I won't make a long speech, but summarize what we did and found yesterday in course of experimental trawling with TED.
We had attached an extra cod end to all the nets fitted with TED, so as to know the amount of fish escape. Since our concern is to see that the escape of fish is kept to a tolerable minimum while we work for turtle conservation. But what is tolerable? Tolerable for whom? Tolerable for the Central Govt., State Government or fishermen? Normally every body thinks he can't tolerate any loss. Our effort from CIFT would be however to keep the escape to a bare minimum, if possible to zero percent.
Yesterday I was in a boat, which conducted two hauls. In the first haul in which there was TED along with an extra cod end, the fish loss was around 1.96%. In the next haul, the loss was 3.85% along with a turtle. In the second hall, we had 75 kg of catch in the main cod end and about 3 kg of fish in the extra cod end. There was a small technical problem, for which the escape was so much. When we hauled up the catch, we pulled up the cod end first, and as a result it became tight and tilted to an angle. So some fishes of main cod end passed through the exit hole into the second cod end. It should not have happened. Were this error not to have been there, the amount of fish escape would have been definitely less than 3 kg, maybe only half of it. In normal situations when we trawl for fishing only, we won't have to attach any extra cod end. Therefore such technical problem won't arise at all. That is what I explained to the people on deck and also to the people who were operating the trawl.
As I told on the first day, if we can operate TED properly, the fish loss would be 2 to 3 percent while the shrimp loss less than 1 percent.
Now let me talk about the boat MV Crown that went for experimental trawling. The first haul was without TED, and I need not talk about its results. The second haul was with TED along with an extra cod end too. I was reported that the fish loss was 14.3 percent. Let me ask the fishermen, 'Can you tolerate a fish loss of more than 14 percent?' I am sure the answer would be an emphatic No. Were I in your position, I would not accept a TED, which brings me a loss of 15 percent. As I came to know, there was a technical flaw in the way the entire haul was operated. The net that was used was of 1999 make and 3 years old, and moreover, TED was not installed properly.
Let me tell you that if TED works in optimal conditions, every thing would be fine. Now that we had a Workshop and a Demonstration on TED, we should not think that we have arrived at the conclusion. When you start using it, umpteen numbers of problems would crop up in due course of time. For instance, maintenance of the proper angle is an important tip. You have to install the TED at 450 angles, which is the optimum position in our view. But as you go on using TED, the angle of TED over a time changes, affecting thereby the possibility of escape of both fish and turtle.
Our next tip is proper maintenance of the net, i.e. timely repair of its wear and tear. Then the Accelerator Funnel, which changes over time, should be taken care of too.
Now let me brief you on a few general things about TED, which I wanted to show on the first day through slides and video, but could not, due to lack of proper arrangement.
TED is basically meant to prevent the incidental catch of turtles in the trawl nets. The turtle being an endangered species, the importance of TED is therefore recognized everywhere. Moreover, TED is important because the US Government have made its use mandatory for all the trawlers which catch shrimp for export to USA. The US Government won't allow the import of your shrimp, unless it is certified to have been caught by a trawl net fitted with TED.
As you know, the price for our shrimp that the USA market gives is higher than the corresponding price available in other shrimp-importing countries including Japan. The moot paint, therefore, is how we can get the proper price for our shrimps. As you further know, country's development would ultimately suffer, if we can't earn maximum possible foreign exchange by way of selling our shrimps to USA market at a competitive price.
Coming to the question of turtle conservation, there are some scientists here who are well conversant with the subject. But let me tell you briefly about its breathing habit. Even though the turtle lives in the sea bottom, it comes to the surface for breathing. Unlike the fish, which has gills, the turtle has lungs like that of human beings for the purpose of breathing. A human being can hold his breath for 2 to 3 minutes, while a turtle for a much longer duration. Maximum duration of breath retention by a turtle recorded so far is 5 hours.
Dr. Sudhakar Kar, Research Officer of Wildlife Wing of Govt of Orissa
No. Maximum is 1 hour only.
Dr. Raghu Prakash R., Scientist CIFT
That is only in a condition of stress. OK. It does not matter whether it is 5 hours or 3 hours or less. I am not a turtle expert. I had only read in a paper that the turtle could stay under waters for 5 hours at a stretch. But I won't agree with you on this point.
A Participant
Voice inaudible.
Dr. Raghu Prakash R., Scientist CIFT
Ok. I am wrong, wrong and wrong. It is not 5 hours but 1 hour only, for which a turtle can hold its breath at maximum.
President Sri T.K. Behera, Joint Director of Fisheries, Orissa
Dr. Prakash, I am sorry to interrupt you. Please confine yourself only to the implications of TED such as your design and its benefits.
Dr. Raghu Prakash R., Scientist CIFT
These people need to understand the whole thing. That is why I wanted to talk about all that.
President Sri T.K. Behera, Joint Director of Fisheries, Orissa
Dr. Prakash.. I would like to request you again to restrict your speech to TED only.
Dr. Raghu Prakash R., Scientist CIFT
Ok. Since you are trawling for more than one hour, the turtle dies due to lack of oxygen. When you are using TED in normal conditions, you don't have any problem. However, we can change the TED design according to the type of sea conditions, type of net and type of the fish catch so on and so forth.
President Sri T.K. Behera, Joint Director of Fisheries, Orissa
Dr. Prakash. Please finish your presentation within 5 minutes only, because we don't have time.
Dr. Raghu Prakash R., Scientist CIFT (Showing the slides)
Look, here is a TED, which helps the turtle escape.
Here are different types of TED, each to suit a different set of conditions.
Here is the CIFT design of TED, which is very simple and cost effective. We have two types of TED; the top opening TED makes less fishes escape than the bottom opening TED. Earlier we had tried only bottom opening TEDs, which showed fish loss to the extent of 40%. That is why we switched over to the bottom opening TED, which reduced fish loss to a range of 2 to 5 percent only.
Some people might think that the exit hole would remain open all the time keeping the way ready for escape of fishes along with the turtle. But let me clarify that there is a flap placed at the top to cover the opening. While you are trawling, the flap is kept straight closing the TED hole.
TED is a small grid, which obstructs the turtles. The gap between the two bars is 15 cm only. Thus any species that has a width more than 15 cm can escape certainly. There is no doubt about it. Anything less than 15 cm in width would straight away pass into the cod end.
TED fabrication is very simple also.
Somebody asked me, how to fix the angle? How the fisherman shall know that it is 450. You should count 15 from one side and 36 from the other side. Fix the top and bottom of the grid accordingly. Mark that. And it would give you 450 angle, which is the ideal one. But as you go on using the TED, the 450 angles would change.
Now let me talk about the Accelerator Funnel. Yesterday's loss of 14% of fish was on account of the faulty positioning of Accelerator Funnel. As I told you, the net was a pretty old one and the Accelerator Funnel had become loose, tilting towards the exit hole and thereby helping the fishes escape. So my advice is that you have to readjust the Accelerator Funnel from time to time. Yesterday I had told the trawl operator of the boat to tighten the Accelerator Funnel, but he didn't do. That is why, so large escape of fish we noticed. The function of the Accelerator Funnel is to direct the shrimp through the grid into the cod end. Were there no Accelerator Funnel, there are chances of shrimps drifting and even escaping.
There are some myths about the TED like huge escape and loss of fish, operational difficulties and high expenses. I won't say that the fish loss would ever become zero percent. For shrimps it is less than 1 percent, and for fishes it is 1 to 2 percent. The cost of making a TED is for us Rs.2,500/-, while MPEDA has done here for Rs.2, 100/- only.
Our experiments were made at Kakinada. The escape of fish was found to be less than 1 percent.
You have to maintain TED all through and then only it would give you the desired results. You have to check for the wear and tear of the exit hole all the time. The Accelerator Funnel, if damaged, need be replaced. The Angle of TED has to be maintained properly.
Last but not the least, this planet is our home. We don't have a second home. We therefore have to preserve it. CIFT is always with you for improving the design of TED so as to keep the escape of fish to a minimum, even to 0 percent. Thanks.
President Sri T.K. Behera, Joint Director of Fisheries, Orissa
Now I request Sri P.K. Rath, ACF (Assistant Conservator of Forests), Paradip to speak on the subject. Since Sri Rath is not present now, let me invite the user friends to put forth their views on the TED demonstration held yesterday. First of all, I call upon Sri Kishore Rath, Secretary OMFPA (Orissa Marine Fish Producers Association), Paradip to make his presentation.
I am associated with this trade of trawling for last 25 years. I myself have accompanied the trawling people on board to the sea several times in the past and have rich experience in the field.
During last 6 to 7 years, a climate of public opinion against the trawling community was created through mass media that we the trawl owners were killing lakhs of sea turtles. It was alleged that the turtles were killed in several ways such as by the blow of a trawler propeller, and by the blow of the body of a trawler. Moreover, the trawler crews had a device by which the eyes of the turtles were dug out and heads chopped off. In this way, not only in Orissa and India, but also throughout the world, a climate of opinion against the trawler industry of Orissa was created. Huge amount of money must have been spent for creating such anti-trawler propaganda.
We discussed among our Association members as to how to give a counter to such malicious propaganda against the trawler industry. But it was felt that if we decide to counter the propaganda in a parallel fashion, we have to undertake a massive campaign involving the mass media and spend therefore huge amount of money after it, which again we won't be able to afford. However, we published our counter in some press conferences called for the purpose. We always used to demand a proper investigation into the cause of turtle mortality, since we the trawl owners or our crews didn't ever view the turtles as our enemies. We further said that trawling was never responsible for mass scale killing of turtles.
Though I had not gone for fishing during the last 7 to 8 years, I got a chance yesterday to go on trawling as a part of this Workshop. A few days back (on 27th Jan.2002), I had also accompanied the Director of Fisheries in the experimental trawling off Paradip coast. On that day the ex-DDF (marine) and Wildlife scientist Dr.Bivas Pandav were there along with us. I had some interaction with them. I had always two questions in my mind. Firstly, whether the trawling is killing a turtle? Secondly, whether the trawling industry would remain viable by using TED?
What I observed from the last two experiments is that a substantial amount of catch loss was being caused due to the use of TED, and secondly no turtle was being caught in our trawl net even without using TED. Among the four boats, which had been to sea for experimental fishing yesterday, the boat named Debasabya, which had no attachment of TED could catch a total 183 kg of fish in two hauls. Though this amount of catch was not sufficient enough to cover the expenses incurred for the trawling operation so undertaken, compared however to the other three boats, it is definitely on a higher side. The rate at which other three boats got their catch, each so low, that if a trawler gets such catch continuously, then in a few days he would become insolvent and have to mortgage his house, ornaments and every thing to recover from the massive loss he would be incurring. Each trawler did 7 to 8 hours of fishing. The cost of diesel and Mobil consumption, cost of manpower, and cost of maintenance etc. taken together can't be compensated for by a meagre amount of Rs.200/- to Rs. 400/- the price of the catch, which was made by other boats.
Now coming to the question of turtle death, the trawler, which operated without TED, didn't catch any turtle. Only in our vessel, during the second haul, a turtle was caught. This fact astonished me too. In my knowledge, no turtle goes to a depth of 80 to 100ft. of the sea bottom to collect its food. I discussed the matter with Dr. Pandav, whose opinion was that a turtle goes to a maximum depth of 4 to 5 fathoms (20 to 30 ft.) to collect its feed. Otherwise the turtle swims in the surface of the sea. But as you know, our trawling touches the bottom of the sea. Yesterday we were at a depth of 14 fathoms (nearly 84 to 90ft.), where there was no chance of turtle being present. Let me repeat, a turtle can't go to such great depth to collect its food. Out of my limited experience, let me explain, what happened yesterday. When we were pulling the haul up, the net was wide open and a turtle while swimming got inside it. This is true in all cases, whenever we find a turtle inside our trawl net. Again all this happens within a few minutes.
Again whenever we find a turtle accidentally entangled in our trawl net, our staff present there instantly release it to the sea. Our crews sincerely don't want the turtle to be caught, since it can cause a substantial damage/loss to our fish catch.
But the public opinion has been created through the mass media in the entire world that the trawl owners and operators are the killers of turtles and as such against conservation of any endangered species. It is a totally wrong idea. We are cent percent for the conservation of turtles like you people.
The scientists are repeatedly telling us that the turtle is an endangered species. But I asked the scientists as to whether they did any survey to determine the minimum size of turtle population that our coast should have, for which we won't call it an endangered species. But no scientist could answer that. Ok, we would conserve a species, but to what limit? No body knows. Thus it is an uncertain area, about which serious research is necessary. It is a fact that the UNDP, Central Government and other agencies do pump in huge amounts of money for the sake of research projects on sea turtles. But where does the money go? What is the work going on at the expense of that money? If an insignificant fraction of that money could be diverted and spent for the welfare of trawler operators, then we would be able to engage thousands of our crews for safeguarding the turtles and take umpteen number of measures for turtle protection with their help all along the coast.
As we know, the turtles emerge from sea to the nesting beach generally during night hours, rather than daytime. There are countless jackals, dogs, and wolves in the coastal areas, which prey upon the turtle as soon as it comes to the beach. Have you ever estimated, how many of such predator animals are there in and around every nesting beach? We know that there is of course some staff and officers of the Forest Department stationed at Gahirmatha, who could guard against the animal predation on turtles. But what about other nesting beaches starting from Paradip onwards to Rishikulya? Is there any work being done to protect the nesting turtles and their eggs and hatchlings from the attack of predator animals?
As you know, the corpses of turtles that died, say 3 or 5 year back are still lying on the beach. But they are being counted every time and each year to create an intentionally inflated figure of turtle death in Orissa coast.
We want to raise the question again, where do go the crores of rupees that are sanctioned in the name of turtle conservation? We are sure, that money is being utilized for some other purposes than that of turtle research or conservation in genuine sense of the term.
I would request this august body to consider the proposal for earmarking a substantial portion of the money so sanctioned for turtle conservation, to be spent after the welfare of the trawl operators, and other fishermen including the gill netters, and for organizing a conference of fishermen like the present one for communicating to them the message and methods of turtle conservation. We sincerely want the fishermen to guard the turtles against any attack on them, just as the policemen guard our home against the thieves and dacoits. At any rate the public money should not be wasted away uselessly.
Now another important point that I want to make here, i.e. our relationship with Coast Guard has been embittered of late centring round the turtle issue. As we know, when ever a boat of ours gets lost or stranded in the sea, where any other boat can't reach, we immediately request the Coast Guard to locate and rescue the said boat and salvage its crews. The Coast Guard does immediately rush to the spot by helicopter or otherwise and rescue the boat and salvage the crews. We feel immensely grateful to them for such service they have been rendering at a huge cost from their side. We have therefore been interacting with the Coast Guard in a cordial manner all through. But slowly and gradually an institution like Coast Guard was pitted against the trawl owners. They are now chasing, beating and shooting our people. Because they are now duty bound to protect sea turtles. The Sanctuary area, as you know is not a visibly demarcated area. If by chance a trawler enters the area, then it faces the endless fury and fire of Coast Guard. Our trawler crews are not educated enough to know for sure, which is a 'no fishing zone', in absence of a physically visible demarcation of the boundaries of the said area. We are human beings and moreover, bona fide citizens of India living in Orissa State. Should we be shot at sight like the mad dogs are? We know, the Coast Guard has been given the order to behave with us in this way. Now there is a virtual war going on between the Coast Guard and fishermen in Orissa coast. They (Coast Guard) have been given an impression that we the trawl owners are against all sorts of conservation and are responsible for killing of thousands and thousands of turtles and deserve therefore to be fired to death. We however do want a good relationship to exist with Coast Guard and all other concerned agencies.
So I appeal to the present fishery officers and scientists to see that no untoward situation is created against the trawl owners in Orissa coast any further. They should take all necessary steps for restoration of a normal situation.
The next point that I wish to place here is that, the Forest Dept. personnel are meting out the crews of the seized trawlers with an inhuman treatment. The seized trawler is kept under their custody for months together and the case is not disposed of and drags on endlessly. By accidental entry into the Sanctuary area, a trawler does not commit as heinous a crime as say, killing a tiger or illegal felling of the forests for making money, as indulged in by the forest contractors. But the trawl owner of the seized boat is compelled to run to the Forest Office for months together and has to pay ultimately a fine of Rs.50,000/- to 1,00,000/- for getting his boat released. Wherefrom the trawl owner shall bring this huge money? As you know, he must have purchased a boat by arranging some loan, which again remains outstanding against him for years. Even if he pays the fine with lot of difficulties, his boat is not released immediately and rather kept under their custody for 6 months to 1 year with the endless lingering of the case lodged against him. For your information, let me cite the case of our Association Vice-president, whose boat was seized for no fault of his. As a matter of fact, his boat after being repaired was taken for a short trial trawling in the Mahanadi mouth off Paradip coast. It was doing trial fishing within 5 to 7 km off the coastline, just behind the Paradip Port. The purpose was not fishing as such, but to see whether the trawler could pull the net or not. It had trawled hardly for 10 to 15 minutes, when a group of officials of Fishery and Forest Departments together on board a boat, arrived there and seized the boat on trial and brought it ashore. We appealed to the said officers saying that the boat was having a trial fishing only and so might be released. In stead of releasing the boat, a serious case was lodged against the trawl owner. The case was heard in Jagatsinghpur Court first, but could not be finalized there and then came to Orissa High Court. The High Court of Orissa not being able to finalise the case referred it back to the Forest Department again for adjudication. Meanwhile the trawl owner by paying a mortgage of Rs.1,00,000/- got his boat released. But the case is still dragging on under the jurisdiction of the Forest Dept. for last 2 years. May be the case shall drag on for 5 years more. Nobody knows how long. Kindly think what kind of treatment is being meted out to us in the name of conservation. Are we killers? We have been branded as greedy people, profiteering crores of rupees out of our trawl business. But nobody wants to study in depth the economics of our trawling industry. If somebody does it, he is bound to be puzzled and asking himself, 'Oh, how come, this industry is still able to run in the face of so many adversities?' If any of you ever come to our Association office, we shall let you interview the trawl owners and thereby get to know the real truth about our miserable plight. You ought to know the serious difficulties with which we operate our trawlers. Once you know the true facts, you yourself shall consider us as foolish people, and think to yourself, 'Despite so many odds and obstacles, why do these people still stick on to this sick, moribund trawling industry?'
We had entered into the trawl industry years back in the face of a lot of dissuasion by our friends and relatives. Their logic was that sea being an uncertain field, and there being no device available to ensure a guaranteed return from fishing, no body could hope to make a sustainable career out of it. Additionally, over the years, operational costs have increased by leaps and bounds. We don't have any control over market, which is a buyers' market. We are bound to accept what the buyers offer. The cost of input is what you cannot hope to reduce. At the same time, the quantity and price of output are uncertain. In such an environment of trade uncertainties and in the face of a hostile marine environment as given by the nature, we are operating our trawlers all over Orissa coast.
A few months back, exactly in the month of October 2001 last, we had appraised our Fisheries Minister and a few other Ministers about our problems. The fishery officials too had prepared an agenda note for discussion on our problems from a sympathetic angle. In that meeting, some decisions were taken to solve our problems. But these decisions have not been implemented yet and are still pending in the Fishery Dept. files.
I must thank the fisheries Department, Govt. of Orissa, which even after a long lapse of time have given thought to our welfare. This Workshop has been convened at an appropriate moment, no doubt. As a matter of fact, on the Inaugural day, when we just started off from our office in a cool mind to attend the Workshop, somebody showed us a sensational news clipping published in Dharitree (that 25 km off Orissa's coastline has been declared 'no fishing zone' for turtle conservation), which made every body's head reel. We thought to ourselves, when the Government has convened a meeting of the trawl owners today, how come, a decision was taken meanwhile without any body's knowledge to ban fishing in 25 km off the coast? It agitated every body, and we came in an exasperated mood.
But as such we are a very peace loving people and believe in the principle of peaceful co-existence. Over several decades, we have a beautiful relation with the Fisheries Dept., which in fact gave birth to our trawl industry once in the past. Thanks to the exploratory survey of the Fisheries Dept. years ago, our trawling industry came into existence and we all got self-employed. We could avail the loan on this account too. Though our career has been damaged due to the hazards of this industry as I mentioned earlier, we are still trying to get on with it. The Dept. is co-operative towards us, no doubt. But of late, efforts are afoot to strain our long established cordial relationship with the Fisheries Department by some quarters with a malicious design.
As you know, there are some people who project themselves as turtle lovers and brand us as turtle killers. But now all this has been proved false.
A scientist Dr. Bibhas Pandav has conducted around 30 trawls with the help of the Fisheries Dept. boat. I asked him about the results of his fishing. He told me that the turtles were caught in some of his hauls, but all were in live condition. In yesterday's experimental trawling, the turtle that was caught was also alive. We want that the Dept. should engage some vessels for experimental fishing to see whether the trawling kills the turtle at all? After such tests are done, we are sure; every body shall be convinced that the trawling does not kill a turtle. If by chance it enters the net, it remains invariably alive, and after being hauled up, is immediately released back to the sea. In yesterday's experiments, the turtle that was caught entered the net while it was swimming and the haul was being pulled up. It didn't enter the net from the bottom side, since a turtle couldn't go to such great depths in search of its food or for any other purpose.
We were given the understanding that TED was going to be imposed on us through this Workshop. The trawler friends of different bases in Orissa coast are telephoning and enquiring about what was going to happen? Shall we survive? We have told them that the Commissioner of Fisheries who was here on the first day, assured us that TED won't be unilaterally imposed on the trawlers, and our welfare and viability issues would be taken into full account before Government adopting any measure. We therefore felt relaxed. Yesterday's experiments have also very much satisfied us. It was proved beyond any shade of doubt that by using TED, the trawl industry can't hope to get a sustainable catch and therefore won't survive at all.
As a CIFT scientist told, their present TED being designed as it was only for shrimp fishing, could however be further modified to suit the catch of big fishes. As you know, trawlers of Orissa coast go for a mixed catch, which consists of not only shrimps but also all other fishes including big fishes. Here the shrimp catch is low, and no trawler of Orissa can survive, only on the basis of shrimp catch. Other exportable fishes like Pomp ret, Seer Fish, Cat Fish and the like are also very much sought after along with shrimp to keep the trawling trade viable. Yesterday we observed that bag fishes were not at all caught with the use of TED. If the CIFT redesigns the present TED or develops any other device, the use of which won't cause any fish loss, we are ready to accept it. Yesterday we found that in one haul, there were two Pompret fishes, one within the main cod end, and the other in the extra cod end. It shows 50% of loss in respect of prize catch like that of Pomp ret. Every trawl owner wants Pomp ret in his catch, since it fetches a good price. If 50% of such fishes get lost through TED hole, we would be pushed to a precarious position. The fishery officers and scientists share this observation too, who accompanied the experimental fishing team yesterday. They have also observed the fish loss through TED hole. Until we are able to reduce this incidental loss to zero percent, the TED should not be imposed on the trawl industry.
The opinion given to this effect by the Commissioner-cum-Secretary of Fisheries, Orissa on the first day of this Workshop is a welcome one. We trawl owners feel therefore relaxed, and confidant that our industry would survive after all. As you know, we like to battle with the sea and its unruly waves, not with any Forum or Department and their policies.
At last, I must thank the organizers of the Workshop for having arranged an open interface with the trawling industry and given their valuable time for conducting it to a success.
President Sri T.K. Behera, Joint Director of Fisheries, Orissa
Thanks to Sri Rath of OMFPA for his presentation. Now I request Sri K. Gopalkrishnan, Zonal Director, Fishery Survey of India, Vishakhapatnam to speak something on the occasion.
Sri K. Gopalkrishnan, Zonal Director, Fishery Survey of India, Vishakhapatnam.
Our colleague Dr. Raghu Prakash of CIFT has already given a description of yesterday's experiments. I thank all the officers of Dept of Fisheries and Project Swarajya along with all the trawl operators, who have made it into a success.
President Sri T.K. Behera, Joint Director of Fisheries, Orissa
Now I request Sri Suvendu Kumar Das of Balasore Trawler Owners Association to place his findings on yesterday's demonstration.
Sri Suvendu Kumar Das, Balasore Trawl Owners Association
Generally we want more of B and C classes of fishes including big fishes while trawling. The haul which was made with TED brought small quantity of fishes, while the other haul which was operated without TED brought more of fishes. This is my observation. Thanks.
President Sri T.K. Behera, Joint Director of Fisheries, Orissa
Now I request Sri Dillip Kumar Sahoo, a leader of trawl owners, who had been to yesterday's TED demonstration to speak.
Now the turtle tears are being shed all over the world. No body has tears for we the human beings. In the last Super Cyclone so many trawl owners turned into have-nots, but no Government agency or NGO provided a paise of grant for amelioration of our condition. Some trawl owners who had only one or two boats, lost their vessels and got pauperized thereafter. No assistance was provided to them from any quarter. Now after two years, the Government have called us to this meeting with a view to impose TED on us. This TED is meant to save the turtles. But as human beings we have a right to live. Now we thousands of fisher folk are being deprived of this right to live.
In yesterday's experiments, it was proved beyond any shade of doubt that TED is a device that would harm the interest of fisherman. Some observers opined here that the fish loss would be 2 to 5% due to the use of TED. But at a later stage of my talk I would prove that the loss would be as much as 50 to 60%. I would prove it on the basis of the findings of yesterday's experiments.
The next point that I want to raise is the call by different quarters to the trawl owners to make some sacrifice for the cause of turtles. You should understand that we are not Gopabandhus (Gopabandhu was a great patriot, freedom fighter, and social reformer of Orissa who said in one of his poems, "Let my body perish and mingle with the soil of this country, so that the people could safely walk over it") and would say, let us perish, so that the turtles survive.
Some ADFs (Assistant Director of Fisheries) advised us to bear the loss due to TED, to the extent of 5%, 10% or even 15% and thereby show a spirit of self-sacrifice for the larger interest of turtle conservation. But we are not in a position at all to bear such loss. Sri Kishore Rath, Secretary of OMFPA has given a detailed picture of how our trawling business has lost its viability in the present situation. How can we bear any further loss?
Now we are considered thieves in our own home. Sea is supposed to be our home by virtue of our profession of marine fishing. We are now being deprived of our right to earn our living. We have not committed any theft or crime. But why should a hand-cuff like TED be thrust on us? Without proving conclusively that we the trawlers kill the turtles, you people are out to arrest us on the grounds of turtle killing. We have been suffering penalties like fine, imprisonment, litigation and seizure of boats without any definite evidence of turtle killing. Cases are still pending against us on the grounds of turtle death. Sri Kishore Babu has already dealt with this point.
As I know, so far there has been no scientific study made on the factors of turtle death. Yesterday's survey was not a scientifically designed one. Every body reported some percentage loss of fish due to use of TED. But whether that loss would be more or same, nobody has scientifically examined it. When science has advanced so much, and when an under water camera could be used to ascertain the exact loss of fish, we have not applied any scientific methods far to ascertain the magnitude of loss caused by TED.
As I remember, back in 1996 at Jayadev Sadan, Paradip, a TED Workshop was held. Myself and another friend had come here to attend the Workshop, where we also opposed the move for introduction of TED. Since 1996 no further survey has been done by any Govt. Dept., as to whether TED would bring profits or loss to the trawling industry. Yesterday, due to my insistence, parallel fishing with and without TED was conducted.
Dr. Pandav in course of his survey of 30 hauls has not come across any dead turtle so far inside the trawl net. It is true that some turtles accidentally get into the trawl net, but we find them alive and release them into the sea.
Just as we see on TV commercial advertisement of different consumer products, TED is being advertised before us.
Now the natural environment of Gahirmatha has degenerated so much that the turtles cannot nest there. As you know, Dhamra mouth is the confluence of Baitarani and Kharasrota rivers. From Dhamara upto Barunei Muhan, I surveyed those areas for 15 days in 1997, making Barunei Muhan as my centre. My boat had got stranded at Barunei, for which I had to stay there for days together. I spoke about this on the first day when Commissioner-cum-Secretary Fisheries, Orissa was present here. The survey that I did was made into a paper of 5 pages, which was given to then DFO (Divisional Forest Officer) Sri B.N. Nayak. I don't know, what happened to that report afterwards.
In that report I had mentioned that when the Defense Establishment was set up in Wheelers Island, its bank was packed with stone ships so as to save the Establishment permanently from erosion by the sea waves. The flood waters which dashed against the stone-packed bank of Wheelers Islands returned naturally from there and dashed against and eroded the shoreline of Gahirmatha beaches. The map you the scientists have drawn does not show the location of Wheelers Island, to the north of Gahirmatha. This omission is intentional, since you people don't have guts to say any thing to Defense about the anti-turtle activities that they might be indulging in. But you shall always tell us to stop this or that. Yesterday I discussed with Dr. Pandav, who admitted that 50% of the 3 km long sandy beach of Gahirmatha has been damaged by the sea erosion.
Earlier I told about the factors that conduce to turtle nesting. First of all, the presence of a natural forest, inaccessible by human beings, which the turtle considers safe for its nesting activities. But now there is no such natural forest. I asked the DFO Rajnagar, if there be no forest, or sand or grass, where shall the turtles nest? The refugees who were rehabilitated in the coastal tracts have damaged the forests. No longer Nalia grass, which is a natural growth in that area, is visible. Nalia as you know, helps soil conservation. I also pointed out two cases to DFO, in which the local persons were allowed to cut Nalia grass in exchange of Rs.200/- as bribe to each of the two forest staff guarding there. The DFO also admitted that his staffs were really responsible for illegal cutting of Nalia grass. After Nalia grass is gone and moreover after the havoc created by the super cyclone of 1999, the soil and sands of the beach lost strength and were therefore washed away. As a result, what we find to-day, the shoreline of Gahirmatha beach is now deformed into strips of steps.
A pregnant turtle, as you know, after migrating for thousands of km comes up along with the tidal currents to the beach. Then it lays its eggs and thereafter goes back to the sea by the return currents. This is out of my own observation, irrespective what scientists know. In the present situation, when the shore-line is divided into layers of clayey steps, the turtles are not able to climb up so as to reach to the nesting beach. So they return without laying the eggs. If they find no suitable place for laying their eggs, they would die out of unbearable pain. In this way, there are thousands and thousands of cases of natural death of turtles. You people don't count these natural factors of turtle death. If a team of scientists visits the area from Dhamra to Barunei Muhan, I would help them survey the state of natural conditions existing in this area. I have already given a detailed report in writing to Dr. Pandav about all this and he has shown interest to know the things further. The turtles being unable to lay their eggs on Gahimatha beach are moving hither and hither through out Orissa coast. But when they ultimately find no suitable place to lay their eggs on, they die.
Now coming to the question of TED, you have heard the reports on percentage-wise loss of fish, as found in the extra cod end. I however don't understand why you attached this extra cod end? Yesterday, I accompanied a team to sea for experimental trawling and found that an amount of 2 kg and 600 gm of fish, which consisted mostly of living fishes, were deposited in the extra cod end. Why the fishes were living, I shall speak a little later.
In the second haul we conducted fishing with TED but no attachment of extra cod end. I insisted that the experimental fishing should be done in the same manner as we trawl owners would be asked to do the fishing with TED. I further insisted that the experiment be done at the same 15 to 16 fathom, at the same degree and for the same duration (1 hour). The purpose was to get a comparative picture. The second haul was conducted from 11AM to 12 noon. Then we returned and reached back to the base at 3.15 PM. The total fish we got from this haul was 23 kg 500gm only. In the first haul, the total amount was 41kg 700gm. In the next haul it was 23 kg 500gm only. The concerned Fishery Officer has reported nearly 5% to be the fish loss, as found from the extra cod end.
As I know, all of you are very knowledgeable people. But I must tell that the extra cod end you attached was meant to deceive us only. I want to ask how was the extra cod end positioned during trawling? You scientists were there. I have photographed it too. The Fishery Officers know it. Rakhal Babu, the ex-Deputy Director of Fisheries knows it well too.
The distance from the cod end to the TED is 30ft. The Extra cod end is 7ft in length and placed on top of the net. A float was attached to the extra cod end, so as to keep it steady. But in my view, the float would keep the mouth of the extra cod end in a perfectly open position. Moreover, the extra cod end was kept hanging in an upturned position. If you keep a bag with its open mouth downward, can it retain any material? There shall always be strong pressure from above for the materials to fall and flow downwards. Thus the fishes which escaped through the TED hole into the extra cod end, got back into the net, and ultimately to the main cod end again. That is why, in the second haul, I insisted on fishing without an extra cod end. The dead fishes naturally got down into the net, and only living fishes stayed back in the extra cod end.
Thus the loss owing to TED, which you consider to be 5%, or 10% or 15%, would be actually 50% to 60%.
When we go up to 30 to 40 fathoms for shoal fishing in Balasore coast, the shoal of fishes shall definitely encounter TED as an obstruction and escape. Just like any animal, say a dog, which faced with an obstruction like a fence, finds for its way of escape through a hole anywhere visible, the fishes would behave similarly faced with TED. I am sure, the TED hole would provide an easy and smooth escape route for such fishes. Will they not get away from the net?
You shall excuse me, if I have wounded any body's feeling in course of my presentation. And my request to the trawler friends is that they should not accept TED. I request the officers and scientists here not to impose forcefully TED on us against our will. Moreover, you should no longer blame, accuse and brandish us as turtle killers.