The population in the area is composed of a diverse group of people coming in with different ideas and norms, and sometimes having obligations and interests in other areas. The people in the area move around a great deal -- this makes it very difficult to really understand what is going on and come to some form of dialogue and communication. It is very difficult to define who are “the fishermen” and who are “the traders”: individuals can be alternatively fishermen or traders. It is also difficult to identify groups which could represent the different people. Most forms of cooperation are ad hoc, revolve around a common interest, and vanish when they are no longer functional.
Although the traditional authorities have lost power, they are still respected. The group “aba-kaya” seems to have strong links with traditional authorities, while the fishermen's association seems to represent mainly the ‘abeni’. Thus, the traditional authorities need to be included in any effort at coordination and cooperation.
Fishermen's associations, being locally based, could have a big role to play in control and management, in any fishery. This potential should be assessed, a dialogue started with the associations, and they should be supported without “taking them over”.
In their relationship with fishermen, the Department of Fisheries (DoF) presents itself as both their advisor and their controller. These two activities conflict with each other. It would be advisable to separate the two. Coordination and division of tasks with the local police may be useful.
In terms of enforcement of management regulations, more effort could be put into the promotion and development of a legal distribution system to improve access of fishermen to (legal) nets. At the same time, coordination with the institutions that are providing credit is necessary to prevent a situation whereby fishermen can get loans for nets which the (DoF) is trying to discourage, and fishermen operating in restricted Mifimbo zones are assisted in their fishing operations.
Since lake fishermen have noticed the effect of closure of the lake, and since they all want the government to reintroduce the fish ban, it is very important that the (DoF) gets the political and material support to do that in the coming season.
As regards the depletion of fuel wood for fish processing and domestic uses, it would be interesting to develop other conservation methods to which resource - poor processors still have access. At the same time it could be investigated whether wood-saving ovens used elsewhere in the world, would be worth promotion. Improved charcoal stoves could decrease the need for fuel.
Emphasis was put on collecting information about individual household members and not about ‘the household’ as a unit. This was useful for gathering information on the interests of individual men and women. In some cases both the husband and the wife were interviewed separately, e.g., a female team member interviewed the wife and a male team member interviewed the husband individually and on a separate occasion. This provided some interesting comparative information. The interviews took between half an hour and one hour. The group interviews took longer, up to two and a half hours. Group interviews were sometimes arranged, but several interviews turned into group interviews when other people joined in the discussion. This was encouraged, while the interview was usually deliberately changed from asking about the opinion of the individual to more general discussion topics on the opinions of the group and the people. Group discussions were in general lively and useful because of the possibility of provoking discussions. People seemed to be less shy, and in some cases ‘socially acceptable’ statements were countered by others.
Communication among team members before the research was limited. The members were recruited via their superiors and informed by their superiors. They were picked up from their various bases and briefed in the field. This was not very satisfactory. For the members, the research approach was new and the fact that they were not given a standardized questionnaire made them uncertain. The members also had the tendency to confirm people's expectations that ‘the government’ -- of which they are of course a part —would usher in a new deal. Our presence created expectations among the people; but it was important to be frank and honest with them and not encourage such high expections — which may eventually lead to disappointment. You may lose an enthusiastic respondent by being honest, but that's a risk you must take.
The late introduction of the team was due to several circumstances: there was no time to visit team members beforehand or organize a training workshop. This was partly because of the late release of funds and partly because the need for that was under-estimated. A more thorough preparation as a team is advisable.
