An examination is made of various issues regarding freshwater aquaculture development raised by the IIMA study on inland fish marketing in India. The following topics are discussed: 1)fish production and the resources; 2)desirability for refined methodology for assessment of fish production; 3)pond resource under fish culture; 4)conflicting data and 5)observation on research input for freshwater

Ghosh, K.K.

Sinha, V.R.P.

Aquatic Commons

Journal ot the Indian Fisheries Association 
18, 1988, 141-150 
NATIONAL ISSUES RAISED BY liMA STUDY ON 
DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF FRESHWATER 
AQUACULTURE IN INDIA- A REVIEW 
V.R.P. SINHA AND K.K. GHOSH 
CENTRAL INSTITUTE OF FISHERIES EDUCATION 9 BOMBAY-400 061. 
The IIMA study on inland fish marketing in~ India 
(U.K. Srivastava et al. , 1985) has apparently succeeded 
in assessing the inland fish production · and marketing 
practices. Based on their assessment of production 
potential of different resources the study has recommended 
feasible strategy for development of inland fish marketing 
in India. However, if one goes deep into the study, he 
gets disillusioned. Perhaps, the study unfortunately could 
not locate the principal sources of inland fish production. 
And thus, it ended up with several observations, recom-
mendations and comments, which are by and large conflic-
ting and at variance with common knowledge about inland 
fisheries of India, particularly the freshwater aquaculture. 
Few examples need to be cited to qualify the above 
observations. 
I. FISH PRODUCTION AND THE RESOURCES 
The IIMA, basing on their own generated 
available information to them indicates the 
data and 
following: 
SINHA AND GHOSH 
-------------~-~--------------------------------------------------~--------
Fish 
production 
system 
Total .Area. 
(million ha) 
Avai-
lable 
Utili-
sed 
Total national Reference 
production 
(million 
tonnesjyr) 
Vol Page 
---------------------------------------------------------------------~=---
Freshwater 
pond culture 
Reservoir 
fisheries 
Brackishwater 
culture 
Brackishwater 
lakes lagoons. swamps 
Estuaries 
Total accounted by 
liMA Study 
Total national 
production 
Balance unexplained 
0.75 o. 15 
1. 4 ~~. 4 
0.947 0.026 
NA* o. 17 
0.54** NA 
0.01 
0.025 
0.010 
0.014 
o. 032*** 
0. 181 
0.909 5 
o. 728 
17 
17 
67-68 
88 
78 aod 
83-85 
6 
===~==========================:=================================:========== 
Not available 
Excluding those of Maharashtra and Orissa. 
From Hooghly, Mahanadi, Godavari, 
Narmada estuaries. 
Coleroon and 
An important source of oxbow lakes, abounding in 
Bihar, Assam and West Bengal seem to have been over-
looked. Even accounting another . 025 million tonnes to 
them and another 0. 003 million tonnes to minor estuaries 
having sustenance fisheries, we find unexplained production 
of 0. 7 million tonnes. The study by several suggestive 
statements attributes the unexplained production to rivers, 
e.g. 
"The fact, however, remains that a major portion 
ISSUES ON FRESHWATER AQUACULTURE IN INDIA 143 
of inland fish supply at present. comes 
fishing and is likely to continue for some 
p 143) (underlining by authors). 
from riverine 
time" (Vol. 1, 
"In inland fish production, riverine fish production 
plays an important role and hence major attention will 
have to be paid to increase the production (from) riverine 
fisheries" (Vol.S, p 11) (underlining by authors, 'from' 
inserted by authors, as there appears to be printing 
error). 
"To develop riverine fish production, which is 
at present the mainstay of inland fish production and 
which is going to remain in that position for a long time" 
(Vol.S, p 143) (underlining by authors). 
The liMA's approach of working on production per 
fisherman and indicating fishermen population along river 
banks suggests that they honestly believed rivers produce 
the balance of about 0. 7 million tonnes and not a mere 
few thousand tonnes. 
However, the IIMA study itself worked at 14 major 
river fishing centres and could find only a total of 205 
tonnes of catch per year (Vol.S, p 37). Also several 
publications by CIFRI scientists and others have shown 
that river fish production in the more productive stretches 
was about a tonne a kilometre with Ganga fisheries being 
the most productive. This too places the maximum produc-
tion from rivers at 29,000 tonnes a year from the available 
29,000 km. 
The major impact of water . management in the 
principal drainages has already reduced water flow in 
all perennial rivers. Impact of urbanisation and industria-
lisation on river banks coupled with flow of sewage and 
agricultural pesticides have brought in increased pollution 
loads and habitat degradation in almost all perennial 
rivers. Thus it is commonly believed that the fish 
productivity in rivers is declining. 
The liMA study also found only about 40 tonnes 
landed at Allahabad as against abouf 200 tonnes in the sixties, 
a figure given by outstanding scientists of CIFRI - persons 
not less than Dr.V.G.Jhingran, an authority on riverine 
fisheries in India. Therefore, the observations made by 
IIMA are difficult to understand, specially that the rivers 
are the mainstay of Indian inland fish production. 
144 
2. DESIRABILITY 
ASSESSMENT OF 
SINHA AND GHOSH 
FOR REFINED METHODOLOGY FOR 
FISH PRODUCTION. 
The high variability in total area . under ponds, 
their number, size and their productivity did certainly 
call for a more refined technique of assessing total pro-
duction from ponds. Following table reproduces the 
varability as reported by liMA. 
Total pond Lowest 
Resources Highest 
Average: Low 
Area of 
pond High 
Average ~ Low 
productivity 
High 
Heryana 
W.Bengal 
Bihar 
W.Bengal 
A. Pradesh 
(Nalg6nda) 
(Ajn\er) 
Karnataka 
(Gulbarga) 
Orissa 
(Ganjam) 
210 ha. 
82560 ha 
0.8-1.5 ha 
0. 9- 1. 9 ha 
20.5 ha 
237 Kg/ha 
1880 kg/ha 
Vol 2 Table 2.2 
p 10 
Vol 3 Table .3.5 
p 101-103 
Vol. 3 Table 4. 1 
p 204-206 
The average productivity at national level was· found 
as 681 kg/ha, while for small ponds less than 0. 4 ha 
(into which class most of West Bengal ponds fall) it was 
found as high as 5023 kg/ha, · while from pQnds above 
10 hectares it was as low as 159 kg/ha (Vol. 3, p 229) 
However, the liMA sample . ponds in West Bengal 
showed average production rate of 1340. 25 kg/ha/ yr (Vol. 3, 
p 206) which when multiplied by liMA's own estimate 
of 82560 ha of pond area under freshwater fish culture 
in West Bengal (Vol.2, p 10) gives a production of 0.11 
million tonnes. Yet the total for the country is estimated 
as 0. 10 million tonnes only. 
A proper approach would have been to work out 
a weighted estimate of total production in sampled states, 
based on district wise resources and productivity data 
for different size classes. This would be raised to national 
figure by simple ratio estimate, using the total resources 
of the states and sample districts. 
In the circumstance, it seems very difficult to accept 
the validity and reliability of the suggested stragies 
for market development particularly when the production 
iteself is not properly documented or located. 
ISSUES ON FRESHWATER AQUACULTURE IN INDIA 145 
3. POND RESOURCE UNDER FISH CULTURE 
liMA found only about 156,000 ha to be utilised 
for fish culture in 1980-81, when NCA ( Govt. of India, 
1976) found 1 million ha to be so in early seventies. 
Severed studies, by National Sample Survey and at CIFRI 
have shown that in West Bengal alone about 90% ponds 
are utilised for some or other form of fish culture. 
Yet IIMA reported only 47.4% being utilised (Vol.2, p 10). 
If the area supported by FFDAs till 1980-81 is the only 
area considered by IIMA to be under freshwater culture, 
it is highly erroneous,. since many farmers do continue 
to produce fish from ponds and tanks all over the country 
and many have adopted new innovations too. 
Further the liMA by adopting its own definition 
of "Effective Storage Level" (ESL) area for ponds, and 
concept of "standard fingerlings", have added a new 
dimension, leading to more complicated situation for any 
comparisons with existing national level know ledge and 
results. Some conversion factors have been used to convert 
conventional area and fish seed sizes to ESL and standard 
fingerlings. However, their rationale does not appear 
to be well established. 
4. CONFLICTING DATA 
4.1 Reservoir fisheries production 
The production is stated to be 25000 tonnes (Vol. 1, 
p 17) But later it is stated as 21 , 750 tonnes (Vol. 1, 
p 56). The average productivity of large reservoirs (above 
5000 ha) is stated "only 5 to 10 kg per hectare" while 
the study itself estimates average productivity as 14.5 
kg/ha (Vol. 1, p 56). 
4. 2 Reservoir stocking and expected production. 
The Study suggests stocking in large measure for 
stepping up reservoir bioproducti v ity. The liMA has 
recommended raising of stocking from 1. 22.7 million finger-
lings in 1980-81 to 900.1 million to increase production 
from 25 thousand tonnes to 53 thousand tonnes (Vol.l, 
p 17). The rationale and sicentific basis for this recom-
mendation are· not very clear to justify. The recommendation 
implies ra1s1ng national average stocking rate from 85 
to 622 fingerlings per ha· to achieve productivity increase 
from 15 to 36 kg per hectare i.e. 750% increase in 
\46 S 1 NHA Af'.D GHOSH 
stocking to result in 250% increase in production. 
The experience of reservoir fisheries . management 
in India indicates that stocking of 200 to 500 fingerlings 
per hectare, generally leads to production of 40-60 kg/ha 
in medium to large reservoirs depending on several 
factors. 
4.3 Average area of pond 
The liMA study finds the average pond area ( FSL) 
in the country as high as 5. 4 ha. The samples chosen 
in some districts are perhaps small irrigation reservoirs 
included in the category of ponds, which has made the 
entire inference lopsided. One finds average maximum 
area of selected ponds in t h~ districts of Kurnool as 16. 1 
ha Nalgonda as 20.5 ha, Chandrapur as 17.8 ha and Ajmer 
as 30. 6 ha (.Vol. 3, Table 3. 5). With such large average 
areas, it is 'not correct to classify them as ponds. A 
large number of them are small irrigation reservoirs, 
which call for different developmental approach as 
indicated by studies conducted at the CIFRI. 
4.4 Depth of pond 
The national average of depth of ponds is reported 
as 4. 7 m at maximum water and 1. 7 m at minimum. The 
interstate variations were not serious (Vol. 3, p 105). 
This does not reconcile with the field experience of 
thousands of ponds all over the country. 
4. 5 Seasonality of ponds 
It would be difficult for any one to accept that 
"1 00% or a very close to that ponds in Gujarat, Madhya 
Pradesh, Orissa, Uttar Pradesh . and West Bengal" are 
perennial, while only 24% are perennial in a state like 
Bihar (Vol. 3, p 109). In fact the reverse. is likely to 
be more apt but for West Bengal. 
4. 6 Culture systems and their economics of production 
The study recognises three forms of freshwater 
fish culture. 
- Extensive with seed only (E) 
- Semi-intensive with seed and fertilisers. (S) 
ISSUES ON FRESHWATER AQUACULTURE IN INDIA 147 
Intensive with seed, fertilisers and feeds (I) 
The yield rates per hectare were found as 510 kg. 
956 kg and 1102 kg for E, S and I respectively and their 
sales or gross revenue was in the ratio of 1 : 2:3 (Vol. 1, 
p 50). The species mix being same, the revenue rate 
is naturally expected to be proportional to production. 
No explanation is offered by the study for this intriguing 
finding of revenue jumping three times while production 
goes up by a factor of two only. 
A computation of production per fingerling stocked 
from the data in the study shows 209 gm, 275 gm and 
157 gm for E, S and I. It is all the more intriguing that 
intensive culture produced smaller fishes compared to 
semi-intensive and got a 50% increase in revenue with 
only about 15% increase in production. 
The report further identifies freshwater fish culture 
with two types of species mix - Indian major carps (IMC) 
and composite fish culture, Indian major carps with silver, 
grass and common carps ( CFC). The production rates of 
743 kg/ha/ yr from CFC as against 643 kg/ha from IMC 
(Vol.3, p 233) are analysed in the report by confusing 
statements, e.g. "The input rates for other factors of 
production, except for residual factors, were also higher 
for polyculture than in monoculture. From the cost point 
of view only, extensive method and monoculture were 
better techniques than the corresponding alternative 
methods of cultivation" (Vol. 3, p 234). Yet there is no 
mention of any monoculture case. Which species do these 
observations refer to? Is it that the IMA study got 
confused to consider monoculture as synonymous with 
culture of Indian major carps? 
Though the average sale price of fish was found 
as Rs. 7.13 kg and Rs.6.59/kg (Vol.3, p 233), respectively 
for the two species mix covered by the study, IMC and 
CFC, the statement "In all India basis, the farmer sold 
fish of an average variety at Rs.7.64/Kg" (Vol.3, p 250) 
is puzzling. How is it that the price realised for average 
variety was more than averages of the systems. 
Considering that the mortality rate remains the 
same, it is difficult to agree scientifically that the overall 
growth rate of fish will be lower in composite fish culture 
particularly when grass carp; silver carp grow faster 
than Indian major carp and common carp grows compara-
SINHA AI\[) GHOSH 
tively better than mrigal and rohu. In fact, over 14 years 
of study under the All India Coordinated Research Project 
on composite fish culture always showed that composite 
fish culture gives higher production than culture of Indian 
major carp alone. Unfortunate! y reference to this Project 
does not appear anywhere in this study. 
4. 7 Modernization of market centre 
As market development strategy, the study recommends 
under Riverine Fish System "To begin with only those 
market places should be selected where the volume of 
business was more than 200 tonnes of fish per day" (Vol. 1, 
p 141) (underlining authors). Does such a centre exists 
anywhere, when the major market centres of riverine 
fish land lings, covered by the study, was found to have 
a maximum of 39.96 tonnes per year at Allahabad and 
a total 205.32 tonnes a year at 14 centres? 
5. OBSERVATION ON RESEARCH INPUT FOR FRESHWATER 
FRESH WATER 
The recommendations made by the study on research 
inputs of freshwater fish culture leaves one in doubt 
about the effort made to read available information in 
a series of handouts, bulletins, training course notes, 
research papers, etc. published by CIFRI and All India 
Coordinated Research Project on Composite Fish Culture 
and Fish Seed Production. 
Puzzling statements are made in the report (Vol. 3, 
p 309) such as, 
i) " ...... the results of experiments of 
research were, by and large, not adopted 
due to economic and social reasons". 
the 
by 
existing 
farmers 
ii) " ...... the research sub-system did not provide 
guideline on usage of fertilisers and feed. . . . . The recom-
mendation based on research was of uniform type, and 
not pond speci fie". 
" ...... no 
its productivity 
input dosage". 
farmer • s pond was ever lab-tested for 
before recommending fertiliser and other 
iii) "all research results to be tested thorough! y before 
recommendation or publcation in public journals. The ICAR 
ISSUES ON FRES~~ATER AQUACULTURE IN INDIA 149 
should setup a committee for the security of research 
results before making it public". 
It is common knowledge that grass carp and silver 
carp were high cost fingerlings. As per report itself, 
248 ponds out of 649 adopted CFC. (Vol. 3, p 233), 41% 
ponds applied feeds (Vol. 3, p 131), 15.4% ponds applied 
inorganic fertilisers (Vol. 3, p 131). USe of these inputs 
are based on results of research based technology develop-
ments. It is well known that application of inorganic 
fertilisers and feeds in fish culture or stocking of exotic 
carps with Indian major carps in composite fish culture 
were new technologies introduced in India as a result 
or research studies and technology development. 
There are many handouts, bulletins and papers g1 v 1ng 
guidelines for pond specific dosages and results of work 
on farmers ponds. Unfortunate! y liMA study has never 
referred to the work done under All India Co-ordinated 
Research Project on Composite Fish Culture, the pond 
Culture Division of CIFRI, CIFRI/IDRC Project or under 
'Lab to Land' Programme of ICAR at CIFRL Thus the 
liMA missed many scientific observations made in the 
farmers ponds and landed in the pitfall of such conclusions. 
In fact, these research results have led to national 
recognition such, as, Hooker Award, Rafi Ahmed Kidwai 
Prize, ICAR Team Research Award, etc., all severly 
secreened and judged by high power national Committees, 
apart from international recognition by FAO by declaring 
India as "Lead centre in Carp Culture Resear:ch in Asia" 
under Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia. 
Perhaps, it would have 
fisheries developmental effort 
report itself was scrutinised 
in inland fisheries/aquaculture 
publications. 
served India's inland 
much better, if the liMA 
by knowledgable experts 
of India, before its final 
REFERENCES 
Government of India, 1976 Report of the National Commission 
of Agriculture. Part VII - Fisheries. 
U.K. Srivastava et al., 1985 Inland Fish Marketing in 
India, Vo.l. 1-8 Concept Publishing Co. New Delhi. 
150 SINHA AND GHOSH 
Abbreviations used 
liMA - Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad. 
CIFRI - Central Inland Fisheries Research Institute. 
NCA - National Commission of Agriculture. 
FFDA - Fish Farmers Development Agency. 
NSS - National Sample Survey Organisation. 


National issues raised by IIMA study on development and management of freshwater aquaculture in India: a review

http://aquaticcommons.org/15956/1/JIFA18_141.pdf

National issues raised by IIMA study on development and management of freshwater aquaculture in India: a review

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Aquatic Commons