Indonesian Journal of Environmental Management and Sustainability p-ISSN: 2598-6260 e-ISSN: 2598-6279 http://ijoems.com/index.php/ijems Research Article DOI: 10.26554/ijems.2017.1.1.1-51 Received: 12 September 2017 Accepted: 28 November 2017 *Corresponding author email: dina.gofar@yahoo.co.id Fish And Fisheries in Flood Plain Swamp in Middle Part of Musi River Dina Muthmainnah1,*, Abdul Karim Gaffar2 1Research Institute for Inland Fisheries and Extensions Palembang 2Faculty Mathematic and Natural Science, PGRI University, Palembang ABSTRACT Floodplain area is a very dynamic water system where the influence from terrestrial and river is high. This area is recognized as feeding, nursery and spawning ground of some fishes. Capture fisheries in this area is frequently occurred by using some of spe- cific fishing gears which related to dynamic pattern of aquatic environment, such as water level, current, and physical-chemical as- pects of water. The research was conducted in order to evaluate fish caught composition and fishing activity in floodplain swamp in middle part of Musi River by survey method. The result showed that 45 species of fish were caught and nine kinds of fishing gears were used by fishers. Gill nets were used in whole year, while seine were used only in the peak of dry season. Intra-annual variations of swamp water flow can modify the distribution and migratory pattern of fish species, with direct effects on fish catches. Keywords: Fish Caught Composition, Fishing Gears, Floodplain Swamp 1. INTRODUCTION River and its floodplain were considered as complex and dynam- ic aquatic ecosystem where alternately and periodically changes from aquatic to terrestrial ecosystem [1]. Main sources of nutri- ents come from decomposed plant litter of macrophytes gave high fertility of aquatic ecosystem. Many kinds of invertebrate organisms were involved in decomposition processes would pro- vide natural food for fish [2]. In Indonesia, inland swamp is around 14 million hectares found in all big islands such as Sumatra, Kalimantan, Sulawesi and Irian. Floodplain swamps are found in South Sumatra Prov- ince as lowland area. The characteristic of lowland area is in wet season inundated by water from the adjacent Musi river forming any kinds of water bodies. Floodplain swamps play a vital role in providing abundant fish food, and one of the most important char- acteristics of floodplain swamps are their combination of shallow water and thick vegetation, which provides nursery habitat for young fish [3]. Together with phytoplankton and benthic algae, organic matter from the emergent vegetation is the source of pri- mary production in floodplain swamps [4]. Association of aquatic vegetation and invertebrate animals provide food and shelter for many species of fish [5]. The local people who live surrounding the area engaged primarily in fishing during wet season and farm- ing during dry season. The previous study in Sekayu District South Sumatra Prov- ince focused on the fish diversity found 20 [6] species in the mainstream and 35species in the floodplain, while there were 233 species of freshwater fishes in South Sumatra waters [7-9]. Dur- ing the wet season, the lowland swamp water becomes a produc- tive fishing ground. Capture fishery range from small subsistence efforts to commercial one, using any form of fishing gears and multi species target. Fisheries activities start at the beginning of rainy season when fish habitually migrate from the main river either for grazing and for`spawning and finish at the mid of dry season when the fish already going back to the main river and the rest have been totally caught out [10]. This paper provides a description of the small-scale fisheries of floodplain swamp in middle part of Musi river, with emphasis on fish diversity and fishing activity. 2. EXPERIMENTAL SECTION Research was carried out in survey descriptive method by direct observation on fishing activity in a selected area in middle part of Musi River of Sekayu sub district (1030:50’:04” to 103o:51’:56,8” E and 02o:53’:59,7” to 02o:55’:05,8” S). Direct observations were done to find out informations on fishing practices and species di- versity of fish cought by different types of gears. Fishing gears recorded base on its size, form, materials, and how to operate [11,12]. Schedule of operation of each kind of fishing was record- ed from Agustus 2015 to July 2016. Fish cought by each type of gears were identified base on morphometric and meristic data and comparing to reference books [13,14]. Hydrological character- istics such as water flow and water level were directly measure during survey time. 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 3.1.Fish diversity Fish caught during one year in research location composed of 45 species, where family of Cyprinidae have the highest diversity of 17 species, while Bagridae, Channidae and Anabantidae have four species respectively. Beside using as human food there were two species of fish considered as ornamental fish, Balantiocheilus melapterus and Chromobotia macracanthus as listed in Table 1. Fishing intensity in a water body was depend on natural produc- tivity which are related to environmental conditions and human activity around the water body [15]. Muthmainnah et al. 2017 | Indones. J. Env. Man. Sus. 1 (1) 2017: 1-5 DOI: 10.26554/ijems.2017.1.1.1-52 3.2. Fisheries activity 3.2.1. Fishers There are two types of fishers, individual fisher who work in- dividually using simple fishing gears, and grouped fishers who work in team of 3 to 10 people using more complex fishing gears. Individual fisher usually the native inhabitant and did not need any license for fishing activity, while grouped fishers not only the native inhabitant but also migrate fishers and to exploit a water body they should have a “license” from local government. The li- cense could be found through auction system which is conducted by village major on early January every year. In the research location, 6 fishers were individually work us- ing pot traps, long lines, gill nets and pole and line, they work as fishers only during rainy season. A group of 10 fishers was working together using more complicated fishing gear such as Tabel 1. Composition of fish caught in Floodplain swamp of Musi River No Family Species Common Name Local name 1 Cyprinidae Osteochilus vittatus Bonylip barb Palau 2 Cyclocheilichthys apogon Beardless barb Seberas 3 Leptobarbus hoevenii Hoven’s carp Jelawat 4 Barbonymus schwanenfeldii Tinfoil barb Lampam 5 Puntioplites bulu Tebengalan 6 Puntigrus tetrazona Sumatra Barb Pirik elang 7 Osteochilus melanopleura Aro 8 Barbichthys laevis Sucker barb Bentulu 9 Osteochilus microcephalus Buing 10 Thynnichthys thynnoides Damaian 11 Labiobarbus ocellatus Lambak Usang 12 Hampala macrolepidota Hampala barb Sebarau 13 Balantocheilus melapterus Tricolor sharkminnow Puntung hanyut 14 Rasbora sp Seluang 15 Haludaria fasciata Melon barb Semuringan 16 Labiobarbus festivus Signal barn Siumbut 17 Labeo chrysophekadion Blackshark minnow Sihitam 18 Channidae Channa pleurophthalmus Snakehead Bujuk 19 Channa striatus Striped snakehead Gabus 20 Channa micropeltes Indonesian snakehead Toman 21 Channa melasoma Black snakehead Serkoh 22 Anabantidae Anabas testudineus Climbing perch Betok 23 Trichopodus pectoralis Snakeskin gourami Sepat siam 24 Trichopodus trichopterus Three spot gourami Sepat Mato Merah 25 Trichopodus leerii Pearl gourami Sepat Daun Buluh 26 Helostomatidae Helostoma temminkii Kissing gourami Tembakang 27 Belontidae Belontia hasselti Malay combtail Selincah 28 Bagridae Mystus gulio Long whiskers catfish Lundu 29 Mystus micracanthus Biran 30 Hemibagrus nemurus Asian redtail catfish Baung 31 Mystus nigriceps Twospot catfish Beringit 32 Clariidae Clarias macrocephalus Bighead catfish Lele 33 Silurudae Wallago leerii Tapah 34 Kryptopterus schilbeides Lais kocor 35 Kryptoperus cryptopterus Lais tapah 36 Pangasidae Pangasius macronema Riu-riu 37 Pangasius polyuranodon Juaro 38 Cobitidae Chromobotia macracanthus Clown loach Kejublang 39 Pristolepididae Pristolepis grootii Indonesian leaffish Kepor/Sepatung 40 Nandidae Nandus nebulosus Bornean leaffish Setambun 41 Mastacembelidae Mastacembelus unicolor Spinny eel Tilan 42 Cynoglossidae Cynoglossus feldmanni River tonguesole Lidah 43 Tetraodontidae Tetraodon sp Buntal 44 Chandidae Parambassis wolffii Duskyfin glassy perchlet Sepengkah 45 Eleotridae Oxyleotris marmorata Marble goby Betutu Muthmainnah et al. 2017 | Indones. J. Env. Man. Sus. 1 (1) 2017: 1-5 DOI: 10.26554/ijems.2017.1.1.1-53 funnel filtering device, barrier traps, fence and traps, and seine, they work as full time fishers. 3.2.2.Fishing gears Floodplain fisheries are known as multispecies and multi gears fishery, where there are no specified fish target and fishers use many kinds of fishing gears, commonly traditional and self made gears [16]. Fishing gears operated in Musi floodplain along year round were practiced in a squence according to water level fluc- tuations. During the early of flooding season and at the end wet season the main fishing gears is fence barrier traps, a static trap filtering fishes in lateral migration from the plain to river and vice versa. During high water level with slow current, fishes moving inside the swamp for feeding, the main gears are the ”set and wait gears” such as gill nets, pot traps, and long lines. In dry season where only some water pools still exist and almost all of fishes crowded in relatively small area of pool, fishing activity were use chasing gears such lift nets and push nets or hoovering by seine net. Type and operating method of fishing gears used in Musi Flood plain was showed in Table 2. These four basic categories of floodplain river gear types have the following characteristics [17]: Set-and-wait fishing gears include gill nets, long lines and in- dividual fish traps. These are usually used in open waters where they are not entangled by weed or disturbed by strong flows. Such gears generally take a small catch per unit of effort but require relatively little effort, and can be used over a long season or even continue to be effective throughout the whole year. Chasing gears such as lift nets, push nets, and spears are mainly used in the flood season, and involve more active pursuit of the fish by fishers, preventing their involvement in other part- time activities. They are a relatively inefficient fishing method at this time, due to the wide dispersal of the fish in the open flood- plain waters. Barrier gears are used on fish migration routes, particularly where water flows off the floodplain into the rivers or permanent pools of the dry season. Fish are trapped along such routes in some type of fyke chamber which is easy to enter but then difficult to escape from. Such fykes may be fished in various ways: several small box traps may be placed along a channel for example, or long fences may be used to direct fish into one central holding chamber. Hoovering gears are used in the dry season to extract or ‘hoo- ver’ those fish stranded in dry season water bodies. At this time of year, fishing waters may either be seine-netted in one or more wide sweeps, or even completely drying so that the fish can be collected by hand. Proportion of fish catch by each kind of fishing gears was shown in Figure 1. Barrier trap was the most effective gears which is yielding 40% of total catch, while long lines yields only 3% of total catch. Gillnets which were operated from February to October yields 32% of total catch and set pole and line yields 21 of total catch. Freshwater swamp which are inundated by nutri- ent-rich water from river resulting in high productivity [18]. 3.3. Relationship of water level fluctuation and operat- ed Fishing gears Figure 2 shows the sequence of fishing gears operated according to water level fluctuation. Any type of fishing gear was operated according to dynamic of water level or water flow which is in- fluence to fish movement. During the initial of flooding the fish tend to migrate laterally from river to plain and at the end of rainy season they move from flood plain to river. Set longlines, gilnets, funnel filtering device were operated during high water level while seine operated only during low wa- ter level with water depth less than 2 meters. Cast net and pole and line were used within whole year. Gill nets with different mesh size could operated within a Table 2. Kinds of fishing gears operated in Musi Floodplain No Fishing gear Mode of work Category 1 Hook and line (Tajur) Passive, bait, Selective, set in night time. Set and wait Set longlines 2 (Rawai) Passive, Bait, Selective, with many hook, Set and wait Gillnets set in day a and night time. 3 (Jaring) Passive, selective according to mesh size. Set and wait Filtering funel (Corong) 4 Silindric pot traps (Bubu) Passive, filtring fish in fast water current, non selective. Set and wait Rectangular pot traps (Bengkirai) Passive, traping fish in grazing area, selective, usually with bait. 5 Cast net (Jala) Passive, trap, selective. Set and wait 6 Barrier traps (Empang) Active, non selective, operated in open area, supported by canoe. Set and wait Seine Passive, fence barrier 50 - 100 m long with box traps, non selec- tive. 7 (Kerakat)w Active, moved by 3 - 5 people to make a small circle as fish room, nonselective. Chasing 8 Barrier 9 Hoovering Muthmainnah et al. 2017 | Indones. J. Env. Man. Sus. 1 (1) 2017: 1-5 DOI: 10.26554/ijems.2017.1.1.1-54 whole year (January – December), in flowing water or in stagnant water. Long lines were operated only during high water (March – June), while set pole and line (tajur) were operated during the end of wet season (April – August) in slow flowing water. Funel filtering device was used in fast flow water, filtering fish which are swing against water current, during wet season (February – March and November December). Barrier trap was used to catch migrating fish from plain to river during the initial of dry season (June – July) and Seine was used during low water level (July – August). Recent studies also found that the fishers using different fish- ing gears related to fluctuation in water depth [19, 20]. During high water level, pole and line, long line, gill nets are favorable fishing gears in swamp forest, while during low water level seine, cast net, lift net and drag net are the favorable gears. Barrier trap and fence are favorable during period with drastic change of wa- ter level when fishes move out and enter the swamp. Pot traps with some different shapes and different materials were used in a whole year. At the beginning of dry season (March to July) when water depth was around 1.5 to 2.0 m, the main gears are pole and line (“tajur”), long lines, and gill nets. From July to mid of October with water depth only around 1.0 m the principal fishing gears used were barrier traps, fence and trap, and seine. Long lines were used during high water level (February – March and October – December). Funnel filtering device only used dur- ing high water with fast flow (February – April). Similar fishing activities were also seen in floodplain around Lempuing River channel. River barier with funnel trap use for fishing migratory fishes along the Lempuing River especially dur- ing the fast flowing water in early flood season. Significant catch- es were also observed during the June/July early reflooding at the upstream sites, but less so at the downstream savanna river sites. After this time, very few fish were caught in the riverine barri- ers during the second drawdown period, and over the dry season. In the subsequent early flood season, longitudinal migrants were again caught in riverine barriers though in smaller numbers, re- flecting the catches taken over the dry season. The catches taken during this flood season confirm the ability of these barrier gears to catch whitefish on their spawning migrations. The mesh sizes used in fishing gears determine their selectiv- ity towards small sizes of fish, and hence have a profound effect on the overall levels of exploitation of fish stocks [21]. On the positive side, the use of small meshed gears increases the num- ber of small fish species which are accessible to the fishery: on the negative side, they also take the small fry of other larger fish species. The different gillnet mesh sizes caught great variation in their size class catch distribution of fish [22]. While a fishery with small meshed gears may be sustained by the smaller fish species, there is an associated danger that the larger fish will become over- exploited and decline. 4. CONCLUSION Flood plain swamp is a dynamic ecosystem where it is become terrestrial habitat during dry season and aquatic habitat during rainy season. The swamp has the high fish diversity and has been utilized as fishing ground. Hydrological variations can affect fish at their distribution and temporal scales. Intra-annual variations of swamp water flow can modify the distribution and migratory pattern of fish species, with direct effects on fish catches. In the long term, variations in the hydrological fluctuation can influence the population dynamics of fish by acting on their reproductive and recruitment processes, changing the relative abundance of the affected species. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The present study was supported by the PGRI University, Palembang in 2015 and 2016. REFERENCES [1] Mitsch, W.J. and Gosselink, J.G. Wetlands. van Nostrand Re- inhold Company. New York. P539, 1986. [2] Graca, M.A.S. and C. Canhoto. Leaf Litter Processing in Low Order Streams. Limnetica, 25(1-2):1-10. The Ecology of The Iberian Inland Waters: Homage to Ramon Margalef. Associa- tion Espanila de Limnologia, Madrid, Spain. 2006. [3] McKee K.L. Neotropical Coastal Wetlands. In: Batzer D.P., Baldwin A.H., editors. Wetland Habitats of North America: Ecology and Conservation Concerns. University of Califor- nia Press; Berkeley, CA, USA. pp 89–101, 2012. [4] Zalewski, M. and R.J. Naiman. The Regulation of Riverine Fish Communities by a Continuum of Abiotik-biotil Factor. In Habitat modification and freshwaters fisheries. Butter- woths. London. pp 3-9, 2008. [5] DeAngelis, D.l., P.J. Mulholland, A.V. Palumbi, A.D. Stein- man, M.A. Huston and J.W.Elwood. 1989. Nutrient Dynam- ics and Food Web Stability. Annual Rev.Ecol. Sys: 20. pp 71- 95. [6] Gaffar, A.K. 2006. Keragaman Jenis Ikan yang tertangkap di Rawa Lebak Lebung Pasunde dan Lebak Sungaimati Kecamatan Sekayu, Kabupaten Musi Banyuasin. Sainmatika. Volume 3. No.2. pp 1-6. [7] Gaffar, A.K. Kegiatan Perikanan di Perairan Hutan Rawa Sungai Musi Kecamatan Sekayu. in Proceeding Seminar Pengelolaan Hutan dan Lahan Rawa Secara Bijaksana dan Terpadu. Departemen Kehutanan. Pusat Penelitian dan Pengembangan Hutan Tanaman. 2006. [8] Utomo, A.D., N. Muflikhah, S. Nurdawati, M.F. Rahardjo and S. Makmur. Ichthyofauna in Musi River South Sumatra. Research Institute for Inland Fisheries. Jakarta. pp 380, 2007. [9] Husnah, E. Nurhayati and N.K.Suryati. Diversity Morpho- Figure 1. Proportion of fish yield by each kind of fishing gear in Floodplain Swamp of Musi River Figure 2. Relationship of type of gears to water level in Flood- plain swamp in middle part of Musi River. Muthmainnah et al. 2017 | Indones. J. Env. Man. Sus. 1 (1) 2017: 1-5 DOI: 10.26554/ijems.2017.1.1.1-55 logical Characters and Habitat of Fish in Musi River Drain- age Area. South Sumatra. pp 440, 2008. [10] Muthmainnah, D. and A.K. Gaffar. The Role of Flood Plain Swamp for Fish Production. in Proceeding International Sem- inar-Workshop on Intergrated Lowland Development and Management. Palembang, 18-20 March 2010. Published by Faculty of Agriculture. Sriwijaya University. pp B91-B9-6, 2010. [11] Weber, M. & L.F.de Beaufort. The Fishes of the Indo Aus- tralian Archipelago. E.J. Brill. Laiden. 6: pp 448, 1931. [12] Kottelat, M., A.J. Whitten, S.N. Kartikasari and S. Wirjoat- modjo. Freshwater fishes of Western Indonesia and Sulawesi. Periplus Editions. Hong Kong. pp 221, 1993. [13] Hickling, C.F. Tropical inland fisheries. John Wiley and Sons. New York. pp 287, 1961. [14] Brand, A.V.E Fish Catching Methods of the World. Fishing New (Books) Ltd. London. pp 240, 1972. [15] King, M. Fisheries Biology, Assessment and Mangement. Fishing News Books. pp 41, 1998. [16] Gaffar, A.K. Possible Effect of Climate Change on Capture Fisheries in Floodplain Swamps of South Sumatra. in Pro- ceeding International Conference on Indonesian Inland Wa- ters II. Palembang. November 29th, 2010. pp 93-96. 2010. [17] Hoggarth, D.D., V.J. Cowan, A.S. Halls, M. Aeron-Thom- as, J.A. McGregor, C.A Garaway, A.I. Payne and R.L. Wel- comme. Management guidelines for Asian Floodplain River Fisheries. Part 2: Summary of DFID Research. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 384/2. Department for International Devel- opment of the United Kingdom, FAO and MRAG, Ltd. Lon- don, pp117, 1999. [18] MacKinnon, K., G. Hatta, H. Halim and A. Mangalik. The Ecology of Kalimantan. Periplus Editions. Singapore. pp 802, 1996. [19] Gaffar, A. K and A. D. Utomo. 1990. Effektivitas dan Sele- ktivitas berbagai Alat Tangkap di Lubuk Lampam, Sumatera Selatan. Bull. Inland Water Fisheries research 9(1):1-7. [20] Muthmainnah, D., Z. Dahlan, R.H. Susanto, A.K. Gaffar and D.P. Priadi. Utilization of Freshwater Fish Biodiversity as Income Source of Poor Rural People (Case Study in Pam- pangan Subdistrict of South Sumatra Province, Indonesia). in Asia-Pacific Biodiversity Observation Network: Aquatic Bi- odiversity Conservation and Ecosystem Services. Editor: S. Nakano, T. Yahara, & T. Nakashizuka. Ecological Research Monographs. Springer Science. Singapore. pp 89-100, 2016. [21] Hamely, J.M. 1975, Review of gillnet selectivity. Journal of Fish Research. 32: pp1943-1969. [22] Chindah, A.C. and C.C.B.Tawari. 2001, Comparative study of different gillnet mesh size in the exploitation of Bonga Fish (Ethmalosa fimbriata) and Sardines (Sardinella eba) in Brass Coastal Waters, Bayelsa State, Nigeria. Journal of Appl. Sci- ence Environment Management. Vol. 5 (1): pp17-24.