Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8 YEARS OF FISHERIES IN CPP8 YEARS OF FISHERIES IN CPP
Experiences and lessons learned in CPP Experiences and lessons learned in CPP
andand
Reflections on Inland Fisheries in Reflections on Inland Fisheries in BangladeshBangladesh
byby
Gertjan de GraafGertjan de Graaf
Fisheries advisor CPPFisheries advisor CPP
1992-20001992-2000
MAIN OBJECTIVE OF THE FISHERIES MAIN OBJECTIVE OF THE FISHERIES PROGRAMME OF CPPPROGRAMME OF CPP
• Estimate the impact of CPP interventions on Estimate the impact of CPP interventions on fisheriesfisheries
• Minimize negative impacts through adapted Minimize negative impacts through adapted designs, construction and water managementdesigns, construction and water management
• Mitigate eventual negative impactsMitigate eventual negative impacts
THE FISHERIES PROGRAMME OF CPP THE FISHERIES PROGRAMME OF CPP FOCUSSED ON TWO LINESFOCUSSED ON TWO LINES
• Studies on fisheriesStudies on fisheries
• Mitigation of negative impacts through Mitigation of negative impacts through aquaculture extensionaquaculture extension
the second activity as it was a general belief the second activity as it was a general belief that interventions of CPP would have a that interventions of CPP would have a
negative impact on fisheriesnegative impact on fisheries
FISHERIES STUDIES OF CPPFISHERIES STUDIES OF CPP
• Estimation of total catch before and Estimation of total catch before and after CPPafter CPP
• Migration of riverine hatchlings and Migration of riverine hatchlings and design of fish friendly regulatorsdesign of fish friendly regulators
• Reproductive strategies of Beel resident Reproductive strategies of Beel resident fish species and their impact on water fish species and their impact on water managementmanagement
• Development of predictive tools for Development of predictive tools for fisheries and water managementfisheries and water management
ESTIMATION OF THE TOTAL FISH CATCH IN ESTIMATION OF THE TOTAL FISH CATCH IN THE CPP PROJECT AREATHE CPP PROJECT AREA
Traditional fisheries monitoring:
• Follows the number of fishermen or Follows the number of fishermen or estimates estimates Fishing EffortFishing Effort
• Estimate the catch of the fishermen or Estimate the catch of the fishermen or Catch per Unit of Effort Catch per Unit of Effort (CPUE) (CPUE)
• Total catch = Fishing Effort x CPUETotal catch = Fishing Effort x CPUE
HOWEVER THIS TRADITIONAL METHOD IS HOWEVER THIS TRADITIONAL METHOD IS DIFFICULT TO APPLY IN FLOODPLAIN DIFFICULT TO APPLY IN FLOODPLAIN
FISHERIESFISHERIES • 60-70% of the 60-70% of the
rural population rural population is sometimes is sometimes fishing fishing
• Statistically it is Statistically it is difficult to difficult to estimate this estimate this Fishing EffortFishing Effort
A NEW METHODA NEW METHOD
HABITAT FISHERIES MONITORINGHABITAT FISHERIES MONITORING
• Monitoring of representative fishing Monitoring of representative fishing AreasAreas
• How to select the areas ?How to select the areas ?
What is representative for a What is representative for a fishing area ?fishing area ?
• Depth of Water ?Depth of Water ?
• Duration of Flooding ?Duration of Flooding ?
• Beels ?Beels ?
• Perennial Beels ?Perennial Beels ?
• Seasonal Beels ?Seasonal Beels ?
Lets have a closer look at the floodplainLets have a closer look at the floodplain
A Beel or Floodplain has no depthA Beel or Floodplain has no depth
MAYMAY SEPTEMBERSEPTEMBER
WHICH DEPTH OR LOCATION DO WE SELECT ?WHICH DEPTH OR LOCATION DO WE SELECT ?
VERY CLEAR CRITERIA ARE NEEDEDVERY CLEAR CRITERIA ARE NEEDED
• criteria which can be quantifiedcriteria which can be quantified
• can be replicatedcan be replicated
• are valid and can be used all over are valid and can be used all over BangladeshBangladesh
• are simple and practicalare simple and practical
ONLY THE MPO LAND TYPE ONLY THE MPO LAND TYPE
CLASSIFICATION FITS THE CRITERIACLASSIFICATION FITS THE CRITERIA The The classification is preciselyclassification is precisely defineddefined
F3F3 Water depth of 180 cm or moreWater depth of 180 cm or more
F2F2 180-90 cm180-90 cm
F1F1 90-30 cm90-30 cm
F0F0 30-0 cm30-0 cm
The Land types have a The Land types have a fixed positionfixed position, related , related to the risks of floodingto the risks of flooding
They They only only change due to water management change due to water management interventionsinterventions when the risks are changed
CPP FISHERIES MONITORING SITESCPP FISHERIES MONITORING SITES
We selected fixed areas We selected fixed areas representative forrepresentative for
•F3 Land types
•F2 Land Types
•Khals
•Lohajang River
MONITORING MONITORING SITES FOR SITES FOR LANDTYPES LANDTYPES
IN CPPIN CPP
F3 Sites F2 Sites
IN EACH SITE WE IN EACH SITE WE CARRIED OUT A CARRIED OUT A
TRADITIONAL TRADITIONAL FISHERIES FISHERIES
MONITORING MONITORING PROGRAMMEPROGRAMME
Catch = Catch per Unit of Area x Total areaCatch = Catch per Unit of Area x Total area
THE TOTAL FLOODED AREA THE TOTAL FLOODED AREA FOR EACH LAND TYPE WAS FOR EACH LAND TYPE WAS
DETERMINED WITH GISDETERMINED WITH GIS
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Ma
y-9
2
Ma
y-9
3
Ma
y-9
4
Ma
y-9
5
Ma
y-9
6
Ma
y-9
7
Ma
y-9
8
Ma
y-9
9
8
8.5
9
9.5
10
10.5
11
DRY YEARSDRY YEARS WET YEARSWET YEARS
THE RESULTSTHE RESULTSOVERALL FISH CATCH OVER THE LAST 8 YEARSOVERALL FISH CATCH OVER THE LAST 8 YEARS
AVERAGE MONTHLY AVERAGE MONTHLY WATER LEVELWATER LEVEL
F3 FISH CATCHF3 FISH CATCHF2 FISH CATCHF2 FISH CATCH
MAJOR CONCLUSIONS FOR CPPMAJOR CONCLUSIONS FOR CPP
• The fish catch in CPP is highly variable The fish catch in CPP is highly variable with an average 300 mt/yearwith an average 300 mt/year
• No No significant trends in fish catch before significant trends in fish catch before or after CPPor after CPP
• F2 lands are the most important fishing F2 lands are the most important fishing areas in terms of total catchareas in terms of total catch
EVERYBODY EXPECTED A DECLINE IN EVERYBODY EXPECTED A DECLINE IN FISH CATCHFISH CATCH
WHY IS THERE NO DIFFERENCE WHY IS THERE NO DIFFERENCE BEFORE AND AFTER CPP ?BEFORE AND AFTER CPP ?
THERE IS NO SIGNIFICANT THERE IS NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE IN THE AVERAGE DIFFERENCE IN THE AVERAGE FLOODED AREA BEFORE OR FLOODED AREA BEFORE OR
AFTER CPPAFTER CPP
September 1992September 1992
September 1993September 1993
September 1994September 1994
September 1995September 1995
September 1996September 1996
September 1997September 1997
September 1998September 1998
THIS AS CPP APPLIES
“CONTROLLED FLOODING”
• Only peak water levels are controlled
• Statistically no differences can be found on flooded areas during the monsoon
Controlled Flooding
10.5
11
11.5
12
12.5
Jun-
96
Jul-9
6
Aug
-96
Se
p-9
6
Oct
-96
No
v-9
6
Da
ily W
ate
r le
vel
The fundamental difference between The fundamental difference between Agriculture and FisheriesAgriculture and Fisheries
• The farmers are working with “risks” The farmers are working with “risks” Taking away the risk of a four days Taking away the risk of a four days extreme water level extreme water level will changewill change agriculture crop types usedagriculture crop types used
• Fish production is determined by monthly Fish production is determined by monthly flooded area, a number of days with flooded area, a number of days with extreme water levels extreme water levels does not have a does not have a significant impact significant impact
THE THE “ADDED VALUE”“ADDED VALUE” OF THE CPP OF THE CPP EXPERIENCE FOR THE WHOLE OF EXPERIENCE FOR THE WHOLE OF
BANGLADESHBANGLADESH
WHAT IS THE VALUE OF FISHERIESWHAT IS THE VALUE OF FISHERIES
NOW WE HAVE A LONG TERM NOW WE HAVE A LONG TERM RELIABLE DATA SETRELIABLE DATA SET
F3 land 160 kg/ha/year or a Net benefit F3 land 160 kg/ha/year or a Net benefit of 12000 Tk/ha/seasonof 12000 Tk/ha/season
• F2 Lands 85 kg/ha/year or a Net benefit F2 Lands 85 kg/ha/year or a Net benefit of 5600 Tk/ha/seasonof 5600 Tk/ha/season
Agriculture and FisheriesAgriculture and FisheriesTk/ha/cropTk/ha/crop
Agriculture crop Net benefit FishF3 DW Aman BC 9700 12000F2 DW Aman TP 8484 5600F1 T Aman L 11955 600F0 T Aman HYV 20559 0
POVERTY AND DISTRIBUTION OF POVERTY AND DISTRIBUTION OF AGRICULTURE & FISHERIES BENEFITSAGRICULTURE & FISHERIES BENEFITS
Category HH number Net Cropped Area (%) Fish %Landless 19900 0% 78%Marginal 2500 10% 13%Small 4600 44% 11%Medium 1360 26% 2%Large farmers 475 20% 0%
FINAL CONCLUSIONSFINAL CONCLUSIONS
Controlled Flooding
is a much better option for fisheries then
Complete Flood Control
In the time ofIn the time of “rice self sufficiency”“rice self sufficiency” in Bangladeshin Bangladesh the agriculture the agriculture
development policydevelopment policy could needcould need some some “re-thinking”“re-thinking”
MECHANISMS BEHIND FLOODPLAIN MECHANISMS BEHIND FLOODPLAIN FISHERIESFISHERIES
• CPP collected 8 years data on floodplain CPP collected 8 years data on floodplain fisheriesfisheries
• This allows for a profound statistical This allows for a profound statistical analysisanalysis
• Questions 1Questions 1:What are the driving forces :What are the driving forces behind floodplain fisheriesbehind floodplain fisheries
• Question 2Question 2: How do they impact : How do they impact managementmanagement
THE PRINCIPAL COMPONENTS OF THE PRINCIPAL COMPONENTS OF FISHERIESFISHERIES
HABITATHABITAT FISHERMENFISHERMEN
FISHFISH
THEY ARE LINKED TO EACH OTHERTHEY ARE LINKED TO EACH OTHER
THE THREE COMPONENTS IN CPP THE THREE COMPONENTS IN CPP FISHERIESFISHERIES
• FISHFISH: Fish stocks or : Fish stocks or abundance of fishabundance of fish
• HABITATHABITAT: water level : water level or floodingor flooding
• FISHERMEN:FISHERMEN: fishing fishing efforteffort
TOTAL FISH CATCH CPP
0
50
100
150
200
250
May
-92
Nov
-92
May
-93
Nov
-93
May
-94
Nov
-94
May
-95
Nov
-95
May
-96
Nov
-96
May
-97
Nov
-97
May
-98
Nov
-98
May
-99
Nov
-99
Mt/
mo
nth
Fish catch is highly variableFish catch is highly variable
WHY IS THE CATCH SO VARIABLE ?WHY IS THE CATCH SO VARIABLE ?
FISH CATCHFISH CATCH
Fish abundance or CPUEFish abundance or CPUE
Fishing effortFishing effort
Extent of flooding or Water levelExtent of flooding or Water level
WHAT IS THE IMPACT OF EACH WHAT IS THE IMPACT OF EACH VARIABLE ON THE FISH CATCHVARIABLE ON THE FISH CATCH
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS-ANOVASTATISTICAL ANALYSIS-ANOVA
• 74% 74% of the seasonal and inter annual of the seasonal and inter annual variance in observed yields can be variance in observed yields can be explained by changes in explained by changes in fishing effortfishing effort
• 15% 15% can be explained in changes in can be explained in changes in CPUECPUE
• 11% 11% can be explained by changes in can be explained by changes in Water levelWater level
Multi linear regressionMulti linear regression with Effort, CPUE with Effort, CPUE and Water leveland Water level
FISH CATCH =A*FISH ABUNDANCE + B*FISHING EFFORT+C* FLOOD
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
May-92 May-93 May-94 May-95 May-96 May-97 May-98 May-99
Log(
Yie
ld)
(kg/
mon
th)
Observed Yields
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
May-92 May-93 May-94 May-95 May-96 May-97 May-98 May-99
Log(
Yie
ld)
(kg/
mon
th)
Observed Yields Simulated Yields
CONCLUSIONSCONCLUSIONS
The The major drivingmajor driving force in force in floodplain fisheries in CPP and floodplain fisheries in CPP and most likely also in the rest of most likely also in the rest of
Bangladesh is the Bangladesh is the fishing effort fishing effort or the number of fishermenor the number of fishermen
CONSEQUENCES FOR CONSEQUENCES FOR MANAGEMENTMANAGEMENT
• management which does not include fishing effort is doomed to fail.
• The impact of over-exploitation of fish stocks is under estimated in Bangladesh
AN OFTEN HEARD STORYAN OFTEN HEARD STORY
• When I was young there was plenty of When I was young there was plenty of fish in the Beelfish in the Beel
• When I went fishing with my father we When I went fishing with my father we caught plenty of Boal in one daycaught plenty of Boal in one day
• RememberRemember when you were young it was when you were young it was 1965, with 65 million people in 1965, with 65 million people in BangladeshBangladesh
• Now we are with 110 million, with half of Now we are with 110 million, with half of them fishingthem fishing
AN EXAMPLE OF THE CONSEQUENCESAN EXAMPLE OF THE CONSEQUENCES
• Species composition was followed over Species composition was followed over the years in the CPP areathe years in the CPP area
• In one Beel, Garinda Beel we saw In one Beel, Garinda Beel we saw dramatic changesdramatic changes
WHY ?WHY ?
GARINDA BEEL COMPLETELY COLLAPSEDGARINDA BEEL COMPLETELY COLLAPSEDGOTOKBARI BEEL REMAINED OKGOTOKBARI BEEL REMAINED OK
Beel fish is replaced by prawns
Species composition did not change
GARINDA GOTOKBARI
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
92-9
3
93-9
4
95-9
6
96-9
7
97-9
8
98-9
9
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
92-9
3
93-9
4
94-9
5
95-9
6
96-9
7
97-9
8
98-9
9
WHY DID GARINDA BEEL COLLAPSEWHY DID GARINDA BEEL COLLAPSE
Dry season area in Dry season area in Garinda decreased Garinda decreased
rapidlyrapidly
Fishing effort Fishing effort during the dry during the dry
season increased season increased rapidly in Garindarapidly in Garinda
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
May-92
May-93
May-94
May-95
May-96
May-97
May-98
May-99
May-00
FIS
HIN
G E
FFO
RT
GOTOKBARI GARINDA
0.00
0.10
0.200.30
0.40
0.50
0.600.70
0.80
0.90
92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99
Rat
io a
rea
May
/Se
pte
mb
er
Gharinda Ghotokbari
CONSEQUENCES FOR MANAGEMENTCONSEQUENCES FOR MANAGEMENT
• The dry season area of the water bodies is The dry season area of the water bodies is as important as the total flooded area during as important as the total flooded area during the monsoonthe monsoon
• No reproduction --> No fish in the monsoonNo reproduction --> No fish in the monsoon• This is an important aspect for This is an important aspect for
developments of surface water irrigation of developments of surface water irrigation of the Borro in the dry seasonthe Borro in the dry season
LET’S LOOK AT THE LET’S LOOK AT THE CONSEQUENCES OF FISHING CONSEQUENCES OF FISHING EFFORT ON THE WHOLE OF EFFORT ON THE WHOLE OF
BANGLADESH BANGLADESH Data from different projectsData from different projects
• Chandpur Irrigation projectChandpur Irrigation project• CPP projectCPP project• FAP 17FAP 17• International data on tropical inland fisheriesInternational data on tropical inland fisheries• Khulna Jessore Drainage Rehabilitation Khulna Jessore Drainage Rehabilitation
ProjectProject
MECHANISMS AND FUTURE MECHANISMS AND FUTURE PROSPECTS, PROSPECTS, A PESSIMISTIC VIEWA PESSIMISTIC VIEW
• In over exploited floodplains slow growing, late maturing species are replaced by quick growing fast maturing species. A shift from Major carps to Beel resident species occurs
• If recruitment of Beel residents is hampered or if fishing effort is too high in the dry season a further shift from Beel residents towards small prawns occurs
• If floodplain is completely cut off the final shift towards prawns and Snakeheads or Catfish occurs
SUCCESSIVE STAGES OF BIO DIVERSITY AND WATER MANAGEMENT
0
50
100
150
200
250
Healthy Floodplain Phase I, over-exploitation
Phase II,Controlled
flooding withspawning
Phase III,Controlled
flooding withreduced
spawning area
Phase IV,Complete Flood
Control w ith reduced
spawning area
yie
ld (
kg/h
a/ye
ar)
Indian carps Catfish and Snakeheads Beel resident species Shrimps Other riverine
CARPS DISAPPEARS
BEEL FISHDISAPPEARS
PRAWNS &
CATFISH REMAIN
FINAL CONCLUSIONFINAL CONCLUSION
forfor
INLAND FISHERIESINLAND FISHERIES
• Habitat restoration, fish sanctuaries, fish Habitat restoration, fish sanctuaries, fish passes, excavation of khals, participatory passes, excavation of khals, participatory management, etc, the main actions of management, etc, the main actions of fisheries management at present, certainly fisheries management at present, certainly improves the situation for fisheries.improves the situation for fisheries.
• However, avoiding the main issue,However, avoiding the main issue, FISHING EFFORT, FISHING EFFORT, will lead to the will lead to the situation thatsituation that “Mache Bathe Bengali”“Mache Bathe Bengali” becomes becomes historyhistory and and “Dal Bathe “Dal Bathe Bengali”Bengali” becomes becomes realityreality
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION
