Fozlul Kabeer
Department of Fisheries, Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock, Bangladesh; Department of Fisheries Technology, Bangladesh Agricultural University, Mymensingh-2202
Md. Jamal Hossain
Department of Agricultural Statistics, Bangladesh Agricultural University, Mymensingh-2202
Subrato Paul
Ministry of Public Administration, Dhaka, Bangladesh
Taufiqul Islam
Department of Law, Northern University, Dhaka
Co-management, MACH, nonMACH, Biodiversity, Fishing rights, Baikka Beel
Two villages were selected as the study sites—Hazipur and Uttar Uttarsur
Socio-economic and Policy
Income generation
Study Area: Based on supplementary information from the Department of Fisheries (DoF) officials, Integrated Protected Area Co-management (IPAC) staff and local communities and a review of previous reports, two villages were selected as the study sites—Hazipur and Uttar Uttarsur. These villages are adjacent to Hail Haor and also very near to Baikka Beel, about five kilometers northwest of Sreemangol upazila and twenty kilometers southwest of Moulvibazar district town. Due to close proximity of villagers to the Beel, most of the fishers of these two villages were fully or partially engaged in fishing as their main occupation for livelihoods. A total of forty respondents were randomly selected for collecting data, twenty from Hazipur village and twenty from Uttar Uttarsur village. In Hazipur, MACH provided AIGAs funds to members of the resource user groups (RUGs) who chosen alternative professions to reduce their dependence on fishing in and around Baikka Beel, but in Uttar Uttarsur there was no MACH presence. In this study, changes in income levels of fishers due to AIGAs in Hazipur village, as well as the difference between the MACH (Hazipur) and non-MACH villages (Uttar Uttarsur) were investigated. Data collection methods For this study, both primary and secondary data were collected. Primary data was collected through field visits and observations, semi-structured interview and discussions with community leaders and key informants and through participatory rural appraisal methods such as focus group discussions (FGDs), visits to fish markets and observations of fish catch composition. Prior to selecting the study sites, the area was visited and two villages were selected for data collection. Information was gathered on the local livelihoods, the socioeconomic conditions and fishing activities of the community members, and their management activities in Baikka Beel. Based on this information, questionnaire was designed to collect qualitative and quantitative data for this study. The study area was visited for data collection once a month from August 2011 to December 2011 (five times). This research was conducted by a small USAID fund and the duration of the study period was six months. Considering the research time frame, data was collected during five months taking into account the main fish harvesting season .Secondary data was gathered on Baikka Beel, from the published reports on MACH activities, IPAC activities, previous and present fish catch, and AIGA trainings done by Department of Fisheries, Upazila Fisheries Office and local IPAC office. Using a semi-structured questionnaire, a comparative household survey was conducted in the Hazipur and Uttar Uttarsur villages; Hazipur had a RMO (and AIGAs) and Uttar Uttarsur did not. Twenty (20) respondents from each village were chosen who were engaged in fishing for several years at that site because they could provide information about fish catch and biodiversity. In Hazipur village, all 20 respondents fish around the beel for their livelihoods and all are members of the RUG who received AIGAs training and fund for alternative profession other than fishing. In Uttar Uttarsur village, all 20 respondents also fish around the beel, but they are not members of an RUG and did not receive any AIGAs trainings or funds. Two focus group discussions were conducted in these two villages for qualitative data collection, with respondents not included in the semi-structured interview, about the current management practices of the sanctuary, implementation of the Fish Act, attitudes towards the sanctuary, whether they benefited from the sanctuary, current problems with the sanctuary, and possible recommendations for enhancing its sustainable management. To determine fish biodiversity, data was collected from the fishermen engaged in fishing in Baikka Beel. The nearby fish markets- Baruna Ghater Bazar, Hajipur Ghater Bazar and Bhairabganj Bazar were visited one time each to collect data on fish species that were collected from the study area. Secondary sources including MACH project documents, reports and other publications were also reviewed for collecting data on fish biodiversity. The respondents of both villages, respondents of FGDs and key informants were asked about currently available fish species, fish species previously found but not available now (endangered and critically endangered species), currently available fish species that were previously present; the amount of previous and current catch and fish consumption; the types of gear used; implementation of Fish Acts and Rules; fish sanctuaries; excavation; swamp plantation; AIGA fund and activities provided, and management strategies of RUGs, FRUGs, RMOs and also asked whether co-management practices and AIGA activities under MACH/IPAC have brought positive results in the context of their livelihoods and fish biodiversity. Data analyses All the collected data from primary and secondary sources were tabulated by using the Microsoft Excel. After tabulation, the data were analyzed accordingly to find out the results. The independent samples t-test was conducted to see the significant difference between MACH and non-MACH fisher groups in terms of their income from fishing and from AIGAs.
J Bangladesh Agril Univ 16(2): 328–336, 2018 ISSN 1810-3030 (Print) 2408-8684 (Online)
Journal