Fishing at Dunga Beach on Lake Victoria. The Centrality of Fishing Methods among the Luo Community.
Organized fishing on Lake Victoria and other water bodies among the Luo was the cause of reliable food source, sustainable economy through trade in fish, development of patronage connected to fishing, and transformation of gender through fishing roles and responsibilities. Fishing also depended on the invention of efficient methods of fishing and development of the outrigger canoe for travel and fishing. This essay focuses on the ingenious traditional methods of catching fish that largely revolved around the invention of traps. Finally, the essay examines the coming of colonialism and its impact on the fishing culture on Lake Victoria. The essay also observes that the Luo adaptation to the modern colonial economy capitalism has enabled them to take advantage of the Nile perch as a sustainable source of food as well as establishing a foothold into the global economy.
Dunga Beach is a longtime fishing village on the eastern shore of the Gulf of Winam on Lake Victoria, just south of Kisumu City. The small community coalesced more than a century ago as migrants from the surrounding countryside arrived there to fish and trade on the outskirts of Kisumu. Over time, and increasingly in the four decades since the Sunset Hotel opened, Dunga Beach and nearby points of interest such as Hippo Point and the Impala Sanctuary have drawn many tourists eager to experience the sights along Africa’s largest lake. Dunga Beach is widely known as one of those places where one can choose a freshly-caught fish and in a few minutes’ time enjoy a fish dinner by the water. Although Dunga Beach may be a popular spot, it reflects something much larger and more long-standing: the historical importance of Lake Victoria as a central feature in the lives of the Luo people.
Indeed, the livelihood of the Luo people living around Lake Victoria revolved around a system consisting of three major elements: fishing, agriculture, and livestock. Given the close proximity to the lake shore and the scarcity of rainfall in the region around Lake Victoria, one of these three elements, fishing, came to be the most dominant element of sustenance for the Luo people and others living around Lake Victoria. The majority of the Luo people depended on fishing. The most popular species of fish among the Luo was the “ngege” [tilapia] fish, but others also included “mumi” [catfish] and “omena” [sardines]. The problem with fishing was that it could at times pose challenges to the amount of fish available to people for consumption and other use. Over-fishing was a problem then, just as it is today. The Luo leaders and elders were aware of the need to protect this important source of food that the community depended on for its survival.
The Luo leaders therefore developed and enforced special precautions to compensate for any possible increase in dependence on fish that could lead to over-fishing. These precautions revolved around two major rules: time or seasons for fishing, and methods of fishing. They were enforced to regulate and control the population of fish to ensure the survival of the community.
In an effort to preserve the fish population on Lake Victoria and in rivers in Luoland, the Luo elders enforced what was known as “a closed season.” This season was described as “a period when elders decreed that there would be no fishing along the beach, [which] coincided with the season from February to June when fishers would turn to crop farming” [cited in Opondo, 2016). This ensured that the fish population could mature, and at the same time crops and other food sources could be prepared for the survival of the community. The Luo did not just subsist on fishing, but also on agriculture. The cultivation of crops such as sorghum and millet and beans supplemented fishing and other activities as sources of food.
The community elders knew that fish preservation was important for the overall survival of the Luo, and that is why they even ensured that the concept of fish preservation took religious overtones. Fishing was not just a practical activity; it was religious. Fishermen were required to observe certain religious decrees to ensure success during fishing excursions. This ensured that fishermen observed the rules during the fishing off-season. One fisherman by the name of Oracho Wire says that fishing and religion were connected, for example:
Before a canoe could go on a fishing voyage, the team leader, Mwasia mar Yie,
had to take some water into his mouth and spray it on the canoe, beseeching the
lake god for blessings. Besides, there were gifts given to the sea god. The first
fish to be caught was handed over to Mwasia to offer to the sea god. Using
strong-smelling bathing soaps while going fishing was considered taboo … probably
because fish could detect strong smelling substances and thus escape being caught.
These practical and religious influences on the fishing culture gave the Luo people
a sense of order and routine among their lives [Cited in Opondo, 2016)
These religious beliefs helped when it came time to declare the fishing season over, and everybody was expected to obey those orders. If you did not obey the orders, it was believed, a curse could befall you and your family.
Another important requirement that helped with fishing regulation was the customary requirement among the Luo that only the men could go out a long distance on the lake to fish. Men did the fishing while the women did the selling or preparing of dried fish for shipment to other communities far away from the lake. Although such rules may look chauvinistic and out of place in the western world, they ensured that only a certain group of people could do the actual fishing instead of leaving the whole activity to all and sundry that might end up abusing it and destroying the fish population. These theories and processes of fishing among the Luo revolved around harvesting and preparing fish enabled the Luo people to survive and thrive.
Apart from the rules and regulations controlling fishing among the Luo, there were also the practical elements of fishing. The first matter that the Luo had to address was the ideal maritime fishing vessel. Throughout the pre-colonial period, the type of boat which the Luo deemed the most reliable and readily available was the outrigger canoe. By the late 17th century, the Luo had developed and popularized what came to be known as the pseudo-double outrigger canoe as their standard means of maritime travel. Gradually, the Luo started incorporating an efficient sail into the outrigger canoe. This iteration allowed the Luo people to focus less effort on paddling to fishing locations and put more effort into creating more efficient means of capturing fish. This canoe became the standard vessel for the Luo fishermen on the lake and other water bodies.
However, the outrigger canoe was not that efficient for large-scale fishing trips when considering the swampy coastline around areas such as Dunga Beach in present-day Kisumu. Something had to be done. The Luo realized that the best way of compensating for poor boating conditions during such long trips was the development of new, efficient methods, equipment, devices, and implements for fishing. The question is, what were some of these methods, tools, and equipment for fishing among the Luo? Apart from canoes, what else did the Luo use for catching fish?
One of the most popular tools were papyrus-woven traps of all shapes and sizes for trapping and catching fish. Arguably the most common trap was known as the “ounga.” As you can see in an accompanying photograph, the “ounga” was an elongated papyrus basket in the shape of a fisherman’s hat. The trap had a wide open base and a hollow elongated trunk that had a sealed end. The trap would be partially immersed in shallow waters horizontally with the open base spread into the water to allow fish to swim into its trunk. It was held by one person with one hand holding the tip of the base and the other hand holding the tip of the trunk in a tilted position for easy flow of water and its contents. The water around the “ounga” would then be “disturbed” using sticks and bare feet, and this act would scare the fish into the trap. The fish would then be taken out and stored in a basket as the fishermen continued fishing. The fishermen kept their “ounga” trap at home when the day ended.
Another contraption for getting hold of fish was called “soyo.” “Soyo” was simply a spear-like stick. The fishermen often used “soyo” to “spear” fish that got trapped in water pools formed after flood levels from rainfall receded or after high tides and lake water currents that carried fish had “spat” them into the environs.
In a similar way, another method was known as “kek.” This method of fishing involved placing huge tree logs across water points that showed signs of water movement, while providing spaces like modern sluice gates from which the locals would place traps after opening the spaces. The logs disrupted water flow and fish were caught from the gushing waters through these spaces. The fishermen would then just pick the trapped fish from those spaces.
The “osadhi” was another implement for fishing. The “osadhi” was a papyrus basket methodically woven into a cylindrical shape with a wide opening that narrowed inwards to allow fish to swim in but not out. It was left immersed in shallow waters and checked at intervals for catches.
Fishermen also sometimes used an “okira” trap. The “okira” trap was more or less like the “osadhi,” except that it was made of sticks with sharp ends which were erected in shallow waters to form patterns that would confuse fish that found their way into it. These traps assumed various shapes depending on the individual who erected them.
Still another method relied on the use of the “otete.” The “otete” trap looked just like the “ounga” that we have described above, save for the fact that it had openings at both ends and was operated while being held in a vertical position. The trap was used mostly in swamps and could be moved from one swampy area to another in an almost scouring motion. Whenever an unusual or violent motion like that of struggling fish was detected or felt, the fishermen immediately dipped his hand through the trunk opening from the top and scoured the waters beneath for the trapped fish. However, this method was dangerous. Accidents involving snake bites were common with this fishing method when a snake or other reptiles got trapped inside the “otete” instead of fish.
Of all these Luo traditional methods of catching fish, none was more insightful to us than the “thow” method. While the technical term of the method is unknown, “thow” is a Luo word for “yeast”, a critical ingredient in brewing beer. This method of fishing involved sprinkling the “thow” [yeast], that the locals used to brew traditional beer, onto water surface. When “thow” is sprinkled over a swamp or pond or other water bodies and is ingested by the fish, it effectively makes the fish “drunk”, causing them to “pass out” on the surface of the water. The fishermen then easily pick or gather them into their fish baskets.
These are just a few examples of ingenious fishing methods and techniques among the Luo. They made the Luo prominent experts at fishing. They also enabled the Luo to depend on fishing without destroying the fishing population.
Yet, in spite of developing some of the best fishing equipment, methods, and techniques, the Luo people have endured a good deal of challenges to their fishing economy throughout the years. During the colonial period, the colonialists poked fun at how a large lake such as Lake Victoria harbored nothing but small fish such as tilapia and sardines. They decided to “solve” the problem without realizing that they were laying the foundation for even greater problems in the lake. The decided to introduce the Nile perch into the lake. The Nile perch is a freshwater predator fish. It arrived in the lake with much gusto. Within a short time, it had consumed and nearly driven the lesser species of fish in Lake Victoria into extinction. Initially, the Luo people were concerned about the Nile perch. They called it “mbuta” and complained that it was causing them to lose more valuable fish and opportunities for trade, and some of them even started spreading dubious stories about the Nile perch, about how the Nile perch could “cause diseases.” There were claims that those who ate the mbuta could develop “nausea, skin rashes or even leprosy.” The Luo also found that their traditional fishing methods could not work effectively to help them catch mbuta.
However, these initial superstitious beliefs subsided, and the Nile perch gradually gained popularity among the Luo. As the population of smaller fish in Lake Victoria dwindled, the Nile perch eventually became leaner and less smelly, making it much more amenable for people to eat and to provide them with nutrients. The Luo also started learning and adopting new methods of fishing using new types of boats using modern engines and fishing nets for trapping the mbuta and other fish species. With a few exceptions many Luos today use modern fishing nets rather than traditional contraptions such as “ounga,” “soyo,” and “osadhi” to trap fish such mbuta for food and sale on the market. But it was not just the Luo who were learning to adapt to the arrival of the Nile perch in Lake Victoria; other species of fish were learning too. Tilapia and other smaller fish also learned to swim and hide in the reeds and swamps around the lake whenever the Nile perch was around, enabling them to survive and even thrive on the lake today.
Many Luos today regard mbuta as being important to their economy. They believe it has contributed a great deal to the overall production of fish caught on Lake Victoria. They fish for it on the lake and bring it for sale at places such as the Dunga Beach in Kisumu, Lake Victoria. The Nile perch is now very important. For example, the total yield of fish on Lake Victoria during the early 20th century was about 100,000 metric tons, but, after the introduction of the Nile perch into Lake Victoria, the average fishing yield skyrocketed to an average of 400,000 metric tons. The Luo rely on mbuta as a rich food source, and also as a stepping stone into the global market.
During the 1990s, Kenya was the leading exporter of the Nile perch caught from Lake Victoria. One sauce has it that “[Kenya] hauled in US$80 million worth of fish from Lake Victoria in 1994 alone…[and] exported 16,400 tons of fish in 1996 for US$46 million, second only to coffee among exports.” A testament by a Daniel Ominde may help us to understand how the Nile perch, or mbuta, has helped him and his family prosper:
Before mbuta, the kind of life we were leading was very low.
We were living in thatched-roof houses. And nowadays, the majority
have permanent structures because of mbuta … we as fishermen have
now lived in the line of the employed class… So there is no gap
between a fisherman nowadays and the employed class (Pringle, 2005).
This testimony might also be true for many other fisherfolk around Lake Victoria. While fishing has always been an important source of livelihood among the Luo people, we cannot simply focus on the types of fish available among the Luo. We should also focus on the traditional fishing methods such as “okira,” “thaw,” “ounga,” “soyo,” and “osadhi” to appreciate how they were used by the Luo to conserve and protect their fish and how this, in turn, made fishing an important economic activity among the Luo. With the introduction of “mbuta” into the local cuisine, it is clear that fishing will continue booming, the “mbuta,” along with the “ngege,” “mum,” “omena,” “flu,” “ningu,” and other fish species, will continue remaining incredibly important, and the livelihood of the Luo will continue revolving around it.
“Fishing at Dunga Beach on Lake Victoria | Macleki,” Macleki, August 26, 2018, https://macleki.org/stories/fishing-at-dunga-beach-on-lake-victoria/.
