-industries in the proper treatment of their effluents and/or profitable uses for these waste products. By use of the world-wide-web, contacts could be established with sister factories that could provide 52 advice on treatment etc. It is possible that the EU could arrange visits to member countries to examine at first hand how manure management is a profitable business. Most activities proposed by the project will have considerable environmllental and economic benefits. Screeninug matrixes 10 & 11 list the key beneFits of these project activ itics. OnI the othcr he nd]11Id, if the re-CSOLII-CCS OF thIC PmOjcc t a rea coItinc to be ovcrised, thlls \vil lecad to alln iICI-CLISCeI Ceivir-e111clntal (IctC-eoi-oation, thaIt n1ot on ill afIrrct tele people living- in the rIcg;oio, bUt aISO COUIdI ha.IVC SOmeIC negC,ativeC nItiOnal an(d internatiotial conscqueLces. Th1ese coIs1eqUences are outlinledl inI SCICCIrenicn M/atrix 12. SMN'l Table 10. AWRI': Environmental Scrcenincg Matrix: Rehabilitationi Activities (Tree Plantling, Sowing, Coppicin g, Ranigelanid Restoi-atioIn). Project Project Relevant Potential Nature, M\itigation Key Componenit Activity Environ- Field Scope & Proposed Assumptionis (number) mental (Env) Actions Time-frame Indicators of Potential Env Impacts 1000, 1100, MVulltiple N'egotive: Planning and Steady Provision of Full 1200, 1300, rehabil- Negligible. undertaking increase in native seeds, consultation 1400, 1500, itation Positiee: various tree ground cover. seedling and vith and 1600, 1700, activities Increase planting Slow but cuttings for participation 1800, 1900, throughout biomass initiatives accelerating the various of local 2200, 2500, project cover with etc. inside the growtlh of regeneration people. 2600, 6100. area. indigenous forest estate biomass. initiatives. Timely species. and on farm. Steady Buffer zones provision of Improve Ditto for accumulation to protect resources. biodiversity. rangeland of C in wood, forests. Cooperation Decrease improvement grass & soil. Fencing and between and erosion. as described Increase in enclose within Improve in the project water quality rangelands. government water plaining and flow. Full support agencies, infiltration & documents. Steady activities. NGOs and water flow. reduction in Training of donors. Increase C. erosion rate. local people Flexibility sequestration. HQ and with plan. support staff. Good M&E. All these forest, farm and rangeland activities should result in considerable environmental benefits to all the MCs within the project area. Most, if not all will provide substantial economic benefits and result in a reversal of degradation and non-sustainable use of resources. The principal emphasis is restoring degraded forest and range areas, but there are tree-planting initiatives etc. on farm to complement the arable and horticultural interventions. Buffer zones of species with potential non-timber value could be planted round forests to protect them. There will be other initiatives to ensure sustainability such as inventories of wood and non-wood products, surveys to locate rare, endangered or popular species and the location of potential areas to promote tourism including eco- tourism. 53 SM Table 11. AWRP: Environmental Screening Matrix: Environmentally-friendly Farming and Horticultural Practices. Project Project Relevant Potential Nature, Mitigation Key Component Activity Environ- Field Scope & PProposed Assumptionis (11vlilber) mileiital (Enov) A{tiois Time-ltialile I(edieatol-s ofn Aote-itial HI__\ Im upacts 4000, 6100. 1X1 "iI frcl &. !Vcgoh IiC I laninig aniLcld Stcaidy D)cmlonstra- ConIstil : Lin 6200. irligation Nlegligible. uliderlakinig decrease soil tioni of with andc ImplovedC areas: Posiuive: various loss aInCd gully improved participationl Practices Cieviron1- Decrease Cnvilronml1clit- formatiol. practices, of local 6000, 6600, menitally- erosionl, and ally-fr-iendcly Steady Initial people. 6900, 7000. friendly loss of N & farming and inclease in provision of Timiely PerenIn1ial arable andct P. Increase hlorticuIltulal improved soil sccds if prOiOll of crops 1horticulturLe soil xvater practices as structure. necessary. I esoulrces Demonl- practices. capacity, described in Moderate Full support Cooperatioln strations imiiproves soil the project accumulation activities. between andi .6400. structure and planniniig of C in soil. Training of withill fertility. docuimenits. Decrease of local people go\vcrinliment I11prove excess N & I-IQ andc agelicies, micro-fauLia. P. support staff. NGOs anici Increase C Good M&:E. donors. sequestration. Organiic Flexibility faiming with plan. promoted. Organic certification pUrIsued. These activities aim to improve sustainable farm production, while decreasing erosion on farm and increasing the beneficial soil properties. There will be complementary activities suchi as soil testing, advice on the correct dosage of fertilizer especially organic fertilizers and the promotion of integrated pest management and apiculture. The principal environmental (and economic) rationale of the project is to reverse the persistent deterioration of the natural habitat of the watersheds in the Anatolia region. This has been caused by over-exploitation of the resource base and inappropriate land-use practices (SM 12). Areas have been cleared for fuelwood, poles and timber and not allowed to regenerate. Farm animals, especially goats in forests and on rangelands have been grazed on areas without letting these areas recover with a resulting deterioration of the vegetation and a dominance of non-palatable species. Farmers have cleared forests and rangelands for arable farming some of it on slopes that are too steep. All these actions have resulted in environmental degradation. Many interventions are proposed to reverse this degradation and make the different land-use options environmentally appropriate and sustainable. In order to measure the effects of the different interventions, baseline surveys both of supply and demand must be undertaken and a tracking of the impacts of the different components monitored at least over the lifetime of the project if not beyond. Only through appropriate M&E could the degree of success be determined and the options available to ensure the sustainability of the resource base. Such surveys will quantify changes in erosion rates, biodiversity, eutrophication, drinking water quality and organic carbon sequestration. 54 SM Table 12. AWRP: Environmental Screening Matrix: Over-use of Natural Resources. Project Project Relevant Potential Nature, Mitigation Key Component Activity Environ- Field Scope & Proposed Assumptions (nuLilber) mental (Env) Actions Time-falanie linicators of Potential 1000, 100, O~ er-ue V~"'': Ox-r *\pat i-nm Env, Imipacts ie 0()0, 1 10(), 0\-LIS' Vc- OverA 11-ols ' ,\,';, ht: ~ i()c \lk A .pi e p1y 't-i! 1200. 1400, of natural exploitation IrsUm-11g contilinual supply ancl baseline 1500, 1600, resources of tlCe n1atur-al pro ject (deter-ior-zationi dleianlid surveys and 1700. 1800, sucIh as resouices has activities to of1 the rcsource INI &.E 1900, 2000, wood and resultecd in rever-se resource base SuIVeys. unlder-takeni. 2200, 2300, noni-timilber- degradation, degradation if insuffiCienit Determinie Mvl&E buciget 4000, 4200, forest cleforestation, and improve action takeln present & sufficienlt to 6100, products, erosion, flashi productivity, to reverse future land measure grazing flooding, surveys of degradation. carrying impacts of areas, and siltation and existing and M&E of capacity. Project farming on inappropriate potential intervenitionls Propose during and unisuitable land use etc. supply and essential to options for beyond the land. Positive: demanid of quanitify scale sustainable Project's Fertilizer, Through the various of various resouirce use. lifetime. pesticides, discussioni natuLral initiatives. Initiate Training in hlerbicides, xvith fariimiers resources agreed land use insecticides can get them must be options. planniniig and ov'er-use to reduce tndertaken to ivlonitor and environiment- discussed over-exploit- deteruine evaluate ally friendly in SM ation and sustainability various agricultural Tables 6/7. degradation. levels. interventions. production As a result of this environmental screening it can be seen that there are no large-scale operations such as highway construction, dam building greater than 15 m in height and large irrigation canals for projects in the MCs. Therefore, no EIAs are required according to the recent environmental impact assessment (EIA) regulations dated 6 June 2002, before the different components are undertaken. It is only necessary to ensure that the various environmental mitigation proposals are stipulated in the operations manual or the contracts and that these stipulations are adhered to, with monitoring being performed by designated people within the government agencies. It is or should be part of the stipulations in the specifications for individual activities such as road building that monitoring and evaluation will be undertaken by an independent body within the various ministries or by outside agencies. The MoE should vet all new initiatives to make sure that they are in compliance with the Country's and Bank's environmental regulations. The EIA regulations state that an Initial Environmental Evaluation (EEE) is required amongst other things on: * Restructuring of agricultural land. * Projects with the objective of intense agriculture on arable and non-arable land. * Water management projects for agricultural purposes. * Transformation of forest land for other land uses. Terracing could be considered as restructuring of agricultural land, rainfed horticulture and application of organic and inorganic chemicals may be regarded as intense 55 agriculture and the proposed micro-irrigation initiative's for arable agriculture and horticulture could be viewed as water management projects. Therefore, subject to clarification by the MoE, such interventions are subject to IEE studies, which the project 'ill have to undertake and submit to the provincial goverm-lenit for approval. Seeing that there are 13 lprovinces in the project area and thlee miniistries dealing with projects, up to 39 TEE stLCics mnay havc to bc sLubmiittccl, but probably the i\/loF will niot lha\ c to do so is all its projects airc Oil Forest Iland \VxhClia pllpfealrS to be CXCm piFom thO reg uLIItions ceccpt perlhaps for imriproving rangeland \\itilin tIle Forest Inl of couL-se clearingt, forests For othice- uses suchl as (legal or illegal) farming. It is recommileiiiecn thdat the M\/loE shoull.d revieCv the proposed mlelLu of comaponients and this screening exercisC undcertakecn above ill Section F to cleterminle if indeed any of the activities are suibject to IEE studies as laid out in thle regulations (Official Gazette No: 24Sl2/11.07.2002). If so, this REA report migllt be of help to prepare tihe IEE stuLdies. Again, according to EIA regulations dated 6 Junle 2002 ther-e are maniy agro-inLdustries that are subject to the EIA and IEE process. These wouldc apply to several inictustries in Amasya, CoruLm, Samsulni and Tokat if they xvwere being built today. Industries subject to the EIA process include: * Poultry plants (>60,000 chiicken and > 85,000 clicks). * Pulp and paper plants. * Sugar factories. Industries subject to the TEE process include: * Cattle (> 500) and sheep (>1,000) fatteninlg units. * Milk and dairy produce plants of 5,000 l/day. * Slaughterhouses subject to I't and 2 class permits. As previously stated these industries are also subject to inteniationally acceptable effluent discharge standards, according to the Water Pollution Control regulation of 1986, but for one reason or another few, if any, comply with it. A full list of factories subject to EIA regulations and other laws is given in Annex 3. G. Project Environmental Impacts. If the results from the EAWRP are duplicated in this project, then the project should have a substantial positive environmental impact. The reason for the success of the EAWRP, despite few objectively verifiable indicators, was the participatory nature of the project, initiatives that were of direct benefit to villagers and the coordination and cooperation of government agencies. Initially, some villages in the EAWRP did not want to be part of the project, but after seeing its benefits they requested to join. Indeed the initial success of the project resulted in an expansion to other provinces in East Anatolia. 12 12 It should be noted that disappointment of some villagers in the EAWRP MCs still prevails because the project was terminated before some of the planned activities were completed. The villagers think that these activities are Government commitments and should be fulfilled before implementing new activities. 56 During the AWR-Ps Preparatory Mission's field trip (6 to 12 July 2002) to selected micro- catchments in five provinces, the villagers welcomed the project. Already, the menu of interventions has been discussed with participating villages and they have chosen specific initiatives fi-om the menu. At one meeting in Amasya province, a village that was excluded fromz onie MC area requested inclusionI; suchI is the entllusiasi for the project. Oinc gencral coimlmicnit \was thlat for too lonrg tile gO\'rCn-llmlCnt 1hLadI neglected tie reillmotel rural arcas and tlhat thc FA\V R P an(l tihis pro] ect wenlt SOml way tow ards Iedrrssine ' is neglect, by recognizing the environmiiienital importance ofsucLc areais. The protectioni of wvatersheds is of nlationlal if niot global importance. Neg,lcct and Imlistuse of such areas has led to severe erosion, flash flooding, sedimenitationi build-up in damus, inundation of lowvland farms and villages with coarse materials, loss of ground cover and biodiversity, and reduced carbon sequestration. This is exacerbated throughl pooI agricultural and agro-industrial practices that increase erosioll, pollute ground water and caused eutrophication in streams, rivers, lakes, wetlands and the delta regions of the seas. Thle presenit piroject is confined to 60 MCs coverling an area of about 535,000 ha out of wllichi 154,000 ha 'will be the physical implementationi area. Therefore, in itself, it will only tackle a small part of the problem of waterslhed protection in Turlk-ey and indeed in the Anatoilian watersheds. Never the less, the fact that the government has requesteCd tllis follow-on project to the EAWRP, even in times of considerable economic restraint, indicates its commitment to protecting watersheds and reversing the vast environmental deterioration caused by past polices and practices. This project will refine the initiatives of the EAWRP and provide verifiable evidence on the scale of its success. It should also act as a catalyst for future public, private and self-help watershed initiatives. The anticipated environmental impacts of the project have been discussed in previous sections, especially in Section F (Environmental Screening) and Annex 2. Therefore, these impacts will not be repeated, except to reiterate that the project should result in substantial environmental benefits. How substantial these environmental benefits are, was not really quantified in the EAWRP and this is a significant task of this present project; hence the importance of monitoring and evaluation. But before this is detailed, an assessment of alternatives is appropriate. H. Assessment of Alternatives The main alternative to the present project is the 'business as usual approach.' This means there would be no follow-on to the (successful) EAWRP. This alternative was rejected because it does little or nothing to address increasing rural poverty, especially in remote areas largely caused by natural resource degradation. It would exacerbate the high economic and social costs caused by the present pervasive environmental degradation and destruction. Without GEF support, the project would lack the holistic approach to controlling nutrient loads, undertake a public outreach program and boost the monitoring and evaluation effort. As already discussed, the EAWRP demonstrated the success of 'participatory watershed management.' However, there is still room for 57 improvement, especially in quantifying results of the interventions. This, together with other new initiatives, described in the PCD (WB 2001 a) will be pursued in this project. Two otlher alterniatives that wiere suggested and rejected were confininig the project extensioin to the East Aniatolian regilon andc hiav ing a single sector approaclh as opposcd to a1 mu1-Ilti-scctor approaclh. Tlhci-c arc bettcr chlianccs of rcplication if cliffrei-nlt aircas and lncw ChallenCgCs arC nilcletiCCi iII rOHO\v-On] pIOeCCLS. Also, ai sill-,C SCCtor aippirOaICh., Whilc it may be administrative simpler-, Nvill nlot solve the probleiii of \vatcrshled imnargaemeni. I. Monitor-ing and Evaluation Planl3 M&E of individual activities. Monitorin, and evaluation lhas to be consider-ed at the micro anid miacro levels. Thiere are enablin(g activiies that assist the project in executin, its plans and there are thle sum of specific activities, wlhiclh together comprise a componienit. A specific activity, SuChI as roacd builddillg, ter-racing and irrigation worls cani be moniiltor-ed closely with a set of rules to enIsuIre that mitigation measuLres are in plaice to negate any adverse environmiiienltal effects (see pages 42, 43, 75 and 76). It Would beneFicial, if the plainers of the individual operationis suchi as road buildilng, terTacing, and irrigation canal COnlStlUction1 are given some training or advice on the environmental aspects of such operations. For example, before fixing the alignmilenit of a road or an irrigation channel, consultations should be held to ensure that the structure does not go through an environmental 'hotspot,' or that excavated soil is not dumped in a wetland or on an area prone to erosion. The screening section detailed the potential negative environmental impacts for the different operations together with the proposed mitigation monitoring and evaluation actions. Therefore, these proposals will not be repeated here. It is up to the supervisors of the different operations to ensure that the construction standards are observed and the necessary environmental concerns are addressed. For example, there should be clauses in all road building contract concerning environmental protection such as no cutting of trees without approval, replacing cut trees with appropriate species, where to dump excavated soil, no use of explosives without approval from MoE, how to maintain a temporary camp etc. It would be advantageous if people within the MoE check such contracts before being issued. Similarly, if for example the forest authority itself undertakes road building, it should have its standards reviewed by the MoE. The cost of M&E of these individual operations is already covered by the operation; therefore no additional cost or extra personnel are required for this monitoring. M&E of Components. Most of the components such as forest rehabilitation and other tree planting efforts, rangeland rehabilitation, improved farming practices and manure management, will have positive environmental benefits, provided the individual activities have been performed properly with correct inputs and land preparation methods. Thus, the M&E COMPONENTS consist of quantifying the scale of benefit, rather than 13 This plan assumes that the M&E activities are part of and coordinated by the M&E Unit of the AWRP. 58 examining individual operations. This quantification can then be used to judge the success or otherwise of the intervention or to compare different interventions or different treatments of the same intervention. There are foul- broad grouLps of comrponents in mnicr-o-catchllllellts covei-illg forestry, rarn(TC1lands, agJriCLitLurC andl ni scel lancous. Solime of tlhcsc coIlpolncnlits arc Oil OV\CriliClit land. sollc on ille 1land, aInd sonic n1 prii\te land .ofo il' . n 1nd evaluationi of each grlUp is similar ancd tlhcrcfor-e four groups of criteria \vill bc giVCIl. The broacl groups of components are given in M&E. Table I below. Anothlel- group of componienits covering agro-industries will be cdcalt with separatcly as the MI&E criteria arc somewhat clifferent. There is or wvill be maps for each of the 60 MC showvincg the topography cuLr-l-elt land use, villages and plhysical infi-astrtuctlule etc. Thclc will bc another set of maps slhowing some or all of the proposecd interventtions by area as specified above. This is the starting point for monitorillg. MA&E Table 1. Proposed CompoInenits by Broacl Groups. Comrpollent Code | Componienit Code Forestry for soil conservation, forest & habitat rehabilitation, Avith participationi tc. Afforestation 1000 Non-timber forest products 2000 Degraded and bare soil 1100 suLrvey Gallery areas 1200 Integrated pest management 2100 Nursery 1300 Habitat rehab. in forest 2200 Oak coppice 1600 Participatory planting: forest 2500 Cedar areas 1700 Participatory plant: outside 7100 High forest 1800 Wild-tree grafting: forest 2600 Maquis 1900 Wild-tree grafting: outside 7000 Rainfed agriculture/horticulture Irrigated agriculture/horticulture Agricultural terracing 4100 Small irrigation 4000 Fallow reduction 6000 Fodder crops 6800 Environmentally friendly 6200 Environmentally friendly 6200 Horticulture 6600 Horticulture 6700 High value crops 6900 High value crops 6900 Demonstrations 6400 Demonstrations 6400 Rangeland _ Miscellaneous activities Management inside forest 1400 Game areas 2300 Management outside forest 6300 River bed rehabilitation 4200 Rehabilitation inside forest 1500 Habitat rehab. outside forest 6100 Rehabilitation outside 6300 Protecting hotspots 2200/6100 Apiculture 7200 Agric. processing techniques 7400 Note. Rehab =rehabilitation. Outside = outside the forest. Plant. = planting. Not included in the current menu of project activities are: 1. Undertaking periodic inventories of (woody) biomass on all land use types. 2. Estimating the demand for wood and non-wood products. 3. Estimating the removals of wood and non-timber forest products. 59 4. Periodically testing the soils for their organic carbon content. 5. Locating and protecting environmental 'hotspots.' 6. Including environmental training in the overall training program. 7. Compiling a plan to tackle the overall pollution caused by agro-inclustries. S. Intr-oducinlg new options for animal lhusbanidry. 9. Demonstrating biogas (encorgy) generation and use from1 agricultuLra-ll \VastCs. Inventories of 11011-NVoodl forest proCLucts are recomimillenided in the menLu Of inliLiatives. However, no inventories of woody biomass are proposed. These inventories are required for a nullmber of reasonis. An invenitory at the star-t of the project acts as a benchmiiiarL-k to jLudge the success of the project. Perioclic invenitories could measuLre changes to thle: * Area unlder trees. * Grownig stock and yield. * Spply of wood products. * Ground cover. * Species imix. An increase in tree density and crown/root cover would lhelp reduce erosion. An increased biomass stock should result in an improved flora and fauna and greater carbon sequestrationi. To complemiienit these invenitories, (village) dlemalnd surveys should be unldertakeni and a record kept of the anllual removal, by location, of forest products. For example the use of fuelwood, poles, fencing materials, timber, fodder, nuts, fr-uit, helbal plants etc. from the forest, private trees and rangelands. This can then be compared to the resource base to determine the sustainability of present supply or if there are actual or potential surpluses/deficits of say forest products. Such infonnation has to be obtained from a baseline survey. Inventories are also necessary to compare the actual growth perfonnance with models and to detennine the financial yield and economic rate of return of the interventions. For trees, this means undertaking a survey of all the areas with trees, including govemment forest areas, private plantations, trees on farm and on rangelands. A stratified random sample could be undertaken, placing emphasis on areas where forestry/tree-planting initiatives are to be undertaken. Knowing the area of each land-use type and the species mix, then an estimate of the growing stock and yield can be made and compared to the estimated consumption of wood products. This will give an estimate of the present degree of sustainability and indicate if the proposed 'forest' initiatives will be sufficient to meet the sustainable supply gap, if any, and may be produce a surplus for sale. It is not anticipated that supply/demand surveys be undertaken in all villages of every micro-catchment, but at least 10% of the villages should be included in such a survey at the start and at or towards the end of the project. Organic carbon is not only stored in trees, but also is sequestered in soils. Soil carbon accumulates mainly through root attrition, but also because of the decay of leafy biomass and other flora and fauna. Thus, the greater store of woody biomass and the greater production of grasses and annual crops, the more organic carbon is stored in the soil. 60 Only by undertaking soil analyses over time can these changes be quantified. Hence the reason for testing soil. From measurements taken in other countries, the increase in carbon storage in forest soils is equivalent to the carbon stored in trees. Thus, a forest with an averace store of 50 tonnes of carbon per ha in above and below ground wood, shLould have an additional 50 t. C in the soil compared to an equivalenlt lhectare of ar-able land{. :Ncglcctinlg mcaSuIing1 soil carbon czani siglni ficantly uLnlerstatc thc scCquCstrItion potcntill Of of-cc replanting (and1t ra1nge111(l) initiatives of thiic ;1and othler pr1oj ects. Regarding potenitial important bio-diversity arcas in MCs, the local peoplc slhould be asked abouLt wild land races of cereals, areas \vhicrc thcy collect miiedicinial/lhce-bal plants and wetlanids. In addition, experts could unlder-take a quick inventory of flora and fauna, prefer-ably Vitli the help of local people. The forest service could also lookl for 'plus' trees as potential sources of seeds, cloning material anid CuttilngS. One observation from the EAWRP was that the tree planting material (seeds and cuttings) was generally of poor quality and the completion report recommended that in the AWRP, better planting material slhould be obtained. -Thlie location Of plus trees is one option1, anothler is only using certified seeds, clonal lmaterial or cLutting fi-om seed orclar-ds or approved souL-ces. The EAWR1P had a GEF component to identify and protect in-situt plant material of actual or potential importanice, (WB. 1999). This may be imiportanit in the Project area because there may be landraces and wild crop relatives of cereals and trees etc. that could help improve agricultural and silvicultural productivity or disease resistance worldwide. This is one reason for seeking out such plants. Another reason is that there may be endangered or economically important species that should be protected and used as a source for propagation and ex-situ production. Such species could include medicinal and herbal plants. Again the local population may be able to identify potential garne areas or 'wildlife' protection areas. These latter two initiatives are already part of the proposed menu of options. But protecting and using all such 'hotspots' is both environmentally and economically important. Some of these activities may be included under components 2200 'Habitat Rehabilitation' (within forests) and 6100, 'Appropriate Use of Marginal Land.' In order to heighten environmental awareness, environmental training should be included in the training programs and in information distributed by the Project. Local people including school children could be involved in recording plants and animals in their areas and the project should consider placing bird nesting boxes in forests and establishing school nurseries for vegetables, bush and tree seedlings. These could be for project use or to give to the children to take home and plant in their gardens. Planting trees round and within the school compound should also be part of the project's initiatives as should be providing schools with posters and other environmental materials. All these efforts will enhance the peoples' interest in their environment and the work of the project. The GEF component of the project is concerned with controlling agricultural pollution. Originally a separate project was considered to address the discharge of agricultural nutrients into the Black Sea and approximating the EU aquis in the Turkish legal system. 61 However, it was agreed to link it to the AWRP so that the watershed project incorporates environmentally friendly farming practices such as minimum tillage and the appropriate use of organic fertilizers. As part of this package soil testing is important. The MoE and the KKGM of MARA will be in charge of the GEF componient. As yet they have had little or no expelienice in the MC participatory process, for tlhey were not involved in the EANWRP. This shoulcd be rectifedci quickly, as tlhC propr)C LISC Of organic (;andC idO i) Fcrtilizers bal;sed oni soil testinlg ShouIld bc anl iml)portarit LianC i ntC,,errl part olf Farling in all MVICs. There are publications about fertilizer use. One useful one is Turlkey: Fertilizer and Fertilizer Use Guidelines (Ulgen N and Yurtsever N 1995). Sucih a guideline could foi-rmi the basis of offerinlg advice to the farnmers. But mlanlur-e fromii farm-i animilals is not the only source of agricultuLral pollution. There a.re agro-indtustries (inicluding forest industries) tllat pollute water bodies. Tlhese include sugar beat factories, slaughlter-lhouses, milk-processincg planits, pulp and paper mills etc. These are listed in Table 8 of Annaex 2 and mitigation measul-es are proposed in SM Table 9 of Section F above (Environmiienital Screening). These industries shouldc not be excluded from the project. At least help should be afforded to the MoE in drawinll up a plan on pollution reductioni for these industries aild suggestin1g hoW they can comply wvith the existing environmental laws. The EAWRP showed that the menu of intervenitionis, whiclh are beinig promotecl in tlhis project, increased the ground cover in forests and rangelanids and by inference decreased erosion and increased biodiversity and carbon sequestration. Farming practices were improved through soil conservation and more appropriate crop rotations and land use. However, there were no measurements on stream flow, turbidity, erosion rates, carbon sequestration and bio-diversity and therefore, figures could not be placed on the scale of success of these outcomes. This is an importanit task of this project. Without undertaking measurements, it is difficult to put figures on the cumulative success of the AWRP in the short and long term, especially as the menu of interventions is large and only a few villagers have as yet chosen the mix of operations for their micro- catchment. Also, while the project may be successful in itself, its cumulative effect has to be judged by the effect it has on people within the area and the rest of the country undertaking some of the project's activities through their own initiatives. Long-term measurements have to be undertaken on stream flow, erosion rates and biodiversity changes. But one example can be given on the short and long-term effect of tree planting in relation to carbon sequestration. With an average rainfall of about 750 mm and a 60% crown cover, the per-hectare accumulation of woody biomass above and below ground of Pinus nigra should be about 12 dry tonnes of wood after 5 years and about 40 t after 15 years. This translates into a sequestration of 6 t /ha of organic carbon in the wood after 5 years and 20 t C after 15 years. In addition, there will be extra organic carbon stored in the soil beneath the trees. This could amount to about 6 t C/ha after 5 years and 20 t C after 15 years. This gives an indication of the cumulative effect of the project in relation to carbon sequestration for one particular tree species in one rainfall zone with a 60% crown cover, assuming that initially the area was bare. This is 62 why it is important to measure the effect of the different interventions so that each intervention can be judged and the sum of the initiatives totalled to provide verifiable results on erosion rates, stream flow, biodiversity and carbon sequestration. Baseline an{d M&E iniforiiiationi for 'Forestry Comnpouneunts.' Obta1inling: basel ln ilnforlllltlion inI a-cas where thcr-c ilre -,oino to he interl-ventions is impor-tant. For forestr-y intercvenition oni all land areas (pLublic anid private), ciitails malk1in1g an estimate of existing growing stock and yield etc. M&E Table 2 gives the key perform-lanice indicator-s (KPI/OVI) that slhould bc measul-ed in order to juldge thle effectiveness of the different interventionis. Thcre are 13 possible components for forestry in M&E Table I above. Not cvcry componenit will be unldertaken in every MC, but all those that are, should be measured separately. Tt is also possible that a component will be undertakeni on1 more than one site. Each sitc should be sampled scpar-ately. A samiiple survcy should be undertaken, the samplinig percenitage depenidinig on the total area of the componienit. A statistician should be consulted about the percentage. Also, there may be individual tree planting efforts inspired by the project and additional components suggested by the beneficiaries. While the forest service should undertake the baseline suLvey on its land, surveys have to be undertaken on non-forest land-private/public as well. The project has to engage some competent body to undertake such work. This should be done tlhrough the M&E unit. Infonnation from this baseline survey will be used to quantify the effectiveness of the individual components (and by specific sites). What can be recorded easily is the net area planted with trees by species etc.,'4 and its success in terms of ground cover, taking account of the area planted as a result of the project, plus individual tree planting efforts because of the project or other initiatives minus the area deforested or degraded for wood products or cleared for other uses. These were the data recorded in the EAWRP. What the EAWRP did not attempt was to measure increase in woody biomass stock and yield, increase in organic carbon sequestration in wood and forest soils, or biodiversity improvements. This will be attempted in this project. 14 This includes interplanting and underplanting, coppice areas, areas established or improved by direct sowing, rehabilitating areas by natural regeneration and farm tree planting. 63 M&E Table 2. Baseline Survey Data: Forests. (5) Component. MC. Date. Survey Team Village Photograph nuimbers. Component sites (1) 1 2 3 (etc.) Area (hla.) Mlap re[cclncc/GPSl Slope (% or % class) Aspect (compass reading) Soil type Cover type (dominianit species) Cover class (% or % class) Principal species of trees ancl slhrubs Total above ground woody biomass (alive and dead)- stem, branclhes and twigs. The measuLe should be given in rnm3 and or dry tonnes (2). Per lha figures should be given in brackets Live trees Dead trees Live shlrubs, buslhes Dead shluLbs, bushes Estimated yield in m3 and or dry tonies (2). Per ha figures slhould be given in brackets Live trees Live slhrubs and bushes Soil C to 0.5m (t C) (3) Other data (4) 1. An individual component may be undertakeni on more thani one site in an MC. All sites slhould be surveyed. Some non-component sites may also be measured as a control. 2. To convert from m3 to dry tonnes, the wood density by species has to be known. It is difficult to measure the volume of shrubs. Therefore weight and moisture content of shluLbs from a sample area should be taken and converted to dry weight. 3. Soil analysis has to be undertaken by certified laboratories. At the same time organic C is being assessed, measurements of N, P could be undertaken as well. Organic soil carbon is also found at lower horizons, but about 80% are found in the first 0.5 meters. 4. Other data may include the presence of medicinal & herbal plants etc., products removed including tree/grass fodder, fruit and nuts from trees and bushes, fauna and management practices, if any. 5. The forest service may have its own tables and format to measure above ground biomass. Two publications may be of use to the AWRP regarding inventory work. They are 'Biomass Assessment Methodologies' (Ryan P & Openshaw K, 1991) World Bank Energy Series No. 48, and 'Baseline Survey of Organic Carbon in Woody Biomass and Soils on Different Land-use Types in Benin' (Openshaw K 2000). To determine organic carbon in wood, the quantity of below ground woody biomass has to be determined. If there are no estimates available in Turkey, then the above publication from Benin can be used to obtain estimates. Irrespective of woody biomass species, dry wood (0% moisture content) contains about 50% organic carbon. Resurveys of the different components should be undertaken every 3 years. In addition, surveys of sites outside the project area especially on the EAWRP area should also take place and 64 information from routine forest service inventories could also be used. M&E Table 3 specifies the type of information required during the component resurvey. M&E Table 3. Resurvey Data: Forests. (5) Componienit. m C. Date. Survey Team Coo111pilernt sites (l) i2 3 _ _ (etc.) _ Area (lha) Map reference/GPS Ownerslhip. Slope (% or % class) Aspect (compass reading) Soil type Cover type (dominiiant species) Cover class (% or % class) Principal sp. of trees & shrubs Total above grounld wvoody biomass (alive and dead)- stei, braniclhes and twigs. The measuIe shoulcl be giveni in i3 and or dry tonnies (2). Per hla figtures shotuld be given in brackets Live trees __ _ _ _X Dead trees Live shrubs, bushes Dead shrlbs buslhes Estimated yield in m3 and or dry tonnes (2). Per ha figures should be given in brackets Live trees Live shnibs and bushes Soil C to 0.5m (t C) (3) Average tree height (mi) Average shrub ht. (m) Yield of fruit etc. (kg & kg /ha) Other data (4) 1. An individual component may be undertaken on more than one site in an MC. All sites should be surveyed. Some non-component sites may also be measured as a control. 2. To convert from m3 to dry tonnes, the wood density by species has to be known. It is difficult to measure the volume of shrubs. Therefore weight and moisture content of shrubs from a sample area should be taken and converted to dry weight. 3. Soil analysis has to be undertaken by certified laboratories. At the same time organic C is being assessed measurements of N, P could be undertaken as well. Organic soil carbon is also found at lower horizons, but about 80% are found in the first 0.5 meters. 4. Other data may include the presence of medicinal & herbal plants etc., products removed including tree/grass fodder, fauna and the existing management practices. 5. The forest service may have its own tables and format to measure above ground biomass. The project's implementation period is seven (7) years, thus, at most, the forest initiatives will be 7-years old and the growth of newly planted trees, even in the oldest areas will be modest. Therefore, while re-measuring project components in year 3 and 6 to record the growth of the trees and changes in cover, it would be beneficial to measure older areas of similar species in the Anatolian catchment area and also in the 'forest' components in the EAWRP areas. Some of the tree plantations in the EAWRP will be 15 years old by the end of this project and thus, they should yield some very useful information. Some coppice areas may have been harvested once and likewise for some poplar areas. Therefore, it is recommended that measurements be undertaken on similar 'forest' 65 components outside the project area in order to obtain information on the likely growth patterns of the different components. Some of the forest componients consist of grafting and/or planting fi-uit and nut trees and bushaes. By the end of the project some \vi]] be yieldinig prodtuce. Therefore, remnovals of procluce slhouldl bc recoirclcd aninually. This nlOt Olnly alplplies tO fruLilt anld Itits, bLIt also to Imedicinal and 1clbal pflants in Forests, tire focdclde-, fLclw\ood and polcs ctc. \While thle above foriml tries to meIasLure somIe flOra anld fLauLnal, a mlore cletatilel iinventory ol flora alld fauna should be unidertakeni througlhout the 'forest' areas to indicate if thiere hlas beenl a noticeable clhange. Thais shIoulcl be d(one with knowledgeable local people. Wlhat is more diffiecLlt to measure is thle decrease in soil erosioni and the improvemiienlt to streamiii flow and water quality because the 'foresttry' components. The measuremiienlt of soil erosioni and 'water quality is discussed later. M\leasuLremIIenlts of tuL-bidity, streami flow, water quality etc. will be undertaken, but the clhanges will be as a resLult of the aggregate interventions, not just because of a single 'sector' intervention, unless it can be shovn that changes in a stream's water quality are directly because of a sector action. Baselinie anld M&E iniforniationi for 'Raiigelaniid Cotmpornents.' Ther-e are both rangelanid areas inside and outside 'forest' land. There are fouL- componienats witliin this 'sector,' namiiely managemalenit of rangelands within and outside forests and rehabilitation of rangelands witlinl and outside the forests. As is to be expected, these areas have mainily grasses and herb species, but there are also shrubs and bushes, with the occasional tree. Many rangelands have been over-grazed and in some areas there is a preponderance of noni-palatable species. The plant cover is usually poor, ranging from 10% to 40%. In consequence these areas are prone to severe erosion. As with the baseline surveys for forests, the existing conditions of the different component areas have to be recorded, so that these baseline conditions can be compared to survey information in subsequent time periods. The basic Baseline survey form is similar to that of the 'forestry' survey form, but of course, much more emphasis is placed on the grass and herb species etc. Also, there should be information recorded as to past and present grazing patterns, with indications of what the carrying capacity was 10 years ago and today. M&E Table 4 gives the Baseline Survey Data required for the rangeland components and M&E Table 5 gives the Resurvey requirements. These surveys will be the responsibility of two organizations, AGM (of MoF) and TUGEM (of MARA). 66 M&E Table 4. Baseline Survey Data: Rangelands. (7) Component. MC. Date. Survey Team Village Photograph numbers Component sites (1) 1 2 3 (etc.) Area (h1a.) lap reference/GPS O\v'lersillp. l l_l Slope (%', or 'XA class) Aspect (compass mcasurc) Soil type Cover type (clominiant species) Cover class (% or % class) Principal species of grass, herbs and shr-ubs Biomass excludilng sllrubs & trees. t & t/ha Estimated animal yield. t &, t/ha Carrying capacity and grazing period. Type and No. animals/ha. Total above ground woody biomass (alive and dead) if any - stem, branches and twigs. (2) The measur-c should be given in m3 and or dry tonnles (3). Per ha figures should be given in brackets Live trees/shrubs/bushes | Dead trees etc. Estimated yield in m3 and or dry tiones (4). Per ha figures should be given in brackets Live trees Live shrubs and bushes Soil C to 0.5m (t C) (5) Other data (6) 1. An individual component may be undertaken on more than one site in an MC. All sites should be surveyed. Some non-component sites may also be measured as a control. 2. A 5% stratified sample undertaken for woody biomass. 3. The vegetation cover (above and below ground) is estimated from stratified m2 plots. The vegetation is separated into above and below ground matter and into vegetation classes. It is then weighed and the weights recorded. Specimens are taken from each sample to determine the moisture content. The dry weight can then be determined and from this information the weight per ha and total area weight can be calculated knowing the sampling percentage. A statistician can advise about the sampling %. From this information estimates of annual yield can be made in consultation with rangeland specialists. This information can be used to estimate the organic carbon in biomass. On a dry basis there is about 45% carbon in grassy vegetation. 4. To convert from m3 to dry tonnes, the wood density by species has to be known. It is difficult to measure the volume of shrubs. Therefore weight and moisture content of shrubs from a sample area should be taken and converted to dry weight. 5. Soil analysis has to be undertaken by certified laboratories. At the same time organic C is being assessed, measurements of N, P could be undertaken as well. Organic soil carbon is also found at lower horizons, but about 80% are found in the first 0.5 meters. 6. Other data may include the presence of medicinal & herbal plants etc., products removed including grass fodder, fauna and management practices, if any. 7. The forest service and TUGEM may have its own tables and format to measure above ground biomass. 67 M&E Table 5. Resurvey S rvey Data: Rangelands. (7) Component. MC. Date. Survey Team Village Photograph numbers Component sites (1) 1 2 3 (etc.) Area (ha) MIap reference/GPS Owvnership________________________________ Slopel A spect Soil type Covcr type Cover class Principal species of grass hcrbs and shru-Lbs Biomass excluding shrubs & trees. t & t/ha Estimated annual yield. t & t/ha Carrying capacity and grazing periodl. Type and No. animilals/la. Total above grounld wvoody biomass (alive andc dead) if any - stem, branlclhes and twigs. (2) The measure shoulcd be given in 1m13 and or cIry tonnles (3) Per ha figLules shoulcd be given in brackets Live trees/shrubs/bushes Dead trees etc. Estimated yield in n3 and or dry tonnes (4). Per ha. figures should be given in brackets Live trees Live shl-ubs and bushes Soil C to 0.5m (t C) (5) Other data (6) 1. An individual component may be undertaken on more than one site in an MC. All sites should be surveyed. Some non-component sites may also be measured as a control. 2. A 5% stratified sample undertaken for woody biomass. 3. The vegetation cover (above and below ground) is estimated from stratified rn2 plots. The vegetation is separated into above and below ground matter and into vegetation classes. It is then weighed and the weights recorded. Specimens are taken from each sample to determine the moisture content. The dry weight can then be determined and from this information the weight per ha and total area weight can be calculated knowing the sampling percentage. A statistician can advise about the sampling %. From this information estimates of annual yield can be made in consultation with rangeland specialists. This information can be used to estimate the organic carbon in biomass. On a dry basis there is about 45% carbon in grassy vegetation. 4. To convert from m3 to dry tonnes, the wood density by species has to be known. It is difficult to measure the volume of shrubs. Therefore weight and moisture content of shrubs from a sample area should be taken and converted to dry weight. 5. Soil analysis has to be undertaken by certified laboratories. At the same time organic C is being assessed, measurements of N, P could be undertaken as well. Organic soil carbon is also found at lower horizons, but about 80% are found in the first 0.5 meters. 6. Other data may include the presence of medicinal & herbal plants etc., products removed including grass fodder, fauna and management practices, if any. 7. The forest service and TUGEM may have its own tables and format to measure above ground biomass. 68 As will be observed the two tables are the same, but the recorded data will be different. Some of the rangeland areas will be fenced and the vegetation allowed to recover naturally. In other areas, ruminants will be excluded and the area left to recover. Re- seeding will occur in yet other areas and planting of fodder species both annuals and perenniials are othier options. Physical interventions sucih as gully pluogginc and teii-acinc may be Undertaken-i and it is possiblc that application of organic fcrtilizcrs, botlh liuild and solid, may be dlonc on an experiniental basis aIs part of tile ImIaneILIC mianazgcimicint prograni. All these actIvities sh1ould lead to ani increascc fora (and faffunra), resullilln in a greater vegetation cover and in consequenice a decrease in the erosion potential. BecauLse the resLilts of re-vecetationi shlould be quicker thani the 'forestry' initiatives, resurveys shouldl be unldertaken every two years. Of coursc, if perelnnials are intr-oduced, tlhcir growth will be slow at first theln accelerate. Therefore, the measuL-ellmenlt of older sites in the EAWRP is recommenided to obtain inifor-miation on the lilkely outcomiie of this kind of intervelntioln. Baseli,ie an,d M&E data for 'Rainfed Agriciiltural/Hortictltiural Compollents.' Undertaking baseline and monitoring surveys on arable areas are somewlhat different fiom forest and rangeland surveys for the soil is constantly being disturbed and the inputs (and outputs) into the area are much greater and more frequent. The aim of the interventionis in the agrictiltural sector is to reduce environmiienital degradation wlile at the saniie time increasing unit output, either physically or economically. Poor and inappropriate practices have led to wind and water erosion, loss of soil structure, ground and surface water pollutioni and the use of marginal land for arable agriculture. A package of environmentally friendly farming practices will be demonstrated and the farmers will be at liberty to chose from a menu of options. They will be given advice on land preparation methods, fertilizer application rates, crop rotations and the appropriate crops and varieties for particular species. The soil will be tested for minerals, especially N and P, but organic C should also be tested. The advice will be geared to the slope and aspect of the land as well as its area. Most farmers have several plots of land in different locations, with different slopes and may be on different soil types; therefore, this will determine the variety of recommendations. The environmental indicators that can be measured are the mineral content of the soil, the pesticide/herbicide/insecticide residues in the soil, its water absorption capacity and the organic content of the soil. It is difficult to measure reduction in erosion, but some of the measures taken such as gully plugging, terracing and minimum tillage should be reflected when stream and river water is tested. However, This may also be reflected in the number of landslides, washouts and the formation/expansion of new and existing gullies. When undertaking a baseline survey, a stratified sample of fields should be chosen being representative of slope aspect and proposed treatments. The present practices and crops should be noted with information about current yields. Soil testing should be undertaken for mineral content, structure, organic matter content and water absorption capacity. The yield of the crops should be given by its components, for example straw and grain for cereal crops. This should be converted into dry weight. Even for green manure yield 69 estimated should be given. M&E Table 6 gives the baseline information to be collected from the sample sites and M&E Table 7 gives the Resurvey Data Table. M&E Table 6. Baseline Surve T Data: Rainifed Agriculture. (8) Comiponient MC. Date. Survey Team Villac P,hotograph numbers ComI1poIICInt sites (I) I 3 D (etc Arca (ha.) Mlap referernce/GPS Ownership Slope Aspect Soil type Presenit farminirg practice Presenit cropping pattern_ _ Erosion description (2) Existing yield(s) Fertilizer application & rates (inorganic) Fertilizer application & rates (organic) Pesticides etc. used & applicationi rates Use of IPM, if any Quanitity of woody biomass in field (3) Soil testing Minerals N &P (4) Soil C to 0.5m (t C) (5) Physical structure Organic content Water capacity Pesticide presence (6) Other data (7) 1. An individual component may be undertaken on more than one site in an MC. All sites should be surveyed. Some non-component sites may also be measured as a control. 2. The erosion description should describe the number and type of gullies, landslides etc. 3. There may be shrubs and trees scattered in the field or along boundaries. If so they should be measured. On marginal lands or steep lands it is possible that the proposed intervention may bee fruit trees and bushes or changing to a meadow. This will be measured as in forestry or rangeland M&E. 4. Soil analysis has to be undertaken by certified laboratories. Trace elements may also be measured. 5. Organic soil carbon is also found at lower horizons, but about 80% are found in the first 0.5 meters. 6. The presence of pesticides etc. will have to be tested in a certified laboratory. 7. Other data may include the incidence of soil fauna. 8. MARA may have its own baseline and monitoring tables. The measurement of N & P in soils should be done before sowing, during the growing season and after harvest. Likewise, pesticide presence can be tested before sowing and after harvest. This baseline information can then be compared to the resurvey information. For arable crops, resurveys should be conducted annually. 70 M&E Table 7. Resurvey Data: Rainfed Agriculture. (9) Component. MC. Date. Survey Team Village Photograph numbers. Component sites (1) 1 2 3 (etc.) Area (ha) Map refereince/GPS . Owinersillp. l l Slope _- l _ I Aspect Soil type New farninig piactice Change of land use with description of cr ops (2) Newv croppinig pattern Erosion description (3) New yield(s) Fertilizer application & rates (inorganic) Fertilizer application & rates (organic) Pesticides etc. used & application rates Use of IPIvI, if any Quanitity of woody biomass in field (4) T Soil testing Minerals N &P (5) Soil C to 0.5m (t C) (6) Physical structure Organic content Water capacity Pesticide presence (7) Other data (8) 1. An individual component may be undertaken on more than one site in an MC. All sites should be surveyed. Some non-component sites may also be measured as a control. 2. On marginal lands or steep lands it is possible that the proposed intervention may bee fruit trees and bushes or changing to a meadow. This will be measured as in forestry or rangeland M&E. With the introduction of irrigation some rainfed agricultural will be converted to irrigation. This should be noted and included under irrigated land. 3. The erosion description should describe the number and type of gullies, landslides etc. 4. There may be shrubs & trees scattered in the field or along boundaries. They should be re-measured. 5. Soil analysis has to be undertaken by certified laboratories. Trace elements may also be measured. 6. Organic soil carbon is also found at lower horizons, but about 80% are found in the first 0.5 meters. 7. The presence of pesticides etc. will have to be tested in a certified laboratory. 8. Other data may include the incidence of soil fauna. 9. MARA may have its own baseline and monitoring tables. Baseline and M&E datafor 'Irrigated Agricultural/Horticultural Components.' The baseline and resurvey infornation for irrigated agriculture/horticulture is very similar to that for rainfed agriculture/horticulture. The only difference being that information is recorded about the type of irrigation system, the number and types of crops per year and 71 the rate and frequency of water and fertilizer application etc. M&E Tables 8 and 9 give the Baseline and Resurvey Data required for monitoring irrigated agriculture. M&E Table 8. Baseline Surve Data: Irrigatedl Agrictulture. (10) Componienit. [ MC. Date Survey Team ! villagc Ph0otog2araphl 1LInumbers. Compoicit sites (1) 1 2 ! 3 (etc.) Area (lia) Map reference/GPS Ownerslip Slope Aspect Soil type Irrigation systemi (2) l Irrigation pyractice (3)) Present farming practice Present cropping pattern Erosion desc riptioon (4) Existing yield(s) Fertilizer applicationS & rates (inorganic) Fertilizer application & rates (orgaanic) Pesticides etc. used & application rates Use of IPM, if any Quantity of woody biomass in field (5) Soil testing Minerals N &P (6) Soil C to 0.5m (t C) (7) Physical structure Organic content Water capacity Pesticide presence (8) Other data (9) 1. An individual component may be undertaken on more than one site -in an MC. All sites should be surveyed. Some non-component sites may also be measured as a control. 2. Some land may already be irrigated but the practice is sub-optimal. If so, describe present system. Other land will be converted to irrigation one the system is installed. 3. If irrigation is undertaken, describe irrigation practice. 4. The erosion description should describe the number and type of gullies, landslides etc. 5. There may be shrubs and trees scattered in the field or along boundaries. If so they should be measured. On marginal lands or steep lands it is possible that the proposed intervention may bee fruit trees and bushes or changing to a meadow. This will be measured as in forestry or rangeland M&E. 6. Soil analysis has to be undertaken by certified laboratories. Trace elements may also be measured. 7. Organic soil carbon is also found at lower horizons, but about 80% are found in the first 0.5 meters. 8. The presence of pesticides etc. will have to be tested in a certified laboratory. 9. Other data may include the incidence of soil fauna. 10. MARA may have its own baseline and monitoring tables. 72 If there is an existing irrigation system this should be described. Otherwise, the areas that will be converted to irrigated agriculture should be recorded under 'rainfed' agriculture. The measurement of N & P and pesticides is the same as for rainfed agriculture. This baseline infonmation can then be compared to the annual resurvey information. Mt&E Table 9. Resur vey Data: Irrigated Agriculture. 'I' Compoliiet MC. Date. Surevy Tczini Village I'lhotographll nuiii-bers. Componenlt sites (1) 1 2 3 (etc.) Area (lha.) Map reference/GPS. Owxx'ership. Slope Aspect Soil type Irrigation system (2) Irrigation practice (3) New farming practice New cropping pattern Erosioni description (4) New yield(s) Fertilizer application & rates (inor-ganiic) _ Fertilizer application & rates (organic) Pesticides etc. used & application rates Use of IPM, if any Quantity of woody biomass in field (5) Soil testing Minerals N &P (6) Soil C to 0.5m (t C) (7) Physical structure Organic content Water capacity Pesticide presence (8) Other data (9) 1. An individual component may be undertaken on more than one site in an MC. All sites should be surveyed. Some non-component sites may also be measured as a control. 2. The new irrigation system should be described. 3. Describe the new irrigation practice. 4. The erosion description should describe the number and type of gullies, landslides etc. 5. There may be shrubs and trees scattered in the field or along boundaries. If so they should be measured. On marginal lands or steep lands it is possible that the proposed intervention may bee fruit trees and bushes or changing to a meadow. This will be measured as in forestry or rangeland M&E. 6. Soil analysis has to be undertaken by certified laboratories. Trace elements may also be measured. 7. Organic soil carbon is also found at lower horizons, but about 80% are found in the first 0.5 meters. 8. The presence of pesticides etc. will have to be tested in a certified laboratory. 9. Other data may include the incidence of soil fauna. 10. MARA may have its own baseline and monitoring tables. 73 Baseline and M&E information for 'Miscellaneous Components.' The Miscellaneous components cover four activities. These are the Planning of Hunting Areas (2300), Appropriate Use of Marginial Land (6100) and Protecting Hotspots (2200/6100). The appropriate use of marginal land can fall under Forestry, Rangelands or even Agricultture. Therefore, uLndertakinig baseline and restirvey work on suclh areas 'ill dependcC on the choice of LIse. Once this is (leciCcldd theCn the p)ertinlenCt sLurveys call be applied. Againi, potential hullting areas may be in forests or ranrgelarids. Whlat is Important is to undertake an inventory of the aniimlals and decide on1 the llulimber of huL1tilln permits that can be issued each year. Alternlatively, it is possible to illtrOduCe partridges or other game birds into an area or restock rivers with indigenous fislh and then issue fishing or hunting perm-iits. Some of a micro-catclhmiienit may form part of a larger area that has wildlife potential. Such areas are not considered under the present project and will have to be considered separately and identified by the General Directorate of National Parks, Game and Wildlife (GDNP) in the MoF. If any areas are fotund suitable, then the GDNP should propose initiatives for reservation and eco-touLrisin. Hotspots in this report cover areas that containi rar-e or endangered plants, species that could be of commercial uise if propagated ex-silu suclh as medicinial and herbal plarnts, superior plants, such as plus trees and bulbs of flowers that can be used for breeding (and cloning) and land races or wild varieties of cereals and fruit/nut trees etc. of use to agriculture and horticulture. Such hotspots have to be identified by project staff, specific experts and local knowledgeable people. Baseline surveys then can be undertaken and a decision taken on their protection and management. These hotspots can be the source of genetic diversity for the project and worldwide. Baselii,e aid M&E information for 'Soil Erosioni & Water Quality.' Using GIS, it is possible to monitor erosion. This is done by observing changes in the digital imagery from satellite data. However, the methodological parameters have to be tested on the ground to see if the interpretation is correct. The MoF has received a proposal to test the methodology in the Kahraman-Maras Orcan stream micro-catchment area. The Project should examine this proposal to determine if it should be supported. Another way to measure soil erosion is by inserting measuring sticks on all land use types throughout the Project area and monitoring the rate of soil loss both in areas with project components and similar areas where no activities will take place. Because the annual erosion rate may be small, meaningful results may not be obtained until after 10 years or more. A quicker method is the use of silt traps down stream from MCs to measure soil carried away be erosion, but this will only give the erosion rate without indicating the principal sources of erosion. Therefore both methods are recommended. The General Directorate of Rural Services (GDRS) has soil research institutes monitoring soil loss. These institutes should be consulted about the methodology and measurement frequency to determine soil loss and erosion by land-use types, slope and cover classes. 74 The rate of soil erosion in a micro-catchment can also be measured by the amount and size of particulates carried in surface water bodies. There should be measuring stations at the start and the end of streams or rivers in each micro catchment. These stations can measure the amount and sizes of particulates in the water, its flow rate and other importanit paramiieters. Litniographs and pluviometers can be used for water quality morlorig in coimbinatioin withl rainifall measUrCem1enCts. TIn thc paper on "Water aned Soil Monitorin, System" preparcd for thic projcct (Kolonrkaya N' 2002), the followilln paramiieters xvere recoimmencded to be measLured (M&E Table 10). M&E Table 10. Water Quality Analysis Parameters. Analytical Parameters Surface Water Ground Water Flow + pH + + Salinity + + Dissolved Solids + + Conductivity + + Suspenided solids + + Turbidity + + NO-N + + NTI3-N ± + N03-N + + Total P + + Organic -N + + Pesticides + Herbicides + Insecticides + Total coliform + + Faecal coliform + + Note. In addition the water flow parameter has been added. Source Kolonkaya N, 2002, amended. The river measuring stations should measure the above parameters at least monthly and for soils the parameters should be measured before planting, during growing and after harvest or on the advice of the soil research station of GDRS. There should be sampling units on all land-use types, but on arable land the sampling percentage should be the greatest. Sampling should occur throughout the project's lifetime. A full discussion of M&E for soil and water monitoring is given in Annex 5. Briefly, this annex lists the additional equipment required to monitor soil and water throughout the project area. Baseline and M&E information for 'Agro-Industry Components.' The GEF component of the project is confined to four provinces whose rivers flow into the Black Sea. One of the main thrusts of the project is manure management from agro- industries and at the farm level. Much of the manure from agro-industries and some of it from cowsheds finish up in surface and underground bodies that ultimately flow into the Black Sea. This is causing excessive eutrophication and thus adversely affecting the flora and fauna. The GEF component will demonstrate methods of manure storage, management and use for agro-industries (cattle and poultry) and farms. 75 A monitoring document for this component has been produced (Kolonkaya N. 2000) and part of the parameters to be tested are given in M&E Table 10 above. There are also parameters given for soils. This monitoring procedure should be followed. However, it only covers one river: the impr-oved storage, hanidling and use of manture are not included in that document. But these facets are covered in anotlher consultants repol-t (Metcalfe J.P. 2002). Ther-c will be moniitorin1g ofthe bLuilding anid use of solid and liquid storage FLCIiItieS, iICquidc aindc solid trani-sportationi ainid its applicationI on1 the Ficl(l. ThCrC \viII be testling of soils before thie (organic) fertilizers are added in order to deter-minie thle correct dosage depending on1 the proposed crop. Tlhere xvill also be testing of the forlmler erfluent discharge point to ensuLe tha.1t the ne1W stolrag,e facilities are functiolnilng properly alnd that no effluents are leaking into water bodies. The testing of surface and ground water should continue after the project's terminiationi and the DSI should be involved. Similarly, soil testing should be an ongoiricg procedure, whlichI in the medium lllter viiill be providecl by GDRS. Eventually the farm-ers shouldc pay for this testinIg service. As a result of this GEF 'manure manageil-ment' componielnt, whliclh also includes the demonstration of environmenitally friendly farming practices suclh as milillulll tillage, the beneficial outcomles wvill be promoted in the remainider of the MCs, so that moniltorilng, the results is important, not only to test the eutroplhicationi rate, but also to demonistr-ate the beneficial effect of the correct application of fertilizers, especially organic fertilizers. There are other agro-industries in the project area releasing ulltreated effluent into wvater bodies besides poultry uLnits and cattle feeding facilities. These include sugar factories and paper mills etc. A list of these industries is given in Annex 2 Tables A2-8 (Agro- Industrial Waste) and environlmenital screeniiig is discussed in the Environllmlelntal Screening Section (F). While the monitoring of this effluellt is not included in the GEF component, it is recommenlded that the project assists the MoE in monitor-inig this effluent and draw up plans for effluent reduction, that can be presented to other donors etc. There are laws about effluent disposal, but for various reasons factories are not in compliance with the laws. This is why it is important to devise a plan to ensure compliance. Precipitation Measurements etc. There is a lack of meteorological information in the project area. Data from the nearest town is usually taken as pertaining to the micro-catchments. But most MCs are remote from these stations and many are at much higher elevations where precipitation, wind and insolation are different from towns. Therefore, it is recommended that the project install at lease five new stations, one in each major catchment area, to monitor the various meteorological conditions over the project's lifetime and beyond. Also simple devices could be placed in many MCs to measure precipitation, humidity and temperature. 76 J. Environmental Management Plan The project covers five large watersheds in 13 provinces and it is planned to have interventions in 60 micro-catchments in 12 of these provinces, plus stand-alone GEF activities in Samsun. In addition three of the 13 provinces will have both GEF and MC activities. Of course, thcrc may be additional private, govcnmnent and donor- activities. In the EAWRP, approximately 60% of the activitics rclated to forcsts, excluding rangelands withinl forests, 25% related to agriculture and the remainin1g 15% were rangeland iniliatives. Most forest activities concernled conifers, including cedar rehabilitation (96%), 3% were oak coppice rehabilitation and the remaininag 1% dealt with trees outside the forest, participatory planting and riverbank protection. Irrigationi initiatives accounted for 60% of the agricultural comrponents and rainfed the remaining 40%. Regarding rangeland rehabilitationi, 90% took place on areas within the forest. The delineation and ownership of rangelands outside the forest hampered work on rangelands in the EAWRP. The same constraints will not be as severe in the AWRP area and tlherefore, more rangeland rehabilitation componenits are expected, compared to the EAWRP. Again because of the GEF component on manlure management and improved fanning practices, there may be a relative increase in farming initiatives. But it is still anticipated that forestry components will account for the bulk of the intervelntions. Therefore, when devising an environmental management plan (EMP) this has to be kept in mind. The EMP Table 1 gives the areas of proposed activities by broad categories for the project. As mentioned above, many villagers in MCs have to finalize activities and as the project progresses the composition of these will be subject to change. EMP Table 1. Proposed Activities for the AWRP. Component Area (000 ha) % Comments (units: 000 ha.) Forestry 48.9 32 Inside forest 48.5, outside 0.4 Range rehabilitation 12.0 8 Inside forest 7.0, outside 5.0 Habitat rehabilitation 31.2 20 Inside forest 30.0, outside 1.2 Hunting areas in forest 30.0 20 Non-timber forest products 1.7 1 Inventory Biotic protection in forests 12.8 8 Integrated pest management Agriculture 17.5 11 Rainfed 6.6, irrigated 10.9 Miscellaneous 0.0 0 Apiculture & nurseries Total 154.1 100 The monitoring and evaluation of environmental indicators is one amongst many that the M&E Unit will be supervising. Therefore, it is part of the activities of this unit and should not be viewed as something distinct. There are two kinds of M&E to be undertaken, one at the micro-level and the other at the macro-level. At the micro-level individual or groups of operations are observed at all stages from planning through execution to post completion to see if they are in compliance with environmental 77 standards and to record the effects of the initiative. If necessary, if there are still negative environmental impacts, the plans will be adjusted to negate such impacts. The followincg action plan has been drawn up to monitor and evaluate tlhese initiatives. 1. The local and HQ govermment officers, the beneiciaries andcl represenatatives fromi MoE slhoLulcl be inVolvcd in planning and approving the cliferncit initiatives. They shIouldCl ConfOrmll to nlatiolnally approvecd practices aiii( havc MloE cleairancc. 2. Bel'ore any MC plans are enactedl, especially whler-e tlhere is a possibility ol' neruatiVe environmiiienital impacts, the plans shoulld be reviewed and inspected by MoE. 3. DuIilng executioll of each operation, theC supe_rvisoiry officCr or tile pCerson1 inI ChaIrIg Of the contractincg teaimi is responsible for ensuLincg adlherenice to the plans. Independelnt inspectors from the MoE and/or the responisible Goveirnmenit Agency plus the M&E Ulit of the project will monitor- the operation and report onl its degree of comnpliance. 4. If the activity is not in complianice, theni the agenicy or firmi undcertakiing thle task \,ill be subject to penalties and/or fines and compliance has to be enacted. 5. On completioni of the specific task or tasks, an indepenidenit inspectioni will take place by the MoE, the M&E Ulit and the 'Inspectioni' body within the concenled minlistry to verify that the job conforns to the criteria specified and that tllere is adlherence to the environmiiienital plan. 6. The field supervisory team and the beneficiar-ies will check the tasks at frequellt inter-vals and report on any positive or negative environmnental effects to the concerned bodies such as MoF, MARA, MoE, GDRS, DSI etc. and the local government offices. 7. Any negative environmnental effects will be reported and action plans will be drawn up by the concernled agencies, witlh the approval of the MoE, to negate the effect and the damage will be repaired or rectified. 8. At yearly inter-vais or other agreed time intervals, post inspectionis of the tasks will be undertaken by MoE, the M&E unit and the concerned ministries to ensure that the initiatives are not causing environmllental damage or if they are, steps have been or are being taken to correct this negative effect. 9. If during the lifetime of the project, actions are taken that would trigger an EIA, such as proposals to increase the height of a dam above 15 m, then the concerned ministry should commission an EIA, which has to be approved by the MoE. Also, the WB should be informed at the preparatory stage to ensure that the amendments are in compliance with the WB "Safeguards Policies." 10. If the MoE does not have sufficient field staff to inspect the various MCs then the project should train the proposed four MoE officers that will be put in the field in the four provinces where GEF operations are to be undertaken. These officers will then be in a position to inspect and approve or reject the 60 MC plans and the operations. In Section F an environmental screening of the project's components was undertaken using the matrix as detailed in the TOR (Annex 1). Section I covered the monitoring and evaluation plan and gives examples of data collection requirements for broad components covering forests rangelands, farms and miscellaneous activities. These two sections form the basis for the Environmental Management Plan. This is given in Standard World Bank Matrix form and is presented in Annex 7. Table 1 of Annex 7 gives the environmental 78 impacts and proposed mitigation measures for 17 environmental concems or issues, from road building at the micro-level to erosion measurement at the macro-level. Table 2 of Annex 7, then details a monitoring program for all these 17 initiatives. Table 3 gives a list of additional equipment required for monitorinig and the traininlg requirements are given in Table 4. All this infomiation is summilarized in this section. EMP Table 2 gives an excerpt fromii Anniex 7 Table 1 higlhlighting the main cnvir-onimilenital concerlins. EMP Table 2: Environ mental Impacts andc Nitigation Nleasures. Issues Anticipated/Potenlti la Effects oii Einvironment Actions or M\Iili-ation ilNcastircs Eiiviroiiiimenital Impacts Road Roads could negatively affect Restoration and re-vegetation of Enforce road-building standards building erosion, soils, biodiversity, stream watershed areas. and provide maintenianice budget. activities. flow, drainage and wetlands. More sustainiable use of land, Issue directives on re-vegetation Roads will give access to areas that greater biodiversity and of exposed areas, replacing cut have been degraded and enable increased C storage. trees, explosives use, disposal of mitigation measures to be Overall reduction of erosion. excavated soils, etc. undertaken thus having positive Reduced dissolved minerals in Include MoE in road alignmilent environmental effects. Roads will surface and ground water. surveys to ensur-e that also open up remote rangelands and Poor alignmeint/steep slopes biodiversity and wetlanids etc. are remove over-grazing pressures on result in accelerated erosion. protected. MoE requested to homestead pastures. conduct an IEE if explosives to Probability ol occurrence: Higii. be used. Forest and Initially, this could lead to surface Restoration and re-vegetation of Enforce standards for terracing rangeland and gully erosion, poor drainage etc. watershed areas. Overall and provide maintenlance budget. (non-arable) The initial surface and gully erosion, reduction of erosion. More Re-vegetate area quickly, terracing, if any, will be substantially offset by sustainable use of land, greater especially ter-race edges and ground improved infiltration, soil biodiversity and increased C chiefly with indigenous species. preparation stabilization, increased ground cover storage. Reduced dissolved Provide training if necessary. etc. (bio-diversity), improved micro- minerals in surface and ground climate, greater C sequestration. water. Inaction and improper Probability of negative effects low, terracing etc. will result in positive effects high. continued degradation. Arable Initially, could lead to surface and Less soil loss through water Enforce standards for terracing ground gully erosion, poor drainage etc. (and wind) erosion. and provide maintenance budget. preparation Improved farming practices such as Reduced dissolved minerals in Demonstrate improved farming incl. minimum tillage, contour ploughing, surface and ground water. practices. Terracing. hand/mechanical terrace reduce top Continued ploughing up and Provide farmer training. soil loss, decrease erosion, improve down the slopes will accelerate Involve farmer participation in soil structure increase infiltration erosion. planning/execution of initiatives. encourage fertility build up. Probability of negative effects low, positive effects high. Gully Initial actions may cause additional Soil stabilization and increased Apply appropriate gully plugging rehabilit- erosion until vegetation established vegetation will reduce erosion, methods and terracing standards. ation. but overall will lead to decreased mineral loss, improve Vegetate with grass, shrubs & erosion, improved bank protection, biodiversity and C trees. Demonstrate improved restoration of vegetation cover, and sequestration. techniques throughout project fertility build-up in soil. area. Provide farmer training. Probability of negative effects low, Involve farmer participation in positive effects very high. planning/execution of initiatives. 79 Issues Anticipated/Potential Effects on Environment Actions or Mitigation Measures Environmental Impacts Chaninel Building of irrigation channels and Properly constructed earth and Apply constr-uctioni standards Nvork, realigning watercourses may cause concrete canals will minimilize Re-vegetate canal banlks with irrigation, initial erosioni. Poor irrigationi erosioni potential. grasses ancl shlrubs etc ponid and p1 aCticCs maIly Icacd to suLra-1cc soIl Ponids and ic rvoilrs will bttci Involvc MIoE lor Ill L' lcd reser\ oir loss, mIlnlcral Icaclill." and/or conitiol water flow and (ci miniiisli bic llcll ICs in site clhoicc. conistruLCtell. salination. Ponid anld reservoir incildence of llashi flooding anci design, plniniliig and( execLitioni constmtction could deprive soil erosioni. phases. Ensur-e that villages that dowestream areas of water . Greater all-year roundc use of clraw water from same sourices Better wvater use shoutld cecrease arable andc pastor al lands. agree on plan for water sharinlg. erosioni by controlling flashi loodng. The provison oflmore Recluce pressur-e of over-grazing Plan for pond constIuction to flooding. 'rhe pi-ovision of imol-e.. watering points will enable fullr . near homesteads atid clearing take into accoulit down-stream Nva.terilmg poliits xvi11 ll iable flUlei-1 anid better use of rangelands. more forest and rangelancls for requiremciits. Increased ground cover by increased arable farming. Trhis slhoulct Ensure that reservoir plans and cropping. decrease organic C einssions construction are approved by cropping. and improve biodiversity MoE and comply with World bank safeguard requiremiienits. Probabilitv of negative effects low Provide farmer training m cli rip to mo(lerate, positive eflects hig-I. anicl sprinkler irrigation and propose proper water pricing. Application Over use or inappropriate use of Inappropriate and/or over use of Only use intcrnlationlally of clemlical herbicides, insecticides aicl chelllical agcnts could approved chemicals in correct control pesticides could affect negatively negatively affect the dosages at appropriate times., 5 agents plant population, lead to leaching in environment tlhroughl leachinlg Provide training for project (CCA) in ground and surface water and affect of the chemicals in ground and workers in storage, handlinig and project the persons applying chemiiicals. surface water and a build up of use of CCAs and disposal of nurseries: Probabilit'y of negative efects low toxins in the soil. It could also containers. to modlel-ate, positive effects adversely affect the user. (and Practice 1PM (integrated pest nioderate. his/lher family). managemeiit) where appropriate. Application Over use or inappropriate use could Inappropriate and/or over use of Ensure farmers only use of chemical affect negatively plant population, chemical agents could approved CCAs. Get MoE to control lead to leaching in ground and negatively affect the examinie chemical list to ensure agents by surface water and affect the persons environment through leaching that only internationally farmers in applying chemicals. of the chemicals in ground and approved chemicals are their own surface water and a build up of allowed.'5 Provide information fields. toxins in the soil. It could also to farmers and distributors of adversely affect the user (and chemicals on the purchase and his/her family). use of CCA. Provide training for farmers in storage, handling and Probability of negative effects low use of CCA and disposal of to moderate, positive effects containers. Demonstrate IPM and moderate. encourage appropriate use. 15 The following pesticides fall into WHO IA and IB lists. Ensure that they are not purchased and used under this project. Azinphos-Methyl, Chlorfenvinphos, Dichlorvos, Dichrotophos, Methidation, 14-EPN, Methamidophos, Monocrotophos, Omethoate, Oxydemeton-Methyl, Parathion-Methyl, Phosphamidon Phorate, Thiometon, Triazophos, Aldicarb, Benfuracarb, Carbofuran, Furathiocarb, Mewthomyl, Oxamyl, Tefluthrin, Zetacypermethrin, Dnoc Ammonium, Cadusafos, Ethoprophos, Fenamiphos, Brodifacoum, Choumachlopr, Zinc Phosphide, Difenacoum, Floucomafen. Also see Annex 3. 80 As outlined above, this routine monitoring of all activities will be undertaken by the project. Of particular importance from an environmental perspective are the project activities specified in Section F, Environmenital Screening, SM Tables I to 6, namely: * Road building. O Grounid preparation includinig terracing in forcsts. O GrouLnc preparation inclldi iit gC Terrcing outside forests. o GuLlly rehiabilitationi. o Irrigationi and ponds etc. o Applicationi of chemical control agenits. Project and MoE staff who are supervising these activities should ensuLe thlat the environmiiiental mitigation actions, as specified in above Table EMP 2 and in Annlex 7 (Table l) and the Environmental Screening Tables, are enacted. These should be specified in contracts or work programmes and the supervisors should report back to the project's Monitoring and Evaluation Unit. Other regular activities undertaken by the project include reporting on the progress of the various activities. These will be judged against ainual targets, such as the area of oak coppice regenerated, the amount of bare land planted, the area of rangeland rehabilitated, the survival rate of planted trees, the area of falims adopting the agronomic package etc. These can be used as indicators to the success of various interventions and of the project. But they do not give measurable indicators as to the effect on the environment. This is why additional monitoring is required. The M&E report (Anderson & Kanalti 2002), recommended that the proposed Special Studies Advisory Group should have primary responsibility for commissioning and managing 'impact studies' such as those detailed above in the M&E section. These impact studies could be awarded through the competitive grants system process (CGS), although for such studies as the inventory of woody biomass inside and outside forests, there may be few groups, except perhaps university departments, capable of doing this outside the government services. The above M&E consultant's report recommend that geographical information system maps (GIS) be used to provide basic data for all project areas. Again it says that global positioning system (GPS) handsets should be used when undertaking baseline and re- survey studies. The report says that every Province will have a portable GPS and the M&E Unit should acquire two more: the use of GPS devices when undertaking the surveys is essential. The report lists the equipment requirements of the M&E Unit, but for the 'environmental' monitoring additional equipment will be required (Annex 7 T.3). At the macro level, the overall environmental impacts of the project will be assessed. It will be too time consuming and costly to monitor all 60 MCs as well as the GEF components. Therefore, regarding erosion measurements, water quality, carbon sequestration and biodiversity, it is proposed to monitor 12 MCs, one for each province as well as the GEF components in Amasya, Corum, Samsun and Tokat. It is proposed that the monitoring will be phased in over three years from 2003, undertaking four baseline surveys (of forestry, rangeland and agriculture) in each of the first 3 years with 81 follow-up resurveys at set intervals, depending on the activities. The proposed time intervals were given in Section I on M&E, namely every 3 years for forestry, every two years for rangelands and every year for agriculture. In addition, the monitoring of the GEF componienlt will start in 2003 and continue over the 7-year lifetime of tlhat componienit. As stated in the M&E sectioni, measurements of forest areas outside the N'lCs shIould(C lIso OCCuIr, cSpCcial1Y inI ihc EA\WVRP area to ohtain in fOrIm1atiOI aIbOlut OlCICIr agC classes of trecs inI siml1ilar cliliatic zonies Ai\nc 'foeCst' on11 itol-ring shouldCI bc Lun1deCrtakeIn every 3 years ulltil thle trees are at least 15 year's olcl, r-angelaLncl monlitoring42r uLtil tell intervenitionis are 10 years old and those for agrictulture utntil eight years after the initiative. The proposedl Baseline sUrvey and monitorincg plan is shown in EIVIP Table 3. Monitoring beyond the year 2009 is subject to moniey being available and the agreemenit of the various govermilent agencies. In addition to monitorinig Forestry, Rangeland and Agricultul-al intervenitionis, there will be general monitorinig of Erosion and Water as described in the M&E section above. This will be monitored at set intervals each year. It is proposed that thle monlitorillg of soil and water continiue for fifteen years. EMP Table 3. Proposed Baseline & Resu-vey Schedtile of Sectors in the Project. Year 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Coninicienits Baseline survey 2/4 2/4 2/4 All sectors (6/12 provinces) Measurements yes yes yes yes Measurements of trees, soil outside AWRP and rangelanids Re-survey (Re-S) Every 3 years to year 15. Forest 4 4 4 4 MeasuLeimienits in other noni- Marginal lands 2 2 2 2 plroject areas. Re-S RZangeland 2 2 4 2 2 Every 2 years to year 1O Re-S Agriculture 2 4 6 6 6 6 Every year to year 8 Monitor (M) rivers 4 8 12 12 12 12 12 Every year to year 15 M soil erosion 8 12 12 12 12 12 12 Every year to year 15 GEF component 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 The project is for 7 years, but monitoring should continue to yr. 15 Note: In the Baseline survey, where 2 provinces are surveyed each year for 3 years, only half of the provinces are surveyed. This applies to agriculture, where half of the provinces have rainfed agriculture surveyed and the other half have irrigated agriculture surveyed. Similarly it is proposed to only survey half of the provinces that have marginal land improvement interventions. The M&E Section I above detailed the work required in each sector for special environmental studies and EMP Table 4 summarizes the activities for these special studies with an estimate of their indicative costs etc. More details are given in Annex 7, Tables I to 3. 82 EMP Table 4. Special Environmental Studies. Component | Activity Perform Comments Forestry sector Tree plantinig etc. for I.fnventory of biomass 1. MvloF; University 1. $5 to S7,500 each production and erosion 2. Monitor-ing of soil 2. Government 2. $5 to 57,500 each Colitrol (Repeat every 3 years) /Univeisity soil UnitS. (In all plroviices) I labitat rchabilitation of1 I .Ilnventui y of biomass I Nflol: UJi1x el-sit) I. S5 to S7.5OO ctachi flora and faunla 2. NMonitoring of soil 2. Government 2. S5 to $7,500 each. (Repeat every 3 years) /University soil units. T-Totspots identified. Sur-vey in 6 provinces Huntinig areas Stirvey of flora ancd Project with perhaps Down as a project fauna (every 3 years) some help. activity Biodiversity study in all Survey of flora and Award throughl the $7 to $10,000 each. areas of project (forest faunia CGS, with perhaps (in all provinces) and noni-forest) (Repeat every 3 years) project assistance. |- Tree & soil measured I.Inventory of biomass As for biomass As for biomass & soil outside forest areas 2. Monitoring of soil invenitory above above. 10 areas Rangeland Sector (within and outside forests). Ranigelanid Management 1. Invenitory of biomass 1. MoF; University 1. $5 to $7,500 each & rehabilitationi 2. Monitoring of soil 2. Governmeent 2. $5 to $7,500 each (Repeat every 2 years) /University soil units. (in 6 provinces only) 1-hlitinig areas on Survey of flora and lProject with perhlaps Down as a project rangelands faunia (every 3 years) some help. activity Biodiversity study in all Survey of flora and Award tlroughl the Included in the forestry areas of project fatina CGS/project assistance. sector Agricultural Sector Rainfed agriculture & 1. Inventory of biomass 1. Project, MoA; MoF 1. $2 to $3,000 each horticulture 2. Farming practices 2. Project 2. Project cost 3. Monitoring of soil 3. Government 3. $5 to $7,500 each (in (Repeat every year) /University soil units. 6 provinces only) Irrigated agriculture & 1. Invenitory of biomass 1. Project, MoA; MoF 1. $2 to $3,000 each horticulture 2. Farming practices 2. Project 2. Project cost 3. Monitoring of soil 3. Government 3. $5 to $7,500 each ____(Repeat every year) [University soil units. (in 6 provinces only) Marginal land 1. Inventory of biomass 1. Project, MoA; MoF 1. $2 to $3, 000 each rehabilitation 2. Farming practices 2. Project 2. Project cost 3. Monitoring of soil 3. Government 3. $5 to $7,500 each (Repeat every 3 years) /University soil units. (in 6 provinces only) Biodiversity study in all Survey of flora and Award through the Included in the forestry areas of project fauna CGS/project assistance. sector Other studies Erosion Monitoring 1. Silt traps and sticks to 1. Project. Monitor at $10,000 for the devices. (Frequent monitoring) measure soil loss. set intervals 2. GIS study. 2. CGS. $25 to $35,000 one area River water study (one Measure flow rate, 1. CGS with project $10 to $15 000 each per per province). Frequent turbidity, sedimentation, assistance year. monitoring mineral content etc. (all provinces) Hotspot studies Determine areas of rare, Project, MoA; MoF $5,000 each if experts (Repeat every 3 years) endangered, useful Local people, national used. species etc. to protect. experts. Undertake inventory. Meteorological Data collection for Project Collect daily records temp. & rainfall. 83 Component | Activity |Perform Comments GEF studies Manure management Improve handling and GEF component Covered by project. storage etc. Funding for Biogas demonstration (EU?) Field trials Manure applicationi GEF comsponienit Covered by project El,l P Ta able 4). Soil C& Soil and1 water testillg GEF coniponent Slhouildl co\ei botlih imaii vatcr ]ollltolill rivels to Black Sca Agro-linduLIst-y (IIsCilaigc I. Conipile planl i\lol, CGS FLICil1g IcLLecC 2. Monitor dischaige; (EU'?) assist xvith compipanice The costing for all the above activities is tentative and should be reviewed. However, taking the above estimates, the total indicative cost of the baseline and resurveys for the different sectors and special stuClies amouLnts to betweeni US S 2.4 and $ 3.5 million; that is between 3.5% and 5% of the total budget. The brealcdowni of the indicative costs for the special envir-onmillenital studies is as follows, (EMP Table 5). EMP Table 5. Estimatecl Cost of Special Environmental Studies. M\Ionitoi-inig Activity Estimated cost for 7 years (USS 000) Foiestry trees 280 - 420 Forestry habitat rehabilitation 140 - 210 Biodiversity (all areas) 196 - 280 Measurements outside project areas 100 - 150 Sub-total 716 - 1060 Rangelaicl maniagemenit & relhabilitationi 200 - 300 Sub-total 200 - 300 Rainfed agriculture 252 - 378 Irrigated agricultire 252 - 378 Marginal land 98 - 147 Sub-total 602 - 903 Erosion measurement (GIS) 25 - 35 River measurements 720 - 1080 Hotspots 140 - 140 Total 2,403 - 3,518 To put these costs in perspective, an example of monitoring benefits is appropriate. Carbon trading is now being undertaken. The value of sequestered carbon on the world market averages between US$ 5 & 10 per t C. The forestry component of the project may sequester about an additional 0.5 million t. C after 5 years and 2.4 million t. C after 15 years on 48,900 hectares. Similarly, the rangeland and habitat rehabilitation areas may sequester an extra 320,000 t. C after 5 years and 960,000 t. C after 15 years on 43,200 ha. Increased sequestration on farm land will be modest, but could amount to 24,000 t. C in both time periods on 17,500 ha. At a price of US$ 5 per t. C, the value of the sequestered carbon on all the areas is worth US$ 4.2 million after 5 years and US$ 12.9 million after 15 years. Unless the carbon accumulation is monitored and certified, this value cannot be claimed. 84 As stated above, these costs are indicative only and have to be verified. It is possible to reduce monitoring costs by decreasing the sampling areas and/or increasing the time intervals between sampling. Again, the nmLber of rivers for monitoring erosion etc. could be reducecl, as could the moniitor-ing paramcters. Measurciiements of strcami flowv and silt load are important and sh1oLuld be uLndeCrta2kenl freiuenLCtly, but tile mCeasuLrilng frecjI- enLc oftthc minrC-al contClet ctc. couLld be reduLIcedC tO saIy twVicC or thil-ice per yealr. 'ThIc 1num1111ber of parameters and the frequellcy of measuremenits should be verified by experts. One additional environmiental concelrl is the pollution of1groundwater, including drinkilng water witlh unacceptable levels of N, P, pesticides and faecal matter. Some of this is because of poor farm and agro-industrial manlure managemiienit, otlhers because of effluents from agro-industries, some because of raw sewage fi-om h1ouselholds is secping into wells and yet others because of excess application of organic and inorganic fertilizers and pesticides etc. on fields. The project, including the GEF component will try and tackle this problem, althouglh some pollutants such as human sewage and non-manure agro-industrial eMLuenits are not in the project's remit. Ways to reduce groundwater contaminiationi are tllrougLh demonistrationi and trainin1g in all aspects of storage and application. This will be part of the training component. Testing of groundwater will be undertakeni as part of the GEF component. Equipment Requirements. The additional equipment needs for environmental monitoring are modest. For measuring trees, bushes, grass and herbaceous cover, standard men surationi eqtuipmiienlt is required. The forest service should already lhave such equipment including consunmables such as paper and string, but if not, theni four sets will be required. In addition, scales to weigh wood and grass are needed, as are moisture content meters. A full list of equipment requirements is given in Amnex 7 Table 3. The cost of each set, including consumables should not be more than US$ 5,000, or for four sets, US$ 20,000. Soil testing will be undertaken in laboratories after samples are taken from the field. The cost of additional equipment such as soil augers is estimated to be US$ 4,000 (Annex 7, Table 3). This will be provided by the project. Measurement of organic soil carbon is of prime importance, but on all land, especially agricultural land the measurement of N and P should be done. If this testing is to be undertaken by government soil laboratories, they may require additional testing equipment, chemicals and other consumables. Also extra equipment may be required in the field. The cost of such equipment etc. is estimated to be US$ 150,000 (Annex 7 Table 3). However, this cost should be covered in the overall cost of undertaking such work. The estimated cost of soil testing using information in EMP Table 3 is US$ 790,000 to 1.185 million. Cost estimates should be obtained from such institutions and compared to the indicative budget. If the government undertake the work on using their staff and the estimate is below US$ 500,000 without equipment, then the project could buy the equipment. However, as part of the GEF component, soil testing for farmers will be done, so in addition, organic C could be requested. This should reduce the monitoring budget for this component. Bio-diversity surveys require 85 standard equipment, which the people undertaking the survey should already have. This also applies to monitoring of IPM areas. As describecl in the M&E section above, soil erosion can be measured by placing measurinig sticks tlhrougLhout the project area and measuLinlg thle level of ciecrease (and sometimies increase) in the suLrfLce level. The cost ofIleCasurlin1g stickxs llas beCen CstillmatCd to be 10,000 (AinnCx 7 Talblc 3). Erosion ratcs mayl1 also be mcasurecl by uLSin' sa.cllitc inmagery. A piroposal lhas been submiitted to tlhe MoF to test the methlodology (Cost US$ 25, to 35,000). Tlis should be considered by the project. The cost is includecd in EMP 5. The largest equipment requiremiienits will be for monitoring 12 rivers in the project area, excluding the GEF proposal. Equipment will be required for two moniitoriing points on each river, one wvher-e the micro-catchmenet starts and the otlher wvhiere it ends. Flow meters or piezometers will be required, as wvill sand/siltation traps. The Cost Of SLuC Field and laboratory equipmenit is estimated to be US$ 26S,000 (Anniex 7, Table 3). Most of this equipmiienat will be covered in the river measuremiienit budget of US$ 720,000 to 1.08 millioni (EMP Table 5). The project will provide simple silt traps and sieves of differenit meslhes to estilmate the degree of erosion on 60 selectecl MC over the project's lifetimiie (and beyond). The equipmiienit cost for 60 micro-catclhmiienit rivers is estimiated to be US$ 48,000 (Annex 7, Table 3). This is in addition to the costs giveni in EMP Table 5 above. While gathering meteorological informationi is not really part of environmiiienital monitorin-g, more accurate informiationi will be useful for the project as a whole as well as for this part of M&E. Therefore, simple equiplmlenit at all 60 MCs (cost US$ 18,000) and it is recommenided to establish an additional five meteorological stations in the projct area. The equipment is listed in Annaex 7 Table 3 and estimatecl to cost US$ 37,000. Tlle combined cost for these stations is US$ 55,000. The GEF componenit will cover equipment costs for soil and water measurements, so no additional costs will be required for this component. However, effluent monitorinig from agro-industries may require additional equipment. This is not included and funding for this will have to come from other sources, possibly the EU or an EU country. The total equipment budget (excluding Table 4 costs - US$ 25,to 35,000) is US$ 137,000. Environmental Training Requirements. An environmental training matrix is given in Annex 7 Table 4. Some of the training will be covered by the project budget when it is holding general training sessions, during village participatory meetings or when it taking farmers to demonstrations. Other training will have a specific 'environmental' budget. Project staff will be given training on the environmental aspects of various project initiatives. In turn, these staff members will pass on this knowledge to the beneficiaries or use it when they are involved in project activities such as road building or pond construction. 86 The environmental training requirements consist of providing environmental awareness training to project staff for specific project components that may need special attention such as road construction, terracing, irrigation etc. as described in the Environmental Screening Sector (F). These courses should be given ainually to staff who will be designing and super-visin1g tlhese activities. Courscs could bc part of gcneral training COuIr'Ses with the en\;ironnlental comlponcnit lasting aboult a clay. The couLrscs could he given by local conIsuIltanits and/or staff frlom01 the ?vloF. The cost Of suLcih a coLIsC is estliimated to be USS 5,000 per year or in total US$ 35,000. Farmers use pesticides, hel-bicides and insecticidcs (chcmical control agents [CCA]). Many are unfamiliar with storage, the correct application rate or the clothing that should be worn durinig application. They also have superficial knowledge about the storage and use of fertilizers, especially organic fertilizers, and its applicationi on rainfed and irrigated land. The project should train staff on these important elements as wvell as the need to test soil. There should also be general environlmental traininlg and field visits. The training of trainers (extension workers etc.) in the above topics should be unldertakeni twice a year for the first four years witlh refresher courses once per year for the last three years. Thlis may be combined with other training. Each course.should last about one week, includinig visits to demonstratioln units. The cost of such training courses includinig CCA hanidling consultants, fertilizer experts, and trained staff fi-om MoE, MoF and MARA should be between US$ 20,000 to 25,000 per course. Therefore, the total cost for eleven traillinig courses will be US$ 220,000 to 275,000. These trainers will thenl train the fanners. In addition, as part of the project's activities, fanrers will be taken to field demonstrations. If meteorological measurements are going to be carried out then some training in the recording and maintenance of the meteorological equipment is required. Likewise for the reading and maintenance of piezometers and measuring sticks for erosion determinatiolns. Project staff will have to be trained (and retrained) for these routine measurement tasks, the cost of training is estimated to be about US$ 22,000 over seven years. While there is a drift to towns, especially of young people, many children will be the next generation of farmers and forest workers. It would be prudent for the project to provide some environmental education for school children. This could take the form of project staff visiting schools and giving talks about the project, providing inputs for the establishment and maintenance of school nurseries, planting shrubs and trees round the school premises, providing posters and environmental materials and organizing competitions or projects with environmental themes. In addition, children could act as environmental monitors, reporting on plants and animals they have seen, good and bad practices they have come across and ways to improve the environment. There should and could be a small budget for school nurseries etc. of the order of US$ 52,000 (US$ 4,000 per province). Supplementary money could be obtained from other donors. In addition to providing some guidance for children, community instruction should be provided including environmental training and incorporating practical work such as tree planting along roads and streams, around houses and in kitchen gardens. People, especially women, could be trained in seedling production and the growing of medicinal and herbal plants. Again a budget of US$ 52,000 could be provided for this activity. 87 In order to undertake the special studies, training should be given on supply and demand methodologies. Staff will be trained to undertake baseline surveys and re-surveys. It is plannied to have a two-week course each year of whichi one week would be in the field. The cost of each couL-se, excludingc consultanits and staff time is estimated to be USS 6,000 or USS 49,000 for seven years. Environimental traininig lik-e Lilly othler traininicg is a t\vo-wvay process. larlny people iav\eC local knowledge about the environmiiienlt ancl thle use of local medicinial and herbal planits etc. This ktnowvledge shIould be tapped. Project persoilnnel should try and obtaini this information by raising the topic at community meetings and during traininig courses. The two govenirnmenit partners in the GEF sub-comiiponienit namiiely MoE andcl KKGM, hiave little, if any, experience in project activities of the type unldertakeln in tlle EAWRP, whereas the otlher partners in the project do. Traininlg courses should be provided to these govermiienit agencies to familiarize the staff about the project activities anld pr-otocol. The M&.E Consultancy Report (Andersoni and Kanatli 2002) recommillenided that tlhere shotuld be four MoE personniiel posted to the project, one in each of the four provilnces \vlere the GEF sub-componienit is active. This recommllenidation is endorsed. It is these people that shIould be trainied quickly about the maini activities in the MC areas and \ways of incorporating the GEF initiatives into the maini project. The estimated cost of all the componenits of this traininig is US$ 423,000 to US$ 478,000. Consultanicy Services. Many environumental consultanicy services have already been specified in the text unlder- the various lheadings, especially for monitoring and evaluation (EMP Table 4). Again on Page 84 it is mentioned that consultants will be required for traininig courses in CCA management and fertilizer use etc. The cost for these consultancy services has already been included under the different components or initiatives. Therefore, this section only deals with additional consultancy requirements. An environmental consultant may be required to give advice on environmental monitoring requirements to the proposed Special Studies Advisory Group and to independently review the M & E results of these activities. For this, a budget of US$ 35,000, spread over 7 years is proposed. In addition, project personnel or people chosen to undertake the inventory work may need training on whole tree measurement and the measurement of shrubs and bushes and other miscellaneous consultancy services. An international consultant is recommended for the 'Supply and Demand' survey training in years 1 & 2 (Annex 7 Table 4). The cost of the consultant is estimated to be US$ 50,000 to US$ 57,000, including preparatory work and equipment. In addition, local consultants are required for environmental training, integrated pest management and other environmental training activities. For this US$ 50,000 should be put aside. 88 It is assumed that the M&E centre will undertake data entry and data analysis. The M&E unit may not have enough personnel for this task. It may be that additional (part-time) staff will have to be hired to undertake data entry and analysis or consultants hired who specialize in data entry and analysis. It is suggested that a budget of US$ 15,000 per year be allocated for sucih tasks or US$ 105,000 for the 7-year period. Thc aldditionalii cost for thCsC coIsSlltaLnicv se-rticcs is LUSS 2140,000 to 247,000 and(I the totli cost of assessing- the environmental benefits of the project is estilmated to be USS 3.14 to US$ 4.38 miiillioni. The Bank's Safeguard Policies. The principal Bank's Safeguard Policy that applies to the pioject is Envirollnllental Assessment (OP 4.01, BP 4.01, GP 4.01). In part, this REA is in responise to this safeguard policy and the provisions in the REA ensure compliance with tills policy. The above Bank ProcedLure (BP 4.01) includes Dam and Reservoir Componenits (BP 4.01 Ainex B and OP/BP 4.37). The dams to be constructed by GDRS in the AWRP will have body heights of 7-15 m, and will accommi0odate up to 80% of the anllual water flow of the nmicro-catclhmienit. The GDRS has a long experience with the design, constrtuction and maintenanice of over 600 small dams. The investigationis and design are normlally carried out by provincial engineers, assisted by headquarter engineers, surveyors, and hydrologists, as needed. Most provincial offices and HQ have computer based design programs. The designs made in the provinces are reviewed and approved by senior HQ staff. Dam constructioll is either done by GDRS construction units or by private contractors. In either case, supervision is undertaken by provincial and HQ staff. Annlual inspections are calTied out by GDRS provincial staff, after which the users are instructed to carry out the necessary mainteniance. The Bank's Operational Policy on Ihzterniationial waterways (OP. 7.50), which applies to the Black Sea and its tributaries may be triggered due to the proposed construction of three small dams in the Kizilirmak and Yesilirmak Basins. The technical specifications of the planned dams in these two basins are summarised in Table SP 1. SP Table 1. Dam Specifications for the Kizilirmak & Yesilirmak Basins. Specifications. Height. Reservoir Irrigated Water surface Province (m volume (m) land (ha) area (ha) Tokat (Kepez) 15 200,000 40 4.0 Tokat (Sarac) 10 120,000 24 3.5 Amasya (Hamamozu) 15 250,000 50 3.5 The amount of water retained in the reservoir and used for irrigation will only marginally decrease the quantity of water flowing into the Black Sea, because the bulk of irrigation water will be conveyed back to the Black Sea by surface and ground water routes. 89 Two of the proposed dams are at the limit to trigger a review by independent qualified persons or companies and the possibility of an EIA. The World Bank distinguishes between small and large dams. Small dams are normially 15 meters or less in height. Large dams are more than 15 meters in heighlt. However, dams betweeni 10 and 15 meter-s in heigllt are treated as large dams if they present special design complexities, for exarmple aL largc flood-handling rcuirccnt, locattiOnI ill a zone Ofrhg scisciciity, founda(1tiotnICs thllat ar-e COIli1)]CX aid dirriCUlt to prCpar'C, Or Ictcnltioll OrtoXiC Mater.CialS For small damls, generic dam safety measures designed by qualified enginieers are usuaLily acecluate. Fromii the above specifications, the proposed damls slhoulcl be treated as ''small." However, slhould the height of the twvo dams at 15 meters be incr-eased, then the Bank would require the following: i. A review by an independent panel of experts (the Panel) of the investigation, design and constructioll of the dam and thie sta-t of operationis. ii. The preparation and imiplemiienitationl of detailed plains: a p)lan for constLuctioll supervisioin anid quality assurance, ani instl-rumlenitationi plan, an operationi and mainteniance plan and an emergency prepared ness plan. iii. The pre-quali Ficatioin of bidclers durillg procurem1enit anid bid teniderinlg. iv. Periodic safety inspectionis of the dam after completion. These provisions are specified in the Bank's 'Safety of Dams' operation policy OP 4.37 (October 2001). The GDRS already fuilfils most i f not all of the above criteria. The Project is only directly involved in Pest Management in its tree nurseries when pesticides and hel-bicides may be used. The Bank's safeguLard policy guidelines on Pest Management (OP 4.09) have been addressecd by ensurinlg that there wvill be propel- storage, handlinig, use and containier disposal of autlhor-ized chemiiicals. The project is undertaking integrated pest managemiienit (IPM) onl areas where it is directly involved. To reduce the insect population that are harmful to the forest trees, biological, semi-biological, bio-technical and mechanical pest control methods will be employed such as chitin inhibition materials, repelling pheromones or mechanical methods. This will be done with the help of natural predators such as insects, birds, and mammals etc. There is a guide for the principles of forest pest control published by the GDF entitled 'Control Principles for Forest Pests,' (GDF, Instruction No. 286, Classification No. IV- 1519, Ankara, 1995). In addition, because farmers are using pesticides and herbicides on their own land within the project area, training will be given in storage, handling, use and container disposal. The project will ensure that through the MoE, only allowable chemicals are used. There is differentiation in agricultural subsidies for pesticides in direct correlation with their toxic ingredients. There is legislation regulating pest control in the Law for Pest Control and Agricultural Quarantine (1957). This law regulates imports, exports, production, sale and control of pesticides. A Regulation on Labelling of Pesticides (1983), the Code of Conduct for Pesticide Prescription (1984) and the Code of Conduct for Toxicological Classification of Pesticides (1984) are other legislations applied to pest control activities. 90 The project will support the construction of small-scale dams that will be on public lands and therefore, the building of these dams will not trigger the Bank's Operational Policy on Inzvolun1taty Settlement (OP. 4.12). Finally, tillhoLugh the GEF sub-componcnit, the projcct is tacidling eXCeSS cuLtrophlication Of SutrfaLCe \aLteCr inCItlillng theC ldelta relgion of an internitional water nam lyC the Blaclc Sta. fhlroughli maluLte managenienlit, efflueCnt disposal anld environmicnitally frienidly fairimlilnl practices, the project shotuld address relevant conlcerins expressed in the Bank's safeguard policy 'Projects in Interiationial Waters' (OP 7.50, BP 7.50, GP 7.50). Table SP 2 details the safeguard policies as it applies to critical components in the AWRP that are of concern from an environmental viewpoint. The project is taking tlle necessary interniationally acceptable measure to address all these concerns. SP Table 2. World Banik Safeguard Policies for Specific Watershed Activities. Activity Safegu ar d IPossible adverse impact Pr oposed mitigation Pro posed mo ilitor-i ig & Responosibl)e policy measu re evaluation ilistito titoi triggered Road Envirotn- Constrctioll actiVities may Follow standlaid pi ocedurcs EndulalIcc and MoiF-AGNI, building mental cause erosion or inciease foI road alignmcits and perifoimance after GDRS, (service assessment crosion r ates. construction mcthods. constrLuCtIOI. GDNP. rioads). (EA) [Possible Some rare habitats and/or Restrict road size (< 4m) Erosion after construction erosion etc.] flora species couli be Plant sides quickly with fast dIstulbed. growing deep rooted plants. Road . EA [Possible Constirictioni activities may Follow standaid procedures En(Lurance and MoF - building erosion when cause erosion or increase for road alignments and performance after General (forest buLidlling. erosion r atcs. construction meihods. constrction. Di-ectorate roads) iLandslides, slips & other Restrict road size (< 5m) Soil can ied by Suriface of F orestry, movements in road cuts. and slope (max 15%) run off (silt at GDNP. Sonic rare habitats and/or Ensuie minimiiumii cut, fill downstream) flora species could be and spoil heaps. limit earth Waste disposals after disturbed/ destroyed. moving to dry periods. construction. Roads could funictioni as Install sediment basins, Distribution and ecological bainers and may vegetate erosive surface as movement of some key interrupt migratory routes soon as possible. fauna species. Create easy access for Restrict explosives uise. illegal wood cutting and To prevent ecological land clearing. bamer, plan corridors. Roads may obstruct stream Effective control of wood flow & fish migration. cutting. Clearing, Forestry; EA Disrupt ecological process Soil erosion control Rangeland condition. MoF - ploughing, [Possible or change the character of measures. Rangeland use and carrying AGM, deep ripping erosion in the rangeland and forest & Water conservation capacity. GDNP. (in non- preparation. affect species distribution. measures. (number and types of flora arable) forest Aim is to help Increase erosion due to Wildlife conservation and fauna). and establish clearing vegetation and measures. Seasonal distribution of rangeland - ground cover disturbing soil. In-situ biodiversity animals. hand and to stop Increase runoff due to conservation activities. Change in social conditions. machinery. erosion.] vegetation clearing and soil Consultations with interest Changes in wildlife loosening. groups. population and species Biodiversity destruction. diversity (flora & fauna). Arable EA [possible Removal of nat. vegetation. Sol] erosion control Monitoring of vegetation GDRS, ground erosion when Biodiversity destruction. measures. structure in sensitive areas MARA. preparation. building.] Increase erosion due to Taking care to protect (species distnbution and cultivation. natural flora and vegetation dominance). Some rare habitats and/or structure by not permitting Erosion rate after ground flora could disappear, cultivation in sensitive areas preparation. 91 Activity Safeguard Possible adverse impact Proposed mitigation Proposed monitoring & Responsible policy measure evaluation institution tritiggered Teriacinig by EA [Possiblc In tile case of ieplaotilig, 'I'akc necessar-y mcasuIr cs to Monitor establishlilicit of GDRS, hand in (non- erosioni in exotic species may be establish indigenious species. plant covei In the disturbed NIARA. ai able) forest pI cpaI ation introdUced Rc-vcuctatc teiTaces. areas. and .11111 to Sttp A-giavata Cilos1on1 following \Waiel harvestiniu Ib Mnilo\0111t1 downsti c:ln laneeland erosion terlacina iangeland rebailitation chalLnes inl sedillmelnt cat Iie c aFe a Ck I-L (.eIat"It 0I \IIm 11 VIII Jillui hbe SLi lace I un1-01Ii ,\l able IA [Pos.ble fi as:iSe ci osioill o while Innlict.ei:1 IC-\s cuetationl t ,stNtloturilnl'g ot \oVf':latill ( D)RS., \hf ioulind crosinol In preparing tel-lacc leo ace edges/slopes suCture (spcieS - GDNI' telTaciiig. preparation; Destruction of natural Planting perennials/grass distribution/dominance) alii is to vcgetation. whercvci possible t iosion r-atc after ground pievent Obtain farmilCer's pledge preparation. elros10io] M initioize Imcclianitcal work AgriCultural/lorticulturaI and design slope in yields. accordance witlh soil StlrUCtUI e & weather. Promote di IP Irrigation. Study/r'Cscarch value of IatLi al vegetation for ter r ace stabilization Building EA. For Attract water bomis diseases. Observe building codes. Monitor water for water GDRS Irrigation watlersheds I'Llddling roun.ld cdges Vcctol s f'r d iscase colti ol. borm d isCases ponids diailling to iPooIr disposal ot' excavated Propel design anid correct tMonitor water qUalitY alnd B3lack Sea. materials vegetation to limit puddling, quaL1tity (sedimentatiotl) Decrease water flowing to IProper disposal of earth etc. Water quanitity and lowevr catcilebments and may Min1or amoLint of \\ater availahility downstirear. be inteniational watersways. storagc. Control storage Monitor cdges of pondcs capacity. Moniitoin-ig of disposal. BulAding EA. For Reduced dowvnst eamiv watet Limiit dam heig-ht to 15 Om Climate (wind, temperatutle, GDRS, small watersheds flow Observe building coders. rainfall). MARA, resel-voils draininiig to Cbliaginig water quality In MNior amounit of water Stored water quality and( NMoE, DSI Black sea. the pond stot age Control storage quanitity in the reservoir Inter-national Sedimenitation, capacity and ensure water Reservoir silt deposits waterways. Chanige in grounddwater ielcase to satisfy Disease vectors Darm safety conditionis dowvnstream reqUilemIIenlts Downstreamii water quantity Water bornc diseases Contr ol land Lise in surTound and availability. Aquatic includinig mosquitoes. area to minimilize erosioni. prodLucts harvested Chaniges in hydrologic Limiit water ictentiots timc in regime of the streams the pond Decrease water flowing to Disease vector control. lower catclments and may I-lydrological plan for water be inteniational waterways. basin Installing EA. Increased water use. Controlled use of water. Physical and chemical GDRS, irrigation Introduction/ increase in use Hydrological plan for water propelties of soils. MARA, pipes and of fertilizers basin. Water quality at upstream MoE small-scale Introduction/increase in use Introduce sprinkler or drip and downstream (nutrients irrigation. of pesticides. irrigation for efficient use. and pesticides). Soil erosion. Economic cost for water Erosion rate. Soil erosion with sprinkler Design of sprinkler system irrigation on slopes. to ensure that sprinkler Changes in vegetation. application rate does not Scouring of canals, clogging exceed infiltration rate. canals by sediments/weeds. Design irrigation canals for easy weed and sediment removal. Proper handling and use of certified pesticides IPM. 92 K Public Consultations The project has been drawing up plans through public consultation from the beginning of project preparation. Since the Bank's Project Concept Document (PCD) meeting in November 2001, eight training courses oni various topics were conducted in the provinces for about 300 field staff. Thie topics Of tllcsC COUISCS included: the participatory process; participatory micr-o-catcllbmcnt (N4C) planning; natUral rcsoui-cc degradation and rehiabilitation; pr'OjeCt moniOl0tor'ing'1 & CVa"lua1tion; alnd p)ojcct adnii niistLatlioni. 'rihis trailliu" better enabled the field staff to explain the project to the beneFiciaries, local aLutholities and NGOs anid help witli problem solvinig during imcetings. Iiideed the training inCILuded the participatory planninig process based on1 the 'Benleficiary Cenltred Problelm Ceinsus, Problem Solving Process' (BCPCPSP). This process stresses the imporltance of listening to the benieficiaries and helps them propose activities, rather than being told what to do. In Febr-uary 2002, a total of 16 MCs were chosenl as the first areas for project activities. One MC was identified in ten of the project provinces concentratinig on erosion contl-ol. In the other 3 provinces where there is GEF involvemiient, namely Tokat, Anasya and Corumii, two MCs were clhoscen per provinice, one focusing on agricultural pollution and the otlher mainlly on erosion control. The BCPCPSP was started in March 2002 in the villages of each micro-catcihiiienit, particularly in those that are prone to erosion. Most if not all the problems were identified in the consultationi meetings with the villagers together with their relevant solutions. Annex 8 gives a list of villages that took part in these participatory planning meeting in the five micro-catchment areas! visited by the national consultant. Several public consultations were nmade with all the actors in the project including MARA, MoE, MoF and the involved departmiienits, field staff of these Ministries of five of the thirteen provinces. Villagers in several water catchmelnts, private farmers, owners of cattle feeding sheds, local mayors of toWlns with agro-industries and village heads were consulted about the project and their views were noted. Two field trips were made to the project area, one by the international consultant in early June 2002 and one by the local consultant in July 2002. The intemational consultant was accompanied by other international and national consultants, government agency personnel from Ankara and the project area and World Bank Staff (Annex 8). The local consultant accompanied by one of her colleagues visited six water catchments in five provinces, discussed the project with local people and government officials and collected infornation on these areas, especially in relation to the environment and the possible mitigation activities. The beneficiaries took an active part in these discussions. The minutes of the meetings held with the people in the six watersheds are given in Annex 6 and a list of participants is given in Annex 8. As a result of a series of meetings with the project staff, it was observed that the MC communities are well aware of the problems associated with over-exploitation of natural resources and the project's concept for their sustainable use. It was also observed that there is a significant commitment to the project both by the project staff and by the community. 93 Consultations are ongoing with all the players and this draft 'Regional Environmental Assessment' report was presented at a workshop in the MoF in Ankara on Friday 6'h September 2002. A participant's list is given in Ainex 8, together with a brief outline of th-e presentationi. In addition in October 2002, the national consultanit visited Malatya Province in order to see the practices and outcomes resulting from the EAWRP and to consult With the local sta ff that \vorked in the prl-eVions projCCt oll lessons lerant (Anncx S). It is anticitp,tccl, that this REA will be the stairtling poilnt OF all CxteCndcdl CiaLoie on mallinstreICamlri ng Ce1\nironmentaliL;l colnceI-lls ill everyday LaictIvitie lS of i iaL-ers anld 11o lCic il a1i the project area. Comments were received from World Bank Staff and GoT officials. As a result, the first draft REA was edited. A second consultation \vorkslhop was held on the 26'h Decembel- 2002 to discuss this new draft REA. Annlex 8 gives a list of participants at this meetilng. But silce theni it has been further refined to include a suLmmlllar-y of the REA in World Bank format (Annlex 7) and a list of participaLnts at various meetinigs with the beneficiaries, local autlhority people and GoT officials etc., together \vith details about makilg the report available to the generial pLublic. This is givenl in Anilex S. One or two points emerge from a review of the consultationi and participation process that took place durinig the EAWRP. The early consultationis were biased to a top-dowin approach. This may be understandable because the villagers requested more economllic initiatives as opposed to environmental inter-venitionis. Also, it was easier for government agencies, especially the MoF to undertake project components on their land rather thall oni land where ownership was in dispute or on private land. Lessons were leant from this anid nlow inl the AVRP (male) villagers are fully involved from the start. Some of the villages were disappointed with the EAWRP project because it was tenrinated before componenits were finished. They contenld that Governiment should fulfil its obligations and complete the initiatives that were started, before proceeding witlh other projects such as this AWRP. This project should ensure that there is enough money and time to fulfil all the commitments it has made. There was a GEF sub-component in the EAWRP, but there does not seem to have been much cooperation between the main project and the GEF intervention. In part, this was because the GEF initiative was concerned with gene conservation of indigenous plants. But one complaint of the project was that planting material, particularly tree seeds, were generally of poor quality. The GEF sub-component could have assisted the main project in identifying superior seed sources in the area or within Turkey. The GEF sub-component of this AWRP has a critical part to play, even though it is confined to four provinces. The promotion of friendly agricultural practices using organic fertilizers; undertaking soil testing and demonstrating minimum tillage applies to all the project areas not just the four provinces. Therefore, there must be a full and integrated partnership between the government agencies that were working in the EAWRP and the new agencies that are joining them on this project. Also barriers must be overcome and there has to be flexibility concerning delineation lines. There are trees 94 outside the forest and samples of these have to be measured during baseline and re- surveys. The forest service has the expertise, but from preliminary indications it says that it is not its responsibility to measure such trees, whereas MARA may not be capable of doing this task. Such disputes must be faced and a compromise reached. This project will benefit the people and the country, not only individual sectors. This REA report hals bccn tr-ianslatcd into TuLr-kisl and(i vWillI be m11adce a\VailaleC tIo tIlC pub)lic cspecially in ihc project areas. lic RIEA CIoCuTiC1t will be discusscd in lengii by the relevant stakeoholders fromii govermenit organizations, professional bodies and NGOs at a workshop to be held in Aikara on the 20t' Februal-y 2003. Finally, when making the field trip in early June, not enough time was spent in each village, because the programme was too crowded. Wheni uLnder-takinig future field trips, enough time must be set aside so that the views of all the villagers, both male and female, be heard. The same should apply to future participatory meeting. Thc project xvill succeed best if the ownierslip is vested in the people anid they feel it is their plan. 95 Baglicadere Micro catchments plan (to be inserted by GDRS). 96 Orcan Micro-catchment Plan (to be inserted by GDRS). 97 Kabaktepe Micro-catchment Plan (to be inserted by GDRS). 98 Gogden Micro-catchment Plan (to be inserted by GDRS). 99 Annexes Annex 1. Terms of Reference for the Regional Environmenital Management Plan. Ainnex 2. Environnmcntal Screenin(g of Proposed Interventions roI- AWRP, incldcIing, the GEF Component, and tlhil- likely Elnvi-onniintal Impaicts. Anniex 3. Legal Framevwork. Annex 4. Selected Micro-catchmzents in the AWRP. Aniiex 5. A TVRP. Project Pelforl17cince MnIorlinolilg Comllpolnenit. Anniex 6. Minutes of Meetings durling Fielcl Trip of Sema Alpan July 2002. Annlex 7. Environmiiienltal Managemiienit Plan AWRP. 100 Annex 1. Terms of Reference for the Regional Environmental Management Plan. The National and International Consultants will carry out the following main tasks. Additional tasks may be requested by the Project Preparation Unit durinig the assessment. Task 1 - Policy, Legal cuiid Aminnisiralive Fraiuzeivo;k. Analyse tihc policy, legal and adini''strat'ive franicvork (governnient, NGOs. coniniunitics) tihat arc inltiencing or involvecl inI enviri-onmenlital manZIMaUemcnit inI tile i-)ojCCt aIr-..Is. In1cludeC tIlC aIssessnieCIlt olI national and, where applicable, regional priorities as to how they may constraini or facilitate implemenitation of proposed project activities. Assess inter-agency coordination issues and propose appropriate institutional arrangements for adequate consideration of environmlental issues during and after project implementation. Propose requiremenits for capacity building durinig project implenmentationi, includilng need for consultants and training, and provide estimates of costs and TOR. Task 2 - Baseline Data. Collect relevant baseline data for the natural environment, includinig climate, soil, geology, water resoturces, land uise, agriculture, livestock, agro-inidustry, biodiversity, rural infi-astructure, as well as thle social environnment, including demography and economics'6. Based on the information collected, key environmlental issues xvill be determined, that wvill have to be considered by the project or that may impact project implementation. Trends with regards to these environmental issues will have to be assessed. Benchmarks for project impact assessment and monitoring wvill be detennined. The REA shall provide a detailed description of the baseline environmental status in the different provinces. Task 3 - Lessons from previous and ongoing7 projects anid studies. Review experiences with enviromnental issues and mitigation under the EAWRP, and detenrine lessons to be taken into account during design and implementation of the AWRP. Identify other projects and studies with similar components as the proposed project that are carried out in the project provinces. Determine whether activities under these projects serve or contradict the proposed project activities. Lessons shall again be integrated in project design and implementation. Task 4 - Environmental Screening. Review the proposed project components and activities from the point of view of environmental risks and benefits. Propose screening criteria to address and prioritise environmental concerns and impacts. Propose environmental indicators to be considered in the evaluation of project benefits, both in the short (up to 5 years) and long-term (15 years) timeframe. Task 5 - Project Environmental Impacts. Outline potential negative and positive environmental impacts of each of the project activities, and provide qualitative and quantitative assessment. Develop mitigating measures for each of these impacts during design, implementation and management of the activities. 16 Some of this baseline information will be available in working papers prepared under other project preparation activities. This data will be made available by the PPU and can be used by the consultants, after review and analysis. 101 Suggested format for the Project Screening Matrix: Project Project Relevant Potential Nature, Scope Mitigation Key Component Activity Environmenital Field and Time-frame Proposed Assumptions Indicators Actions of Potential Envir-onmlenltal Impacts Tcask 6 - Analysis of alter-niatives. Compare the project's activities and the resulls of the impact assessmenit a"ainist the \vithout-project situation in the short and lorno-term scenarios. Estimate the cumulative incremenital impact of the project on the project areas' environmehit, natural resource base and socio-economic conditions. For the non-Black Sea catchment areas the extent of intervenitionis under the EAWRP shall serve as the startling point for estimating this cuml1ulative impact assessmenit. For the GEF fundcled activities in the Black Sea provinces, thle resulls of manlure mlaniagemllentt and agro-industry studies will be used to provide a possible scenario of interventionis. Task 7 - Mlollnitorinlg alnld Evaliuation Plani. Deteriminie the expected enlvironimenital outputs expected from the proposed project. Propose appropriate practical and useful indicators to monitor and evaluate negative and positive project environmenltal impacts. Propose monitoring and evaluation tools and strategies that could be integrated into the project. Task 8 - Elnvironiiiielntal Alfancagement Plci. Prepare an environmenital management and monitoring plan for project implemiienitationi, whlichi addresses all key environmllental impacts, as well as the mitigating measures durinig constructioni and thereafter, and institutional responsibilities for implemiientationi, monitor-inig and supervision. This plan shall be fully costed and requirements for equipment shall be determined. Develop an environnmental management training program, includillng training modules, consultants' needs, TOR, and costing possible funding sources. Task 9 - Consultation with Stakeholders. Take the lead in conducting public consultation workshops (with affected/beneficiary groups, relevant government agencies, local administrations, academics, NGOs, and others). Solicit opinions on positive and negative environmental issues associated with the proposed project to aid the development of the REA framework. The public consultation will be facilitated by the PPU and Group 2 staff. There will be a close cooperation with the social assessment Consultant and other project preparation teams. The workshops will be conducted early on during the consultancy in two central cities within the project area, as well as towards the end of the consultancy to present the draft REA. Review the consultation and participation process that took place during EAWRP and provide recommendations for necessary awareness raising, consultations and feedback during project implementation. 102 Task 10 - Review of Bank Safeguard Policies. Review the Bank's safeguard policies and determine which of these policies applies to the proposed project. For those that apply, determnine the implications for project design. The Consultants will produce a Draft REA covering the tasks outlined above. The REA report should be developed in a clear, logical and rcadable manner. A sug:,gestedl outline of the REA is given below. Thc CXCCUtiv'C Su.lmmNlary shall be bricf and sIuccinct. The drCIift report \iVII be sLbllittCed to the [PlU. Commiiienlts \\ill be providcd by the l'llu and implementing agencies and the World Bank wltlilti two weeks from the submissioin date. Within three weeks of receipt of the commllenlts the draft final REA rcpor-t wvill be submitted to the PPU. Commu-ents will be provided withiln one week from the submission date. This is also the time when the final consultation workshops will take place (see Task 9). The final EA report shall address final comments and wvill include the milnltes of the public consultationis. The consultants will also prepare a non-technical summary of the EA report. The Consultanit will submit any additional material that was collected as part of the project that may be of use to the proposed project. An electronic version of the REA report and noni-teclhnical sumlmlllary wvill also be submllitted in MS Word 2000 format and any electronic version of maps and figurles included in the EA report. Suggested Outline of the REA Report. This outline is based on the REA framework outlined in the World Bank Environmental Assessment Sourcebook Update #15, and has been modified to a more appropriate fonrat given the scope of the proposed REA. The REA will include a clear and concise executive summary, and sections outlined below that describe the consultant's tasks. The main report should be succinct. Other data that is relevant should be attached as annexes. Executive Summary Acronyms A. Introduction B. Project Description C. Institutional & Policy Issues D. Baseline Information E. Lessons from Previous Ongoing Projects & Studies F. Environmental Screening G. Project Environmental Impacts H. Assessment of Alternatives I. Monitoring and Evaluation Plan J. Environmental Management Plan K. Public Consultation Maps, Tables, Figures, Graphs, Photographs Appendices/Annexes Information Sources/Bibliography 103 Annex 2. Environmental Screening of Proposed Interventions for AWRP, including the GEF Component, and their likely Environmental Impacts. Table A2 1. Proposed interventionis by the MloF for Soil Conscervation and Sceedling Prodtictioni. Intervention Soil collservation throuigh trCee plantin"g an(l seellini p)rodul itjioll At'Ftorestanon 1Poor. deLraded Ciallcyv Ntirsci v Landct bai-c soil areals i chabiliituii Intervenition code 1000 1 1100 1200 1300 A. Interventions witlh possible a(lverse eni-vironnien tal iml.lCt Forest roads Yes No No No Service roads Yes No No No Ground preparation/terracing Yes Yes Yes Yes Gully rehabilitationi Yes Ycs No'? No Applicationi of pesticides/insecticides No No No Yes? Overuse of r esouirces IPerhaps -Yes Perlhaps No B. Interventions withl possible positive environmcntal impacts Seed sowin1g Yes Yes No Yes Natulal regenler-ationi No Yes NIo No Plantinig Yes Yes Yes No Weeding Yes Yes Yes Ycs Gully rehabilitationi Yes Yes No No Fertilizer application (witli GEF) ? Yes Forest road maintelnanice Yes No No Yes Fencing Yes Yes Yes Yes? (natLral) Maintenance Yes Yes Yes Yes C. Interventions to imp rove productivity Re-vegetation (seed sowing) Yes Yes Yes Yes Natural regeneration No Yes No No Planting No Yes Yes Yes Puinlllg Yes Yes Yes ? (roots) Thinning Yes Yes Yes Yes'? Fertilizer application (witli GEF) ? ? ? Yes Weeding Yes Yes Yes Yes Natural conservation Perhaps Yes No No D. Interven tions to improve economic activities Inventory of woody biomrass Yes Yes Yes No Estimation of use of woody biomass Yes Yes Yes No Improved management/use of woody Yes Yes Yes No biomass etc. (2200) Inventory of NWFP (2000) Yes Yes Yes No Promotion of NWFP (2000) Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps No Establish/manage bee hives (6800) Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Possible hunting areas (2300) Perhaps Perhaps No No Possible protection area (2400) Perhaps Perhaps No No Integrated pest management (2100) Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Yes Establishing private nurseries No No No Yes Training incl. Enviromnental training Yes Yes Yes Yes Guard shed/Store Yes No No Yes Note. Yes, No, Perhaps etc. refers to whether or not a specific activity such as road building is listed under the component such as afforestation. If the particular intervention could have a negative or positive environmental impact etc., then this is recorded in the appropriate column and discussed in the main text. 104 For tree planting initiatives for soil conservation in forest areas including galleries and to protect and improve poor degraded and bare soils as well as to raise seedlings, there are little potential adverse environmental impacts caused by the proposed interventions and many positive impacts. One potential negative impact concerns road construction. When undertaking road construction, maximum slopes should not exceed standards set for the soil type and terrain. Culverts should be installed to prevent erosion and bridges built acr-oss str-camis o0 rivers of a specified N idth. \WheIrc thC soil is distulbed throughL cut alid Fill, the CxposeCd grouLnd shoul-d he re-vegetated qtuickly to prev%ent crosion Mlaintcnance of ioads Is imlportalit to preCelnlt closio lrlting dld \%vatCr iogging CIc At pl eseut seonlc Of the alcus, especially the dCLr,1dCed areas, are beinig overused for goods and services (grazing, W\ood and no0-wooCI producLts etc.). This is a principal reason for the interventions. It is importanit to unidertake an invenitory of the growing stock and yield of the different flora and fautna so as to determilne the imbalance, if any, between supply anic dleiiai and to formulate a sustainable supply strategy. Where ground preparation by hand and machinle is proposed including terracing, care must be taken to prevent erosion. If fertilizers, both organic and inorganic, are to be added, first, soil testing must be undertakeni to ensure that the correct dosages are applied. Otherwise, too much application could lead to leaching of excess minerals into surroundinig water bodies; these could eventually finish up in the Black Sea. This could be undertaken in collaboration with the GEF component. Generally speaking, fertilizer application will have a positive influence on the environmllenlt by promotinig plant growth and encouraging an increase in flora and faunla. The nurser-y may use pesticides and/or herbicides. It is importanit to ensure that only certified chemicals are allowed and that they are handled, used and stored according to FAO or other agreed directives. Also, the containers must be disposed of according to agreed procedures. The local population should be consulted about rare or endangered flora and fauna and possible sites for protection or hunting. If such areas exist, then a complete inventory should be undertaken and if potential biodiversity areas (hotspots) are found, then they should be protected, provided agreement is reached with the beneficiaries. As mentioned above, a forest inventory of total aboveground woody biomass should be carried out before the proposed interventions occur. This will act as a baseline by which the rehabilitation measures can be judged. In addition, an estimate of the annual increment should be made and compared to an estlimate of annual removals of wood products. This will indicate the condition of the growing stock. Similarly, an inventory of flora and fauna should be undertaken before interventions are made with estimations of the current off-take of plant and animal products (fruit, mushrooms, honey, game, fish etc.). Such an inventory can then be used as a baseline to compare changes, both positive and negative. These inventories can be used to devise an improved management plan in order to remove not more than the sustainable supply of any one product and if necessary, protect biodiversity hotspots. Various interventions are given to improve the productivity of the land. Some have already been suggested, but others are new. Likewise interventions are given to improve the economic viability of the rangeland areas. Again some have been suggested and others are new. Besides rehabilitating nurseries, it is important to provide training in nursery establishment and management to the local population, so that they are encouraged to raise seedling of perennials for the project, for their own use and for sale. Training should also be given in environmental protection. All the above interventions, except for nursery rehabilitation should lead to an increase store of woody biomass and additional sequestration of carbon in wood and the soil beneath the wood. This is why it is important to undertake a biomass inventory and soil sampling for carbon content prior to the start of the initiative and at intervals throughout the project's lifetime and beyond. Only by doing this will the scale of carbon sequestration become apparent. This carbon could be used to offset emissions from fossil fuels and/or to trade. Action to reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide is an environmental concem just as important as biodiversity preservation or reduction of the nutrient load in water and hence decreasing eutrophication in national and intemational waters and reducing excessive mineral content in groundwater. 105 Table A2 2. Proposed interventions by the MoF for Forest Rehabilitation. Intervention Forest Rehabilitation | Oak coppice Cedar | Higli forest Maquis Intervenitioni code 1600 1700 1800 1900 A. Interventions with possible advcrse cnvironmnenital impact Fru,est r-oadcis Yes Y _es 1 _ _ GronL1ud pcpa at on/ic Irac inc Yes Yes ,Yc es tinily Yess Ycs Yes Ics OverLse of IesouLces PIrhaps l'erkaps l'ehliaps | erlhaps B. Interventions with possiblc positive environmental impacts NatuLal coniservation Ycs No Yes Yes Re-vegetation (seed sowinlg) No Yes Yes Yes Plantiing No Yes Yes Yes Coppicing Yes No Yes Yes Prunilg No Yes Yes Thinnin1g No ? Yes Gtilly rehabilitation Yes Yes Yes Yes Fertilizer application (witlh GEF) '? ? '? '! Forest road maintenianice Yes Yes No No WVeeding ? ? ?_'! Fencing Yes Yes Yes Yes Maintenianice Yes Yes Yes Yes C. Interventions to improve lorest prodtuctivity Natural conservation Yes No Yes Yes Re-vegetation (seed sowin1g) No Yes Yes Yes Planting No Yes Yes Yes Coppicing Yes No Yes Yes PrLlilmg No Yes Yes Thiinuiing No Yes ' Fertilizer application (with GEF) ? ? ? ? Weeding ? ? D. Interventions to improve economiiic activities Inventory of woody biomass Yes Yes Yes Yes Estimation of current use of woody Yes Yes Yes Yes biomass Improved management/use of woody Yes Yes Yes Yes biomass etc. (2200) Inventory of NWFP (2000) Yes Yes Yes Yes Promotion of NWFP (2000) Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Wild tree grafting (2600) Perhaps No Perhaps Perhaps Establish/manage bee hives (6800) Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Possible hunting areas (2300) Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Possible protection area (2400) Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Integrated pest management (IPM) Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps (2100) Training including environmental Yes Yes Yes Yes training 106 For forest rehabilitation and management, there are few potential adverse environmental impacts caused by the proposed interventions and many positive impacts. One potential negative impact concerns road construction. When undertaking road construction, maximum slopes should not exceed standards set for the soil type and terrain. Culverts should be installed to prevent erosion and bridges built across streams or rivers of a specified width. Where the soil is disturbed througLh cut and fill, the exposed ground should be re-vegetated quickly to prevent erosion. Maintenance of roads is importanit to prevent erosion, rultting and watcr lo0cilln etc \WherC erouLnic preparation is undertaken, partlicularly terracn1g wvith llachincs, carc must be taken to minim'izc crosioni XVhile cUndertaking the operation and vc'etation coverl of thle terracc \\alI soiU(l bc Jlo)0lllntCd 'his aIso apJples to Etil 1' rellahiIiaitlon. At present sonlic of tlhe a teas aic heillL oVCx'used for goods and services (wood and ilill-\vooWd products, grazing ctc.). Tlhis is a principal IrCason fiO the intervenitions. It is important to unidertake an inventory of the growing stock andl yield of the different flora anid fauna so as to determiinle the imbalanice, if any, between supply and demand and to form-iulate a sustainiable supply strategy. The local populationi should be consulted about rare or endanigered flora and fauna and possible sites for protection or hunting. If such areas exist, then a complete inventory should be undertaken and if potential biodiversity areas (hotspots) are founld, theni they should be protected, provided agreemlenlt is reached withl the beneficiar-ics. As menitionied above, a forest inventory of total aboveground woody bioniass should be cair-ied out before the proposed interventions occur. This will act as a baseline by wlhiclh the relhabilitationl measures can be judged. In addition, an estimate of the annual increment should be made and compared to an estimate of annual removals of wood products. This will indicate the condition of the growinig stock. Simiilarly, an inventory of flora and fauna should be undertakeni before interventions are made witl estimations of the current off-take of plant and animal products (firLit, mushrooms, honey, game, fish etc.). Such an inventory can theni be used as a baseline to compare chaniges, both positive and negative. These inventories can also be used to devise an improved managemenit plan in order to not remove more than sustainable supply of any one product and if necessary to protect biodiversity hotspots. Various interventions are given to improve forest productivity. Some have already been suggested, but others are new. Likewise interventions are given to improve the economic viability of the forest areas. Again some have been suggested and others are newv. If fertilizers are added, this could be done in collaboration with the GEF component. Training should be given to the local populationi in all aspects of tree planting, coppicing, establishment, management and environmental protection. All the above interventionis should lead to an increase store of woody biomass and additional sequestration of carbon in wood and the soil beneath the wood. This is why it is important to undertake a biomass inventory and soil sampling for carbon content prior to the start of the initiatives and at intervals throughout the project's lifetime and beyond. Only by doing this will the scale of carbon sequestration become apparent. This carbon could be used to offset emissions from fossil fuels and/or to trade. Action to reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide is an environmental concern just as important as biodiversity preservation or reduction of the nutrient load in water and hence decreasing eutrophication in national and international waters and reducing excessive mineral content in groundwater. 107 Table A2 3. Proposed Interventions by MoF & MARA for Range Management and Rehabilitation. Intervention Range maanagement Range rehabilitation In forests Outside forest In forests Outside forests Interventioni code 1400 7500 1500 7600 A. Interventions wi'itli possible adverse emvironmiental impact Scivice roadis Yes No Yes No Iorest /r ance road(s IYes _ I.rhaps Y.s 1 B'e; hps Decep rippin, N\1o No INs | Vo l GLully relhabilitationi No No Yes Yes Fertilizer application (witlh GEF) No No Yes Yes Field/stone clearanice No No Yes (field) Yes (stonie) Reservoir constuLction Yes No Yes No OveruLse of resources Yes Yes Yes Yes B. Interveentions with possible positivE il-enionen , al impacts Re-vegetation No No JYes Yes Gully rehabilitation No No Yes Yes Fertilizer application (vith GEF) No No Yes Yes Deep rippin;, No No Yes No Field/stone clearing No No Yes (field) Yes (stone) Forest road mainitenianice Yes No Yes No Weeding No No Yes Yes Fcinciig Yes Yes Yes Yes Small reservoirs Yes No Yes No Maintenanlce Yes Yes Yes Yes Demonstrations Yes (1400) No Yes (1500) Yes (7400) Efficiency estimation cages Yes Yes Yes Yes C. Interverntions to implrove animilal hu sbandry- Weeding No No Yes Yes Field clearance No No Yes No Shade frames Yes Yes Yes Yes Small reservoirs Yes No Yes No Well construction Yes Yes Yes Yes Drinkinig troughs Yes Yes Yes Yes Sheep dips Yes Yes Yes Yes Salt licks Yes Yes Yes Yes Itching posts Yes Yes Yes Yes D. Interventions to improve economic activities Inventory of NWFP (2000) Yes Yes Yes Yes Promotion of NWFP (2000) Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Inventory of mountain fruit Yes Yes Yes Yes Promotion of mountain fruit Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Inventory of woody biomass Yes Yes Yes Yes Estimation of use of woody biomass Yes Yes Yes Yes Improved management/use of woody Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps biomass etc. (2200) Wild tree grafting (2600) Perhaps No Perhaps No Establish/manage bee hives (6800) Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Fish Farming (4000) Perhaps No Perhaps No Possible hunting areas (2300) Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Possible protection area (2400) Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Training incl. Environrental training Yes Yes Yes Yes 108 For rangeland management and rangeland rehabilitation inside or outside forests, there are few potential adverse environmental impacts caused by the proposed interventions and many positive impacts. One potential negative impact concerns road construction. When undertaking road construction, maximum slopes should not exceed standards set for the soil type and terrain. Culverts should be installed to prevent erosion and bridges built across streams or rivers of a specified widtlh. Where the soil is disturbed through cut and fill, the exposed ground should be re-vegetated quickly to prevent erosion. Maintenance of roads is 111po1taut to pr"evet crosioin, rutting anid water lo- ing etc. At prc,ecniany of many au. e 1s beillg overused for goods and services (grazing. wood anlcl non-wood pr ocdllcts etc.) This is a prin-cipal reasoni for the InIteIreCIntIiOlnS. It is impIo(l;I l tIo to LIndl(ai-,IC 1 Ian nVCItol of t thek ierowvi stock zani d yieI d oftl d ifferent llora and 1aIbuna so as to CdeteCmilic thc imbalanice, it any, betwcnii stnpply and demliall(n and lo to fo-rullatC a sustainable supply strategy. Where deep ripping is proposed, care must be taken to prevent erosion. However, deep ripping should ensure a greater percolation of water and minimize ruLn-off and possible erosion. Similarly, wlhen field clearanice is unidertakeni, care must be taken to preserve biodiversity especially of rare plants suchi as orchids. However, this operation should clear intrusive weed species, some of which are exotics. If fertilizers, both organic and inorganic, are to be added to rangelands, soil testing must first be uLndertakell to ensuLc that the correct dosages are applied. Otherwise, too muclh application coulci lead to leachinig of excess minerals inlto surrounidincg Nvater bodies; these could eventually finiislh up in the Black Sea. This could be done in collaboration witlh the GEF componient. Gener-ally speaking, fertilizer application will have a positive influenice on the environmenit by promoting plant growtlh and encouraging an increase in flora and faunla. The local populationi should be consulted about rare or endangered flora and faunia and possible sites for protection or hunting. If such areas exist, then a complete inventory of these areas should be undertakeni and if potential biodiversity areas (hotspots) are found, then they should be protected, provided agreement is reached with the beneficiaries. As indicated above, a general invenitory of flora and fauna should be undertaken before interventions are made with estimations of the current off-take of plant and animal products (wood, fiuit, honey, milk, meat, wool, fish etc.). Such an invenitory can then be used as a baseline to compare chaniges, both positive and negative. Thle invenitory can also be used to devise an improved managemenit plan in order to remove not more than sustainiable supply of any one product. Various interventions are given to improve the productivity of the land. Some have already been suggested, but others are new. Likewise interventions are given to improve the economic viability of the rangeland areas. Again some have been suggested and others are new. Training should be given to the local population in all aspects of the above interventions and general training in envirotimental protection and environmental friendly pastoral practices should be part of such training. All the above interventions should lead to an increase store of woody biomass and additional sequestration of carbon in wood and the soil beneath the wood. This is why it is important to undertake a biomass inventory and soil sampling for carbon content prior to the start of the initiatives and at intervals throughout the project's lifetime and beyond. Only by doing this will the scale of carbon sequestration become apparent. This carbon could be used to offset emissions from fossil fuels and/or to trade. Action to reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide is an environmental concern just as important as biodiversity preservation or reduction of the nutrient load in water and hence decreasing eutrophication in national and international waters and reducing excessive mineral content in groundwater. 109 Table A2 4. Miscellaneous Interventions by MoF to assist Forest Management and Rehabilitation Intervention Inventory w rk Planning and Establishing Trees Non-wood Inteorated Game areas Protection Forest Pest areas Products Managemiienit 1ntrcrclntion codc Code 2000 2100 2300 2400 i eqeLiilccl A. InLervcniionis vilih possible adv'crsc cii'qii -oilIcIIidI i_):ict BuLldillng ICCCSS ro;l(ls No No N/A l'cIh Lps ]ci imps Buildinig infrastructure No No N/A Perhaps Ieieriaps Ovel-LISC of resources N/A N/A N/A Perhaps P erihaps B. Interventions with possible positive environmental impacts Sustainable management and Yes Ycs N/A Yes Yes maniagement plans Natural control of pests N/A N/A Yes N/A N/A Increased flora and fauLna Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Demonstrations Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Monitor-ing & evaluation Yes Yes Yes | Yes Yes C. Interventions to improve productivity Seeding and planting, especially No Yes N/A Yes Yes of fodder/browvse plants. Ga me manageemcnt No No N/A Yes ? Breeding insects to control N/A N/A Yes N/A N/A pests and their release Fencinig of hotspots N/A Yes No Perhaps Yes D. Interventions to improve economiiic activities Estimation of current use of Yes No N/A No No woody biomass Promotioni of wood products Yes No N/A No No Promotion of NWFP (2000) No Yes N/A Perhlaps Perhaps Improved management/use of Perhaps No N/A No No woody biomass etc. (2200) l Inventory of flora and fauna Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Promotion of huilting N/A N/A N/A Yes lNo Use of gene pool from hotspots Perhaps Perhaps N/A Perhaps Perhaps Eco-tourism N/A N/A N/A Perhaps Yes Marketing and market Yes Yes N/A Yes Yes information Training including. Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Environmental training l N/A = Not applicable. 110 For the above miscellaneous forest activities, there may be a few adverse enviromnental impacts caused by the proposed interventions, relating to possible hunting and protection areas. If such areas are developed, then access roads and game trails may have to be built and accommodation and centres for visitors and staff may have to be constructed. When undertakinig road and trail constructioni, maximumLi slopes should not exceed standar-ds set for the soil type and terraini. CLlverts should be installed to prevent erosion and bridges built across strealIs or rivers of a speciFied w\idth. Building should comply with ihc building codes an1cd carc shou.ld be taklen that thei size is in Iinc with the carrving capacity of the are1a. At present the potulli;al gallmc and p lottce0i(t LarLas 11a1yV be AeruSted 6 r goods adl scrv;c:Cs (gNrazil. wild\ltlc-. woo(l anld non-0Wood produLcts etc.). Ihis Is a plrincipal ieasonor ltole iniciventions. It is importanlt tO Undcrtakc an inventory of the growing stock and yield of the different flora and faunla so as to determnie the imibalanice, if any, between supply and demrand and to formulate a sustainiable supply strategy. The local population should be consulted about rare or endanlgered flora and fauna and possible sites for protection or hunting. As indicated above, a complete inventory of flora and faunia should be uLndertakenl and if potential biodiversity areas (hotspots) are founld, theii they should be protected, provided agreement is reaclhed witlh the beneficiaries. This invenitory should include estimations of the currenit off-take of plant and animilal piodctcts (vood, frulit, honiey, mcat, fish etc.). It can then bc tised as a bascline to compare changes, both positive and negative. The inventory can also be used to devise an improved managemiienit plan in order to remove not more than sustainable supply of any one product. Various interventions are given to improve the productivity of the land. Some have already been suggested, but others are new. Likewise interventions are given to improve the economic viability of the rangeland areas. Again soIIIe have been suggested and others are new. Traininlg should be given to the local population in all aspects of the above intervenitionis including environimental protection. There should be an ilcrease store of woody biomass and additional sequestration of carbon in wood and the soil for protected areas and possibly game areas. This is why it is important to undertake a biomass inventory and soil sampling for carbon contenit prior to the start of the initiatives and at intervals throughout the project's lifetilme and beyond. Only by doing this xvill the scale of carbon sequestration become known. This carbon could be used to offset emissions from fossil fuels and/or to trade. Table A2 5. Interventions by MoF and MARA for Habitat Rehabilitation, Participatory Planting and Wild Tree Grafting Intervenition Habitat rchliabilitation Participato ry planting WVild tce 1rafcicg In forest Outside: In forest Outside In forest Outside imcl. use of includinig forest mai-inal agro- lands forestr y 11tcl\VCHlfofl Code 6200 6100 2300 6600 2600 6200 A. lertvreiitions wiith possil Ic _a(dv'e'1se enNxirollinieiial ilill);Ict GrouLnd prep'n/terracing Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Gully relabilitationi Perhlaps Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps No No Fertilizer application (with Perhlaps Perhlaps Perhaps Perhaps No N,o GEF) OveruLse of resources Yes Yes Plerhaps Perhlaps No No B. Intcrventions with possible positive cnvil-ronmllclital impacts Nat. re-enierationi: trees Yes Yes l No No No No Nat riegenerationi: her-bs etc. Yes Yes INo Perhaps No No Seed sowing: trees & herbs Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Planting: trees & herbs Yes Yes Yes Yes Perhaps Perhaps Grafting Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Yes Yes Gully rehabilitation Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps No No Fertilizer application (witlh Perhlaps Perhaps Perhaps Perhlaps No No GEF) . C. Interventions to improve productivitv Nat. regenerationi: trees Yes Yes No No No No Nat regeneration: herbs etc. Yes Yes No Perhaps No No Seed sowiing: trees & herbs Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Plantinu- trces &. lher bs Yes Ycs Yes Yes Perhllaps Perhaps Graftingp s rhrli a ps Perhaps Perhaps Yes Yes Weeding Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Tendinig Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Sustainable managenieiit Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes D. Interventionis to improve economic activities Production of valuable Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes wood and non-wood species Promotion of farm trees of No No No Yes No Yes economic value Sustainable management Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Promotion of shelterbelts No Perhaps No Yes No No and agro-forest species Promotion of beekeeping Perhaps Yes Perhaps Yes No No and fish farming etc. Integrated pest management Perhaps Yes Perhaps Yes Yes Yes Training inc. environmental Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 112 For the above activities, there are few potential adverse environmental impacts namely ground preparation and gully rehabilitation caused by the proposed interventions. At present many of the areas are being overused for goods and services (wood and non-wood products, grazing etc.). This is a principal reason for the intervenltions. It is impoltant to undertake an inventory of the growing stock and yield of the different flora and fauna so as to determinie the imbalanice, if any, between supply and demand and to formulate a sustainiable supply strategy. There should be maniy positive impacts includinlIg increasinig the ground cover with tices and herbs etc., inmprovinlg the microclimiate and establishing favourable habitats roi- indigenous flora and fauna. If fertilizers are to be applied, this conld he done in collaboration withi the GEF colplipreln. As niciitionedI aovo\e. an I\'elntorv of each aea ThlioUld h. LIdICHtakenl beCfor-C ile intop)osed IlteCIVenlIon StarIItS 'Tis Slt111d iluC}UdC theC CuLrrCnt otCt-hikC Of plant aild anini1al piOdUCLS, if aIlly, (\\oOLi, fruit, honiey etc.). Suchi an invenitory can tlheni be used as a baseline to compare changes, both positive and negative. The invenitory can also be used to devise an improved managemcnent plan in order to r-emiove not more than sustainable supply of any one product. \Various intervenitionis are given to improve the productivity of the land and to ensure sustainability. Some have already been suggested, but others are new, especially plantinig trees on farms in agro-forestry formllations. Like-wise intervenitionis are given to improve the economic viability of the rangeland areas. Againi some have been suggested and othlers are new. Traininig should be given to the local population in all aspects of the above interventions including environmiental awareness and protectioni of hotspots, if any. All the above intervenitionis should lead to an increase store of woody biomass and additional sequestration of carbon in wood and the soil beneath the wood. This is wihy it is important to uLndertake a biomass inventory and soil sampling for carbon content prior to the start of the initiatives and at intervals throughout the project's lifetime and beyond. Only by doiig this will the scale of carbon sequestration become apparent. IThis carbon could be used to offset emissions from fossil fuels and/or to trade. Action to reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide is an environmnenital concern just as important as biodiversity preservation or reduction of the nutrient load in water and lhence decreasing eutrophication in national and interniational waters and reducing excessive mineral content in groundwater. 113 Table A2 6. Interventions by MARA related to Rainfed Environmentally-friendly Agricultural/Horticultural Practices. Intcrventioni/Land(i type M Iarginal lani(| Sloping land Plains River be(d Interventioni code 6100 4200 A. Eirosioni coiiti ol interventions Terracing (4100) Yes Yes N No 1Cs G(lill, 1Cailtaiioll .Ycs | es lerhilap.s | Yes Clhlnll work Peci hIalps 'N'o Ni, Ys Soil protectioni: mechanical Perilaps Yes No Yes Soil protection: plants Yes Yes Yes Yes Contour pIOughlilng Yes Yes Yes No Minimumi tillage Yes Yes Yes Yes Perenniiial crops Yes Yes Perhaps Yes Rotational crops No Yes Yes No Annual crops No Yes Yes No Perm1anienit crops Yes Yes Perhaps Yes B. Soil improvements Soil testing pH, N, P, K & C; humiius Yes Yes Yes Perhlaps contenit etc. (7000) Appropriate fertilizer use (organic & Perhaps Yes Yes Perhlaps inorganic) (7000) (with GEF) Legume crops Yes Yes Yes Yes Agronomic package (6900) No Perhaps Yes No o-orticultural cr-ops (6200) No Perhaps Yes No Crop rotations (fallow reduction 6000) No Yes Yes No Minimum tillage (6900) Yes Yes Yes Yes P'erennial cr ops. Yes Yes Perhaps Yes Agro-forestry/farm trees (6600) Yes Yes Yes Yes C. Economic enhanicemiienit Higlh value crops (6700) No Perhlaps Yes No ApicultuLle (6800) Yes Yes Yes P'erhaps Plastic tLnnels (7100) No Perhaps Yes No Fish ponds (4000) Perhaps Pcrhaps Perhaps Possible Appropriate fertilizer use (organic & Perhaps Yes Yes Perhaps inorganic) (7000) (with GEF) Demonstrations (7300) Yes Yes Yes Yes Training (including environmental Yes Yes Yes Yes training) Market informnation Yes Yes Yes Yes Application of pesticides and/or Perhaps Yes Yes No insecticides 114 For the above activities, there are few potential adverse environmental impacts namely ground preparation, terracing, gully rehabilitation and riverbank work caused by the proposed interventions. On some farms, the application of organic and/or inorganic fertilizers has been excessive with a consequential leaching of N, P and K into groundwater, streams and rivers. This is why soil testing is important. However, the majority of farms do not apply sufficient fertilizers and the appropriate application rates can increase productivity substantially. This intervenitioni can be undertaken in collaborationi witlh thc GEF componielnt. Likewise there may have been an oveluse or ina1ppropriatc use of pestici(ies/lhcrbicides yicldinlg simlilar adverse environmen-etal consequenlces If farmers are usintg pesticides anrd/or herbicicdes onl thleir crops. it is 1lmportant tO CnSutleC Ithat ouR1\ ccrtihicd clhClicicas arc AlliVwed an11d thlat theCy IC 1arehdledIC, LISed an(d S10tecd accoridilg to FA\O o0 other aiZrCCd dreCCtieCS. Also, thIe COn1taICInSr mlUISI bc disposed of accordilng 11o Igl cd procedures. There will be many positive environmenital impacts. These include soil stabilization withl terracing, gully plugging, contour ploughing and minimum tillage, increasling the ground cover witlh rotationial crops, grass, perenunial crops and herbs etc., improving the microclimate with trees and buslhes and applying the appropr-iate quantities of organic/inorganic fertilizers at the correct time. An inventory of eaclh area should be unidertakeni before the proposed nltervenitioni staits, especially of the minieral and humuis contenits of the soils. This shoulcl inclucle the currenit off-take of farm crops and the incidence of woody biomass on farm and other non-forest land. This will indicate if some resources arc being overused. Such an inventory can also be used as a baseline to compare changes, both positive and negative. The inventory can also be used to devise an improved management plan for the farming areas. Various interventions are given to improve the productivity of the land. Most have already been suggested, but a few are new such as minimilumii tillage and planting trees on farms in agro-forestry formatiolns. Likewise interventions are given to improve the economic viability of the farming areas. Again some have been suggested and others are new such as fishponds. Training should be given to the local population in all aspects of the above interventions including environmental training. All the above interventionis should lead to a decrease in erosionl, a decrease in the mnieral content in water bodies and an increase in crop productivity. It should also lead to an increase in carbon sequestration in woody biomass and the soil. This is why it is important to undertake a biomass inventory and soil sampling for carbon content prior to the start of the initiatives and at intervals throughout the project's lifetime and beyond. Only by doing this will the scale of carbon sequestrationi become apparent. This carbon could be used to offset emissionis from fossil fuels and/or to trade. Action to reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide is an environmental concern just as important as biodiversity preservation or reduction of the nutrient load in water and hence decreasing eutrophication in national and international waters and reducing excessive mineral content in groundwater. 115 Table A2 7. Interventions by the GDRS related to Irrigated Environmentally-friendly AgriculturaUlHorticultural Practices. lnter-venitioni/Land(l type Marginal land | Sloping land Plains Intervention code 4000? 4000 4000 A. Erosioni contirol inter-ventions Ter-iacilng (4100) Yes Ye No Gul11v ichabilitanton [ Yes | Yes Pes ps 11 C1atloll Caiial I-'c Lips P 'erhlaps _'Cs DIwersion wCirs Perhaps P1Ce.1rhps Y`Cs Irrigationi pond/far m pond No Perhaps Yes Soil protection: mechaniical Perhaps Yes No Soil protection: plants Yes Yes Yes Contour ploughinlg Yes Yes Yes MminimuLm1 tillage Yes Yes Yes Pereniniial crops Yes Yes Perilaps Rotationial crops No Yes Yes Anullal crops No Yes Yes Permanient crops Yes Yes Perhaps B. Soil improvemiients Soil testing: pH, N, P, K & C; huimus content Yes Yes Yes etc. (7000) Appropriate fertilizer application (organic & Perhaps Yes Yes inorganic) (7000) (with GEF) Legume crops Yes Yes Yes Agronomic package (6900) Perhaps Yes Yes Horticultural crops (6200) No Yes Yes Crop rotations (fallow\ reductioni - 6000) No Yes Yes Minimum tillage (6900) Yes Yes Yes Perennial crops. Yes Yes Yes Shelterbelts (6600) Yes Yes Yes C. Economic enhianicemiienit High value crops (6700) Perhaps Yes Yes Appropriate fertilizer application (orgailc & Perhaps Yes Yes inorganic) (7000) (with GEF) Apiculture (6800) Yes Yes Yes Plastic tunnels (7100) No Yes Yes Fish ponds (4000) Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps Demonstrations (7300) Yes Yes Yes Training (including environmental training) Yes Yes Yes Market information Yes Yes Yes Application of pesticides and/or insecticides Perhaps Yes Yes 116 For the above activities, there are few potential adverse enviromnental impacts namely weir construction (riverbank work), irrigation canal and pond construction including farm ponds, ground preparation, terracing and gully rehabilitation caused by the proposed interventions. On some farms, the application of organic and/or inorganiic fertilizers has been excessive witlh a consequenitial leaching of N, P and K into groundwater, streams and rivers. This is why soil testing is important. However, the majority of farms do not apply sufficient fertilizers and the appropriate application rates can increase productivity substanitially. This intervention can be unldertakeii in collaborationi \ith the GEF comilpoinenlt. Solime faimcrs milay Use ol overuse pesticides and/or herbicides on their crops. It is importanit to ensul-e that only certificd chemicals arC 31alo\\c d and that tlcv are hndled. used and storcel accoR(liln 1t IA0 or otheIr aYCCd diriCCtiVS A Iso. tilC containers miusist hc disposed of accordingu to aurecd procedill-res. However, most of the impacts are positive. These include soil stabilization witlh terracing, gully pluggilng, reduced water erosion because of more controlled use of the water, contour ploughlinig andc minimiuimiIll tillage, increasing the ground cover with rotational crops, grass, perennlial crops ancl herbs etc., improving the microclimiate with trees and buslhes and applying thc appropriate quanitities of organic and inorganiic fertilizers at the correct timie. It is essential that training be given on the appropriate use of irrigation water. If this is not done, excessive water use may cause the soil to be un-useable because of salt being broughlt to the surface, or alternlatively, water logging may occur, which again ma;kes the land sterile and uni-useable. An invenitory of each area should be unldertakeni before the proposed intervention starts, especially of the mineral and humnus contents of the soils. This should include the currenit off-take of farm crops and the incidence of woody biomass on farm and other non-forest land. Such an inventory can then be used as a baseline to compare changes, both positive and negative. The inventory can also be used to devise an improved management plan for the farming areas. Various interventions are given to improve the productivity of the land. Most have already been suggested, but a few are new such as minimumLl tillage and plantinig shelterbelts Likcwise interventions are given to improve the economic viability of the farming areas. Again some have been suggested and others are new such as fishponds. Training should be given to the local population in all aspects of the above interventions includingl environmiiienltal traininlg. All the above interventions should lead to a decrease in erosion, a decrease in the mineral content in water bodies and an increase in crop productivity. It should also lead to an increase in carbon sequestration in woody biomass and the soil. This is why it is importanit to unidertake a biomass invenitory and soil sampling for carbon content prior to the start of the initiatives and at intervals tlhroughout the project's lifetime and beyond. Only by doing this will the scale of carbon sequestration become apparent. This carbon could be used to offset emissions from fossil fuels and/or to trade. Action to reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide is an environmental concern just as important as biodiversity preservation or reduction of the nutrient load in water and hence decreasing eutrophication in national and international waters and reducing excessive mineral content in groundwater. 117 Table A2 8. Environmental impacts of Agro-Industrial Waste. Agro-industry Type of Polluting places Potential Environmental effect (Componieiit #) waste uise Medium to large Liquid and Rivers, Black Sea, Fertilizer, Excessive nitrate concentration cattle feeding solid grouilidwater, energy in water bodies, pathogenis in slied sometillmes excessivc (Imietlhanie) water, Lulnpleasanit smiiell, flies. uise oni Fielcls Dumips at 1-lgh biochemical oxygen (Al 1) roadside cc. dlellmllid (1301)) VICedium.11 to large iq,CiLd an RIvcI' s, Black SC.el t1ihzcr, Lxccssivc N coillcciatiloli ii poultry units solic groundwater, energy water bodies, patlhogens in (egg production) sometimes excessive (metlhanie) water, unipleasanit smell, flies. use on fields. Dumps at Hilgh BOD (Al 2) roadside etc. Medium to large Liquid and Rivers, Black Sea, Fertilizer, Excessive N concenitratioln in poultry uniits solid, guts grounldwater, energy xvater bodies, pathogenis in (broiler intestinies sometimes excessive (imiethanle) \vater, unpleasant smell, flies. proCdlction1) Luse on fields. Dumps at I-ligh 130D (Al 3) roacisidle etc. Slaughter hlouse Liquid and Rivers, Black Sea, Fcrtilizc-, Excessive N concenitiationi in solid, blood groundwater. Dumps at energy water bodies, pathogenis in guts, roadside etc. (metlhanie) water, unpleasant smell, flies. (Al 4) intestiiies High BOD Dairy products Whey and Rivers, Black Sea, Fertilizer? Higgh BOD maniufacture liquids groundwater Food. (Al 5) Sugar beet Liquid, Rivers, Black Sea, Fertilizer? High BOD, smell, flies. Smoike factory residues groundwater. Dumilps at Energy. (Al 6) roadside etc. \nlliery I-IcluiCd, Rivers, Black Sea, Iecrtilizcr? High BOD, smell, flies residues grounldwater. Dumps at Eniergy? (Al 7) roadside etc. Fi-uit juice LiquLid, Rivers, Black Sea, Fertilizer? -ligh BOD, smell, flies maniufactule residues groun1clwater. Dumps at Energy? (A1 8) roadside etc. __ Fruit and Liquid, Rivers, Black Sea, Fertilizer'? High BOD, smell, flies vegetables residues groundwater. Dumps at Energy? (Al 9) roadside etc. Confectionery Residues Rivers etc.'? Dumps at Energy? Smell, flies. Smoke (Al 10) roadside Wood processing Residues Rivers etc.? Dumps at Energy, Smoke roadside Board (Al 11) making Pulp/paper Liquid, Rivers, Black Sea, Energy, High BOD, some toxins. chemicals, groundwater. Dumps at reuse of Smoke. (Al 12) solid roadside etc. chemicals 118 There are envirornental laws goverming most if not all the effluents produced by the agro-processing factories. However, some of the factories were built before the environmental laws were introduced (sugar factories) and other factories, while having some treatment units do not utilize them fully or they are in a state of disrepair. The poultry and cattle units dispose of some of the manure to farmers, but they cannot get rid of it all. Many units are near towns and so the smell from suclh factories is obnoxious as well as being a potential hcaltlh hazard by pollutillg the drinking water and being a biceding ground for flies and other potentially dangerous insects. Also, ther-e may be traces of imiedicinies anid growth hiorioilnes in somile of thlC ase. \ 1hicli could lnlter the foocd chaint: this has to be colrollled if it is deltctc(l. While tlhele ae-c c(x lrlVonn ilntal I tles, tlhe best \\ y to have th le allctol ics comiply witI tlhemii is to fitnd( (pro iit,ablle) UseS s'r thll waste and/or help them dispose of them in a safe way. It is in the Governments ilterest to do so, for it has signalled its intelntion to comply witlh the Europeani Unionis "Nitrogcni Directive" and it is a silgnatory to pollution reduction in inter-niational waters. The GEF component of this Anatolia Watershed Rehabilitationi Project has the express aim of deimonstratinig practical uses for agro-industrial wastes, especially malLul-e from cattle andc poultry, while at the same time reducing nitrates inl rivers and grounid wvater, by applying appropriate amounts of organic fertilizers to agricultural and hor-ticultLral crop as well as to ranigelands and some tree crops. This will be achieved by testing the various soils for their miineral and hlumus contents and specifygin the quanitity and type of fertilizers to be addcd for specific crops. Fertilizer application in collaboration with the GEF Component has been specified in the tables. To complemenit this, environmentally friendly practices will be demonstrated such as minimum tillage, contour ploughing, agro-forestry, green manure and crop rotations. Specific poultry units and cattle feeding sheds will be chosen to demonstrate appropriate storage and use of liquid and solid manure. The water entering and leaving such factories will be tested, as will farmer's fields that ar-e testing grouLnds for the application of organic fertilizers. Some of the stored manure will vent methane, a more dangerous greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. This methane could be captLred in a digester. It is possible that the Project will demonstrate appropriate digesters at poultry units or cattle feeding sheds. If successful, suchI units could supply enough encrgy for the unit or be used to genel-ate electricity. The slurry from the digester is a better fertilizer thaln the raw dung. 119 Annex 3. Legal Framework. Some relevant legislation on agriculture and agricultLral sector activities are as follows: * Law No. 3285 on Animal Health and Surveillance. * Law No. 904 on the Breedinig of Animilals. * Law on Breedinig of Olives and Grafting of Wilcd Olive Trces. * Law on Agricultulal Combat and Agricultural Quar-anitinie. * aIW Oll on Ishcrly PI oducts. * L 0 il Ii ecl cl. * La\w on Agriculltlal Reformll on the Landscaping in Irrigated Arcas * Decree Law on the Productioll, ConsuLMption and Contr-ol of the Foodstuffs and Regulationi on thie Production of Plant and Animal Products tlhroughi Ecological Methods. In addition to the Turkislh legislation listed above, the following legislation applies to forestry: * Law No. 3800 on the Establishmiienlt of the Mlinistry of Forestry. * Law No. 6831 on Forestry. * Law No. 2873 on National Parks. * Lawv No. 2924 on SupporIt for the Improvement of Forestry Farmers * Law No. 4122 on National Mlobilizationi on Afforoestationi andc Erosioni Control. * Law No. 3234 on the Establishmenlt of Directorate General for Forestty. * Law No. 3167 on Land Hunting. * Corrmunique No. 285 on Implementation Principles onl the Preventioni &, Combat of Forest Fires. The framework Environiment Act issued in 1982 is the basis for environmental legislation. The followinig legislation can be listed relating to nutrienits and nutrienit pollution. Water Pollution Control Regulation (4 September, 1988). The purpose of the Regulationi is to mainitaini the quality of surface and ground water resources according to their allocated uses, to ensure the best use of water resources, to set the techniical and legislative rules to control the water quality. This is in order to pr'enllt pollution in ComplianCCe \vith the econoniiic and social development goals Water quality criteria. The Water Pollution Control Regulationi sets out principles for classifying surface ancl ground water quality in four and thlree classes respectively. Seawater is also classified in three classes. The classification by water quality of inlanid surface waters in rivers, lakes andl dam reservoirs is as follows. Class I: High Quality Water (for drinkinig supply, swimminig, trout farm-inlg, husbanidry and farming). Class 11: Slightly Polluted Water (appropriate for drinkinig supply with tertiary treatmenit, recreationlal purposes, fish harvesting other than trout, irrigation, other uses not included in Class I). Class III: Polluted water (tndustrial supply after treatment except industries - like food and textile industries - which require high quality water). Class IV: Highly polluted water (other low quality water uses). Table A 3. 1- Quality Criteria of Inland Water Resources by Class. Water Quality Classes Quality ParametersIIIIV I 11 III IV Ammonia N (mg NH4+-N/l) 0.21 Ii 21 >21 Nitrite N (mg N02-N/1) 0.002 0.01 0.05 >0.05 Nitrate N (mg N03-N/l) 5 10 20 >20 Total Kjeldahl N (mg/l) 0.5 1.5 5 >5 Total P (mg P04-3-P/l) 0.02 0.16 0.65 >0.65 The concentration offree ammonia may not exceed 0.02 mg NH3-N/7 depending on pH. 120 The classes of groundwater as defined by their quality are given below: Groundwater Class I: High quality groundwater (may be used for drinking and in the food industry). Under the condition of supplying necessary oxygen with aerationi, ground water whiclh satisfy the quality criteria for Class I surface waters is considered as Groundwater Class I. Grounlidwater Class I: Medium quality grounidwater (may be used for drinking following a puLificationi process; and may bc used for irrigation, for animiils and as cooling water without any purification). WVater with the quality parameters. \vhich satisfy the criteria for Class IT surface waters is considered to be Groundwater Class II Gromudwatei Class 111. Lo0w\r qualitV croun1d\\ ater C.,mpa reId to tIIe pIVxioLs CaINsses (Lue of stfeLi x\ka1tei shall be determined by the degree of purificationi attainable economically and technologically ancl witl respect to health). Table A 3. 2 - Eutrophicationi Control Limits in Lakes, Ponds, Miarshes and Reservoirs. Area of Use Desired Properties Nature Conservationi Areas and Various Uses (including, natural Recreationl salt bitter and soda rich lakes) PH 6.5 - 8 5 6 -10.5 COD (mg/l) 3.0 8.0 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/1) 7.5 5.0 Suspended Solids (mg/l) 5.0 15.0 Total Coliform (MPN/100 ml) 1000 1000 Total Nitrogen (mg/l) 0.1 1.0 Total Phosphontls (mg/l) 0.005 0.1 Emission Discharge Principles. Industrial enterprises are allowed to discharge wastewater to the local sewerage system and to the deep sca, although firms may be required to pre-treat effluent prior to discharge into wastewater treatment plants. Discharge of hazardous substanlce to water is prohibited. The permittinco procedure has been regulated since 1989 after the issuance of the Water Pollution Control Regulation. Principles for discharging effluent to ground and surface waters, and for treating wastewater, are also contained in the regulation. Effluent standards have been set for different types of industr-ies and for the substances that may be discharged, along with basic principles to be followed. Discharge limits of pollutants listed for agro-industries do not include the nutrients. Discharge permits are subject to three-year renewable authorization. They may be refused or withdrawn in order to prevent any adverse environmental impact (e.g. direct discharge in areas, which have been highly polluted). Although the discharge standards are specified for each industrial sub-sector, they are fixed regardless of the receiving body. This means that, the limits for pollutant parameters for a specific industrial discharge are the same whether it is discharged into a lake or into the Black Sea. Water Quality Planning. For water resource protection used for drinking and other purposes, the general principles and protection areas indicated below shall be valid until special provisions have been introduced for each resource. Absolute protection zone. This is a 300-m wide strip extending from the maximum water level of a drinking and bathing water reservoir. Proximate protection zone. This is a 700-m wide strip extending from the absolute protection zone surrounding a drinking and bathing water reservoir. Mediate protection zone. This is a 1-km wide strip extending from the boundary of the proximate protection zone surrounding a drinking and bathing water reservoir. Remote protective zone. This is the whole of the water collection basin that falls outside the other protective zones surrounding drinking and bathing water reservoirs as defined above. All kinds of activities, which are banned or allowed with limitations, are addressed for each buffer zone. However, these rules are subject to change whenever special provisions are introduced for any resource. 121 Monitoring. Effluent discharges must be monitored by the enterprises themselves according to the Water Pollution Control regulation. The recordings of the monitoring are subject to inspection by The Ministry of Environment, the municipalities, or provincial goverm-nents dependinig on their authlorizationi. The frequency of monitoring is stated in the "discharge permission " whliich is granited by the Adminiistr-ationi for all direct discharges of hoLuselhold and/or industrial wastewaters into water receptor medlia on1 the condiltion of compliance vilth the principles of the Watcr Pollu1tion COntl-1 Regulation. The inspections to bc conu(ticted by tilc Adminiistrationi arc based on instantaneous. 2-hourly andc 24-lhouiiy composite samllples of ellluent. Tlicrcforex, mon0itorling Is supposecl to be based oii spot savuplcs a nd composite samples. According to thle Regulationi on Water PollutIoll Contlol, "lthe rClevallt ulnits of the Nlinistry of AgricultuLre and Rural Affairs shiall specify in detail the metlhod of calculatilng the required amounlts of fertilizers and shall conduct inspections regarding their oveLise." Nevertheless, the Ministry has rarely practised tllis yet. Solid Kastes conitrol Regulationi (14 jlarch 1991). The intended puLpose of the Regulation is to ban the disposal, transportation, storage of all kinds of wastes and waste materials which might be disposed cirectly or indirectly to the receiving bodies and have an adverse impact on these bodies; to protect plant and animlal genlerations, natural assets ndicl ecological systern by regulIating the managemienlt of somae consuLm1ptioll goocds wIlicIl mighit have persistent impacts. To this encl, for all kinids of hIousehIolICI waste, waste from industrial plants, [other thlan hazadclous waste], waste from commercial activities anld construLction debris, provisions are made in the Regulations to encourage waste minimization, recycling and reuse, collection, transportation, disposal, composting, incineration, rehabilitation of existing disposal sites. The Regulation consists of provisions, which require treatment of leachate from the sanitary landfills and composting facilities to the extent required in the WVater Pollution Control Regulationi for receiving water bodies. The quality criteria of the compost to be used for agricultural practices are also included in the regulation. When the C/N ratio is greater thani 35, nitrogeni should be added into the compost reactor providing the optiiunim conditionis for composting reaction. The 6rganic material contenit slhould be 35% of the solid material in the compost, which will be used for soil conditionilng. Regulation oni Alqua-products (28 Junie 1973,). The intenccecd purpose of the Regulation is to regulate fishling and fish farminig practices, to set limits, principles, methods, prohibitions, responsibilities, measures, control and inspections in the productioni and marketing of aqua-products, and disposals of pollutilng and hazarddous materials into harvest zones to protcCt Fish stocks andc exploit aqtia-prociltcts economi1cally Nutlienit Limits. Tolerable limits in the receiving water bocies for the lhazardous substanlces, which arc banned to be disposed into the production zones in inland waters and seas are addressed in the Regulationi. Tolerable limits regarding nutrients in the said Regulation are as follows: Ammonia ion 0.02 mg/I, Phosphate ion 15.0 mg/I. Pesticides. There are some limitations set in the Aqua products Law for pesticides in the water bodies. These limitations are given in Table A3. 3. 122 Table A 3. 3: Pesticide Concentration Limits in Inland Water Bodies. IInterinational name of active ifigre(liciit Banined (1) Allowed (2) Tolerable limit microgram/I I- ALDRIN (2) 0.04 2- BHC (1) 2.0 3- CLORDANE (I) 37.5 4- CPYONRAI-IE (1) 2.0 5- EiNDRIN (1) 0.2 6- I I Ei lA(t i LOR 2 3 7- LINDANE (I) 0.2 8- DDT (1) 0.6 9- DICOFOL (2) 100.0 10- DIELDRIN (1) 0 3 11- ENDOSULFAN (2) 0 2 12- PERTHANE (1) 3.0 13- TDE (DDD) (1) 3.0 14- TOXAPH-IENE (1) 3.0 15- CHLOROBENZILATE (1) 550.0 16- DILAN (1) 16.0 17- TETRODIFON (2) 1100 0 18- STROBAN (1) 2.5 19- PARATHION-ETHYL (1) 1.0 20- MONOCHROTOPHOS (2) 7000.0 21- DICROTOPHOS (2) 600.0 22- DIOXATHION (2) 14.0 23- DIAZINON (2) 0.9 24- DICHLORVOS (2) 0.07 25- EPN (2) 0.1 26- ETHION (2) 0.01 27- AZINPHOS-M ETHYL (2) 0.2 28- MALATHION (2) 1.8 29- PARATHION-METHYL (2) 96.0 30- MEVINPHOS (2) 0 16 31- PHOSI'I-IAMIDON (2) 3.8 32- TRICHLORPHON (2) S. i 33- CARBARYL (2) 1.3 34- ANILAZINE (2) 15.0 35- ATRAZIN (2) 12600.0 36- CUPPER SULFATE (2) 150.0 37- 2, 4-D ISOPROPYLESTER (2) 800.0 38- 2, 4-D BOTYLESTER (2) 1300.0 39- 2,4-D BOTYL+IZOPROPYLESTER (2) 1500.0 40- DALAPON (2) 6000.0 41- DICAMPA (2) 5800.0 42- CAPTAFOL (2) 31.0 43- DIQUAT (2) 12300.0 44- DIURON (2) 380.0 45- FENTIN HYDROXIDE (2) 33.0 46- PARAQUAT (2) 3700.0 47- SILVEX (2) 1200.0 48- SIMAZINE (2) 5000.0 49- SODIUM ARSENITE (1) 36500.0 50- TRIFLURALIN (2) 11.0 1- VERNOLATE (2) 5900.0 Note: (1). These chemicals are banned in Turkey. They are included in the Table, since they have long-term residual impact on the environment. (2). Chemicals, which are licensed and used in Turkey. 123 Regulation on Environmental Impact Assessment (6 June 2002). The ETA Regulation was enacted in 1993. It was amended in 1997 and in 2002. Assessments are required for a wide range of economic activities, including agro-industries and major infrastructure projects. There are two categories of activities listed in the annlexes of the regulationi: (1) The projects for wvhiclh Environmental Impact Assessmienit (EIA) ProceduL-es are applied; (2) The projects for whlich Iinitial Environmiiienital Evaluation [IEE] is applied. These reports must be prepared durling the planninig phase for an investment, since the activity can only be approved, authorised or licenised to proceed after an "EIA Positive Certificate" is ISSLued. Public commnclt on the drarft report is obtained through tile Local Envilonm11lental Comimiittees. The MoE is rcsponsible for- inonitlo lug thlC process Mlid ISSLin1g permiits lor [.IA after all applicants' rIeCllmllents arc Imlet. [lie Local lEnvironm1llental Commllittecs arc rcsponsiblc for thlc IEI- stucly procedures. According to the EIA regulation dated 6 JuLic 2002, the following aIro-ilIdustry projects arc subject to the EIA process: * Poultry planlts (60,000 or greater number of chlickeni andl 85,000 or gieater numllber of chicks). * Pork fattening farms (30 tonues or more, 3,000 heads or more). * Sowv farms (900 head or more). * Integrated meat processing plants. * Sugar plants. * Pulp and celluloid processing plants. * Paper pulp production from timber or from other fibrous materials. * All kinds of paper, cardboard and plasterboard producing plants witlh a capacity of 200 tonnles per day. Agriculture, forestry, aqua product and food sector projects, wlichi are subject to an IEE Study:. * Unrefined and refined vegetable oil, or integrated oil plants. * Fat productioni plants. * Starch production plants. * Alcoholic drinlks production. plants by fermentationl or the maltillg process. * Aqua-proCIucts processing plants. * Milk and dairy products plants with a capacity of 5,000 I/day * Slaughterhouses, whliclh are subject to 15i and 2nd Class permnits in complianice witlh the Regulationl on Establishlmlent, Inauguration1 , Operationi anIc Ilspectioni Priniciples of Red icat and Red IMeat Products Enterprises issued in the Official Gazette No. 24167 on I 1"' Sept 2000. * Rendering plants. * Poultry enterprises witlh a capacity of >10,000 chickens/day or equivalent poultry slaughterlhouses or processing plants. * Fattening farms for small and large ruminianlts (capacity being 500 or more for large ruminants, 1000 or more for small ruminants). * Fish farm projects having a capacity of 30 tonnes/year or more. * Cigarette manufacturing plants. * Restructuring of agricultural land. * Projects with the objective of intensive agriculture on arable or non-arable land. * Water management projects for agricultural purposes. * Transformation of forest land into other land uses. * Yeast culture. 124 Annex 4. Selected Micro-catchments in the AWRP Ilyasli (Bafra/Samsun) MC (Kizilirmak). Location. Ilyasli Micro catchment area is located in the Kizilirmak Basin; within the adin-iistrative ter-itory of Bafra District in Samnsun and it covers 8 villaoes. These are listed together withl their population in Table A4 1. The total catclimenit area is 7,010 hectares (0.1% of the Kizilhrimak Basin). Topography is °ivCIl in Table A4 2; soils data in Table A4-S andcl temlapcratuic/p-ecipitationi arc showni onl the chart. abIlc A4 1. 11lyasli \ I C. Iopull ltion and villages. Settlement namiie Population Households Settlement name Population Population Eynegazi 257 Kuslagan 234 Ilyasli 728 Pasaseyh 738 Kamberli 707 Terzili 694 Kozagzi 273 Turkkoy 482 Total 4,113 Topography ancl Geology. The geological formations of the area conisist of yellow-reddish fragile and loose mudstone, sandstone and conglomerates witli clay and sparsely distributed joints. This unit dates back to the eosin age (Oligocene in upper layers). The altitLdes of villages vary from 50 to 250 meters and all villages except Kozagzi are located along Ilyasli Brook. Land gradient in the villages of Kozagzi and Kuslagan is 10-20% while it varies from 15-35% in other villages. Climate. The Kizilirmak Delta has a typical Black Sea coastal region climate, i.e. mild winiters (winds mainly from the north and north west), high precipitation and a rather high temperature. Historical data from the meteorological station near Bafra recorded a mean precipitation of 726 inmmyear and a mean ainual temperature of about 13.4 'C. In winter the minimllum is 4 'C, in summer the maximtm is 23 °C. 140 30 120 25 100 20 E 80 15 U prec. E60 10 J F M A M J J A S O N D months Hydrology. No study or data are available as to the area's hydrologic system. Earlier, the State Hydraulic Works (DSI) carried out land surveys of land fit for irrigation in the Delta within the framework of the Bafra Plain Irrigation Project. Ilyasli catchment area starts at the point where this survey finished. Therefore, it is outside the hydrologic survey. Visual observations on the hydraulic system gives the following picture. Spring and surface waters in the upper parts feed the Ilyasli stream. This stream flows for 7-8 km from west to east and then joins Kizilirmak near Cayagzi. The body of Derbent Dam is located about 2 km to the east of this point. To the north of this conjunction point Bafra District is reached after 10 km and then after 20 km. there is the Kizilirmak Delta wetland and the Black Sea. Irrigation is not possible since there is not enough water and the ground is too steep. Water needed for tobacco fanning, especially for nursing seedlings is pumped to tanks from the Ilyasli Stream and 125 transported. These tankers, each with a capacity of about 2 tonnes, are hauled by tractors to farming plots and nurseries; hoses then water the plots. The flood plains of Ilyasli Stream, which are mostly in narrow strips, cannot be used for permanent cultivation. Rather, these stripes are used for growing vegetables such as green pepper anid tomatoes usilng stream water. Drinkinlg water is supplied fiom wells whose depths vary fiom 10 to 25 meters belowgr-ou-nd. Farm-ier-s state that the minimllumii streamii flow is in July and August, when the rainfall is lowest. Still, the streamii has enough water to meet smlall-scale irrigationl needs. Agricultuiral activities Liiile iufo,i-aicioni i.s ieadily (;vlilalble ibotiu g (g;l icuuil ctl ;iucci . 7ics c .14O 1 i4 .s ilhc chelniicalfeltilizer acpplication in 2000. Table A4 2. Fertilisers use(d in agricultural land( I Type of fertilizer Amount applied (tonnles) CAN 440 DAP 470 Composed fertilizers 230 Soulrce: SamsuLi Provincial Directorate of Agriculture Biological Data. There is no historical study and data on the ecology and biological diversity of the area. Some information derived from a short tour as well as from interviews witlh people is summarized below: Fauna. Large mammals. Both local people and official from the local forestry office stated that tlhere are plenty of boar (Sits scrofa scrofa) and wolf (Caunis hipus) in mounitainis and forests surrounding the area. It is further stated that the former damage crops in both summliiier and winter. Otlher informiiationi is that therc has recently been and increase in the population of roe dear (Capreolits capreolus capreolus). These animals even make their way down to villages, as they are no longer shot by local people. Roe is an animiial having its natural environiment in the Kizilirmak Delta and Central Black Sea Region. It has faced the thlcat of extinlctionl for the last 30 years because of the dest-ructioll of their habitat aicid through huntingt Avifttuna. No recor-clcd ciata exist as to the avil'auna of tlhe area. Tlc following bird spccies have bncci so far observed during the field trip: Syrian woodpecker (Dendrocopus svr,acuscs), Crested lark (Galerida cristata), Pied wagtail (Motacilla albac), Red backed Shrike (Lani is co/luia.o) and Chaffiniclh (Frii gilla colelebs). These birds are frecquently observed in habitats suchi as forests, buslhes and streamn balnks Flora. Forests cover a rather large part of this 7,010-hectare arca. Thlcr are natLulal forests, thougl1 Il smalll parcels, especially on hilltops. Dominanit trees in these forests include hornibeam (Caipilnuis beti/ll.s), beech (Fagus sylvatica), English oak (Que/cus lroblu) and pine (Piniuis nigra). One can also see oriental plane (Platantus orientalis) especially along streams. Other significant eco-systems. Kizilirmak Delta is one of the Turkey's most valuable wetlands. It is considered to be the largest coastal wetland and has been able to preserve the natural characteristics of the Black Sea region. The delta plain is 0-15 m above the sea level and the total surface of the area is about 56,000 ha. Today approx. 80% of the total delta plain is cultivated and intersected by roads and canals. The eastern part of the delta consist of about 20 lakes and together with the surrounding extensive redbuds and marshes covers an area of ca. 10,000 ha. The eastern part of the delta has two connections with the sea. Karabogaz Lake on the western side has one connection as well. Liman lake and Karabogaz has fairly brackish water because of the sea outlets. 310 bird species (146 breeding species) have been recorded in the delta. Almost 40% of all Turkish breeding bird species have been recorded in the delta and also 70% of all species on the Turkish list were observed in the delta. These numbers clearly point to the international ornithological importance of area. Furthermore the Kizilirmak Delta is a good example of the economic benefits of wetland ecosystem. The delta is the main recharge area for ground water and thus of major importance for irrigating fields. Other human activities of economic importance include fishing, animal husbandry and reed cutting. Cernek Lake and its surrounds were declared a Permanent Wildlife Reserve in 1979 (4,000 ha). In 1994 the majority of the eastern half of the delta was declared a "nature site". In 1996, a management plan for the 126 delta was completed and enforced by the Ministry of Public Works and Resettlement. The plan regulates all land-use and is especially important for the restriction it places on the construction of holiday homes. In 1998, the delta was designated as Ramsar site, one of nine in Turkey. In 1948 the first drainage channels were built in the delta and a total of 55,000 ha (including low-lying areas south of Bafra) were protected from flooding: embainkmiients were built along most of its lower reaches. The Altinkaya eserivoir (35 kml south of Bafra) wvas completed in 1990 followed by the Dcibelnt reservoir immllediately norItlh in 1992: the twvo clamis together store 6.000 hall; and( produce a total Or 1.8S9 G\Vh/p.a.). Thlle Balfra irri gation proi0cCt ultimately aims to irrigate 35,000 ha. Par t of this plani concerniis the reclamiation of 12,119 ha in tlie lowest-lying part of tlc eastern lial of tilhc delha (i.C. tile wetlandl). In 1 992. as part of the schemlle, DSI started to construct a 35 km-lonig interceptor chainnel, which vwould have effectively cut off the eastern lake area from its maini water supply. After 8 kLm of digging, constr-uctioni was cancelled and the area was left to comply witli wetland conservation. The wetland is polluted by agricultural run-off and untreated Bafra sewage, flowinig to the Cernek Lake tlroughl the Badut chaninel, leadnig to eutrophicationi. However, in 2001 Bafia Mullicipality constructed sewvage treatment system. Environmental Problems. Pollutioni. In the Ilyasli catchment area no observation could be made onl aniy serious pollutionl problems that may significantly affect the Black Sea and Kizilirmak Delta. However, tlhcre are probably major sources of pollution: Agricultural and Organic. Agricultural polltutioni. This is related to chelleicals such as agricultural pesticides aild fertilizers used in tobacco fields and nurseries. Here in this area, pesticides and fertilizers are used not based on any scientific analysis (i.e. soil analysis or analysis on pests), but ratlher by listening to what other farmers say. However, little data are available on either agricultural pollution or current use of ferttlizers and nutrient needs of the soil. What limited information is to hand has been obtained by interpolating data relevant to the flat and irrigated parts-of the delta. It is still possible, even from this limited data, accoimlpanied by field interviews, to say that pesticides are used in extreniely intensive and uninformed ways especially in tobacco famling. Orga1niC pO/llutOII. Orgallic pollution coniles fr-oIm dwellilngs anid aiimal shelters. Eaclh louselhold is engaged in ainlmal husbandry. According to surveys madle by the Provincial Directorate of Agrtculture, the animal stock in the region consists of 2,070 cows and 1,270 slieep as well as 8,950 poultry. Although these figures may inot be very reliable (i.e. the same report gives tvo different sets of figures for the number of cows and poultry), still they cail be taken as giving an approxiilate pictul-e of the actual situationi. Each day, manure is takeii out of shelters and piled nearby. This practice itlvolves risk of pollution both to soil and wvater as well as a threat to humai lliealtlh. Atiimal shelters are constructed on smooth or levelled spots on hillsides and dung is piled on flat surfaces. Thlus, the risk of leakage from dung to soil is higher oil such spots than it is on steeper slopes. The settlement pattern in the area consists of small and independent farming enterprises. Drinking water wells are located close to animal shelters. Seepage from dung heaps may reach these wells through groundwater reserves and thus increase phosphate and faecal coliform contamination. There is no sewage system collecting domestic wastes. Such effluent is mostly discharged to septic tanks. This is certainly another contamination factor for groundwater reserves. The first gathering point for contaminants, which flow either by surface water or mix with groundwater, is the Ilyasli stream. The contaminant load gradually increases as the stream flows north towards the Kizilirmak delta. Water with a high chemical load coming from irrigated plots and intensive horticulture areas of the Delta is discharged partly to wetlands through drainage canals or directly to the Black Sea. Degradation. Erosion. Agricultural plots in the catchment area have been split up into smaller pieces as a result of inheritance. Farmers think that contour tilling is uneconomic on such small plots, thus they plough the soil in the direction of the inclination aggravating the problem of erosion. Erosion is a significant threat by tilling after wheat harvest, for this leaves the soil unprotected against autumn rains. Since soil wash also increases the amount of soil nutrients carried away in colloids, another side effect of erosion is pollution and even eutrophication of wetland to the south of the Delta. Forest clearing. This is prevalent. Villagers interviewed stated that the forestland is under their proprietorship by title. However, officials from the Local Forest Conservancy maintain that the catchment 127 is not covered by forest cadastre and it will become clear later when cadastral work is completed that areas cleared for farming have been designated as "forest land" on maps. Nevertheless, under Article 2B of the present Forestry Law No. 6381, it is possible to exclude from the forestry regime those cleared areas which have been gained from forests before 1981. As a rough estimiate, it can be said that 60 % of the forest cover in the area is damaged or degraded. Apparently, this deforestationi accompanied by erosioni fuirthel accelerates the loss of topsoil and indirectly contr-ibutes to pollutioni. Forests provide ecological colrid'Ctor's for fauna in the area's mntcro-catchments. Animals such as boar, wolf, fox and roe deer may travel between catchments using these corridors. Furthler forest clearing will obviously end this migratory route and conscqLcently the habitat of mnany fauina species. Baglicadere (Zile/Tokat) MIicro-catchnment (Ycsilirmak Basin). Location. Baglicadere micro-catchmenit, at a distance of 7 km fiomii Zile district centre is in the administrative tcrritory of Zile District, Tokat Provinice and covers an area of 7,000 hectares within the Yesilirmnak Basin. Villages and populations are given in Table A4 3. Table A4 3. Population of Ba6licadere M1\lC. Settlemcent Poptulation H-louselholcls Settlement Population H-louseholdls Sarac 185 34 Palanli 201 51 Kepez 156 32 Buyukkar-aytin 207 71 Yalnizkoy 145 62 Akdogan 107 27 Cokcaabdal (Akguller) 116 30 Total 1,117 347 Topography. The valley, extendinig in an east-west directioni, clivides the catclmienit along two main axes. In various parts of the valley there are small streams such as the Degirmene Dere, the Baglica Dere, and the Demircilik Dere. The catchment as a whole has very steep slopes. Fourteeni percent of the area has slopes in the range of 0-20, 8% have gradients of 21-40 and 78% hlave 41-60 gradients. Hlowever, these slopes become smoother in the southlerni and southeasternl parts compared to the nortlhernl sections. Intensive agricultuLr-Ll activities were observed in tllesc parits. Slopes become steeper to the northi \'llcre soil has erodeci away andc plant cover has disappeaied. Some patches of relatively less dcstroyed jullliper ancd oak coppice are found on the nortlher-n hilils. Climate. According to data provided by the meteorology station in Zile, the average anlllLal precipitation in the region is 450 mmll, the average temperature is 11.5 °C and there is snow cover for 24 days. June and July are the hottest months - 21 °C, while December and January are the coldest montlhs - 0 to 2.5 'C. 70 - 25 20 _ 0 0o _ J F M AMJ J AS ON D months Biological information. No study could be found on the biological diversity and eco-system values. Taking a broad look at the area's flora, it can be said that originally, it was covered with denlse oak and pine forests before human intervention. At present, juniper seems to have replaced oak, the main reason being over grazing and logging. In geographical terms the catchment constitutes a transition zone from Central Anatolian steppe ecosystems to forest ecosystems of the Black Sea region. The diversity of flora is a typical 128 indicator. The presence of astragalus and verbascum species and especially the fact that astragalus is dominant is an indicator of both over grazing and the ecologic conditions unique to steppe ecosystems. Apart from the above, probably the best proof that the catclhment is in a transitioni zone between two ecosystems is the very rare presence of oleaster and wild hazelntit trees on hills. It is possible to say that the area is also rich in terms of thyme, wild barley and couch grass. No data coulid bc found on the fauna of the area. However, people interviewed state that there are boars (Sus scrofa scrofa,), wolves (Callis lupus) ancd foxes (C(m'is viulpc's). While people state that hoars are shot for damaging crops. no statemenit is made aboLit \olVcs NorI is thlere any inrio0 ItOII On axOlFauna. Quick observations Coilfllmn the pi esc1Ce of suLch steppe birdls as the shioit-toed .lark (Ca/lndrc/lu brach 'vileIa,i l(t), Crested lark (Galci ida criXst(lta), \Wheatear (Oelianiihe oeaanitlie) and Chukar (Alectoris chli-kar). According to local people, the great bustard (Otis ta(lnda) was seen in the area unltil 1980's but is seen no more. Agriculttural activities. The total arable land in the micro-catchmenet is 2,325 ha, out of wvhicih only about 21 ha is irri-ated. Almost all of the catclimenit is cultivated wvhere tilling by tractor is possible, while other parts with steep slopes are left as rangeland. Husbandry. Each household has several cows and sheep (Table A4.4) as well as a few chickens in Kepez and Yalizko. There are some feed farms in five villages of the Baglicadere rnicro-catchment. (Table A4 5). Table A4 4. Number of Livestock in Baglhcadere Micro Catchmileint Villages cattle buffalos sheep Goats Beehives (head) (head) (head) (head) (number) Sarac 436 91 0 0 Kepez 250 15 340 0 0 Yalnizkoy 269 95 0 0 Akauller 103 165 0 0 P'alaili - 0 0 Buyukkarayun 0 0 0 0 Akdogan 113 100 0 0 Total 1171 15 791 0 0 Source: Tokat Provincial Directorate of Agriculture. Table A4 5. Feed barns in the Baohcadere Micro catchlnieiit Feed barns Sarac Kepez Yalnizkoy Akguller Palanli B. karayun Akdogan Sheep feed 1 150 100 barn (head) Cattle feed 220 40 110 50 20 barn (head) Source. Tokat Provincial Directorate ofAgriculture. Environmental problems. Habitat Destruction. In the Baglicadere catchment, the destruction of natural flora is the most important environmental problem. Birds are significant indicators of healthy ecosystems. Birds such as the great bustard, Chukar and larks live in steppe ecosystems. The disappearance of the great bustard is an indicator that there is extreme human pressure. Because of human habitation, the destruction of pastures and hunting, the great bustard was one of the first to leave the area. Another striking indicator of human pressure and flora destruction (of natural grasslands) is the wide distribution and dominance of astragalus species and the rare presence of such plants as thyme, wild barley and couch grass only in less accessible places. This is explained by the fact that astragalus and verbascum 129 are not edible. Also, the shrinking of oak coppices can be explained by the demand for fuel and fodder. Local people state that there is tangible improvement after the banning of goats from forests in 1980. Sixty-four percent of total micro catchlm-ent area is prone to severe erosion (Table A4. 6). The cumulative result of land mismiianagemiienit, loss of flora accompainied by severe erosioni is what may be called an environimenital disaster. Especially in the northern parts of the catchlmlenat area, maniy spots on the hlills and slopes have turned barren because of erosion; even the parent rock is visible in some parts. It is meaningless to talk about any ecosystem restorationi in suchl areas Table A4.6. Degree oi Erosioii ill the Nlicro-catchrrment. (Ullits hcctrears) Village Degree of Erosion Gully Lanid Total namiie nil or very slight Moderate severe very severe erosion slide Yainizkoy 0.0 0.0 57.0 122.0 0.0 0.0 179.0 Sarac 5.0 50.0 215.0 928.0 0.0 0.0 1,198.0 Palanli 8.0 44.0 122.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 174.0 Kepez 0.0 0 0 94.0 560.0 0.0 0.0 654.0 Akguller 0.0 53.0 229.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 282.0 Akclogaln 0.0 2.0 27.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.0 Total 13.0 149.0 744.0 1,610.0 0.0 0.0 2,516.0 Source: AGM Chief Engineering Office in Tokat. Also, there is need to attach importance to other negative impacts of erosion, both inside and outside of the catclhment. Sediment carriec away by erosion reaches irrigationi and drainage canals in the lower parts, increasing the amount of soil nutrients in these canals and filling tlemnl up rapidlly. One of the major problems faced the Tokat Branch of State Hlydraulic Works (DSI) is the difficulty in operating irrigation systems efficiently because of heavy run off from sUchI catchments as Baglicacdere. lKazova ('T'oklat) NIicro-catclnmelnt (Yesilirma k Basil) Location. Kazova micro-catchment is on the Tokat-Turlhal highway. The catclhment is surrounded by a mouL1tain rangc to the south and a DSI drainage canril to the nortlh 3ii6y(ikbaglar villagc is locatedi to thlc West, whlere the drainage canal joint Yeqilirmak River and Ulas village is in the cast. Tlhere are 8 villages in the catclmnent: Ulas, Cerci, Songut, Bagbasi, Gulpiniar, Guzeldere, Buyukbaglar and Kucukbaglar. Table A4 7. Populationi of Kazova Micro-basini (Yesilirimak Basiii). Settlement Population Settlement Population Ulas 630 Guzeldere 231 Cerci 641 _ Buyukbaglar 472 Baglarbasi 412 Kucukbaglar 921 Gulpinar 208 Total 3,515 Topography. The topography of Tokat province becomes more rugged to the north. There are smooth and fertile alluvial plains on both sides of the rivers Kelkit and Yesilirmak. In administrative terms, these fertile plains are attached to the districts of Niksar, Erbaa and Turhal. Under the "Upper Yesilirmak Project" irrigation will cover 1,953 hectares on the right bank and 2,960 hectares on the left. The Kazova micro-catchment area is within this project's remit. Already there is pumped irrigation on the right bank Climate. Since the province of Tokat is located in a transition zone from the mild climate of coastal Black Sea region to the continental climate of Central Anatolia, climatic conditions are harsher. Precipitation is less than the coastal region. Average annual temperature is 9.8 °C and average annual precipitation is 475 mm. This is below the country average. 130 Biological environment. No study could be found on the biological diversity or ecosystem parameters of the catchment area. Nevertheless, observations suffice to conclude that all the selected locations, with the exception of mountainous terrain to the south, have long been turned into farmland. The bed of Yesilirmak was examined at selected points in the catchlnient area. It is observed that Yesilirmak's banks are barren on both sides, and floodplains have been tlrned into farmlands. Therefore, it is rather difficult to assert that the catchment lhas any area of natural significance. 131 Agricultural activities. Little information is readily available abolut agricultural activities. Table A4 8 gives the fertilizer application in 2000. Table A4 8. Fertilisers used on agricultural land. T,pVe)c of fertilizcr Amilotiiit applied (touincs) N 10.090 P 5,435 K 512 Manure 556,625 Source: Tokat Provincial Directorate of Agricultr-c, Environmental Problems Two major cnvironmental problems can be observecd in this micro-catclhmiicnit: pollutioll that derives from a-ricultural activities and sedimentation causecd by erosioii in thc upper parts of tllc catchllment Polluttionz fionit agricuiltural activities. No data could be founid on this subject. To date, the Tokat Provincial Directorates of Agriculture and Environment hlave not conducted studies on poliutioni in the drainage canals. On the other hand, the DSI does not hold the view that there is water pollutioll in drainiage canals. Yet there is intensive farmring in the area, mainly vegetable cultivation. Pesticides arc also used haphazardly. Officials state that fertilizer use was not based Uponl any soil analysis. Although thcse agricultural chemicals seem to pose no serioLts problem for the time being, they constittute a potential environmenltal threat in the medium term. According to statements by local authority personniel, there are fish deaths in Yesilirmak, especially arounld Amasya. They add that this event usuLally takes place dulillg the sugar plant's production period in Turhal. Probably, this is because of a clrastic decrease in dissolved OXygell cue to organic waste discharges. FUrthermlore, it can be expected that N conccitrations in thie \.atel rise as a resuilt of Initrouls coipoliunCiS CXistinIg in CftlilCut being discharged. In case tllis planlt fails to introduce a biological treatment facility and necessary measuLres are not taken to prevent pollutioll in the Yesilirmak upper reaches, (includinig Kazova MC) it is inevitable that agricultLral and domestic pollutanits will have a cumulative effect on the Yesilirmak andl ciCate SCeriOUS pOIIutOI problelmlS ill tIlC Black Sea. Erosioni. Erosion as a problem does not originate in the Kazova micro-catclhmenit. Sediment washed clown from unprotected upper catchments such as Turlhal and Zile creates problems in Kazova. These problems cover two points. The first is that sediments fill and clog the drainage canals. Farmers use drainage canals for irrigation. Therefore, waterborne plants grow fast in drainage canals filled with sediment and the water flow is blocked. Additionally, N, P and K, carried by sediments are used by canal plants and thus to some extent, this nutrient rich water becomes subject to natural filtration. This is a kind of natural treatment, but the origin of the problem is unnatural. The second erosion problem, according to the regional directorate of DSI, is caused by meanders in the Yesilirmak encouraging excessive sedimentation. Meanders, in turn, block river rehabilitation works. However, contrary to this assertion of the DSI, many practices in the world (i.e. the Rhine in Holland and Danube in Austria) indicate that meanders play an important role in river rehabilitation. Nevertheless, this cannot be a pretext for belittling the importance of the threat of erosion in the area 132 Kabaktepe (Kayseri/Pinarbasi)-Sariz Micro-basin. Location. Kabakiepe micro basin with an area of about 5,750 ha is located to the south of Pinarbasi town as a N-S elongated basin around Kabaktepe Stream. Its N-S maximum lengtlh is 17 kim, wliile its width is about 5 knm. The westerni watershed varies bctween 1,950 to 2,250 metcrs in elevation (increasing towards soutlh), and there are peaks betweeni 1,900 to 2,300 m on the eastcrn boundary. Populationi and houselhold figures of the 3 villages are given in Table A4 9. Golcuk and B. Kabaktepe Villages are within the administrative territory of Pinarbasi town, while K. Kabaktepe adminiistratively belongs to Sariz toxwni. The younger gencration have beeni migrating to the urban areas (In thc case of KIucukkabaktepe to Britain) Table A4 9. Population of the Kabaktepe (Kayseri/Pina rbasi-Sariz) iM1icro-basin. Settlement Population Households Buyuikkabaktepe 175 33 Golcuk 200 45 Kucukkabaktepe 120 20 Total 495 98 Topography. The nortlhwestern, the far westerni and the far Eastern parts of the Southemn half and the most souther-ni part of the basinl7 consisted of carbonate rocks of marine sedimenitation dated betveen the Devonian and Cretaceous periods (375-80 my BP). The oldest calcareous rocks, from Devonian and Permian time (375-250 my BP), are located at the southern and the eastern parts of the basin while relatively younger carbonate rocks of Cretaceous time are situated in the western zone of the basin. Cretaceous rocks include some serpantiniic lenses on the northwesterni part cause unfavourable conditions for plant growtlh. All the Palaeozoic and Mesozoic rocks appear as mounitainous zones wvith steep scarps, whiclh are more than 30% and display severe erosion. Their peaks reach to about 2,300 m in the east and 2,250 m oni the western boundary of the basin. About 775 ha (1/8 of the total basin) of the mountailnous zone are rocky outcrops and therefore, are left \vithout any rehabilitation proposals. At the nortlherni part of Kabaktcpe, thel lower slopes and tlle mid- eastern part of the basin arc characterised by tertiary flysclh rocks, consistinig of alternate conglomiierates - sandstone and marls of the Eocene period. The petmeable/impermeable layers of these rocks cause landslides and result in jagged topograplhy. Kabaktepe is located at the southern part of the basin wvith a 2,277 m peak as a volcanic (andesite) dome (2-3 km in diameter) of the tertiary period. The north and the middle basin parts to B. Kabaktepe village consists of Plio-Quatenary co-alluvial/alluvial fan material and therefore, shows an undulating topography with flat to gentle sloping surfaces. Slope inclination in this zone varies between 0 to 12%. Kabaktepe valley bottom extending between 10-150 m in width has the youngest (Holocene) material of the MC consisting of clay, silt, sand and pebbles. Climate. Because, Kabaktepe Micro Catchment is located between 1,000 to 2,250 m high, it has a typical continental climate. There are two meteorological stations close to the Basin. Pinarbasi Meteorological Station to the north of the Catchment at 1,500 m altitude, and Sariz Meteorological Station located at SE of the Catchment at 1,470 m altitude. Since K. Kabaktepe and B. Kabaktepe villages are closer to Sariz Station, its meteorological data are taken and have been interpolated according to the area's elevation. The mean precipitation of the basin varies between 550-720 mm and much of the precipitation falls in wintertime. The mean annual temperature is 7.4 °C while that of the coldest month is -1 °C. Hydrology. Kabaktepe stream emerges at about 2000 m in the south and flows northward for about 14.5 km in the basin and joins the Degirmendere River on the northeast boundary of the basin. After this junction the Degirmendere River marks the boundary for the last 1/4 of the basin at the north-eastern corner. 17 Geological data is taken from R.F. Lebkuchner 1957), 'Kayseri ve Avanos-Urgiip Havalisi ile Bogazliyan Havalisinin Uzunyayla'ya Kadar Olan Kisminin Jeolojisi Hakkinda Rapor' M.T.A. Rapor No: 2658, Ankara. 133 (The sedimentation carried by Degirmnendere may gradually fill the reservoir of Bahgecik Dam that will be used to irrigate about 36,282 ha and for power generation when completed.). Spring water around K. Kabaktepe and B. Kabaktepe feed Kabaktepe stream, which is one of the tributaries of Degirmendere. These springs at the basin's nortlhern part arouLnd Golcuk feed Degirmendere by its soutlhwester-ly brooks. The flow rates of the main springs, wvhich are subject to project implementation, have recently becn measured by GDRS experts during preparation stage of the Project. The flow rates vary between 3-30 It/sec around K. Kabaktepe village, 20-25 Itlsec around B. Kabaktepe Village and 2 It/sec in G6lc(ik village. The flow rates of the Kabakiepe Rivcr that \vwll be subJect to benid conso uction ,te 50 It/sec I tile soitllt he r pait amld 350 It/sec i northllern part (T he low rate of the rtvye r Inc reases towva rd s no-rlli gradcuially Aroulid the GoicuLk river, the flow rates of the brooks of Degiimenidere River are as followings: Haticecikan Dere 12 It/sec, Nisanyurt Dere 25 It/sec All the above-mentionled flow rates were meastured in May 2001; the montlh whlen all the springs reachi thc maximum flow rate. Therefore, they will be re-measured in the driest montlh (August) and the irrigation fiame of the project will be revised accordinigly. In total, 7 ponds will be constructed in the Kabaktepe micro-catchments to collect water from the above-mentioned springs. By this way some rainfed fields will be tranisformedci into irrigated fielcds andc the trefoil wvill be harvested tlhrce timies In a year. Biological environment. There is no previouIs study on the biological diversity and the ecology of the MC. The information about fauna and flora, wlhichi is given below have been derived from the short tour in the area as well as from local people through the interviews. Fauna. Large AMlanmnals. Local people state that there are numLlber-s of wolves (Canlis hlptis), rabbit (Lepus carpensis), squirrel and varieties of mole. Avifaunwa. The followinig species have been list by the local people: partridge (Alectoris chitkar), fieldfare (Ur-dus pillars), quiail (Coterie sp.) and Gocmene (local namiie). The population of partridge and quail has decreased due to over hunting. Hunting for partridge and red hawk is seasonally limited, and there are some provisions endorsed by tlle Kasseri Provincial Hunting Commirission to protect the population Fivl. In thc past, river-s aitd perni1anelt brooks were trout habitat. 13utL cluc to newV COStlruct iOl Of road anid bridge, spawning migration of trout from Zamanti stream11 hias becn obstructecd, anid cg laylng locatioLns have been destroyed. Thus, the trout populationi in the rivers of the MC has dramatically declined. lTlora. Since Kabaktepe Catelimncit is at a high clevation, it is a tranasitionl zonie betweei foircst and alpine grasses. Therefore, natural grasses constitute the dominianit flora of the basin. These areas merge withl the forest zones and are the maini catchmenit pasture zones. Sparse julliper trees at tlle upper watershed areas are the proof of severe degradation and consequent retreat. Sparse Oak Forest occupies relatively lower parts of the slopes, below the juniper trees. Planted poplar and willow (Salix alba) trees appear in the valley bottoms of the main rivers and their tributaries. Beside the above-mentioned flora, there are other herbaceous plants that are used either for aromatic or medicinal purposes by the local people as follows: Trefoil (Trifoliuni sp.), St John's wort (Hypericumll sp.), Common mullein (Verbascum thapsus), Sage (Salvia sp.), Tlyymelaea tartoniraiva (coban yastigi), wild thyme (Polytrichlus sp.), orchid (Orchidaceae sp.), milkvetch (Astragalus sp.) and common berberry (Berberis sp.). Land Use. The lithological setting of the basin dictated the present land use and as well as directed the plans of the proposed micro basin project. For example; the present agricultural activities, which are predominant around Golcuk village, are based on the relatively larger arable land derived from lithology. In the same manner, the balanced arable and pastoral mix (about 50% each) is the main sources of income in B. Kabaktepe, while husbandry and related fodder harvesting are the main occupation in K. Kabaktape village. Table A4.10 gives the land use pattern in the micro-catchment. 134 Table A4 10. Land Use of Kabaktepe Kayseri/Pinarbasi-Sariz) Micro-basin (ha). Village Product- Degraded Energy Reforest Settle- Arable Range Rocky, Total ive forest forest forest -ation ments land land lake etc. Baylkka- 0 102 0 0 41 89 1,058 11 1,299 baktepe Golcuk 0 142 0 0 13 420 575 0 1,150 Kucukka- 0 438 0 0 37 351 1,740 765 3,331 Baktepe Tolil 0 6S2 0 0 91 860 3,371 l 776 5,780_ In the samiie wvay, the laind wvith 20-30% slope oni the old Palaceozoic cnld Mfesozoic rocks are being utsed as pasture and classified as pastutrelanid anid planlned as 'Forest Ilntelrior Pasturle Rehabilitationi Zonie' in the project. Lan1d wvith slopes betwee7 12 to 20%, which ncailnly developed in flysch r-ocks, is planiiuedl ais 'reforestation for soil preservation ' alnd 'oak rehabilitation'. The Kabaktepe streaun bottomii is completely dedicated to fodder hai-vestinig (grass aind trefoil) throughout its courlse. Through the project, niiore trefoil vill be planited in the valley bottomii aniid through thiis, two to thIriee harvests per year will be possible. Agriculture. In the basin, rainfed wheat and barley is grown and generally, these fields occupy inclined surfaces (except the gentle slopes near Golcuk village). Since the local seeds and agricultural practices are not very productive, the farmers claim more forest land for farming, consequently accelerating erosion. Through implemenitinig the project, farmllers will use more productive hybrid seeds thus concenitratinig farming on the lower slopes and leavung the upper slopes for natural regeneration of grass and trees. At present farmers in Golciik plant wheat and barley alternately; farmers in B. Kabaktepe grow wheat, barley, and rye; and in K. Kabaktepe the plant wheat, rye and fodder. At present G6lciik has about 390 ha of arable land. bitt every year about h1alf of it is left as fallow. Table A4 1 lgives prinIcipal crop productioll. Table: A 11. Agricultural products according to the first 4 crops. Fmiit/ Unit Buyukkabaktepe Golcuk Kucukkabaktepe Vegetable (*) Yield(**) (*.) Yield (**) (*) Yieli (**) Apple Trees 50 50.0 80 50.0 Cheiry Trees 20 10.0 Sour/black Trees 50 10.0 cherry Beans da 10.0 150.0 5.0 250 Onion da l 4.0 100 Wheat da 750 140 700 140 100 120 Rye da 500 200 40 160 Sainfoin da 80 250 Trefoil da 60 500 Barley da 750 160 500 170 80 100 Potato da I 6 1,000 Note. (*) Rainfed/Irrigated. (**) In terms of kg/tree or kg/da. 150 ha is left fallow each year. Fallow land will decrease during the project implementation by sowing chickpea or fodder and cereals side by side. Husbandry Table A4 12. Present state of the livestock in the villages of the Kabaktepe MC. Villages Cows Sheep Goats Beehives Biiyikkabaktepe 150 10001 90 75 G6lciik 100 500 0 0 135 Kiiuiikkabaktepe | 60 800| 151 1,000 | Total 310 2,300 105 1,075 According to a survey made by Proviiicial Directorate of Agriculture, the animal stock in the region consists of 310 cows, 2,300 sheep and 105 goats plus some poultry, (Table A 4.12). Because Golcuk has a large arable area, the farmers obtain their main income fr-oim crops rather thian husbanidry. Therefore, in they gradually sold their sheep and bought tractors. (Their number increased to 16). Consequently, husbandry has decliiied. These tractors are uised in their own fields as \vell as in the fields of B Kabaktepe. ILxcess hay prodCCUoict0 Is sold tO ohlicr villagCs. ]II lasi \cai s. because ol advcrse economic condiions. (increasilng fcIl-oil prices), deImlandLIc hlas dropped anll I iactors aic not fully uscl. In GolCik, about S0% ol the dunlg is used for heating, while only 20% is used as manire. Insteacl, farmers use chemilical fertilizer-s (mainly 20/20 DAP) about 10-12 kg/da. More or less same situationi exists in BCiytikkabaktepe village: 50% dung is used for heating. In Kucukkabaktepe village, dried duLig is used for domestic heatin,g. The villagers declared that cattle duLig is used for fuel, but sheep droppings are used for manuire. Since they have more sheep than cattle, the dlung, which is used for fuel, is about 20% of total. The farimers in Btiyiikkabaktepe produce cereals for subsistence and are mainly occupied with huisbanldry. Tlley graze animiials in tie harvestedi fields and in pastuLes. In wvimter, they feecd themi with silagc, \vhichl is made of the focider grown on the Village land. By doing this, tIley cdo not need to purchase any lodIder o comimieicial feed. Presently, Kucukkabaktepe is concentratin,g on husbanidry andc beekeeping activities Therefore, they sell lamb, wool and honiey. Most part of Kuicukkabaktepe andc its environi use 'Forest Interior Pastures'. Tlhrough the project these areas will be relhabilitated by creation of lens-type terraces within the sparse juniper relicts. So there will not be typical reforestation in this area. The altitude is very high and the land is situiated at the bounldary of the forest and alpine meadows. Since planned activities in the Kabaktepe ImlicIo basin are very small scale, (construCtilg bendcs at some locations of the river bed fol irrigation by accumulating water or building pools for collecting spring water for irrigation purpose), they hardly have a negative impact on the present ecosystems. It may be predicted that accumulatilg thle present water sources upstream might diminishi the water quantity dowinstream and adversely impact some other points of the MC in termis of water availability. Buit the opposite is the case. Because of the Iligh altitudce of the region, tile landl is tioire suitable toI pastures/rangelalids than the forest. Ihlic excess \\vatclr ilol the slopes concenitiates in the valley bottom of Kabaktepc and makes this flat zone a kindc of grasslanId'. BuLt the highi water table (especially long lasting stagnant water) in the flood plain does not pemlit grasses to grow. The planined withdrawals will divert spring water and bends on the valley bottom will create better conditions by preventinig stagnanit vater on the valley. The excess water will be used to create new Irrigated fields for productive fodder through irr igation canals. Table 4.13 Grazing animiials in forests and on rangelanids. Village Rangeland in Number of ruminant Rangeland Number of ruminant Forest area animals grazed outside animals grazed (ha) Large Small forest (ha) Large Small Buyukkabaktepe 1,027.0 150 1,090 178.0 150 1,090 Golcuk 0.0 150 500 207.0 150 500 Kucukkabaktepe 644.0 70 815 0.0 70 815 Total 1,671.0 2,405 385.0 370 2,405 Environmental Problems. Erosion. Erosion is less severe in Kabaktepe MC compared to other MCs (see Table A4 14). The causes of erosion in the Kabaktepe Micro-catchment, may be explained by the following anthropogenic activities. Illegal fuelwood cutting: local people have long been cutting trees for domestic heating, as well as for construction purposes. Nomads (shepherds), who come from outside the area to graze sheep in the pastures of the MC, also cut trees to stay warm and to prepare cheese. As a result of this overuse, the forest has become very sparse. In addition, the melting springtime snow on the uplands encourages slope wash, resulting in gully erosion on the slopes. 136 Table A4 14. Erosion in the MC (Units hectares) Village De_gree of Erosion Gully Land Total Nane nil or very moderate severe very erosion slide slight I severe K. Kabaktepe 210.0 677.0 269.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,156.0 Golcuk 65.0 311.0 133.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 509.0 B. Kabaktepe 329.0 1 075.0 507.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 1.91 1.0 Trotall 604.0 2.063.0 1 909.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 _ 3,576.0 Sou-rce: AGMI Chief Engincering Office in Kayseri. Forest clearin7g to gaini fields. The fields acquired from forests are ustially located on relatively steep slopes and have thin soils. Vertical tilling leave ruts, some of wvhich turn into gullies. In addition sheet floods on the bare soil transports soil to the riiver basins. Overgrazing oni the pastur e areas. Overgrazing on the pastures of the Micro-catchment has been practised for ages without any interferenice and witlhout any rehabilitationi. Wlhen the fine-graiaied (silt an(d clay) soil on the inclinied parts of the pastuLes loses its vegetation cover completely, the soil is easily remnoved by sheet and gully erosion. Until 14 years ago nomads from Adana, Maras and Aydm Provinces used to come seasonally to the MC to graze their animals on the pastures of Kabaktepe River Basin. Then they were bamned. For 12 years, this allowed the province to recover from this over-grazing. However, two years ago the ban was lifted and again the pastures of B. Kabaktepe and K. Kabaktepe villages were opened, despite an application by the villagers to the Provincial Rangeland Comnmissioni, to re-impose the ban. Agricultural and Organic Pollution: Thlis is mainly derived frolmi pesticides and fertilizers, which are used in cereals and fodder fields. Organic pollution is derived from dwellings and from animal manure. The manure, which is taken out of barns and piled nearby is likely to cause groundwater pollution. In addition, there is no village sewage system. Domestic wastes are discharged into pits dug by the villagers near their houses. Pit seepage might cause groudvdwater, and in tuirn 5spring water contamiiinatioln. Orcan Stream (Turkoglu/Karamararas) Micro-catchmcnt (Ceyhan Basin). Location. Orcan Stream micro basin is located about 25 km soutlh ol Kahiramainmaras city arounid the SW- NE flowing Orcan Stream within Ceyhan Basin. The stream is located about 6 km west of Tiirkoglu towi, within the administrative boundaries of Kahramanmara§. Orcan micro-basini, of about 7,750 ha, covers almost all the river basin except the last 3 km terminal part of the river. There is one town (Yesilyore) and 7 villages in the basin. About 16,000 people live in the basin according to the 1997 census. (Table A4 15). Table A4 15. Population of Orcan Stream Micro-catchment. Settlement Population Households Settlement Population Households Yesilyore Kirmakaya Village 1,216 230 Municipality 4,197 980 Doluca Village 1,481 255 Bahcelievler quarter 1,171 250 Uzunsogut Village 1,805 350 Fatih quarter 1,285 300 Aydinkavak Village 552 115 Cicekli quarter 771 180 Yavuzlar Village 489 85 Camlica quarter 971 250 Yolderesi Village 955 185 Hapurlu Village 1,169 210 Total 16,062 3,390 Topography. The topography of the basin in the west traces the 1,000m peaks, while the altitude increases to 1350-1500m in the SW and south. The elevation of the basin decreases to 650-800m in the east and to 800-550m in the NW part. (The lowest point is 545 m at the Orcan Bridge at the northern terminal point). About 4/5 of the basin is located to the east of the river while 1/5 of the area is on its western flank. 137 Geological Setting of The Micro Catchment8: The oldest rocks of the basin are from the Paleozoic age (between upper Cambrian to lower Ordovician, which is older than 450 my BP) and consist of altemate layers of sandstone, quartzite, shale and mudstone and outcrop at the midwest (Demirciler oba and their surroutndinigs) and northeast cornier of the basin (around Hopurlu). The remaining part of the basil consists of dolomites, which arc emabedded in the shale from the MNlesozoic Period (Triassic and Jurassic time betweeni 225 to 130 my BP). Because soluble dolomites comprise much of the basin, a numliber of isolated karstic depressions have been formed at in the middle and easternl sCction1s ol thc basiln. These cnlile siopitig l7cpressionis created a vast taining arCas \Vtlih gCnllt I slopil to flat sui-lices. TlLus, the total land suitable for agrilculture (3,716 hia), comprises ahlmost half of the basin. The valley of the Orcan Streaimi is also related to karstic form-lationis more thani the fluvial processes. The River takes a numlber of short but deeply incised ephemiieral tribtutaries fiom the narrowv wvestern side (because most parts of this section consists of impermeable rocks), while thele are broad dissolved depressions xvith faint (internial) drainage in the eastern side beCause of dissolhing characte- of the limestone and dolomites. Climate. The chlimate is a tranisitioni type of Mediterraneall Climate with railly winter and sprillg anld its mild temperature. The mean preiipitation is 710 mnim (most of it in \vInter and sprin,g) and the annlual mean temperature is 16.5 'C. Thle coldest monitlh is 4.5 'C in Januar-y and the waarmllest monitlh is 28 5 'C in August. Meteorological data are taken from records of Kahlaimiaiinmaras Meteorological Station, located in the centre of the Province at 500-in elevation. Since the entire basin is higlher than this elevation, precipitation and temperature figures should be interpolated accordingly (i.e. temperatures will be lower and precipitation will be higher thani above values). Hydri ology. The season-round flowing Orean stream originates on the SW edge of the basin from 1400 in peaks, andc after a short distance (about 2 kim) reaches a flat bottom and flows in this bed about IS km farther and joins the Delicay stream, wlhiclh is one of the maini tributaries of Aksu river (Aksu is one of the maini tributaries of Ceyhanl). The widtlh of the Orcani streamii varies between 250 and 700m. The Orcan stream,1 usually floocis in iMarch Its flowv late dimiiiislhc- dramatically between .hllv and( Septellmbel Biological environment. There is no detailed survey of the biological diversity and ecology of the basin. However there is some information about the forest features of the Micro-catchlmlenit. Data about fauna and flora that is given below have been gathered fi-om consultations witlh the local people. Frauna. Large mancnnals. Foxes (Canis vulpes) (abuLiclalit), Wolves (Cacnis Iupu.s), rabbit (decreasinog cuc to over hunting), wild boar (Sits scrofa scrofa) (almost extinct due to over hullting), pine martini (decreasing) badger, (decreasing), otter (almost extinct), deer (Damna da,na). Birdis Partridge, Rudcly shelduck Flora. Red pine (Plz ups brutia) is predominant at the western slopes while degraded oak (Quercius sp) forest occupies the eastern part of the basin. In addition to trees, there are herbaceous plants used locally either for aromatic or medicinal purposes. These are: Wild thyme (Tltymus thapsus), Sage (Salvia sp), Tulsi (Ocimuim basilicuni) common or field mint (Men tha anrensis), and Chamois (Rupicapr-a rupicapra). Through the project, the flat dry farming areas will be transformed into irrigated fields. Consequently, farmers are expected to abandon cultivating the steep sloping fields, which were acquired through forest clearing. It is planned to plant fodder species (especially sainfoin) on the upper slopes of the MC. Land Use. Table A4. 16 gives the land use in the micro-catchment. 8 Hiiseyin Korkmaz, 2002, "Kahramanmaras Havzasinin Jeomorfolojisi", Kahramanmara§ Valiligi il Kultur Mildurlugo Yayini No: 3 pp. 197, Kahramanmaras 138 Table: A4 16. Land use in Gogden Micro Catcthment (ha .). Village Productive Degraded Energy Reforest- Settle- Arable Range Rocky, Total forest forest forest ation ments land land lakes, etc. Yesilyore 0 651 0 0 100 932 0 14 1,697 Mtunicipality Hopuril 0 430 0 0 25 617 0 34 1,106 Ktrmakaya 0 381 0 0 25 248 0 35 689 Doluca 0 540 0 0 30 185 0 0 755 L7LlnSoeutIt 0 -.526 0 0 S 544 70 1.170 Avchnkav'ak 0 363 0 0 20 454 0 0 837 Yavuzlar 16 303 0 0 20 277 0 32 648 Yolderesi 0 660 0 0 25 185 0 0 870 Total 16 4,854 0 0 275 3,442 0 185 8,772 Agricultur-al Activities. At present, mainly wvheat and cottoin is grown in the irrigated fields. Also cucumber (dominantly), green beans, and to a lesser extent; tomato, green pepper and eggplants ate grown for salads. In rainfed areas mainily cereals (wheat, barley and rye) are grownii and sometimes chickpeas and lentils. In addition, pistachio, grape, almond and olive are secondary products. Trabzon ur1m-111asi (local namiie) has becomie a favourite orchard fruit in recent years. Table A4 17. Agriculttiral products according to the 1ir-st 4 crops. Fri-Lit/ Unit Yesilyore Hopurlu Village Kirmakaya Village Doluca Village vegetable Municipality cereals (**) Yield(*) (**) Yield (Y) (**) Yield(*) (**) Yield (*) Date Trees 2,000 40.0 200 50.0 1,000 30.0 1,000 50.0 Walntt Trees 2,000 5.0 200 12.0 200 12.0 Vine Trees 500 7.0 2,000 5.0 Olive Trees 1,000 12.0 Ahlmonld Trees ____ 3,020 2010.0 l Pluml1 Trces 1,000 50 0 Antep peanut da 4,000 2.5 1,000.0 2.0 Tomatoes da 50.0 1,000.0 40.0 500.0 50.0 1,000.0 50.0 2,000 Beans da 300.0 1,000.0 Cucumber da 50.0 1,500.0 30.0 1,000.0 50.0 1,000.0 50.0 1,500 WN'heat da 1028/ 80/ 186/ S0/ 100/ 120/ irrigated 1500 200 100 150 50 220 Barley da 150 300 Chickpea da 100/ 100/ irrigated 100 140 Stuffed Pepper da 30.0 500.0 30.0 50.0 50.0 500.0 Cotton da 273 300 l Rye da l 1,000 200 Lentil da 30.0l 150.0 (*) In terms of kg/tree or kg/da. (**) Dry/Irrigated. Source: 139 Table A4 17 continued. Agricult ral products accordi g to the first 4 crops Fruit/ Unit Uzunsogut Village Aydinkavak Yavuzlar Village Yolderesi Village vegetable Village (**) Yield(*) (**) Yield (*) (**) Yield(*) (**) Yield (*) Date Trees 1,000 50.0 500 20.0 1,000 20.0 Walnut Trees 50 6.0 Vine Trees 3,000 5.0 2,000 3.0 Oliv0e: TI cs 700.0 10.0 400.0 7 0 Almondcl Trees 2,000 10.0 Antep Peanut da 500,000 3.0 1,000.0 2.5 20,000 4.0 Tomiiatoes da 30.0 2,000.0 50.0 2,000.0 70.0 3,000.0 Beans da 10.0 750.0 Cucumiiber da 200.0 2,000.0 350.0 1,500.0 100 0 1,500.0 20.0 2,000.0 Wheat da 1312/ 150/ 400/ 200/ 752/ 200/ 170/ 80/ Irrigated 100 200 138 300 50 225 126 200 Barley da 353 250 50 250 Chickpea da 25 100 1 5 50 StLffed Pepper cda 50.0 500.0 50.0 500.0 Cotton da Rye da 70 150 Lentil da 30 120 (*) In terms of kg/tree or kg/da. (**) Dry/Irrigated. Husbandry. Table A4.18 gives animilal numilbers in the MC and Table A4 19 gives the number of grazing animals. Table A4 18. Present state oi thie livestock in the villages of IIe Orcan MC \Village Cows Sheep Goats B3celmics Yesilyore Toown 400 2,000 1,000 200 Hopurlu Village 150 1,700 300 20 Kirmiakaya Village 50 200 300 250 Doluca Village 150 150 1,000 0 UzuLnssgut Village 200 500 600 1,750 Aydinkavak Village 75 440 40 200 Yavuzlar Village 100 190 70 25 Yolderesi Village 100 30 800 15 Total 1,225 5,210 4,110 2,460 Table A4.19 Grazing animals in forests and rangelands. Village Rangeland in Number of ruminant Rangeland Number of ruminant Forest area animals grazed outside animals razed (ha) Large Small Forests (ha) Large Small Yesilyore Town 7.0 500 3,500 7.0 500 3,000 Hopurlu Village 16.0 150 2,000 16.0 150 2,000 Kirmakaya Village 15.0 50 500 15.0 50 500 Doluca Village 0 Uzunsogut Village 2.0 0 0 2.0 0 Aydinkavak Village Yavuzlar Village Yolderesi Village Total 40.0 700 5,500 40.0 700 5,500 140 Environmental Problems. Degradation. Forest/pasture degradation due to tree cutting, forest clearance and overgrazing are the major enviromu-iental problems. The local forest authorities have stated that about 240 ha, wlhiclh is almost bare at present, was once a healtlhy forest. Only Pinius piniea trees are left because local people preserved theimi for their pine nuts. Erosion. Severe erosion (see Table A4.20) has resulted from over cutting of fuielwood especially at the southwest part of tile '1 icro-ctlicihmct, TliIhe compositioll of rock (claey) liiestoie) also lostei S crosion ii this sectioIi sinice thc characteristic of this type of iock is less pernicable thani dolomite. ThuIs, slopC Wash- water induces gully and rill erosion and changes the land to steep slopes. The other parts of the basin prone to erosion appear in the unresisting and impermeable Paleozoic rocks around Hopurlu and at the western part of Demirciler Oba and Yesilyore settlements. All these severely eroded areas are planned to be 'Foorestationi for Soil Prevenitioni Zones' or 'Maquis Rehabilitation Zones.' Table A4. 20. Erosion in the MC. (Units: hectare s)- Village Name Deg,ree of Eriosion _ Gully Land Total. Nil or very slight. Moderate. Severe. Very severe. erosion. slidc. Yol deresi 4.0 50.0 190.0 405.0 11.0 0.0 660.0 Yesilyore 6.0 75.0 337.0 233.0 0.0 0.0 651.0 Yavuzlar 6.0 15.0 261.0 37.0 0.0 0.0 319.0 Uzunisogut 30.0 186.0 555.0 755.0 0.0 0.0 1,526.0 Kirmakaya 0.0 31.0 85.0 258.0 7.0 0.0 381.0 Hopulou 2.0 6.0 230.0 192.0 0.0 0.0 430.0 DoIlca 10.0 36.0 10.0 484.0 0.0 0.0 540.0 Aydinkavak 0.0 61.0 268.0 34.0 0.0 0.0 363.0 Total 58.0 460.0 1,936.0 2,398.0 18.0 . 0.0 4,870.0 Source: AGM Chief Engineering Office in Kahramanmaras. Gogden (Mut) iMlicro-basin (Goksu Basin). Location. Gogden ml1icro basin ts located about 30 km ENE of Mut towvn, \vhich belongs to Icel Provinice. The micro basin covers only 25 km of the upper and middle parts of Gogden Streamii. There are thlree villages witlinl the catchment (Table A4.21). Haclaiihmetli; in the upper part, lbrahimili; in the lower west part at aboutl200 m altitude and Comelek located on the lower- east part between 1,150-1,200 m. The people of this village are well educated because it has a well-established secondary school. The village has a Development Cooperative and publish a periodical journal. Table A4 21. Po ulation of Gog den (Mut) Micro- asin (Goksu Basin). Settlement Population Households Settlement Population Households Haciahmetli 650 380 Comelek 700 274 Ibrahimli 150 45 Total 1,500 699 Topography. Table A4 22. Topographical information of Gogden (Mut) Micro-basin (Goksu Basin). Altitude Area (ha) % Altitude Area (ha) % Slope (%) Area (ha) % | 0-250: 0 0 1251-1500: 2,034 18.9 0-20: 5,730 39.3 251-500: 0 0 1501-1750: 4,298 39.8 21-40: 5,660 38.9 501-750: 0 0 1751-2000: 4,229 39.2 41-60: 3,177 21.8 751-1000: 147 1.4 2001+ 0 0 60+: 0 0 1001-1250: 80 0.7 Total 10,788 100 Total 14,567 100 141 Two streams join the north-south flowing Goksu River outside tie basin. The two arms originate in high karstic plateaus at 1,800 m elevations. Erkec stream flows from the east and Kurudere from the west, and enters a gorge near Haciahmetli village. It enters a very narrow canyon after 14 km and flows about 11 km mo-c in this confiniecd valley and joins witlh the Sason stream. This is the soutlhern bounidary of the protected part of the basin. The lheiglht of the catclhmenit varies from 750 to 2,000m. About 80% of the land is higlher tlhan 1,500m wvhile 40% is above 1,750mn. (See Table A4 22). Geographical information. The project area transverses limestone and marls, wvhichi belong to lowver NlioCcrnC mll:irinc seCdiiimentatioii ThleicforC, the Gogd(eii imiicro basin IrclCsnClltS thlC yOunLgCst mar;linC carbonate rocks of Turkey from 25 my BP. Because of thie soluble character of carboniates all tile valleys are very deep. Because the rocks weren't affected by Alpine Orogenesis its stratums lie almost horizontal anic constitutes shallow karstified limestonie plateaus at the watershed level. Table A4 23. Soil infor mation of Gooden (NInt) Mficro-basin (Goksu Basin). Soil capability Area (ha) (%) SCC Area (ha) (%,o) Soil deptlh Area (hia) (%) class _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 190 1 3 V 0 0 >90 0 II 5 0.0 VI 1,583 10.9 50-90: 0 III 414 2.8 VII 12,376 85.0 21-50: 1,717 25.9 IV 0 0.0 Total 14,568 100 0-20: 4,907 74.1 The karstified plateaus are used for crops (barley and chickpea are planted in the shallow dolines which hlave a bottom red soil) and the farmers graze tlhcir goats in summnuer. In omder to mitigate the grazing pressure in these karstified plateaus 'PastLure Rehabilitation Areas' are planned in project areas. The larger flat zones on the plateau and at moderately sloped banks of Gogden River are planuned as agricultural areas. There is severe erosion in the uplands at the edge of karstic plateau. The marl (clayey limestone) nature of the rocks accelciates tihe erosioni, becausc the marl is nlot as permeable as purc Ihmestonie. All ithesc sC\cicly erodcd slopes arIc classified in ilte p( oecit is 'Soil Prevenition Zone by ConstiLmctim,g I crlccs. Climate. Tlhere is nzo meteorological inonitolring statioi in th/e Gogdeni Microbasini. The nearest ineteorological statioln is situated in Mllait toIWn1 at 275ini elevation. Simice tlhere is ci big djference between elevationi of the MC anld of Stationi the data of illfilt is hardly reepresentative of the acrec. Therefore, precipitation amcid telnyperalture valutes of MAllt in111s! be intelpolated according to the altitudes of the cirea. The precipitcitioni anld tenmperatuire values of Mut are seeni below. 100 35 80 - Average Total 25 Precipitation (mm) E 60 20 E 15 + Average 40 10 Temperature ( 20 5 Celsius) J FMAMJ J ASOND months 142 Biological Environment. The local people have identified the following species. Fauna. At one time, it is stated that there were numbers of bears (Ursus arctors), clhamois (Rupicapra nipicapra), jackal (Canis aureus) and black vultire (Aegypius monaclius) in the MC, but they all have disappeared becausc of over hunting as well as food scarcity for the wvild animals due to habitat degradation. For the same reason, foxes (Vulpes vulpes) and rabbits (Lepus carpensis) have decreased. Flora. There are several herbaceous species in the area19. These include wild thynie (Tlhnn3tv thapsuts), '\ol)ll\Vood (..-l (l//lI/m( (bl/J'iltIlIhu). tumnlblc\\e(d (Gu;idellito tio/lU7jfi)11i), St. John1 s wVort (Ilp.lull/ .iC t), Coban Cokerten, Demir dikeni, (Tribulus terrestris L.), ozan arpasi, tavsan kuyrugu, tavsan topugu, koyull emzigi, crocus (Crocuts sativus,), topalak (Cvperus rothlndllus), mushroomii/field mushlroom (Agaricuis camzpestris), pitrak, cetrefil, kuzu kulagi, bird's foot trefoil (Lotus cor nticulatlus), yemlik (Scor-zonnera sp), madimak (Polygoniiiii cogntat/fn/,), imarjorani (penny royal), stinging nettle (U,tica urens), har-dal (Siliapis arres/Sis) reed (Phrag/niles auistralis), esek biberi-gerdeme (Lepidium// santiv/n), coban kahvesi Kuzo kulagi-eksi kuLilak (Ru/nex acetosella) (decreased due to overgrazing) and salkaba (Urginca //ia/iti///e). Land Use. Table: A4 24. Land( usc in G66cdn 1Micro Catcthlimiciet (ha). Village PloduL/ive Dcgraded Encrgy Reforest- Settle- arable Range Rocky, Total lorest forest forest ation ments land land lakes, etc Haciahmetli 0 1,990 0 0 21 5,169 2,670 0 9,850 lbrahimli 455 779 0 0 6 120 52 26 1,438 Comelek 109 3,007 0 0 23 1,700 2,312 470 7,621 Total 564 5,776 0 0 50 5,351 5,034 496 17,271 Agricultural Activities. Table A4 25. Agricultural prodticts accor(ling to thc first 4 crops. vegetable/ Unit Hlaciahlectli-c.h. lbrahimiili Comelek cereals etc. (**) Yield(*) (**) Yield (*) (**) Yield (*) Apple Trees 28,800 90 19,200 90 Walnlut Trees 720 20 1,500 20 Vine Trees 71,400 9 7,000 9 Olive Trees 2,500 30 Apricot Trees 12,100 50 Peach Trees 1,450 20 Onion da 130 600 250 600 Tomatoes da 270 2,000 250 2,000 Pepper da 120 S00 100 500 Beans da 150 150 Cucumber da 70 4,000 Wheat da 2,000/ 90/ 350 90 5,000 390 irrigJated 3,000 300 Barley da 6000 100 100 100 400/ 100/ irrigated 100 325 Chickpea da 2,500 60 1,000 60 (*) In terms of kg/tree or kg/da. (**) rainfed/irrigated. Source. Icel Provincial Directorate of Agriculture. 19 Flora. The names of the tlora were collected from local people. Afterwards their scientific names were found in a Dictionary of Turkish Plant Names (in English) by Prof. Dr. Turhan Baytop (1997), [Turk Dil Kurumu Yayini No 578, Ankara]. If it is not found in the dictionary, the local name of the plant is left. 143 The total arable land is 5,351 ha., of which about 20% is irrigated. The fields are usually on stony inclined surfaces. Apple and walnut are sold out of the province. Mechanisation is low. Farmers grow wheat, barley and chickpea by, rainfed/fallow methods. Wheat and barley are grown for subsistence, only chickpeas are sold. Apples, grapes, nuts, apricots (recently) and chelries (recently) are grown in irrigated areas. Tomato, grecn pepper, onions and beans are also cultivated in homiie gardenis for thcir owin use. The fields are usually inclined and stony. Withiin the scope of the project, water from 22 springs will be collected and about 900 ha will be irrigated. About 20% of the area is used for grazing. I-hlsbanldry. Goats and slclCp le mIaCjilly 2IrIZed Onl pa stIuelanld \wliereas catile are stall-ecd iIn bairns. Table A4 26. The present state of livestock in the villages of Gogdeni MC. Village Cows Sheep - Goats Bechives H. Ahlmletli- C.H 52 3,700 4,500 1,120 Ibrahiili jd 31 50 1,200 150 Comelek 49 100 4,000 1,000 Total 132 3,850 9,700 2,270 Soulce. Icel Provin-cial Directorate of Agriculture. Table 4.27 Grazing animilals in tor-ests and on rangelanids. Village Rangeland in Number of ruminant Rangeland Number of ruminiant Forest area animals grazed outside animals grazed (hla) Large Small forests (ha) Large Small H. Ahmetli- Q.H 2,670 0 8,200 3,866 0 8,200 ibrahiillli 52 30 1,250 Comelek 2,312 50 4,100 l Total 5.034 80 13,550 _8.200 Sotirce. I[el Provinicial Directorate of A"lgricLlture Einvironimental P roblemiis. The greatest problenii iln the ar ea is accelelrated erosion. A'fore thlaii 90%° of the lanid is subject to severe erosioni (Table A4.28). Onl1y abouit 4% of t/e total micro-catchinent is produictive for-est while 33% is degraded. Pasturles colnstitllte abolut 30% allid aie severely degraded. Table A4 28. Erosion in the MC. (Units: hectares). Village Nanme Degree of Erosio _ _ Gully Land Total nil or very moderate severe very severe erosion slide) slight __ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ H. Ahmetli-C.H 189,674.0 414,322.0 3,058,753.0 2,551,225,0 0.0 0.0 6,213,974.0 Ibrahimli 4,585.0 5,411.0 871,430.0 1,089,438,0 0.0 0.0 1,970,864.0 Comelek 0.0 548,375.0 2,068,066.0 3,765,891,0 0.0 0.0 6,382,332.0 Total 194,259.0 968,108.0 5,998,249.0 7,406,554,0 0.0 0.0 14,567,170.0 Source: Head of the AGM Chief Engineering Office in Icel. 144 Annex 5. AWRP-project performance monitoring component. Discussion of the monitoring concept. Performance of the AWRP needs to be monitored and revisions in application of the proposed measures need to be amended accordingly. Therefore, parameters need to be defined to track the project outcomes. As to review, the following are the problems set forth in the project documnents I. Over-application of fertilizers. resulting in discharge of fertilizer compounds by Kizilirmak and \esilirInIak to the Black Se.l, 2. Over-application of pest control chemicals resultinig in excessive pesticides and lherbicides discharge from Kizilirmak and Yesilirmak to the Black Sea, 3. Pollutioll carried by rivers to land, canals and to Black sea, as well as to groundwater resouLces, 4. Inappropriate manure and waste management, including intenisive animilal feeding activities in stables, improper handcling of industrial wastes, insufficieint municipal solid waste disposal applications, discharge of industrial and muniicipal wastewater to rivers without treatment 5. Erosion Parameters, addressinig eaclh category should be set and tr-anslated into analytical terms in order to clevelop the monitorinig componenit of the project: Table A5.1: Development of a Monitor-inig Model, by parameter. Problem to which monitoring Translation to a Parameter to be Translation to Analytical metliodology is to be addressed i\Monitored Terms Fertilizer in the rivers, Black sea, soil N, P, K NO2, NO3, NH4, ON, TKN, TP, and ground water resources Flow & level of river/ground water OP. Water flow and level Pesticides and herbicides in the rivers, C, Cl, N, P, S Cl-S containing organic Black Sea, soil and ground water Flow and level of river and ground compounds resources watc\ Water flowv and level PolluIion of rivers, Black Sea, soil andl A\S Per Water Pollution Rcgullitioni As per \Water Plollution underground water resources by Tablel: Inland water resources Regulatioii Table 1: Inland water industrial & municipal solid wastes and Flow & level of river/ground water resources wastewater Water flow and level Pollution of rivers, Black Sea, soil and C, bacteria TOC, TC, Total and Faecal grounld water resources by manure Flow & level of river/grouLnd water Coliformii. Water flow and level Erosion of soil Soil level, meteorological Soil depth, wind, rain hLumidity, _ paramleters speed/direction, temperature. Next is the determination of sampling/monitoring points and sample/data collection frequency. Sampling/monitoring points should be selected as to allow monitoring impacts of: 1) agro-industrial wastes 2) agricultural activities 3) meteorological events 4) natural events 5) farmiing activities In the ideal case, a maximum of four sampling points should be chosen in the streams regarding pollution parameters in GEF component to ensure that the sample is representative: (a). Upstream site, unaffected by the pollution source under consideration; (b). Just below the source of pollution or dilution; (c). Where the stream is in the worst condition due to a specific pollution source. (d). A point midway between the bottom of the oxygen sag and the recovery of the oxygen level There must be at least four times for sampling per year, two of which corresponding to minimum and maximum water levels in streams. 145 For micro-catchment rehabilitation projects, two sampling points are required, one upstream and one at the outlet of the micro-catchment to monitor both pollutants and sediments arising from erosion. Meteorological parameters can be monitored continuously at a station, located at a representative point. As to review sampling/data collection frequenicy, it is appropriate to take each sample type separately: Table A5.2 gives a moniitoriing model by surface and grouLnd watcr andl by soils. Table A5. 2: Development of a Monitoring Model, by sample type. Rivcrs and NCeds contilnuous mon1ltolrilng for qulality ill gnci CI., SCIISC, idclntifyi'n1g tilc Icvcl of poHlt ion, sea howvever fertilizer and pesticide Input Is seasonal and can be measured two times a year, early after winter and next after harvesting Manure paranmeters in rivers and sea can be moniitored every molnthl, in order to see the t-elnd. Ground water Needs to be moniitored in the same way, witlh the same paramnetcrs, as rivers and sea, as pcr Water Pollutionl Regulation. Comimuniqu-6 for Sampling andc Analysis Methlods, Article 10 Soil meteorological parameters need to be monitored continuously, soil dleptlh can be observed a couple of timiies a year, if not continiuous; wlhile pollution parameters are to be handled the same way with rivers and sea. Note. FrequLency of sampling fromll ground surface water, advised by WVater Pollutioni Rcgulatioll, Colnununique for Sampling and Analysis Metlhods, Article 10. Regularly: once every montlh. Occasionally: after every lheavy rain. It should be n7oted that, water quality parameters in rivers anid sea, are assumed to be already clmonitored or are hanidled by the current institutions; tlher efor-e n1eed 11ot be tlhe part of the aim of this project. Howvever data gen1erated by the other Ilnstitultionis s/hol/ld be exchanged systematicallyfor evaluation. As disclussed above anid listed in Table A5. 1 is esseniticl to miieasuire these paraMeters cicii the c.fore theire is ci 1eed to colnsider-ed Iheli witlhin the scope of investimienit /)rOglit of i/he plqoect. Table A5. 3. gives a comparison with "water and soil monitoring system." This was taken fiom the report by report by Prof. N. Kolonkaya. Table A5 4 lists parameters, teclnilques and cqulpmiienit required to uniclertake water and soil monitoring. 146 Table A5. 3. A comparison with "water and soil monito ing system" report by Prof. N. Kol nkaya. Parameter Surface Water Ground Water Soil Table Water Tabl Water Pollution Table 7 (*) Pollution e 7 Regulation, 7 (*) Regulation (*) Communique for Tablel :Inland Sampling and water Analysis Methods, l-CSOLII-CCS ftciii I O Temperatur-c + + 1'1-1 + + + + + Dissolved 02 + + 02 Saturation + + 1F1ee C02 Cl + c SO4 Salinity + + Total dissolved solids + + + + Colour + + Na + + ConductIvIty + + Suspeinded solids + + Tulibidity + + N02-N + + + + NO,-N + + + + + NH4-N + + + + Orgapnic-N + + + 1'KN + + TotaliP + + + + + COD + + BOD+ + OC + + Inlusulsitfcd oil & gi-casc + 4 DctcrcLlnts l'henolic Stubstances + + Mineral oils & derivatives + + Total Pesticides + + + + -lei-bicides + + 1-h! ~~~~~~~~~~~~++ Cd + + I'b + + As + + CuL + + TIotal Cr + + Cr+6 + + Co + + Ni + + Zn + + CN + F + + Free Cl + + S + + Fe + + Mn + + B + + Se + + Ba + + Al + + a and 13 radioactivity + + Faecal coliform + + + + Total coliform + + + + (*) "water and soil monitoring system" by Prof N. Kolonkaya. 147 Table A5. 4: Parameters, Techniques, Equipment. Parameter Surface Ground Soil Air Allowed-advised Equipment Watcr Water Most Appropriate Analytical Water_l_e___p_ _atL_rc__. __ TechniqLuc (**) XVater I'emper aturc+ + Tero'lieiioieter TI'hrc-milonieter NO2-N + + + Coloirmetoc Plhotonmetei+kit NO3-N + + + Colorinmetric Photometer+kit NH,-N + + + Titration Glassxvare+digital bur ette 'I'KN + + + l_jc khihl NlacioKjlcdalil ei 'ToOal P + ± + Colonilietilc I'hotoilctcr+kl t Organic P + + + Phlotornmeter+kit OC + + + Persu[lphate-UV oxidation TOC Analyser Total Pestici(dcs + + +- G L-Chroniatography GC-1-CD/FI'ID/FI D I-lerbicielcs + GL-Chroriatogiuriphy GC-IECD/FPD/FID Faccal coliforill + + Mcmibranc iltration Filtariton sei+vacuum punip 'I'otal col i tolm + + NicInibrane 1 iltration 1-d tarn ton Set+vaCu Lum11 pTliIl Water flow + Flowmeter \V'atcr l1o\' + Flow inctei-i datalooggc 'Water level + Level sensor Soil dept + Dept indicator \Vind iit-cctioli SCnsor-+dat:ll oeuC Wind speed + Sensor Relative H-uinmidity + Seiisor Barometric prCssurc + Scnsor Air TemperatulC + Sensor Rain + Rain gauge + Water Sampler + Soil samplcl (**) As per Water Pollution Control Regulationi, Communiqu6 for Sampling and Analysis M/letliods, Item 4: samnpling should accomplish TS 5090; Item 8: storage of samples should accomplishi TS 5106; Item 9: on samplinlg methiods, sampltng poitnts and fiequenicies shoLild be followed; Itemil 9 D-I) and D-2) wvater level and flo\w rate nee(is to be miionitorec at evct' samirplinu poillt; 'I'able 1 r-ccomiineildecl analysis methods shoulld be accomplisiec. Estilmated cost of equipment is given in Table A5. 5. Table A5.5: Equipment List aind Cost. Equipment List Quanitity per set Unit Price (S) ellicmlomieter 1 100 General lab-ware 1 5,000 Photometer 1 5,000 Various photometer kits, 250 test/pk 4 400 Digital burette 600 Filtration set T 4,000 Vacuum pump T 4,000 Macro Kjeldahl set 1 12,000 TOC analyser 1 25,000 GC-ECD/FPD/FID 1 40,000 Surface water sampling equipment 1 2,000 Surface water flow meter+data logger 1 5,000 Ground water flow sensor+data logger 1 4,000 Ground water level sensor 1 4,000 Meteorological sensors: wind speed and direction, temperature, humidity, I 6,000 pressure, rain gauge, data logger and reporting Soil sampler I 1,000 Soil depth indicator 1 200 148 Annex 6. Field Trip Minutes, Sema Alpan, (National Consultant). July 2002. Area: Samsun-Bafra/Ilyasli MC. Date: 29 July 2002. Participants Mr. Meltmet Cubukcu (Provincial Director of Environment) Mr. Yuksel Ordulu (Provincial Directorate of Environment) Mrs. Zehra Sirimsi (Provincial Directorate of Agriculture) Mrs. ASUiMLnn Sczei (Plovincial Directorate of ,\griculturc) Mr. Cubukcu assigned one of his colleagues and a vehicle for the field trip. The meeting was held in Mrs. Zehla Sirimli's office. i\4rs. Sirinli is the chief of personnel in the Directorate in charge of the GEF sub- project. The staff who are in charge of implementing the project were not fully informed about the content, objectives and steps to be takeni in the project. They wvere confused about the coordinationi among differ-enit components of the AWRP and amonigst various institutiolns. The office provided some useful, but not very reliable baseline data on a survey dealing with regional animllal stock. (T\vo tables gave different fig,ures). iMeeting at the Agrictultur-c Olfice in Bafra. Participants: Mr. Dursuni Hacioglu (Director) Mr. Mehmet Gures (Agriculture Engineer) Mustafa Ozturk (Veterinary) Sedat Yilmaz (Techlnician) In Bafra, the nearest town to Ilyasli, a short visit was made to the local Director and his colleagues. Briefly they explained the situation in the project area and their activities particularly on greenhouse vegetable and strawberry cultivation as alternatives to tobacco. They also stated that these kinds of alternative farmning practices wovuld certainily encourage local participation. During- the field visit to the Tlyasli micro- catchlimcnt, accompanied by two local villagc hcacis (NMr Orhani TIal1t1 inuLh1tar of llyasli Villagc and M\r Fatih Simsek muihtar of Kamberli Village) approximately 50% of the whole catchment could be observed. We had the opportunity to see pilot greenhouses, strawberry fields and drip irrigation systems. A small group meeting was held in Ilyasli Village witli the participationi of represenitatives fromii the local Agriculture Office, the MoE and local people. Althoughi locals were mainly supportinig the project they were expecting some incomc ocieratifig activities and irrigation as well. The declining price of tobacco was one of their common complaints. They were also not comfortable to have a common manure collecting and storing system, as they were unclear about how to share the product. Area: Tokat. Date: 30-31 July 2002. A general meeting was organized by Mr. Mesut Tandogan on the 30'h July. Mr. Tandogan works at the Local Forestry Office as Department Chief. Those present were as follows: Mr. Mesut Tandogan (Head of Dept. Local Forestry Office) Mrs. Rabia Duzdemir (Agriculture Eng. Local Forestry Office) Mrs. Senay Kandemir (Agriculture Eng. Local Agriculture Directorate) Mr. Osman Sahin (Agriculture Eng. Local Agriculture Directorate) Mr. Ahmet Yucer (Agriculture Eng. Local Agriculture Directorate) Mr. Muzaffer Idi (Agriculture Eng. Local Agriculture Directorate) Mrs. Yasemin Ispirli (Expert/Eng. Provincial Environmental Directorate) (No attendance by the Provincial Directorate of Rural Affairs) Briefly we explained the basic purpose of our visit. Local officers gave a presentation about their activities and the state of the environment in the areas concerned. They all highlighted habitat destruction in Baglicadere MC and pollution in the Kazova MC, which appeared as major environmental problems in Tokat province and the surrounding areas. Mrs. Ispirli mentioned that due to the very recent establishment 149 of the local office of the MoE it does not have any data on pollution. After the meeting, a half-day field trip to Kazova Plain was organized. During the trip, some agriculture fields, drainage and irrigation canals, a pumping station and flood plains of the Yesilirmak were visited. There is intensive farming in the area, mainly consisting of vegetable growing. Local officials stated that fertilizer use was not based upon any soil analysis. During- this ViSIt vlsual imprcssionis were noted an(d information obtained from interviews with local villagers. In the evening of the same day we visited Mr. Ayhain Yuksel, the Local State Hydraulic Works (DST) director. Mr. Yuksel cxplained the DSI activities In the region and their- possible contribtitioni to the iMC lProject. -lowvcer, hie docs not shalie thle vic\\ tha:t pollutiOnl is one of the major problemiis particularly in the drainage canals. According to Mvir. Yuksel, erosion and sedimentation are the region's priority problems. On 3 I" of July, we weint to Baglicadere MC. Almost all local officers wlho attended the previous meetillg joinecd us. Dulilng tile ficld trip, dest-uctioni of natural flora Nvas observed to be thc most important environimental problem. The combined result of land mismanagement, loss of flora accompanied by severe erosion adds up to wvhat may be called an environmental disaster in the area. It Nvas strikinig to observe less degradation on one of the hills; because of there are tombs, which are considered as holy places. Also, the people conserve the gardenls and trees surr-ounl(dillg them11. Wc wcre worried about the ncw afforestation strategy because of the possible introduction of invasive and exotic species. Flowever Mr. Tandogan assured US that attention woould bc paid to native species. We also highlighted that thc same approach should be adopted in rangeland relhabilitation. Informiiationl was gathered fiom elderly people about local flora and fauna. Area: Orcan 1\Mlicro catchllicnit (Kahraniannmaras). D)ate: 22"'. July, 2002. Meetings were held in Yesilyore Town, Yolderesi and Doluca Villages all in Orcan MC. Meeting inYesilyore ToNvn: Pai-ticipanits: M\lultaza KIalli, Mayor. Ahlmlet Tcpebasi, 1Head of Kayserl Division of AGIM. Bahattin Acar Sari, Representative of Provincial Directorate of Rural Services. Assistant Prof. Dr. Recep Gundogan in the Kahramanmaras Sutcu Imam University, Faculty of AgricultuLre. About 30 ihllabitanits including some officers of Municipality. The Mayor explained that there are 9 officers anil 21 wvorkers in the Municipality and the town has clean drinking water, a post office and other necessary infiastructuLre. He stated that the annual houselhold earninigs range between 0.3 to I billion TL. H-le complainied that because the Govern-mnctt started to Cut some part of the municipal budget based on the Natural Disasters Decree, he could hardly pay salaries of the technical personnel in, the municipality. The villagers said that only 5% of the inhabitants can purchase coal for heating and the rest cut trees (especially oak) from the forest as well as using prunings from their garden trees. They confessed that they have cut oak and pistachio (Pistacia lentiscus) trees for charcoal making for generations. They also stated that they take leaves and branches of sandalwood (Arbutus unedo) and oak trees (kermes mesesi) as winter- feed for their goats and cows. The villagers stressed that they were well aware about the relationship between accelerated erosion and forest degradation, but their misuse was derived from poverty. Because the Government said this project will improve their economic situation they won't do illegal cutting during implementation. An option might be to subsidize coal for some years for local people (especially women). The villagers decided not to hunt in habitat reservation areas for a reasonable period. The villagers also promised not to graze in the pastures, subject to rehabilitation. (They are well aware that to do without pastures for some period will create considerable future benefit). The farmers wished to obtain young turkey as well as modem turkey coops (hut). This turkey breeding project proposal may be re-evaluated within the context of the present project. During the meeting it became clear that the farmers are ready to use drip and sprinkler irrigation. However, high equipment investment costs is their concem 150 (according to the project proposal, Government will bring pressured water to the fields, but farmers must pay for the irrigation equipment). Dr. Recep Gundogan stressed the necessity to leave newly planted fruit gardens (productive walnut, almond, cherry) to the legal entities of the Village. Meeting in Yolderesi Village. Ahmnet Yildiz (Muhtar-Headman), and the same officers meentioned for Yesilyore Towln plus about 20 villagers participated in the meeting. The Muhtar and villagers suffered from low hotusehold incomiie (about 0.7 to 0.8 billion TL) resulting in the migration of inhiabitalits to othier places as fiecld-\\orkers dutrillg sImIIr. TI'hy also confeCsscd to the b0)g- time cutting of trees for heatinig purposes. They complainecd that villagers of Doluca take some of their irrigation water. This is because they get their water from Kurtpinari spring, which is close to Doluca Village. The irrigation canal passcs throughl Dohlca and thcse villagers take what they xwant, resultinig in insufficienit water for the needs of Yolderesi. Mr. Yildiz stressed that water rights of both villages must agreed at the sprinlg location and it must bc delivered in two separate irrigation canals. The Muhtar- explained that due to conflicts between village inh1abitanits -derived from political reasons- they stopped protecting thc forest. Therefore, forest degradation has accelerated in the last three years. The Muhtar and other villagers asked about the lack of well water and asked for artesian water. Since deep drilling for water is the responsibility of the DSI, the project will not be able to unldeltake this. Meeting in Doluca Village. A meeting was held with the Headmen of Doluca Village (Mr Ali Sari) and the above mentionied project officers and with a few villagers. The Muhtar and villagers rejected the accuses of Yolderesi villagers about capturing their water rights from the Kurtpinari spring and indicated that the outflow of the spring was reduced to 70 lt/sec in the recent years and this was hardly sufficient for their needs. They added that this kinid of problem could be solved with trickle anid sprinikler irrigation system1s. Area: Gogden Microcatchmnent (Mut/mersin). Date: 24i' July, 2002. Meeting in Gogden MC was held in Comelek town1. Participants: The Mayor of Comelek. -JUsCylli Ozbakir (I-lead ofMlcrsin l)ivision of AG:\I). Alparslan Tunc (Forest enginieer in Mersin Division of AGMI). Sedat Yildirim (Chief of the Forest Region in Mut). A teachel fr-oln the Priminary School, plius arboutt 40 inihabitanits. The Mayor infornmed in the meeting that there is a "Development Cooperative" in the towni that sells pesticides, and some kitcheni material (sugar, oil and so fortlh) wvith a low mzark-up. He said that thie citizens are relatively well educated and that they publish a journal periodically. The villagers suffered from a lack of irrigation water. They satd that they have enough rainfed fields, but they canunot produce enough fodder because they are unable to irrigate the fields. They stressed that at present, they plant wheat, barley and chickpea, and will plant more maize and clover for silage. They believe that, in this way, stall-feed animal husbandry with will improve their financial conditions. They also added that the high price of the fodder adversely affected animal husbandry and also indirectly wild animals. The villagers stressed that they are ready to use sprinklers and drip irrigation if enough water can be brought to the fields. The villagers are happy that they started to protect their forest five years ago under the Forest Law. The legal entity of the town obtains money for this mandate and revenues are spent on the needs of the town. They also stressed that since 1998, all the govemmental works dealing with contractors in the area are being given to the Town Legal Entity. They are happy because on a 44 ha area, existing wild pistachio plants (Pistacia lentiscus) will be grafted, and additional pistachio plants will be planted on the border of the forest; afterwards this land will be left completely to the responsibility of the legal entity of the town. (The land will not be given but will be rented for 49 years). The villagers said that they started growing fruit in 1965 and began harvesting fruit after 1970. They said that they also produce grapes on about 50% of horticultural land. (The other half is for fruit growing). They use N fertilizers (15/15, 20/20, and 18/46) and pesticides for irrigated horticulture. They declared that they use about 150 tonnes of chemical fertilizers. They complained that they use chemicals less than their 151 needs because its price has gradually increased. It was said that only one farmer used organic fertilizers and they are aware that such manure is as productive as chemical fertilizers. They will try to use organic fertilizers during project implemenltation. Some farmers indicated that they are ready to produce organic products (fruit & vegetables) if the know-lhow is given to themii. On the other hanid, they emaplhasized that they used pesticides indeterminlately. They use about 500 to 750kg (in some years 1,000kg) pesticides on 700 ha of irrigated land. They said that the optilullm use of the chemiiicals was learnt from each othel-, or from the sellers as well as by techniicianis in the local Agriculture Government Office. However, usually they could not get satisfactory informiaation. The villagers stressed that they were reacly to participate in the project wvitlh their labour. Area. Kabaktepe MC (Kayseri). Date: 22 July 2002. The first meetinig was held in the Local Forestr-y Departmilenlt. Participanits: Mr. Zafer Atilla; (Head of the AGM Chief Enginecrinig Office in Kayseri) Mr. Ahlmlet Yenikalaycl; (Kayseri Provincial Directorate of Agriculture) M1r. Sacit Sen ocak; (Kayser-i Pr-ovinicial Directorate ofAgricultltire) M,Ir. Mehmllet Erkanitarci; (ORKOY, in Kayseri) Mr. Mehdi Aksoy; (Kayseri Provincial Directorate of RuL-al Services) Mr. Levent Kocer; (Kayseri Provincial Directorate of Rural Services) Local meetings. Meetings in Kabaktepe MC were held in th1ree villages Golcuk, B.Kabaktepc and K.Kabaktepe. Local Meeting in Golcuk. The first meeting wvas done in Golcuk village, at the Muhltar's homiie. Participanlts: Mr. Zafer Atilla; Head of the AGM Chief Engineering Office in Kayseri. Mr. Ahlmlet Yenikalayci; Kayseri Provincial Directorate of AgiricultuL-e Mr. Mehmet Erkantarci; ORKOY, in Kayseri Mr. M'lehii iAksov Kayseri Provincial Directoiate of Rural SCeVicCs, plus a fCXe Villagers The Muhltar anic other villagers expressed their regret about their contlnuing tree cutting activities. TIhe villagers expressed a great desire to cooperate with project staff during the implementation phase. The Muhltar explained that, in the past, pastoral agriculture xVas mucl grcater- tlhanl today, however, now cultivation has increased. As a consequenice, they have ImoreC wlveat and barley thani fodder in rainfecl fields and therefore, animral breeding has gradually decreased because the lack of fodder. I-le stresseci that. at present, thiere is no stockbreeding. fnstead, farmies graze animiials in arable and falloxv fields. FHe added that they are ready to start stockbreeding. The Muhtar said that 80% of animal dung was used for fuel wlhile 20% was used as manure. He explained that all households use nitrogenous fertilizers (20/20) and in total it reaches to about 70 toiunes (in some years 100 t.). The Muhtar and the villagers suffered from lack of irrigation water. They said that they have enough fields (about 600 ha) but they cannot produce enough fodder because they have insufficient irrigation water, (usually they leave 300 ha field as fallow every year). The villagers stressed that they are ready to use sprinkler and drop irrigation systems if enough water is available. The peasants stated that the wild boar population has increased due to a hunting prohibition. Kucukkabaktepe Meeting. The meeting was held in the house of vice Muhtar, Mr. Haydar Koca. The governmental project staff who participated in the Golcuk meeting were also present. . In addition, a few relatives of Mr. Koca also participated. Mr. Koca said that the village suffers from a gradual migration. He stated that there were 120 households in the past but, the number has dramatically diminished in the recent years. He mentioned numerous flora and fauna species in their territory; these were mentioned previously. This reflects a relatively less degraded environment. The area also suffered from increasing population of wild boar due to the hunting ban. There will be no reforestation on village land, only pasture rehabilitation. However, a debate between the brother-in-law of the vice Muhtar and Mr. Zafer Attila indicated that the villagers have 152 some concerns about the project. It appears that they are anxious because they think their rights, derived from the continuous use of the land, might be captured by the government through this project. Buyukkabaktepe Meeting. The meeting was held in the house of the Muhtar, Mr Battal Sezer. The governimental staff wlho participated in the Golcuk and K. Kabaktepe meetings were present. The ivluhltar stated that they have a fifty-fifty balance in terms of cultivation and animal husbandry. And they plant more fodder than cereals. Therefore, they produce all the fodder they need. Thcy are awaiting sprinkler and drip irrigation systems so iliat thcy w1ll be able to prodtice moic focdcler in irrigated Fieldls. Conisequlcnltly. they W1ill pro(lucc ior-e silage and breed more animllals. 153 Annex 7: Environmental Management Plan AWRP. Environmental Assessment. This project should have a substanitial positive impact on thie environment, but the degree of the impact is unlcertaini. Thius, a m11on1itolilng andl evaliationi plan has becn drawn up to try to determine the impact (Section 1). Some of the proposed activities in the AWRP could result in (local) environmental damage. Therefore, an environmenital screening of the various project activities has been made in Sectionl F and mitigation measures are proposed in the Environmental 'Management Plan [EIMPi (Section J) to acldress possible (negative) environmental impacts. T'liCsC inIpacIts arc suLmmar111izC(l in Table 1 below. The EMP also proposes procedures to measure the micro and macro environmilenital effects (Table 2). Table 1. EMP for AWRP: Environmiielntal Impacts and Mitigationl Measures. Issues Anticipated/lPotcntial Envir-onmilenital Efeccts oni Environment Actionis or Mlitigation MNleasures Impacts Road This could negatively affect erosionl, Restoration and re-vegetation of Enforce road-building standlar-ds builclinig soils, biodiversity, streamii flow, drainage watershed areas. and provide maintenance buldget. activities. and wetland. More sustainable use of land, Issue directives about re- Roads will give access to areas that have greater biodiversity and vegetation of exposed areas, becn degraded and enable mitigation inicreased C. storagc. replacing cut trees, explosives use, measures to be undertaken thus having Overall reduction of erosion. disposal of excavated soils, etc. positive environmental effects. Roads Reduced dissolved minerals in Include MoE in road alignmenit will also open up remote rangelands and surface and ground water. surveys to ensure that biodiversity remove over-grazing pressures on Poor alignment/steep slopes and wetlands etc. are protectecd. homestead pastLres. result in accelerated erosion. MoE requested to conduct an IEE Probability of occurrenice: High. if explosives to be used. Forest Initially, this could lead to surface and Restoration and re-vegetation of Enforce standards for terracing andi gully erosion1, poor drainlage etc. xx:aticrshed areas. anll( provide ma itiuenanc budg-t rangelanla(d Tlhe initial suLface and gully erosioni, if MIore sustainable uise of'landc., Re-vegeltatc aica quickly. (n1on1- any, will be substanitially offset by greater biodiversity and especially terrace edges andl arable) improved infiltration, soil stabilization, increased C. storage. Overall chiefly with indigenous species. terr-acing, incr eased grouLnd cover (bio-diversity), reductioni of erosion. Reduceec Provide training if necessar y grounld improved micro-climate, greater C dissolved minierals in surface piepaiatio sequestration. and "rounid wvatcr. No actionl n etc. Probability of negative effects lowv, and improper terracing etc. will positive elfects higl, result in continued degraclationi. Arable Initially, this could lead to surface and Less soil loss through water Enforce standards for terracing ground gully erosion, poor drainage etc. (and wind) erosion. and provide maintenance budget. prepara- Improved farming practices such as Reduced dissolved minerals in Demonstrate improved farming tion incl. minimum tillage, contour ploughing, surface and ground water. practices. Terracing hand/ mechanical terrace reduce top soil Continued ploughing up and Provide farmer training. loss, decrease erosion, improve soil down the slopes will accelerate Involve farmer participation in structure increase infiltration encourage erosion. planning/execution of initiatives. fertility build up. Probability of neg. effects low, positive effects high. Gully Initial actions may cause additional Soil stabilization and increased Apply appropriate gully plugging rehabil- erosion until vegetation established but vegetation will reduce erosion, methods and terracing standards. itation. overall will lead to decreased erosion, mineral loss, improve Vegetate with grass, shrubs & improved bank protection, restoration of biodiversity and C trees. Demonstrate improved vegetation cover, soil fertility build-up. sequestration. techniques throughout project Probability of negative effects low, area. Provide farmer training. positive effects very high. Involve farmer participation in __ planning/execution of initiatives. 154 Issues Anticipated/Potential Env. Impacts Effects on Environment Actions or Mitigation Measures Channel Building of irrigation channels and Properly constructed eartlh and Apply construction standards. work, realigning watercourses may cause initial concrete canals will minimize Re-vegetate canal banks with irrigation, erosion. Poor irrigationi practices may erosion potential. grasses and shlrubs etc. pond and lead to surface soil loss, mineral leaching Ponds and reservoirs will better Involve MoE for IEE and reservoir and/or salination. Pond and reservoir control water flow and diminish beneficiaries in site choice, design, construct- constrlctioln could deprive downstreamn incidenicc of flash floodidg and planning and eXeCutIOlln phases. ion. areas of water, soil el osion. EnsuLre that villagcs that draw Better water use should decrease erosion Greater all-year round use of water from same sources agree on1 by controlling flash flooding. The arable and pastoral lands. plan for water sharing. prOViSio1 of more watering points will Reduce pressure of over-grazing Plan for pond construictioni to take enable fuller and better use of ran-elands. inear homesteads and clearing into account down-stream a .iniore forest anid ranloe la nds for requiirei meiits. Increased ground cover by increased me cropping. arable farming. This should Ensure that reservoir plans and decrease organic C emissions construction are approved by MoE andc improve biodiversity and comply witlh World bank Probability of negative ef-fects low to safeguard requirements. moderate, positive effects high. Provide farmer training in drip and sprinkler irrigation and propose proper water pricing. Applica- Over use or inappropriate use of Inappropriate and/or over use of Only use internationally approved tion of herbicides, insecticides and pesticides chemical agents could chemicals in correct dosages at chemical could affect negatively plant population, negatively affect the appropriate times. 5 control lead to leaching in ground and surface environment through leaching Provide training for project agents water and affect the persons applying of the chemicals in ground and workers in storage, handling and (CCA) in chemicals. surface water and a build up of use of CCA and disposal of project Probability of negative cfl'ects low to toxins in thc soil. It could also conitailners. nurseries. mo(lerate, positive effects moderate. adversely affect the user. (ancl lractice 1PM (integrated pest his/her famllily). managemenit) where appropriate. Applicati Over use or inappropriate use could Inappropriate and/or over use of Ensure farmers only use approved on of affect negatively plant population, lead to chemical agents could CCAs. Get MoE to examinie chemical leaching in ground and suLface water and negatively affect the chem-lical list to ensure that only contlol affect the persons applying chemiiicals. enviroiinmenit through leaching internlationially approved agents by of the chemicals in ground and chemicals are allowed.20 farmers in surface \vater and a build up of Provide infornmation to farmers their own toxins in the soil. It could also and distributors of chemicals on fields. adversely affect the user (and the purchase and use of CCA. his/her family). Provide training for farmers in storage, handling and use of CCA Probability of negative effects low to .an dipoaso' onanes moderate, positive effects moderate. Dnstrat oP co urag . ~~~~~~~~Demonstrate IPM and encourage use where appropriate. 20 Ensure that the following pesticides, which fall into WHO IA and IB lists are not purchased and used under this project: Azinphos-Methyl, Chlorfenvinphos, Dichlorvos, Dichrotophos, 14-EPN, Methamidophos, Methidation, Monocrotophos, Omethoate, Oxydemeton-Methyl, Parathion-Methyl, Phorate, Thiometon, Phosphamidon, Triazophos, Aldicarb, Benfuracarb, Carbofuran, Furathiocarb, Mewthomyl, Tefluthrin, Zetacypermethrin, Dnoc Ammonium, Cadusafos, Ethoprophos, Fenamiphos, Oxamyl, Brodifacoum, Choumachlopr, Zinc Phosphide, Difenacoum, Floucomafen. Also see Annex 3. 155 Issues Anticipated/Potential Env. Effects on Environment Actions or Mitigation Impacts Measures Applicati Over use or inappropriate use could lead Over use can adversely affect Provilde soil testing and advise on on of to leaclhing inito grounlcl and surface water ground and surface water application rates to farmers. organic of N, P & K and pathogens. Proper including drinking water, Find use for surplus manure. and use/handling of fertilizers increases plant encourage eutrophication, Demonstrate storage and handlinig inor,ganjic yields. a ffects Fislh population andc sp-cading metlho(ds fertilizers P'robalbilitv of n1Cg-ativC cltects lo\w to negatively. Plov ide f"arirei training. moderate, positive effects moderate to Involve farmer participation in high. planninlg/execution of initiatives. Mfultiple Increase biomass cover with Steady increase in ground Provision of native seeds, rehlab)ilit indigenlous species. Improve cover. Slow bLit seedling and CuttillngS For tlle activitics biodiversity. Decrease erosion. accelerating growth of various regeneration in forests Improve water infiltration & water biomass. Increase in bio- iniliatives. Buffer zones to an(l flowv. Increase C. sequestration. diversity. Steady ptotect forests. ran gelani accumulationi of C in Fencinig and eniclose ds. Probability of negative effects wood, grass & soil. rangielands. very low to negligible, positive Increase in water quality Full consuiltation witlh and effects high to very high. and flow. Steady participationi of local people. reduction in erosion rate. Training of local people HQ cancl SLIp)OIt staff. Good M&E. Environ- Decrease.in water (and wind) Increase soil water Demonistr-ationi of improved mentally erosion. Change of N & P levels capacity, improve soil practices. Initial provision of in soil to optimum amoitnt for structuLe and ferlility. seeIs if necessary. FLiII ancl holrt- specific Crops. Decr-ease in Imipr-ove micro-failta. SUppOt acitivities. icultural leaching. Optimum use of organic Moderate increase in C Training of local people HQ practices fertilisers. seqitestr-ationi. Optimum N and stupport staff. Good Oil & P levels in soil. M&E. Organic faLming^, rainfed P raindell Probability of negative effects Reductioll of chemlical piomloted. ConsLultation and irrigated very low, positive effects high. control agents in soil and paiticipation of local people areas. groundwater. Over-use Over exploitation has resulted in If over-use continues, then Undertake supply and of degradation, deforestation, watershed degradation will demand resource surveys. natural erosion, flash flooding, siltation continue. This will not Detennine present & future sToris is etc. only affect the immediate land carrying capacity. a no- Through discussions and surroundings, but could Propose options for action initiatives get farmers to reduce have negative impacts on sustainable resource use. case and degradation and over-exploitation. lowland agriculture, bio- Initiate agreed options. has very diversity, C sequestration Monitor and evaluate severe negative With business as usual, negative and international waters. various interventions. impacts). effects very high, positive effects Involve beneficiaries at the negligible. planning stages and in the execution of initiatives. Carbon The degree of C accumulation will Tree planting and management Ensure that species choice is sequest- determine the global impact. activities, improved appropriate for land and climate. ration. A significant increase could enable C management of rangelands, Ensure that choice of plant species 156 trading to take place and/or allow the appropriate farming and is biased to those indigenous Gov. of Turkey to offset some C horticultural practices will species that have a comparative emissions. increase carbon sequestration advantage in C sequestration. Probability of occurrence: High. and biodiversity. . Measure and monitor C increase. 157 Issues Anticipated/Potential Env. Effects on Environment Actions or Mitigation Impacts Measures Biodivers Better land management &, conservationl Increased biodivcrsity on all Undiel-take biodiversity moonitoring ity. measules (1P.M) improve habitats and land use types, especially native over lifetime of project. migratory routes for species. flora and fauna. Use beneficiaries to locate Considerable increase of indigenous important areas of bio-diversity. species, especially pereiiinials. Use Enstire suistainable uise of important biodiversity areas as gene biodiversity by public pools. participation. Probability of occurrence: High. Traini local populationi in NM & E. Soil and With the introductioni of better pastoral More productle lands with Undertake soil andc water Water (and arable) farmilig systems, soil and increased organiic mzatter and monitorinlg of selectcd areas to Quality. water quality (both surface and grounid) greater carbon sequestratioln. establish tile effect of better will imiplrove. Reduced minerals, patlhogens. & farminig systems on1 soil and w\ater Probability of occurrence: High. pesticides etc. in soil & w\ater quality. Erosioni. The scale of erosioni redLiction, if Decrease in erosion, Measure erosion rates on any, will not only influence the besides having positive selected land-use types and immiiediate area, but affect the environmiiienltal effect on in MC rivers or streamils. wlhole watershed especially immediate area will bring Train project staff to monitor- lowland and the delta areas. benefits to lowland erosion. Probability of significant erosion agriculture and the quality reduction: Moderate. and quanitity of water flowing into rivers and reservoirs. Decrease maintenianice in irrligationl canals, extend . reservoir/dam life. 158 Table 2. EMP for AWRP: Monitoring Plan. Road Construction: Assessment and Monitoring Program. The parameter(s) Cost Responsibility iPhasc What 1Vh1cre Howv W XVhenl Wily Install Operate is to be is it to be assessed / type is it to be assessed Install assessed? assessed? of equip)nent? assessed? (optional)? Baseline Plans and site. At each site. Examinie plans. Before road To compare to Use existing Builders, l'MU Compaire to building inter natiolnall facilities. andc MloE. acceptable coimmences y acceptable standards. . standards. Inspect site. MoE to conduct lEE for use of explosives. Construction Road At each site. Physical As specified To ensure that As specified Builders, PMU buildinlg. inspectioni. in contracts standards arc in contract. and MoE. or plans. being met. Operate Road . At each Physical At specified To ensure that Included in Builders, PMU sites. inspection. (yearly) standards are the project. and MoE. intervals. being met. Decommission. Not applicable (N/A) I _I Forest and Rangelanid Ground Preparation/Tern-acing: Assessmiet and Mlonitor-ing Program. ____________ The parameter(s) Cost Responsibility Plhase WVhat Wlherc How When Why Install Operate assessed? assessed? assessed etc. ? assessed? assessed? Install Baseline Plans and site. At eachi site. Elxamine plans. Before To colmpaic to Use existing Contractors, C.omrpare to operation internationiall facilities PMU, MVloMF, acceptable commences y acceptable KKGM and standards '. . standards. MoE. linspect site. Construction Ground At each site. Physical As specified To ensure that As specified As above. preparationi inspectioni. in contract standards are in contract. and terracing. or plans. being met. Operate Ground At each site. Physical At specified To ensure that Included in As above. preparation inspection. (yearly) standards are the project. and terracing. intervals. being_ met. Decommission. N/A Note 1. Annex technical specifications of terracing/ground preparation as a guide in the bidding documents. 159 Arable Ground Preparation/Terracing: Assessment and Monitoring Program. The parameter(s Cost Responsibility Phase Wlhat WVhere Howv When Why Install Operate is to be is it to be assessed / type is it to be assessed Install _ assessed? assess ed? o equlminent? aIssessed? (_optional)? Baseline Plans and site. At each site. Examine plans '. Before To compare to Use existing Contiactors, Compare to operation internationall facilities. PMU, MARA acceptable commi1lences y acceptable and MoE. stain(larcds. . standards. Inspect site. Constiniction Ground At each site. Physical As specified To ensure that As specified As above. preparationl inspection. in contract standards arc in contract. and terracing. or plans. being met. Operate Ground At each site. Physical At specified To ensure that TIncluded in As above. prepar-ationi inspection. (yearly) standaids are the project. and terracing. l intervals. being met. Decommission. N/A Note. 1. Aiumex techniical specifications of terracing/ground preparationi as a guide in the bidding documents Gull, Rehabilitation: Assessmenit and MoAnitoring (A &i\I) Proolrali. The paramieter(s) Cost Responsibilitv Phase What Where How Wlihen Wihy Install Operate assessed? assessed? assessed etc. ? assessed? assessed? ITnstall Baseliie Plans and site. At each site. Examinie plans. Before To compare to Use existing Contiacto-s, Compare to operation internationall facilities. PMU, MoF, acceptable comieiices y acceptable N4oE, KKGM standards. . standards. and MARA. Inspect sitc. Constr-Liction Gully . At each site. lPhysical As specified To cnstiic that As specihied As above. pluggling and inspection. in contract standards are in contract. terracing etc. or plans. being met. Operate As above. At each site. Physical At specified Tlo ensuLe that IncludedC in As above. inspectioni. (yearly) standards are the project. _intcrvals, beiing met. Decoimlissioni. N/A 160 Channel Work, Irrigation, Pond Construction Small Reservoir: Assessment and Monitorin Program. The parameter(s) Cost Responsibility Phase What Where How When Why Install Operate assessed? assessed? assessed? assessed? assessed? I nstall Baseline Plans and site. At each Exaiminie Before To compare to Use existing Contractors, site. plans. operation internationally facilities. PMU, MoF, Compare to commences acceptable DSI, MARA. acceptable . standards, incl. standards. WVB Safegualrd Inspect site. standards. Construction Dam wall, pond At each Physical As specified To ensure that As specified As above. constrLuction, canal site. inspection. in contract standards are in contracts. work, irrigation or plans. being met. pipes & cha-nnels. Operate As above. At each Physical At specified To ensure that Included in As above. site. inspection. (yearly) standards are the project. intervals. being met. Decommission. N/A Nurser Application of Herbicides, Insecticides ancl Pesticides. Rehabilitationi: A &A M ProcGram. The parameter(s) Cost Responsibility Phase What Where How WVhen Why Install Operate assessed? assessed? assessed? assessed? assessed? Install Baseline CCA, At each Assess IPM option. Before To compare to Use existing Contractors, sprayers, nursery Exanine CCA etc. operation internationally facilities. PMU, MoF, clothing, site. Compare to commences. acceptable MoE drum acceptable standards. standards. storagce/ Ban application of disposal. WI-10 IA and 113 list Training, chemicals. Construction N/A Operate Method of At each Plhysical inspection. During To ensure that Included in As above. application. site. application. standards are the project. beiio nmet. Decommission. N/A I_I Farm Application of Herbicides, Insecticides and Pesticides. Rehabilitation: A & M Program. The parameter(s' Cost Responsibility Phase What Where How When Why Install Operate assessed? assessed? assessed t? assessed? assessed? Install Baseline CCA At sample Assess 1PM option. Before To compare to Use existing Contractors, clothing, of farm Examine CCA etc. operation intemation- facilities. PMU, MARA, sprayers, sites. Compare to bench commences ally MoE. drum mark. Avoid . acceptable storage/ application of WHO standards. disposal. IA and IB list Training. chemicals. Construction N/A Operate Method of At sample Physical inspection. During To ensure that Included in As above. application. of farm application. standards are the project. sites. being met. Decommission. N/A _ 161 Ap, D lication of Organic and Inorganic Fertilizers: Assessment and Monitoring Program. The parameter s) Cost Responsibility Phase WVhat Where HoNv Wlien Why Install Operate is to be is it to be assessed / type is it to be assessed Install assessed? assessed? of equipin)ent? assessed? (optional)? Baseline Soil for At sample Standard soil Before To determnine Use existing Contractors, existing sites in testing fertilizer present NPK facilities. PMU, GDRS, chemiiical farmers' equipmenit. application and proposed MARA. contenit. fields. begIins. application ralte ConstruLctioni N/A. Operate Effectiveness As above. As above. After crop To determiinle Included in As above. of fertilizer IS NPK in soil. the project. application. harvested. Decommissioin. N/A Manure Management: Assessment and Monitor-ing Program. (See also separate M &E Plan l\Ietcalle J P' 2002). The parameter(s) Cost | Responsibility Phase What Wlhere Howv Wlhen Whiy Install Operate assessed? assessed? assessed2 assessed? assesse2 v1n stall Baseline Solid and At selected Assess presence Before To assess Existing Contr-actors, liquid manure agro- of N, (PK) in operation amount of facilities PMU, KKGM. in water industry water or soil. commences NPK. and new bodies aiid sites. equLipmenit. landfills etc. Construction Selected maniu re managemen t units buLilt by thl project. Operate Solid and At selected Assess presenice After To detenniinle Inicluded in As above plus liqui(d maniuec agro- of N, (PIK) in ColnstrlUCt- if mIani urI-e the piloect. MoIE]& KlCG.\L in water indlulstr y water oi soil. ion at set mllallagmilenllt bodies, sites intervals. uinit working. landfills etc. \lanure use Application In fields. Obserxvation. Durillg To determinilie Includcd in As above. techliique application. effectiveness. the project. Pollution Control of Agro-Indutstries: Assessmenit and Monitoring Program. lie paramleter(s) Cost Responsibility Phase What Where How WheICI Why Install Operate assessed? assessed? assessed? cassessed? Assessed? Install Baseline Effluents of At selected Assess presence Before To assess Existing MoE existing agro- agro- waste remedial amount of facilities'? industries industry discharged in measures harmful sites. water or soil. commences discharge Construction As a result of inspection alterations to existing discharge methods may be proposed. Operate Effluents of At selected Assess presence After To assess Included in As above. existing agro- agro- waste remedial amount of the project. industries industry discharged in measures. harmful after sites. water or soil. discharge. alterations. | l l l _l_l Decommission: N/A. Note. This is not the responsibility of the Project, but it could assist the MoE in compiling mitigation plans. 162 Rehabilitation Activities: Assessment and Monitoring Program The parameter (s) Cost Responsibility Phase What Where How When Why Install Operate is to be is it to be assessed / type is it to be assessed Install assessed? assessed? of equ(iipi le/lt? assessed? (o tional )? Baseline Existing At sample Standard flora Before To determine Use existing Contractors, quantity and sites. sampling operation quantity and facilities. KKGM, MoF, quality of techlliques. begins, quality of PMU. flora. flora Construction Type of At the Number of After To determnine As above. As above. operation. sample site. new plants operation initial etc. success. Operate Effectiveness As above. Survival rate At set To detem-ine Included in As above. of operation. of new plants intervals over success. the project. etc. rotation. Decommilssion. N/A Environmentally-friendly Farming and Horticultural Practices: Assessmenit and Monlitoring Program. The parameter(s_ Cost Responsibility Phase Wlhat Whlere How Wihei WVhy Install Operate assessed? assessed? assessed? assessed? assessed? Install Baseline Existing At selected Existing crop Before To assess Existing Contractors, practices. arable and yields, NPK, operation effect of facilities MARA, PMU, horticultural pesticides etc. commences existing and Gov. Labs. sites. presence of . practices. equipmenit. erosion etc. CoisiruiCtioii N/A Operate 'Ncw As above. Nwcv crop At planting To deter-miiine Inicludecd in As above. practice yields, NPK, and at effectiveness the project. over 3 to 4 erosion rate. harvest for of new years. 3 to 4 years. practices. Decommission. N/A I Over-use of Natural Resources: Assessment and Monitorinig Pro oram. The parameter(s) Cost Responsibility Phase What Wlhere Howv WlVenl Why Install Operate is to be is it to be assessed / type Is it to be assessed Install assessed? assessed? of equipmel?t? assessed? (optional)? Baseline Existing At selected Survey Before To assess effect of Existing Research resources villages & demand and interventions existing practices. facilities institutes, Existing resource sustainable commences. and Government demand. sites. supply. I_I equipment. agencies. Survey work. As a result of surveys, propose measures to balance supply with demand, if any. Operate Modified As above. Resurvey of For up to 10 To determine Included in As above. resources; demand and years. after effectiveness of the project. modified sustainable intervention new practices. |demand. | _ | supply. commences | l _ l Decommission. N/A T T T T T T 163 Carbon Sequestration: Assessment and Monitoring Program. Organic Carbon Assessmenit in Biomass antd Soils. The paran eter(s) Cost Responsibility Phase What Where How WiciVe Why Install Operate is to be is it to be assessed / tpe Is it to be assesse(d Install assessed? assessed? of equipinent? assessedi? (optionial)? Baseline Carbon At Determination At the start To determine C Existing Research storage in selected of organic C in anid at set sequestration in facilities institutes, MoF, planls sites anid plant and soil intervals. biomarss and soils. phis neC\V lioE:, MIAZ\A and soil. scaled up. samples in lab. CCeuiplmlenlt? SIS. Constructioll. N/A Operate Carbon At Biomass and Plant and soil To record change Includecl in 1nclCLded in the storage in selected soil measured C measured at in C storage at the project. project. plants sites. for C contenit set intervals. different sites. and soil. over time. Decommission. N/A Biodiversity: Assessment and( Mlonitoring Program (A & M\1). Survey of Planits aiid Anjimnals. The param ter (s) Cost Resl)onsibility Phase WXhat Wlher e How Wheni \VhIy Install Operate assessedl! assessed! assessed! assessed/ assessed! Install monitored? mnonitored? inonitored? mnonitored? mnonitored? Basclin Plant and At selected Sample At the start. deter-mine existing Use existing Researclh e animal sites. survcys. . plant/ animilal people. institutes, MoE, species and numl-bers. MoF. incidenice, CoistrU--ction1. NI/A OCprate INlonitor plant At thle same Sample At specific To record cIhace ilncluCde in InIcluCdC(l InI IC and animal selected surveys and inter-vals, in in flora & fauna. the project. project. nos over sites. local obser- same month. timiie. \ations. Decommniission. N/A Soil ancl Water: Assessment and Monitorinlg Program. Nfeasuring soil an(id water both sur-l'ace and groundwater. The paranieter s) Cost Responsibility Phase What Where How Wlhen Why Install Operate assessed? assessed? assessed? assesse!? assessed? Ins tal I Baseline Soil and water At selected Soil & water At the start. To determine N, Use existing PMU and research and quality. sites. sampled in P & K plus C, facilities. institutes. laboratory. CCA & pathogens. Construct. N/A Soil & water _________ _____________ testing equip. Operate Soil and water At selected Soil & water At specific To record NPK, Included in Included in the and quality. sites. sampled in intervals, CCA & the project. project. laboratory. but in same pathogens in l_______ months. soil & water. Decommission. N/A l 164 Erosion: Assessment and Monitoring Program. Measuring incidence of erosion: (land and water methiods). The parameter(s) Cost Responsibility Phase Wlhat Where How When Why Install Operate is to be is it to be assessed / type Is it to be assessed Install assessedl? assessed? of eqllipvllenlt? assessed? (optional,)? Baseline Degree of At selected Erosion At the To estimate Existing Research erosion. sites oil measurinlg sticks stailt of erosion rate witlh facilities institutes. GDRS, land andc in and determininig the and without plus new MloF. rivers (start particulates in project. project equipmiienit and end of water (quantity interventions MC). & quality) Construction N/A Measuring equipment Operate Erosion As above. As above. At set To record level Included in Included in the rate. intervals of erosion by the project. project. over land and \vater several methods at years. different sites. Decommission. N/A Institutional Str-enigtheninlg. A. Equipment Purchases. The Monitoring and Evaluation unit will have maps of all the 13 provinces. Each province will have a GPS device andc the MI & E uiiit will have two exti a oncs. MiuchI of thc cquipment will be pro\ idecl by the people undertaking the various surveys (see EM I Table 3) andc thiis has becn includcd in the estimated cost, For example, if the forest service undertakes tree measuremenit within the forest, it atready has equipment for tree measurement and general survey work. Contractors will have their own equipment. Additional tree measLuinlg equipmiienit may be reqtuired to measure trees outside the forest. The forest services can advise the project about this, but provision has been made for the Project to obtain four sets of tree measuring equipment such as scales, hypsometers, moistuL-e content meters and consumables, (Table 3). The cost for this set of equipment has been estimated at US$ 5,000 and four sets will be required, giving a total cost of US$ 20,000. Soil testing will be done by four teams. The field work will be done by the project and analysis by contracted laboratories. Some additional equipment is required such as spades, soil augers, plastic bags and other consumables. The cost of each set has been estimated at US$ 1,000 or US$ 4,000 for four sets, (Table 3). Additional field and laboratory equipment for soil testing may be required. Such equipment is given in Table 3. This equipment cost (field US$ 50,000; laboratory US$ 100,000) should be covered in the contract cost for soil testing, estimated to be US$ 790,000 to 1.185 million. However, if a government, university or private laboratory can do the testing for US$ 500,000 or less, without equipment, then the project could pay for the equipment. It should be noted that N & P determination would be done in addition to testing for organic carbon. 165 Table 3. Type of equipment for the project. Type of Equipmcint Number Unit cost Total Cost Pur chasc: Local (L) of units US$ US$ or Interinationial (1) Additiolnal tree mneasuring equfipinent Hypsometer 4 150 600 L (I) Measuring tapes (50 m) 8 15 120 L Relascope (simple plastic) 4 2.5 10 L Diameter tapes S 2.5 20 1 Tree calipers S 25 200 L Ladders 4 60 240 L Scales (50 kg) 4 100 400 L Spring balance (10 kg) 4 25 100 L Power saNv 4 300 1,200 L Axe 8 10 80 L Compass 4 5 20 L Camera 4 50 200 L Clip board 4 2.5 10 L Consumablcs (sacks, string, paper, 4 sets for 7 4,200 16,800 L pencils, films includinig developing, years fuel, oil etc.) Estimated total cost for above 5,000 20,000 Additioiwalfiel(I equipmenit (soil samnpling,) Spades (2 per team) replaced after year 16 10 160 L 3. Soil aLIgCr (2 per tcam). 8 50 400 1 Camicr a 4 50 200 L Consumables (plastic bags, string, 4 sets for 7 810 3,240 L paper, pencils, films etc.) years Estimated total cost for abovc 1,000 4,000 Soil testinig acclitioncal field equhipm)1ent Groundwater flow meter + data logger 4 4,000 16,000 L Ground water level sensor 4 4,000 16,000 L Soil sampler 4 1,000 4,000 L Soil depth indicator 4 200 800 L Consumables (for 7 years) 4 3,300 13,200 L Total additional field equipment 12,500 50,000 The above costs should be covered in the soil-testing budget of $ 790,000 to 1,185,000 (see next item as well). 166 Table 3 continued. Type of equipment for the project. Type of Equipnient Number of Unit cost Total Cost Purchase: Local (L) units USS US$ or Internationial (I) Soil Iaboratory -addition al equiipin eit. Thermometer 1 100 100 L General laboratory ware 1 5,000 5,000 L Photomiieter 1 5,000 5.000 L Photomiieter kits (250 tests/pk -4 sets) 1 1.600 1,600 L Digital burette 1 600 600 L Filtration set 1 4,000 4,000 L Vacuum pump 1 4,000 4,000 L Macro Kjedahl set 1 12,000 12,000 L TOC analyzer 1 25,000 40,000 L GC-ECD/FPD/FID 1 40,000 40,000 L Miscellaneous consumables 1 2,700 2,700 L Total additionial laboratory Equimniplelt 100.000 100,000 Tle above costs shiould be covered i tthesoiljetiinubiudgt of $ 790,000 to 1,185,000. Measur-ing sticks 2,000 5 10 000 L River montitorinig of 12 rivers Sur-face water sampling equipnment 24 2,000 4S,000 L Surface water flow meter + data logger 24 5,000 120,000 L Consumables for 7 years 12 1,000 12,000 L Total additional sampling equipment 8,000 180,000 Lab equipme1cnIt for testing river water 100,000 100,000 (see Ann1ex 5 Tables 4 &.R 5). Tlec cost of the equlpmicnit is simillar to lhe above Tlte above costs shiould be covered in tihe river mollitorintg bu(iget of$ 720 000 to 1,080,000. AlIicro-catclhuneiat rivers (60) Silt traps 120 50 6,000 L Mesh Screens (set) 120 50 6,000 L Laboratory/office work (for 7 years) 60 350 21,000 L Consumables (for 7 years per MC) 60 250 15,000 L Total equipment cost for MCs 800 48,000 Simple im et stations in each MC Simple meteorological equipment. 60 300 18,000 L Rain gauge, wet and dry bulb, temperature, tatter flags etc. ($ 160 per station) Consumables for 7 years ($ 140 per MC) Complete met stations in each watershed Complex meteorological equipment. 5 7,400 37,000 L Sensors: wind speed and direction, temperature, humidity, pressure, rain gauge, data logger and reporter ($ 6,000). Consumables - 7 yrs ($ 1,400/watershed) 167 Calibrated measuring sticks placed throughout the project area will be used to measure the loss (or gain) of soil at specific sites. It is estimated that about 2,000 sticks will be placed in the 13 provinces. The cost of each stick is estimated to be US$ 5, thus the total cost xvill be US$ 10,000. Project personnlel will undertake routine monitoring. There will be sampling of river flow eaclh in one river of the 12 regions making up the project area. Contracts will be awarded to undertake this work, estimated to be US$ 720,000 to US$ 1.08 million. Additional surface water sampling equipmenit and river flow equipmiient is required. This xwill cost an estimated USS 280,000 and slhould be covered in the contract costs. Howvc\ver, if a goverlinmelnt. nllvei sity or private laboratory can unidertake the contract for US$ 400,000 or less, without cquilpment, tllen thle project could purclhase the equipmenit. One river per micro-catchmiiient will be tested for the quantity and quality of particles in the water. This will be done at the head and foot of the MC. Simple silt traps will be establisled and measurements will take place at specified intervals throughout the year. Tlhcse intervals may vary according to rainifall. The monitorinig work will be undertaken by project staff witlh the help of the M&E Unit. The cost of this equipment, plus consumiiables is estimated at US$ 48,000 (Table 3). Meteorological stations will be established in the project area. There will be one simple one per micro- catchlmlenit and anothler more complex one per waterslhcd. Project staff and beneficiaries could collect the data each day. The estimated cost of these stations is US$ 18,000 and US$ 37,000 respectively (Tablc 3). B. Training/Study Tours. Enviroiinmenital training will be undertaken at several levels. There will be formzal courses for project staff, farmers and other beneficiaries. There will informiial discussions during meetings xvith village groups etc., there will be demonstrations of environmental- friendly practices and there will be site visits to various M\Cs within the project and to the formler EAWRP area as well as other areas xvItIn1 Turkey. Thc trainineg will cover landc-use planninlig, environmental management, monitoring andc mintigation As the projeIct procceds, cenvironmlental tiamini-g xvill be tailoi ed to thle lessons learnt fliom the1 project andci the clhan- in- needs of the beneficiaries. Thus the following table (Table 4) covers the present proposals, but is subject to chalnge. Table 4. Proposed Traininig andl Demonostrationi courses. Type of Training No Organ- Job Duration Timings Venue Institute Cost IJSS ization Trainers (days) local Environmmenital awareness 24 Project MoF, One day At start of Project Consultanit 5,000 each for specific components; staff MARA, each year area and/or MoE for 7 years. road building, ponds etc. GDRS (35,000) Chemical control agents 24 Project MoE, MoF, One week 2 per yr, Project Consultants 20, - 25,000 and fertilizers (Training staff MARA year 1-4, area (220,000 to of trainers). Train GDRS I per yr, 275,000). beneficiaries 5-7. Integrated Pest 24 Project MoF and One-day Through- IPM area Forest staff Part of Management (IPM) in staff farmers out yr for in forest forest IPM forests. Train 7 yrs budget beneficiaries. Demonstrations IPM on farm. Train 24 Project MARA One day Through- IPM in Consultants, Part of farm beneficiaries. staff out yr for farm MARA budget Demonstrations 7 yrs areas staff Environmentally friendly 24 Project MoE, MoF, One day Through- Project All staff Part of land-use practices. Train staff MARA out yr for area general 168 staff and beneficiaries. GDRS 7 yrs budget Establish demonstrations Type of Training N0 Organ- Job Duration Timings Venue Instittite Cost USS ization Trainers (days) Local Environmentally friendly 24 Project MoE, MoF, One day Through- Project Forest Staff Part of forest practices. Traill staff GDRS out yr for area - forest staff and beneficiaries. 7 yrs for ests budcg-et Establish demonstrations Environmentally friendly 24 Project MoE, MoF, One day Throughl- Project Forest and Part of rangeland practices. staff GDRS out yr for area - rangeland rangeland Train staff and 7 yrs range- staff budget beneficiaries. Establish land demonlstrations Environmentally-friendly 24 Project MoE, One day ThrougLh- Project Farm staff Part of farm farminig practices staff MARA, out yr for area - budoet (rainfed). Train staff and GDRS 7 yrs farms beneficiaries. Establish demolnstrations Environmentally-friendly 24 Project MoE, One day Through- Project Farm staff Part of farm farming practices staff MARA, out yr for area - budget (irrigated). Train staff GDRS 7 yrs farms and beneficiaries. Establish demonstrations Monitoring of equipment. 12 Project MoF, One day At start of Project Ministry 3,000 each M/leteorological, soil and staff MARA. each year area experts for 7 years, vater measUrin11g, forestry GDRS pIls 1,000 equLipmeCnIt ctc. Trlaill for operators to record data handouts. etc. (Training of trainers). (22,000) Special studies suLveys. 24 Project MoF, One xveck 1 per year Project Miii. people. 6,000 for 7 Train staff to undertake staff MARA, teaching for 7 area International years baseline surveys and re- GDRS one week in years Consultant yr (42,000) surveys. the field 1, & 2. _ _ Environmental traininig All Project MoF, HIalf day Thirough- Project Project 4,000 per and demonstration to schools staff MARA, out year area schools district. schools. (try to obtain ? GDRS (52,000) other funds for nurseries Min Ed. and posters etc. Training in Village Project MoF, Half day Through- Project Project 4,000 per Environmental activities s area MARA, out year area schools district. for beneficiaries. GDRS (52,000) Training in survey 24 Project MoF, One-day 2 per year Project Project offices Project cost techniques . staff MARA, for 7 area GDRS years Training in survey 24 Project MoF, One-day 2 per year Project Project offices Project cost techniques. staff MARA, for 7 area To recognize plant and GDRS years animal species. Train beneficiaries including children to undertake species recognition 169 This is required to survey local people to obtain indigenous knowledge. Some beneficiaries can be used as trainers and to locate areas of important and/or rare species. Tvpe of Traininlg No Organ- Job Duration Timinigs VNente Instittute Cost US$ ization Trainier-s (days) Local Training in biomass 14 Project MoF, One-day 2 per year Project Project offices Project cost invenitory survey work. staff MARA, for 7 area GDRS years Training in demanid 24 Project MoF, One-day 2 per year Project P'roject offices Project cost survey work survey staff MARA, for 7 area wvork. Can thell ulidertake GDRS years demand surveys Regular maintenanice 24 Project MoF, One-day 2 per year Project Project offices Project cost traininlg. Traini staff in staff MARA, for 7 area mainitenance techniques GDRS years for roads, ponds, check dams, canals, terraces, etc. In tuLr these staff will traiin beneficiaries. Training MoE and 8 Project MloF, One-clay 2 per year Project Project oftices GEF cost KKGM staff in aspects of staff MARA, for 7 area project GDRS years Manure managemiienit Included in GEF project componienit Site visits for staff and 24 Project MoF, One-day 24 per Project Site visits Project cost beneficiaries visits staff and MARA, year for 7 area per farmers GDRS years year Site \isits olutsi(dc project 12 Plroject .i\olF Onec-dav 12 peC FA\W\\R Site visits IPi-o1Wct cost area for staff and visits staff and MARA, year for 7 P & beneficiaries per farmers GDRS years other year areas C. Consultanit Services. See Page 83, Mlain Report. (Cost USS 240,000 to 247,000) D. Special Studies. See Pages 77 to 79 Main Report. (Cost US$ 2.4 to 3.5 mnllion). 170 Annex 8. Public Consultations and Disclosures on Environmental Aspects of the AWRP. The International Consultanit and the National Consultant signed contracts witlh the Government of Turkiey on 14th June 2002. However, before the contracts were signed, both consultants attended meetings and went on field trips to the projects area. The International Consultant arrived in Turkey on Ist June and joined the 'Preparatory Mission' for Bank Staff and Consultanlts Thcrefore, this section dealing with public consultations rcfers to the time after the first ofJJulc 2002. A Preparatory Mission Handbook [PMH] was prepared by the WB Mission in Tul-key. This gives a detailed timetable of meetings and the itinerary for a field trip to the project area (WB Turkey June 2002). A list of meeting with Government of Turkey officials of concerned Ministries in Ankara is given in the report and their names of people attending these meetings are on record at the WB office in Turkey. Similarly, the program for the field trip is given in thle PMH and the names of the micro-catchments visited, together witlh the meetings helcd witlh villagers, local Ministry staff and other interested parties is available at the WB office in Ankara. The Intemational Consultant went on the field trip from the 6tlh to 12th June and participated in all the meetings with the beneficiaries and government staff. Observations wvere made on the envirolnmental degradation. In the area, includinig pollutioni from agro-industries. There were several site visits to witness at first hanid environmental degradation and actions that had been taken in some areas to mitigate the adverse environmental effects. Several meeting were held with villagers in the proposed project areas and there views were sought on the proposed interventions. Tt should be stated that several meetings had previously been held with the villagers and they had been inivolved in drawing Up action plans for their particular micro-catclhments. On retunLinig to Ankara, the International Consultanlt participated in a mceting with Bank Staff. Constultants and GoT officials at the Forestry Departmenlt on1 Friday 14th Julle. A brief report was prepared by the lnterniiationlal Consultant anci this wvas incorporated in tilc World Bank Aidc-Nemoire. Again this report is available at the WB office in Ankara, togetlher with the names of the people who attended the various meetings and the villages where meetings were held during the field trip. In accordance with the TOR, the National Consullant made visitecl the project area between the 19th and 31st July 2002. A record of this trip togetlher wilth people met and villages visited is given in Aninex 6. Annex 4 gives a detailed description of the six micro-catchments visited and Section D of the main report gives a stimmary of the environmental concerns of these mnicro-catchments. Extensive mneetings were held with local officials and villager-s in each of these six. miclro- catchmiie7nts. The views of the villagers were solicited anid problemns were discussed with solutions agreed by all parties. A list of participants at the various meetinlgs is as follows (Table A8). Table A 8. Micro-catchments Visited and List of Participants in Meetings. Province Date MC Venue Participants Kayseri 19 July Kayseri Kayseri Mr. Zafer Atilla; (Head of AGM, Chief Engineering Office in Kayseri). 2002 AGM Mr. Ahmet Yenikalayci; (Kayseri Provincial Directorate of Agriculture). Mr. Sacit Senocak; (Kayseri Provincial Directorate ofAgriculture). Mr. Mehmet Erkantarci; (ORKOY, in Kayseri). Mr. Mehdi Aksoy; (Kayseri Provincial Directorate of Rural Services). Mr. Levent Kocer; (Kayseri Provincial Directorate of Rural Services). Kayseri 19 July Kabaktepe Golcuk Mr. Zafer Atilla; Head of the AGM Chief Engineering Office in Kayseri. 2002 village Mr. Ahmet Yenikalayci; Kayseri Provincial Directorate of Agriculture. Mr. Mehmet Erkantarci; ORKOY, in Kayseri. Mr. Mehdi Aksoy Kayseri Provincial Directorate of Rural Services. Muhtar of golcuk village plus a few villagers. 171 Province Date MC Venue Participants Kayseri 19 July Kabaktepe Kucuk- Mr. Zafer Atilla; Head of the AGM Chief Engineering Office in Kayscri. 2002 kabaktepe Mr. Ahmet Yenikalayci; Kayseri Provincial Dinectorate of Agriculture. village Mr. Mehmet Erkantarci; ORKOY, in Kayseri. Mr. Meihdi Aksoy Kayseri Piovincial Directorate of RuL-al SCrvi\cCs Mr. Haydar Koca, viCe Muhtar of Kueukkabaktepc Village. Some villagers. Kayseri 19 July Kabaktepe Buyuk- Mr. Zafer Atilla; Head of the AGCM Chief Engineerinig Office in Kayseri. 2002 kabaktepc MNr A\hnict Ycnikalayci; Kayscri lProvincial Directorate of A gricultuIIe village Mr. Mchimct Erkantarci; ORKOY, in Kayseri. Mr. Mehdi Aksoy Kayseri Provincial Directorate of Rural Services. Mr Battal Sezer, Mulitar of Buyukkabaktepe Village. Kahramiiani 22 July Orcanl Yesilyoic MIr NLlr-taza Kalli, Mayor. niaras 2002 town Mr Ahmet Tepebasi, Head of Kayseri Division of AGM. Mr Bahattin Acar Sari, Rcp.of Provinicial Directoratc of Rural Scrvices. Assistant Prof. Dr. Recep Gundogan in the lKahranianniaras Sticu Im;a University, Faculty of Agriculture. About 30 inhabitants including somc officcrs of Municipalitv. Kahrailian 22 July Orcan Yolderesi Mr Ahmet Tepebasi, I-lead of Kayscri Division of AGIM. maras 2002 village Mr Bahattin Acar Sari, Rep.of Provincial Directorate of Rural Services. Assistant Prof. Dr. Recep Gundogan in the Kahramanmaras Sutcu Iniai University, Faculty of Agriculture. N.lr Ahniet Yildiz, M.uhitar. Kahraman 22 July Orcan Doluca Mr Ahmet Tepebasi, Head of Kayseri Division of AGM. maras 2002 village Mr Bahattin Acar Sari, Rep. of Provincial Directorate of Rural Services. Assistant Prof. Dr. R.ecep Gulidogani Kahrarianniaras Sutcu Inalim Univ Mr Ali Sari, Muhtar. Mersin 24 July Gogden Comeilek Huseyin Ozbakir (I-lead of Mersin Division of AGM). 2002 towvn Alparslan Tunc (Forest enginieer in Mersini Division of AGCM) Sedat Yildirimi (Chief of the Forest Region in Mut) The NM ayol of Comlcik. A teacher ftomii tihc Pi miiaryl v Schiool- About 40) inhabitants Samsun 29 July Samsun Mr. Mehmet Cubukcu (Provincial Director of Environment). 2002 Mr. Yuksel Ordulu (Provincial Directorate of Environment). Mrs Zchra Sii imsi (Provincial Directoi ate of Ag Iculture) Mrs. Asumani Sezer (Pr-ovincial Directorate of Agriculture). SaMnsun 29 July llyasli Bafira Mr. DuLrSuIII lacioglu (Director) 2002 Mr. Mehmet Gures (Agriculture Engineer). Mr Mustafa Ozturk (Veterinary) Mlr. Yukscl Ordulu (IProvinicial Di-ectoiate of Environment). Mr Sedat Yilniaz (Technician). Samsun 29 July Ilyasli llyasli Mr Mehmet Gures (Agriculture Engineer). 2002 village Mr. Yuksel Ordulu (Provinicial Directorate of Environment). Mr Sedat Yilmaz (Technician). Mr. Orhan Tarim, Muhtar of Ilyasli Village. Mr. Fatih Simsek, Muhtar of Kamberli Village. Tokat 31 July Baglicadere Tepez Mr. Mesut Tandogan (Head of Dept. Local Forestry Office). 2002 village Mr. Osman Sahin (Agriculture Eng. Local Agriculture Directorate). Mrs. Senay Kandemir (Agriculture Eng. Local Agriculture Directorate). Mr. Muzaffer Idi (Agriculture Eng. Local Agriculture Directorate). The Muhtar and a few villagers. Attendance at the meetings held in villages was variable. The local Muhtar village head) was informed about the meeting. Sometimes the Muhtar attended the meeting alone, othertimes with representatives from the village and yet other times any villager was invited. Much depended on the size of the venue and the availability of people to attend. But, even in small meetings, the Muhtar reported back to the inhabitants of the village. 172 While on thefield trip, baseline information was collectedfrom government offices and the villagers were questioned about environmental conditions anld bio-diversity over their lifetiimie. Site visits were made with goverinmlenit anzd local officials. Local people were questioned on various environnmenital aspects and these were recorded and summarized in Annexes 2 & 5 acmcl the mlainl texlt iiizlde Baseline Imiformilatioll. At the request of the World Bank, a visit xvas made by the Nationial Consultanit to Malatya an area in the form-ier East Anatolia Waterslhed Rellabilitation Project. The National Consultanit met \vith represcntatives fiom the AGM in October 2002. A summIniary of the discussioni is giveni in Anniiex 5, and a list of tlle representatives in given in Table A 8 2 below. Table A 8 2. Participanits from the AGMI at the Mleeting in Malatya. Province Date MC Venue Participants Malatya 30 Oct. Malatya Malatya Mr Ismail Flakki Atabay (Head of Dcpt. Local Forestry Office). 2002 AGM Mr Arif Akdere (Agriculture Eng. Local Agriculture Directorate). Mr Gursel Kusek (Agriculture Eng. Prov. Directorate of Rural Affairs). Participatory planning meeting were also held in five of the six MCs that were visited by the national consultant. No meetings took place in Samsuni as it is no part of the maini AWRP, but only part of the GEF componenit. These meeting, were held to draw up plans for the specific micro catcluhents. A list of the participants is given in Table A 8.3 by venue. Table A 8.3 M\licro-catchnient Planninig: Public Participation IM,leetings. Date Province Micro-catchmncnt Venue/village Participants The above mneetings are part of aln onigoing process to fiilly involve thle people at evely stage of the process. The International Consultant (IC) returned to Turkey on the 18th August and remained until the 7th September 2002. The IC and National Consultant produced the Draft Regional Environmental Assessment. This was presented to government on the 6th September at the AGM offices in Ankara. A list of attendees at this presentation is given in Table A 8 4. Table A 8.4. Participants at the Presentation of the Draft REA: 6 Sept 2002 AGM HQ. Name Affiliation Name. Affiliation Mr Keith Openshaw International Consultant Ms Sema Alpan National Consultant Ms Nedret Durutan World Bank Mr Cuneyt Okan World Bank Mr Ismail Kucukkaya AGM Mr Malmut Simsek AGM Ms Sule Ozguren TUGEM Mr Eyup Koksal TUGEM MrCelal Yenginol GDRS Section Director Ms Rah,san B. Oztekin ORKOY Mr Sedat Kadioglu Min of Environment Mr Doluay Kanatli M & E Consultant 173 It was stated that the overall outcome of the project will be environmentally very beneficial. However, there are some environmental concerns in individual operations and these were described. In order to quantify the scale of the environmental benefits a monitoring and evaluation program was proposed. The A summary of the report was given section by section and questions were taken on1 each section. After some confusion concerning Annex 2, which details the environmenital effect of a particular activity, the presentation was well received. The Draft REA xwas theni presented to the AGM and the Nationial Consultant had a meeting with the translator concerning the technical sections of the report. The National Consultanit made herself available to answer questions about the report. After a rivciev and comimenits by the WB and othel interestedl parties, the Diaft Report was revised, andc the revised version together with the Environmiiienital Managciiiemet Plan Matrices was presented to Governmient Officials on 26th December 2002. Table A 8.5 gives a list ofparticipalnts. Table A 8.5. Participants at the Presentationi of the2nd Draft REA: 26th Dec. 2002 ORKOY HQ. Name Affiliation Name. Affiliation Ms Sema Alpan National Consultant Mr Ismail Kucukkaya AGM Mr Atilla Kurl-ILus Gen. Dir. of Forestry Mr Ialahlllut Simsek AGNM Mr Ali Temerit Gen. Dir. of Forestry Ms Dilvin Senyaz AGM Ms Sule Ozguren TUGEM Ms Nuray Taneri MoE Mr Eyup Koksal TUGEM Ms Saliha Degirmenlci MoE Mr Ali Kasaci KKGM Ms Rahsan B. Oztekin ORKOY Since the presentation in December, the REA was modified furtller in compliance with the commenlts and suggestions of the participants listed in Table A 8.5 above and World Bank Staff Anniex 7 was compilecd: this gives a sunmimnary of the Environmental Management Plan in World Bank Formiat. Also, the section dealing xvith Public Consultationis was revised to give details about makinig this report available in Tulkislh to the general public. The Turkish versionl of the REA wxill be discussed in detail by the relevant stakeholders ri-omii -overniment organizations, plrofesslonal boclies anci about 12 NGOs at a mecucing to be heldl ni Ankara oni 20thi February 2003 In format ion about tiic RE XE will bc scit to initeicstcd oig ilizatilons aiId thC CocuLmlellt will be miade available to pioJecCt-ittected groups anld otlher parties. 174 References Alpan-Atamer S., 2002. Towards FAO Agri-Environmental Indicators. FAO-ESSA Rome 21 February 2002. Ainderson F.M. and Kanatli D., 2002. Monitoring and Evaluation for the Anatolia Watershed Rehabilitation Project (Draft). AGM, Ankara, June 2002. DP T 2001 . Vill. Bes Yillik Kalkinina Plani, Orimianicilik Ozcl llitisas KomilisyonIu Raporu, Ankara, Aralik. Government of Turkey (AGM) (various dates) AGM 2002. Unit price list for the activities to be contracted in 2002 by the Department of Study and Project of AGM, Ankara, 2002 (Turkish). AGM 1999. Issues to be taken into Account in the Erosion Control Activities. Instruction No: 14, AGM, Ankara. AGM 1994.Instructions No. 6, 7 and 8 regarding erosion control activities, in-forest rangeland rehabilitation activities and reforestation activities respectively, AGM, Ankara. AGM 1998. Rangeland Act. Government of Turkey (GDF) (various dates). GDF 1995. Control Principles for Forest Pests. (GDF, Instruction No. 286, Classification No. IV-15 19, Ankara. GDF 1988. Forest Roads, Road Constructioln Works. Ankara. Government of Turkey, GDRS (2000). Teclhnical Specifications for Bidding for Terracing, 2000a. GDRS, Ankara-2000. Techinical Specifications for Small Trrigation Damns. 2000b. GDRS Ankal-a-2000. Government of Turkey, MARA (various daites) AgricultLral Quarartine 1957. A Regulation on Labelling of Pesticides 1983. The Code of Conduct for Pesticide Prescription1 1984a. The Code of Conduct for Toxicological Classification of Pesticides 1984. Government of Turkey (MoE) (various dates). MoE 2001. National Action Plan of Turkey for Combating Desertification (Draft). MoE 1998. National Environmnental Action Plan of Turkey, SPO, Ankara. Government of Turkey, SIS (various years) SIS, 2000 Agricultural Statistics, Ankara. SIS 2001. Agricultural Structure. 2000 SIS, Ankara. International Office of Water, 1999. Aegean Rivers Integrated Water Resources Use Planning and Management. Integrated Development and Pollution Control: Feasibility Study. Final Report, Part B. Monitoring Network & River basin Observatory. Office International De L'Eau, B.P. 75, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France. Metcalfe J.P., 2002. Turkey: AWRP: Design of Agro-Industrial Waste Management Storage and Handling System (Draft). ADAS, Woodthorne, Wergs Road, WV6 8TQ Wolverhampton, England UK, and World Bank Ankara, June 2002. MoE (CKOK) & MARA (KKGM). 2002. Report on Water and Soil Pollution. MoE/ MARA, Ankara Turkey, April 2002. Kolonkaya N. 2002 AWRP: Design of Water and Soil Quality Monitoring System (Draft). World Bank Ankara Turkey July 2002. 175 MoF 2002. AWRP: Regional Environmental Assessment TOR for National and International Consultancy. MoF Ankara June 2002. Openslhaw K, 2000. A Baseline Survey of Organic Carbon in Woody Biomass and Soils on Different Land-use Types in the PGFTR Project Areas, Goverlnment of Benin- World Bank/GEF PGFTR Project. Report prepared by AED/IRG Silver Spring MD. Ryan P & Openshaw K, 1991. Biomass Assessment Methodologies. World Bank Energy Series No. 48, World Bank, Washilngton DC, USA. SPO June 1998. Konukcu, M., Statistical Profile of Tuikislh Forestry, Ankar-a Mart. SPO 1998. Ulusal Cervre Eylem Plani, Tari-ml ve Mera Arazilerinin Yonetillm, Ankara. Siirkal Ltd, 2002. Household Questionnaire for the GEF Componenit of Anatolia Basin Project (Draft). Suirkal Ltd. Havadar Sistesi No 51 Cayyolu, Ankara May 2002. TCV 1998. Turkiye' nin Cevre Sorunlari 1999, Ankara, Aralik. TEMA, 1997. Guniay, Turilan, Ormani Ormiansizlasma Toprak Erozyon, Vakfi Yayinlari, Istanbul. TOPRAIKSU, 1978. , Turkiye Arazi Varligi, Ankara. TOPRAKSU, 1997 Guidelines for Terracing, Toprak ve SLI Muhafaza Fen Heyeti, Ankara. Ulgen N aind Yurtsever N 1995. Turkey: Fertilizer and Fertilizer Use Guidelines. 4"' Edition Publication No. 209, GDRS Ankara 1995. UNDP, N.Y. 1998. Black Sea Environmental Priorities Study-Turkey, UNDP, N.Y. World Bank, 1993. Tulkey: EAWRP Staff Appraisal Report. Agricultulal Operations Division, CD 1, E&CA Region. World Bank, Washington 9 Feb. 1993. World Bank, 1999. Turkey: ICR EAWRP Iln-si/ti Conservation of Genetic Diversity. (Report No. 19248) ECSSD, E&CA region, World Bank Waslingtoni, 30 April 1 999. World Banlk, 2001a. Project Concept DocuLmllent. Tul-kev AWRP. E&CA region. ECSSD, \World Bank \Washington, t7 Octobler 2001. World Bank, 2001b. Turkey: Forest Sector Review. ECSSD, World Bank Washingtoni, 20 February 2001. World Bank, 2001c. Agricultural Profile, Pollution and Erosion Problems of Qorum, Amnasya and Tokat Provinces: Identification Trip Report of Okan C and DuruLtall N. World Bank Ankara 26-31 November 2001. WB 2002a. Turkey: EAWRP ICR. World Bank Ankara, 20 May 2002. WB 2002b. Turkey: AWRP Preparation Mission Handbook. WB Ankara, May 2002. WB 2002c. Turkey: AWRP Statistical Information Handbook. WB Ankara, May '02. WB 2002d. Turkey: AWRP Preparation Mission Report. WB Ankara, June 2002. World Bank (GEF) (various dates). Environmental Assessment (OP 4.01, BP 4.01, GP 4.01). World Bank Washington. Dam and Reservoir Components (BP 4.01 Annex B). World Bank Washington. Safety of Dams (OP 4.37, BP 4.37). World Bank Washington. Guidelines on Pest Management (OP 4.09). World Bank Washington. Involuntary Settlement (OP. 4.12). World Bank Washington. International waterways (OP. 7.50). World Bank Washington. 176