Land use impact report

DRAFT LAND USE IMPACT ASSESSMENT Prepared for: chemin des Vergers 1208 Geneva Switzerland Prepared by: Coastal & Environmental Services GRAHAMSTOWN P.O Box 934 Grahamstown, 6140 046 622 2364 Also in East London www.cesnet.co.za October 2009 Volume 2: ESHIA Specialist Volume –Land-use Impact Assessment This report should be cited as: Hawley G., Avis T, Bekker M Conservation Support Services and Coastal & Environmental Services, October 2009 Sugarcane to Ethanol project, Sierra Leone: Land-use Impact Assessment, Coastal & Environmental Services, East London in South Africa Coastal & Environmental Services Addax Bioenergy Volume 2: ESHIA Specialist Volume –Land-use Impact Assessment DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE Land use Assessment Impact I Greer Leigh Hawley declare that I am an independent consultant and have no business, financial, personal or other interest in the proposed sugarcane to ethanol project in Sierra Leone, application or appeal in respect of which I was appointed other than fair remuneration for work performed in connection with the activity, application or appeal There are no circumstances that compromise the objectivity of my performing such work Land use Assessment Impact I Anthony Avis declare that I am an independent consultant and have no business, financial, personal or other interest in the proposed sugarcane to ethanol project in Sierra Leone, application or appeal in respect of which I was appointed other than fair remuneration for work performed in connection with the activity, application or appeal There are no circumstances that compromise the objectivity of my performing such work Coastal & Environmental Services Addax Bioenergy Volume 2: ESHIA Specialist Volume –Land-use Impact Assessment EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Addax Bioenergy, a division of the Swiss-based energy corporation Addax & Oryx Group (AOG), intends to develop a greenfield integrated agricultural and renewable energy project in Sierra Leone to produce fuel ethanol and power The project will consist of a sugarcane plantation, ethanol distillery and biomass power plant and related infrastructure It will produce up to 90,000 m3 of ethanol per annum, primarily for export to the EU market and about 100,000 MWh of renewable power per annum which will be fed into the national grid The project is embedded in the policy framework of both the European Union and Sierra Leone The project development area is located approximately 15 km west of the town of Makeni in the Makari-Gbanti Chiefdom of the Bombali District, Northern Province of Sierra Leone The surveyed area is a large, gently undulating plain limited to the north by the Lunsar-Makeni highway and to the south by the Seli/Rokel River The factory feedstock will consist of sugar cane and cassava Over 90% of the sugarcane requirements will be sourced from the company plantation, the balance and most of the cassava will be purchased from local and regional outgrowers The project will be developed in an area covering about 15,500 hectares, including: A total planted area of 12,500ha, consisting of an annual harvested area at full development of 10,500ha and with 2,000ha lying fallow every year for a rest period An area of 1,000ha will be used for factory, residential areas and road and irrigation infrastructure The sugar cane season is expected to last about 200 days and the factory operating period will be extended into the cane off-season through the use of cassava as an alternative feedstock supply The sugarcane estates will require partial irrigation during the dry season The factory, distillery and the sugarcane estates irrigation system will be powered by the factory’s own power-plant which will be fuelled with cane residues (bagasse and trash), plus biogas produced by the anaerobic digestion of the fermentation effluent and vinasse (wastewaters) The power-plant will be designed to generate approximately 30 MW of power Project size: Plantation size Processing capacity Ethanol output Excess power Workforce 12,500 hectares sugar cane 900,000 tons of cane per annum 90,000 m3 per annum 15 MW ± 4000 direct jobs Timing: Construction start First harvest Full capacity 2010 2012 2015 The layout design of the sugar cane study areas (Phase study area) have been spread out over a large area in order to compensate for cultivation and movement of communities in between the estate Apart from avoiding physical displacement the Addax land selection strategy is based on avoiding cultivating the lower lying swamp land currently used for rice production The Land Use assessment was based on a number of information sources Land use mapping was conducted by digitising aerial photographs of a 46 000 hectare area Using GIS, land area for each land use could be described and calculated In addition, the Social Impact Assessment (SIA, 2009) and Household census (2008) was used as reference material Coastal & Environmental Services i Addax Bioenergy Volume 2: ESHIA Specialist Volume –Land-use Impact Assessment The following two uncertainties are important: The land calculations are based on the number of people from the census data and number of people surveyed in the SIA, and average household numbers based on SIA data gathered on site (i.e 9.9 people per household) The methodology involved digitising aerial photographs to define land use, which was substantiated by a field survey of selected areas for ground-truthing As not all areas were visited, the calculated area for each land-use category has a small margin of error of about 10% It is apparent that cultivation of land has been practiced for a number of generations, due to evidence of extensive land working and land scars (slow recovery of cultivated land) Areas within the study used to be cultivated by British-America Tobacco plantations The following main land-use categories linked to livelihoods have been identified through field observation: • • • • • • • • Villages Fruit trees (Citrus, Mangos etc, around villages) Palm plantations Cultivated lands: cassava crops, not in Bolilands but uplands Rice cultivation in Bolilands Natural vegetation cover which includes: Elephant grass (Pennisetum purpureum), Riparian and Terrestrial forest Charcoal: Lophira (savannah) Woodland and Forest harvesting (fruit and wood collecting) Roads In relation to the 46 000 hectares of studied area, there is approximately 23 500 hectares of arable land Using the aerial photos, it is not entirely possible to separate cultivated, fallow or idle lands due to the burning carried out from as early as December through to April The second most extensive vegetation type is the Lophira woodlands, covering almost 19,000 hectares These woodlands are an important source of off-season income, through charcoal production The values acquired for Addax’s needs were derived from the land-use categories and areas derived from the land-use map It is important to note that the calculation of land required for rural community needs does not necessarily satisfy food security, as yields are limited by lack of resources The land that Addax initially demarcated for assessment (the Phase study area) totalled 12,500ha However, an area of 1,936ha (say 2,000ha – 16%) was deducted from this land to accommodate for ecological sensitivity, drainage areas and buffer areas (See Specialist Report 1) Thus, the net amount of land available to Addax for Phase is ±10,500ha, made up of the land use categories presented in the table below An additional 2,000ha (plus 16% for buffers = 2,320ha) is still required to achieve the planted area target of 12,500ha To be cautious, CES have assumed that this land will come from the Bolilands The land use analysis therefore reveals that there is adequate land available for both Addax and the local community who subsist off the land This is particularly important with regards to the Bolilands, where rice as a cash crop is grown The only deficit calculated in this scenario were the cultivated lands (3ha) and Palm plantation (8ha), which is considered insignificant A small area of Boliland and Elephant grassland is still available for agriculture and the Smallholder and Outgrower development program If the farmer support program proves successful it is conceivable that food security in and around the estate will improve No risk to charcoal livelihood strategy has been detected Controlled woodlots and substitute alien tree species may result in enhance conservation of Lophira (savanna woodlands) Coastal & Environmental Services ii Addax Bioenergy Volume 2: ESHIA Specialist Volume –Land-use Impact Assessment Area (ha) Cultivated lands (other than Bolilands) Palms (indigenous and plantation) Water Elephant grassland Bolilands Subtotal of arable land Lophira (savannah) woodland Totals Rural community minimum required land Total required to meet all needs Total area available Area remaining 40 43 40 -3 720 4,565+ 2,320 =6885 1125 125 1120 1133 125 1840 1125 374 2919 -8 249 1,079 12,900 19,785 20,600 815 7,615 14500 22,926 25,058 2,132 5,269 12,885 10,000 24,500 15,269 38,195 18,562 43,620 3,293 5,425 Addax needs: The following impacts as a result of the Addax Bioenergy project in the context of land used within the Phase land selection project area were identified and assessed: Issue 1: Reduced food crop yields Impact 1.1: Reduced soil fertility due to soils not being allowed to rest Impact 1.2: Reduction of land available for rotational cultivation could reduce crop yields Issue 2: Displacement: clearing virgin land for small scale farming due to Addax displacement Impact 2.1: Community clearing of limited pockets of Savannah woodlands Impact 2.2: Community clearing of remaining terrestrial forest Impact 2.3: Community disturbance of wetland and riparian zones Issue 3: Loss of land Impact 3.1: Available for community utilisation: cultivation, charcoal and palm oil Impact 3.2: Natural vegetation: biodiversity Impact 3.3: Loss of important resource plants (grass for thatching) Issue 4: Conflict of land use management between Addax and surrounding landowners/Farmers Impact 4.1: Burning of entire site annually, as is traditionally practiced will result in a conflict of land use management, since sugar cane should not be burned Issue 5: Long term food security Impact 5.1: Too much land planted to sugar-cane and too little to food crops will result in food shortages in the area The most significant impacts of the Addax Bioenergy project include: • Reduction of land available for rotational cultivation that could reduce crop yields in the absence of the Addax Smallholder and Outgrower program or other support programs • Potential community-clearing of off-site terrestrial Forest and other ecologically sensitive areas • Loss of important available land utilised for livelihoods (cultivation, charcoal and palm oil production) The study has estimated reserves for community cultivation and charcoal harvesting for the study area of 46,000 hectares as 14,500 and 10,000 hectares respectively The estimates of land currently planted to agricultural crops and Lophira woodlands used for charcoal were used to determine a land “reserve” for continued livelihood strategies, which does not equate to food security This exercise has demonstrated that there is sufficient “land reserve” for local people, and enough land for Addax to plant 12,500ha to sugar cane Coastal & Environmental Services iii Addax Bioenergy Volume 2: ESHIA Specialist Volume –Land-use Impact Assessment Although the Addax Bioenergy project presents some risks to local land users and food security, this risk is considered low due to the following: • • • • • Addax will as far as possible avoid cultivating the lower lying swamps currently used for rice production, but rather develop the middle and upper slopes and so called uplands which are less utilized by local communities The implementation of a Smallholder and Outgrower development program The economic stimulation (including jobs) to the local agricultural economy if successful The cautious and conservative approach adopted in this study, whereby sufficient land to meet existing needs is guaranteed (commercial cane production must not exceed the values calculated in Section 4.3.3) The monitoring requirements It is also important to emphasise that the number of people in the affected area was extremely difficult to quantify In addition, the direct impact on each village through loss of agricultural land was not possible as the location of the Addax Phase planting areas and boundaries of village land owners has not yet been established These need to be verified and the principles of this report applied before activities are started The following critical recommendations are required to mitigate impact associated with land use and livelihoods: The development of a comprehensive Resettlement Action Plan, in accordance with the framework set out in the RPF (Specialist Report 6) and in compliance with IFC PS The development of a Smallholder and Outgrower Program, in accordance with the concepts and guiding principles presented in this report The implementation of a phased approach for the expansion of the estate, which would consider each areas to be planted in more detail before it is transformed The incorporation of all mitigation strategies and recommendations presented in this study, by incorporation into either the Smallholder and Outgrower Program Management Plan, the Social Management Plan, the Resettlement Action Plan or the Estate Management Plan, as appropriate The development of guidelines for the monitoring of food security and livelihoods, which need to be maintained at all costs Avoiding leasing the lower lying land currently used for rice production, but rather develop the middle and upper slopes of the Bolilands Coastal & Environmental Services iv Addax Bioenergy Volume 2: ESHIA Specialist Volume –Land-use Impact Assessment TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 OVERALL PROJECT DESCRIPTION THE STUDY AREA IMPLICATIONS OF BIOFUEL PROJECTS FOR FOOD SECURITY AND LIVELIHOOD STRATEGY THE ADDAX RESPONSE TO FOOD SECURITY – THE SMALLHOLDER AND OUTGROWER DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME 1.4.1 Introduction 1.4.2 Development of SHOG 1.4.3 Smallholder and community development 10 1.4.4 Commercial Outgrower Development 11 1.4.5 Social benefits 14 1.4.6 Challenges and threats 15 1.5 TERMS OF REFERENCE 16 1.6 STRUCTURE OF THIS REPORT 16 1.7 THE STUDY TEAM 17 METHODOLOGY 18 2.1 INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS 18 2.2 INFORMATION GATHERING AND MAP ANALYSIS 20 2.2.1 Spatial assessment of arable land 20 2.2.2 Description of current agricultural land-uses 21 2.3 GAPS AND LIMITATIONS 21 2.3.1 Uncertainties and Gaps 21 2.3.2 Limitations 21 DESCRIPTION OF LAND-USE AND STUDY AREA 22 3.1 HISTORICAL/CURRENT LAND-USE 22 3.1.1 Rice cultivation 28 3.1.2 Fruit cultivation 29 3.1.3 Palm plantations 29 3.1.4 Charcoal: Lophira woodlands 30 3.1.5 Livestock land-use practices 30 3.1.6 Soil characteristics 30 PILOT STUDY: SPATIAL ANALYSIS 31 4.1 CULTIVATED AREAS AND POTENTIAL ARABLE LAND 31 4.2 UTILISATION OF OTHER NATURAL VEGETATION TYPES 33 4.3 LAND REQUIREMENTS IN ORDER TO SUSTAIN FOOD SECURITY AND LIVELIHOODS 33 4.4 FUTURE LAND-USE PLANNING 34 4.4.1 Land required for crop farming 34 4.4.2 Land required for Lophira harvesting for charcoal production 35 4.4.3 Assessment of land availability 36 CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES 38 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 CONSERVANCY / RESERVE 38 CATTLE FARMING 38 PALM PLANTATION 39 FOREST REHABILITATION AND CARBON CREDITS 39 NO-GO 39 IMPACT ASSESSMENT 40 6.1 ISSUE 1: REDUCED FOOD CROP YIELDS 40 6.1.1 Impact 1.1: Reduced soil fertility due to soils not being allowed to rest 40 6.1.2 Impact 1.2 Reduction of land available for rotational cultivation could reduce crop yields 41 6.2 ISSUE 2: CLEARING VIRGIN LAND FOR SMALL SCALE FARMING AS A RESULT OF AGRICULTURAL (CROP LANDS) DISPLACEMENT 42 Coastal & Environmental Services v Addax Bioenergy Volume 2: ESHIA Specialist Volume –Land-use Impact Assessment 6.2.1 Impact 2.1 Indirect impact of community clearing late successional stages of Lophira (Savannah) woodlands 42 6.2.2 Impact 2.2 Community clearing of off-site Terrestrial Forest 43 6.2.3 Impact 2.3 Community disturbance of wetland, swamps and riparian zones 44 6.3 ISSUE 3: LOSS OF LAND 45 6.3.1 Impact 3.1 Cumulative loss of land utilised for livelihood strategies such as cultivation, charcoal and palm oil production within the Phase concession area 45 6.3.2 Impact 3.2: Loss of natural vegetation and biodiversity- onsite effects 46 6.3.3 Impact 3.3: Loss of grass resources 46 6.4 ISSUE 4: CONFLICTS FROM DIFFERING LAND USE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES: FIRE MANAGEMENT 47 6.4.1 Impact 4.1: Conflicts from fire management 47 6.5 ISSUE 5: LONG TERM FOOD SECURITY 47 6.5.1 Impact 5.1: Food shortages due to a shift in crop species 47 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 49 7.1 7.2 7.3 SUMMARY 49 CONCLUSIONS 49 RECOMMENDATIONS 50 REFERENCES 51 Coastal & Environmental Services vi Addax Bioenergy Volume 2: ESHIA Specialist Volume –Land-use Impact Assessment LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Layout of field plots (green patches) south west of Makeni and north of the Rokel/Seli River …………………………………………………….……………………………… Figure 2: The Phase project area, which was covered by the aerial survey Phase relates to the original plots identified initially, but adapted as a result of the ESHIA……………… Figure 3: Population densities in Africa……………………………………………………………5 Figure 4: Landscape elements and hydrological regimes along an inland valley toposequence (after: Andriesse and Fresco 1991; adapted, and taken from Windmeijer and Andriesse (1993)……………………………………………………………………………………19 Figure 5: The Phase area, indicating provisional parcels of land to be planted to cane….22 Figure Land uses and vegetation within the 46 000 Phase study area The site is primarily covered with Bolilands and Lophira woodland ………………………………………31 LIST OF TABLES Table Population, density and extrapolated calculations for the number of households affected by Addax Bioenergy in Phase concession area……………………………………………………………………………………………… …25 Table 2: Data from the Social Impact Assessment (Van Vlaenderen, 2009)………….…….25 Table 3: Size of agricultural fields in the study area………………………………………… 27 Table 4: Acreage cultivated for main crops in the study area and their yields………… …27 Table 5: Total area of each land use category identified for this study……………….….….32 Table Area availability within the demarcated Phase study areas as delineated by GIS mapping……………………………………………………………………………………….……33 Table Total area planted to main food crops (Figures from SIA, Household census)….34 Table Area planted annually per household……………………………………………… 35 Table Area planted to each crop annually……………………………………………… 35 Table 10 Total area required to sustain community livelihoods………………………… ….36 Table 11 Comparison of available land, Addax requirements and minimum land required for food security and livelihood strategies It is important to note that the calculation of land required for rural community needs does not necessarily satisfy food security, as yields are limited by lack of resources………………………………………………………………… …37 Table 12: Summary of Issues and impacts identified as a result of the Addax Bioenergy project………………………………………………………………………………………….… 40 Coastal & Environmental Services vii Addax Bioenergy Volume 2: ESHIA Specialist Volume –Land-use Impact Assessment CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 7.1 Summary The limitations of data and mapping in this report must be acknowledged Therefore, this study reports on a scenario based on the data (areas identified for planting sugar cane to date) The methodology can be applied to future land acquisitions, and can be adapted to incorporate decreased land requirements due to increased yields This should be incorporated once the smallholder and outgrower program has been established, so that more accurate figures are applied to the model In addition, ground-truthing of the landuse/vegetation map should be undertaken as the project unfolds, verifying the assumptions used in this study At this stage it is recommended that sufficient land remains available to households to ensure food security based on present agricultural practices This will guarantee that existing food production levels are not reduced Once the merits of the SHOG have been demonstrated (in the form of improved yields of food crops), it is possible that additional land could be planted for biofuel production 7.2 Conclusions Reserves for community cultivation and charcoal harvesting were estimated for the study area of 46,000 hectares as 14,500 and 10,000 hectares respectively However, the agricultural landscape is not limited to the study area, and secondary impacts (positive and negative) are expected In addition, the Addax Bioenergy project will not be operating in isolation from the surrounding community, and could positively influence the community by providing up to 4,000 jobs, providing agricultural support in the form of the smallholder and outgrower program, provide educational programs and most importantly secondary economic activities In the light of dynamic human interactions, accurate prediction of outcomes is difficult and hence a precautionary approach to impact assessment has been adopted The estimates of land currently planted to agricultural crops and Lophira woodlands used for charcoal were used to determine a land “reserve” for continued livelihood strategies, which does not equate to food security This exercise has demonstrated that there is sufficient “land reserve” for local people, and enough land for Addax to plant 12,500ha to sugar cane The Addax Bioenergy project provides a key opportunity to significantly impact the needs of the community Therefore, it is important to factor in the provision of the Addax Bioenergy project as an alternative livelihood in terms of job opportunities for skilled and unskilled labour The negative impacts on land use may be outweighed by a careful land selection process and by the significant financial injection and agricultural support to surrounding small scale farmers The positive impacts are difficult to translate into land-use quantification, but should not be ignored in terms of its impact on land requirements Although the Addax Bioenergy project presents some risks to local land users and food security, this risk is considered low due to the following: • • • • • That Addax will as far as possible avoid cultivating the lower lying swamps currently used for rice production, but rather develop the lower slopes and uplands of the Bolilands which are less utilized by local communities The implementation of a Smallholder and Outgrower development program The economic stimulation including jobs to the local agricultural economy if successful The cautious and conservative approach adopted in this study, whereby sufficient land to meet existing needs is guaranteed (commercial cane production must not exceed the values calculated in Section 4.3.3) The monitoring requirements Coastal & Environmental Services 49 Addax Bioenergy Volume 2: ESHIA Specialist Volume –Land-use Impact Assessment It is also important to emphasise that the number of people in the affected area was extremely difficult to quantify In addition, the direct impact on each village through loss of agricultural land was not possible to determine as the location of the Addax Phase planting areas and boundaries of village land owners has not yet been established This needs to be verified and the principles of this report applied before activities are started 7.3 Recommendations The following critical recommendations are required to mitigate impacts associated with land use and livelihoods: The development of a comprehensive Resettlement Action Plan, in accordance with the framework set out in the RPF (Specialist Report 6) and in compliance with IFC PS The development of a Smallholder and Outgrower Program, in accordance with the concepts and guiding principles presented in this report The implementation of a phased approach for the expansion of the estate, which would consider each areas to be planted in more detail before it is transformed 10 The incorporation of all mitigation strategies and recommendations presented in this study, by incorporation into either the Smallholder and Outgrower Program Management Plan, the Social Management Plan, the Resettlement Action Plan or the Estate Management Plan, as appropriate 11 The development of guidelines for the monitoring of food security and livelihoods, which need to be maintained at all costs 12 Avoiding leasing the lower lying swamps currently used for rice production, but rather develop the lower slopes and uplands of the Bolilands Coastal & Environmental Services 50 Addax Bioenergy Volume 2: ESHIA Specialist Volume –Land-use Impact Assessment REFERENCES Aerial photography provided by Addax Bioenergy Defoer, T; Wopereis M.C.S., Jones, M.P Lançon, F Erenstein O and Gueil R.G (nd) WARDA, Abidjan, Côte d'Ivoire Rice-based production systems for food security and poverty alleviation in sub-Saharan Africa Hawley G., Colloty B Coastal & Environmental Services, April 2009 Sugarcane to Ethanol project, Sierra Leone: Biodiversity and Ecological Impact Assessment, CES, East London in South Africa Jallah, J K.; Mulbah, C K.; Kiazolu, J S.; Frank, K.; Morris, M Z (no date) Efficient fertilizer use for increased crop production: the Liberia experience Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels: http://cgse.epfl.ch/page79931.html Teelbuck JP, Hulman B and Preston TR 1982 Leucaena forage and Elephant Grass as roughage and protein sources in a molasses/urea based diet for fattening Zebu Cattle Tropical Animal Production 7: 241-245 USAID: 118/119 Sierra Leone biodiversity and tropical forest assessment , 2007 Van Vlaenderen, H May 2009 Sugarcane to Ethanol Project, Sierra Leone: Social Impact Assessment, Vaux Le Penil, France Wakatsuki, T (2003) Sustainable intensification and diversification strategies for African ricebased cropping systems Kinki University, Japan Windmeijer PN and Andriesse W 1993 Inland Valleys in West Africa: An agro-ecological characterisation of rice-growing environments International Institute for Land Reclamation and Improvement, Netherlands Coastal & Environmental Services 51 Addax Bioenergy Volume 2: ESHIA Specialist Volume –Land-use Impact Assessment APPENDICES Appendix A (CSS site examples) Lophira Woodland Palms Coastal & Environmental Services 52 Addax Bioenergy Volume 2: ESHIA Specialist Volume –Land-use Impact Assessment Village Forest Terrestrial Forest Coastal & Environmental Services 53 Addax Bioenergy Volume 2: ESHIA Specialist Volume –Land-use Impact Assessment Cultivated lands Bolilands Coastal & Environmental Services 54 Addax Bioenergy Volume 2: ESHIA Specialist Volume –Land-use Impact Assessment Harvested Forest Village Coastal & Environmental Services 55 Addax Bioenergy Volume 2: ESHIA Specialist Volume –Land-use Impact Assessment Elephant Grass Harvested/Burned Lophira Coastal & Environmental Services 56 Addax Bioenergy Volume 2: ESHIA Specialist Volume –Land-use Impact Assessment Riparian Forest Riparian Zone Coastal & Environmental Services 57 Addax Bioenergy Volume 2: ESHIA Specialist Volume –Land-use Impact Assessment Burned Vegetation Woodlands Coastal & Environmental Services 58 Addax Bioenergy Volume 2: ESHIA Specialist Volume –Land-use Impact Assessment Water Coastal & Environmental Services 59 Addax Bioenergy Volume 2: ESHIA Specialist Volume –Land-use Impact Assessment Appendix B Summary of Soil Study: Kamara (January 2009) Soil Series Area(Ha) % of Total Area Map Unit Suitability 12.8 0.12 S1 49.5 Yandugu Series Yandugu-Tarawally Complex 0.47 Restriction to Root Penetration Fertility 1-2 months Nil Good 20.5 0.2 17 S2n,m 0.51 16 High Low/High months 2-4 months Nil Nil Good Fair to poor Nil 1.46 Poor Slight Poor Little Poor Slight Poor Slight Slight Poor Nil N1fl,d 153.5 S3r,n,m months months Lunneh Series 80.3 0.77 S3d,n,m,r Low months Lunac Series 368.4 484.8 3.51 4.62 6a S2n,m S2n,m Low months Gravel and few stones at>20cm Gravel at >10cm depths Soil compaction between 2040cm Nil Low months Nil 30.8 0.29 6b S3r,n,m Moderate Maneh Series 648.3 6.18 Erosion Hazard Nil S1 53.8 Yandudgu Boli Kote Series Droughtiness High Lungi Series Water Retention Capacity S3r,n,m months Low Shallow Phase of Lunac Series Compacted Phase of Lunac Series Slight Surface compaction Gravelly throughout Gravel at >35cm depth Low Maronko Series Sloping Phase of Maronko Serie 48.8 2012 767.5 0.47 19.18 7.31 10 10a months Gravelly from surface months Gravelly from surface S2n,m Lungiya Series Yansa Series Nil Low 1.7 months S3n,m Tinkabella Series 178.7 months Low months Moderate 13.41 months Low 1407 Little Poor Slight Fair S3n,m Little to moderate S3n,m Very poor Little to moderate Poor S3s1,n,m Moderate to severe Low Coastal & Environmental Services Poor 60 Poor Addax Bioenergy Volume 2: ESHIA Specialist Volume –Land-use Impact Assessment Strongly Sloping Phase of Maronko Series 0.25 10b S3s2 1505.8 14.35 11 Low months Gravelly from surface Poor severe Moderate 26.5 months Fair Slight to nil Moderate months Gravel at >30cm Gravel at >15 Gravelly throughout S2n Yainkasa Series Shallow Phase of Yainkasa Series 137.8 1.31 11a S3r,n,m Kolisoko Series 883.5 8.42 12 S3n,m Low months Gbom Series 430.2 4.1 13 S2n Moderate months Tarawally Series 185.7 1.77 14 S3n,m Low months Mixed Bottom Soil Wallie Series 1,006.9 9.6 17 N1fl,d N2r,n,m Low months Sub-Total (All Land Area) Total (Minus Mixed Bottom Soils) Soil Series 10,492.7 9,432.02 Area(Ha) % of Total Area Map Unit Suitability Droughtiness Lungi Series Yandugu Series Yandugu-Tarawally Complex 12.8 49.5 20.5 0.12 0.47 0.2 17 S1 S1 S2n,m Water Retention Capacity High High Low/High Yandudgu Boli Kote Series 53.8 153.5 0.51 1.46 16 N1fl,d S3r,n,m Moderate 1-2 months months 2-4 months 648.3 6.18 S3r,n,m Low Lunneh Series 80.3 0.77 S3d,n,m,r months Low months Lunac Series Shallow Phase of Lunac Series Compacted Phase of Lunac Series 368.4 484.8 30.8 3.51 4.62 0.29 6a 6b S2n,m S2n,m S3r,n,m Low Low Low months months months Tinkabella Series 1407 13.41 S3n,m Low months Lungiya Series 178.7 1.7 S2n,m Moderate months Coastal & Environmental Services 61 Very poor Fair Very poor Slight to nil Little to modearte Slight to nil nil Very poor Restriction to Root Penetration Nil Nil Nil Erosion Hazard Fertility Good Good Fair to poor Nil Nil Nil Poor Slight Poor Little Poor Slight Poor Poor Poor Slight Slight Slight Poor Little Fair Slight months months Maneh Series Gravel at >30cm nil Fair to poor Gravel and few stones at>20cm Gravel at >10cm depths Soil compaction between 2040cm Nil Nil Surface compaction Gravelly throughout Gravel at >35cm Addax Bioenergy Volume 2: ESHIA Specialist Volume –Land-use Impact Assessment Yansa Series 48.8 0.47 S3n,m Low months Maronko Series 2012 19.18 10 S3n,m Low months Sloping Phase of Maronko Series 767.5 7.31 10a S3s1,n,m Low months Strongly Sloping Phase of Maronko Series 26.5 0.25 10b S3s2 Low months Yainkasa Series 1505.8 14.35 11 S2n Moderate months Shallow Phase of Yainkasa Series 137.8 1.31 11a S3r,n,m Moderate months Kolisoko Series 883.5 8.42 12 S3n,m Low months Gbom Series 430.2 4.1 13 S2n Moderate months Tarawally Series 185.7 1.77 14 S3n,m Low months Mixed Bottom Soil Wallie Series 1,006.9 9.6 17 N1fl,d N2r,n,m Low months Sub-Total (All Land Area) Total (Minus Mixed Bottom Soils) depth Nil Gravelly from surface Gravelly from surface Gravelly from surface Gravel at >30cm Gravel at >15 Gravelly throughout Little to moderate Poor Moderate to severe Poor severe Fair Slight to nil Fair to poor Slight to nil Little to moderate Little to modearte Very poor Fair 10,492.7 9,432.02 Coastal & Environmental Services 62 Gravel at >30cm nil Very poor Poor Very poor Slight to nil nil Very poor Addax Bioenergy Volume 2: ESHIA Specialist Volume –Land-use Impact Assessment Coastal & Environmental Services 63 Addax Bioenergy