1. Introduction

1.1 Coral reef fisheries, the Bajau and Sampela

Coral reefs support many small-scale fisheries in communities within tropical countries.  They produce high levels of productivity, however many are now under pressure from high levels of fishing effort that can result in environmental changes to target species and reef ecosystems (Jennings & Lock, 1996).  The Bajau are a sea-based fishing culture that populate areas of Southeast Asia.  They were once nomadic, however many Bajau have now in villages, such as Sampela in the Tukanbesi Islands, Southeast Sulawesi.

It is perceived that many of the coral reefs surrounding the village of Sampela are under pressure from fishing.  This is primarily due to an increase in fishing effort resulting from population growth in Sampela, which is traditionally reliant upon the sea and its resources.  Since the availability of motorised fishing vessels in Sampela, fishermen have begun to fish further out to sea in deeper water for pelagic fish species, such as tuna.  This shift may be reducing the pressure upon coral reefs in the area as technology and efficiency increase in many fishing techniques.  The reasons behind this shift will be investigated during this study by comparing the economic returns of each fishery.  The environmental implications or benefits will also be examined for each fishery, such as the proportion of immature fish caught.  Policy priorities for future management of fisheries in Sampela will be suggested in the discussion.

1.2 Aims

The central hypotheses of this study are to:

1.      Assess if the shift from reef fishing techniques to pelagic fishing is primarily occurring due to economic returns gained by the fisher

2.      Assess if this shift is beneficial to the marine environment

To answer these hypotheses the following will be attempted:

To compare the pelagic and reef fisheries of Sampela, including:

-         catch weight and fishing trip time to calculate catch per unit effort (CPUE)

-         species selectivity of different fishing techniques

-         catches from different locations and habitats

-         proportion of mature fish caught

To compare the economic returns of different reef fishing techniques and pelagic line fishers by calculating the:

-         Price per kilogram of reef and pelagic fish sold in Sampoawatu, Buranga and Hoga

-         Catch prices received for fishers practising different fishing techniques

-         Economic fishing costs, including fuel, gear replacement and fishing agreements for each fishing technique

-         Economic returns from selling the catch in Sampoawatu, Buranga and Hoga fish markets after removing the economic costs associated with each fishing technique

To examine relevant social factors associated with each fishery including:

-         reasons and desires behind choices of fishers.

-         perceptions of fishers to their fisheries and the future

1.3 Chapter Outline

2. Background

2.1 Current Fishery Status

Fisheries are often given the characterisation of being in crisis and many stocks are currently fished at maximum sustainable levels with one in three overfished and being depleted (McGoodwin, 2001).  Over-capacity is a major factor contributing to overexploitation and many fisheries across the world must be subsidised to cover costs.  Other factors contributing to overexploitation include poor knowledge of science, management failures, a lack of data and statistics, the lack of institutions designed to involve stakeholders in the management process and a lack of long term planning in policy at local, national, regional and international levels (Mace, 1996). 

Small-scale fisheries, many of which are found in tropical regions, contain 95% of the world’s fishers and maintain the livelihoods of over 200 million people (McGoodwin, 2001).  Small-scale fishers provide approximately half of the world’s fish catch that is consumed by people (McGoodwin, 2001), reflecting their importance to human society.  Small-scale fisheries in tropical regions are often dependent upon coral reef ecosystems as they are easily accessible without need for an engine and provide a high level of productivity in excess of 5 t km^-2 year^-1 (Dalzell, 1996).

2.2 Coral reef fisheries

Coral reefs often provide many humans with a resource that entire communities depend upon.  Small-scale fisheries in the past harvested fish typically for subsistence purposes and local markets, but now increasingly small-scale fisheries target high value species for national commercial markets.  Reef fishers use a variety of fishing gear, including lines, spears, nets and traps (Dalzell, 1996).  Due to the variety of fish present in coral reef ecosystems (Sale, 1991) many of these fishing techniques catch a variety of species and are therefore known as multispecies fisheries.  Productivity in reef ecosystems due to nutrient recycling is very high (Ebeling & Hixon, 1991) and fishing may yield high catch rates, for example yields have been recorded as high as 40 tons km^-2year^-1 (Dalzell, 1996).  However in many communities high levels of fishing pressure is put upon small-scale fishery resources from market demands, human population growth, development and marine pollution.  This has often resulted in overfishing of resources (Amar et al 1996; Jennings et al, 1995; McClanahan, et al, 1999 and Sunderlin, 1994) creating direct impacts to the target species, such as changes in abundance, population structure and distribution, and indirect impacts to reef ecosystems (Jennings & Lock, 1996).  In south-west Madagascar a variety of factors including increased population growth has lead to fishers using gill nets with decreasing mesh sizes, smaller and more hooks and visiting fishing grounds further out to sea (Laroche et al, 1997).

A need has developed in many regions to reduce fishing effort upon reef ecosystems to protect fish stocks and the livelihoods of communities that depend upon them (Sunderlin, 1994; McClanahan et al, 1999).  This may be by encouraging other sources of income, such as aquaculture and tourism or new fishing methods for species not traditionally targeted.  However these options are not always possible and family planning, environmental education, fishery restrictions and marine protected areas should also be considered (Salm et al, 2000).  One possible solution to lower fishing pressure on coral reefs is to target pelagic fish.  This is increasingly occurring, as motorised vessels are becoming accessible allowing more distant fishing grounds to be reached faster and increasing safety for fishermen fishing further out to sea.  Many small-scale fisheries are also beginning to use Fish Aggregation Devices (FADs) to attract pelagic fish such as in Mauritius and Malaysia (Roullot et al, 1988; Ibrahim et al, 1990).

Community based co-operative management or co-management is becoming recognised by more and more countries as being the best way to manage ecosystems (Brown, 1996; King & Faasili, 1999).  Community based co-management involves the co-operation of governments, and the local community and stakeholders to manage and have responsibility for the resource.  It is becoming more and more popular by the failures seen in the past from centrally controlled management strategies (Brown, 1996).  Often NGOs may be involved in the process to act as a catalyst by giving advice, motivation and education to local communities (Ahmed et al 1997).  Community based co-management is especially important to many coral reef fisheries due to the lack of financial and institutional support that can be given by governments to local communities in developing countries.  Many communities have also implemented traditional forms of management without the need for outside help through cultural knowledge (Amarasinghe & de Silva, 1999).

2.3 Indonesia

Figure 2.31: Map of Indonesia and Sulawesi (World Bank Group, 2001):

2.31 Geography and the socio-economic background

Indonesia (Figure 2.31) is made up of over 17,000 islands (Djohani, 1996), supplying an immense coastline of 36,800 km (Pauly & Thia-Eng, 1988) with a diverse range of internationally important ecosystems, especially mangroves and coral reefs.  The population of Indonesia was estimated to be 206 million people in 2001 (Elliot et al, 2001).  This human population is rapidly increasing and will possibly exceed 265 million people by 2020 (Djohani, 1996).  Human population growth, together with a growing economy and with 60 percent of people living in the coastal zone (Elliot et al, 2001) places a high pressure on the marine environment.  The large number of islands throughout the Indonesian archipelago makes enforcement of conservation from central government almost impossible, especially with the lack of institutional capacity and funds available.  Further Indonesian socio-economic figures are given in table 2.31.

Table 2.31 Figures giving a socio-economic background to Indonesia (adapted from Pauly & Thia-Eng, 1988).

2.32 Indonesian fisheries

The diversity of Indonesia’s geography and culture together with the high amount of coastline present has produced a wide range of fishery types.  Far higher proportions of fisheries products are destined for human consumption (4 million tons) than for animal feed and other uses (0.3 million tons) according to the FAO (2002).  Fish contributes to almost two-thirds of protein in the diet of Indonesians and the fishing industry employs over 5 million people.  Over 94% of the total production is produced by small-scale operations by either small companies or individual fishers (FAO, 2002).  Industrial fisheries in Indonesia produce small amounts in proportion to the total catch, however they target highly valued species including tuna and shrimp for export (see Table 2.31). 

Marine fisheries landings have risen in the last fifteen years from 2.2 metric tonnes in 1988 to 3.6 metric tonnes in 1997 (FAO, 2002).  The fishing fleet has also increased, although more than half still use non-powered boats, mainly consisting of dugout canoes.  These fishers use a variety of techniques and are restricted to areas close to their homes.  According to the FAO (2002), it is estimated that 80% of fishers in this category had incomes less than the national level of poverty.  In South and Southeast Sulawesi (the area of investigation) there are a large number of fishers (9.47% of the total marine fishers in Indonesia), suggesting a high level of fishing pressure and poverty may be present.

2.4 The Bajau

The Bajau are an indigenous culture based upon the use of the sea, which are found spread across areas of Southeast Asia including Borneo, Sulawesi, southern and eastern Indonesia and parts of the Philippines (Sather, 1997).  In the past the Bajau were nomadic sea-travellers living in boats and only visiting land for freshwater. Over time many Bajau have moved away from their nomadic lifestyle (Djohani, 1996) and now live either on land or in small villages built on stilts above coral reef lagoons. However in Sulawesi, Sulu and the Mergui islands small numbers of nomadic Bajau still exist (Djohani, 1996).  

Many Bajau inhabit villages built on stilts within coral reef lagoons.  Coral is mined to provide bases to support the houses and to protect the villages from storm damage.  The removal of coral often causes a combination of habitat destruction and coastal erosion.  Damaged reefs were found to be 50% less diverse in life in shallow areas by Edinger et al in 1998.  Sanitation within these settlements is non-existent and garbage and nutrient overloading may be an environmental problem to surrounding coastal waters which can also lead to reduced diversity (Edinger et al, 1998) and an important health issue.  The gradual removal of this Bajau nomadic lifestyle has concentrated fishing effort on coastal waters surrounding each village and in some areas could lead to a reduction of fish stocks.  The population within many Bajau villages is also growing rapidly (Djohani, 1996) placing pressure upon local resources as are outside pressures from commercial fishers and destructive fishing practices.

2.41 Bajau fishing practices

The Bajau are heavily dependent upon fishing for subsistence purposes and much of their catch is sold to other Bajau or to local markets of various land farming cultures throughout Indonesia.  Fishing methods used by the Bajau range from traditional lines, spears and traps to more modern techniques, including nets and fish attractants, such as lamps (Djohani, 1996).  The increased availability of the motorboat has also allowed Bajau fishers to travel further and reach new fishing grounds not previously exploited on a daily basis.  The Bajau have learnt from outsiders, for example, destructive fishing techniques, such as blast fishing, may be important fisheries within certain areas (Sather, 1997).  The Bajau in the past due to their nomadic existence required no control to manage their fishing practices.  However, Bajau now living in villages and fishing on a daily basis may soon need to manage the resources of the sea in a responsible manner and it seems unlikely that this management will develop fast enough without the aid of outside help. 

2.5 The Wakatobi National Park

2.51 Wakatobi National Park Management

The Wakatobi National Park (WNP) was designated in 1996 by Indonesian government (Elliot et al 2001).  The park covers an archipelago of islands (known as the Tukanbesi Islands) and associated coral reefs off the southeastern tip of Sulawesi.  The local community has an estimated population of 76,000 people (Elliot, 2001) and there are four main islands within the park: Wangi-wangi, Kaledupa, Tomia and Binongko (the first two letters of each island gave the park’s name Wa-Ka-To-Bi).  Within the park in 1998 a zoning plan was produced (Elliot, 2001).  This intended to divide areas of coastal sea into zones, including a rehabilitation zone, core zone, terrestrial wilderness zone and a usage zone (Figure 2.51).  Fishing is prohibited to locals in the core and rehabilitation zones.  According to Elliot et al (2001) the current management plan does not include the needs of the local people and consequently prohibited zones are not always respected or understood leading to the conclusion that the zoning system appears to be failing.  They suggest the Indonesian government needs to work more closely with local communities to understand and serve their needs as well as the needs of the environment.  A revised zoning scheme that works more closely with the needs of the local community is currently being approved and should be implemented in 2003 (Operation Wallacea, 2002).

Figure 2.51: The zoning scheme in the Wakatobi National Park (supplied by Operation Wallacea):

2.52 Operation Wallacea

Operation Wallacea is a non-profit research organisation based on Hoga Island, Ambeua in Kaledupa and Sampela within the Wakatobi National Park (Figure 2.52).  Operation Wallacea and the Wakatobi National Park authorities designated a no-fishing zone along the western shoreline of Hoga Island in September 2000 (Figure 2.52).  This was agreed to by local Bajo fishermen and is generally respected. Operation Wallacea pays the community of Sampela (Section 2.6) rent each month for the no fishing zone to be held.  This money is used for community development projects within Sampela.  No fishing zones or marine protected areas have in other areas resulted in an increase in biomass within the zone (McClanahan et al, 1999) and in some instances a ‘spill-over effect’ has been observed to stabilise or even improve resources of nearby fishing grounds (Salm et al 2000).

Figure 2.52: Map of Kaledupa and Hoga showing the Operation Wallacea research centres and the designated no fishing zone (supplied by Operation Wallacea):

2.53 The Stakeholder Zone

During 2002, a Stakeholder Zone is being introduced around the Northeast side of Kaledupa and to the north of Lintea, including the island of Hoga (Figure 2.53).  The zone has been approved by the Wakatobi National Park authorities and will be implemented by local communities working in conjunction with Operation Wallacea.  The stakeholder zone is primarily aiming to introduce ownership of the coastal reefs to local villages including land-based people on Kaledupa, Hoga and Lintea and the Bajo villages of Sampela and La Hoa (Figure 2.53).  Fishers originating from outside the area will be excluded from fishing within the stakeholder zone.  Members from Operation Wallacea will be visiting each of these villages in turn to give presentations about the stakeholder zone and the benefits it will give to locals.  The stakeholder committee have agreed on a number of stakeholder zone objectives including fisheries and biodiversity monitoring, income maximisation and sustainable management (Operation Wallacea, 2002).  The stakeholder implementation process has only just began and will take a number of years to become effective and supported by communities and fishers. 

Figure 2.53: Map of the proposed Stakeholder Zone and the villages, which will decide how fishing is managed.  The bold straight lines represent the Stakeholder Zone boundary. (supplied by Operation Wallacea):

2.6 Sampela

The village of Sampela is situated between the island of Kaledupa and Hoga (approximately 1000m from Kaledupa) within the Wakatobi Marine National Park (Figure 2.61).  Sampela is a Bajo village of approximately 250 families (Bajo is the south Sulawesi regional dialect spelling of Bajau).  The village has one school and a mosque but many of the people still have strong animalistic beliefs.  All people from Sampela speak Bajo and some can speak varying levels of Indonesian and Kaledupan (the dialect spoken on Kaledupa).  The Bajo from Sampela make up the majority of fishers in the local area because the majority of the Kaledupan community is involved in farming.  La Hoa, the Bajo settlement in the south also fishes in the local area, however this village is much smaller than Sampela.

Expanding populations within Sampela are thought to be placing increasing fishing pressure upon reef ecosystems in the local area by Operation Wallacea.  To minimise this pressure and increase coral reef biodiversity a number of management initiatives have been devised and are currently being implemented by Operation Wallacea and Yayasan Bajo Sejahtera (an Indonesian NGO based in Sampela).  One of these, for example, is the use of rompong or fish aggregation devices (FADs) to encourage net fishers away from the reef towards fishing for small coastal pelagic fish (rompong are floating rafts made from bamboo and floats that are anchored to the seabed and attract pelagic fish, such as scads and tuna (Freon & Misund, 1999)).    The local NGO Yayasan Bajo Sejahtera operating in Sampela is helping to deal with the underlying cause of the problem by conducting a family planning program to reduce population growth in Sampela as well as environmental education for future generations of fishers.

Figure 2.61: Sampela (taken from Kaledupa with Hoga Island in background):

2.7 The Sampela reef fishery

Ever since Sampela was first chosen as a Bajo settlement, approximately 70 years ago, fishermen have been fishing around the local reefs using various traditional techniques many of which are still used today, including the use of lines, nets and spears.  There were three common fisheries that were sampled during this study: the morning, afternoon and evening fishery.

2.71 Reef fishing techniques

Two major components of the reef fishery include line and net fishing.  Line fishing is carried out using handlines and is practised in dugout canoes on sea grass beds close to the village and in Kalokoes, (Figure 2.71).  Kalokoes are specially designed canoes that are primarily used to fish for reef fish off the reef wall but can also go further out to sea to fish for tuna in calm weather.  Fishers may use three types of lines depending on the technique they are using.  These include weighted lines for bottom dwellers, trawl lines for mid-water fish and flies for tuna at the surface. 

Figure 2.71: Fisher, line fishing from a Kalokoe:

Net fishers use a variety of techniques.  The nets they use are almost always gillnets.  Net fishers may use a variety of mesh sizes depending on the type of fish they are trying to catch between 1” for ‘sardine like fish’ which are often caught around the edge of the village and used for bait, and 2.5” nets for fish inhabiting the reef flat.  Most net fishers use between 4 and 6 individual nets at once which are commonly cut horizontally or vertically and tied together to produce longer or deeper nets respectively.  There are two main types of net fishing methods, active and passive net fishing.  Passive net fishers set their nets and leave them for a number of hours to come back to collect the fish later.  They usually set their nets as the tide is just starting to go out, and collect the fish at low tide.  Many variations exist depending on the species of fish they are targeting.  Active net fishers lay out their nets, normally in a circular shape enclosing fish, and then hit the surface of the water or the base of their canoes with a paddle or a pole to make a sound that scares the fish into the net (Figure 2.72).  They collect the net after a short period of time and will lay the net a number of times in different locations on each fishing trip. 

Figure 2.72: Active net fishing:

A smaller proportion of fishers in Sampela fish primarily using a speargun.  Many of these fishers make their own spearguns and free dive using goggles to catch fish.  Fishing using a speargun is harder during the colder season and trips will often be shorter in duration. 

Spear fishers are often out fishing during the extreme low afternoon tides in Sampela (an extreme low tide is seen every other week in the local area in the afternoon getting later each day).  Spear fishers use a wooden pole with metal forked prongs attached to one end, unlike the speargun fishers that use stretched elastic to fire a spear underwater.  Spear fishers are often fishers that practice other techniques such as line fishing, or young people that walk out onto the reef flats and sea grass beds during extreme low tides in the afternoon to spear fish in shallow water at the same time as collecting invertebrates by reef gleaning. 

The final fishing technique practised in Sampela is ngambai.  Only one person owns a net necessary for this technique but many fishers (up to ten per fishing trip) will fish in association with him.  Ngambai is a fishing technique that uses a large net (300m +) with a large mesh size (3”) that is slowly encircled around an area of high fish density by pulling both ends using two motorboats.  As the nets are drawn around into a circular shape, pieces of bamboo attached to the net vibrate scaring the fish into the net.  Fish not trapped in the net are then caught by free divers using spearguns that swim inside the net.  Although this technique is uncommon compared to other techniques in Sampela when practised (once every other day or so) it catches a significantly large number of adult fish compared to other techniques (for example 50kg and above are regularly caught using ngambai compared to a standard line catch of 1-3kg).

2.72 Reef fisheries

Three important fisheries were sampled in Sampela.  The morning fishery has a large proportion of reef fishers involved and fishers begin fishing around 6 am.  The afternoon fishery surveyed took place during extreme low tides in association with reef gleaming.  This is a combination of net and spear fishers going out in canoes and younger people fishing with spears on foot by wading in shallow water.  The evening fishery takes place from dusk and can last until the early hours of the morning.  It consists of both line and net fishers.  Line fishers will fish using similar techniques as the daytime if the moon is full.  If a new moon is present they will use gas-powered lights to attract fish using a traditional technique known as bena bena.  Passive and active net fishers will also often fish during the night depending in the state of the tide.

2.8 The Sampela pelagic fishery

In the past in Sampela most fishers fished using a line from Kalokoes.  They fished over local reef walls and went further afield in calm weather fishing for tuna or to the outer reefs for live reef fish.  Kalokoes were widely used to fish for tuna until about 5 years ago. 

Figure 2.81: Sampelan motorboat returning from a tuna-fishing trip:

Since the increased availability of motorised vessels to the Bajo in Sampela (Figure 2.81) more and more fishers are choosing to invest in these boats.  Many pay using saved money or loans and use the boats to fish further offshore targeting pelagic species using handlines, especially skipjack and bigeye tuna.  Line fishing for tuna from motorboats is a recent fishery in Indonesia and according to Stequert & Marsac (1989) was only being introduced to a small number of islands in the late 1980s such as Flores and Timor.  Offshore motorised fishermen may fish for tuna in association with rompong (see section 2.6) built by commercial fishers from Buton.  The commercial fishermen gillnet pelagic species around these rompong but line fishing is permitted by anyone.  Pelagic fishermen also fish in association with birds, dolphins and other floating objects, such as logs to target tuna.  They leave early in the morning (between 3 and 5am) and return between 10am and 12pm.  The number of fishers within the pelagic fishery using motorboats has risen in the last 5-10 years and fishers go further and in more weather conditions than in the past from Kalokoes.  Motorboats often carry 2 or 3 fishers whereas Kalokoes only carry one fisher and have the capacity to store much greater catches.

2.9 Markets used by Sampelan fishers

2.91 Sampoawatu Fish Market

An important market for reef and pelagic fishers is Sampoawatu fish market in Kaledupa.  After returning from fishing to Sampela the fisherman’s wife then takes the fish by boat to Sampoawatu after retaining a small proportion of the catch as food for family use.  At the market in Kaledupa, Bajo may either sell their fish directly to Kaledupan customers or through middle-women (figure 2.91), which sell the fish on for them.  If few consumers are present at the market, or if the market is flooded with fish, the middle-women will be used as a better price can be obtained benefiting the Bajo who can travel back to Sampela and the middle-women who will earn commission on the catch.  Many Bajo also hold fisheries agreements with middle-women which may force them to sell fish through middle-women and even give away small amounts of fish daily in repayment for loaned nets, for example.

2.92 Buranga Fish Market

A smaller market also exists in Buranga (see Figure 2.53).  This is an early morning market beginning daily at 4am.  The market sells a range of general goods, of which a small proportion is fresh fish coming from the Sampela night reef fishery.  If fishermen catch enough fish to warrant a trip to Buranga (approximately 4 km away) they will travel down to sell fish in Buranga.  If the catch is not high enough, fishers will sell the catch to Bajo middle-women, which will sell the fish on for them in Buranga.  Two Bajo women often work as middle-women and buy the catch in the evening as the fishers return to Sampela.  Fishers and middle-women sell their catch initially on the pier by their boats to the women waiting.  This demand may not be sufficient to buy the whole catch and so after a period of time the Bajo will take the fish down to the general market.

Figure 2.91: Middle-women selling fish at Sampoawatu Market

2.93 Tuna for Operation Wallacea on Hoga

A small proportion of tuna is also sold on to Operation Wallacea.  Pelagic Fishers compete to sell their fish here because the price is higher than the variable prices received in Kaledupa market.  This is an important source of income for many pelagic fishers as over 150 staff and volunteers occupy Hoga during the high season and at least 50 staff and volunteers are present on the island for over 5 months of the year.

3. Methods

All biological data obtained during this study because of resource and time limitations came from fishery monitoring.  Surveying took place daily for six weeks between June and July 2002.  There were four main sources of data collection: fisheries surveys of morning, afternoon and evening reef fisheries and the pelagic fishery, Sampoawatu, Buranga and Hoga market surveys, a daily fisher survey and interviews with pelagic and reef fishers.

3.1 Fishery surveys

3.11 Morning reef fishery survey

The majority of fishing effort in Sampela is conducted around reefs and seagrass beds in the morning between 6 and 11am.  The morning reef fishery was surveyed using two methods.  Firstly, a boat was used to meet fishermen while they were actively fishing.  The boat surveyed fishers in the Stakeholder Zone in two parts due to its size (sampling Sampela, Langgira and Hoga, or Sampela, Buranga and Lintea (Figure 3.11)). 

During the surveys as fishers were met the following information was collected: GPS locations, fisher names, gender, number of boats, number of fishermen, the time fishing began, fishing method and fishing gear details.  The zone and habitat fished in was also recorded for each fisher.  Areas were used to roughly divide the Stakeholder Zone into 5 areas: Sampela, Hoga, Buranga, Lintea and Langgira (Figure 3.11).  Habitats were divided into three: sea grass, reef flat and reef wall.  Seagrass areas were dominated by seagrass cover, reef flats contained patches of coral behind the crest and the reef wall covered fishing occurring on or just off the reef wall.  Technical details included net length (in fathoms) and mesh size for net fishers and number and size of hooks for line fishers (see Appendix 8.1).

Figure 3.11: Map of the Five areas within the Stakeholder Zone (supplied by Operation Wallacea):

The fishers being surveyed were given a ticket and asked to return after fishing to a specific location in Sampela so that their catch could be recorded.  Fishers were asked to bring their catch to the surveying point as soon as they returned to Sampela, before selling or removing fish for personal consumption.  A ticketing system was used to stop any fishers that turned up with their catch in Sampela but were not surveyed out on the water.

The survey in Sampela (see Appendix 8.2) recorded the fisher’s name to relate them to the boat survey and the time they returned to Sampela so that fishing trip times could be calculated and fishing effort compared.  The catch was then sampled recording the total catch weight, species identification, the number of each species and each individual’s fork length, measured from the nose to the middle of the tail fork.  If more than twenty fish of the same species were caught, the total number of individuals was counted and the fork length of a randomly selected sub-sample of twenty individuals were measured.  The species were identified, for the morning fishery survey and all other fisheries surveys, using Allen (1997) and Lieske & Myers (1996).  Names were recorded in Bajo, Latin and English for each species.

3.12 Afternoon reef fishery survey

The afternoon fishery was sampled during periods of low tide as fishers were coming back into Sampela.  During this period the reef flats and sea grass beds become exposed in front of Sampela, leaving a single channel filled with water.  As this was the only way back from the reef edge into Sampela all canoes had to pass through this channel.  Therefore we could survey canoes at this point by waiting in the channel.  The following information was obtained from each fisher: date, time, the time they began fishing, fishing technique and gear details.  The catch was sampled using the same method as described for the morning reef fishery survey.  Fishing locations and habitats were not sampled for the afternoon fishery.

3.13 Evening reef fishery survey

The evening fishery was sampled in a similar way to the afternoon fishery.  Catches were sampled in a variety of locations, by waiting for fishers to return on the edge of Sampela, at the fisher’s house (Figure 3.13) or at the point where catches were sampled during morning reef fishery surveys.  The same method and details were collected as described previously for sampling the reef afternoon fishery.

Figure 3.13: Surveying a net catch during an evening reef fisheries survey:

3.14 The pelagic fishery

Due to safety requirements we were unable to GPS positions of pelagic fishermen outside the reef crests.  The pelagic areas regularly fished are to the north and east of Kaledupa and Hoga, past the Stakeholder Zone boundary (Figure 3.11).  Pelagic fish surveys were carried out using a small canoe.  The canoe would be situated on the edge of the village and binoculars would be used to identify pelagic fishers returning from fishing trips.  Once the fisher was identified the canoe was paddled around to the fisher’s house and the catch would be sampled at this point.  The following general information was collected (see Appendix 8.3): Fisher’s name, gender, number of fishers, start and finish times of fishing trip, fishing method and gear details (as for reef fishers).  The fishermen were also questioned as to whether they fished that day in association with a rompong, the cost of fuel for that day’s fishing trip and if they sold any or all of their catch to Operation Wallacea on Hoga before returning to Sampela. This information was verified using the daily catch record in Hoga.  The fisher’s catch was then sampled (Appendix 8.2) and the total weight was recorded together with species identification, numbers and fork lengths of individuals.  The fork lengths of a randomly selected sub-sample of ten fish were measured when over ten individuals of the same species were found in the same catch.  This was necessary to not hold up fishers on their way to market.  Fish were identified using Allen (1997).

3.2 Market surveys

3.21 Sampoawatu and Buranga Market Surveys

At Sampoawatu morning fish market, reef and pelagic fish catches were recorded between 9am and 1pm (see Appendix 8.4).  The fisher’s name, fishing method and family names of fish caught were noted.  The entire catch or a sub-sample of bundles (reef fish) or fish (tuna and large reef fish) was weighed.  If fish were bundled into more than one size or tuna were of different sizes a sub-sample of each size class was recorded.  If the catch was large a sub-sample was used so as not to disrupt the fishers, middle-women and customers at the market.  The price, per bundle, or fish and the total price received by the Bajo were also recorded, allowing the calculation of the price per kilogram for each catch.  The early morning reef catch in Buranga Market was recorded using the same method.  On some occasions a pelagic fishery survey was carried out at the same time as a Sampoawatu market survey.  This enabled tuna to be surveyed in Sampela and the entire catch to be weighed.  Later when it arrived at market a more accurate price per kilogram could be calculated and the number of fish kept or sold in Sampela was recorded.

3.22 Hoga market survey

Prices were also monitored at the Operation Wallacea base in Hoga.  Tuna is bought here for the staff and volunteers working on Hoga (Operation Wallacea has a policy not to buy reef fish).  The date, time, name of the fisher, total weight for each species caught, individual fish fork lengths and total price paid were recorded on a daily basis for all fish.

3.3 Daily fisher income survey and interviews

Two randomly selected groups of 15 reef and 15 pelagic fishers were selected for interviews and a daily fisher income survey

3.31 Daily fisher income survey

The daily fisher income survey was carried out everyday over two weeks asking three basic questions to fifteen reef and fifteen pelagic fishers (see appendix 8.5).  Firstly they were asked if they went fishing on the day of questioning and what time during the day for reef fishermen (yesterday evening, this morning or afternoon).  If they did go fishing they were then asked how many fish (pelagic fishers) or bundles of fish (reef fishers) they caught and what price they sold them for, if they sold any.  It was also noted if the pelagic fishers sold to Operation Wallacea on Hoga and this was verified later.

3.32 Interviews

The same fifteen reef and pelagic fishers were also asked more detailed questions during an interview.  The interviews differed for reef and pelagic fishers, although some of the questions were repeated (see Appendix 7.61 and 7.62).  Each interview lasted between 20 and 30 minutes.  Two translators were used for the interviews: one to translate from Bajo to Indonesian and one to translate from Indonesian into English. 

Two basic demographic questions were asked: the fisher’s age and how many people he/she supported by fishing.  Both pelagic and reef fishers were asked about the economic costs of their fishing practices.  Fishers were questioned about where they sold their catch and were asked to rank markets in order of how much fish they sold to each.  Fishers were also asked to comment about their perceptions to changes in fish stocks over time and other relevant social issues.

The answers to interview questions were used in a variety of ways:

-         to assign economic costs to fishing techniques to calculate economic returns

-         to back up data collected from other surveys

-         to examine perceptions to issues within each fishery

-         to examine social reasons for various actions and choices in reference to possible fishery management in the future

The main middle-woman at Sampoawatu market was also interviewed, as many fishers from both the pelagic and reef fisheries in Sampela often sell their fish through her.  Two interpreters were used to translate from Kaledupan into Indonesian and from Indonesian into English.  The middle-woman also has a close relationship with many fishers in Sampela, including many fishery related financial agreements.

3.4 Statistical methods and data analysis

Catch per unit effort (CPUE) was calculated to compare effort between different factors as the total catch weight per fisher hour^-1 (section 4.1).

All data were tested for normality and homogeneity of variance using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and Bartlett’s test respectively.  When required a log₁₀(x+1) transformation was used to transform non-normal and heteroscedertic data.  All data tested were observed to be significantly different at values whereby p < 0.05.

Most statistical tests used to analyse the data had more than one treatment involved, for example, fishing technique included pelagic, reef line, net, speargun and spear methods.  When the data were transformed to become valid for parametric tests, a one way ANOVA was used to test for differences between treatments.  If a statistical difference was found within the data Tukey’s 95% confidence intervals were used to find where underlying differences occurred.

If data could not be transformed to fit the assumptions of one-way ANOVA, a Kruskal-Wallis test was used for treatment comparison.  If significant differences were found within the data 95% confidence intervals were plotted for each treatment.  If these intervals did not overlap between individual treatments they were deemed to be significantly different.

When testing data with only two treatments, two sample t-tests were used to compare between treatment, unless data could not be transformed to fit normality, whereby Mann-Whitney tests were used.

To test for similarity between reef and pelagic fisher’s assigned ranks of markets a similarity dendrogram was used.  The output plotted the 1^st 2^nd 3^rd and 4^th market choices for pelagic and reef fishers and the levels of similarity between each one.  To analyse the importance of different markets to pelagic and reef fishers a simple scoring system was assigned to each.  The first choice of market was given a score of five the second choice four points down to the fifth choice that received one point.  By adding the scores of each market from the fifteen fishers interviewed and converting each into a percentage of the total, each market was assigned a relative importance compared to the others.

The proportion of fish caught that were mature was calculated by comparing the lengths of fish sampled to previous research of known lengths of first maturity (section 4.8).  There were two sources of maturity lengths for fish: Fishbase (2002a) and Heemstra & Randall (1993).

4. Results

4.1  Catch and Effort

Table 4.11: Fishery summary statistics

Overall 220 pelagic catches and 217 reef catches were sampled during the 6 weeks of surveying (Table 4.11).  There are two main differences between the fisheries that are shown in Table 4.11.  Firstly there are far more species caught in the reef fishery than the pelagic fishery and, secondly, the total weight and size of fish caught in the pelagic fishery is far higher the reef fishery, even though the number of fishing trips is approximately equal.

Fishers make around one fishing trip per day according to data from the daily fisher income survey and interviews (Figure 4.11).  The daily fisher income survey suggests reef and pelagic fishers make a similar amount of fishing trips each day.  Responses given during interviews suggest reef fishers on average may make more fishing trips than pelagic fishers, however there is also a larger range of responses given by reef fishers.

Differences were found in the duration of fishing trips between different fishing techniques and fisheries (Figure 4.12).  The mean fishing trip duration was longer for pelagic (6.5 hours) than reef fishers (4.2 hours).  Reef line, net and speargun fishers had similar fishing trip lengths, however spear fishers spent less time fishing with a mean of 3 hours.  The afternoon fishery has shorter fishing trip lengths (mean = 2.8 hours) compared to the morning and evening fisheries that had similar trip lengths (approximately 4.5 hours).

The mean catch weight (Figure 4.13) was higher for pelagic fishers than all reef fishing techniques.  The difference between pelagic and reef fishers is not as clear for CPUE (kg per fisher hour^-1) although mean pelagic CPUE is still over double that of all reef techniques.  Mean catch weight and CPUE for reef techniques is highest for net fishers and lowest for line and spear fishers.

Figure 4.14 shows mean catch weight and CPUE is higher for pelagic fishers than reef fishers.  Mean catch weights are higher in the evening fishery than the morning and afternoon fisheries, however there is large variation between fishers.  Mean CPUE is higher however in the afternoon fishery than the evening or morning fishery.

The catch weight from the three habitats surveyed by reef fishers (Figure 4.15) was similar due to large variations within each habitat.  CPUE is also very similar between different habitats but may be highest for sea grass.

Figure 4.16 shows no clear differences in catch weight between the four areas, with the exception of Buranga, which may have a lower catch weight than the other three areas.  CPUE is highest in Sampela and Buranga has the lowest CPUE of the four areas.

Figure 4.17 (below) shows the locations of fishers surveyed during the reef morning fishery surveys.  The majority of fishing effort takes place in the area of Sampela in close proximity to the village to the north and the west.  The second highest zone of fishing effort is around the island of Hoga.  Much of this takes place to the west of Hoga by line fishers fishing over the reef wall.  Buranga and Lintea had least fishers found within them, however less surveys took place in these two areas.

Figure 4.17: GPS positions of morning reef fishers (black circles represent fishers surveyed; shaded area represents the no fishing zone and dashed lines represent boundaries between each area: Sampela, Langgira, Hoga, Buranga and Lintea):

Both the mean catch weight and mean CPUE (Figure 4.18) are higher for pelagic fishers when they fish in association with rompong.  This is especially apparent for CPUE where the mean CPUE in association with rompong (5 kg per fisher hour^-1) is more than double the CPUE without rompong (2 kg per fisher hour^-1)

4.2  Market destinations

Figures 4.21a and 4.21b show Sampoawatu to be the primary market for pelagic and reef fishers with a relative importance of 32% and 38% respectively.  Selling fish in Sampela appears to be more important to reef fishers (27%) than pelagic fishers (16%).  Pelagic fishers regularly use the markets of Hoga and Mola, which are never used by reef fishers interviewed.

4.3 Sampoawatu and Buranga economic data

Figure 4.31 shows the mean price kg^-1 paid to fishers of different fishing techniques.  It suggests pelagic fishers receive a higher price kg^-1 (mean = 4000 Rp) than reef fishers using line or net techniques (mean = 3200 Rp).  Fishers using ngambai received a higher price kg^-1 than line or net reef fishers, however the small sample size for this technique produced a larger variation in prices (exchange rate: Rp 13,810 = £1).

The total price received was higher for pelagic fishers (mean = 80,000 Rp) than any reef fishing technique in Sampoawatu market (Figure 4.32).  Net fishers also appear to receive a higher total price (mean = 40,000 Rp) each time they visit Sampoawatu market than line fishers (mean = 12,000 Rp).

Buranga fish market was much more informal than Sampoawatu.  It was surveyed on three occasions, during two of which no fish were sold.  One the first occasion of surveying, one fisher and a middle-woman from Sampela sold reef fish directly to Kaledupans.  All fish were surveyed and prices were similar to Sampoawatu.  Due to the lack of fish present at Buranga market no data from Buranga was analysed.

4.4 Hoga

The price per kilogram paid to pelagic fishers for tuna by Operation Wallacea in Hoga is set at 8000 Rp.  Figure 4.41 (below) shows this is approximately double the mean price per kilogram paid to fishers in Sampoawatu market.

Table 4.41 Changes in tuna variables as the number of people living on Hoga increased:

There were increases in the number of people on Hoga between the three fortnight’s surveyed and smaller increases in the mean amount of tuna bought each day (Table 4.41).  This meant that the amount of tuna decreased from 0.41 to 0.26 kg per person between the first and third fortnight surveyed (tuna is the only meat bought by Operation Wallacea on Hoga to feed staff and volunteers except for rare occasions).  The number of fishers supplying tuna to Hoga increased as the amount of tuna increased between the three fortnights at approximately the same rate.

Figure 4.42 shows increases in people living on Hoga Island with Operation Wallacea during three fortnightly periods.  The amount of tuna increases between the 1^st and 2^nd fortnights (day 14 and 15).  However there is no apparent rise in the weight of tuna bought between the 2^nd and 3^rd fortnights (day 28 and 29) even though there is an increase of 50 people.

4.5 Catch prices

Figure 4.51 shows pelagic fishers receive higher mean financial returns (48,000 Rp) than reef fishers from all four techniques from fishery survey data (Rp 13,810 = £1).  Net fishers receive the highest financial return (15,000 Rp) between reef fishing techniques surveyed.  Line and spear fishers receive the lowest mean financial return (7,000 and 5,000 Rp respectively).

Earnings received per trip from the daily fisher income survey are higher for pelagic fishers than line, net and speargun fishers (Figure 4.52) and therefore reflect results of fishery surveys.  The ngambai fisher surveyed, however received more money for his catches than pelagic fishers on average.

4.6 Economic expenditures

Table 4.61: Economic expenditures of different fishing techniques:

Boat and engine maintenance is expensive for pelagic fishers, however these costs are infrequent unlike fuel, which is the highest daily cost to pelagic fishers (Table 4.61).  It is this daily fuel cost that makes pelagic fishing considerably more expensive to practice than reef fishing techniques, except ngambai fishing using a motorboat.  Net fishing is on average more expensive than line fishing and higher effort is also required to repair minor damage to nets.  Spear fishing has the fewest costs, which are virtually insignificant.

Motorboats and their engines are normally purchased separately and cost approximately the same with mean values of Rp 2.75 million and Rp 3.25 million (or approximately £199 and £235) respectively.

4.7 Economic returns

The mean economic return per trip (including fishing costs) for individual fishers is higher for pelagic fishers (Rp 24,500) than fishers of any reef fishing technique (Figure 4.71).  However there is also a large variation in the economic returns of different pelagic fishers.  Between reef fishing techniques, net fishers have the highest mean economic return (Rp 11,000) and line and spear fishers the lowest mean economic return (Rp 4,500 and Rp 4,000 respectively).

4.8 Environment implications

The number of species caught by reef fishing techniques (Figure 4.81) is higher than pelagic fishers (see Table 4.11).  The number of species caught is very similar for line, speargun and spear fishers (around 4 species per trip).  This is lower than net fishers who catch on average nine species on each trip.

Footnote: a = more fish present, b = no change in fish numbers, c = fish have moved away but not declined, d = there has been a decline in fish populations, e = do not know.

Figure 4.82 shows the responses of reef and pelagic fishers to how fish numbers have changed since the past.  The most popular response for both fisheries is that there has been a significant decline in fish populations, followed by the answer that fish have moved away (i.e. fish catches have decreased) but numbers have not actually declined.  Fewer people thought numbers had stayed the same and very few people in either fishery believed fish numbers had increased.

Figure 4.83 Length frequency distributions for Katsuwonus pelamis and Thunnus obesus (dotted lines mark lengths of maturity):

The length frequency distribution for Katsuwonus pelamis (skipjack tuna) and Thunnus obesus (bigeye tuna) surveyed from catches in Hoga and Sampela is shown in Figure 4.83.  The reported mean maturity length of K. pelamis is 42 cm (Fishbase, 2002a).  Most of the proportion of K. pelamis caught is above the mean maturity length, however there are a significant proportion caught as juveniles.  The mean maturity length of T. obesus according to Fishbase (2002a) is 108 cm.  This is significantly longer than the length of any T. obesus surveyed in pelagic fish catches.

Table 4.81: Length and maturity figures for tuna surveyed in Sampela and Hoga:

Table 4.81 shows that Katsuwonus pelamis was caught more often than Thunnus obesus in surveyed pelagic fish catches, however, the mean fork length and weight of T. obesus is higher than K. pelamis in the catches sampled.  The length of maturity for T. obesus is significantly higher than any of the fish sampled in Hoga or Sampela making all fish surveyed juvenile.  The maturity length of K. pelamis is 43 cm making 61% of K. pelamis surveyed mature.

Length frequency distribution graphs for 19 reef fish are shown below in Figure 4.84.  They cover a range of families (including Serranidae, Lutjanidae, Lethrinidae, Mullidae and Siganidae) and fish caught by line and net techniques during the morning, afternoon and evening fisheries.  There is a significant proportion of species within which high proportions of immature individuals were surveyed.  Two regularly fished species with high numbers of immature individuals observed were Gerres oyena and Siganus canaliculatus.

Figure 4.84: Length frequency distributions for reef fish.  All x-axis = length (cm) and y-axis = frequency.  The dotted lines mark the lengths of maturity for each species.

Figure 4.84 (continued): Length frequency distributions for reef fish.  All x-axis = length (cm) and y-axis = frequency.  The dotted lines mark the lengths of maturity for each species.

Table 4.82: Length and maturity figures for reef fish:

19 species of reef fish, each surveyed five times or more and for which data was available on maturity length, were examined.  Table 4.82 shows that for 11 of these species, less than 50% of the individuals measured were mature and for four species no fish surveyed were mature (Cephalopholis sonnerati, Sphyraena barracuda, Lutjanus gibbus and Lutjanus bohar).  The individuals of only two species surveyed were found to be 100% mature (Mulloidichthys flavolineatus and Hemiramphus far).

The mean fork length of reef fish (Figure 4.85) caught in Sampela (the area of highest observed fishing effort (see figure 4.17) was less than Hoga (an area of reduced fishing effort).  Langgira and Buranga have large ranges in fish length because of small sample sizes in these areas, especially Buranga, which was sampled on fewer occasions than the other three zones.

The mean fork lengths of Katsuwonus pelamis and Thunnus obesus were longer when caught without rompong than those caught in association with rompong (figure 4.86).

4.9 Fisher responses

All 15 pelagic fishers interviewed thought that pelagic fishers were increasing and the numbers of fishers in the fishery would continue to increase into the future (Figure 4.91).

Most reef fishers currently do not want to change to pelagic fishing in the future if the option to do so was available to them out of the fifteen fishers interviewed (Figure 4.92).  The fishing technique with the highest proportion of fishers wanting to become pelagic fishers is line fishing.  Net fishers appear to have much less desire to become pelagic fishers.

Figure 4.93 shows that a variety of techniques are practised by pelagic tuna fishers during the calm season and sometimes during the westerly winds.  Live fish fishing is most commonly practised at atolls only reachable using a motorboat.  Turtle fishing is also popular, often carried out using spearguns and shark fin, net and line fishing are also practised. 
5. Interpretation

5.1 Catch and effort

5.11 Quantity and length of fishing trips

There was no overall difference between the quantity of fishing trips made each day between reef and pelagic fishers according to the daily fisher income survey or interview responses (survey: t = 0.77, d.f. = 20, p = 0.45; interview: t = 1.92, d.f. = 15, p = 0.074).  The duration of fishing trips was significantly longer for pelagic fishers than reef fishers by approximately 2 hours (t = 9.4, d.f. = 83, p < 0.01).  The majority of pelagic fishers came back to Sampela at approximately the same time as reef fishers (between 9am and midday) however they tended to leave earlier in the morning (3-4am) than reef fishers (6am).  Pelagic fishers have further to travel past Hoga or Lintea than reef fishers, which almost exclusively fished within the Stakeholder Zone.  However it should be acknowledged that a small proportion of net fishers use motorboats to fish on the other side of Kaledupa around Sombano (Figure 2.53).  Fishing using a speargun was the only reef technique that did not differ to pelagic fishing in trip duration, however only a small number of speargun fishers were surveyed.  Fishers using spears spent significantly less time fishing than line or net fishers.  Many spear fishers fished at extreme low tides around the reef flat close to Sampela.  The short duration before the tide started to rise once more and the short distance from Sampela could be used to explain the difference.  Another important factor to be considered are the high proportion of children in this fishery fishing for family consumption rather than markets, which could also mean shorter fishing trips as they are not aiming to catch as many fish.  These results are also backed up by the fishing trip duration of the afternoon fishery, which was significantly shorter than the morning and evening fisheries (f = 15.6, d.f. = 2, p < 0.01) as fishing using spears dominates the afternoon fishery.

5.12 Catch and CPUE

Technique

The catch weight was significantly greater for pelagic fishers than net fishers, which were significantly higher than spear and line catches. (h = 49, d.f = 4, p < 0.001).  The only reef technique that may consistently match pelagic fishing for catch weight is ngambai.  However, only one ngambai catch was sampled and so it was included under net fishing for analysis. 

As pelagic fishers spend longer fishing than net fishers no statistical difference was found between these techniques in CPUE.  CPUE also overlaps between spear fishers and net fishers reflecting the short duration of spear fishing trips.  Line fishers received significantly less CPUE than pelagic and net fishers (h = 29.5, d.f. = 4, p < 0.001).  Reef line fishers are thought to be in decline in Sampela (Chris Majors, personal communication) and many line fishers interviewed thought their catches had declined over time.

Fishery

Fishers in the evening reef fishery were found to catch a significantly greater weight of fish than the morning reef fishers (f = 4.83, d.f. = 2, p = 0.001).  The evening fishery may have high catch weights due to the higher proportions of net fishermen surveyed in this fishery compared to the morning, which is dominated by line fishers.  CPUE however was significantly greater for afternoon reef fishers than morning reef fishers (f = 6.83, d.f. = 2, p < 0.001).  Even though catch weight is similar between the afternoon and morning fisheries, because of short fishing trip times in the afternoon this fishery has a higher CPUE. 

Habitat

No significant difference was observed between the catch weight and CPUE between reef wall, reef flat and sea grass habitats (Catch weight: f = 1.06, d.f = 2, p = 0.35; CPUE: f = 1.67, d.f = 2, p = 0.195).  Different techniques being practised in sea grass and reef flat ecosystems produced large variations within the catch weight and CPUE of these habitats.  The reef wall is the only habitat, which is almost exclusively fished using only one fishing technique (hand-lines from kalokoes). 

Area

The four broad areas (Sampela, Langgira, Hoga and Buranga) also showed no differences in catch weight or CPUE for reef fishers (Catch weight: f = 0.74, d.f = 3, p = 0.53; CPUE: h = 7, d.f. = 3, p = 0.07) even though fishing effort seems to be concentrated in Sampela and to the west of Hoga (Figure 4.17).  Catch weight and CPUE, however are not depressed in Sampela and mean catch weight and CPUE are highest in Sampela.  This may give the impression that fish resources are still healthy in the area as the area of highest fishing effort produces the greatest mean catch and CPUE.

Use of rompong?

Pelagic fishers fishing around rompong caught significantly more fish and had a higher CPUE than pelagic fishers not fishing around rompong (catch weight: w = 2175, d.f. = 83, p = 0.031; CPUE: t = 3.18, d.f. = 83, p < 0.001).  Fishers rely upon rompong to catch fish more than in the past as fish catches in association with rompong are higher.  Tuna not associated with rompong are typically spread out over large areas of ocean making fishing very hit and miss and often fishers were surveyed coming back to Sampela with no fish.  This is common within the pelagic fishery, however often catches may be large and these larger catches help to balance against days without fish.  Fishers reported the last remaining rompong to the north of Hoga was missing at the start of the third fortnight of sampling.  After this time the daily catch weight being bought by Operation Wallacea varied widely (figure 4.42) and it was noticed that the amount of tuna sold in Sampoawatu market decreased.  This may show the importance of rompong to the sustainability of the pelagic fishery.

5.2 Market destinations

Figure 5.21:

The similarity dendrogram (Figure 5.21) was used to compare the importance of markets to reef and pelagic fishers.  Pelagic and reef fishers first choice (1^st) through to forth choice (4^th) markets are shown on the x-axis.   Similarity is shown on the y-axis (100 = exactly the same, 0 = completely different).  The most important market to both pelagic and reef fishers is 80% similar.  This is because most fishers from both fisheries use Sampoawatu market to sell most of their fish.  Sampoawatu is a large market with a high demand for fish on a daily basis and is the closest market to Sampela on Kaledupa.  The middle-woman who has the largest share in selling fish at Sampoawatu also has fisheries agreements with 16 reef fishers and 6 pelagic fishers from Sampela that mean they must sell their fish through her on a regular basis. 

The 2^nd choice markets through to the 4^th choice markets are much less similar between reef and pelagic fishers.  This suggests that there are differences in the markets that pelagic and reef fishers use on a daily basis.  Reasons behind these differences include the greater importance to reef fishers of selling and giving away fish in Sampela and the importance of Hoga as a market for pelagic fishers but not to reef fishers.  Many reef fishers will give away fish on a regular basis in Sampela to family and friends.  This practice is part of Bajo culture to look after other Bajo (Chris Majors, personal communication).  It is not seen, however in pelagic fishing as these fishers must cover economic costs, such as fuel and pelagic fishing is more driven by making a profit rather than purely supplying yourself and your family with food.

5.3 Sampoawatu Market

The price per kilogram for tuna was significantly higher than reef fish caught by line or net methods at Sampoawatu Market (f = 4, d.f = 3, p = 0.01).  Reef fish caught using ngambai had a large range in price per kilogram and consequently did not differ with the price of pelagic or reef fish.  Very few speargun and no spear catches were surveyed at Sampoawatu market and so they are absent from analysis.

The total price received in Sampoawatu market significantly differed between fishers using different techniques (f = 29.9, d.f = 3, p < 0.001).  Pelagic fishers received a higher price than net fishers who also received a higher price than line fishers.  The total price received by ngambai fishers did not differ to net or pelagic fishers but was significantly greater than line fishers.

5.4 Hoga

Hoga pays a higher price (Rp 8,000) for tuna than local markets (Rp 4,000) so that fishers are encouraged to visit Hoga to sell their fish.  Many fishers however, never visit Hoga.  The main reason given for this is that they have slower boats and reach Hoga too late in the morning after Operation Wallacea has bought enough fish for that day.  Typically Operation Wallacea will only buy from a maximum of 4 fishers each day depending on the amount of tuna each has to sell and this means that on average by 9am enough tuna has been bought on Hoga.  Some fishers remarked that they go fishing early in the morning catching enough tuna to sell on Hoga to cover fuel costs and then go back out fishing in the same morning selling these fish in Sampoawatu when they return.  Operation Wallacea pay higher than the market price to encourage fishers to go to Hoga rather than Sampoawatu and to put money back into the local community.  However this money goes to pelagic fishers, which earn more money than most reef fishers (see section 5.7) helping to increase the gap in income between reef and pelagic fishers.

5.5 Catch prices

The money received for catches is significantly higher for pelagic fishers than all reef fishing techniques and net fishers receive higher amounts of money for their catches than both line and spear fishers (h = 52.9, d.f = 4, p < 0.001).  The price paid at Sampoawatu market is significantly higher for pelagic fish than reef fish and pelagic fishers sell a small proportion of fish to Hoga (which pays over double the price per kilogram that reef fishers would receive in Sampoawatu).  This increases the gap between the mean catch weight for reef and pelagic fishers already shown (Section 5.12).

Secondary data from the daily fisher income survey showed that pelagic fishers received significantly higher amounts of money per fishing trip than both net and line fishers (f = 19.2, d.f. = 2, p < 0.001).  There were no differences however found between line and net fishers.

5.6 Economic expenditure

To buy a motorboat and engine costs on average around Rp 5.5 million and at the very least Rp 2 million.  Prices differ according to whether it is bought first or second-hand, the size and quality of the vessel, and engine power.  This amount is almost impossible to save by practising reef fishing alone, except for possibly the best net fishers and ngambai fishers in Sampela (for which there is the least interest in becoming a pelagic fisher).  One option is to owe a debt, however this is risky to a fisher who has fished from the reef and has little experience of full-time pelagic fishing for tuna and repairing engines.  Many existing pelagic fishers interviewed saved the money to buy their motorboat and engines from other activities, such as working in Malaysia or shark fishing. 

Spear fishing as the equipment is cheap and only occasionally needs to be replaced is the cheapest reef fishing technique.  Hooks, lines and nets, which are often snagged on coral, need to be replaced much more often making these techniques more costly.

5.7 Economic returns

The economic returns received by individual fishers practising different fishing techniques was significantly higher for pelagic fishers than reef line and spear fishers (h = 9.71, d.f. = 4, p = 0.046). There was no difference, however between the economic returns of pelagic and net fishers.  This is reflected by interview responses during which reef fishers were asked ‘if they thought pelagic fishing was more or less lucrative than reef fishing?’  Line fishers in general thought pelagic fishing was more lucrative, whereas net fishers perceived pelagic fishing to be less lucrative than reef fishing because of the extra costs involved.

5.8 Environmental implications

The number of species caught by net fishers was significantly greater than all other reef fishing techniques, which did not differ from each other (h = 34.2, d.f. = 3, p < 0.001).  Gillnets are highly selective in the size of the fish they catch as only certain size classes of fish will become tangled by their gills, operculi, fins or scales (Jennings et al 2001).  Gill nets however, are indiscriminate in the species of fish they catch and catches from nets often consist of over 10 different species.  Speargun and spear fishers can be more selective in the type of fish they are targeting.  Often speargun fishers will try to target high value species and larger fish that sell well in local markets.  More ‘timid’ fish that keep away from divers and nocturnal fish that are hard to find during the daytime will have a higher chance of escaping from speargun fishers.  Line fishers which fish over the reef wall often have very diverse catches but because they are targeting large fish, such as Serranidae and Carangidae they will only catch 5 or 6 fish per fishing trip limiting the number of species caught.  As net fishers have significantly higher catch weights and higher numbers of fish and fish species in their catches than line fishers it may be suggested that this technique is having the greatest environmental impact upon fish resources of the reefs around Sampela.

Very little is known about the state of the fisheries resources and the pressure upon them by the reef fishery from Sampela, and even less is known about the pelagic fish resources.  Opinions of fishers from both fisheries are similar and most believe fish resources are either declining or have moved away.  Many fishers from both fisheries believe that fish have moved into deeper waters or away from Hoga because of bomb explosions or the noise made from motorboats.  Increases in fisher numbers and more efficient fishing techniques such as nets, motorboats, cyanide and bombs may all contribute to the perceived declines.

Overall out of the 19 species and 832 individual reef fish surveyed for maturity 36.2%.   were found to be mature This compares to the two species and 47.5% mature individuals of the 1270 pelagic fish surveyed for maturity.  High proportions of immature fish caught can be detrimental to fish stocks.  If too many individuals are taken before they have a chance to reach adulthood, the overall spawning stock biomass may decrease reducing future recruitment levels (Jennings et al, 2001).

The fork lengths of reef fish from the areas of Sampela, Langgira and Hoga (Figure 3.11) were compared (Buranga was excluded as fewer surveys took place in this area).  The lengths of fish caught in Hoga were significantly longer than fish caught in Sampela (h = 22.52, d.f. = 2, p < 0.001).  These results may explain why CPUE did not differ between Hoga and Sampela, even though fishing effort was much higher in the area of Sampela.  This is because fishers are catching smaller sizes and fish species, which are more resistant to high levels of fishing pressure in Sampela.  Also a higher proportion of time is spent fishing, as travel time is less to nearby fishing grounds in Sampela compared to Hoga.

The fork lengths of Katsuwonus pelamis and Thunnus obesus were significantly longer when caught without rompong compared to those caught in association with rompong (K. obesus: w = 28305, d.f. = 376, p < 0.001; T. obesus: w = 1453, d.f. = 81, p = 0.005).  Rompong in the area are therefore attracting smaller tuna from the main tuna stock.  As fishing around rompong gives fishers higher catch weights and CPUE than fishing without rompong it encourages fishers to catch smaller, less mature fish rather than targeting larger fish found in free-swimming schools in the region.

5.9 Fisher responses

Pelagic fishers believe the number of fishers will continue to increase in the pelagic fishery.  This maybe reflected by the desires of some reef fishers to become pelagic fishers in the future.  Many of these are line fishers, which are often asked to go out with pelagic fishers as second or third fishers in the same boat.  Reef line fishers are most experienced and often perceived as the best fishers in the village at using hook and lines to catch fish.  By becoming a second fisher in another fisher’s boat it may allow the reef line fisher to save enough money over time to be able to purchase their own boat.

Many pelagic fishers practice fishing techniques other than line fishing for tuna during the calm season and some also practice other techniques during the westerly winds. 

Many fishers find that tuna are much harder to catch during the calm season and it was suggested that the abundance of tuna during the calm season might decrease due to seasonal migrations, especially for K. pelamis (Fishbase, 2002b).  Some fishers also suggested that during the calm season and westerly winds, while Operation Wallacea is not operating on Hoga and the weather allows better reef fishing, the Sampoawatu market price falls making pelagic fishing less profitable.  Another fisher commented that he didn’t like pelagic fishing in the westerly winds, as if his motorboat broke down at sea he would get blown out further making fishing during this period unsafe.  Many fishers, however, do take these risks and accept lower incomes by fishing for tuna throughout the year.

6. Discussion

6.1 The Sampela pelagic fishery

The recent increase in fishers owning motorboats and practising line fishing for tuna is perceived to rise in the future by fishers interviewed.  This increase may be justified in part by higher economic returns for pelagic fishing than reef line fishing.    Other reasons for the change may include declining fish resources and reef catches as perceived by many reef fishers.  Sunderlin (1994) found an increase in fishers using long lines to catch deeper pelagic species in response to declining traditionally fished resources in San Miguel Bay.  The economic returns of net fishers are no different to pelagic fishers, mainly due to the large variation in catch weight caught by pelagic fishers.  The mean catches of a small number of pelagic fishers surveyed, were too small to cover their economic costs.  One fisher commented during his interview that he was subsidising his pelagic fishing activities with money he saved in Malaysia.  Fishers may also have engine problems that, unless they have money saved, can result in large debts. 

The high prices paid to pelagic fishers by Operation Wallacea acts as an economic incentive, encouraging fishers to fish for tuna. Pelagic fishing is often encouraged by NGOs and fisheries authorities as an environmentally less damaging practice to reef fishing and to increase small-scale fisheries productivity (Roullot et al, 1988).  There is often little known about the environmental impacts of tuna fishing from artisanal fishers, such as those from Sampela.  Over half of the tuna surveyed from catches were found to be immature and all Thunnus obesus caught were juvenile.  Many pelagic fishers from Sampela perceive that tuna stocks around Hoga and Lintea (Figure 2.52) are declining and fishers have to travel further and further to catch tuna.  Rompong in the area are also encouraging fishing for immature tuna as they tend to attract juvenile fish.

Encouraging an increase in money and motorboats in Sampela increases the use of motorboats for other activities during the calm seasons (September to December and April to May (Operation Wallacea, 2002)) and occasionally during the westerly winds (January to March), during which fishing for tuna is less profitable.  Many pelagic fishers fish for live fish, such as Serranidae during the calm season.  The motorboat gives them access to outer atolls in the Wakatobi National Park.  Live fish are caught using both lines and cyanide.  Fishing using cyanide is a destructive technique that can cause widespread damage to the target fish and coral ecosystems (Thorburn, 2001) but is more effective and economically lucrative than line fishing. 

Other techniques practised during the calm season include shark-fin and turtle fishing.  Fishing for sharks and turtles was originally practised in Bajo communities for subsistence purposes.  Now however, there are strong markets for shark fins and turtles in Southeast Asia and shark fin and turtles caught by the Bajo are sold to middlemen that export the products to international markets.  Demand has increased for shark fin in China, Hong Kong and Singapore (Weber & Fordham, 1997) and concern is increasing for shark populations, which due to their life history make them vulnerable to exploitation (Fong & Anderson, 2002).  Indonesia in 1991 took the highest catch of elasmobranch fish species (79,800 metric tons) of any state in the world (Weber & Fordham, 1997) and CITES produced Conference Resolution 9.17 which calls for a review of the current knowledge on the population and trade of sharks (Weber & Fordham, 1997).

Turtle hunting is practised by many Bajo fishers across Southeast Sulawesi, the Flores Sea and Timor, who will often target known turtle breeding grounds (Bjorndal, 1995).  A study by KSBK (an Indonesian NGO) in 2002 reported that fishers from the Tukanbesi Islands catch turtle to ship to Bali.  Many Bajo in Sampela have turtle holding pens underneath their houses where they feed turtles to sell to middlemen, which ship them to Bali.  The trade is economically lucrative and individual turtles can be worth up to Rp 1 million (or £72).  They are used for religious ceremonies in Bali, however according to the WSPA (2002) only 300 turtles are required for religious purposes, whereas over 30,000 turtles are shipped to Bali each year.

6.2 Tuna stocks in the Western Pacific Ocean

World demand for tuna species is increasing and it is the second highest valued fishery product exported from Indonesia, after shrimp (Retnowati, 2002).  Thunnus obesus is the most highly valued tropical tuna in the Japanese sashimi market making it extremely sought after (Hampton, 2002).  Both T. obesus and Katsuwonus pelamis are highly migratory species and tagging experiments have revealed long distance migrations across large areas of the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (Hampton, 2002 & Hampton & Fournier, 2002).  For this reason K pelamis is considered as a single stock over the Western Pacific for stock assessment, although recruitment contributes to over 50% of the adult population in regional areas (Hampton & Fournier, 2002).  Tagging studies for T. obesus generally show many individuals to remain close to where they were released (Hampton, 2002) suggesting movement is less apparent than for other tuna species and high fishing pressure may depress regional populations.

The fishing mortality of K. pelamis has increased over time in the western Pacific, however according to Hampton & Fournier (2002) the impact of fishing is minimal in tropical regions.  The rapid growth and shorter time taken to reach maturity for K. pelamis makes this species less vulnerable to fishing pressure than many other tuna species.  Even though fishing mortality of K. pelamis has increased, the overall population of K. pelamis has also increased because of exceptionally high levels of recruitment in the late 1990s.  High recruitment across the Western Pacific is thought to be the result of favourable environmental conditions produced by the El Nino that occurred during this time (Hampton & Fournier, 2002). 

The catch per unit effort of K. pelamis declined, as did the number of boats in Northern Sulawesi fisheries between 1990 and 1995 (Naamin et al, 1996).  Landings of K. pelamis have, however, increased in the area as has industrial effort, which are now over 50% of total landings.  Industrial fisheries may be out-competing small-scale fisheries in Northern Sulawesi waters by installing offshore rompong attracting tuna away from coastal areas (Naamin et al, 1996).  Reductions in catch per unit effort in the area suggest the population of K. pelamis may be declining and fisheries management may be required to protect small-scale Indonesian fishers and fish stocks.

The fishing mortality for Thunnus obesus has rapidly increased in the Western Pacific since 1992 because of purse seine fisheries and Indonesian and Philippine hand line fisheries (Hampton, 2002).  This has resulted in decreases in the T. obesus population of the Western Pacific to approximately 60% of the 1960 biomass, until the late 1990s where biomass has increased due to favourable conditions produced by the 1989 El Nino (Hampton, 2002).  High levels of fishing pressure exist in Indonesian waters but very few fisheries statistics are available, making the state of this fishery uncertain (Williams, 2002).  The Indonesian fishery targets juvenile tuna between 30 and 45cm in fork length (Hampton, 2002).  These are tuna less than half a year old and are significantly below the age of maturity (approximately 2 years old).  Even though the biomass of T. obesus has recently increased in the Western Pacific, in the Southeast Asian region biomass stabilised but did not increase producing a large difference between the actual biomass and the projected biomass that would be present if fishing was absent (Hampton, 2002).  This suggests during times of reduced recruitment fish populations may be significantly depressed from the high levels of fishing mortality in Southeast Asia.

6.3 The Sampela reef fishery

The catch per unit effort of different fishing techniques is similar to that found by Amar et al (1996) and Friedlander & Parrish (1997) as shown in table 6.1.

Table 6.1: The CPUE (kg per fish hour^-1) for different reef fishing techniques in different locations:

The catch per unit effort at Malalison Island is higher for reef fishing techniques than in Sampela, although there is a large range in gillnetting depending on the method used.  The high fishing effort and low yield found in Malalison Island together with observed reef degradation and community poverty led Amar et al (1996) to suggest Malthusian over-fishing was taking place.  Catch per unit effort is also lower in Sampela than fishing techniques employed in Hanalei Bay, except for hook and line which is similar to Hanalei Bay.  Friedlander & Parrish (1997) found fish catches to represent only a small proportion of the total stock in Hanalei Bay (1.3%) and concluded that the fish community was not severely overfished.

Most reef fishers from Sampela interviewed perceived fish stocks and catches had declined since the past, as did fishers in San Miguel Bay between 1983 and 1993 (Sunderlin, 1994).  In San Miguel Bay the community responded to the decline by reducing the number participating in fishing activities, increasing numbers of people finding alternative income and an increase in fishery organisations to manage resources.  These adaptations may be harder to achieve in a community like Sampela because of two main reasons.  Firstly the Bajo are a culture that has always relied upon the sea and little opportunities for alternative income exist outside fishing.  Secondly the Bajo living in Sampela were until relatively recently a nomadic culture that never required any form of fisheries management.  Now that they live in a permanent settlement, resources may be being depressed around the local reefs, however it is the first time the Bajo have ever required to implement fishery management and this is an alien concept to them.

Of the 19 species of reef fish for which maturity is known, only 36.2% were found to be mature.  Although this sample is only approximately 25% of the total number of reef fish sampled, it shows that many of the reef fish caught around Sampela are immature and growth overfishing might be occurring (Jennings et al, 2001).  The average length of the reef catch surveyed is 18.7cm, which shows the fishery is targeting not just immature individuals but also small species of fish, especially around Sampela where fishing effort is highest.  Gobert (1994) found similar results in the small-scale fishery of Martinique and concluded that the catch is based on species that can withstand the selectivity and effort of the fishery and overfishing had already eliminated larger fish species.  Friedlander and Parrish (1997) found some target species of the reef fishery in a Hawaiian Bay to be undersized when caught and concluded this was an important area of concern for future management.

6.4 Future management of fisheries in Sampela

The Stakeholder Zone encompassing the reefs on the Northeast coast of Kaledupa is to be managed by a Stakeholder Committee.  This will include park authorities, local government representatives, village spokespeople and Operation Wallacea (Operation Wallacea, 2002).   One underlying objective agreed by the Stakeholder Committee is the sustainable management of the artisanal fisheries within the zone by monitoring each fishery (Operation Wallacea, 2002).  The results of this study suggest reef fish resources in the zone may be under pressure from high levels of fishing effort.  Monitoring of the reef fishery needs to take place in the future to gain a more accurate picture of the state of fish stocks in the Stakeholder Zone.  Monitoring also needs to take place throughout the year (the Operation Wallacea research season lasts from June to September) to detect seasonal changes and to monitor seasonal fisheries, such as live fish and shark fishing, which only take place in the calm season.  This may be achieved through stakeholder participation by the training of local staff from Sampela, which has proven to be successful in other studies (McDuff, 2001).  The encouragement of: alternative incomes, such as agar cultivation, family planning, the removal of destructive fishing techniques and the introduction of marine reserves may help to improve the situation.  However environmental education is the key to successful management in the long-term.  Detailed monitoring which identifies primary environmental issues within the Stakeholder Zone, together with the education of fishers so that they can see the benefits and give their support to particular management options may create the best chance for effective management.

A concern arising from this study is the encouragement by Operation Wallacea of pelagic fishing for tuna. The fish resources of the stakeholder zone may be under pressure and one possible way of relieving this pressure is to encourage reef fishers to become pelagic fishers.  Almost nothing however, is known about the environmental impacts in the area from tuna fishing.  This study has shown that many fishers perceive declining tuna stocks, many juveniles are caught and other studies show concern over the state of tuna stocks in the region.  Without knowing the state of tuna stocks the precautionary principle (Garcia, 1994; FAO, 1995) is not being followed and may lead to further environmental and socio-economic problems in the future.  The fishing grounds of pelagic fishers are also not within the stakeholder zone.  The pelagic fishery supports many fishers in Sampela and effort is required by Operation Wallacea in the future to monitor the pelagic tuna fishery as numbers of fishers are expected to rise.
7. Conclusion:

7.1. Concluding remarks:

-         The economic returns are higher for pelagic fishers than some reef fishing techniques providing an incentive to become a pelagic fisher.

-         Large numbers of fish that are caught before they reach maturity in both reef and pelagic fisheries warrant concern for fisheries management.

-         Low catch per unit effort for all reef fishing techniques suggest reef resources are under pressure from fishing, especially from nets that yield the highest catch weights and number of species.

-         There is a high level of feeling from both reef and pelagic fishers that fish stocks are declining.

7.2. Further study and fisheries management:

-         Further research is needed to examine the sustainability of the pelagic tuna fishery in Sampela and tuna catch records for stock assessment need to be improved throughout Indonesia.  The possible management of the pelagic tuna fishery also needs to addressed by Operation Wallacea with the community of Sampela and pelagic fish stocks should be included within the management of the Wakatobi National Park.

-         The reef fishery needs to be surveyed during all seasons of the year and a long-term monitoring programme is essential to assess changes over time and calculate multi-species stock assessments.  The reef fisheries monitoring programme also needs to take into account all fishers within the Stakeholder Zone from Sampela, La Hoa and Kaledupan villages possibly through participatory evaluation by local staff from each village, which would report to Operation Wallacea and the Stakeholder Committee.  The fisheries monitoring programme must work more closely with biodiversity monitoring research taking place on Hoga, to combine results of fishery surveys with fishery independent data and build up an accurate picture of the state of fish stocks and the reef ecosystem within the Stakeholder Zone.

8. Appendices

8.1 Reef Morning fishery survey – fisher’ details data collection sheet:

8.2 Reef and Pelagic fisheries surveys: catch data collection sheet

8.3 Pelagic fishery survey: fisher’ details data collection sheet:

8.4 Market Survey data collection sheet

8.5 Daily fisher Survey data collection table

8.6 Interview Structure:

8.61 Pelagic Fishers

1.      Age

2.      How many people do you support by fishing? (children/adults)

3.      Do you practice any other fishing techniques, other than pelagic line fishing?

4.      Were there more or less pelagic fishermen in the past (5-10 years ago)?

5.      Are numbers of pelagic fishermen still increasing?

6.      Have numbers of pelagic fish increased or decreased since you began pelagic fishing?

7.      Did you change from reef fishing to pelagic fishing?

8.      If so, what techniques did you use before?

9.      What reasons prompted you to change from reef to pelagic fishing?

10.  How often do you go fishing each week?

11.  How much money do you spend on fuel each fishing trip?

12.  Do you hold any fisheries agreements with middle-women in Sampoawatu?

13.  Details

14.  Who did you buy your engine and boat from?

15.  How much did they cost?

16.  Did you need to purchase a loan to enable you to buy a motorboat?

17.  If so how much did/do you owe?

18.  Who did/do you owe money to?

19.  Was/is it hard to pay back?

20.  Do you spend more on boat maintenance or fuel?

21.  Is life easier now that you are fishing pelagic waters?

22.  Do you earn more money pelagic fishing?

23.  Do you use the motorboat for other income gathering activities? – what?

24.  Where do you sell your catch, what proportion goes to Family, Sampela and Sampoawatu and Hoga markets? – rank in order

7.62 Reef Fishers

Age

How many people do you support by fishing? (children/adults)

1.      Which fishing techniques do you practice?

2.      How often do you go fishing each week?

3.      Why do you fish using a line net, spear or bena bena?

4.      What is the main cost of the technique you fish by and How much does new gear cost?

5.      Who do you purchase new gear from?

6.      Where do you sell your catch, what proportion goes to Family, Sampela and Sampoawatu, Buranga and Hoga markets? – rank in order

7.      Does you sell your catch directly or through a middleman?

8.      Do you hold any fisheries agreements with middle-women in Sampoawatu?, details

9.      Do you think pelagic fishing earns more or less money than reef fishing?

10.  Would you like to in the future change to pelagic fishing?, If so, why haven’t you done so already?

11.  Are there more or less reef fish since you began fishing?

12.  Are there more or less pelagic fishers than 5-10 years ago?

8. References

Ahmed, M., Capistrano, A. D. & Hossain, M. 1997.  Experience of partnership models for the co-management of Bangladesh fisheries.  Fisheries Management and Ecology, 4, 233-248.

Allen, G. 1997.  Marine fishes of Tropical Australia and South-East Asia.  Western Australian Museum, Perth.

Amar, E. C., Cheong, R. M. T. & Cheong, M. V. T. 1996.  Small-scale fisheries of coral reefs and the need for community-based resource management in Malalison Island, Philippines.  Fisheries Research, 25, 265-277.

Amarasinghe, U. S. & de Silva, S. S. 1999. Sri Lankan reservoir fishery: a case for introduction of a co-management strategy.  Fisheries Management and Ecology, 6, 387-399.

Bjorndal, K. A. 1995.  Biology and conservation of sea turtles (revised edition).  Smithsonsian Institution Press, London.

Brown, R. C. 1996.  Community-based cooperative management: renewed interest in an old paradigm.  In Polunin N. V. C. & Roberts, C. M. (ed.) Reef fisheries. Chapman and Hall, London, pp. 185-194.

Dalzell, P. 1996. Catch rates, selectivity and yields of reef fishing.  In Polunin, N. V. C. & Roberts, C. M. (ed.) Reef fisheries. Chapman & Hall, London, pp. 161-192.

Djohani, R. H. 1996.  The Bajau: future marine park rangers in Indonesia?.  In: Parnwell, M. J. G. & Bryant, R. L. (ed.) Environmental Change in Southeast Asia, people politics and sustainable development.  Routledge, London.

Ebeling, A. W. & Hixon, M. A. 1991.  Tropical and temperate reef fishes: comparison of community structures.  In Sale, P. F. (ed.) The ecology of fishes on coral reefs.  Academic Press, San Diego, pp. 509-563.

Edinger, E. N., Jompa, J., Limmon, G. V., Widjatmoko, W. & Risk, M. J. 1998.  Reef degradation and coral biodiversity in Indonesia: effects of land-based pollution, destructive fishing practices and changes over time.  Marine Pollution Bulletin, 36, 617-630.

Elliot, G., Mitchell, B., Wiltshire, B., Manan, IR. A. & Wismer, S. 2001.  Community participation in marine protected area management: Wakatobi National Park, Sulawesi, Indonesia.  Coastal Management, 29, 295-316.

FAO, 1995.  Precautionary approach to fisheries.  Part 1: Guidelines on the precautionary approach to capture fisheries and species introductions.  FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No. 350/1.

FAO, 2002.  The Republic of Indonesia.  Available from: http://www.fao.org/fi/fcp/FICP_IDN_E.asp [accessed on: 4 August 2002]

Fishbase, 2002(a).  Fish database.  Available from: http://www.fishbase.org  [accessed on: 30^th July 2002]

Fishbase 2002(b).  Ecology of Katsuwonus pelamis.  Available at: http://www.fishbase.org/Ecology/FishEcologySummary.cfm?stockcode=121&GenusName=Katsuwonus&SpeciesName=pelamis Accessed on: 29^th September 2002.

Fong, Q. S. W. & Anderson, J. L. 2002.  International shark fin markets and shark management: an integrated market performance cohort analysis of the blacktip shark (Carcharhinus limbatus).  Ecological Economics, 40, 117-130.

Freon, P. & Misund D. A. 1999.  Dynamics of pelagic fish distribution and behaviour: effects on fisheries and stock assessment.  Fishing News Books, Oxford.

Friedlander, A. M. & Parrish, J. D. 1997.  Fisheries harvest and standing stock in a Hawaiian Bay.  Fisheries Research, 32, 33-50.

Garcia, S. M. 1994. The precautionary principle: its implication in capture fisheries management.  Ocean and Coastal Management, 22, 99-125.

Gobert, B. 1994.  Size structures of demersal catches in a multispecies multigear tropical fishery.  Fisheries Research, 19, 87-104.

Hampton, J. 2002.  Stock assessment of bigeye tuna in the western and central Pacific Ocean.  Available at: http://www.spc.org.nc/oceanfish [accessed on: 1 August 2002]

Hampton, J. & Fournier, D. 2002.  Stock Assessment of skipjack tuna in the western and central Pacific Ocean.  Available at: http://www.spc.org.nc/oceanfish  [accessed on: 1 August 2002]

Heemstra, P. C. & Randall, J. E. 1993.  FAO species catalogue: vol. 16. Groupers of the World.  FAO, Rome.

Ibrahim, S., Ambak, M. D., Shamsudin, L. & Samsudin, M. Z. 1996.  Importance of fish aggregating devices (FADs) as substrates for food organisms of fish.  Fisheries Research, 27, 265-273.

Jennings, S., Grandcourt, E. M. & Polunin, N. V. C. 1995.  The effects of fishing on the diversity, biomass and trophic structure of Seychelles’ reef fish communities.  Coral Reefs, 14, 225-235.

Jennings, S. Kaiser, M. J. & Reynolds, J. D. 2001.  Marine Fisheries Ecology.  Blackwell Science, Oxford.

Jennings, S. & Lock, J. M. 1996.  Population and ecosystem effects of reef fishing.  In Polunin, N. V. C. & Roberts, C. M. (ed.) Reef fisheries. Chapman & Hall, London, pp. 193-218. 

King, M. & Faasili, U. 1999.  Community-based management of subsistence fisheries in Samoa.  Fisheries Management and Ecology, 6, 133-144.

KSBK 2002.  KSBK Investigation on turtle trade in Bali.  Available at: http://www.ksbk.or.id/propg/UpdatereportonTurtleTradeinBali2.htm [accessed on 30 August 2002]

Laroche, J., Razanoelisoa, J., Farroux, E. & Rabenevanana, M. W. 1997.  The reef fisheries surrounding the south-west coastal cities of Madagascar.  Fisheries Management and Ecology, 4, 285-299.

Lieske, E. & Myers, R. 1996.  Coral reef fishes: Caribbean, Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean.  Harper Collins, London.

Mace, P. M. 1996.  Developing and sustaining world fisheries resources: the state of science and management.  2^nd World Fisheries Congress.  CSIRO, Australia.

McClanahan, T. R. Muthiga, N. A., Kamukuru, A. T., Machano, H. & Kiambo, R. W. 1999.  The effects of marine parks and fishing on coral reefs of northern Tanzania.  Biological Conservation, 89, 161-182.

McDuff, M. D. 2001.  Building the capacity of grassroots conservation organisations to conduct participatory evaluation.  Environmental Management, 27, 715-727.

McGoodwin, J. R. 2001.  Understanding the cultures of fishing communities: a key to fisheries management and food security.  FAO Fisheries Technical Paper.  No. 401.  Rome, FAO.

Naamin, N., Mathews, C.P. & Monintja, D. 1996.  Studies of Indonesian tuna fisheries, part 1: interactions between coastal and offshore tuna fisheries in Manado and Bitung, North Sulawesi.  In: Shomura, R. S., Majkowski, R. F. & Harman, R. F. (ed.).  Status of interactions of Pacific tuna fisheries in 1995.  FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No. 365.  FAO, Rome.

Operation Wallacea 2002.  Formation and proposed management for the Kaledupa stakeholder zone.  Available at: http://www.opwall.com/Stakeholder%20zone.htm [accessed on: 3 August 2002]

Pauly, D. & Thia-Eng, C. 1988.  The overfishing of marine resources: socioeconomic background in Southeast Asia.  Ambio, 17, 200-206.

Retnowati, D. 2002.  Tuna and tuna-like fisheries in Indonesia.  Proceedings of the 15^th Meeting of the Standing Committee in Tuna and Billfish, Hawaii.  Available at http://www.spc.org.nc/Oceanfish/Html/SCTB/SCTB15  [accessed on: 3 August 2002]

Roullot, J., Venkatasami, A. & Soondron, S. 1988.  SWIOP/WP/55 – The first three years experience in the use of fish aggregating devices in Mauritius (FAO document).  Available at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/field/310967.htm  [accessed on: 9 January 2002]

Sale, P. F. 1991.  The ecology of fishes on coral reefs.  Academic Press, San Diego.

Salm, R. V., Clark, J. & Siirila, E. 2000.  Marine and coastal protected areas: a guide for planners and  managers.  IUCN.  Washington DC, pp 257-259.

Sather, C. 1997.  The Bajau laut: adaptation, history, and fate in a marine fishing society of South-eastern Sabah.  Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Stequert, B. & Marsac, F. 1989.  Tropical tuna surface fisheries i