First of all, I congratulate the Govt.of Orissa, especially the Department of Fisheries and the Department of Forest and Wildlife for their pioneering work in conducting this Workshop with an aim to create awareness among the fishermen about the utility of TED programme. Even though I do not understand Oriya much, I gathered from the discussions that there is some resentment among you people, fisherfolk. As a representative of Government of India I want to clear your doubt. I want to emphasise that for both Govt. of India and State Government, our prime target group are the fishermen. So the upliftment of fishermen is also our prime concern. Whatever programme is now being taken up is solely meant for the upliftment of fisherfolk. Production of fish and development of fishermen are our prime objectives.
I congratulate the fishermen, especially those who have come prepared to discuss the viability of installing the TED in their trawlers. The question that has been raised of course is, why TED?
Let me tell you that export promotion for our fish products has been our goal from the beginning. In 1996 when the US Govt. imposed an embargo on shrimp import from different countries including India, we were badly affected. Since then with the objective of making our fish export sustainable, we were forced to adopt the programme for installation of TEDs. This programme as you might understand, helps the fishermen in a definite way.
Another important issue before us is the conservation of sea turtles. Orissa coast is well known for mass nesting of Olive ridleys. We have to preserve this fauna at any cost. Simultaneously the development of fishery resources is also our prime concern. We are thinking of formulating such programmes as shall help the development of fishery resources and also the fishing harbours.
A friend told here that the Government of India or State Government do not take care of the fishermen. I think, it is not true. Keeping the objective of development of fishermen, we are already implementing so many programmes, such as provision of subsidy for modernisation of traditional crafts, relaxation in Central Excise duties etc.
Whatever points I heard in this workshop, I shall convey to my higher authorities, so that the policies and programmes being formulated by them become fishermen friendly.
We are in the midst of finalizing of 10th Five Year Plan now. The demands you have ventilated here like provision of communication equipments shall be conveyed to my higher authorities for better formulation of the plans and schemes for the fishermen, whether they be traditional fishermen, small mechanized boat owner or trawl owners. I am carrying your message to the appropriate authorities at Government of India level and hope to help thereby.
I do not intend to go into the details regarding the anticipated fish loss by the use of TED, over which the concerned scientists and you the trawl owners present here shall have to debate and discuss amongst yourselves. But what I can assure you in this connection, is if at all there be any fish loss by the use of TED, it may be compensated by the implementation of some suitable fishermen welfare programmes like provision of electronic equipment such as fish finder, that will help you produce more fish and thereby make up the loss likely to be incurred on account of installation of TEDs.
Please do not harbour the feeling that the Government is against the fishermen. Both Central and State Government are pro-fishermen. THANKS.
Let me explain my view point on TED, this ring like equipment is fitted at the throat of the net. This would definitely work as an obstruction for the fishes to pass through into the cod end of the net. Any fish of larger width than that of the space between the bars won't be able to pass through the TED. Whenever the fish would strike against the TED, the TED would bend and a flap placed at the upper end would open, allowing the fish to escape. The turtle would escape, but along with it the fishes too.
All of you should understand what losses the fishermen have to bear, if the fishes are allowed to escape in this manner. As you know, we the trawl owners in Orissa coast depend upon B and C Classes of fishes. The fish market of neighbouring West Bengal has a large demand for big size fishes, which are usually supplied by the Orissa fishermen. Now what should we do, if large size fishes are allowed to escape through the TED hole?
Dr. Pandav conducted his TED trals only in shore-line areas, where only shrimp and small fishes are available. (Dr. Pandav was heard objecting to Sri Praharaj's remark). But practically we do deep fishing for catching large size fishes, which cannot be caught with TED any longer.
When I along with the Director Fisheries had been to our Departmental boat yesterday, and saw the TED for the first time, it appeared prima facie that the present model of TED might be Ok for shrimp trawling. I asked Sri R. Raghu Prakash also about this. I want to know from the CIFT scientists, on what basis did they decide the width between the bars? If it (TED) is used for shrimp catch, it is all right. But this design is not a correct one for catching large-size B and C Classes of fishes.
I suggest that from the existing 5 nos. of bars, 2 bars may be moved. You will then have 3 bars. The turtle width would be still much greater than the enlarged inter-space and the turtle would therefore not be able to pass through into the cod end, whereas large fishes would easily get into the net. I would now request the CIFT scientist Dr. Prakash to kindly consider modifying the present design of TED, if it is not meant for big fishes of B and C classes. Kindly modify the design.
Your doubt is quite correct. The fishes shall escape through the TED hole certainly. I am not saying no. This TED design is not meant for fish trawling, but for eliminating turtles from shrimp trawling only. I think, I am now clear and your doubt is clarified.
Let me explain something. This design is for shrimp trawling. When you have to catch big fishes, this won't be useful. However I would request the CIFT scientist Dr.Prakash and wildlife scientist Dr. Pandav along with our Deputy Director Fisheries to see which design is suitable for our coast. Accordingly let us proceed to modify so as to arrive at the correct design.
Regarding TED I have two proposals to make. The first one, the TED should be put to trials by the experienced fishery officials. The so-called scientists who have spoken here don't have enough practical experience in the field. So the TED trials should be made by the sufficiently experienced officers of the Fisheries Department.
My second proposal is that, if we are forced to use TED, we shall close down our trawling industry for one year. Let every one see whether the turtles die, despite the closure of our industry. If the turtles still die, then the Government should compensate for the loss we might have borne for one year due to the closure of our industry. If the turtles don't die then we shall fully close down our trawling industry. Now it is left to the house to consider the merit of these two proposals.
Now let me clarify their doubt. It was told that we the scientists were only experimenting the TED and don't have practical experience. But let me tell you that I personally go for fishing for 20 days a month, in a vessel to the sea like you people with socks on my feet. We have the practical experience of fishing in the seas.
While Dr. R. Raghu Prakash was speaking, the trawl owners shouted saying, 'Have you ever made comparative fishing with and without TED?')
Yes, there shall be such a demonstration in course of this programme. But earlier too other persons from our office had come and made such experiments in your coast. We always conduct several fishing operations before demonstrating a model before you people.
Have you developed a TED for the high opening net?
No.
If there is no TED for high opening net, what shall the Balasore Trawl owners do, since they catch only pompret and other such fishes that are caught with high opening net? So what you have developed is no TED at all.
Sri Pattnaik says that they do mid-water trawling for catching bigger fishes. Have you developed a TED for larger mess net?
No.
Director, Fisheries says that they have hired some trawlers for experimental fishing with TED in sea the day after tomorrow. Now that all scientists are here, let us see whether TED is working or not. If the finding is that the TED is not working for our type of fishing, we shall never recommend this design at your (trawl owners) cost. The trawl owners of Orissa cann't use it. I will be also foolish to recommend this. I request all the scientists Dr. Prakash Dr.Pandian and Dr.Pandav to be present at the time of demonstration of TED. At the same time I request Sri Pattnaik, Sri Rath Sri Praharaj and other leaders of Trawlers Association to accompany them to prove their point that the existing design of TED is not suitable for our type of fishing, and thereby help the scientists to redesign the TED to suit our purpose.
Various scientists are giving their opinion on TED on the basis of the experiments they had made. Here is also proposed to conduct another demonstration of TED tomorrow or day after tomorrow as a part of this Workshop. We are being asked to accompany the scientists in the demonstration. I am sure there shall be differing interpretations on the results of demonstration, and the controversy around TED shall linger on.
As you know, the scientist of CIFT has admitted that their TED is meant for shrimp and small fishes only. However, this claim is also again subject to test, but we the trawl owners use different types of net for different type of fish in different grounds and in different season. So the design of TED has to vary depending upon these factors. Without going into further controversy about TED, let the Government test the TED of whatever design for at least one year and draw up a profit and loss estimate thereof. As you know, the Fisheries Department have two trawlers along with net, staff and other accessories. The Fisheries Department through their exploratory fisheries programme had once motivated us to come to this trawling business, though recently for some years this programme has been discontinued. So the Government after having observed the loss and profit accounts of fishing with TED for one year should tell us to use it.
No doubt, the present model of TED is meant for shrimps only. In course of my visit to New Fishing Harbour yesterday, I learnt that some local trawlers are going out in the night hours exclusively for shrimp trawling. Let us not close our mind fully. We may shout whatever here we can against America, WTO, Japan or France, but when the shrimp processing plants like Falcon would refuse to accept your shrimp, then the matter would have reached to an irretrievable position and you would be at a loss. As I have learnt from Sri Tara Pattnaik of Suryodyog, the shrimp processing and exporting companies are now procuring certificates from MPEDA to the effect that the shrimp being exported has been caught with trawl net fitted with TED. At present, nobody is coming from USA to check whether TED is being used or not in your trawl nets. However, no body can check the media publicity.
Today morning itself, you the trawl owners got agitated over the exaggerated press reports on turtle killing in Orissa coast. I also saw a story in Zee news on turtle death, in which the same footage showing the upturned position of dead turtles, which might have been taken a year back, is being telecast time and again. Here also a friend from UK circulated a paper requesting you to come forward to form trawlers association.
My concern is that we should not be too late in making the amends and allow the situation to slip out of our hands. We should not precipitate the situation, by which our shrimp export shall come to a dead stop.
As reported by the CIFT scientist, in Kakinada and Vizag of Andhra Pradesh, where shrimp trawling is the main scenario, the trawl owners vied with each other to take TED for installation in their trawl nets. You may verify the authenticity of this report through your own source. The shrimp trawlers of our coast might choose to fit the existing model of TED for their shrimp net. In this way only, your shrimp can be considered export worthy.
Let me tell you again, we cannot recommend a design which is not suitable for fish trawling and shall instead hurt the income of the trawl owners. It is an education for me too. Yesterday Dr. Pandav gave me three books dealing with biology of sea turtles and survey they conducted. I read some chapters and found that in USA the Government took long ten years from 1983 to 1993 to convince their trawl owners to fit TED. Accordingly legislation was made in 1993 in USA for compulsory use of TED. In our country, we have made legislation on TED about a year back in 2001. I would now request those trawl owners who are doing exclusive shrimp fishing, to take and try the TED available with us free of cost.
Some people talked of the hegemony of WTO. Of course I am not afraid of WTO. But as you might know, China, a communist country has joined WTO very recently. As a result of this, we find our Indian market especially in metros being flooded with Chinese goods. For the sake of debate or argument we may raise the issue of WTO, but from a practical view point, there is no other go except joining the main stream.
It was suggested that the Fisheries Department should experiment the use of TED for one year and make open its findings, following which the trawl owners might be asked to fit the TED into their trawl nets. I would say it is not a correct position. Please don't close your mind. Those trawlers who are doing shrimp trawling might avail the free TED for their shrimp nets. As regards the fish trawling, unless and until our departmental officers and technicians are fully convinced on a particular design of TED suitable for our coast, we won't force any body to use it.
My request to the CIFT is that they should interact with our trawl owners on the types of catch in different conditions of sea and seasons. We should also look into the size of the fishes that we get here and whether they have got a streamlined body or their body is of a wider dimension. Accordingly you should design the bar spacing, so that the turtle is excluded but bigger fishes are retained. The trawl owners who are present here are more knowledgeable than our technical officers, even than us. Instead of having a closed mind they should interact with the marketing agencies like Suryodyog who buy fish from you and export it abroad. If you yourself are exporting, then you will be knowing too the problems. Sooner on later we shall experience the pinch in the matter of exporting particularly shrimps. The situation may not be as bad for pompret and other fishes. We cannot cheat the USA Government, who is having their agents in India. In one fine morning, they land up to check, and say, 'You are not using TED'. In the last meeting the Chief Secretary said, the legislation on TED that was made last year was just eyewash for the WTO, US Government and such other international fora. But as you know, we have not implemented TED in a rigorous and systematic manner despite the legislation. Only when some trawls trespass into the sanctuary areas, they are being checked. So I would request the trawl owners not to close their mind on TED. We shall definitely ask our departmental officers, who in cooperation with Dr. Pandav shall improve the sampling technique and decide thereby where to do the sample hauling, at what depth, in which area etc, so that we get a representative picture of the sampling results. Again we may request WII (Wildlife Institute of India) to extend the on-going experimental fishing with TED beyond the projected period of three months, to cover different seasons. I request the scientist of CIFT to take note of the fact that the TED they have designed is not for universal use and is meant for only shrimp trawling. Before they recommend any other design for our trawl owners, who are investing lakhs of rupees, to be cautious enough in conducting scientific survey and compiling the fishing data there of on the particular design of TED which they shall recommend in future.
As Dr. Pandian of FSI was telling, there are several designs of TED and Soft TED too, which we have not tried so far. Before we recommend to our trawl owners a particular design of TED, we should see that it does not hurt their economic interests. I therefore request the CIFT to study what should be the future structure of TED.
I wanted to discuss with Secretary and Director Fisheries about some trade secrets of our trawling business in an exclusive interview in course of this Workshop. But I heard that both are leaving today. Since these points cannot be discussed openly in this meeting, I want you to spare some of your valuable time for an exclusive discussion around them.
Any time you are most welcome to my office and the office of the Director of Fisheries. Just makes sure that I am available in my room and then drop in. No prior appointment is necessary.
Only ten minutes we require.
Yes. If possible we can have the discussion today, otherwise we can meet afterwards.
The TED that was shown to you is meant for shrimp trawling only. The US ban related to our shrimp export only. In view of this, the present TED was designed. I want to make it very clear that this design is meant for shrimp trawling only, and not for fish trawling.
If the trawl owners think that they can export the fish to the countries other than USA, we have nothing to say, but let me warn you, even if you are able to export shrimps, say indirectly through Philippines, Thailand or Japan, at some stage you shall be required to use TED. You can talk to your shrimp exporters about all this.
The gist of Secretary's discussion is to recommend TED for shrimp trawling and not for fish trawling, but as you know, there are some agencies like Project Swarajya, Wildlife Institute of India and Forest Department who have got a different interest in view. They want to see somehow a resolution for mandatory use of TED as per the legislation is made. They are further interested to see what actions are going to be taken against the trawl owners on account of violation of TED regulations. They are not interested in any technological mission.
I want to tell Mr. Pattnaik that either the Fisheries Department or the Forest Department have not so far checked with stringency the implementation of TED regulations. My self and Director being new to the Department didn't also know a lot of things concerning these issues. So far the idea that we had got was that the present design of TED was meant for all types of fishing. Even from the discussion with our technical officers we got the same idea. Now that the present model of TED is proved to be meant only for shrimp trawling, and not for fish trawling, we would request Dr. Pandav and others to try this for only shrimp trawling only, not for fish trawling. Now I want to emphasise it again that only those amongst you who are doing exclusively shrimp trawling, they might use it. For others who are interested in fish trawling, we would request CIFT and others to give a correct design anew. The CIFT scientist in his clarification has already stated that their TED has been designed only for shrimp trawling in view of the possible ban by USA on our shrimps export. They have therefore to redesign the TED as required for the purpose of fish trawling. When the new design is developed, you shall use it fish trawling. But when you go for exclusive shrimp trawling, you might use the present one.
If the design of TED is improved to suit the trawl owners in respect of fish catch, and more so if TED is made mandatory for some reasons or the other, shall we the TED users be allowed to trawl in sanctuary areas? With TED, as you know, turtle shall be excluded. So why there shall be a 'no fishing zone' any longer?
The point you Mr. Patnaik are raising, I want to ask the Chief Wildlife Warden about the same. From today morning, I have been thinking of this issue. Suppose the Government make the TED mandatory, will you (Chief Wildlife Warden) permit the trawlers to fish in the Sanctuary areas? Of course, I know, you (Chief Wildlife Warden, Orissa) are not the proper authority over this matter. Definitely I shall put forth your (trawl owners ) point of view, even without being asked again, through an official letter to the Department of Forest and Environment and Chief Wildlife Warden, Orissa on this matter. If legally something can be done for lifting the ban on fishing in Sanctuary areas following the mandatory use of TED, we shall definitely do the needful from our side. As you know, in Andhra Pradesh there is no such area declared as a 'no fishing zone'.
I am of the strong opinion that the Forest Department won't take at all into account the proposal now being mooted by you. We have got bitter experience with this Department.
You are educated people. You should speak out your opinions and suggestions in a proper manner. As Mr. Nayak used very aggressive language against WTO, USA Govt, foreign hegemony and all that, any body might do that here for expressing his opinion. But let me tell you, this manner of expression won't cut any ice. We should come down to practical things like how to maintain our shrimp export abroad. Suppose there won't be any ban on our shrimp export to USA, I won't also bother about TED. If they (Govt of USA and WTO) are made somehow to realize that the turtle population is increasing and there is therefore no need for conservation measures, I won't also bother. No body would bother. Every body here should understand that our TED efforts are only in response to the ban on our exports. Our Chief Secretary who was the Secretary of the Commerce Department, Govt. of India a few years back had taken up the issue at the Appellate Body of WTO. Twice the Govt. of India lost. At the last chance, the Government of India narrowly escaped the ban on exports by showing the amendments to the Central Marine Fishing Regulations Act and corresponding legislations made in different States. At that time we showed them the documentary evidence of the turtle sensitive areas having been excluded from fishing activities and that of TED made mandatory.
I discussed with Mr. Tara Patnaik of Suryodyog (shrimp exporting company), with whom you may like to discuss to ascertain the real position. As I know, they are now issuing certificates to the effect that the TED has been used for catching the shrimp being exported.
Suppose TED is used mandatorily, who is the authorized officer to check whether a trawler is fitted with TED or not? Will the Forest Dept personnel or Coast Guard not check it?
They (Forest Dept) shall conduct the check in the Sanctuary areas under the relevant Acts. The Chief Wildlife Warden shall better be able to speak on the concerned Acts.
The laws dealing with Sanctuary areas are very stringent. The State Govt. cannot do any thing for their relaxation. Let me tell you that the law provides for imprisonment of 3 years and fine upto 20 thousand rupees for violation of sanctuary laws. If the offence is committed for the second time, the minimum period of imprisonment is 2 years, which can extend up to 6 years along with a fine not less than 10 thousand rupees. If you know the law and are a leader of an Association, you should better understand all these legal implications and refrain from violating them.
If you come to us, we shall explain in further detail to you about these laws. So far the Sanctuary is concerned, there cannot be any compromise. The law that governs a Sanctuary is a Central law, which strictly prohibits any sort of activity within a Sanctuary area. So I would request you not to enter into any discussion at all regarding relaxation of that law. TED or no TED, no activity shall be allowed inside a Sanctuary area.
There are so many maritime States in our country. In other States, no such fishing regulations are there as we find them only in Orissa.