Philip M.

Fearnside
American Peace Corps
Volunteer
October 3, 1970
REASONS FOR ABANOONING BUNDH BARETHA FISH FARM
The fish farm at Bundh Baretha has major defects whlch will
prevent flsh-culture work from being done there until d-raetic
changes are made. The Fisheries Iepartment must now decide
whether to commit its resources to making these changes, or
to abandon the fish farm. The following reasons have led me to
the conclusion that the farm should be abandoned.
I) UNJUSTIFIABLY EXPENSIVE CHANGES ARE NEEDED:
In order to make the present fish farm operational, major improve-
ments would be necessary. The most striking problem is that of
seepage. Due tot he sandy soil, water will not stay in the nurseries
when the level in the reservoir falls below that of the fish farm.
The fish farm dried up completely during the dry season this year,
and due to a weak monsoon thls year there will not be adequate
water. for any fish culture at all. Within a few years the character
of the seepage problem may be altered completely. A pipeline is
currently being constructed to supply the city of Bharatpur with
drinking water from Bundh Baretha. In conjunction with this
scheme, plans have been made to construct a small dam and
bridge across the outlet and raise the water level of the reservoir
by ten feet. When this occurs, the water seepage at the fish
farm would keep the nurseries full at all times. The problem
then would be that the nurseries could not be drained. If the nurseries
cannot be drained, fish-culture is impossible. In order to solve
the drainage problem when the water level in tre reservoir is
raised, completely new nurseries would have to be constructed
above the ground level. This would be excessively expensive.
In addition to the seepage problems, many other expers ive improve-
ments are required. These include constructing a new water
source, a new water system, a new drainage system, and supplying the
nurseries with cement catch basins and roads. A more detailed
description of needed alterations and the reliSons for them is given in
the "Report on Work Done at Bundh Baretha" which I 'drafted earlier .
. . . .. . .. 2/-
2
II} INHERENT DRAWBACK OF PUKKAH NURSERIES:
The inherent drawback of pukkah nurseries is their high construction
cost in comparison to katchah nurseries. The same amount of
money spent here to make nine pukkah nurseries would fund many more
nurseries , and thus produce many more fish, if it were spent on
katchah nureseries at a site with proper soil. Fish produced in
costly pukkah nurseries will never be able to compete on an economic
basis with fish produced ln low-cost katchah nurseries.
III) INHERENT DRA !BACK OF A SMALL FISH FARM:
The fish farm at Bundh Baretha has only nine 1/10 acre nurseries
and one 1/2 acre rearing tank. A small fish farm such as this has
many of the same overhead costs as a larger fish farm, and thus
is uneconomical. The expenses i:>r staff are almcs t the same for
a small farm as for a large one, and some of the construction expenses
such as the water source and drainage system will also remain
constant, thereby raising the cost of production. Even if all
necessary money is p n t and the fish farm is put in working
order, lt will always be small and operating costs per fish produced
wlll be high. The fish farm at Rana Pratap Sagar has fifty nurseries,
and therefore holds far greater potential than does the tiny operation
at Bundh Baretha.
IV) BAD LOCATION WILL ALWAYS GIVE HEADACHES:
Bad soil and location means that even if a great deal of money
is spent on repairing and improving the present fish farm, it will
always be plagued by minor defects. When Dr. Howard Clemens
visited here, he compared this kind of situltion to driving in a car
with bad tyres: the tyres will go flat again and again In spite
of constant patching. Eternally patching the tyres wlll only lead
to the frustration and discouragement of those trying to travel
in the car. What is needed is to throw away the old tyres and
replace them with new ones. What is needed here is an entirely
new fish farm-------in a new location.
3 ..
V) DECISION TO MAKE MAJOR CHANGES REALLY DECISION TO
MAKE NEW FISH FARM:
So many major improvements would be necessary to make the fish
farm at Bundh Baretha operational that what the Department would
actually be doing if it decides to overhaul it is to build an entirely
new fish farm on the same bad location. Putting in entirely new
above ground pukkah nurseries, drains, water-systems, etc
is in effect to make a new fish farm. Only the living q.I arters v.o uld
be left of the present facitities. Mhy make the same mistake twlce
by choosing the same bad site for the new fish farm?
VI) STOCKING BUNDH BARETHA UNNECESSARY:
The fish farm was built on the Bundh Baretha site with the
assumption that the fingerlings to be produced there would be needed
to stock the Bundh Baretha reservoir. This assumption is highly
questionable. The. reservoir has a naturally reproducing population of
major carps. Supplementing this natural recruitmmt by stocking
a few thousand fingerlings every year is not justifiable. In a reser-
voir as large as Bundh Baretha the recovery of the stocked finger-
lings would be extremely small. Stocking for large reservoirs should
not be done with the intent of continuously adding fingerlings which
will later be harvested in the commercial catch. Rather, large
reservoir stocking programs should be limlted to introducing new
species which are not already e8tabllshed ln the reservoir. Thls
would not be done with a few thousand fingerlings spread over
several years, but with a massive introduction of fingerlings at
one time; combined with other management such as eradication of
weed fish and improvement of spawn.fng areas. Since the stocking
program in Bundh Baretha is not of a kind suitable for large
reservoirs, it should be discontinued. Fish seed from a nearby fish
farm is therefore unnecessary.
VII) STATE-WIDE PLANNING OF FISH FARM DEVELOPMENT MUST
BE BASED ON SOUND ECONOMICS:
The. one objection that has been raised to the proposal to abandon
the Bundh Baretha Fish Farm is that so much money has already been
invested that the farm must be put in working order at any cost.
4 . ...
Thi.s is not a valid reason for spending money on further attempting
to develop a bad site. Sentimental considerations must be set aside
in deciding where the Fisheries Department will invest ite money. All
sites in the state should be objactlvely evaluated and the money
spent where it will bring the best return. Because of the
location, the Bundh Baretha Fish Farm will never give an
return if additional money is invested. The money earmarked by
the Department for fish culture would yield far more fingerlings
per rupee spent if tt "vVere concentrated on the Rana Pratap Sagar
site in Kota District. Fingerlings could then be transported from
there to ponds and reservoirs throughout the state which have
been shown to need stocking, and the excess fingerlings sold outside
the state at considerable profit.
VIII) BUNDH BARETHA PROJECT STILL NEEDED FOR RESERVOIR
RESEARCH:
Were the Bundh Baretha Flsh Farm to be abandoned, the Project
Officer slated to come to Bundh Baretha would still be needed for
reservoir research and management. Bundh Baretha has tremendous
potential as a site for reservoir research. \Vhen the American
fisheries expert, Dr. Howard C. Clemens, visited Rajasthan, he
spoke of Rajasthan as having the potential to become the "impound-
ment research centre of the world.
11
The funds to be spent on the
Bundh Baretha project can well be used to equip the Project Officer
for a proper study of the reservoir.
st:
October 12, 1970