vol73_2007_4_art07_255_269

8/10/2019 Vol73_2007_4_Art07_255_269

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/vol7320074art07255269 1/15

River Ecology in India 255Proc Indian Natn Sci Acad 73 No.4 pp. 255-269 (2007) 255

* Address for Correspondence: E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]

River Ecology in India: Present Status and Future Research Strategy ForManagement and ConservationVK SRIVASTAVA

Department of Zoology, Jawaharlal Nehru College, PASIGHAT, P.O.-Hill- Top-791 103, Arunachal Pradesh

(Received on17 April 2007; Accepted on 24 October 2007)

The paper reviews the present ecological and biological conditions of the rivers in India, and also states managementpractices and conservational approach. Works on the various rivers of the country have been surveyed and analyzed so asto identify the constrains and problems related to management and conservation. For effective management, it is stressedto assess precisely the ecological impacts (through biomonitoring) caused by anthropogenic activities (i.e. any develop-mental project and policy) by segregating the natural variations from the actual impacts caused. It is also recommended toadopt appropriate sampling design and method (BACI, beyond BACI, Nested sampling, Rapid bioassessment etc.) andplanned study for such segregation. Further, it has become pre-requisite to integrate the findings of ecological impactassessment (Eco IA) with the execution of projects so as to manage the sustainable lotic ecosystem with developmentalactivities. Author has also advocated for the study of functional attributes along with the structural parameters; so as to getthe spectrum of variation in energy flow all along the channel and also in entire watershed. Studies related to riparianvegetation, floodplain ecology, longitudinal and transverse flow of organic matter and energy dynamics are still verysparse which is stressed to be undertaken. River regulation and its deleterious impact on functional state of river areneeded to be considered more.

Key Words: River Ecology; Natural Variation; Eco IA; BACI; Nested Sampling; Reference ConditionApproach; Energy Dynamics; Riparian Vegetation

Review Article

IntroductionIn India, rivers are classified mainly of two types based on their geographical locations and origin. (a) Himalayarivers and (b) peninsular rivers. The Himalayan riversare glacier fed and perennial, while peninsular riversare altogether monsoon fed.

The perennial Himalayan rivers of the countryconstitute three major river systems (e.g. Ganga,Brahamputra and Indus), which covers various types of catchments and provide a variety of microhabitats fromheadwater to mouth. The Ganga river system (major tributaries-Yamuna, Ghghara, Gandak, Gomati, Soneand Tons.), Brahmaputra river system(with Siang river as a main channel and major tributaries-Dibang, Lohit,Subansiri, Ranganadi, Manas, Kulasi, Dhansiri,Champamati, Sankhosh and Digaru rivers) and Indus(consisted of Beas and Sutlej as major tributaries inIndia) river systems are the principal Himalayan rivers;

but however, major stretch of Indus river flows inPakistan leaving back a small segment of its drainage

basin in Indian territory (Fig. 1).As far as the nature of Himalayan rivers is

concerned, these are antecedent rivers having deepgorges chasms, exhibiting practically vertical to convexvalley walls; and slope failure have become verycommon phenomenon particularly in the belts cut by

active faults in their hilly stretch [1]. And also, Himalayais the youngest mountain with comparatively morefragile soil [2]. Therefore, Himalayan rivers providedifferent gradient of habitat heterogeneity from itsheadwater to mouth for colonization of aquatic fauna.Further, because of fragility of soil and deforestationof riparian catchments, soil erosion in upper stretchof Himalayan rivers is very much prevalent causingsevere silting to downstream followed by habitatdestruction [3].

The ecological conditions of peninsular riversdepend on its hydrological characteristics (like water level, current velocity and discharge) which vary fromvery lean to very high depending on relative rainfall inrespective watershed. Among peninsular rivers, majorityof them are east coast rivers (e.g. Mahanadi, Krishna,Godavari and Cauvery) and empty their water in bay of Bengal; while a few others i.e. west coast rivers (e.g.

Narmada, Tapi, Sabarmati and Luni) are west flowingand drain out in Arabian sea. All the peninsular rivers

are entirely dependent on monsoonal rhythm and displayfrom very poor water flow to heavy flood and accordingly exhibit the fluctuating ecological and

biological conditions. (Fig. 1)

However, almost all the Indian rivers are under thesevere despoliation caused by anthropogenic sources [4,5]; though the magnitude of which is of varied degreeat various segments of the rivers all along the length.Many anthropogenic modifications of river water are

8/10/2019 Vol73_2007_4_Art07_255_269


256 VK Srivastava

the result of despoliation caused in many sectors; butmost prominent among them are— a) River pollution throughout the country caused by

untreated urban sewage, industrial effluents,

agricultural runoff, mining wastes, religiousceremonies and navigational operations.b) Indiscrimate destruction of drainage basin because

of clearing of riparian zone vegetation which, in turn,is responsible for elevated load of suspended solidand increased magnitude and frequency of floodchanging the level of interaction between land andwater; and hence affects allochthonous input of energy source.

c) River regulation, lift irrigation and water allocationwithout considering the ecological consequenceshave influenced much adversely to the density,diversity and productivity of aquatic bioresources.

Further, population of migratory fishes is alsonegatively affected.

However, in past, a few notable review papers have been published [6-8], but all of them cover wholelimnological scenario including lentic water bodies also;therefore, they could not reflect a detailed state of art of lotic ecosystem of the country. So far an exhaustivereview on lotic system of India is lacking which did warrant the author to review the ecological and

Fig. 1: Major rivers of India

8/10/2019 Vol73_2007_4_Art07_255_269


River Ecology in India 257

biological status of the rivers. Further, because of exponential increase of publications in various journals,edited books and proceedings of seminars and symposia,it is very difficult to go through all the works donethroughout the country; but the publications of highsignificance have been taken in to consideration.

Present Status of River Ecology

Abiotic Characters

In India rivers have been studied in respect to the levelof pollution caused by cumulative effects of variousanthropogenic activities, rather than the effects caused

by specified particular project or process. Effect of pollution as a whole in relation to various test organismsare well documented in various Indian rivers. Whilemany workers [9-34] have studied general water quality

and magnitude of its deterioration caused by variousanthropogenic sources in different rivers at variouscenters of the country; Mathur [35] has studied the statusof pollution in Ganga river in integrated manner for almost entire stretch of channel, i.e. from Badrinath (near to river headwater) to Farakka the near last point inIndian territory and observed that generally the load of

pollution was higher to its downstream with very highvalue of COD (ranging from 160.0mg/l to 240.0mg/)and BOD (ranging from 56.0mg/l to 78.9mg/l) betweenMirzapur and Ghazipur. In general, the middle and lower stretch of Ganga are reported to be more deteriorated than to upper stretch; simultaneously, the alarmingincrease in bacterial count at various downstream centersof Ganga river is also a matter of great concern [36].

The effect and concentration of heavy metals to thewater of Indian rivers have been the great concern tothe biological diversity of the lotic system. The studiesrelated to the heavy metals have been carried out in river Ganga [37, 38, 42, 44-46, 51], in river Subarnarekha[39-41], in river Yamuna [43], river Son [47], river Kali[48, 49], in river Bhagirathi [50]; and almost all of thesestudies have concluded the accumulation of heavymetals in aquatic animals including fishes, and alsocaused the decline in lotic resources. However, level of heavy metals were reported to be different in thesestudied and found that the sites at the industrialized areawere much loaded with heavy metal pollution than tonon industrialized sites.

Further studies on Indian river systems have beenextended towards more specific functionalcharacteristics of the system; but, however such studiesare a few in numbers. Major ion chemistry with its courseto downstream in Ganga- Brahmaputra river system wasstudied by Sarin and Krishnaswami [52] and Sr level inthe rivers of India and Pakistan have been reported byTrivedi et al. [53]; further, some other workers havestudied the dynamics of carbon and organic matter inGanga and Brahamaputra [54] and Himalayan rivers [56]

specially during the flooding and concluded the run-off from heavily cultivated flood plain. The studies werefurther extended to the functional aspect of Nayyar river

by Nair et al. [55] who studied the applicability of river continuum concept and resource processing in the said river.

Biotic Characteristics

Biotic component of any aquatic ecosystem is anindicator to determine the productivity potential and health of the system. In Indian rivers, studies on aquatic

biota include only documenting the amplitude of effectson them caused by pollution from various sources; but,however, its application as a biomonitor to assess theecological impact caused by the different specificanthropogenic sources is still required to be taken upwith high precision and accuracy.

However, in this review only plankton, benthicmacroinvertebrates, fishes and mammals have beentaken into account.

Plankton

Plankton play the role of basic living component of theaquatic ecosystem and up to much extent, responsiblefor the primary production in the river; but the

productivity potential of any lotic system is influenced by a complex interplay of its physical and chemical

attributes.Phytoplankton seasonality has been studied by many

workers in various Indian rivers which shows that itexhibits a general trend of fluctuation attaining its peak value in winter season when the flow is observed to belean; while its density and diversity tilts down and achieves monsoon minima as a function of synergeticeffects of high discharge volume, pollution, turbidityand fast current velocity [16, 57-62, 63-71]. However,some workers [9, 58, 70] have concluded bimodal

fluctuation (with two peaks) of phytoplankton densityin Ganga river. And, a general survey regarding densityand diversity of phytoplankton in Ganga river fromheadwater to distant lower stretches has been made bySrinivasaprasad [72]. Further, Natrajan [73] has reported about the 400% increase in phytoplankton density inmiddle Ganga within twenty years of span (1960-1980)and concluded as a result of organic nutrient richness.

Nutrient limitations have also been concluded due toalgal growth in two streams at Shillong [173]

Similarly, primary production of river system hasalso been adversely affected by industrial wastes and sewage discharge as concluded in river Mahanadi [62],in river Khan [60] and in river Ganga [74].

Zooplankton density varied ‘hand in hand’ with phytoplankton and exhibited a direct correlation withthe latter. Density and periodicity of the zooplanktonand effects of various anthropogenic disturbances have

8/10/2019 Vol73_2007_4_Art07_255_269


258 VK Srivastava

been studied on different lotic system of the country,notably by some workers [15, 59, 75-77, 78-83]. But,however, its use as a biomonitor and pollution indicator is still wanted, though a few workers [17, 36, 84, 85]have taken up this study in different rivers. Further, Unniand Nayak [86] have drawn the conclusion about the

increase in zooplankton population following reductionin flow and discharge volume in Narmada river and alsoopined that the low density and diversity towards thedownstream of the dam may be attributed as a possiblecause of serial discontinuity of nutrients. Bilgrami [36]has documented a complete inventory of zooplanktonfauna from headwater to almost up to mouth of Gangariver.

Macrozoobenthos

Macrozoobenthic organisms possess very important position in structural studies of lotic ecosystems; and hence can significantly be applied as biomonitor toassess the degree of ecological impacts caused byvarious sources because of their suitable properties.

Various structural properties (like density, diversityetc.) of benthic macroinvertebrates, in respect of temporal and spatial variations with its seasonality have

been studied by many workers. Notable contributionsamong them made in Ganga river [87, 97, 100], in ahigh altitude stream [88], in Sind and Lidder streams of Kashmir [89], in Bhagirathi river, Garhwal Himalaya[68, 94], in river Kosi, Kumau Himalaya [90], in river Khan, Indore [91], in river Kshipra [92], in Gadigarhstream, Miran Sahib Jammu [93], in trout streams of Kashmir [95], in a polluted stream of Ranchi [96], inriver Cooum, Madras [98]. Further, the maiden studieson epilithic flora and fauna in the Siang river of Arunachal Pradesh has been carried out by Srivastavaand Sabat [99], who reported the diatom dominance inthe river during winter to pre-monsoon; and the effect

of silt load on benthic invertebrates of that river has been studied by Srivastava [101], who has concluded the silt load, fast water current and the factors related to

physical disturbances caused the habitat destruction of the river and were inhibitory for the colonization of

bottom fauna. During the ir st udie s, most of theinvestigators have observed that density, distribution and diversity of benthic macroinvertebrates are greatlyinfluenced by discharge regime, current velocity,riverbed composition, geological variables, pollution

and allochthonous input of energy in the river; and inmajority of the studies, the peak value of the benthicmacroinvertebrates were observed to spread over latemonths of winter to early summer. But the late summer to whole monsoon months were not conducive for thecolonization because of very fast current velocity,inundation, silt load, unstable bottom composition and inflow of organic pollutants from catchment areas.Further, it has also been concluded that the distribution

of most of the species is regulated by substratum and,water current is found to be the prime factor to provideheterogeneity in substratum and channel characteristics[172].

In India, studies of benthic macroinvertebrates driftin rivers are almost lacking except the works of Krishnamurthy and Reddy [102], who have studied about the drift as an ecological phenomenon and haveconcluded factors behind it in an unpolluted tropicalriver Tunga, Western ghats of the country.

However, biological assessment of Cauvery river catchment using macroinvertebrates was made [103] inwhich workers have tried to test the applicability of water quality monitoring approaches on Indian rivers,developed in other countries. The deleterious ecologicalconsequences of impoundments on density and diversityof benthic macro fauna in the lotic, intermediate and lentic sections of Rihand reservoir [104] has been studied and concluded the serial discontinuity of resources todownstream.

Fishes

Fishes are such biotic component of the aquaticecosystem which makes a shuttle between aquaticecosystem and socioeconomic sector of the people of the catchment. In India, the studies regarding fisheries

of inland rivers are confined mostly to its taxonomicdiversity and commercial exploitation [105,106]; buthowever, literatures focusing its ecological significanceas biological indicator to assess the ecological impactsof anthropogenic sources are very a few [107-111]. Inrecent years, decline in fishery output has occurred dueto habitat destruction or its modification, chemical

pollution, overexploitation and introduction of exoticspecies; besides multiple deleterious impacts of dams,

barrages and li ft ir rigation complexes [105, 112-116].Multiple deleterious effects of dams include- (i)diversion of water flow which cause very lean water availability to downstream of main channel. (ii) changeof habitat from riverine to lacustrine. (iii) the checkingof spawning migration [116]. Sehgal [112] reported thatmigration routes of important native fishes such asmahasheers ( Tor putitora , and Tor tor ) and snow trouts(Schizothorax richardsonii , Schizothorax plagiostomus )have been blocked by dams. Overexploitation has also

been responsible to decline the fishes of higher economicvalue such as Schizothorax sp. And Tor sp. Semiplotus

sp, Eutropichthys sp, Pangasius sp, Notopterus sp etc.Arunachalam. et al . [110&111] have also reported lowspecies richness in Uchalli falls due to physical barriers;and further they concluded that episodic events of flood and spates have caused the wipe off of column dwelling(Puntius dorsalis and Puntius bimaculatus ) and surfacedwelling( Danio aequipinnatus ) fishes in some segmentsof Chittar river , western ghats. Many nemachilineroaches from Bhavani river Coimbatore, are no longer

8/10/2019 Vol73_2007_4_Art07_255_269



available, and reported to be the effect of chemical pollution. Habitat alteration and change in spawningground due to natural and anthropogenic reasons havecaused many fishes of lotic system to becomeendangered and vulnerable. While Ompok pabada of Ganga and Brahmaputra system become endangered due

to silting [175&176], Notopterus chitala of Ganga river,Tor putitora of Brahmaputra river and Cirrhinus cirrhosaof Cauvery, Godavary, Krishna and Narmada rivers have

become vulnerable due to various anthropogenic stress,indiscriminate fishing, construction of dams,submergence and silting of spawning grounds [175 &177].

Further, it has also been concluded that multi-river projects that nconnects river system lead to abolition of geographical barriers responsible for maintaining

reproductive isolation will cause the loss of genetic purity and native fish germplasm [116].

Habitat destruction caused by silting is the major problem for the inland rivers, as the silt content carried by the Indian rivers is reported to be 2050 million tonsout of total eroded soil (from cultivable land and forests)of 5334 million tons per annum [116]. Such massivesilting of the rivers and erosion of the soil is theconspicuous effects of indiscriminate destruction of riparian and catchment area vegetation. Though, there

is probably no study highlighting any specificenvironmental variable as a causative factor for dwindling fish germplasm; but synergetic effects of various adverse factors have caused as many Indianfishes as threatened and vulnerable species [116]. Habitatdestruction and river control projects have caused thedwindling population of fishes in river Ganga [73] as ithas deprived breeding grounds of major carps.

Mammals

The well known mammal, which inhabit the Indian river system is the Ganges river dolphin ( Platanistagangetica) , and distributed throughout the Ganga-Brahmaputra river system. The animal belongs tocetacean, and status of this animal in IUCN red data listhas been declared endangered [178] because of decliningtrends of its population. It is reported [179] thatPlatanista gangetica is available to the stretch of Gangariver from Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Bengal. Theconservational approach of Gangetic dolphin has lead to set up the Gangetic dolphin sanctuary in Bihar

between Sultanganj and Kahalgaon for about 50 Kmstretch of main channel of Ganga river.

During survey, Sinha [179] has reported that thelargest concentrations of dolphins were located atconfluence of Farakka feeder canal and downward meanders scattered throughout the length of the river;and also concluded that concluded that construction of

barrages at many segments of Ganga river system and

its tributaries has caused severe decline in populationof Gangetic dolphin due to-i. Shrinkage of habitat, and probably that is the reason

for complete absence of dolphins in Tarai (foothillsof Himalaya) region.

ii. Restriction of dolphin’s movement and inhibiting

genetic, social and ecological interaction amongindividuals, groups and ecosystem.iii. Fragmentation limits the gene flow and increases the

vulnerability of formation of individual sub-population.

Pollution is also a major causative factor for declining population of Platanista gangetica asevidenced by Kannan et al. [180&181] who havereported high content of organochlorine in the tissue of dolphins collected from Ganga river near Patna. Further,

the situation of Ganges dolphin in Brahmaputra river system is different. Brahmaputra river does not havedam and also least industrial pollution; but the

population of Platanista gangetica declines alarminglydue to several other anthropogenic and natural reasonslike over fishing of forage fishes, intentional traping,siltation and changes of river course [182 and 183].

Conservation and Management

For the effective conservation and management, one hasto look in to the (i) problem related to the management

practices (ii) and thereafter to take the appropriate futureresearch strategy to overcome that.

Problems and Constrains Related to Conservationand Management of Indian Rivers

If we think of conservation and management of loticsystem in the country, we have to consider as how muchinformation do we have regarding any particular river and its basin? And, beyond what we have to start as to

prevent the further deterioration from the present status

of the river? In India unfortunately-a. The works done on the various rivers are entirely

fragmentary and there is no co-ordination, harmonyand linkage of informations from headwater to mouth(i.e. for entire drainage basin) except Ganga river.

b. There is no any exhaustive and inventory typeinformation available and compiled for any riverexcept Ganga river, for which a detailed state of arthas been brought up by Krishnamurthy et al. [117].

c. The information regarding functional roles of riparian

vegetations and flood plains (including allochthonousinput of energy and its dynamics) to the riverecosystem are too inadequate to draw any conclusionabout its status for conservational approach.

d. Most of the basic research works are carried outby workers in academic institutions (rather thanriver basin managers), which are mainly engagedto document the effect of pollution to bioticcommunities; but they pay less attention for “in field”

8/10/2019 Vol73_2007_4_Art07_255_269


260 VK Srivastava

practical application of such studies forconservational approach.

e. Less attention has been paid for the “in field” settingof experiments in the river channel itself, which gives“in situ” accurate spectrum of ecobiologicalconditions of the rivers.

f. The ecological considerations of the system duringriver regulation, lift irrigation and water allocationis less accounted; especially to those rivers whichcross inter-state and inter-national boundaries. Thissituation has led to various kinds of disputes relatedto socio-economic dimensions of riparian states/ country, which more often, are settled politically.During this policy process, it is the ecosystem of theriver concerned, which suffers.

g. The accuracy of the ecological impact assessment(EcoIA) is confounded by various natural variationsdue to procedural deficiencies in sampling designsand hence the management plans get misdirected andbecome less effective to achieve the target.

Natural Variations Vs Ecological Impact Assessment(EcoIA:

Ecological Impact Assessment (EcoIA) is the processof identifying, quantifying and evaluating the potentialimpacts of defined action on ecosystem or their components. If properly implemented, it provides a

scientifically defensible approach to ecosystemmanagement. It is often used in conjunction withEnvironmental Impact Assessment (EIA) studies with

broader mandate, which also considers soc ial and economic consequences of developmental activities.However, in this text, only ecological impact assessmenthas been taken in to account [184].

For effective management plan, it becomes essentialto assess the ecological impacts caused to lotic habitatdue to anthropogenic activities (like developmental

projects and plans); and also it would have important bearing on future policies and plans. But, accuracy of the ecological impact assessment (EcoIA) remains in

question, because it suffers deficiencies of naturalvariations caused to the different environmental sectors.However, while assessing the impact we have to think whether-i. Impact is being assessed accurately?ii. Do we segregate the natural variations (of various

dimensions) from that of actual impacts causedthrough anthropogenic sources?

iii. Is reference site(s) used to compare the impacted site,really in pristine condition? Or whether both the siteswere exactly identical before the impacts caused?

iv. Do we consider of what bio-monitor (and why) willbe suitable to assess the impacts?

In general practice, the ecological impactassessment of anthropological disturbances in Indianrivers is done by comparing the impacted sites withupstream non- impacted site and downstream recoverysite by considering them as reference sites. The practical

problem arises with such procedure of EcoIA is “naturalvariations” (environmental variations) which isinevitable [118,119]; but, however, it can be minimized

by appropriate sampling design so as to reach closer tothe accuracy. Dudgeon [118] has classified the four maintypes of natural variations viz. longitudinal, temporal,interstream and spatial microhabitat variations (Fig. 2).

Longitudinal spatial variability is clearly felt, as inrivers and streams, sites are neither identical nor

Fig. 2: Types of Natural Variations in Lotic Ecosystems

8/10/2019 Vol73_2007_4_Art07_255_269


8/10/2019 Vol73_2007_4_Art07_255_269


262 VK Srivastava

sampling protocol according to which control (upstream)and impacted, both the sites needed to be sampled out

before and after impact occurred. But, in lotic system, because of unidirectional flow the two sites are neither independent nor exactly identical; and hence “pseudo-replication” may lead another problem for the accuracy

of EcoIA. In such conditions, variables of two sites cannot be statistically independent, and hence theconclusion will test only difference between the sitesand not the actual impact caused [122]. And Green’s

protocol does not give any provision to ‘rule out’ thetemporal variations. Further, an improved method of taking temporal replicates of samples at control and impacted sites, before and after the impacts caused (BACI- Before- After Control Impact), was suggested

by Stewart- Oeten et al. [123]. However, Underwood [128, 129] modified it and proposed as beyond BACIdesign with an argument that temporal replications of the sample may not provide any relief to spatialvariability which are expected to arise because of onlyone control site was taken in sampling design. Hence in

beyond BACI design, more than one control sites wereincluded to have spatial replicates along with thetemporal replications. Multivariate methods [130, 131]can also be used to accentuate the accuracy and

predictability of the results.

In India, since rivers are classified as two types viz.Himalayan Rivers and Peninsular Rivers; they exhibitvery contrasting characters regarding their flow,discharge, physiography and accordingly ecologicalconditions too.

North-eastern part of the country consti tutes adistinct type of eco-region which is heavily rainfed and considered to be as humid tropics. The main river systemof the area is Brahmaputra river system, which is glacier fed and its main channel named as Siang river originatesfrom Mansarovar glaciers. Since this entire eco-region(and hence watersheds) receives high and erratic

pr ecipi tation , and also exh ibi ts a conspi cuo us physiographic condition; its rivers also display varied degree of physiography from headwater to mouth. Thereis every possibility to have many micro-habitats in therivers of this region [132]. But, almost all the peninsular rivers are rain fed and their ecology entirely dependson the rainfall in their respective watersheds. Hence,the magnitude of the rainfall regulates the intensity of discharge and flow regimes and causes temporal changes

in physical, chemical and biological condition of theriver. Therefore, to avoid the inaccuracy in the resultsof EcoIA caused due to the microhabitat heterogeneityand temporal natural variability, ‘nested samplingdesign’ [133,134] with temporal and spatial nesting can

be a useful tool. Srivastava [101] has used the spatiallynested sampling procedure during the study of benthicmacroinvertebrates in Siang river. However, the impactassessment of any project can be done by using ‘Rapid

Bioassessment Protocol’-RBP [126, 135, 136,] whichmay direct another way of assessing the impact withhigh precision having economy in labour and time. RBP

provides much accuracy to the result of biomonitoring because of simultaneous habitat assessment alongwith the benthic macroinvertebrates. Recently,

Sivaramkrishnan et al. [137] have compared the various biomonitoring approaches while studying on Kaveryriver and advocated that Rapid Bioassessment Protocol(which is a multimetric approach) with habitatassessment procedures should be applied into further

biomonitoring of South Indian rivers. Further, a refined RBP has been developed [174] for use in the peninsular Indian streams and river.

For biomonitoring and EcoIA at larger spatial area(like whole watershed, eco-region etc.) selection of

reference sites (control sites) should also been taken careof. Reynold et al. [138] in their Reference ConditionApproach (RCA) define “the reference condition as thecondition that is representative of a group of minimallydisturbed sites organized by selected physical, chemicaland biological characters”. According to them, basicallytwo functionally different methods are used to selectout the reference sites i.e. multimetric approach (used in USA) and multivariate approach (used in UK and Australia). But, many workers [139, 140] have debated on these both the approaches and recommended multivariate method (predictive model method) for reference site selection. However, in India, suitabilityof both the methods should be thoroughly tested, whileapplying for the purpose concerned. StrategicEnvironmental Assessment- SEA [168] procedures mayalso be useful for the higher level policy making.

Emphasis on Functional Aspects of the River andRiparian Vegetation

It is well studied that the functional state of river controls

its structural scenario. Role of allochthonous input and autochthonous generation of energy, followed by itsdynamics to downstream of the lotic ecosystem,importance of riparian vegetation and floodplains arealso studied elsewhere in temperate countries and insome of the Asian countries.

For the study in energy dynamics, the role and linear processing of allochthonous materials-River ContinuumConcept [121], Nutrient Spiraling [141] and SerialDiscontinuity Concept [142] may prove very useful and

to be studied on Indian rivers (specially to high gradientsegments of Himalayan rivers where lateral flow of water is restricted). But these concepts focus onlyunidirectional processing of organic matters; however,in India, both Himalayan (to its downstream low gradientstretches in plains) and peninsular rivers are very largeand have vast flood plains to their downstream, whichexperiences periodic floods and lateral exchange of materials. Therefore, a thorough testing of ‘RCC’ and

8/10/2019 Vol73_2007_4_Art07_255_269



‘resource spiraling concept’ is required in Indian rivers.However, for large Indian rivers, like Ganga and Brahmaputra, application of Flood Pulse Concept-FPC[143, 144] with conceptual modifications of its paradigm[145] may be more useful to understand the functional

behaviour of the river (and also ecotone area) to their

downstream segments covering plains of India.However, the studies related to energy dynamics

and functional role of flood plain and riparian vegetationon Indian rivers are very scarce. Some notablecontributions have emphasized the organic carbondynamics and resource partitioning of some rivers of southern India [109, 146]. Further, Unni and Naik [86]have assumed the serial discontinuity of nutrients as thereason of the declined zooplankton productivity atdownstream to the dam than upstream in Narmada river.

Studies related to flood plain ecology are also verylimited; though in Indian rivers, roles played byfloodplains to river conservation are well documented and significantly recognized [5, 147]. While Singh and Srivastava [149] have concluded that Macrobrachiumbirmanicum choprai (Tiwari) migrates to vast shallowinundated areas in the middle stretch of Ganga river,where availability of food promotes the growth rate of the individual; Bilgrami 169] has studied the effect of flood on primary productivity of floodplain of Gangariver and concluded that, decline and increase in net

pr imary pr od uc tivi ty in na tur al and cultiva ted vegetations respectively during post flood season. Theconspicuous role played by flood plain to the fisheryoutput has been studied [148] and also been concluded that the degraded flood plain adversely affects thefisheries production and output [67].

Riparian vegetations have important bearings for the ecosystem of rivers as they exhibit multiscalefunctional role to geomorphological, physical, chemicaland biological conditions of the river [3]. But, only afew workers have paid attention regarding this aspectof the river management. While Singh and Srivastava[149] have observed that riparian vegetations act ashabitat for the juveniles of M. birmanicum chopraiwhich prefer bushy and shady places for colonizationin shallow inundated flood plain of middle stretch of Ganga river; Ambasht [150] has studied the functionalrole of three species of riparian macrophytes and concluded that Saccharum bengalensis (one of the threemacrophytes studied) exhibited the highest conservation

value (cv) for water, soil and phosphorus (i.e.77.25%,83.47% and 82.17% respectively).

Further studies have stressed and recognized aboutthe role of riparian vegetations and use of soil and water inventory data for planning sustainable development inHimalayas [151]. Gopalkrishna et al. [152] haveconcluded that the cultivable lands are more prone toerosions and nutrient loss than forested and grazing land

in Henwal river watershed of Tehri Garhwal of centralHimalayan region. While some workers [153, 154, 155]have worked out as goat grazing did not induce anychange in the hydrology of the biomechanicallystabilized ravine watershed of river Yamuna; Prajapatiand Lavania [156] have done comparative evaluation

of bank stability of river Yamuna under different ripariancover and land use, and concluded that the river bank stability class was ‘excellent’ under forest cover but poor under both traditional agriculture and free land grazing.However, Watershed based research strategy for sustainable agriculture [165] may be a useful tool for the conservational approach. Further, Arunachalam et al . [109, 110] have studied the effect of riparianvegetation and other attributes of substrate complexityon fish diversity in rivers of Western Ghat of the country;and they concluded that high evenness index of thesubstrate complexity variables is associated with highevenness index of fish cover. Some of the workers [166& 167] have studied elsewhere and recommended thatthree layers of interactive zone of multispecies riparianvegetation are to be maintained specially to those areaswhere riparian vegetation is still available

Political- Bureaucratic Linkage

It is a non environmental factor which is responsible toaffect the state of environment including aquatic

environment too. Keeping a keen interest, the ministryof environment and forest (MoEF), Govt. of India hasenacted an umbrella act as Environment Protection Act[157] to provide the judicial shield to various aspects of the environment. Environment Protection Act (EPA)necessitates the environmental impact assessment (EIA)followed by formulation of Environment ManagementPlan (EMP) for various developmental projects(anthropogenic activities). Accordingly, EIA notification[158] was issued in 1994 and environmental impactassessment has been made mandatory for 29 (twentynine) types of developmental projects including ‘river valley projects’ depending on their certain investments(as specified in para 3b and 3c of EIA notification, 1994);one additional project was included vide its amendmentin 2000 making a total of 30 projects. Further, ministryof environment and forest (MoEF) has issued another fresh EIA notification 2006 [170] superseding its earlier notification in which a total of 39 kinds of projects wereadded under classification of eight different heads. Allthe projects are classified under two categories ‘A’ and

‘B’. All projects or activities included in Category ‘A’shall require prior environmental clearance from theCentral Government in the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) on the recommendations of an ExpertAppraisal Committee (EAC) to be constituted by theCentral Government; while projects under category ‘B’will require prior environmental clearance from theState/Union territory Environment Impact AssessmentAuthority (SEIAA). The SEIAA shall base its decision

8/10/2019 Vol73_2007_4_Art07_255_269


264 VK Srivastava

on the recommendations of a State or Union territorylevel Expert Appraisal Committee (SEAC) as to beconstituted for in this notification. In the absence of aduly constituted SEIAA or SEAC, a category ‘B’ projectshall be treated as a category ‘A’ project. Again, the

process of EIA has been tightened by the provisions that

any project or activity specified in category ‘B’ will betreated as category A, if located in whole or in part within10 km from the boundary of: (i) wild life protected areas(ii) critically polluted areas (iii) notified eco-sensitiveareas, (iv) inter-State boundaries and international

boundaries. Guidelines for the preparation of EIA reportfor river valley projects was notified by department of environment, Govt. of India [159] much earlier, in whichauthor has pin pointed some of the important parametersneeded to be considered during preparation / formulationand construction phases of river valley projects.Recently, in 2001 Ministry of Environment and Foresthas published an EIA Manual [171] in which systematicguidelines are given for EIA. In earlier and present EIAnotification [158, 170] public hearing has been mademandatory for the projects involving large displacementand having severe environmental ramification including‘river valley projects’; also the procedure of publichearing has also be spelt out. But, however, it is observed that in some part of the country, people are unaware of the type and magnitude of ill consequences ought to

occur by any river valley projects being launched in their area. And, unless they know the specific kind of adverseimpact to be caused by any river valley project to itsdownstream and upstream, they can not draw anyconclusion or will draw wrong conclusion regarding the

project; therefore, public hearing to those particular areaof the country will not be so effective to solve the

purpose for which it is made. Further, before the publichearing to such area, a mass awareness programme for the positive and negative both the effects expected to

occur to the downstream and upstream catchments of the project concerned should be launched. However,various deficiencies in the EIA of river valley projectsof North-East India have been pin pointed.[160, 161].

Another problem related to river management is thewater allocation and river regulation, where politicalintervention becomes inevitable because most of therivers flow through interstate boundaries. In past, therehave been several disputes related to distribution/allocation of river water among the states of upper and

lower riparian catchments from regulated site. Also,many disputes have been settled [162]. Cauvery water dispute between the state of Karnataka and Tamilnaduis a recent example. During decision making for thesettlement of disputes at higher level, it has been clearlyobserved that the issues regarding socio-economicexploitation of water are considered only; and less careis taken about what ecological consequences would cropup at upper and lower riparian catchments by release /

retention of high or low volume of water from the siteof regulation? And, how will it indirectly affectadversely to the socio-economic status of people of thecatchment. For amicable solution of interstate river water disputes, the political level negotiations are made by

party states of river basin; but, however, if it fails for

negotiation, Government of India has enacted “InterstateRiver Water Dispute Act-1956” [162],to provide for adjudication of dispute by constituting “Water DisputeTribunal”(vide provisions laid down in section 4 of theact). And, situation becomes worst when river disputesarise between two countries; for example Ganga water dispute (between India and Bangaladesh) and Induswater dispute (between India and Pakistan) wereglobally known cases. Whatever may be the conditions,

but during the settlement of the dispute, environmentalissues related to the river are least considered, whichultimately appears to be the major hurdle for management practices.

Recently, Govt. of India has decided for interlinkingthe rivers with an objective to (i) provide water for irrigation in drought-prone areas, (ii) reduce the extentof annual flooding of the Ganga and the Brahmaputra,and (iii) generate additional hydroelectric power [163].In the said projects, it has been suggested that the‘surplus’ basin can be identified and there is no harm totransfer the water from ‘surplus’ basin to ‘scarce’ basin;to rationalize the river water which is lost to sea. But,considering the river water as ‘surplus’ or ‘lost’ is thenon-ecological view, which looks water for storage,transfer and allocation only [164]. Further,Bandhopadhyaya and Parveen [164] has concluded that,not a single drop of water in any river can be taken as‘surplus’ or can be said as ‘lost’ because every drop hasits significant ecological services; and transfer of water from any river basin has to be paid in terms of ecologicaldamage and it is the biodiversity which has to pay the

ecological cost. Conflicts which are expected to beinevitable regarding compensation for resettlements and environmental damage, sharing of water among theriparian states, co-operative management of the riverscrossing international boundaries will pose another kind of administrative problem. Again, it is the health of theriver which is going to suffer from this project of river linking.

Further, no where in EIA notification and in other provisions, the impact assessment of any river valley

project is made mandatory towards the downstream fromregulated site. Actually, the biodiversity of aquatic (inchannel), ecotone region and floodplain suffers a lot toits downstream because of its variation in water volumeand frequency, timing and magnitude of land water interface of riparian area; which ultimately affects socio-economic condition of the people of downstreamcatchment. Also, downstream impact is severesedimentation causing the loss of habitat.

8/10/2019 Vol73_2007_4_Art07_255_269



Recommendations

During various river valley projects and developmentalactivities, the impact assessment is done at the projectsite; but following points are recommended for accentuate the sensitivity of the assessment.1. It is essential to prepare the detailed inventory of all

the ri vers (from headwater to mouth) of the countryrelated to their physical, chemical and biologicalconditions. These inventories will provide the basicpresent status of the rivers and its energy dynamicsand can be used to assess the impact of the projectfrom far upstream to far downstream; which is thebasis of the future policies of the management.

2. Research related to energy dynamics and functionalstate of river are strictly warranted, which is the factorto regulate the structural components of the lotic

system.3. For accurate study of the lotic systems, setting of ‘infield’ experiments ( in situ experiments) have becomean essential part of the study.

4. In order to have an effective management plan,studies to whole drainage basin of entire watershedshould be taken up instead of any particular segmentor tributary of the river. Also, management of entirewatershed is an integral issue which affects the riverecosystem, to which the pattern of land use inwatershed for agricultural purposes is to beconsidered..

5. Long term research should be initiated before andafter the commission of any river valley project, sothat to evaluate the ecological impacts closer to theaccuracy which is essential to formulate the effectivemanagement plan.

6. Since EIA (Environmental Impact Assessment) hasbeen made mandatory by Government of India, andEIA encompasses the overall assessment of socio-economic impact and ecological impact. But, while

impact assessment, ecological impact assessment(Eco IA) is to be carried out with much precision;and in case of river valley projects, the precision of EcoIA may be out ridden by natural variations.Therefore, the appropriate sampling design like BACI(Before-After Control Impact), beyond BACI, NestedSampling and Rapid Bioassessment Protocol (RBP)may be used to accentuate the accuracy. Also, theresults of EcoIA (along with whole EIA findings)though, integrated to the policies and plans of any

developmental river valley project; but the samplingprocedures for the EcoIA should be taken care of tominimize the natural variability and to have the moreaccurate assessment.

7. Maintenance and research related to riparianvegetation should be undertaken as to understand themagnitude of its influence. However, the riparianvegetations of most of the rivers in plains of thecountry have been almost cleared; but the upstream

reaches of the Himalayan rivers, and also of somepeninsular rivers are still with some naturalvegetation. However, a detailed study is still neededregarding how much width of the riparian vegetation(for adequate health of the river) is essential? Allalong the catchment area, three layers of interactive

zone of multispecies riparian vegetation are to bemaintained specially to those areas where riparianvegetation is still available. Before maintaining theinteractive zone, extensive survey is to be carried outto delineate and classify the riparian forests from restof the forest cover and should be declared as RiparianVegetation Buffer Zone (RVBZ) as a sense of protected area with separate specific legislation. Buthowever, in those stretches of rivers, generally inplains, where riparian vegetation is severelydegraded, restorative afforestation by flood resistantspecies is warranted.

8. Through study of flood plains and ecotone ecologyis the need of the day, which may be indicative of the facts related to lotic health; and hence will be theuseful information for management practices.

9. Since River Continuum Concept is the one way, andFlood Pulse Concept and its modified version arethe two way flow of energy, which regulates theenergy budget of the river up to much extent. It isessential to test the applicability of RCC on Indian

rivers. In India, Himalayan rivers in their hilly stretchdo not exhibit lateral inundation of water, rather onlylongitudinal water current is their characteristic. But,however, they have very vast flood plain with lateralexchange of resources in their stretch of plains of the country; and also some area of the country,especially north-eastern part experience high rain fall.Therefore, keeping the view of a conspicuousclimatic, geographical and geological situation, athorough and extensive study on mixed application

of RCC and FPC in upper and lower stretches of Himalayan rivers respectively is needed to have abetter understanding of energy dynamics.

10. Since Himalaya is the youngest mountain, which isseismologically sensitive and has fragile soil; morecare is needed while launching any river valleyproject. However, mini projects may be the eco-friendly alternatives.

11. Findings of research works done in academicinstitutions are to be integrated with the managementplans.

12. Strategic Environmental Assessment – SEAprocedures may be applied and strictly consideredduring policy formulations and decision making athigher level.

References1. Valdiya KS Dynamic Himalaya ; University Press (India) Ltd.

Hyderabad, (1998) Pp 178.

8/10/2019 Vol73_2007_4_Art07_255_269


8/10/2019 Vol73_2007_4_Art07_255_269



59. Verma SR, and RC Dalela Acta Hydrochim Hydrobiol 3(1975) 259-274.

60. Mathivanan V, P Vijayan and Selvi Sabhanayakam Curr Sci5 (2004) 573-578

61. Prasad BN and M Saxena Indian J Environ Hlth 22 (1980)151-168.

62. Patra AK, L Nayak and E Patnayak Trop Ecol 25 (1984) 153-157.

63. Nautiyal P Proc. Indian. Acad. Sci (Anim Sci ) 93 (1984) 671-674.

64. Nautiyal P Uttar Pradesh J Zool 5 (1985)14-19.65. Sabata BC and MP Nair Bull Bot Serv India 27 (1985) 219-

221.66. Biswas BK and SK Konar Poll Res 20 (2001) 583-58867. Sharma RC J Adv Zool 5 (1984) 28-33.68. Sharma RC Indian J Ecol 13 (1985)157-160.69. Singh SR and VK Srivastava J Adv Zool 10 (1991 a) 64-65.

70. Singh SR and VK Srivastava Poll Res 10 (1991 b) 93-101.71. Verma MC, NK Singh and J Duttamunshi Proc Acad Environ

Biol 1 (1992) 87-94.72. Srinivasaprasad S Biol og ic al profil e of th e Ga nga:

Phytoplankton: In : The Ganga – A Scientific StudyKrishnamurty CR, Bilgrami KS, Das TM and MathurRP(Eds) Ganga Project Directorate, Ministry of Environmentand Forest, Govt. of India (1991) Pp 53-67.

73. Natarajan AV Can Spec Publ Fish Aquat Sci 106 (1989) 545-560.

74. Tripathi BD An overview of hydrobiological features of theGanga in the stretch from Mirzapur to Ballia: In: The Ganga– A Scientific Study. Krishnamurthy CR, Bilgrami KS, DasTM and Mathur RP (Eds) Ganga Project Directorate, Ministryof Environment and Forest, Govt. of India (1991) Pp 156-160.

75. Jha AK, A Latif and JP Singh J Environ Pollut 4 (1997) 143-151

76. Sampath V, A Srinivasan and A Ananthanarayan Proc Symp Environ Biol (1979) 441-452.

77. Adholia UN Geo Eco Trop 3 (1979) 267-271.78. Kulshreshtha SK, UN Adholia, AA Khan, A Bhatnagar, M

Saxena and M Baghail Int J Environ Sci 15 (1989) 27-36.79. Kulshreshtha SK, UN Adholia, A Bhatnagar, AA Khan, and

M Baghail Acta Hydrochim Hydrobiol 19 (1991) 181-191.80. Kulshreshtha SK, UN Adholia, A Bhatnagar, Int J Environ

Studies 40 (1992) 207-216.81. Ahmed M and A Shayestehfer J Environ Biol 12 (1991) 123

-129.82. Sinha RK Proc Nat Acad Sci India, 62B (1992) 313-322.83. Srivastava VK and SR Singh Proc Acad Environ Biol 4 (1995)

83-89.84. Bilgrami KS, JS Dattamunshi and BN Bhowmic Symp

Biomonitoring State Environ (1985)141-14585. Laal AK and M Karthikeyan Curr Sci 65 (1993) 874-875.86. Unnisankaran K and Lakshamikant Naik International

Journal of Ecology and Environmental Sciences 23 (1997)1-16.

87. Pahwa DV Indian J Animal Sci 49 (1979) 212-219.88. Gupta A and RG Michael Proc Workshop High Alt Entom

Wildlife Ecol . Zoological Survey of India (1983) pp 21-28.89. Chowdhary SR Indian J Ecol 11 (1984) 160-165.

90. Bhatt SD, Y Bisht, and U Negi Proc Indian Natn Sci Acad B50 (1984) 395-405.

91. Rao KS, NK Das and SS Pandya Bull Bot Soc Sagar 32(1985)114-119.

92. Rao KS, S Jain, R Dubey, S Srivastava, U Choubey and SSPandya Ujjain J Hydrobiol 3 (1987) 83-87.

93. Dutta SPS and R Malhotra Ind J Ecol 13 (1986)138-145.94. Sunder S and BA Subala Indian J Ecol 13 (1986)127-132.95. Kumar K Proc Indian Natn Sci Acad B53 (1987) 227-234.96. Sinha MP, N Pandey and PN Mehrotra Indian Zoologist 13

(1989)79-83.97. Singh SR and VK Srivastava Acta Hydrochim Hydrobiol 17

(1989a) 159-166.98. Jebanesan A and M Selvenayagam J Environ Biol 15 (1994)

213-220.99. Srivastava VK and BC Sabat Proc Acad Environ Biol 3 (1994)

229-231.

100. Srivastava VK and SR Singh Proc Indian natn Sci Acad B62(1996) 259-279.101. Srivastava VK J Appl Biosci 32 (2006) 44-53.102. Krishnamurthy SV and SR Reddy International Journal of

Ecology and Environmental Sciences 22 (1996) 261-270.103. Sivramkrishnan KG, J Morgan, Hennaford and VH Resh

Internat ional Journal of Ecology and EnvironmentalSciences, 22 (1996) 113-122.

104. Srivastava NP and VR Desai J Environ Biol 18 (1997) 325-331.

105. Jhingaran VG Fish and Fisheries of India HindustanPublishing Corporation, New Delhi ((1991) pp 727.

106. Dattamunshi JS and MP Srivastava Natural History of Fishesand Systematics of Fresh Water Fishes of India. NarendraPublishing House New Delhi, India (1988) pp 403.

107. Arunachalam M Measuring and monitoring the fish diversityof Western Ghats. Salim Ali Centenary Symposium on WesternGhats Biodiversity, Nov. 5-9 , Indian Institute of ScienceBangalore; (1995) (Unpublished).

108. Arunachalam M, KC Madhusudanan Nair, J Vijverberg andK Kortmulder Food and habitat usage of cyprinid fishassemblages in stream pools of a south Indian rivers . Instituteof Royal Academy of Sciences The Netherlands (1988) pp-

89.109. Arunachalam M, KC Madhusudanan Nair, J Vijverberg and

K Kortmulder Intern ational Jou rnal of Ecology and Environmental Sciences 23 (1997a) 271-295.

110. Arunachalam M, JA Johnson and A Sankarnarayanan International Journal of Ecology and Environmental Sciences23 (1997b) 327-333.

111. Arunachalam M, R Soranam, JA Johanson and MA Haniffa Internat ional Journal of Ecology and EnvironmentalSciences. 23 (1997c) 335-342.

112. Sehgal KL State of art of endangered, vulnerable and rare

cold water fishes of India: In: Threatened Fishes of India.,Dehadrai PV, Das P and Verma LR(Eds); Soc NatureConservation, Muzaffarnagar India (1994) Pp 127-135

113. Dehadrai PV, P Das and SR Verma (Eds) Threatened Fishesof India ; Society for Nature Conservatoin Muzaffarnagar,(1994 ) pp 412.

114. Dhanze JR and R Dhanze Proceedings of symposium on fishgenetics and biodiversity conservation for sustainable

production , National Bureau of Fish Genetic Resources,Lucknow India (1996) pp 9-10.

8/10/2019 Vol73_2007_4_Art07_255_269


268 VK Srivastava

115. Dhanze JR and R Dhanze Proc Acad Environ Biol 7 (1998)11-16.

116. Dehadrai PV and AG Poniah International Journal of Ecologyand Environmental Sciences 23 (1997) 315-327.

117. Krishnamurthi CR, KS Bilgrami, TM Das and RP Mathur(Eds) The Ganga–A Scientific Study. Ganga ProjectDirectorate, Ministry of Environment and Forest, Govt. of

India, (1991) Pp- 245.118. Dudgeon D In te rn at io na l Jour na l of Ec ol ogy an d

Environmental Sciences 20 (1994) 255-285.119. Humphrey CL and PL Dostine Mitt Internat Venein Limnol

24 (1994) 293-314.120. Hynes HBN The Ecology of Running Waters ; Liverpool

University Press Liverpool (1970) Pp 555.121. Vennote RL, GW Minshal, KW Cummings, JR Sedel and

CE Cushings Can J Fish Aquat Sci 37 (1980)130-137.122. Hurlbert SH Ecological Monographs 54 (1984)187-211.123. Stewart-Oeten A, WM Murdoch and KR Parker Ecology 60

(1986)1176-1184.124. Rosenberg DM and VH Resh Freshwater Biomonitoring and

Benthic Macroinvertebrates; Chapman and Hall New York (1993) Pp 486.

125. Naiman RJ, OG Lonzarich, TJ Bechie and SC Ralf General principles of classification and the assessment of conservation potential in rivers: In: River Conservation and ManagementBoon PJ, Callow P and Petts GE (Eds). John Wiley and Sons.U K (1992) pp1-22.

126. Resh VH, RH Norris, and MT Barbour Aust J Ecol 20(1995)108-121.

127. Green RH Sampling Design and Statistical Methods for Environmental Biologists ; Wiley Interscience New York (1979) 257 pp.

128. Underwood AJ Aust J Mar Freshwat Res 42 (1991) 569-587.129. Underwood AJ Aust J Ecol 12 (1993) 99-116.130. Faith DP, CL Humphrey and P Dostine Aust J Mar Freshwat

Res 42 (1991)589-602.131. Faith DP, P Dostine and CL Humphrey Aust J Ecol 20

(1995)167-180.132. Srivastava VK Environmental impact assessment of river

ecosystem in North East India : In: Perspective for Planning

and Development in North-East India: Sundriyal RC,Umashankar and Upreti TC (Eds) GB Pant Institute of Himalayan Environment and Development, Almora UP(1998) Pp 298-304

133. Morrisey DJ, L Howitt, AJ Underwood and JS Stark Marine Ecology Progress Series. 81 (1992) 197-204.

134. Downes BJ, PS Lake and ESG Schreiber Aust J Ecol 20(1995)502-514.

135. Plafkin JL, MT Barbour, KD Poter, SK Gross and RM Huges Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for use in streams and smallrivers: benthic macroinvertebrates and fish; USEPAWashington DC (1989) pp 185.

136. Barbour MT, J Gerritsen, BD Snyder and JB Stribling Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Streams and Wadeablerivers: Periphyton, Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Fish ; 2 nd

ed, USEPA Office of the Water, Washington (1999) Pp 251137. Sivramkrishnan KG, K Venkataraman, S Sridhar and S

Manumuthai In te rn at io na l Jour na l of Ec ol ogy an d Environmental Sciences 21 (1995) 141-161.

138. Raynoldson TB, RH Norris, VH Resh, KE Day, and DMRosenberg JN Am Benthol Soc 16 (1997) 833-852.

139. Hawkins CP, RH Norris, JN Hogue and JW Feminella Ecological Applications , 10 (2000) 1456-1477.

140. Norris RH and CP Hawkins Hydrobiologia 435 (2000) 4-17.141. Wallace JB, JR Webster and WR Woodall Arch iv fur

Hydrobiologie 79 (1977) 506-532.142. Ward JV and JA Stanford The serial discontinuity concept of

lotic ecosystems: In: Dynamics of Lotic Ecosystems FontaineTO and Bartell SM (Eds); Ann Arbom Science Publishers,Michigan (1979) Pp 29-42.

143. Junk WJ, PB Bayley and RE Sparks Can Spl Publ Fish Aquat Sci 106 (1989)110-127.

144. Junk WJ Arch Hydrobiol (3 supple) 115 (1999) 261-280.145. Puckridge JT, F Sheldon, KF Walker and AJ Boulton Mar

Freshwater Res 49 (1998) 55-72.146. Arunachalam M and LK Arun Mitteil Intern Verein Theon

Angewan Limnol 24 (1994)179-188.147. Gopal B International Journal of Ecology and Environmental

Sciences 23 (1997)305-313.148. Dobriyal AK and HR Singh Arch Hydrobiol 118 (1990) 93-

103.149. Singh SR and VK Srivastava Acta Hydrochim Hydrobiol 17

(1989 b) 475-484.150. Ambasht RS Community structure, biomass production and

energy aspects of aquatic macrophytes and soil, water and nutrient conservation of the Ganga: In: The Ganga- AScientific Study, Krishnamurty CR, Bilgrami KS, Das TMand Mathur RP (Eds); Ganga Project Directorate, Ministryof Environment and Forest Govt. of India (1991) pp 161-165.

151. Dwivedi GK, M Dwivedi and MC Nautiyal Use of soil and water resource inventory data for planning sustainabledevelopment in Himalaya, In National Symposium onEnvironmental Strategies for Sustainable Development. GBPant University, Pantnagar (1996) Pp 45.

152. Gopal Krishna, Madhu Dwivedi, MC Nautiyal and VK Sah International Journal of Ecology and Environmental Sciences24 (1998) 37-47.

153. Prajapati MC, AK Tiwari, KTN Nambiar, JP Singh, BMMehrotra and VN Sharada Ind J Soil Cons 27 (1989) 9-16.

154. Prajapati MC, G Singh, LS Bhushan and JP Singh Growth pattern of goat in relation with wetness and available foragesin Yamuna ravines : In: Recent Advances in Goat ProductionLokeshwar RR (Ed) Proc Int Cong Goat ( 1992) Pp 407-412.

155. Prajapati MC In te rnat iona l Journ al of Ecology and Environmental Sciences 24 (1998)65-72

156. Prajapati MC and GS Lavania International Journal of Ecology and Environmental Sciences 24 (1998) 73-80.

157. MoEF Envi ronm en t (P rote ct io n) Ac t; Ministry of Environment and Forests, Govt. of India, New Delhi (1986)

158. MoEF The Environmental Impact Assessment Notification(as amended on 04-05-94); Ministry of Environment andForests, Govt. of India, New Delhi (1994)

159. Moudgal S Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment of river Valley Projects ; Ministry of Environment and Forests,Govt. of India, New Delhi (1985) pp224

160. Darlong VT Environmental Impact Assessment in North-East India: A case study of river valley projects: In: Perspectivesfor Planning and Development in North East India . SundryalRC, Umashankar and Upreti TC (Eds); GB Pant Institute of Himalayan Environment and Development, Kosi Katermal,Almora, UP India (1998) Pp277-289.

8/10/2019 Vol73_2007_4_Art07_255_269


vol73_2007_4_art07_255_269

Documents