June 17, 2008

 

Profits lure wheat farmers in India's Punjab into aquaculture

 

 

The State of Punjab is emerging as the major carp farming state of India as farmers diversify from wheat and paddy cultivation into aquaculture, according to a UN FAO study on the economics of fish farming in five Asian countries.

 

In India, the study "Economics of aquaculture feeding practices in selected Asian countries", focussed on 60 aquaculture farms in Punjab province. Field survey for the study was carried out between October 2005 and February 2006.

 

Aquaculture activities had been growing rapidly in Punjab due to the easy availability of feed, higher profitability and government support.

 

To encourage fish farming, the Government of Punjab increased funding for fish farming for 2006-07 to US$1.8 million, triple the US$0.61 million in the last fiscal year.

 

At the time of study, nearly 9,890 ha is under fish farming as compared to 343 ha in 1980–81 with fish production increasing correspondingly from 2 800 tonnes to 86,000 tonnes, including both capture fisheries and aquaculture.

 

Aquaculture production per ha in Punjab is more than double the national average production of 2,600kg/ha/year. Average farmer income varies from Rs 75,000-10,0 000 (US$1,666-US$2,426)/ha, which is much higher than that from agriculture and livestock rearing.

 

Farmers in the study were grouped into two categories: those  largely using industrially produced pellet feed (semi-intensive farmers) and others using on-farm feed mixtures largely consisting of rice bran mixed with oiled/de-oiled mustard cake (traditional farmers).

 

All farmers cited profitability as the main reason going into aquaculture. Factors favouring the activity were: the low labour requirements for fish culture relative to paddy or wheat cultivation, easy access to grains and byproducts for feed, easy access to buffalo and cattle manure and the large numbers of hatcheries that provided seed.

 

India's ponds were usually larger in size  with an average area of 1.7 ha for traditional systems and 2.3 ha for semi-intensive ( compared with China's at about 1 hectare).

 

Farmers prefer large size ponds for grow out as growth is faster in such ponds.

 

The species cultured consists of Indian major carps: catla, rohu and mrigal and exotic carps silver carp, grass carp, common carp and bighead carp.

 

Although no specific species mix was adopted, rohu was stocked at high density with a large number of bottom dwelling species like mrigal and common carp. Catla was stocked at a lower percentage, while silver and grass carp were also stocked in small numbers.

 

 

Feed
 

Feed constituted the largest input cost in both the semi-intensive system (US$1,109/ha/year) and traditional system (US$1,121/ha/year).

 

Traditional farmers were able to obtain a higher production (5,699 kg/ha/year) than semi intensive farmers (5,853kg/ha/year).

 

In terms of total variable costs, semi-intensive farmers spent less (US$2 036/ha/year) than traditional farmers (US$2 134/ha/year) on production costs.

 

Although in terms of net return, there was no major difference between the two systems (US$1,878/ha/year) in semi-intensive system as compared to US$1 821/ha/year among traditional farmers).

 

The benefit cost ratio was better in semi-intensive system (BCR 1.81) than the traditional system (BCR 1.75).

 

Pellet feeding used by semi-intensive farmers obtained a better food conversion ratio (1.55) compared to farm made feeds from traditional farmers (2.11).

 

The break-even price was US$0.41/ kg in semi-intensive farming as compared to US$0.42/kg in traditional farming.

 

Similarly, the net return per kg fish was slightly better in semi-intensive farming (US$0.33/kg) as compared to traditional farming (US$0.31/kg).

 

The report concluded that the revenue of farmers could be significantly increased by increasing feed and fertilizers inputs.

 

Fish produced in the State was largely consumed by the immigrant population and some was exported to the adjoining states like Delhi. Carp is not popular to the indigenous population because of its intramuscular spines.

 

Farmed-derived mixtures had similar fat and protein content to pelleted feed.

 

The pellet feed used by farmers had a protein level of less than 25 percent with 3-4 percent fat.

 

Those using derived mixtures used both de-oiled rice with a protein content of 10–15 percent, or mustard oil cake with a protein level 35-40 percent.

 

Farmers also used small amounts of fish meal, green grasses and soymeal.

 

Pellet feed serve mainly as a convenience feed and because it reduces wastage.

 

The cost of pellet feeds at Rs 6-8 (US$0.15-0.20/kg), was competitive and farmers have been gradually adopting them. Feed mills sold feed at minimal profit to attract buyers. They were able to do this due to bulk procurement.

 

Semi-intensive farmers applied an average 8,806 kg/ha/year, comprising 6,494 kg/ha/year pellet feed and 2 313 kg/ha/year for other feeds. Other feeds included rice bran, oil cake and green grasses. Rice bran and oil cake was used by most traditional farmers.

 

Traditional farmers used 12 322 kg/ha of feed a year, much more than semi-intensive farmers. However, in terms of cost, both categories spent similar amounts - semi-intensive spent US$1,110/ha while traditional farming systems spent US$1,121/ha.

Yields and returns
 

The average yield of fish was 5 699 kg/ha/ year in semi-intensive farms as compared with 5 853 kg/ha/year in traditional farms.

 

The gross revenue obtained by farmers was almost the same for both the groups of farmers with an overall average of US$4,421/ha/year.

 

The net returns were slightly higher in the case of semi-intensive farming systems with an average of US$1,878/ha as compared to the traditional fish farmers at US$1 821/ha.

 

The lower net returns in traditional farming were due to the relatively higher cost of labour and electricity costs.

 

The overall net return/ha was US$1 846/ ha, a better income as compared to other agriculture crops.

 

Fish prices were almost constant with an average price of about US$0.73/kg. The break-even price was found to be slightly lower in the case of semi-intensive farmed fish (US$0.41/kg) as compared to traditional fish (US$0.42/kg), indicating that costs could be lowered when using quality feed.

 

Given the inputs, the break-even production was set at 3,252 kg/ha for all farms, with most farms exceeding that volume by a large margin.

 

Production in traditional systems was 5,853 kg/ha while that for semi-intensive farms was 5,699 kg/ha.

 

Though the production level was slightly higher in traditional systems, in terms of food conversion ratio and benefit-cost ratio, the semi-intensive method of farming proved to be better.

 

The net returns per kg of fish was slightly higher in semi-intensive farming (US$0.33/kg) as compared to traditional farming (US$0.31/kg).

 

The report noted that farmers were unaware of the benefits of quality feed in terms of improving their returns on investment and stressed the need to educate farmers on the benefits of quality feed.

 

The report concluded that it is likely that the current level of profitability would encourage more land to be converted to aquaculture.

 

It was suggested that technology could be developed for the culture of alternative species, such as catfish, which could have a higher demand in the local market.