Tilapia Pond Team

March 2011 Montaña de Luz

Documentation

March 3, 2011

Written By:

Amelia Quilon

Laura Reisenauer

Matthew Morelock

Mike Guthrie

Table of Contents

I. Introduction/Background ……………………………………… ….Page 3

II. Problem Statement ………………………………………….……. Page 4

III. Initial Project Planning ……………………………………….…. Page 5-7

IV. Plans for Implementation…………………………………….……Page8-9

V. Schedule while in Honduras……………………………………….Page 10-11

VI. Expenses…………………………………………………………...Page12

V. Objectives Achieved……………………………………………….Page13-15

VI. Future Recommendations……………………………………….....Page16-17

VII. Packing List…………………………………………….………...Page 18

VIII. Useful Spanish Words………………………………………..….Page 19

IX. Team Agreement………………………………………………..…Page 20

X. References………………………………………………………… Page 21

Appendix A – Instruction Manual Outline…………………………….Page22-31

Appendix B – Basic Spanish Instructions …………………………….Page 32-33

I. Introduction/Background

In the past, Montana de Luz (MdL), an orphanage for children with AIDS and HIV, decided to start a tilapia pond. A tilapia pond is an above or underground pond that is stocked with tilapia, a hardy fish that can live in varying conditions. Many small ponds are used to provide a protein source for the family or organization that uses the pond. Other large ponds produce enough tilapia when they are harvested to sell in the market in order to make a profit. The pond at MdL was constructed and was used for three years before it was shut down. When we asked the current staff why the pond was shut down, they replied that the past staff at the time decided that the cost of running the pond was too high for the amount of fish produced. The majority of the cost was determined to be linked to the electricity needed to run the pump in order to aerate the pond. Due to the cost of maintaining the pond and the lack of profit coming from harvesting the fish, management decided to cease the project.

In 2010, a team with ECOS traveled to Honduras and assessed the current pond. They evaluated the current pond at MdL that was previously used for a tilapia pond and determined that the current pond was not designed efficiently to produce tilapia because the pond was too deep. The current depth made aeration a large issue. The team suggested constructing a new pond that would be much more shallow (they suggested a meter) and located near the chicken coop. They recommended this because the area was clear and available for construction and the location was in close proximity to the chicken coop, suggesting that chicken scraps and waste could be discarded into the tilapia pond to be used as food.

II. Problem Statement

After evaluating the background information of the tilapia pond, we decided to first develop a problem statement/definition. This problem statement is as follows.

MdL’s past experience with the tilapia pond was negative. The past pond was too expensive and was thus shut down. Therefore, any future ponds must be more cost efficient in order to promote the project. This may include aeration, feeding techniques, harvesting techniques, and any other areas that may have respective costs. The past pond was also designed inefficiently, lacking any concern for the needs required to maintain a successful tilapia pond. The past team suggested constructing a completely new pond, but with that construction comes many risks and costs. Therefore, we must also determine the benefit of keeping the old tilapia pond or constructing a new tilapia pond. We must also ensure that whatever route we decide to take is sustainable for MdL. Another issue is whether MdL desires to continue the project of the tilapia pond. We must therefore determine the benefit versus the cost. These benefits include an additional protein source for the kids and a future profit. This is expanded under the Initial Project Planning section.

III. Initial Project Planning

Our initial problem was that MdL’s experience with a tilapia pond was mostly negative. Therefore, our first goal in our initial project planning was to convince ourselves first that the pond would be beneficial for MdL. After determining that a tilapia pond provided many benefits for MdL, we then proceeded to ask the staff at MdL what their opinion on the project was. Alexandra Russo, who is a staff member in Honduras with MdL, replied that the staff would like to proceed with the project so that we could achieve a working tilapia pond on site at MdL. She replied that they would like to use the pond to harvest tilapia to increase the protein in the diets of the children and if possible, an external profit. Alexandra also suggested that our team discover a more energy efficient aeration method of the pond, since that was a major issue in the past.

Our next issue with our problem statement was the decision to either use the current pond or to construct a new pond near the chicken coop. We weighed the different consequences with each option. A new pond would allow us to construct it more optimally for tilapia production and would provide a better location near the chickens. However, this option would likely increase the costs of the project. Using the old pond would require us to alter the construction of the existing pond to make it more efficient for tilapia production but would likely cost less than constructing an entirely new pond. When brainstorming this issue, we contacted Laura Tiu, an Aquaculture expert at The Ohio State University. She mentioned that we should focus on a small scale project instead of diving into a large scale project. This was one of the main viewpoints that influenced our further planning for our project.

At this point, we decided to focus on using the existing pond’s structure instead of creating a newly constructed pond. Constructing a completely new pond would increase the project costs, thus increasing the risks. Therefore, using the existing pond would decrease risks and allow us to use the pond as a test run to prove to future groups and MdL that a tilapia pond is feasible and beneficial.

After deciding that we were going to use the existing pond, we then had to determine how we were going to alter the pond’s structure in order to make it more efficient for tilapia production. Our first idea was to fill the pond with dirt to a more optimal depth (so that the depth of the water would be around 1 meter) and then to cap the pond with concrete. After reviewing this option, we discovered that this would be extremely costly. After determining that this option would be too expensive, we weighed other ideas. Our next idea was to fill the pond 1 meter with water and to then build a catwalk or step system that would allow Saul (the maintenance manager at MdL) to harvest the fish and maintain the pond more easily. We determined that this option would not be as expensive and would therefore, be more cost effective and would make the pond more efficient.

After determining our plan for reconstructing the pond, we then had to tackle the issue of aeration. In previous years, MdL used a pump during the day and night to aerate the pond. This was the main source of cost for MdL and the deciding factor when shutting the pond down. We then had to brainstorm various solutions to this. Our first idea was to use aquatic plants to aerate the pond during the day. We decided to use algae and duckweed; the two plants, through photosynthesis, would produce oxygen during the day as well as a food source for the tilapia. However, during the night the process is reversed and the plants use up oxygen. Our next issue was to determine how we would aerate the pond during the night. We considered a solar powered pump, but this would not run during the night. Therefore, we decided to consider a solar powered battery that could store energy during the day that would then be used at night to provide power for the pump. After doing a cost analysis on this idea, we determined that this plan was not cost effective and would require a better assessment of the area and plan. Our meeting notes for these discussions can be found on the MdL Wiki site. Our final idea was to find a more energy efficient pump. After researching various pumps, we decided to go with the Hakko 120L Air Pump. This pump is energy efficient (using the same amount of energy as a light bulb) and was more cost effective.

Another problem that we faced was the sustainability of our project. We wanted to ensure that the project was successful and could continue to be successful in the future. In order to ensure the sustainability of this project, we decided two factors. The first is the documentation of our project (the final version of our documentation) that future groups could use as a reference when doing further projects of the tilapia pond. We also plan to construct an instruction manual that we will leave at MdL. This instruction manual will include all of the necessary pieces of information MdL will need to continue the tilapia pond’s success. The plan for the instruction manual can be found in the Implementation Plan section. An outline for the instruction manual can be found in Appendix A. We will fill out and complete this outline while in Honduras.

II. Plans for Implementation

During our stay, we plan on completing two important tasks.

The first task is to reconstruct and modify the old pond in order to provide a more suitable environment for the tilapia. First, we must assess the overall condition of the pond. This includes repairing any cracks in the concrete first to ensure the pond retains water. After repairing the concrete, we’re going to construct infrastructure on the bottom of the pond that will make harvesting easier. We’re planning on constructing a form of dock or catwalk.

Once these steps are finished, we plan on visiting the University of Zamorano to learn more about tilapia aquaculture. We hope to learn more about how tilapia ponds are managed in Honduras and the best conditions for raising tilapia in regards to food, water quality, and species. In addition, we plan on making purchases at Zamorano that include fingerlings, food, and nets.

One of our main problems with the tilapia pond in the past was aeration. In the past, MdL used a pump as their primary source of aeration for the pond. However, after realizing that electricity costs were an issue, we looked for alternative solutions. One solution was to use plants during the day that through photosynthesis, would produce oxygen for the tilapia. However, during the night, plants use up oxygen rather than produce it. Therefore, we decided to implement a new pump for the pond.

The pump we decided on is more energy efficient and will cut down electricity costs for running the pond. The pump will only need to be run during the night which will also cut down on electricity costs.

Our second task is to create an instruction manual that will detail procedures on testing the water, feeding the fish, harvesting the fish, and overall maintaining the pond. Our hope is that this task will outline for MdL how to care for the pond so that it is sustainable. This manual will include testing procedures to ensure that the water quality remains safe for the tilapia.

Analysis will be conducted on the pond in the form of several tests. Tests will check for pH levels, ammonia/nitrite levels, oxygen levels as well as tilapia feeding habits. These tests will be initially conducted by the OSU team while in Honduras, then taught and outlined in the manual for MdL to reference to continue in the future. Harvesting techniques and suggestions will also be included in the manual. An outline of the manual can be found in Appendix A.

III. Schedule

Saturday

Arrive
Tour MdL

Sunday

Excursion day

Monday

Visit Zarorano
Patch cracks in the center of the pond
Cleaned middle section of pond
Claudio visited MdL

Tuesday

Cleaned other two sections
Patched cracks in two sections

Wednesday

Harwarestor – water tank, PVC
Filled middle section of the pond
Filled third section of the pond
Started documentation
Installed pump
Tested Backup system

Thursday

Unclog water pipe
Refilled pond (lost some water during night)
Tested water height
Claudio and Angel came with fish
Received manual for aquaculture/tilapia

Friday

Tested water
Bought fry food
Built barbed wire fence with Saul

Saturday

Departure

IV. Expenses

1. Pump System

i. Hakko 120L Pump = $325

ii. 50ft sinking hose = $150

iv. 12”Air Disc = $75

v. Shipping = $35

Total: $585

2. Concrete Patch Material

i. Hydrolic Cement: $15 (x2) = $30

3. Back up System

i. Water Storage Tank = $125

ii. Piping = $3

4. To be purchased: additional pump parts: $100

5. Testing Kits:

i. pH, nitrites, nitrates testing kit: $12

ii. Ammonia Detox: $25 (in case of high ammonia)

iii. Ammonia Test: $17

V. Objectives Achieved

The main goal for Team Tilapia was to reinstate a working Tilapia pond at MdL. The old pond had been abandoned and had been becoming under a constantly greater state of disrepair for the last three years. There were multiple cracks, some of which extended for several feet, that needed to be repaired. In addition to this, the larger part of the pond contained its own ecosystem, including frogs and a venomous snake, that had to be cleared out before any work could be done to the pond. The team made use of a bucket system to remove the stagnant water and various creatures from the pond.

Figure 1

Once the pond was cleaned out, the team worked to fill the cracks with hydraulic cement. However, when the middle section of the pond was filled, water still leaked into the larger portion of the pond through the cracks. The hydraulic cement was unable to withstand the water pressure. Since both sections of the pond will usually be filled to an equal height, the water pressures will be equal; thus the cracks have been determined not be a problem.

The team also worked on making the pond a suitable habitat the fish by working to provide ways to aerate the pnd. In order to do this, the team brought an aeration pump to the orphanage. However, since power outages are a weekly occurrence at MdL, the pump may not be able to be run whenever the fish need more oxygen. Therefore, a back-up aeration system that is not dependent on electricity was designed. The pipe and water storage tank that were needed for creating the back-up system were purchased and a copy of the plans for the system will be sent to MdL staff. Saul agreed to build the back-up system after the team returned to America.

Figure 2 In addition to preparing the pond for Tilapia, the team visited Zamorano University to learn more about Tilapia. The team was able to talk to Claudio Castillo, an instructor in Tilapia farming at Zamorano, and have him come visit MdL to survey the pond. Through Claudio, the team was Figure 3 able to learn about Tilapia farming practices in Honduras, get recommendations on how many fish to stock the pond with, obtain a textbook (written by Claudio) on Tilapia cultures in Honduras and obtain about five hundred fry. The team and MdL staff were also Claudio’s dinner hosts on two separate occasions. On the second occasion, the day that Claudio brought the fish to the orphanage, the team also invited Angel Pena, a student of Claudio’s who released the Tilapia in the pond, to dinner. Thus, the team was able to begin forming a working relationship between MdL and Zamorono University.

Once the fish were in the pond, the team tested the water to be sure that the ammonia, nitrate and other chemical concentrations were at acceptable for the fish. All of the test results showed that the water did not contain any unhealthy levels of contaminates.

It should be noted that the team never inserted steps or a catwalk as had been originally discussed in the planning stages. At Zamorano University the experts drain the pond and then walk around dragging a net collecting fish. Claudio recommended doing this. Therefore, since the pond is planned to be drained at harvesting time and that is the only time anyone should need to go down, a catwalk was deemed unnecessary. In addition to this, building steps would have been a waste of resources because Saul can use a ladder to descend into the pond since the pond will not be full of water.

VI. Future Recommendations

Next year’s team should reassess the pond in terms of MdL’s satisfaction with it, needed maintenance, and possible improvements. Before going down to Honduras, future teams should communicate with MdL staff to be sure that the pump is still working, the pond is well stocked, and the back-up system is operational and effective. Teams should also inquire about MdL staff’s satisfaction with the current pond. In particular, check to see if Saul is satisfied with the pond’s condition, yield, and methods for taking care of the fish. If any of these areas do not meet the staff’s, particularly Saul’s, expectations, then those areas should be worked on.