Background

Agriculture sector has played the most important role for the livelihood of Nepalese people. Agriculture contributes about 33.1 % to the GDP and employs about 65.7 % of the economically active population (MoAD, 2014). Aquaculture is the fastest growing food sector with a growth rate of 14.54% in the year 2016/17. Contribution to AGDP by fisheries sector in Nepal is 4.29% which is 1.33% of the GDP in 2016/17 providing employment for nearly about 3% of the population (DoFD, 2017). In Nepal, aquaculture is fairly a new enterprise. It began in the 1940s but commercial aquaculture production was initiated only in 1981/82. The recent production from aquaculture has increased to 83,898 Mt. compared to 750Mt. in 1981/82 (DoFD, 2017). There are 14 government and 67 private hatcheries, 222 nurseries and 20 fish seed traders working in Nepal (Mishra, 2015). Contribution of aquaculture is just less than 75% in total fish production of the country. Carp polyculture in ponds is the most popular production system. It contributes 88.62% in total aquaculture production. However, it is mostly confined to southern part of the country where nearly 94% of the ponds are located. Bara produces over 10,000 tons of fish from aquaculture with a productivity of 6.1 t/ha compared to national pond productivity of 4.9 t/ha (DADO, 2017).

Among several aquacultural practices, Chhadi Fish production is emerging rapidly. It has successfully earned the reputation to be a profitable farming system. Chhadi is a local term for small sized whole fish of Rohu (Labeo rohita) and mostlyNaini (Cirrhinus mrigala). The appropriate size of fish for production and drying preferred is ranged between 20 to 100 g reaching up to 10-15cm long (Pradhan et al., 2017). This method of fish farming in pond has been traditionally developed by fish farmers of Bara district and confined in adjacent districts like Parsa, Dhanusha, Saptari, and Rautahat districts of Terai region of Nepal.  Despite of high productivity and high market demand, knowledge transfer of this technology is limited and still a gap in its advancement is felt. Inarguably, farmers all over the country are not being benefitted due to dearth of technology transfer. At the same time this technology needs to be understood and documented scientifically for diffusion.

1 Materials and Methods

Out of 258 commercial fish farmers (having Water surface area >0.2 ha) enlisted by PM-AMP, Bara; a total of 60 households who cultured Chhadi fish were selected by purposive sampling method from 8 different wards each of Simraungadh and Pachrauta municipalities. A well-structured and pretested questionnaire was used for interviewing farmers at their home as well as in farm from 7 am to 12 pm that enabled direct observation of pond activities spending 45 minutes on each. Out of 60 HHs, 23 HHs were from large scale (more than 2.0 ha pond area), 22 HHs were from medium scale (0.51-2.0 ha pond area) and 15 HHs were from small scale (up to 0.50 ha pond area).

The primary data was sourced by oral interview, field observation and field survey for six months whereas the secondary data were extracted from reports, publications and profiles of DADO, PM-AMP, DoFD, CBS and internet browsing.

The collected data were edited and the local units of measurements were standardized into the scientific one. All the important primary data that were collected from fish farmers were entered and analyzed in Ms-Excel and Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) program (Version 16.0) for further analysis. Descriptive statistics such as mean, median, mode, range, frequency tables, percentage was used to describe the socio-economic variables. Budgetary analysis was employed to estimate the cost and return structure. The formula is explicitly defined as follows;

π = TR-TC.……............................ (1)

Where:

TR = PQ (Av. Price x Av. Quantity). (2)

TC = TFC + TVC………………... (3)

GM = TR-TVC…………….......... (4)

NI = TR-TC…..……..................... (5)

BCR (with Fixed Cost) = TR/ TC… (6)

BCR (without Fixed Cost) = TR/TVC…(7)

GM: Gross Margin

TR: Total Revenue

TVC: Total Variable Cost 

TFC: Total Fixed Cost

NI: Net Income

2 Results and Discussion

2.1 Socio-economic characters

2.1.1 Farmer's category

Farmers having cumulative water surface area up to 0.5 ha, 0.51-2 ha and above 2 ha are designated as small, medium and large farmers respectively. Out of 60 HHs, 23HHs were from large scale, 22 HHs were from medium scale and 15 HHs were from small scale (Table 1).

Table 1 Farmer's category based on Water Surface Area

2.1.2 Education of Respondent Farmer's

Education is of paramount importance as it effects the decision making and risk taking by HH heads (Meena et al., 2002). Majority of respondents had primary level of education. The illiteraterespondent farmer’s % was only 5. Out of 60 respondent farmers, 18% had secondary level education, 11% had intermediate level education and 8.3% had bachelor level education (Figure 1).

Figure 1 Education level of respondent farmers

2.1.3 Age

Age influences the technology adoption and level of physical work. Mostly, young and middle-aged farmers are aggressive, energetic and more willing to adopt new technology. Older farmers are conservative, risk averse and unlikely to try new ideas (Gupta & Dey, 2015). 68.3% of the total fish farmers belonged to the middle age group followed by 18.4% older age groups and 13.3% young age groups (Table 2).

Table 2 Age of respondent farmers in the study area

2.1.4 Source of Information

Chhadi farmers get information from DADO, PM-AMP, Agriculture Section of Municipality regarding notices, trainings on improved methods, subsidies in pond construction and establishment from various media. Social network refers to friend’s circle and neighbors from where one can get information. Radio was the chief source of information used by majority of producers. Both television and internet users were 10%. Likewise, internet and social network users were same i.e. 8.3%. Small scale farmers had no access to internet while both medium and large-scale farmers were equal users (Figure 2).

Figure 2 Source of Information for respondents

2.1.5 Length of experience in Chhadi production

Farming experience is an important factor determining both productivity and production level in aquaculture. Farmers who have acquired knowledge on fish farming were more likely to adopt it than those who had not acquired knowledge (Gupta & Dey, 2015). The present results showed that fish culture has been a long practice in the surveyed area. The average length of experience in fish culture was 17 years, with a range of 2-32 years. Out of 60 HHs, 75% HHs had 1-9 years of experience in aquaculture, while 15% of the HHs had 10-19 years of experience. About 8.3% HHs had more than 20 years of experience (Table 3). Majority of farmers in all categories are having 1-9 years of experience which indicates that farmers are moving towards chhadi production in recent years.

Table 3 Length of experience in fish farming

2.1.6 Pond holdings and ownership

Majority of the farmers had taken land in lease for farming (46.7%), 25% have their own fish pond while 28.3% have private and lease pond others had lease ponds (29.2%). Majority of the large-scale farmers had taken land in lease (50%), while majority of the small scale farmers had their own private ponds (60%) (Table 4).

Table 4 Pond ownership of respondent farmers

2.1.7 Source of water

Most of the fishponds relied on underground boring water which obviously turns to be expensive. In overall, fishponds of 41.7% HHs were irrigated by shallow tube well, 28.3% were irrigated by dip tube well, 16.7% depend on rainfall water and around 14% relied on stream or canal. 96% of large-scale farmers depend on dip tube well. However small-scale farmers (40%) and medium scale farmers (36.4%) depends mostly on shallow tube well (Table 5).

Table 5 Source of water in ponds by farmers

2.1.8 Training

Training is an effective tool for transfer of fish farming technology systematically (Wetengere, 2009). Even though training programs are being organized in Bara district by DADO, ASC, INGOs and NGOs, it was not effective as same farmers used to repeat who were reluctant to learn. 48.3% were not trained while rests were trained (Table 6).

Table 6 Training status of respondent farmers

2.2 Fish production

2.2.1 Source of fish seed

Among the 60 HHs, 23.3% HHs and 41.7% HHs got fish seed from Government and private hatchery, respectively. Although the seeds of government hatchery are of good quality, they are not enough to fulfill fish seed requirement. Large proportions of small-scale HHs (46.7%), medium scale farmers (31.8%) and large-scale farmers (47.8%) got their fish seed from private hatchery (Figure 3). Private hatcheries are main source of seed where as farmers are still using Indian seeds.

Figure 3 Sources of seed in Chhadi fish farming

2.2.2 Stocking size of Chhadi

The size and density of fry stocking varied among farmers (Figure 4). Although, there was a large variation in fish stocking size among farmers, 43.3% of farmers stocked less than 1-inch size, 40% stocked 1 inch, 8.3% stocked 1.5 inch and rest of them stocked 2-inch size. The maximum stocking size in small-scale, medium-scale and large-scale farmers were <1-inch, 1 inch and 1 inch respectively. Similarly, the mean stocking density of chhadi fish in the study area was 221000 fry/ha. Chhadi productivity in ponds could be increased by increasing stocking rate up to 30 fish/m² (Yadav, 2011).

Figure 4 Stocking size of Chhadi

2.2.3 Production size of Chhadi

Fish farmers prefer to grow fish of size 31-50 g due to more demand in nearby highway restaurants. This showed that the marketable size between 31g-50g (51.4%) dominated the production followed by 50 g-100 g (35.3%) and of 20g-30 g (13.3%). The average productivity of the study area was 6.4 ton/ha (Figure 5).

Figure 5 Production size of Chhadi

2.2.4 Demand size of Chhadi

As per the demand in the market, chhadi fish is classified into three categories namely Pakali size (20-30g), Malekhu size (31-50g) and Kathmandu size (50-100g). The highest demand is of Kathmandu size (55%) followed by Malekhu size (36.7%) and Pakali size has a low market demand (8.3%) (Figure 6). Although the demand is highest for Kathmandu size in market, farmers are producing more of Malekhu size. Therefore, the production in farms should be synchronized with the demand in market for higher return.

Figure 6 Demand size of Chhadi in market

2.2.5 Share of various variable costs

Chhadi production is semi intensively managed pond aquaculture technology where stocking density is quite higher in comparison to table fish production. So, there come greater chances of deterioration of water quality, and higher dependency on artificial feed which obviously increases the overall cost of production. From the pie chart it is overt that feed shares the major part of variable cost i.e. 65%. Likewise, labor is required for feeding, care and management as well as social security of ponds accounting 12% of TVC. Similarly seed, maintenance, fertilizer, lime, medicine, fuel and others accounted for 4%, 3%, 4%, 2%, 3%, 6% and 1% respectively (Figure 7).

Figure 7 Share of variable costs in Chhadi production

2.2.6 Economic Analysis

The study depicted that the total variable cost for Chhadi fish production in one ha pond was calculated Rs.827390. The total fixed cost was also accounted taking pond annual rent and pond digging cost into consideration. The pond digging cost was depreciated @ 10%. The total fixed cost was found to be Rs. 286600 and the total cost was found to be 1113990 (Table 7). Gross margin is positive and the BCR is greater than one which indicates that the investment is financially viable and business can run smoothly. Hence Chhadi Fish farming is a profitable business.

Table 7 Economic analysis of Chhadi production

2.2.7 Occurrence of disease

Chhadi fish is grown semi intensively at a high stocking density in ponds. As a consequence, many diseases are common. Among many EUS is the most common one accounting for 53.33% of disease. The second one is Asphyxiation accounting for 18.33% as per respondents view. Huge loss is caused by asphyxiation in many ponds as it affects all the aquatic lives. Fin rot, ulcer and gas bubble diseases are other prime diseases in chhadi farming as responded by 10, 53.33 and 10% of HHs (Figure 8).

Figure 8 Occurrence of Diseases in Chhadi fish

2.2.8 Constraints of aquaculture

There are several technical and policy constraints that hinder the development of aquaculture in the Bara district. Lack of water (especially during the dry season) is the major constraint for all level of farmers (Figure 9). The major technical constraints include lack of feed industry, lack of sufficient fish hatcheries/nurseries, technology, lack of initial investment support, poor credit facilities and others such as potential risks of flood, drought, poaching, etc. Above all, Marketing is a serious problem in the study area as the producers are compelled to give 6-7 kg in place of 5 kg weighted. They are paid only for 5 kg. Locally it is referred as Dhalta.

Figure 9 Constraints of Aquaculture in the study area

2.2.9 Price variation

The line graph below depicts that the price of Chhadi fish is increasing each year (Figure 10). It signifies a slight fluctuation in price each year. However, the rate of increase is quite low in comparison to the price fluctuation of inputs. That is why, the margin of farmer's is decreasing each year.

Figure 10 Price variation of Chhadi fish

3 Conclusion

The present study demonstrates that although the aquaculture system in the Bara district is not well developed and established, it contributed significantly to household food and nutrition security and income generation of fish farmers. Farmers were cultivating Chhadi fish with their own knowledge, which can be further enhanced to increase productivity. Chhadi fish culture was even practiced by farmers of low economic status. The cost, net revenue, productivity per ha and BCR were Rs.1259230, Rs.210770, 6.46 ton/ha and 2.17 respectively. Marketing was severe problem in the study area followed by water quantity and diseases. Essentially, expansion and improvement of aquaculture will help in poverty reduction in this area. There is a good potential to develop and expand small-scale aquaculture in some feasible areas of the Bara and adjoining districts with some technical and infrastructural interventions.

Author's contribution

Each author made a remarkable contribution in data collection, analysis and manuscript preparation. The final manuscript is read and approved by all the authors.

Acknowledgement

We would like to express our deepest acknowledgement, profound gratitude and indebtedness to all the concerned people, PM-AMP as well as Agriculture and Forestry University for their significant contribution and support during research. Most sincere gratitude goes to Md. Saddam Hussain, Mr. Rahul Ranjan, Saroj Mandal, Sunil Das Patel, Niraj Singh, Anuj Kumar Mandal, Dipesh Sahani and Raj Kishan Kushwaha.

References

Dado, 2017, DADO Profile Report 2016/2017, Kalaiya, Bara: District Agriculture Development Office

DoFD, 2017, Fish Statistics and Annual Progress Report, s.l.: Directorate of Fisheries Development, Ministry of Agriculture Development

Gupta T., and Dey M., 2015, Socioeconomic and cultural profile of fish farmers: a study in and around the lumding town, nagaon district of assam, Indian Journal of Environemntal Sciences, 19(1&2): 71-78

Meena S.B., Kirway T.N., Lema N.M., and Nalitolela A.J., 2002, Farming System Approach to Technology Development and Dissemination. Dares Salaam: Color Print Limited, Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security, A Teaching Manual andTutors' Guide for Training at Certificate and Diploma Levels

Mishra R.N., 2015, Status of Aquaculture in Nepal, Kathmandu. Nepal: Nepalese Journal of Aquaculture and Fisheries

MoAD, 2014, Statistical Information on Nepalese Agriculture: Agribusiness Promotion and Statistics, Singhadurbar, Kathmandu: Ministry of Agriculture Development

Pradhan et al., 2017, Quality assessment of dried mrigal (Cirrhinus mrigala) chhari fish from different market outlets of Nepal, 463-471

Wetengere K., 2009, Socio-economic Factotrs critical for adoption of fish farming the case of selected villagers in Eastern Tanzania, International Journal of Fisheries and Aquaculture, 1(3): 28-37

Yadav J., 2011, Chhadi Fish Production System in Pond, IAAS, Rampur, Chitwan: Tribhuwan University