GAZETTE NOTICE NO. 16934

the following options • Tree planting by 4,200 primary schools to fast track reforestation initiative; • Improvement of market centres in rehabilitating 210 “jua kali” sheds and 200 hospitals through a beautification initiative of landscaping by plating grass, flowers and trees; • Minimize soil erosion around 200 fish ponds and promote effective use of water in irrigation for improved agriculture productivity in Bura, Hola, Pekera, Tana Delta, Kibwezi, Ahero, West Kano, Bunyala, Mwea and South West Kano; Alternative Options The reforestation of degraded lands option shall study the reforestation technological and land use inputs for the proposed expansion of restoration of the ecosystem that shall facilitate, meet current and future forestry service demands for Kenya. The proponent with the advice of the lead expert has settled on the carbon sequestration of ecosystem restoration for the economic stimulus programme as it was considered to be economical in term of resources and the technological input. The fish ponds will consist of excavations, breaking soil, dumping soil and treading on biodiversity. The potential environmental impact of the fish ponds will be released of stored carbon dioxide (CO2) gas a greenhouse gas from below the ground. The strategic environmental assessment considered the following alternatives carefully. If there is no project: The people living in the Kenya rural areas are amongst the poorest in the country with 62% of the people living below the poverty line thus making the rural area the most poverty stricken f the country. Implementation of sound projects such as the Economic Stimulus Programme that provide clear measurably benefits to the poor communities, opportunities for knowledge exchange and capacity building and natural resource management skills would have a significant impact on the livelihoods and quality of life to the communities involved in this project. Livelihoods are unlikely to occur without Economic Stimulus Programme (ESP). The ESP was initially conceived as an economic project with sustainable livelihoods as its core focus. However, it was redesigned as a carbon project with a focus on environmental management, protection, conservation and development within the framework of enhancing carbon sequestration, reducing poverty in the poor areas through the promotion of income generating activities, training communities to access technology for forest production, markets and carbon financing. THE KENYA GAZETTE 7th January, 2011 The alternative of designing environmental project was considered and rejected in view of the extreme poverty and social issues in poor communities. Other alternatives discussed included (a) having a larger number of components, (b) a rural village enterprise managed by Community Development Fund (CDF) or all of its partners. The alternative selected reduced the complexity of the project. The Arid Lands Resources Management Project that has been tried and tested as being successful in the delivery of resources to communities was selected. The lessons learnt will assist with the carbon project aimed at reforestation, sustainable development in Kenyan degraded lands. The ESP is in line with the priorities of Vision 2030 and National Climate Change Response Strategy. On its own, the Government of Kenya would not be able to meet the targets of this vision thereby the input of development partners and approach to mobilizing resources from carbon markets among other development partners like the World Bank, African Development Bank, French Development Agency, Swedish Development Co-operation would provide a higher probability of achieving the goals of the vision for the rural areas. The focus on environmental impacts and the mitigation measures that are inbuilt in ESP provide strong linkages between environmental integrity and the reduction of poverty in rural areas. The ESP support would provide for greater monitoring, supervision and evaluation for proposed development activities. No environmental governance component: The original project was conceived without a focus on environmental governance issues of the Kenyan rural areas. Lack of environmental governance would have meant that the project activities would ignore compliance to requirements of sustainable use in relevant legislation and in particular environmental guidelines, procedures, practices safeguards, rules and regulations. Analysis of alternative construction material and technology: 4,200 primary schools are involved in the tree planting initiative. Most of the planting will be done in degraded lands within and or around schools. Some schools for example Funyula, Naivasha and Ahero have taken the tree planting initiative with excitement and doing much more with their own internal resources to sustain the process. Other project sites with tree planting, landscaping, beautification include; hospitals, market centres and around fish ponds. However, inadequate seedlings impact tree planting and not easy to obtain indigenous species. Affected parties consulted Athi-River Primary School, DEO, DFO; Naivasha and Laikipia Primary schools, DEO, DFO; Ahero and Bondo Primary schools, DEO, DFO; Nambale and Funyula Primary schools; DEO, DFO, Fisheries Local Government; Kitui and Mwingi Primary schools, DEO, DFO; Garissa Primary School, DEO, DFO; Nyeri and Murang’a Primary schools, DEO, DFO; Kwale and Kilifi Primary schools, DEO, DFO. Affected areas: (a) Existing Indigenous Forest- Expansion and rehabilitation of market centres with jua kali sheds, hospital facilities and centres of higher learning may lead to clearing of some the existing indigenous forest affecting the rich biodiversity. (b) Rivers and wetlands_ (i) construction of fish ponds along the lake shores or river banks may affect the wetland areas through pollution that may contaminate water and make it unsafe for domestic use. (ii) Encroachment in the wetland supporting the river is foreseen, then the wetlands will be drained and the lake shores and river banks end affected that may result into deteriorationof the ecosystem. Anticipated impacts and mitigation measures. Potential Impacts Mitigation Measures Soil erosion and compaction, increased dam sediments, obstruction of natural water channels • Develop soil erosion management measures • Limit the circulation of heavy machinery to minimal areas. • Locate access roads perpendicularly or diagonally to the slope rather than along steep slopes. Potential Impacts Mitigation Measures • At the end of drilling works, level off the soils and facilitate plant regeneration. • Plan work in sections to avoid opening up areas that are left undeveloped. Increased waste deposits and blockage of open sewers, decreased oxygen levels in the fish ponds • Encourage separate treatment for industrial and domestic effluent. • Conduct awareness on need of appropriate waste management practices including reduction, reuse, recycle, segregation, pre-treatment among others • Avoid open damping of solid waste on wind ward side of the fish ponds. • Construction of waste screens and sediment traps. Reduced amount of water flow downstream, increased irrigation operations, reduced water quality including, contamination with heavy metals and nutrients, diversion of water • Observe the water Act, 2007, and the 30% water rights for downstream users. • Use of metering methods including v- notches and sluices. • Construction of sediment traps. • Keep natural water channels free from obstruction. • Conduct water quality monitoring at river recharge points. • Incorporate biological treatment methods in fish ponds to improve water quality. • Develop monitoring strategies and penalties for individuals diverting water from main sources. Avoid interference with animals drinking points, loss of vegetation cover/Deforestation, destruction of indigenous tree species in the forest, perturbation of terrestrial, aquatic and avian wildlife, increase in poaching due to non- resident workers, derangement of terrestrial, aquatic and avian wildlife (competition for food and water resources) • Avoid constructing at animals water drinking points. • Avoid selecting sites sheltering or frequented by wildlife. • Preserve migration corridors for wild and domestic animals. • All trees uprooted to pave way for weir and access construction should be replanted. • Avoid interference with wildlife breeding sites. • Control introduction of invasive plants and animal species in forest, sewage ponds and water bodies. • Promote the development of community nurseries. • Environmental conservation measures should be instituted. Degradation of air quality and ambient noise due to excavations operations, degradation of air quality by vehicles emissions and dust during constructions, interference with domestic and wildlife due to excessive and destructive noise evolution of odours and green house gases from stagnant water • Operate equipment with air pollution control systems. • Insulate noisy machines when working near animal habitats. • Maintain vehicles and machinery in good condition in order minimize gas emissions and noise. • Ensure continuous maintenance of sewage treatment plant and develop appropriate sludge handling procedures. • Avoid construction of fish ponds on windward side to avoid spread of dust emissions, odours. Migration communicable diseases, resources competition, loss of • Conduct continuous public awareness and encourage participation throughout the project span to discuss contentious 7th January, 2011 THE KENYA GAZETTE 51 Potential Impacts Mitigation Measures cultural heritage, destruction of private property including farm produce and other investments, loss of land, gender equity issues including compensation of project affected persons. • Communicate on project progress to community members and alert on sections to be developed to reduce destruction and interference. • Accord local community employment and business opportunity as a priority. • Implement HIV/AIDS and other communicable diseases programmes in conjunction with line ministries. • Establish lobour camps at reasonable distance from villages. • Where possible offer women equal employment opportunities to men. • Develop secondary uses of fish farming to generate income. Injuries and accidents to workers, communicable diseases, suffocation, poisoning, floods, disease vectors, cultivation along fish ponds and water supply lines • Complying with work place legal requirements, provision of protective professional equipment. • Employment of competent work force, instituting safety drills, disaster preparedness and management programmes. • Develop appropriate structures that meet recommended standards. • Control disease rectors using appropriate methods. • Conduct education and awareness on effects of cultivating using sewage water, inference with water supply etc. The full report of the proposed project is available for inspection during working hours at: (a) Director-General, the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA), Popo Road, off Mombasa Road, P.O. Box 67839–00200, Nairobi. (b) Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Mineral Resources, N.H.I.F. Community, P.O. Box 30521, Nairobi. (c) Provincial Environment Committee, c/o Provincial Director of Environment, Nairobi Province. (d) Provincial Environment Committee, c/o Provincial Director of Environment, Central Province. (e) Provincial Environment Committee, c/o Provincial Director of Environment, Eastern Province. (f) Provincial Environment Committee, c/o Provincial Director of Environment, North Eastern Province. (g) Provincial Environment Committee, c/o Provincial Director of Environment, Rift Valley Province. (h) Provincial Environment Committee, c/o Provincial Director of Environment, Western Province. (i) Provincial Environment Committee, c/o Provincial Director of Environment, Coast Province. (j) Provincial Environment Committee, c/o Provincial Director of Environment, Nyanza Province. The National Environment Management Authority invites members of the public to submit oral or written comments within sixty (60) days from the date of publication of this notice to the Director- General, NEMA, to assist the Authority in the approval process of the project. B. M. LANGWEN, for Director-General, National Environment Management Authority.