FISHERIES VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT OF CARAMOAN

FISHERIES VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT OF
CARAMOAN, CAMARINES SUR
R. Muallil, S. Mamauag, M. Deocadez, F.
Panga, J. Cababaro, L. Peñaflor
WORKSHOP ON KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT TOOLS
Acacia Hotel, Jakarta, Indonesia,
11-12 April 2013
RARE PROGRAM FOR SUSTAINABLE
FISHING IN THE PHILIPPINES (Philippines
2 Cohort)
Friday, April 12, 13
TURF Scoring Exercise
Demonstration Site:
Caramoan, Camarines Sur
v
v
v
v
Friday, April 12, 13
Vulnerability
Exposure
Sensitivity
Potential Impact
Adaptive Capacity
Vulnerability
Friday, April 12, 13
Vulnerability Assessment
Potentia
l Impact
Adaptiv
e
Capacity
Exposure
Sensitivity
Ability of the
system to cope
with changes
Friday, April 12, 13
Vulnerabilit
y
IPCC 2007, Allison et al. 2009
TURF:
Tool for Understanding Resiliency of
Fisheries
Friday, April 12, 13
S Sensitivity
Fisheries
Reef
Ecosystem
Friday, April 12, 13
Socioeconomic
S
Dominant Catch
CRITERIA
LOW
1 to 2 points
MEDIUM
3 to 4 points
HIGH
5 points
What are the
dominant catches in
the area?
catch predominantly
pelagics (tuna, mackerel,
etc)
catch a mix of demersal
and pelagic species
catch predominantly
demersal fish e.g.
groupers
Brgy.
Score
Bikal
5
Daraga
4
Gata
3
Oring
4
Friday, April 12, 13
S
Catch Rate
LOW
1 to 2 points
MEDIUM
3 to 4 points
HIGH
5 points
> 8 kg per fisher per day
(or equivalent CPUE)
3 to 8 kg per day (or
equivalent CPUE)
< 3 kg per day (or
equivalent CPUE)
CRITERIA
What is the average
catch rate in the area?
Brgy.
Score
Bikal
4
Daraga
4
Gata
4
Oring
5
Friday, April 12, 13
S
Gear dependence
LOW
1 to 2 points
CRITERIA
What types of gears are
predominant (dependence
on habitats)?
Brgy.
Score
Bikal
5
Daraga
4
Gata
4
Oring
3
Friday, April 12, 13
mostly mobile fishing
gears (e.g. drift gill nets)
MEDIUM
3 to 4 points
HIGH
5 points
considerable number of
presence of both
habitat-associated gears (e.g.
types
fixed on seagrass beds)
S
Abundance of exposure (wave)tolerant species
LOW
1 to 2 points
MEDIUM
3 to 4 points
HIGH
5 points
Pectoral-swimming fishes
(labrids, scarids,
acanthurids) greater than
50%
mix of site-attached
and mobile fish
species;
15-50% pectoralswimming fish
more abundant siteattached butterflyfish,
angelfish, damsel fish;
<15% pectoral-swimming
fish
CRITERIA
How significant are
wave-tolerant species,
relative to the total
abundance?
Brgy.
Score
Bikal
4
Daraga
4
Gata
5
Oring
4
Friday, April 12, 13
S
Density of coral-dependent
fish species
CRITERIA
LOW
1 to 2 points
MEDIUM
3 to 4 points
HIGH
5 points
What is the % to the total density of
coral-dependent fish species in the
area? (butterflyfishes)
< 5% of the total
density
5-10% of the total
density
> 10% of the total
density
Brgy.
Score
Bikal
2
Daraga
3
Gata
2
Oring
2
Friday, April 12, 13
S
Habitat quality
CRITERIA
How much is the coral cover
(%) in the area?
Brgy.
Score
Bikal
3
Daraga
4
Gata
3
Oring
3
High
Friday, April 12, 13
Low
LOW
1 to 2 points
MEDIUM
3 to 4 points
HIGH
5 points
> 50% coral cover
between 25% and 50%
coral cover
< 25% coral cover
S
Population Density
LOW
1 to 2 points
CRITERIA
< 200 per square
kilometer (not crowded;
sparsely distributed)
What is the population
density of the area?
Brgy.
Score
Bikal
1
Daraga
1
Gata
1
Oring
1
Friday, April 12, 13
MEDIUM
3 to 4 points
between 200 to 400
persons per square
kilometer (moderately
crowded)
HIGH
5 points
> 400 persons per
square kilometer
(very crowded)
S
Fisheries Ecosystem
Dependency
LOW
1 to 2 points
CRITERIA
What is the percentage of
fishers to the total
population?
Brgy.
Score
Bikal
1
Daraga
5
Gata
3
Oring
5
Friday, April 12, 13
< 15% of the total
population are fishers
MEDIUM
3 to 4 points
HIGH
5 points
15%-30% of the total
> 30% of the total
population are fishers population are fishers
E Exposure: Wave
Brgy.
Bikal
Daraga
Gata
Oring
Friday, April 12, 13
Score
AC Adaptive Capacity
Fisheries
Reef
Ecosystem
Friday, April 12, 13
Socioeconomic
AC
CRITERIA
How large are the fishing
grounds?
Brgy.
Score
Bikal
3
Daraga
5
Gata
5
Oring
5
Friday, April 12, 13
Habitat Size and
Condition
LOW
MEDIUM
HIGH
1 to 2 points
3 to 4 points
5 points
small areas of habitatlarge areas of habitatdependent fisheries (relative to intermediate sizes
dependent fisheries
the waters)
AC
Average size/amount of
adult
LOW
1 to 2 points
CRITERIA
MEDIUM
3 to 4 points
What is the size composition
mostly small, immature abundant of small but
and the relative abundance of
fish
with few large fishes
the catch?
Brgy.
Score
Bikal
2
Daraga
2
Gata
5
Oring
2
Friday, April 12, 13
Inquire from the participants
HIGH
5 points
more abundant large
fishes
AC
CRITERIA
How frequent the occurrences
and how abundant are the
juveniles that are important in
the fisheries?
Occurrences of Juveniles
LOW
1 to 2 points
MEDIUM
3 to 4 points
HIGH
5 points
absence to minimal
occurrence of juveniles
(no known peak
occurrence)
few to medium level
abundance during
peak occurrence
abundant juveniles
during peak
occurrence
Brgy.
Score
Brgy.
Bangus
(milkfish)
Tutus
(Siganid)
Lapu-lapu
(grouper)
Bikal
4
Bikal
no
Yes
Yes
Daraga
4
Daraga
No
Yes
Yes
Gata
4
Gata
No
Yes
Yes
Oring
4
Oring
No
Yes
Yes
Friday, April 12, 13
Others
AC
Change in Catch
Composition
CRITERIA
LOW
MEDIUM
HIGH
1 to 2 points
3 to 4 points
5 points
How significant are the changes in
considerable changes in few changes in the no change in the catch
the catch composition in the last 2
the last 2 decades
last 2 decades
composition
decades?
Friday, April 12, 13
Brgy.
Score
Bikal
1
Daraga
1
Gata
4
Oring
1
AC
CRITERIA
How large /small are the reef
areas relative to the coastline?
Brgy.
Score
Bikal
3
Daraga
5
Gata
5
Oring
5
Friday, April 12, 13
Extent of Habitats (coral
reefs)
LOW
1 to 2 points
MEDIUM
3 to 4 points
HIGH
5 points
small reef areas;
fragmented
intermediate size of
areas
large reef areas
AC
CRITERIA
Are there are adjacent
habitats? What is the
condition of the habitat?
Brgy.
Score
Bikal
3
Daraga
5
Gata
5
Oring
5
Presence and Condition of
Adjacent Habitats
(Corals, Mangroves and Seagrass beds)
LOW
1 to 2 points
poor adjacent habitat
quality/no adjacent
habitats
one habitat is of poor
quality or very far
HIGH
5 points
presence of adjacent
habitats w/ good
conditions
Corals
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Mangroves
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
None
Yes
Yes
Yes
Dara
ga
Gata Oring
Seagrass beds
Bikal
Poor
Friday, April 12, 13
MEDIUM
3 to 4 points
Fair
Good
Excellent
AC
LOW
1 to 2 points
MEDIUM
3 to 4 points
Per capita income is below
the provincial poverty
threshold
If income is higher than
the provincial poverty
threshold up to 60%
CRITERIA
What is the annual per
capita income from
fisheries?
Brgy.
Score
Bikal
4
Daraga
3
Gata
3
Oring
2
Friday, April 12, 13
Annual Per Capita
Income from Fisheries
HIGH
5 points
If income is higher
than 60% of the
provincial poverty
threshold
AC
LOW
1 to 2 points
CRITERIA
What is the % of the total
where fishers have other
sources of income?
Brgy.
Score
Bikal
5
Daraga
2
Gata
5
Oring
4
Friday, April 12, 13
Percent of Fishers with
Other Sources of Income
MEDIUM
3 to 4 points
HIGH
5 points
< 40% of fishers have
> 60% of the fishers
40%-60% of fishers have
other sources of
have other sources of
other sources of income
income
income
AC
Annual Total Cumulative
Income from All Other
Sources
LOW
1 to 2 points
CRITERIA
What is the total amount
of all income?
MEDIUM
3 to 4 points
total cumulative income is total cumulative income total cumulative income
below provincial poverty
is higher than poverty
is greater than 60% of
threshold
threshold up to 60%
the poverty threshold
Fishers with alternative livelihood
Brgy.
Score
Bikal
3
Daraga
2
Gata
4
Oring
4
Friday, April 12, 13
HIGH
5 points
Occupation of fishers’ wives
Computation for Potential Impact (PI):
1 (S)
Add the scores of the components of “Sensitivity”.
2
Convert scores into
L, M and H categories
“Rank”
Friday, April 12, 13
Put it in
“Total” cell.
4
From exposure
model
(E)
2
S and E to derive
“Potential Impact”
Use
Computation for VULNERABILITY (V):
Add the scores of the components of
“Adaptive Capacity”
1 “Total”
2 “Rank”
Convert scores into
L, M and H categories
Friday, April 12, 13
P.I. score (from previous
(AC). Put it in
3
cell.
4
slide)
AC and PI to derive
“Potential Impact”
Use
1
Reference to convert scores into L, M and H categories
(“Rank”)
2
Reference to derive
“Potential Impact”
Reference to derive
3 “VULNERABILITY”
Mamauag et al. Under review
Friday, April 12, 13
Computation for Overall Vulnerability
H
Friday, April 12, 13
M
L
Results
Friday, April 12, 13
Fisheries
Friday, April 12, 13
Reef Ecosystem
Friday, April 12, 13
Socioeconomic
Friday, April 12, 13
Friday, April 12, 13