TECHNICAL GUIDE TO CADS_TOOL

A Cage Aquaculture Decision Support Tool

Software for Marine and Freshwater Cage Aquaculture Managers developed by

Halmar Halide1,2

Version 1.0 2008

Technical Guide compiled by

Halmar Halide1,2, David McKinnon2, Mark Rehbein2, Lindsay Trott2 & Richard Brinkman2

1,2

Physics Department, Hasanuddin University, Makassar Indonesia

2

Australian Institute of Marine Science Townsville, QLD 4810, Australia

Funding for the development of CADS_TOOL was provided by the Commonwealth of Australia through the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR) as part of project FIS/2003/027 Planning tools for environmentally sustainable tropical finfish cage culture in Indonesia and northern Australia.

CADS_TOOL has been developed by the copyright holders (the Australian Centre of International Agriculture Research (ACIAR), the Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS) and the Departem Kelautan dan Perikanan (DKP : Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, Indonesia) as a tool. The copyright holders provide it on an as is basis without warranty of any kind, either express or implied, as to its effectiveness, accuracy, reliability, currency or fitness for purpose. The copyright holders expressly disclaim all and any liability and responsibility to any person in respect of the consequences of anything done or omitted to be done by such person in reliance, whether wholly or partially, upon this software, including but not limited to, predictions arising from the use the this software. All access and use of this software is done at the discretion and risk of the user.

All enquiries should be directed to: Dr Halmar Halide Physics Department Hasanuddin University Makassar, South Sulawesi Indonesia Tel: 62 411 433803 Mobile: 62 8194195447 Fax: 62 411 585188 Email: halmarh@yahoo.com

1. Introduction
A broad range of decision support systems for a variety of aquaculture purposes is currently available. Their uses range from selecting and licensing aquaculture sites (Silvert 1994a,b; Stagnitti and Austin 1998; Hargrave 2002; Moccia and Reid 2007) and planning nutrient removal facilities (Vezzulli et al 2006), designing aquaculture facilities (Ernst et al, 2000), managing hatchery production (Schulstad 1997), forecasting aquaculture production (Zhang et al 2005), facilitating aquaculture research and management (Bourke et al. 1993) and performing economic impact evaluation (Bolte et al, 2000). The decision support tool developed here is called CADS_TOOL (Cage Aquaculture Decision Support Tool). The objective of this software is to: classify a site select the best site from several site alternatives calculate the sustainable holding density of a chosen site perform a basic economic appraisal of a farm at that site.

The software was developed using the Java platform and has been created to run on any computer supporting this platform. This user guide is designed to help install and run the program, and describes how to make the measurements required as program inputs.

2. Program Installation
The CADS_TOOL package and this user guide can be downloaded from the Australian Institute of Marine Science website: http://data.aims.gov.au/cads/ A link to this page is available on the NACA (Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia Pacific) website. http://www.enaca.org/modules/marinefish/index.php?content_id=35 The program requires Java to be installed on the client computer. The most recent version of Java may need to be installed for satisfactory performance of the models 3

(Version 6, Update 5, as of March 2008). Most recent computers have Java preinstalled. If Java is not installed, it can be downloaded from: http://www.java.com Figure 1. CADS_TOOL entry screen. A decision support tool for cage aquaculture managers

3. The Program Modules

There are four modules supported in this package, presented as tabs. The first two of these, the Site Classification and Site Selection tabs, are linked and result in an 4

assessment of the suitability of a particular site for cage aquaculture. The Holding Capacity tab includes 4 models for estimating the carrying capacity of a farm. The economic appraisal tab is a ready reckoner to determine the potential financial viability of the farm.

3.1. Site Classification Tab

In this module, a site is classified into three categories of suitability (Poor, Medium, or Good) based on water quality, substrate quality, hydrometeorology and socioeconomics. Each of these factors is determined by three measured parameters. Water quality is represented by oxygen concentration, ammonium concentration and secchi depth, while substrate quality is determined by sediment texture, redox potential and organic matter in the sediment below a cage. The user enters values measured from a site and the classification suitability score is automatically calculated. The suitability score is determined according to the categories listed in Appendix I. An example is shown in Figure 2. Input variables required for site classification. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Oxygen concentration (mg/L) in surface water: range 0-10 (see Section 4.2.1) Ammonia concentration (mg/L) in surface water : range 0-180 (see Section 4.2.2) Secchi depth (see Section 4.1.5) Sediment texture: category 1 (mud), 2 (muddy sand) and 3 (sand; see Section 4.1.6) Redox potential (-mV) of sediment: range -250 to +250 (see Section 4.2.4) Organic carbon content (%) of sediment: range 0-20 (see Section 4.2.5) Surface current speed: range 0-300 (see Section 4.1.1.) Significant wave height : range 0-3 (see Section 4.1.3) Water depth: range 0-100 (see Section 4.1.5) Proximity to market. This should be scored as near if the fish can reach the market fresh without requiring special infrastructure e.g. freezers. See Huss (1995) for guidance on appropriate fish handling procedures.

11.

Infrastructure. This should be scored as available if all means that keep the fish in fresh condition are available, such as appropriate transportation, freezers, etc.

12.

Regulations. This should be scored as available if laws preventing poaching and conflicts in coastal zone usage are in place, or that appropriate zoning laws are in place.

Figure 2. CADS_TOOL. Site classification tab. CADS_TOOL automatically passes these scores on to the Site Selection tab.

3.2. Site Selection Tab.

The Site Selection tab is illustrated in Figure 3. Site Classification scores are automatically entered from the inputs on the Site Classification tab and site selection is determined by 4 criteria. For each criterion there are 3 sub-criteria. The only inputs required are the user weights (index of relative importance) of the criteria and subcriteria, entered by typing in a number from 1-100 (in percentage). This is a subjective assessment dependent on the opinion of the user. Both the criteria and subcriteria should sum to 100. The overall suitability of the site is automatically calculated using the AHP (analytical hierarchy process) method described in Appendix II. Figure 3. CADS_TOOL. The site selection tab.

3.3. Holding Capacity Tab

Carrying capacity for cage culture operations can be considered as the level of sustainable production that can be achieved in a given water body without overly perturbing environmental integrity, i.e. causing eutrophication, algal blooms, or inducing negative environmental impacts on sensitive ecosystems such as coral reefs
ACIAR/NACA workshop on carrying capacity, Nov 2007.

CADS_TOOL includes 4 models for calculating holding or carrying capacity as sub-tabs under the Holding Capacity tab. For marine cages, the methods used are: Simplified MOM based on Stigebrandt et al., (2004), Tookwinas et al. (2004) and Hanafi et al. (2006), while Pulats et al. (2003) is used for freshwater cages in lakes/dams.

3.3.1. Simplified MOM model

The MOM (Modeling - On growing - Monitoring) model developed by Stigebrand et al. (2004) estimates the monthly maximum production of fish that can be sustained given a set of environmental conditions, feeding regimes, and sea cage arrangements. The original version of the model needs 28 inputs to run. In order to simplify the model and reduce the number of input variables required, we ran 100 simulations by varying each of the inputs listed in Appendix 1 to calculate holding density, i.e. holding capacity per cage volume. We then used a stepwise multivariate regression to select the most important variables. The simplified model has an adjusted R2 and standard error of estimate of 0.59 and 20 kg/m3, respectively. Input variables required for simplified MOM : 1. Surface current (see Section 5.1.1) 2. Standard deviation of the current (see Section 5.1.2) 3. Critical oxygen concentration in the cage. This is the minimum oxygen concentration that can be tolerated by the cultured fish species. For culture temperatures of 30, we recommend using 2 mg l-1 for barramundi, and 4 mg l1

for grouper and siganids.

4. Critical oxygen concentration at the seabed. This is the lowest oxygen concentration that allows the benthic infauna to survive. For culture temperatures of 30, we recommend using 2 mg l-1. 5. Ammonium concentration in the cage (see Section 5.2.2) 6. Critical ammonium concentrations in the cage. For culture temperatures of 30, we recommend using a number in the range 0.12 0.5 mg l-1. 7. % Dry matter of Feed. Here we follow the conversion ratios for DMR (Dry Matter Ratio) given by Boyd et al. (2007): Dry pellets are 90% dry matter, and fish (in this case trash fish) are 25% dry matter. In the case of moist pellets, the dry matter content will need to be derived experimentally. 8. Food conversion ratio (FCR). The original version of MOM was developed for the use of formulated (dry) diets, and the FCR has an input range of 1-3. CADS_TOOL adjusts the FCR entered by the user, based on the % dry matter of feed. 9. Farm length is the length of the farm. For circular cages, L is the square root of the farm area 10. Number of rows of cages in the farm. In the case where the cage rows are not joined (i.e. are moored separately), the number of rows = 0.

Figure 4. CADS_TOOL. Holding/carrying density of a seacage determined by the Simplified MOM model.

3.3.2. Tookwinas et al (2004) model

This model was developed for the culture of seabass (Lates calcarifer) and grouper species (Epinephelus spp.) in marine waters of Thailand, and is based on an oxygen budget. As such, it relies on measurements of oxygen (see Section 4.2.1).This method estimates the biomass of fish that can be held within a farm area. An example is given in Figure 5.

10

Input variables required for the Tookwinas method. 1. Oxygen concentration in the water entering the farm area. See Section 5.2.1. 2. Oxygen concentration in the water exiting the farm area. See Section 5.2.1. 3. Oxygen consumption in the water column (= water column respiration rate). Note that for the Tookwinas method this is calculated on the basis of area, so the water depth needs to be taken into account. For coastal waters around Indonesian sea cage farms we have measured respiration rates of ~8 mg m-3 h1

, which in a 10m water column would result in a respiration rate of 80 mg m-2

h-1 . See Section 5.3.1. 4. Oxygen consumption in the sediment (= benthic respiration rate). See Section 5.3.3. 5. Oxygen consumption by the cultured fish (= fish respiration rate). See Section 5.3.2. 6. Surface current (see Section 5.1.1) 7. The farm area. Tookwinas et al. (2004) refer to this as the net cage culture area and we recommend that this be derived drawing the smallest possible box that contains all the net pens in a particular farm. 8. The water depth (see Section 5.1.4).

11

Figure 5. CADS_TOOL. Holding/carrying capacity of a seacage determined by the Tookwinas et al (2004) model.

3.3.3 Hanafi et al (2006) model

This model was developed for the culture of grouper species in semi-enclosed marine waters of Indonesia, and is based on an oxygen budget. The model relies on measurements of oxygen (see Section 4.2.1).This method estimates the biomass of fish that can be held within a semi-enclosed marine bay. An example is given in Figure 6.

12

Input variables required for the Hanafi method. 1. Oxygen concentration in the water in the bay (average of bottom, mid-depth and surface concentration). 2. Oxygen threshold (the minimum oxygen concentration tolerated by the cultured fish at the water temperature at the cage site ). 3. Oxygen consumption in the water column of the bay (= water column respiration rate). See comments in 3.3.2 (but note that the Hanafi method requires a volumetric measurement of respiration rate), and Section 4.3.1. for the appropriate method. 4. Volume of the bay in 106 m3 (see Section 4.1.7). 5. Flushing rate of the bay, per day (see Section 4.1.8). Figure 6. CADS_TOOL. Holding/carrying capacity of a bay determined by the Hanafi et al (2006) model

13

3.3.4. Pulats et al (2003) model

This model is used for freshwater cages in an enclosed lake, and is based on a phosphorus budget for rainbow trout aquaculture in Turkey. It has been adapted from the model of Dillon and Rigler (1975). The model requires the measurement of total phosphorus content (= dissolved + particulate phosphorus) in the feed and in the lake water (see Section 5.2.3). An example is given in Figure 7. Input variables required for the Pulats method. 1. Initial concentration of total phosphorus in the water body, before the commencement of farming. 2. Maximum total phosphorus concentration tolerated by the cultured fish species. The range of 60 - 250 mg L-1 is the published value for temperate inland water bodies used for the culture of rainbow trout (Vollenweider 1968, Beveridge, 2004). 3. Total phosphorus content of the feed. 4. Total phosphorus retention in the cultured fish, calculated as Rfish = x +[(1-x)R] Where x = the net proportion of total P lost permanently as a result of deposition of solids (usually 0.45 0.55) And R = 1/(1 + 0.747 p 0.507) 5. Mean depth of the lake (see Section 5.1.4) 6. Lake surface area 7. Lake volume 8. Voume of water flowing out of the lake.

14

Figure 7. CADS_TOOL. Holding/carrying capacity of a lake for freshwater cages determined by the Pulats et al (2003) model.

15

3.4. Economic Appraisal tab.

CADS_TOOL will calculate the break even price and return on investment based on 9 inputs, using the formulae given in Appendix IV. An example is given in Figure 8. Input variables required for the economic appraisal. 1. Cage holding capacity, as kg m-3. This can be derived using simplified MOM (Section 4.3.1). 2. Total volume of cages 3. Mean fish weight at harvest 4. FCR 5. Survival rate of seed 6. Feed cost 7. Seed cost 8. Cage cost 9. Interest rate on borrowed funds 10. Fish price

16

Figure 8. CADS_TOOL. Economic appraisal of an aquaculture site.

17

4. Data required as inputs for CADS_TOOL

4.1 Physical measurements
4.1.1 Surface current

Currents can be measured by various methods, ranging from simple observation of the drift speeds of floating objects, through to the deployment of self logging current meters. If the technology is available for a particular site, then self recording current meters may be deployed to provide high quality time series data of current speed and its variability. However, useful information can still be obtained using lower technology methods that utilise items likely to be found around an aquaculture farm. A simple approach is to measure the drift distance of a floating object over a known time period. In this case, the drifting object can be anything that floats, although objects that sit lower in the water (with minimal exposed area above the waterline) are preferred to limit the influence on the surface wind. Some examples are coconuts, a net floats with a small counter weight, or a partially full plastic container. Using a fixed object (such as the farm, or an anchored vessel) as a reference, drop the object into the water, and time how long the object takes to drift a know distance. For example, if working from an anchored farm, determine the mean direction of the current by observing the movement of any floating or submerged objects drifting near the farm. Find the side of the farm that is as close as possible to parallel with the current flow. Mark out a known distance along this side of the farm. Drop the floating object into the water at the upstream end of the marked out distance. Using a stopwatch, measure the time taken for the object to drift the measured distance. Retrieve the floating object when finished. Calculate the current speed by dividing the measured distance by the time taken to drift that distance: Speed (m/s) = distance (m) / time (sec) This procedure can be repeated at regular (hourly) intervals over a few days to better characterise the temporal variability in current speed, and determine a more accurate estimate of mean current speed.

18

4.1.2 Current standard deviation

Observations of current speed produced using the methods described above can be used to estimate the standard deviation of the surface current speed. If M is the total number of current observations, and ui and uo are the the i-th current observation and mean current, respectively, then the current standard deviation is defined as

= [1/M ((ui - uo)2]1/2

i=1 This can be simply calculated using either a hand-held calculator or a spreadsheet program such as Microsoft Excel.
4.1.3 Significant wave height

Significant wave height Hs, is the average height of the one-third highest wave in a continuous wave time series (Prez et al., 2003). Observations of wave height can be made by observing the oscillations of the sea surface against some fixed object, such a pier pylon or a breakwater. By marking the fixed object with a vertical scale at known increments (say 5cm) an observer can estimate the height (from trough to crest) and total number of waves over a given period of time. This should be repeated a number of times during different tidal and wind conditions. The accumulated time series of wave heights can then be sorted from lowest to highest, and analysed to determine the average height of the largest one-third of all observed waves.
4.1.4 Water depth

Bathymetric surveys to determine the spatial variability in water depth can utilise either echo-sounding equipment, or more simple techniques such as dropping a weighted line marked with depth increments and observing the total line required to reach the bottom. Positions of observations should be determined using GPS technology (Mac Dougall and Black, 1999).
4.1.5 Secchi depth

Water transparency can be measured using a Secchi disc. This provides a useful indication of suspended solids or algal biomass in the water column (Gavine and McKinnon, 2002). The disc is lowered into the water by unwinding a marked waterproof tape until the disc disappears. The observer marks this depth as the Secchi depth.

19

4.1.6 Sediment texture

Mud (category 1) refers to fine-grained and mostly cohesive (sticky) sediments, whereas sand (category 3) refers to coarse-grained sediments. Category 2 refers to any mixture of the two.
4.1.7 Volume of a bay

A simple formula for calculating water volume in a bay is provided in Beveridge (2004): V = A*D where: V = Volume of water in a bay (m3) A = Surface area of the bay (m2) D = Mean depth of the bay (m) Mean depth of the bay can be determined from the bathymetric data collected as described in Section 4.1.4. Mean surface area can be determined from aerial photographs of maps/charts, using GIS if available.
4.1.8 Flushing rate of a bay

A simplified water exchange or flushing rate for ideal conditions can be estimated (Beveridge, 2004) for a bay by calculating the following: Flushing time (T) can be estimated as: T = V/F where: V = Volume of water in a bay (m3) F = hourly mean incoming water volume (m3) - this is dependent on diurnal or semidiurnal nature of the tides. F = A*H/(Tidal period factor) where: H = mean tidal range (m) A = area of the bay.. Tidal period Factor = 12.5 for semi-diurnal tides, 25 for diurnal tides. So: T (flushing time in hrs) = (Tidal period factor)*D/H where D= Mean depth of bay (m) and H is mean tidal range (m).

20

4.2 Chemical measurements

4.2.1 Dissolved oxygen (DO)

In-situ DO can be measured by a variety of methods. DO profiles over time or depth can be obtained by using a dataloggers or CTD profiler fitted with a DO electrode. Hand held Clarke type oxygen electrodes connected to a meter can give a direct read out of the DO concentration. Alternatively, the Winkler method can be used to analyse samples in the laboratory after proper preservation of samples (Parsons, et al, 1984). Oxygen electrodes should be calibrated according to factory specifications (Johnston et al., 2002), and compensated for temperature, depth and salinity (seeTable 2, Oxygen solubility, p. 138 in Parsons et al., 1984, or Table 4.4, p. 119 in Beveridge, 2004). The manual YSI oxygen electrodes includes a solubility table and can be accessed at: https://www.ysi.com/DocumentServer/DocumentServer?docID=WQS_55_MANUAL
4.2.2 Ammonium

Ammonium can be determined by kit test or dip sticks (eg Merck, Hach, or Palintest), by a local laboratory with wet lab techniques (Parsons, et al., 1984), or at a regional or certified lab with automated facilities. Water samples should be filtered (Whatman GF/F, or Sartorius Minisart 0.45 um HAWP filters) and immediately chilled or frozen until analysis. Automated determination of dissolved ammonium can be performed using the methods developed by Clesceri et al. (1989) using a Skalar autoanalyser (Norgross, GA, USA) (Jones et al., 2001).
4.2.3 Phosphorus

Filtered water samples (as in 5.2.2 Ammonium above) can be analysed for dissolved inorganic phosphorus (PO42-, phosphate or filterable reactive phosphorus, FRP) by the method described in Parsons, et al. (1984). However, this is only the dissolved inorganic component of the total phosphorus concentration [P] in a water body. Particulate and organic phosphorus must also be considered Total phosphorus [P] can be analysed using methods outlined in standard methods texts such as Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 17th Ed. (APHA, AWWA, WPCA, 1987).

21

Dillon and Rigler (1974) state that the concentration of total P in a water body, [P], is determined by the P loading, the size of the lake (area, mean depth), the flushing rate (i.e. the fraction of the water volume lost annually through the outflow) and the fraction of P permanently lost to the sediments. At steady state, [P] = L(1-R)/z where [P] is in gm-3 total P, L is the total P loading in gm-2 yr-1, z is the mean depth in m, R is the fraction of total P retained by the sediments, and is the flushing rate in volumes per year. CADS_TOOL also requires phosphorus content of the pellet and phosphorus retention in fish. The latter is determined using a formula (Beveridge, 1984; Pulats, 2003).
4.2.4 Redox potential

Redox potential (Eh) can be recordef from surface samples of the sediment, or from cores sampled from the watersediment interface using diver held hand corers, or by a gravity corer that retrieves an undisturbed sediment profile. Repeated sediment Eh profiles taken over time, and examined at2-cm intervals, can detect if changes are occurring in the depth of the oxic/anoxic layer. Eh can be measured using a calibrated Model PBFC pH and calomel Eh electrode connected to a TPS LC 80 meter (Alongi et al., 2007). Electrodes can be standardized with Zobells solution (Karakassis et al., 2000) or Orion electrodes (Johnston et al., 2002).
4.2.5 Organic carbon

Sediment samples can be taken by means of core tubes of 2.2 cm in diameter (Karakassis et al., 2000). The top 2 cm are separated for analysis and stored frozen at -20C. Total organic carbon and nitrogen in the sediment samples can be determined on a CHN Elemental Analyzer (eg Perkin Elmer 2400 or similar) following the procedure of Hedges and Stern (1984). Other methods are described in Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 17th Ed. (APHA, AWWA, WPCA, 1987). The Loss on ignition method (LOI) that simply records the weight of pre-dried sediments before and after a high temperature treatment is a relatively cheap and easy method to determine organic and inorganic carbon content of sediments (Craft et al., 1991)

22

4.2.6 Biological oxygen consumption

Oxygen consumption by the water column is determined using dark and light BOD bottle incubation of water samples according to methods described in APHA, AWWA, and WPCA, 1989 and Tookwinas et al., 2004.
4.2.7 Oxygen consumption of fish

Oxygen consumption of fish is estimated using a formula relating fish body weight and temperature. Such a formula is determined indirectly from daily energy needs for a fish (in kJ/day) EN for example is: EN = (-1.04+3.26 T 0.05 T2) BW0.824 Here T is temperature in oC and BW is body weight in kg (Kaushik, 1998). There is a conversion rate from O2 uptake and EN, i.e. 1 g O2 = 13.6 kJ. Another empirical formulae relating gross oxygen consumption (in mg O2/h) OC (Glencross and Felsing, 2006) is written as: OC = (-20.7818+11.4017 T - 0.0227 T2) - BW 0.673. Published literature values may be available for the cultured species (Lucas and Southgate, 2003, Beveridge, 2004) and consideration should be given to the rearing temperature, activity level of the fish during feeding or stressful conditions which can dramatically increase the resting consumption rates. FishBase has oxygen consumption rates for a wide range of species at: http://www.fishbase.org/Topic/List.cfm and a general relationship to body weight is available at: http://www.fishbase.org/manual/english/FishbaseThe_OXYGEN_Table.htm
4.2.8 Oxygen consumption of sediment

Sediment respiration is measured by incubating samples from sediment cores obtained from either below or around the cages through the following procedures. The cores of undisturbed sediment are collected by divers. The volume of the overlying water is determined by siphoning into a measuring cylinder. Cores are sealed with an air-tight cap such that ca. 400 ml of ambient seawater overlays the sediment. A small magnetic stir bar is fitted onto the underside of the air-tight cap and the overlying water is stirred without resuspending sediment particles. Cores are incubated in the dark at ambient water temperatures for several hours. After incubation a second water sample 23

is taken, fixed, and O2 concentration in all samples determined in the field by the micro-Winkler method (Findlay et al., 1995; Findlay and Watling, 1997). Alternatively, a similar chamber arrangement to the above, as described in Alongi, et al. (in press, 2007), utilises an oxygen electrode and meter to record oxygen concentration over time.

24

REFERENCES
Al-Harbi, K.M.A., 2001. Application of the AHP in project management. International Journal of Project Management 19, 19-27. Alongi, D.M., Trott, L.A., Undu, M.C., Tirendi, F., 2007. Benthic microbial metabolism in seagrass meadows along a carbonate gradient in Sulawesi, Indonesia. Aquatic Microbial Ecology, (in press). APHA, AWWA, WPCA, 1989. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 17th Edition. American Public Health Association, Washington, D.C., 1391 pp. Beveridge, M.C.M., 1984. Cage and pen fish farming. Carrying capacity models and environmental impact. FAO Fish.Tech.Pap., (255) :131 p. Beveridge, M.C.M., 2004. Cage aquaculture. 3rd Edition. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, UK. 368 p. Bolte, J., Nath, S., Ernst, D., 2000. Development of decision support tools for aquaculture: the POND experience. Aquacultural Engineering, 23 (1), 103-119. Boyd, C. E.; Tucker, C.; Mcnevin, A.; Bostick, K., and Clay, J. 2007 Indicators of Resource Use Efficiency and Environmental Performance in Fish and Crustacean Aquaculture. Reviews in Fisheries Science, 15(4):327-360. Bourke, G, Stagnitti, F, Mitchell, B., 1993. A decision support system for aquaculture research and management. Aquacultural Engineering, 12 (2), 111-123. Chandran, B., Golden, B., Wasil, E., 2005. Linear programming models for estimating weights in the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Computers & Operations Research, 32, 22352254. Clesceri, L.S., Greenberg, A.E., Trussell, R.R., 1989. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 17th Edition. American Public Health Association, Washington, D.C. Dillon, P.J., Rigler, F.H., 1974. A test of a simple nutrient budget model predicting the phosphorus concentrations in lake water. Journal of Fisheries Research Board of Canada, 31(14), 17711778. Findlay, R.H., Watling, L., 1997. Prediction of benthic impact for salmon net-pens based on the balance of benthic oxygen supply and demand. Marine Ecology Progress Series,155, 147-157. Findlay, R.H., Watling, L., Mayer, L.M., 1995. Environmental impact of salmon netpen culture on marine benthic communities in Maine: A case study. Estuaries, 18 (IA), 145-179. Gavine, F.M., McKinnon, L.J., 2002. Environmental monitoring of marine aquaculture in Victorian coastal waters: A review of appropriate methods. Technical Report No. 46. Marine and Freshwater Resources Institute, Victoria. Glencross, B.D., Felsing, M., 2006. Influence of fish size and water temperature on the metabolic demand for oxygen by barramundi, Lates calcarifer (Bloch), in freshwater. Aquaculture Research, 37, 1055-1062. Hanafi, A., Andriyanto, W., Syahidah, D., Sukresno, B. 2006. Characteristics and carrying capacity of Kaping Bay, Buleleng Regency, Bali for marine aquaculture development (in Indonesian). Kajian Keragaan dan Pemanfaatan Perikanan Budidaya (Editors: Ahmad, T., Syah, R., Mustafa, A.): 83-95. Hedges, J.I., Stern, J.H., 1984. Carbon and nitrogen determination of carbonate containing solids. Limnology and Oceanography, 29, 657663.

25

Huss, H.H. 1995. Quality and quality changes in fresh fish. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper. No. 348. Rome, FAO.
http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/v7180e/V7180E00.HTM#Contents

Johnston, D., Lourey, M., van Tien, D., Luu, T.T., Xuan, T.T., 2002. Water quality and plankton densities in mixed shrimp-mangrove forestry farming systems in Viet Nam. Aquaculture Research, 33, 785-798. Jones, A.B., ODonohue, M.J., Udy, J., Dennison, W.C., 2001. Assessing ecological impacts of shrimp and sewage effluent: Biological indicators with standard water quality analyses. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 52, 91109. Karakassis, I., Tsapakis, M., Hatziyanni, E., Papadopoulou, K.N., Plaiti, W., 2000. Impact of cage farming of fish on the seabed in three Mediterranean coastal areas. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 57, 14621471. Kaushik, S.J., 1998. Nutritional bioenergetics and estimation of waste production in non-salmonids. Aquatic Living Resources, 11 (4), 211-217. MacDougall, N., Black, K. D., 1999. Determining sediment properties around a marine cage farm using acoustic ground discrimination: RoxAnn. Aquaculture Research, 30, 451-458. Craft, C.B., Seneca, E.D., Broome, S.W., 1991. Loss on Ignition and Kjeldahl Digestion for Estimating Organic Carbon and Total Nitrogen in Estuarine Marsh Soils: Calibration with Dry Combustion. Estuaries, 14, 2, 175-179. Lucas, J.S, Southgate, P.C., (Eds) 2003. Aquaculture, Farming aquatic animals and plants. Fishing News Books, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, UK. Nilsson, H.C., Rosenberg, R., 1997. Benthic habitat quality assessment of an oxygen stressed fjord by surface and sediment profile images. Journal of Marine Systems, 11, 249-264. Parsons, T.R, Maita, Y., Lalli, C.M., 1984. A manual of chemical and biological methods for seawater analysis. Pergamon Press, Oxford, England. Prez, O.M.,Telfer, T.C., Ross, L.G., 2003. On the calculation of wave climate for offshore cage culture site selection: a case study in Tenerife (Canary Islands). Aquacultural Engineering, 29,1-21. Pulats, S. 2003. The application of a phosphorus budget model estimating the carrying capacity of Kesikkpr dam. Turkish Journal of Veterinary Animal Sciences, 27: 1127-1130 Saaty, T.L., 1980, The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. Salam, M.A., Khatun, N.A., Ali, M.M., 2005. Carp farming potential in Barhatta Upazilla, Bangladesh: A GIS methodological perspective. Aquaculture, 245, 7587. Schulstad, G., 1997. Design of a computerized decision support system for hatchery production management. Aquacultural Engineering, 16 (1), 7-25. Silvert, W., 1994a. Decision support systems for aquaculture licensing. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 10, 307-311; Silvert, W., 1994b. A decision support system for regulating finfish aquaculture. Ecological modelling 75/76, 609-615. Stagnitti, F., 1997. A decision support tool for aquaculture. Environmental Modelling and Software 12 (2), 229-236; Stagnitti, F., Austi C., 1998. DESTA: a software tool for selecting sites for new aquaculture facilities. Aquacultural Engineering 18 (2), 79-93. Stigebrandt, A., Aure, J., Ervik, A., Hansen, P.K., 2004. Regulating the local environmental impact of intensive marine fish farming III. A model for

26

estimation of the holding capacity in the ModellingOngrowing fish farm Monitoring system. Aquaculture, 234: 239-261. Tookwinas, S., Songsangjinda, P., Kajonwattanakul, S., Singharachai, C., 2004. Carrying capacity estimation of marine finfish cage culture at Pathew Bay, Chumphon Province, Southern Thailand. Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Centre. TD/RES/91 LBCFM-PD No. 34. UNESCO 2000. Ad hoc Benthic Indicator Group Results of Initial Planning Meeting. IOC Technical Series No. 57, Viaroli, P., Bartoli, M., Giordani, G., Magni, P., Welsh, D.T., 2004. Biogeochemical indicators as tools for assessing sediment quality/vulnerability in transitional aquatic ecosystems. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 14, S19S29. Vollenweider, R.A., 1968. Scientific fundamentals of the eutrophication of lakes and flowing waters, with particular reference to nitrogen and phosphorus as factors in eutrophication. OECD, Paris DAS/CS/68. 27: 1-182. Wildish, D.J., Hargrave, B.T., Pohle, G., 2001. Cost effective monitoring of organic enrichment resulting from salmon mariculture. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 58, 469-476. Yanagi, T., Murashita, K., Higuchi, H., 1982. Horizontal turbulent diffusivity in the sea. Deep Sea Research, 29, 2A, 217 226. Zhang Xiaoshuan, Z., Tao, H., Revell, B., Zetian, F., 2005. A forecasting support system for aquatic products price in China. Expert systems with applications, 28 (1), 119-126.

27

APPENDIX I
Suitability Class Criteria1 No Criteria and subcriteria Classification Good Medium <0.5 4-7 1-5 Sand >(-200) 3-8 5-20 <0.5 10-30 close available available 0.5-1.0 Sandy Mud 0.5-1.0

Poor >1.0 <4 <1; >5 Mud <(-200) >8 <1; >50 >1.0 <10; >30 far none none

1 Water quality 1.1 NH4 [mg/L] 1.2 Dissolved Oxygen (DO) [mg/L] 1.3 Secchi disc [m] 2 Substrate quality 2.1 Texture 2.2 2.3 3 3.1 3.2 3.3 4 4.1 4.2 4.3
Redox potential [mV] Organic Matter [%]

Hydrometeorology
Current [cm/s]

Significant Wave height [m] Water depth [m] Socioeconomic

Market Infrastructure Regulations

adopted from UNESCO 2000, Nilsson & Rosenberg 1997, Viaroli et al. 2004, Wildish et al. 2001.

28

APPENDIX II
AHP (Analytical Hierarchy Process) Procedures B.1 Converting the relative importance RI into pair wise matrix elements M Suppose we have two relative importance values of c1 and c2. We then take the ratio of these values. There are two conditions to be considered. B.1.1. c1 > c2 ratio1=c1/c2 if ratio1=1 then m=1 if 1 <ratio12 then m=2 if 2 < ratio13 then m=3 if 3 <ratio14 then m=4 otherwise m=5 B.1.2. c1 < c2 ratio2=c1/c2 if ratio2=1 then m=1 if 1< ratio22 then m=1/2 if 2<ratio23 then m=1/3 if 3< ratio24 then m=1/4 otherwise m=1/5 (B.1.2) (B.1.1)

B.2 Interpreting the pair wise matrix elements M in terms of Saatys Intensity of Importance Measures (Al-Harby, 2001) M 1 2 3 4 5 Meaning Equally preferred Equally to moderately preferred Moderately preferred Moderately to strongly preferred Strongly preferred

B.3 Calculating eigen value and consistency ratio Let the pair wise matrix is represented by a matrix M of order n. M = (mij) This matrix is also a reciprocal matrix, i.e. mij=mji (B.3.2). (B.3.1).

The eigen value problem is able to derived from this matrix (Saaty, 1980; Chandran et al., 2005) and has the form:

29

(M I) = 0 where I is the unity matrix.

(B.3.3),

The eigen vectors, i.e. the weights, and the maximum eigen value max is obtained through a MATLAB subroutine called EIG. Consistency index CI = (maxn) (n1) Random index Rdi = 0.5 (for n = 3) and = 0.9 (for n = 4). Consistency ratio = CI/Rdi (B.3.5). (B.3.4).

30

APPENDIX III
Input parameters used in 100 simulations for computing maximum holding density for tropical fish species (grouper, rabbit fish and barramundi). The nine variables in the shaded rows were selected by the stepwise discriminant analysis.
No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. Input Parameters Temperature (oC) Water depth (m) Sigma (cm/s), i.e. current standard deviation Salinity (ppt) Bottom oxygen (mg/l) Ammonium (mg/l) Surface current (cm/s) Bottom current (cm/s) Number of cage rows Cage area (m2) Cage length (m) Cage depth (m) Distance between cage rows (m) Reduction factor Critical oxygen in cage (mg/l) Critical ammonium in cage (mg/l) Critical oxygen at the bottom (mg/l) FCR* (food conversion ratio) Protein content of feed (%) Fat content of feed (%) Carbohydrate content of feed (%) Ash content of feed (%) Sinking velocity of feed (cm/s) Fish initial weight (g) Fish final weight (g) Protein content of fish carcass (%) Fat content of fish carcass (%) Sinking velocity of fish faeces (cm/s) Range 28-32 21-100 2-20 29-33 1-6 0.01-0.38 1-30 1-29 1-3 36-100 6-100 1-20 0-2 0.7-0.8 3-5 0.12-0.50 1-3 1-3 43-80 15-53 2-10 10-15 5.68-13.88 30-40 122-398 10-20 5-10 1-9.07

31

APPENDIX IV
Economic Appraisal Formulae
Given a holding density (HD in kg/m3), cage volume (CV in m3), survival rate of fish seed (SR in per cent), mean fish weight at harvest (FW in kg), FCR (food conversion ratio), seed cost (SC), feed cost (FC), cage cost (CC) for construction and operation, interest rate for borrowed loan to cover the cost (IR in per cent), and fish price at harvest (FP), we seek to determine the break even price (BEP) and the return on investment (ROI in per cent). The following formulas are used. Suppose that at harvest, the total weight of fish WH and the total fish biomass BH are: WH=HD CV BH=WH/FW The total number of seed NS and feed needed to produce biomass at harvest FN are: NS=BH/SR FN=FCR HW The total cost for seed TSC and fed TFC are: TSC= SC NS TFC=FC FN The total cost TC is TC = (TSC + TFC + CC) (1 + IR) The break even price is calculated as: BEP=TC/WH Now, if the fish is sold at a price of FP, the revenue REV and profit PRO obtained is REV=FP WH PRO=REV-TC Return on investment ROI (in per cent) is found as: ROI = 100 (PRO/TC) (C11). (C9) (C10). (C8). (C7). (C5) (C6). (C3) (C4). (C1) (C2).

32