By K L Tariang
The detection of traces of formalin in fish brought from outside to the state recently leading to subsequent ban of their import, brought back the subject of the need for the state to be self sufficient in fish production. The ban was soon considered as an opportunity for our fish farmers to produce more fish. There was even an assertion that the Meghalaya Aquaculture Mission would be revived Looking back however , there had been no lack of opportunity for our fish farmers to boost fish production as the Fisheries Department had been promoting fish farming in these areas since the time of the erstwhile Assam Government and thereafter continuously by the Meghalaya Government That we have not been able to improve our fish production till recently led to the introduction of the Meghalaya Aquaculture Mission with the aim of making the state self sufficient in fish production by the year 2018.
The much hyped Aquaculture Mission has unfortunately not delivered enough on its promise till now thus leading to negative reactions and scepticism about its efficiency . It thus call perhaps for the need for an independent evaluation on the ground to determine the reasons for this setback for lessons to be learnt and for changes if any to be adopted if the Mission is to be revived Simultaneously, an on the ground inventory may also be necessary to ascertain the actual number and locations of the fish ponds which were created by the Mission, by different Government Departments and independently by individuals down the years as this will provide a realistic base for setting fresh targets and to prevent overlapping while It will also determine as to how many of these existing ponds are actually utilized for fish farming. Subsequently if the Mission is again to proceed then it may need to minimize targets in the initial years for proper selection of genuine applicants for fish ponds , for effectively building up their capacities and to guarantee their keen participation and by ensuring proper monitoring during implementation, for systematic provision of follow up programs with hand holding exercises up to the production stage. The target can further be escalated in the succeeding years when signs of visible success generate real interest in others to take up fish farming. Further if the aim is to improve fish production then the facilities provided may not be for the small and marginal farmers only but also for interested progressive individuals or groups with flexible targets.
On the other hand, it would be expected that the cumulative number of fish ponds in Meghalaya by now would be quite high as many were created since the inception of the State and inclusive of those spilled over from the erstwhile Assam government. Therefore it might not be the lack of number of fish ponds which led to the shortage in the production of fishes in the state but it could be the low yield of fishes from these ponds which is the primary reason for the deficit. In any case going by the record , the large number of fish ponds created by the Aquaculture Mission would have been sufficient enough to give the desired production as envisaged provided these ponds yielded well as anticipated. .
It is common knowledge however that the yield of fish from ponds in the upland areas of Meghalaya is usually less than from those in the plains with the same inputs. No wonder fishing competition in such ponds is preferred to fish harvesting, as a better means of earning, as anglers will always pay to try their luck even when fishes in the water are not in plenty. It is the thrill that counts though a sizable catch if made would be an added bonus.. Therefore banning fishing competition in these ponds may not be the solution to improve fish production; nor will construction of more ponds be a viable proposition unless ways and means to improve the yield is addressed first where not much of investments would be required .
Regrettably many of our rivers and streams which were once fertile fishing grounds have been adversely affected by indiscriminate activities in their catchments in the last few decades where the resultant effect led to dwindling of fish in these waters and in certain instances even led to extinction of aquatic lives .Such rivers and streams have otherwise been rich sources of indigenous fishes where trading in local fish has been the source of income to most riverside dwellers. Certain spots along these rivers were also once known as angler’s paradise for avid anglers even from outside the state though now that paradise tag is lost and may never be regained . These rivers and streams can otherwise bring in additional sources of fish if they are allowed to be naturally revived and if people are taught to protect and preserve them for their own sustainable livelihoods through fish trade..
However there Is a big “IF” in as far as the natural rejuvenation of these rivers and streams is concerned because of the ever looming threat of indiscriminate activities in their catchments where it seems not much initiatives have been taken so far to control these. Or the desire for quick returns from such activities have taken precedence instead. Coal mining in the catchments especially with toxic acid mine drainage leads to the worst form of destruction of aquatic life in the rivers and streams around. Large power projects and water reservoirs like that of the Kopili on the Meghalaya side and of the Leishka power project would be ideal for Reservoir Fishery Development if it were not for the coal mining activities in the catchments. Closer home, there is the alarming decrease of fish in the Umiam reservoir for reasons which are not clearly specified yet. There were reports however that lately fishes have reappeared again in some rivers and streams after the NGT ban on coal mining but this may be a short reprieve for these fishes as there is no guarantee that the ban will remain for long or if surreptitious coal mining activities in the catchments remain unchecked.
Ultimately , it is hard to visualize that with time Meghalaya would eventually be self sufficient in fish production; not at least within the lifetime of many. When we have not been able to improve fish production in our artificial ponds for so long then it does leave doubts as to whether we can ever do it in the near future. Secondly it requires a shrewd balancing act for any government to let coal mining thrive for more revenue collection while simultaneously ensuring that indigenous fish species flourishes in our rivers , streams and reservoirs. Nor can we be sure that we can religiously protect our water catchments from other indiscriminate activities. Therefore with local fishes not readily available, for many now the thought is whether “to eat or not to eat fish,” when there is the lingering anxiety regarding the quality of fish brought from outside. And whether to wait patiently until there is plenty of fresh fish harvested from our local waters is another question. Certainly there is a lot of ‘FISH FOR THOUGHT.’