Training and Extension in
Aquaculture Health Management in the Asia-Pacific:
Present Status and Future Requirements

Kamonporn Tonguthai

Aquatic Animal Health Research Institute
Directorate General for Fisheries
Kasetsart University Campus
Jatujak, Bangkok 10900
Thailand

Tonguthai, K. 1996. Training and extension in aquaculture health management in the Asia-Pacific: present status and future requirements. In Health Management in Asian Aquaculture. Proceedings of the Regional Expert Consultation on Aquaculture Health Management in Asia and the Pacific. R.P. Subasinghe, J.R. Arthur & M. Shariff (eds.), p. 60– 74. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No. 360, Rome, FAO. 142 p.

Abstract

Training and extension are an important components of a strategic program for health management in aquaculture. Considering the huge contribution made by Asia to the global aquaculture production and the importance of continuing production to meet future demands, Asian fish health personnel must be adequately trained in order to provide effective extension services to aquaculturists. Effective extension of sound fish health practices to the farmers themselves is also essential, so that they will be trained to manage their operations using methods which will reduce the likelihood of outbreaks of disease. This paper summarizes the present status of fish health training and extension in the Asia-Pacific and makes recommendations for the future.

INTRODUCTION

It is undoubtedly true that total world fisheries production from aquaculture is increasing. Approximately 84% of world aquaculture production comes from Asia (Nash and Kensler, 1990). Aquaculture is expanding along the lines of more intensive culture practices, with disease problems appearing to coincide with these practices. At present, the economic importance of aquatic animal disease control and health management is well recognized.

To develop better culture practices and reduce problems due to disease, advanced technology should be introduced. The techniques developed for dealing with cultured species in one country can be applied to similar species in other countries, especially in the same region. The most effective means of technology transfer is through training.

The governments of various countries in the Asia-Pacific Region realize the need to develop technology and to increase knowledge of aquatic animal health to achieve sustainable aquaculture. More institutes are now capable of conducting advanced research, and the number of experts in the various fields of fish disease is increasing. As a result of this progress, the present situation provides great possibilities for organizing various types of training within the region. This may lead to better cooperation among the countries.

TRAINING NEEDS IN AQUACULTURE HEALTH MANAGEMENT IN THE ASIA-PACIFIC REGION

Information on training and extension presented in this paper is based on the four following sources:

• ADB/NACA. 1991. Fish Health Management in the Asia-Pacific Region. Report on a Regional Study and Workshop on Fish Disease and Fish Health Management. ADB Agricult. Dep. Rep. Ser. No 1. Network of Aquaculture Centres in the Asia-Pacific Region, Bangkok.

• Anon. 1993. Priorities for disease research: towards minimizing losses from diseases in Asian Aquaculture. Asian Fish. Soc., Fish Health Sect. Newsletter 4(2): 4–5, 10 p.

• Tonguthai, K., S. Chinabut and I.H. Macrae. 1995. Regional institutional survey, April-May 1995. South East Asia Aquatic Disease Control Project, Aquatic Animal Health Research Institute (AAHRI), Bangkok, 10 p.

• U Khin Maung Aye and P. B. Bueno. 1994. An overview of fisheries development in Myanmar with special reference to opportunities for TCDC assistance, 3–7 December 1994. TCDC, Network of Aquaculture Centers in the Asia-Pacific Region, 12 p.

The present situation indicates that the services of fisheries experts have increased in the institutes in the Asia-Pacific Region. Experts offer their services mainly on a short-term basis. In addition, “on the job” or group training sessions are also organized depending on the experience of the participants. Among the 23 countries which participated in the meeting in Myanmar in December, 1994, at least six can offer services in health management (about 12 institutes) (see Table 1).

The ADB/NACA report (ADB/NACA, 1991) indicates that the level of capability in fish health management in the Asia-Pacific Region is extremely inadequate but also quite variable. The development of this expertise relies on the training of staff and the provision of facilities and must take into account the individual problems within each country. Virology has been identified as a new field for most laboratories in developing countries in the Asia-Pacific Region. At present, where shrimps have become a major species for culture, viruses appear to be one of the major pathogens causing shrimp disease. Knowledge concerning shrimp viruses, therefore, has developed dramatically in some institutes.

The number of institutes in the Asia-Pacific Region involved in fish disease control and fish health management in 1990 is given in Appendix I of ADB/NACA (1991). Institutes are also categorized according to level of expertise. However, if this is compared with the regional survey of the AADCP project conducted in 1995 (Tonguthai et al., 1995), some institutes can now be upgraded, for example, the Fisheries Research Institute (FRI) and Bangladesh Agricultural University (BAU) in Bangladesh, and the Faculty of Fisheries, Kasetsart University, Thailand. Progress in the upgrading of facilities can also be seen in other institutes, for example, the Brackishwater Aquaculture Development Centre (Jepara), the Research Institute for Freshwater Fisheries (Bogor) and the Fisheries Research Institute No. 1 (Hanoi). Expertise will not improve unless the training of staff is developed. Training and extension, therefore, are still in great demand. Even where expert services are offered by various institutes, the expertise seems to be limited to particular fields. The number of experts from each institute is also limited and may not be sufficient to provide service to their own countries.

Table 2 provides a summary of the needs for assistance in aquatic animal health management, and is based on information obtained from the meeting in Myanmar in 1994 (U Khin Maung Aye and Bueno, 1994).

The ADB/NACA report (ADB/NACA, 1991; see Appendix I) on fish health management institutes in the Asia-Pacific Region involved in research, diagnosis and extension appears to be comprehensive. It indicates that 23 of the 43 institutes involved in fisheries are concerned with fish disease control. In some, the level of expertise is very low. Therefore, there is a high demand for assistance in this field.

FUTURE REQUIREMENTS FOR TRAINING IN AQUACULTURE HEALTH MANAGEMENT

In summary, the greatest need for assistance by the 23 countries is in the field of shrimp diseases. It is clear that most future training should be in this field. However, basic training in fish disease diagnosis is still needed in some countries.

In intensive shrimp culture practice, management seems to play a major role in the disease problem. Knowledge of the diseases themselves may not always prevent the occurrence of the disease. Shrimp health management should be included in the training program.

There are quite a few countries in the Asia-Pacific Region where intensive shrimp culture is not fully developed and fish culture is more intensive. Shrimp health management, therefore, is not required in the near future in these countries.

The results of the regional survey carried out by the AADCP (Tonguthai et al., 1995) in eight participating countries (Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, Bangladesh and Thailand) indicate that there have been improvements in laboratory facilities in all eight countries (but not all institutes) during the past four to five years. The other countries in the Asia-Pacific Region (except Laos and Cambodia) probably show similar trends. However, the number of trained staff is still limited, and there is, therefore, an urgent need to upgrade the existing staff who are actively involved in aquatic animal health. Training within the region is cost effective. Because fish disease problems are similar in many countries, the knowledge gained from training can easily be transferred from one country to another. In some specific fields where expertise is lacking in the region, it may be possible to make use of outside experts.

In any developing country, training organized at an international level relies mainly on donor funding. Without this support, the chances of setting up training programs are very slim, so donor agencies must be made to recognize the economic importance of fish health management to aquaculture sustainability, and funding should be allocated for training in this field.

Academic training programs are also needed. Unfortunately there are very few institutes offering training in fish health at a degree level. To my knowledge only on university in Southeast Asia, the Universiti Pertanian Malaysia (Faculty of Fisheries and Marine Science) offers post-graduate training in tropical fish health. There are quite a few universities in the Asia-Pacific Region with Faculties of Fisheries whose courses include aquaculture and fish disease specialities. It is necessary to encourage these universities to establish training programs in fish health or to include advanced courses in fish disease control and health management in their programs.

REFERENCES

ADB/NACA, 1991. Fish Health Management in the Asia-Pacific Region. Report on a Regional Study and Workshop on Fish Disease and Fish Health Management. ADB Agricult. Dep. Rep. Ser. No 1. Network of Aquaculture Centres in the Asia-Pacific Region, Bangkok.

Nash, C.E., and C.B. Kensler, 1990. A global overview of aquaculture production in 1987. World Aquacult. 21: 104–112.

Tonguthai, K., S. Chinabut and I.H. Macrae, 1995. Regional institutional survey, April-May 1995. South East Asia Aquatic Disease Control Project, Aquatic Animal Health Research Institute (AAHRI), Bangkok, 10 p.

U Khin Maung Aye and P.B. Bueno. 1994. An overview of fisheries development in Myanmar with special reference to opportunities for TCDC assistance, 3–7 December 1994. TCDC, Network of Aquaculture Centers in the Asia-Pacific Region, 12 p.

¹ OJ = on-the-job training, G = group training, ST = short-term visits by experts,Dg = Degree level academic training.

¹OJ = on-the-job training, G = group training, ST = short-term visits by experts, Dg =Degree level academic training.

APPENDIX I

INSTITUTES IN ASIA INVOLVED IN RESEARCH, DIAGNOSIS OR EXTENSION ON FISH DISEASES AND FISH HEALTH MANAGEMENT

(modified from ADB/NACA. 1991)

¹ C = crustaceans (mainly penaeid shrimps), FF = freshwater finfishes, M = molluscs,MF = marine finfishes, SW = seaweeds.
² * _ ** = major upgrading needed,
*** = upgrading needed in specialist areas
****_***** = good all-round facilities