Status of Hilsa Fishery in Hooghly-

Bhagirathi River System and Associated

Coastal Waters of Northern Bay of Bengal

A. M. Sajina, V. R. Suresh,
K. M. Sandhya, J. Mukherjee,
R. K. Manna, B. K. Behera, R. Samanta,
T. Maity & S. K. Banik
Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences, India Section B:
Biological Sciences

ISSN 0369-8211

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., India, Sect. B Biol.

Sci.
DOI 10.1007/s40011-019-01140-7

1 23
Your article is protected by copyright and all
rights are held exclusively by The National
Academy of Sciences, India. This e-offprint
is for personal use only and shall not be self-
archived in electronic repositories. If you wish
to self-archive your article, please use the
accepted manuscript version for posting on
your own website. You may further deposit
the accepted manuscript version in any
repository, provided it is only made publicly
available 12 months after official publication
or later and provided acknowledgement is
given to the original source of publication
and a link is inserted to the published article
on Springer's website. The link must be
accompanied by the following text: "The final
publication is available at link.springer.com”.

1 23
 Author's personal copy
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., India, Sect. B Biol. Sci.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40011-019-01140-7
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Status of Hilsa Fishery in Hooghly-Bhagirathi River System
and Associated Coastal Waters of Northern Bay of Bengal
A. M. Sajina1 • V. R. Suresh1 • K. M. Sandhya1 • J. Mukherjee1 • R. K. Manna1
B. K. Behera1 • R. Samanta1 • T. Maity1 • S. K. Banik1
Received: 10 August 2018 / Revised: 27 August 2019 / Accepted: 30 August 2019
 The National Academy of Sciences, India 2019
Abstract Hilsa, Tenualosa ilisha, is a popular fish in
northern Bay of Bengal and Hooghly-Bhagirathi river
system in India. Despite the high commercial and cultural
importance of the species in the region, data on its catch
status and fishing effort are highly fragmentary and,
sometimes, not reliable as these have not been systemati-
cally gathered. By adopting ‘Stratified Multistage Random
Sampling’ method, mostly followed for marine fish catch
estimation, with modifications to suit the nature of inland
fish landings and migratory habit of the species, the annual
catch of hilsa in Hooghly-Bhagirathi river system and
associated coastal waters in northern Bay of Bengal was
estimated for four consecutive years, from 2013 to 2016, as
16,318 t, 45,615 t 12,192 t and 48,922 t, respectively. The
catch thus estimated was validated by comparing it with the
daily catch data collected by enumerators for three months
each during fishing seasons in the first two years from two
locations. The catch, seasonality, CPUE and the fishing
gear and crafts used were recorded. Comparison of the
estimated catch of hilsa with the earlier reported catches
indicated that the commercial fisheries of the fish in the
Hooghly-Bhagirathi river system have seriously declined,
highlighting the compelling need for conservation of the
species and managing its fishery.
Significance Statement By adapting the stratified multistage
random sampling method, the annual catch of hilsa in northern Bay
of Bengal and Hooghly-Bhagirathi river system was estimated for 4
consecutive years. The method of estimation was validated and the
status of the fishery was analyzed. Historical data available on catch
too were used for the analysis of the fishery.
& A. M. Sajina
sajnaali2000@gmail.com
1
ICAR-Central Inland Fisheries Research Institute,
Barrackpore, Kolkata, West Bengal 700 120, India
•
Keywords Hilsa  Tenualosa ilisha 
Hooghly-Bhagirathi river system  Migratory shad 
Stratified multistage random sampling
Introduction
The shads belonging to subfamily Alosinae (family Clu-
peidae) include more than 30 species with a distribution
ranging across six continents, and most of the species of the
family are anadromous and are facing anthropogenic
pressures such as overharvesting, pollution and habitat loss
in both freshwater and marine environments [1]. Tenualosa
ilisha (Hamlton, 1822), commonly called as hilsa (also
called as Indian shad) in the eastern region of India, is a
migratory shad species contributing to commercial catches.
The species is distributed in several countries bordering the
Bay of Bengal, Indian Ocean, Arabian Sea and Persian
Gulf [2]. Among the hilsa fishing countries, Bangladesh
and India are the major contributors [3], as its highest catch
comes from the deltaic region of the Ganga–Brahmaputra
river system in the coastal Bay of Bengal. The fish is
anadromous; grows and matures in the sea and migrates to
freshwater for spawning [4, 5]. Juveniles grow in the
freshwater and gradually migrate to the sea where they
spend most of their lives [6], hence forming a very lucra-
tive fishery in the coastal waters of the Northern Bay of
Bengal and associated river systems. In the Indian region,
the Hooghly-Bhagirathi river system and its offshore areas
along West Bengal support major fisheries of the species.
Available catch estimates indicate that about 90% of hilsa
catch in India comes from the Northern Bay of Bengal and
the associated river systems and it accounts for about
20–25% of the total fish landing from Hooghly-Bhagirathi
123
 Author's personal copy
river system [7]. Along West Bengal, the fishery of the
species is confined to the artisanal fishing sector in the
Hooghly-Bhagirathi system, a traditional nonmechanized
sector in the coastal areas and small mechanized sector in
the nearshore waters of the northern Bay of Bengal.
Owing to the commercial and cultural importance, hilsa
received attention since the beginning of the twenty-first
century and there is a wealth of literature on various
aspects of the species [8]. On the contrary, reliable catch
statistics and fishing effort data are highly fragmentary, as
most of the catch statistics are not based on proper
methodology. As a catch and stock status form two perti-
nent measures for evaluating the status of a fishery, erro-
neous catch data might lead to wrong resource
management decisions. Diversity of gear used, diffused
nature of fish landing and marketing centers and socioe-
conomic complexities of the fishers have a major impact on
the type and quality of catch statistics, resulting in deficient
or unreliable data situations. Hilsa, like other clupeid
fishes, are characterized by substantial year-to-year, sea-
son-to-season and area-to-area fluctuations in availability,
caused by variable success in recruitment, which, in turn, is
regulated in complex and less predictable ways by physi-
cal, chemical, biological and fishing-related factors.
Among these, monitoring and managing of fishing pressure
is important and hence continuous monitoring of fishing
methods, catch, effort and other related fisheries parame-
ters are important in taking steps in managing its natural
stock. Though there are multiple agencies providing catch
data of hilsa, the data are sometimes neither comparable
nor aggregated at the national level as the concepts and
definitions of the generation of these data vary from region
to region. Hence, there has been a strong need for adopting
an appropriate methodology for the collection of catch data
of the species along with estimates of fishing effort and
other relevant fishery details for managing its natural
population. The authors estimated hilsa landings from the
Hooghly-Bhagirathi river system and associated coastal
waters in the Northern Bay of Bengal for four consecutive
years by adopting ‘Stratified Multistage Random Sam-
pling’ method, modified to suit the nature of the fishery,
and assessed the current status through catch trend analysis,
compared with earlier catch estimates.
Material and Methods
The Study Area
Along the Indian coast of Bay of Bengal, the Hooghly
estuarine system is one of the largest and most productive
estuaries that support large-scale hilsa fishery. This is
constituted by river Bhagirathi, the first offshoot of river
123
A. M. Sajina et al.
Ganga, which flows southward through the lower Ganga
deltaic plains and joins the Bay of Bengal. After the
commissioning of the Farakka barrage in 1975, the hilsa
fishery is largely confined to downstream of the barrage,
due to obstruction of hilsa’s migratory pathway [9]. Hence,
for the catch estimation, eight major hilsa landing centers,
starting from Farakka (24470 35.600 N; 87540 34.400 E) and
ending at Digha (21280 53.1000 N; 87460 15.6800 E), were
selected (Fig. 1) for regular structured data collection,
along with 21 minor landing centers for random observa-
tions on very low intense catch. The major and minor
landing centers were classified based on historical data
available from these stations [10–12].
Fishing Crafts and Gear
For estimating fishing effort in the marine sector, details of
the registered hilsa fishing crafts and gear were collected
from the Department of Fisheries, Government of West
Bengal. Fishing crafts operated in the inland areas of the
Hooghly-Bhagirathi system were enumerated directly
through field visits.
Catch Estimation
For estimation of catch, the ‘Stratified Multistage Random
Sampling’ method developed for marine fish catch esti-
mation in India [13] was modified to suit the characteristics
of hilsa fishery, considering its seasonal and migratory
nature. The stratification over space was done based on the
known migratory route of hilsa from sea to freshwater
along the Hooghly-Bhagirathi river. The strata selected
were marine, estuarine, major freshwater and minor
freshwater hilsa landing zones. The stratification of fresh-
water zone into major and minor landing zone was for
making individual strata more homogeneous within them.
Apart from the major landing centers, hilsa is caught in
small quantities from several places along the entire stretch
of the Hooghly-Bhagirathi; of these, 21 centers were
identified and they formed a minor freshwater zone.
Important landing centers within each stratum (i.e., zones)
were listed out based on historical knowledge on the catch.
Second-stage strata over space were the landing centers.
Some of the landing centers lying in the estuarine zone
were considered as marine (such as Namkhana) as the
vessels carrying catches from marine zones are landed in
these centers.
A calendar month was taken as the stratum over time,
and one zone and a calendar month is a space–time stra-
tum. Two random consecutive days in a month (i.e., 24 h
direct observations with 12 h on each day, the duration
depended on the most active landing time in the center)
were assigned for each major landing center for gathering
 Author's personal copy
Status of Hilsa Fishery in Hooghly-Bhagirathi River System and Associated Coastal Waters…

Fig. 1 Map of important major and minor hilsa landing centers regularly monitored in the Hooghly-Bhagirathi river system

123
 Author's personal copy
the catch estimates. As fishing operation in marine, estu-
arine- and tide-influenced freshwater centers were depen-
dent on lunar cycle [14] and sampling days for such centers
were selected randomly within the two spring tide periods
of the lunar cycle, whereas for other centers, the days were
selected on a completely random basis. Unlike the marine
fishing sector, where the fishing is done every day except
during fishing ban period, the inland fishing is character-
ized by days without any hilsa fishing activity in some
months depending on the tidal effect. Around full moon
and new moon (i.e., during the spring tide, locally termed
as ‘bodokotol’), fishermen get a higher catch, whereas the
remaining days of the lunar cycle (i.e., the neap tide period,
locally termed as ‘morokotol’) are period of the lean catch
[15]. Hence, the total number of actual fishing days in a
month in each selected center was obtained through an
inquiry from fishers. For each zone, the number of ‘land-
ing-center days’ was estimated by multiplying an average
number of actual fishing days of sampled landing centers
with the number of total landing centers in that zone. For
the minor centers, monthly observations were made from
20% of the identified minor centers on a random basis to
get an estimate of scattered hilsa catch.
At the selected center on the assigned observation days,
fishing boats were monitored for data on catch and fishing
effort. In estuarine and freshwater zones, all the fishing
boats were targeted as the number of boats was less, but in
the marine zone where the number of boats was large,
sampling of boats was done in a manner as shown in
Table 1.
From the catch of the fishing boats in a landing center
for the sampling day, total catch for the center for a day
was estimated. From these, a monthly catch of hilsa for
each zone was estimated using the following formula:
Nij X
n
Yij ¼ Yijk
n k¼1
where Yij is the estimated landings for the jth month in the
ith zone, Nij is the number of landing center days in the jth
month for the respective zone, n is the corresponding
number of landing centers actually sampled and Yijk is the
estimated yield for the kth landing center (k = 1 to n) in the
sample for the respective space–time spectrum. From the
Table 1 Sampling procedure for recording landings from the boats
Number of boats landed Fraction actually examined
Less than or equal to 10 100%
Between 11 and 19 First 10 and the balance 50%
Between 20 and 29 1 in 2
Between 30 and 39 1 in 3
and so on
123
A. M. Sajina et al.
monthly catch estimates of each zone, yearly zonal esti-
mates were made by adding the monthly catch. Total
landing for the year was estimated by adding the yearly
catch of all the zones.
The hilsa landing from the Hooghly-Bhagirathi river
system and adjacent coastal waters in Northern Bay of
Bengal was estimated for four consecutive years from 2013
to 2016 adopting the sampling design and estimation
method detailed above. Hilsa below 150 mm length were
considered as juveniles or immature as there was no gonad
development in fishes below 150 mm. There were con-
flicting reports on the size at first maturity of the species
from the same river system [8, 16, 17], and the lowest size
at first maturity was reported by Pillay [18] as
160–170 mm for males and 190–200 mm for females, and
hence it could safely assume that fishes below 150 mm
were juveniles. Since the separation of juveniles from the
landed catch was difficult, the juvenile catch was estimated
in weight by converting length to corresponding weight
through established length–weight relationship and multi-
plying with the frequency of juveniles from the length–
frequency data raised for the whole catch. For analysis of
ovary stages, the key for maturity stages of hilsa described
by Pillay and Rosa [19] was followed. A catch trend
analysis of annual catches of hilsa for 1962–2016 period
was performed taking previous estimates of hilsa catch
from various sources (1962–2012) and 4-year estimates
obtained in the present work.
Validation of Sampling Method
For validation of the sampling method, the authors trained,
motivated and deployed few enumerators residing near the
landing centers for collection of actual daily fish landing
data, in two randomly selected centers and the daily
recorded catches were added to get the actual monthly
catch. This actual catch was compared with the catch
estimated through the stratified multistage random sam-
pling described above, using the t test for statistical sig-
nificance of variation. The validation process has been
carried out for three consecutive months in the fishing
season each year.
Results and Discussion
Fishing Crafts and Gear
The hilsa fishing in the marine nearshore waters is done by
both mechanized and motorized vessels, where mechanized
boats with inboard engines as well as traditional motorized
(with outboard engine) crafts are operated. The traditional
boats which are plank-built, undecked or partly decked are
 Author's personal copy
Status of Hilsa Fishery in Hooghly-Bhagirathi River System and Associated Coastal Waters…

Table 2 Details of fishing crafts involved in hilsa fishery fishing in Hooghly estuarine area are Behunti jaal or
Crafts Number
bhendi jaal (bag net) and Char-pata jaal (barrier net),
which were described and categorized as highly unsus-
Marine vessels registered with Govt. of West Bengal 12,415 tainable [28]. The gillnets continue to remain as the dom-
Marine mechanized boats 7500 inant fishing gear for hilsa, whereas some gears like clap
Inland fishing crafts 1642 nets have become obsolete.
Total fishing crafts targeting hilsa 14,057
Crafts—length overall (LOA) Length (Feet) Catch

Marine mechanized boats 55–58
Marine motorized boats 25–35
Inland wooden boats 15–30
Inland corrugated tin boats 9.0
most commonly employed for hilsa fishing in freshwater
and estuarine zones. The details of fishing crafts involved
in hilsa fishery are given in Table 2.
The most important and common fishing gear involved
in hilsa fishery is monofilament gillnets, locally called
‘Ilish jaal’ or ‘Chandi jaal.’ In the marine zone, gillnets of
85 to 125 mm mesh size were most commonly used by the
multiday mechanized boats, whereas the mesh size of
gillnets used by motorized boats in the estuary mouth
varied from 65 to 90 mm, while the traditional boats in the
upper freshwater stretches used 40 to 100 mm mesh gill-
nets. Another gear of importance in the marine zone is
trawl net, which is also operated by mechanized vessels,
especially by those from Digha during peak fishing season
(August–September). Trawl nets contributed significantly
to the total catch. Apart from these nets, hilsa is also caught
using traditional bag nets, clap nets, shore seines, boat
seines and barrier nets in lesser quantities by weight.
In hilsa fishery, there are variations in fishing crafts,
compared to the descriptions given by Pillai and Rosa [19].
The gears catching hilsa in the Hooghly-Bhagirathi system
were described [17, 19–27], among which De [17]
described gillnets, boat seines and clap nets as most
important. The situation has changed since the 2000s when
modernization of boats and the advent of monofilament
gillnets started. The nonselective gears employed for hilsa
The estimated annual catch of hilsa for the four years from
2013 to 2016 was 16,318 t, 45,615 t, 12,192 t and 48,922 t,
respectively. The monthly zone-wise and station-wise
catch trends were analyzed to generate information on the
fishing season as well as the migratory pattern of the spe-
cies. The major portion (93.8–99.5%) of the catch came
from the marine zone, followed by the freshwater zone and
the estuarine zone (Table 3). Length class of 250–300 mm
total length (TL) dominated the fishery, and the maximum
size recorded was 564 mm, which has been published [29].
The length–frequency analysis of samples in catch
indicated that a considerable portion of hilsa catch was
constituted by juveniles or immature individuals, i.e.,
below 150 mm TL. The juvenile catch estimated by weight
contributed insignificantly in the catch, whereas its per-
centage in numbers in the catch was highest in the estuarine
zone (95.2%) followed by freshwater zone (83.6%) and
lowest in the marine zone (3.6%) (Fig. 2a). Any estimate of
the catch taken only by weight will be misleading as to the
quantum of juvenile catch, as has been done until recently
when it comes to conservation decision making where
every individual is important to breed and contribute to the
ensuing year’s catch. The catch composition indicated that
growth overfishing has marked an impact on the total catch
from the fishery considering the failure of recruitment of
next generation due to juvenile catch. Males and females
with an advanced stage of gonad maturity were frequent in
monsoon and post-monsoon landings, especially from the
estuarine and freshwater stretches of the river. An analysis
of ovary stages of representative samples from the estuar-
ine landing of hilsa indicated that 59.8% of females in the
catch were in stage IV (late maturing) and 26.4% in stage

Table 3 Estimated annual catch of hilsa (April 2013 to March 2017)

Zones 2013–2014 2014–2015 2015–2016 2016–2017
Catch (t) % of total catch Catch (t) % of total catch Catch (t) % of total catch Catch (t) % of total catch

Marine 15,302.3 93.8 45,371.6 99.5 12,025.96 98.6 48,633.88 99.4

Estuarine 174.87 1.1 59.2 0.13 71.01 0.6 31.10 0.1
Freshwater
Major 399.03 5.2 34.45 0.43 26.12 0.8 53.43 0.5
Minor 441.81 150.26 69.07 204.02
Total catch (t) 16,318.01 45,615.52 12,192.17 48,922.43

123
 Author's personal copy
Fig. 2 Overfishing in hilsa fishery. a The number- and weight-wise
proportions of immature fishes in catch. b Frequency of samples of
hilsa in estuarine catches with different ovary stages
III (early maturing) (Fig. 2b) signaling serious recruitment
overfishing of hilsa.
The predominance of seasonality in hilsa abundance in
different zones became evident while estimating the
monthly catches (Fig. 3), which may be accounted for the
migratory nature of the species. The major fishing season
for hilsa is southwest monsoon (June–September) with a
peak during July–August when most of the marine landings
occur. For the estuarine zone, the major fishing season is
also southwest monsoon, followed by the winter season
(December–February). In the freshwater zone, hilsa is
caught almost throughout the year with peak landings
during winter and toward the end of the monsoon season.
The two peaks of hilsa abundance in the freshwater and
Fig. 3 Hilsa fishing seasons
123
A. M. Sajina et al.
estuarine areas (Fig. 3) confirmed the occurrence of two
spurts of migration of hilsa in Hooghly-Bhagirathi river
systems, as reported by earlier workers [18, 30, 31].
The validation of catch estimation done during August–
October in 2014 and July–September in 2015 in Sultanpur
and Nischintapur centers is shown in Fig. 4. The t test of
catch estimated through the stratified multistage random
sampling and catch data collected by enumerators showed
no significant difference between them at a 90% confidence
level.
Hilsa landings in the Hooghly-Bhagirathi river system
during 2000–2001 to 2011–2012 varied between 12,733
and 77,912 metric tonnes [32]. The catch trend of annual
catch data of hilsa using available historic data from var-
ious sources for years 1962 to 2016–2017 as compiled by
Suresh et al. [8] indicated high inter-annual fluctuations
post-1997 (Fig. 5). Until the late 1990s, the hilsa catch was
less and almost consistent with minor decadal peaks. With
the advent of modern fishing technologies and intensifica-
tion of fishing effort, hilsa catch increased to a great extent
since 2000. Since then, a gradual decline in catch from the
inland sector is noticeable, whereas the marine catch
showed greater year-to-year fluctuations (Fig. 5). The
comparison of the recent catch statistics of hilsa with the
earlier catch reports [10, 11, 33–37] indicated that the
once-lucrative commercial fishery of the fish in the
Hooghly-Bhagirathi river system and adjacent coastal
waters in the Northern Bay of Bengal is declining after the
year 2001.
The large numbers of juveniles caught from the estuary
and freshwater stretches were due to use of small meshed
bag nets locally called as Behunti jaal or Bhendi jaal which
are operated seasonally in the freshwater tidal stretches of
the river system where the juveniles of hilsa spend their
early life stages before returning to sea for further growth.
The juvenile catch by bag nets is huge as indicated by a
study in the year 2010 which recorded 2.8 kg of hilsa
juveniles of 5–20 g size out of the 10 kg total catch in a
single bag net operation at Godakhali stretch of the river
 Author's personal copy
Status of Hilsa Fishery in Hooghly-Bhagirathi River System and Associated Coastal Waters…
Fig. 4 Month-wise validated catch and estimated catch. a Nischinta-
pur, b Sultanpur
[32]. They are easily marketed as Gudusia chapra, another
valued small clupeid fish in the region, as hilsa of that size
is not relished by the consumers. Thus, catch of immature
specimens and brooders are two important reasons for the
decline of hilsa, among the yet to be known reasons.
Hence, growth overfishing and recruitment overfishing
Fig. 5 Catch trend of hilsa in the Hooghly-Bhagirathi river system and nearshore areas (1962–2016). Source: Suresh et al. [8]
need to me immediately managed for protection of the
stock. The Hooghly-Bhagirathi River is facing ecological
issues such as siltation, urban development, point source of
effluent discharge and sewage pollution to the extent that
the biotic integrity of the river system is impaired in few
stretches [38]. However, there is a need for focused studies
in this direction as to its probable impact on hilsa fisheries.
As the species is a highly fecund clupeid [10, 29, 32],
which makes it intrinsically more resilient against over-
fishing and collapse of the fishery, its stock depletion can
be restored to a healthy level comparatively faster with
control overgrowth as well as recruitment overfishing.
Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE)
Data on catch per unit effort were used to assess the stock
abundance of the species in different stations along the
river system. As gillnet is the most common gear used to
fish hilsa, the CPUE was estimated for the gear from
important sampling stations during peak fishing months,
i.e., monsoon (June–September) and winter (December–
February) for four years (2013–2016). CPUE of traditional
single-day gillnetters varied from 0.04 to 2.36 kg/boat/day
in the freshwater zone and 1.31 to 10.95 kg/boat/day in the
estuarine zone in the four years. The CPUE of marine
multiday mechanized crafts was estimated from three
major centers: Digha, Frazerganj and Namkhana-kakdwip,
and observed CPUEs were high (38.8–563.8 kg/boat/day)
during monsoon months and lower (0.3–56.6 kg/boat/day)
during winter months (Fig. 6).
As the assumption of CPUE as an indicator of local fish
abundance is contentious in case of time-series data and as
123
 Author's personal copy
Fig. 6 CPUE of gillnets targeting hilsa. a Single-day fishing during monsoon, b single-day fishing during winter, c multiday fishing during
monsoon, d multiday fishing during winter
there are noticeable changes in the fishing efficiency and
catchability in hilsa fishery, present CPUE values were not
compared with historical data but short-term changes in
CPUE during the study period were analyzed. In general,
CPUE showed a gradually declining trend toward upstream
of the river. Though CPUE will rarely be exactly propor-
tional to the stock density, it often reflects a measure of the
stock abundance in the region [39]. As hilsa is a migratory
species, the CPUE may indicate the relative abundance in
the particular zone or station during the study period rather
than the status of the fishery.
Conclusion
The dwindling trend of hilsa catch is evident from the
study. Increased demand for hilsa owing to its high popu-
larity exerts high fishing pressure on the fish. The
123
A. M. Sajina et al.
methodology for catch estimation tested and validated in
the present study can be a useful approach for the moni-
toring catches of this migratory species in its areas of
distribution. There is a compelling need for conservation
and rehabilitation of this important fishery for which the
catch and corresponding effort and size frequency in cat-
ches need to be continually monitored for management
decisions and need-based adjustments of the management
interventions.
Acknowledgements The authors acknowledge the support and
facilities provided by Prof. A. P. Sharma, Former Director, and Dr.
B. K. Das, the present Director, ICAR-Central Inland Fisheries
Research Institute, Barrackpore. This work was supported by ICAR-
National Agricultural Science Fund, New Delhi, India, through a
project, ‘Stock characterization, captive breeding, seed production
and culture of hilsa (Tenualosa ilisha)’ [Sanction No: WQ-3021/
2012-13]. The authors also acknowledge the support and coordination
extended by Dr. P. K. Agrawal, Assistant Director-General, ICAR-
National Agricultural Science Fund, New Delhi. The support and help
 Author's personal copy
Status of Hilsa Fishery in Hooghly-Bhagirathi River System and Associated Coastal Waters…
by Mr. Jayanto Pradhan, Mr. Indranil Mukherjee and Mr. Y. Ali
during field data collection is greatly acknowledged.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest The authors declare that there is no conflict of
interest regarding the publication of this article.
References
1. Limburg KE, Waldman JR (2003) Biodiversity, Status and con-
servation of the world’s shads. American Fisheries Society,
Bethesda
2. Jafri SIH, Melvin GD (1988) An annotated bibliography
(1803–1987) of the Indian Shad, Tenualosa ilisha (Ham.) (Clu-
peidae: Teleostei). Manuscript No. 178e. IDRC-CRDI-CIID
3. Amin SMN, Rahman MA, Haldar GC, Mazid MA, Milton DA,
Blaber SJM (2004) Stock assessment and management of Tenu-
alosa ilisha in Bangladesh. Asian Fish Sci 17:51–59
4. De DK, Sinha M (1997) Studies on the migration of hilsa, Ten-
ualosa ilisha by tagging experiments. In: Proceedings of national
seminar on changing perspectives on inland fisheries. Inland
Fisheries Society of India and Central Inland Capture Fisheries
Research Institute, Barrackpore, pp 16–17
5. Haroon AKY (1998) Hilsa Shad: fish for the teeming millions,
new management alternatives needed for the hilsa young. Shad J
3(1):7–10
6. Hashemi S, Mohammadi G, Eskandary G (2010) Population
dynamics and stock assessment of hilsa shad, (Tenualosa ilisha,
Hamilton-Buchanan, 1822) in coastal waters of Iran (Northwest
of Persian Gulf). Aust J Basic Appl Sci 4(12):5780–5786
7. Bhaumik U, Sharma AP (2012) Recent status of hilsa in
Hooghly-Bhagirathi River. Bulletin No. 179. Central Inland
Fisheries Research Institute, Barrackpore, India
8. Suresh VR, Sajina AM, Dasgupta S, De D, Chattopadhyay DN,
Behera BK, Ranjan R, Mohindra V, Bhattacharya S (2017)
Current status of knowledge on hilsa. ICAR-Central Inland
Fisheries Research Institute, Barrackpore
9. Vass KK, Mondal SK, Samanta S, Suresh VR, Katiha PK (2010)
The environment and fishery status of River Ganges. Aquat
Ecosy Health Manag 13:385–394
10. De DK (1986) Status on the food and feeding habit of hilsa, Hilsa
ilisha (Hamilton) of the Hooghly estuarine system and some
aspects of its biology. PhD Thesis, Calcutta University, India
11. De DK (1998) Hydrological changes, fish population trends and
production potential of Hooghly estuarine ecosystem with special
emphasis of hilsa. Bulletin No. 83. Central Inland Capture
Fisheries Research Institute, Barrackpore, India
12. De DK (2014) The shad hilsa, Tenualosa ilisha (Hamilton) its
biology and fishery. Narendra Publishing House, New Delhi
13. Srinath M, Kuriakose S, Mini KG (2005) Methodology for esti-
mation of marine fish landings in India. Special Publication 86,
Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute, Kochi, India
14. Giri S, Hazra S, Ghosh P, Ghosh A, Das S, Chanda A, Das I,
Chakraborty K, Mukhopadhyay A, Maity S (2019) Role of lunar
phases, rainfall, and wind in predicting Hilsa shad (Tenualosa
ilisha) catch in the northern Bay of Bengal. Fish Oceanogr 00:1–9
15. Rahman MJ, Cowx IG (2006) Lunar periodicity in growth
increment formation in otoliths of hilsa shad (Tenualosa ilisha,
Clupeidae) in Bangladesh waters. Fish Res 81:342–344
16. Jones S, Menon PMG (1951) Observations on the life history of
the Indian Shad, Hilsa ilisha (Hamilton). Proc Indian Acad Sci
31(3):101–125
17. De DK (1980) Maturity, fecundity and spawning of post-mon-
soon run of Hilsa, Hilsa ilisha (Hamilton) in the upper stretches of
the Hooghly estuarine system. J Inland Fish Soc India
12(1):54–63
18. Pillay TVR (1958) Biology of the hilsa, Hilsa ilisha (Hamilton)
of the river Hooghly. Indian J Fish 5(2):201–257
19. Pillay SR, Rosa H (1963) Synopsis of biological data on Hilsa,
Hilsa ilisha (Hamilton, 1822). FAO Fisheries Biology Synopsis.
No. 25
20. Hornell J (1950) Fishing in many waters. Cambridge University
Press, England
21. Swarup K (1958) The hilsa fishery at Allahabad. Proc Natl Acad
Sci India Sec B Biol Sci 28:379–394
22. Jones S (1959) Fishing methods for the Indian shad, Hilsa ilisha
(Hamilton) in the Indian Region. Part 1. J Bombay Nat Hist Soc
56(2):250–275
23. Jones S (1959) Fishing methods for the Indian shad, Hilsa ilisha
(Hamilton) in the Indian Region. Part 2. J Bombay Nat Hist Soc
56(3):423–448
24. Pillay TVR, Pillay SR, Ghosh KK (1963) A comparative study of
the populations of hilsa, Hilsa ilisha (Hamilton) in Indian waters.
Proc Indo-Pac Fish Council 10(2):62–104
25. Saxena RK (1964) The fishing nets and traps in a section of the
middle reach of Ganga river system in India. Proc Indo-Pac Fish
Council 11(11):250–271
26. Saxena RK, Chandra R (1968) On the Introduction of Palasa Jal,
a gillnet, for catching hilsa in the Ganges and Yamuna near
Allahabad. J Bombay Nat Hist Soc 65:496–498
27. Mitra PM, Ghosh KK, Saigal BN, Sarkar ND, Roy AK, MandaI
NC, Paul AR (1987) Fishing gears of the upper and the middle
Hooghly estuary. Bull Central Inland Capture Fish Res Inst 49:22
28. Remesan MP, Pravin P, Meenakumari B (2009) Non selective
fishing gears and sustainability issues in Hooghly-Matlah estuary,
West Bengal, India. Asian Fish Sci 22:297–308
29. Sandhya KM, Sajina AM, Suresh VR, Manna RK, Behera BK,
Mukherjee J, Banik SK, Kar S, Mukhopadhyay MK (2016) A
new size record of hilsa, Tenualosa ilisha (Hamilton, 1822) from
Hooghly estuary, West Bengal. J Inland Fish Soc India
48(1):93–96
30. Bhaumik U (2013) Decadal studies on hilsa and its fishery in
India—a review. J Interacademicia 17(2):377–405
31. Jones S (1957) On the late winter and early spring migration of
the Indian Shad, Hilsa ilisha (Hamilton) in the Gangetic Delta.
Indian J Fish 4(2):304–314
32. Bhaumik U, Sharma AP (2012) Recent status of hilsa in
Hooghly-Bhagirathi River. Bulletin No. 179. Central Inland
Fisheries Research Institute, Barrackpore, India
33. Hora SL, Nair KK (1940) Further observations on the bionomics
and fishery of the Indian shad, Hilsa ilisha (Ham.) in Bengal
waters. Rec Indian Mus 42(1):35–50
34. Pillay TVR (1957) On the abundance of the Hilsa, Hilsa ilisha
(Hamilton) in the Hooghly and Padma rivers, during 1955. Indian
J Fish 4(1):150–159
35. De DK. (2001) An overview of the biology and fishery of Hilsa,
Tenualosa ilisha (Ham.) of Hooghly Estuary and River Ganga.
In: Blaber S, Brewer D, Milton D, Baiano C (Eds) International
Terubok Conference, Kuching, Sarawark, Malaysia: Sarawark
Development Institute (SDI), pp 25–51
36. Mitra PM, Karamkar HC, Sinha M, Ghosh AK, Saigal BN (1997)
Fisheries of the Hooghly-Matlah estuarine system-an Appraisal.
Bulletin Central Inland Fish Res Inst 67:49
37. Mitra PM, Karamkar HC, Ghosh AK, Mandal NC, Sen HK, Das
BN (2001) Fisheries of the Hooghly-Matlah estuarine system-
further appraisal. Bulletin No. 109. Central Inland Fisheries
Research institute, Barrackpore, India
123
 Author's personal copy
A. M. Sajina et al.

38. Das MK, Samanta S (2006) Application of an index of biotic Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
integrity (IBI) to fish assemblage of the tropical Hooghly estuary. jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Indian J Fish 53:47–57
39. Gulland J (1969) Manual of methods for fish stock assessment.
Part I. Fish population analysis. FAO 4:44

123