Environmental Assessment
Volume C-4.3
Slurry Pipeline
Fish and Aquatic Resources
Ambatovy Project
138
January 2006
distribution and abundance varied because of the diversity and span of the
pipeline route across numerous drainages.
Table 4.3-9 Distribution, Number of Species and Relative Abundance (Compared
to Exotic Species in each Sample) of Endemic Fish Species in the
Slurry Pipeline Local Study Area
Site
Endemic Fish
Present
# Endemic
Species
Relative Abundance
(+= greater than exotics)
R2+000
√
1
+ (only species present)
R5+575
√
1
R9+250
√
2
R16+100
0
042+300
√
1
+ (only species present)
051+800
√
2
060+600
√
2
+
107+200
√
4
+
136+200
√
3
+
145+700
√
5
+
157+700
√
1
175+200
√
2
+
178+900
√
1
E3 005+150
(a)
0
E3 011+950
(a)
0
(a)
E3 denotes sites that were sampled along a potential alternative pipeline route.
The ranges of many endemics have diminished and are localized due to habitat
degradation and introduced competitors and predators (Ravelomanana 2004). All
species encountered in the LSA have been previously reported within the eastern
highlands and lowlands regions (CAMP 2001); however, species distributional
information is new for some of the watercourses and watersheds crossed by the
pipeline route. Insufficient information is available on the biology of endemic
and native species in the study area to identify critical habitats or uses
(i.e., migration routes) by the resident fish communities encountered at the
watercourse crossing sites. Of interest, although many watercourse habitats
along the proposed route were classified as disturbed, endemic fish populations
persisted in a majority of streams, and the relative abundance of the endemics
were greater than the exotic fish populations in nearly 60% of these locations
(Table 4.3-9).
