SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF THE KOME ISLAND FISHERIES:
REPORT OF A TRIAL FRAME SURVEY

(14th – 16th FEBRUARY 1990)

1. INTRODUCTION

Mr. O.K. Odongkara of the SEC group made a short visit to Kome Islands between 14th and 16th February 1990 in the company of Mr. D. Nyeko, Bio-Statistician on the Project and Mr. Walakira, the Fisheries Assistant stationed at the Kome Islands. The trip was part of the exercise of conducting trials of the frame survey of fishing units and on-shore fishery facilities in the different regions of Project work. The tour covered the islands of Nsadzi, Kiimi, Ngamba, Bulago, the northern section of Kome, Damba and Dwanga Muto, an area within Kome Sub-County, Mukono County in Mukono District. It is an area of approximately 200 km² located 35 km. south-east of Entebbe. Prior to departure, the files of the Fisheries Department were reviewed. It was found that hardly any records existed on Kome. This is rather surprising in view of the fact that the islands are an important source of fish supply to the main urban markets of Entebbe and Kampala and constitute a region in which the productive activities are almost exclusively centred on fishing.

Thirty eight landings were visited and interviews conducted with the most knowledgeable persons identified at the landings at the time of visit. These included Fisheries Department staff, Head Fishermen, Resistance Committee members (RCs), and veteran fishing operators or traders. The tour itinerary and list of persons met is given in Annex 1. Annex 2 provides a map of Kome Islands with the surveyed landings marked according to their code numbers. In Annex 3 various tabulations of the survey data discussed in the text are presented.

2. KOME ISLAND FISHERIES

The Fisheries Assistant stationed on the Kome Islands briefed the team on the situation in the region. There is only one Fisheries staff in the area, responsible for all the islands which constitute the Kome complex. He is stationed on the main Kome Island from where he is required to go out to the other islands to undertake statistical data collection, give extension services and enforce management regulations. In addition to this serious understaffing situation for the large area to be supervised, the officer has to contend with the severe inadequacy of all the basic working facilities. Included here are office accommodation and equipment, transport to access the several scattered islands under the region, and field equipment for statistical data collection. The performance of this officer is severely hindered by this situation. The region is also very remote from the District Office at Mukono to which it reports and is thus poorly supervised and supplied by the District Fisheries Officer. This in part explains why its activities are little reflected in the regular returns of the Mukono Office.

2.1 PRODUCTION

Kome is basically a production area with very limited processing and virtually no marketing undertaken in the region. Nile perch and tilapia are the main species landed with other species namely Bagrus, Clarias and Mormyrus also featuring in the catch in various quantities. The exact magnitudes of production in this region is not known in the absence of any apparent systematic statistics work here. However, on the basis of the number of transport boats delivering fish to the main market landings of Kasenyi, Gaba and Katosi from Kome and the fish loads that they ordinarily carry, Kome could be producing something in the region of 1000 tonnes of fish in a year.

Thirty eight landings were identified on this tour which covered the northern half of the region, and it is estimated that production in the Kome complex is probably being carried on from about double this number of landings. Some of the landings on these islands are quite old, having been in operation for over 40 years, but quite a few have been opened as recently as 1989. This shows that fishing activities in this area have been expanding. The main producing areas appear to be in the vicinities of Kansanvu, Kiimi, Kisigala, Kasali, and Dwanga Muto landings. Marked seasonal variations in catch occur with the result that fishermen migrate between different sites over the course of the year, or even curtail their operations during some periods. At the time of visit the catch level was considered to be at its lowest. Almost one third of the fleet at the surveyed landings was lying idle (Table 1), mainly because returns were so low that operating costs could no longer be covered, particularly for the powered boats. A new threat to fishing in this region is posed by the trawling operations of the Sino-Uganda Joint Venture Ltd. As the survey interviews were taking place, two of the Company's Chinese-built boats were engaded in pair-trawling through the gulfs where hundreds of gillnets were deep-set, much to the consternation of the local fishing communities. Several complaints have already been lodged with the local Fisheries Department Office at Kome. It would be in the interest of all the parties concerned to co-ordinate their operations to minimise the destruction of scarce inputs and maintain smooth social relations in the area.

A count of the boats at the surveyed landings revealed 180 active fishing and 10 transport units and 63 idle boats (Table 1). It could be safely said that about twice this number of units are operating in the whole complex of the Kome islands, with an average of 7 boats of all categories - active and inactive - per landing. Observed numbers in the surveyed area vary from 0 to 34 per landing. The fishing fleet consists essentially of planked boats with occasional occurrences of the dug-out. It perhaps comes as a surprise that these boats are constructed from the mainland and boat construction work is little encountered at these landings (Table 2), given that the islands are known as a source of timber as well as fish.

Single ownership of fishing units characterises production here, reflecting the low level of business organisation in the Kome fishery. Furthermore, the overwhelming majority of the fishing unit owners operate with only one boat, an indicator of the limited capital available to them. Co-operative development is hardly to be seen on Kome, as only 36 of the 500 or so fishermen at the surveyed landings belong to what can loosely be described as a co-operative organisation. These are fishermen based at Kansanvu (Table 2). The failure of the co-operative movement to take root within fishing communities is a common phenomenon but in the Kome situation the high mobility of individual fishermen imposes a particularly strong constraint on the possibility of interest group formation. Co-operative ventures can usefully be undertaken only within medium and long term planning horizons, but fishermens' plans on these islands are at best very short term, and are unable to accommodate any meaningful involvement in a co-operative undertaking. Lack of education is another explanation for the failure of co-operative and other efficient forms of business organisations to take root within the fishing communities in general.

Table 1 summarises additional information collected on fishermen during this survey. A total of 512 crew members were reported to be actively engaged on the fishing and transport boats, averaging 13 crew per landing. Actual numbers range from 0 at Banga, Busiro 3, Buzibira and Lukoko landings all of which have been deserted, to 57 recorded at Kansanvu. In addition there may be about 200 or so idle fishermen whose 63 or so boats are currently lying inactive on the beaches for one reason or another.

This community of fishermen has to contend with quite limited operating facilities and social amenities (Table 2). Fishing equipment and fuel supplies are not available on the islands and have to be secured over the waters from the mainland. Some form of boat repair services are available at 4 of the landings while net repair is only available at 3 landings. No services exist for the 41 powered boats reportedly operating here as fishing and transport units. Access to the landings is primarily by water only. The several foot paths reported in Table 2 are of no significance because they do not really connect the landings to any markets or transportation networks for delivery of the catch to markets. The islands are very poorly served with public health facilities. The complete lack of piped water and the limited use of pit latrines makes the contraction of Schistosomiasis and other water born infections a real threat to the health of the community, particularly in the virtual absence of any medical facilities here.

The principal explanation for this lack of initiative to provide facilities and amenities to the communities is the highly volatile nature of these communities. Widespread mobility, triggered off by fluctuations in the catch, has the result that many fishermen do not regard any particular centre as their “permanent” one. This tendancy is reinforced by the fact that most of the fishermen belong to the mainland, and look forward to returning there at the end of their ventures. During the survey 4 of the landings were found to be deserted and 5 had only recently been opened (less than one year ago). This situation, coupled with the varying definitions of a landing, may explain why surveys undertaken at different time points may come out with diverse information on landings, boats, fishermen, etc., in this region.

2.2 HANDLING & MARKETING

The information collected on fish handling and marketing is summarised in Table 3. As can be observed from the table, Kome could do with many more of the facilities required for fish preparation. The survey obtained information on the market destinations for the catch (Table 4) and found that virtually no fish selling takes place at the landings. This explains the complete absence of display racks or stands as shown in Table 3. All the catch is shifted to the mainland landing markets of Kasenyi (82% of the landings), Gaba (42%), Katosi (18%) and to a lesser extent other landings like Port Bell, using the Uganda Railways Corporation passenger/cargo ferry “M.V. BARBUS”. In an interview with the captain of the vessel, it was reported that the ferry delivers about half a tonne of smoked fish weekly, picked up from Lwazimirule Ferry Terminal during its bi-weekly stop overs at the point.

To get an appreciation of the marketing system for the Kome Island fish, it is important to understand the institution of the middle agent in this trade. Popularly known as the kinara, this agent performs the functions of bulking of the catch, transportation and selling. Operating with a powered boat, the operator collects fish from his clients, who may be stationed on more than one landing, on a daily basis. Consignments are clearly labelled to identify the owners. The kinara man proceeds to sell them at his destination markets for a commission, usually 10% of the gross sales, to cover the cost of transportation and selling services. The prices received by the fishermen are, therefore, the mainland prices less the kinara margins. The growing competition among the kinara units has had a positive effect in ensuring that the fishermen receive reasonably competitive prices for their catch. To strengthen their positions in the trade, a number of kinara operators also act as financiers to the fishermen, offering them fishing materials on credit.

Part of the survey objective was to enumerate the processing facilities at the landings. This information is also given in Table 3. The situation portrayed here is that of very little processing activities going on in the region. Kansanvu alone, with its 34 units, accounts for 55% of the smoking facilities at these centres. Other landings with limited smoking facilities are Kasali (5 units) Kiimi, Kisigala, and Dwanga Muto each with 4 units recorded. At the time of the visit most of the units were not operating due to the poor catch. However, even during normal production periods, the need for smoking is not much because of the efficient kinara operations serving these landings. Fish frying and sun-drying, the product of which is popularly known as bambara, are even less practised, presumably because of the limited market for them.

Virtually no storage facilities were encountered in the survey. This is expected because storage in the case of fish is mainly applicable in the case of extensive processing activities. The product of the limited smoking done on these islands is usually stored in compartments within the smoking structures, thus minimising the need to erect separate storage constructions.

The main means of delivering the catch to market is water transport. The kinara operations have already been described above. Ten such kinara units were registered as being active in the survey. A few others were recorded among the idle boats because of the poor catch at the time. These islands also depend on the kinara for delivery of food. Except for limited activities on the main Kome Island and Bulago, virtually no agriculture takes place on the islands and the residents have to receive supplies of posho, matoke and potatoes in addition to manufactured consumer goods from the mainland. It is clear from the observations that the available kinara units are serving the transport needs of these islands well. The passenger/goods ferry mentioned earlier is not a major fish transporter for Kome Islands, unlike for Ssese Islands from where it delivers an estimated 6 tonnes of processed fish weekly to Kampala. It helps mainly in delivering timber from Kome to Kampala and in return it brings general merchandise, namely soap, posho, sugar textile etc. from Kampala. According to the captain, the ship is generally underutilised. It is up to the management of this ferry to think of ways and means of making this ferry do the job for which it was introduced -- that is, that of stimulating development in the region instead of simply doing what the kinara can do even more efficiently.

Transport within the landings is quite limited, but since these islands are rather small, this does not constitute a major limitation to the social life of the communities. The data on transport facilities are presented in Table 5.

2.3 WATER ACCIDENTS

The last area of concern on the survey was to obtain data on water accidents. This is an issue that is overlooked in the existing Fisheries Department statistical information system. Inquires were made on the number of water accidents in Kome during the year 1989, including the number of lives lost and any resulting loss of property. The findings are summarised in Table 6. A total of 8 accidents took place at the surveyed landings during 1989, involving the loss of 10 lives. In 2 of the accidents fishing gear was lost and in 3 of them fish loads were lost. Lwazimirule was the worst landing, in that half the accidents took place there and four people lost their lives. The general opinion is that the loss of life through water accidents in this small area is altogether too high, and that there is a need for further safety measures to be instituted. In two of the accidents, one at Bugiri and the other at Lwazimirule, youths feel into deep water and drowned because they couldn't swim. In the third, an unseaworthy boat from Kiimi capsized in an encounter with a hippopotamus and two people died. These are accidents which could have been avoided, had people exercised more care and safety sense.

3 GENERAL REMARKS

In as far as this trip was undertaken primarily to test the questionnaire and the approach for the frame survey, it could be said that the frame design is quite effective as a means of extracting information on fisheries facilities and, by implication, the activities and operations of the fishing units. This is despite the fact that some minor problems were encountered in defining an inactive boat, what constitutes a landing, what can be accepted as an access to a landing, etc. The trip revealed a whole fishery at Kome which has hitherto been little reported upon, even though it obviously plays a big role in supplying fish to the major Kampala/Entebbe markets.

ANNEX 1
TOUR ITINERARY AND LIST OF PERSONS MET

ITINERARY

PERSONS MET

ANNEX 2
SKETCH MAP OF KOME ISLANDS SURVEY AREA

ANNEX 3
SURVEY DATA TABLES

TABLE 1: BOATS AND CREW AT SURVEYED KOME LANDINGS

TABLE 2: FACILITIES/AMENITIES AT SURVEYED KOME LANDINGS

NOTE: “W” = Water Only
“F” = Foot Path
 N" = Not Available

TABLE 3: HANDLING, PROCESSING & STORAGE FACILITIES AT SURVEYED KOME LANDINGS

NOTE “N” = Not Available

TABLE 4: MARKET DESTINATIONS FOR SURVEYED KOME LANDINGS

NOTE “Y” = Yes

TABLE 5: TRANSPORT FACILITIES AT SURVEYED KOME LANDINGS

TABLE 6: WATER ACCIDENTS AT SURVEYED KOME LANDINGS IN 1989

FISHIN NOTES & RECORDS

LIST OF DOCUMENTS
(To Feb. 1990)

FIELD REPORTS

Coenen, E., 1988. Mission report, Tororo District, 29/11 – 1/12/88. BIOSTAT Field Report No. 1, FISHIN Notes and Records. Fisheries Statistics and Information Systems, FAO/UNDP Project UGA/87/007.

Ikwaput, J., 1989. Report on the mission to Iganga District, 29/5 – 2/6/1989. BIOSTAT Field Report No. 8, FISHIN Notes and Records. Fisheries Statistics and Information Systems, FAO/UNDP Project UGA/87/007.

Kirema-Mukasa, C.T., & J.E. Reynolds, 1989. Brief notes on fisheries production, marketing and credit facilities in Uganda. SEC Field Report No. 11. FISHIN Notes and Records. Fisheries Statistics and Information Systems, FAO/UNDP Project UGA/87/007.

Nyeko, D., 1989. Report on the tour of south-western lakes: George and Edward landings. BIOSTAT Field Report No. 7. FISHIN Notes and Records. Fisheries Statistics and Information Systems, FAO/UNDP Project UGA/87/007.

Odongkara, O.K., 1989a. Visit to Kasenyi Landing: 20th January, 1989. SEC Field Report No. 1, FISHIN Notes Records. Fisheries Statistics and Information Systems, FAO/UNDP Project UGA/87/007.

Odongkara, O.K., 1989b. Preliminary report on Kichwamba Region landings: 4th – 7th February, 1989. SEC Field Report No. 2, FISHIN Notes and Records. Fisheries Statistics and Information Systems, FAO/UNDP Project UGA/87/007.

Reynolds, J.E., C.T. Kirema-Mukasa & O.K. Odongkara, 1989. Trip to Jinja Town and UFFRO. SEC Field Report No. 3, FISHIN Notes and Records. Fisheries Statistics and Information Systems, FAO/UNDP Project UGA/87/007.

Reynolds, J.E. & C.T. Kirema-Mukasa, 1989a. Visit to Kampala markets. SEC Field Report No. 4, FISHIN Notes and Records. Fisheries Statistics and Information Systems, FAO/UNDP Project UGA/87/007.

Reynolds, J.E., 1989b. Notes on Kichwamba Region. SEC Field Report No. 6, FISHIN Notes and Records. Fisheries Statistics and Information Systems, FAO/UNDP Project UGA/87/007.

Reynolds, J.E., 1989c. Brief notes on fisheries production, marketing, and credit facilities in Uganda. SEC Field Report No. 11, FISHIN Notes and Records. Fisheries Statistics and Information Systems, FAO/UNDP Project UGA/87/007.

Reynolds, J.E. & O.K. Odongkara, 1989a. Preliminary notes on Iganga District landings. SEC Field Report No. 5, FISHIN Notes and Records. Fisheries Statistics and Information Systems, FAO/UNDP Project UGA/87/007.

Reynolds, J.E., 1989b. Fish marketing and distribution in Tororo and Mbale Regions: a brief survey. SEC Field Report No. 7, FISHIN Notes and Records. Fisheries Statistics and Information Systems, FAO/UNDP Project UGA/87/007.

Reynolds, J.E., 1989c. Socio-economic aspects of fisheries development in Uganda: The ‘FISHIN’ Project. SEC Field Report No. 10, FISHIN Notes and Records. Fisheries Statistics and Information Systems, FAO/UNDP Project UGA/87/007.

Tumwebaze, R., 1989a. Mission report to Kasenyi Fish Landing (20/01/1989). BIOSTAT Field Report No. 5, FISHIN Notes and Records. Fisheries Statistics and Information Systems, FAO/UNDP Project UGA/87/007.

Tumwebaze, R., 1989b. Report on the tour of Masaka Region - Lake Victoria. BIOSTAT Field Report. No. 6, FISHIN Notes and Records. Fisheries Statistics and Information Systems, FAO/UNDP Project UGA/87/007.

Wadanya, J., 1989a. Report on the tour of Kichwamba Region: the area of Lakes George - Edward and Kazinga Channel Complex. BIOSTAT Field Report No. 2, FISHIN Notes and Records. Fisheries Statistics and Information Systems, FAO/UNDP Project UGA/87/007.

Wadanya, J., 1989b. Report of the visit to Kigungu Landing. BIOSTAT Field Report No. 3, FISHIN Notes and Records. Fisheries Statistics and Information Systems, FAO/UNDP Project UGA/87/007.

OTHER DOCUMENTS

FAO/UNDP, 1988. Project Document: Rehabilitation of Fisheries Statistics and Information Systems - Project UGA/87.007.

Ikwaput, J. & R. Tumwebaze, 1989. The present status of fisheries data collection and analysis in Uganda. BIOSTAT Working Paper No. 3, FISHIN Notes and Records. Fisheries Statistics and Information Systems, FAO/UNDP Project UGA/87/007.

Orach-Meza, E.J.Coenen & J.E.Reynolds, 1989. Past and recent trends in the exploitation of the Great Lakes fisheries of Uganda. Paper presented at the International Symposium on Resource Use and Conservation of the Great Lakes. Bujumbura, 29/11 – 2/12/89.

Reynolds, J.E., J. Wadanya, & D. Nyeko, eds., 1989. Fisheries statistics and information management in Uganda: past approaches, current status, and future prospects. Field Document No. 1, FISHIN Notes and Records. Fisheries Statistics and Information Systems, FAO/UNDP Project UGA/87/007.

FISHIN PROJECT - UGA/87/007
FAO/UNDP
P.O. Box 521
KAMPALA, UGANDA