Q1: What are impacts of development activities on vegetation and

wild life?
Direct Impacts:
a) Habitat loss:
The consumption of land the consequent loss of natural habitat is
inherent in road development. Where new roads intersect habitat, the
area occupied by the road itself, borrow pits, and quarries is subtracted
from the total habitat area available to flora and fauna.
b) Habitat fragmentation:
When a road cuts through an ecosystem, the sum of the two parts
created by the cut is less than the value of the initial whole, even when
the habitat loss is ignored. Ecosystems are characterized by complex,
interdependent relations between component species and their
physical environment, and the integrity of the ecosystem relies on the
maintenance of those interactions. Roads tend to fragment an area into
weaker ecological sub-units, thus making the whole area more
vulnerable to invasions and degradation.
c) Corridor restrictions:
Most animal species tend to follow established patterns in their daily
and season all movements. The areas, through which they travel on
their way to and from feeding, breeding and birthing grounds, and
between their seasonal ranges, are known as conidors. When a road
intersects or blocks a wildlife corridor, the result is either cessation of
use of the corridor because animals are reluctant to cross the road, an
increase in mortality because of collisions with vehicles, or a delay in
migration which may result in the weakening or disappearance of an
entire generation of the population. Some animals are attracted to
roads for various reasons, including protection from predators, good
food supplies, better travel conditions, and so forth.
d) Aquatic habitat damage:
Road development has perhaps its most serious effects on aquatic
ecosystems. Erosion from poorly constructed and rehabilitated sites
can lead to downstream siltation. ruining spawning beds for fish.
Constriction of flows at water crossings can make the current too fast
for some species. Alterations of flood cycles. tidal flows. and water
levels can upset tropic dynamics by affecting the life cycle of plankton.
and have corresponding effects on the rest of the food chain.
In the process of rechanneling. natural streambeds are dug up and
useful obstructions. including large boulders. are removed (Fig, 5.9).
The same applies to shade trees on the banks. Frequently, the result is
a straight, featureless channel, which may be an efficient evacuator of
water, but has little in the way of the eddies. shaded areas. sheltering
ledges. and turbulence essential to the health and existence of so many
aquatic species.
e) Interruption of biogeochemical cycle:
The flow of nutrients and materials is a major determinant in
ecosystem structure and function. and road development can easily
disrupt it through alteration of flows of surface and groundwater,
removal of biomass. and relocation of topsoil. Also, human activity can
be a major source of nutrients (sewage, animal dung, and eroded
topsoil) which. provided can raise turbidity and biological oxygen
demand (BOD) of the water to the point where certain aquatic species
simply cannot survive.
Indirect impacts:
In many cases, indirect impacts are more damaging that direct ones,
and their effects can be felt farther, sometimes several dozen
kilometers, from the road. Where the road provides access to areas
which were previously relatively untouched by human activities, the
environmental assessment should take into account these frequently
long effects. Some indirect impacts encountered commonly are:
a) Accessibility:
Roads increase contact between humans and the natural environment,
which in most cases leads to ecosystem modification. Penetration of
previously unmodified areas makes them available for a host of human
activities of varying effect, from recreation, forest and mineral
exploitation to colonization and urbanization. Upgrading of existing
roads generally facilitates an increase in the number of people having
access and is accompanied by an increase in the likelihood of impacts. A
classic example of the accessibility impact is the widespread land
degradation occurring in Brazilian Amazonian, which has been induced
in large part by road-building initiatives
b) Ecological disequilibrium:
The establishment of new plant and animal species along the right-of-
way can upset the dynamic balance which exits in ecosystems. Native
species face competition for resources from new arrivals, and predator-
prey relationships can be altered, often to the detriment of the native
species. Non-native species can gain a competitive advantage because
of a lack of natural controls and become dominant. The result is usually
a simplified ecosystem that is more vulnerable to further impacts.
In some cases, road development may actually alter the ecological
equilibrium in a positive way by providing for the creation of new
ecotones, which tend to be relatively bio diverse. This will only apply if
the total area of the existing system is relatively large compared to the
newly created ecotones.
c) Contamination of the biota:
The presence of motor vehicles introduces the potential for
contamination of the soil, air, and water adjacent to the road, and in
the case of surface water, well beyond the immediate surroundings.
Chronic contamination can become a serious problem for animal
species, especially those at the top of the food chain, because of
bioaccumulation of pollutants.
d) Fires:
Increases in human activity are often associated with more frequent
incidents of fires, which can obviously have sudden. severe, and wide
ranging impacts.
e) Transmission of disease:
Roads are effective vectors for the spread of diseases, which can have
marked impacts on populations of plant and animal species). Carriers of
diseases. both flora and fauna, can gain easy access to wilderness areas
along new road corridors. Transportation of livestock and plant
products, such as firewood. animal feed. and fruit. may also aid in
spreading disease.
f) Ecosystem types and sensitivity:
The biophysical environment is made up of a myriad of ecosystems of
different types. Different ecosystem types experience impacts in
different ways and display variable levels of resilience in the face of
change, depending on factors such as biodiversity, climate. Soil type,
the similarity of adjacent ecosystems, and size.

Q2:What are the mitigation measures for impacts on vegetation and

wild life?

Mitigation measures: Mitigation for potential impacts on vegetation

and wild life may be very site-specific, such as, replacing landscaping
or creating open space and parks in more urban areas; or
geographically expansive in scope, such as, implementing particular
management techniques in national forests. In some cases, rare
plants or particular animals may actually be transplanted or trapped
and moved to other safe locations.
Mitigation measures include
1. avoiding,
2. minimizing,
3. rectifying,
4. reducing and
5. compensating.
If particularly sensitive or valuable natural areas were destroyed the
first mitigation technique should be development and feasibility
analysis of avoidance alternatives. If total avoidance is not possible,
design refinements may reduce the quantity of exceptional natural area
affected. Techniques to improve the productivity and functional value
of the remaining habitat can be used to offset adverse impacts. Such
measures may include installation of nesting boxes or trees, creation of
waterholes and open spaces, planting of food supply vegetation, or
increasing the overall vegetation diversity.
Habitat impacts can also be mitigated through compensatory
preservation or created replacement habitats. Depending on the value
of the lost habitat, the required replacement ratio may be as high as 5:
1, and the replacement should be functional in kind to that lost one. As
with wetland mitigation programs, the habitat replacement plan should
include detailed plans for physical construction and for planting of
various plant species. Sometimes trees and vegetation removed by the
proposed project or action can be saved and used to replant the
created habitat. Barriers to wildlife travel condors can sometimes be
mitigated through provision of wildlife underpasses in highway or
railroad fills or similar types of protected travel corridors for power
lines or artificial drainage channels. Wildlife losses through road kills
can be further minimized by installation of fencing to prevent wildlife
from crossing the highway and to direct wildlife movement to the
provided underpasses.
Proposed mitigation measures should be coordinated with appropriate
federal, state, and local agencies. The mitigation plan should include
documentation of designated funding, responsible parties,
performance criteria, monitoring methods, and schedule.

Q3: Define” deforestation”. What are the harmful effects of

deforestation?
Deforestation is the cutting down of trees from an area with no
intension of establishing a future stand of trees. It can meet some
human needs but affects us the most.
Harmful effects of deforestation:
a. Heavy Soil Erosion – The roots of the trees hold the soil firmly
keeping it intact. With large scale deforestation soil erosion and
landslides have become a normal phenomenon. During heavy
 rains and typhoons soil is washed away to lower regions. This
increases the risk for landslides which can cause seriously
threaten the safety of the people and damage their properties.
b. Extinction of flora and fauna – Destruction of the forests leads to
a tragic loss of biodiversity. Millions of plants and animal species
are on the verge of extinction due to deforestation. Countries
with tropical forests suffer the greatest causalities due to
deforestation.
c. Relocation of wild life to urban areas – Many wild animals have
started relocating to urban areas as a result of massive
deforestation. There have been many cases of various wild
animals like snakes, bats etc. causing accidents in urban areas.
Many times wild animals get killed in an effort to capture them.
There have been instances of carnivorous predators like lions,
tigers and wolfs preying on humans in villages surrounded by
forests.
d. Global warming – The trees absorb the harmful carbon dioxide
and release the life sustaining oxygen, thus acting as natural
friends of humans. Deforestation increases the amount of carbon
dioxide in the atmosphere leading to global warming due to
greenhouse effect. Silting of Rivers and Dams – Deforestation
causes large scale deposition of sediments in the rivers. This leads
to collection of sediments in the dams, thus reducing their
lifespan.
e. Flooding – Trees absorb water in large quantities during heavy
rains. But due to large scale deforestation there are very less tress
to retain water. This again leads to heavy floods causing heavy
loss of life and property.
f. Desertification – Deforestation is one of the causes behind the
conversion of many fertile tracts of land to deserts. This
phenomenon is known as desertification. When mountain forest
faces desertion, watersheds are degraded and this leads to the
loss of sustained water supplies for low land communities.
 g. Danger of submersion of coastal areas and glaciers – Due to
massive deforestation, the average temperature of the earth has
risen in the last century. If this phenomenon continues then the
increased temperatures would lead to melting of glaciers. This
would lead to a massive rise in the sea levels leading to
submersion of coastal areas.
Keeping these dire consequences in mind, an honest effort should be
made by the human civilization to conserve forests

Q4: Define the terms ‘Hazard’, ‘Risk’, ’Probability’ and ‘Risk

Management’. What is meant by Environmental Risk Assessment?
How it is different from EIA?
Since the concept of Risk has been applied over a broad range of
disciplines and activities to avoid confusion ,Royal Society defined some
of the terms used in Risk assessment as given below:
a. Hazard: a property or a situation with the potential to cause harm
b. Risk: a combination of the probability or frequency of the
occurrence of a particular hazard and the magnitude of the
adverse effects or harm arising to the quality of human health or
the environment.
c. Probability: The occurrence of a particular event in a given period
of time or as one amongst a number of possible events.
d. Risk Management: the process of implementing decisions about
accepting or altering Risks.

Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA):

1. It is a new emerging technique which involves structured
gathering of available information about the environmental risks
and then formation of judgment about them.
 2. Environmental Risk Assessment and Management with reference
to issues relating to human health and ecological issues is a
rapidly growing field which can provide information to decision
makers about the frequency and magnitude of adverse
environmental consequences arising from human activities or
planned interventions.
3. In Ecological risk assessment as there are no definable harm like
that premature death used in human health risk assessment,
appropriate criteria have to be chosen based on Scientific
information and Social judgments.
4. Ecological Risk Assessment (EcoRA) deals with the condition of
ecosystems rather than human health or individual organisms.
The site, or ecosystem occurrence in geophysical terms, is
analogous to the person in human health ERA. EcoRA has a host
of special problems (for example, choosing assessment endpoints)
that are well recognized and that add to the uncertainty of the
results.
5. The communication of ERA results should take the form of
decision analysis, that is, what options are available and, for each
option, what are the risks, costs, and benefits, and how are these
distributed within society. Proper comparison and communication
can change lay people's misperceptions of risks. so participatory
decision making may proceed on a more rational less emotional
basis.
Q5: Explain various key steps in performing an Environmental Risk
Assessment.
ERA addresses four questions:
1. What can go wrong to cause adverse consequences?
2. What is the probability of frequency of occurrence of adverse
consequences?
3. What are the range and distribution of the severity of adverse
consequences?
 4. What can be done, at what cost, to manage and reduce
unacceptable risks and damage?
Risk management is integrated into ERA because it is the attitudes and
concerns of decision makers that set the scope and depth of the study.
ERA attempts to quantify the risks to human health, economic welfare,
and ecosystems from those human activities and natural phenomena
that perturb the natural environment.

Environmental Risk assessment with reference to human health and

ecological issues from human activities involve analyzing uncertainties
which require the following basic steps which are iterative.
The five step sequence in performing ERA is:
1. Hazard identification - sources of adverse impacts;
2. Hazard accounting - scoping, setting the boundaries of the ERA;
3. Scenarios of exposure - how the hazard might be el1countered;
4. Risk characterization - likelihood and severity of impact damage;
and
5. Risk management - mitigation or reduction of unacceptable risk.
Step 1 - Hazard Identification:
This step, which is akin to the qualitative prediction of impacts in EIA,
begins to answer the question "What can go wrong?" It lists the
possible sources of harm, usually identified by experience elsewhere
with similar technologies, materials, or conditions.
Step 2 - Hazard Analysis
In the second step, ERA (a) considers the total system of which the
particular problem is apart (b) begins to answer questions about the
frequency and severity of adverse impacts, and c) sets the practical
boundaries for the assessment.
Step 3 - Exposure Assessment:
No exposure means no risk, so imaginative constructions (models) are
made of how the hazard might be encountered. For the environmental
pathway, the bodily dose/response calculation is only one step.
Knowledge of earlier parts of the exposure sequence can reveal
chances to reduce risk. For example, a toxic chemical may ultimately
poison people when inhaled, but ERA seeks information on :
1. The type, amount, location, and storage conditions of the
chemical (an inventory);
2. Releases to the environment, whether deliberate or accidental;
3. How people are exposed and for how long;
4. Ambient concentrations;
5. The actual bodily dose; and then
6. The physical condition of specific victims that might affect how
they respond.
Step 4 - Risk Characterization: Methodically observing or estimating
the likelihood of occurrence and the severity of impacts for each
scenario can produce curves as illustrated in Fig. 9.8 plotting the
probability of frequency of adverse events of a given severity vs. the
severity per event (for example, the number of fatalities). Known as FIN
curves, they present the "how often" and "how bad" aspects of risk.
Step 5 - Risk Management: Risk management is the use of ERA results
to mitigate or eliminate un acceptable risks. It is the search for
alternative risk reduction actions and the implementation of those that
appear to be most cost-effective. Most human activities are undertaken
for obvious and direct benefits and risks are intuitively compared with
these benefits. Avoiding one risk may create another (risk
transference); net risk is a consideration facilitated by ERA.

Q6:What are the benefits of the use of ERA in EIA?

A. Two key benefits of ERA within EIA, discussed further below, are that
it provides a means to:
a. Systematically identify potential hazards of a proposal and scope
the detailed investigations required for the EIA; and
b. Set EIA priorities and manage uncertainty.
Use of ERA to assist with scoping of EIA investigations:
The scoping phase is an early phase of the EIA process that typically
involves identification of the key hazards associated with the project
and development of the overall study design. The scoping phase is
when the breadth and the depth of proposed EIA investigations are
determined. Hazards are identified by exploring the ways that proposal
might interact with the environment. A high-level risk assessment
during the scoping phase focusing on key interactions is a useful tool
for identifying the priority hazards for detailed study and separating
them from other issues requiring only limited attention. The benefits of
applying ERA during the scoping phase are that it:
a. Provides greater assurance that all significant hazards requiring
investigation have been identified;
b. Informs preparation of the proposed study program;
c. Ensures that the level of investigations are proportionate to risk;
and,
d. Promotes efficiency in the EIA process.
Use of ERA to set EIA priorities and to manage uncertainty:
ERA can play a significant role in managing uncertainty as part of an EIA
process. Uncertainty can be investigated as part of the process by
considering plausible worst case scenarios as part of the ERA method.
By assigning likelihood and consequence levels taking this approach,
the risk assessment process incorporates uncertainty. For example, if it
is unknown whether vegetation to be removed is habitat for an
endangered species, for the purposes of the risk assessment it should
be assumed that it is suitable habitat. This approach leads to
conservative risk ratings that may overestimate risks but provides an
upper threshold for evaluation of risk.
This conservative approach is useful because it may reveal that a risk is
not significant (even taking into account of uncertainty). Alternatively it
may reveal that based on a conservative assessment a risk is potentially
significant. This may prompt:
a. Further data collection or investigation to reduce uncertainty;
b. Investigation of alternative means of carrying out the project
that better address the issue; and,
 c. Measures to manage uncertainty during project development
and implementation phases.

Q7: What are the benefits of the use of ERA in EIA?

Two key benefits of ERA within EIA, discussed further below, are that
it provides a means to:
i)Systematically identify potential hazards of a proposal and scope
the detailed investigations required for the EIA; and
ii)Set EIA priorities and manage uncertainty.
Use of ERA to assist with scoping of EIA investigations:
The scoping phase is an early phase of the EIA process that typically
involves identification of the key hazards associated with the project
and development of the overall study design. The scoping phase is
when the breadth and the depth of proposed EIA investigations are
determined. Hazards are identified by exploring the ways that proposal
might interact with the environment. A high-level risk assessment
during the scoping phase focusing on key interactions is a useful tool
for identifying the priority hazards for detailed study and separating
them from other issues requiring only limited attention. The benefits of
applying ERA during the scoping phase are that it:
e. Provides greater assurance that all significant hazards requiring
investigation have been identified;
f. Informs preparation of the proposed study program;
g. Ensures that the level of investigations are proportionate to risk;
and,
h. Promotes efficiency in the EIA process.
Use of ERA to set EIA priorities and to manage uncertainty:
ERA can play a significant role in managing uncertainty as part of an EIA
process. Uncertainty can be investigated as part of the process by
considering plausible worst case scenarios as part of the ERA method.
By assigning likelihood and consequence levels taking this approach,
the risk assessment process incorporates uncertainty. For example, if it
is unknown whether vegetation to be removed is habitat for an
endangered species, for the purposes of the risk assessment it should
be assumed that it is suitable habitat. This approach leads to
conservative risk ratings that may overestimate risks but provides an
upper threshold for evaluation of risk.
This conservative approach is useful because it may reveal that a risk is
not significant (even taking into account of uncertainty). Alternatively it
may reveal that based on a conservative assessment a risk is potentially
significant. This may prompt:
d. Further data collection or investigation to reduce uncertainty;
e. Investigation of alternative means of carrying out the project
that better address the issue; and,
Measures to manage uncertainty during project development and
implementation phases

Q8: What are the limitations of ERA?

Limitations of the use of ERA in EIA:
Recognizing the limitations of ERA methods enables the level of
precision of risk assessment output to be understood and informs how
the output should be used as part of the EIA. ERA methods used within
EIA processes in Australia typically involve:
Setting the context and compiling background information;
a. Reviewing the project and identifying risk pathways based on
conceptual models;
b. Establishing a risk framework including definitions of likelihood
and consequence;
c. Assigning risk ratings using expert input often in a risk workshop
setting;
d. Reviewing and refining risk ratings; and,
e. Identifying mitigation measures to address key risks.
These processes have limitations due to:
a. Different interpretations of terms and concepts by participants;
b. Conceptual models as a basis for risk assessment potentially
oversimplify system interactions;
 c. Linear risk pathways ignore cumulative and synergistic impacts;
d. Incapacity to define risks discretely (because a risk is often a
continuum of different (possibilities); and.
e. Subjectivity of expert input used in the analysis (Burgman, 2005).
Effective processes for working across disciplines and providing the
opportunity for external input and validation of risk assessment
information can mitigate the limitations of ERA.
Purposes for which ERA is not suited within an EIA process:
Further, there is a range of impact assessment objectives that ERA
methods cannot address. Recognizing these limitations, ERA will ensure
its appropriate use within the EIA. For example ERA cannot objectively
determine whether a risk is acceptable. Most parties will agree on the
risks that clearly acceptable and risks that are clearly unacceptable but
because such judgments are value laden there will be differing views on
the acceptability of in between risks. Some parties are more risk averse
than others.
Additionally, ERA is not particularly suited to evaluating project
compliance with legislation and policy as part of the EIA process. This is
because even if and issue is of low risk, non-compliance with policy or
legislation may still occur.
ERA methodologies also do not deal well with cumulative and
synergistic impacts. Because methodologies are typically built on linear
impact pathways they do not easily address these effects. For example
two separate activities having an effect on the same asset. Are the
effects mutually exclusive or additive?

Q9: Compare EIA and ERA.

A. Both EIA and ERA are structured tools which give recommendations
concerning environment to the decision makers for project
implementation which can be extended to strategic levels of decision
making. Though they have similarities they have some fundamental
differences. While EIA involves consideration of development
alternatives ERA doesn’t. Both are iterative processes and in final
stage after implementation of a project or proposal for both
monitoring and auditing are needed. After learning from experiences
and mistakes committed decisions are to be improved next time
While EIA gives thrust to public participation and consultation. Risk
perception and risk communication are advocated in ERA. The
salient features of these two processes are compared in Table
below.