The paper is based on the premise that an understanding of the role and potentials of fish farming entrepreneurs in terms of their activities and expectations would enhance fish production and productivity. To this end, the present paper investigates the activities of 24 fish farmers in Anambra State, Nigeria. Based on the fish farmers' experience, the paper presents fish farming investments, budgets and recommendations that could ensure fish farming development as a profitable business venture and at the same time ensure greater fish production in the countr

Williams, S.B.

English

Aquatic Commons

FISH FARMING IN AN BRA STATE:
ECONOMIC CRITERIA
by
S.B. WILLIAMS
Dept. of Agricùltural EconomiCs
University of Ife
Ile-Ife, Oyo State
ABSTRACT
The paper is based on the premise -04-at an understanding of
the role and potentials of fish farming enterpreneurs in
terms of their activities and expectations would enhance
fish production and productitivity. To this end, the
present paper investigates the activities of 24 fish farmers
in Anambra State, Nigeria.
Based on the fish farmers' experience, the paper presents
fish farming investments, budgets and recommendations that
could ensure fish farming development as a profitable
business venture and at the same time ensure greater fish
production in the country.
INTRODUCTION
The farming of food fish in Nigeria began as a hobrNy in
the 1940's in Lagos and Ibadan by the then expatriate
Fisheries Officers. The first commercial fish farm was
established in Panyam, near Jos in 1952. By 1979, nearly
every State in the Federation was involved in the develop-
ment of a fish farming pilot project. From then on, the
recreational production of food fish was replaced by
commercial food fish market.
In the commercial operation, the producer who is now a
private investor rather than a government agency, performs
the production, distribution and marketing functions, and
with it food fish culture in Nigeria has expanded
tremendously between 1981 and 1985. Regardless of the
distribution mode, food fish culture in Nigeria as in other
parts of the world is capital intensive. Even where inputs
are at a minimum, the fixed capital expenditures are still
relatively high.
Fish farming in land-locked States must have some type of
impoundment constructed using either manual labour or
machine labour. In addition, commercial food fish operations
require relatively high operating capital expenditures
especially when the system is intensive* in nature.
If formulated rations are fed to achieve a shc ter
growing period.
358
Available statistics show that few potential producers have
enough capital to construct ponds and that some form of
crqdit has to be used (Esobhawan, 1986; Ezeife, 1985; Obuseh,
1986; Ofor, 1984; Williams, 1983). Capital for fish farming
enterprise must be acquired through long-term financing
arrangements. Also, short-term loans are frequently required
to finance operating day-to-day activities. Therefore, bank
officials or financial institutions should look further than
an individual's character and collateral when considering
whether or not to lend an individual money to begin a food
fish,culture operation. Every potential borrower wishes to
succeed in his venture, therefore, both the creditor and
the debtor want to carefully evaluate a new enterprise such
as food fish production before making any commitments. Itis therefore, important to define the perspective from which
an economic analysis is done. This is important because
human desires and needs vary greatly, and economic analysis
may resalt in contradictory results depending on whose
perspective the economic analysis is carried out.
Thus, the ourpose of this study is to present a means of
evaluating fish farming enterprise from an economic stand-
point. The example used here is from Anambra State, Nigeria.
The computation is that of a generalized situation based on
average conditions. However, the farmer's perspective is
used as a focal point because of his need to succeed.
Therefore, any fish farmer should be liable to analyze his
enterprise using his own personal data in the same manner.
Prior planning in this manner would result in better
decision-making.
A basic assumption for this analysis considers fish production
as an integrated enterprise on an existing far that has
other crops and livestock operations as was observed in
Anambra State.
METHODOLOGY
The methodology consisted of eaterprise budget developed
from production costs incurred by the fish farmers in
Anambra State. The enterprise budget apprOaoh is chosenbecause it gives a general idea of whether the farmer's
investment of capital and labour is worth the effort or
whether there are sufficient returns in cash or in kind
to justify the effort put into the farming activity. The
survey results are described under two headings:
assessment of the area for food fish production, and
preparation of enterprise budgets for 1-, 5-, and
10-hectare ponds.
The survey was carried out between December 1984 and
February 1985
559
LS AND DISCUSSIONS
f the Area fo Food Fish Production
In g a freshwater fish farm, several technical
factox:s muFA: be considered.
a) Water Qualit and Su
Water is a pre-requisite for food fish culture. In the case
of Analabra State, field survey results indicated.that there
are several rivers and streams that will provide the ponds
with perennial water of good quality throughout the year.
It was also recorded that all the fish farm aperation in
Anambra State during the period the survey was carried Mt
were all sited near a river or stream.
Soil
Soils with a high percentage of clay m:teriI ü:e considered
to be cîul.e d.quete for pond construction rse of the
clay's cruality Aigh water retention property. An.Pra
State has good land areas rich in clay soils0
Topography
The Shape of the land is important when considerinç Libe
location of pond sites. Anambra is noted for her hills,
albeit, private farmers who have already invested in fish
farming received good advise from fisheries exports in the
Federal, State and Local Government agencies. Summary of
pond construction costs showed that the 24 private fish
farmers in the State as of February 1985 spent a total of
N522,300 to construct 49.56 hectares fish ponds. This.gave
an average estimated cast of N10,540 per hectare of fish
pond. Costs ranged between N2,500 and over N20,000 per
hectare (Table 1).
Table 1 Pond construction costs in Anambra State
b: :d fish farmers' responses, 1985
360
,L, (...;.ange (N) umber of Farmers(Frequency) Percentage(% FrequencY)
1,000 - 4,999.99 6 25.00
999.99 - 9,999099 7 29.20
10,000 - 14,999.99 5 20.80
15,000 - 19,999.99 4 16.70
20,000 and abow 2 8.30
Total 24 100.00
Ve.ietation
Clearing of heavily.wooded land as-well as stumping the site
for pond construction can add more to the cost of constructing
the fish ponds. Thus, fisheries enterprises located on
relatively rolling land with good watershed is ideal. Results
of the survey shoWed that clearing costs ranged from N155 to
N3,000 per hectare (Table 2).
-Table 2 Land Clearing Costs based on fish farmers'
responses in Anambra State, 1985
Fish Seed and Stocking Rate
Almost all the fish farmer* 1 interviewed in Anambra State-
stated that stocking rate is dependent on the quantity offish seed supplied for the production activity. This they
said was due to the irregular availability of fish seeds
in the State. Hence, the quantity and quality of fishfingerlings available at the time of stocking dictate the
stocking rate. There were only t fish farms in the State
during the survey exercise noted for fish seed production.
It was estimated that only 30,000 fingerlings were available
as compared to the estimated demand for 200,000 fingerlings.
Most of the farmers had plans to start producing their
fingerlings in order to remove the economic hardship creAted
by the insufficient production of fish seeds to satisfy
farmers needs.
fi Fe eA and Feeding
Fish farmers in Anambra State use a variety of feeds such
as groundnut cake, palm kernel cake, rice bran, brewer's
waste and cassava but the two most frquently IL_=d feed, fed
to the fishes are palm kernel cake and rice brcai.
361
Cost Range (01) Number of Farmers Percentage
(Frequency) (Per cent Frequency)
100 - 499.99 9 37.50
500 - 999.99 11 45.80
1,000 - 1,499.99 8.30
1,500 - 1,999.99 1 4.20
2,000 - 2,499.99
2&500 - 2,999.99 1 4.20
3,000 and above
Total 24 100,00
Source: Field Survey, 1985
14,
Limin and Pond FertilizatiOn
All the farmers interviewed stated that they lime and
fertilize their ponds. They used organic fertilizers' such
as poultry waste, pig dung aad compost or inorganic fertilzers
(NPK). The organic fertilizers are applied tlt the 1:Ate of
160kg per hectEire uhile the inorganic fertilziers are applied
at the rate of i00kg per hectare per month.
Fish Speci, :A ed
tour tvps of fj sper w9re named and these are: tilapia,
catfish, COMMOP carp and HeterotiF. The . o most commonly
cultured are LiLapia aDd catfil.
Harvestin
The survey results sho ed Aost of the fish farmers
harvest their fishes once or at most twice a year. The
harvested fishes are sold dile(A:ly to the public or
accredited agents at the pond sites. They indicated that
they have no problem7 y=keting their fishes as there ate
more fish retailers distributors than producers. The
price range of fish sold was between N2.50 and 144.00 per
kg depending on the species.
Preparation of Enterprise Budgets
An enterprise budget is a stai7ic image of a certain farm
activity (Engle, 1985). It is static in the senSe that it
analysis the activity at a given point in time rather than
over the whole productive life of the activity. Positive
net returns is always'an indication of profitability in an
enterprise budget (Crawford and McCoy, 1977). Tables 3, 4
and 5 summarized budgets for 1-, 5- and 10- hectares of fish
pond cultured using tilapia,carp and catfish in a polycul-
ture system.
As shown by the budgets, fish farming is economically
feasible in Anambra State given that capital (liquid assets),
management, labour and all the necessary inputs are
available at the right time. Hence, in terms of protein
production, the increase in fish available for home consuMp-
tion in Anambra State can contribute significatly to the
stabilization in other food crop production and this can be
perceived by the fish farmers as important benefits to the
farmers in Anambra State in general.
SU:- Y, OONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
As of February 1985, there were approximately 24 active
fish farmers in Anmbra State, Nigeria. In addition, there
was a viable State Pilot Fish Farm in operation. Total land
under utilization was 52 hectares with an estimated output
of 33 1 -_7iC tonnes.
Most o: the fish;fl'ilTa were stted near rivers and streams
for easy assess to watel: suppiv needed for year-round fish
production The State has potentials for commercial fish
farming operations.
It was reperted by the farmers interriewed that the fishetie
experts engaged by the Federal, State or Local Government
agenciae viere actively involved in the State's de'iielopmental
programme.
The en*(:.e.pise budgets developed from the survey showed that
fish farming can be a lucrative business all things being
equal.
It Is therefore, recommended t/eAt prospective fish farmers
should as a rule carry out an economic analysis of any
proposed fish farming operation before embarking on the
activity. The budget can be prepared along the lines
demonstrated in this study to allow the farmer interprete
his on plans in Ifinancial terms. A well prepared plan wile
oerve as checks and balance for the fareier's activities
especially if it is to be a comercial enterprise.
Major constraints identified from the survey were:-
lack of capital for interested fish fa investors
in the State
dire scarcity of fingerlings, feed and experience
fish farm Managers for the commercial enterprises.
lack of infrastructural facilities for a wel/
developed marketing activity.
Future researches should include budgeting for intergrated
syst s such as Chicken-FirA Production, Hog-Chicken-Fish
ProduCtion, DUck-Chicken-Fish Production, to name a few..
ACKNOWLeDGEMENTS
The author wishes to acknowledge her student, Mr. T.C.
Ezeifo for his help in collecting the data used in the
study and the following fisliery experts: Messrs Phillip
Amiegheme, S.E. Sagay and Ude and all the wonderful people
of Anambra State for their help and cooperation in making
the study possible.
REFERENCES
CRAWFORD, K.W. and E.W. McCOY (1977) BudgetiRg for selected
Aquacultural enterprise. Agricultural Experiment Station,
Auburn University, Aubun, Alabama.
ENGLE, C.R. (1985) Criteria for the preparation and the
evaluation of subsistence aquaculture projects.
rAo, Rome, Italy.
ESOWMAW, A.O. (1986) Resource - Use efficiency in fish
farmieAg in Cross River and Ondo States, Unpublished M.Sc.
Thesis, Department of Agriculture Economics, University
of Ife.
363
EZEIFE, T.C. (1985) Analysis of Economic viability of fish
farming in Anambra State of Nigeria. Unpublished M.Sc.
Thesis, Department of Agriculture Economics, University
of Ife.
OBUSEH,N.C. (1986) Profitability of investment in the
aquacultural subsector of the economy in Kwara and Niger
States, Unpublished M.Sc. thesis, Department of Agriculture
Economics, University of Ife.
OFOR, O.S. (19,84) Fish farming in Rivers State of Nigeria
Unpublished B.Sc. thesis, Department of Agric. Economics,
University of Ife.
WILLIAMS, S.B. (1983) Groundwater demands associated with
catfish production in West-Central Alabama, Ph.D. Disser-
tation, Auburn University, Alabama.
364
Returns
pia
Item
365
, Value Annual
- Depreciation
4725.00
..sh
ubTctal '7
400.00
A50.00
450.00
30.00
24.00
15.00
360.00
270.00
200.00
100000
100.00
250.00
200.00
50.00
1,500.00
100.00
397.16
2,6-81.64
40.00
xed: Pond cons
ftting:
d: Tilapia
Carp
Catfish
Lime
Fertilizer
Poultry waste
Feed: Pa]m kernel cake
Rice bran
Labour Cost:
Fertilizing, liming
x.iodic stocking
,..nL maintenance
Harvesting
Transportatior
Land rentage
Nets
Management
Miscellaneous
Interest on operating
capital at 83/4%
Net Returns to
'tal and Labour
7,617.80
.20
Table,3 Annual co0A:0 and J:e Tilapia-Carp-Catfishpoduction foif,7he pol:d in AlKailva State,
1985
Tabie 4 - Annual Costs and returns for Tilapia-'Carp-Catfish
production for 5-hectares pond in Anambra State,
1985
I t ern Total Value
or Cost
(N)
Annual
Depreciation
Annual Returns
Tilapia 20,490.00
Carp 21,245.00
Catfish 21,437.50
Sub-Total 63,172.50
Costs
A. Fixed: Pond construction 7,828.06
B. Operating:
Fish seed - Tilapia 2,000.00
Carp 2,250.00
Catfish 2,250.00
Lime 150.00
Fertilizer 120.00
Poultry waste 75.00
Feed: Palm kernel cake 1,800.00
Rice bran 1,350.00
Labour Cost:
Fertilizing, liming 450.00
Periodic stocking 200.00
Pond maintenance 250.00
Harvesting 550.00
Transportation 480.00
Land rentage 250.00
Nets 80.00
Management 2,400.00
Miscellaneous 250.00
Interest on Operating
Capital at 83/4% 1,282.31
Sub-Total 16,187.31
Annual Net Returns to
Capital and Labour 39,157.13
'Table 5 - Annual costs and returns for Tilapia-Carp-Catfish
production for 10-hectares tond in Anambra State,
1985
367
Item Total Value
or Cost (N) Depreciation(N)
Annual Returns
Tilapia 40,950.00
Carp 43,960.00
Catfish 43,400.00
Sub-Total 128,810.00
Costs
A. Fixed: Pond construction 15,656.11
B. Variable:
Fish seed: Tilapia 4,000.00
Carp 4,500.00
Catfish 4,500.00
Lime 300.00
FeiLilizer 240.00
Poultry waste 150.00
Feed: Palm kernel 3,600.00
Rice bran 2,700.00
Labour Cost:
Fertilizing, liming 650.00
Periodic stocking 250.00
Pond maintenance 350.00
Harvesting 800.00
,Transpdrtation 600.00
Land rentage 500.00
Nets 120.00
Management 3,600.00
Miscellaneous 400.00
Interest on Operating
Capital at 83/4% 2,385.25
Sub-Total 29,645.25
Annual Net Returns to
CapilEal and Labour 83,008.64


Fish farming in Anambra State: economic criteria

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Aquatic Commons