Environment - ތިމާވެށި
Browse
234 results
Search Results
Item Environmental impact assessment report for Hulhumale’ swimming area and land based facilities development project(2010-03) Land and Marine Environment Resources group Pvt LtdThe non technical summary outlines the findings of the Environmental Impact Assessment of the proposed development of swimming track and associated land based facilities. The proponent of the project is Housing Development Corporation Plc. The proposed project involves development of a swimming track and associated land based facilities at the eastern side of Hulhumale. The swimming tracks will be 20m by 25m. The total length of both tracks is 50m. The plate form and access jetty will be constructed using floats. Land based area includes, restaurants, kitchens, food outlets, toilets, changing facilities and park (including a small children’s park) A scoping meeting to discuss the development proposal and determine the Terms of Reference (TOR) for the EIA report was held between the Client (Housing Development Corporation Plc), LaMer Group Pvt Ltd as the EIA Consultant, Ministry of Housing, Transport and Environment (water and sanitation section of EPA) and representatives from Environment Protection Agency (EPA) as the Regulator on 23rd November 2009. Data collection or field was carried out during January 2010 for assessment of existing environment. Since the scope of work of the proposed project is small, existing environment data was limited to reef health, general wave, tide condition and seawater quality assessment. The water quality assessment done at the proposed swimming track area revealed alarming levels of Enterococci levels which was probably due to high number of users and disregard to general hygienic values (showering before entry to water). Also it has to be noted that an outfall pipe is location near the swimming track area and this may have some level of leakage (although close inspection showed none. Alternatives are given for location of swimming track area, since contamination of seawater is major social impact. Assessing alternatives the location identified by HDC Plc during consultation with HDC seems to be a better candidate as a location for swimming track. Mitigation measures are discussed for the construction and operational stage of the swimming track area only.Item Post-tsunami infrastructure rehabilitation project : rehabilitation of 6 selected harbors : social and environmental impact assessment for the rehabilitation of the harbor in Makunudhoo island, Haa Dhaal atoll(2007-11) SOGREAH Consultants; Water SolutionsThis report discusses the findings of a social and environmental impact study undertaken by Water Solutions Pvt. Ltd. and SOGREAH consultants of France upon request from Ministry of Construction and Public Infrastructure. The project involves the rehabilitation of the existing harbour in Makunudhoo, Haa Dhaal Atoll with improved infrastructures. This project is initiated by the government of Maldives with funding from Agence Française de Dévelopement” (AFD) as part of the Tsunami rehabilitation programme. The harbour of Makunudhoo has been damaged to various extents and requires repair and upgrading, including deepening the harbour basin, and increasing slightly the size. A detail assessment of the environmental and social conditions was assessed based on which a rehabilitation project has been proposed. This EIA has been prepared to assess the social and environmental impacts of this proposed rehabilitation project. Major environmental impacts of the project have been identified as resulting mainly from dredging and disposal of dredged materials. Dredging will be undertaken in the harbour basin and to some extent in the access channel. In view of the assessment, the environmental damages to marine resources have not been considered major due to the limited boundary of the project and also due to confined nature of the project. The impacts are likely to be felt on an estimated 5% of the lagoon and reef‐flat of that extensive reef system. These environmental impacts were assessed for both construction and operation phase of the project. Mitigation measures for these anticipated impacts have been identified and outlined in detail, including sedimentation control methods and other measures. These mitigation measures will have to be followed in order to minimize environmental damage. Stakeholder consultations were held with various groups, including the community and the client in order to incorporate the socio‐ economic components in the project. The proposed rehabilitation plans for Makunudhoo has been prepared after considering the needs and requirements from the community by assessing and incorporating the outcomes from the extensive community consultations held during the data collection stage. It is inevitable that there would be some negative environmental impacts, especially when dredging is undertaken. However, these minor negative impacts out weight the socioeconomic benefits gained by rehabilitating the harbour. As a result, a comprehensive monitoring component has been suggested which takes in to consideration, the most important elements that require regular checks. This monitoring component will be adhered and will allow the assessment of long term changes, despite the limited nature of the impact. The most important consideration is the socioeconomic impacts that have been assessed mainly as positive in nature. Not only they are positive, but most importantly in the long term. Therefore, it appears justified from a technical and from an environmental point of view, to carry out the proposed rehabilitation project if the island is to absorb the economic gains achieved by the project.Item Environmental impact assessment : for the removal of seagrass beach replenishment activities in Herathera Island Resort, Addu atoll, Maldives(2010-09) CDE ConsultingThe Herathera Island has been experiencing seaweed overgrowth for a number of years, even before construction began on the island. Similarly, the island does not have a natural beach system which is suitable for a resort product. An attempt was made in 2007 and 2008 to remedy these shortcomings by removing seagrass and undertaking beach replenishment. Unfortunately, the beach replenishment design and implementation was flawed and new seagrass colonies have started to emerge. The island is currently is a worse condition, particularly its beach system. These environmental issues are decreasing the economic value of the tourism product being offered Resort and is reaching a point where the product may be unviable. Immediate action is required to address these issues, thus, a new and improved beach replenishment and seagrass removal programme. The proposed project involves the removal of sea grass colonies and beach replenishment. Details of the proposed project components are outlined below. a) Sea grass removal The primary component of the project is seagrass removal. Seagrass areas covering approximately 200,000 – 250,000 m2 is proposed to be cleared (see Site plan in Appendix B), 100,000 m3 of dredge waste. TwoEIA for the proposed Seagrass Removal and Beach Replenishment Activities in Herathera Island Resort Prepared by: CDE Consultancy Page| ix methods have been proposed for the project: 1) using a sand pump; 2) using an excavator and; 3) soft measures. b) Beach Replenishment Beach replenishment has been considered as part of the project to mitigate the severe erosion on the island. The dredged waste from the sea grass removal activity, after cleaning and sorting, will be used to replenish the a 2900 m beach up to 10 m from the existing shore line. Additional sand will be dredged from borrow areas within the lagoon using sand pumps and excavators. Replenishment will be carried out using a three staged process. The first stage will collect and filter sediments on designated sites. The second stage will transfer the cleaned sediments to severe erosion zones using trucks. The final stage will profile the beach using fine sand. For the direct replenishment, sand will be pumped or transferred via barges to a designated location, where loaders and trucks and move the material.Item Initial environmental examination for a coral frame project(2010-07) Systems Engineering and Marine ConsultingThe potential environmental impacts of the development of a coral propagation project on the island of H.A. Manafaru are assessed. Manafaru is leased to Beach House Maldives and is operated by the Waldorf Astoria collection of the Hilton group. The assessment exposes the solutions and preferred alternatives as well as mitigation measures to minimize any negative impacts whilst trying to derive the maximum positive impacts from the project. Manafaru has very little coral cover after being degraded by the 1998 bleaching event. As it is important to be proactive in reef restoration, the resort management wishes to enhance the value of the island by propagating corals using the coral frame technique. The frames will be installed near the water villas and sparsely on the house reef. Coral fragments will be attached by a marine biologist and will develop into full colonies within a few years. Coral fragments from the house reef will provide a small number of fragments and will heal rapidly. Preference will be given to damaged colonies. 136 frames of 1m2 will be initially deployed, and after the first batch, the existing frames will provide fragments for transplantation. The project will start as soon as approval is granted, and as this is a long term project, it could span several years before completion. The island of Manafaru is located inside the northernmost atoll of the Maldives, and is subject to high winds and warming waters, which may be a cause of low coral survival. As the island is located in the middle of the atoll, the waves reaching its shores are diffraction of swells, and wind waves. As the energy encountered are of second magnitude, and the reef does not form a proper crest, the waves reach the island with less obstruction than most areas. Sand displacement depends on the predominant influence during different monsoons, forming a bulging beach rather than a sand tip.Item Environmental impact assessment for harbor extension works at Fares-Maathodaa, Gdh. Atoll(2016-04) Land and Marine Environmental Resources GroupBackground The non-technical summary outlines the findings of the Environmental Impact Assessment of the proposed harbour extension works at Fares-Maathodaa, Gaafu Dhaalu Atoll. The proponent of the proposed project is Ministry of Housing and Infrastructure. The total estimated cost of this project is USD 843,060. The proposed project involves extension of the existing facility (which lies on the northern side of the island) by addition of 61m (along its length) to the eastern side of the facility. The project also involves construction of the main quay wall along the extension area and a sand bund breakwater along the outer boundary. Dredged material sourced will be disposed along the shoreline to the east of extension area. Key impacts, mitigation measures and alternatives Impacts on the environment have been considered for the constructional phase and post constructional phase of the project. These impacts have been identified through interviews with the project management team, field data collection and surveys and are also based on past experience of consultant in similar development projects. Impact analysis was done using the Leopold matrix. The impacts identified are described according to their location, probability of impact, magnitude, significance and duration. Mitigation measures have also been identified for impacts which are irreversible in nature. Impact analysis showed that the main impact due to the project was during the construction phase, due to dredging activity. This impact was also anticipated to be of low effect due to the location (shallow intertidal area with seagrass beds) and scale of project (even though loss of seagrass beds from project site is a permanent impact). Overall, impacts identified were found to be of low effect and restricted to the project site, with temporary effects. Positive impact due to the project is the availability of a bigger and more planned area (dedicated area for unloading and passenger use) for use by the numerous vessels of the island and those who visit the island. Mitigation measures are discussed in the report for potential impacts, such as limiting dredging activity to low tide phase to reduce possible sedimentation impacts. Detailed mitigation measures are discussed in Section 11 of the report. Given the scope of the project and need alternative has only been considered for the material to be used for breakwater construction and location of extension. The no-project scenario which was also considered, is not feasible, given the scope of project and associated impacts on environment which are which are mainly of low effect and short term. The benefits on continuation of project outweigh the impacts and hence the no-project scenario is not considered a feasible option. The Consultant feels that the project is feasible with proper implementation of the mitigation measures proposed to minimize the impact on the environment. Stakeholder Consultation Stakeholder consultation was undertaken with Island Council regarding the concept drawing formulated by MHI. The council stated that they require a side quay wall to be included in the eastern side and if excess dredged material is available back filling areas where erosion is observed. Based on the stakeholder consultation, MHI agreed to change the concept design to include a side quay wall at the eastern side. The revised final drawing is provided in Appendix 5 of this report.Item Third addendum to the environmental impact assessment for the proposed Hulhulé-Malé bridge project(2016-05) CDE ConsultingThe purpose of this document is to assess the potential environmental impacts and mitigation measures for the proposed changes to the Hulhulé-Malé Bridge project. This document is an addendum to the original Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) prepared for the Bridge project in November 2015. The proponent of this project is Ministry of Housing and Infrastructure. The addendum is prepared to address the need to use Gulhifalhu NE reef flat to temporarily store large steel structures (Steel Pipe Piles, and Steel Casings) of the bridge. The main rationale for selecting this lagoon is the short distance to the project site, availability of space, access to deep water and relatively calms sea conditions to safely store the structures. The pipes will be removed in 7-8 months. The main reason why the piles have to be stored is due to the difficulties in holding a chartered barge for a 7 month period to store the pipes. The study area of this project considers the proposed storage site in Gulhifalhu Lagoon and surrounding areas that are likely to be affected by the proposed changes. The site has been affected by past reclamation activities and human activities. The site is also earmarked for future reclamation. The proposed developments are generally in conformance to the laws and regulations of the Maldives. The key impacts from the proposed changes are on the marine water quality, marine biodiversity within the pipeline footprint, and health and safety risks to workers. A number of mitigation measures are proposed for the most significant impacts from the project. These include ensuring only licensed, well-qualified and experienced personnel operate vessels and machineries; undertaking unloading and loading works in calm sea conditions; ensuring strict health and safety measures are followed at site; and to place the pipe fully and perpendicular to the reef flat. Alternative site was assessed to store the steel structures, at Thilafushi Reef Flat, Hulhumale Reef flat and Hulhule reef. The Hulhumale’ site is not suitable due to flight path restrictions and proximity to resorts. Hulhule site does not have enough space and there is too much marine activity in the area. Thilafushi site is suitable but when compared to Gulhifalhu site the distance to bridge site is longer and is more exposed to SW monsoon conditions. All sites have similar environmental impacts. Thus, the proposed Gulhifalhu site was preferred. Gulhifalhu Investment Limited (GIL) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) were they key stakeholders consulted for this addendum. The key recommendations from GIL were to take all practical measures to avoid and minimize damage to the reef, and to ensure that the pipes do not block the entrance channel to Gulhifalhu located on the eastern side of the reef. The main recommendations by EPA were to plan all works according to approved EIA and addendums. If any additional components are required to properly follow the EIA procedure. All works conducted outside the scope of the approved EIA reports must be presented as an audit in this addendum. EPA also recommended assessment of Hulhulé site as an alternative for storage of the proposed steel structures. This report is prepared in accordance to the technical guidelines and EIA regulations, prepared by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the terms of reference issued by the EPA for this EIA addendum.Item First addendum to the environmental impact assessment for the proposed harbour project in Nilandhoo, Faafu Atoll, Maldives(2016-07) SandcaysThis is the first Addendum to the EIA for the harbour project being undertaken in Nilandhoo, Faafu Atoll. The project is proposed by Ministry of Housing and Infrastructure. The project constitutes dredging of a large harbour for the people of Nilandhoo while at the same time creating land using dredged sand including additional dredging for proposed reclamation of 10hectares of land for housing and infrastructure development including semiindustrial activities. An environmental assessment was undertaken for this project in Nov 2015, which has been subsequently approved. According to the EIA report, the objective of the harbour project is to provide a sizeable harbour to accommodate the increasing number of vessels in the island and to restore the usability of the harbour that has been filled over time with the breakwater being damaged, especially following the tsunami of 2004. The harbour on the northeast side is too small given that Nilandhoo has a lot of large fishing vessels and has been serving as the regional hub with fuelling services established on the old (tsunamidamaged) harbour on the northwest. This addendum addresses the modification to the location of the borrow area. One of the main concerns is that the performance of the dredger is affected due to having to pump up to 1km from the borrow to the fill area. Therefore, it has been considered important to move the dredge (borrow) area closer to the fill area in order to enhance dredging performance and achieve cost-effectiveness. During the first Scoping Meeting, which was cancelled by EPA stating that the project justifications were not clear, EPA identified that the borrow area needs to be moved as far as possible from the proposed quaywall as there may be stability issues. Taking this concern into consideration, further alternatives to the borrow area were also considered by the Proponent in consultation with the Contractor and the representatives of Nilandhoo people. During discussions with the Council and people of Nilandhoo, they have raised concern regarding the need to protect the proposed harbour, which would involve huge costs if the proposed option were adopted although it had been mentioned in the original EIA that harbour protection will be considered in the future. Therefore, in order to reduce the overall cost of the proposed project and to increase the usability of the proposed harbour even during rough southwest monsoon, appropriate alternatives were considered to the harbour design as well although it is beyond the scope of this EIA. A number of alternatives to the proposed harbour design was considered in the original EIA report. Of these, the option of upgrading the existing harbour on the northwest has been given due consideration in the light of improving on social concerns related to limitations in land reclamation. An alternative analysis that have been done in the original EIA and during the current Addendum indicated that the preferred alternative to redesign the existing harbour would have several advantages over the proposed especially the ease of use during rough southwest monsoon while leaving the possibility of an external quaywall if it becomes necessary at a later stage. However, some stakeholders believe that the proposed option has advantages over the preferred alternative as it has better opportunities for future expansion and growth of the economic potential of the island. Some of the other alternatives considered in the original EIA report including the expansion of existing harbour on the northeast to the northwest has cost advantages while it has restrictions over future expansion that the recommended alternative in this Addendum provides. Environmental impacts were assessed for both the construction and operational phases of the project. Most of the direct, negative environmental impacts identified for the construction phase of the project were minor negative; the main impact being the impact on sedimentation from the proposed borrow area to the coral colonies in the vicinity and more importantly sedimentation during the filling of the proposed fill areas, which have already been covered in the original EIA report. Therefore, the impact of dredging has been considered in this Addendum. The main impact arising from the proposed new dredge area is the damage to the inner reef as a result of the dredging. There was a concern relating to the closeness of the dredge area to the proposed quaywall and the potential failure of the structure due to a collapse of the sides of the dredged basin. However, since the dredged basin would need to be dredged to less than 4m from the existing seabed, which is less than 6m in depth at present, there should not be such a problem. Only a few berths or quaywalls just adjacent to the reef edge dropping to 30m suddenly have failed whereas the proposed structure is over 110m from the dredge area, which will be dredged to only about 10m and not more than 13m under the current proposal. Furthermore, most of the naturally deep lagoon areas in similar islands would be about 10m in the middle areas with some areas having 15m depths. Therefore, the direct removal of some of the corals due to proposed option can be avoided by not dredging from the inner reef flat areas but the deep lagoon only, as in the proposed alternative. Reclamation of land considering current and future potential use is a favoured development activity in many islands today. However, based on the experience of most of the land reclaimed in many islands, the cost recovery of the project is low and taxpayers have reason to question the outcome of the project. Yet, if the project objectives were achieved by renting the reclaimed land for semi-industrial activities and housing developments, it may be a justifiable cost. It is sad to note that the proposed reclaimed land has yet to find itself a landuse plan and development scenario after several months of EIA approval that had passed by. This is a cause for concern in terms of the afore-mentioned socio-economic impact of the project, although it is beyond the scope of the EIA. If the land is appropriately managed, the project is considered to have several socio-economic benefits that will certainly outweigh the negative environmental impacts, which are of low significance. Although the impacts are not significant due to the absence of sensitive ecological elements that would be directly impacted, some project-specific mitigation measures have been discussed. These include consideration of the preferred alternative (which is also the or one of the alternatives discussed in the original EIA report) to mitigate the impacts of wave activity at the proposed quaywall, to consider shore protection as the reclamation progresses to minimize erosion and to move any live corals that may be directly affected into safer locations. General mitigation measures, involving appropriate construction management such as working during low-tide as much as possible and rigorous supervision during project implementation are also recommended. It is recommended to carry out regular monitoring as proposed in this Addendum, which replaces the monitoring programme given and approved in the original EIA report. It would be important to assess the movement of the sediment plume regularly and to ensure that sediment plume does not severely affect the reef areas. Turbidity levels are expected to be measured within the sedimentation zone on a regular basis up to 6 months after the project. In conclusion, it appears justified, from a technical and environmental point of view, to carry out the proposed project. Since alternatives have not been considered or discussed with the relevant stakeholders including the Council, it is recommended to consider all potential alternatives, including those identified by the EIA Consultants, before proceeding with the project. The preferred alternative borrow areas including the existing harbour on the northwest is recommended.Item First addendum to the environmental impact assessment for the proposed sewerage system in Hulhudheli, Dhaalu Atoll, Maldives(2016-07) SandcaysThis report addresses the environmental concerns of the proposed changes to the vegetation clearance component in the vegetated areas of the island, the details of which were not provided in the original EIA for the Proposed Sewerage System in Dh. Hulhudheli. During the construction phase it was found necessary to remove some vegetation, which had not been considered in the initial planning and design. In order to provide some of the newly registered plots with sewerage connections, the pipe network in these areas required vegetation clearance consisting mainly of coconut palms. Compensation has to be paid for some of the trees which are owned by the community. Therefore, a special announcement was made by the Council and only 2 members of the community claimed ownership of 2 coconut palms. According to the Council, they would make the necessary arrangements to pay compensation to these 2 parties. Since the trees in consideration being mature coconut palms with a few younger palms, the younger palms will be replanted and the rest will be used for timber wood. For each tree that is cut down, two trees will be planted in the newly reclaimed area where extensive plantation of coconut palms have been already carried out by the community in the recent past. Therefore, the proposed vegetation clearance would not have any additional impacts and no additional mitigation measures would be necessary. There are also no additional requirements for monitoring. However, the number of coconut palms cut down and those transplanted as well as the number of coconuts planted as compensation will be included within the revised monitoring programme provided in this report.Item Environmental impact assessment for the proposed sea water cooling system in Addu City, Maldives(2016-05) SandcaysThis report discusses the findings of an environmental impact study under the proposed sea water cooling system for the electrical generator sets in the central power station of Addu city. Central Power House at Addu City requires Engine cooling by using saline water. The system will require installing three boreholes with multi stage submersible pumps, supply line for pressure header and feeding lines with valves and flanges. The proponent of this project is Fenaka Corporation Ltd. Rotary-mud drilling will be employed for the construction. The depth of borehole will be determined in accordance with the existing guidelines; i.e. if electrical conductivity of discharge water has reached 50-60mS/cm before reaching 30m depth, drilling will continue until it has reached 30m. Furthermore, if electrical conductivity of discharge water at 30m depth is measured less than 50-60mS/cm, drilling will be continued until electrical conductivity reaches to 50-60mS/cm. The extracted earth and saline water from drilling activities will be deposited on a purpose-built plastic sheet and water will be separated from the solids. The water extracted from this is proposed to be disposed off into the lagoon via the reject line in the operational phase. The most significant impact from the proposed project would be temporary deterioration of local freshwater quality during borehole installation and seawater quality at the disposal site. The impact on groundwater during borehole construction is of low magnitude and temporary. The impact is also of little significance. The impact of seawater quality at discharge location is almost negligible given that the discharge water has similar characteristics to the lagoon water in terms of salinity although the water would be hot at the time of discharge. Since the discharge location is a reef flat area with no coral the impact is negligible. Furthermore, the area gets dry at low tide and there is no recreational value in this area as it is the rim reef flat. Alternatives have been identified in the EIA, however it is seen that the best method to carry out the project is the proposed method of using boreholes. The alternative is to use a seawater intake, however, due to the distance of a feasible intake location with the rim reef closest to the location, boreholes are considered to be more suitable. The consultations with the Council also revealed that the proposed route for the discharge pipeline is not suitable, as there is no road in the proposed route. Therefore, as per the Council’s recommendation, it is proposed to consider the alternative route that would dispose at the same location as the existing brine discharge pipe. Since there were no significant environmental impacts identified for the proposed project, mitigation measure were general construction phase guidelines such as dust control measures and appropriate waste management. The alternative route for the discharge pipe may also mitigate some social concerns and is recommended to consider the alternative route. There would not be additional costs associated with this alternative route, and even if there is, there would not be a considerable cost difference. Environmental monitoring is not considered necessary for this project. However, monitoring has been proposed for about one year to assess and examine changes to the environment, if any. It covers the monitoring of marine water quality at the discharge location for temperature and salinity only at 3-monthly intervals for a maximum of 2 years. This can be integrated within a monitoring programme for the powerhouse. Water quality testing that may be necessary to be performed upon completion of the borehole, which has been indicated in the Borehole Guidelines shall also be performed. In conclusion, it appears justified from a technical and environmental point of view to carry out the proposed project to construct a cooling water system for the existing powerhouse in Hithadhoo, Addu City. However, it is recommended to consider the alternative route for discharge pipeline, as recommended by Addu City Council.Item Environmental impact assessment for the proposed sea cucumber aquaculture project in Boduhaikondi, Raa Atoll(2016-06) SandcaysThis report addresses the environmental concerns of the proposed mariculture project for the farming of sea cucumber in the lagoon of Boduhaikondi, Raa Atoll. Sea cucumber juveniles and grouper fingerlings will be bought from local hatcheries such as the sea cucumber hatchery at Nalandhoo until the proposed hatchery has been established. Sea cucumber juveniles (over four months old) will be put in the lagoon to grow out in its natural habitat to the adult size. The sea cucumber will grow to adult size in a year. The Project is proposed by Ali Ahroosh Ibrahim, M. Meadows. Boduhaiykondi is a small island towards the middle of Raa Atoll close to Dhuvaafaru. It has been leased for agricultural/fishery purposes by the Ministry of Fisheries and Agriculture. With the potential for mariculture with a sizeable lagoon with a small deep lagoon, acting as a natural habitat for sea cucumber, the proposed aquaculture or mariculture project has been considered as a potential investment. Sea cucumber production using fingerlings from Nalandhoo will form the initial component of the proposed project. A hatchery will be later established on the island for improved productivity. Sea cucumbers will be fed with food that will be imported to some extent but locally available seagrass and other food sources will be given priority. Sea cumber will be at the right size in 9 to 10 months following which they will be harvested, processed, packed and exported. A processing facility will be established on site. In addition to staff accommodation, power house, fuel storage, water supply and sewerage, telecommunication services, jetty and channel, the following investments directly targeted at sea cucumber production will be established. Sea cage fish farm in the lagoon Sea cucumber boiling and processing facility Ice making facility Storage facility for processed sea cucumbers Environmental concerns from the proposed project include: Sedimentation of some degree during channel dredging and jetty installation. The channel being about 3m on average, it will require only the removal of rock outcrops in the channel. Therefore, impact will be small. The impact of disease transmissions on wild populations. This impact is considered to be minor negative and depends on stocking densities and feeding. Environmental controls shall be established from the very onset of the project to mitigate disease prevalence and ensure a healthy environment. The impact cages may have on wild fish populations. Although this impact is not considered to be significant, this impact has to be studied in detail during the implementation stage. The genetic or competitive effect escapees may have on wild stock. Since juveniles that are not able to escape are used and exotic species would not be imported, this impact is unlikely to occur. In the case of cage culture using locally found species, genetic pollution will not be a concern even in case of escapees and new diseases will not be introduced to the wild stock. However, an incubation of local diseases present in the wild stock may be a potential cause for concern in case of high stocking densities. Therefore, stocking densities shall be kept to an optimum at all times. The likelihood for habitat modification could occur in case of imported broodstock causing stress and related disease prevalence. However, this is a minor impact not considered to be significant. The proposed project is expected to be managed in conformity with local and international regulations and standards of relevance, especially environmental regulations and standards. Therefore, environmental impacts will be well managed, minimized and mitigated. The overall environmental impacts of the project have been assessed using appropriate matrices and the results indicated that the proposed project had net positive impact. That is, the project has no major adverse impacts on the environment as far as current knowledge is concerned. Given that the project has moderate level of socio-economic benefits and possible environmental benefits, it is recommended to allow the project to proceed as proposed. However, due to the project being among a few of its kind in the country, it is important to consider uncertainties and continue to monitor the project impacts and undertake appropriate mitigation measures in consultation with the EPA and other relevant government agencies.