Previous Page Table of Contents Next Page


Country review: India (East coast)


Peter Flewwelling and Gilles Hosch
FAO Consultants, Fishery Policy and Planning Division, Fisheries Department
December 2003

INTRODUCTION

This review is concerned with the Eastern States of India[127], facing the Eastern Indian Ocean. The States are Tamil Nadu in the south-east, Andhra Pradesh and Orissa further north, and West Bengal, bordering with Bangladesh. Included are the Union territory of Pondicherry[128], and the Andaan and Nicobar Islands (A&N Islands) in the Bay of Bengal.

India is one of the largest countries in the world, with a combined coastline of 8 041 km in length, and an EEZ of 2.02 million km2 (FAO, 2000). With a land area of 3.3 million km2, India is referred to as a sub-continent in its own right. India is bordering with Pakistan in the north-west, China in the north, Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh and Myanmar to the north-east. The Ganges drains a substantial part of India’s northern states, and drains into the Bay of Bengal after passing Calcutta, not far from the border with Bangladesh.

There are marked oceanographic differences between east and west coasts, with the prolific monsoon-driven upwelling system found along India’s west coast.[129]

In mid-year 2002, the population was estimated to stand at 1.03 billion people. 28 percent of the population lives in urban centres, illiteracy is high at 41 percent, and child malnutrition stands at 47 percent for children under five years of age. 29 percent of the people live under the national poverty line.[130] 360 million live in coastal areas, and 6.7 million are fishermen, including, full-time, part-time and occasional fishermen (Vivekanandan, 2002). About 2.4 million are employed full-time in marine capture fisheries (Flewwelling, 2000). Fishing communities generally rank amongst the poorest in India (GoI, 2001). Just over one third of full-time fishermen are located on India’s east coast, and 70 percent of the marine fish production originates from the west coast.

India’s economy has shown good long-term growth, with an average growth rate of 5.6 percent for the decade leading up to 1992, and 6.1 percent during the decade to 2002. The structure of the economy has changed over the last 20 years, with the agriculture contribution to GDP falling from over one third in 1982 to only one quarter in 2002, and the service sector growing from 37.2 percent in 1982, to 49.2 percent in 2002 - representing now virtually half of India’s economy. The contribution of the manufacturing industry to the economy has remained stable at roughly 26 percent throughout this period. Exports of marine products have quadrupled, growing from US$313 million in 1982 to US$1.2 billion in 2002.[131]

POLICY FRAMEWORK

Unlike most other developing countries, India has never signed a fisheries access agreement with a distant water fishing nation (DWFN), and has persisted for decades in its attempts to develop its own offshore industrial fisheries by nationally-owned interests. With respect to marine capture fisheries, the inshore fisheries have always been the most important sub-sector, both in terms of catch and numbers of people depending on the fisheries.

State and Government policy focuses on developing fisheries at all levels, with the aim to sustain or increase production and to guarantee continued growth of the sector. Modernization of the fleet and upgrading of infrastructure receives attention through subsidies, though amounts are modest, and one-time payments. This production-oriented focus applies especially to the activities of the Ministry of Agriculture and related Departments responsible for capture fisheries, at both Union and State levels, with significant variations across States and Union territories.

Interestingly, India is one of the world leaders in terms of establishing associations and societies formed by fishing communities, workers, and other stakeholder related to the sector.[132] These organizations develop and defend positions, publish findings, and influence authorities on policy formulation and management options. Government encourages the formation of associations in all sectors (aquaculture, inland fisheries, mariculture, coastal fishing, offshore fishing, etc.) in order to put in place an enabling framework to engage in discussions with stakeholders, to receive realistic reports of field activities, constructive recommendations for strategy and policy formulation, and to receive feedback on government proposals.

India distinguishes between two types of marine capture fisheries, each one ruled by its particular legal regime. These are: a) coastal fisheries, and b) deep sea fisheries. Coastal fisheries fall under State jurisdiction, and take place within the first 12 nautical miles from the base line out to sea. Deep-sea fisheries are those operations taking place between 12 nautical miles and the outer boundary of the EEZ, falling under the jurisdiction of the Union Government. In practical terms, most coastal fishing operations take place in waters less than 50 meters in depth, and are carried out from small-scale vessels, generally less than 20m LOA. Deep sea fishing is generally meant to indicate industrial operations, but in practical terms, some small-scale craft targeting particular resources are found to operate all the way to the outer boundaries of the EEZ.

Coastal Fishing Policy

Coastal Fishing Policy is defined by an open access regime, which has given rise to a sector with many entrants exploiting coastal marine resources to their full potential. The current legal framework provides for conflict minimisation between traditional and industrial sub-sectors, with little emphasis on sustainable management of the resources.[133]

Government has initiated a range of schemes that aim to develop and modernize the traditional inshore sector. Modernisation focuses on improvements to: a) types of fishing craft used, replacing old and heavy materials with newer, more durable and lighter ones, b) materials used in fishing gears, such as nets, and c) motorization and mechanization[134] of the fleet.

Vivekanandan (2002) lists five separate, centrally-funded programmes to develop coastal marine fisheries. It must be noted though, that the scope of these programmes are subject to budget constraints, and may not necessarily represent significantly large programmes:

In addition to this, Government supports the construction of major and minor fishing ports, bearing all the costs of major developments, and entering cost-sharing arrangements with State Governments for smaller projects. Welfare of coastal fishing communities is one of the objectives of fisheries development. Attention is also directed at the post-harvest sector through programmes to strengthen fish marketing infrastructure. This included facilitating the acquisition of cooling vans, cold storage, ice plants, bicycles, etc.[136]

Coastal Fishing Policy is thus production and export oriented and under the control of State Governments with support from the National/Union Government.

Deep-Sea Fishing Policy

Deep-Sea Fishing Policy is the responsibility of, and developed by the Union Government.[137] Since the declaration of its EEZ in 1976, the intent was to develop its own deep-sea fishing capacity. This was attempted through a series of joint ventures that have not been successful. The first deep-sea policy was announced by Government in 1977, providing for chartering arrangements with foreign operators. The 1981 Maritime Zones of India (Regulation of Fishing by Foreign Vessels) Act requires 60 percent of capital to be held by Indian citizens in joint venture companies, and an obligation to train Indian fishermen. A newer Deep Sea Fishing Policy was developed in 1986, and was revised in 1991.[138] This policy was rescinded by Government in September 1996, under pressure of the National Fishworkers’ Forum (NFF), highlighting serious conflicts between the domestic small-scale and industrial joint venture fleets.[139]

In late 2002, a new set of Guidelines for deep-sea fishing was announced by the Government. The focus now lies on the registration status of vessels, rather than mode of acquisition of vessels under charter arrangements and joint ventures - as was the case under previous policies. In combination with new legislation ruling foreign investments, fishing companies with 100 percent foreign-owned capital may now register as Indian companies and fly the Indian flag.[140], [141]

Under the new 21-point Guidelines there are no obligations to land catch in India, to train Indian crews, and to pay license fees commensurate with the value of targeted catches. Therefore, potential benefits for the economy and fishing interests of India remain completely indistinguishable (Mathew, 2003). Further, the Guidelines do not reflect the new deep-sea fishing policy proposed by the Gopakumar Committee Report,[142] which awaits formal Government acceptance. This means that by the end of 2003, the deep-sea fishing sector has been evolving in a policy vacuum for more than seven years.[143]

Fisheries policies of India have been developed with few linkages between the sectors, based on dated legislation, and focused on increased production with little emphasis on conservation, sustainability or responsible fisheries management

LEGAL FRAMEWORK

The various facets of marine capture fisheries and marine habitat fall under the responsibility of several agencies and Ministries, at both the Union Government and State levels. Items on List I (Union List) are dealt with by the Union Government, and items on List II are dealt with by State Governments. List III contains a list of items which fall under the shared responsibility of both the Union Government and the States (Concurrent List), and both the Indian Parliament and the State Legislatures have power to pass laws regarding these items. The Lists are enshrined in the Constitution of India. Table I provides a summary overview of core items related to marine capture fisheries, presenting the agencies/Ministries responsible for legislating and implementation.

There are no legal provisions in place below State level to legislate for fisheries management at the local level. As noted by Matthew (2003), most vessels either have a sharing arrangement between capital and labour or an incentive system for workers. The sharing system is the norm in India as opposed to wages and is unique in that it can include all members of a fishing crew, whether or not they fish, widows of former crew members lost while fishing and even down to the village barber.

The current legal framework for fisheries hinges around a series of Acts, which do not directly deal with, or simply fail to mention the sustainable management of fisheries resources. The only Indian legislation mentioning “undertaking measures for the conservation and management of offshore and deep-sea fisheries” is the Marine Products Export Development Authority Act of 1972 (Mathew, 2003).[144] Although the Territorial Waters, Continental Shelf, Exclusive Economic Zone and other Maritime Zones Act that followed in 1976 recognizes the sovereign rights to conservation and management of living resources in the Indian EEZ [145] as well as providing Central Government with the power to legislate for the conservation and management of the marine living resources within the EEZ,[146] the ensuing Maritime Zones of India (Regulation of Fishing by Foreign Vessels) Act of 1981, and its regulations of 1982,[147] do not mention conservation or management of fisheries resources (Mathew, 2003).

TABLE 1
Marine fisheries-related areas of competence

Item

Agency/Ministry/Department

· Deep Sea fishing (List I)


· Survey & assessment of fisheries resources


· Research

Ministry of Agriculture /
Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying

· Training & extension


· Aquaculture development


· Monitoring of fishing by foreign vessels (List I)


· Prevention of marine pollution by ships

Ministry of Defence /
Coast Guard

· Protection of endangered species (Wildlife Protection Act, 1972)


· Fish processing

Ministry of Food Processing

· Processing units


· Seafood exports (List I)

Ministry of Commerce & Industry /
Marine Products Export Development Authority (MPEDA)

· Quality control

Export Inspection Council (EIC)

· Law of the Sea negotiations (List I)

Ministry of External Affairs

· Potential fishing zones

Department of Ocean Development (DoD)

· Monitoring ocean pollution


· Fishing vessel industry (List I)


· Major fishing ports (List I)

Ministry of Shipping

· Minor fishing ports (List II)


· Aquaculture in territorial waters (List II)


· Fisheries in territorial waters (List II)

State Government /
Department of Fisheries

· Protection of marine biodiversity (List III)


· Protection of coastal habitats (List III)

Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF)

· Focal point for Ramsar, CITES, CMS & CBD Conventions (List III)


Since maritime States are responsible for marine fisheries legislation within the territorial sea[148] (List II item; see table 1), States proceeded to develop their own Maritime Fishing Regulation Acts and Regulations.[149] The driving force behind these Acts was the rising number of serious conflicts between artisanal fishermen and trawlers. The ensuing Acts and Regulations focused principally on provisions enabling the regulating of fishing vessel operations and movements in the territorial sea, aiming at protecting traditional fishermen, and maintaining law and order. This legislation failed to provide for limited access, effective legal action against infringements, and inter-State vessel movements (Mathew, 2003). The West Bengal Act did not provide for a protected exclusive zone for traditional craft operations, which is given in the other three States; the reason being that few conflicts between traditional fishing vessels with trawlers exist, trawling being undertaken in waters further offshore. Some Acts also left fisheries officers with discretionary powers in granting fishing licenses for motorized vessel owners and assigning areas of operation.[150] Under this system of Union Acts, State Acts and Regulations, legislative frameworks have evolved with respect to fisheries production but not with respect to the sustainable management of fisheries.

The absence of legislation relating to the planning and implementing of responsible fisheries management leaves the executive arms of Ministries and Departments at Union and State levels in a considerable legal void.

It is reported that mechanisms for consultation and the involvement of stakeholders in the management process do exist. Co-management arrangements are being actively discussed (Kurien, 2000), and partly applied, even if not formally enshrined in the law.[151] It is also reported that more than 2/3 of fisheries are managed in some way and input controls are part of legislation. However, the effectiveness of implementation is subject to debate and examples of some of the more important fisheries that remain in need of management efforts include shark and sea cucumber fisheries.[152]

STATUS OF THE FISHERIES

It is important to note that next to marine capture fisheries, there are important freshwater fisheries and freshwater and marine aquaculture sectors operating in India. In 2001, overall fish production stood at 6.0 million tonnes, accounting for approximately four percent of the world production. Of which, marine, freshwater, and aquaculture production levels were 2.9, 0.98, and 2.1 million tonnes, respectively (FAO FishStat).[153] In that year, marine capture fisheries represented 48 percent of the overall national fish production and marine capture production from the east-coast States represented 48 percent (.94 million tonnes) of marine capture production.[154] However, in the 2001-2002 period, the four east coast states produced 95 percent of the national cultivated shrimp production (MPEDA, 2002).

India’s fisheries are characterised by marked differences between west and east coast in terms of numbers of fishers, and distribution of assets. The eastern seaboard counts for 55 percent of the total number of fishing vessels, while the western seaboard counts for 65 percent of the total active fisher’s population.

India’s fisheries are small-scale in nature. On the eastern seaboard, some 70 percent of all vessels are non-motorized and face stiff competition from mechanised operations. Vessel sizes range from 5 m LOA to 30 m LOA, with most vessels less than 20 m LOA. The fisheries are difficult to categorise, and boundaries between subsistence, artisanal and small-scale commercial are fluid.[155] Vivekanandan (2002) splits the fisheries into mechanized and artisanal sectors. Mechanized vessels have inboard engines and are used for purse-seining, longlining, gillnetting and trawling operations.[156] Artisanal craft on the east coast consist of catamarans and plank-built boats.[157] This coastal, small-scale sector (mechanized and artisanal combined) contributes the bulk of the marine catch.[158] Only one percent of the marine catch originates from vessels more than 20 m LOA (Mathew, 2003).

In 1991, the Ministry of Agriculture estimated the total MSY for the marine waters of India to be approximately 3.9 million tonnes; of which 2.2 million tonnes from inshore waters (<50m depth), and 1.2 million tonnes from offshore grounds. The marine capture fisheries production of 2000 stood at 2.75 tonnes, of which 0.5 tonnes were estimated to have originated from offshore operations (>50m depth).[159] This implies that inshore MSY levels as established by Government have been reached sometime after 1995[160] for the inshore zones, and that these resources are fully exploited. It would also imply that potential offshore resources of some 0.7 tonnes are currently not being exploited.

The status of inshore resources is portrayed as fully exploited, or overexploited, with possible room for expansion offshore.[161] Contributing factors are the large number of entrants into the fishery under the “open access” regime, and the adoption of modern fishing craft and gears that are ever more efficient at catching fish. Ubiquitous use of illegal mesh sizes is reported, as well as the ever-increasing deployment of bottom trawling operations. This leads to unequal “vertical” exploitation of coastal water column, meaning that demersal species suffer more from fishing mortality than pelagic assemblages, which are fished by a whole range of different gear types, more selective at targeting specific species. Currently, and nation-wide, only clupeids, carangids, and silverbellies are thought to be able to sustain significant production increases (Vivekanandan, 2002).

The main stocks exploited on the east coast[162] include: lesser sardines, silverbellies, penaeid shrimps, sciaenids, Hilsa spp., catfishes and perches (Vivekanandan, 2002). The landings for these seven groups represent 10.06 percent of all India landings, and 26.5 percent of overall eastern seaboard landings.

The following problems have surfaced in a number of inshore fisheries in recent years (adapted from Vivekanandan, 2002):

These represent clear warning signals regarding the status of fish stock health. Factors causing the above are linked to the following (adapted from Vivekanandan, 2002):

The industrial, deep-sea fisheries catches of India are much lower than the coastal fisheries. Under the policy schemes in force since the late 1970s, foreign investments and joint venture companies never flourished, and development of this sub-sector constantly faltered. The main resources are tuna, deep-sea shrimp, lobster, squid, and cuttlefish. There is little available information on the status of the resources, and the operations. It is important to add, that along with technological advances in craft and gear, and with increasing pressures on coastal fisheries, numerous operators of vessels in the 20m LOA class have started to exploit resources far beyond the territorial waters, some operators even leaving the EEZ in search of particular target species. These catches are often reported as “coastal” in origin- due to the size class of the vessel from which catches are landed. Figures for the main coastal small-scale fisheries are summarised in Table 2.

TABLE 2
Fishers and their catches for the east coast of India

Category of Fishery

Fishery

# of Vessels

# of Fishers

Catch 2000
tonnes

Catch 1995
tonnes

Catch 1991
tonnes

Coastal commercial*

Shrimp



80 912

66 987

51 997

Sardines

23 966

153 360

48 992

71 343

44 535

Leiognathids



43 350

58 239

40 116

Coastal artisanal*

Shrimp



n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

Sardines

112 118

707 300

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

Leiognathids



n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

Total


136 084

860 660




* “commercial” refers to mechanised vessel operations, “artisanal” to both motorised and non-motorised traditional craft operations
Note: n.a. = not available
Source: Government of India

Historically, offshore resources were exploited by joint venture fishing companies from Thailand and Taiwan. At the height of the offshore fisheries, some 200 vessels[163] were exploiting offshore tuna resources, and deep water species such as shrimp and lobster. Longlining and trawling (for shrimp and demersals) were the main operations targeting these resources. Following the 1996 abolition of the charter/joint venture system, numbers of industrial scale vessels operating in the EEZ dwindled back to below 60, but have recently picked up again under the new regime governed by the new guidelines on deep-sea fishing, promulgated by Government in late 2002.

The actual catch of offshore industrial vessels, operated by “Indian” companies under 100 percent foreign ownership, is unknown. This is owing to the fact that those vessels can currently land their catch outside India, if so they wish.

The Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute (CMFRI) has estimated tuna stocks available for exploitation at 640 000 tonnes. Little research has been carried out and/or published on the other resources.

MANAGEMENT ACTIVITY

Fisheries-specific management activity remains limited in India - partly owing to lacking legislation to provide a clearer mandate and structure of fisheries management. Overall, the Indian tool-box of fisheries management contains little more than a few basic measures, essentially confined to minimum gear specifications, seasonal and spatial ground closures, and the harvesting and size restrictions for protected species. Measures to minimize gear conflicts between different types of fishing operations are being implemented[164], but enforcement of other management measures is weak. Inter-State variations also exist, e.g., in Tamil Nadu and Orissa, a 5 km zone is reserved to traditional craft operations; in Andhra Pradesh, a zone of 10 km is reserved; and no provisions have been made for a protected traditional fishing zone in West Bengal.

Closed seasons differ between western and eastern seaboards. The west coast observes a closed season for mechanized craft which is declared on a yearly basis with the onset of south-west monsoon activity, and lasts throughout the period. Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh on the east coast observe a set period of 45 days, during April-May, and this only since 1999 and 2001, respectively (Vivekanandan, 2002). This is a measure which aims at protecting stocks during their most sensitive phase of the annual reproductive cycle (Vijayan & Edwin, 2001).

Ground closures or zoning relates more to the declaration of marine protected areas and conservation initiatives, and will be dealt with in more detail under section 7.

The Fisheries Survey of India (FSI) agency within the Ministry of Agriculture is responsible for mapping and assessing the extent of fish stocks. Activities are troubled by budget limitations. The CMFRI, Kochi, is among a number of Institutes tasked with fisheries research. The CMFRI is tasked with collection and analysis of national catch and landing data.[165] These are all linked to the Ministry of Agriculture and the Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi.

The Ministry of Environment and Forests, which also functions as the national focal point for a number of Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) such as the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, 1973 (CITES) and the Convention on Biological Diversity, 1992 (CBD), is gradually introducing measures for the protection and management of marine resources (Mathew, 2003).[166] This stands in contrast with the production and growth oriented policies pursued by the Ministry of Agriculture, other Union ministries and State departments and agencies dealing directly with fisheries. This clearly symbolizes a step forward in terms of legislating for the sustainable management of fisheries resources.

In terms of enforcement, it is to be noted that dockside and landing site inspections are carried out by fisheries officers. Neither a VMS system, nor an on-board observer scheme are in use. The enforcement activity is not portrayed as being stringent enough to provide a strong deterrent effect, or to guarantee reasonable compliance of the various sectors with the fisheries law. Enforcement at-sea is split into two sectors. The State Police is tasked with law enforcement of the territorial sea, using its own set of patrol boats, while the Indian Coast Guard41 is tasked with patrolling of the EEZ. The agencies responsible for penalty attribution are the respective Departments of Fisheries. Penalties include fines and the revoking of fishing licenses. Fines and the risk of getting caught are generally found too low to represent an appropriate deterrent level to bring about compliance.[167] Central Government states that offences have decreased over the past decade.[168] It is noteworthy however, that all junior officers in the Indian Coast Guard are required to complete six weeks of fisheries-related training as part of their national Coast Guard training. This is a model that can be utilized elsewhere to promote inter-agency cooperation. In this case it is effective at the national level, but does not yet extend down to the national/state levels of management coordination.

Although the Indian Coast Guard are willing to assist and address the MCS concerns in support of management, the lack of effective State and National coordination and cooperation mechanisms in the respective jurisdictions create difficulties. This has not changed in the past five years despite regional training exercises by FAO.

BOX 1
Dealing with complexity and change in fisheries management: the case of small-scale fisheries in Andhra Pradesh, India

The state of Andhra Pradesh has 900 km of coastline on the east coast of India and an estimated 870 000 fishers living mainly in fishing communities. The communities vary widely with distinctive fishing systems, fish disposal and marketing systems, and social and political organisation. Amongst the many villages are two that provide interesting examples of how traditional community-based fisheries management systems (TCBMS) can regulate fishing practices successfully: Uppada and Boddu Chinna Venkataya Palem (BCV Palem).

In Uppada and BCV Palem, the well-developed TCBMS operate through the traditional Indian village management system known as Panchayats. The specific nature of TCBMS varies between fisheries. In BCV Palem, where fishing activities are carried out by a number of fishing systems confined to the creeks and the backwaters, the traditional systems of management and control related to fisheries and fishing are elaborate and have an important economic function. In Uppada, on the other hand, where there is often considerable competition for space for beach seining which often requires large groups of people, there is a greater emphasis on social issues and relationships.

The community-based nature of fishing occupations in Uppada seems to be a reason for the inclusive nature of its membership. Shore seines, boat launching and lifting, are all more or less dependent on the involvement of a large number of people in the activity. The predominance of small pelagics in the catches means that during certain parts of the year, the entire community has to work as one unit to be able to dispose of the fish properly. Membership of the Panchayat is not exclusive and outsiders are able to join.

In BCV Palem, where fishing pressure in the shallow creek waters was higher and boundary conflicts more likely, the existence of use rights that are shared equally amongst the members has meant that there are more incentives to keep people out than in.

So why have TCBMS survived in Andhra Pradesh and why have they been so successful at managing fishing activity? First, they are directly connected to the specific conditions of natural and social environment in the area and so are flexible enough to cope with change and locally relevant so as to engender support. Panchayats are holistic and cross-sectoral - they develop systems that emphasise secure, sustainable and equitable access to resources and do this through the integrated and holistic nature of the systems of governance concerning resource allocation. Finally, the decision-making process is participatory.

First, the dynamic nature of the whole fisheries environment (resource, habitat, markets etc) highlights the need to design resilient systems that can cope with change. Second, the need to integrate fishery management systems into the wider socio-economic environment, either at regional or national macroeconomic levels. Third, the issue of appropriate scale: locally-based community management systems work well provided that the national (or regional) authorities play their role of overseeing the whole system. Such local initiatives are vulnerable to activities beyond their scope. The scale of the management system must be commensurate with the scale of the resource. Fourth, the case-study also demonstrates that the participation of stakeholders enhances respect for institutions and increases compliance, making the enforcement problem more tractable. Stakeholders participation and sustainability will be influenced by the degree of equity within the management system and the level of security of rights.

Source: Extracted from SIFAR, 2004.

COSTS AND REVENUES OF FISHERIES MANAGEMENT

Government reports that the overall national budget for fisheries management has decreased over the last ten years. Costs related to MCS and conflict management are said to have increased, and likewise, Government perceives the financial means directed at MCS as adequate.

License fees are levied in the mechanised sector, but fees are low, as are penalties applied for fisheries offences. These sources of revenue do not represent a serious contribution to the overall cost Government faces for the management of the resource.

Fishermen cooperative societies are exempted from income tax. Perhaps, the most important reasons for this exemption are the following:

Seafood exporters were exempted from income tax until recently. Exports (all agricultural commodities exported, including seafood) are charged a cess of 0.3 per cent of the FOB value of seafood exports, having been reduced from 0.5 per cent initially. The collected tax is used for financing the Marine Products Export Development Authority (MPEDA), and currently stands at about 4 million US$ per annum. Import tariffs on seafood were 60 percent until recently; but these were reduced to 30-35 percent in 2002-03.[169] India imports very little fish, unlike China or the Philippines.

IMPLEMENTATION OF GLOBAL FISHERIES MANDATES AND INITIATIVES

India reports to have taken up some of the challenges represented by a host of International Programmes of Action (IPOAs) that have been launched by FAO over the past few years.

While by-catch of seabirds is perceived as a minor problem in Indian fisheries, ten species of endangered shark have come under the ambit of the Indian Wildlife Protection Act of 1972 (see footnote 43), and research programs are being directed at this particular resource.[170] A sub-group has been constituted to assess fishing capacity, and the Government intends to have capacity measured by 2005. In addition to this, the new deep-sea policy is mentioned in the capacity study, and is expected to address these issues.

The extent of IUU fishing and related problems is to be assessed by a sub-group, with the inputs of an FAO needs assessment study into IUU fishing in India (FAO, 2001b). The dual registration and flag hopping for foreign vessels registered under Indian companies have not been addressed.

In 1997, India declared a Marine Sanctuary in the east coast State of Orissa. Gahirmatha is the largest known rookery of the olive ridley turtle in the world. The Sanctuary was declared in the wake of the 1996 United States ruling on the mandatory use of turtle excluder devices (TEDs) for fisheries targeting US export markets.

There are a number of initiatives started under MEAs, reflecting India’s interest and participation under international agreements. Not yet mentioned, and closely linked to coastal fisheries are India’s activities with respect to the Jakarta Mandate (CBD).[171]

The all-India Coordinated Project for the Conservation and Management of Coastal and Marine Biodiversity was launched in 1999-2000, as well as a coral reef monitoring programme.

PARTICIPATION IN REGIONAL FISHERY BODIES

India is party to a host of regional bodies, programmes and projects dealing with fisheries management and the protection of coastal habitats, communities and resources. The regional fisheries bodies that include India are listed in the annex in Table 7. India reports it collects data in formalised data collection schemes, and to regularly feed back due data to these regional bodies.

Beyond the regional fisheries bodies listed in Table 7, India participates in a host of programmes, inter-governmental and regional organisations that also deal with the management and conservation of fisheries resources, or the trade of fisheries products. These include the following:

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

India is a very large country with an EEZ of 2 million km2, a continental shelf of some 500 000 km2, and ranks as the world’s fourth-largest fish producer, after China, Peru and Japan. Marine capture fisheries contribute less than half of the national fish production (48.7 percent in 2000), the remainder coming from inland fisheries, inland aquaculture and brackishwater aquaculture. Shrimp currently represents the single largest foreign currency earner as an export commodity.

Coastal resources are described as overfished, and the open access regime is identified as one of the core reasons for the current situation. In excess of 90 percent of the catches are being harvested from coastal waters with approximately one dozen species making up the majority of these captures. Bottom trawling operations using vessels less than 16 m LOA take 50 percent of the catches. The sector is modernising with increased mechanisation, but traditional small-scale craft stall remain responsible for these large catches. The east coast sector is modernising at a slower pace.

Offshore fishing, or deep sea fishing, is still very much under-utilized in India. It is thought that another 0.7 million mt of untapped resources could be harvested from India’s EEZ, outside the territorial waters, but the lack of a coherent policy on deep sea fishing is required to promote this sector.

Employment, increased production, welfare of fishermen and increased export earnings are the main aims pursued by the Government in its recent five year plans. Efforts aimed at fisheries focus on infrastructure enhancement (ports and post harvest facilities) and modernisation of the fleet implemented through direct investments and subsidy schemes. Much less effort is aimed at resource appraisal, management and conservation of the resources.

No single Ministry is responsible for managing the fisheries sector. The lack of an overarching and coherent policy for coastal and deep-sea capture fisheries contributes to the weak structure of the sector. The current legal framework is dated, production oriented, and fails to provide a clear mandate and a framework for responsible fisheries management. A new legal framework is required to define the objectives of marine resource management for the national and state administrations.

The lack of effective inter-agency coordination and cooperation mechanisms, especially between the States and the National government to address respective jurisdictions of territorial seas and the EEZ significantly weaken the MCS efforts of all agencies, despite the positive step by the Indian Coast Guard of requiring fisheries training for all its junior officers. The Regional and National MCS training efforts of FAO have not yet shown any significant difference in strategies or methods in the implementation of management plans in East India.

Participatory and cooperative activity by fisherfolk in India is very well developed, and represents a most tangible management tool to address access to marine resources and management issues through empowerment of communities. Effective input controls, community-based property rights and co-management schemes are further tools to solve the problems of overcapitalisation and excessive fishing pressure in coastal waters. Diversion of fishing effort to the offshore areas through the use of traditional, motorised, mechanised and sea-worthy craft is another option to be considered. Further, the re-orientation of current fisherfolk towards other fisheries such as the brackish water shrimp culture, especially as practiced on the east coast; inland fisheries; and aquaculture are other options Government could actively investigate.

REFERENCES

FAO. 1999. Report of a Regional Workshop on Fisheries Monitoring, Control and Surveillance and Supplement 1, Country Reports, Regional Reports and Case Studies. Kuala Lumpur and Kuala Terengganu, Malaysia, June/July1998, FAO, Rome.

FAO. 2000. Country Fisheries Management Brief for India. (available at http://www.fao.org/countryprofiles)

FAO. 2001. Report of the National Workshop on Fisheries Monitoring, Control and Surveillance in Support of Fisheries Management. Goa, India February 2001, FAO, Rome.

FAO. 2001b. Suggestions for the Government of India to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing. October 2001. Unpublished, FAO, Rome.

FAO. 2002. Building an Awareness in Aspects of Fishery Statistics, Stock Assessment and Management. Proceedings of the FAO/SEAFDEC Workshop on the Use of Statistics and Other Information for Stock Assessment. Samut Prakarn, Thailand, September 2002, FAO, Rome.

FAOlex Web site. Resumés on Fisheries Legal Texts.

Flewwelling, P. 2000. Report on travel to India. Mission Report No. 15, FishCode Project MCS, FAO, Rome.

Flewwelling, P. 2001. Fisheries Management and MCS in South Asia: Comparative Analysis. FAO, Rome.

GOI. 2001. Handbook of Fisheries Statistics 2000. Ministry of Agriculture. Government of India. New Delhi.

Kurien, J. 2000. Community property rights: Re-establishing them for a secure future for small-scale fisheries in Use of property rights in fisheries management. Proceedings of the FishRights99 Conference, Fremantle, Western Australia, 11-19th November 1999. Mini-course lectures and core conference presentations. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No. 404/1; pp. 288-294. (Also available on-line at http://www.fao.org/documents/).

Marine Products Export and Development Authority (MPEDA). 2002. An Overview. MPEDA. Cochin.

Mathew, S. 2003. Trade in Fisheries and Human Development. Country Case Study - India. Asia Pacific Regional Initiative on Trade, Economic Governance, and Human Development. UNDP. Asia (available at http://www.asiatradeinitiative.org)

Ministry of Agriculture. 1991. Report of the Ministry of Agriculture. Government of India, New Delhi, 51 pp.

SIFAR. 2004. Support unit for International Fisheries and Aquatic Research. Good Management Practice in Sustainable Fisheries, Policy Briefs. Available at http://www.sifar.org/DfID_Keysheets/wb_index.htm

Vijayan, V. & Edwin, L. 2001. Monsoon trawl ban in Kerala and the resultant changes in the fishing gear of the traditional and mechanized sectors. Appl. Fish. Aquac. Vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 139-142.

Vivekanandan, E. 2002. Marine Fisheries and Fish Biodiversity in India. Madras Research Centre of Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute, Chennai.

APPENDIX TABLES

Current Management of Marine Capture Fisheries in India (East)

Level of
Management

% Fisheries
Managed

% with Fisheries
Management Plan

% with Published
Regulations

Trends in the number of managed
fisheries over the last ten years

National (Union)

>67

<33

>67

increasing

Regional (State)

>67

<33

>67

increasing

Summary Information for three largest fisheries (by volume) in India (East) for 2000

Category of
Fishery

Fishery

Volume
(mt)

Value*
mil USD

% of Total
Volume
Caught**

% of Total
Value
Caught**

Covered by a
Management
Plan?

# of
Participants
(full time)

# of
Vessels

Commercial†

Shrimp

80 912

809.12

46.7

89.5

No



Sardines

48 992

73.49

28.3

8.1

No

153 360

23 966

Leiognathids

43 350

21.67

25

2.4

No



Artisanal

generic¨

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

No

707 300

112 118

Recreational

does not exist

not applicable

not applicable

not applicable

not applicable

not applicable

not applicable

not applicable

n.a. = not available
† “commercial” refers to mechanised vessel operations, “artisanal” to both motorised and non-motorised traditional craft operations.
¨generic: includes all fisheries in this category.
* Value in 2002 U.S. Dollars
** % values are based on totals for each category of fishery.

Use of Fishery Management Tools within the three largest fisheries in India (East)

Category of
Fishery

Fishery

Restrictions

License/
limited
Entry

Catch
Restrictions

Rights-based
Regulations

Taxes/
Royalties

Performance
Standards

Spatial

Temporal

Gear

Size

Commercial

generic

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes*

No

No

No

No

Artisanal

generic

Yes

Yes

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

* Most maritime States have provided for licenses for motorised vessels in their Acts. This encompasses the possibility to limit entry for given areas for such vessels.

Costs and Funding Sources of Fisheries Management within the three largest fisheries in India (East)

Category of
Fishery

Fishery

Do Management Funding Outlays Cover

Are Management Funding Sources From

R&D

Monitoring &
Enforcement

Daily
Management

License fees
in fishery

License fees from
other fisheries

Resource
rents

Commercial

generic

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes*

Artisanal

generic

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

No

* roughly 0.5% are levied on value for export products

Compliance and Enforcement within the three largest fisheries in India (East)

Category of
Fishery

Fishery

VMS

On-board
observers

Random
dockside
inspections

Routine
inspections at
landing sites

At-sea boarding
and inspections

Other

Commercial

generic

No

No

Yes

Yes

No


Artisanal

generic

No

No

No

Yes

No


Capacity Management within the three largest fisheries in India (East)

Category of
Fishery

Fishery

Does overfishing
exist?

Is fleet capacity
measured?

Is CPUE increasing,
constant or
decreasing?

Have capacity
reduction
programmes
been used?

If used, please
specify objectives
of capacity
reduction
programme

Commercial

Shrimp

Yes

India plans to have fleet
capacity measured by 2005

decreasing

No


Sardines

Yes

decreasing

No


Leiognathids

Yes

decreasing

No


Shrimp

Yes

decreasing

No


Artisanal

Sardines

Yes

decreasing

No


Leiognathids

Yes

decreasing

No


n.a. = not available


[127] Note: The information for this paper was gathered from many multi-media sources, the internet, and papers, some published and some being "grey literature", but a key source was a 53 page FAO Questionnaire sent to fisheries contacts in each country to assist them in formatting their responses. Data provided in these questionnaires comes from officials and Department’s files, and was reported "personal correspondence and discussions with Department officials". The authors wish to express their gratitude to Mr. Sebastian Mathew of ICSF, who: (i) contributed a significant amount of background information for this review, and (ii) patiently answered many questions concerning a host of facets of Indian fisheries management.
[128] Coastline of only 45 km.
[129] Inshore areas (<50m depth) of the east coast only yield 66% of the fish per unit area (5.9 t/km2), when compared to west coast areas (8.8 t/km2).
[130] Source: World Bank online database; www.worldbank.org/data/countrydata/countrydata.html
[131] Ibid.
[132] A selection of associations and societies across the whole of India, to show the diversity include: Indian Fisheries Association, Mumbai; Inland Fisheries Society of India, West Bengal; Society of Fisheries Technologists (India), Cochin; Marine Biological Association of India, Cochin. The Asian Fisheries Society, Indian Branch, Mangalore; Seafood exporters Association of India; Association of Indian Fishery Industries; All India Shrimp Hatcheries Association; Kerala Fishermen Welfare Fund; Confederation of Fish Farmer’s Welfare Associations; National Fishworkers’ Forum (to protect the interests of fishworkers and mechanized boat operators).
[133] See: Section 3.
[134] Within the Indian context, "motorization" refers to out-board engine propulsion, replacing or adding to sails and oars of traditional craft, while "mechanization" refers to the operation of fishing crafts through inboard engines. In motorized craft, fishing operations are carried out manually.
[135] High speed diesel oil used for fuel
[136] This particular programme is an initiative of the Marine Products Export Development Authority (MPEDA), functioning under the Ministry of Commerce and Industry.
[137] See: Section 3.
[138] This policy permitted up to 51% foreign share capital in fishing companies, inconsistent with the Maritime Zones of India (Regulation of Fishing by Foreign Vessels) Act, 1981.
[139] A strike prompted the Government to constitute the Murari Committee in 1995, which recommended that the deep sea fishing policy of 1991 be called off.
[140] The Maritime Zones of India (Regulation of Fishing by Foreign Vessels) Act, in force since 1981, defines an Indian fishing vessel as any vessel, which is owned by a company in which not less than 60% share capital is held by citizens of India. This gives rise to an inconsistency in the legal substance ruling ownership and registration of fishing vessels owned by companies with more than 40% foreign share capital.
[141] This enables, for example, a tuna fishing company from Taiwan to register as an Indian company, while also being registered as a fishing company in Taiwan.
[142] In 1999, an expert group led by K. Gopakumar, then Deputy Director of Fisheries, Indian Council of Agricultural Research, was constituted to elaborate a comprehensive marine fisheries policy. The report was submitted to the Government in late 2001.
[143] See: Legal Framework
[144] See: Marine Products Export Development Authority Act, 1972. Section 9 (2)(a).
[145] See: Territorial Waters, Continental Shelf, Exclusive Economic Zone and other Maritime Zones Act, 1976. Section 7 (4) (a).
[146] See: Territorial Waters, Continental Shelf, Exclusive Economic Zone and other Maritime Zones Act, 1976. Section 15 (c).
[147] Maritime Zones of India (Regulation of Fishing by Foreign Vessels) Rules, 1982.
[148] In 1967, India proclaimed a territorial sea of 12 nautical miles instead of six, by Presidential Proclamation, revoking the previous proclamations of 1956 concerning the territorial sea and the contiguous zone.
[149] e.g. West Bengal Marine Fishing Regulation Act, 1993 - "An Act to regulate fishing by fishing vessels along the coast line of the State". Karnataka Marine Fishing Regulation Rules, 1987 - implementing the provisions of the Karnataka Marine Fishing Regulations Act, 1986.
[150] e.g. Goa, Daman and Diu Marine Fishing Regulation Rules. Section 3. Application for licensing of fishing vessels under section 6. - (1) Every owner of a fishing vessel which is mechanically propelled shall make an application accompanied by a license fee of Rs. 205/- to the authorized officer, for the grant of a license for using such fishing vessel in the specified area in Form A. (2) The authorized officer shall, while granting or refusing the license, apart from the conditions specified in clause (a), (b) & (c) of sub-section (4) of section 6, have regard to the number of fishing vessels already licensed in the area where the fishing vessel is sought to be operated. (3) If the authorizing officer, after making such enquiries as deemed fit, decides to grant the license applied for, he shall issue the license in Form B, which shall be valid for a period of one year the date of issue. (4) The authorized officer, having regard to the area in which the fishing vessel is sought to be operated, may direct the applicant to deposit an amount which shall be no less than Rs. 210/- but not more than Rs. 250/- as security for the due observance of the conditions of the license.
[151] Source: Government of India
[152] Ibid.
[153] Data are also available from Agricultural Statistics at a Glance. http://agricoop.nic.in/agristatisticsnew.htm
[154] Including the A&N Islands, making up 6% of overall national catch.
[155] In actual fact, a significant portion of subsistence fishing in India is conducted in the inland sector.
[156] Dolnets (fixed bagnets) are popular, and are deployed to catch the Bombay duck. These are only found in the north-west of India, along with this particular resource.
[157] Catamarans are mostly replaced by canoes on the western seaboard.
[158] 50% of the catch stems from bottom trawling operations from vessels less than 16 m LOA.
[159] This estimate however, is not verifiable, and some authors believe that much less than 0.5 tonnes originates from offshore operations. This is due to inherent flaws in the data collection systems in place.
[160] Total marine capture: 2.613 million tonnes; with the most important fraction from inshore waters.
[161] "offshore" meaning in waters beyond the limits of the territorial sea, and in waters deeper than 50 m and beyond the continental shelf.
[162] Including the A&N Islands
[163] 149 Taiwanese joint venture vessels operated in the Indian EEZ from 1985 to 1993.
[164] Based on the fact that the enacting of the State Marine Fishing Regulation Acts was particularly motivated to address this issue. See Section 3, 4th paragraph.
[165] url: http://www.cmfri.com/cmfri_frad.htm
[166] In 2001, ten species of shark and ray and nine species of molluscs, all sea horses, giant grouper, five species each of coral and sea cucumbers, sponges and molluscs, have been brought under the ambit of the Indian Wildlife Protection Act of 1972.
[167] Source: Government of India
[168] Source: Government of India
[169] Source: Sebastian Mathew, personal communication.
[170] Source: Government of India.
[171] The Jakarta Mandate on Marine and Coastal Biological Diversity was adopted in 1995. It has a component on fisheries in coastal areas. To assist the implementation of the Jakarta Mandate at various levels, the CBD adopted a programme in 1998 on integrated marine and coastal area management, the sustainable use of living resources, protected areas, mariculture and alien species.

Previous Page Top of Page Next Page