6. RESULTS

6.1 Pond Construction

Table 1 shows the number of people contacted in the different pilot areas, the number of ponds constructed, under construction or in consideration.

Table 1: Number of households involved in pond construction at the end of April 1988

The fish farming group in Yokoniya started construction of the pond in August and it was finished mid-October. In total, 417 man-days were needed to construct the 200m² fish pond, moving some 145 m³ of soil. In the beginning the members of the group worked hard but after a while the motivation declined, due to uncertainties about the funding of the project.

Because of the late rains in 1987, the pond could be stocked only at the beginning of February 1988.

In Mtemang'ombe village (Magwero area) the clearing of the site started in the middle of December 1987. The fish pond (75m²) was finished and stocked at the beginning of March 1988. After viewing the slides and the pamphlet on construction the village carried out all construction work on its own. In the beginning, the compacting of the dikes seemed to be difficult but the problems were solved. The whole construction took 205 man-hours spread over 15 days, with 35m³ of soil being moved. The water in the pond from the watertable reached exactly the level predicted during the dry season. The villagers want to construct a second pond in the near future for which they did not intend to request any assistance. They also wanted to give advice to others who, after seeing their pond, were becoming interested in fish farming.

In Rukuzye area only four groups really started the construction, and progress was slow. Because of the delay in the rain at the beginning of the 1987–88 season the planting was late. At the same time weeding had started in some of the other fields. Hence there was a heavy labour demand from December until mid-February.

6.2 Proposed Technology

For the Yokoniya fish farm project the SCF had made a project proposal in consultation with the DoF for five ponds: one reproduction pond (500m²), one rearing pond (500m²) and three production ponds (3 × 1 000m²), concrete canals, a harvesting chamber, security fencing, a storeroom and vegetable gardens. Because of the problems in funding this project, the group started digging one pond. ALCOM proposed that they build only one small pond for the first year in order to obtain a clear idea about the water availability, and to give the group the opportunity to acquire experience in pond management. This pond (200m²) was built at the site proposed by SCF.

For the other areas the project tried as much as possible to take into account the available means of production, and to adapt the technology to these means. For digging the pond, hoes were always available in the villages. The dirt could be transported in baskets or buckets if no wheelbarrow was available. For constructing a house, tools to compact the walls and the floor are being used. These tools could also be used to compact the dikes.

The supply of fingerlings seemed to be one of the most important issues, farmers wanting to be independent of outside supplies. This meant that, in those cases where the pond would not hold water the whole year, a way had to be found to store the fish at the end of the dry season, or a local supply of fingerlings had to be found (e.g., from other farmers or natural resources). On the other hand, the reason people were reluctant to depend on an external input like fingerlings was their negative experiences with the supply of agricultural inputs. If the DoF can guarantee a reliable supply and delivery of fingerlings, this constraint might be removed.

In October 1987, when the pond in Yokoniya was almost finished, a study was carried out to identify locally available resources for fish feed. Consideration was given to waste which could be fed to the fish or waste which could be used for making compost in order to fertilize the pond. During a three-day stay in the village the wife or mother of each member was interviewed. The reason for interviewing the women rather than the members themselves is that the women process and prepare the food and are thus better informed about eventual wastes. The by-products of food processing, subsistence and cash crops, kitchen wastes, and different kinds of animal manure were identified as well as their use. From this the availability of by-products for compost and fish feed was determined. The findings of this study were discussed in a meeting where all the members as well as the interviewees were present.

Many feed components can be found in the villages. The occurrence of by-products throughout the year is given in Table 2. Many by-products are used for fertilizing the fields (maize stalks, groundnut leaves, manure), feeding the chickens (maize bran, kitchen waste), making soda (maize ears, groundnut leaves), building materials (sorghum stalks) or for brewing beer (sorghum bran).

Table 2 : Occurrence of by-products in Yokoniya

+++ = available in large quantities
--- = available in small quantities

The by-products available for fish feed or compost are mentioned in Table 3; a tentative indication of the amount is also given. The group in Yokoniya has 16 members, compared to the size of the pond (200m²) this number is rather high. This means that in other cases with small groups or just one household, the quantity of the by-products may be less. However, the availability of resources for composting is not likely to be a problem.

Table 3 : Availability of by-products for compost and fish food in Yokoniya

* = small amount
** = fair amount
*** = large amount
d = direct feeding
c = composting

Table 4 : Financial analysis for the production cycle January-August 1987

Note: 1 US$ = ZK8

An indication that the proposed technology can be economically profitable is given in Table 4. At the drainage of a fish pond (196m²) of a lady fish farmer, the expenses and receipts were estimated. The fertilization and feeding of the pond were poor, and the management more extensive than that proposed above.

It was difficult to obtain precise figures, therefore the analysis should be considered preliminary. The farmer said that intermediate fishing was important to her: “With a fish pond you're never without food”.

Because there are few fish farmers in Chipata District, these were the only data which could be obtained. While no general conclusions should be drawn from this example, it is important to point out that a pond which most professional aquaculturists would consider “poorly managed” does benefit the owners.