Post on 29-Jul-2020
1
EVALUATION OF HEALTH AND MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
IN FISH FARMS IN ABUJA AREA, NIGERIA
BY
EMMANUEL OYIWONA SUNDAY
PG/MSc/08/49430
A DISSERTATION
SUBMITTED TO THE UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA, NSUKKA IN PARTIAL
FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE
OF MASTER OF SCIENCE (ANIMAL HEALTH AND PRODUCTION)
DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL HEALTH AND PRODUCTION
FACULTY OF VETERINARY MEDICINE
UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA, NSUKKA
MAY, 2014
2
DECLARATION
This is to certify that the work presented in this project is original and was done by me under the
supervision of Professor B.C.O Omeke. The references made to the works of researches were duly
acknowledged. The work embodied in the project is original and has not been submitted in part or
full for award of any diploma or degree of this or any other University.
3
4
CERTIFICATION
Dr Emmanuel Oyiwona Sunday a postgraduate student in the Department of Animal Health and
Production, University of Nigeria Nsukka with registration number PG/MSc/08/49430 has
satisfactorily completed the requirement for course and research work for the degree of Master of
Science in Animal Health and Production. The work embodied in this project is original and has
not been submitted in part or full for award of any diploma or degree of this or any other
University.
______________________ ____________________
Professor B.C.O Omeke Dr Pius A. Nnadi
(Supervisor) (Head of Department)
___________________________
Professor S.V.O. Shoyinka
(Dean, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine)
______________________
External Examiner
5
DEDICATION
This project is dedicated to my Lord God, who created me in His image and likeness, and has it in
His plans for me to obtain additional qualification at this time.
6
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First and foremost, I am eternally grateful to my supervisor, Professor Benjamin Chidozie
Okpanachi Omeke whose unrelenting encouragement, tolerance, criticisms and support made this
work possible. His personal efforts and sacrifices even at very odd times to go through the
manuscript page by page severally contributed to the success of this study.
My special thanks go to the Head of Department of Animal Health and Production, also my
lecturer and good friend, Dr Chuka Dom Ezema for his support and encouragement. I cherish
immensely his personal efforts and commitment to add value to my person.
I will also like to appreciate the good effort of another friend and my lecturer, Dr Pius
Ajanwachukwu Nnadi for his wonderful lectures on Feeds and Nutrition. He added a lot of
unquantifiable knowledge to my field experience and broadened further my horizon of
understanding.
I lack words to express my gratitude and appreciation to Professor Okwudiri Chukwunyere
Nwosu, Professor Shodeinde Vincent Olumuyiwa Shoyinka and Dr Chinedu Athanasius Eze,
whose comments, criticisms and recommendations helped to make this work better. I want to
particularly single out Professors Nwosu and Shoyinka for their very wonderful encouragement
and support. Professor Shoyinka’s personal effort in going through the questionnaire made all the
difference and in deed gladdened my heart. He is on record as the person who made the greatest
contribution to the success and practical use of the questionnaire on the field.
7
I am grateful to Joel Ogbole, the Chief Laboratory Technologist, fishery laboratory,
Department of Fishery and Aquaculture and also Moses Tyonenge, Chief Laboratory Technologist,
food microbiology laboratory, Department of Food Sciences and Technology both of Federal
University of Agriculture, Makurdi for the immeasurable assistance in analysis of the samples.
The field work will not have been possible without the support and cooperation of Mr
Jackson Obiong, a senior management staff of the Federal Department of Fishery Abuja and Mr.
Sunday a private fish farmer for spending valuable time with me visiting fish farms in the study
area.
The various contributions of Dr Moses Ogah of Faculty of Agriculture Nasarawa State
University Keffi, Alhaji Ahmed Madaki and AkiloTsoko both retired and present Directors
Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources Lafia,
Alhaji Sulieman Dada of the Department of Fisheries College of Agriculture Lafia and the last but
not the least Mrs Embu of Nasarawa Agricultural Development Programme Lafia are highly
appreciated.
My greatest gratitude goes to a very worthy friend and father, Professor emeritus Loveday
Onyemechi Wosu for stimulating my interest and encouraging me to under take a postgraduate
studies in aquaculture related field during our meeting in Lagos.
A very special thanks to another valuable good friend, Professor Maduka Boniface Anene
who in the first instance encouraged and supported me to come for a post graduate studies in this
great University whose wonderful motto ‘‘To Restore the Dignity of Man’’ 1 love so much.
For the development and completion of this study, I feel a deep sense of gratitude to my
wonderful wife Mrs Hellen Niya Sunday and children for their fervent prayers, patience,
understanding and support during my numerous travels, absence and engagements out side the
comfort of the home.
8
And finally, I thank God almighty and to Him I give the honour and glory, amen.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------i
DECLARATION--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ii
CERTIFICATION------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------iii
DEDICATION-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT----------------------------------------------------------------------------------v
TABLE OF CONTENTS----------------------------------------------------------------------------------vii
LIST OF TABLES ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS------------------------------------------------------------------------------xi
ABSTRACT-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------xiii
CHAPTER ONE
1.0 INTRODUCTION------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1
1.1 Justification of the Study---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2
1.2 Objectives----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3
CHAPTER TWO
2.0. LITERATURE REVIEW--------------------------------------------------------------------------4
2.1. Agriculture in Nigeria------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
2.2. Food and Population problems in Nigeria-------------------------------------------------------5
2.3. The Livestock Sub-Sector in Nigeria --------------------------------------------------------------5
2.4. Prospects in Livestock Production---------------------------------------------------------------6
2.5. Constraints to Livestock Production-------------------------------------------------------------7
9
2.5.1 Technical Factors-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------9
2.5.2 Socio-economic Factors---------------------------------------------------------------------------10
2.6. Overcoming Constraints--------------------------------------------------------------------------12
2.7. An Overview of Global Fish Production-------------------------------------------------------13
2.8. Fish Production Trend in Nigeria----------------------------------------------------------------14
2.9. Aquaculture in Nigeria----------------------------------------------------------------------------16
2.10. Constraints to Aquaculture Production---------------------------------------------------------18
2.11. Current Efforts in Fish Production- The Aquaculture Value Chain----------------------------22
2.12. Overcoming Constraints to Aquaculture-------------------------------------------------------23
2.13. Nutritional Qualities of Fish---------------------------------------------------------------------24
CHAPTER THREE
3.0 MATERIALS AND METHODS---------------------------------------------------------------- 26
3.1 Questionnaire Distribution for Data Collection---------------------------------------------- 26
3.2 Selection of Farms and The Study Area------------------------------------------------------ 26
3.3 Sample Collection--------------------------------------------------------------------------------26
3.4 Experimental-Procedures------------------------------------------------------------------------27
3.4.1. Experiment 1.Examination and Identification of Ecto and/or Endoparasites-------------27
3.4.2. Experiment2. Identification of Bacteria-----------------------------------------------------28
3.4.2.1. Total Viable Count of Bacteria---------------------------------------------------------------28
3.4.2.2. Identification of Coliform Bacteria----------------------------------------------------------29
3.4.2.3. Identification of Bacteria through Gram’s Stain-------------------------------------------29
3.4.3.4. Identification of Bacteria through IMVIC Tests-----------------------------------------------30
3.4.3.5. Identification of Bacteria through Catalase and Coagulase Tests------------------------31
10
3.5. Data Analysis---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------31
CHAPTER FOUR
4.0 RESULTS------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------32
4.1 Table. 1 Factors Affecting Location of Fish Farms in the Study Area-----------------------32
4.2. Table. 2 Personnel Structure of Fish Farms in the Study Area-------------------------------33
4.3 Table.3 Pond Types and Management Systems Practiced in the Study Area----------------35
4.4 Table.4 Feeds and Feeding Management in Fish Farms Located in the Study Area--------36
4.5: Table.5 Ecto and Endoparasites of Fish in Study Area----------------------------------------38
4.6: Table.6 Biochemical Tests for Isolation and Identification of Bacteria in Study Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------40
4.7: Table4.7 Types of Fish Pond and Disease Prevalence in Study Area-------------------------41
CHAPTER FIVE
5.0 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS----------------------------43
5.1 Discussion-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------43
5.2 Conclusion----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------46
5.3 Recommendations---------------------------------------------------------------------------------44
REFERENCES----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------48
APPENDIX--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------55
11
12
LIST OF TABLES
Table.1 Factors Affecting Location of Fish Farms in the Study Area
Table.2 Personnel Structure of Fish Farms in the Study Area
Table.3 Pond Types and Management Systems Practiced in the Study Area.
Table.4 Feeds and Feeding Management in Fish Farms Located in the Study Area.
Table.5 Ecto and Endoparasites of Fish in the Study Area
Table.6 Biochemical Tests for Isolation and Identification of Bacteria in the Study Area
Table.7 Types of Fish Pond and Disease Prevalence in the Study Area
13
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AOAC: Association of analytical chemists
ACVA: Aquaculture value chain
CBN: Central bank of Nigeria
CFU: Colony forming unit
DFRRI: Directorate of foods, roads and rural infrastructures
FAO: Food and Agricultural Organisation
FCT: Federal Capital Territory
FLD: Federal livestock department
FMA: Federal Ministry of Agriculture
FDF: Federal department of fisheries
GDP: Gross Domestic Product
GIS: Geographic information system
ICMSF: International commission on microbiological specification for food
ILCA: International livestock centre for Africa
ITC; International trade centre
IMVIC: Indole, methyle red, voges prokauer and citrate utilisation
KM: Kilometre
LGA: Local Government Area
MCA: MacConkey agar
MMT: Million metric monnes
NBS: National bureau of statistics
NDP: National development plan
NGO: Non Governmental Organisation
14
PH: Negative logarithm of the hydrogen ion concentration
PRB: Public research bureau
RIGA: Rural income generating activities
15
ABSTRACT
In view of high demand for fish product and consequent indiscriminate establishment of
fish farms in Abuja area, this study was carried out to evaluate factors affecting location, personnel
structure, management practices and health status of fish farms, marketing methods and constraints
to fish production in the area. Constraints and solutions to the practice were proffered. A
questionnaire was designed and face-validated by four experts. Cronbach alpha was used for the
reliability test and an overall reliability coefficient of 0.87% was obtained. This was used in
collecting information from farm workers and data were collected from on-going management
practices. Stratified random sampling technique was used to select 60 fish farms out of the total of
271fish farms, 5 each from the 12 Local Government Areas that made up the study area. They
included the 6 Area Councils of the FCT (Abuja, Gwagwalada, Kuje, Bwari, Kwali, and Abaji),
four Local Government Areas (LGAs) from Nasarawa state (Karu, Keffi, Kokona and Nasarawa)
and two LGAs from Niger state (Suleja and Tarfa). A total of 120 medium sized live fish
suspected to be sick were thus selected from 20 farms. Sixty (60) of them were used in the
examination and diagnosis for ecto and endoparasites (using the gills and intestines), while the
other half (60) were used to isolate and identify bacteria from their skin. All data collected were
subjected to descriptive statistics where necessary. Main factors identified affecting location of
fish farms in the study area were availability of land (68.3%), water (16.7%) and demand for fish
(11.7%). Other factors such as security and availability of feeds (3.3%) were negligible. Most
farm managers (88.3%) were male, majority (86.7%) were resident in the farms, while a small
percentage (3.3%) were trained fishery officers. On the whole, an average of 3 workers maintained
a farm at cost of N69,513.52 per worker. Structurally, 75% of ponds were of concrete types, 21.7%
were earthen, 3.3% tanks and 1.7% natural types. For water supply, 68.3% sourced water from
16
boreholes, 18.3% from streams, 10.0% from taps and 3.3% from spring. Main production system
was monoculture (66.7%), while Clairas species (71.1%) was the fish of choice. For farm security,
28.3% use mosquito nets, 26.7% use security men and 23.3% use dogs mainly. Majority of the
farms (83.3%) used commercial feeds, 11.7% formulated feeds without a feed mill, while 5% had
their own feed mills. Supplemental feeding was carried out in 78.3% of farms surveyed. Eighty
three percent of harvested fish were sold live. Most farms (78.3%) engaged in on-farm sale of
products, while 56.7% of farm owners sell their products. Major constraints militating against fish
production in farms were inadequate capital in 70% of farms, high cost of feeds in 50% and poor
skills in 21.7%. Out of the 20 farms evaluated for diseases, ectoparasites (leeches and lice) were
isolated and identified in 4, endoparasites (cestodes, nematodes and trematodes) in 8, while gram
negative and positive bacteria were identified in 12 farms but only gram positive bacterium was
isolated from the 13th
farm. In conclusion the author advocates for; more in-service training and
involvement of womenfolk in fish production business, sourcing of low feed ingredients and
formulation of local feeds in farms mills, provision of low interest credit facilities for farmers,
formulation of profit oriented marketing strategies and encouraging veterinarians and livestock
extension experts to get involved in health and extension services.
17
CHAPTER ONE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Food of animal origin provides high quality energy, protein and a variety of micro-nutrients
for man. Thus Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO, 2009) highlighted that about 16% of
man’s energy and 34% of protein constitute total contribution of animal food products of the world
food supplies. Meat is the major contributor, followed by milk, and then fish and eggs in that order
(McDonald et al., 2002). In particular, protein consumption by man varies from country to country
depending on the levels of development and availability of resources. McDonald et al., (2002)
further noted that about 55.5 grams of animal protein is consumed per/person/day in most
developed countries which is above the world recommended average of 28g. Protein consumption
rate reached 34g/person/day in Burundi, 11.4g in Ghana but only 8.0g in Nigeria against 35.0g
recommended for developing countries (FAO, 1992).
Evidently, FAO (2009) highlighted that Nigeria rates least among 47 countries evaluated
for its animal protein consumption in sub-Saharan Africa. This is attributable to uncontrolled
population growth, rapid urbanization and a widening gap between demand and supply of food for
her teeming population (Tewe et al., 1998). The population of Nigeria is estimated at about 167
million by the year 2011 and it has been rationalized that fish farming could be a less expensive
means of providing animal protein for this population.
Dada et al., (2004) stated that many factors are acting as impediments to the supply of
animal protein food in Nigeria. These include prevalence of diseases, fluctuating pasture quality
and quantity, limited water availability, poor quality breeding stock and religious discrimination.
Poultry which flourished in the 70s in Nigeria has almost been wiped out by the frequent outbreak
of diseases, lack of improved stocks and high cost of poultry feeds.
18
Fish therefore, seems to be the only animal protein source which has no serious socio-
cultural constraints to its production and in-take. Indeed 40% of animal protein food consumed in
Nigeria comes from fish (FMA, 1981). Aihonsu et al., (2006) had reported that traditionally, fish
on the average generally appear cheaper than meat. Thus fish is considered a more effective source
of animal protein in human diet to supplement proteins from plant source. Protein from fish is
known to contribute about 8.4 percent of total protein derived from ingested foods in Nigerian
diets. The protein contents of fish and fish products are higher than those of other similar food
items such as meat and eggs.
The authors also acknowledged that fish food has a high nutrient profile superior to all
terrestrial meats. Eyo (2001) had earlier argued that fish meat is less tough and more digestible
when compared with other meat types.
There is no doubt that demand for fish in Nigeria is at very high rise against the short
supply. In view of high rising human population and demand for scare but costly animal protein
foods in Abuja area, fish farming is considered an appropriate means for bridging the gap between
high demand and supply. Consequently, new and less experienced farmers are lured into fish farming in
the area when they may not have adequate knowledge of principles and management skills needed to
sustain high productivity and efficient marketing of the product. One of the approaches for promoting
satisfactory fish farming in the zone is to evaluate critical factors affecting production and methods needed
to overcome arising constraints.
1.1 Justification
There is fast growing human population within Abuja and the nearby states, with high
demand for scarce and costly animal protein food. Fish food has all the potential for meeting this
demand. Hitherto, there was no record of the dynamics of these emerging fish farms. This is
19
inspite of the dire need for such information which will guide fish farmers to attain optimum
productivity. This information lacuna is militating against proper planning to achieve sufficient
and affordable animal source food within the study area, thus the need for this study.
1.2. Objectives
The specific objectives of the study were;
i. to evaluate the factors affecting location, personnel structure, management practices, feeds
and feeding, health status of fish,
ii. to assess the marketing strategies being applied, and
iii. to determine the constraints of fish production in the study area.
20
CHAPTER TWO
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Agriculture in Nigeria
At independence in 1960, agriculture accounted for 84.3% of all Nigerian export earnings,
while petroleum products accounted for only 2.7%. By 1970, the contribution of agriculture fell to
31.8%, while that of crude oil rose to 58.1% and by 1980, crude oil accounted for 96% of all the
country’s export earnings. Although agriculture remains Nigeria’s leading non-petroleum sector,
employing more than 60% of the countries active population, it is currently unable to meet the
food demands and needs of the country. It is no gain saying therefore when Tewe et al., 1998
stated that hunger and malnutrition are perhaps the greatest problems facing this country today.
Tewe further observed that with all the agricultural institutions turning out hundreds of trainees
every year and the advances in technology which enables increase in productivity, coupled with
the huge financial resources allocated to agriculture in each succeeding yearly budgets since
independence, there is still not enough food for a vast majority of Nigerians. The reason for this
predicament is the tragic neglect of our Agriculture which for decades before the discovery of oil
had sustained the country’s economy. Yearly earnings from oil resources were ostensibly used for
developing prestige projects instead of developing the capacity of our rural population to feed the
nation and generate sufficient incomes for themselves.
This situation can be improved on if Government can plough back adequate fraction of the
country’s huge financial resources for sustaining efficient food and agricultural production. This
would invariably make food easily available and affordable to the generality of Nigerians.
21
2.2 Food and Population Problem in Nigeria
Nigeria presently accounts for appropriately 15% of Africa’s population with the
population reported to have increased from 96.15 million in 1990 to 111.72 million in 1995
(FAO,1995). The National Population Commission had also projected that Nigerian population
will hit 178 million by 2015, at the present growth rate of 2.83% per annum. Accordingly,
Winrock (1992) stated that Nigeria will have projected urbanization rates of 36.3% by 2000,
43.5% in 2010 and 54.2% by 2025. This rapidly growing population coupled with increasing
urbanization rates and increase in personal incomes of most urban dwellers will fuel an increase in
demand for food, especially food of animal origin (Tewe, et al., 1998)
2.3 The Livestock Sub-Sector in Nigeria
Livestock plays an important role in the national economy. Historically, it has consistently
contributed between 5-6% of the National Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and between 15-20% of
the total agricultural GDP over the years (FMA, 1981). The livestock industry in Nigeria is
estimated to have GDP value in excess of N5.82 billion as at December, 1997. At present the
agricultural sector contributes 40% of the GDP to the national economy, with livestock accounting
for 10% and fish 4% (FMA, 2009).
The Nigerian livestock industry represents an important asset with very great economic,
social and nutritional implication for the country. For, apart from providing a means of livelihood
to a significant portion of the population, the sub-sector together with the fishery sub-sector,
constitute the country’s main hope for bridging the yawning gap between demand and supply of
animal source food (Tewe et al., 1998). The sub-sector employs about two-thirds of the total
labour force and provides livelihood for about 90% of the country’s rural population (FMA, 2008).
It also provides 80% of the meat requirement of the country (JCVA, 2011). MacDonald et al.,
22
(2002) acknowledged that livestock products provide essential micronutrients that are not easily
derivable from plant-based foods. It is the source of high quality proteins, provided usually in the
form of meat, milk and eggs (Olowu, 2008).
In many developing countries including Nigeria, livestock keeping is a multifunctional
activity as they provide employment to the farmer and family members (Sansoucy,1995); as a store
of wealth (CAST,2001); as a form of insurance (Fafchamps and Gavian,1997) and contributes to
gender equality through generating income opportunities for women amongst others. The keeping
of livestock depends on the intended scale of output, farmers’ convenience, financial base and
available physical resources, such as land and pasture (Smith, 2009). It is the most important
agricultural practice for the production of food and non-food materials to man.
2.4 Prospects in Livestock Production
The potential sources of animal protein in diet include cattle, sheep, goats, pigs, donkeys,
horses, poultry, fish and game (Ayinde and Aromolaran, 1998; Smith, 2009). FAO (1995) put the
livestock population in Nigerian as 17.8 million cattle, 14 million sheep, 24.5 million goats, 6.9
million pigs, and 124 million poultry. By implication, Nigeria has about 9.05% of the cattle
population in Africa, 6.61% of the sheep, 14% of the goats, 32% of the pigs and 11.61% of the
poultry. Nigeria also has 68 million hectares of arable land, 267.7 billion cubic metres of surface
water, 57.9 bcm of underground water, and 3.14 million hectares of irrigable land in addition to
abundant rainfall of between 300 mm to about 4000 mm per annum. All these, coupled with
diverse and rich vegetation according to FMA (2008) are capable of supporting a heavy livestock
population. Given these potentials therefore, Nigerians should not have problem with availability
of animal protein.
23
However, Tewe et al., (1998) noted that productivity for livestock products. The
productivity capacity for the national herd is also very low and therefore the demand for meat,
dairy and poultry outstrips the supply. Okah et al., (2009) observed that the shortage of animal
protein food in Nigeria is a serious problem and had reached a crisis level, its consumption far
below the minimum requirement of 35.0g recommended by the FAO (Atsu, 2002).
2.5 Constraints to Livestock Production in Nigeria
In an FAO database on Rural Income Generating Activities (RIGA) conducted in 14
sampled countries, it was discovered that people who keep livestock face different challenges;
which include poor access to markets and technical information; periodic drought and diseases,
competing resource uses; policies that favour larger scale producers and weak institutions.
Tewe et al., (1998) had earlier noted that despite the strategic role livestock plays in
accelerating national economic growth in Nigeria; the subsector has never received any
prominence in budgetary allocation. A review of successive National Development Plans since
Independence in 1960 showed that whereas other sectors have continued to receive substantial
allocations, agriculture has always been given less, and within agriculture, the livestock sub-sector
has always received the smallest allocations. In the 2nd
National Development Plan (1970-74), out
of a total budget of N2.05 billion, agriculture received only N265.3 million or 12.94% and out of
this, livestock received only N23.3million or approximately 1.14% of the overall allocation.
During the 3rd
NDP (1975-1980) agriculture was allocated N2.2 billion (6.7%) of planned
expenses, livestock received N344 million (15.6%) of total planned expenditure. It could therefore
be noted that over the years, livestock has consistently been given very little priority.
Tewe et al., (1998) further observed that the low productivity from livestock was generally
due to prevailing production systems in which the animals are reared. The varieties of production
24
systems in Nigeria reflect an adaptation of livestock producers to the prevailing ecological
conditions, national policies and available resources. These production systems are grouped into
two broad types; the traditional system and the improved system. The traditional production
system involved the nomadic pastoral cattle, sheep, goat production to the backyard indigenous
poultry and some extent piggery. This is associated with most households in rural areas of Nigeria
and is characterized by minimum inputs in terms of feeding, health care, breeding and
management; all of which contribute to low level of productivity. Smith (2009) observed that in
this system, animals are exposed to various natural hazards, and are therefore poorly productive.
The thousands of producers involved in the traditional production system accounts for more than
80% of domestic production of meat, milk and eggs in Nigeria.
The improved system represents the intensive and semi-intensive systems of animal
production which have been successfully used for attaining the high levels of productivity in the
livestock industries of the agriculturally developed countries. The systems have only been adopted
in urban and peri-urban areas of Nigeria in response to the good market opportunities. These
systems mark the point of commercial intervention and the application of improved technology.
However, most of the existing livestock units managed under the improved system lacked the
needed public sector catalytic action to promote the much needed higher livestock production. The
improved systems are characterized by their dependence on imported inputs (stock, concentrate
feed, drugs, equipment etc) which implied that production cost are to some extent, very much
influenced by international market forces. Even though productivity from the improved systems
are several times higher than that of the traditional systems, the numbers of producers are not yet
there in large numbers as to make a dramatic impact on the availability of livestock products to the
generality of the consuming public in Nigeria.
25
Nine factors have been identified as limiting increased productivity of animals in the
tropics including; low livestock numbers, unexplored genetic potentials, unfavourable climatic
conditions, high prevalence of diseases, low reproductive rates, unimproved systems of husbandry,
inadequate numbers of suitably trained personnel at all levels in the field of livestock industry,
poor processing, preservation, storage, distribution and marketing of animal products (ISAPT,
1973).
In a related development a study conducted by a team of consultants from both the World
Bank and Nigerian in 1981 further confirmed the aforementioned constraints and identified many
others as limiting factors to efficient and suitable animal production. These factors were grouped
into two; technical or biological Factors and socio-Economic and institutional Factors (ILCA,
1987).
2.5.1 Technical/Biological Factors
According to ILAC (1987), these factors include animal production inputs with particular
reference to their quantity, quality and timely delivery; and include such crucial inputs like
improved breeding stock, feed, diseases and animal health care, management and water.
2.5.1. i. Improved breeding stock: Generally there is scarcity of improved breeding stock and with
the exception of a few commercial farms; there are a few well maintained highly productive stock
in Nigeria. Most producers to a great extent still rely on imported stock of day old chicks, and the
production of improved weaner pigs is still generally low.
2.5.1. ii. Feeds and nutrition: Supply of feeds both in quantity and quality is inadequate resulting
into low state of nutrition and productivity well below the potential of improved stock.
26
2.5.1. iii. Diseases and animal health Care: Poor animal health care resulting from inadequate
disease control and health care management remain one of the most important constraints to
livestock production in Nigeria. In spite of the technological advances in animal health care and
development of more effective drugs for disease prevention and control, epidemic and endemic
diseases of livestock remain widespread.
2.5.1. iv. Management: There is comparative scarcity of well-trained professionals and technical
man power to operate livestock enterprises, which has resulted in poor performance of many
commercial livestock projects. The general tendency has been for poultry and piggery operations
to employ cheap untrained attendants, resulting in inefficiency, mismanagement and unprofitable
operations.
2.5.1. v. Water supplies: Inadequate water supplies have become one of the most limiting
constraints in recent years, as the erratic rainfall pattern adversely affected water supplies for
livestock operations.
2.5.2 Socio-Economic or Institutional Factors
ILCA, (1987) further stated that the Socio-Economic or Institutional Factors include
Government agricultural policies, access to credit facilities, land tenure system, marketing and
infrastructures, trained manpower and inadequate research support.
2.5.2. i. Government agricultural policies: National agricultural policies play a critical role in
livestock development. They affect the economic environment directly there by affecting
production, marketing, consumption and external trade in livestock products. Poorly formulated
policies on commodity pricing, subsidies and products imports have often been a disincentive to
the local livestock industry in Nigeria.
27
2.5.2. ii. Access to credit facilities: There is generally lack of adequate credit facilities to cover the
comparatively high cost of establishing livestock industries to potential producers that want to
venture into the industry. In some cases where credit facilities are available, the period of
moratorium is often too short and credit provided often too below the need, thus, leading to
insolvency and project failure.
2.5.2. iii. Land tenure system: The system as currently embodied in the land Use Decree is aimed
at encouraging agricultural development with minimum hindrance. Experience has however shown
that there are multifarious problems which often discourage potential investors from committing
their funds in long-term productions due to the uncertainties over land ownership.
2.5.2. iv. Marketing and infrastructures: Marketing as a constraint arises mostly because of the
inadequate provision for planned production. Lack of good roads to facilitate quick transportation
of livestock products to consumers, inadequate electricity and portable water for processing (milk)
and preservation (dairy products) have often frustrated milk collection schemes and the
distribution of the available domestic supplies.
2.5.2. v. Trained Manpower: There is generally a shortage of trained manpower for livestock
development in Nigeria. There are shortages of range and pasture management specialists,
Veterinarians, Animal scientists, Artificial insemination technicians, and Livestock extensions
workers. There is a dearth of technicians with the technical know-how appropriate to small holder
production development and the managerial capacity to run such operations. There is also an
inadequate supply of qualified and experienced manpower to conduct problem-solving research,
analyzing policies and implement development.
2.5.2. vi. Inadequate research support: It is common knowledge that the high level of productivity
of livestock in the industrialized countries was achieved through public and private sector
28
investments in research and development (R&D). An estimated equivalent of 3-5% of the annual
gross value of agricultural production in Europe and North America are invested annually.
Currently, there is a low level investment in R&D in the livestock industry in Nigeria (Tewe et al
1998).
2.6 Overcoming Constraints to Livestock Production
Constraints to sustainable livestock production in Nigeria created difficult situation which
made livestock products expensive in relation to current income levels. The more important
constraints which have proved intractable are the socio-economic constraints (Tewe et al, 1998).
In a World Food Summit in 1996 during which all the strengths, weaknesses and failures of
past livestock programmes in Nigeria were analyzed, a recommendation was made for the
establishment of a National Food Security programme for Nigeria. The programme which was to
reposition Nigerian Agriculture had a strong provision for a livestock component and had the
primary objective of closing the supply-demand gap in livestock production and related products
within a period of 4 years (2008-2011). The intervention attracted and recruited new farmers into
the livestock and fishery business and the strategy recognized the fact that existing farmers were
ageing, while many have been frustrated out of livestock business by high incidence of diseases
and rising cost of inputs. It comprised of three components namely; large, medium and small
scales livestock and fish farming. Large scale farming involved land acquisition, preparation and
the development of ranch facilities. Government provided fiscal incentives like tax free credit
scheme on agriculture inputs and collaborated with commercial banks that provided N200 billion
as seed fund for lending to commercial farmers to fund farm set up on interest free basis. The
various states and local governments participated by providing land and 15 % equity to the cost of
set up of the farms. The programme provided for 12 large farms across the country with 2 from
29
each geo- political zone. It set a production target for the major species of livestock; 50% for
poultry, 30% for goats, 30% for sheep, 25% for cattle, 25% for pigs and 200 % for fish from the
present livestock population. The strategy also recognized the importance of micro-livestock
(snails, grass cutters and rabbits) in ensuring animal protein security.
A second approach to overcoming constraints would be by investing in research, as this can
enhance productivity by finding solutions to bio-technical bottlenecks. Biotechnology is providing
opportunities to overcome constraints; some of the available technology may not be directly
appropriate to our environment but they can be adapted through research to suit the local problem
situation. The development of appropriate feeding systems, under different agro-ecological
conditions, the development of health packages including the increasing prospects of tick control
through vaccination are all exciting outputs of investments in research.
2.7 Overview of Global Fish Production
Aquaculture is one of the fastest growing food production sectors in the world with an
annual growth rate of 10% since the mid-1980s and a farm gate value of 70.3 billion US dollars in
2004 (ACVC,2012). Presently, 22% of global fish production comes from aquaculture and global
production of aquatic products was valued approximately 93.2 million metric tonnes (mmt) in
1997, of which capture fisheries supplied 64.5 million metric tonnes and aquaculture 28.6 million
metric tonnes (Delgado,2003). Official statistics indicated that 75% of the growth in fish
production from 1985-1997 came from China for both capture fish food and aquaculture. By 1997,
China’s shares in capture fish food and aquaculture had grown to 68% and 21% respectively
making it the single largest producer in both categories in the world.
Delgado et al., (2003) further stated that the overall fish food production in the past 30
years steadily shifted away from developed countries to developing countries, where production
30
has been growing at 13.3% per year since 1985 as against 2.7% for developed countries within the
same period. Of the three major categories of production environment listed (FAO, 2002a)
aquaculture (58%) accounts for the majority of global production in 1999, followed by mariculture
(36%) and brackish water (6%).
Aquaculture provides foreign exchange to many developing countries with trade in culture
fish products accounting for 22% and 20 billion US dollars per year in the late 1990s of the world
trade in fish (FAO, 2002a). The value of fisheries exports from developing countries exceeded that
from meats, dairy, cereals, vegetables, fruits, sugar, coffee, tobacco and oilseeds in 1997
(International Trade Centre, 2002).
Adikwu (1999) noted that with the growing realization on the amount of fish that could be
harvested from the world’s seas and fresh water system, coupled with the growing human
population, the means to explore other means of complementing fish production has become
imperative.
2.8 Fish Production Trend in Nigeria
The oldest way of fish production all over the world is the utilization of existing water
bodies like the seas, oceans, lakes, reservoirs, rivers, streams, floodplains and drains amongst
others (Akegbejo,1997). These natural waters and their environment constitute the different
varieties of wetlands which forms the bulk of the artisanal grounds for fishing in Nigeria.
Welcome (1976) identified two major floodplains (Niger and Benue) and estimated the total
flooded areas as 660,000 and 439,000 hectares respectively and Ita et al., (1985) gave the total
surface area of approximately 12.5 million hectares for the existing water bodies.
Nigerian fish supplies come from four major sources namely; Importation, Inland, estuaries
and costal artisanal fishery, industrial trawl fishery and aquaculture. The artisanal fishing is largely
31
labour intensive and of low productivity. It covers coastal canoe fishery, brackish water canoe
fishery, fresh water fishing and aquaculture (Aihonsu et al., 2006). By far, the bulk of Nigeria fish
production is contributed by this sector. A lot of fish also come from estuarine and coastal
fisheries; dominated by small scale artisanal operators accounting for between 180-200,000 tonnes
of fish yearly. These fishermen use both motorized and un-motorized canoes, covering about 800
km of maritime zone and producing about 1tonne of fish per operator per annum.
The inland fisheries cover the lakes and the reservoirs and are also dominated by artisanal
fishermen who use both motorized and un-motorized canoes. The Kainji Lake basin alone
produces about 60% (30,000) tonnes of fish mostly the Nile perch, tilapias, cat fish and tiger fish
while lake Chad produces about 6,000 to 10,000 tonnes annually (GTZ reports)
The Industrial fishery consists of the commercial trawlers which trawl for fish and shrimps
within the country’s continental shore, while the distant fishery comprises the imports. The fleet is
currently over 300 vessels and produces about 30,000 tonnes of fish and 7,000 tonnes of shrimps
annually.
Fisheries occupy a very unique position in the Nigerian economy, recording the fastest
growth rate in agriculture to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The sub-sector’s contribution to
GDP at 2001 current factor cost rose from N76.76 billion to N162.61 billion in 2005 (CBN, Report
2005). Adegoke (2009 ) stated that Nigeria has the resource capacity to produce 2.4 million metric
tonnes of fish per year, yet estimated production is about 0.7 million metric tonnes, while
estimated demand is put at about 1.5 million metric tonnes as at 2007. The short fall is made up
from fish import at a cost of almost 500 million US dollars per year. Aihonsu et al., (2006) had
confirmed this when he acknowledged that Nigeria’s numerous water bodies are presently not been
adequately utilized for fish production.
32
Nigeria freshwater and coastal fisheries traditionally provide an important source of food
for many millions of people (Okorie, 2003). In the last few decades human populations have been
growing at a high rate, and so have the demand for fish. There have been profound demographic
shift and changing food habits, with more and more people moving to urban areas and acquiring
enlightened appetites for protein foods. Aihonsu et al., (2006) observed that based on projected
population levels of 150.3 million in 2010 and 203.4 in 2025 (PRB, 2003) the demand for fish in
Nigeria will continue to rise.
Despite the long coastline and the extensive network of inland rivers, the outputs from
inland capture fisheries are not likely to rise further in Nigeria. This is because the fisheries
resources are being degraded by unsustainable fishing practices and environmental pollution.
Records in the last few decades showed a marked decline in the per capita availability of fish
(Dugan, 2003).
According to Okorie (2003) there would have been little to worry if other sources of
protein supply were steady, or if Nigerian population was not growing at an alarming 2.8 percent
(PRB, 2003) or if fish production itself was not threatened by environmental constraints. Virtually
all our traditional protein sources are under severe pressure and even our aquatic protein sources
are also threatened by environmental degradation, notably river siltation, inland oil population in
the Niger Delta region, and over fishing in many fisheries. The development of culture fisheries to
supplement the capture fisheries in Nigeria therefore becomes a matter of strategic imperative.
2.9 Aquaculture in Nigeria
The history of fish culture dated back to the middle ages fish culture in Europe, when fish
culture was practiced in Monasteries (Agbede and Olufemi,1999). Some centuries ago the Chinese
and Indo- Pacific regions practiced the art of fish culture, in North America fish culture developed
33
at the beginning of this century while in Africa the practice is far more recent. Stickney (1979)
defines aquaculture as the rearing of aquatic organisms under controlled or semi-controlled
conditions, while Agbede and Olufemi (1999) defined it as the growing of fish in ponds from
which they cannot escape; thus allowing for feeding, breeding, growing and harvesting in a well
organized manner. The various management practices in aquaculture encompasses meeting all
requirements for stocking with the desired fish species, care and maintenance of the water quality
and quantity, procedural repairs of the holding facility (earthen pond, caged or concrete tank,
feeding of the fish with the desired diets or available feeds, and harvesting when they reach table
size using appropriate fishing gears (Akegbejo, 1997).
A study conducted by Kapetsky (1995) using geographical information system (GIS) to
identify areas suitable for water fish farming in ponds in Africa showed that Nigeria, out of the 40
countries studied was 3rd
best in terms of available land for subsistence fish farming and was 2nd
best with regards to potentials for commercial fish farming. Although aquaculture production in
Africa generally is still insignificant at the global level and accounts for only about 0.9% (407,571
metric tonnes) of the total global aquaculture production (FAO, 2003), there is evidence of some
sustained growth in aquaculture in countries like Ivory Coast, Egypt, Ghana, Malawi, Zambia and
Nigeria (Jamu and Ayinla, 2003). The FAO (1984a) ranked Nigeria aquaculture production as
second in Africa and when combined with Egypt, Nigeria accounts for about 84% of total
aquaculture production in the continent.
Akegbejo (1997) stated that in Nigeria fish production in ponds was the beginning of man’s
effort to culture his desired fish species in a controlled environment. Akegbejo further stated that
the first modern fish farm was first introduced into Nigeria by Maclaren in 1941. He sited a fish
farm in Ikoyi Lagos between 1949 and 1953, and also established a modern fish farm in Panyam,
near Jos in Plateau State. This opened the gateway for modern fish farming in other states of the
34
country. Being tropical Nigeria has virtually uninterrupted year round environmental conditions
for uninterrupted growth of fish. Water temperatures are optimum, annual rainfall is adequate to
optimum in more than 96% of the land areas, and water availability is optimum to suitable in more
than 95% of the land areas (FAO, 1994). Other environmental conditions like slope of land and
soil textures are optimum to suitable in virtually all parts of Nigeria. The socio-economic aspects
of aquaculture, especially in terms of availability of suitable inputs and local market for the
products are also optimum all over the country (FAO, 1994). In almost parts of Nigeria, the
potentials for two good crops per year with good growth are high. About 600,000 km2 and
400,000 km2 of potential land for subsistence and commercial fish farming respectively have been
identified in Nigeria, and lack of suitable sites is not a constraint to aquaculture development in
Nigeria (FAO, 1984a b; 1994). Despite this status however, the potential for fish production from
aquaculture in Nigeria is nowhere near optimum when compared with the positive natural
endowments of Nigeria for greater aquacultural production.
2.10 Constraints to Aquaculture Development
The complexity of factors that influence aquaculture development viz. site selection, socio-
economic, legal, political, physico-chemical, and biological considerations must be addressed to
ensure sustainable and autonomous aquaculture development in Nigeria (Adikwu, 1999). A close
examination of these factors show that aquaculture is intrinsically a multi-disciplinary endeavor,
therefore adequately trained personnel with broad multi-disciplinary orientation that are capable of
identifying and addressing deficiencies in aquaculture production project is vital for aquaculture
development. The shortage of such well trained staff is one of the major constraints to aquaculture
development in most countries, including Nigeria (Kutty, 1985).
35
2.10.1. Unavailability of fish feed: Absence of fully dedicated fish feed industries is a major
constraint to aquaculture development. Feed ingredients for fish feed formulation often compete
with human nutrition and other animal husbandry practices, and they are sourced haphazardly
rather than through phased and systematic programming. Thus fish feeds are neither affordable nor
cost-effective and quality cannot be guaranteed as consistently as is necessary in commercial fish
farming.
Since the costs of fish feed represent a significant proportion of fish farming and other
aquaculture operations, accounting for between 60-75% of operating costs (FAO, 1984a), the
economics of aquaculture in Nigeria and indeed in most developing countries is sensitive to
variability in cost of ingredients used in feed formulations. The wastes and by-products of agro-
allied industrial activities have been identified as the most feasible option in solving the feed
problem in aquaculture. Adikwu and Yusuf (1997), Haruna and Adikwu (in press), Adikwu (in
press), Fagbenro (1988) and many others have demonstrated the feasibility of the utilization of
palm kernel, cotton seed cake, soya-bean cake, sorghum bran, groundnut leaf, and a cocktail of
various agro and agro-allied industrial wastes and by-products in the formulation of complete feeds
for tilapia, orechromis niloticus and catfish, and Clarias gariepinus. However, the main drawbacks
of the use of these wastes is their generally low protein and high fibre content which makes it
difficult to rely solely on them as fish feed ingredients to the exclusion of fish and other meat
proteins in the formulation of compete fish feed rations.
Therefore, despite the fact that it may look ethically wrong to feed fish with fish, in order to
produce fish for human consumption, it is still the feasible option available to the formulator of
fish rations, and some input of fish meal must still go in to the formulation of complete rations for
fish in aquaculture production.
36
2.10.2. Insufficient supply of fish seeds: Hatcheries and nurseries could be considered to be the
bedrock on which true aquaculture is built. They guarantee the supply and maintenance of brood
stock, their maturation and spawning, and even supply of food for the newly hatched larvae. In
realization of these pivotal roles of hatcheries in aquaculture development, various fish seed
multiplication projects were initiated at various times and places in Nigeria.
Government invested significant funds over the years in fish farm infrastructure, which led
to the establishment of some 59 federal and state fish farms and hatcheries across the country. Also
the defunct Directorate for Food, Roads, and Rural Infrastructure (DFRRI) commissioned various
hatchery development projects in many states in Nigeria. Though laudable at conception, these
projects were either stillborn or grossly under-utilized, and hence failed to provide the much
needed fish seeds for aquaculture intensification. Thus, reliance on the harvesting of fry from the
wild and uncontrolled or partly controlled breeding programme provide the bulk of fish seed for
on-growing in most culture facilities in Nigeria. This practice does not permit for reliability in
stock quality and quantity and cannot form the basis for fish culture in Nigeria.
2.10.3. Inadequate research: The absence of additional research efforts in endemic fish and other
aquatic organisms, especially in the areas of diseases, genetics, and feeds (Huisman and Machiels,
1986) militate against fish farming development in Nigeria.
2.10.4. Diseases of fish: Oresungu et al., (2006) stated that increased yields from the various
culture systems in Nigeria are limited by the incidence of fish diseases. In homestead fish tanks,
Anyanwu (1983) observed that one major problem encountered in the culture of C.gariepinus was
the incidence of ‘‘Broken Skull Disease’’ and ‘‘Infectious Abdominal Dropsy’’. These diseases
resulted in fish mortalities in the culture system. The practice of polyculture and intensification of
37
production system is also thought to spread bacteria diseases especially in out-door concrete
ponds.
The study of the bacterial micro flora of the gills and kidneys of H. bidosarlis showed the
presence of the gram positive bacteria of the genera Pseudomonas, Klebsiella and Escherichia
(Ibiwoye et al., 1990). Ecto-parasites of catfish can cause 100% mortality especially in fingerlings
and juveniles. Oladosu et al., (1992) identified parasites from skin and gills of some catfishes. In
the fadama region of Bida area of Niger State, Ibiwoye and Agbontale (1990) reported helminthes
parasites (nematodes larve) which constituted one of the major problems confronting farmers in
the area.
According to Otitolaiye (1999) the lack of efficient harvesting mechanism is also a big
constraint. The current methods whereby individual fish is trapped or pond is drained and
harvesting done with plastic bowls are wasteful, strenuous and inefficient. Durborow ((2000)
advocated the use of Trap Seining Equipment as the most efficient method to harvest a predictable
large volume of fish with little effort.
Increasing yield from the various culture systems practiced in Nigeria today could be
limited by the incidence of fish diseases. This area of aquaculture has not been as well studied as
management systems and nutrition of catfish.
2.10.5. Processing constraint: Preservation is carried out for the purpose of extending the shelf life
of fish. In commercial sea fishing, preservation equipment like ice plants, air blast freezers, and
vertical plant freezers are installed in fishing trawlers to keep fish fresh. In the canoe fishery,
relevant preservation equipment are provided on land by Government agencies, fisheries
entrepreneurs and fishermen (Eyo, 2001).
38
Fisher men prefer to market large sized fishes in the fresh wet form: and sell fish that
landed live on shore. Fishermen would result to smoking or drying only when there is no
possibility of marketing the fish in the wet form. However, about 50% of local production (over
90 % of which is artisanal) is dried, smoked or smoked dried and this is very common in Nigeria
(Talabi,1999).
Most of the fish harvested in the tropics is used for direct human consumption but a great
deal is processed into fish meal for use in compound feeds. A significant quantity is lost due to the
absence of adequate technology and the know-how to prevent post harvest losses in most tropical
countries including Nigeria. An estimated 20 to 50% of the fish produced in the remote coastal
areas and hinterland of many tropical countries perish before they get to the consumers due to poor
handling, preservation and processing practices adopted by the artisanal fishermen, commercial
fish farmers and fisheries entrepreneurs.
2.11 Current Efforts in Fish Production-The Aquaculture Value Chains
Huisman (1985) had earlier observed that an aquaculture expansion concept must be based on
fish availability from capture fisheries and returns from sales. This observation is applicable to the
Nigerian situation, since expansion in capture fisheries was expected to provide the necessary trash
fish for incorporation in fish feed formulation which will ensure commodity acceptability and
create the needed market infrastructure. Adikwu (1999) stated that to a large degree, the Nigerian
government is deeply involved actively in aquaculture development. Government’s role should be
geared towards the provision of good legislation, credit schemes, infrastructural support, and
general enabling environment. It is in the effort to create this enabling environment that the
Agricultural Value Chains Transformation Agenda was launched (ACVC, 2012). The agenda has a
Fish Value Chain component which involves a strategy for improved aquaculture development that
39
will enable Nigeria to become self sufficient in fish production with a target to produce 1 million
tonnes of fish within the next 5 years (ACVC Report, 2012). The value chain is made up of 3 sub-
categories; production, processing, and ancillary. Fish fingerlings hatcheries, fish food production,
fish farm supplies are some of the activities which makeup the production category, while fish
processing includes filleting, drying, gutting, scaling and deboning, smoking, production of fish
paste and production of fish oil. Ancillary activities include storage, packaging, ware-housing,
marketing, haulage, distribution, freighting, and all export related activities.
2.12 Overcoming Constraints to Aquaculture Development in Nigeria.
A viable approach to aquaculture development in Nigeria must include long term technical
and extension assistance in addition to financial and marketing assistance directed at well defined
aquaculture expansion concept (Huisman, 1985; Adikwu,1999). The concept involves the
application of the principles of economic efficiency to fish farming in all ramification with strict
compliance to issues and practices in the economics of production, marketing, management, feed,
health, inputs utilization and by-products of fishery enterprises with a view to developing a
modernized packaged of technology for fish producers. Emphasis should be placed on; the
expansion of research and extension services, exposure of scientists to modern appropriate
technologies in aquaculture especially tilapia and catfish, promotion of aquaculture parks as a
major infrastructure investment especially for tilapia and catfish, promotion of fingerling
production especially of tilapia and catfish, promotion of feed business as part of a holistic
rehabilitation of the animal feed industry in Nigeria, removal of marketing constraints facing the
aquaculture industry and the involvement of food industry in fish utilization and the total
reorientation of university and polytechnic fisheries studies towards national socio-economic
needs; especially development of graduates who can manage aquaculture industries with minimum
supervision.
40
Due to the fact that the number of specialized fisheries institutions and research institutes are
grossly inadequate compared with the country’s population, new ones should be established across
the country and existing ones should be properly funded and equipped with modern facilities.
The country should develop the fisheries manpower through regular seminars, workshop and
conferences and also send some of their result oriented fisheries scientists to the newly established
Global Fish Disease and Information Exchange System (FAO, 1993) with a view of developing the
aquaculture sector adequately.
2.13 Nutritional Qualities of Fish
According to FDF (1997) report, fish provide about 40% of the dietary intake of animal
protein of the average Nigerians. Adegoke (2009) noted that fish and fish products constitute more
than 60% of the total protein intake in adults especially in the rural areas.
Fish food has a high nutrient profile superior to all terrestrial meats (beef, pork, mutton,
chicken etc) being an excellent source of high quality animal protein and high digestible energy. It
is not surprising therefore that McDonald et al., (2002) acknowledged that many consumers of
animal protein food prefer white meats (fish, chicken) to red meats (beef). Eyo (2001) advanced
further reasons in favour of eating fish which is fish is less tough and more digestible compared
with beef, mutton, chicken and bush meats. This is possible because of the greater ratio of muscle
protein to connective tissue protein in fish. Eyo highlighted that the biological value (BV) of fish
(83) % which is a measure of its useful in building the body tissue exceeds those of other animal
products except milk (84%) and eggs (94%). The protein content of fish are recognized as being
nutritionally superior to meat and eggs, while fish has between 10.2 to 23.0g of protein per calorie,
meat and eggs provide between 0.8 and 9.6g of protein per calorie (Borgstorm, 1962).
Amiengheme (2005) equally enumerated the importance of fish in human nutrition and the reasons
41
for its wide acceptability; fish is a good source of sulphur, and it is particularly rich in essential
amino acids such as lysine, leucine, valine, and arginine which are suitable for complementing
high carbohydrates diets. Fish is also a good source of minerals such as thiamine, riboflavins,
preformed vitamin A & D, phosphorous, calcium and iron. It contains high content of poly-
unsaturated fatty acids (omega-3) which are important in lowering blood cholesterol level and high
blood pressure. Omega 3 fatty acids also lower the risk of age related muscular degeneration and
vision impairment. These facts have been stressed at various times by research reports (Tobor,
1984., 1985; Kent, 1984). Fish reduces the risk of sudden death from heart attacks and rheumatoid
arthritis, decreases the risk of bowel cancer, and reduces insulin resistance in skeletal muscles
Apart from its nutritional importance, fish also adds variety and taste to diets as well as
improves the palatability of food (Aihonsu et al., 2006). Fish is free from cultural and religious
taboos, thus making it acceptable to people of all nations, tribes, and religions. The price of fish is
relatively low when compared with other sources of animal proteins and, virtually in the diverse
cultures of Nigeria; a meal is hardly complete without some form of fish and fish products as the
main animal protein component or as a flavor.
42
CHAPTER THREE
3.0 MATERIALS AND METHODS
3.1: Questionnaire Distribution for Data Collection
The study adopted a survey design. A questionnaire titled “Health and Management
Practices in Fish Farms in Abuja Area, Nigeria’’ was designed and validated by four experts.
Cronbach alpha was used for the reliability test and an overall reliability coefficient of 0.87 was obtained.
This was used in collecting information from farm workers and data on establishment and
management of fish farms in Abuja area (Appendix 1). The methodology for the data collection
was quite explicit. The questionnaire sought for factors affecting farm location, personnel
structure, management practices, feeds and feeding, health status of fish and marketing strategies
applied among fish farmers in Abuja FCT and its environs.
3.2 Selection of Farms and the Study Area
Stratified random sampling technique was employed to select sixty fish farms; five each
from twelve LGAs. The study area was made up of the six Areas Councils in FCT (Abuja,
Gwagwalada, Kuje, Bwari, Kwali, and Abaji; four LGAs (Karu, Keffi, Kokona and Nasarawa) in
Nasarawa State and two LGAs (Suleja and Tarfa) in Niger State. Delineation and identification of
the study farms lasted for 2 months.
3.3 Sample Collection
On each visit to a fish farm, farm records and the health status of fish were assessed. Six
fish with obvious symptoms such as low feed consumption, outright failure to eat, sluggishness,
fish gathering together, emaciation, leanness, fish scrubbing their bodies against the walls of the
pond, sores or lesions or bleeding area, on the bodies of fish, mortalities or dead fish floating on
surface of the pond) were randomly selected from the farm, properly labeled, divided into two
43
groups (A and B) of three fish in each group and dispatched to laboratories located at the Federal
University of Agriculture, Makurdi for diagnosis. A total of 120 medium sized live fish were
selected from 20 farms. Half of them (n=60) were used for the detection of ecto and endoparasites
(using the gills and intestines), while the skin of the other half (60) were used for isolation and
identification of bacterial types that had caused the fish diseases. Samples were collected from the
edge of ponds with a deep net as described by Durborow (2000). They were transported in cool
bore-hole water under normal environmental temperature in a 50-litre plastic jerry can within 2 to
6 hours of collection.
3.4 Experimental Procedures
Two experimental studies were carried out as follows:-
Experiment 1: Examination and identification of ecto and/or endo-parasites
Experiment 2: Identification of bacteria.
3.4.1 Experiment 1: Examination for ecto and/or endo-parasites
60 samples were used in this study (Group A). The gills of the fishes collected for
diagnosis were examined by method described by Emere and Egbe (2006) as follows: The
operculum of the gill was cut open with a clean scissor to expose the arches. With a hand lens the
arches were examined for ecto-parasites. A glass pipette with blunt tip was placed on the arches
and aspirated. The content of the pipette was placed on a petri-dish containing normal saline
solution and examined under a dissecting microscope for proper identification of ecto-parasites.
The fish sample was further dissected to expose the gastrointestinal tract and the intestine was
removed and placed whole on a glass and slit open longitudinally with dissecting needles. The
content was washed into a petri-dish containing normal saline solution and examined under a
dissecting microscope for endo-parasites. Isolated parasites were identified by matching and
44
comparing them with the ‘‘Pictorial Guide on Fish Parasites’’ as described by Pouder et al.,
(2005)
3.4.2. Experiment 2: Identification of bacteria.
3.4.2.i Total Viable Count of Bacteria using the Pour Plate Method
The skins of another 60 fish (Group B) were used for bacterial counts using the pour plate
method. For each sample, bacteria were cultured, counted and properly identified based on method
described by Eyo (2001) and further improved upon by Baird-Parker (2004). This technique
involved serially diluting a known volume of skin extract and then spreading evenly the
homogenate of each dilution on Nutrient agar plate. To do this, 7g of nutrient agar powder was
weighed out using electronic balance, dissolved in 250mls of distilled water in a conical flask,
covered with cotton wool and aluminum foil and vigorously agitated to dissolve content, then
autoclaved at 121oC for 15 minutes. The skin extract was done by using paired forceps to raise the
skin carefully, freed from the muscle and cut off aseptically with a pair of scissors. The skin cuts
were placed on an electronic balance to weigh out 5g. The extract was homogenized for 2 minutes
in 50mls of distilled water. 9ml of distilled water was put into each of 5 culture tubes. They were
sterilized by autoclaving at 121oC for 15 minutes and allowed to cool to 45
oC. 1ml of the
homogenate solution was transferred into the first culture tube (A) and vigorously agitated, then
serially diluted into four other tubes (B-E). These serial diluents were coded 10-1 to 10-5
respectively. Five (5) petri-dishes were arranged and coded 10-1 to 10-5 accordingly and 0.1ml of
the diluents was dispensed into the first petri-dish coded 10-1 and this was repeated for 10-2 to 10-
5 dishes. The cooled Nutrient agar (cooled at 45oC) was then poured into respective petri-dish
containing the diluents and mixed properly. The petri-dishes were incubated at 37oC for 48 hours
to allow for formation of colonies from the extract. Using a colony counter, all samples were
45
counted and recorded as colony forming unit per gram (cfu/g). The diluent was multiplied with a
dilution factor to get the cfu/g.
3.4.2. ii. Identification of Coliform Bacteria
Another Five grams (5g) of the skin extract was diluted with 50mls of distilled water,
homogenized in a blender for 60 seconds. 10g of MacConkey broth was prepared as a single
strength and another 20g of MAC broth was prepared as double strength. Each was dissolved
separately in 250mls of distilled water, dispensed into 15 culture tubes divided into three groups of
10mls, 1ml and 0.1ml respectively. A durham tube was inserted into each of the culture tubes and
sterilized in autoclave at 121oC for 15 minutes. 10mls, 1ml and 0.1ml, of the homogenate solution
were added to the corresponding 10mls, 1ml and 0.1ml of the culture tubes containing MacConkey
broth. Five tubes were used for the double strength of 10mls and the other 10 tubes were used for
the single strength of 1ml and 0.1ml. These were incubated at 37oC for 24 to 48 hours. A change of
colour of the culture tube from purple to light-yellow with gas trapped inside the durham tube was
considered positive for coliform bacteria. Data on all the culture tubes were collected and collated
for analysis.
3.4.2. iii. Identification of Bacteria through Gram’s Stain
The bacterial colony was picked with a loop, mixed with a drop of clean water on a slide,
evenly spread over an area of 1.5cm diameter and allowed to air dry. It was heat fixed by passing
the slide through a flame 3 times, flooded with 0.5% crystal violet for 30 seconds, drained and
flooded again for 30 seconds with Lugol’s iodine. Slide was then decolorized with absolute alcohol
for 10 seconds and washed with water. It was again stained for 30 seconds with1.10 carbol fuchsin,
washed with water, blotted gently and allowed to dry completely by air. Slide was examined under
the microscope to locate organisms under oil immersion. Gram-positive organisms stained violet-
blue and Gram-negative ones pink-red.
46
3.4.2.iv. Identification of Bacteria through IMVIC tests
Indole test
Procedure
0.3 ml of konvac,s reagent was added to coliform colony and culture for 24 hours. Test was
considered positive for E.coli if the upper layer turned red.
a. Methyl Red test
Procedure
Colony of the test organism was inoculated in 0.5 ml of sterile glucose phosphate broth. This
was incubated at 35 oC for 24 hours and drop of methyl solution was added. A bright red colour
was positive result for E.coli, while yellow and orange color indicated negative result.
b. Voges Proskauer test
Procedure
0.6 ml of 5% alcoholic alpha-naphtol solution and 0.2 ml of KOH solution with few
crystals of creastine were added in a test tube. This was shaken properly and allowed to stand for 2
hours. The development of eosin pink colour indicated positive result for Enterobacter.
d. Citrate Utilization test
Procedure
4ml of sterile koser’s citrate medium was inoculated with the coliform colony broth and
incubated at 35oC for 4 days. Positive result showed Turbidity and blue colour indicated positive
result for Enterobacter.
3.4.2. v. Identification of Bacteria through Catalase and Coagulase tests
a. Catalase test
This is to differentiate bacteria that produce the enzyme catalase (Staphylococcus from
Streptococcus)
Procedure:
47
2ml of hydrogen peroxide solution was poured into a test tube. Sterilized glass rod was used to
remove a quantity of growth of the coliform colony and this was immersed into hydrogen
peroxide. There was evolution of oxygen bubbles resulting from decomposition of hydrogen
peroxide. The presence of active bubbling gas in the test tubes indicated a positive test for
Staphylococcus. The results were recorded for analysis.
b. Coagulase test
This is to differentiate Staphylococcus aureus from Staphylococcus epidermidis.
Procedure
Drop of 5% calcium chloride was added to 0.5ml of plasma in test tube that contained
quantity of growth of coliform colony. Formation of clot after 2 minutes indicated positive result
for Staphylococcus aureus.
3.5 Data Analysis
All data collected were subjected to descriptive statistical analysis according to method
described by Udom (2005).
48
CHAPTER FOUR
4.0 RESULTS
The results from this study identified 3 main factors prompting location of fish farms in the
3 States studied; these were availability of land (68.3%), water (16.7%), demand for fish (11.7%)
and security (3.3%).
4.1 Table 1: Factors affecting location of fish farms in the study area
S/N Location of
farm
Abuja (30)
No. of
respondents
Nasarawa (20)
No. of
respondents
Niger (10) No.
of
respondents
Total (60)
No of
respondents
1 Availability
of land
22 (73.3) 14 (70) 5 (50) 41 (68.3)
2 Availability
of water
4 (13.3) 3 (15) 3 (30) 10 (16.7)
3 Demand for
fish
3 (10) 2 (10) 2 (20) 7 (11.7)
4 Security 1 (3.3) 1 (5) 0 (0) 2 (3.33)
NB: Figures in brackets are in percentages
49
The personnel structures of fish farms in the study area are presented in Table 2. Male farm
managers were 88.3%, females 11.3%. 86.7 % of them were resident in the farms, 3.3% were
trained Fishery officers. The average number of workers in a farm was 3 and the annual income
per person was N69,513.52. Income variation per worker in the 3 States was; N78,232 in Abuja
FCT, N76,000 in Niger and N50,877 in Nasarawa State.
4.2: Table 2: Personnel structures of fish farms in the study area.
S/N Farms
heads
Abuja (30)
No. of
respondents
Nasarawa
(20) No. of
respondents
Niger (10
No. of
respondents
Total (60)
No of
respondents
1 Sex (M/F) 29/1 (96.7/3.3) 16/4 (80/20) 8/2 (80/20) 53/7
(88.3/11.7)
2 Job trained 2 (6.7) 0 (0) 0 (0) 2/0 (3.3/0)
3 Trained on
job
20 (66.7) 13 (65) 8 (80) 41 (68.3)
4 Trained
outside
8 (26.7) 7 (23.3) 2 (20) 17 (28.3)
5 Resident on-
farm
28 (93.3) 17 (85) 7 (70) 52 (86.7)
6 Resident
outside
2 (6.7) 3 (15) 3 (30) 8 (13.3)
Personnel
1 Number 103/3.4 57/2.9 25/2.5 185/3.0
2 Trained on
job
103/10.3% 57/ 1.7% 25/0.3% 185/25.9%
3 Emolument 8,060,000/
78,232.43
2,900,000/
50,877.20
1,900,000/
76,000
12,860,000/69,
513.52
NB: Figures in brackets are in percentages
50
Types of pond and management systems in the study area are shown in Table 3. Concrete
types of fish pond were 75%, earthen-21.7%, tanks-3.3% and1.7% were of natural types.
Similarly, 68.3% of farms sourced water from boreholes, 18.3% from streams, 10.0% from taps
and 3.3% from spring water.
Most farms sourced water from boreholes and taps in Abuja area, while in Nasarawa and
Niger States farmers source water from boreholes and streams.
Irrespective of States, 66.7% of the farmers practice monoculture and Clairas was the major
species of fish kept in the farms. The trend was the same for respective areas. Mosquito nets
(28.3%), security men (26.7%) and dogs (23.3%) were major security measures adopted.
51
4.3: Table 3: Pond types and management systems practiced in the study area.
A Water source Abuja (30)
No. of
respondents
Nasarawa (20)
No. of
respondents
Niger (10)
No. of
respondents
Total (60)
No of
respondents
1 Bore-hole/well 21 (70) 15 (75) 5 (50) 41 (68.3)
2 Stream/river 3 (10) 4 (20) 4 (40) 11 (18.3)
3 Tap water 5(16.6) 1 (5) 0 (0) 6 (10)
4 Spring water 1 (3.3) 0 (0) 1 (10) 2 (3.3)
B Pond type
1 Concrete/homestead 23 (76.7) 15 (75) 7 (70) 45 (75)
2 Earthen 5 (16.7) 5 (25) 3 (30) 13 (21.7)
3 Tank 2 (6.7) 0 (0) 0 (0) 2 (3.3)
4 Natural pond 1 (3.3) 0 (0) 0 (0) 1 (1.7)
C Production system
1 Monoculture 19 (63.3) 14 (70) 7 (70) 40 (66.7)
2 Poly-culture 11 (36.7) 6 (30) 3 (30) 20 (33.3)
D Security device in
use
1 Mosquito net 14 (46.7) 3 (15) 0 (0) 17 (28.3)
2 Security men 2 (6.7) 10 (50) 4 (40) 16 (26.7)
3 Dogs 3 (10) 5 (25) 6 (60) 14 (23.3)
4 Bamboo trees 11 (36.7) 2 (10) 0 (0) 13 (21.7)
NB: Figures in brackets are in percentages
52
Feeds and Feeding management in the fish farms in the study area are presented in Table 4.
Majority of the farms (83.3%) used commercial feeds, 11.7% formulated feeds without a feed mill,
while 5% have feed mills in the farms. Supplementary feeding which were mostly dried trash fish,
fly larvae grown on animal wastes, fresh cow dung, dried poultry wastes and multivitamin
supplements was carried out in 78.3% of farms. Major ingredients used in formulating local feeds
were maize, ground nut cakes, millet, sorghum, dried fish and premixes mainly, while supplements
popularly used included abattoir maggots from cow dung, wastes from fruits and vegetables and
premix, although not depending on any set order. Feeding regiment was twice daily.
4.4 Table 4: Feeds and feeding management in fish farms located in the study area.
S/N Feeds and
feeding
Abuja (30)
No. of
respondents
Nasarawa
(20) No. of
respondents
Niger (10)
No. of
respondents
Total (60) No
of respondents
1 Have feed mills 2 (6.7) 1 (5) 0 (0) 3 (5)
2 Formulate feeds 3 (10) 2 (10) 2 (20) 7 (11.7)
3 Totally depend
on commercial
feeds
25 (83.3) 17 (85) 8 (80) 50 (83.3)
4 Supplementary
feed
23 (76.7) 17 (85) 7 (70) 47 (78.3)
NB: Figures in brackets are in percentages
53
Marketing strategies mostly adopted included farm owners selling live fish on farm based
on demand and attainment of fish table size (1.8 2.5kg live weight). Farmers complained of being
short chained in instances where middle men constituted the major purchasers.
Fish farmers minimally sought the assistance of veterinarians and other livestock experts in
managing their farms, although this tended to pose minimal problem.
Major constraints identified from the questionnaire militating against fish farming business
in the study area were finance, (70%), high cost of feeds (50%) and poor skills on the part of
farmers (21.7%).
54
The laboratory findings of the ecto and endoparasites of fish in the study area are presented
in Table 5. Out of the 20 farms suspected with disease, ectoparasites; Piscicola spp and Argulus
spp were isolated and identified in 4, (20%) while endoparasites, Caryophilleus spp, Capillaria
spp, Dactylogyrus spp and an unidentified parasite were similarly isolated and identified in 8
(40%).
55
4.5 Table 5: Ecto and endoparasites of fish in the study area
_______________________________________________________________________________
S/N Farm Sample
Date
Organ Nematode Cestode Leeches Lice
2 NA-M 22/01/2011 - - - - - -
NA-E Same Intestine - - Caryophilleus
spp
- -
3 NAL -1 Same Intestine Capillaria
spp - - - -
4 NAL -2 Same Intestine Capillaria
spp
- - - -
5 AB-AM 2/02/2011 Gills - - - Piscicola spp -
6 AB-N Same Gills - - - Piscicola spp -
7 AB-K Same Intestine Un-inden--- -tified--------- Parasite - -
8 NA-M 11/02/2011 - - - - - -
9 NA-Z S Same - - - - - -
10 NA-K Same Intestine - - Caryophilleus
spp - -
11 AB-AB 26/02/2011 - - - - - -
12 AB-M Same - - - - - -
13 AB-B Same Intestine - - Caryophilleus
spp - -
14 AB-T Same Intestine - - Caryophilleus
spp - -
15 AB-EC Same Gills - - - - Argulus
spp
16 NA-N 28/02/2011 Gills - - - Piscicola spp -
17 NA-I Same - - - - - -
18 NA-G Same Intestine - Dactylogyrus
spp - - -
19 NI-G V Same - - - - - -
20 NI-JF Same - - - - - -
56
Results of the Biochemical tests for identifying bacteria isolated from fish samples in the
study area are shown in Table 6. The total viable count of bacteria ranges from 3.0x103
to 5.8x103.
Two bacteria genera, a gram negative Escherichia and gram positive Staphylococcus were isolated
from 13 (65%) of the 20 farms. Escherichia and Staphylococcus were isolated from 12 (60%)
farms, while Staphylococcus only was isolated from 1 (15%) farm.
57
Table 4.6: Biochemical tests for isolation and identification of bacteria in the study area
Name of
Farm
Total viable count/
colony forming unit/g
(Tvc/cfu/g)
Indole
test
Methyl
red
Vogues
prokauer
Citrate
utilization
Catalase
test
Coagulase
test
NA-M 5.2x103 + + - - + +
NA-E 5.3x103 - + - - - -
NAL -1 4.8x103 + + - + + +
NAL -2 5.8x103 + + - - + +
AB-AM 4.8x103 - + - + - -
AB-N 4.2x103 + + - - + +
AB-K 5.4x103 + + - - + +
NA-M 3.2x103 + + - + + +
NA-Z S 4.8x103 - + - - - -
NA-K 4.0x103 - + - + - -
AB-AB 4.2x103 + + - - + +
AB-M 4.2x103 - + - + - -
AB-B 5.2x103 + + - - + +
AB-T 4.0x103 + + - - + +
AB-EC 4.0x103 - + + + - -
NA-N 3.5x103 + + - - + +
NA-I 3.0x103 + + + + + +
NA-G 4.0x103 + + - - + +
NI-G V 3.4x103 - + + + - -
NI-JF 3.8x103 + + - - + +
58
Study of pond types and disease prevalence are presented in Table 7. Piscicola spp
(ectoparasite) were observed in 2 (10%) concrete ponds and 1 (5%) earthen pond (Table 7). The
second ectoparasite identified was Argulus spp and was found only in 1 (5%) concrete pond (Table
7). The most prevalent endoparasite was Caryophilleus spp and was identified in 5 (25%) of the
concrete ponds and 0 (0%) in earthen pond (Table 7). While the second most prevalent
endoparasite (Capillaria spp) was only found in 2 (10%) earthen ponds (Table 7). Dactylogyrus
spp was indentified in 1 (5%) concrete pond (Table 7). Escherichia coli was found in 5 (25%)
earthen ponds and 6 (30%) concrete ponds (Table 7). While Staphylococcus was identified in 6
(30%) earthen ponds and 5 (25%) concrete ponds (Table 7).
59
4.7 Table 7: Types of fish pond and disease prevalence in the study area
Name of
farm
Type of
pond
Ectoparasites Endoparasites Escherichia Staphylococcus
NA-M Earthen - - + +
NA-E Concrete -
Caryophilleus
spp
- -
NAL-1 Earthen - Capillaria spp + +
NAL-2 Earthen - Capillaria spp + +
AB-AM Concrete Piscicola
spp
- - -
AB-N Concrete Piscicola
spp
- + +
AB-K Concrete - Un-identified parasite + +
NA-M Earthen - - + +
NA-ZS Earthen - - - -
NA-K Concrete - Caryophilleus
spp
- -
AB-AB Concrete - - + +
AB-M Concrete - - - -
AB-B Concrete - Caryophilleus
spp
+ +
AB-T Concrete - Caryophilleus
spp
+ +
AB-EC Concrete Argulus spp - - -
NA-N Earthen Piscicola
spp
- + +
NA-I Concrete - - - +
NA-G Concrete - Dactylogyrus spp + +
NI-GV Earthen - - - -
NI-JF Earthen - - + +
60
CHAPTER FIVE
5.0 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 DISCUSSION
The study evaluated the health and management problems of fish farms in Abuja area of
Nigeria. The present study has shown that the main factors that determine location of fish farms in
Abuja FCT and its environs were availability of land, water and demand for fish. These finding are
in agreement with earlier findings of Kudi et al., (2008) who highlighted that the most critical
factors affecting fish production in Kaduna state, specifically in two LGAs (Chikun and Kaduna
South) in order of importance were land, water and labour. However, in Abuja with the escalating
population, labour was not a problem.
The participation of more men than women in fish farming was not surprising because
women in the area were more interested in hair dressing and sales in shops and offices than fish
farming. This result is supported by Kudi et al (2008) who reported a similar observation in
Kaduna State. Men also have quick access to credit facilities than women in Nigeria.
The numerous numbers of fish farms being currently established in Abuja and its environs
is quite encouraging and may not be unconnected with the desire to alleviate high unemployment
rate and the desire to meet the demand for the venture that is economically viable.
It was observed in this study that most (75%) fish farms use concrete ponds with water
supply mainly from bore holes because of the urban nature of the study area, where physical space
availability is considered a luxury to farmers. A closed recirculating water system (RWS) with a
bore-hole becomes a much better source of water, as it could be constructed in-doors.
61
The adoption of monoculture as the main system of farming and clarias as species of choice
in the study area agrees with the findings of Fagbenro et al., (2003) who reported that of the over
30,000 metric tonnes of various freshwater fish species raised from culture in Nigeria in 2000,
catfish were more abundant only next to tilapias. This is further supported by the report of
Oresegun et al., (2006) which confirmed that of the several fish species available for culture,
Clarais gariepinus was the fish that met the rigorous conditions of hardiness, ability to spawn in
captivity, tolerance to poor water quality, fast growth and relative disease resistance.
Other authors (Fagbenro and Sydenham, 1990; Okoye and Abubakar, 1995;) who reported
preference for polyculture do so in favour for areas away from highly populated city centres where
there is enough land for earthen ponds.
Security services in most farms in the study area were provided by security men and dogs.
Mosquito nets were used to ward off predators. This is in agreement with the findings of Okaeme
(2006) who reported that in severe cases of predation, both mechanical and human efforts could be
employed accordingly.
Feeds and feeding management varied greatly in farms, with most farms using commercial
feeds which are imported and costly. However, Oresegun et al., (2006) who carried out feeding
trails in fish production confirmed the relative acceptability of commercial diet by the catfish
family. Notwithstanding, nutritionists and livestock experts should double efforts in proposing use
of low cost local ingredients to formulate fish feeds. The study showed that supplementary feeding
(dried trash fish, fly larvae grown on animal wastes, fresh cow dung, dried poultry wastes and
multivitamins supplements) was practiced in most (78.3%) farms. Most farms that used
supplementary feed reported faster grow rate in fish. However, Durborow (2000) reported that the
use of feed supplements when cat fish are stocked in high density result in poor growth and death
62
of fish due to nutritionally induced diseases. The author’s view was that farmers should be
cautious in the use of feed supplements in farms where catfish will be stocked.
There was absence of organized fish marketing system which resulted in most of the
farmers indiscriminately selling live fish on-farms. Quite often these farmers sell to middle men
who exploit the fish production business to the detriment of the producers. It is necessary that meat
shops be properly established for farmers to dispose of their products at reasonable cost and
benefits, where consumers could easily locate the products and purchase at affordable prices.
The isolation and identification of ectoparasites (Piscicola spp and Argulus spp),
endoparasites (Caryophilleus spp, Capillaria spp, Dactylogyrus spp) and bacteria (Escherichia and
Staphylococcus) from fish samples was evident that health poses a potential serious challenge to
fish farming in the study area. The presence of endoparasites gives credence to earlier report by
Amlacher (1972) who found 32 nematodes of different sizes in the intestine of fish. Also, Ibiwoye
et al., (2004) who also reported that some freshwater fish species in Nigeria are rich in parasitic
fauna.
Okaeme, (2006) had reported that for a successful fish farming, there is need to keep
disease problem in check as an integral part of production because disease can lead to loss of
appetite, weight loss, prevent maximal utilization of available resources, deformities, death and
overall poor economic return in fish production enterprise. The author advocates for greater
participation of veterinarians and fishery experts in the prevention and treatment of diseases and in
the production of acceptable healthy feeds for fish.
Okaeme (2006) advocated provision of more in-service training for prospective farmers,
participation of women in fish farming enterprise, provision of low credit facilities by government
and NGOs to promote the industry, improvement of marketing strategies, and participation of
63
veterinarians and fishery experts in health services and formulation of low cost fish feeds using
local ingredients. If these are promoted there is high prospect for fish production business in Abuja
and its environs.
5.2 Conclusion
From the findings of this study, four factors namely; capital, skills, feed cost and poor
marketing strategies were the major constraints of fish farming in the study area.
5.3 Recommendations
In view of high desire by potential fish farmers to practice, demand for the product, low
availability of inputs and capital for these farmers, major recommendations are hereby proposed to
improve the industry.
i. Fish farming should further be promoted to meet up with the high demand in Abuja area.
Consequently, capacity of personnel through on the farm training and studies in higher
institutions need to be encouraged.
ii. Women folk should be encouraged to engage in this lucrative profit making skilful venture.
It is a serious enterprise that does not demand discrimination.
iii. Fish farmers should be encouraged to source low cost ingredients and formulate fish feeds
in farms in order to minimize dependence on imported feeds and its accompanying high
cost as well as health risk.
iv. Local, State, Federal Governments and NGOs should be encouraged to assist and avail low
interest credit facilities and promote skills in farming techniques in Abuja area.
v. Veterinarians and livestock health extension officers should organize stock health visitation
to fish farms to encourage farmers to improve health standards.
64
REFERENCES
Adegoke, O.O. 2009. Business opportunities in the aquaculture sub-sector in Nigeria. Aqua-
Bounty Consults Limited, Abuja.
Adikwu, I.A. 1999. Aquaculture in Nigeria: prospects and constraints. Journalnof Fishery
Technology Vol.1 NO.1Pp16-27.
Adikwu, I.A. ( Inpress). Utilization and digestibility of palm kernel soya bean cakes in
experimental diets for tilapia, Oreochromis niloticus (TREWAVAS). Journal of African
Zoology.
Adikwu, and Yusuf, A.Y. (1997) Use of wastes agro and agro-allied activities in the nutrition of
African catfish Clarias gariepinus. Proc. 28th
Annual Conference of the Nutritional Society
of Nigeria: 6-8th
May 1997. Pp 65-68.
Agbede, S.A. and Olufemi, B.E. 1999. \Opportunities for fish practice, production and related
business package. In: Gateway to effective management of modern veterinary services and
privatization of veterinary functions in Nigeria.Vol.1. Vetcare Resource Foundation.Pp62-
73.
Aihonsu, J.O.Y. Jimoh, S.B. and Banwo, A. 2006. Economic analysis of commercial fish farming
in Ijebu and Re mo Divisions of Ogun State, Nigeria. The Ogun Journal of Agricultural
Sciences Vol.4. Pp1-11.
Akegbejo-Samson,Y.1997. Introduction to aquaculture and fisheries management in Nigeria.Pp76.
Amiengheme, P. and Adeleke, A.A. 2005. The importance of fish in human nutrition. Federal Dept
of Fisheries Abuja, Nigeria.
Amlacher, E.1972. Textbook of fish diseases. Translation T.F.H Publication. New Jersey.
Anyanwu, A.O. 1983. Parasitic infection of Pseudotolithus spp off the coast of Lagos, Nigeria. J
Fish Biol.22. Pp 22-33.
65
ACVC, 2012. Aquaculture value chains. Agricultural value chains transformation agenda,
Fisheries value chain group report. Strategy development for improved aquaculture
production in Nigeria. Federal Department of Fisheries, Abuja. Pp20-29, 36-41.
Atsu, D.W. 2002. Contributory role of animal production in national development. Proceedings of
the 7th
Annual Conference Animal Science Association of Nigeria. University of
Agriculture, Abeokuta Nigeria. Ppxvi-xviii.
Ayinde, I.A. and Aromolaran, A.B. 1998. Economic of rabbit production in Abeokuta South Local
Government of Ogun State, Nigeria. Nigeria Journal of Animal Production 25(1):Pp100-
105.
Baird-Parker, A.C. 2004. An improved diagnostic and selective medium for isolating coagulase-
positive staphylococci. Journal of Applied Bacteriology. ( 25): Pp12-19.
Borgstrom, M. 1962. Grams of protein of selected foods, nutrition and protein intake in Nigeria.
Mc. Graw-Hill Encyclopaedia of Foods, Agriculture and Nutrition.
CBN, 2005. Central Bank of Nigeria annual report and statement of accounts. CBN, Abuja. Yearly
Publications.
CAST, 2001. (Council for Agricultural Science and Technology). Role of animal agriculture in the
human food supply. Ames, USA.
Dada, S.A. Idris, M.B. and Umaru, I.M. 2004. Fisheries and aquatic sciences information centre: A
must for Nigerian fisheries development. Proceedings of the 38th
Annual Conference of the
Agricultural Society of Nigeria. College of Agriculture Lafia. Nasarawa State. October,
17-21st , 2004. Pp76-78.
Delgado, C. L. Wada, N. Rosegrant, M.W. Meijer, S. and Ahmed. M. 2003. Fish to 2020. Supply
and demand in changing global market. Pp226.
Dugan, P. 2003. Agricultural technologies for rural poverty alleviation. IFAD advisory notes
number 2. Investing in Africa: the world fishcentres.
Durborow, R.M. 2000. Catfish farming in Kentucky. Agriculture Programme Kentucky State
University, Frankfort, Kentucky. Pp97-106.
66
Eyo, A.A. 2001. Fish processing technology in the tropics. NIFFR. University of Illorin press.
Illorin. Pp403.
Emere, M.C. and Egbe, N.E.L. 2006. Protozoan parasites of synodontis and clarias. (A fresh water
fish). Best journal 3(3): Pp58-64.
FAO, 1984a. Inland water resources and aquaculture science, Fishery Resources and
Environmental
Division. A study of methodologies for forecasting aquaculture development. FAO Fish
Techn. Paper (248) Pp 47.
FAO, 1984b. Report of the FAO world conference on fisheries management and development,
Rome. 27th
June-6th
July, 1984. Pp60.
FAO, 1992. 1991 Production year book. Food and Agricultural Organization. Rome, Italy.
FAO, 1993. Strategies for sustainable animal agriculture in developing countries. Proceedings of
FAO Expert consultation held in Rome, Italy, 10-14th
December, 1990. Edited by Mack S.
FAO Animal production and health papers No. 107, Rome. Pp 271.
FAO, 1994. A strategic assessment of warm water fish farming potential in Africa. CIFA
Technical paper 27.
FAO, 1995. The State of world fisheries and aquaculture. FAO Fisheries Dept. Rome. Pp57.
FAO, 2002a. Fisheries: capture production. FAO Yearbook.Vol.94/1,2002.FAO.
FAO, 2003. 2002 Production Yearbook. Food and Agricultural Organization. Rome, Italy.
FAO, 2008. Year book. fisheries and aquaculture statistics.
FAO, 2009. The State of food and agriculture. Livestock in the balance. Posted online by SLP
Coordination under Crop-Livestock, FAO, News Publication. Rome.
Fafchamps, M. and Gavians, S. 1997. The determinants of livestock prices in Niger. Journal of
African Economics, 6(2): Pp255-295.
67
Fagbenro, O.A.1988. Evaluation of cotton-seed cake as fish feed and pond fertilizer in the
production of non-cichlid fishes. Journal of Applied Fisheries and Hydrobiology, (3):Pp9-
14.
Fagbenro, O.A. and Sydenham, D.H.J. 1990. Studies on the use of Clarias isheriensis Sydenham
(Clariidae) as a predator in Talapia guineensis (Dumeril) (Cichlidae) ponds. Journal of
Applied Ichthyology, (6):Pp99-106.
Fagbenro, O.A. Adeparusi, E.O. and Fapohunda, O.O. 2003. Feedstuffs and dietary substitution for
farmed fish in Nigeria. In: Proceeding of National workshop on fish feed development and
feeding practices in Aquaculture. Organised by FISON, NIFFR and FAO-NSPFS, 15-I9th
September, 2003. (Ed. Eyo, A.A).Pp 60-72.
F.D.F. 1997: Federal Department of Fishery 1997 statement report.
FMA, 1981. A Livestock production plan for Nigeria. Federal Ministry of Agriculture; Green
Revolution National Committee, Lagos. Nigeria. Pp 236.
FMA, 2008. National food security programme report.
FMA, 2009. National food security programme report.
Haruna, A.B. and Adikwu, I.A. (Inpress) Biological and nutritive evaluation of ground leaf in the
African mud cat fish, Clarias gariepinus (Burchell-1882). Bioscience Research
Communication.
Husiman, E.A. 1985. Recent advances in aquaculture and their implication in the African region.
Italy.
Husiman, E.A. and Michiels, M.A.M. 1986. Fish production for food in the tropics. proc. XIIIth
Int. Congress of Nutrition, Brighton, U.K.
Ibiwoye, T.I.I. Okaeme, A.N. Okojie, P.U.A. Agbontale, J.A. Jolayemi, J. 1990. Bacterial disease
investigation and pathology of excretory organs (Gills and Kidney) of Heterobranchus
biodarsalis and Tilapias in the NIFFR hatchery ponds. In: NIFFR Annual Report. Pp28-31.
68
Ibiwoye, T.I.I. and Agbontale, J.J. 1999. Prevalence, intensity and abundance of Eustronglides
africanus larvae in Clarias species of freshwater Fadama of Bida area, Niger State. In:
NIFFR Annual Report. Pp21-24.
Ibiwoye, T.I.I. Balogun, A.M, Ogunsusi, R.A, and Agbontale, J.J. 2004. Determination of the
infectious densities of nematodes Eustronglides in mud fish Clarias gariepinus and Clarias
anguillaries from Bida floodplain of Nigeria. Journal of Applied Sciences and
Environmental Management. 8(2):Pp39-44.
ILCA, International Livestock Centre for Africa.1987. ILCA’s strategy and long term plan; Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia.
ISAPT, 1973. International symposium on animal production in the tropics. In: Tewe, O.O.; Iyayi,
E.A.; Oluyemi, J.A.; Adewumi, M.K.; Abu, O.A. 1998. Sustainable animal production for
self-sufficiency in the 21st century.
Ita, E.O. Sado, E.K. Baogun, J.K. Pandori, A. and Ibitoye, B.1985: Inventory survey of Nigerian
inland waters and their fisheries resources: A Preliminary checklist of inland water bodies
in Nigeria with special reference to ponds, lakes, reservoirs, and major rivers. Kainji Lake
Research Institute Technical Reports Series N0.14 Pp15.
ITC, 2002. International Trade Centre Report.
Jamu, D.M. and Ayinla, O.A. 2003. Potentials for the development of aquaculture in Africa.
NAGA 26 (3): Pp 9-13.
JCVA, 2011. Joint Committee on Value Addition report. Federal Department of Fisheries.
Kapetsky, J.M.1995. A first look at the potential contribution of warm water fish farming to foods
security in Africa. In J.J. Symoens and J.C. Micha (eds) The management of integrated
fresh water agro-piscicultural ecosystems in Tropical areas. Brussels, Pp547-572.
Kent, O.1984. National fisheries policies and alleviation of nutrition in the Philippines and
Thailand. FAO. Fisheries circular No. 777.
69
Kudi, T.M. Bako, F.P. and Atala, T.K. 2008. Economics of fish production in Kaduna State
Nigeria. ARPN Journal of Agricultural and Biological Science. Vol.3No.568.September-
November, 2008.
Kutty, M.N. 1985. Aquaculture development and training in Nigeria. In: Aquaculture research in
Africa region (ed. E.A.Huisma). Proc. Of the African Seminar on Aquaculture, organized
by the International Foundation for Science (IFS) Stockholm/Sweden, held in Kisumu,
Kenya.
McDonald, P. Edwards, R.A. Greenhalgh, J.F.D. and Morgan, C.A. 2002. Animal Nutrition.6th
Eds. Pearson Education Limited. Edinburg Gate. Harlow. Essex CM20 2JE.Pp481-494.
Okaeme, A. N. Olufemi, B.E. and Obiekezie, A. 1998. Parasites and non-fish predators of tilapias
with particular reference to the sustainable management of fisheries of Lake Kainji Nigeria.
In: Proceedings of the 14th
annual conference of the fisheries society of Nigeria (FISON).
Ibadan, 19-23rd
January, 1998. (Ed. Eyo, A.A and Ajao, E.A.) Pp147-151.
Okaeme, A. N. 2006. Fish diseases, prevention and control: A Simple field guide. Pp31.
Okaeme, A. N. 2006. Essential hints on practices for cottage fish farming (A Guide for
Veterinarians) Remi Thomas Press.Pp7-20.
Okorie, P.U. 2003.Nigerian fisheries at a time of economic paradigm shift. Proceedings of the 18th
Annual Conference of the Fisheries Society of Nigeria. Pp12-20.
Okah, U. Ibeawuchi, J.A. and Herbert, U. 2009. Performance of west African dwarf sheep. Fed
graded levels of dietary pigeons pea seed meal. Journal of Applied Agricultural Research,
2009.Vol.1. Pp29-26.
Okoye, F.C. and Abubakar, I. 1995. Polyculture trial with Clarias gariepinus, Oreochromis
niloticus and Heterotis niloticus in Wuya fish farm, Bida Niger State. In: Annual report of
National Institute for Freshwater Fisheries Research (NIFFR). Pp89-94.
70
Olowu, T.A. 2008. Agriculture, fishery, forestry and livestock. In: Assessment of Agricultural
information needs for CTA’s products and services in Africa, Caribbean, and Pacific
(ACP) states-country study, Nigeria. Pp3-4.
Oladosu, G.A. Ajiboye, M.O. and Ayinla, O.A. 1992. Investigation on the ecto-parasites of catfish
fingerlings and juveniles In: NIOMR Annual Report. Pp79-80.
Oresegun, A. Oguntade, O.R. and Ayinla, O.A. 2006. A Review of catfish culture in Nigeria.
Nigerian Journal of Fisheries Vol.4 (1): Pp27-43.
Otitolaiye, J.O. 1999. Economic analysis of fisheries production in Nigeria. Journal of Fisheries
Technology.Vol.1 No.1 Pp34-38.
PRB, 2003. 2003 World population data sheet. Population Reference Bureau, Washington. Scott,
J.S. (1966). Report on the fisheries of the Niger Delta special area. N.D.D.B. Port Harcourt.
Pp 109.
Pouder, D.B., Curtis, E.W. and Yanong, R.P.E. 2005. Common fresh water pictorial guide Edis.
(Online). Htt://Edis.ifas.ufi.edu.
Sansoucy, R.1995. Livestock-a driving force for food security and sustainable development. World
animal review, 84/85 (available at www.fao.org/docrep/V8180T/v8180T07).
Stickney, R. S. 1979. Principles of warm water aquaculture. pp375.
Smith, M.A.K. 2009. Economic importance of animal husbandry. In: Agriculture General.
National Open University of Nigeria Lecture Modules, AGR 201, Victoria Inland, Lagos,
Nigeria. Pp 113-156.
Talabi, S.O. 1999. Fishery situation in Nigeria. In: Proc. Of a CTA/MAPA Seminar: Marketing
and distribution of perishable food products. Madrid, Spain, 19-30th
April, 1999. Pp191
194.
Tewe, O.O. Iyayi, E.A. Oluyemi, J.A. Adewumi, M.K. Abu, O.A. 1998. Sustainable animal
production for self-sufficiency in the 21st century; In: Animal science at the University of
Ibadan, the way forward. De-Ayo Publication. Ibadan. Pp29-45.
71
Tobor, J.G. 1984. A review of the fishing industry in Nigeria and status of fish preservation
methods and future growth pre-requisites to cope with anticipated increase in production.
Institute of Oceanography and Marine Research (NIOMR). Technical Paper. (17): Pp1-14.
Tobor, J.G. 1985. Fish production and processing in Nigeria. NIOMR Technical Paper. (22): Pp1-
12.
Udom, A.U. 2005. Essentials of statistics. Magnet Business Enterprises (Publishers) 10 Nise Street
Nwani, Enugu Nigeria. Pp1-4.
Welcome, R.L. 1976. Extensive aquaculture practices on African floodplains. In: Symposium on
Aquaculture in Africa. CIFA, Tech. Paper (4) Suppl.1:791.
Winrock, 1992. Assessment of animal agriculture in sub-saharan Africa. Winrock International,
Morritlton. USA.
72
APPENDIX
QUESTIONNAIRE
Health and Management Practices in Fish Farms in Abuja Area, Nigeria
This questionnaire is a student project with the major objective of investigating the practice of
fish farming within Abuja, FCT and its environs with a view to identifying management problems,
health status of fish and constraints and proffer solutions. You are please requested to cooperate in
supplying proper information that may be needed for the project. The content of this questionnaire
may not be directly disclosed to the public. Please tick only one answer
A. MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
1. Location
a. Location of farm _________
b. LGA _________
c. State _________
2. What prompted your choice of location (site)?
a. Adequate water supply
b. Land availability
c. Accessibility to market
d. Availability of security
73
e. Availability of fish feed
3. Source of water
a. Rain water
b. Stream/river
c. Well/bore- hole
d. Pipe-borne water
e. Others (specify)
4. Type of pond
a. Concrete/home stead
b. Earth
c. Natural pond
d. Others (specify)
5. Farm size
a. Less than 500
b. 500-5000
c. Above 5000
d. Others (specify)
6. Pond temperature
a. Range ________________
b. No records ________________
7. Pond PH
a. Range ________________
b. No Records________________
8. Do you measure the dissolved oxygen of the pond? Yes/no?
If yes, how often?
a. Morning and evening
74
b. Once a day
c. weekly
9. Average/range amount of dissolved oxygen __________
10. Any security device on pond? Yes/no. If yes, which one
a. Bamboo sticks
b. Wire mesh
c. Iron rods frames
d. Mosquito net
e. Others (specify)
11. How often is the pond drained?
a. Every 2 weeks
b. Every 4 weeks
c. Randomly (No specific timing)
12. Do you record operational problems in the farm? Yes/ no. If yes, which one?
a. Water management strategies
b. Stocking strategies
c. Leech infestations
d. Parasitic crustacean
e. Predation
f. Cannibalism
g. Poaching
h. Starvation
l. Inadequate availability of fingerlings
j. Poor harvesting technique
13. How do you overcome such problem?
_____________
_____________
75
_____________
B. PERSONNEL STRUCTURE
14. What is the educational qualification of farm head?
a. First School Leaving Certificate (FSLC)
b. WASC or equivalent
c. National Diploma
d. Degree
e. Others
15. Enumerate personnel;
a. No ________________
b. Skill________________
16. Where does the farm head reside.
a. On farm
b. Outside farm
17. Any arrangement for personnel training/development? (Yes/no). If yes, indicate
a. Further training in institutions
b. Attendance of workshops/seminars/conferences
c. On farm training
d. Others (specify)
18. What is the average personnel wage?
a. Below N50,000
b. N51,000-N100,000
c. N101,000-N150,000
d. N151,000-200,000
e. Above N200,000
76
C. STOCKING/ HARVESTING.
19. What type of culture practice do you embark on?
a. Monoculture
b. Polyculture
20. What fish species do you culture and their stocking rates/combination?
a. Monoculture
Species _____________
Stocking rate _____________
b. Polyculture
species combination ______________
stocking rate ______________
21. Why the choice of this species?
a. Accepts supplementary feeding
b. Fast growth rate
c. Seed readily available.
d. Resistance to disease
e. Acceptable to consumers/Marketable within the area
f. High survival in culture facility
g. High reproductive rate/Easy to breed in captivity
h. Low cost of production
22. How often do you harvest/crop
a. Every 2 months
b. 3 months
c. 4 months
d. 5 months
e Others (specify)
77
23. Do you operate?
a. Total harvest or
b. Partial harvesting of your pond?
24. What is your restocking interval?
a. I month
b. 2 months
c. 3 months
d 4 months
e. Others (specify)
25. How do you prepare the pond before restocking?
a. Drying and flushing out pond of old water
b. Pond bottom restoration (work the soil/dredge the soil/draw and dry out mud)
c. Weeding excessive vegetation from pond
d. Eradication of predators/competitors
e. Exposing the pond to air for 2-4 weeks
f. Letting in freshwater into the pond
g. Liming the bottom of pond
h. Fertilizing the pond water
26. What is the;
a. Average live weight of fingerlings/juvenile at stocking
b. Average live weight of fish at harvest
27. How do you measure fish growth rate?
a. Scale: ___________
b. Metre: ___________
28. What is the cost of;
a. Fingerling/juvenile at stocking?
78
b. Cost of 1kg at harvest
29. Main sources of supply of fingerling/juvenile
a. From open waters (lakes, lagoons, rivers)
b. Hatchery produced
c. Farm produced
30. How do you handle your fingerlings during transportation?
a. In containers (plastic basins, gourds, pots, fish transportation cans etc)
b. In polythene bags
c. Aerated fiberglass
d. Nursery tank
e. Breeding tank
D. NUTRITION
31. What feed type do you use for different stages of fish
a. 0.1-0.3 mm = Larvae
b. 0.5-0.8 mm = Fry
c. 1-1.5 mm = Advance fry
d. 2 mm = Fingerling
e. 3-3.5 mm = Post-fingerling
f. 4-4.5 mm = Juvenile/Jumbo
g. 6 mm =Adult
h. 8.5-9 mm =Adult
32. Feed sources
a. commercial ________________
b. compounded in the farm_______________
33. Cost of feed per unit weight (kg) for different species of fish
a. Vital feed (10 kg, 4-6 mm) =N3000
b. Coppen (15 kg, 2-8.5 mm) =N5100
79
c. Multifeed (15 kg, 3 mm) =N4600
d. (18 kg, 0.1-1.5 mm) =N18000
34. How do you arrive at daily feed ration per number of fish at each given stage?
a. fry ________________
b. fingerling________________
c. grower ________________
d. finisher ________________
35. What feed supplement do you use?
a. Vitamins
b. Trace elements
c. Manure
36. What major ingredient do you use in compounding feed other than supplements mentioned
above
a. Fish meal
b. Groundnut cake
c. Cotton seed
d. Palm kernel cake.
e Blood meal
f. Soya beans
g. Cassava peels
h. Cocoa husk
i. Millet/Sorghum
j. Maize
E. HEALTH
37. How often do you record fish mortalities in your pond?
38. Indicate main cause of mortalities
a. Cannibalism
80
b. Environmental stress
c. Sudden acclimatize procedure
d. Poor management practices
e. Poor water quality
f. Strand of algae dogging of gill
g. Algae bloom toxicity
h. Ecto-parasitic infection
i. Water borne bacteria infection
j. Ulceration due to handling injuries
39. What is the symptom of ill health you have observed in fish in your pond?
a. Low feed consumption/out right failure to eat
b. Sluggishness
c. Fish gathering together.
d Emaciation/Leanness
e. Fish scrubbing their bodies against the wall of pond
f. Sores or lesions and bleeding areas on the bodies of fish
g. Mortalities or dead fish floating on water surface
40. Do you at any time seek health assistance from;
a. Veterinary doctors
b. Fisheries officers?
41. How do you rate cost of such external assistance?
a. Necessary
b. Un-necessary
c. Economic
d. Not available
42. What was the diagnosis of your observed symptom?
F. RECORDS
43. What record of event you keep on your farm.
81
a. Personnel
b. Finance
c. Stocking
d. Harvest
e. Marketing
f. Treatment
44. What percentage average yearly profit or loss from the initial capital do you make?
a. 0-5%
b. 6-10%
c. 11-20%
d. Above 20%
45. When you treat fish when you find them sick, what common drugs do you use? Please list
them.
46. What processing arrangement do you have for your product?
a. Processed live
b. Packaged before sale
c. Stored in fridges before sale
47. What sales outlets do you have?
a. On farm
b. Supermarkets
c. Self eating houses/restaurants
d. Hotels
e. Open market
48. What sales agent other than you do you have?(eg sales boy/girl, middleman etc)
a. ___________
b. ___________
c. ____________
82
49. Any arising problems?
a._______________
b._______________
c._______________
50. List 3 suggestions for improvement of the business.
a._________________
b._________________
c._________________
THANK YOU