BIOSTAT REPORT NO. 7

Report on the Tour of Southwestern Lakes :
George and Edward Landings.

by

D. Nyeko

1. Introduction.

From the 11th to 16th June 1989, a field trip was carried out on some of the landings in Kichwamba region (Southwestern Lakes). The team was led by Dr. E. Reynolds (Socio-Economist Advisor), who was accompanied by Dr. Ssali (Fisheries Officer incharge of the Fish Technology Laboratory in Entebbe) and Mrs. C. Mukasa (Socio-Economist). It involved the coverage of 8 landings on Lakes George and Edward. A frame Survey preliminary questionnaire was tried by interrogating the Chief fisherman of each landing. Aspects of the present statistiscal collection system used were also studied on the landings not visited during the last field trip.

The landings covered during this trip were:

1. 12.06.89 - Ruwenshama Landing
   - Kishenyi Landing

2. 13.06.89 - Kasenyi Landing
   - Kashaka Landing

3. 14.06.89 - Mahyoro Landing
   - Kayinza Landing

4. 15.06.89 - Katwe Landing
   - Hamukingu Landing

2. Report on Landings visited.

2.1 Mahyoro Landing (L. George):

This is a fairly large landing in Kitagwenda County, Kabarole District. The landing is manned by an Assistant Fisheries Development Officer and a Fisheries Assistant. The landing has 32 registered boats of which 29 are smaller flat-bottomed and 3 are larger, motorised ssesse-type planked canoes. The landing has a total of 679 gillnets of which 40 have a mesh size of 6", 255 of 5" and 384 of 4.5". A total of 600 hooks is in use (employed mainly during the rainy season).

The predominant fish species caught were (in descending order of total weight in the catches): O. niloticus, Bagrus, Protopterus and Clarias. More than half of the total catch landed is smoked and a fair proportion of the remainder sold as fresh fish. Fish traders collect fish from the landing mainly by water and a smaller fraction by road destined for Kabale, Bwera, Kasese and Mbarara markets. Most fishing gears are acquired from Kampala and few from Zaire.

Data collection in terms of the number of fish landed for each day in a month is carried out: the FAS have a list of all canoes from which numbers of fish by species landed are recorded. These are raised by the average weight for each species, to arrive at the overall production for the month by weight. Auto-consumption of fish by the fishermen is not recorded.

2.2 Kayinja Landing (L. George):

This is a remote landing in Kitagwenda County, Kabarole District. It is controlled by two Fisheries Assistants. Access roads to the landing are almost impassible because of bad seasonal roads and rough terrain. The only reliable outlet is thus by water. Consequently almost all the landed fish is smoked and reaches the distant markets of Bwera and Kasese via Kasenyi. However, a substantial proportion of the remainder is transported on foot to settlements of a nearby mountainous region.

The landing has 40 small flat bottomed fishing canoes with an average of 3 fishermen per canoe.

There are 288 gillnets of which 210 are of meshsize 5" and 78 of 4.5". Hook (longline) fishing was abandoned since this gear was constantly stolen.

The main fish species landed are (in decreasing importance): Tilapia, Protopterus, Bagrus and Clarias (mainly during rainy months). An average number of 30–100 Tilapia, 50–75 Protopterus, 50–70 Bagrus and 0–2 Clarias are landed daily per canoe. Catch statistics are collected on a daily basis in terms of number and weight for each species. The fish landed are put on a shed where they are counted. The number derived for each species is multiplied by the average weight to get the monthly production by weight.

2.3 Hamukungu Landing (L. George):

This is a major landing only 9.7 km from the main road. It is located in Muhokya sub county, Busongora County in Kasese District. A total of 141 (5"), 41 (6") and 50 (4.5") are in use. The longlines (size 8 were 390 in number) are employed mainly during rainy periods. The 24 registered flat-bottomed canoes in use employ as much as 254 fishermen who work part time on a rotational basis. None of the boats have out-board engines due to nearness of the fishing site.

The catch mainly consists of Tilapia(40–60 on the average per canoe , per day) Bagrus (5–20 per canoe, per day); Protopterus (14–20 per canoe, per day), Clarias (1–5 per canoe, per day). Due to a large market on the mainland, most of the catch is disposed of as fresh fish, mainly by traders using bicycles (daily) and pick-ups (three times a week.)

There is no proper weighing shed. Sampling of fish is done on a daily basis by asking the number of fish landed by species for each canoe. These figures are then multiplied by the average weight for each species to get the total fresh weight landed. The average weights were 0.45 kg for Tilapia, 2.0 kg for Bagrus, 2.2 kg for Clairas and 2.5 kg for Protopterus.

3. Frame Survey preliminary questionnaire:

The frame survey questionnaire (see appendix I) was first tried at Ruwenshama landing. Some of the questions which proved to be inadiquate were omitted on subsequent interviews and more appropriate ones tried. The question on whether they belonged to a cooperative had to be added. Problems were however encountered in framing the right questions to gauge the number of illegal fishing vessels in operation even when there was general agreement that they indeed existed.

The first part of the questionnaire tries to guage the background of the nature of the fishing communities. Some of it was not very much applicable to the southwestern lakes where all landings are gazetted, hence permanent. The landings were for the most part static and only isolated cases of fishermen dynamics (migration/transfer) from one landing to another would be exhibited.

The questions about the period of effective fishing activity needed modidication. All the landings visited exhibit some sort of all year round in fishing activity. However, some gears (especially hooks and gill-nets of sizes larger than 5") are abundoned during drier periods of the year when their use becomes less effective.

The number of gears was quite easy to determine by interview/ inspection. The defination of the different kinds of canoes was confusing. This was especially true for the transport canoes as they might be used for the transport of fish; passengers and other goods or any other combination of the latter three.

The classification of engines proved adequate. To determine the relative importance of each species of fish to the local (micro) fishery level was practicable. Nonetheless, there should be specification whether this would be by number or by weight.

The part of the questionnaire on disposition of catches proved essential and easy to manage. Findings indicated that about 75% of the landings visited dispose of catches as smoked fish. Finally, questions dealing with catch origin, prices etc. proved impracticable and were not attempted in many landings.

TABLE 1 : Results of Effort data during the trial Survey

Planked canoes - PC
Planked canoeswith engines - PCE
Owner - OWN
Assistant - ASST
Basket trap - BT
Transport - T
Gillnet - G
Distance to main road (km) - DT
Dug-out - D/OUT
Hooks - H

Table 2. The average total number of gillnets (specified for different mesh sizes) per canoe for each of the surveyed landings.