APPENDIX 1: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

Mr. John Balarin
Aquaculture and Fisheries Advisor
PO Box 1871
Harare, ZIMBABWE
tel/fax: +263 4 885434

Mr. Moises Balate
Department of Fish Culture
C.P. 68
Chimoio, MOZAMBIQUE
fax: +258 51 23256

Mr. Wellington Binali
Fisheries Unit, AGRITEX
PO Box CY 639, Causeway
Harare, ZIMBABWE
tel: +263 4 753623

Dr. Randall Brummett
ICLARM Africa Aquaculture Project
PO Box 229
Zomba, MALAWI
tel: +265 531274
fax: +265 522733
email: [email protected]

Mr. Cleopher Bweupe
Department of Fisheries
PO Box 410055
Kasama, ZAMBIA
tel: +260 4 221869
fax: +260 4 221410

Mr. David Campbell
Small Scale Fish Farming in the Lake Basin Area
KEN/86/027
PO Box 1516
Kisumu, KENYA
tel/fax: +254 35 21396

Ms. Maria do Carmo Carrilho
FAO/ALCOM
C.P. 68
Chimoio, MOZAMBIQUE
tel: +258 51 23373/4
fax: +258 51 23256

Mr. Fredson Chikafumbwa
National Aquaculture Centre
Malawi Fisheries Department
PO Box 206, Zomba, MALAWI
tel: +265 531274
fax: +265 522397

Mr. Sloans Chimatiro
National Aquaculture Centre
Malawi Fisheries Department
PO Box 206, Zomba, MALAWI
tel: +265 531274
fax: +265 522397
email: [email protected]

Mr. C. Chimfwembe
Provincial Agricultural Officer
PO Box 510046
Chipata, ZAMBIA
tel: +260 62 21433/21747

Mr. Martin Fakubze
Ministry of Agriculture & Cooperatives
PO Box 162
Mbabane, SWAZILAND
tel: +268 42731 (194)
fax: +268 44700

Mr. Boyd Haight
FAO/ALCOM
PO Box 3730
Harare, ZIMBABWE
tel: +263 4 724985
fax: +263 4 703479
email: [email protected]

Mr. O. Kajitanus
c/o ALCOM
PO Box 148
Morogoro, TANZANIA
fax: +255 56 4088
email: [email protected]

Mr. Emanuel Kaunda
Dept of Animal Science
Bunda College of Agriculture
PO Box 219, Lilongwe, MALAWI
tel: +265 277222
fax: +265 277403
email: [email protected]

Mr. G. Kazako
Malawi Broadcasting Corporation
PO Box 206
Zomba, MALAWI
tel: +265 522888
fax: +265 522397

Dr. Uwe Lohmeyer
Division 422, GTZ
PO Box 5180
Eschborn, GERMANY
fax: +49 6196 79 6103

Mr. Colin MacMillan
University of Zululand
Private Bag X1001
Kwadlangezwa 3886, SOUTH AFRICA
tel: +27-351-93911 x2625
fax: +27-351-93489
email: [email protected]

Mr. Charles Maguswi
Assistant Director
Department of Fisheries
PO Box 350100
Chilanga, ZAMBIA
tel/fax: +260 1 278418

Mr. Luciao Majone
MARRP
C.P. 490
Chimoio, MOZAMBIQUE
tel: +258 51 22059
fax: +258 51 23430

Mr. Manuel Martinez
FAO/FIRI
via delle Terme di Caracalla
00100 Rome, ITALY
tel: +39 6 5225 3470
fax: +39 6 5225 3020
email: [email protected]

Mr. Henk van der Mheen
FAO/ALCOM
PO Box 3730
Harare, ZIMBABWE
tel: +263 4 724985
fax: +263 4 703479
email: [email protected]

Mr. Emanuel Mkenda
Fish Farming Project
PO Box 1477
Arusha, TANZANIA
email: [email protected]

Mr. Ineelo Mosie
Ministry of Agriculture
Private Bag 003
Gaborone, BOTSWANA
tel: +267 350502
fax: +267 356027

Mr. Joseph Mutale
Provincial Fish Culturist
PO Box 510738
Chipata, ZAMBIA
tel: +260 62 22755
fax: +260 62 22706

Ms. Gertrude Ngenda
Consultant Socio-economist
Private Bag CII13
Lusaka, ZAMBIA
tel: +260 1 283259/222883
fax: +260 1 222883/227184
email: [email protected]

Mr. A. Ngulu
Rural Development Centre
PO Box 1486
Oshakati, NAMIBIA
tel: +264 6751 30282
fax: +264 6751 30281

Dr. Tim Ngwira
Dept of Animal Science
Bunda College of Agriculture
PO Box 219
Lilongwe, MALAWI
fax: +265 277403

Mr. Henrik Nilsson
FAO/ALCOM
National Aquaculture Centre
PO Box 206
Zomba, MALAWI
fax: +265 522397
email: [email protected]

Mr. Edward Nsiku
SADC IFSTCU
PO Box 593
Lilongwe, MALAWI
tel: +265 722299
fax: +265 721117

Dr. Uwe Scholtz
MAGFAD
PO Box 206
Zomba, MALAWI
tel: +265 522888
fax: +265 522397

Mr. Stephen Slippers
University of Zululand
Private Bag X1001
Kwadlangezwa 3886, SOUTH AFRICA
tel: +27-351-93911
fax: +27-351-93489/93735
email: [email protected]

Mr. Mulane Tsie
Fisheries Section
Ministry of Agriculture
Private Bag A82
Maseru, LESOTHO
tel: +266 322444

Ms. K. Veverica
Fisheries Department
Auburn University
AL 36849, USA
tel: +1 334 844-4786
fax: +1 334 844-9208
email: [email protected]

Mr. Kitojo Wetengere
FAO/ALCOM
PO Box 172
Morogoro, TANZANIA
fax: +255 56 4088
email: [email protected]

Mr. Olaf Weyl
MARRP
C.P. 490
Chimoio, MOZAMBIQUE
tel: +258 51 22059
fax: +258 51 23430

Mr. Shlomo Yerushalm
Embassy of Isreal
PO Box 146
Mbabane, SWAZILAND
tel: +268 42626/43439
fax: +268 45857

Ms. Margaret Zunguze
FAO/ALCOM
PO Box 3730
Harare, ZIMBABWE
tel: +263 4 724985
fax: +263 4 703479
email: [email protected]

APPENDIX 2: PROGRAMME

Sunday 19 November

Monday 20 November

Tuesday 21 November

Wednesday, 22 November

Thursday, 23 November

Friday, 23 November

APPENDIX 3: LIST OF DOCUMENTS

APPENDIX 4: EXTENDED ABSTRACTS

Why select a target group?

A target group can be defined as a social group of any size with basic common socio-economic characteristics, which an extension service can be aimed at.

Selection of target groups for an extension service is part of the entire approach and philosophy of the development policy. Such a selection - or at least a conscious reflection who the extension service is aiming at - is basic for the successful execution of an extension project. Without this, the extension message will treat the entire population as one big unstratified group of people and not take into consideration the existence of different levels of capability and of economic performance.

Information requirements

Rural populations in Southern Africa are in general characterized by deriving their livelihood from farming, and for the majority by having limited land - at least limited land suitable for fish farming - and by being relatively poor. These small scale farmers are the target group of ALCOMs' activities. It is acknowledged that ‘small scale farmers’ is a very big and broad target group but this is as the same time seen as a strength of the Programme, as it in principle includes the vast majority of the population who has nutritional and income deficits.

In practice, however, one has to realize that project areas obviously have to be selected where the agro-climatic conditions can support the fish farming activity, i.e. where rain is sufficient throughout the year and the soil is suitable for pond construction. This leads to an exclusion of many small scale farmers living in drier areas. These population groups have to depend on other activities to create or rather diversify their income generating and protein providing activities.

Before designing any extension message, these small scale farmers have to be described in detail for the specific project area. Firstly, such a description should include economic, social, political, cultural, and gender structures on community and/or household level. Secondly, crop patterns, agricultural calendars and other farming related issues should be discovered. Finally, an analysis of the present and previous extension services given in the area and their effects on their target groups can assist the new project in avoiding pitfalls by building on experience and achievements learned.

Extension messages

Fish farming can only be sustained in the long run if it proves to be advantageous to the other farming activities with which it is competing. It should be mentioned, however, that there might be other reasons - especially in the short run - than strictly economical for adopting a new farming activity.

A special vulnerable group among the small scale farmers are women and youth, as they in general have less access to nutrients and income produced or generated by the household. Traditionally, these have not been reached by extension services targeting farmers as one group. This has a serious consequence in the frequent cases where the actual pond manager is the wife and/or children in the household.

Female headed households usually belongs to the poorest sections of the rural population. To target this group, the extension message should be adapted to their special economic and social condition.

Extension medium

As women in general - and especially rural women - are less literate than men, written extension materials should avoid long texts and to a larger extent use other channels like drawings, drama and slide or video shows. In some cases where customs demands it, a better result is achieved when rural women are approached by extension agents of their own sex. However, as there might be a lack of female extension agents, equally stress should be given to gender sensitivity in training of extension agents in general.

Other, more well-to-do farmers, who have spend more years in the school system are able to perceive extension messages through written materials and will often demand more technically advanced advice.

Conclusions

A clear identification of the target group of a given extension service is important in order to develop a proper extension package. A thorough description of various aspect of the farming system and related economic, social, etc. issues helps the understanding of the target groups conditions and capability. This should be reflected in the extension messages given, e.g. the management level suggested. Finally, the medium used extending the messages should take into consideration which media gives the best understanding by the target group.

Overview of the available fish culture technologies

Fish culture systems can be classified on the basis of their specific objectives. The fish culture technologies can be grouped on the basis of fish propagation, fingerling or table fish production.

An other way to group the available fish culture technologies is more complex, however it can be done on the basis of the following considerations. Growth, as well as the propagation require appropriate nutrition and suitable water quality. In a simplified form:

• Proper nutrition means that the fish receive all the inorganic and organic materials through their diet, which are required for maintaining their life, providing their growth and producing eggs and milt for their propagation.
• Proper water quality means that the main physical and chemical qualities of the water meet with the demand of the fish.

Fish culture technologies have to concentrate on satisfying the demand of the selected fish species in general and of the targeted age group in particular, for both nutrition and water quality. The more and the better these demand are satisfied, the better fish production results can be achieved. Fish culture techniques can be classified on the bases on how the necessary nutrition and water quality are provided for the fish. Accordingly there are 2 main types of fish culture; pond and tank cultures on one side, and pen and cage cultures, which are adaptions to natural water systems. These systems can be further divided based on the intensity of the management, from extensive with no feeding and fertilizing to intensive feeding systems with water quality control.

Conclusions

Super intensive fish culture technologies like tank and cage cultures do not offer a wide range of options as far as inputs are concerned. This technologies are based on a rigorously complied biologically 100% balanced diet, as well as on techniques how to provide and maintain the required water quality. Application of such technologies mainly depends and will always depend on wether it is profitable or not to produce the selected fish species in these systems.

Creating fish pens on the edge of natural waters will always be a feasible option if people of this areas are aware of basic fish culture knowledge and in addition will protect their fish stock from predators.

Pond culture offers the most advantages and the widest range of choices of selecting the most suitable level of technology, giving chance for all type of farmers to start and practice fish culture successfully. The small holder farmers are those who may provide fish for the local consumption of remote rural areas of Africa, because the natural waters are usually empty due to over-fishing and transport is infrequent which does not allow the movement neither of local people, nor the supply of food like fish. Therefore an efficient fish culture extension system which penetrates into the remote areas is very important in order to introduce, support and develop fish culture activities.

Agriculture extension

Many definitions of agriculture extension exist, and these definitions depend on what are the most important elements as perceived by the author. These definitions also change over time with the developments of new extension theories and approaches. Van den Ban and Hawkins define extension as “the conscious communication of information to help people form sound opinions and make good decisions”.

Agriculture extension can not be defined very specific, and likewise the extension service has many roles. Among these roles are the following:

• provision of information to farmers to help them make better decisions;
• assisting farmers, in participation with the farmers, in solving particular problems as perceived by them;
• transferring new ideas and technologies from the developers to the ultimate users;
• training of farmers in specific fields related to agricultural production.

Extension structures in Zambia

In Zambia the Department of Agriculture is highly decentralized. The department has staff at provincial, district, block and camp level. The unit at village level is the camp. At camp level the target group participates through village extension groups and soil conservation and agroforestry committees. Many other organisations and government institutes make use of this set up to reach their target groups in remote areas. The agriculture extension set up has also been used to introduce the idea of fish farming to small scale farmers in Eastern Province of Zambia.

The Department of Fisheries is not very decentralized and has been unable to provide adequate aquaculture extension to the fast growing number of fish farmers. At Provincial level arrangements between the two departments have been made for collaboration.

Farming systems

Eastern Province of Zambia is a predominant agricultural province. Most farmers grow crops, keep animals, and are engaged in a mixed farming system. Especially since the market liberalisation the agriculture extension is laying emphasis on diversification of the farming systems. This diversification provides a good environment for fish farming.

Extension approach

The Department of Agriculture has adopted an extension approach based on the Training and Visit system. Specialists of various fields meet to discuss the extension messages to be included in the extension bulletin. These monthly bulletins are send to district and block meetings to inform the camp extension officers, who will bring the messages to the village extension groups. The messages are not only determined by the specialists, but through participatory appraisals the needs of the farmers are identified and included in the bulletins.

Other extension methods used are:

• group training: both residential and mobile courses are given;
• drama performances;
• group meetings through the village extension groups;
• field days;
• agricultural shows.

Conclusion

Agriculture extension is very important for the small scale farmer in Eastern Province. The Department of Agriculture is very decentralized in the whole country. This provides an enabling environment for collaboration with other departments which are not decentralized. It is therefore imperative to use the existing structure in collaboration to disseminate fish farming messages down to grassroots level. The farming systems in Zambia have diversified over the last few years. Agriculture extension therefore has to advice farmers on many different crops. Fish is one of these crops.

The training of both fisheries and agricultural personnel should be more adapted to the present needs of extension in the field. Extension skills, communication skills and planning and socio-economic aspects of extension as well as appropriate culture techniques should become part of the syllabus.

Introduction

Increasing population pressure in sub Saharan Africa has led to over utilization of land and a subsequent decline in actual and potential agriculture productivity. Putting more land under cultivation will only exacerbate the decline of environmental quality which is already occurring. Increasing intensity of production systems is therefore essential. However, classical methods of technology development and transfer have generally failed. New methods for increasing the efficiency, productivity and sustainability of smallholdings must be found. Farmer-led participatory research has been fused with methods of rapid rural appraisal to identify constraints to technology adoption and give farmers the intellectual tools with which to overcome them.

Resource flow diagramming

Integrated resource management (IRM) enhances production, stabilizes output and increases profitability by reducing waste and reducing extractive land husbandry practices. The benefits of IRM can be maximized by introducing elements which can improve the efficiency of resource cycling.

It makes sense that, to develop new and truly useful management practices for IRM farming systems, farmers and scientists must work in partnership. Farmers have the knowledge of their resources and skill and can also spread the technology to the neighbours once it has been developed.

To establish how farmers classify and perceive their natural and agricultural resources, farmers were encouraged to make resource flow diagrams. These flow diagrams were most successfully made by groups of farmers, drawn on the ground, in their own environment. These drawing show the researcher what enterprises exist and enables the farmers to obtain a broad overview of their environment which they may not previously have visualised in its totality. Farmers gain a perspective, often for the fist time, of their own farm's relationship within the rural community and its agroecological environment.

Farmer-led experimentation

Having established a map showing the enterprise and resource flows on the farm, the farmer is requested to imagine a scenario where a new or modified enterprise is incorporated into the farming system. In this case it was the incorporation of a fish pond.

The theoretical farming system model created during the re-drawing session is used by farmers and researchers as a guide for conducting applied experiments. After constructing and stocking the new pond the farmer uses the resource flow diagram to manage the farm. The farmer records the amounts of materials which flow along the different pathways and notes any deviation from the design. Replicated simulations of these trials are carried out on the experiment station. This provides the needed replications, helps providing insight to potential new technologies, and provides shared experience necessary to the creation of a more positive mutual understanding between scientist-researcher and farmer-researcher.

Technology development: A new approach

After the growing season the results of all ponds, on-farm and on-station, are presented to the farmer for discussion. The farmers are requested to redraw their resource flow diagrams to show how the system will be managed in the following year. The production results from these trials are much lower than those designed by classical methods. However, the results are much closer to those which the farmers can actually expect to achieve, and it gives the farmer a sense of propriety over new developed technologies.

In addition to using the resource flow diagrams as an experimental tool for planning new strategies, farmers often use the model as a teaching aid to farm management for their family and neighbours.

Introduction

This paper aims to explore the main extension methodologies used in aquaculture, how this has affected the audience reached and its impact on the sustainability of aquaculture. The elements of the extension process are: objectives, target group, information and services, method, and organization. These elements form an interconnected whole. Extension methods comprise the communication techniques between extension workers and target groups. Methodologies shape and inform the processes of research and extension. Methodologies orient the user by providing a framework for selecting the means to find out about, analyze, order and exchange information about a particular issue.

Transfer-of-technology model

The best known approach to aquaculture extension is the transfer-of-technology model. In essence what happened is that scientists attempted to find solutions to what they perceived to be the farmers' major technological problems. The extension workers are then asked to disseminate this ‘new knowledge’ to the farmers in their area, so that the newly recommended practice could diffuse amongst them.

Typically, farmers were viewed as ignorant and treated as passive receivers of expertise from outside. The top-down extension approach where those in the higher ranks defined what is worth knowing by the farmers and employed extension workers to lecture at farmers, have defined the nature of relationships between the various actors involved. It has led to a situation where the attitudes and behaviour needed for rapport are missing.

Target group approach

The extension approach that takes cognizance of the fact that rural communities comprise a diverse audience of farmers, is the target group approach. Working for special categories at least implies that detailed knowledge is available about the actual situations of these groups, or rather categories, of people. However, the target group approach still does not say anything about the way the extension methods were used in the transfer of information.

Need for a change in approach

Over the last decade there has been a growing awareness of the inadequacies of conventional approaches to aquaculture research and extension. They have typically been concerned with the absence of knowledge about aquaculture and have aimed at producing and conveying recommendations to remedy this lack.

While previously transfer of knowledge between farmers was discouraged because of anticipated distortion of messages, this communication channel is now receiving considerable attention because it has proven to be an important multiplier in the number of recipients that can be reached.

Participatory aquaculture extension strategies have been advocated as a remedy for the low-impact extension, but few people have attempted to describe what it entails, how practitioners in the field should go about it and what consequences it has for training, Government Departments and other implementing Agencies and donors.

The realization that aquaculture has more in common with agriculture than fisheries, has led to the conclusion that aquaculture should be integrated into existing farming systems. This factor as well as the economic hardships many African countries are facing at the moment, has triggered the debate whether a separate aquaculture extension service is feasible and desirable. However, it can be questioned whether the merging of extension services alone will lead to a more participatory extension approach for aquaculture.

Elements of a participatory extension approach

If extension is to be effective and successful it will have to take the knowledge, ideas, opinions and interest of their intended target groups as its point of departure.

Aquaculture as a Holistic Concept

Aquaculture can not be conceptualized as a purely technical activity. Opportunities available to different people for aquaculture not only depend on environmental conditions, access to means of production but also to their social relationships within and beyond the household. This will influence the interest in aquaculture as perceived by the various target groups. This may also explain that for example not all farmers' priorities are production oriented as is sometimes believed. The aquaculture technology provided is being reworked to fit with the farming production strategies, resource imperative and social desires of the farmer or farm family.

Dialogue with Farmers

Participative processes that allow for a dialogue with target groups regarding their possibilities and intentions are required. This means in fact that the unilateral responsibility that aquaculturists used to have in the aquaculture development process will change into a shared responsibility that puts aquaculturists and farmers on a more equal footing. Working with people or facilitating them to work with each other requires a fundamentally different approach to research and extension.

Farmer-to-Farmer Exchanges

Social networks affect the flow of information and processes of knowledge dissemination. There are important differences in the nature and operation of knowledge networks within the same farming populations. Conflicts of interests and relations of power between people affect the extent to which sharing of information can take place. Network analysis can help to reveal patterns in communication networks for aquaculture.

Changing Roles

The conventional extension system was entirely oriented towards the delivery of messages from aquaculturists to farmers. Participatory programmes focus on facilitating exchange between farmers and enhancing their organisational capacity to diagnose and solve problems themselves. Professionals therefore have to act as facilitators and trainers.

Implications for Institutions and Extension Organization

A system for supporting sustainable aquaculture should be decentralized, with facilitators in the field who have considerable ‘people skills’ in addition to technical understanding of aquaculture. They need to be supported by a network of specialists and local experiment stations. But such attempts to introduce decentralized, ‘bottom-up’ approaches must be complemented by strong ‘top-down’ commitment and a very clear, shared view of the mission of the organization, filtering through at all its levels.

The change in extension approach thus dictates a change in monitoring and evaluation criteria. A participatory extension approach thus requires a rethinking of conventional project programming procedures. Instead of leaping into project formulation from the start, the process must start with a slow and patient building up of village-level capacity through skills training and institutional support. It must precede formal project planning and is followed by participatory planning, implementation and evaluation. Physical and financial targets should be drawn up in detail at this stage, and conventional tools of appraisal and economic analysis can be used in conjunction with analysis of institutional development.

Conclusions

Conventional extension approaches have generally regarded local people as passive recipients of aquaculture production techniques, incapable of analyzing their own situation and designing their own solutions. The limitations of these extension approaches in aquaculture have now been recognized by many projects. However, a participatory use of extension methods in itself is not enough to bring about sustainable aquaculture. Flexible and long-term aquaculture extension approaches that build upon local knowledge and skills, reinforce local village organizations, involve villagers in technology generation and employ village facilitators for appraisal, planning, implementation and monitoring are needed. The external institutions should act as support organizations playing a catalytic role of facilitation and networking.

This change requires much engagement from all parties, extension agents, researchers, Government Departments and donors. Especially since the institutional barriers one may encounter while working towards this change in extension methodology may be substantial.

Introduction

The Malawi-German Fisheries and Aquaculture Project (MAGFAD) was launched in 1987. It is now in its handing over phase, focusing on awareness campaigns, strengthening self reliance of farmers, capacity building, training, and extended collaboration with NGO's and other Departments.

During the duration of the project, the number of fish farmers in southern Malawi increased from 429 to 1517 despite the third drought period in the region.

Technology package

During its first phase the project focused entirely on fish production technology, and on technology transfer. In 1993 the project adopted an integrated resource management approach, focusing towards the need of a water reservoir and its multiple use within the farm system.

The different level of farmers created the need for two technology packages:

• a basic package with one pond, two indigenous fish species, extensive or semi intensive management, on-farm inputs, intermitted harvests, and vegetable fish integration;
• an advanced package with breeding nursing and grow out ponds, four fish species, semi intensive management, off-farm inputs, complete harvests, and chicken fish integration and advanced farm management.

Extension package

The project operates though the Malawi Fisheries Department who's extension workers are seconded to the project.

Until 1993 the extension methods used were the Training and Visit system with an emphasis on individual farmers, residential training courses for farmers, and open days where farmer to farmer visits were organised. In its present phase the project uses:

• awareness creation campaigns regarding integrated aquaculture through the radio programme and participatory needs assessment and problem solving methods like RTP (Road to progress), SWAP (Successes, weaknesses, aims and problems) and PRA (Participatory rural appraisal);
• training of farmers in villages and extension outposts;
• follow up visits of individual farmers or clubs;
• training of fisheries staff and personnel form other departments, and co-operation with NGO's.

Conclusions

Recent publications conclude that the development of aquaculture in sub-Saharan Africa is still far away from being called successful despite an enormous effort carried out by donor agencies and various projects. However, the tonnage of fish alone should not count. The data on the benefit of the integrated farming approach show the significance of the technical concept regarding rural income and food security. The mean annual cash income for rural households in Malawi is 310 MK (US$ 20). The surplus from integrated aquaculture is 1800 MK, and is therefore significant. The further general improvement of the living standard through provision of approximately 1 kg. of fish per week for household consumption, fresh vegetables and fruits is not even considered.

Proposed technology packages are not always well adapted to the situation of the target group. The technology package proposed by 4 projects in Malawi in 1990 was not uniform, despite working in the same area and was not appropriate for rural conditions. MAGFAD has meanwhile changed its concept and went back to the basics, an approach which is well adapted to the situation in the target area, and to the problems and abilities of the target group.

The future of aquaculture in Malawi still leaves a lot of activities open. The prospective of the current extension service is unclear due to arisen financial problems. Retrenchment of the extension service is not a solution for development. Privatisation of the extension service with compensation through the target group is at present in Malawi not feasible due to a high expectation of the rural population towards free inputs, a side effect of ongoing famine relief and promises and presents from politicians and Government officials.

A different approach towards sustainability could be the promotion of successful farmers and development of small enterprises which makes the surrounding area independent from government services. As such kind of activity is still quite new in Malawi, it will be left to the project to establish activities in regard of loans, basic business training and illiteracy classes for farmers.

Introduction

Tanzania is a country with vast water resources and a great potential for aquaculture development, yet currently only a fraction of this potential is being utilized. Several NGO's have become involved in the promotion and development of fish farming in Tanzania. In the Arusha Region the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Tanzania (ELECT) has been involved in fish farming development for the past 12 years.

Project background

There are two fish farming projects in the region: the Fish Farming Project (FFP) of the ELECT which began in 1984 and the Fish Farming Development Project (FFDP) which began in 1993 as a cooperative effort of the regional Fisheries Office and the FFP. Their objectives are:

• to improve the overall standard of living of farm families by promoting integrated fish farming development;
• to improve the nutrition of the farm families;
• to increase the farmer's income;
• to diversify farm production.

The FFP started an outreach programme in 1991 to assist organisations with fish farming activities outside the project area. The following services are provided:

• site surveys and project feasibility;
• assistance in fish farming development planning and project set-up;
• training in fish farming and extension skills;
• technical support and consultancy;
• assistance in project evaluation and monitoring.

Project Philosophy

The projects focus on training and developing of local human resources. The projects demand people participation and voluntarism. The projects try to avoid to do anything for the people which they can do themselves using a self help approach.

Methodology

The projects utilize a variety of extension methods to promote fish farming, these are:

• public meeting and seminars;
• participation of church and community leaders;
• farmers field trips to existing fish farmers;
• mass communication media of newspapers and radio;
• displays at agricultural shows.

However by far the most effective method of promotion appears to be the natural exchange which takes place between farmers.

The projects begin working in new communities when a request for assistance has been received. The projects are using a farmer motivator system to provide extension services throughout the project areas. Motivators are local, determined farmers, interested in assisting others, and are selected by their community. Motivators receive a two week course in fish farming and extension through a participatory learning approach. Motivators have ponds that can serve for demonstrations. The extension methods employed by the motivators are:

• personal visits;
• village seminars;
• demonstration ponds;
• assistance to primary school;
• fish farmer groups;
• women's groups.

Fish farming system

Semi intensive integrated farming systems are promoted. Oreochromis niloticus is stocked at densities of 2 per square metre in small earthen ponds. Intermediate harvest is advised after 3–4 months and total harvest after 6–12 months. Fish are fed with by products and ponds are fertilized with manure.

Results

Presently there are 600 farms with 1100 ponds in the region, up from 5 ponds in 1984, total surface area is 14.3 ha. Average pond production is 3.2 ton/ha/yr, which is higher than average in Tanzania. 124 farmer motivators, of which 25 are women, promote fish farming in their communities.

The outreach programme has worked with 15 organisations throughout Tanzania, 14 short courses have been given to 204 motivators.

Advantages and disadvantages of farmer motivator system

The farmer motivator system can be very effective method of technology transfer, advantages are:

• people participation maximized;
• greater sustainability since less dependence on outside funding;
• expertise and ownership of project activities;
• cost effective;
• knowledge in the hands of member of the communities;
• enables dedicated and committed people;
• enhances sense of sharing and self worth;
• motivators are permanent member of communities with knowledge of targeted people.

Disadvantages are:

• motivators usually not very highly educated;
• motivators not paid for this work and can not devote full time to this work;
• difficult to discipline or demand work performance from ineffective volunteers.

Problems encountered

Farmer related problems are: predation, theft, water shortage, low production, lack of credit, lack of nets, lack of suitable fish species in low temperature areas.

Project related problems are: poor record keeping and reporting, poor work performance of some motivators, low priority given to fish farming by Fisheries Office, poor communications, limited funding, no government fish farming station, inefficient government structure and organisation.

Problems with the extension system are: high cost, lack of resource material, poor cooperation between sectors/institutes/NGOs, inadequate aquaculture training for fisheries office, lack of funds.

Conclusion

The farmer motivator system employed by the projects has contributed greatly to the positive results. It has been demonstrated that this system can effectively promote, teach and coordinate fish farming at a relatively low cost. It is thought that this system could be applicable in other fields of development and in other countries.

Introduction

Small scale aquaculture has a significant role to play in the improvement of fish production and living standards of some rural communities in Zimbabwe. It can improve the nutrition of rural communities, improve productive use of on-farm resources, and can generate income. The government policy on fisheries development is aimed at:

• improving animal protein at farm household level;
• increased cash income at household and enterprise levels.

Extension services

The Department of Agriculture, Technical and Extension Services (AGRITEX), within the ministry of Agriculture is responsible of all agricultural and fisheries extension. Staffed with at least 2500, the department provides a national field level extension coverage.

Fisheries (aquaculture and reservoir fisheries) is integrated into the agricultural extension system. The extensionist is a generalist and carries out both fisheries and agricultural extension as well as other community oriented duties. Extension advice is provided to farmers through the extension workers who are based at community level. They are supported by specialists at district, provincial and national level.

The Fisheries Unit under AGRITEX seeks to increase fish production through:

• transfer of fisheries technology;
• skilled manpower development, through regular in-service training of target staff in potential areas;
• farmer training;
• assessment of extension requirements;
• linking with supply services.

The role of an extension agent is diverse and include:

• making farmers aware of fish farming and new farming practices;
• motivating farmers through visits and demonstrations;
• training of farmers;
• follow-up on existing activities;
• technical support for extension staff;
• assistance with transport and stocking of fingerlings.

Extension strategy

Emphasis is placed on reaching as many of the target farmers as possible. In order to do this several strategies have been adopted. These include:

• working with farmer groups;
• pilot/model farmer programmes;
• individual farmer visits;
• mass media methods, pamphlets, hand-outs, mobile training units with films and slides.

Fish farming technology

The main species used is Oreochromis mossambicus. 2203 ponds were enumerated in 1991. Pond sizes range from 50 to 500 square metres. 88% of the ponds are fed by seepage, and 42% of the ponds are manured and receive some supplementary feeding. Harvest is normally incomplete, but due to the drought of the recent years most ponds are now dry.

Selection of the target group and extension message

Trainings are targeted for extension staff and farmers in those areas where there is potential for fish farming.

The extension message is designed to be delivered as part of the overall agricultural extension approach of Agritex, thus the message is modest and simple and promotes the farming systems approach for efficient utilisation of on-farm resources to increase production.

Current problems facing aquaculture extension

Problems faced by farmers are: undesirable species, poor pond siting and construction, poor management practices, poor yields, lack of advice from extension staff.

At institutional level the main problem is the fact that there are two government department involved in fisheries research, with often inter-institutional disputes, very little exchange of ideas, and competition for funding from donors. This inadequate planning and coordination has led to inappropriate research being carried out. The link between research and extension is very weak, resulting in irrelevant and inappropriate research.

Evaluation of aquaculture extension approach in Zimbabwe

Advantages of the unified extension approach:

• the system seeks to encourage research extension linkage, although the linkages is often weak;
• extensionist is field based, has a holistic approach and is supposed to have confidence of the community;
• problems are easier diagnosed with field based extensionists;
• efficient utilisation of government resources.

Disadvantages:

• extensionist is a generalist and may lack knowledge in certain fields;
• state run extension services are rigid, bureaucratic, without participation of the target group, and not able to motive their staff sufficiently;
• trained and well functioning staff can be transferred;
• not every body in the system has knowledge of aquaculture which hampers communications;
• extension staff are used by the government for duties other then extension

Conclusions

It is clear that extension should be the vital link between the farmers and the support services. However, it should be stressed that to spear head aquaculture development organisations and departments should collaborate. While all institution should play key roles there is need for greater co-operation and linkages in order to provide the target groups with the necessary techniques for overall comprehensive development.

Introduction

Smallholder fish farming systems do not exist in Kwazulu Natal (KZN), and hence a dedicated extension effort for small holder fish farming is equally lacking. The Republic of South Africa (RSA) has a relatively well established commercial aquaculture industry, which is supported by relevant scientific training and research, as well as technology development and transfer.

A start can be made by developing the necessary infrastructure for research and formal and non-formal training in smallholder fish production at suitable localities. Any initiative to stimulate development of smallholder fish farming in KZN should be directed at integrating fish farming as a sub-system of existing crop-livestock agriculture systems. The rudiments of such an integrated system are operational at the University of Zululand Department of Agriculture (UZDA).

Aquaculture development potential in Kwazulu-Natal

The aquaculture development potential for KZN was explored, and revealed the following findings:

• water availability is not an obstacle for aquaculture development;
• temperature wise the coastal areas are suitable for water fish species, while the higher areas are suitable for coldwater species;
• suitable combinations of slope and soils can be found in the vicinity of suitable water sources in most areas;
• tilapia is the fish species preferred by rural people;
• there is a considerable reluctance towards the consumption of african catfish;
• if fish can be produced for a competitive price relative to chicken if will command a share of the animal protein market.

From these findings it is clear that no insurmountable physical constraints stand in the way of developing a sustainable aquaculture industry in KZN.

The UZDA integrated aquaculture unit and its potential role

The UZDA is situated in the coastal belt which is the area most suitable for fish farming. It runs an integrated unit with aquaculture, vegetables, fruit trees, chickens, ducks, pigs, irrigation and duckweed, which serve as a research facility and a demonstration unit. Extension personnel and farmers visit the unit and receive information. Present manpower constraints reduce the active extension role towards the rural communities.

Other support for aquaculture development at university of Zululand

A number of academic departments at the university are involved, directly or indirectly, in aquaculture and therefore have a supportive role in aquaculture extension. These departments include Zoology, Home Economics, Hydrology, and the NGO "Centre for Low Input Agriculture Research and Development.

Approach to extension and rural development training

The extension approaches taught to students is biased towards the farming systems development approach and the participatory methods. Practical training is conducted in rural communities surrounding the university.

Incorporating aquaculture in the agriculture curriculum at UZDA

Due to understaffing of the department the aquaculture course at UZDA is currently not activated. This is highly unsatisfactory since the non-adoption of technologies at farmer level is often blamed on extension staff with insufficient knowledge of technical subject matter.

Conclusions

Fish farming does not form part of agricultural system currently employed by resource poor smallholder in KZN, despite a definite potential. UZDA is striving to create interest in aquaculture as a component of integrated crop-livestock production systems. Students must acquire an adequate technical knowledge of the subject. Therefore aquaculture should form part of the formal agriculture curriculum for agriculture students, while in-service training courses can be devised for extension officers.

Introduction

In the first phase of the project, a large number of farmers started fish farming. The second phase (1994–1998) identified the need of an efficient and effective extension approach. The main aspects of this approach are:

• teaching target farmers the principles of fish farming;
• preparing extension officers to be able to perform quality extension services;
• motivating extension officers to be interested to perform quality extension services.

Organisation of extension services

The aquaculture extension officers (AEO) operate in a defined area under the extension training officer (ETO). The AEO prepares and delivers the extension services as: training of farmers, supply of seed, and technical support on site selection, pond construction and management.

Preparation of extension officers

The project conducts training workshops for AEOs, and give on-the-job training. AEOs also attend courses by universities and specialised training institutes, study tours to farms and projects in Zambia and abroad.

Teaching of farmers

Teaching of farmers is an important extension method used by the project. Farmers who have already fish ponds and those with the physical conditions for building ponds are targeted. The most interested and innovative farmers within the communities are selected, trained, and guided to serve as demonstration farmers fingerling producers and suppliers in their areas. The idea is that these interested farmers boost the fish culture activities of other farmers in their village.

The use of satellite stations as extension tools was abandoned because it was realised that these stations were not efficient and effective in accomplishing their purpose.

Training booklets and flip chart are produced in order to create a uniform syllabus for training courses organised for extension staff and farmers.

Motivation of extension officers

In order to motivate the AEOs to regularly render the various extension services and report them appropriately a new system of reporting and renumeration was introduced. In this system each type of extension activity has a certain fixed rate. The AEO is paid according to the services carried out.

Evaluation of the extension service

Different degrees of evaluation are combined to evaluate the necessary aspect of the extension services. Daily observations, visits, meetings, etc. are used to evaluate the teaching methods and materials. A formal survey of all fish farmers is carried out once a year, to evaluate whether the farmers are well trained and satisfied with their fish culture activity. It is also used to estimate the quantity of fish produced by the households in Northern Province.

Conclusions

On the basis of the gained experiences the elaborated extension approach has been found to be efficient and effective in delivering knowledge and skills to the target farmers in order for them to establish fish ponds and operate them to produce fish for their own consumption or for sale. This is because:

• the intention is that the farmers would receive quality service from professional staff;
• the extension officers are trained so that they would be able to deliver quality work;
• the extension officers are motivated with incentives to do their work;
• the financial incentive have a direct correlation with performance;
• the work of the extension officers is monitored continuously, and low quality work can be detected and improved immediately.

Introduction

Eastern province of Zambia is predominantly an agricultural province. The dominant crop is maize, other crops are groundnuts, sunflower, cotton, tobacco, and soya beans. Vegetables and fruits are also grown. The Department of Fisheries has four fish farms which are used for the production of fingerlings, table size fish and for applied research.

ALCOM has been working in the province since 1987 and developed a participatory extension approach. During the first phase of the project emphasis was given to the development and testing of the extension methodology. Later the project focused more on the expansion of fish farming amongst smallholder farmers. Aquaculture extension is now integrated into the agriculture extension service which uses the Training and Visit approach.

Target group selection

The target group is the smallholder farming household. This group of farmers did not benefit much from previous aquaculture extension efforts, because these farmers could not adopt pre-formulated technical packages which were not suited to their conditions.

Level of technology

The level of technology was adapted to the conditions of the farmers. In most cases small ponds were constructed and managed with agricultural by products, leftovers and manure.

Extension methods

The extension methods used are:

• individual visits;
• group meetings;
• agricultural shows;
• mobile and residential courses;
• drama;
• slide shows.

The materials used are:

• agriculture extension bulletin;
• extension pamphlets;
• slides;
• flipcharts.

Since 1992 aquaculture extension was incorporated into the agriculture extension service that used the T&V system. The fisheries assistants operate as the subject matter specialists and inform and train the block and camp officers. They prepare monthly extension messages.

Evaluation of the extension approach

ALCOM started with a participatory extension approach to identify, develop and test methods suitable for aquaculture extension for smallholder farmers. This resulted in an extension message that was well suited to the needs and capacity of these farmers. After the development of the extension methods and messages, the focus was on expanding the adoption of fish farming.

Incorporating aquaculture extension within the agriculture extension service has the advantage that many more people can be reached since the department of agriculture has a well established network of extension staff.

Previous fish farming development projects had used the Training and Visit approach to fish farming for 8 years. The field day approach was introduced in 1994. In 1995 a series of 11 field days were held on specific topics in each of 13 selected areas of Western Kenya where there were a total 677 practising fish farmers. The annual rate of recruitment for new fish farmers quadrupled in the sampled areas in 2 years. An average of 30% of the farmers attended each field day in each area.

Following this series a survey showed that between 70% and 90% of the farmers who had attended a particular field day had improved their management techniques and were able to answer detailed questions on the specific topic. For those farmers who had attended 3 or more field days but missed that particular topic between 24% and 84% were able to correctly answer detailed questions on all field day topics, demonstrating their inter-farmer exchange of information. Of those farmers who attended 3 or more field days 30% were expanding their fishponds and 41% were effecting repairs.

The cost of training a farmer through a series of field days was half that of formal courses. The study concluded that the field day approach of fish farming development is viable in Western Kenya and recommends that it be expanded. Other observations were:

• the field days are particular effective in areas with high population densities and concentrations of fish farmers;
• one field day per month in each area would be a good frequency;
• a field day should be tailored to the specific need of the area;
• if possible a document summarizing the topic of the field day should be handed out to the farmers;
• a positive spinoff of the field day is the formation of loose farmer associations;
• it was obvious that farmers pay attention to the smallest detail in the demonstrations;
• knowledge gathered at the field day is effectively spread to other farmers.

Introduction

The pilot project “Semi Intensive Aquaculture of Small Scale Farmers” is executed by ALCOM in collaboration with the Ministry of Natural Resources, Tourism and Environment, and started late 1993. The projects main objective is to identify techniques that will lead to the formulation of sustainable extension packages for small scale farmers in Tanzania.

Selection of the target group

The project target group was the small scale farmers who are characterised by:

• crop farming as the main activity;
• most keep some animals;
• family labour as the main source of farming labour;
• fish production is mainly for home consumption;
• locally available implements are used for constructing fish ponds.

Unintentionally the project also reached other farmers who were the better off farmers in the community. these were characterized by:

• used hired labour for pond construction;
• production was geared towards the market;
• used purchased equipment and material for pond construction and management.

The adoption of fish farming by this group of farmers was an obstacle to adoption of small scale farmers since these farmers used means and materials that are beyond the reach of the small scale farmers.

Level of aquaculture technology

The level of management varied from one farmer to the other. Farmers were explained the importance of feeding and fertilizing but no strict quantities were given. Most farmers fertilized their ponds until it was generally green and increased the amount of feed when there were more fish in the pond or when the feed was quickly finished.

Extension messages used

Since the target group was the small scale farmers it was important at the beginning to provide extension messages which did not involve extra expenditures or if necessary only affordable expenditures. The project provided fish farming education and transport of the first fingerlings but no other inputs. The message considered the following:

• suitable siting of the ponds;
• inputs from farmers own resources;
• only assistance for first time delivery, at cost, of fingerlings;
• marketing of fish;
• farmers own tools to use for pond construction.

Extension channels used

The project used the following channels:

• village meetings, organised through the village authorities. This had some disadvantages like that people were not always informed, only friends and relatives were informed, and message had changed;
• slide show. Although it has the advantage that farmers see what fish farming is the disadvantages are that slides are not interesting enough for certain people who have been used to tv and video;
• site and farm visit. At the site extension was always carried out in dialogue with the farmer. It proved that all farmers had a good knowledge on the water availability of the sites and the possibilities to construct the ponds there;
• pamphlets;
• agriculture Extension Officers. Collaboration with these officers greatly depended on the motivation of the individual officer.

Evaluation

The following aspect of the project have been reviewed:

• attainment of the target group. Only two women took up fish farming due to the reasons that women do not own land, do not make the decisions in the household and pond construction is considered a mans' job;
• fish farming education. All fish farmers had good knowledge of all aspects of aquaculture;
• intensity of management. All farmers were aware of good management but some did not manage their pond intensive enough for the reasons of lack of time to devote to fish farming, lack of inputs, long distance to the pond to bring inputs, and high opportunity cost for inputs;
• improving farmers welfare. Fish consumption of the fish farmers household had increased, but the economic feasibility of fish farming has not yet been determined.

Introduction

In Western Bangladesh over 5500 ha of oxbow lakes provide and important miscellaneous floodplain fishery, however, due to excessive fishing pressure, yields had declined in recent years. Development of selective fish retention structures converted these oxbow lakes into fish pens and allowed for improved management which increased the yields from the lakes. Technology transfer to semi-literate fishers was achieved through a participatory process of training material development.

Target group

The project aimed at the poorest and landless member of the fishing community who had no source of income other then to sell their labour. The target group was defined as: “any person who catches fish with his own hands and owns less than 0.5 acre or earn less then Tk 10.000 (US$ 250) from manual labour in a year”.

This target group has a vague notion as the biological principles of fish production. The general level of understanding of the fishers was high with respect of fishing techniques but low with regard to biological understanding of culture based principles and had a great deal of misconceptions.

Many of the target group were illiterate of semi-literate.

Definition of technology levels

The practise of screening of inlets and outlets converts the lake from an open water fishery into a fish pen and the stocking with juvenile carp makes the approach one of a culture based fishery. Fishers, traditionally accustomed to harvesting wild fish now had to learn more about the ecology of the ecosystem and the biology of the fish as to stock fish species according of the feeding niches available. For most, this was the first time that they had to move away from hunting and learn a new farming system.

The actual technological package for carp culture based fisheries remained to be refined. The key element to stocking was to match the fishes feeding behaviour to the available niches, in addition Secchi disk readings were found to be a useful tool providing a guide to optimum stocking ratios. Some technical messages which helped to enhance yields were as follows:

• minimum size for caught fish of 1 kg;
• catch quota's set per month and per year;
• no fishing during the flood season;
• stocking of fry of over 10–15 cm.

Extension message, methods and adoption

In order to transfer the technology to the target group it was important to minimize the use of text with maximum use of illustrations to explain a point. Wherever possible symbols were used, for instance pictures were used to depict the seasons and the fish so as to avoid writing.

For the development of extension material and training the following steps were taken:

• training needs evaluation, to evaluate the existing knowledge base of the fishers and the gaps in the understanding;
• material preparation, to prepare a first draft of training material;
• field test, after testing with extension staff and fishers the material is modified;
• training, materials are used in training;
• post training evaluation, this helps to assess the benefits of the course and acts as feed-back to improve the material and training.

Delivery mechanisms

The training subject covered project objectives, lake biology, stocking and harvesting, by-laws, role of women, fry production etc. These messages were presented in a number of formats:

• A4/A5 Poster booklet                     for distribution to extension staff;
• A3 Poster                                       for trainer to show to groups;
• Single sheet handout                     for distribution to the target group;
• A4 overhead projector slide           for classroom teaching.

Conclusion

In the project participatory approach to training material development, extension staff, and a sample of fishers, were actively involved in designing, drawing and in giving lectures of others. In this way they get to “say and do” and feel comfortable with the approach. In addition other advantage are:

• the extension staff having contributed to the design of the material identify with it and they readily accept to use the material;
• in the process, extension staff learn how to carry out training needs surveys as well as how to prepare posters and how to give lectures and use audio visual aides;
• target group leaders also identify themselves with the material, and readily accept to use it to show other group members.

The development of the poster series saw the introduction of illustrated talks where the trainees became actively involved in making comments about the posters. The material has received wide publicity such that other projects have now started to use the same ideas, particular for fish farming extension.

Introduction

In southern Africa most of the countries faced a situation where Governments had to reduce their expenditures. Supplying farmers with fingerlings was then often no longer seen as a task to be carried out by the departments but should be taken over by the private sector. Extension budgets were also cut and it was not always possible to continue to provide adequate extension to farmers. In Madagascar, the fingerling production had been taken up by the private sector on a large scale, and it was argued that extension could be provided through the same channels.

Aquaculture extension approach used in Madagascar

In rice cum fish farming the farmers stocked their existing rice fields with fish as soon as the rice was high enough to enable a water level of 10–15 cm. The rice fields had to be altered slightly to adapt them to rice cum fish farming. In cases where common carp was used the fingerlings of around 5 grammes each were stocked at a rate of 1 fish per 10 square metres. The fish were harvested at the end of the rice cycle, which gives a growing period of around 150 days. The production at the High Plateau of Madagascar could reach 400 kg/ha/cycle but averaged between 100 and 150 kg/ha/cycle.

In 1992 it was estimated that 51% of all farmers in the project area were engaged in fish farming. 45% of the farmers practised rice cum fish farming. 38% pond fish farming and 13% were engaged in both.

The great potential for rice cum fish farming and the high demand for fingerlings within a short period of the year made the delivery of the fingerlings to the fish farmers became very expensive and complicated to organise. The project diverted from fingerling production at the Government stations towards the production by specialized farmers.

In 1992 after 3 years of promoting the system of specialized fingerling producers 42% of all the fingerlings (470.000 out of 1.100.000) were purchased from these farmers. One fingerling producer sold between 10.000 and 20.000 fingerlings to around 80–100 farmers in the area.

It was argued that the same fingerling producers could become extension agents to promote fish culture. By giving advice, the market for fingerlings would increase because more farmers became involved in fish farmers and those already involved would stock more fish if the productions were to be increased through good management. This increase in market for fingerlings would motivate the fingerling producer to promote fish farming. The fingerling producers agreed that extension would be beneficial to them, but in 1993 still focused more on marketing then on extension. These aspects were observed when the market for fingerlings was still much larger than the supply and fingerling producers could still find buyers without going into the effort of carrying out extension. They were interested in selling as many fingerlings as possible and much less in transmitting the knowledge of aquaculture techniques. It was even noted that technical extension was sometimes not provided because it might discourage farmers to buy fingerlings if they were aware how much effort fish farming demanded. Others opted for the possibility to increase the area they supplied by employing salesmen instead of improving the sales in a smaller area.

It was concluded that it would not have been possible for fish farming in Madagascar to spread as fast and as widely as it did without the involvement of the specialized fingerling producers. It was also concluded that although extension was not effectively carried out by the fingerling producers this could be expected to happen in the near future.

Comparison with other countries in Southern Africa

When Madagascar is compared with some other countries in Southern Africa, some similarities exist, but in aquaculture there are many differences. Agriculture was predominantly dry land agriculture with maize as the single most important crop. Very few farmers practised irrigated agriculture and irrigation was not traditionally embedded in agricultural practices.

Fish culture was practised in ponds with the tilapia species as the most important fish. The main source of fingerlings in most countries had been the government fish farms. In fish farming extension, site selection concentrated on a perennial water supply. Fish were cultured in ponds that were exclusively constructed for fish farming or were in some cases used as a water supply for irrigation.

Fish were stocked at rates of 1–2 fish per square metre and productions varied from 1000–3000 kg/ha/yr. Ponds were small. The number of farmers engaged in fish farming was limited and did not exceed 1% in most countries. In areas with favourable conditions for fish farming this percentage was higher. Fish farming distribution was scattered, with small areas where ponds were concentrated.

Conclusions

Private fingerling production

Conditions under which fingerling production as a specialized activity could be considered were:

• areas with a large number of seasonal ponds and few farmers with access to a perennial water supply;
• use of a fish species that does not reproduce under normal culture conditions;
• offer of a quality of fingerlings that is superior than those produced under normal conditions, and is in demand by a large number of farmers;
• high adoption of fish farming and new farmers need to stock their ponds.

The situation in Madagascar clearly met the first two conditions. Tilapia culture in ponds in southern Africa in general did not meet any of these conditions. However, with an increased adoption of fish farming in many areas the need for fingerlings increased. Concurrently with the increased adoption sites were often selected that did not have a perennial water source. Under these conditions there would be a need for a local fingerling supply apart from the farmers' own supply. However this does not necessarily justify a specialised fingerling producer.

In those areas where other species are in high demand, or where a demand for larger fish justifies the production of all male tilapia culture specialised fingerling production could have a future.

Privatizing extension

In order to privatize extension the person to carry out extension has to gain from the activity. Giving advice to other farmers increases the status of a person but this is probably not enough an incentive to become an efficient extension worker who has to devote a lot of time to this work.

In Madagascar it was argued that a specialized fingerling producer should be interested in increasing his own market for fingerlings and would therefore besides marketing of the fingerlings also be interested in carrying out extension. During the first stages of the project this did not happen, and it was maintained that the market for fingerings was still large enough for the farmers to concentrate on marketing only.

The specialized fingerling producers in Madagascar were critically selected on the criteria of willingness, sufficient water supply, suitable land, and availability of a nearby market for their product. Since perennial water supplies were rare, this became the most important selection criteria. The social status and position in the community were not used in this selection. It is not evident for a farmer to become an accepted source of information in a community. It is doubtful whether the selection criteria used to identify specialized fingerling producers would at the same time select a farmer who could become an efficient supplier of aquaculture information to the various categories of community members.

It could be expected that in those cases where technical and physical aspects have to be used to select a fingerling producer, it is unlikely that all these will become effective transmitters of information and other channels of information dissemination have to be identified. In those situations where the choice of a fingerling producer does not primarily depend on the siting of ponds or land, the fingerling producer should be selected on the grounds of his/her acceptability in the community to become a source of information. In that case there might be a better chance of combining the supply of fingerlings and extension.

Introduction

In 1983, the Rwanda National Fish Culture Project began. This was a bilaterally-funded project by USAID and the Government of Rwanda. It continued through 1988 and had a second phase funded at a much lower level as part of a Natural Resources Management Project. There had been several previous projects involved in fish culture, but none of these projects demonstrated success. On closer examination of these projects, it was found that fish culture was one of several activities and that there was little or no focus on extension. This project was designed as a “classical” fish culture extension project in which ponds were to be renovated and put back into production and specialized extension agents trained.

Background

Rwanda is a high elevation, equatorial country. Elevations range from about 900 to 4700 metres; most of the country being at 1300 to 2000 metres elevation. The terrain is hilly, with valleys, called “marais” between the hills. Water seeps out of the hills and a main drain is evident in the valleys. Ponds are sited usually at the margin where the hill meets the valley; water is channelled from the main drain to fill the ponds. Most ponds are located at elevations of 1500 to 1800 m.

At first look the constraints to fish culture in Rwanda seem to be overwhelming. The physical constraints are the cool temperatures, acid soils and soft water. Minimum air temperatures range from 6 to 15°C, and maxima are around 28 to 30°C. Water temperatures in ponds are usually in the low twenties. Social and economic constraints included high population density which resulted in very small farm sizes and lack of inputs, lack of land tenure in the valleys where ponds are located, a population largely unaccustomed to preparing and consuming fish, and very poor cash flow in rural areas. Although these constraints made it difficult to develop fish culture, similar constraints existed for any type of agriculture development.

Extension service

There were about 50 extension agents supposedly working in fish culture already in place, so it was decided to evaluate these agents and replace them with more conscientious individuals if necessary. The agricultural extension service in Rwanda was virtually dysfunctional. Because agriculture extension agents charged fines to farmers who did not follow the centrally mandated agricultural practices, farmers tended to disappear whenever the agriculture extension agent made a visit. Therefore a conscious decision was made to distance the fish culture extension service from the so-called “agriculture policemen”.

Extension message

Extension agent training was very intensive and practical in orientation. An effort was made to instill a service attitude in the trainees and the training was conducted by experienced, enthusiastic and energetic trainers. Additionally, school teachers, station managers, and farmers were trained. Given the low education level of the extension agents (only 3 years of post primary schooling), it was difficult for them to extend much else other than a set “management package”. However, at the start of the project, a management package had not been developed. Feedback from the extension agents and regular farm visits from the supervisors were essential in developing an appropriate set of recommendations for the prevailing climactic and economic conditions. This management package focused on Oreochromis niloticus stocked at fairly low densities (67 fish per are for beginners and 100 fish per are for better farmers), minimization of water flow-through to maintain highest possible water temperatures, utilization of grasses and other farm by-products for in-pond composting and complete pond draining after 9 to 10 months.

Extension method

The extension agents made weekly visits to groups of farmers. They could usually visit two valleys per day, where they would often work with the farmers at their ponds. The frequent visits were necessary during the period of pond renovation and the first production cycles. As farmers gained more experience, their valley would be put on a bi-weekly and ultimately a monthly visit schedule, allowing the extension agents to include other valleys on the program. Extensionists were instructed to make a special effort to include women in their extension activities because if no special effort was made, they may inadvertently ignore women.

Results

Over the first four years of the project, average pond productivity went from 3.4 to 14.5 kg/are/year, after which the rate of increase slowed down. The last figures available for 1990 indicate average pond productivity of about 16 kg/are/year. This is consistent with good management practices for ponds receiving low quality inputs such as grasses supplemented with small amounts of manure. Better farmers who used wastes from sorghum beer making achieved on average 25 kg/are/year. For a while, the record production was held by farmers, not by government stations. It was 65 kg/are/yr, achieved with tender green leaves, goat manure and sorghum beer waste as inputs. Total number of ponds in the project area (about one third of the country) increased fairly steadily to 3,500 in 1990. However, due to the collective management of the ponds, total number of people involved in fish farming was 10 to 20 thousand (the higher number when members of schools and prisons were counted). About 25 percent of the fish farmers were women. By 1990, reported production of market-size fish attained about 50 tons. However, by extrapolation of pond area and average production, taking into account that an average of 20% of total harvest weight is fingerlings, well over 100 tons per year were probably produced. About 90 percent of the fingerlings used for pond stocking were produced by farmers. Accurate reporting proved to be a problem after about 1992, as farmers became more independent of extension services.

The results of the extension project were encouraging. Hishamunda and Moehl calculate a 41 percent internal rate of return for fish culture as a farm enterprise. The increased cost to the government to maintain the extension program compared to the production increase resulted in a calculated 27 percent internal rate of return.

Conclusions

We now have the benefit of hindsight for this project and there are a couple of things we think should have been done differently. At the end of the contract for technical assistance, the two US technical assistants left the project, which only left two university-trained Rwandese to supervise the 55 extension agents and conduct farmer training sessions. There were some mid-level supervisors but these were relics from the dysfunctional agriculture extension service and notably disinterested in extension. After 5 to 8 years, it became apparent that farmers had more experience and sometimes better understanding than the extension agents. Some of the fish culture extension agents also fell into the bad habits of their associates, the agriculture extension agents. Others had trouble with local governance and were even criticized for not being in their offices enough and for working out in the field every day. Ideally, it would have been good to phase out the special fish culture extension agents and concentrate on farmer training and advising as requested by farmers. For this, an additional 2 to 4 university-trained people would have been needed. (Salary of 55 extension agent is roughly equal to 13 university-trained staff). However, although economically feasible, it was not socially acceptable for the government to do this. Nor were there sufficient numbers of university-trained staff available. In a different country, the good extension agents would be transferred to new areas but this was not socially acceptable in Rwanda. As of 1993, however, the agriculture extension service was re-designed to function on the training and visit system. Fish culture extension was to be incorporated into the overall agriculture extension system although no mention was made of including university-trained special advisors in fish culture. Events in Rwanda prevented implementation of the plan.