18 management committee members, although appreciating their work, have also complained
that this was their function. The CBFMCs have embarked upon community electrification projects particularly to light up
the beaches at night. They have also organized search and rescue operations for fishers in distress at sea and helped in locating relatives of bodies washed onto their beaches. CBFMCs
have also set up arbitration panels to resolve conflicts between fishers both at sea and at the beach. In addition, they have helped school going children found loitering at the beaches to
get back into the classrooms.
3.10.5 Existence of bye-laws All CBFMCs studied had developed bye-laws on fishing through community interactions and
had presented them to their respective DistrictMunicipal Assemblies for processing and onward transmission to the Attorney General’s office for gazetting. As already indicated
elsewhere in this document these laws cover among others beach fouling, loitering of school children at the beach, illegal fishing, social order, fishing taboos and equipment to take to sea.
Although implementing the bye-laws has been difficult because they have not been gazetted, fishers are aware of them.
3.11 Constraints of CBFMCs
3.11.1 False understanding of the CBFMC concept The study revealed that only a few members of the CBFMCs have a total understanding of
the CBFMC concept. These were the active members of the management committees who were always invited to participate in governance workshops and were regularly consulted on
issues relating to the fishing industry. The active members of the CBFMCs were cardinal in the adaption of the bye-laws to suit local conditions and are eager to see these laws gazetted
by the state. Active members included some chief fishermen and leaders of fishing associations.
The other members of the CBFMCs do not have a total understanding of what the whole concept is about. It became clear during the study that these members felt the committees
should also be in charge of distributing fishing equipment and pre-mix fuel. Apart from the chief fishermen of Abuesi, Aboadze and Sekondi who could make a clear distinction between
the traditional work of chief fishermen and that of the CBFMCs, those of New Takoradi, Axim Apewosika and Asanta could not differentiate the roles of the two. The women
representatives on the committees were also of the opinion that the committees were a conduit to offer loans to improve the businesses of the fish traders. It appeared that the
governance function of the CBFMC has not been fully appreciated and all members would need re-orientation on a regular basis.
3.11.2 Livelihood status of CBFMC members
A number of CBFMC members particularly in the smaller fishing communities indicated that they did not have any sustainable livelihoods. As a result these members had to travel
regularly or sometimes relocate to other fishing communities to work for long periods. It was claimed by some CBFMC members and some officials that this was one major reason why
meetings could not be held.
3.11.3 Lack of a constitution to regulate CBFMCs The case study revealed that CBFMCs did not have constitutions that guided and regulated
their activities. Members indicated that the Fisheries Commission gave them guidelines for
19 the formation of the CBFMCs but these were not in documented form. It became clear that
the CBFMCs operations were haphazard and not geared toward any laid down regulations. 3.11.4 Community sensitization and perception
Members of fishing communities have not been made aware of the CBFMCs through their inauguration. This makes it difficult to solicit their cooperation for effective governance of
the industry.
3.11.5 Lack of institutional support and political will The study has identified the fact that state agencies such as the Fisheries Commission and the
DistrictMunicipal Assemblies have not done much in terms of offering support to the CBFMCs. In addition, the state itself set up parallel committees such as the Landing Beach
Committees LBCs to manage the fishing industry at the landing sites. This committee deals with channeling of fishing equipment and gear and pre-mix fuel to fishermen, and is expected
to use profit from the sale of premix fuel to undertake development activities in the communities. As it stands the LBCs are duplicating the development roles of the CBFMCs. It
may be prudent to bring the activities of the LBCs under the ambit of the CBFMC. Management committees indicated that these added functions would motivate them to work.
They also suggested that the state should provide offices for use by committee members as well as offer some incentives.
3.11.6 High turnover of District Assembly Staff There has been a high turnover of Assembly staff such as community representatives and
Chief Executives to the extent that it has been difficult sustaining the momentum gained with the CBFMCs Fisheries Commission Official, 2010. New sets of Assemblymen and Chief
Executives have to be briefed on the CBFMC concept time and again. The Chief Executives have to find out the state of CBFMC bye-laws, which keep on changing, and follow up to the
Attorney General’s office for gazetting. Such process has been unduly delayed because of the frequent change in local government personnel.
4.0 CONCLUSION AND LESSONS LEARNED
