ALCOM implemented a wide variety of pilot projects, each relevant to a particular aspect in the development of aquaculture. In 1995, ALCOM reduced the number of pilot projects and integrated all aspects of aquaculture development within these pilot projects.
Field work started in Eastern Province of Zambia in 1987, focusing on methodology and strategy identification. In August 1989 the project was revised to implement the developed strategy on a larger scale. Fisheries assistants were trained in extension methods, and were provided with transport and extension materials. This wider coverage resulted in an increase in the number of fish farmers. In view of this increase in fish farming in the Province, it was decided that advice should be made more accessible, to ensure that all interested farmers would receive sufficient information. In 1991, the project concentrated on training courses for extension staff and fish farmers. Since 1995 the pilot project “Improved Aquaculture for Small-scale Farmers” in Eastern Province, Zambia focused more on improving the management and sustainability of existing fish farms rather than on increasing the number of fish farmers.
The pilot project “Improved Aquaculture for Small-scale Farmers” in Manica Province, Mozambique started with training of technical and extension staff in 1992. A large number of staff received training but eventually fish farming was only recorded in a few areas. In these areas further assistance was provided since 1994, in the form of farmers' training and technical, logistical and financial support to the extension service.
The pilot project “Development of Semi Intensive Aquaculture for Small-scale Farmers” was initiated in Morogoro Region, Tanzania in 1993. The objective of the project was to develop viable semi-intensive fish farming techniques and extension packages for small-scale farmers taking local conditions into account, and to incorporate these into the rural extension system. Before this project started, it was anticipated to work with existing fish farmers in the region and assist them to improve the management of their fish ponds. A survey however revealed that very few farmers practised fish farming in the region. Consequently the project's focus changed towards the introduction of fish farming in selected areas, and developed techniques for further application with farmers who adopted fish farming.
During the implementation of the ALCOM pilot projects, the number of fish farmers in Eastern Province, Zambia increased from eight in 1987 to over one thousand in 1998. In Morogoro region, Tanzania, 40 farmers constructed 47 fish ponds as a direct result of the project extension activities. In 1992 there were no fish farmers in Manica province, Mozambique, while as a result of the pilot project the number increased to 332 fish farmers by 1998. Areas with fish farmers are presented in Figure 1.
Fish were raised in earthen ponds, which were in most cases constructed by the farmer and family members. Around 30% of the farmers used hired labour to construct the pond. Very few farmers (5%) bought materials for the construction, the most commonly purchased materials were pipes for the outlet of overflow.
Pond sizes fluctuated according to local conditions. In Tanzania 43% of the constructed ponds were smaller than 100 m2. The main reasons for the small fish ponds were the unavailability of labour, water and land, and the steep topography of the area.
Ponds were generally small in Mozambique as a result of the sloping sites and high demand for agricultural land. In the Chazuka area the average pond size was only 46 m2 (n=145) while in the Rotanda area the average size was slightly larger, 74 m2 (n=45), as a result of lower population pressure and a reduced gradient of the area.
The topography and the lower population density in Zambia allowed for the construction of larger ponds. Here the average size was 233 m2, while there was a clear relation between the number of ponds and the size of the ponds. The average pond size for farmers with one pond was around 150 m2, while the average pond size for farmers with more than three ponds increased to above 300 m2.
Figure 1: Location of areas with concentrations of fish ponds (•) as a result of ALCOM's pilot projects
Ponds in Tanzania and Mozambique were generally constructed on slopes, fed by small streams, and were drainable. In Zambia most ponds were filled with water from the water table and could not be drained by gravity.
All ponds received inputs to raise the natural production. Amounts, types, and frequency of application varied considerably between the different sites and farmers. In Tanzania, manure was used to fertilise the fish ponds, but the quantity of animal manure was limited. In areas where farmers had large amounts of manure, it was already used in the vegetable gardens while in those areas where manure was seldom used in gardens, farmers raised very few animals. In one area, farmers had access to sufficient amounts of manure. However, the ponds in this area were situated far from the homes, and thus pond fertilisation required laborious transporting of manure. A few farmers kept pigs and ducks above or near the ponds, where the ponds were situated next to the homes.
The most commonly used feeds were maize and rice bran, kitchen left overs, and brewery waste. These feeds were also used to feed livestock and were therefore subject to competition.
The relatively small fish ponds in Mozambique were managed intensively, ponds were in most cases located close to the homesteads, and were fertilised with animal manure and a variety of plant materials. Fertilising and composting materials were added to the fish pond at least once a week. Maize bran was the most common feed given to the fish, while kitchen waste was also used by more than half the fish farmers. Feeding frequency was more than three times a week and the majority of the farmers fed their fish daily.
In Zambia, the management of the majority of the ponds was much less intensive. Fertilisers were applied on average once per month, but fluctuated between once a day and once a year. Feeding was practised on average once a week, and fluctuated between daily and once every fifty days. Ponds located closer to the homesteads received more intensive management than ponds located further away.
Farmers were in general reluctant to drain their fish ponds. Intermittent harvesting of ponds was the most common harvesting practice in all areas.
In the areas where fish farming was adopted in Tanzania and Mozambique, farmers grew a wide variety of cash crops. The perennial water sources allowed for the culture of irrigated crops, fruits and vegetables year round. These crops were mainly exported out of the areas and sold in the major towns. Most farmers adopted fish farming for the purpose of home consumption, and harvested the ponds accordingly. The main objective for starting fish farming was to have a ready supply of fish for consumption, intermittent harvesting permitted this objective. The topography of the areas allowed for easy drainage of the ponds, yet ponds were seldom drained.
In Tanzania, intermittent harvesting was practised three to five times per year, and most often with the use of a net. Thirty percent of the fish from these partial harvests was sold, as opposed to 70% of the fish from total harvests. After realising and understanding the problem of stunted fish stocks, farmers adopted total harvest by drainage. Intermittent harvesting still continued, but total harvesting was now also practised. Ponds were only drained during the rainy season, when there was no shortage of water in the area.
Out of a sample of seventeen farmers in Mozambique only nine had ever drained their ponds during a one year period, and none of the farmers had drained their ponds more than once a year. While all had used hook and lines and nets to harvest fish regularly. Even for those farmers who had drained their ponds, the intermittent harvests represented on average 160% of the weight of the batch harvest.
In Zambia farmers only drained their ponds when there was a risk that the pond would dry out. Intermittent harvesting was mainly practised by hook and line or with traps, smaller quantities were caught than in Tanzania, but ponds were fished more frequent. Fish from ponds was the most frequently consumed source of animal protein for fish farmers, and was on average eaten once a week. Very little fish was sold.
In Morogoro Region, Tanzania, the initial stock of fingerlings was transported by the project from a hatchery near Dodoma at some 300 km. distance. After the first farmers had produced fingerlings, this assistance ceased. Fingerlings in all areas became available from local producers. Most farmers tried to be completely independent from fingerling producers and used their own fingerlings for restocking ponds.
Until 1994 the fingerlings for stocking mainly came from the Government fish farm in Mozambique, but gradually more and more fingerlings were produced and traded locally. The extension service emphasised the need for local fingerling production, and several farmers became interested in supplying fingerlings to other farmers. By 1998 all fingerlings for stocking fish ponds came from local small-scale suppliers.
In Eastern Province of Zambia. O. andersonii was the main species used in fish farming. Fingerlings were supplied by government stations and by private farmers. The privatisation of the fingerling supply did not develop to the extent as in the other countries. The main reason was that the water supply was insufficient to keep ponds full during every dry season in all areas. During years of low rainfall, many ponds dried up and fingerlings were locally unavailable. For instance, during the drought of 1992, 90% of all the ponds dried up.
Production figures from farmers are difficult to obtain. This is not just a problem encountered in fish farming, for example 85% of the small-scale farmers in Zambia do not keep records about any of their farming activities. Farmers often remember how many bags of fertiliser they applied to their fields or how many bags of their main crops were harvested. However, fish ponds were regularly fertilised with on-farm inputs and fed with small quantities at a time, ponds were frequently harvested for home consumption by catching a few fish. It proved very difficult to obtain reliable production and management data under these circumstances.
ALCOM collected information on pond management and production in Tanzania by using bi-weekly questionnaires and by observations. Pond production was estimated between 9 and 33 kg/are/yr6, for ponds that were only harvested intermittently and were not drained. The remaining fish in these ponds was thus not included in the production. Fish production was between 33 and 39 kg/are/yr. for ponds that were completely drained at least once. Economic calculations revealed that fish production was more profitable than the production of other crops, and comparable with rotated irrigated crops with three harvests a year.
In Mozambique production data was obtained through data collection by the farmers themselves with the assistance of the extension worker, but input data were unreliable. Fish was kept mainly for home consumption, only 40% of the fish farmers had ever sold fish. Six of the 17 sampled fish farmers had become fingerling producers, two received all their cash income generated through fish farming from the sales of fingerlings, while the other four received a considerable amount of their cash income from fingerling production.
Figure 2: Prices per kilogram of fish in Mozambique and Tanzania against the individual weight of the fish.
Contrary to what was generally believed, smaller fish fetched a better price per kilogram than larger fish (Figure 2). It was therefore not necessary for farmers to aim at high final weights of the fish, or to introduce special management techniques aimed at producing large fish.
The pilot projects used different channels to disseminate information to the farmers. Figure 3 presents these channels.
| Project→ | Farmer → | Farmer | |
| Project→ | DoF → | Farmer → | Farmer |
| Project→ | Ag. Extension→ | Farmer → | Farmer |
| Project→ | DoF → | Ag. Extension→ | Farmer → Farmer |
Figure 3: Information channels used by the Programme
Channel 1: direct contact between the project staff and the farmers was used during the initial two years of the pilot project in Zambia, and during most of the implementation of the pilot project in Tanzania.
Channel 2: after the initial two years of the pilot project in Zambia, staff of the Department of Fisheries (DoF) were trained and received financial and logistical support to conduct the extension work.
Channel 3: in Mozambique the project initially only conducted training courses for the agriculture extension staff, who were expected to disseminate fish farming information to the farmers. At a later stage of the project, the agriculture extension staff based in areas where aquaculture developed, received extra direct support from the project in the form of logistical and financial support and technical assistance. Also in Tanzania the project conducted training courses for agriculture extension staff, in anticipation that they would assist farmers with technical information.
Channel 4: in three provinces of Zambia a large number of agriculture extension staff was trained by staff of the Department of Fisheries. The project supported these training courses financially and provided training material.
Seeing a fish pond from other farmers became an important step in the decision for new farmers to adopt aquaculture, 90% of all the fish farmers and all second generation farmers saw a fish pond before starting the construction of their own. Discussions with other farmers also proved important in creating interest amongst farmers. Information from other farmers and the local availability of fingerlings became, after the stage of first introduction, decisive reasons for the further spreading of fish farming.
Farmer to farmer information dissemination performed well in several areas, information was provided to friends and relatives and spread even over long distances. Farmers who received advice through other farmers, however, showed a higher percentage of abandoning due to poor harvests. After the project ceased most of its extension activities in Tanzania, farmer to farmer extension became very prominent. Several farmers actively informed others and supplied fingerlings to new farmers. Farmers organised monthly meetings to discuss fish farming problems. Good performing fish farmers proved better extension agents than less performing fish farmers.
When asked, farmers preferred information directly from project, or fisheries' staff. In Zambia the information of agriculture extension staff was considered of better quality than that from other farmers. In Tanzania however, it was argued that farmers gained experience by implementing the advice themselves and were thus preferred as a source of information above the agriculture extension agents.
The training of agriculture extension staff alone did not result in the spreading of fish farming. A large number of extension staff was trained in various provinces in Zambia, in Mozambique and also in Tanzania, but fish farming adoption was only reported from a few areas. Most agriculture extension staff did not consider aquaculture part of their official duties, and whether they provided information to farmers depended greatly on the individual interest and dedication. Only in Eastern Province of Zambia and a two areas in Mozambique this collaboration produced positive results. In these areas the project and the department of fisheries actively collaborated and demonstrated the potential of aquaculture for small-scale farmers. This resulted in commitment from the other services. The additional financial and logistical support from the project in Mozambique ensured further collaboration.
ALCOM aimed at improving the lives of smallholder farming families through the adoption of aquaculture. Activities were to be focused on the poorer families, while women and youth were mentioned as a special target area throughout the Programme.
The only means used to reach its target group was through the introduction of fish farming in areas where mainly small-scale farmers lived, the creation of awareness about the Programme through channels that effectively reached the target group and the provision of assistance that was appreciated by these farmers.
Studies that used wealth ranking techniques revealed that fish farmers were not considered significantly more or less wealthy than other farmers in the same area Fish farmers however were predominantly male, very few women started fish farming. Several explanatory reasons were identified. First of all the fish farmer, or owner of the pond, was in most cases referred to as the owner of the land, which was predominantly male owned, or the person in charge of the construction. Pond construction was in most areas considered a task for men, sometimes assisted by women. Women played a role in fish farming, especially in daily management of the ponds, but were seldom referred to as the owner.
Special emphasis on women in extension activities, however, increased the female ownership of fish ponds. In Zambia, a female extension worker worked for five years in aquaculture extension. In the district where she worked the number of female fish farmers rose to fifteen percent of the total number of fish farmers, while in other districts this percentage was between one and two.
An economic analysis of ALCOM's survey data7 indicated that the introduction of fish farming would have most impact when it was focused on small-scale farmers with under-utilised water and labour resources. However, in the areas where ALCOM worked water was limited. Areas with water sources that allowed for pond construction were in most cases intensively utilised, and opportunity costs for water, land and labour were high in these areas. Economic impact could had been higher when fish farming was introduced in areas with more abundant water resources.
The physical conditions in areas with potential for fish farming defined the possible farming systems, the production system, and thus influenced the economic situation of the farmers. Although fish farmers were not more wealthy than other farmers in the same area, it can be expected that the economic situation of farmers in the fish farming areas in Morogoro Region and Manica Province differed considerably from the situation of farmers in areas where fish farming was not possible.
The Programme developed, tested and demonstrated suitable fish culture technologies and extension methodologies for smallholder farmers in Zambia. Tanzania and Mozambique. It effectively informed the participating countries of these developments and created awareness about the aquaculture development issues, potentials and limitations, through its information service (see Chapter 8.1). The immediate results obtained in the field and the outputs of the information service increased the support for further aquaculture development in the region. This support was especially noticeable by the initiatives taken in the countries where ALCOM implemented its aquaculture pilot projects.
Through the attainment of the immediate objectives, the Programme achieved its overall development objective of an increase in cash income and/or animal protein component in the diet of rural communities. However, despite the availability of an appropriate methodology and increased support of government and other institutions, the sustainability of aquaculture development remained an issue of concern. Many new initiatives, resulting from demonstrations by ALCOM, depended on external funding, whilst government extension services experienced problems adopting all the aspects of the developed methodology. This was caused by the lack of desire to change and lack of capacity of the extension services to adopt the new methodology.
ALCOM achieved most impact where it was directly involved in the implementation of pilot projects. For example the fisheries staff in Zambia involved in the execution of the pilot projects, adopted a new approach, and gained confidence in their extension work. The integration of aquaculture into agriculture extension was being formalised in the whole country.
The positive results obtained with the pilot project in Tanzania changed the attitude of government fisheries staff from initial scepticism to enthusiasm for the adopted approach. Aquaculture extension activities have become more common in Morogoro Region and aquaculture has become part of an integrated programme on household food security. The aquaculture sector has further received increased support from the government resulting in an increased budget allocation and additional staff. Recently the government set aside an unprecedented part of their budget for the printing of aquaculture extension materials developed under the Programme.
The interest, among government and development organisation's staff in Mozambique, in fish farming has increased tremendously as a result of the significant and very visible adoption of fish farming in Manica Province. In this province aquaculture is no longer seen as an odd activity, but as an activity that is commonly practised by farmers.
