The study compared the technical and economic performances of gillnet forms with different, as opposed to the normal same, hanging ratios at the top and down ropes, with a typical gillnet of hanging ratio 0.5 at the top and down ropes, at ten fishing sites in Stratum VII of the Volta Lake. The hanging ratio determines the form of a mesh size and is one of the most significant factors affecting gillnet yield and selectivity. The goal was to see whether gillnet types with different hanging ratios at the top and down ropes could outperform traditional gillnet types with the same hanging ratios at the top and down ropes in terms of improving monofilament gillnet performance, by determining the net types’ fishing efficiency, cost efficiency, and economic efficiency index. In April–June 2016, the depth of the fishing sites, the quantity and value of fish captured, and the costs of fishing operations were determined; in February 2017, the length frequency distribution of Oreochromis niloticus and Sarotherodon galileus caught by the net types was reported for differences; and in April–June 2017, the length frequency distribution of Oreochromis niloticus and Sarotherodon galileus caught by the net types was recorded for differences. The results revealed that gillnet types with different hanging ratios at the top and down ropes outperformed gillnet types with the same hanging ratios in terms of performance. Different hanging ratios at the top and down ropes, combined with slack netting, were found to be a superior intervention for improving monofilament gillnet technical and economic efficiencies. The lack of hard spines preferring capture by gilling by all net types over entangling, a property of only slack nets that could result in differences in the sizes of fish captured, could explain the negligible difference in the LFD of the Tilapiine species caught.
Author (s) Details
Lawrence Issah Braimah
Former Coordinator, West Africa Regional Fisheries Program, Liberia, P.O.Box AS 806, Ashaiman, Ghana.
View Book :- https://stm.bookpi.org/RRAB-V6/article/view/807