Community Based Fisheries Management in Bangladesh
Ghagot River
Click here to download the complete report
The Ghagot River is located in the Sadar Upazilla of the north-eastern district of Gaibandha. The FFP intervened here through creation of four sanctuaries in the third year of the project. The length of the PWB is 7.5 kilometres and the area 70 hectares, though much dries up. There are eight project villages. According to the baseline survey, there are 1,603 households in these project villages. The Tengamara Mohila Sabuj Sangha (TMSS) is the implementing NGO.
The main fishing in Ghagot is done by kathas set in the deeper parts of the river, where water is retained throughout the year. These are owned by non-fishers but harvested by professional fishers. Fishers also use cast nets in large numbers and some lift nets, locally known as khora.
There were several anomalies in the process of implementing the FFP in this water body. The FFP started here from 2001 without any FMP and still no FMP had been approved till date (Report drafted in November 2003). The rules and regulations are created in an ad hoc fashion without any participation from the community or with consultation with those fishers who have been fishing in the PWB for a long time. In fact, the institutional structures designed by the FFP through which the community participates in the decision making process have gradually been tripped.
Kathas were removed at a stage when the katha season was coming to an end in 2003. The removal of kathas did not have any noticeable effect on the katha owners in terms of catch because main harvesting had, by that stage, already been completed. This delayed the process of acquiring the sites earmarked for sanctuaries.
Khoras or the lift nets were removed. The SUFO wanted to enforce the Fish Acts of 1950. This Act prohibits fixed-engines. The SUFO claimed that khora is a fixed engine and hence it should be removed from the PWB. The well-off khora owners could cope with this ban because of their initial wealth positions but the poor khora fishers suffered to some extent. They did report that they sometimes had to drop breakfast and quality of food purchased declined; savings and spending on religious festivals were both reduced; and essentials had to be purchased on credit from local grocery shops. But this impact was not too strong because the khora fishers had already having multiple source of income because catch was declining and (aur) khora fishing is done for a very short period of four months with high variability in catch.
The sanctuary sites were allegedly acquired in 2003 and therefore the benefits in terms of higher catch are yet to show. This assumes that the FFP in Ghagot would be able to prohibit the non-fishers from setting up kathas in the upcoming season and control effort. This will be an uphill task not only because there will be a strong resistance from the previous katha owners but also because of the fact that the FMC has not yet formally received management rights from the DOF. We have witnessed fishing in the sanctuaries during water body transects.
The CBOs are not functioning, with almost no trace being left of the VDCs. People living in the project villages have a vague idea about the project. The project is locally comprehended as "Tengamara Project", that is the project of the implementing NGO. The tendering process allegedly involved outright corruption against which no action was taken. The role of the NGO in performing its responsibilities is poor. They could neither motivate the fishers, nor train and guide the FMC or secure their management rights or to inform them of their rights. The FMC also failed in many ways. The president of the FMC was also the secretary of the fishers' co-operative that controlled the PWB before the FFP. The new institutional arrangements and objectives introduced by the project seemed, however, to have little impact on his behaviour. His primary interest was toll collection from the fishers, as it had been before. Little was done to convince them of the benefits of the FFP interventions. As a result, the fisher neither saw the benefits of FFP intervention nor believed in it. They were lacking faith on the FMC and NGO leadership. This is not helpful for implementing any community based management of a natural resource.
The FFP in Ghagot has not generated any benefit so far in terms of higher catch. However, costs were incurred by the khora fishers in terms of lost income. These costs were estimated at Tk. 135,000 per annum on the average for all khora fishing gear. Unapproved FMPs, strong retention of management rights by the DOF, non-participatory decision making process, irresponsible FMC and extinct VDCs, a nonchalant NGO makes it difficult to comprehend how the project has been managed so far and where it is heading to. It now looks like a ship without radar.