Dimapur, August 1 (MExN): People for Democratic Rights (PDR) has issued a rejoinder to the Department of Fisheries & Aquatic Resources’ response on fish production in Nagaland.
The rejoinder issued by PDR Media & Publicity Affairs today mentioned that PDR had said fish production increased to 8605 MT during 2016-17 as against 8220 MT in 2015-16 as per Nagaland Economic Survey 2016-17. PDR had also clearly stated that the fish production stood at 8220 MT during 2017-18 and that data was attributed to the then Secretary, Fisheries Department, who said “the total fish production of the state is 8200 MT which covers about 30% of the total requirement of fish consumption in the state” as published in a local daily on April 18, 2018, it added.
For the decline in fish production, the rejoinder said, PDR had never quoted the Annual Administrative Report 2017-18. The only thing quoted by PDR out of the Administrative Report was the gap between demand and supply.
“If the fish production during the last financial year stood at 8990.5 MT as stated by the Director of Fisheries & Aquatic Resources, then it proves that either the Secretary or the Administrative Report had provided incorrect data,” PDR stated. “Whichever is wrong, why did the Department not take any corrective measures to rectify the misinformation to the public? Whom should the public believe was giving the correct data; the Secretary, who is the Administrative Head of Department or the Administrative Report?”
As for the potential fishery pond culture covered in the State, it was informed that the PDR said 4000 hectares have been covered so far basing on what was said during a programme on ‘Recent advances in development of aquaculture and fisheries’ under Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana 2016-17 organised by Department of Fisheries at Hotel Japfü, Kohima on August 23, 2017 and subsequently published in the local dailies.
“However, if the Director says that the current potential area developed stands at 3375 hectares, then, it reflects that the developed area has been reduced from 4000 hectares in 2017 to 3375 hectares in 2018,” the rejoinder said.
With regard to the output production not commensurating with the amount released, PDR clarified that it had mentioned there have been many projects “prior to 2017-18 and crores have been invested” and did not say that the funds released during 2017-18 specifically did not commensurate with the output. “The production not commensurating with the funds received was said taking into account crores of rupees released to the Department over the years even before 2017-18.”
Welcoming the position of the department for joint verification of projects, PDR however urged to keep all records ready regarding state/central schemes/projects since inception of the department so that a clear picture can be brought out regarding the department’s performance.
It further termed the advice to ascertain facts from the department before making it public as “most absurd.” PDR wondered, “What is more to ascertain when facts were extracted from official documents that have already been made public and statements of the Department’s officers who spoke during the Department’s own official programmes were referred to as already published in local dailies?”
The PDR rejoinder maintained that records/data provided by the Director contradicts with the statements of the department’s own officers “thereby confusing the public as to which officer is providing the ‘factually’ correct data.”
Some funds released during 2016-17
PDR specifically mentioned the following funds released during 2016-17: 1. Rs 2.05 crore released on March 17, 2017 by the Finance Department under Blue Revolution Project. 2. Rs 1.20 cr released on March 24, 2017 for implementation of Fishery Project at Lamhai Dunki village in Peren district under NEC (2nd instalment). 3. Rs 50 lakh released on March 18, 2017 for Livestock cum Fish Farming at Suruhuto village, Zunheboto.
“While some fishery activities funded by centre/state may be individually owned, it is the responsibility of the Department to see that such projects are properly monitored and then assist the beneficiaries of all logistical assistance to see that success is achieved and that public money do not go waste,” PDR maintained. “Any project being individually owned is not free from public and departmental scrutiny as long as such projects receive financial assistance out of the public exchequer.”
