People power vs illegal fishing: Can it work?

 Two decades ago, faced with daunting challenges in coastal law enforcement, the Philippine government began harnessing local communities to help fight illegal fishing. How well has the strategy worked? This article provides some answers.

By Ruperto F. Sievert and Dolores Ariadne D. Diamante-Fabunan

"Ano naman ang magagawa namin laban sa mga high-powered guns ng mga iyan? Eh di siyempre, bababa na lang kami ng barko nang hindi nai-inspeksyon nang ayos iyon. May mga pamilya rin kami.."

(What can we do against their high-powered guns? Even when we do manage to get on board a suspected illegal fishing boat, we have no choice but to get off the boat before we can inspect it properly. After all, we have our families to think about.)               

his expression of fear and disgust by a government employee rang all too true 15 years ago. These days seem better, but are they, really?

Who will protect our country. s extensive shoreline?

A shared responsibility

In the Philippines, unless declared alienable and disposable for private ownership, natural resources including coastal resources, are owned by the State, a property regime long established by Spanish colonizers. Now, as an instrument of the modern State, the national government assumes the responsibility for regulating resource use. Many laws on fisheries, waste disposal, navigation, forestry, mining, infrastructure, and other human activities have, indeed, been formulated, debated on, enacted, and then revised. Also, reports on violations and petitions for action can be found among the records of national government offices. Unfortunately, enforcement leaves much to be desired. When it comes to enforcement, the Philippines may be regarded as a "soft" State.

Enforcement agencies of the government have always bewailed the lack of personnel, equipment and financial resources, allegedly preventing them from effectively protecting the country. s extensive shoreline of some 18,000 km. To address this weakness and to respond to the clamor of civilians for authority to apprehend fishery law violators, the national government has passed a number of measures that have allowed local governments and communities to share this responsibility since 1978.

From as early as 1978, local governments and communities have shared the responsibility for coastal law enforcement.

In 1978, then President Ferdinand E. Marcos ordered the training and deputation of barangay officials and fisherfolk association officers as deputy fish wardens and forest guards. Patrol boats and radios have been given out by the national government since the presidency of Corazon C. Aquino in response to requests from municipal governments. Some of these boats are made of fiberglass and already equipped with radio while a few are aluminum boats with outboard motors. Two of the more recent laws, the Local Government Code of 1991 (Download) and the Fisheries Code of 1998 (Download) , explicitly obligate municipal and city governments to enforce fishery laws in their respective territories. However, this devolution of power is not yet well recognized. It is not surprising to still hear the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resoruces of the Department of Agriculture, the lead national government agency for fisheries management, being blamed for incidences of illegal fishing in municipal waters.

Local government response

Thus far, not all local governments have effectively organized fishery law enforcement teams, some of which are more popularly referred to as "Bantay Dagat" (guardians of the sea; or literally, to watch over the sea). The organization of the enforcement team depends primarily on the determination of the political leadership to go after the illegal fishers. There are political leaders who are personally convinced about the adverse impact of destructive fishing. And then there are also those who act only upon extreme pressure from their constituents. Here, the persistence of the Municipal Agriculturist, an appointed official whose office is expected to provide basic services to the fishery sector, is critical. It is a trusted municipal agriculturist who can convince an unsure mayor to take a stand. In the absence of financially influential relations or relatives who are illegal fishers, this may not be difficult. Otherwise, it would take a non-governmental organization of good repute, with a wide network and the support of other influential entities, from outside the locality, to make for the indifference of the municipal government. Whatever the case, adherence to the policy against illegal fishing practices changes periodically coinciding with municipal elections held every three years. Fishery law enforcement may or may not be high on the agenda of the new mayor.

Tour of duty: A schedule for the local patrol teams is posted at the Bantay Dagat base in Palompon, Leyte. (Click image to enlarge)

The team enforces laws on closed areas and seasons, license requirements, prohibited gears (e.g. fine mesh nets, explosives, poisons, trawls, scare-lines that degrade or alter the fishing ground), banned fishery products and for protected species. Depending on the nature of the violation and whether a national law or municipal ordinance is invoked, violators are fined outright or changed in court. The gear, boat or catch may also be confiscated and the license (if licensed) revoked.

Fines for violating national laws go to the national treasury. In some municipalities, the fine paid by the violator is shared between the municipal government and the members of the patrol.

The upside

There are many advantages in employing a local fishery law enforcement team. Authorizing civilians to go after violators involve the people. This can facilitate community development, empowering the community to make informed decisions and be responsible for their fishery resources. The team may be multi-sectoral, comprising the deputized fish wardens, members of the police force who may be assigned by the mayor and, occasionally, a representative from the Philippine National Police Maritime Command, Coast Guard or Navy. The patrol leader could be one of the fish wardens or the assigned police personnel. The mayor, some town councilors, municipal agriculturist and fishery technologist occasionally join the patrol. This provides a good opportunity for the community to work together, supporting each other achieve a common goal. Their concerted effort becomes even more meaningful in instances when neighboring municipalities undertake joint patrols.

Some success stories: A cohesive community can make a
difference in coastal law enforcement.

Indeed, there have been instances of improved law enforcement, particularly in well-organized communities, where illegal fishing is controlled to a significant degree, proving that a cohesive community does help in solving law enforcement problems. One successful case is that of the Calaogao Marginal Fishers and Farmers Association of Caliling, Cauayan, Negros Oriental. Through the association. s effort, the apprehension of illegal fishers intensified and, in about four years, a significant drop in the number of violators was reported. The group started with four Bantay Dagat members, whose ranks swelled to 20 by the fourth year. What is particularly notable was the community. s active support of the Bantay Dagat. Thanks to donations from local stakeholders, the group was able to purchase radios, binoculars, searchlights, uniforms and other equipment.

Reality check

Reality, however, has a way of tilting the balance against law enforcement. The national government sometimes provides local governments with patrol boats and radios, but this is not enough to address the day-to-day law enforcement-related needs of the hundreds of coastal municipalities in the country.  Often, the patrol boat is a wooden outrigger boat powered by a 16-HP gasoline engine or a converted ("marinized") diesel truck engine. Municipalities without their own patrol boats usually borrow the boats of fishers for use in law enforcement.

The deputized fish wardens may work strictly voluntarily or receive some form of compensation, depending on the discretion of the municipal government. In a few municipalities, they are covered by accident and/or life insurance. In others, a minimal amount in recognition of the service they provide (honorarium) is given.

The ."term of office" is shaky because the assignment of fish wardens is not formalized in any document, and the tenure of fish wardens is supposed to be co-terminus with the mayor. s.

Even for a lawyer, learning all fishery laws can be a formidable task, all the more so for a civilian volunteer. Fishery laws tend to be complicated, vague, and subject to many interpretations. Moreover, documenting the evidence can be daunting, particularly for the team members, many of whom hardly reached high school.

Apprehending commercial boats fishing in municipal waters that extend to 15 km from the shoreline can be very dangerous, especially at night. Civilian volunteers are not provided firearms; only a member of the Philippine National Police or military who accompanies them, if at all, are allowed to carry arms. In extreme cases, patrol boats are deliberately rammed by often larger commercial fishing boats, or patrol members find themselves staring up the muzzles of armalites. Many commercial fishing boats are said to be accompanied by armed escorts, some rumored to be members of the police, military or paramilitary groups. There are documented cases in which fish wardens were beaten up by the crew of commercial fishing boats. Not too long ago, Raymundo Campanero, a fish warden from the province of Samar, was gunned down, allegedly on orders of blast and cyanide fishers.

But the more usual way by which violators try to get even is by filing countercharges against the patrol team members, alleging damage to gears or boat. And this can hurt -- a lot.

When countercharges are made after an apprehension, there is no concrete mechanism that would provide legal support to the deputy fish warden unless he or she happens to be a barangay official. Neither is there a mechanism to provide nay other means of financial assistance during the lengthy court hearings or should anything untoward happen. This is tragic, more so in the face of the fact that most fishery law enforcement team members are small fishers who depend solely on fishing for their livelihood, and are volunteers taking on a real law enforcer. s job with hardly any financial compensation.

Given all this, involving civilians to enforce the law may not be viable . at least, not just yet. Local participation in law enforcement is an ideal arrangement, but not if civilians, especially small fishers with little means to defend themselves, tend to be exploited and exposed to undue risks. One hears proposals to recognize and award the fish wardens. bravery, but this only obscures the continuing inadequacy of the government to reliably deploy professional armed forces that should be doing the job.

What now?

For the time being at least, community volunteers should be employed more in getting information about illegal fishing activities in their area. The job of apprehending illegal fishers is best left to the uniformed enforcers.

Members of the military or the Philippine National Police Maritime Command should be trained in the intricacies of enforcing fishery laws. This is more practicable than simply enjoining local participation in active law enforcement posthaste, forgetting to create the necessary mechanisms to help enforce the law without unduly exposing the people to risk. Only when these mechanisms are in place can the government and the community begin an enduring partnership in protecting the environment and managing the country. s natural resources.

Reprinted with authors' permission from Intercoast Network, International Newsletter of Coastal Management. (34):16-17.