developing a wetland classification system...the schedule of workshops was as follows: v st1...

DEVELOPING

A

WETLAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

for the LOWER MEKONG BASIN

Results from a series of Regional and National Workshops

A report in two parts:

Analysis

and

Workshop Proceedings

IMW-LMB Project Phase 2

MRC June 2001

ABBREVIATIONS

BDP Basin Development Plan CNMC Cambodia National Mekong Committee CTA Chief Technical Adviser DFRC Division of forest Resources Conservation DLD Department of Land Development (Thailand) FIPI Forest Inventory and Planning Institute HGM Hydro Geomorphic ICLARM International Centre for Living Aquatic Resources Management IMW-LMB Inventory of Wetlands in the Lower Mekong Basin (Project Phase 2) IUCN The World Conservation Union IWRPM Institute of Water Resources Planning and Management JC Joint Committee LARReC Lao Aquatic Resources Research Centre LMB Lower Mekong Basin LNMC Lao National Mekong Committee MRC Mekong River Commission MRCS Mekong River Commission Secretariat MRC-EP Mekong River Commission Environment Programme NEA National Environment Agency NIES Japanese National Institute for the Environment Studies NMC National Mekong Committee Sida Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency WIMSG Wetland Inventory Monitoring Specialist Group WLCS Wetland Classification System WSC Watershed Classification WRDD Water Resources Development Division WUP Water Utilisation Programme

LIST OF CONTENTS PART ONE – ANALYSIS 2 1. BACKGROUND 2 1.2 Approach 2 1.3 Summary of the Workshops’ Input and Outcome 4 1.4 First Regional workshop (‘setting of the stage’) 4 1.5 National Workshops 5 1.6 Second Regional workshop (‘consolidating the process’) 6 1.7 Analysis conclusion – the way forward from here 6 PART TWO – WLCS WORKSHOPS’ PROCEEDINGS 9 2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 9 2.1 FIRST REGIONAL WLCS WORKSHOP (VIENTIANE) 11 2.2 Introduction 11 2.3 Proceedings 12 2.4 Outcome 16 2.5 Presentation summaries: !st Regional WLCS Workshop: 16 3. NATIONAL WLCS WORKSHOP, LAO P.D.R. 19 3.1 Proceedings 19 3.2 Outcome 22 3.3 Presentation summaries: Lao PDR National WLCS Workshop: 23 4. NATIONAL WLCS WORKSHOP, VIET NAM 25 4.1 Proceedings 25 4.2 Outcome 27 4.3 Presentation summaries: Viet Nam National WLCS Workshop: 28 5. NATIONAL WLCS WORKSHOP, CAMBODIA 30 5.1 Proceedings 30 5.2 Outcome 32 5.3 Presentation summaries: Cambodia National WLCS Workshop 33 6. NATIONAL WLCS WORKSHOP THAILAND 34 6.1 Proceedings 34 6.2 Outcome 36 6.3 Presentation summaries, Thailand National WLCS Workshop: 36 7. SECOND REGIONAL WORKSHOP (Phnom Penh) 39 7.1 Proceedings 39 7.2 Presentation summaries, 2nd Regional WLCS Workshop: 45 7.3 Outcome 48

Developing a WLCS for the LMB / MRC June 2001 2

PART ONE - ANALYSIS This part of the report comprises an analysis of the input and output of the MRC workshop Wetland Classification System (WLCS) development process, and of the requirements for a sound WLCS for the Lower Mekong Basin (LMB). The objective of this document section is to provide an overview of the WLCS activity process, and to summarize the obtained results.

1. BACKGROUND Wetlands’ rich biodiversity and productivity is now widely acknowledged, and so is their bio-physical function, for instance in storing and cleansing water. By their nature, wetlands are habitats and landforms that demand a cross-sectoral management approach. But not many countries in the world are ready with this approach, and in the LMB there are problems with wetlands’ management because wetland administration is difficult. In some places tackling this issue is evaded by still maintaining a standpoint of uncertainty of what wetlands are. The main reason for defining the term “wetland” is to accurately catalogue wetland types. Thus providing an essential tool for making management decisions regarding wetland areas, both at site and at catchment level. A standard regional classification system needs to be implemented to allow site-specific pin-pointing, as well as comparison of regional wetland types within the member countries. This could facilitate a more holistic approach to sustainable LMB wetland management issues. There is a heavy reliance, especially at subsistence level on the functions and products of wetlands. It is a matter of some urgency to provide a contextual definition of wetlands that is not only relevant to planners, policy makers and local people but also to indicate that wetlands can play a major part in sustainable socio-economic development. During 1999, the first year of IMW-LMB Phase 2 activities, the need in all four countries for a forum for discussions on WLCS became evident. For example, the Ramsar-based WLCS that had been adopted by MRC in 1993 was not fully understood by the government agencies working with wetlands in the LMB countries. Wetland classification should include functional values considered important by local users, managers and policy makers. Hence, the need for certain country specific modifications within the regional system. For example multiple rice cropping, mariculture, hydropower projects and land tenure issues may be differently ranked in the individual LMB countries. These various types should be incorporated into a standard system, as opposed to continuing with parallel classification systems that are not directly comparable. In 2000 a process of developing a more suitable WLCS for LMB was initiated under the auspices of the IMW-LMB Phase 2. 1.2 Approach The whole WLCS project activity has been done with a process-oriented approach. The scope of issues to clarify regarding WLCS in the LMB is large, which warranted an extensive and thorough process. Therefore, a fully participatory approach was taken


with the NMCs and line agencies of the four LMB countries, from the beginning in tackling the WLCS queries. The three main steps of the process were as follows: • A study of impacts of the Ramsar – based WLCS, adopted by MRC; • The member countries’ NMCs were requested to arrange a meeting between the

line agency staff involved in wetlands management. This in order to identify a national team to participate in a series of workshops on a WLCS for the LMB (permanence of participants was considered to be a key process element), and to approve the proposed dates for the workshops;

• A series of workshops were held between mid September and early November 2000 (one regional, then four national, and lastly another regional workshop).

The workshops were carried out as planned and they all had lively sessions with active debate, an indication that these exchanges on wetland types and their use in the LMB are needed. This was necessary in order to gain a consensus within the LMB on how to tackle the issues of wetlands distribution, inventory, classification, and mapping. These wetland project workshops were held in direct conjunction with workshops conducted by the ICLARM ‘Legal and Institutional Framework / Wetlands’ Project’. The ICLARM workshops provided coverage of other relevant and closely related issues of wetland management in the LMB. Many participants could take part in both the WLCS workshops and the ICLARM workshops, increasing significantly the ‘wetlands issues impact’ on those participants from the workshops. ICLARM wetland workshops of 2 days started the day after the WLCS workshops in Lao PDR, Viet Nam and Cambodia. The workshops were organized by the IMW-LMB Project with support from the MRC-EP, and workshop facilitators were the IMW-LMB CTA and consultant, with support from the NMCs. However, main actors in this quite intensive process were each country’s workshop participants, the government line agency, national institution and NMC staff. The schedule of workshops was as follows: v 1st Regional, Vientiane, 18-19 September 2000 v National Lao PDR, 26-27 September 2000 (Vientiane) v National Viet Nam, 3-4 October 2000 (Hanoi) v National Cambodia, 8-9 October 2000 (Siem Reap) v National Thailand, 16-17 Thailand 2000 (Khon Kaen) v 2nd Regional, Phnom Penh, 7-8 November 2000. The Institutional framework for conducting the WLCS workshops is the IMW-LMB Project Phase 2. The WLCS activities contribute to achieving IMW-LMB Project Immediate objectives 1, 3, 4 and 7. The WLCS activities also address the important issue of integrating the Cambodian Wetland project with IMW-LMB Project activities. During initial preparation of the WLCS workshops, the activities were to establish a benchmark for the MRC Wetland Core Component, then under formulation. At that time these WLCS activities were envisioned to be a leading part of the process of the then Environment Unit’s shift to new Environment Programme. By the time the development activities of a LMB / WLCS were finished, the outcome was envisioned to become parts of the new MRC-EP sub-component A2, ‘People and Aquatic Ecosystems’. Significant wetland organizations Ramsar and Wetland International were invited to participate in the Regional WLCS workshops, but they could not attend for various reasons.


1.3 Summary of the Workshops’ Input and Outcome A summary of the main input to and outcome from the workshops is presented below, while complete proceedings are presented in part two of this document. The input to the Regional workshops presented here is mainly presentation summaries, and input to the National workshops is indicated mainly as topics of discussion (group work tasks). Separate National workshop reports have been produced by Lao PDR, Thailand and Cambodia. These are presented in the separate Annexes volume, accompanying this main report 1.4 First Regional workshop (‘setting of the stage’) Outcome: There was consensus that : • A simpler WLCS should be made. • The Hydro Geomorphic (HGM) system could provide such a system. • Landform, land use, water regime and water quality could be included in a WLCS

for the LMB. • MRC requested to facilitate the development of an improved WLCS for the LMB. The foundation of the HGM approach in classifying wetlands may be illustrated simply as the schematic Table below indicates. In this way, the basis for classifying a wetland located in one of 5 landforms, and with one of four hydroperiods can be seen. (See the WLCS Aide Memoire for further clarification.)

Landform + hydroperiod = WETLAND CLASS

Landforms Hydroperiod

BASIN CHANNEL

FLAT

SLOPE

HIGHLAND

Permanent Inundation

WL Type 1

WL Type 5

--------

--------

--------

Seasonal Inundation

WL Type 2

WL Type 6

WL Type 9

---------

--------

Intermittent Inundation

WL Type 3

WL Type 7

WLType 10

---------

--------

Seasonally Waterlogged

WL Type 4

WL Type 8

WL Type11

WLType 12

WLType 13

Diagramme A (Table).


1.5 National Workshops1 Lao P.D.R Input – main discussion points: • Lack of understanding over the terminology and definition of wetlands; • Current WLCS too academic; • Modifications to the classification system required; • Improved base line data generation; • Development of methods for assessing the function of wetlands. Outcome: • WLCS to assist in wetland management, i.e. ‘wise use’, to alleviate poverty; • Training and training of trainers requested; • Suggested that pilot sites used to develop wetland classification and assessment; • HGM system to integrate with existing system needed; • Simple classification needed; • Ways to include land use should be explored. Viet Nam Input – main discussion points: • Difficulties in terminology. Generally, the Ramsar definition was agreed upon, and

the “wise use” concept supported. • Terminology of rice fields and their ‘wetlands’ classification; • The difficulties of classification, its relevance to scientists and local people; • Soil classification, land use, water quality, ecosystem types to be considered; • Results and experiences made during the many years Mekong Delta inventory

work. Outcome: • Harmonisation of national and regional classification systems an important issue; • Land use and water quality criteria should be included in a LMB WLCS system; • A simpler system was called for at the regional level; • The HGM system was flagged as a means of providing a simple, hierarchical

system for regional classification (as a general framework, which may then be integrated into the national classification system).

• MRC requested to continue to assist with the development of a LMB / WLCS. • Pilot site activities suggested as being a means of developing a LMB / WLCS. Cambodia Input – main discussion points: • Lack of base line data on wetlands; • Lack of information on functions and values; • Biodiversity considerations most prominent in Cambodian WLCS; • Cambodian national classification presently based on MedWeT Europe (see p 31),

but there is also a lack of information on how MedWet WLCS is made; • Difficulties in terminology.

1 A separate document of Annexes accompanies this report, and includes National WLCS workshop reports from Lao PDR, Thailand and Viet Nam..


Outcome: • National and regional classification to be integrated; • Capacity building required; • Pilot sites required to develop regional WLCS; • Multi-sectoral approach to wetland classification necessary; • Ramsar definition agreed to; • LMB / WLCS to be incorporated into national classification. Thailand Input – main discussion points: • National classification required; • Classification applicability and local people; • Some examples of community involvement in management highlighted; • Problems associated with canal building; • Difficulties within the current WLCS in classifying wetland complexes, i.e. wetland

definition and problems of mixed criteria, when needed to separate wetlands; • Laws to conserve wetlands established 7 years+ but lack of continuity in

organisational responsibility; • Conflict between resource users and governing agencies; • Differing capacities across the region. Outcome: • Ramsar definition accepted as the most useful for ecosystem approach; • National classification to include extra hierarchical level(s); • Needs for the development of a regional classification agreed upon; • Suggested that regional classification should be mapped at a scale of 1:1M; • Regional classification to be simpler and include first three levels of Thai

classification and then land use (1. water type, 2. geomorphology, 3. inundation regime);

• Pilot sites requested to develop regional classification system; • Criteria for defining rice field wetlands (i.e. water present for >3months). 1.6 Second Regional workshop (‘consolidating the process’) Outcome: The country delegations agree to develop a regional Wetland Classification System for the LMB, following the HGM approach, which fulfils the workshop objective. 1.7 Analysis conclusion – the way forward from here It is suggested that the next step is to request MRC to facilitate the preparation of proposal to the Joint Council to endorse the workshop’s decision. Thereafter, a series of 2 day training workshops on the HGM approach could be arranged in each country. Alternatively, two 2-country workshops could be conducted instead of doing four. One topic of the workshop could be to elaborate the HGM structure shown in Diag. B and C, below. Identifying links WLCS to WUP and BDP would be critical components of the meetings. It is important to follow other activities similar to WLCS in the region, primarily, the Asian Wetland Inventory initiative, run by WI and their partners WIMSG and NIES).


Diagramme B. Simple illustration of the HGM approach to wetland classification.

Opened-ended HGM

Classification System

Regional level

LOWER MEKONG BASIN WETLAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (Suggested to encompass landform, hydroperiod and land use.)

National level

NATIONAL WETLAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS (Could encompass all levels) A schematic diagramme of how additional data levels can increase the detail of wetland classification is provided on the following page (Diagramme C). An advantage to the HGM approach to WLCS is that it is both a dynamic and systematic. Thus, the broader levels of the WLCS can both deliver information towards local level, and assimilate the more detailed information from the ‘subject’, or topic level of classifications and surveys shown on the right hand side (see below).

L A N D F O R M

H Y D R O P E R I O D

WETLAND C L A S S

MORE WETLAND CLASSES

MORE SPECIFIC WETLAND CLASSIFICATION, AS CORE DATA INCREASES

National classification systems, applicable to site level

Land Use


Suggested information flows between a regional WLCS using the HGM approach and subject area national and local level information. Diagramme C.

Regional WLCS using the HGM

approach

LAND USE Classification

SOIL TYPE Classification

WATER QUALITY

INDEX

FISH HABITATClassification

VEG TYPE Classification

WATERSHED Classification

FUNCTIONAL INDEX

FORESTRY Classification


PART TWO – WLCS WORKSHOPS’ PROCEEDINGS The objective of this document section is to provide a comprehensive account of meeting proceedings of all the WLCS workshops. 2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Rationale Wetland classification is needed for the provision of baseline information for inventory and planning, to increase the capacity of policy makers to make informed wetland management decisions. The outputs can also integrate with external and internal natural resource programmes e.g., hydrological information for the WUP; land use information for the BDP; and relevant data for many other sectoral programmes. WLCS Purpose A wetland classification system in the LMB aims to provide managers and planners with a simple “tool” for sound planning and management of wetland natural resources. The WLCS should describe geomorphic setting, hydrology and land use and through a clear and systematic structure provide a basis for inventory and monitoring of LMB wetlands. The structure of the classification should be hierarchical with a stepwise increase in complexity, and be open ended and applicable at any level. The WLCS is also intended to furnish mapping units and to provide uniformity of concepts and terms, with the ultimate goal of assessing and predicting wetland functions. This availability of this structure is important to other LMB water-use activities, and will be of particular relevance to the MRC Water Utilization Programme (WUP) & Basin Development Plan (BDP). National Wetland Classification Workshops Under the auspices of the IMW-LMB Phase 2, a status review of issues relating to regional wetland classification was conducted in April 2000, and the findings written in the ‘study’ report. One of the central findings of the report was that there was no single, functioning classification system for wetlands of the Lower Mekong Basin. The initial regional and subsequent national classification workshops were held in order to discuss the Study report, and take the WLCS development process further from there. The classification workshops were conducted using a fully participatory approach, making provision for, and being driven by, the needs of the LMB countries. A fundamental output of the initial regional classification workshop in Vientiane, was the riparian countries’ request to the MRC for assistance in developing a regional WLCS. Another output of the regional workshop was that alongside geomorphology and hydrology, land use was suggested to be included at regional level within the classification system. (This is more usually associated with wetland assessment or after tertiary levels of classification.) Generic Workshop Objectives • To assist the riparian countries in the development of a regional classification

system based on national needs;


• To obtain information from and assess the needs of riparian countries regarding WLCS, i.e. identify important national criteria for inclusion in wetland classification;

• To provide natural resource planners and managers with an effective means of making informed decisions for the sustainable development of aquatic habitats in the lower Mekong Basin.

All workshops have been carried out as originally planned. There was active discussion in each workshop, and in most cases the workshops provided a first occasion for all ‘bodies’ working with wetlands to come together to discuss issues important to all. The countries’ main findings: • A simpler WLCS should be made. • Land use, water regime and water quality criteria could be included in a WLCS for

the LMB. • The HGM approach to WLCS could provide such a system. • Ramsar definition accepted, as best available. • Important to include rice fields in LMB WLCS. • Pilot sites studies could be included as LMB WLCS development activity. • Multi sectoral approach is best for wetlands. Some of the difficulties: • Many discussions were about terminology of wetlands, and of classification

classes. • These two topics were seen by many participants as being complicated, & issues

repeated in most workshops included the following: - The Ramsar definition is accepted, but it is not completely suitable. - The current WLCS for LMB too academic and does not work well as a LMB planning tool for wetland natural resources.

• National needs of WLCS for deeper detail (i.e. mapping topics) relevant at national or local level, and often hard to separate from regional LMB needs.

Next steps for a LMB WLCS The main conclusion from the National workshops is that a simple and flexible WLCS system, to allow development of greater detail when necessary (national and site levels) is needed. Therefore, the HGM approach may be considered. The HGM approach is the relevant approach for MRC to consider because MRC cannot act independently in the WLCS activities. Other main actors such as WI, Ramsar, and ICLARM also are working with or toward the HGM approach. Also, there is a need to make haste in providing data and maps to the riparian countries, and MRC is best placed to facilitate this. Basic LMB data for WLCS development with HGM is available, with the main source being Digital Terrain Model data from the MRC Watershed Classification Project.


2.1 FIRST REGIONAL WLCS WORKSHOP (VIENTIANE) This workshop was held in Vientiane, Lao P.D.R. during 17 – 18 September 2000. Thirty delegates attended the two-day meeting, including ministerial and sector representatives. The objectives of the workshop were:

- To present and discuss the report ‘Study on the MRC Wetlands Classification System’; and - To establish a sound basis for the riparian National workshops on WCS development.

2.2 Introduction Findings from the study report indicate that despite developing an agreed system in1993 there is no standard classification system used in the lower Mekong Basin (LMB). It was noted that the Ramsar / MRC classification system was too academic and used mixed criteria to separate wetlands masking their underlying geomorphological settings and functions. Further, the “classification tool” should be an aid in the decision making process for the use of natural resources, it was sometimes found to be ineffective. There also appear to be gaps in our knowledge about where wetlands are, what type they are and what functions and products are carried out or produced by them. Within the study report it was suggested that indigenous classification systems be researched and incorporated within a hydro-geomorphic classification system (HGM) for the basin. The HGM system is based initially upon landform and hydroperiod but can be applied further to assess and predict wetland functioning. It is open ended. This combination allows regional comparison using the fundamentals of wetland formation in conjunction with applicability at the site level as core data increases. This opportunity to incorporate the economic, direct & indirect, valuation of wetland functioning alongside traditional knowledge of resource management poses an intriguing opportunity for true wise use. It was also noted in the study report that there have been a number of classification system developments across the region. All with differing methodologies. Regional comparison is therefore not practical. In the past the MRC has provided little guidance on national modifications to classification. There have been few feedback sessions. Some countries have hardly used the system at all. Other countries have modified the system in isolation to increase national applicability. This is not solely a consequence of differing capacities or national differences, rather it is the lack of flexibility and simplicity of the adopted classification system, hence its dysfunction. A support document was distributed in the form of an aide memoire, to strengthen awareness of the issues of wetland inventory and management and form the basis of further literature resource assistance. As planned for earlier, the character of this meeting was that of consultation workshop, with many presentations given on WLCS issues in order to provide a good information basis for this and the four National workshop deliberations.


2.3 Proceedings The workshop was conducted without any major changes to the previously established meeting agenda. The proceedings report that follows is done according to this agenda. Day 1 Registration: The workshop was opened with an address by H. E. Mr. Sitaheng Rasphone, Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Forestry and Vice Chairman of LNMC, followed by Statements by Mr. Christer Holtsberg, Charge d’Affaires, Embassy of Sweden, and Ms. Busabong Thephasdin Na Ayudhya, Director of MRC Environment Programme. The opening statements are presented in section 2.3. Participants introduced themselves and the opening session was then ended with a photograph taken of the group. Presentation: Mr. Valdemar Holmgren, CTA / Wetlands Coordinator spoke about the rationale behind the activity to develop a WLCS for the LMB, including some points about the ongoing restructuring of the MRC-EP, and the transition from Project to Programme mode of MRC operation. The focus of the MRC WCLS activity is within a regional and basinwide scope, but the basis for this should come from the national level. National wetland classification data should feed into the regional WLCS, and vice-versa, as there are wetland areas outside the LMB in each country. Only Lao PDR is in the situation of equating a LMB WLCS with a national one. Mr. Valdemar called for guidelines for the role that a MRC WLCS would have for the LMB member counties. Presentation: Mr. Mark Dubois, IMW-LMB Consultant gave a presentation on The Study on the MRC Wetland Classification System. Main points: Central Findings:

Considerable outputs have been achieved, but not always with common methodologies. The MRC classification system is not fully implemented across the LMB.

WLCS Origins: Cowardin (1979). US Fish & Wildlife Service Scott (1989). A Directory of Asian Wetlands (IUCN) Dugan (1990). Wetland conservation: A review of current issues & required action (IUCN)

Wetlands are Dynamic Systems But the MRC WLCS is static with little room for adaptation and National needs are not always catered for. Few feedback sessions.

Adaptive classification Differences in capacities and needs in the region, and there is little scope for parallel development based on common core data focusing on regional goals.

Issues of context Difficulties with terminology, 3 of 4 languages don’t have a term for wetland. Indigenous systems of classification not assessed.

Legal & Administrative issues Few specific wetland policies implemented across the region. Challenges regarding jurisdiction of wetlands, i.e. those seasonally inundated.


Concluding Remarks on the ‘MRC’ WLCS Problems over definitions despite inherent understanding of wetland values. Other systems of classification not fully investigated. Insufficient feedback, and National modifications not easy to include. Insufficient valuation of wetland functions & products. Static system with little connection to existing data sources.

Presentation: Mr. Thomas Breu, CTA, MRC Watershed Classification (WSC) Project, presented the project and pointed out that this data could be used for establishing a basis for terrain classes that would be useful for the HGM approach to WLCS. Mr. Thomas pointed out that the aims of the WSC project fitted well to the needs of the MRC WLCS activities. The aims are: To elaborate a Watershed Classification system for the LMB; To make a cartographic assessment of the Watersheds, using this classification; Transfer of know how, and Application of WSC and related data. (Powerpoint pres.) Presentation: Mr. David Coates, CTA MRC Fishery Programme, Assessment Component, presented Fish ecology issues and capture fisheries perspective on wetland classification, chiefly the dynamics of wetland habitats, fish movements and dry season concerns. The role of wetlands is critical to fish, as their life cycles involve many different wetlands. Mr. David spoke of the dependency fish have on different places during their life, and how this is intimately connected to the water dynamics of the Mekong river, i.e. Rapids and pools within the river as Spawning habitats; river Channels as Rearing habitats; Floodplains as Feeding habitat; and Deep pools within the river as Refuge habitats. Presentation: Mr. Magnus Torell, Project Leader ICLARM Project ‘Legal and Institutional Framework, and Economic Valuation of Resources and Environment in the Mekong River Region: Wetlands Approach’, presented the project and the wetlands issues closely related to WLCS that the ICLARM Project is addressing. Mr. Magnus stressed that it is important to link WLCS to land use, as there is, in regard to LMB wetlands policy, legal and institutional issues the following difficulties: Unclear responsibilities; Lack of clear mandates; and insufficient law-making processes. (Powerpoint presentation) Country presentations Thailand: Inclusive national classification of wetlands agreed on. Cambodia: Wants to organise greater co-operation with Lao PDR & general transboundary issues / community involvement, with national objectives first. Lao PDR: Little documentation of wetlands, concerned with the bottom-up approach / people- centred classification Vietnam: Modifications to the regional system, land use criteria to be included within the classification system.


Day 2 Presentation Mr. George Begg, Wetland Scientist with the National Centre for Tropical Wetland Research, Australia, presented an overview of the current approach to wetlands classification in Australia, and in SE Asia through the AWI initiative. Mr. George emphasized that the HGM can be simple, but open-ended, so more detail can be included, the more close to site level one gets. The main points were as follows Lessons from the past The word “wetland” is a generic term used to group land areas where saturation with water is the dominant factor determining their ecological character. Wetlands have similar determinants (landform and water regimes) throughout the world, and uses (and users) of the wetlands are similar throughout the world. There is little to be gained by independent development of a new classification scheme Purpose of classification

“Decision makers cannot make informed decisions about wetlands without knowing how many and what type are where” (Wilen 1985).

This implies that wetland classification: • must be accompanied by inventory and mapping; and that it • is a stock-taking exercise aimed at:

• locating areas that meet the accepted definition of wetlands; • arranging ecological units for inventory and mapping; • aiding decisions about resource management;S • providing uniformity in wetland concepts and terminology; • facilitating basin wide landuse planning; and • meeting the needs of users with different goals.

Ramsar classification weaknesses include:

inconsistent application of criteria used similarity of landfrom setting for some types on hydroperiod inconsistent separation on salinity imprecise definition of some systems

Criteria for a robust classification system: A “robust classification system” must be:

Simple (easily learned and applied); Contain building blocks that can be easily understood by lay public / other users; Hierarchical to allow:

- for the systematic (logical) aggregation (grouping) and disaggregation of potentially large data sets; - decision making at various geographical and administrative levels; - rational comparisons to be made; and - value judgements to be made without it being an evaluation system.

Open ended (to accept new elements as knowledge advances); Incorporate scale (global / regional/local) ; Capture the diversity of wetlands and wetland uses. Recommendations + Adoption of the HGM (hydrogeomorphic) approach: proposed by Semeniuk and Semeniuk (1987, 1995, 1997) and adopted by AWI. + Re-ordering of the “Ramsar / LMB classification” by strengthening its underlying geomorphic and hydrologic elements. The various levels of data that may be included in the HGM WLCS approach, are as follows (from overview towards detail):


Geomorphic features àTerrain units à Geographical coordinates / altitude / slope / wetland shape / wetland area à Hydrological features and Hydroperiod à Soil / Water regime and Soil morphology à Water chemistry (salinity, pH, turbidity, nutrients, etc) and Ecological features (plant zonation, dominant biota ànoteworthy / protected species, etc) Group work session 1: Tasks: How can a LMB WLCS contribute to National needs?

Outline objectives for the National workshops. General discussions on topics/ questions raised by Mr. Valdemar.

Group presentations #1 (Main points) Cambodia 1. Consider the Information provided during the workshop. Information during the workshop was applicable to immediate needs at local, national and regional level. There was good info on AWI and WI. 2.How can regional class system contribute to the national needs? Build capacity (training needs, technical assistance), inventory and mapping, policy and planning alongside identification of trans-boundary issues all based around functions and values of wetland types. 3.Outline objectives for national workshop - common concept of wetlands, to improve the national wetland classification systems based on information of regional workshops and ensure future plans for the sustainable use and management of wetlands. Vietnam 1 Harmonise Mekong Delta classification with an LMB classification system. Useful as a basis for biodiversity conservation, environment protection, sustainable development as a tool for inventory, monitoring and management. 2. MRC to fund the above. 3. To provide information on LMB WLCS, and to discuss workplan for the year 2001 and further. Thailand 1. Integrated WLCS to contribute to national needs and a national inventory. Issues for consideration Geomorphology / hydrology. Ramsar definition accepted. Output: National WLCS Lao P.D.R. 1. Wetland definition and criteria for wetland classification unclear,. 2. Planning / management / monitoring and evaluation à policy and decision-making. 3. Discuss wetland definition and terminology. Group work session 2: Task: What are the national, and the regional wetland issues?


Group presentations #2: Cambodia To develop inventory and mapping based on landform + hydroperiod (HGM?) and to classify wetlands according to functions and values (HGM?). Vietnam To develop common scheme with LMB using HGM (?) approach i.e., based on: (a) water, (b) landform/geomorphology and (c) hydrology duration”. Thailand Harmonize the wetland definition; MRC to assist riparian countries with WLCS and data for wetland identification. A LMB WLCS a desired output. Lao PDR Mainly discussion on terminology issues and problems with definition. Monitoring and evaluation were mentioned along with some specific inputs for consideration within a LMB classification system e.g., extra categories for rice and inclusion of fish habitats. 2.4 Outcome There was consensus that : • A simpler WLCS should be made. • The HGM system could provide such a system. • Landform, land use, water regime and water quality could be included in a WLCS

for the LMB. • MRC requested to facilitate the development of an improved WLCS for the LMB. Workshop closure: Valdemar Holmgren closed the workshop by thanking all participants for their participation and contributions to a good start of the discussions on developing a WLCS for the LMB. He stated that the accomplishments of the workshop had ensured that the workshop objectives had been fulfilled. 2.5 Presentation summaries, !st Regional WLCS Workshop: Opening statements Regional Consultation Workshop on the MRC Wetlands Classification System, 18-19 September 2000, Vientiane, Lao PDR Opening address By H.E Mr. Sihtaheng Rashaphone, Vice Minister of Agriculture and Forestry, Member of MRC Joint Committee for Lao PDR, Vice Member of Lao National Mekong Committee. Mr. Christer Holtsberg, Chargé d’Affaires, Swedish Embassy, Vientiane; Ms. Busabong Thephasdin Na Ayudhya, Director, Environment Division, Mekong River Commission Secretariat; Distinguished delegates, colleagues and guests , Ladies and Gentlemen It is a pleasure for me to welcome you all to Lao P.D.R and Vientiane, and to participate in this regional workshop on the Mekong River Commission Wetlands Classification System. The Mekong River is the lifeline of Lao PDR. The Mekong River drains most of the country's land area, it is an important means of transportation, and it is a resource for very productive fisheries. Associated with the Mekong River are wetlands, that are found throughout the Mekong River Basin. In the flat and low-lying areas of the lower Mekong basin there are large areas of wetlands such as marshes, flood plains, ponds and rice fields. The Mekong River and its wetlands are also very important to our neighbours Cambodia, Thailand and Viet Nam. The annual flood of the Mekong River and resulting inundation sustains and recharges the majority of the Lower Mekong Plain wetlands. These wetlands provide vital benefits to the countries’ economy, and people in their daily life, through their functions of buffering floods, of recharging ground water, processing nutrients and providing habitats for a tremendous variety of organisms.


Distinguished delegates and guests, ladies and gentlemen Quite a lot of work has been done on wetland inventory and wetland classification by the Mekong River Commission, and by others. But still, not all is known about the lower Mekong River wetland ecosystems and the benefits they provide. We need to know more in order to improve the sustainable use of wetlands. Developing a wetland classification system for the Lower Mekong Basin is part of the work needed to gain more knowledge of our wetlands and their functions. This knowledge is essential for making proper decisions on good wetland management. The MRC Project Inventory and Management of Wetlands in the Lower Mekong Basin is, with its regional activities in wetland classification contributing to increasing our knowledge. This workshop that starts today, is the first of six taking place from now until November 2000. There will be four national workshops, and then one more regional workshop, that will deal with the many issues involved with wetland classification pertaining to our Mekong Basin region. Many things about wetland names and terminology, and wetland functions and usage need to be discussed. This is important for the achievement of sustainable use of these very valuable natural resources that our wetlands are. In the context of the support required to carry out these meetings, and on behalf of people living in the Mekong Basin, I wish to extend our sincere gratitude to the generous project donor, the Swedish International Development Authority, Sida, through their representatives with us here today. Finally, may I once again extend you all our warmest welcome. I hope that you will have a productive and successful workshop, and a pleasant stay in Vientiane. Thank you. Opening address By Mr. Christer Holtsberg, Charge d’Affaires, Swedish Embassy, Vientiane Dear Participants, Ladies and Gentlemen, It is indeed a pleasure to be given the opportunity to address this regional consultative workshop on wetlands classification organized by the MRC. I don’t think in this audience it is necessary to tell you anything about the importance of wetlands in general. You are all well aware of that, ecologically, wetlands are among the most biologically productive ecosystems of the world which means that the importance of wetlands goes far beyond national boundaries which also means that wetlands become an international issue subject to an international convention on the subject. But it’s also important to know that wetlands serve many other purposes in forming the habitat of a large variation of species. They are in many places functioning as storage of water during floods and excessive raining. Removing wetlands means increasing risks for excessive floods in the future, something which we may have experienced in Southeast Asia this year. Wetlands are also found to efficiently improve water quality due to their capacity to remove sediments and toxic substances and filter excess nutrients. It is interesting to notice that in my own country where also wetlands have been destructed over the years, there are ambitions nowadays to reconstruct the wetlands just for that very purpose and in fact build new wetlands to secure or protect the sea water from excessive nutrients particularly from the agriculture. The high productivity of wetlands also means that they are also very important economically which on one hands is very positive but on the other hand make wetlands vulnerable to the over exploitation, and despite the importance and despite international efforts to conserve the world’s wetlands, degradation and destruction of wetlands continue on an alarming rate. It may be worth mentioning in the context of destructed wetlands, is not only a developing country phenomenon, it indeed takes place worldwide, as an example in the US it has been estimated that around 50% of the wetlands have been lost. The situation is probably not better in other countries. But as we know also in SE Asia, wetlands are under threats. Fishes are reportedly declining, swamp forests and switch spawning areas are destroyed and many species flora and fauna are close to extinction. The most serious implication of wetlands degradation is however in my view the reduced capability to provide for sustainable livelihood of the population. It is a qualified guess that wetlands as a source of income or food are most important for the poor people who lacks access to other productive resources. Maintaining wetlands therefore should not only be seen as an environmental intervention but also and perhaps even more importantly as an important element of any government poverty alleviation strategy. In this context planning a sustainable management of wetland require the most urgent and immediate attention. Wetlands have been on the agenda of MRC for some time and Sweden has been pleased to support the commission in this field for many years. We believe that the Commission has moved a long way to promote better understand of the role of the wetlands in the Mekong River basin. The present transformation of the MRC mode of operation from product to programme implementation will further its efficiency which in the end will be beneficial to the member countries of the Commission. The present workshop which is just about to start will certainly have a narrow focus on wetlands classification systems, but I am convinced even the broader aspects of wetlands and wetlands conservation and its economic implications will be touched upon as well. With these few introductory words I would like to conclude my address and I will also wish you a successful 2-day seminar. Thank you very much for inviting me to address this meeting.


Welcome address By Ms. Busabong Thephasdin Na Ayudhya, Director, Environment Division, MRC Secretariat Your Excellency, Distinguished Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen, On behalf of the Mekong River Commission Secretariat as well as on my own behalf of it is a great privilege and pleasure to extend a warm welcome to you all to this regional workshop on MRC wetlands classification system. May I firstly express my sincere appreciation to his Excellency Mr. Sihtaheng Rashaphone, Vice minister of Agriculture and Forestry, vice member of Lao National Mekong Committee, member of MRC Joint Committee for Lao PDR, for his kind offer to preside over this opening ceremony. My warm welcome is also extended to our distinguished participants from the four riparian countries, the representatives of Embassy of Sweden, and representatives from various international and regional institutions who are all here to discuss the many issues surrounding wetlands and their classification. As we are aware, wetlands are found in many if not most parts of the lower Mekong basin. When the Mekong river is in flood as it is now, large areas of wetland are created in the plains. The feeding and reproductive cycles of fish take place and many other animals and plants are also given their annual refreshment. When the flood recedes most fish return to rivers and recharge the fish stocks while the rest remain in the wetlands. Thus, ‘wetland fish species’ contribute enormously to the rich Mekong River fisheries. Maintenance of wetland productivity is dependant upon the maintenance of the MR complex hydrological cycle, and the annual flooding in the basin recharges the wetlands’ production cycles. Many million of people in the Mekong River basin rely on wetlands as a source of good water, food and building materials. In addition wetlands serve to boost national assets including unique biological diversity and cultural heritage. However, the present and foreseeable threats to the Mekong River wetlands are many and varied. In the next decade a number of dams, irrigation, land reclamation, agriculture aquaculture, forestry infrastructure and industrial projects will be implemented in the Lower Mekong Basin. Most activities whatever their scale will have an impact on the natural conditions of water resources qualitatively as well as quantitatively. Some may abruptly destroy the valuable nature of wetlands and their intrinsic functions and most of them may trigger serious and long term ecological and socio economic consequences. Ecologically sound management plans would facilitate and ensure the future productive utilization of this ecosystem without compromising their major natural functions. This is why wetlands classification is important as the basis for good management plans. With the recognition that daily subsistence of people of the Lower Mekong Basin is greatly dependent upon the Mekong River and its associated wetlands, Sida has for many years supported activities directed to insuring wetland sustainability. The stated Development objective of the Sida funded project ‘Inventory and Management of Wetlands in the LMB’ is “To sustain and improve the value and functions of wetlands in the LMB”. This is in order to support environmentally sound development and enhancement of the quality of life of the people in this region. Your Excellency, distinguished participants, ladies and gentlemen, I wish to express our sincere thanks to SIDA and the Swedish Government for their long term support and encouragement to the MRC and also wish to thank our colleagues at the LNMC for their assistance in organizing this workshop and for their continued cooperation with MRC. Last but not least, I wish you all a successful workshop and also hope that the coming national workshop will prove to be productive for the sake of the Mekong River wetlands and for the many, many people that depend on them. Thank you for your kind attention. Short Welcome address By Mr. Boriboun Sanasisane, Director General LNMCS On behalf of the LNMC, we are pleased to receive all the riparian high-ranking officials from Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos, and other organizations who are gathered here for a few days for discussion and exchange of ideas. On behalf of the LNMC, we are very pleased to conduct together with the experts how to make this meeting useful, and to get more information. We thank everybody for your participation and hope this meeting will be successful. Thank you.


3. NATIONAL WLCS WORKSHOP, LAO P.D.R. The Lao P.D.R. National WLCS workshop was held in Vientiane during 18 – 19 September 2000. Thirty delegates attended the two-day meeting, including representatives from government departments, line agencies, province and central offices, and international organisations. 3.1 Proceedings The workshop was conducted without any major changes to the previously established meeting agenda. The proceedings report that follows is made according to this agenda. The workshop was opened with an address by H. E. Mr. Linseng Douasavanh, followed by a Statement by Mr. Xaypladeth Chounlamany, and welcome address by Mr. Valdemar Holmgren. Day 1 Mr. Sourasay Director, WRD, LNMC chaired the meeting. Opening speech: Mr. Linseng Douasavanh-Deputy director general of LNMC, Welcomed all participants to the Lao PDR national classification workshop. He spoke on the importance of the Mekong river and its associated wetlands for the majority of people, as a source of food, in terms of aquatic products like fish and rice and clean water for domestic, agricultural and industrial use. He spoke of the need for sustainable management of these resources, for the improvement of living standards whilst safeguarding ecological diversity. Mr. Linseng thanked all participants and wished them a successful two day workshop. Opening speech: Mr. Xaypladeth Chounlamany, Director of LARReC- welcomed all participants and again reiterated the importance of wetlands in Lao PDR. He mentioned the ongoing and future research plans implemented by LARReC and the implementation strategies of the institution regarding wetlands. Opening statement: Mr. Valdemar Holmgren- MRC wetland co-ordinator - Welcomed all participants and expressed conviction that the outcome of these discussions, will contribute to the suggestions on how to make better wetland management planning tools, that will be useful at a regional, basin-wide level. He also called for delegates to remember to: • Establish what the purpose of wetland classification is; • Who will be the user of it; and • To define at what level the wetland classification is going to be applied. Under the 1995 Agreement, the four member countries of the LMB have agreed to work together with MRC to achieve sustainable development and sustainable management of the Mekong River natural resources. These workshops on wetland classification are part of that work, Mr. Valdemar said. He emphasised that the format of these workshops will be carried out with full participatory involvement.


Presentation: Mr. Valdemar Holmgren provided an overview of the MRC restructuring, with transition from project to programme, and a Basinwide framework for future activites. Mr. Valdemar also asked for: assistance from the Lao PDR team to suggest ways in which the MRC can facilitate in providing a classification system that is useful to Lao PDR and also regionally applicable. He concluded by discussing the purpose of classification beyond the “ where, what type and how many”, in this case, a “tool” for planners and managers in natural resource decision making. Presentation: Mr. Mark Dubois delivered a power point presentation in two parts: (I) Review on Status report of the MRC Classification system across the LMB; and (II) Outcome of the regional workshop including discussions on the HGM approach to classification. Main points re. (I) No standard classification in functional usage across the LMB; National needs are insufficiently catered for; and, Objectives for classification are not fully in line with those required for the sustainable development of the LMB. Main points re. (I) The HGM system, with Lao terms for landforms and hydroperiod discussed; Wetland dynamics (hydroperiod) as a way of including fishery and other sectoral concerns in wetland classification; The assessment of functions and values; The role of the MRC in facilitating the formulation of a regional classification system incorporating these concerns. Plenary: Focused on difficulties in terminology and concepts of the Ramsar wetland definition and MRC / Ramsar classification systems. The classifications mentioned were seen as being too academic and having a conservation/exclusionist reputation and hence the issue of whether rice fields should be considered as wetlands was raised. Several delegates mentioned that if rice fields are considered wetlands, the farmers might be forced into acting against their best interests. The importance of seasonal wetlands and community based management plans were also discussed. Presentation: Mr. Saleumsay -focused on the classification undertaken during phase 1 of the project IMW-LMB in Lao PDR and the rationale behind MRC classification system. Mr. Saleumsay said that work was initiated using the IUCN Classification system. Due to specific needs this was refocused in 1993 and since that time, applied to all classification work undertaken. Some detailed site level work was carried out at pilot sites at that time which contributed to management decision making processes in Vientiane. Field trip to Bansivilay (Nongnok). Community based wetland resource management projects not far from Vientiane were observed. Information on community wetland management (bird watching tourism and community fishery) was provided to the participants.


Day 2 Presentation Ms. Phetsamone, Biologist DFRC, reiterated the classification undertaken during phase 1 of the project IMW-LMB in Lao PDR. It included some background on the pilot sites in Vientiane municipality and information on base line data collection and mapping. Assessment included: • Socioeconomic; • Flora & fauna; • Soils; and • Water quality. Mapping was carried out at a scale of 1:250000 for the Mekong corridor and 1:50000 at site level. Plenary Followed, on what practical management uses was the data put to. It was noted that the pilot site assessments assisted in the decision to install storm water drainage systems in Vientiane. Further discussions were concerning the increase in sensitivity on Lao PDR wetlands from the nine detailed in 1993 to thirty wetland complexes now recorded (after 1996). Presentation: Mr. Xaypladeth Choulamany, Director of LARReC provided an overview of wetland issues and project proposals in Lao PDR. He said there were disagreements over the Ramsar definition of wetlands and some wetland criteria. These must be resolved before a classification system can be implemented. He focused on issues concerning the: • Many project proposals regarding wetlands submitted to the government from a

range of institutions; • Classification, assessment and monitoring needs nationally; • Priorities for developing a strategic national wetland action plan; Mr Xapladeth suggested that there should be three levels of classification regarding wetlands: International, National, & Site. In conclusion he said there were two main criteria for a classification system, it had to be simple and appropriate for Lao PDR. Presentation: Mr. Sourasay-Director of WRDD outlined the Structure of the Water Resources Development Division of the LNMC. His presentation focused on: • Emphasising duties and responsibilities; and • The organisational framework. Group work: General discussions on topics raised by Mr. Xaypladeth with regard to needs for classification in Lao PDR focused on developing a LMB classification system based on simple units. Guidance from Mr. Valdemar Holmgren and Mark Dubois was provided in the form of national and regional concepts to consider regarding wetland classification. Group work outcomes: A simpler more widely understood classification system was called for, that had relevance to non-wetland specialists and decision makers. Classification based on data that is simple and can be easily interpreted from maps. Other main points included a


general lack of understanding over the term and definition of wetlands. All spokespeople mentioned the need to establish pilot sites and training requirements. Further, the training of trainers was flagged as a requirement to assist in development of an LMB classification system. The current system was perceived to be too cumbersome and modifications to the classification system were required, as well as improved base line data generation, mapping, inventory. Plenary: followed with topics raised on the functions of wetlands, these were considered to be important within a classification framework, as was land use. The HGM system was called for to form the basis of a regional classification system which may then be integrated into the national systems. 3.2 Outcome A general outcome of the workshop was the provision of a forum to exchange ideas and discuss wetland issues within a professional atmosphere and with the participation of experts from many fields. Specific outcome included • The HGM system of classification being called for to provide a regional WLCS. • Classification that can largely be interpreted from Topographic and satellite maps. • Land use to be included at regional level of classification. • The Ramsar wetland definition was accepted. • Future work on the assessment of functions and values of wetlands. • Pilot sites to be set up to facilitate the above. Workshop closure: Valdemar Holmgren closed the workshop by thanking all participants for their commitment and outputs. He wished them every success in their ongoing efforts to strengthen capacity for wetland management in Lao PDR, and the future endeavours in WLCS development.


3.3 Presentation summaries, Lao PDR National WLCS Workshop: Mr. Xaypladeth provided some background to classification issues in Lao PDR. He Talked about the ongoing assisstance of the MRC. He also mentioned that Lao PDR had learned from both the Ramsar convention and IUCN. He spoke of the inventory of wetlands in Lao PDR (Claridge 1996), and the change of emphasis or rather level of classification from Scott’s Inventory of four wetlands of international importance to the IUCN inventory detailing twenty-nine wetland types. Mr Xaypladeth spoke on issues of national importance and the need to modify classification to adapt to differing national needs within the region. He also spoke of the increasing emphasis on wetlands in Lao PDR, mirrored by the large number of wetland related projects due to begin implementation next year. Other topics highlighted in the presentation were difficulties over terminology for the MRC/Ramsar/IUCN systems and the Ramsar wetland definition was said to not be totally suitable. He called for assessment and inventory at three levels of importance: International; national; and site. A strategic wetlands management plan and national action plan were also called for. He said that the initiatives should be addressed with the assistance of Lao staff at all levels and for classification to be simple and appropriate to capacity. He rounded up his presentation by suggesting the need for pilot sites to develop the classification system, training needs and the necessity to follow directives from the MRC’s Environment Programme.

------------------ Mr. Saleumsy stated that wetlands are ecosystems that play a very important role in contributing directly or indirectly to the socio-economic, environmental and cultural needs of the people. He also said that sometimes this was overlooked with high degrees of encroachment and development activities are degrading some wetland areas. There is the need to sustainably use our wetland resources and develop wise management plans to implement this, he said. A general background to the activities of the MRC project IMW-LMB since its inception in 1990 was given. He spoke on the agreement between the member countries to adopt the Ramsar definition and the development of the classification system which was largely based on Dugan 1990 at two pilot sites in each member country (at this time Cambodia was not involved in the project, but joined later). The pilot sites in Lao PDR were assessed in terms of socio-economics, ecosystem status and flora and fauna. There were also detailed maps created at this time he said. The project phase ran from 1990-1996. He closed the presentation stating his interpretation of the Ramsar wetland definition and its relevance to Lao PDR in that it separates wetlands into two broad types, natural and artificial.

-------------------- Ms. Phetsamone spoke of her involvement in the project since its inception. She worked on parallel issues with Mr. Saleumsy and as a result some of the content of the presentation was similar to the above. Other topics she highlighted were the lack of specific guidance on how the data collected for the pilot sites was to be applied. Ms. Phetsamone also spoke on the proceedings of the regional workshop in Vientiane 2000 and emphasised the importance of classification. She noted that there was still a lack of skilled staff to implement wetland projects in Lao PDR and called for training to be provided. With regard to terminology she spoke of the difficulty in translating words like pond, lake, swamp and marsh, as, in Lao language these are encompassed by either Bung or Nong.

----------------------- Mr. Mark presentation on Wetland Classification, (several diagrams and one slide by George Begg). This presentation has been substantially edited to avoid repetition or where similar subject matter has already been covered elsewhere in the report. What are wetlands and how do we define them?


Wet-Lands are Wet-Lands, with > 50 Definitions in current usage. Position in the landscape = Landform

Slope setting Plains/flat setting Stream bank/channel setting Marginal/fringe setting Channel disrupting flat

Inundation Regime = Hydroperiod

Permanently inundated Seasonally inundated Intermittently inundated Waterlogged

Landform + Hydroperiod = Class

Application can be: Global, Regional, and with modifiers at the National, and the Local level.

Uses of classification

Aiding decisions about resource management; Providing uniformity in wetland concepts and terminology; Facilitating basin wide landuse planning; and Meeting the needs of users with different goals.

Core data

If indeed we do need a regional classification system it may need to be based on core data such as Landform & Hydroperiod. Basic principles relate regionally as a foundation for comparison as well as at the national level, even if individual countries develop at different rates.

Valuation of wetland products

Forest resources, and Wildlife resources Aquatic products e.g., fish, frogs, and of course, Rice production

Valuation of wetland functions

Flood control Nutrient retention Sediment/toxicant retention Ground water recharge/discharge Transport

------------------


4. NATIONAL WLCS WORKSHOP, VIET NAM The Viet Nam National WLCS workshop was held in HaNoi during 3 – 4 October 2000. Thirty-nine delegates attended the two-day meeting, including representatives from government departments, line agencies, province and central offices, and international organisations. 4.1 Proceedings The workshop was conducted without any major changes to the previously established agenda. The proceedings report that follows is made according to this agenda. Day 1 Mr. Thanh,Deputy Director sub FIPI 2 chaired the meeting. Opening speech: Mr. Toan, Secretary General of the Viet Nam National Mekong Committee opened the meeting. He welcomed all participants and emphasised the importance of wetlands for Viet Nam. He spoke on national issues relating to wetlands and the wetland classification system of the Mekong Delta. Participants introduced themselves and the opening session was then ended with a photograph being taken of the group. Presentation: Mr. Thanh, Deputy director sub FIPI -presented general objectives of the two day workshop which were to: • Inform participants the results of the regional workshop in Vientiane, and to develop

a wetland classification system for the LMB; • Discuss the Mekong Delta wetland classification system; and • Discuss the future work plan of the Viet Nam wetland team. Mr. Thanh spoke of the need to develop a regional classification system for the LMB and its integration with the national system. He concluded by requesting the mapping of wetlands using remote sensing throughout the LMB. Presentation: Mr. Valdemar Holmgren, MRC wetland coordinator- presented an overview of the MRC restructuring and the transition from project to programme. He discussed the need for classification and the need to discuss the level of classification required which would be useful for Mekong Basin planning. Mr. Holmgren underlined the connection between ecosystems in the basin and the dynamics of wetlands. Presentation: Mr. Mark Dubois, MRC Consultant provided a status review on the use of the former MRC classification system across the region. He described some of the strengths and weaknesses in the current system. It was noted that there was not a basinwide classification system in functional use. Mr. Dubois briefly introduced the HGM system of classification. He also spoke of its potential, regional and national, application when integrated with the national classification at the primary and secondary levels. Plenary followed the presentations by the MRC representatives, with issues concerning:


• The harmonisation of national and regional classification systems; and • Land use and water quality criteria for inclusion in the LMB system. The HGM system was flagged as a means of providing a simple, hierarchical system for regional classification (as a general framework which may then be adapted to suit national needs). Presentation: Mr. Mark spoke briefly on the variation in national applications of the agreed wetland classification system (1993). Plenary: continued with issues raised on: • The difficulties of classification, its relevance to scientists and local people; • Whether rice fields should be considered as wetlands; • Simplifying classification at the regional level; and, • Difficulties in terminology. The Ramsar definition was agreed upon, and the “wise use” concept supported. Presentation: Mr. Thinh, Head of science division Sub FIPI, presented the wetland classification system of the Mekong Delta. He explained the objectives for classifying wetlands in terms of: • Their “ecology, botany, zoology, limnology and hydrology”; • The approach, which is Ramsar based as is the terminology; • Finally he stated that “the system should be simple, flexible and easily mapped”. Presentation: Mr. Nhan, Director Integrated Resources and Mapping Centre Sub-NIAPP, raised issues related to wetland mapping in the Mekong Delta: • Mentioned the three maps created for the Mekong Delta (1993, 1995/6 & 1998/9)

and their origins; • Explained some of the data sources used and techniques employed when

interpreting remote sensed data, and; • Talked about different map scales and their application. Presentation: Mr. Anh, Head of hydrology Sub-IWRPM, discussed the inundation regime of the Mekong Delta. He mentioned some constraints on food production which included: • Flooding; • Salinity intrusion; and • Lack of fresh water. Mr. Anh also mentioned the effects of the above on the ecological character, biota and water quality of wetlands. Presentation: Mr. Khanh, Head of soil section Sub-NIAPP- provided information on land use status and classification in the Mekong Delta. He talked on the relationship between the classification of wetlands, soil types and land use. Water type, Geomorphology and hydrology are used as the primary levels of classification followed by soil types and land use, he said. Mr. Khanh stated he would like to see the land use patterns included into the wetland classification maps. It was noted that the only fishery based land use included in the classification is aquaculture.


Day 2 Presentation: Ms. Le Thanh Binh, NEA presented issues concerning the draft national strategy for wetland management: • General issues concerning the conception of the national strategy; • Economic, biological and environmental value of wetlands; • Wetland classification and management status; and • Strategies for development and protection of wetlands in Viet Nam. Ms. Binh told the delegation that the third draft document will be presented to the government in Sept. 2000. Ms Binh also said that a national wetland inventory is proposed for implementation in 2001. She concluded by saying that up to now the inventory of wetlands (1999) details just 79 wetlands, catalogued for their biodiversity value only Plenary: followed the morning presentation with issues discussed including: • Wetland classification as one of the Viet Nam government’s priority areas; • Integrated natural resource management; • National wetland classification and mapping; • Study tours-exchange of wetland experiences; • Urban & highland wetlands suggested for inclusion in classification and mapping; • Data & information exchange, transboundary Mekong Delta data in particular; • Structural instituitional support assessment (MRCS); and, • Methods of coordinating donor support. Activities were proposed for 2001-2002: 1. Regional study tours for technical and managerial staff; 2. A national strategy for wetland management; and 3. A national inventory. It was said that strong support has been provided by MRC and national institutions. Other topics included: • The need to Cooperate within and between relevant line agencies & institutions as

a priority; • General agreement that wetlands play an important role in the social and economic

well being of both the Mekong Delta and the country; • Need for communication improvements between different project initiatives; • Issues on how to include the coastal areas into the NAP; • Planned future modifications of the national WLCS; and • Harmonisation of national and regional (LMB) classification system. The MRC was asked to establish the LMB system and the Viet Nam team committed to bring ideas to the regional workshop on how to merge the national and regional system. 4.2 Outcome A general outcome of the workshop was the provision of a forum to exchange ideas and discuss wetland issues within a professional atmosphere, and with the participation of experts from many fields.


Specific outcomes included • The HGM system of classification being called for to provide a regional WLCS. • Land use to be included at regional level of classification. • The Ramsar wetland definition was accepted. • Multi sectoral approach to wetland classification. • Pilot sites to be set up to facilitate the above. Closure Mr. Toan closed the workshop indicating the positive commitment of Viet Nam to continue to strive for better wetland classification, inventory and management. 4.3 Presentation summaries, Viet Nam National WLCS Workshop: Mr. Thinh detailed the classification of the Mekong Delta. He stated that Vietnam is a member country of the Ramsar convention and therefore uses the Ramsar definition and the terminology of the classification is rooted in the Ramsar convention and therefore provides the basis for wetland inventory and management in Vietnam. He reiterated several concepts from the Ramsar convention i.e., wetland definition to be in terms of “ecology, botany, zoology, limnology or hydrology” and wise use. Mr. Thinh expressed his belief that the wetland classification of the Mekong Delta reflects this. He talked of the similarity between the Mekong Delta classification system and the national system, as there is not as yet a national classification system or inventory. He explained that the classification system detailed as having three hierarchical levels in the 1999 report of the Mekong Delta wetland classes did in fact have five hierarchical levels. These were water quality, geomorphology, hydrology, land use and “wetland habitat”.

----------------- Mr. Nhan explained that the current wetland map of the Mekong Delta was created using a variety of data sources. He said that maps used detailing physical factors included: • Geomorphology and sedimentation maps; • US Topographic maps; • Soil maps; and • Hydrological and surface water maps. The map scales used were 1:250,000 from maps created in the 1960’s to the late 1990’s. Maps generated by remote sensing and aerial photography included LANDSAT-5TM Land use and vegetation maps. Mr. Nhan continued with explanations on how the mapping was carried out. He said that the first step was to digitise physical maps and then overlay the above onto a topographical map of the Delta. This was done to define the first and second hierarchical levels and create a base map. The next step was to interpret the satellite photographs and ground truth the land use types and compare to historical land use maps. Finally, land use and vegetation were digitised in formation and overlaid onto the base map to define wetland class.

---------------------- Mr Khanh talked on the relationship between classification of wetlands, soil types and land use. He presented the land use of the Mekong delta and the rest of Vietnam as being one of seven broad categories, agriculture, aquaculture, forestry, special use, settlements, un-used and water channels/open water. Over sixty eight percent of the land in the Delta was agricultural he said compared to twenty four percent for the remainder of the country. Mr. Khanh then presented in tabular format the relationships between wetland classification at primary, secondary and tertiary levels with that of soil types and land use patterns. He explained that for the purposes of land use is was important to classify whether rice was single, double or multiple cropped. The largest number of land uses patterns was six. This occurred in flood plain areas, he said.

--------------------


Mr. Mark In his presentation talked about the comparitive strengths and weaknesses of wetland classification systems. MRC / Ramsar

Weaknesses: Imprecise definition of some systems Repetition of basic wetland types Not easily understood by lay public Fundamental similarities are masked Scale is used as a primary criterion Inconsistent separation of wetland types on hydroperiod.

Difficulties / Problems:

Objectives for classifying not primarily for the sustainable use of resources. Insufficient valuation of functions & products. Little connection to existing data sources.

What is HGM and how does it work?: Hydrogeomorphic approach

combination of land form and hydroperiod Hierarchical approach to classification Directly applicable to LMB mapping Applicable at any level Open ended and ongoing at the site level

What use is HGM?: Aiding decisions about resource management; Providing uniformity in wetland concepts and terminology; Providing fewer more readily translatable terms; Comparing wetland types globally; Facilitating basin wide land use planning; Meets national needs of users with different goals .

------------------


5. NATIONAL WLCS WORKSHOP, CAMBODIA The Cambodian National WLCS workshop was held in Siem Reap during 9 – 10 October 2000. Forty delegates attended the two-day meeting, including representatives from government departments, line agencies, province and central offices, and international organisations. 5.1 Proceedings The workshop was conducted without any major changes to the previously established meeting agenda. The proceedings report that follows is made according to this agenda. Day 1 Opening speech: H.E. Mr. Theuk Kroueun Vutha, Under Secretary of State, opened the workshop, and invited Mr. Valdemar to make a key-note address. In his address, Mr. Valdemar underlined two main points which coulds a ct as discussion guidelines: This was: “* to remember to establish what the purpose of wetland classification is, and who will be the user of it; and therefore, * to define at what level the wetland classification is going to be applied “ Thereafter, participants introduced themselves and the opening session was then ended with a photograph taken of the group. Presentation: Mr. Watt Botkosal- Senior programme officer, CNMC, delivered an overview of the Cambodian perspective, objectives and expected outcome of the workshop. He stated that there were two important features of wetlands, hydrology & geomorphology. Mr. Botkosal said that the IUCN/MRC/Ramsar system was easy to understand by local people eg System, subsystem, class & subclass. At the national level Cambodia would follow their existing classification but were unsure where this had originated from, he said. Mr. Botkosal also spoke of the need to assess functions related to sustainable development of wetlands and asked the MRC to assist in the development of the national system. Cambodia has only just started wetland classification, we lack human resources and baseline data, he said. Mr. Botkosal concluded by suggesting that national and regional classification be integrated. Presentation: Meas Sophal, Deputy Director, Protection & Conservation Department, and National Project Director of the Cambodian Wetlands Project, talked on the process of wetland classification in Cambodia. He said they follow the definition and classification of Ramsar according to MedWet, even though they code for wetland type numerically. He mentioned the Ramsar definition as being applicable to Cambodia as it included swamp, marsh, peatland, natural and artificial areas with water. Mr. Sophal spoke of the need for an open ended classification system to incorporate new knowledge as it becomes available. He also said that the WLCS in Cambodia, is in-keeping with the classification of the other three countries of the LMB. Mr. Sophal welcomed the opportunity to establish national and regional levels of classification.


Plenary: focused predominantly on terminology issues. More definitions of terms were called for. There was also a lack of basic understanding of wetland class types. It was pointed out that there were considerable difficulties in translating the word wetland and the Ramsar definition of it into Khmer. Size and depth criteria of the Ramsar definition and the mixed criteria for the separation of systems were discussed. Over all, the Ramsar classification and definition were seen as the best option for the Cambodian national system. However there was general confusion over where the numerical codes [MedWet system] in the Cambodian wetland classification originated from.2 Other topics raised included: • How do we clearly delineate wetland areas and trans boundary demarcations? • How do we include wetland functions? • Sovereignty of Wetlands; • Wetland awareness and capacity differences across the region; • Needs for WLCS. Presentation: Mr. Chea Phalla , Wildlife Protection Officer, Dept Forestry & Wildlife, spoke on Information provided through counterpart organisations related to wetlands with regard to the conservation management of wildlife and project activities undertaken. He discussed the capacity building as a major factor in the success so far of Cambodian wetland activities. Other noteworthy advances were the inventory, assessment and management of wetlands in Stung Treng and two other provinces. Mr. Phala discussed the selection criteria for wetland sites of importance. They focused primarily on the occurrence of red data book species and important areas for birds. He concluded by talking about trans boundary issues related to the Sarus crane and called for increased effort in wetland assessment. Presentation: Mr. Srun Lim Song, Chief of aquaculture office, Dept of fisheries, commenced his presentation by calling for Ramsar to clarify their definition of, “what is wetland”? He also questioned whether a WLCS should be solely related to water birds and wildlife. Mr. Song talked about direct and indirect stakeholders of wetlands and mentioned that 80% of Cambodian people live on wetlands. He discussed the importance of wetlands for fish species and biodiversity. He linked this by saying that ultimately people eat fish, and this was a direct value of wetlands. He talked about the wise use concept but felt it concentrated on to much on biodiversity and did not include enough socio-economic considerations. Mr. Song provided some figures on the catch and value of Cambodian fisheries in relation to the three Ramsar sites of international importance. Group work: Mr Meas Sophal introduced discussions on terminology and translation difficulties of the Ramsar system into Khmer. The discussions will be focused around the WLCS of Cambodia, and comparison with other systems in the LMB.

2 MedWe t is a partnership between the European Commission, The Ramsar Bureau, the governments of the EU countries France, Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain, and several NGOs, and concerns management of wetlands in countries of the Mediterranean basin. MedWet promotes a strategy of the need to integrate the conservation of wetland biodiversity with sustainable development, while considering three key issues:-1) poverty and economic inequality; -2) pressure from population growth, immigration and mass tourism; and –3) social and cultural conflicts.


DAY 2 Group work outcome: The report back from the session the day before, focused on semantics of the Ramsar and MRC classification system and other definition problems. Certain class definitions e.g., subtidal & intertidal were discussed. It was even suggested that Ramsar include a sub-intertidal class. Main topics included additions to the Khmer translation of the classification systems. There was general acceptance that clear translation of definitions from English to Khmer were problematic, if not unattainable. All groups concentrated on sifting through the typology and pinpointing difficulties in understanding the system. It was apparent that even at this technical level the MRC / Ramsar WLCS was causing a great deal of confusion. Plenary: Followed, which concentrated on where the Cambodian class codes came from. Presentation: Mr. Mark Dubois, Provided a brief presentation by request, on the basic principles and application of the HGM approach. It focused on the logical hierarchical framework and the integration within national systems. The contextual terminology of the land forms and hydroperiod were discussed at primary and secondary levels of classification. Group work 2: Mr. Valdemar, MRC Wetlands Coordinator, reiterated some central themes that should be discussed in the second group work session: • For what purpose do we need classification in Cambodia; • What levels of classification are required in Cambodia; • How do we want to classify wetlands in Cambodia; • What needs to be considered regionally for a WLCS in the LMB; • What land use issues need to be highlighted. Mr. Valdemar suggested that discussions on terminology could continue later on during the WLCS development process. Group work outcome: The report-back again focused on discussions on terminology difficulties. With regard to the purpose of classification the groups discussed needs for public and private sectors, inventory, GIS, conservation and management. Classification was to be used for assessment and planners and policy makers. The type of information required for classification was said to be land use, hydrology, hydroperiod, landform, soil type, plants, animals and rice types. The group report back finished by detailing important sites in Cambodia. These included the three Ramsar sites of international importance and twenty-four nationally important sites chosen for bird and biodiversity value. Concluding remarks were that the Ramsar classification was considered most appropriate for Cambodia as it was said to have a strong conservation focus. 5.2 Outcome A general outcome of the workshop was the provision of a forum to exchange ideas and discuss wetland issues in a professional atmosphere with the participation of experts from many fields. Specific outcomes included


• Classification at regional level that includes geology, hydrology and land use. • The Ramsar wetland definition and classification was accepted at national level. • Future work on the assessment of functions and values of wetlands. • Pilot sites to be set up to facilitate the above. Closure: The workshop was closed with positive commitment to improve wetland management. 5.3 Presentation summaries, Cambodia National WLCS Workshop Meas Sophal Deputy Director Natural Protection & Conservation Department-the focus of this presentation was the wetland classification system in Cambodia. He mentioned that the guidance of the classification system employed was provided by MRC and that the definition and terminology was Ramsar based. Mr.Sophal talked about the numerical codes attributed to wetland types, their origins however were not clearly expressed. There was emphasis placed on the Ramsar definition and its usefulness as a broad, all encompassing standard. He spoke of the requirement in a classification system to be open ended to allow for new data. In conclusion he said that the wetland classification system in Cambodia was similar to that of the other three riparian countries. The presentation gave rise to a lengthy plenary discussion which centred on difficulties over Ramsar terminology and criteria used to determine wetland type.

------------------ Mr.Chea Phalla Officer of the Wildlife Protection Office-summarised inventory work carried out in Cambodia. He mentioned that counterpart organisations had provided much of the information related to wetlands. His presentation focused on the project activities related to the conservation management of wildlife. Specifically mentioned was the wetland inventory of three provinces. Mr. Phalla talked about the strengthening of capacity in line agencies and the criteria used for the inventory. These included red data book species, and important areas for birds. He talked on transboundary issues relating to the Sarus crane. The cranes come to feed in Tram Chim (Viet Nam) in the dry season and migrate back to Stung Treng and Southern Laos to breed, he said. Mr. Phalla concluded that wetlands were very important for these and other species, requiring increased effort in wetland assessment.

------------------- Mr. Srun Lim Song Chief of aquaculture office talked on issues relating to wetland food webs, fish species, catch figures and water birds. He also spoke on Ramsar terminology issues and the wise use concept. Mr. Lim Song talked of the indirect and direct stakeholders of wetlands. Of the direct stakeholders he said that eighty percent of Cambodian people depend on wetlands. It was also noted that wetlands were of critical importance for endangered fish species and biodiversity. Fish and their importance as a food source was underlined. The three Ramsar sites in Cambodia were discussed along side the annual fish production which was he said, in the region of: • 300-445000 tonnes,

with numbers of inland fish species in excess of 800 providing on average: • Gt. Lake 80kg / pers; • mid country 40kg / pers; and • upland >8kg / pers. Marine fisheries account for 50-80000 tonnes per annum with over 435 species, he said.

-------------------


6. NATIONAL WLCS WORKSHOP THAILAND The Thailand National workshop was held in Khon Kaen during 17 – 18 October 2000. Thirty delegates attended the two-day meeting, including representatives from government departments, line agencies, province and central offices, and international organizations. 6.1 Proceedings The workshop was conducted without any major changes to the earlier announced meeting agenda. The proceedings report that follows is made according to this agenda. Day 1 Opening speeches The workshop was opened with an address by Mr. Sopon Chomchan, Land Development Department., followed by a Welcome Address by Valdemar Holmgren, MRC Wetland Co-ordinator. The speeches are provided at the end of Section 6. Participants introduced themselves and the opening session was then ended with a photograph being taken of the group. Presentation: Mr. Manu Omakupt, Senior consultant, presented the wetland inventory in the South of Thailand. He spoke on issues of multi-sectoral responsibility. Across these sectors there are still disagreements over wetland definition even though the project has been running since 1990, he said. Mr. Omakupt said that often those responsible for classification and management were seen as ‘the enemy of the people’. This he said highlighted a conflict between resource users and responsible agencies. He spoke of the need for a classification system using simple terms so it is easy to map and be applicable to local people. He talked about the established laws in Thailand for the conservation of wetland resources and mentioned some instances where there was good co-operation from local people. Finally he spoke of the lack of continuity in funding and the need to implement a national strategic plan. He thanked the MRC for their continuing support. Presentation: Mr. Yon Musik, Kasetsart University, Spoke on the wetland inventory in the North of Thailand. He talked about the number, area and types of wetland. He talked on the eight wetlands of International importance and mentioned that there were fifty-seven that were considered nationally important. He spoke on some areas with regard to specific management problems due to sedimentation and encroachment and how using a variety of community centred techniques they were dealing with them. Plenary: A question was raised concerning the public perception that if people support Ramsar, they will loose management control of their own land. Another question, on whether fishery concerns were included in the Inventory was raised. Presentation: Dr. Sansanee Choowaew, Mahidol University, presented the wetland inventory in Central and East Thailand, and provided general information on the region, including information on specific wetland types.


Also: • National wetland research which included information on where, how many and

correct use of resources • The importance of classification & policy making. • Types of information required • Requirements of base line data to include in an inventory: Size, type, importance,

location, delineation, mapping and database generation. Dr. Sansanee also spoke of the different classification levels required. At the site level she recommended a more detailed classification of rice types, soils and plant types. Presentation: Mr. Wanchai Chandrachai, Senior policy and planning analyst, LDD, provided background, historical overview and specifics on wetland classification in Thailand. He spoke on the translation of the Ramsar wetland definition in 1993, the agreed classification system and its further development in 1994. Mr. Wanchai discussed difficulties in determining the classification of wetland complexes. He spoke on methods of soil classification and aquatic plant categorisation (submergent, emergent, floating, etc,). Mr. Wanchai broadened the presentation to include most systems classified in Thailand. He talked on some of the modifications to the classification system including the integration of ‘artificial’ wetlands into the main structure and the inclusion of an extra hierarchical level. Plenary: Followed, on topics including: the building of houses on dry season wetlands; degradation of urban seasonal wetlands; promotion of Thailand’s policy on wetlands; wetland definition difficulties; institutional difficulties; mapping scales; levels of classification; and funding support needs. Day 2 Plenary & conclusion: It was said that classification must include wetland delineation and a broad definition. The words, marsh, swamp, ponds and lakes are all the same broad term in Thai language. It was noted that more work is needed on the terminology to make it simpler and easily understood. Some wetland types in the MRC / Ramsar classification were not understood. Local terms were discussed as having regional differences. The outcome of these discussions was that Thailand is proposing to produce a dictionary of wetland terms in Thai language. Until this is completed, terms that already exist in the English language will be used. Other discussion points included the emphasis that wetland management was not to prohibit utilisation. Rather, to raise awareness in wetland ecology and to bring the importance of wetlands to the forefront to assist in poverty alleviation. The issue of whether rice fields are wetlands was raised. It had previously been decided that the presence of water for more than three months was to be used as a qualifying characteristic. These wetlands are termed as man made seasonal wetlands. It was also agreed that a further hierarchical level of classification be included in the national system. Land use was flagged to be included at the regional level of classification and mapping scale was discussed. It was agreed that a regional classification system should be developed to include geology, hydrology and land use.


6.2 Outcome A general outcome of the workshop was the provision of a forum to exchange ideas and discuss wetland issues in a professional atmosphere with the participation of experts from many fields. Specific outcomes included • Consensus that WCLS requires Geology, Hydrology and Land use to be included

at regional level. • The Ramsar wetland definition was accepted. • More work required to make terminology simpler and better understood. • A proposal to produce a dictionary of wetland terms in Thai. • Important to include rice fields in classification at both regional and national level. • Pilot sites to be set up to facilitate the above. Closure: The workshop was closed with summary discussions on the further development of the Thai national classification system. 6.3 Presentation summaries, Thailand National WLCS Workshop: Mr Wanchai Chandrachai Senior policy and planning analyst, LDD, provided a general overview including historical perspective and background as well as specifics on wetland classification in Thailand. Mr Wanchai spoke of the variety of objectives for classification, among these he mentioned objectives for land use planning, protected areas, agricultural development, fish habitat etc. He said that the wetland classification of Thailand is a modified version of the MRC, AWB, IUCN and US systems. A brief critique was provided of these systems. It was mentioned that the Scott (AWB) system was too simplistic whilst the IUCN system suffers from its technical language. Mr. Wanchai provided a list of wetland functions, products and attributes. He also presented land use patterns arrived at using remotely sensed data. A schematic diagram of wetlands and their position in the landscape was also shown. The final section of the presentation was guidance on how to identify and delineate wetlands. This was based on the concept of wetlands having water some or all of the time, adapted plants and special soils.

--------------- Mr.Manu Omakupt senior consultant/advisor, spoke on related issues to the wetland inventory of southern Thailand. He spoke of the transitional position of wetlands in the landscape and this very position crossing many sectors. Thus, giving rise to multi-sectoral jurisdictive problems with regard to wetland management. Further complicating matters were the differing capacities and understanding of wetland issues across these sectors, he said. Mr. Omakupt reviewed issues of centralised natural resource policy makers and planners and decentralised resource users. He indicated that often the responsible agencies were in conflict with local people. Examples of situations where good co-operation between local users and responsible agencies were also cited. Mr. Omakupt spoke of the need to use simple terms with regard to classification to be applicable to local people. He also said the system should be easy to represent spatially. The existing legal framework was discussed as were the provision of well established laws for the conservation of wetland resources. In conclusion he spoke of the lack of continuity in funding and related difficulties in implementing a national strategic plan. He thanked the MRC for their continued support.

----------------


Dr. Sansanee Choowaew Mahidol University, spoke on the wetland inventory in central and east Thailand. Background on project similarities across Thailand was provided. She said important areas were the study of wetland ecology, wetland inventory and wise use. She stated the importance of classification and the types of information necessary. Requirements of base line data to include in inventory and mapping were detailed as: • Size • location • Delineation • Type • Importance • Database The importance of classification is to map and then manage, she said. Dr. Sansanee told the delegates that classification is useful to assist in the modelling of future planning. This will further the decision-making progress and facilitate conservation and wise use. She also talked on the level of classification required. Differing geographical size classes require differing levels of detail, she said. At the site level she called for a greater number of rice, soil and some plant type classes.

----------------- Opening statements National workshop on Wetland Classification System in Thailand , Khon Kaen ,17-18 Oct.2000 Opening address By Mr. Sopon Chomchan,Specialist of LDD Dear Specialists of Land Use Planning, On behalf of the committee holding the conference and participants, we are glad that you have come to the opening ceremony of the conference “ National Workshop on Wetland Classification System in Thailand”. This conference is sponsored by the government of Sweden through The Mekong River Commission Secretariat to study the wetland management in Thailand in the Lower Mekong Basin, under the project of “Wetland Inventory and Management Program” since 1990. The committee of Lower Mekong Basin and Land Development Department (LDD) would like to hold the workshop to discuss and exchange opinions of Wetland Classification in Thailand in order to classify the standard of Wetland management among membership countries along the Mekong. This workshop includes representatives of implementation of Wetland management in all regions of Thailand. The group discussion consists of 30 representatives from LDD, Department of Forestry, Department of Fishery, Ministry of Irrigation, Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives, Ministry of the Interior, Office of Policy and Planning for Environment, Department of Energy Development and Promotion, The National Research Council of Thailand, Kasetsart University, Khon Kaen University, Mahidol University and the representative from Mekong River Commission Secretariat. It was of great opportunity to come for the National Workshop on Wetland Classification System in Thailand. This is a cooperative work between Mekong River Commission Secretariat and LDD and it is a good opportunity for various government organizations to discuss for improving the standard of Wetland Classification System in Thailand among membership countries along the Mekong. I would also like to thank the Mekong River Commission Secretariat on supporting the Wetland Management in Thailand and holding this workshop.


Opening Statement By Valdemar Holmgren, CTA / MRC Wetlands Coordinator, Dear Khun Sophon, Specialist, Department of Land Development, Distinguished colleagues, ladies and gentlemen. On behalf of Mekong River Commission, I am very happy to welcome you all to this national workshop on Wetland Classification. And I am honoured to take part in this opening ceremony of the workshop, and to deliver an opening statement. This is the fourth and final national workshop that follows the first regional workshop in Vientiane 18-19 September 2000. Along with the other national workshops in the riparian countries, we are today taking part in a process of discussions on developing classification systems for the wetlands of the Lower Mekong Basin. The outcome of these discussions will contribute to the suggestions on how to make better wetland management planning tools that will be useful at a regional, basin-wide level, and also, I believe, to contribute to understanding the various requirements of wetlands classification at national level. The proceedings of the Vientiane regional wetland classification workshop have assisted us with some guidelines for the National Workshops, such as: * to remember to establish what the purpose of wetland classification is, and who will be the user of it;

and therefore, * to define at what level the wetland classification is going to be applied. Thus, it is evident that there are different needs and levels of wetland classification at regional, national and local, or site, levels. I am sure that we will be having many discussions on these aspects. It has been established that the Mekong River and its tributaries and wetlands are extremely productive systems. There is a very rich biodiversity in these waters and on the adjacent land. Many millions of people depend on this biodiversity for their food. The Mekong River wetlands are particularly important in this respect. The wetland habitat provides the conditions that are suitable for growing rice and for fishing, and thus, large parts of the wetland complex of the Mekong River are used for rice paddy and for fishery. Under the 1995 Agreement, the four member countries of the LMB have agreed to work together with MRC to achieve sustainable development and sustainable management of the Mekong River natural resources. These workshops on wetland classification are part of that work. Wetland management requires a multi-disciplinary approach, with cross-sectoral involvement from the riparian countries’ ministries, departments, agencies, and others. As in the previous Wetland Classification workshops, I am happy to see that there are representatives here today from a wide range of Thailand offices that work with wetland issues. I would like to mention that as part of better collaboration between MRC and other organisations, several national wetland classification workshops have been held in conjunction with ICLARM meetings. Thus, during two days following the wetland classification meetings, ICLARM and our common counterparts have also hosted a two-day workshop. The topic is Legal and Institutional Framework and Economic Valuation of Resources and Environment in the Mekong River Region – a Wetlands approach. We are fortunate that Dr. Magnus Torell, ICLARM project leader is here with us today. The ICLARM topic has very close links to wetland classification, and through close workshop arrangements between MRC and ICLARM, we work in this way together towards a more comprehensive management of Lower Mekong Basin wetlands. Many of you have already worked with the planning stage of this ICLARM project last year. This time, in Thailand, that meeting will not be held now, but a little later on instead. Finally I wish to thank our colleagues at Land Development Department, and at Thailand National Mekong Committee for arranging this workshop. I wish you all a successful workshop. Thank you.


7. SECOND REGIONAL WORKSHOP (Phnom Penh) The second regional workshop was held in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, during 7 – 8 November 2000. Forty delegates attended the two-day meeting. The character of this meeting was that of consolidation workshop, with a focus on group work. It was thought that this would be the most effective way of providing appropriate opportunity for the country delegations to discuss the issues of WLCS that had been brought forward in the first regional and the subsequent national workshops, and on this basis discuss the meeting objective. 7.1 Proceedings The workshop was conducted without any major changes to the previously established meeting agenda This proceedings report is made according to the agenda. Day 1 Opening session The workshop was opened with an opening address by H. E. Dr. Mok Mareth, Minister of Environment, Royal Government of Cambodia, and followed with Welcome Address by Mr. Kristensen, CEO / MRC. The opening statements are provided at the end of this section. Participants introduced themselves and the opening session was then ended with a photograph being taken of the group. Presentation: Mr. Valdemar held a Workshop Introduction presentation on the background, objective, and expected outcome of this workshop. After that, he also presented the outcome of the previously held national workshops. This was done in more detail, as the participants were hearing it for the first time. Background In 1993 the IMW-LMB Project adopted the Ramsar WLCS to assist in project wetland inventories. However, in 1999, the ‘MRC’ WLCS seemed not to have been developed to be suitably applicable to the LMB, and the four countries were using different methodology for wetland classification. Furthermore, project Counterparts provided feedback that the current ‘MRC’ WLCS was not easy to understand, despite an urgent need for its use. In order to a) ascertain the WLCS implementation situation in each country, and to b) define the regional framework within which it would be possible for MRC to facilitate assistance for WLCS activities in the LMB, MRC initiated the following steps: i). A Study on WLCS implementation in the LMB – the ‘Study report’ (April 2000). ii). A series of workshops (1 regional, 4 national, and 1 regional again) to gain full participatory involvement with the LMB member countries in exploring ways to develop a WLCS in the LMB. In July 2000 the National Mekong Committees facilitated the holding of meetings of line agencies in order to identify participants, and approve proposed dates for all six workshops. The workshop schedule proposed by MRC in July was kept, with only minor changes, including the second regional meeting, this time in Phnom Penh.


Workshop Objective To reach consensus to develop a regional Wetland Classification System for the Lower Mekong Basin following the HGM approach. Expected Outcome of the workshop 1. On the basis of the results of the national workshops and group discussions, the countries agree to the MRC proposal to develop a WLCS for the LMB following the HGM approach. 2. Guidelines for the main steps of the process to initiate this development of WLCS are made by the riparian countries, for submission to MRCS. Summary of WLCS National Workshops: All workshops have been carried out as originally planned, with only occasional changes in dates, programmes, or participants. The topic of the workshops has generated considerable interest in each country, and there was active discussion in each workshop. In most cases these national WLCS workshops provided a first occasion for representatives of all government agencies working with wetlands to come together to discuss a wetland issue that is important to all concerned. Main findings: • A simpler WLCS should be made. • The HGMA could provide the basis for such a system for the LMB. • That land use, water regime and water quality criteria could be included in a

WLCS for LMB. • The Ramsar wetland definition is accepted as the best available, but it is not

completely suitable. • It is important to include rice fields in a WLCS for LMB. • Pilot site studies could be included as LMB WLCS development activities. • A multi-sectoral approach is best for wetlands. The discussions during the national WLCS workshops also took considerable time to elaborate on some of the difficulties concerning wetlands classification. The main issues connected to this were wetland terminology, and classification classes, which were brought up during all four national workshops. These two topics were considered by many workshop participants to be complicated, and issues repeated in most workshops included: • The current ‘MRC / Ramsar’ WLCS for LMB is too academic and does not work

well as a LMB planning tool for wetland natural resources. • WLCS needs of deeper detail (i.e. mapping information) are relevant at national or

local level, but this is often hard to separate from regional LMB needs. The outputs from the national WLCS workshops are: Cassette recordings of all workshop proceedings; Presentations in national languages on a wide variety of topics of WLCS (summarized in section 1 of this report); and workshop reports. Conclusions from the National workshops: WLCS for the LMB - a simple, and flexible system, to allow development of greater detail when necessary (national and site levels). The HGM approach is thereby suitable.


The way forward The HGM approach is the relevant one for MRC to consider, because MRC cannot act independently in this activity. Other main actors such as Wetlands International, Ramsar, and ICLARM also are working with, or towards, the HGM approach. Also, there is a need to make haste in providing data and maps for a WLCS, and MRC has a comparative advantage in this as basic LMB data for WLCS development with HGM is available. The main source is Digital Terrain Model data from the MRC Watershed Classification Project. Group work session ‘A’: The task for the country delegations in the first group work session was to discuss the MRC proposal ‘To develop a WLCS for the LMB with the Hydro Geomorphic (HGM) approach’. Three support questions were also given to the groups, as discussion basis: - Provide examples of existing National / Regional data that can support the development of the HGM approach for the LMB. - Provide guidelines for priorities to initiate the captioned proposal. - What time frame should be considered to achieve the captioned proposal? Group work Report Back Session A: Cambodia 1. Existing data for supporting the development of HGM approach for LMB. Data source maps: Vegetation

Topographic Watershed Land use Geographical Hydrological Fisheries habitat/ migration information

2. Prioritisation of activities for development of the above. - Water regime and its utilisation potential - Topography of the LMB - Land use - Socio-economic setting - Uniqueness Red data book Species - Sites: Tonle Sap; Stung Treng ( with Lao PDR); Bassac River (with Viet Nam); Kratie 3.Timeframe for achieving the above.

Water regime & its utilisation potential: 2001-2003 Topography of LMB: 2001-2002 Land use: 2001 Socio-economic: 2002-2003


Lao PDR Agree to use HGM Regionally and nationally. The Lao group gave a short presentation on their understanding on “What is the HGM approach?” The group said it was prepared to accept the Ramsar definition for now and adopt the HGM approach. They mentioned some provinces where pilot sites were suggested and provided a time frame estimating three years to complete the proposal. Thailand Biogeographical Data source Status 1.Regional Satellite ok DTM not sure AP ok

Base map 1:250,000 & 1:50,000 Watershed class 1:50,000 Geo & hydrology 1:250,000 National Land use map 1:50,000 Soil map 1:50,000 Geo map 1:50,000 2: Prioritisation Satellite image AP DTM Topographic map Geo map Interpretation of Satellite Image and Aerial Photographs (AP) Integrate information (satellite / AP / WSCP / Geo). 3: Time frame Data preparation 6 months Data interpretation 12months Data processing 12-18 months Total time 2.5 years Vietnam 1. Fully agree with HGM approach. ‘MRC’ hierarchy accepted with: Geomorphology

Landform Hydroperiod Land use Modifiers (Water quality, habitats)

It was noted that to avoid confusion with using the word ‘system’ in the hierarchical level as well as in the phrase ‘WLCS’ it was proposed to use ‘Wetland Systematic Classification’, (WLSC).


2. Existing data to support HGM approach WLCS:

a. Wetland classification / geomorphological map of the Mekong Delta Soil map Mekong Delta

Inundation map Mekong Delta Water quality Salinity intrusion map Mekong Delta Land use Mekong Delta

b. Regional wetland (Systematic) classification Wetland database for mapping

Activities of priority: 1. Set Map scale / Regional 2. Identify data required to produce the wetland map according to the HGM approach 3. Formulation of MRC guideline for wetland inventory 4. Filling the data gap 5. Database development 6. Workshop / meeting training. (Time frame difficult to estimate, so was not indicated by the Vietnamese delegation.) Group Session B: Task – discuss a WLCS / LMB and Land use aspects, and provide Land use categories of regional importance. Group work Report Back Session B: Vietnam Open water Open Water Tidal barelands Aquaculture Coastal aquatic land Salt Pans/Fields Mangrove forest Coastal Forest Land Rice field Perrenial Crops Agricultural Land Annual crops Grassland Inland Forest Land Mellaleuca Forest Others Others

-----------------------------------------------------------


Thailand Important Land use categories for WLCS Vegetation Rice field Forest Grass Land

Lake/reservoir

Mud flats Consolidated bottom

---------------------------------------------------------------- Lao PDR

Lake Resevoir Pond Marsh Rice field Forest Recreation area Residence Industry Infrastructure Zoning

------------------------------------------------------------

Cambodia Farming area Fishing Flooded veg Forest concession Protected area Hydropower/dam Urban and residential development zone Industrial develop Tourism Cultural site Road infrastructure Water way Open water Habitats of critical impo to spp Habitats of unique endemic spp Intertidal area Coral reef Seagrass


7.2 Presentation summaries, 2nd Regional WLCS Workshop: Opening statement by H.E. Dr. Mok Mareth, Minister of Environment, Vice Chair-Man of CNMC Mr. Kristensen, CEO, Mekong River Commission Secretariat Distinguished Colleagues, Ladies and Gentlemen First of all, on behalf of the Royal Government of Cambodia, and the Cambodia National Mekong Committee, I would like to extend my warmest welcome and sincerest greeting to each and every one of you to this Regional Wetland Classification Workshop. t is indeed a great honor and privilege for me to be here today among distinguished representatives, from the four countries who are actively involved in the management and classification of Mekong River wetlands. I would like also to express my sincerest thanks to the Swedish government for providing financial support through the MRC for this workshop. Distinguished Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen; As all of you know well, the Mekong River has a diverse array of wetlands covering over one million hectares. Mekong wetlands are very rich in habitats that support a high biodiversity of both domestic and international importance, especially fish, reptiles and amphibians, water birds and other wildlife. Therefore, Mekong wetlands have a high economic and social value for agriculture and fisheries, and also supply drinking water, and industrial and domestic raw materials. As such, the Mekong wetlands have inestimable importance for many millions of people. This is the Second Regional Workshop on Wetlands Classification in the Lower Mekong Basin. The first was held in Vientiane on 18-19 September 2000, and was followed by four national workshops. This has been a complex process, which might lead us to ask: Why do we need to develop a wetland classification system? It is because we need: - To describe wetland resources information in an organized and logical way that is useful for

wetlands management planning; - To provide consistent units for mapping, planning and inventory; and - To provide uniform concepts and terms in order to share and compare wetland management

planning activities. Classification is one of the first steps in sustainable wetland management, and is important for establishing a sound basis for the rest of the process. Each country should know what their resources are, and where they are. The Mekong River Commission can assist the Mekong Basin countries to develop wetland management strategies and in order to achieve sustainable development. Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen, In order to serve Mekong River Basin needs, strong efforts should be made within the national agencies and organisations and the Mekong River Commission, for wetland management strategy development. To this end, I hope that the result of this workshop lays a basis for the Mekong River Commission to compile a regional wetland classification system in the Lower Mekong Basin. It will also provide a knowledge base and tools for decision-makers in the four riparian countries in sustainable wetland development and conservation of wetland resources. Again, I thank the MRCS and Sida for their generous providing of support for this workshop. I hereby wish to officially declare the workshop open. Thank you for your kind attention. And I wish all of you good health and great success. Welcome Address By Mr. Joern Kristensen Chief Executive Officer Mekong River Commission Secretariat Your Excellency Dr. Mok Mareth, Minister of Environment, Vice Chairman of Cambodia National Mekong Committee, Distinguished delegates Ladies and Gentlemen On behalf of Mekong River Commission, I am very happy to welcome you all to Phnom Penh, and to today’s meeting on Wetland Classification. This regional workshop is the last in a series of two regional and four national meetings aimed at discussing and developing a Wetland Classification System for the Lower Mekong Basin. The outcome of these workshops have contributed with suggestions on how to make a better wetland classification system that will be useful as a planning tool at a regional, basinwide level. In addition, the national workshops have provided a forum for discussion among representatives from the various


agencies and organisations that are involved in wetland management and planning, and contributed to increasing the awareness of the needs of national level wetland classification. Today’s meeting, and the earlier workshops are part of the work programme of the Inventory and Management of Wetlands in the Lower Mekong Basin Project, and contribute to fulfilling its objectives. This work area also fits with the activities of the new MRC Environment Programme, and is thus an example of where earlier MRC initiatives can be developed further within the new framework of MRC. The livelihood of the majority of the rural population of the lower Mekong Basin is closely dependent on the wetland ecosystems and will continue to be for many years, parallel with possible livelihood improvements through development of the Lower Mekong Basin. However, development plans, rather than supporting the functions and benefits derived from wetlands, often threaten the integrity and the natural productivity of the wetland systems. Development decisions are made without a thorough understanding of the existing economic benefits provided by these areas. If the rural and the poor population is to benefit from improved and sustained use of the region's wetland resources, the planning and management of wetlands require immediate attention. Developing a wetland classification system for the Lower Mekong Basin contributes to gaining more knowledge of our wetlands and their functions, and thereby contributes to making sound decisions for good wetland management. Under the 1995 Agreement, the four member countries of the LMB have agreed to work together with MRC to achieve sustainable development and sustainable management of the Mekong River natural resources. These workshops on wetland classification are part of that work. Wetland management requires a multi-disciplinary approach, with cross-sectoral involvement from the riparian countries’ ministries, departments, agencies, and others. As in the previous Wetland Classification workshops, I am happy to see that there are representatives here today from a wide range of offices that work with wetland issues. Finally, I would like to thank H. E. Dr. Mok Mareth for coming to preside over the opening of this workshop, and I would also like to thank Sida for their support to the important issues of wetland management in the Mekong River Basin. I wish you all a successful workshop. Thank you.

------------------------------------------------- Day 2 Mr. Valdemar made a recap of the previous day. The main outcome yesterday was that a consensus was reached on the proposal to use HGM for a LMB WLCS. This is an important step, and institutionally relevant as others are using the HGM approach, i.e. Wetlands International and ICLARM. Furthermore, in regard to basinwide issues, we shall link the results of the WLCS development to the BDP & WUP. We must remember that what we do here has connections to other MRC activities. Group session ‘C’ Task: Discuss in two mixed ‘regional’ groups, the important issues concerning wetlands regionally and trans-boundary. Provide a list of priority basin-wide issues for the development of a regional WLCS which involves BDP & WUP and other related activities. Group work Report Back Session C: Group 1: Spokesman Mr. Sourasay Regional issues:

Develop HGM approach; Establish a task force for developing a work plan, data inventory, site selection, classification scheme, filling data gap, develop a data base, and mapping;


Workshop / meeting / study tours; Preparation of follow up activities; Task force will be lead by CTA; Funding supported by MRC.

Group 2: Spokesman Mr. Wanchai 1. Regional working group set up( new members). 2. Information needs/ data collection & review. Satellite image, Topographic maps and Geo maps 3. Training field study, on the job training for HGM, remote sensing, water quality, etc. Study tour to prepare a classification system to integrate country user concepts (ie, bench mark) etc. 4. Equipment In regard to BDP & WUP: Watershed management is an important method for conservation, agriculture & industry planning. Land use, similarly, for basin development plan. Prepare a data catalogue –pictoral, indicators, include Data quality. Plenary Valdemar mentioned that data inventory has already begun within the wetland projects, with assessment of old project data. Also, remember to focus on trans-boundary regional issues. Look towards study sites that have a strong regional focus. Somphan suggests 1: 1Mill Regional map scale, 1: 100000 national, 1:50000 Local. Viet Nam suggest that in order to move forward must decide on scale, data catalogue and quality check and two types of data, spatial & attribute, before we can proceed with HGM. Valdemar: There are regional WLCS activities taking place that have a bearing on our activities today. We look forward to participate in Penang at the AWI Symposium in August – September 20001, and to include the outcomes of these workshops there. Mr. Triet: ICF is supporting wetland habitat activities of trans-boundary nature, i.e. Lao PDR/ Cambodia /Viet Nam. Also small seasonal dipterocarp forest (ephemeral) NW Cambodia / S. Lao PDR, & seasonally inundated grass land Cambodia / Viet Nam. Query from the floor: Where does the regional wetland classification fit into the new MRC-EP? Mr. Anders Thurén: There have been around 15 or 16 workshops on the formulation of the Environment programme which has been endorsed and appraised. Debriefing of the appraisal highlighted support for the BDP to commence early next year as well as support initially amounting to $2.5 mill/per year for five years. The work carried out on WLCS over the last few months will continue from here. We will certainly need more information and workshops to discuss trans-boundary issues and site selection (study of issues). Anders assured continued support within the EP especially within Sub component A1 and A2.


7.3 Outcome A general outcome of the workshop was the provision of a forum to exchange ideas and discuss wetland issues in a professional atmosphere with the participation of experts from many fields. The specific outcome of the country delegations agreeing to the use of the HGM approach in the continued process of developing a WLCS for the LMB, is an important benchmark on which the next step can soundly be made. Workshop closure H.E. Mr. Hou Taing Eng, Secretary General, CNMC, Alternate Member of MRC JC for Cambodia, provided the closure speech for the workshop, and for the workshop series, as follows below. Good Morning, Khun Busabong, Director of Mekong River Commission Environment Programme Distinguished colleagues, ladies and gentlemen On behalf of Royal Government of Cambodia and CNMC, I am very happy to have been here for the opening of this workshop and to take part in this closing opening ceremony of the workshop. This is the final workshop that has followed the first regional workshop in Vientiane in mid September 2000, and four national workshops since then. This a lot of work and I congratulate you all to have committed your work to these meetings. As I have noticed this morning, there were very active discussions here, and I have been told that the other workshops were also very active. The outcome of these discussions will contribute to the suggestions on how to make a better classification system that will be useful at a regional, basin-wide level, and also, I am sure, contribute to understanding the various requirements of wetlands classification at national level. It has been established that the Mekong River and its tributaries and wetlands are extremely productive systems. There is a very rich biodiversity in these waters and on the adjacent land. Many millions of people depend on this biodiversity for their food. The Mekong River wetlands are particularly important in this respect, and our work on wetland classification contributes to strengthening our capacity to provide sound planning and management of these important ecosystems. The proceedings of the earlier workshops have assisted us with some guidelines for the development of a regional wetland classification such as: * to remember to establish what the purpose of wetland classification is, and who will be the user of it; * and therefore, to define at what level the wetland classification is going to be applied. The proceedings of this workshop have made the important contribution of fully supporting the MRC proposal to develop a regional wetland classification system with the Hydro Geomorphic approach. This approach also allows more detailed wetland classification to be made at National and site level. Other important outcomes of this workshop are the provision of: * guidelines for priorities to initiate the MRC proposal, and * guidelines for priority trans-boundary and basinwide issues to consider when carrying out the development of a regional wetland classification system, including links to BDP and WUP. Therefore, I find that the workshop has reached its objectives and should be considered a success for all those involved in this process. I congratulate all participants of this meeting, and those of the earlier workshops. Finally, may I wish you all a safe return to your homes and offices, and hope that some may be able to stay and take part in our celebrations of the Water Festival. I thank you all for contributing to a successful workshop, and I hereby pronounce this workshop closed. Thank you.

END OF REPORT

ANNEXES to

The Report

DEVELOPING

A

WETLAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

for the LOWER MEKONG BASIN

Results from a series of Regional and National Workshops

IMW-LMB Project Phase 2

MRC June 2001

LIST OF ANNEXES ANNEX 1 IMW-LMB Aide Memoire to WLCS in the LMB ANNEX 2 Presentation by George Begg: the HGM approach to WLCS (PowerPt) ANNEX 3 Presentation by Thomas Breu: Watershed Classification data (PowerPt) ANNEX 4 Pres. by Magnus Torell: ICLARM ‘Legal & Institution Project’ (PowerPt) ANNEX 5 Lao PDR WLCS National Workshop Report ANNEX 6 Thailand WLCS National Workshop Report ANNEX 7 Viet Nam WLCS National Workshop Report

ANNEX 1: IMW-LMB Aide Memoire to WLCS in the LMB

Annex 1 to WCLS Report (June 2001) // IMW-LMB Project Sept.2000 // 1

Inventory and Management of Wetlands in the Lower Mekong Basin P.O.Box 9197, Vientiane, Lao P.D.R.

Telephone: (856-20) 514 616 and (856-21) 215 015 ext. 105 Fax: (856-21) 214 855

E-mail: [email protected] & [email protected]

AIDE MEMOIRE

Support document for the Regional and National Workshops on the

MRC Wetland Classification System (18-19 September to 7-8 November 2000)

1. Background to this Aide Memoire As part of its contribution to the development of sound management of wetlands in the Mekong River Basin, the Mekong River Commission is organising a series of workshops on the topic of ‘The MRC Wetland Classification System’. Under the auspices of the project ‘Inventory and Management of Wetlands in the Lower Mekong Basin’ four national workshops will be arranged to hold discussions on the issues of wetland classification. Before and after these meetings, regional workshops will be conducted. 2. Objective of this Aide Memoire The intention of this Aide Memoire is that it would serve two purposes during the workshops: • to provide background information on the topic of wetland types and their ecology, including also

some information on wetland formation; and

• to provide some general guidelines for the workshop discussions; 3. Workshop discussion guidelines Wetlands are important for peoples’ livelihood and for feeding their families. The inevitable development progress in the Lower Mekong Basin (LMB) will entail impacts on the Mekong River and its tributaries, i.e. on the quality and quantity of water, and thereby, impact also on the functions of wetlands. In order to accomplish good and sustainable management of LMB wetlands, governments should have good information on where wetlands are, and the extent of them, and know what types of wetlands they are. This is where the issues of wetland classification come in. There are some core issues to include in the discussions on the development of a wetlands classification system. It is perhaps easiest to pinpoint these issues with questions, as follows: Ø Who will use the wetlands classification system? Ø Why will it be used? Ø Where will it be developed? Ø How will it be maintained and developed? In addition, a particular issue with our work with Mekong River wetlands and wetland classification, is that of the connection between National needs and applications, with those of the Regional.


It is hoped that these guidelines will be helpful to the Riparian delegations’ at both the regional and the national workshops. 4. What are wetlands? There is today consensus among scientists around the world that wetlands have great value, and due to this, there is a large amount of literature on wetlands available for reference. The following pages of this Aide Memoire, contain excerpts from this literature, together with some of our own views. Despite the fact that there are over fifty definitions of wetland in current usage, most definitions of wetlands will include the following three main components which are integral to wetland ecosystem dynamics. 1. Wetlands are distinguished by the presence of water, either at the surface or within the root zone. 2. Wetlands often have unique soil conditions that differ from adjacent non-wetland areas. 3. Wetlands support vegetation adapted to permanently or seasonally wet conditions (termed

hydrophytic vegetation) The most widely used definition, is the one employed by the Ramsar convention: ”areas of marsh, fen, peatland or water, whether natural or artificial, permanent or temporary, with water that is static or flowing, fresh, brackish or salt, including areas of marine water, the depth of which at low tide does not exceed six metres”. Wetlands occupy characteristic positions in the landscape. Stream source, estuarine, and marine wetlands could be described as being ‘fixed’ at their respective upper and lower positions of a catchment area. Basin, plains and streambank wetlands span a wide range of landscape settings within the catchment’s gradient. Descriptions of these six wetland types are presented with a blend of text from different sources, as follows: A. Stream source Wetland The stream source spring, seepage slope or seepage plain in steeper younger valleys just below the watershed. Water inflow is diffuse and outflow can be diffuse or channeled. These settings are easily overlooked as wetlands and because they may often be the only green "oases" in an otherwise dry landscape they are often important water sources and grazing areas for domestic stock and wildlife. B. Basin Wetland The depressions, fringes and open water of temporarily, seasonally, or permanently wet ponds, dams and lakes. They can occur in all positions in the landscape. Basin settings include Lacustrine & Palustrine classes; Lakes and ponds develop through several processes. “Some are formed by folding, faulting, or movement of earth’s crust. Volcanic disturbances formed some crater lakes. Some lakes in arid regions were formed by wind action. Stream action forms oxbow lakes and alluvial fan lakes, plunge pools, and basins. Wetlands often form on lake margins extending from the shallow littoral zone out to the deeper limnetic zone to the extent that light penetration supports rooted vegetation. C. Plains Wetland


These have gentle gradients and can occur in all but the highest positions in the landscape. Water inflow is channeled, or diffuse, and can be directly linked to a stream source. Outflow is channeled, but within the site the flow can be diffuse, channeled or braided, i.e., a number of small channels separated by bars. Ox-bows (cut off meanders) and back-marshes often occur on the alluvial plains. Plains wetlands are some of the most recognisable of wetland systems and are commonly referred to as marshes and swamps. Both these may be flooded permanently or only seasonally. Freshwater marshes are common wherever groundwater, surface springs, streams or runoff cause frequent flooding or more or less permanent shallow water. Marshes are characterized by emergent aquatic macrophytes, whereas swamps are dominated by trees. Thus, marshes are dominated by emergent aquatic macrophytes, such as reeds and sedges, and have submerged or floating macrophytes, such as pond-weeds and waterlilies. A major distinguishing feature of marshes is the absence of trees and shrubs. Swamps contain large trees and shrubs, but also, a variety of aquatic macrophytes grow in the more open sunlit areas. Swamp forests develop mainly in still water areas around lake margins and in parts of floodplains, such as oxbows, where the water rests for longer periods. Their precise character varies according to geographical location and environment. D. Streambank Wetland The channels, walls and adjacent riparian corridors of streams, rivers and dry water courses that occur throughout the catchment connecting many wetland settings to each other thus creating a continuum of wetlands from mountain to sea. The system includes habitats contained within a channel. A channel is an open conduit either naturally or artificially created which periodically or continuously contains moving water, or which forms a connecting link between two bodies of standing water. E. Estuarine Wetland “The waterbody, fringes and peripheral wetlands around an estuary. For descriptive purposes they are sub-divided in: Estuaries - the tidal portion of river mouths; Lagoons- normally closed river mouths; and Non-tidal open river mouths. Whilst estuarine wetlands are amongst the most diverse and richest of natural habitats they are the recipients of intense local use and all up-river use and as such are the ultimate barometers of the condition of their catchments. Estuaries are bodies of water where a river mouth widens into a marine ecosystem, where the salinity is intermediate between salt and fresh water, and where tidal action is an important bio-physical regulator. F. Marine Wetland “This setting includes the: lnter-tidal zone: rocky and sandy marine shores; Sub-tidal zone: permanent marine shallow waters and coral reefs less than 6m deep at low-tide; and Coastal bays: coastal inlets without feeder streams or rivers. Open coasts are those not subject to the influence of river water and lagoon ecosystems. Like estuaries, open coastal ecosystems can support a diversity of wetland habitats, including mudflats and mangroves, although these normally reach greatest development under estuarine conditions. 5. Wetlands have distinctive plant communities Wetlands such as swamps or marshes are obvious, but some wetlands are not easily recognised, often because they are dry during part of the year or they just don’t look very wet at first sight as the water table is just below the surface. It is normally possible to determine if wetlands exist by being able to identify a few plants such as bulrushes, reeds, sedges, mangroves and other water-loving trees and grasses.


A wetland’s rich plant growth develops by virtue of the greater moisture availability. The plant cover fills an important function of intercepting surface run-off and reducing water velocity through the increased resistance caused by the plant stems. This also allows time for water scrubbing, filtering and infiltration into the soil. Of all the wetland processes operative in the environment, infiltration is probably the most important. This is a process by which water soaks into the soil and replenishes the moisture stored there. In most wetlands the passage of water through the soil profile is slow often due to the high clay content of the soil together with the gentle gradient of the wetland. Water that flows this particular route remains within the catchment for the longest possible time and in so doing, sustains the flow of streams. 6. Why value wetlands? The societal benefit or value of a wetland is subjective estimate of the worth, merit quality or importance of the wetland to mankind. This implies that a dollar value can be ascribed to wetlands in terms of providing habitat for fishing, hunting, viewing, plant material, harvesting, domestic stock grazing, flood damage control and water cleaning, to name a few. These values are derived directly from the existing wetland function. For example to establish the value of a function such as flood retention, the question: “what will it cost to replace that function?” should be answered. Likewise, to establish the value of the “fish and crustacean nursery” function of an estuary it would be necessary to establish the economic dependence on fishing and tourism in the vicinity of the estuary. Wetland functions and values – some examples: The soil erosion protection function: Soil retained for agriculture, and clean water for local communities and for tourism. The flood control and stream flow regulation function: Protection of human life and property. The water cleansing function: Longer life of dams and cleaner, safer, cheaper water. The provision of stock grazing function: Milk and meat. The provision of wild habitat function: Fishing, hunting, material harvesting, education and wildlife viewing. This “Aide Memoire” was compiled directly from a number of sources quoted first in the reference section on page 8.


ANNEX I: Table of Wetland Values

Est

uarie

s (w

ithou

t man

grov

es)

Man

grov

es

Ope

n co

asts

Floo

dpla

ins

Fres

hwat

er m

arsh

es

Lake

s

Pea

tland

s

Sw

amp

fore

st

Functions

1. Groundwater recharge µ µ µ ν ν ν λ λ 2. Groundwater discharge λ λ λ λ ν λ λ ν 3. Flood control λ ν µ ν ν ν λ ν 4. Shoreline stabilization/Erosion control λ ν λ λ ν µ µ µ 5. Sediment/toxicant retention λ ν λ ν ν ν ν ν 6. Nutrient retention λ ν λ ν ν λ ν ν 7. Biomass export λ ν λ ν λ λ µ λ 8. Storm protection/windbreak λ ν λ µ µ µ µ λ 9. Micro-climate stabilization µ λ µ λ λ λ µ λ 10. Water Transport λ λ µ λ µ λ µ µ 11. Recreation/Tourism λ λ ν λ λ λ µ λ

Products

1. Forest resources µ ν µ λ µ µ µ ν 2. Wildlife resources ν λ λ ν ν λ λ λ 3. Fisheries ν ν λ ν ν ν µ λ 4. Forage resources λ λ µ ν ν µ µ µ 5. Agricultural resources µ µ µ ν λ λ λ µ 6. Water supply µ µ µ λ λ ν λ λ

Attributes

1. Biological diversity ν λ λ ν λ ν λ λ 2. Uniqueness to culture/heritage λ λ λ λ λ λ λ λ Key: µ = Absent or exceptional; λ = present; ν = common and important value of that wetland type. Reproduced from IUCN Publication “ WETLAND CONSERVATION ”; Patrick Dugan,1990.

ANNEX II: A comparison of wetland classification systems


• MITSCH AND GOSSELINK 1993 A. Coastal

Tidal salt marsh Tidal fresh water marsh

Tidal Mangrove B. Inland

Freshwater marshes Northern peatlands Southern deepwater swamps Riparian wetlands

• COWARDIN SYSTEM/ US Fish & Wildlife Service 1978; later modified by many organisations and ultimately adopted by the MRC classification system.

A. Hierarchy

System, subsystem, class, subclass, special modifiers

B. Systems Marine Palustrine Riverine Estuarine Lacustrine

• BRITISH SYSTEM (RIELEY & PAGE)

Running and standing waters (minerotrophic) Streams Upper reach Middle reach Lower reach Lakes Fens Marsh Swamp

A. Trophic status Oligotrophic Mesotrophic Dystrophic

B. Ombrotrophic mires (bogs) Raised Basin Blanket

• HYDROGEOMORPHIC CLASSIFICATION (HGM) FAEWE after (Brinson 1993)

A. Geomorphic setting Depressional wetlands Riverine Fringe Peatland

B. Water source Precipitation Groundwater discharge Surface or near-surface flow Tides, overbank, interflow, overland, stream

C. Hydrodynamics Vertical movement of water Unidirectional Bi-directional

• (The US HGM system is very similar , see

Annex III. Both systems are being developed.)

Adapted from ‘Wetland classification system’: http//faculty.washington.edu/kern/uhf475/outclas.htm -


ANNEX III: Table a) Two systems for naming wetland classes. Table b) Some characteristics of marshes, swamps, bogs and fens.

Wetland classes Scott. 1989 A directory of Asian wetlands. Hydrogeomorphic classes (US HGM system)*. 1. shallow sea bays and straits (under six metres at low tide) 1. Riverine. Overbank (channel)

Horizontal 2. estuaries, deltas 2. Depressional. Gr.water return flow/interflow Vertical 3. small offshore islands, islets 3. Slope. Ground water return flow

Horizontal 4. rocky sea coats, sea cliffs 4. Flats. (mineral soil)Precipitation Vertical 5. sea beaches (sand, pebbles) 5. Flats. (organic soil) Precipitation Vertical 6. intertidal mudflats, sand flats 6. Fringe.(estuarine) Overbank (estuary)

Horizontal 7. mangrove swamps, mangrove forest 7. Fringe.(lacustrine) Overbank (lake)

Horizontal 8. coastal brackish and saline lagoons and marches 9. salt pans (artificial) (http//faculty.washington.edu/kern/uhf475/outclas.htm) 10. shrimp ponds, fish ponds 11. rivers, streams – slow – flowing (lower perennial) 12. rivers, streams – fast – flowing (upper perennial) 13. oxbow lakes, riverine marshes 14. freshwater lakes and associated marshes (lacustrine) 15. freshwater ponds (under 8 hectares) marshes, swamp (palustrine) 16. salt lakes, saline marshes (inland drainage systems) 17. water storage reservoir, dams 18. seasonally flooded grassland, savanna, palm savanna 19. rice paddies 20. flooded arable land, irrigated land 21. swamp forest, temporarily flooded forest 22. peat bogs. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________

__ Table b). Summary: Features of marshes, swamp, bogs, and fens.

Almost all wetlands are slightly acidic due to the anoxia of flooded soils. As well as direct river inflow, marshes and swamps may receive water from river overflows during floods and from ground water. These terms are a simplification of the wide and historical literature on wetlands, and some classifications may not fit exactly to the terms listed here. Typical emergent

(submerged)

Organic matter

Name Macrophytes PH Water source (peat)

Marsh Reeds,waterlilies,pondweed 5.1-7.0 River Yes Swamp

Cypress, (water lilies)

3.0-7.0

River

Little

Bog

Sphagnum (none)

3.6-4.7

Rain

Much

Fen

Mosses, sedges (cottongrass, willowswater)

5.1-7.6

Ground

Yes

Reproduced from Chapter 18, Wetlands Table 18.1 in “Limnology”, Horne & Goldman 1994. McGraw Hill International Editions.


ANNEX IV: References A). References often used directly in the Aide Memoire text: Dugan, P.J. (ed.). 1990. Wetland conservation: A review of current issues and required action. IUCN Horne. A, J, Goldman. C, R, Limnology International Editions 1994. http:// faculty.washington.edu/kern/uhf475/outclas.htm –Wetland Classification Systems. http:// psybergate.com/wetfix/wetlandfix/wetlandfix 1/part1.htm http:// www.nwi.fws.gov/contents.html – Classification of wetlands and deep water habitats of the US. http:// www.wetlands.com/coe/fr16au96.htm Maltby. E, Hogan. D, McInnes. R 1996.Functional analysis of European wetland ecosystems-Phase 1 (FAEWE) R 16132 – EU Ecosystems research Report. B). Other useful References: Asian Wetlands Bureau 1992. Definition of Wetlands and Wetland Benefits. Claridge, G.F. 1996. An Inventory of Wetlands of the Lao PDR. Claridge, G.F. & O’ Callaghan, B. 1996. Community involvement in wetland management: lessons from the field. Wetland International. Dugan, P.J. (ed.). 1990. Wetland conservation: A review of current issues and required action. IUCN Finlayson, M and Moser, M (eds) 1991.- Wetlands. Facts on file, Oxford. http://ramsar.org/key Key Document of the Ramsar Convention: Classification System for Wetland Type. ICLARM. 1999. Legal and Institutional Framework, and Economic Valuation of Resources and Environment in the Mekong River Region: A Wetlands Approach-Draft Programme/Project Document Maltby, E. 1986. Waterlogged Wealth: why waste the world’s wet places? Earthscan, London, UK. 200 pp http://medwet.gr/ Characteristics of Mediterranean wetlands- Scott, D.A.(ed.) 1989b. A Directory of Asian Wetlands. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK 1181 pp Scott, D.A. & Poole, C.M.1989. AWE-A Status Overview of Asian Wetlands.


ANNEX V: Wetland Glossary Acid:……………………….. Term applied to water with a pH less than 5.5 e.g. acid rain. Alkaline:……………………Term applied to water with a pH greater than 7.4. Aquifer:……………………. A water bearing stratum of rock, sufficiently porous to carry water and sufficiently coarse to release

the water and permit its use. Back swamp:……………… Slack water enclosed between natural or constructed leeves and embankments. Bar:………………………… An elongated landform generated by waves and currents, usually running parallel to the shore

composed predominantly of unconsolidated sand, gravel, stones, cobbles, or rubble and with water on two sides.

Basin:……………………….The catchment area of a river and its tributaries. A depression in the earth’s surface consisting of rock strata that slope down to a common centre.

Beach:………………………A sloping landform on the shore of larger water bodies, generated by waves and currents and extending from the water to distinct breaks in landform or substrate type (e.g., a fore-dune, cliff, or bank)

Bog:………………………... An area of wet acid peat and the vegetation associated with its poorly drained or undrained surface. Bogs are characterized by a low species diversity, few higher plants, and an abundance of the peat-building sphagnum moss.

Brackish:…………………...Marine and Estuarine waters with Mixohaline salinity. The term should not be applied to inland waters.

Channel:……………………“An open conduit naturally or artificially created which periodically or continuously contains moving water or which forms a connecting link between two bodies of standing water”. In natural conditions considered the deepest part of a river or stream.

Catchment area:………….. The area of land, which catches rainfall for a particular river, lake or estuary. Synonymous with the American use of the term watershed.

Depression:………………...Sunken area of the earth’s surface (with water: oxbow, pond or lake), without surface drainage outlet. Diffuse:……………………..To spread out freely in all directions. Dominant:………………….As in the species controlling the environment. Ecology:……………………. The study of the interrelationships between living organisms and the environment. Ecosystem:………………… Ecological system formed by the interaction of living organisms with each other and with the

chemical and physical factors of the environment in which they live all being linked by the transfer of energy and materials.

Effluent:…………………… Liquid waste, generally pouring out or flowing away. Emergent hydrophytes:….. Erect, rooted, herbaceous angiosperms that may be temporarily to permanently flooded at the base but

do not tolerate prolonged inundation of the entire plant; e.g., bulrushes Emergent mosses:………….Mosses occurring in wetlands, but generally not covered by water. Environment:………………The sum of all the external conditions and influences which effect the development and life of

organisms. Erosion: …………………… The movement of soil and rock material by agents such as running water, wind, and moving ice. Estuary: …………………… A semi-enclosed water body where land-derived fresh water mixes with sea-water. Eutrophic lake: ……………Lake that has a high concentration of plant nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus. This promotes

excessive growth of algae, which deplete the available oxygen. Fen: ……………………….. Fens are often species-rich lowland wetlands and are typically supplied by mineral-rich ground water.

In contrast to a bog, the soil is alkaline neutral or only slightly acidic. Flat: ……………………….. A level landform composed of unconsolidated sediments-usually mud or sand. Flats may be

irregularly shaped or elongate and continuous with the shore, whereas bars are generally elongate, parallel to the shore, and separated from the shore by water.

Floating plant: ……………A non-anchored plant floats freely in the water or on the surface; e.g., water hyacinth (Eichhonia crassipes)

Floating-leaved plant:……..A rooted, herbaceous hydrophyte with some leaves floating on the water surface; e.g., white water lily (Nymphaea odorata)

Floodplain: …………………The relatively level part of a valley bordering a river resulting from alluvium deposited by the river in times of flood.

Fresh: ………………………Term applied to water with salinity less 0.5% dissolved salts. Fringe: ……………………...Peripheral, at the outer edge. Functional Capacity Index: An index of the capacity of a wetland to perform a function relative to other wetlands within a

regional wetland subclass in a reference domain. Functions (wetland):………Those functions that result directly from the characteristics of a wetland ecosystem, the surrounding

landscape and their interaction. Also, activities or actions which occur naturally in wetlands as a product of the interactions between the ecosystem structure and processes. Functions include actions such as flood control, nutrient retention and food-web support. These functions may be of varying significance to local communities depending on their needs.

Geomorphic: ……………… Study concerned with land formation evolution and processes. Glide: ………………………Moderately shallow reaches with ever flow that lack destruction or common in large rivers passing

through mountainous terrain. Groundwater: …………….. The water stored within an aquifer, derived from percolation of rainwater and other sources. Habitat: …………………… The place or environment in which specific organisms live. Haline: ……………………..Term used to indicate dominance of ocean salt. Herbaceous: ……………… With the characteristic of a herb, a plant with no persistent woody stem above ground. HGMA: …………………… Hydrogeomorphic approach (to wetland classification & functional assessment). HGMU: …………………… Hydrogeomorphic Units are areas of homogenous geo-morphology, and under normal conditions

homogeneous soil.


Histosols: …………………..Organic soils. Horizontal: ……………….. Parallel to the horizon, at right angles to the vertical. Hydraulic: ……………….. Water in motion, or the pressure exerted by water. (Also: moving fluids, when carried through pipes.) Hydric soil: ……………….. Soil that is wet long enough to periodically produce anaerobic conditions, thereby influencing the

growth of specific plants. Hydrodynamics:…………... The mechanics of water flow Hydrology: …………………The study of water, particularly the factors affecting it’s movement on land or underneath it. Hydrophyte: ……………… Any plant growing in water or a substrate that is least periodically deficient in oxygen as a result of

excessive water content. Hyperhaline: ………………Term to characterize waters with salinity greater than 40%, due to ocean-derived salts. Hypersaline: ……………….Term to characterize water with salinity greater than 40%, due to land-derived salts. Impact: ……………………. The influence or effect that any particular land use has on a wetland’s functions. The degree of

impairment to the wetlands functions is directly related to the type and magnitude of the impact. Impervious: ………………. Incapable of being penetrated by water. Intertidal………………….. Between high and low tide. Inventory(of Wetland):……A stocktaking / mapping or listing exercise designed to generate information on the location and

characteristics of wetlands in any given area. Levee (natural)……………. Raised crests above the floodplain surface adjacent to the channel usually containing coarser

materials deposited as flood waters flow over the top of channel banks. Marsh: ……………………. A wetland zone, which is dominated by emergent herbaceous vegetation (usually taller than 1 m),

such as common reed – Phragmites australis. Some marsh zone areas are seasonally wet but most are permanently or semi-permanently wet.

Mesohaline: ……………….Term to characterise waters with salinity of 5 to 18%, due to ocean-derived salts. Mud: ………………………. Wet, soft soil composed predominantly of clay and fine sediments less than 0.074 mm in diameter. Non persistent emergents:..Emergent hydrophytes whose leaves and stems break down at the end of the growing season so that

most above-ground portions of the plants are easily transported by currents, waves, or ice. Obligate hydrophytes:……Species that are found only in wetlands. Organic soil: ………………Soil composed of predominantly organic rather than mineral. Equivalent to Histosol. Ox-bow lake: ……………... A lake formed from a meander(bend) in a river eventually cut off when the river takes a straighter or

a newer course. Pan ………………………… A hard substratum of soil, usually slightly depressed, and surface lying. Peat land : ………………… Under conditions of low temperature, high acidity, low nutrient supply, water logging and oxygen

deficiency, the process of decomposition is retarded and dead plant matter accumulates as peat. Pools: ………………………Flat deep zone of rivers with bottom of fine material. Associated with riffles, eg: alternation of pools

+ riffles. See riffle. Potamon: …………………. A division of the river course. In the region where monthly mean temperatures are > 20°C, the flow is

slow, oxygen deficits may occur, and the bed is mainly sand or mud. Precipitation: ……………...Rain, snow, sleet, dew etc., formed by condensation of water vapour in the atmosphere. Resource (natural):………… Any raw material, either living or non-living, renewable or non-renewable, obtained form nature. Riffle: ………………………A rocky obstruction in a river bed, a shallow gravel bar over which water flows rapidly with a ruffled

surface. See pool Riparian: …………………. Occurring on the banks of streams and rivers. Siltation : …………………. Sediment that occurs when water velocity drops sufficiently to allow deposition to occur. Slope: ………………………An inclined (upward or downward) portion of ground. Swamp: …………………… Wooded wetlands with standing, or gently flowing water. Typical species include Mellaleuca, and

Icus trichopoda. Swamps are often poor in peat deposits, which are flushed out by floods or oxidized in the dry seasons. Swamps develop in still water areas around lake margins and in parts of floodplains, such as oxbows, where the water rests for longer periods.

Values: ……………………..The perceived benefits to society, either direct or indirect, that result from wetland functions. These values include human welfare, environmental quality and wildlife support.

Vertical: ……………………Perpendicular to the plane of the horizon. Watershed: ………………...The dividing line/ridge/ground between river systems (drainage areas). See Catchment. Water table: ………………. The upper surface of groundwater, or that level below which the soil/permiable rocks are saturated. Wet grassland: …………….A wetland zone which is usually temporarily wet and supports predominantly grasses common to dry

and wet areas. Wet meadow: ………………Wetland zone which is usually seasonally wet and dominated by short sedges (often < 1m) and

grasses. Wetland: ………………….. A collective term used to describe those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or

groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support and that under normal circumstances do support a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. The Ramsar convention for wetlands of international importance (especially as a waterfowl habitat), defines wetlands as, “areas of marsh, fern, peatland, or water, whether natural or artificial, permanent, or temporary, with water that is static or flowing, fresh, brackish, or salt, including areas of marine water the dept of which at low tide does not exceed six metres”.

ANNEX 2: Presentation by George Begg: the HGM approach to WLCS (PowerPoint)

1

Towards the development of a “ROBUST REGIONAL

CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM” for the Inventory and Management of

Wetland in the Lower Mekong Basin

*

* The NCTWR is an alliance formed between the Environmental Research Institute of the Supervising Scientist;James Cook University of North Queensland; University of Western Australia; and Northern Territory Univeristy

ØV & C Semeniuk (SRG, WA)

ØM Finlayson (eriss, NT; Ramsar STRP; WIMSG)

ØD Kotze and C Breen (INR, RSA)

ØJ Wyatt (NPB, RSA)

ØB Bayliss and J Lowry (eriss, NT)

Acknowledgments

2

Lessons from the pastØ The word “wetland” is a generic term used to group land areas where

saturation with water is the dominant factor determining their ecological character.

Ø Wetlands have similar determinants (landform and water regimes) throughout the world.

Ø Uses (and users) of the wetlands are similar throughout the world.

Ø There is little to be gained by independent development of a newclassification scheme.

Purpose of classification

Ø “Decision makers cannot make informed decisions about wetlands without knowing how many and what type are where” (Wilen 1985).

This implies that wetland classification:

Ø must be accompanied by inventory and mapping; and that it

Ø is a stock-taking exercise aimed at:

Ø locating areas that meet the accepted definition of wetlands;

Ø arranging ecological units for inventory and mapping;

Ø aiding decisions about resource management;

Ø providing uniformity in wetland concepts and terminology;

Ø facilitating basin wide landuse planning; and

Ø meeting the needs of users with different goals.

3

RiverineRiverine

Estuarine

Coastal

Marine

““VariablesVariables””

4 Springs4 Waterfalls4 Pools4 Rivers4 Streams4 Lakes4 Ponds4 Marshes

4 Swamps4 Floodplains4 Flooded forests4 Oxbow lakes4 Mangrove swamps4 Mudflats

4 Saltflats4 Beaches

4 Tidal pools4 Sea grass beds4 Coral reefs

““Fixed ComponentsFixed Components””

Ramsar Classification (Cowardin et al 1979)

The classification adopted by Ramsar is based on a heirarchical approach that recognises the following categories:

SYSTEMS – wetlands that share similar hydrologic, geomorphic, chemical and biological factors (estuary; lacustrine; palustrine …)

SUBSYSTEMS – which reflect hydrologic conditions within systems (subtidal; intertidal; ….)

CLASSES - which describe the appearance based on vegetation cover or substrate where veg. is absent (aquatic;emergent; forested; consolidated …..)

SUB-CLASSES – which describe within-class differences in vegetation cover or substrate where veg. is absent (submergent; broadleaved; evergreen; gravel ….)

MODIFIERS – to more precisely describe the water regime, salinity, pH and soil (seasonally flooded; hypersaline; acid; irrigated; artificial …)

4

Weaknesses include:

Øinconsistent application of criteria used

Øsimilarity of landfrom setting for some types on hydroperiod

Øinconsistent separation on salinity

Øimprecise definition of some systems

Criteria for a robust classification system

A “robust classification system” must be:

Ø simple (easily learned and applied);

Ø contain building blocks that can be easily understood by lay public / other users;

Ø hierarchicalto allow:

Ø for the systematic (logical) aggregation (grouping) and disaggregation of potentially large data sets;

Ø decision making at various geographical and administrative levels;

Ø rational comparisons to be made; and

Ø value judgements to be made without it being an evaluation system.

Ø Open ended (to accept new elements as knowledge advances );

Ø Incorporate scale (global / regional/ local) ;

Ø Capture the diversity of wetlands and wetland uses .

5

Recommendations

Ø Adoption of the HGM (hydrogeomorphic) approach:

Ø proposed by Semeniuk and Semeniuk (1987, 1995, 1997)

Ø adopted by AWI.

Ø Re-ordering of the “Ramsar / LMB classification” by strengthening its underlying geomorphic and hydrologic elements.

Example of selected inland wetlands reclassified in terms of HGM approach

System Subsystem

(LANDFORM)

Class

(HYDROPERIOD)

Subclass

Riverine River

(CHANNEL)

Perennial rivers

(PERMANENTLYINUNDATED)

Seasonal rivers

(SEASONALLYINUNDATED)

Pools ; Channels

Artificial canals

Rapids ; Waterfalls

(SIZE; SHAPE; SOILS;VEG …)

Pools ; channels ;

Rapids ; waterfalls

6

System Subsystem

(LANDFORM)

Class

(HYDROPERIOD)

Subclass

Lacustrine Lakes (>8ha)

(BASIN)

Ponds (<8ha)

(BASIN)

Permanent lakes


Seasonal lakes


Permanent ponds


Seasonal ponds


Natural permanentfreshwater ; Lakesartificial permanent ….

(SIZE; SOILS;VEGETATION ;SALINITY…)

Natural permanentpond ; freshwateraquacultural ponds …..

Natural ; artificial……..


System Subsystem

(LANDFORM)

Class

(HYDROPERIOD)

Subclass

Palustrine Permanent

(FLAT)

Seasonal

(FLAT)

Grass ; Sedges

Trees/shrubs ;

(PERMANENTLYWATERLOGGED)

sedges ; trees/ shrubs

swamp ….

(SEASONALLYWATERLOGGED)

Permanent floodedgrassland ; ..marshes;…. swamps

(SIZE; SOILS;VEGETATION ;SALINITY…)

Permanent floodedgrassland ; ..marshes;…. Swamps;plantations ….


7

Ø Geomorphic features :

Core data for the AWI (future LMB?) scheme

Landform Settings


8


ØDelineation of wetland boundaries;

Ø Geographical co-ordinates;

Ø altitude; Ø slope;

Ø wetland shape;Ø wetland area;


9

Ø Hydrological features:

Ø Soil / water regime (hydroperiod / water permanence; water depth


Ø Soil morphology (depth and duration of anaerobic conditions)


10

Ø Water chemistry (salinity; pH; transparency; nutrients ……..)

Ø Ecological features (habitats ):

Ø Plant zonation;

Ø Biota (dominants);

Ø Noteworthy species (Red Data spp; protected spp; endemics …);

Ø Migratory / nomadic species; ………


Contribution to Ramsar / Asian Wetland Database

ØGeographical overview;

ØStatus and trend reports;

ØCause and effect evaluations;

ØWI protocols, manual and training.

ANNEX 3: Presentation by Thomas Breu: Watershed Classification data (PowerPoint)

1

Watershed Classification ProjectWatershed Classification Projectandand

Inventory and Management of Inventory and Management of Wetlands in the LMB ProjectWetlands in the LMB Project

Thomas Breu

Project SummaryProject Summary

Watershed Classification Project

WSC Method

Digital Terrain Model

WSC Products

GIS data generation

Wetlands and WSC data

Outlook

2

NextPrevious

Aims of the Project Aims of the Project ((summarizedsummarized))

l To elaborate a Watershed Classification system for the Lower Mekong Basin

l To make a cartographic assessment of the Watersheds using the Classification developed

l Transfer of know how

l Application of WSC and related data

NextPrevious

Watershed Classification MethodWatershed Classification MethodWSC WSC = = a a + + bb**slope slope + + cc**landform landform ++dd**elevation elevation + + ee**geology geology + + ff* * soilsoil

Parameters used in ThailandParameters used in Thailand

3

NextPrevious

WSC = 1.709 -(0.035*slope) + (0.0163*landform) - (0.002*elevation)

WSC Equation and ClassesWSC Equation and Classes

Class 1: Protection ForestClass 2: Commercial ForestClass 3: Agro-ForestryClass 4: Upland FarmingClass 5: Lowland Farming

NextPrevious

WSC

dra

ped

over

W

SC d

rape

d ov

er 33

d vi

ew o

f DT

Md

view

of D

TM

Class 1

Class 2

Class 3

Class 4

Class 5

4

NextPrevious

DT

M C

reat

ion

Proc

ess

DT

M C

reat

ion

Proc

ess

Topographic map 1:50’000

5

NextPrevious

Vectorized contours

NextPrevious

Digital Terrain ModelDigital Terrain Model

6

NextPrevious

WSC ApplicationWSC ApplicationA

djus

tmen

t of N

BC

A b

ound

arie

sA

djus

tmen

t of N

BC

A b

ound

arie

s

NextPrevious

WSC ApplicationWSC Application

WSC

map

exc

erpt

WSC

map

exc

erpt

##

7

NextPrevious

Products of the WSCPProducts of the WSCPl Countrywide digital data

l Watershed Classification datal Digital Terrain Model datal Elevation, Landform and Slope datal Contours and river networkl Subcatchments and administrative boundariesl Flowdirection and flowaccumulation datal Rasterfiles of original Base Maps

l WSC mapsl Province WSC mapsl WSC maps 1:250’000 and country maps 1:1 Mio.

l Servicesl Compilation of biggest database in LMB (incl. roads,

villages, census data, forest data etc.)l Data provision and statistics upon request l Conceptual support in Watershed Management

NextPrevious

Advantages and power of GISAdvantages and power of GISAdvantages and power of GIS

l Combination of different information

l Update of existing data

l Independence on mapscale

l Possibility of modeling

8

NextPrevious

Three main components of GISThree main components of GISThree main components of GIS

l Data and data management

l Hardware and software

l Human resources

DataData sourcessources

lSatellite images, aerial photographs

lTopographic maps

lConversion of existing digital data

lTabular data

lField checks with GPS

9

NextPrevious

Hardware and softwareHardware and softwareHardware and software

lHardware requirements

lUNIX, NT, or Win95/98

lWide variety of GIS software

NextPrevious

Human resourcesHuman resourcesHuman resources

10

NextPrevious

GIS data generation in generalGIS data generation in generalGIS data generation in general

l What are the data needed for?l Management, mapping, inventory, etc.?

l Envisaged User Groups?l Technicians, decision makers, legislation

l Mapscale

l Degree of generalisationl Classification scheme

l Update

l Ownership, data sharing

NextPrevious

Topographic criteria as potential wetlandsTopographic criteria as potential wetlands

Cur

vatu

re c

onca

ve a

nd

Cur

vatu

re c

onca

ve a

nd

slop

e <

slop

e <

2 2 pe

rcen

tpe

rcen

t

11

NextPrevious

Buffered rivers as potential wetlandsBuffered rivers as potential wetlandsR

iver

s bu

ffer

ed b

y R

iver

s bu

ffer

ed b

y 50

50

met

erm

eter

))

NextPrevious

Topographic criteria and buffered rivers as Topographic criteria and buffered rivers as potential wetlandspotential wetlands

Cur

vatu

re c

onca

ve a

nd s

lope

<

Cur

vatu

re c

onca

ve a

nd s

lope

< 2

2 pe

rcen

t and

rpe

rcen

t and

rive

rs b

uffe

red

by

iver

s bu

ffer

ed b

y 50

50

mm

12

NextPrevious

Existing wetlands data layerExisting wetlands data layer of MRCSof MRCS

NextPrevious

Thank you for your Attention

Mekong River Commission Secretariat

Mekong River Commission Mekong River Commission SecretariatSecretariat

ANNEX 4: Presentation by Magnus Torell: ICLARM ‘Legal & Institution Project’ (PowerPoint)

1

PRIAP

Legal and Institutional Framework, and Economic Valuation of Resources and Environment in the Mekong River Region: Wetlands Approach

Dr. Magnus Torell

PRIAP

Map of Mekong

River Region

2

PRIAP

Thematic and Areal Focus• Themes

--Cumulative and interactive analysis of legal,institutional and policy systems and applications

--Assessment of the production levels and economic values of wetland resources (including scenic values)

• Areal Scope (Mekong River Region)--Country-wide and the region as a whole

(legal and institutional analysis)--Basinwide, within each country and the basin

as a whole (the assessment part)

PRIAP

Policy, Legal and Institutional Issues:A Summary

• Unclear responsibilities; subsequent confusion in allocation of resources (for enforcement, etc.)

• Lack of clear mandates--confusion of local people--who are the “police”?

• Law making process--Not enough time allocated--No proper system to consult with stakeholders...--Lack of consistency within the legal system as a whole

3

PRIAP

--Mismatch in “cultures” being imposed (i.e. donor influence)

--Difficult to develop a “national” institutional culture

--Economic/political strong people’s influence and no guarantee

for local people individual and community users

--Weak (or strong) political system

--Corruption and Commission

--Available rules not followed by central authorities

PRIAP

Highlight the non-existence of certain types of basic dataand the possible consequences thereof.

Important to:

4

PRIAP

• The legal basis for locally (and central)based development

• Roles and functions of national and sectoral development plans

• Ownership to land and water,

• User rights, etc.

Important to clarify:

PRIAP

RAMSAR Wetlands DefinitionWetlands -- “are areas of marsh, fen,

peatland or water, whether natural or artificial, permanent or temporary, with water that is static or flowing, fresh, brackish or salt including areas of marine water the depth of which at low tide does not exceed six meters”

(UNESCO 1994)

5

PRIAP

Ph

oto

by

Lo

uD

emat

teis

PRIAP

Institutional & Project Collaboration

• National core collaboration partners have been identified as a key entrypoints for detailed project planning ineach of the countries

6

PRIAP

At regional (and national) levels collaboration and subcontracts (and MoU’s) will be made with established institutions and projects such as the MRC-Wetlands Program, AIT- Aqua Outreach, UNEP-EAP, as well as some Swedish institutions.

ICLARM

AIT Aqua Outreach

MRCWetlands Program

UNEP-EAP

IUCN/GEF

Swedish Institutions

GMS

PRIAP

Moving ahead...

• Four national workshops and regionalworkshop will be held to work outnational plans and focus the regionalobjectives. Key persons from each of thecountries and central institutions andprojects will be invited.

• The implementation will be carried out through the active participation oflocal institutions.

7

PRIAP

Thank you.

8

PRIAP

National Level

Fig 1. Policies formulation and planning processes at different levels of administration in Thailand

AmphurDevelopment Plan

Provincial Development Plan

Provincial Development Plan

SukhapaibanDevelopment Plan

MunicipalityDevelopment Plan

Tambon AdministrationDevelopment Plan

Pattaya CityDevelopment Plan

Ministry Level

Provincial Level

Ministry Level

Local Level

Development Plansat Minister Levels

Development Plansat the Department Levels

National Economic, and Social

Development Plans

GovernmentPolicies

Specific DevlopmentPlans and Policies

9

PRIAP

Fig 2. Decision-making process of provinces in Vietnam

Source: Development Strategy Institute, 1997. Natural resources, environment and socioeconomic condition of the coastal zone of Quang Binh. Project Cooperation Between Vietnam and Sweden (PCM), Component 5, Hanoi . Unpublished.

MasterPlan

MasterPlan

Ministry forPlanning &Investment

Ministry forPlanning &Investment

ProvincialDevelopmentProvincial

DevelopmentPlan & Inv.Services

Plan & Inv.Services

DistrictDev. PlansDistrict

Dev. PlansPlan & Inv.Services

Plan & Inv.Services

CommuneDev. Plans

CommuneDev. Plans

Local Planner

Local Planner

SectoralMinistries

SectoralMinistries

NationalSector Dev.

Plans

NationalSector Dev.

Plans

SectoralMinistries

SectoralMinistries

ProvincialSector Dev.

Plans


Plans

DistrictSectoralSections

DistrictSectoralSections


Plans


Plans

GOVERNMENT

People Committee ofprovince

People committee of district

People committee ofcommune

PEOPLE

Development information

Development decision

Development orientation

ANNEX 5: Lao PDR WLCS National Workshop Report

Annex to WLCS Report / MRC June2001 1

National Workshop on MRC Wetland Classification on 26-27 Sep. 2000

General The National Workshop On the MRC Wetland Classification for Lao PDR was held on 26-27 Sep 2000 at LARReC, Vientiane. The Workshop was attended by….participants who represented various parts of the country and international organization, such as from MRCS, ICLARM, LNMCS, Champasack Province, Savannakhet, Khammuoane, Vientiane Province, Vientiane municipality, LARReC and other relevant sectors. The workshop was officially opened by Mr Linseng Douasavanh, Deputy Director General of the LNMCS. Following the opening speech of Mr Linseng Douasavanh, Mr Valdemar Homgreen, CTA at Lao PDR, had given the welcome address. Proceeding • Adoption of workshop agenda was made. • Thereafter, Mr Valdemar immediately continued to proceed the workshop sessions

by giving briefly the workshop background. Mr Valdemar stated that with the work is doing today was started quite sometime ago, and the middle of this year he decided that we need to do more national works, and national participation on WLC. The project for inventory and management of wetland in the Lower Mekong Basin in earlier had included the WLC in the report. The first thing to do was work together a report on how the different country have been used the WLC. Mr Mark Dubois has been helping Mr Valdemer since April to do the work together on the report for the study on MRC WLCS (it sometime appeared with the green color front-page and sometime in the white color). The MRC classification system, which was included in the report, has been translated into Lao language and it also available in English and other country language in the region. The study report shows that in each country of Lao PDR, Vietnam, Cambodia and Thailand, the WLC have been used in different ways. However, when the project started in 1993 to 1997-98, MRC lets the country working until to the point of this WLC. As it is known that from the October last year, MRC have been going through a very big restructuring process. Part of that restructuring process is to do things in quite different way, and one of that is to involve the countries in almost all of different steps of this process. Thus, this workshop is one of those steps. With the work that we are doing today belong to what so called to the old project. The result of the workshop today will be used in the new Environmental Programme of MRC. Then Mr Valdemar proposed if some participants of the workshop have some question about the MRC restructuring process “ Moving from projects to the programs”, please ask himself or ask those participants who were at the Novotel regional workshop, because it was quite discussed a lot during the workshop. Today, we will talk more about how WLC can be done in Lao PDR. The main question that was posed to the participants at the regional workshop was how the MRC can assist, how MRC can facilitate to make the WLCS a good system for the Lower Mekong River Basin. Now there are many ways to classify the Wetland,


many people have been work on this before. One of the main things to remember is from the MRC’s point of view, we should try to have the country talk more about the wetland, so every body in all riparian country understand. It is well aware that in each country, some wetlands are different and some wetlands are the same type. Again from the MRC point of view, perhaps it would be easier for the planning if there were the same name for the same type of wetlands. It means that it could be the same name for the regional planning, so that people in Lao, Cambodia, Thailand, and Vietnam understand what that name means and that name indicates one kind of wetland in all countries. Now, it should be at regional level, then it can down to different levels for national and each different level can be more and more detail. Referred back to the question on how is the best to do the classification in Lao PDR, how the individual structure of the countries, agencies, and different expertise are doing in a good way to address the WLC, at the regional and national and local level. Mark will present more about WLCS. We all know there are difficulties in name of wetland both in English, when you come to more detail name, and also in all languages in the basin countries. This is the work for all participants of the workshop today, and also know that wetland is vary where there are, both water component and land component, and we have to work out how to give the name to the wetland on those areas. Another main point is the purpose of classification. WLC should not be just a list in the report where many people who working at decision making level and planners who work with the natural resources of the Mekong Basin, and wetland is one those. Some of the reasons is to decided how many wetland are, what type and where. The participants know better about the structure of this thing more than Mr Valdemar do. Therefore, the participant have to think about how to answer to those three questions: how many wetlands, what type they are, and where, how we can do the information to the planners, decision making levels and higher level of the government.

• Then Mr Valdemar transfer the floor to Mr Mark Dubois, who will give the next presentation on WLCS.

• Mark’s presentation is divided into two parts. The first part was the overview of the

presentation at regional workshop on the study report, and the second part is about regional presentation and regional workshop it-self. In the first part, Mark expressed that the central theme of the study report is the MRC WLCS, which is not easy to do in the region. There were off cause several outputs and achievements on that, but unfortunately the gathered data is not yet completed. This makes a question why the classification is not being implemented? And to quickly going that report and to look at the origins and objectives. Historically, the hierachry of the system was used in 1979 by the US “ site broadcast unit”. Then it has been risen to the Scotch system and Dublin System. The Scotch system is the classification that based on international wetland importance. It means that the international is more importance rather national importance, or local importance. (Mark had mentioned about hard copy of his presentation paper). IUCN is another classification system, 1990, which heavily based on RAMSA system of classification and is involve the international importance. These two classifications system were used by the MRC classification system, which was revised in 1993. When we look directly to the Scotch classification, Lao PDR have 4


types of wetland. Off cause, there are more than these, but the directory suggested that it is importance at international WLC. Another reason that the classification is not being implemented, there are wetland some of which are less dynamic system on planning; and we are being to try to classify the system with static classification. As a result, there are national needs that not always being involved. Mark also aware that the classification did not incorporate other data, other programme data, and field data of other system of the WLC. In addition, I also know that the evaluation of the WL importance is not yet that functioned. For example, for the rice- field product including aquatic such as fish, snake, frogs… also the function which is not directly affected and is not easy to manage that you want in right away, such as flood control and other natural hazards even. It also noticed that that consideration terminology that Lao PDR, Khmer, and Thai have no term direction connected with wetland. There are off cause many classes, many types, many terms in Thai and Lao language and people being used for many years; and with condition of classification system. There is also few specific classification of wetland policy that being implemented in this region. In concluding this part, the objectives that classify will not finally the same use in the clauses for the managers and planners with connection with this thing is the existing if data sources. Another problem was discussed is the definition, to find out the current understanding if what wetland are and what that is? And other system if WLC at the end if the classification list was not completed in better way. To wrap up the first part of the presentation that is the static system which being placed in 1993, with insufficient feedback, insufficient methods for the modification of classification system. All these are comments from Lao. Therefore, national connection modify themselves to that regional consensus and hence the classification system is not fully implemented across the region The central theme of the regional workshop and number if issues regarding the WLCS were discussed. These include landform, the geomorphology that shapes the land itself. In fisheries’ concerned which is primarily the dynamic of wetland ecosystem, works if GIS date and water movement and its function. The general consensus that the MRC should assist in WLCS and cooperation with concerned sectors. One if such system is the HGM (Hydro-geomorphology Management) system that is basically focuses on water and land. The idea if this was to strengthen the existing MRC WLCS and we could put in primary and sector level based on landform and water. Based on MRC goals which necessary to promote is to have a plan between management, monitoring and evaluation, and policy and decision-making. Resource of native in what group session to that fishery concern should be included; and to discuss some if the issues about classification arisen. These will be given to the group working and what classification will be the best for Lao PDR. As Valdemar mentioned earlier, at the decision-makers could not make information about wetland: how many, what type, and where? Another problem that we did not know the same until the participant here in the workshop did not say. These two issues take together by the name of WLC and have inventory and mapping. Some of the uses for the WLC are to take decision-making about natural resources management and planning and to provide the use of formative on wetland process, a regional the same language approach. Off cause again to able to meet the needs of users at the local, national level as well as to facilitating basically timing planning. Different needs that do we need a regional classification system that mainly make from core data. These core data will be generated from maps, airal photos, GIS, satellite and that information


landform and hydro-criteria. Now these principles can relate regionally at foundation for comparison, as well as at national level, people in individual countries that developed in different rate, but in parallel use the same language. However, it own to different capacity at different rate. The essential core data of water and land is what make wetlands- wetlands, and they are in fact wetland. There are over 50 definitions in current usage; out of these the RAMSA definition is the most international incentive. Wetland occurs in transitional zone, transitional seasonally or occasionally wet and permanent dry. Basically it is the movement of the terrace land. Mark demonstrated some pictures of the landform in which wetland occurs or particular wetland habitats. The combination of landform and habitations create classes that we can use where they are existing system.

• Mark well come the question if the participant have any.

• Saleumsy comment: It is very pleased that today we come here to talk about MRC WLCS. This system can be considered as a good system for the region. However, this classification may be suitable to use for the wetland in freshwater areas, but how about the wetland within the salty water, is this classification applicable?

• Mark responses: we aware that occasion discus based on inland water and fresh

water, but not estuarine or marine water. There are the system using the HGM for estuarine marginal, estuarine wetland and marine wetland being developed now, and has been developed for over 5 years, So there are systems in place. In the Lao national context, it oversees the estuarine and marine wetland is not so important, but it should have the regional classification system. Because it have to look at the application of any systems that to the riparian countries decided to use. There are some debate a whether marine system itself is considered as wetland as well.

• Saleumsy: I posed this question as in the Mekong region, Vietnam has coastal sea

and Vietnam also agreed that this classification should appropriate and own by four riparian countries.

• Valdemar comment: today we are talking of many different levels of classification;

and the important thing we all work is to decided from the group discussion that in what level the Lao participant are going to do that. Now, there are two levels: regional level because that what MRC can work with, but it si very important for the participant and Lao PDR to first understand what kind of wetland classification would be needed. Then, it is easier for Laos to contribute to the discussion on what regional classification we needed. Because the differences in work framework, this workshop is for old project that is going to change in January 2001. MRC mandate from 2001 is basin-wide, regional issues, so this old project will transfer some activities to be applied at regional basin-wide level. Therefore, this is why sometime a bit difficult to remember what level of work we are talking about? This question we talked about at the Novotel Regional Workshop

• The same work will be for all countries, each workshop like this will take place next

month. After that, we will have one more regional workshop to make some kind of decision on how MRC can help the basin-wide issues of the WLC. In November 2000 six people who will be part of that regional workshop. Before they departure, we hope that they will take the information to tell the regional on what is important


for Lao PDR in regional WLC. The three level of classification that we have to carry out are: regional plan, national plan, and site plan. For these three different levels information is require.

• Sourasay suggested that if the participants would like to know more about the

regional workshop at Novotel, the participant could discuss with Saleumsy, Ms Phetsamone, Saipradeth, and himself during the break, or lunchtime. As the workshop has to take the next session.

• Khamphet’s comment: he would like the participant to understand that what is the

purpose of this national workshop and why they all came here? The main purpose of out meeting today id to identify the best system of wetland classification that appropriate to the Lao PDR. It should also know that who will be involve in this project, from where they are, and shall it have the focal site for this task in the region? According to the MRC WLCS, there are 4 types of wetlands, and for instance the rice field which also able to use for other crops, shall it include into one wetland type, are the participant here agreed? Can we use this as a case study? Thus, in the group working we have to discuss on how we would classify the wetland, and what makes wetland-wetland? It is where water occurred seasonally, or permanently. Or where there is salty water?

• Thereafter, Sourasay touch on group working, which was divided into three groups

and the session will take around one hour. The main issues that have to be considered are: Wetland definition, the important of WLCS, MRC WLCS, and other international systems like IUCN, AWB, etc.

• Lunch break • The group leaving for the field trip (To Nong Nok at Sivilay Village) • Report back to the workshop by representative of each group. • Then, the workshop was continued with the presentation session.

Firstly, Saleumsy presented on background of the wetland project, and what they have done so far: the background of the wetland is referred back to the year 1990, when the workshop on the project was held in Pattaya of Thailand. During that workshop, it was agreed to identify a wetland definition and each country had to select two sites within the country in order to conduct a pilot study. In Lao PDR, Nong Chanh and Buong ThatLuang were selected as pilot study site. After the site selection, the plan on data collecting, especially on socio-economic aspect, ecosystem, and living aquatic life status, was formulated. In addition to this, the wetland map was also draw out. This project started from 1990 till 1996. Concerning the map of WLC, it was based mainly on IUCN system with cooperation of Eswaren consultant. Then Saleumsy presented the activities that have been carried out during the life of the project. Then he touched upon the definition of the wetland, which primarily based on the RAMSA Conference in 1971 in Ramsa of Iran. It was stated that wetland is the area along water, moisturised-low land, flooded area, waterlogging area, water sources area or where land and water have been occurred naturally or


artificially, the area with temporally of permanently water, land where there is water flow, fresh or salty water and mixed water (river mouth), as well as delta and coastal areas. In this connection, in Lao PRD the wetland may divided into two types: (1) natural wetland, including creeks, lakes, channels, marshes, water sources, inland water, area where there is a border with river, water sources or beaches and forest. (2) Artificial wetland, including the area where water exists permanently or temporally such as rice field, aquaculture field, fishpond, and reservoir. Wetland is one ecosystem that play very important role in contributing directly and indirectly to the socio-economic, environment and the livelihoods of the local people. However, sometime the importance of the wetland was overlooked. Often, wetland was encroached by developing activities, which brought about degradation of the wetland and its sustainable uses. At the present the environmental and natural resources issues are in global concern, especially sustainable use and sound development management. Therefore, we should preserve wetland habitat for the sustainable development.

• Sourasay questioned that what kind of outputs that this project had produced, as we

have to discuss and agreed what we would like to do in the first step, then we will submit out proposal to the MRC?

• Saleumsy responded that in the pass the classification of wetland was based on

IUCN system and that became our first reference and has been used by many parties. However, sometime those information in not applicable as it is quite confusing and not that well to understand.

• Somphanh questioned that which system and methodology have been used by the

wetland unit in classifying, would you able to give more explanation? • Saleumsy responded: IUCN and RAMSA. • Question: how many wetland in Lao and in what level? • Saleumsy responded: detailed information on wetland we have only for two places.

This was relied on MRC project and survey unit. Besides this, DAFI project is another one that based in Siphandone.

• Sourasay: suggested that he will give more information later. • Question: analysis of data collected is adequate? If so, in what level it could

certified? • Saluemsy responded: most of the information collected were used by the

development projects or other activities. • Question: Nong Chanh and ThatLuang Marsh are including in which classification

of MRC system? It is water logging, it is a case study accordingly to the technical aspect? Is there any classification was undertaken for the whole country?


• Saleumsy responde d: Most of the survey for the Nong Chanh was done on wastewater, ecosytem, but we did not have specific data management.

• Sourasay edited to the MRC WLCS. • Question: does they know if this information has been applied into practice

management? • Valdemar comment: First of all just to go back to the information today,

remember the work have done 7-8 years ago, it was in the middle of the old project. There was no question why we were looking at the Nong Chan. From the beginning, the idea was that the project would look at the different type of Wetland in the best. In Thailand we looked at rice field, semi Agriculture - semi natural. In Vietnam, the Mekong Delta off cause, Halong coast mangrove which is mixed agriculture and also one site of the project. In the Lao PDR, it was decided that should be open wetland. In that way, you get three different categories. At that time project did not looking at the wetland classification, but looking at the pilot study, procedure and methodology. The other shown economic, some water quality, inventories. It was very different set up than what we are talking today. The thinking of that time was different with what we do and the project was not persisted that we do and the project was not persisted that much by MRC. There was no CTA of project, the country team worked alone, and some body came from MRC two times a year to visit each country. Now, we have different idea to develop on this project, and one of the first thing that I talked about yesterday was: I begin to understand that Wetland Classification is still a problem. So only now it very late in the project, we begin to look at the Classification problem. This should be work from 1992 to 1993; you can see it may not do the same way as today. Look at the category here, in fact I would suggest that today I’m sure every body would agreed that this type of wetland would be on top. This is one wetland with different habitats inside. Some habitats are rice, grass, and fishpond. This may not be different kind of areas independent Wetland where all habitat are link together. And you know the ThatLuang is very hard to see where is the rice side, where fishpond is or flood. This is something that we working on now, are trying to clarify the wetland idea, try to get away from making distinction where is not necessary to make distinction. Many wetlands are like that; they have different components. Many wetland look like the one (Nong Nok) we visited yesterday. Many wetlands look like ThatLuang where water logging exist throughout the year. Sometime, you see more rice, sometime more water. For the fish in ThatLuang, there is so much fish. I thing may be now there is not much fish, but during the day, there are very much of fish catch. So I am just trying to classify some think which may be easy to be confused. Now we thinking in that way that is belong to old project. I would like to asking you working for our workshop today, perhaps you remember the best thing to explain about the wetland to person that did not know at all. Do you remember any thing that easy to you to try to explain about what is wetland?

• Saleumsy: is quite difficult to explain what the exact meaning of Tham, because in

some area people is living in. some areas are rice field, or forest. We continue to conduct a study.


• Comment: according to the Vientiane Municipality developing plan, it would have forest, agriculture, livestock production, and fishpond. In this case, if it would against the project objectives?

• Saleumsy: (Could not heard from the cassette) • Explanation on Vientiane project: the project will construct the wastewater

channel and will install water pump for discharge the wastewater. However, this project is still in the prefeasibility study. We do not know if it would affect this project.

• Saleumsy had touched uponthe organization structure of the wetland unit within the

MAF: he himself responsible for the land component, Ms Phaivanh responsible for the water quality analysis, Khamphet Roger responsible for fish, and Sirivanh.

• Then Ms Phetsamone gave the presentation on wetland. Basically her presentation

was what Mr Saleumsy presented: some background and activities. She also mentioned that there is no detailed plan or specific guideline on how the collected information can be applied and how to manage it? In addition, she had reported on the Novotel regional workshop, and it has been realized that the WLC is needed and very important. However, we still lack of skilled staff.

• Question: Phetsamone is also one person who has engaged with the wetland works,

so it was learn that there are around 25 types of wetlands. That classification was based on which data baseline? It was from the practical surveys or summary of MRC? IUCN?

• Phetsamone responded: regarding to the Lao language, Dinh Tham is land existing

within water. It very difficult to explain. In English, there are pond, lake, swamp, and marsh. While those words have to be translated into Lao, we do not know to what meaning that should be, as in Lao has only word Nong, or Buong. We also do not know exactly what is different between those and what size they are?

• Valdemar’s comment: One of the questions is for instance, should rice field

include into wetland or not, I think it is good for us to talk here for the rest of the day as one example of wetlands and how to classify. There are other issues, but let focus on the title of this workshop.

• Question: The name of the project was Inventory and Management of Wetland.

Obviously, the classification of data collected was to serve the management purposes. My question is have you follow before that to use this information, and then given to manager to use it? Do you know to what extension the information has been used? For example, the Vientiane Municipality project, have this information been many use to the planners in municipality? And what of the information has been most useful to you? Perhaps, you have problem with that information collected, may not exactly information that you needed? So, it is very nice to know is this classification is practically used to the planners or it is more less like academic exercise. And since the project intension is to inventorisation for management so what has been done for management use?


• Answer: this collected information has been used as a reference for many development projects/activities, e.g. wastewater channel construction project. However, the capacity of staff in systematically managing and applying those data is still limited.

• Saleumsy: In addition to Phetsamone’s responded on application of collected data,

it means that after the data was gathered, the meeting between concerned parties such as STEA, Ministry of industry, urban planning sector, etc, was conducted. So that thay able to obtain information and apply it into they works.

• Valdemar comment: I would like also to give some to that question: just to

remember that the project at that time, data collection was not for wetland classification, it was interpreted for gathering baseline data to start some thing in these countries for data management. The data for Lao PDR was open urban wetland and was gathered much earlier in 1991-92; and MRC came here to assist and continued. Now some of these data is available for ministries in Vientiane, because it begin evidence there was land to make a protection to this system, and data collection of the project shown that water quality leaving Nong Chan to That Luang is very good. So the vegetation in Nong Chan cleans the wastewater, and water left from Nong Chan to That Luang to the rice field was very good and cap good fish population. If you remember Lacoursiere and his team who are doing this work and assisting MRC in this project, and that able to authority here in regard to the plan of action, and channel scheme which have been started, but it seems that some advises was for, perhaps, not to be united with the modern way of thinking. So desirable was chosen for making channel no vegetation, and now the water quality in the channel is worst than before when there was vegetation. So, there is no data available from the work of laboratory from these things, and it was now activity of the project regarding wetland in Lao PDR. They are still engage with this work and we still have to assist with the planning of Vientiane. Because in many cases in many towns, people is trying to create wetland like Nong Chan was, so we hope that we can show or help another way in this urban planning.

• Saypradeth presentation: (1) the presentation will touch upon the transformation

of activities to the Programme, (2) During the regional workshop; we had discussed a lot on wetland definition? What is this, is the land where water occurs? (3) The wetland background, which area he did not touched as Saleumsy and Phetsamone had mentioned quite a lot about that. Beside the implementation of MRC project, we also learn from the RAMSA agreement which also was addressed the wetland issues. The other system is IUCN system. It was determined that in Lao there are 29 kind of wetlands, and it was stated that the site located around 50 Km from the river and that would meet the WLC criteria. At the moment, we are emphasizing a lot on the WLC methodology. As far as MRC WLCS in concerned, all four countries agreed that the MRCS WLCS is much more in regional context. Therefore, each country might revise/adjust it in order to make an appropriated system for each own national context. As a result, group working was undertaken to find out the best outcome and suggestion. Wetland tasks are holistic system task and we had talk about what we would like to do next in respect with the WLCS. In connection with the wetland importance: nowadays, there are many projects that were submitted to the Government for consideration and approval for its advance


implementation such as: MRC WLCS; Digital wetland project in Champasack supporting by ADB, especially focus area is Tonle Sap of Cambodia; IUCN project study on wetland biodiversity. Furthermore, management and uses of wetland in sustainable way will also be implemented. We also will received support from DANIDA on the enhance the livelihood standards of the people by sound management. In regards to the WLC, during the regional workshop, we also had discusses on the wetland terminology which is not that clarify. MRC WLCS, in Lao context, it considered as not really suitable system, e.g. wet rice, how we would translate into Lao? Hence, the classification should be in more detailed, what kind and what is the criteria? As it well aware that there are more than 50 definitions, and which definition is preferably for Lao PDR? After that we should address about assessment of existing wetland sites by conducting the survey. Once we able to identify the definition, we would able to classify the wetland. This should follow up by resurvey, using the participatory approach in order to avoid confusion. It may divide into three levels of importance: international importance, national importance and site importance. This is a good approach. A part from the above mentioned, a good strategic management plan for the wetland and action plan for the whole country should be addressed. The initiative should be commenced from this kind of step, and that would be enabling the classification simple and appropriate to the Lao condition. Another thing, if look back at the project that commenced in1990 and what had been done, it quite hard to integrate those activities into what we are raising up in today workshop. Therefore, it should commence with the provincial wetland, select 2-3 sites, and then classify accordingly to national and regional level. A training course is also important. While we all agreed upon what we want to do for the year 2001 and how to integrate into Environment programme, it would be good if the MRC able to give more clarification.

• Saleumsy: In addition to Mr Saypradeth, in the pass we had discussed on what is the

best word for the Wetland in Lao? So wetland comprise of many components, including land, water, vegetation, and animals. Due to Tham also comprise of land, water, vegetation, fish population, it was agreed to use Tham as an official word for the wetland.

• Mr Sourasay, then, presented briefly the LNMCS organization structure and its

Mandate. • Prior to the session of group discussion commenced, Sourasay gave a small

comment: wetland can be referring to the Tham, or area where water occurred, or moisturized land. In summary, Tham is the land area where water existed, areas where there are natural vegetation, indicate the naturally change of ecosystem, has capacity in cleaning wastewater by biological process. About the MRC classification, it quite confusing; and we have to decide which system will be use in Lao, IUCN or AWBN? Nevertheless, we have to look carefully on the MRC classification combining with environmental and EIA aspects.

• Lunch break


• Prior to discussion session Valdemar urged participant try to remember some of many thing that have been discussed. This covers some difficulties with MRC classification system project. There are different materials a front of you, some slices from yesterday, and try to remember thing was said. He also explained that MRC is not a classification agency, we do not have ownership to this system. So think about that what is the best terminology to be use; think of purposes that you believe it should be bottom line of this work for developing a classification for Wetland in Lao PDR. I think there are lots of ideas after our discussion. One of questions that should be discussed is how to develop this classification system to be a good system for Lao PDR? We will work on what to do later on, but now is how? Organization chart of LNMCS was show as example such as how to involve and who should do this classification. Now look at the basic of classification, what is needed, what the classification for? Think about natural resources of wetland and where would the classification be based from? Which structure is the best for classification? What is the focus of wetland natural resource in the three years? For example: Wetland unit is lie within Forestry Dept. So the MRC mandate is to help you and base on your guidance.

• Discussion session commenced. The participants were divided into three groups.

Some guidance questions were given by Mark Dubois. • Group report.

Presented by Khamphet Roger from group 2: we are agreed with the question 1,2,3, but we would like to take these as homework, Then we will submit the outcome two weeks prior to the regional workshop. For example, we would able to find out what is riverine, marsh. Etc. Question (4) we agreed to select three pilot sites, of which one in Vientiane Municipality itself, one in Vientiane province, and another one in Savannakhet Province. Question (5) what we are going to do in the sites. Firstly conduct survey on ecosystem of wetland in the area, impact of the study, train local staff of those three site areas. Question (6) we would like to mention about the budget. Group 3: (1) In order to simplify the classification, firstly we should have data on socio-economic, ecosystem. (2) Those data will determine it would be the regional or site? (3) We require a wetland classification map. What system should be used for the mapping? The map should be easy for use. (4) It must have pilot sites, but it selection should be based on many criteria and appropriate. (5) Wetland component are land, water, and vegetation.

• Coffee break • Wrap-up the worshop by Valdermar • Valdemar’s closing speech. It is a part of all project, I am sure we can find some

needs to assist you as best as we can. While we are worry that I would like to be part of that process, but now we traveling a lot, till 20 Oct. I will come back from National Workshop of the other tree Countries. So after this date we could meet to talk, but before that I be very happy to tell you how to make propose, your consultation in abroad for any other meeting or suggestion please. What is the good delegation and what kind of products to make. May be 20 to 25 October we could meet in Vientiane to discuss on what to do in November – December.


• The workshop closed.

ANNEX 6: Thailand WLCS National Workshop Report

National Wetland Classification

Workshop in Thailand

October 17-18, 2000

Sofitel Hotel

Khon Kaen, Thailand


Preface The classification of Wetlands has been implemented for a long time. The Asian Wetlands Bureau (AWB) together with Forestry Department has classified Wetlands in Thailand by using AWB’s classification system. In 1990 Land Development Department was asked by Mekong River Commission Secretariat to cooperate in studying the possibility of Wetlands in Lower Mekong Basin under the project of Wetlands Inventory and Management Programme. The countries, which took part in, the project had to survey, classify and drawing map to indicate the Wetlands of each country. After that they had to put the maps together to develop the map of Lower Mekong Basin. This is the first time that Wetlands were classified by using Dugan 1990 Classification System, which was certified by Ramsar Convention. In 1994 Thailand had held a seminar on “Setting up System of Wetlands Classification in Thailand”. In this seminar, the hierarchical structure classification system according to Dugan 1990 and the American Structure were used to classify Type, System, Sub-system, Class and Sub-class of Wetlands in Thailand. The Mekong River Commission Secretariat and LDD have held this workshop to exploit the discussion in developing Classification System in Thailand. Moreover, it can be used as a standard of classifying and managing the whole Wetlands among Mekong River membership countries. LDD has published the report on Wetlands Classification System in order to create more understanding about Wetlands classification in Thailand. And, we would like to thank Mekong River Commission Secretariat, the guest speakers and participants who cooperate in this conference.


Contents

Page Opening Ceremony Speech a Opening Statement by Specialist of LDD b Opening Statement by Mr.Valdemar Holmgren c Chapter 1 General Information of Wetland • Wetland definition 1 • Wetland value 1 • The signification of the study of Wetland

Management in Thailand 1

• The order of priority of Wetland 2 • Lists of National importance level

Wetland 4

• Wetlands that should be proposed as Ramsar Site

5

Chapter 2 Each Region Inventory • South Region 6 • North Region 8 • Central & East Region 10 Chapter 3 Classification of Wetlands in Thailand • Objectives of Wetlands classification 15 • Background of Wetlands Classification in

Thailand 15

Chapter 4 Conclusion 18 Participants 24


Opening ceremony speech

On National workshop on Wetland Classification System in Thailand October 17, 2000

At Sofitel hotel Khon Kaen Province

-------------------------------------------

Dear Specialists of Land Use Planning, On behalf of the committee holding the conference and participants, we are glad that you have come to the opening ceremony of the conference “ National Workshop on Wetland Classification System in Thailand”. This conference is sponsored by the government of Sweden through The Mekong River Commission Secretariat to study the wetland management in Thailand in the Lower Mekong Basin, under the project of “Wetland Inventory and Management Program” since 1990. The committee of Lower Mekong Basin and Land Development Department (LDD) would like to hold the workshop to discuss and exchange opinions of Wetland Classification in Thailand in order to classify the standard of Wetland management among membership countries along the Mekong. This workshop is being held from October 17-18, 2000. It includes the implementation of Wetland management in all regions of Thailand. The group discussion consists of 30 representatives from LDD, Department of Forestry, Department of Fishery, Ministry of Irrigation, Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives, Ministry of the Interior, Office of Policy and Planning for Environment, Department of Energy Development and Promotion, The National Research Council of Thailand, Kasetsart University, Khon Kaen University, Mahidol University and the representative from Mekong River Commission Secretariat.


Opening statement by Specialist of LDD (Mr. Sopon Chomchan)

Oct 17, 2000 at Sofitel hotel Khon Kaen Province

It was of great opportunity to come for the National Workshop on Wetland Classification Sy stem in Thailand. This is a cooperative work between Mekong River Commission Secretariat and LDD and it is a good opportunity for various government organizations to discuss for improving the standard of Wetland Classification System in Thailand among membership countries along the Mekong. I would also like to thank the Mekong River Commission Secretariat on supporting the Wetland Management in Thailand and holding this workshop.


General information of Wetland

Definition According to Ramsar Convention Wetlands mean “Areas of marsh, fen, peat land, or water, whether natural or artificial, permanent or temporary with water that is static, flowing, fresh, brackish or salt, including areas of marine water, the depth of which at low tide does not exceed 6 meters”. Wetlands values

1. Functions • Recharge to ground water • Discharge from ground water • Flood protection • Shoreline protection • Toxic sediment/retention • Nutrient sediment/retention • Increase Bio-mass • Protection from natural forces • Control microclimate • Water transportation • Recreation/tourism

2. Products

• Forest resources • Wild animal resources • Aqua productions • Flora resources • Agricultural resources • Water consumption supply • Energy supply

3. Attributes

• Biodiversity • Natural heritage

The signification of the study of Wetland Management in Thailand There are a lot of Wetlands in Thailand both big and small. Thai people not only in the rural but also in the urban areas have involved with Wetland for a long time ago. They have gained a lot of benefits from Wetland for free, particularly; the benefits are for public not individuals. Up to now, most Wetlands have been destroyed and the rest are extremely in critical situation. The causes of the Wetland destructions are:

• The increase of population, which leads to highly requirement of Wetland for social and economical development.

• The inefficient use of Wetland such as the water ventilation from agricultural area, the use of sea water for fishery, the use of land for industry and city expansion, the development of housing and community, the development of infrastructure which creates the hydrology change, the change of water way such as road building. Besides, the tourism development without concerning the impact on ecology system of Wetland affects the whole syst em of ecology and the way of life of people in the area.


• The problems of Wetland management: government, private sector and the local people lack knowledge and understanding of ecology system in Wetland. People are unaware of value of Wetland and use it carelessly. Moreover, the laws involved are not efficient enough to manage the Wetland properly in the long run.

The pilot project is to be held immediately to create the understanding of the Wetland ecology system so as to solve the problem of destroying Wetland. The order of priority of Wetland Wetland is divided into 3 level: International importance level, National importance level and local important level. The criteria of classifications are; • International importance level Wetland There are 4 standard qualifications according to Ramsar Convention section 2(Brisbane Resolution Vl.2 Brisbane conference, 1996) as follows;

1. The criteria of evaluating a good representative of Wetland or unique Wetland which should be considered as international importance level; § As an example or good representative of natural Wetland or close to nature which

indicates the biogeography aspect of that region. Or § As an example or good representative of natural Wetland or close to nature which

can be found in more than one biogeography area. Or § As an example of good representative of Wetland which plays an important role

in hydrology, biology or ecology in natural procedure of basin system or important sea coasts, especially, marsh or sea coast which has an area or border line in more than one country. Or

§ As a good example of any kinds of Wetland, especially the rare one in the biogeography region.

2. General criteria evaluated from plants and animals in the Wetland. Wetland can be

considered as international importance level when; § It is a place where rare plants and animals or almost extinct plants and animals

can be found. Or § The quality and special aspect of plants and animals in that area are of great value

in maintaining the varieties of genetic and the ecology of that region. Or § It is of great value as the habitat of plants and animals in their life cycles. Or § It is of great value for type or society of specific local plants and animals.

3. The criteria evaluated from waterfowls. Wetland can be considered as international

importance level when; § More than 20,000 waterfowls can be found. Or § The same number of waterfowls can be found regularly. These can indicate the

fertility and variety of Wetland. Or § In case of having data of waterfowl population, there should be at least 1 %

population of any kind of waterfowl in that Wetland.

4. The criteria evaluated from fish. Wetland can be considered as international importance level when; § It is a habitat of a great number of local fish and plays important role for the living

of various kinds of fish. Or, we can obtain the benefit from productivity of fish from the Wetland. Or

§ It is a food resource or spawning ground for fish and/or the route of fish migration both in the Wetland and other sources.


• National importance level Wetland There are 3 qualifications as follow;

1. The criteria of evaluating a good representative of Wetland or unique Wetland which should be considered as national importance level; § As an example of good representative of natural Wetland or close to nature which

can be found in Thailand. Or § As a good example of any kinds of Wetland which has an outstanding aspect

which is rare in Thailand. Or § As an example of good representative of Wetland which has an important role in

natural system, biology, ecology and hydrology. Or § As an example of good representation of Wetland which is of great value for Thai

living and culture.

2. The criteria evaluated from plants and animals in Wetland. Wetland can be considered as national importance level when; § It is a place where rare plants and animals or almost extinct plants and animals

can be found in Thailand. Or § The quality and special aspect of plants and animals in that area are of great value

in maintaining the varieties of genetic and the ecology of Thailand. Or § It is of great value for type or society of specific local plants and animals in

Thailand.

3. The criteria evaluated from the status of laws and management. Wetland can be considered as national importance level when it is in a reservation area or under the protection of Thai laws.

• Local importance level Wetland There are 2 criteria as follows;

1. It is evaluated from the status of laws and management; § It is on the lists as local natural source which should be reserved (Agreement of

the ministry; November 7, 1989) 2. It is evaluated from the importance to that local area;

§ It is important to the way of life of local Thai people. It is the origin of important factors for living such as water resource, food resource, herbal plants, fabric plants and raw materials for making a living. Or

§ It is of great value for society, customs and culture, religion, history, local legend, local recreation and transportation route.

§ It is important for local ecology system such as flood preventing, keeping the balance of climate and maintaining quality of water.


Lists of National importance level Wetland Northern Region

1. PruYaThatorn 2. Nong Luang 3. Nong Hang 4. Ping River 5. Wang River

6. Yom River 7. Nan River 8. Kok River 9. Yom River National Park 10. Huay Ka Kang Wild Animal

reservation area Northeastern Region

1. Doonlamphan 2. Nongkomkoh 3. Nongplakoon 4. Bungkluar Borkae 5. Nongsammeun 6. Kanglawa

7. Huay Seuten 8. Lower Mong Basin 9. Nong Huaku Forbidden Area for

Animal Hunting 10. Moon River and Boongtam 11. Junction of Moon and She River 12. Nong Wang Forbidden Area for

Animal Hunting Central/East

1. Lower Central Plain 2. Gulf of Thailand 3. Chaopraya River 4. Pasak River 5. Thachin River 6. Bangpakong River 7. Nakhonnayok River 8. Phetchaburi River 9. Toongpothong or Toongkamyad 10. Kao Soidao Animal Reservation

Area 11. Bungchawak Forbidden Area for

Animal Hunting

12. Haadwanakorn National Park 13. Wattan-aen Forbidden Area for

Animal Hunting 14. Kaolam National Park 15. Srinakarin Dam National Park 16. Taplan National Park 17. Pangsrida National Park 18. Pasalakpra Animal Reservation Area 19. Toongyainaresuan Animal

Reservation Area 20. Kaokeow Kaochompoo Animal

Reservation Area 21. Kungkraben Bay 22. Kao Ang-reu-nai Animal Reservation

Area Southern Region

1. Prukanturee 2. Prubanmaikao 3. Pa Nong Plakpraya and Kao

Rayabangsa Forbidden Area for Animal Hunting

4. Koh Tan

Wetlands that should be proposed as Ramsar Site Northern Region

• Nongbongkai Forbidden Area for Animal Hunting in Chiangrai • Bung Borapet in Nakhonsawan

Northeastern Region

• Pabungkonglong Forbidden Area for Animal Hunting in Nongkai


Central and Eastern Region

• Kao Samroiyod National Park in Prachuabkirikan • Don Hoilod in Samutsongkram

Southern Region

• Prutohdang Animal Reservation Area in Narathiwas • Koh libong – Paknamtrang Forbidden Area for Animal Hunting in Trang • Pang-nga Bay in Pang-nga • Pak Maenam Kraburi in Ranong

Besides, there are Wetlands which should be urgently protected, restored and studied as follows;

Wetlands urgently need to be Region Protected Restored Studied

North • Nong Hung • Nong Lengsai • Yom River Delta

• Yom River Delta • Nong Hung • Nong Lengsai • Kwan Prayao

• Salawin River • Yom River Delta * Ecology

Northeastern • Nong Harnkumpawapee

• Bunglaharn

• Nong Komkoh • Nongwang Forbidden

Area for Animal Hunting

• Nong Huaku Forbidden Area for Animal Hunting

• Phukeow Animal Reservation Area

• Yoddom Animal Reservation Area

* Bird migration population

Central and East

• Toongpothong or Toongkamyad

• Toongphukaothong or Toongmakamyong

• Bungchawak Forbidden Area for Animal Hunting Bung Chawarg

• Wat Ratsatthakayaram Forbidden Area for Animal Hunting

• Lower Central Basin • Gulf of Thailand * Population/specie of bird

South • Pak MaNam Krabi • Swamp forest in the

east of Phuket island

• Patalesarb Forbidden Area for Animal Hunting

• Prubajoh • Prukruankreng • Other swamps *Biodiversification


Inventory of each region

South Region By Mr. Manoo Omakoop

The geographic prospect of the southern part is like an axe holder ad also divided into tow coasts; West coast and East coast. There are a lot of old rivers on the East coast therefore more Wetlands can be found than in the West coast. In the southern part, there are at least 5,478 Wetlands which include the area of 28,465,882 Sq.Km. that is 5.548% of the area in Thailand. Most Wetlands can be found in Nakhonsrithammarat province. In the southern part, 29 Wetlands are considered to be important for an international level, 41 Wetlands for national level and 4,088 Wetlands for local level. They are divided into 2 systems as Coastal System and Water Resource System.

1. Coastal System consists of a. Coast of 1,783 Kms. b. 16 gulfs c. Wetlands around the 733 islands d. 611 Coral resources e. 7 Artificial coral resources f. 64 Sea grass resources g. Sea animal resources along the coastline of 13 provinces h. 51 Beaches i. 2,100.82 Sq. Kms. Mangrove forest and swamp forest j. Shrimp farm

2. Water Resource System consists of

a. 3,074 Canals, creeks or brooks b. 72 Waterfalls c. 4 Hot springs d. 3 Fountains, underground channel

Moreover, Talenoi Forbidden Area for Animal Hunting, Thai Wetland which is listed on the Ramsar site is situated in the north of Songkla Lake, Pattaloong province, Songkla province and Nakhonsrithammarat province. It was declared “Forbidden Area for Animal Hunting” on April 29, 1982. The 281,625 Rais of Wetland is one of 42 Wetlands that IUCN said to be the important Wetland in Asia Region. In 1998, Office of Policy and Planning for studied the environment project of conservation and protection of important Wetlands that is Thalenoi Forbidden Area for Animal Hunting in Pattaloong province. The objectives of the project are making plan, management of natural resources in the area, holding meetings for organizations, setting an organization to take care the exploitation of natural resources in Thalenoi. This organization consists of government sector, private sector, specialists and local people. There is also a campaign to make people aware of the value of Thalenoi. Having special value according to the Ramsar Convention, Prukuansisean, the area of 3,085 Rais of Wetland in Thalenoi Forbidden Area for Animal Hunting was declared the first Ramsar site in Thailand on August 29, 1997.

Problems and Suggestions Problem: The intrusion of Wetland caused the lack of biodiversification. Suggestion: Prompt publication of Wetland procedure is advisable so that people will get involved and be aware of Wetland conservation and reservation.


Northern Region By Vice-Professor Dr. Yon Musik

Dean of Department of Fishery Kasetsart University

In the northern part, 0.6% of the area consists of water which includes 17 provinces and area of 169,000 Sq. Kms. This consists of

• At least 15,073 Fresh water resources • At least 28,000 Rais of aquatic animals raising area • 5,441 flowing water resources

o 2,600 Perennial flowing water resources o 2,851 Seasonal flowing water resources

• At least 111 Waterfalls • At least 4,573 Fresh water resources • 25,000 Farms and aquatic animal raising areas in the area of 28,000 Rai • 3,526 Man made resources • 5 Dams with capacity of 1,000,000 Cubic Meters • 132 Dams with capacity of 1-1,000,000 Cubic Meters • 1,000 Small dams and reservoirs • 2,156 Fish ponds in schools • 539 Agricultural flooded areas • Wetlands for paddy

o 12.8 Mio Rais Rainny season crop o 1.7 Mio Rais Dry season crop

• 8 International important level water resources o Ang Chiangsaen – Chiangsaen district, Maechan district, Chiangrai province o Nonglengsai – Maechai district , Payao province o Kwanpayao – Muang district, Payao province o Yom delta – Sukhothai province, Pichit province, Pitsanulok province o Stream system – Doi Inthanon, Chiangmai province o Salavin river – Maehongson province, Tak province o Bungsifai – Muang district , Pichit province o Maekong river – Chiangkong district, Chiangrai province

• 57 National important level water resources o Kok-ink river and Yom river are the important water resources in the northern part

which consist of Nonglengsai, Nonghang, Nongluang, Kwanpayao and Pruya Thaton. The result from the survey indicates that there was a lot of changes caused by accumulated sedimentationation of the river and intrusion by local people. The way to solve the problem is by digging the canal and making the contour bank around the water resource. However, there is a disadvantage of this method, that has an impact on aquatic animal expansion. Road construction around Yom river and AngChiangsaen also maintains the condition of the Wetland but a lot of Mimosa, sedimetation of the river and intrusion from local people are found the same as Kok-ink river.

Problems:

1. There is a natural change that causes accumulated sedimentationation of the river. 2. There is an intrusion by the local people living nearby the river. 3. There is no clear objective in working in the Wetlands.

Suggestions:

1. There should be a development to restore the Wetlands. 2. The understanding between people and various organizations should be built up in order to

develop the Wetland in the same direction.


Central and Eastern Region By Dr.Sansanee Choowaew

Mahidol University There are 10 water resources in the central and the eastern region which include 26 provinces, 129,723.25 Sq. Kms. There are 6 international important level Wetlands that are Bungboraphet, Kwae Yai river system, Lower central basin, Gulf of Thailand, Krung swamp forest in Chantaburi and Wetland around Kao Samroiyod national park. There are 47 national important level Wetlands that are Wetlands around 18 national parks (5 waterfalls, 1 beach). Wetlands around 7 national animal reservation areas (1 River and 1 Swamp). Wetlands around 8 Forbidden area for animal hunting (1 Water reservoir, 1 Swamp, 3 Pastures) 8 Rivers, 1 mudflat, 1 beach, 1 bay, 2 pastures and 1 swamp. Total 2,062.99 Sq. Kms. listed Wetlands are 17.01% of the region area or 4.3% area of the country. They can be divided into 5 systems:

1. Sea System, Coastline, River mouth (Estuarine?) consists of a. Coast line, sea around the islands, bay b. Natural coral resource, artificial coral resource c. Sea grass and Seaweed resources d. Raising area for marine animals e. Coastal beach, sand beach, muddy beach, mudflat beach f. Swamp forest g. Raised salt marsh h. Salt works

2. River system consists of

a. Perennial river, canal, channel and stream b. Seasonal river, canal, channel and stream c. Dry/accumulated sedimentaryary river, cannal, channel and stream (classified by it’s

width and depth) d. Waterfall, islet e. Hot spring, hot steam, underground stream, fountain f. Fish raising area, Na Wat Fishery reservoir at floating market g. Flooded arable land of 19,568.05 Sq. Kms. (including wet rice field in seasonal)

3. Lucustrine System

a. Perennial water resource bigger than 80,000 Sqm. b. Seasonal water resource bigger than 80,000 Sqm. c. Perennial water resource less than 80,000 Sqm., average over 2 m. in depth with less

than 30% of aquatic plants on the surface d. Seasonal water resource less than 80,000 Sqm., average 2 m. in depth with less than

30% of aquatic plants on the surface.

4. Palustrine System a. Perennial swamp of average less than 2 m. in depth with more than 30% of aquatic

plants on the surface b. Seasonal swamp of average less than 2 m. in depth with more than 30% of aquatic

plants on the surface


The presentation of data (of Wetlands) consists of full vision obtained from listed names of Wetlands, full vision of biological diversity involved with Wetlands and full vision of problems and suggestions in managing Wetlands.

• Full vision of listed names of Wetlands in the central and eastern regions.

1. Code

2. Names of Wetlands

3. Province/district/subdist rict

4. Size/ surface area

5. Volume/ capacity of dam up level

6. Dimension: width, length, depth

7. Kind/ Type of Wetlands

8. (Size/Tonnage of )Geographical map

9. Level of importance

10. Water condition (perennial, seasonal, dry/sedimentary)

11. Management status

o NP, WS, NA, FP, RF

o BG, AR, PP

o RP, PCA

o RCA

o AS, HS, G

o VFP, FCT, FCP, CP

o S, I, F, H, C

12. Data source


As seen from classification system of Wetlands in Thailand, central and eastern Wetlands. CE Level II Level III Level IV Level V

Sea/Shore line (SM)

Under sea (SMS)

Non vegetated (SMS1)

Gravel ground (SMS1a)

Vegetated/Coral (SMS2)

• Natural coral source (SMS2a) • Artificial coral source (SMS2am • Natural sea grass source

(SMS2b) • Natural sea weed source

(SMS2c) • Natural sea weed culture source

(SMS2cm) • Aquatic animal culture source

(SMS2dm)

Tidal(SMI) Non vegetated(SMI1) • Sand beach (SMI1a) • Salt wok (SMI1am) • Mudflat (SMI1b) • Aquaculture source (SMI1bm) • Rock cliff (SMI1c) • Salt water basin (SMI1d) • Shallow lake (SMI1e)

Vegetated/coral (SMI2)

• Natural coral source (SMI2a) • Artificial coral source (SMI2am) • Natural sea grass source (SMI2b) • Natural sea weed source

(SMI2cm) • Coastal mangrove forest

(SMI2d) • Coastal mangrove plantation area

(SMI2dm)

Non-tidal (SMN)

Marine culture (SMN1an) Salt work (SMN1bm)

•

Estuarine(SE) Perennial Flood (SES)

Non vegetated (SES1)

• Gravel ground (SES1a) • Mudflat (SES1b) •

Vegetated/coral (SES2)

• Natural coral source (SES2a) • Artificial coral source (SES2am) • Natural sea grass source (SES2b) • Natural sea weed culture source

(SES2m) • Aquaculture source (SES2dm)

Tidal (SEI) Non vegetated (SEI1) • Sand beach (SEI1a) • Mudflat beach (SEI1b) • Rock cliff (SEI1c) • Salt marsh (SEI1d)


Vegetated (SEI2) • Natural coral source (SEI2a) • Artificial coral source (SEI2am) • Natural sea grass source (SEI2b) • Natural sea weed source (SEI2c) • Estuarine mangrove forest

(SEI2d) • Mangrove plantation area

(SEI2dm) • Brackish marsh/Salt marsh

(SEI2e) Salt/ Brackish/ Fresh/ Lake Shore line (SC) Lagoon (SI)

•

Riverine (FR) River/Canal/Stream/Channel (FRR)

Perennial flowi ng water(FRR1)

• Basin in the river (FRR1a) • Channel in the river (FRR1b) • Man made canal/irrigated canal

(FRR1bm) • Perennial islet (FRR1c) • Waterfall (FRR1d) • Hot spring /hot stream (FRR1e) • Underwater stream (FRR1f)

Seasonal flowing water (FRR2)

• Basin in the river (FRR2a) • Channel in the river (FRR2b) • Man made canal/irrigated canal

(FRR2bm) • Perennial islet (FRR2c) • Waterfall (FRR2d) • Hot spring /hot stream (FRR2e) • Underwater stream (FRR2f)

River bed/ bank/ beach/sand dune (FRB)

•

Flood plain (FRF)

Pasture/grass marsh (FRF1)

• Pasture/Natural grass marsh (FRF1a)

• Rice field in flood plain (FRF1am)

• Other crops planting area (FRF1bm)

Trees/Shrubs (FRF2) • Seasonal flooding forest (FRF2a) • Seasonally flood

plantation/Agricultural irrigation (FRF2am)

Swamp >80,000 sqm. Seasonal flood (FRF3)

•

Swamp < 80,000 sqm. Seasonal flood (FRF4)

•


Seasonal flood basin (FRF5)

• Natural field (FRF5a) • Rice field in irrigation area

(FRF5am) • Others irrigational agricultural

area (FRF5bm) •

Lacustrine (FL)

Water source >80,000 Sqm.(FLL)

Permanent flowing water (FLL1)

• Natural water source (FLL1a) • Man made water source

(FLL1am)

Seasonal flowing water (FLL2)

• Natural water source (FLL2a) • Man made water source

(FLL2am) Water

source < 80,000 Sqm. Avg. 2 m. in depth Less than 30% aqua plant on the surface (FLP)

Permanent flowing water (FLP)

• Natural water source (FLP1a) • Fresh water aquaculture pond

(FLP1am) • Sewage treatment pond

(FLP1bm) • Farm Pond (FLP1cm) • Fresh water cooling pond

(FLP1dm) • Borrow Pit, Excavation

(FLP1em) • Other Permanent fresh water

pond (FLP1fm) Seasonal flowing

water (FLP2) • Natural permanent freshwater

pond (FLE2a) • Man made freshwater pond

(FLP2am)

Palustrine (FP)

Permanent flooded pond Avg. 2 m. in depth More than 30% aqua plant on the surface (FPP)

•Grass (Permanent Flood Grassland) (FPPa)

•Sedges (Permanent fresh water marsh)(FPPb)

•Trees/shrubs (Permanent swamp) (FPPc)

•

Seasonal flooded pond Avg. 2 m. in depth More than 30% aqua plant on the surface (FPS)

•Grass (Seasonal Flood Grassland) (FPSa)

•Agricultural plantation (FPSam)

•Sedges (FPSb) •Trees/ Shrubs

(Seasonal flooded swamp) (FPSc)

•Trees/ Shrubs (Seasonal flooded plantation) (FPScm)

•


Source: Sansanee Choowaew (editor) 1999 Survey project on directory, status and database of Wetlands in Thailand (Central and Eastern Wetlands)

Suggestions for implementation

1. Wetlands implementation emphasizes on data that are important in managing, conserving, and utilizing Wetlands in the long run. It also indicates government, co-operative working and encouraging public to be aware of the value of Wetlands.

2. There should be basic data ready to be used. This includes data of sort classification, result of

Wetlands condition survey, data of Wetlands value evaluation, data of evaluation on impact in doing activities which may occur to Wetlands and data of ecology research in Wetlands.

3. The set up of survey project, arranging directory, status and basic data of Wetlands. Full

vision of Wetlands in each basin, province and district in both quantity and quality that is important for planning of Wetland preservation in each part of the country.


Classification of Wetlands in Thailand

By Mr. Wanchai Chanshai Department of Land Use Planning LDD

Objectives of Wetlands classification:

• To study Wetlands of the institute • To manage living things’ natural resource eg. Aquaculture resource • To develop the protective system for Wetlands in local level, national level and international

level • To prevent flood • To provide water resource • To develop potential agriculture • To manage use of land

Other principles in Wetlands classification:

• Be logical • Be flexible. Able to be used for a number of purposes • Be simple, so that it can be used and understood by workers at the local level • Use terms and criteria which are meaningful in the national language • In general allow most Wetlands to be allocated to only one class, though some large Wetlands

may need to be subdivided into two or three classes and • Be useful at regional and national level, but be able to be further and sub-divided to produce

units which can be used at the local management scale. Background of Wetlands Classification in Thailand AWB (Asian Wetland Bureau) and Department of Forestry have classified Thai Wetlands into 41 areas by using AWB Classification System that divided Wetlands into 22 categories. Each Wetland area consists of multi categories of Wetlands. In 1990, Mekong River Commission Secretariat asked LDD to cooperate in studying the possibility of managing Wetlands around Lower Mekong Basin. That is 50 Kms. from Mekong bank. The countries which take part in the project are Laos, Thailand and Vietnam. Each country had to make a survey to classify and make a map to show types of Wetlands. After that the maps were put together to make the map of Lower Mekong Basin. In the first mission, Dugan Classification system (1990), which was, certifies by Ramsar convention was used. Later MRC held a meeting to set up the appropriate Wetlands Classification System at Vientiane in Laos. The committee agreed to set up Wetlands Classification System in Thailand which was similar to those of Ramsar Classification System and Lower Mekong Basin. Then Thai committee held a seminar to develop classification system and try to find suitable ways to be used in real situation. To conclude, Wetlands were divided into 2 groups, Salt water and Fresh water. Besides, the American Structure was used to classify Wetlands into Type, System, Sub-system, Class and Sub-class. <<Wetlands Classification Diagram – (Thai paper - page 20-21>>


Conclusion The main idea is divided into 3 topics: Definition of Wetlands Classification of Wetlands Scale used in developing maps Definition of Wetlands According to Ramsar Convention, Wetlands mean “areas of marsh, fen, peat land or water, whether natural or artificial, permanent or temporary, with water that is static or flowing, fresh, brackish or salt, including area of marine water the depth of which at low tide does not exceed 6 metres”. Classification of Wetlands Systematically classification of Wetlands makes it simple to understand. It is also simpler to develop maps. In order to utilize the areas, the Wetlands Classification System should be improved to make it standard for using in any countries. However, the details may be adapted to the objectives of utilization. Wetlands Classification System in Thailand has been developed from level 1-3. It concerns the standard system and the ability to develop maps. For level 4-5, there should be more specialists in various fields to take care of the detail. The coordinator would be very graceful if MRC and Office of Environmental Policy and Planning would support the meeting in order to set up the details of Wetlands classification in Thailand. Classification System agreed in the meeting is from level 1-3 (level 4-5 is illustrated in a table in order to arrange the detail in the near future) Clarification Salt flat can be both vegetative and non vegetative. Salt flat does not say what details that area is. Salt work, salt plane and salt mine originally were salt flat. From the physical geographic point of view, salt flat is another broad term below that there would be many details habitat which would describe the kind of plants which are adapted to grow there. There may be salt march which has more water, which has less saline, which has more reeds, more grass and there can be a degree of plant life depending on how salty the water is. In really tropical salty water,salt flat may be very devoid of plants. In the temperate areas and perhaps sub tropical areas you get a lot of well adapted of hardy plant which can live in salty water. The main division would be artificial or natural after that there would be different categories. From land use point of view, it would not be necessary to define on a national map if salt area is a salt plane, salt work or salt mine. Salt plane may have a different methodology than salt works , some can be manual or some can be on machines. There probably are big varieties in that one category. Scale used in developing maps The meeting has agreed to use an appropriate scale in developing maps for Wetlands classification system from level 3-5 as follows; Level 3-4 or International Level = 1:1,000,000 or less Level 4 or National Level = 1:250,000 – 500,000 Level 5 or Provincial Level = 1:50,000 – 100,000 Remark: 1. Scale of the maps can be changed according to the appropriation and objectives in utilizing it. 2. Should usage on Wetland mapping

ANNEX 7: Viet Nam WLCS National Workshop Report

Annex to WCLS Report / MRC June2001 1

REPORT ON THE NATIONAL WORKSHOP ON WETLAND CLASSIFICATION IN THE LOWER MEKONG BASIN AND IN THE MEKONG DELTA OF VIETNAM

Compiled by Pham Trong Thinh

1. INTRODUCTION:

Recognised that a wetland classification system is necessary for inventory and management of wetland in the Mekong river basin, MRCS holds a series of workshop in the riparian countries and region to develop the wetland classification system. The national workshop on wetland classification in the lower Mekong basin and in the Mekong delta of Vietnam held on two days 3-4 October, 2000 in Ha Noi is one in this series of workshop. The objectives of the workshop were:

• Inform to participants results of regional workshop hold in Vientain on 18 and 19 September, 2000 and the process to develop wetland classification system in the Mekong Basin and in the Mekong Delta;

• Discuss the wetland classification system applied on making wetland classification map of the Mekong Delta by Vietnamese Wetland Team;

• Discuss the follow-up activities of Vietnamese Wetland Team.

2. PARTICIPANTS

…..30 participants took part in the workshop, list of participants attached. Officials of VNMC, Scientists from research institutes, from MOSTE, MoF and participants of Vietnamese Wetland Team, Dr. Torell and Mr. Albert Mr. Salamanca (ICLARM), Mr.Valderma and Mr. Mark Dubois and Mr.Chin Samouth (MRCS) Mr. Nguyen Hong Toan, General Secretary of Viet Nam National Mekong Committee chaired the workshop.

3. WORKSHOP PROGRESS

The workshop program is attached. Main reports in the workshop are: • Review… by Mr. Dubois and Mr. Valderma • Inform the results of regional workshop in Vientain by Mr. Nguyen Chi Thanh, Wetland National

Coordinator, Deputy Director of Sub-FIPI; • Explanation about the wetland classification applied on the Mekong Delta Vietnam by Mr. Pham

Trong Thinh, Executive Secretary of Wetland Project, Head of Technical and Scientific Division of Sub-FIPI;

• Report on the results of wetland classification mapping in the Mekong Delta Vietnam, by Dr. Nguyen Van Nhan, Director of IRMC;

• Report on the relationship between hydrological features and wetland classification of the Mekong Delta by Mr. Nguyen Ngoc Anh, Head of hydrological division, Sub-IWRMP

• Report on the relation between land use and wetland classification by Dr. Pham Quang Khanh, head of Soil Scientific Division, Sub-NIAPP

• Summary the National Strategy of Wetland Development and Management of Vietnam By Ms. Le Thanh Binh, NEA.


4. SUMMARY THE DISCUSSION:

• Wetland classification system for the Mekong delta and Mekong Basin

Principles:

• Wetland terminology rooted in the Ramsar Convention, Vietnam country is one party of the convention so that the definition of wetland by Ramsar Convention is the base for wetland inventory and management in Vietnam.

• The importance of wetlands being defined in term of “ecology, botany, zoology, limnology or hydrology.” Two concepts very clearly pointed out in the Ramsar Convention were Conservation and Wise-Use. Hence, the Classification of Wetland should reflect and base on this point of view, they should not be base on sectoral aspect such as fishery, agriculture, or forestry management.

• As agreed among Vietnamese wetland team, the wetland classification in the Mekong delta of Vietnam has to be assured to reflect above attitude. The wetland classification is not only analogize with international classification systems (especially the MRCS’s classification) but also the national classification system. The satiable system should be simple, lithesome, easy to use for mapping at various scales by satellite photo interpretation, and GIS technique.

The wetland classification in the Mekong delta:

• The wetland classification system for Vietnam Mekong delta includes 5 hierarchical levels:

First Water quality Salt or marine / Fresh

Second Geomorphological Marine/ Coastal/ Estuarine /lagoons

Riverine/ Lacustrine/ Palustrine

Third Hydrology (Tidal, Sub-tidal, Non-tidal, Permanent,

temporary)

Bas

in w

ide

1/1.

000.

000

Fourth Land use patterns M

ekon

g D

elta

1/2

50.0

00

Fifth

Habitats of wetland sites

Wet

land

site

s 1/

1000

0- 1

/25.

000

Figure 1. Hiearachical classification of Wetlands in the Mekong delta


• Wetland Classification of the Mekong delta in 1999

1. SALT WATER 1.1. MARINE / COASTAL: M 1.1.1.Sub-tidal S

1. Marine Natural Sub-tidal Bares MS 1.1.2. Inter-tidal

2. Coastal Inter-tidal Beach MI1 3. Coastal Inter-tidal Mudflat MI2

4. Coastal Inter-tidal Cliff MI3 5. Coastal Inter-tidallSalt Work MI4

6 Inter-tidal Coastal Aquaculture MI5 7. Coastal Mangrove Swamp MI6 8. Coastal Mangrove Plantation MI7

1.1.3. Non-Tidal 9. Coastal Non-tidal rainfed wetrice MN1 10. Coastal Non-tidal Aquaculture MN2

11. Coastal Non-tidal other crops MN3 12. Coastal Non-tidal Vegetated Lands MN4 1.1.4. Coastal lagoon ML 13. Coastal saline/brackish lagoon ML1 1.2. ESTUARINE E 1.2.1. Subtidal ES 14. Estuarine Sub-tidal Bares ES1

15. Estuarine Sub-tidal Mudflat ES2 16. Estuarine Sub-tidal Aquaculture ES3

1.2.2.Inter-tidal 17. Estuarine Inter-tidal Mudflat EI1 18. Estuarine Inter-tidal Saltmarsh EI2

19. Estuarine Inter-tidal Saltwork EI3 20. Estuarine Inter-tidal Aquaculture EI4 21. Estuarine Inter-tidal Mangrove Plantation EI5 22. Estuarine Rotated Croping lands EI6

1.2.3. Non-Tidal (Khoâng ngaäp Trieàu) EN 23. Estuarine Non-tidalWetrice EN1 24. Estuarine Non-tidalAquaculture EN2 25. Estuarine Non-tidal Other Crops EN3 26. Estuarine Non-tidal Grassland EN4 27. Estuarine Non-tidal Vegetated Lands EN5 28. Estuarine Non-tidal Sandy Ridge EN6

2. FRESH WATER 2.1 RIVERINE 2.1.1.Permanent riverine 29. Perenial rivers and channels RR 30. Riverine banks and bares RB 2.1.2.Riverine floodplain (ñoàng baèng ngaäp luõ)

31. Flood plain Wetrice RF1 32. Flood plain other crops RF2 33. Seasonally flooded Orchards/plantation RF3 34. Seasonal flooded Melaleuca plantation RF4 35. Floodplain Grassland RF5

2.2. LACUSTRINE 36. Man-made Seasonal Lake LL 2.3. PALUSTRINE PS

37. Palustrine Seasonal flooded wetrice PS1 38. Palustrine Seasonal flooded other crops PS2 39. Palustrine Seasonal flooded Melaleuca plantation PS3 40. Palustrine Seasonal flooded Grassland PS4


• Impacts of water resources development and human activities to wetlands

- Impacts of water resources development: + Changing salinity intrusion length due to cultivation area development; + Flood control on hydrological regimes (both flood& low flow seasons); + Fresh water supply for irrigation and domestic uses in the salinity intrusion; + Reclamation of acid sulphate soils & propagation of acid sulphate water; + Water loss and return flow in irrigation system; + Natural reserve, natural forest protection and reforestation areas: + Melaleuca forest protection and agricultural development; + Habitat destruction and protection of wildlife and natural resources; + Protection of aquatic production and species; + Eutrophication in the rivers and canal system; + Sediment load and siltation changes; + Agricultural production pollutions to water quality and environment; + Changes of quantity and quality of undergroundwater resources; + Arsenic issue in groundwater. - Impacts of other human activties: + Human activities on solid waste and sewage emissions into surfacewater; + Industrial activities on water pollution; + Urban non-point pollution + Exceeding flood water level of road system to flood currents; + Increasing fresh water supply for industrial and domestic uses; + Degrading ground water quality due to over-exploitation; + Navigation in the main rivers and canal system.

- Impacts of the upstream development to the Mekong delta/Plain of Reeds + Sediment change along the main Mekong river; + Agricultural development & landuse variations on water quantity & quality; + WR developments on water supply, salinity intrusion and flood control; + Agricultural development in the Great Lake areas on flow regulation;

• Soil and land use in relationship with wetland classification in Mekong Delta of Vietnam:

Total natural area of the delta is 3.9 million hectares, occupies 12% total area of Vietnam, comprises 12 provinces. Agricultural land is about 2.9 million hectares, about 34.7% total agriculture land, and contributes 40% total food production of the country. Typical soil groups in the delta are:

+ Sandy soil (Arenosols) 43,318 ha equally 1.1 % total natural area of the delta + Saline soil (Salic Fluvisols) 744,547 ha 18.93 % + Acid sulfate soil (Thionic Fluvisols) 1,600,263 ha or 40.69% + Alluvial soil (Fluvisols) 1,184,857 ha or 30.13 % + Slushy and peat soil (Histosols) 24,027 ha or 0.61% + Grey soil (Acrisols) 134,656 ha or 3.42% + Brown-yellow soil (Acrisols) 2,420 ha or 0.06% + Erosive soil (Leptosols) 8,787 ha or 0.22% + River, canals 190,257 ha or 4.84 %.


• Land use in the Mekong delta in 1998 presented in the following table:

Table 1. Land use in the Mekong delta and in Vietnam country in 1998

Land use Mekong delta Country Area (ha) % Area (ha) % Agriculture land 2,703,968 68.19 8,416,298 24.39 Aquaculture land 208,206 5.25 336,360 1.20 Forest land 308,600 7.78 11,985,367 36.44 Special use land 205,176 5.17 1,377,350 4.19 Settlement area 102,868 2.59 447.470 1.36 Un-used land 225,767 5.69 9,450,355 30.22 River, canal, opened water 210,729 5.31 727,222 2.21 Total area 3,965,314 100.00 32,894,398 100.00

• The realationship between wetland classification with land use in the Mekong delta is in the table 2.

Table 2. Land use patterns and wetlands in the Mekong delta

Wetlands First level

Second level

Thirt level Soil groups Land use patterns

Sub-tidal Opened water Openned water

Inter-tidal 1. New accretion area 2. Saline soil under mangrove 3. Acide sulfate soil under mangrove 4. Strong saline soil

1. Bare land 2. Mangrove 3. Aquaculture 4. Salt pan

Non-tidal

1. Strong saline soil 2. Medium and light saline soils 3. Acid sulfate-saline soil 4. Sandy ridge

1. Aquaculture 2. One-rice crop 3. Two-rice crop 4. Coconut, etc. M

arin

e an

d co

asta

l

Lagoon Opened water Opened water Sub-tidal Opened water 1. Opened water

2. Aquaculture

Inter-tidal 1. New accretion area 2. Saline soil under mangrove 3. Strong saline soil 4. Sandy ridge

1. Bare land 2. Aquaculture 3. Salt pan 4. Mangrove

SAL

T W

AT

ER

Est

uari

ne

Non-tidal

1. Medium and light saline soils 2. Sandy soil

1. One-rice crop 1. Two-rice crop 2. Aquaculture 3. Grass land

River, canal Opened water 1. Opened water

R

iver

ine Flood plain

1. Alluvium soil 2. Acide sulfate soil 3. Sandy soil

1. Two-three rice crop 2. Rice-dry crop 3. Melaleuca forest 4. Grass land 5. Fruit tree 6. Pineapple, sugar cane

Lacustine Lake Opened water Aquaculture

FR

ESH

WA

TE

R

Palustine

Palustine

Acid sulfate soil Peat soil

1. One rice crop 2. Melaleuca forest 3. Grass land


• The Vietnam strategy on wetland management and sustainable development

+ The strategy goals:

Promoting the wise use of wetlands, to protect the biodiversity of the wetland ecosystem in parallel with sustaining ecological, environmental and socio-economic functions of wetlands at presents and for the future

+ Objectives

- To end un-sustainable uses which are emphasized on short term economic benefits or to eliminate land use conversion without strong scientific considerations;

- To protect existing biodiversity values of the wetland ecosystem;

- To make a balanced use of wetlands for ensuring the sustainability among its ecological economic and social functions. To recover wetland ecosystem in the environmental sensitive areas. To introduce farming system which integrates sustainable agriculture, forestry and fisheries;

- To build up an effective wetland managerial and organizational system with active part icipation from local people;

- To raise awareness of local administration at all levels and local people on important functions of wetlands;

+ Specific measures

- Policy and law; - Planning; - Organizing and management; - Rational use and recover wetland resources; - Stopping the wetland draining out; - Water surface and land management; - Biodiversity conservation; - Environmental impact assessment; - Dealing with pollution; - Scientific research and basic investigation; - Raising awareness; - International cooperation;

+ Actions in priority

- To develop policies addressing on the protection and enhancement of wetland functions and attributions; - To conduct additional basic investigation in the rich biodiversity and environmental sensitive wetland

areas; - To build up a monitoring program for biodiversity change, and for the area change in all type of wetland

ecosystems; - Measures and experiences for effective management of wetlands; - Experiences in organizing ecologically sustainable tourism (eco-tourism); - To build up and implement the program for raising awareness of public people on wetlands; - To specify the wetland conservation areas and to build up the investment projects; - Formulation of the action plans on wetland management for the Mekong river delta and the red river delta; - Establishment of the national integrated wetland classification system;

5. PROPOSED THE FOLLOW-UP ACTIVITIES FOR WETLAND CLASSIFICATION PROGRAM


5.1 Revising the wetland classification for Mekong Delta Vietnam and setting up database of wetland management

Objectives

Based on the results of regional and national workshop revising the draft classification and setting up the database of wetland management in the Mekong delta.

Outputs: • Wetland classification system that corressponded to Basin wetland classification and it could be

harmonized with national classification system. • Wetland classification maps of the Mekong delta Vietnam at the scale 1/250.000, (digital and paper map) • Wetland Information Sheet (WIS) of wetland Units of the delta, information sheet present physical

features, living organisms, management measures takend and proposal management measures

Activities: • Revising the wetland classification and legend of wetland maps; • Collecting data & information and revising the wetland map; • Revising the existing wetland map, to make it coresponded to the revised wetland classification system; • Design the wetland information sheet; • Inventory to collect data and information and input into wetland information sheet; • Workshop to dis cuss about revised wetland map and wetland information sheet; • Compile software for management of wetland information sheets • Finalization presentation and produce outputs Implementation duration 2001-2002

5.2. Establishing the wetland classification and wetland map of Vietnam at the scale of 1/1.000.000

Objective: • Delineating boundary of wetland units on the map at the scale of 1/1.000.000 to determine major wetland

units in the country. • Generally evaluation of the areas, distribution, physiacal environment and biological resources of

wetlands and also the socio-economical activities in wetland units • Above results are foundation for implementing the Vietnam National Strategy of wetland development

and sustainable management and National Biolodiversity Action Plan; • These also provide foundation for setting up the national wetland database

Main ouputs: • National wetland classification system • National wetland classification map at scal 1/1.000.000 (digital and paper maps). • Development report writing; • Thematic maps and reports.

Activities: • Collecting, evaluating and selecting relevant information; • Developing wetland classification and legendary of the map at the scale of 1/1.000.000; • Compile and establish thematic maps; • Digitize thematic maps; • Analyze information and compile wetland classification map; • Report writing; • Meetings, workshops (discuss about work plan methodology and implementation program and outputs)

Implementation duration: 2 years (2001-2002)

To implement this activity it is suggested that MRCS should provide technical support (mainly in term of expertise, document and materials), and fund support focus to activity in Mekong Delta.

5.3. Study tours


Objectives: • Improve the awareness of people in functions and benefits of wetlands, and also recognize threat, negative

impact to wetlands in the Mekong basin. • Exchange experience in wetland conservation, management and wise use.

Target group:

- Technical staff and managers

Concrete plan and programs

- MRCS help to prepare

developing a wetland classification system...the schedule of workshops was as follows: v st1...

Documents