- Fish refugia are designated areas aimed at protecting critical habitats and ecosystems essential for the life cycles of specific fish species.
- There is demonstrated potential from other countries of fish refugia safeguarding marine fish populations.
- While Indian marine policy recognises fish refugia, the country does not have any official fish refugia due to challenges such as policy overlap, food security pressures and limited community involvement.
The decline in fish stocks has been a global concern. Overfishing, with high catch rates that leave little time for species to replenish, threatens many marine species.
In India, 4.4% of fish stocks are subject to overfishing, while 8.2% are already overfished, reveals a 2022 report from the Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute (CMFRI).
As part its strategies to promote sustainable fishing and restore fish stocks, India’s 2017 National Policy on Marine Fisheries proposed establishing fish refugia. Creation of fish refugia is also mentioned in the latest (2020) draft of the National Fisheries Policy (NFP) for both marine and inland fisheries. However, currently, India has not formally established fish refugia.
What are fish refugia?
Fish refugia are designated areas meant to protect critical habitats and ecosystems vital for the life cycles of certain fish species.
Over the last decade, fish refugia was the focus of an initiative by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) that aimed to operate and expand fish refugia as a strategy to conserve dwindling fish stocks in the South China Sea, including the Gulf of Thailand. This UNEP-led project in Cambodia, Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam focuses on linking fisheries management with habitat conservation.
UNEP defines fish refugia as “spatially and geographically defined marine or coastal areas in which specific management measures are applied to sustain important species [fisheries resources] during critical stages of their life cycle for their sustainable use.”
Rajeev Raghavan, an assistant professor at the Kerala University of Fisheries and Ocean Studies (KUFOS), notes that similar concepts have existed historically under different names and identities, all with the goal of safeguarding fish habitats.
Raghavan, who has observed fish refugia in Southeast Asia, explains that these areas are small, protected portions of habitats, mostly in rivers where certain endemic and threatened species can take refuge and avoid capture or predation. Natural habitats like coral reefs, seagrass beds, mangroves, and wetlands are vital in establishing fish refugia. Fish refugia are established within these natural habitats with specific rules and regulations to ensure their effectiveness in sustaining fish populations.
The Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Center (SEAFDEC), a regional treaty organisation based in Thailand, notes that these habitats provide a natural refuge for many species during critical life stages, such as breeding and preserving these habitats should be a priority for fisheries management.
How are fish refugia established?
The success of fish refugia depends on three factors: effectively identifying species, identifying habitats, and implementing efficient management strategies.
Identifying the species, or group of species, that need protection is the first step of the process to establish fish refugia, explains Raghavan. Understanding their biology, ecology and life history is also crucial, including knowing when and how they breed and which specific habitats they require for breeding.
This process must take into account the species’ life cycle, the type of refugia required, and the most suitable site for their establishment, note the National Guidelines for Establishment and Operation of Fisheries Refugia in Thailand.
Thailand’s guidelines prescribe using both technical data and community consultations when selecting sites. In addition, implementing proper fisheries management measures is crucial to the success of fish refugia. These measures may include regulating fishing methods, restricting certain gear types based on mesh size, and controlling the size and engine capacity of fishing vessels.
Fish refugia follow a rights-based approach in allowing access for small-scale fishers, permitting limited access while ensuring long-term sustainability. The guidelines further suggest that fisheries refugia can complement conventional fisheries management strategies, such as effort and gear restrictions, particularly in areas where fishing pressure is high or difficult to manage.
Are fish refugia different from marine protected areas?
Fish refugia allow some forms of resource use, unlike the strictly “no-take” marine protected areas. They are designed to be flexible, with characteristics that vary depending on their purpose and the species they aim to protect. While some areas within fish refugia may be closed to fishing due to their critical role in the species’ life cycle, other areas allow controlled fishing activities. Management strategies are tailored to the specific needs of the habitat and target species. In its definition of fish refugia, the UNEP emphasises the sustainable use of fisheries resources for both present and future generations.
Marine protected areas, in contrast, tend to be more restrictive. In India, they fall under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change and generally prohibit all human activities, including fishing, says K. Sunil Mohamed, a retired principal scientist and former head of the Molluscan Fisheries Division at the Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute (ICAR-CMFRI).
What is the status of fish refugia in India?
The concept of fish refugia in India was introduced by Mohamed in one of his presentations for CMFRI in 2015. After that, the term was mentioned in the 2017 National Marine Fisheries Policy, where “creation of fish refugia through consultative processes” was a part of a list of actions for fisheries management. It was mentioned in a similar context in the National Fisheries Policy draft of 2020 as well.
However, as Raghavan confirms, as of now, India does not have any formal fish refugia. There are a few community-based initiatives, mostly in the form of temple sanctuaries and pools, in the states of Karnataka, Kerala, Himachal Pradesh and Maharashtra, where local communities are taking steps to protect fish from various threats, especially poaching.
Raghavan attributes the delay in establishing fish refugia in India to several factors, one being the interconnection among fish, food security, and livelihoods in India. This makes it challenging to protect fish and other aquatic organisms when there is pressure from the food production standpoint, he says, emphasising the need for community engagement.
Drawing from his experience in Southeast Asia, Raghavan highlights the vital role of community participation in the success of establishing fish refugia. In southeast Asian countries, communities are allowed to fish within refugia under regulated conditions, such as limiting the number of fish caught per day or the size of the fish caught. Fishers are registered and provided with licences, and the rules and regulations are largely voluntary. In contrast, India’s conservation policies and laws tend to be primarily top-down, offering little room for grassroots involvement.
Mohamed, meanwhile, attributes the delay in creating fish refugia, as proposed in the National Marine Policy of 2017, to policy overlap. The 2017 policy, which focussed on marine fisheries and introduced the concept of fish refugia, was overshadowed by the 2020 draft fisheries policy. Unlike the marine-focused 2017 policy, the 2020 draft takes a broader approach, covering marine, inland fisheries, aquaculture, post-harvest, and infrastructure. While it still mentions fish refugia, the expanded scope dilutes the earlier policy’s strong focus on marine fisheries, according to him.
Mohamed also points to concerns about local communities accepting the idea of fish refugia. “In one of our studies, we looked at areas where biodiversity was being stretched due to fishing pressure. We identified two areas, one in Kerala and another in Karnataka, that could potentially function as fish refugia. But when we presented these ideas to local fishers, they were strongly against it,” he says. According to Mohamed, resistance stems from a lack of awareness and fears of losing access to fishing grounds. “Unless we show them tangible benefits, there’s no way to address those concerns,” he says.
Read more: Kerala’s artisanal fishers concerned about rise of ring seine fishing
Banner image: A school of sergeant fish in the Gulf of Thailand. A regional treaty organisation based in Thailand notes that aquatic habitats provide a refuge for many species during critical life stages and must be protected. Image by Steve Jurvetson via Flickr (CC BY 2.0).
Credits
