Tanzania - River Basin Management and Smallholder Irrigation Improvement Project : environmental assessment (Vol. 2 of 11) : Smallholder irrigation improvement component-Soko irrigation scheme

E968 Volume 2 UNITfFP' F . -T1 MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND FOOD-SECURITY RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT AND SMALLHOLDER IRRIGATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (RBMSIIP) SMALLHOLDER IRRIGATION IMPROVEMENT COMPONENT SOKO IRRIGATION SCHEME ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT DRAFT REPORT November 2003 i'- piimentalI ResoR irces Cinstiftancl Cf lstitig enviio.menaconserv ati)n. lntur2 rpsurces iyawgelneit sfnd capacity buildinc- FILE COPY  l' 1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ............................................................. IV ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................. VII EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................... .......................................... VIII 1. BACKGROUND ..............................................................1 1.1 INTRODUCTION ..............................................................1 1.2 UNDERSTANDING OF THE STUDY .........................................................2 1.2.1 Objective of the Study ......................... ..................................2 1.3 STRATEGIC APPROACH ..............................................................2 1.3.1 Ecosystein Approach ...................... ......................................2 1.3.2 Farming System Approach ..........................................................2 1.3.3 Participatory Approach ...........................................................2 1.4 METHODOLOGY .............................................................4 1.4 METHODOLOGY .............................................................5 1.4.1 Consultation ............................................................5 1.4.2 Analytical Tools ............................................................5 1.5 LIMITATIONS ..............................................................7 2. BASELINE CONDITIONS OF THE IRRIGATION SCHEME AREA ... 8 2.1 THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT .............................................................8 2.1.1 Location ...........................................................8 2.1.2 History of the scheme ........................................................... 11 2.1.3 Landuse patterns ........................................................... 1] 2.1.4 Land ownership/acquisition pattern .................................................... 12 2.2 BIOPHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT ............................................................. 12 2.2.1 Climatic Data ........................................................... 12 2.2.2 Water Resources ........................................................... 12 2.2.3 Soil ........................................................I.. 13 2.2.4 Biodiversity ........................................................... 15 2.4 SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT ..................................................... 15 2.4.1 P opulation ........................................................... 15 2.5 SOCIAL-CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT .................................................. 18 2.5.1 Description ojfenvironmentally sensitive areas of special/unique scientific and/or cultural value ............................................. 18 3. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMMES AND STAKEHOLDER .. 21 3.1 JAPAN INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY ........................ 21 3.2 NGOs ............................................................. 21 3.3 COMMUNITY BASED INITIATIVES ........ ............................................. 21 3.4 STAKEHOLDER'S ROLE ............................................................. 22 3.4.1 Identifled stakeholders ............................................ 22 3.4.2 Analysis ofstakeholders ........................................... 22 3.4.3 Involvemenit ofstakeholders in environmental audit and implementation of ESMP ........................................................... 22 i  3.4.4 Ensuring incorporation of concerni ofstakeholders in ESMP ............. 23 4. COMPLIANCE WITH TANZANIA'S POLICIES, LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND WITH WORLD BANK'S SAFE GUARD POLICIES .... 24 4.1 NATIONAL POLICIES ....................................................... 24 4.1.1 National Envirotinmenit Policy of 1997 .24 4.1.2 Agriculture Policy 1997 .24 4.1.3 Land Policy of 1995 .24 4.1.4 Water Policy of 2002 .25 4.1.5 Forest Policy of 1998 .25 4.1.6 Wildlife Policy of 1998 .25 4.1.7 Energy Policy of 2002 (Draft) .25 4.2 LEGAL FRAMEWORK ....................... 26 4.2.1 Environment Legislation .26 4.2.2 NEMCAct no.1 9 of 1983 .26 4.2.3 Land Act no. 4 and Village Land Act no. 5 of 199 .26 4.2.3 Wildlife Act 1974 (with amendments of 19 78) .27 4.2.4 Water Acts of 1974 .27 4.2.5 Forest Act 1974 .27 4.2.6 The Towni and Country Planning Ordinance. Cap 378 of 1956 . 27 4.2.7 Local Governzmenit Act (District and Urban Atutlhorities) Acts of 198227 4.2.8 Land Use Planniing Commission Act of 1984 .28 4.2.9 The Land Acquisitions Act of 1967 .28 4.2.10 By-Laws .28 4.3 NATIONAL STRATEGIES ......................................................... 28 4.3.1 Government Development Vision 2025 ............................................... 28 4.3.2 Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) of 2000 ............................. 29 4.3.3 Rural Sector Development Strategy (RDS) of 2000 ............................. 29 4.3.4 Agricultural Sector Development Strategy (ASDS) of 2001 ................ 29 4.4 COMPLIANCE WITH WORLD BANK SAFEGUARD POLICIES .......... 29 5.0 TOOLS AND TECHNIQUES USED IN ASSESSING AND ANALYSINGENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS .. 32 5.1 INTRODUCTION .32 5.2 IMPACT ASSESSMENT .32 6.0 CONSULTATIONS WITH COMMUNITY AND FARMERS . 33 6.1 INTRODUCTION .33 6.2 MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ISSUES IDENTIFIED BY STAKEHOLDERS .......................................... 33 6.2 MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS IDENTIFIED BY STAKEHOLDERS: WOMEN DISCUSSIONS .......................................... 34 7.0 IDENTIFIED ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS . 35 7.1 INTRODUCTION .......................................... 35 7.2 UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM IMPACTS ....................................... 35 7.2.1 Demographic trends (population changes) ......................................... 35 ii  7. 2.2 Hydrological changes .......................... ................................. 3 7 7.2.3 Catchinent degradation ........................................................... 3 7 7.2.4 Water quality upstream and down streamt villages (Kochakindo and Ghona,) 38 7.2.5 Socio economic impacts on downstream users .................................... 39 7.3 IRRIGATION SCHEME LEVEL IMPACTS .............................................. 39 7.3.1 Hydraulic regime .40 7.3.2 Soil quality. 41 7.3.3 Water quality .43 7.3.4 Fertilizers andpesticides use .45 7.3.5 waterborne diseases (health data) .46 7.3.6 Drinkintg water quality and sanitatio. .46 7.3.7 Socio-economic. positive and negative impacts of villages within the scheme 47 8. IDENTIFIED MITIGATION MEASURES . .49 8.1 INTRODUCTION .49 8.2 UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM MEASURES .49 8.2.1 Environmental Management . . 49 8.2.2 Enhancement of social-economnic conditions . .49 8.3 IRRIGATION SCHEME LEVEL .50 8.3.1 Environnental Manageent ..50 8.3.2 Improving health situation ..51 8.3.3 Revisiting engineering designs and/or construction stages .. 51 9. ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT PLAN (ESMP) ... 52 9.1 INTRODUCTION ............... ............................................. 52 9.2 OBJECTIVES ............................................................ 52 9.3 SUMMARY OF MAJOR ENIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND ................ 53 IDENTIFIED MITIGATION MEASURES ............................................................ 53 9.4 DESCRIPTION OF ELEMENTS OF MONITORING PROGRAM . 55 9.5 INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY .60 9.6 INPUTS REQUIREMENTS AND EXPECTED OUTPUTS .60 9.7 IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE FOR MITIGATION MEASURES .61 10. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS .66 10.1 CONCLUSION ......................... 66 10.1.1 General conclusion .......... .............. 66 10.1.2 Specific conclusions ........................ 66 10.2 RECOMMENDATIONS ......................... 67 REFERENCES ......................... 69 iii  ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The team wishes to acknowledge with thanks the contributions of various staff members of the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security's Directorate of Irrigation and Technical Services, during the different stages of the preparation of this report: the Project Coordinator of Smallholder Irrigation Improvement Project, Mr. Masija: the Head of Environmental Unit Cell, Mr.Simukanga, and other staff. The team also extends its appreciation to the District Officers, in particularly the irrigation techniicians who are in charge of the eight schemes, at Arumeru, Moshi Rural, Simanjiro, Korogwe, Iringa Rural and Mbarali Districts. Thanks also go to the scheme management committees, farmers and other stakeholders of the eight schemes and the community members who actively participated in the discussions and helped to provide information that was very useful during the preparation of the Environmental Audit. The team appreciates to more than 50 people who participated in data collection and analysis, especially the facilitators, research assistants, enumerators, water and soil staff, data analysts, etc. Last but not least, our appreciations go to ERC's internal staffs who directly or indirectly contributed with enthusiasm to the EA reports. Iv  List of tables and figures Tables Table 2.1 Number of farms per household Table: 2.2 Size of farms (acres) per household Table 2.3 Climatic data Table.2.4. Mean Monthly flow for Soko springs Table 2.5 Distance for domestic water points (in meters) Table 2.6 Soil data Table 2.7 Crops under cultivation during wet season Table 2.8 Crops uLider cultivation durinig dry season Table 2.9 Types of fertilizer used by interviewed farmers of Soko Table 2.10 Fertilizer Users Table 2.11 Number of beneficiaries Table 2.12 Type and number of Livestock kept Table 2.13 Income activities Table 2.14 Small-scale business Table2.15: Education level (males) Table: 2.16 Education level (females) Table: 2.17 Education Level (Males & Females) Table: 2.18 Existence of by laws Table: 2.19 Common diseases Table: 2.20 Availability of energy resources Table: 2.21 Types of stove used in the scheme area Table: 2.22 Availability of village extension officer Table: 2.23 Availability of the extension officer for services Table 7.1 Summary of key environmental and social/impacts for Soko Table 7.2 Populations and distribution of the beneficiary villages Table 7.3 Number of households in the beneficiary villages v  Table 7.4 Soko village Table 7.5 Kiterini village Table 7.6: Kyomu village Table 7.7 Water Analysis Table 7.8 Water use efficiency for Soko Scheme Table7.9 Soil quality results Table 7.10 Results of exchangeable cations measured in 1998 Table 7.11 Water quality results Table 7.12: Water Analysis from Scheme Improvement Assessment of 1998 Table 7.13 Agrochemicals used at Soko Table 7.14 Pests, Diseases and Vermin Table 7.15 Summary of common diseases in the scheme. Table 9.1 Environmental and social impacts mitigation measures Table 9.2 Monitoring Plan Figures Figure 1-1 Basic approach to the study Figure 2-1 Soko irrigation scheme: Location map Figure 3.1 The organizational chart for Soko DEM DEM 2.1 digital elevation modal 2D DEM 2.2 digital elevation modal 3D Plates Plate 7.1 The encroacihing grasses to the diversion scheme Plate 7.2 Intake Structure for the new tertiary canal Plate 7.3 Wooden crossing along the main canal MAP Map.7.1 Soil samples location VI  Abbreviations ADP Area Development Programme AHI African Highlands Initiative ASDS Agricultural Sector Development Strategy CIDA Canadian International Development Agency CBO Community Based Organization DED District Executive Director EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EC Electric conductivity EA Environmental Audit ECU Environmental Cell Unit FAO Food and Agriculture Organization GIS Geographical Information System GTZ German Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Tennische Zusammenarbeit IEE Initial Environmental Examination IPM Integrated Pest Management ISFM Integrated Soil Fertility Management IPPM Integrated Production and Pest Management Programme KATC Kilimanjaro Agricultural Training College LDC Least Developed Country MADP Mombo Area Development Programme MAF Mean Annual Flow MAFS Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security MWLD Ministry of Water and Livestock Development NEMC National Environment Management Council NIDP National Irrigation Development Plan NLUPC National Land Use Planning Commission NRM Natural Resources Management NGO Non Governmental Organization PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper RBMSIIP River Basin Management and Smallholder Irrigation Improvement Project RDS Rural Sector Development Strategy SIIC Smallholder Irrigation Improvement Component SECAP Soil Erosion Control and Agroforestry Project TAFORI Tanzania Forestry Research Institute TMA Tanzania Meteorological Agency ToR Terms of Reference TIPDO Traditional Irrigation and Environmental Development Project TIP Traditional Irrigation Project UNDP United Nations Development Programme UCLAS University College of Lands and Architectural Studies URT United Republic of Tanzania VEO Village Executive Officer VPO Vice President's Office WB World Bank WMA Wildlife Management Areas WHO World Health Organization WVT World Vision Tanzania ZIO Zonal Irrigation Office vii  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Government of Tanzania (GoT) through the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security (MAFS) has taken various initiatives to improve agricultural sector in the country. One of these initiatives is undertaking the River Basin Management and Smallholder Irrigation Improvement Project (RBMSIIP); in context with which, is the Smallholder Irrigation Improvement Component (SIIC). Among others, the need to undertake the RBMSIIP arose out of a nation-wide realisation that the ecosystems of coLintry's river basins (especially those of the Rufiji and the Pangani Rivers) are not being properly managed, leading to extensive environimentai degradation and loss of potentialities of these vital ecosystems. Moreover, it was also realised that in view of the above-mentioned loss of potentiality, smallholder traditional irrigation schemes are the worst affected: hence the need arose to undertake also the SIIC. Support t o smallholder t raditionial irrigation i mprovement and rehabilitation i s, t herefore, o ne o f the major components of this RBMSIIP programme. The SIIC component focuses on improving management of water resources and crop husbandry practices in existing smallholder irrigation schemes. This can be achieved, among others, through improvement of natural resources, land and water, during implementation of the rehabilitation and upgradinlg of irrigation schemes.) SIIC is geared at improvement of water management in smallholder irrigation schemes to ensure sustainable use of land and water resources and ultimately yield increase with minimal environmental degradation. Under the auspices of the SIIC both the Scheme Environmental Assessment (SEA) as well as an Environmental Audit (EA) were carried out for the Soko Irrigation Scheme. Among others, both the assessment and the audit were based on the Initial Environmental Assessments (IEE) studies carried out by the Environmental Cell Unit (ECU) of the Irrigation Section of the MAFS. This report presents the findings of the study. The objective of the study was identifying changes that have taken place before/after scheme improvement, assessing and quantifying thereto environmental and social impacts, also duly preparing an environmental and social management plan as well as developing an environmental and social management and monitoring system. According to the ToR the expected outputs of this study are two in one interrelated reports i.e. covering both Environmental Audit (EA) as well as Scheme Environmental Assessment (SEA), analysing e.g. socio-economic, socio-cultural and engineeriig factors in order to provide quantitative information. Furthermore, the report incorporates an assessment of compliance of the scheme's improvement to the Tanzanian policy and legislation framework, as well as the World Bank's relevant environmental safe guard policies (especially on OP 4.01). Different methodologies were employed to carry out the task, including the following: * Desk review of recommended documents * Questionnaire administration to key stakeholders * Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) At different stages of the study the following approaches and analytical tools were applied * Participatory data collection * Key informant interview * Trend analysis * Geographical informationi system Describing the location of the scheme, the study found that the Soko irrigation scheme lies at lowlands of foot of Mt.Kilimanjaro about 30km east of Moshi municipality. Its coordinates are latitude 03028i viii  South and longitude 37030' East, and are at an altitude of about 700m above mean sea level. It comprises the following villages: Chekereni, Kiterini, Mangaria, Utomovu, Mwangaria. Villages aroulid the Soko irrigationi scheme have a total population of 3179 people. The main ethnic groups in the scheme area are Wakahe, Wachaga, Wapare, and other smaller groLips. The majority of these are agriculturalists. Few are livestock keepers. The land use in the adjacent villages of Soko is mainly irrigation as well as rain-fed cultivation and grazing. The source o fw ater for the Soko scheme is Soko springs that forms Soko River and which is later joined by Dehis River to form one Soko River. Mean monthly flows in cumecs are higher in Nov/Dec (0.465 m3/sec) and lowest in March/April/May/JUne/July (0.39, 0.36, 0.35, 0.35, 0.38). Conflicts over water use have been recorded in the study area, especially in the dry season when river flows are at the lowest. With the improvement of irrigation structures and prospects for higher income earnings from irrigated agricultire within reach, there is greater loyalty to the leadership of Water Associations. Since most of the people are irrigators and members of the associations, the latter has greater influenlce beyond irrigation matters. The following are some of the positive effects: * Strengthened existing Water Users Association. -Crop production has improved a great deal * Water availability has improved with more areas obtaining water than used to be in before improvement. * Temporary employment opportunities were created during the construction phase. * Some farmers have attended on farm training and exchange visits to other areas to share experience with other farmers as well as learning new skills. A summary of identified impacts differentiated at up-stream, down-stream and within scheme levels for resulting from Chapter 7 and appropriate mitigation measures are summarized in the Environimental and Social Management Plan as follows: ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS MITIGATION MEASURES Up-stream impacts: Category: Environmental Management: The team wishes to acknowledge with thanks the contributions ofvarious staffmembers ofthe Ministry of * Establishing mechanism for ensurinig Agriculture and Food Security's Directorate of Irrigation that up-stream resource use activities and Technical Services, during the different stages of the e.g. drilling, gravel mining etc don't preparation ofthis report: the Project Coordinator of result into hydro geological affects of Smallholder Irrigation Improvement Project, Mr. Masija; the area. the Head of Environmental Unit Cell, Mr.Simukanga, . Afforestation/reforestation activities in and other staff. The team also extends its appreciation to order to protect the underground the District Officers, in particularly the irrigation course of the Soko spriig. tecinicians who are in charge of the eight schemes, at * Strengthening local community Arumeru, Moshi Rural, Simanjiro, Korogwe, Iringa capacity to monitor and control up- Rural and Mbarali Districts. stream water abstractions. Thanks also go to the scheme management committees, farmers and other stakeholders of the eight schemes and the community members who actively participated in the discussions and helped to provide information that was very useful during the preparation of the Environmental ix  Audit. The team appreciates to more than 50 people who participated in data collection and analysis, especially the facilitators, research assistants, enumerators, water and soil staff, data analysts, etc. Last but not least, oLir appreciations go to ERC's internal staffs that directly or indirectly contributed with enthiusiasimi to the EA reports. - Demographic trend (population changes) - Hydrological changes - Catchment degradation - Water quality Downstream impacts: Category: Environmental Management: - Backwater effects * Effective water management - Poor water efficiency - Poor soil and water quality, e.g. increased salinity - Increased incidences of waterborne diseases Category: Enhancement of social- - Socio-economic economic activities: * Socio-economic activities in the area, namely pastorals and small enterprises business development . Improve health facilities and water supply . Preparing and implementing a participatory land use plan (i.e. PLUM) * Provision of water troughs to downstream users Category: Improving health situation * Monitorinlg of waterborne diseases and damage to downstream ecosystem due to reduced water quantity and quality a Promoting awareness on waterborne diseases, as well as HIV/AIDS, a Improving availability of health, water and sanitation services. Irrigation scheme level impacts Category: Environmental Management - - Hydraulic regime - - Poor water efficiency * Establishinig effective water - - Weed infestation management system, namely: e.g. - - Poor soil and water quality controlled allocation and distribution - - Fertilizer and pesticides use of water, - - Increased incidences of waterborne disease * Establishment of mechanism for - - Drinking water quality and sanitation resolution of conflicts. . Integrated management to minimize the use of saline water a Promoting or providing education on appropriate ir-igation practices e.g. on proper uses of water resources, soil and water conservation, proper uses of agro-chemicals, IPM, ISFM etc. * iu,:.rr,b.li,rLs :Vi. ,lif;lai,. x  * Establishiing enforcemenit mechanismiis on abstraction rights, Category: Improving health situation * Promoting awareness on waterborne diseases, as well as HIV/AIDS. * Iriprovinig availability of healthi, water and sanitation services Category: Revisiting engineering designs and/or construction stages * Construction of bridge crossings for livestock * Re-filling up ofthe borrow pits. * -Supply proper drainage slope . Field service roads and crossings for easy access of harvests and services * Construction of cattle troughs The monitoring program comprises the following attributes: water quality, groundwater, soil conservation, biodiversity, crop diseases, afforestation, socio-economic and health indicators Additionally, the study main conclusions and recommendations are: In conclusion, it was found that the location of the scheme enhances sustainability of the scheme. This is because the scheme is located near a rapidly growing minor township of Chekereni, as well as the highway junction of Moshi -Mombasa -Tanga and Dar-es Salaam all of which provide mucIh trading opportLinities. However, the short distance to the scheme itself (of about 4 km) is very rough, thence Lindermining all that favourable situation mentioned above. In order to minimize water and landuse conflicts, stakeholders of Pangani River Basin in general should work together as partners to improve production and sustainable development of the watershed management and the Soko's sustainable development. xl  1. BACKGROUND 1.1 INTRODUCTION The Governmenit of Tanzania, through the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security ( MA FS), has undertaken various initiatives to improve the agriculture sector in the country. One of these initiatives is the River Basin Management and Smaliholder Irrigation Improvement Project (RBMSIIP). The Smaliholder Irrigation Improvement Component (SIIC) is included within the scope of RBMSIIP. RBMSIIP was developed in response to a water shortage crisis prevalent in many parts of the country. Water demands often exceed available resources; this is especially true in the Pangani and Rufiji basins. Support to smallholder traditional irrigation improvement and rehabilitation is one of the major components of this project. SlIC focuses on improving the management of water resources and crop husbandry practices in existing smallholder irrigation schemes. This is achieved through, among other things, the improvement of natural resources (land and water) during implementation of the rehabilitation and upgrading of irrigation schemes. The SIIC undertaking supports the objectives of the National Irrigation Development Plan (NIDP) that was formulated and adopted in 1994. The plan includes a management and decision-making framework that is based on the comprehensive ranking of schemes within each management unit (river or drainage basin). Under NIDP the order of priority for irrigation development is as follows: * Improvement/rehabilitation of Traditional Smallholder Irrigation Schemes: * Water Harvesting Technology; * Opening of New Smaliholder Schemes; * Large Scale Irrigation Schemes for Private Sector. SIIC focuses on the improvement of water management in smallholder irrigation schemes to ensure the sustainable use of land and water resources. Ultimately, SIIC aims to facilitate increases in crop yields while minimizing environmental degradation. According to World Bank guidelines, the irrigation schemes in the Rufiji and Pangani basins are classified as Category B. Under this category, no major adverse environmental impacts are permitted and mitigation measures must be incorporated into the scheme design, implementation and operation. Under the auspices of the SIIC, a feasibility study was carried out that resulted in the preparation of the Project Implementation Plan for 1996/97 - 2001/02. This plan, produced in October 1996, contains an assessment of enviroinenital issues together with proposed environinental mitigation measures. Under World Bank advisement, the Environmental Cell Unit (ECU) of the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security conducted an Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) of the irrigation schemes. The IEEs were u sed as the basis for t he S cheme Improvement A ssessment Stidies. T he c onsultants, i n collaboration with ECU, have been charged to conduct environmental audits in seven Category B sites: Ruanda Majenje, Igomelo, Mangalali, Nyamahana, Soko, Kambi ya Tanga, and Mahenge. An additional site, Lemkuna, only required the development of an Environmental and Social Management Plan. This report is focused on presenting the findings of the environmental audit that was conducted for the Soko Irrigation Scheme. This report draws heavily on intensive field observations by the study team. Discussions were held with farmers and other local people, village and district officials, and project staff. A review of various existing documents was also conducted in the preparation of this report. I  1.2 UNDERSTANDING OF THE STUDY 1.2.1 Objective of the Study The objective of the study is to get a better understanding of the present environmental conditions and relevant i mpact a reas (environimental a Lidit) within the scheme. Increased a wareness will allow for improved monitorinig of both negative and positive changes over time and will assist in the formulatioll of niore effective mitigation measures. The environmental audit will also be the basis for the preparation of an environmental and social management plan and monitorinlg system. Specifically, the study will undertake the following: * Assess and quantify baseline environmental and social conditions * Assess and quantify environmental and social impacts * Conduct environmental audits in order to comply with existing Government of Tanzania and World Bank environmental and safeguard policies * Prepare an environmental and social management plan * Develop an environmental and social management and monitoring systeim * Conduct public consultations 1.3 STRATEGIC APPROACH The consultant's environmental audit of the Soko irrigation scheme was characterized by three approaches: ecosystem, farming system and participatory. The basic approach of the stLidy is illustrated in Figure 1-1. 1.3.1 Ecosystem Approach In view of the fact that the project activities are wholly based in a rural area, potential conflicts between the project and the e nvironment are likely to arise. Thus, i ssues pertaining t o the use of natural resources (e.g. livestock grazing, agriculture, irrigation, water source protection, agroforestry, etc.) have to be studied. In applying the ecosystem approach, the consultant not only focused on the Soko irrigationi scheme bLit also on all the ecosystems upstream and down stream that impact the environmental and social characteristics of the area. To accomplish this, the study sought an understanding of all activities taking place within the irrigation scheme's water catchment area. River pollution, sedimentation, flash floods, deforestation, destabilization of riverbanks, erosion, salinity, land degradation, and waterborne diseases (among others) are all contributing to degradation of the catchment area. In suggesting mitigation measures, sustainable practices for the use of water and land resources must be adopted to prevent and control environimenltal and social problems. 1.3.2 Farming System Approach Oii the irrigation scheme level, a farming system approach was used to describe and analyse environmenital and socio-economic conditions. Issues related to soil contamination, water pollution, the use and dangers of pesticides and fertilizers, health, and others have been identified. It is clear that the irr igation activities will traiisform village life and the whole farming system in the Soko area. The success of the proposed mitigating measures will, therefore, depend on commull1ty involvement, improvement of the socio-ecoiiomic situation, capacity building, and proper upgrading, maintenance and operation of the irrigation infrastructure. The latter should take into account the local environment as well as the prevailing institutional, economic and social conditions. 1.3.3 Participatory Approach A participatory approach was adopted in preparation for the environmental audit. This entailed seeking informationi/experience from st akeholders (i.e. farmers, district a nd regional o fficers, R BMSIIP a nd other institutions who have been involved in the project). In order to ensure effective participation and 2  cooperation it was necessary to inform stakeholders prior to the aLidit of the environmental and socio- economic problems to be addressed. Their inputs have contributed to the development of more realistic and appropriate mitigation measures. 3  Figurel-1 BASIC APPROACH TO THE STUDY Mitigation Measuresnsu ( pstream ( Dwstra )1 rrOn fr Focusgrus ) nv ronmI ater qualEin, sonal""Soia V ...............economic Ilmnpacts Vsocio economic , Environmental & Social Management Plan r F Monitoring system 4  1.4 METHODOLOGY The methodology follows Tanzanian policy and legislation and the World Bank's policies on environmental assessment (OP/BP 4.01 and related policies and guidance documents). Available reference documnents were reviewed for pur1poses of identifying pertinent environmental and social Issues. Information was obtained on the Soko irrigation scheme before and after construction as well as during operation. Several meetings were held with SIIP project staff In particular, the ECU team, which was involved in the Scheme Environmental Assessment, was consulted to discuss background and potential issues. Subsequently, a ten-day field mission was conducted in August by the study team and members of ECU. The team was used to: 1) complete further fieldwork at various sites in the Soko irrigation scheme, 2) collect additional information, 3) work with the irrigation scheme management team, and 4) to liaise with the various stakeholders includinig the district officials. During the field visits, the Public Consultation and Disclosure Plan for disseminating the results of the Draft Environmental Audit were developed with the ECU staff. 1.4.1 Consultation Public c onsultations t ook place i n two phases. The first phase t ook place d uring the E nvironmental Audit (EA) preparation process. This initial stage allowed for the identification of the key environmental issues and involved the gathering of information on stakeholder concerns and views of potential environmental and social impacts. During the secondly phase, consultations allowed stakeholders to review findings and give their comniiients. 1.4.2 Analytical Tools The followiiig methodologies were applied in the process of the study: * Participatory data collection * Key informant interviews * Socio-economic and environmental analysis * Trend analysis of river flow and rainfall * Water and soil quality analysis * Geographical information systems (GIS) Participatory Data Collection Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) involves problem analysis, ranking, proposal planning, role assigning and timing. The role playing consisted of a facilitator who played the role of an advisor on the d ifferent matters raised d uring the workshop ( those which t he team was not i nformed a bout or aware of). In the final analysis, a Logical Framework Approach workshop (also known as ZOPP) produced the Environmental Action Plan for the irrigation scheme. Key Informant Interview In addition to group discussions, information was also obtained from key informants. These were generally staff from the Zonal Irrigation Office (ZIO), the District Executive Director (DED), farmers of the Igomelo scheme, village officials (including village leaders), and others (agriculture and irrigationi officers who are residents in the community). Any inconisistenit information was cross- checked to ensure accLiracy. Various officials conducted the crosschecking of inforniatioii while members of the study team facilitated the group discussiolIs. 5  Socio economic and Environmental Analysis A total of 93 household questionnaire (sample size) have been administered using the random sampling method. This represents.20 Percent of households of the study area (upstream, down stream and scheme level) 80 percent approximately (80 questionnaires) of selected sample size has been administered at Soko village (scheme level), where as 10 percent (10 questioninaires) has been administered at Kiterini village (upstream village) and 10 percent (10 questionnaires) has been administered at Mwangaria village (downstream village). Quantitative data reiating to the socio-economic and environmental conditions of the scheme was collected and analysed using Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS ) software. Trend Analysis of River Flow and Rainfall An investigation was conducted upstream and downstream on rivers that feed the scheme. Both statistical and visual interpretations of variability analysis were applied. To further reveal any existence of severe abstraction or flow regime changes, variability analysis was done month to month. Any possible causes for the change in the flow regime were quantified. In this regard, annual rainfall variability for stations in or around the study area was noted. Three approaches were followed to tackle the impacts problem: * Visual interpretation - Understanding and interpreting the annual time series and percent deviation time series from the annual mean. * Testing randomness on the annual and monthly time series data - This test indicates that if the null hypothesis tested for randomness is accepted, no flow regime change prevails in the record; otherwise, it shows the flow regime is changed or there is a likely impact on the river upstream or downstream. * Testing of breaks - At times a break or jump may be observed in the time series of flow. If, for example, a huge volume of water is suddenly diverted to an irrigation area, segments before and after the diversion can have different means. Subsequent sections provide scheme level variability analysis and interpretation of the results for both flow and rainfall. The flow and rainfall data were collected from various sources. Rainfall data were collected partly from Tanzania Meteorology Agency (TMA) and partly from the Ministry of Water and Livestock Development (MWL). Flow data were partly collected from the Ministry of Water and Livestock (MWL) and partly from previous reports. Water and Soil Analysis Water and soil samples were analysed at the laboratory of the Department of Environmental Engineering, University College of Lands and Architectural Studies (UCLAS) and Mlingano Soil Laboratory. Procedures and analysis were done according to the Internationial Standards of Water and Soil Analysis. Geographical Information System (GIS) Overlay maps and GIS were used to analyse sensitive/significant/relevanit features of the irrigation scheme area. Attributes and features that were mapped and analysed included water bodies, land use patterns, vegetation cover, and cultural structures. The technique involved the physical overlaying of individual topographic maps to provide a composite pictire of the overall environmental and social situation. Usiiig ArcView 3. 1, analysis was carried out to liik spatial and noni-spatial data. 6  1.5 LIMITATIONS Data quantification proved a difficult exercise due to the following reasons: (i) There was insufficienit baseline data related to environmental and socio-economilic parameters. (ii) Updated meteorological and hydrological data were not available. 7  2. BASELINE CONDITIONS OF THE IRRIGATION SCHEME AREA 2.1 THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 2.1.1 Location The Soko irrigation scheme is located in Kahe ward, Vunjo division in Moshi Rural district of Kilimanjaro region it is located about 30 Km south east of Moshi Municipality and about 4 Km south west of Chekereni village along the Moshi-Dar-es Salaam highway. It lies at latitude 03 28' South and longitude 37 30' East. Soko scheme is situated at an altitude of approximately 700m above sea level. 8  Fig 2-1: Soko irrigation scheme: Location map 3Ocoo 0sssooo 340000 _ 4 5000 i 0 > -vA/r \(t l+ e0_ 0 + ;