1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Mission reviewed the Zimbabwe sub-project from 11 to 13 May. The Mission held working sessions with the FAOR, the DNPWM, the Fisheries Unit of Agritex, the Head and Deputy Head of BADC, and staff members of ALCOM headquarters.
ALCOM's subproject pertains to the subject of small water bodies, and has been implemented in dams situated a short distance from Harare. Field inspections were carried out in the Mwenje and Mufurudzi dams where there was ample opportunity for dialogue with the community members and leaders involved in the management of fisheries in both dams.
That ALCOM headquarters is in Harare, did not necessarily lead to better coordination with the Zimbabwean authorities or that ALCOM's concept was clear. This can certainly confuse the message delivered to the farmer. It was ascertained, however, that ALCOM's publication reached the national organization unofficially.
Besides ALCOM's activities in Zimbabwe, there were two other projects: FAO/UNDP Support for Rural Aquaculture Extension (Jan. 1988–June 1993) implemented by AGRITEX, and the FAO/OSRO Restocking of Reservoirs in Communal Farming Areas (1992–1994). This caused some confusion in the execution of coherent activities. At present, ALCOM is collaborating with the Branch of Aquatic Ecology of the DNPWM on a subproject concerning cage culture in reservoirs and community-based fisheries management. The sub-project under review (SWB/ZIM) started in June 1993, and was expected to last 28 months. The rational relates to the fact that Zimbabwe has over 10, 000 reservoirs between 5 and 2,000 ha distributed throughout the country, both on private and on communal land.
2.0 OBJECTIVE
The overall objective is to devise methods to increase fish production and economic benefits from Small Water Bodies via:
2.1 Community-based management systems which enable the adoption of appropriate fisheries management techniques for small reservoirs;
2.2 Appropriate fisheries management techniques for use in small reservoirs; and
2.3 Cost-effective fish production enhancement techniques.
| Output 1.: | Community-based management on 2 dams with the collaboration of District Council, AGRITEX, and National Parks; |
| Activity 1.1 | Facilitate and provide advice to institution - building processes for dam committees at Mwenje and Mufurudzi dams; |
| Activity 1.2 | Training of dam committee members in administration and account planning, fishery resource management; |
| Activity 1.3 | Provide fisheries technical advice to dam committees at Mwenje and Mufurudzi dams in collaboration with NP; |
| Activity 1.4 | Monitor progress of community based management (institution building aspects, catch data, income, perception of benefits) using modified computer procedure and agritex. Evaluation the whole approach; |
| Output 2.: | Community-based management on 2 or more dams with other institutions (NGO's), etc.) as field implementing agencies; |
| Activity 2.1 | Inventory, classification and identification of institutions working with SWB such as DNPWM, Agritex, Zimbabwe Trust, The Campfire Association, LWF, Save the Children Fund. Africare, World Vision, IUCN, EEC microprojects, and others; |
| Activity 2.2 | Hold information/awareness meetings on SWB management with high level officials from institutions show how community-based management can be done at the local level; |
| Activity 2.3 | Investigate the interest and define the capability of these institutions to collaborate with ALCOM to improve their existing community, based management/including fisheries in Small Water Bodies; |
| Activity 2.4 | Select 2 or more reservoirs for community- based managements activities in collaboration with selected institutions, and support them with fisheries technical advice; |
| Activity 2.5 | Provide baseline data and design monitoring schedule; |
| Activity 2.6 | Design and organize training courses on SWB elements of community-based management for selected institutions/committees at field level, including fishery management, fishery enhancement and water-borne diseases; |
| Output 3.: | Practical guidelines on institutional building for SWB management; |
| Activity 3.1 | Consolidate experiences on different institution-building processes from outputs 1 and 2 into one set of practical guidelines for organization and monitoring of community-based management; |
| Activity 3.2 | Prepare guidelines on community-based management for use by Governments and/or developments agents; |
| Output 4 | Practical guidelines for SWB management aimed at institutions (using CBM), incorporating fishery management, monitoring of economic benefits, and experiences working with institutions; |
| Activity 4.1 | Review literature and local experiences on fishery management tools; |
| Activity 4.2 | Decide in collaboration with institutions/committee, management options to include gear type/use, level of fishing effort, fishing seasons, protection of breeding areas; refuge/attraction devices, fishing monitoring methods, etc for each dams selected; |
| Activity 4.3 | Test management tools on reservoirs. |
| Activity 4.4 | Produce guidelines on SWB management as in 4.0; |
| Output 5. | Guidelines for cage culture in reservoirs aimed at small scale entrepreneurs/farmers/fishermen in collaboration with REC programme; | |
| Activity 5.1 | Review literature on cage culture with respect to cage design, fish species, feeding and economic viability; | |
| Activity 5.2 | Make an economic evaluation of different designs and management options; | |
| Activity 5.3 | Construct cages of most feasible design; | |
| Activity 5.4 | Carry out cage culture trials under most feasible management; | |
| Activity 5.5 | Report on the feasibility of small scale cage culture; | |
| Output 6. | Identification of fish species effective in controlling schistosomiasis vector snails; | |
| Activity 6.1 | Carry out snail control trials with Serranochromis codringtonii; | |
| Activity 6.2 | Report on the results of the trial; | |
| Output 7. | Guidelines for stocking fish in small reservoirs aimed at institutions/groups managing dams; | |
| Activity 7.1 | Review literature on stocking of reservoirs, and identify areas for further activities; and | |
| Activity 7.2 | Select most appropriate activities identified under 7.1 and carry out these activities. | |
5. TARGET GROUPS AND PROJECT AREA
6. REVIEW OF OBJECTIVES
The subproject is broadly conceived as institutional collaboration, since SWB fisheries development involves not only technical aspects but also community related and other matters.
Target groups are fisherfolk (direct recipients) and local population (indirect). Targeting the whole of Zimbabwe appears rather bold. However, the fact that the “the main project staff will be based at Harare” leads one to believe that the real purpose was to justify the presence of the staff in Harare itself. In fact, the overall objective to develop “methods to increase fish production and economical benefits from SWB”, appears to oversimplify conceptunal difficulties in the development of SWB.
7. REVIEW OF ACTIVITIES
Proposed activities include everything that is more or less feasible under the heading “small water bodies”: community based management, guidelines, cage culture, and schistosomiasis. Most activities appear to be desk studies, since the main project staff is based in Harare. There are 25 activities grouped in 7 expected outputs (see above). Somewhat unusual is that of although most of the proposed activities relate to the socio-economic aspects of the management, the socio-economic input is only two months whereas the input of fisheries officers and specialists accounts for 34.4 man months.
8. REVIEW OF OUTPUTS
Seven outputs are listed in the project document.
(a) Community-based management on two dams with the collaboration of District council, AGRITEX and National Parks.
The two selected dams: Mwenje and Mufurudzi, were inspected by the Mission. Two different management models are being developed. The target groups correspond to the SWB sub-project document. The results show that the Mwenje dam committee, composed of 40 members (10 of each of 4 communities), was established. A management committee was elected. During the visit, it appeared that only 9 fishermen (8 from 1 village) had payed licenses and there were complaints about poaching. One fisherman was allowed to fish with non-regular gear (experimental), and apparently was the only one with fishing success. The other fishermen claimed they were not catching fish because they could use only regular gear.
ALCOM started working on this reservoir in 1991. At the time of the visit the management committee appeared total functioning, probably due to the efforts of the NPO fisheries officer. Fish dynamics in the lake are apparently not well known. Test fishing by ALCOM is limited to some isolated activities.
The other dam: Mufurudzi, has been managed by a community- based company. This was the result of the efforts of the District Administrator (DA), with ALCOM assistance. The whole effort clearly reflects the sub-project document's objectives. It demonstrates that a community-based exploitation of a reservoir is possible with the active participation of local authorities. The community received material help (boats, nets) from the New Zealand High Commission, through the formal request of the DA. Although not all problems are solved, the results obtained so far are encouraging. Nonetheless, once more, the result is uneven despite ALCOM's presence for two years. This time the bio-technical work lags the socio-economic analysis. It shows poor coordination from management. Annex 9 elaborates the tenure arrangements for both cases.
(b) Community-based management on two or more dams with other institutions (NGO's, etc.) as field implementing agencies.
In collaboration with two NGO's and the district officials, ALCOM is involved in the management on 4 other reservoirs, not visited by the Mission. The Mission encourages ALCOM to continue this strategy in order to develop a management method by the end of the sub-project.
(c) Practical guidelines on institutional building for SWB management.
It is evident that these guidelines can be produced only after obtaining reliable field results.
(d) Practical guidelines for SWB management aimed at institutions (using CBM), incorporating fishery management, monitoring of economic benefits and experiences working with institutions.
To the extent that monitoring of fishing efforts, dynamics, etc, has not been systematic, it will be difficult to produce guidelines.
(e) Guidelines for cage culture in reservoirs aimed at small scale entrepreneurs/farmers/fishermen in collaboration with REC programme.
According to the literature review, a cage of 36m3in which Oreochromis macrochirwould be grown, at densities of 300 per m3from 25 to 240 g in a period of 105 days. ALCOM has selected this design as feasible. This approach appears opportunistic and one questions how small scale farmers can afford this enterprise. First, the assumption of growing tilapias, even the selected one, on a continuous basis at a rate of 2 g/d is overrated and only achievable in commercial farms. Second, how can a small farmer afford to construct a 36m3cage, procure 4 tons of quality feed and stock 10,800 quality fingerlings, and three months later commercialize more than 2 of fish? The proposed cage culture trial is clearly a commercial enterprise for farmers endowed with substantial assets. Of course, in principle, cage culture may be a solution to improve the condition of some rural communities living nearby reservoirs. But then trials should be designed in such way that the economics of the culture is at the level of the farmers' resources, without excessive risks. Examples can be found in Eastern Asia.
(f) Identification of fish species effective in controlling schistosomiasis vector snails.
This sub-project appears as an academic exercise. It seems evident that the more snail eating fish you put in a tank, the more snails will disappear. Why not conduct this project in the field at farmers fields and in infested areas?
(g) Guidelines for stocking fish in small reservoirs aimed at institutions/groups managing dams.
No results have been presented to the Mission.
9. MANAGEMENT
The sub-project is implemented by National Parks in consultation with ALCOM's SWB Action Programme. It is surprising that, according to the subproject document, the implementation organization limits its participation to one day a week (ecologist-aquaculturist). As stated before, ALCOM puts 38.4 man/months into this subproject, of which only 2 man/months are allocated for a socio-economist. The inputs by APO's are not even listed.
10. BUDGET
In the subproject document a total budget of USD179,490 was proposed for 28 months execution period. Travel amounts to USD15,000, reporting to USD3,500, and training has no budget.
The indicative budget for 1994 amounts to USD64.507, including USD1,600 “contractual services”.
11. SUSTAINABILITY
Sustainibility is not guaranteed, though it appears feasible. The small involvement of a counterpart at national level (1 day a week) will not suffice to continue ALCOM's activities in this subproject. But most of the work so far has apparently been done by the NPO, who demonstrates knowledge and experience in community development methods for resource management. If he could be integrated into the at national structure, this would ensure continuity of activities and eventual sustainability.
Moreover, at the community level, sustainability would be ensured by the continuous support of the DA or District Council. A good management plan needs to be worked out, both at the socio-economic and on biotechnical levels.
12. PREVAILING ISSUES
The subproject appears a mixture of activities without structure.
Fortunately, the most important activity, elaboration of procedures for a community-based management of reservoirs, has been conducted properly, from institutional and sociological standpoints. It was particularly satisfying to verify that the driving force of this subproject was a national officer. Worrisome, however, is the limited effort displayed by the sub-project staff to conduct biotechnical research to estimate, at least, relative productivity and biodynamics throughout the year.
Cage, snails and stocking activities are to now desk studies or in-vitro trials, which should not be included in the programme of ALCOM, since they do not complement the central efforts of the sub-project.
