
1. Background
The fishery in India is a very important economic activity and a flourishing sector with varied resources and potentials. The country ranks second in the world in terms of total fish production. Annually, the country pro- duces about 9.06 million metric tonnes of fish. Aquaculture in India has evolved as a viable commercial farming practice from the level of traditionally backyard activity. Over the last three decades, there has been considerable diversification in aquaculture in terms of species and systems and it shows an impressive annual growth rate of (6-7)%. Freshwater aquaculture contributes to over 95% of the total aquaculture production and contributes to around 60% of the total fish production11. Importance of aquaculture is further emphasised by the fact that fish is a major source of livelihood and provides nutritional security for the rural poor.
Aquaculture resources in India include 2.36 million hectares of ponds and tanks. Whereas, in addition to 0.12 million kilometres of canals; 3.15 million hectares of reservoirs and 0.72 million hectares of upland lakes could be utilised for aquaculture purposes. Ponds and tanks are the prime resources for freshwater aquaculture in India. However, less than 10% of India’s natural potential is been utilised for aquaculture currently.
Freshwater aquaculture activity is prominent in the eastern part of the country, particularly in the states of West Bengal, Odisha and Andhra Pradesh, new areas are also coming under it in the states of Punjab, Haryana, Assam and Tripura.
2. Constraints in Fish Farming
Aquaculture or fish farming is however vulnerable because of the following reasons:
- Climate change impacts such as water availability, weather patterns like extreme rain and exacerbates eutro- phication and stratification in static waters has led to crop failures. This is more relevant in the context of coastal areas where aquaculture and fish farming forms a major source of livelihood.
- Floods and cyclones, especially in the eastern coast have become more frequent in recent years and had se- vere impacts on the aquaculture scenario. Fish farmers are therefore, forced to abandon their ponds due to siltation and water salinity.
- Constraints in availing credit from formal sources for fish farming are forcing farmers to take loans from informal sources like money lenders at a very high rate of interest.
- Lack of technical know-how to improve productivity, further dissuades farmers to take up fish-farming as a viable livelihood option.
3. Project Idea
The project idea is based on the concept of IFF wherein ‘there is no waste’, and waste is only a misplaced resource which can become a valuable material for another product2.
In India, in the coastal and fishing belt, several ponds are available which are unused, unproductive and un- derproductive. These ponds can be easily revived with minimal resources which can lead to significant income enhancement for the fish farmers.
At present, the farmers involved in fish farming have an annual productivity ranging from 500 to 600 kgs per acre. This can be significantly increased through IFF to around 1900 kgs per acre per annum. The low produc- tivity is attributed to lack of capital, technology, extension, marketing facility, poor socio-economic condition and frequent natural disasters etc. In addition to fish farming, the integrated system would have duckery, dairy and vegetable cultivation in and around the pond unit. The graphical representation of the model is provided in Figure 1, below.
IFF can thus serve as a model of sustainable food production by following principles, such as:
-
Waste products of one biological system serve as nutrients for a second biological system.
-
The integration of fish and plants results in a polyculture that increases diversity and yields of multiple products.
-
Water is reused through biological filtration and recirculation.
-
Local food production provides access to healthy foods and enhances the local economy.
Integration of agricultural and animal husbandry activity for optimal utilisation of resources in a sustainable manner is the central theme on which the interventions are based. IFF model has shown potential for enhancing aquaculture productivity through the enrichment of the heterotrophic or detritus food chain. The model has the potential for replication in other parts of the country especially in coastal areas.
4. Integrated Fish Farming (IFF) - The Model
Fish farming with the integration of one or more activities amongst duck rearing, poultry, dairy and horticulture is taken up under IFF model. All these activities and fishery are complementary to each other.
For example, the cow dung is used as manure to create plankton (natural fish feed) in the pond. Besides, dairy is a regular source of income to the farmers.
Duck droppings are good organic fertilisers for fish farming. Approximately, 40-50 kgs of this organic manure can produce 1 kg of fish flesh. Moreover, when ducks flap their wings while swimming in the pond, oxygen is being made available to fish.
Pond silt can be used as fertiliser for land crops, which in turn can be used by livestock, poultry or as fish feed, thus, a recycling ecosystem is achieved. The dikes of ponds can also be used for cultivating fruit bearing trees like banana, papaya, drumstick and other horticultural production. The interventions of the project are as under:
-
Undertaking scientific fish farming through renovation of ponds
-
Duck rearing/backyard poultry/dairy development
-
Horticulture/vegetable cultivation
-
Training & capacity building
-
Formation of co-operatives/ federation
-
Establishment of knowledge centres for farmers
-
Establishment of local fish nursery
5. Scope of Credit Financing and Subsidy
The scope for lending is huge in this sector with almost 7% annual rise in production every year. The outlay for the fishery sector in India during the current plan is more than Rs.4,00,000 crore. Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) on Development of Inland Fisheries and Aquaculture under the Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers’ Welfare has also designed a number of subsidy schemes which can be linked to commercial loans from banks. The risk of Non Performing Asset (NPA) in this sector is extremely low compared to other Priority Sector Lending (PSL) schemes. This becomes even lower when combined with the other subsidy schemes. Some of the schemes have been outlined below:
Loan on Construction of New Ponds: Loan upto Rs 2.00 lakh/ha in the plain areas. Subsidy @ 20% with a ceiling of Rs. 40,000/ha for all farmers except Scheduled Castes’s (SC’s)/Scheduled Tribe’s (ST’s) for whom it will be Rs 50, 000/ha (25%). Loan upto Rs 3 lakh/ha in the hill States/Districts and the North-Eastern (NE) region. Subsidy @ 20% with a ceiling of Rs 60,000/ha for all farmers except SC’s/ST’s for whom it will be Rs 75, 000/ ha (25%).
Loan for Integrated Fish Farming: Rs 80,000/ha. Subsidy @ 20% with a ceiling of Rs 16,000/ha for all farmers except SCs/STs for whom it will be Rs 20,000/ha (25%).
Loan for Reclamation/Renovation of Ponds/Tanks: Rs 60,000/ha. Subsidy @ 20% with a ceiling of Rs 12, 000/ha for all farmers except SCs/STs for whom it will be Rs 15,000/ha (25%)
Loan for Freshwater Fish Seed Hatchery: Rs 8 lakh for a fish seed hatchery with 10 million (fry) capacity for the plain areas and Rs 12 lakh for same capacity in the hill States/Districts and the NE region. Subsidy @ 10% with a ceiling of Rs 80,000/- and Rs 1.20 lakh in the plain and hilly areas respectively to entrepreneurs only.
6. Expected Impacts (Social, Economic, Environmental)
- Social
-
Women members of households were earlier less involved in backyard aquaculture even though it often occurred within the homestead. By the provision of training, women now participate in the pond, feed and medicine management which enhanced their social standing and decision making in the household.
-
Self Help Group (SHG) programs have empowered women to contribute financially to such livelihood activities thereby elevating their social status as entrepreneurs.
-
Research studies have shown that the main source of protein for households with aquaculture is fish which is more than the combination of all meat (poultry and mutton) products. Fish contributes more than 80% of the total protein.
-
- Economic
-
IFF with better management practices led to a significant rise in fish production and productivity per acre. This was supplemented by enhanced income from dairy/ poultry/duckery/vegetable production. As calculated, the net income from this integrated model can be close to Rs.2,00,000 annually per acre which is substantially higher as compared to traditional farming methods.
-
IFF led to diversification of livelihood, thus, reducing the risk for poor farmers by integrating it with dairy, fishery, vegetable cultivation and meat production.
-
The prohibitive cost of pelleted feeds was a problem in aquaculture which required a cheap substitute. The integrated fish farm produced feeds and fertilisers for itself, thereby, contributed in saving energy and reducing expenditures.
-
- Environmental (water recharge, soil quality, soil organic matter, salinity control, green cover and health effects)
-
Unused ponds in villages are generally used to dispose trash of and debris from household and are a source of mosquitoes, bugs and other insects. Renovation of ponds not only reduced such risks but also has proven economically advantageous.
-
Groundwater recharge through ponds; a very imminent outcome of the activity helped in enhancing the productivity of crops grown in the vicinity.
-
Aquaculture can provide large amounts of silt and fertile water for agriculture. Land on fish farms has much agricultural potential. It can be directly used as base manure for fodder crops. In the summer, silt is applied to the fields with water. This method is beneficial to release and diffuse the nutritional elements. It also improves the dissolved oxygen content of the bottom layer of water.
-
Water salinity level in the coastal regions tends to rise because of frequent floods and cyclones. Freshwater ponds and rivers reduce the salinity levels of the aquifers.
-
7. Mainstreaming the Model - Options
-
The model has been showcased at both state and national level events organised under UPNRM and other NABARD events. Exposure visits to the project sites have also been regularly organised for a diverse range of stakeholders such as government officials, bankers, donors etc. Information leaflets, video documentary and other knowledge materials have been developed under UPNRM, to popularise and mainstream the model.
-
Gram-Utthan has also made constant efforts at district and state level for replication and upscaling of the model. The model has received awards and accolades at various forums.
Annexure
The loans support to the beneficiaries under the IFF model is extended by combining fisheries with any one of the activities i.e poultry, vegetable cultivation, duckery or dairy farming. The analysis is based on a loan amount of Rs.1,00,000 to Rs. 1,20,000 for a period of 3 years @ 12% per annum. The detailed financial modelling for these four loan models under IFF is presented below.
IFF Model Cost Analysis
1. A CAPITAL COST Amount in Rs |
||
Sl No Name of component Amt ( Rs) |
||
1 |
Clearing and repairing of dyke |
2000 |
2 |
Desilting and renovation |
120000 |
3 |
Farm equipment |
2500 |
|
Sub Total |
124500 |
1. B |
RECURRING COST |
|
|
Amount |
in Rs |
|
Sl No |
Name of component |
Quantity |
Unit |
Rate |
Amt ( Rs) |
|
1 |
Lime |
500 |
Kg |
12 |
6000 |
|
2 |
Cow dung |
2000 |
Kg |
1 |
2000 |
|
3 |
Single super phosphate |
100 |
Kg |
22 |
2200 |
|
4 |
Urea |
100 |
Kg |
15 |
1500 |
|
5 |
Kerosene |
15 |
liters |
40 |
600 |
|
6 |
Medicine and Feed supplement |
5 |
liters |
900 |
4500 |
|
7 |
Fish seed (Yearlings) |
2500 |
Nos |
14 |
35000 |
|
8 |
Feed |
2500 |
kg |
30 |
75000 |
|
|
Sub Total |
|
|
|
126800 |
|
9 |
Add Minor Repairs to pond |
|
|
|
5000 |
|
10 |
Netting cost |
6 |
No. s |
500 |
3000 |
|
|
Recurring Cost from Year II onwards |
|
|
|
134800 |
|
1. C PRODUCTION AND INCOME |
||||
Year 1 Year 2 |
||||
i |
Stocking density (@2500 seeds) |
2500 |
2500 |
2500 |
ii |
Survival rate (90 %) |
|
|
|
iv |
Year wise total production (KG) |
1350 |
1620 |
1944 |
v |
Average price/KG |
130 |
140 |
150 |
|
Total Income |
175500 |
226800 |
291600 |
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 |
|||
Fishery 1 acres as calculated above |
124500 |
Included in maintenance Cost |
|
Duckery (Duck house) |
13000 |
Included in maintenance Cost |
|
Poultry (Poultry house) |
13500 |
Included in maintenance Cost |
|
Dairy (cow shed) |
80000 |
Included in maintenance Cost |
|
Vegetable growing |
0 |
|
|
Subtotal |
231000 |
0 |
0 |
Recurring Costs |
|
|
|
Fishery 1 acre |
126800 |
134800 |
134800 |
Duckery |
7500 |
7500 |
7500 |
Poultry |
9000 |
9000 |
9000 |
Dairy |
40000 |
40000 |
40000 |
Vegetable growing |
11000 |
11000 |
11000 |
Recurring cost total |
194300 |
202300 |
202300 |
Capital+ Recurring |
425300 |
202300 |
202300 |
Income Stream: Fish Farming with Duckery, Poultry, Dairy and Vegetable
Items / Years |
Year 1 |
Year 2 |
Year 3 |
Fishery 1 acres |
175500 |
226800 |
291600 |
Duckery |
38000 |
42000 |
42000 |
Poultry |
34560 |
43200 |
43200 |
Dairy |
60000 |
67380 |
67380 |
Vegetable growing |
25000 |
27500 |
30250 |
Total Income |
333060 |
406880 |
474430 |
Net Income (Total Income-Total Cost) |
-92240 |
204580 |
272130 |
Chapters
Download the detailed resource material to help understand the better functioning and best practices for FPO.