Fresh Water Fish Habitat Management

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

This article was downloaded by: [[email protected]]On: 7 September 2008Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 901775928]Publisher Taylor & FrancisInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Aquatic Ecosystem Health & ManagementPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713393886

Freshwater fish habitat science and management in IndiaS. K. Ghosh a; A. G. Ponniah b

a Technical Services Department (Fisheries), National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development(NABARD), Pune, India b Central Institute of Brackishwater Aquaculture, Chennai, India

Online Publication Date: 01 July 2008

To cite this Article Ghosh, S. K. and Ponniah, A. G.(2008)'Freshwater fish habitat science and management in India',AquaticEcosystem Health & Management,11:3,272 — 288

To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/14634980802319044

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14634980802319044

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial orsystematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply ordistribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contentswill be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug dosesshould be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directlyor indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713393886

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14634980802319044

http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

Freshwater fish habitat science and management in IndiaS. K. Ghosh1∗ and A. G. Ponniah2

1Technical Services Department (Fisheries), National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD),Maharashtra R. O., 54, Wellesley Road, Post Bag No.5, Shivaji Nagar, Pune – 411 005, India

2Central Institute of Brackishwater Aquaculture, 75, Santhome High Road, Chennai – 600028, India∗Corresponding author: [email protected].

India is a land of diverse topography, climate and natural resource. There are 12 major rivers and 48lesser rivers with a total catchment area of 277.6 million ha. The freshwater resources of the country, whichare varied, harbor 587 species of finfishes, and account for 9.3 percent of global inland fish production.India’s natural capital of fish habitat resource has been eroded as reflected in loss of biodiversity andreduced fish landings.

Studies on the ecology, environment and fisheries of five major river systems, in addition to reservoirsand flood plain lake fisheries, have been conducted with greater focus on water quality and less on physicalhabitat parameters.

River conservation programs cover major rivers in 10 states of the country; the ‘Ganga Action Plan’being the most important. These projects target improvement in water quality and not fish habitat. Lack ofconcern for fish habitat is reflected in the planning of Farakka Barrage, a large dam built to divert the flowof River Ganga (The Ganges) into the Hooghly River, and its impact on the ‘Hilsa’ run. Environmentallaws have not achieved desired results for lack of enforcement mechanisms.

Freshwater habitat management in India raises both concern and hope. Concern arises out of the missingelements in current fish habitat research, planning and management of resource. The hope for the future isincreasing public awareness on the need for better resource management and environmental conservation.In the backdrop of the learning from implementation of the eco-restoration programmes, the task appearsto be not only challenging but also demanding in terms of participation of stakeholders, commitment ofresources, backup of research support, monitoring of environmental standards, enforcement of regulationsand setting up of priorities in terms of conservation of the natural assets.

Keywords: Ganges, Hilsa, biodiversity, conservation, floodplain

Introduction

Sustainable exploitation of fish stocks and con-servation of fish habitat are matters of deep con-cern for fishery scientists and administrators all overthe world. Humans have been exploiting aquatic re-sources ever since their presence on this planet tomeet their basic necessities. However, the past cen-tury has witnessed increasing pressure on freshwaterfish stocks and habitats for reasons that have their

origins both within and outside of the sector. Increas-ing harvest pressure, destructive fishing operations,introduction of exotics, are examples of factors fromwithin the sector responsible for increasing pressureon fish stocks. The factors outside the sector arerelated to aquatic and terrestrial resource use. Theaquatic resource uses with potential adverse impacton fish habitat are water abstraction for irrigation,electricity generation, domestic use, industrial use.The threat to fish habitat from terrestrial resource use

272

Aquatic Ecosystem Health & Management, 11(3):272–288, 2008. Copyright C© 2008 AEHMS. ISSN: 1463-4988 print / 1539-4077 onlineDOI: 10.1080/14634980802319044

Downloaded By: [[email protected]] At: 20:52 7 September 2008

Ghosh and Ponniah / Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management 11 (2008) 272–288 273

may be in the form of increased siltation, reducedwater yield, and deterioration of water quality, withtheir origin traced to human activities like defor-estation, destructive agricultural practices, mining,dumping of untreated sewage and industrial wastesetc. All forms of resource use at their end gener-ate wastes that, if not mitigated, may render suchexploitation unsustainable. Fish habitat cannot beprotected without taking care of the sustainabilityof the human activities within the sector as wellas outside it. Therefore, fish habitat managementneeds an integrated approach seeking solutions tosuch problems both within and outside the sector. Interms of resource management, not only manage-ment of the fish habitat under consideration is re-quired, but also the catchment areas of the drainagebasins.

Here, we ascertain for India: i) the status of thefreshwater fishery resources; ii) the state of fresh-water fish habitat science and its current focus; andiii) the prospects for freshwater fish habitat manage-ment and its linkages with various aquatic and terres-trial ecosystem management programmes. An effortis made to identify priority research needs and gapsin institutional linkage, and project future trends infreshwater fishery science and habitat managementin the country.

Country profile

The total geographical area of India measures3287263 sq km comprising of 2973001 sq. km ofland area and 314262 sq. km of water area (I.1) Itsnorthern border is guarded by the loftiest mountainrange in the world, ‘The Himalayas’. It is surroundedby the Arabian Sea in the west, the Indian Ocean inthe south, and the Bay of Bengal in the east (Fig1). It has a coastline of 8000 km with an ExclusiveEconomic Zone of 2.02 million sq km. The land usepattern indicates arable land 57.7%, land under per-manent crops 1%, permanent pastures 3.2%, forestsand woodland 21.2%, and others 16.9% (I.2). Thepresence of the great Himalayan range on the northand of the ocean on the south are the two majorinfluences on the climate of India. The mountainrange provides an impenetrable barrier to the influ-ence of cold winds from central Asia, and gives thesub-continent the elements of a tropical climate. TheIndian Ocean, which is the source of cool moisture-laden winds reaching India, gives it the elements ofan oceanic climate. The population of the countrywhich was 966 million in July 1997 has crossed the

1 billion mark. The growth rate during 1996–2006is expected to be 1.57%.

Overview of freshwater resources

Precipitation, including snowfall, the mainsource of freshwater, is estimated to be of the orderof 4000 km3 per year. Natural runoff in the riversis about 1869 km3. Due to various constraints onlyabout 1122 km3 of the potential is put to beneficialuse, of which, 690 km3 occurs as surface water re-sources and the remainder as ground water resource.Freshwater resources of the country are classifiedas rivers and canals, reservoirs, tanks and ponds,flood plain lakes and derelict water areas (Table 1).The length of major and medium rivers is estimatedto be 29000 km or 45000 km including tributaries.Not including rivers and canals, total water bodiescover an area of about 6.58 million ha (Table1) ofwhich, the major components are tanks, ponds andreservoirs occupying 2.36 m. ha and 3.15 million ha,respectively.

India has many rivers; as many as 12 of them areclassified as major rivers whose total catchment areais 252.8 million ha. Of the major rivers, the Ganga -Brahmaputra Meghana system is the largest with acatchment area of about 110 million ha Other majorrivers with catchment area more than 10 million haare Indus (32.1million ha), Godavari (31.3 millionha), Krishna, (25.9million ha) and Mahanadi (14.2million ha). There are 48 medium rivers with catch-ment area of about 25 million ha.

A large number of small, medium and large rivervalley projects have been initiated in the past fivedecades for irrigation and hydro-electric power gen-eration. This has given rise to a chain of man-madelakes, dotting the Indian landscape. These reservoirshave been classified into three categories: small,

Table 1. Freshwater resources of India.

Resource Type Length/Area

Rivers & Tributaries (km.) 45 000Canals (km.) 126 334Subtotal: 171 334Reservoirs (ha) 3 153 366Ponds & Tanks (ha) 2 355 300Flood Plain Wetlands (ha) 202000Derelict Water (ha) 868000Subtotal: 6 578 666Total 6 750 000


274 Ghosh and Ponniah / Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management 11 (2008) 272–288

Figure 1. Major river basins of India.

medium and large reservoirs (Table 2). These man-made lakes account for 56% of the total fresh waterresource excluding rivers and canals. However itscontribution to the fresh water fish production is lessthan 3%.

India has extensive riverine wetlands in the formof oxbow lakes, variously named as beel, jheel,mauns, and chaurs. These flood plain lakes aremostly found in the eastern and the north eastern partof the country along the Ganges and Brahmaputra

river basins (Table 3). The area under flood plainlakes in the country is approximately 202000 ha(Sugunan, 2000).

Ponds and tanks occupying 2.35 million haconstitute the major aquaculture resource ofthe country in terms of production (Table 1).The freshwater aquaculture sector accounts for75% of the inland fish production and aboutone-third of the total fish production in thecountry.



Table 2. India’s reservoir fishery resources (after Sugunan, 1995).

Variable Small∗ Medium Large Total

Size Class (ha.) <1000 1000–5000 >5000Number 19134 180 56 19370Area (ha.) 1485557 527541 1140268 3153366Production (tonne) 74129 6488 13033 93650Yield (kg ha−1) 49.90 12.30 11.43Yield Potential (kg ha−1) 100 75 50Potential (tonne) 148556 39565 57013 245134Utilization of potential (percent) 49.90 16.40 22.86 38.20

∗Including irrigation tanks above 10 ha under this category.

Other freshwater aquaculture resources, namelycanals and derelict water areas, are not being uti-lized at present for aquaculture but could provideopportunities for running water aquaculture and air-breathing fish culture.

Freshwater fish fauna

Of the estimated 27,977 living species of fishesin the world (Nelson, 2006), India has 2,118 finfishspecies (Kapoor et al., 2000) distributed in differentecosystems. Of these, 587 species are present in thefreshwater habitat (Table 4). This latest compilation(Kapoor et al., 2000) has been made based on con-sultation of many published records and eliminatingsynonyms. Talwar and Jhingran (1991) reported 930freshwater fishes belonging to 326 genera from theIndian subcontinent (India, Pakistan, Nepal, Burma,Sri Lanka and Bangladesh). Comparison of thefreshwater species listed in FISHBASE (Fishbase,1998) for India, Sri Lanka, Maldives, Bangladesh,

Bhutan, Nepal, Pakistan and Afghanistan has shownthat 46.7% of the fishes are shared by these groupof countries (Ponniah, 2000).

From the major rivers of India, the number offishes reported are for Ganga-192, Brahmaputra-179, Godavari and Mahanadi-105, Narmada andTapti - 60, Krishna - 104 and Cauveri-139 (Yazdani,1992). Within India, the major hot spots of fish bio-diversity are the Western Ghats and North East In-dia comprising of the states of Assam, Manipur,Nagaland, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Tripura. Notonly do they have a large number of species, they alsoexhibit high degree of endemism and a large numberof potential food and ornamental fishes (Ponniah andSarkar, 2000, Ponniah and Gopalakrishnan, 2000). Itis from these regions that new records (Arunachalamet al., 1998) as well as new species are continuingto be described (Jayaraj et al., 1999; Zacharias andMinimol, 1999).

In a 1992 review of the 587 freshwater fishes,three were found to be endangered, 13 vulnerable,

Table 3. The area and distribution of inundated flood plain lakes.

States River Basins Area (ha)

Ganga River systemBihar Gandak and Kosi 40000West Bengal Hooghly and Matlah 42500Brahmaputra River systemArunachal Pradesh Kameng, Subansiri, Dibang, Lohit, Dihing and Tirap 2500Assam Brahmaputra and Barak 100000Manipur Iral, Imphal and Thoubal 16500Meghalaya Someswari and Jinjiram 213Tripura Gumti 500Total 202213



Table 4. Species diversity of Indian fishes in major aquatic ecosystems (Kapoor et al., 2000).

Ecosystem Fish species (No.) Endemics (percent) Food fish (percent) Ornamental fish (percent)

Freshwater 587i.Western Ghat 283 67.1 16.3∗ 37.5∗ii. North East 267 23.2 22.5 19.9Estuarine 171Marine 1360Total 2118

∗Only endemics.

two rare and 28 of indeterminate status (Mahantaet al., 1994). A Conservation Assessment of Man-agement Plan (CAMP) Workshop assessed 320freshwater fishes (Anon, 1998).

Freshwater fisheries

Riverine fisheries comprise artisanal, subsistenceand traditional fishing activities. They are highlydispersed and unorganized, making collection ofdata on fishing and fish yield difficult (Sinha,1999).The Central Inland Capture Fisheries Institute(CIFRI), Barrackpore has collected data from se-lected stretches of river Ganga, Brahmaputra, Nar-mada, Tapti, Godavari and Krishna. These riversharbour a rich and varied fish fauna of which theGangetic system alone has 265 species, followed bythe Brahmaputra system with 126 species and thepeninsular rivers harboring 76 species (Sinha, 1999).Hook and line is the main gear in the upper stretcheswhere no organized fishery exists. The major fishinggears in use in the middle stretches are drag nets, gillnets, cast nets, traps, and hook and line. In the lowerstretches they include gill nets, drag nets, dip nets,purse seine, cast nets, scoop nets, hook, line andtraps (Sinha et al., 1998). Available data show fishyield in these rivers ranges from 0.64 to 1.6 tonnesper km. (Sinha, 1999).

Data on reservoir fisheries of India are rare due tothe common property nature of these resources, thediverse modes of exploitation adopted by the StateGovernments, the scattered nature of the fish landingcenters, and the remoteness of many reservoirs. Thefisheries potential of reservoirs was not evaluateduntil the 1970s, when fishery yields were as low as5 to 8 kg.ha−1 yr−1 (Sugunan, 1995). Organised re-search was initiated in 1971 with the launching of AllIndia Coordinated Project on Reservoir Fisheries byCIFRI. These studies led to formulation of reservoirfisheries management policies. The three-pronged

strategy recommended is increasing mesh sizes, anddecreasing fishing effort, and increasing stocking.Medium and large reservoirs were developed forcapture fisheries, wherein the management normsinclude stock manipulation, adjusting fishing effort,enforcement of conservation measures, and gear se-lectivity. Stocking is used as a management op-tion to correct species imbalances and fill vacantniches. Small reservoirs are managed as culture-based capture fisheries, where the major emphasis ison extensive aquaculture through intensive stockingand harvesting. This strategy has yielded good re-sults as reflected from the per hectare yield of large(11.43 kg), medium (12.30 kg) and small reservoirs(49.90 kg) in the post development scenario (Table2). Production as high as 316 kg ha−1 has been ob-tained in Chulliar, a small reservoir in Kerala (Su-gunan, 1995). It has been estimated that a modestincrease in yield rate up to 100, 75, 50 kg ha −1 inrespect of small, medium and large reservoirs wouldincrease the production potential to 2.5 times thecurrent levels (Table 2).

Flood plain lakes provide important fisheryresources considering their production potential(1000–1500 kg ha−1 yr−1). The total production po-tential from this sector is estimated to be 0.21 milliontonne. The present average production from theselakes is quite low, 160 kg ha−1 yr−1 in Bihar andabout 210 kg ha−1 yr−1in West Bengal and Assam(Sinha, 2000). Two distinct lines of fishery man-agement have evolved for these water bodies. Theopen lakes are developed with capture fisheries inthe deeper central areas and culture fisheries in theinshore margins and pockets. In closed wetlands,stocking is the mainstay of management. These lakesprovide ideal condition for pen and cage culture.CIFRI has developed technologies with productionpossibilities of 4 t ha−1 in 6 months for carp, 1 t ha−1

in 6 months for prawns in pens, and 0.25 kg (m2)−1

for air breathing fishes in cages (Sinha, 2000).



Freshwater aquaculture has emerged as a ma-jor fish producing system in India, with produc-tion around 2.35 million t yr−1 (I.3). Carps ac-counts for over 87% of farmed fish. Major carpspecies cultured are rohu (Labeo rohita), catla (Catlacatla) and mrigal (Cirrhinus mrigala). The otherspecies utilized under mono or polyculture are grasscarp (Ctenopharyngodon idellus), common carp(Cyprinus carpio), silver carp (Hypothalmitchthysmolitrix), catfish (Clarius batrachus), singi (Het-eropneustes fossilis), rainbow trout (Onchorhynchusmykiss), and giant river prawn (Macrobrachiumrosenbergii). Freshwater aquaculture has evolvedfrom a domestic activity, as in the Eastern Indianstates of West Bengal, into an industry in the statesof Punjab, Haryana and Andhra Pradesh with pro-ductivity touching new heights. Productivity has in-creased from 0.6–0.8 to 6–8 t ha−1 yr−1. Major tech-nological developments during the 1970s backedby the efforts of the State Directorates of Fisheriesand the 422 Fish Farmers Development Agencies(FFDAs) have created a strong production base offreshwater aquaculture, which has made India thesecond largest aquaculture production state in theworld. So far, it has been possible to extend scien-tific farming to 20% of the potential water area. Theaverage production of the areas covered by FFDAsis 2202 kg ha−1 yr−1(Gopakumar et al., 1999).

State of freshwater fish habitatscience in India

Studies on freshwater habitat

Most of studies on Indian freshwater habitat havefocused on water quality parameters. Purely physicalparameters like substrate, velocity, habitat types andcharacteristics of channel, bank and riparian veg-etation, have received less attention. Compared torivers, streams have received less attention and gen-erally more focus has been on reservoirs comparedto other natural aquatic habitats. To analyse the rel-ative focus given to studies on Indian fish habitat,Aquatic Science and Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA)were searched sequentially for 12 years (1988–1999) using key words India, fish, freshwater, en-vironment and habitat. Only 301 entries amountingto 4.2% of Indian publications abstracted in ASFAwere found, indicating that little effort was directedto habitat studies. These abstracts were screened in-dividually to determine the specific area covered. Ofthese, only 4% were on laboratory studies related

to pollution; among the field studies 3.7% were onpollution related areas and 7% covered ecologicaltopics. Most of the articles were on water qualityparameters. This shows the greater focus given towater quality parameters compared to studies on thenatural interaction between fish and habitat. Earlylife stages and intraspecific variation in life historytraits of Indian fishes have received little attention(Ponniah, 2001).

Studies of habitat preference of larval and juve-nile stages of Indian fishes have not been under-taken. Field experimental studies to determine ef-fect of riparian alterations and habitat restorationare lacking for Indian freshwaters. Sand-mining andcivic pollution, along with hydroelectric projects,have led to habitat degradation of many hill streamsand rivers but their impact on physical habitat, finesediment dynamics, invertebrates and fish have notbeen documented. Apart from pollution, the effectsof most other anthropogenic disturbances have notbeen studied. While species assemblages have beendetermined for many freshwater bodies, studies in-cluding physical habitat are few. For Western Ghatsstreams, pioneering work has shown correlationsbetween species diversity in the Chittar River ofWestern Ghats and variation in habitat character-istics such as substrate type, flow pattern, riparianvegetation, fish cover, disturbance in riparian cor-ridors, water quality and natural barriers such asbig water-falls, (Arunachalam et al., 1997a). Sig-nificance relationships were found between speciesrichness and habitat diversity in some Western Ghatstreams (Arunachalam, 2000).

Habitat requirements of Indianfreshwater fishes

The spawning and feeding habitat of Indian fisheshave been described generally (Jhingran,1968;Mitra, 1968). The Central Inland Fisheries ResearchInstitute (CIFRI) had conducted spawn prospect-ing investigations in riverine stretches. Studies onspawning and habitat requirement of the goldenmahseer Tor putitora have been carried out byShrestha (1997), and on chocolate mahseer at theICAR Research Complex for NEH Region (Ghosh,1996) and on Deccan mahseer (Tor khudree) byTata Electricals Co. Ltd, a private hydroelectric-company (Sehgal et al., 2007). To identify the op-timum and degraded areas in relation to the habi-tat requirements of T. putitora, data on habitat



type, substratum, channel dimension, instream coverwere collected from the Himalayan hill stream Lad-hiya (Srivastava et al., 2001). These studies havebeen expanded to include remote sensing imagesmainly to document changes in riparian vegeta-tion (NBFGR, 2000). Microhabitat use by juvenileand adult cyprinids was assessed in stream poolsof the south India river, Kallar (Arunachalam etal., 1997b). Species-specific habitat requirements ofWestern Ghats fishes from 10 streams have beendetermined based on macrohabitat segregation andmicrohabitat use, (Arunachalam, 2000). Overall forIndian fishes, there are few specific studies aimed atdetermining the habitat requirements for larval andjuvenile stages, and spawning grounds.

Research institutes working onfish habitat

Research on freshwater fish habitat falls withinthe mandate of the three research institutes under theIndian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR).Also there are a number of agricultural and otheruniversities within the country with limited pro-grammes on fish habitat. The CIFRI is the nodalagency to conduct research on freshwater fish habi-tat (I.4). The National Research Centre on Coldwa-ter Fisheries (I.5) covers fish habitat related work inhilly regions, and the National Bureau of Fish Ge-netic Resources (NBFGR) (I.6) is working on con-servation of fish resources at the national level worksand also on endangered fish habitat with the focuson developing frehwater aquatic sanctuaries. Mostof the universities and colleges working on freshwa-ter fish habitat are concentrating more on pollutionaspects. The studies conducted to date on freshwaterhabitat in India are confined to ecological studies ofrivers, reservoir and flood plain lakes.

Riverine habitat science has evolved from fisheryecology and related limnological studies during the1960s and 1970s to integration of fisheries, waterquality and general ecology during the 1980s, tak-ing into account the different riparian zones fromhead water to confluences with the sea. Samplinghas been attempted using standard methods (Sinha,et al.,1998), covering fish fauna as well as fish-eries. Studies conducted by CIFRI are now avail-able for the Gangetic System, Brahmaputra System,Godavari System and Narmada river system. How-ever, the information has not been used as yet toaddress aquatic habitat management issues.

Under the All India Coordinated ResearchProject on the ‘Ecology and Fisheries of Reservoirs’,CIFRI conducted studies on biological and fisheriespotential of reservoirs in relation to morphometricand hydro-edaphic factors and energy flow dynam-ics. However, as the management of these water bod-ies being vested with irrigation/electricity boards,the advocated fisheries management guidelineslargely remain unimplemented. CIFRI has stan-dardized the technique of pen culture of carps andfreshwater prawns in enclosed bays and conductedresearch on the ecology and fisheries of flood plainlakes leading to suitable management strategies.

Studies to document freshwater genetic resourcesfrom biodiversity hot spots have been undertakenunder the National Agricultural Technology Projectfunded by World Bank. NBFGR is the lead centre iscarrying out a project entitled ‘Germplasm Inven-tory and Gene Banking of the Freshwater Fishes’with 12 local collaborators mainly from North EastIndia and Western Ghats. The project has col-lected data on both habitat data and fish germplasmto better understand freshwater fish biodiversity,ecological interactions and habitat requirements. Forprioritized endangered or potential cultivable / orna-mental fishes, studies on life history traits, captivebreeding, genetic characterization and gene bankingare also being carried out. The results should helpimprove management of freshwater habitat of theseregions.

Survey of freshwater fish habitatmanagement in India

Legislative and regulatory treatment offish habitat in India

There are two sources of environmental regu-lations governing fish habitats in India: i) interna-tional conventions to which India is a signatory;and ii) judicial decisions of the Supreme court andthe High courts and other judicial bodies (Paul,2000). The various regulations and obligations en-shrined in these pronouncements are discussed here.India participates with many international agree-ments and programmes concerned with aspectsof nature conservation and sustainable develop-ment. These range from legal instruments such asthe Convention on Biological Diversity to scien-tific programmes such as the UNESCO Man andthe Biosphere Programme, a global programme of



international scientific cooperation. India is also ac-tive in: i) Convention on International Trade in En-dangered Species (CITES); ii) World Heritage Con-vention; iii) Convention on Biological Diversity;and, iv) Ramsar (Wetlands) Convention.

The Constitution of India also enables the Cen-tre and states to enact laws to carry out duties ofpreservation, reforestation and conservation of nat-ural resources [Article 33].

In India, there are three Acts (River BoardsAct, 1956, Water Cess Act, 1977, and Water Act,1974) that have some form of regulatory controlon fish habitat management. According to the RiverBoards Act, 1956, River Boards have to regulateand develop inter-state rivers and river valleys. RiverBoards are responsible for: i) conservation, controland optimum utilisation of water resources of inter-state rivers; ii) promotion and operation of schemesfor irrigation, water supply, drainage, flood con-trol, reforestation and navigation; and iii) controlof soil erosion and prevention of pollution of wa-ters of inter-state rivers (I.7). The Water Cess Actof 1977 (prevention and control of pollution) autho-rises Water Boards and local authorities to levy andcollect cess on water consumed by persons engagedin certain industries, to augment their resources. TheWater Act of 1974, as amended in 1979, defineswater pollution, sewage effluents, sewer, industrialeffluents, and streams. It was enacted to establishCentral and State Water Boards. The functions ofCentral Boards are mainly advisory and supervi-sory, while the State Boards functions are morecomprehensive.

The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 is anumbrella legislation that empowers the Governmentof India (GoI) to take necessary measures to protectand improve the quality of the environment (I.8).Beside these legislative measures, a National Con-servation Strategy and Policy Statement on Environ-ment and Development, 1992; National River Policy,1988; a Policy Statement on Abatement of Pollution,1992; and National Environment Policy, 2006, havealso been evolved. The National Environment Policy(NEP), 2006, is intended to be a guide to action inregulatory reform, programmes and projects for en-vironmental conservation and review and enactmentof legislation, by agencies of the central, state andlocal governments. These objectives are sought to befulfilled through environmental impact assessment,eco-regeneration, assistance to organisations imple-menting environmental and forestry research, edu-cation and training, dissemination of environmental

information and international cooperation and cre-ation of environmental awareness (I.9).

The provisions of international declarations arenot reflected in municipal laws of India. Such dec-larations presently act as guiding principles andmechanisms for international interventions to fundeco-restoration programmes. None of the domes-tic laws for preventing habitat destruction are effec-tive because of a lack of enforcement mechanisms.There are laws governing environmental protection,but these have not been enforced by the implement-ing agencies. However, increasing public awarenessand media coverage of the neglect may improve thesituation and there may be better transparency inenforcement of environmental laws in future.

Linkages with ecosystemmanagement

Fish habitat management in India is not the di-rect concern of any of the development agenciesinvolved in aquatic or terrestrial ecosystem manage-ment. Apart from fish tanks and ponds and certainreservoirs in the country, fish habitats are not man-aged for the purpose of fish or fisheries developmentor conservation. If there is any management inter-vention that positively or negatively affect fish or fishhabitat, it is entirely incidental and can be attributedto management of these resources from a develop-mental focus. On the other hand, aquaculture hasbeen linked with other eco-restoration programmessuch as Ganga Action Plan under which aquacultureponds have been used for stabilization of municipalsewage before releasing the effluents to the river.This has been considered as a resource regenera-tion pathway for meeting the operation and main-tenance cost of the sewage treatment plants (STPs).The linkages with ecosystem management would in-clude the various developmental activities involvingthe aquatic and the terrestrial habitats beside cover-ing eco-restoration programmes such as pollutioncontrol and sustainable development.

Aquatic ecosystem management

The Union Ministry of Water Resources is re-sponsible for development, conservation and man-agement of water as a national resource. Thesefunctions are carried out through various central or-ganisations. The assessment of irrigation potentialand its monitoring is conducted by the Central Wa-ter Commission. Urban water supply and sewage



disposal is handled by the Ministry of Urban De-velopment while rural water supply is within thepurview of Ministry of Rural Development. Hydro-electric and thermal power are the responsibility ofthe Ministry of Power.

Pollution and environment control as well asriver conservation comes under the purview of theMinistry of Environment and Forests. The Min-istry of Environment and Forests is primarily con-cerned with the implementation of policies and pro-grammes relating to conservation of the country’snatural resources including lakes and rivers, its bio-diversity, forests and wildlife, ensuring the welfareof its animals, and prevention and abatement of pol-lution. The Ministry also serves as the nodal agencyfor implementation of programmes based on inter-national and regional co-operation. The policies arewell supported by a set of legislative and regulatorymeasures aimed at the reservation and protection ofenvironment (I.9)

To study the linkages with aquatic ecosystemmanagement, it may be worthwhile to take a look atthe range of human activities affecting the ecosys-tem (Barg et al., 1998). India has developed thelargest irrigation system in the world with over 89million hectares under irrigation. It also has a vastpotential for hydro-power generation, estimated at84,000 MW, of which, 22,000 MW have so far beenharnessed or is being harnessed.. However, the im-pact of river corridor engineering on fish habitathas shown the disappearance of Puntius dubius, agravel spawner from Stanley Reservoir in TamilNadu due to smothering of breeding grounds by finesilt (Singh, 2000); the disappearance of mahseersTor khudree and Acrossocheilus hexagonolepis fromthe Cauveri river system owing to habitat changesconsequent to construction of Stanley and Bhavanis-agar Reservoirs (Singh, 2000); decline in the Hilsa(Tenualosa ilisha) fishery in the upstream of FarakkaBarrage on the River Ganga (Bilgrani et al., 1979);the adverse impact on the anadromous migrationof hilsa in the Cauvery and Godavari rivers owingto the construction of small dams for the purposeof regulating the flow to irrigation systems (SundarRaj, 1942; Sreenivasan, 1976, 1977); and the dis-appearance of Puntius carnaticus from Trimoorthyand Amaravathy reservoirs (Sreenivasan, 1976). .To prevent repetition of such occurrences, the Gov-ernment has constituted the National Commissionon Integrated Water Resource Development and en-trusted it with the job of integrated planning utiliz-ing the river continuum concept and eco-restorationprinciples.

Large areas of reservoir waters (3.15 million ha)have been created during the post-Independence pe-riod. These contribute 2.55% of the inland fish pro-duction in the country with the potential to furtherenhance production by 160%. Management of fish-eries and fish habitat in the post-impoundment phasefor Indian reservoirs is, perhaps, better understoodthan the impacts inflicted on the original habitatsand their fisheries.

Floodplains lakes that act as reservoirs for thelarge volumes of water discharged by the riversat spate during the monsoon are highly productivefrom a fisheries point of view and promote humansettlement. These water bodies are subject to heavysiltation, resulting in reductions in the storage vol-ume often with cascading effects of flooding newerareas and disturbing the breeding and recruitment ofthe aquatic fauna.

National water quality monitoringnetwork

The Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) incollaboration with concerned State Pollution Con-trol Boards (SPCBs) established a nationwide net-work of water quality monitoring comprising 1019stations in 27 states and 6 union territories. Themonitoring is done on monthly or quarterly basis insurface waters and semi-annually in case of groundwater. The monitoring network covers 200 rivers, 60lakes, 5 tanks, 3 ponds, 3 creeks, 13 canals, 17 drainsand 321 wells. Among the 1019 stations, 592 are onrivers, 65 on lakes, 17 on drains, 13 on canals, 5 ontanks, 3 on creeks, 3 on ponds and 321 are ground-water stations (Fig.2) (I.10).

Presently, the inland water quality-monitoringnetwork is operated under a three-tier pro-gramme i.e. Global Environment Monitoring Sys-tem (GEMS), Monitoring of Indian NationalAquatic Resources System (MINARS) and YamunaAction Plan (YAP). The water quality data are re-ported in Water Quality Status Year Book (I.11).

The water quality monitoring results obtainedduring 1995 to 2006 indicated that the organic andbacterial contamination are continued to be criticalin water bodies. This is mainly due to discharge ofdomestic wastewater mostly in untreated form fromthe urban centres of the country. The municipal cor-porations at large are not able to treat increasingload of municipal sewage flowing into water bod-ies without treatment. Secondly, the receiving waterbodies also do not have adequate water for dilution.



Figure 2. National water quality monitoring stations.

Therefore, the oxygen demand and bacterial pollu-tion is increasing day by day.

The water quality monitoring results were anal-ysed with respect to indicator of oxygen consumingsubstances (bio-chemical demand) and indicator ofpathogenic bacteria (total coliform and faecal co-liform). The result of such analysis shows thatthere is gradual degradation in water quality.The number of observations having BOD andcoliform density has increased during 1995 to2006.

Terrestrial eco-systemmanagement

The activities associated with management of ter-restrial eco-system that impact aquatic habitat are:1. management of nutrient overload; 2. reforestationprogram; 3. watershed /wasteland development pro-gram; and 4. catchment area treatment under multi-purpose river valley projects.

Eutrophication of water bodies can have sub-stantial impacts on aquatic flora and fauna includ-ing fishes (WRI, 1998). Reduction in nutrient lossthrough better application of fertilizers, i.e. timelyapplication and accurate delivery, is an issue thathas not been given due importance. The countryhas a diverse and rich forest resource with a totalforest cover of 67 million hectare. However the cur-rent annual withdrawal of forest wood is 235 millioncubic meters compared to an estimated sustainablecapacity of 48 m.c.m. The enactment of The Forest

Conservation Act, 1980, has been able to partiallyarrest this trend.

As per, the National Bureau of Soil Science andLand Use Planning (NBSSLUP), out of a total landarea of the country of 328 million ha (mha), about107.43 mha or 32.75% of the total geographicalarea of the country is affected by various formsand degree of land degradation. With the creationof the Department of Land Resources in 1999, anew approach was developed with compact micro-watershed units as a basis for project planning, withinvolvement of the user groups and other stakehold-ers depending directly on the watershed. Involve-ment of NGOs for capacity building of grass-rootorganisations have been considered as integral partof project component. The target is to treat 5 millionhectare of rain-fed watershed during the current five-year plan period. This is probably the only ecosystemmanagement programme that has been establishedand is progressing well with active involvement offunding agencies like National Bank for Agricul-ture and Rural Development (NABARD), Kreditun-stalt fur Wiederaufbau (KFW) of Germany and withthe support of voluntary organisations. Up to March2005, an area of 28.533 mha has been developedwith an expenditure of Rs.14,5773.2 million. About76.5 mha of degraded lands will remain to be treatedin the 11th Five Year Plan. (I. 12).

Under two government sponsored soil and waterconservation programmes, the soil conservation inthe catchments of river valley projects (RVP) andthe integrated watershed management in the catch-ments of flood prone rivers (FPR), efforts are made



in the catchment areas to mitigate flood hazards,and improve productivity. So far eight such catch-ment areas, covering 16.7 million hectares, havebeen included. Treatment of the catchments of suchrivers, although not directed towards fisheries de-velopment, is expected to help the cause of fisheriesdevelopment through habitat improvement due to re-duction of silt loads, protection of breeding grounds,and improved discharge of rivers over time. Waterquantity is a very important indicator of fishery po-tential, and its variations are indicative of natural orhuman-induced changes in fishery potential. Varia-tions in flows affect both the efficiency of fishing andfishery biological productivity. Models have beendeveloped to predict fishery yields one and two yearsahead based on changes in water availability (I.13) .

Eco-restoration program

The key eco-restoration programs involve: (i)river action plans; (ii) industrial pollution controlprograms; and, (iii) wetland management program.

River action plan

The Central Ganga Authority established in 1985launched the Ganga Action Plan. With the approvalof the National River Conservation Plan (NRCP) inJuly 1995, the Central Ganga Authority has been re-designated as the National River Conservation Di-rectorate (NRCD). The National River ConservationDirectorate (NRCD) functions under the Ministryof Environment and Forests is in-charge of imple-menting the River Action Plans. The River ActionPlans were undertaken based on surveys conductedby the CPCB, which identified 27 grossly pollutedstretches of major rivers of the country. The objec-tive is to improve the water quality of the majorrivers, which are the major freshwater sources inthe country, through the implementation of pollu-tion abatement schemes. The important works be-ing taken up under the National River Action Planinclude: a) Interception and Diversion of works tocapture the raw sewage flowing into the river throughopen drains and divert them for treatment; b) SewageTreatment Plants (STP) for treating the divertedsewage; c) Low Cost Sanitation works to preventopen defecation on river banks; d) Electric Crema-toria and Improved Wood crematoria to conservethe use of wood and help in ensuring proper crema-tion of bodies brought to the burning ghats; e) RiverFront Development works such as improvement of

bathing ghats etc. (I.14) . The National River Con-servation Plan was launched to cover 18 major riversin 10 states of the country. Under this action plan,pollution abatement works are being undertaken in46 towns in the country. About 1928 million litresday –1 (mld) of sewage is targeted to be intercepted,diverted and treated.

The Ganga action plan (GAP)

Ganga runs its course of over 2500 km fromGangotri in the Himalayas to Ganga Sagar in theBay of Bengal through 29 cities with population over1,00,000 (Class-I cities), 23 cities with populationbetween 50,000 and 1,00,000 (Class-II cities), andabout 48 towns. It is a river with which the people ofIndia are attached spiritually and emotionally. De-partment of Environment, in December 1984, pre-pared an action plan for immediate reduction of pol-lution load on the river Ganga. The Cabinet approvedthe GAP (Ganga Action Plan) in April 1985 as a100% centrally sponsored scheme.

The GAP, launched in 1985, with the objective ofbringing the water quality of river Ganga and its trib-utaries to bathing levels, was not able to achieve itsobjectives, despite a total expenditure of Rs 901.71crore over a period of 15 years. There were short-falls in allocation of resources. Of the total domesticsewage of 5044 mld, in 110 towns selected for pol-lution abatement along the banks of river Ganga andits tributaries, the GAP addressed itself to processonly 2794 mld. The reported achievement of the par-ticipating states was 1095.69 mld, i.e. only 39% oftruncated target. The assets created in the Schemesuffered impairment and closure because of techni-cal design flaws, inter se mismatch of the schemesand their components, problems in land acquisition,contract mismanagement, lack of adequate mainte-nance, and in general because of lackadaisical atti-tude of the States and their implementing agencies.Technologies adopted by the NRCD for construc-tion of STPs were often questionable inasmuch asthey could not adequately address the problem ofreducing bacterial load in the river to the desiredlevel. The NRCD has abandoned the crucial activityof monitoring the water quality monitoring on riverGanga since September 1999, reportedly for wantof funds, and deprived itself of a key instrument ofoverall performance monitoring of the GAP (I.15).

The problem is further compounded by the pro-cess of global warming, leading to fast disappear-ance of world’s best known ice masses, including



Figure 3. Current status of Yamuna river water quality.

India’s Gangotri glacier. Studies conducted byWWF, available exclusively with CNN-IBN revealthat the Gangotri glacier is receding at an alarmingaverage rate of 23 m yr−1, with the snout positionof the glacier now 19 km upstream from Gangotri,at Gaumukh. With the 27 km long Gangotri glaciershrinking, there is now less water downstream to di-lute the chemical wastes of over a 100 industries thatpour into the river.

The Yamuna action plan (YAP)

Yamuna is the largest tributary of river Gangaand the main source of fresh water in Northern India.Originating from Himalayas, its total length is 1,376km covering a catchment area of 366,220 km2. Ya-muna water, downstream of Okhla barrage up tothe confluence with the Chambal River, is eutrophi-cated and BOD loads at Mazawali and Agra down-stream is above 30 mg l−1. This prohibits the usageof the river Yamuna as a source of water for potablewater scheme in Agra and the water of the riverGanga needs to be transported to Agra by a 138km pipeline. To tackle pollution in river Yamuna,YAP-I was launched by the Ministry of Environ-ment and Forests (and implemented by NRCD) in1993 with Japan’s ODA loan amounting to 17.77billion yen. Under YAP-I, 15 Class-I towns includ-ing six in Haryana, eight in Uttar Pradesh State and

Delhi were covered. Pollution arising from the do-mestic sector was considered to be of major concernand given the highest priority. The river water in up-per segment is relatively unpolluted. Downstreamof Tajewala, domestic and industrial wastewatersfrom urban and rural areas are discharged into theriver. The Delhi Reach, located between two bar-rages, has practically no perennial flow of its ownand receives partly treated and untreated wastewa-ter effluents from Delhi. Therefore, this stretch is themost polluted segment. The BOD load is observed tobe 27 mg l−1 (almost similar to treated wastewater)at Nizamuddin Bridge in Delhi (Figure 3). Despitethe serious efforts under YAP-I, the pollution of Ya-muna River has worsened and it is affecting the lifeof the residents alongside the river. The challenge isformidable. Pollutants contained in domestic, indus-trial and agricultural waste largely contribute to thewater pollution in Yamuna River with the pollutantratio of 20%, 17% and 63%, respectively.

Based on the success and lessons learned fromYAP I, JBIC signed a new Loan Agreement in March2003 for the ongoing YAP Project as a continu-ation and expansion of the earlier program. TheLoan Agreement provided financial assistance of13.33 billion yen. The YAP-II project commencedin December 2004 and is expected to be com-pleted by November 2009. Delhi, being a major pol-luter, receives a proportionally higher share of fund



allocation in this program. Under YAP-II, seweragecomponents include construction and rehabilitationof trunk sewer, Okhla STP extension, Keshopur STPrehabilitation in Delhi; construction of STPs andSPSs in UP. In addition to physical implementationof these facilities, capacity building and technologytransfer are also important for more efficient and ef-fective implementation and operation of sanitationfacilities.

YAP-I and YAP-II address mainly the issue of do-mestic wastes. It is very difficult to control agricul-tural wastes due to their nature. On the other hand, itis frequently observed that untreated industrial wastewater flows into the sewer. For the investments underYAP-I and YAP-II to be effective for the pollutioncontrol of Yamuna River, industrial effluents shouldbe controlled according to the relevant affluent stan-dards established by CPCB (Central Pollution Con-trol Board).

Industrial pollution control

A programme was initiated in 1993–94 to iden-tify polluting industries along the rivers to controlindustrial discharges into rivers. The NationalRiver Conservation Authority (NRCA) in 1997 hadtaken a decision to identify the grossly pollutingindustries that were discharging their effluents intorivers and lakes without requisite effluent treatmentsystems and serve notice on them to comply withthe requisite norms or face closure. A total of 851industries which are discharging 100 kg day−1 ormore of BOD without adequate treatment wereidentified under this programme in 1997 (I.16). Asa result of the declaration, there has been steadydecline in the number of defaulting units over a pe-riod of three years since the date of pronouncement(Fig. 4a and 4b).

Wetland management programme

The major ecological aspects related to wetlandsare decrease in biodiversity, particularly of endemicand endangered species, deterioration of water qual-ity, sedimentation and shrinkage in the area un-der wetlands, decrease in migratory bird popula-tion, reduced productivity of fishes and other aquaticfauna, and proliferation of unwanted aquatic weeds.The MOEF had sponsored a project on nation-widewetland mapping for inventory and creation of adatabase for conservation and management of wet-lands in the country using space-borne remotely

sensed data from the Indian Remote Sensing Satel-lite (IRS) 1A/B (Garg et al., 1998). The results ofthe wetland inventory are now available for use. TheMinistry has identified 21 wetlands of paramountimportance of the need for special conservationmeasures. However, implementation of conserva-tion measures is a state subject requiring focusedattention of the state governments.

Sustainable development

Fisheries development, including aquaculture, isconsidered to be truly sustainable with possible ame-liorating effect on the aquatic ecosystem when car-ried out with proper selection of species. Fishes arebeing used to keep the village ponds in better con-dition by taking advantage of the different feedinghabits of the fishes involving organic matter, plank-tons, aquatic vegetations and mollusks. It is thisattribute of carp culture that has been utilized fortreatment of domestic wastes following stabilizationpond technology. The waste stabilization pond isrecognised to be a cost effective technology, capableof killing pathogens to make the levels of microbialpollution in treated waste water safe for agriculture,aquaculture and bathing. Under the Ganga ActionPlan, carp culture in waste stabilization ponds hasbeen recognized as a technique for improving waterquality.

An overview of currentconservation priorities

The current conservation priorities for freshwa-ter fishes and fish habitat are: i) cataloguing aquaticbiodiversity, along with indices of abundance; ii)in situ conservation of endangered species throughspecies specific habitat requirement studies; iii) ge-netic management of natural and farmed stocks dueto genomic introgression (as high as 27%) throughmixed breeding of the three Indian Major Carpsin hatcheries; iv) sustainable harvesting of naturalstocks especially in hill stream or isolated standingwaters, where destructive fishing through dynamit-ing or poisoning is a major threat; v) incorporationof new candidate species into the aquaculture and or-namental fish industries to for diversify aquacultureproduction; and vi) formulation of guidelines on theintroduction of exotic species and their quarantine.



Figure 4. (a): Statewise distribution of the GPI industries. (4b): The status of defaulting industries along the rivers and lakes (1997–2001).

Conclusions

Summary overview of science andmanagement

The linkages between science and managementin the ultimate analysis are very weak as may beevident from the impact analysis (Figure 5). Al-though the science of fish habitat is not yet welldeveloped in India, the real bottleneck in manage-ment of the fish habitat lies in the non-applicationof laws and regulations based on available science.The reason for non-application can be attributed tothe management control of these water bodies beingvested with such agencies that neither have the req-uisite know-how for fisheries management nor themandate. These agencies carry out management ofthese water bodies independent of the fisheries re-

search and the end use in this context. The scientificresearch, especially with respect to riverine fisheriesis not holistic and does not address the issues of habi-tat improvement. The science of reservoir fisheriesand that of flood plain lake fisheries are fairly welldeveloped but suffer from lack of application owingto, absence of linkage between research, develop-ment and lack of mandate/knowledge of the author-ities managing them. Regarding the conservation offreshwater fish fauna, the science is of recent ori-gin. Although there are strong research programmesin hand, the outcomes of such studies would de-pend on management interventions. Although im-provement in riverine water quality has been at-tempted using various management interventions,these are of little importance to fisheries sector sincethe underlying principles do not conform to fisheriesneed.



Figure 5. Fish habitat impact analysis.

Priority research needs and gaps ininstitutional linkage

To meet the conservation priorities, there is needto document the present status of freshwater fishand habitat diversity especially from biodiversity-rich areas like Western Ghats and North East India.The World Bank funded NATP project is expectedto address this gap. All the information on species,habitat and genetic diversity needs to be incorpo-rated in a GIS-based database. The work carried outon a relational database on fish biodiversity (Kapoor

et al., 2000) and the GIS-based habitat database byNBFGR would address this gap. Absence of speciesspecific information on the spawning and larvalgrounds along with habitat requirements of differ-ent life stages of endangered fishes has been a stum-bling block in formulating species specific recoveryprogrammes. Development of aquatic sanctuariesis another priority gap that needs to be addressed.There is a need for an integrated approach to sus-tainable resource use with a focus on living aquaticcomponents, involving resource users in the plan-ning process.



Future trends and potentials of fish habitatscience and management

The future trends of development of fish habi-tat science and management will be guided in theultimate analysis by the perceived need, capabilityand political will to implement a set of actions re-quired to bring about protection, rehabilitation, mit-igation and enhancement of fish habitat (Barg et al.,1998). While the dwindling supply of popular foodfishes is a matter of public concern, conservation offish fauna and habitat is still only a scientific con-cern. However the concern for the dwindling sup-ply of popular food fish like ‘Hilsa’ has resultedin government intervention, allowing its duty-freeimport. The task of fish habitat conservation, nodoubt is enormous and spills beyond the realms offish habitat science and management calling for ad-dressing the bigger issue of unsustainable land andwater use. However within the broad framework ofhabitat management, the fishery scientists need toaddress the identified gaps in research and providethe solutions within a reasonable time frame. Theymay be required to draw up strategies involving suchtrade-offs as scientific vs. empirical management orbasin level vs. riparian habitat management, consid-ering time and resource factors. Given the intricaciesof common property resource management, and theweak links between fish habitat science and habitatmanagement, such tasks may be quite daunting in-volving conflict resolution at all levels of resourceuse and implementation involving multi-agencyplanning. Enforcement of environmental regula-tions and conflict resolution may require strong po-litical will to implement the programmes. The in-creasing public awareness and concern is a goodsign; however, the pace of increase in public aware-ness needs to outstrip the pace of habitat loss andfishes entering the list of endangered species.

ReferencesAnon, 1998. Report of the workshop on conservation assessment

and management plan (CAMP) for freshwater fishes of India,1997 eptember 22–26. Zoo Outreach Organisation and Na-tional Bureau of Fish Genetic Resources (NBFGR), Lucknow.

Arunachalam, M., 2000. Assemblage structure of stream fishesin the Western Ghats (India). Recent Advances in IndianAquatic Research. Hydrobio. 430, 1–31.

Arunachalam, M., Soranam, R., Johnson, J. A., Haniffa, M. A.,1997a. Fish diversity in Chittar river of Western Ghats. Eco.Envir. Sci. 23, 335–342.

Arunachalam, M., Madhusoodanan, K. C., Nair, J., Vijverberg,J., Kotmulder, K., 1997b. Food and habitat partitioning

among fishes in stream pools of a South Indian river. Eco.Envir. Sci. 23, 271–295.

Arunachalam, M., Johnson J.A., Manimekalan, A., 1998. Newrecord of Heteropneustes microps (Gunther) (Clariidae :Heteropneustidae) from Western Ghats rivers, India. J. Bom.Nat. Hist. Soc., 96(2), 330–332.

Barg, U., Dunn, I.G., Petr, T., Welcome, R.L., 1998. InlandFisheries. In: A.K. Biswas (Ed.), Water Resources—Environmental Planning, Management and Development,pp. 439–476. Publ. Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Co. Ltd.,New Delhi.

Bilgrani, K.S., Dutta Munshi, J.S., 1979. MAB Programme,UNESCO Project, Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur.

FISHBASE, 1998. FishBase 98 CD-Rom. ICARM, Manila,Philippines.

Garg, J.K., Singh, T.S., Murthy T.V.R., 1998. Wetlands ofIndia- Nationwide Wetland Mapping Project, sponsoredby Ministry of Environment & Forests, GOI. Publ.No.RSAM/SAC/RESA/PR/01/98, Space Applications Centre,ISRO.

Ghosh, S.K., 1996. Biology, Ecology and Culturability ofChocolate Mahseer, Acrossocheilus hexagonolepis (McClel-land) from Umium reservoir, Meghalaya. Doctoral thesissubmitted to University of Calcutta, Calcutta, India.

Gopakumar, K., Ayyappan, S., Jena, J.K., Sahoo, S.K., Sarkar,S.K., Satapathy, B.B., Nayak, P.K., 1999. National Freshwa-ter Aquaculture Development Plan. Publ. Central Instituteof Freshwater Aquaculture, Kausalyaganga, Bhubaneswar,India.

Jayaraj, E.G., Krishna Rao, D.S., Reddy, R., 1999. A newcyprinid fish of the genus Salmostoma (Swainson) from atropical reservoir of South India. J. Bom. Nat. Hist. Soc.,96(1), 113–115.

Jhingran, V.G., 1968. Synopsis of biological data on catla. FAOFisheries Synopsis No. 32 Rev. 1.

Kapoor, D., Dayal, R., Ponniah, A.G. (Eds.), 2002. Fish Biodi-versity of India. Published by Publication of National Bureauof Fish Genetic Resources, Lucknow, India.

Mahanta, P.C., D. Kapoor, D., Dayal, R., Ponniah, A.G., 1994. Pri-oritisation of the Indian fish species for conservation. P. 379–385. In: P.V. Dehadrai, P. Das and S.R. Verma (Eds.), Threat-ened Fishes of India: Proceedings of the National Seminaron Endangered Fishes of India held at NBFGR, Allahabad,1992 April 25–26. Nature Conservators, Muzaffarnagar.

Mitra, G.N., 1968. Production of quality fish seed of Indian majorcarps in the Mahanadi river system in Orissa. In: Seminaron Production of Quality fish Seed for Fish Culture, 1968November 1–2. Sponsored by ICAR at CIFRI, Barrackporefrom NBFGR, 2000.

Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India,2007. Third National Report on the Implementation of theUnited Nations Convention to Combat Desertification inIndia. Article 33. IRIS Publication Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi.

National Bureau of Fish Genetic Resources (NBFGR) AnnualReport, 2000, Lucknow, India.

Nelson, J.S., 2006. Fishes of the World, 4th Edition. John Wiley& Sons, New York.

Paul, S., 2000. The efficacy of legislative instruments forconservation of aquatic environment.. In: M. Sinha, B.C. Jhaand M.A. Khan (Eds.), Environment Impact Assessment of



Inland Waters for Sustainable Fisheries Management andconservation of Biodiversity, pp. 189–193. Publ. CentralInland Capture Fisheries Research Institute Bulletin No.101, Barrackpore, India.

Ponniah, A.G., 2000. Perspectives on aquatic animal diversityinformation in south and west Asia. Paper presented inFAO’s expert consultation on Aquatic Animal DiversityInformation and Communication System (AADIS) at Rome,Italy during 2000 Nov 13–16.

Ponniah, A.G., 2001. Research and policy requirements for sus-tainable utilization of India’s fish germplasm resources. In:T.J. Pandian (Ed.), Proceedings of National Seminar on Sus-tainable Fisheries for Nutritional Security National Academyof Agricultural Sciences, New Delhi 2000 Nov 29–Dec 2.

Ponniah, A.G., Gopalakrishnan, A. (Eds.), 2000. Endemicfish biodiversity of western ghats. NBFGR’s NATP specialpublication no. 1. published by NBFGR, Lucknow, India.

Ponniah, A.G., Sarkar., U.K., 2000. Fish biodiversity of northeast India. NBFGR’s NATP special publication no. 2.NBFGR, Lucknow, India. .

Sehgal, K.L., Dehadrai, P.V., Kumar, D., Nasar, T., Ogale,S.S., Chauhan, D.P.S., Kohli, M.P.S., Krishna, G., Langar,R.K., 2007. Art and Science of Mahseer Conservation andManagement. Publ. Indian Fisheries Association, Mumbaiand Central Institute of Fisheries Education, Mumbai

Shrestha, T.K., 1997. The Mahseer. B. Shrestha, Kathmandu,Nepal.

Singh, S.N., 2000. Impact of catchments and river course mod-ifications on fisheries of river Narmada. In: M. Sinha, B.C.Jha and M.A. Khan (Eds.), Environment Impact Assessmentof Inland Waters for Sustainable Fisheries Managementand conservation of Biodiversity, pp. 37–56. Central InlandCapture Fisheries Research Institute. Bulletin No. 101,Barrackpore, India.

Sinha, M., 1999. Inland fisheries development—achievementsand destinations for twenty first century. In: M.K. Mukhopad-hyay and A. Hajra (Eds.), Souvenir: the National Seminaron Eco-friendly Management of Resources for Doubling ofFish Production—Strategies for 21st Century, pp 25–35.Publ. Inland Fisheries Society of India, CIFRI, Barrackpore,India.

Sinha, M., 2000. Inland aquatic resources of India, issues &threats—A fisheries perspective. In: M. Sinha, B.C. Jhaand M.A. Khan (Eds.), Environment Impact Assessment ofInland Waters for Sustainable Fisheries Management andconservation of Biodiversity, pp. 1–9. Publ. Central InlandCapture Fisheries Research Institute. Bulletin No. 101,Barrackpore, India.

Sinha M., De, D.K., Jha, B.C., 1998. The Ganga- Environment& Fishery. CIFRI, Barrackpore, India.

Sreenivasan, A., 1976. Fish production and population changesin some reservoirs in Tamilnadu. Indian Journal of Fisheries23, 124–152.

Sreenivasan, A., 1977. Limnological studies- ParambikalamAliyar Project. Limnology and fisheries of Trimoorty

reservoir (Tamil Nadu) India. Arch. Hydrobio. 80(1), 70–74.

Srivastava, S., Kr., Sarkar, U.K., Ponniah, A.G., 2001. Arrange-ment of habitat inventory information on GIS platform toidentify optimum and degraded areas of golden mahseer.Proceedings of First International Symposium on GIS inFishery Science, 1999 March 2–4. Seattle, Washington. GISResearch Group, Saitama, Japan.

Sugunan, V.V., 1995. Reservoir Fisheries of India. FAO FisheriesTechnical Paper, No. 345. FAO, Rome.

Sugunan, V.V., 2000. Environmental issues and sustainable fishproduction from floodplain wetlands of Brahmaputra basin..In: M. Sinha, B.C. Jha and M.A. Khan (Eds.), EnvironmentImpact Assessment of Inland Waters for Sustainable FisheriesManagement and conservation of Biodiversity, pp. 76–86.Central Inland Capture Fisheries research Institute. BulletinNo. 101, Barrackpore, India.

Sundar Raj, B., 1942. Dams, Fisheries, Mettur and its lessonsfor India. Proc. Indian Acad. Sci. 14B, 341–358.

Talwar, P.K., Jhingran, A.G., 1991. Inland fishes of India andadjacent countries. Vols. I and II. Oxford & IBH PublishingHouse, New Delhi.

WRI, 1998. World Resources (1998–99): A Guide to the GlobalEnvironment. Publ. Oxford University Press, New York.

Yazdani, G.M., 1992. Biodiversity of freshwater fish faunaof Indian rivers with observations on threatened species,pp. 134–147. Proc. First National Symposium on Environ-mental Hydraulics 24–26 1992 June 24–26. Central WaterPower and Research Station, Pune.

Zacharias, V.J., Minimol, K.C., 1999. Noemacheilus menoni, anew species of fish from Malappara, Periyar tiger reserve,Kerala. J. Bom. Nat. Hist. Soc., 96 (2), 288–290.

Internet CitationsI.1 (http : // en . wikipedia . org / wiki / Geography of India #

Bodies of water)I.2 (http://www.dacnet.nic.in/eands/PDF LUS/Allpercent20-

Indiapercent20Summary/lus-yr-table-1.1.pdf)I.3 (http://www.fao.org/fishery/countrysector/FI-CP IN/en)I.4 (http://www.cicfri.ernet.in/)I.5 (http://www.icar.org.in/nrccf/default.htm)I.6 (http://www.nbfgr.res.in/)I.7 (http://www.sdnpbd.org/river basin/waterpolicy/interstate

dispute.pdf )I.8 (http://envfor.nic.in/unccd/book01/UNCCD BOOK.pdf)I.9 (http://india.gov.in/sectors/environment/index.php)

I.10 (http://www.cpcb.nic.in/oldwebsite/water.htm)I.11 (http://www.cpcb.nic.in/Water/Water.html)I.12 (http://envfor.nic.in/unccd/book01/UNCCD BOOK.pdf)I.13 (http://www.fao.org/docrep/W4745E/w4745e00.HTM)I.14 (http://envfor.nic.in/nrcd/nrcd-wh.htm)I.15 (http://cag.nic.in/reports/scientific/2000 book2/ganga-

actionplan.htm)I.16 (http://www.cpcb.nic.in/oldwebsite/riv&lake.htm)


Fresh Water Fish Habitat Management

Documents

Transcript of Fresh Water Fish Habitat Management