As is a requirement by law, CNOOC Uganda Limited undertook an Environment and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) baseline survey for the planned oil and gas development and production project in the Kingfisher Field Development Area (KFDA). The ESIA was aligned with the IFC Performance Standard 6 (IFC 2019) which prioritises the protection and conservation of biodiversity. The standard requires that ‘the risks and impacts identification process consider relevant threats to biodiversity and ecosystem services especially focusing on habitat loss, degradation and fragmentation, invasive alien species, overexploitation, hydrological changes, nutrient loading, and pollution’. To achieve this, the standard outlines ideal strategies for management of impacts on biodiversity for both modified and natural habitats including critical habitats. Critical habitats represent areas with the high biodiversity value including habitat of significant importance to Critically Endangered and/or Endangered species (Stefan et al, 2013). The standard recommends avoidance where critical habitats may be affected unless specific criteria (outlined in Guidance Note 17 of the standard) are demonstrated. These include an exhaustive analysis of alternatives; a requirement that the project does not degrade values for which critical habitat status was designated and a robust monitoring program, among others. As such, the ESIA baseline survey sought to determine presence or absence of valued species to assess whether or not the project area of influence constitutes a critical habitat.

According to IFC (2012) performance standard 6 paragraph 16, a ‘Critical habitat’ is an area with high biodiversity value, and has to fall under the following criterion;

1. Habitat of significant importance to Critically Endangered and/or Endangered species
2. Habitat of significant importance to endemic and/or restricted-range species
3. Habitat supporting globally significant concentrations of migratory species and/or congregatory species
4. Highly threatened and/or unique ecosystems
5. Areas associated with key evolutionary processes.

The KFDA was found to have areas which qualify to be classified as critical habitats basing on IFC performance standard 6 paragraph 16 criterion (i) and (iv), which triggered an analysis to identify possible triggers of critical habitat within the landscape surrounding the KFDA. The analysis identified three critical species namely; Common chimpanzee, Grey Crowned Crane and Nahan’s Francolin as one of these potential triggers. A critical species is any species that has an extremely high risk of extinction in the near future as categorized by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN, 2016).

The assessment was based on existing document review, including the Project ESIA and earlier baseline studies, interpretation of global and regional datasets (e.g. the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species), and consultation with renowned primatologists and primary data collection. The KFDA Critical Habitat Area of Analysis (CHAA) identified Bugoma Forest as a Critical Habitant with the project likely to directly and/or indirectly affect this area. Bugoma forest reserve is a refuge to a number of wildlife species in the area including the endangered eastern chimpanzee.

One of the globally listed Endangered species in the Bugoma Forest are the Eastern Chimpanzees. These are great Apes, therefore, under the quantitative and qualitative triggers for Criterion 1 critical habitat they trigger Criterion 1 Tier 1. However, during the ESIS, the precise number of individuals occurring within the CHAA was noted to be unknown with CHAA estimated to support approximately 38% of this species known regional.

It’s against this background, that CNOOC Uganda Limited (CNOOC) commissioned the survey in a bid to assess Chimpanzee population density and current/future threats facing Chimpanzees in the Forest Reserve and the surrounding Forest fragments.

The main purpose was to update the status of critical habitats and critical habitat species study, looking at populations, vulnerability, and to evaluate the current ecosystem composition and function. 

The standard requires that ‘the risks and impacts identification process consider relevant threats to biodiversity and ecosystem services especially focusing on habitat loss, degradation and fragmentation, invasive alien species, overexploitation, hydrological changes, nutrient loading, and pollution’. To achieve this, the standard outlines ideal strategies for management of impacts on biodiversity for both modified and natural habitats including critical habitats. Critical habitats represent areas with the high biodiversity value including habitat of significant importance to Critically Endangered and/or Endangered species (Stefan et al, 2013). The standard recommends avoidance where critical habitats may be affected unless specific criteria (outlined in Guidance Note 17 of the standard) are demonstrated. These include an exhaustive analysis of alternatives; a requirement that the project does not degrade values for which critical habitat status was designated and a robust monitoring program, among others. As such, the ESIA baseline survey sought to determine presence or absence of valued species to assess whether or not the project area of influence constitutes a critical habitat.

According to IFC (2012) performance standard 6 paragraph 16, a ‘Critical habitat’ is an area with high biodiversity value, and has to fall under the following criterion;

1. Habitat of significant importance to Critically Endangered and/or Endangered species
2. Habitat of significant importance to endemic and/or restricted-range species
3. Habitat supporting globally significant concentrations of migratory species and/or congregatory species
4. Highly threatened and/or unique ecosystems
5. Areas associated with key evolutionary processes.

The KFDA was found to have areas which qualify to be classified as critical habitats basing on IFC performance standard 6 paragraph 16 criterion (i) and (iv), which triggered an analysis to identify possible triggers of critical habitat within the landscape surrounding the KFDA. The analysis identified three critical species namely; Common chimpanzee, Grey Crowned Crane and Nahan’s Francolin as one of these potential triggers. A critical species is any species that has an extremely high risk of extinction in the near future as categorized by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN, 2016).

Underground storage tanks (USTs) are used for storing fuel, but they can pose a risk if they develop leaks. Leakage from USTs can result in soil and groundwater contamination, presenting environmental and health concerns. Eco and Partner undertook a thorough site investigation is crucial to confirm the presence of leakage from these underground tank at a fuel station in Central Uganda.

Site investigations involved a systematic process of assessing and evaluating the condition of UST, as well as the surrounding soil and groundwater, to determine if leakage has occurred and to what extent, allowing for appropriate remediation measures to be implemented.

Soil samples were collected from specific locations around the USTs to determine if petroleum hydrocarbons or other contaminants are present. These samples were analyzed in an accredited laboratory to quantify the concentrations of contaminants, to determine the potential severity of the leakage and the extent of soil contamination.

Site investigations involved the use of specialized techniques and equipment, such as soil vapor surveys or geophysical surveys.