SOME SUGGESTED MANAGEMENT INITIATIVES IN PALAU'S NEARSHORE FISHERIES, AND THE RELEVANCE OF TRADITIONAL MANAGEMENT - Inshore Fisheries Research Project
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Inshore Fisheries Research Project
Country Assignment Report
SOME SUGGESTED MANAGEMENT
INITIATIVES IN PALAU'S NEARSHORE
FISHERIES, AND THE RELEVANCE
OF TRADITIONAL MANAGEMENT
South Pacific Commission
Noumea, New CaledoniaSOME SUGGESTED MANAGEMENT INITIATIVES IN PALAU'S
NEARSHORE FISHERIES, AND THE RELEVANCE OF TRADITIONAL
MANAGEMENT
R.E. Johannes
CSIRO Division of Fisheries
Hobart, Australia
August, 1991ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My thanks to the many Palauan fishermen who patiently explained their views on fisheries management problems to me and proposed and discussed various alternatives for dealing with them. I was also greatly helped by a number of Palau government personnel, including David Idip, Director, Bureau of Resources and Development Noah Idechong, Chief, Marine Resources Division Ann Kitalong, Fisheries Biologist, Marine Resources Division Gerry Heslinga, Manager, Micronesian Mariculture Demonstration Center Nancy Wong, Chairman, Palau Fishing Authority Demei Otobed, Chief Conservationist Despite a very busy schedule Noah Idechong was very generous with his time in facilitating my work and explaining the many changes in Palauan inshore fisheries that had occured since my last visit to Palau. Ann Kitalong provided much useful information and feedback. The entire staff of the Marine Resources Division was unfailingly hospitable and efficiently supportive. April Olkeriil ably interpreted during many of my discussions with fishermen.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 5
METHODS 6
RESULTS AND OBSERVATIONS 7
Fishermen's Concerns about Marine Resources 7
New Laws Recommended by Fishermen 1 1
Fishermen's Suggestions Concerning Enforcement 13
Marine Resource Management in Palau: History and
Present Status 1 4
- History of Traditional Management 1 4
- Current Status of Traditional Management 1 5
- National Government Regulations 1 6
- State Government Regulations 1 7
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS 18
Improvingthe Enforcement of Marine Conservation Laws 18
-The Role of Traditional Authority 18
-The Role of State Governments 20
-The Role of the National Government 21
-The Need for New Laws 21
-Enforcement on the Fishing Grounds vs
Points of Sale 22
- Support of Traditional Authority 23
- Enforcement by Fishermen 24
Suggested New Fisheries Regulations 28
- Groupers 28
- Rabbitfish 30
- Fishing on Spawning Aggregations of
Other Species 31
- Net Mesh Size 31
- Spearfishing Using SCUBA 31
- Mangrove Crabs 32
- Rock Lobsters 32
- Commercial Export of Crabs and Lobsters" 33- Size Limits on Fish 33
Miscellaneous Recommendations 33
- Training of Customs Inspectors 33
- State Legislation 34
- Education 34
- DMR and Enforcement 35
- Fishing Rights Boundary Disputes 35
- Impacts of Foreign Workers 35
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS 36
REFERENCES CITED 38INTRODUCTION In early 1991 the Palau Division of Marine Resources requested assistance from the South Pacific Commission in exploring inshore, small-scale fishermen's concerns with regard to their fisheries, as well as the relevance today of traditional marine resource management. In response to this request CSIRO marine biologist R.E. Johannes spent the month of July, 1991 in Palau The terms of reference were: a) to examine inshore fisheries and resource management problems, especially as seen by fishermen. b) to examine social and institutional mechanisms for improving fisheries management, with particular emphasis on the value today of traditional Palauan management measures. c) to assist in the formulation of a program to guide inshore marine resource management and the drafting of associated legislation A draft report was prepared during the visit. This provided a basis for discussions with DMR and SPC which led to many of the revisions made in this final version. A more extended description of Palau's traditional system of customary marine tenure, the substantial changes it has undergone in the 20th century, and its relevance to contemporary marine resource management will be prepared separately. Description of Palau's Nearshore Fisheries A detailed description of Palau's inshore fisheries seems unnecessary here, since they have been described many times elsewhere. The essential features are: 1. many reef and lagoon species and a few nearshore pelagics are involved, 2. many different low technology methods are used, 3. the catch may go through any one of innumerable rural distribution channels throughout Palau, or commercial or subsistence channels in the urban center, Koror. Buyers or receivers range from families and individual restaurants to private fish dealers to the government- supported Palau Federation of Fishing Associations.
Reef gleaning for various invertebrates including clams, sea urchins and sea cucumbers is carried out mainly by women and children. Since a survey is currently underway to determine the nature and significance of these activities I will not deal with them here. The total seafood catch, estimated by Preston (1990) at about 1,700 tonnes per year, is very small by world standards. The costs of comprehensive monitoring and management for such a small yet complex fishery would greatly outweigh the economic benefits. Costs would probably also be well out of proportion even to the substantial social benefits in Palau, although the latter are not readily measured. In such circumstances a fisheries manager aims not for some management ideal like maximum sustained yield, but rather simply to prevent serious overfishing, to ensure reasonably satisfactory allocation of resources and to minimize conflict. The majority of Palauan fishermen I talked with said that their standard of living has been going up during the past few years because of increased overseas demand for their catch and associated rises in prices. Many fishermen now have cars or trucks, as well as bigger boats and motors than they did ten years ago. However, since at least the mid-1970s they have been concerned about a perceived dwindling in numbers of many species of food fish on their fishing grounds, as well as about poaching and destructive fishing practices (e.g. Johannes 1981). METHODS I held meetings with groups of fishermen in the following villages, Ngeremetengel (Ngeremle-ngui State); Ollei (Ngcherelong State), Aimeliik Village (Aimeliik State), Ngiwal Village (Ngiwal State), Peleliu Village (Peleliu State). In Koror I had similar discussions with fishermen individually or in groups from a number of states (Koror, Aimeliik, Ngatpang, Ncherelong, Ngeremlengui, Peleliu), as well as High Chief, Ibedul Yutaka Gibbons, a number of members of the Koror State and National Legislatures, and with various other individuals who were knowledgeable about or concerned over inshore fisheries management issues, including: Franny Reklai, Manager, Palau Fishing Authority; Marhence Madranchar, Director, Environmental Quality Protection Board; Tamara Gabel, Staff Attorney, Environmental Quality Protection Board; Victorio Uherbelau, Director, Bureau of Foreign Affairs; Mark Horlings, Attorney General.
Finally, after the above discussions were completed, a meeting in Koror was organized by the Palau Federation of Fishing Associations, to which fishermen were invited from throughout Palau in order to discuss management issues further with Noah Idechong and me. During these various discussions I sought information and opinion in four basic subject areas: 1. what fishermen considered to be the most important marine resource conservation problems. 2. how well existing traditional rules and government laws that address these problems have been working in recent years, 3. what new laws seemed desirable, and, 4. what mechanisms seem most practical for improving the enforcement of marine conservation laws and the observance of relevant traditional customs. Since time did not permit interviewing all fishermen individually it is not possible to analyze their responses quantitatively. I will thus focus mainly on issues concerning which there was a clear consensus during our discussions. Opinions and observations gathered from these meeting were compared with those recorded in extensive field notes made over 16 months in the mid-1970s during which I interviewed fishermen throughout Palau. I was unable to visit the South West Islands during this trip because of the time and distance involved. Undoubtedly their inshore fisheries conservation needs are quite different and perhaps less pressing than those of Palau proper. RESULTS AND OBSERVATIONS A. Fishermen's Concerns About Marine Resources Improved design and enforcement of marine conservation laws strongly dominated the 198 responses of Palauan fishermen in a survey of their concerns conducted by Paul Gates in 1988, (Gates, in prep, and pers. comm.). The responses I obtained in 1991 were similar except that two problems - dynamiting and uncontrolled inshore fishing by foreigners - had been significantly reduced by various goverment actions since Gate's survey and this was reflected in the lesser emphasis given to these problems in 1991. (Dynamiting was still possibly a significant
problem in Peleliu state although time did not permit investigating
conflicting claims here.)
There was general agreement that neither the use of dynamite nor
chlorine had been a significant problem north of Koror for some years
and that in the south the use of chlorine in combination with kesokes
nets in Peleliu was the only instance where it was widely claimed to
remain a significant problem (although a number of Peleliu fishermen
said this was not the case).
There was general agreement that stocks of most species of reef and
lagoon food fish were declining throughout the archipelago. Fish species
of greatest concern in this regard were:
meyas (rabbitfish, Signaus canaliculatus);
maml (hump-head wrasse, Cheilinus undulatus);
kemedukl (bumphead parrotfish, Bolbometopon muricatum);
temekai and tiau (grouper, Epinephelus spp. and Plectropomus spp.
respectively);
klsbuul (rabbitfish, Siganus lineatus);
mekebud (gold-spot herring, Herklotsicthys quadrimaculatus);
urn (unicornfish, Naso unicornis), and
kelat (mullet, Crenimugil crenilabus) [especially in Koror and Peleliu
states]
Komud (rudderfish, Kyphosus spp.) {prominently mentioned by Peleliu
fishermen]
In Ngiwal there was agreement that many species of reef fish were
declining in numbers, but there was less concensus concerning which
were declining most seriously. In Aimeliik the opinion was expressed
that klsbuul was not declining especially noticeably although meyas
was.
Fifteen years ago I compiled the following list of fishes which Palauan
fishermen declared to be declining seriously in numbers.Table I. Fish Species Whose Populations Had Declined Markedly by the Mid-1970s According to Palauan Fishermen (in no order of ranking) (from Johannes, [I98I], Table 4.) Species harvested particularly heavily while in spawning aggregations. mekebud kelat tiau temekai mlangmud meyas klsbuul Species harvested particularly heavily by spearfishermen at night. kemedukl maml There is considerable similarity between the lists of species about which Palauan fishermen were most concerned in I99I and in the mid- I970'S. Only mlangmud is confined to the earlier list and urn to the current list. [In I988 Paul Gates compiled a list of the five fish believed by Palauan fishermen to have declined most in abundance in the previous five years. In addition to meyas, klsbuul, keremlal and urn, his list also included ngyaoch (parrotfishes, Scarus harid, S. longiceps and Hipposcarus longiceps) (Gates, pers. comm.)] There were also widespread reports in 1991 of declining numbers of chemang (the mangrove or mud crab, Scylla serrata), cheraprukl (rock lobsters, Panulirus penicillatus and P. versicolor) and kirn, (giant clams). No major concerns were expressed by fishermen about these three groups in the mid-1970s. Demand for them by restaurants and importers has driven prices up faster than prices for most other seafoods over the past decade, and brought increased fishing pressure. A tenfold increase in the recorded landing of mangrove crabs has occured in less than ten years (Kitalong et al, 1991).
10 Neither wel (sea turtles) nor mesekiu (dugongs) were mentioned by any fisherman I talked with as sources of concern. However, when I raised the subject in one village in an area not generally recognized as being frequented by dugongs, a fisherman volunteered that he knew a local area where they could routinely be found. He did not want to discuss it publicly because he was afraid that other fishermen might catch the dugongs if they knew their location. I received some reports of reductions in numbers of other species of invertebrates, especially sea urchins and small clams collected in shallow inshore waters. But there were too few such reports to yield any firm conclusions, such as whether overharvesting or accelerating sedimentation due to dredging and bad land management was the most important cause. I suspect the second of these causes to be significant, since poorly regulated development, especially on Babeldaob, is clearly inducing accelerated nearshore sedimentation in some areas. Concern was widely expressed that giant clams and other restricted marine animals were being exported without being detected by customs officers. The latter are not trained for the purpose. A disturbing opinion put forward by a number of fishermen was that boat traffic was responsible for the death of many fish eggs and juvenile fish in shallow waters and that this is a major source of declining stocks. One fishermen argued with conviction that the CO 2 given off by outboard motors was the cause. The problem with this belief is not simply that it is wrong, but that it shifts the responsibility for declining fisheries away from the main cause - fishing pressure. DMR could respond to fishermen who express this concern by stating that there is no scientific justification for it. (Outboard motor propellers, fumes and oil undoubtedly kill a few small fish and eggs but the effect on food fish stocks is trivial compared with overfishing. Sedimentation due to dredging bad land management, as mentioned above, is also very likely a far more serious cause of mortality of inshore juveniles and eggs.) This belief could also be rebutted with the obsrvations that: I. there are coral reef areas where boat traffic is much higher than in Palau but where fish densities are also very high (i.e. in well-managed marine reserves, such as some within the Great Barrier Reef of Australia), and 2. that there are Pacific Island countries where average reef and lagoon fish catches were far lower, prior to the significant use of outboard motors, than they are in Palau today,
11
because of intensive fishing by divers, reef gleaners and fishermen in
unmotorized canoes (e.g. Western Samoa [Lindsey 1971; Wass, I980]).
B. New Laws Recommended bv Fishermen
Fishermen in several villages suggested closing, throughout Palau, the
fishing grounds where groupers (temekai and tiau) aggregate to spawn
from April through July. This received uniformly strong support from
fishermen in areas where such spawning aggregations occured and no
opposition in areas where they did not. No fishermen I talked with
objected to the banning the buying and selling of groupers during the
main spawning season and many were strongly in favor of the action.
In addition there was also a frequent call and widespread support for
the banning throughout Palau of fishing for, selling or buying of meyas
(rabbitfish, Signaus canaliculatus) during part or all of their spawning
season. Fifteen years ago fishermen were already concerned about
dwindling catches of this species on some of their spawning grounds,
and Airai State (then a municipality) imposed a ban on fishing on their
aggregations.which were reputedly once the largest, and the best known
in Palau (Johannes, I98I; see also Hasse et al, I977). In 1991 some
fishermen wanted the ban limited to the first spawning month of the
year, saying that too much of their catch would have to be forfeited if
the entire spawning season were closed. They pointed out that in the
first spawning month only large meyas aggregate to spawn, whereas in
subsequent months both large and smaller fish spawn.
Today meyas have known spawning aggregation sites in most states1
other than the South West Islands.
A number of fishermen volunteered that they thought all species of food
fish should be protected during their spawning periods.
Fishermen expressed a widespread desire to see the mesh sizes of nets
regulated. The minimum mesh size for the wings of kesokes (barrier)
x
The regular aggregation of meyas to spawn south of Ngiwal village reportedly
ceased some years ago, although fishermen doubt that overharvesting was the cause.
They also no longer see juvenile meyas in adjacent shallow inshore waters.
Possibly some environmental change contributed to the demise of this aggregation.
The inner reef flat has become significantly shallower in recent decades. (N.
Idechong, pers. comm.,) and seemingly-related environmental changes have
occurred, such as the replacement of long species of seagrasess with shorter species.12
nets should be 1.5 inches, they said, because this was small enough so
that few small fish were gilled. (They acknowledged that 1.0 inches
would be even better in this regard, but that there was too much drag
created by currrents on such small mesh nets.) The minimum mesh size
they recommended for gillnets and the bags of kesokes nets ranged
from 2.5 to 3.5 inches, with the majority favoring 3.0 inches. Only
Peleliu fishermen demurred, saying they needed one-inch nets to catch
dech, (goatfish, Mulloides flavolineatus) and regularly used 2 inch nets
for other purposes.
There was also widespread support for a size limit on lobsters;
fishermen observed that periodically many very small individuals were
seen in the Koror markets. Once again Peleliu fishermen demurred. A
closed season on lobsters was viewed favorably by most fishermen. A
majority of fishermen were generally opposed to placing a ban on the
spearing of lobsters. It was pointed out to them that spearing lobsters
was against the law in many countries, and the reasons (see below)
were explained to them. But they remained generally opposed, saying
such a restriction would make lobsters too hard to get, "especially now
that they are getting scarcer".
A closed season on chemang, mangrove crab, was suggested by some
fishermen and was generally favored by them. However size limits
were not as widely approved of. Peleliu fishermen were especially
negative about this proposal, saying that such a restriction would mean
that people who harvested chemang commercially would suffer
financially. Some fishermen said that they believed that there were
two species2. One species, which was found around northern Babeldaob,
was smaller than the other, and it might not be possible to harvest this
species if there was a single size limit. One fishermen suggested that
the minimum net mesh size for chemang traps should be 4 inches.
A number of fishermen suggested banning spearfishing using SCUBA (as
is already done in Koror State), and there was virtually unanimous
support for this suggestion among other fishermen I talked with.
Certain species of fish which were easily speared at night have moved
into deeper water in the past 20 years according to fishermen (e.g.
2
Recent research has indicated that Australia has more than one species of mangrove
crab, contrary to marine biologists' previous assumption. This adds some credibility
to Palauan fishermen's assertions and suggests that a crab taxonomist might be asked
to investigate them, since regulations intended for one species but actually covering
two will seldom be effective.13 Johannes, 1981). SCUBA enables divers to pursue them even into their deeper retreats and their numbers are reportedly seriously declining. The two species most often mentioned were two of those on the "top 7" declining speces listed by fishermen in both the mid-70's and 1991, namely, mam I (hump-head wrasse, Cheilinus undulatus) and kernedukl (bumphead parrotfish, Bolbometopon muricatum). There was evidence that fishermen were generally much more concerned with the conservation of species whose populations, though declining, were still important to the fishery, such as meyas, than with rebuilding stocks of species that had dwindled to the point of no longer being important in the catch, such as kelat (mullet, Crenimugit crenilabus). In two villages fishermen commented favorably on the trochus fishing ban that had been in effect throughout Palau for more than a year and is due to extend for a total of three years. No one seemed seriously affected by it, they volunteered, and they asked if three years was long enough. They wondered whether the ban should be extended to enable trochus stocks to recover more fully. No fisherman I talked with complained about the current ban on trochus harvesting. All who mentioned it said they thought it was a good idea. Whatever the length of the present trochus ban (I do not feel qualified to comment here on the basis of the information available to me), it is important to ensure that, before it lapses, future trochus management plans are fully worked out and that fishermen are consulted in the process. C. Fishermen's Suggestions Concerning Enforcement The following suggestions were made by fishermen to improve enforcement of conservations laws. 1. The chiefs should be given more powers of enforcement and receive some payment to support these activities. Aimeliik fishermen were especially positive about their chiefs ability, with appropriate support, to provide improved enforcement. However, fishermen elsewhere were skeptical concerning the ability of the chiefs in their states to contribute significantly to enforcement, (see Discussion below). 2. The states should hire some (or, in the case of Koror, additional) enforcement officers. Considerable skepticism was expressed by some
14
fishermen, however, concerning the ability of some states to enforce
conservation laws effectively because of political problems. Others
strongly disagreed, (see Discussion below).
3. Some fishermen should be selected from each state, by their fellow
fishermen, to be trained as enforcement officers. This subject will be
discussed at length below.
4. The opinion was widespread that the National Government should
assume the overall responsibility for marine resource management and
enforcement, since most of the states were not doing so effectively.
Neither was the National Government effective3, they said, but its
superior resources meant that it was in a better position to become
effective.
P. Marine Resource Management in Palau: History and Present Status
a. History of Traditional Management
Palauan villagers have held the exclusive right to harvest marine
resources in nearby waters for as long as anyone can remember. This
tradition, known as customary marine tenure (CMT) is probably of great
antiquity. Traditional fishing boundaries were well known and and their
observance strongly enforced. The orderly exploitation and protection
of tenured waters was controlled by the chiefs in the name of the
villagers they represented.
Some form of controlled access to marine resources such as this is
essential for effective marine resource management. Ownership of
marine resources provides the most essential incentive to conserve
them; that is, it ensures that the benefits of conservation will go to the
owners rather than being dissipated by all comers. Moreover, as chief
Ngiraklang of Ngeremlengui remarked in the 1970s, if Palau's system of
traditional fishing rights broke down "the rich will get richer and the
poor will get poorer."
Traditionally, Palauans took various steps to conserve the marine
resources within their tenured fishing grounds. Bul, a term roughly
page 16 for an explanation of this situation.15 equivalent with "conservation regulations" were declared and enforced on the fishing grounds. Some are described by Johannes (1981). For example, taking nesting turtles or their eggs were forbidden on the beaches of the island of Ngerur. After WWII, when fish stocks had reportedly been severely depleted to supply the large Japanese population in Palau, a number of new bul (or their more recent counterpart, municipal ordinances) were introduced. For example, fishing for temekai and tiau (groupers, Epinephelus spp. and Plectropomus spp. respectively) on one of their spawning grounds was banned. Fishing for meyas (rabbitfish, Siganus canaliculatus) during the first day of their massing on their Airai spawning grounds was also banned. b. Current Status of Traditional Management Customary marine tenure remains legitimate in the minds of most Palauans today, but poaching is widespread and enforcement of traditional conservation regulations is weak. Fishermen expressed considerable concern about poaching. A recurring theme throughout Palau was the concern expresed both by chiefs and fishermen that they do not have legal authority (in the case of chiefs) or support from authorities (in the case of fishermen) to exclude outsiders from their fishing grounds. Fishermen said, moreover, that people living in Koror (by far the most often-mentioned poachers) were in the habit, when challenged while on the fishing grounds of other states, of claiming some tie through kin affilitations with the local state. They often abused this relationship by bringing in significant numbers of other fishermen with no such affiliations. People who fish for their own consumption are usually allowed to fish in other people's waters. But, according to fishermen, people who claimed to be fishing for themselves were often, in fact, fishing commercially. Accordingly, fishermen recommended making contemporary laws more explicitly supportive of their rights to exclude outsiders, especially commercial fishermen, from their fishing grounds.
16 Customary marine tenure has not been observed in Koror State4, with the largest fishing grounds in the Republic, for decades. This is because the State contains Palau's urban and administrative center and many people from other states now live there. Attempting to enforce traditional marine tenure laws under the circumstances is probably impractical, as it is around most district centers in the Pacific Islands. c. National Government Marine Conservation Regulations National government marine conservation laws prohibit: -the use of dynamite or non-traditional chemicals or poisons in capturing or killing marine organisms, -the taking of sea turtles while on the beach -the taking of hawksbill turtles between June I and August 31 or December I to January 31, or hawksbills with a carapace length of less than 27 inches or green turtles with a carapace length of less than 34 inches. -the taking of turtle eggs -the capture or killing of dugongs -the taking of black-lip mother-of-pearl oysters shell between August I and December 31, or of shell diameter of less than 4 inches. -the taking of trochus except under specified conditions. -the commercial export of giant clam meat. -Fishing for several grouper species on their spawning grounds at Ngerumekaol Channel during the months of April through July. However, enforcement of national marine conservation laws effectively ceased about 15 years ago, prior to independence, when the Trust Territory Administration transferred the Conservation Office to the Department of Public Safety but did not refill vacated positions. After Palau became a Republic in 1981 the Conservation Office was transferred to the Bureau of Resources and Development, but, until recently, was given no budget or staff. A Chief Conservationist was appointed in I988 and three enforcement officers (for marine and 4 Some Koror hamlets have maintained nominal fishing rights in adjacent waters, but exclusion of outsiders does not appear to have concerned hamlet dwellers for decades. Time prevented me from obtaining as much information on this subject as I would have liked.
17 terrestrial conservation) are expected to be appointed before the end of 1991. d. State Government Marine Resource Regulations Various state government conservation laws have been passed since I98I when the states became political entities in the new Republic. The national law prohibits fishing for groupers while in their spawning aggregations in Ngerumekaol channels has apparently been partially effective because Koror State has employed enforcement officers who patrol this spawning ground periodically during this season. Koror State is also planning to declare a marine preservation area which will encompass this channel and another nearby grouper and snapper spawning ground. No fishing will be permitted year round in this area. The use for other than baitfish of nets with a mesh of less than three inches is also prohibited by Koror State. A number of other Koror State laws such as banning dynamiting and the use of chemicals, are similar to national marine conservation laws. Both Ngerelengui and Ollei states have banned fishing on specified spawning aggregations of groupers in their waters, Ollei having recently marked these areas with buoys. These bans have been largely ineffective according to fishermen because of poaching and lack of enforcement and because the spawning ground in Toachel Mlengui is bissected by the Ngeremlengui-Ngatpang state boundary and Ngatpang fishermen have been unwilling to recognize the ban. Several other states, including Ngerelmengui, have declared areas near their villages closed to fishing so as to serve as breeding reserves. In general these reserves have not been respected and the relevant laws not effectively enforced. However, Ngeremlengui placed observers on their fishing reserve to enforce the ban for the first two days of the spawning of meyas in March this year. Laws reserving fishing grounds near some villages for subsistence fishing have apparently been more successful because they are generally voluntarily observed. Each state has had at least one trochus reserve (Koror State has five) in which harvesting trochus is banned. Enforcement has generally been unsuccessful and stocks have been depleted. Accordingly, as mentioned above, a three year ban on the harvesting of trochus was declared by the national government in I990 to allow stocks to rebuild.
18 This list of state laws is not complete; time did not permit tracking down all relevant legislation. More legislation is pending. This recent spate of state laws reveals a continuing and widespread desire on the part of Palauans to conserve their marine resources. But, as outlined above, much of this legislation, as well as older laws and tradition bul, have not been effectively enforced in recent years. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS A. Improving the Enforcement of Conservation Laws. a. The Role of Traditional Authority in Enforcement In Palau traditional leaders once strictly regulated fishing. Is reasserting this traditional authority a promising means of addressing marine resource management problems today? Some fishermen and others that I consulted said that it was. But many others said that it was not. Many Palauans I consulted, from village fishermen to university- educated government officials, said that arresting and reversing the decline in traditional authority had little chance of success because of the apparent irreversibility of many of the social, political and economic changes which had brought it about. The western legal system is said by Palauans to have greatly diminished the traditional powers of their chiefs today. Chiefs are now widely seen as possessing neither legal right, nor community support for enforcing conservation laws, western or traditional. Already in the early 1970s one of Palau's most respected chiefs, and an ardent conservationist, Ngiraklang of Ngeremlengui, acknowledged that fishermen who were breaking the law were increasingly challenging the authority of chiefs to restrict their actions, arguing that it was no longer a traditional matter, but a legal one, and thus the responsibility of the courts (Johannes, 1981). Where communities no longer back up their chiefs to enable them to override such arguments, traditional authority is rendered impotent. This erosion was also noted by McCutcheon (1980), who stated with regard to Melekeok Municipality (now Melekiok State) that "the indigenous judicial authority is now too ineffectual to deal with most conflict situations."
19 In addition, a pronounced shift of both economic and political power to younger people is occuring because of their greater exposure to western education and their greater consequent access to better paying jobs, including jobs in the higher levels of the government administration. This adds to the growing inability of chiefs to control the activities of those they traditionally governed. It was also widely stated by fishermen and other Palauans I interviewed that by 1991 some of the chiefs were actually among those breaking marine conservation laws. It is also no secret that large economic inducements provided by overseas investors have persuaded some of Palau's elected and traditional leaders to pursue personal gain at the expense of Palau's natural environment. Many Palauans I talked with freely acknowledged this state of affairs (see also Kluge, I990). The willingness of some leaders to break fishing laws they, themselves, enacted is one example. Allowing foreign investors to eliminate a major spawning aggregation of tiau (Plectropomid groupers) at Denges Pass in less than five years recently - an aggregation that has probably provided abundant food for Palauans for many centuries - is another. As mentioned above, however, the fishermen of Aimeliik, were more positive than other villagers about the will of their chiefs to enforce conservation regulations. But, they and their chiefs believed, the lack of offical western legal authority prevented them. In addition, High Chief Ibedul Gibbons and members of his Koror State Government staff, as well as one very experienced and deeply committed Palauan government conservationist, disagreed strongly with the notion that traditional (i.e. chiefly) authority over marine resource use was not amenable to resurrection. The latter asserted that not only could it be accomplished, by means of education, but also that this was the best way to approach current problems of enforcement of conservation regulations. I conclude from these discussions that traditional management of marine resources should be supported and encouraged where it still exists, but that traditional authority has eroded to the point, in many states, where it cannot be relied upon at present as a major source of marine resource management. Improved management of marine resources and enforcement of conservation laws cannot wait for or gamble on education and the reemergence of effective chiefly leadership, although in the long run this approach may prove-valuable.
20
I was unable to find out in the time available exactly what legal support
chiefs do have today for making and enforcing traditional laws through
the use of customary fines and traditional forms of social punishment.
In the recent past these forms of punishment were feared far more than
punishment dispensed by the court (Johannes, 1981).
Today where traditional customs governing natural resource use lack
institutional and legal protection they may erode if outsiders perceive a
high value in obtaining access to the resources to which they peertain
(e.g. Johannes, 1978; Ruttley, 1987). This creates a dilemma. For when
such local customs and laws are precisely defined and fixed legally they
tend to freeze tradition, leaving villagers less flexible in their
responses to demographic changes, changes in technology, or other
developments that require adjustments in local resource use patterns
and controls.
Some Pacific Island countries have addressed this problem through
legislation that guarantees the protection of traditional customs
without specifying exactly what those customs are. Legal definition of
the latter are arrived at on a case-by-case basis and only as a last
resort when the need arises for detailed, locale-specific information
during court-mediated disputes. Local leaders have generally tried to
prevent this from happening by resolving dispute at the local level if
they can possibly do so (e.g. McCutcheon, 1980).
But today in Palau, fishermen and traditional chiefs are unccertain
about just what legal support they have to enforce local customs and
traditional laws, such as those associated with customary marine
tenure. The whole subject of the relation between traditional laws and
customs and contemporary law needs to be clarified in Palau.
b. The Role of State Governments in Enforcement
Some states were seen as being much less likely than others to be
effective in enforcing marine conservation laws. Koror
State was credited by fishermen with reducing significantly the use of
dynamite and chlorine in its waters, by patrolling fishing grounds and
increasing security over dynamite stored in public works facilities and
chlorine 5 stored in water treatment facilities.
5
Household chlorine bleaches, such as "Chlorox", are readily available throughout
Palau, but fishermen say that this form of chlorine is too expensive to justify its use
in fishing.21 But "politics" were widely and emphatically cited as interfering with effective enforcement throughout Palau. Some politicans in some states were often referred to as setting poor examples by flagrantly disregarding their own conservation laws. The speaker of a state legislature bragged at one of our meetings about his dugong-hunting exploits and said that the only reason he didn't use dynamite at present was its unavailability. Nepotism and cronyism were also seen as major impediments, to some state's hiring effective enforcement officers. c. The Role of the National Government in Marine Resource Enforcement Fishermen widely expressed two opinions with regard to the role of the national government's role in marine resource enforcement: 1. that national government enforcement had been virtually non-existent for about 15 years, and 2. that it was, nevertheless, the responsibility of the national government to take the lead in enforcement, especially in view of the general impotence of traditional authority and the poor performance of many state governments. I agree that Palau's national government should indeed take the - initiative on marine conservation enforcement. Its program should be designed with the flexibility to enlist the assistance of traditional authority where it still exists, and encourage it where its reassertion seems feasible. But traditional authority should not be depended upon at present as a main source of enforcement. State governments should likewise be encouraged to contribute to enforcement but, similarly, should not be relied upon too heavily. Another source of enforcement is discussed below. d. The Need for New Marine Conservation Laws Palauan fishermen, as well as marine resource administrators and other knowledgable Palauans, expressed widespread concern over what they believe are dwindling numbers of various food fish and invertebrates. Fishermen wish to see not only that existing laws are more effectively enforced, but also that new national laws are enacted. They wish to see seasonal closures during the spawning periods of some species, size limits for some species, net mesh size limits, and the banning of spearfishing with SCUBA.
22 But scientific data are inadequate to demonstrate conclusively that Palau's marine fish stocks are overharvested. What are the pros and cons of enacting and enforcing fisheries conservation laws before the need for them is proven scientifically? Preston (1990) has pointed out that; "falling catch rates do not necessarily indicate overfishing. Catch rates can be expected to fall in any fishery where fishing effort is increasing. When a fish population has become exploited to the maximum level which is biologically sustainable (maximum sustainable yield, or MSY) catch rates are typically as low as one-half to one-third of those experienced when exploitation was at a low level. Fishermen may perceived these drastic falls in their fishing success as indications of overfishing, when in fact the fishery is in or approaching its most productive state." On the other hand, South Pacific and international experience has shown that it is often a mistake to postpone the establishment of fisheries conservation regulations until sufficient research has been done to prove scientifically that they are needed. Information requirements for the purpose are enormous in tropical small-scale, multi-species, multi- method fisheries. As a result, available data are almost invariably inadequate. The consequent reluctance among fisheries biologists to impose regulations is one of the reasons that the great majority of Pacific Island nearshore fisheries are still not managed (Munro, 1988) despite decades of fisheries research. Marine resources, meanwhile, have been very seriously depleted in many areas. Moreover, as mentioned above, it seems that once fish stocks reach low levels, Palauans are less interested in conserving them than conserving stocks that are declining but still significant to the fishery. Some of the merits and drawbacks of fishermen's specific recommendations for new laws will be discussed in a later section. e. Enforcement on the Fishing Grounds vs at Points of Sale Preston (1990) concluded that enforcement on the fishing grounds should be minimized in Palau because it is costly. He suggested that size limits, species bans etc. could be enforced in the commercial fishery at points of sale. I believe, however, that enforcement is desirable both at points of sale (by national government conservation officers) and on the fishing grounds.
23 Enforcement is needed on the fishing ground for several reasons. The most important of these is that poaching cannot be controlled in any other way. Unless it is controlled, customary marine tenure, the foundation of Palauan marine conservation, will continue to erode, fishermen will have increasingly less incentive to harvest their resources in moderation voluntarily, and conservation laws will have to be enforced entirely and directly by state and national governments. Another reason is that enforcement on the fishing grounds allows some control over fishing for subsistence purposes, which probably accounts for a larger percentage of the catch than commercial fishing (Preston, 1989). A third important reason is that Palauan fishermen strongly support it. In addition, I will outline in the next section an enforcement mechanism which should cost much less than conventional arrangements and which has a number of novel and seemingly attractive features. f. Support of Traditional Authority Traditional chiefly authority no longer holds the respect it once had. One of the reasons is that it is widely believed that traditional laws have been superceded by modern ones, and that chiefs are thus powerless to exert their traditional authority on the fishing grounds. My tentative understanding is that contemporary Palauan law supports chiefly authority to a greater degree than many Palauans realize. If so, this information should be made more widely available. If not, some form of legal recognition of traditional law should be considered, as is provided in the Constitutions of a number of other Pacific Island nations such as Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, Fiji and Yap. Obviously legal advice is needed in connection with these matters. When, and if, chiefly authority is firmly and publicly established in law, chiefs can be expected in at least some states (e.g. Aimeliik), to exercise greater control over lawbreakers.
24
G. Enforcement by Fishermen
Traditionally Paluans clearly possessed a conservation ethic6. As the
above discussion demonstrates, this ethic was still strongly and
explicitly articulated by many fishermen, especially the older ones,
during our discussions in 1991. But whereas this sentiment is still
strong, it is nevertheless eroding, especially among the young. I believe
it must be tapped and strengthened through education as well as through
management arrangements that give fishermen a significant role in
enforcement.
The suggestion was independently made by several groups of fishermen
as well as certain individual fishermen I talked with that individuals
selected from among them, and chosen by them, should be trained and
hired for enforcement activities. I believe this sugggestion deserves
serious consideration 7 .
It might be argued that enforcement should not be entrusted to a group
containing those who break the laws. But, when those who break the
laws include legislators and traditional leaders (as was widely
acknowledged, even by some of these leaders themselves), who can
blame ordinary fisherman for breaking them too?
Fishermen cannot be expected to obey conservation regulations under
existing circumstance - as some of them openly acknowledged during
our interviews. But, as they also pointed out, this is no justification
for rejecting the idea that they could play a practical future role in
management. TMoreover, there are growing numbers of examples from
throughout the world of ex-breakers of conservation laws who have
proved to make ideal conservation officers - once they have been given
the appropriate incentives.
The closer to the source of a problem that a remedy is applied, the more
effective the remedy is likely to be. If Palau's marine resources are to
6
Defined by Johannes and Macfarlane (in press) as "an awareness of one's ability
to deplete one's natural resources and a commitment to reduce or eliminate the
process."
7
Japan provides an example of fishing nation where the responsibility of enforcing
regulations on the traditional inshore fishing grounds was successfully transferred
from village authorities to the fishermen themselves (e.g. Ruddle, I987).25 be protected today I believe that those with the most to gain from their sound management - Palauan fishermen - must be more directly involved. Fishermen have the most to gain from effective enforcement of marine conservation laws, and many fishermen I talked with seemed well aware of that fact. Chiefs and members of state and national governments derive progressively less immediate personal gain from discouraging local evaders of laws designed to protect nearshore fisheries. Fishermen are also the people most likely to witness the breaking of marine conservation laws. Involving fishermen in enforcement of marine conservation regulations gives them some assurance that the short-term sacrifices they make in order to obey these laws will also be made by their fellow-fishermen, and that they will therefore share the ultimate benefits. Many Palauan fishermen I talked with seemed well aware of the fact that, as Pinkerton (1989) says, "It is this sharing of actual or potential benefits which permit fishermen to move from a position of . . . individual profit-maximizers . . . to a position of collective managers." Some enforcement on the fishing grounds is already underway in Koror State waters by state enforcement officers. National enforcement is imminent, with three conservation officers expected to take up their posts later this year. But these governments do not have - and are not likely ever to have - the resources to do the job effectively without the support and cooperation of the majority of Palauan fishermen.. No criticism is intended here - few if any governments around the world can effectively regulate such fisheries without fishermens1 support. The greater involvement of fishermen in the management of their marine resources is a growing trend (e.g. Pinkerton, 1989). Reasons for this include the beliefs that: i. The more secure ownership of marine resources is (as exemplifed in Palau by customary marine tenure) the greater the incentive owners have to protect these resources. ii. The more the regulations reflect fishermen's perceptions of management problems, the more they will respect them. iii. The greater the amount of decision-making authority given to fishermen the more acceptable management is to them. 4. The greater their involvement in enforcement the greater is their acceptance of it.
26 On several occasions I asked fishermen if they felt that fishermen- wardens with official government backing and training would have sufficient confidence to take action again colleagues, relatives or highly ranked chiefs or government authorities. They were emphatic in their assertions that all they needed was the security of knowing that that the government would back them up. The actions proposed here would not replace the traditional right of chiefs to enforce fishing laws using traditional means, such as fines in Palauan money and public censure. Nor would they involve new restrictions on the state governments' legal right to enforce state conservation regulations. But, in some states, traditional and elected leadership are both proving ineffective in this area. Here I am proposing anadditional enforcement mechanism, enabling a few fishermen in each state, who are chosen by their fellow fishermen, to assume some of the authority and responsibility for the management of their marine resources on the fishing grounds in circumstances where neither chiefly authority nor state government action are sufficient. Fishermen designated as enforcement personnel under the plan proposed here would remain fishermen; they would simply have the authority to act in an enforcement capacity on the fishing grounds when the need arose. Paying a small salary to fishermen who used their own boats should be much cheaper than hiring additional full-time enforcement personnel and providing them with boats. The question remains; who should fund of program of training and support of fishermen as wardens? Suggestions ranged from state governments to the national government to a combination of the two. I favor the latter arrangement, not only because it spreads the costs but also because it guarantees continuing consultation between national and state governments on fisheries matters. This question deserves more deliberation than I can give it here, however. Two important questions are to whom such fishermen should report and to whom they should ultimately be responsible. I believe that for purposes of training and coordination it is essential that the National Government take the primary responsibility. Who such fishermen should report to is a complex question. Whatever arrangements are made, they should be flexible enough to make use of existing traditional authority where it is available, to use state authority as the next alternative, and to use national authority only in
27
cases where local authority is inadequate. Initial legal advice I
obtained on the above arrangement suggests that it is not impractical
but that the legal framework for it would have to be worked out
carefully. Also it may be practical in some cases for fishermen-
wardens to issue on-the-spot citations, like traffic tickets.
The question of the specific nature of the training, the rights, the
responsibilities and the remuneration of such officers can only be
decided after lengthy consideration and consultation with the various
groups involved.
It would probably prove impractical to introduce such a scheme
simultaneously in all states. If only one or two states are chosen for
initial trials of such a scheme I recommend choosing from among the
following states:
i. Ngerchelong State.
The village of Ollei in Ngerchelong State stands out as the most socially
cohesive and well-organized of all the archipelago's fishing
communities. This fact and the area's comparative remoteness suggest
that such a scheme would have a higher than usual chance of success
here. Ngerchelong State nominally controls the second largest and
richest fishing grounds (after Koror) and most species are probably
underharvested. These are almost certainly the richest inshore waters
remaining in the archipelago. But without controls these resources
could soon be threatened by the rapid growth in numbers of high speed
commercial, recreational and tourist8 boats; poaching is clearly a
growing problem.
iii. Aimeliik State
In Aimeliik the chiefs seem to have retained more cohesion and greater
community respect than in most if not all other states. There seems to
be a positive commitment on the part of Aimeliik fishermen to work
with their chiefs, if given the opportunity, to improve management.
Aimkelii would provide instructive contrasts to Ngerchelong in that in
Aimeliik:
- chiefs would assume much greater responsibility for management.
8
Tourism, based mainly on Palau's marine resources, has been growing at a
compound rate of more than 15% per year for the last five or six years.28
- the state is close to Koror, accessible by road, and in general more
adapted to a cash economy
- the state's marine resources are likely to be much more heavily
exploited and its waters almost certainly subject to more poaching.
iii. Peleliu State
The young fishermen of Peleliu state appear to have an especially
environmentally insensitive attitude toward their marine resources.
(This is not just my own tentative impression, it is an opinion widely
shared by Palauan fishermen). Successful management in Peleliu would
be a real challenge, and education would have to play a major role in any
initiatives.
h. Suggested New Fisheries Regulations
1. Groupers (Temekai and Tiau)
An especially strong case can be made for the protection of groupers on
their spawning grounds. Because groupers are extremely easy to catch
in large numbers when they are in their spawning aggregations, their
vulnerability to overharvesting is great, and it can occur within a very
short space of time. Moreover, the potential for outright local
extinction of some groupers seems greater than for any other group of
coral reef finfishes. There is a growing consensus among fisheries
researchers that, when exploited, groupers (and snappers) tend to
"decline drastically relative to other components of the reef community
and {that} the species can become virtually extinct" (Munro, I987, p.
649).
Statistics on coral reef serranid fisheries are scant. But there are
several anecdotal reports that some serranid species have been
severely reduced or completely eliminated by overfishing in some areas.
Hooper (I985) reports concerns among fishermen of Fakaofo Atoll,
Tuamotu Islands, over the "almost complete disappearance" of P.
leopardus from their waters. This species was once caught there in
'sufficient numbers to sink a canoe" while in its spawning aggregations
(Hooper, pers. comm.). Bell (I980) was unable to locate a single
specimen of P. leopardus on the reefs of two populated atolls in French
Polynesia during 40 hours of underwater surveying, nor in the fish
market at Papeete, nor in collections from fish poison stations. Yet the29 species was common around nearby uninhabited islands. Two species of grouper, P. laevis and Promicrops lanceolatus, disappeared from Rarotonga in the Cook Islands shortly after the introduction of spearfishing (Sims, 1990). Two spawning aggregations of Epinephelus striatus, long known to Puerto Rican fishermen, were wiped out by intensive fishing and have never become reestablished (Olsen and LaPlace, 1979 and Olsen, pers. comm.). This last observation has especially troubling implications in Palau for the large spawning aggregation of Plectropomus spp. that was recently fished out at Denges Pass to supply the Hong Kong live grouper market, suggesting that it may never become reestablished. In the absence of some controls over harvesting of important species of groupers on their spawning grounds their decline could occur very quickly as fishing pressure builds, especially with the strong trend toward high-powered boats enabling increasing numbers of Koror fishermen to reach even the remotest spawning grounds within little more than an hour. These considerations suggest that it would be dangerous to wait for data showing unmistakably that the grouper fisheries were approaching states of overexploitation before banning exploitation of their spawnilng aggregations. In addition, DMR should strictly monitor the spawning grounds in Denges Channel to see if the tiau aggregation that was recently fished out there rebuilds over the years. DMR should also continue to monitor the protected aggregations at Ngerumekaol Channel. Monitoring methodology should be rigorously systematized and rigidly adhered to. This includes ensuring that annual surveys at each place are made several times during the spawning season and always on the same days of the lunar cycle. DMR should also verify and establish baseline data for the locations and sizes other grouper spawning aggregations reported by Palauan fishermen (I have heard of roughly ten such sites, all associated either with channels through, or promontories on the barrier reef). Monitoring spawning aggregations is an exceptionally cheap and fast method of keeping tabs on the state of stocks of those species which aggregate at known times and places in shallow water (Johannes, 1980). Palau offers perhaps the most convenient place in the world to study spawning aggregations of groupers, with multiple, readily accessible spawning sites, each involving two or more species which aggregate more or less simultaneously. By studying these particular aggregations, much information of practical value could be gained which would be highly useful for management both in Palau and elsewhere in the Indo-
You can also read
