State of the Environment Report: Fisheries of Lake Malombe, Malawi FISHERIES INTEGRATION of SOCIETY and HABITATS (FISH) PROJECT

State of the Environment Report: Fisheries of Lake Malombe, Malawi FISHERIES INTEGRATION OF SOCIETY AND HABITATS (FISH) PROJECT

AWARD NUMBER: AID-612-A-14-00004

PACT IS A PROMISE of a better tomorrow for all those who are poor and marginalized. Working in partnership to develop local solutions that enable people to own their own future, Pact helps people and communities build their own capacity to generate income, improve access to quality health services, and gain lasting benefit from the sustainable use of the natural resources around them. At work in more than 30 countries, Pact is building local promise with an integrated, adaptive approach that is shaping the future of international development.

Visit us at www.pactworld.org.

Authority/ Disclaimer: Prepared under Cooperative Agreement NO. AID-612-A-14-00004 awarded to Pact and entitled; the Malawi Fisheries Integration of Society and Habitats Project.

This document is made possible by the support of the American People through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The contents of this document are the sole responsibility of the FISH Project team as such are not intended as statements of policy of either USAID or the cooperating organizations and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government.

For more information on the report and FISH Project contact: Dr. Daniel Jamu FISH, Deputy Chief of Party (Programs): [email protected] Dr. Elin Torell, Associate Coastal Manager: [email protected] Alan Brooks FISH, Chief of Party: [email protected]

Pact Pact Malawi COVER PHOTO: 1828 L Street NW, Suite 300 1st Floor, Amina House Washington, DC 20036, USA Fish on drying rack at one P.O. Box 1013 +1-202-466-5666 of the Fish processing sites Lilongwe, Malawi E-mail: [email protected] in Mangochi Phone: 01751220; 01751201 Credit: Maggie Dougherty

CONTENT 1 ACRONYMS ...... ii 2 Background ...... 1 3 INTRODUCTION ...... 2 3.1 Methodology ...... 2 4 Main findings ...... 4 4.1 Fish Diversity and Distribution ...... 4 4.2 Habitat Types ...... 4 4.3 Fish Breeding Habitats ...... 4 4.4 Nursery Grounds ...... 5 4.5 Juvenile and Adult Feeding Habitat ...... 5 4.6 Trends in Small Scale Fisheries ...... 10 4.7 Summary of Frame Survey Results ...... 12 4.8 Threats, Stressors, Drivers, Contributing Factors and Impacts ...... 15 4.9 Climate Change Vulnerability ...... 16 4.10 Community Performance Index...... 17 4.11 Applied Political Economic Analysis ...... 18 4.12 Good Governance Barometer of Fisheries Co-management ...... 19 5 Opportunities for Action2 ...... 21 5.1 Opportunities to reduce illegal fishing and improve fisheries management ...... 21 5.2 Opportunities to improve aquatic habitat management and land management within the catchment ...... 21 5.3 Actions to improve resiliency to climate change ...... 22 6 REFERENCES ...... 23

1 ACRONYMS

ADC Area Development Committee APEA Applied Political Economic Analysis BVC Beach Village Committee CPI Community Performance Index CSA Climate Smart Agriculture DoF Department of Fisheries DFO District Fisheries Officer EAP Environmental Action Plans EAV Emerged Aquatic Vegetation ETOA Environmental Threats and Opportunities Assessment FA Fisheries Associations FGD focus group discussions FISH Fisheries Integration of Society and Habitats FSTAP Fisheries Science and Technical Advisory Panel GGB Good Governance Barometer GIS Geographic Information System GoM Government of Malawi IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change LEK local ecological knowledge LFMA Local Fisheries Management Authority LFMP Local Fisheries Management Plan MT Metric tonnes PFM Participatory Fisheries Management PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal PVCA Participatory Vulnerability Capacity Assessment RVC River Village Committees SAV Submerged Aquatic Vegetation SEA southeast arm SOER State of the Environment Report TA Traditional Authority USAID United States Agency for International Development VDC Village Development Committees VLSA Village Savings and Loans Associations

2 BACKGROUND

The State of the Environment Report (SOER) of Lake Malombe is meant to be a guide to the fishery chapter in the national and district level SOER, illustrating the trends in the status of the fishery, the anthropogenic pressures on the various stocks, and the outcome of various actions in response to drivers. The aim is to make recommendations for both the national and district Environmental Action Plans (EAPs) and contribute towards the ecosystem based management plan for Lake Malombe as part of step 5 of Participatory Fisheries Management (PFM).

3 INTRODUCTION

The Environmental Threats and Opportunities Assessment (ETOA) was prepared by the USAID funded Fisheries Integration of Society and Habitats (FISH) project in 2015 (CRC 2015) and provides a detailed assessment of aquatic biodiversity assets and threats in the southeast arm (SEA) of Lake Malawi, Lake Malombe, Lake Chilwa, and Lake Chiuta, including the shorelines to 10 km inland. The ETOA identified the drivers and threats to biodiversity change in each lake ecosystem, impacts to the ecosystem, and societal responses to threats. The ETOA is akin to a SOER in that it takes pressure, state, and response indicators into consideration. It represents more than an overview consideration of issues, and is based on an in-depth fact gathering process that included visits and profiling of 18 specific lake communities (Figure 1). The four PRA community profiles conducted around Lake Malombe included Chisumbi, Likulungwa, Mwalija, and Nalikolo villages. The data collection was supervised by the University of Rhode Island, Coastal Resources Center and conducted by a trained local assessment team composed of FISH project staff and district fisheries officers from the Department of Fisheries. 3.1 Methodology The status, trends, drivers and threats to each of the lake systems were evaluated separately using a uniform methodology applied to all lakes that included:

• A comprehensive review of both formally published and grey literature, and compilation of a bibliography of published materials for each lake • Collection of all available layers of spatially coded data to prepare GIS maps • Collection and follow-up validation of local ecological knowledge (LEK) in 18 communities from all lakes, and 4 from around Lake Malombe, through focus group discussions (FGD) with Beach Village Committee (BVC) members on a) spatial features of each lake in terms of key habitat and fisheries, b) threats, c) drivers, d) impacts, and e) responses • A two-day workshop of 30 participants pooled together experts on each of the lake systems and provided key informant validation and inputs to the findings from the field work Figure 1: Locations of the 18 communities visited during the two-stage PRA activities implemented as part of the development of this ETOA.

The habitat, fishery, and land feature maps and GIS layers produced in the ETOA exercise provide an important baseline on environmental condition, trends, and threats. The community profiles and spatial data represent a valuable resource for planning and setting priorities for ecosystem management. This document summarizes the main findings and action opportunities for Lake Malombe to help inform the fisheries chapter of the next State of the Environment Report (SOER) both national and Mangochi District, and provides recommendations for the environmental action plans. Photo 1: PRA participants assist in the spatial profiling of their communities.

4 MAIN FINDINGS 4.1 Fish Diversity and Distribution A total of 47 fish species has been documented within Lake Malombe belonging to the Anguillidae, Bagridae, Characidae, Cichlidae, Claridae, Cyprinidae, Mastacembelidae, Mochokidae, and Mormyridae families (WWF 2005). All three species of Chambo (Oreochromis karongae, O. lidole and O. squamipinnis) are found within the lake’s clear water located near the Shire River inlet (G. Kanyerere, personal communication, July 2015). Numerous species including Mlamba, Mpasa, Mphuta, Nkholokolo, Ntchira, Sanjika, and Silibanga are present in the inflowing and outflowing rivers. Usipa is concentrated within the Upper Shire River and northern section of Lake Malombe while Sapuwa and Matemba are found predominantly within the middle and southern sections of the lake, respectively. Utaka is particularly abundant within the eastern portion of the lake while Ncheni have been documented within the submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) as well as the Upper Shire River (Turner et al. 2001). Other species such as Kambuzi and Kampango are distributed throughout the entire lake. 4.2 Habitat Types The bottom substrate of Lake Malombe is muddy, and with the exception of the area closest to the Shire River inlet, the water is quite turbid (G. Kanyerere, personal communication, July 2015). The deepest section of the lake coincides with the geological formation of the historic Shire riverbed, while the shallowest areas are located along the western and southeastern shoreline (Figure 1). The lake was historically covered in dense beds of SAV, i.e. oxygen weeds (Tarbit 1972), but the current coverage consists of only a small number of patches coinciding with the shallower areas of the lake. Similarly, the EAV has been reduced over time to only small, thin bands of continuous vegetation along the northeastern, eastern, and southwestern shoreline (Figure 2). 4.3 Fish Breeding Habitats The emergent and SAV within Lake Malombe as well as the inflowing rivers all serve as very important breeding habitats for a wide array of species including Chambo, Kambuzi, Mbaba, Mlamba, Nkhalara and Silibanga. High levels of Chambo breeding activity, especially Oreochromis karongae, were historically observed from July to December in Lake Malombe (FAO 1993). However, the removal and degradation of the aquatic vegetation over time due to cutting EAV and damaging SAV from fishing equipment has adversely affected the Chambo stocks by reducing the total area of available breeding habitat (FAO 1993). Many Lethrinops spp. (Kambuzi) have been observed breeding over sandy shores (FAO 1993), and a study conducted by Jambo and Hecht (2001) found high abundances of breeding female Kambuzi in areas with muddy substratum and aquatic macrophytes. Species such as Makumba, Matemba, Nkholokolo, Phuta, and Sanjika were reported during the PRA as breeding in the emergent vegetation and inflowing rivers while the Mpasa and Samwamowa (Mormyrus longirostis) were reported to breed in SAV and inflowing rivers (Table 1).

Figure 2: Distribution of habitats within Lake Malombe based upon local ecological knowledge gathered from community PRA assessments and local expert workshop. 4.4 Nursery Grounds The female Chambo release and protect their fry in nearshore shallow water macrophyte habitats. Observations made during a 1993 FAO study found Chambo fry up to 7 cm (kasawala) in length gathered in large shoals at depths less than one meter, and fry 7-15 cm in length most abundant in water depths of a few meters concentrated around SAV. EAV was widely reported during the PRA activities and confirmed by the local experts to serve as essential refugia to an assortment of species including Chambo, Kambuzi, Kampango, Matemba, Mbaba, Mlamba, Mpasa, Nkhalara, Sanjika, Silibanga, and Usipa. River inlets/outlets and shallower sections of the lake also provide important nursery habitat to a number different species (Table 1 and Figure 3). 4.5 Juvenile and Adult Feeding Habitat Similar to the patterns described above, many of the fish inhabiting Lake Malombe continue to use the EAV, SAV, river inlets/outlets and shallow areas during their juvenile and adult stages (Table 1). Certain species

5 such as Chambo, Kambuzi, Kampango, Mbaba, Mlamba, Samwamowa and Usipa are reported to utilize a range of habitat types during their juvenile and adult stages while others such as Bluefish, Dondolo, Mpasa, Mphuta, Ncheni, Ningwi are restricted to only one or two specific types of habitat (Table 1). The map in Figure 3 highlights species rich zones within Lake Malombe. The different colors on the map represent the cumulative score of fish species harvested by the local communities with at least one critical life stage occupying the given habitat area. Life stages are all given a value of one and are not weighted (i.e., the multiple life stages of a single species coexisting within a habitat area are not double counted). The highest species richness areas are found in the vicinity of the river inlets followed by the shallow areas with submerged and EAV (Figure 3).

Figure 3: High biodiversity areas map based on community perceptions and validated by local experts. The different colored areas represent the different habitat types where the important fish species are found within Lake Malombe.

Table 1: Summary of key habitats for critical life stages of the main fish species groups within Lake Malombe based on LEK.

Breeding Nursery Juvenile Adult Feeding Species Habitat Grounds Habitat Ground Bluefish Middle of the Middle of the lake, Shallow areas, Middle of the lake Copadichromis lake SAV deep areas chrysonotus

Chambo/kasawala EAV, SAV, river EAV, SAV, river EAV, SAV, river inlets/outlets, inlets/outlets, Oreochromis lidole, EAV, SAV, inlets/outlets, shallow areas, shallow areas, shallow areas O. squamipinnis, shallow areas middle of the lake, middle of the lake, deep areas deep areas O. karongae

Chimbenje River SAV, river Shallow areas, Shallow areas inlets/outlets, Fossorochromis SAV inlets/outlets rostratus shallow areas Dondolo EAV, SAV, Shallow areas Shallow areas Shallow areas Docimodus spp. shallow areas

Kadyakoro River River River inlets, Rivers/inlets, inlets/outlets, inlets/outlets, rivers shallow areas shallow areas shallow areas

EAV, SAV, river EAV, SAV, river Kambuzi EAV, SAV, EAV, SAV, inlets/outlets, inlets/outlets, shallow areas, shallow areas, shallow areas, shallow areas, middle of the Lethrinops spp. middle of the lake middle of the lake, middle of the lake, lake, deep areas Otopharynx spp. deep areas deep areas

EAV, shallow Kampango EAV, middle of EAV, SAV, middle Shallow areas, areas, middle of the lake, deep of the lake, deep middle of the lake the lake, deep Bagrus areas areas meridionalis areas EAV, SAV, river Makumba EAV, river inlets/outlets, inlets/outlets, Shallow areas EAV, shallow Oreochromis shallow areas, shallow areas areas, rocky areas shiranus middle of the lake

Matemba EAV, river SAV, river SAV, river EAV, SAV, river inlets/outlets, inlets/outlets, inlets/outlets, inlets/outlets Barbus shallow areas shallow areas shallow areas paludinosus

EAV, SAV, EAV, SAV, river River shallow areas, inlets/outlets, inlets/outlets, Shallow areas, Mbaba middle of the shallow areas, middle of the lake deep areas lake middle of the lake,

deep areas

Lethrinops spp. Protomelas spp.

Breeding Nursery Juvenile Adult Feeding Species Habitat Grounds Habitat Ground Mlamba/bombe

EAV, SAV, river EAV, SAV, river EAV, SAV, river EAV, SAV, river inlets/outlets, inlets/outlets, inlets/outlets, inlets/outlets, shallow areas, shallow areas, shallow areas, Clarias gariepinus shallow areas, middle of the middle of the lake, middle of the lake, and Bathyclarias middle of the lake lake deep areas deep areas spp.

Mphuta River River River inlets/outlets, EAV inlets/outlets inlets/outlets Marcusenius middle of the lake macrolepidotus Ncheni Middle of the Middle of the lake, Middle of the Middle of the lake Rhamphocromis lake lake, deep areas deep areas spp.

Ningwi SAV, Middle of SAV, river inlets SAV SAV the lake Labeo cylindricus

EAV, SAV, river EAV, river Nkhalara EAV, SAV, river EAV, SAV, shallow inlets/outlets, inlets/outlets, inlets/outlets areas Brycinus imberi shallow areas shallow areas EAV, river Nkholokolo SAV, river EAV, SAV, river inlets/outlets, SAV, shallow inlets/outlets inlets/outlets Synodontis njassae shallow areas areas; deep areas

River SAV, river Nchila SAV, river inlets/outlets, Shallow areas, inlets/outlets, inlets/outlets Labeo mesops deep areas SAV shallow areas River Phuta EAV, river Shallow areas SAV inlets/outlets, inlets/outlets shallow areas

River EAV, river EAV, SAV, River Sanjika inlets/outlets, inlets/outlets shallow areas inlets/outlets, shallow areas, shallow areas

Opsaridium middle of the lake, microcephalum deep areas Sapuwa

Middle of the Middle of the Middle of the lake Middle of the lake Bathyclarias lake lake nyasensis

Silibanga EAV, SAV, river EAV, shallow EAV, SAV, river inlets/outlets, EAV areas inlets/outlets shallow areas

River inlets/outlets, Solomon fish SAV, river SAV shallow areas, SAV, deep areas (samwamowa) inlets/outlets middle of the lake, deep areas

Breeding Nursery Juvenile Adult Feeding Species Habitat Grounds Habitat Ground

Usiliwa EAV, SAV, river Middle of the inlets/outlets, EAV lake, shallow Shallow areas shallow areas, areas, deep areas middle of the lake,

deep areas

Usipa EAV, shallow SAV, shallow EAV, SAV, middle areas, middle of SAV, shallow areas, middle of of the lake, deep the lake, deep areas the lake, deep Engraulicypris areas sardella areas areas

4.6 Trends in Small Scale Fisheries Artisanal fishing commenced in Lake Malombe in the 1960s after the large crocodile population was eradicated (Tweddle et al. 1994). In the 1980s, the Lake Malombe fishery comprised approximately 15% of the country’s total fish landings with Oreochromis squamipinnis and O. karongae constituting the majority of the catch (FAO 1993). However, the total catch levels fell from ~13,000 MT/yr in the early-1980s to ~2000 MT/yr by 2007. Within the past five years, the total catch levels have fluctuated between 3,530 MT/yr to 4,575 MT/yr (Figure 4). This declining trend was due in large part to the significant reductions in the Chambo population (i.e., a 98% reduction from a peak catch of 8,000 MT/yr in 1982 to less than 200 MT/yr in 2003 (Jamu et al. 2011). Over 90% of the reduction occurred between 1981 and 1991, a time period corresponding to a 320% increase in the number of kambuzi and nkacha seines (FAO 1993). Both of these nets have small mesh, and the collapse of the Chambo has been attributed to the high exploitation rates of juveniles and spawners as well as the removal of important inshore and offshore SAV and EAV weed beds by the beach seines lowering the total area of available critical life stage habitats (FAO 1993, Mangochi District Profile 2014). Other factors that may have contributed to the decline include declining water levels due to reduced rainfall and increasing silt load (van Zwieten et al. 2003 as cited in Jamu et al. 2011, and Banda et al. 2002; Zwieten et al. 2003, as cited in van Zwieten et al. 2011).

As the Chambo population declined, the Kambuzi (small haplochromine cichlids) population swelled from 4% of the total catch in 1976 to almost 90% of the total catch by 1991 = ~5,750 MT (FAO 1993, DoF Frame Survey data). The trend of Kambuzi dominating the catch has continued, especially in the eastern part of Lake Malombe, and is the key indicator species for production trends in Lake Malombe. The Utaka, which peaked at ~2200 MT in 1987, has declined considerably while the Mbaba has fluctuated between 200 MT/yr to 1,200 MT/yr since the mid-1990s (DoF Frame Survey Data, Figure 3). Other species harvested from Lake Malombe include Kampango, Mlamba, Nchila, and Usipa. The annual catch levels of Usipa have exhibited cyclical fluctuations since 1990 when the catch levels were ~207 MT while the total amounts of Kampango, Mlamba and Nchila harvested have all declined over the past 25 years (DoF Frame Survey Data, Figure 5).

14000

12000

10000

Total Catch 8000 Chambo

6000 Kambuzi Mbaba

4000 Utaka Metric Metric tonnes 2000

Figure 4: Overall total catch and total catch of Chambo, Kambuzi, Mbaba and Utaka in Lake Malombe (1976- 2014) Source of data: Fisheries Research Unit.

450

400

350

300

250 Kampango Mlamba 200

Nchila MetricTonnes 150 Usipa

100

1982 2002 1978 1980 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 1976 Figure 5: Total catch of Kampango, Mlamba, Nchila and Usipa in Lake Malombe (1976-2014) Source of data: Fisheries Research Unit.

4.7 Summary of Frame Survey Results Within Lake Malombe and the Upper Shire River, the number of fishers remained relatively constant between 1976 and 2005, but the numbers of boats and quantities of Chambo and kambuzi seines have declined since the mid-1990s in response to the dwindling Chambo stocks (Figure 5). The number of nkacha seines peaked in the early 1990s and then declined, but this trend reversed in the early 2000s as their usage increased again. Other less expensive gear types such as gillnets, longlines, and mosquito nets became more profuse from the mid-1990s to 2005 (Figure 6).

Figure 6: Trends in the number of fishers and types of boats/fishing gear (1976-2005) Source: van Zwieten et al., 2011, p. 36.

More recent frame survey data collected between 2005 and 2014 show an overall decreasing trend in the number of gear owners and crewmembers despite the increases observed between 2005 and 2008 (Table 2). In contrast, however, there were significant increases in gear owners and crew members from 2014 to 2015.

Table: Estimated numbers of gear owners, crew members and fishing craft in Lake Malombe in 2005, 2008, 2014 and 2015 Indicator 2005 2008 2014 2015 % Change (2014 to 2015) Gear Owners 438 497 319 486 + 52% Crew Members 3,583 3,618 1,906 3,904 +105% Plank boats with engines 0 0 0 no data NA Plank boats without engines 369 446 367 no data NA Dugout canoes 125 82 no data no data NA Source of the original data: 2005, 2008 and 2014 Department of Fisheries Annual Frame Survey Reports

The number of Chambo seines declined between 2005 and 2014, but rose again in 2015, while the number of nkacha seines has risen over time. In contrast to the pattern observed between 1975 and 2005, the number of gill nets declined through 2014. A very sharp rise in gill nets was observed in 2015. The use of recorded mosquito nets has fallen considerably and longlines decreased by 88% from 2008 to 2015. The use of inexpensive small meshed illegal gillnets, which are locally referred to as ‘ngongongo,’ have risen markedly since 2005 (Table 3). The increase in ngongongo reflects the decreasing size and quantity of fish caught in the Lake.

Table 2: Estimated numbers and percentage changes of fishing gear in Lake Malombe in 2005, 2008, 2014 and 2015. Indicator 2005 2008 2014 2015 % Change (2014 to 2015) Chambo seines/wogo 42 14 4 18 +350% Chilimira nets 0 10 no data 0 no base data Fish traps 424 643 no data 0 no base data Gill nets 768 616.5 137 2,742 +1,901% Handlines 76 2 no data 8 no base data Kambuzi seines 0 5 no data 0 no base data Kandwindwi nets 1 26 12 58 +383% Longlines 72 168.6 41 20 -51% Mosquito nets 103 74 37 8 -78% Nkacha seine nets 145 139 186 280 +51% Ngongongo 43 145 522 no data no 2015 data Source of the original data: 2005, 2008 and 2014 Department of Fisheries Annual Frame Survey Reports

4.8 Threats, Stressors, Drivers, Contributing Factors and Impacts The threats, stressors, drivers, contributing factors to and impacts on aquatic biodiversity identified in literature review, PRA, and expert workshop are summarized below:

Table 3: Summary of threats, stressors, drivers, contributing factors, and impacts for Lake Malombe1 Threats and Drivers and Contributing Factors Impacts Stressors Decline in fish abundance (e.g., Chambo) due to loss of habitat Large areas of reed beds and SAV were removed for diverse species: breeding in the 1970s to enable beach seining. The spatial Loss and habitat, nursery grounds, extent of EAV has also declined considerably due fragmentation of juvenile habitat, and adult to removal by the local communities to create SAV and EAV feeding grounds; loss of buffer beach landing sites and additional fishing to capture sedimentation, which grounds and for farming. in turn increases the lake’s turbidity levels. Open access and lack of effective governance limits on fishing capacity and catch drive Overfishing exploitation beyond biological and economic • Reduced abundance and size (growth in sustainability. Post-harvest losses of Kambuzi, of fish number of Usipa and other species are due to inadequate • Post-harvest losses reduce fishers, boats, fish handling and processing practices, poverty, value added to the fishery engines, and and a general culture of acceptance of and total available protein for gear) spoiled/poor fish quality consumption. Other consumption contributing factors are population growth and lack of alternative livelihood opportunities. Poor governance capacity (and low compliance and enforcement of rules including non- compliance with closed areas/seasons and use of Catch of juveniles reduces Illegal and illegal and under meshed gear). Also, corruption recruitment, destruction of destructive that is often characterized by disparities in habitat, and reduced abundance fishing traditional fishery management across fishing and size of fish villages and ineffective coordination of traditional and formal fisheries management systems. Silt on river inlets and lake bed Catchment land use change/deforestation lowers lake level (M. Tsirizeni, causing erosion and sediment run-off and personal communication, July climate change (causing intense periods of rain Sedimentation 2015), affects lake habitat, and flooding). Non-compliance with regulations species abundance and on buffer zone around the lake (i.e., buildings diversity, and increases nutrient constructed within the 10-meter buffer zone). levels. Lower lake level affects lake Annual rainfall Natural and anthropogenic caused climate habitat and species abundance variability change and variability and diversity

1 More detailed information on the primary threats, stressors, and drivers to freshwater biodiversity is available on pp. 76-81 of the Environmental Threats and Opportunities document (CRC, 2015) 15

4.9 Climate Change Vulnerability

The FISH Project conducted a Participatory Vulnerability Capacity Assessment (PVCA)that 100 included focus group discussions and key informant 80 interviews at the village of Nalikolo located along the northeastern shore of Lake Malombe. The 60 participants reported an increase in prolonged dry respondents % 40 spells/drought, floods, and seasonal strong storms/winds (Figure 7). Some of the most drought 20 prone areas are located around the rain shadow of 0 Lake Malombe. 2000 2005 2010 2015 Drought Floods Strong winds

Figure 7: Trends of perceived climatic hazards by community members in Nalikolo village

The national assessment of community vulnerability to climate change, which was conducted in 2015 by the GoM and the Regional SERVIR Program, singled out Mangochi District as one of the districts showing the highest sensitivity to climate. The Chowe area along Lake Malombe was noted as particularly drought prone. Similarly, Balaka exhibits high vulnerability implying that the Middle Shire is also extremely sensitive to climate change (Figure 8). The FISH project, working with researchers from Chancellor College, piloted a rapid climate change vulnerability mapping exercise in 2015. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) conceptual framework, which separates vulnerability into exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity to climate stressors components, was adopted for the analysis. Existing national data sets were combined with data collected during the ETOA PRA visits. The results of this exercise provided a more detailed vulnerability analysis for the areas within the FISH project’s boundaries. The central eastern section of Lake Malombe was classified as a high vulnerability area (Figure 9).

Figure 8: Overall vulnerability based on GoM and SERVIR national assessment of community vulnerability to climate change report Source: DoDMA 2015.

Figure 9: Composite score for exposure, sensitivity, adaptive capacity, and vulnerability for the areas adjacent to Lake Malombe Source: CRC 2015. 4.10 Community Performance Index Pact carried out a Community Performance Index (CPI) to assess and rate the performance of community structures in Lake Malombe e.g., BVCs, River Village Committees (RVCs), Fisheries Associations (FAs), and Village Development Committees (VDCs) using the four CPI domains thus quality of service, relevance, resource mobilization (sustainability) and efficiency. Findings from the survey showed that a larger proportion of BVCs are performing at the lowest level measured by the CPI and are equally receiving limited to no support from the VDCs leading to poor performance of the BVCs in fisheries management. The table below shows issues identified by the target group and recommended priority actions that offer the potential to lead to the required performance of the target group/local structures.

Table 5: Summary of issues identified during the CPI and recommended priority actions Issue Target group Recommended Action(s) Lack of systems and tools (for BVCs and - Six-steps training and support to develop management budgeting, planning, VDCs plans monitoring, and documenting BVC - If no tools exist, work closely with the BVCs and VDCs to activities/successes) develop standardized tools for budgeting, monitoring, and reporting their activities and achievements. - Mentor BVCs and VDCs in use of the tools - Support BVCs to schedule periodic report back sessions with fishing communities on their achievements (i.e. progress against the management plans, successes, and challenges). During these sessions, involve communities in identifying actions needed to support BVCs in addressing any challenges. Lack of training on/ BVCs and - Six steps training knowledge of fisheries co- VDCs management - Regular follow up by FISH and/or DoF staff to check on how the co-management structures are undertaking their work. Lack of operating guidelines BVCs and - Six-steps training VDCs - Support the co-management structures to have on file copies of their terms of reference (TORs) and institutionalize a process of promptly inducting new committee members. Lack of power/authority to BVCs and - Advocacy at higher levels of the government to accord co- enforce fisheries regulations VDCs management structures the due authority to enforce fisheries regulations and support their interventions. - Awareness creation to the fisheries communities/ stakeholders to understand role of the co-management structures in enforcing fisheries regulations. IEC materials can be used to support these awareness efforts. Lack of prioritization of VDCs - Six steps training fisheries resource management in the VDC - Facilitate VDCs to get input from BVCs when developing planning processes the District wide development plan. - Support BVCs to develop management plans annually and link them to VDCs so that they can contribute from this plan to the District development plan.

4.11 Applied Political Economic Analysis Pact carried out an Applied Political Economic Analysis (APEA) of the fisheries co-management in Lake Malombe to better understand the implicit and explicit barriers to the effective management of the fisheries governance by BVCs, FAs, and draw opportunities for future engagement. The APEA revealed that the power dynamics between the DFO, traditional leaders, and BVCs has obstructed the effective implementation of fisheries co-management. Below are some recommended priority actions that may lead to effective co-management of the fisheries resources; • Clustering of BVCs under one FA per lake body to engender a more targeted and effective advocacy and lobby force. 18

• Support each FA to write/develop their own discrete constitution, ecosystem-based management plan, set of universal bylaws and one ecosystem-based management agreement that are applicable to all BVCs nested under the FA. The latter would then be the nested BVCs’ legitimate representation at fishing district and DoF level. • The process of developing and signing Fisheries Management Plans by the Director of Fisheries must be depoliticized and based on agreed jurisdictions, resources, and biological principles. • An FA manual should be used to train BVC and FA members in the basics of co-management, particularly the six steps to institutionally empower the Local Fisheries Management Authority (LFMAs) as stipulated in the Policy and Act. • Encourage greater budget allocation to the capture fisheries subsector that is reflective of the actual economic value of the subsector to the national economy. • Fisheries Management Plans must be developed with the stakeholders’ participation wherever possible (i.e., participatory research) and/or widely explained to develop understanding so as not to be seen to be advocated by a development project and solely driven by DoF at the central level. • The Fisheries Science and Technical Advisory Panel (FSTAP) could include in its agenda scoping to address the power dynamics of the FA and its nested BVCs, reviewing progress made by FISH, and institutionalizing the outcome as a learning process to revise the PFM policy, where needed. This FSTAP could be linked to the Fisheries Fund that is mentioned in the policy, but is as yet non- functional. • Assure free, fair, and open elections for BVC sub-committee members to ensure proper representation of the fishing industry/community, particularly giving credence to the sub- committee to regulate fishers that are seen to be using illegal or unsustainable fishing methods. • Traditional Authorities (TAs) cannot be marginalized in any type of co-management scenario because they have great influence and can be disruptive. Work to bring them into the fold wherever possible and assure that they understand their role in the co-management process. 4.12 Good Governance Barometer of Fisheries Co-management The Good Governance Barometer (GGB) was used to assess the quality of local governance as it relates to fisheries co-management. It identified several constraints in terms of the local fisheries governance system along Lake Malombe, each of which could warrant various actions. The GGB found that the government, traditional, and community institutions primarily responsible for fisheries co-management are largely incapacitated in delivering basic services to fishing communities, as well as lacking institutional stature for enforcing fisheries regulations. Overall, local governance in Lake Malombe was found to be poor. The table below shows recommended priority actions that offer the potential to lead to significant and near term improvements in terms of local governance:

Table 6: Summary of issues identified during the GGB and recommended priority actions. Issue Target Recommended Action(s) group Lack of vision and planning LFMAs (BVCs, Training on six steps for fisheries management FAs, TAs, Technical assistance for the development of LFMPs DFO) Develop a very simple and appropriate tool to help BVCs and FAs complete basic planning

Issue Target Recommended Action(s) group Lack of accountability and BVCs and FAs Develop and train BVCs and FAs on a very simple and transparency by LFMAs appropriate set of practices aimed at increasing their transparency (such as practices related to publicly sharing activity plans and resource usage) Use Fish Technicians to facilitate feedback sessions between BVCs/FAs and communities Hold an annual competition for the “most accountable and transparent BVC” along Lake Malombe based on established criteria Limited collective action and LFMAs (BVCs, Organize collective action workshop at which key civic mindedness among FAs, TAs, stakeholders jointly analyze problems and plan solutions for LFMAs and communities DFO) clearly identified issues. This should build off planning begun during the GGB process, with emphasis on issues that can be addressed by LFMAs with limited to no external support. Lack of resources for LFMAs Support LFMAs (possibly focused on FAs) to advocate for supporting the work of (possible focus resources to more effectively support fisheries management. LFMAs on FAs) This should include building their capacity to advocate for resources as part of the District planning process, as well as through the central Ministry of Fisheries channels.

5 OPPORTUNITIES FOR ACTION2

The ETOA identified a number of opportunities to improve fisheries co-management and aquatic habitat and land management as well as activities to adapt and decrease climate change vulnerability. 5.1 Opportunities to reduce illegal fishing and improve fisheries management

• Strengthening co-management awareness and capacity, including passing ecosystem based bylaws to empower BVCs • Better dialogue and cooperation among the local, district, and national levels of government, and stronger partnership between the DoF and BVCs. Put in place measures to enable more effective dialogue and cooperation between the Chiefs, police, magistrates, DoF personnel, District Councilors, and the local communities (e.g., ADC, VDC and BVC). • Dedicating more resources for DoF and BVC enforcement • Consider brush parks as artificial reefs or “silent policemen” to create sanctuaries in the shallows of Lake Malombe to prevent damaging of SAV, but to also act as artificial sanctuaries for juveniles like Chambo. • Apply self-enforcement in which local community members act as beach scouts and data recorders in coordination with DoF enforcement officials. The Lakeshore Community Project could potentially serve as a guide given that they have demonstrated success in linking community members trained in collecting water quality data with the Water Department. • Declare certain areas within Lake Malombe as sanctuaries and help bolster the enforcement of regulations in the water components of Liwonde National Park to protect important EAV and SAV serving as critical breeding and nursery grounds. Some of the specific areas suggested for new sanctuaries by the community include the following: Mwalija, Mtenje, Mphwanya, Likala, and Changamire. 5.2 Opportunities to improve aquatic habitat management and land management within the catchment

• Ban removal of EAV by local community members for creating additional fishing areas and beach landing sites. The regulations banning EAV removal could potentially be enforced at the VDC level by actively incorporating community members in a partnership with the Department of Forestry. • Provide outreach via trained Fisheries Extension Officers and FISH technicians on the ecosystem values of EAV, including the breeding, nursery, and juvenile refugia functions provided by EAV. • Extension via FISH project partners (i.e., Christian Aid, CISER, Emmanuel International and WESM) on climate smart agriculture that integrates soil and water conservation, watershed management and ecosystem management. • Creation of a collaborative forum to help weave and integrate the various projects around Lake Malombe together. In this forum, methodologies, good practices, and adaptive management measures could be shared. • Reduce encroachment of agriculture activities and the construction of additional buildings within the regulated 10-meter buffer zone along the lakeshore through efforts to remove conflicting policies between different governmental departments and enhancing enforcement efforts. • Work with Liwonde National Park and Mangochi Forest Reserve to see if blocks of land for sustainable community use can be set aside adjacent to these protected areas following the model used in the Zomba forest management reserve.

2 More detailed information on the opportunities for action/management suggestions is available on pp. 81-85 of the Environmental Threats and Opportunities document (CRC, 2015) 21

5.3 Actions to improve resiliency to climate change • Promote and facilitate adoption of fuel-saving and alternative energy technologies • Support the drought prone areas with CSA technology • Promote more drought tolerant crops (e.g., drought resistant maize, cassava, etc.) • Provide communities in drought prone areas with early warning information about the type of cropping season to expect, what to plant as well as disaster preparedness plans (i.e., 2015/2016 is an el Niño year, which needs to be conveyed to farmers to plan accordingly). • Transition over to alternative sources of income that are resilient to flooding. • Give storm warnings to fishers so that they can decide how best to avoid the dangers therein. • Support community banking (VSLA) and help to strengthen the community members’ land resource management skills, and business and entrepreneurship skills. • Implement training and education on climate change effects and adaptation options that include school education programs and awareness raising campaigns.

6 REFERENCES

Government of Malawi, 2014b. 2014 FRAME SURVEY REPORT. FISH (2015). Environmental Threats and Opportunities Assessment (ETOA) of Four Major Lakes in Malawi. USAID/FISH Project, Pact Publication, Lilongwe, Malawi: 250 pp. FISH (2015) USAID/FISH Project Baseline Aerial Photographic Documentation of Fisheries Activities in the Four Lakes in Malawi. Produced by Cluny Wildlife Trust & Quantum, authored by Owen Cardew. FISH (2015) Consolidated Baseline Report. USAID/FISH Project, Pact Publication, Lilongwe, Malawi: 92p. FISH (2015) Participatory Vulnerability and Capacity Assessment (PVCA) of Four Major Lakes in Malawi. USAID/FISH Project, Pact Publication, Lilongwe, Malawi: 54 p.