Authors : Abdalla Y. Kombo; Ali M. Ussi

Volume/Issue : Volume 9 - 2024, Issue 12 - December

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/4ecfrnv7

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/4zffz3n7

DOI : https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14546721

Abstract : The sustainability of octopus fisheries in Zanzibar is essential for local livelihoods and the broader economy. This study assessed the impact of different fishing gears and access methods on the catch rates (CPUE) of Octopus cyanea in Zanzibar, conducted over a year at Matemwe and Michamvi on Unguja Island. The research employed random sampling and quantitative analysis to explore variations in CPUE influenced by gear type and fishing site access. Spearfishing showed the highest variability in CPUE, recording 4.96 kg/fisher/day at Matemwe and 3.01 kg/fisher/day at Michamvi, indicating a strong dependency on the fisher's skill and local conditions. In contrast, metal hooks and sticks showed more consistent CPUEs across both sites, with Matemwe fishers using metal hooks and sticks achieving CPUEs of 2.79 kg and 2.97 kg per fisher per day, respectively. These gears are suggested as more sustainable due to their consistent performance and reduced ecological impact. Significant differences were also observed based on the methods of site access. At Michamvi, paddling fishers yielded a higher CPUE of 2.95 kg/fisher/day compared to 2.54 kg/fisher/day for boat fishers. Conversely, at Matemwe, fishing boats were more effective, achieving a CPUE of 4.63 kg/fisher/day against 2.56 kg for paddling. This illustrates the varying impacts of access strategies on sustainability and efficiency between sites. The findings insist on the need for detailed fishery management that accounts for gear types and access methods, essential for promoting ecological balance and economic growth within Zanzibar’s blue economy. This research offers valuable insights for other fisheries, highlighting the importance of tailored management practices adapted to specific local conditions.

Keywords : Fishing Gear, Means of Fishing Site Access, Octopus Cyanea, Catch Rate, Zanzibar.

References :

1. S. Rocliffe and A. Harris, “The status of octopus fisheries in the Western Indian Ocean.,”p. 40, 2016.
2. S. Rocliffe and A. Harris, “Scaling success in octopus fisheries management in the Western Indian Ocean .,” in Blue Ventures Conservation, 2015, vol. 44, no. December, p. 24.
3. M. Guard and Y. D. Mgaya, “The artisanal fishery for Octopus cyanea Gray in Tanzania,” Ambio, vol. 31, no. 7–8, pp. 528–536, 2002.
4. M. C. Jiddawi, N.S.; Öhman, “Marine Fisheries in Tanzania Marine Fisheries in Tanzania,” ambio a J. Hum. Environ. 31(7). p. 518-527, 2002.
5. R. Mutayoba. V. & Mbwete, “Is Booming Tourism in Zanzibar Pro-poor? A Micro-economic Impact Analysis Venance Mutayoba 14 and Rose Mbwete 15,” KIVUKONI J., 1(2), pp. 104–120, 2013.
6. K. Schreckenberg, G. Mace, and M. Poudyal, Ecosystem services and poverty alleviation: Trade-offs and governance. New York: Routledge, 2018.
7. A. I. Hamad and C. A. Muhando, “Feeding habits and diet composition of Octopus cyanea (Gray, 1849) in Zanzibar waters, Tanzania,” West. Indian Ocean J. Mar. Sci., vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 61–73, 2023.
8. A. I. Hamad, C. A. Muhando, and B. M. Yahya, “The influence of fishing methods on catch size, catch rate, and size distribution of Octopus cyanea (Gray, 1849) in Zanzibar, Tanzania,” Fish. Res., vol. 281, no. May 2023, p. 107213.
9. J. C. Selgrath, S. E. Gergel, and A. C. J. Vincent, “Shifting gears: Diversification, intensification, and effort increases in small-scale fisheries (1950-2010),” PLoS One, vol. 13, no. 3, 2018.
10. W. H. H. Sauer, W. Potts, D. Raberinary, J. Anderson, and M. J. S. Perrine, “Assessment of current data for the octopus resource in Rodrigues, western Indian Ocean,” African J. Mar. Sci., vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 181–187, 2011.
11. URT, “The United Republic of Tanzania (URT), Ministry of Finance and Planning, Tanzania National Bureau of Statistics and President’s Office - Finance and Planning, Office of the Chief Government Statistician, Zanzibar. The 2022 Population and Housing Census: A,” 2022.
12. A. M. Hart, D. Murphy, S. A. Hesp, S. Leporati, and A. Arkhipkin, “Biomass estimates and harvest strategies for the Western Australian Octopus aff. tetricus fishery,” ICES J. Mar. Sci., vol. 76, no. 7, pp. 2205–2217, 2019.
13. C. Mtonga, N. Jiddawi, and D. Benjamen, “Recent rise in exploitation of Tanzanian octopuses: a policy and management challenge,” West. Indian Ocean J. Mar. Sci., vol. 2022, no. 1, pp. 107–118, 2022.
14. D. R. Goethel et al., Oceans of plenty? Challenges, advancements, and future directions for the provision of evidence-based fisheries management advice, vol. 33, no. 2. Springer International Publishing, 2023.
15. M. Mangel, “Scientific inference and experiment in Ecosystem Based Fishery Management, with application to Steller sea lions in the Bering Sea and Western Gulf of Alaska,” Mar. Policy, vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 836–843, 2010.
16. P. G. Rodhouse, “Effects of environmental variability and change on cephalopod populations : an Introduction to the CIAC ’ 09 Symposium special issue,” pp. 1311–1313, 2010.
17. P. G. K. Rodhouse et al., Environmental effects on cephalopod population dynamics: Implications for management of fisheries, vol. 67. 2014.