CMFRI Special Publication No.

104

Socio-economic dimensions of Seaweed Farming in India

M. Krishnan
Principal Scientist (Agricultural Economics) Central Institute of Brackishwater Aquaculture, Chennai

R. Narayana Kumar
Senior Scientist (Agricultural Economics) Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Kochi

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

(Indian Council of Agricultural Research) Post Box. 1603, Marine Drive North Extension, Kochi 682 018, Kerala, India www.cmfri.org.in

Socio economic dimensions of Seaweed Farming in India

M. Krishnan R. Narayana Kumar

Published by Dr. G. Syda Rao Director Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Kochi-682 018, India Telephone : 0091-484-2394867 Fax Email Website : 0091-484-2394909 : mdcmfri@md2.vsnl.net.in : http://www.cmfri.org.in

Front Cover Photo : Courtesy, National Bank for Agricultural and Rural Development, (NABARD) Chennai Back Cover Photo : Seaweed Culture, Olaikuda, Rameswaram

2010 Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute, Kochi ISSN 0972 - 2351

ii

FOREWORD
Stanza 1033 of the Tamil Epic Tirukkural when translated reads: Those who cultivate their food live in self-sufficiency All others follow them and subsist in self-made dependence. Nearly 60 per cent of the Indian population is directly or indirectly dependent on agriculture and related activities. Agriculture is Indias largest private sector activity; yet, far from being a business, agriculture is a livelihood issue. Less than 4 per cent of the population is engaged in agricultural activities in the US and the EU where it is agri-business. Financial literacy and empowerment In India, financial literacy is seen as a means to achieve financial inclusion. The thrust is on rural areas. 5.7 lakh out of the six-lakh villages do not have a bank branch. There is, however, a strong case for extending the efforts of financial inclusion to urban areas as well. The Economic Survey 2009-10, quoting the NSS 61st Round, says that poverty ratio in urban areas is 25.7 per cent which is only somewhat lower than the 28.3 per cent poverty ratio in rural areas. What will help financial inclusion is not financial literacy per se but linking peoples livelihood needs with banking services. The Aryavrat Gramin Bank in Uttar Pradesh achieved 100 per cent financial inclusion in some hamlets in UP through its tie-up with a corporate to sell solar powered lamps. The Kisan Mitra Scheme of Punjab National Bank achieved 100 per cent financial inclusion in 40 villages by linking bank finance to farming needs. There is also the example of a pilot project in Warangal district of Andhra Pradesh, where pension payments and payments under NREGS were made through direct credit to bank accounts. If people need banks for saving or receiving income or for remittances or loans they will avail of such banking services. In such cases, financial literacy becomes only the catalyst and not the main driving force behind financial inclusion. Role of NABARD Financial literacy can achieve a larger goal: that of empowering the consumer to take financial decisions confidently. The National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD), in a bid to step up its focus on the farm sector, plans to bring together about 10 lakh small and marginal farmers across the country in 2010-11 along the lines of the self-help group (SHG) model. This will help farmers harness their collective bargaining power to access credit at competitive rates, improve productivity using quality inputs, and realise better price for their produce in the market. Ever iii

since the SHG-Bank linkage programme was conceptualised and launched by NABARD in 1992, about 47 lakh self-help groups (as of March-end 2009), predominantly comprising poor women, have been able to access the formal banking sector in a sustainable and cost-effective manner. PURA The PURA (Providing Urban Amenities in Rural Areas) scheme, on public-private-partnership mode, in a month at an outlay of ` 1,000 crore on civic amenities such as drinking water supply, roads, street-lighting and drainage and sewerage systems with private sector efficiencies pooled in. PURA is being taken up on a pilot basis in six to eight clusters where the population is between 30,000 and 40,000. This marked a paradigm shift in the way the Centre was looking at creating rural infrastructure. Developers would be required to maintain the facility they build for 10 years before handing it over to the panchayats which can again put it up for bidding. The total amount spent on rural development schemes in 2009 was around ` 75,000 crore. Despite substantial spends on rural infrastructure development at the panchayat level, it has been seen that the impact on the ground was absent. The PURA scheme launched in 2006 this time round, the basic idea was convergence, done with private sector efficiency and the maintenance entrusted to them for 10 years. Priority was, what was planned was built properly, maintained and serviced properly. Further, all amenities would come up near simultaneously in a specified time span so that the impact was wholesome. On the locations to be taken up on a pilot basis, once the partners were identified they would come up with proposals on the areas they would like to work. Priorities of the Reserve Bank of India With the deadline to draw up a roadmap for providing banking services in every village with a population of over 2,000 by March 2011, the Reserve Bank of India has asked banks to establish linkages with NGOs for facilitating and channelling credit to low income households. It has also asked banks to use well-run primary agricultural credit societies (PACS) as business correspondents (BCs). Of the nearly six lakh inhabited villages in the country, 1.09 lakh villages have a population of over 2,000. In its action points to help banks draw up a roadmap for financial inclusion by the end of this month, the Reserve Bank of India said establishing linkages with local non-government organisations (NGOs)/ corporate houses can lead to credit flow to low income households. Based on the report of the high-level committee on lead bank scheme, the RBI believes that banks should make concerted efforts to use well-run PACs as BCs. Currently, PACs, despite being permitted, are not being used as BCs. Agriculture occupies centre-stage in the Governments plan to promote inclusive growth, enhance rural incomes and sustain food security. The exercise of Budget hinges on 4 per cent growth in the agriculture sector Huge investments are necessary at both pre-harvest and postharvest stages and the Budget provides ` 400 crore for the initiative for 2010-11. We have had a iv

significant stepping-up of investments in rural infrastructure in the past five years. Roads have been built and investments made in rural electrification two key infrastructure services. These investments may have led to new industries in rural areas, creating jobs and adding to incomes. Have they also led to diversification of agricultural output as new market opportunities may have emerged? Have they spurred new investments on the farm as additional income may have flowed to farm households from non-farm activities? The returns on new investments are not evident in the overall growth rates of the farm sector in recent years. It may, of course, be too early to assess the impact. It is also possible that the development has not been quite effective. Supply of infrastructure services is more important than the infrastructure itself (Shashank Bhide, 2010). Extension work A salaried scientist can never be the best of his kind; nor will a salaried extension worker care for what happens to the farmers and to the fields after his visit. An extension system based on qualified agricultural scientists undertaking work on payment of a minimal proportion of the incremental income in the first year of consultation could change this scenario. The normal channels of primary and secondary education should care about agricultural education. The extension work does not keep the farmer informed about the latest developments in agricultural technology. An agricultural nation like India does not have an all India or a Central Civil Service (Class I) for agriculture (Sharad Joshi, 2010). If only agricultural graduates who find employment in banks could become agricultural officers with the same rank and status as the District Collector or the District Superintendent of Police, a significant stride can be made towards improving the quality of agriculture operations, making agriculture more attractive not only to the children of the farmers but also to outsiders and lend agriculture some sort of prestige and status which it does not enjoy at present. The development in seaweed sector A livelihood becomes a business enterprise with the right mix of financial and institutional and policy support. The seaweed sector has emerged as the trial blazer for other sectors. A typical example of demand driven development, the right mix of financial and institutional support in tandem with private investments have made the prospects of the development of the seaweed sector bright. The developments documented in this work, underline the fact that consistently servicing the infrastructure created or, in other words, consistent quality extension education, maybe more important than creation of the infrastructure itself. Commitment of the government departments and private sector involved in this work is commendable and I wish the scope of such typical development models are explored in other areas also. New Delhi-110 114 May 2010 Dr. S. Ayyappan, Secretary, DARE & Director General, ICAR v

PREFACE
Seaweed mariculture is an important and profitable livelihood option for the coastal fishing community especially for fisherwomen, who with little effort can earn a substantial income for the household. India possesses 434 species of red seaweeds, 194 species of brown seaweeds and 216 species of green seaweeds. The seaweed potential in India is estimated at 1,005,000 tonnes (t) in six states of India (Modayil, 2004) comprising 250,000 t in Gujarat, 250,000 t in Tamilnadu, 100,000 t in Kerala, 100,000 t in Andhra Pradesh, 5,000 t in Maharasthra and 300,000 t in Andaman & Nicobar Islands. In India, traditionally, seaweeds have been collected from natural stocks. However, the need for farming of seaweeds arose from the unsustainable harvesting of the seaweeds and the increasing demand for high quality and adequate quantity of seaweed raw material from the seaweed processing industries. Accordingly the Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute (CMFRI), the Central Salt and Marine Chemicals Research Institute (CSMCRI) and related organizations began the experimental cultivation of agar-yielding seaweeds Gelidiella and Gracilaria in 1964 for developing suitable technologies for the commercial-scale cultivation of raw material to the agar industries, Today seaweed cultivation techniques have been standardized, improved and made economically viable. Corporate backed by institutional and financial support led to the expansion of seaweed (Kappaphycus alvarezii) farming, through Self Help Groups (SHG) model (mostly women), starting in a small scale in Ramanathapuram district of Tamilnadu in 2000, which now gradually has spread to neighbouring coastal districts like Tuticorin, Pudukottai and Thanjavur. The seaweed mariculture is a potential employment generating and income earning activity, which is practiced by more than thousand members of SHGs in Ramanathapuram district alone and marching ahead in the other coastal districts of the country with the support of private investments, industries, financial institutions like NABARD (through scheduled commercial banks), National Fisheries Development Board and NGOs led by Aquaculture Foundation of India. This publication has given a comprehensive picture of the status of seaweed collection as well as farming in India with a case study on the socio-economic transformations in Ramanathapuram district of Tamilnadu. The authors have traced the historical development of seaweed collection/technology development for farming, the marketing channels and exports, substantiated with analytical results. The socio-economic conditions of the seaweed farming/ collecting households have been brought out clearly to give background information about the stakeholders, which is very vital in the process of technology development and adoption. The study also has established the profitability, economic viability and financial feasibility of the vi

enterprise by working out appropriate economic indicators, which will help the lending institutions to come forward to provide the much required financial support. Besides, the structure of organized SHG contract seaweed farming, the systemic strengths and weakness of the organized seaweed farming in India and the marketing channels for seaweed farmers in Tamilnadu have also been brought out clearly. The study has suggested knowledge dissemination on the technology through organizations like ASSOCHAM, FICCI, and ICCI to motivate entrepreneurs and bring in more investment into this seaweed sector. Besides, the Government can also encourage this sector by streamlining the tax, customs and excise duties and collection issues. I compliment the authors, Dr. M.Krishnan, Principal Scientist, Central Institute of Brackish Water Aquaculture, Chennai and Dr. R.Narayanakumar, Senior Scientist, Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute, Cochin for their concerted and committed effort in bringing out this publication undertaken on Personal Services Consultancy mode of the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), Rome. I also appreciate the support given by Dr. G. Gopakumar, Principal Scientist and Scientist-in-Charge, Scientists and staff members of Mandapam Regional Centre of CMFRI, Dr. P. Kaladharan, Principal Scientist, Calicut Research Centre of CMFRI in scrutinizing the manuscript and also the help rendered by Dr.M.Sakthivel, President, Aquaculture Foundation of India, Chennai and Shri.Abhiram Seth, Chief Executive Officer, M/s. Aquagri Processing (P) Ltd., New Delhi. I am sure that this publication will be of immense use to the academicians, researchers, policy makers and entrepreneurs to bestow more attention in this sector and strive for its development in the days to come.

Cochin - 682 018 May 2010

G. Syda Rao Director

vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors express their sincere thanks to Dr. S. Ayyappan, Director General, Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), New Delhi for his constant encouragement and support during the course of this work. We acknowledge with thanks the support of Dr. Madan Mohan, Assistant Director General (Marine Fisheries), ICAR, Dr. A.G. Ponniah, Director, Central Institute of Brackishwater Aquaculture (CIBA), Chennai and Dr. G. Syda Rao, Director, Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute (CMFRI), Kochi for providing the facilities and access to institute resources and duty leave for carrying out field surveys. The authors express their thanks to Dr. S.M. Pillai, Principal Scientist & OIC, Technical Cell, CIBA and Dr. Grace Mathew, Principal Scientist & Chairperson, Consultancy Processing Cell, CMFRI for facilitating the work during the period of this consultancy. The first author expresses his thanks to Dr. V.S. Chandrasekaran and Dr. K.P. Jithendran, Principal Scientists, CIBA, for their inputs and ideas. Thanks are also due to Messrs. R.Elankovan, S. Nagarajan, S.Rajukumar and R.Rajasekaran, Technical Officers, CIBA for assistance. The second author expresses his thanks to Dr. R.Sathiadhas, Head, Socio-economic Evaluation and Transfer of Technology Division for his constant support. This work would not have been possible but for the close and personal cooperation of Shri Abhiram Seth, CEO, M/s. Aquagri Processing (P) Ltd., New Delhi and his colleagues at Mandapam, Manamadurai, Tuticorin and Pudukottai, Tamil Nadu. Equally enthusiastic and supportive were Dr.M.Sakthivel, President, Aquaculture Foundation of India, Chennai, Dr.G.Gopakumar, Principal Scientist & Head Mariculture Division and Scientist-in-Charge Mandapam Research Station (MRC) of CMFRI, Dr. K.Palanisamy and Mr. Kannabiram, Assistant General Managers, NABARD, Mrs.Uma Basu Sarkar, IFS, Director, GoMBRT, Ramanathapuram, Mr. G.D.Rajeev, Deputy Director, MPEDA, Kochi, Mr. R.Dinakaran, Assistant Director, TNDoF, Mandapam, Mr. Elankovan, Aquaclinic, Mandapam, We also acknowledge with thanks the cooperation and inputs of Mr. Vinod Nehimiah, CEO and his colleagues at SNAP Natural and Alginate Products, Ranipet, Tamil Nadu. Special thanks are due to Dr. N.Kaliaperumal, Principal Scientists (Retired) CMFRI, viii

Dr. P. Kaladharan, Principal Scientist, Calicut Research Station of CMFRI, Dr. G.Tamilmani, Scientist, MRC of CMFRI, Mr. V.Edwin Joseph, Officer-in-Charge and Dr. V.Mohan, Technical Officer, Library and Documentation Section, CMFRI, Kochi, Mr. P.Chidambaram, Library-in-Charge, MRC of CMFRI, Mandapam, Messrs. K.K. Sankaran, N.K. Harshan, Technical Officers, Mr. M. Antony Joseph, SRF, Mr. Abilash, Videographer, CMFRI, Kochi and Mr. J.Ramalingam, Technical Officer -CMFRI (Retired), Madurai The authors express their thanks to Dr. Diego Valderrama, Fishery Planning Analyst (Aquaculture), FAO for the consultancy. The contents of this publication, in no way reflect the official position of CIBA and CMFRI of the ICAR. All views expressed here are ours including errors.

R. Narayana Kumar
Senior Scientist (Ag. Economics) Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Kochi, INDIA Email: ramani65@gmail.com

M. Krishnan
Principal Scientist (Ag. Economics) Central Institute of Brackishwater Aquaculture, Chennai, INDIA Email: mkrishnan57@gmail.com

ix

Socio-economic dimensions of Seaweed Farming in India

Summary
The Ramanathapuram district in Tamil Nadu was identified as the target location for studying the structure, conduct and performance of seaweed farming in India in view of its historical background, locational advantages, industry interactions, socio-economic institutional framework and opportunities for expansion and growth. For these reasons, the Ramanathapuram district has long been recognized as the center of the seaweed farming in India. Although 434 species of red seaweeds, 194 species of brown seaweeds and 216 species of green seaweeds naturally occur in India, it was only until the beginning of the twenty-first century that the country made any concrete progress towards organized seaweed farming. The tardy progress was caused by a number of factors including locational disadvantages, inconsistent performance of species for commercial exploitation, absence of a complete package of farming practices, and industry and policy support. Although the commercial potential of Kappaphycus alvarezii had been previously recognized and its culture technology had been perfected by the Central Salt and Marine Chemicals Research Institute (CSMCRI), culture at a commercial scale only began when PepsiCo India Holdings Ltd (PepsiCo) made its entry into the venture with a pilot-scale investment in the early 2000s. The entry of PepsiCo turned out to be decisive, acting as a catalyst to rejevunate the industry-institutional linkages. The concept of Self Help Groups (SHG) spearheaded by the National Bank for Agricultural and Rural Development (NABARD) also led to rapid development in the Mandapam area of Ramanathapuram, which soon became the hub of seaweed farming in the country. Self Help Groups in the fishing villages of Vedalai, Thonithurai, Ariyankkundu and R. Vadakadu currently operate more than 1,000 rafts. Many of the SHGs have been able to obtain a yield of more than 50 kg per raft per day (dry weight). Based on findings from this study, seaweed farming offered 161 and 144 days of employment per annum in the Rameshwaram and Mandapam areas, respectively. With current development projections targeting 5,000 families in the near future, the seaweed sector could generate around 765 thousand man-days of employment in the Ramanathapuram district. It has been estimated that India can produce one million tonnes of x

dried seaweed and provide employment to 200 thousand families with annual earnings of around ` 0.1 million per family. The annual turnover of Kappaphycus seaweed farming alone can be safely estimated to be ` 2.0 billion. Spearheaded by private investments, the clear institutional and financial support of the Government of India through development agencies and research establishments has been fundamental for the development of the sector. The distinct possibility of expansion of operations based on successful commercial trials in sites in Andhra Pradesh and Gujarat will give a significant boost to the sector. Seaweed farming has all the potential to rise from a low-income livelihood activity into a reasonably profitable commercial enterprise in coastal India.

xi

xii

TABLE OF CONTENTS Sl. No. Foreword Preface Acknowledgements Summary List of Tables List of Boxes List of Figures List of Plates List of Annexures 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Introduction Unorganised seaweed collection sector Seaweed processing industry in India Resource management issues Historical account of seaweed mariculture in India Historical production statistics Seaweed exports Socio-eonomic dimensions of seaweed farming in India Economic analysis of seaweed farming Marketing channels of seaweed farmers Policy notes, advisories and notifications Conclusions, insights and development strategies References Annexures Content Page Number iii vi ix x xiv xvi xvi xvii xvii 01 01 06 10 10 28 32 33 57 61 63 65 68 75

xiii

LIST OF TABLES
Table Number 1 Title of the Table Primary characteristics of commercial seaweeds collected in coastal Panchayats of Ramanathapuram District, Tamil Nadu, India Prices for seaweed paid by processors to agents A time line of the development of seaweed farming in Tamil Nadu, India Per cent increase in crop yields resulting from the use of bio-fertilizers of seaweed origin Estimated harvestable potential of wild seaweeds in India, by State Seaweed resources along the coast of India Area, production and exports of Kappaphycus in Tamil Nadu, India (2001-2009) Trends in raft productivity, 2001-2009 Exports of seaweeds from India Economics of seaweed farming in Tamil Nadu, India: cost of materials for the construction of one raft (3 m x 3 m) Economics of seaweed farming (raft culture) in Tamil Nadu, India: analysis of costs and returns for the first year of operation Economics of mono line culture of seaweeds per block of 60 ropes Composition, structure and performance of SHGs engaged in seaweed farming in the Mandapam and Rameshwaram regions of Ramanathapuram district, Tamil Nadu, India Gender composition and average family size of respondents Caste and religion structure of the sample respondents Page Number

03 05 22 26 28 29 31 32 33

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

36

11

37 39

12 13

41 44 45 xiv

14 15

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35

Family type Fishing experience Experience in seaweed farming Age classification of respondents Literacy level of respondents Occupational profile of respondents Income levels in the Mandapam area Income levels in the Rameshwaram area Housing ownership and type Livestock ownership Occupational patterns in Mandapam and Rameshwaram areas, Ramanathapuram district, Tamil Nadu Estimation of employment generation in seaweed farming in Ramanathapuram district, Tamil Nadu, India Consumption expenditure patterns, Ramanathapuram district, Tamil Nadu, India Level of indebtedness, Ramanathapuram district, Tamil Nadu, India Social impact of seaweed farming, Ramanathapuram district, Tamil Nadu, India Annual costs and returns of a one-ha seaweed farm - raft culture (900 rafts) Gross revenue of a one-ha seaweed farm (900 rafts) Annual cashflow stream for a one-ha seaweed farm (900 rafts) Economic viability and financial feasibility indicators for a one-ha seaweed farm (project cycle of three years) Policy notes, important recommendations, advisories and selected notifications and communications relevant to seaweed culture in India

45 46 46 47 47 48 48 49 49 50 51 51 52 53 54 58 59 60 60

64 xv

LIST OF BOXES
Box Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Title Self Help Groups - History, Guidelines and Performance CSMCRI - PepsiCo interaction Beneficial environmental impact of sea plant cultivation Carrageenan extraction from dry weed Products from Kappaphycus alvarezii Seaweed as an animal feed supplement The Socio-economic premise for Kappaphycus culture in India Page Number 17 19 23 23 25 27

35

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Number 1 1. (a) 2 3 4 Map of the Study Area Map of Ramanathapuram district Products from Kappaphycus alvarezii Top view of 3m x 3 m size bamboo raft with 4' diagonals General Structure of Organised SHG Contract Seaweed Farming Production and Buy-back System in India Casual loop diagram for systemic strengths and weaknesses in organised seaweed farming in India Components of initial investment of one hectare seaweed farming (percent) Marketing channels of seaweed farmers in Ramanathapuram district of Tamil Nadu Title Page Number 1 2 25 38

55

56

59

62 xvi

LIST OF PLATES
Plate Number 1 2. Title Kappaphycus cultivation in Mandapam-First portion Kappaphycus cultivation in Mandapam -Second Portion Page Number 12 13

LIST OF ANNEXURES
Annexure Number 1 Title Composition, structure and performance of SHG seaweed farming in Pudukottai and Tanjavur districts Gulf of Mannar Marine Biosphere Palk Bay Page Number 75 76 77

2 3

xvii

ABBREVIATIONS
ADGR AFI APEDA ASSOCHAM BIS CAA ISI CIBA CMFRI CRZ CSIR CSMCRI DBT DRDA EEZ EIA FAO FICCI FIT GoM GOMBRT GoMMNP G.O ICAR ICCI Average daily growth rate Aquaculture Foundation of India Agriculture Produce Export Development Authority Associated Chambers of Commerce Bureau of Indian Standards Coastal Aquaculture Authority (of India) Indian Standards Institute Central Institute of Brackishwater Aquaculture Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Coastal Regulation Zone Council of Scientific and Industrial Research Central Salt and Marine Chemicals Research Institute Department of Bio Technology District Rural Development Agency Exclusive Economic Zone Environmental Impact Assessment Food and Agriculture Organization Federation of Indian Chamber of Commerce and Industry Fisheries Institute of Technology Gulf of Mannar Gulf of Mannar Biosphere Reserve Trust Gulf of Mannar Marine National Park Government Order Indian Council of Agricultural Research Indian Chamber of Commerce and Industry xviii

JECFA JLG KIA KMC MARS MRC MPEDA MYRADA NAAS NABARD NACA NBA NCST NGO NIO NPOP PB QoL SBI SCZMA SGSY SHG SNAP TNCDW TNDoF TNMB VAT

Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives Joint Liability Group Krishnamurthy Institute of Algology Kudumbam Model of Cultivation Marine Algal Research Station (of CSMCRI) Mandapam Regional Centre of CMFRI Marine Products Exports Development Authority Mysore Resettlement and Development Agency National Academy of Agricultural Sciences National Bank for Agricultural and Rural Development Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific National Biodiversity Agency National Committee on Science and Technology (NCST) Non Governmental Organization National Institute of Oceanography National Programme for Organic Produce Palk Bay Quality of Life Index State Bank of India State Coastal Zone Management Authorities Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana Self Help Groups SNAP Natural and Alginate Products The Tamil Nadu Corporation for Development of Women Tamil Nadu Department of Fisheries, Government of Tamil Nadu Tamil Nadu Maritime Board Value added tax xix

xx

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute 1 Introduction

India possesses 434 species of red seaweeds, 194 species of brown seaweeds and 216 species of green seaweeds. Traditionally, seaweeds have been collected from natural stocks. However, these resources have been depleted by overharvesting and hence the need for their cultivation arose overtime. Today seaweed cultivation techniques have been standardized, improved and made economically viable. In addition, the industry has developed a preference for greater stability through sustained supply of quantity and quality of farmed raw materials. Nevertheless, collection of seaweed production statistics is not systematic in India; official time series of seaweed production simply do not exist.

Unorganized seaweed collection sector

Although the major focus of this study is on the development of seaweed farming in India, the progress that the country has made in this field is deeply connected with the constraints currently faced by the agar-agar and alginate industries. As of today, these industries are dependent on the raw materials collected from natural sources. Therefore, a brief review of the seaweed collection process in India is in order.

2.1 Seaweed collection in the Gulf of Mannar 1

2.1.1 Location Commercial harvesting of seaweed from natural sources takes place in the southern portion of the Tamil Nadu coastline, from Kanyakumari (Cape Comorin) in the south, extending northwards to the peninsula that forms the GoM - a total distance of almost 300 km. The "seaweed belt" runs along the coast of Ramanathapuram District and includes the villages of Mundel, Valinokkam, Chinna Ervadi, Kilakari, Kalimangundu, Periapattnam, Pudumadam, Seeniappa Darga, Vedalai, Pamban, Chinnapalam and Rameshwaram. All these villages lie on the GoM side towards the fag end of the peninsula (Fig 1 & 1.a). Seaweeds in these locations are collected from the waters off the mainland coast and the chain of offshore islands.

This section is largely based on Coppen and Nambiar (1991) and inputs from SNAP Natural and Alginate Products Ltd, Ranipet, Tamil Nadu.

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

2.1.2

Species of seaweed utilized

The genera Gracilaria, Gelidium and Gelidiella are agarophytes used for commercial purposes. Gracilaria is used for those applications in which the strength of the gel is not critical, e.g., food products. In other cases, Gelidium or Gelidiella, separately or mixed with Gracilaria, is utilized for the manufacturing of bacteriological-grade agar (the terms Gelidium and Gelidiella are often used interchangeably within the industry although they are recognized as being separate genera). The distribution of the different genera along the Indian coast is varied. Gracilaria edulis, found along the entire length of the Tamil Nadu coastline, is the most abundant and commonly used Gracilaria species. Gracilaria verrucosa occurs in estuarine/brackishwater areas such as those found near Tuticorin, where it is collected by a few producers. Gracilaria crassa, G. corticata and G. multipartita are also found in Indian waters. Gelidiella acerosa is the predominant species in its genus; it tends to be found in slightly more rocky areas than other seaweeds. Other important seaweeds are Sargassum wightii, S. myriocystum, Turbinaria conoides and T. ornate, which are used for alginate production. 2.1.3 Seasonality of collection

Most seaweeds are generally available from middlemen (agents) throughout the year, but supplies can be more plentiful in some months than in others. Gracilaria collection peaks during January-April. Gelidium/Gelidiella is usually available throughout the year but may become scarce at times. Seasonality is a function of seaweed growth rates, which in turn depend on local environmental conditions and the extent to which seaweed collection is a primary or secondary activity within the fishing community. Seaweed collection is minimum during times of rough seas (June) and heavy rains (November). The peak period for Sargassum collection is July-August, when high winds have detached the weeds from their growth points. Table 1 presents the major characteristics of seaweeds collected in Tamil Nadu. 2

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Table 1. Primary characteristics of commercial seaweeds collected in coastal Panchayats of Ramanathapuram District, Tamil Nadu, India.
Species Year of first collection for commercial purposes 1966 Collection centres Rameswaram, Pamban, Vedalai Seeniappa darga Kilakarai, Ervadi Seasons of harvest Throughout the year Remarks a) Ratio of fresh to dry weed is 7:1. b) Harvested resources are often mixed with Ulva reticulate. c) Collected seaweed is 50 percent pure. a) Ratio of fresh to dry weed is 7:1 b) Found mixed with other species

Gelidiella acerosa

Gracilaria edulis

1966

Rameswaram Pamban, Vedalai, Seeniappa darga Kilakarai Pamban Vedalai Kilakarai

Throughout the year in GoM

Gracilaria crassa

1983

When G. acerosa a) Hand picked since and G. edulis are weeds are attached not available to pebbles or in shallow areas. b) Large quantities of sediments settle over the plants.

Sargassum spp*

1966

From GoM Islands; August-January shore collection only at Pudumadam and Kanyakumari area Rameshwaram Pamban Vedalai Seeniappa darga Periapattnam Kilakarai April-July; a) Ratio of fresh to August-December; dry weed is 7:1. January-March.

Turbinaria spp.

1975

* Natural seaweed collection from the islands of GoM is presently allowed only beyond the core area of the GoM Marine Biosphere Reserve (Personal communication from CMFRI, Mandapam). Source: Silas et al. (1987).
2.1.4 Methods of collection Fishing is the major income source for the coastal village inhabitants, with seaweed collection as an important secondary source. Seaweed collection may be the only income-generating activity for women as they are not actively engaged in fishing. Weather conditions, festival and marriage seasons, and personal judgments as to which of the two activities is more remunerative at a particular time also determine the intensity of either activity. 3

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Female seaweed collectors usually work in groups of 6-10 people and jointly hire a vathai (boat) for ` 300 per day. Their working day starts at 6 AM; depending on the tidal conditions, return to the mainland is made by 12 PM. The women wear their traditional sarees but also wear a divers mask with a gunny bag (50-kg capacity) tied to their waist; collection is done by hand in waters up to 3-4 m depth. In recent years, the use of metal scrapers has made it possible to harvest larger quantities of seaweed with less effort; however, the scraped seaweed tends to contain a higher proportion of rock and coral fragments. In addition, removal of the rootstock prevents regeneration with the consequent threat to future supplies (Coppen and Nambiar, 1991). The scrapers are also used as tools for warding off eels which may physically injure the collectors hands.2 Environmental committees have recently been formed in each costal village engaged in seaweed collection. Committees are usually formed by seven to eight people and include middlemen or agents. Meetings are held monthly and are used to discuss issues such as misuse of scrapers and impacts on the environment. Men typically collect the alginophytes (Sargassum, Turbinaria) as this involves hoarding larger quantities of weed. Nevertheless, harvesting of the alginophytes poses fewer complications as compared with the agarophytes collected by women, which are more likely to be associated with unwanted seaweeds. 2.2 The role of the seaweed agent Two distinct phases are evident in the seaweed collection and trade in Ramanathapuram district, Tamil Nadu. Seaweed collection, marketing and processing is an unorganised activity in India. Since no government approval is necessary for a local individual to become a collector, an agent or a trader, instances of the lowly collector becoming an agent and then assuming the role of a trader in due course of time is a normal transition. According to Coopens and Nambiar (1991), agents play a key role in the seaweed industry, acting as a middleman between the collector and the processor. The collection, transfer and sale of the seaweed was handled by the traders involved in seaweed trade who generally hired some 20 boats belonging to different boat owners during the season. Harvesting is directed by the major agents, who designate an organizer to assist the seaweed collectors. For a fee, the organizer leads the collectors to the seaweed areas. If the agent owns the boat, he is entitled to a share of the harvest while the reminder is divided among the collectors. The role of an agent within a village community, however, extends well beyond buying and selling seaweed. The agent controls the quality, quantity and price of seaweed released to the processor while also determining the price offered to the collector. Collectors normally borrow from agents to cover their daily living expenses; they also buy goods on credit from shops owned by the agents. Debts are adjusted against the value of the weeds the collectors bring in. These
2

Personal communication from SNAP.

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute agreements ensure a regular supply of seaweed to the agents; however, collectors easily fall into a never-ending cycle of indebtedness. At the end of a season, it is not unusual for a collector to owe up to ` 20,000 to his agent. In recent times, the presence of SNAP has become more pronounced as this company is the main procurer of the landed seaweeds. Payments are made on boat load basis by the local traders on behalf of the company directly. The company has engaged its own supervisors who oversee the landings. Companies or outsiders cannot own and operate boats since the local communities have exclusive rights of seaweed collection there is complete transparency in the actual billed reportedly amount paid to the agent-trader by the company. The payments are made in full knowledge of all the collectors and boat owners. As a measure of good will SNAP is reportedly undertaking repairing the boats of the collectors through their agents-traders. Land for storage and drying is generally leased; one or two thatched sheds are normally constructed for seaweed storage. A few agents have registered for tax purposes and tax records serves to assess the scale of their transactions.

2.3 Pricing the landings

After the seaweed is landed, the agent inspects the harvest and pays a non-negotiable price to the collectors. Quantities are measured per basket of wet weed for agarophytes and per boatload for alginophytes - the latter being more abundant, easier to harvest and consumed in greater quantities. Prices quoted by processors for the different types of seaweed were fairly consistent (Table 2). TABLE 2 Prices for seaweed paid by processors to agents
Seaweed Gelidium/Gelidiella Gracilaria Sargassum/Turbinaria
Sources: * Coppen and Nambiar (1991). **SNAP.

Price (`/tonne) (1991)* 5,000 - 8,000 2,500 - 3,500 750 - 1,000

Price (`/tonne) (2009) ** 10, 000 (Fresh) 6,000 (Fresh) 7,500 (Semi dry)

These prices are indicative rather than representative as the assessment regarding the weight of one basket or boat-load of seaweed does not appear to be consistent across the different villages. Payments received by the collectors are discounted against the loan amounts and value of goods owed to the agents. Agents in turn claim that the prices they receive from processors are falling, preventing landing prices on the beach from rising. Prices paid to collectors are also normally discounted based on the agents' belief that the collectors deliberately adulterate the wet seaweed 5

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute with sand and other materials. Following its purchase, the seaweed is spread on the beach for drying. Dried weed is transferred to thatched sheds for storage in heaps or in gunny bags. Hired labour is used for sorting, cleaning, drying and packing. As much as five tonnes a day could be handled during the peak season. During periods of excess demand, agents procure additional partly-dried stock from subordinate agents for complete drying and the subsequent final sale. In any given year, seaweed sales typically comprise of a large proportion of Sargassum and Turbinaria and a smaller proportion of the higher value agarophytes. The processor negotiates the price of the weed according to his evaluation of purity and dryness. Small processors inspect the raw material personally and negotiate the deal. Larger firms have employees who procure the material. These processors often maintain a purchase office in the locality and even provide "in-house" labour for preliminary sorting and cleaning of seaweed. Costs of transportation and packing are borne by the processors. The turnover time from collection to sale could be only 15 days. Agents claim that properly dried material can be stored safely for many months. How much seaweed is purchased at any given time by the processors depends more on the distance between the landing point and the processing factory than on the scale of the operation. Frequency of purchase could be as high as once a month or as low as once a year. Some processors may acquire the bulk of material when it is in plentiful supply and then "top it up" with smaller lots as required. The process of collection, assembly, drying, storage, sale and transportation has remained more or less unchanged over the last two decades. Marketing channels have apparently not undergone any modernization during the same period, either. 2.4 Employment in the seaweed sector It has been estimated that seaweed resources in India can provide employment to more than 20,000 fishers in harvesting and an equal number of jobs in post-harvesting activities, provided stocks are managed rationally. The seaweed resources along the southern end of the Tamil Nadu coast provide a ready-made livelihood for both men and women in poor fishing communities. Rao and Mantri (2006) have reported that there are 13 seaweed landing centres on the southeastern coast. According to Immanuel and Sathiadhas (2004), five thousand women in southeastern India depend on seaweed related activities for their livelihood.

Seaweed processing industry in India

3.1 The agar industry in India In India, industrial uses for agar-agar emerged during the Second World War (Khan, 2003). The seaweed industry then developed as commercial uses and technologies for agar-agar, alginic 6

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute acid, carrageenan and liquid seaweed fertilizers were being developed. The R&D conducted by CSMCRI was crucial in this respect. The seaweed industry emerged primarily as a cottage industry (Kaladharan and Kaliaperumal 1999) based on the natural stocks of agar-yielding red seaweeds such as G. acerosa and G. edulis and algin-yielding brown seaweeds species such as Sargasum sp. and Turbinaria sp. Agar production in India started in 1940 using G. edulis as raw material. Subsequently, Thivy (1960) developed a viable cottage-industry method for the manufacture of agar from Gracilaria lichenoides. Using Gelidium micropterum as raw material, Kappana and Rao (1963) developed a process for the industrial manufacturing of agar. Subsequently, a number of firms also turned to G. acerosa as raw material. It is estimated that the Indian industry currently requires around 400 tonnes of agar annually, but only 30 percent of this total is being produced domestically. As the nearest commercial and industrial hub to the seaweed belt, Madurai district which is adjacent to Ramanathapuram district is the natural center for agar production in India. Other producers in Tamil Nadu are located in towns nearer the southern coast. There are also a number of factories in Kerala, northern Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh. However, the potential for growth in Kerala has been reduced by the energy and water crisis affecting the state during the last decade. 3.1.1 Scales of operation The Indian agar industry is mostly composed of small, family-run enterprises employing as few as three or four people and producing 2-4 kg of agar per day (0.5-1 tonnes per year). Mediumsized units can produce 10-40 kg of agar per day (2-10 tonnes per year). The outlook for the agar industry has remained more or less unchanged during the last two decades. The scope of expansion is very limited as the industry is strictly dependent on the natural stocks of red and brown seaweeds. India produces between 110-132 tonnes of dry agar annually based on the harvest of 880-1,100 tonnes (dry weight) of agarophytes (Mohanta et al., 2007). Immanuel and Sathiadhas (2004), estimate that there are 25 agar factories in Kerala and Tamil Nadu, each of which employs around 8-10 workers earning monthly salaries of ` 1,750 (men) and ` 1,500 (women). 3.1.2 Uses of agar The coastal population of Tamil Nadu uses G. edulis for preparing gruel (porridge); this is the only known use of algae as food in India. Gracilaria edulis is also used in Tamil Nadu as manure for coconut plantations (Silas et al., 1987). Agar is used in the preparation of jellies, dairy products (yoghurt), confectioneries (jelly/ marshmallow type), bakery products (including pie fillings and icings), and canned meats. Agar is widely used in India in vegetarian foods and dishes such as faluda and blancmange. The Muslim community traditionally consumes large quantities of agar during the Ramadan season. The 7

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute growing interest in tissue culture as a standard method for the propagation of orchids and other ornamental plants, vegetables, fruits and other agricultural products has increased the demand for agar-agar as a culture media. Agar is also used in the preparation of dental casts in prosthetic dentistry. Although the gel strength of Indian agar is lower than that from other sources, it nevertheless meets the requirements of the domestic food and pharmaceutical industries. 3.1.3 Sourcing raw materials - Quality criteria Dried seaweeds are available at collection centres in Tamil Nadu at a price of ` 22-25/kg. The agar industry routinely complains about both the quantity and quality of the raw material. Inconsistent supplies, poor quality owing to improper drying, fungal infestations and presence of foreign matters in the seaweeds (e.g. small seashells and seagrasses) result in low agar output and poor gel strength and viscosity. Most agar producers grade the purity of their raw materials at around 50-60 per cent at best; users of Gelidiella typically consider it to be 30 percent pure. However, this state of affairs generate a sense of resignation among processors as the prevailing view is that someone else would buy what is being offered to them, regardless of the quality of the material. They repeatedly state that there is little to gain by attempting to enforce quality standards. Indian producers consider the colour and gel strength of agar as the most important criteria of its quality. For food uses, paleness of colour ("whiteness") is deemed essential; thus, bleaching of the agar gel during the final stages of processing is universal. Because gel strength is a less important attribute, Gracilaria is mainly used for the production of food grade agar. Currently, no Indian standard specifications have been placed with regard to gel strength, meaning that producers have little incentive to improve the quality of the product (Coppen and Nambiar, 1991). 3.1.4 Marketing Food-grade agar (called China Grass) is sold by small and medium-scale producers to wholesalers or dealers from large cities such as Chennai and Mumbai. The common mat form is packed in polythene bags and dispatched in sacks to the dealer, who then repackages the product for retail sale, often under his own brand name. Poorer quality (off-white) mat agar is powdered and sold as "instant" China Grass. Larger producers sell to both wholesalers and end-users. IF grade agar3 is generally sold directly to end-users. IF grade agar appears to be particularly attractive to new or prospective producers as well as to some of the existing producers of food-grade agar. Occasional consignments of agar are exported by the larger producers, with opportunities emerging for the sale of food-grade agar to West Asia. However, most Indian production targets the domestic market; foreign buyers are not in general attracted to the quantity and quality of the seaweed produced in India. Output is low (or nil) during the monsoon season (because the
3

The IF grade is the agar used for bacteriological or pharmaceutical applications. The term "IF" is used to denote the fact that the agar meets Indian Pharmacopoeia standards.

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute agar cannot be sundried) while both demand and supply increase during the Ramadan season. Prices for food-grade agar are dependent upon colour and gel strength, regardless of the occurrence of Ramadan. Prices for good quality food-grade agar produced in powdered form are higher than those of the corresponding mat form. Marine Chemicals Private Limited, Cochin, Kerala, contributes 50 percent of the total domestic production (Rao and Mantri, 2006). This company has also established a strong reputation in the export markets, with sales to countries in the five continents. Its production units are located in 3 different centres - Kochi in the state of Kerala and Pamban and Madurai in Tamil Nadu, with a combined production capacity of 60 tonnes per year. The company produces a range of products based on both bacteriological and food-grade agar. 3.1.5 Constraints faced by the industry Operational constraints such as power and water supply shortages are common. When operational constraints become overbearing, bankruptcy is often the end result. Growth of the industry has also been limited by the unavailability of capital. Small-scale producers are also affected by low capacity utilization caused by enforced stoppages and seasonal factors. In general, the industry is looking forward to the potential of culture agarophytes. Producers have repeatedly expressed their willingness to pay a higher price for cultured seaweeds free of epiphytes and other foreign matter. 3.2 Alginate production in India The production potential of refined alginates in India is around 500 tonnes, assuming a yield of 7 to 30 percent (on dry weight basis) for algin-yielding seaweeds (Thivy, 1964). SNAP contributes half of the domestic production (Rao and Mantri, 2006). It is estimated that the Indian industry currently requires around 1,000 tonnes per year of alginate, meaning that domestic production is only capable of supplying 50 percent of internal demand. Madurai and surrounding areas, with their proximity to the sources of raw material, and Ahmedabad (near the major markets) have emerged as the major centres of alginate production in India. A few producers of agar also manufacture alginates, even though the equipment and chemical requirements for the two operations are different. Although the industry is not constrained by the availability of raw materials (Sargassum and Turbinaria), processing can nevertheless operate at less than installed capacity owing to other operational constraints. Many grades of alginates are produced in India. Alginic acid and sodium, calcium, potassium and ammonium alginates are some of the products manufactured. Alginates are widely used in textile printing and in the food and pharmaceutical industries; applications in other industries are constantly emerging. 9

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Mumbai and Ahmedabad, the textile hubs of India, are the major purchasers of textile-grade alginate. Erode, the hosiery hub, is also supplied by alginate producers in Tamil Nadu. Price rather than quality seems to be the determining factor for buyers in the textile industry. Food-grade alginates are mainly supplied to the ice cream industry. Pharmaceutical and food-grade alginate, which are manufactured according to Indian and international standards, are priced around ` 275-300/kg. These products are subject to an 8.2 per cent duty but no value-added tax (VAT) is levied. 4 Resource management issues

With the establishment of the GoMBRT and the GoMMNP (Appendix 2), the livelihood opportunities of seaweed-collecting fishermen have been restricted to collection outside core areas of the Reserve Trust. The livelihoods of many of these fishers are entirely dependent on seaweed collection. Restrictions have not been placed on the Palk Bay side, which has become a beehive of activity for seaweed farming. Landings of Gelidiella, Sargassum and Turbinaria peaked in 1979 while landings of Gracilaria peaked in 1978. Since then, collectors have complained about the increasing scarcity of red seaweeds over the years, meaning that they have to work harder to collect the same quantities harvested in previous years. Management of seaweed resources has received little attention in India. Government actions have been restricted to controlling trade through licensing, with little effort being made to prohibit harmful harvesting practices. The need for conservation is recognized by present efforts to develop seaweed farming as an alternative source of good quality, easily accessible raw material for the industry (Coppen and Nambiar, 1991). Sustainable utilization involves both conservation efforts and proper husbandry practices as unplanned harvesting of seaweeds from their natural habitats have led to depletion of standing crops. Continuation of these practices might exhaust the resource completely, not even sparing the basic nuclei needed for propagation in the succeeding season. Timetables for commercial harvest of economically important seaweeds from the Tamil Nadu and Gujarat coasts have been drawn up based on the maturity of the crops, which might aid to improve sustainability of the sector (Kaliaperumal and Kalimuthu, 1997). Countries such as France, Spain and Zanzibar have enacted legislation to regulate the harvest of seaweed resources. Similar legislations could be enacted in India to achieve a more sustainable utilization of the resource. 5 Historical account of seaweed mariculture in India

It has been estimated that seaweed can be farmed in around 200 thousand ha or 0.001 percent of the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) (Krishnamurthy, 2005). The rocky beaches, mudflats, estuaries and lagoons on the Indian coasts offer ideal habitats for seaweed farming. 10

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute 5.1 Experimental culture trials With a view towards developing suitable technologies for the commercial-scale cultivation of raw material to the agar industries, the Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute (CMFRI), the Central Salt and Marine Chemicals Research Institute (CSMCRI)4 and related organizations began the experimental cultivation of agar-yielding seaweeds Gelidiella and Gracilaria in 1964. In addition, various carageenophytes and edible seaweeds such as Hypnea, Sargassum, Turbinaria, Cystoseira, Hormophysa, Caulerpa, Ulva, Enteromorpha and Acanthophora have been cultured in different field environments using various techniques (Kaliaperumal, 2004). These experiments revealed that Gelidiella acerosa can be successfully cultivated on dead coral and Gracilaria edulis, Hypnea musciformis, Acanthophora spicifera and Enteromorpha flexuosa on long line ropes and nets. The agar-yielding G. acerosa was cultured successfully on coir/nylon ropes, frames, nets and dead coral stones in the inshore waters of the (GoM) and Palk Bay near Mandapam (Plate 1&2). Small fragments obtained from mother plants were inserted in the twist of the coir ropes,5 tied at the mesh intersections of nylon rope nets using nylon twine; seeded twines were wound on the nails fixed to the dead coral stones. A two-fold increase over the quantity of seed material after 60 days of culture period was obtained from coir rope frames and nylon nets while a 33-fold increase was achieved on coral stones (Subbaramiah et al., 1975; Patel et al., 1986). The CSMCRI has developed a technology for commercial scale cultivation of G. acerosa using the dead coral stone method. Cultivation of G. edulis was carried out in the lagoon of the GoM islands and in the shallow waters of the GoM and Palk Bay at Mandapam using coir rope and nets, nylon rope nets and nylon mono-lines (Kaliaperumal, 2004). The fragments of the plants were directly inserted on the twists of coir ropes and nets tied at mesh intersections of nylon rope nets with nylon twine. These experiments obtained an average yield of a three-fold increase after 60 days. From the experiments conducted in a 0.1-ha area, it is estimated that a total quantity of 120 tonnes (fresh weight) could be harvested from a 1-ha of nets in a year. These experiments also showed that G. edulis could be successfully cultivated on a commercial scale throughout the year in the GoM coast and during June-September in the Palk Bay coast of the Mandapam area (Raju and Thomas, 1971; Umamaheswara Rao, 1974; Krishnamurthy et al., 1975, 1977; Chennubhotla et al., 1978; Kaliaperumal et al., 1996). Attempts were made to culture the agarophytes G. edulis, Gracilaria corticata and Gracilaria foliifera in the Kerala coast by reproductive and vegetative propagation methods. Based on the results obtained with the field trials for G. edulis cultivation, CMFRI evolved a viable technology for commercial-scale farming using coir rope nets by 1983 (Chennubhotla and Kaliaperumal, 1983; Kaliaperumal and Ramalingam, 2000). With this method, one kg of seed material could potentially yield an average of 3 kg/m2 of net after 60 days.
4 5

CSMCRI is a constituent laboratory of the Indian Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR). Ropes made from fibre extracted from coconut husks.

11

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

Plate 1. Kappaplycus Cultivation in Mandapam first portion

Courtesy: Aquagri Processing Private Limited, New Delhi

12

Plate 2. Kappaplycus Cultivation in Mandapam Second portion

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

Courtesy: Aquagri processing Private Limited, New Delhi

13

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute In 1990, G. edulis was transported from Krusudai Islands (Mandapam) and Kavaratti Island to Minicoy Islands (Lakshadweep) to be cultivated in lagoons on long line ropes and nets by the vegetative propagation method. Results were encouraging, with yields reaching a maximum of a 30-fold increase in a 60-day growth period. These trials proved that G. edulis could be successfully cultivated on a commercial scale in the lagoons of these islands during the pre-monsoon (March to June) and post-monsoon (October to February) seasons (Chennubotla et al., 1992; Kaliaperumal et al., 1992). Commercial cultivation of G. edulis was also shown feasible using fiberglass tanks in outdoor environments with continuous running water and aeration. A growout period of 70 days resulted in a maximum of a 4.75-fold increase in biomass (Kaliaperumal, 2004). Gracilaria edulis has also been cultivated successfully by reproductive methods using tetraspores and carpospores. With this technology, spores from mature plants are liberated and settled on cement blocks and other substrates and cultured to germlings in the laboratory. They are thereafter transferred to the sea. The germlings take between 5 to 6 months to reach a harvestable size. The technology has been perfected at CMFRI for commercial scale cultivation (Reeta Jayasankar and Kaliaperumal, 1991). In the case of the carrageenan-yielding red algae H. musciformis, CMFRI achieved a four-fold increase in biomass in 25 days during experimental trials (Rama Rao et al., 1985; Rama Rao and Subbaramaiah, 1986). With A. spicifera, CMFRI achieved a 3.6-fold increase after 45 days through vegetative propagation (Kaliaperumal et al., 1986). Kappaphycus alvarezii was cultured successfully by vegetative propagation at the Suarashtra in the west coast of India and Mandapam regions (Mairh et al., 1995; Eswaran et al., 2002). It was also successfully cultured in the nearshore areas of Narakkal (Kochi) and Calicut in the state of Kerala. Chennubhotla et al. (1986) has documented the pattern of release of spores for several Gracilaria species found in Mandapam. The TNDoF has also conducted trials on the seaward side of Kurusadai Island using vegetative propagation techniques (Kalkman et al., 1991). In 1987, following a great deal of preparatory work and the active involvement of communities from the fishing villages of Vedalai and Chinnapalam, the FAO-supported Bay of Bengal Programme set up culture trials of G. edulis after assessing the technical, economic and social viability of seaweed culture in Ramanathapuram district (Kalkman et al., 1991). The program had the objective of introducing commercially oriented practices suitable to the local environmental and socioeconomic conditions, to increase the level of training in seaweed culture and to conduct marketing trials. Although a small amount of seaweed was harvested, these pilot-scale attempts failed primarily because of grazing by juvenile siganids (rabbit fish) and issues with the management of the program. Despite the encouraging results from some of the initial experimental trials, which revealed a 14

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute clear potential for successful commercial cultivation, industrial development did not follow up immediately (Coppen and Nambiar, 1991). 5.2 Organized development of seaweed farming6

The first organized attempt to culture seaweed at an industrial scale in India was initiated by PepsiCo Holdings India Ltd (PepsiCo) in 2000. Given its experience with contract farming, the international chocolate, foods and pet foods manufacturer MARS requested PepsiCo to explore seaweed farming as a business opportunity in India. The search for technology and the planting material eventually led to CSMCRI in Bhavnagar, Gujarat, which had developed the commercial cultivation method for K. alvarezii. Initially PepsiCo evaluated two types of red seaweeds, K. alvarezii and H. musciformis. From the onset, evaluation trials revealed that efforts had to be focused on the former given its greater ease of cultivation and market acceptability. Activities began in 2002 with the leasing of an area of 10 ha on the Palk Bay side towards Mandapam; around 100 kg of planting material received from CSMCRI were seeded. Early challenges included heavy grazing by fish and the need for modifications in the culture technology to enable adoption by local growers. Mono-line cultivation gave way to raft culture with net bottoms to prevent grazing by fish. PepsiCo had initially requested permission to operate along a 35-km stretch along the GoM and Palk Bay, equivalent to an area of about 350 ha. The company had a preference for the GoM because of its calmer seas, conducive to faster growth rates (average daily growth rate [ADGR] of 6-8 %). However, because the selected area fell within the GoMNNP, cultivation was restricted to the Palk Bay side, where growth rates are lower (ADGR of only 2.5 to 3.5 %). After having demonstrated the economic feasibility of the proposed venture, the company decided to modify its business model in 2003. Instead of hiring daily wageworkers, PepsiCo encouraged workers to engage in contract farming by making available the culture infrastructure on a staggered payment basis. Even though contract farming offered a greater potential for increased income, the proposed contractual arrangement did not gain immediate acceptance among fishing villagers. The contract farming model proposed an allocation of 45 rafts for each individual member of a SHG (Box 1) and a harvest cycle of 45 days. The model assumed that each individual within the group would be able to conveniently plant and harvest one raft per day. A farmer should be able to harvest around 260 kg per raft, out of which 60 kg would be used as planting material for the next cycle, leaving 200 kg of fresh weed or 22 kg of dry weed available for sale. 5.2.1 Role of the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD)7 NABARD is a refinancing development bank with a mandate for facilitating credit flow for promotion and development of agriculture and small-scale industries in rural areas of India. The
This section is based on personal communications and inputs from Mr Abhiram Seth, Managing Director, Aquagri Processing P7 15 This section is based on personal communications from Dr K. Palanisamy and Mr. Kannabiram, Assistant General Managers, NABARD in Chennai and Ramanathapuram (Tamil Nadu), respectively.
7 6

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute funds available to commercial banks, including State Bank of India, for agricultural sector lending are normally routed through NABARD. Under this scheme, financing of SHGs is collateral free. Because many SHGs in the Mandapam area already had savings accounts with their local banks, the channeling of collateral-free microcredit was facilitated. The involvement of the banks has also assisted the SHGs with mobilization, capacity building, training and extension of technology. Marketing arrangements were assured through contract-farming mechanisms wherein PepsiCo agreed to procure the harvested seaweed at a predetermined minimum price and remit the cash through the bank accounts. To ensure smooth implementation, farming contracts were arranged between the State Bank of India (SBI) and PepsiCo, enabling the bank to provide credit support to the SHGs interested in seaweed cultivation while PepsiCo agreed to procure the harvested seaweed. By means of Government Order G.O. Ms No. 229 (dated 20 December 2005), the Government of Tamil Nadu authorized SHGs to begin seaweed cultivation in the sea waters north of Palk Bay and on the South of Tuticorin coast. Under this arrangement, SBI approved the release of ` 11,542 million8 to finance around 60 SHGs (covering 285 members) in the Ramanathapuram-Mandapam area during 2008-2009, with no subsidies being involved Encouraged by the success of these SHGs, the District Rural Development Agency (DRDA) began providing subsidies to selected SHGs under the Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana (SGSY) programme, which covered 50 percent of the project cost, provided the subsidy did not exceed ` 10,000 per person or ` 0.125 million per SHG, whichever was less. Under this scheme, the Bank of Baroda financed 40 SHGs (covering 200 members) during 2008-2009. Sporadic financing has also been provided in Thanjavur, Tuticorin and Kanyakumari districts of Tamil Nadu by the Indian Overseas Bank and SBI. An Aquaclinic Centre (Meenvalamaiyyam) operating in Mandapam, has been promoted by NABARD and the M.S. Swaminathan Research Foundation (MSSRF), an Indian NGO that implements training programs on various livelihood opportunities in fisheries (including seaweed culture), in association with the TNDoF. Seaweed culture has been identified by the Indian Government as one of the rural technologies to be promoted in India (NIRD, 2003).

Exchange rate as of April 2010: USD 1.00 = ` 44.422.

16

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

BOX 1 Self help groups history, guidelines and performance Self-help groups (SHGs) first emerged in projects led by the Mysore Resettlement and Development Agency (MYRADA) in 1985. By 1987 some 300 SHGs had been established in MYRADA projects. NABARD (1992) issued guidelines that would allow banks to lend directly to SHGs. The Tamil Nadu Womens Empowerment Project, an IFAD-supported project implemented through the Tamil Nadu Corporation Development of Women (TNCDW), was the first project in the country to incorporate the SHG concept into a state-sponsored program, in 1990. A SHG is an association of rural poor who have volunteered to organize themselves into a working group. Members agree to save regularly and pool their savings into a common fund known as the group corpus. Members agree to use this common fund and such other funds they may receive as a group through a common-management arrangement. The SHG may consist of 5-20 persons. To be recognized as a SHG, a group should adhere to the following norms: 1) all members should belong to families below the poverty line (BPL); 2) only one member from a single family is permitted as a member in a SHG; 3) a member can belong to only one SHG; 4) members belonging to families marginally above the poverty line (living with BPL families) can be admitted into a SHG as long as they do not represent over 20 percent and in exceptional cases over 30 per cent of the entire membership; 5) above-poverty-line members will not be eligible for state subsidies and positions as office bearers in the SHG; and 6) 50 per cent of members should be women. The SHG movement in India has reached an exceptional number of poor households since its inception and thus has been recognized as the largest microfinance program in the world. Since 1992, when NABARD initiated the SHG-bank linkage programme, over 2.2 million SHGs have been reached, which translates to almost 33 million households. Today there are more than 3 million SHGs with active banking accounts in India. As of 31 March 2008, 4770,612 SHGs have been credit-linked in Tamil Nadu, of which 46, 283 are formed exclusively by women. The pace of formation of SHGs in the southern Indian states is remarkable. On the other hand, activity in the northern and eastern states is not very encouraging. These states account for as much as 63 per cent of the countrys rural BPL population, but claim only 40 percent of the total SHGs. The southern states are home to 11 per cent of the rural BPL population but account for more than 33 per cent of the SHGs. Federations of rural SHGs from village up to the district level are necessary to strengthen their voice and bargaining power and reduce their dependency on external agencies. In most states, however, very few SHGs have been federated at various levels. State Government initiatives - Mahalir Thittam programme The TNCDW has been spearheading the SHG movement in Tamil Nadu in partnership with NGOs and community-based organizations, under the Mahalir Thitttam programme. Training in leadership

17

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

quality, team building, accounting systems are currently being undertaken. As of 31 March 2008, 370 thousand SHGs had been formed under this programme, of which 310 thousand had been credit linked with bank loans amounting to ` 26,734 million. To upscale the program, the Government of Tamil Nadu has started providing revolving funds of ` 10,000 to groups in rural areas under the Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana (SGSY) programme, with banks providing cash credit (up to ` 30,000 per group). In 2008-09, the State Government has decided to provide a revolving fund subsidy to all eligible 150 thousand SHGs. The State Government is also providing seed money to panchayat-level federations of SHGs functioning in the State (Panchayat is the basic unit of district administration in Tamil Nadu). The State Government has now started the Vazhndhu Kaatuvom Project to financially assist SHGs with the formation of micro enterprises. For more details, visit: http://www.tn.gov.in/dtp/shg.htm http://www.nabard.org/fileupload/DataBank/FocusPapers/SPF%20Executive%20Summary%200910_170209.pdf

5.2.2 Role of the State Bank of India (SBI) The SBI began to promote seaweed cultivation projects in collaboration with the Chennaibased NGO Aquaculture Foundation of India (AFI) in 2006. Marketing was conducted through PepsiCo. It is estimated that each member of participating SHGs earned over ` 5,000 a month after repaying the monthly loan installment to SBI. This model represented a new approach for funding livelihood restoration projects following the destruction caused by the December 2004 tsunami. Nearly 80 per cent of those involved in these SHGs were women. The experience with SHGs has proved to be a major success in entrepreneurship development and loan recovery. By 2006, the bank had granted a total of about ` 22,630 million to over 540 thousand groups, 64 662 of which were located in Tamil Nadu. This approach was also implemented in the livelihood restoration project in Mandapam and extended to Tuticorin and Kanyakumari. The bank had plans to extend the project to other states and other coastal districts in Tamil Nadu. By March 2007, SBI was planning to release over ` 1.0 billion in credit to support the livelihoods of over 10 thousand families. 5.2.3 Role of the Seaweed Research and Utilization Association (Mandapam) The Seaweed Research and Utilization Association was established in 1970 at the initiative of Prof. V. Krishnamurthy, who was at the time an Assistant Director at CSMCRI directly in charge of the field station in Mandapam (subsequently named the Marine Algal Research Station). The Association organizes an annual symposium on algae related topics and publishes a journal, Seaweed Research and Utilization, with Prof. Krishnamurthy as its Chief Editor. This is the only journal in India devoted exclusively to the publication of research on marine algae. 18

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

BOX 2 CSMCRI PepsiCo interaction During the last few years, PepsiCo has provided funds to the CSMCRI (Bhavnagar, Gujarat) to carry out a number of projects on the development of viable technologies for Hypnea Kappaphycus cultivation, harvesting and manufacture of semi refined carrageenan, and studies on the environmental impact assessment of Kappaphycus cultivation on the marine ecosystem. CSMCRI successfully transferred the technological package for cultivation of Kappaphycus on a commercial scale to PepsiCo in March 2000. For its contribution to the development of seaweed farming in India, the CSMCRI was granted the prestigious CSIR Technology Award in Biological Sciences in 2001. At present, PepsiCo is engaging in massive scale cultivation of K. alvarezii in a 15-20 ha area in the Palk Bay site near the famous temple at Rameshwaram. The total permitted area extends to 100 ha. The company continues to benefit from the advice of CSMCRI scientists. Source: CSIR News, Vol. 53, No. 13, 15 July 2003.

5.2.4 Role of the Krishnamurthy Institute of Algology The Krishnamurthy Institute of Algology (KIA) was established by a group of Indian phycologists who felt there was a need for an institution devoted to research and development on algal studies. The group unanimously resolved to establish the Institute in Chennai and to name it the Krishnamurthy Institute of Algology after Prof. Krishnamurthy, who had convened the meeting for discussing the creation of such an institution in July 1991. The laboratory is currently equipped for studies on morphology, taxonomy, life history and basic algae chemistry. The library has an extensive collection of books and journals on phycology. The herbarium contains about 500 sheets of Indian marine algae, in addition to collections from South Africa, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. The facilities of the institute are open to research to any visitor with a special interest on the field. During its beginnings, the institute was mostly interested on macroalgal culture and practical applications; the current focus has expanded to cover microalgae culture, development and utilization. The institute conducts periodical seminars and symposia on algal-related subjects and has been publishing a journal (Indian Hydrobiology) for the last 12 years. 5.2.5 Aquagri Processing Private Limited (Aquagri) PepsiCo sold its eight-year-old seaweed cultivation business which also resulted in a global patent for a chemical-free derivative product to a group of entrepreneurs led by former PepsiCo executive Abhiram Seth in August 2008. PepsiCo transferred the assets of the seaweed venture at 19

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute book value to a newly formed company, Aquagri. According to press reports, PepsiCo hived off the seaweed division owing to problems associated with managing an increasing workforce on a noncore business activity. Through Aquagri, PepsiCo continues to honor its buyback commitment made to the SHGs. Aquagri has placed its focus on the agricultural by-produce, ensuring marketing through strategic associations with agro-based businesses. The company is planning to extend operations in the Gujarat coast and set up the first seaweed processing plant in Tamil Nadu. Aquagri has also provided buyback guarantee for the new cultivation projects launched by CSMCRI in the states of Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh; in addition Aquagri has indicated its intent to set up manufacturing facilities at these centres once activities scale up. While seaweed cultivation currently engages about 1,000 people (predominantly women) in Mandapam area of Tamil Nadu, Aquagri plans to increase that number to 50,000. A seaweed farmer typically earns ` 3,000 5,000 a month but his/her earnings could go up to ` 10,000 a month. In order to provide prospects for long-term livelihood sustainability, Aquagri introduced the Growers Investment Program (GIP) in April 2009. Under this program, the company deducts 5 per cent of the income of the SHG/farmer; the deduction is matched by the company and the total contribution is deposited in a bank. The overall goal is to initiate a SHG-owned microcredit lending program. Aquagri also extends monetary assistance to growers to help them meet their out-of pocket expenses in times of social emergencies. As an additional example of corporate social responsibility, SNAP Natural and Alginate Products Limited (SNAP), an Indian alginate conglomerate based in Ranipet, Tamil Nadu, is also engaged in organizing village committees to help seaweed collectors understand the issues of responsible collection and conservation of Sargassum resources in the region. The company is reportedly in the process of taking over the debt burden of the seaweed collectors to release them from their obligations with seaweed agents and traders. SNAP has also made financial contributions to cover the salaries of teachers in Panchayat9 schools. 5.2.6 The Tamil Nadu State Department of Fisheries (TNDoF)10 The support of the TNDoF to seaweed farming as an alternative livelihood strategy for smallscale fishermen has provided a major impetus to the activity. Given the length of the Indian coastal line and the number of people looking for alternative livelihood opportunities, India has the potential to evolve into a major world seaweed producer. From 2007 to 2009, the TNDoF trained 1,300 fishers (13 batches of 100 members each) in the farming of Kappaphycus. This included 200 members of 40 SHGs who received a government subsidy under the Joint Liability Group (JLG) scheme of the TNDoF.
9

Panchayat is the basic unit of district administration in Tamil Nadu.

20

Personal communication: Mr R. Dinakaran, Assistant Director of Fisheries, TNDoF, Mandapam, Ramanathapuram district, Tamil Nadu (26 October 2009).

10

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute 5.2.7 Role of the Aquaculture Foundation of India (AFI) The Aquaculture Foundation of India (AFI)11 plays a very active role in the promotion of seaweed farming in the southern districts of Tamil Nadu. AFI identifies the most suitable SHGs for further involvement with the DRDA, TNDoF and the banks. With support from Aquagri and the government departments, AFI also imparts training and provides support to to SHG participants for obtaining government subsidies and financing from the banks. AFI also works in collaboration with colleges and universities (such as the M.S. University, Tirunelveli, Tamil Nadu) to increase the scale of seaweed farming. 5.2.8 Role of the National Fisheries Development Board (NFDB) The NFDB is a government agency specifically constituted in 2006 for development of the fisheries sector in India. Considering the vast potential of seaweed cultivation and processing in India, the NFDB has developed supporting schemes for the promotion of these activities. This support includes (a) training and demonstration programs and (b) establishment of seaweed processing units. For the training programs, farmers/entrepreneurs (preferably fisher women) are selected based on (i) past experience of the farmer in undertaking seaweed cultivation; (ii) willingness of the farmer to assimilate scientific advice; and (iii) willingness to upgrade current farming practices. The NFDB also awards grants to other government agencies, NGOs, etc. for the development of training and demonstration sites for seaweed farming. The NFDB is currently considering to provide financial assistance for the construction of seaweed processing plants. 5.3 A time line of the development of seaweed farming in Tamil Nadu Table 3 provides a timeline of the major events marking the development of seaweed farming in Tamil Nadu since the year 2000.

11

AFI is an NGO based in Chennai, Tamil Nadu.

21

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Table 3 A time line of the development of seaweed farming in Tamil Nadu, India 2000 2001 Agreement with CSMCRI on Kappaphycus cultivation and genesis of the undertaking. The project seaweed cultivation was commenced in February 2001. The net-bag technique was the method formulated by CSMCRI, but was not found suitable for commercial scale. The TN Government granted PepsiCo access to one km of water front (10 ha) for pilot-scale cultivation at Palk Bay. Farming began in Munaikkadu (Mandapam area) by adapting the mono-line method. Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) officials visited the PepsiCo site to monitor the 10-ha farming area and certified the project. Mono-line cultivation was in place until April 2002. Due to severe grazing, the entire seeded area (10 ha) was lost in May. Thereafter, trials were conducted to establish a commercially viable method. ` 0.2 million were paid to the Tamil Nadu Maritime Board (TNMB) for the leasing of the 1-km water front area. A full-fledged quality control lab to check the quality dry weeds was also established. Based on the results of more than 120 trials, the bamboo raft technique emerged as the most suitable commercially viable method. The daily-wages model was withdrawn and the contract faming method was successfully implemented in March 2003. About 3,500 rafts were harvested, delivering 126 tonnes. Another 5,000 rafts were seeded for further expansion. Trial cultivation was also carried out in the Prakasam District of Andhra Pradesh (AP). PepsiCo expanded farming to the Tuticorin District. For the first time, three SHGs received subsidies from DRDA to engage in seaweed cultivation. The Department of Biotechnology (DBT) sanctioned ` 9 million to rehabilitate tsunami-affected areas, which led to the floating of 5,500 rafts. The company entered into an agreement with SBI for establishing a buyback guarantee; both infrastructure and cultivators were placed under insurance coverage. Expansion of farming to the Tanjore District. A total of 8,100 rafts were harvested, delivering 244 tonnes of dry weed. The sap extracted from Kappaphycus was found to be an excellent biofertilizer. Expansion of farming to Pudukkottai. The DBT activates a project in Tanjore but due to poor growth/whitening, it is moved to Mandapam. Mono-line method was restarted again in Mandapam as it is found to provide better returns. Trial cultivation is carried out in Krishna district (AP); however, salinity drop in back waters and rough waves in open seas lead to poor plant growth. Aquagri takes over the PepsiCo project. Commercialization of AquaSAP has been started. Construction of a Semi-Refined Carrageenan (SRC) unit at SIPCOT is initiated. 22

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008 2009

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute 5.4 Development of alternative production methods and value-added processes and products The main product derived from K. alvarezii is carrageenan, a gel-forming agent widely used in the pharmaceutical, cosmetic, food and pet food industries. Carrageenan fetches prices of up to USD 5,000/tonne in the world market, the total size of which was valued at over USD 300 million in 2005. The Philippines and Indonesia today account for over 90 per cent of the world production of K. alvarezii, currently estimated around 400 thousand tonnes. Sixty-five per cent of this total is traded in dried form. Carrageenan is much superior to agar both in terms of cost and versatility, particularly in its ability to form an almost infinite variety of gels at room temperature. It is for this reason that carrageenan compounds are used for thickening, stabilizing and improving viscosity of various foods and non-food products.
BOX 3 Beneficial environmental impacts of sea plant cultivation As any other alga, Kappaphycus sequesters carbon, thereby ameliorating the impact of greenhouse gases. Twenty-six percent of the dry mass of Kappaphycus consists of carbon. Seaweed farming offers a clear opportunity for growers to earn carbon credits. Co-cultivation of algae with marine finfish is recommended as a best aquaculture practice as it reduces the polluting potential of farming sites. Algal cultivation creates habitats/shelters for the breeding of fish and other marine organisms. Most algae have a 90 percent moisture content and, despite growing in sea water, have limited sodium content and are rich in potassium, which opens up the potential for extracting fresh potable water and low-sodium salt. BOX 4 Carrageenan extraction from dry weed Carrageenans are a family of linear sulphated polysaccharides extracted from seaweeds. Carrageenan has the ability to form a variety of different gels which are stable at room temperature. This leads to a wide range of applications as thickening and stabilizing agents in various industries such as food processing, dairy, pet foods, cosmetics and pharmaceuticals. The process of manufacture and extraction of carrageenan from dry weed is both water and energy intensive. Given concerns of water availability in coastal areas, PepsiCo partnered with CSMCRI in developing fresh-weed processing technology.

23

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute The partnership established between PepsiCo and CSMCRI to explore more water and energy efficient processing technologies led to the development of a fresh-weed processing system which yielded SAP,12 an organic fertilizer rich in micronutrients, aminoacids and growth hormones. Since then SAP has been applied to a range of crops (brinjal, onion, corn, black gram, paddy, sugar cane) and has consistently increased yields by 12 to 40 per cent (Table 4). This technological innovation for which CSMCRI obtained a global patent was licensed to PepsiCo. The development was singled out as an important technology breakthrough by former President Dr Abdul Kalam in his National Technology Day broadcast to the nation in 2006. Aquagri has sourced the technology for extracting SAP from wet seaweeds and acquired exclusive marketing rights for three years from CSMCRI.

A seaweed farmer in Rameswaram

A good haul of seaweed, Olaikuda, Rameswaram

12

In this context, SAP is not a generic term. It rather indicates the liquid biofertilizer developed by Aquagri and branded as AQUASAP.

24

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

AQUASAP Seaplant nutrient

BOX 5

AQUAFEED Animal nutrition

CARRAGEENAN Polysaccharide gelling/stabilizing agent

Fig 2 Products from Kappaphycus alvarezii

25

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Table 4 Per cent increase in crop yields resulting from the use of bio-fertilizers of seaweed origin Crop Broad Acre Crops Gracilaria Paddy Barley Wheat Increase in yield (%) 16.1 2,500 - 3 500 18 11; 22 20.2 (2005-6); 13.5 (2006-7) 40.1; 45 7.2 Trials location Pepsi farm. 6,000 (Fresh) Madras University. 4 farmer fields; Rajasthan government farm. Pepsi farm; 5 farmer fields. Renuka Sugar; farmer fields in Karnataka. Rajasthan government farm.

Sugarcane Mustard Vegetables Brinjal Tomato Potato

22.1 20 26, 25

Pepsi farm. Clean Foods. Techno Tubers; Agricultural University, Kalyani, West Bengal. Pepsi farm. Clean Foods.

Capsicum Chilli Legumes Soya Bean

19.1 18

13.6 (2005); 15.3 (2006) 12.5; 16 14.5

Soya Producers Association. 5 farmers; Rajasthan government farm. Madras University.

Gram Peanut

Source: Aquagri Processing Private Limited, New Delhi.

According to CSMCRI, Kappaphycus sap also contains considerable quantities of nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, organic matter, sodium calcium, magnesium, manganese, iron, copper, zinc, cobalt, molybdenum, sulphate and chloride. Incidentally, applying SAP at the germination stage of seaweed cultivation has also shown impressive results in terms of increase in growth of roots and shoots. 26

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

BOX 6 Seaweeds as an animal feed supplement Research and trials have proved beyond doubt that animals can obtain natural nutrients from seaweeds. The nutritional value of seaweeds may even exceed that of land plants. Seaweeds contains macro and micronutrients, trace minerals, alginic acid, vitamins, aminoacids, naturally occurring plant growth hormones and antibiotics. All these compounds are chelated, making them 100 percent absorbable. Seaweeds are also a natural source of iodine which acts as an antibiotic to kill germs; it also increases growth rates and helps regulate metabolic functions in organisms. The complex constituent profile of seaweeds also contributes to strengthen the immune system and increase resistance against disease. Advantages of seaweeds for cattle International literature and trials suggest that seaweeds build resistance to disease by ensuring a complete balance of micronutrients. They also help reduce the incidence of mastitis and cow fever; increase the availability of nutrients; improve milk yield, fertility and health; improve fat level and iodine content in milk. Seaweeds as a poultry feed supplement Seaweeds as a supplement for poultry feed have been used since the 1960s. Their benefits are as follows: Carotenoids (30-60 mg/kg) and trace elements in seaweeds improve egg shell strength. Fucoxanthin A, which produces a xanthophyll in the gut, improves egg yolk colour. By adding five-percent-content granules to the feed, trials showed a decrease in mortality rate of five percent and an increase in weight of 10 percent in treatment individuals as compared to control individuals.
Source: Aquagri Processing Private Limited, New Delhi

Aquagri has recently completed the construction of two facilities for processing of seaweeds in Tamil Nadu, located at Mandapam and Manamadurai. These facilities are capable of handling 150 tonnes/day of fresh seaweed; most of the input material is being converted to SAP; the residual content after extraction of SAP is used for the extraction of carrageenan. These are state-of-theart facilities using solar power and biofuels as energy sources. Other firms such as SNAP (Ranipet, Tamil Nadu) are also developing value-added products using Sargassum as raw material. The list of products includes organic manure, foliar sprays, and 27

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute liquid and gel fertilizers. SNAP reported that their products were certified by the Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority (APEDA) under the National Program for Organic Produce certification. 5.5 Farming problems Seaweed farming can be affected by a host of problems. Grazing fish such as siganids (rabbitfish) and puffers can damage the crops. Siganids are the most destructive, especially if the plants have not grown much. Entire crops can be devoured and even dense beds can be severely damaged. There is no simple solution except to move the farming location to another site where predators are less prevalent. Turtles pose a special problem: besides grazing, they also crawl through the farms, causing devastating physical damage. Long spined sea urchins are also a pest and can cause injury to the farmer as he tries to remove them. The most common symptom of poor health is ice-ice, disease so named because of the white segments that appear on the plants, causing them to break at that point. There is disagreement about its causes: some people argue that the segments are indicative of a bacterial or viral infection while others attribute the disease to physical stress caused by changes in the farming environment. Storms lead to strong water movements that can cause plants to break apart and even cause physical damage to the rafts and lines. Locations that are subject to cyclical cyclones should be avoided; if this is not possible, precautions should be taken during the period of storms (FAO, 2003). The period from October to December in Tamil Nadu are months of seasonal rains and cyclones.

Historical production statistics13

6.1 Production potential Modayil (2004) estimated a total potential of 1 005 000 tonnes of seaweed in six states of India. The greatest potential exists in Andaman and Nicobar Islands and the lowest in the state of Maharashtra. (Table 5). Table 5 Estimated harvestable potential of wild seaweeds in India, by State State Gujarat Maharashtra Kerala Tamil Nadu Andhra Pradesh Andaman and Nicobar Islands
Source: Modayil (2004).
13 The section is strictly a compilation of available information from various sources and the authors have no specific comments to offer on the estimates and the methodology.

Potential (tonnes) 2,50,000 5,000 100,000 2,50 000 100, 000 300, 000

28

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Dhargalkar and Pereira (2005) estimated the total seaweed harvest from the Indian coastline at about 100 thousand tonnes (fresh weight). Their survey covered eight States and two Union Territories of India. The estimates of seaweed resources in earlier studies by other workers in various states are given in Table 6. Table 6 Seaweed resources along the coast of India
Area

Annual yield (tonnes fresh weight Gulf of Kutch Hanumandandi to Vumani (Okha) Adatra reef Saurashtra coast 100,000 19,000 650 60 282-608 315 20,000 2,000 Negligible Nair et al., (1982) 5 66,000 1,000 900 20,535 22,044 Data not available 5 3,645 to 7,598 120 Mitra (1946) Negligible Cape Comorin to Colachel Calimere to Cape Comorin Pamban Palk Bay South East coast Entire coast

Source

Gujarat Chauhan and Krishnamurthy (1968) Bhandari and Trivedi (1975) Sreenivasa Rao et al.,(1964) Chauhan and Mirh (1978) Chauhan (1977) Untawale et al. (1979) Dhargalkar (1981)

Maharashtra Konkan coast Entire coast Goa Karnataka Kerala Tamil Nadu Koshy and John (1948) Chacko and Malu Pillai (1958) Varma and Rao (1964) Umamaheshwara Rao (1968) Subbaramaiah et al., (1977) Subbaramaiah et al., (1977)

Andhra Pradesh Orissa Chilka lake Lakshadweep Islands Andaman and Nicobar Islands Little Andaman
Source: Dhargalkar and Pereira (2005).

Subbaramaiah et al., (1979) Gopinathan and Panigrahy (1983) 29

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Although structured feasibility studies on seaweed farming did not appear until the last decade of the twentieth century in India, Thivy (1958) was perhaps the first to map the distribution of economic seaweeds along the Indian coast. The Survey of Economic Seaweed Resources was initiated by the CSMCRI during 1961-91. This effort was funded by the National Committee on Science and Technology (NCST). However, surveys were sporadic after 1980 owing to lack of funding. The Indian seaweed flora is highly diversified: boreal, temperate and subtropical species have all been reported. Krishnamurthy (2005) reported that Indian waters contain 271 genera and 1,153 species of marine algae belonging to four groups of algae: Cholorophyceae, Rhodophyceae, Phaeophyceae and Cyanophyceae. These seaweed resources have supported a collection industry that currently faces many obstacles such as overexploitation of a number of species, poor quality of harvested material, labour shortages during the paddy harvesting and transplanting seasons, lack of technology to improve processed product quality, and lack of information on new and alternative sources of raw materials. Despite the great number of sheltered bays and lagoons suitable for mariculture, large-scale attempts to grow seaweed were never attempted. 6.2 Production statistics of Kappaphycus seaweed

PepsiCos entry into Kappaphycus culture marks the beginning of organized, commercialoriented production of this specific type of seaweed. Production increased from 21 tonnes in 2001 to 714(+) tonnes (dry weight) in 2009. The entire production resulted from the output of the SHGs working in coordination with PepsiCo (Table 7). Competitive pricing arrangements were extended to farmers by PepsiCo. Price incentives were also offered to growers who produced more than the targeted quantity so as to prevent breaching of contracts. With the opening of the new SAP plant, Aquagri will increase its purchases of wet Kappaphycus, enabling growers to devote a greater portion of their time on farming rather than on drying. Wet seaweed is currently being purchased from the SHG members at the rate of ` 1.50 per kg. Table 7 provides information on raft productivity in Kappaphycus farming. The output per raft increased from 21 kg in 2002 to almost 50 kg in 2008, i.e. productivity more than doubled in just seven years.

30

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Table 7 Area, production and exports of Kappaphycus in Tamil Nadu, India (2001-2009)
Year Cultivation method Growth rate (%) Business model Procurement Number of Production Exports cost, (`)/kg (dry ML/BR dry weight (FCL of dry (tonnes) seaweed) weight)**

2001

ML

1.5 - 6.0

Company owned Company owned

Daily wage system Daily wage system

Test plots

21

2002

ML

2.2 - 2.4

ML: 5 275 ML: 3 567 BR: 1 962

82

2003

BR: 75% ML: 25%

2.0 2.5

Company Daily wage owned and system contract & 4.50 farming Contract farming Company owned Company owned 4.50 & 7.50

147

2004

BR

2.6

BR: 3 469

126

2005

BR

3.25

7.50 & 8.50

BR: 3 450

135

2006

BR

2.5 - 3.0

8.50 & 10.00

BR: 8 100

244

12

2007

BR: 95% ML: 5%

2.5 3.0

Contract 10.00 & 12.00 farming and private cultivators Company owned Company owned 12.00 & 14.00

BR: 10 464

315

15

2008

BR: 90% ML: 10% BR: 90% ML: 10%

2.5 - 3.0

BR: 16 000+

588

28

2009

2.5 - 3.0

14.00/kg BR: (dry) 18 000+ 1.75/kg (fresh)

714*

34*

TOTAL
Note: BR: bamboo rafts; ML: mono-line culture; FCL: Full Container Load (1 container = 21 tonnes). * Data incomplete for 2009. ** The column includes two prices to indicate that prices offered to SHG members were revised in the same year.

2, 372

113

31

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Of the 250 -260 kg of seaweed that is obtained as wet weed from a raft, about 25 percent of the harvest is kept aside as seed material (cuttings) for planting the next raft. Therefore, since the yield of dry weed is a proportion of total output harvested, there is an urgent need to develop an off shore seed jetty to help the SHG farmers to outsource their seed (instead of keeping a part of their total harvest towards seeding the next raft). Table 8 indicates loss in dry weed yield and income resulting from retaining a portion of the total harvest as seed material. It may also be noted that yields have been increasing over time indicating that SHG farmers have been seeding and harvesting more rafts and monolines than estimated, daily. The yields have risen from 21 kg to 49 kg at full utilization rate in less than a decade. The figures given here are indicative (as obtained from Aquagiri Procesing Private Limited) since the data is a mix of output from rafts and monoline culture. Table 8 Trends in raft productivity, 2001-2009 (kg)
Year Number of ML/BR Dry weed yield per raft at 100% utilization (kg/raft) Number of ML/BR Dry weed yield per raft at75% utilization (kg/raft)

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009*

Test plots 5 275 5 529 3 469 3 450 8 100 10 464 16 000+ 18 000+

Test plots 20.73 35.45 48.43 52.17 40.16 40.14 49.00

Test plots 3956 4147 2602 2588 6075 7848 12000 13500

Test plots 15.55 26.59 36.32 39.13 30.12 30.10 36.75 **

**Ongoing (*No of BR and ML) Source: Aquagri Processing Private Limited, New Delhi

Seaweed exports

By international standards, Indian agar and alginates do not compare favourably in terms of gel strength and viscosity. Although Indian products are competitive on a cost basis and are not subject to export restrictions, the world market offers little scope for most categories of Indianproduced agar and alginates. However, some large producers (e.g. Marine Chemicals, Kochi) have achieved important export levels. Seaweed exports data are available from MPEDA and are shown in Table 9. PepsiCo has exported 32

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute 113 containers of dried seaweed between 2000 and 2008 (valued at USD 0.923 million). It should be noted that PepsiCo exports are not reflected in MPEDA statistics. Table 9 Exports of seaweeds from India
(1) Year (2) Quantity (Tonnes) (3) Value ( ` million) (4) Value (USD Million) (5) Exports of PepsiCo (FCL Dry)

2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09

Negligible Negligible 0.37 Negligible Negligible Negligible 21 74.25 855.82

Negligible Negligible 0.149 Negligible Negligible Negligible 0.538 1.991 38.438

Negligible Negligible 0.00 Negligible Negligible Negligible 0.01 0.05 0.86

1 4 7 6 6 12 15 28 34*

Sources: MPEDA (columns 3 and 4); Aquagri (column 5). FCL: Full Container Load (1 FCL: 21 tonnes). *Incomplete data for 2008-09

Socio-economic dimensions of seaweed farming in India

Kappaphycus seaweed grow profusely in areas with sandy or rocky bottoms, salinity in the range of 28 to 33 ppt, temperature around 30o 3o C, depth around 1.5 meters, moderate light intensity and wave action. A seed plant of 150 g grows to more than 600 g in 45 days in calm waters such as those found in the Palk Bay area. Seaweeds only require sunlight and transparent seawater with mild wave action for replenishing bottom nutrients. But Kappaphycus seaweed grows more than eight times in the open sea where wave action is fairly high (AFI, 2008). The Kudumbam (family) model of cultivation (KMC) is a farming system initially introduced by PepsiCo and then widely adopted for Kappaphycus culture in Tamil Nadu. All seaweed farming in Ramanathapuram district is under the KMC. Cultivation is organized by members of a SHG who normally belong to the same family but may include other members from the same community. Collectively, the group prepares the rafts, seeds the lines, provides maintainance and harvests on the due date. Basic infrastructure is facilitated by the company, the harvest is purchased on a buyback basis and payments are effected by the company through the bank accounts of the SHG (Box 7). The advantages of the SHG/KMC model are manifold and obvious. The major advantage is 33

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute that fishers are given an opportunity to become entrepreneurs in an activity with growth potential. The seaweed farming initiative in Ramanathapuram started with a strong positive gender bias. Women took up the gauntlet with ardor as the activity empowered them with a highly productive, non-hazardous work environment. The overall economic and social quality of life has improved by leaps and bounds as discussed in the following sections. Convenient hours and stress-free work of 4-6 hours a day enhanced their quality of life. It has been argued that seaweed farming development has also led to alleviate pressure on fish stocks and reduce dependence on agriculture, although these facts are not well documented. According to experts, the area suitable for culture in Ramanathapuram district -- one of the most under-developed regions in Tamil Nadu could exceed 50 thousand hectares. It has been estimated that substantial employment and income opportunities can be provided to more than 50 thousand families for every 10 thousand hectares brought under cultivation. 8.1 Locations PepsiCo started operations in 2002 by leasing an area of 10 hectares (one km of sea front) on Palk Bay, near Mandapam (Ramanathapuram district) in Tamil Nadu. Currently, seaweed farming is practiced in Tamil Nadu at various scales of operation in Mandapam, Rameswaram, Pudukottai, Tuticorin, Tanjore and Cuddalore. Experimental trials are being conducted in Thondi and Karangadu areas of Ramanthapuram district, Parangipettai in Cuddalore district of Tamil Nadu, Ongole district of Andhra Pradesh on the east coast, Edavanakad in Kerala and state of Diu on the west coast of India. 8.2 The SHG model of seaweed farming There are currently more than 110 SHGs involved in seaweed farming in the Ramanathapuram district. Each group presently comprises five persons. During 2002-2003, the daily-wage corporate model was the prevailing production arrangement in the region, which came to be replaced by the more successful contract farming/SHG model. In addition to PepsiCo (2002-2008) and Aquagri, the seaweed farming movement in India has been promoted by a network of institutions, namely NABARD, commercial banks, the TNDoF, AFI, DRDA, DBT, CSMCRI, CMFRI and numerous NGOs. The economics of the raft-culture/SHG production model for the farming of Kappaphycus as supported by the TNDoF (2009) is presented in Tables 10 and 11. Fifty per cent of the total production cost of 45 rafts per SHG trainee (` 31,050) is borne by the TNDoF; the other 50 per cent is financed with a commercial bank loan.

34

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

BOX 7 The socio-economic premise for Kappaphycus culture in India The advantages of Kappaphycus cultivation in coastal waters of Tamil Nadu are: Kappaphycus grows by absorbing nutrients (N, P and other minerals) present in the seawater (i.e, no input of external nutrients is needed). Kappaphycus is a versatile plant capable of growing almost anywhere in tropical marine environments. It propagates vegetatively by cuttings (no need to undergo sexual phases) and thus it is easy to reproduce. Grows fast and regenerates fast after harvesting. Can be consumed raw or used in salads. Culture does not involve applications of fertilizers, growth hormones, pesticides, insecticides, or herbicides; the final product is 100-percent organic. Cultivation technology is simple and environmentally friendly. Kappaphycus is a major source of Kappa carrageenan. Kappaphycus culture does not release any harmful chemicals or solid wastes into the surrounding environment. Two to three persons in a family can handle the operations and earn from ` 12,000 to 15,000 a month (The average net income per annum per farmer is ` 73,107 which works out to ` 6,092 per month per farmer. In a family if two to three members are involved in seaweed farming, they can earn about ` 12,200 to `18,000, which is near to the approximation of ` 12,000 to ` 15,000 a month) The technological and economic viability has been established in Tamil Nadu. Farming, harvesting and processing generates new cottage industries and direct and indirect employment for the coastal poor. Commercial banks provide loans to SHGs without collateral (up to ` 0.50 million per SHG). Buyback of the produce is guaranteed. Research, development institutions, TNDoF, commercial banks and corporate investors have developed a network to promote Kappaphycus cultivation in the coastal waters of Tamil Nadu. Refined carrageenan extracted from Kappaphycus fetches a price ranging from USD 7,000 to 10 000 per tonne depending upon grade and quality. Raw weeds with around 30 percent moisture get a price of USD 250-600/tonne. Kappaphycus is a high-value seaweed with expanding demand and innumerable applications in various industries. Because of its plant-growth-promoting properties, Kappaphycus culture could revolutionize organic agriculture in India. Preliminary experiments have revealed substantial growth enhancement (18-40 percent) in rice, sugarcane, groundnut and wheat. Source: Modified from AFI (2008).

35

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Table 10 Economics of seaweed farming in Tamil Nadu, India: cost of materials for the construction of one raft (3 m x 3 m)
Items Quantity/ Raft `/ Unit Total value (`)

Bamboo rafts Five cornered anchors 3-mm nylon rope (1.25 mm thickness / 4.5 m length / 20 lengths) 20 ropes for seeding 400 cuttings 36 m of 6-mm thickness nylon rope (for the manufacturing of the raft) 3.5 x 3.5-m nets for reducing grazing by fish 28 m of 2-mm thickness ropes for tying the nets to raft bottoms 1 kg nylon rope of 5.4 m length pieces for tying together a batch of 10 rafts. Anchor ropes 17 M of 10mm thickness. 1 length for a batch of 10 rafts 65 kg of seed materials (including 5 kg-loss in handling) Transportation charges for seed materials Mats/ladders/baskets/ knives, etc. Floats TOTAL

64 ft 15 kg 0.45 kg

` 3.10/ft ` 40/kg ` 10/kg

198.50 60.00 50.00

0.165 kg 0.65 kg

` 120/kg ` 110/kg

20.00 75.00

1.13 kg 0.09 kg 0.10 kg

` 75/kg ` 110/kg ` 110/kg

85.00 10.00 11.00

0.09 kg

` 110/kg

10.00

65 kg

` 0.85/kg

55.25

25.00 40.00 25.00 690.00

36

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute It maybe noted that the interest rate is charged annually, even though culture is restricted to 270 days and since the Tamil Nadu coast is subjected to the north east monsoon seaweed culture is not practiced during the balance of 95 days (Table 10). The yield is calculated for 270 days as the culture operations are confined to this period in a year. One raft a day is expected to be seeded and harvested by the SHG farmer. Therefore the yield of dry weed (24 kg) indicated is for a cycle of 45 days. It may also be noted that the figures cited here by the government of Tamil Nadu forms the basis on which the commercial banks work out their lending strategies to the SHGs. However, the farmers now (December 2009) are receiving upto ` 18/- per kg of dry weed based on quantity and quality of output. Many farmers are able to handle as many as 3 rafts a day by way of seeding and harvesting therby enhancing their economic returns handsomely. Table 11 Economics of seaweed farming (raft culture) in Tamil Nadu, India: analysis of costs and returns for the first year of operation
Item number Item Quantity

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Cost of 45 rafts per farmer - ` Subsidy from TNDoF (50%) - ` Bank loan (50%) - ` Production from 45 rafts in 45 days (kg fresh weight) Seed material allocated to the next stocking cycle (kg) Production of dried weed Interest on bank loan (11%) - ` Insurance - ` Returns (24 kg @ ` 14.00 x 270 days) - ` Net returns for the first year (9 - [2 + 7 + 8]) - `

31,050 15,525 15 ,525 300 60 24 kg 1,708 380 90,720 73,107

Source: Seaweed Culture, Golden Jubilee Village Self Employment Opportunities, Government of Tamil Nadu (2008-09).

8.3 Seaweed farming practices Two different culture techniques are practiced in Mandapam: raft culture and mono-line culture. The raft method is suitable in areas where water currents are weak, e.g. Palk Bay. A floating frame made of bamboo (normally of dimensions 3x3) is used to suspend the seaweed about 50 cm below the surface. Three-mm polypropylene ropes are stretched in parallel between the two sides of the raft, at 10-15 cm intervals. The seedlings are tied to the ropes and the raft is anchored to the bottom. Anchor ropes may be need to hold the raft below the surface at the beginning but 37

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute as the plants grow and add weight to the raft, extra support (such as polystyrene foam boxes tied to the corners of the rafts) may be required to prevent it from sinking too low in the water. Specific details of this technique are provided in Figure 3. A cluster of 4-6 rafts during the monsoon season or a cluster of 10 rafts during the normal season can be anchored with a five-toothed iron anchor of 15 kg. Alternatively, holed stones can be linked with chains and then tied to the cluster. The major advantage of floating rafts is that they can be easily moved to another location if necessary, and removed from the water during bad weather. Rafts can also be used as drying racks by providing appropriate support when placed onshore. Figure 3 Top view of a 3 m x 3 m bamboo raft with 4-ft diagonals.

Source : AFI, 2008 In the mono-line culture method, ropes of 60 m each are tied in two sections to avoid sags in the line caused by the weight. Each fishermen or stakeholder is given 45 ropes, which are tied in two plots of 30 m x 45 m each. A spacing of one metre is allowed between the two plots. In each plot, 150 seaweed cuttings are inserted in the ropes, leaving a spacing of 20 cm. The initial weight of the seedling is 200 g and thus a total of 60 kg of seed material is required for each production cycle. Normally the seaweed plants are simply tied up to the nylon ropes. However, 38

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute during the summer months of May-June (fish breeding season), the plants are covered with net bags to avoid grazing by fishes, which increases production costs. The seeds are always covered with net bags in Tuticorin and Kanyakumari. The major advantage of mono-line culture is that it provides superior yields to those achieved with rafts. The disadvantages are that investment per rope is higher, there is a higher threat of grazing by fish, ropes could break (leading to crop loss), and maintenance of the plots is labor intensive. Table 12 Economics of mono line culture of seaweeds per block of 60 ropes
Item Number Item Quantity

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Average initial investment for 60m rope- ` Average operating cost for 60 ropes Cost of seedlings Production from 60 ropes in 45 days (kg fresh weight) Seed material allocated to the next stocking cycle (kg) Production of dried weed at 10:1 ratio of fresh to dry seaweed Average harvest of dried seaweed per rope (after deducing 2 kg for impurities and other wastes)-kg Average gross revenue - ` Cost of Harvesting- ` Net returns per farmer per block of 60 ropes- `

1,716 175 105 400 100 30 28 448 50 398

Harvest is normally conducted after 45 days in the Ramanathapuram district; because growth rates are higher, the production cycle is shortened to only 30 days in the southern districts of Tuticorin and Kanyakumari. The expected yield from the two plots ranges from 350 to 400 kg of fresh seaweed. From this harvest, 100 kg are separated as planting material for the subsequent cycle. Hence 25 to 30 kg of dry weed are obtained from a harvest of 250300 kg of fresh weed after 45 days (10:1 ratio). The estimated annual harvest of seaweeds (per 900 ropes) is 27,000 kg, which is higher than what is obtained under raft culture. The average initial investment for 60-m length of long line culture amounts to ` 1,716, which is higher than that of the raft, which was ` 690. (Table 12) The cost of the nylon ropes accounted for of 33 per cent of total investment but the labour charges for the installation accounted for the highest share of 38.5 per cent of the total investment (` 660). The average 39

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute operating cost per rope worked out to ` 175 per 60 m ropes, if family labour wage is not included. This comprised the cost of seedlings, which worked out to ` 105 for 60 kg seed material. The average harvest per rope was 28 kg of dried seaweed, which fetched gross revenue of ` 448. Deducting the harvesting charge of ` 50, the average net income per rope worked out to ` 398 (Table 11). Although mono-line culture appears to be more profitable than raft culture, the operational difficulties may be overbearing, especially when the workforce is mostly composed by women. The non-monetary advantages of raft culture make it a preferred system choice in the Ramanathapuram district. As such, this study will concentrate on the socio-economics of the raft culture system. The socio-economic status of seaweed farmers was assessed through personal interviews using a pre-tested schedule. Details on socio-economic parameters such as family size, age composition, experience in fishing and seaweed farming, asset ownership, income and occupational status, indebtedness, and socio-economic status improvement associated with seaweed farming, were collected from the sample respondents (n = 437). The population of organised SHG seaweed farmers at the time the survey was administered was estimated at 1,000. The sample was drawn based on purposive sampling proportionate to size. For comparison purposes, respondents were grouped into two major areas: Mandapam and Rameshwaram. The selected locations represent the mainland and island ecosystems, respectively. Farmers in the Mandapam region included in the sample were specifically located in Vedalai, Umilyalpuram, Munaikadu, T. Nagar, Meenavar colony and Thonithurai. The locations covered in Rameshwaram were Pamban, Akkalmadam, Nallupanai, Ariyankudu, A.Vadakadu, Parvatham, Sambai, Mangadu and Olaikuda. The earliest groups in the selected locations seem to have been formed in 2006 (Table 13). The SHGs are predominantly formed by women, even though a few of the SHG consisted exclusively of men and some other SHGs were mixed. Each SHG consists of five members. The names of the supporting institutions are also indicated in Table 13; the agencies most actively engaged are DBT, Ramanathapuram Rural Development Agency (RDDA) and TNDoF. The Aquaculture Foundation of India (AFI) has provided seedlings and other materials to farmers in the region. A number of SHGs in Vedalai, Thonithurai, Ariyankkundu and R.Vadakadu are currently handling more than 1,000 rafts each. These SHGs have been exposed to Kappaphycus culture longer than other groups; because of this experience, they are able to obtain yields exceeding 50 kg per raft (dry weight). The performance of the most recent SHGs is expected to improve over time. Overall, farmers report that they have been able to obtain good returns from the activity. Seaweed farming is now expanding to other districts within Tamil Nadu such as Pudukottai and Thanjavur also(Annexure I). 40

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Table 13 . Composition, structure and performance of SHGs engaged in seaweed farming in the Mandapam and Rameshwaram regions of Ramanathapuram district, Tamil Nadu, India
Name of location Name of SHG Number Number Annual Supporting Starting Number of female of male Number yeild per institution Year of SHGs members members of rafts raft (kg)

Sri Lingeshwar Andavar SHG Vedalai Sri Karumaliyan Andavar SHG Sakthi Mariyamman Mahalir Umiyal Puram MNS Mahalir SHG Valarpirai Andavar SHG Vidivelli Andavar SHG Munaikadu Team Andavar SHG Kadal Pavalam Andavar SHG Kadal Alli Mahalir SHG T.Nagar Kadal Thamarai Mahalir SHG Kadal Pasu Mixed SHG Meeenavar Karuppanasamy colony Andavar SHG Sri Thillai Adavar SHG Uthayam Mixed SHG Krishna Andavar SHG Thonithurai Nila Andavar SHG

DBT DBT RDDA

2006 2006 2007

12

10

1040

52

RDDA DBT DBT TNDoF DBT DBT DBT DBT DBT DBT DBT DBT DBT

2007 2006

1 4

12 0

0 20

540 900

53 58

2006 2006 2006 2007 2007 2006 2006 2006

12

750

54

10

400

55

12

19

1050

43

41

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

Kadal Nila Mahalir SHG Kadal Muthu Pamban Jesus Andavar DBT Vasantham Andavar SHG Akkal madam Kadal Thendral Andavar Kadal Osai Mahalir Nallupanai Vetri Andavar SHG Ariyan kundu Red Algae Andavar SHG Thendral Andavar SHG St. Sebasthiyar Mahalir SHG A.Vadakadu Nalvalvu Josw a Andavar SHG R. Vadakadu Private Cultivators Parvatham Sri Sastha Mahalir SHG Sambai Kadal Rani Mahalir SHG Subam Andavar SHG Dharma Muneshwarar Mahalir SHG Mangadu Kadal Pura Andavar SHG Nalvalvu Antoniyar Andavar SHG RDDA DBT DBT DBT DBT DBT 2007 DBT DBT TNDoF DBT DBT DBT RDDA DBT 2006 2007 2008 2006 2006 2006 2007 2006 2008 2007 2007 2006 1 0 1 1 3 0 0 12 5 5 5 0 0 0 10 250 1080 540 200 700 46 47 48 51 49 1 3 0 12 5 10 250 1040 46 1 3 0 5 5 10 200 675 43 48 2007 2007

DBT DBT

2006 2007

DBT

2006

12

790

51

42

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

Name of location Name of SHG Number Number Annual Supporting Starting Number Number of female of male yeild per institution Year of SHGs of rafts members members raft (kg)

Iyarkai Mahalir SHG Paralogamatha Mahalir SHG Punitha Antoniyar Andavar SHG Olaikuda Annai Therasa Andavar SHG Sengol Matha Andavar SHG Punitha Annal Andavar SHG Kadal Pura Andavar SHG Kadal Pookkal Mahalir SHG Sri Vinayagar Mahalir SHG Kaliamman Mahalir SHG Sambai Ramanathasamy Mahalir SHG Pathrakaliamman Mahalir SHG Kanthari Amman Mahalir SHG Prathingara Devi Mahalir SHG Kadal Ulagam Andavar SHG

RDDA TNDoF

2007 2009 5 5 0 225

TNDoF TNDoF TNDoF TNDoF TNDoF TNDoF TNDoF TNDoF TNDoF TNDoF TNDoF TNDoF TNDoF

2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

0 0 0 0 0 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 0

5 5 5 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5

225 225 225 225 225 225 225 225 225 225 225 225 225

Source: Aquagri Processing Private Limited, New Delhi

43

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute 8.4.1 Socio-economic indicators in seaweed farming The socio-economics of the farming villages were studied by examining parameters such as average family size, age and caste structure, occupation and income patterns, consumption expenditure and indebtedness. 8.4.1.1 Head of the family - Family size Normally in Tamilnadu as in most other states of India, Head of the family is the senior most male in the family. Of late, widows who are the bread winners are also represented as family head. The analysis of the head of the family is given in Table 14. The analysis of the head of the family of the respondents revealed that about 64 percent of the respondents in Mandapam and 66 percent in Rameswaram are males and the rest are female seaweed farmers (Table 14). The concept of SHG was founded on the basic premise that women are more responsible and have a better disposition to work towards achieving social and economic independence. In the case of seaweed farming, rather than assuming a leadership role, men in fishing households followed their women. The initial success of women in seaweed farming motivated men to enter the activity as well. The average family size of respondents ranged from 4.5 in Mandapam to 5.5 in Rameshwaram. This is consistent with the national average of 4.5 for fishermen families reported by the Marine Fishery Census (CMFRI, 2005). Table 14 Gender composition and average family size of respondents
Category Mandapam Number % Rameshwaram Number %

Male Female Total Average family size 8.4.1.2 Caste / Religion structure

145 81 226 4.5

64 36 100

139 72 211 5.5

66 34 100

The analysis of caste structure reveals that only a few castes like valaiyan and kadayar are getting involved in seaweed farming (Table 15). It must be noted that these castes form the major coastal belt community engaged in fishing and related enterprises. It also must be noted that a number of individuals with capital resources but without any other liaison to the coastal area have entered seaweed farming. To avoid potential conflicts, authorities have adopted the method of allocating the oceanic inshore area among stakeholders based on the "ration cards" 14 allocated by the Government of Tamil Nadu (Olaikuda village, Rameswaram).
14 Ration cards are family food cards allotted to households in India which entitles the holder to periodic subsidized rations of food. These cards also function as identification documents enabling the holder to establish his place of residence at a particular place and

44

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Table 15. Caste and religion structure of the sample respondents
Caste structure Mandapam Number % Rameshwaram Number %

Backward communities Valaiyan Ambalakarar Sheeper Kadayar MBC Servai Muslim Christian Paman Paller Nadars Total 8.4.1.3 Type of family

0 124 5 0 63 0 23 5 0 0 0 6 226

0 54.99 2.01 0 28.07 0 9.93 2.01 0 0 0 3.99 100.00

15 119 14 1 21 33 1 2 3 1 1 0 211

7.11 56.40 6.64 0.47 9.95 15.64 0.47 0.95 1.42 0.47 0.47 0 100.00

Most of the sample respondents' families belong to the nuclear family type15 (Table 16). However, Rameshwaram has a relatively greater number of joint families16 involved in seaweed farming. The social development programmes promoted by the Government of Tamil Nadu have led to a general improvement of the socio-economic conditions of the overall population. These programmes have also altered the structure of families, with joint families giving way to nuclear families. This phenomenon is also taking place in coastal villages. Table 16. Family type
Type of family Mandapam Number % Rameshwaram Number %

Nuclear Joint Total

15 16

219 7 226

97 3 100

162 49 211

77 23 100 45

A nuclear family is a family group consisting of only a father and mother and their children, who share living quarters. A Hindu Joint Family or Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) or a Joint Family is an extended family arrangement prevalent among Hindus and consisting of many generations living under the same roof. All the male members are blood relatives and all the women are either mothers, wives, unmarried daughters, or widowed relatives.

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute 8.4.1.4 Experience in fishing and seaweed farming Table 17 indicates that 92 and 72 percent of the respondents in Mandapam and Rameshwaram, respectively, have between 11 and 25 years of experience in fishing. Because these individuals belong to the middle-aged group, they can be expected to successfully adapt to innovations in farming techniques. Table 17. Fishing experience
Years of experience Mandapam Number % Rameshwaram Number %

Less than 10 years 11- 25 years More than 25 years Total

11 208 7 226

6 92 2 100

49 151 11 211

23 72 5 100

The concept of seaweed farming was introduced only after 2001, thus the maximum experience a farmer can be expected to have is nine years (Table 18). About 85 percent of respondents in both areas have about five years of experience in seaweed farming, with 9-13 percent of respondents already having between 6-7 years of experience. This indicates the level of commitment of stakeholders as fishers perceive seaweed farming as a less risky and more sustainable activity relative to traditional fishing practices. Table 18. Experience in seaweed farming
Years of experience Mandapam Number % Rameshwaram Number %

Less than 5 years 6 - 7 years More than 7 years Total 8.4.1.5 Age classification of respondents

196 20 10 226

87 9 4 100

176 28 7 211

84 13 3 100

Table 19 indicates that the proportion of middle-aged individuals (31- 50 years old) in both groups was around 60 percent. This age bracket corresponds to a productive group of individuals, which is usually receptive to new ideas and is capable of implementing them, even if doing so involves some risk. 46

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Table 19 Age classification of respondents

Age group Mandapam Number % Rameshwaram Number %

Below 30 years old 31- 50 years old Above 50 years old Total 8.4.1.6 Literacy level of respondents

70 138 18 226

31 61 8 100

53 124 34 211

25 59 16 100

The literacy rate was estimated to be approximately equal to the district average of 52.8 percent. The infrastructure of educational facilities in the area is poor. The cumulative quality of life (QoL) index was estimated to range from 0.285 at Puliamadam to 0.485 in Vedalai, with an average cumulative QoL index below normal tending towards unsatisfactory (CSMCRI, 2003). The literacy level of respondents in the two areas is comparatively higher than the national average of about 65 percent. Table 20 reveals that about 43 percent of respondents in Mandapam have undergone elementary schooling while 43 percent of respondents in Rameshwaram have reached middle-school level. About 10-20 per cent of respondents have achieved secondary level of schooling. Table 20. Literacy level of respondents
Literacy level Mandapam Number % Rameshwaram Number %

Illiterate Elementary Lower primary Upper primary Secondary Higher Secondary Total 8.4.1.7 Occupational profile

2 97 48 49 25 5 226

1 43 21 22 11 2 100

14 17 38 91 38 13 211

7 8 18 43 18 6 100

Fishing and seaweed farming are th0e two most important occupations in these two areas. In Mandapam, 48 percent of the respondents practiced fishing as a primary activity while only 13 percent chose fishing as the primary occupation in Rameshwaram (Table 21). Seaweed farming has become the primary livelihood activity of fishers in Rameshwaram, which has contributed to reduce pressure on the fish stocks of the area. The emergence of seaweed farming has also 47

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute contributed to reduce the political tension with neighbouring Sri Lanka over access to common fishing grounds. Table 21 occupational profile of the respondents
Occupation Mandapam Number % Rameshwaram Number %

Fishing Seaweed farming Total 8.4.1.8 Income status

108 118 226

48 52 100

24 187 211

13 87 100

Table 22 indicates that the maximum proportion of income earned in fishing in the Mandapam area was within the range of ` 10,001 to ` 20,000 (69 percent), followed by the less than ` 10,000 bracket. In the case of seaweed farming, most individuals earn income between ` 20,001 and ` 30,000 (57 per cent), with two individuals reporting even higher earnings (` 30,001 to ` 40,000 bracket). Table 22. Income levels in the Mandapam area
Income levels (` per year) Fishing Number % Seaweed farming Number %

Less than 10 000 10 001- 20 000 20 001- 30 000 30 001- 40 000 40 001 - 50 000 50 001- 80 000 80 001- 100 000 More than 100 000 Total

62 157 7 0 0 0 0 0 226

28 69 3 0 0 0 0 0 100

20 76 128 2 0 0 0 0 226

9 33 57 1 0 0 0 0 100

In Rameshwaram, the maximum proportion of income earned from fishing was also in the range of ` 10,001 to ` 20,000 (57 per cent) while the maximum proportion of income earned in seaweed farming was equally split between the ranges of ` 10,001 to ` 20,000 (25 percent) and ` 20,001 to ` 30,000 (24 percent). A considerable number of seaweed farming practitioners reported relatively high income levels, up to ` 100,000. Tables 22 and 23 highlight the clear potential of seaweed farming for lifting the socio-economic status of the communities in both regions. 48

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Table 23. Income levels in the Rameswaram area
Income levels (` per annum) Fishing Number % Seaweed farming Number %

Less than 10 000 10 001- 20 000 20 001- 30 000 30 001- 40 000 40 001 - 50 000 50 001- 80 000 80 001- 100 000 More than 100 000 Total 8.4.1.9 Housing and livestock ownership

5 53 51 36 46 16 1 3 211

2 25 24 17 22 8 1 1 100

27 121 41 16 4 2 0 0 211

13 57 19 8 2 1 0 0 100

Housing is an important indicator of the socio-economic status of an individual, particularly in small villages. All respondents in both areas were living in their own houses. With regard to the housing type, the proportion of kutcha houses was high in Mandapam (75 percent). The proportion of kutcha and pucca houses was approximately the same (49 percent) in Rameshwaram (Table 24). Only four respondents (in Rameshwaram) were found to reside in Reinforced Cement Concrete (RCC) houses.16 Table 24 Housing ownership and type
Details Number Fishing % Seaweed farming Number %

Ownership of house Owned Rented Type of House Kutcha Pucca RCC Total 171 55 0 226 75 25 0 100 103 104 4 211 49 49 2 100 226 100 211 100

16 A pucca house is one which has walls made of any of the following materials: burnt bricks, stones (packed with lime or cement), cement concrete, timber, ekra, etc. In addition, the roof is made of either tiles, GCI (Galvanized Corrugated Iron) sheets, asbestos cement sheets, RBC (Reinforced Brick Concrete), RCC (Reinforced Cement Concrete), timber, etc. In a kutcha house, the 49 walls and/or roof are made of materials other than those mentioned above, such as un-burnt bricks, bamboos, mud, grass, reeds, thatch, loosely packed stones, etc

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Livestock husbandry is an important source of supplementary income for the fishermen households. Maintaining livestock is also often seen as a symbol of prestige among rural households. About 55 percent of respondents in Mandapam and 60 percent in Rameshwaram maintain livestock to supplement their income and domestic needs (Table 25). The most common livestock type is poultry. Table 25 Livestock ownership
Livestock Details Mandapam Number % Rameshwaram Number %

Cattle Buffalos Poultry Non owners Total

43 15 67 101 226

18 7 30 45 100

8 0 116 87 211

4 0 55 41 100

8.4.1.10 Changes in patterns of consumer expenditure During the last five years, the surveyed households were able to acquire electronic appliances such as TVs, DVD players and mobile phones in addition to household appliances such as mixers and grinders. A total of 135 respondents (60 %) and 141 persons (67 %) had purchased cell phones in Mandapam and Rameshwaran, respectively, over the last five years. 8.4.1.11 Occupational patterns Table 26 present the occupational patterns of respondents. On average, one member from each family is involved in active fishing in both areas. One member per family is involved in postharvest fisheries like peeling, drying, freezing, processing, value addition and related activities in the Mandapam area, while two members are involved in the Rameshwaram area. For seaweed farming, on average two members per family are involved in the activity in both Mandapam and Rameswaram. The average annual employment in fishing and post-harvest activities is marginally higher in Rameshwaram (181 and 100 days) than in Mandapam (179 and 96 days). A similar trend was also observed for seaweed farming (161 days in Rameshwaram as opposed to 144 days in Mandapam).

50

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Table 26 Occupational patterns in Mandapam and Rameshwaram areas, Ramanathapuram district, Tamil Nadu
Mandapam Name of the occupation
Average number of members per family Number of days employed per year Normal Lean Peak

Rameshwaram
Average number of members per family Number of days employed per year Normal Lean Peak

Active fishing Post-harvest fisheries Seaweed culture/harvest

01 01 02

179 96 144

0 0 0

0 0 0

01 02 02

181 100 161

66 0 95

98 0 106

8.4.1.12 Estimated labour force in the seaweed farming sector Table 27 provides an estimate of total employment (man-days per year) in seaweed culture in the Mandapam and Rameswaram regions. Assuming that two members in each household are engaged in seaweed farming during 144 and 161 days of the year in Mandapam and Rameswaram, respectively, the sector would be providing 148,896 and 155,526 man-days of employment per year in the two areas (this calculation assumes a total of 1,000 families engaged in seaweed farming in the Ramanathapuram district). The various development programs in the region are currently planning for total of 5 thousand families to become involved with seaweed farming, which would translate into 765 thousand days of employment in the district (assuming 153 days of employment per person per year). More generally, it has been argued that seaweed farming could provide employment to 200 thousand families in the country, with annual earnings of about ` 0.10 million per family (AFI, 2008). Table 27 Estimation of employment generation in seaweed farming in Ramanathapuram district, Tamil Nadu, India
(1) (2) (4) (3) Number of Average Days of Days of sample number of employment employment in households family members in seaweed seaweed farming per year for engaged in farming sample house seaweed per person holds farming per year (1) x (2) x (3) (4) (6) (8) Days of Total Man-days employ -ment inseaweed number of per year in families seaweed farming per (N = 1000) farming year for (2)x(3)x(6 sample house holds (1) x (2) x (3)

Area

Mandapam Rameshwaram

226 211

02 02

144 161

65,088 67,942

51.7 48.3

517 483

148,896 155, 526 51

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute 8.4.1.13 Consumption expenditure patterns The household consumption basket includes expenses on items such as food, oils, meat, fish, clothing, medical and children education expenses. The average annual expenditure per household amounted to ` 28,417 in Mandapam and ` 31,625 in Rameswaram (Table 28). The maximum expenditure share in both areas corresponded to the purchase of fish (28.26 and 30 percent, respectively). Total food expenditures (including food, oils, meat and fish) amounted to ` 18,525 (65.19 percent) and ` 19,819 (62.79 percent) in Mandapam and Rameswaram, respectively. These large expenditure shares are characteristic of households with relatively low incomes. Seaweed farming has enabled the families to raise their economic status significantly, with members of SHG families actively participating in the activity and contributing handsomely to total family income, thus enabling comfortable family consumption expenditure. Table 28. Consumption expenditure patterns, Ramanathapuram district, Tamil Nadu, India
Mandapam Items of expenditure Expenditure (`/year) Percentage of total expenses Rameswaram Expenditure (`/year) Percentage of total expenses

Food Oils Meat Fish Clothing expenses Children education Medical expenses Electricity Fuel charges Recreation Social function Others Total 8.4.1.14 Indebtedness

5,569 2,358 2,568 8,030 2,027 1,210 4,284 836 1,193 0 342 0 28 417

19.60 8.30 9.04 28.26 7.13 4.26 15.08 2.94 4.20 0.00 1.20 0.00 100.00

5,462 2,704 2,205 9,448 3,407 1,749 3,668 851 807 583 701 0 31 625

17.27 8.55 6.97 30.00 10.77 5.53 11.60 2.69 2.55 1.85 2.22 0.00 100.00

Table 29 presents the average amounts of loans availed, repaid and outstanding for Mandapam 52

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute and Rameshwaram. Respondents prefer institutional loans mainly due to awareness that has been created since the advent of seaweed farming in the region. They now realize that though institutional loan procedures maybe slightly more cumbersome, the post loan experiences are decent and transparent and hence worth the trouble of going through the paper work. The households avail loans for different purposes including domestic activities and social obligations. The absolute amounts availed as loans clearly indicate the preferences of the respondents in Ramanathapuram district for institutional sources of credit. The comparative absolute levels of outstandings also indicate the easy terms of repayment in respect of the institutional loans. Table 29 Level of indebtedness, Ramanathapuram district, Tamil Nadu, India
Source of loans Average loan availed Average loan repaid Outstanding loan per per household (`) household (`) per household (`)

Mandapam a) Institutional b) Money lenders Rameshwaram a) Institutional b) Money lenders 8,071 5,089 7 ,607 4,763 464 324 4,350 1,505 3,050 1,292 1,300 213

8.4.1.15 Social impacts of seaweed farming The socio-economic impact of seaweed farming was examined by means of a series of questions asked to participants in the study. The evaluation revealed that 68 and 48 per cent of respondents in Mandapam and Rameshwaram were able to purchase or renovate their existing house using the income earned from seaweed. In Rameswaram, about four percent of the respondents were able to purchase agricultural land with their earned income (Table 30). Seaweed farming has also had a large positive impact on the ability of the respondents to purchase livestock, quality clothing and consumer durables. Respondents in Rameshwaram also reported a large positive impact of seaweed farming on their ability to celebrate marriages in the family. Seaweed culture has also allowed respondents to engage more frequently in social and religious traveling. The responses from the participants reveal that seaweed farming has indeed emerged as a new, sustainable livelihood option for the fishing communities in the district. Encouragement of seaweed aquaculture with appropriate policy, financial, technical and institutional support can also serve to divert pressure on overexploited fish stocks. Dramatic structural changes in the socio-economic status of many fishermen have taken place over the last 10 years: a number of 53

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute seaweed farmers actually started as hired labor for other farmers; however, many of them used this initial experience to become members of a SHG. After a few production cycles, a SHG member can aspire to operate his own set of rafts and transform himself into a farmer capable of hiring labour to look after his own plots. Table 30 Social impact of seaweed farming, Ramanathapuram district, Tamil Nadu, India
Using the income earned from seaweed farming, were you able to... Mandapam Yes % No % Yes Rameshwaram % No %

Purchase or renovate the existing house Purchase agricultural land Purchase cattle/poultry Purchase quality clothing Purchase consumer durables and modern electronic appliances Celebrate a marriage in the family Engage in social and religious traveling outside the district/State Transfer to a better educational institution Increase expenses on entertainment Engage in any other activity

154 0 168 223

68 0 74 99

72 226 58 03

32 100 26 1

103 08 177 188

48 4 84 89

108 203 34 23

52 96 16 11

156 9

69 4

70 217

31 96

139 97

66 46

72 114

34 54

75 0 0 0

37 0 0 0

151 226 226 226

67 100 100 100

53 20 0 0

25 9 0 0

158 191 211 211

75 91 100 100

The organised seaweed farming sector as given in Fig 4 is driven by committed corporate interests, NGO's and related government agencies. Though Tamil Nadu is the second most literate state in India next only to the state of Kerala, the expected social transformation resulting from higher levels of education such as adherence to commitments, keeping away from negative societal influences such as drinking and gambling etc. is yet to get reinforced. Figure 5 summarizes the major strengths and weaknesses associated with organized seaweed farming. The seaweed farmers tend to break the contract if they are offered a higher price by competing by fly by night operators in the sector leading to a possible chain reaction among neighbouring farmers. The 54

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute organised value chain management has taken steps to keep the flock together by announcing incentives prices for producers who attain high levels of production and ensure proper management of stock during the season. Figure 4 General structure of organized SHG contract seaweed farming production and buyback system in India

Drying of seaweed at Pamban, Rameswaram 55

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Figure 5 Loop diagram illustrating systemic strengths and weaknesses in organized seaweed farming in India

56

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

Economic analysis of seaweed farming

The farming of seaweed is preferred to its natural collection because of the comparatively lesser effort involved and the suitability of the marine ecosystem for seaweed cultivation. In addition, seaweed farming holds the potential of larger economic returns. In this regard, this section evaluates the economic performance of seaweed farming in Tamil Nadu, India, by 1) estimating annual costs and returns for the raft culture technique, and 2) by developing indicators of economic viability and financial feasibility. Subsidies were excluded from these analyses. 9.1 Annual costs and returns of seaweed farming Table 31 presents the annual costs and returns for a one-ha seaweed farm using the raft culture technique. The average initial investment amounted to ` 600,000. The different types of nylon ropes required for planting, tying, mooring and anchoring the rafts accounted for the maximum share of investment (41%) followed by the bamboo poles (32%) and seedlings (15%) (Figure 6). Seedlings are sourced from the harvest of an earlier crop. The annual total cost of production was estimated at ` 694 100, comprising a fixed cost of 197,300 (28 percent) and an annual operating cost of ` 496 800 (72 percent). The annual fixed ` cost included depreciation on capital investment, interest on capital and insurance premium while operating costs included labour expenses, transportation, and raft maintenance. The annual gross revenue was estimated at ` 1.15 million, leading to an annual net income of ` 460,000. The estimation of gross revenues assumed a yield of 280 kg of fresh seaweed per raft after a growout period of 45 days, a 10:1 ratio of fresh to dry weight, and a market price of ` 16/ kg of dry weed. The complete set of assumptions is presented in Table 32. 9.2 Economic and financial viability Indicators of economic and financial feasibility for a one-ha seaweed farm were estimated. The following assumptions were made: i) each cultivation cycle has a duration of 45 days; ii) four cycles are carried out in the first year; iii) six cycles are carried out in the second and third years; iv) after three years of operation, a new set of investments needs to be made; and v) interest on investment is charged at 7 percent per annum, based on the guidelines provided by the commercial banks. The average annual net income for the three-year farming project (` 676,300) is higher than the initial investment (` 597,100), suggesting a payback period shorter than a year (Tables 31, 32, 33 and 34). The estimated Net Present Value (20-percent discount rate) was ` 1.30 million (implying an IRR higher than 100%) while the Benefit-Cost Ratio was 1.70. All these indicators provide strong evidence of the economic and financial feasibility of seaweed farming in Tamil Nadu. The estimated high rate of return on investment is consistent with the findings of Padilla and Lampe (1989), who calculated an IRR of 78 per cent for seaweed farming in the Philippines; Shang (1976), who estimated an IRR of 56 per cent for Gracilaria cultivation; and Tisdell (1991), who reported an IRR of 123 per cent in Bali. Seaweed farming has thus emerged as one of the most profitable 57

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute livelihood options for coastal fishing communities in various locations of the Asian continent. Table 31 Annual costs and returns of a one-ha seaweed farm raft culture (900 rafts)
Unit Quantity Price per unit (`) Total value (` thousand) Share (%) Economic life (in years

A. Initial investment Seedlings Bamboo poles Anchorage weight Nylon ropes, 3-mm PP twisted Nylon - Braided ropes Raft framing ropes HDPE fishing nets HDPE net tying rope Anchoring rope Raft lining rope Labour charges for installation Total Initial Investment B. Fixed costs Depreciation Interest on investment (7%) Insurance at 1.2% of investment Total fixed costs C. Operating costs Braider twining charges ` ` ` ` ` ` 108.00 22 58 148.40 41.80 7.10 197.30 75 21 4 100 kg feet kg kg kg kg kg kg kg kg raft ` 54 000 57 600 1 350 405 148.5 585 1 017 81 81 90 900 1.75 3.30 42.00 115.50 126.00 115.50 78.80 115.50 115.50 115.50 15.00 94.50 190.10 56.70 46.70 18.70 67.60 80.10 9.40 9.40 10.40 13.50 597.10 16 32 9 8 3 11 13 2 2 2 2 100 3 10 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Transportation Raft maintenance Miscellaneous Total operating costs D. Total cost of production E. Gross revenue (four production cycles in first year) F. Net income ` ` ` ` ` (B+C) 93.60 284.40 10.80 496.80 694.10 19 57 2 100

` ` (E-D)

1 152.00 457.90

Note: Based on data from the 2008-2009 production year.

Figure 6. Initial investment in a one-ha seaweed farm, Tamil Nadu, India

Table 32 Gross revenue of a one-ha seaweed farm (900 rafts)

Details of harvest Unit Value

Average harvest of fresh seaweed per raft after 45 days of culture (Less) allocation of seedling for the subsequent crop Balance of fresh seaweed kept for drying Quantity of dry seaweed produced from 220 kg of fresh seaweed at 10:1 ratio of fresh to dry weight Dry seaweed available for sale per raft after allowing for impurities

kg kg kg kg kg

280 60 220 22 20 59

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Market Price Average revenue per raft per preduction cycle (45 days) Average revenue per raft in the first production year (four cycles) Average revenue per ha (900 rafts) in the first production year Average revenue per hectare (900 rafts) in the second production year (six cycles) Average revenue per hectare (900 rafts) in the third production year (six cycles) `/kg ` ` ` (thousand) ` (thousand) ` (thousand) 16 320 1,280 1,152 1,728 1,728

The annual cash flow stream for the first three years of the farm is presented in Table 33. The net cash flow is much lower in Year 1 (` 58,100) because of the initial investment; however, net cash flow increases to ` 983,000 in Years 2 and 3. These high values are indicative of the overall profitability of seaweed farming and corroborates findings from earlier studies (Padilla and Lampe, 1989; Tisdell, 1991). Table 33. Annual cashflow stream for a one-ha seaweed farm (900 rafts) (` thousands)
Year Cash outflow Annual cash Investment outflow Total cash outflow Annual cash inflow Annual cash flow

1 2 3

597.10 0 0

496.80 745.20 745.20

1 093.90 745.20 745.20

1,152.00 1,728.00 1,728.00

58.10 982.8 982.8

Table 34 Economic viability and financial feasibility indicators for a one-ha seaweed farm (project cycle of three years)
Indicators Unit Year I Year II Year III Average

Gross investment Total cost of production

` (thousands) ` (thousands)

597.10 694.10

N/A 942.50

N/A 942.50

597.10 859.70

60

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Gross returns Net income Net Present Value (20% discount rate) Benefit Cost Ratio (20% discount rate) Return on investment Payback period IRR ` (thousands) ` (thousands) ` (thousands) Ratio Percent Years Percent 1,152.00 457.90 1,728.00 785.50 1,728.00 785.50 1,536.00 676.30 1,300.00 1.70 113.26 0.9 >100

10 Markets, marketing channels and prices

Harvested seaweeds are sun dried on the beach and then bundled into bales. Although the institutions and companies involved in the development of seaweed farming have constructed drying platforms, most drying is still conducted by farmers on the sandy beaches. Apparently, this problem has not yet been corrected due to Aquagri's willingness to source the dried weed irrespective of its impurities. The marketing channels for seaweed are illustrated in Figure 7. Basic prices are arranged to the satisfaction of the farmers taking into account the effort invested. In 2009, Aquagri was offering ` 16/kg of dried weed. Although it has been argued that Aquagri currently holds a monopsony advantage, competing companies with an interest on Kappaphycus have routinely induced the farmers to break the contracts by offering a marginally higher price. However, Aquagri has developed its own price incentive schemes for loyal farmers and high-volume producers. In addition, non-price measures such as providing assistance to farmers with their economic and social obligations have contributed to build bondages of mutual trust and loyalty. SAP is the major product extracted from the dried weed. Efforts are currently underway for building a plant in Manamadurai for the extraction of carrageenan; the plant is to be commissioned in 2010. Dried seaweed is exported by PepsiCo to the carrageenan conversion plants of MARS, the international chocolate, foods and pet foods manufacturer, in Indonesia. International price fluctuations, which have disrupted the development of seaweed farming in other locations in the world, have had relatively little impact in India due to the large demand from the domestic market.

61

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

Figure 7. Marketing channels of seaweed farmers in the Ramanathapuram district of Tamil Nadu, India.

62

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

11 Policy notes, advisories and notifications

The Government of India, the banking and insurance sectors, the State Departments of Fisheries, development agencies (e.g. DRDA and DBT) and research institutions (e.g. ICAR, CMFRI and CSMCRI) are fully conscious and enthusiastic about the prospects for seaweed culture in India. Roundtables and expert committee meetings on seaweed cultivation and utilization have been organized by the National Academy of Agricultural Sciences (NAAS), CMFRI and CSMCRI. The salient findings and recommendations from these high-level meetings are presented in Table 35. Experts have given recognition to the potential of seaweed aquaculture in India and have advised the Government of India to provide full-fledged institutional support to the activity. Table 35 (column 4) also provides a list of periodic advisories with relevance to the development of seaweed farming in the Ramanathapuram district of Tamil Nadu. These advisories are mostly related to the establishment of the GoMMNP (1986) and the GoMBRT (1989). The G.O. Ms. No. 229 of the Department of Environment and Forests, Government of Tamil Nadu, Chennai (dated 12 December 2005) issued a directive allowing seaweed cultivation by SHGs in the North of Palk Bay and South of Tuticorin coast; in this regard, the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and Chief Wildlife Warden informed that from the point of the Wildlife (Protection) Act of 1972, no objections are made to cultivation of Kappaphycus by SHGs in the above mentioned locations. The Conservator of Forests and GoMBRT Director in his communication GoMBRT/Misc-08/ dated 1 June, 2009 has clarified that stoppage of Kappaphycus culture is not applicable to the regions other than GoM (i.e. Coastal Waters of Tamil Nadu excluding GoM). This seems to be in response to a report in the Hindu dated May 25, 2009 on stoppage of Kappaphycus culture in Mandapam area (Not seen). The Wildlife warden GoM Marine National Park, in his communication of September 4, 2009 has requested for a clarification from the Government of Tamil Nadu on the correct interpretation of the order of 20 December, 2005 regarding the jurisdiction where Kappaphycus can be cultivated. In view of the potential impact that the cultivation of Kappaphycus has had on the livelihoods of coastal communities in the Ramanathpuram distric, the State Government is well advised to take decisive actions in favour of this activity, declaring it as an economic alternative with the potential to raise the socio-economic status of coastal inhabitants. The Government should also lead a transparent process for the designation of areas where the cultivation of Kappaphycus would be allowed. Marine scientists from the CMFRI Mandapam Research Station have clearly stated that seaweed farming is relatively benign to the environment when compared to the bottom trawling activities currently taking place on the region.17
17 Personal communication from Dr. G. Gopakumar, Principal Scientist and Head, Mariculture Division and Scientist-in-Charge, CMFRI Mandapam Research Station. Dr. Gopakumar is categorical in his assertion that the damage caused by roller muddies trawling in the Mandapam/Rameshwaram waters is the major environmental threat faced by the marine ecosystems of the region. In addition, claims made on the negative impact of Kappaphycus culture on the GoM corals are easily proven unfounded, simply because seaweeds do not have the ability to grow on live corals.

63

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Table 35. Policy notes, important recommendations, advisories and selected notifications and communications relevant to seaweed culture in India.
(1) NAAS (2003) (2) CMFRI (2005) (3) (4) CSMCRI (2003) advisories Notifications/ commissioned by PepsiCo Communications 1. G.O. Ms. No. 962 Forests and Fisheries, dated 10 September 1986. 2. No. 1/S/80 Mannar/ K3/ 49181/88 Government of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, dated 4 April 1989. 3. G.O. Ms. No. 229 Department of Environment and Forests of GOTN, dated 20 December 2005. 4. Rc. No. 37076/ Q3/2006 TN DoF, dated 8 June 2009. Lr. No. 3264/2009/ M, TN Forest Department, dated September 2009.

Observations: Commercial cultivation and Observations: processing of marine Most Indian Most Indian macroalgae identified as a seaweed culture seaweed culture national priority. practices are ecopractices are ecofriendly. A new nodal cell for promotion friendly. of commercial cultivation, Kappaphycus is a Kappaphycus is a non-invasive processing and marketing of non-invasive marine macroalgae to be established. marine macroalgae. Kappaphycus alvarezii macroalgae. No adverse introduced to Indian coastal No adverse impact impact on the waters over a decade ago and on the marine marine domesticated since then ecosystem. ecosystem. considered ecologically safe. Salient Salient Natural incidence of recommendations: recommendations: Kappaphycus alvarezii is Seaweed farming Seaweed farming reported in the Andaman as a strategy for as a strategy for islands. Ecological studies have pollution control. pollution revealed that cultivation yieds control. Good prospects for no adverse effects to the co-cultivation of Good prospects ecosystem. Large-scale Kappaphycus with for co-cultivation cultivation of Kappaphycus other species. of Kappaphycus alvarezii in Andaman islands is with other Formation of ideal. species. District and State Other recommendations: Formation of level committees Seaweed farming is ideal in District and State for monitoring of Chilika, Andamans and level committees seaweed farming. Lakshadweep. for monitoring Promotion of Cultivations of agarophytes, of seaweed culture through alginophytes and farming. SHG model. carrageenophytes must be Promotion of Develop protocols given high priority. culture through for the collection SHG model. Sustainable cultivation is of seaweeds from possible. Develop natural habitats. protocols for the Environmental friendly disposal collection of of wastage. seaweeds from natural habitats.

Sources: (1): NAAS (2003); (2): Minutes of expert committee on seaweed cultivation, CMFRI, Kochi, 2 February 2005; (3) CSMCRI (2003).

64

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

12 Conclusions, insights and development strategies

Commercial farming of seaweeds including Eucheuma in coastal waters is a well proven practice by many countries including Japan, China, Philippines and Korea. This is a time tested practice and such activities are increasing in these countries and other countries. Considering the above said facts, it is clear that Eucheuma cultivation will be beneficial for the environment as well as local inhabitants (CSMCRI, 2003). Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific (NACA, 2009) in a recent trainers training programme in August 2009 has prioritized the needs of red seaweeds farming communities in the Philippines under policy support, regulation and sector management. The issues seem to be typical of problems that small farmers in developing countries face the world over. The issues in research and development, training and extension, information development and dissemination, credit needs are also typical. It is heartening to state that India has been able to circumvent most of the problems that seem to be haunting the development of seaweed sector in other developing countries. The adoption of the SHG model in seaweed culture in India by PepsiCo from 2003 has proved to be a big success. Participatory approach in culture and management via contract farming has enabled rapid expansion of this activity that began as a livelihood option and is now developing into an organised and institutionalized socio-economic transformation of these farming villages. The insights gained from the development of seaweed farming in India so far are listed below 1. The SHG model accepted by the network of institutions involved in the process of development of seaweed farming is at the foundation of this development. Strengths are in strong organization, record keeping and transparency. Kappaphycus culture is perhaps the first of its kind initiated by a corporate in Indian agriculture. It also maybe the first to get designated as an agricultural activity among other mariculture initiatives in India. Demand driven and corporate led initiative has enabled the development of the sector on a fast track. Corporate commitment is very evident. Based on rough calculations, the gross revenue over cost per tonne exported works out to only ` 8,000 which is a reasonable margin for a corporate considering its overheads. The social responsibility is well and truly getting translated to tangible benefits to the farming community. The consistent backing of the sector by the banking sector led by NABARD and other commercial banks such as SBI, IOB, Bank of Baroda and Indian Bank besides others has strengthened the movement The clear policy back up and financial support of the Government of India, through 65

2.

3.

4.

5.

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute development agencies and research establishments have given a substantial fillip to the sector 6. 7. The distinct possibility of expansion of operations based on commercial trials in sites in Andhra Pradesh and Gujarat will give a further presence to the seaweed farming sector Seaweed sector has all the potential to rise from a low level equilibrium trap that is normally associated with livelihood interventions to higher levels of employment-incomeconsumption relationships in coastal India At the farm level, the establishment of a off shore seed jetty will enable the farmers to go in for full scale cultivation at the beginning of the season itself instead of having to divert part of their output as cuttings for the next crop Poaching is a problem but is limited by the strong organizational structure of the enterprise

8.

9.

10. Industrial and civic discharges reportedly take place and have an adverse impact on water quality. 11. Improper garbage disposal in the region needs to be stopped. 12. Occurrences of seaweed diseases like ice-ice and epiphytism; prevalent during the summer months need to be studied and suitable preventive / ameliorative measures suggested. 13. Better understanding and joint exercises and efforts of concerned monitoring institutions, TNDoF and Department of Environment and Forests (GoMBRT and GoMNP) will enable the direct stakeholders in seaweed farming in the region work with greater degree of confidence and trust 14. The corporate initiative taken by PepsiCo and equally well followed by Aquagri needs to be appreciated and is a clear case of how responsible community inclusive corporate interventions in agriculture can bring about a sea change in the lives of local communities. 15. Seaweed sector offers one of the best avenues for institutional financial agencies to promote venture capital

Immediate suggested policy initiatives The nodal cell for quick clearance of new projects and for handling all issues related to seaweed culture as envisaged in NAAS (2003) needs to be set up on a priority basis. a. Entry into the Kappaphycus culture in India is restricted by knowledge. Corporates need to be educated on the immense scope in terms of returns to investment considering the low levels of investment requirement and the fast turnover that could be forthcoming given efficient human resource management. Periodic presentations 66

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute by experts on Kappaphycus culture at chambers of commerce such as ASSOCHAM, FICCI and ICCI will help induce new investment in the seaweed sector b. Anomalies, if any, in the tax structure in terms of excise and customs duties need to be ironed out c. The nodal cell could be the final authority in deciding the various aspects of culture practices, interpretations of G.Os and inter-departmental conflicts. Development strategies A sector develops either by deficiency of Social Overhead Capital (SOC) or availability of Directly Productive Activities (DPA) or vice-a-versa. Either of these development strategies or business models in a macro sense is suitable depending upon current stage of development of a sector. In the case of seaweed sector in India we are fortunate that the DPA is more or less in place at least in Tamil Nadu and in a typical model that warrants the development of forward linkages, it is most crucial that support infrastructure and policy are available to the entrepreneurs for furthering the growth of the sector. Warehouses to store dried weed, port facilities for enabling exports, power, potable water, roads, telecommunications, public transport are some of the linkages that need to be established in coastal towns that will help industry to take the opportunity in seaweed sector. Lessons need to be learnt from policies in place for New Zealand aquaculture development. A hectare of water area is leased at NZ$200,000 (Townsend and Young, 2005). This could keep weak firms from entering the market. The Government of New Zealand has a 10 point policy plan which has helped the countrys aquaculture to reach new heights. New Zealand aquaculture, though restricted to mussels, oysters and salmon, has had a disease free track record. Modified version of such measures which promotes inclusive growth of stakeholders in all levels of the society needs to be charted out in India for the development of the seaweed sector. Based on track record of multi-national aquaculture companies, contract farming of seaweed based on the current model in place in Tamil Nadu may also be examined. This would make the field more competitive and spur movement towards a perfectly competitive market structure. The immediate pay offs would be towards achievement of the much elusive 4 % growth rate envisaged for the agricultural sector in India during the XI and XII Five Year Plan periods The seaweed sector in India even at this point of development can serve as role model to other developing countries of the world.

67

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

13 References
Agadi, V. V. 1985. Distribution of marine algae in the littoral zone of Karnataka coast. In Krishnamurthy, V. & Untawale, A. G. (eds), Marine Plants, Madras, Seaweed Research Utilization Assoc., pp. 3542. Anon. 1979. A report on the survey of marine algal resources of Lakshadweep, 19771979. Bhavnagar, CSMCRI, p. 48. Anon. 1984. A report on the survey of marine algal resources of Andhra Pradesh, 19791982. Bhavnagar, CSMCRI, p. 30. Anon. 1978. A report on the survey on the marine algal resources of Andhra Pradesh, 1972-1982, Bhavnagar, CSMCRI, p. 137. Anon. 2004. Progress report of the DBT project - Studies on field cultivation and harvesting of seaweeds Porphyra (Nori), Enteromorpha (Ao Nori), Eucheuma (Tosaka Nori) and their use in processed foods, October 2003June 2004, Bhavnagar, Central Salt and Marine Chemicals Research Institute, p. 9. Anon (undated). Income generation activities for the fisher folk living around Gulf of Mannar and Palk Bay coastal regions through eco-friendly seaweed farming in India in AFI 2008. Aquaculture Foundation of India. 2008. Final report of the DBT project: Seaweed Farming to Rehabilitate Tsunami Affected Coastal Communities in Tamil Nadu, Department of Bio-technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, New Delhi, Government of India, pp. 41. Bhanderi, P. P. & Trivedi Y.A. 1975. Seaweed resources of Hanumandandi reef and Vumani reef near Okha port, Gujrat. Indian J. Mar. Sci., 4: 9799. Brgesan, F. 1933a. Some Indian green and brown algae, especially from the shores of presidency of Bombay III. Journal of Indian Botanical Society, 12: 1-16. Brgesan, F. 1933b. Some Indian Rhodophycaea, especially from the presidency of Bombay III. Bulletin of Miscellaneous Information, Royal Botanical Gardens, Kew, pp. 113-142. Brgesan, F. 1933c. Some Indian Rhodophycaea, especially from the presidency of Bombay IV. Bulletin of Miscellaneous Information, Royal Botanical Gardens, Kew, 1-30 Brgesan, F. 1934. Some marine algae from the northern part of the Arabian Sea with remarks on their geographical distribution. Dan. Vidensk. Selsk. Biol. Med., 11: 72 Brgesan, F. 1935. List of marine algae from Bombay. Dan. Vidensk. Selsk. Biol. Med., 12: 64. Brgesan F. 1938a. Two species of Scinaia from south India. Bot. Nat., 16: 183-189. Brgesan, F. 1938b. Contribution to a south Indian marine algal flora II. Journal of Indian Botanical Society, 16: 311-357. Brgesan F. 1938b. Contribution to a south Indian marine algal flora III. Journal of Indian Botanical Society, 17: 205-242. Bradford, D.F., 1975. Constraints on government investment opportunities and the choice of discount rate. Am.Econ.Rev.65 (6):887-899 Chacko, P. I. & Malu Pillai, C. 1958. Studies on utilization of the seaweed resources of Madras State. Contrib. Mar. Biol. Stn., Krusadai Island, GoM, 6: 112. Chandrkrachang, S. & Chinadit, U. 1988 : Seaweed production and processing a new approach. INFOFISH International, 4: 2225.

68

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

Chauhan, V. D. & Krishnamurthi, V. 1968. An estimate of algin-bearing seaweeds in the Gulf of Kutch. Curr. Sci., 37: 648. Chauhan, V. D. 1978. Report of the survey of marine algae resources of Maharashtra coast. Salt Res. Ind., 14: 110. Chauhan, V. D. & Mairh, O. P. 1978. Report on survey of marine algal resources of Saurashtra Coast, India. Salt Res. Ind., , 14: 2141. Chennubhotala, V.S., Kaliaperumal, N., Ramalingam, J.R. & Kalimuthu, S. 1986. Growth, reproduction and spore output in Gracilaria folifera (Forsskal) Boergesen and Gracliaraia sjoestedtii (Kylin) Dawson around Mandapam. Indian J. Fish., 33(1): 76-84. Chennubhotla, V.S.K., Kaliaperumal, N & Kalimuthu, S. 1978. Culture of Gracilaria edulis in the inshore waters of GoM (Mandapam). Indian J. Fish., 25 (1&2): 228-229. Chennubhotla, V. S. K., Ramachandrudu, B. S., Kaladharan, P. & Dharmaraj, S. K. 1988. Seaweed resources of Kerala coast. Aquat.Biol., 7: 6974. Chennubotla, V.S.K. & Kaliaperumal, N. 1983. Proven technology 7, Technology of cultured seaweed production. Mar. Fish. Infor. Serv., T&E. Ser., No. 54: 19-20. Chenuubhotla, V.S.K., Kaladharan, P., Kaliaperumal, N. & Rajagopalan, M.S. 1992. Seasonal variation in poduction of cultured seaweed Gracilaria edulis (Gmelin) Silva in Minicoy lagoon (Lakshadweep). Seaweed Res. Utiln., 14(2): 109-113. CMFRI. 1987. Seaweed research and utilization in India. Bull. Cent. Mar. Fish. Res. Inst., No. 41: 116 Coopen, J.J.W. & Nambiar, P. 1991. Agar and alginate production from seaweed in India. Madras, Bay of Bengal Programme (India), p.32. Coppen, J.J.W. 1989. International trade in agar for countries in the Bay of Bengal Project Region. In Seminar on Gracilaria production and utilization in the Bay of Bengal, October 23-27, 1989, Songkhla, Thailand. CSMCRI, 2003. CSMCRI- PepsiCo Interaction. CSIR News Vol 53 No 13, 15 July 2003, ISSN 0409-7467 CSMCRI, 2003. Report on Rapid Environmental Impact Assesment of Euchema Cultivation on Marine Environment in the Selected Regions of Gulf of Mannar and Palk Bay of Tamil Nadu Coast, Submitted to M/s. PepsiCo Holdings (I) Ltd., pp. 8. Department of Fisheries, 2009. Swarna Grammeena Rozgar Yojana : Seaweed cultivation, Goovernment of Tamil Nadu. 19pp. Desai, B. N. 1969. Seaweed resources and extraction of alginate and agar. In: Krishnamurthi, V.(ed.), Proceedings of the Seminar on Sea, Salt and Plants, Bhavnagar, CSMCRI, 1967, pp. 343351. Desikachari, T.V. 1967. Seaweed resources of India. In: V. Krishnamurthi, ed. Proceedings of the Seminar on Sea, Salt and Plants, Bhavnagar, CSMCRI, pp. 724. Dhargalkar, V.K. 1981. Studies on marine algae of the Goa coast. Ph.D thesis, Bombay University, p. 168. Dhargalkar, V.K. & Deshmukh, G.V. 1996. Subtidal marine algae of the Dwaraka coast (Gujarat). Ind. J. Mar. Sci., 25(4): 297-301. Dhargalkar, V.K. & Neelam Pereira. 2005. Seaweed : Promising plant of the millennium. Science and Culture, March-April, 60-66.

69

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

Dinabandhu, S. Seaweeds Utilisation and their cultivation as an alternate source of livelihood. (available at http://www.nio.org/past_events/fisheries/session_III.jsp) Dogma Jr. I.J., Trono, Jr. G.C. Tabbada, R.A. 1981. Proceedings of the symposium on culture and utilization of Algaein Southeast Asia, 8-11 December, 1981, AQD, Tigbaun, Iloilo, Philippines, SEAFDEC, p. 111 Earthtrends. 2003. (available at http://earthtrends.wri.org/pdf_library/cp/coa_cou_356.pdf) Eswaran, K., Ghosh, P.K. & Mairh, O.P. 2002. Experimental field cultivation of Kappaphycus alvarezii (Doty) ex. P.Silva at Mandapam region. Seaweed Res. Utiln., 24(1): 67-72. FAO. 2003. Seaweeds used a source of carrageenan (available at http://www.fao.org/docrep/006/y4765e/ y4765e09.htm, accessed on December, 12.2009) Firdausy, Carunia and Tisdell, Clem, 1991. Economic Returns from Seaweed (Eucheuma cottonii) farming in Bali, Indonesia. Asian Fisheries Science, 4(1991):61-73 Gittinger, J.P., 1982. Economic analysis of agricultural projects. The John Hopkins University Press, Second Edition, Baltimore, London Gopinathan, C. P. & Panigrahy, R. 1983. Seaweed resources in mariculture potential of Andaman and Nicobar islands an indicative survey. Bull. Cent. Mar. Fish. Res. Inst., No. 34: 4751. Hornell, J. 1918. Report on development of fishery resources of Baroda state.(cited in Rao and Mantri, 2006) Original not seen Hurtado, Q.A., Agbayani, R.F., Roman Sanares, Ma Teresa, R. de Castro-Mallare, 2001. The seasonality and economic feasibility of cultivationg Kappaphycus alvarezii in Panagatan Cays, Caluya, Antique, Philippines. Aquaculture, 199: 295-310. Immanuel, S. & Sathiadhas, R. 2004. Employment potential of fisherwomen in the collection and post harvest operations of seaweeds in India. Seaweed Res. Utiln., 26: 209215. Iyengar, M.O.P. 1927. Krusadai Island Flora. Bulletin Madras Government Museum New Ser., Natural History, 1: 185-188. Joshi, H.V. & Chauhan, V.D. 1985. Effect of repeated harvesting on the growth of Gelidiella acerosa (Forsskl) Feldmann et. Hamel. Seaweed Res. Utiln., 7: 94100. Joshi, H.V. 1984. Studies on Indian seaweeds physiological ecology of Sargassum of Okha. Ph D thesis, Bhavnagar University. p.229. Kaladharan, P. & Kaliaperumal, N. 1992. The seaweed industry in India. Naga, the ICLARM Quarterly, 22(1): 11-14. Kaladharan, P., K.Vijayakumaran & V.S.K.Cheenabhotla, 1996. Physical parameters in the husbandry practices for mariculture of Gracilaria edulis in Minicoy Lagoon and Laccadives Archipelago. Aquaculture, 139:265270 Kaladharan, P. & Jayasankar, R. 2003. Seaweeds. In M.J. Modaiyil, & A.A. Jayaprakash, eds. Status of exploited marine fishery resources of India. Cochin, Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute, pp. 228239. Kaliaperumal, N., S.Kalimuthu, J.R.Ramalingam & M.Selvaraj. 1986. Experimental field cultivation of Acanthophora spicifera (Vahl). Boergesen in the nearshore area of Gulf of Mannar, Indian J. Fish., 33 (4): 476-478 Kaliaperumal N., Rajagopalan, M.S. & Chenuubhotla, V.S.K. 1992. Field cultivation of Gracilaria edulis (Gmelin) Silva in Minicoy lagoon (Lakshadweep). Seaweed Res. Utlin., 14(2): 103-107.

70

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

Kaliaperumal, N. 2004. Prospects of seaweed farming in India. In Proceedings of Ocean Life Food and Medicine Expo, 27-29 February, 2004, Chennai, Aquaculture Foundation of India, Chennai, pp. 384-393. Kaliaperumal, N. & Kalimuthu, S. 1997. Seaweed potential and its exploitation in India. Seaweed Res. Utiln., 19: 3340. Kaliaperumal, N. & Ramalingam, J.R. 2000. Seaweed culture. In Training course manual of seaweed culture, processing and uitilization, Cochin, CMFRI, pp. 7-13. Kaliaperumal, N. 1992. Seaweed culture. In Handbook of Aquafarming, Cochin, MPEDA, pp. 30-37. Kaliaperumal, N., Kalimuthu, S., & Ramalingam, J.R. 1998. Seaweed resources and distribution in deep waters from Dhanushkodi to Kanyakumari, Tamilnadu. Seaweed Res. Util., 20: 141151. Kaliaperumal, N., Kalimuthu, S. & Muniyandi, K. 1996. Experimental cultivation of Gracilaria edulis at Valinokkam Bay. In Proc. Natl. Symp. Aquaculture for 2000 AD. Madurai Kamaraj University, pp. 221-226. Kaliaperumal, N., Kalimuthu, S. & Ramalingam, J.R. 1996. Effect of repeated harvesting on the growth of Sargassum spp. and Turbinaria conoides occurring in Mandapum area. Seaweed Res. Utiln, 18: 5766. Kaliaperumal, N., Kalimuthu, S. & Ramalingam, J.R. 2004. Present scenario of seaweed exploitation and industry in India. Seaweed Res. Utiln., 26: 4753. Kalkman Ineke, Issac Rajendran & Charles L. Angell, 1991. Seaweed (Gracilaria edulis) farming in Vedali and Chinnapalem, India. Bay of Bengal Programme, Madras, India BOBP/WP/65, Small Scale Fisherfolk Communities GCP/RAS/118/MUL, p. 28 Kappanna, A. N. & Rao, A. V. 1963. Preparation and properties of agar agar from Indian seaweeds. Indian J. Technol., 1: 222 224. Khan Sajid, I., Goud D., Patil S.V. & Satam S.B. 2003. Importance of seaweeds and their culture prospects. Fishing Chimes 23(9): 25-28. Koshy, T.K. & John, C.C. 1948. Survey of Gracilaria resources of Travancore. Department of Research, University of Travancore, Rept. Septen. pp.35-53 Krishnamurthy, V. 2005. Seaweeds Wonder Plants of the Sea. Chennai, Aquaculture Foundation of India, p.30. Krishnamurthy, V. 1969. Seaweed drift on the Indian coast. In Proc. Symp. Indian Ocean, Natl. Inst. Sci. India, 38: 657666. Krishnamurthy, V., Raju, P.V. & Thomas, P.C. 1977. Onaugmenting seaweed resources of India. Seaweed Res. Utiln., 2(1): 37-40. Krishnamurthy, V., Raju, P.V. & Venugopal, P.V. 1975. On augmenting seaweed resources of India. J. Mar. Biol. Ass. India, 17(2): 181-185. Kumaraguru, A.K., V.Edwin Joseph, N.Marimuthu & J.Jerald Wilson, 2006. Scientific information on Gulf of Mannar-A Bibliography . Centre for Marine and Coastal Studies, Madurai Kamaraj University, Madurai, Tamilnadu, India, p656. Kumaraguru, A.K., V.Edwin Joseph, M.Rajee & T.Balasubramanian, 2008. Palk Bay Information and Bibliography, Centre for Marine and Coastal Studies, Madurai Kamraj University, Madurai, Tamil Nadu, India, 1-27 Mairh, O.P., Zodape, Tewari, A. & Rajyaguru, M.R. 1995. Culture of marine red alga Kappaphycus striatum (Schmitz) Doty in the Saurashtra region, West Coast of India. Indian J. Mar. Sci., 24: 24-31.

71

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

Mantri, V. A. & Subba Rao, P. V. 2005. Diu island: A paradise for tourists and seaweed biologists. Curr. Sci., 89: 17951797. Marine Fisheries Censu 2005 Part I. All India over view of the Census data. Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India and Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute, Indian Council of Agricultural Research.pp104 Mendelsohn, R., 1981. The choice of discount rate for public projects. Am.Econ.Rev. 71(1):239-241 McHugh, D. J. 2003. A guide to the seaweed industry. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper, No. 441: 105. Miahan, E.J., 1982. Cost-benefit analysis. Third Edition. George Allen and Unwin, London Michanek, G. 1975. Seaweed resources of the Ocean. FAO Fish Tech. Rep. No. 138. pp. 1-126. Misra, J.N. 1960. The ecology, distribution and seaweed succession of the littoral algae on the west coast of India. In: Kachiroo, P.(ed.), Proceedings of the symposium on algology, New Delhi, ICAR, pp. 187-203. Mitra, C. 1946. Report on development of Chilka Lake, Cuttack Modayil, M. J. 2004. How to increase marine fish production. Fishing Chimes, 28(1): 14-16. Mohanta, K.N., Subramaniam, S., Komarpant, N. & Saurabh, F. 2007. On improving the present status of seaweed industry in India. Fishing Chimes, 26(10): 157-158. MPEDA. 2001. Statistics report of Marine Products Export Development Authority, Cochin, MPEDA. 300 pp. Mukhopadhyay, A. & Pal, R. 2002. A report on biodiversity of algae from coastal West Bengal (South and North 24-Parganas) and their cultural behaviour in relation to mass cultivation programme. Indian Hydrobiol., 5: 97107. Muthuvelan, B., Chennubhotla, V. S. K., Nair, K. V. K., Sampath, V. & Ravindran, M. 2001. Standing crop biomass and comparative distribution of agarophytes, alginophytes and other algae in south Andaman. Indian Hydrobiol., 4: 130138. Muthuvelan, B., Chennubhotla, V. S. K., Nair, K. V. K., Sampath, V. & Ravindran, M. 2001. Seaweed standing crop biomass and comparative distribution in eastern shoreline of middle and north islands. Indian Hydrobiol., 4: 139148. National Academy of Agricultural Sciences. 2003. Seaweed cultivation and utilization, Policy Paper 22, p.5 National Institute of Rural Development, 2003. Directory of Rural Technologies-Part IV(Eds.) Mathew Kunnankal and B.Sant, NIRD, Hyderabad, pp156-158 Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific. 2009. Capacity Building Needs For Small Scale Aquaculture http://library.enaca.org/inland/reports/ Farmers, available at annex_b_capacity_building_needs_for_aquaculture_farmeINRpdf; accessed on Novemver 4, 2009 Padilla, J.E. and H.C.Lampe, 1989. The economics of seaweed farming in he Philippines, Naga, the ICLARM Quarterly.12(3):3-5 Patel, J.B., Gopal, B.V., Nagulan, V.R., Subbaramaiah, K. & Thomas, P. C. 1986. Experimental field cultivation of Gelidiella acerosa at Ervadi in India. In: Proc. Symp. Coastal Aquaculture, Pt. 4: 13421343 Pearce, D.W. and C.A.Nash, 1981. The social appraisal of projects: a text in cost-benefit Macmillan, London analysis,

Raju, P.V. & Thomas, P.C. 1971. Experimental filed cultivation of Gracilaria edulis (Gmel.) Sila. Bot. Mar., 14 (2): 71-75.

72

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

Rama Rao, K., Nair, M.R.P. & Subbaramiah, V. 1985. Experimental field cultivation of Hypenea musciformis (Turn). Mont. at Krusudai Island. In V. Krishnamurthy, ed. Marine Plants, pp. 205-208. Rama Rao, K. & K.Subbaramaiah, !986. A technique for the field cultivation of Hypenea musciformis (Wulf.) Lam. Proc. Symp. Coastal Aquaculture (MBAI, Cochin), 4:1190-1192 Rao, G. Syda, and Kumar R.Narayana, 2008. An economic analysis of land based production of marine pearls in India. Aquaculture Economics and Management . 12(2):130-144 Rao, M.U. 1973. Seaweed potential of the seas around India. Proc. Symp. Living Resources of the Sea around India, Cochin, CMFRI, pp. 687692. Rao, M.U. 1974. On the cultivation of Gracilaria in the near shore are around Mandapam. Curr. Sci., 43(20): 660-661. Rao, M.U. & Seeramulu, T. 1964. An ecological study of some intertidal algae of the Visakhapatnam coast. Journal of Ecology, 52: 595-616. Rao, P.V. Subba 1983. Biology and propagation of Gelidiella acerosa (Forsskal) Feldmann et Hamel in the Mandapam region. Ph D thesis, Banaras Hindu University, p. 127. Rao, P.V. Subba & Mantri, V.A. 2006. Indian seaweed resources and sustainable utilization: scenario at the dawn of a new century. Cur. Sci., 91(2): 164-173. Rath, J. & Adhikari, S.P. 2004. Algal biomass of Chilika Lake, east coast of India, Seaweeds 2004. National Symposium and Exposition, Cochin, Abst., p. 24. Ravindran, V. S., Thangaradjou, T. & Kannan, L. 2004. Qualitative and quantitative distribution of seaweeds in the Great Nicobar Island. Seaweeds 2004 National Symposium and Exposition, Cochin, Abst. p. 27. Reeta Jayasankar and Kaliaperumal, N. 1991. Experimental culture of Gracilaria edulis by spore shedding method. Seaweed Res. Utiln., 14 (1): 21-23. Sahoo, D., Sahu, N. and Sahoo, D. 2003. A critical survey of seaweed biodiversity of Chilika Lake, India. Algae, 18: 112. Sahoo D., available at http://www.nio.org/past_events/fisheries/Sustainabilityof_seafood.jsp Sakthivel, M. 2006. Kappaphycus seaweed cultivation: Economics. Fishing Chimes, 26(8): 19-24. Sanil Kumar, V., Pathak, K. C., Pednekar, P., Raju, N. S. N. & Gowthaman, R. 2006. Coastal processes along the Indian coastline. Cur. Sci., 91(4): 530-536. Shang, Y.C., 1976. Economic aspects of Gracilaria culture in Taiwan. Aquaculture 8:1-7 Shang, Y.C., 1981. Aquaculture Economics: basic concepts and methods of anlaysis. Westview, Press, Boulderview, Colorado Silas, E.G., Chennubhotla, V.S.K. & Kaliaperumal, N. 1986. Seaweed resources, products and utilization. Seaweed Res. Utiln., 9(1): 11-24. Silas, E. G. & Kalimuthu, S. 1987. Commercial exploitation of seaweeds in India. Bull. Cent. Mar. Fish. Res. Inst., No. 41: 5559. Sreenivasa Rao, P., Iyengar, E. E. R. and Thivy, F. 1964. Survey of algin bearing seaweed at Adatra reef, Okha. Curr. Sci., 33: 464465.

73

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

Srinivasan, K.S. 1947. Ecology and seasonal succession of the marine algae at Mahabalipuram. (Seven pagodas) near Madras. In B. Sahni, ed. M.O.P.Ieyngar Commemoration Volume. Silver Jubilee Session, Allahabad, Indian Botanical Society, pp. 267-278. Subbaramiah, K., Rama Rao, K., Thomas, P.C., Nair, M.R.P., Gopal, B.V. and Nagulan, V.R. 1975. Cultivation of Gelidiella acerosa. Salt Res. India, 11(1): 33-36. Thivy, F. 1958. Economic seaweeds. In: Jones, S. (ed.), Fisheries of West Coast of India, Mandapam Camp, Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute, pp. 74-80. Thivy, F. 1960. Seaweed utilization in India. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on Algology, New Delhi, Indian Council of Agricultural Research. Thomas, P.C., Rama Rao, K. & Subbaramaiah, K. 1975. Periodicity in growth and production of agar of Gelidiella acerosa (Forsskl) Feldmann et. Hamel. Indian J. Mar. Sci., 4: 21021. Tisdell, C., 1972. The Microeconomics: the theory of economic allocation. John Wiley and Sons, Sydney Townsend, Ralph E., & Michael D.Young. 2005. Perspectives: evergreen leasing of aquaculture sites, Marine Resource Economics, 20, pp. 203-210 Trono Jr. G.C. 1981. Seaweed resources in the developing countries of Asia: Production and socio-economic implications. In I.J. Dogma Jr. G.C. Trono, Jr. R.A. Tabbada, eds. Proc. Symp. on Culture and utilization of algae in south-east Asia, 8-11, December 1981, Tigbaun, Iloilo, Philippines. p. 1-7. UNDP. 1994. Conservation and sustainable-use of the GoM siosphere reserves coastal biodiversity, New York. (available at UNDP Project Brief), accessed on November 4, 2009 Untawale, A.G., Dhargalkar, V.K., Agadi, V.V. & Jagtap, T.G. 1983. Marine algal resources of Maharashtra coast. NIO Technical Report, Goa, National Institute of Oceanography, p. 42. Usitalo, J. 1986. Commercial seaweed collection and the agar/alginate industries in Tamil Nadu, India. Seaweed cultivation as a solution to over-exploitation of a natural resource. Swedish National Board of Fisheries, Gothenburg, pp. Verma, R. P. & Krishna Rao, K. 1962. Algal resources of Pamban area. Indian J. Fish, 9: 205211. Zemke-White, L. W. & Ohno, M. 1999. World seaweed utilization: An end of century summary. J. Appl. Phycol., 11: 369376.

74

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

14 Annexure Annexure - 1
Composition, structure and performance of SHGs engaged in seaweed farming in Pudukottai and Tanjavur districts.
Name of the location Name of the SHG Year of start Number of female members Number of male members Number of rafts Average yield per raft (kg/year)

Muthukuda

Kadal Muthu (men) Five Star (men) Panimalar (men) Pasumai Bishmilla (mixed)

2008

200

18

Arasanagri Pattinam

2009 2009 2009 2009 2009

0 0 0 2 2

15 5 5 3 3

600 200

23 23

200 200

23 23

Gopalapattinam

Kadal Pasu (mixed)

Jegathapattinam Valampuri (women) Thamarai (men) Jevan (men) Kottaipattinam Mallikai (mixed) Senthuram (mixed) Roja ( mixed) Sethupava Chatram Tanjore Manora Tanjavur Kadal pasu 2007 (mixed) Kadal Nila Kalpana Chawla (women)

2007 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2 2007

5 0 0 2 3 3 3 3

0 5 5 3 2 2 200 2

225 200 200 200 200 200 21 200

26 23 23 23 23 23

21

2007

200

21

Source: Aquagri Processing Private Limited, New Delhi

75

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

Annexure - 2
Gulf of Mannar

The Gulf of Mannar (GoM) in the southeast coast of India extends from Rameshwaram Island in the north to Kanyakumari in the south. It encloses a chain of 21 islands stretching from Mandapam to Tuticorin to a distance of 140 km along the coast. Each of the islands is located anywhere between 2 and 10 km from the mainland. The Gulf of Mannar Biosphere Reserve (GoMBR) was established on 18 February 1989 by the Government of Tamil Nadu with the purpose of protecting the marine environment and its wildlife. The reserve has an area of 10 500 km2 (including the 21 islands in the gulf) and it runs along the mainland coast for about 170 nautical miles. The GoM is endowed with a rich variety of marine organisms as it houses ecosystems of coral reefs, rocky shores, sandy beaches, mud flats, estuaries, mangrove forests, seaweed stretches and seagrass beds. These ecosystems support a wide variety of fauna and flora including rare cowries, cones, volutes, murices, whelks, strombids, chanks, tonnids, prawns, lobsters, pearl oysters, seahorses, sea cucumbers, etc. Among other reasons, the GoMBR is particularly important because it provides a safe habitat to the declining populations of the endangered dugong, an herbivorous aquatic mammal of the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean. The GoM supports finfish and shellfish fisheries as well a number of aquaculture activities (seaweed farming, primarily). The finfish fishery includes perches, carangids, barracudas, mackerels, milkfish, mullets, tunas, sardines, scrombroides, silver bellies, pomfrets, lethrinids, groupers, sharks and rays. The shellfish fishery includes oysters, mussels, clams, prawns, lobsters and crabs. In addition to seaweed, aquaculture trials have been conducted for pearl oysters, edible oysters, crabs, sea cucumbers, prawns, and milkfish.

Source: Kumaraguru et al., (2006)

76

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

Anneuxre - 3
Palk Bay

Palk Bay, named after Sir Robert Palk (1717-1798), Governor of Madras from 1755 to 1763, is situated in the southeast coast of India encompassing the sea between Point Calimer (Kodikkarai) near Vedaranyam in the north and the northern shores of Mandapam to Dhanushkodi in the south (about 110 km long). Palk Bay and the GoM to its south are connected by a narrow passing called Pamban Strait (about 1.2 km wide), which separates the Island of Rameswaram from the mainland. The coastline of Palk Bay harbors coral reefs, mangroves, lagoons and seagrass ecosystems. The saline water and the muddy substratum coupled with seasonal rain and discharge form Vaigai and Cauvery rivers has created good breeding grounds for pelagic and demersal fishes. Palk Bay is also rich in seaweed resources of economic importance. The fringing coral reefs contain Gelidium micropterum and various species of Gracilaria. The lagoons between the reefs and the shore exhibit rich growth of Gracilaria lichenoides (locally known as kanji ppasi). The reefs also harbour large standing crops of Sargassum and Turbinaria.

Source: Kumaraguru et al. (2008)

77

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute

78