Lake Chiuta Basin

CONTENTS:

 

 

 

1. Description of Water Resource

Lake_Chuita_400.jpg

 Figure 1: Map of Lake Chiuta (Source: Njaya, 2005:2)

1.1. Geographical Description

1.1.1. Location

Lake Chiuta is a shallow lake on the border between Malawi and Mozambique, drained northward by the Lugenda River. It lies between latitudes 14040’ and 14056’, and longitudes 35047’ and 35055’ a few kilometres to the north of Lake Chilwa. Lake Chiuta is narrow, 3–13 km wide and about 64 km long. Its southern shore is marshy and indefinite. It lies to the south of Lake Amaramba, and the lakes are separated by a sandy ridge. Both lakes lie in a graben which runs northeast-southwest, east of the main African Rift Valley.

Lake Chiuta is a permanent lake (Tweddle, 1983[1]) oscillating between a minimum area of 93km2 and a maximum of 304km2 according to season and rainfall. The depth of Lake Chiuta varies with season with a maximum depth of 3 to 4 metres. The basin embraces all streams draining north-eastward out of Malawi into Mozambique, either directly or through Lake Chiuta. Lake Chiuta straddles the Malawi-Mozambique border, and except in dry years the lakes form a single water body connected by a swamp formed by the “delta” of the Lifune River. In very dry years, the swamp dries sufficiently to cause discontinuity between the lakes. The lake habitat is less degraded than most, with a muddy bottom and submerged vegetation.

Table 1: Characteristics of Lake Chiuta Basin

Characteristics of Lake Chiuta Basin (Source: Ojda, 1994).

 

Mean Depth

1.13 m

Average surface area

199 km²

Average volume

0.225 km³

Catchment area

1755 km²

 

1.1.2. Riparian States

Lake Chiuta sits astride the international boundary between Malawi (80% of lake surface) and Mozambique (20% of lake surface). This makes Lake Chiuta a transboundary resource where bilateral cooperation becomes necessary to effectively and sustainably benefit from and manage the resource.

1.1.3. Topography

Most of the rivers in this catchment have flat gradients except for the upper reaches of the Lusangusi, which rises in the Mangochi Forest Reserve. The northern and central areas are mostly from 800–1000 m in elevation, with many small hills with heights in the range 1000–1300 m (Mangochi and Likulilo Hills). The southern 700 km2 area to the west of the lake is at an elevation of 600–700 m (NWRMP 1986; Government of Malawi, 2011:55[2]).

WRA 11 under which Lake Chiuta falls is within the low to highland topographic division (Interim Report[3]). The area forms the east banks of Great Rift Valley and comprises gentle hills ranging from 600 to 800m in elevation. Lake Chiuta is located on the edge of eastern area.

Large parts of the highland areas of Malawi are underlain by crystalline metamorphic complex belonging to the Mozambique Tectonic Belt. These rock bodies are comprised of mainly gneiss, schist, quartzite and granulate of Pre-Cambria to Early Paleozoic age. On the highland areas, these fresh rocks are overlaid thickly with decomposed materials and these outcrops are rarely visible on the surface. On the escarpment areas, the fresh rock bodies can be observed well due to constant incising by rivers or gullies (Interim Report).

In the lowland areas, basement rocks are thickly covered by Quaternary alluvium deposits composed of unconsolidated clay, silt, sand and gravel. These sedimentary faces reflect transitions of past river channels, and are highly variable in vertical succession and lateral extent (ibid).

The lake has a number of islands such as Big Chiuta, Small Chiuta, Nthambalale, Njiriti, Nanyowe, Likanye and Phiri la Nsatsi. In times of high water levels such as in 1977 and 1978, the Kumbanga and Koloko hills become surrounded by water. Big Chiuta is important for fishing activities for migratory fishers who sometimes dwell temporarily on the island to process their fish before transporting them to the mainland (Njaya, Donda and Hara, 2006[4]).

2. Hydrological Description

2.1. Rainfall

Climate conditions of Malawi are greatly influenced by the dominant wind shift caused by Inter-Tropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ), which oscillates north and south in seasons in the African continent. The wet season occurs from November to April when the ITCZ moves southward bringing rainfall, and the dry season occurs from May to October when the ITCZ retreats northward. The climate of Malawi is categorized as sub-tropical and divided into three weather variations such as warm-wet (November to April), cool-dry winter (May to August) and hot-dry seasons (September to October). The warm-wet season is recognized as the rainy season with about 95% of annual rainfall expected.

 

 

Figure 2: Average climatic conditions at Lilongwe (Source: weatherbase (http://www.weatherbase.com. In the Project for National Water Resources Master Plan in the Republic of Malawi, Interim Report. P3)

While relative humidity in the rainy season is higher than that of the dry season, the polygon line of pan-evaporation generally yields opposite reaction to the humidity as shown in Figure 2 above.

There are a number of rainfall stations across Lake Chiuta (WRA 11), details of which are shown in Table 1 below. Further details of the rainfall analysis completed are highlighted in figure 2 above.

Table 1: WRA 11, rainfall station summary (source: Government of Malawi (2011:58 )

 

The temperature and evapotranspiration data used for rainfall-runoff modelling is described in detail in Figure 2 and not re-stated at WRA level.

The overall yield for WRA 11, Lake Chiuta, is derived from a long-term assessment of the gauged record at station 11A6 (Government of Malawi (2011:58[5]). The flow statistics for the gauge is factored by the area of the WRA to derive the yield statistics for the WRA. This represents the total available surface water yield from WRA 11 and since it is based upon observed flow data (i.e. not naturalised), it represents the residual actual flow that might be utilised to help meet future demand. The total yield is shown in Table 2 below.

Table 2: Lake Chiuta, total theoretical surface water yield (source: Government of Malawi (2011:58 ).

Scenario

Average Residual Available Flow (Ml/d)

Dry Season

607

Extreme Drought (1991)

96

Wet Season

1723

Annual Average

1165

 

The total surface water yield is not an appropriate metric to use to derive the total available water that could be further abstracted from a river (Government of Malawi (2011:58[6]) since account must be taken of the Environmental Flow Requirements (EFR) of that watercourse on the basis of the current and potential future catchment condition and of any existing minimum flow requirements.

The resultant total sustainable surface water yield for WRA 11 in 2010 is shown in Table 3 below.

Table 3: Lake Chiuta, total sustainable surface water yield, 2010 (Source: Government of Malawi 2011)

Scenario

EFR (Ml/d)

Average Sustainable Yield (Ml/d)

Dry Season

119

488

Extreme Drought (1991)

 

119

0

(−23)

Wet Season

486

1237

Annual Average

302

862

Source: Government of Malawi (2011:59[7]).

These are the values derived once the maximum of the EFR or the Minimum Flow has been subtracted from the total yield and are used for water resources assessment. They represent the total flow available in the WRA to meet future demands for water.

2.2. Runoff

Lake Chiuta is fed by a number of inflowing streams and is sometimes connected by a swampy channel to Lake Amaramba, from which flows Lujenda River, a major tributary of Ruvuma River (Njaya et al, 2006:2). The major inflowing rivers include Lifune, Chitundu and Mpili rivers. Lake Chiuta’s associated marshes are separated from those of Lake Chilwa by a sandbar of about 20 m (Lancaster 1979).

2.3. Surface Water

The one Water Resource Unit in WRA 11 is presented in Table 4 below.

Table 4: Water Resource Units, Lake Chiuta (Source:  Government of Malawi (2011:55 )

WRU

Area

(km2)

Key features

11 A

2443

Lake Chiuta and nearby catchments

 

Table 5, below shows the period of the data record and details of the gauge(s) that have been used to infill any missing data periods.

Table 5: Lake Chiuta flow gauge summary (Government of Malawi (2011:56 )

 

Table 6, below shows the summary statistics for each flow gauge based on the reporting period (1970– 1999), after the infilling of missing data periods.

Table 6: WRA 11, flow statistics based on reporting period (1970–1999) (Source: Government of Malawi (2011:56 )

 

The primary gauge used in the Water Resources Assessment for WRA 11 is gauge 11A6. This flow series is summarized in Figure 3 and Figure 4, below. The flow for November to April is used to derive dry season statistics and data, used in the later water resources assessment, and the flow in months May to October used to derive wet season statistics.

 

Figure 3: WRA 11 (Lake Chiuta), monthly average flow for 11A6  (Source: Government of Malawi (2011:57 )

 

 

Figure 4: Lake Chiuta (WRA 11), flow duration curve for 11A6 (Source: Government of Malawi 2011)

2.4. Groundwater

While the groundwater resources of the basin are poorly studied, Dawson (1970[8])states that the Lake Chiuta plain is’ ideal for holding groundwater’, while groundwater is poor in the Nsili Hills and Mlomba Uplands.

2.5. Water Use

The estimated demand for water in 2010 within WRA 11 (Lake Chiuta) and the main elements of the forecast are illustrated in table 7 and Figure 5. The figures and calculations shown refer to total demand for water, irrespective of the relative consumptiveness of the water use.

As can be clearly seen the demand for water is made up primarily by arable agriculture, with just under 50% of the total demand attributed to this sector. Domestic demands make up 40% of the total, especially associated with protected wells / BHs (23%) or with unimproved supplies (11%).

Table 7: Water demand estimates (annual average values) for Lake Chiuta, 2010 (Source: Malawi Water Resource Investment Strategy Report, Annex I (iii) – Water Resources Assessment for WRAs 11–17 (2011: 52)).

 

 

 

Figure 5: Water Demand Estimate for WRA 11 (Lake Chiuta), 2010 (Source: Malawi Water Resource Investment Strategy Report, Annex I (iii) – Water Resources Assessment for WRAs 11–17 (2011: 52)).

This demand assessment is factored for wet and dry season conditions, to allow for direct comparison with the water supply and yield data. This analysis is based upon a sectoral analysis of demand changes during different wet and dry periods, particularly crop water requirements. The result of this analysis is shown in Table 8 below.

Table 8: Water Demand Estimate for WRA 11 (wet and dry season), 2010

Scenario

Total demand (Ml/d)

Annual average

30

Dry season

34

Wet season

25

Extreme drought *

34

* Insufficient data to determine this value separate from a standard dry season

2.6. Water Quality

The water quality ‘fitness for use’ analysis, although robust for most for the country, was thought to be much less accurate with regards to the lakes (Malawi Water Resource Investment Strategy Report, 2011:42[9]). This was because the data for these areas tended to be relatively sparse, and was based on only a few samples thought to be taken in shallow, in-shore and/or heavily populated areas and therefore not fully representative of the quality of the whole lake (ibid). For this reason, only the results of current ‘fitness for use’ analysis are presented for the lake areas as to extrapolate this data would not have given a remotely accurate picture of potential future water quality for these water bodies in their entirety (ibid). As it stands, the results for the current analysis for the lakes should also be treated with a high degree of caution and are only presented by way of highlighting the potential water quality issues that these lakes are susceptible to, especially in the in-shore areas.

The fitness for use as determined for surface water in WRA 11 (Lake Chiuta) is shown in Table 9 below.

Table 9: Fitness for use for surface water for WRA 11 2010 (Source: Government of Malawi (2011:71 )).

 

As noted from Table 9 above, current water quality is tolerable, and thus usable “as is”, i.e. without the need for treatment, for the majority of sectors, and is good for livestock watering. Current water quality is however deemed poor for irrigation, due to potential for damage to irrigation equipment, and is also deemed poor for Industrial categories I, II, & III; the definitions of which are shown in Table 10. These categorisations were mainly due to the presence of high levels of Iron (Fe) and Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and consequently, in order for water to be used for such purposes, it would require treatment first.

Table 10: Industrial use categories for water quality (Source: Government of Malawi (2011:72 )).

Industrial

use

category

Definition

I

Processes requiring good quality water with stringent specifications, particularly where treatment cost is a major consideration in the economy of the process e.g. petrochemicals pharmaceuticals, wash-water for electronic parts

II

Processes requiring intermediate quality water with specifications lying between those of Category I and domestic water quality (Category III) where treatment cost is a significant consideration in the economy of the process e.g. hydroelectric power generation, beverage products, lubrication, evaporative cooling

III

Processes for which domestic water quality is the minimum standard and treatment cost is not significant in the economy of the process e.g. food products, surface washing, solvents

IV

Processes that are not dependant on the quality of water and where no extra

treatment is usually required e.g. dust suppression, wash water, fire fighting


3. Socioeconomic Issues

3.1. Demographics

Population statistics for Lake Chiuta (WRA 11) is provided in table 11 below.

Table 11: Population statistics for Lake Chiuta (Source: Government of Malawi 2011)

District

Area of district

within WRA

(km2)

Pop density

(per km2)

2010

Population

Machinga

1317

126

168,378

Mangochi

1181

128

148,354

Total

 

 

316,733

3.1.1. Income and occupations

There are a variety of sources of income in the Lake Chiuta basin including fisheries, mining and agriculture. However, figures on income and occupations for other sectors apart from fisheries are not readily available. The income and occupations pertaining to the fisheries sector are presented in the ensuing paragraphs below.

Fishing provides a livelihood to many people on both sides of Lake Chiuta. The growth of the urban centres of Mecanhelas in Mozambique and Liwonde in Malawi mean that fishing and fish trading are important sources of income for the majority of the population around the lake (Njaya, 2005[10]:12). Regulation remains a critical issue and is being pursued by both fishing communities and fisheries management authorities. Lake Chiuta lies in a remote area where alternative fish supply from other sources such as Lake Chilwa may not be reliable. Its stable fish supply ensures provision of much-needed nutrients and income to local villagers (ibid).

In relation to fishing on the lake, Njaya et al (2006) report that there are less ancillary workers at present compared to the 1980s and early 1990s as seining was banned by the beach village committees (BVCs) from 1995 when co-management arrangements started. In 1990 there were 462 gear owners and 1 452 crew members operating on the lake using 68 plank canoes and 282 dugout canoes. However, in 1998 (three years after the co-management began) only 86 gear owners and 831 crew members were operating on the lake using 476 dugout canoes and 12 plank canoes (Fisheries Department 1999; Njaya et al, 2006:4).

3.1.2. Economic sectors active in the basin

The area near Lake Chiuta offers few economically viable alternatives to fishing. Indeed, the very bleakness of this situation is what makes fishery compelling (Thompson, 2006[11]). The fishery is the most economically important sector in the basin. The fishery is characterized by artisanal fishers who operate using either dugout or planked canoes for subsistence or cash. In terms of fishery development, the lake did not receive significant recognition by the Fisheries Department until around the mid-1970s when the lake was divided into two minor strata (Dinji and Saleya) for the purpose of data collection (Njaya et al, 2006).

The Department of Fisheries reported an annual catch of 2,000 tons of fish during the two decades from 1976-96, or 100 tons/year (Njaya, Donda and Hara: 3). This activity provides jobs and income to fishers, gear owners, fish processors and fish mongers, and others associated with the sector. Observers note that 90% of the Lake Chiuta catch is sold, first to wholesalers and then to retailers and consumers. Most (80-90%) fish traders are males (Njaya, Donda and Hara, 2006: 5).

Thomson (2006) highlights that Lake Chiuta, on the Malawian side alone, counts 31 beaches, and probably an equivalent number of villages. On the Malawian side of the lake there are 11 Beach Village Committees (BVCs), but none on the Mozambican shore. The Mozambican area was much depopulated by armed struggle during the country’s civil war, and fishers there have still not been organized, or organized themselves (ibid). The Malawi Department of Fisheries’ 1998 “Frame Survey” (an annual census of fisher numbers, beaches, gear types, etc.) reveals that of 917 fishers recorded that year, only 86 (9.3%) worked as crew members. Most own the gear they fish with, including the dugout canoes typical on the lake (ibid).

Table 12: Socio-economic characteristics of Lake Chiuta (Source Donda 1997)

Socio-economic characteristics of Lake Chiuta (Source: Donda (1997).

Attribute

Indicator and explanations

User homogeneity/heterogeneity

Lomwe and Yao ethnic groups

Dependence on fishing for subsistence and commercial

Very high. Large proportion of fish caught is sold for cash

Household size

Relatively high. Average of nine members per household

User motivation

Commercial fisheries

Attitudes towards risk, innovation, collective action

Strong

Level of information and knowledge of the fishery and its management

Local indigenous knowledge available

 

Crop and livestock farming also play an important role in the income of the rural households around the lake, especially during the rainy season. Large areas are used for maize crops in both winter (irrigated) and particularly summer (rainfed), dominated by small scale farmers, rather than large estates. Smaller areas are used to cultivate summer (rainfed) crops of rice, tobacco and cotton. Table 13 below summarises the proportion of the total area of the different crop types irrigated in WRA 11 (Lake Chiuta) against the total areas farmed.

Table 13: Proportion of the total area of the different crop types that are irrigated in Lake Chiuta 2010 (WRA 11), and areas farmed (ha) (Source: Government of Malawi (2011:45) )

Proportion of the total area of the different crop types that are irrigated in Lake Chiuta

Total Areas farmed (units in ha)

Crop

Summer

Estate

Winter

Summer

Estate

Winter

Maize

1%

5%

2%

32,917

112

1,824

Rice

10%

-

100%

3 ,851

-

86

Tobacco

5%

-

-

1 ,465

-

-

Cotton

2%

0%

-

717

-

-

Wheat

0%

-

0%

1

-

-

Coffee

-

 

-

-

-

-

Sugarcane

0%

 

0%

-

-

-

Tea

-

 

-

-

-

-

 

Livestock agriculture in Lake Chiuta (WRA 11) is dominated by small scale chicken and goat farming, supported by smaller numbers of cattle. Sheep and pig farming do form a small part of the economic baseline, but are not nearly as extensive as for other livestock as illustrated in table 14 below.

Table 14: Livestock Agriculture summary for WRA 11, Lake Chiuta (Government of Malawi, 2011:46 )

 

3.2  Legal and Institutional Frameworks

With respect to transboundary governance, Lake Chiuta is governed by the SADC Protocol on Shared Watercourses, as well as the SADC Protocol on Fisheries.  Both require States to share information on the state of the shared resource, on planned measures, and on monitoring efforts (SADC Watercourse Protocol, Arts. 3;4; SADC Fisheries Protocol, Art. 7).  The Fisheries Protocol further requires efforts to share information specifically related to levels of fishing effort, measures taken to monitor and control exploitation of shared fisheries resources, plans for new or expanded exploitation, and all relevant research activities and results (SADC Fisheries Protocol, Article 7(3)). 

Both Protocols encourage the establishment of joint management mechanisms/institutions to facilitate collaborative planning, harmonization of relevant policies and laws, and integrated decision-making (SADC Watercourses Protocol Arts. 2; 4(3); SADC Fisheries Protocol, Arts. 7(4); 8).   The Fisheries Protocol specifies that this joint management mechanism may take the form of scientific advisory groups, joint advisory committees, joint ministerial commissions, and joint efforts in research and enforcement (SADC Fisheries Protocol, Art. 7(4)).  Both Protocols also encourage integrated management planning as a key tool for cooperation (SADC Watercourses Protocol, Art. 4; SADC Fisheries Protocol, Arts. 7(5)-(6); 12). 

Moreover, the principles guiding joint management efforts require an equitable balancing of interests and needs among the riparians (SADC Watercourses Protocol, Art. 3; SADC Fisheries Protocol, Art. 7).   With respect to the overall protection and conservation of the resources, both Protocols also mandate an ecosystem-based approach that takes into consideration the biodiversity, as well as the human benefits from the shared resources (SADC Watercourses Protocol, Art. 4; SADC Fisheries Protocol, Art. 14).  

At the national level in Malawi, the two main laws governing Lake Chiuta are the Water Resources Act (2013) and the Environmental Management Act (1996).  Several national policies also govern the basin’s management, including the National Forestry Policy, National Land Resource Management Policy, the National Fisheries and Aquaculture Policy, and the National Wildlife Policy.  The sector-based approach has led to a number of issues in the Basin.  One example is the promotion of cultivation on the banks of the Lake to increase food security without considering the potential impacts of soil erosion and siltation on the fishery. 

As noted above, local management regimes have evolved from a traditional management scheme, to a centralized approach (1946-1995), to attempts to facilitate more effective user participation and co-management of the Lake’s resources.  The traditional system relied on traditional authorities as custodians of fisheries resources, as well as on a well-development set of customary tenurial rights and rules (Jamu et al., 2011).   A more centralized approach was introduced during the colonial period, which attempted to regulate the Lake’s fisheries, in particular, by setting specific catch sizes and licensing fisheries equipment.

Following the advent of multi-party elections and a period of prolonged drought, a new co-management scheme was introduced in the Lake.  As part of a recovery management strategy, fishing communities, traditional leaders and the Department of Fisheries worked together to raise awareness on specific issues and methods for facilitating recovery.  The co-management approach was extended in 1996 with the establishment of 48 Beach Village Committees (BVCs), consisting of local fishers and other stakeholders.  Traditional authorities and village heads then formed the Lake Chilwa Fisheries Management Association, but the Association was criticized for failing to effectively engage with fishers themselves.  Fishers later formed their own association. 

The 1997 Fisheries Conservation and Management Act recognizes the important role of the community in managing fisheries, but does not specifically require the establishment of BVCs.  Instead, the Act enables the Minister to enter into fisheries management agreements with management authorities that provide for management plans that “facilitate the establishment of fisheries management authorities for the benefit of the local communities.”  The Minister is also enabled to establish local fisheries committees and endow them with authority as appropriate, but no further specification about the form or powers of the instiuttions are provided for in the Act. 

Part XIII of the 1997 Fisheries Act addresses international cooperation in fisheries management and enables the Minister to enter into access agreements with other countries to license their commercial fishers.  It also enables the Director of Fisheries to “produce management plans which lead to the realization of common fisheries goals in shared cross-border management.” No such management plan is yet in place.

In 1984, Malawi and Mozambique established a Permanent Joint Commission on Cooperation (PJCC).  This could form the institutional basis for more integrated transboundary management on the shared Lakes between the countries.  To date, however, there is no formal agreement regulating the shared resources of Lake Chiuta. 

4. Transboundary Issues

4.1 Managing the fisheries issue

Before 1970, Lake Chiuta had similar management regimes in both Malawi and Mozambique, with traditional leaders allocating sites to fishers (Whande, Malasha and Njaya, 2006[12]). Transformation of the fishery from a traditional to a commercial orientation, with the introduction of seine nets that were not allowed by the local fishers, created conflicts between the resident and migrant fishers (Whande et al, 2006:3). As a conflict resolution measure, a co-management arrangement on the Malawian side was established in the 1990s whereby the local fishers sought support from the DoF, leading to the formation of local beach village committees (BVCs). Two factors necessitated the formation of BVCs. Firstly, the local Malawian fishers wanted the DoF to evict seine fishers with whom they competed for fish. Secondly, it mirrored a more general and wide acceptance of local people’s role in managing natural resources, which manifested itself in terms of co-management arrangements in fisheries (Whande et al, 2006).

Whande et al (2006:3) further note that on the Mozambique side, traditional leaders continued to play a more central role in controlling access to, and use of, fisheries on Lake Chiuta. One outcome of this was that the strict control of access to and use of resources experienced on the Malawian side was not implemented in Mozambique. A contributing factor in this regard might be the protracted civil war from the 1970s to the 1990s which diminished the role of the state in remote areas along Mozambique’s vast international boundaries. Presently, seine fishers are still allowed only on the Mozambican side, creating conflict over approaches to resource access and control between the two countries (ibid).

Njaya et al (2006:15) report that the problem of managing the Lake Chiuta fishery, considering that it is a transboundary water resource, is of particular interest and common to all stakeholders. The problem of nkacha (illegal fishing gear especially nets) operations noted by the Malawian fishing community appears not to be appreciated by the local leaders and fishers in the Mozambican waters (ibid). This is one of the greatest challenges that lies ahead of any future management strategies of the lake. There have been several meetings organized to discuss and agree to certain terms with the Mozambican local authorities but the situation does not improve as the use of nkacha is still being observed.

Resource monitoring initiatives in terms of catch data collection and analysis have some limitations as the lake is divided into two minor strata in Malawi’s territory only (Njaya et al, 2006:15). This underscores any potential the lake might have in future fisheries development plans. For example, catch statistics and frame survey data are recorded in Malawi’s territorial zone, which accounts for only a portion of the water resource (ibid). This could lead to some problems as on one side the fishing effort may be increasing while the opposite may be happening on the other side. It appears fishers on the Malawian waters are responsible for the management of Lake Chiuta resources while the Mozambican fishers enjoy the fruits of the Malawian co-management program. It is important that any research work on the lake should focus on the entire resource through joint arrangements between the two countries.

 



[1] Tweddle, D. (1983). The Fish and fisheries of Lake Chiuta Luso: J. Sci. Tech. (Malawi) (1983) 4(2), 55-81.

[2] Government of Malawi, 2011. Malawi Water Resource Investment Strategy Report, Annex I (iii) – Water Resources Assessment for WRAs 11–17.

[3] Project for National Water Resources Master Plan in the Republic of Malawi. Report compiled by CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd.et al.

[4] Njaya, F.J, Donda, S.J and M.M. Hara. 2006. Fisheries Co-Management in Malawi: Lake Chiuta Re-Visit, a Case Study. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Fisheries Co-management.

 

[5] Government of Malawi, 2011. Malawi Water Resource Investment Strategy Report, Annex I (iii) – Water Resources Assessment for WRAs 11–17.

[6] Government of Malawi, 2011. Malawi Water Resource Investment Strategy Report, Annex I (iii) – Water Resources Assessment for WRAs 11–17.

[7] Government of Malawi, 2011. Malawi Water Resource Investment Strategy Report, Annex I (iii) – Water Resources Assessment for WRAs 11–17.

[8] Dawson AL, 1970: The Geology of the Lake Chiuta Area. Geological Survey Department, Malawi Ministry of Natural Resources. 1970

[9] Government of Malawi 2011 Malawi Water Resource Investment Strategy Report, Annex I(iii) – Water Resources Assessment for WRAs 11–17.

[10] Challenges of co-management on shared fishery ecosystems: Case of Lake Chiuta. Working Paper No. 9. CASS/PLAAS.

[11] Thomson, J.T. 2006. Malawi’s Lake Chiuta Fisheries: Intelligent Burden Shedding that Favours Renewable Resources Stewardship.

 

[12] Whande, W, Malasha, I and Njaya, S.J. 2006 Challenges and prospects for trans-boundary fisheries in Lakes Chiuta and Kariba. Policy Brief No.21. Debating Land reform, natural resources and poverty. CASS/PLAAS Commons Southern Africa.