UNDP/FAO PELAGIC FISHERY INVESTIGATION PROJECT FIRM- I ND/75/038 ON THE SOUTHWEST COAST OF INDIA January 1979
PHASE II - PROGRESS REPORT No.3
AERIAL FRAME SURVEY ALONG THE SOUTHWEST COAST OF INDIA
FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS January 1979 The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication de not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
The copyright in this book is vested in the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. The book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, by any method or process, without written permission from the copyright holder. Applications for such permission, with a statement of . the purpose and extent of the reproduction desired, should be addressed to the Director, Publications Division, Food and Agriculture Organization of the u"nited Nations, Via delle Terme di Caracalla, 00100 Rome, Italy.
© FAO 1979 (iii)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This is one of a series of technical progress reports prepared and issued by the Project (Phase II) at irregular intervals.
This progress report on the Aerial Frame Survey conducted by the Pelagic Fishery Project, in September 1978, has been prepared by the participants in the survey namely: Dr. G.P. Bazigos Fishery Resources Officer Team Leader FAO Consultant Mr. S.R. Coppola FAO Consultant Mr. K.C. George Senior Biologist, PFP Mr. K. Krishna Rao Senior Biologist, PFP Mr. V.N. Bande Biologist, PFP Mr. G.P. Edwin Daniel Research Assistant, PFP
Any comments or criticism are welcome and should be addressed to: The Project Manager UNDP/FAO Pelagic Fishery Project P.O. Box 1791 Cochin 682016 India
(v)
PREFACE
The concept of aerial surveys for estimating the fishery resources and various related parameters is new to a country like India, but the UNDP/FAO Pelagic Fishery Project, Cochin had conducted three such surveys in 1972, 1973 and 1974, mainly for estimating the pelagic fishery potential in the Project area extending from Tuticorin in the south to Ratnagiri in the north along the south-east and south-west coasts of India. The present survey, the fourth in the series, has been planned by Dr. G.P. Bazigos (FAO Consultant) and conducted under his leadership. The objective of this survey was primarily for obtaining a synoptic picture of the fishing effort distribution and localization of the inshore fishing industry in the Project area with a view to correlating it with the distribution of the resources located by the acoustic surveys of the Project.
The survey was conducted using an 8-seater Twin-Beech aircraft chartered from M/s Goldensun Aviation, Bombay, from 27 to 30 September 1978,
This report includes accounts of the structure of the fisheries of the Project area such as information on non-mechanized and mechanized fishing crafts, gears, resources, fishing seasons and grounds and the presentation, analysis and critical analysis of the data collected during the survey.
It gives me great pleasure to record here my appreciation of the most devoted, sincere and hazardous work put in by the scientific personnel, viz. M/s. G.P. Bazigos and S.R. Coppola, Consultants from FAQ-Rome, M/s. K.C. George, K.K. Rao, V.N. Bande and Edwin Daniel from the Pelagic Fishery Project for the completion of the programme successfully. The cordial and helpful attitude of the pilots and crew of the aircraft, especially Capt. Kataria, Capt. Kulkarni and Capt. Ashar is also gratefully acknowledged. I also wish to acknowledge the cooperation and help extended by the Project Manager, Mr. W.R. Murdoch for organizing this survey.
M.s. P~abhu V.lltec.:t.o~
(vii)
CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1: AN OUTLINE OF THE PROBLEM 1
CHAPTER 2: NON-MECHANIZED FISHERIES, FISHIN& CRAFTS AND FISHING GEAR 3
CHAPTER 3: MECHANIZED FISHERIES, FISHING CRAFTS AND FISHING GEAR 11
CHAPTER 4: RESOURCES, FISHING SEASONS AND FISHING GROUNDS OF THE PROJECT AREA 13
CHAPTER 5: FISHING VILLAGES AND LANDING CENTRES 18
CHAPTER 6: THE SURVEY DESIGN OF AFS 21
6.1 Aerial Pilot Frame Survey 25 6.2 Description of the plane used 25 6.3 Cost items 26 6.4 Coverage Check Survey {CCS) of the AFS 26
6.4.1 De-biasing the estimated number of marine 26 mechanized fishing boats seen on the water 6.4.2 De-biasing the estimated number of canoes 28 seen on the water
CHAPTER 7: ESTIMATED SURVEY MAGNITUDES 29
CHAPTER 8: ESTIMATED SECONDARY MAGNITUDES 37
CHAPTER 9: COMPARISON OF THE ESTIMATES CALCULATED BY AFS 45 WITH THE OFFICIAL STATISTICS
9.1 Mechanized marine fishing boats 45 9.2 Non-mechanized marine fishing boats 50
9.2.1 Estimated validity coefficients, 52 non-mechanized marine fishing boats (viii)
CHAPTER 10: THE LOCALIZATION PATTERN 54
10 .1 The concentration pattern of non-mechanized fishing boats 54 10.2 The concentration pattern of mechanized fishing boats 62 10.3 The geographic relation between non-mechanized 64 and mechanized fishing boats
CHAPTER 11: DISTANT ANALYSIS 66
11.1 Spatial distribution pattern of non-mechanized 66 marine fishing boats
11.1.1 Estimated mathematical models, 68 non-mechanized marine fishing boats
11.2 Spatial distribution pattern of mechanized 73 marine fishing boats
11,2.l Estimated mathematical models - 75 mechanized marine fishing boats
CHAPTER 12: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 79
APPENDIX 1 81
APPENDIX 2 97
REFERENCES 103 - 1 -
CHAPTER 1: AN OUTLINE OF THE PROBLEM
A large-scale Aerial Frame Survey (AFS) based on the census approach was conducted during the period 27 to 30 September 1978. The Survey covered the entire Project area (see Figure 1.1).
The main objectives of the AFS can be summarized as follows:
1. To assess the area distribution and level of localization of the inshore sector of the fishing industry
2. To provide current estimates of the number of operational fishing crafts seen by type and by major fishery, i.e. non-mechanized fishery and mechanized fishery
3. To provide information of the level of fishing activity of the operational fishing boats at the beginning of the fishing season
Because in the present Aerial Frame Survey the calculated estimates of the surveyed magnitudes are presented on an area-zone basis of 20 n.mi, the results of the survey can easily be matched with the results of the large-scale acoustic surveys of the Project area tabulated on 1° latitude basis (= 60 n.mi).
The stratification system of the AFS provides also the basis for the comparison of the results of the AFS with the official statistics published on a state basis. This simpli fies our study for a critical analysis of the findings.
The report is divided into 12 Chapters. Specifically, in Chapters 2-5, we discuss the organic structure and other characteristics of the fisheries of the Project area. The presentation, analysis and critical analysis of the results of the survey are given in Chapters 6-11. Conclusions and recommentations are presented in the last Chapter of the report. N I
,,-4-----+------+- -
I I
10°L--l------+------t------:-
,.t+ ··--r------1 I i I I I t' t------r------t--
F!S, 1.1 n . - 3 -
CHAPTER 2: NON-MECHANIZED FISHERIES, FISHING CRAFTS AND FISHING GEAR
It is estimated that about 80 percent of the marine fish produced in India is caught by non-mechanized fishing crafts. The limit of their operations generally do not exceed 10 n .mi from the shore 1 however, the longlining crafts operate in more distant waters. The non-mechanized crafts usually operate within 40 m depth contour except in the southern sector where they operate in deeper waters due to the narrow continental shelf. Wind power and rowing are the modes of propulsion. Recently some mechanized boats are engaged for towing the crafts to and back from the fishing grounds. Dugout canoes, plank-built boats with or without outrigger and the raft-like catamarans are the major crafts. The canoes and catamarans differ in dimensions depending upon the type of fishing they are used for.
Shore seines, boat seines, gill nets, drift nets, longlines, handlines and cast nets are used for fishing in the area. The _crafts and gears operated are characteristic for the different zones depending on the type of coastline and fisheries of the area (see Figures 2.la-e and 2.2a-d}.
Figure 2 .1 (a} Dug-out canoe
(b} Plank-built canoe with outrigger - 4 -
(c) Plank boat (Tuticorin type)
(d) Boat catamaran
(e) Raft catamaran
- 6 -
(b) Beach seine (Rampan)
(c) Indigenous boat seine - 7 -
(d) Chinese dip-net
RATNAGIRI - MANGALORE ZONE Craft Mainly 3 types of indigenous non-mechanized crafts are existing in the zone - they are: 1. Plank-built canoes with outrigger 2. Built-up boats 3. Dugout canoes
1. ~!~~~=~~~!!_~~~~~~-~~!~-~~!~~gg~~~: These are essentially dugout canoes, with few planks stitched on the sides to raise the freeboard. There are several local variations. The canoe used in shore-seine Rampan - operations on the Konkan coast - has a narrow keel and the upper planks spread out more to accommodate big seines and are provided with outriggers.
2. ~~~!!:~E-~~~!~: These are plank-built boats with carvel-type planking arrangement. In between two planks, cotton soaked in glue is packed to make the boat water-tight. Ratnagiri-type boats differ from Satpati-type boats of the Bombay region in having pointed bows, straight but narrow keels and low gunwales. These are equipped with sail and rudder and used for sea fishing.
3. Q~g~~!-~~~~~~: As the name implies, the canoe is made by scooping out a large log of wood. The keel portion is thicker than the sides. The size of the canoe varies from the tiny one-man angling canoe to the big 12 m Odam manned by 8-10 persons used for boat seine operation. There are variations from place to place. Some are provided with ribs to give strength, an outrigger for sta bility and a sail and mast. Medium-sized canoes (9 m) are mostly used for the operation of gill nets, drift nets and longline fishing. At Honavar (14°10'N latitude) southwards, small and medium-sized dugouts are observed in hundreds operating gill nets and angling in the estuaries and creeks.
Gear Shore seines: The largest shore-seine Rampan operated in any part of the Indian coasts is found in this sector, particularly in the northern half. The net is operated for mackerel and oil sardine shoals which migrate in the inshore waters after the south-west monsoon. - 8 -
Rampan:
This is a wall net of enormous size with wooden floats and stone sinkers attached to the head and foot ropes. It is one of the oldest nets in operation on the Konkan and Karnataka coasts. It is believed that this net was first introduced in South Kanara by a Portugese Priest, Father Rampani and hence its name. The net made of hemp or cotton consists of a number of pieces. In the northern half about 400-600 pieces are joined together but the number is reduced to 300-400 in the southern sector. In a net of 500 pieces there are about 100 pieces in the central region known as Chikkanbale, and 200 pieces on each side called Allibale. The width of the side pieces is progressively reduced towards the ends where ropes are attached. The dimensions of different pieces are:
Chikkanbale 1.8x10.7I1.9 Allibale 4.9 x 11.3/3.8-4.4 End pieces 4.9>< 4.9/3.2-4.4
A complete unit of big Rampan consists of two big plank-built and four medium-size outrigger canoes locally known as Pindi and Doni, respectively. The smaller unit has one big and four medium-size canoes.
The big canoe, Pindi: 13. 7x3x1.2 m, is manned by a crew of 16-20. The medium canoe, 7. 3 x 0. 9 x 0. 6 m, is operated by 6-8 persons. The former is prorelled by oars whereas the latter may use the sail in addition to oars.
The operation of the gear is a community effort involving 40 to 80 able-bodied men depending upon the size of the net. The catches are shared by the workers and the owner of the unit proportionally.
The net is loaded in the big canoe and kept ready for operation in shallow waters. On receipt of a signal from the boats scouting for approaching shoals the crew boards the mother canoe. The free end of a lead rope is brought to the shore by a Doni. The Pindi rows perpendicular to the shore and later surrounds the shoal in a semi-circle by quickly paying the net. It is then steered to the shore in a line parallel to the first lead rope. After handing over the other lead rope to the waiting team the boat returns to the centre of the net from outside where the head rope of the net is tied to its pro to prevent it from sagging. Five or six Donis are also stationed at intervals on either side of the Pindi for the same purpose.
The dragging of the net which continues for 2-4 hours, is done by 20-40 men on each side, arranged in pairs, one behind the other. Both teams gradually approach each other as the dragging continues. The dragging is stopped when two ends are about 100-150 m apart. The fish is either removed by hauling the entire net ashore or is impounded by retaining a portion of the net in shallow water, depending on the demand. The head rope of the net in the water is raised above the high water mark with crutches and poles, to prevent the escape of fish by jumping over the net. The impounded fish is removed with the help of a small shore seine as and when required during the course of a week to 10 days. The Rampans are operated only during the mackerel and oil sardine season, which lasts from October to February in the zone.
* Length x breadth in m I mesh in cm - 9 -
A small shore seine - Yeni or Kairampani - made up of 40-60 pieces, is operated practically all the year round for inshore fish complex with one canoe and 8-12 persons.
Gill nets are the other type of gear employed for fishing in the area and the usual operational distance for this gear is about 5 miles from the shore. Angling from single man small canoes with baited hooks is common along the southern half of the sector. Another type of inshore subsistence fishing is practised with cast nets.
MANGALORE TO QUILON ZONE.
Craft
This stretch of the coast is known for the large concentrations of oil sardine and mackerel. The dugout canoe is the typical non-mechanized fishing craft of the zone. Ranging from 3 to 12 m in length, the largest of them is used for the operation of big boat seines for oil sardine and mackerel. The medium-sized 9 m canoes are generally used for line fishing, gill netting and drift netting. The 3 m small canoes are used for one-man angling in the estuaries and back waters. On a rough estimate about 50 percent of the total number of canoes in the zone belong to the medium size (9 m) • These are especiallv r.oncentrated along the Cochin (10°N latitude), Kasaragod (12°30'N latitude) belt.
Gear
The major fishing gears of the zone are the boat seines, gill nets, drift nets, longlines, shore seines and some cast nets.
The boat seines are bag shaped nets with or without wings, the cod ends being squarish to conical in shape. They are operated as pelagic or midwatei trawls by a pair of canoes dragging the net with the oar power of 8-10 people in each canoe. A single canoe seine in the form of an encircling net maneuvered during the operation into a shallow bag is in vogue in areas around Cochin and southwards.
Gill nets with light twines and suitable meshes for the sardine and mackerel are common in the zone. In recent times synthetic twines are often used for these nets. The range of operation of boat seines is limited to within about 5 miles from the shore. Gill net operations for small pelagic schools mainly at the beginning and end of the season extend beyond this limit for a further few miles. Drift netting for catfish, sharks, seerfish, large carangids, tunas, etc. is also carried out in relatively distant waters up to 10 or 15 miles from the shore. Longliners venture out to further distances even beyond 15 miles from the shore to reach the perch grounds. Very large shore seines are less in numbers in this, than the northern zone from Mangalore to Ratnagiri. Bag shaped shore seines, Kampavala and Karamade, are typical of south Kerala and Tamil Nadu coasts of the Project area. The cod end, made up of cotton is about 7.5 m long with another section of 8 m each on either side connected to the wings 30-60 m in length and made of coir. The method of operation is similar to Rampan or Yendi described earlier. Mackerel, sardine, whitebait and occasionally tuna are caught by this net.
Chinese dip-net: Several hundreds of stationery nets known as Chinese dip-nets are located in most of the barmouths and estuaries of this zone, particularly in Kerala. The size of the net is variable, being usually a square piece of about 10 m supported by a wooden framework. The .net is dipped in the water and lifted up through a lever arrange ment mounted on two stout piles driven at the site (Figure 2.2d). The catches include prawns, mullets and several species of fish moving with the tides. QUILON TO TUTICORIN ZONE
Craft
The concentration of major pelagic fishes, namely oil sardine and mackerel, dwindles southwards from Quilon and the fishing crafts and gear show variation accordingly to suit the species to be fished and the surf-beaten coastline. The flexible raft-like catamarans are the major craft along with the plank-built boats found along the lower south-east coast. Some canoes do operate from areas where sandy beaches are available, particularly around Trivandrum.
The catamaran is a keel-less craft formed by lashing together three to five logs of wood in raft fashion. The logs are cut square on one edge and curved into a rough cone at the other., The central log when fitted with others acts as a keel, and is at a lower level than the side ones which form the stem.
Between Colachel and Cape Comorin the coast is particularly exposed and surf-beaten and has few landing places. An improved type of catamaran, Boat Catamarans, are found in this region. Here at each end the logs are held together in position by a transverse two-horned block of wood, whereto the logs are lashed securely by coir ropes. They usually work in pairs. Their length varies from 6 to 8 m. Wind power is the major mode of pro pulsion for catamarans. A small triangular sail is used for the purpose. Catamarans are mostly used in the operation of boat seines. Almost a total absence of free-board enables them to haul up the net with an ease not possible with high free-board boats. The opera-· tional range of catamarans is limited.
Gear
Boat seines, gill nets, drift nets, longlines, shore seines and cast nets are in vogue in this zone. Shore seines are operated in most patches of sandy beaches. - 11 -
CHAPTER 3: MECHANIZED FISHERIES, FISHING CRAFTS AND FISHING GEAR
Introduction
As we have discussed earlier the traditional fishing in India has been mainly dependent on non-mechanized country crafts. Different types of these crafts have been in vogue in various parts of the maritime states of the country. These crafts, however, face the dis advantage of not being in a position to reach the far-off fishing grounds quickly and to return with their catch in fresh condition. Also their man-power requirement is high. Hence mechanization of the craft was considered as a solution to operate in distant fishing grounds to augment the country's fish supplies.
Growth of mechanization
A beginning in the direction of mechanization of the fishing crafts in India was made by examining the possibility' of motorising the existing large indigenous fishing crafts. This was done in the case of Lodhias and Machwa boats of the north-west coast (Maharashtra and Gujarat). With slight modification of the frame, they could be fitted with a suitable inboard engine; however, the fishing craft of the other areas could not be mechanized simi larly as they were not found suitable for mechanization, hence the need for evolving suita ble designs of mechanized fishing vessels arose. In 1949 a small mechanized boat with 5HP engine was introduced by the Department of Fisheries in Madras (Tamil Nadu). Subsequently, the Indo-Norwegian Project has brought out the design for 6.5 m mechanized vessels. At a later date a beach landing craft of 6.7 m and Pablo-type boat of 7.5 m were introduced. Most of these are in the size range of 10-14 m (OAL) with engine of 10-70 HP. Some of the 1 most common sizes are 9.15 m (30'), 9.8 m (32 ), 11 m (36') and 14 m (43.5'). A typical mechanized boat of the Indian coast is a wooden hulled stern trawler. Some of the large sized steel-hulled vessels (over 17 m) are also designed in the country and these vessels are used for trawling and purse seining. The number of mechanized vessels in the country was estimated around 900 in 1955 and in 1977 their number stood at 14,000. 90 large-sized vessels (over 17.0 m) belonging to governmental or corporate agencies are fishing in the offshore grounds.
Mechanized fishing
Most of the mechanized vessels do stern trawling for shrimp. A few smaller ones are engaged in the operation of gill nets and drift nets. Mid-water trawling for column fishes has been recently introduced. Purse seining for oil sardine and mackerel is being carried out on a commercial scale by about 150 boats along Goa and Karnataka coasts.
The contribution from mechanized vessels to the All-India catch is about 20 percent. Certain states have imposed restriction on fishing by mechanized vessels close to the shore, to avoid competition with country crafts. The mechanized vessels registered in one state move to fishing grounds of neighbouring states or from the west coast to the east coast or vice versa. The present trend is for the south-west coast boats especially from Kerala to move to the south-east coast looking for profitable shrimp grounds (see also Figure 3.1). - 12 -
t
, ...,,..Jr.. - ~+;;g
Figure 3 .1 Mechanized vessels - 13 -
CHAPTER 4: RESOURCES, FISHING SEASONS AND FISHING GROUNDS OF THE PROJECT AREA
The fishery resources of the Project area are comprised of several species of pelagic, columnar and demersal fishes mostly inhabiting the shoreward half of the shelf. The Project area can be broadly classified into two sectors based on the shoreline, sea bottom and fisheries viz. the area north of Quilon (09°N latitude) to Ratnagiri (17°N latitude) and the area south of Quilon to Tuticorin (09°N latitude) on the east coast. The former area has a gradually widening continental shelf from Quilon northwards and the latter a narrow and irregular continental shelf contour. The northern area generally has sandy shores in its southern half and rocky and sandy shores in the northern half. In this sector the bottom is mostly sandy or muddy, whereas in the southern sector the shoreline is by and large rocky and surf-beaten with generally hard bottom sea bed. The fisheries of the two sectors are dissimilar and consequently the types of fishing crafts and gear are also different.
The northern sector embraces the major areas of upwelling along the west coast of India with its highly productive pelagic fisheries for oil sardine and Indian mackerel.
The southern sector harbours mostly the hard bottom species like perches, as well as pelagic and columnar species of a wider distribution like coastal tunas, horse mackerel, scads, shite baits, etc. Large crustacean fisheries are sustained by the mud-bottom areas off the bar mouths and river mouths in the Project area.
PELAGIC AND COLUMNAR RESOURCES
1. Oil Sardine (Sardinetta tongiaeps)
The oil sardine is the most important marine fish of India. Nearly 99 percent of the fish are landed between Quilon and Ratnagiri (9°-17°N latitude) of the Project area. The fishing season starts soon after the south-west monsoon, by about August, and extends up to April or May. The annual catch during the last decade (1968-1977) has fluctuated from 126,000 to 300,000 metric tons with an annual average of 175,000 t for the period. Except for the catches of the few medium-sized (36'-57') purse seiners, all the fish are caught by non-mechanized canoes from the inshore waters within 6-7 miles from the shore using pelagic trawl like boat seines, encircling nets or gill nets. Fish ranging in total length from 9-18 cm which are less than one year and about one year old constitute the catches. During recent years the bulk of the catches have been made from areas between 10°-13°N latitude.
2. Indian Mackerel (Rastrettiger kanagurta)
The Indian mackerel constitutes a large fishery in the Project area especially between Quilon and Ratnagiri. About 90 percent of the annual catch of Indian mackerel are caught from this area. The concentration of the fish is more between 12°-16°N latitude. The average annual catch during the last decade (1968-1977) was of the order of 85,000 metric tons with the lowest catch at 10,785 metric tons in 1968 and highest at 104,575 metric tons in 1971. Just as the oil sardine, the fishery season starts around August and enps by April-May, fishing being earlier in the south; Fishes from 12 to 23 cm contribute to the fishery and most of them are immature or maturing fish less than one year or past one year. The commercial catches are mostly made by large shore seines, boat seines, and gill nets from inshore waters, within a distance of 10 miles from the shore. - 14 -
3. Tunas
The average annual catch of tunas in India which stood at 4,000 tons in the sixties have gone up to the level of about 20,000 tons in 1976. The skipjack (Katsuwonus petamis) and smaller nwnbers of yellowfin (Thunnus atbacaPes) are traditionally caught by an orga nized pole and line fishery in the Laccadive group of islands of the Arabian Sea lying 150-200 miles west of the Project area. Frigate mackerel (Awx:is spp.), oriental bonito (SaPda oPientatis), little tunny (Euthynnus affinis), and the long tail tuna (Thunnus tonggot) are the coastal tunas caught in the Project area. Recent estimates indicate that at least 50 percent of these are caught off Kerala. The catches come from shore seine operations, small nwnbers of purse seiners and drift nets.
4. Catfish and Ribbonfish
Catfish and ribbonfish form significant commercial fisheries in the Project area.
The catfish stock within the Project area consists mainly of APius dusswniePi and APius thatassinus, of which the former is commercially more important in the inshore fishing grounds.
TPichiur>Us teptUr>Us is the most dominant species of ribbonfish caught. LeptuPacanthus savata and EupteUPogPammus interrrnedius are the other common species.
In the Ratnagiri-Mangalore region good quantities of catfish are available in shallow waters up to 20. m in the first half of the year. In the Mangalore region they were caught in abundance up to 50 m depth in the latter half of the year. During April to June period the fish is observed in good quantitie~ in the same region in deeper waters up to 80 m.
Ribbonfish are observed in good quantities at 20-50 m depths, from Ratnagiri to Mangalore during January-May. In the region between Mangalore to Quilon they are seen in considerable quantities from May to November at 20-80 m depths. Adults are found in shoals and juveniles in dispersed conditions.
Catfish and ribbonfish in good concentrations are found during the monsoon months in areas between 8°-14° latitudes up to 80 m depth.
5. Horse mackerel and scads
The group consisting mainly of the horse mackerel (Megataspis coPdyta) , scads (Decapter>Us spp.) and some of the trevallies (CaPanx spp.) form about 2 percent of the annual marine fish catches in India. The resource is estimated to form on an average about 13 percent of the total fish biomass of the Project area. The average annual landings of the group in the country for the recent ten years amounts to about 21,000 t; however, the estimated standing stock in the Project area alone is around 150,000 t.
The horse mackerel is more abundant between 9°-17°N latitude. The scads are observed in equal abundance in the whole Project area. The trevallies are seen more between 7°~19°N latitude including the Wadge Bank. Horse mackerel and scads are available as surface and column schools mainly in the 20-80 m bottom depths. Trevallies are more abundant in less than 50 m depth. - 15 -
Surface school concentrations of horse mackerel are found along the southern sector of the Project area during October-December and March-April and during September-February period over the northern sector, main concentrations being limited to 30-50 m bottom depth. In view of its relatively offshore distribution, this resource is not exploited adequately by the artisanal fisheries.
6. White bait
In the Project area white baits (Anehovieiia spp.J contribute to a significant fishery in the Kerala and Tamil Nadu coasts. The average annual landing of the fish in the country during the past decade (1968-1977) is of the order of 28,000 tons, of which about 60 percent are caught from inshore waters of the Project area. At least five species are dominant in the catches. The fish occur in waters up to about 50 m depthi most of the landings are however made from the inshore area within 30 m. The current exploited quantum appears to be very low compared to the average stock abundance of 500,000 tons estimated for the Project area. White baits are observed to school in very large concentrations in the Gulf of Mannar east of Cape Comorin during the south-west monsoon in July-August, after which they disperse along the south-west coast. During November-December, concentrations of the fish are found between 9°-13°N latitude. The coastal fisheries along the south west coast starts soon after the monsoon in August and extends up to November. The catches are sustained by 0 year classes. The fish are found as surface, column or bottom schoolsi it also forms a sizable component of shallow water fish complex.
7. Shallow water mixture
This community of fishes comprising several genera and species occur in the shallow inshore belt within 20 m all over the Project area, and is a major resource sustaining the subsistence fishery. The major components of this group are: golden scad, glass perches, silver bellies, white baits, small jew fishes, lesser sardines, rainbow sardines, and other small clupeoids. These are caught during most part of the year except during the rough monsoon weather conditions along the coasts, by non-mechanized crafts and by the shrimp trawlers.
8. Silver bellies
These small-sized lean fish (Leiognathidae) are abundant especially in the southern half of the Project area and large shoals are caught in the Gulf of Mannar. They also form part of the shallow water fish complex all over the Project area during most part of the year.
9. Spanish mackerel
Three species of Spanish mackerel (Seomberomorus spp.) are caught from September to March in the Project area from the inner third of the shelf. Mainly drift nets and hook and lines are used in this fishery.
10. Pomfrets
Like the Spanish mackerel, the pomfrets (Stromatidae) are esteemed table fishes. Three species are caught: silver pomfrets, brown pomfret, and Chinese pomfret. They occur sometimes in large shoals in the Project area but generally are caught from small dispersed schools in drift nets, boat seines, and trawls. - 16 -
DEMERSAL RESOURCES
The typical demersal fish resources in the Project area are the hard-spined perches, jew fishes, threadfin breams, soles, prawns and lobsters. Dog fishes, skates and rays also come under this category.
1. Perches
Large Serranids, medium-sized Lethrinids, Pomadasyids and Lutjanids, and the Nemip terids form the bulk of the perch catches of the Project area. The large groupers (Epinephetus spp.) are found along the chain of rocky out-growths 15-25 miles offshore and at depths from 70-100 m from Cape Comorin to Karwar, These are exploited by long lines, reel-lines and traps, Trawlable perch grounds are available over the Wadge Bank and in the Gulf of Mannar. The Wadge Bank grounds south of Cape Comorin, harbour a resident population of assorted perches mostly belonging to the genera Lethrinus and Lutianus.
The rosy threadfin breams (NemiptePUs spp.) are caught in trawl in large quantities for a few months from September onwards from grounds around 30 m depth by trawlers along the south-west coast. The fish make brief incursions into the shallow water and become available to the non-mechanized fisheries along the central Kerala coast in post monsoon months. Of the 20-30 thousand tons of perches caught .in Indian seas annually, about 70 percent are landed from fishing grounds in the Project area.
2. Croakers and Jew fishes
In recent years the Sciaenids contributed annually about 100,000 tons to the marine fish landings of the country. About 20 percent of it was caught from the Project area. There are several species which form a significant component of the shallow water fish complex in the inshore areas. A part of the landings of Sciaenids in the Project area come as by-catches of the shrimp trawlers.
3. Soles (Cynogtossus spp.)
The sole (Cynogtossus maarostomus) form an important inshore fishery between 10°30'N- 130N latitude in the Project area. The season extends from August to December, the peak month being September. The fishery is supported mainly by one year old fish which attain about 12 cm at this age.
4. Sharks, Skates and Rays
These elasmobrachs with an annual average catch of over 50,000 tons are a significant component of the marine fish landings all over the Indian s8as and is an important fishery in the Project area also. Most of the catches come from the inshore belt. Medium-sized dog fishes, skates and rays form the main constituents of the catches.
5. Prawns and other crustaceans
Penaeid prawns form an important export-oriented fish resource of the Project area and a big majority of the mechanized fishing vessels in the area are shrimp trawlers using bottom trawls. At least four dominant penaeid species contribute to the fishery. - 17 -
Rock lobsters (PanuZirus spp.), sand lobsters (Thenus orientaZis) and deep-sea lobsters (PueruZus aeweZZi) are caught from the shelves and slopes of the south-west coast. About 100,000 tons of penaeid prawns are landed annually in the country, of which over 60 percent are landed in the Project area. The sand lobster is caught in small quantities by the shrimp trawlers and the deep-sea lobsters by large trawlers. Rock lobsters are caught by lines or traps along rocky costal areas.
6. Other resources
These include the large stocks of unconventional resources like file fishes, swimming crabs in the mid and outer shelf, and the sizable quantities from the slope like boar fishes (ChZorophthaZmua spp.), butter fish, rat tails, Myctophids, etc. A full appreciation of the potentials of these deep water resources off the Project area is yet to be made, for enabling viab~e commercial exploitation. - 18 -
CHAPTER 5: FISHING VILLAGES AND LANDING CENTRES
The fishermen population in the Project area live in more or less detached habitations called villages in areas north of Mangalore and south of Trivandrum, while in the central zone there is an evenly dispersed fishing population along the coast. The geografical features of the coastline are mainly responsible for this pattern. The northern and southern zones mentioned being of rocky and indented coastlines interspersed with sandy beaches, whereas Kerala coastline is by and large with a continuous sandy shoreline. Fishing boats land their catches at any point on the beach or any inlets-and-quays, depending upon transport and marketing facilities. The landing centres also align to the pattern of distribution of the fishing population.
Fish landed by the traditionally non-mechanized crafts are marketed out-right on the beach through' middle-men or partly by direct sale to small vendors who transport them to central markets in the interior areas for sale. Central markets in the interior also receive fish from large landing centres by speedier transports like motor trucks, etc. During the peak of the season, fish is also transported packed in broken ice to distant interior centres by rail and trucks. A part of the catch may be sun-dried and disposed. The map in Figure 5.1 shows the directional movement of long-distance transport of fresh fish from the major landing centres of the Project area.
The mechanized boats land their catch in small harbours located along the coastline. Their catches of shrimp are sold to agents buying for the several freezing factories and the by-catches of miscellaneous fish auctioned or sold by negotiations. Transport of fish in broken ice has become a practice in most fish landing centres, especially those of mechanized boats. Motorized land and water transports are mostly used for transport of shrimps to the factories.
Modern facilities at the traditional fish landing centres are limited to roads leading to the centres, availability of ice and motor trucks for transport. Cooperative marketing sponsored by government agencies may be functioning in some areas while a large majority of the sale transactions are handled by middle-men. The landing centres for mechanized boats are better equipped with the facilities cited earlier which are available on a larger scale. There may also be freezing factories in the vicinities of major landing centres, for pro cessing the shrimp. Weighing sheds or fish cleaning and packing halls are seldom available at landing centres. Some large centres, seasonally handling enormous quantities of pelagic fish may have fish-curing yards near the centres, where salt-drying of part of the catch is practised. Goa, Karwar, Malpe, Mangalore, Calicut, Cochin, Quillon and Tuticorin are some of the major fishing ports for mechanized fishing crafts. These centres have several pro cessing plants mainly doing shrimp freezing and canning. Goa, Mangalore, Cochin and Tuticorin have facilities for basing fishing boats larger than 16 m (OAL) which do distant water fishing.
Appendix 1 presents a list"of the marine fish landing centres of the Project area. Also, a detailed map is given portraying the l.ocation of the landing centres at the Project area on a stratum basis. DISPOSITION PATTERN OF FISH CATCH CFRESH FISHl
- PELAGIC FISHERY PROJECT AREA -
20°-
VI SHAKHAPATNAM
KAKI NADA
16°
MADRAS
FIG. 5.1 I L 7, 75° 80° - 21 -
CHAPTER 6: THE SURVEY DESIGN OF AFS
Experience with large-scale fisheries statistical surveys .has given incentive to develop new survey methods and techniques in order to provide an adequate frame of the surveyed population within a short period of time and with minimum cost.
Aerial Frame Surveys based on a bird's eye view from the air along the surveyed coastline have been designed and successfully implemented in a number of FAO member countries.
The multi-purpose character of the Aerial Frame Survey (AFS) designed and success fully completed in the Project area is described in Chapter 1 of the report,
In making a decision about the survey plan of the AFS, the multi-purpose character of the survey and the organic structure and peculiarities of the surveyed population were taken into account.
By using available topographical maps of 1:150,000 scale, an estimate was first calculated of the length of the surveyed coastline (Table 6.1). Specifically, the mapping material used for the AFS consisted of:
(a) A general map covering the Project area - scale 1:1,500,000
(b) An operation navigation chart - scale 1:1,000,000
(c) A set of 16 reference maps - scale 1:150,000
Table 6.1 Estimated length of map shoreline of the surveyed area *
Length of shoreline Str. State Remarks n.mi km TOTAL: 759 1 405
1 Maharashtra 93 172 A part of the total state's shoreline 2 Goa 83 153
3 Karnataka 162 300
4 Ker ala 302 560
5 Tamil Nadu 119 220 A part of the total state's shoreline
* Rounded-off numbers - 22 -
The non-overlapping coastline of the individual states are here called Strata (see Table 6 .1).
Because numerous non-mechanized fishing boats that do not cluster into landing places are prevalent along the surveyed coastline, the survey· plan of AFS used was the one for "widespread populations", here called P-WP.
In order to reduce heterogeneity that can be introduced w.i.thin the elementary area survey units with respect to characteristics to be studied and increase the level of accuracy of eye estimates, we introduced the time/space unit as the elementary survey unit of the survey. The cruising speed of the aircraft during the survey flight, i.e. when measurements of the surveyed characteristics were taking place, was fixed at 120 n.mi/hr. An elementary survey unit was made up:
Time: space zone 10' survey flight: 20 n.mi of surveyed coastline
Past experience has also proved that an elementary survey unit of 20 n.mi is the optimum one for eliminating the effect of systematic bias inherent in aerial frame sur veys of widespread populations..!./.
During the survey flight the aircraft was cruising as follows:
(a) Altitude at 500 ft above sea level
(b) Fixed speed of 120 n.mi/hr
(c) The flying track was an imaginary line at a distance of 1 km offshore
(d) There was a complete coverage of the surveyed coastline (census approach)
Experienced personnel of high quality were employed and given detailed briefing about the workload of the survey before the flight. Two working groups were formed and put on board:
Working Group 1 Working Group 2 1. K.C. George - Senior Biologist 1. K.K. Rao - Senior Biologist 2. V.N. Bande - Biologist 2. G.P. Edwin· Daniel - Research Asst. 3. R.S. Coppola - FAO 3. G.P. Bazigos - FAO (Team Leader)
Working Group 1 was responsible for obtaining measurements of the fishing boats seen on the coastline/landing places. Working Group 2 was responsible for obtaining measure ments of the fishing boats seen on the water. Separate records were kept during the survey flight for the non-mechanized and mechanized boats .
..!/ See also: Bazigos, G.P. (1974) - The Design of Fisheries Statistical Surveys - Inland Waters. FAO-FIPS/T133 - 23 -
During the survey flight, items of information were also collected of the big gears and Chinese.dip-nets.
The form below (Form A1 ) is the Log Book which was used for the collection of the required items of information. Specifically, for survey purposes the population of units covered by AFS was grouped into the following categories:
1. Non-mechanized fishing boats by kind 2. Mechanized fishing boats 3. Big gears and Chinese dip-nets
It should be noted that the AFS covered the operational fishing boats seen during the survey perio~. This in turn means that the existed non-operational fishing boats were not covered by the AFS.
The measuring process of the survey was the method of "eye observations". Experience has proved that the counting of fishing boats by kind is not a difficult task if an inge nious process of measurement has been adopted in the survey. In our case the workload during the survey flight was allocated as follows between and within groups:
Group 1 (Counting of fishing boats on the coastline/landing places) : Observer Counting the non-mechanized fishing boats Observer 2 Counting the mechanized fishing boats Supporting Unit 3 Recording the obtained items of information, keeping precise track of survey flight time
Group 2 (Counting of fishing boats on the water): Observer 1 Counting the non-mechanized fishing boats Observer 2 Counting the mechanized fishing boats Supporting Unit 3 Recording the obtained items of information by following the established time/space zone
During the flights back to the base, additional information was collected on a sample basis of the shore seines seen, Chinese dip-nets and of the location and size of landing places with mechanized fishing boats. AERIALFRAME SURVEY - IND/75/038 [TORM: A:1J (Log Book)
working Group: CJ Flight No. L j Survey Date: I I I I Starting time l : ] surveyed Area: From To ----- Finishing time I : ] Stratum: CJ Speed I= : ] Altitude [ : ]
Actual At the coastline / landing places flight Ele- Gears On the water mentary Canoes Canoes time Small Plank Mecha- Chinese Mecha- area Cata- nized Shore Small Plank Cata- Remarks on 10' and Big boats mar dip- nized units ans boats seines and Big boats mar ans basis Medium nets Medium boats
"'.!'> - 25 -
6.1 Aerial Pilot Frame Survey
An Aerial Pilot Frame Survey was conducted prior to the main survey (27 September 1978). The survey covered the coastline of Cochin area. The survey flight was 1 hr and 3 min.
The purpose of the Pilot Survey was to test the applicability of the system of the AFS, reveal types of errors of measurement and find ways of eliminating them. It should be noted that the measurement errors depend intimately both on the items to be measured and on the measuring process.
It was observed that optimum results are obtained under the following flying conditions:
1. Altitude 500 ft above sea level 2. Fixed cruising speed of 120 n.mi/hr 3, Flying track on an imaginary line at a distance of 1 km offshore
The above flying conditions were adopted for the survey flight of the main Aerial Frame Survey.
6.2 Description of the plane used
(a) Name of the firm operating M/s. Goldensun Aviation, Bombay-4 the aircraft
(b) Type of craft Twinbeech - E.18 - S Type of Airplane
(c) Year of manufacture 1956
(d) Capacity 8 passengers plus 2 pilots
(e) Cruising 120-170 mph
(f) Flight range 3 hours
(g) Refuelling every 3 hours
(h) Communication 2 VHF trans-receivers 1 HF trans-receiver
(i) Flight crew Capt, A.L. Kulkarni Capt. D.M. Kataria Capt. K.P. Asher - 26 -
6.3 Cost items '!:.!
The total cost of the Aircraft time for the survey was RS.60,342/-. The overall flight time was 27 hours and the survey flight time including the Pilot Frame Survey was 14 hours and 51 min.
6.4 Coverage Check Survey (CCS) of the AFS
It was observed that bias was inherent in the calculated estimates based on the results of the AFS by omissions of measurements of fishing boats on the water operating beyond the Project area covered by the AFS. In this section we describe in summary the survey plan of the conducted CCS of the AFS for de-biasing the calculated estimates.
6.4.1 De-biasing the estimated number of marine mechanized fishing boats seen on the water
It was observed that bias is caused in the results of the AFS by omissions of the mechanized fishing boats on the water operating beyond the area covered by the Aerial Frame Survey.
In order to de-bias the calculated estimates of the total number of mechanized boats seen on the water, an ingenious small-scale Coverage Check Survey (CCS) of the AFS was carried out.
A sample sonar-exploratory fishing survey was conducted by the Project soon after the completion of the AFS (R/V SARDINELLA) . The sample tracks of the survey were ex tended up to 40 m isobath; the visibility of the eye observations of the survey was extended up to 50 m isobath. During the survey, supplementary information was collected, among other things, on the number of mechanized boats seen on the water.
The findings of the survey were divided into two categories:
1) Mechanized boats seen on the water operating within the area covered by the AFS
2) Mechanized boats seen on the water operating beyond the area covered by the AFS
Table 6.4.1 below provides the findings of the survey.
u.s.$1 RS. B.10 - 27 -
Table 6.4.1 Mechanized fishing boats SP.en on the water, R/V SARDINELLA, Cruise 1.10 to 2.10.78
Boats seen on the water Log Date/Time Within Beyond No. Remarks AFS AFS area area
1.10.78 0830 290 0 0 Estimated total number of 0930 300 0 0 mechanized fishing boats 1000 305 0 0 seen on the water: 1030 310 0 0 15 + 25 = 40 1130 316 0 2 out of which: 1320 324 0 2 (a) within AFS area 25 1420 3j4 1 0 = (b) beyond AFS area, 15 1835 362 0 5 =
2.10.78 0600 369 0 1 Estimated correction 0630 368 1 0 coefficient: 0700 373 0 1 15 1100 401 0 1 C1 = 1 + = 1.60 1118 405 0 0 2s 1130 409 1 0 1400 434 0 1 1500 444 0 2 1530 449 8 0 1630 459 14 0
TOTAL 25 15
The above estimated correction coefficient c 1 = 1.60 was applied on the findings of the AFS (mechanized fishing boats seen on the water) for de-biasing the obtained results, here called adjusted estimates of mechanized fishing boats seen on the water~.
if Only the adjusted numbers of the AFS have been used in this report 6.4.2 De-biasing the estimated number of canoes seen on the water
During the Coverage Check Survey items of information were also collected for the following two surveyed magnitudes:
1) Canoes seen on the water operating within the area covered by the AFS
2) Canoes seen on the water operating beyond the area covered by the AFS
Table 6.4.2 below gives the findings of the CCS.
Table 6.4.2 Canoes seen on the water, R/V SARDINELLA, Cruise 1.10 to 2.10.78
Boats seen on the water Log. Date/Time Within Beyond Remarks No. AFS AFS area area
1.10.78 0830 290 0 4 Estimated total number of 0930 300 4 0 canoes seen on the water: 1000 305 0 1 28 + 19 = 47 1030 310 0 2 out of which: 1130 316 0 0 (a) within AFS area = 28 1320 324 0 0 (b) beyond AFS area = 19 1420 334 2 0 1835 362 0 0
2 .10. 78 0600 363 0 1 Estimated correction 0630 368 2 0 coefficient: 0700 373 0 2 C2 = 1 + __!2_ = 1.68 1100 401 0 9 28 1118 405 20 0 1130 409 0 0 1400 434 0 0 1500 444 0 0 1530 449 0 0 1630 459 0 0
TOTAL 28 19
The above estimated coefficient c2 = 1.68 was applied on the findings of the AFS in order to estimate the adjusted numbers of canoes seen on the water~. - 29 -
CHAPTER 7: ESTIMATED SURVEY MAGNITUDES
In this Chapter we present the calculated adjusted estimates of the AFS. The tabulated data provide estimates of the following survey magnitudes:
1) Mechanized marine fishing boats seen
2) Non-mechanized marine fishing boats seen and by kind: i) Small and medium size canoes ii) Big size canoes iii) Plank-built boats iv) Catamarans
3) Big gears seen (shore seines) and Chinese dip-nets seen
The reference period of the calculated estimates is the survey period of the AFS (28-30 September 1978).
The tabulation system we developed comprises a series of summary and detailed tables covering the individual survey magnitudes. Specifically, the following tabulation system was introduced:
Summary tables 1. Estimates are presented on a state basis 2. Estimates are presented on 10 latitude basis Detailed tables 3. Estimates are presented on elementary area (survey) unit basis (= 20 n.mi)
The summary tables of the surveyed magnitudes are given below. The tabulated data provide information of the size of the surveyed magnitude and its structural sub-totals, i.e. boats seen on the shoreline/landing places and boats seen on the water.
The detailed tables of the surveyed magnitudes are given in Appendix 2.
The established code list for the tabulation of the obtained results is as follows:
Table 7 .1.1 Estimated total number of mechanized marine fishing boats seen on a state basis
Table 7.1.2 Estimated total number of mechanized marine fishing boats seen on 1° latitude basis
_!_/ Table 7. 1. 3 Estimated total number of mechanized marine fishing boats seen on an elementary area unit basis (= 20 n.mi)
Table 7.2.1 Estimated total number of non-mechanized marine fishing boats seen, by kind, on a state basis
Table 7.2.2 Estimated total number of non-mechanized marine fishing boats seen, by kind, on 1° latitude basis
U Table 7.2.3 Estimated total number of non-mechanized marine fishing boats seen, by kind, on an elementary area unit basis (= 20 n.mi)
Table 7.3.1 Estimated total number of big gears (shore seines) and Chinese dip-nets seen on a state basis .!/ See Appendix 2 - 30 -
In summary, the overall number of operational marine fishing boats and gears covered by the AFS in the Project area are:
1) Mechanized fishing boats 3 216
2) Non-mechanized fishing boats, 24 070 out of which: Canoes - small and medium 9 681 Canoes - big 6 166 Plank-built boats 412 Catamarans 7 811
3) i) Big gears (shore seines) 158 ii) Chinese dip-nets 818
Fig4re 7.1 shows a pictorial chart of the distribution of the marine fishing boats covered by the AFS in the Project area by 1° of latitude.
Table 7 .1.1 Estimated total number of marine mechanized fishing boats seen on a state basis
Mechanized fishing boats At Str. State On the Remarks Total landing water places TOTAL 3 216 1 970 1 246 i.------i------i------1 Maharashtra 276 245 31 A part of the state
2 Goa 320 203 117
3 Karnataka 1 207 575 632
4 Kerala 950 673 277
5 Tamil Nadu 463 274 189 A part of the state - 31 -
Table 7 .1. 2 Estimated total number of marine mechanized fishing boats seen on 1° latitude basis
Mechanized fishing boats At Latitude Space Zone On the Remarks Total landing water places TOTAL 3 216 1 g10 1 246 ------17°-16° 1.01 - 1.06 275 244 31
16° - 15° 1.07 - 2.05 2g3 1g2 106 0 15° - 14° 2.06 - 3.05 306 1g6 110
14° - 13° 3 .06 - 3 .og 3g3 183 210
13°-12° 3.10 - 4. 04 620 254 366
12°-11° 4.05-4.08 23g 231 58
11·0 - 10° 4 ,og - 4 .11 131 g1 34
10° - go 4.12-4.14 252 147 105
go - 30 4.15-5.02 278 235 43
30 - go 5.03 - 5.05 374 1g1 183 East coast: E of 77°30'longitude Table 7.2.1 Estimated total number of marine non-mechanized fishing boats by kind on a state basis
At shoreline Total On the water and landing places Canoes Canoes Canoes Str.* State Remarks Small Plank Cata- Small Plank Cata- Small Plank Cata- and Big boats mar ans and Big boats mar ans and Big boats mar ans medium medium medium
TOTAL 9 681 6 166 412 7 811 9 635 3 754 232 7 096 46 2 412 180 715 ------
1 Maharashtra 872 42 872 42 A part of the state
2 Goa 822 3 819 3 3 w "' 3 Karnataka 2 271 384 2 256 17 15 367 I
4 Ker ala 5 634 5 737 2 471 5 606 3 737 2 195 28 2 000 276
5 Tamil Nadu 82 412 5 340 82 232 4 901 180 439 A part of the state
* 1-3 Medium and big canoes refer to built-up boat canoes with outrigger 4-5 Canoes refer exclusively to dug-out All small canoes are dug-outs Table 7.2.2 Estimated total number of marine non-mechanized fishing boats by kind on 1° latitude basis
Total At shoreline and landing places On the water Latitude Space Zone Carioes Canoes Canoes Small Plank Cata- Small Plank Cata- Small Plank Cata- Remarks and Big boats marans . and Big boats mar ans and Big boats mar ans medium medium medium
TOTAL g 681 6 166 412 7 811 g 635 3 754 232 7 096 46 2 412 180 715 ------..------1------17° - 16° 1.01 - 1.06 483 2g 483 2g
16° - 15° 1.07 - 2.05 g55 13 g52 3 13
15° - 14° 2.06 - 3.05 1 647 164 1 632 17 15 147
14° - 13° 3.06 - 3.og 645 13g 645 13g w w 13° - 12° 3.10 - 4.04 577 763 577 227 536 D
12°-11° 4.05 - 4.08 2 014 1 565 2 004 1 336 10 22g
11° -10° 4.og - 4.11 1 665 1 684 1 647 1 oga 18 586 go 10° - 4.12-4.14 896 1 153 896 5g7 556 go - 80 4.15 - 5.02 7gg 656 6 027 7gg 47g 5 621 177 406 go - go 5.03-5.05 412 1 784 232 1 475 180 30g East coast: E of 77 30' longitude - 34 -
Table 7. 3 .1 Estimated total number of big gears (shore seines) and Chinese dip-nets seen on a state basis
Beach seines Chinese seen Str. State dip- Remarks Total Fishing nets
TOTAL 158 72 818
------~------Estimates were cal- culated by using 1 Maharashtra 33 15 aerial sample (a part) observations.
2 Goa 16 7 --Note:
3 Karnataka 69 28 Big size shore seines are operated by 40 to 50 fishermen 4 Kera la 40 22 Very big size shore seines are operated 4a Cochin area 818 by 80 to 90 fishermen
5 Tamil Nadu (a part) ~"""-L&.>1)11. .,.,, .... CALICUT llmG - 1565 11'1------:----_:_ - 37 -
CHAPTER 8: ESTIMATED SECONDARY MAGNITUDES
By using the results of AFS, estimates were calculated of the numerical values of some secondary statistical magnitudes providing indications of the level of fishing activity of the operational marine fishing boats during the survey period. The following two secon dary magnitudes were considered:
1) Level of fishing activity of the operational mechanized marine fishing boats
2) Level of fishing activity of the operational non-mechanized marine fishing boats
A measur~ of the level of fishing activity was formulated with the use of fishing activity coefficients:
Coefficient of Fishing. Activity of mechanized marine fishing boats
Coefficient of Fishing Activity of non-mechanized marine fishing boats
Specifically, the formulae used ·for the above coefficients are:
x 100 ••• %
where,
T Number of mechanized marine fishing boats seen on the water 1 1
1 T Total number of mechanized marine fishing boats seen
x 100 ••• %
where,
T Number of non-mechanized marine fishing boats seen on the water 2 1
2 T Total number of non-mechanized marine fishing boats seen
Estimates of the numerical values of the above coefficients were calculated on a state basis and 1° latitude basis. The tables below (Table~ 8.1,2,3,4) provide the estimated values of the coefficients. - 38 -
Table 8.1 Estimated values of Ci.FA on a state basis, mechanized marine fishing boats - Sept.1978
Estimated Str. State Ci .FA Remarks (%) TOTAL 38.74 ------1 Maharashtra 11.23 A part of the state
2 Goa 36.56
3 Karnataka 52.36
4 Ker ala 29 .16
5 Tamil Nadu 40.82 A part of the state
Table 8.2 Estimated values of Ci.FA on 1° latitude basis, mechanized marine fishing boats - Sept.1978
Estimated Code Latitude C .FA Remarks No. 1 (%)
TOTAL ______38.74 ,... ___ 1 17° -16° 11.27
2 16° - 15° 35.57
3 15° - 14° 35.95
4 14° - 13° 53.44
5 13° - 12° 59.03
6 12° -11° 20.07
7 110-100 25.95
8 100 - 90 41.67
9 90 - 90 15.47
10 90 - 90 48.93 East coast: East of longitude 77°30'E - 3g -
Table 8.3 Estimated values of c2 .FA on a state basis, non-mechanized marine fishing boats by kind - Sept.1g79
Estimated C2.FA (%) Small & str. State Big Plank Cata- Remarks medium canoes boats mar ans canoes TOTAL .48 3g .12 43.69 9.15 ------1 Maharashtra 100.00 A part of the state
2 Goa .36 100.00
3 Karnataka .66 95.57
4 Ker ala .so 34.86 11.17
s Tamil Nadu 43.69 8.22 A part of the state
Table 8.4 Estimated values of C2 .FA on 1° latitude basis, non-mechanized marine fishing boats by kind - Sept.1g79
Estimated C2.FA (%) Small & Code Latitude Big Plank Cata- Remarks medium No. canoes boats mar ans canoes TOTAL .48 39.12 43.69 9.15 ------1 17°-16° 100.00 A few big canoes
2 16° - 15° .31 100.00 A few big canoes
3 1S 0 - 14° ,g1 89.63
4 14° - 13° 100.00
s 13° - 12° 70.2S
6 12°-11° .so 14.63
7 11°-10° 1.08 34.80
8 10° - go 48.22
9 90 - 90 26,gS 6.74
10 90 - go 43.69 17.32 East coast: East of longitude 77°30 1 E - 40 -
The tabulated data show some interesting findings:
1. Mechanized marine fishing boats
The estimated overall value of Ci.FA, during the survey period, was about 40 percent. It varies between states, ranging from 11 to 52 percent. The highest values of Ci.FA were observed in Karnataka state and Tamil Nadu state.
On 1° latitude basis, the estimated values of c 1 .FA ranged from 11 percent to 59 percent. The highest values of Ci.FA were observed in fishing areas 13°- 120 latitude, 14°-13° latitude, 8°-9° latitude (east coast), and 10°-9° latitude.
The graphs below (Figures 8.1, 8.2) portray the fluctuations of Ci.FA over the Project area.
2. Non-mechanized marine fishing boats
The tabulated data indicate that the overall value of c2 .FA of big canoes and plank boats are 39 percent and 44 percent, respectively. There are no significant differences between the above values and the estimated overall value of Ci.FA of mechanized marine fishing boats.
The graphs below (Figures 8.3, 8.4) portray the fluctuations of c2 .FA over the Project area.
It should be noted that the estimated numerical values of c2 .FA indicate the level of fishing activity of the operational non-mechanized marine fishing boats observed during the survey period (AFS) . - 41 -
50 -.... ~ '- ~ .... 40 CJ Cf-. Cl (/) I)) ;::-; N 30 \:::! ~ ~ I)) ~ \:::! 20 ·~~ (/) kl
10
l 2 3 5 Str./State
Figure 8.1 Estimated level of fishing activity of mechanized marine fishing boats on a stratum basis 60
50
....._ -~ ~ l+O t) :.. ti--. () co ~ ;:s N 30 ~ ~ 11\J""' '"13 I I \ ~ \ I i ~ ~ ~
-~20 ~ co l't:i
10
0 '--~~~-+--~~~-1-~~~~+-~~~-+-~~~--1!--~~~-1-~~~--1-~~~~-1--~~~-+- 1 2 3 I+ 5 6 7 8 9 10 1° latitude (C.No.)
Figure 8.2 Estimated level of fishing activity of mechanized fishing boats on 1° latitude basis - 43 -
(%) i o'o ------\r big canoes ~. 't-;, 80 \ N c..:i \ ~a \ U) m ~ 60 N \ !j ~ \ plank boats ~ m .µ !j \ l.w 40 ·~.µ U) \ r.:.:i " 20 catamarans " l " " 0 1 2 3 5 Str. I State
Figure 8.3 Estimated level of fishing activity of non-mechanized marine fishing boats on a stratum basis 100 i- -- ...... /\ ...... / ...... / \ \ ne-- big canoes 80 \ \ ~ "I"';> \ CJ"' \ ti-. 60 Cl \ a:i
Figure 8.4 Estimated level of fishing activity of non-mechanized marine fishing boats on 1° latitude basis - 45 -
CHAPTER 9: COMPARISON OF THE ESTIMATES CALCULATED BY AFS WITH THE OFFICIAL STATISTICS
The previous chapters (Chapters 6'-8) describe t.he methodology we used for the design and implementation of the large-scale AFS and summaries our findings.
The second important objective of our :;tudy is the matching ::>f the results of AFS with the official statistics .!J covering the same population of magnitudes.
In order to simplify our comparative study we introduce below the magnitudes under comparison by using the proper concepts, definitions and symbols. Specifically, Section. 9.1 covers mechanized marine fishing boats and Section 9.2 covers non-mechanized marine fishing boats.
9.1 Mechanized marine fishing boats
In the AFS the obtained counts express the population of operational mechanized marine fishing boats operating in the Project area during the survey period, Le.
"'Y Total number of operational mechanized marine fishing boats covered by the AFS
Records of official statistics summarize the total number of registered mechanized marine fishing boats, i.e.
X"' Total number of registered fishing boats in the states of the Project area
For our analysis, the above magnitude Xcan first be split into the following components : "' "' X .1 X (total number of operational mechanized marine fishing boats)
(total number of non-operational mechanized marine fishing boats)
Furthermore, because of the dynamic nature of the mechanized fishery, the above magnitude 1x can be split as follows by taking into account the spatial distribution of the operational mechanized marine fishing boats during the survey period:
.!/ Supplied by the Governments of the states of Maharashtra, Goa, Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu, and by the CMFRI (Central Marine Fishery Research Institute).
We acknowledge our thanks to the states of Maharashtra, Goa, Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu, and CMFRI for the provided official statistics. - 46 -
" " 1 X 1 X1 (total number of operational mechanized marine fishing boats within the Project area) " + 1x2 (total number of operational mechanized marine fishing boats outside the Project area)
Under the assumption that the existing Register of mechanized marine fishing boats is complete and accurate, the size of the estimated secondary magnitude D, D" X" - "Y
expresses the net migration of the existing mechanized marine fishing boats outside the surveyed Project area.
The assumption made that the existing Register of mechanized marine fishing boats is complete and accurate cannot easily be justified.
The table below (Table 9.1.1) shows some defects in the data provided by two sources of information, i.e. states and Central Marine Fishery Research Institute (CMFRI), of the total number of registered mechanized marine fishing boats.
Table 9.1.1 Estimated mechanized marine fishing boats on a state basis - 1977
Mechanized boats States Str. State CMFRI (5)=(3)-(4) Remarks statistics ( 1) (2) (3) (4)
TOTA!...... ------i------I"'"------1 Maharashtra 358 ...... A part of the state
2 Goa 275 387 -112
3 Karnataka 1 500 2 127 - 627
4 Ker ala 2 641 2 322 319
5 Tamil Nadu 710 ...... A part of the state· - 47 -
Table 9.1.2 gives the estimated values of 6 (X - Y) on a state basis. For our calculations the states statistics and the results of AFS were used.
A Table 9.1.2 Estimated values of D on a state basis
Mechanized boats States Str. State AFS A A A Remarks statistics (Yl D = X-Y (x)
TOTAL 5 484 3 216 2 268 ------1------1 Maharashtra 358 276 +82 A part of the state
2 Goa 275 320 - 45
3 Karnataka 1 500 1 207 +293
4 Ker ala 2 641 950 1 691
5 Tamil Nadu 710 463 +247 A part of the state
The graph below .(Figure 9.1.1) shows the estimated separation area portraying the observed differences in the numerical values of the estimated mechanized marine fishing boats between states statistics and AFS.
A critical assessment of the tabulated data (Table 9.1.2) shows some very interesting findings: - 48 -
2000
1800
Separation . area 1600 ......
1400 .
1300 - 'b.,. •• 0 ••••••••••••••• 0 ••
' ' ••••••••• 0 •••••••••
'-eooOOOOOOOODOOOODO ' ,...... ', ...... 1000 "-···········
800
\ \ \ AFS 600 ,_ \ \ \
400
200
0 2 3 4 5 Str./State
Figure 9.1.1 Estimated separation area of mechanized marine fishing boats portraying differences between states statistics and AFS - 49 -
1. Maharashtra State (a part):
In this state the estimated value of the secondary magnitude D= 82. The estimated numerical value of Dindicates that about 23 percent of the registered mechanized marine fishing boats in the state have not been covered by the AFS.
The above analysis leads to the following conclusions:
(a) There is a local mechanized fishery in the state
(b) The observed differences between state statistics and AFS can be attributed to: i) Quality of existing Register ii) Non-operational marine fishing boats iii) Migration of mechanized marine fishing boats from the state to Goa state (see Goa state below)
2. Goa State:
In this state the estimated value of D= -45. This in turn means that the AFS counted 16.36 percent more marine mechanized boats than the registered ones.
There are traces of immigration .of mechanized marine fishing boats from neighbouring states to Goa State.
3. Karnataka State:
In this state the estimated value of D= +293, i.e. about 20 percent of the mechanized boats registered in the state have not been covered by the AFS. This is due mainly to the quality of the existing Register, non-operational mechanized marine fishing boats and migration of mechanized boats from the state to fishing grounds located outside the surveyed area.
4. Kerala State:
The estimated value of o= +1691, i.e. about 64.03 percent of the mechanized marine fishing boats in the state have not been covered by the AFS. This situation presents traces of mass migration of the mechanized marine fishing boats from the state to the eastern coast and other fishing grounds outside the Project area (confirmed by personal communication, shrimp fishing).
5. Tamil Nadu:
The estimated value of "D= +247, i.e. about 34.79 percent of the mechanized fishing boats of the state have not been covered by the AFS. This situation presents traces of migration of mechanized fishing boats from the state to fishing grounds located outside the surveyed area. - 50 -
9.2 Non-mechanized marine fishing boats
It has been discussed that, in the AFS, estimates have been calculated of the operational marine non-mechanized fishing boats by kind. The states statistics provide estimates of the total number of existing marine non-mechanized boats (= operational non-mechanized boats plus non-operational non-mechanized boats) irrespectively of kind on a state basis. The accuracy of the reported official statistics is unknown.
The tabulated data (Table 9.2.1) provide information on the reported official statistics of non-mechanized marine fishing boats by the states and CMFRI, respectively.
Table 9.2.1 Estimated number of non-mechanized marine fishing boats - official statistics
Non-mechanized boats States Str. State CMFRI (5) = (3) Remarks statistics . - (4) (1) (2) (3) (4) TOTAL 54 518 * ...... 1------1 Maharashtra 2 250 ...... A part of the state 2 Goa 2 438 ......
3 Karnataka 8 000 6 357 1 643
4 Ker ala 23 858 20 667 3 191
5 Tamil Nadu 17 972 * ...... A part of the state
* Includes 16,328 catamarans
Because of the nature of the reported official statistics on non-mechanized marine fishing boats and the existing differences as far as the reference period is concerned between the official statistics and AFS, it is rather difficult to work out a straight forward comparison of the data of states statistics with the findings of AFS. The principle adopted for our comparative study is described below.
For our analysis some support is lent from our experience with similar kinds of surveys conducted in a number of fishery proj.ects. Coverage Check Surveys (CCSs) of Aerial Frame Surveys based on the water approach ..!../ have indicated that, other things being equal, the numerical value of the proportionality coefficient R1 expressing the expected ratio of existing to operational non-mechanized marine fishing boats, ranges from R1 = 1. 3 to R1 = 1.5.
By applying the above coefficients on the results of AFS, estimates were calculated on the expected number of existing non-mechanized marine fishing boats in the Project area (Table 9.2.2) .
.!/ See: Bazigos, G.P. (1974) - The Design of Fisheries Statistical Surveys - Inland Waters, FA0-FIPS/T133 - 51 -
Table g.2.2 Estimated total number of existing non-mechanized marine fishing boats, irrespective of kind - state statistics and AFS (expected) Existing non-mechanized boats Str. State States AFS Remarks statistics Maximum Minimum TOTAL 54 518 * 36 106 31 287 ------1------1 Maharashtra 2 250 1 371 1 188 A part of the state 2 Goa 2 438 1 237 1 072 3 Karnataka 8 000 3 g92 3 451 4 Ker ala 23 858 20 764 17 gg3 5 Tamil Nadu 17 g12 * 8 752 7 583 A part of the state
-It· Includes 16,328 catamarans
Table g.2.3 below provides estimates of the expected total number of existing non mechanized fishing boats by kind in the Project area on 1° latitude basis.
Table g.2.3 Expected total number of existing non-mechanized marine fishing boats by kind on 1° latitude basis - AFS
Canoes Plank boats Catamarans Code Small and Latitude Big Remarks No. Medium Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. TOTAL 14 524 12 581 g 24g 8 017 618 536 11 716 10 153 ------i=""------1------1 17°-16° 725 628 43 38
2 16°-15° 1 432 1 241 20 17
3 15°-14° 2 471 2 141 246 213
4 14°-13° g68 835 208 180
5 13°-12° 866 750 1 144 gg2
6 12°-11° 3 021 2 618 2 348 2 035
7 11°-10° 2 4g9 2 164 2 526 2 1go
8 10°- go 1 344 1 165 1 730 1 4gg
g go_ 90 1 1gg 1 03g g94 853 g 040 7 834
10 30_ go 618 536 2 676 2 31g East coast, L 77°30'E - 52 -
The tabulated data (Table 9.2.2) shows that the total number of expected non mechanized marine fishing boats in the Project area ranges from 36,106 (maximum) to 31,287 (minimum).
The relative spatial distribution of the expected non-mechanized marine fishing boats is given in Table 9.2.4 below.
Table 9.2.4 Relative spatial distribution of the expected non-mechanized marine fishing boats on a state basis
Relative spatial Str. State Remarks distribution (%)
TOTAL 100.00
~------1 Maharashtra 3,80 A part of the state
2 Goa 3,43
3 Karnataka 11. 03
4 Ker ala 57.51
5 Tamil Nadu 24.23 A part of the state
9.2.1 Estimated validity coefficients, non-mechanized marine fishing boats
In our comparative study of states statistics with the results of AFS, estimates were also calculated of the numerical values of the validity coefficient, VC. The VC is a secondary magnitude expressing the ratio of existing non-mechanized marine fishing boats (states statistics) to operational non-mechanized marine fishing boats (AFS) . The table below (Table 9.2.5) gives the estimated values of VC. - 53 -
Table 9.2.5 Estimated values of the validity coefficient (VC)
Non-mechanized boats Str. State States Remarks AFS vc statistics
TOTAL 54'518 * 24 070 2.26
~------1------1 Maharashtra 2 250 914 2.46 A part of the state
2 Goa 2 438 825 2.96
3 Karnataka 8 000 2 655 3.01
4 Ker ala 23 858 13 842 1. 72
5 Tamil Nadu 17 972 * 5 834 3.08 A part of the state
* Includes 16,328 catamarans - 54 -
CHAPTER 10: THE LOCALIZATION PATTERN
In this Chapter we describe the spatial concentration pattern of the surveyed non mechanized and mechanized fishing boats and derive a number of useful coefficients indi cating the existing geographic relation between non-mechanized and mechanized fishing boats.
10.1 The concentration pattern of non-mechanized fishing boats
Table 10.1.1 below provides information on the length of the surveyed map-shoreline as well as estimates of the surveyed surface area for various depth domains.
Table 10.1.1 Estimated length of map-shoreline (n.mi,km) and surface area (n.mi2 ,km2 ) on 1° latitude basis
Length of map- Surface Area Code shoreline Depth: 0-20 m Depth: 0-50 m Latitude Remarks No. 2 2 n.mi km n.mi km2 n.mi km2
TOTAL 758.7 1 405 4 002 13 381 13 178 44 055 ------1------1------1 17°-16° 71.3 132 224 749 1 127 3 768 2 16°-15° 96 .1 178 361 1 208 1 156 3 865 3 15°-14° 75.6 140 426 1 425 1 495 5 000 4 14°-13° 75.6 140 433 1 449 1 755 5 869 5 13°-12° 67.5 125 340 1 135 1 106 3 695 6 12°-11° 72.9 135 433 1 449 1 567 5 241 7 11°-10° 64.8 120 361 1 208 1 264 4 227 8 10°- 90 62.1 115 419 1 401 1 214 4 058 9 90_ 90 83.7 155 181 604 810 2 705 10 90_ 90 89.1 165 824 2 753 1 684 5 627 East coast, ~ 77°30' loncritude
For the calculation of Concentration Coefficients (CC) of non-mechanized fishing boats, one approach to the problem was to express the various kinds of boats into standard unit boats (SUBs). - 55 -
For the estimation of the respective conversion coefficients we used available measures of the control characteristic CPUE = kg/boat/day. The introduced SUB equalled to the medium ~ize canoe. Table 10.1. 2 below provides the estimated conversion coefficients.
Table 10.1.2 Estimated conversion coefficients for SUBs
CPUE Conversion Kind of Boat (kg/boat/ Remarks Coefficient day)
1. Small canoe 5 0.125 (angling canoes)
2. Catamaran 40 1
3. Medium canoe 40 1 (Basis)
4. Plank-built boat 100 2.5
5. Big canoe 240 6
By using the tabulated data, estimates were calculated of the following two types of Concentration Coefficients (CCs) :
CC 1 Expressing average number of operational non-mechanized fishing boats seen (SUBs) per n.mi, km of map-shoreline (Table 10.1.3)
CC2 Expressing average number of operational non-mechanized fishing boats seen (SUBs) 2 2 per n. mi , km of the surveyed surface area (Table 10.1.3) - 56 -
Table 10.1.3 Estimated cc1 and cc2 coefficients on 1° latitude basis - operational SUBs
A No.of CC1 C'C2 (estimated) SUBS (estimated) 0-20 m 0-50 m Code Latitude (non- Remarks No. SUBs/ SUBs/ SUBs/ SUBs/ SUBs/ SUBs/ mecha- n.mi km n.mi 2 km 2 n.mi 2 km2 nized)
TOTAL 53 7g2 7o.go 3s.2g 13.44 4.02 4.08 1.22 ------=------r----- ..... ------1 17°-16° 546 7.66 4.14 2.44 0.73 0.48 0 .14
2 16~-15° 813 8.46 4.57 2.25 0.67 0.70 0.21 3 15°-14° 2 252 2g.7g 16.og 5.29 1.58 1.51 0 .45 4 14°-13° 1 330 17.5g g.50 3.07 o.g2 0.76 0.23 5 13°-12° 5 071 7 5 .13 40.57 14.gl 4.47 4.58 1.37 6 12°-11° 11 110 152.40 82.30 25.66 7.67 7,og 2 .12 7 11°-10° 11 526 177.87 96.05 31,g3 g,54 g.12 2.73 8 10°- go 7 684 123.74 66.82 18.34 5.48 6.33 i.sg g go_ 30 10 646 127.lg 68.68 58.82 17.63 13.14 3.g4 10 go_ go 2 814 31.58 17.05 3.42 1.02 1.67 0.50 East coast, E 77°30' longitude
The graph below .(Figure 10.1.1) portrays the estimated localization curves based on -he estimated cc1 and cc2 coefficients, respectively. Specifically, curve-A portrays the concentration pattern of SUBs/km of map-shoreline and curve-B portrays the concentration pattern of SUBs/km 2 of the surveyed area (0-50 m depth domain) .
From the tabulated data (Table 10.1.3) and the produced graph (Figure 10.1.1) one can easily see that the gravity zone of the SUBs in the Project area occurs in the latitudes with code numbers 5-g, By taking this as a criterion the surveyed area can be divided into the following three major concentration zones, here called major strata:
Major Stratum 1: Latitude C.No. 1-4 with a low concentration of SUBs
Major Stratum 2: Latitude C.No. 5-g with a high concentration of SUBs
Major Stratum 3: Latitude C.No. 10 with a rather moderate concentration of SUBs (east coast) 100 Curve A - SUBs/km 5 Curve B - SUBs/km.2 (0-50 m)
80-! I \ '\. 4 -... N I:.) 1\ I:.) -...... __ ... I \ ~ -... '-~ \ E: I ~ 60 3 lQ I I ~ ~ .....__ Cf,) .,,....' I N § I.Ji tQ / / ' ' I ~ -.JI Cl;) I 40 / ' I 2 § //\B/ ' tQ / 20 -I / \\ I- 1 / /
0 - ; 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1° latitude (C.No.)
Figure 10.1.1 Estimated localization curves of operational SUBs on 1° latitude basis - 58 -
Table 10.1.4 provides estimates of the calculated ee1 and ee2 coefficients on a major stratum basis.
Table 10.1.4 Estimated ee1 and ee2 coefficients on a major stratum basis - operational SUBs
0-50 m Length of Area " A Major No.of ee 1- shoreline km 2 SUBs/ ee2- Remarks Stratum SUBs (km) (0-50 m) km SUBs/ km2
TOTAL 1 405 44 055 53 792 38.29 1.22 ------F------1------F'------1 590 18 502 4 941 8,37 0.27
2 650 19 926 46 037 70.83 2.31
3 165 5 627 2 814 17.05 0,50 East coast, E 77°30' longitude
Figure 10.1.2 below portrays the localization curves based on ee1 and ee2 coefficients for the above established major strata.
100 Curve A SUBs/km 5 Curve B SUBs/km 2 (0-50 m)
80 '+
-.... A -...... N C.) 8 C.) '- / 60 ' '- / ' '-rA 3 -.... .§ / ~ !::: ...... <:::. (0 lJ;) / ' I § .._<:::. tQ / ' 40 2 / N ' .§ / ' ...... (0 / ' § / ', tQ 20 / ' / /
0 0 1 2 3 Major Str.
Figure 10.1.2 Estimated localization curve of operational SUBs on a major stratum basis - 59 -
Estimates of cc1 and CC 2 coefficients were also calculated for the expected number of existing non-mechanized boats (maximum number) expressed in SUBs. Figures 10.1.3 & 4 portray the estimated concentration curves.
Tables 10.1.5 & 6 provide numerical values of the estimated concentration coefficients.
Table 10.1,5 Estimated cc 1 and CC 2 coefficients on 1° latitude basis - existing SUBs (maximum number)
No.of CC1" (estimated) &2 (estimated) SUBS Code Latitude (non- SUBs/ SUBs/ 0-20 m 0-50 m Remarks No. mecha- n.mi km SUBs/ SUBS/ SUBs/ SUBs/ nized) n.mi2 km 2 n.mi2 km2
TCYI'AL 80 688 106.35 57.43 20 .16 6.03 6 .12 1.83
------~------1------~------1 17°-16° 816 11.44 6 .18 3.64 1.09 o. 72 0.22 2 16°-15° 1 222 12.72 6.87 3.39 1.01 1.06 0.32 3 15°-14° 3 378 44.68 24 .13 7.93 2.37 2.26 0.68 4 14°-13° 1 993 26.36 14.24 4.60 1.38 1.14 0.34 5 13°-12° 7 604 112.65 60.83 22.36 6.70 6.88 2.06 6 12°-11° 16 668 228.64 123.47 38.49 11.50 10.64 3.18 7 11°-10° 17 290 226.82 144.08 47.89 14.31 13.68 4.09 8 10°- go 11 528 185.64 100.24 27.51 8.23 9.50 2.84 g go_ 90 15 968 1g0.7(l 103.02 88.22 26.44 19.71 5.90 10 90_ go 4 221 47.37 25.58 5.12 1. 53 2.51 0.75 East coast, E 77°30' longitude
Table 10.1.6 Estimated cc 1 and cc2 coefficients on a major stratum basis - existing SUBs (maximum number)
Length of 2 CCr Major Area km No.of CC" - shoreline 1 SUBs/km2 Remarks Stratum (0-50 m) SUBS SUBs/km . (km) (0-50 m) TOTAL 1 405 44 055 80 688 57.43 1.83 ------f------1 590 18 502 7 409 12.56 0.40 2 650 19 926 6g 058 106.24 3.47 3 165 5 627 4 221 25.58 0.75 East coast, E 77°30 I lonaitude 160 8
Curve A - SUB/km 2 Curve B - SUB/km (0-50 m) 140 7
120 6 \ I\ I \ -... 100 7 5 8~ -... I \ N '- 8 ...... ~ I \ -...... 80 4 E /"', I ~ ~ ~ lQ ::::,; i l:Q \. I / I ~ en '- 0 / ' I N 60 / ' I 3 ~ / (0 / ' § ti) /It- B 40 / 2 I I
20 I I 1 - -I Oi--r-~~~--i-~~~-+~~~~1--~~~-+-~~~--+-~~~--+~~~~1--~~~-i-~~~--+--l--- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1° Latitude (C. No.)
Figure 10.1.3 Estimated concentration curves of existing SUBs (maximum value) on 1° latitude basis - 61 -
120 Curve A= SUBs/km Curve B = SUBs/km 2 (0-50 m) r.
100 I\ 5 II \ r A -..._ I \ <'l tJ -..._ 80 .... I \ 4 ...._tJ ...._8 -..._ I \ ~ c:::i .§ I lQ \ I -...... 60 I 3 ...._c:::i (f,j \ § I <'l tQ ] \ '--.. I (f,j r:Q ~ 40 I \ 2 tQ I \ I \ 20 I 1 I
0 0 1 2 3 Major Str.
Figure 10.1.4 Estimated concentration curves of existing SUBs (maximum number) on a major stratum basis - 62 -
10.2 The concentration pattern of mechanized fishing boats
By using the results of the conducted Aerial Frame Survey (AFS), estimates were calculated of the numerical values of CC 1 and CC 2 coefficients for the operational mechanized boats.
Table 10.2.1 below provides estimated values of the coefficients on a 1° latitude basis and on a major stratum basis. Figure 10.2.1 shows the estimated concentration curves.
Table 10.2.1 Estimated CC 1 and cc2 coefficients on a 1° latitude basis - operational mechanized boats (MBs)
No.of CC1 (estimated) ct2 (estimated) Code mecha- 0-50 m Latitude Remarks No. nized MB/n.mi MB/km MB/ MB/ boats n.mi.2 km 2
TOTAL 3 216 4.24 2,2g 0.24 0.07
------~------1------1 17°-16° 275 3.86 2.08 0.24 0.07 2 16°-15° 2gs 3.10 1.67 0.25 0.08 3 15°-14° 306 4.05 2.1g 0.20 0.06 4 14°-13° 3g3 5.20 2.81 0.22 0.07 5 13°-12° 620 g.1g 4.96 0.56 0.17 6 12o'_11° 2sg 3.96 2.14 0.18 0.06 7 11°-10° 131 2;02 i.og 0.10 0.03 8 10°- go 252 4.06 2.1g 0.21 0.06 g go_ 90 278 3.32 1. 7g 0.34 0 .10 10 90_ go 374 4.20 2.27 0.22 0.07 East coast, E 77°30 1 longitude
From the tabulated data (Table 10.2.1) and prepared graph (Figure 10.2.1) one can see that the highest ocncentration of mechanized marine fishing boas occurs in 13°-12° latitude. One can see variations in the size distribution of mechanized fishing boats among latitudes in the areas above and below the observed gravity centre (13°-12° latitude). 5 0.2
Figure 10.2.1 Estimated concentration curves of operational mechanized boats on 1° latitude basis - 64 -
10.3 The goegraphic relation between non-mechanized and mechanized fishing boats
In order to get a measure of the level of the geographic relation between the opera tional SUBs on the one hand, and the operational mechanized boats (MBs) on the other, we calculated the arithmetical values of the specific coefficients, i.e. LC= Location Coefficients and AC = Association Coefficient. Estimates of the coefficients were calculated on a major stratum basis (see Section 10.1).
The actual computation work typically consists of:
1. Calculation of the relative area distribution of the total number of SUBs (pi, %) and MBs (qi, %) , respectively.
2. Calculation of the secondary magnitude Ri = qi/ pi, here called Loc'ation Coefficient (LC) .
3. The estimated Association Coefficient (AC) is obtained by: (a) Calculating first the differences ai (b) Adding all positive differences, or all negative differences (c) Dividing the sum of the positive (or negative differences) by 100 (d) The limits to the value of the coefficient (AC) are 0 to 1
The table below (Table 10.3.1) gives the estimated values of LC and AC, respectively.
Table 10.3.1 Estimated values of LC and AC coefficients
Major Major Major Item. Str. Str. Str. Remarks 1 2 3 I I I 1 I p. (%) 9 .18 85.59 5.23 SUBs I 1. I I
2 qi (%) 39.55 48.82 11.63 MBs
3 R. = qi I Pi 4. 31 0.57 2.22 LC : Location 1. Coefficients
4 a. = -30.37 +36.77 -6.40 1. pi - qi
AC : Association AC = +36. 77 I 100 = 0. 3677 Coefficient - 65 -
A critical analysis of the tabulated coefficients (Table 10.3.1) leads to the following conclusions:
(a) The estimated relatively low value of AC ~ 0.37 indicates that the surveyed fisheries are relatively non~concentrated regionally.
(b) The observed spatial variation in the estimated values of LC indi cates that the spatial relative distribution of the operational mechanized fishing boats is affected both by the relative spatial distribution of non-mechanized fishing boats and other factors, as well as for example profitability of fishing grounds, etc. (see also Figure 10.3.1).
(%)
100 5
180 I "\r A 4 I \ I \ 60 I \ I;_) \ 3 h1 I '\:l Ill I \ .µ -·- \ .~ , .µ .-· I 40 -· ' \ 2 (/) -· B ' \ kl I ' I ' .\ 20 I '·\ 1 I \...... I \
0 0 1 2 3 Major Strata
Figure 10.3.1 The geographic relation between non-mechanized and mechanized marine fishing boats:
Curve A - Spatial relative distribution of non-mechanized boats Curve B - Sparial relative distribution of mechanized boats Curve C - Estimated values of LC -66 -
CHAPTER 11: DISTANT ANALYSIS
In this chapter we discuss the pattern of distribution of operational fishing boats (AFS) in the Project area. Specifically, in the sections below, we present the estimated "boats interchange curves" and the estimated mathematical models describing the spatial distribution pattern of non-mechanized and mechanized marine fishing boats, respectively.
11.1 Spatial distribution pattern of non-mechanized marine fishing boats
By using the standardized data of AFS (SUBs) estimates were fir.st calculated on the pattern of distribution of SUBs along the surveyed coastline. Specifically, estimates were calculated on 1° latitude basis of the secondary magnitude:
where, Estimated number of operational SUBs on !°latitude basis (results of AFS)
Estimated number of operational SUBs on !°latitude basis under the assumption of uniform distribution of SUBs in the Project area, here called expected number of SUBs
Table 11.1.1 below provides estimates of the numerical values of the above magnitudes. Also, the tabulated data give the numerical values of the ratio: Di = wi I zi.
Table 11. 1, 1 Estimated values of the magnitudes and Di = wi/zi (%) (SUBs)
~ " wi Code " " W." = "Y.-z. " D· = Latitude Yi zi l. l. l. "° No. i zi Remarks (%) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
TOTAL 53 7g2 53 7g2 1------i------1 17°-16° 546 5 056 -4 510 -ag,20 2 16°-15° 813 6 816 -6 003 -88.07 3 15°-14° 2 252 5 358 -3 106 -57,g7 4 14°-13° 1 330 5 358 -4 028 -75.18 5 13°-12° 5 071 4 787 + 284 + 5,g3 6 12°-11° 11 110 5 16g +5 g41 +114. g4 7 11°-10° 11 526 4 5g4 +6 g32 +15o.ag 8 10°- go 7 684 4 406 +3 278 +74.40 g go_ 90 10 646 5 g33 +4 713 +1g,44 10 90_ go 2 814 6 315 -3 501 -55.46 East Coast: E 77°30'longitude Bi - 67 - (%) 140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
-20
-40
-60
-80
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1° latitude (C. No.) Figure 11.1,1 Estimated boats interchange curve, non-mechanized boats (SUBs) - 68 -
By using the tabulated values of Di (Col.5, Table 11.1.1) we prepared the graph above (Figure 11.1.1). In this figure the estimated "boats interchange curve" gives an idea of the type of pattern of distribution of SUBs along the coastline in the Project area. It is indicated that the highest level of localization of SUBs, here called the "centre of SUB's concentration" exists in the latitude with Code No.7, i.e. 11°-10°, where the estimated total number of operational SUBs in the zone is about 151 percent higher than the expected number of SUBs.
The estimated high negative values of Di in latitudes Code Nos. 1,2,3,4 & 10 show that the operational numbers of SUBs in these zones are lower than the expected ones. The estimated positive values of Di in latitudes with Code Nos. 6,7,8 & 9 show that the operational SUBs in these zones are higher than the expected number of SUBs in these area zones.
The above analysis justifies the findings we worked out in Section 10.1 of this report concerning the pattern of distribution of SUBs in the Project area.
11.1.1 Estimated mathematical models, non-mechanized marine fishing boats
Another point which received consideration in our analysis is the effect of distance on the number of boats between the individual latitudes (1°) on the one hand, and the "centre of SUB's concentration" on the other. Specifically, we divided the Project area into two space domains, i.e.
Space Domain That is the area above the centre of SUB's (SD-1) concentration (17°-10° latitude)
Space Domain 2 That is the area below the centre of SUB's (SD-2) concentration (11°-8° latitude plus east coast 8°-9° latitude)
We divided the estimated number of operational SUBs (Yi) by the expected number of SUBs (Zi) to derive the ratio of the operational to the expected SUBs:
Estimates were calculated on 1° latitude basis within the established space domains. Also, within SD-1 and SD-2, we noted the distance di which separates the individual zones (1° latitude) from the centre of SUB's concentration (latitude 11°-10°). The tables below (Tables 11.1.1 & 2) give the estimated values of Li and di within the established space domains. Figures 11.1.la,b give a graphical presentation of the existing relationship between the two magnitudes (Li, di).
A visual assessment of the type of relationship portrayed in Figures 11.1.la,b leads to the following conclusions:
Space Domain 1 A model of the type,
perfectly describes the existing quantitative relationship between the ratio of operational to expected SUBs on the one hand, and distance on the other. The estimated R-square is of the order: A2 R 0.951 (R 0.975) - 6g -
Table 11.1.1.1 Estimated numerical values of the magnitudes Li and di in Space Domain 1 (SUBs)
A Code Latitude Li di Remarks No. (%) (n. mi)
1 17°-16° 10.go 360
2 16°-15° 11.g3 300
3 15°-14° 42.03 240
4 14°-13° 24.g2 1go
5 13°-12° 105 .g3 120
6 12°-11° 214.g4 60
7 11°-10° 250.gg 0 Centre of SUB's concentration
Table 11.1.1.2 Estimated numerical values of the magnitudes Li and di in Space Domain 2 (SUBs)
A Code L. d. Latitude l. l. Remarks No. (%) (n.mi)
7 11°-10° 250.gg 0 Centre of SUB's concentration
g 10°- go 174.40 60
g go_ go 17g.44 120
10 go_ go 44.54 1go East Coast: E 77°30 1 Longitude - 70 -
Space Domain 2 A model of the same type as above,
perfectly describes the existing quantitative relationship between the ratio of operational to expected SUBs on the one hand, and distance on the other. The estimated R-square value is of the order, 0.8891 CR 0 .942)
Table 11.1.1.1.3 shows the estimated regression parameters of the estimated regression models within the established space domains.
Table 11.1.1.1.3 Estimated regression parameters
Space A Model a b c R2 R Domain
~ 2 1 Li = a+ bdi + cdi 267.55 -1. 620 0.003 0.951 0.975
2 L,"' a+ bd, + cd~ 239.817 -0.293 -0.004 0.889 0.942 l. = l. l.
The established relationships above (Li, di) depict the interaction of SUBs between the individual zones· (1° latitude) and the centre of SUB's concentration as a function of the distance between them when the interaction is expressed in the level of localization of SUBs. - 71 -
A Lj (%) 2.60 Space Domain 1
2.40
22.0
2.0 0
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40.
2. 0
0 0 60 12. 0 180 240 300 360
Figure 11.1.1.la Estimated quantitative relationship between Li (ratio of operational to expected SUBs) and di (distance) , SUBs - 72 -
A Lj (%) 260 Space Domain 2
21+ 0
220
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
Lt 0
20
0 dj 0 60 120 180 21+ 0 300 360
Figure 11.1.1.lb Estimated quantitative relationship between Li (ratio of operational to expected SUBs) and di (distance), SUBs - 73 -
11.2 Spatial distribution pattern of mechanized marine fishing boats
By using the same methodology described in Section 11.1, estimates were calculated of the operational mechanized boats interchange,curve. The table below (Table 11.2,1) shows the estimated numerical values of the magrti tudes Qi, zi, wi and fii = ¥ I zi, and Figure 11.2.1 portrays the estimated interchange curve.
Table 11. 2. 1 Estimated values of the magnitudes Yi,zi,Wi and Di = Wi/Zi , mechanized fishing boats
wi Code " = ;;;-- Latitude " " W." ='" Y.-z. " Di Remarks No. Yi zi· 1. 1. 1. zi (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (%) TOTAL 3 216 3 216 - - 1------I-_____ ..;. ____ ------1 17°-16° 275 302 - 27 - a.g4 2 16°-15° 2ga 407 -1og -26.78 3 15°-14° 306 320 - 14 - 4.38 4 14°-13° 3g3 320 + 73 +22.81 5 13°-12° 620 286 +334 '!-116. 78 6 12°-11° 2ag 3og - 20 -' 6.47 7 11°-10° 131 275 "'."144 -52.36 8 10°- go 252 264 - 12 - 4.55 g go_ 90 278 355 - 77 -21.6g 10 80_ go 374 378 - 4 - 1.06 East coast, E 77°30' L
The estimated negative numerical values of the magnitude Di in all zones (1° latitude) but zones 13°-12° and 14°-13° latitudes, show that the operational numbers of mechanized boats in these zones are smaller than the expected numbers of mechanized boats.
Zone 13°-12° latitude should be considered as the gravity centre or centre of con centration of mechanized marine fishing boats. - 74 -
(%) 120
60
60
20
0
-20
-1+0
-60
-BO
1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 1° latitude (C.No.}
Figure 11.2 Estimated boats interchange curve, mechanized boats 11.2.1 Estimated mathematical models - mechanized marine fishing boats
Regression models were estimated portraying the effect of distance on the number of boats between the individual latitude (1°) on the one hand, and the centre of mechanized marine fishing boats concentration on the other.
Tables 11.2.1.1 & 2 give the estimated values of ~i and di within the established space domains, i.e. SD-1 covering the area above the established gravity centre of mechanized boats, and SD-2 covering the area below the gravity centre. Figures 11.2.1.a & b give graphical presentations of the existing relationships between the two magnitudes (Li, di).
Table 11.2.1.1 Estimated numerical values of the magnitudes Li and di in Space Domain 1 - mechanized marine fishing boats
Code Latitude L." d. Remarks No. l. l.
1 17°-16° 91.06 240
2 16°-15° 73.22 180
3 15°-14° 95 .. 63 120
4 14°-13° 122.81 60
5 13°-12° 216.78 0 Gravity centre of mechanized marine fishing boats - 76 -
Table 11. 2, 1. 2 Estimated numerical values of the magnitudes Li" and di in Space Domain 2, mechanized marine fishing boats
Code Latitude L." d, Remarks No. 1 1
5 13°-12° 216.78 0 Gravity centre of mechanized marine fishing boats 6 12°-11° g3.53 60
7 11°-10° 47.64 120
8 10°- go g5.45 180
9 go_ 90 78,31 240
10 90_ go g9,g4 300 East coat: E 77°30'Longitude
Mathematical models were estimated expressing the existing quantitative relationship between Li and di on a space domain basis (Table 11.2,1,3).
Table 11.2.1.3 Estimated regression models
Space Model a b c R.2 R" Domain
~ 1 L. = a+ bd. + cd~ 212.733 -1. 59g 0.0044 o.gs4 o,gg2 1 1 1
~ 2 L, = a+ bd, + cd~ 196.707 -1.521 0.0041 0.788 0.888 1 1 1 -Tl -
,... Li (%) 240 Space Domain 1
220
200 \ \
180 \ \ 160 \ \ \ 140 \ \ \ 120 ' ' 100 ' ...... ,,. ' / 80 ' / ' / ' ,. / 60
40
20
0 di 0 610 120 lBO 240
Figure 12.2.la ~stimated quantit~tive relationship between Li (ratio of operational to expected marine mechanized fishing boats) and di (distance) - 78 -
A Li (%) 240 Space Domain 2
220
200 \ \ 180
\ 160 \ b 140 \ \ \ 120
\ 100 I ,,..- /' ,,. 'I...... / / -- 80 ' ' / . -- / ' / 60 ' ' / ' / 40
20
0 d; 0 60 120 180 240 300 360
Figure 11.2.1b ~stimated quantitative relationship between Li (ratio of operational to expected marine mechanized fishing boats) and di (distance) - 79 -
CHAPTER 12: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
In our attempt for the consolidation of the results of the research programme of the Project, it became obvious that it is almost impossible to work out a proper analysis and critical analysis of the obtained findings until estimates of basic magnitudes describing the fisheries in the Project area are at least approximately calculated. Specifically, for our purposes, detailed statistics was needed on the size and structure of the surveyed fisheries on 1° latitude basis. These items of information are necessary for assessing the localization pattern of the surveyed fishing industry and work out a proper matching system of catch statistics with the results of the conducted large-scale acoustic surveys and other related surveys.
Because existing official statistics was unable to meet our requirements, it became evident that effective operational technique~ should be developed and implemented for the collection of the required items of information,
The multi-purpose character of the designed and successfully completed Aerial Frame Survey (27 September to 30 September 1978) served a number of purposes:
1. Provided detailed estimates of the surveyed magnitudes with the minimum cost and surveyed time
2. Demonstrated the ability of Aerial Frame Surveys to be used as a basis for setting up a Sampling Frame of the surveyed population
3. Provided estimates of the level of fishing activity and migratory pattern of the fishing units at the beginning of the fishing season
Because fisheries in the Project area are more dynamic in character than originally thought, for a better understanding of their spatial distribution, level of activity and migration pattern, estimates should be calculated on a current basis. From a practical standpoint, for a continuation of the estimated numerical magnitudes which reveal the dynamic character of the fisheries, we recommend the design and implementation of two Aerial Frame Surveys (AFSs) during the fishing period over time, i.e. at the beginning and peak of the fishing period.
Coverage Check Surveys (CCSs) of AFSs should be used in order to provide sample estimates of the existing marine fishing boats in the Project area.
In our statistical analysis (Chapters 10 & 11) an attempt was made for assessing the spatial distribution and level of localization of the surveyed fisheries. To help deal with such situations, we developed mathematical models expressing the spatial distribution of the fishing boats (mechanized, non-mechanized) as a function of the distance from the existing fishing boats gravity centres. These models facilitate spatial projections of the surveyed magnitudes and the estimation of the expected level of concentration of fishing boats at any point in the Project area.
Although estimates of the localization pattern of the surveyed magnitudes were well calculated for the Project area, there are some indications that the estimated patterns do not summarize the whole geographical pattern of the surveyed fisheries. For a better under standing of the whole geogrqphical pattern of the surveyed fisheries some thoughts should be given for the expansion of the coverage of future Aerial Frame Surveys in areas adjacent to the Project area.
APPENDIX 1
Landing Centres at the Project area on a stratum basis - 83- LIST OF MARINE FISH LANDING CENTRES OF THE PROJECT AREA Maharashtra State 17°00 1 N 1. Mirkarwads (Ratnagiri) 16°00'N 26. Tondavli Lat. 2. Rajiwada Lat. 27. Talashil 3. Karla 28. Sarjekot-Miryaband 4. Bhatiya 29. Dhuriwada s. Phan sop 30. Medha 6. Golap-Pawas 31. Makrebag 7. Purnagad 32. Dan di 8. Gaonkhade 33. Wayri 9. Amber a 34. Kalethar 10. Sakrinata 3S. Tarkarli 11. Tulsunda 36. Deobag 12. Vadap 37. Mo bar 13. Vijaydrug 38. Kochara 14. Va de tar 39. Khawana 1S. Phanse-Padawne 40. Khanoli-Wayangani 16. Mond 41. Kelus 17. Malai 42. Dabholi 18. Anandwadi 43. Dabhoswada (Vengurla) 19. Tara-Mumbri 44. Navabag 20. Mith-Mwnbri 4S. Ubhadanda 21. Kunkeshwar 46, Muth 22. Katwan 47. Mochemad 23. Mithbao 48. Aravli-Tank 24. Morvewadi 49. Shiroda 2S. Achra (Hirla) so. Aronda Goa State SL Querim 77. Goa Velha S2. Arambol 78. Agacaim S3. Merjim 79. Durbhal S4. Mandrem 80. Cortalim SS. Chopdem 81. Chicalim/Bagmalo S6. Assegao 82. Vas co S7. Siolim 83. Baina S8. Sal.de Mundo 84. Pale S9. Revada 8S. Valsao 60. Col vale 86. Cansaulim 61. Camurlim 87. Utorda 62. Ox el 88. Majorda 63. Anjuna 89. Colva 64. Calangute 90. Benaulim 6S. Saligao-Arpora 91. Sarnabatim 66. Condolim 92. Betalbetim 67. Nerul 93. Cavalossim 68. Ver em 94. Ovli/Verca 69. Reis Magos 9S. Velim 70. Penha de Franca 96. Betul 71. Malim 97. Cabo da Rama 72. Britona 1s0 00 1 N 98. Talpona 73. Panaji Lat. 99. Nuem 74. Caranzalem 100. Agonda 7S. Dona Paula 101. Palolem 76. Siridona - 84 - Karnataka State 102, Majali 158. Bailur 103, Gotnil:;>ag 159. Tudalli 104; NichRanbag 160. Mavalli 105. Dandibag 161. Kaikini 106. Ba val 162. Tengingundi 107. Devbag 163. Honnegadda 108. Newbag 164. Venkatpur 109. Kodibag 165. Shirali-Alvekodi 110. Karwar 14°00'N 166. Bhatkal Lat. 111. Baithkhol 167. Mavinkurve 112. Kamat's beach 168. Karikal 113. Binga 169. Talgod 114. Sankarubag 170. Mundalli 115. Arga 171. Jali 116. Chendiya 172. Belke 117. Kodar 173. Go rte 118. Mudgi 174. Alvegadda 119. Andalli 175. Shiroor 120. Harwada 176. Hadavinakone 121. Aversa 177. Kalihithlu 122. Belikiri 178. Kesarkodi 123. Keni (Ankola) 179. Karkikali 124. Shedguli 180. Uppanda 125. Be lamber 181. Tarapathy/Paduvari 126. Munjuguni 182. Koderi 127. Gangavali 183. Kilimanjeshwara 128, Gokarn 184. Marvanthe 129. Tadri 185. Navunda 130, Shedgiri 186. Trasi 131. Siddheswar 187. Kanchikodi 132 •. Hosabatta 188. Kharvikeri 133. Wanahali 189. Gangoli 134. Kumta 190. Cundapoor-Kodi 135. Alvekodi 191. Koteshwara 136, Kagal 192. Kumbasi 137. Gudiangadi 193. Gopadi 138. Aganashini 194. Bijadi 139. Mirjan 195. Manoor 140. Holangadde 196. Kodi-Bengre/ 141. Kadle Kodi-Kanyan (Hangar-Katta) 142. Shashihittal 197. Paduthonse 143. Haldipur 198. Kodvoor-Kola 144, Honavar 199. Malpe 145. Mallikurve 200. Kidiyoor 146. Payinkurve 201. Kadekar 147. Kasarkod 202. Udiawara 148, Holangadda 203. Mattu 149. Balkur 204. Kaipunjal 150. Idaguji 205. Uliargoli 151. Ho sad 206. Polippu 152. Manki 207. Kaup 153. Achalgudi 208. Muloor 154, Mugali 209. Uchil 155. Alvehitalu 210. Yermal (Bada) 156. Hosa hittalu 211. Yermal (Thenku) 157. Murdeshwar 212. Padubidri - 85 - 213. Hejmadi-Kodi 221. Thannirbavi 214. Mulki 222. Bokapatna 215. Sasihithlu 223. Kuduroli 13°00'N 216. Iddya (Suratkal) 224. Bengri(Mangalore)/Sandpit Lat. 217. Hos abettu 225. Ullal 218. Kulai 226. Someshwar (Uchil) 219. Baikampady 227. Kotekar 220. Bolur 228. Talapady (Ullal) Kerala State 229. Uppala 275. Quillandy 230. Muttam-:Berikal 276. Edakkadavu 231, Mangalpadi 277. Kannankadvu 232. Shirye 278. Elathur 233. Arikkadi 279. Puthiappa 234. Kaipadi 280. Puthiangadi (Near Kozhikode) 235. Mograi 281. Vellayil 236. Kudlu 282. Kozhikode (south) 237. Adakathbail (Kasaragod) 283. Mar ad 238. Kilzhur 284. Beypore 239. Kotikulam 285. Chaliyam 240. Bekal 286. Kadalundi 241. Pallikeri 287. Parappanangadi 242. Chittari 11°00 'N 288. Tannur 243. Ajanoor-north-Balla Lat. 289. Puthiyakadapuxam 244. Hosadurg-south-Balla 290. Thserukadapuram 245. Kanhangad-Kadapur-Poonjavi 291. Puthanangadi (Paravanna) 246. 'l'haikadapuram 292. Vakad 247. Cheravattoor (Kadanhimoola) 293. Kootayi 248. Kadangod 294. Ponnani 249. Padnekadapuram 295. Puduponnani 250. Udinoor 296. Veliangode 251. Kawai 297. Palapetty 252. Ettikulam 298. Mannalamkunnu 12°00'N 253. Mattool 299. Edakazhiyoor Lat. 254. Azhikode (Thekkumbhagam) 300. Kathialam 255. Edakkad 301. Eriyad 256. Dharmadam 302. Azhikode 257. Madappally 303. Munambam II 258. Iring al 304. Cherai-Pallipuram (south) 259. Ayanikkad 305. Kuzhipilly 260. Vanmugam 306. Edamanakad 261. Muthya Kadapuram 307. Nayarambalam 262. Palakkod 308. Ottamassery 263. Puthiangadi (Madai) 309. Thykal 264, Thayyil (Cannore)-Ayakara 310. Arthungal 265. Chalil (Tellicherry) 311. Puthenkadapuram 266. 'l'halayl 312. Blangad 267. Mahe 313. Kadapuram 268. Chombala 314. Kottakadapuram 269. Madakkara 315. Vadanapally 270. Badagara 316. Thalikulam (?allom) 271, Payyoli (Meladi) 317. NatiJ<.a 272. Tikkodi 318 •. Kodwnbi (Valapad) 273. Valavilkadapuram 319. Karimpuram (Chullikadayul 27 4. Koll am 320. Kaipamangalaill - 86 - 321. Perinjanam 377. Neendakara 322. Attupuram (Vekkodu) 378. Thankasserry 323. Narakkal 379. Wadi 324. Malipuram 380. Moothakara 10°00'N 325. Moolamkuzhi-Soudi- 381. Quilon Lat. Manassery 382. Thopu-Kayakara 326. Kannamaly 383. Kakathopu 327. Maruvakad 384. Eravipuram-Thanni 328. Chellanam 385. Pozhikara (Pozhikukkam) 329. Palli thode 386. Kayakara 330. Manakodam 387. Mampally 331. Vettakal 388. Anjengo 332. Punnapra (South & North) 389. Thekkaumbhagham 333. Neerkunnam 390. Kapil 334. Valanjavazhi 391. Edava 335. Kakazham 392. Oday am 336. Chennavely 393. Thilekoor 337. Che thy 394. Vattoor 338. Mararikulam 395. Paruman 339. Pol lethal 396. Rathikal 340. Kattoor 397. Arivalam 341. Chettykad 398. Onnampalam (Nadunkandi) 342. Thumboli 399. Valiaveli 343. Kanjiramchira (Alleppey 400. Kochuveli North & South) 401. "Puthanthura 344. Kurusupallikal 402. Vettukad 345. Vadayakal 403. Kannanthura 346. Paravoor 404. Valiathoppu 347. Valiazhikal 405. Kochuthoppu 348. Azhikal 406. Valiathura 349. Sriakad 407. Cheriathura 350. Parayadavu 408. Bheemapally 351. Kuzhithura 409. Poonthura 352. Alappad 410. Panathura North 353. Cheriazhikal 411. Panathura South 354. Pandarathurathu 412. Poothura 355. Vellanapuram 413. Thazhampally 356. Panmana 414. Perumathura 357. Kottarakadavu 415. Puthukkurichi 358. Anchumanakal 416. Alillathura 359. Chillekal 417. Vettuthura 360. Parakadavu 418, Puthanthoppu 361. Thottukuzhl 419. st. Andrews 362. Ambalapuzha 420. Vettukad 363. Pazhaya Purakad 421. Kochuthura 364. Purakad 422. Koval am 365. Punthala 423. Vizhinjam 366. Thottapalli 424. Kottapuram 367. Thottapalli (South) 425. Adimalathura 368. Pallana 426, Puthiathura 369. Thrikunnapuzha 427. Chempakaramanthura 370. Kallikad 428. Erayarnmanthura 371. Vattacha 429. Pal lorn 372. Tharayilkadavu 430. Chinnamarthandanthura 9°00'N 373. Kozhithottam 431. Kochuthura Lat, 374. Karithura 432. Karimkulam 375. Puthenthura 433. Poovar 376. Parimanam 434, Parithiyoor 435. Kollamgode - 87 - Tamil Nadu State 436. Neerodi 469. Memamanakudy 437. Marthandanthurai 470. Keelamanakudy 438. Vallavilai 471. Kadiapatnam 439. Iraviputhenthurai 472, Muttom 440. Chinnathurai (I) 473. Koval am 441. Thoothoor 8°04.3'N 474. Cape Comorin 442. Poothurai Lat. 475. Chinnamuttom 443. Eramana Thurai 476. Leepuram 444. Thenga Patnam 477. Vattakottai 445. Raman Thurai 478. Kootapuly 446. Enayam Puthenthurai 479. Peurmanal 447. Enayam chinnathurai 480. Idinthakarai 448. Enayam/Ilanjan 481. Kuthankuli 449. Melamidalam 482. Uvary 450. Naduthurai 483. Kuttapanai 451. Chinnathurai (II) 484. Kooduthalai 452. Keelamidalam 485. Periathalai 453. Kurupannai 486. Manapad 454. Vaniyakudi 487. Alanthalai 455. Kodimunai 488. Amalinagar 456. Colachel 489. Veerapandia Patnam 457. Kottil Padi 490. Pinnakayal 458. Pudur 491. Pazhayakayal 459. Periavilai-Chinnavilai 492. Pazhayakayal North 460. Mela Thurai 493. Tuticorin South 461. Pillathope 494. Kaya! Pattinam 462. Alikkal 495. Tuticorin Harbour Point 463. Rajakkamangalam 496. Alangarathattu 464. Periakadu 497. Tuticorin North 465. Polikarai 498. Taruvaikulam 466. Kesava Puthanthurai 499. Patna Maruthur 467. Puthenthurai 500. Sippikulam 468. Pal lam 501. Vaipar - 89 - 17°:'1/F======;===;======,======~~:;:,T;".,~a==R~A~T~N7A~G~I:R;I==r======,======;======:;======11 """5 30 1 IJl 0 STR. 1 16° 30' - 90 - \ YI" \ .. \~ ' '\ ... \\ \ .., \ 30 I i \ ; \ \ \.": t ...... \ ······ .. U1 0 STR. 2 ..J ·, ·. ' "~7 l ...... "·... qs \. \ ! i ~ •...... \., 30' TAD RI 30' <> KUMTA 3 30' 13° <> MANGALORE ~ 74° 30' 75° 30' ------~---~------~- @ 315 " illlEPPEV 30' ! " TRI\11\NDRUM 30' 30' 77 ° 75° 30. KASARAGOD • 24-0 STR. 4 (bl '"' 30' -95 - 90\r====r=====;:;===;:;=::=;=====r===""""'"==:=;======r======;r=====-===p::======-r==~.~~~~~ 6 soo -... TUTlCORlN 0 /f90 30• // ...... ······ 44lf ..... ·· ...... "" (, "°"' .. ' ( ...... / ·············,· •••• , I/SE> CAPE ····;_/ f ~...... 1>7 i COMORlN ,...... / : ,! "•·.,·... , ,,,:~G / ...... / '·, .. \ ...... / l \ ...... ,...... 20,,., ...... ( i !' / STR. 5 / ·...... ·········· .... ····.\ ..... ······· ,••" ,.~~w\'•,,,_, , .. • •'' •• ••,,., ...... ··· 30' 77° 30' 78° - 97 - APPENDIX II ~99 - Table 7 .1. 3 Estimated total number of mechanized marine fishing boats seen on an elementary area unit basis (= 20 n.mi) Elementary Mechanized fishing bo~ts area At Str. State On the units Total landing Remarks water (S. No.) places TOTAL 3 216 1 970 1 246 i.----.;.. ____ ------~------1 Maharashtra ---276 ---245 --31 A part of the state 1.01 204 175 29 1.02 5 5 0 1.03 55 55 0 1.04 0 0 0 1.05 8 8 0 1.06 3 1 2 1.07 0 0 0 1.08 1 1 0 2 Goa ---320 --203 --117 2. 01 ) 2 2 .02 ) 2 0 2.03 14 9 5 2.04 231 135 96 2.05 50 45 5 2.06 23 12 11 Only for 7' time (,fire range) 3 Karnataka ---1 207 --575 --632 3.01 56 48 8 3.02 19 13 6 3.03 66 0 66 3.04 91 75 16 3.05 51 48 3 3.06 34 8 26 3.07 44 17 27 3.08 74 63 11 3.09 241 95 146 3.10 531 208 323 (Continued) - 100·- Elementary Mechanized fishing boats area At Str. State On the Remarks units Total landing water (S. No.) places 4 Ker ala -950 -673 -277 4.01 22 0 22 4.02 - - - Skipped 4.03 31 20 11 4.04 36 26 10 4.05 54 48 6 4,06 52 34 18 4.07 126 113 13 4.08 57 36 21 4.09 27 24 3 4.10 11 6 5 4.11 93 67 26 Fort Cochin included 4 .12 92 18 74 4 .13 117 107 10 4 .14 43 22 21 4 .15 45 45 0 Creek 4 .16 125 88 37 4 .1 7 0 0 0 Creek 4 .18 19 19 0 4 .19 0 0 0 A part of the state 5 Tamil Nadu -463 -274 -189 5.01 79 73 6 5.02 10 10 0 5.03 248 70 178 5.04 106 104 2 5.05 ' 20 17 3 Table 7.2.3 Estimated total number of marine non-mechanized fishing boats by kind on an elementary area unit basis (= 20 n.mi) At shoreline On the water Ele- Total and landing places mentary Canoes Canoes Canoes Str. State area Plank Cata- Remarks units Small Plank Cata- Small Plank Cata- Small Big mar ans and Big boats mar ans and Big boats mar ans (S.No.) and boats medium me di.um medium TOTAL 9 681 6 166 412 7 811 9 635 3 754 232 7 096 46 2 412 180 715 ,______------~------A part of the 1 Maharashtra --872 --42 --872 --42 state 1.01 187 13 187 13 1.02 24 0 24 0 1.03 61 3 61 3 1.04 2 0 2 0 1.05 42 0 42 0 1.06 167 13 167 13 1.07 208 13 208 13 1.08 181 0 181 0 -0 2 Goa 822 3 819 3 3 - 2.01) 2.02) 110 110 2.03 85 85 2.04 246 243 3 2.05 125 125 2.06 256 3 256 3 Only for 7'time (fire range) 3 Karnataka 2 271 384 2 256 17 15 367 3.01 208 40 208 40 3.02 397 27 397 27 3.03 198 3 198 3 3.04 226 24 217 17 9 7 3.05 362 67 356 6 67 3.06 263 52 263 52 3.07 68 35 68 35 3.08 36 15 36 15 3.09 278 37 278 37 3.10 235 84 235 84 ( ContiYtUe.d) At shoreline Ele- Total On the water mentary and landing places Canoes Canoes Canoes area Remarks Str. State units Small Plank Cata- Small Plank Cata- Small Plank Cata- and (S.No.) Big boats marans and Big boats mar ans and Big boats mar ans medium medium medium 4 Ker ala 5 634 5 737 2 471 5 606 3 737 2 195 28 2 000 276 4.01 91 104 91 61 43 4.02 - - - - - 4.03 103 375 103 68 307 4.04 148 200 148 98 102 4.05 244 199 240 160 4 39 4.06 497 414 491 328 6 86 4.07 706 571 706 470 101 4.08 567 381 567 378 3 4.09 1 020 680 1 020 680 - .... 4.10 301 329 301 201 128 0 4.11 344 675 326 217 18 458 N I 4.12 289 228 289 193 35 4.13 467 486 467 311 175 4.14 140 439 140 93 346 4 .15 60 40 60 40 0 4.16 328 365 224 328 219 224 146 4.17 ------4 .18 114 105 1 618 114 76 1 342 29 4.19 215 146 629 215 144 629 2 276 A part of the 5 Tamil Nadu --82 --412 --5 340 --82 --232 ---4 901 --180 --439 state 5.01 82 2 570 82 2 492 78 5.02 0 986 934 52 5.03 50 1 511 50 1 225 286 5.04 166 273 88 250 78 23 5.05 196 0 94 0 102 0 - 103 - REFERENCES Anon Agricultural Marketing in India: Preliminary guide to Indian fish, Fisheries, 1941 Methods of fishing and cµring. Mark.Ser. No.24 ~----~Handbook of Indian Fisheries, Ed. B.N. Chopra. 1951 ----~~25 years of Marine Fisheries Research, Handbook, CMFRI, Cochin 1972 ______Fisheries of Goa Daman and Diu, 1974. Govt. of Goa, Daman and Diu 1975 ______Kerala Fisheries, Facts and Figures. Govt. of Kerala 1977 ~----~Indian Fisheries, 1947-1977, Ed. E.G. Silas, issued 5th Session of IOFC, Cochin 1977 -----~General description of Marine Small Scale Fisheries, India (RAS/74/031) - 1977 Working Paper No.2, FAO/UNDP ~--,---~Twelth Quinquennial Livestock Census, 1977. Union Territory of Goa, Daman and 1978 Diu, Govt. of Goa, Daman and Diu Bazigos, G.P. Frame Surveys at Volta Lake, St.S/2, FIO-SF/GHA/10 (March) 1970 ------Frame Survey at Kainji Lake, St.S/1, FIO-SF/NIR/24 (January) 1971 ~----~Aerial Survey on the Lakes Malombe and Malawi, St.S/1, UNDP/SF/MLW/16 1972 (November) ~----~Coverage Check Survey of the Aerial Survey at Lake Kossou, St.S/2, UNDP/SF/ 1973 IVC/71/526 (April) ~----~ Statistical Analysis of the Results of the Aerial Survey at Lake Victoria, 1973 St.S/1, UNDP/SF/RAF/71/242 (August) ~----~The Design of Fisheries Statistical surveys - Inland Waters, FAO, Rome. 1974 FIPS/T133, 122 p. ------Populations in Non-random Order, Sampling Methods for Echo Surveys, Double 1976 Sampling, FAO, Rome. FIPS/T133,Suppl.1, 46 p. ~-~1_9~7_4_~ Applied Fishery Statistics, FAO, Rome. FIPS/T135, 164 p. - 104 - Bazigos, G.P. and F. Henderson Indicators of Movement Useful to Problems of Biomass 1975 Estimation of Pelagic Stocks. FAO, Rome. FIPS/T140, 18 p. Devidas Menon and K.C. George White bait resources of the South-West Coast of India. 1975 Sea Food Export Journal, 7(1) George, P,C. Experience and plans for nationalization of small-scale fisheries in India, 1973 J.Fish.Res.Bd.Can,, 30 George, P.C., B.T. Antony Raja and K.C. George Fishery Resources of the Indian Economic 1977 Zone. Souvenir - Integrated Fisheries Project, Cochin Granadoss, D.A.S. Whether Mechanization: Souvenir - Integrated Fisheries Project, Cochin 1977 Narayana Rao, K.V., M. Kumaran and J. Sankarasubramanian Resources of horse mackerel 1977 off the south-west coast of India. Sea Food Export Journal, 9(8) :9-26 Resources of Ribbon Fish and Cat Fish off the south-west coast of India. ------1977 Ibid. 9(11):9-25 Pradhan, L.B. Mackerel Fishery of Karwar, Ind.J.Fish., Vol.3, No.1 1956 Paul, B., Zener and Kjeld Rasmussen Report No.1 to the Govt.of India on Fishing Boats. 1958 FAO Report No.945 Prabhu, M.S., S. Ramamurthy and M.H. Dhukhed Fishery Resources of Ullal (Malgalore) in 1972 relation to certain Environmental Factors during 1963-67. J.Bom.Nat.His.Soc., Vol. 71 ( 1) Silas, E.G., S.K. Dharmaraja and K. Rangarajan Exploited Marine Fishery Resources of 1976 India. Bull., 27, CMFRI, Cochin Virabhadra Rao and K. Rao Major Exploited Marine Fishery Resources of India. Proc.Symp. 1973 Living Resources of the Seas around India. spl. publication, CMFRI, Cochin