In those old good times, of the 1930s, when the fisheries were predominantly native, a kilogram of fish cost UGX 10 (Ugandan Shillings) and demand arose from the local markets.

Economic activities in the fisheries were structured around the family unit, which facilitated the distribution of economic benefits at the nucleus of society. The roles of men and their sons included boat construction, repairing broken fishing nets and capture of fish, whereas women and their daughters processed and sold fish in the local markets. Women also sold mukene (Rastrineobola argentea), a tiny fish used as a sauce, to the poor who could not afford to buy bigger fish. Likewise, women prepared food and sold it in local markets. Trust and a sense of ownership were the drivers of a flourishing sustainable native fishery that secured benefits for biological diversity and human well-being. Partners in ownership were more decentralized, and income from fish catches was fairly and evenly distributed (Kayiso 2009). Household income was high and therefore people faced fewer hardships in paying family expenses, e.g. paying school fees for their children or buying basic necessities. Steady income was a factor in stabilizing marriages according to local beliefs.

Around 1900 large scale sugar works and tea estates were established in the surrounding watershed to take advantage of fertile soils and frequent rains. They attracted immigrant workers seeking employment who settled in the lake basin, hence increasing population and demand for lake resources. The influx of immigrants had social, economic, ecological and cultural impacts on the fishing villages. For instance, the locals learnt new fishing methods from immigrants such as pokoto from Lake Kyoga. Jaluo women from Kenya brought knowledge of medicinal properties found in the enkeje (cichlids) fish species.

Population explosion increased the demand for fish and resulted in hikes in fish prices. However, at the same time, it was possible for artisanal fisher folk to retain profitability in fisheries based on their effort to work in a cost effective manner within the ecological limits of the fish stock in the lake. Native fisheries harvests used small manually propelled rafts and simple dugout canoes and other affordable local materials such as papyrus seine nets, basket traps, harpoons and hooks. These crafts could not go long distances from shore, and therefore had little or no impact on fish stocks. Traditional fish capture methods provided employment opportunities for young men. The supply deficit was a blessing in disguise because it created room for participation by more local fishermen in the capture of fish to supply the growing fish market. It also offered opportunities for innovation to cope with increasing demand. At that time, small scale operators dominated the fish processing and trading subsectors, according to Abila (2000, cited in Njuri et al. 2005). These were mainly women; they sold fresh fish and processed the surplus using simple technologies such as smoking, salting and sun drying for later sale. The traditional fish harvesting methods were therefore economically viable, environmentally sound and socially acceptable in that they supported the livelihoods of the locals in terms of employment creation and generating income for households. Both men and women were fully employed in the capture, processing and marketing of fish. The elders we talked to claim that their livelihoods were far better than they are today following liberalization of Lake Victoria fishery.

Notwithstanding the above social trends and economic performance, around 1900 the British colonial administration established a large fisheries industry in Lake Victoria, purportedly to meet the high demand for fish by the growing population and to take advantage of the arrival of the new railway line from the East African coast. The move was also designed to allow entry of the colonialists in the fish trade, to secure their dominance and control of resource use to the detriment of the livelihoods of riparian communities. Poverty was one of the tools used by colonialists to subdue their subjects. It can be inferred, therefore, that the plight of livelihoods in the Lake Victoria SEPLS was deliberate and a result of hostile policies of colonial rule. The colonialists introduced nylon gillnets and outboard engines which allowed large numbers of fish, particularly the cichlids, to be caught, leading to a sharp decline in the native fishery. Hence, the livelihoods of lakeside communities started to deteriorate. In 1950, the British colonialists illegally introduced the predator Nile perch (Lates niloticus) and tilapia to Lake Victoria, amidst protests from scientists and the media. Moreover, Pringle (2005) shows that, in 1950, the East African High Commission implemented the Lake Victoria Fisheries Act. The act initiated several conservation measures, one of which was the stricture that “any person, who introduces, puts or places into Lake Victoria any fish, or the spawn thereof, of a species other than that in Lake Victoria…shall be guilty of an offense against this Act.” This Act was disregarded by colonialists and their agents, the first transplants were branded and locals were asked to throw them back in the lake when found in their nets.

The introduction of Nile perch in Lake Victoria was first proposed by Graham (1929), to feed on what was termed “trash fish” and convert the population of fish in the lake into larger fish of greater commercial and recreational value, reports Anderson (1961, cited in Taabu 2004). The eventual move to introduce the alien species did not give due consideration to the locals who depended on the fish in the lake for their livelihoods and as a source of protein and medicine. The decision deprived the natives of their livelihoods and concentrated economic benefits derived from the newly established fishery among a few foreign companies. The colonialists being exploiters and plunderers of natural resources had projected the inability of the poor artisanal fisher folk to access the capital required for investment in Nile perch fishery due to lack of collateral, which gave the foreign companies the exclusive monopoly in the Nile perch fishery today. This deliberate attack on riparian communities and their resources, has resulted in acute poverty and misery up to the present day, is tantamount to a crime against humanity and contradicts the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals: 1) End poverty in all its forms everywhere, and 2) End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture.

The following section will examine the threats and challenges emanating from the loss of native fish species diversity and how these threats and challenges have affected the livelihoods of riparian communities in the Lake Victoria Basin. Examination is based on our many years of engagements with different stakeholders in the Lake Victoria SEPLS, existing reviews and first-hand information gathered from both men and women that participated in the native fishery prior to the introduction of Nile perch.