Fish farming (Aquaculture) for income generation and water conservation. (Betty Adoch)

FISH FARMING (AQUACULTURE) FOR INCOME GENERATION AND WATER CONSERVATION (Uganda)

gwoko rec

Description

Fish farming, commonly referred to as aquaculture, is one of the common practices promoted by small, medium and large scale farmers in Amuru District, Northern Uganda. Labour, hoes, wheelbarrows, spades and slashers are used for establishment. The technology is established on a gently sloping physical environment located mainly at the valley bottom for purposes of obtaining food security and household income.

Fish farming requires initial consultation with the extension agents or experts to access knowledge and skills on establishment as well as proper procedures including testing the water suitability and the reliabilty of water sources to constantly provide water to the fish pond.

The farmer has seven big fish ponds of various sizes ranging from 30m*40m, 40m*50m, 20m*25m, 20m*26m, 15m*15m, 20m*18m and 18m *16m, which serve different purposes including the bigger ones are for breeding fish of different sizes, another for production, one is meant for cat fish (omel), another pond has mixed species of tilapia (lapok) and cat fish, another pond is meant for a rare species known as singida. The farmer has established another pond meant for only male tilapia ready for sale and the last one inhabits mixed mature species ready for sale.

Usually, the fish ponds are restocked by bringing young species from another fish pond. To ensure hygine and survival, fish ponds are maintained by clearing the bushes around the ponds weekly. Feeds are provided to the fish at a specific time interval that is regularly 10:00 am, 3:00 pm and 6:00 pm.

At the end of the day; once the technology is established the pond system requires only maintenance costs for removing weeds, feeding, restocking and slashing around the pond. What is not liked about this technology is that it relies on a natural spring. In case of drought survival of the fish is not guaranteed.

Location

Location: Amuru town council, Northern Uganda, Uganda

No. of Technology sites analysed: 2-10 sites

Geo-reference of selected sites
  • n.a.

Spread of the Technology: applied at specific points/ concentrated on a small area

Date of implementation: 2012

Type of introduction
Photo showing 28/04/2017 (betty adoch.)
Photo showing fish farming and land users at the fishing site. (Betty Adoch)

Classification of the Technology

Main purpose
  • improve production
  • reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
  • conserve ecosystem
  • protect a watershed/ downstream areas – in combination with other Technologies
  • preserve/ improve biodiversity
  • reduce risk of disasters
  • adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
  • mitigate climate change and its impacts
  • create beneficial economic impact
  • create beneficial social impact
Land use

  • Waterways, waterbodies, wetlands - Ponds, dams
    Main products/ services: Fish, Water conservation

Water supply
  • rainfed
  • mixed rainfed-irrigated
  • full irrigation

Number of growing seasons per year: n.a.
Land use before implementation of the Technology: Crop production.
Livestock density: Not applicable.

Purpose related to land degradation
  • prevent land degradation
  • reduce land degradation
  • restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land
  • adapt to land degradation
  • not applicable
Degradation addressed
  • other -
SLM group
  • water harvesting
  • surface water management (spring, river, lakes, sea)
  • ground water management
SLM measures
  • structural measures - S5: Dams, pans, ponds

Technical drawing

Technical specifications
Author: Betty Adoch
The farmer has seven big fish ponds of various sizes ranging from 30m*40m, 40m*50m, 20m*25m, 20m*26m, 15m*15m, 20m*18m and 18m*16m established in the valley bottom.

Establishment and maintenance: activities, inputs and costs

Calculation of inputs and costs
  • Costs are calculated: per Technology area (size and area unit: 6 acres)
  • Currency used for cost calculation: UGX
  • Exchange rate (to USD): 1 USD = 3500.0 UGX
  • Average wage cost of hired labour per day: 3000shs
Most important factors affecting the costs
Labour is the important factor that influences costs. The farmer used own money to hire labour.
Establishment activities
  1. Digging of ponds (Timing/ frequency: dry and wet)
  2. Water is drained out of the dam during constructions (Timing/ frequency: dry and wet)
  3. The dam gets filled by water from underneath (Timing/ frequency: dry and wet)
  4. Fish introduction into the pond (Timing/ frequency: dry and wet)
Establishment inputs and costs (per 6 acres)
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (UGX) Total costs per input (UGX) % of costs borne by land users
Labour
Labour on monthly basis workers 5.0 150000.0 750000.0 100.0
Equipment
Spades pieces 5.0 7000.0 35000.0 100.0
Slasher pieces 5.0 7000.0 35000.0 100.0
Wheelbarrow pieces 1.0 8000.0 8000.0 100.0
Other
Fish fry pieces 200.0 1000.0 200000.0 100.0
Feeds per week kgs 100.0 1000.0 100000.0 100.0
Fish nets pieces 5.0 4000.0 20000.0 100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 1'148'000.0
Maintenance activities
  1. Removing water weed (Timing/ frequency: dry and wet)
  2. Fertilizer application(lime), chicken waste, cow dung to promote growth of plankton (Timing/ frequency: dry and wet)
  3. Replacement of water (Timing/ frequency: dry and wet)
  4. Feeding the fish (Timing/ frequency: dry and wet)
  5. Slashing the dam sides (Timing/ frequency: dry and wet)
Maintenance inputs and costs (per 6 acres)
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (UGX) Total costs per input (UGX) % of costs borne by land users
Labour
Labour on monthly basis workers 1.0 150000.0 150000.0 100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology 150'000.0

Natural environment

Average annual rainfall
  • < 250 mm
  • 251-500 mm
  • 501-750 mm
  • 751-1,000 mm
  • 1,001-1,500 mm
  • 1,501-2,000 mm
  • 2,001-3,000 mm
  • 3,001-4,000 mm
  • > 4,000 mm
Agro-climatic zone
  • humid
  • sub-humid
  • semi-arid
  • arid
Specifications on climate
Average annual rainfall in mm: 850.0
Two rainy seasons and two dry season
Slope
  • flat (0-2%)
  • gentle (3-5%)
  • moderate (6-10%)
  • rolling (11-15%)
  • hilly (16-30%)
  • steep (31-60%)
  • very steep (>60%)
Landforms
  • plateau/plains
  • ridges
  • mountain slopes
  • hill slopes
  • footslopes
  • valley floors
Altitude
  • 0-100 m a.s.l.
  • 101-500 m a.s.l.
  • 501-1,000 m a.s.l.
  • 1,001-1,500 m a.s.l.
  • 1,501-2,000 m a.s.l.
  • 2,001-2,500 m a.s.l.
  • 2,501-3,000 m a.s.l.
  • 3,001-4,000 m a.s.l.
  • > 4,000 m a.s.l.
Technology is applied in
  • convex situations
  • concave situations
  • not relevant
Soil depth
  • very shallow (0-20 cm)
  • shallow (21-50 cm)
  • moderately deep (51-80 cm)
  • deep (81-120 cm)
  • very deep (> 120 cm)
Soil texture (topsoil)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Soil texture (> 20 cm below surface)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Topsoil organic matter content
  • high (>3%)
  • medium (1-3%)
  • low (<1%)
Groundwater table
  • on surface
  • < 5 m
  • 5-50 m
  • > 50 m
Availability of surface water
  • excess
  • good
  • medium
  • poor/ none
Water quality (untreated)
  • good drinking water
  • poor drinking water (treatment required)
  • for agricultural use only (irrigation)
  • unusable
Is salinity a problem?
  • Yes
  • No

Occurrence of flooding
  • Yes
  • No
Species diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low
Habitat diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low

Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Market orientation
  • subsistence (self-supply)
  • mixed (subsistence/ commercial
  • commercial/ market
Off-farm income
  • less than 10% of all income
  • 10-50% of all income
  • > 50% of all income
Relative level of wealth
  • very poor
  • poor
  • average
  • rich
  • very rich
Level of mechanization
  • manual work
  • animal traction
  • mechanized/ motorized
Sedentary or nomadic
  • Sedentary
  • Semi-nomadic
  • Nomadic
Individuals or groups
  • individual/ household
  • groups/ community
  • cooperative
  • employee (company, government)
Gender
  • women
  • men
Age
  • children
  • youth
  • middle-aged
  • elderly
Area used per household
  • < 0.5 ha
  • 0.5-1 ha
  • 1-2 ha
  • 2-5 ha
  • 5-15 ha
  • 15-50 ha
  • 50-100 ha
  • 100-500 ha
  • 500-1,000 ha
  • 1,000-10,000 ha
  • > 10,000 ha
Scale
  • small-scale
  • medium-scale
  • large-scale
Land ownership
  • state
  • company
  • communal/ village
  • group
  • individual, not titled
  • individual, titled
Land use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Water use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Access to services and infrastructure
health

poor
good
education

poor
good
technical assistance

poor
good
employment (e.g. off-farm)

poor
good
markets

poor
good
energy

poor
good
roads and transport

poor
good
drinking water and sanitation

poor
good
financial services

poor
good

Impacts

Socio-economic impacts
fodder quality
decreased
increased


Fodder planted on the pond levee.

risk of production failure
increased
decreased


Monitoring and supervision by the extension worker and the land user.

land management
hindered
simplified


Running water retained in the ponds.

expenses on agricultural inputs
increased
decreased


Only for purchase of fish feeds.

farm income
decreased
increased


From the sale of fish.

workload
increased
decreased


Only for feeding, fishing and clearing the bush around the pond.

Socio-cultural impacts
food security/ self-sufficiency
reduced
improved


Income from the sale of fish is used to purchase other food stuffs.

community institutions
weakened
strengthened


Fish farming associations in place to enhance fishing and negotiate for better prices.

SLM/ land degradation knowledge
reduced
improved


On fishing farming extended by fisheries office and partners

Ecological impacts
groundwater table/ aquifer
lowered
recharge

Off-site impacts
water availability (groundwater, springs)
decreased
increased


Via the increased groundwater table.

Cost-benefit analysis

Benefits compared with establishment costs
Short-term returns
very negative
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
very positive

Benefits compared with maintenance costs
Short-term returns
very negative
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
very positive

Climate change

Gradual climate change
annual temperature increase

not well at all
very well
annual rainfall decrease

not well at all
very well

Adoption and adaptation

Percentage of land users in the area who have adopted the Technology
  • single cases/ experimental
  • 1-10%
  • 10-50%
  • more than 50%
Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many have done so without receiving material incentives?
  • 0-10%
  • 10-50%
  • 50-90%
  • 90-100%
Number of households and/ or area covered
60
Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?
  • Yes
  • No
To which changing conditions?
  • climatic change/ extremes
  • changing markets
  • labour availability (e.g. due to migration)

Conclusions and lessons learnt

Strengths: land user's view
  • The technology is a good source of food.
  • Easy to maintain.
  • Provides income from the sale of the fish.
Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
  • Does not require high maintenance costs once established.
  • Requires technical advice which is available with extension workers.
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome
  • Easily affected by drought especially during the dry season. Water harvesting.
  • Easily destructed by wild birds. Tide security through watchman.
  • Flooding can lead to overflow hence fishes may escape. Channel created to drain away excess water from the pond.
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome
  • Presence of water weeds may affect fish growth and feeding. Constant removal of weeds which might be an extra cost.

References

Compiler
  • betty adoch
Editors
  • JOY TUKAHIRWA
  • Kamugisha Rick Nelson
Reviewer
  • Udo Höggel
Date of documentation: July 3, 2017
Last update: Nov. 2, 2022
Resource persons
Full description in the WOCAT database
Linked SLM data
Documentation was faciliated by
Institution Project
Key references
  • Aquaculture production and its contribution to development in the Rwenzori region Uganda, Ronald Rulijwa, June 2018: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326059904_Aquaculture_production_and_its_contribution_to_development_in_the_Rwenzori_region_Uganda
Links to relevant information which is available online
  • The Effect of Water Quality on Aquaculture Productivity in Ibanda District, Uganda ,Received: 8 November 2021 / Revised: 16 December 2021 / Accepted: 21 February 2022 / Published: 4 March 2022: https://www.mdpi.com/2673-9496/2/1/3
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International