Chapter BOOK - Gambia Ref 10.1007 - 978-3-319-58538-3 - 68-1

Enhancing Resilience of Vulnerable Coastal
Areas and Communities: Mangrove

Rehabilitation/Restoration Works
in the Gambia
Jean-Hude E. Moudingo, Gordon Ajonina, Diyouke M. Eugene,

Ansumana K. Jarju, Kwasu Jammeh, Foday Conteh, Saul Taal,
Lamin Mai Touray, Modou Njei, and Saiko Janko
J.-H. E. Moudingo (*)

FAO Cameroon Representation Mangrove Project & Cameroon Wildlife Conservation Society
(CWCS), CWCS Coastal, Forests & Mangrove Programme, Mouanko, Littoral Region, Cameroon
e-mail: m_ekindi@yahoo.fr
G. Ajonina · D. M. Eugene
Cameroon Wildlife Conservation Society (CWCS), CWCS Coastal, Forests & Mangrove
Programme, Mouanko, Littoral Region, Cameroon
e-mail: gnajonina@hotmail.com; dme_eugene@yahoo.fr
A. K. Jarju
NARI, Brikama, West Coast Region, Gambia
e-mail: Akjarju2013@gmail.com
K. Jammeh
Department of Parks and Wildlife Management, Kanifing, Gambia
e-mail: kjammesope@yahoo.com
F. Conteh
Department of Water Resources, Abuko, Gambia
e-mail: geefing@gmail.com
S. Taal
Ministry of Agriculture/Research Institute, Banjul, Gambia
e-mail: sotaal@yahoo.com
L. M. Touray
Department of Water Resources, Banjul, Gambia
e-mail: touraylm@yahoo.co.uk
M. Njei
WABSA West Africa Study Birds Association, Banjul, Gambia
e-mail: kunowabsa@yahoo.com
S. Janko
KOMFORA, The Kombo/Foni Forestry Association, Kafuta, Gambia
e-mail: komfora@yahoo.com
# Springer International Publishing AG 2018 1

C. M. Hussain (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Materials Management,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58538-3_68-1
2 J.-H. E. Moudingo et al.
Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Overview of Wetland Restoration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
A Brief History of Restoration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Basic Concepts and Principles of Restoration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
The Mangrove Restoration Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
What Are Mangroves? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Importance of Mangroves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Basic Factors in Mangrove Regeneration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Overview and Status of Mangrove Restoration in the Gambia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Overview Cost of Restoration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Techniques of Mangrove Planting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Preliminaries Mangrove Planting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Pro and Cons of the Direct Planting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Seeding or Planting Mangrove Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Mangrove Health Monitoring and Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Concept of Monitoring and Evaluation: Why Monitoring? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Usefulness of Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Monitoring Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Monitoring Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Data Management, Analysis, and Presentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Conclusion and Way Forward in Mangrove Restoration in the Gambia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Cross-References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Appendix 1 Principles of Restoration (Prepared from USEPA 2000; Ajonina
and Tata 2006) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Abstract
Growing awareness of the protective, productive, and social functions of the
tropical mangrove ecosystem has highlighted the need to conserve and manage
them sustainably. The majority of these efforts with community implication are
oversimplified planting projects, largely attempts to force mangroves to grow in
intertidal mud flats, usually below mean sea level, where mangroves simply do
not grow due to poor understanding of the ecological and requirements of
mangroves, and the processes which lead to their establishment and early growth.
Restoration principle and methods have been applied mindful of the challenges of
development projects and their impacts and the difficult terrain.
This chapter while promoting active and passive restoration approaches focus
of this “how-to-do” to bring community animators or practitioners through the
major steps of a mangrove rehabilitation project. It is organized as follows: gives
an overview of wetland restoration and a general overview of restoration of
wetlands with the viewpoint on basic concepts, principles, and the reason for
restoration and existing methods and case studies of restoration, dwells on
restoration issues dealing with aspects of mangrove dispersal and propagation
and its limits, and involves community in mangrove replanting and potential cost
for restoration. And finally it covers relevant aspects and techniques of
Enhancing Resilience of Vulnerable Coastal Areas and Communities: Mangrove. . . 3
monitoring mangrove nurseries and plantations for health and growth necessary
for evaluating mangrove restoration projects and programs.
In structuring an appropriate response to manage mangrove sustainably
through restoration, within an integrated context in the Gambia, it is necessary
to recognize that there are yet many information gaps (technically, financially,
etc.) and constraints.
Keywords
Acrostichum aureum · Avicennia germinans · Care · Coastal · Communities ·
Conservation · Control · Coppicing · Creation · Degradation · Diaspores ·
Ecological character · Ecosystem · Engineering · Environment · Eocological ·
Equipment · Estuarine · Evaluation · Gambia · Geo-referenced · Guide ·
Guidelines · Health · Knowledge · Lacustrine · Laguncularia racemosa,
Conocarpus erectus · Management · Mangrove · Marine · Mitigation · Monitor ·
Monitoring · Nursery · Outplanting · Palustrine · Plantation · Planting ·
Pneumatophores · Potting · Preparation · Principles · Propagule · Protection ·
Ramsar Convention · Reconstruction · Rehabilitation · Replanting: Restoration ·
Rhizophora · Rhizophora harrisonii; R. mangle; R. racemosa · Riverine ·
Salinity · Sensitisation · Space · Species · Species · Stilt root · Sustainable use ·
Technique · Tidal · Vantage point · Water · Wetland
Introduction
Background
Gambia has lost more than 17.5% of its mangrove between 1980 (70,400 ha) and
2006 (58, 100 ha) to a range of human-accelerated factors such as population
growth, infrastructural development, and other human activities (CBD 2006;
UNEP 2007; Spalding et al. 2010). Many factors have been blamed for the decline
mostly human induce especially urbanization, infrastructural development, rice
agriculture, etc. with the manifested consequences of massive mangrove dieback
and decline especially in Tanbi Wetland Complex, Niumi National Park, Gambia
Mouth, and Bintang Bolon tributary. Most efforts have been made to restore these
mangroves especially through the community-based organizations (WABSA and
CONFORA) with communities and other stakeholders. Unfortunately, most man-
grove rehabilitation efforts being targeted, only Rhizophora genus easily regenerated
from harvesting and pricking of propagules thus failing to reestablish the required
mixed species mangrove forests. The majority of these efforts are oversimplified
planting projects, largely attempts to force mangroves to grow in intertidal mud flats,
usually below mean sea level, where mangroves simply do not grow due to poor
understanding of the ecological requirements of mangroves, and the processes which
lead to their establishment and early growth. This manual takes the reader through a
process of assessment, design, implementation, and reflection around social, eco-
nomic, and ecological factors which contribute to the failure or success of a
mangrove rehabilitation effort. By understanding both pitfalls and recommended

practices around mangrove rehabilitation, it is our hope that by 2020 the rather
simple but enigmatic practice of restoring mangrove forests is approached more
scientifically and rationally and that practitioners and community animators become
more reflective about their actions.
The purpose of this manual is to provide community animators and practitioners
with activities, tools, and options to be used in assessing, designing, implementing
and monitoring a mangrove rehabilitation project. The focus of this “how-to-do”
chapter is to bring community animators or practitioners through the major steps of a
mangrove rehabilitation project. These steps are based on the principles of learning
by doing.
Overview of Wetland Restoration
A Brief History of Restoration
Ecosystem restoration is the process of recreating an ecological community. It is an

emerging profession within the science of ecology. It is attracting billions of dollars
and producing an enormous stream of published papers. Restoration has been
practiced since time immemorial and on different ecosystem. Many other writers
in this field traced the roots of restoration back as far as Philips wrote a book on the
restoration of forests in 1883; Clements in 1935, who wrote an essay titled “exper-
imental ecology in the public service”; and Aldo Leopold 1949 (Keddy 2010). He
also noted that during the 1900s, Beard’s basic book on the vegetation of the
Caribbean Bands discussed forest restoration activities to wetlands. Spartina angel-
ica for reclamation’ of coastal mud flats (Keddy 2010). In Africa, especially in
Burkina Faso, in 1980s building of irrigation canals and terrace to prevent spread of
desert in Sahel.
There is no need for us to pretend that restoration is something entirely new to
human thinking. We should know something about the historical origins of our
scientific discipline. Indeed it is vital that we learn from past mistakes, what they
renew in the scope of the project and the number of people involved in them.
Currently, restoration ecology has one important potential benefit to the history
and development of ecology. This is the potential to bring together a wild range of
scientific activities. It challenges conservationists, applied ecologist, and theoreti-
cians in different ways. Conservationists are challenged to shift some energy from
protecting remnant fragments of habitat toward the longer-term goal of restoring and
reconnecting entire landscapes. There is now the society for ecological restoration
international too. Applied ecologists are being challenged to move from manipulat-
ing single species, such as few species of fish or water birds, to the reconstruction of
the entire ecosystem. Theoretical ecologists are challenged to develop practical tools
to guide restoration and monitor its success with indicators.
These challenges are increasing due to the request of goods and services by local
population; hence the synergy of the anthropogenic actions and pressure coupled to
the natural phenomenon like climate change renders most ecosystem worldwide
vulnerable.
The Gambia ecosystem is not exempted from adverse climate change impacts.
Many initiatives to curb the degradation of the ecosystem especially that of the
mangrove are ongoing. But most of the replanting actions triggered by local NGOs
are gradually failing to yield desirable and healthy mangrove environment. The
reasons not exhaustive include poor spacing between and within rolls, planting
approach at somewhat very poor tides, and practically no monitoring plantation
success even with the direct planting adopted.
Conscious of these facts, the Gambian government through the UNDP/CO
undertook a project termed “enhancing resilience of vulnerable coastal areas and
communities to climate change project,” and its component studies mangrove
dieback. It is worth mentioning that the UNDP program funds practical field
experience and scientific training opportunities for promising scientists and conser-
vationists worldwide. By providing these opportunities, UNDP supports the Gam-
bian government to address a key need cited in the Convention on Biological
Diversity, the Kyoto Protocol, and the Millennium Development Goals: the need
for conservation goal and career development in emerging countries. This project
has many deliverable among which is the production of a “Training Manual for
mangrove planting and Monitoring of health of Mangrove.”
This manual therefore serves to build mangrove conservation capacity – the
capacity of individuals and communities to become future mangrove conservation
and restoration leaders in Gambia to be more effective stewards of their country’s
rich and irreplaceable mangrove biodiversity. Hence, this manual is conceived and
prepared to help mangrove custodian and grassroot communities to understand
replanting and M and E mangrove plantation.
Basic Concepts and Principles of Restoration
Definition of Concepts and Terms

The word restoration is often carelessly used to mean many different things. A word
that means too many things often seem to end up meaning nothing. Hence, let us use
the word precisely, guided by Fig. 1. We start at the upper left, with the original state
of the system, which could also be termed a pre-perturbed system, or in some
circumstances, a natural or pristine system. One or more forces have damaged
(rapid change) or degraded (gradual change) the site (first solid line) so that the
present state is different from this original state. So rating from the present state,
what are the options? There are four. The most obvious is that the system could
degrade further (second solid line). Should humans intervene, thus intentional, they
have three options shown by the dashed lines which include (1) convert the site to an
alternative ecosystem, (2) repair certain selection attributes of the system, and
(3) restore the site to its original state.
As one of effort to manage wetland, restoration, often termed ecological, tries to
mimic the specified structure, functioning, diversity, and dynamics using reference
Fig. 1 Restoration state and

system. (Adapted from Keddy
2010)
ecosystems as models or analogue ecosystem (Moudingo 2010). First restoration has

a specified target state, and second, there is evidence that this state existed in the past.
Nevertheless, rehabilitation, creation, or restoration is frequently used interchange-
ably in wetlands and conservation literature.
As defined by the Convention (Ramsar 2007), wetlands include a wide variety of
habitats. They include marshes, peatlands, floodplains, rivers and lakes, and coastal
areas such as saltmarshes, mangroves, and sea grass beds, but also coral reefs and
other marine areas no deeper than 6 m at low tide, as well as human-made wetlands
such as wastewater treatment ponds and reservoirs.
Restoration. Restoration is more challenging (Primavera et al. 2012) and aimed
at a return of an area of landscape to a specified previously occurring ecological
state. (Example: removing embankments to allow) a river to annually flood a former
wetland with the objective of recreating a wet prairie). Restoration as an intentional
act is open and “breathing,” of supporting the recovery of an ecosystem that has been
degraded, damaged, or where homeostasis has been permanently stopped,
unarrested, or inhibited in a way by anthropogenic activities.
Mitigation. Purchasing or creating wetlands to compensate for damage being
done elsewhere (e.g., paying for restoration of one cypress swamp to compensate for
building a subdivision on another), a legal rather than scientific term that is most
commonly used in the United States of America.
Rehabilitation. Making specified changes to an existing wetland in order to
improve one or more services (e.g., a group such as Ducks Unlimited removes
patches of cattails to create pools of open water for ducks and wading birds).
Preservation. Maintaining an existing highly valued wetland in its valued state.
(Example; a group such as The Nature Conservancy purchases a set of vernal pools
with the intentions of keeping populations of endangered species at their current
level).
Creation. Making a new wetland in an area where it was not previously present.
(Example: making a pond in a city to attract wildlife. This could be called restoration
if there are historical records of similar ponds there before the city was built).
Conservation. A general term that implies a wetland will be retained more or less
green wet but without specific exactly how it will be managed. Often a group of
stakeholders will be allowed to choose the future state. (Example: the Atchafalaya
Swamp is still being heavily altered by humans but with the general agreement that
will remain a wetland).
Ecological character. Is the combination of the ecosystem components, pro-
cesses, and benefits/ services that characterize the wetland at a given point in time.
Why Restore a Wetland Ecosystem?

Restoration is a holistic process not achieved through the isolated manipulation of
individual elements (Ajonina 2008). There are three basic aims for restoration:
ecosystem preservation, sustainable use, and coastal protection. All is to enhance
the ecological character of system (Ramsar 2007). In that regard, restoration com-
pletes management processes, since the signal comes from the results of inventory
and assessment of the milieu (Ajonina and Tata 2006; Ajonina 2008). If so, then the
most important step in an ecosystem restoration is passive (Moudingo 2010), which
is the removal or the correction of the disturbance to let nature create its own system.
The need to reverse wetland degradation, in addition to the recognition of benefits
associated with wetland restoration, has led to initiation of numerous restoration
projects globally. The multiple roles of wetland ecosystems and their value to
humanity have been increasingly understood and documented in recent years. This
has led to large expenditures to restore lost or degraded hydrological and biological
functions of wetlands. But it’s not enough – the race is on to improve practices on a
significant global scale as the world’s leaders try to cope with the accelerating water
crisis and the effects of climate change and especially at a time when the world’s
population is likely to increase by 70 million every year for the next 20 years.
Global freshwater consumption rose sixfold between 1900 and 1995 – more than
double the rate of population growth. One third of the world’s population today lives
in countries already experiencing moderate to high water stress. By 2025, two out of
every three people on Earth may well face life in water-stressed conditions. The
ability of wetlands to adapt to changing conditions, and to accelerating rates of
change, will be crucial to human communities and wildlife everywhere as the full
impact of climate change on our ecosystem lifelines is felt.
Policy- and decision-makers frequently make development decisions based upon
simple calculations of the monetary pros and cons of the proposals before them – the
importance of wetlands for the environment and for human societies has traditionally
been underrated in these calculations because of the difficulty of assigning dollar
values to the wetland ecosystem’s values and benefits, goods, and services. Thus,
more and more economists and other scientists are working in the growing field of
the valuation of ecosystem services. This is a difficult task, but in order for decision-
makers to have the correct information before them about the comparable monetary
values of a healthy wetland, the economic losses of a lost or degraded wetland, there
is no choice but to progress in this direction (Ajonina and Tata 2006).
Ramsar Convention Principles and Guidelines for Wetland Restoration

The following section is based on comprehensive guiding principles for wetland
ecosystem restoration developed by the Ramsar Convention of Parties (COP) 2002.
These principles and guidelines for wetland restoration use the term “restoration” in
its broadest sense, which includes both projects that promote a return to original
conditions and projects that improve wetland functions without necessarily promot-
ing a return to pre-disturbance conditions. The development of these principles
stems from the fact that although there is increasing interest in wetland restoration
and opportunities are widespread, efforts to restore wetlands are still sporadic, and
there is a lack of general planning at the national level. Moreover, individuals and
organizations interested in restoration often work in isolation and without the benefit
of experience gained on other projects.
General principles and guidelines were developed by Ramsar Convention based
upon the experience with many projects in many settings that can offer a useful
starting point for restoration projects. They provide the underlying ideas that form
the foundation of a successful restoration project, and as such they should be
integrated into national wetland policy. The guidelines provide a step-by-step pro-
cess guiding the identification, development, and implementation of a restoration
project, and as such they can be integrated into administrative guidelines. Given the
uniqueness of every restoration project and while these principles and guidelines are
designed to be useful in many situations, they are neither universally applicable nor
definitive.
Principles for Wetland Restoration

Nowadays, valuable lessons exist based on field restoration projects like stream,
river, lake, estuary, etc. (USEPA 2000; Ajonina and Tata 2006; Ramsar 2007). A list
of principles with a scientific and technical issues and critical for the success of a
wide range restoration projects was developed (USEPA 2000; Ajonina and Tata
2006; Ramsar 2007). These principles include (1) need for a national program and
priorities for wetland restoration; (2) need for clear understanding and statement of
goals, objectives, and performance standards; (3) need for careful planning at all
stages; (4) maintaining natural processes; (5) scale of wetland restoration planning;
(6) stakeholders’ participation; (7) long-term stewardship and monitoring; (8) indig-
enous traditional knowledge; (9) adaptive management; (10) disseminated success
stories; and (11) awareness generation (see Appendix 1 for detailed description).
These principles which are environmental management activities apply to wetland
restoration project life cycle (inception, implementation, and monitoring) and are
equally an all-inclusive process to ensure sustainability.
Existing Methods for Wetland Restoration

Wetland ecosystems provide invaluable products and services to mankind (Millen-
nium Ecosystem Assessment 2005; UNEP 2014) yet have been badly degraded as a
result of unsustainable human use activities (Nellemann and Corcoran 2010). There
is an urgent need to restore these wetlands to sustain benefits for the present and the
future. There is also the need for well-planned restoration programs involving
relevant stakeholders at all phases. Many tools and methods have been applied to
restore degraded wetland ecosystems scattered within the existing literature.
Methods applied depend largely on wetland types and the underlying factor con-
tributing to the degradation of the wetland type in question. For convenience, these
methods can be grouped into four major categories: replanting, control, engineering,
and management.
The employment of any particular method or combination of methods will largely
hinge on the cost of economic factors such as labor and capital equipment available
as well as time weighed against expected benefit from restoration.
Replanting: This is often used to rehabilitate degraded forested wetlands. Trees
may be planted from established nurseries or direct seeding. Once the collected
seeds/propagules or saplings are hand planted at a given spacing, we termed that
disposition as plantation (an area where tree stands are grown for wood or for other
intentional purposes). Five forest types can be identified according to their origin
(Evans 1982). These include:
1. Afforestation of bare land where there has been no forest for at least 50 years
2. Reforestation of land which has carried forest within the last 50 years but where
the previous crop is replaced by an essentially different one
3. Reforestation of land which has carried forest within the last 50 years by renewal
of essentially the same plant or crop as before
4. Forest established by natural regeneration with deliberate silvicultural interven-
tion and assistance from man
5. Forest which has regenerated naturally without assistance from man. Most natural
forest in the tropics
Mangroves throughout Africa especially Rhizophora-dominated mangroves have

been replanted by community action through direct seeding of propagules. As for
Avicennia, direct planting is rare. NGOs and partners have been playing a highly
facilitating role in the revegetation process. The use of indigenous species is highly
recommended in such replanting schemes. In this manual plantations are the first
three forest class and that artificial regeneration is the basic criterion.
Control: Control is another method by which wetland ecosystems can be
restored. Control activities may range from total protection of wetland site from
further human use to allow the wetland to regenerate naturally to the application of
mechanical, chemical, and biological methods to control invasive species. Mechan-
ical control usually involves the employment of human labor to weed out invasive
species. This method is time-consuming. Chemical control uses a wide spectrum of
chemical substances including herbicides to control invasive species. Biological
control introduces living organisms to feed on and control the pest in question
such as crabs (Neochetina eichhorniae and N. bruchi) used to control water hyacinth
Eichhornia crassipes (Howard and Matindi 2003). Integrated control methods
employ a combination of mechanical, chemical, and biological control methods
with due consideration to the ecosystem health.
Engineering: This embraces construction activities putting in place physical

structures to restore wetlands. These include the building of dams and dikes to
control water flow and stop sedimentation as well as using equipments to dredge
wetlands degraded through sedimentation.
Management: We put under management all actions needed to control human
behavior and habits for the sake of wetland restoration. These range from the
development of policies, laws, and institutions to regulate behaviors, community/
stakeholder mobilization, education, and awareness creation to the development of
viable economic alternatives to reduce dependence on wetland resources so that they
can regenerate.
Situation of Wetland Restoration/Rehabilitation in Africa

Many tools and methods have been applied to restore degraded or damaged wetland
ecosystems. More often, restoration methods (Table 1) are associated with different
major wetland types and the factor contributing to the degradation of the wetland
type in question. Thus, restoration is treated in isolation or integrated depending on
the level of threats. Most of these situations are applied to the Gambia ecosystem.
The Mangrove Restoration Issues
What Are Mangroves?
Mangroves occupy less than 1% of the world’s forested surface (Maniatis 2005).
They are a diverse group of predominantly tropical trees and shrubs growing at
intertidal edges of tropical and subtropical coasts worldwide (Kathiresan and Bing-
ham 2001). It is also termed wetland (Selvam et al. 2003) because it is made up of
mangrove forests and associated water bodies (Frazier 1996; Selvam et al. 2003;
Ramsar 2007), which is predominantly un-drained or saturated at a given season.
Mangroves are usually referred to as “tanda” (sing.) or “matanda” (pl.) in the
Duala language, Cameroon, or either as “egba” or “odo nowe” for Nigerian language
(Letouzey 1968; Vivien et Faure 1985). In the Gambian experience, it is usually
known either as Manko in “Mandinka” or Mangi in “Wolof.” The dominant tree
species in the intertidal zone are characteristic for the West African mangroves. Six
true mangrove species are known to exist in the Gambia (Tomlinson 1986; UNEP
2007; Spalding et al. 2010). This includes Avicenniaceae (Avicennia germinans),
Combretaceae (Laguncularia racemosa, Conocarpus erectus), and Rhizophoraceae
(Rhizophora harrisonii; R. mangle; R. racemosa) (Plate 1) with little or no invasive
mangrove fern Acrostichum aureum (Pteridaceae).
Importance of Mangroves
As illustrated in Fig. 2, mangrove forests are vital for healthy coastal ecosystems in
the regions where they occur, providing vital ecosystem services that support
Table 1 Methods of restoration of different types of wetlands in Africa. (Adapted from Ajonina
and Tata 2006)
Major Underlying
wetland Wetland factor of
type subtype degradation Restoration method(s) Case studies
Marine Shallow Sedimentation Engineering: dredging Wouri estuary
coastal waters Cameroon by Ports
and shores, Authority Douala,
coral reefs, Cameroon
coastal Inundation Engineering: building Djoudj National
lagoons canals and dikes Park, Senegal
Pollution Control: protection Regulation
Management: available across
pollution control Africa but hardly
policies and laws applied
Invasive Control: mechanical, Control of water
species chemical (herbicides), lily in Lake
biological, integrated Naivasha
pest management
Estuarine Deltas/creeks, Sedimentation Engineering: dredging Wouri estuary
tidal marshes Cameroon
Pollution Control: protection Regulation
Management: available across
pollution control Africa but hardly
policies and laws applied
Invasive Control: mechanical,
species chemical (herbicides),
biological, integrated
pest management
Mangroves Deforestation Control: protection; FAO/World Bank
replanting Mangrove projects
Management: in Guinea Conakry;
policies, laws, IUCN/EU Projects
institutions, and in Senegal; FAO
development of and WWF Projects
alternative sources of in Cameroon
energies for fish
smoking
Shrimp Engineering: Rufiji Delta
aquaculture Canalization and Tanzania
dredging
Invasive Control: mechanical, Nypa palms control
species Nypa chemical (herbicides), project Nigeria
palms (Nypa biological, integrated
fruticans) pest management
Lacustrine Lakes Sedimentation Engineering: dredging Lake Victoria
Inundation Engineering: building Lake Naivasha,
canals and dikes Kenya
(continued)
Table 1 (continued)
Major Underlying
wetland Wetland factor of
type subtype degradation Restoration method(s) Case studies
Pollution Control: protection Lake Victoria
Management: Lake Naivasha,
pollution control Kenya
policies and laws
Invasive Control: mechanical, Lake Victoria, Lake
species biological, integrated Naivasha, Kenya
Eutrophication pest management
Riverine Streams, Sedimentation/ Engineering:
rivers/deltas/ inundation of dredging, canalization
creeks, banks
floodplains, Pollution Control: protection
water Management:
catchments/ pollution control
springs/oases policies and laws
Invasive Control: mechanical, Waza Logone in
species chemical (herbicides), Cameroon
pest management
Deforestation Replanting HELVETAS
Highlands
Watershed Projects
Palustrine Swamps/ Pollution Control: protection Wetlands
marshes Management: Management
pollution control Program, Uganda
policies and laws
Invasive Control: mechanical,
species chemical (herbicides),
pest management
Mangroves are store houses Mangroves sustaining fisheries & livelihoods Mangroves are bio-shields:
of biodiversity Protecting our dwellings and
cities from storm surges,
strong waves, erosion and
sea level rise helping fight
climate change
Fig. 2 Importance of mangroves

livelihood and ecological securities of people living in coastal areas (Bos et al.
2006): provisioning services (tangible goods/resources – fuel wood, fish, oysters,
crabs, shrimps, salt, sand, medicines, etc.), regulatory services (carbon sequestration
(blue carbon) mitigating climate change where they sequester more carbon per ha
than tropical forests, shoreline protection against storms and surges, and other
natural disasters such as hurricanes and tsunamis), supporting services (habitat and
nursery grounds for fish and other aquatic faunas, e.g., the oysters and fish you eat),
and cultural services (ecotourisms, recreation, research, education, etc.).
In regions where the forest has been destroyed or lost as in current trends through
pressures from unsustainable exploitation of mangrove resources, encroachments
from urbanization, and development infrastructure, local coastal communities are
left with marginal or unproductive fisheries and loss of traditional livelihoods.
Basic Factors in Mangrove Regeneration
Reproductive Approaches and Mangrove Restoration

Mangroves have little capacity for vegetative propagation and are thus dependent on
seedlings for forest maintenance and spread (Feller and Sitnik 1996). No mangrove
species can spread vegetatively by root suckers. No form of agamospermy has been
reported for mangroves although the Nypa palm, Acrosticum spp., can spread by
Fig. 3 Photoplate (a) cigar-shaped propagule and (b) growing seedling of the Rhizophora spp.; (c)
bark-fissured seeds of the parental tree Conocarpus erectus; (d) fruit ellipsoid and (e) seedling
surrounded by pneumatophores of the Avicennia germinans; (f) flowering whitish bell shape of the
L. racemosa
rhizome or recumbent stems. Rhizophora and other genera do not coppice because
they lose the ability to produce reserve meristems at a very early stage. Although
some species (A. germinans and L. racemosa) (Fig. 3d, e, f) can resprout from
stumps (coppicing), this process is not equivalent to propagation.
Mangroves exhibit two relatively unique reproductive strategies: hydrochory and
vivipary. Hydrochory (dispersal by water) is a major means by which mangrove
spreads seeds, fruit, and/or propagules. Tidal action can carry mangrove diaspores
great distances from their point of origin. Vivipary refers to the condition in which
the mangrove embryo germinates while still attached to the parent tree. A number of
mangrove species, including R. mangle, for example, propagules (Fig. 3a), may
remain attached to the parent tree for 4–6 months and attain lengths of 25–35 cm at
“maturity,” and they fall to the ground or into the water where they are dispersed by
the tides. Once it detaches, the seed established into a suitable substrate and grows
(Fig. 3a, b). The embryo of A. germinans breaks through the seed coat (Fig. 3d, e)
but remains enclosed in the fruit wall until detachment. Upon falling into the water,
the thin pericarp is quickly shed, leaving the seedling, which is composed of two
folded cotyledons. Laguncularia racemosa is not considered to be viviparous
(Fig. 3f), but germination often occurs during dispersal. Vivipary increases the
chances of successful establishment in an unpredictable environment where germi-
nation of seeds would typically be inhibited.
Limits on Mangrove Dispersal and Distribution

Extensive development of mangroves has occurred in the estuaries of large rivers
flowing over shallow continental shelves. The Amazon and Congo, the two largest
rivers in the world, do not have extensive stands of mangroves primarily because of
the huge outflow of freshwater. Major factors determining mangrove spreading and
distribution (FAO 1994; Lewis and Brown 2014) include:
Climate. Mangroves are tropical species and are not tolerant of freezing temper-
atures. Their latitudinal limits worldwide vary depending on air and water temper-
atures (Tomlinson 1986). The abundance of mangroves is also affected by aridity,
and development is much greater along coasts that have high inputs of rainfall.
Salinity. Salt is generally not a requirement for growth, since most mangroves
can grow in freshwater. However, they do not develop in strictly freshwater habitats
because of competition from freshwater species. Salinity is thus important in elim-
inating other vascular plant species that are not adapted for growth in a saline habitat.
Tidal fluctuation. Tidal influence is also not a requirement, but plays an impor-
tant indirect role:
(a) Inundation with saltwater helps exclude most other vascular plants and reduces
competition.
(b) Tides bring saltwater up estuaries against the outflow of freshwater and extend
mangrove development inland.
(c) Tides transport sediment, nutrients, and clean water into the mangrove environ-
ment and export organic carbon and reduced sulfur compounds.
(d) Where evaporation is high, tides help flush soils and decrease salinity.
The effect of this “tidal subsidy” can be seen on two landscape scales: a regional
or geographic scale (mangroves reach their greatest development around the world
in low-lying regions with large tidal ranges (Tomlinson 1986)) and a local scale –
trees closest to the edges of land masses, which are subject to the largest fluctuations
of the tide, are obviously larger and more productive than trees in the interior. The
latter is the situation in the Gambia mangrove. In the then Gambia, most roads
crossing the wetland aren’t eco-friendly with mangrove ecosystem, the conse-
quences are visible, but the underlying causes have not been addressed accordingly.
The mangroves aren’t fed with tidal water as required; hence there is dieback of
some mangrove stands.
Sediment and wave energy. Mangroves grow best in a depositional environment
with low wave energy according to Tomlinson (1986). High waves prevent propa-
gule establishment, expose the shallow root systems, and prevent accumulation of
fine sediments.
Overview and Status of Mangrove Restoration in the Gambia
There have been positive responses worldwide. In West Africa, efforts are ongoing
since 1993 with over four hundred and fifty (450) hectares of mangrove forests
plantations were established within the coastal regions of Benin, Guinea, and
Senegal (AMN 2009). In the Gambia replanting mangrove is recent. Most of these
initiatives or trials restored close to 300 ha between 2000 and 2014. Hence, in the
year 2000, direct sowing of seed or propagules pricking from the Rhizophora
parental tree were used and at irregular spacing (1 1 m; 2 1 m; 2 1.5 m).
All these efforts are done through community participation, NGOs (KOMFFORA,
WABSA, and TRY Oyster Women Association), CBOs, and donors and partners like
GEF, WWF, UNDP, etc. While such efforts are very commendable for the situational
dieback trees, they are some important shortcoming. Monitoring on the many
plantations is ad hoc or complete absence even with claimed 95% of success rate.
There is no adequate silvicultural organization and process in place for replanting.
Among these, there are no clear understanding of the flowering and fruiting behavior
of most mangrove species, badly appreciated hydrologic system for site selection
restored, absence of nursery operations and best practices.
Consequences to these shortcomings include the preferential choice for
Rhizophora spp. at the expense of other species like Avicennia sp., and Laguncularia
racemosa leads to monoscultural stand and poor or difficult scientific follow-up and
monitoring, making it difficult to assess growth parameters (diameters, height,
number of branches, etc.). In the absence of this dynamics, most, if not all, of the
biodiversity of the mangrove ecosystem is comprised. A good mastering of the
silvicultural organization and its subsequent implementation will further enhance
mangrove restoration projects. This manual will help ameliorate most of these
shortcomings and produce scientific monitoring mangrove endeavor.
Overview Cost of Restoration
Efforts have been made worldwide over the past decade by nationals and multina-
tionals like UNDP-GEF, IUCN, ITTO-ISME, WWF, AMN, and CWCS (Cameroon)
and KOMFFORA and WABSA (Gambia) to reverse mangrove loss through a
number of restoration projects and initiatives and other research programs. Every
restoration project or initiative is unique and depends on conditions specific to
individual and the area to restore persuaded by its goal(s) and objective(s) and so
is the costs of mangrove restoration (Lewis and Streever 2000), influenced by the
type of method involved and the species considered. Contrary to political, cultural,
and economic priorities, restoration necessitates time (Alongi 2002). In an early
review of restoration of mangrove habitats, Lewis (2000) and Gilman and Ellison
(2007) reported that the price of labor and the extent of necessary earthwork also
vividly affect the costs. Moreover, Lewis (op. cit.) noted that the price differs if it is
the private sector or government attempting mangrove restoration.
In Asia, for example, more precisely in Bangladesh and Vietnam, the World Bank
(in 1990) funded projects worth US$ 81.4 million (35.8 billion Fr. CFA), with 39.1%
and 60.9% for each country, respectively. Lewis (op. cit.) reported that eight projects
in Biscayne Bay, Florida, USA, ranged in cost from about US$ 5,300 to
200,000 ha 1 (2.3–88 million Fr. CFA ha 1). While Karieva (2002) reported that
Columbia’s government spent over US$ 25 million (11 billion Fr. CFA) around the
Magdalena River to restore the normal hydrology in model estuarine wetland and
mangrove forests between 1995 and 1998. Recent tsunami-hit countries (India, Sri
Lanka, Thailand, Malaysia, and Indonesia) spent US$ 4.5 million (2 billion Fr. CFA)
to restore degraded coastal areas. Restoration of comparable areas of abandoned
shrimp aquaculture ponds and tsunami-hit areas back to mangroves would take
about 3 years and cost averagely US$ 9 million (4 billion Fr. CFA).
According the AMN (2014), in some West Africa countries especially in Benin,
mangrove planting costs that include propagule collection and sell by the local
communities and planting were estimated at up to 400,000 FCFA (US$ 8000)/ha
at rate of 16 (US$0.032) FCFA per propagule. Maintenance cost was estimated at
100,000–125,000 FCFA per ha.
Techniques of Mangrove Planting
Preliminaries Mangrove Planting
Generally, a first thought that comes to our mind about mangrove restoration is
raising mangrove nursery and planting mangrove propagule or seedling in coast
(Ellison 2012). These two methods have been used before in the tropics to restore
mangrove-degraded areas (Ochsner 2001; Choudhury 1996; Clarke and Johns 2002;
Lewis et al. 2006).
Natural regeneration: It uses naturally occurring mangrove propagules as the
source for regeneration by protecting the forest. The species composition of the
areas depends on the species composition of the natural sources (wild seedling) of
the forest. Artificial regeneration: artificial regeneration of mangroves involves hand

planting of desired propagules and saplings at the selected intertidal areas. It is an
important challenge to organize plantations in time when propagules are available in
the particular season.
As a matter of fact, mangrove replanting can use direct or indirect approaches.
Mangrove “climate smart” species (Ellison 2012) specific to the area should be used,
and this can either be Avicennia germinans or Rhizophora spp. for the Gambia, for
example. Direct approach of mangrove planting refers to the collection mangroves
seeds/propagules from a parental tree or floating, whereas in the indirect approach
there is an intermediary stage where the seed/propagules growth under control or not
plant (equally wild seedling) before outplanting. It appears that direct seeding is
particularly effective in areas where waters (tides) are scarce or irregular (Ochsner
2001) and are inaccessible permanently of periodically.
In reality, as promoted by MAP the method known as “Ecological Mangrove
Restoration” (MAP 2007; Lewis III and Brown 2014), there are several facts to be
considered before we go into mangrove planting. These stages usually successes are
strongly linked to the cost available:
1. As mentioned in EMR techniques, we need to find the reason for existing

mangrove degradation in the project site.
2. Discuss with local communities to know their interest in mangrove restoration,
and explain how it would benefit them both economically and ecologically. Note
that failure to get community interest in the project will not lead to successful
project impacts.
3. Develop a community-based work plan to remove the threats to natural man-
groves (assess modifications to hydrology or added stress) (Ellison 2012).
4. Restore natural water circulatory systems (select the replanting site based on
technical, political, social, and economic considerations).
5. Restore natural seed sources (if the threats to natural adult mangrove trees are
removed, then it will be very easy to get enough seeds/seedlings).
6. Go for nursery raising and plantation if it is necessary. However, in developing
countries, mangrove nursery plays an important role to bind community partic-
ipation in mangrove restoration activities such as backyard nursery.
Whatever the approach used in regenerating mangrove-degraded areas, there is

need for the involvement of the local communities and the government department
since restoration (Fig. 4) is not just manipulation of one aspect (Moudingo 2010,
Ellison 2012; Lewis III and Brown 2014). Hence, curbing the pressure from local
will influence the dynamics of mangrove forests that surround these areas (Ajonina
2008). The process of mangrove replanting is usually involving communities as
shown in the chart below. Apart from the six points mentioned, monitoring and data
sharing are inclusive and important to the success of mangrove restoration in
general.
Sensitization, capacity building and organization of model village or

communities to uphold mangrove replanting is the site selected
Seed/ propagules Preparation of nursery bags Nursery construction

and pseudo-bed
material (A)
Gathering mud
Seed collection Site selection
Seed selection Removing debris

Shade construction
Storing seeds Potting mud in nursery bags Making pseudo -

(temporary) and transport to shade bed, water facility,
poles for keeping
the nursery bags
Potting of propagules/seeds
Nursing
Monitoring (diseases, diameter, etc.)
Selection of seedlings
Direct
seeding Outplanting and field monitoring
Fig. 4 Chart of possible stages toward direct or indirect mangrove replanting. (Adapted Moudingo
2010)
7. Monitor, evaluate, and reporting of progress of nursery/replanting activities.

8. Share and disseminate information and experience. A monitoring report is pro-
duced, its content and findings (lessons learnt and best practices) shared with key
stakeholders.
Pro and Cons of the Direct Planting
Advocates of natural regeneration argue that such silvicultural systems are more in
tune with the natural indigenous forest ecologies (FAO 1994). The pros and cons of
natural versus artificial regeneration are described in Table 2 (FAO 1994; Ochsner
2001; Primavera et al. 2012).
Table 2 Advantages and disadvantages of direct seeding

Advantages of direct seeding Disadvantages of direct seeding
Establishment cost is low as there are no Normally more seed is required to stock an
nursery and planting expenses area sufficiently, mainly because seeds are lost
Transport is much cheaper; normally the seed to seed predators or tidal waves or erosion. If
necessary for a truck-full of nursery plants can seed of a desired species is scarce, it will be
fit into the glove compartment of a normal car more advantageous to raise plants in a nursery
or boat for later transplanting, for example, Avicennia
Better root development and avoidance of sp.
transplanting shock, which is common for Tree density is more difficult to control and
nursery-raised seedlings that are transplanted monitor
from the sheltered nursery to the harsh Too high may require early thinning, whereas
environment of the planting site too low density may require additional seeding
Tree seed can be sown at the same time as an or planting
agricultural crop. Usually minimum of 4 years Seedlings are better protected in the nursery
Direct seeding will normally ensure more from hazards like fire, pests, livestock, etc.
plants per unit area, which through natural It is easier to discover and control pests and
selection or selective thinning can result in a diseases in the nursery
stand of better quality
Large areas or inaccessible areas such as mud
flats or swamps can be seeded from the air or
moderate tides
Certain species and sites are not suitable for
nursery production. Suitable for both seafront
and abandoned ponds
Seeding or Planting Mangrove Method
Site Preparation
With the decision made following a meeting with the communities, the selected site
to be prepared will depend on previous use of the area and the method of seeding.
Take note to remove any identified disturbances in site. Consult the calendars to
select a suitable date and time.
Species, Seeds/Propagule Collection

In the Gambia, among the six true species, there is one main species (Rhizophora
spp., red mangrove) used for mangrove restoration in the Gambia. Other mangrove
species like Avicennia germinans (black mangrove) and Laguncularia racemosa
(white mangrove) still have to be tested under such a scheme. However, there are
another species that needs to be equally mentioned because it is found dispersed
along the coast – Conocarpus erectus (buttonwood). For restoration purposes only
the red mangrove is usually used. Preference should be equally placed on the black
mangrove because once establishes, it creates conditions for most of the mangrove
species to grow in the area. Mindful of the limited number of seeds and/or propa-
gules produces seasonally by mangrove species, passive restoration can be consid-
ered Useful to the ecosystem. Therefore, protecting mangrove degraded site from
any disturbance can favor establishment and growth of propagules into seedling/
sapling them maturing into adult tree. This type of seed or propagules is termed
wildings. The following are descriptions of the mangrove species recommended for
propagation in the nursery:
The red mangrove is an evergreen tree, which grows to about 25 m in height and
40 cm in diameter at breast height. A single seed germinates inside the conical fruit
forming a long narrow first root (radicle), which is green except for the brown
enlarged and pointed end up to 1.25 cm in diameter. It can grow up to 30 cm in
length before it gets detached from the mother tree and falls. The root systems
stabilize the trees and act as a first line of defense against wave action, in line with its
position on the seaward edge of the system. The species normally grows in soft
muddy soils along sheltered river banks and estuarine margins. Flowering and
fruiting occurs during the entire year (Hussain 1990).
The black mangrove is the most important and dominant mangrove species in the
open mud flats of the Gambia. It is tolerant to high saline conditions and the tree
grows in the form of isolated groups or woodland formations. The tree is fairly large
and may grow up to 10–15 m in height and 20–40 cm in diameter at breast height.
The species flowers and fruits all year round. This species regenerates and coppices
well and can be managed under a coppice system (Hussain 1990).
Propagules are produced at any time of the year. However, it was the most prolific
production commences in early September and may be available for 3 months. The
first ripe seeds of the season are the best. The earlier they are picked, the better the
chances for the new plant, as this gives the longest optimal conditions for growth
during the period of warm weather ensuring good sized, sturdy young seedlings
ready for planting time. For Avicennia sp. the best time to pick the seed is when they
are slightly yellow and fat. Small seeds will produce small plants. Fallen seeds are
okay to be collected, but if they are starting to germinate, take care not to damage the
fragile roots. Shaking the trees can make ripe seeds fall. A plastic bucket will hold
about 2,000 seeds.
It is important to note that during this period, there are also many unripe seeds
which do not come off the branches easily. While it is tempting to gather as many as
possible, it is a waste of time to pick small or unripe seeds as they will not germinate.
They will simply go black and eventually rot. Small seeds produce smaller plants.
Need for Mangrove Nurseries

Mangrove seedlings can be grown in the nursery in black or white plastic biode-
gradable bags. These containers hold the soil and the seeds/propagules together and
allow water to drain from them. Usually the nursery is constructed in situ where it is
accessible and tides are favorable. Seedlings grown in these containers have stronger
and healthier root systems. The natural availability of seeds and propagules some-
times does not coincide with the timing of replanting of degraded areas. Hence, the
seedlings raised in the nursery can be used for planting in degraded areas in the
absence of natural planting material.
The survival rate of nursery-raised seedlings in restoration areas is high compared
to the direct planting of seeds/propagules (Ravishankar and Ramasubramanian
2004). This is due to the fact that nursery-raised seedlings have a well-established
root system before being transplanted in the degraded areas.
Seed Preparation and Outplanting

Following the flowchart above, outplanting uses either propagule planting or seed-
ling/sapling planting (Ellison 2012; Lewis and Brown 2014) especially through
nursery plan (Selvam et al. 2005).
• Nursery Practices for Different Species In Situ
Nursery techniques differ from one species to another, depending on the salt
tolerance level and the ecological zone. In the following pages, guidelines that
should be followed for each species are described.
(a) Avicennia germinans – Local name: Black mangrove
Selection and Processing of the Seeds
• Mature fruits should be selected and checked for insect borers.
• Seeds should be placed in brackish water overnight to remove the seed
coats. This treatment reduces the establishment time by 2–3 days.
• Seeds should be placed in damp jute bags until the roots and shoot appear.
Sowing into Nursery Containers
• For nursery established in situ the tides favors potted soil peaty and
seedlings growth. No hardening of the soil is required.
• The radicle (root) part of the seeds must be gently pushed 2 cm inside the
soft mud.
• Use goo substrate to pot seedling.
Irrigation
Nursery and its shade should be put in the tidal zone for salt water at least
twice a day. Studies show that Avicennia has the best survival at high tidal
sites owing to its tolerance of higher salinities (Ellison 2012).
Pest and Disease Control
Caterpillars and crabs may be the major pests for mangroves in the nursery in
the Gambia. Damping off fungal disease may affect very young seedlings.
This can be treated with one of the recommended fungicides.
Selection of Nursery Seedlings for Outplanting
The recommended specifications of the seedling areas are follows:
1. Height: 30–35 cm
2. No. of leaves: at least four to six
3. Duration in nursery: 3 months
4. The germination period: 5–8 days
(b) Rhizophora mangle – Local name: Red mangrove
Collection of Propagules
Healthy and mature propagules should be collected from the tidal zones,
handpick or using fishing nets and baskets. Mature propagules of Rhizophora
mangle are pale green to yellow.
Selection and Processing of Propagules
Healthy propagules should be selected and checked for insect borers. The
propagules should then be planted immediately in the polythene bags. In case
of storing, the seeds should be kept in the shade for 1–2 days, without being
exposed to direct sunlight.
Sowing into Nursery Containers
Polythene bags filled with mud should be prepared. The hypocotyls (root) of
the propagule should be inserted to a depth of about 7–8 cm in the bags. In
some cases small sticks are to be tied to the hypocotyl to provide support.
Irrigation
Tidal water usually flows in twice daily.
Pest and Disease Control
Same like for Avicennia sp.
Selection of Seedlings for Outplanting
The recommended specifications of the seedlings areas are follows:
1. Height: 35 cm
2. No. of leaves: four to six leaves
3. Duration in the nursery: 3 months
4. The germination period: 20 days
• Direct: Seeding or Propagule Planting (Sowing the Propagules)
Rhizophora spp. propagules can be sown by hand into the mud at most 2/3 of the
propagule. Usually, radicals are pushed gently into soft mud to about 5–8 cm deep
depending on the Rhizophora species. The seeds are placed more exactly in the
ground where it is expected to grow. Interval between and within row is 2 2 m
(ideal for monitoring) based on management objective.
Manual method is dibbling, where a small hand tool is used to punch a hole in
the muddy ground into which the seedling or saplings are placed. Dibbling is
commonly used where there is little competition from weeds and when the soil is
not too muddy.
Aftercare Operations
Intensive care should be given to the young seedlings in a plantation for the first
2–3 years. The following aspects are appropriate to be taken care of to establish a
successful mangrove plantation.
Algal growth All algae (seaweeds) that are entangled with the transplanted seedlings/
propagules should be removed by hand during low tide to reduce seedling
mortality
Effect of algae can also be prevented by using seedlings that are 1–2 years
old, so that their leaves would be held above water level
Siltation Silt may get deposited on leaves of the seedlings (if they get flooded with
tide), and subsequently gastropods (mollusks) may damage the leaves. This
damage can be avoided by using 1–2-year-old seedlings
Predation Plants predated by crabs or cattle should be replaced. Planting propagules in
the hollow of a piece of bamboo or PVC pipe, for example, will keep the
crabs out of reach of the delicate parts of the seedling that are eaten by crabs
Cattle grazing Planted area should be demarcated with a mesh/barbed wire/bamboo fence to
keep the cattle and goats away. Regular patrolling the area for presence of
cattle
Erosion Mud flats that can experience erosion with tidal water movement can be
stabilized first with an appropriate species of grass that can consolidate the
mud before planting the seedlings
Human Community should be educated of the importance of restoration efforts and
intervention should be made part of the team of monitors/protectors
Steps in Planting Mangrove: What You Need to Know About Rhizophora

spp.
1. Community, sensitization, and organization
Our mangrove needs you!

Organization is key to Please follow these
mangrove replanting. This orientations
activity most have leader
technically empowered to
arrange the villagers
including men, women and
children into propagule
sorter and porter groups,
some for the layout
outplanting lines while the
majority are drilled to sow
the propagules in the
designated site.
Best field practices include

taking drinking water to the
field and identifying
containers and bags to use
for the transportation of
propagule.
2. Site selection for Rhizophora planting
This area is
acceptable
The choice of area should be where mangrove already grow before (or have
already pushed). Be careful mangrove don’t strive on any kind of soil.
Site selection-Continue)
Tide is down!
Please! Record
the time
The area must be submerged

at least twice a day: at each
high tide, including during neap
tides in the dry season
It should be sandy or
compacted
Good
substrat
Oh no! This soil is sandy.
Anyway if hydrologic channel are restored

and the area protected wilding spread
and colonize this area
3. Tides and demarcate the area for replanting activities
This should be done at the end

of the dry season, when the
tidal coefficient is lower (that is
to say when the moon appears
in the sky has half).
The area waits until the tide is
highest and plant stakes on this
limit.
This will help you be sure that
the seedlings that you plant will
be immersed each high tide,
even during the harshest
periods of the dry season.
Water movement is very
Tide entrance important to the survival of
mangroves, in nutrients are
brought into the system by tides
and its current even upstream
flows
Suitable tidal
elevation !
Yes! The tides
follow the moon
more closely than
the sun do
Highest Tide Do the moon

play a role in
tide fluctuation!
Tide withdrawal
4. Propagules harvest, collection, and storage
Please don't
pick up those
eaten by crabs
The team made off the youth should collect

maximum propagules parental tree. Others
collect those fallen to the ground or floating or
easily accessible.
Care must be taken to choose the best

propagules, the most mature, and least damaged
and store carefully in a horizontal bags, not
damaging them.
Warning!!!
Once harvest is completed, if the propagules cannot be transplanted the same day, the
rest is kept in a bag close the top and the bags must be stored well especially under a
shad where sea water reaches.
5. Sorting of propagules
Yes Yes
NO NO NO
It's time for replanting!

Take the path to the replanting site to
join the team on site. Equip yourself
with either buckets or basins; they will
serve to transport propagules which
will be sorted.
Once the bags are emptied, the team

selects the best sorters of propagules
then uncaps the propagules to
update the small bud that grows up
once planted
Key note
Working in small groups of 10 to 15 people with a team leader. There can be many of
these small groups with an overseer, and this will allow you to be much more effective
if you are too large.
6. Demarcated line set for outplanting of propagules
Two method can be implored. Each zone can create its own strategy to mark the soil
and plant. But here are some tips.
Please! Let us
move in a
straight line to
avoid
irregularity
spacing in the
plantation
then a step
forward then
plant
a
Seedling will need
The first (the cons-a) is to put a team down room to grow well.
on the field with a guide to move on a So avoid planting
straight line to plant. The actors are too tight propagules.
separated by 2 meters. It is recommended
The second method is the most accurate. It to plant 5 000 plants
will allow you to accurately assess the per hectare (ideal 2
number of trees planted. meter x 2 meter).
The area is to mark

Please mark baseline the soil before
with the aid of a stick. planting.
.
Get yourself a rope
and tie pieces of
b cloth every 2
meters.
Pull the cord and

move towards
established direction
of the area
reforested.
Two method can be implored. Each zone can create its own strategy to mark the soil
and plant. But here are some tips.
7. Outplanting of seedlings
Planting should done timely because the tide will soon raise and propagules must be
planted. With the propagules in the hand or in a bag, planters moving in the
predetermining lines inserts the propagules not more 2/3 and progresses through the
mud built along the predetermining lines.
KOMFORA trial of Rhizophora mangle outplanting at Bintang Bolon

8. Aftercare for seedling and saplings in the field
When the area is replanted, it is important to return regularly see the growth of
young mangroves. Every 2 to 3 months, team (5-10 personnel), should tour
the area and take stock of survival.
Living sapling with

Vigorous
103 leaves, 4
seedling!
branches
WABSA trial of R. mangle plantation in the Nuimi National Park

Mangrove Health Monitoring and Evaluation
Concept of Monitoring and Evaluation: Why Monitoring?
There is distinction between monitoring and evaluation (Tuxill and Nabhan 1998;
Davis-Case 1990). Monitoring refers to the regular collection and analysis of
information to determine whether or not activities are working and explain why
(SNV 1997; Keddy 2010). Common factors to measure include water depth,
dissolved nutrients, and number of calling amphibians or birds. The challenge in
monitoring is to choose the minimum number of variables that will produce the
maximum amount of information (Keddy 2010). Monitoring is usually done at
regular intervals (daily, weekly, or seasonally) so that over a cumulative time period
(a month, a year, or longer), trends in a particular situation become evident and
measurable. Without monitoring, it is impossible to be aware whether or not
restoration has occurred. Adaptive environmental assessment allows one to change
the restoration project while it is in progress to respond to unexpected events.
Evaluation is an opportunity for participants in a conservation effort to step back,
review information, and look at whether their work has met the desirable goals and
objectives (Davis-Case 1990). It is chance to take stock of the effects, positive and/or
negative, expected and unexpected, created by the project actions and activities.
Evaluation and monitoring are often part of the same process. For instance, the
information obtained by monitoring the reproductive success of plant population can
be indispensable for evaluation management designed to maintain habitat favored by
the plant. Overall, evaluation tends to take place less frequently than monitoring,
which is more of a continual process. Evaluation also offers an ideal opportunity for
debating and modifying the direction of a project or management effort or for
addressing problems that have arisen during implementation.
Usefulness of Monitoring
However academically interesting it is to know the status, characteristics, or health

of a particular natural ecosystem, monitoring is not usually an end in itself
(Sriskanthan et al. 2008). It is a means to an end for better and more informed
conservation and development decision-making. A key aim of carrying out moni-
toring is to improve management practice and to ensure that it is well-informed by,
and responsive to, the situation on the ground (Ellison 2012; Lewis and Brown
2014).
In the case of the Gambia, there is no clear management plan sets specific to
mangrove management and related environment issues, ranging from scientific
information and research, through active management of species and ecosystems,
to local participation in mangrove management. Monitoring can provide useful
information for planning and implementing all of these management decisions
(Lewis and Brown 2014), including:
1. To record how the actual replanting compares to earlier designs. This is accom-
plished through an as-built survey and a site and Time-Zero Monitoring Report,
which provides a benchmark to assess change over time.
2. To quantify the recruitment, establishment, and early growth of mangroves in an
initial period after restoration (usually 2–5 years).
3. To identify, early on, potential issues inhibiting establishment of mangrove
seedlings and to inform midcourse corrections.
4. To increase community involvement, knowledge, and understanding of the entire
restoration process.
5. To inform future management strategies of mangrove area (facilitating the for-
mulation and the implementation of mangrove conservation legislation and
policies based on the informations provided).
6. To contribute to international knowledge bank of restoration project successes,
failures, and lessons learned.
7. To develop nature-based tourism.
Finally, it is important to ensure that monitoring is planned and budgeted at the

onset of the project and is in line with project goals and that success criteria are
clearly established to determine what aspects of a site must be measured.
Monitoring Levels
It is generally understood that there are two distinct types of monitoring: ecological
monitoring and performance monitoring (Abbot and Guijt 1998). Performance
monitoring refers to the assessment of management effectiveness, examining the
outputs of laws, policies, community initiatives, donor projects, and spatial planning.
Performance monitoring is thus linked inextricably to socioeconomic aspects and
impacts of mangrove management. Most mangrove restoration initiative don’t
inform sufficiently both the perception of communities and the success rate of
mangrove replanting so far. For the Gambian mangrove monitoring, incorporating
performance aspects into our monitoring system (is recommended) involves consid-
ering factors such as local perceptions to mangrove conservation and restoration,
community participation and management, revenues, and institutional arrangements.
In many cases, the mere numbers of propagules or seedlings planted are considered
indicators of success. Yet subsequent investigation demonstrates that very few plants
have survived because either the site or species selection has been inappropriate and
limited community participation. Hence, possible pathway for mangrove restoration
and monitoring with community involvement should be ensured and will in due cost
and time combine scientific (calculation of survival rate) or simple (visible health
problem, indigenous knowledge is strongly used) methods.
Monitoring Techniques
Techniques on mangrove monitoring stand dynamics have been reviewed, tested,

and proposed (Ajonina 2008; Ellison 2007, 2012; Ellison et al. 2012; Lewis and
Brown 2014).
Ecological Monitoring
First Approach – Transect-/quadrat-based survey recording mangrove locations,
species zones, mangrove condition, and identifying pressures. This is quick to do
and is a suitable exercise for capacity building with community groups.
Second Approach – Vegetation plots in each zone recording community struc-
ture, height and diameter of trees, and density of seedlings. This takes about a day
per transect and is better carried out by project staff, though can be done with
community groups assisting.
The two different approaches build upon each other, hence rather than being
alternatives. You can start with the first and then add in second as capacity and
experience builds in the team or country.
According to Primevera et al. (2012), there are four steps to set up a fixed quadrat
where growth rate and survival rate are calculated. These include:
• Step A – Plant an area at least 100 m2 with mangrove seedlings and make a note
of the date.
• Step B – Measure a 100 m2 plot within your planted area which may be square
(10 10 m) or rectangular (20 5 m) depending on the planted area. If the area
has varying substrate, elevation, etc., set up more than one quadrat in these micro-
sites.
• Step C – Permanently mark the plot by inserting bamboo or wooden poles buried
~1 m deep in each of the four corners. This will then give a permanent reference
area for monitoring. If available, take a GPS reference point of the quadrat, or use
permanent local landmarks or features to reference the plot.
• Step D – Through briefings with the community, ensure that no undocumented or
ad hoc replacement planting is undertaken within the quadrat as this will distort
the results.
Monitoring Equipment
According to Ellison (2012), many equipments are used to collect data. These
include:
(i). PVC or other durable stakes to mark plot corners

(ii). Small metric tape measures (e.g., sewing tape measures) with mm intervals
(iii). Numbered aluminum tree tags (may be available at a forestry department)
(iv). Aluminum, stainless steel, or brass nails of 4–5 cm length
(v). Hammers
(vi). Metal wire or heavy-duty cable ties
(vii). Wire cutters (if metal wire is used)
(viii). Extending surveyor’s staff (can be borrowed from a survey department)

(ix). Handheld GPS
(x). Pencils and copies of data sheets (in Appendix)
(xi). Clipboard
(xii). 30–50 m measuring tape (open reel is best in mangrove mud)
(xiii). Magnetic compass
(xiv). Copies of aerial photos of the area – if possible
(xv). Brightly colored flagging tape
(xvi). Personal safety gear
(xvii). Good and high-resolution camera
Monitoring can be done at the level of the nursery and the plantation within the
technical capability and resources of some trained local monitoring teams, though
interpretation of results can be challenging (Primavera et al. 2012). An expert can be
of assistance. The primary objective of communities involved in mangrove rehabil-
itation projects is to conduct the most resource-effective approaches to start gaining
the resource benefits from recovered mangrove forests.
• At the nursery level
Existing nurseries and their surface area, survival rates (%), nursery stock (num-
ber of leaves, number of branches, etc.) – seedlings per species; digital photo). At the
nursery monitoring is usually done after three weekly or monthly.
• At the plantation level
Parameters to know will include planted or reforested area, survival rates (%),
alongside post-planting activities – beating-up, thinning etc. existing nurseries,
nursery stock – seedlings per species; digital photo) and stand dynamics – at the
stage the monitoring is done after 6 2 months in the first years and once after
2 years. The results can be compared to that of the permanent sample plots (PSPs)
later.
Steps to Calculate Survival Rate (SRt)
• Step A: Count the total number of plants within your quadrat on the day it is
established. This initial number will serve as the baseline for your future analyses.
• Step B: Return to the site, make a note of the date, and calculate how many days it
has been since your last visit.
• Step C: Count all of the surviving plants within your quadrat.
• Step D: Calculate the survival rate of all plants.
(Number of survivors/initial number of seedling) 100 = survival rate (%)
• Step E: Repeat steps B–D every time you monitor your quadrat.
Steps to Calculate Growth Rate (GRt)
• Step 1: Select at least 30 plants at random (meaning do not choose a particular size
or characteristic, e.g., tallest, smallest) within your quadrat, and measure their
height on the day the quadrat is established. This initial height (H1) will act as the
baseline for your future analyses. Using your meter stick and/or measuring tape,
measure the height from ground level to the highest bud (not the tip of leaves) of
the tallest branch; straighten out plants that are bent (by the weight of algae)
before measuring to ensure the tip of the stem is measured. For plants with dead
branches, measure up to the living portion.
• Step 2: Return to the site, make a note of the date, and calculate how many days it
has been since your last visit.
• Step 3: Select another 30 plants at random (they do not have to be the same plants
as in step 1) within your quadrat and measure their height (H2) as described in
step 1.
• Step 4: Calculate the growth rate as follows: (H2– H1)/ H1 100 = growth rate
(%)
• Step 5: Repeat steps 2–4 every time you monitor your quadrat.
Equally, other parameters can be calculated; these include the number of leaves,
number of nodes and nodal distance, and the number of pneumatophores or stilt root
alive or dead, and document first flowering and fruiting events.
Picture Monitoring
This involves keeping photographic data of image taken periodically from this same
initially chosen vantage point (geo-referenced or marked point) located in the
plantation toward the same direction. Such data gathered from the images or
photographs convey visibly and convincingly changes or evolution in the plantation.
A good high-resolution camera is often needed for such activity.
Socioeconomic Monitoring
It is good to assess the change of community perception on the restoration seed
issues especially through planting methodologies (focus or target group discussions,
combined checklist/data sheet, questionnaire, and key informant interviews). Ques-
tionnaire, for example, can assess the participation of the locals.
Cost and Expenditure Monitoring

The financial report of the project should be able to state and provide the trends of
expenditures per activity per stage. Record keeping should be aligned with activity
for easy analyses. Hence, sections like outplanting activity and plantation mainte-
nance (1 year) further break down into activities that can be used within the report.
Total costs are lower if the community provides labor (transportation becomes
minimal) and higher if protective fence is added.
Data Management, Analysis, and Presentation
The collection of data is only one step in the process of using information collected
from the field to influence management (Ellison 2012). Data storage and analysis
must be carried out in a timely manner in order to ensure that it remains relevant and
useful. Furthermore, careful thought must go into the process of disseminating the
information generated in the right form and to the right people, so as to ensure that
monitoring information will be utilized in the most effective manner (Sriskanthan
et al. 2008).
Recording
Maintaining accurate records is one of the most important activities in the nursery.
Accurate records can help save the nursery unnecessary spending and assist you
making your nursery well-organized. A daily report (activities) is a useful tool that
assists in record keeping and should have the following information (Table 3).
The record keeping can take many forms and should be simple and easily
understood by the nursery operator. This will further assist with the planning process
of nursery management.
Data Storage
All original data inputted should be stored in an acceptable format such as Excel. The
ideal timeframe is within 2 weeks of collecting the data. It is important to ensure that
the names of the recorders are also inputted, so that any potential queries about the
data can be directed to the correct person.
For example, for image files (i.e., digital photos), the names should be in a way
that allows easy reference, including a description of what the photo is depicting, the
date the photo was taken and a location reference if possible.
Example 1
File name: Rh_man_15apr08_SQ3
Information: Rhizophora mangle, 15 September 2014, strip quadrat 3
Example 2
File name: plntd_seedlings_01jan14_nurs
Information: planted seedlings 01January14, nursery
Table 3 Record keeping information needed

Activities Financial Planning
Species planted Dates money was spent Number of seedlings to
Seed source Amount spent be supplied
Date seed sown Purpose for spending (labor, Amount of seeds needed
Germination date materials, equipment) Amount of labor needed
Date of pest or disease Number of bags required
attack
Number of seedlings
Date seedling outplanted
and location
Final monitoring reports containing all photos and original data files in excel
format should therefore be stored in a CD and hard copy accordingly.
Data Analysis and Integration

It is recommended that a person with experience in socioeconomic and ecological
data analysis should be tasked with processing and analyzing the inputted data.
A final report should be generated after each monitoring exercise, which inte-
grates socioeconomic and ecological aspects of the monitoring, describes the status
and trends in all the measured indicators, and discusses the potential implications of
any changes.
Changes observed from the baseline (either negative or positive) over the partic-
ular time period should be identified and measured. If necessary, comparisons can be
made with one period to another period to understand the specific trends of changes.
This will help managers to change their management strategies according to the
results.
Based on the analysis of the monitoring data, management recommendations
should be made. This step should be completed within 3 months of data collection to
ensure that the information generated is valid and useful for site-level managers.
Sharing and Disseminating Information

Once monitoring reports are produced at a certain frequency (monthly, quarterly,
biennially, or annually), it is suggested that its contents and findings should be shared
with key stakeholders, for example, to:
• The institutions or authorities in charge of the management of the environment

and mangrove issues
• The ministries in charge of environment, forestry, agriculture, water, etc.
• The mangrove custodian and bordered community involved
• The private sector tour operators and hoteliers bringing visitors to the Gambia
• The field recorders that were not involved in the analysis stage
Care should be taken to ensure that monitoring information quickly and effec-
tively reaches the individuals who are responsible for management decisions. In
doing so, decision policy-makers will devise best management strategy for the
Gambia mangrove ecosystem and ensure that management approach is both adaptive
and reactive to any changes which are taking place or lessons learned that are
generated. Sharing information in a transparent manner to the larger community
and associated field recorders encourages ownership and interest in management and
monitoring activities.
Conclusion and Way Forward in Mangrove Restoration

in the Gambia
With the projected sea increase alongside anthropogenic activities, the Gambia
mangroves are progressively degrading and losing it services. Ongoing efforts by
individual, NGOs, the Gambia government, and donors geared to reverse this trend
are done by replanting mangrove. Most of these trials proved to be limited and
incomplete in terms of silvicultural practices by local stakeholder.
Hence, this manual demonstrated the different approaches based on scientific and
learning-by-doing approaches in streamlining mangrove conservation for the Gam-
bia vision by 2020. Moreover, in the cause of the production of this manual across a
number of sites where available, mangrove restoration is presented in Fig. 5, so as to
further demonstrate the practical use of these approaches in the Gambia.
The following recommendations can be made:
• Testing and improvement of the manual. There is need for wide testing and
documentation of the experience from the documentation of this manual pointing
out its strengths and weakness geared toward better improvement from which
revised versions can be produced to integrate such gaps.
• Complementing efforts from both PSPs and plantation monitoring schemes.
There is a need to complement monitoring efforts from both natural and artificial
plantations in order to ascertain responses of both system to anthropogenic
pressures and impacts.
• Involvement of the universities and research institutes in monitoring. As
observed during participatory site surveys for PSP location and selection of
restoration sites, there was a conspicuous absence of these important groups of
Fig. 5 Mangrove nursery Co

layout (Selvam et al. 2005) nn
ec
te
d
to
cr
ee
k
Nursery Beds
Foot path
Irrigation canal
Drainage canal
1m
10 m.
Nursery Beds
stakeholders in monitoring efforts yet being custodians of knowledge production

and discussion for science and technological development; their involvement at
various stages of project and program implementation cannot be overemphasized.
• Promoting data sharing for better decision-making and green planning
processes. To this end data collected form of PSPs and planted plantation should
continually be collected and reported. There is equally the need to promote data
and information sharing from these monitoring efforts in order to fit in decision-
making processes for the better planning and implementation of projects and
programs toward sustainable management geared, enhancing the steady flow of
ecosystem services, for improved livelihoods and poor reduction and general
green economic growth.
Cross-References
▶ An assessment of the environmental impacts of oil and coal

▶ Environmental impact assessment of Biogas Exposure
▶ Impact of Climate Change and Land Use Change Scenarios on Water Resources in
Tha Chin River Basin: A case study of Suphan Buri Prrovince, Thailand
▶ Integrated Assessment of Environmental Factors: Risks to Human Health
▶ Landscape Rehabilitation in Disturbed Areas
▶ Life-Cycle Assessment of Construction Materials: Analysis of Environmental
Impacts and Recommendations of Eco-Efficient Management Practices
▶ Major Environmental Issues and Problems
▶ Monitoring and Risk Analysis of PAHs in the Environment
▶ Performance Evaluation of Global Environmental Impact Assessment Methods
through a Comparative Analysis of Legislative and Regulatory Provisions
▶ Soil Pollution and Remediation
▶ Wastewater Management to Environmental Materials Management
Appendix 1 Principles of Restoration (Prepared from USEPA 2000;

Ajonina and Tata 2006)
Basic principles of restoration Description

Need for a national program and priorities This should be established, based on a national
for wetland restoration inventory of wetlands with potential for
restoration, as a component of the national
wetland policy, plan, or strategy, so as to
maximize the benefit to the overall
conservation status and wise use of wetlands of
the efforts and resources applied to wetland
restoration
(continued)

Need for clear understanding and statement Should be taken as an element of national
of goals, objectives, and performance planning for wetland conservation and wise
standards use. If a project hopes to promote a return to
pre-disturbance conditions, this should be
stated as part of the project goals, with more
detailed information on exactly how to
incorporate restoration into project objectives
Need for careful planning at all stages This will limit the possibility of undesirable
side effects. For example, careful planning can
allow restoration projects to avoid problems
such as increased numbers of mosquitoes,
unwanted flooding, or saltwater intrusion into
sources of drinking water. To assist in
planning, an assessment should be made of the
features of the site under consideration and the
factors that may affect its feasibility and
success
Maintaining natural processes Natural processes and existing conditions
should be considered during project selection,
design, and development. To the extent that is
possible, ecological engineering principles
should be applied in preference to methods
requiring hard structures or extensive
excavation. Maintenance and conservation of
existing wetlands is always preferable and
more economical than their subsequent
restoration. Moreover currently available
restoration techniques almost never lead to
conditions that match those of pristine natural
ecosystems. As a corollary to this, trading
high-quality habitat or ecosystems for
promises of restoration should be avoided
except in the case of overriding national
interests. However, restoration of individual
sites can contribute to ongoing management of
existing high-quality wetlands by, for example,
improving overall catchment condition and
contributing to improved water allocation
management
Scale of wetland restoration planning Whenever possible, the minimum acceptable
scale for wetland restoration planning should
be at the catchment level. Individual, relatively
small restoration projects targeting a single
wetland can be valuable provided that they are
planned within the context of the catchment.
Wetland restoration planning should not ignore
the value of upland habitats and linkages
between upland and wetland habitats. Wetland
restoration planning should consider water
allocation principles and the role that
restoration can play in maintaining ecological
functions of wetlands
(continued)

Stakeholders’ participation Wetland restoration should be an open process
that involves local community stakeholders as
well as stakeholders who will be affected by a
project even though they may be
geographically distant from the project, for
example, stakeholders living well downstream.
All stakeholders, including local communities
and indigenous people and sectoral interests
both in situ and ex situ, should be fully
involved in a wetland restoration project from
its earliest stage of consideration through its
implementation to its long-term stewardship
Long-term stewardship and monitoring Restoration requires long-term stewardship,
including ongoing management and
monitoring. Successful restoration should be
designed, as far as possible, for self-
maintenance, but it also generally requires a
constituency that understands the need for
long-term stewardship, the resources required
to support this stewardship, and a commitment
to delivering this stewardship. Development of
incentive measures can make a valuable
contribution to the long-term success of a
restoration project
Indigenous traditional knowledge Wetland restoration planning should
incorporate, where practicable, knowledge of
the traditional resource management that
contributed to shaping the landscape.
Incorporation of traditional environmental
knowledge, management, and sustainable
harvesting practices by local people should be
an integral component of restoration
Adaptive management The principles of adaptable management
should be applied to restoration projects. As a
project develops, modifications may be
necessary to accommodate unforeseen
developments and take advantage of newly
acquired knowledge or resources. Any
modifications should be designed in the light
of evaluation of the project against its
established goals, objectives, and performance
standards
Disseminate success stories Successful restoration projects can provide
inspiration and stimulus for continuing
stakeholder involvement and for the
development of further projects and programs.
Information on proposals for, and the results
and successes of, a restoration project should
be widely disseminated both in scientific and
technical fora and as popular information
accessible to stakeholders
(continued)

Awareness generation Restoration interventions should be coupled
with measures to raise awareness and influence
the behaviors and practices that led to the
degradation of the ecosystem, in order to
ensure that the causes, as well as the effects, of
degradation are addressed. These actions
provide a further mechanism for landowners,
resource users, and surrounding communities
to be drawn into restoration projects
References
Abbot J, Guijt I (1998) Changing views on change: participatory approaches to monitoring and
evaluation, SARL discussion paper no. 2. International Institute for Environment and Develop-
ment, London
Ajonina GN (2008) Inventory and modelling mangrove forest stands dynamics following different
levels of wood exploitation pressure in the Douala-Edea Atlantic Coast of Cameroon. PhD
thesis, Faculty of Forestry and Environmental Sciences, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, 215p
Ajonina GN, Tata TF (2006) Wetland assessment, planning, management and monitoring in Africa.
Draft Report, African Development Bank (PSDU). (In press) 67p
Alongi D M (2002) Present state and future of the world’s mangrove forests. Environmental
Conservation 29: 331–349
AMN (2009) Newsletter of African Mangrove Network. www.mangrove-africa.net
Bos D, Grigoras I, Ndiaye A (2006) Land cover and avian biodiversity in rice fields and mangroves
of West Africa. A&W-report 824. Altenburg & Wymenga, ecological research, Veenwouden.
Wetlands International, Dakar
CBD (2006) The Gambia: Third national report. Banjul, The Gambia. 145pp (https://www.cbd.int/
doc/world/gm/gm-nr-03-en.pdf retrieved September 2014)
Choudhury JK (1996) Mangrove Forest management: mangrove rehabilitation and management
project in Sulawesi, pp 297
Clarke A, Johns L (2002) Mangrove nurseries: construction, propagation and planting: fisheries
guidelines, Department of Primary Industries, Queensland, Fish Habitat Guideline FHG
004, p 32
Davis-Case D (1990) The community toolbox: the idea, the method and tools for community
forestry field manual 2. FAO/UN, Rome
Ellison JC (2007) Manual for mangrove monitoring in the pacific islands region: monitoring
changes in mangrove condition. Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Program,
Apia, p 37
Ellison JC (2012) Climate change vulnerability assessment and adaptation planning for mangrove
systems. World Wildlife Fund (WWF), Washington, DC
Ellison JC et al (2012) Manual for mangrove monitoring: in the Pacific Islands region. Secretariat of
the pacific regional environmental Programme (SPREP), Apia, p 53
Evans J (1982) Plantation forestry in the tropics. ELBS Clarendon Press, Oxford. 472pp
FAO (1994) Mangrove forest Management guidelines. Forest Service Department of Agriculture
and the FAO forestry department, paper 117, Rome
Feller C-I, Sitnik M (1996) Mangrove ecology: a manual for a field course. Washington,
Smithsonian institution, 135 p
Frazier S (1996) An overview of World’s Ramsar Sites. Wetlands International Publication 39. 58pp
Gilman E, Ellison J (2007) Efficacy of Alternative Low-cost Approaches to Mangrove Restoration,

American Samoa. Estuaries and Coasts 30 (4): 641–651
Howard GW, Matindi SW (2003) Les espèces étrangères envahissantes dans les zones, humides de
l’Afrique. Quelques IUCN Programme Régional de l’Afrique de l’Est. Nairobi, 15pp
Hussain MZ (1990) Restoration and expansion of the mangrove belt in Guyana. Technical paper
no. 1. TCP/GUY/8953, FAO, Rome
Karieva P (2002) Colombia’s Model Wetland Restoration at Risk. TRENDS in Ecology and
Evolution 17 (11): 500–501
Kathiresan K, Bingham B L (2001) Biology of Mangroves and Mangrove Ecosystems. Advances in
Marine Biology 40:81–251.
Keddy P (2010) Wetland ecology: principles and conservation, 2nd edn. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, pp 365–387
Letouzey R (1968) Etude phytogeographique du Cameroun. Edition Paul Chevalier, Paris, 511pp
Lewis R R, Streever B (2000) “Restoration of mangrove habitat” WRP Technical Notes Collection.
U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS. 7 p
Lewis R R (2000) ‘Don’t forget wetland habitat protection and restoration for Florida’s fisheries’.
National Wetlands Newsletter 22(6): 9–20
Lewis RR, Brown B (2014) Ecological mangrove rehabilitation (EMR): a field manual for practi-
tioners. Restoring Coastal Livelihoods Program, p. 151
Lewis RR, Quarto A, Enright J, Corets E, Primavera J, Ravishankar T, Oswin DS, Djamaluddin R
(2006). Five steps to successful ecological restoration of mangroves. Mangrove Action Project/
Yayasan Akar Rumput Laut, Yogyakarta, p 64
Maniatis D (2005) Retrospective study of the mangroves of the Tanbi Wetland Complex, The
Gambia. M. Sc. Thesis, Faculty of Environmental Sciences and Technology, Vrije Universiteit
Brussel, Brussel-Belgium. 129 p
MAP (2007) Ecological mangrove restoration- workshop series proceedings report, 5–9 &
12–15 Feb
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: biodiversity syn-
thesis. World Resources Institute, Washington DC
Moudingo EJ-H (2010) Assessment of community participation in mangrove ecosystem restoration
in four selected villages in the Douala-Edea reserve, Cameroon. Master II. Department of Plant
Biology, Faculty of Science, University of Yaounde I, 101 pp
Nellemann C, Corcoran E (2010) Dead planet, living planet – biodiversity and ecosystem restora-
tion for sustain-able development. A Rapid Response Assessment. United Nations Environment
Programme UNEP, GRID-Arendal
Ochsner P (2001) Direct seeding in the tropics. IUFRO joint symposium on tree seed technology,
physiology and tropical silviculture College of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of
the Philippines, Los Baños, Apr–May 2001
Primavera JH, Savaris JD, Bajoyo B, Coching JD, Curnick DJ, Golbeque R, Guzman AT,
Henderin JQ, Joven RV, Loma RA, Koldewey HJ (2012) Manual on community-based man-
grove rehabilitation – mangrove manual series no. 1. ZSL, London. viii + 240 p
Ramsar (2007) Ramsar handbooks for the wise use of wetlands. 3rdedition, US Department of State
and the US Fish & Wildlife Service, Gland, Switzerland
Ravishankar T, Ramasubramanian R (2004) Manual on mangrove nursery techniques. M.S.
Swaminathan Research Foundation; Chennai, India. pp. 48
Selvam V, Ravichandran K K, Gnanappazhan L, Navamuniyammal M (2003) Assessment of
Community-based Restoration of Pichavaram Mangrove Wetland using remote sensing data.
Current Science 85(6): 794–798.
Selvam V R, T. Karunagaran R, Ramasubramanian P, Eganathan, A.K. Parida (2005) Toolkit for
Establishing Coastal Bioshield. M.S. Swaminathan Research Foundation, Chennai. 120 p
SNV (1997) Working paper “using the logical framework in process planning”. SNV, Den Haag
Sriskanthan G, Emerton L, Bambaradeniya C, Kallesoe M, Ranasinghe T (2008) Seocioeconomic
and ecological monitoring toolkit: Huraa mangrove nature reserve. Ecosystems and Livelihoods
Group Asia, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN),
Colombo
Spalding M, Kainuma M, and Collins L (2010) World atlas of mangroves. A collaborative project of
ITTO, ISME, FAO, UNEP-WCMC, UNESCO-MAB, UNU-INWEH and TNC, Earthscan,
London, 319 pp
Tomlinson P B (1986) The botany of mangroves. Cambridge University Press. 419 pp
Tuxill J, Nabhan GP (1998) Plants and protected areas: a guide to in situ management. WWF
international/UNESCO/Royal Botanic Gardens. Stanley Thornes Publishers Ltd, Cheltenham,
pp 134–135
USEPA (2000) Principles for the ecological restoration of aquatic resources. EPA841-F-00-003.
Office of Water (4501F). United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,
DC. 4 pp
UNEP (2007) Mangroves of Western and Central Africa. UNEP – Regional Seas Programme/
UNEP–WCMC.88pp. Available http://www.unep-U wcmc.org/resources/publications/UNEP_
WCMC_bio_series/26.htm (Retrieved 16 December 2007)
UNEP (2014) The Importance of Mangroves to People: A Call to Action. van Bochove J, Sullivan
E, Nakamura T (Eds). United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitor-
ing Centre, Cambridge. 128 pp
Vivien J, Faure J J, (1985) Arbres des Forêts Denses d’Afrique Centrale. Agence de Cooperation
Culturelle et Technique (ACCT), Paris. pp. 370–371
Useful Websites Consulted

http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/restore/
http://www.mangroverestoration.co
http://www.omcar.org/user/Conservation.aspx?ID=1. Retrieved Sept 2014. Ecological mangrove
restoration techniques- field experience from southeast coast of India
http://www.rcl.or.id

Chapter BOOK - Gambia Ref 10.1007 - 978-3-319-58538-3 - 68-1

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Chapter BOOK - Gambia Ref 10.1007 - 978-3-319-58538-3 - 68-1

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Enhancing Resilience of Vulnerable Coastal

Areas and Communities: Mangrove

Jean-Hude E. Moudingo, Gordon Ajonina, Diyouke M. Eugene,

J.-H. E. Moudingo (*)

# Springer International Publishing AG 2018 1

mangrove rehabilitation effort. By understanding both pitfalls and recommended

Overview of Wetland Restoration

A Brief History of Restoration

Ecosystem restoration is the process of recreating an ecological community. It is an

Basic Concepts and Principles of Restoration

Definition of Concepts and Terms

Fig. 1 Restoration state and

ecosystems as models or analogue ecosystem (Moudingo 2010). First restoration has

Why Restore a Wetland Ecosystem?

Ramsar Convention Principles and Guidelines for Wetland Restoration

Principles for Wetland Restoration

Existing Methods for Wetland Restoration

Mangroves throughout Africa especially Rhizophora-dominated mangroves have

Engineering: This embraces construction activities putting in place physical

Situation of Wetland Restoration/Rehabilitation in Africa

The Mangrove Restoration Issues

What Are Mangroves?

Fig. 2 Importance of mangroves

Basic Factors in Mangrove Regeneration

Reproductive Approaches and Mangrove Restoration

Limits on Mangrove Dispersal and Distribution

Overview and Status of Mangrove Restoration in the Gambia

Overview Cost of Restoration

Techniques of Mangrove Planting

Preliminaries Mangrove Planting

the forest. Artiﬁcial regeneration: artiﬁcial regeneration of mangroves involves hand

1. As mentioned in EMR techniques, we need to ﬁnd the reason for existing

Whatever the approach used in regenerating mangrove-degraded areas, there is

Sensitization, capacity building and organization of model village or

Seed/ propagules Preparation of nursery bags Nursery construction

Seed selection Removing debris

Storing seeds Potting mud in nursery bags Making pseudo -

7. Monitor, evaluate, and reporting of progress of nursery/replanting activities.

Pro and Cons of the Direct Planting

Table 2 Advantages and disadvantages of direct seeding

Seeding or Planting Mangrove Method

Species, Seeds/Propagule Collection

Need for Mangrove Nurseries

Seed Preparation and Outplanting

Steps in Planting Mangrove: What You Need to Know About Rhizophora

Our mangrove needs you!

Best field practices include

2. Site selection for Rhizophora planting

The area must be submerged

Oh no! This soil is sandy.

Anyway if hydrologic channel are restored

3. Tides and demarcate the area for replanting activities

This should be done at the end

Highest Tide Do the moon

4. Propagules harvest, collection, and storage

The team made off the youth should collect

Care must be taken to choose the best

It's time for replanting!

Once the bags are emptied, the team

6. Demarcated line set for outplanting of propagules

The area is to mark

Pull the cord and

KOMFORA trial of Rhizophora mangle outplanting at Bintang Bolon