ODMP Fishery Frame Survey Draft Report

OKAVANGO DELTA FISHERY FRAME SURVEY
DRAFT REPORT
ODMP SUSTAINABLE FISHERIES UTILIZATION

AND MANAGEMENT COMPONENT
By:
Thethela Bokhutlo, Motshereganyi Virat Kootsositse and Ketlhatlogile Mosepele
April 2007
OKAVANGO DELTA FISHERY FRAME SURVEY
DRAFT REPORT
PREPARED FOR
OKAVANGO DELTA MANAGEMENT PLAN
BY
THETHELA BOKHUTLO1, MOTSHEREGANYI VIRAT
KOOTSOSITSE1 AND KETLHATLOGILE MOSEPELE2
APRIL 2007
ABSTRACT
The study was conducted in all villages by means of a questionnaire in the delta save for
Xhaxhaba which was inaccessible due to floods. Data collection lasted six months from
June to November 2005. Current results indicate that the number of fishers has slightly
decreased since 1997 from 3243 to 2703. This may be ascribed to a number of reasons
including cessation of government financial aid and the inaccessibility of Xhaxhaba
village. However, the number of commercial fishers has doubled in the same period from
44 to 85. The majority of the Okavango fishers are female (53%) while males make up 47
% of the fishery. The paucity of males in the fishery may be less intelligible to most
people but it is trite knowledge among floodplain fisheries pundits that such fisheries are
characterized by the preponderance of female fishers due to the opportunities proffered
by shallow floodplain waters for the use of traditional gear. It is however worth noting
that the commercial gillnet fishery in the delta is dominated by males. The Bambukushu
are the predominant tribe in the fishery with 67.5% followed by Bayei with 19.8%. Most
of the fishers have spent 10 years and less in the fishery and they are mostly between the
ages of 21-30 years.
There are 975 fishing craft in the Delta and the majority of them are dugout canoes
(80%). There are 4487 fishing gears and they are comprised mainly of hook and lines.
However, the number of gillnet fishers has generally increased drastically from 332 in
1997 to 1468 in the current survey. The Okavango fishery is therefore changing its
structure from that of traditional fishing towards that of modern gillnets. Moreover, there
is apparent preference of 100mm stretched mesh size as opposed to 115mm and 125 mm
stretched mesh sizes that were popular in the last survey.
The fishery only employs 3.24% of the people in the region. The best fishing season is
summer while the worst is winter. The fishery is currently not managed and this leads to
conflicts among stake holders. Even though most of the conflict is among locals, the most
pronounced form of conflict is that associated with access to fishing grounds and it
occurs between a small fraction of commercial fishers and tour operators in the
panhandle. This conflict is fomented mainly by the intransigence of the two parties and
therefore only the enforcement of fishing regulations can redress this dichotomy.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to thank the survey team that is outlined in Appendix A for their
dedication to this study. Without their support, the study could never have seen the light
of day. In a special way, we would like to thank the Assistant Director for Fisheries
division, Mr. Shaft Nengu for painstakingly going through the report and making very
useful comments that went a long way in shaping this report. Finally we are indebted to
our superiors in the division for believing in us that we could handle the onerous task of
producing this report amidst a laden work schedule. The experience was surely
invaluable indeed.
CONTENTS
Specific objectives.....................................................................................................................................10
3.2.0.8. Ditshipi.................................................................................................................35
YEAR..............................................................................................................................156
AMOUNT (PULA).........................................................................................................156
LEVY..............................................................................................................................156
TERMS OF REFERENCE....................................................................................................................166
LIST OF TABLES
Discription of the whole Fishery................................................................................................................61
Description of Seronga Fishery..................................................................................................................68
Description of Mogotho Fishery................................................................................................................75
Description of Ngarange Fishery................................................................................................................82
Description of Kauxwi Fishery..................................................................................................................89
Description of Shakawe Fishery.................................................................................................................96
Description of Sepopa Fishery.................................................................................................................103
Description of Etsha 13 Fishery ..............................................................................................................110
Description of Ditshipi Fishery................................................................................................…………117
Discription of Daonara Fishery................................................................................................................124
Description of Khwai Fishery..................................................................................................................131
LIST OF FIGURES
Map of Ngamiland District showing the proposed new boundaries of the Okavango Deelta Ramsar site
and some of the major fish landing sites..................................................................................................138
Proportion of fishers in the major landing sites with regard to the best fising season.............................139
Proportion of fishers in the major landing sites with regard to the worst fishing season.........................140
Proportion of boat type by percentage per landing site............................................................................141
Proportion of commercial and subsistence fishers...................................................................................141
Proportion of commercial fishers per landing site...................................................................................141
Proportion of various types of conflicts by percentage for the major landing sites.................................142
Total annual production for the okavango Fishery (1996-2005) .............................................................143
The age class distribution of fishers by number in the major landing sites............................………… 144
The distribution and number of fishers by ethnicity in the major landing sites.......................................144
Number of fishers by sex across the major landing sites.........................................................................145
Number of fishers by Marital status across the major landing sites.........................................................145
Number of fishers by years spent fishing across the major landing sites.................................................146
Number of fishers by catch disposal across the major landing sites........................................................147
Number of fishers by years living in village across the major landing sites............................................148
Number of fishers by time spent fishing across the major landing sites..................................................149
Comparison of effort (No. of fishers, boats and gillnets) across the major landing sites........................149
1. INTRODUCTION
While fishing must surely be one of the oldest recorded sources of livelihood, it is
comparatively recently that fish have become important components of the diets of the
majority of the worlds people-especially those living in developing countries (Delgado et
al, 2003). A considerable proportion of about 65%, of the 120,000 Ngamiland residents
derive their livelihood from fishing. Fishing is often considered a complementary activity
to a myriad of livelihood strategies ranging from arable agriculture, livestock rearing,
basket making, beer brewing, canoe poling of tourists and grocery vending (semausu) etc.
However, the value of fishing and hence its ranking amongst these occupations has never
been fully assessed. The daily diets of the masses in developing countries have been
shown to be calories –deficient, with cereals providing much of the dietary energy and
meat, fish, and eggs supplying only a minimal fraction of the daily diet (Balayut, 1983).
Delgado et al (2003), state that consumption of fish and seafood products reached
14kg/capita in developing countries in 2001, nearly twice the level recorded in the early
1970’s at which the per capita consumption of fish and other marine products on a world
basis was 12.5kg in 1979, while the average consumption in the third world was only
8.4kg/person (Balayut, 1983).
Relevant information for monitoring a fishery can be obtained directly from fishery
related operations, by sampling, and /or through biological studies. There is extensive
interaction among these categories as they are all related to fishery activities (Csirke,
1984). It should be remembered that population dynamics calculations depend much
more upon data generated from commercial fishing operations than from specialized
research cruises. Even where good data are available, it is very difficult to make good
estimates of future yields in a new fishery until the commercial fishing effort has had a
significant impact upon the stocks (Campleman, 1976). Inland fisheries in Africa are of
great importance in creating jobs and providing protein rich food (Mmopelwa et al,
2005:, Hay et al, 2000). Population expansion in Africa has led to increased pressure for
employment in most economic sectors and fisheries is a particularly attractive sector
because of the generally low entry cost, hence steadily increasing effort which has
resulted in overexploitation of many stocks (Csirke,1984)
In light of the fore going, attempts have been made to characterize the Okavango fishery
and also to quantify its socio-economic importance in terms of its value as a livelihood
source for the delta communities albeit intermittently
In 1987 a NORAD funded study estimated the total number of people identified as fishers
at over 5000. In this study the definition of a fisher was loosely meant to refer to anyone
who at sometime of the year engaged in catching fish for consumption or sale. It was thus
not easy to distinguish between full time and part time fishers. A decade later (1997) the
Fisheries Division carried-out a frame survey across nearly all fishing households around
the Okavango delta and estimated 41 commercial fishers and 200 subsistence fishers. An
attempt was also made to quantify the type of fishing equipment used to catch fish and
how the use of such equipment varied with seasons. Mmopelwa et al (2005) point out
that commercial fishing is a viable enterprise which can offer positive investment
opportunities in northwestern Botswana.
A research project assessing the fish biological resources of the delta was launched in
1999, a report of which will be finalized sometimes this year. The status of the biological
resources will blend in well with how the communities benefit from and use the resource,
how much is being exerted to the fishery in terms of number of fishers and their fishing
gear. Thus the fisheries frame survey dimension of the fishery together with the
envisaged fisheries socio-economic study that will be conducted at a later stage and the
ongoing biological perspective will lead to sound economic and scientific planning for
the fishery.
A frame survey is a complete description of the structure of any system to be sampled for
collection of statistics. In fisheries, it may include the inventory of ports, landing places,
number and type of fishing units (boats and gear), and a description of fishing and
landing activity patterns, fish distribution routes, processing and marketing patterns,
supply centers for goods and services, etc (FAO 1998).The overall objective of this study
therefore is to generate information about the Okavango delta fishery in order to better
understand, amongst others, its characteristics, composition and structure, which in turn
will lead to sustainable management of the resource and resolution of current conflicts.
The study is the second one among several that are envisaged to be carried out on a
regular basis of not more than five years intervals. Consistency is highly important since
the Okavango river fishery is constantly changing in structure and importance due to its
heavy reliance on rain fall in Angola and the ensuing floods.
Specific objectives
The following objectives were outlined.

To describe the structure of the Okavango delta fishery in terms of
• Total number of fishers
• Sex
• Tribe
• Number of fishing craft and fishing gear
• age distribution of fishers
To make an assessment of the fishery in view of the present and future management strategies.
To contribute towards conflict resolution mechanisms associated with the Delta fishery
2. MATERIALS AND METHODS
2.1. Area of study
The Okavango Delta is situated at the northern most edge of the Kalahari Desert in north
western Botswana, below the Caprivi Strip in Namibia. It is the largest designated inland
wetland in the world and is fed by the water of the Okavango River with between 8-15
thousand million cubic meters of water per annum from the river’s headwaters in
Namibia and especially Angola.
This is a large area, particularly untouched with large areas still in their original state. It is
also an area with abundant natural resources, located not only in a rapidly developing
country, but also in a semi-arid environment where lack of water is one of the biggest
constraints to development. Pressure on the utilization of the delta’s resources is
increasing, especially in view of the very fast population growth of Botswana (Van der
Heiden 1992).
The study was conducted in 16 villages in the Northwest District which are in the
periphery of the delta within the newly proposed boundaries of the existing Okavango
Delta Ramsar site (see fig 1).
Villages: Ditshipi/Daunara, Boro, Maun, Gumare/Tubu, Etsha villages, Ikoga, Sepopa,
Nxamasere, Shakawe, Mohembo, Kauxwi, Xakao, Ngarange, Mogotlho, Seronga and
Gunitsoga (These are the main fishing villages and they also comprise of small
settlements).
2.2. Frame survey form and collection of data
A few months prior to the commencement of the frame survey, a questionnaire was
developed by the fisheries division staff in collaboration with Harry Oppenheimer
Okavango Research Centre (HOORC). The expert from HOORC had in-depth
knowledge of all the logistics necessary for a comprehensive survey since he had
conducted a similar survey before. A meeting was convened in Maun, where all the
fisheries staff in the Okavango met and brainstormed on the way forward. First of all, the
head of Division, Mr Shaft Nengu verified if everybody new what a frame survey was by
asking individuals to define the survey and its purpose. It turned out that everybody was
in the same boat. The form that was agreed upon was a slightly modified version of the
form that was developed by the AWF four corners TBNRM project. The usage of the
final form was thoroughly practiced at Chanoga village, about 30 km away from Maun
where there were fishing activities at the time.
All the fisheries staff in the district was actively involved in data collection. This
included seven field assistants, three technical assistants, one technical officer, three
scientific officers one labourer and two drivers. The staff was divided into two groups
and they went out into the field on rotational basis after every two weeks. For the villages
in the lower delta bordering the reserve such as Ditshipi and Daonara, the survey
coincided with the time when people were engaged in grass and reed harvesting. People
had relocated to areas where these resources were abundant and they had put up
temporary camps lasting more than three months. Temporary camps in this survey were
taken as autonomous entities and they were recorded as such as opposed to bringing them
under main villages from which the people had come from. Most of the fishing camps in
the lower delta were abandoned in favour of grass and reed harvesting. Within the
temporary camps, households were identified and recorders asked if the household had
ever engaged in fishing activities in the last five years. A fisher was therefore taken to be
anybody who had fished within the last five years using whatever type of method
regardless of whether he had fishing equipment or not at the time of questioning. In the
major villages, data was recorded from house to house using the same assumptions as
mentioned above. Recorders walked through the villages parallel to one another from one
end of the village to the other.
After his introduction, the recorder and the fisher or a close relative of the fisher sat
together and went through the questionnaire as in P.A.M. van Zwieten et al (1995). It
took fifteen to twenty five minutes (approximately) to complete an interview with one
fisher. The data sheet was divided into three main areas of the fishery being: (1) Fishing
village/camp characteristics (2) Fisher characteristics and (3) Resource management.
Fishing village/camp characteristics encompass such information as the name of the
village/camp, the age of the village/camp and the status of the village/camp i.e. is it
temporary or permanent. Fisher characteristics include demographics and fishing gear
characteristics. Resource management deals with the production and regulation of the
fishery looking at both present and future management strategies. Data collection lasted
six months, from June to November 2005.
2.3. Data analysis
Data was entered initially in Microsoft access and due to complications with the database
and time constraints we resorted to entering the data in a spread sheet in excel. Entering
and cleaning data turned out to be a colossal activity and two temporary assistants were
engaged to assist in data entry.
Several calculations relating to the structure of the fishery were done in Microsoft Excel
spreadsheets as in Mosepele (2001). Some of the calculations included total number of
gill nets by mesh size, total number of fishers in the fishery by sex and tribe, the fishing
behavior of the fishers, the total number of fishing craft in the fishery, the total number of
fishing gear in the fishery and an identification of the different fishing types in the
fishery.
Analysis was carried out for the whole fishery and subsequently for selected landing sites
that were perceived to be the major ones so as to get a picture of the fishery dynamics
across a linear gradient from the upper to the lower delta. Selection of the major landing
sites was as in Yamamoto (1980) (with modifications) where by the main landing sites
have to satisfy the following standard conditions:
1. More than 50 percent of the total fish landings in the extension area are landed through
such landing places, regardless of whether a fish market exists or not.
2. Such landing places are manned by full time Fishery Extension field assistants.
2.4. Sources of error, critical analysis of the form and set up of the database
o Definition of a fisher: This was a bit ambiguous. At first, a fisher was considered
to be somebody who had fished in the last 10 years. This was then reduced to five
years after realizing that most of the people who had fished 10 years ago no
longer fished at all.
o Age: Some fishers did not know their age. This became apparent during the data
entering exercise. The years fished were often more that the age of the fisher. This
shows that some recorders were negligent of their duties during data collection.
o Years fished: These were estimated by subtracting 10 from the age of the fisher if
the fisher claimed that he had been fishing all his life. This was based on the
assumption that the average age at which young boys and girls start using hook
and lines and baskets respectively is around 10 years.
o Banned fishing methods: This question revealed that there was a lot of confusion
among the Okavango fishers. Most of them mentioned one method or the other as
a type banned while to our knowledge, the fishery was not regulated. They
claimed that the methods were banned by the government.
o Illegal fishing: Contrary to most fishers having mentioned that there were some
banned fishing methods, the same fishers maintained that there was no illegal
fishing. The question was confusing to most fishers and it took quiet a while to
explain what illegal fishing was.
2.5. Information through Catch and Effort data, Frame Surveys and Experimental Gillnet
Surveys
Frame surveys in the Okavango delta are a relatively new development. The first data
collection was carried out by the Fisheries Section in the Ministry of Agriculture in 1997
from which a report was produced in 2001. The 2005 survey is the second one after 8
years. This goes to show that there are information gaps between the years. Intermittent
surveys with no consistency do not help much in proper management of the fishery. Field
assistants should be encouraged to report the number of boats and fishers that are actively
involved in the fishery every quarter in their stations. This could act as a form of a
supplementary frame survey from which total effort indicators could be derived.
The present system of collecting fish production figures is theoretically the best. It was
first developed in the late nineties and the earliest production figures date as far back as
1996. Field assistants are stationed in the major fishing villages of the delta which are
assumed to be the major landing sites. The mandate of the field assistants is to monitor
the amount of fish extracted from the system and also to keep record of the number of
fishers actively involved in the fishery. Each fisher is supplied with catch and effort
datasheets on which he records the number and weight of fish that he catches per day in a
month. The total production of the fishery is then calculated by adding together the
production from the different stations. Occasionally, field assistants are supposed to visit
fishers at the fishing grounds and assist them with data capturing but this does not
happen. Eventually data comes with a lot of noise while the majority of it is lost since
most fishers are illiterate. Best as it may seem in theory, the system is fraught with
implementation problems that are aggravated by negligence on the part of field assistants.
This results in poor quality data of little help to the Division.
The Division obtains another indication of changes in Catch per Unit Effort through
regular experimental gillnet surveys. These surveys are conducted in three different
sampling sites in the system chosen strategically to cover both the upper and lower delta
habitats. At the upper delta, Ngarange and Seronga are sampled while in the lower delta
sampling is done in Guma lagoon. There is no sampling in protected areas and at the
distal end of the delta
3. RESULTS
3.1. Description of the whole fishery
3.1.1. Demographics
The Okavango fishery is made up of a majority of fishers in the age bracket of 21-30
years (Table 1). This age group makes up 32.33% of all the fishers in the region. The age
class 31-40 makes up 19.04 % while 11-20 makes up 18.07%. Fishers with age 51 and
above make up less than 20% of the total fisher population in the Okavango while less
than 1% of the fishery is made up children in the age class of 0-10 years. The survey
findings indicate that there is a total of 2703 fishers in the Okavango. The majority of the
fishers are female (Table 2), making up 52.65% (1423) of the fishery while males make
up only 47.35% (1280). A significant amount of the Okavango fishery is composed of the
Bambukushu tribe (Table 3). This ethnic group makes up 67.46% of the fishery. The
other tribe that makes a significant proportion of the fishery is the Bayei (19.84%).
Basarwa, Bakgalagadi, Barotse, Baxhereku, all combined make up less than 10% of the
fishery while other tribes not mentioned here make up only 2.67% of the fishery. The
fishery is made up of a majority of single people (77.63%; Table 4). Married fishers
make up 18.60% of the fishery while divorced and widowed fishers make up 1.66% and
2.11% respectively.
Fishers who have spent of 0-10 years fishing make up the majority of the fishery (Table
5). It is an indication that most the fishers are new in the trade relatively. A significant
proportion of fishers have spent 11-20 years fishing (28.43%) while 13.03% of fishers
have spent 21-30 years fishing. Years spent fishing from 41 upwards make up less than
10% of the fishery. Most of the fishers have spent 21-30 years (28.90%) living in their
villages (Table 6). This shows that most fishers are not very migratory. 20.14% of fishers
have spent 11-20 years fishing while 17.52% have spent 31-40 years fishing.
Only 3.10% (85) of fishers in the Okavango are pure commercial fishers (Table 7, Fig 5).
The rest of the fishers are subsistence fishers (97%). The majority of subsistence fishers
catch fish solely for home consumption (68.65%). Some of the subsistence fishers in
addition to home consumption also sell surplus fish making up 15.08% of the fishery.
There are also incidences of bartering fish for other goods (4.73%). Generally, a
significant proportion of fishers (4.88%) dispose of their catch in various ways. In
addition to the catch disposal methods mentioned above, they also sell and barter, and
barter and consume at home. The Okavango fishery is composed of mainly seasonal
fishers (Table 8). A significant proportion of fishers are part-time (29.46%) while only
5.58% of fishers are full-time.
3.1.2. Fishing Gear
There are 975 boats in the Okavango fishery. A large proportion of boats in the fishery
are dugout canoes (Table 9). These traditional boats made by fishers make up 79.90% of
all the boats in the fishery. Fibreglass canoes and aluminum boats constitute almost the
same proportion of boats number in the Okavango, 8.92% and 8.21% respectively. There
are very few fibreglass boats (2.97%). Most of the boats are used for fishing (Table 10).
However a significant proportion is used as water transport (26.45%) while a small
amount is used for poling (6.27%). Most of the boats are not motorized (Table 11). Only
a small proportion of boats are motorized (9.65%). Of all the boats owned by fishers
59.31% is used for fishing.
There is 4487 fishing gear in the delta. The most abundant gear in the fishery is the hook
and line (Table 13) which constitutes 33.25%. The gillnets make up 32.72% while the
baskets make up 29.77%. Other fishing gear make up a very small proportion of the total
fishing gear (4.26%). Of all the fishing gear available, 79.38% are in use (Table 14). Of
the 1314 gillnets available in the fishery, the most abundant mesh size is 100mm (Table
15) accounting for 54.49%. The next abundant mesh size is 115mm (30.44%). Other
mesh sizes ( 75mm, 50mm and 125mm) make up less than 20% of all the gillnets. The
most common mesh size used by most fishers is 100mm (Table 16; 57.09%). The next
common mesh size used is 115mm (30.4%). Other mesh sizes (50mm, 75mm and
125mm) make up only 11% of all the mesh sizes that are currently in use. Most of the
fishing gear (Table17) is used seasonally (73.69%). A significant proportion of the gear is
also used occasionally (17.65%) while only 8.66% of the gear is used all year round. The
fishers themselves (Table 18) own most of the fishing gear. Only 5.67% of the fishing
gear is not personally owned. Gear lifespan for most of the gear (Table 20) is less than 1
year (38.52%). Gear having a lifespan of 1 and 2 years each make up 33.93% and 18.40%
respectively. Less than 10% of all gear in the fishery has a lifespan of 3 years and more.
3.1.3. Fishing activity
The Okavango fishery has employed 2067 people (Table 19). These are the people hired
to fish and 89.84% are family assistants. Family friends form 6.63% of all the people
hired to fish. Only 3.24% of the people hired to fish are employees. It is not common to
hire people from elsewhere (0.29%). The majority of fishers identified summer as the
best fishing season (Table 21). A very small proportion of fishers on the other hand
identified autumn as the best fishing season (4.87%). Winter and spring are also preferred
fishing seasons with 10.04% and 6% of the fishers identifying these seasons as the best
fishing seasons respectively. The season that was identified as the worst fishing season is
winter (Table 22). Very few fishers mentioned spring as the worst fishing season
(4.74%).
The most preferred fishing areas are lagoons (Table 23). This fishing area was preferred
by 57.42% of all the fishers. Apart from lagoons, the other preferred fishing area is
floodplains (20.55%). Side channels are also used to a considerable extent (11.97%)
while the least utilized fishing area is the main channel (8.32%). A very small proportion
of fishers (1.74%) utilize all these fishing areas. Most of the fishers share fishing areas
with neighbours (Table 24). A significant proportion of fishers also share fishing areas
with family members (33.48%). A very small proportion of fishers share fishing areas
with tour operators (2.41%). Very few fshers do not share fishing areas with anybody at
all (0.31%) while 15.56% of fishers share fishing areas with everybody. The majority of
fishers do not require permission to fish (Table 25). Only a small proportion of fishers
mentioned that they need permission to fish (1.24%). Of those fishers that seek
permission to fish, the majority obtain permission from the local authority (4.33%). Some
seek permission from government (3.31%), while others obtain permission from
neighbours (0.25%) and relatives (2.80%). Almost no fishers pay to fish (Table 27).
3.1.4. Present resource management
A large proportion of fishers do not know of any banned fishing method (Table 28). A
significant proportion of fishers (24.34%) say that poisoning is the banned fishing
method that they know of while 21.05% say that small mesh size is banned. Only 10.41%
know that seining is banned while 8.19% say drive fishing is banned. Of those fishers
that know of banned fishing methods (Table 29) majority say that banning was instituted
by government (42.01%) while 32.03% say that local authority is responsible for banning
certain fishing methods. A significant proportion of fishers (25.95%) attribute banning of
fishing methods to both Government and local authority. The majority of Okavango
fishers do not know of any illegal fishing activities (Table 30). Only a small proportion of
fishers (3.23%) purports that there are some illegal fishing activities. Of all the fishers
that purport illegal fishing activities, the majority blame local people (Table 31). A
significant proportion of fishers allege that illegal fishing is done by outsiders who are
nationals (23.61%) while only 8.33% of fishers attribute illegal fishing to foreigners. In
most cases, these illegal fishers when found they are warned (Table 32). To a large
extent, their nets are often confiscated (12.77%), while some of them are fined (10.64%).
Only a small proportion of illegal fishers are arrested (4.26%).
The majority of fishers allege that there are no conflicts in the fishery (Table 33). Only
13.84% of fishers experience conflicts. Most of these conflicts are with locals (Table 34).
To a large extent, some of the conflicts are with tour operators (16.76%). A very small
proportion of fishers experience conflicts with outsiders and foreigners. In most cases,
conflicts are about fishing grounds (Table 35). Fishing conflicts about other things such
as illegal fishers, number of nets, nets theft, boat theft and fishing methods make up less
than 20% of all the conflicts in the delta.
3.1.5. Future resource management
The majority of fishers prefer that the fishery be regulated in future (Table 36). However,
a considerable proportion (32.88%) does not want any form of regulation in the fishery.
Of those fishers that want the fishery to be regulated most of them want regulation to be
carried out by both the government and the traditional authority (Table 37). A significant
proportion of fishers (19.07%) want the government alone to be responsible for
regulating the fishery while (13.44%) of the fishers prefer regulation to be done by the
traditional authority alone. The majority of fishers want fishing regulations to be used for
conserving fish (Table 38). On the other hand, some fishers want regulations to be used
for keeping away outsiders (3.90%), while some would prefer these regulations to be
used for both conserving fish and to keep away outsiders (8.55%). The majority of fishers
prefer that fish poisoning be banned (Table 39), while the least proportion of fishers
advocated for the banning of drive fishing (7.65%). Small mesh net sizes and seine nets
are some the fishing methods that fishers want banned, (16.89%) and (12.28%)
respectively. Some fishers identified closed seasons as the best sustainable fishing
method (14.45%). Generally fishers in the Okavango are content with all the above-
mentioned ways of conservation and they think that the use of a combination of all these
methods can go a long way in sustaining the fishery.
3.2. Description of the fishery in the major landing sites of the Okavango
3.2.0.1. Seronga
3.2.0.1.1. Demographics
A total of 142 fishers were interviewed in Seronga. The majority of the fishers were male
(Table 41). Only 21.13% of fishers were female. Most of the fishers were in the age class
of 21-30 years (Table 40). Children ten years and less did not fish at all in Seronga. Only
three fishers were above 80 years old. The majority of fishers were from the Bayei tribe
(Table 42) while a significant proportion was of the Bambukushu ethnic origin (15.79%).
Basarwa, Bakgalagadi, Barotse, Baxhereku and the other tribes combined made up less
than 20% of the fishery. The majority of fishers were single (Table 43) while a significant
proportion was married (22.08%). A very small proportion of fishers were divorced
(1.95%) while 3.90% were widowed.
The majority of fishers have spent ten years and less fishing (Table 44) while a
significant proportion has spent 11-20 years fishing (15.97%). There were no fishers that
had spent more than 80 years fishing. The majority of fishers have spent 21-30 years
living in the village (Table 45). Less than 40% of fishers have spent more than 30 years
living in the village. No fishers had spent more than 80 years living in the village. Most
of the catch is taken for home consumption (Table 46). Some of the catch is disposed of
by both selling and consuming at home (30.73%). Small proportions of the catch are sold
and bartered (8.38%) and 4.47% respectively. The majority of fishers are part-time
(Table 47) and a large proportion is seasonal (35.46%). Very few fishers are fulltime
(7.09%).
3.2.0.1.2. Fishing Gear
There are 144 boats in Seronga (Table 48). The majority of these boats are dugout canoes
(72.92%) while a significant proportion is fiberglass canoes (15.97%). Aluminum boats
make up (6.25%) of the boats while a very small proportion of boats are made up of
fiberglass boats (4.86%). Most of the boats are used for fishing (Table 49). A significant
proportion of boats are used as a form of water transport (40.91%). A very small amount
of boats is used for poling (4.04%). The majority of boats are non-motorized (Table 50).
Only 5.69% of boats are motorized. Most of the boats are personally owned by the fishers
(Table 51).
The predominant type of gear used in Seronga is the gillnet (Table 52). Some other gear
used in the fishery is hook and line (27.93%) and baskets (2.79%). Other gear not
mentioned here make up 2.23% of all the gear in Seronga. Of all the gear available,
75.70% are in use (Table 53). For gillnets, the most abundant mesh size is 100mm (Table
54). Mesh size 115mm makes up 29.76% of all gillnets while 125mm makes up 20.46%.
The mesh size that is available in small proportions is 50mm, making up only 7. 30% of
all gillnets. 100mm is the mesh size that is utilized the most (Table 55). It is followed by
115mm (27.46%), 125mm (21.53%), 75mm (11.86%) and finally 50mm (7.96%). Most
of the gear is used seasonally (Table 56). A significant proportion of gear is used
occasionally (40.67%) while few fishers use their gear all year round (14%). The
majority of fishing gear is personally owned by the fishers themselves (Table 57). Of all
the gear found in Seronga the majority has a lifespan of less than 1 year (Table 59). There
is very little gear with a lifespan that is more five years (0.63%).
3.2.0.1.3. Fishing activity
The Seronga fishery has employed 246 people (Table 58). Most of the employees are
family assistants (91.06%). There are very few people hired permanently as full time
employees (6.91%). No one is hired from outside the village while 2.03% of people hired
to fish are family friends. The best fishing season in this village is summer (Table 60)
while the worst fishing season is winter (Table 61). Fishing areas preferred the most are
lagoons (Table 62) while the least preferred fishing area is the main channel. Most fishers
share fishing areas with neighbours (Table 63). Very few fishers in Seronga share fishing
areas with tour operators (4.41%). Seronga fishers do not need any permission to fish
(Table 64).
3.2.0.1.4. Present resource management
Most of the fishers in Seronga do not know of any banned fishing method (Table 66).
However, a significant proportion know that small mesh sizes have been banned
(23.01%), while 21.68% know that poisoning has been banned. Only 11.95% of fishers
allege that seining is banned and 18.14% purport that drive fishing is banned. Of the
fishers that allege to know of a form of banned fishing methods, the majority attribute
banning to the local authority (Table 67). Most fishers in Seronga do not know of any
illegal fishing activities (Table 68). Of the few that allege illegal fishing the majority
blames outsiders as the culprits (Table 69). When found, culprits are usually warned
(Table 70). There are very few fishing conflicts in this region (Table 71) and most of
these conflicts are with locals (Table 72). The bone of contention is mainly fishing
grounds (Table 73).
3.2.0.1.5. Future resource management
Most of the fishers in Seronga strongly feel that the fishery should be regulated (Table
74) by both the government and the traditional authority (Table 75). Fishers want these
regulations to be used mainly for conserving fish (Table 76). There is a general consensus
that detrimental fishing methods should be banned (Table 77).
3.2.0.2. Mogotho
There were 61 fishers interviewed in this village (Table 79), 60.66% of which are male
while 39.34% are female. Most of the fishers are in the age class of 21-30 (Table 78).
The Mogotho fishery is dominated by the Bambukushu tribe which is seconded by
Baxhereku (Table 80). Most of the fishers are not married (Table 81). The fishery is
dominated by young people in the age class of 0-10 years (Table 82). Mogotho fishers are
not very migratory with the majority having spent 21-30 years living in the village (Table
83). The majority of the fishers are subsistence fishers (Table 84). Only 5% of fishers are
commercial fishers in the village. Fishing is mostly done seasonally (Table 85).
3.2.0.2.2. Fishing gear
There is a total of 59 boats in Mogotho (Table 86). 93.22% of these boats are dug out
canoes while 6.78% are aluminum boats. There are no fiber glass canoes and fiber glass
boats. The majority of the boats are used for fishing (Table 87). A significant proportion
is also used as a form of transport (31.25%). Most of the boats are non-motorized (Table
88). A large number of boats are owned by the fishers (Table 89). The majority of gear
used is gillnets (Table 90). Hook and line makes up 17.29% of all the gear while Baskets
make up 15.04% of the gear in Mogotho. Of all the gear available 90.23% are in use
(Table 91). The majority of gillnets (54.65%) are 115mm stretched mesh (Table 92).
40.70% are 100mm stretched mesh while only 4.65% are 125mm stretched mesh.
Gillnets with mesh sizes 50mm and 75mm are not available in Mogotho. There is a total
of 86 gillnets in Mogotho and all of them are in use (Table 93). Most of the gear is used
seasonally (Table 94) and it is personally owned by the fishers (Table 95). The majority
of gear lasts a maximum of 1 year (Table 97). There is no gear with a lifespan that is
more than 5 years.
Mogotho fishery has hired 81 people (Table 96), the majority of which are family
assistants (95.06%). The most preferred fishing season is summer (Table 98) and the least
preferred fishing season is winter (Table 99). The preferred fishing area (Table 100) is
lagoons (38.03%) and floodplains (32.39%). Fishing areas are mostly shared with
neighbours (Table 101). All fishers do not need permission to fish in Mogotho (Table
102) and none of them pays to fish (Table 103).
The majority of fishers know that fish poisoning has been banned (Table 104). An almost
equal amount of fishers (25.56%) do not know of any banned fishing methods. Some of
the fishers mentioned the following types of fishing methods as banned methods: small
mesh (24.44%), seining (14.44%) and drive fishing (8.89%). Of those fishers that
mentioned that there are some banned fishing methods, the majority said that banning
was instituted by the local authority (Table 105). The majority of fishers do not know of
any illegal fishing activities in the village (Table 106). Of those that have witnessed
illegal fishing, all of them attribute it to outsiders (Table 107). Any culprit that is found
fishing illegally is punished by confiscating his nets (Table 108). There are not many
fishing conflicts in Mogotho (Table 109). The few conflicts that exist are all between
locals (Table 110) and usually it is about boat theft (50%) and fishing grounds (50%).
Most of the fishers do want the fishery to be regulated (Table 112) and they want
regulations to be enforced by both government and the traditional authority (Table 113).
The majority of fishers want regulations to be used for conservation of fish (Table 114).
A number of ways of ascertaining fish conservation are very much appreciated by fishers
in Mogotho such as, banning fish poisoning (27.59%), banning seine nets (19.83%) and
banning small mesh net sizes (18.97%).
3.2.0.3. Ngarange
There are 42 fishers in Ngarange (Table 117). 54.76% of which are male while 45.24%
are female. The majority of fishers are in the age class of 31-40 years (Table 116) and
they are from the Bambukushu ethnic origin (Table 118). A significant proportion of
Ngarange fishers is also made of Baxhereku (28.57%) and Basarwa (21.43%). The
majority of fishers (66.67%) are single (Table 119) and they have fished for only 10 years
and less (Table 120). Most of the fishers have lived in Ngarange for 31-40 years (Table
121). An equal proportion has lived in Ngarange for 21-30 years and 11-20 years
(19.05%) each. The majority of Ngarange fishers are Subsistence fishers (Table 122).
There are no commercial fishers. Fishing is carried out seasonally (Table 123).
There are 28 boats in Ngarange (Table 125). The majority of boats are dugout canoes
(85.71%) and they are mostly used for fishing (Table 125). Most of the boats are non-
motorised (Table 126) and they are personally owned by the fishers (Table 127). Of the
different gear types found in Ngarange, the majority is gillnets (Table 128). Hook and
lines make 26.32% of all gear while Baskets make up 16.84% of all gear in Ngarange. Of
all the gear available in Ngarange, 81.05% are in use. Ngarange has 52 gill nets. The
majority of gillnets are 100mm stretched mesh (Table 130). A lot more other gillnets are
115mm stretched mesh (48.08%). 50mm and 125 mm stretched mesh sizes are not
available in Ngarange while a very small proportion of gillnets are 75mm (1.92%). An
equal amount of both 100mm and 115mm mesh sizes are in use (Table 131). The
majority of gear is used seasonally (Table 132) and it is owned by the fishers themselves
(Table 133). The majority of gear has a lifespan of less than 1 year (Table 135).
The fishery in Ngarange has hired 66 people (Table 134). The best fishing season is
Summer (Table 136) while the worst fishing season is winter (Table 137). The preferred
fishing areas are lagoons (Table 138) and they are mostly shared with everyone (Table
139). Nobody needs permission to fish (Table 140).
The majority of fishers do not know of any banned fishing methods in Ngarange (Table
141). Of those who know of banned fishing methods, the majority say that it is
government that banned (Table 142). Most of fishers do not know of any illegal fishing
activities in the area (Table 143). Of those who proclaim illegal fishing activities all of
them say it is done by foreigners (Table 144) and all the culprits are warned (Table 145).
There are very few conflicts (7.14%) in the fishery (Table 146) and all of them are with
locals (Table 147). Conflicts are either about fishing grounds or fishing methods (Table
148), but the majority of conflicts are about fishing grounds (66.67%).
The majority of fishers in Ngarange want the fishery to be regulated (Table 149) and they
want the regulation to be enforced by both government and the traditional authority
(Table 150). Most fishers want the regulations to be used for conserving fish (Table 151).
Although most fishers advocated for the banning of fish poisoning as the most preferred
conservation practice (Table 152), they generally want a variety of methods to be
employed e.g. Banning of seine nets (23%), Banning small mesh sizes (18.84%) and
banning drive fishing (13.04%).
3.2.0.4. Kauxwi
A total of 50 fishers were identified in Kauxwi (Table 154). Most of the fishers are
female 62% or 31 in number while there are only 19 (38%) male fishers. Kauxwi fishery
is made up of a majority of people in the age class of 21-30 years (Table 153) making up
(36%) and 31-40 years making up (34%) of the fishery. There are only two ethnic groups
in the fishery (Table 155). Bambukushu form the larger proportion of the fishery (98%)
while Baxhereku only make up 2% of the fishery. The majority of fishers are not married
(Table 156). Only 18% of fishers are married and 2% are widowed. Most of the fishers
have spent between 11-20 years fishing (Table 157) making up 36.73% of the fishery and
21-30 years making up 34.69% of the fishery. The majority of fishers have spent between
21 and 40 years living in the village (71.42%). Most of the fishers fish for home
consumption (Table 159). A significant proportion of fishers dispose of their catch by
bartering (34.69%). Most fishers resort to fishing only seasonally (Table 160).
There are 10 boats in Kauxwi and all of them are dugout canoes (Table 161). The
majority of boats are used for fishing (Table 162) and all of them are non-motorised
(Table 163). Most of the boats are personally owned (Table 164). There is total of 57
gears in Kauxwi (Table 165). Baskets make up 50.88% of all gear while hook and line
make up 42.11% of gear in Kauxwi. Gillnets make up only 7.02% of all gear in Kauxwi.
Of all the gear in kauxwi 96.49% are in use (Table 166). The most prevalent mesh size is
115mm stretched mesh (Table 167). Another mesh size available is 100mm, making up
25% of all the nets in Kauxwi. All of the nets available (4) are in use (Table 168). Fishing
gear is used mostly on a seasonal basis (Table 169) and it is personally owned by the
fishers (Table 170). Gear lifespan is mostly 2 years and less (Table 172). Only 14% of
gear has a lifespan of 3 years or more.
Kauxwi fishery has hired 21 people (Table 171). Most of the people hired are family
assistants (90.48%) and only 9.52% are employees. The best fishing season in Kauxwi is
summer (Table 173) and the worst fishing season is winter (Table 174). Preferred fishing
areas are lagoons (52.17%), side channel (17.39%) and flood plains (23.19%). Fishing
areas are usually shared mostly with neighbours (57.41%; Table 176) and with everyone
else (31.48%). No one needs permission to fish (Table 177).
The fishing methods that Kauxwi fishers know to have been banned are small mesh size
(29.03%) and poisoning (32.26%). The rest of fishers do not know of any banned fishing
methods (38.71%). Banning is said to have been instituted by government (Table 179).
There are no illegal fishing activities in Kauxwi (Table 180). Very few fishers experience
conflicts (Table 181) and all the conflicts are with locals (Table 182) about stolen nets
(Table 183).
The majority of fishers in kauxwi do not want the fishery to be regulated (Table184). Of
those fishers that want regulation the majority want regulations to be enforced by
government (Table 185). Fishers want regulations to be used for the conservation of fish
(Table 186). Kauxwi fishers want a combination of methods to be used as way of
ensuring sustainable utilization of fish (Table 187).
3.2.0.5. Shakawe
There are a total of 161 fishers in Shakawe (Table 189). 32.92% of which are male while
67.08% are female. Most fishers are in the age class of 21-30 years (Table 188). A
significant proportion of fishers are in the age class of 31-40 years (25.63%) and 11-20
years (21.88%). The majority of fishers are from the Bambukushu ethnic origin (Table
190) making up 95.60% of the fishery in Shakawe. Most of the fishers are not married
(Table 191) and the majority have spent 11-20 years fishing (Table 192). A significant
proportion of fishers have spent 0-10 years fishing (27.16%) and 21-30 years fishing
(20.99%). The majority of fishers in Shakawe fish for home consumption (Table 194).
There are very few commercial fishers (4.97%) while a considerable proportion of fishers
also dispose of their catch by bartering (11.18%). The majority of fishers are seasonal
(Table 195).
There is a total of 31 boats in Shakawe (Table 196) and the majority of these boats are
used for fishing (Table 197). Most of the boats are non-motorised (Table 198) and they
are owned by the fishers themselves (Table 199). There are 217 gears in Shakawe (Table
200) of which the majority are Baskets (47%). A large proportion of gears is also made
up of hook and lines (34.10%) while 15.67% is gillnets. Of the 217 gears, 203 (93.55%)
are in use (Table 201). There are 34 gillnets in Shakawe (Table 202). The majority of
gillnets are 100mm (44.12%). Other mesh sizes are 75mm (29.41%), 115mm (20.59%)
and 50mm (5.88%). There are no gillnets with 125mm mesh size. A total of 33 gillnets
are in use (Table 203) of which the majority are 100mm mesh size (42.42%). Other mesh
sizes in use are 75mm (30.30%), 115mm (21.21%) and 50mm (6.06%). Gear use is
mostly seasonal in Shakawe (Table 204) and gear is personally owned (Table 205). The
majority of gear has a lifespan of 2years and less (Table 207) and less than 6% of gear
has a life span of 4 years or more.
Shakawe fishery has hired 68 people (Table 206). 98.53% of the people hired are family
assistants and only 1.47% are employees. The best fishing season is summer (Table 208)
and the worst fishing season is winter (Table 210). The most preferred fishing area is
lagoons (Table 210). A significant proportion of fishers also favour side channels
(23.08%), main channel (20.33%) and floodplains (13.19%). Fishing areas are mostly
shared with neighbours (40.83%; Table 211) and also with family (29.82%). To a lesser
extent there is sharing of fishing areas with tour operators (4.13%). There is no
permission needed to fish Shakawe (Table 212).
The majority of fishers in shakawe proclaim that the banned fishing method that they
know of is poisoning (Table 215; 47.68%). Other methods that fishers know to be banned
are small mesh (23.18%), seining (2.65%) and a significant proportion knows of no
banned fishing method (26.49%). Of the fishers who know banned fishing methods, the
majority say that banning was done by government (50%; Table 216). There are few
cases of illegal fishing (Table 217) and the culprits are all local people (Table 218) who
are always warned when found (Table 219). Few conflicts do occur in the fishery (Table
220) and normally conflicts are always with locals (Table 221). All conflicts are about
fishing grounds (Table 222).
Shakawe fishers want the fishery to be regulated (Table 223) and they want regulations to
be enforced by both government and the traditional authority (Table 224). The major
purpose of regulating the fishery should be for conservation purposes (Table 225). The
most preferred sustainable fishing method is to ban fish poisoning (Table 226).
3.2.0.6. Sepopa
There are 17 fishers in Sepopa (Table 229). The majority of which are male (64.71%) and
only 35.29% are female. Most fishers fall in the age class of 21-30 years (Table 227) and
a significant proportion lies in the age class of 31-40 years (23.53%). The majority of the
ethnic groups found in Sepopa fishery are Bambukushu (Table 230; 47%) and Bayei
(41.18%). Basarwa and other ethnic groups make up 5.88% of the fishery each. Most of
the fishers are not married (Table 231). The majority of fishers have spent only 0-10
years fishing (Table 232). Equal proportions of fishers have lived in Sepopa for 11-20
years and 21-30 years each (23.53%). Fishers who have lived in Sepopa for 21-30 years
and 31-40 years each make up 17.65% of the fishery. Most fishers in Sepopa fish for
home consumption (Table 234) and they fish on seasonal and part time basis only (Table
235). 52.94% of them are seasonal while 47% are part time. There are no full time
fishers.
There are 10 boats in Sepopa (Table 236) 9or 90% of which are dugout canoes. These
boats are mainly used for fishing (Table 237) and they are non motorized (Table 238).
The majority of them are personally owned by the fishers themselves (Table 239). There
are 33 gears in Sepopa (Table 240). A large proportion of the gear is hook and line
(48.48%) followed by Gillnets (33.33%). Baskets only make up 6.06 % of the fishery and
12.12% is made up of other gear. 54.55% of all gear are in use in Sepopa. There are 11
gillnets (Table 242) the majority of which are of mesh size 75mm (63.64%) followed by
115mm (18.18%) and 50mm and 100mm (9.09%) each.. There is no gillnet with a mesh
size of 125mm. Of the 11 gillnets, 7 are in use (Table 243). The majority of gillnets in
use are comprised of 75mm mesh size (42.86%). The other mesh sizes that are in use are
115mm (28.57%), 50mm and 100mm (14.29%) each. The majority of gear is used
occasionally (Table 244) and it is owned by the fishers themselves (Table 245). Gear
lifespan is mostly less than 1 year (Table 247). However some gear last for one year
(25%), 2 years and 3 years (18.75%) each. There is no gear with a lifespan of 4 years and
more.
Sepopa fishery has hired 17 people (Table 246). The best fishing season is Summer
(Table 248) and the worst fishing season is Winter (Table 249). The most preferred
fishing areas are lagoons (64.71%; Table 250) and a considerable proportion of fishers
also favour side channels (23.53%). Fishing areas are mostly shared with neighbours
(42.31%; Table 251) and also with family members (34.62%). To a lesser extent, there is
sharing of fishing areas with tour operators (7.69%). No permission is needed to fish in
Sepopa.
The majority of fishers do not know of any banned fishing method in Sepopa (Table
253). However a small proportion of fishers claimed that small mesh sizes are banned
(17.65%). Of the fishers who claimed that there are banned fishing methods they all said
that banning was done by the local authority (Table 254). There are few illegal fishing
activities in Sepopa (Table 255) and they are done by local people (50%; Table 256) and
outsiders (50%). The culprits if found are normally punished by confiscating their nets
(50%; Table 257) or they may be warned (50%). There are very few conflicts (Table
258) and they are all with tour operators (Table 259) about fishing grounds (Table 260).
Sepopa fishers all agree that the fishery should be regulated (Table 261) by both the
traditional authority and the government (37.5%) each. A significant proportion of fishers
want both government and the traditional authority to enforce regulations (25%) for
proper conservation of fish (Table 263). Banning of fish poisoning, seine nets and small
mesh net sizes (Table 264) are the most preferred methods of ensuring sustainable
fishing.
3.2.0.7. Etsha 13
The majority of fishers in Etsha 13 are in the age class of 21-30 years (Table 265).
Children of 10 years and less do not fish. Fishers in the age class of 11-20 years make up
10.61% of the fishery. A significant proportion of the fishery is made up of fishers in the
age bracket of 31-40 years (18.69%) and 41-50 years (17.68%). Fishers in the age bracket
of 51 and over make up only 15.66% of the fishery. There are 198 fishers in Etsha 13
(Table 266) the majority of which are female (60.61%; 120). Only 78 fishers (39.39%)
are male. Bambukushu tribe make up the majority of the fishery (Table 267; 64.14%).
Another tribe that makes up a significant proportion of the fishery is Bayei (17.68%).
Baxhereku make up 8.59% of the fishery while Basarwa make up only 0.51%. Other
tribes combined form 9.09% of the fishery. Most of the fishers are not married (Table
268) and they have spent between 11 and 20 years fishing (Table 269). A significant
proportion of fishers have spent 10 years and less fishing (22.73%) while an almost equal
amount of fishers have spent 21-30 (14.14%) and 31-40 years fishing (15.15%). The
majority of fishers have lived in the village for 21-30 years (Table 270) and they mainly
fish for home consumption (Table 271).Most of the fishers are seasonal (Table 272).
There are 47 boats in Etsha 13 (Table 273) the majority of which are dugout canoes
(63.83%). A large proportion of boats is also made up of fiber glass canoes (27.66%).
Aluminium boats make up 6.38% of all the boats while 2.13% is made up of fiber glass
boats. 74.07% of boats are used for fishing (Table 274) while 16.67% is used for poling.
Only 9.26% of boats are used as transport. The majority of boats are non-motorized
(Table 275) and they are personally owned by fishers themselves (Table 276). There are
363 gears of different types in Etsha 13 (Table 277). Gillnets make up the majority of the
gear (41.87%). Baskets make up 31.40%, hook and lines 21.49% and others 5.23% of all
gears in the fishery. Of all the gear available only 75.76% are in use (Table 278). There
are 150 gillnets in Etsha 13 (Table 279). The majority of gillnets are of 100mm mesh size
(60.67%). 115mm mesh size forms 29.33% of gillnets. The rest of mesh sizes make up
10% of all gillnets. The mesh size that is utilized the most is 100mm (60%; Table 280).
Another mesh size that is utilized in large numbers is 115mm (29.6%). Other meshes
make up only 10.4% of all gillnets that are in use. The majority of gears are used
seasonally (Table 281) and they are owned by the fishers themselves (Table 281). Most
gears have a lifespan of less than 1 year (Table 284).
Etsha 13 fishery has hired 121 people to fish (Table 283). The majority of the people
hired are family assistants (96.69%). The best fishing season is summer (Table 285) and
the worst fishing season is winter (Table 286). The most preferred fishing areas are
lagoons (Table 287) and they are normally shared with neighbours (54.81%; Table 288)
and Family (40%). Etsha 13 fishers do not need any permission to fish (Table 289) and
they don’t pay (Table 291).
Several fishing methods are banned in Etsha 13 (Table 292). Fishing with small mesh
sizes is a method that most fishers know to be banned (29.21%). Other methods also
proclaimed to be banned are seining (20.90%), drive fishing (17.06%) and poisoning
(23.88%). Both government and the local authority are known to have instituted banning
(Table 293). In spite of proscription on several fishing methods, there is no illegal fishing
(Table 294). The majority of fishers do not have conflicts with any body (Table 295).
However a significant proportion alleged that they do have conflicts (31.98%). Most of
the conflicts are with locals (Table 296) about fishing grounds (Table 297).
The majority of fishers answered in the affirmative with regard to the regulation of the
fishery (Table 298). They want regulations to be enforced by both the traditional
authority and government (Table 299) in order to conserve fish for future generations
(Table 300). Several methods are preferred for sustainable utilization of fish resources
(Table 301). The method that fishers prefer the most is banning of fish poisoning
(21.85%). Other methods advocated for are banning of small mesh sizes (18.77%),
banning seine nets (15.17%) and the use of closed seasons (13.62%).
3.2.0.8. Ditshipi
There are 61 fishers in Ditshipi village (Table 303), the majority of which are male
(57.38%). Female fishers form 42.62% of the fishery. Most fishers in Ditshipi are in the
age group of 21-30 years (31.15%; Table 302). There is also a significant proportion of
fishers in the age class of 31-40 years and 41-50 years both making up 27.87% and
13.11% of the fishery respectively. Other age classes make up 9.84% (11-20 years),
8.20% (51-60 and 61-70 years) and 1.64% (71-80 years). The majority of fishers in
Ditshipi are of the Bayei ethnic origin (86.89%; Table 304). Other tribes, with the
exclusion of Bbakgalagadi, Barotse, and Baxhereku make up only 13.12% of the fishery.
The majority of fishers are not married (Table 305) and they have spent only 10 years and
less fishing (Table 306). Fishers that have spent more than 30 years fishing make up only
26.24% of the fishery. Most fishers have spent 10 years and less living in the village
(Table 307). A significant proportion has spent 11-20 years (22.95%), 21-30 years
(19.67%) and 31-40 years (18.03%) living in Ditshipi village. Fishers that have spent
more than 40 years living in the village make up only 6.56% of the fishery. The majority
of fishers in Ditshipi are subsistence fishers (Table 308). 68.25% of them fish for home
consumption while 25.4% sell surplus fish. There is no bartering in Ditshipi village and
the majority of fishers are seasonal (Table 309).
There are 42 boats in Ditshipi village (Table 310). The majority of boats are dug out
canoes (97.62%) while 2.38% of boats are fiber glass canoes. There are no fiber glass and
aluminum boats in this village. Most of the boats are used for poling (44.44%; Table 311)
and fishing (42.86%). Only 12.70% of boats are used as a form of water transport. All the
boats in this village are non-motorised (Table 312) and most of them are personally
owned by fishers themselves (Table 313). There are 136 gears in Ditshipi (Table 314).
The majority of gears are gillnets (55.15%), followed by hook and lines (27.94%) and
baskets (11.03%). Other gears make up only 5.88% of the fishery. Of all gears in the
fishery, 64.71% are in use (Table 315). Ditshipi village has 71 gillnets (Table 316), the
majority of which are 100mm mesh size (57.75%). Gillnets with mesh sizes of 50mm,
115mm, and 75mm make up 22.54%, 16.90% and 2.82% of the fishery respectively.
There are no gillnets with 125mm mesh size. The mesh size that is highly utilized is
100mm (77.27%; Table 317). Another mesh size that is utilized in significant proportions
is 115mm (13.64%). Mesh sizes of 50mm and 75mm combined make up 9.10% of all
mesh sizes in use. Most of the gear is used seasonally (Table 318) and it is personally
owned by fishers themselves (Table 319). The majority of gears in Ditshipi have a
lifespan of 1 year (39.66%; Table 321). Gears with a lifespan of less than 1 year make up
36.21% of the fishery. Gear lifespan of 2 and more years makes up only 24.13% of all
gears in Ditshipi village.
Ditshipi fishery has hired 95 people (Table 320) of whish the majority are family
assistants (98.95%). The best fishing season is summer (60.94%; Table 322). Another
season that is reasonably favoured by fishers in Ditshipi is winter (34.38%). However, on
the other hand the majority of fishers purport that winter is the worst fishing season
(56.45%) and a considerable proportion of fishers also mention summer as the worst
fishing season (30.65%). There may have been a flawed administration of the
questionnaire here since there is no consistency in the fishers’ responses. The most
preferred fishing areas are lagoons (59.26%; Table 324) and flood plains (24.69%) and
they are mostly shared with family (52.08%; Table 325) and neighbours (42.71%). No
permission is needed to fish in Ditshipi (Table 326) and no payment is required (Table
327).
Ditshipi fishers proclaim that several fishing methods have been banned (Table 328). The
majority of fishers point out small mesh size as the method that has been banned
(48.28%). Poisoning is another method that a significant proportion of fishers highlighted
to be a banned fishing method (41.38%). Other methods known to be banned are seining
(6.90%) and drive fishing (3.45%). The majority of fishers allege that government is
responsible for instituting banning (Table 329). Most fishers do not know of any illegal
fishing activities in the village (Table 330). Of the fishers who claim that some form of
illegal fishing does go on, the majority blame outsiders for the practice (57.14%; Table
331) and local people (42.86%). Illegal fishing culprits are usually warned (Table 332)
and some times nets are confiscated. Most fishers do not experience any conflicts (Table
333). However there are few who experience conflicts (21.43%) and these conflicts are
mostly with locals and tour operators (Table 334). The majority of conflicts are about
fishing grounds (Table 335).
The majority of fishers concur that the fishery should be regulated (57.38%; Table 336)
while a significant proportion does not want any regulation at all (42.62%). Of those that
want the fishery to be regulated, the majority want regulation to be done by both
government and the traditional authority (Table 337) in order to conserve fish for future
generations (Table 338). The most favoured conservation method is to ban small mesh
sizes (34.34%; Table 339). Other conservation methods of preference are closed seasons
(20.20%), proscription of seine nets (9.09%), fish poisoning (28.28%) and drive fishing
(6.06%).
3.2.0.9. Daonara
There are 11 fishers in Daonara (Table 341), the majority of which are female. Most
fishers in Daonara are in the age class of 41-50 years (Table 340) and they are from the
Bayei ethnic origin (Table 342). The majority of them are not married (Table 343) and
they have spent 10 years and less fishing (Table 344). A significant proportion of
Daonara fishers have spent between 31 and 40 years fishing (36.36%). Most of them have
lived in the village for only 10 years and less (Table 345). However a significant
proportion of fishers have lived in the village for 31-40 years (27.27%) and 11-20 years
(18.18%). Most of the fish caught is consumed at home (Table 346) and the majority of
fishers fish on a part-time basis (Table 347).
There are five boats in Daonara (Table 348) and all of them are dug out canoes. The boats
are mainly used for poling (50%; Table 349) and also for fishing (35.71%) and as a form
of transport (14.29%). All the boats are non-motorized (Table 350) and they are mostly
owned by the fishers themselves (Table 351). There are 22 fishing gears of different
types (Table 352) the majority of which are gillnets and hook and lines (40.91%) each.
Baskets make up only 18.18% of all gears in the fishery. Of all the gears available,
81.82% are in use (Table 353). There are 10 gillnets in Daonara (Table 354) the majority
of which are of 100mm (60%) and 115mm (20%). Mesh sizes that are in use are 100mm
(71.43%), 50mm and 75mm (14.29%) each. Fishing gear is mostly used on a seasonal
basis (50%; Table 356) and occasionally (41.67%) and it is personally owned by the
fishers themselves (Table 357). Most of the fishing gear has a lifespan of 1 year (Table
359).
Daonara fishery has hired 6 people to fish (Table 358) and all of them are family
assistants. The best fishing season is summer (Table 360) while the worst fishing season
is winter (Table 361). The most preferred fishing areas are side channels (Table 362) and
they are mostly shared with family and neighbours (Table 363). No permission is
required to fish (Table 364).
The majority of fishers do not know of any banned fishing method (Table 365). Of those
who know of some banned fishing methods, the majority pointed out that government
instituted banning (Table 366). Most fishers do not know of any illegal fishing activities
in Daonara (Table 367). Of those who encounter illegal fishers, the majority blame local
people (Table 368) and the culprits are usually warned (Table 369). Most fishers do not
experience any conflicts in Daonara (Table 370). Of those who experience conflicts, it is
mostly with locals (Table 371).
The majority of fishers do want the fishery to be regulated in future (Table 372) by both
the government and the traditional authority (Table 373). They want regulations to be
used both for conserving fish and to keep away outsiders (Table 374). The most preferred
methods of conservation are banning of fish poisoning (44%; Table 375), small mesh
sizes (20%) and seine nets (16%). Some fishers also advocated for the banning of drive
fishing (12%) and the introduction of closed seasons (8%).
3.2.1.0. Khwai
3.2.1.1. Demographics
There are 25 fishers in Khwai (Table 377) the majority of which are Male (60%). Most
fishers fall in the age class of 21-30 years (Table 376) and the majority is from the
Basarwa ethnic origin (Table 378). A significant proportion of fishers are also fro the
Bakgalagadi ethnic origin (36%). Most fishers are not married (Table 379) and they have
fished and lived in the village for only 10 years and less (Tables 380 and 381). No fishers
have lived in Khwai for more than 60 years. Khwai fishery is to a large extent subsistence
based (Table 382) and most fishers are part-time (50%) and seasonal (41.67%). Only
8.33% of fishers are full time.
3.2.1.2. Fishing gear
There are five boats in Khwai (Table 384). The majority is aluminum boats (80%) and
fiber glass canoes (20%). All the boats are used for fishing (Table 385) and they are
personally owned by the fishers themselves (Table 386). There are 20 gears of different
types (Table 387). The majority of the gears are gillnets (Table 387) and the most
abundant mesh size is 50mm (Table 389) which is also the mesh size that is used the
most (58.33%; Table 390) followed by 75mm (33.33%) and 115mm (8.33%). Most gear
is used seasonally (52.63%; Table 391) and occasionally (31.58%). However, 15.79% of
fishers use their gear all year round. The majority of gear is owned by the fishers
themselves (Table 392). Most of the gear has a lifespan that is less than 1 year (Table
394).
3.2.1.3. Fishing activity
Khwai fishery has hired 25 people (Table 393), the majority of which are family
assistants (96%). Only 4% of the people hired to fish are employees. The best fishing
season is autumn (Table 395) and the worst fishing season is winter (Table 396). The
most preferred fishing areas are lagoons (42.42%; Table 397) and side channels (33.33%)
and these areas are mostly shared with family and neighbours (Table 398).The majority
of fishers require no permission needed to fish (Table 399). Of the few that seek
permission to fish, they get it from government (Table 400) and they do not pay (Table
401).
3.2.1.4. Present resource management
Most fishers do not know of any banned fishing method (Table 402). Of those who
proclaim to know of some banned fishing methods, they allege that that government is
responsible for banning (Table 403). The majority of fishers do not know of any illegal
fishing activities in Khwai (Table 404). Of those who encounter illegal fishers, the
majority blame local people (66.67%) and foreigners (33.33%) and the culprits are
usually arrested (Table 406). The majority of fishers do not experience conflicts (Table
407).
3.2.1..5. Future resource management
Most fishers in Khwai do want the fishery to be regulated in future (Table 408) by both
the government and the traditional authority (Table 409). They want regulations to be
used mostly for the conservation of fish but also to keep away outsiders (Table 410).
Several methods of regulating the fishery are preferred (Table 411). For example, the
introduction of closed seasons (13.46%), banning of seine nets (15.38%), fish poisoning
(17.31%) and drive fishing (13.46%). However the most preferred method of
conservation is proscription of small mesh sizes (25%).
4. DISCUSSION
4.1. The whole fishery
4.1.1. Demographics
In 1987, the population of Ngamiland district was estimated at about 80 000 and 80% of
the people were living in and around the delta (Skjonsberg and Merafe, 1987). Fourteen
years later in 2001, the population had grown to 124 712 and the Okavango region
experienced the highest growth rates in the district between 1991 and 2001 (Ngamiland
district settlement strategy, 2003). In the Namibian section of the Okavango region in
1994 there was an estimated population of more than 136 000 people and an estimated
90% of the population lived within 10 km of the river and approximately 80% within
5km. The social structure is mainly rurally based, and many of the economic and social
activities in the region are connected to the river (Hay et al, 2000). This is an indication
that the majority of people in the Okavango region derive their livelihood directly from
the river.
One of the major livelihood activities that the river provides is fishing and most of the
national fish out put (81%) is currently derived from the Okavango fishery (Fisheries
annual report. 2004/2005). The present study revealed that there are 2703 fishers in the
Okavango. However, Mosepele (2001) found that there were 3289 fishers in 1997 of
which 46 were workers which means that there were actually 3243 fishers while Zwieten
(1995) identified 9301 fishers in the Mweru – Luapula fishery in Zambia from the 1992
frame survey data. According to Donda (2006) in 1972 only 200 fishermen were reported
to be actively fishing in Lake Chiuta in Malawi and by 1990 the total number of fishers
had increased to about 468 with 975 assistants, making a total of 1443 fishers. In 1980,
over 450 commercial fishers were operating along the Zambezi-Chobe floodplains in the
Caprivi area (Skelton 2001).
Mosepele (2001) defined a fisher as anybody who owned any kind of fishing gear
regardless of their age with the exception of ownership of boats since these were assumed
to be traditional means of water transport and therefore they were not necessarily used for
fishing. In this particular survey, a fisher was identified as anybody who had fished in the
last five years regardless of whether they had fishing gear or not at the time of
questioning. The slight decrease (17.8%) in the number of fishers could be attributed to a
number of reasons. One could be tempted to posit that the cessation of government
financial aid played a major role in the decline of fisher numbers. The usual analogy is
that fishers are no longer capable of maintaining their fishing equipment and storage
facilities and eventually they abandon the trade (Pers com). Contrary to this analogy,
commercial fisher numbers have ostensibly doubled from the 44 that existed in 1997 to
85 in 2005. In the 2005 frame survey a commercial fisher was taken to be any body that
caught fish solely for sale using any kind of fishing method. Therefore this could have
resulted in the increase in commercial fisher numbers assuming that a commercial fisher
for the 1997 frame survey was identified as a gillnet fisher with an established business.
Hook and line fishers that fish solely for sale could have contributed to the increase in
commercial fishers. Therefore the general analogy adumbrated above could still hold for
the decline in the total number of fishers. Another reason that could have resulted in the
slight decrease in fisher numbers is the inaccessibility of Xhaxhaba village during the
present survey which prevented data collection from this area.
The 2005 frame survey data revealed that the majority of fishers are female (53%) while
males make up 47% of the fishery. This is in agreement with what Hay et al (2000) found
in the Namibian section of the Okavango region where 55% of the fishery is made up of
women. However, Mosepele (2001) found that the Okavango fishery was dominated by
males (56%) from the 1997 frame survey. The increase in the number of women could be
ascribed to the definition of a fisher in the 2005 frame survey. Since a fisher was
identified as anybody who had fished in the last five years, it was more encompassing
irregardless of whether one had fishing gear or not. Another reason could be the one
advanced before whereby men are no longer involved in the fishery in large numbers
because they could not sustain their businesses after government stopped assisting them
financially. This would therefore result in women dominating the fishery since they use
traditional gear and they do not need financial assistance. However, it is worth noting that
the commercial gillnet fishery is mainly dominated by males (Pers.observ).
The tribe that makes up the majority of the fishery is the Bambukushu (67.5%) followed
by Bayei (19.8%). This is in agreement with Mosepele (2001) where the Bambukushu
made up 68.8% of the fishery followed by Bayei with 23.1%. This shows that the
Okavango fishery is dominated mainly by two major tribes following the pattern
observed in Lake Chiuta in Malawi where the tribes are mainly Lomwe and Yao (Donda
2006). A similar observation was made also in Lake Mweru Luapula where there are two
major tribes making up the fishery: the Lunda and the Bemba (Zwieten et al 1995). These
are fisheries with similar characteristics and it goes to show that generally as observed by
Zwieten (1995) the influx of fishers from other regions appears to be fairly low. Most
fishers in the Okavango are not married (77.6%). The sex structure shows that in
Ngamiland there are more female than male headed households (Ngamiland district
settlement strategy 2003). According to the district strategy (2003) this observation can
be attributed to a number of reasons; the first one being the changing marriage patterns
which result in child bearing out of wed lock. This phenomenon results in single parent
families headed by females because men rarely commit themselves towards the care of
children born out of wed lock. The second reason is the absence of employment
opportunities which results in men migrating else where to look for jobs while females
are left behind to tend for the kids. The third reason is the death of a partner or divorce.
There are very few widowed (2%) and divorced (1.7%) fishers thus reducing the
probability of the third reason. The most plausible reason in this instance is the first one
followed by the second one. The increase in the number of women fishers could also be
attributed to these two reasons. The provision of ARV therapy could have played a major
role in ameliorating the third reason.
The majority of fishers are relatively new in the trade, having spent only 0-10 years
fishing. This is because the majority of fishers are in the age class of 21-30 years.
Assuming that children start fishing at around the age of 10 years, it therefore follows
that most fishers in the Okavango should have fished for approximately 10 years. There
are very few immigrant fishers 11.3% and most fishers have spent 21-30 years living in
their villages. Okavango fishers are therefore not very migratory and a similar
observation was made in Lake Chiuta where 75% of sampled fishers were found to have
lived in the area either since birth or for more than 30 years (Donda 2006).
4.1.2. Fishing gear
There are 975 fishing craft in the delta, a large proportion of which are dug out canoes
(80%). This shows a significant increase of 65.5% in the number of fishing craft from the
1997 frame survey where Mosepele (2001) identified only 589 fishing craft. There is also
an increase in the number of dugout canoes from 63.8% in 1997 to 80% in 2005, but
during both surveys dugout canoes were the most abundant fishing craft in the delta.
Other similar observations have been made elsewhere in Africa. For example, in Lake
Chiuta in Malawi the number of fishing craft increased from 351 in 1990 to 739 in 1996
with dugout canoes dominating (Donda 2006). On the contrary, 8 674 active canoes were
counted in Lake Victoria of which only 26% were dugout and 74% planked, the latter of
which (14%) were powered with outboard engines (Tumwebaze and Coenen 1991). From
the Sofala frame survey in Mozambique, the most important fishing craft used was the
canoe (85%) and the main system of propulsion used on the canoes was paddles (F.A.O
1990).
On the other hand, there was a steep decrease in the number of fiber glass boats from
28.5% in 1997 to 2.97% in 2005. Aluminum boats have remained almost stable with a
mild increase from 7.7% in 1997 to 8.92% in 2005. It is apparent that the increase in the
number of fishing craft is attributable to the increase in the number of dugout canoes
(16.2%) and also the slight increase in the number of aluminum boats (1.2%). Fishers
may be switching back to the use of dugout canoes for economic reasons thus resulting in
the crafting of more of these boats. Since the stoppage of F.A.P. most fishers cannot
afford to fuel and maintain their engines. The steep decline in the number of fiber glass
boats could be attributed to the fact that in 1997, fiber glass boats and fiber glass canoes
were not separated whereas in 2005 the two were counted separately. A combined count
of both fiber glass canoes and fiber glass boats in 2005 makes (11.2%). Generally there is
a decrease in the number of fiber glass fishing craft probably because they have to be
purchased and most fishers cannot afford them. Mosepele (2001) purports that the
preponderance of traditional fishing craft suggests that the greatest percentage of fishers
is economically marginalized assuming that most cannot afford modern fishing craft.
This scenario has recently been worsened by lack of government aid. Most fishers have
not yet been well informed about the CEDA scheme that has replaced F.A.P and
moreover, they cannot afford the loan repayments
There are 4487 fishing gears in the delta. Hook and line fishers form the majority of the
fishers in the delta with a total number of 1492 followed closely by gillnet fishers (1468)
then basket fishers (1336) and others at (191). For the frame survey in the Sofala
Province in Mozambique (FAO, 1990) the most important gears were the beach seine
(37%) and the hand line (34%), followed by the surface gillnet (23%). Mosepele (2001)
also found that hook and line fishers were the most abundant in the 1997 frame survey of
the Okavango delta with a total number of 1433 fishers followed by basket fishers (1433)
and there were very few gillnet fishers (332). This shows that the Okavango fishery is
dominated by hook and line fishers and these fishers have increased since 1997 by 43
fishers. According to Mosepele (2001) there are more males in the hook and line fishery
than females and they are of school going age from the Bambukushu and to a lesser
extent Bayei ethnic origins. Hook and lines may be preferred because they are cheap to
purchase and maintain while being reasonably efficient. The most caught species in the
hook and line fishery is Tilapia (Mosepele, 2001). In the Okavango the most cherished
food species also happens to be Tilapia (Pers observ), therefore this could be another
reason why hook and line fishing is preferred over other fishing methods.
Gillnet fishers have increased drastically from 332 in 1997 to 1468 in 2005. In the Mweru
Luapula fishery, gillnets were observed to be the most common fishing gear of the
fishery owned by 71% of the fishers (Zwietien et al 1995). According to Howard (1992)
fishing techniques in floodplain fisheries include seine and gillnets, traps, lines, spears
and, especially in Bangweulu, extensive bunds built along the floodplain across the
direction of drainage, with weirs and palisades to collect fish. Skelton (2001) reports that
gillnets and other more modern equipment are also used by subsistence and commercial
fishermen along the larger floodplains and in man-made impoundments. However in spite
of the increase in the number of gillnet fishers, there has been a decrease in the number of
gillnets from 1410 in 1997 to 1314 in 2005. This is an indication that in the past, very few
fishers owned nets and they owned them in large amounts. The structure of the fishery
has since shifted towards a scenario where by more people own gillnets but in very small
quantities. The ratio of fisher to gillnet in 1997 was 1: 4.2 and it went down to 1: 0.9 in
2005. It follows therefore that the increase in the number of gillnets is not due to the
increase in the number of commercial fishers. One reason why gillnet fishers have
increased could be that the majority of subsistence fishers are now preferring to use
gillnets instead of traditional fishing gear. The fishery is slowly evolving from a hook and
line and basket fishery to a gillnet fishery. However this scenario does not increase the
gillnet fishing effort in the system since it is apparent that most of the fishers do not own
more than one net. Purchasing power may have also played a role in the decrease of
gillnet numbers since in the past most fishers relied on government aid to buy nets.
Kolding et al (1996) report that the Bangweulu swamps fishery is dominated by small
meshed nets (38 and 50mm). However, in the Okavango delta fishery Mosepele (2001)
identified the three most common gillnets as 115mm stretched mesh size (36.5%)
followed by the 100mm stretched mesh size (33.0%) and the 125mm stretched mesh size
(18.2%). The least common mesh size was the 150mm stretched mesh size (0.8%).
Current results indicate that there are two most common gillnets, the 100mm stretched
mesh size (54.5%) and 115mm stretched mesh size (30.4%). 100mm stretched mesh size
nets have increased significantly from 33% to 54.5% while 115mm stretched mesh size
nets have decreased slightly from 36.5% to 30.4%. The number of nets available is
proportional to the intensity of usage since we see that 100mm stretched mesh size nets
are the ones that are currently utilized by a lot of fishers followed by 115mm mesh size.
125mm stretched mesh size has gone down considerably in number since the last frame
survey.
The prevalence of 100mm stretched mesh size nets and 115mm stretched mesh size nets
could be attributed to the efficiency of these mesh sizes in catching commercial size
cichlid species. One has to note that preference is slowly shifting towards the use of
100mm mesh size instead of 115mm as it was in 1997 which is an intriguing exploitation
pattern. However this cannot raise fears of stock depletion since overexploitation is
localized and replenishment invariably occurs from other parts of the system. In fact
Mosepele (2000) argues that the current fishing effort in the delta cannot result in
biological over-exploitation. The use of 125mm mesh size may have gone down because
of localized fishing pressure in lagoons that has wiped out trophy sized cichlids. This
concurs with Alonso and Nordin (2003) who report that commercial fishermen target a
particular lagoon and fish intensively for the large bream in that lagoon for several days
until catches decline. Most of the fishing gear is owned by the fishers themselves
probably because the majority of it is traditional and it is used seasonally since traditional
gear in most cases becomes efficient only in the flood plains and shallow waters. Gear
lifespan in the fishery is mostly less that one year. The majority of these could be gillnets
and the short lifespan could be attributed to damage by aquatic animals, more especially
crocodiles.
There has been a 7% reduction in basket fishers’ numbers between 1998 and 2005. The
reduction is very small which shows the importance of this fishery in the provision of
cheap protein to the indigent rural communities. The slight decrease may also be due to
the preference of nets to traditional gear (by subsistence fishers) in recent times.
Mosepele (2001) discusses that the majority of the basket fishers are female and of school
going age from mainly the Bambukushu and to a lesser extent Bayei ethnic origins.
4.1.3. Fishing activity
According to Mosepele (2001) there were only 46 employees in the Okavango gillnet
fishery from the 1997 frame survey. However, he went on to discuss that the number
could be much higher because most commercial fishers do not regard their children or
spouses as employees. This observation supports the current finding where 2067 people
have been identified as people hired to fish in the Okavango fishery and only 3.24% of
these people are perceived as employees while 89.84% are family assistants. Zwieten et
at (1995) report that most fishers in Lake Mweru Luapula have one or more workers with
whom they work together or who do the actual fishing. They found that with around 1600
workers, a total of around 25 000 people are active in the catching of fish. This shows
that flood plain fisheries do not provide much in terms of full time employment even
though being very labour intensive as evidenced by the escalating number of assistants.
The best fishing season in the Okavango is summer while the worst fishing season is
winter. However, Mosepele (2001) states that most basket fishers’ fishing behaviour is
regulated by the extent and intensity of the flood regime. Usually in areas at the upper
side of the delta, floods arrive in summer around December and they reach Guma lagoon
around March where they often cause fish kills before arriving in Maun around June
(Pers observ). Since the majority of the fishery is composed of subsistence fishers, it is
apparent that it is these fishers with their limited access to the fishery who find summer to
be the best season because the floodplains would be inundated during this season thus
enabling them to use their traditional gear when floods recede. This supports Hay et al
(2000) who report that traditional fishing methods are widespread in the Okavango river
(Namibian section) and peak fishing activities are performed during low water in
September. This is in support of current results which indicate that most of the Okavango
fishers are seasonal. When flood plains dry down, these fishers can no longer fish and
thus the identification of winter as the worst fishing season. It has to be noted that this
discussion is based on pulled results and therefore these observations are influenced by
the large number of fishers in the upper delta. Acknowledgement has to be made however
that the delta has diverse characteristics across spatial and temporal scales.
The two most preferred fishing areas in the Okavango delta are Lagoons (57.42%) and
floodplains (20.55%). This can be explained by the fact that the fishery can be divided
into three as in Mosepele (2001). The three components of the fishery are (1) the gillnet
fishery (2) the basket fishery and (3) the hook and line fishery. Looking at these three
components of the fishery it is apparent that the majority of fishers in the lagoons would
be gillnet fishers while those in floodplains are basket fishers. Significant amounts of
fishers are using the side channels (11.97%) and the main channel (8.32%). Mosepele
(2001) found that 9% of hook and line fishers were utilizing the main channel and they
could explain the 8.32% observed in the 2005 frame survey. Most fishers in the
Okavango delta share fishing areas with neighbours and family. Only a small proportion
shares fishing areas with tour operators (2.41%). This therefore shows that conflicts exist
between a small proportion of fishers and tour operators. Most fishers do not seek
permission to fish anywhere in the delta (except for protected areas). The Okavango
fishery is therefore open access.
4.1.4. Management of the fishery
The Okavango fishery currently has no management tools in place. This is evidenced by
the high proportion of fishers who do not know of any banned fishing methods or the
occurrence of illegal fishing. Alonso and Nordin (2003) discuss that the fishery is at
present unregulated. This concurs with Kolding (1996) who reports that fish in the
Okavango delta are in reality under no management and alleged overexploitation, with
serious conflicts between interests, have occurred. Mosepele (2001) discusses that the
fisheries section has been operating under the agricultural policy guidelines, whence it
has been difficult for the section to effect its own management paradigm aimed at
maximizing benefits from the sector. Notwithstanding lack of regulation, there are some
fishers who allege that some fishing methods have been banned e.g. fish poisoning
(24.34%) and small mesh size (21.05%). This can be explained by ignorance on the part
of fishers and to some extent confusion. The confusion could be emanating from the
Okavango Fishermen Association. After they registered as a bona fide entity with a
proper constitution they later on made themselves identity cards so that they could easily
identify one another at the fishing grounds. The membership fee was P50.00 and for one
to get the identity tag they had to part with P30.00.
The majority of fishers after joining the association and attaining the Identity card started
harassing those who did not join alleging that they are illegal fishers since they did not
pay. With regard to the banning of fish poisoning and small mesh sizes, it is purely a
matter of misinterpretation. The fisheries section initially was teaching fishers that it is
bad to use small mesh sized nets since they will capture juvenile fish and adversely affect
recruitment. Perhaps some fishers mistook this for a banning decree on these nets and
that could account for the 42% of fishers who alleged that banning was instituted by
government.
However, management tools have been implemented else where in floodplain and lagoon
fisheries and a lot can be learned from such. For example in the Lake Mweru Luapula
fishery in Zambia there is a closed period from 1 December to 1 March the following
year, closed fishing areas in certain breeding areas of the river, fishing gear mesh
regulations and the control of fishing methods (Zwieten et al 1995). In the Mexican
lagoon shrimp fisheries, a management technique favoured is the closed season, “Venda,”
which is timed to protect shrimp during their period of rapid growth in lagoons, before
their seaward migration for reproduction (Kapetsky 1981). According to Rossi et al
(1984) in the Scardovari fishery in Italy, regulations include minimum size limits and the
prohibition of fishing some species during the spawning season. This is in agreement
with Cheney and Rabal (1984) who point out that the main concerns in the management
of inland fisheries are to optimize exploitation and to protect resources from drastic
environmental changes which may reduce or alter the fishery potential.
Current results indicate that the majority of fishers do not experience any form of conflict
(86%) and of those who experience conflicts, the majority of the conflicts are with locals.
This is in support of Kapestky (1981) who reports that at present, serious conflicts
between commercial and sport fisheries in the coastal lagoons and estuaries of developing
countries are probably nearly non-existent. This can be explained (in the Okavango) by
the fact that the majority of fishers are subsistence fishers who mainly fish on a seasonal
basis using traditional gear. Therefore the 13.8% of fishers who have conflicts can be
presumed to be commercial fishers. Since most of the conflicts are with locals, it could be
because most of the respondents were members of the O.F.A. and they would therefore
have conflicts with other fishers because they view them as illegal fishers if those fishers
are not registered with the association. This contradicts Mosepele (2001) who reports that
most of the friction in the delta is between commercial gillnet fishers and the recreational
fishery. Despite the majority of conflicts being with locals there is a considerable amount
of fishers who have conflicts with tour operators and these conflicts are about fishing
grounds. Mosepele (2001) could have highlighted this conflict because it is the most
obvious and indeed the most important since it involves two parties with completely
different interests in terms of use of the fishery. Another reason why he did not report on
the conflict between fishers could be that the conflict did not exist back then.
Membership registration and payment of subscription fees started in 2003 hence resulting
in the ensuing conflicts between commercial fishers from then. Alonso and Nordin
(2003) discuss that the issues surrounding the fisheries conflicts are complex and not easy
to resolve. Furthermore, they assert that continued delays in implementing fisheries
regulations will have damaging consequences for the fisheries in future. Conflicts about
other things such as boat theft, nets theft, fishing methods and illegal fishers are
insignificant.
The current situation prevailing in the delta is not favoured by most fishers. It is apparent
that the majority of fishers do want the fishery to be regulated in future and they prefer
regulations to be enforced by both the government and the traditional authority. This
brings in to the picture a question of co-management. Fishers want these regulations to be
used for conserving fish. Even though most fishers want regulations and they want
certain fishing methods to be banned, it is only a few who want drive fishing to be
banned (7.65%). This is an indication that most of the Okavango fishers prefer to use this
fishing method and therefore they do not want it to be banned. However, they are in
support of banning small mesh sizes and fish poisoning probably because they do not use
these methods. Most commercial fishers use large mesh sizes so that they can catch
bigger fish.
4.2. Dynamics of the fishery in the major landing sites
There is very little fisher migration in most of the major landing sites in the upper delta.
This is evidenced by the majority of fishers having spent more than 21 years living in
these villages (Fig 15). However there are a lot of migrant fishers in the lower delta
landing sites of Ditshipi, Daonara and Khwai. The majority of fishers in these landing
sites have spent ten years and less living in these villages. In Daonara, it is interesting to
note that even though most fishers have spent less than ten years living in this village,
they are old people ranging in the age class of 40-50 years. This confirms that they have
migrated from elsewhere. Little or insignificant migration in the upper delta can be
attributed to the fact that in these areas all the necessary social amenities are readily
available. For instance, there are primary schools and health posts in all the villages and
most of the villages are in close proximity to secondary schools. This therefore reduces
the need for migration and when kids grow up they get involved in the fishery.
In the lower delta villages mentioned above, there are no schools and health posts.
Therefore people are compelled to move to Maun where they can have access to
education and health facilities. Access to these villages is very difficult even though they
are not far from Maun due to poor roads. It is apparent therefore that most fishers in the
lower delta resort to fishing only later on in life after they have tried other livelihood
options in Maun as confirmed by the Daonara scenario whereby most of the fishers are
old but have lived in the village for only 10 years and less. The close proximity of these
villages to Maun therefore plays a major role in the migratory pattern exhibited by
fishers. Some people go to these villages in search of opportunities in the poling and
safari industry and eventually they end up complementing their livelihoods with fishing.
Similar patterns of migration have been observed in Malawi (Donda 2006) where fishers
migrated in to Chimanda village either because they were looking for better farming land
or because they came there to marry and 70% of household heads were migrant fishers.
Apart from Daonara, the other villages have the majority of fishers ranging in the age
class of 21-30 years which has implications on employment opportunities in the region.
This is the most productive group of people and under different circumstances they
would not fish for a living since historically fishing is associated with a lower social class
in the region. This could also have implications on the levels of education in the region. It
could imply that most of the youth have attained minimal levels of education that cannot
enable them to get jobs. The Ngamiland district strategy (2003), states that the district
adult literacy rates are 65.2 percent for males and 57 percent for females. These are
relatively low numbers and it could explain why the majority of fishers are female.
Fisheries in the upper delta are dominated by the Bambukushu ethnic group save for
Seronga village (Fig 10) where the dominant ethnic group is Bayei. This follows the
trend that was observed in the last frame survey. The majority of the Bambukushu ethnic
group is found in the villages of Kauxwi, Shakawe, Etsha 13 and to a lesser extent
Mogotho. For Ditshipi and Daonara villages the majority of fishers are from the Bayei
ethnic group while Khwai has the majority of Basarwa. The structure of the fishery in
terms of ethnicity has not changed since the last survey which confirms further still that
the upper delta in particular has little influx of fishers from other regions and therefore
very insignificant inter-marriages.
For villages in the upper delta, it is Seronga, Mogotho, Ngarange and Sepopa that are
dominated by male fishers while Kauxwi, Shakawe and Etsha 13 are dominated by
female fishers (Fig 11). This also follows the pattern that was observed in the first survey.
The fisheries that are dominated by females are characterized by extensive floodplains
which during good floods take up to 9 months before drying up, therefore providing a
lucrative source of cheap protein for the basket fishers. Women fishers normally use
traditional fishing gear which can only be operated in shallow water in floodplains and
hence their abundance in these villages. For landing sites in the lower delta, Ditshipi and
Khwai are dominated by males while Daonara is predominantly a female fishery. The
river in Daonara does not exist as it used to and therefore there is no significant fishing
activity in this village. Actually most of the people were not cooperative saying that we
should not ask them about fishing while we see that there is no river in Daonara which
means that those female fishers are seasonal fishers who use traditional gear occasionally
when there are good floods.
A large proportion of commercial fishers are found in the upper delta fishery. This
concurs with Mosepele (2001) who identified the highest number of fishers in the pan
handle. Seronga has the highest number of commercial fishers (Fig 6) followed by
Shakawe, Etsha 13 and Mogotho. This shows that a considerable amount of off take
could be going on in the upper delta more so in Seronga than in the pan handle area. It is
only that fishers in Seronga do not have established commercial businesses such as the
Boiteko syndicate in Samochima to attract interest. Mostly they sell as individuals in their
yards. Seronga has the highest number of gillnets and the highest number of boats and a
considerably high number of fishers (Fig 17).
Using effort from the current results and catch statistics for 2004/05 (Appendix B),
Seronga has an annual production of slightly more than 10 tons for a fishing effort of 144
boats, 240 gillnets and 142 fishers. Mogotho produced 17 tons with a fishing effort of 61
fishers, 59 boats and 86 gillnets. Ngarange produced 15 tons for a fishing effort of 42
fishers, 28 boats and 52 gillnets. Kauxwi produced 13 tons for a fishing effort of 50
fishers, 10 boats and 4 gillnets. Shakawe produced 15 tons for a fishing effort of 161
fishers, 31 boats and 34 gillnets. Sepopa produced slightly over 14 tons for a fishing
effort of 17 fishers, 10 boats and 11 gillnets while Etsha 13 produced 37 tons for a fishing
effort of 198 fishers, 47 boats and 150 gillnets.
Using the number of fishers and the number of gillnets as a measure of effort and making
the assumption made by Mosepele (2001) that boats are not necessarily used for fishing it
is apparent that Seronga has almost the same effort as Etsha 13 and yet production in this
landing site is three times lower than it is in Etsha 13. According to the fisheries annual
report (2005) this discrepancy can be attributed to the inconsistency of staff collecting
data. Therefore it remains a challenge for the division to ensure that the field assistants
are well informed with regard to the importance of collecting data consistently and
efficiently. They have to be drilled in understanding that they are an important
component of the division. Perhaps their educational background has to be enhanced to
encompass issues of management and conservation.
Using the 2004/05 catch statistics and the effort from the current study, the three landing
sites in the lower delta have a production of 6 tons for a fishing effort of 97 fishers, 92
gillnets and 52 boats. This could be an underestimation of production from these landing
sites since collection of data is also inconsistent in this region.
Production for the whole of Okavango indicates that in 97/98 it was 160 tons for a fishing
effort of 3289 fishers and 589 boats and in 98/99 it rose to 191 tons which is by far the
highest figure ever recorded for the system. From then on there was generally a down
ward trend until 2004/05 when production went back to the figure of 160 tons (Fig 8), but
this time with a fishing effort of 975 boats and 2703 fishers. Generally the effort has gone
down in terms of numbers of fishers, but production has increased compared to the last
three years. This could therefore be associated with good floods in recent years which
may have resulted in good recruitment assuming consistent collection of data by field
assistants.
The Okavango fishery itself has not undergone any major changes demographically and
even the decrease in the number of fishers is very small. Using canoes as a measure of
effort in the Ugandan side of Lake Victoria Tumwebaze and coenen (1990) report that
there were 8000 canoes with a total catch estimate of 204 000 tonnes. It is very difficult
to compare the productivity in the two systems due to the use of different measures of
effort. However in the lake Mweru-Luapula fishery total production has not changed
while the fishery has seen a considerable increase in effort (Zwieten et al 1995). Zwieten
et al (1995) continue to argue that this means that the average amount of fish caught per
unit of effort (CPUE) has decreased and the decrease coincides with years of extremely
low water levels in the lake. However, this is in contrast with the observations made by
Merron (1991) who found that the CPUE in the Okavango was high during periods of
low flood. He attributed the increase in CPUE to what he termed the ‘concentration
effect’ due to a reduction in fish dispersal. In Lake Chiuta in Malawi, the average annual
production for the 1980’s was 1600 tonnes and by mid 90’s, the average annual catch was
2700 tonnes (Donda 2006). Kolding et al (1996) report that for the Bangweulu swamps
fishery for the period of 1952 to 1991 the average annual yield is estimated at 11 tonnes.
This shows that the Okavango fishery compares well with other flood plain fisheries in
Africa and it is even more productive than some of them.
Across a linear gradient from the upper delta to the lower delta, the most preferred fishing
season is summer. But in Khwai village, which is in the lower delta, a considerable
proportion of fishers do prefer autumn as a good fishing season. Floods arrive in the
upper delta during summer (around December) and reach Khwai around April (autumn)
before finally arriving in Maun around June (winter). Since most of the fishers are
subsistence fishers who use traditional fishing gear in shallow water they tend to prefer
periods of flooding as the best fishing times. This explains why in the upper delta the
majority of fishers prefer summer and as one goes to Khwai, Daonara and Ditshipi there
appears a considerable proportion of fishers who prefer autumn and winter with Ditshipi
showing a high proportion of fishers who prefer winter as the best fishing season (Fig 2).
The worst fishing season across all villages is winter. But in Khwai and Ditshipi a
significant proportion of fishers cite summer as the worst fishing season probably
because during this time the floodplains are dry in this part of the delta. In the upper
delta, winter is normally associated with dry floodplains and in the villages that have a lot
of basket fishers such as Shakawe and Kauxwi, we see the highest proportion of fishers
saying that winter is the worst fishing season. In Ngarange and Sepopa, a significant
proportion of fishers also cite autumn as the worst fishing season. This is usually the time
of flood recession in these villages thus diminishing the fishing grounds.
The majority of boats in all the stations are dugout canoes. We see Kauxwi and Daonara
having 100% dugout canoes. Dugout canoes however are mostly used as a form of
transport; both water and land. Sometimes these canoes are pulled by a span of oxen on
land; therefore they cannot really be used as an estimate of fishing effort. Khwai has the
highest proportion of aluminum boats by percentage and a significant proportion of fiber
glass canoes. Etsha 13 has the highest number of fiber glass canoes and these are also
seen in significant proportions at Seronga and to a lesser extent in Ngarange and Ditshipi
(Fig 4).
4.3. Conflicts and conflict resolution
There are conflicts in the Okavango fishery. The majority of conflicts are about fishing
grounds (Fig 7). In Shakawe, Sepopa and Daonara all conflicts are entirely on fishing
grounds signifying the intensity of this conflict in these landing sites. In Sepopa and
Shakawe there are a number of tour operators along the river bank and therefore as
highlighted in Mosepele (2001) the greatest source of friction between these stake holders
would primarily be related to access to the fishing grounds.
On the other hand, it is astonishing that there is absolute fishing grounds conflict in
Daonara. Perhaps this can be ascribed to the fact that the river really does not exist in this
area as it used to and therefore people are forced to go and fish in Ditshipi where they
experience conflicts with permanent residents of Ditshipi village, since most of the
conflict is with locals. In Seronga all of the six conflicts considered in this study are
prevalent, i.e. net theft, boat theft, fishing grounds, fishing methods, number of nets and
illegal fishers. However, the predominant fishing conflict in this village is about fishing
grounds. Generally there is a more varied manifestation of conflict in the upper delta than
in the lower delta. All of the six forms of conflict considered in this study do occur in the
upper delta while only half of them occur in the lower delta. This therefore buttresses the
recommendation made by Mosepele (2001) that future research in the Okavango delta
fishery should consider the panhandle a top priority area since it is where the highest
fishing effort occurs and is the same area where there have been reports of increasing
friction between the resource stake holders.
But it has to be noted that attention has to be extended as far as Seronga since there are
surely more varied forms of conflict and a substantial amount of off take from this part of
the delta as evidenced by the high fishing effort in this region (effort = number of
gillnets). Much of the issues resulting in conflict in the Okavango delta have not changed
since the last survey and Mosepele (2001) offers a detailed description of such together
with proposed interventions with emphasis on co-management and dialogue.
4.3.1. Development of commercial gillnet fishery in the Okavango Delta (implications for
conflicts)
Prior to the outbreak of CBPP, there were very few commercial fishers in the delta. This
is because people in the Okavango region are mainly pastoral and arable farmers and
fishing comes third in importance. Following the eradication of the lung disease, most
people resorted to fishing since they did not have any cattle to look after and this
increased the number of people deriving their livelihood from fishing. Through assistance
from the fisheries division, communities were encouraged to form syndicates through
which they could get funding to start commercial fishing enterprises. Communities in
Ngarange, Mohembo and Samochima managed to form syndicates. Boiteko syndicate
located at Samochima became the prototype of success in this endeavor (Appendix C).
Other people got funding on individual bases and started their businesses. Funding was
mainly from F.A.P. (Financial Assistance Policy) and it was in the form of grants.
Government financial assistance meant that fishers could now traverse greater distances
in the river and reach areas that they never reached before. This increased the frequency
of meeting with tour operators in the river. These commercial fishers could also afford to
fish at night in the safety of an outboard engine powered motor boat. They also could
afford to purchase factory made gillnets which meant improved efficiency of catching
fish and the resultant wiping out of big fish in lagoons. All these developments bode ill
for the future of recreational fishery and conflicts between the two parties ensued.
Recreational fishers accused commercial fishers of over fishing basing their allegations
on the fact that they could no longer catch trophy sized breams in lagoons.
Conflicts over fishery resources have occurred elsewhere in the world such as in the
Japanese fisheries whose history is replete with incidents of conflict, some relatively
easily and amicably solved and others to which solution was found only after outbreaks
of violence and bloodshed (Ruddle, 1987).
The most important form of conflict in the Okavango fishery is mainly about access
rights to fishing grounds, especially lagoons that are shared with recreational fishers.
Major causes of disputes in the Okavango fishery are comparable to those in the Japanese
fishery where major disputes have been varied stemming from entry rights disputes, gear
conflicts, illegal fishing, island ownership, boundary jurisdiction and institutional reform
problems (Ruddle, 1987). Biological over exploitation has been ruled out as a cause of
dispute in the Okavango fishery and therefore it is mainly lack of mutual respect for one
another and the uncompromising attitude displayed by the warring parties that occasions
so much unrest. Seeing that the informal management of this conflict has failed in all
attempts before, with both parties flagrantly disregarding agreements, it is incumbent
upon government to enforce a formal conflict resolution mechanism in the form of
fishing legislation. This conflict resolution mechanism has worked well in the Japanese
Fisheries where apprehended law breakers are fined by authorities and the worst or repeat
offenders suspended from fishing (Ruddle, 1987). Just like in many parts of rural Japan
(Ruddle, 1987), the threat of suspension alone can be a major deterrent to would be law
breakers in the Okavango, since alternative jobs are scarce in the narrowly based
economy.
5. CONCLUSIONS
• The Okavango fishery is evolving from a hook and line and basket dominated
fishery to a mainly gillnet dominated fishery. Even though the number of gillnets
has generally gone down over the years, there are more individual fishers who
own nets today than a decade ago. This shows an increasing preference for
gillnets among subsistence fishers than before. Even so, the fishery is still
currently dominated by hook and line fishers (1492) while there are only 1468
gillnet fishers. There are 1336 basket fishers.
• The gillnets that are utilized the most in the fishery are 100mm stretched mesh
size and 115mm stretched mesh size and preference is slowly shifting towards the
use of 100mm stretched mesh size. However this cannot raise fears of stock
depletion since over exploitation is localized and replenishment invariably occurs
from other parts of the system.
• The total number of fishers has gone down in the Okavango by 17.8% since 1997.
This is mainly ascribed to the cessation of government aid which subsequently
made it difficult for fishers to sustain their projects. Inaccessibility of Xhaxhaba
village also contributed to the decline in fisher numbers since data could not be
collected from this area. Another reason could be embroiled in the methodology,
especially the definition of a fisher.
• There are more female fishers (53%) than male fishers (47%) in the fishery.
Female fishers are more prevalent in Kauxwi, Shakawe and Etsha 13. These areas
have vast floodplains and therefore the current scenario can be explained by a
causal connection between flood plains and the basket fishery. On the other hand
there are more male fishers in Seronga, Mogotho, Ngarange and Sepopa.
• The fishery is dominated by two tribes; the Bambukushu (67.5%) and the Bayei
(19.8%). This scenario has not changed since the last survey carried out a decade
ago. This therefore shows that if at all there is any influx of migratory fishers, it is
insignificant.
• There has been an increase in commercial fisher numbers from 44 in 1997 to 85
in this survey. This is a paradox since the number of gillnets has decreased in the
same period from 1410 to 1314. One plausible explanation could be that the
former commercial gillnet fishers resorted to the use of hook and lines after the
cessation of government financial aid and they continued to fish commercially.
Another possible source of the inconsistency is definition of a commercial fisher
which varies between the two surveys.
• Fishing craft have increased in the delta from 589 in 1997 to 975 in 2005. There
has also been a notable increase in the number of dug out canoes from 63.8% in
the last survey to 80% in the current survey. The poling industry could have
played a major role in the increase of dug out canoes.
• The Okavango fishery does not offer much in terms of employment to non-
family members with the current rate of only 3.24% of people being in the
employ of the sector. Most fishers prefer to engage the services of family
members (89.84%).
• The best fishing season in the Okavango is Summer while the worst fishing
season is winter
• The two most preferred fishing areas are lagoons (57.42%) and floodplains
(20.55%)
• The majority of conflicts in the delta are between locals. The root cause of this
conflict could be a misguided perception of other fishers by the O.F.A. members
as illegal fishers since they have not registered with the association. However, the
conflicts are more intense and protracted between commercial fishers and tour
operators.
• The majority of fishers prefer that the fishery be regulated, more so with their full
participation in the management process. This therefore calls for fisheries co-
management where there is participation of both the fishing communities and the
Department of Wildlife and National parks in the management of the fishery
resources.
6. RECOMMENDATIONS
A number of recommendations had been made from the previous survey and it is pleasing
to note that some of them have been implemented so far. But it is also worth noting that
some of the previous recommendations are still relevant. Below are some of the
recommendations that can be drawn from the current study.
o The hook and line fishery practiced on a commercial basis seems to be thriving in
the delta. Therefore there is need to delve more into this fishery and find out its
impact in the fishery
o Catch and effort data collection in the field appears to be a major determining
factor of the fish production figures for the system. Therefore the importance of
consistency in data collection needs to be drilled thoroughly into field assistants.
Perhaps ignorance is the major factor leading to negligence. Therefore these field
assistants need to trained in conservation and management issues or alternatively
they ought to be accompanied in their stations by people with such career
orientation.
o As recommended in the previous survey report, involvement of local communities
is important in resource management. Co-management has, where properly
implemented yielded more dividends than the expected sustainable management
of fishery resources. The results have in some instances been the development of
sustainable livelihoods and enhanced food security. As alluded by Donda (2006),
when planning to implement co-management in any natural resource
management, socio-economic issues affecting the resource users should be taken
into consideration.
o The preferred fishing season across the entire delta is generally the same
(Summer). Therefore although the fishery is diverse in space and time as its
ecological basis, there is no particular need to enforce different management
regimes in different sections of the delta.
o The introduction of fish legislation, although not a panacea is currently the only
way that the frothing conflict between commercial fishers and tour operators can
be abated.
o Since there appears to be a growing preference slowly but surely for smaller mesh
sizes, ecological work has to be carried out on the commercially important species
to determine the impact of selective commercial fishing on these species and also
to determine their biology, ecology, behaviour and their economic potential.
7. REFERENCES
Alonso, L.E. and L. Nordin (editors). 2003. A rapid biological assessment of the aquatic
ecosystems of the Okavango Delta, Botswana: High Water Survey. RAP Bulletin of
Biological Assessment 27. Consevation International, Washington, DC.
Balayut, E.A. 1983. Stocking and introduction of fish in lakes and reservoirs in the
ASEAN countries. FAO Fish. Tech. Pap., (236): 82pp
Campleman, G. 1976. Manual on the identification and preparation of fishery investment

projects. FAO Fish. Tech. Pap., (149): 86pp
Cheney, D.P. and H.R. Rabal. 1984. remote sensing and its application to inland fisheries
and aquaculture. FAO Fish. Circ., (768):50pp
Csirke, J. and G.D. Sharp (eds), Reports of the Expert Consultation to examine changes
in abundance and species composition of neritic fish resources. San Jose, Costa Rica, 18-
29 April 1983. A preparatory meeting for the FAO World Conference on fisheries
management and development. FAO Fish.Rep., (291) Vol.1:102pp
Delgado, C.L., Wada, N., Rosegrant, M.W., Meijer, S. and Ahmed, M. 2003. Fish to
2020: supply and demand in changing global markets. International Food Policy
Research Institute. Washington, D.C. 226pp
Donda, S.J. 2006. Fisheries co- management as a strategy for contribution to enhanced
livelihoods and food security. Department of Fisheries, Lilongwe, Malawi. 20p
F.A.O. 1990. SWIOP/WP/57 - Frame Survey of Artisanal Fisheries of the Sofala

Province (Mozambique).REGIONAL PROJECT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND
MANAGEMENT OF FISHERIES IN THE SOUTH WEST INDIAN OCEAN.
VICTORIA, MAHE, SEYCHELES. 30p
FAO. 1998: Guidelines for the routine collection of capture fishery data. FAO Fish. Tech.
Pap, 382: 113 p.
Fisheries annual report. 2004/2005. Ministry of Environment Wildlife and Tourism.

Fisheries Division. Gaborone. 25p
Hay, C.J., Naesje, T.F., Breistein, J., Harsaker, K., Kolding, J., Sandlund, O.T. and Zyl,
B.V. 2000. Fish populations, gillnet selectivity and artisanal fisheries in the Okavango
River, Namibia. Recommendations for a sustainable fishery. NINA.NIKU PROJECT
report No. 010. 105p
Howard, G.W. 1992. Floodplains: utilization and the need for management. pp. 15-26. In:
T. Matiza and H.N. Chabwela (eds). Wetlands Conservation Conference for Southern
Africa. Proceedings of the Souththern African Development Coordination Conference
held in Gaborone, Botswana, 3-5 June 1991. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. x + 224pp
Kapetskey, J.M. 1981. Some considerations for the management of coastal lagoon and
estuarine fisheries. FAO Fish. Tech. Pap., (218):47pp.
Kolding, J. 1996. Feasibility study and appraisal of fish stock management plan in
Okavango. University of Bergen, Norway. 76pp
Kolding, J., Ticheler, H. and Chanda, B. 1996. Assessment of the Bangweulu Swamps
Fisheries. WWF Bangweulu Wetlands Project. Final report. 51pp
Merron G.S. 1991. The ecology and management of the fishes of the Okavango delta,
Botswana, with particular reference to the role of the seasonal floods. Rhodes
University, PhD thesis. 171 pp.
Mmopelwa, G., Raletsatsi, S. and Mosepele, K. 2005. Cost Benefit Analysis of

Commercial Fishing in Shakawe, Ngamiland. Botswana Notes and Records, 37: 11-21.
Mosepele, K. 2000. Preliminary Length Based Stock Assessment of the Main Exploited
Stocks of the Okavango Delta Fishery. Mphil thesis, University of Bergen, Norway.
139pp.
Mosepele, K. 2001. Discription of the Okavango Delta Fishery. Fisheries section,

Ministry of Agriculture. 132p
Ngamiland District Council. 2003. Ngamiland District Settlement Strategy: 2003 – 2027.
Report of survey. Gaborone. 404p
Ruddle, K. 1987. Administration and conflict management in Japanese coastal fisheries.

FAO Fish. Tech. pap., (273): 93p.
Skelton, P. 2001. A Complete Guide to the FRESHWATER FISHES of Southern Africa.

2nd ed. Struik Publishers. South Africa
Skjosberg, E. and Merafe, Y. 1987. The Okavango fisheries. Socio – Economic Study. A
report commissioned by the ministry of Agriculture, Botswana and the Ministry of
Development Cooperation, Norway. 69p
Tumwebaze, R. and Coenen E.J. (editors) 1991. REPORT ON THE FRAME SURVEY
CONDUCTED IN THE UGANDEN PART OF L. VICTORIA. 3rd September – 20th
December 1990. 22pp
Van der Heiden, L.J. 1992. The Okavango delta: current planning and conservation. In:
T. Matiza and H.N. Chabwela (eds). Wetlands Conservation Conference for Southern
Africa. Proceedings of the Souththern African Development Coordination Conference
held in Gaborone, Botswana, 3-5 June 1991. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. x + 224pp
Yamamoto, T. 1980. A standard Statistical System for Current Fishery Statistics in
Indonesia. A report prepared for the Fisheries Development and Management Project.
Rome, FAO, 1980. FI:DP/INS/72/064, Field Document 7. 79pp
Zwieten, P.A.M., Aarnink, B.H.M. and Kapasa, C.K. 1995. How diverse a fishery can be!
Structure of the Mweru – Luapula fishery based on an analysis of the frame survey and a
characterization of the present management strategies. Department of fisheries, Zambia.
Report No. 25. 91p.
Whole of Okavango Fishery
Table 1: Total number of fishers and percentage by age class

age class Total percentage
number
0-10 12 0.44
"11-20 488 18.07
21-30 873 32.33
31-40 514 19.04
41-50 359 13.30
51-60 208 7.70
61-70 159 5.89
71-80 61 2.26
80+ 26 0.96
Table 2: Total number of fishers and percentage by sex

M F
sex 1280 1423
Percentage 47.35 52.65
Table 3: Total number and percentage of fishers by ethnic origin

Ethnic origin Total Percentag
number e
Bambukushu 1822 67.46
Bayei 536 19.84
Basarwa 92 3.41
Bakgalagadi 46 1.70
Barotse 8 0.30
Baxhereku 125 4.63
Others 72 2.67
Table 4: Total number and percentage of fishers by marital status

Marital Status Total Percentag
number e
Married 503 18.60
Single 2100 77.63
Divorced 45 1.66
Widowed 57 2.11
Table 5: Total number and percentage of fishers by years fishing

Years Fishing Total Percentag
number e
0-10 1108 41.13
"11-20 766 28.43
21-30 351 13.03
31-40 231 8.57
41-50 137 5.09
51-60 67 2.49
61-70 21 0.78
71-80 12 0.45
80+ 1 0.04
Table 6: Total number and percentage of fishers by years living in village in the
Okavango
Years living in Total Percentag
Village number e
0-10 306 11.31
"11-20 545 20.14
21-30 782 28.90
21-30 474 17.52
41-50 281 10.38
51-60 156 5.76
61-70 111 4.10
71-80 42 1.55
80+ 9 0.33
Table 7: Total number and percentage of fishers by catch disposal

Catch disposal Total Percentag
number e
Sale 85 3.10
Barter 130 4.73
Home Consumption 1885 68.65
Sell and Barter 45 1.64
Sell and Home consumption 414 15.08
Barter and Home 53 1.93
Consumption
All of the above 134 4.88
Table 8: Total number of fishers and percentage by fisher status

Fisher Total Percentag
status number e
Full time 150 5.58
Seasonal 1746 64.96
Part-time 792 29.46
Table 9: Total number of boats and percentage by boat type

Boat type Total Percentage
number
Dugout canoe 779 79.90
Fibre glass 87 8.92
canoe
Fibre glass boat 29 2.97
Aluminum boat 80 8.21
Table 10: Total number of boats and percentage by boat use

Boat use Total number Percentag
e
Fishing 730 67.28
Transport 287 26.45
Poling 68 6.27
Table 11: Total number of boats and percentage by propulsion

Propulsion Total Percentag
numbe e
r
Motorised 75 9.65
Non-motorised 702 90.35
Table 12: Total number of boats and percentage by ownership

Yes No
Own 532 365
Table 13: Total number of gears and percentage by type

Gear type Total Percentag
number e
Gillnet 1468 32.72
Hook and 1492 33.25
line
Baskets 1336 29.77
Others 191 4.26
Table 14: Total number and percentage of gears in use

No. in Use Percentage
3562 79.38
Table 15: Total number and percentage of gillnets by mesh size
Mesh Total Percentag
size number e
50 62 4.72
75 77 5.86
100 716 54.49
115 400 30.44
125 59 4.49
Table 16: Total number and percentage of gillnets in use by mesh size
Mesh Number in Percentage
size use
50 28 2.59
75 57 5.28
100 616 57.09
115 343 31.79
125 35 3.24
Table 17: Total number and percentage of gear use by time

Gear use Total Percentage
number
All year 218 8.66
round
Seasonal 1854 73.69
Occasional 444 17.65
Table 18: Total number and percentage of gears by ownership

Yes No
Own 2510 151
Table 19: Total number and percentage of people hired to fish

People hired to Total Percentag
fish number e
Employee 67 3.24
Family assistant 1857 89.84
From elsewhere 6 0.29
Family friend 137 6.63
Table 20: Total number and percentage of gears by lifespan

Gear Total Percentage
lifespan(Years) number
<1 1007 38.52
1 887 33.93
2 481 18.40
3 151 5.78
4 27 1.03
5 46 1.76
>5 15 0.57
Table 21: Total number and percentage of fishers by best fishing season
Best fishing Total Percentage
season number
Autumn 134 4.87
Spring 165 6.00
Winter 276 10.04
Summer 2174 79.08
Table 22: Total number and percentage of fishers by worst fishing season
Worst fishing Total Percentag
season number e
Autumn 319 12.29
Spring 123 4.74
Winter 1848 71.19
Summer 306 11.79
Table 23: Total number and percentage of fishers by fishing area

Fishing areas Total Percentag
number e
Floodplain 637 20.55
Side channel 371 11.97
Main channel 258 8.32
Lagoon 1780 57.42
All 54 1.74
Table 24: Total number and percentage of fishers by fishing area shared
Who shares fishing Total number Percentage
area
Family 1291 33.48
Neighbours 1860 48.24
Tour operators 93 2.41
All 600 15.56
No one 12 0.31
Table 25: Total number and percentage of fishers by permission needed

Yes No
Permission needed 33 2625
Table 26: Total number and percentage of fishers by person asked for permission to fish
Person asked Total number Percentag
for permission e
to fish
Local authority 17 4.33
Relatives 11 2.80
Neighbours 1 0.25
Government 13 3.31
No one 351 89.31
Table 27: Total number and percentage of fishers by requirement to pay

Yes No
Do you 2 531
pay?
Table 28: Total number and percentage of fishers in terms of fishing method banned
Type of fishing method Total Percentag
banned number e
Small mesh 730 21.05
Seining 361 10.41
Drive fishing 284 8.19
Poisoning 844 24.34
None 1249 36.01
Table 29: Total number and percentage of fishers in terms of banning institutions
Who banned? Total Percentag
number e
Local 353 32.03
authority
Government 463 42.01
Both 286 25.95
Table 30: Proportion of fishers in terms illegal fishing activities

Yes No
Illegal fishing? 82 2459
Table 31: Proportion of fishers in terms of people involved in illegal fishing activities
By who Total Percentage
number
Local people 49 68.06
Foreigners 6 8.33
Outsiders (Nationals) 17 23.61
Table 32: Total number and percentage of fishers with regard to the fate of culprits of
illegal fishing
Fate of culprits Total Percentag
number e
Fined 5 10.64
Take nets 6 12.77
Arrested 2 4.26
Warning 34 72.34
Table 33: Total number and percentage of fishers with regard to conflicts
Yes No
Conflicts? 364 2266
Table 34: Total number and percentage of fishers with regard to conflicting groups
With who? Total Percentag
number e
Locals 255 73.70
Foreigners 17 4.91
Outsiders 16 4.62
(Nationals)
Table 35: Total number and percentage of fishers with regard to the type of conflict
About what? Total number Percentag
e
Illegal fishers 9 2.52
No of nets 6 1.68
Nets theft 12 3.36
Boat theft 7 1.96
Fishing 298 83.47
grounds
Fishing 25 7.00
methods
Table 36: Total number and percentage of fishers with regard to fishery regulation
Yes No
Should the fishery be 1774 869
regulated?
Table 37: Total number and percentage of fishers with regard to authorities that should
regulate the fishery
By who? Total Percentag
numbe e
r
Traditional Authority 241 13.44
Government 342 19.07
Both 1210 67.48
Table 38: Total number and percentage of fishers with regard to the use of the regulations
What should the regulations be used Total Percentag
for number e
Conserve fish 1547 87.55
Keep away outsiders 69 3.90
Both 151 8.55
Table 39: Total number and percentage of fishers with regard to the best sustainable
fishing season
Best sustainable fishing Total Percentag
method number e
Closed seasons 546 14.45
Ban seine nets 464 12.28
Ban small mesh net sizes 638 16.89
Ban fish poisoning 877 23.21
All 964 25.52
Seronga
Table 40: Total number and percentage of fishers by age class

age Total percentag
class number e
0-10 0 0
"11-20 21 14.79
21-30 39 27.46
31-40 22 15.49
41-50 19 13.38
51-60 17 11.97
61-70 10 7.04
71-80 11 7.75
80+ 3 2.11

M F
sex 112 30

number e
Bambukushu 27 15.79
Bayei 112 65.50
Basarwa 5 2.92
Bakgalagadi 7 4.09
Barotse 5 2.92
Baxhereku 7 4.09
Others 8 4.68

Marital Total Percentag
Status number e
Married 34 22.08
Single 111 72.08
Divorced 3 1.95
Widowed 6 3.90

Years Total Percentag
Fishing number e
0-10 81 56.25
"11-20 23 15.97
21-30 7 4.86
31-40 12 8.33
41-50 10 6.94
51-60 5 3.47
61-70 3 2.08
71-80 3 2.08
80+ 0 0
Table 45: Total number and percentage of fishers by years living in village
Village number e
0-10 22 15.49
"11-20 31 21.83
21-30 39 27.46
31-40 16 11.27
41-50 11 7.75
51-60 9 6.34
61-70 6 4.23
71-80 8 5.63
80+ 0 0

number e
Sale 15 8.38
Barter 8 4.47
Consumption

status number e
Full time 10 7.09
Seasonal 50 35.46
Part-time 81 57.45

Boat type Total Percentag
numbe e
r
Fibre glass canoe 23 15.97

Boat use Total Percentag
number e
Fishing 109 55.05
Transport 81 40.91
Poling 8 4.04

number e
Motorised 7 5.69

Yes No
Own 67 51

number e
Gillnet 240 67.04
Hook and 100 27.93
line
Baskets 10 2.79
Others 8 2.23

No. in Percentag
Use e
271 75.70

Mesh Total number Percentag
size e
50 51 7.30
75 81 11.59
100 216 30.90
115 208 29.76
125 143 20.46
Mesh Number in Percentag
size use e
50 51 7.96
75 76 11.86
100 200 31.20
115 176 27.46
125 138 21.53

Gear use Total Percentag
number e
All year 21 14
round
Seasonal 68 45.33
Occasional 61 40.67

Yes No
Own 135 9

fish number e
Employee 17 6.91
From elsewhere 0 0
Family friend 5 2.03

Gear Total Percentag
lifespan(Years) number e
<1 56 35.44
1 44 27.85
2 27 17.09
3 14 8.86
4 7 4.43
5 9 5.70
>5 1 0.63
Best fishing Total number Percentage
season
Autumn 30 18.75
Spring 6 3.75
Winter 29 18.13
Summer 95 59.38
season number e
Autumn 28 16.57
Spring 22 13.02
Winter 79 46.75
Summer 40 23.67

Fishing Total Percentag
areas number e
Floodplain 42 21
Side 28 14
channel
Main 8 4
channel
Lagoon 104 52
All 18 9
Who shares fishing Total Percentag
area number e
Family 53 25.36
Neighbours 82 39.23
All 59 28.23
No one 6 2.87
Table 64: Total number and percentage of fishers by permission needed to fish
Yes No
Permission 0 144
needed?
Percentage 0 100
Table 65: Total number and percentage of fishers by person asked to fish
Who do you Total Percentag
ask? number e
Relatives 2 13.33
Neighbours 3 20
Government 4 26.67
No one 5 33.33
banned number e
Small mesh 52 23.01
Seining 27 11.95
Poisoning 49 21.68
None 57 25.22
Authorities Total Percentag
responsible number e
for banning
fishing
methods
Local 64 74.42
authority
Government 4 4.65
Both 18 20.93

Yes No
Illegal 9 135
fishing?
By who? Total Percentag
number e
Foreigners 4 26.67
Outsiders 7 46.67
(Nationals)
illegal fishing
Fate of Total Percentag
culprits number e
Fined 4 23.53
Take nets 2 11.76
Arrested 3 17.65
Warning 8 47.06
Yes No
Conflicts? 13 131
People involved in Total Percentag
conflicts number e
Locals 9 42.86
Foreigners 2 9.52
Outsiders 4 19.05
(Nationals)
Type of conflict Total Percentag
number e
No of nets 2 5.71
Nets theft 4 11.43
Boat theft 7 20
Fishing grounds 12 34.29
Fishing 9 25.71
methods
Yes No
regulated?
Authority Total Percentag
supported to number e
regulate the
fishery
Traditional 21 16.41
Authority
Government 15 11.72
Both 92 71.88
Table 76: Total number and percentage of fishers with regard to the use of the regulations
Supported use of regulations Total Percentag
number e
Conserve fish 104 80
Both 22 16.92
fishing season
Best sustainable fishing method Total Percentag
number e
All 57 21.59
Mogotho

age Total percentag
class number e
0-10 0 0
"11-20 4 6.56
21-30 26 42.62
31-40 10 16.39
41-50 10 16.39
51-60 2 3.28
61-70 7 11.48
71-80 2 3.28
80+ 0 0

M F
sex 37 24

number e
Bambukushu 36 59.02
Bayei 2 3.28
Basarwa 8 13.11
Bakgalagadi 1 1.64
Barotse 2 3.28
Baxhereku 11 18.03
Others 1 1.64

Status number e
Married 22 36.07
Single 37 60.66
Divorced 2 3.28
Widowed 0 0

Fishing number e
0-10 40 65.57
"11-20 13 21.31
21-30 5 8.20
31-40 1 1.64
41-50 1 1.64
51-60 1 1.64
61-70 0 0
71-80 0 0
80+ 0 0
Village number e
0-10 8 13.11
"11-20 13 21.31
21-30 20 32.79
31-40 10 16.39
41-50 5 8.20
51-60 1 1.64
61-70 2 3.28
71-80 2 3.28
80+ 0 0

number e
Sale 3 4.92
Barter 0 0
Consumption

status number e
Full time 10 16.13
Seasonal 23 37.10
Part-time 29 46.77
Table 86: Total number of boats and percentage by type

number e
Fibre glass 0 0
canoe
Fibre glass boat 0 0
Table 87: Total number of boats and percentage by use

number e
Fishing 43 67.19
Transport 20 31.25
Poling 1 1.56

numbe e
r
Motorised 1 2.22

Yes No
Own 32 14

number e
Gillnet 86 64.66
Hook and 23 17.29
line
Baskets 20 15.04
Others 4 3.01

No. in Use Percentag
e
120 90.23

size number e
50 0 0
75 0 0
100 35 40.70
115 47 54.65
125 4 4.65
Mesh Number Percentag
size in use e
50 0 0
75 0 0
100 35 40.70
115 47 54.65
125 4 4.65

number e
All year 5 8.06
round
Seasonal 26 41.94
Occasional 31 50

Yes No
Own 55 7

fish number e
Employee 1 1.23
Family friend 0
<1 18 30.51
1 22 37.29
2 10 16.95
3 6 10.17
4 1 1.69
5 2 3.39
>5 0 0
Best fishing Total Percentag
season number e
Autumn 15 23.08
Spring 3 4.62
Winter 6 9.23
Summer 41 63.08
season number e
Autumn 10 15.87
Spring 6 9.52
Winter 37 58.73
Summer 10 15.87

number e
Floodplain 23 32.39
Main channel 7 9.86
Lagoon 27 38.03
All 2 2.82
People that fishing Total Percentag
area is shared with number e
Family 20 24.10
Neighbours 45 54.22
All 13 15.66
No one 1 1.20
Yes No
Permission 0 16
needed?
Percentage 0 100
Table 103: Proportion of fishers with regard to payment needed to fish

Yes No
Do you 0 6
pay?
Percentage 0 100
banned number e
Small mesh 22 24.44
Seining 13 14.44
Poisoning 24 26.67
None 23 25.56
responsible number e
for banning
fishing
methods
Local 25 67.57
authority
Government 5 13.51
Both 7 18.92

Yes No
Illegal 4 53
fishing?
Illegal fishers Total Percentag
number e
Local people 0 0
Foreigners 0 0
Outsiders 4 100
(Nationals)
illegal fishing
culprits number e
Fined 0 0
Take nets 3 100
Arrested 0 0
Warning 0 0
Yes No
Conflicts? 3 58
conflicts number e
Locals 4 100
Foreigners 0 0
Outsiders 0 0
(Nationals)
Tour operators 0 0
Type of Total Percentag
conflict number e
Illegal fishers 0 0
No of nets 0 0
Nets theft 0 0
Boat theft 2 50
Fishing 2 50
grounds
Fishing 0
methods
Yes No
regulated?
Authority Total Percentag
regulate the
fishery
Authority
Government 11 18.03
Both 37 60.66
Table 114: Total number and percentage of fishers with regard to the use of the
regulations
Supported use of regulations Total Percentag
number e
Both 6 10.53
fishing season
Best sustainable fishing method Total number Percentag
e
All 24 20.69
Ngarange

age Total percentag
class number e
0-10 0 0
"11-20 7 16.67
21-30 7 16.67
31-40 10 23.81
41-50 4 9.52
51-60 7 16.67
61-70 5 11.90
71-80 2 4.76
80+ 0 0
Table 117: Total number and percentage of fishers by sex

M F
sex 23 19
Table 118: Total number and percentage of fishers by ethnicity

number e
Bambukushu 15 35.71
Bayei 4 9.52
Basarwa 9 21.43
Bakgalagadi 1 2.38
Barotse 0 0
Baxhereku 12 28.57
Others 1 2.38

Status number e
Married 11 26.19
Single 28 66.67
Divorced 2 4.76
Widowed 1 2.38

Fishing number e
0-10 19 45.24
"11-20 6 14.29
21-30 7 16.67
31-40 4 9.52
41-50 4 9.52
51-60 2 4.76
61-70 0 0
71-80 0 0
80+ 0 0
Table 121: total number and percentage of fishers by years living in village
Village number e
0-10 3 7.14
"11-20 8 19.05
21-30 8 19.05
31-40 10 23.81
41-50 4 9.52
51-60 4 9.52
61-70 3 7.14
71-80 2 4.76
80+ 0 0

number e
Sale 0 0
Barter 0 0
Consumption
Table 123: Total number and percentage of fishers by status

status number e
Full time 3 7.14
Seasonal 28 66.67
Part-time 11 26.19
Table 124: Total number and percentage of boats by type

number e
Fibre glass 1 3.57
canoe
Table 125: Total number and percentage of boats by use

number e
Fishing 20 80
Transport 4 16
Poling 1 4
Table 126: Total number and percentage of boats by propulsion

number e
Motorised 3 14.29
Non- 18 85.71
motorised
Table 127: Total number and percentage of fishers by ownership of boats

Yes No
Own 16 9
Percentage 64 36
Table 128: Total number and percentage of gear by type

number e
Gillnet 52 54.74
Hook and 25 26.32
line
Baskets 16 16.84
Others 2 2.11
Table 129: Total number and percentage of gear in use

No. in Percentag
Use e
77 81.05

size number e
50 0 0
75 1 1.92
100 26 50
115 25 48.08
125 0 0
Table 131: Total number and percentage of gillnets by mesh size in use
size use e
50 0 0
75 1 2.22
100 22 48.89
115 22 48.89
125 0 0
Table 132: Total number and percentage of gear by frequency of use

number e
All year 2 4.26
round
Seasonal 37 78.72
Occasional 8 17.02
Table 133: Total number and percentage of fishers by ownership of gear

Yes No
Own 41 2
Table 134: Total number and percentage of fishers by people hired to fish
fish number e
Employee 1 1.52
Family friend 0 0
Table 135: total number and percentage of gear by lifespan

<1 29 65.91
1 10 22.73
2 3 6.82
3 2 4.55
4 0 0
5 0 0
>5 0 0
Table 136: Total number and percentage of fishes by best fishing season
season number e
Autumn 0 0
Spring 1 2.33
Winter 11 25.58
Summer 31 72.09
season number e
Autumn 11 25.58
Spring 1 2.33
Winter 22 51.16
Summer 9 20.93
Table 138: Total number and percentage of fishers by fishing areas used
Fishing areas Total Percentage
number
Floodplain 9 16.36
Lagoon 30 54.55
All 3 5.45
Table 139: Total number and percentage of fishers by people sharing fishing area
People sharing fishing area Total Percentag
numbe e
r
Family 3 6.67
Neighbours 27 60
Tour operators 0 0
All 15 33.33
No one 0 0
Table 140: Proportion of fishers with regard to permission needed to fish

Yes No
Permission 0 42
needed?
Percentage 0 100
Table 141: Total number and percentage of fishers with regard to banned fishing methods
banned number e
Small mesh 6 10.91
Seining 8 14.55
Poisoning 8 14.55
None 31 56.36
Table 142: Total number and percentage of fishers with regard to authorities that banned
fishing methods
that banned number e
fishing
methods
Government 5 45.45
Both 2 18.18
Table 143: Proportion of fishers with regard to illegal fishing

Yes No
Illegal 1 41
fishing?
Table 144: Total number and percentage of fishers with regard to illegal fishers
number e
Local people 0 0
Foreigners 1 100
Outsiders 0
(Nationals)
Table 145: Total number and percentage of fishers with regard to the fate of culprits
culprits number e
Fined 0 0
Take nets 0 0
Arrested 0 0
Warning 1 100
Yes No
Conflicts? 3 39
Table 147: Total number and percentage of fishers with regard to the people involved in
conflicts
conflicts number e
Locals 3 100
Foreigners 0 0
Outsiders 0 0
(Nationals)
Tour operators 0 0
Table 148: Total number and percentage of fishers by type of conflict

number e
Illegal fishers 0 0
No of nets 0 0
Nets theft 0 0
Boat theft 0 0
Fishing grounds 2 66.67
Fishing 1 33.33
methods
Table 149: Total number and percentage of fishers by need for regulating the fishery
Yes No
Need for regulation of the 28 14
fishery
regulate the
fishery
Traditional 3 10.34
Authority
Government 3 10.34
Both 23 79.31
Table 151: Total number and percentage of fishers with regard to use of regulations
for number e
Both 11 39.29
Table 152: Total number and percentage of fishers of fishers with regard to the best
sustainable fishing method
method number e
All 7 10.14
Kauxwi

age Total percentag
class number e
0-10 0 0
"11-20 5 10
21-30 18 36
31-40 17 34
41-50 7 14
51-60 2 4
61-70 1 2
71-80 0 0
80+ 0 0

M F
sex 19 31
Percentage 38 62

number e
Bambukushu 49 98
Bayei 0 0
Basarwa 0 0
Bakgalagadi 0 0
Barotse 0 0
Baxhereku 1 2
Others 0 0

Status number e
Married 9 18
Single 40 80
Divorced 0 0
Widowed 1 2

number e
0-10 5 10.20
"11-20 18 36.73
21-30 17 34.69
31-40 6 12.24
41-50 2 4.08
51-60 1 2.04
61-70 0 0
71-80 0 0
80+ 0 0
Village number e
0-10 0 0
"11-20 4 8.16
21-30 18 36.73
31-40 17 34.69
41-50 7 14.29
51-60 2 4.08
61-70 1 2.04
71-80 0 0
80+ 0 0

number e
Sale 2 4.08
Barter 17 34.69
Barter and Home 0 0
Consumption
All of the above 0 0

Fisher status Total Percentag
number e
Full time 1 2.04
Seasonal 43 87.76
Part-time 5 10.20

number e
Dugout canoe 10 100
Fibre glass 0 0
canoe
Aluminum boat 0 0

number e
Fishing 9 90
Transport 1 10
Poling 0 0

number e
Motorised 0 0
Non- 9 100
motorised

Yes No
Own 7 2

number e
Gillnet 4 7.02
Hook and 24 42.11
line
Baskets 29 50.88
Others 0 0

No. in Percentag
Use e
55 96.49
size number e
50 0 0
75 0 0
100 1 25
115 3 75
125 0 0
size use e
50 0 0
75 0 0
100 1 25
115 3 75
125 0 0

number e
All year 1 2
round
Seasonal 42 84
Occasional 7 14

Yes No
Own 46 4
Percentage 92 8
fish number e
Employee 2 9.52
From elsewhere 0 0
Family friend 0 0

<1 12 24
1 18 36
2 13 26
3 5 10
4 1 2
5 1 2
>5 0 0
Best fishing season Total Percentag
number e
Autumn 1 1.96
Spring 0 0
Winter 5 9.80
Summer 45 88.24
Worst fishing season Total number Percentag
e
Autumn 2 4
Spring 0 0
Winter 43 86
Summer 5 10
number e
Floodplain 16 23.19
Main channel 5 7.25
Lagoon 36 52.17
All 0 0
People sharing fishing Total Percentage
area number
Family 4 7.41
Neighbors 31 57.41
All 17 31.48
No one 0 0

Yes No
Permission 0 50
needed?
Percentage 0 100
Type of fishing method Total Percentage
banned number
Small mesh 18 29.03
Seining 0 0
Drive fishing 0 0
Poisoning 20 32.26
None 24 38.71
fishing methods
fishing
methods
Local authority 0 0
Government 18 85.71
Both 3 14.29

Yes No
Illegal fishing? 0 46
Percentage 0 100
Yes No
Conflicts? 1 45
conflicts
conflict number e
Locals 1 100
Foreigners 0 0
Outsiders 0 0
(Nationals)
Tour operators 0 0

Type of conflict Total number Percentag
e
Illegal fishers 0 0
No of nets 0 0
Nets theft 1 100
Boat theft 0 0
Fishing grounds 0 0
Fishing methods 0 0
Yes No
fishery
Percentage 40 60
regulate the
fishery
Traditional 2 10
Authority
Government 11 55
Both 7 35
for number e
Conserve fish 18 90
Keep away outsiders 1 5
Both 1 5
Table 187: Total number and percentage of fishers of fishers with regard to the best
sustainable fishing method
Best sustainable fishing Total number Percentag
method e
Drive fishing 0 0
All 24 55.81
Shakawe

age Total percentag
class number e
0-10 0 0
"11-20 35 21.88
21-30 61 38.13
31-40 41 25.63
41-50 14 8.75
51-60 6 3.75
61-70 3 1.88
71-80 0 0
80+ 0 0

M F
sex 53 108

number e
Bayei 0 0
Basarwa 1 0.63
Bakgalagadi 1 0.63
Barotse 0 0
Baxhereku 3 1.87
Others 2 1.26

Status number e
Married 16 9.94
Single 144 89.44
Divorced 1 0.62
Widowed 0 0
number e
0-10 44 27.16
"11-20 64 39.51
21-30 34 20.99
31-40 13 8.02
41-50 6 3.70
51-60 1 0.62
61-70 0 0
71-80 0 0
80+ 0 0
Village number e
0-10 5 3.07
"11-20 34 20.86
21-30 60 36.81
31-40 42 25.77
41-50 14 8.59
51-60 6 3.68
61-70 2 1.23
71-80 0 0
80+ 0 0

number e
Sale 8 4.97
Barter 18 11.18
Consumption

status number e
Full time 5 3.11
Seasonal 136 84.47
Part-time 20 12.42

number e
Fibre glass 0 0
canoe

number e
Fishing 25 80.65
Transport 4 12.90
Poling 2 6.45

number e
Motorised 7 26.92
Non- 19 73.08
motorised

Yes No
Own 21 5

number e
Gillnet 34 15.67
Hook and 74 34.10
line
Baskets 102 47.00
Others 7 3.23

No. in Percentag
Use e
203 93.55

size number e
50 2 5.88
75 10 29.41
100 15 44.12
115 7 20.59
125 0 0
size use e
50 2 6.06
75 10 30.30
100 14 42.42
115 7 21.21
125 0 0
number e
All year 14 8.43
round
Seasonal 151 90.96
Occasional 1 0.60

Yes No
Own 154 8
fish number e
Employee 1 1.47
From elsewhere 0 0
Family friend 0 0

<1 34 22.52
1 58 38.41
2 37 24.50
3 13 8.61
4 2 1.32
5 7 4.64
>5 0 0
number e
Autumn 0 0
Spring 15 9.20
Winter 5 3.07
Summer 143 87.73
Worst fishing season Total Percentag
number e
Autumn 14 10.29
Spring 0 0
Winter 109 80.15
Summer 13 9.56
number e
Floodplain 24 13.19
Lagoon 78 42.86
All 1 0.55
People sharing fishing Total Percentag
area number e
Family 65 29.82
Neighbours 89 40.83
All 55 25.23
No one 0 0

Yes No
Permission 0 161
needed?
Percentage 0 100
Table 213: Total number and percentage of fishers by people authorizing fishing
People who Total number Percentag
authorize fishing e
Local authority 0 0
Relatives 0 0
Neighbours 0 0
Government 0 0
No one 23 100
Table 214: Total number and percentage of fishers with regard to payment required to
fish
Yes No
Do you 0 28
pay?
Percentage 0 100
banned number e
Small mesh 35 23.18
Seining 4 2.65
Drive fishing 0 0
Poisoning 72 47.68
None 40 26.49
fishing methods
fishing
Local 30 29.41
authority
Government 51 50
Both 21 20.59

Yes No
Illegal 7 154
fishing?
Table 218: Total number and percentage of fishers with regard to illegal fishers
number e
Local people 6 100
Foreigners 0 0
Outsiders 0 0
(Nationals)
Table 219: Total number and percentage of fishers with regard to the fate of culprits
culprits number e
Fined 0 0
Take nets 0 0
Arrested 0 0
Warning 4 100
Table 220: : Total number and percentage of fishers with regard to conflicts
Yes No
Conflicts? 6 156
conflicts
conflicts number e
Locals 3 100
Foreigners 0 0
Outsiders 0 0
(Nationals)
Tour operators 0 0

number e
Illegal fishers 0 0
No of nets 0 0
Nets theft 0 0
Boat theft 0 0
Fishing grounds 3 100
Fishing 0 0
methods
Yes No
fishery
Authority
Government 5 11.11
Both 27 60
for number e
Both 2 4.35
fishing method
method number e
All 52 27.23
Sepopa

age Total percentag
class number e
0-10 0 0
"11-20 1 5.88
21-30 7 41.18
31-40 4 23.53
41-50 2 11.76
51-60 0 0
61-70 1 5.88
71-80 1 5.88
80+ 1 5.88

M F
sex 11 6

number e
Bambukushu 8 47.06
Bayei 7 41.18
Basarwa 1 5.88
Bakgalagadi 0 0
Barotse 0 0
Baxhereku 0 0
Others 1 5.88

Marital Status Total Percentag
number e
Married 3 17.65
Single 14 82.35
Divorced 0 0
Widowed 0 0

Years Fishing Total Percentage
number
0-10 11 64.71
"11-20 4 23.53
21-30 1 5.88
31-40 0 0
41-50 1 5.88
51-60 0 0
61-70 0 0
71-80 0 0
80+ 0 0
Village number e
0-10 4 23.53
"11-20 4 23.53
21-30 3 17.65
31-40 3 17.65
41-50 1 5.88
51-60 0 0
61-70 1 5.88
71-80 1 5.88
80+ 0 0

Catch disposal Total number Percentag
e
Sale 2 10.53
Barter 2 10.53
Sell and Barter 0 0
Sell and Home consumption 0 0
Barter and Home 0 0
Consumption

Fisher status Total Percentage
number
Full time 0 0
Seasonal 9 52.94
Part-time 8 47.06

number e
Dugout canoe 9 90
Fibre glass 0 0
canoe
Aluminum boat 1 10

Boat use Total Percentage
number
Fishing 9 81.82
Transport 2 18.18
Poling 0 0
Propulsion Total Percentage
number
Motorised 1 10
Non- 9 90
motorised

Yes No
Own 3 7
Percentage 30 70

Gear type Total Percentage
number
Gillnet 11 33.33
Hook and 16 48.48
line
Baskets 2 6.06
Others 4 12.12

No. in Percentag
Use e
18 54.55

Mesh Total number Percentag
size e
50 1 9.09
75 7 63.64
100 1 9.09
115 2 18.18
125 0 0
Mesh Number in Percentage
size use
50 1 14.29
75 3 42.86
100 1 14.29
115 2 28.57
125 0 0

Gear use Total Percentage
number
All year 2 11.76
round
Seasonal 4 23.53
Occasional 11 64.71

Yes No
Own 15 2

People hired to fish Total Percentag
number e
Employee 1 5.88
Family friend 0 0

Gear lifespan(Years) Total Percentag
number e
<1 6 37.5
1 4 25
2 3 18.75
3 3 18.75
4 0 0
5 0 0
>5 0 0
number e
Autumn 1 5.88
Spring 0 0
Winter 0 0
Summer 16 94.12
season number e
Autumn 5 25
Spring 1 5
Winter 13 65
Summer 1 5

Fishing areas Total number Percentage
Floodplain 0 0
Main channel 1 5.88
Lagoon 11 64.71
All 1 5.88
Who shares fishing Total Percentage
area number
Family 9 34.62
Neighbours 11 42.31
All 4 15.38
No one 0 0

Yes No
Permission 0 17
needed?
Percentage 0 100
banned number e
Small mesh 3 17.65
Seining 0 0
Drive fishing 0 0
Poisoning 0 0
None 14 82.35
Who banned? Total number Percentag
e
Local authority 2 100
Government 0 0
Both 0 0

Yes No
Illegal 2 15
fishing?
illegal fishing number e
Local people 1 50
Foreigners 0 0
Outsiders 1 50
(Nationals)
illegal fishing
culprits number e
Fined 0 0
Take nets 1 50
Arrested 0 0
Warning 1 50
Yes No
Conflicts 2 15
Conflicting groups Total Percentag
number e
Locals 0 0
Foreigners 0 0
Outsiders (Nationals) 0 0
Tour operators 2 100
number e
Illegal fishers 0 0
No of nets 0 0
Nets theft 0 0
Boat theft 0 0
Fishing grounds 2 100
Fishing methods 0 0
Yes No
regulated?
Percentage 100 0
Authorities Total number Percentag
preferred to e
Traditional 6 37.5
Authority
Government 6 37.5
Both 4 25
Table 263:Total number and percentage of fishers with regard to the use of the
regulations
Use of regulations Total Percentag
number e
Conserve fish 16 100
Both 0 0
fishing season
method number e
Ban fish poisoning 12 30
Drive fishing 3 7.5
All 4 10
Etsha 13

age Total percentag
class number e
0-10 0 0
"11-20 21 10.61
21-30 74 37.37
31-40 37 18.69
41-50 35 17.68
51-60 10 5.05
61-70 13 6.57
71-80 6 3.03
80+ 2 1.01

M F
sex 78 120

number e
Bayei 35 17.68
Basarwa 1 0.51
Bakgalagadi 0
Barotse 0
Baxhereku 17 8.59
Others 18 9.09

Status number e
Married 38 19.19
Single 150 75.76
Divorced 5 2.53
Widowed 5 2.53

Fishing number e
0-10 45 22.73
"11-20 74 37.37
21-30 28 14.14
31-40 30 15.15
41-50 11 5.56
51-60 4 2.02
61-70 3 1.52
71-80 2 1.01
80+ 1 0.51
Village number e
0-10 17 8.59
"11-20 19 9.60
21-30 74 37.37
31-40 37 18.69
41-50 26 13.13
51-60 9 4.55
61-70 11 5.56
71-80 3 1.52
80+ 2 1.01
number e
Sale 3 1.48
Barter 3 1.48
Sell and Barter 0
Consumption

status number e
Full time 10 5.08
Seasonal 166 84.26
Part-time 21 10.66

number e
Fibre glass 13 27.66
canoe
Table 274: Total number of boats and percentage by use

number e
Fishing 40 74.07
Transport 5 9.26
Poling 9 16.67

number e
Motorised 75 10
Non- 675 90
motorised

Yes No
Own 32 20
number e
Gillnet 152 41.87
Hook and 78 21.49
line
Baskets 114 31.40
Others 19 5.23

No. in Percentag
Use e
275

size number e
50mm 5 3.33
75mm 6 4
100mm 91 60.67
115mm 44 29.33
125mm 4 2.67
size use e
50 5 4
75 4 3.2
100 75 60
115 37 29.6
125 4 3.2

number e
All year 15 10.79
round
Seasonal 115 82.73
Occasional 9 6.47

Yes No
Own 181 16

fish number e
Employee 4 3.31
From elsewhere 0 0
Family friend 0 0

<1 99 51.30
1 57 29.53
2 26 13.47
3 9 4.66
4 0 0
5 2 1.04
>5 0
season number e
Autumn 4 1.98
Spring 3 1.49
Winter 42 20.79
Summer 153 75.74
Worst Total Percentag
fishing number e
season
Autumn 13 7.07
Spring 10 5.43
Winter 127 69.02
Summer 34 18.48

areas number e
Floodplain 73 31.47
Side 16 6.90
channel
Main 4 1.72
channel
Lagoon 133 57.33
All 6 2.59
Fishing area shared Total Percentag
number e
Family 108 40
Neighbours 148 54.81
All 10 3.70
No one 0 0
Yes No
Permission 0 185
needed?
Percentage 0 100
Table 290: Total number and percentage of fishers by person asked for permission to fish
Person asked Total Percentag
for permission number e
to fish
Relatives 5 5.56
Neighbours 0
Government 9 10
No one 65 72.22

Yes No
Do you 0 110
pay?
Percentage 0 100
banned number e
Small mesh 137 29.21
Seining 98 20.90
Poisoning 112 23.88
None 42 8.96
Institutions Total Percentag
fishing
methods
Local 26 18.31
authority
Government 54 38.03
Both 62 43.66

Yes No
illegal 0 148
fishing?
Percentage 0 100
Yes No
Conflicts? 63 134
number e
Locals 57 81.43
Foreigners 7 10
Outsiders 2 2.86
(Nationals)
conflict number e
No of nets 1 1.43
Nets theft 3 4.29
Boat theft 0
Fishing 61 87.14
grounds
Fishing 1 1.43
methods
Yes No
regulated?
preferred to number e
regulate the
fishery
Authority
Government 23 16.43
Both 101 72.14
regulations
Preferred purpose of regulations Total Percentag
number e
Both 3 2.38
fishing season
method number e
All 81 20.82
Ditshipi

age Total percentag
class number e
0-10 0 0
"11-20 6 9.84
21-30 19 31.15
31-40 17 27.87
41-50 8 13.11
51-60 5 8.20
61-70 5 8.20
71-80 1 1.64
80+ 0 0

M F
sex 35 26
number e
Bambukushu 3 4.92
Bayei 53 86.89
Basarwa 3 4.92
Bakgalagadi 0 0
Barotse 0 0
Baxhereku 0 0
Others 2 3.28

Status number e
Married 3 4.92
Single 57 93.44
Divorced 1 1.64
number e
0-10 23 37.70
"11-20 12 19.67
21-30 10 16.39
31-40 6 9.84
41-50 5 8.20
51-60 5 8.20
61-70 0 0
71-80 0 0
80+ 0 0
Village number e
0-10 20 32.79
"11-20 14 22.95
21-30 12 19.67
31-40 11 18.03
41-50 3 4.92
51-60 0 0
61-70 1 1.64
71-80 0 0
80+ 0 0

number e
Sale 1 1.59
Barter 0 0
Barter and Home 0 0
Consumption

status number e
Full time 8 13.33
Seasonal 19 31.67
Part-time 33 55

number e
Fibre glass 1 2.38
canoe
Aluminum 0 0
boat

number e
Fishing 27 42.86
Transport 8 12.70
Poling 28 44.44

number e
Motorised 0 0
Non- 32 100
motorised

Yes No
Own 27 5
Percentag 84.38 15.63
e

number e
Gillnet 75 55.15
Hook and 38 27.94
line
Baskets 15 11.03
Others 8 5.88

No. in Percentag
Use e
88

size number e
50 16 22.54
75 2 2.82
100 41 57.75
115 12 16.90
125 0 0
size use e
50mm 2 4.55
75mm 2 4.55
100mm 34 77.27
115mm 6 13.64
125mm 0 0

number e
All year 15 10.79
round
Seasonal 115 82.73
Occasional 9 6.47

Yes No
Own 53 4
Percentag 92.98 7.02
e
fish number e
Employee 1 1.05
From elsewhere 0 0
Family friend 0 0

<1 21 36.21
1 23 39.66
2 7 12.07
3 4 6.90
4 1 1.72
5 1 1.72
>5 1 1.72
season number e
Autumn 2 3.13
Spring 1 1.56
Winter 22 34.38
Summer 39 60.94
season number e
Autumn 5 8.06
Spring 3 4.84
Winter 35 56.45
Summer 19 30.65

areas number e
Floodplain 20 24.69
Side 6 7.41
channel
Main 4 4.94
channel
Lagoon 48 59.26
All 3 3.70
Who shares fishing Total Percentag
area number e
Family 50 52.08
Neighbours 41 42.71
All 3 3.13
No one 0 0

Yes No
Permission 0 61
needed?
Percentage 0 100

Yes No
Do you 0 43
pay?
Percentage 0 100
banned number e
Small mesh 28 48.28
Seining 4 6.90
Poisoning 24 41.38
None 0 0
Alleged Total Percentag
banning number e
institutions
Local 5 16.13
authority
Government 25 80.65
Both 1 3.23

Yes No
illegal 6 54
fishing?
Percentage 10 90
Foreigners 0 0
Outsiders 4 57.14
(Nationals)
illegal fishing
culprits number e
Fined 0 0
Take nets 1 16.67
Arrested 0 0
Warning 5 83.33
Yes No
Conflicts? 12 44
number e
Locals 4 40
Foreigners 0 0
Outsiders 2 20
(Nationals)
Tour operators 4 40
conflict number e
Illegal fishers 1 10
No of nets 0 0
Nets theft 0 0
Boat theft 0 0
Fishing 8 80
grounds
Fishing 1 10
methods
Yes No
regulated?
regulate the
fishery
Authority
Government 12 27.91
Both 16 37.21
regulations
Preferred purpose of regulations Total Percentag
number e
Conserve fish 28 80
Both 4 11.43
fishing season
method number e
All 2 2.02
Daonara

age Total percentag
class number e
0-10 0 0
"11-20 2 18.18
21-30 0 0
31-40 1 9.09
41-50 3 27.27
51-60 2 18.18
61-70 2 18.18
71-80 0 0
80+ 1 9.09

M F
sex 4 7

number e
Bambukushu 0 0
Bayei 10 90.90
Basarwa 0 0
Bakgalagadi 1 9.09
Barotse 0 0
Baxhereku 0 0
Others 0 0

Status number e
Married 2 18.18
Single 6 54.55
Divorced 0 0
Widowed 3 27.27

Fishing number e
0-10 3 27.27
"11-20 1 9.09
21-30 1 9.09
31-40 2 18.18
41-50 2 18.18
51-60 1 9.09
61-70 1 9.09
71-80 0 0
80+ 0 0
Village number e
0-10 4 36.36
"11-20 2 18.18
21-30 0 0
31-40 3 27.27
41-50 0 0
51-60 1 9.09
61-70 1 9.09
71-80 0 0
80+ 0 0
number e
Sale 0 0
Barter 0 0
Sell and Barter 0 0
Barter and Home 0 0
Consumption
11 100

status number e
Full time 0 0
Seasonal 4 36.36
Part-time 7 63.64
11 100

number e
Dugout canoe 5 100
Fibre glass 0 0
canoe
Fibre glass 0 0
boat
Aluminum boat 0 0

number e
Fishing 5 35.71
Transport 2 14.29
Poling 7 50

number e
Motorised 0 0
Non- 5 100
motorised

Yes No
Own 4 1
Percentage 80 20

number e
Gillnet 9 40.91
Hook and 9 40.91
line
Baskets 4 18.18
Others 0 0

No. in Percentag
Use e
18 81.82

size number e
50 1 10
75 1 10
100 6 60
115 2 20
125 0 0
10 100
size use e
50mm 1 14.29
75mm 0 0
100mm 5 71.43
115mm 1 14.29
125mm 0 0

number e
All year 1 8.33
round
Seasonal 6 50
Occasional 5 41.67
12 100

Yes No
Own 11 1

fish number e
Employee 0 0
Family assistant 6 100
From elsewhere 0 0
Family friend 0 0

lifespan(Years number e
)
<1 3 25
1 5 41.67
2 2 16.67
3 2 16.67
4 0 0
5 0 0
>5 0 0
season number e
Autumn 0 0
Spring 0 0
Winter 2 16.67
Summer 10 83.33
season number e
Autumn 1 9.09
Spring 0 0
Winter 9 81.82
Summer 1 9.09

areas number e
Floodplain 2 13.33
Main 0 0
channel
Lagoon 9 60
All 0 0
Table 363: Total number and percentage of fishers with regard to people sharing fishing
area
People sharing fishing Total Percentag
area number e
Family 8 50
Neighbours 8 50
Tour operators 0 0
All 0 0
No one 0 0

Yes No
Permission 0 11
needed?
Percentage 0 100
banned number e
Small mesh 2 16.67
Seining 1 8.33
Drive fishing 0 0
Poisoning 2 16.67
None 7 58.33
Institutions Total Percentag
alleged to number e
have banned
fishing
methods
Local 1 33.33
authority
Government 2 66.67
Both 0 0

Yes No
illegal 1 10
fishing?
activities
Local people 1 100
Foreigners 0 0
Outsiders 0 0
(Nationals)
illegal fishing
culprits number e
Fined 0 0
Take nets 0 0
Arrested 0 0
Warning 1 100
Yes No
Conflicts? 3 8
number e
Locals 3 75
Foreigners 0 0
Outsiders 1 25
(Nationals)
Tour operators 0 0
Yes No
regulated?
regulate the
fishery
Traditional 0 0
Authority
Government 1 33.33
Both 2 66.67
regulations
Preferred use of regulations Total Percentag
number e
Both 2 66.67
fishing season
method number e
Closed seasons 2 8
Ban seine nets 4 16
Ban small mesh net sizes 5 20
Ban fish poisoning 11 44
Drive fishing 3 12
All 0 0
Khwai

age Total number percentag
class e
0-10 0 0
"11-20 2 8
21-30 13 52
31-40 4 16
41-50 2 8
51-60 4 16
61-70 0 0
71-80 0 0
80+ 0 0
Total 25 100

M F
sex 15 10
Percentage 60 40

number e
Bambukushu 0 0
Bayei 3 12
Basarwa 12 48
Bakgalagadi 9 36
Barotse 1 4
Baxhereku 0 0
Status number e
Married 1 4
Single 24 96
Divorced 0 0
Widowed 0 0

number e
0-10 14 51.85
"11-20 7 25.93
21-30 2 7.41
31-40 2 7.41
41-50 1 3.70
51-60 1 3.70
61-70 0 0
71-80 0 0
80+ 0 0
Village number e
0-10 8 30.77
"11-20 4 15.38
21-30 7 26.92
31-40 3 11.54
41-50 1 3.85
51-60 3 11.54
61-70 0 0
71-80 0 0
80+ 0 0

Catch disposal Total number Percentag
e
Sale 0 0
Barter 0 0
Sell and Barter 0 0
Barter and Home 0 0
Consumption

status number e
Full time 2 8.33
Seasonal 10 41.67
Part-time 12 50

number e
Dugout canoe 0 0
Fibre glass canoe 1 20
Aluminum boat 4 80

Boat use Total number Percentag
e
Fishing 1 100
Transport 0 0
Poling 0 0

Yes No
Own 1 0
Percentage 100

number e
Gillnet 11 55
Hook and 7 35
line
Baskets 2 10
Others 0 0

No. in Percentag
Use e
27

size number e
50 26 89.66
75 0 0
100 2 6.90
115 1 3.45
125 0 0
size use e
50mm 7 58.33
75mm 4 33.33
100mm 0 0
115mm 1 8.33
125mm 0 0

number e
All year 3 15.79
round
Seasonal 10 52.63
Occasional 6 31.58

Yes No
Own 18 1

fish number e
Employee 1 4
Family assistant 24 96
From elsewhere 0 0
Family friend 0 0

<1 15 78.95
1 3 15.79
2 1 5.26
3 0 0
4 0 0
5 0 0
>5 0 0
season number e
Autumn 9 60
Spring 1 6.67
Winter 5 33.33
Summer 0 0
season number e
Autumn 3 10
Spring 4 13.33
Winter 15 50
Summer 8 26.67

areas number e
Floodplain 2 6.06
Lagoon 14 42.42
All 2 6.06
Who shares fishing area Total Percentag
number e
Family 14 36.84
Neighbours 18 47.37
Tour operators 0 0
All 5 13.16
No one 1 2.63

Yes No
Permission 5 17
needed?
Table 400: Total number and percentage of fishers by person asked to fish
Person asked Total Percentag
before fishing number e
Local authority 0 0
Relatives 0 0
Neighbours 0 0
Government 2 100
No one 0 0
Yes No
Do you pay? 1 12
banned number e
Small mesh 4 12.90
Seining 4 12.90
Poisoning 4 12.90
None 15 48.39
alleged to number e
have banned
fishing
methods
Local 0 0
authority
Government 6 100
Both 0 0

Yes No
illegal 3 7
fishing?
Percentage 30 70
activities
Foreigners 1 33.33
Outsiders 0 0
(Nationals)
illegal fishing
Fate of culprits Total Percentag
number e
Fined 0 0
Take nets 0 0
Arrested 1 100
Warning 0 0
Yes No
Conflicts? 1 17
Yes No
regulated?
People preferred to Total Percentag
regulate the fishery number e
Traditional Authority 0 0
Government 1 5.26
Both 18 94.74
regulations
Preferred use of regulations Total Percentag
number e
Conserve fish 13 65
Both 0 0
fishing season
method number e
Ban small mesh net sizes 13 25
All 8 15.38
Fig 1: Ngamiland district showing the proposed new boundaries of the existing
Okavango Delta Ramsar site and some of the major fish landing sites.
100%
90%
80%
70%
60% S um m e r
W i n te r
50%
S p rin g
A u tu m n
Proportion of fishers
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
ona i
Da K3hwa
aka i
Sh eauxw
pi
ha a
Ng got a
ara ho
Dit ra
shi
Ets epoep
Morong
1
Sw
nKg
Se
V illa g e
Fig 2: Proportion of fishers in the major landing sites with regard to the best fishing
season
100%
80%
60% Summer
W in t e r
S p r in g
40% A u tu m n
Proportion of fishers
20%
0%
i
Da 3Khwa
aka i
Sh eauxw
pi
Ets poepa
shi
Moronga
ara o
Daitra
Ng goth
1
Se w
ngK
ha
on
Se
V il l a g e
Fig 3: Proportion of fishers in the major landing sites with regard to the worst fishing
season
100%
90%
80%
70% A lu m i n u m b o a t
60%
F ib r e g la s s b o a t
50%
F ib r e g la s s c a n o e
40%
30% D ug o ut c a no e
Proportion of Boat type
20%
10%
0%
oDna ai
aSka wi
Da 1K3hw
i pi
ha a
Sh nKgaeux
Ng go a
ara tho
itsrha
Ets ewpoep
Moerong
S
F is h in g v illa g e
Fig 4: Proportion of boat type by percentage per landing site
D it s h ip i
Da ona ra
1
0
3%
0%
Sepopa
Khw ai
2
0
85, 3% 6%
0%
S h a kaw e
S eronga
8
S u b s is t e n c e 24%
15
43%
C o m m e r c ia l Kaux w i
2
6%
2616, E ts h a 1 3
Ng ara ng e
97% 0
3
9%
0%
M o g o th o
3
9%
Fig 5: Proportion of commercial and Fig 6: Proportion of commercial fishers per
Subsistence fishers landing site
100%
90% F i s h i n g m e th o d s
80%
70% F is h in g g ro u n d s
60% B o a t th e ft
50%
40% N e ts th e ft
conflicts
Percentage of
30% N o o f n e ts
20%
10% i lle g a l fi s h e rs
0%
i
wa
aka i
Sh aeuxw
ona i
Da itshiap
rKah
Moha 1 a
ara ho
Ng got 3
D pop
Se w e
Ets rong
nKg
Se
F is h in g v illa g e
Fig 7: Proportion of various types of conflicts by percentage for the major landing sites in
the delta
Production (tonnes)
19
0
96/
9
50
100
150
200
19 7
97/ 250
9
19 8
98/
9
19 9
99/
0
20 0
00/
0
20 1
01/
Ye a r
0
20 2
02/
0
20 3
03/
0
20 4
04/
05
Fig 8: Total annual production for the Okavango fishery (1996-2005)

80
70 0 -1 0
1 1 -2 0
60
2 1 -3 0
50
3 1 -4 0
40 4 1 -5 0
30 5 1 -6 0
6 1 -7 0
No. of fishers per age class
20
7 1 -8 0
10 80+
0
i
wa
aka i
Da shipi
Ets opa
Sh auxw
Krah
Mo onga
Dit 3
Ng otho
ha1
Sewe
Knge
ona
p
g
r
ara
Se
V illa g e
Fig. 9: The age class distribution of fishers by number in the major landing sites
160
140
120
100 B am bukushu
80
60 B ayei
No. fishers
40 B a s a rw a
20
0 B a k g a la g a d i
B a ro t s e
B a x h e re k u
i
wa
aka i
ona i
Ets popa
Sh aguexw
Da tship
Krha
Ng goth a
O t h e rs
Dhia13
ara o
Mo rong
Sewe
Kn
Se
V illa g e
Fig. 10: The distribution and number of fishers by ethnicity in the major landing sites
140
120
100
80 M a le
60 F e m a le
number
40
20
0
i
wa
aka i
Da shipi
Ets popa
Sh auxw
Krha
Mo ronga
Dita13
Ng gotho
Sewe
Knge
ona
h
ara
Se
V illa g e
Fig. 11: Number of fishers by sex across the major landing sites of the delta
160
140 M a r r ie d
120
100 S in g le
80
60 D ivo rc e d
No. of fishers
40
20 W id o w e d
0
i
wa
aka i
Ets popa
Da shipi
Sh auexw
Krah
Mo ronga
Dita13
ara o
Sewe
Ng goth
ona
Kng
h
Se
V illa g e
Fig. 12: Number of fishers by marital status across the major landing sites of the delta
90
80
0 -1 0
70
1 1 -2 0
60 2 1 -3 0
50 3 1 -4 0
4 1 -5 0
40 5 1 -6 0
6 1 -7 0
No. of fishers per years fishing
30
7 1 -8 0
20
80+
10
0
i
wa
aka i
Ets opa
Da shipi
Sh auxw
Krah
Mo ronga
Dit 3
Ng gotho
ha1
Sewe
Knge
ona
p
ara
Se
V illa g e
Fig. 13: Number of fishers by years spent fishing across the major landing sites of the
delta.
160
s a le
140
b a rt e r
120
100 hom e
c o n s u m p t io n
80
s e ll a n d b a r t e r
No. of fishers
60
s e ll a n d h o m e
40
20 b a rt e r a n d h o m e
0
i
wa
aka wi
ona i
Dha1 a
Da itsh3ip
Krah
Ng got a
Ets epeop
ara ho
Sh Kageux
Moerong
Sw
n
S
V illa g e
Fig. 14: Number of fishers by catch disposal across the major landing sites of the delta.
80
70
60 0 -1 0
1 1 -2 0
50 2 1 -3 0
3 1 -4 0
40 4 1 -5 0
village
5 1 -6 0
30 6 1 -7 0
No. of fishers per years living in
7 1 -8 0
20 80+
10
0
i
wa
aka i
Da shipi
Ets popa
Sh auxw
Krah
Mo ronga
Dita13
Ng gotho
Sewe
Knge
ona
h
ara
Se
V illa g e
Fig. 15: Number of fishers by years living in village across the major landing sites of the
delta.
180
160
140
120
F u llt im e
100
S eas onal
80
P a r t - t im e
No. of fishers
60
40
20
0
i
wa
aka i
Ets popa
Da shipi
Sh auexw
Krah
Mo ronga
Dita13
ara o
Sewe
Ng goth
ona
Kng
h
Se
V illa g e
Fig 16: Number of fishers by time spent fishing across the major landing sites of the delta
800
700
600
500 N o . o f fis h e r s
400 N o . o f b o a ts
Number
300 N o . o f g illn e t s
200
100
0
i
wa
aka i
ona i
Ets peopa
Sh aguexw
Da itsh3ip
Krha
Ng goth a
ara o
Mo rong
Dha1
Sew
Kn
Se
V illa g e
Fig 17: Comparison of effort (No. of fishers, boats and gillnets) across the major landing
sites of the delta
8. APPENDIX
Appendix A: Staff involved in the 2005 frame survey

Name Position
Shaft M. Nengu Principal scientific officer
Judge Manyemane Principal technical officer
Thethela Bokhutlo Scientific officer II
Motshereganyi Kootsositse Scientific officer II
Loago Mokunki Chief technical assistant
Okae Setswalo Principal technical assistant
Kesego kutoro Principal technical assistant
Keakabetse Mmopi Field assistant
Letota Morokotso Field assistant
Seloilwe Maeze Field assistant
Ratjitavi Kanji Field assistant
Aaron Samoxa Field assistant
Godwin Kenosi Field assistant
Gaebonwe Monnaatsheko Field assistant
Ontekotse Macha Driver
Joseya Phillip Driver
Appendix B: Total fish harvested from the Okavango Delta (weight in Kg). (Extracted
from the Fisheries annual report 2004/2005)
Extension Bream Barbel S/barbe Tiger Others Totals
Area l fish
Etsha 13 32548.2 4195.3 28.8 233.6 22.5 37 028.4
Sepopa 6411 6465.8 249 682 963.2 14 771.0
Shakawe 12657 1825.8 40.6 889.3 55 15 468.7
Kauxwi 9964.5 2511.3 224 576 106.6 13 382.4
Ngarange 9885.2 2921.4 773.4 1106.7 395 15 081.7
Mogotho 8525.9 6263.7 667.6 1073.3 513 17 043.5
Seronga 5949.4 4509.4 5.3 242.8 20.9 10 727.8
Xhaxhaba 266.6 3389 17.8 20.5 19.7 6 109.6
Total 88604.7 32081.8 2006.5 4824.2 2095.9 129 613.1
Appendix C: Production and revenue collection figures for Boiteko Syndicate

(Samochima) 1999-2005
WEIGHT (KG)
YEAR AMOUNT LEVY
(PULA)
1999 15 324.7 121 935.40 P6 141.95

2000 16 339.8 179 737.80 P7 829.40
2001 10 221.6 112 437.6 P5 133.43
2002 9 648.9 106 137.90 P4 035.43
2003 9 420.7 97 111.70 P4 855.60
2004 8 750.3 93 474.40 P4 673.70
2005 7 651.8 91 821.60 P4 244.95
TOTAL 77 357.8 802 656.4 36 914.46
Appendix D: Summary of effort in terms of no. of fishers, gillnets, hooks, baskets and
boats in the Okavango delta.
Village Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total
numbe numbe numbe numbe numbe number numbe numbe
r of r of r of r of r of of r of r of
fishers gillnets hooks baskets dug aluminu fiber fiber
out m boats glass glass
canoes boats canoes
Seronga 142 240 100 10 105 9 7 23
Mogotho 61 86 55 4 0 0
Ngarange 42 52 25 16 24 2 1 1
Kauxwi 50 4 24 29 10 0 0 0
Shakawe 161 34 74 102 22 8 1 0
Sepopa 17 11 16 2 9 1 0 0
Etsha 13 198 152 78 114 30 3 1 13
Khwai 25 11 7 2 0 4 0 1
Daonara 11 9 9 4 5 0 0 0
Ditshipi 61 78 38 15 41 0 0 1
Appendix E:
Glossary
Fulltime fisher Fishes throughout the year and relies solely on fishing as a
livelihood source
Part-time fisher Fishes only during certain times of the year when there is a
need or when he time to do so. Has an alternative source of livelihood and therefore
fishing is only a complementary activity. In the delta, other livelihood sources are usually
pastoral and arable farming.
Seasonal fisher Fishes only during particular seasons. Fishing is dependant

on the availability of water. Most of the seasonal fishers are subsistence fishers who use
traditional fishing gear in the shallow waters of the floodplain; therefore they rely on the
seasonal flood regime.
Appendix F: Questionnaire used in the 2005 Frame survey
OKAVANGO DELTA FISHERIES FRAME SURVEY: FISHING VILLAGE/CAMP

CHARACTERISTICS - FORM 5A
Village
Camp
Name of recorder: _______________________ Date: _____/_____/_____(dd/mm/yy)

Time: ____________
Name of Village/Camp: ___________________ Age of Village/Camp: ______ (yrs)

Population: ________
GPS: S: ______________________________ E: _________________________ Number of

households: ____________
Chief: ______________________________ Headman:

______________________________
Number of fishing boats by type: Number

1. Dugout canoes
2. Plank boats
3. Fibreglass
4. Other
Number of fishers by type:

5. Boat and net owners
6. Net owners
7. Boat owners
8. Others :
_______________________________________________(specify)
Camp/Village status Temporary Permanent
How many months a year is the camp occupied?

_________________________________________________
Is there any agricultural activity? Yes No
If YES, where is this practised: Mainland Flood plain
Type of agriculture: Crop Livestock

Both
What is planted? Maize Cassava

Millet
Sorghum Pumpkin
Beans
Vegetable Rice
Others: _______________________________________________(specify)
Livestock kept: Cattle Goats Pigs

Sheep
Poultry
Others:_____________________________(specify)
Notes: (such as condition of village, behaviour of people interviewed):

________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________
______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________
______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________
* Need to define terms (Village/Camp) in field manual and this form is administered to village heads
CONFIDENTIAL
OKAVANGO DELTA FISHERIES FRAME SURVEY:FISHER CHARACTERISTICS - FORM 5B1

Name of Recorder: ______________________ Village/Camp name: __________________ Date:
_____/_____/____(dd/mm/yy)
PART ONE: DEMOGRAPHICS
Years express as a year fraction

Gender Marital Fisherman
FisherID Age Ethnic origin Catch Disposal
(M/F) status Fished living in village status
1. Bamb 1. married 1. Sale 1. Full-time

ukushu 2. Single 2. Barter 2. Seasonal
2. Bayei 3. Divorced 3. Home consumption 3. Part-time
3. Basar 4. Widowed 4. Sell & barter
wa 5. Sell & home consumption
4. Bakgalagadi 6. Barter & home
5. Barotse consumption
6. Baxhereku 7. All of the above
7. Others
* There is need to seek informed socio-economic input to design
CONFIDENTIAL
OKAVANGO DELTA FISHERIES FRAME SURVEY: FISHER CHARACTERISTICS - FORM

5B2

_____/_____/______(dd/mm/yy)
PART TWO: FISHING GEAR
People hired
Boat parameters Gear parameters
to fish Gear
FisherID
Own Total No. in Mesh Gear Own lifespan
Type No. Use Propulsion Type E FA
(Y/N) no. use size use (Y/N)
1. Mokoro /Dug out
E- employee
2. Fibreglass 1. Gillnet
1. Fishing
Mokoro 2. Hook and line 1. All year round
2. Transport 1. Motorised FA – Family
3. Fibreglass boat 3. Baskets 2. Seasonal
3. Poling 2.Non motorised Assistant
4. Aluminium 4. Others 3. Occasional
4. Others (specify) FE- From
5. none
elsewhere
6. Other
* Define codes and terms in field manual e.g. E & FA
CONFIDENTIAL
OKAVANGO DELTA FISHERIES FRAME SURVEY: RESOURCE MANAGEMENT -

FORM 5C1

_____/______/______(dd/mm/yy)
PART ONE: FISHING ACTIVITY
Fishing time
Who shares the areas Permission needed Do you pay
FisherID Fishing place/area Who do you ask
Best Worst you fish in (Y/N) Y/n
1.Floodplain/Mabala
1. Family 1.Local authority
1. Letlhabola/Autumn 2.Sidechannels
2. Neighbours 2. Relatives
2.Dikgakologo/Spring 3.Main channel
3. Tour operators 3. Neighbours
3. Mariga/ Winter 4.Lagoon
4. All 4.Government
4. Selemo/Summer 5. all
5. No one 5. No one
6. Other
CONFIDENTIAL
OKAVANGO DELTA FISHERIES FRAME SURVEY: RESOURCE

MANAGEMENT - FORM 5C2

______/_____/______(dd/mm/yy)
PART TWO: PRESENT RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
Fishing methods Fishing rules and regulations Fishing relationships

FisherID
Illegal Who Any
By Fate of
Type banned Who banned fishing prosecutes conflicts With who About what
who culprits
(Y/N) offenders (Y/N)
1. Local 1. Local People 1. Locals
Authority 2. Foreigners 2. Foreigners
1. Illegal fishers
2. Government 3. Outsiders 3. Outsiders
1. Fined 2. No of nets
1. Small mesh 3. Both (nationals) 1. Traditional Authoruty (nationals)
2. Take nets 3. Nets theft
2. Seining 2. Government 4. Tour
3. Arrested 4. Boat theft
3. Drive fishing 3. Both O
4. Warning 5. Fishing grounds
4. Poisoning 4. Nobody p
5. Nothing 6. Fishing methods
5. None er
6. Other (state) 7. Other (specify)
6. Other (specify) at
or
s
5. Other
CONFIDENTIAL
OKAVANGO DELTA FISHERIES FRAME SURVEY: RESOURCE

MANAGEMENT - FORM 5C3
_____/______/______(dd/mm/yy)
PART THREE: FUTURE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
Ways of managing fishery resources

FisherID
Should the fishery be
What should the regulations Most important way of ensuring everyone
regulated? By who?
be used for? has fish?
(Y/N)
1. Traditional Authority 1. Conserve Fish 1. Closed seasons
2. Government 2. Keep away outsiders 2. Ban seine nets
3. Both 3. Both 3. Ban small mesh net sizes
4. Other (specify) 4. Ban fish poisoning
5. Drive fishing
6. All
7. Other (specify)
Appendix G: Frame survey Terms of Reference
Department of Wildlife and National Parks, Ngamiland District
And
Okavango Delta Management Plan, Project Secretariat

_______________________________________________________________________
_______
TERMS OF REFERENCE
ODMP Sustainable Fisheries Utilisation

and Management Component
Frame Survey of the Okavango Delta Fishery

_______________________________________________________________________
_______
March 2005
1. BACKGROUND
1.1 On the 4th April 1997, Botswana became a contracting party of “The Ramsar
Convention” and listed the Okavango Delta as the world’s largest wetland of
international importance.
1.2 In order to ensure the Delta’s conservation and wise use, The Okavango Delta
Management Plan (ODMP) project proposal was drawn up in 2002 as a means “to
integrate resource management for the Okavango Delta that will ensure its long
term conservation and that will provide benefits for the present and future well
being of the people, through sustainable use of its natural resources” (ODMP,
2002).
1.3 The strategy that will be utilised to realise the implementation of the ODMP is to,
amongst other things, collectively create a greater sense of responsibility and
accountability amongst communities and in existing institutions with a mandate to
manage the Delta and its resources. In doing so, 9 components and their
respective responsible institutions were identified as follows:-
1.4
i. Policy, Planning and Strategy is the responsibility of the
National Conservation Strategy Agency (NCSA) and the
ODMP Project Secretariat
ii. Local, national, regional and international communication by
ODMP Project Secretariat
iii. Research, Data Storage and Data Management by the Harry
Oppenheimer Okavango Research Centre (HOORC)
iv. Hydrology and Water Resource by Department of Water
Affairs (DWA).
v. Wildlife Management by Department of Wildlife and National
Parks (DWNP)
vi. Sustainable Tourism by the Department of Tourism (DoT) in
Maun and the North West District Council (NWDC) Economic
Planning Unit (Tourism Section)
vii. Sustainable Fisheries management by the Division of
Fisheries in the Department of Wildlife and National Parks
(DWNP)
viii. Vegetation Resources by the Department of Crop Production
(DCP), Ministry of Agriculture and the Agricultural Resources
Board (ARB) and Forestry Division, Ministry of Environment,
Wildlife and Tourism
ix. Physical Planning by the Department of Town and Regional
Planning (DTRP).
x. Land use Planning and Land Management by Tawana Land
Board (TLB) in association with the District Land Use
Planning Unit (DLUPU).
xi. Waste Management by the NWDC Environmental Health
Department (EHD)
xii. Sustainable Livestock Management by the Department of
Animal Health and Production (DAHP)
1.5 There will also be active stakeholder participation in the main stages, an association
of international stakeholders and an integrated planning process.
1.6 A considerable proportion of about 65%, of the 120,000 Ngamiland residents derive
their livelihood from fishing. Fishing is often considered a complementary activity to
a myriad of livelihood strategies ranging from arable agriculture, livestock rearing,
basket making, beer brewing, canoe poling of tourists and grocery vending (semausu)
etc. However, the value of fishing and hence its ranking amongst these occupations
has never been fully assessed.
1.7 In 1987 a NORAD funded study estimated the total number of people identified as
fishers at over 5000. In this study the definition of a fisher was loosely meant to refer
to anyone who at sometime of the year engaged in catching fish for consumption or
sale. It was thus not easy to distinguish between full time and part time fishers.
1.8 A decade later (1997) the Fisheries Division carried-out a frame survey across nearly
all fishing households around the Okavango delta and estimated 41 commercial
fishers and 200 subsistence fishers. An attempt was also made to quantify the type of
fishing equipment used to catch fish and how the use of such equipment varied with
seasons. The frame survey did not go to sufficient detail on broad issues of
complementarities of fishing to other economic activities, the role of fish in child
nutrition and general profile of fishing as a household activity particularly with
respect to food security and income generation.
1.9 A research project assessing the fish biological resources of the delta was launched in
1999, a report of which will be finalised before sometime this year. The status of the
biological resources will blend in well with how the communities benefit from and
use the resource, how much is being exerted to the fishery in terms of number of
fishers and their fishing gear. Thus the fisheries frame survey dimension of the
fishery together with the soon to commence fisheries socio-economic study and the
ongoing biological perspective will lead to sound economic and scientific planning
for the fishery.
2.0 AREA OF STUDY
2.1 The Okavango Delta is situated at the northern most edge of the Kalahari Desert
in north western Botswana, below the Caprivi Strip in Namibia. It is the largest
designated inland wetland in the world and is fed by the water of the Okavango
River with between 8-15 thousand million cubic metres of water per annum from
the river’s headwaters in Namibia and especially Angola.
2.2 The proposed study is to be conducted in 17 villages in the Northwest District
which are in the periphery of the delta within the newly proposed boundaries of
the existing Okavango Delta Ramsar site (see Map 1).
Villages: Xhaxhaba, Ditshipi/Daunara, Boro, Maun, Gumare/Tubu, Etsha villages, Ikoga,
Sepopa, Nxamasere, Shakawe, Mohembo, Kauxwi, Xakao, Ngarange, Mogotlho,
Seronga and Gunitsoga (These are the main fishing villages and they also comprise of
small settlements).
Map 1 Ngamiland district showing the proposed new boundaries of the existing
Okavango Delta Ramsar site
3.0 OBJECTIVES, OUTPUTS AND ACTIVITIES
Overall objective
To undertake a Frame survey of the Okavango delta fishery in order to better understand,
amongst others, its characteristics, composition and structure, which in turn will lead to
sustainable management of the resource and resolution of current conflicts on the basis of
improved understanding of the fishery.
Outcomes
1. Enhanced understanding of the composition and structure of the fishery in terms

of fisher’s demographics, fishing activity, fishing methods, fishing gear, fishing
seasons etc.
2. A better understanding of the total fishing effort exerted by subsistence,
commercial and recreational fishers on the fishery.
3. To contribute to long-term planning and sustainable management of the Delta

fishery and fish stocks
4. To contribute towards conflict resolution mechanisms associated with the Delta

fishery
Outputs
A report outlining;
1. the demographics of fishers in terms of ethnic origin, gender, age, years fished,
etc.
2. the fishing activity in terms of fishing seasons, permission to fish, access

restrictions, areas fished etc.
3. the fishing gear in terms of type, number, size etc.
4. the present resource management strategies in terms of fishing methods, fishing

regulations etc.
5. the future resource management strategies in terms of ways of sustainable

management of fisheries resources
Activities
The Fisheries Division should:
• Familiarize itself with the 1998 Fisheries Division Frame survey report and any
other related literature
• Examine and assess the composition of fishers in respect of gender, ethnic origin,
number of years the fisher has been fishing, catch disposal, village of residence
etc.
• Determine;
i). the fishing seasons that are most favored by fishers in different parts of the
delta, and those that are least favored by fishers
ii). the fishing areas for each fishermen and whether these are shared with other
people, and the resulting conflict
iii) Whether fishers do require any permission to fish from any institution or
anyone.
• Examine and assess all fishing gear types, and further give an account of their
number, size, lifespan etc.
• Train Fisheries division staff on the techniques applied in conducting a Frame
survey. All Fisheries division technical staff will join the survey team at alternate
times.
• Train staff on data analysis
4.0 REPORTING SCHEDULE AND TIMING OF WORK
4.1 The study shall not take more than 6 (six) months
4.2 The Fisheries Division and HOORC will report to the ODMP Task Force in
collaboration with the ODMP Project Secretariat.
4.3 The work will be carried out by the Fisheries Division in collaboration with
HOORC. Both institutions are based in Maun. All meetings pertaining to
this survey will be held in Maun, and all stakeholder meetings related to
the work will be held in and around the Okavango delta.
4.4 A “Task Force” responsible for technical input and steering of the contract will
be established and the Fisheries division and HOORC will be expected to
report their progress to that group at each milestone during delivery of the
work. The composition of the Task Force is likely to be as follows:
(a) Dept. of Wildlife and National Parks – District Wildlife

Coordinator (Mr. Sibangani Mosojane and Senior
Scientific Officer - Fisheries (Mr Shaft Nengu CE&O
officer (Claudia Zuze), Research (Lettie Pitlagano).
(b) Division of Forestry – Mr Kealeboga Kemoreile
(c) Agricultural Resources Board – Mr Boikago Maswabi
(d) Ministry of Agriculture, Range Ecology section –
(e) Physical Planner, DTRP/NWDC – Mr Fanuel Kibakaya
(f) ODMP Project Coordinator – Ms Portia Segomelo
(g) ODMP Chief Technical Advisor –
(h) Board Secretary Tawana Land Board – Landboard
Secretary and Mr. S. Mongati
(i) District Officer (Development), North West District – Mr.
Macha
(j) District Officer (Lands), North West District – Mr
Ramsden Kelebemang
(k) Dept. of Tourism – Ms Felicity Rabolo & Ms Patricia
Chilume
(l) Dept. of Water Affairs – Dr Naidu Kurugundla
(m) NGO reps, e.g. KCS, CI, People and Nature Trust
(n) Harry Oppenheimer Okavango Research Centre –
Hannelore Bendsen and Mr. Mosepele
(o) Dept. of Animal Health and Production – Mr Onkeme
Gaebope and Mr Patrick Kgori
(p) North West District Council, Environmental Health Unit,
Waste Management Section – Ms Letty Ragonamanye
and Rutherford
(q) NGO’s – KCS, CI
4.5 The Fisheries Division and HOORC will be expected to prepare and submit
the following reports: -
a) An Inception Report (2 digital and 5 hard copies) within 3

weeks after approval of the Terms of Reference by the Task
Force. The document should detail proposed methodologies
including survey instruments, timing, required resources and
a detailed plan for the delivery of training as an integral part
of the delivery of this subcomponent
b) A Draft Final Report (2 digital and 10 hard copies) to be

produced within 5 months commencement of work.
c) A Final Report (2 digital and 10 hard copies) to be produced

within one month after discussion of the Draft Final Report.
4.6 The Fisheries Division and HOORC are expected to fully involve all relevant
stakeholders including communities, safari operators, and concessionaires
as and when appropriate in the delivery of their work.
4.7 The Fisheries Division and HOORC should undertake consultation with other
government institutions, especially those directly involved in the delivery of
other aspects of the ODMP (see list on page 2), as well as NGOs etc.
4.8 All reports will also ultimately be subject to consideration and approval by the
ODMP structures, i.e. the Task Force, Project Management Group, the
Okavango Wetland Management Committee and the ODMP Project
Steering Committee. Reports from this survey will be incorporated into the
ODMP Framework Management Plan, the Draft Management Plan and
the Final Management Plan.
4.9 To ensure that all graphics included in reports are of a professionally high
standard and quality, they shall be presented in either A4 or A3 format in
the report and in A0 or A1 in an additional hard copy. Any maps shall also
be digitized in a format compatible with PC/ARCINFO and a digital copy
submitted along with the reports.

ODMP Fishery Frame Survey Draft Report

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

ODMP Fishery Frame Survey Draft Report

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

OKAVANGO DELTA FISHERY FRAME SURVEY

ODMP SUSTAINABLE FISHERIES UTILIZATION

Thethela Bokhutlo, Motshereganyi Virat Kootsositse and Ketlhatlogile Mosepele

The following objectives were outlined.

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1. Area of study

2.2. Frame survey form and collection of data

2.3. Data analysis

3.1. Description of the whole fishery

3.1.2. Fishing Gear

3.1.3. Fishing activity

3.1.4. Present resource management

3.1.5. Future resource management

3.2.0.1.3. Fishing activity

3.2.0.1.4. Present resource management

3.2.0.1.5. Future resource management

3.2.0.2.2. Fishing gear

3.2.0.2.4. Present resource management

3.2.0.2.5. Future resource management

3.2.0.3.2. Fishing gear

3.2.0.3.4. Present resource management

3.2.0.3.5. Future resource management

3.2.0.4.2. Fishing gear

3.2.0.4.4. Present resource management

3.2.0.4.5. Future resource management

3.2.0.5.2. Fishing gear

3.2.0.5.4. Present resource management

3.2.0.5.5. Future resource management

3.2.0.6.2. Fishing gear

3.2.0.6.3. Fishing activity

3.2.0.6.4. Present resource management

3.2.0.6.5. Future resource management

3.2.0.7.2. Fishing gear

3.2.0.7.3. Fishing activity

3.2.0.7.4. Present resource management

3.2.0.8.3. Fishing activity

3.2.0.8.4. Present resource management

3.2.0.8.5. Future resource management

3.2.0.9.2. Fishing gear

3.2.0.9.4. Present resource management

3.2.0.9.5. Future resource management

3.2.1.2. Fishing gear

3.2.1.3. Fishing activity

3.2.1.4. Present resource management

3.2.1..5. Future resource management

4.1. The whole fishery

4.1.2. Fishing gear

4.1.3. Fishing activity

4.1.4. Management of the fishery

4.3. Conflicts and conflict resolution

Campleman, G. 1976. Manual on the identification and preparation of fishery investment

F.A.O. 1990. SWIOP/WP/57 - Frame Survey of Artisanal Fisheries of the Sofala

Fisheries annual report. 2004/2005. Ministry of Environment Wildlife and Tourism.

Mmopelwa, G., Raletsatsi, S. and Mosepele, K. 2005. Cost Benefit Analysis of

Mosepele, K. 2001. Discription of the Okavango Delta Fishery. Fisheries section,

Ruddle, K. 1987. Administration and conflict management in Japanese coastal fisheries.

Skelton, P. 2001. A Complete Guide to the FRESHWATER FISHES of Southern Africa.

Table 1: Total number of fishers and percentage by age class

Table 2: Total number of fishers and percentage by sex

Table 3: Total number and percentage of fishers by ethnic origin

Table 4: Total number and percentage of fishers by marital status

Table 5: Total number and percentage of fishers by years fishing

Table 7: Total number and percentage of fishers by catch disposal

Table 8: Total number of fishers and percentage by fisher status