Marine protected areas (MPAs) in the Central Visayas are mostly managed on the ground by combined teams of local government officials usually at the barangay level, and people’s organizations (POs).
Above this local leadership structure are mainly policy organizations (councils), whose memberships include municipal vice-mayors or municipal mayors representing clusters of municipalities with MPAs.
This hierarchy of MPA leadership is often inspired by NGOs or academic institutions that have programs on technical support, education, livelihoods, and social empowerment. Because of their support, including financial support, to MPA management, they have much influence on how these MPAs are managed.
A week-long field trip to southern Cebu, Panglao and Siquijor was made this month by a team from the ICRMP project of DENR to learn how the above management structure is able to sustain the MPAs. Here are a couple of our findings and conclusions:
The inclusion of mayors and vice-mayors is seen negatively by many as opening the MPAs to political pressure, based on reports that some public officials tend to abuse their authority by not respecting sanctuary rules.
But others point out that this development indicates ownership by these officials of their respective MPAs. This appears to be the reason why contributions towards the support of MPAs from the development fund of each concerned municipality in Panglao (Bohol), and southeast Cebu was facilitated, despite the initial objection of the Commission on Audit to the transfer of public funds to private entities (PADAYON, Panglao; and SCCRM, southeast Cebu). This transfer was strengthened by the the country’s policy of encouraging public-private partnership in development projects.
However, minor difficulties still remain because of the slowness of the process of fund release.
For example, one reason why the buoys demarcating the boundaries of the MPA at Tulapos, Enrique Villanueva, in Siquijor was delayed resulting in poaching by fishers is the non-release of funds for the purchase of buoys. It is hoped that despite the membership of the vice-mayors in the Southeast Cebu Council, the on-the-ground team that manages the MPA will make independent decisions in not allowing fishing in the no-take zone irrespective of who makes the request.
For Siquijor, another MPA visited (Tubod in San Juan town), where the management committee chair is a member of a PO, was doing very well in effecting the full protection of the MPA, as expected of a good community-based MPA.
Our conversations with the groups on the three islands showed that their understanding of MPA networking covered only elements of what might be considered social and management networking, where managers of a cluster of MPAs agree to implement a uniform set of rules, regulations and good practices governing MPAs.
There was no networking with those responsible for land areas above MPAs that could release sediments and other pollutants (through river systems) that are harmful to marine biodiversity. Neither was there effort to network MPAs to ensure connectivity between and among MPAs in terms of spillover of adults and larval propagules in order to ensure sustainable fishery and biodiversity.
For these to occur, two things have to be done: establish MPAs every five to 10-kilometer distance and monitor regularly to check for the occurrence of spillover.
Overall, our visit to the three Visayan islands showed that community based MPAs are the way to go because small MPAs are manageable; and in order to compensate for their small size, more MPAs should be established close to each other.