Assessment of Wetlands Aquaculture Practice in the Southern Kerala District, Kerala.

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1656757/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Assessment of Wetlands Aquaculture Practice in the Southern Kerala District, Kerala.

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1656757/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

In Kerala, out of 11.14 lakh of fishers, 2.55 lakh in the inland fishers. Also, 34199.5 ha area of inland wetlands have great potential for fishery resources, but not well documented. In this paper, the contribution of wetland ecosystem resources to fisheries in the Southern Kerala district (SKD) is because of fewer studies. Surveyed 75 inland wetlands and, 247 respondents from areas next to wetlands in five districts of Kerala by group discussions, key informant interviews, and direct observations methods. In Kerala, fish rearing is predominant in Thrissur and Ernakulam district, followed by prawn culture and less mixed cultures. Also, identified 34 fish species, exotic (14.7%), local (85.29%), and three prawn varieties had reared throughout the year. The Pearson correlation results revealed a significant positive relationship between the wetland fish catch and the mesh size (r = 90, .391, p < 000), net length (r = 70, .205, p < .198) and net cost (r = 96, .239, p < 018). According to fishers' capacity, the cost of rearing fish, materials, and expenses is varied. Mostly, the traditional fishing method used and 4–6 fishers required during harvesting and catching. The fishing business had done on a partnership basis, and 63% earns a monthly income below Rs.5000. A sampling of fish diversity provides current knowledge on wetland fisheries and economic status in the SKD. The wetland fishing practices facing severe impacts on recent climate changes, labor cost, and other practical difficulties lead to shifting forms in small-scale fishers nowadays.

Aquaculture and Mariculture

Ecosystem service

Biodiversity

RAMSAR

Southern Kerala

Wetlands

Fish farming

Wetlands are lands provisional between terrestrial and aquatic systems where an excess of water for all or part of the year marks separate wetland societies. Wetlands are significant for the employments of millions of people. Greatest wetland ecosystems livelihood local fishes that not only show crucial parts in the aquatic-terrestrial system but moreover deliver leisure and profitable fisheries yields cost billions of dollars yearly (Woodward and Wui, 2001). Out of the 6000 km sea coast of India, Kerala has a coastal line of 589.5 km, around 10% of India’s total. The high rate of rainfall and many rivers make Kerala the most fertile for fish. In 2016, Kerala backed 5.22 lakh tones of overall marine fish creation in India (Zacharia et al., 2019). The south Indian state of Kerala produced about 549 thousand metric tons of fish in 2018 (DOF, 2018). The fish diversity in floodplain wetlands has formed on the biodiversity of the connected rivers and tributaries. Extensive studies on fish diversity and catch composition from rivers and tributaries have been carried out during the last few decades in India (Dubey et al., 2013; Sarkar et al., 2014, 2015). Wetland geomorphic and geographic settings appear to have a significant influence on how the fish community responds. Besides these, unfavorable climatic condition poses a serious threat to freshwater habitats and fish diversity (Sarkar and Borah 2018, Sarkar et al. 2019). In addition, the periodic accessibility of proper wetland zones as a nursery, spawning, and foraging habitat is an acute life-history condition for many ephemeral fish classes (Jude and Pappas 1992; Saint-Paul et al. 2000; Nagelkerken and van der Velde 2002; Manson et al. 2005). Research literature in India on wetlands, fish diversity, and fish disease ( Banerjea, 1967; Kar, 2013b, 2014c, Kar, et al., 2014, Menon, 1994, 1999 Singh et al., 2015a,). In India, a vital resource of fish production with a high production potential of 2000–2500 kg/ ha/ yr based on natural food spectrum viz. plankton, macrophytes, and detritus (Sugunan et al., 2013; Sarkar et al., 2019). There are conscientious changes in the practice of production, processing, export, and marketing activities in Kerala’s seafood industry. The fisheries sector plays a crucial role in the socio-economic development of the Kerala economy. The economy of fisheries has two divisions: old-style and automated. The traditional part has two zones as the oceanic and the inland. At present, the old-fashioned fishing division has merely a partial excess creation of fish for the market. The traditional fisheries part has been an employee income for several years. They have a vast knowledge of the ocean of winds and currents based on the local area of their operation. The fishing economy comprises three activities, like harvesting, processing, and marketing of fish. Harvesting or catching fish contributes 66% of the workforce in the fisheries sector (Mathew 2000, p.24). Pen culture was found successful in Kerala for raising fish fry to fingerlings for stocking. Pen culture in the reservoir ensures the high survival of fish seeds, which will be later released into the fishery for fishery enhancement. (Albert et al., 2021) Cage culture activities appropriate for inland freshwater and took part in Malampuzha and Pazhassi reservoirs of Kerala on a participatory management basis (NFDB, 2016). In Kerala, the major drawback in inland aquaculture fisheries due to mismanagement stocking, lack of collaborator's input, lack of fishing inventories, and unscientific management practices. The aim of the present study includes

To identify the rearing fish species in the wetlands of SKD.
To determine the methods of culturing, feeding, and cost of fish production in the wetland of the SKD.
To assess the economic status of fishers and the cost of fish production.

STUDY AREA

Kerala state is the southern Malabar Coast of India, also known as god’s own country. Also, Kerala state bordered by Karnataka state to the northern & North, Eastern and Southern by Tamil Nadu, Western by the Lakshadweep Sea. Our study area mainly focuses on the five southern districts of Kerala, as Alappuzha, Kottayam, Ernakulam, Thrissur, and Palakkad. Alappuzha district is in the Southern state and bounded on the northeast by Ernakulam and Kottayam districts, East by Pathanamthitta, the southeast by Kollam, West by the Arabian Sea.

Kottayam district is in central Kerala state, bordered on the northern by Ernakulam, Eastern by Idukki, on the South of Alappuzha and Pathanamthitta district. In addition, Ernakulam district includes the biggest metropolitan area of the Kerala state. Ernakulam borders Thrissur in the North, the Idukki district in the East, the Arabian Sea in the West, and Alappuzha and Kottayam District in the South. Also, the central region of Kerala State is the Thrissur district. The Bounded on the northern by Malappuram and Palakkad District, south by Idukki and Ernakulam Districts, eastern by Palakkad District and Coimbatore district of TamilNadu state, on the West by Lakshadweep sea. In addition, Palakkad had called (Gateway of Kerala) surrounded in the North by Malappuram District, Eastern by the Coimbatore district of Tamil Nadu, southern by Thrissur district, and in the West are Thrissur and Malappuram districts (Fig. 1). We used the Mapitute Version 2020 software used to create Landsat satellite images of study areas. The figures had collected based on quality and clarity (less than 20% of cloud cover) during the period of s18/11/2020, and also used India Vavteq2012 for their image type. The mapping ratio is 1:1,313,972.

METHOD

Fish Data collection:

The wetland survey and the questionnaire interviews were conducted from June 2019 to April 2020 in the society lying within a 1 km radius of each Wetland. To crowd lawful and dependable data, the course of action has mainly aimed at qualitative information. A pre-tested discussion plan was used to gather data openly from the fishers' families over individual considerations and meetings about the many aspects of the socioeconomic conditions. The data had collected in 2020 from a total sample of 280 respondents selected from the five districts, under 100 villages, through a random sampling method. Information about their fishing activity, main household data, economic, historic, cultural reliance on fishing, gender fairness, occupational structure and employment, income supply and resources, physical capital, financial investment, social capital, exposure were collected and analyzed. From the CMFRI department of fisheries, census statistics, various research studies were considered for the secondary data studies.

Data Collection:

A preliminary survey was conducted along the central part of Kerala, covering all the central and southern districts to examine the intensity of fishing operations in the various major fish landing centers. After this, we were selected for a detailed study on mechanized, motorized, and traditional non-mechanized fishing units. The costs and earnings data of 10 randomly sampled fishing units for all days in different areas, which cover all seasons in a year (2019–2020) were collected. The sample fishing units were not always necessarily the same fishing boat, and the data were gathered from whatever boats with the same specifications landed on the sampling days. By using the direct observation and the cost details of the fishing trip were collected by interviewers. Also, to collect information on the fixed cost details and the other one for daily operating costs. Operating costs include all those costs, which were acquired only when the vessels were under operation, and fixed costs were even if there was no operation. On the Kerala coast, the sharing of the fish catch was the prevailing system of payment, of wages for fishing labor. For the fishing units, in the revenue per trip, after deducting the daily beta and fuel cost, labor share is one-third for gillnetters, 35% for trawlers, and 40% for purse seiners. In the non-mechanized sector so, two-third of the revenues take part as wages to the laborers. Hence, the main operating cost in all the fishing units is the wages for fishing labor, which depends on the total landings of the fishing units. The operational costs of fishing include fuel cost, auction charges, daily operational allowance for the fishing crew, cost of repair and maintenance of the craft and gear. Data on species-wise, juvenile in the catch composition of each fishing unit, were collected from the landing centers as the percentage of total landings. The juvenile fishes are classified, so when they are caught before attaining their size at first sexual maturity, rendering them to get a poor price compared to that of the corresponding adult size fish. The number of juveniles landed in each fishing unit was recorded, along with the corresponding price from the landing center. A differential ratio applies to know the price difference between the juvenile and adult price of the same group of fishes at the landing center level. The length of specimens from the tip of the snout to the tip of the longest caudal ray is measured to find out the size of juveniles. The average annual wholesale price of juveniles and adult fishes were calculated separately and used for further economic analysis. The data on growth, mortality rates, individual fish length-weight relationships, and species had collected from (Joseph and Jaya Prakash, 2003). For estimation, the fish biomass to the number of juveniles landed if they were left in the water to grow up to their size at first maturity.

We surveyed wetlands in the SKD were mentioned in the Map(Supplementary file). 280 respondents were selected randomly from the area of the Wetlands in the SKD. Overall, 93% are males. The data collection was targeted mainly from the head of the households of the fishing community who can give better and accurate information. The details about the fishing activity, economic dependence can be reported by the male member of the family. The majority expressed that fishing is their chief occupation. All 75 wetlands had used for aquaculture practices. In general, 34% noted Thrissur district, 19% in Ernakulam, 16% in Alappuzha and Palakkad, and 15% of fish culture in the Kottayam district (Table 1.Graph1).

Table 1

District wise Mean values of aquaculture practices in SKD
District	Range Statistic	Mean	SE	SD	Variance Statistic	Skewness Statistic	Skewness Std. Error
Alappuzha	14.00	5.33	4.37	7.57	57.33	1.597	1.225
Ernakulam	10.00	6.33	2.90	5.03	25.33	− .586	1.225
Kottayam	.00	15.0	.	.	.	.	.
Palakkad	14.00	8.00	7.00	9.89	98.00	.	.
Thrissur	13.00	11.3	4.17	7.23	52.33	-1.695	1.225

In the coastal district of Kerala, 70% of wetlands are used for fish rearing, 18% used for prawns rearing and the remaining 12% used for both the fish and the prawns. The district-wise, average mean values were mentioned in Table 1. In the Alappuzha district (n = 16) wetlands, 87.5% used for fish culture, 12.5% used for prawn culture. In the Kottayam district (n = 15) wetlands are used for fish rearing itself. In Ernakulam district (n = 19) wetlands, 57.8% used for fish culture, 5.26% for prawn culture, 36.8% is the mixed culture. Utmost rearing In Thrissur district (n = 34) wetlands, 44.11% for fish culture, 47.05% for prawn culture, and 8.82% for mixed culture. In Palakkad district (n = 16) wetlands, 93.75% for fish culture and the remaining 6.25% is the prawn culture (Graph 1). Also, 80% of the aquaculture ponds are used for commercial activities, 16% of the ponds are natural ponds, and the remaining 4% are canal types (Alappuzha district (AC Road- AC canal).

Graph1.District wise aquaculture practices in Southern Kerala District

In the Coastal District of Kerala, we recorded 34 species of fishes and 3 prawns are cultivated in the wetlands. Among 34 species, 14.7% are the exotic species such as Oreochromis mossabicus (Tilapia GIFT), Pygocentrus natterei (Red-bellied Piranha), Litopenaeus vannamei (White leg shrimp), Oreochromis aurens, and Oreochromis niloticus (red and white Tilapia), and the remaining 85.29% are the local species. The details of the fish and prawn species were mentioned in Table 2.

Table 2

List of rearing fish species in the SKD, Kerala.
No	Vernacular name	Common name	Scientific name	Type of fish
1	GIFT Tilopia	Tilopia	Oerochromismossabicus	Exotic
2	Nutter/ Redbelli	Red bellied piranha	Pygocentrusnatterei	Exotic
3	Vanamii Prawn	White leg shrimp	Litopenaeusvannamei	Exotic
4	Red Tilapia	Red Tilapia	Orechromis aureus	Exotic
5	White Tilapia	White Tilopia	Orechromisniloticus	Exotic
6	Aranjil / Nandan	Nandan	Parambassisdayi	Local
7	Bral/ Varal	Striped Snakehead	Channa striata	Local
8	Catla	South Asian Carp	Catlacatla	Local
9	Choodan	Speckled Shrimp	Metapenaeus monoceros	Local
10	Cobia	Black kingfish	Rachycentron canadum	Local
11	Red Prawn	Red Prawn	Selenoceracrassicornis	Local
12	Gourami	Gourami	Osphronemusgoramy	Local
13	Grass carp	Grass carp	Ctenopharyngodonidella	Local
14	Kaari	African Sharptooth catfish	Clariasgariepinus	Local
15	Kalanji	Gaint Sea Perch	Lates calcarifer	Local
16	Kalladamutti/ Chembally	Climbing Perch	Anabustestudineus	Local
17	Kanambu	Mullet	Mugil cephalus	Local
18	Karachemeen	Black tiger /Gaint tiger prawn	Penaeus monodon	Local
19	Karimeen	Pearl Spot	Etroplussuratensis	Local
20	Koorivala /Valah	Wallago fish/ Boal	Wallago attu	Local
21	Kuruva/ KuruvaParal	Peninsular Olive Barb	Puntius sarana	Local
22	Manjakkoori	Yellow Catfish	Horabagrusbrachysoma	Local
23	Mrigal	Mrigal	Cirrhinusmrigala	Local
24	Mushi	Walking CatFish	Clariasbatrachus	Local
25	Naran	Indian White Prawn	Penaeus indicus	Local
26	Pallathi	Orange chromide	Etroplusmaculates	Local
27	Paral	Gaint Danio	Danio malabaricus	Local
28	Poolan	Tank goby	Glossogobiusgiuris	Local
29	Poomeen	Milkfish	Chanoschanos	Local
30	Rohu	Carpo fish	Labeorohita	Local
31	Silver pompono	Silver pompono	Trachinotusblochii	Local
32	Thooli	Thooli	Labeodussumieri	Local
33	Vattan	Ceylon Snake Head	Channa orientalis	Local
34	Vayambu	Vayambu	Amblypharyngodonmelettinus	Local

Regarding rearing season, 82% of the wetlands were culture the fishes and prawns throughout the year. 16% of wetlands were aquaculture during in monsoon, summer seasons. Also, utmost prawn culture during summer due to avoid diseases. 1% of wetlands rearing the aquaculture in the summer and winter after the paddy cultivation (Laikadupadam).

Table 3

Correlation of equipment’s used in aquaculture practices in Southern Kerala District (SKD)
	District	Fish catch	Net length	Mesh size	Fisherman
District	1	0.034	0.131	-0.183	0.112
Fish catch	0.034	1	0.135	.391^**	0.014
Net length	0.131	0.135	1	-0.038	.205^*
Mesh size	-0.183	.391^**	-0.038	1	0.120
Fisherman	0.112	0.014	.205^*	0.120	1
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

The Pearson correlation results show that significant positive relationship between the wetland fish catch and the mesh size (r = 90, .391, p < 000) and net length (r = 70, .205, p < .198) were observed (Table 3).The study revealed that there are different timings for the fish catch. Mostly, 71% of the ponds catch fish in the morning, evening, or even night, according to the convenience of the owner. 12%, fish caught according to the river tides. Also, 12% of ponds catch the fish only once a year. Only 4% of the ponds catch the fishes during the nighttimes and 1% catches fishes either in the evening or the night. Different cost-wise was available on the fishing rod, net, fishing boat, fuel cost, types of the nets, fish traps. The basic essential thing required in the fishing unit is the fish feed. Fish feed types, composition, and costs are also varied. The method of the fish and the prawn culture differ from each other. Some owners cultivate the adult fish in two different ponds. The requirements for stocking the fish are entirely different. We observed that the traditional type of fishing rod is used by the local people. Advanced fishing rods are available in the markets nowadays and they are of varying cost according to their quality. As the rate of rods increases, their quality and specializations increase. Mainly six types of nets are used by the fisherfolk. The cost of these nets varies according to their length, mesh size, and thickness.

Table 4

List of stocking variety of fish and prawn species in the Southern Kerala District.
S.No	Name of species	Fish size (cm)	Depth ( feet)	Food preference
1	Fishes: Black Kingfish	10–15	8.0–11.0	Crushed prawn,fishes
2	Carpfish(Rohu)	10–15	7.0–8.0	Powdered fish feed, Natural pond feed, Godrej starter feed
3	Ceylon Snakehead	10–15	8.0–11.0	Fish feed Powder, Crushed Prawns and fishes
4	Climbing perch	10–15	5.0–18.0	Godrej starter(2mm, 3mm, 5mm),Fish feed Powder,Crushed Prawns and fishes
5	Giant Sea Perch	10–15	8.0–11.0	Crushed prawn,fishes, Fish Feed Powder
6	Grass carp	10–15	4.0–18.0	Godrej starter(2mm, 3mm, 5mm),Fish feed Powder,Crushed Prawns and fishes
7	Mrigal	10–15	5.0-5.01	Powdered fish feed, Natural Pond feed, Godrej starter feed
8	Pearl spot	10–15	5.0–11.0	Godrej starter(2mm, 3mm, 5mm),Fish feed Powder,Crushed Prawns and fishes
9	Red bellied piranha	10–15	6.0–7.0	Crushed prawn,fishes, Poultry waste
10	Silver Pompano	10–15	8.0–11.0	Crushed prawn,fishes
11	South Asian carp	10–15	5.0–7.0	Starter(1mm,3mm), Natural pond feed,Powderedfish feed
12	Tilapia	10–15	4.0–18.0	Godrej starter(2mm, 3mm, 5mm),Fish feed Powder,Crushed Prawns and fishes
13	Wallago Fish	10–15	6.0–7.0	Crushed prawn,fishes, Poultry waste, Company feed, Natural pond feed
14	Prawns: Black Tiger Prawn	10–15	20.0–23.0	Crushed prawn, fishes, Poultry waste
15	Speckled Shrimp	10	5.00	Starter CP (1mm,3mm,5mm)
15	White Leg shrimp	10–12	7	Powder Feed

The stocking of fish and prawn species was listed in Table 3. Overall, 13 species of fish and 3 species of prawns are listed under the stocking category in the wetlands of CDK. Out of 100 pounds, 19 ponds carried the stocking practices. The study revealed that 16 species are most easily and commonly cultivated in the nursery ponds (Table 1). The species could be categorized based on the depth of the water in which they are cultivated. About 62.5% (n = 10) of all total species (n = 16) are grown in a depth of 1–5 feet, 31.25% (n = 5) species are grown in a depth of 6-15feet and 6.25% of grows in a depth of 15–23 feet depth (Black tiger Prawn). The size of the fishes and prawns when stocked is 10-15cm, which is almost the same for all the species. The feed for the fries is a mixture of natural and artificial feed. It includes the crushed small fishes, shrimps, poultry waste, zooplanktons, Godrej, and CP fish feed starters (1mm,2mm,3mm), which are mainly given. These fries are cultivated and sold wholesale to the farmers who cultivate adult fishes and the prawns commercially based on several fish. 52% of fishers feed their fishes by the natural feed includes small fishes, prawns, zooplanktons, poultry waste, household waste, rice bran, coconut oil cake, wheat, wheat flour, gram flour, soya bean powder, the fish meal had reported. Artificial feed is used for 38% of fishers and feed for the fish and the prawns are different in composition as Pellets, starter, and grower are varying in the feed's size.

Graph 2.District wise aquaculture practices in Coastal District of Kerala

In SKD, 31% of fishers use a cast net, whereas 22% use dragnet, 19% of the fisher uses monofilament nets, and 12% of the fishers use purse seine nets, 13% uses the gill nets for fishing, and the remaining 3% belonging to the uses landing Net (pole). These are mainly used where Cage farming and nursery ponds are also recorded (Graph 2).

Table 5

Correlation of production cost for the aquaculture in Southern Kerala District(SKD)
Cost category	Fisherman	Fish rod cost	Net cost	Boat cost	Fuel cost	fish feed cost	Wages cost	District
Fisherman	1	-0.282	.239^*	-0.344	.846^*	-0.243	0.340	0.112
Fish rod cost	-0.282	1	0.290	.804^**	-0.500	.^c	0.189	-0.124
Net cost	.239^*	0.290	1	0.059	-0.195	-0.169	0.101	0.180
Boat cost	-0.344	.804^**	0.059	1	0.481	.^c	0.695	0.034
Fuel cost	.846^*	-0.500	-0.195	0.481	1	.^c	-0.115	0.427
Fish feed cost	-0.243	.^c	-0.169	.^c	.^c	1	.^c	− .549^*
Wages cost	0.340	0.189	0.101	0.695	-0.115	.^c	1	0.264
District	0.112	-0.124	0.180	0.034	0.427	− .549^*	0.264	1
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

c. Cannot be computed because at least one of the variables is constant.

The Pearson correlation results show test significant positive relationship between the wetland fish catch and the net cost (r = 96, .239, p < 018), boat (r = 4, .804, p < .009) and fuel cost (r = 4), .846, p < .034) were observed (Table 5).The cost of the fishing nets is varied. In Coastal Kerala District, 85% of fishers use nets cost of Rs. 3000 to Rs.5000/-, 8% of the fisherfolk uses nets that range between Rs.2000 to Rs.3000, and the remaining 7% uses the nets that cost > Rs.5000. fishnet price is more based on its length and flexibility. Four types of boats as wooden canoes, plastic rowboats, motorized wooden canoes, and rowboats and the cost varies. In Kerala, wooden canoes are mainly used, with or without the motor. 25% of the total fishers only use these boats. 44% (n = 11) uses the boats that cost more than Rs.50000, 28% (n = 7) uses the boats between Rs. 40000 to Rs.50000, and another 28% (n = 7) use the boats between Rs.30, 000 to Rs.40000. The fuel is mainly used for running the motors in the boats and motors and aerators for the farm. 3% of the fishers only use motorboats, which range from Rs. 25000 to Rs.60000. Motorized rowboats are used mainly in Matsyafed Aqua tourism centers and fishing in wide canals. Especially, in prawn farms, the aerators are used for the oxygen supply, which costs Rs.50000, and the 4 pad aerators cost about 1.5 lakh rupees. Other expenses include the pH meter, for bio-security: for labor requirements based on the area of the pond. If greater areas increase, the workers. Overall, 63% were 4–6 members for fishing activities, whereas 20% were 7–15 members in a group. 17% fall into the category of 1–3 members in a group. In larger wetlands, harvest occurs once a year, and the artificial farms, just give the contract to the agencies who recruit fishers. Sometimes, the owner and their family members help in harvesting. These are mostly seen where cage farming is done and in the nursery farms. The study revealed that most of the respondents (85%) were doing the fishing business on a partnership basis. It was tough to collect the household income details as most of the respondents were not ready to reveal their monthly turnover and also it is difficult to assess as it fluctuates accordingly. Although, the study shows that more than half of the respondents (63%) are earning an appropriate monthly income below Rs.5000, whereas 26% of them are earning between Rs. 5,000 and Rs.10, 000, 11% are earning between Rs.10, 000 and Rs. 15,000, monthly.

The total fish production in India has been growing steadily over the years, and during 2017–2018 is estimated to be 12.60 million tonnes, of which nearly 65% is from the inland sector. We have done the survey in Alappuzha, Kottayam, Ernakulam, Thrissur, and Palakkad cover 75 wetlands from 60 villages. The study showed that rearing species in separate habitats were observed because old traditional methods gave low yield due to lack of polyculture or composite or mixed farming (Alikunhi et al., 1957; Avnimelech et al., 1994). Aquaculture is dominant in cultivated ponds and tanks for commercial use, followed by natural ponds and wide canals. Our study also supported the inland wetland in the southern Kerala district, which has supported the significant contribution of fish rearing and prawn rearing and supported by many researchers (Budhin et al., 2015). We collected the survey from the head of the households of the fishing community who can give better and accurate information. Aquaculture practices in SKD showed that the male’s role is dominant, such as 93% are male workers directly involved in operational activities. Similarly, a case study in an Elamkunnapuzha fishing village reveals that among 300 respondents, 82 percent (247) are males, and there are women in leadership roles in the community (Ramees Rahman and Meera Bai, 2019). Our study recorded female activity is less in rearing aquaculture practices. However, the study says that income-generating activities have great potential to empower women by involving them in aquaculture. They should get required training and provide input to rear fingerlings in the backyard ponds as part-time employment (Budhin et al., 2015). Out of the 34 fish species, Oreochromis mossabicus (Tilapia GIFT), Pygocentrus natterei (Red-bellied Piranha), Litopenaeus vannamei (White leg shrimp), Oreochromis aurens, and Oreochromis niloticus(red and white Tilapia respectively) were dominant in all wetlands. In SKD, rearing species throughout the year were commonly followed by the monsoon and summer season. No definite catching or harvesting time because of the local environment and other issues. Catching fish is based on a change of the light, at dawn or dusk. Some ponds catch the fish only once a year as occurs in the public ponds, temples, and houses ponds. The time of catch, mostly in the early morning or evening. Many wetlands undergo seasonal changes in physicochemistry that can influence the fish behavior, movement and, sampling gear efficiency. Different fishing nets, such as cast net, dragnet, gill nets, landing nets, monofilament nets, and purse seine nets, are recorded in the present study, and the cost ranging between Rs. 2000/- and above Rs.5000. From the recent study, fishing rods from traditional to advanced types range from Rs.250 to Rs.500. The cost of fishing rods, fishing net, fishing boat, fuel cost, types of nets, fish traps is varied according to size and advancement. The method of the fish culture and the prawn culture differ from each other. Mostly fishers practicing like initially the ponds are cleaned, bleached, applied disinfectant and left for about 2–3 weeks and ponds are filled with pure clear freshwater. After a couple of days, the fishes or the prawns are introduced and maintained pH and ammonia level. In SKD, some fishers cultivate the adult fish and the fries in two different ponds, and the requirements for stocking the fish are entirely different. For the Prawn culture water will be pumped from a nearby reserve pond. Fish culture in reserve ponds including Temple and house ponds, the source of the water is rainwater. Therefore, the water could be present almost throughout the year. The fishes could be introduced as the wish of the public. The small fishes, prawns, zooplankton, and phytoplankton are the feed-in these culture ponds. Mostly the traditional type of fishing rod is used by the local people. Advanced fishing rods are available in the markets nowadays, and they are of varying cost according to their quality. As the rate of rods increases, their quality and specializations increase. Our study observed that six types of nets are used by the fisher and the cost of nets varies according to their length, mesh size, and thickness.

The basic essential thing required in the fishing unit is the fish feed. Its types, composition, and costs are also important. According to our study, fish feed as natural feed, artificial feed, and mixed feed (both natural & artificial feed) that range from Rs.1500 to Rs.3000 are reported. Our study supported that artificial feeding given in fish farming increases the production which is coated by many studies (Kabir et al., 2009, Nazish and Mateen, 2011). The fish stocks migrate in and out of local fishing grounds. Sometimes they are locally plentiful, and sometimes they are not. The study shows that there are different fish feeds like Godrej fish feed and the Growl’s grow-finish feed are scientifically planned and nutritionally balanced to meet the nutritional demands of rearing fishes. The feed is fed 3–4 times daily for fries and 1–2 times as the weight of the fish increases. It cost nearly Rs.1500 to Rs.2500 per 25kg bag. Growel’s Growfin nutrition for fish is the extruded floating feeds that are scientifically planned, complete, and balanced nutrition and cost Rs.822 for 10 kg bags. Shrimp artificial feed like Godrej shrimp feed, CP Aquaculture feed, and Marigold feed provides 100% complete and balanced nutrition. These are mainly fed for the white shrimp and black tiger shrimp. Normally, the feed regularity is 4 to 5 times a day with natural and artificial feed about 10%. In our study, integrated farming, cage farming, pen culture, and fish-prawn culture are seen. Mostly, the fish farmers use plant and animal leftovers of agriculture and animal husbandry as the chief section of feeds and fertilizer in fish culture reported. From the study, four types of boats as wooden canoes, plastic rowboats, wooden canoes, and rowboats were reported and the cost of boats varies from Rs.30000 to above Rs.50000. Our study of the fish stocking is based on a local marketing strategy and the minimum size of fingerlings ranges from 10 cm to 15cm in different ponds with varying depths. The stocking of fish seed is prime input; depending on species, size of fingerlings, and pond conditions, a fish pond can support a certain quality of fish in its limited space and natural food. A fertile fish pond produces several kinds of fish food organisms; therefore, different fish stocks will effectively use the space and food. The study revealed that the number of fishers working in wetlands differs largely from a single person to 17 − 15 members, depending on the size of ponds and effort needed for harvesting. Our study supported that Inland fisheries can contribute to the livelihood and improve the economic activity of many countryside families that live nearby to water bodies that were reported by other studies (Robin et al., 2010, Bene et al., 2009). In SKD, 63% of fishing businesses on a partnership basis were earning monthly income below Rs. 5,000 whereas 26% (Rs.5000 to Rs 10,000) and 11% (Rs. 10000 to Rs. 15000) monthly. Rearing fish farming facing several issues nowadays due to cost of labor, climate change, instrument cost, maintenance of pond, water quality and quantity, and marketing inconsistency lead shifting the practice of most of the small scale fishers.

Wetlands are one of the most productive ecosystems in the biosphere and play a significant role in the ecological sustainability of a region. In Kerala, we have surveyed 75 wetlands from the five selected districts. The questionnaire includes all the general information about wetlands and fisheries. Wetland uses the culture and feeding methods of fishes, the economic status of fishers, and the cost of fish production. In Kerala, fish culture is predominant, followed by prawn culture alone and sometimes mixed culture. Aquaculture rearing practices were (fish, prawn, and both species) utmost in the Thrissur, followed by Ernakulam district. In SKD, 93% of aquaculture practices were involved in the male category. Also, 34 species were identified, out of 14.7% are Exotic species, and 85.29% are the local type fishes and rearing throughout the year. Detailed information about the cost of fishing, fishing rods, fishing net and types, fishing boats, fuel cost is varied according to fisher capacity had noted. Also, the rearing habitat, stocking fishes, fishes type, size, depth of stocking water, and fish feed seem mostly used low-cost method had used. Mostly 4–6 members are required during the harvest time but vary based on the pond's size and amount of harvest. In Kerala, the fishing business had carried on a partnership basis, and it is tough to collect the household income details but, earning a monthly income below Rs.5,000 was observed. The wetland aquaculture practices facing severe impacts on recent climate changes, labor cost, and other practical difficulties leads to shifting operations in small-scale fishers nowadays. Overall, the study gives crucial details about wetlands, fish varieties, and rearing practices along with the economic status of fishers in the Southern Kerala District.

DECLARATION OF COMPETING INTEREST

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

CREDIT AUTHORSHIP CONTRIBUTION STATEMENT

Amritha P S^b: Investigation, Data collection, Formal analysis, Visualization, Writing- original draft.

Dr. K. Varunprasath^a*: Supervision, Conceptualization, Final analysis, Writing review, and editing.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

None

FUNDING

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors

Joseph, M. M., & Jayaprakash, A. A. (2003). Status of exploited marine fishery resources of India. Kochi: Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute, 157.
Ramees Rahman M and Meera Bai. M,(2019). Portraying a Vulnerable Fishing Village – A Case Study of Elamkunnapuzha Fishing Village, Kerala. SSRG International Journal of Economics and Management Studies 6(5), 18–26.
Alikunhi, K. H. (1957). Fish culture in India. Farm Bulletin, (20), 1–144.
Avnimelech, Y., Shkedy, D., Kochva, M., &Yotal, Y. (1994). The use of compost for the reclamation of saline and alkaline soils. Compost Science & Utilization, 2(3), 6–11.
Kabir, A. N. M. A., Hossain, M. A., & Rahman, M. S. (2009). Use of duckweed as feed for fishes in polyculture. Journal of Agriculture & Rural Development, 157–160.
Nazish, N., & Mateen, A. (2011). Winter growth of carps under different semi-intensive culture conditions. Pak. Vet. J, 31(2), 134–136.
Béné, C., Steel, E., Luadia, B. K., & Gordon, A. (2009). Fish as the “bank in the water”–Evidence from chronic-poor communities in Congo. Food policy, 34(1), 108–118.
Woodward RT, Wui Y-S (2001) The economic value of wetland services: a meta-analysis. Ecol Econ 37:257–270.
Jude DJ, Pappas J (1992) Fish utilization of Great Lakes wetlands. J Great Lakes Res 18:651–67.
Saint-Paul U, Zuanon J, Correa MAV, Garcia M, Fabre NN, Berger U, Junk WJ (2000) Fish communities in central Amazonian white- and blackwater floodplains. Environ Biol Fish 57:235–250.
Nagelkerken I, van der Velde G (2002) Do non-estuarine mangroves harbour higher densities of juvenile fish than adjacent shallow-water and coral reef habitats in Curac¸ao (Netherlands Antilles)? Mar Ecol Prog Ser 245:191–204.
Manson RA, Lonegran NR, Skilleter GA, Phinn SR (2005) An evaluation of the evidence for linkages between mangroves and fisheries: a synthesis of the literature and identification of research directions. Oceanogr Mar Biol 43:483–513.
Banerjea S. M., 1967 – Water quality and soil condition of the fish ponds in some states of India in relation to fish production, Indian Journal of Fish, 14, 1–2, 115–144.
Kar D., 2013b – Wetlands, rivers and fishes of North-East India with a note on the health of fishes, Proceedings of International Symposium, Kerala University, 3–5 October 2013.
Kar D., 2014c – Research Frontiers in Wetlands, Fishery and Aquaculture, Dominant Publishers and Distributors Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, xi + 320.
Kar D., Bharbhuiya A. H. and Saha B., 2014 – Panorama of wetland diversity in South Assam, Frontiers of Wetlands, Fishers and Aquaculture Research, 187–210, in Research Frontiers in Wetlands, Fishery and Aquaculture, (eds) Kar D., Dominant Publishers and Distributors Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, xi + 320.
Kar S. and Kar D., 2014 – Ecology of four wetlands in South Assam: a comparison, 239–246, in: Research Frontiers in Wetlands, Fishery and Aquaculture, (ed.) Kar D., Dominant Publishers and Distributors Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, xi + 320.
. A Mathew 2000 Fishworker’s movement in Kerala (1997), Indian Social Institute, New Delhi.
Menon A. G. K., 1994 – Criteria for determining the status of threatened categories of Indian freshwater fishes, 1–5, in Threatened Fishes of India, Natcon Publication, 4, 384, UP. 217. Menon A. G. K., 1999 – Checklist: freshwater fishes of India, Occasional Paper, 175, Zoological Survey of India, Calcutta, xviii + 366.
Singh N. R., Singh M. S. and Kar D., 2015a – A check list of fish species diversity of Sone Beel, the biggest wetland in Assam, NeBIO, 6, 1, 21–26.
Dubey VK, Sarkar UK, Pandey A, Lakra WS. 2013. Fish communities and trophic metrics as measures of ecological degradation: a case study in the tributaries of the river Ganga basin. Rev Biol Trop. 61(3):1351–1363.
Sarkar SD, Gogoi P, Sarkar UK, Mishal P. 2019. Trophic State Index to assess aquatic ecosystem health. Indian Farm. 69(3):63–66.
Sarkar UK, Borah BC. 2018. Flood plain wetland fisheries of India: with special reference to impact of climate change. Wetlands Ecol Manage. 26(1):1–15. doi:10.1007/s11273-017-9559-6.
Sarkar UK, Lakra WS, Dubey VK, Pandey A, Tripathi M, Sani R, Awasthi A. 2014. Freshwater fish diversity in a tropical river of Ganga Basin: abundance, threats and their management. Proc Natl Acad Sci India Sect B Biol Sci. 84(4):1043–1051. doi:10.1007/s40011-013-0266-7.
Sarkar UK, Pathak AK, Pal A, Khan GE, Rebello S, Agnihotri P. 2015. Pattern of distribution, abundance, diversity and threats to fish biodiversity of the Chambal river (Uttar Pradesh). Indian J Trop Biodiv. 23(1):11–20.
Sugunan VV, Sharma AP, Jha BC. 2013. Recent advances in culture based fisheries in India. Barrackpore (India): ICAR-CIFRI. p. 351.
Zacharia, P. U., Najmudeen, T. M., Shyam, S. S., Kuriakose, S., Sajna, V. H., Ninan,R. G., … amp; Rojith, G. (2018). Marine climate and fisheries scenario of Kerala Climcard-3.9. DOF, 2018. Annual Report2018-2019, p. 198.
NFDB, 2016. Guidelines for Cage Culture in Inland Open Water Bodies of India, p.20.
Albert C., A., Paul, T.T., Das, V.G., Manoharan, S., Sudheesan, D., Meharoof, M. and Das, B.K. 2021. Reservoir Fisheries in Kerala - An Unmined Resource. Biotica Research Today. 3, 3 (Mar. 2021), 176–180.

A Supplementary File is not available with this version.

Graph 1 and 2 are available in the Supplementary Files section.

Onlinedrawingimage1.png
Graph1.District wise aquaculture practices in Southern Kerala District
Onlinedrawingimage2.png
Graph 2.District wise aquaculture practices in Coastal District of Kerala

Download PDF

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Assessment of Wetlands Aquaculture Practice in the Southern Kerala District, Kerala.

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Methods

STUDY AREA

Fish Data collection:

Data Collection:

Results

Graph1.District wise aquaculture practices in Southern Kerala District

Graph 2.District wise aquaculture practices in Coastal District of Kerala

Discussion

Conclusion

Declarations

References

Supplementary File

Graph 1-2

Supplementary Files

Status:

Version 1