The survey findings make it possible to address recommendations to three different groups: DoF staff in the North Western Province, the Zambia Department of Fisheries; and ALCOM.
Although from the fish scout's standpoint it might be natural to maximize production from the available pond surface area, that might not at all be rational. First of all, it should be borne in mind that his yardstick is likely to be the rewards he obtains per hour of activity (considering what that hour costs him, either in terms of cash, or foregone opportunities including leisure).
What are these opportunities? The survey indicates that the average farmer is short of cash, has few fixed assets (that means capital: land is not included here). The only way he can make up for the tools he does not have and the inputs he has not bought is through the labour he and his family members can provide. This is reflected in the way fish ponds are managed. Feed and fertilizer are collected manually. Ponds are harvested intermittently by using hook and line. All of this is time consuming.
However, this scenario presents the extension service with an opportunity. If it can demonstrate to the farmer considerable increases in physical productivity by modestly modifying practices -- modest in terms of the farmer's outlay or efforts -- the modifications are likely to be accepted. Similarly, modifications which result in a lower effort even if output remains unchanged would be attractive.
There would seem to be at least an immediate alternative of the first kind. The practice of letting ponds overflow leads to loss of nutrients. Most such situations can probably be remedied through a rather minor effort, which the extension service can demonstrate.
The second possibility concerns the time farmers spend on fish farming. Once the farm is built, most of the time is spent on collecting feeds, especially fertilizers. Any arrangements which can reduce this effort are likely to be very useful to the farmers. They will also possibly have the beneficial side-effect of ensuring a more even use of both feed and fertilizers.
However, it should be pointed out in this context that integrated fish farming is not an option likely to succeed under present conditions. There are two main reasons: dependency on external inputs; and the risks of predation and theft. Pekin ducks, introduced in the early stages of the ICARA project, were alien to local communities, required additional structures at the ponds and created outside dependency in that new ducklings could not be produced unless sophisticated electric incubators were provided. Zambian Moskovich ducks and rabbits proved equally difficult. These animals are either taken rather soon by thieves or predators at the pond site, or spend their time at the homestead -- seldom, if ever, at the ponds. Theft and predation occur frequently as ponds and homesteads are fairly far apart. As fish farming is complementary to other farm activities and major crops, it is hardly realistic for the farmer to move his homestead closer to the ponds in order to avoid theft and predation.
Rather than expend development resources on integrated fish farming, the extension staff should emphasize the appropriate use of locally available feeds and fertilizers.
The average period between major harvests is reported to be almost a year. It seems urgent that those who do not practise intermittent harvesting should start to do so. There are three major reasons: (a) Reproductive behaviour of fish over a full year would lead to stunting (b) There is the risk of losing fish to predation and theft (c) If fish is lost, so would the contribution of fertilizers, which could have been used differently. Can the productivity of intermittent farmers be increased by encouraging them to harvest even more frequently? Investigations would be worthwhile.
The most effective approach is likely to be to instruct farmers on the need for preventive pond maintenance. This will probably prove cheaper than providing either funds or machinery to help repair ponds already damaged.
The major obstacle to pond construction is that it requires labour which few households can afford to mobilize by themselves. The ICARA project subsidized construction of ponds during the years it was active. The survey team was often identified with ICARA or other foreign donors which extend assistance.
It should be noted, however, that it is not known to what extent ICARA subsidies actually paid for labourers. (Some farmers reported that they kept the funds and dug the ponds themselves, or with labour available in the household).
It is difficult to judge ICARA's future effect on the construction of new ponds. Through subsidies paid by the project, the idea got established among many farmers that though fish farming is a good thing, construction of ponds must be funded from outside. The survey team frequently encountered this argument among potential farmers. It may be suspected for good reason that several farmers built fish ponds to get subsidies, not because they were interested in fish farming, and that a number of such farmers may abandon their ponds in the near future. On the other hand, the survey team got the impression that the ICARA project had created an impact and a general awakening, making many farmers dig fish ponds without receiving subsidies. However, these observations give little guidance as to the rate at which some ponds will be abandoned and some others constructed, in the future.
There are two main groups of action: experimental work in DoF fish farms, and the organization and focus of extension services.
The authors recommend that the relevance of intermittent harvesting should be tested in one or more DoF fish farms. The testing should focus on the yearly results obtained with different combinations of feed/ fertilizer applications and different frequencies of intermittent harvesting. The experiments should naturally be designed to reflect as closely as possible the conditions prevailing in relevant areas of Zambia.
These experiments should be combined with experiments employing different intermittent harvesting practices: e.g. hook and line; cast nets; and traps.
The authors urge that instead of deploying government research and development resources to promote exotic land animals and fish, more emphasis should be placed on development of indigenous feeds and fertilizers.
The survey clearly brings out the fact that fish culture in ponds is complementary to agriculture; it does not conflict with what the farmer already is doing. This means that those who promote fish culture in rural areas must be very knowledgable not only about fish farming but also about agriculture. The authors see no reason why this should be different in other parts of Zambia where subsistence fish farming is practised.
There are different ways of ensuring that fish scouts and other staff of the Department acquire this knowledge: (1) Provide technical training to those who do not have this knowledge. (2) Make fish scouts team up with agricultural extension officers, particularly when encouraging farmers to dig fish ponds. (3) For the future, recruit as fish scouts only individuals who already have agricultural training
The survey indicates that extension services should give priority to assisting farmers with ponds to keep them in good order, and familiarizing non-fish farmers with the labours and rewards of fish farming. Fish scouts must be assisted so that they have the capabilities and resources to do this. This means they should have better means of transport, and access to tools and equipment necessary to assist farmers with pond activities. The authors believe that this priority is valid for the country as a whole.
To support the growth and development of subsistence fish farming in Zambia, and probably also elsewhere in Southern Africa, ALCOM should:
Investigate further the practice of intermittent harvesting, and support technology developments aimed at developing and spreading this management strategy. The investigation should focus on the scope of the practice, its results and constraints. Support to technology developments should aim at establishing the optimum combination of feed/ fertilizers/stocking densities/harvesting practices.
Investigate to what extent labour and fertilizer (feed) shortages are rational (from the farmers' viewpoint) limitations to fish culture activity; Support technology developments aimed at overcoming these constraints, such as suitable harvesting technologies, and methods to collect and prepare fertilizer (compost).
It is outside the scope of this survey, however, to consider the volume of resources that ought to be channelled towards constructing new ponds in the future. That will depend on government funds in the North Western Province, as well as on alternatives open to the farmer.
Thus, though the survey does not offer conclusive judgement on how to distribute government effort between practising and the potential fish culturists, the authors are convinced that all the effort must not be expended on recruiting additional farmers to construct ponds. A considerable share should be allocated towards present ponds in good order by providing sufficient means to the extension service network created under the ICARA project.
