The ricefield catch and rural food security.

Abstract

Longitudinal studies in southeastern Cambodia of three different areas with differing water regimes indicated that the average amount of fish and other aquatic animals caught in rice fields and surrounding areas was over 380 kg per household per year-1. The amount varied significantly (P<0.001) between areas with better (mean 604 kg) and poorer (mean 158 kg) water resources. Despite this trend, the annual consumption of 37 kg per person and the amount of fish purchased annually did not vary significantly between the different areas. The amount of fish sold, however, increased almost tenfold between water-poor and water-rich areas, 34 and 356 kg, respectively. This suggests that the desirable level of per caput fish consumption in these areas is around 37 kg and most households will attain this one way or another. The value of the ricefield catch was on average over 80% of that of the rice harvest, though this varied significantly between areas with differing water resources. It can be argued that a one-third increase in rice production would be detrimental if it reduced local fish catches by 40% or more. Aquaculture is often promoted to fill the gap between declining fish production from natural sources and the increasing demand from the growing populations. We argue that this is a gross over-simplification, as sustainable management of the ricefield fishery and associated resources needs to be high on the national agenda for many countries such as Cambodia. This important resource should feature in any agricultural and infrastructure development initiatives aimed at addressing rural food security and helping the rural poor.

Geographical Distribution of Investment in Small-Scale Rural Fish Ponds

“…In essence, should policy continue with the traditional perspective of aquaculture development as a process of leading farmers away from their dependence on capture fisheries, along a path of enclosing and intensifying production through aquaculture along a 'ladder of intensification' (Setboonsarng, 1993;Deb, 1998;Kwei-Lin, 2001)? Or, alternatively, should a more dynamic continuum model of small-scale rural aquaculture be adopted, highlighting the simultaneous use of fish ponds as a hybrid form of capture fisheries and aquaculture (Guttman, 1996;Gregory & Guttman, 2002; see Figure 1)?…”

Habitat use, migration pattern and population dynamics of chevron snakehead Channa striata in a rainfed rice farming landscape

“…Rice farming landscapes often support very productive fisheries, with intensive harvesting of wild fishes in the rice fields, along drainage lines (the principal migratory pathways), and in natural streams and wetlands. Such fisheries contribute significantly to livelihoods of rice farming areas (Tan et al ., 1973; Garaway, 1999; Gregory & Guttman, 2002; Nguyen Khoa et al ., 2005). Not surprisingly therefore, rice farmers often create and manage aquatic habitats on their land specifically for fisheries purposes.…”

Exceptionally High Prevalence of Infection of Bithynia siamensis goniomphalos with Opisthorchis viverrini Cercariae in Different Wetlands in Thailand and Lao PDR

“…Rice field aquaculture is becoming an increasingly important source of fish (including cyprinid) protein for the local populations in Southeast Asia generally. 34,35 Although our data do not provide direct evidence for why such high-prevalence levels are found in this habitat, a number of hypotheses can be presented. (1) It is possible that fish used to stock the rice fields are infected in the source nurseries, leading to high prevalence in humans and thus, snails.…”