BIODIVERSITY HOTSPOT Nagawara Tank
	Setting | Threats | Knowledge Individuals | Habitat | Life Scape | Management

 

1.      Name of the Hotspot: Nagawara Tank.

2.      Focal species: 

a.      Plants

Typha angustata, Cyperus haspan, Lemna sp.,

      (List attached)

b.     Mammals:

Three Striped Palm Squirrel

c.       Reptiles:  

Gecko, Rat Snake, Cobra, Checkered Keelback, Russel’s Viper, Skink

(List attached)

d.     Birds:  

Northern Pintail, Northern Shoveller, Garganey, Pochard, Common Teal.

(List attached)

e.      Fishes:  

 (Source Mr. Chandrashekariah & Mr. Rahman)

3.      Coordinating Team: None

4.      Investigating Team: Manjunath P, Pramod Subbarao and Harish Bhat

       Experience/expertise: Naturalists and Researcher

5.      Dates of data collection: 18-01-2004 & 25-01-2004

6.      Process of data collection: Field visits, Interviews.

7.      Sources of information: Knowledgeable Individuals, Experts & Officials

8.      Number of man-days consumed in data collection: 6 Days.

Location:             Nagawara Tank

Bangalore North

Bangalore Urban District

2.      Area (in ha or sq.km.): 43.86 ha.

3.      Latitude/Longitude/Altitude: 

Latitude: 13° 08‘ N

Longitude:77° 43’ E

Altitude:

Temperature: 13°C - 34°C

Rainfall: 380 mm Approx.

4.      Village/Town/Taluk/District:  Nagawara Village, Bangalore Urban District

5.      Maps (kind of map and the scale):

6.      Mode of access (Distance from Railway/Bus station):

Nearest Airports: Bangalore

7.      Facilities to stay closest to the hotspot:  Nil

8.      Tariff (if any) to be paid to visit the Hotspots:  None

9.      Controlling Authorities: Lake Development Authority

10.  Classes of Landscape:  Plain Land & Tank

11.  Water bodies:  Tank

12.  Human populations: No human settlement within the hotspot but there are human settlement at the periphery.

13.  Presence of Scheduled tribes or Nomadic tribes population:  None

14.  Livestock: None.

15.  Irrigation status & Major crops:  Non-existent.

16.  Significant forest produce:  Nil

17.  Quantities recorded at the Range or Divisional Forest Offices:  Nil

18.  Cooperative societies and their transactions: NA.

19.  Significant fresh water fish productions:  NA.

20.  Disposal of fishing rights (Leasing/Auctioning/License): NA.

21.  Significant estuarine & marine fish/shell fish productions: NA.

22.  Number and type of fishing crafts: NA.

23.  Nearest Fishing landing centres: NA.

24.  Availability of fish processing facilities: NA.

25.  Mining and quarrying activities: NA.

26.  Sources & extent of Air and Water pollution: NA.

27.  Prevalence of Human diseases: NA.

28.  Prevalence of Livestock diseases: NA,

29.  Educational institutions: None

30.  Cooperative societies: None

31.  Youth clubs: NA.

32.  Ladies clubs: NA.

33.  Active NGOs: None

Inventory of two kinds of activities affecting the core area as well as zone of influence

Table – 1

Table-2

(For core area, zone of influence)

a.      Preparation of sketch map of the landscape

1.      For zone of influence

2.      For zone of influence

b.     Description of Habitat types

1.      Habitat type:  Tank

2.      Local name (if any):  Nagawara Kere

3.      Approximate total area (ha): 43.86 ha.

4.      Special significance of the habitat type (if any):  Aesthetic & Recreational Value

5.      Management regimes:  Lake Development Authority

6.      Goods and Services provided by the habitat: Recharges Open Wells around the Tank, Provides Good Habitat for Breeding, nesting birds

7.      Bads and Disservices provided by the habitat: Weeds & Urban Pollutants

8.      Significant ecological processes influenced by the habitat type:  NA.

9.      Significant man- induced processes influenced by the habitat: No significant man –induced processes.

10.  Interacting individuals and institutions (Local): No interaction of individuals & institutions.

11.  Activities:  Jogging, Angling, Weed Collection, Hunting of Birds.

12.  Interacting individuals and institutions (External): NA.

13.  Activities: NA.

c.       History of important habitat patches over 10-15/40-50 years

1.      Type and name of the habitat patch:  Aquatic Habitat – Nagawara Tank

2.      Change in

i.                    Area:  Shrunken due to Encroachment

ii.                 Vegetation strata:  Planted

3.      Aquatic habitat change in

i.                    Catchment area:  Shrunken.

ii.                 Aquatic fauna: Depletion in the Fish Species

iii.               Aquatic flora: Invasion of Weeds

4.      Significant ecological processes influencing the habitat patch:  Augmenting Groundwater Level

5.      Significant man induced processes influencing the habitat patch: Treated water pumped into the tank is restoring the avifauna

6.      Productivity of Goods and Services: NA.

7.      Extent of Bads and Disservices: NA.

8.      Reasons for ongoing changes: No ongoing changes.

9.      Gainers:  The Local Contractors and the Government Officials are the gainers when desilting of the pond is undertaken using public money.

10.  Losers:  Nil

11.  Desired changes/Desired future: Retain as Occurring Now

12.  Desired management system:  As Per Lake Development Authority

13.  Suggested component for a feasible management plan for that habitat patch:  NA

(For core area, zone of influence)

a.      Naturally occurring species of significance

1.      Flowering plants:

2.      Insects:

v     Butterfly

3.      Fishes:

4.      Amphibians:

5.  Reptiles:

v     Lizards

v     Snakes

6.      Birds:

7.  Mammals:

b.     Additional information on species of significance

1.      Most common local name of the species (Language):

2.      Scientific name of the species: See the table above.

3.      Habitat favoured:  Tank

4.      Value to local community: Not much use.

5.      Major uses/ill effects:

6.      Value of global relevance (as Rare, Threatened or Endangered):

c.       Inventory of significant varieties of domestic plants/animals:

1.      Local name of Species:  NA.

2.      Scientific name of species: NA.

3.      Local name of variety:  NA.

4.      Language employed: NA.

5.      Distinctive features of the species/varieties: NA.

6.      Value to local community: NA.

7.      Major uses: NA.

8.      Value of global relevance (as rare, threatened or endemic etc.): NA.

d.     History of significant species/varieties

1.      Most common name of the species: NA.

2.      Scientific name: NA.

3.      Most common local name of variety: NA.

4.      Existing management authority: NA.

5.      Fish breeding season: NA.

6.      Fishing methods (Types of nets used): NA.

7.      Existing management authority: NA.

8.      Current level of abundance: NA.

9.      Trend in abundance in last 10-15/40-50 years: NA.

10.  Significant ecological processes influencing the species/varieties: NA.

11.  Significance man induced processes influencing the species/variety: NA.

12.  Reasons for the ongoing change: NA.

13.  Gainers (Internal/External): NA.

14.  Losers (Internal/External): NA.

15.  Desired changes/Desired future: NA.

16.  Desired management system: NA.

17.  Suggested component for a feasible management plan for the species/variety: NA.

(For core area, zone of influence)

a.      Perspectives of others

1.      Desired response options of different members of local or outside communities/institutions/government agencies/industrial or mining undertaking etc. to be recorded):

2.      Significance of management issues and response options:

3.      Management issues pertaining to:                      

a.      Habitat and/or:

b.     Species/variety:

4.      Customary/Administrative:          

Customary:  Nil

Administrative:  Lake Development Authority desilted the tank recently.  Sewage water is being treated and let into the tank.

5.      Since how long the arrangements have been in practice:  One Year

6.      Changes if any in management pattern over last 10-15/40-50 years:  Now taken over by Lake Development Authority

7.      Desired changes/Desired future:  To be maintained as exists

8.      Desired management system:  Lake Development Authority could continue to maintain water level, water quality and protection of birds.

b.     Perspectives of Investigators:  Lake Development Authority should continue to maintain water level, water quality and protection of birds.

c.       Desired and feasible pattern of management that should be promoted in the opinion of the investigators:  De-weeding, proper protection, regulated movements of public and restricting boating at certain places only.

d.     Suggested strategy for promoting these desired patterns of management and the communication needs for the purpose:  To be implemented the above by LDA.

e.      Cultural, religious, recreational, scenic, tourist significance of the hotspot: It harbours many numbers of Birds, visitors come to see & relax.

f.       Ecological evaluation of the hotspot:  To be protected as it harbours more that 40 species of water birds.

g.      Suggested follow up investigations:  Periodical monitoring and inventory of water birds.

h.     Any other suggested follow up:

–       Educate locals about conservation.

–       Take locals into confidence and protect the tank.

–       Organize educational tours to the hotspot.

–       Involve school children in documentation.

–       Periodic census for flora and fauna to be carried out.