TCP/SRL/6712

Field Document No. 2

TECHNICAL COOPERATION PROGRAMME

AQUACULTURE DEVELOPMENT

BASED ON THE WORK OF

Mr. Geoffery Meaden

FAO Consultant in Application of GIS and Remote Sensing

FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS

BANGKOK, 1997

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I wish to conclude this report by acknowledging the huge degree of co-operation that was obtained from all personnel at NARA. This includes especially from the Chairman, from the Director General and from all staff of the PIU. I was particular impressed by the wide range of thought and consideration given to making sure that the my stay was as successful and enjoyable as possible.

The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this document do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.

The Food and Agriculture Organization is greatly indebted to the organizations and individuals who assisted in the implementation of the project by providing information, advice and facilities.

1. Introduction and Terms of Reference

Following the demise of the inland fisheries state structure during the early 1990's, a new Government in Sri Lanka took the decision (in late 1993) to revitalise inland fisheries and aquaculture. This meant that much of the fisheries infrastructure was to be upgraded, with special attention being paid to technological improvements and the rehabilitation of certain aquaculture stations and hatcheries. The expertise for much of this work is located at the National Aquatic Resource Agency (NARA), which is basically the research branch of the Ministry of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Development (MFARD). As part of this work, it has been decided to establish a Planning Information Unit (PIU) as a sub-section of the Library and Information Division within NARA. The PIU will provide a decision support and monitoring system for marine and inland aquaculture development, and primary use will be made of Geographical Information Systems (GIS) and Remote Sensing (RS) capabilities.

This consultant is scheduled to carry out two missions to Sri Lanka, having a total duration of three months. In close collaboration with a GIS consultant and with various appointed PIU staff members, and under the direct supervision of a National Project Co-ordinator plus the general guidance of a Project Co-ordinating Committee, the consultant will develop the PIU so that it can provide the basic information and analyses to plan and further develop aquaculture and inland fisheries. The specific Terms of Reference (TOR's) for this first mission of six weeks were proposed as:

(3) Develop a programme of work to collect the basic data and to perform the analyses in order to complete a plan to zone coastal aquaculture.

(4) Plan and organize workshops on aquaculture zoning for the Scoping Committee and for government and non-government personnel.

After being at NARA for a few days, it became evident that considerable efforts are still needed to establish the PIU as a permanent unit. This is an essential consideration because the PIU must start off, and then progress, on a sound foundation, i.e. it should proceed as a coherent group whose purpose was well understood and which was capable of serving a wide range of fishery ideals. The PIU had not in fact made as much progress as had been anticipated.

Further details relating to TCP/SRL/6712 are to be found in the Project Document and in the report of the backstopping visit made to Sri Lanka (and to NARA) by Dr James Kapetsky, dated 28 April, 1997. The rest of this report is set out under headings which correspond to the four TOR headings, and a number of recommendations are included in a concluding section. A complete itinerary, plus mention of all the main persons met, is given as Annex 1.

2. Installing the GIS Hardware and Software

During his backstopping mission of April, 1997, Dr James Kapetsky (FAO, Rome) left instructions for the Colombo FAO office to arrange the purchase of a list of GIS hardware and software which would be needed by the Project. This was all to be tendered for and purchased before the consultant's arrival. Upon arrival it was established that the IDRISI software had been delivered (but not ArcView), and none of the hardware had yet arrived. Preparations had been made to establish a permanent base for the PIU, i.e. by doing some structural conversions in part of the existing library complex. This conversion work was completed by the beginning of the third week of the consultant's visit. By the end of the first week, the computers had arrived (though only with borrowed monitors), and the IDRISI software was then installed. The consultant also arranged the installation of the UNESCO produced "Marinf" RS tutorial software. At the end of the third week the Laserjet black and white printer was installed, and on August 12th the 17" monitors and the A3 colour inkjet printer arrived. The Internet/E-Mail facilities were connected on August 15th.

A perusal of the various documents relating to this TCP shows that there is some discrepancy regarding the various pieces of GIS related equipment which should be ordered for this project. Thus, for instance, the original GIS equipment order had omitted to include a digitising board, though this was mentioned as part of the requisite equipment listed on page 9 of the Project Document. It was ascertained that in fact NARA could have access to a digitiser which was kept in the National Hydrographic Office (NHO - part of NARA) so, following discussions with other members of the PIU, it was agreed that we should not arrange for the purchase of this equipment immediately. Instead it seemed appropriate to wait until we saw how much demand would be made for digitising, i.e. bearing in mind how much access we could reasonably get to the NHO board, and how many pre-digitised outlines may be obtained. However, by the end of the fourth week it became apparent that there was very little digital data available and that in fact a great deal of digitising would be needed. During the fifth week FAOR was requested to proceed with the purchase of an A1 digitiser and a small flat-bed scanner. The GIS equipment budget was used to purchase an air-conditioning unit for the PIU room, plus an external modem, a UPS, a "Magiboard" and a data switch. Upon the consultant's departure, the PIU were still awaiting the delivery of:-

3. Organisation of the Formal GIS Training for PIU Personnel

Before tackling this TOR directly, it is relevant to say something more on the PIU itself. As indicated in the Introduction, the PIU forms part of the Library and Information Unit within NARA, and its basic purpose is to develop the information and data resources capacity of NARA, largely through the medium of GIS and RS. At the present stage the PIU comprises of the following personnel:

Attached to this group there is also A.M.Adikari, who has been seconded from the Environment and Forest Conservation Division of the Mahaweli Project, and who will take over as FAO national consultant the main GIS responsibilities within the PIU for a period of six months. Unfortunately, due to delays in Mr Adikari's clearance to undertake the posting, he was unable to join up with the Unit until August 15th. In direct overall control of the PIU, and acting in the capacity of the National Project Co-ordinator, there is Upali Pushpakumara (from MFARD).

If the PIU is to continue over the long term to have its operational capacity based on a GIS and RS capability, then it is essential that most of the members are familiar with these systems. At the present time only Mr. Adikari has GIS experience, though all other members of the Unit do have a range of computing knowledge, and indeed Mr. Ajith Gunaratne is presently completing a Masters degree in computing at the University of Colombo. As part of the basic plans for this project, it was recognised that GIS experience could best be gained through an intensive, practically based course. Following recommendations from Dr Kapetsky (FIRI, FAO), contact was made with the University of Colombo's Geography Department, and they agreed to provide all of the necessary basic GIS training. Four members of the PIU will follow an intensive two week course which begins on September 1st. Approximate details of the course are given as Annex 2. This shows the details of a similar course which was organised last year - this year the University has agreed to use Arc/View instead of ARC/INFO. It is not intended that Mr. Adikari should attend the course, since he already has extensive GIS experience.

As well as attending this course, it is proposed that a range of other GIS and RS experiences will be given. When the requisite GIS hardware and software have been fully installed, then there will be the opportunity for hands on practice with GIS and RS. Thus the IDRISI software comes with a very comprehensive tutorial programme, and this consultant will ensure that the PIU personnel familiarise themselves with this. Investigations will be made to see whether Arc/View offers similar opportunities. This author has also brought to Sri Lanka the UNESCO "Marinf" RS tutorial programme, which will allow for extensive self tuition in marine and coastal remote sensing functionality. Additionally, a large amount of other GIS and RS learning material was brought over for instructional purposes. This consultant made arrangements for an FAO Associate Professional Officer based in Madras, and working for the Bay of Bengal Project, Ms. Barbara Bierhuizen, to come over to the PIU for one week from August 11th to the 15th. The idea of this mission was that she could assist in passing on some GIS information to the PIU personnel, and in turn she could find out a little on the use of GIS in aquaculture zoning. Once this consultant's first mission is complete, then it is intended that Mr. A.M.Adikari will continue to give GIS and RS instructions to PIU members as and when required. The consultant would anticipate that all PIU members should have a sound working knowledge of both the complete demands which GIS makes upon an organisation, and to have had some practical contact with both of the GIS's being used.

4. Developing a Programme to Collect the Necessary Data in Order to Plan for Coastal Aquaculture

A decision was taken early on to delay the start of this component. The reasons for this were mainly concerned with the fact that it was very important to work on this TOR in conjunction with the FAO Coastal Aquaculture consultant, and he did not start work until 25th July. It was also essential that an early start was made on arranging both the workshops and the GIS training. The only work done on data collection during these first three weeks was to ascertain the range of data held by NARA personnel and in the NARA library, and to have consultations with the Coastal Aquaculture consultant on the likely range of data which would be required. From the fourth week on, a series of visits was made to a range of potential data suppliers, and written requests commenced to various data suppliers asking them to supply a range of maps and other data. Data started to accumulate during the latter stages of the visit, and this author has shown how to set up a meta-database to record all of this (plus likely future sources of data). At the end of the visit a list of potential data sources yet to be visited was given to the PIU (see Annex 3).

The Coastal Aquaculture expert and myself had extensive consultations to decide on the best set of production variables which were necessary to the successful pursuance of coastal aquaculture. Our deliberations were placed upon making provision for shrimp farming, though obviously we were aware of data needs for other activities. It was finally agreed that the PIU would eventually need to be able to map the following variables:

In addition to these variables there are a few on which a decision remains to be made, i.e. either because of uncertainty on their degree of importance or because of the need to work out a way of ascertaining the data. These include :- a) the elevation of the land, and b) storm hazard vulnerability, and c) tidal range. It is realised that some of the variables listed will in fact be made up of several considerations for which separate mapping sources may be required, e.g. "Suitable Soils" will need a consideration of both soil pH and soil texture.

Lengthy and regular discussions were held with PIU members, sometimes on an informal basis, on various aspects of data collection relevant to the above variables, and the Coastal Aquaculture Consultant, Mr. Charles Angell, organised an afternoon meeting at which we put to the Research Officers at NARA all of the data requirements the Project would be making. This covered factors such as:

f) The need to search through bibliographies to find the original sources for data.

g) The need to maintain a wide range of contacts in order to increase the likelihood of getting suitable data.

It is this consultant's opinion that there is a large range of potentially useful data for aquaculture zoning, but that it will be very fragmented and it may thus be difficult to assemble. Two major problems to assembling data are the fact of the military insurgency, which makes obtaining maps a bureaucratic task, and the fact that the 1:10 000 series are almost completely unavailable for coastal areas. There is comprehensive topographic coverage at the 1:50 000 scale, and both land use maps and soil survey maps are available nation wide at a 1:250,000 scale. One useful fact from the data coverage viewpoint if that a large number of coastal zone management studies have been carried out, and many of these provide clues to further data sources.

Once the data have been identified and secured, then there are a series of processing tasks which must be undertaken. There was insufficient time to accomplish any of this using actual data, but this author went carefully through the various steps required, i.e. at various times with PIU members, and on August 15th with the National GIS consultant. Annex 4 gives the detail on these steps. One major problem here is that, for many of the production variables which will need to be mapped, then it is difficult to go through the exact scoring procedures without knowing what data may be found. So, although verbal accounts of the possibilities were given, this will need to be tackled with some precision during the coming months. Though some of this can be done via E-Mail with this author, his recommendations give a further possibility which will involve restructuring his planned visits. Immediately prior to his departure, this author went through a detailed list of tasks (see Annex 5) which members of the PIU should undertake in the immediate future. During his stay a facility was arranged whereby members of the PIU were given training in digitising by a staff member of the Hydrographic Department. An effort was also made to keep all members of the PIU informed as to what was happening relative to this consultancy (see Annex 6) - this was necessary because of the "irregular" attendance at the PIU.

Since inadequate progress was made on data collection for aquaculture zoning, it will be imperative that this is given priority in the immediate future. Specific items which need to be sought include:-

* Any salinity readings for coastal and lagoon areas sited between Chilaw and the northern part of Puttalam lagoon. These will be vital for the construction of a "salinity layer".

* Any points in the above area where pollution could be a problem, including any water qualitative data which may be available.

* Mapping, or other data, which gives clues to the positions of the 5 metre surface contour and the 5 metre bathymetric contour in the above zone. This may be obtainable via the Internet.

* Any hydrogeological data for this area, especially that which gives likely fresh water yield rates.

* An assessment will need to be made of the "degree of existing use of lagoons and other areas". Thus, one of the important production variables is that new shrimp farms should avoid those areas where waters are already intensively utilised by other local water users. Information for this production variable will either be gathered by real time surveys, or some form of "proxy" data should be considered, e.g. census data.

* Careful consideration needs to be given as to how to map "Areas liable to flooding". Several alternatives have been provided to PIU members.

* The electricity authorities should be approached for information on the distribution network for electricity supplies.

* The location of hatcheries needs ascertaining. These should be divided into three classes :- small, medium or large. Buffers drawn on final maps should reflect these classes, i.e. larger hatcheries are capable of servicing larger areas.

In seeking this data, PIU members will need to consider carefully likely data sources. It would appear that many of these might be within NARA itself, or within MFARD. Contacts should also be established with all members of the GIS sub-group within CINTEC (Computer & Information Technology Council of Sri Lanka).

5. Planning and Organising Workshops on Aquaculture Zoning

At mission briefing talks held with Dr Kapetsky in Rome before departure, it was suggested that it might be better to delay this component until the second mission. However, after having talks with various employees at NARA, it became apparent that the PIU could gain a lot of credence if it explained now, to as wide an audience as possible, what its raison d'�tre was. This was approached in two ways:

a) About half way through the mission a brief seminar was arranged. This was targeted at all the Research Officers within NARA. The aim was simply to explain, in as much detail as possible, what the aims of the PIU were. Points covered included the main elements of this project : how the PIU was physically being set up; who it consisted of; what would be its main functions; the importance of complete participation of NARA and MFARD; linkages with other organisations, and what results the PIU would hope to achieve.

b) Before departure a major workshop was held on August 14th. The attendee list for this included research officers at NARA, the NARA management Board, interested officers from MFARD, plus a large number of delegates from a wide variety of other institutions who might be interested in the work of the PIU (see Annex 7). A copy of the programme is included as Annex 8. As can be seen from the workshop programme, the main contents consisted of a number of lectures given by this consultant. Each lecture was followed by a short question and answer session. A total of five GIS and RS demonstrations were successfully given during the luncheon break. The consultant would like to record here, that this workshop took a great deal of organisation, most of which was carried out by Mr. Ajith Gunaratne, with extra help from other members of the PIU. The initial demand for seats outnumbered the 156 seats available in the auditorium, though the eventual attendance was in the region of 130. Coverage was given to the event in the national press. It was generally concluded that it was a successful workshop, and it was certainly useful in obtaining knowledge on additional data sources. The total spent on the workshop was 68,000 Rupees ( Annex 9 shows the expenditure for the event).

6. Conclusions and Recommendations

It will be clear from the above details on the achievements relating to each task that, although in some ways the mission was extremely successful, it did not reach the stage that might have been anticipated, certainly not with regard to data collection and data processing. Briefly, the reasons for lack of the anticipated progress were:

a) Very little of the GIS hardware and software was available during most of the visit. Though in some ways this was not a great impediment, it certainly hampered any preliminary exploration of GIS possibilities and potential.

b) The delayed arrival of the Coastal Aquaculture consultant, through visa problems, meant that data gathering could not commence until the third week of the visit.

c) The FAO National GIS Consultant could not get clearance to start work with the PIU until three working days before the consultant's departure! Although he did visit the PIU occasionally, and thus the consultant was able to update him with the progress being made, it meant that he could not get involved in our work.

d) The National Project Co-ordinator was only appointed to this position one week before the consultant's arrival in Sri Lanka. This co-ordinating job had to be added to his already heavy work burden, on top of which he has a seven hour commuting journey to undertake daily. This meant that he was seldom available, though when he did visit NARA he showed great interest in our activities.

e) Upon arrival, the PIU had barely been formulated as a working group, and one of the four members did not appear until the last week of the consultant's visit.

f) There was an indication (from James Kapetsky's backstopping report) that the GIS training for the four members of the PIU should take place before the consultant's arrival at NARA. This had not happened, and in fact it will take place after the consultant's departure. This meant that the PIU personnel were working in a "partial vacuum" regarding the essence of what we were trying to achieve.

g) The consultant feels that a large proportion of his time was unfortunately taken up by bureaucracy or by clerical activities. This was largely a result of the delayed preparatory stage of the project, and the need to add "notes of authority" in order to expedite various matters.

Having stated these negative points, it is still felt that a worthy core of personnel has been assembled in the PIU and all have certainly showed great interest in the activities. The PIU itself has achieved a good measure of identity and it will be well furnished and equipped when all the GIS equipment has been assembled. The bulk of the Research Officers at NARA have a very good idea of what the PIU is all about, though it will take some time before there is much initiative from within NARA regarding requests for the PIU to undertake GIS related work. It will certainly be up to PIU members to be creative in this regard. The workshop gave a huge degree of publicity to the work of the PIU, and to the prospects for the use of GIS and RS. It is to be hoped that the linkages made can be followed up, especially for the PIU to be in a position to undertake collaborative ventures.

Recommendations and ideas. These will be listed in an approximate order of increasing importance:-

a) That the PIU be allowed to purchase certain items which were not on the original list showing hardware and software. These include a UPS; an A3 flatbed scanner, an A1 digitiser plus various smaller items, e.g. some type of map storage facility, extension leads, UPS cable links, dual printer cable links, and air conditioning for the PIU room.

b) Ms. Bierhuizen informed this author of a UNEP programme which was about to commence. The programme is numbered UNEP (OCA) SAS IGI/REP, and there is a report about it (dated 16/6/95) entitled "Report of the Meeting of Plenipotentiaries on the Action Plans for the Protection and Management of the Marine and Coastal Environment of the South Asian Seas Region". Though this author has not had time to find out what is involved, the substance of the report clearly needs to be followed up, since it is intimately concerned with coastal zone management in Sri Lanka.

c) A small budget needs to be established for the purchase of computer consumable and for the acquisition of data. At this stage it is very difficult to assess the amount which needs to be spent on data in order to fulfil the task, though it is not thought to be large. The PIU should consider allocation and administration of such a budget.

d) It will be important that each member of the PIU should establish specific roles within the Unit. Specific tasks which need to be managed include:-

e) Adequate funding will need to be budgeted by NARA for the continuance of the PIU operations. Presumably this will not require a large input for salaries, unless replacement officers are needed for those members who have joined the PIU. However, in perhaps three years time it can be anticipated that funds will be increasingly needed for data purchases, for the replacement of obsolete equipment, and for equipment servicing requirements.

f) The Internet connection made to the PIU requires the use of the only telephone line to the Library and Information Division. Since part of the Internet "deal" established with the Service Provider (Itmin Limited) gives the right of 20 hours per month of free access to the Internet, this is all time during which telephone calls cannot be made. It seems important that further communication lines are established.

g) The PIU should make out a detailed "Programme of Work" schedule for the carrying out of the zoning activities. This would not only be an opportunity to recognise and organise all the necessary procedures, but it would also provide target deadlines to aim for. A copy should be sent to FAO.

h) Meta-databases must be established on both potential data sources and on data held by the PIU. Details have been given on how these databases could be structured.

i) The National Project Co-ordinator's position should be made into a full time (or near full time) post. At the present time, Dr. Upali Pushpakumara is having to cope with another full time post, plus a seven hour commuting journey each day. Under these conditions he will not be able to give the attention that the PIU will require. There is ample proof that a GIS Unit such as the PIU will only thrive if it gets full time attention from someone at a managerial level.

j) It will be vital that both the membership of the PIU is clearly established, and their degree of time allocation to the UNIT is made clear. As the consultant understands the original plans, the PIU should consist of four full time workers, plus a full time co-ordinator, and a GIS national consultant who has been appointed by FAO for a six month period. At the moment this situation does not exist. Three of the current PIU members are presently working part time in the Unit, though their exact contribution has not been defined. The fourth member's position is not at all clear to this consultant. The position of the National Co-ordinator has been described above. The FAO National GIS consultant commenced full time work from August 15th.

k) A project (Rs 25.85 million over 4 years) is about to commence which is aimed at using GIS and RS as an aid to developing and fine-tuning the management of Sri Lanka's inland tank and reservoir fisheries (see Annex 10). This project will be co-ordinated between the Deakin University (Victoria, Australia), the Victorian Fisheries Research Institute, the Kelaniya University, the MFARD, NARA and the CEA. Since the start of this Australian project is imminent, immediate decisions need to be taken as to how the work of the PIU might be complementary and not duplicating

l) In view of the relative lack of progress made on some aspects of this project, it is recommended that the arrangements for the future visits of this consultant to Sri Lanka should be changed. Thus, instead of one seven week visit planned for early next year, it is considered that much more benefit and the likelihood of achieving the aims of the project, would accrue from two shorter visits. One three week visit should be timed for early in 1998 (January), with the specific aims of checking that all the necessary data has been adequately and reliably collected, that the scoring and weighting procedures can be established and then correctly applied, that the GIS's are working satisfactorily and that PIU members are familiar with them, and that the PIU is in a position to continue without the aid of the FAO national GIS consultant. It is considered especially important that the scoring procedures are scrupulously checked since this author has not been in a position to explain this in sufficient detail, i.e. this has been impossible without access to the main types of data which might be used. This task is also important since the national GIS consultant was only in place for two working days at the end of his visit, i.e. this was totally insufficient time to tell him of all the demands of the GIS work. A second four week visit should be timed for the Summer of 1998. It is pertinent to state here that, if progress is to be made on the GIS related aspects of the project, then frequent E-Mail communications will most likely be necessary between the PIU and this consultant over the next six months.

Although it might be beyond the remit of this project, the consultant would like to conclude with what he considers to be a point of vital importance to the work he has been doing. After being in Sri Lanka for a short period, and having carried out a number of library based searches, it was obvious that a huge amount of attention has been paid in the past to the issue of coastal zone management in Sri Lanka. Annex 11 sets out a limited range of the types of studies which he has seen. So there is abundant evidence of the recognition that coastal management is vital in this island state. As well as this written evidence, there have been conferences, institutional frameworks have been set up, laws have been drafted, committees have been formed, etc. But there is no land use master plan for the study area." (p.83) and this state of affairs would appear to apply for the whole coastal zone.

This author had discussions with two major contributors to thinking on coastal zone management in Sri Lanka, i.e. Olof Linden (Project leader of the Puttalam/Mundel study and director of the Swedish Aid Agency - SAREC), and Mervyn Wijeratne ( an environmental consultant who has co-authored several of the major studies). They were both in agreement that enough has been said on the matter of coastal management, and that all effort must in the future be directed towards overcoming the problems of effectively institutionalising and enforcing the numerous recommendations which have been made in the past. Indeed much of both of these authors' work has been directed precisely at this objective. If it is hoped that this complete zoning exercise will contribute to surmount implementation barriers.

ANNEX 1

10.7.97 Briefing with Jim Kapetsky, FIRI. Background reading on aquaculture situation in Sri Lanka.

14.7.97 Meeting with FAO Representative (Ms Marcella Nanni) and FAO Programme Officer (K.P.Sugathapala) to sort out general \ arrangements. Meeting at Ministry of Fisheries & Aquatic Resources with Director of Aquaculture (A.M.Jayasekara) and with the National Project Co-ordinator (U.Pushpakumara). Further meeting at National Aquatic Resources Agency (NARA) with some members of the newly created Planning and Information Unit (PIU) (A.Adikari, A.Gunaratne and S.Jayamanne). Commence various details on planning PIU activities.

15.7.97 Moved to Galle Face hotel. Detailed discussions with three members of PIU about planned activities during the consultant's stay. Questions asked of Project Co-ordinator. Outlined plans for the PIU with NARA Chairman (H.Gunawardena). Prepared list of "clarification" issues to put to FAO Project Officer.

16.7.97 Reading around general subject of "coastal aquaculture zoning". Visit Professor of Geography at University of Colombo (K.Gunawardene) and made arrangements for four PIU persons to attend ARC/INFO and IDRISI GIS course in late August.

17.7.97 Settled many Project problems with FAO Programme Officer. Make further plans at NARA, and start an "Information Sheet" to inform PIU personnel of progress. Discuss GIS type proposals with various Divisional heads at NARA.

18.7.97 Public holiday. Work in hotel - mostly background reading and sorting out avenues of progress.

21.7.97 Complete a GIS Progress Report and circulate to PIU members. Make further preparations for major workshop to be held on August 14th. Start PIU members off on some preparatory GIS and RS learning programmes.

22.7.97 Preparation of list of prospective participants in workshop. Print programme and invitations. Prepare for mailing. Talks with A.Adikari on his role in the PIU.

24.7.97 Preparation of lecture to be given on August 14th, plus more admin work.

25.7.97 Completion of above lecture. Made arrangements for demonstrations to be given on August 14th. Discussions with FAO Coastal Aquaculture expert (Charles Angell).

26.7.97 Rest day. Wrote seminar notes for talk to be given to NARA Research Officers next Thursday.

28.7.97 Discussions with Coastal Aquaculture expert (Dr Charles Angell) on various aspects of the work which we will be doing in unison. Completed list of venues to collect mapping data from. Discussions with Hydrography Office concerning use of their digitiser. Completed notes for future lecture on coastal aquaculture zoning.

30.7.97 Administration work plus discussions with Charles Angell on zoning aquaculture.

31.7.97 Gave seminar to NARA of the objectives of this TCP, concentrating on the PIU and GIS. Discussions with Upali Pushpakumara to solve some recent problems, plus do more admin work.

1.8.97 Visits made to Survey Department, Irrigation Department, Water Resources Board and the Land Use Policy Planning Division in order to find out about data and mapping availability.

5.8.97 Admin work and meeting with PIU staff to discuss progress and future tasks.

6.8.97 Admin work associated with August 14th workshop. Discussions with Environmental Consultant (M.Wijeratne) on problems associated with coastal zone management in Sri Lanka. Prepared detailed instructions for PIU members on how to carry out the zoning for aquaculture.

7.8.97 Explored data resources in NARA library. Visited Survey Dept to collect topographic maps, and FAO to collect visa and Fisheries Tech papers. Gave detailed instructions to PIU group on how to carry out zoning for aquaculture.

8.8.97 Visit FAO to collect cash for paying workshop expenses. Negotiate for installation of Netscape and E-Mail facilities with service providers (IDMIN Ltd). Design overlays for Coastal zoning lecture.

11.8.97 Complete preparation of OHP's for lecture. Welcome and have discussions with Barbara Bierhuizen (APO, BOBP). Attend meeting for all Research Officers at NARA to explain data needs of this TCP.

12.8.97 Made visits to the Coast Conservation Department, The Central Environmental Authority and the Forestry Department in the search for data and data sources. Admin work in afternoon.

13.8.97 Prepared introductory speech for workshop and press releases. Helped with setting up displays and other preparatory tasks. Discussed with Barbara Bierhuizen many of the plans and procedures which the PIU will be following.

14.8.97 Participated all day in major workshop (at NARA) to promote the PIU's activities.

15.8.97 Discussions with Director of Natural Resource Management of Central Environmental Authority (Mr W.A.Wijesooriya) on their GIS work. Lengthy discussions with the consultant's PIU, National GIS consultant (Mr Adikari) on his future work. Clear up after yesterday's workshop, and finalise some of admin work. Final advice given to Barbara Bierhuizen on some future moves for her BOBP, GIS work.

16.8.97 Rest day. Completed project report. Final discussions with Charles Angell.

17.8.97 Rest day. Visit to Udawalawe wetland area, fishery station and National Park.

20.8.97 Final briefing meetings with FAO and with NARA. Visit to the MFARD and the Planning Co-ordinating Committee for discussions on final report. Depart Colombo.

ANNEX 3

The following is a list of the organizations who might still be able to provide data which is of use to the PIU, in the coastal zone planning project. The consultant

(Dr. Meaden) did not have time to visit these organizations, so it will be important for members of the PIU to establish exactly what data they hold (hard copy or digital formats (and which may be obtainable by NARA.

1. International Irrigation Management Institute. (Gamini Batuwitage - Deputy Project Leader)

2. Shrimp Growers Association, "La-Mirage", 177 Puttalam Road, Chilaw. Christie Perera. Tel. 032-22326/23282.

3. Land Use Planning Project of MFARD, 31 Pathiba Road, Colombo 5. Possibly Mr. J. Jayasinghe or Mrs. W. Priyanthi, or Mr. Gunawardane. Tel. 587236

6. Inter-agency Coordinating Committee on Sustainable Use of Coastal and Marine Resources - Ministry of Forestry and Environment.

7. Marine Overseas Agency, 3rd Floor, Paul VI Centre, 24 Malwatta Road, Colombo 11. Tel. 326262. (for possible maps showing 5 metre bathymetric line.)

ANNEX 8

Bandara, C.M.M. (1989) A Survey of the Coastal zone of Sri Lanka. CCD, Colombo.

Central Environmental Authority (1994) Wetland Site Report and Conservation Management Plan: Mundel Lake and Puttalam Corridor Channel. Wetland Conservation Project, CEA, Colombo. (This is one publication in a large series).

Coast Conservation Department (1986) Sri Lanka: Coastal Zone Management Plan. NARA, Colombo.

Coast Conservation Department (1990) Sri Lanka: Coastal Zone Management Plan. CCD, Colombo.

Coast Conservation Department and University of Warwick (1997) Coastal Zone Habitat Atlas of Southern and Western Sri Lanka. DOE, London, UK.

Dayaratne, P., Linden, O. and De Silva, M.W. (Eds) (1997) The Puttalam/Mundel Estuarine System and Associated Coastal Waters: Environmental Degradation, Resource Management Issues and Options for Their Solution. NARA, Colombo.

Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (1985) Coastal Environmental Management Plan for the West Coast of Sri Lanka. UN, Bangkok.

Ganewatte, P., Samaranayake, R.A., Samarakoon, J., White, A. and Haywood, K. (Eds) (1995) The Coastal Environmental Profile of Rekawa Lagoon. CCD, Colombo. (This is one of a short series).

National Aquatic Resources Agency (undated) Survey to Identify Suitable Areas in the Coastal Belt of Sri Lanka for Prawn Culture. Phase 1 and 2. NARA, Colombo.

National Aquatic Resources Agency (1987) Coastal Zone Management Plan. NARA, Colombo.

Olsen, S., Sadacharan, D., Samarakoon, J., White, A., Wickremeratne, H.J. and Wijeratne, M. (Eds) (1992) Coastal 2000: A Resource Management Strategy for Sri Lanka's Coastal Region. Vols and 2. Coastal Resources Management Project. CCD, Colombo.

South Asia Co-operative Environmental Programme (1991) Coastal Resources Management Planning in the SACEP Region. SACEP, Colombo.

White, A.J. and Wijeratne, M. (Eds) (1993) Are Coastal Zone Management and Economic Development Complementary in Sri Lanka? CCD, Colombo.

AQUACULTURE DEVELOPMENT

Table of Contents

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

1. Introduction and Terms of Reference

2. Installing the GIS Hardware and Software

3. Organisation of the Formal GIS Training for PIU Personnel

4. Developing a Programme to Collect the Necessary Data in Order to Plan for Coastal Aquaculture

5. Planning and Organising Workshops on Aquaculture Zoning

6. Conclusions and Recommendations

ANNEX 1

ANNEX 3

ANNEX 8