Elaboration and implementation of the National Fisheries Development Programme by DMRIF will require extensive collaboration with almost all other PGE departments, as briefly outlined below.
Eritrea Environmental Action Plan
The PGE is now engaged in the formulation of an Eritrean Environmental Action Plan (EEAP), and this exercise will be an immediate focus of collaborative effort between several departments. The exercise will involve: (a) an overall assessment of the state of the country's environment and critical information gaps; (b) an inventory of environmental problems and their possible solutions by order of priority; (c) assessment of the environment content of ongoing and planned programmes and projects; (d) assessment of existing institutional and legal mechanisms and their elaboration as appropriate in order to implement a broad environmental programme; and (e) formulation of such a programme and a strategy for its implementation. An Environmental Working Group has been constituted under the chair of the Department of Economic Planning and Coordination. In addition to DMRIF, departments participating in the group include Agriculture, Industry, Mining, Energy, Water, and Health. The University of Asmara is also represented. The Working, Group will prepare a series of background papers which will form the basis for setting national priorities and drafting an action programme to be presented at a national conference tentatively scheduled for June 1993.
Agriculture
DMRIF already has close links with the Department of Agriculture in that the Veterinary Section of the latter is in charge of quality control inspection at major fish landings and market centres, and also for fish product exports at the time of embarkation. Further scope for collaboration exists with respect to the popularisation of fish consumption, particularly in rural areas, with the assistance of Agriculture's Home Economics Section and its Home Agents extension staff. Possibilities for pilot fish farming activities within the context of integrated rural development projects involving the Department of Agriculture might also be considered.
Commerce
The Department of Commerce is currently spearheading an effort to establish product standards for Eritrea, to be overseen and enforced by an independent Board of Standards. It will be extremely important for DMRIF to pursue technical consultations with Commerce with regard to the formulation of quality assurance standards for fisheries products, particularly in connection with efforts to encourage export sales.
Defence
The Navy has provided valuable support for fisheries administration and enforcement (interception of unauthorised industrial fishing vessels) in the past, and has also collaborated with DMRIF in the organisation of scuba diving training (vide Section 5.2.3). Navy involvement along with the Ports and Maritime Transport Department in future fisheries monitoring, control, and surveillance activities, perhaps through the establishment of a Coast Guard service, is also a possibility to consider in the longer term.
Economic Development and Cooperation (DEDC)
The DEDC holds decision-making authority on the PGE's budget for both recurrent and capital expenditure and is responsible, in consultation with the sector departments, for the formulation and co-ordination of Eritrea's Emergency Recovery and Rehabilitation Programme. As already reviewed, this programme gives highest priority to the restoration of basic infrastructure and productive capabilities in agriculture and industry, and to the development of an adequate institutional framework for economic management. International Development Association (IDA) credit and other donor support will be used to finance the programme, which will be implemented through a Programme Management Unit to be established in the DEDC.
DEDC also runs a processing and budget office through which specific sectoral projects, both Government and donor funded, are evaluated and programmed. The Department's legal office reviews bilateral and multilateral project agreements and advises on relevant aspects and implications. It is also responsible for drafting certain legal texts. It has, for example, formulated the Investment Code (Investment Proclamation No 18 of 1991).
Education
An extremely useful role could be played by the Department of Education in terms of encouraging wider awareness of and appreciation for Eritrea's marine resources. DMRIF could through technical consultations assist with the necessary school curriculum and instructional materials development to achieve this purpose. The organisation of pilot school meal schemes in which fish is one of the components is an additional area for DMRIF - Department of Education collaboration.
External Affairs
Extensive consultations between DMRIF and the Department of External Affairs will be necessary when it becomes time to draft and enact maritime zones legislation (vide Section 5.2.4). External Affairs will also have a central role to play with regard to the establishment of cooperative ties with other national fisheries authorities in the region, and to any bilateral fisheries agreements that the PGE may eventually be interested in negotiating.
Finance
The Revenue Office advises Government on questions of taxation and custom tariffs, but from what can be learned has not yet established any schedules for the import of fisheries equipment and gear. DMRIF should move quickly before final rate determinations are made to ensure that the Treasury and the DEDC are fully briefed on the productive input scarcity situation and to advocate that any tariffs and taxes that might be applied to them be kept to a minimum level at least for the time being.
Imports of fish products are subject to a customs levy of 15% and a 24% sales tax. Fish meal imports are charged a 10% customs levy and 12% for sales tax. Although records of these imports are available, the data will have to be compiled and tabulated before exact quantities are known. Since all records on fisheries-related imports are of interest and need to be covered in any future statistical reporting system, DMRIF should consider making arrangements for obtaining them from Finance on a routine basis.
Health
Nutritional welfare is one of the responsibilities of the Department of Health and plans are being made gradually to train village food and nutrition assistants to work throughout the country. As in the case of Agriculture Home Agents, the Health extension personnel could play an extremely effective role in promoting greater use of fish in local diets, especially for lower income families who are the most nutritionally stressed. The Department of Health is also considering the idea of starting a national “Nutrition Institute”. If such an institute is actually established, fish product utilisation would certainly qualify as an important area of research and development focus.
Industry
There is presently no industrial fish processing capacity in Eritrea, though DMRIF has received some tentative proposals from firms interested in developing freezing and canning facilities. Should any of these proposals be followed through, consultations with the Department of Industry can be envisioned to deal with questions of plant siting, layout, infrastructural requirements, and other technical issues.
Information and Culture
DMRIF has from the very first made quite extensive use of mass media -- the newspaper, radio, and television -- to promote fish consumption and to build public awareness of marine resources and departmental activities. Obviously it will be be crucial to continue to work as closely as possible with the Department of Information and Culture personnel to popularise the availability, possible forms of preparation, and food value of fish products if they are to play a more meaningful role in fostering national nutritional welfare.
Justice
Officials at the Department of Justice were consulted in the process of preparing draft fisheries legislation and close collaboration with them will clearly be necessary as the draft is reviewed and prepared for enactment. Their further technical advisory support will be essential to the task of formulating and enforcing the regulations aimed at ensuring proper management of the fisheries (vide Section 5.2.4).
Ports and Maritime Transport (DPMT)
DPMT is considering a proposal to create an independant Harbour and Ports Authority with offices in Massawa and Assab. The Authority would have broad competencies in the areas of navigation and safety, including rescue, salvage, equipment and machinary certifications. The creation of a ship registry is also foreseen. Whether this would include fishing vessels or not is unclear.
The possibility of establishing a Coast Guard service to undertake, among its other activities, fisheries monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS) operations within the areas under Eritrean jurisdiction could eventually be considered as a collaborative undertaking with DPMT. The costs of such a service are so enormous in terms of capital, equipment, and facilities that any decision should probably be deferred until the fiscal system is functioning in a more coherent way and determinations can be made about what percentage of revenues from the relevant sectors, including fisheries, would actually have to be committed to support it.
Tourism
The Eritrean Red Sea coast has significant potential as a tourist destination. Clear waters and extensive, unspoiled, and richly biodiverse reef areas have a particular appeal to diving enthusiasts, and this form of tourism is expected to show rapid growth within the next few years. It is reported that several diving charter boats are soon to start operating regular circuits within the southern Red Sea area. In addition to diving the coastal zone offers many opportunities for tourists interested in sites of archeological or historical interest, natural history and culture, sports fishing, boating, or simple sightseeing and relaxation. Interest in the development of tourist resort facilities has been expressed by a number of private investors, including some of the firms now seeking to start fishing and processing operations in Eritrea, and the PGE through the Department of Tourism has already begun rehabilitating the war-damaged Government tourist hotels in Massawa. Given that so much of the national tourist industry will have a marine resources orientation of one form or another, the need is clear for maintaining strong consultative links between DMRIF and Tourism. the two departments will need to work closely with local populations to identify potential sites for facility development and scenic use. In particular this would involve the designation of underwater and shoreline reserve/protected areas and the establishment of procedures and regulations for their management in environmentally sound ways.
Commission for Eritrean Refugee Affairs (CERA)
Nearly one-third of all Eritreans are estimated to be residing outside of the country, and roughly half of these are thought to be living under poor and harsh conditions in various refugee camps in Sudan. CERA is the PGE agency responsible for war refugee repatriation and resettlement and is concentrating particularly on those who have been displaced into Sudan. Its policy is to try insofar as possible to reintegrate refugees with their respective home communities, but to do this through sectoral and area development programmes that involve all community residents -- those who stayed on as well as those who are being repatriated. A great deal of population displacement due to the war took place along the coast, and CERA and DMRIF thus have a strong common cause in terms of fishing community resettlement and development. As noted earlier, DMRIF has already formulated a pilot project for such work in the Sahel Region (vide Annex 7).
Eritrean Relief and Rehabilitation Agency (ERRA)
ERRA was formed in 1975 as an organisation dedicated to providing humanitarian and economic assistance to the many thousands of Eritreans who were being displaced and impoverished by the war. It has consistently played a lead role in the distribution of relief supplies to needy areas. With the end of hostilities a new mandate has been defined that establishes ERRA as an autonomous organisation with close consultative ties to the PGE. ERRA now assumes primary responsibility for national relief programmes and for co-ordinating and overseeing all indigenous and international NGO activities in Eritrea. Of particular relevance for DMRIF are ERRA's field survey activities covering nutrition and other local welfare issues. Collaboration with the agency could involve efforts to increase the role of fish for the alleviation of malnutrition, including investigations of current nutritional situations in particular localities and/or social groups. ERRA could also possibly collaborate in fishing village settlement and development project work by channelling relief assistance and food-for-work supplies from its donor sources.
Monetary and exchange rate policies in Eritrea remain linked to those of Ethiopia and it is not clear whether or how soon the PGE will decide to establish an independent central bank with its own monetary and exchange rate policies, or to leave the existing arrangement intact. Indications are that the former option will be pursued but only sometime after the national referendum on self determination in April 1993. The Asmara branch of the “Ethiopian National Bank” has already been redesignated as the “Eritrean National Bank”.
A two-tiered exchange rate system currently operates in Eritrea in that the official Ethiopian rate (adjusted in October 1992 from Br. 2.07 to Br. 5.00 against one US$) is applied for government transactions and visiting foreign nationals, and a more devalued “free market” rate for visiting Eritrean nationals and nationals converting remittances from abroad (Br. 7.00+ against one US$). It is reported that the PGE will in future pursue a liberal exchange rate policy that will allow ready conversion between foreign and domestic currencies.
There is franco valuta permission for Eriteans to keep and use foreign exchange abroad, and this is in fact the way the majority of imported goods are obtained.
Major sources of Government revenue are custom duties and sales taxes on imported goods and on domestic goods and services. Government expenditure is mostly for salaries, which use up about 70% of the revenues, with the remainder going to meet operations and maintenance costs. The entire budgetary process is under review and revisions to both the tax and revenue allocation systems are anticipated.
Allocations are currently made to sector departments after review of their requests. The DEDC has overall budget decision making responsibility and expenditures are controlled by the Treasury through monthly allotments for both recurrent and capital items. It appears that there is a category of partially “self-financing” Government departments, i.e. ones relying on independant resources in addition to those provided by the Treasury. It is not clear to what extent such arrangments have been made part of a formalised budgetary scheme or are merely operating on a de facto basis for the time being. In the case of DMRIF some income is currently generated directly by and for the Department through the sale of processed fish products abroad. Early review should be given to the question of future arrangements. Options to consider include extending self-financing measures so that some proportion of licensing revenues are retained by DMRIF, remitting all revenues to a central consolidated fund maintained by the Treasury, or adopting a mix of retention and remittance arrangements depending on the revenue category. In this connection the possibility of establishing a “Fisheries Development Fund” to be fed by a portion of sector-generated revenues collected as fees for facility use, licenses, or through other means, could be explored. Such a fund could support at least part of the costs of redevelopment and maintenance of fisheries service points and support facilities.
The Investment Proclamation (No. 18 of 1991) is the principal text governing investment, particularly foreign investment, in all sectors including fisheries. By its terms it overrides all other legislation, with a suggestion that licensing provisions in other laws would be subject to the Investment Proclamation. While this would not necessarily prevail against a later law, it still suggests a scheme in which the Investment Proclamation rather than sectoral legislation has the primary role.
The stated objectives of the Investment Proclamation are broadly to expand the economy and value-added activities: developing natural resources and increasing exports, employment, and production. These are normal objectives of investment laws. When applied to renewable natural resources, however, increased production must be subordinated to sustainable management of the resource if development is not to be followed by collapse.
The Proclamation establishes an Investment Centre with an Investment Board to serve as an independent body for the administration of the law. The Investment Centre is intended to provide a “one-stop” service for potential investors, including powers to decide on investment applications and issue certificates which entitle incentives (Art. 29). The Centre has the power to “allocate” land and water to investors (Art. 7), extremely significant since land is generally state-owned. Actual leases are issued by provincial authorities at its direction.
The Centre also has extensive co-ordination powers over other government decisions on which investment depends. This is especially marked in the case of licensing. Although not drafted especially clearly, the Investment Proclamation appears to give the Investment Centre the power to cancel licences including fishing licences and to approve their transfer, while the Investment Board may require their issuance. These provisions would seriously undermine fisheries management if exercised to their full, but so far it appears that the Board has deferred to the judgement of sectoral departments. It would seem preferable for the new fisheries legislation now being prepared to base licensing squarely on management planning and for the Board give appropriate weight to management considerations in its decisions. If this is not done it may be necessary to amend the Investment Proclamation to clarify licensing authority.
All aspects of fisheries except domestic marketing appear eligible for incentives, and even marketing by local investors could receive incentives. In addition, agricultural investors, which perhaps include fisheries investors, may receive permission from the Investment Centre to market their production locally.
Incentives include income tax and duty exemptions for initial imports and raw materials during the first five years. Replacement equipment is not covered, which could be a disincentive to fishing investments where equipment frequently has a short life.
Besides tax benefits, qualifying investments are protected against taking without due process of law [Art. 11 (1)]. Confusingly, they are also protected against “nationalization” with or without due process. They also receive valuable protection against price control, except for certain services, and against the establishment of government monopolies [Art. 11(2)–(3)]. Agricultural, industrial, and mining investors “may export their produce at any time” although this may be subject to a fee (“In so doing the investors will be required to … pay fees for the additional activities” [Art. 23(3)]). As elsewhere in the proclamation, it is not clear whether agriculture includes fisheries.
Access to foreign exchange is indispensable to the operation of even small-scale mechanised fishing and processing. The proclamation recognises the right of investors and investment projects to hold and utilise foreign exchange [Art. 26(1)–(2)], as well as giving priority in foreign exchange allocations to exporters and investors, in that order [Art. 9, 26(2)]. Expatriate workers, on the other hand, may only remit salaries “in accordance with the foreign exchange regulations” [Art. 27(2)].
The incentives and other benefits provided by the Investment Proclamation are apparently not exclusive. Article 4 states that “This proclamation does not reduce or rescind additional incentives accorded to investors by virtue of agreement at any level concluded by the Government.” While this could be a reference only to agreements concluded prior to the proclamation, it seems to speak to the future as well.
Eritrea's banking system was inherited from the former regime and is considered quite weak owning to the lack of qualified personnel, inadequate communications and operating facilities and procedures, and poor linkage to the international banking system. For the time being the PGE is continuing to follow the former policy of limiting bank ownership to the public sector and restrict foreign banks from operating in the country.
The Commercial Bank of Eritrea (formerly Commercial Bank of Ethiopia) runs 13 branch offices in the larger cities and towns. Along the coast branches exist only in Assab and Massawa.
Other Government-controlled banking institutions in the country include branches of the Housing and Savings Bank, the Agriculture and Industrial Development Bank, and the National Insurance Corporation.
Credit services for the fisheries sector are especially weak. As described earlier on, revolving credit-for-input schemes for members of local fishers co-operatives were developed through the LWF Massawa/Dahlak project and the old Assab fisheries rehabilitation project, both of which were abandoned due to the war (vide Sections 5.2.3 and 5.3.2). At the present time credit only seems to be available on a fairly informal basis through the two marketing “co-operatives” at Massawa, which advance small amounts, to be repaid at sale of catch, allowing vessel operators to obtain ice, fuel, and other supplies necessary to carry out fishing trips.
So far as is known, the only commercial banking institution that has been involved with fisheries sector credit extenstion in the past is the Agricultural and Industrial Development Bank (AIDB). In the 1960s the AIDB was involved in a fleet motorisation scheme for the Massawa and Assab fisheries that was set up through the Sea Fisheries Board, a body of central and local government officials, banking personnel, and fishing industry representatives that functioned until about 1975. The motorisation loan scheme apparently operated well up to the point when fishing activity south of the Zula area was curtailed by the former regime due to an upsurge of fighting with, Eritrean liberation forces. With their operations restricted, some of those who had taken out loans could not meet their repayments. War activities also disrupted a later credit application by the Dahlak Fishermens' Service Co-operative to the AIDB in the late 1980s. The Co-operative was seeking a credit for the purchase of inboard engines, nets, and other fishing inputs to be distributed to its members on a loan basis.
The Semhar Fisheries Rehabilitation Project (ERI/92/C01 & ERI/92/001) Formulation Mission reported in early 1992 that the Commercial Bank of Eritrea (CBE) would in principal be willing to advance credit to fishing enterprises but that the usual security and collateral requirements in property or equivalent assets would apply. Such requirements automatically bar most small-scale fishers from being seriously considered as loan applicants, which is why credit arrangements for purchase of fishing inputs and credit processing services had to be designed as a project responsibility. The inputs themselves would be acquired with foreign exchange through an Import Support Fund to be established by the Project Implementation Unit (PIU) through arrangements with the National Bank. Provision will also be made for a limited number of pick-up trucks fitted with insulated containers for the distribution of ice-chilled fish to inland markets. Although it is intended to use the CBE to hold and disburse funds, loan requests will initially at least be processed through a special Loans Board, to be set up as a small impartial; body made up of Project personnel, Fisher Association representatives, and a few individuals holding responsible positions in the local community. Loans would be repayable over the short-to medium-term (one to five years) in local currency, into a fund maintained by the local Fisher Association or Associations. Over time the Association(s), which are still to be established, would thus accumulate capital for future revolving credit operations.
It may be desirable to review these plans, however, in view of the fact that the management of credit is a complex and specialised business and, in the context of a small community-based organisation, one that can become burdensome and fraught with misunderstanding and conflict. The local association(s) might better serve as “credit intermediaries” between fishers and the PIU/Loan Board in the early stages of the Semhar Project, and a commercial banking institution (presumably the CBE acting in consultation with the Loan Board or its successor body) in the later stages.
A further question that will need to be addressed is that of loan indexing, since repayment terms must be fixed in such a manner that the real value of the original funds advanced is maintained. In this connection the suggestion has been raised that repayments be calculated on the basis of parallel market dollar value current at the time of each repayment installment.
Close monitoring of the Semhar scheme experience should provide important lessons on the ways credit provision can best be managed between banks, local associations and individual fishers and traders operators, with the aim of incorporating the service as a routine part of the commercial banking system.
Scovazzi, T. & J.E. Reynolds, 1992. Initial considerations and proposals for an Eritrean fisheries legal framework. Sector Studies, No. 1. Fisheries Development Planning and Resource Management, Eritrea -- TCP/ERT/2251. Rome, FAO.
Bellemans, M.S. & J.E. Reynolds, 1992. Proposal for a preliminary Eritrean marine fisheries sampling frame. Sector Studies, No. 2. Fisheries Development Planning and Resource Management, Eritrea -- TCP/ERT/2251. Rome, FAO.
Bellemans, M.S. & J.E. Reynolds, 1992. Eritrean marine resources and fisheries in review: past developments and present indications. Sector Studies, No. 3. Fisheries Development Planning and Resource Management, Eritrea -- TCP/ERT/2251. Rome, FAO.
Bellemans, M.S. & J.E. Reynolds, 1992. The Eritrean marine fisheries, 1992: preliminary baseline survey results. Sector Studies, No. 4. Fisheries Development Planning and Resource Management, Eritrea -- TCP/ERT/2251. Rome, FAO.
Appleton, J., M.S. Bellemans, & J.E. Reynolds, 1992. Observations on food security, nutrition, and the demand for fish in Eritrea. Sector Studies, No. 5. Fisheries Development Planning and Resource Management, Eritrea -- TCP/ERT/2251. Rome, FAO.
Vandeputte, M., 1993. Prospects and constraints for inland fisheries and aquaculture development in Eritrea. Sector Studies, No. 6. Fisheries Development Planning and Resource Management, Eritrea -- TCP/ERT/2251. Rome, FAO.
Scovazzi, T. & L.C. Christy, 1993. Eritrea: Draft fisheries legislation. Fisheries Development Planning and Resource Management, Eritrea -- TCP/ERT/2251. Rome, FAO (FL/IOR/93/35).
Atkins, W.S., 1965. Development of the fishing industry in Ethiopia; a report for the Technical Agency of the Imperial Ethiopian Government. Epsom, Surrey, W.S. Atkins and Partners.
Aubray, R., 1975. The fisheries of Ethiopia: An economic study. Rome, FAO (mimeo).
Ben Yami, M., 1964. Report on the fisheries in Ethiopia. Ministry for Foreign Affairs, Department for International Cooperation. Jerusalem, State of Isreal.
Ben Yami, M., 1968. Observations on the distribution and behaviour of pelagic schooling fish in the Southern Red Sea. InContributions to the knowledge of the Red Sea No. 41, Sea Fisheries Research Station, Haifa, Isreal.
Ben Yami, 1975. Southern Red Sea fisheries. In World Fishing. May, 1975:94–99.
Breuil, C., 1990. Fish handling, distribution, and marketing in Ethiopia. Report prepared for the Project TCP/ETH/0052, Assistance to Fisheries Planning, Management, and Development. Rome, FAO.
Centre for Development Studies, Leeds. Eritrea 1991 -- A needs assessment study, final report. Centre for Development Studies, University of Leeds.
Danish Fisheries Technology Institute, 1987. Massawa/Dahlak Fishermen's Rehabilitation Project, Ethiopia. Evaluation report prepared for Danchurchaid. Hirtshals, Denmark.
Eritrean Relief and Rehabilitation Agency, 1992. Statement on the new role and mandate of ERRA. Asmara.
FAO, 1983. Fishery Country Profile: Ethiopia. Rome, FAO (FID/CP/ETH, Rev.1).
FAO Investment Centre, 1992. Fisheries rehabilitation project in Semhar Region (Eritrea); Reformulation Mission. FAO/UNCDF Cooperative Programme. Rome, FAO.
Gaudet, J.L., 1981. Report on mission to Ethiopia. Fisheries Policy and Planning Service files. Rome, FAO (mimeo).
Global Environment Facility (GEF), 1993. The conservation of biological diversity associated with coral reefs in the Eritrean Red Sea. Report of a GEF Project Identification Mission (UNDP Project No. INT/91/G31). Asmara.
Grofit, E., 1971. The Red Sea fisheries of Ethiopia. Centre for Agricultural Cooperation with Developing Countries, Ministry of Agriculture, State of Isreal.
Guidicelli, M., 1984. The Ethiopian fisheries: situation, development needs and opportunities. Report prepared for the Fishery Planning and Development Project. Field Document 1. Rome, FAO (FI/DP/ETH/82/016).
Kiflemariam Melake, 1988. Bio-economic perspective of the Ethiopian Red Sea Coast fisheries. In Ethiopian Journal of African Studies, 5(1): 21–31.
Laor, A., 1969. Exploratory shrimp trawling in the southern Red Sea. In Fish. Fish Breed. Isr., 4(2): 36–41.
Losse, G.F., 1975. Exploratory fishing in the Gulf of Aden and observations on the biology of large pelagic fishes. Rep. East Afr. Mar.Fish.Res.Organ., (L/7): 33p.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Italy, 1986. Project for development of artisanal fishing in Massawa and Dahlak Islands. Report prepared for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Italian Aid Fund. Landsystem spa.
Porat, Z. 1970. Exploratory shrimp trawling in the Red Sea. In Fish. Fish Breed. Isr., 4(2): 30–36.
Sanders, A.P.L., 1988. Baseline Survey (Technical Appendix). Mission Report for proposed Fisheries Rehabilitation and Boatyard Development Project, Massawa and Dahlac Islands (Expansion of LWF/UNHCR/83/RT/ETH).
Sanders, A.P.L. and G.R. Morgan, 1989. Review of the fisheries resources of the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper. No, 304. Rome, FAO.
Walczak, P., 1977. A study of the marine resources of the Yemen Arab Republic. Rome, FAO (FI DP/YEM/74/003/5).
World Bank, 1992. Eritrea: An overview of the economy. Reconnaissance Mission Report (Appendix). Washington, D.C. (Draft).
World Bank, 1993. Recovery and rehabilitation project for Eritrea (Technical Annex). Washington, D.C. (Draft).
Zerai Araya, 1992. Eritrean Environmental Action Plan: Draft Phase I Document. Asmara, Provisional Government of Eritrea (Draft).
Table A1. Length frequency distribution of fishing craft by typea
LENGTH CLASS | NUMBER OF | LENGTH CLASS | NUMBER OF | LENGTH CLASS | NUMBER OF | ||||||
CANOE | HOURI | SAMBUK | CANOE | HOURI | SAMBUK | CANOE | HOURI | SAMBUK | |||
1- | - | - | 11 m | - | 27 | 1 | 21 m | - | - | - | |
2 m | 23 | - | - | 12 m | - | 55 | 10 | 22 m | - | - | 5 |
3 m | 37 | 7 | - | 13 m | - | 14 | - | 23 m | - | - | 1 |
4 m | 48 | 14 | - | 14 m | - | 10 | 6 | 24 m | - | - | 4 |
5 m | 21 | 16 | - | 15 m | - | 18 | 10 | 25 m | - | - | 5 |
6 m | 7 | 22 | - | 16 m | - | 2 | 7 | 26 m | - | - | 1 |
7 m | - | 44 | - | 17 m | - | 3 | 5 | 27 m | - | - | 1 |
8 m | - | 61 | - | 18 m | - | 2 | 5 | 28 m | - | - | - |
9 m | - | 44 | 1 | 19 m | - | 2 | 6 | 29 m | - | - | - |
10 m | - | 57 | 11 | 20 m | - | 6 | 14 | 30 m | - | 1 | 1 |
Total | 136 | 265 | 12 | Total | 0 | 139 | 64 | Total | 0 | 1 | 18 |
Table A2. Average purchase and replacement costs for fishing craft by length classa
TYPE | LENGTH CLASS [m] | AVERAGE LENGTH [m] | PURCHASE PRICE [E.Birr] | REPLACEMENT COSTS [E.Birr] | AGE
[year] | NUMBER OF RECORDS |
CANOES | < 6 | 3,8 | 1 770 | 2 886 | 13 | 94 |
6 – 10 | 6,0 | 2 000 | 4 000 | 2 | 3 | |
HOURIS | < 6 | 4,2 | 3 479 | 5 278 | 8 | 36 |
6 – 10 | 8,3 | 10 451 | 16 723 | 7 | 196 | |
11 – 15 | 12,5 | 18 432 | 28 540 | 6 | 88 | |
16 – 20 | 18,5 | 28 153 | 38 933 | 6 | 15 | |
21 – 25 | 25,0 | 60 000 | 65 000 | 1 | 1 | |
26 – 30 | 30,0 | 23 000 | 40 000 | 5 | 1 | |
SAMBUKS | < 6 | - | - | - | - | - |
6 – 10 | 9,9 | 33 667 | 48 000 | 10 | 11 | |
11 – 15 | 13,6 | 38 040 | 59 280 | 9 | 25 | |
16 – 20 | 18,6 | 56 875 | 83 312 | 10 | 32 | |
21 – 25 | 23,6 | 66 818 | 112 273 | 10 | 11 | |
26 – 30 | 27,7 | 81 667 | 141 667 | 13 | 3 |
Table A3. Average engine power by type of engine and region
OUT-BOARD ENGINES:
REGION | SEMHAR | AKELE GUZAI | DANKALIA | GLOBAL | ||||||||
BOATTYPE | COAST | DAHLAK | COAST | ISLANDS | ||||||||
CANOES | - | [-] | - | [-] | - | [-] | - | [-] | - | [-] | - | [-] |
HOURIS | - | [-] | 32 | [101] | 55 | [1] | 34 | [213] | 29 | [15] | 33 | [330] |
SAMBUKS | - | [-] | 60 | [4] | - | [-] | 55 | [1] | 33 | [1] | 54 | [6] |
IN-BOARD ENGINES:
REGION | SEMHAR | AKELE GUZAI | DANKALIA | GLOBAL | ||||||||
BOATTYPE | COAST | DAHLAK | COAST | ISLANDS | ||||||||
CANOES | - | [-] | - | [-] | - | [-] | - | [-] | - | [-] | - | [-] |
HOURIS | - | [-] | - | [-] | - | [-] | - | [-] | - | [-] | - | [-] |
SAMBUKS | - | [-] | 53 | [9] | - | [-] | 55 | [1] | - | [-] | 54 | [10] |
Table A4. Engine Power Distribution by Engine and Craft Typea
POWER [HP] | CANOES | HOURIS | SAMBUKS | ||
OUTBOARD | INBOARD | OUTBOARD | INBOARD | ||
0–10 | - | 32 | - | - | - |
11–20 | - | 27 | - | - | - |
21–30 | - | 99 | - | - | - |
31–40 | - | 128 | - | 2 | 2 |
41–50 | - | 19 | - | - | 3 |
51–60 | - | 9 | - | 2 | 2 |
61–70 | - | - | - | - | - |
71–80 | - | 16 | - | 2 | 3 |
81–90 | - | - | - | - | - |
Table A5. Average Purchase and Replacement Costs for Various Engines
ENGINE TYPE | POWER CLASS [HP] | AVERAGE HORSE POW. [HP] | PURCHASE PRICE [E.Birr] | REPLACEMENT COSTS [E.Birr] | AGE [year] | NUMBER OF RECORDS |
OUTBOARD | < 10 | 8 | 2 761 | 5 242 | 6 | 31 |
10 – 15 | 15 | 3 277 | 5 005 | 5 | 18 | |
16 – 20 | 20 | 3 500 | 7 000 | 8 | 3 | |
21 – 25 | 25 | 6 286 | 10 097 | 6 | 63 | |
26 – 30 | 30 | 9 000 | 13 333 | 9 | 3 | |
31 – 35 | 35 | 13 000 | 35 000 | 8 | 1 | |
36 – 40 | 40 | 9 941 | 14 082 | 7 | 78 | |
41 – 45 | - | - | - | - | - | |
46 – 50 | 48 | 14 300 | 21 123 | 8 | 17 | |
51 – 55 | 54 | 17 850 | 23 350 | 5 | 6 | |
56 – 60 | - | - | - | - | - | |
61 – 65 | - | - | - | - | - | |
66 – 70 | - | - | - | - | - | |
71 – 75 | 75 | 19 770 | 27 318 | 4 | 11 | |
INBOARD | 11 – 20 | - | - | - | - | - |
21 – 30 | 25 | 8 000 | 13 000 | 8 | 1 | |
31 – 40 | 34 | 17 500 | 25 000 | 7 | 2 | |
41 – 50 | - | - | - | - | - | |
51 – 60 | 55 | 52 500 | 85 000 | 12 | 2 | |
61 – 70 | - | - | - | - | - | |
71 – 80 | 74 | 120 000 | 123 000 | 5 | 3 |
Table A6. Place of Engine Purchase
TYPE | YEMEN | SAUDI ARABIA | DJIBOUTI | LOCAL MARKET | TOTAL | ||||
OUT-BOARD | 72 | 31 % | 142 | 62 % | 1 | - % | 16 | 7% | 231 |
IN-BOARD | 0 | - % | 8 | 100 % | - | - % | 0 | - % | 8 |
Table A7. Average age (years) of engines by engine and craft type
OUT-BOARD ENGINES:
REGION | SEMHAR | AKELE GUZAI | DANKALIA | GLOBAL | ||||||||
BOATTYPE | COAST | DAHLAK | COAST | ISLANDS | ||||||||
CANOES | - | [-] | - | [-] | - | [-] | - | [-] | - | [-] | - | [-] |
HOURIS | - | [-] | 5 | [97] | 4 | [1] | 6 | [213] | 4 | [15] | 6 | [326] |
SAMBUKS | - | [-] | 10 | [5] | - | [-] | 9 | [1] | - | [-] | 10 | [6] |
IN-BOARD ENGINES:
REGION | SEMHAR | AKELE GUZAI | DANKALIA | GLOBAL | ||||||||
BOATTYPE | COAST | DAHLAK | COAST | ISLANDS | ||||||||
CANOES | - | [-] | - | [-] | - | [-] | - | [-] | - | [-] | - | [-] |
HOURIS | - | [-] | - | [-] | - | [-] | - | [-] | - | [-] | - | [-] |
SAMBUKS | - | [-] | 8 | [13] | - | [-] | 9 | [56] | 9 | [3] | 9 | [72] |
Table A8. Age frequency distribution of engines by type
AGE CLASSES [year] | ENGINES | AGE
CLASSES [year] | ENGINES | ||
INBOARD | OUTBOARD | INBOARD | OUTBOARD | ||
1 | - | 20 | 12 | 1 | 5 |
2 | 4 | 32 | 13 | 2 | 2 |
3 | 2 | 33 | 14 | - | 1 |
4 | 4 | 39 | 15 | 3 | 8 |
5 | 3 | 32 | 16 | 1 | 2 |
6 | 1 | 34 | 17 | 2 | 1 |
7 | 11 | 41 | 18 | - | 1 |
8 | 8 | 42 | 19 | 1 | - |
9 | 12 | 12 | 20 | 1 | 2 |
10 | 12 | 22 | 21 | - | - |
11 | 2 | 2 | > 21 | 2 | 1 |
Table A9. Average purchase and replacement costs for major gear
TYPE OF GEAR | LENGTH CLASS [ m ] | AVERAGE LENGTH [ m ] | PURCHASE PRICE [E.Birr] | REPLACEMENT COSTS [E.Birr] | AGE [year] | NUMBER OF RECORDS |
GILLNETS | < 50 | 34,6 | 6 328 | 9 879 | 7 | 14 |
50– 100 | 87,6 | 5 355 | 7 041 | 3 | 241 | |
101– 150 | 141,0 | 6 800 | 9 500 | 5 | 5 | |
151– 200 | 194,0 | 4 859 | 7 300 | 4 | 25 | |
201– 250 | - | - | - | - | - | |
HOOK/LINES | < 50 | - | - | - | - | - |
51– 100 | 73,5 | 73 | 106 | 1 | 49 | |
101– 150 | 150,0 | 2 100 | 4 000 | 16 | 1 | |
CASTNETS | 3,8 | 50 | 60 | 2 | 2 |
Table A10. Place of gear purchase
YEMEN | SAUDI ARABIA | DJIBOUTI | LOCAL MARKET | Total | ||||
238 | 71 % | 47 | 14 % | 1 | - % | 50 | 15 % | 336 |
Table A11. Availability of services & amenities, Eritrean coastal fishing sites, 1992
REGION | FISHING SITES | PRIMARY SCHOOL | SECONDARY SCHOOL | HEALTH CENTER | HOSPITAL | WATER SUPPLY | PETROL STATION | GEAR SUPPLY | ENGINE SPARES | BOAT YARD | ICE SUPPLY | COLD STORAGE | JETTY | FISH MARKET | ENGINE REPAIR |
SEMHAR COAST | IMBEREMI | X | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
MASSAWA | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | - | X | X | X | X | X | X | |
HERGIGO | - | - | X | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | X | - | - | |
SEMHAR DAHLAK | DEBELO | - | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
DERBUSHET | X | - | X | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | X | |
DAHLAK KHEBIR | X | - | X | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
SELIT | - | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
DASKO | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
MELLIL | - | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
JIMHILE | X | - | - | X | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | X | - | - | |
CAMBIBA | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
ABAY NORAH | - | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
SAHLIET | - | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
RASELGAD | X | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
ALDEHER | X | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
ALBELED | X | - | X | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
AKELE GUZAI | AFTA | X | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
ZULA | X | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
ARAFALE | X | - | X | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
DANKALIA COAST | GANFEROR | X | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
GURU'ETA | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
ADGUFAYTO | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
ALI-KATAH | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
INGEL/DAGODA | X | - | X | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
GUBER | - | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
DELEMI | - | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
MAHRA | - | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
DANKALIA COAST | DAWYAT | - | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
DULUH/DULEH | - | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
HARENA | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | X | |
GELAYALO | - | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
AKELO | - | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
RASA | - | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
ALOLEA | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
BEDEDA | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
DEWELI | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
MORAH | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
HARASAN | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
ME'DERE | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
SAHEL | - | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
TIYO | X | - | X | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
SAROTA | - | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
KARMU | - | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
EDD | X | - | X | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
OBOL | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
BARA'SOLE | - | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
BEILUL | X | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
ASSAB | X | X | - | X | X | X | - | - | X | X | X | - | X | X | |
KILOMA | X | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
REHAITO | X | - | X | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
GINIBEDA | - | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
DANKALIA ISLANDS | RAS DUMEIRA | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
DESSIE ISLAND | - | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
SER ABAY ISL. | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
HAWAKIL ISL. | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
BAKA ISLAND | - | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
AGA'EGUBA ISL. | - | - | - | - | X | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Table A12. Summary of landings at Massawa 1992 (kgs gutted fish)a
Merat Bahri cooperative
MERAT BAHR | Grade I | Grade II | Grade III | Total | # sea days | # trips |
January | 10 163 | 8 632 | 5 163 | 23 958 | ? | ? |
February | 20 138 | 4 444 | 2 753 | 27 335 | 173 | 38 |
March | 24 294 | 3 477 | 6 417 | 34 188 | 263 | 52 |
April | 8 849 | 326 | 4 094 | 13 269 | 83 | 18 |
May | 10 931 | 818 | 1 087 | 12 836 | 84 | 18 |
June | 7 856 | 74 | 566 | 8 496 | 56 | 10 |
July | 15 970 | 1 974 | 2 184 | 20 128 | 127 | 24 |
August | 2 671 | 2 113 | 1 762 | 6 546 | 56 | 11 |
September | 4 137 | 8 665 | 3 859 | 16 661 | 147 | 20 |
October | 10 291 | 904 | 4 586 | 15 781 | 124 | 22 |
November | 11 712 | 4 707 | - | 16 419 | 148(*) | 25 |
Total | 127 012 | 36 134 | 32 471 | 195 617 | 1 271(*) | 238(*) |
Red sea cooperative
RED SEA | Grade I | Grade II | Grade III | Total | # sea days | # trips |
January | 8 137 | 1 934 | 719 | 10 790 | ? | ? |
February | 14 787 | 1 867 | 642 | 17 296 | 130 | 27 |
March | 7 739 | 332 | 2 373 | 10 444 | 111 | 28 |
April | 8 440 | 1 581 | 2 950 | 12 971 | 111 | 26 |
May | 11 224 | 617 | 926 | 12 767 | 101 | 21 |
June | 4 169 | 3 393 | 604 | 8 166 | 59 | 8 |
July | 4 183 | 3 883 | 409 | 8 475 | 64 | 10 |
August | 2 749 | 11 353 | 755 | 14 857 | 114 | 14 |
September | 4 342 | 10 150 | 645 | 15 137 | 124 | 20 |
October | 8 643 | 1 024 | - | 9 667 | 120 | 23 |
November | 13 179 | 1 481 | - | 14 660 | ? | 21 |
Total | 87 592 | 37 615 | 10 023 | 135 230 | 934(*) | 198(*) |
a Re-compiled on a calendar month basis for the first eleven months of 1992.
Table A13. Number of distinct fishing boats landing per month at Massawa, Feb.-Aug. 1992a
Month | |||||||
Co-operative | Feb | March | April | May | June | July | August |
Merat Bahr | 17 | 21 | 11 | 10 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
Red Sea | 13 | 12 | 10 | 11 | 5 | 5 | 7 |
Table A14. Frequency of landings per fishing craft, Massawa, Feb.-Aug. 1992a
Number of Landings | Frequency | Number of Landings | Frequency | ||
Merat Bahr | Red Sea | Merat Bahr | Red Sea | ||
1 | 2 | 4 | 11 | - | 1 |
2 | 5 | 5 | 12 | - | - |
3 | 3 | 3 | 13 | - | - |
4 | 2 | 2 | 14 | 1 | - |
5 | 5 | 1 | 15 | 1 | - |
6 | 1 | 2 | 16 | 2 | - |
7 | - | 1 | 17 | - | - |
8 | 1 | 2 | 18 | - | - |
9 | 2 | 1 | 19 | - | - |
10 | 2 | 4 | 20 | - | - |
Table A15. Estimation of fisheries potential, Eritrean inland reservoirs with known area*
RESERVOIR | Altitude Class | Capacity (m3) | Area (ha) | Average Depth (m) | Non- drying area | Purpose | Yield (kg/ha/yr) | Prod (t) |
Adi Gombolo | 1 | 150000 | 7 | 2.1 | 0 | IR | 0 | 0 |
Adi Guadad | 1 | 60000 | 4 | 1.5 | 0 | IR | 0 | 0 |
Selae Daro | 1 | 150000 | 5 | 3.0 | 0 | IR | 0 | 0 |
Adi Segdo | 1 | 150000 | 6 | 2.5 | 0 | IR | 0 | 0 |
Shiketi | 2 | 300000 | 6 | 5.0 | 6 | IR | 300 | 1.8 |
Tseazega | 1 | 150000 | 7 | 2.1 | 0 | IR | 0 | 0 |
Tsada Christian | 1 | 130000 | 5 | 2.6 | 0 | IR | 0 | 0 |
Zagr | 1 | 150000 | 5 | 3.0 | 0 | IR | 0 | 0 |
Himbirti | 1 | 250000 | 8 | 3.1 | 0 | IR | 0 | 0 |
Adi Tekelezan | 1 | 170000 | 6 | 2.8 | 0 | IR | 0 | 0 |
Golagul | 1 | 250000 | 4 | 6.3 | 4 | IR | 200 | 0.8 |
Hayelo | 1 | 130000 | 3.5 | 3.7 | 0 | IR | 0 | 0 |
Afdeyu | 1 | 90000 | 3 | 3.0 | 0 | IR | 0 | 0 |
Shimangus | 1 | 230000 | 8 | 2.9 | 0 | IR | 0 | 0 |
Adi Teklay | 1 | 53000 | 4 | 1.3 | 0 | IR | 0 | 0 |
Adi Sheka | 1 | 5000000 | 80 | 6.3 | 80 | WS | 200 | 16 |
Beleza | 1 | 12 | 12 | 200 | 2.4 | |||
May Nefhi | 1 | 26000000 | 220 | 11.8 | 220 | WS | 200 | 44 |
Elabered 1 | 3 | 1512740 | 15 | 10.1 | 15 | IR | 400 | 6 |
Elabered 2 | 3 | 0.5 | 0.5 | IR | 400 | 0.2 | ||
Elabered 3 | 3 | 5 | 5 | IR | 400 | 2 | ||
Elabered 4 | 3 | 1.5 | 1.5 | IR | 400 | 0.6 | ||
Elabered 5 | 3 | 2 | 2 | IR | 400 | 0.8 | ||
Elabered 6 | 3 | 1 | 1 | IR | 400 | 0.4 | ||
Elabered 7 | 3 | 0.5 | 0.5 | IR | 400 | 0.2 | ||
Shitaf | 3 | 900000 | 15 | 6.0 | 15 | WS | 400 | 6 |
Zibangzb | 1 | 150000 | 10 | 1.5 | 0 | IR | 0 | 0 |
Awhune | 1 | 260000 | 12 | 2.2 | 0 | IR | 0 | 0 |
Afoma | 1 | 150000 | 8 | 1.9 | 0 | IR | 0 | 0 |
Teraimni | 2 | 250000 | 9 | 2.8 | 0 | IR | 0 | 0 |
Adi Mongotti | 2 | 1000000 | 100 | 1.0 | 0 | IR | 0 | 0 |
Mai Aron | 2 | 80000 | 20 | 4.0 | 20 | IR | 300 | 6 |
Dirko | 2 | 240000 | 8.5 | 2.8 | 0 | IR | 0 | 0 |
Cheffa | 1 | 600000 | 13.9 | 4.3 | 13.9 | IR | 200 | 2.78 |
Hawatsu | 1 | 212000 | 4.7 | 4.5 | 4.7 | IR | 200 | 0.94 |
Ziban Una | 2 | 299000 | 7.4 | 4.0 | 7.4 | IR | 300 | 2.22 |
Adi Abaghi | 2 | 480000 | 10.6 | 4.5 | 10.6 | IR | 300 | 3.18 |
Adi Bahro | 2 | 260000 | 6.5 | 4.0 | 6.5 | IR | 300 | 1.95 |
Adi Hawsa | 1 | 150000 | 3.7 | 4.1 | 3.7 | IR | 200 | 0.74 |
Korbaria | 2 | 290000 | 6.7 | 4.3 | 6.7 | IR | 300 | 2.01 |
Egri Mekel | 2 | 350000 | 8.1 | 4.3 | 8.1 | IR | 300 | 2.43 |
Deki Gebru | 2 | 200000 | 4.8 | 4.2 | 4.8 | IR | 300 | 1.44 |
Tseazega | 2 | 230000 | 5.7 | 4.0 | 5.7 | IR | 300 | 1.71 |
Adikubulo | 2 | 290000 | 7.3 | 4.0 | 0 | IR | 0 | 0 |
Tareshi | 1 | 280000 | 7 | 4.0 | 7 | IR | 200 | 1.4 |
Zawl | 2 | 300000 | 7.5 | 4.0 | 7.5 | IR | 300 | 2.25 |
Shimangus Tahtai | 1 | 230000 | 5.1 | 4.5 | 5.1 | IR | 200 | 1.02 |
Liban | 1 | 300000 | 7.1 | 4.2 | 7.1 | IR | 200 | 1.42 |
Ira | 1 | 190000 | 4 | 4.8 | 4 | WS | 200 | 0.8 |
Embaderho | 1 | 360000 | 9.2 | 3.9 | 0 | IR | 0 | 0 |
Sheib | 2 | 200000 | 2.4 | 8.3 | 2.4 | IR | 300 | 0.72 |
Adighiorgis | 3 | 180000 | 4.5 | 4.0 | 4.5 | IR | 400 | 1.8 |
Bejuk | 3 | 250000 | 5.8 | 4.3 | 5.8 | IR | 400 | 2.32 |
TOTAL | 733.5 | 498 | 118.33 |
* Altitude classes: 1 = > 2200 m, 2 = between 1800 and 2200 m, 3 = <1800 m)
Table A16. Estimation of fisheries potential, Eritrean inland reservoirs without known area*
Reservoir | Altitude class | Volume (m3) | estimated depth (m) | estimated area (ha) | estimated yield (kg/ha/yr) | estimated production (t/yr) |
Adi Gebru | 1 | 160000 | 6 | 2.7 | 200 | 0.5 |
Adi Hamushte | 1 | 150000 | 6 | 2.5 | 200 | 0.5 |
Lamza | 1 | 196000 | 6 | 3.3 | 200 | 0.7 |
Deki Gebru | 1 | 185000 | 6 | 3.1 | 200 | 0.6 |
Dekemare | 2 | 130000 | 6 | 2.2 | 300 | 0.7 |
Laguen | 1 | 200000 | 6 | 3.3 | 200 | 0.7 |
Dairo Paulos | 1 | 45000 | 6 | 0.8 | 200 | 0.2 |
Aderada | 1 | 20000 | 6 | 0.3 | 200 | 0.1 |
Adesfeda | 2 | 201281 | 6 | 3.4 | 300 | 1.0 |
Werketi | 1 | 30000 | 6 | 0.5 | 200 | 0.1 |
Keren | 3 | 70000 | 6 | 1.2 | 400 | 0.5 |
Imni Tselim | 2 | 170000 | 6 | 2.8 | 300 | 0.9 |
Adi Wegera | 1 | 215000 | 6 | 3.6 | 200 | 0.7 |
Ahune | 1 | 77000 | 6 | 1.3 | 200 | 0.3 |
Taketa | 2 | 80000 | 6 | 1.3 | 300 | 0.4 |
Adiagua | 2 | 200000 | 6 | 3.3 | 300 | 1.0 |
Adihizbay | 2 | 60000 | 6 | 1.0 | 300 | 0.3 |
Kodofelasi | 2 | 62623 | 6 | 1.0 | 300 | 0.3 |
geza Gobo | 2 | 135000 | 6 | 2.3 | 300 | 0.7 |
Dogali | 3 | 1000000 | 6 | 16.7 | 400 | 6.7 |
Kilawlie Gula | 1 | 800000 | 6 | 13.3 | 200 | 2.7 |
Ametsi | ? | 271000 | 6 | 4.5 | 300 | 1.4 |
Imbatkala | ? | 198000 | 6 | 3.3 | 300 | 1.0 |
Deki Zeru | ? | 205000 | 6 | 3.4 | 300 | 1.0 |
Degertab | ? | 263000 | 6 | 4.4 | 300 | 1.3 |
Adi Gebray | ? | 350000 | 6 | 5.8 | 300 | 1.8 |
Golgol | ? | 300000 | 6 | 5.0 | 300 | 1.5 |
Tsebib | ? | 250000 | 6 | 4.2 | 300 | 1.3 |
Rubabur | ? | 900000 | 6 | 15.0 | 300 | 4.5 |
Minah | ? | 250000 | 6 | 4.2 | 300 | 1.3 |
Bambi | ? | 220000 | 6 | 3.7 | 300 | 1.1 |
TOTAL | 7393904 | 123.2 | 35.3 |
* (Altitude classes : 1 =>2200 m, 2 = between 1800 and 2200 m, 3 = < 1800 m).
Table A17a. Dried products purchased and sold - Massawa, March 1992
COMMODITY | QUANTITY PURCHASED | QUANTITY SOLD | |||||||
Area | Wgt | Unit Price | Tot. Value | Area | Wgt | Unit Price | Tot. Value | ||
Shark Meat
| - small | Dahlak | 4071 | 3.50 | 14248.50 | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. |
-large | " | 900 | 1.00 | 900.00 | " | " | " | " | |
Sea Cucumber | " | 232 | 18.00 | 4176.00 | " | " | " | " | |
Shark Fins
| - large | " | 216.5 | 46.50 | 10067.25 | " | " | " | " |
- small | " | 72 | 18.00 | 1296.00 | " | " | " | " | |
- white | " | 7 | 80.00 | 560.00 | " | " | " | " | |
Snail nail
| - small | " | n.d | n.d | n.d | " | " | " | " |
- large | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | |
Mullet
| - large | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | " |
- medium | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | |
- small | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | |
Jack fish | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | |
TOTAL | -- | 5498.5 | -- | 31247.75 | -- | -- | -- | -- |
Table A17b. Dried products purchased and sold - Massawa, April 1992
COMMODITY | QUANTITY PURCHASED | QUANTITY SOLD | |||||||
Area | Wgt | Unit Price | Tot. Value | Area | Wgt | Unit Price | Tot. Value | ||
Shark Meat | - small | Dahlak | 7888.5 | 3.30 | 26032.05 | Dahlak | 4071 | 3.50 | 14248.50 |
- large | " | 1530 | 1.00 | 1530.00 | " | 900 | 1.20 | 1080.00 | |
Sea Cucumber | " | 1459 | 18.00 | 26262.00 | " | 232 | 20.00 | 4640.00 | |
Shark Fins | - large | 372.5 | 46.50 | 17321.25 | " | n.d | n.d | n.d | |
- small | " | 108.5 | 18.00 | 1953.00 | " | " | " | " | |
- white | " | 24.5 | 80.00 | 1960.00 | " | " | " | " | |
Snail nail | - small | " | 5 | 450.00 | 2250.00 | Massawa | 5 | 700.00 | 3500.00 |
- large | " | 145.5 | 130.00 | 18915.00 | " | 5.5 | 100.00 | 550.00 | |
Mullet | - large | " | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. |
- medium | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | |
- small | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | |
Jack fish | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | |
TOTAL | -- | 11533.5 | -- | 96223.3 | -- | 5213.5 | -- | 24018.50 |
Table A17c. Dried products and sold — Massawa, June 1992
COMMODITY | QUANTITY PURCHASED | QUANTITY SOLD | |||||||
Area | Wgt | Unit Price | Tot. Value | Area | Wgt | Unit Price | Tot. Value | ||
Shark Meat
| - small | Dahlak | 10375.5 | 3.30 | 34239.15 | Dahlak | 14045.5 | 4.00 | 56182.00 |
- large | " | 1226.5 | 1.00 | 1226.50 | " | 1740.5 | 1.30 | 2262.65 | |
Sea Cucumber | " | 1253.5 | 18.00 | 22563.00 | " | 2477 | 21.00 | 52017.00 | |
Shark Fins
| - large | 156.5 | 46.50 | 7277.25 | " | n.d | n.d | n.d | |
- small | " | 48 | 18.00 | 864.00 | " | " | " | " | |
- white | " | 6 | 80.00 | 480.00 | " | " | " | " | |
Snail nail
| - small | " | 52.75 | 450.00 | 23737.50 | " | 52.75 | 580.00 | 30595.00 |
- large | " | 172 | 130.00 | 22360.00 | " | 306.5 | 158.00 | 48427.00 | |
Mullet
| - large | " | 1840 | 3.00 | 5520.00 | " | 1840 | 4.00 | 7360.00 |
- medium | " | 1305 | 2.00 | 2610.00 | " | 1305 | 3.00 | 3915.00 | |
- small | " | 4800 | 1.00 | 4800.00 | " | 4800 | 2.00 | 9600.00 | |
Jack fish | " | 615 | .50 | 307.50 | " | 615 | .70 | 430.50 | |
TOTAL | -- | 21850.75 | -- | 125984.90 | -- | 27182.25 | -- | 210789.20 |
Table A17d. Dried products purchased and sold -- Assab, June 1992
COMMODITY | QUANTITY PURCHASED | QUANTITY SOLD | |||||||
Area | Wgt | Unit Price | Tot. Value | Area | Wgt | Unit Price | Tot. Value | ||
Shark Meat | - small | Assab | 9691 | 3.00 | 29073.00 | Assab | 9691 | 3.50 | 33918.50 |
- large | " | 2239 | 1.00 | 2239.00 | " | 2239 | 1.75 | 3918.25 | |
Sea Cucumber | " | 14.2 | 14.00 | 198.80 | " | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | |
Shark Fins | - large | " | 235.5 | 25.00 | 5887.50 | " | 203 | 18.00 | 3654.00 |
- small | " | 152.5 | 12.00 | 1830.00 | " | 148 | 11.00 | 1628.00 | |
- white | " | 45.5 | 80.00 | 3640.00 | " | 40 | 33.00 | 1320.00 | |
Snail nail | - small | " | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | " | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. |
- large | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | |
Mullet | - large | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | " |
- medium | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | |
- small | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | |
Jack fish | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | |
TOTAL | -- | 12377.7 | -- | 42868.30 | 12321 | -- | 44438.75 |
Table A17e. Dried products purchased and sold — Massawa, July-August 1992
COMMODITY | QUANTITY PURCHASED | QUANTITY SOLD | |||||||
Area | Wgt | Unit Price | Tot. Value | Area | Wgt | Unit Price | Tot. Value | ||
Shark Meat | - small | Dahlak | 6584 | 3.30 | 21727.20 | Dahlak | 1102 | 4.00 | 4408.00 |
- large | " | 1206 | 1.00 | 1206.00 | " | 6245 | 1.30 | 8118.50 | |
Sea Cucumber | " | 1379 | 18.00 | 24822.00 | " | 988 | 21.00 | 20748.00 | |
Shark Fins | - large | " | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | " | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. |
- small | " | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | " | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | |
- white | " | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | " | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | |
Snail nail | - small | " | 19 | 450.00 | 8550.00 | Massawa | 3.5 | 116.67 | 407.35 |
- large | " | 139 | 130.00 | 18070.00 | Dahlak | 139 | 158.00 | 21962.00 | |
Mullet | - large | " | 1100 | 3.00 | 3300.00 | " | 1100 | 4.00 | 4400.00 |
- medium | " | 540 | 2.00 | 1080.00 | " | 540 | 3.00 | 1620.00 | |
- small | " | 5400 | 1.00 | 5400.00 | " | 5400 | 1.30 | 7020.00 | |
Jack fish | " | 100 | .50 | 50.00 | " | 100 | .70" | 70.00 | |
TOTAL | -- | 16467 | -- | 84205.20 | 15617.5 | -- | 68754.85 |
Table A17f. Dried products purchased and sold — Massawa, Sept. 1992
COMMODITY | QUANTITY PURCHASED | QUANTITY SOLD | |||||||
Area | Wgt | Unit Price | Tot. Value | Area | Wgt | Unit Price | Tot. Value | ||
Shark Meat | - small | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | Dahlak | 11580 | n.d. | n.d. | |
- large | " | " | " | " | 527 | " | " | ||
Sea Cucumber | " | " | " | " | 1140 | " | " | ||
Shark Fins | - large | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | |
- small | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | ||
- white | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | ||
Snail nail | - small | " | " | " | " | 0 | " | " | |
- large | " | " | " | " | 419 | " | " | ||
Mullet | - large | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | |
- medium | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | ||
- small | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | ||
Jack fish | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | ||
TOTAL | " | " | " | " | 13666 | " | " |
Table A17g. Dried products purchased and sold — Massawa, Oct. 1992
COMMODITY | QUANTITY PURCHASED | QUANTITY SOLD | |||||||
Area | Wgt | Unit Price | Tot. Value | Area | Wgt | Unit Price | Tot. Value | ||
Shark Meat | - small | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | Dahlak | 1610 | n.d. | n.d. | |
- large | " | " | " | " | 637 | " | " | ||
Sea Cucumber | " | " | " | " | 0 | " | " | ||
Shark Fins | - large | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | |
- small | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | ||
- white | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | ||
Snail nail | - small | " | " | " | " | 119 | " | " | |
- large | " | " | " | " | 0 | " | " | ||
Mullet | - large | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | |
- medium | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | ||
- small | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | ||
Jack fish | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | ||
TOTAL | " | " | " | " | 2366 | " | " |
Table A17h. Dried products purchased and sold — Massawa, Nov. 1992
COMMODITY | QUANTITY PURCHASED | QUANTITY SOLD | |||||||
Area | Wgt | Unit Price | Tot. Value | Area | Wgt | Unit Price | Tot. Value | ||
Shark Meat | - small | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | Dahlak | 15076 | n.d. | n.d. | |
- large | " | " | " | " | 1828 | " | " | ||
Sea Cucumber | " | " | " | " | 2716 | " | " | ||
Shark Fins | - large | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | |
- small | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | ||
- white | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | ||
Snail nail | - small | " | " | " | " | 0 | " | " | |
- large | " | " | " | " | 207 | " | " | ||
Mullet | - large | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | |
- medium | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | ||
- small | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | ||
Jack fish | " | " | " | " | " | " | " | ||
TOTAL | " | " | " | " | 2366 | " | " |