Significance of Geographic Information System (GIS) and remote sensing in management of coastal issues. Remote sensing monitoring can serve the dual purpose of water quality monitoring and nature policing.

1. Looking Beyond CRZ
Arun B.Inamdar
CSRE, IIT Bombay

2. Introduction
Coastal issues through:
CRZ (1991) LU/LC Mapping, Shoreline Change Studies,
Wetland Mapping, HTL Demarcation, Mangrove Mapping/
Monitoring, Coastal Geomorphology Mapping, Coastal
Vulnerability Assessment, Natural Hazard Studies, Marine
Water quality Studies & GIS based CMIS Development.
- In view of the inclusion of 12 NM coastal sea area as CRZ-
IV as per ‘CRZ (2011) our marine water quality monitoring
studies present interesting insights of the status of coastal
waters around Mumbai.
- Need for GIS based CMIS

3. 1. Marine Water Quality Studies
• Monitoring of water quality parameters viz.
Chl-a, CDOM, TSS, Euphotic Depth, Nitrates,
SST is possible with effective RS techniques.
• For Mumbai coastal region it was done for
last decade largely using OCM & MODIS data
• Data base is useful for monitoring coastal
ecosystem health as well as for policing
purposes.

4. Study Area

5. SST Monitoring Methodology
• Sea Surface Temperature (SST) was calculated from
MODIS data using the following formula:
L= 2 * h * c2 * l-5 / [ e (h * c / k * l * T) – 1]
Where,
L = radiance (Watts/m2/steradian/m)
h = Planck's constant (joule second)
c = speed of light in vacuum (m/s)
k = Boltzmann gas constant (joules/kelvin)
l = band or detector center wavelength (m)
T = temperature (degree Kelvin)

6. Methodology
• Daily cloud-free MODIS (Terra) data with 1km
resolution from Thermal band (B-31)- Wavelength
range :10.78 to 11.28 μm, which are first converted
to radiance and then to SST.
• Monthly averages of SST were generated for every
year for December, January and March from 2004 to
2010, from the daily images.
• Standard deviation and yearly averages were
calculated using daily images.
• To generate the SST maps, the images were
resampled to a 5 x 5 km grid size and a land-mask
has been applied to the images.

7. December 2004 December 2005 December 2006
December 2007 December 2008 December 2009
Monthly average SST for December (2004-2009)

8. Monthly aggregated average and standard deviation
images for December (2004-2009)
Average Standard Deviation

9. Average SST (December)
284.00
285.00
286.00
287.00
288.00
289.00
290.00
0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00
Perpendicular distance from shoreline (km)
SST(degreeKelvin)
Average SST
Vs
Perpendicular
distance
from shoreline
Standard Deviation in SST (December)
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00
Perpendicular distance from shoreline (km)
SST(degreeKelvin)
SST standard
deviation
Vs
Perpendicular
distance from
shoreline

10. January 2005 January 2006 January 2007
January 2008 January 2009 January 2010
Monthly average SST for January (2005-2010)

11. Average Standard Deviation
Monthly aggregated average and standard deviation images
for January (2005-2010)

12. Average SST (January)
276.00
278.00
280.00
282.00
284.00
286.00
288.00
290.00
292.00
0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00
Perpendicular distance from shoreline (km)
SST(degreeKelvin)
Standard Deviation in SST (January)
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
14.00
16.00
0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00
Perpendicular distance from shoreline (km)
SST(degreeKelvin)
Average SST
Vs
Perpendicular
distance from
shoreline
SST standard
deviation
Vs
Perpendicular
distance from
shoreline

13. March 2005 March 2006 March 2007
March 2008 March 2009 March 2010
Monthly average SST for March (2005-2010)

14. Average Standard Deviation
Monthly aggregated average and standard deviation images
for March (2005-2010)

15. Average SST (March)
282.00
284.00
286.00
288.00
290.00
292.00
294.00
296.00
0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00
Perpendicular distance from shoreline (km)
SST(degreeKelvin)
Standard Deviation in SST (March)
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00
Perpendicular distance from shoreline (km)
SST(degreeKelvin)
Average SST
Vs
Perpendicular
distance from
shoreline
SST standard
deviation
Vs
Perpendicular
distance from
shoreline

16. Comparative SST trends near CETP with respect to average SST 5 km
away from shoreline for study period.
Average SST in degrees Kelvin shown as linear trend line
December
283.00
283.50
284.00
284.50
285.00
285.50
286.00
286.50
287.00
287.50
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 `2009
Year
SST(monthlyaverage)
SST near CETP
Average SST for 5 km from land
Average SST for CETP

17. Comparative SST trends near CETP with respect to average SST
5 km away from shoreline for study period.
Average SST in degrees Kelvin shown as linear trend line
January
273.00
275.00
277.00
279.00
281.00
283.00
285.00
287.00
289.00
291.00
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Year
SST(monthlyaverage)
SST near CETP
Average SST for 5 km from land
Average SST for CETP

18. Comparative SST trends near CETP with respect to average SST
5 km away from shoreline for study period.
Average SST in degrees Kelvin shown as linear trend line
March
282.00
284.00
286.00
288.00
290.00
292.00
294.00
296.00
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Year
SST(monthlyaverage)
SST near CETP
Average SST for 5 km from land
Average SST for CETP

19. Comparative SST trend at Mahul Creek with respect to the
average SST 5 km away from shoreline for the study period.
Average SST in degree Kelvin shown as a linear trend-line.
December
283.00
284.00
285.00
286.00
287.00
288.00
289.00
290.00
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 `2009
Year
SST(monthlyaverage)
SST near Mahul
Average SST for 5 km from land
Average SST for Mahul

20. Comparative SST trend at Mahul Creek with respect to the
average SST 5 km away from shoreline for the study period.
Average SST in degree Kelvin shown as a linear trend-line.
January
273.00
275.00
277.00
279.00
281.00
283.00
285.00
287.00
289.00
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Year
SST(monthlyaverage)
SST near Mahul
Average SST for 5 km from land
Average SST for Mahul

21. Comparative SST trend at Mahul Creek with respect to the
average SST 5 km away from shoreline for the study period.
Average SST in degree Kelvin shown as a linear trend-line.
March
283.00
284.00
285.00
286.00
287.00
288.00
289.00
290.00
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Year
SST(monthlyaverage)
SST near Mahul
Average SST for 5 km from land
Average SST for Mahul

22. Observations
• Results show Mahul Creek & Vashi creek area are
thermally active, compared to a 5 km buffer zone off
the shoreline.
• Both are situated in a bay area, away from the
influences of any deep sea warm water phenomenon
• This anomaly can not be explained by anything but
anthropogenic interference.
• Mahul area and Vashi creek show high SST anomalies
in March and December resp.
• Except 2006, which was declared as a
La Nina year, the SST has increased from the
year 2004 to 2010.

23. (mg/m3)
Chlorophyll concentration contours for January, February, March and
April (2012) for coastal waters of Mumbai {Chlor-a 3 (Carder et.
al., 1999), Wavelengths used – 488 and 555 nm}
January & February
March & April

24. (m)
Euphotic depth contours for January, February, March and April (2012)
for coastal waters of Mumbai {kd(490) (Lee et. al., 2005), wavelengths used –
490 nm }
January & February
March & April

25. CDOM concentration contours for the months of January, February,
March and April (2012) for coastal waters of Mumbai {Tassan (1994),
wavelengths used- 412, 490, 443 nm}
January &
February
March & April

26. Conclusions
1. RS & GIS techniques are a boon in all these
studies and should be extensively used in
identification, demarcation, assessment
and monitoring a wide variety of coastal
and marine attributes.
2. Must relook at the new ‘exceptions/
concessions’ in CRZ laws as well as the
‘carrying capacity of coastal ecosystem’ to
aim at Sustainable Development

27. 2. Major Issues in CRZ Rules & Way Ahead
1. Fixed area of NDZ (500m) all over India
Sol.:Coastal Habitat studies and modifications based on it
2. Undue importance to development status, esp. CRZ-II
Sol.: Adoption of Ecosystem Approach
3. ‘Sector need’ based additional exceptions in CRZ(2011)
Sol.:Carrying capacity studies to decide them.
4. Excessive fishing
Sol.: Need for Sustainable Fishing
5. Influence of dams/ urban structures on fresh water/
sediments/ nutrients transport in CRZ
Sol.: Permissions to be based on assessment of impacts of
dams/other development downstream.

28. 6. Permission to destroy mangroves in Mumbai if replant 5 times
that elsewhere.
Sol.: Not practical !..Ensure survival of planted mangroves.
7. Untreated sewage/ solid waste not allowed to enter CRZ-IV after
Jan. 2013
Sol.: Not feasible unless we recycle and reuse liquid & solid waste
8. Little / No involvement of stake holders in decision making
Sol.: Compliance with ICZM practices/ principles
9. Lack of political will to go with nature/ follow laws
Sol.: (e.g. New airport in New Mumbai) Coastal Environmental
Education ?
10. Lack of awareness / info / education in coastal environment
management & transparency.
Sol.: Development of a GIS based Coastal Management Information
System (CMIS) accessible through internet, for networking / free
exchange of information amongst researchers

29. GIS based CMIS

30. THANKS