Marine protected areas (MPAs) in the Central Visayas and in the Bohol Sea are managed either by NGOs and people’s organizations, or by a management group consisting of local government officials usually at the barangay level and POs.
In many cases, however, above this local leadership structure are policy organizations (councils), whose memberships include municipal vice-mayors or municipal mayors representing clusters of municipalities with MPAs.
These Councils are usually assisted by NGOs or academic institutions with programs on technical support, education, livelihoods, and social empowerment. Because of their support, including financial support to MPA management, the councils have much influence on how these MPAs are managed.
The monitoring of nine community-based no-take marine reserves in the Bohol Sea was conducted in 2009-2010 by researchers from the Jose Rizal State University in Dapitan City led by Dr. Rio Naguit, and supervised by the SU Angelo King Center for Research & Environmental Management.
A week-long field visit to southern Cebu Island, Panglao and Siquijor Islands in October 2011 by a team from the ICRMP project of DENR was made to find out how the MPAs in these areas are managed and sustained over the long term.
In the case of the nine marine reserves in the Bohol Sea, it was found that four of them (Cantaan Giant Clam Reserve, Mantigue Marine Sanctuary, Tubod Marine Sanctuary and Selinog Marine Sanctuary) have been reasonably well-managed.
Cantaan has had success in natural propagation of giant clams. The target fish biomass of the three other reserves had more than doubled after seven to 10 years of their existence. They may have, however, minor problems in poaching that their managers will have to address.
Two of the nine Bohol Sea marine reserves had barely doubled their target fish biomass in seven years. These are Carang and Guimputlan. These two have problems, primarily from poaching, and their managers need to double their effort at solving these problems.
Three of the nine Bohol Sea marine reserves (Aliguay, Canlucani, and Tulapos) are not well-managed based on their small target fish biomass (<10 to 10 kg per 1000 m2), which indicates serious problems including poaching as revealed by direct observation by us and reports by other observers. Their managers have to devise ways to prevent poaching, otherwise the past gains due to protection will not be restored.
Regarding the management councils, the important findings are: The inclusion of mayors and vice-mayors is seen 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 in line with 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, on 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.
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 for every five to 10 kilometers, and monitor regularly to check for the occurrence of adult spillover and larval recruitment.
