BY
T. TWONGO & J.E. REYNOLDS
With
PETER MWENE-BEYANGA
| T. Twongo Uganda Freshwater Fisheries Research Organisation P.O. Box 343 JINJA, UGANDA | J.E. Reynolds Socio-Economist FISHIN Project FAO/UN P.O. Box 521 KAMPALA, UGANDA | |
| P. Mwene-Beyanga Uganda Department of Fisheries P.O. Box 4 ENTEBBE, UGANDA |
The task set for this final paper of the seminar is to provide, on the basis of the points raised in the previous papers1 and in the context of past experience, an appreciation of management issues, options, and strategies for the Lake Victoria fisheries of Uganda. Its purpose is to stimulate further discussion and, hopefully, some agreement on appropriate measures to formulate and implement in order for these fisheries to be adequately utilised and developed.
But perhaps such a statement as “adequately utilised and developed” already takes too much for granted. Just what should be meant by our use of the term “fisheries management”? Very often it is taken to refer to the administration of fisheries regulations and the provision of extension work -- tasks usually assumed by a Fisheries Department type of agency. But this understanding of the term is rather narrow and restrictive. A living and renewable yet fragile and finite resource system such as the Lake fisheries involves a diverse, complicated, and not always compatible mix of elements and events, and any meaningful approach to “management” must comprehend all of them.
It is precisely these varied yet interconnected qualities of the resource-base/resource-use complex that occasions the need for management -- that gives rise to what might indeed be called the “management imperative”. The fisheries resource base is limited and fragile, being subject to perturbations that emanate from the “natural environment” as well as those that are more directly anthropogenic. Human involvement with the resource base is almost invariably aimed at deriving maximum benefits in terms of sustenance and/or profit. Sometimes, more rarely, other concerns may play a role. Different individuals or groups commonly have divergent and even contradictory ideas about the nature and extent of any exploitation to be pursued. Sustenance or the direct food value of the resource to a local population may loom as a more important consideration in some minds than the cash or foreign exchange value the resource might be able to generate for the national economy. What represents “maximum” use for one might be “minimal” for another, depending upon the motives involved. The prospect of immediate benefit accumulation can prove far more attractive than one of lower-order but sustained accumulation in the longer term. Moreover, from certain perspectives “benefits” may be hard to express in simple hard currency or protein-energy unit terms, as when high valuation is placed on the maintenance of bio-diversity within a natural aquatic system and the need for conservation rather than wholesale exploitation is stressed.
1. A full list of papers presented is given in Appendix 3.
Fisheries management in its full sense is a process that involves this whole complex of resource conditions and the influences and interests that can act upon them and so determine their relative stability or instability through time. Management must be based on policy -- a code that should clearly set out the priorities in terms of which the different influences and interests are to be allowed to exert their effects. Policy that guides the way benefits are extracted from a renewable resource base is normally expected to conform to the principle of utilising the “dividends” that the resource base can yield rather than squandering the standing stock or “capital” that it represents. It is for the sake of “good policy,” or at least the pretence of such, that such phrases as "rational exploitation, “sustained yields,” “sound planning,” “resource stewardship,” and the like, have become part of the vocabulary of fisheries management.
Other papers presented to this seminar have dealt with a diverse set of issues and themes, yet all have been taken to relate to aspects of fisheries management. In other words, the concept of management has been implicitly treated in its fuller and more meaningful sense. In this paper too such a usage is adopted and indeed is explicitly affirmed: management is not something only confined to the narrow “departmental” functions of administration and extension service supervision. In fine, fisheries management is seen as a process that involves several interacting components, namely:
knowledge about the state of fisheries resources, regularly updated through continual monitoring and research;
knowledge about the mode and intensity of exploitation and end-use of the resources, and of the associated interests and socio-economic effects, again as derived from continual monitoring and research;
the educational and administrative guidelines on resource exploitation which usually involve extension services for fisherfolk and regulation of effort and post-harvest practices, and which ideally should be elaborated on the basis of consultation and consensus between all parties concerned; and
a policy context that provides for the rational use and development of fisheries resources, and which itself is formulated and held open for timely review on the basis of the information acquired and evaluated through monitoring, research, and consultation.
The local peoples living around the shores of Lake Victoria up to the beginning of the twentieth century depended a great deal on their fishery. Using simple gear like spears, basket traps and seines made out of papyrus stalks, they had subsisted on the inshore fish stocks of the Lake from ancient times. One may assume that “how to catch fish” was the major preoccupation or issue in their “management planning” because at the time the stocks were predominantly virgin hence plentiful. However, the introduction of the much more efficient flax gillnets into the Lake Victoria fisheries in 1905, followed by their widespread use in Uganda waters by 1916, and by a general rise in fish consumption, soon led to increased fishing pressure. Localised overfishing had set in by the early 1920s.
It would seem that the drive to “manage” fisheries is often triggered by the perception of some form of overexploitation of the resource. This certainly was the case for Lake Victoria. Although considerable advances had been made earlier concerning the taxonomy of the fishes of the Lake (e.g. Boulenger, 1909; Cunnington, 1920; Regan, 1922), the real impetus to the development of scientific knowledge appears to have come from the results of the brief fishing survey conducted by M. Graham in 1927–1928 (Graham, 1929). His lakewide study contributed useful preliminary information on species composition, distribution, and aspects of relative abundance. Based on survey observations, four principal recommendations were made with regard to the future management of Lake Victoria. These were to:
prohibit the use of gillnets with a mesh size of less than 127 mm stretched;
institute sustained research on the fisheries resources;
set up fishery statistics collection to monitor the fishery; and
establish a lake-wide authority to oversee collection of statistics and enforce fishery regulations.
The above recommendations focussed attention on several pertinent issues for the fisheries of Lake Victoria, namely: overfishing - though localised at the time; lack of scientific knowledge on the resources; lack of information on exploitation; and the need to regulate and control the fishery. Fishery management strategy for Lake Victoria-Uganda essentially developed around these issues.
Graham's recommendations were accepted by the Governments of the states riparian to Lake Victoria and subsequently implemented. The mesh size limit of 127mm for the tilapia gillnet fishery was enacted in 1933 by Uganda, and the East African Fisheries Research Organisation (EAFRO) started work in 1949, with headquarters located at Jinja-Uganda. Its mandate was to carry out hydrobiological and fisheries research whose results were expected to guide fisheries management planning all over East Africa. Another organisation, The Lake Victoria Fisheries Service (LVFS), had been formed 1947 with the objective of consolidating fisheries development over the whole of Lake Victoria. LVFS was particularly concerned with experimental fishing, processing, the collection of catch statistics and marketing data, and enforcing fishery regulations.
Considerable success was achieved by EAFRO on hydrobiological and fisheries research during the next two decades. However, lack of suitable vessels for offshore work, and for extended field research, confined most of the studies by EAFRO to the bays and gulfs around Jinja. Hence the Uganda sector of Lake Victoria was comparatively better studied. Results obtained in hydrobiological/limnological studies (e.g. Beauchamp, 1953; Fish, 1952; 1956; 1957, Talling, 1961) contributed greatly to the understanding of the behaviour and functioning of tropical aquatic ecosystems. Similarly investigations into the food and feeding of the major fish species (e.g. Fish, 1951; 1955; Corbet, 1961) and on their reproductive biology (e.g. Greenwood 1955; Lowe, 1955; 1956), have been very important to the understanding of the lake ecosystem and to the evaluation of fishery management options.
However, up to the close of the 1950s available scientific knowledge on the fisheries resources still fell short of what was required to guide management planning for expanded fishery exploitation. Hardly any scientific studies had been conducted for the open waters of Lake Victoria due to lack of suitable craft. Therefore, the composition, distribution and abundance of commercial fish stocks offshore remained unknown. Attempts by EAFRO in collaboration with LVFS at experimental fishing were not very successful (EAFFRO, 1967). For instance one study to establish the viability of a mechanised fishery for Bagrus and Mormyrus in the northern waters of Lake Victoria (Uganda) produced unreliable predictions.
A breakthrough to lakewide fish stock investigations was made when a joint stock assessment survey was mounted by FAO/UNDP and EAFFRO. MV Ibis, a deepwater trawler, was purchased for use at the renamed East African Freshwater Fisheries Research Organisation (EAFFRO) and the most extensive bottom trawling survey of Lake Victoria thus far undertaken was carried out between 1969 and 1971. The results of the survey (Kudhongania & Cordone, 1974) though preliminary, gave the first meaningful insight into the fish stock situation of Lake Victoria since the pioneering study by Graham (1929), forty years earlier.
But the political and economic problems in Uganda in the 1970s and early 1980s and the differences that emerged in regional political relations greatly affected progress at EAFFRO. Co-operation with and support from international aid agencies was slowly phased out, leading EAFFRO to scientific isolation. Even the access to international professional publications was terminated due to failure by the Organisation to meet the exchange requirements. Research activity slowed down considerably. Then came the breakup of the East African Community in 1977 with the attendant renaming of EAFFRO to become the Uganda Freshwater Fisheries Research Organisation (UFFRO), in line with its new national character. After the breakup of the community and with Uganda's political and economic turmoil continuing to compromise the operating capabilities of UFFRO, only limited studies confined to the fish stocks of the northern portion of the lake near Jinja, (Okaronon et al., 1985; Mbahinzireki, 1985) were made into the 1980s.
On the whole the 1980s were years of slow but steady recovery for UFFRO during which contacts with international support and co-operation were gradually re-established. A notable example is the financial support by the International Development Research Centre (IDRC) - Canada, which now funds two research projects. One is concerned with the primary productivity of Lake Victoria-Uganda. The other involves a study of the biology, ecology, and population dynamics of the Nile perch in Lakes Victoria, Kyoga, and Albert, including the predator's impact on other fisheries within the same environment. However, perhaps the most important positive development for UFFRO during the years of isolation has been the recruiting and training of a team of Ugandan research personnel who, if availed inputs, operational support, and international professional orientation to methods in modern aquatic science, are capable of undertaking the daunting problems of studying the fisheries resources of Lake Victoria.
Like fisheries research, organised administration of fisheries activities on Lake Victoria-Uganda seems to have had its origins in the recommendations by Graham (1929). Staff of the Game Department had overseen and made reports to the Game Warden on fishing activities in Uganda before the fishing survey of Lake Victoria. After the survey the role of fishguards, as they became known, was specified to include compilation of catch statistics, general control, and limited experimental investigations involving the use of gillnets (Uganda Game Dept. Ann. Report, 1937, 1938, 1940, 1946).
Eventually the Lake Victoria Fisheries Board (LVFB), the administrative body of LVFS under the direction of a Chief Fisheries Officer, assumed co-ordination responsibility for the the three riparian states. The work of the LVFS in each state was supervised by a resident Senior Fisheries Officer. When the LVFS started operations in 1947 Uganda handed over to the LVFB all responsibilities regarding fisheries administration in her portion of Lake Victoria. Canoe licensing however remained the responsibility of the local Sleeping Sickness Inspectorates (Uganda Game and Fisheries Dept. Annual Report 1950; LVFS Annual Report 1950; Sastry 1957).
The Lake Victoria Fisheries Board thus consolidated administration of the fisheries of Lake Victoria, recruiting Fisheries Assistants, acquiring a patrol vessel in each riparian state to ease transportation problems, and forging what appears to have been a close collaborative relationship with EAFRO particularly in the field of experimental investigations on fish stocks (E.A. High Commission. Ann. Rep., 1964). Success in the collaboration with EAFRO was apparently limited by lack of suitable vessels to facilitate prolonged investigations in the open waters.
Fishery exploitation on Lake Victoria continued to expand and intensify after the imposition of the minimum mesh size limit at 127 mm in 1933. Attempts to start mechanised fishing enterprises after the Second World War failed, leaving all fishing activities in the hands of subsistence and artisanal operators. Expanding markets for fish, introduction into the fishery of the more efficient synthetic gillnets in 1952, and availability of outboard engines shortly afterwards intensified fish capture and extended fishing grounds farther offshore, while facilitating faster transport of the catch to markets. Fishing became a very attractive enterprise and the tilapia fishery so intensified that by the mid-1950s the catch per net had dropped to quite low levels. The temptation to use gillnets with lower mesh sizes in order to catch smaller tilapias which were then abundant, became irresistable. Such gear would also harvest other members of the multispecies fishery including those of Labeo, Bagrus and Clarias, as well as the smaller O. variabilis. Uganda and Tanzania (then Tanganyika) repealed the minimum mesh size law in 1956, against the advice of EAFRO scientists. Kenya followed this move in 1961. The EAFRO scientists had earlier lost the policy “debate” on the proposal to introduce non-endemic fishes into Lake Victoria and Lake Kyoga (EAFFRO, 1967). Introductions of four tilapiine species (Oreochromis niloticus, O. leucostictus, Tilapia zillii, and T. melanopleura) into these lakes had started in 1953 (Welcomme, 1966). Although EAFRO scientists had even stronger reservations about the introduction of the predatory Nile perch Lates Niloticus (EAFFRO, 1967) the fish was introduced into Lake Kyoga in 1957. Following its unexpected appearance near Jinja in the early 1960s, the perch was also formally introduced into Lake Victoria (Reynolds and Greboval, 1988).
The LVFS wound up its activities on Lake Victoria at the end of 1959 and handed over the duties of fishery administration and statistical data collection to the respective governments. The Uganda Fisheries Department (UFD), formed in 1961, assumed all administrative responsibilities for the fisheries of Lake Victoria-Uganda.
Reynolds et al. (1989) have traced the series of efforts to put the Department's statistical recording and information management procedures for the national fisheries on a sound footing. Many observers have commented on the deficiencies of existing approaches over the years and have suggested ways in which they might be improved. Attempts to strengthen collection and analysis procedures have been mounted through various agencies, missions, and projects (Sastry 1957; Stoneman 1969; Bazigos 1971, 1972). They include the abortive effort to standardise procedures lakewide under the Lake Victoria Fisheries Commission, which was set up in 1973 but failed to function effectively and was eventually disbanded in 1977 with the collapse of the East African Community.
A common set of themes emerges from the earlier commentaries on fisheries data management. To wit, there are problems of: inadequate numbers of field staff and staff performance; lack of uniformity in the mode of data collection; insufficient quality controls; and of limited coverage of fishing and post-harvest factors in time and space as well as in terms of the range of items measured. Fundamental to all of these problems is the lack of resources necessary to run an efficient, standardised, and comprehensive system of monitoring and information management.
Just as in the case of UFFRO's experience, the situation for the UFD became particularly acute as a result of the political and economic disruptions of recent years. Steps are now being taken through the FAO/UNDP FISHIN' Project to improve UFD data collection and processing capabilities, but if this project is not to become just another in the series of failed attempts to upgrade and rehabilitate operations, Government will have to begin committing budgetary support to the Department commensurate with the fishing industry's exceedingly important role in the national economy and as a major source of nutritional security.
It is now generally believed that the Lake Victoria environment is in a state of flux. Profound changes are taking place in the structure and functioning of its ecosystem, possibly being driven by the gradual reduction in the diversity of the fish fauna as initiated by overfishing, and accelerated by the introduction of non-indigenous fish species and environmental changes in the watershed of the lake. Whatever the causes of the changes, it is certain that what was known about the limnology and fisheries of Lake Victoria has to be re-assessed.
Preliminary results of limnological studies underway at UFFRO and elsewhere indicate important changes in the physical and chemical as well as biological limnology of Lake Victoria. For instance some of the nutrients like soluble reactive silicon now occur in much lower concentrations; the thermocline has significantly been elevated thereby reducing the volume of the mixed layer (epilimnion); and there is a big increase in the density of phytoplankton and some zooplankton. All these changes are apparent through comparison with records of the 1960s (Talling, 1966; Hecky & Bugenyi 1990; Bugenyi & Magumba 1990). The observed elevation of the thermocline during the period of stratification implies increase in the volume of water whose oxygen concentration declines with depth. Such an environment is most probably unfavourable to fish. The full extent of these and similar limnological changes in Lake Victoria, their causes, and their implications to the functioning of the lake ecosystem are yet to be studied.
There is also and most alarmingly the fairly recent appearance of the notorious water weed, Eichhornia crassipes, commonly known as the water hyacinth, on Lakes Victoria and Kyoga (Reynolds and Coenen, 1991). On Lake Victoria-Uganda the weed is currently widespread amongst the Ssese Islands, along parts of the western shoreline, and in parts of the northern portion of the lake near Jinja. Where it is fully established, this weed is known to impede navigation, invade and cover fishing grounds, and smother breeding and nursery areas of some fish species. The huge and highly buoyant hence mobile mats which it forms destroy any fishing gear that may lie in their windblown paths. Apart from diverting large quantities of nutrients from the water into its rapidly accumulated biomass, the weed depletes dissolved oxygen in areas under its mats, using it for respiration and decay and thus hindering normal gaseous exchange at the water surface. Such areas are unlikely to shelter fishes like the Nile perch and the Nile tilapia that require high oxygen concentration.
While the water hyacinth could spread to cover much of the open water on shallow Lake Kyoga, the weed will most probably remain concentrated along the shoreline and around islands in Lake Victoria, forming huge mats in bays. The hyacinth is, therefore, likely to have considerable impact on the stocks of the Nile tilapia and the Nile perch whose nursery grounds lie inshore. The Nile tilapia which spawns in relatively shallow water and depends on the shoreline macrophytes for juvenile as well as adult shelter, and on resident invertebrates and algae for food, would be particularly affected by extensive spread of the water hyacinth in-shore. All in all the situation is shaping up as a environmental disaster of nightmare proportions.
As a consequence of the gradually collapse in the multispecies fisheries of Lake Victoria during the 1980s, many of the results of the 1969–1971 stock assessment survey (Kudhongania and Cordone, 1974), though still of immense scientific value, have been rendered marginal as a basis for decision-making on resource exploitation. The commercial fishery of Lake Victoria-Uganda now largely consists of two introduced fish species, namely the Nile perch and the Nile tilapia, plus one indigenous pelagic species, Rastrineobola argentea, known locally as mukene. It is most likely that these three fishes are the only major species with widespread commercial viability in the Uganda waters of, and quite possibly all over, Lake Victoria (Ssentongo and Welcomme, 1985; Reynolds and Greboval 1988; Kudhongania, 1990).
The introduced species, though they have only been present in Lake Victoria for less than forty years, have produced the highest catches ever known for these waters. In terms of greater availability of food, employment opportunities, and financial return to the industry, therefore, the new fisheries regime has proved to be of tremendous value to lakeside populations and fish consumers within the three riparian states and the neighbouring region.
But it must be borne in mind that the introduced species are still undergoing a process of adjustment in the context of an ecosystem that is itself in a state of flux. Moreover, available knowledge on the biology and ecology of the above three commercial fish species is insufficient for long term management planning. For instance, far too little is known about their current spatial and temporal distribution, size structure, and stock sizes; nor have the dynamics of their populations been studied. Yet knowledge on these and other aspects especially as influenced by the changes occurring in the Lake ecosystem is vital for management planning.
A further point is that the Nile perch preys on Nile tilapia and mukene, as well as on its own progeny. In a severely restricted fish species array situation like that in Lake Victoria and Kyoga knowledge about predation pressure and its impact on the prey species is essential for assessing the viability of the fishery, especially in view of the current intense exploitation for commercial purposes. This information is lacking although Ogutu-Ohwayo (1984) has made some relevant preliminary studies on Lake Kyoga. The recently observed regular appearence of severely emaciated specimens of Nile perch at Masese and Kiyindi fish landings on Lake Victoria-Uganda by scientists at UFFRO may herald an onset of starvation due to lack of prey availability on the lake. Yet it has also been suggested for other parts of the lake that stocks of R. argentea have increased over their previous levels in recent years, as has the abundance of the freshwater benthic shrimp Caridina niloticus (Wanink, Ligtvoet, and Witte 1988; AUW 1989; Reynolds and Orach-Meza 1989). These developments, if of significant and enduring effect, could obviously have a bearing on the long-term prospects for the perch fishery.
In view of the uncertainties that exist, any attempt to guess at the sustainable exploitation levels on Lake Victoria at the moment would amount to little more than guesswork. Three things are clear above all else, however. One is that there is an urgent need to conduct out further studies of the sort referred to above and to use them as foundations for planning out the continued exploitation of fish resources. The second is that, in the meantime, there is also an urgent need to avoid the danger of overexploitation and the dissipation of the prodigious benefits that have accrued under the new fisheries regime (Reynolds and Greboval 1988; Greboval 1989). The third is that there is a further urgent need to pursue research and development efforts aimed at establishing alternative ways to ensure continuity and growth of the country's fisheries production base. In this regard, attention should be paid to the following possible options: the creation of aquatic protected reserve areas or “parks”; the use of “enhanced production systems” such as artificial reefs and pen culture in protected bays; the promotion of a viable aquaculture sector; and the utilisation of non-traditional aquatic resources such as shrimps, molluscs, and lake flies.
In the context of fisheries management for Lake Victoria or any other fishery, the term “exploitation” in its full sense embraces the whole sequence of fish capture, processing, marketing, and consumption -- i.e the total mobilisation of resources for the nutritional and/or financial benefits of the nation.
The current fisheries on Lake Victoria-Uganda are dominated by artisanal operators using a large number of traditional ‘Ssese’ planked canoes and some “dugouts” fashioned, as the name suggests, out of large tree trunks. A variety of fishing gear are utilised. The most abundant and by far the most important is the synthetic gillnet (Biribonwoha 1991). A large number of beach seines (prohibited by “Administrative Order” in Uganda), and some longlines and castnets are also used. Mechanisation of the commercial fishery has recently been attempted by one company - the Sino-Uganda Fisheries Joint Venture Co. Ltd., operating two pair-trawling units.
The choice of gear allows for some degree of species specialisation. On Lake Victoria, gillnets capture mainly the Nile tilapia and the Nile perch. They are generally set to stay in the water overnight. Castnets capture almost entirely Nile tilapia. On the other hand, the beach seine as operated on Lake Victoria-Uganda catches mostly Nile perch, although Nile tilapia may also be caught particularly at night. Mukene (R. argentea) is currently fished using light attraction during dark, moonless nights with seines of 10 mm and 5 mm meshes, either dragged to the shore or in combination with net-lifting or dipnetting mechanisms offshore. While fishing of whatever sort is mostly done at night, seine nets and castnets are fished during the day also. Fishers usually operate in twos or threes when using gillnets, in twos for castnets, and in groups of four or more for seines, depending on their size. A canoe is often an individual fishing unit but several canoes may combine operations when fishing for mukene. Longlines and basket traps are usually tended by one and sometimes two fishermen.
Until the most recent inventory survey of Lake Victoria-Uganda by the FAO/UNDP FISHIN Project, the total fishing effort in terms of active fishing canoes on the lake was not accurately known. Preliminary results of the above survey turned up a total of 715 landing sites hosting a total of 8674 active canoes (6432 planked, 2242 dugout; 8000 fishing and 674 transport), of which 1250 are equipped with outboard engines (Tumwebaze and Coenen 1991). Clearly a great deal of effort is being directed towards exploitation of the lake's resources.
Although the gillnet has evolved as the most suitable fishing gear so far on Lake Victoria, various circumstances including scarcity, high prices, and rampant theft in certain areas have led to innovative variations to the normal use of the nets as passive gear, and have also contributed to the upsurge in the use of the “illegal” seines and castnets. In some places the gillnet is no longer used as a passive gear but is set and immediately lifted after fish have been chased into the meshes by beating the water with a long stick (the “Mwoko”) or a special club (the “Tycoon”). Some fishermen use the gillnet as an enclosure net, setting and lifting it before moving to the next fishing ground. These active methods of fishing allow for the use of only a few (four up to ten or twelve) gillnets in a working fleet, often making catches which are comparable to, and sometimes better than, those made with many nets set passively.
The main advantage of active fishing with gillnets, and seine nets is that the risk of gear theft on the lake is virtually eliminated. Secondly, in the case of gillnets and castnets, the initial capital input for the gear is also greatly reduced. Although construction of the beach seine requires very high capital input the gear is not easily stolen at “sea” (because it is actively operated), is cheap to maintain, and may last for years depending on the strength of the twine used.
However, active fishing methods involving the use of gillnets, castnets, and beach seines are widely regarded as destructive. For instance, apart from physical destruction of the beach environment the seine is notorious for the capture of immature fish, particularly the Nile perch. Twongo (1986) attributes the collapse of the Nile perch stocks in Lake Kyoga after 1983 to the rampant use of seines offshore. The seine has become particularly popular in the Nile perch fishery in Uganda mainly because the codend can be adjusted to catch both the large and very small (illegal) sizes of fish. An important market for the small Nile perch (down to 10 cm total length!) exists in the rural areas (see, e.g. Reynolds and Odongkara 1990), making the use of seines with small meshes in the codend very attractive.
Discussion on fishing gear and equipment on Lake Victoria-Uganda remains incomplete without comments on mechanised fishing. This subject has been reviewed by Reynolds and Ssali (1990), who point out that such fishing has been practised much more in the other two states riparian to Lake Victoria than it has in Uganda. Two unsuccessful attempts were made within Ugandan waters in the past. One was a commercial industrial venture in the northern part of the lake and the other an experimental fishing operation around Entebbe. Currently, one company operates trawlers on Lake Victoria-Uganda, and two major lessons are beginning to emerge. First, the offshore waters may not be “teeming with trawlable fish” contrary to optimitic predictions from some quarters. This possibility would surprise few informed observers, because no recent study has been made to establish the presence of such stocks in the first place. Moreover, the current limnological trends towards a diminished epilimnion during the period of stratification suggest that the Lake Victoria environment may be hostile to demersal fish stocks offshore. However, presence or absence of commercially viable fish stocks in the open waters of Lake Victoria will only be established by systematic experimental fishing.
A second lesson, also not very surprising, is that a basic clash of interests occurs between artisanal fishers and the mechanised investor over the exploitation of the inshore waters and shallow banks where fish are known to gather. Mechanised fishing is not compatible with the techniques and gear of artisanal fishing and hence can never innocuously co-exist with the latter. Besides this, it is not known how resilient tilapia stocks -- comprising one of the two major inshore commercial fisheries in Lake Victoria -- would be to mechanised fishing. The reproductive strategies and life history patterns of the Nile tilapia are such that intense trawling would likely prove extremely disruptive, just as it did for the haplochromine stocks of southern Lake Victoria (Witte and Goudswaard, 1985).
Fresh fish: A recent survey conducted by the FISHIN Project established that the proportion of fish marketed fresh (i.e. unprocessed) in the districts fringing the Uganda sector of Lake Victoria is around 47% (Kirema-Mukasa and Reynolds 1991). At the same time it is recognised that a considerable amount of fish is smuggled across the border with Kenya. The amount of fish marketed fresh on the shores of Lake Victoria is often influenced by the distance between the fishing ground and the markets, and by the mode of water transport used. These two factors will determine delivery of the fish in a fresh or stale condition. In this respect use of outboard engines to transport fish from fishing grounds has greatly added to the total quantity and quality of fish marketed fresh at the lakeshore. Similarly, improved road transport has enabled movement of fresh fish considerable distances to the urban and rural centres inland. The advent of large Nile perch with a relatively longer shelf-life in the fresh state than the tilapias has also contributed to the increased range of fresh fish distribution to the rural areas. However, lack of outboard engine spares and bad, at times impassable roads to fishlandings often frustrates the distribution of fresh fish to local consumers.
Traditional fish processing: Two traditional methods, namely curing of fish over heat and smoke, and sun-drying, remain the most important means of processing fish on Lake Victoria-Uganda, and indeed for the entire fishing industry of the country (Semakula 1961; Reynolds and Ssali 1990; Ssali, Reynolds, and Ward 1990). The smoke curing technique has been slightly modified in some places mainly to control heat losses and hence reduce waste of fuel wood. It is currently used for both Nile tilapia and Nile perch, with the final product having a shelf life of up to several weeks, depending on the residual moisture content. Sun-drying is often used on Lake Victoria-Uganda to preserve Nile tilapia split along the dorsal profile before it is spread out in the sun. Very often it is juvenile fish that is cured in this way. The final product when thoroughly dried is believed to have a longer shelf life than fire cured fish. Split Nile tilapia may be dry-salted or dipped into brine before drying. Salting significantly increases shelf life. However, while the use of salt to process fish has gained considerable popularity on Lake Albert and at some landings of Lake Kyoga, the method is apparently not common on Lake Victoria-Uganda.
Sun-drying on grass, rock, or sand is currently the only traditional method of processing mukene, whose fishery has assumed considerable importance on Lake Victoria-Uganda over the last ten years. However, mukene dried over sand remains gritty to eat. Indeed, improved processing is a challenging development problem that should be addressed in the likely event that the R. argentea fishery continues to expand on Lake Victoria-Uganda.
The largest quantity of fish distributed to distant rural areas is traditionally processed, and consists of smoked Nile tilapia, Nile perch and sun-dried mukene. Consignments are distributed by fishmongers who move mainly by public transport and sell to resident retailers. Some fishmongers time the major market days for the retailing of their consignments.
One of the major issues connected with the traditionally processed fish is the need to reduce or eliminate post-harvest losses. Some of the losses are introduced even before the processing itself when decomposing fish are diverted to the fire or for sun-drying. Of course, the processed product will be poor. However, most post-harvest losses are due to inadequate processing methods, and losses are also incurred during transport and storage under poor conditions.
Industrial processing: Icing and freezing was used in the industrial processing and marketing of fish at the now defunct TUFMAC (The Uganda Fish Marketing Corporation) plant sited on Lake George, and at several other fish processing plants in western Uganda, between the early 1950s and early 1970s (Reynolds and Ssali, 1990). These industries, which processed fish from Lake George, Lake Edward, and the Kazinga Channel, produced Nile tilapia fillets plus quantities of whole frozen, salted, and smoked fish, mainly for export but also for a limited local market.
At the present time both ice-chilling and freezing are used in industrial processing operations linked to the Lake Victoria fishery. Ice is used to preserve fish during transit to processing plants and in storage, and both fresh chilled and frozen products are marketed. The current keen interest to industrialise processing in Kenya and Uganda was triggered in the mid-1980s by the upsurge in fish production from Lake Victoria, based on the introduced Nile perch and Nile tilapia. Uganda lagged somewhat in this new venture behind Kenya, where it is believed that around 20 plants have been established in recent years, although some have subsequently had to curtail or even cease operations because of supply and competition problems. At least seven plants with a combined installed capacity of over 100 tons of fresh fish per day have started or are close to starting production in Uganda. Investors are said to be ready to construct even more plants if permitted. So far most of these industries get their supplies of fresh fish from the artisanal fishery. Some have started to operate fish collection boats, and some would wish to invest in trawlers to fish for themselves. Most of the processed fish products are for the export market. A very small percentage goes to local hotels and to some homes with the purchasing power for these relatively expensive items. There is however a vigorous local market for the frames or carcasses left over from filleting operations, as can be verified by the many buyers who congregate outside of the plants whenever fish consignments are being processed. These leftovers can be smoked or cooked into sauces for market sale.
The export of fish from Lake Victoria-Uganda now covers all forms of traditionally processed Nile tilapia, Nile perch, and even mukene, and these are sent mainly to neighbouring countries. On the other hand, the export of industrially processed table fish products is to both neighbouring and distant markets. Even though a great deal of official encouragement has been given to the trade in fish as a way of earning Uganda convertible currency from a diversified export commodity base, the usefulness and desirability of fish export as currently conducted in the country requires urgent review.
It is now generally known that a large quantity of fresh fish from Uganda waters of Lake Victoria regularly crosses the border via the lake into Kenya, destined mainly for the sizeable fish processing industry in that country. Naturally there are no records of this trafficking, and the revenue in foreign exchange that it generates is completely lost to Uganda's national coffers. At the same time, there is the contrary argument which appeared in the Uganda press, to the effect that in some parts of the border zone such as Majanji, buyers of fish smuggled to Kenya provide the only avenue for local fisherfolk to sell their catch. Whatever the case, those engaged in this business appear to offer extremely competitive prices for Ugandan fish. Also, since fish only has to be transported in one direction, there is always the possibility of returning with backloads of various consumer goods from Kenya to sell ‘duty-free’ in Uganda markets (Kirema-Mukasa and Reynolds 1991).
A further point about export is that even though large quantities of smoked and sundried fish pass through the Busia customs post every week, there are no facilities to weigh the bulky and heavy loads. Thus their weights are often simply estimated, or probably underestimated. This introduces a curious loophole which likely leads to serious loss of export revenue.
The declared policy of the Government of Uganda regarding utilisation of fishery resources is to “encourage industrial fishing and the export of fish, provided it does not jeopardise the resource base and upset domestic supply” (MAIF 1989: 30). The situation with regard to industrial fishing has already been commented upon above. As for increasing fish export and the growth of industrial processing plant capacity which this would entail, there is genuine cause for concern not only about its negative effects on the local consumer, but on fisheries resources as well.
Sooner or later, the combined effect of the extremely active smuggling of fresh fish, the vibrant export trade in traditionally processed fish to neighbouring countries, plus the rapidly expanding industrial fish processing capability primarily for export, will almost certainly be to upset supplies of fish to local consumers. Given the status of fish as the least expensive and probably most important source of animal protein in Uganda (Kirema-Mukasa and Reynolds 1991), this is hardly a trivial prospect. Nor is it a remote prospect. For example, early this year during a period of particularly severe smuggling of fresh fish from northern Lake Victoria-Uganda, only about three tons of fresh fish arrived daily at the Masese fish landing in Jinja instead of the usual average of at least seven tons. For several weeks the fishmongers who supply up-country centres from Masese had to share the landed catch with one of the fish processing plants in Jinja town. The supply of fish from Masese to Mbale town 160 km away (via Budaka), and to parts of Iganga District and Pallisa sub-district, en-route, had to be suspended, to the obvious dismay of the local people who had become used to the availability of fresh Nile perch at their local evening markets.
The proliferation of fish processing plants in Uganda could contribute directly to the shortage of fish to the local consumer because their products are almost exclusively for the export market. If the seven plants currently operational or nearly so were to attain the estimated 120+ tonnes daily installed processing capacity for raw material, their annual fresh fish requirement would be at least 36,500 tonnes. This is fully 30% of the estimated 119,940 tonnes production from Lake Victoria-Uganda for 1990 (UFD Records; cf. Reynolds and Ssali 1990).
It is quite likely that the main impact of the current fish export drive on the Lake Victoria resource will be to encourage the capture of undersize fish using mainly beach seines and gillnets with small meshes. Such undersize fish would go to fill a widening demand in the local market created by the diversion of table fish to external markets. This has in fact been going on for years on Lake Kyoga and has resulted in the depletion of Nile perch stocks since 1984 (Twongo 1986; Marriott et al. 1988). Large numbers of seines are currently sweeping the beaches of the Uganda portion (and also the Kenya portion), of Lake Victoria capturing even the very small immature Nile perch to supply the demands of the ordinary Ugandan (and Kenyan), who must be able to eat. It is also of course true that preference for small (immature) fish is further induced by socio-economic factors particularly in rural communities. Many rural families can afford to buy several small fish as opposed to one or two of the more expensive larger fish. There has also recently been a marked increase in the exploitation and export of immature whole split sundried Nile tilapia through Busia (Ogutu-Ohwayo, personal communication; Reynolds and Odongkara 1989). Considering that this fish first matures at about 500 gm (50% maturity) in Lake Victoria and Kyoga, there is every reason to fear that recruitment overfishing is occurring, with its inevitable disastrous effects on stocks. This tendency has to be countered as a matter of the utmost urgency.
As was pointed out in the Introduction to this paper, fisheries management in order to be coherent must be set within a context of policy. And policy itself should be held open for timely review and revision in light of new information and perspectives which derive from the other component activities of the management process -- monitoring, research, and consultation between the agencies and interests involved with fisheries exploitation. The process as it has evolved in Uganda conforms to this ideal pattern to some extent, but still stands in need of considerable improvement. Specifically with regard to Lake Victoria, it would seem that the enunciation of Government policy, while strong on recognising the conventional expectations relating to “rational exploitation,” and “sustainability,” and while subscribing to the objective of “balanced development” between the provision of domestic supplies and the development of industry to produce for export and foreign exchange, is rather weak on the specifics of how all of this is to be accomplished. A broad statement of current Government fisheries policy is to be found in the Blueprint for Fisheries Development, a document that was prepared some years ago (MAIF 1983). General policy guidelines have been reaffirmed more recently, in the statement on Livestock and Fisheries Policy Towards the Year 2000 (MAIF 1989). Given the various developments and threats to the future well-being of the Lake fisheries and the local and commercial interests who depend upon them for sustenance and profit, it is high time that more concrete and clear-cut policy measures be formulated. On the basis of the present reading of the situation, as reviewed in this and the previous papers presented in the seminar, and until the state of the fisheries can be more accurately known through comprehensive stock assessment survey work, it is proposed that the following measures be adopted forthwith:
For mechanised trawling: Imposition of a ban on any further expansion of trawling activity in the Uganda sector of Lake Victoria, and diversion of current operations to strictly specified zones.
For processing plants: Restriction on the number of processing plants to those which are already operating, and a moratorium on the opening of any new plants. Restriction also on the creation of any new capacity within existing plants, such that, unless there is a reversal of the trend towards diminution in the domestic supply of fish, the production of fish for export purposes be confined to its present level -- presumably about 25% of the total estimated annual production from the Uganda portion of the Lake.
For sustained resource use: In order to discourage present tendencies towards recruitment overfishing in the artisanal sector, serious and meaningful attention must be given to:
extension/education campaigns within fisherfolk communities;
an overhaul of the legal framework through which management is supposed to be effected; and
the creditable enforcement of existing legal provisions and any new ones deemed appropriate to create.
These guidelines to action, subject to further consultations that should be undertaken without delay between the various parties and agencies involved in fisheries exploitation, research, extension, and administration, should be promulgated in an updated “Blueprint” for fisheries policy and planning.
The fisheries of Lake Victoria-Uganda, along with all the other fisheries of the country, are provided for under the Laws of Uganda through the Fish and Crocodiles Act (Chapter 228, Revised Edition, 1964) and the Trout Protection Act (Chapter 229, Revised Edition, 1964). The Law (Cap. 228, Sect. 43) empowers the Ministry concerned to gazette Statutory Instruments to strengthen or amend Fishing Rules for the better carrying out of the purposes of the Fish and Crocodiles Act. “Administrative Orders” are also issued on an ad hoc basis by the Ministry concerned either to encourage or discourage various activities by fisherfolk and traders, but these do not carry the force of law and are thus not actionable in court. In practice compliance to an Administrative Order can only be fostered through the application of indirect sanctions, like the refusal to renew someone's annual license.
Insofar as its legal framework is concerned, Lake Victoria is still largely an uncontrolled (open access) fishery, such that very few restrictions apply to canoes and fishing gear used of the Lake. Formerly the law prohibited gillnets with meshes less than 127 mm, but this was both widely unpopular and widely ignored, and was repealed in 1956. It seems likely that the commonly held misconception of the huge Lake's resources as being virtually inexhaustible played a role in this decision. Now, of course, it is well known that even the much more diverse and vast fisheries resources of the oceans can be depleted.
Removal of the restriction on net size left fisheries administrators with few other tools for direct control of fishing effort. The Law as presently constituted stipulates that the only prohibited gear for Lake Victoria are gillnets with a stretched length of greater than 100 yards, and a depth exceeding 30 meshes. There is however no limitation on the number of nets than can be used, when set separately. The Law also prohibits the use of seine nets of a length greater than 250 yards, unless specifically authorised by the Chief Fisheries Officer (the Commissioner for Fisheries) in writing, and only for specifically designated waters. There are no restrictions placed on the number of canoes allowed to fish Lake Victoria-Uganda. It is only required that each canoe be licensed by the Department of Fisheries.
Two additional legal restrictions affecting the Lake Victoria fisheries have been put in place since the 1964 revision of the Fish and Crocodiles Act. First, the Fish and Crocodiles (Amendment) Act of 1967 specifically forbade the use of any “lamp, light, flare or torch” for the capture of fish, adding these items to the list of techniques which are prohibited unless authorised in writing by the Chief Fisheries Officer. The list otherwise includes the use of “any poison, noxious substance, explosive or electrical device” (Cap. 228, Section 9, Amended 1967). This obviously has a bearing on the mukene fishery, normally conducted with the aid of lamps.
Secondly, by Statutory Instrument No. 15 of 1981, it was laid down that the legal minimum size in Lake Victoria for Nile tilapia be 280 mm (11 inches) and for Nile perch 440 mm (18 inches). Provision therefore exists in law to discourage the possession of small-sized fish of these species (Fish and Crocodiles (Immature Fish) Instrument, 1981).
In terms of the landing and disposal of fish, there are no special “authorised places” for Lake Victoria, such as are found with the gazetted landings in the controlled fisheries of Lakes George and Edward and the Kazinga Channel. However, in order to facilitate the collection of catch statistics, the Fishing Rules (No. 8, 1964) require that fish only be landed between sunrise and sunset on all national waters, as specified within the Schedule of Rules.
Although it is commonly supposed that the use of beach seines and fishing at night are prohibited in Lake Victoria-Uganda, such is not actually the case in law. Seines and night fishing, along with the use of cast nets and beating on the water to scare fish into nets, were only “prohibited” by Administrative Order issued in 1986. Any “offenders” against the Order thus cannot be taken to court, so that the prohibition is in fact an empty one in legal terms.
It is understood that steps are now being taken within the UFD to update and revise the Fish and Crocodiles Act so that it is more appropriate to contemporary circumstances (Orach-Meza, pers. comm. 1991). A statutory Instrument is being drafted which would specifically prohibit the use of beach seines unless specially authorised. Fairly sweeping proposals for other amendments to existing legislation and the Fishing Rules include tightening control of access through the extension of licensing requirements from the present coverage of vessels alone to include individual fishing operators and their gear (including gear operated from land or without a canoe). Further regulation of fishing pressure is proposed through measures to restrict operations of vessels to certain designated areas, to officially gazette certain sites as the only places where fish can be landed, and to establish limits on the maximum number of gear that any one vessel may carry. Other suggestions are to introduce closed seasons and closed fishing areas (specifically known fish breeding areas), and minimum sized regulations for other fish that are targets of subsistence and commercial exploitation including species of Bagrus, Clarias, and Barbus. It is additionally proposed that some legal provision be made to relate industrial processing plant capacity to sustained availability of resources, to strengthen the hand of Fisheries Officers in collecting necessary statistical information by imposing greater penalties for misinformation or obstruction, and to require industrial fishing concerns to file survey forms and monthly reports on landings and other aspects of their operations (Orach-Meza 1991).
In fine, the stage is now being set to thoroughly overhaul existing legislation and the Fishing Rules to achieve the following major effects:
A formal (legal) prohibition on beach seines.
Regulation of access through the extension of licensing requirements to cover individual operators and their gear.
Regulation of pressure through the establishment of local fishing areas, authorised landings, closed seasons, and closed fishing zones.
Limitations, so far unspecified, on expansion of processing plant capacity.
Enhancement of authority for fisheries officials to monitor the industry.
While these proposals are all appropriate in terms of revising what has become an obsolete legal foundation for fisheries management in the country generally, and in terms of filling out the kit of administrative tools needed to cope with the changed realities of Lake Victoria in particular, several observations should yet be made. To begin with, it must be emphasised that although these sorts of measures are long overdue and in principle should be implemented with urgency, full opportunity must still be availed for other industry interests (researchers, fisherfolk, commercial operators) to play a meaningful role in deliberating on and shaping the character of any restructured regulatory regime. Secondly, further steps remain to be considered in completing this all-important task. These include the following:
Formal prohibition on the use of cast nets, known to have damaging effects on the tilapia fishery.
Elaboration of a legal framework for the mukene fishery, so that, for example, the use of lamps for this particular case be clearly sanctioned, and the specifications for its gear spelled out. Small-meshed beach seines are sometimes used to harvest mukene, and these would presumably have to be outlawed under the general prohibition for such gear. Lift-nets, scoop nets, and purse-seine nets, on the other hand, as operated from vessels away from the shore, would presumably all be given a legally defined status.
Restoration of minimum mesh size to the old standard of 127 mm (5 inches) for Lake Victoria-Uganda, and the establishment of a minimum of 10 mm for mukene nets of any description.
Exploration of possibilities for linking the establishment of restricted or closed fishing zones with the establishment of aquatic reserve or conservation areas.
Extension of access control to include the local fish processing and trading sector. Legal measures governing small-scale processors and traders are vague as presently constituted, and licensing requirements need to be both enlarged in scope and made more rigorous insofar as provisions for their enforcement are concerned. Although some licensing of “wholesale” traders is carried out, the entire post-harvest sector is basically a free-access arena in practice.
Several interrelated questions must be addressed in considering the institutional context of management for the Lake Victoria fisheries. Which agencies are involved in management and in what capacities? How are their activities best co-ordinated? What is the basis of funding for management agencies and how efficiently are these resources utilised?
The present institutional arrangement broadly divides research and administration responibilities between UFFRO and the Fisheries Department, respectively. UFFRO's mandate is a legacy from the early EAFRO days, except that activities are now national rather than regional in scope. Thus UFFRO scientists are expected to conduct hydrobiological and fisheries research and to use the results to help guide management planning. The UFD serves as the sole administrator of policy including the tasks of ensuring that there is compliance with fisheries regulations, that statistics relating to catch, fishing effort, and marketing are collected and analysed, and that fisherfolk are provided with extension service support for the benefit of their enterprises and the industry in general. But the UFD is also involved in various research activities, e.g. fish technology and basic aquaculture research. Theoretically, UFD officers are also expected to carry out experimental and exploratory fishing, besides collecting other hydrobiological and ichthyological information from the field.
Present arrangements would appear deficient in several respects, and these will now be discussed in turn.
It is the authors' observation that far too little co-ordination and consultation takes place between UFFRO and the UFD -- the two principal fisheries agencies in the country. This weakness is noticeable in connection with policy decision-making, the organisation and conduct of research, administration, and information management, and in the general lack of professional contact between UFD and UFFRO personnel.
Fisheries policy-making for Lake Victoria and all other national water bodies seems to have been assumed as a more or less exclusive responsibility of the UFD. There is no compelling reason why this should be so; indeed, there is every reason why it should not be so. For instance, until very recently, UFFRO scientists were never involved in policy discussions regarding the industrialisation of fish processing on Lake Victoria-Uganda; and it is not uncommon for high level discussions including those on aspects of fisheries research to be held at policy formulation level without the participation of UFFRO. This omission seriously compromises the whole management process.
Perhaps the present state of affairs is due at least in part to the somewhat inconsistent way in which fisheries management interests have developed in the country. As has been shown in the earlier review, the establishment of a fisheries administration came comparatively late, and at first only as an adjunct to Game Department operations. For Lake Victoria specifically, both research and administrative functions have been overseen by a number of different agencies over the years. Even after the breakup of the East African Community, when management responsibilities for the fisheries were assumed by the relevant authorities in each of the three riparian countries, the state of political and economic uncertainty which was afflicting Uganda at the time made it extremely difficult for UFFRO and the UFD to even maintain some basic level of operation, far less to embark on a major effort to refashion approaches to management.
However, it would seem that an excellent opportunity now exists to accomplish this all-important task: conditions have stabilised and the country is rapidly recovering from its earlier setbacks; there is heightened interest in the fisheries and appreciation of their importance to the national economy and welfare; and the recent merger which combined the former Ministry of Agriculture, and Ministry of Animal Industry and Fisheries into one ministry (MAAIF), may offer new possibilities for institutional adjustment.
The starting point must be a serious self-examination on the part of all of those concerned with the fisheries and their future, guided perhaps by the following set of questions:
How should projects in fisheries research, primarily expected to generate information for the rational management of the resources of Lake Victoria and other national water bodies, be initiated?
How should research results reach the end-users of the fisheries? Do results actually reach the end-users at the present time?
How are long-term research strategies for the fisheries of Lake Victoria-Uganda planned/reviewed?
Are there adequate means to effect the co-ordination of views and other inputs relating to fisheries management, including its policy foundations, from the major interested parties?
The issues raised by these questions are crucial and warrant careful deliberation by all seminar participants. Several general observations can be made here to initiate this process of consideration and discussion.
First of all, there is clearly a need for policy formulation and review to be put on a more consultative and consensual footing, such that important inputs from researchers as well as administrators be formally accomodated. And other relevant agencies and parties to the management process must be similarly accomodated. These latter include fisherfolk and industrial investors, the parties directly involved with resource exploitation and use. They also include other relevant ministries, such as: Planning and Economic Development (export promotion); Commerce, Cooperatives and Marketing (export procedures); Finance (customs and income tax formalities); Industry and Technology (industrial processing); and Environmental Protection (wetlands concerns).
One mechanism for ensuring the formal accomodation of all agencies and parties with an interest in the management process could be a “National Fisheries Council” or “National Fisheries Policy Review Committee” type of arrangement, constituted as a standing body with a remit to meet on, say, an annual basis. Representives of the various fisheries interests would devote such occasions to a review of the state of the industry and to formulate such major policy and planning decisions as are warranted by developments.
Some provision should also be made for better contact and collaboration on a more routine basis between fisheries personnel operating in the various agencies and stations -- researchers, administrators and extension agents. This might be accomplished through a couple of different avenues. As was remarked upon above, some officers attached to the UFD are involved in research activities on aspects of fish technology and aquaculture. In the past this work has been carried out largely without any co-ordination or collaboration with UFFRO scientists. Thus national fisheries research overall has not been exactly a unitary effort. This is likely to change soon as the result of the ministerial reshuffling that led, among other things, to the merger of Agriculture with Animal Industry and Fisheries, thus creating MAAIF. The old Ministry of Agriculture was structured such that there was a Secretary for Research (SR) in addition to a Permanent Secretary. It appears that this arrangment will be retained in the new Ministry and that research establishments in livestock and fisheries will also report to the SR, who will likely oversee administration, finance, and programming responsibilities through deputies (Under-Secretaries?) assigned to crop, livestock, and fisheries “desks” respectively. On the face of it, this seems a promising development that should reduce the chance of duplication in fisheries research staff establishments, inputs, and activities.
But direct UFFRO-UFD linkages need to be encouraged as well. One means could be through joint “Fisheries Workshops” convened on a semi-annual or quarterly schedule. These fora would serve to give researchers and UFD Headquarters and field staff a chance to update one another on the progress of ongoing projects, problems that need to be resolved, and any other news and views that deserve attention. They would also serve as a way to exchange ideas about research needs and priorities for the fisheries sector. There are some precedents for this idea. A national fishery workshop was held in Jinja in 1986 which brought together UFD and UFFRO personnel for a general exchange of information and assessment of activity in progress. Also, between 1987 and 1989 monthly review meetings were held at UFD Headquarters, attended by all senior field staff in the Department but also by a representative from UFFRO. Both the earlier workshop and the regular monthly meetings were thought to be very worthwhile by those who participated. A point that should not be overlooked is that such meetings not only foster better communication at an inter-agency level, but at an intra-agency level as well. It is surprising how reserved and compartmentalised fellow colleagues can become in their dealings with one another as they pursue various assignments and projects. Such a situation is not conducive to effective teamwork for the best possible performance of resource stewardship -- a public trust.
A further means to promote communication could be through the establishment of a monthly or quarterly “Fisheries Newsletter” or “Notes and Records” type of publication. The idea would be to provide a forum through which research, administrative, and extension personnel as well as those representing other fisheries interests could learn about recent developments, new ideas, experiences in the field, upcoming events, and so on. Such a publication need not be elaborate and expensive to produce, but it would certainly serve a role in helping staff identify with their institutions and the industry they serve, and in helping to inform a broader audience about problems and prospects in the fisheries sector. In this connection it should be noted that commercial operators and would-be investors make a disappointingly poor effort to seek out information from readily available sources at UFFRO and the UFD. Many research and activity reports relating to the changing fisheries of Lake Victoria (and other national waters) have been written in the last few years, and these are bound to be of interest to a wider public.
One of the most severe constraints to management planning and the execution of management strategies is lack of funds. Limited budgets obviously restrict the ability of fisheries institutions to carry out their mandates. The problem is exacerbated by irregular and/or unreliable fund disbursement (Reynolds et al. 1989). The funding constraint is no doubt as old as the history of management activities on Lake Victoria and the other national water bodies. Many examples of the frustrations that it has caused over the years could be cited, but it suffices to mention only a few.
Although EAFRO was formed way back in 1949 with the study of the off-shore fishery resources of the Lake high on the priority agenda, lack of funds to purchase a suitable craft, hindered action in this area until the MV Ibis was purchased some 20 years later.
Lack of funds is often cited as responsible not only for scarcity of weighing scales (a vital tool in statistical data gathering) at many fishlandings of Lake Victoria-Uganda. It is also responsible for the inability by the law enforcement officers to mount effective patrols to check the illegal fishing and smuggling of fish across the long borders on Lake Victoria.
Quite often at UFFRO data collections on a set schedule has been abandoned due to irregularly released funding or to diversion of research funds to more pressing Government commitments. Exactly the same problem is encountered within the UFD. In both institutions employee morale is damaged by delayed payrolls and poor levels of remuneration and allowances.
Aside from the fact that all Government services have suffered especially in recent years because of the politico-economic disruptions that have plagued the country, it must be admitted that the national fisheries authorities could probably have mounted a stronger case for claiming a fair share of annual Government budgets on behalf of their agencies. But the fault lies too with the central budgeting authorities, who have consistently failed to recognise the crucial role fisheries play in the national economy. That a strong case for heftier budget allocations can be made is beyond doubt. For 1990/91, for example, the total operating budget granted to all the major fisheries agencies in the country, i.e. to the UFD, UFFRO, and the Fisheries Training Institute taken together, amounted to UShs. 104 million. Yet the industry was estimated to have produced financial returns to the country to the tune of UShs. 34 billion. Fisheries officers and researchers certainly have every reason to feel that their interests are being neglected to an almost shocking degree.
International donor agencies have often assisted the national fisheries authorities with grants and loans, and this has to some extent saved the situation. For instance the first research effort on Lake Victoria to be sustained for some years was the stock assessment project funded by UNDP and executed by FAO in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Similarly, current research effort in Lake Victoria-Uganda and on other lakes in the country to study the biology, ecology and population dynamics of the Nile perch is funded by a grant from IDRC - Canada. On the side of the UFD, there has been recent external aid in the form of the EEC-funded Artisanal Fisheries Rehabilitation Project and the UNDP-funded, FAO-executed FISHIN' Project. Externally funded projects are, however, usually specifically focussed and of limited duration (normally a few years at most). Often they are mounted without adequate provision for follow-up. It is a great pity, for example, that Ibis was not available to help monitor the fish stocks of Lake Victoria through the 1970s and 1980s when species diversity drastically declined. This was simply due to lack of maintenance and operating funds. Ibis continued to deteriorate until it ground to a halt. Thanks to financial input by the EEC, it should be rehabilitated soon for return service in the study of the fishery resources of Lake Victoria.
Sometimes foreign aid has a condition that includes recipient government contribution. This can jeopardise project success by making it dependent once again on the state of the national economy. It is for this reason suggested that loans or grants be negotiated such that they are self-sufficient in terms of cash, leaving the recipient government to contribute only in kind. This kind of financial arrangement would facilitate uninterrupted investigations on various aspects of fisheries management for the desired period of time and according to schedule.
A further way to ease the chronic problems of insufficient funding for management work on Lake Victoria-Uganda would be to turn to the fishery resources themselves. There is no doubt that the fishing industry on the Lake is currently doing lucrative business, much of it in foreign exchange. Increasing fees and ploughing back a fraction of the revenue collected from licensing and as market dues to improve local infrastructural facilities and to meet some administrative costs would not only go a long way towards alleviating routine funding problems, but would also increase the efficiency of revenue collection. This money could be administered by the Fisheries Department possibly at regional level. An additional modest source of revenue that should not be overlooked in this connection is the sports fishery. Nile perch especially have become the object of keen interest by angling enthusiasts, yet so far nothing has been done to revise outdate licensing fee schedules for sports fishing.
Funding for research presents a different set of problems, since it is relatively more expensive and requires a considerable foreign exchange component. This could perhaps be met in part from the fish export sector through a levy arrangement, as has already been suggested to industrial processors at the recent Fish Export and Quality Assurance Seminar convened in May 1991 by the Fisheries Department and sponsored by the Export Policy Analysis and Development Unit (EPADU) of the Ministry of Planning and Economic Development. The proposition appears quite viable and should be taken seriously by fisheries authorities and fish exporters alike. There should be no doubt that research is essential for a fishery resource under intense and still increasing exploitation pressure like that on Lake Victoria. The fact that the entire lacustrine ecosystem is undergoing changes greatly adds to the urgency for study. The direction and magnitude of these changes on the fishery resources can only be tracked by continuous and vigorous research and monitoring.
Closely related to funding is the issue of productivity, or the efficiency with which the management process utilises the available inputs. Several factors that tend to hinder productivity of management for the fisheries of Lake Victoria-Uganda need to be considered.
Combination of enforcement and extension functions: First there is the question of the contradictory nature of the roles that UFD personnel are expected to serve. On the one hand, as administrators they are supposed to be enforcement agents, i.e. to ensure compliance with fishery regulations. They are thus called upon to act strictly and do often take steps, in the interests of the fisheries, which tend to make them unpopular with fishers and traders. On the other hand the same personnel are supposed to serve as extension agents, and are thus expected to establish good rapport with fisherfolk so as to communicate effectively with them. These two roles appear fundamentally incompatible. Their combination reduces the productivity of the field staff because in practice they tend to concentrate on administration. Extension messages may thus fail to reach fisherfolk who in turn are deprived of a major avenue for discussing their ideas and problems with the other parties to fisheries management. This gap in communication is a very serious hindrance to the entire management process.
The co-operation of local operators and traders is absolutely vital if the goals of rational exploitation and quality control are to be achieved. But co-operation can hardly be ensured without an active and effective extension service. For example, very few fishing operators on Lake Victoria-Uganda know and appreciate the importance of fishing gear regulations. They tend to regard such regulations simply as UFD impositions on their free enterprise. Their compliance, such as it is, requires strict policing and will in any case break down as catch rates decline. A far better approach would entail the understanding and co-operation of local fishers as willing partners in gear use arrangements -- something that can only be encouraged through genuine extension efforts.
The modalities for effecting the separation fisheries law enforcement and extension in the field are a matter for further deliberation, though the creation of a special, uniformed fisheries enforcement arm of the Department would appear to be the most logical solution. This could be something to co-ordinate with the Uganda Police. Fisheries extension should then be accorded due emphasis in the administrative hierarchy of the Fisheries Department, and in courses at the Fisheries Training Institute.
Problems of centralisation, workers' morale, and staffing: Although the administration of the Fisheries Department is broken down into Regions and Districts, most administrative decisions and directives originate from Entebbe. Similarly the chain of communication from say Fisheries Assistants posted at landings to the office of the Commissioner where decisions are taken is rather too long, having to pass through three stages (i.e. Assistant Fisheries Development Officer - District Fisheries Officer - Regional Fisheries Officer) to reach Entebbe. These two factors are likely to render communication inefficient, stifle initiative and hence delay action. Confusion may arise where decisions made at the top (such as issuing certain fishmongers' licences) become effective at the local level before information about the decision filters through to the local administrators.
A further point here is that successful execution of programmes is quite often influenced by workers' morale which in turn tends to be linked to the levels of renumeration and work-related allowances, opportunities availed for career development or training courses, and the quality and nature of supervision. For instance, Fisheries Assistants at remote postings on Lake Victoria who do not get their salaries regularly and spend years without seeing their superiors are likely to be more apathetic and unproductive on duty than those who, though still subject to delayed payment of salary, at least receive regular visits from colleagues to explain problems relating to pay disbursement and to give encouragement and guidance.
At the same time, it seems likely that there are problems of inadequate deployment and over-staffing within the various national fisheries institutions and stations. Staff who have not been deployed to posts for which they have been trained and where they are needed, as well as those who are simply superfluous to requirements, have the same effect as staff who are simply unproductive: they all use up scarce funding resources, obviously without making meaningful contributions to the collective management effort. Job tenure should be linked far more closely than it is at present to performance and duty commitment. Such an emphasis would foster higher levels of staff efficiency and would help free up resources to secure, among other things, adequate deployment of personnel and the availability of suitable levels of service-related allowances.
The various proposals for action made in the course of the preceding discussion of the institutional context of management may be summarised in the following way.
For better co-ordination and consultation between agencies:
Ensure that policy formulation and review is conducted on a more consultative and consensual basis, such that important inputs from researchers and other relevant agecies and parties to the management process as well as administrators be formally accomodated. Therefore constitute a national standing body to meet for example on an annual basis, with the mandate to evaluate the state of the fisheries industry and to formulate such major policy and planning decisions as are warranted by developments.
Support the move to have all fisheries researchers, whether UFFRO- or UFD-based, report to the Secretary for Research under the new MAAIF structure, in order to make more effective use of research staff establishments, inputs, and activities.
Promote better direct UFFRO-UFD linkages by convening joint ‘Fisheries Workshops’ on a semi-annual or quarterly schedule.
Also promote communication between all fisheries personnel and fisheries-related agencies and parties through a modest newsletter type of publication.
For Funding:
Campaign for more meaningful annual budget allocations from the Central Government, proportional to fisheries real contributions to the national economy and nutritional welfare.
Negotiate loans or grants in such a way that the projects they support are self-sufficient in terms of cash, leaving the recipient government to contribute only in kind, thus avoiding the almost inevitable delays that dependence on host country funds involves.
Seek an increase in revenue for direct support of fisheries institutions and fisheries-related infrastructure development through raising fees for licensing and market dues, with the justification that Lake Victoria-Uganda has been generating rather immense rents for fisherfolk over the last several years. Consider also possibilities for raising modest amounts of revenue from the sports fishery. Develop a system through which the additional revenue could be more readily accessible at the district level for its intended purposes.
Also develop a scheme to ensure the more adequate funding of research, through a levy arrangement with the fish export sector.
For enhanced management productivity:
Separate the functions of fisheries law enforcement and fisheries extension as conducted by field officers, by setting up a special enforcement arm within the UFD.
Renew the dedication to effective fisheries extension service and strengthen this service in the administrative hierarchy of the UFD and in courses at the Fisheries Training Institute.
For better staff performance:
Devolve greater authority to the Regional and District levels of administration, thereby shortening lines of communication, fostering more initiative among out-posted staff, and reducing the delay in implementing administrative measures.
Provide far higher levels of support in terms of work-related allowances and opportunities for career development/training courses, and in terms of backstopping by supervisory staff, for personnel posted in the field.
Consider ways and means of paring back on superfluous staff within the fisheries administrative hiararchy, using as criteria job performance and dedication to duty. At the same time, expedite efforts to correct the inadequate deployment of staff who are currently unable to fill the posts for which they are intended.
Lake Victoria is a shared resource base administered by Tanzania (49%), Uganda (45%), and Kenya (6%). Clearly its fisheries must depend crucially on close co-operation between the three East African states for their maintenance and future development. This imperative has long been recognised by the many administrators and researchers who have been associated with the Lake in one way or another from the time of Graham's early study in the 1920s. Lakewide co-ordination was highlighted on the research side during the era of the East African Fisheries Research Organisation and its successor, the East African Freshwater Fisheries Research Organisation, and on the administration side during the time of the Lake Victoria Fisheries Service and the Lake Victoria Fisheries Commission. Within the last decade, it has been the underlying theme of the CIFA (Committee on Inland Fisheries for Africa) Sub-Committee for the Development and Management of the Fisheries of Lake Victoria. The Sub-Committee convenes every two years with the FAO serving as the secretariat. At each meeting delegates from the fisheries authorities of the riparian states have the opportunity to update one another on developments within their respective territorial sectors, to consider pertinent biological and socio-economic issues, and to agree through resolutions on measures for collective action. The CIFA meetings might be faulted in that the resolutions they yield are not followed up with enough vigour. Yet they are of the utmost importance as avenues for deliberation and the creation of some consensus on matters of mutual interest. Rather than dwell on the shortcomings, every effort should be made by the three member states to strengthen the role of these essential fora.
On another front, it is encouraging that practical steps towards lakewide co-ordination of research work are now being taken through the EEC-funded Lake Victoria Regional Project. This was alluded to earlier when mention was made of work being undertaken to rehabilitate the MV Ibis at UFFRO. Similar work is underway at the other national fisheries research stations on the Lake -- the Kenya Marine and Freshwater Researh Institute at Kisumu and the Tanzania Fisheries Research Institute at Nyegezi (Mwanza). When preparations are complete, it is intended to conduct a comprehensive stock assessment of the Lake -- the first since the major EAFFRO-UNDP/FAO effort mounted some thirty years ago.
It may also be observed that the present seminar is itself a promotion of regional integration of purpose and practice vis-a-vis the Lake fisheries, since it is one of three national meetings being convened in the respective riparian states at the initiative of the FAO/UNDP Inland Fisheries Project (IFIP) based in Bujumbura. The national meetings are intended to prepare the ground for a tripartite seminar to be held in the near future, and IFIP is certainly to be commended for putting all of these arrangements in train.
As far as the present seminar is concerned, it is recommended here that strong endorsement be given to the view that the regional context of the management process be cultivated and otherwise encouraged as much as possible. Thus, as a general proposition, it is submitted that:
Uganda fisheries agencies, in seeking closer co-ordination and collaboration between their own policy-making, research, administration, and extension activities, should at the same time seek to harmonise such activities with those of the other states riparian to Lake Victoria. This can best be done through full commitment to and participation in the CIFA Sub-Committee for the Lake and equally to the other projects now being implemented to foster regional orientations towards management of the resource.
This paper has tried to draw together a number of salient points raised in the previous seminar presentations and in other contexts pertaining to management issues, options, and strategies for the management of the Lake Victoria-Uganda fisheries. Even though the discussion has been fairly extensive, much remains to be considered. Perhaps enough has been said, however, to set the stage for the final working sessions of the seminar that are intended to debate and draft out resolutions for eventual deliberation by all participants.
It has been stressed that management should be regarded as a process that involves a number of interacting components. It is not only about enforcement and extension; there are also the crucial components of monitoring and research, and consultation between the various parties involved in resource stewardship and exploitation. And all of these components are structured by and at the same time feed back into a code of policy.
Keeping this orientation in mind, and after a review of the historical background of fisheries research, administration, and exploitation for Lake Victoria, and of current management issues in terms of the resource base and its use and users, options and strategies were considered with reference to their multiple contexts. A number of proposals were also set forward.
In fine, with regard to the context of policy, it was proposed that a new “blueprint” for fisheries development be compiled which should include specific provisions restricting mechanised trawling and industrial processing plant expansion, and encouraging sustained resource use through more effective extension work and improved laws and enforcement mechanisms. It was recognised that steps are now being taken to provide a more adequate legal context for management, but that further provisions governing gear and effort are called for. In terms of the institutional context, rather extensive improvements were identified as necessary to achieve adequate levels of co-ordination and consultation between national fisheries research and administrative-extension agencies, and of the funding and staff productivity elements that are the critical driving forces behind the routine tasks of management. Last but of equal importance, taking into account the shared nature of Lake Victoria fisheries resources, it was proposed that the regional context of management must be duly recognised and every effort therefore made to encourage co-operation between the three riparian states.
