Some Ecological and Socio-Economic Impacts of an Angling Competition in the Zambezi River, Namibia
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Some ecological and socio-economic impacts of an angling competition in the Zambezi River, Namibia Tor F. Næsje, Clinton J. Hay, Servatius Kapirika, Odd T. Sandlund and Eva B. Thorstad NINA•NIKU Project Report no. 014 Directorate Resource Management Norwegian Institute for Nature Research Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources Tungasletta 2 Private Bag 13 355 Windhoek N-7485 Trondheim Namibia Norway Some ecological and socio-economic impacts of an angling competition in the Zambezi River, Namibia Tor F. Næsje, Clinton J. Hay, Servatius Kapirika, Odd T. Sandlund and Eva B. Thorstad Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources, Namibia Foundation for Nature Research and Cultural Heritage Research, Norway nina•niku Project Report 014 Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA) and Næsje, T.F., Hay, C.J., Kapirika, S., Sandlund, O.T. & Thorstad, Norwegian Institute for Cultural Heritage Research E.B. 2001. Some ecological and socio-economic impacts of an (NIKU) issue the following publications in English: angling competition in the Zambezi River, Namibia. – NINA•NIKU Project Report 14: 1 – 31. NINA-NIKU Project Report Trondheim, March 2001 This series presents the results of both institutes' projects when the results are to be made available in English. The series may ISSN: 0807-3082 include reports on original research, literature reviews, analysis ISBN: 82-426-1210-2 of particular problems or subjects, etc. The number of copies printed will depend on demand. Management areas: Fish, sustainable utilisation In addition to this report series published in English, NINA-NIKU publish the following series in Norwegian: Copyright ©: NINA•NIKU Foundation for Nature Research and Cultural Heritage Research NINA Fagrapport (Scientific Report) NIKU Fagrapport (Scientific Report) The report can be quoted with references to the source. Editor(s): NINA Oppdragsmelding (Assignment Report) Tor F. Næsje NIKU Oppdragsmelding (Assignment Report) Norwegian Institute for Nature Research Design and layout: NINA Temahefte (Topic Report) Kari Sivertsen NIKU Temahefte (Topic Report) NINA•NIKUs Graphic Office Cover photo: NINA Faktaark (Fact Sheet) Eva B. Thorstad NIKU Faktaark (Fact Sheet) Prints: Norservice A/S Stock: 400 In addition, NINA's and NIKU's staff publish their research results in international scientific journals, symposia procee- Printed on environment paper dings, popular science journals, books, newspapers, and other relevant publications. NINA-NIKU also has a WWW home Address to contact: page: http://www.nina.no NINA•NIKU Tungasletta 2 NO-7485 Trondheim NORWAY Tel: +47 73 80 14 00 Fax +47 73 80 14 01. http://www.nina.no Accessibility: Open Contracting sponsor: Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources (MFMR) Project no.: 13530 Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (NORAD) Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA) Signature of responsible person: 2 nina•niku Project Report 014 Abstract additional fish were reported as caught and released during the competition. These 831 fish weighed a total of 1190 kg, Næsje, T.F., Hay, C.J., Kapirika, S., Sandlund, O.T. & and represented 13 species or species groups. The dominant Thorstad, E.B. 2001. Some ecological and socio-economic species in terms of number of fish were nembwe impacts of an angling competition in the Zambezi River, (Serranochromis robustus), sharptooth catfish (Clarias Namibia. – NINA•NIKU Project Report 14: 1 – 31. gariepinus) and spotted squeaker (Synodontis nigromacula- tus). In terms of weight, the dominant species were sharp- tooth catfish and nembwe. The largest catfish weighed 9.7 This report describes and discusses some ecological and kg, whereas the largest tigerfish (Hydrocynus vittatus) socio-economic aspects of the Nwanyi Millennium Open weighed 7.5 kg. The largest cichlid was a nembwe weighing Fishing Competition. The competition was organised by the 3.0 kg. The average catch per hour of allowed fishing time Nwanyi Angling Club, Katima Mulilo, 14 – 16 September was 0.88 kg, but the success of the anglers varied greatly. 2000. Maximum attainable number of points per day was 66. Only one angler attained an average score between 50 and 60 The competition was held at the Kalimbeza Fishing Camp points, whereas 28 % of the anglers reached an average of on a side channel to the Zambezi River approximately 30 km 0 - 10 points. downstream from Katima Mulilo, Namibia. In this section of the Zambezi, the river forms the border between Namibia The anglers’ catches are clearly size selective, catching larger and Zambia. September is in the low water period of the fish than the scientific survey catches from the same area river, with a mean water discharge of 236 m3/s in and season. Moreover four cichlid species caught by the September 2000. Only the main channel, the deeper side anglers were not recorded in the survey catches. An index of channels and backwaters were filled with water. relative importance of the different fish species (% IRI) dif- fered greatly between anglers’ catches and survey catches. A total of 40 anglers were registered as participants. Three Based on this index the only two species represented both of these anglers were women, and four were juniors (< 16 among the 13 most important species in the anglers’ and years old). This is approximately 50% of the number survey catches were the squeakers (Synodontis spp., ranked expected after the wide distribution of the invitation. The as 2. in the survey and 9. in anglers catches) and tigerfish interest this year was probably restricted by recent hostilities (ranked as 3. in both catches). in Western Caprivi, causing travellers from parts of Namibia to depend on military convoys to reach Eastern Caprivi. The total expense laid down by the participants to take part in the competition is calculated at approximately N$ 73,000 Thirtyfour of the 40 participants were from Namibia. (US$ 9,417), or N$ 1,825 (US$ 235) per angler. Out of this, Fourteen were locals from Katima Mulilo, 12 were from approximately 60% (N$ 43,000; US$ 5,547, or N$ 1,075; Windhoek, and four from Rundu. Six participants came US$ 139, per angler) were spent locally. The organisers’ from Zambia and Zimbabwe (Victoria Falls). budget for the event was approximately N$ 55,000 (US$ 7,097). The participants were organised in ten four-person teams. Nine of the teams used two boats with two anglers per boat, while the last team used one boat with four anglers. The boats used were relatively small speed boats with Key-words: Fish catch, sport fishery, CPUE, exploitation, engines between 25 and 2 x 60 hp. The fishing period selectivity, socio-economic returns, gear use, area use lasted from 0600 to 1800 hrs on 14 and 15 September, and from 0600 to 1600 hrs on 16 September. The river section available to anglers (148 km) was restricted to Namibian ter- Tor F. Næsje, Odd T. Sandlund & Eva B. Thorstad, ritory, which goes out to the deepest part of the main river. Norwegian Institute for Nature Research, Tungasletta 2, NO- The positions of the participants on the river were recorded 7485 Trondheim, Norway by means of GPS. The first two days the anglers used a river stretch of 84 km, including both upstream and downstream Clinton J. Hay & Servatius Kapirika, Ministry of Fisheries and areas from Kalimbeza. The third day, fishing was located to Marine Resources, Private Bag 2116, Mariental, Namibia a 24 km stretch approximately 30 km downstream from Kalimbeza. The competition rules were based on a system with bag lim- its for each species or species group. In addition weight points were given for individual fish above a certain mini- mum size. A total of 538 fish were brought ashore, and 293 3 nina•niku Project Report 014 Contents Abstract ...........................................................................................................3 Contents..........................................................................................................4 Preface.............................................................................................................5 1 Introduction.................................................................................................5 2 Study area....................................................................................................6 3 Material and methods ................................................................................8 3.1 The arrangement and participation ..........................................................8 3.2 Pre-competition communication with fishermen ......................................8 3.3 Sampling programme ..............................................................................9 3.4 MFMR fish survey and importance of species ...........................................9 4 Results........................................................................................................10 4.1 Anglers ..................................................................................................10 4.2 Equipment and river section used ..........................................................10 4.3 Weight and number of fish caught ........................................................10 4.4 Relative importance of species ...............................................................13 4.5 Sexual maturation of fish species ...........................................................15 4.7 Economic aspects of the competition.....................................................20 5 Discussion...................................................................................................23