Fishing in Troubled Waters
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Fishing in Troubled Waters A Case Study on Local Ecological Knowledge & Freshwater Resource Management in Peñablanca, the Philippines University of Leiden Department of Cultural Anthropology and Development Sociology K.N.A. van Lieshout, s1305077, April 1st, 2014 Supervisor: Dr. J. van der Ploeg Second reader: Dr. G. Persoon For Olivier and Matthijs With Love 1 Abstract This study focuses on the value of local ecological knowledge of fishers for fisheries management in the Philippines. Many rural communities depend on freshwater fish for their subsistence. Since a couple of decades freshwater fish stocks have been at decline. In order to improve the management of fish stocks, it is essential to know the factors related to fish stock decline. This research was undertaken with the goal to identify how local ecological knowledge of fishers in the municipality of Peñablanca in Northern-Luzon is valuable to understand these factors. During three months of fieldwork this question was studied through interviewing, observation, and the calculations of Catch-per-Unit-Efforts. It was found that conservationists – those responsible for the formulation and execution of fisheries policy – underestimated the knowledge of the people who live in close interaction with fish stocks: fishers. Conservationists assume that they need to be educated about the ecological threats to riverine resources in order to restore fish communities. However, this research shows that fishers possess rich ecological insight that can potentially help in restoring fish stocks. They listed the fish communities that degraded most and where in the river. Fishers observed that many fish species are disappearing, except for one: the giant tilapia. Fishers regret this, because they prefer to catch one the (higher-value) disappearing species. Giant tilapia is known for successfully invading ecosystems and driving away native and endemic species. In case this applies for Peñablanca, the BFAR – responsible for the annual dispersal of this fish – perhaps should research the possible consequences of its practice. This thesis argues that there is a need for a holistic approach to fisheries management in order to improve it. Which means multi-level cooperation, including both fishers and conservationists, and the incorporating and acknowledgement of the credibility and knowledge of those who use aquatic resources. The ecology of fishing can be construed more properly through a multi-level dialogue, in which political, socio-economic, cultural, and biological interests are adopted. 2 Acknowledgement This study on local ecological knowledge and freshwater resource management in the Philippines is conducted as part of the Master degree Cultural Anthropology and Development Sociology at Leiden University in the Netherlands. My first day of school was in September 2012. It has been the first one since one-and-a-half year. Full of excitement I wandered my way to the lecture room while I fantasized about the upcoming academic year. Little did I know that only three months from then I would rock-climb the foothills of the Northern Sierra Madre with a bag of rice on my back and a tray of eggs in my hand. I would brave rough rivers, fanatically scoop out water from leaky boats, slaughter chickens, hook fishes, eat developing duck embryos, bake badoyas; and discover that arachnophobia was only a fictive existence in my head. Together with my kuya and companion Sandy, I entered the world of versatile and rich knowledge of the fishers of Peñablanca. Living and working among them and their exceptionally hospitable families for three months, yielded major contentment and minor discomfort, both personally and academically. Now, almost one year after my departure to the Philippines, I am about to hand in the results of this journey of discovery. This will finish off my life as a student and mark the beginning of a new phase. This achievement, however, was not a one woman’s job. Hereby, I would like to express my gratitude to everyone who helped me achieving this. Jan van der Ploeg, Gerard Persoon (Leiden University), Mercy Masipiqueña (Director Centre of Cagayan Valley Program on Environment and Development), Dr. Aleth Mamauag (President Isabela State University), Merlijn van Weerd, Tess Balbas, Edmund José, Arnold Macadangdang, Dominic Rodriquez (Mabuwaya Foundation), Rob Moolenbeek (Biodiversity Centre Naturalis), Olivier van Lieshout, Matthijs Muller, and most of all kuya Sandy Ranay and your family, thank you very much! Kiki van Lieshout Amsterdam, April 2013 3 Table of Contents Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... 2 Acknowledgement ..................................................................................................................... 3 Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................... 4 List of Figures and Tables ........................................................................................................ 5 List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................................ 6 Terminology .............................................................................................................................. 7 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 8 1.1 Rationale ........................................................................................................................... 8 1.2 Defining and Understanding Local Ecological Knowledge ........................................... 10 1.3 Main Goal and Research Question ................................................................................. 12 1.4 Thesis Outline ................................................................................................................. 13 2. Methodology ........................................................................................................................ 15 2.1 The Research Area .......................................................................................................... 15 2.2 Research Methods........................................................................................................... 19 2.3 Data Analysis .................................................................................................................. 23 2.4 Limitations ...................................................................................................................... 24 3. Riverine Knowledge ........................................................................................................... 27 3.1 Description of Riverine Species ..................................................................................... 27 3.2 Changes in Fish Populations .......................................................................................... 35 3.3 Comparing Emic-Etic Explanations of Changes in Fish Populations ............................ 37 3.4 Current Status of Fish Populations ................................................................................. 38 3.5 Importance of Riverine Species ...................................................................................... 40 4. Resource Management Systems ........................................................................................ 43 4.1 Used Fishing Methods .................................................................................................... 43 4.2 Most Used Fishing Methods ........................................................................................... 52 4.3 Analysis of the Fish Yields ............................................................................................. 53 4.4 Towards A Better Future ................................................................................................ 62 5. Discussion ............................................................................................................................ 66 5.1 Summary Main Findings ................................................................................................ 66 5.2 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 68 References ................................................................................................................................ 71 Appendix I: Short Semi-Structured Interview .................................................................... 75 Appendix II: Long Semi-Structured Interview Itawes Fishers .......................................... 76 Appendix III: Long Semi-Structured Interview with Agta Fishers ................................... 77 Appendix IV: Assessment Form Target Species per Fishing Method ............................... 78 Appendix V: Assessment Form Level of Abundance per Species by Village .................... 79 Appendix VI: Catch-per-Unit-Effort Form ......................................................................... 80 Appendix VII: Comparing Two Means when σ is Unknown ............................................. 81 4 List of Figures and Tables Figure 1: Knowledge-practice-belief complex (Berkes 1999) 11 Figure 2: Geographical location of Peñablanca 15 Figure 3: Map of studied sites in Peñablanca 17 Figure 4: Images