An evaluation of the effects of wastewater treatment

initiatives on water quality in coastal waters along the

Coral Coast, southwest Viti Levu, Fiji Islands

By

Exsley Jemuel TALOIBURI

A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for

the Degree of Master of Science in Marine Science.

School of Islands and Oceans

Faculty of Science, Technology and Environment

The University of the South Pacific, Suva, Fiji

2009
You are encouraged to cite my thesis with proper citations and

acknowledgements.
 Abstract

Most tourist hotels and villages on the Coral Coast of Fiji are situated
along the coastline resulting in higher observed coastal wastewater
pollution. This study was aimed at evaluating the effects of wastewater
treatment initiatives on water quality in coastal waters along the Coral
Coast, Fiji. Monitoring was undertaken on a planted gravel bed
constructed wetland at Tagaqe Village, Crusoe‘s Resort wastewater
treatment system, Coral Coast nearshore sites, Votua Village Creek, and
an ex-situ greywater treatment drum experiment. Results for the wetland
showed removal efficiency range of 94.7-99.3% for faecal coliform, E/coli,
total suspended solids (TSS) and biological oxygen demand (BOD).
Nitrogen elimination ranged between 50% for nitrite and 82.6% for
ammonia. Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) declined by 75.5%, Total
Phosphorus by 69.1% and phosphate by 75.5%. The system at Crusoe‘s
Resort indicated removal range of 63.6-94.7% for faecal coliform, E/coli,
TSS and BOD. Nitrite was reduced by 50.9%; nitrate by 68.5%; ammonia
by 72.7%; and TKN by 50.1%. Total phosphorus was reduced by 60.5%
and phosphate by 70.7%. For the Coral Coast nearshore water quality,
results showed a mean salinity of 32ppt; temperature of 29.4ºC;
dissolved oxygen level of 6.10mg/L; conductivity 49.92mS/cm; nitrate
4.16µM; ammonia 2.09µM; nitrite 0.35µM and 0.43µM for phosphate
with a N:P ratio of 17. Votua Creek data showed that the lower housing,
bridge and creek mouth experience polluted wastewater discharges
relative to upper housing and the dam. The village and Mike‘s Diver tap
water were observed to be of unsafe drinking water quality standards,
without further treatment, but the housing tap water was safe. The
greywater treatment drum experiment showed general removal
efficiencies for all parameters in both mesocosms but varied considerably
between different loading regimes, sampling intervals and individual
water quality parameters.
 Acknowledgements

The researcher is grateful to the Institute of Applied Science (IAS) for

funding this project as well as the researcher‘s postgraduate studies at

the University of the South Pacific. Sincere acknowledgement is extended

to Professor William Aalbersberg (principal supervisor and IAS Director);

Dr Milika Sobey-Naqasima (co-supervisor); Dr Chris Tanner and Dr Tom

Headley of the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research

(NIWA) in Hamilton, New Zealand; Mr Sarabjeet Singh, Dr Bale Tamata,

analytical and administrative staff of the IAS; and technicians from the

School of Marine Studies particularly Mr Jone Lima and Shiv Sharma as

well as other school support staff.

Appreciation is also offered to the chiefs and people in all villages

monitored along the Coral Coast; tourist hotel owners, managers and

staff along the Coral Coast; overseas visiting professionals and

volunteers; postgraduate student colleagues; immediate and extended

family members and friends; and other individuals or authorities that

contributed in one way or another to the successful completion of this

research project. Without assistance, this study would not have been

undertaken successfully.
Table of Contents Page

Abbreviations i
List of Tables ii-iii
List of Figures iv-vii
Chapter 1 Introduction 1-17
1.1. General 1-5
1.2. Importance of wastewater management 6-7
1.3. Contents of wastewater that cause problems 8-11
1.4. Status of wastewater legislation in Fiji 11-12
1.5. Wastewater treatment practices 12-14
1.6. Implications of the study 14-15
1.7. Research objectives 15-16
1.8. Organisation of thesis 16-17
Chapter 2 Background of Fiji & the Coral Coast 18-39
2.1. Introduction 18
2.2. Fiji Islands and Viti Levu 18-25
2.3. The Coral Coast 26-30
2.4. Water quality standards for normal coral growth 31-33
2.5. Status of water quality in Fiji & the Coral Coast 33-39
Chapter 3 Nutrient enhancement & coastal waters 40-55
3.1. Introduction 40
3.2. Importance of coastal aquatic systems 40-42
3.3. Potential effects of nutrient enrichment on corals 43-55
Chapter 4 Monitored wastewater treatment systems 56-91
4.1. Introduction 56
4.2. Constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment 56-72
4.3. Commercial wastewater treatment systems 72-85
4.4. Greywater treatment drum experiment 85-91
Chapter 5 Methodology 92-108
5.1. Introduction 92
 5.2. Field sampling procedures 92-95
5.3. Greywater treatment drum experiment 96-97
5.4. Analytical methods 97-100
5.5. Automated Flow Injection Analysis 100-108
Chapter 6 Results 109-128
6.1. Introduction 109
6.2. Tagaqe Village constructed wetland 109-111
6.3. Crusoe’s Resort treatment plant 111-112
6.4. Coral Coast water quality monitoring 112-117
6.5. Votua Creek water quality monitoring 118-121
6.6. Drum system model experiment 122-128
Chapter 7 Discussion 129-158
7.1. Tagaqe Village constructed wetland 129-135
7.2. Crusoe’s wastewater treatment system 135-140
7.3. Coral Coast nearshore water quality 140-147
7.4. Votua Creek water quality 147-151
7.5. Drum system model experiment 152-158
Chapter 8 Conclusions 159-164
Bibliography 165-183
Appendices 184-195
Appendix A: Tagaqe wetland monitoring data 184-186
Appendix B: Crusoe’s system monitoring data 187-188
Appendix C: Coral Coast monitoring data 189-193
Appendix D: Votua Creek monitoring data 194-195
 Abbreviations

kW kiloWatts
BOD Biological Oxygen Demand
TSS Total Suspended Solids
DO Dissolved Oxygen
TDS Total Dissolved Solids
COD Chemical Oxygen Demand
FJ$ Fijian dollars
rtPBRs Recirculation textile Packed Bed Reactors
mg/L milligram per litre
ENSO El Nino Southern Oscillation
RSF Recirculation Sand Filter
SPCZ South Pacific Convergence Zone
EIA Environment Impact Assessment
WHO World Health Organisation
STP Sewage Treatment Plant
UNEP United Nations Environment Programme
mm/day millimetre per day
m3 cubic metres
ppt parts per thousand
m metre
µg/L microgram per litre
µmol/L micromole per litre
mmol/L millimole per litre
c/100ml counts per 100 millilitres
NH3-N Ammonia Nitrogen
NO3-N Nitrate Nitrogen
NO2-N Nitrite Nitrogen
PO4-P Phosphate Phosphorus
TP Total Phosphorus
TIN Total Inorganic Nitrogen
TKN Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
ºC degree Celsius
± plus or minus
> greater than
< less than
% percent
cm centimetre
HLR Hydraulic Loading Rate
APHA American Public Health Association
L Litres
FIA Flow Injection Analyser
ml milliliter
m2 square metre

i
 List of Tables

Table 1: page 29
List of general Coral Coast water quality sampling sites
Table 2: page 33
Summary of recommended standards for nearshore waters to support
coral reefs and recreation in Australia and New Zealand
Table 3: page 39
Comparison of the mean faecal coliform counts around Suva nearshore
waters and rivers from different studies
Table 4: page 39
Water quality results for the Port of Suva in 1992 as observed by Tamata
et al.
Table 5: page 91
Summary of typical greywater characteristics targeted in the experiment
Table 6: page 96
Preliminary water quality monitoring program to compare different
loading regimes
Table 7: page 97
Starting recipe for artificial greywater
Table 8: page 98
Accuracy and precision for each Lachat Quick Chem FIA method
Table 9: page 99
Method detection limit for each Lachat Quick Chem FIA method
Table 10: page 110
Summary of water quality results from Tagaqe wetland over the period
between June 2005 and October 2006
Table 11: page 111
Summary of water quality results from the Crusoe‘s wastewater
treatment plant over the period between October 2005 and September
2006
ii
Table 12: page 114
Summary of water quality results from the Coral Coast between July
2005 and July 2006
Table 13: page 117
Summarised ―baseline‖ water quality data from the Coral Coast over a
five year period prior to July 2005
Table 14: page 121
A summary of Votua Creek water quality monitoring between June and
September 2006
Table 15: page 123
Summary of results for ―Monitoring Period 1 – Large Doses‖
Table 16: page 124
A summary of results for ―Monitoring Period 2 – Moderate Doses‖
Table 17: page 126
Mean results for ―Monitoring Period 3 – Small Doses‖

iii
 List of Figures

Figure 1: page 1
A village and associated latrine along the Coral Coast of Fiji, within ~10
m of beach high tide level
Figure 2: page 2
A piggery about 2m from high tide mark at Votua Village
Figure 3: page 2
Black spots of algal cover in front of Namaqumaqua Village along the
Coral Coast of Fiji
Figure 4: page 3
Algal proliferation along the Coral Coast in Fiji
Figure 5: page 3
Seaweed and seagrass breakage physically pollutes the beach in front of
the Fijian Shangri La Resort along the Coral Coast of Fiji
Figure 6: page 4
Exposed shoreline in front of Votua Village on the Coral Coast of Fiji due
to coastal erosion
Figure 7: page 5
(a) Wetland at Tagaqe; (b) wastewater treatment system at Crusoe‘s
Retreat; and dry composting toilets at Komave (c) and Tagaqe (d)
Figure 8: page 7
Discharge of untreated black water into a river at Votua Village
Figure 9: page 13
A household septic tank exemplifying ―primary treatment‖
Figure 10: page 14
A basic flow chart of the wastewater treatment train
Figure 11: page 19
Location of the Fiji Island group

iv
Figure 12: page 28
Map of Coral Coast showing the location of the two primary wastewater
treatment systems being monitored
Figure 13: page 29
Location of general Coral Coast sampling sites, villages and hotels
Figure 14: page 41
Mangroves are a classic example of a coastal aquatic system
Figure 15: page 58
A systematic diagram of a horizontal flow constructed wetland
Figure 16: page 59
Diagram of a ―surface flow‖ constructed wetland
Figure 17: page 59
Diagram of a ―subsurface flow‖ wetland
Figure 18: page 63
A simplified diagram of the nitrogen processes and the flows of different
nitrogen forms in a wetland
Figure 19: page 66
Factors affecting the biological processes of denitrification on different
spatial scales
Figure 20: page 71
Construction stages of the gravel bed wetland at Tagaqe Village
Figure 21: page 72
Similar cross section diagram of Tagaqe Village wetland
Figure 22: page 79
The AdvanTex AX100 Treatment System at Crusoe‘s Retreat
Figure 23: page 80
Biotube Effluent filters used in septic tanks at Tagaqe and Crusoe‘s
Retreat
Figure 24: page 81
Schematic as built of the Crusoe wastewater treatment system

v
Figure 25: page 84
(a) The ProSTEP Effluent pump switchboard at the recirculation tank; (b)
the lower septic pumping system closer to the beach at Crusoe‘s Resort
Figure 26: page 84
(a) George Reece standing beside the Carbon filter and ventilation fan of
the treatment system at Crusoe‘s; (b) The AX100 textile filter pod fibre
layers for wastewater treatment at Crusoe‘s Retreat
Figure 27: page 85
(a) The recirculation splitter valve and the effluent pumping system; (b)
the recirculation splitter valve with piping connections from septic tank
effluents and the AX100 treatment system
Figure 28: page 85
The flower gardens and ground disposal area at Crusoe‘s Retreat
Figure 29: page 88
(a) An in situ greywater treatment drum system at Votua Village along the
Coral Coast; and (b) an ex-situ model at the university
Figure 30: page 89
Side view of greywater treatment mesocosm
Figure 31: page 90
Details of drainage holes in 20L buckets used to contain coconut shell
and husk
Figure 32: page 94
Acid bath for field sampling bottles and reagent/standard preparation
Figure 33: page 94
Field sampling at Crusoe‘s wastewater treatment system
Figure 34: page 94
(a) Sample collection at the Tagaqe wetland inlet; (b) sample collection at
the Tagaqe wetland outlet

vi
Figure 35: page 100
The Auto Sampler Injector which sucks sample to be passed through the
FIA manifold
Figure 36: page 102
(a) The injector and sample zone; (b) reagents being added to samples; (c)
analyser pumps; (d) a 4 channel manifold; (e) nitrate column on
manifold; (f) the computer system that log results; (g) FIA waste outlet;
(h) peak shaped signals on computer for analyte
Figure 37: page 103
Schematic diagram of a typical flow injection analysis manifold
Figure 38: page 110
Sample of treated and untreated wastewater from Tagaqe wetland
Figure 39: page 122
Sampling the ex-situ drum system experiment
Figure 40: page 127
A graph showing the effluent flow rate vs. time for the two mesocosms
Figure 41: page 128
Some degree of clogging on the coconut husk layer within the High
Loading mesocosm

vii
Chapter 1 Introduction

1.1. General

Most tourist hotels and resorts, villages, and industrial developments in

Fiji are situated along coastlines (Figures 1 & 2) to enable tourists,

villagers and industries to utilise the coral reef and lagoon environments

for activities such as swimming, transportation, fishing, snorkelling,

scuba diving and food collection (Thaman and Sykes, 2005).

Figure 1: A village and associated latrine (circled) along the Coral Coast of Fiji,
within ~10 m of beach high tide level [Tanner and Gold, 2004]

Recently high levels of seaweed growth (Figure 3) have been noticed

around some resorts and coastal areas throughout Fiji, particularly in

the Mamanuca Islands and along the Coral Coast, which is an indication

of elevated nutrient levels in the coastal water (Lovell and Tamata, 1996;

Vuki et al., 2000; Thaman and Sykes, 2005).

1
Studies conducted on water quality indicated high nutrient levels in

coastal waters (Mosley and Aalbersberg, 2003), above guidelines for coral

reef areas, and in some places high faecal coliform levels, an indication of

sewage pollution (Hodgson, 1999; Coral Cay, 2001; Coral Cay, 2005).

Both these phenomena are likely to lead to the degradation of coral reefs

and deteriorating water quality, which will be detrimental in the long

term to tourism and health of people in these respective areas.

Figure 2: A piggery about 2m from high tide mark at Votua Village

Figure 3: Black spots of algal cover in front of Namaqumaqua Village along the
Coral Coast of Fiji

2
The obvious Sargassum algal overgrowth in lagoons along the Coral

Coast of Fiji is a major concern given the importance of the region for

local communities and as a tourist destination. A large number of

tourists come to Fiji to enjoy tropical reefs, fish biodiversity, and scuba in

clear and clean water (Figure 4). Hence if the Coral Coast reefs and

nearshore ecosystems are degraded, it will result in adverse impacts for

hotel owners and local villagers that rely on tourism for income and

employment. Breakage of seaweed and seagrass can pollute pristine

beaches that resorts and hotels rely on for tourism attraction (Figure 5).

Figure 4: Algal proliferation along the Coral Coast in Fiji (Tanner & Gold, 2004)

Figure 5: Seaweed and seagrass breakage physically pollutes the beach in front of
the Fijian Shangri La Resort along the Coral Coast of Fiji

3
In addition fish stocks that many coastal dwellers harvest from

nearshore areas for protein will also be limited. Moreover coastal erosion

along the Coral Coast (Figure 6) is likely to increase as the reefs are

broken down by waves and not regenerated (Mosley and Aalbersberg,

2003).

Figure 6: Exposed shoreline in front of Votua Village on the Coral Coast of Fiji due
to coastal erosion

Immediate strategies are needed at community, regional and government

levels to try and reduce wastewater discharges and nutrient enrichment

on the Coral Coast of Fiji. An integrated approach to coastal management

is needed to manage and control land based sources of wastes before

being disposed into the coastal environment.

As a result sanitation engineers (Tanner and Gold, 2004) in collaboration

with the University of the South Pacific and other stakeholders studied

the nutrient pollution along the Coral Coast as part of the Fiji integrated

coastal management project and recommended:

4
 a) Upgraded hotel sewage treatment by on-site systems;

b) Better village treatment using septic tank filters, dry composting

toilets, and/or artificial constructed wetlands;

c) In-situ composting of pig waste.

Since then, several model projects along these lines had been initiated

which include a sub-surface gravel bed wetland at Tagaqe Village; an

AdvanTex wastewater management system at Crusoe‘s Retreat;

composting dry toilets in Vunisinu Village in Rewa, Tagaqe and Komave

Villages in Nadroga; and a composting pig waste in one piggery at the

National Youth Training Centre in Sigatoka (Figure 7).

Figure 7 (a): Wetland at Tagaqe; (b) wastewater treatment system at Crusoe’s

Retreat; and dry composting toilets at Komave (c) and Tagaqe (d)

(a) Wetland at Tagaqe Village (b) Treatment system at Crusoe’s

(c) Dry composting toilet at Komave (d) Composting toilet at Tagaqe

5
1.2. Importance of wastewater management

Wastewater is liquid or water associated with waste disposed from

residences, institutions, commercial and industrial establishments,

together with groundwater, surface and storm water. Wastewater

includes dissolved contaminants, suspended solids and micro-organisms

(New Zealand Ministry for the Environment, 2003). Every community

produces both solid and liquid waste and the liquid portion is essentially

the water supply after it has been contaminated by the various uses to

which it has been exposed. Wastewater can be classified into four

categories including domestic (wastewater from residences and

commercial facilities); industrial (wastewater from industrial waste);

Infiltration (wastewater from leaking joints, cracks, porous walls, storm

drain connections, roof headers, manhole covers); and storm water

(wastewater runoff from flooding due to rainfall).

Wastewater from tourist resorts, villages and agricultural runoff

comprises greywater and black water. Greywater includes wastewater

from laundry, kitchen, shower and sink water. Black water consists of

sewage effluent, which can be the principal source of pollution in

nearshore waters if inadequately treated (Thaman and Sykes, 2005).

Likely problems associated with untreated wastewater effluent being

discharged into the coastal environment may include the following:

6
 a) High Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD) – a measure of the amount

of oxygen that would be taken up by degrading the organic matter

in the effluent. Excessive BOD may result in low oxygenated waters

and fish kills.

b) High levels of nutrients, particularly nitrogen and phosphorus –

promotes excessive growth of plants, including algae and seaweed,

which can smother corals.

c) Pathogens (faecal coliform) – disease causing microorganisms that

can be harmful to swimmers and other organisms.

d) Suspended solids – particles that lead to poor water clarity and

smothering of corals.

The discharge of untreated greywater and sewage effluent (Figure 8) into

the environment can have major impacts on coastal habitats and human

health. Sources of pollution into coastal waters include discharge outlets

for greywater, seepage from septic tanks and soak pits, seepage from pit

or drum toilet systems, seepage from gardens and golf courses,

agricultural and fertiliser runoff through rivers, and sewage effluent

discharge outlets (Thaman and Sykes, 2005).

Figure 8: Discharge of untreated black water into a river at Votua Village

7
1.3. Contents of wastewater that cause problems

The impact of wastewater discharges on the environment depends on the

standard of wastewater discharged, volume discharged and

characteristics of the receiving environment.

1.3.1. Organic material

Wastewater organic contents consist of human faeces, protein, fat,

vegetable and sugar material from food preparation, and washing

detergents. Some of this is dissolved into the water whilst some exists as

separate particles.

In a natural system, bacteria from the soil and water usually consume

organic materials from wastewater to promote growth. In a healthy

diluted water environment where there is adequate dissolved oxygen,

aerobic (oxygen-using) bacteria tend to feed on the organic material and

form a slime of new bacterial cells and dissolved salt waste products. On

the contrary, if undiluted wastewater is isolated anaerobic (non-oxygen-

using) bacteria would decompose the waste organic material in the

process releasing odorous gases such as hydrogen sulphide and other

non-smelly gases such as methane and carbon dioxide. Thus, it is the

amount of oxygen removed or the rapid growth of bacterial slime that can

cause harmful effects on the coastal environment (New Zealand Ministry

of Environment, 2003).

8
In addition where there is an overwhelming amount of wastewater,

available dissolved oxygen will be used up resulting in deoxygenated

water columns. This can have adverse impacts on fish and other forms of

oxygen-dependent life. As a result, it is equally important for wastewater

to be treated in order to reduce as much organic material as possible.

1.3.2. Suspended solids

The portion of organic material that does not dissolve but remains

suspended in water is known as suspended solids. When untreated

effluent is discharged into rivers or a water body, accompanying solids

will tend to settle in quiet spots where there is no or little water flow. In

extreme cases, this would result in an anaerobic condition, which can be

harmful to fish, and other oxygen dependent life forms at the bottom of

streams and creeks.

1.3.3. Dissolved salts

The most significant salts in wastewater are nitrates and phosphates.

These naturally occur in coastal waters to some extent. Nitrate is derived

from the breakdown of organic nitrogen in protein waste matter, and the

oxidation of ammonia in urine. Phosphates are present in detergents

used in washing and laundry, and are also produced by organic

breakdown. Nitrates and phosphates are essential elements for growth.

When nitrates and phosphates are discharged into natural waters they

fertilise the growth of microscopic algae and seaweeds.

9
Coral reefs flourish in clean, nutrient poor waters and are very sensitive

to changes in their environmental conditions such as increased levels of

freshwater, sediment and nutrients (Castro and Huber, 2003). Slight

increases in nitrate levels in coastal waters can lead to growth of dense

mats of algae and seaweed on reef areas. The algae often overgrow and

smother the reef, preventing fish and other reef inhabitants from finding

food and shelter (Goreau and Thacker, 1994; McCook, 1999). Increases

in phosphate levels can lead to brittleness of coral and crumbling (Mosley

and Aalbersberg, 2003).

1.3.4. Bacteria and viruses

The human gut produces a huge quantity of bacteria, which are excreted

as part of faeces on a daily basis. The most common and easily measured

organism is the faecal coliform bacterium. This is called an indicator

because its presence indicates the presence of faecal matter from warm-

blooded animals.

The discharge of non-disinfected sewage effluent into the marine

environment may result in bacterial contamination of waters and

organisms. Many of the faecal coliform bacteria in human waste are

harmless. However, there are disease organisms or pathogens than can

cause harm to human health. These include bacteria such as typhoid, or

viruses such as hepatitis B. Direct contact with these pathogens or

10
pollution of the water supply can result in infections. This poses a public

health risk (i.e. nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, ear, and throat infections)

to people who use the waters for recreation or fish harvesting (New

Zealand Ministry of Environment, 2003).

Moreover relatively high concentrations of pathogens in water can also

make an area unsafe for swimming and recreation. A likely effect of

direct contact with polluted water is skin irritation and scratchiness.

Therefore it is important that levels of faecal coliform do not exceed

recreational exposure standards.

1.4. Status of wastewater legislation and regulation in Fiji

Current legislation or regulations on waste discharges into the

environment in Fiji are either inadequate or absent. Subsequently there

is no agency that consistently monitors the quality of Fiji‘s coastal

waters. However there are some upgraded existing waste disposal

practices which ensure that new tourism developments undergo

Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) that encourage proper waste

treatment.

The new Environment Management Bill (2004) which was enacted by the

Parliament of Fiji on 17 March 2005 requires a tourism facility to obtain

a permit to discharge waste or pollutants into the environment (Article

35) and fines up to FJ$250,000 if the facility is found to be polluting

11
(Article 45). The Bill also requires a tourism facility to establish an

environmental management committee (Article 16). Thus, it is in the best

interest of prospective stakeholders to invest in upgrading their

wastewater treatment systems and undertake environmental monitoring

not only in terms of improving their surrounding environment but also to

comply with the new legislation.

1.5. Wastewater treatment practices

Wastewater management practices have different stages including

primary, secondary and tertiary treatments. The initial treatment of

wastewater is referred to as ‗primary treatment‘, which focuses on the

separation of solids from liquid in order to reduce suspended solids and

biological oxygen demand from wastewater effluents. Good examples of

this stage include settling tanks in sewage treatment plants and

household septic tanks (Figure 9). The process allows solids to settle at

the bottom of the septic tank while organic matter is digested by

bacteria. Sludge removal depends on the size and level of the tank. From

this stage, pathogens are filtered and ammonia-like material is converted

to nitrate through nitrification bacteria (Castro and Huber, 2003).

However since nitrate can flow easily through sand and groundwater

without degrading, only 15 percent of nitrogen from wastewater is

removed from septic tanks. Thus primary treatment alone is insufficient

(UNEP, 2002).

12
 Figure 9: A household septic tank exemplifying “primary treatment”

The second stage of effluent treatment can be defined as ‗secondary

treatment‘. This process aims to remove biological oxygen demand (BOD)

and bacteria. Widely used examples that utilise aerobic bacteria to

decompose organic matter include trickling filters (wastewater is sprayed

over rocks or plastic media that are coated with a slimy layer of bacteria),

activated sludge (wastewater mixed with bacteria containing sludge and

air), and oxidation/algal ponds (large ponds where organic matter is

consumed by bacteria using oxygen which is supplied algal growth)

(Castro and Huber, 2003; Thaman and Sykes, 2005). Another classic

example is constructed wetlands, which provide secondary treatment

through advanced nutrient removal as a result of denitrification (UNEP,

2002).

13
Tertiary treatment is the third stage of wastewater management. Tertiary

treatment covers a whole range of processes including disinfection,

nutrient removal and removal of anything that has not been dealt with at

the secondary stage but is deemed necessary to get out. Classic examples

are tertiary ponds and wetlands (UNEP, 2002). In certain cases, before

treated effluent is discharged into the coastal environment or sprayed

onto land vegetation the effluent is further disinfected using ultraviolet

light, ozone, or chlorine (Thaman and Sykes, 2005).

Figure 10: A basic flow chart of the wastewater treatment train

1.6. Implications of the study

This study was derived purposely to monitor the efficiency of specific

village and hotel wastewater treatment initiatives along the Coral Coast

of Fiji, particularly the subsurface flow constructed wetland at Tagaqe

Village and the wastewater management system at Crusoe‘s Retreat to

determine their likely effects on nutrients in coastal water and viability

for future development in other villages and tourist resorts throughout

Fiji and the Pacific. Results from this study will act as baseline

information on the performance of wastewater treatment systems

14
relevant to coastal villages and tourist resorts in Fiji and elsewhere

throughout the Pacific.

Cost-effective treatment plants, such as the constructed subsurface flow

wetland at Tagaqe Village and the wastewater treatment plant at

Crusoe‘s Retreat are the first of their kinds to be constructed and

monitored in Fiji. If they are effective and viable then there are

possibilities that they can be promoted and further developed in other

Pacific Island countries.

1.7. Research objectives

The central aim of this project was to evaluate the effects of wastewater

treatment initiatives on water quality in coastal waters along the Coral

Coast of Fiji. This was accomplished with the following objectives:

a) To determine influent and effluent water quality parameters including

temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen, total suspended solids, pH,

conductivity, biological oxygen demand, and coliform levels from

wastewater treatment systems.

b) To evaluate nutrient levels from untreated and treated outlets

especially nitrate, nitrite, ammonia, total nitrogen, total Kjeldahl

nitrogen, phosphate and total phosphorus from the Tagaqe Village

constructed wetland and Crusoe‘s Retreat wastewater treatment plant

wastewater treatment systems to determine the levels of removal

efficiency.

15
c) To compare water quality trends and nutrient levels in Coral Coast

nearshore waters adjacent to tourist hotels and villages. This was

achieved by comparing data for this present study with baseline

monitoring data obtained by the Institute of Applied Science

researchers.

d) To analyse the actual pollution level along the Votua Village Creek, as

a typical Coral Coast freshwater stream that is utilised for piggery

farming, with relatively considerable wastewater discharge from both

human and animal sources.

e) To set up an ex-situ greywater treatment model drum experiment

mimicking on-site drum trial at Votua Village with different substrates

including gravel, sandy soil, coconut husk and shells, and coral

rubble to be dosed with known concentrations of prepared artificial

greywater solutions, and then analyse effluent samples from the drum

systems, in order to understand the potential efficiency in an in-situ

system.

1.8. Organisation of the thesis

This section outlines the thesis overview in order to assist readers to

locate appropriate chapters, which are of interest to them. The thesis

consists of eight major chapters excluding other sections such as the

Abstract, Acknowledgement, Dedication, List of Figures, List of Tables,

Abbreviations, Table of Contents, Bibliography and Appendices. Chapter

1 entails the Introduction; Chapter 2 consists of a Background of Fiji

16
Islands and the Coral Coast in relation to water quality status; Chapter 3

comprises the Literature review of nutrient enrichment impacts on

aquatic systems and water quality standards for normal coral growth;

Chapter 4 describes the different wastewater treatment initiatives

monitored; Chapter 5 contains the Methodology; Results in Chapter 6;

Discussion section in Chapter 7; and Conclusions in Chapter 8.

17
Chapter 2 Background of Fiji and the Coral Coast

2.1. Introduction

This chapter reviews the background of the Fiji group, particularly the

study site on the Coral Coast of Fiji. Aspects covered include location,

coastal zone, climate and hydrology, human impacts on coastal

environments, water quality standards for normal coral growth and

recreation, and the status of water quality in Fiji.

2.2. Fiji Islands and Viti Levu

2.2.1. Location

Fiji is an island nation in the South Pacific Ocean which occupies an

archipelago of more than 322 islands excluding atolls and reefs, of which

106 are permanently inhabited, and 522 smaller islets (Vuki et al., 2000;

Singh, 2001). The Fiji group is situated between 15° and 22°S latitude

and 174°E and 177°W longitude (Figure 11).

Most of Fiji‘s land area consists of two large mountainous islands that

account for 87 percent of the country‘s total human population. The two

major islands are Viti Levu with an area of 10,400 km2, and Vanua Levu

with an area of 5,540 km2 (Watling and Chape, 1992). The capital of Fiji

Islands is Suva, which is located on the southeastern side of Viti Levu.

18
 Figure 11: Location of the Fiji Island group

2.2.2. The coastal zone of Fiji

The Fiji Islands is surrounded by a vast maze of reefs, particularly on the

southwest, northwest and northeast coasts of Viti Levu and extending to

other locations throughout the Fiji group. Well developed barrier reefs

are common around the many islands off the northwest coast of Viti

Levu. Sediments produced are largely derived from broken corals,

calcareous algae, molluscan fragments and foraminifera (Maharaj, 1998;

Singh, 2001).

Similarly, the shallow coastal zone of Fiji comprises of three major,

interrelated habitat types: marine algae and seagrass; large areas of

19
mangroves; and extensive coral reefs. The marine resources include

approximately 1000 coral reefs with representatives of all major reef

types (Vuki et al., 2000). Although marine biodiversity is lower than in

the ‗coral triangle‘ of Indonesia, the Philippines, Papua New Guinea and

northeastern Australia, Fiji does support approximately 200 species of

coral (Veron, 2000). Furthermore it has been estimated that Fiji has

approximately 1200 marine fish species (Vuki et al., 2000).

Fiji‘s population in 2000 was above 775,000 and increasing rapidly

(South and Skelton, 2000). Since much of this population is

concentrated around the coast, the expanding development of coastal

areas and exploitation of the reefs are resulting in a suite of threats to

the coral reefs including siltation, eutrophication and pollution (Coral

Cay, 2005). For example, some of the natural landscape has been

converted for agriculture, particularly sugar cane, which impacts the

coastal environment via soil erosion leading to elevated sediment loads

smothering coral colonies. Further erosion is also caused by the removal

of mangroves to reclaim land for urban development. Such expansion of

urban areas has also led to pollution of the coastal zone because of

inadequate sewage treatment and waste disposal. Industrial point

sources have also been shown to contribute to decreasing water quality

(Coral Cay, 2001).

20
Specifically Viti Levu has about 750 km of coastline, of which over 94

percent comprises fringing reefs and mangroves. The remaining 6

percent consists of open or exposed coast, without natural reef or

mangrove protection (Maharaj, 1998). Moreover, half of Viti Levu‘s

coastline entails undeveloped areas with mangroves and reef fringes with

low near sea elevations of less than 3 m above mean sea level. Coastal

settlements and agricultural developments account for about 23 percent

of the Viti Levu coastline (Maharaj, 1998).

2.2.3. Climate and hydrology

The countries within the Pacific Ocean experience a variety of weather

and climate due to their wide ranging geographical locations, which

comprise both tropical and semi-temperate latitudes (Rapaport, 1999).

The dominant climate feature that affects the Fiji region is the South

Pacific Convergence Zone (SPCZ), a zone associated with high rainfall,

which fluctuates northeast and southwest (Salinger et al., 1995).

Fiji has a tropical maritime climate that is generally pleasant year-round,

lacking excessive temperature variation. Due to the easterly and

southeasterly trade winds predominance, the climatic conditions vary

from moderately hot and moderately dry on the leeward side of Viti Levu

to warm and wet on the windward side of the island (Pahalad, 1995).

21
During all seasons the common winds over Fiji are the trade winds from

the east to southeast. On the coast of the two main islands, Viti Levu and

Vanua Levu, day-time sea breezes blow across with great regularity.

Winds over Fiji are generally light or moderate; stronger winds are far

less common and are most likely to occur in the period June to

November when the trade winds are most persistent. However, tropical

cyclones and depressions can cause high winds, especially from

November to April when the trades die down (Koushy and Leetmaa,

1989).

In Fiji there are two major seasons including the wet, hot season lasting

from November through April and the warm, dry season, lasting from

May through October. The main island of Viti Levu is drier and more

temperate on the western side (e.g. Sigatoka to Rakiraki). The eastern

part where Suva is located is known for its wet and cloudy weather. The

islands off the coast are generally sunny and more stable than the

mainland particularly the Mamanuca Group off the west side of Viti

Levu.

At lower levels around Fiji the air temperatures are fairly uniform. In the

lee of the mountains on the largest islands however, the day time

temperatures are often 1° to 2°C above those on the windward sides.

Also, the humidity on the lee side tends to be somewhat lower. Due to

22
the influence of the surrounding ocean, the changes in the temperature

from day to day and season to season are relatively small. The average

temperatures change only about 2° to 4°C between the coolest months

(July and August) and the warmest months (January to February).

Around the coast, the average night time temperatures can be as low as

18°C and the average day time temperatures can be as high as 32°C. In

the central parts of the main islands, average night-time temperatures

can be as low as 15ºC (Fiji Meterological Service, 2004).

Similarly, water temperature fluctuations in Fiji are negligible averaging

around 26oC throughout the year making its crystal blue waters perfect

for snorkelling and other water activities.

With reference to rainfall, it is highly variable and strongly influenced by

topography, with the prevailing southeast trade winds bringing moisture

onshore and causing heavy showers in the mountain regions. These

trades are often saturated with moisture, and any high landmass lying in

their paths receive much of the precipitation. The mountains of Viti Levu

and Vanua Levu create wet climatic zones on their windward sides and

dry climatic zones on their leeward sides resulting in wet and dry zones

with that are fairly well defined. On the outer islands and other small

islands nearby the climatic differences from one part to another of

individual islands is insignificant (Fiji Meteorological Service, 2004).

23
Fiji‘s wet season is controlled largely by the north and south movements

of the South Pacific Convergence Zone, the main rainfall producing

system for the region. The wet season is characterised by heavy, brief

local showers and contributes most of Fiji's annual rainfall. Rainfall is

usually abundant during the wet season, especially over the larger

islands, and it is often deficient during the rest of the year, particularly

in the "dry zone" on the northwestern sides of the main islands (Fiji

Meteorological Service, 2004).

Annual rainfall in the dry zones averages around 2000mm (79 inch),

whereas in the wet zones, it ranges from 3000mm (118 inches) around

the coast to 6000mm (236 inches) on the mountainous sites. The smaller

islands receive various amounts according to their location and size,

ranging from around 1500mm (59 inches) to 3500mm (138 inches). The

southeastern parts of the main islands, generally receive monthly total

rainfall of 150mm (6 inches) during the dry season, and 400mm (16

inches) during the wettest months. These parts of the islands have rain

on about six out of ten days for the dry season, and about eight out of

ten days for the wet season. The northwestern parts of these islands are

in the rain shadow and receive generally less than 100mm (4 inches) per

month during the dry period. The variation in the monthly totals between

the two zones during the wet season is little (Fiji Meteorological Service,

2003 & 2004).

24
On average, around 10 to 15 cyclones per decade affect some part of Fiji

with a few causing severe damage. Specific locations may not be directly

affected for several years but the dominant northwest to southeast

cyclone track gives some increased risk of damage in the outlying

northwest island groups. Large-scale flooding in Fiji is mostly associated

with the passage of a tropical cyclone or depression resulting in

prolonged heavy rainfall. Normally urban centres situated near the

mouth of the four main rivers on the main island are affected the most.

Localised flash flooding during the wet season is common on a small

scale. Storm tides and heavy swells can also result in flooding of low-

lying coastal areas during the pass of a severe cyclone (Fiji Meteorological

Service, 2004).

Moreover, droughts in Fiji can be closely linked to the ENSO (El Nino

Southern Oscillation) phenomenon, which results in generally below

average rainfall for Fiji. A strong ENSO episode is likely to result in a

major drought over the country, as happened during 1982 - 1983 and

1997 - 1998 ENSO events. Otherwise, even in a normal year the rainfall

in the "dry zones" of the country is so low during the Dry Season that an

incident of below average rainfall for a few months can cause a drought

effect (Koushy and Leetmaa, 1989).

25
2.3. The Coral Coast

2.3.1. Location of study sites

The principal study site for this research was along the Coral Coast. The

Coral Coast is the name given to the southwest coastline of Fiji‘s largest

island, Viti Levu Island, which is a popular tourist retreat and

destination for a Fiji vacation. It is located about 190 kilometres from

Suva on the Queen's Highway between Nadi and Suva (Coral Cay, 2005).

Along the Coral Coast are a handful of large resorts (including the Fijian

Shangri-La, Naviti, Warwick, Hideaway, Crusoe‘s and Outrigger) and

many medium and small resorts. Between the resorts are large stretches

of uninhabited rainforest with occasional coastal villages. The coastline is

a combination of bays, reefs, beaches, rocky outcrops and mangrove

forests. Sigatoka is the Coral Coast's main town.

For the purpose of this study, the Coral Coast is only defined as the

coastline between Crusoe‘s Retreat near Namaqumaqua Village in Serua

Province and Fijian Shangri-La Resort near Sigatoka Town in Nadroga.

These areas represent the continuation of fringing and back reef platform

that typifies this coastline. Attractive reef and beach features combined

with moderate rainfall stimulated rapid development along the Coral

Coast after the sealing of the Queens Highway in the early 1970s

(Thaman, 2002). This has resulted in erosion, habitat loss, elevated

26
siltation, pollution, and the degradation of near shore habitats, such as

mangroves, seagrass beds and coral reefs. Visitors at tourist resorts

make use of the coastline for activities such as scuba diving, snorkelling,

glass bottom boat rides, fishing, kayaking, and sailing. Tourism forms an

integral part of the local economy as a number of local people work in

hotels or related industries (Coral Cay, 2005).

Small settlements and households are scattered along the coastline,

however the majority of the population live in villages of between 100 and

300 people or in the market town Sigatoka, which is central to the region

and houses more than 8000 people. In addition to tourism, the fishing

grounds of the Coral Coast region provide for a large proportion of the

local diet (Coral Cay, 2005).

The southwest coastline of Viti Levu is steeply shelving offshore; the

200m depth contour lies approximately 1km from shore. Fringing reef

extends along the Coral Coast for approximately 63 kilometres and up to

1000 metres offshore. Behind the break zone, back reef habitat extends

over the comparatively flat platform towards shore. The continuity of the

reef is periodically broken by channels cut through the reef due to fresh

water influx from rivers and streams and sediment deposition. These

channels provide suitable habitat for corals, other sessile forms, and

their associated communities below the spring low tide (Coral Cay, 2005).

27
In particular, the two primary wastewater treatment initiatives that were

monitored as part of this study include a subsurface flow constructed

wetland at Tagaqe Village near Hideaway Resort, and a cost effective

commercial wastewater management system at Crusoe‘s Retreat near

Namaqumaqua Village (Figure 12). However, constant water quality

monitoring on general sites along the Coral Coast as a follow up on the

findings of Mosley and Aalbersberg (2003) was also undertaken for other

locations (Figure 13 and Table 1).

Figure 12: Map of Coral Coast showing the location of the two primary wastewater
treatment systems being monitored (monitored systems circled).

28
 Figure 13: Location of general Coral Coast sampling sites, villages and hotels
[after Mosley and Aalbersberg, 2003].

Table 1: List of general Coral Coast water quality sampling sites, similar to Mosley
and Aalbersberg (2003)
Site Number Location
1 Fijian Resort – ocean side
2 Outrigger resort-western side
3 Tubakula resort-eastern side
4 West of Navola Village
5 East of Votua Village
6 Tagaqe Village
7 Sovi Bay Beach
8 Hideaway resort-western side
9 Front of Naviti resort
10 West of Komave Village
11 Tabua Sands resort
12 Vatukarasa Bay
13 Malevu Village-eastern side
14 Crows Nest resort
15 Korotogo Bridge
16 Matai Kandavu Beach
17 Between Malevu/Vatukarasa Villages
18 Warwick Hotel

29
2.3.2. Human impacts on the coastal environment
Human impacts on the coastal aquatic systems in Fiji are becoming

evident. Poor sanitation and inadequate waste treatment and disposal

practices are visible in most places, resulting in significant degradation

of coastal ecosystems both in rural and urban centres (Singh, 2001).

In addition, much pollution derived from industrial wastes, agricultural

runoffs, wastewater effluents, and faecal inputs are likely to be trapped

in enclosed, slow flowing, shallow water muddy environments, especially

adjacent to villages, towns, industries, or tourist hotels. The problem is

disastrous when fish stocks that are important for fisheries are depleted

as a result of loss of certain inter-related ecosystems and overfishing.

Shellfish can also assimilate toxic pollutants over a period of time thus

increasing the toxicology effects on humans (Singh, 2001).

In Fiji, particularly along the Coral Coast the principal contributor to

human impacts on coastal environments can be attributed to the

inadequate wastewater treatment and disposal from sources including

tourist resorts and hotels, coastal village households, piggery, and

agricultural runoffs through rivers and creeks. Therefore, strengthening

of legislation and self motivation is paramount to achieve a healthier

coastal environment (Tanner and Gold, 2004).

30
2.4. Water quality standards for normal coral growth

Research on coral reefs in other locations has found that the critical

nutrient levels considered healthy for coral reefs without being overgrown

by algae are approximately 1.0 mol/L of nitrogen (N) as nitrate,

ammonia or nitrite (14 g/L N) and 0.1 mol/L of phosphorus (P) as

orthophosphate and organophosphate (3 g/L P) (Bell et al., 1987; Bell,

1992; Goreau and Thacker, 1994).

However, recent studies (Blake and Johnson, 1988; Brodie et al., 1989)

on Australian nearshore fringing reefs in good condition have found

relatively high nitrogen levels within the range of 1.5 - 2 mol/L. The

required concentration of dissolved phosphates found by Crossland and

Barnes (1983) for normal coral growth was within the range of 0.11 -

0.32 mol/L. However, phosphate levels as high as 0.74 mol/L had

been reported from studies of Australian fringing reefs (Blake and

Johnson, 1988).

For relatively unpolluted open ocean waters, nitrate concentrations

usually range from 0.5 – 4.8 mol/L (cited in Naidu et al., 1991). Nitrite

levels for unpolluted waters often varied from 0 – 0.22 mol/L (Wetzel,

1975). Besides that, ammonia levels are a better indicator for sewage

pollution and anaerobic conditions compared to nitrate and nitrite

(Hawker and Connell, 1992). For the Astrolabe lagoon where there is

31
insignificant pollution, levels of ammonia obtained were in the range 0.05

– 0.20 mol/L. Nitrite concentrations ranged from 0.05 – 0.24 mol/L

(Yamamuro et al., 1991). This lagoon represents a relatively unpolluted

site.

According to Wetzel (1975), total phosphorus levels in unpolluted surface

waters range between 0.32 mol/L and 1.6 mol/L. In freshwater rivers

and creeks, the critical total phosphorus levels fall in the range 1.0 – 3.2

mol/L. With regards to dissolved phosphates, the range of

concentrations in unpolluted natural waters extends over a wide range

from 0.01 mol/L to 2.1 mmol/L in some cases. Values obtained for the

Astrolabe lagoon seagrass bed was lower at 0.08 – 0.15 mol/L

(Yamamuro et al., 1991).

Moreover, in open ocean seawater production is thought of as being

influenced by the mole ratio of concentrations of nitrogen to phosphorus

in the water. For average seawater, the nitrogen (N) to phosphorus (P)

mole ratio is about 15 N: 1 P which reflects the ratio of their utilisation

by phytoplankton (Collier, 1970). For nearshore waters the expected

nitrogen to phosphorus mole ratio was found to be around 10 N: 1 P

(Blake and Johnson, 1988; Mosley and Aalbersberg, 2003).

32
Furthermore, there are currently no country specific water quality

standards in Fiji as most authorities are using the World Health

Organisation (WHO) Drinking Water Quality guidelines (WHO, 2004). But

in Australia and New Zealand, the recommended water quality standards

for nearshore waters to support normal coral growth and for recreation

are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2: Summary of recommended standards for nearshore waters to support

coral reefs and recreation in Australia and New Zealand [ANZECC, 2000]

Parameter Coastal water quality standards

pH 8.0 – 8.4
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) >6
Clarity (m) >1.2
Total nitrogen (µmol/L) <7.14
Total phosphorus (µmol/L) <0.48
Nitrate and nitrite (µmol/L) 0.14 – 0.57
Phosphate (µmol/L) 0.16
Faecal coliform (counts/100ml) <150

2.5. Status of water quality in Fiji and the Coral Coast

A water quality study on unpolluted nearshore waters in Fiji‘s Great

Astrolabe Reef and lagoon has revealed low average nutrient

concentrations approximately 0.74 micromoles/litre (mol/L) of nitrate,

and 0.07 mol/L of phosphate. The nitrogen (N) to phosphorus (P) mole

ratio was around 10 (Morrison et al., 1992).

Another nutrient study of moderate polluted coastal waters along the

Coral Coast in Fiji (Mosley and Aalbersberg, 2003) found that levels for

nitrate and phosphate exceeded thresholds considered harmful to coral

33
reef ecosystems. Furthermore, nutrient levels were highest at sites

located near hotels, other populated coastal locations and in rivers. The

study has yielded nitrate concentrations ranging from 0.1 – 7.01 mol/L

with a mean of 1.69 mol/L for seawater samples. The nitrate values for

river water samples ranged from 1.9 – 24.7 mol/L with a mean of 10.8

mol/L. The phosphate levels for seawater varied between 0.07 – 1.51

mol/L with an average of 0.21 mol/L. For freshwater samples,

phosphate concentrations ranged from 0.50 – 3.40 mol/L with a mean

of 1.30 mol/L. The mole ratio of nitrogen to phosphorus for seawater

samples was 8 whilst for freshwater the mean N: P ratio was 12.

In addition to coastal development, fishing in Fiji, which occurs at both

traditional subsistence and commercial scales, has significantly reduced

the populations of many species. Although data are scarce, even

traditional techniques, such as hand-lines, fish traps and gill nets, in

combination with commercial catches have led to over-fishing of many

reef areas (Coral Cay, 2005). For example, an earlier study by Jennings

and Polunin (1996) found low abundances of certain highly targeted fish

species, such as Groupers and Emperors. Over-fishing of prized

invertebrate species such as Tridacna clams and Sea Cucumbers has

also been reported close to urban areas and is thought to have increased

since the introduction of scuba apparatus and escalating demands of

foreign markets (Vuki et al., 2000).

34
Fiji is the world‘s second largest exporter of live reef products for the

aquarium trade (Wilkinson, 2002) with a well-established industry that

has been operating for over 16 years exporting coral reef fishes and curio

coral (Lovell, 2001). The anthropogenic threats to reef health have been

compounded by natural and semi natural threats such as storm damage,

outbreaks of the coral eating Crown-Of-Thorns starfish (Acanthaster

planci) and coral bleaching events (Coral Cay, 2005). Bleaching events

occur during occasional periods when climate conditions raise seawater

temperatures and solar irradiance and cause a paling of coral tissue from

the loss of symbiotic zooxanthellae (Brown, 1997; Westmacott et al.,

2000).

A major coral bleaching event occurred in Fiji in March and April 2000

and had large-scale effects throughout the country, including the

Mamanucas region. For instance, South and Skelton (2000) reported

bleaching of up to 90 percent of coral colonies with up to 40 percent

mortality (Wilkinson, 2002), although there was significant spatial

variation in its severity throughout Fijian waters. There is evidence that

many of the corals recovered but mortality was certainly significant

although it is difficult to quantify because of the limited long-term

monitoring data available (Coral Cay, 2005). A second less severe

bleaching event occurred in the Mamanucas in April 2002 but did not

35
significantly alter the percentage cover of live hard coral (Walker et al.,

2002).

According to a recent study of the Coral Coast in Fiji (Tanner and Gold,

2004), nitrogen export from the coastal land use practices assessed in

that study have increased by more than 60 percent in the past 20 years.

The study extrapolated that if nitrogen control measures are not adopted,

at the current growth rate of 2.7 percent per annum for village and

tourist populations, nitrogen export in 2014 (e.g. 37,500 kg/year) will be

more than double the 1984 levels of 16,800 kg/year. However with the

adoption of widespread nitrogen control practices and initiatives,

nitrogen exports in 2014 (e.g. 17,500 kg/year) could be comparable to

1984 levels even at the current annual Coral Coast human growth rate of

2.7 percent.

The study indicated that around 60 percent of nitrogen export to the

Coral Coast from key coastal sources excluding rivers and streams can

be derived from village wastewater. Small piggeries account for 30

percent of nitrogen inputs while the remaining 10 percent can be

attributed to tourist resort and hotel wastewater (Tanner and Gold,

2004).

36
Moreover a Japanese International Cooperation Agency (JICA) funded

review of wastewater management by tourist resorts on the Suva, Coral

Coast, Nadi and Mamanuca areas has found that the standard of

wastewater in Fiji resorts is poor. Results showed that only 5 out of 11

sewage treatment plants (STPs) and 3 out of 5 septic tanks assessed have

satisfied recommended levels for biological oxygen demand (BOD). For

total suspended solids, only 3 out of 11 STPs and 4 out of 5 septic tanks

analysed achieved World Health Organization (WHO) recommended

standards. With regards to faecal coliform and total nitrogen, 4 out of 11

STPs complied with recommended standards of 200 counts/100ml

(c/100ml) or less and 714 µmol/L or less, respectively. The

recommended level for total phosphorus in a STP is 32 µmol/L or less.

Unfortunately, only 1 out of 11 STPs sampled has fulfilled this

requirement (Thaman and Sykes, 2005).

Research on the highly populated nearshore waters of Suva Harbour and

Laucala Bay by Naidu & Morrison (1988) and Naidu et al. (1991) showed

that the concentration of nitrogen as nitrate (NO3-N) in the harbour

ranged from <0.7 µmol/L to 2.5 µmol/L. The total phosphorus

concentrations (PO4-P) ranged from 0.19 – 2.2 µmol/L which was

comparable to results by Campbell et al., (1982).

37
In general, clarity of the Suva Port waters in 1987 – 1988 ranged from

0.5m to 5m with a mean of 1.7m (Naidu et al., 1991), which has

decreased significantly from the observed 3.1m in 1982 (Campbell et al.).

Temperature variations within the water column were less than 0.5 C

and seldom exceeded 1 C. Salinity of surface water in the Laucala Bay

and Suva Harbour varied from 7 parts per thousand (ppt) to 35 ppt.

Respective mean nitrate and phosphate levels of 17.29 µmol/L and 5.61

µmol/L were also attained for the Suva Port nearshore waters by Naidu

et al., (1991). Dissolved oxygen level in the Suva Port in 2003 ranged

from 1.8 mg/L to 8.2 mg/L with a mean of 6.1 mg/L (MS312 Class,

unpublished Report).

Campbell et al. (1982) found extremely high faecal coliform levels from

various rivers discharging into Laucala Bay, especially during periods of

heavy rainfall when septic tank effluent and sewage effluent from pit

latrines seep into creeks and rivers. In 1981 when population was not as

high as today, sewage population was already significant. Sanitary

surveys by Corless (1995) and a Marine Pollution (MS312) Class in 2003

also found alarming faecal pollution in the Suva nearshore area (Table 3).

38
 Table 3: Comparison of the mean faecal coliform counts around Suva nearshore
waters and rivers from different studies (cfu/100ml)
Site Campbell et al., (1982) Corless (1995) MS312 Class 2003
Vatuwaqa River 5,100 20,100 14,900
Raiwaqa Outfall 350,000 not assessed not assessed
Samabula River 830 not assessed not assessed
Nasinu River 4,200 not assessed not assessed
Rewa River 110 not assessed not assessed
Nabukalou Creek not assessed 6,267 10,000
Walu Bay bridge not assessed 670 >20,000
Tamavua River not assessed 3,700 9,400
Navesi River not assessed 1,500 1,900
Vatuwaqa I/estate not assessed 10 29,000
Nasese foreshore not assessed 100 17,600
MSP jetty not assessed 23 110
Kings wharf not assessed 140 1,700

Another study of the Port of Suva by Tamata et al. (1992) found variable

results for different water quality parameters as summarised in Table 4.

Table 4: Water quality results for the Port of Suva in 1992 as observed by Tamata
et al.
Parameter Range Mean
Temperature (C) 22 – 28.5 27.7
pH 7- 8.5 8.0
Salinity (ppt) 0.5 – 35 27.6
Clarity (m) 0–3 1.9
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) 3.2 – 9.8 6.0
Total Kjeldhal nitrogen (µmol/L) 3.57 – 271.4 60.7
Nitrates (µmol/L) 0 – 98.57 5.47
Nitrite (µmol/L) 0 – 6.02 0.59
Ammonia (µmol/L) 0 – 184.4 6.61
Total phosphorus (µmol/L) 0.1 – 14.2 1.63
Phosphate (µmol/L) 0 – 10.32 1.26
Faecal coliform (counts/100ml) 0 – 8.5 x 106 156,917

Furthermore an assessment of nutrients in Laucala Bay from 2003 –

2004 found nitrate values between 0.87 µmol/L and 27.05 µmol/L with a
mean of 1.77 µmol/L. Phosphate varied between 0.46 – 11.01 µmol/L
with a mean of 0.95 µmol/L (Singh & Mosley, unpublished). Another
survey in 2004 yielded mean nitrate and phosphate levels of 3.68 µmol/L
and 1.20 µmol/L, respectively (Taloiburi, unpublished).

39
 Chapter 3 Nutrient Enhancement and Coastal Waters

3.1. Introduction
This chapter outlines the potential effects of nutrient enrichment on

coral reefs, as observed from previous case studies elsewhere. This is of

uttermost importance because it highlights the deleterious implications

that coral reef ecosystems can face if proper wastewater management

practices and initiatives are not adopted. Sections covered include

importance of coastal aquatic systems, potential effects of nutrient

enhancement on coral reefs with proven case studies of the Kaneohe Bay

in Hawaii, the Florida Keys, and the Discovery Bay in Jamaica.

3.2. Importance of coastal aquatic systems

Coastal aquatic systems, including estuarine and marine nearshore

environments, deserve human attention for three primary reasons. First,

healthy coastal systems serve as shelter and food for numerous plants

and animals that are vital for biodiversity. Another reason for

maintaining coastal environments can be attributed to aquatic systems

being utilized for commercial and recreational activities. The third

implication is that any coastal or inland activities can pose threats to the

health of coastal ecosystems (Hauxwell et al., 2001).

A distinguishable difference between a coastal system and an offshore

oceanic environment is that a coastal zone is where inputs of nutrients

and other materials from the land are a key feature, whilst an offshore

40
boundary begins from a zone that receives insignificant influence from

land inputs. Consistent loading from land activities into coastal

environments tends to support rapid growth and reproduction of primary

producers and consumers, making these areas the most highly

productive in the world (Taylor et al., 1995). Research shows that

although coastal waters represent only 10 percent of the total ocean

surface, they account for 20 percent of total production and 50 percent

of total fish production in the oceans (Ryther, 1969).

Figure 14: Mangroves are a classic example of a coastal aquatic system

In general, coastal aquatic ecosystems (Figure 14) including coral reefs,

mangroves and seagrass beds are directly degraded by natural

disturbances (Short and Echeverria, 1996) and human activities (Sargent

et al., 1995) even though the linkage process may involve multiple steps

(Kemp et al., 1983). But it is the indirect effects of excess nutrient

addition from watersheds to coastal waters that are cited as the most

41
pervasive human impacts on coastal areas and coral reefs (GESAMP,

1990; Short et al., 1993; National Research Council, 1994; Valiela et al.,

1997).

Of all the essential nutrients, nitrogen and phosphorus are the two key

nutrients that often limit the growth of primary producers. Hence, excess

addition to coastal waters will yield genuine concerns, as they are likely

to influence the survival of corals. In freshwater environments,

phosphorus is often the limiting nutrient implying that the addition of

phosphorus stimulates primary productivity. Nitrogen is often limiting in

marine environments, which means that loading of nitrogen will boost

growth and reproduction of primary producers (Hauxwell et al., 2001).

However, it is difficult to accurately predict the amount of nutrients that

can be safely added to coastal waters, despite studies showing the

existence of links between nutrient supply, algal production, and

degradation of coral reefs (Lapointe and Clark, 1992; Goreau and

Thacker, 1994; McCook, 1999; Szmant, 2002). Thus, it is essential for

scientists, governments, non government bodies, managers and

community members to work together to develop research initiatives and

monitoring programs that detect and predict small, relevant changes

caused by increased nutrient loads (Hauxwell et al., 2001).

42
3.3. Potential effects of nutrient enrichment on coral reefs

Coral reefs are highly productive with a considerable biodiversity (Goreau

and Thacker, 1994). They are extremely important in the Pacific for

fisheries, tourism, shoreline protection, source of protein, medicine,

employment, and income for many coastal people (Mosley and

Aalbersberg, 2003).

Despite coral reefs being more productive and species rich, they are very

sensitive to elevated levels of nutrients. Increased development of the

coastline and utilisation of coastal resources over the past years have

contributed to significant degradation of reef habitats and loss of species

diversity (Hodgson, 1999).

Maintaining the health of coral reefs within the South Pacific is therefore

necessary in protecting coastal infrastructure (seawalls, wharves, roads,

houses and hotels) and employment (in fisheries, tourism and services).

In recent years, several reef systems throughout the Pacific have

significantly deteriorated compromising the valuable ecological services

that reefs provide (Goreau and Thacker, 1994). Degraded reefs have most

corals replaced by fleshy algae thus, supporting only a limited fish

population and virtually lacking both growing corals, which break waves

in shallow water and sand producing algae such as Halimeda that helps

43
to renourish a small fraction of beaches (Bell, 1992). These impacts have

been attributed to various factors such as eutrophication (increased

growth of algae due to elevated nutrient levels in water), human physical,

increased erosion on land and siltation of reefs, hurricanes, overfishing,

climate change, and water pollution.

Nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus are required for the growth

of phytoplankton and other algae, which form the base of the ocean food

chain. Inorganic nitrogen exists predominantly as ammonia, nitrate and

nitrite whilst phosphorus is present as orthophosphate and

organophosphate. These two nutrients exist in seawater naturally.

However, when levels exceed concentrations considered healthy for coral

survival, reefs may be overgrown by weedy macroalgae resulting in

deleterious effects. The problem is severe in tropical waters because

nutrient concentrations capable of damaging corals are lower than

temperate regions (Naidu et al., 1991; Mosley and Aalbersberg, 2003).

Increased nutrient loading into coastal waters from sewage outfalls,

household wastes, fertilised farmland, chemicals, cleaning detergents,

and industrial effluents may lead to an abundant content of organic

material which is gradually decomposed by micro-organisms in the

water. This process enables algal growth, which eventually results in

eutrophication within the waters receiving emissions. The process of

44
decomposition consumes oxygen and sometimes can lead to oxygen

deficiency and fish kills. Nevertheless, this impact is limited nowadays

due to improved sewage treatment and disposal (Goreau and Thacker,

1994; McCook, 1999).

On the other hand, effects of moderate eutrophication of originally

nutrient poor water are not entirely negative. Increased growth of algae

and other vegetation can be beneficial to the aquatic fauna, at least to

begin with. Fish production rises, for instance (Clark, 2002). But if

eutrophication continues, plankton growth becomes so great that it

eventually clouds the water. The resultant darkness below the surface

can be harmful to benthic vegetation. Such a process favours algae and

plankton eating fish including parrotfish (Scarids), surgeonfish,

damselfish (Pomacentrids), and unicorn fish (Acanthurids), while

depleting the numbers of predator fish species more sought after for

human consumption and commercial purposes (Goreau and Thacker,

1994).

In highly nutrient rich waters, plankton production can be copious

indeed. Certain plankton species appear intermittently in massive

quantities, in what is termed ―algal bloom‖. Such algae can give the water

an unpleasant smell or taste and some are even poisonous. The best-

documented examples of algal bloom were from the Hong Kong Harbour

45
(Songhui Lu and Hodgkiss, 2004) and Seto Sea in Japan (Imai and Itoh,

1987; Fisheries Agency, 2000). In these places harmful algal blooms

steadily became prevalent as the human population and water pollution

increased. The linkage between water pollution and algal bloom was

evident in the Japanese experience where harmful algal blooms suddenly

declined after pollution control measures were introduced (Castro and

Huber, 2003).

Recent research on the shift from coral to macroalgae dominance (a

common picture in reefs experiencing eutrophication) indicates that this

effect, presumed to be a direct impact from liquid nutrient enhancement,

may not be exactly as imagined. Apparently, accomplishing the shift from

coral to macroalgae dominance also requires that population of

herbivorous fish be significantly depleted (Ginsburg, 1994; McCook,

1999). Therefore, the influence of other factors such as the abundance of

herbivores (e.g. sea urchins, grazing fishes) to graze the algae is equally

important (Aronson and Precht, 2000). Overfishing does contribute to the

shift from coral to algal dominance and not primarily driven by nutrient

enhancement alone (Neckles et al., 1993).

Nevertheless, nutrient enrichment alone has the potential to harm

corals. According to Olivieri (1997), eutrophication also operates at the

zooxanthellae level. Excess nutrients increase zooxanthellae growth,

46
which, counter intuitively, is not beneficial for the coral host.

Zooxanthellae populations under natural conditions are constant and

nutrient limited, particularly by nitrogen within the coral host. However

with excess nutrients the zooxanthellae population grows uncontrolled

and the balance of nitrogen-carbon fluxes between the coral host and

zooxanthellae is abruptly disrupted resulting in reduction and weakening

of coral calcareous skeletons.

In addition, nutrient enrichment increases coral diseases such as coral

bleaching, white pox and the black band disease. It also enables the

growth of animal competitors like filter feeding sponges, polycheate

worms, boring molluscs and ascidians, many of which bore into corals

and weaken their skeletons as well as displacing corals and accelerating

the bioerosion of reefs. The problem is worse in areas where there is

overfishing (Goreau and Thacker, 1994; McCook, 1999; Mosley and

Aalbersberg, 2003).

Moreover, the overgrowth of macroalgae as an impact of nutrient

enrichment can lead to mortality and loss of biodiversity of live corals

and a loss of settlement sites for coral larvae. Overgrowth of algae may

also impact fish and invertebrate biodiversity due to the resulting habitat

homogeneity (McCook, 1999).

47
According to Thrash (2003), nutrient enhancement in tropical waters has

the most significant effect on reef building corals. Specifically inorganic

forms nitrogen and phosphorus have the greatest effect on coral

mortality and reproduction. Production of viable gametes and successful

fertilisation has been found to reduce as a consequence of excess

nutrients. Phosphorus itself has proven to dramatically reduce

fertilisation and stimulate growth of irregular embryos. Corals exposed to

elevated amounts of ammonium produced smaller and fewer eggs and

had less testes material compared to unexposed corals. These effects

appear if the nitrogen level exceeds 1.0 mol/L and phosphorus

concentration above 0.1 mol/L (Thrash, 2003).

Furthermore, high levels of phosphorus can lead to reduction in the

structural density of stony corals, causing them to lose their strength

and crumble (Mosley and Aalbersberg, 2003).

Currently, some of the best studied areas of the effects of nutrient

enrichment on coral reefs are in the Kaneohe Bay in Hawaii (McCook,

1999; Szmant, 2002), Florida Keys (Lapointe and Clark, 1992; Thrash,

2003) and the Discovery Bay in Jamaica (Goreau, 1992; Goreau and

Thacker, 1994). The incidents showed that elevated nutrient levels favour

growth of planktonic algae and large macroalgae, which would normally

grow slowly in low nutrient waters. Thick algal turfs are likely to smother

48
corals. The problem is disastrous in areas where there is overfishing

since grazers like parrotfish are depleted. Grazer fish usually controls

algal growth from overshadowing and replacing corals (Goreau and

Thacker, 1994).

3.3.1. Kaneohe Bay case study

Kaneohe Bay, located on the northeast shore of the island on Oahu, once

had some of the most luxuriant reefs in Hawaii. Until the 1930s the area

around the bay was sparsely populated. In the years leading up to the

World War Two, with military build up of Oahu, the population began to

rise. The increase continued after the war as the shores of the bay were

developed for residential use (McCook, 1999; Szmant, 2002; Castro and

Huber, 2003).

The sewage from this expanding population was dumped right into the

bay. By 1978 about 20,000 cubic metres (over 5 million gallons) of

sewage were dumped into the bay every day. Long before then, by the

mid 1960s, marine biologists began to notice disturbing changes in the

middle of the bay. Loaded with nutrients, the sewage acted as fertiliser

for seaweeds. The green bubble algae (Dictyosphaeria cavernosa) found

the conditions agreeable and grew at an alarming rate, literally covering

the bottom in many parts of the bay. Bubble algae began to overgrow and

smother corals. Phytoplankton also multiplied with the increase in

nutrients, clouding the water. Kaneohe Bay‘s reefs began to die because

49
of such accelerated algal growth due to excess nutrient loading (Castro

and Huber, 2003).

In 1978 public pressure managed to help in the great reduction of

sewage discharge into the bay, as sewage was diverted offshore. The

result was dramatic. Bubble algae in much of the bay died and corals

began to recover at an unexpected fast rate. By early 1980s, bubble algae

were fairly scarce and corals had started to grow healthier. The reefs

were not what they once were, but they seemed to be on track for

recovery (Szmant, 2002; Castro and Huber, 2003).

However in November 1982 Hurricane Iwa struck Kaneohe Bay. During

the years of pollution a layer of coral skeleton had weakened, becoming

fragile and crumbly. During the hurricane, this weak layer collapsed and

much of the reefs were severely damaged. Fortunately corals were

already recovering enabling broken pieces to grow back (Goreau and

Thacker, 1994; Castro and Huber, 2003).

The rapid recovery of reefs in Kaneohe Bay observed during the early

1980s did not continue. By 1990 the recovery seemed to have leveled off.

Some coral areas began to decline allowing bubble algae to become

abundant. There were a number of possible explanations for this. Even

though most sewage was now discharged outside the bay, some

50
nutrients continue to enter the bay from boats, septic tanks and

cesspools of private homes and other sources. Besides that, nutrients

from old sewage outfalls adsorbed and accumulated onto sediments were

being slowly released even after the outfall was diverted offshore. There

was also evidence that overfishing had reduced grazing fish population

that was likely to graze on the bubble algae, thus controlling their growth

(Szmant, 2002; Castro and Huber, 2003).

In addition, few grazing fish species that remained prefer to eat other

introduced species of seaweed from outside Hawaii rather than the green

bubble algae. Therefore, it appeared to indicate that reefs would continue

to face stress if developments on land are not properly planned and

incorporated with other inter-dependent systems (Castro and Huber,

2003).

3.3.2. Florida Keys case study

Florida Keys is another well researched classic example of the effects of

nutrient enhancement on coral contamination. The Florida Keys are a

chain of approximately 800 independent islands located in Monroe

County off the southeastern tip of Florida, representing the most

southerly point of the continental United States. The Florida Reef Tract is

the most widespread living coral reef system in North American waters

and the third largest system in the world. Extending over 1,550 square

kilometres across southern Florida and the Florida Key archipelago,

51
these reefs consist of a series of ridges and channels that form parallel to

the Straits of Florida. The reefs comprise a bank reef system of almost

continuous reef communities in line that run parallel to each other

(Thrash, 2003).

Unfortunately there are numerous threats to the marine environment in

south Florida and the Keys. Past research has shown that there is

decline of healthy corals; invasion by algae into sea grass beds and reefs;

decline in certain fisheries; increase of coral diseases; and coral

bleaching. Although the cause of these problems, whether natural or

anthropogenic, can be debated, studies showed that land use and

resource exploitation by humans have implicated coral communities in

the Florida Reef Tract (Hauxwell et al., 2001; Thrash, 2003).

On average, over three million visitors and 80,000 fulltime residents

inhabit the Florida Keys each year and there are considerable direct and

indirect effects from land use and utilisation of nearshore systems.

Although sedimentation is the most widespread problem, nutrient

loading of coastal waters is perhaps the most common human impact

plaguing several stretches of the Florida Reef Tract, particularly in the

Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. Researchers have noted a loss

of biodiversity in corals and rise in diseased and damaged corals

throughout the National Marine Sanctuary. Some of diseases include

52
white pox and black band disease along with coral bleaching and

macroalgal blooms (Lapointe and Clark, 1992; Thrash, 2003).

The most significant source of nutrient input in the Florida Reef Tract

originated from improperly treated and mismanaged wastewater. In the

Florida Keys alone there were roughly 200 sewage treatment plants,

22,000 septic tanks, 5,000 cesspools and 139 marinas harbouring over

150,000 boats. Nutrients such as nitrate and phosphate are intimately

associated with sewage and carried through the region by more than 700

canals and channels (Thrash, 2003).

Organic nitrogen is carried in ground water reservoirs and is problematic

through seepage of porous limestone. The impacts from deficient

wastewater treatment systems in the Keys extend beyond disease and

contamination of corals. In fact the effects of this deficiency are

beginning to adversely affect water resources and ultimately human

health and welfare of people in southern Florida and the Keys. Therefore,

wastewater management efforts in the Florida Keys need to focus on

elimination of diffuse sources of pollution, particularly nutrients and

faecal loadings (Lapointe and Clark, 1992; Thrash, 2003).

3.3.3. Discovery Bay case study

The third known case of the implications of excess nutrient on coral reef

survival was observed in the Discovery Bay in Jamaica. Coral reefs are

53
the most important natural resource for Jamaica and other Caribbean

islands, providing the bulk of fisheries, marine biodiversity and tourism

returns. However, most parts of Jamaican reefs have significantly

deteriorated in recent years due to enriched nutrient inputs (Goreau,

1992; Goreau and Thacker, 1994).

Nutrients enter the Jamaican coastal environment from streams, creeks,

and submarine springs supplied by groundwater seepage. Measurements

in 1980 within the Discovery Bay found nitrate levels within the range of

5 – 10 µmol/L. By the late 1980s these had risen to around 10 – 15

µmol/L and ecological replacement of corals by weedy algae was nearly

complete. Growth of human population and tourism along the shore in

the 1980s provided local phosphorus inputs which had been previously

lacking, causing rapid eutrophication (Goreau, 1992; Goreau and

Thacker, 1994).

Negril, located at the western tip of the island, had explosive tourism

development and population growth. As a result, Negril was subjected to

unprecedented algae overgrowth that covered the bottom exceeding live

corals (Goreau and Thacker, 1994).

Recent observations of the increasing abundance and species diversity of

algae around Jamaica suggested that eutrophication has become a

54
general phenomenon. Eutrophication has been so severe that many reefs

which formerly had more than 95 percent live coral cover are now more

than 95 percent algal covered (Goreau, 1992). Studies undertaken in the

1990s showed that only least developed and populated areas have coral

reefs in good condition with algae cover of 20 percent or less.

Eutrophication was visible in all populated bays including the Port

Antonio which had the lowest population density due to mountainous

topography and high rainfall. This implies that nutrient concentrations

need to be reduced by 90 – 95 percent to allow ecosystem recovery

(Goreau and Thacker, 1994).

55
Chapter 4 Monitored Wastewater Treatment Systems

4.1. Introduction

This chapter aims to explain the background, design, operating

procedures, and expected performance of the two major cost-effective

wastewater treatment initiatives implemented along the Coral Coast of

Fiji, which had been consistently monitored by this study since 2005.

The two principal wastewater management initiatives that are discussed

in this chapter include a constructed subsurface wetland at Tagaqe

Village and an AdvanTex wastewater treatment system at Crusoe‘s

Resort, both of which are situated along the Coral Coast of Fiji. This

chapter also discusses a model greywater treatment drum system

experiment ex-situ at the Faculty of Islands and Oceans‘ laboratory to

mimic an in-situ system at Votua Village along the Coral Coast.

4.2. Constructed wetland for wastewater treatment

4.2.1. Status of wetlands

Natural wetlands are land areas that have prolonged high water tables or

are at least covered with shallow water which tend to support plants

specially adapted to grow in alternating wet and dry conditions. Classic

examples of natural wetlands include swamps, bogs, sloughs, fens and

marshes (Moore, 1993). A ―constructed wetland‖ is defined as a wetland

specifically constructed for the purpose of pollution control and waste

management, at a location other than existing natural wetlands.

Specifically a constructed wetland is a shallow basin filled with some sort

56
of substrate, usually soil or gravel, and planted with vegetation tolerant

of saturated conditions. Wastewater is introduced at one end and flows

over the surface or through the substrate, and is discharged at the other

end through a weir or other structure which controls the depth of the

water in the wetland (US EPA, 1993).

Historically, natural wetland areas have not made good farmland. As a

result, wetlands were viewed negatively and systematically reclaimed for

alternative development in various parts of the world. Research, however,

showed that wetlands are highly productive ecosystems that support

vigorous plant growth and a broad variety of animals. Wetlands also

improve the quality of water that flows through them by filtering out

impurities, actively degrading waste matter and removing certain

chemicals that flows from upstream. The discovery of this attribute led to

the idea of intentionally using wetlands to treat wastewater (Moore,

1993).

Wetlands incorporate physical, biological, and chemical processes to

treat wastewater. Water flows in and slows down as it spreads across the

wetland surface. This slowing of flow allows soil and sediment particles

to filter or be physically adsorbed. The process also removes nutrients

such as phosphorus and chemicals that are attached to sediments.

57
Biological and chemical treatment processes transform materials

contrary to mere physical removal (Moore, 1993).

Figure 15: A systematic diagram of a horizontal flow constructed wetland [Fujita,

1998]

Inflow Outflow

In addition, constructed wetlands maximise wastewater treatment by

ensuring slow flow rates and extra surface area provided by wetlands

(Figure 15). Plant stems and roots provide surface areas that promote

micro-organism presence, which utilise some of the nutrients and

organic matter carried in runoff water (Smil, 2000).

Constructed wetlands have been enthusiastically adopted in many

societies in other countries including New Zealand, Australia, United

States of America, Canada, Denmark, Czech Republic and so forth as a

cost effective means of efficient secondary and tertiary wastewater

management (Fujita, 1998; Tanner and Sukias, 2002).

However the constructed wetland at Tagaqe Village on the Coral Coast of

Fiji is the first of its kind to be trialled in Fiji or any other small Pacific

Island country.

58
There are two main categories of constructed wetlands comprising (i)

surface flow, and (ii) subsurface flow designs. In a surface flow wetland

(Figure 16), wastewater flows through a shallow pond planted with

emergent plants such as bulrushes, reeds or sedges.

Figure 16: Diagram of a “surface flow” constructed wetland [Kadlec et al., 1996]

In subsurface or gravel bed designs (Figure 17), the wetland if filled with

gravel or similar substrate and plants are grown rooted in the gravel.

Despite that a number of subsurface wetlands were just bare with no

plants at all on the gravel (Tanner and Sukias, 2002).

Figure 17: Diagram of a “subsurface flow” wetland [Kadlec et al., 1996]

4.2.2. How constructed wetlands improve water quality

A constructed wetland is a complex assemblage of water, substrate,

plants (vascular and algae), litter (primarily fallen plant material),

invertebrates (mostly insect larvae and worms) and an array of micro-

organisms (most importantly bacteria). The mechanisms that are

available to improve water quality are therefore numerous and often

interrelated. These mechanisms include: (i) settling of suspended

particulate matter; (ii) filtration and chemical precipitation through

59
contact of the water with the substrate and litter; (iii) chemical

transformation; (iv) adsorption and ion exchange on the surfaces of

plants, substrate, sediment, and litter; (v) breakdown and transformation

of pollutants by micro-organisms and plants; (vi) uptake and

transformation of nutrients by micro-organisms and plants; and (vii)

predation and natural die-off of pathogens (US EPA, 2000).

4.2.3. Nitrogen transformation processes in wetlands

In the biosphere, nitrogen is continuously transformed between organic,

soluble inorganic and gaseous nitrogen forms. The nitrogen cycle is very

complex, and it is hard to control even the most basic transformations

within a wetland. How much nitrogen is removed (i.e. transformed or

removed from the water phase) in a wetland and which nitrogen

processes or nitrogen fluxes that are the most important depend on

water chemistry and other wetland conditions, such as climate,

vegetation, water depth and water flow (Tanner, 2001a; Bastviken, 2006).

The dominant forms of nitrogen in wetlands that are of importance to

wastewater treatment include organic nitrogen, ammonia, ammonium,

nitrate, nitrite, and nitrogen gases. Inorganic forms are essential to plant

growth in aquatic systems but if scarce can limit or control plant

productivity (Mitsch and Gosselink, 1993).

‗Ammonification‘ is the microbial mineralisation of organic nitrogen to

ammonium. This process can be caused by heterotrophic bacteria and

60
fungi (Patrick and Reddy, 1976; Mitsch and Gosselink, 1986). The

formation of ammonia (NH3) occurs via the mineralisation or

ammonification of organic matter under either anaerobic or aerobic

conditions (Keeney, 1973). The ammonium ion (NH4+) is the primary form

of mineralised nitrogen in most flooded wetland soils. The formation of

this ion occurs when ammonia combines with water as follows:

NH3 + H2O NH4+ + OH-

Upon formation, the ammonium ion can be absorbed by the plants and

algae and converted back into organic matter, or the ammonium ion can

be immobilised onto negatively charged soil particles (Mitsch and

Gosselink, 1986).

Ammonium is then transformed to nitrate by the bacterial process

‗nitrification‘. Wetzel (1983) defines nitrification as the ―biological

conversion of organic and inorganic nitrogenous compounds from a

reduced state to a more oxidised state‖. Nitrification is strictly an aerobic

process in which the end product is nitrate (NO3-); this process is limited

when anaerobic conditions prevail (Patrick and Reddy, 1976). The

process of nitrification (i) oxidises ammonium (from the sediment) to

nitrite (NO2-), and then (ii) nitrite is oxidised to nitrate (NO3-). The overall

nitrification reactions are as follows:

i) 2 NH4+ + 3 O2 4 H++ 2 H2O + 2 NO2-

61
 ii) 2 NO2- + O2 2 NO3-…………(Davies and Hart, 1990)

Two different bacteria are required to complete this oxidation of

ammonium to nitrate. Nitrosomonas bacteria oxidises ammonium to

nitrite via reaction (i) and Nitrobacter bacteria oxidises nitrite to nitrate

via reaction (ii) (Keeney, 1973).

Nitrate or nitrite is finally reduced to gaseous end products, nitrous gas

and dinitrogen gas, through the bacterial process ‗denitrification‘

(Bastviken, 2006). Nitrate can also be transformed to ammonium during

low redox conditions (Prescott et al., 1990; Vymazal, 2001). According to

Wetzel (1983) ―Denitrification by bacteria is the biochemical reduction of

oxidised nitrogen anions, nitrate-N and nitrite-N, with concomitant

oxidation of organic matter‖. The general sequence as given by Wetzel

(1983) is as follows:

NO3- ---> NO2- ---> N2O ---> N2

The end products, N2O and N2, are gases that re-enter the atmosphere.

Denitrification occurs intensely in anaerobic environments but will also

occur in aerobic conditions (Bandurski, 1965). A deficiency of oxygen

causes certain bacteria to use nitrate in place of oxygen as an electron

acceptor for the reduction of organic matter (Patrick and Reddy, 1976).

The process of denitrification is restricted to a narrow zone in the

sediment immediately below the aerobic-anaerobic soil interface (Mitsch

and Gosselink, 1986; Nielson et al., 1990). Denitrification is considered

62
to be the predominant microbial process that modifies the chemical

composition of nitrogen in a wetland system and the major process

whereby elemental nitrogen is returned to the atmosphere (Patrick and

Reddy, 1976; Richardson et al., 1978; Johnston, 1991; Vymazal, 2001;

Trepel and Palmeri, 2002). To summarise, the nitrogen cycle is completed

as follows: ammonia in water, at or near neutral pH is converted to

ammonium ions; the aerobic bacterium oxidises ammonium to nitrite;

then nitrite is converted to nitrate. Under anaerobic conditions, nitrate is

reduced to relatively harmless nitrogen gas that is given off to the

atmosphere (Figure 18).

Figure 18: A simplified diagram of the nitrogen processes and the flows of
different nitrogen forms in a wetland [adapted from Bastviken, 2006]. “ON” is
organic nitrogen, “AN” ammonium nitrogen and “NN” nitrate nitrogen.

63
Nitrogen fixation is a bacterial process, which transfers dinitrogen gas to

ammonium. However, nitrogen fixation is generally not significant in

nitrogen rich waters such as constructed wetlands for water treatment

(Kadlec and Knight, 1996). Nitrogen assimilation is the transformation of

inorganic nitrogen to organic nitrogen in cells and tissue. Plant

assimilation only accounts for a small percent of the total nitrogen

removal when the nitrogen load is high (Tanner et al., 1995), which is the

case in most free water surface treatment wetlands (Kadlec and Knight,

1996).

Furthermore, plant uptake does not play an important role in the annual

nitrogen removal in the long run as the nitrogen assimilated by

vegetation usually is released during decomposition of litter (Johnston,

1991). However, plant uptake can contribute to the seasonal dynamic of

nitrogen removal and account for a significant part of the wetland

nitrogen removal during the growth period with rapid nitrogen uptake

(Bastviken, 2006).

Ammonia volatilisation is a physicochemical process where ammonia in

the ammonium-ammonia equilibrium is transported to the gas phase.

Ammonia volatilisation can be important in wetlands with high

temperature and pH, although volatilisation losses of ammonia usually

are small if pH is below 8 (Reddy and Patrick, 1984). Other nitrogen

64
fluxes that can occur in a wetland are sedimentation and resuspension of

the various nitrogen forms. Burial of organic nitrogen in the sediment

will make the nitrogen less available to living plants and organisms,

while release of nitrogen from biomass during decomposition will make

the nutrients available again. Ammonium can also readily adsorb to

sediment particles and litter, ammonium adsorption, as ammonium is a

positively charged ion. The adsorbed ammonium concentration is in

equilibrium with the ammonium concentration in the water, and can be

released if a change in the water chemistry or hydrology occurs

(Bastviken, 2006).

Nitrification and denitrification are influenced by factors at different

spatial scales. In Figure 19, factors affecting denitrification have been

described at different spatial scales; the process scale, the wetland scale

and the landscape scale. At the process scale, the process rates

performed by the bacteria are directly regulated by factors like

temperature and redox conditions. These process scale factors can be

affected by factors on the wetland scale, such as water flow, nutrient

load and different plant communities. Finally, the wetland scale factors

are affected by landscape factors such as climate and land use (e.g.

higher nitrogen load the more agricultural areas there is in the upstream

catchment area) (Bastviken, 2006).

65
Figure 19: Factors affecting the biological processes of denitrification on different
spatial scales [adapted from Trepel, 2002].

On the wetland scale, plants can play an important role for the total

removal of nitrogen in wetlands. Wetlands containing plants have been

shown to remove larger quantities of nitrate than unplanted wetlands

(Tanner et al., 1995; Zhu and Sikora, 1995; Bachand and Horne, 2000;

Lin et al., 2002). However planted systems only showed small

improvements in disinfection, Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD),

Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), and suspended solids removal. Direct

nutrient uptake by plants was insufficient to account for more than a

fraction of the improved removal shown by planted systems (Tanner,

2001).

66
4.2.4. Phosphorus transformation processes in wetlands

Phosphorus occurs in natural waters and wastewater primarily as

phosphates. They are classified as orthophosphates, and organically

bound phosphates. They may be in solution or particulate form. Organic

phosphates are formed primarily by biological processes and are found in

raw wastewater as food residues and body wastes, and in treated

wastewater as living or nonliving biota (e.g. algae and bacteria from

treatment ponds). Inorganic phosphorus found in wastewater most often

comes from various forms of personal and commercial cleaning solutions

or from the treatment of boiler waters. Storm waters carry inorganic

forms of phosphorus from fertilizers into combined sewers (US EPA,

2000).

Dissolved organic phosphate and insoluble inorganic and organic

phosphate are not usually available to plants until transformed to a

soluble inorganic form. These transformations may take place in the

water column by way of suspended microbes and in the bio-films on the

emergent plant surfaces and in the sediments. Uptake of phosphates by

micro-organisms including bacteria and algae acts as a short-term,

rapid-cycling mechanism for soluble and insoluble forms. Cycling

through the growth, death, and decomposition process returns most of

the phosphate back into the water column. Uptake by the macrophytes

occurs in the sediment pore water by the plant root system. Uptake

67
occurs during the growth phase of the plant and release occurs during

plant death followed by decomposition in the plant litter (US EPA, 2000).

The removal and storage of phosphorus from wastewater can only occur

within the constructed wetland itself. According to Mitsch and Gosselink

(1986) phosphorus may be sequestered within a wetland system by the

following: (i) The binding of phosphorus in organic matter as a result of

incorporation into living biomass, and (ii) precipitation of insoluble

phosphates with ferric iron, calcium, and aluminum found in wetland

soils.

4.2.5. Advantages of constructed wetlands

Constructed wetlands are a cost-effective and technically feasible

approach to treating wastewater and runoff for several reasons: (i)

wetlands can be less expensive to build than other treatment options; (ii)

operation and maintenance expenses (energy and supplies) are low; (iii)

operation and maintenance require only periodic, rather than

continuous, on-site labour; (iv) wetlands are able to tolerate fluctuations

in flow; (v) they facilitate water reuse and recycling; (vi) they provide

habitat for many wetland organisms; (vii) they can be built to fit

harmoniously into the landscape; (viii) they provide numerous benefits in

addition to water quality improvement, such as wildlife habitat and the

aesthetic enhancement of open spaces; and (ix) they are an

environmentally sensitive approach (US EPA, 2000).

68
4.2.6. Limitations of constructed wetlands

There are limitations associated with the use of constructed wetlands:

 They generally require larger land areas than do conventional

wastewater treatment systems. Wetland treatment may be

economical relative to other options only where land is available

and affordable.

 Performance may be less consistent than in conventional

treatment. Wetland treatment efficiencies may vary seasonally in

response to changing environmental conditions, including rainfall

and drought. While the average performance over the year may be

acceptable, wetland treatment cannot be relied upon if effluent

quality must meet stringent discharge standards at all times.

 The biological components are sensitive to toxic chemicals, such as

ammonia and pesticides.

 Flushes of pollutants or surges in water flow may temporarily

reduce treatment effectiveness.

 They require a minimum amount of water if they are to survive.

While wetlands can tolerate temporary draw-downs, they cannot

withstand complete drying.

 The use of constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment and

stormwater control is a fairly recent development. There is yet no

consensus on the optimal design of wetland systems nor is there

much information on their long-term performance (US EPA, 2000).

69
4.2.7. Description of the constructed wetland at Tagaqe Village

The constructed wetland at Tagaqe Village on the Coral Coast of Fiji is a

―subsurface flow‖ gravel bed design (Figures 20 & 21). It was set up in

December 2004 by villagers and staff from the University of the South

Pacific under principal supervision of a scientist from the National

Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) in New Zealand. The

wetland at Tagaqe is a large rectangular hole about 11 m long, 4 m wide

and 0.4 m deep lined with heavy duty plastic and filled with 19 m3

gravel. It was estimated for 15 people assumed to be 160 litres waste

production/day per person. This is a post-septic treatment to further

purify the water and nutrients. Once the liquid reaches near the gravel

level, water and nutrient absorbing plants were planted. Assumed

hydraulic loading was 50 mm/day justified by higher temperatures in

Fiji. The operational concept of the wetland at Tagaqe was for blackwater

(including kitchen wastes) treatment via septic tank and bathroom

greywater (piping connected directly to wetland), to be treated via a

subsurface-flow gravel-bed. The septic tank was also fitted with Biotube

Effluent filters to improve efficiency. To facilitate sampling of final

effluent quality, proposed discharge for this demonstration system is to a

gravel-filled seepage channel. Operational systems could utilize open-

bottomed seepage zones in the final stage of the constructed wetlands.

70
 Figure 20: Construction stages of the gravel bed wetland at Tagaqe Village
[Photos: courtesy of Chris Tanner]
(a) Briefing before beginning work (b) Original septic tank before work

(c) Addition of biotube filters to septic (d) Preparing piping for greywater
tank

(e) Starting digging work on wetland (f) Additional assistance on digging

(g) Completion of wetland less plants (h) Fully grown sedge on wetland

71
At a depth of 0.4 m and porosity of 0.38, gives nominal resident time of

2.8 days. Kinetic modeling predicts Biological Oxygen Demand removal of

around 70 percent and total nitrogen removal of 40-50 percent at full

loading. However, performance may improve at a lower loading rate of

less than 15 daily occupants (Tanner, 2004: personal communication).

The total cost of the wetland at Tagaqe was around FJ$6,000.

Figure 21: Similar cross section diagram of Tagaqe Village wetland [adapted from
EPA, 2000]

4.3. Best-practice commercial wastewater treatment systems

4.3.1. Packed Bed Filter technology

Packed bed filters incorporating naturally occurring treatment media

such as sand and gravel have been used successfully for treating small

to medium volume wastewater flows for decades. Over the past fifteen

years, two types of packed bed sand filters have been most commonly

used—the single-pass filter and the recirculating filter. Single-pass sand

filters are capable of treating septic tank effluent to advanced wastewater

72
treatment levels or better. Single-pass filters have been most successful

with low influent strength. With high influent strengths, maintenance

may increase, although with a diligent service and monitoring program,

performance is not expected to suffer. Recirculating (multiple-pass) filters

also treat septic tank effluent to advanced wastewater treatment levels or

better. Multiple-pass recirculating sand/gravel filters have been most

popular in applications with medium to large wastewater flows (Bounds,

2002).

The purpose of a sand filter is not only to remove sediment and

suspended solids, but mainly to provide biological aerobic treatment of

the wastewater. This is considered secondary treatment. The first six

inches of the filter is where most biological treatment occurs. Here is also

where suspended solids and BOD are removed. Sand filters are very

effective at lowering suspended solids as the media in the filter holds

onto the solids well. Faecal coliform bacteria removal ranges from 99-

99.99 percent (Orenco, 2009).

Recirculating filters, like single pass units pre-treat effluent from septic

tanks before it is released into the environment. Instead of all the water

in the underdrain flowing to the soil absorption system, the pipes return

some of it to the recirculation/dosing tank. Here the water is combined

with the effluent from the septic tank. Recirculating filters can be smaller

73
and have less odour than single pass units. Recirculating filters use a

more coarse material and have a higher hydraulic loading than single

pass units therefore reducing the removal of faecal coliform bacteria.

However, almost all ammonia is removed through nitrification (Orenco,

2009).

4.3.2. Limitations of Sand/gravel Media Packed Bed Filters

While sand/gravel media Packed Bed Filters are an excellent choice for

wastewater pretreatment, certain limitations have prevented them from

being considered at all sites:

 Land area — some sites lack the land area required for a sand

filter. Single-pass sand filters for single-family homes typically

require between 300 and 400 square feet, depending on

jurisdictional design or flow criteria.

 Media quality and accessibility — good quality sand media is

occasionally not locally available, resulting in either high

transportation costs or the use of inferior local media. In addition,

getting sand to some sites—such as islands, mountainous regions,

or other isolated areas—can be difficult.

 Installation quality — sand filters are typically built onsite with

locally available materials, and the quality of installation is

partially contingent on the consistency of these materials, and the

knowledge and ability of the installing contractor.

74
  Serviceability — the ease of maintaining a buried onsite single-

pass sand filter has been a long-term design concern that resulted

in robust designs with low loading rates. The low loading rates are

intended to ensure 10 to 20 years of continuous usage with little to

no intrusive filter maintenance because replacing the sand media

can be difficult and costly (Bounds, 2002).

4.3.3. Textile-based Packed Bed Filters

The efforts to improve loading capacities and serviceability have led to

extensive research into a wide variety of media (e.g., foam, glass, styrene,

plastic products, expanded clays, zeolite, limestone, furnace slag, peat,

etc.). Over the past decade, this research has led to the development of

an advanced technology for packed bed filters that uses an engineered

textile medium assembled in a variety of configurations. Textile provides

all the benefits inherent in the packed bed filter design but overcomes

the limitations listed above (Bounds, 2002).

Advantages of Textile-based Packed Bed Filters

 Land area — the land area needed is significantly smaller than

that for sand filters because loading rates are 5 to 30 times higher.

Thus, the footprint area for a textile filter serving a typical four-

bedroom single-family home is now only about 20 square feet. If

the textile filter is positioned over the processing tank, virtually no

additional area is required.

75
 Media quality and availability — the manufactured textile medium

ensures consistent quality and availability.

 Installation quality — lightweight textile medium and small filter

size make pre-manufactured treatment units practical, eliminating

onsite construction and reducing installation time, labour, and

construction errors. These characteristics make textile systems

ideal for cost-saving self-help programs and particularly suited for

difficult-to-access and remotely located sites.

 Serviceability — special configurations allow for ease of

maintenance and cleaning without expensive or large excavation

equipment, or the need for replacing the medium (Bounds, 2002).

 Porosity — the porosity of the textile media is several times greater

than that of sand, gravel, and other particle-type mediums. The

more porous the medium, the greater its hydraulic conductivity,

the greater its air space (which enhances the capacity of passively

ventilated systems and free air movement), and the greater its

capacity for the accumulation of solids and biomass development.

 Surface area — textile media can be blended with a variety of fibers

to achieve relatively large total surface area per unit volume.

Expanding the biomass growth area provides a greater surface

potential for air and effluent to interface and come in contact with

the biomass.

76
  Water holding capacity — the water-holding capacity of textile

media also varies considerably depending on the media density,

type of material, and blend of fibers. The water-holding capacity in

textile media is also several times greater than expected in the

sands and gravels used in filters. Water-holding capacity performs

a key function in the treatment process. Together with the

programmed dosing time and frequency, it governs the effluent

retention time within the filter and ultimate effluent quality

(Bounds, 2002).

4.3.4. AdvanTex AX100 treatment systems

In packed bed systems, effluent trickles through a moist, porous media.

Microorganisms growing in the media remove impurities from the

effluent. Compared with advanced treatment systems that use liquid or

membranes, packed bed systems use less electricity, require less

maintenance, and are much less prone to upsets from abuse. For

advanced treatment, the AdvanTex Treatment System is ideal. AdvanTex

systems can reduce BOD, TSS, and faecal coliform by up to 98 percent

while nitrogen can be removed by up to 70 percent (Orenco, 2009).

AdvanTex systems possess the characteristics of an aeration treatment

unit. The filter itself is a textile material contained in a fibre-glass unit.

The components of the system include a septic tank, the AdvanTex unit

itself, and a drain field. Like sand filters, AdvanTex are biological reactors

77
which rely on bacteria for treatment of the wastewater. The textile of the

filter is where the colonies of bacteria grow and treat the water. Typical

effluent from AdvanTex systems contains BOD, suspended solids, and

total nitrogen levels of less than 10 mg/L. For proper operation AdvanTex

systems should be maintained annually (University of Wisconsin, 2009).

The AdvanTex AX100 onsite Treatment System is ideal for multi-family

residential properties; cluster community systems; subdivisions, resorts

and golf course developments; mobile and manufactured home

communities; parks and rest areas; truck stops, restaurants and

casinos; and school or office buildings (Orenco, 2007).

The patented AdvanTex Treatment System (Figure 22) is a recirculating

filter that has been configured like a recirculating sand filter (RSF).

Similar to recirculating sand filters, AdvanTex is affordable, reliable and

low maintenance. It is superior to other packed bed filters, however, in

its serviceability and longevity (Orenco, 2007).

In addition, the AdvanTex system is also superior in its treatment media.

AdvanTex uses a highly efficient, lightweight textile that has a large

surface area, lots of void space, and a high degree of water holding

capacity. Consequently, AdvanTex Treatment Systems can provide

treatment equivalent to that of sand filters at loading rates as high as

78
2,000 mm/day or one fortieth the footprint of the wetland. This implies

that AdvanTex can treat high volume commercial and multi-family flows

in a very compact space (Orenco, 2007).

Figure 22: the AdvanTex AX100 Treatment System at Crusoe’s Retreat

4.3.5. Description of Crusoe’s wastewater treatment system

The treatment system at Crusoe‘s Retreat is a simple, relatively low cost

and highly efficient wastewater treatment package set up in collaboration

between scientists at the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric

Research (NIWA), the University of the South Pacific and Innoflow

Technologies Limited, as an attempt to reduce effects of effluent disposal

on the coastal environment. As a result, the Crusoe‘s Retreat between

Navua and Sigatoka agreed to install this system for their small resort.

79
Installation of the AdvanTex AX100 wastewater management system

and construction of all tank work was completed in April 2005 by local

workers, under the supervision of a staff from Innoflow Technologies Ltd.

The system re-used existing septic tanks, after thorough investigation to

ensure suitability, with two lower tanks feeding to a new pumped tank

and an upper tank that flows directly via gravity into the recirculation

tank. All tanks were also fitted with Biotube Effluent filters to improve

efficiency (Figure 23). Although the AdvanTex system is usually installed

below ground, the site constraints at Crusoe‘s Retreat did not allow for

burying the treatment plant. As a result the system was just installed

above ground, as overall performance would not be affected (Innoflow,

2005).

Figure 23: Biotube Effluent filters used in septic tanks at Tagaqe and Crusoe’s
Retreat [Photo: courtesy of Chris Tanner]

The Crusoe‘s treatment system was estimated for 13 two-people ‗bures‘

(bungalows) with larger allowance for another additional four two-people

80
―bures‖, due to increased water consumption in resorts (longer showers)

at a peak flow of 7,000 litres/day. A pump station with a capacity of

7,000 litres was constructed close to the beach to collect wastewater

from lower septic tanks and transport up to the recirculation tank with a

size of 7,000 litres. Recirculating textile packed bed reactors (rtPBRs)

with a surface area of 12m2 were chosen to ensure anticipated

performance (see schematic diagram in Figure 24).

Figure 24: A schematic diagram of the Crusoe’s treatment system as

built

Crusoe’s Entrance,
Reception & Car Park Upper septic
tank fitted with
biotube filters
AX100 Textile Filter POD

Flow through gravity

Carbon filter & Recirculation Tank

ventilation fan

Gravity discharge
Point to flower beds Flow via pump

Old septic tank New lower

Flower beds septic tank
with biotube
Old septic tank
filters & pump

Shoreline

81
The operational concept was that blackwater and greywater would first

be treated initially via three septic tanks. Wastewater from one upper

septic tank would then flow into the recirculation tank due to gravity,

whilst wastewater from two lower septic tanks would be electrically

pumped up into the recirculation tank. The effluent pumping system at

the recirculation tank would then pump the wastewater into the Textile

Filter Pod and then comes back into the recirculation tank through an

underlain collection pipe. The recirculation pumps were anticipated to

run for 2.1 hours per day at 0.75 kW per pump at peak periods. The

process from the recirculation tank through to the Textile Filter Pod and

then back to the recirculation tank takes 4 cycles, before the treated

water is eventually discharged into a flower garden by gravity (Figures

26-30). It was anticipated that a reasonably significant outflow up to

about 6,500 litres per day of treated wastewater would be discharged on

the ground disposal system and flower garden (Innoflow, 2005).

According to an Innoflow engineer, Chris Shortt, who supervised the

instalment stage the system basically consisted of three major phases

(cited in Hasan, 2005).

a) Primary treatment – takes place inside septic tanks (already

existing ones and a new one built). These were modified slightly by

installing a filter at the outlet so that big solid matter (>3mm) do

not pass through and move to the next phase.

82
 b) Secondary treatment – the wastewater from the septic tank gets

filtered again in a small chamber and moves to a large tank for

treatment. In this tank are specially designed filters which are

used instead of the traditional sand filters. Its advantage is that it

is more efficient for microbial growth and it will last a life time if

properly maintained. The wastewater is recirculated four times

through the filters before they move to the final phase.

c) Disposal – the treated waste is disposed to gardens for nutrient

uptake by plants.

The main nitrogen-related processes in the wastewater treatment system

are nitrification and denitrification. Basically, the ammonia in waste is

converted to nitrate (nitrification) and then the nitrate is changed to

nitrogen gas (denitrification). When wastewater is not properly treated, a

lot of nitrate is discharged into the sea and other water bodies like rivers

and streams leading to algae problems. The treatment system set up at

Crusoe‘s was anticipated to transform about 75 percent of nitrate to

nitrogen gas and about 15 percent was assumed as going to be taken up

by the plants. Hence only 10 percent would be going out to the sea which

will help keep the reef ecosystem healthy (Hasan, 2005). The rate of

nutrient removal was expected to exceed 90 percent while the treatment

performance for suspended solids and biological oxygen demand were

predicted to be less than 15 mg/litre (Innoflow, 2005). Total cost for the

83
Crusoe‘s wastewater treatment system was about FJ$62,500 which was

cheaper than other systems used by nearby hotels.

Figure 25: (a) the ProSTEP Effluent pump switchboard at the recirculation tank;
(b) the lower septic pumping system closer to the beach at Crusoe’s
(a) (b)

Figure 26: (a) George Reece standing beside the Carbon filter and ventilation fan
of the treatment system at Crusoe’s; (b) The AX100 textile filter pod fibre layers
for wastewater treatment at Crusoe’s Retreat
(a) (b)

84
Figure 27: (a) The recirculation splitter valve and the effluent pumping system; (b)
the recirculation splitter valve with piping connections from septic tank effluents
and the AX100 treatment system

(a) (b)

Figure 28: The flower gardens and ground disposal area at Crusoe’s Retreat

4.4. Greywater treatment “drum system” experiment

4.4.1. Experimental Plan

The model drum experiment was aimed at evaluating the performance of

the greywater treatment system under two different hydraulic loading

rates equivalent to one or two drums per household.

Rather than the daily hydraulic load being distributed evenly throughout

a day, greywater from a household is typically generated in episodic

pulses (e.g. when washing machine discharges or someone has a

85
shower). It is expected that the treatment efficiency of a greywater system

(and underlying soil) will be different for large pulses of inflow with rest

periods in between compared to small continuously trickling inflows.

Thus, a secondary aim of the experiment was to assess the performance

of the systems under different dosing regimes (that is, by dividing the

―average‖ daily hydraulic load received by each mesocosm into doses of

different size and frequency). It was proposed that two greywater

treatment mesocosms be set-up and operated side-by-side at two

different loading rates as depicted in Figures 29 - 31. Specifically, High

Loading Rate is equivalent to one drum system per ―typical‖ household.

Low Loading Rate is equivalent to two drums per household.

The mesocosms were set-up and operated for at least 4 weeks before the

start of monitoring in order to allow the build-up of micro-organisms,

bio-films and potentially clogging organic matter within the systems.

4.4.2. Hydraulic Loading Rates

Estimated daily greywater load from Votua household:

Total wastewater load from Votua household ≈ 250 L/person/day

multiply by 5 people/household = 1250 L/day

Assuming greywater load = 70% of total wastewater hydraulic load, then:

Greywater hydraulic load (Q) = 875 L/household/day

= 0.875 m3 day-1

86
The areal hydraulic loading rate (HLR) for one greywater drum per

household (High Loading Rate) = [Q] / [surface area of drum (≈ 0.24 m2)]

= 0.875 m3 d-1 / 0.24 m2

= 3.65 m day-1

= 3650 mm/day

= the ―High Loading Rate‖

The areal HLR for two greywater drums per household (Low Loading

Rate): = 0.875 m3 d-1 / 0.48 m2

= 1.82 m day-1

= 1820 mm/day

= the ―Low Loading Rate‖

Thus, if the surface area of the 20L buckets used in the mesocosms is

0.07 m2 (assuming diameter of bucket = 30 cm), the daily hydraulic load

(amount of greywater to be added each day) for the two mesocosms will

be: High Loading Rate = 3.65 m day-1 * 0.07 m2

= 0.255 m3 day-1

= 255 L/day

Low Loading Rate = 1.82 m day-1 * 0.07 m2

= 0.127 m3 day-1

= 127 L/day

During the 4 week ―start-up‖ period, the greywater mesocosms were

dosed with artificial greywater twice per day (morning and afternoon).

87
Thus, at each dose the High Loaded mesocosm received 127.5 L and the

Low Loaded mesocosms received 63.5 L of greywater.

Figure 29: (a) an in situ greywater treatment drum system at Votua Village along
the Coral Coast; and (b) an ex-situ model at the university

(a) (b)

88
 Figure 30: Side view of greywater treatment mesocosm. All lengths in cm
[diagram: courtesy of Tom Headley, 2007]

Greywater inflow

2 x 20L plastic buckets (usually

white), 35cm high by 30cm diameter:
30cm depth of One sitting partially inside the other,
coconut husk each one filled with 25cm depth of
pieces (approx. media.
10cm x 5cm) Top bucket with 2cm holes drilled in
bottom to allow drainage through to
30cm depth of Bottom bucket which has 1cm holes
coconut shell pieces. drilled in a band around the sides (no
Break shell into holes in bottom).
quarters with hammer

Ventilation pipe:
10-15 20mm PVC, ends
40
open, sitting on top of
gravel under-drain.

10

90 Coral rock:
5-10cm diameter rocks

Sandy soil:
40
Soil typical of Votua,
placed in drum to
resemble in-situ soil.

Gravel under-drain:
10 layer of 10mm gravel
to allow free drainage.

200L plastic drum

Bricks or concrete blocks:
to enable outlet to be placed
in bottom of drum.

50mm PVC drain pipe:

plumbed through the bottom of drum (at
lowest point so that water does not sit in
bottom of drum) using a “tank connector”.
Set-up so that effluent goes to sewer, but
also to enable sample collection.

89
Figure 31: Details of drainage holes in 20L buckets used to contain coconut shell
and husk [diagram: courtesy of Tom Headley]

Upper bucket with 2cm holes

drilled in bottom. Bucket sits
on top of coconut shell in
bottom bucket.

1cm diameter holes

drilled at approx. 5
30 cm
cm spacing around
bottom bucket in a
25cm high band
from upper level of
5 cm coconut shell down
0 cm to 5cm from bottom
of bucket

4.4.3. Targeted greywater characteristics

Greywater is the wastewater generated from showers, bathtubs, hand

basins, laundry, washing machines and kitchen sinks and consequently

contains a mixture of soaps, detergents, food particles, fats, oils, soil,

hair, and potentially some small amounts of faecal matter and urine.

Studies (Urban Water Research Association of Australia, 1996; Jefferson

et al., 1999 & 2001; Eriksson et al., 2002; Brown and Palmer, 2002; Toifl

et al., 2006) show that greywater has a similar organic strength to

domestic wastewater, but relatively low suspended solids (i.e. greater

proportions of the contaminants are dissolved).

90
Table 5 provides a summary of typical greywater characteristics from

other studies, which was used as target concentrations for the artificial

greywater (Toifl et al., 2006).

Table 5: Summary of typical greywater characteristics targeted in the experiment

Parameter Target greywater concentration

Suspended solids 60 – 80 mg/L
BOD 150 – 200 mg/L
Temperature 20° - 30°C
pH 6.5 – 8.0
Turbidity 60 – 80 NTU
Sodium 80 – 130 mg/L
Total Phosphorus 10 – 20 mg/L
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen 3.0 – 5.0 mg/L
Conductivity 450 – 550 μS/cm
COD 250 – 400 mg/L
TOC 100 – 150 mg/L
Total coliform 103 – 104 counts/100ml
E.coli 101 – 102 counts/100ml

91
Chapter 5 Methodology

5.1. Introduction

This chapter outlines the field sampling procedures of wastewater,

freshwater and coastal seawater samples both from the wastewater

treatment initiatives, freshwater creeks, and near shore sites along the

Coral Coast of Fiji. It also attempts to detail the sampling plan and recipe

for the greywater drum system experiment. Analytical techniques for

varying water quality parameters are also explained.

5.2. Field sampling procedures

5.2.1. Dissolved inorganic nutrients

The frequency of sampling was done on a monthly basis in average. For

the constructed wetland at Tagaqe, there were eight samplings

undertaken on 15th June 2005, 18th July 2005, 20th October 2005, 11th

May 2006, 8th June 2006, 5th July 2006, 14th September 2006, and 8th

October 2006. In regard to the Crusoe‘s wastewater treatment system,

five sampling trips were completed on 20th October 2005, 8th June 2006,

5th July 2006, 13th August 2006, and 14th September 2006. For general

Coral Coast sites, five sampling trips were carried out on 18th June 2005,

20th October 2005, 11th May 2006, 8th June 2006, and 5th July 2006.

Votua Creek sampling was done on 8th June 2006, 5th July 2006, 13th

August 2006 and 14th September 2006 (refer to Appendix).

Unfortunately, the loading rates or flow rates for each device was not

determined due to lack of funding.

92
Water samples for dissolved inorganic nutrients including ammonia

(NH3), nitrate (NO3-), nitrite (NO2-) and phosphate (PO43-) were filtered in

the field and collected in acid-cleaned polypropylene bottles with leak-

proof caps. Prior to collection, each sampling bottle and cap was soaked

overnight in 10 percent hydrochloric acid bath and later washed with

deionised water in the laboratory to remove bacteria. While in the field,

each sampling bottle was rinsed at least three times with sample solution

before the final sample was collected. For the Tagaqe wetland and the

wastewater treatment system at Crusoe‘s Retreat, filtered wastewater

samples were collected at the inlet and outlet pipes from both treatment

initiatives (Figures 32-34). In general nearshore seawater and freshwater

creek sampling sites, filtered samples were collected at a depth of about

10-50 cm below the water surface. Filtration of wastewater and seawater

samples for determination of dissolved nutrients was carried out using

the Whatman GF/C, 1.2 µm pore size filters to remove large particles,

plankton and bacteria. This was conducted in-situ using the suction

filtration kits. During transportation to the laboratory samples were kept

in ice and upon arrival they were either analysed immediately (i.e.

ammonia) or stored by freezing the filtrate at less than 4 ºC for up to 7

days in order to attain good results.

93
Figure 32: Acid bath for field sampling bottles and reagent/standard preparation

Figure 33: Field sampling at Crusoe’s wastewater treatment system

Figure 34: (a) Sample collection at the Tagaqe wetland inlet; (b) sample collection
at the Tagaqe wetland outlet

(a) (b)

94
5.2.2. Bacteria

The specific bacteria that were monitored in water samples from this

study include faecal coliform and E/coli. For coliform counts, the

wastewater and/or seawater samples were collected in either a labeled

500ml or 250ml sterilised sampling bottle. Wastewater samples were

usually collected in 250ml sterilised bottles whilst 500ml bottles were

used for freshwater or seawater samples. Collected samples were placed

in ice and transported back to the micro laboratory for immediate

analysis in order to achieve accurate results.

5.2.3. In-situ measurements

Several water quality parameters including salinity, temperature,

conductivity, and dissolved oxygen (DO) were measured in-situ using a

calibrated measuring probe attached by a 5m cable to a conductivity

meter (model: YSI-85).

5.2.4. Other water quality parameters

Water samples intended for analyses including total suspended solids

(TSS), Total Phosphorus (TP), Total Nitrogen (TN), Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen

(TKN), Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD), and pH measurement were

collected in unfiltered labeled acid-cleaned bottles and kept in ice whilst

transported back to the laboratory. BOD and pH analyses were

undertaken immediately whilst samples for other parameters could be

refrigerated for up to 7 days.

95
5.3. Greywater treatment drum system experiment

5.3.1. Water Quality Monitoring Program

After the completion of the drum system experiment set up in mid April

2007, as explained in Chapter 4, a start up period of at least four weeks

was initiated whereby monitoring was conducted on the two mesocosms

under various dosing regimes (Table 6).

Table 6: Preliminary water quality monitoring program to compare different

loading regimes [courtesy of Tom Headley]
Monitoring Mesocosm Average Dosing Dose Period at this
Daily HLR Regime# volume regime before
sampling
Period Loading L/day doses/day L/dose (minimum)
Rate
1 (large High 255 3 85 3 days
doses) Low 127 3 42.5
2 High 255 6 42.5 2 days
(moderate
doses) Low 127 6 21.25
3 (small High 255 12 21.25 1 day
doses) Low 127 12 10.6
# assumes mesocosms will be dosed manually during work hours
[between approx. 8am and 5pm, (9 hour period)].
5.3.2. Other Monitoring

Hydraulic performance:

The most likely mode of long-term failure of this type of greywater

management system was clogging or blockage of the soil surface where

the partially treated greywater infiltrates into the natural soil. A ―bio-

mat‖ of biofilm, slime and accumulated organic solids was attributed to

be the main cause of such clogging. The degree of clogging was expected

to be greatest in the highly loaded mesocosm. A gauge of the degree of

soil-interface clogging was obtained by comparing the hydrograph (i.e.

96
effluent flow rate versus time) for the two mesocosms following

application of a single dose, both when first set-up (i.e. clean system) and

at the end of the experiment. It was anticipated that the time taken for a

dose to drain through the system to increase as the soil-interface

becomes clogged.

Visual Observation of the condition of the different layers:

At the very end of the experiments, the various components of the system

were visually inspected for signs of clogging, organic matter build-up and

decomposition.

5.3.3. Starting recipe for artificial greywater solution

Table 7 provides a starting recipe for the artificial greywater solution

used. This starting recipe can be refined after preliminary analysis of the

drum system during the start up phase. Where necessary, urea could

also be added to increase the nitrogen concentration.

Table 7: Starting recipe for artificial greywater [courtesy of Tom Headley]

Ingredient Amount (per litre) Relevant inputs

Soap (powdered or grated) 50 mg/L Na, BOD, COD, fat
Shampoo/dishwashing liquid 0.5 ml/L Na, BOD, COD, surfactant
Secondary treated sewage 1.0 ml/L Bacteria, BOD
Whole milk powder 200 mg/L BOD, COD, N, oils, fats
Laundry powder 250 mg/L Na, B, P, surfactants
Soil 25 mg/L TSS, microbes

5.4. Analytical methods

The analyses of dissolved chemical species including nitrate, phosphate,

ammonia, and nitrite in wastewater, seawater and/or freshwater samples

were performed using an automated Lachat Quik Chem Flow Injection

97
Analyser (FIA) based at the University‘s Institute of Applied Science

laboratory (Figure 35). The flow injection analyser uses colorimetric

analyses and has the ability to process up to 60 samples an hour with

high reproducibility using relatively small sample sizes of ~3 ml per

analysis (Loder, 2000). Nitrate and/or nitrite analysis was adapted from

the methods written by Diamond (1994), as detailed in Lachat

Instrument Quik Chem Method 31-107-04-1-A. Phosphate analysis

followed Lachat Instrument Quik Chem Method 10-115-01-1-B (Prokopy,

1994). Ammonia analysis was based on the methods written by Ninglan

(2002) and detailed in Lachat Instrument Quik Chem Method 31-107-06-

1-B. The accuracy and precision of each of the methods is shown in

Table 8 and their detection limits in Table 9. Data obtained for the

General Coral Coast water quality samples were statistically analysed

using a software package known as SPSS 16.0 for Windows.

Table 8: Accuracy and precision for each Lachat Quik Chem FIA method
Nutrient Method (reference) Conc Mean conc Standard % RSD
species (µmol/L) (µmol/L) deviation
Nitrate/ 31-107-04-1-A 10.0 10.1 0.090 0.89
nitrite (Lachat Inc., 1994)
Ammonia 31-107-06-1-B 1.0 1.0 0.04 3.5
(Lachat Inc., 2002)
Phosphate 10-115-01-1-B 1.0 0.98 0.04 4.0
(Lachat Inc., 1994)
Nitrite 31-107-04-1-A 0.50 0.49 0.011 2.24
(Lachat Inc., 1994)

98
 Table 9: Method detection limit for each Lachat Quik Chem FIA method
Nutrient Method Known Mean Standard Method
species (reference) conc. conc. deviation Detection
(µmol/L) (µmol/L) Limit
(µmol/L)
Nitrate/nitrite 31-107-04- 0.28 0.25 0.015 0.04
1-A (1994)
Ammonia 31-107-06- 3.57 3.64 0.138 0.27
1-B (2002)
Phosphate 10-115-01- 0.50 0.48 0.005 0.01
1-B (1994)
Nitrite 31-107-04- 0.25 0.24 0.005 0.01
1-A (1994)

Typically, four standards (high, medium, low, and zero) were used in the

colorimetric analysis to create a standard curve from which the unknown

sample concentration was determined. These standard curves generally

had an r-value of 0.9998 or higher in order to be accepted. Both a blank

and known standard were sampled at least every ten samples throughout

each analysis to monitor instrument drift and base level consistency.

Later, during the data processing, these blank sample concentrations

were averaged together and subtracted from the standard and unknown

samples. The standard concentration values were compared to confirm

overall analytical accuracy as well as stability across the run.

Other water quality parameters were analysed using internationally

accredited ‗Standard Operating Procedures‘ at the Institute of Applied

Science laboratory, as detailed in the American Public Health

Association‘s (APHA) Standard Methods for the Examination of Water

and Wastewater (Clesceri et al., 1998; APHA, 2005). For instance, faecal

99
coliform (method reference number APHA 9221-B); E/coli (APHA 9222-G);

total suspended solids (APHA 2540-D); biological oxygen demand (APHA

5210-B); pH (APHA 4500-H); total Kjeldahl nitrogen (APHA 4500-Norg);

total phosphorus (Danish Std); and total nitrogen (APHA 4500-N).

Figure 35: The Auto Sampler Injector which sucks sample to be passed through
the FIA manifold

5.5. Automated Flow Injection Analysis

5.5.1. General description

Flow Injection Analysis (FIA) is a continuous flow technique which is

ideally suited to rapid automated analysis of liquid samples. In a flow

injection analyser, a small, fixed volume of a liquid sample is injected as

a discrete zone using an injection device into a liquid carrier which flows

through a narrow bore tube or conduit. The sample zone is progressively

dispersed into the carrier, initially by convection, and later by axial and

radial diffusion, as it is transported along the conduit under laminar flow

conditions. Reagents may be added at various confluence points and

100
these mix with the sample zone under the influence of radial dispersion,

to produce reactive or detectable species which can be sensed by any one

of a variety of flow-through detection devices (Figure 36). The height or

area of the peak-shaped signal thus obtained can be used to quantify the

analyte after comparison with the peaks obtained for solutions

containing known concentrations of the analyte (McKelvie, 1999; Lachat,

2003).

The complete process of sample/standard injection, transport, reagent

addition, reaction and detection can be accomplished very rapidly

(seconds to tens of seconds), using minimum amounts of sample and

reagents, and with excellent reproducibility (e.g. coefficient of variation,

CV, generally < 2 percent). Although complete equilibrium may not be

achieved during this process, quantitation is possible because both

standards and samples are dispersed to the same extent and processed

in an identical manner (McKelvie, 1999).

101
 Figure 36: (a) The injector and sample zone; (b) reagents being added to samples;
(c) analyser pumps; (d) a 4 channel manifold; (e) nitrate column on manifold; (f)
the computer system that log results; (g) FIA waste outlet; (h) peak shaped signals
on computer for analyte

(a) (b)

(c)
(d)
(a)

(e) (f)

(h)
(g)

102
5.5.2. Components of a Flow Injection Analyser

The assemblage of flow tubing, mixing coils, injection valve, etc, in a

given configuration, used in a flow injection analysis system is referred to

collectively as a manifold. A typical flow injection analysis manifold is

shown in Figure 37 using the common symbolic notation (McKelvie,

1999; Lachat, 2003).

Figure 37: Schematic diagram of a typical flow injection analysis manifold. P is a

pump, C and R are carrier and reagent lines respectively, S is sample injection,
MC's are mixing coils, D is a flow through detector, and W is the waste line.

The major components of a flow injection analysis system (Ruzicka and

Hansen, 1975; Valcarcel and Luque de Castro, 1987; Ruzicka and

Hansen, 1988; Karlberg and Pacey, 1989; Burguera, 1989; McKelvie,

1999) are:

1. A ‗propulsion‘ system for delivery of carrier and reagent solutions.

This is most frequently a peristaltic pump or pumps, typically with

the capacity to pump between four to eight carrier/reagent lines.

103
 2. ‗Flow tubing or conduit‘ with an internal diameter of 0.3 -1.0 mm

is generally used to maintain laminar flow conditions and

controlled dispersion of the sample zone.

3. A ‗sample injection‘ device for reproducibly introducing a small

volume of sample into the flowing carrier or reagent stream.

4. A ‗mixing device‘ to promote radial diffusion, and hence reaction

between sample zone and reagents. Mixing devices usually consist

of coils of tubing. If a small coil radius is used, secondary flow

occurs and enhances the radial mixing with minimal gains in axial

dispersion.

5. One or more flow-through ‗detection devices‘ which may sense

changes in absorbance, fluorescence, chemiluminescence, atomic

emission or absorption, infra-red absorption, pH, electrode

potential, diffusion current, electrical conductivity, turbidity, mass,

etc.

6. An ‗instrument control-data acquisition/processing/output

system‘. An automated FIA system may be controlled using a PC

with a suitable analogue to digital board, and control/data

acquisition software.

5.5.3. General guidelines for using the FIA for nutrient analysis

The following guidelines were developed by the researcher during the

study to ease future usage of the Flow Injection Analyser at the

104
University of the South Pacific‘s Institute of Applied Science laboratory in

regard to nutrient analytes in water samples:

 Manifold Connections: Nitrate cannot be interchanged. Only

interchange ammonia and phosphate manifold and tubing (refer to

Quik Chem Methods).

 Heating temperatures: phosphate - 37˚C; nitrate/nitrite - 33˚C;

and ammonia - 60˚C.

 To adjust temperature: Press menu button until ―SP‖ appears, use

up key (۸) or down key (۷) to adjust to appropriate temperature,

press ENTER to save, press menu button once to show the current

temperature, run machine with Deionised water for 15 minutes to

reach appropriate temp.

 Ammonia, nitrate/nitrite and phosphate could be analysed in one

run. Always analyse for ammonia when sample is still fresh whilst

nitrate/nitrite and phosphate could be analysed later after freezing

within 7 days.

 For ammonia analysis, all reagent containers should be covered

with parafilm after insertion of the transmission lines to prevent

contamination from airborne ammonia. Also add standards and

samples slowly in sampler to avoid contamination from ammonia

in air. Ensure to add reagents in the order that they appear on the

Lachat Quik Chem Method 31-107-06-1-B manifold to reduce

105
 staining. Also prepare fresh reagents and ensure that EDTA in the

buffer is completely dissolved.

5.5.4. General steps for running samples on the FIA

1. TURN ON: main power-point, pump switches, manifold switch and

computer (data system).

2. Pump DI water through all reagent lines for at least 15 minutes to

reach appropriate temperature and to check for leaks and smooth

flow.

3. Switch to reagents and allow 5 minutes at ―Manual rate pumping‖

for system to equilibrate for nitrate/nitrite and phosphates. Keep

the nitrate channel column switch at ―Off line‖ to avoid bubbles

from entering the Cadmium Column at this stage. For ammonia:

allow 15 minutes for system to equilibrate.

4. Place 4-5 tubes of blanks (Deionised water) in the sampler, open

Omnion 3.0 program in computer or any existing file e.g: ‗Exsley‘ in

either ‗My computer‘ or ‗My documents‘. Type Deionised water in

the spaces provided beside each cup number and click ‗START‘.

Now turn the Cadmium column switch to ―On line‖ and system will

start running after 90 seconds. A low stable baseline needs to be

achieved and should not give a peak. If the blank peak is negative,

the carrier is contaminated. If the blank peak is positive, the blank

is contaminated.

106
5. Place respective nutrient standards and/or samples in the

sampler. Input the information required by the data system such

as concentration, cup number, replicates, check standards,

blanks, moos, field blanks and so forth. Click Start and injection of

standards and/or samples will start within 90 seconds. In certain

cases it might go beyond the 90 seconds.

6. Verify calibration using a midrange calibration standard every 10

samples or every analytical batch. Use 35ug/L for nitrate, 10ug/L

for phosphate, and 20ug/L for ammonia.

7. At the end of analysis, click STOP and select appropriate mode of

stopping. Turn pump to ‗minimum setting‘ when the system shows

―IDLE‖ in the computer and check for calibration curves. Discard

way off points to get good calibration curves.

8. Click on icon for graph enlargement on the bottom left hand corner

of the computer and left click on graph and move bars to detect

peaks. Right click on graph and select ―re-run peak detection

limits‖.

9. Flash all tubes with DI water for at least 10 minutes while turning

the nitrate channel column to ―Off line‖. Note: For phosphate

(optional); place the colour reagent and ascorbic acid transmission

lines into NaOH-EDTA solution and pump this solution for 5

minutes while placing the other lines for nitrate/nitrite and

107
 ammonia separately in deionised water. Then place all lines in

deionised water and pump for another 5 minutes.

10. Save Report or Print customized copy on printer installed and close

computer and turn off all switches including the main power-point.

Ensure to release all the pump clippings to relieve unnecessary

stress on the tubing.

108
Chapter 6 Results

6.1. Introduction

This chapter progressively presents the results and monitoring data from

the Tagaqe Village constructed wetland, Crusoe‘s Resort treatment plant,

general Coral Coast sites, Votua Village Creek monitoring, and an ex-situ

model drum experiment.

6.2. Tagaqe Village constructed wetland

The subsurface constructed wetland at Tagaqe Village was completed in

December 2004 and left for about six months to allow for the wetland

plants to flourish and the system to stabilise. Preliminary monitoring

occurred in May 2005, but actual monitoring commenced in June 2005

and ended in October 2006 (Appendix A). The frequency of sampling was

done on a monthly basis in average. There were eight samplings

undertaken on 15th June 2005, 18th July 2005, 20th October 2005, 11th

May 2006, 8th June 2006, 5th July 2006, 14th September 2006, and 8th

October 2006. The overall wetland monitoring period was around sixteen

months and a summary of the water quality results are presented in

Table 10. A visual observation of untreated and treated wastewater from

the wetland is shown in Figure 38.

109
 Figure 38: Sample of treated and untreated wastewater from Tagaqe wetland
Treated Sample - clear and
earthy smell

Untreated Sample - cloudy

and foul smell

Table 10: Summary of mean water quality results from Tagaqe wetland over the
period between June 2005 and October 2006 (n=8)
Parameters Influent Effluent % Removal
Temperature (˚C) 28.6 27.2 -
Salinity (ppt) 0.0 0.0 -
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l) 0.16 0.82 -
Conductivity (mS/cm) 0.12 0.02 -
pH 6.80 6.85 -
Faecal Coliform (c/100ml) 3.6 x 106 2.4 x 104 99.3
E.coli (c/100ml) 1.4 x 106 1.5 x 104 98.9
Total Suspended Solids (mg/l) 886.6 30.6 96.5
BOD5 (mg/l) 324.8 17.3 94.7
NH3-N (µmol/L) 4596.8 798.1 82.6
NO3-N (µmol/L) 1.04 6.08 -
NO2-N (µmol/L) 0.14 0.07 50.0
Total Inorganic Nitrogen (µmol/L) 4598 804.3 82.5
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (µmol/L) 8169.2 1997.6 75.5
PO4-P (µmol/L) 392.0 96.1 75.5
Total Phosphorus (µmol/L) 539.0 166.6 69.1
TIN: P ratio 9 5

Results for the Tagaqe wetland showed that removal efficiency of faecal

coliform, E/coli, total suspended solids (TSS), and biological oxygen

demand (BOD) exceeded 90 percent. Nitrogen removal from the wetland

ranged from 50.0 percent for nitrite (NO2-N) to 82.6 percent for ammonia

(NH3-N) while nitrate (NO3-N) appeared to show no direct removal. In

regard to phosphorus, the removal rate was 75.5 percent for phosphate

110
(PO4-P) and 69.1 percent for total phosphorus (TP). The total inorganic

nitrogen (TIN) to phosphorus (PO4-P) ratio was 9 for the untreated

influent and 5 for the treated effluent.

6.3. Crusoe’s Resort wastewater treatment plant

The wastewater treatment plant at the Crusoe‘s Resort was completed in

April 2005. Monitoring spanned for around 11 months starting in

October 2005 until September 2006 (Appendix B). Results for the

treatment plant performance are summarized in Table 11.

Table 11: Summary of mean water quality results from the Crusoe’s wastewater
treatment plant over the period between October 2005 and September 2006 (n=5)
Parameters Influent Effluent % Removal
Temperature (˚C) 30.3 30.7 -
Salinity (ppt) 0.0 0.0 -
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l) 0.17 4.20 -
Conductivity (mS/cm) 0.74 0.02 -
pH 6.76 6.90 -
Faecal Coliform (c/100ml) 8.9 x 105 5.8 x 104 93.5
E.coli (c/100ml) 1.0 x 106 5.3 x 104 94.7
Total Suspended Solids (mg/l) 35.2 12.8 63.6
BOD5 (mg/l) 63.6 18.0 71.7
NH3-N (µmol/L) 2702.4 872.7 72.7
NO3-N (µmol/L) 19.3 6.07 68.5
NO2-N (µmol/L) 0.57 0.28 50.9
Total Inorganic Nitrogen (µmol/L) 3214.2 879.1 72.7
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (µmol/L) 3194.3 1347.6 50.1
PO4-P (µmol/L) 220.4 64.6 70.7
Total Phosphorus (µmol/L) 263.1 103.9 60.5
TIN: P ratio 12 8

Data from the Crusoe‘s wastewater treatment system outlined in Table

11 showed that the percentage removal of faecal coliform was 93.5;

E/coli 94.7 percent; total suspended solids 63.6 percent whilst 71.7

percent was attained for biological oxygen demand. Ammonia (NH3-N)

was removed at 72.7 percent; nitrate (NO3-N) 68.5 percent; and nitrite

111
(NO2-N) 50.9 percent. In addition, phosphate (PO4-P) removal reached

70.7 percent while total phosphorus yielded 60.5 percent. The nitrogen

to phosphorus ratio was 12 for influent and 8 for treated effluent.

6.4. Coral Coast nearshore water quality monitoring

Coral Coast nearshore sites consist of monitored locations adjacent to

tourist resorts and villages similar to sites studied by Mosley and

Aalbersberg (2003). Monitoring under this study was undertaken

between July 2005 and July 2006 (Appendix C). The average results are

detailed in Table 12. A comparative baseline data for the Coral Coast

which was obtained by the University of the South Pacific‘s Institute of

Applied Science researchers (e.g. Bale Tamata, Luke Mosley, Bill

Aalbersberg and Sarabjeet Singh) is displayed in Table 13.

Table 12 showed that salinity for the 17 sites monitored varied between

27.3 ppt at Korotogo Bridge and 34.1 ppt at Malevu Village shoreline.

Average salinity for the 17 sites was 32.0 ± 0.4 ppt. Water temperature

ranged from 27.2 ºC for Tabua Sands and Komave to 32.1 ºC for Naviti

Resort shoreline with a mean of 29.4 ± 0.3 ºC. Dissovled oxygen (DO)

levels were relatively moderate with a minimum of 3.47 mg/L at Korotogo

Bridge and a maximum of 7.13 mg/L at Outrigger Resort shoreline. The

mean DO level for the 17 sites was 6.10 ± 0.20 mg/L. Conductivity

fluctuated within 36.76 mS/cm (i.e. Matai Kadavu Beach) and 56.0

mS/cm for Malevu shoreline with an average of 49.92 ± 1.16 mS/cm.

112
In reference to nutrients, Komave and Tagaqe shorelines yielded the

lowest nitrate (NO3-N) values of 2.33µmol/L and 2.58µmol/L respectively.

The highest nitrate concentrations were observed for Malevu, Outrigger

Resort and Tubakula Resort shorelines with levels of 6.88µmol/L;

6.68µmol/L; and 6.18µmol/L respectively. However the average nitrate

level for the 17 monitored sites was 4.16 ± 0.35 µmol/L. Ammonia (NH3-

N) varied between 0.98µmol/L at Tabua Sands and 5.82µmol/L at

Korotogo Bridge with a mean of 2.09 ± 0.29 µmol/L. Site number 17 (e.g.

between Malevu & Vatukarasa) had the lowest nitrite (NO2-N)

concentration of 0.24µmol/L and the highest was observed at site

number 16 (Matai Kadavu Beach) with 0.63µmol/L. The average nitrite

value for the Coral Coast was 0.35 ± 0.02 µmol/L.

Phosphate (PO4-P) concentration was lowest at Hideaway Resort

(0.28µmol/L) and Fijian Resort (0.31µmol/L) shorelines whilst Votua,

Vatukarasa and Korotogo Bridge yielded the highest phosphate levels of

0.51; 0.58; and 1.14 µmol/L, respectively. A mean PO4-P of 0.43 ± 0.05

µmol/L was obtained for the Coral Coast water quality monitoring. The

total inorganic nitrogen (TIN) to phosphorus (PO4-P) ratio ranged between

9 and 29 with an average of 17 ± 1.

113
 Table 12: Summary of mean water quality results from the Coral Coast between July 2005 and July 2006 (n = 5)
Site Place & (GPS Location) Sal Temp DO Cond NO3-N NH3-N NO2-N PO4-P TIN:P
# (ppt) (ºC) (mg/l) (mS) µmol/L µmol/L µmol/L µmol/L ratio
1 Fijian Resort (18-08.62S;177-25.76E) 33.0 29.2 5.77 53.45 3.09 1.71 0.38 0.31 17
2 Outrigger Resort (18-10.82S;177- 32.2 28.3 7.13 52.9 6.68 1.61 0.39 0.36 24
33.08E)
3 Tubakula Resort (18-10.86S;177- 32.7 29.1 7.06 51.95 6.18 1.25 0.37 0.33 24
33.46E)
5 Votua Village (18-12.69S;177-42.89E) 31.6 29.3 5.90 54.38 2.85 2.34 0.32 0.51 11
6 Tagaqe Village (18-11.91S;177-39.75E) 32.6 28.2 6.32 45.91 2.58 1.07 0.28 0.45 9
7 Sovi Bay (18-12.30S;177-36.39E) 33.4 30.1 5.86 53.97 3.74 2.14 0.33 0.35 18
8 Hideaway Resort (18-11.92S;177- 33.0 30.2 6.33 47.15 3.99 3.75 0.35 0.28 29
39.32E)
9 Naviti Resort (18-12.31S;177-41.84E) 31.5 32.1 5.97 51.83 3.59 3.07 0.29 0.37 19
10 Komave Village (18-13.38S;177-45.71E) 31.6 27.2 5.49 45.14 2.33 2.0 0.29 0.35 13
11 Tabua Sands (18-11.62S;177-37.89E) 32.1 27.2 5.95 51.63 3.90 0.98 0.30 0.33 16
12 Vatukarasa (18-10.85S;177-36.22E) 31.7 29.7 6.62 50.7 3.14 2.44 0.34 0.58 10
13 Malevu Village (18-10.85S;177-33.62E) 34.1 29.3 6.50 56 6.88 1.40 0.37 0.44 20
14 Crows Nest (18-10.65S;177-32.60E) 32.9 29.4 6.81 53.25 5.45 1.22 0.36 0.43 16
15 Korotogo Bridge (18-10.67S;177-32.59E) 27.3 28.9 3.47 45.9 5.68 5.82 0.47 1.14 11
16 Matai Kadavu Beach (18-10.77S;177- 31.8 30.1 5.81 36.76 2.97 1.69 0.63 0.35 15
31.05E)
17 Between Malevu & Vatukarasa (18- 30.6 29.9 6.30 46.69 3.53 1.31 0.24 0.35 15
11.17S;177-33.57E)
18 Warwick Hotel (18-13.69S;177-44.37E) 31.7 30.8 6.43 51.05 4.11 1.73 0.28 0.37 17
Mean 32.0 29.4 6.10 49.92 4.16 2.09 0.35 0.43 17
Mean Standard Error ±0.4 ±0.3 ±0.20 ±1.16 ±0.35 ±0.29 ±0.02 ±0.05 ±1
Standard Deviation 1.5 1.2 0.8 4.8 1.5 1.2 0.1 0.2 5

114
Table 13 which displayed a summary of Coral Coast ―baseline data‖ prior

to the monitoring period under this study (e.g. July 2005 to July 2006)

showed that salinity ranged from 27.2 ppt at Votua to 36.4 ppt for the

Fijian Resort shoreline with a mean of 33.8 ± 0.6 ppt. Water temperature

yielded a minimum of 21.2 ºC at Korotogo Bridge and a maximum of 29.6

ºC for Fijian Resort and Sovi Bay. Average temperature for the 17

monitored sites was 27.5 ± 0.5 ºC. Dissolved oxygen fluctuated between

2.29 mg/L for Korotogo Bridge and 8.3 mg/L for Tagaqe with an overall

mean of 6.94 ± 0.33 mg/L.

Faecal coliform levels showed a significant variance between sites. For

instance Fijian Resort yielded 1 count/100ml; Naviti Resort 31

count/100ml; Hideaway Resort 137 count/100ml; Votua Village 507

count/100ml; and Warwick Hotel 902 count/100ml. The average

coliform level for the Coral Coast sites was 169 ± 68 counts/100ml.

Nitrate (NO3-N) concentration was lowest at Matai Kadavu Beach with

0.10µmol/L and higher at Votua (3.34µmol/L) and Vatukarasa

(2.13µmol/L). Mean nitrate level was 1.11 ± 0.20 µmol/L. Site number 13

(i.e. Malevu Village) attained the least ammonia value of 1.39µmol/L

while Vatukarasa yielded the highest concentration of 9.36µmol/L

followed by Hideaway Resort at 7.93µmol/L. The average ammonia (NH3-

N) level for the Coral Coast prior to July 2005 was 5.24 ± 0.71 µmol/L.
115
The level of phosphate (PO4-P) was observed to be lowest at site number

7 (Sovi Bay) with 0.09µmol/L and varied between other sites, for

example: 0.28µmol/L for Matai Kadavu Beach; 0.59µmol/L for Fijian

Resort; 0.89µmol/L for Tabua Sands; 1.39µmol/L for Outrigger Resort

and 1.51µmol/L for Korotogo Bridge. Nevertheless the mean phosphate

concentration for the Coral Coast prior to July 2005 was 0.73 ± 0.10

µmol/L.

Total inorganic nitrogen to phosphorus ratio for the Coral Coast ranged

from 0.2 (site number 15) to a maximum of 13 at site number 8

(Hideaway Resort). However the mean nitrogen to phosphorus ratio for

the Coral Coast prior to July 2005 was 6 ± 1.

116
 Table 13: Summarised “baseline” water quality data from the Coral Coast over a five year period prior to July 2005
(courtesy of Bale Tamata, Sarabjeet Singh, Luke Mosley & Bill Aalbersberg – IAS monitoring)
Site Place GPS location Sal Temp DO F/Coliform NO3-N NH3-N PO4-P TIN:P
# (ppt) (ºC) (mg/l) (c/100ml) µmol/L µmol/L µmol/L ratio
1 Fijian Resort 18-08.62S; 177-25.76E 36.4 29.6 8.0 1 1.11 3.75 0.59 8
2 Outrigger 18-10.82S; 177-33.08E 34.5 27.9 6.54 45 1.78 2.37 1.39 3
3 Tubakula 18-10.86S; 177-33.46E 35.6 27.0 6.5 24 1.08 6.10 0.79 9
5 Votua Village 18-12.69S;177-42.89E 27.2 28.5 7.6 507 3.34 - 0.47 7
6 Tagaqe Village 18-11.91S; 177-39.75E 30.9 28.2 8.3 29 1.21 4.37 0.67 8
7 Sovi Bay 18-12.30S; 177-36.39E 31.7 29.6 7.54 7 0.35 - 0.09 4
8 Hideaway 18-11.92S; 177-39.32E 36.0 28.0 8.0 137 0.64 7.93 0.63 13
9 Naviti Resort 18-12.31S; 177-41.84E 33.6 28.8 7.4 31 0.63 3.98 0.71 7
10 Komave Village 18-13.38S; 177-45.71E 31.3 26.2 7.6 87 0.40 - 0.47 1
11 Tabua Sands 18-11.62S; 177-37.89E 35.8 28.6 7.9 4 1.08 6.71 0.89 9
12 Vatukarasa 18-10.85S; 177-36.22E 34.5 26.5 6.4 289 2.13 9.36 1.33 9
13 Malevu Village 18-10.85S; 177-33.62E 35.0 27.3 6.35 109 1.80 1.39 0.79 4
14 Crows Nest 18-10.65S; 177-32.60E 34.3 27.8 7.38 191 1.60 6.20 1.0 8
15 Korotogo Bridge 18-10.67S; 177-32.59E 33.9 21.2 2.29 - 0.25 - 1.51 0.2
16 Matai Kadavu 18-10.77S; 177-31.05E 34.0 28.7 5.98 - 0.10 - 0.28 0.4
Beach
17 Between Malevu 18-11.17S; 177-33.57E 34.1 27.4 7.35 - 0.71 - 0.20 3
& Vatukarasa
18 Warwick Hotel 18-13.69S; 177-44.37E 36.1 26.9 6.8 902 0.65 5.51 0.59 10
Mean 33.8 27.5 6.94 169 1.11 5.24 0.73 6
Mean Standard Error ±0.6 ±0.5 ±0.33 ±68 ±0.20 ±0.71 ±0.10 ±1
Standard Deviation 2.4 1.9 1.4 253 0.8 2.4 0.4 4

117
6.5. Votua Creek water quality monitoring

Ongoing monitoring of water quality along the Coral Coast by the

Institute of Applied Science has shown that Votua Creek is one of the

relatively higher sources of pollution input into the coastal water due to

untreated wastewater and piggery farming. As a result there was need to

investigate the points of pollution from an upstream housing

development along the Votua Creek prior to an anticipated village

wetland system. Monitoring was undertaken from June to September

2006 (see Appendix D) and results are summarised in Table 14.

Data in Table 14 appear to show that faecal coliform levels generally

increased on a linear trend from the Votua water supply dam

downstream to the creek mouth. For instance Votua Dam had 140

counts/100ml; Upper Housing 165 counts/100ml; Lower Housing

yielded 535 counts/100ml; Votua Bridge 664 counts/100ml and Votua

Creek mouth 813 counts/100ml. In terms of drinking water supply, the

Votua Housing tap water had <1 coliform counts/100ml, 58

counts/100ml for Votua Village tap water and 33 counts/100ml for

Mike‘s Diver tap water. E/coli for creek water quality was lowest at the

Votua Dam site with 95 counts/100ml; followed by Upper Housing (135

counts/100ml); Lower Housing (296 counts/100ml) and the Creek

mouth (483 counts/100ml). The highest E/coli level was observed at the

Votua Bridge with 751 counts/100ml). Votua Housing tap water reached
118
<1 counts/100ml while the Village and Mike‘s Diver tap water yielded 48

and 21 counts/100ml respectively.

Conductivity also increased from the Votua Dam downstream to the

Creek mouth with a range between 0.11mS and 0.23mS. In terms of

water flow, it was generally ‗fast‘ at the Votua Dam and Upper Housing

sites; ‗medium‘ at Lower Housing; and ‗slow‘ at Votua Bridge and Creek

mouth. Votua Dam also obtained the lowest total suspended solids

reading with 8.3 mg/L followed by Upper Housing (9.7 mg/L), Lower

Housing (14.0 mg/L) and Creek Mouth (14.3 mg/L). Votua Bridge

displayed the highest suspended solids level of 15.3 mg/L. For biological

oxygen demand, the results showed no obvious variance between sites as

all monitored sites yielded <18 mg/L.

Ammonia (NH3-N) concentration for the Votua Creek ranged between

3.1µmol/L at the Dam site and 11.4µmol/L at the Bridge. Lower Housing

had the second highest ammonia level with 10.7µmol/L. Nitrate (NO3-N)

also showed a similar trend to ammonia at all the monitored sites along

the Votua Creek with a low of 1.96µmol/L at the dam to a high of

11.9µmol/L at the bridge. Nitrite (NO2-N) was least at the dam with

0.46µmol/L and increased downstream to a maximum of 1.12µmol/L at

the creek mouth. Total kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) was least from the upper

creek dam site and relatively increased downstream to the creek mouth
119
ranging from 7.2 to 23.8 µmol/L. Total inorganic nitrogen (TIN) reached a

maximum at the bridge with 24.4µmol/L with the lowest concentration of

5.5µmol/L at the dam.

Phosphate (PO4-P) concentrations for the Votua Creek yielded

0.36µmol/L at the dam, exceeded upper housing with 0.39µmol/L,

0.78µmol/L for lower housing, Votua Bridge with 0.99µmol/L, and the

creek mouth with 1.36µmol/L. Total phosphorus also highlighted similar

trend as compared to phosphate with the dam site showing the lowest

value of 0.44µmol/L. Upper housing had 0.50µmol/L; lower housing

0.67µmol/L; 0.93µmol/L for Votua bridge whilst the creek mouth

attained 1.35µmol/L.

120
 Table 14: A summary of Votua Creek mean water quality monitoring between June and September 2006 (n = 4)
Site FC E.coli Sal Temp Cond pH TSS Flow BOD NH3 NO3 NO2 TIN TKN PO4 TP
c/100ml c/100ml ppt ºC mS mg/l mg/l µM µM µM µM µM µM µM
Votua
Dam 140 95 0.0 19.3 0.110 7.7 8.3 Fast <18 3.1 1.96 0.46 5.5 7.2 0.36 0.44

Upper 165 135 0.0 18.1 0.111 7.4 9.7 Fast <18 4.7 6.45 0.56 11.7 11.6 0.39 0.50
Housing

Lower 535 296 0.0 20.7 0.115 7.3 14.0 Med <18 10.7 11.0 0.75 22.5 26.5 0.78 0.67
Housing

Votua 664 751 0.2 20.9 0.124 7.3 15.3 Slow <18 11.4 11.9 1.07 24.4 23.3 0.99 0.93
Bridge

Votua 813 483 15.6 22.6 0.230 7.8 14.3 Slow <18 10.3 10.7 1.12 22.1 23.8 1.36 1.35
Creek
mouth

Housing <1 <1 0.0 - - - - - - - - - - - - -

tap water

Village 58 48 0.0 - - - - - - - - - - - - -
tap water

Mike‘s 33 21 0.0 - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Diver tap
water

121
6.6. Drum system experiment

6.6.1. Water quality monitoring program

Sampling and actual monitoring started in mid May until early June

2007 (Figure 39). For monitoring period 1 (i.e. large doses) which

comprised 3 doses per day; artificial greywater solutions were added

every 8am, 1pm and 5pm. After 3 days, samples were collected from

the 1pm dose. In regard to monitoring period 2 (e.g. moderate doses)

consisting of 6 doses per day; artificial greywater doses were added

every 8am, 10am, 12midday, 2pm, 4pm and 6pm. After 2 days,

samples were collected from the 12midday dose. Monitoring period 3

(small doses) included 12 doses per day, hence doses were added

every 8am, 8.40am, 9.20am, 10am, 10.40am, 11.20am, 12midday,

12.40pm, 1.20pm, 2pm, 2.40pm, and 3.20pm. After 1 day, samples

were collected for the 12midday dose. Results for the different dosage

regimes are summarised in Tables 15 to 17.

Figure 39: Sampling the ex-situ drum system experiment

122
 Table 15: Summary of results for “Monitoring Period 1 – Large Doses”
Parameter Artificial High Loading Low Loading
Greywater (HL) (LL)
Solution
Temperature (ºC) 23.8 24.6 25.7
Salinity (ppt) 0.19 0.23 0.23
Conductivity (mS) 0.586 0.592 0.588
pH 6.3 7.6 8.2
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) 1.96 2.33 2.31
Total Dissolved Solids (mg/L) 0.466 0.421 0.430
Faecal coliform (c/100ml) 1.2x106 1.7x105 2.2x105
E.coli (c/100ml) 5.0 x103 2.0x103 2.0x103
BOD (mg/L) 81 76 63
Total Suspended Solids (mg/L) 119 93 113
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (mg/L) 8.3 5.45 8.27
Phosphorus (mg/L) 9.2 8.33 7.61

During ―Monitoring Period 1 (i.e. large doses)‖ which is summarised in

Table 15; conductivity, dissolved oxygen, total dissolved solid and

E/coli showed very small variance between the High Loading and Low

Loading mesocosms. Conductivity was 0.592mS/cm for the high

Loading drum effluent and 0.588mS/cm for the low loaded system. A

dissolved oxygen level of 2.33 mg/L was obtained for high loading and

2.31 mg/L for low loading whilst E/coli levels remained constant at

2,000 counts/100ml for both mesocosms.

Faecal coliform concentration was relatively higher for the Low

Loading drum with 220,000 counts/100ml in comparison to 170,000

counts/100ml for the High Loading regime. Biological oxygen demand

was 76 mg/L for high loading and 63 mg/L for low loading. The low

loaded drum attained a higher total suspended solids value of 113

mg/L as opposed to 93 mg/L for the high loaded mesocosm. TKN

increased from 5.45 mg/L for high loading to 8.27 mg/L for the low

123
loading regime. Phosphorus decreased from 8.33 mg/L for high

loading to 7.6 mg/L for low loading.

Table 16: A summary of results for “Monitoring Period 2 – Moderate Doses”

Parameter Artificial High High High Low Low Low
Influent Loading Loading Loading Loading Loading Loading
Solution #1 #2 #3 #1 #2 #3
Temperature 26.4 25.6 25.6 25.7 26.3 26.3 25.7
(ºC)

Salinity (ppt) 0.23 0.27 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.33 0.30

Conductivity 0.597 0.599 0.582 0.587 0.870 0.877 0.869

(mS)

pH 5.7 7.8 7.8 7.9 8.1 8.3 8.3

DO (mg/L) 2.34 2.11 1.95 1.13 2.24 2.09 2.01

TDS (mg/L) 0.576 0.379 0.431 0.378 0.538 0.511 0.377

Faecal
coliform 1.7x106 5.9x105 1.6x105 1.6x105 1.6x105 1.6x105 1.6x105
(c/100ml)

E.coli 2.0 x104 800 2.3x103 5.0x103 8.0x103 3.0x103 1.7x103

(c/100ml)

BOD (mg/L) 292 82 81 271 61 104 130

TSS (mg/L) 132 92 93 110 108 118 110

TKN (mg/L) 11.4 <2 <2 <2 9.94 6.09 <2

Phosphorus 10.1 6.28 7.34 7.38 6.75 7.75 7.48

(mg/L)
Note: #1 - an effluent sample collected immediately after dosing
#2 - a middle sample collected 30 minutes after the first sample
#3 - an end sample collected 60 minutes after the first sample

Table 16 depicting ―Monitoring Period 2 (e.g. moderate doses)‖ showed

lower conductivity levels of 0.582 to 0.599 mS/cm for the High

Loading drum effluent, while low loading ranged between 0.869 and

0.877 mS/cm. Salinity levels were slightly higher in the low loaded

drum than the high loaded system. The low loaded effluent was more

basic than the high loading drum as well. In regard to dissolved

oxygen, levels were higher for the low loaded drum ranging from 2.01

124
mg/L to 2.24 mg/L where as the high loading drum attained lower

values within 1.13 to 2.11 mg/L. Similarly, total suspended solids

(TSS) and total kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) showed comparatively higher

concentrations for the low loaded drum as opposed to the high loading

mesocosm. Other parameters such as faecal coliform, E/coli, and

biological oxygen demand (BOD) displayed no obvious variance

between the two mesocosms.

For monitoring period 2, three periodic samples were collected from

each drum experiment in 30 minute intervals. Sample #1 was

referenced as the immediate effluent sample after dosing; sample #2

was a middle sample collected 30 minutes after the first sample; and

sample #3 was an end sample collected 60 minutes after the first

sample. From Table 16 it can be seen that the pH levels slightly rose

for both mesocosms from sample #1 to sample #3. On the contrary,

dissolved oxygen levels fell in the order from samples #1 to #3. For

E/coli there was an increase from sample #1 to sample #3 in the High

Loading drum whilst for the Low Loading drum there was reduction.

BOD, TSS and Phosphorus showed increases in the order from

samples #1 – 3 for both mesocosms. TKN was stable for the High

Loading experiment and decreased for Low Loading from sample #1 to

sample #3.

125
 Table 17: Mean results for “Monitoring Period 3 – Small Doses”
Parameter Artificial High High High Low Low Low
Influent Loading Loading Loading Loading Loading Loading
Solution #1 #2 #3 #1 #2 #3
Temp (ºC) 24.9 26.5 26.5 26.5 25.3 25.3 25.4

Sal (ppt) 0.14 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.33 0.30 0.29

Cond (mS) 0.557 0.696 0.581 0.583 0.885 0.624 0.606

pH 5.3 7.7 7.8 7.8 8.25 8.26 8.26

D/Oxygen 2.81 1.65 1.35 1.21 2.23 2.11 1.36

(mg/L)

TDS (mg/L) 0.618 0.451 0.378 0.379 0.573 0.405 0.393

Faecal
coliform 1.7x106 9.0x105 3.0x105 1.7x105 3.0x105 1.3x105 2.2x105
(c/100ml)

E.coli 4.0 x104 6.0x103 4.0x103 4.0x103 2.6x104 8.0x103 1.4x104

(c/100ml)

BOD 273 240 172 135 60 98 108

(mg/L)

TSS (mg/L) 36 32 22 20 29 11 26

TKN (mg/L) 15.9 10.9 4.34 7.28 14.0 10.1 8.96

Phosphorus 9.13 7.05 7.54 8.07 4.05 5.98 6.22

(mg/L)
Note: #1 - an effluent sample collected immediately after dosing
#2 - a middle sample collected 30 minutes after the first sample
#3 - an end sample collected 60 minutes after the first sample

Table 17 represents ―Monitoring Period 3 (i.e. small doses)‖. Effluent

from the low loading drum appears to be more basic than the effluent

from the high loading system. Dissolved oxygen was also higher for

the low loaded effluent than high loading. Faecal coliform, phosphorus

and biological oxygen demand concentrations for the high loading

design exceeded that of the low loading drum. However, E/coli and

total kjeldahl nitrogen levels were higher for the low loading drum

than the high loading regime.

126
In relation to the variance between 30 minute interval samples;

salinity, dissolved oxygen, conductivity, total dissolved solids, total

kjeldahl nitrogen and faecal coliform showed decreases from sample

#1 to sample #2 for both drums. For the high loaded drum obvious

reduction from sample #1 to #3 were observed for biological oxygen

demand and total suspended solids. Phosphorus and biological

oxygen demand were observed to rise in the low loading effluent from

sample #1 to sample #3.

6.6.2. Other monitoring

A gauge of the degree of soil-interface clogging was obtained by

comparing the hydrograph (i.e. effluent flow rate versus time) for the

two mesocosms following application of a single dose of 85 litres/dose

for the High Loading mesocosm and 42.5 litres/dose for the Low

Loading regime, both when first set-up (clean system) and at the end

of the experiment. The findings are displayed in Figure 40.

Figure 40: A graph showing the effluent flow rate

Figure 42: vs
A graph showing
time for themesocosms
the two effluent flow rate vs
time for the two mesocosms

140
118
120
Time (minutes)

100
73
80 66 Clean system
60 Clogged system
38
40
20
0
HL - 85 litres/dose LL - 42.5 litres/dose
Mesocosm regime

Figure 40 highlights that for a standard high loading dosage of 85

litres of artificial greywater solution, it took 73 minutes to elute when

the experiment was first set up (clean system) and 118 minutes to
127
elute when the same dose was added at the end of the experiment.

The difference was 45 minutes. For a standard low loading dosage of

42.5 litres of artificial greywater solution, it took 38 minutes to elute

for the clean system and lasted 66 minutes for the clogged system at

the end of the experiment. The difference was 28 minutes.

In regards to a visual observation of the condition of the different

layers within the two mesocosms, it was found that signs of clogging

and organic matter build up were relatively higher within the ‗High

Loading‘ drum as compared to the ‗Low Loading‘ drum. Organic

matter build up was obvious on the coconut husk and shell layers and

decomposition was greatest at the deeper layers comprising the coral

rubble, sandy soil, and gravel producing an anoxic environment and

emitting septic-like foul smell. A display of some degree of clogging on

the coconut husk layer within the High Loading drum is highlighted in

Figure 41.

Figure 41: Some degree of clogging on the coconut husk layer within the High
Loading mesocosm

128
Chapter 7 Discussion

7.1. Tagaqe Village constructed wetland

Monitoring data for the Tagaqe Village constructed wetland which are

summarised in Table 10 showed that there was no significant

difference in temperature and salinity measurements for both the

untreated influent and treated effluent. For example the influent and

effluent temperatures were 28.6 ºC and 27.2 ºC respectively. Salinity

remained constant at zero ppt for both the untreated and treated

samples. These results are consistent with the warmer climate in Fiji

and the amount of daily household freshwater that enters the Tagaqe

wetland as blackwater and greywater. The constant and low salinity

levels are also related to the wetland pH levels of 6.80 (i.e. influent)

and 6.85 (effluent) which are quite close to a neutral pH value of 7.

Despite both wetland influent and effluent being slightly acidic, the

levels fall within ‗natural waters‘ characteristics of a pH range between

6.5 and 8.5. An acidic pH of 6.5 or lower may enhance odours in

anaerobic conditions (Mukhtar et al., 2004). According to Wood et al.,

(1999) temperature affects both the physical and biological activities

in wetland systems. Similarly, crucial nitrogen processes or nitrogen

fluxes depend on water chemistry and other wetland conditions, such

as climate, vegetation, water depth and water flow (Johnston, 1991;

Tanner, 2001a; Bastviken, 2006).

129
Dissolved oxygen concentrations showed slight improvement at the

outlet sampling point with 0.82 mg/L in comparison to 0.16 mg/L for

the untreated wetland influent. Dissolved oxygen is the oxygen freely

available in water which is vital to fish and other aquatic life and for

the prevention of odours. Therefore visual observation of wastewater

samples from the wetland (see Figure 40), which characterised treated

effluent as being clearer with an earthy odour rather than the clogged

and foul odour for untreated influent, can be partially attributed to

the observed improvement in dissolved oxygen. Research undertaken

on oxygen fluxes and ammonia removal efficiencies has found that

ammonia removal efficiency in constructed wetlands is often limited

by the amount of oxygen available in the system (Mei-Yin et al., 2001).

Electrical conductivity was observed to decrease significantly from the

untreated influent to treated effluent with a mean efficiency of around

83.3 percent. The influent yielded a mean of 0.12 mS/cm while 0.02

mS/cm was attained for the treated effluent. The reduction in

conductivity may be attributed to the decline in ions present (Tanner,

2004: personal communication).

Results indicated that the percentage removal or wetland treatment

efficiency for faecal coliform was 99.3 and E/coli 98.9 percent. The

treated wetland effluent contained a mean E/coli count of 15,000 per

100ml and faecal coliform count of 24,000 per 100ml. Both levels lie

within the range of discharge consent requirements issued for

130
constructed wetlands in New Zealand by Regional Councils, which

perceived the effectiveness of constructed wetlands by a discharge

faecal coliform range of 14 – 80,000 counts per 100ml (Tanner and

Sukias, 2002). High bacterial removal from the Tagaqe wetland

exceeding 98 percent for both faecal coliform and E/coli signify that

constructed wetlands, particularly in a warm tropical region is an

effective and affordable wastewater treatment alternative for coastal

villages and tourist hotels in terms of bacterial reduction and

disinfection.

In addition total suspended solids (TSS) were removed at 96.5 percent

from an average 886.6 mg/L in the inflow sample to 30.6 mg/L in the

treated effluent. Similarly, biological oxygen demand (BOD) decreased

from 324.8 (i.e. influent) to 17.3 mg/L for the treated effluent

correlating to 94.7 percent removal. The observed high BOD removal

efficiency for the Tagaqe wetland exceeds initial kinetic modelling

predictions of around 70 percent (Tanner, 2004: personal

communication). BOD is a measure of the amount of oxygen

consumed in the biological processes that break down organic matter

in water. Higher BOD implies a greater degree of pollution. The

significant rate of TSS and BOD removal is also higher than results

obtained by Tanner (2001b) for planted subsurface flow treatment

wetland systems which showed enhanced nitrogen and initial

phosphorus removal, but only small improvements in disinfection,

BOD and suspended solids removal. The trend may be attributed to

131
either wetland under-loading from the Tagaqe Chief‘s house or the

variance in climatic conditions between Fiji and New Zealand.

Other studies in France (Boutin et al., 1997), Switzerland (Schonborn

et al., 1997) and Thailand (Puetpaiboon and Yirong, 2004) also

reported higher removal efficiencies for TSS and BOD. For example,

investigations into reed bed filters for sewage treatment from small

communities in France yielded 92.5 percent for BOD and 94.5 percent

for TSS (Boutin et al., 1997) whilst constructed wetland research in

Switzerland obtained 95.8 percent for BOD removal (Schonborn et al.,

1997). A laboratory scale constructed wetland experiment in Thailand

achieved BOD and TSS removal efficiencies of 85 and 95 percent,

respectively (Puetpaiboon and Yirong, 2004). The performance of a

South Finger reedbed constructed wetland in the United Kingdom

indicated good treatment levels, with suspended solids reduction

around 80 percent and BOD generally above 60 percent (Worrall et al.,

1997). Another study on horizontal subsurface flow systems in the

German speaking countries (Geller, 1997) obtained very high

elimination rates far better than 90 percent for BOD. Tanner (1996)

also cited higher mean removals of 76-88 percent of suspended solids

and 77-91 percent of biological oxygen demand.

Nitrogen and Phosphorus fractions from the Tagaqe wetland seemed

to vary in their removal. Ammonia was removed at 82.6 percent while

nitrite attained 50 percent. A lower ammonia removal efficiency of 60

percent was found by Puetpaiboon and Yirong (2004) while Schonborn

132
et al. (1997) observed a higher ammonia reduction of 93.0 percent.

According to Keeney (1973), ammonia (NH3-N) formation occurs

through the mineralisation of organic matter under either anaerobic

or aerobic conditions. When ammonia combines with water within a

wetland it results in the formation of the ammonium ion (NH4+) which

can be absorbed by the plants and algae and converted back into

organic matter, or the ammonium ion can be immobilised onto

negatively charged soil particles (Mitsch and Gosselink, 1986).

Ammonium is eliminated when it is transformed to nitrate by the

bacterial process ‗nitrification‘ (Patrick and Reddy, 1976).

Nitrate did not show a decrease but instead increased from

1.04µmol/L for untreated influent to 6.08µmol/L for the treated

effluent. This equates to a rise of 484.6 percent. Despite other

research (US EPA, 1988; Drizo et al., 1997) highlighting reductions in

nitrate (NO3-N) within constructed wetland systems, Schonborn et al.,

(1997) reported similar NO3-N increases of 323.0 percent for a small

constructed wetland system in Switzerland which receives greywater

and liquid human waste. Nitrate is formed within a wetland system

when ammonium is transformed by the bacterial process called

‗nitrification‘. The process of nitrification (i) oxidises ammonium (from

the water column) to nitrite (NO2--N), and then (ii) nitrite is oxidised to

nitrate (NO3--N) (Keeney, 1973). Nitrate or nitrite is finally reduced to

gaseous end products, nitrous gas and dinitrogen gas, through the

bacterial process ‗denitrification‘ (Bastviken, 2006). Denitrification is

133
considered to be the predominant microbial process that modifies the

chemical composition of nitrogen in a wetland system and the major

process whereby elemental nitrogen is returned to the atmosphere

(Patrick and Reddy, 1976; Richardson et al., 1978; Johnston, 1991;

Vymazal, 2001; Trepel and Palmeri, 2002).

The observed concentration of nitrate from the Tagaqe wetland may

reflect the relative speed of transformation processes that occur within

the wetland, and is only marginally related to the initial nitrate

concentration. For instance, there was overall decline in the Total

Inorganic Nitrogen (TIN) concentration implying that the treated

effluent is mainly ammonia and unmineralised organic nitrogen. In

addition, the higher mean nitrate concentration at the wetland treated

sampling outlet may signify a delay in the ‗denitrification‘ process in

which nitrate is reduced to gaseous end products, N2O and N2, that

re-enter the atmosphere. Bandurski (1965) stated that ‗denitrification‘

occurs intensely in anaerobic environments. Results for the Tagaqe

wetland indicate that the treated effluent is less anaerobic as opposed

to the untreated influent. Hence, it may be reasonable that the

process of denitrification is hampered by slight aerobic conditions for

the wetland treated effluent.

Nevertheless there was enhanced total inorganic nitrogen (82.5

percent) and total kjeldahl nitrogen (75.5 percent) removal from the

wetland. Orthophosphate was eliminated by 75.5 percent and total

134
phosphorus 69.1 percent. These trends were compared to Schonborn

et al. (1997) who reported higher total nitrogen and total phosphorus

eliminations of 80 and 90.6 percent, respectively. Research in France

achieved total kjeldahl nitrogen removal of 76 percent whilst total

phosphorus removal was lower at 40 percent. Phosphate removal was

only 28 percent (Boutin et al., 1997). Another constructed wetland

case study in the United Kingdom attained an extremely high

phosphorus removal of 98-100 percent (Drizo et al., 1997). Tanner

(1996) also cited higher total phosphorus removal of 79-93 percent

while total nitrogen removed ranged from 65 to 92 percent.

Investigations into the effect of loading rate and planting on treatment

of dairy farm wastewaters in constructed wetlands reported 48 to 75

percent reduction of total nitrogen and 37 to 74 percent of total

phosphorus removal, in planted wetlands (Tanner et al., 1995).

Phosphate removal efficiency of the Tagaqe wetland decreased after a

period of time due to excess sediment adsorption and plant maturity.

This was initially predicted (Tanner, 2001; Headley, 2007: pers. com.).

Despite the high removal efficiencies within the constructed wetland,

there was no indication of the actual loading rate or residence time,

which can be attributed to lack of funding resulting in that limitation

of the experimental design.

7.2. Crusoe’s Resort wastewater treatment plant

Results for the Crusoe‘s Resort wastewater treatment plant (see Table

11) indicated that there was no variance in temperature and salinity

135
measurements for both the untreated influent and treated effluent.

Temperature measurements were 30.3 ºC for the influent and 30.7 ºC

for the effluent. As expected salinity levels remained at 0 ppt for

sampling points. Besides, pH levels of 6.76 for the untreated influent

and 6.90 for the effluent imply that the wastewater comprised ‗natural

water‘ characteristics of a pH range between 6.5 and 8.5 (Mukhtar et

al., 2004). Dissolved oxygen was significantly improved for the system

from 0.17 mg/L for the influent to 4.20 mg/L for the effluent. This

means that oxygen freely available in the effluent may be comparable

to sites that experience a high degree of pollution but can still support

other aquatic life (Clark, 2002). Conductivity also decreased

considerably from 0.74 mS/cm from the untreated influent to 0.02

mS/cm for treated effluent with a mean efficiency of 97.3 percent. The

reduction in conductivity is likely the effects of a decline in ions

present. This is reasonable with the predicted peak flow of 7,000

litres/day due to excess water usage in tourist hotels (Tanner, 2004:

personal communication; Innoflow, 2005).

In terms of bacteria elimination, the Crusoe‘s system recorded 93.5

percent for faecal coliform and 94.7 percent for E/coli. The coliform

values found in this study are similar to those found by Louden et al.,

(1985) for a recirculating filter system in Michigan (99.6 percent), and

to other studies in Maryland (99.5 percent; Piluk and Peters, 1994),

Oregon (96.7 percent; Ronayne et al., 1982), Quebec (97.3 percent;

136
Roy and Dube, 1994), and Wisconsin (98 percent; Ayres Associates,

1998).

Total suspended solids and biological oxygen demand removals were

observed to be lower than the performance of the constructed wetland

at Tagaqe. Total suspended solids (TSS) yielded a removal of 63.6

percent while biological oxygen demand (BOD) was 71.7 percent. TSS

was eliminated from 35.2 mg/L for the influent to 12.8 mg/L for the

effluent, which satisfies the Innoflow expected treatment level of less

than 15 mg/L. BOD fell from 63.6 mg/L at the inflow to 18.0 mg/L at

the effluent, which is slightly above the predicted performance of less

than 15 mg/L (Innoflow, 2005).

TSS and BOD removal efficiencies attained for the Crusoe‘s treatment

plant seemed to be lower than other related studies. O‘Reilly et al.,

(2008) found TSS removal of up to 90.7 percent with a BOD reduction

range of 77.3-92.9 percent. Research in Michigan achieved 96 percent

removal for BOD and 85.7 percent for TSS (Louden et al., 1985); in

Maryland researchers reported removal efficiencies of 97.9 percent for

BOD and 89.3 percent for TSS (Piluk and Peters, 1994); whilst in

Oregon BOD was observed to be removed at 98.6 percent and TSS at

97.3 percent (Ronayne et al., 1982). Similar work undertaken in

Quebec by Roy and Dube (1994) cited 94.1 percent for BOD removal

and 96.1 percent for TSS; in Wisconsin (Ayres Associates, 1998) BOD

was eliminated at 98.3 percent and 98.4 percent for TSS; where as
137
Owen & Bob (1991) obtained average BOD and TSS removal

efficiencies of 90.0 and 83.3 percent, respectively.

Moreover ammonia (NH3-N) was removed at 72.7 percent; nitrate

(NO3-N) 68.5 percent; and nitrite (NO2-N) 50.9 percent. Dissolved

inorganic nitrogen removal efficiency was 72.7 percent and total

kjeldahl nitrogen 50.1 percent. In addition, phosphate (PO4-P) removal

reached 70.7 percent while total phosphorus yielded 60.5 percent. The

nitrogen to phosphorus (N: P) ratio was 12 for untreated influent and

8 for treated effluent. The Crusoe‘s Resort system displayed direct

nitrate reduction of 68.5 percent as opposed to the Tagaqe

constructed wetland, which may imply that this treatment system is

more effective in achieving enhanced ‗nitrification‘ and ‗denitrification‘

processes. Mean N: P ratio for this system was 12 for the influent and

8 for the effluent which compares to a mean of 9 for the Tagaqe

wetland influent and 12 for the wetland effluent. This ratio gives an

indication as to whether a water or wastewater sample is enriched

with either N (ratio>20) or P (ratio<10) relative to unpolluted levels

(Mosley and Aalbersberg, 2003). There was considerable variability in

this ratio between the Tagaqe wetland and the Crusoe‘s Resort system

between the influent and effluent but it appears that the wastewater

within the Crusoe‘s system is more enriched with nitrogen at the

influent and phosphorus at the effluent.

138
Generally nitrogen and phosphorus removal efficiency at the Crusoe‘s

Resort system were less than 73 percent and did not meet the initial

predicted nutrient removal of more than 90 percent. However,

dissolved inorganic nitrogen removal of around 72.7 percent is

relatively similar to the expected system transformation of 75 percent

of nitrogen fractions into nitrogen gaseous end products, and only 15

percent would be disposed into flower gardens and eventually seeping

into the coral reef areas (Shortt, April 2005: personal communication).

Nutrient removal efficiency from similar systems elsewhere also

showed significant variability. For example, a study in Ireland for a

related system indicated total inorganic nitrogen (TIN) removal of 40-

81.6 percent while ammonia achieved 89.8 percent (O‘Reilly et al.,

2008). Research in Michigan cited total kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN)

elimination of 95.8 percent and TIN reduction of 52.7 percent (Louden

et al., 1985). A TKN removal efficiency of 98.1 percent and 45.2

percent of TIN were observed by Ronayne et al., (1982). Roy and Dube

(1994) found 79.1 percent for TKN and 46.7 percent for TIN while a

study in Wisconsin by the Ayres Associates (1998) reported 95.5

percent removal for TKN and 75.7 percent for TIN. Other studies

showed >95 percent of TKN removal (Owen and Bob, 1991) and 64.9

percent of TIN removal (Piluk and Peters, 1994).

In comparing the Tagaqe wetland with the Crusoe‘s system, it was

noted in the results obtained that the influent to the Crusoe device
139
was much cleaner than the influent to Tagaqe. Therefore, it was more

difficult for the Crusoe system to achieve a high removal efficiency.

The cleaner influent at Crusoe is probably a reflection of the more

complex and larger primary treatment via at least four separate septic

tanks before being passed through the system.

7.3. Coral Coast water quality monitoring

Water quality data from the Coral Coast sites monitored in this study

(i.e. Table 12) showed that short term temporal differences were the

major source of variation for salinity, temperature, dissolved oxygen

and conductivity for the 17 sites monitored. For instance, mean

dissolved oxygen and temperature were greater over sampling times

consistent with increases in solar irradiation, and surface water

mixing due to strengthening wind conditions (e.g. sea breezes) whilst

salinity and conductivity were influenced by freshwater or seawater

flushing and dilution effects (Clark, 2002; Castro and Huber, 2003).

Generally, salinity varied between 27.3 ppt (parts per thousand) at

Korotogo Bridge and 34.1 ppt at Malevu Village with an average of

32.0 ± 0.4 ppt. The low salinity measurement at Korotogo Bridge is

probably due to freshwater input from a creek running under the

bridge. The addition of masses of freshwater from rivers and creeks

along the Coral Coast may have some influence on this result. Water

temperature ranged from 27.2 ºC for Tabua Sands and Komave to

32.1 ºC for Naviti Resort shoreline with a mean of 29.4 ± 0.3 ºC. The

mean temperature is within the range of normal ocean temperature,

140
which is from 20 to 30 ºC (ANZECC, 2000). Overall, there was no

significant difference in salinity and temperature ranges for the Coral

Coast sites in this study as compared to baseline monitoring data

obtained prior to July 2005 by the Institute of Applied Sciences (see

Table 13).

Dissovled oxygen (DO) levels were relatively moderate with a minimum

of 3.47 mg/L at Korotogo Bridge and a maximum of 7.13 mg/L at

Outrigger Resort shoreline. The mean DO level for the 17 sites was

6.10 ± 0.20 mg/L. Apparently the mean DO value attained in this

study is slightly lower than the level observed for a Coral Coast

baseline monitoring data which yielded an average DO of 6.94 ± 0.33

mg/L for the same sites. However, both values fall within the

recommended DO standard of >6 mg/L for nearshore waters to

support coral reefs and recreation in Australia and New Zealand

(ANZECC, 2000).

Despite this study not investigating the coliform pollution along the

Coral Coast, baseline monitoring data indicated that there was a

significant variance between sites. For instance Fijian Resort yielded 1

count/100ml; Naviti Resort 31 count/100ml; Hideaway Resort 137

count/100ml; Votua Village 507 count/100ml; and Warwick Hotel

902 count/100ml. The average coliform level for the Coral Coast sites

was 169 ± 68 counts/100ml (IAS Monitoring Data, 2005:

unpublished). Considering the average coliform level of 169

141
counts/100ml coupled with the lower end of the standard error of ±

68 counts/100ml, it can be assumed that faecal coliform levels at the

Coral Coast is within the recommended standard for nearshore waters

to support coral reefs and recreation in Australia and New Zealand,

which is <150 counts/100ml (ANZECC, 2000).

In reference to nutrients, Komave and Tagaqe shorelines yielded the

lowest nitrate (NO3-N) values of 2.33µmol/L and 2.58µmol/L,

respectively. The highest nitrate concentrations were observed for

Malevu, Outrigger Resort and Tubakula Resort shorelines with levels

of 6.88µmol/L; 6.68µmol/L; and 6.18µmol/L respectively. The average

nitrate level for the 17 monitored sites was 4.16 ± 0.35µmol/L. Site

number 17 (e.g. between Malevu & Vatukarasa) attained the lowest

nitrite (NO2-N) concentration of 0.24µmol/L and the highest was

observed at site number 16 (Matai Kadavu Beach) with 0.63µmol/L.

The average nitrite value for the Coral Coast was 0.35 ± 0.02 µmol/L.

Baseline monitoring data (IAS Monitoring Data, 2005: unpublished)

obtained prior to the commencement of this study in July 2005

showed nitrate (NO3-N) concentration was lowest at Matai Kadavu

Beach with 0.10µmol/L and higher at Votua (3.34µmol/L) and

Vatukarasa (2.13µmol/L). Mean nitrate level was 1.11 ± 0.20 µmol/L.

A comparative analysis appears to show an increase in mean nitrate

concentration on the Coral Coast from 1.11 ± 0.20µmol/L to 4.16 ±

0.35µmol/L between 2005 and 2006. Nitrite concentration is often

142
regarded as insignificant to nitrate and ammonia fractions but nitrite

levels for unpolluted waters often varied from 0 – 0.22 mol/L (Wetzel,

1975). Another study on an unpolluted lagoon yielded nitrite

concentrations ranging from 0.05 – 0.24 mol/L (Yamamuro et al.,

1991). Therefore the mean nitrite level found in this study (0.35 ±

0.02µmol/L) is above results obtained for unpolluted waters, but is

still below a mean nitrate value of 0.59µmol/L reported for the Port of

Suva (Tamata et al., 1992).

The mean nitrate level in this study (4.16 ± 0.35µmol/L) exceeds

recommended nitrate and nitrite standard range for nearshore waters

to support coral reefs and recreation in Australia and New Zealand,

which is between 0.14-0.57 µmol/L (ANZECC, 2000); as well as

critical nitrogen levels considered healthy for coral reefs without being

overgrown by algae which is 1.0 mol/L of nitrogen (N) as nitrate,

ammonia or nitrite (Bell et al., 1987; Bell, 1992; Goreau and Thacker,

1994). However higher nitrate values up to 4.8µmol/L (Naidu et al.,

1991); 7.01mol/L (Mosley and Aalbersberg, 2003); 27.05µmol/L

(Singh and Mosley, 2004: unpublished); 98.57µmol/L (Tamata et al.,

1992); and 357.1 µmol/L (Naidu and Morrison, 1988) were also

reported for other studies on the Coral Coast, Laucala Bay, Suva

Harbour and elsewhere in Fiji. Research on the highly populated

nearshore waters of Suva Harbour and Laucala Bay by Naidu &

Morrison (1988) and Naidu et al., (1991) yielded a mean nitrate level of

143
17.29mol/L. Similar study by Tamata et al., (1992) found a mean

nitrate value of 5.47mol/L. An unpublished assessment of nutrient

status in Laucala Bay from 2003 – 2004 found an average nitrate level

of 1.77 µmol/L (Singh and Mosley, unpublished). Another

unpublished report of nutrient pollution in the Laucala Bay and Suva

Harbour in 2004 yielded a mean nitrate concentration of 3.68µmol/L

(Taloiburi, unpublished).

Ammonia (NH3-N) results in this study varied between 0.98µmol/L at

Tabua Sands and 5.82µmol/L at Korotogo Bridge with a mean of 2.09

± 0.29 µmol/L. On the other hand, baseline monitoring data prior to

2005 showed that site number 13 (i.e. Malevu Village) attained the

least ammonia value of 1.39µmol/L while Vatukarasa yielded the

highest concentration of 9.36µmol/L followed by Hideaway Resort at

7.93µmol/L. The average ammonia (NH3-N) level for the Coral Coast

prior to 2005 was 5.24 ± 0.71 µmol/L. According to Tanner and Gold

(2004) coastal sites that attain higher nutrient levels are likely to be

the effects of piggery and/or improper treated wastewater. Comparing

this study with the baseline data, it is obvious that there was a

general decrease in the mean ammonia level from 5.24 ± 0.71 µmol/L

before 2005 to 2.09 ± 0.29 µmol/L by 2006. For the Astrolabe lagoon

where there is insignificant pollution, levels of ammonia obtained were

in the range 0.05 – 0.20 mol/L (Yamamuro et al., 1991). Ammonia is

144
a better indicator for sewage pollution and anaerobic conditions

compared to nitrate and nitrite (Hawker and Connell, 1992).

Phosphate (PO4-P) concentration was least at Hideaway Resort

(0.28µmol/L) and Fijian Resort (0.31µmol/L) shorelines whilst Votua,

Vatukarasa and Korotogo Bridge yielded the highest phosphate levels

of 0.51; 0.58; and 1.14 µmol/L, respectively. A mean PO4-P of 0.43 ±

0.05 µmol/L was obtained for the Coral Coast water quality

monitoring. For the baseline monitoring data prior to 2005 (IAS

Monitoring Data, unpublished), phosphate was observed to be lowest

at site number 7 (Sovi Bay) with 0.09µmol/L and varied between other

sites. For example: 0.28µmol/L for Matai Kadavu Beach; 0.59µmol/L

for Fijian Resort; 0.89µmol/L for Tabua Sands; 1.39µmol/L for

Outrigger Resort and 1.51µmol/L for Korotogo Bridge. Mean

phosphate concentration for the Coral Coast prior to 2005 was 0.73 ±

0.10 µmol/L. Comparatively the average phosphate level for the Coral

Coast declined from 0.73 ± 0.10 µmol/L before 2005 to 0.43 ± 0.05

µmol/L by 2006. However both mean values exceed the critical

phosphorus level considered healthy for coral reefs without being

overgrown by algae, which is 0.1mol/L of phosphorus as

orthophosphate and organophosphate (Bell et al., 1987; Bell, 1992;

Goreau and Thacker, 1994). Similarly the mean phosphate

concentration in this study is higher than the recommended level

0.16mol/L for nearshore waters in Australia and New Zealand

(ANZECC, 2000).
145
Other studies (Crossland and Barnes, 1983) observed phosphate

levels suitable for normal coral growth to be within the range of 0.11 -

0.32 mol/L whilst phosphate levels as high as 0.74mol/L had been

reported from studies of Australian fringing reefs (Blake and Johnson,

1988). In addition, phosphate values obtained for the Astrolabe lagoon

seagrass bed was lower at 0.08 – 0.15 mol/L (Yamamuro et al., 1991)

with an average phosphate concentration of 0.07mol/L (Morrison et

al., 1992).

Research on moderate polluted coastal waters along the Coral Coast

in Fiji (Mosley and Aalbersberg, 2003) found phosphate levels that

exceeded thresholds considered harmful to coral reef ecosystems.

Phosphate levels for seawater varied between 0.07 – 1.51 mol/L with

an average of 0.21 mol/L. For freshwater samples, phosphate

concentrations ranged from 0.50 – 3.40 mol/L with a mean of 1.30

mol/L. An assessment of nutrient status in Laucala Bay from 2003 –

2004 found phosphate levels ranging between 0.46 – 11.01 µmol/L

with a mean of 0.95 µmol/L (Singh and Mosley, unpublished). Another

unpublished report of nutrient pollution in the Laucala Bay and Suva

Harbour in 2004 yielded a mean phosphate level of 1.20µmol/L

(Taloiburi, unpublished).

146
The nitrogen to phosphorus (N: P) ratio for this study ranged between

9 and 29 with an average of 17 ± 1. This is significantly higher than

the mean N: P ratio of 6 ± 1 observed for the baseline monitoring data

for similar sites along the Coral Coast prior to 2005 (IAS Monitoring

Data, unpublished). Water quality research by Morrison et al., (1992)

for other unpolluted sites in Fiji yielded a mean N: P ratio of 10 while

Mosley and Aalbersberg (2003) reported a mean N: P ratio of 8 for the

same sites monitored in this present study along the Coral Coast. In

open ocean seawater production is thought of as being influenced by

the mole ratio of concentrations of nitrogen to phosphorus in the

water. For average seawater the nitrogen (N) to phosphorus (P) mole

ratio is about 15 N: 1 P which reflects the ratio of their utilisation by

phytoplankton (Collier, 1970). The N: P ratio provides an indication as

to whether a water sample is enriched with either N (ratio>20) or P

(ratio<10) relative to unpolluted levels (Mosley and Aalbersberg, 2003).

There was considerable variability in the N: P ratio between different

sites in this study, but in general the seawater within the fringing reef

on the Coral Coast is similar to the N: P ratio (i.e. 15) in open ocean

seawater yet slightly enriched with nitrogen than phosphorus. Efforts

had been made to encourage hotels to switch to non Phosphorus

detergents in 2004 and this may be reflected in these results.

7.4. Votua Creek water quality monitoring

Votua Creek was monitored from June to September 2006 in order to

attain a clear understanding of the major sources of wastewater

pollution along the creek as part of preliminary investigations toward

147
a village wetland system initiative, coordinated by the Institute of

Applied Sciences in partnership with the National Institute of Water

and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) in New Zealand.

Results (Table 14) showed that there was 5-6 fold increase in faecal

coliform from the dam and above housing down to the creek mouth.

Faecal coliform levels generally increased on a linear trend from

140counts/100ml at the Votua dam to 813counts/100ml at the

downstream creek mouth. Similarly, E/coli was least at the Votua

dam with 95counts/100ml; followed by upper housing (135

counts/100ml); lower housing (296 counts/100ml); creek mouth (483

counts/100ml); and the Votua bridge with 751 counts/100ml. This

correlates to a 5-8 fold increase from the dam and downstream.

Unfortunately both the faecal coliform and E/coli levels observed at

the dam were very high for a human drinking water supply without

further treatment (Tanner, 2006: personal communication; WHO,

2004). The mean upper housing faecal coliform measurements of 165

counts/100ml and 135 counts/100ml of E.coli were within

recommended nearshore standards for bathing and recreation, which

is 150-200 counts/100ml (ANZECC, 2000). However other common

bathing sites at the lower housing vicinity and the bridge indicated

very unsafe coliform levels.

Presence of coliform in the water body can be an indicator of sewage

discharge into the water either of mammalian or avian origin. Many of

148
the faecal coliform bacteria in human waste are harmless. However

there are disease organisms or pathogens than can cause harm to

human health. These include bacteria such as typhoid, or viruses

such as hepatitis B. Direct contact with these pathogens or pollution

of the water supply can result in infections. This poses a public health

risk (nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, ear, and throat infections) to people

who use the waters for bathing (New Zealand Ministry of

Environment, 2003). Another likely effect of direct contact with

coliform polluted water is skin irritation and scratchiness (Clark,

2002). Therefore, it is important that levels of faecal coliform do not

exceed recreational exposure standards.

In terms of drinking water supply, less than 1 count/100ml of faecal

coliform and E/coli were observed for the Votua Housing tap water.

The Votua Village drinking tap water reached 58 counts/100ml of

faecal coliform and 48 counts/100ml of E.coli. A nearby diving

centre‘s (i.e. Mike‘s Divers) drinking tap water obtained 33 and 21

counts/100ml of faecal coliform and E.coli, respectively. According to

World Health Organisation drinking water quality standards of <1

count/100ml (WHO, 2004) only the Votua Housing tap water is safe

for usage, but the village and Mike‘s Divers tap water are unsafe as

drinking water without further treatment. This is not surprising as the

village and diving centre drinking water was channelled directly from

the dam without any disinfection. The housing drinking water is

sourced near the upper housing sampled site and pumped up into a
149
chlorine treated storage tank on the ridge before distribution to the

households.

Conductivity increased from the dam to the creek mouth with a range

between 0.11mS and 0.23mS. In terms of mean stream flow it was

generally ‗fast‘ at the dam and upper housing; ‗medium‘ at lower

housing; and ‗slow‘ at the bridge and creek mouth. Total suspended

solids at the dam was 8.3 mg/L but elevated to the creek mouth with

14.3 mg/L. Votua Bridge displayed the highest suspended solids level

of 15.3 mg/L. The stream flow and relative suspended solids trend

may imply that contamination downstream was likely due to storm

flows from the upper stream pollution points including human and

animal (i.e. piggery) wastewater. Results for biological oxygen demand

(BOD) showed no variance between sites as all monitored locations

yielded <18 mg/L. This is likely due to the minimum detection level of

18 mg/L for the APHA5210B Method used by the Institute of Applied

Science laboratory to determine BOD (APHA, 2005). In addition most

of the sampling schedules on the Votua Creek were undertaken

during rising tides so dilution may have an influence on the creek

mouth data.

Ammonia concentration ranged from 3.1µmol/L at the dam to

11.4µmol/L at the Bridge. Nitrate also showed a similar trend to

ammonia at all the monitored sites along the Votua Creek with a low

of 1.96µmol/L at the dam to a high of 11.9µmol/L at the bridge.

150
Nitrite was least at the dam with 0.46µmol/L and increased

downstream to a maximum of 1.12µmol/L at the creek mouth. Total

kjeldahl nitrogen was least from the dam and relatively increased to

the creek mouth ranging from 7.2 to 23.8 µmol/L. Total inorganic

nitrogen reached a maximum at the bridge with 24.4µmol/L with the

lowest concentration of 5.5µmol/L at the dam. River monitoring

results obtained by Mosley and Aalbersberg (2003) along the Coral

Coast also showed higher nitrate values that ranged from 1.9 to 24.7

µmol/L. Generally the critical nitrogen concentration considered

healthy to be deposited into the nearshore coastal waters without

affecting coral reefs is 1.0 mol/L of nitrogen as nitrate, ammonia or

nitrite (Bell et al., 1987; Bell, 1992; Goreau and Thacker, 1994). The

nitrogen (e.g. ammonia, nitrate and nitrite) levels observed at the

bridge and creek mouth significantly exceeds recommended

standards.

Phosphate concentrations for the Votua Creek were 0.36µmol/L at the

dam, followed by upper housing with 0.39µmol/L, 0.78µmol/L for

lower housing, Votua bridge with 0.99µmol/L, and the creek mouth

with 1.36µmol/L. Total phosphorus also showed similar trend with

the dam showing the lowest value of 0.44µmol/L. Upper housing had

0.50µmol/L; lower housing 0.67µmol/L; 0.93µmol/L for Votua bridge

whilst the creek mouth attained 1.35µmol/L. Earlier research on

selected river water along the Coral Coast by Mosley and Aalbersberg

(2003) reported phosphate values ranging from 0.50 to 3.40 µmol/L.

151
The critical phosphorus level considered healthy for coral reefs

without being overgrown by algae is 0.1mol/L of phosphorus as

orthophosphate and organophosphate (Bell et al., 1987; Bell, 1992;

Goreau and Thacker, 1994). Therefore, phosphate and phosphorus

levels observed at the creek mouth are higher than normal accepted

standards.

7.5. Drum system experiment

Greywater is the wastewater generated from showers, bathtubs, hand

basins, laundry, washing machines and kitchen sinks and

consequently contains a mixture of soaps, detergents, food particles,

fats, oils, soil, hair, and potentially some small amounts of faecal

matter and urine. Studies (Urban Water Research Association of

Australia, 1996; Jefferson et al., 1999 & 2001; Eriksson et al., 2002;

Brown and Palmer, 2002; Toifl et al., 2006) suggest that greywater has

a similar organic strength to domestic wastewater, but relatively low

suspended solids (i.e. greater proportions of the contaminants are

dissolved).

7.5.1. Monitoring period 1 (large doses)

During ―monitoring period 1‖ whereby the mesocosms were loaded

with three large doses per day between 8am to 5pm (i.e. working

hours), conductivity, dissolved oxygen, total dissolved solid and E/coli

showed very small variance between the High Loading and Low

Loading mesocosms. In the ex-situ experiment, the High Loading drum

represents ‗one‘ onsite drum system per household at Votua Village

while the Low Loading drum correlates to ‗two‘ onsite drum per
152
household (Tanner and Headley, 2007: personal communication).

Therefore assuming that households dispose only three large periodic

doses per day (e.g. morning, midday, evening) into the onsite drum

greywater treatment systems, there would be less variance between

the one drum per household (i.e. High Loading drum) and the two

drum per household (i.e. Low Loading drum) in how they treat

conductivity, dissolved oxygen, total dissolved solid and E/coli.

The faecal coliform concentration was relatively higher for the Low

Loading drum with 220,000 counts/100ml in comparison to 170,000

counts/100ml for the High Loading regime. The same trend was

observed for total suspended solids where the low loaded drum

attained 113 mg/L as opposed to 93 mg/L for the high loaded

mesocosm. Similarly, total kjeldahl nitrogen yielded 5.45 mg/L for

high loading and 8.27 mg/L for the low loading regime. These results

may imply that for three large periodic doses per day (e.g. morning,

midday, evening) into the onsite drum greywater treatment systems at

Votua Village, the one drum per household would be more efficient

than two drum per household in terms of faecal coliform, total

suspended solids and total kjeldahl nitrogen treatment.

On the other hand, biological oxygen demand measured 76 mg/L for

high loading and 63 mg/L for low loading. Phosphorus was 8.33 mg/L

for high loading and 7.6 mg/L for low loading. This indicates that for

phosphorus and biological oxygen demand treatment, the two drum

153
per household would be more efficient than one drum per household,

assuming a discharge of three large periodic doses per day.

Nevertheless both ex-situ mesocosms (e.g. low loading and high

loading) showed some degree of removal efficiencies for monitored

parameters from the prepared artificial greywater solution that was

passed through the experiment, but removal efficiencies varied

between parameters and the loading regimes.

7.5.2. Monitoring period 2 (moderate doses)

―Monitoring period 2‖ was reflective of six moderate doses per day

between 8am and 6pm (i.e. period greywater discharges every two

hours). Results indicated lower conductivity levels of 0.582 to 0.599

mS for the High Loading drum effluent, while low loading ranged

between 0.869 and 0.877 mS/cm. Salinity levels were slightly higher

in the low loaded drum than the high loaded system. The low loaded

effluent recorded a higher pH than the high loading drum as well. In

regard to dissolved oxygen levels, the values were higher for the low

loaded drum ranging from 2.01 mg/L to 2.24 mg/L where as the high

loading drum attained lower values within 1.13 to 2.11 mg/L.

Assuming that household greywater discharges at Votua Village is

achieved by moderate flushes every two hours (e.g. 8am, 10am,

12midday, 2pm, 4pm and 6pm), then the two drum per household

(i.e. low loading drum) would be the better set up to improve salinity,

dissolved oxygen and pH as opposed to one drum per household (i.e.

high loading).

154
Total suspended solids and total kjeldahl nitrogen showed

comparatively higher concentrations for the low loaded drum as

opposed to the high loading mesocosm. Other parameters such as

faecal coliform, E/coli, phosphorus and biological oxygen demand

displayed no obvious variance between the two mesocosms. This

signifies that for total suspended solids (TSS) and total kjeldahl

nitrogen (TKN) treatment, the one drum per household (i.e. high

loading) would be the ideal system choice. However, the choice of

either one drum per household (high loading) or two drum per

household (low loading drum) in Votua does not necessarily matter for

elimination of other crucial water quality parameters including faecal

coliform, E/coli, phosphorus and biological oxygen demand. Both ex-

situ drum mesocosms displayed variable removal efficiencies for

monitored parameters from the prepared artificial greywater solution

that was passed through the experiment.

Samples were collected immediately after dosing (#1), 30 minutes after

the first sample collection (#2), and 60 minutes after the first sample

collection (#3) (Tanner and Aalbersberg, 2007: personal

communication). In terms of variance between samples which were

collected 30 minutes apart from the ex-situ drum experiment; pH,

BOD, TSS and phosphorus were observed to increase for both

mesocosms at the end sample. This means that for both mesocosms,

removal efficiency was greatest at the immediate sample (#1) for BOD,

TSS and phosphorus, except pH. Dissolved oxygen removal efficiency

155
was also enhanced at the immediate sample and deteriorated at the

end sample for both mesocosms. Similarly, E/coli removal efficiency

for the high loading drum was higher in the immediate sample and

least in the end sample whilst for the low loading drum; elimination

was elevated at the end sample. TKN was stable for the high loading

experiment and decreased for low loading from sample #1 to sample

#3, which implies that TKN removal efficiency for the low loading

drum was highest at the end sample.

7.5.3. Monitoring period 3 (small doses)

―Monitoring period 3‖ comprised 12 small doses per day periodically

added every forty minutes (i.e. 8am, 8.40am, 9.20am, 10am, 10.40am,

11.20am, 12midday, 12.40pm, 1.20pm, 2pm, 2.40pm, and 3.20pm).

Results indicated that the pH from the low loading drum appears to

be higher than the effluent from the high loading system. Dissolved

oxygen was also higher for the low loaded effluent than high loading.

Faecal coliform, phosphorus and biological oxygen demand

concentrations for the high loading design exceeded that of the low

loading drum. However, E/coli and total kjeldahl nitrogen levels were

higher for the low loading drum than the high loading regime. These

findings imply that by assuming the greywater discharge from Votua

households to be emitted every forty minutes in an average of 12

small doses per day; then the two drum per household (i.e. low

loading drum) set up would be more efficient in improving dissolved

oxygen, pH, faecal coliform, phosphorus and biological oxygen

demand whilst the one drum per household (i.e. high loading drum)
156
set up would enhance total kjeldahl nitrogen and E.coli removal.

Nevertheless both systems would achieve general greywater removal

efficiencies, despite possible variances between parameters.

In relation to the variance between 30 minute interval samples; total

kjeldahl nitrogen and faecal coliform elimination efficiencies were

achieved at the middle sample (#2) for both mesocosms. Biological

oxygen demand and total suspended solids achieved maximum

treatment efficiency at the end sample (#3) for the high loaded drum.

In the low loading drum, phosphorus and biological oxygen demand

removal were enhanced at the immediate sample (#1).

7.5.4. Other monitoring

The most likely mode of long-term failure of this type of greywater

management system was clogging or blockage of the soil surface

where the partially treated greywater infiltrates into the natural soil. A

―bio-mat‖ of biofilm, slime and accumulated organic solids was

attributed to be the main cause of such clogging (Urban Water

Research Association of Australia, 1996; Toifl et al., 2006). A gauge of

the degree of soil-interface clogging was obtained by comparing the

hydrograph (i.e. effluent flow rate versus time) for the two mesocosms

following application of a single dose, both when first set-up (i.e. clean

system) and at the end of the experiment (Headley, 2007: personal

communication). Monitoring data showed that for a standard high

loading dosage volume of 85 litres of artificial greywater solution, it

took 73 minutes to elute in the clean system and 118 minutes for the
157
same volume at the end of the experiment. The difference was 45

minutes. For a standard low loading dosage volume of 42.5 litres of

artificial greywater solution, it took 38 minutes to elute for the clean

system and lasted 66 minutes for the clogged system at the end of the

experiment. The difference was 28 minutes. This supports initial

prediction which anticipated the time taken for a dose to drain

through the system to increase as the soil-interface becomes clogged

and the degree of clogging to be greatest in the highly loaded

mesocosm (Headley, 2007: personal communication).

158
Chapter 8 Conclusions

In conclusion it is undeniable that most tourist hotels and villages on

the Coral Coast of Fiji are situated along the coastline. As a result of

the extreme pressure of anthropogenic actions exacerbated by animal

wastes and natural phenomenon, the abundance of seaweed growth

indicating enriched nutrient levels in nearshore coral reef areas and

higher coliform levels signifying sewage presence were observed

recently along the Coral Coast. As a result, sanitation experts

recommended various wastewater treatment initiatives which resulted

in the implementation of a constructed wetland at Tagaqe Village and

a commercial wastewater treatment system at Crusoe‘s Resort beside

other initiatives that were not monitored under this study. Monitoring

was undertaken on the planted gravel bed constructed wetland at

Tagaqe Village, Crusoe‘s Resort wastewater treatment system, Coral

Coast nearshore sites, Votua Village Creek, and an ex-situ greywater

treatment drum experiment.

Results for the wetland showed removal efficiency range of 94.7-99.3

percent for faecal coliform, E/coli, total suspended solids (TSS) and

biological oxygen demand (BOD). Nitrogen elimination ranged between

50 percent for nitrite and 82.6 percent for ammonia. Total kjeldahl

nitrogen (TKN) achieved 75.5 percent. Total phosphorus and

phosphate attained 69.1 and 75.5 percent, respectively.

159
The wastewater treatment system at Crusoe‘s Resort indicated

removal range of 63.6-94.7 percent for faecal coliform, E/coli, TSS

and BOD. Nitrite yielded 50.9 percent; nitrate 68.5 percent; ammonia

72.7 percent; and TKN 50.1 percent. Total phosphorus reached 60.5

percent while phosphate obtained 70.7 percent.

For the Coral Coast nearshore water quality, results showed an

average salinity of 32.0 ± 0.4 ppt; temperature of 29.4 ± 0.3 ºC;

dissolved oxygen level of 6.10 ± 0.20 mg/L; and mean conductivity

level of 49.92 ± 1.16 mS/cm. In terms of nutrients, the average nitrate

concentration of nearshore waters along the Coral Coast was 4.16 ±

0.35µmol/L. Ammonia yielded a mean value of 2.09 ± 0.29µmol/L

while nitrite attained 0.35 ± 0.02µmol/L. The mean phosphate level

for the Coral Coast was 0.43 ± 0.05 µmol/L. The N: P ratio for the

Coral Coast waters in this present study was 17 ± 1.

Results for Votua Creek showed a 5-6 fold increase in faecal coliform

from the dam and above housing down to the creek mouth. Faecal

coliform levels generally increased on a linear trend from

140counts/100ml at the Votua dam to 813counts/100ml at the

downstream creek mouth. Similarly, E/coli was least at the Votua

dam with 95counts/100ml; followed by upper housing (135

counts/100ml); lower housing (296 counts/100ml); creek mouth (483

counts/100ml); and the Votua bridge with 751 counts/100ml. This

correlates to a 5-8 fold increase from the dam and downstream.

160
In terms of drinking water supply, less than 1 count/100ml of faecal

coliform and E/coli were observed for the Votua Housing tap water.

The Votua Village drinking tap water reached 58 counts/100ml of

faecal coliform and 48 counts/100ml of E/coli. A nearby diving

centre‘s (i.e. Mike‘s Divers) drinking tap water obtained 33 and 21

counts/100ml of faecal coliform and E/coli, respectively.

Conductivity increased from the dam to the creek mouth with a range

between 0.11mS and 0.23mS. In terms of mean stream flow it was

generally ‗fast‘ at the dam and upper housing; ‗medium‘ at lower

housing; and ‗slow‘ at the bridge and creek mouth. Total suspended

solids at the dam was 8.3 mg/L but elevated to the creek mouth with

14.3 mg/L. Votua Bridge displayed the highest suspended solids level

of 15.3 mg/L. Biological oxygen demand (BOD) showed no variance

between sites as all monitored locations yielded <18 mg/L.

Ammonia concentration ranged from 3.1µmol/L at the dam to

11.4µmol/L at the bridge. Nitrate also showed a similar trend to

ammonia at all the monitored sites along the Votua Creek with a low

of 1.96µmol/L at the dam to a high of 11.9µmol/L at the bridge.

Nitrite was least at the dam with 0.46µmol/L and increased

downstream to a maximum of 1.12µmol/L at the creek mouth. Total

kjeldahl nitrogen was least from the dam and relatively increased to

the creek mouth ranging from 7.2 to 23.8 µmol/L. Total inorganic
161
nitrogen reached a maximum at the bridge with 24.4µmol/L with the

lowest concentration of 5.5µmol/L at the dam. Phosphate

concentrations for the Votua Creek were 0.36µmol/L at the dam,

followed by upper housing with 0.39µmol/L, 0.78µmol/L for lower

housing, Votua bridge with 0.99µmol/L, and the creek mouth with

1.36µmol/L. Total phosphorus also highlighted similar trend with the

dam showing the lowest value of 0.44µmol/L. Upper housing had

0.50µmol/L; lower housing 0.67µmol/L; 0.93µmol/L for Votua bridge

whilst the creek mouth attained 1.35µmol/L.

Moreover, results for the greywater treatment drum experiment

signified that there would be little variation between one drum per

household (i.e. High Loading drum) and two drum per household (i.e.

Low Loading drum) in how they treat conductivity, dissolved oxygen,

total dissolved solid and E/coli, assuming that households dispose

only three large periodic doses per day into the onsite drum greywater

treatment systems. Also for monitoring period 1, results indicated that

one drum per household would be more efficient than two drum per

household in terms of faecal coliform, total suspended solids and total

kjeldahl nitrogen treatment. However for phosphorus and biological

oxygen demand treatment, the two drum per household would be

more efficient.

For monitoring period 2, which assumes that household greywater

discharges at Votua Village is achieved by moderate flushes every two

162
hours per day, then the two drum per household (i.e. low loading

drum) would be the ideal set up to improve salinity, dissolved oxygen

and pH as opposed to one drum per household (i.e. high loading). For

total suspended solids and total kjeldahl nitrogen treatment, the one

drum per household (i.e. high loading) would be the ideal system

choice. However, the choice of either one drum per household (high

loading) or two drum per household (low loading drum) in Votua does

not necessarily matter for elimination of other crucial water quality

parameters including faecal coliform, E/coli, phosphorus and

biological oxygen demand.

Data for monitoring period 3 showed that by assuming the greywater

discharge from Votua households to be emitted every forty minutes in

an average of 12 small doses per day; then the two drum per

household (i.e. low loading drum) set up would be more efficient in

improving dissolved oxygen, pH, faecal coliform, phosphorus and

biological oxygen demand whilst the one drum per household (i.e. high

loading drum) set up would enhance total kjeldahl nitrogen and E.coli

removal.

Furthermore, a gauge of the degree of soil-interface clogging test

indicated that for a standard high loading dosage volume of 85 litres

of artificial greywater solution, it took 73 minutes to elute in the clean

system and 118 minutes for the same volume at the end of the

experiment. The difference was 45 minutes. For a standard low

163
loading dosage volume of 42.5 litres of artificial greywater solution, it

took 38 minutes to elute for the clean system and lasted 66 minutes

for the clogged system at the end of the experiment. The difference

was 28 minutes.

Finally the wastewater treatment initiatives monitored under this

study including the greywater treatment drum experiment were the

first of their kind to be trialled in Fiji. Results obtained were difficult

to compare and contrast with local examples either in Fiji or in the

small Pacific Island Countries; except in countries of differing climate.

Therefore there is great need for further research into such

wastewater treatment initiatives such as the Tagaqe constructed

wetland and Crusoe‘s Resorts system as well as the greywater

treatment drums regardless of their potential efficiency, to ascertain a

better understanding of how they operate. Nevertheless the

constructed wetland and Crusoe‘s treatment system have a significant

potential to be promoted in other coastal communities and tourist

hotels in Fiji and elsewhere throughout the Pacific Islands.

164
Bibliography

ANZECC, 2000. Australian and New Zealand guidelines for fresh and

marine water quality. Australian and New Zealand Environment

and Conservation Council.

Anderson, D.L., Siegrist, R.L., and Otis, R.J., 1985. Technology

Assessment of Intermittent Sand Filters. U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, and

Office of Water, Publication, Washington, DC.

APHA, 1992. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and

Wastewater. 18th edition. American Public Health Association,

Washington, D.C, USA.

Aronson, R.B. and Precht, W.F., 2000. Herbivory and algal dynamics

on the coral reef at Discovery Bay, Jamaica. Limnology and

Oceanography 45, 251-255.

Ayres Associates, 1997. Florida Keys Wastewater Nutrient Reduction

Systems Demo Project: Second Quarter Report. Florida

Department of Health, Tallahassee, FL.

Ayres Associates, 1998. Unpublished data from Wisconsin.

Bachand, P.M. and Horne, A.J., 2000. Denitrification in constructed

free-water surface wetlands: II. Effects of vegetation and

temperature. Ecological Eng. 14, 17-32.

Bastviken, S., 2006. Nitrogen removal in treatment wetlands- Factors

influencing spatial and temporal variations. Linkoping Studies in

165
 Science and Technology Dissertation No. 1041. Department of

Biology, Linkoping University, Sweden.

Bell, P., 1992. Eutrophication and Coral Reefs: Some Examples in the

Great Barrier Reef Lagoon. Water Research 26, 553- 568.

Bell, P., Greenfield, P.F., Gough, G., Hawken, D., and Connell, D.,

1987. Guidelines for management of waste discharges into the

Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. Report to the Great Barrier Reef

Marine Protected Area.

Blake, S.G., and Johnson, D.P., 1988. Preliminary Report on water

quality, current patterns, and sediment composition around

Hamilton and Hayman Islands, the Whit-Sundays. Unpublished

report to the Great Barrier Reef Marine Protected Area.

Boutin, C., Lienard, A., and Esser, D., 1997. Development of a new

generation of reed-bed filters in France: first results. Water

Science and Technology 35, 315–322.

Brodie, J., Mapstone, B., and Mitchell, R., 1989. Magnetic Quay: water

quality and sediment baseline study. A report to the Great

Barrier Reef Marine Protected Area.

Brown, R., and Palmer, A., 2002. Water Reclamation Standard;

Laboratory testing of systems using greywater. Technical Note

TN 7/2002 BSRIA Ltd., Bracknell, United Kingdom.

Bruen, M.G., and Piluk, R.J., 1994. Performance and Costs of Onsite

Recirculating Sand Filters. In Proceedings of the Seventh On-site

Wastewater Treatment Symposium. American Society of

Agricultural Engineers, St. Joseph, MI.

166
Burguera, J.L., (ed.) 1989. Flow Injection Atomic Spectroscopy. Marcel

Dekker.

Campbell, L.E., Cock, R.R., and Corris, R.A., 1982. Kinoya Sewerage

Treatment Plant- Report on receiving water study.

Commonwealth Department of Transport and Construction &

Caldwell Connell Engineers. Canberra, Australia. 91pp.

Castro, P., and Huber, M., 2003. Marine Biology. Fourth Edition.

McGraw Hill. New York, United States of America. 297- 320.

Clark, B.R., 2002. Marine Pollution. Fifth Edition. Oxford. New York,

United States of America. 40- 62.

Clesceri, L.S., Eaton, A.D., and Greenberg, A.D., (eds.) 1998. Standard

Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. 20th

Edition. American Public Health Association (APHA).

Washington, D.C, United States of America.

Coral Cay, 2005. The Coral Coast, Viti Levu, Fiji: A Marine Resource

Assessment. Coral Cay Conservation Ltd, United Kingdom.

Coral Cay, 2001. Mamanuca Coral Reef Conservation Project- Fiji: Pilot

project final report. Coral Cay Conservation Ltd, United

Kingdom.

Corbit, R.A., 1989. Standard handbook of environmental engineering.

McGraw Hill Inc.

Corless, M., 1995. An exploratory study of marine pollution in Suva

Harbour and Laucala Bay (Fiji) using benthic community

structure analysis. IAS Environmental Report No 79. University

of the South Pacific, Suva, Fiji.

167
Crossland, C.J., and Barnes, D.J., 1983. Dissolved nutrients and

organic particulates in the water flowing over coral reefs at

Lizard Island. Australian Journal of Marine Freshwater

Resources 34, 835-844.

Diamond, D., 2001. Determination of Nitrate/Nitrite in Brackish or

Seawater by Flow Injection Analysis. Lachat Instrument‘s

QuikChem Method 31-107-04-1-A. New York, United States of

America.

Drizo, A., Frost, C.A., Smith, K.A., and Grace, J., 1997. Phosphate

and ammonium removal by constructed wetlands with

horizontal subsurface flow, using shale as a substrate. Water

Science and Technology 35, 95–102.

Environment Management Bill, 2004. Government of Fiji.

Eriksson, E., Karina, A., Henze, M., and Ledin, A., 2002.

Characteristics of grey wastewater. Urban Water 4, 85–104.

Fiji Meteorological Service, 2004. Fiji Islands Weather Summary-

September 2004. Volume 4, Issue 9. Nadi Airport, Fiji.

Fiji Meteorological Service, 2003. Fiji Islands Weather Summary-

December 2003. Volume 3, Issue 12. Nadi Airport, Fiji.

Fisheries Agency, 2000. Information on the occurrence of red tide in the

Seto Inland Sea Fisheries Damages. Seto Inland Sea Fisheries

Coordination Office, Supplemental Report.

Fujita, S., 1998. Restoration of polluted urban water courses in Tokyo

for community use. Presentation at the Engineering

Foundation/ASCE Symposium on Sustaining Urban Water

168
 Resources in the 21st Century, Malmo, Sweden, September 7-12

1997.

Geller, G., 1997. Horizontal subsurface flow systems in the German

speaking countries: summary of long-term scientific and

practical experiences; recommendations. Water Science and

Technology 35, 157–166.

Goreau, T.J., 1992. Bleaching and Reef Community Change in

Jamaica: 19511991, Symposium on long-term dynamics of

coral reefs. American Zoologist 32, 683- 695.

Goreau, T.J. and Thacker, K., 1994. Coral Reefs, Sewage and

Wastewater Quality Standards. Proceedings, Caribbean Water

and Wastewater Association Conference, Kingston, Jamaica.

Gold, A., and Tanner, C., 2004. Powerpoint presentation to Fiji Water

Quality Stakeholders Group. Ministry of Health, May 12 20004.

Greenpeace, 1997. Measuring up – report on waste management

practices in the tourism industry of Fiji. Greenpeace, Suva, Fiji.

Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Pollution

(GESAMP), 1990. The state of the Environment. Blackwell

Scientific Publications, Oxford. 146pp.

Hasan, T., 2005. Wastewater Management Demonstration at Crusoe’s

Retreat, Coral Coast, Fiji: Report on the Demonstration and

Observations 21 April 2005. SOPAC Trip Report 374, Suva, Fiji.

Hauxwell, J., Jacoby, C., Frazer, T.K., and Stevely, J., 2001. Nutrients

and Florida’s coastal waters: the links between people, increased

nutrients and changes to aquatic systems. University of Florida.

169
Hawker, D.W., and Connell, D.W., (eds.) 1992. Pollution in Tropical

Aquatic Systems. CRC Press. 252pp.

Headley, T., pers. comm., March 2007. Greywater treatment system

trial notes.

Hodgson, G., 1999. A Global Assessment of Human Effects on Coral

Reefs. Marine Pollution Bulletin 38, 345- 355.

Imai, I., and Itoh, K., 1987. Annual life cycle of Chattonella spp.,

causative flagellates of noxious red tides in the Inland Sea of

Japan. Marine Biology 94, 287-292.

Innoflow, 2005. Coastal wastewater management solutions. Innoflow

Technology Ltd, Auckland, New Zealand.

Institute of Applied Sciences, 2004. A review of the standard of

wastewater treatment in Fiji’s tourism industry. Institute of

Applied Sciences, University of the South Pacific. Suva, Fiji.

Jefferson, B., Laine, A., Parsons, S., Stephenson, T., and Judd, S.,

1999. Technologies for domestic wastewater recycling. Urban

Water 1, 285-292.

Jefferson, B., Joanna, E.B, Pichon, A., Harkness, J., and Simon, J.J.,

2001. Nutrient addition to enhance biological treatment of

greywater. Water Res. 35, 2702–2710.

Johnston, C.A., 1991. Sediment and nutrient retention by freshwater

wetlands: Effects on surface water quality. Critical Reviews in

Environmental Control 21, 491-565.

Kadlec, R.H., and Knight, R.L., 1996. Treatment wetlands. Lewis, Boca

Raton, Florida.
170
Karlberg, B., and Pacey, G.E., 1989. Flow Injection Analysis - A

Practical Guide. Elsevier, Amsterdam.

Keeney, D.R., 1986. Sources of nitrate to ground water. CRC Critical

Reviews in Environmental Control 16, 257-304.

Kemp, W.M., Twilley, R.R., Stevenson, J.C., Boynton, W.R., and

Means, J.C., 1983. The decline of submerged vascular plants in

upper Chesapeake Bay: summary of results concerning possible

causes. Marine Technology Society Journal 17, 78-89.

Kerri, K.D., and Brady, J., 1997. Small Wastewater System Operation

and Maintenance: Vol. 1. California State University,

Sacramento, CA.

Kinsey, D.W. and Davies, P.J., 1979. Effect of elevated Nitrogen and

Phosphorus on a coral reef. Limnology and Oceanography 24,

935- 940.

Koop, K., Booth, D., Broadbent, A., Brodie, J., Bucher, D., Capone, D.,

Coll, J., Dennison, W., Erdmann, M., Harrison, P., Hoegh-

Guldberg, O., Hutchings, P., Jones, G.B., Larkum, A.W., O‘Neil,

J., Steven, A., Tentori, E., Ward, S., Williamson, J., and

Yellowlees, D., 2001. ENCORE: The Effect of Nutrient

Enrichment on Coral Reefs. Synthesis of Results and

Conclusions. Marine Pollution Bulletin 38, 91- 120.

Lapointe, B. and Clark, M., 1992. Nutrient Inputs from the Watershed

and Coastal Eutrophication in the Florida Keys. Estuaries 15,

465- 476.

171
Lin, Y., Jing, S., Wang, T., and Lee, D., 2002. Effects of macrophytes

and external carbon sources on nitrate removal from

groundwater in constructed wetlands. Environmental Pollution

119, 413-420.

Louden, T.L., Thompson, D.B., Fay, L., and Reese, L.E., 1985. Cold-

Climate Performance of Recirculating Sand Filters. In

Proceedings of the Fourth On-site Wastewater Treatment

Symposium. American Society of Agricultural Engineers, St.

Joseph, MI.

Lovell, E.R., 2001. Reef Check description of the 2000 mass coral

bleaching event in Fiji with reference to the South Pacific.

Unpublished report to University of Rhode Island.

Lovell, E., and Tamata, B., 1995. Baseline water quality and coral reef

assessment for PAFCO- Levuka. IAS Environmental Report No.

78. IAS, University of the South Pacific.

Maharaj, R., 2002. Pacific islands at risk: foreshore development and

their vulnerability and implications for adaptation strategies to

climate change. In: Mimura, N. & Yokoki, H. (ed). Proceedings of

the APN/SURVAS/LOICZ Joint Conference on Coastal Impacts of

climate Change and Adaptation in the Asia- Pacific Region. Kobe,

Japan. November 14-16 2000. APN Environment Agency,

Japan.

McCook, L.J., 1999. Macroalgae, Nutrients and Phase Shifts on Coral

Reefs: Scientific Issues and Management Consequences for the

Great Barrier Reef. Coral Reefs 18, 357- 367.

172
McKelvie, I.D., 1999. Flow Injection Analysis. Analytical Testing

Technology 20, 20-24.

Mei-Yin, W., Franz, E.H., and Shulin, C., 2001. Oxygen fluxes and

ammonia removal efficiencies in constructed treatment

wetlands. Water Environment Research 73, 661-666.

Mitsch, W.J., and Gosselink, J.G., 1993. Wetlands. 2nd edition. Van

Nostrand Reinhold, New York.

Moore, J.A., 1993. Using constructed wetlands to improve water

quality. Oregon State University EC 1408.

Morrison, R.J., Maata, M., Aalbersberg, W., Koshy, K., Harrison, N.L.,

Peter, M., Vuki, M., Fuavao, A., Naidu, S., and Dixon, W., 1992.

Water Quality in Fiji’s Great Astrolabe Reef and Lagoon: a

baseline study. Morrison, R.J., and Naqasima, M.R., (eds.).

Environmental Studies Report No. 56, Institute of Natural

Resources, University of the South Pacific, Suva, Fiji.

Mosley, L., and Aalbersberg, W., 2003. Nutrient Levels in Sea and

River Water along the Coral Coast of Viti Levu, Fiji. South Pacific

Journal of Natural Sciences 21, 35-40.

MS312 Unpublished Class Report-2003. Annual sanitary survey of the

shoreline of Suva Harbour and Laucala Bay. Marine Studies

Program, University of the South Pacific, Suva, Fiji.

Mukhtar, S., Ullman, J.L., Auvermann, B.W., Feagley, S.E., and

Carpenter, T.A., 2004. Impact of anaerobic lagoon management

on sludge accumulation and nutrient content for dairies.

173
 American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers 47, 1-

7.

Naidu, S., Aalbersberg, W., Brodie, Fuavao, V., Naqasima, N., Whippy,

and Morrison, J., 1989. Water Quality Studies on Selected South

Pacific Lagoons. UNEP Regional Seas Reports and Studies No.

136, UNEP, Nairobi. 99.

Naidu, S., and Morrison, J., 1988. Development of Effluent and Waste

Disposal Standards for South Pacific Island Countries. INR

Technical Report No 88/3.

National Research Council, 1994. Priorities for Coastal Ecosystem

Science. National Academy Press. Washington, D.C. 118pp.

Neckles, H.A., Wetzel, R.L., and Orth, R.J., 1993. Relative effects of

nutrient enrichment and grazing on epiphyte-macrophyte

dynamics. Oecologia 93, 285-295.

New Zealand Ministry for the Environment, 2003. Understanding

wastewater within the natural and human systems. Available at

http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/waste/wastewater-mgmt-

jun03/html/part1.html [accessed March 20 2008]

Nielsen, L.P., Christensen, P.B., Revsbech, N.P., and Sorensen, J.,

1990. Denitrification and oxygen respiration in biofilms studied

with a microsensor for nitrous oxide and oxygen. Microb. Ecol.

19, 63-72.

Ninglan, L., 2002. Determination of Ammonia in Brackish or Seawater

by Flow Injection Analysis. Lachat Instrument‘s QuikChem

Method 31-107-06-1-B. New York, United States of America.

174
Nunn, P.D., and Naqasima, M.R., 1994. Environmental change around

Eluvuka (Treasure Island) Manamuca Group, Western Fiji:

Results of 1993 coral, algal and sediment surveys and water

testing. Institute of Applied Sciences Environment Report No.

71, University of the South Pacific, Fiji.

Olivieri, M., 1997. Effect of Elevated Nutrients on a Coral Reef.

Limnology and Oceanography 24, 935- 940.

O‘Reilly, E., Rodgers, M., and Zhan, X-M., 2008. Pumped flow bio-film

reactors (PFBR) for treating municipal wastewater. Water

Science & Technology 57, 1857–1865.

Orenco, 2007. AdvanTex AX100 Treatment Systems- For onsite

treatment of commercial and multi-family wastewater. Orenco

Systems Inc., Sutherlin, Oregon.

Owen, J.E., and Bobb, K.L., 1994. Winter Operation and Performance

of a Recirculating Sand Filter. In Proceedings of the WEFTEC

67th Annual Conference. Water Environment Federation,

Alexandria, VA.

Patrick, W.H., and Reddy, K.R., 1976. Nitrification-denitrification in

flooded soils and water bottoms : dependence on oxygen supply

and ammonium diffusion. Journal of Environmental Quality

5,469-472.

Piluk, R.J., and Peters, E.C., 1994. Small Recirculating Sand Filters

for Individuals Homes. In Proceedings of the Seventh On-site

Wastewater Treatment Symposium. American Society of

Agricultural Engineers, Joseph, MI.

175
Polunin, N.V.C., and Jennings, S., 1996. Effects of fishing effort and

catch rate upon the structure and biomass of Fijian reef fish

communities. The Journal of Applied Ecology 33, 400-412.

Prescott, L.M., Harley, J.P., and Klein, D.A., 1990. Microbiology.

Second edition. Wm. C. Brown Communications, Inc., Dubuque.

Prokopy, W., 2000. Determination of Orthophosphate by Flow Injection

Analysis Colorimetry. Lachat Instrument‘s QuikChem Method

10-115-01-1-B. New York, United States of America.

Puetpaiboon, U., and Yirong, C., 2004. Nitrogen removal in

constructed wetland treating wastewater from the seafood

industry. In: Coastal Environment V, incorporating Oil Spill

Studies, Brebbia, C.A., Saval Perez, J.M., and Garcia, L.A.,

(Eds.), WIT Press.

Reddy, K.R., and Patrick, W.H., 1984. Nitrogen transformations and

loss in flooded soils and sediments. Critical Reviews in

Environmental Control 13, 273-309.

Roy, C., and Dube, J.P., 1994. A Recirculating Gravel Filter for Cold

Climates. In Proceedings of the Seventh On-site Wastewater

Systems Symposium. American Society of Agricultural

Engineers, St. Joseph, MI.

Ruzicka, J., and Hansen, E.H., 1988. Flow Injection Analysis. John

Wiley and Sons, New York, United States of America.

Ruzicka, J., and Hansen, E.H., 1975. Flow Injection Analysis. Part I. A

New Concept of Fast Continuous Flow Analysis. Analytical

Chem. Acta 78, 145-147.

176
Ryther, J.H., 1969. Photosynthesis and fish production in the sea.

Science 166, 72-76.

Salinger, M.J., Jamieson, P.D., and Johnstone, J.V., 1995. Climate

variability and wheat baking quality. New Zealand Journal of

Crop and Horticultural Science 23, 289-298.

Sargent, F.J., Leary, T.J., Crewz, D.W., and Kruer, C.R., 1995.

Scarring of Florida’s sea-grasses: assessment and management

options. FRMI Technical Report RT-1. Florida Marine Research

Institute, St Petersburg, Florida. 37pp.

Schonborn, A., Zust, B., and Underwood, E., 1997. Long term

performance of the sand plant filters Schattweid (Switzerland).

Water Science and Technology 35, 307–314.

Short, F.T., and Wyllie-Echeverria, S., 1996. Natural and human

induced disturbance of sea-grasses. Environmental Conservation

23, 17-27.

Short, F.T., Burdick, D.M., Wolf, J.S., and Jones, G.E., 1993.

Eelgrasses in estuarine reserves along the East Coast, USA.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Coastal

Ocean Program Publication. Rockville, Maryland.

Singh, S., and Mosley, L., Unpublished. Nutrient Status in Laucala

Bay. University of the South Pacific. Suva, Fiji.

Singh, S., 2001. Heavy metal pollution in Suva Harbour sediments, Fiji.

Master of Science Thesis, Department of Chemistry, University

of the South Pacific, Fiji.

177
Smil, V., 2000. Phosphorus in the environment: natural flows and

human interferences. Annual Review of Energy and Environment

25, 53-88.

Songhuia, L. and Hodgkiss, I.A.J., 2004. Harmful algal bloom

causative collected from Hong Kong waters. Hydrobiologia 512,

231-238.

South, R., and Skelton, P., 2000. Status of coral reefs in the

southwest Pacific: Fiji, Nauru, New Caledonia, Samoa, Solomon

Islands, Tuvalu and Vanuatu. In: Wilkinson, C., (ed.) Status of

the Coral Reefs of the World: 2000. Australian Institute of

Marine Science, Townsville, pp 159-180.

Szmant, A.M., 2002. Nutrient Enrichment on Coral Reefs: Is it a major

cause of coral reef decline? Estuaries 25, 743- 766.

Taloiburi, E., Unpublished MS411 Class Report-2004. Nutrient status

in Suva Harbour and Laucala Bay. University of the South

Pacific, Suva, Fiji.

Tamata, R.B., Lloyd, C.R. and Green, D., 1992. Water Quality in the

Ports of Fiji: 1992 Monitoring Programme. Institute of Applied

Sciences Environment Report No. 67. University of the South

Pacific, Suva, Fiji. 12- 71.

Tanner, C.C., personal communition-2004, on the predicted efficiency

of the Tagaqe Village constructed wetland and the Crusoe‘s

Resort wastewater treatment plant.

Tanner, C.C., and Gold, A.J., 2004. Review and Recommendations for

178
 Reduction of Nitrogen Export to the Coral Coast of Fiji. NIWA

Client Report: HAM2004-085. Hamilton, New Zealand.

Tanner, C.C., and Sukias, J.P.S., 2002. Status of wastewater

treatment wetlands in New Zealand. EcoEng Newsletter 1, April

2002. International Ecological Engineering Society, Wolhusen,

Switzerland.

Tanner, C.C., 2001a. Growth and nutrient dynamics of soft stem

bulrush in constructed wetlands treating nutrient rich

wastewaters. Wetlands Ecology and Management 9, 49-73.

Tanner, C.C., 2001b. Plants as ecosystem engineers in subsurface

flow treatment wetlands. Water Science & Technology 44, 9-17.

Tanner, C., Sukias, J.P., and Upsdell, M.P., 1998. Organic matter

accumulation during maturation of gravel bed constructed

wetlands treating farm dairy wastewaters. Water Research 32,

3046-3054.

Tanner, C.C., 1996. Plants for constructed wetland treatment

systems- A comparison of the growth and nutrient uptake of

eight emergent species. Ecological Engineering 7, 59-83.

Tanner, C., and Sukias, J.P., 1995. Accumulation of organic solids in

gravel-bed constructed wetlands. Water Science & Technology

32, 229-239.

Tanner, C., Clayton, J.S., and Upsdell, M.P., 1995. Effect of loading

rate and planting on treatment of dairy farm wastewaters in

constructed wetlands - II. Removal of nitrogen and phosphorus.

Water Res. 29, 27-34.

179
Taylor, D., Nixon, S., Granger, S., and Buckley, B., 1995. Nutrient

limitation and the eutrophication of coastal lagoons. Marine

Ecology Progress Series 127, 235-344.

Thaman, B., and Sykes, H., Improving wastewater management in

Fiji’s tourism industry: A booklet for resort operators. Institute of

Applied Sciences, University of the South Pacific, Suva, Fiji.

Thrash, P.J., 2003. The Effects of Nutrient Loading and Coral

Contamination on the Reefs of Southeast Florida and the Keys.

http://jrscience.wcp.muohio.edu/fieldcourse03/PapersMarineE

cologyArticles/bTheEffectsofNutrientLoad.html[Accessed

21/07/2008].

Toifl, M., Grace, T., Diaper, C., Storey, M., and O‘Halloran, R., 2006.

Developing a Synthetic Greywater for Testing Greywater

Technologies. CSIRO, NSW, Australia.

Trepel, M., and Palmeri, L., 2002. Quantifying nitrogen retention in

surface flow wetlands for environmental planning at the

landscape scale. Ecol. Eng. 19, 127-140.

UNEP, 2002. A directory for environmentally sound technologies for the

integrated management of solid, liquid and hazardous waste for

small island developing states in the Pacific region. United

Nations Environment Programme.

Urban Water Research Association of Australia (UWRAA), 1996. Model

guidelines for domestic greywater reuse for Australia. Research

Report No 107. Jeppesen B. Brisbane City Council.

180
US EPA, 2002. Onsite wastewater treatment systems manual. United

States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water.

EPA/625/R-00/008.

US EPA, 2000. Guiding Principles for Constructed Treatment Wetlands:

Providing for Water Quality and Wildlife Habitat. United States

Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 843-B-00-003. Available

online at www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/constructed/guide.html

[Accessed 14/04/2008].

US EPA, 1999. Constructed Wetlands Treatment of Municipal

Wastewaters: Manual. United States Environmental Protection

Agency, EPA/625/R-99/010.

US EPA, 1993. Subsurface Flow Constructed Wetlands for Wastewater

Treatment: A Technology Assessment. United States

Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 832-R-93-008.

US EPA, 1988. Design manual: constructed wetlands and aquatic plant

systems for municipal wastewater treatment. United States

Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/625/1- 88/022. p. 83.

Valcárcel, M., and Luque de Castro, M.D., 1987. Flow Injection

Analysis - Principles and Applications. Ellis Horwood Limited,

Chichester.

Valiela, I., McClelland, J., Hauxwell, J., Behr, P.J., Hersh, D., and

Foreman, K., 1997. Macro-algal blooms in shallow estuaries:

controls and eco-physiological and ecosystem consequences.

Limnology and Oceanography 42, 1105-1118.

181
Veron, J.E.N., 2000. Corals of the World, 3 Vols. M.Stafford-Smith

(ed.) Australian Institute of Marine Science Monograph Series.

Vuki, V., Zann, L.P., Naqasima, M. and Vuki. M., 2000. The Fiji

Islands. Pages 751-764. In: C. Sheppard (ed.) Seas at the

millennium: an environmental evaluation. Elsevier Science.

Vymazal, J., 2001. Types of constructed wetlands for wastewater

treatment: Their potential for nutrient removal. In: Vymazal, J.,

(ed.) Transformations of nutrients in natural and constructed

wetlands. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, pp 1-93.

Watling, D., and Chape, S.P., 1992. Environment Fiji - The National

State of the Environment Report. IUCN. Gland, Switzerland.

Westmacott, S., Teleli, K., Wells, S., and West, J.M., 2000.

Management of bleached and severely damaged corals reefs.

IUCN. Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge. UK. 36pp.

Wetzel, R. G., 1993. Constructed wetlands: scientific foundations are

critical. pp 3-7. In: Constructed Wetlands for Water Quality

Improvement, G.-A., Moshiri (ed.), CRC Press, Boca Raton,

Florida.

WHO, 2004. Surveillance of Drinking Water Quality in the Pacific

Islands: A situation Analysis and Needs Assessment. World

Health Organization.

Wilkinson, C., (ed.) 2000. Status of coral reefs of the world: 2000.

Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville.

Wood, S.L., Wheeler, E.F., Berghage, R.D., and Graves, R.E., 1999.

Temperature effects on wastewater nitrate removal in laboratory

182
 scale constructed wetlands. American Society of Agricultural and

Biological Engineers 42, 185-190.

Worrall, P., Peberdy, K.J., and Millet, M.C., 1997. Constructed

wetlands and nature conservation. Water Science and

Technology 35, 205–213.

Yakub, N., Chandra, A., Shah, Z., and Chand, A., Unpublished MS312

Report, 2004. Nutrient Analysis in Suva Harbour. University of

the South Pacific, Fiji. 2-17.

Yamamuro, M., Minagawa, M., and Kayanne, H., 1992. Preliminary

observation on food webs in Shiraho coral reef as determined

from carbon and nitrogen stable isotopes. p352-355. In:

Proceedings of the 7th International Coral Reef Symposium.

Zann, L.P., 1994. The status of coral reefs in southwestern Pacific

Islands. Marine Pollution Bulletin 29, 52- 61.

Zhu, T., and Sikora, F.J., 1995. Ammonium and nitrate removal in

vegetated and unvegetated gravel bed microcosm wetlands.

Water Science & Technology 32, 219-228.

183
Appendix A: Tagaqe Constructed Wetland Monitoring
Date of Sampling: 15 June 2005 (Tagaqe wetland)
Influent Effluent % removal
Temperature (˚C) 24.6 23.7 -
Salinity (ppt) 0.0 0.0 -
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) 0.13 0.41 -
Conductivity (mS) 0.03 0.04 -
pH 6.78 6.82 -
Faecal Coliform (c/100ml) 9.29 x 106 6.85 x 104 99.3
TSS (mg/L) 1254.5 38.5 97.0
Mean BOD5 (mg/l) 452 18 96.0
Mean NH3-N (µM) 2564.3 662.1 74.2
Mean NO3-N (µM) 2.14 5.57 -
TIN (µM) 2566.44 667.67 74.0
Mean PO4-P (µM) 337.7 79.0 76.6
N : P ratio 8 8
Date of Sampling: 18 July 2005 (Tagaqe wetland)
Influent Effluent % removal
Temperature (˚C) 25.8 24.9 -
Salinity (ppt) 0.0 0.0 -
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) 0.16 0.47 -
Conductivity (mS) 0.03 0.05 -
pH 6.76 6.81 -
Faecal Coliform (c/100ml) 4.5 x 10 6 1.2 x 10 3 99.97
TSS (mg/L) 809 47 94.2
Mean BOD5 (mg/L) 265 18 93.2
Mean NH3-N (µM) 6242.86 814.29 87.0
Mean NO3-N (µM) 0.21 5.0 -
TIN (µM) 6243.07 819.29 86.9
TKN (µM) 10214.3 735.7 92.8
PO4-P (µM) 406.45 51.61 87.3
TP (µM) 598.1 57.4 90.4
N:P ratio 15 16
Date of Sampling: 20 October 2005 (Tagaqe wetland)
Influent Effluent % removal
Temp (˚C) 31 26.2 -
Salinity (ppt) 0.0 0.0 -
DO (mg/l) 0.25 0.85 -
Cond (mS) 0.01 0.002 -
pH 6.79 6.84 -
Mean FC (c/100ml) 2.6 x 10 6 1.9 x 10 4 99.3
Mean TSS (mg/l) 434 11 97.5
Mean BOD (mg/l) 182 18 90.1
Mean NH3-N (µM) 2314.29 470 79.7
Mean NO3-N (µM) 2.14 5.21 -
TIN (µM) 2316.43 475.21 79.5
TKN (µM) 7985.71 1907.14 76.1
Mean PO4-P (µM) 330 76.45 76.8
TP (µM) 445.16 141.94 68.1
N:P ratio 7 6
184
 Date of Sampling: 11 May 2006 (Tagaqe wetland)
influent effluent % removal
Temp (˚C) 29.8 28.4 -
Sal (ppt) 0.0 0.0 -
DO (mg/l) 0.14 0.93 -
Cond (mS) 0.03 0.01 -
pH 6.81 6.85 -
FC (c/100ml) 2.3 x 10 5 4.8 x 10 3 97.9
BOD (mg/l) 500 18 96.4
NH3-N (µM) 4471.43 565.36 87.4
NO3-N (µM) 0.32 0.64 -
NO2-N (µM) 0.14 0.07 50.0
TIN (µM) 4471.89 566.07 87.3
PO4-P (µM) 359.35 71.94 80.0
N:P ratio 12 8
Date of Sampling: June 2006 (Tagaqe wetland)
influent Effluent % removal
Temp (ºC) 29.3 29.2 -
Salinity (ppt) 0.0 0.0 -
DO (mg/L) 0.19 0.89 -
Cond (mS) 0.04 0.01 -
pH 6.83 6.89 -
Mean FC (c/100ml) 9.0 x 106 4.8 x 104 99.5
Mean BOD (mg/L) 942 18 98.1
Mean TSS (mg/L) 855 22 97.4
Mean NH3-N (µM) 5738.57 740.7 87.1
Mean NO3-N (µM) 2.64 10.1 -
Mean NO2-N (µM) 0.14 0.07 50.0
TIN (µM) 5741.35 750.87 86.9
TKN (µM) 8272.4 2357.1 71.5
Mean PO4-P (µM) 282 92.97 67.0
TP (µM) 690.3 331.29 52.0
N:P ratio 8 8
Date of Sampling: 5 July 2006 (Tagaqe wetland)
influent effluent % removal
Temp (ºC) 28.6 30.3 -
Sal (ppt) 0.0 0.0 -
DO (mg/l) 0.15 0.96 -
Cond (mS) 0.03 0.01 -
pH 6.79 6.86 -
FC (c/100ml) 1.6 x 105 3.5 x 104 78.1
E.coli (c/100ml) 9.0 x 105 3.5 x 104 96.1
BOD (mg/L) 211 18 91.5
TSS (mg/l) 420 10 97.6
NH3-N (µM) 4607.14 582.14 87.4
NO3-N (µM) 0.36 7.14 -
NO2-N (µM) 0.14 0.07 50.0
TIN (µM) 4607.64 589.35 87.2
TKN (µM) 6135.71 4064.29 33.8
PO4-P (µM) 301.29 70.32 76.7
TP (µM) 316.77 92.26 70.9
N:P ratio 15 6

185
 Date of Sampling: September 2006 (Tagaqe wetland)
influent Effluent % removal
Temp (ºC) 30.1 27.5 -
Salinity (ppt) 0.0 0.0 -
DO (mg/L) 0.15 0.89 -
Cond (mS) 0.30 0.005 -
pH 6.84 6.87 -
Mean FC (c/100ml) 1.6 x 10 6 7.0 x 10 3 99.6
E.coli (c/100ml) 1.6 x 106 4.0 x 103 99.8
Mean BOD (mg/L) 28 18 30.8
Mean TSS (mg/L) 291 51 82.5
Mean NH3-N (µM) 6014.29 1164.29 80.6
Mean NO3-N (µM) 0.29 7.86 -
Mean NO2-N (µM) 0.14 0.07 50.0
Total Inorganic N (µM) 6014.72 1172.22 80.5
TKN (µM) 6121.43 1271.43 79.2
Mean PO4-P (µM) 525.81 110.97 78.9
TP (µM) 564.52 126.45 77.6
N:P ratio 11 11

Date of Sampling: 8 October 2006 (Tagaqe wetland)

influent Effluent % removal
Temp (˚C) 29.5 27.9 -
Salinity (ppt) 0.0 0.0 -
DO (mg/L) 0.13 1.14 -
Cond (mS) 0.45 0.01 -
pH 6.82 6.88 -
Mean FC (c/100ml) 1.6 x 10 6 7.0 x 10 3 99.6
Mean E.coli 1.6 x 106 7.0 x 103 99.6
Mean BOD (mg/L) 18 12 33
Mean TSS (mg/L) 2143 35 98.4
Mean NH3-N (µM) 4821.4 1385.7 71.3
Mean NO3-N (µM) 0.21 7.14 -
Mean NO2-N (µM) 0.14 0.07 50.0
Total Inorganic N (µM) 4821.75 1392.91 71.1
TKN (µM) 10285.71 1,650 84.0
Mean PO4-P (µM) 593.55 215.81 63.6
TP (µM) 619.35 250.32 59.6
N:P ratio 8 6

186
Appendix B: Crusoe’s Resort STP Monitoring
Date of Sampling: 20 October 2005 (Crusoe’s STP)
Influent Effluent % removal
Temp (ºC) 32 31.4 -
Salinity (ppt) 0.0 0.0 -
DO (mg/l) 0.14 4.37 -
Cond (mS) 0.116 0.01 -
pH 6.76 6.85 -
Mean FC (c/100ml) 1.2 x 105 8.6 x 103 92.8
Mean TSS (mg/l) 16 3 81.3
Mean BOD (mg/l) 85 18 78.8
Mean NH3-N (µM) 3185.7 470 85.2
Mean NO3-N (µM) 55.7 15 73.1
TIN (µM) 3241.4 485 85.0
TKN (µM) 3557.14 1078.57 69.7
Mean PO4-P (µM) 180 31 82.8
TP (µM) 206.45 109.68 46.9
N:P ratio 18 16
Date of Sampling: June 2006 (Crusoe’s STP)
influent effluent % removal
Temp (ºC) 29.6 30.2 -
Sal (ppt) 0.0 0.0 -
DO (mg/l) 0.15 4.64 -
Cond (mS) 1.12 0.02 -
pH 6.77 6.96 -
FC (c/100ml) 9.0 x 105 7.0 x 104 92.2
TSS (mg/L) 18 4 77.8
BOD (mg/L) 87 18 79.3
NH3-N (µM) 3498.57 618.57 82.3
NO3-N (µM) 7.14 3.57 50.0
NO2-N (µM) 1.43 0.71 50.3
TIN (µM) 3507.14 622.85 82.2
PO4-P (µM) 166.45 90.65 45.5
N:P ratio 21 7
Date of Sampling: 5 July 2006 (Crusoe’s STP)
influent effluent % removal
Temp (ºC) 30.3 30.7 -
Sal (ppt) 0.0 0.0 -
DO (mg/l) 0.25 3.79 -
Cond (mS) 0.97 0.015 -
pH 6.76 6.87 -
FC (c/100ml) 7.4 x 10 5 3.9 x 10 4 94.7
E.coli (c/100ml) 6.6 x 105 3.8 x 104 94.2
BOD (mg/L) 76 18 76.3
TSS (mg/l) 26 5 80.8
NH3-N (µM) 3685.71 573.57 84.4
NO3-N (µM) 7.14 2.86 60.0
NO2-N (µM) 0.14 0.07 50.0
TIN (µM) 3692.99 576.5 84.4
PO4-P (µM) 223.2 68.71 69.2
N:P ratio 17 8
187
 Date of Sampling: August 2006 (Crusoe’s STP)
influent Effluent % Removal
Temp (ºC) 29.8 31.2 -
Salinity (ppt) 0.0 0.0 -
DO (mg/l) 0.18 4.43 -
Cond (mS) 0.69 0.02 -
pH 6.70 6.92 -
FC (c/100ml) 2.4 x 10 6 9.0 x 10 4 96.3
E.coli (c/100ml) 2.4 x 106 9.0 x 104 96.3
Mean TSS (mg/L) 61 42 31.1
Mean BOD (mg/l) 25 18 28.0
NH3-N (µM) - - -
NO3-N (µM) - - -
NO2-N (µM) - - -
TIN (µM) - - -
TKN (µM) 1971.43 1235.71 37.3
PO4-P (µM) - - -
TP (µM) - - -

Date of Sampling: September 2006 (Crusoe’s STP)

influent Effluent % Removal
Temp (ºC) 30.0 30.2 -
Salinity (ppt) 0.0 0.0 -
DO (mg/l) 0.14 3.75 -
Cond (mS) 0.84 0.018 -
pH 6.82 6.89 -
FC (c/100ml) 2.8 x 105 8.0 x 104 71.4
E.coli (c/100ml) 5.0 x 104 3.0 x 10 4 40.0
Mean TSS (mg/L) 55 10 81.8
Mean BOD (mg/l) 45 18 60.0
NH3-N (µM) 2407.14 1828.57 24.0
NO3-N (µM) 7.14 2.86 60.0
NO2-N (µM) 0.14 0.07 50.0
TIN (µM) 2414.42 1831.5 24.1
TKN (µM) 2578.57 1728.57 33.0
PO4-P (µM) 311.94 68.06 78.2
TP (µM) 319.68 98.06 69.3
N:P ratio 8 27

188
 Appendix C: Coral Coast Water Quality Monitoring
Date of Sampling: 18 July 2005 (Coral Coast Sites)
Site Place GPS location NO3-N NH3-N PO4-P TIN:P
(µM) (µM) (µM) ratio
1 Fijian Resort: ocean side 18-08.62S; 177-25.76E 6.43 0.97 0.49 15
2 Outrigger Resort: western side 18-10.82S; 177-33.08E 6.41 0.49 0.18 38
3 Tubakula Resort: eastern side 18-10.86S; 177-33.46E 5.53 0.61 0.37 17
5 East of Votua Village 18-12.69S; 177-42.89E 3.58 0.52 0.24 17
6 Tagaqe Village 18-11.91S; 177-39.75E 5.71 1.44 0.37 19
7 Sovi Bay beach 18-12.30S; 177-36.39E 5.23 0.85 0.33 18
8 Hideaway Resort: western side 18-11.92S; 177-39.32E 6.63 6.24 0.26 49
9 Front of Naviti Resort 18-12.31S; 177-41.84E 4.85 0.92 0.25 23
10 West of Komave Village 18-13.38S; 177-45.71E 2.48 0.98 0.31 11
11 Tabua Sands Resort 18-11.62S; 177-37.89E 5.73 0.62 0.28 23
12 Vatukarasa Bay 18-10.85S; 177-36.22E 4.95 0.65 0.45 12
13 Malevu Village: eastern side 18-10.85S; 177-33.62E 5.93 0.81 0.33 20
14 Crows Nest Resort 18-10.65S; 177-32.60E 6.57 0.84 0.35 21
15 Korotogo Bridge (River water) 18-10.67S; 177-32.59E 6.13 5.37 1.03 11
16 Matai Kandavu Beach 18-10.77S; 177-31.05E 2.99 0.57 0.10 36
17 Between Malevu/ Vatukarasa Villages 18-11.17S; 177-33.57E 4.86 0.49 0.31 17
18 Warwick Hotel 18-13.69S; 177-44.37E 11.50 0.99 0.54 23
mean 5.62 1.37 0.36 19

189
 Date of Sampling: 20 October 2005 (Coral Coast Sites)
Site Place GPS location Time Temp Sal DO Cond. NO3-N NH3-N PO4-P TIN:P
(ºC) (ppt) (mg/l) (mS) (µM) (µM) (µM) ratio
5 Votua Village 18-12.69S 1219 30 30.3 6.2 50.9 2.38 0.32 0.18 15
177-42.89E
6 Tagaqe Village 18-11.91S 1327 20.2 32.7 6.8 32.24 1.57 0.79 0.32 8
177-39.75E
8 Hideaway Resort 18-11.92S 1336 31.6 33.2 5.67 40 3.63 3.24 0.23 29
177-39.32E
9 Naviti Resort 18-12.31S 1230 32 30.3 6.23 54.2 4.43 0.87 0.25 21
177-41.84E
10 Komave Village 18-13.38S 1143 24 31.1 4.97 22.25 2.18 0.83 0.28 10
177-45.71E
11 Tabua Sands 18-11.62S 1351 23 31.6 6.12 48.3 3.41 0.48 0.31 11
177-37.89E
18 Warwick Hotel 18-13.69S 1202 32.3 29.4 6.7 53.5 4.5 0.49 0.33 15
177-44.37E
mean 27.6 31.2 6.1 43.06 3.15 1.0 0.27 15

190
 Date of Sampling: 11 May 2006 (Coral Coast Sites)
Site Place Time Tide Sal Temp DO Cond NO3-N NH3-N NO2- PO4- N:P
(ppt) (ºC) mg/l (mS) (µM) (µM) N(µM) P(µM) ratio
1 Fijian Resort [18-08.62S;177- 1110 H+6 33.4 28.8 5.87 54.5 1.86 0.489 0.13 0.29 9
25.76E]
2 Outrigger [18-10.82S;177-33.08E] 1210 H-5 33 28.6 7.48 54.3 5.35 0.09 0.14 0.42 13
3 Tubakula [18-10.86S;177-33.46E] 1220 H-5 32.8 28.9 7.68 54.2 4.93 0.16 0.10 0.32 16
5 Votua Village [18-12.69S;177- 1410 H-3 31.3 28.9 5.67 56.2 1.97 0.22 0.10 0.20 11
42.89E]
6 Tagaqe Village [18-11.91S;177- 1321 H-4 32.6 30.8 6.81 52.3 1.71 1 0.32 0.23 13
39.75E]
7 Sovi Bay [18-12.30S;177-36.39E] 1246 H-5 34.4 29.1 6.6 56.7 3.96 0.10 0.06 0.27 15
8 Hideaway Resort 1315 H-4 33.2 28.9 7.51 43.5 3.23 0.28 0.12 0.24 15
18-11.92S;177-39.32E
9 Naviti Resort [18-12.31S;177- 1343 H-4 34.6 32.4 6.64 53.8 3.76 0.31 0.08 0.26 16
41.84E]
10 Komave Village 1430 H-3 32 27.7 5.75 51.2 2.11 0.23 0.11 0.29 8
18-13.38S;177-45.71E
11 Tabua Sands [18-11.62S;177- 1305 H-4 31 29.6 6.57 54.1 2.62 0.27 0.12 0.33 9
37.89E]
12 Vatukarasa 18-10.85S;177-36.22E 1253 H-5 31.7 28.4 7.77 48.9 1.72 0.13 0.09 0.17 11
13 Malevu Village 1230 H-5 34.7 28.9 6.34 56.8 1.20 0.20 0.10 0.15 10
18-10.85S;177-33.62E
14 Crows Nest [18-10.65S;177- 1205 H-5 33.6 28.9 7.68 55.2 1.91 0.33 0.08 0.19 12
32.60E]
15 Korotogo Bridge 1154 H-6 27 28.4 3.50 47.96 6.79 4.58 0.23 1.24 9
18-10.67S;177-32.59E
16 Matai Kadavu Beach 1130 H-6 31.2 30.6 6.32 26.14 0.60 0.12 0.07 0.14 6
18-10.77S;177-31.05E
17 Between Malevu & Vatukarasa 1240 H-5 29.7 30.3 6.78 43.45 1.09 0.16 0.09 0.20 7
18-11.17S;177-33.57E
18 Warwick Hotel 1355 H-4 33.1 29.8 6.64 43.9 2.12 0.29 0.08 0.31 8
18-13.69S;177-44.37E
mean 32.3 29.4 6.57 47.6 2.76 0.53 0.12 0.31 11

191
 Date of Sampling: June 2006 (Coral Coast Sites)
Site Place Time Tide Sal Temp DO Con NO3-N NH3-N NO2-N PO4-P T:P
(ppt) (ºC) mg/l (mS) (µM) (µM) (µM) (µM)
1 Fijian Resort [18-08.62S;177- 1110 H+1 32.6 29.6 5.67 52.4 0.98 3.67 0.63 0.16 32
25.76E]
2 Outrigger Resort [18-10.82S;177- 1235 H+3 31.4 27.9 6.78 51.5 8.29 4.26 0.64 0.47 28
33.08E]
3 Tubakula Resort [18-10.86S;177- 1243 H+3 32.5 29.2 6.43 49.7 8.07 2.98 0.63 0.31 37
33.46E]
5 Votua Village [18-12.69S;177- 1408 H+4 32.8 27.5 5.88 54.3 3.89 6.48 0.64 1.08 10
42.89E]
6 Tagaqe Village [18-11.91S;177- 1321 H+3 32.1 30.3 5.92 46.7 1.86 1.14 0.30 0.71 5
39.75E]
7 Sovi Bay [18-12.30S;177-36.39E] 1258 H+3 33.3 31.2 5.75 55.4 3.06 4.27 0.63 0.38 21
8 Hideaway Resort [18-11.92S;177- 1332 H+3 31.2 29.5 5.74 53.6 3.26 5.29 0.64 0.23 39
39.32E]
9 Naviti Resort[18-12.31S;177- 1355 H+4 30.7 31.5 5.69 52.1 2.56 9.14 0.64 0.58 21
41.84E]
10 Komave [18-13.38S;177-45.71E] 1430 H+4 31.6 29.8 5.30 53.4 2.78 4.31 0.58 0.46 16
11 Tabua Sands [18-11.62S;177- 1323 H+3 32.7 27.9 5.54 52.8 5.84 1.75 0.65 0.36 22
37.89E]
12 Vatukarasa [18-10.85S;177-36.22E] 1310 H+3 29.5 29.3 5.36 49.8 3.47 5.77 0.66 1.22 8
13 Malevu [18-10.85S;177-33.62E] 1250 H+3 33.4 29.6 6.65 55.2 13.5 3.18 0.64 0.83 20
14 Crows Nest [18-10.65S;177-32.60E] 1228 H+3 32.1 29.9 5.94 51.3 7.86 2.49 0.64 0.75 14
15 Korotogo Bridge [18-10.67S;177- 1222 H+3 27.6 29.3 3.43 43.8 4.11 7.50 0.70 1.14 11
32.59E]
16 Matai Kadavu Beach 1200 H+2 32.4 29.5 5.30 47.3 5.31 4.39 1.18 0.82 13
[18-10.77S;177-31.05E]
17 Between Malevu & Vatukarasa 1240 H+3 31.5 29.4 5.81 49.9 4.64 3.29 0.39 0.53 15
18-11.17S;177-33.57E
18 Warwick Hotel 1355 H+4 32.9 30.3 6.13 53.6 0.97 3.33 0.63 0.32 15
[18-13.69S;177-44.37E]
mean 31.7 29.5 5.73 51.3 4.73 4.31 0.64 0.61 19

192
 Date of Sampling: 5 July 2006 (Coral Coast Sites)
Site Place Time Tide Sal Temp. DO Cond. NO3-N NH3-N NO2-N PO4-P TIN:P
(ppt) (ºC) (mg/l) (mS) (µM) (µM) (µM) (µM) ratio
5 Votua Village 1210 H-2 31.9 30.7 5.85 56.1 2.45 4.23 0.21 0.83 8
18-12.69S
177-42.89E
6 Tagaqe Village 1355 H+0 32.9 31.5 5.76 52.4 2.07 1.0 0.23 0.64 5
18-11.91S
177-39.75E
7 Sovi Bay 1445 H +1 32.5 29.9 5.23 49.8 2.71 3.34 0.31 0.41 10
18-12.30S
177-36.39E
8 Hideaway Resort 1410 H+0 34.5 30.6 6.41 51.5 3.13 3.71 0.29 0.43 15
18-11.92S
177-39.32E
9 Naviti Resort 1330 H-1 30.3 32.3 5.32 47.2 2.33 4.11 0.15 0.51 13
18-12.31S
177-41.84E
10 Komave Village 1120 H-3 31.7 27.4 6.11 53.7 2.08 3.65 0.19 0.42 14
18-13.38S
177-45.71E
11 Tabua Sands 1420 H+0 33.1 28.1 5.57 51.3 1.92 1.78 0.14 0.36 11
18-11.62S
177-37.89E
12 Vatukarasa 1435 H+1 33.8 31.3 6.72 53.4 2.43 3.22 0.26 0.47 13
18-10.85S
177-36.22E
18 Warwick Hotel 1140 H-2 31.4 30.6 6.23 53.2 1.47 3.54 0.12 0.33 15
18-13.69S
177-44.37E
mean 32.5 30.3 5.91 52.1 2.29 3.18 0.21 0.49 12

193
 Appendix D: Votua Creek Water Quality Monitoring
Monthly Sampling: June 2006 (Votua Creek)
Site Faecal Coliform (c/100ml) NH3-N (µM) NO3-N (µM) NO2-N (µM) PO4-P (µM)
Votua dam 168 - - - -
Upper housing 273 5.34 12.50 0.71 0.41
Lower housing 1100 14.0 12.57 0.75 1.20
Votua bridge 300 14.14 13.36 0.95 1.17
Votua creek mouth 1700 10.07 9.14 1.0 1.42

Monthly Sampling: July 2006 (Votua Creek)

Site FC E.coli Sal Temp Cond pH TSS Flow Tide BOD NH3 NO3 NO2 TIN TKN PO4 TP
c/100ml c/100ml ppt ºC mS mg/l mg/l (µM) (µM) (µM) (µM) (µM) (µM) (µM)
Votua 34 34 0.1 21.7 0.108 7.77 4 Fast rising <18 3.32 2.34 0.37 6.03 10 0.33 0.45
dam flow
Upper 125 125 0.1 22.4 0.110 7.42 2 medium rising <18 3.81 5.98 0.47 10.26 12 0.37 0.67
housing
Lower 320 229 0.1 22.7 0.112 7.34 7 medium rising <18 12.79 13.37 0.71 26.87 28.4 0.61 0.65
housing
Votua 54 54 0.2 23.4 0.121 7.4 6 slow rising <18 13.0 12.52 0.95 26.47 27.7 0.92 0.97
bridge
Votua 300 200 15.6 24.2 0.235 7.8 6 slow rising <18 10.53 9.47 0.99 20.99 24.1 1.26 1.29
creek
mouth
Housing <1 <1
tap
water
village 60 30
tap
water
Mike 29 23
diver‘s
tap
water
Housing 57 21
dug out
well

194
 Monthly Sampling: August 2006 (Votua Creek)
Site FC E.coli Sal Temp Cond pH TSS Flow Tide BOD NH3 NO3 NO2 TIN PO4 TP
c/100ml c/100ml ppt ºC mS mg/l mg/l (µM) (µM) (µM) (µM) (µM) (µM)
Votua dam 57 50 0.0 18.4 0.111 7.71 2 Fast Rising <18 2.73 1.67 0.46 4.86 0.40 0.40
Upper housing 60 60 0.0 16.9 0.107 7.22 3 Fast Rising <18 4.51 3.89 0.49 8.89 0.40 0.42
Lower housing 300 240 0.0 21.2 0.113 7.24 5 Fast Rising <18 7.90 8.91 0.73 17.54 0.64 0.65
Votua bridge 800 800 0.1 20.7 0.125 7.10 7 Slow Rising <18 8.79 10.74 1.11 20.64 0.89 0.88
Votua creek 500 500 1.7 26.1 0.224 7.78 6 slow rising <18 9.48 11.81 1.22 22.51 1.30 1.31
mouth
Housing tap 2 <1
water
Votua village tap 36 36
water
Mike diver‘s tap 37 19
water

Monthly Sampling: September 2006 (Votua Creek)

FC E.coli Sal Temp Cond pH TSS Flow Tide BOD NH3 NO3 NO2 TIN TKN PO4 TP
c/100ml c/100ml ppt ºC mS mg/l mg/l (µM) (µM) (µM) (µM) (µM) (µM) (µM)
Votua 300 200 0.0 17.7 0.112 7.7 19 Fast Rising <18 3.29 1.88 0.56 5.73 4.35 0.34 0.46
dam
Upper 200 220 0.0 15.1 0.117 7.5 24 Fast Rising <18 5.14 3.41 0.56 9.11 11.2 0.38 0.41
housing
Lower 420 420 0.0 18.3 0.121 7.34 30 Medium Rising <18 8.16 9.29 0.80 18.25 24.55 0.66 0.71
housing
Votua 1.5 x 1.4 x 0.0 18.6 0.127 7.30 33 Fast Rising <18 9.62 10.98 1.27 21.87 18.90 0.97 0.93
bridge 103 103
Votua 750 750 1.0 17.4 0.231 7.87 31 Medium rising <18 11.06 12.21 1.28 24.55 23.41 1.46 1.44
creek
mouth
Housing <1 <1
tap
water
Votua 78 78
village
tap
water

195