The idea behind having a policy is to make aquaculturists culture fish, shrimps, etc. in a viable manner and so that Governments' development objectives are fulfilled. The policy must clearly address those who are involved.
The study group sees a Jamaican national aquaculture policy essentially as two sets of instructions or guidelines. The first is directed towards present and potential aquaculturists (subsistence, small commercial, corporate); the second towards civil servants whose task it is to promote/regulate aquaculture activities in the private and public sector. However, the study group has not seen it to be its task to provide detailed instructions or guidelines, but rather to describe their nature and purpose.
The previous chapter concluded with a list indicating the order of priority which the study group considers the Government should give to its development effort in aquaculture; that is, the order of priority amongst culture systems. The list corresponds to the situation of the Jamaican economy in early 1983. Changes in the economy and in Government economic policy may influence the Government's list of priorities and therefore its policy towards aquaculture.
The study group therefore has done two things. First, it has outlined an aquaculture ‘production’ policy it believes Government may want to adopt for present and potential aquaculturists in Jamaica in 1983–1984. Second, it has identified an institutional machinery with a dual function; (i) to implement Government policy, and (ii) to review and update the policy in view of economic conditions and political priorities.
This chapter will describe the ‘production’ policy and then the institutional machinery. Given Jamaica's present policy for economic development, it is focused on two issues: (i) the access that aquaculture producers have to inputs, and (ii) the freedom of disposing of their products as they see fit. Before these subjects are discussed, the chapter will address the all-important role of pilot-scale trials intended to verify the local viability of proposed culture system.
At present the Government of Jamaica encourages the formation of enterprises. It intervenes in this process at little as possible. Control in effect is achieved almost exclusively by regulating the use of factors of production.
Aquaculturists need basically the same inputs (or factors of production) as does the agriculturist: land, water, animal feed, fertilizer, labour and credit. The only significant difference is the type of animal reared.
However, in an incipient industry, as is aquaculture in Jamaica, the most important input to production is know-how; the knowledge of how to combine the physical factors of production and of how to cope with unexpected results.
Of the aquaculture systems recommended, only pond-culture of tilapia and oyster culture, although less conclusively, are proven in Jamaica. However, the study group expects on the basis of experience elsewhere that the other three systems (raceway culture of tilapia, pond culture of fresh water shrimp, and pen culture of marine fish) will turn out to be similarly proven in the next few years.
However, aquaculture production technology is, as a whole, not yet standardized. The reasons are basically two. First, any aquaculture venture (which is not of the very intensive type) is influenced by the natural environment; and second, and equally important, standardized genetic stocks of fish and crustacea are not available. Different strains of any one species in one and the same environment may react differently to man's husbandry efforts.
Therefore, pilot-scale activities are essential in order to avoid wasted efforts (particularly when they relate to pond-based aquaculture where the investment in ponds can be significant). The pilot-scale trials should be carried out before Government, through whatever agency, encourages local resources to be used by as yet inexperienced aquaculturists, however enthusiastic.
Thus, Government should handle its ‘borrowed’ know-how (some of it reflected in Annex 9 of this report) very carefully. It is essential that investors (or farmers) be told clearly the approximate nature of the information available, and the fact that local peculiarities may cause considerable deviations of results.
Given the need for pilot project activities, there is at present little justification in giving subsidies to as yet unproven culture technology (culture of fresh water prawn, raceway culture of tilapia, pen culture of marine fish).
The study group holds the view that as a rule aquaculturists should be allowed access to inputs on the same conditions as are agriculturists or livestock farmers. However, there are two exceptions. These concern land and fresh water, which are available to man in almost fixed amounts. That is, the amount is fixed in relation to man's efforts; he can slightly modify the amount available but not so significantly as he can modify the amount available of inputs such as fertilizer, animal feed, credit or labour.
Water: The fish farmer is not a great user of water. Mostly he borrows it. In fact, some culture systems can be conducted in areas where activities neither add nor subtract water from the water mass in which they are carried out (e.g. pens and cages in reservoirs, lakes, lagoons, etc.). Fish culture in raceways uses little water, however contradictory this might appear at first sight. The reason is that water is not lost to seepage, only to evaporation, and as the water surface in a raceway system is small in relation to the volume of water that flows through the unit, the quantity lost to evaporation is infinitesimal.
The study group therefore recommends that water charges to be paid by aquaculturists (e.g. those having ponds in irrigation areas) be related only to the water actually used (that is, lost to evaporation and/or seepage) and not to the water that runs through the fish farm and is restituted (through pumping or gravity flow) to the irrigation (or natural surface) water. Such a regulation would encourage economic use of water.
Land: In order to minimize pond construction costs and maximize pond productivity, potential fish farmers opt for the best agricultural land. This may not be the best solution for the economy as a whole. While the soil, to reduce pond construction cost, should be impermeable, the need for fertile soils is in fact not overriding, as fish farmers can compensate by using organic and/or chemical fertilizers. However, the soil should not have pH values much different from those tolerated by the species to be cultivated.
The ideal pond construction land is the gently sloping, open, rockless (down to 1.5 to 2 metres) valley with a soil that is impermeable while not being agriculturally very productive. The land should preferably have the capability to be flooded from surface waters (irrigation and/or natural streams).
The study group feels that in the following areas the Government should attempt to identify lands which qualify under the above description: BRUMDEC, Cabarita River Basin, Queen of Spain's Valley, Milk River Valley, Blue Mountain Valley. Once identified, Government promotional efforts (related to pond-based fresh water aquaculture) should be focused primarily on these areas.
The study group considered in detail the situation which aquaculturists face when attempting to use the following inputs: fresh water, sheltered marine bays, fish feed, fertilizer, male tilapia fingerlings, PL's of M. rosenbergii. These considerations are listed in detail in Annex 11. The principal policy recommendations are listed below:
Fresh water. In areas other than those designated for fresh water pond culture, the Government should encourage fish cages or use of raceways as a means of reducing water usage. The Government should ensure that aquaculture production units located in irrigation areas have physical installations such that they can return used water back to the irrigation system.
Fish feed. There is no need to subsidize fish feed or otherwise make it available to the industry on conditions other than those faced by the livestock industry.
Sheltered bays. The Government should designate Port Morant and the Portland Bight areas as mariculture sites, leaving the bays on the northern coast for other activities (primarily tourism).
Fertilizer. The Government should encourage the use of organic fertilizers instead of imported chemical fertilizers.
Male tilapia fingerlings. The Government should gradually increase the sale price of male tilapia fingerlings until it equals production costs. It should also facilitate the establishment of commercial fingerling production units, and intensify research on sex reversal of tilapia fingerlings.
PL's of M. rosenbergii. The Government should encourage use of the local hatchery facility.
Land for pond culture of marine shrimp. The Government should attempt to ensure that any pilot project for pond culture of marine shrimp be located at Black River, and that the total pond area not exceed 10 hectares. Nearby land should be reserved to allow for expansion to a commercial facility.
In principle, Jamaican aquaculturists have two markets for their products: the local market and the export market. It is the study group's view that during the next two to three years aquaculturists in Jamaica will produce mostly tilapia, and possibly some oysters. It is unlikely that other aquaculture products will be available in significant quantities. However, in 1985 fresh water prawns should start to come onto the market.
As the volumes of production are small, there is no need at present for elaborate physical arrangements which would not be rationally used. The investments involved could not yet be justified. In the immediate future it is only the local market that is of interest. Therefore, in 1983 and 1984 the most important contribution that the Government can make to the industry is one of helping to increase awareness in Jamaica of the availability and quality of aquaculture products.
Policy must be formulated jointly with, and primarily for, the private sector (subsistence, small farmers or corporate ventures). Policy will be conditioned by the fact that the inputs used are common to aquaculturists, agriculturists and others (e.g. the tourist industry, which is in direct competition with any potential mariculture industry for sheltered bays). Therefore, policy formulation will always involve several branches of government and cannot be handled single-handedly by any ministry or authority.
The study group recommends that a ‘National Aquaculture Development Committee’ (NADC) be formed. It must include representatives of the private sector (as defined above) and should have representatives of all concerned Government agencies. It should meet not less frequently than once every four months under the chairmanship of the Minister of Agriculture. It should review developments affecting the aquaculture sector, including the activities of Government itself, and propose such modifications to existing policies and Government activities as it deems adequate. It should have a full-time secretary (knowledgeable in aquaculture and with proven administrative capabilities) who should be housed in the National Planning Agency. The secretary in addition to serving the NADC (agendas, minutes of meetings, obtaining views on questions of importance) should establish an aquaculture information centre with emphasis on foreign developments in fields of interest to Jamaica.
The implementation of policy will be affected through a number of Government agencies. NADC will monitor policy implementation and appraise results.
The study group has found it worthwhile to distinguish two ways of implementing policy: control (or surveillance that ‘rules’ are not broken), and promotion (attempting to make the private aquaculturist engage in one particular type of aquaculture, or adopt one particular way of culture).
Presently, nationally appropriate use of water is ensured through controls. Permission is needed from the Underground Water Authority before a ground-water well can be drilled. The NRCD issues permits for any activity - including aquaculture - carried out in coastal waters. At present, ‘aquaculture business’ is probably a very small part of both agencies' activities and the rules under which permissions are granted were not developed especially considering the needs particular to aquaculture activities. The study group does not believe that this type of policy implementation can be done away with. At present the only possible changes are of an administrative kind: imposition of a maximum number of days for granting approvals or licenses.
The Inland Fisheries Unit (IFU) is the principal branch of Government presently concerned with promoting aquaculture in Jamaica. The University of the West Indies (Mona campus) might have such a role but is not presently exercising it. The IFU is now facing the task of (i) expanding pond culture of tilapia, and (ii) popularizing the culture of mangrove oysters. It should also design and implement pilot projects to prove the project viability of pond culture of fresh water prawns, raceway culture of tilapia and pen culture of marine fish.
It is likely that corporate scale aquaculture will develop in Jamaica during the coming decade. The corporate sector will need to employ Jamaican aquaculturists. Given the significant difference in salary levels between employees in the Government and the private sector it is likely that the IFU will lose its trained and experienced personnel to the private sector within the next few years. This would probably lead to a reduction of the present pond-based fish production and possibly to a virtual elimination of the Government's capacity to bring new know-how and technology to the medium and small-sized farmer.
The study group therefore recommends that the Government create an ‘Aquaculture Promotion Ltd.’. The Government should be majority shareholder but let the company be managed and staffed by a private enterprise. The management fee should be a function of (a) profits, (b) employment generation in the private sector, and (c) export earnings from aquaculture.
The study group recommends that ‘Aquaculture Promotion Ltd.’, have the following terms of reference:
to fund and manage pilot projects in aquaculture;
to participate with equity capital in private aquaculture production units, but without becoming the largest shareholder;
to manage any aquaculture development project funded with bilateral or multilateral aid funds (against a management fee);
to establish, if found appropriate, an aquaculture service company meant to provide inputs, and buy outputs, from small aquaculture producers;
to develop and conduct fee-paying courses through which proven technology be imparted to private aquaculturists;
to lease aquaculture managers on short or long-term contracts to the private sector; and
to report to NADC.
Government staff should be permitted to work for Aquaculture Promotion Ltd., for periods of up to a year at a time without forfeiting the right to their posts in Government.
If organized in this manner the Government would, through the Aquaculture Promotion Ltd., achieve the following advantages:
private enterprise managerial ability would be used to ensure efficient use of public resources allocated to aquaculture promotion;
competent IFU staff would be able to continue their work serving all sectors of the aquaculture industry without foregoing the income which their talent can command; and,
pilot-project activities (in the study group's view the most important condition for future large-scale aquaculture development) will go ahead without waiting for the participation of foreign investors/technology vendors.
