National Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks in the Philippines (Philippine NPOA-Sharks)

Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 1 NATIONAL PLAN OF ACTION FOR THE CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF SHARKS IN THE PHILIPPINES (Philippine NPOA-Sharks 1 ) DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE BUREAU OF FISHERIES AND AQUATIC RESOURCES 2009 1 The term “sharks” refers to all cartilaginous fishes, as used in the UN-FAO IPOA-Sharks Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 2 CHAPTER 1 Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 3 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background On a global basis, shark fisheries belong to the unmonitored, unregulated and unmanaged (IUU) resources. In recognition of the expanding global catch of sharks and the potential negative impacts on shark populations, an International Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks (IPOA-Sharks) was adopted by the 23rd session of the UN FAO Committee on Fisheries (COFI) in 1999 (Oliver et al. 1998). The IPOA-Shark is a voluntary international instrument developed so that nations can take positive action to ensure the conservation and management of shark and their long-term sustainable use. The IPOA Sharks suggests that member States of the FAO (such as the Philippines) should adopt a National Plan of Action (NPOA-Sharks or Shark Plan) if their vessels conduct directed fisheries for sharks or their vessels regularly catch sharks in non directed fisheries. The IPOA Sharks requires each member nation that takes sharks in their fisheries to prepare a shark assessment report (SAR) with the aim of identifying conservation, management and any other issues associated with the shark catch, which may be possibly addressed in a NPOA- Sharks. The NPOA-Sharks requires collection and ongoing synthesis of compatible data at the appropriate resolution, including inter alia commercial data and data leading to improved species identification and, eventually, abundance indices. States are also encouraged to cooperate and, where appropriate, develop regional Shark-Plans through regional and sub-regional fisheries management organizations or arrangements, and other forms of cooperation. States are further requested to have a Shark-Plan in place by the 24th COFI Session in 2001 (Oliver et al. 1998). In Southeast Asia, there had been indications of the vast trade of shark resources brought out largely by the high profitability of shark and shark products (such as fins, cartilage and live oil) (Chen 1996). Although the ASEAN-SEAFDEC member countries have a common position that the management of commercial fisheries, including shark fisheries, should come under the purview of FAO, they nonetheless endorsed the FAO IPOA-Shark. At the ASEAN-SEAFDEC Millennium Conference, Fish for the People, held in Bangkok in November 2001, discussions on the sustainability of regional fisheries were initiated. Member countries acknowledged the potential threats to shark populations and the need to comprehensively address species management-related issues but also recognized the difficulty and challenges considering the lack of available information on shark catches, utilization and trade in the region (SEAFDEC 2006). Since the Millennium Conference in 2001, ASEAN member countries have taken several actions toward the formulation of the NPOA-Sharks. SEAFDEC, as a regional fisheries management organization, provided a forum for the member countries to discuss and build a common stand on the issue of the management of sharks. In October 2002 ASEAN-SEAFDEC member countries agreed and endorsed the collection and analysis of data on sharks and its fisheries as basis for the development of appropriate fisheries management policy and actions. The Philippines is not a major shark fishing nation but as a member of the UN FAO, it is committed to produce its own National Plan of Action for Shark as also agreed upon during the second ASEAN-SEAFDEC Regional Technical Consultation on Sharks Fisheries, held in Phuket, Thailand from 13 to 15 July 2004. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 4 1.2 Definitions The term “shark” is often used as a generic term for all shark and shark-like species under the Class Chondrichthyes, as applied by UN-FAO in IPOA-Sharks. The chondrichthyan fishes, so-called based largely on a cartilaginous endoskeleton, are generally grouped into two major extant (i.e., living) subclasses, namely the Subclass Elasmobranchii, to which true sharks and winged sharks (i.e., batoids) belong, and the Subclass Holocephalii to which the silversharks (or chimaeras) belong. The “true sharks” technically belongs to eight specific orders under Subclass Elasmobranchii, generally characterized with a fusiform body shape and 5-7 laterally positioned gill openings. Some shark taxonomists sometimes refer to true sharks as “non batoids”. The “winged sharks” under Subclass Elasmobranchii are the skates and rays including guitarfishes, sawfishes and electric rays, and as a group, is often collectively called as “batoids”. The winged sharks are generally characterized by a disc-like dorso-ventrally flattened body and ventrally positioned gills. “Silversharks” refers to chimaeras, characterized by a large head, scale-less skin, a long sharp spine on the leading edge of the first dorsal fin, and, often a whip-like tail; also known as ratfishes or elephantfishes. In this document, the term “sharks” will be used in a generic sense to refer to all cartilaginous species, as applied by IPOA-Sharks of the UN-FAO. “Shark-plan” is also used interchangeably with NPOA-Sharks. 1.3 Purpose and Need Historically considered as having low economic value to large-scale commercial fisheries, sharks have been often neglected by fishery management agencies. In recent years, sharks have gained commercial importance and are increasingly targeted for its meat, skin, cartilage, teeth, jaws, liver and other internal organs (Rose 1996). They are increasingly taken in by-catch fisheries which target other more commercially important bony fishes (Camhi et al. 1998). Increasing demands for shark and shark products in the past 30 years have led to a considerable number of species threatened with extinction due to a combination of factors including degradation of important habitats (i.e., nursery and breeding grounds) from development and pollution. Consequently, concerns have increased also about the rise in shark catches and the results this has for some shark species populations in several areas of the world's oceans. Sharks are characterized by K-selected life history traits such as slow growth, late sexual maturity, low fecundity and long life, resulting in low rates of population increase, highly vulnerable to overexploitation and stock collapse, and slow recovery once the population is depleted. Sharks often have a low stock-recruitment relationship and long stock recovery times when overfished due to their late sexual maturity, low fecundity, albeit with low natural mortality, and complex spatial structures (size/sex segregation and seasonal migration) (Hoenig and Gruber 1990; Pratt and Casey 1990; Last and Stevens 1994; Camhi et al. 1998). Such complex life history traits make them highly vulnerable to overexploitation. As shark has a relatively low market value (excluding fins), countries may not manage their shark fisheries as effectively as those for higher valued species. There is a need to improve the management of directed shark fisheries and certain multispecies fisheries in which sharks constitute a significant bycatch. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 5 Figure 1.1. World reported catch of elasmobranch fishes (1947-1991). 1946 = 200 thousand tones; 1991 = 714 thousand tones, equivalent to an estimated 71 million animals. (Source: Bonfil 1994). In the Philippines, inventory studies in market and landing sites show that most, if not all, of these species are taken in various fisheries operation (Compagno et al. 2005; Maypa et al. 2000; Barut 2006; NSAP regional reports, in prep.). There is a need to balance fishing efforts and resource exploitation with conservation and management to attain sustainability marine fishery resources. The current limitation on knowledge of sharks and the practices employed in shark fisheries in many areas is causing problems for their conservation and management. Largely there is a lack of available catch, effort, landings and trade data, as well as limited information on the biological parameters of many species and their identification. Further, to improve knowledge on the state of shark stocks and facilitate the collection of the necessary information, adequate funds and support system for research and management is sorely lacking. The NPOA-Sharks addresses the importance of shark resources in the conservation of marine biodiversity and sustainable use of the resources for future generation. The success of the plan depends on the close cooperation between the implementing agencies and stakeholders. It requires collection and ongoing synthesis of compatible data at the appropriate resolution, including inter alia commercial data and data leading to improved species identification and, eventually, abundance indices. 1.4 Overall Objective of NPOA-Shark As prescribed by the UN-FAO IPOA-Shark, the overall objective of the National Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks (Shark Plan) is to ensure the conservation and management of sharks and their long-term sustainable use. The Philippine Shark Plan aims to: (a) Review existing knowledge of general biology (including distribution and ecology), fisheries, and trade of sharks in the Philippines; (b) Review existing shark conservation measures and legislation at the subnational and national levels; (c) Identify significant gaps in scientific knowledge, problems/ issues/concerns related to shark conservation and management. (d) Contribute to IPOA Shark Action Plan by targeting minimum requirements of a National Shark Plan, as follows: 1. Ensure that shark catches from directed and non-directed fisheries are sustainable. 2. Assess threats to shark populations, determine and protect critical habitats and implement harvesting strategies consistent with the principles of biological sustainability and rational long-term economic use. 3. Identify and pay attention, in particular, to vulnerable or threatened species. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 6 4. Improve and develop frameworks for establishing and coordinating effective consultation involving stakeholders in research, management and educational initiatives within and between States. 5. Minimize unutilized incidental catches of sharks 6. Contribute to the protection of biodiversity and ecosystem structure and function. 7. Minimize waste and discards from shark fisheries in accordance with paragraph 7.2.2g of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (e.g., requiring the retention of sharks from which fins are removed). 8. Encourage full use of dead sharks. 9. Facilitate improved species-specific catch and landings data and monitoring of shark fisheries. 10. Facilitate the identification and reporting of species biological and trade data. (e) Develop recommendations, guidelines for sustainable management of sharks in the Philippines, priorities for action, institutional responsibilities for such actions and resources needed for the implementation of these actions. (f) Promote the widespread use of these guidelines in the country. 1.5 Issues and Concern Lack of available catch, effort, landings and trade data as well as limited information on biological parameters and difficulties with species identification has led to poor state of knowledge of shark and shark fishery practices and problems in the conservation and management of sharks. Emphasis, therefore, is on greater understanding on shark and shark fishery practices through improved fishery monitoring, establishment of biological research and positive management action ensuring their sustainable use in fisheries. As in most other developing countries in the region, there is no dedicated stock assessment of shark fisheries in the country. Intermittent research on diversity and/or fisheries have been conducted in the past, either initiated independently by academic/research institutions or non-government organizations (e.g. Silliman University, WWF-Philippines), or in collaboration with BFAR-NFRDI and the NSAP. These studies are collated and used as a baseline document for a Philippine Shark Assessment Report (SAR). Major issues pertaining to the conservation and management of sharks emerged from these few studies, as reported in this document. These issues are grouped into the following: Monitoring; Data Collection and Analysis; Research; Capacity-building; and Conservation and Management, further subgrouped into Policy, Institutional Arrangements, IEC, Compliance and Enforcement. 1.6 Monitoring and Evaluation The lead agency in the development and review of the Philippine Shark Plan is the Department of Agriculture – Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resource (DA-BFAR). The Shark-plan is based on research results and findings of the NPOA-Shark Technical Working Group composed of national and regional shark specialists, fisheries scientists, and conservationists, managers or local practitioners from the following agencies: • BFAR-National Fisheries Research and Development Institute • BFAR-National Stock Assessment Project (Regional Offices) • BFAR-Fisheries Regulatory and Quarantine Division Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 7 • Conservation groups (Conservation International-Philippines, First Philippine Conservation Incorporated, World Wide Fund for Nature - Philippines, FishBase/WorldFish, and USAID BFAR FiSH Project) The Shark-plan underwent a series of consultation and review by other agencies and stakeholders with relevant interest in shark conservation and management, comprising of representatives from the: • Relevant Philippine government agencies • Commercial fishing industry • Recreational fishing groups • Indigenous groups • Conservation groups • Scientific agencies Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 8 CHAPTER 2 Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 9 CHAPTER 2: PHILIPPINE SHARK RESOURCES 2.1 Overview Cartilaginous fishes belong to an ancient group of fishes that evolved for over 400 million years. Living representatives are grouped into two main subclasses, namely, Holocephalii (silver sharks = chimaeras, ratfishes and elephant fishes), with representatives from deep cool water environment; and the Elasmobranchii, a large, diverse group (including sharks and batoids) with representatives in all types of environments, from fresh waters to the bottom of marine trenches. Subclass Holocephalii have three families and about 37-50 species. The classification of Subclass Elasmobranchii is still a subject of continuous debate but they are generally divided into two superorders, i.e., galeomorphs and squalomorphs, which include the sharks composed of 30 families and approximately 368-488 species and the batoids composed of rays, skates, torpedoes, guitarfishes, and sawfishes, embracing 14-21 families and about 470-627 species (Compagno 1997, 1984, and 2000). Diversity of cartilaginous fishes in the Philippines is easily seen from records of various landing and markets sites in the country. Compagno et al. 2005 report at least 163 species present or possibly present in the Philippine waters: Subclass Holocephalii is represented by at least three species; Subclass Elasmobranchii represented by at least 160 species (i.e., 94 true shark species; 66 batoids/ winged sharks) (see Appendix A; Table 2.1). At least two more species have been confirmed to be present since the 2005 checklist while over 60 more species have been reported from various sources (e.g., results of fishers’ interviews of fishers; review of literature; species checklists of from NSAP catch landings from the regions) which needs further validation. All of these species factor in Philippine fisheries, either in directed/targeted catch or incidental by-catch of commercial and/or municipal fisheries. However, there has been limited information and reporting records on each of these species nationwide. Opportunistic inventory studies in the past made it possible to come up with a species list for the country. However, since knowledge and capacity for shark biodiversity assessment is generally lacking, problems in relation to species identification, catch reporting and monitoring abound. There is, thus, great difficulty in assessing status of populations and in providing appropriate management measures. 2.2 Taxonomy and Research Historically, research on the biodiversity of Philippine sharks has, for the most part, been accomplished as part of exploratory research on the diversity of Philippine fishes. Compagno et al. (2005) discuss in detail the historical account on ichthyofaunal research in the Philippines. Apparently, the earliest publication on Philippine marine fishes was as early as 1706. Linnaeus’ Systema Naturae published in 1758 “… set the stage for ichthyological exploration of the world by European research institutions as a part of the great wave of conquest, colonization, trade, and exploitation in the 18th and 19th centuries”. Consequently, Philippine waters were explored and fishes were collected and deposited in various museums in Europe (Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle in Paris; British Museum Natural History in London; Humboldt Museum in Berlin). The University of Santo Tomas (founded in 1611) had also accumulated a considerable collection of fishes, including a Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 10 stuffed whale shark acquired about 1840, while the Ateneo de Manila University also started their own collection in 1865, which purportedly exceeded that in the UST holdings after ten years. Collections from the Albatross (1907-1910) expeditions, mostly lodged at the U.S. National Museum of Natural History in Washington, D.C. were partially reported on by various U.S. ichthyologists, including Hugh M. Smith, Lewis Radcliffe, Henry W. Fowler and Barton A. Bean. Some other ichthyologists, including Alvin Seale, also conducted their own collections around the same time. Albert Herre made extensive visits in Philippine waters between 1920 - 1948 and deposited major collections of fishes at Stanford University and at various Philippine institutions (i.e., the Philippine Bureau of Sciences and Silliman University). Herre’s checklist of Philippine fishes in 1953 listed 2145 species which included new species of sharks. The collections at the Philippine Bureau of Sciences, however, were completely destroyed by the Japanese during the war and Herre had to rebuild his Philippine checklist. Despite the seemingly “large amount of collecting”, Herre (1953) concluded Philippine fish fauna is by no means completely known while Compagno et al (2005) reiterated that cartilaginous fishes, in particular, is “sketchily understood”. The first and only known focused elasmobranch species inventory conducted was between 1998-2001, by the WWF through Silliman University, in collaboration with CSIRO and the South African Museum which yielded productive results in terms of confirming species present in the waters and discovering new ones, to either the Philippines, in particular, or science in general. 2.3 Species Occurrence Little is known about the species composition of elasmobranch catches in the Philippines in previous years. Warfel and Clague (1950) report tiger sharks to be the major catch of shark longlines around the Philippines from exploratory fishing. Other sharks reported in the survey include at least six species corresponding to the genus Carcharhinus, plus Sphyrna zygaena, Scyliorhinus torazame, Hexanchus griseus and an unidentified nurse shark. The species taken by gillnets were Pristis cuspidatus and Rhynchobatus djiddensis. Encina (1977) reports the commercial fishery for piked spiny dogfish Squalus acanthias was reported to have been started in 1967, specifically for squalene oil (as cited in Barut and Zartiaga 1997 and in Chen 1996). The initial identification of the species (i.e., S. acanthias), however is highly suspect since there is no confirmed collection record for the species in the country. Additionally, dogfishes are one of the more diverse group of sharks (>20 species with very similar features in one genus alone and more new species being discovered as new fisheries are monitored. Reports, historical or current, on the fishery or population of this species therefore, would be a collective for the members of the family exploited in the fishery (e.g., Squalus spp. and Centrophorus spp.). Maypa et al. (1999) conducted an initial review of at least 18 published and unpublished papers, reports, and manuscripts dealing with shark and ray catches in 44 provinces in the country also yielded similar pitfalls. The preliminary literature review yielded at least 120 species (6 species unidentified) belonging to 24 families, and identified priority areas for spot assessments and validation. Follow-up field visits and voucher specimen collections in at least 10 provinces in central Visayas and northern Mindanao confirmed 83 elasmobranch species, 43 of which are accorded provisional record status as new species to science, new or confirmed records to the Philippines, among others (Alava et al. 2000; Maypa et al. 2000; Maypa et al. 2001). Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 11 Inventory results contributed to the update of Compagno’s 2000 Philippine Chondrichthyes checklist from 122 species of belonging to 38 families (i.e., 2 species of chimaeras, 70 shark species and 50 batoids) to about 163 species (i.e., 3 chimaeras, 94 sharks and 66 batoids) (Compagno et al. 2005). From the Compagno’s checklist, 59% are confirmed to be present (i.e., based on vouchers and other evidences reviewed by the authors), 41% (67 species) are not confirmed (i.e., no voucher specimens reviewed nor validated by the authors at that date) but with likelihood for occurrence in Philippine waters based on the distributional information of the animal, and at least 23% (38 species) are new records to the Philippines, still undescribed, 16% (26 species) of which are possibly Philippine endemics (see Table 2.1). This suggests high endemicity for Philippine sharks and rays. Compagno et al.’s 2005 checklist includes the three planktivorous sharks: the whale shark (Rhincodon typus) (e.g., in Alava et al. 1999); the megamouth shark (Megachasma pelagios) accidentally caught in gillnet fishery in Cagayan de Oro in 1998 (Morissey and Elizaga 1999); and remains of an apparently stranded vagrant basking shark (Cetorhinus maximus) in Masbate in 1996 (Compagno et al. 2005). At least six more megamouth individuals have been reported in the Philippines since 1998: three more from Cagayan de Oro, two from Bayawan, Negros Island, one in Tigbauan, Iloilo and recently in Burias Pass (www.flmnh.org; Bagarinao 2004; Yasay 2003; Aca 2009). A few though sporadic studies on sharks and rays have been conducted which generated at least 30 more species not recorded in the Compagno et al.’s 2005 checklist (Table 2.2). Alava et al, (1997b) conducted a whale shark- manta ray fishery study in the Bohol Sea. Results show reports of mantas and the possibility of other devilray species under the genus Mobula. Data, however, was lumped, due to the researchers limited knowledge on mobulid taxonomy When manta ray was protected in 1998, NFRDI and NSAP Region 6 (2003-2004) conducted a fish stock assessment of mobulids (i.e., manta rays and devilrays) in Pamilacan Island, Bohol and Camiguin Island, Mindanao, Results confirmed the presence of at least four species Mobula which are also directly targeted with the manta rays in the Bohol Sea (Barut, unpub. ms). An independent and largely opportunistic discovery by WWF field personnel between 2003 2006 confirmed presence of two other species, namely Dalatia licha and Isurus paucus, and listed at list eight others which were not identified to the genus and/or species level (Gaudiano, unpub ms). A SEAFDEC-funded shark fisheries studies in four monitoring/landing sites (i.e., Coron/Panlaitan, Palawan; Aparri, Cagayan; San Jose Occidental Mindoro; and Mabua, Surigao del Norte by BFAR-NFRDI yielded at least 24 species, a report on a shovelnose ray (Aptychotrema sp.) suggest possibly new record for the Philippines and needing further verification and validation (Barut, unpub ms). NSAP initiated shark and ray assessments in the regions, between 1998-2006, also yielded additional species (see Table 2.2). A number of these species need further validation in terms of species identification. 2.4 Abundance, Distribution and Population Status There has been no dedicated study on population research on any species of sharks in the Philippines. Information on the status of the population of whales, Rhincodon typus, however, may be inferred from the studies of Trono (1996), Alava et al. (1997), Yaptinchay et al. (1998) on its the fishery and trade of whale sharks in the Philippines, and Groves (1999) and Alava and Yaptinchay (2000) on the burgeoning whale shark tourism industry in Donsol, Sorsogon. These studies confirm occurrences of whale shark aggregation and feeding sites, thus also targeted as fishing grounds. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 12 Datasets also show that the whale shark numbers are going down, based on surrogate population information such as catch data in the Bohol Seas between 1993 and 1997 (Alava et al. 1997) and on sighting information in Donsol between 1997 and 1998 (Groves 1999; Alava and Yaptinchay 2000). Information was used in estimating a declining population in the Philippines through the application of the IUCN Red List Criteria and Categories and was classified as Critically Endangered (Alava 2005). Knowledge on the biology and ecology of the animal is still wanting. Whale shark aggregation sites were later identified as priority conservation areas in the Philippines (DENR 2001). There is no initial estimate as to size much less the characteristics of the population of whale sharks. WWF-Philippines initiated a participatory research (i.e., involving volunteers and tourists) on the whale sharks in Donsol, to identify individuals through distinguishing markings, sexing, behavior, as well as photo-identification. This is envisioned to at least provide valuable information on the characteristics of the whale shark population in Donsol. Recent activities in the past couple of years are currently conducted by Eco-Ocean in collaboration with various local NGOs and volunteers to address. A population discovered in Honda Bay by the Palawan Whale Shark Society in 1999 led to some behavioral studies on the species in the natural habitat (sans tourists) by Torres et al. (2000). Migration patterns through telemetry and satellite tracking as well as population stock analysis through genetic-microsatellite technique and feeding biology through plankton sampling was conducted between 1997 and 1998, in Malaysia and Philippines, by Hubbs Sea World Research Institute, in collaboration with Scripps Institute of Oceanography and Southwest Fisheries Science Center in La Jolla, San Diego, California. Initial results with one individual tagged in the Bohol Sea in early 1997, monitored to be transmitting signals off the coasts of Vietnam in mid-1997 (Eckert, pers comm.). This study revealed that the whale sharks are indeed highly migratory, suggesting, though not conclusively as yet, that the whale shark is a global population and thus required global management. Eckert (1998) also provided additional support for the migratory nature of whale sharks in the movement patterns of whale shark population at the Sea of Cortez, Mexico. One individual tagged from Mexico sent back a signal in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, after a span of over one year. Early attempts at inferring population data on the manta/mobula fishery studies (Alava et al 200b; Barut unpub ms) has been proven difficult largely in part due to the difficulty in the identification of members of the family. Again, reports (and any consequent management recommendations) on any one of the species is considered in this report as a collective for the family. 2.5 Population and Habitat Status Assessments of the habitat status of sharks and rays in the Philippines are lacking. An attempt, however, is conducted in early 1999 to collect baseline information on the biological and physico-chemical parameters of the municipal waters of Donsol, the world renowned aggregation site of whale sharks in the Philippines (Boncodin and Alava 1999). Data, however, is patchy and trends has not established. Similar ecological assessment is being conducted in Honda Bay (Puerto Princesa) by a group of researchers in Dos Palmas, Arrecefi Island, Puerto Princesa in 1999-2000. Other areas also known to be seasonally frequented by large aggregates of whale sharks are the Zambales (Mudjie Santos, pers. comm), Mati, Davao (Ruel Uy, pers comm.), Bohol Sea, and Sogod Bay, Leyte (Alava et al. 1997a). Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 13 Based on this information, priority conservation areas (PCA) for whale sharks in the Philippines have been identified during the PBCPP (See Figure 2.1). A similar attempt to identify priority conservation areas for elasmobranchs in general is shown in Figure 2.2. Despite the integral significance of habitat modification and loss to the management of sharks, researches on these aspects are virtually lacking. There is thus a need to strengthen research on elasmobranchs in the country so as to address concerns on habitat management. At least one site has been identified and established as a protected area specific for a shark species: Donsol, Sorsogon where its municipal waters has been primarily protected as a whale shark sanctuary, being the only known aggregation site and critical feeding are of whale sharks at that time. No such other habitat protection is given to any other shark species in the country. Conservation International –Philippines initiated the identification of marine Key Biodiversity Area for globally threatened marine species, inclusive of threatened species sharks and batoids. The mKBA identification process considered over 30 species of threatened sharks and batoids found in the Philippines as trigger species. At least 30 areas have been identified and proposed as mKBAs for sharks and batoids with seven more as candidate mKBAs (Ambal et al, in prep). Although additional information is still needed to refine the resolution of the boundaries, the proposed elasmobranch mKBAs would be one of the first step in highlighting the much needed management or protection of shark and batoids habitats in the country. 2.6 Gaps, Issues and Concerns Basic concern highlighted here is the limited local knowledge, capacity and skill to identify shark and ray catches to the species level which leads to misidentification of species, recording of synonyms, misspellings, general inconsistencies and absence of standards in terms of recording and reporting, and presence of largely unidentified species that are potentially new to the Philippines and to science. There is a need to develop a standard identification/field guide, data collection and monitoring protocols for a more productive monitoring of species in fisheries. It is also necessary for field staff to be trained on taxonomy, data collection and monitoring technique to better equip them in research and monitoring. Although some field personnel have undergone basic training in taxonomy, local capacity needs to be regularly evaluated and strengthened to correct identification lapses. Data collectors and monitoring team should have the enabling environment for them to effectively implement their roles, and as such, should have the necessary system of support in the field. In terms of habitat protection, there are also not many studies done on the habitats and ecology of sharks and sharks species. Priority Conservation Areas (PCAs) have been identified for elasmobranchs in general, the identification of which were based on productivity in captured fishery (whether direct or by-catch). Such areas however are too large that needed refinement for a more focused management intervention. Such PCAs are now currently refined through the MKBA process which currently rely on two criteria such as vulnerability and irreplaceability of trigger species (i.e., under global threat category such as Critically Endangered or; or endemicity). Several iterations have been done on mKBA analysis based on threatened and/or endemic Philippines sharks and batoids. However, since this type of analysis is largely data-dependent, it is recommended that more focused research and assessment is needed on the biology, ecology and threats to each species under consideration. Higher resolution data (in terms of identifying the local threat category of the species) would mean better applicability in terms of mKBA identification and local management (e.g., MPA establishments). Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 14 Figure 2.1. Whale shark priority conservation Areas (PCA) of the Philippines. (Source: DENR 2001). Figure 2.2. Elasmobranch priority conservation Areas (PCA) of the Philippines. (Source: DENR 2001). MREL7 MREL3 MREL9 MREL2 MREL11 MREL6 MREL12 MREL1 MREL4 MREL10 MREL? MREL5 MREL8 MREL? MREL? Coastline Elasmobranchs Scale Legend 50 0 50 100 Kilometers N EW S 116 ° 118 ° 120 ° 12 2° 12 4° 126° MRW S8 MRW S2 MRW S6 MRW S11 MRW S4 MRW S7 MRW S10 MRWS14 MRW S1 MRW S5 MRW S3 MRW S13 MRW S12 MRWS9 MRW S16 Coastline Whalesharks Scale Legend 50 0 50 100 Kilometers N EW S Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 15 Table 2.1. List of cartilaginous fishes in the Philippines and status of species occurrence in Philippine waters. (Source: Compagno et al. 2005). SPECIES AUTHORITIES COMMON NAME PHIL OCCURRENCE Subclass Holocephalii (chimaeras) 1. Chimaera phantasma Jordan & Snyder, 1900. Silver Chimaera. Confirmed 2. Hydrolagus mitsukurii (Dean, in Jordan & Snyder, 1904). Mitsukurii's chimaera. Confirmed 3. Hydrolagus sp. Philippines reticulate chimaera. New/Undescribed/Endemic Subclass Elasmobranchii (sharks and batoids) Sharks 1. Alopias pelagicus Nakamura, 1935. Pelagic thresher Confirmed 2. Alopias superciliosus (Lowe, 1839). Bigeye thresher. Confirmed 3. Alopias vulpinus (Bonnaterre, 1788). Thresher shark. Confirmed 4. Apristurus herklotsi (Fowler, 1934). Longfin catshark. Confirmed 5. Atelomycterus marmoratus (Bennett, 1830). Coral catshark, marbled cat-shark. Confirmed 6. Carcharhinus albimarginatus (Rüppell, 1837). Silvertip Shark. Confirmed 7. Carcharhinus altimus (Springer, 1950). Bignose shark. Confirmed 8. Carcharhinus amblyrhynchoides (Whitley, 1934). Graceful shark. Confirmed 9. Carcharhinus amblyrhynchos (Bleeker, 1856). Gray reef shark. Confirmed 10. Carcharhinus borneensis (Bleeker, 1858-1859). Borneo shark. Reported/unconfirmed 11. Carcharhinus brevipinna (Müller & Henle, 1839). Spinner shark. Confirmed 12. Carcharhinus dussumieri (Valenciennes, 1839). Whitecheek shark. Reported/unconfirmed 13. Carcharhinus falciformis (Bibron, 1839). Silky shark. Confirmed 14. Carcharhinus hemiodon (Valenciennes, 1839). Pondicherry shark. Confirmed 15. Carcharhinus leucas (Valenciennes, 1839). Bull shark. Confirmed 16. Carcharhinus limbatus (Valenciennes, 1839). Blacktip shark. Confirmed 17. Carcharhinus longimanus (Poey, 1861). Oceanic whitetip shark. Confirmed 18. Carcharhinus macloti (Müller & Henle, 1839). Hardnose shark. Reported/unconfirmed 19. Carcharhinus melanopterus (Quoy & Gaimard, 1824). Blacktip reef shark, black-finned shark. Confirmed 20. Carcharhinus sealei (Pietschmann, 1913). Blackspot shark. Confirmed 21. Carcharhinus sorrah (Valenciennes, 1839). Spot-tail shark. Confirmed 22. Carcharodon carcharias (Linnaeus, 1758). White shark. Confirmed 23. Centrophorus ?squamosus (Bonnaterre, 1788). Leafscale gulper shark. ? = C. acus Garman, 1906 New/Undescribed/Endemic 24. Centrophorus cf. moluccensis Bleeker, 1860. Philippine smallfin gulper shark. New/Undescribed/Endemic 25. Centrophorus isodon (Zhu, Meng, & Liu, 1981). Black gulper shark. Confirmed 26. Centrophorus lusitanicus Bocage & Capello, 1864. Lowfin gulper shark. Confirmed 27. Centroscyllium cf. kamoharai Abe, 1966. Bareskin dogfish. New/Undescribed 28. Cephaloscyllium, sp. nov. Philippines swellshark. New/Undescribed/Endemic 29. Cetorhinus maximus (Gunnerus, 1765). Basking shark. Vagrant Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 16 30. Chiloscyllium plagiosum (Bennett, 1830). Whitespotted bambooshark. Confirmed 31. Chiloscyllium indicum (Gmelin, 1788). Slender bambooshark. Reported/unconfirmed 32. Chiloscyllium punctatum Müller & Henle, 1838. Brownbanded bambooshark. Confirmed 33. Chiloscyllium griseum Müller & Henle, 1838. Gray bambooshark. Reported/unconfirmed 34. Cirrhoscyllium expolitum Smith & Radcliffe In Smith, 1913. Barbelthroat carpetshark. Confirmed 35. Deania cf rostrata Garman, 1906. New/Undescribed 36. Deania profundorum (Smith & Radcliffe, 1912). Arrowhead dogfish. Confirmed 37. Echinorhinus cookei Pietschmann, 1928. Prickly shark. Reported/unconfirmed 38. Eridacnis radcliffei Smith, 1913. Pygmy ribbontail catshark. Confirmed 39. Eridacnis sp.: Philippine ribbontail catshark. New/Undescribed/Endemic 40. Etmopterus brachyurus Smith & Radcliffe, 1912. Shorttail lanternshark. Confirmed 41. Etmopterus lucifer Jordan & Snyder, 1902. Blackbelly lanternshark. Confirmed 42. Eusphyra blochii (Cuvier, 1816). Winghead shark. Confirmed 43. Galeocerdo cuvier (Peron & Lesueur, 1822). Tiger shark, spotted shark. Confirmed 44. Galeus sauteri (Jordan & Richardson, 1909). Taiwan sawtail catshark. Confirmed 45. Galeus schultzi Springer, 1979. Dwarf sawtail catshark. Confirmed 46. Galeus sp. nov. near G. nipponensis Nakaya, 1979. New/Undescribed 47. Glyphis sp. River shark. Reported/unconfirmed 48. Gollum sp. nov. Sulu gollumshark. New/Undescribed/Endemic 49. Halaelurus cf. boesemani Springer & D'Aubrey, 1972. Speckled catshark. New/Undescribed 50. Halaelurus cf. buergeri (Müller & Henle, 1838). Blackspotted catshark. New/Undescribed 51. Hemigaleus microstoma Bleeker, 1852. Sicklefin weasel shark. Confirmed 52. Hemipristis elongatus (Klunzinger, 1871). Snaggletooth shark. Confirmed 53. Hemitriakis sp. Ocellate topeshark. New/Undescribed 54. Hemitriakis leucopteriptera Herre, 1923. Whitefin tope. Confirmed 55. Heptranchias perlo (Bonnaterre, 1788). Sharpnose sevengill shark. Confirmed 56. Heterodontus zebra (Gray, 1831). Zebra bullhead shark. Confirmed 57. Hexanchus griseus (Bonnaterre, 1788). Bluntnose sixgill shark, cow shark. Confirmed 58. Hexanchus nakamurai Teng, 1962. Bigeyed sixgill shark. Confirmed 59. Iago garricki Fourmanoir, 1979. Longnosed houndshark. Confirmed 60. Isistius brasiliensis (Cuvier, In Quoy & Gaimard, 1824). Cookiecutter shark. Confirmed 61. Isurus oxyrinchus Rafinesque, 1810. Shortfin mako. Confirmed 62. Isurus paucus Guitart Manday, 1966. Longfin mako. Reported/unconfirmed 63. Loxodon macrorhinus Müller & Henle, 1838. Sliteye shark. Confirmed 64. Megachasma pelagios Taylor, Compagno & Struhsaker, 1983. Megamouth shark. Confirmed 65. Mustelus 1 cf. manazo Bleeker, 1854. Philippine white-spotted smoothhound. New/Undescribed/Endemic Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 17 66. Mustelus 2 cf. griseus Pietschmann, 1908. Philippine brown smoothhound. New/Undescribed/Endemic 67. Mustelus 3 cf. griseus Pietschmann, 1908. Philippine gray smoothhound. New/Undescribed/Endemic 68. Nebrius ferrugineus (Lesson, 1830). Tawny nurse shark. Confirmed 69. Negaprion acutidens (Rüppell, 1837). Sharptooth lemon shark. Confirmed 70. Orectolobus japonicus Regan, 1906. Japanese wobbegong. Reported/unconfirmed 71. Orectolobus sp. near ornatus. Philippine wobbegong. New/Undescribed/Endemic 72. Pentanchus profundicolus Smith & Radcliffe, 1912. Onefin catshark. Confirmed 73. Prionace glauca (Linnaeus, 1758). Blue shark. Confirmed 74. Pristiophorus sp. C [Compagno & Niem, 1998]. Philippine sawshark. New/Undescribed/Endemic 75. Pseudocarcharias kamoharai (Matsubara, 1936). Crocodile shark. Reported/unconfirmed 76. Rhincodon typus (Smith, 1828). Whale shark. Confirmed 77. Rhizoprionodon acutus (Rüppell, 1835). Milk shark, Bongalonon. Confirmed 78. Scoliodon laticaudus Müller & Henle, 1838. Spadenose shark. Reported/unconfirmed 79. Scyliorhinus garmani (Fowler, 1934). Brownspotted catshark. Reported/unconfirmed 80. Scyliorhinus torazame (Tanaka, 1908). Cloudy catshark. Reported/unconfirmed 81. Sphyrna lewini (Griffith & Smith, 1834). Scalloped Hammerhead. Confirmed 82. Sphyrna mokarran (Rüppell, 1837). Great hammerhead. Confirmed 83. Sphyrna tiburo (Linnaeus, 1758). Bonnethead shark. Reported/unconfirmed 84. Sphyrna zygaena (Linnaeus, 1758). Smooth hammerhead. Confirmed 85. Squaliolus aliae Teng, 1959. Smalleye pigmy shark. Confirmed 86. Squaliolus laticaudus Smith & Radcliffe, 1912. Spined pigmy shark. Confirmed 87. Squalus sp. Philippine longnose spurdog. New/Undescribed/Endemic 88. Squalus sp. Philippine fatspined dogfish. New/Undescribed/Endemic 89. Squalus cf. mitsukurii Jordan & Snyder, 1903. Philippines shortspine dogfish. New/Undescribed/Endemic 90. Squalus cf. megalops Macleay, 1881. Philippines shortnose spurdog. New/Undescribed/Endemic 91. Squatina formosa Shen & Ting, 1972. Taiwan angelshark. Confirmed 92. Stegostoma fasciatum (Hermann, 1783). Zebra shark, tiger shark, Butanding. Confirmed 93. Triaenodon obesus (Rüppell, 1837). Whitetip reef shark. Confirmed 94. Triakis scyllium Müller & Henle, 1839. Banded houndshark Reported/unconfirmed Batoids 1. Aetobatus cf. guttatus (Shaw, 1804). Indian eagle ray New/Undescribed 2. Aetobatus cf. narinari (Euphrasen, 1790). Spotted eagle ray, bonnetray, eagle ray, Pagi Manok, Paol, Banogan, Taligmanok. New/Undescribed 3. Aetomylaeus milvus (Valenciennes, 1841). Ocellate eagle ray. Reported/unconfirmed 4. Aetomylaeus niehofii (Bloch & Schneider, 1801). Banded eagle ray. Reported/unconfirmed 5. Aetomylaeus vespertilio (Bleeker, 1852). Ornate eagle ray. Confirmed 6. Aetoplatea zonurus Bleeker, 1852 Zonetail butterfly ray. Confirmed 7. Anacanthobatis cf. borneensis Chan, 1965. Philippine legskate. New/Undescribed/Endemic Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 18 8. Anoxypristis cuspidata (Latham, 1794). Knifetooth sawfish. Confirmed 9. Dasyatis bennettii (Müller & Henle, 1841). Bennett's cowtail or frilltailed ray. Confirmed 10. Dasyatis cf. akajei (Bürger In Müller & Henle, 1841). Philippine red stingray. New/Undescribed/Endemic 11. Dasyatis kuhlii (Müller & Henle, 1841). Bluespotted stingray or maskray, Kuhl's stingray, Dahonan, Doragon, Kiampao, Perisan. Confirmed 12. Dasyatis sp. Adon's maskray. New/Undescribed/Endemic 13. Dasyatis zugei (Bürger In Müller & Henle, 1841). Pale-edged stingray. Confirmed 14. Dipturus sp. 1. Philippine longnose skate. New/Undescribed/Endemic 15. Dipturus gigas Ishiyama, 1958. Giant skate. Confirmed 16. Dipturus sp. Tilted thorn skate. New/Undescribed 17. Dipturus sp. [Seret] [Seret] (Philippines) New/Undescribed/Endemic 18. Dipturus sp. 2. New/Undescribed 19. Dipturus tengu (Jordan & Fowler, 1903). Goblin skate, tengu skate, acutenose skate. Confirmed 20. Glaucostegus granulatus (Cuvier, 1829). Sharpnose guitarfish. Reported/unconfirmed 21. Glaucostegus halavi (Forsskål, 1775). Halavi guitarfish. Reported/unconfirmed 22. Glaucostegus microphthalmus (Teng, 1959). Smalleyed Guitarfish. Reported/unconfirmed 23. Glaucostegus typus (Bennett, 1830). Giant shovelnose ray. Confirmed 24. Gymnura cf. micrura (Bloch & Schneider, 1801). Smooth butterfly ray. New/Undescribed 25. Gymnura poecilura (Shaw, 1804). Longtail butterfly ray. Confirmed 26. Hexatrygon bickelli Heemstra & Smith, 1980. Sixgill stingray. Confirmed 27. Himantura bleekeri (Blyth, 1860). Longtail whipray. Confirmed 28. Himantura fai Jordan & Seale, 1906. Pink whipray. Confirmed 29. Himantura gerrardi (Gray, 1851). Sharpnose whipray. Confirmed 30. Himantura granulata (Macleay, 1882). Mangrove whipray. Confirmed 31. Himantura imbricata (Bloch & Schneider, 1801). Scaly whipray. Confirmed 32. Himantura jenkinsii (Annandale, 1909). Golden whipray. Confirmed 33. Himantura uarnak (Forsskål, 1775). Spotted whipray, marbled stingray, ring tailed ray, whip-tailed ray, whip ray, Paging bulik, Paging sulatan. Confirmed 34. Himantura undulata (Bleeker, 1852). Leopard whipray, honeycomb stingray or whipray. Confirmed 35. Himantura walga (Müller & Henle, 1841). Dwarf whipray. Confirmed 36. Insentiraja cf. subtilispinosa (Stehmann, 1989). Philippine looseskin skate. New/Undescribed/Endemic 37. Manta birostris (Walbaum, 1792). Manta. Confirmed 38. Mobula eregoodootenkee (Bleeker, 1859). Longfin devilray. Confirmed 39. Mobula kuhlii (Valenciennes, In Müller & Henle, 1841). Shortfin devilray. Confirmed 40. Mobula thurstoni (Lloyd, 1908). Bentfin devilray. Confirmed Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 19 41. Myliobatis cf. tobijei Bleeker, 1854. Philippine kite ray. New/Undescribed/Endemic 42. Narcine timlei (Bloch & Schneider, 1801). Blackspotted numbfish. Confirmed 43. Narke dipterygia (Bloch & Schneider, 1801). Spottail sleeper ray. Reported/unconfirmed 44. Okamejei boesemani (Ishihara, 1987). Black sand skate. Reported/unconfirmed 45. Okamejei hollandi (Jordan & Richardson, 1909). Yellow-spotted skate. Reported/unconfirmed 46. Okamejei kenojei (Müller & Henle, 1841). Spiny rasp skate. Reported/unconfirmed 47. Okamejei sp. nov. Philippine ocellate skate. New/Undescribed/Endemic 48. Pastinachus sephen (Forsskål, 1775). Cowtail stingray, feathertail stingray, frill tailed Pagi. Confirmed 49. Platyrhina sinensis (Bloch & Schneider, 1801). Fanray. Reported/unconfirmed 50. Plesiobatis daviesi (Wallace, 1967). Deepwater stingray, giant stingaree. Confirmed 51. Pristis microdon Latham, 1794. Largetooth or freshwater sawfish, sawfish, Tagan. Confirmed 52. Pristis pectinata Latham, 1794. Smalltooth sawfish. Confirmed 53. Pristis zijsron Bleeker, 1851. Green sawfish. Confirmed 54. Rhina ancylostomus Bloch & Schneider, 1801. Shark ray. Confirmed 55. Rhinobatos cf. schlegelii Müller & Henle, 1841. Philippine guitarfish. New/Undescribed/Endemic 56. Rhinobatos formosensis Norman, 1926. Taiwan guitarfish. Reported/unconfirmed 57. Rhinoptera javanica Müller & Henle, 1841. Javanese cownose ray, flapnose ray, cow-nosed ray, Palimanok, Ogaog, Banogan. Confirmed 58. Rhynchobatus australiae Whitley, 1939. Whitespotted wedgefish. Confirmed 59. Rhynchobatus cf. laevis (Bloch & Schneider, 1801). Smoothnose wedgefish. New/Undescribed 60. Rhynchobatus sp. 2 Compagno & Last (1999). Broadnose wedgefish. New/Undescribed 61. Taeniura lymma (Forsskål, 1775). Bluespotted ribbontail ray, bluespotted fantail ray, blue-spotted stingray, blue-spotted Pagi, ribbontailed stingray. Confirmed 62. Taeniura meyeni Müller & Henle, 1841. Round ribbontail ray. Confirmed 63. Temera hardwickii (Bloch & Schneider, 1801). Finless sleeper ray. Reported/unconfirmed 64. Torpedo sp. [spotted] Philippine spotted torpedo. New/Undescribed/Endemic 65. Torpedo sp. [offshore] Philippine offshore torpedo. New/Undescribed/Endemic 66. Urogymnus asperrimus (Bloch & Schneider, 1801). Porcupine ray, thorny ray. Confirmed Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 20 Table 2.2. List of cartilaginous fishes caught in Philippine waters, as reported from various sources, with remarks on status of identification. SPECIES FISHING GROUNDS SOURCE REMARKS 1. apiang Calamba Babanto 2007 (NSAP 10 Shark Report 1998-2005) Unidentified. Needs vouchers/photos for identification 2. bamer (Unidentified) Gingoog/Butuan Gaudiano unpub ms Unidentified. Needs vouchers/photos for identification 3. banakon Region 10 Babanto 2007 (NSAP 10 Shark Report 1998-2005) Unidentified. Needs vouchers/photos for identification 4. binsulan (probably Spiny dogshark) Gingoog/Butuan Gaudiano unpub ms Unidentified. Needs vouchers/photos for identification 5. danlugan (Unidentified) Gingoog/Butuan Gaudiano unpub ms Unidentified. Needs vouchers/photos for identification 6. mistiza Region 10 Babanto 2007 (NSAP 10 Shark Report 1998-2005) Unidentified. Needs vouchers/photos for identification 7. pinyahon (Unidentified) Gingoog/Butuan Gaudiano unpub ms Unidentified. Needs vouchers/photos for identification 8. puntahon Region 10 Babanto 2007 (NSAP 10 Shark Report 1998-2005) Unidentified. Needs vouchers/photos for identification 9. Shark(chop) Panay Gulf R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) Need different method to identify. 10. tadlongan Region 10 Babanto 2007 (NSAP 10 Shark Report 1998-2005) Unidentified. Needs vouchers/photos for identification 11. Alopias pelagicus San Jose, Mindoro; Mabua, Surigao del Norte; Aparri, Cagayan; Coron, Palawan Barut 2006 Pilar, Sta. Cruz, Ilocos Sur; Poblacion 1, Pagudpud, Ilocos Norte Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) Visayan Sea R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) Iligan Bay Babanto 2007 (NSAP 10 Shark Report 1998-2005) Southern Leyte Balambao 2007 (NSAP 13 Shark Report 1998-2005) most abundant Zambales coast Bathan 2007 (NSAP 3 Shark Report 1998-2007) 12. Alopias sp. Visayan Sea R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) Unidentified to species level. Needs confirmation. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 21 SPECIES FISHING GROUNDS SOURCE REMARKS 13. Alopias superciliosus Zambales coast Bathan 2007 (NSAP 3 Shark Report 1998-2007) Iligan Bay Babanto 2007 (NSAP 10 Shark Report 1998-2005) 14. Alopias vulpinus Gingoog/Butuan Gaudiano unpub ms Confirmed from photo Visayan Sea R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) R7 2007 (NSAP 7 Shark Report 1998-2007) Zambales coast Bathan 2007 (NSAP 3 Shark Report 1998-2007) 15. Aptychotrema sp. San Jose, Mindoro; Mabua, Surigao del Norte; Aparri, Cagayan; Coron, Palawan Barut 2006 Needs confirmation. Not in Compagno et al 2005 checklist. Only four species reported in the world; three are endemic to Australia. 16. Atelomycterus marmoratus Poblacion 1, Pagudpud, Ilocos Norte Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) Visayan Sea R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) R7 2007 (NSAP 7 Shark Report 1998-2007) 17. Carchahinus dussumieri San Pedro, Narvacan, Ilocos Sur; Petal, Dasol, Pangasinan; Puro, Magsingal, Ilocos Sur; San Lorenzo-Abaca, Bangui, Ilocos Norte Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) Needs confirmation (refer to Compagno et al. 2005) 18. Carcharhinus albimarginatus San Jose, Mindoro; Mabua, Surigao del Norte; Aparri, Cagayan; Coron, Palawan Barut 2006 Batanes Waters Aragon 2007 (NSAP 2 Shark Report: 1998-2006) Balangiga, E. Samar; Brgy. Bislig, Tanauan, Leyte; Brgy. Bulusao, Lawaan, E. Samar Francisco 2007 (NSAP 8 Shark Report 1999-2006) Surigao Strait Balambao 2007 (NSAP 13 Shark Report 1998-2005) 19. Carcharhinus altimus San Jose, Mindoro; Mabua, Surigao del Norte; Aparri, Cagayan; Coron, Palawan Barut 2006 20. Carcharhinus altinius [=altimus?] Balambao 2007 (NSAP 13 Shark Report 1998-2005) Mis-spelling? 21. Carcharhinus amblyrhynchoides Surigao del Norte Balambao 2007 (NSAP 13 Shark Report 1998-2005) 22. Carcharhinus amblyrhynchos Cuyo East Pass; Visayan Sea R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 22 SPECIES FISHING GROUNDS SOURCE REMARKS Brgy. San Roque Tanauan, Leyte Francisco 2007 (NSAP 8 Shark Report 1999-2006) 23. Carcharhinus amboinensis San Jose, Mindoro; Mabua, Surigao del Norte; Aparri, Cagayan; Coron, Palawan Barut 2006 Not in Compagno et al 2005 checklist; needs confirmation. Batanes Waters Aragon 2007 (NSAP 2 Shark Report: 1998-2006) Not listed in Compagno et al. 2005. Needs confirmation. 24. Carcharhinus brachyurus Visayan Sea R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) Not in Compagno et al. 2005; needs confirmation. 25. Carcharhinus brevipinna Pilar, Sta. Cruz, Ilocos Sur Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) Batanes Waters; Babuyan Channel Aragon 2007 (NSAP 2 Shark Report: 1998-2006) Surigao del Norte Balambao 2007 (NSAP 13 Shark Report 1998-2005) 26. Carcharhinus dussumieri Babuyan Channel Aragon 2007 (NSAP 2 Shark Report: 1998-2006) Needs confirmation (refer to Compagno et al. 2005) Tayabas Bay R4A 2007 (NSAP 4A Shark Report 2004-2007) Needs confirmation (refer to Compagno et al. 2005) Abuyog, Leyte; Brgy. Lupok Guiuan E. Samar; Balangiga, E. Samar; Brgy. Rizal, Dulag, Leyte; Brgy. Sto. Nino, Abuyog, Leyte Francisco 2007 (NSAP 8 Shark Report 1999-2006) Needs confirmation (refer to Compagno et al. 2005) 27. Carcharhinus falciformis Poblacion 1, Pagudpud, Ilocos Norte; Parinago, Bauang, La Union; San Pedro, Narvacan, Ilocos Sur Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) Visayan Sea R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) 28. Carcharhinus galapagensis Pilar, Sta. Cruz, Ilocos Sur Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) Not in Compagno et al. 2005; needs confirmation. Babuyan Channel Aragon 2007 (NSAP 2 Shark Report: 1998-2006) Not listed in Compagno et al. 2005. Needs confirmation. 29. Carcharhinus leucas San Jose, Mindoro; Mabua, Surigao del Norte; Aparri, Cagayan; Coron, Palawan Barut 2006 Pilar, Sta. Cruz, Ilocos Sur Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) Visayan Sea R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) 30. Carcharhinus limbatus San Jose, Mindoro; Mabua, Surigao del Norte; Aparri, Cagayan; Coron, Palawan Barut 2006 Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 23 SPECIES FISHING GROUNDS SOURCE REMARKS Poblacion 1, Pagudpud, Ilocos Norte; San Pedro, Narvacan, Ilocos Sur; Pilar, Sta. Cruz, Ilocos Sur Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) Cuyo East Pass; Visayan Sea R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) Abuyog, Leyte; Balangiga, E. Samar; Tanauan Francisco 2007 (NSAP 8 Shark Report 1999-2006) Zambales coast Bathan 2007 (NSAP 3 Shark Report 1998-2007) R7 2007 (NSAP 7 Shark Report 1998-2007) 31. Carcharhinus longimanus Batanes Waters Aragon 2007 (NSAP 2 Shark Report: 1998-2006) Cuyo East Pass R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) Balangiga, E. Samar; Brgy. Sto. Nino, Abuyog, Leyte; Macarthur; Taraguna Beach Macarthur, Leyte Francisco 2007 (NSAP 8 Shark Report 1999-2006) 32. Carcharhinus melanopterus Pasaleng, Pagudpud, Ilocos Norte Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) Batanes Waters; Babuyan Channel Aragon 2007 (NSAP 2 Shark Report: 1998-2006) Abuyog, Leyte; Balangiga, E. Samar; Brgy. Bislig, Tanauan, Leyte; Brgy. Lupok Guiuan E. Samar; Brgy. Rizal, Dulag, Leyte; Brgy. San Jose Dulag, Leyte; Brgy. Sto. Nino, Abuyog, Leyte; Brgy. San Miguel Dulag, Leyte; Lawaan; Taraguna Beach, Macarthur, Leyte; Tanauan Francisco 2007 (NSAP 8 Shark Report 1999-2006) Zambales coast Bathan 2007 (NSAP 3 Shark Report 1998-2007) R7 2007 (NSAP 7 Shark Report 1998-2007) 33. Carcharhinus melanopterus [melanoptera] Visayan Sea R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) Other records show C. melanoptera 34. Carcharhinus melapterus [=malenopterus?] Surigao del Norte Balambao 2007 (NSAP 13 Shark Report 1998-2005) Mis-spelling? 35. Carcharhinus obscurus Iligan Bay Babanto 2007 (NSAP 10 Shark Report 1998-2005) Needs confirmation. Not in Compagno et al 2005 checklist. 36. Carcharhinus palciformis Mindoro R4A 2007 (NSAP 4A Shark Report 2004-2007) Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 24 SPECIES FISHING GROUNDS SOURCE REMARKS 37. Carcharhinus plumbeus Zambales coast Bathan 2007 (NSAP 3 Shark Report 1998-2007) Not listed in Compagno et al. 2005. Needs confirmation. 38. Carcharhinus sealei Cagdiano, Surigao del Norte Balambao 2007 (NSAP 13 Shark Report 1998-2005) 39. Carcharhinus sorrah Pilar, Sta. Cruz, Ilocos Sur; Petal, Dasol, Pangasinan; Puro, Magsingal, Ilocos Sur; Poblacion 1, Pagudpud, Ilocos Norte Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) Batanes Waters; Babuyan Channel Aragon 2007 (NSAP 2 Shark Report: 1998-2006) Tayabas Bay R4A 2007 (NSAP 4A Shark Report 2004-2007) Visayan Sea R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) Abuyog; Brgy. Bislig Tanauan, Leyte; Tanauan Francisco 2007 (NSAP 8 Shark Report 1999-2006) MMaayyaa DDaaaannbbaannttaayyaann,, CCeebbuu R7 2007 (NSAP 7 Shark Report 1998-2007) 40. Carcharhinus sp. Batanes Waters; Babuyan Channel Aragon 2007 (NSAP 2 Shark Report: 1998-2006) Unidentified to species level. Needs confirmation. Gaang, Currimao, Ilocos Norte Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) Unidentified to species level. Needs confirmation. Tayabas Bay R4A 2007 (NSAP 4A Shark Report 2004-2007) Unidentified to species level. Needs confirmation. Cuyo East Pass; Visayan Sea R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) Unidentified to species level. Needs confirmation. 41. Carcharhinus sp. (sliced) Panay Gulf R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) Need different method to identify. 42. Carcharias melanopterus [=Carcharinus melanpterus?] Brgy. Bislig, Tanauan, Leyte; Brgy. Rizal, Dulag, Leyte; Brgy. San Jose Dulag, Leyte; Brgy. Sto. Nino, Abuyog, Leyte; Taraguna Beach Macarthur, Leyte Francisco 2007 (NSAP 8 Shark Report 1999-2006) Probably mis-identified or typo error 43. Centrophorus lusitanicus Gingoog/Butuan Gaudiano unpub ms Confirmed from photo 44. Centrophorus moluccensis Poblacion 1, Pagudpud, Ilocos Norte Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) Needs confirmation (refer to Compagno et al. 2005) San Jose, Mindoro; Mabua, Surigao del Norte; Aparri, Cagayan; Coron, Palawan Barut 2006 Needs confirmation (refer to Compagno et al. 2005) 45. Centrophorus sp. Gingoog/Butuan Gaudiano unpub ms With photo but unidentified to species level 46. Charcharhinus albimarginatus Brgy. Bislig, Tanauan, Leyte Francisco 2007 (NSAP 8 Shark Report 1999-2006) Unidentified to species level. Needs confirmation. R7 2007 (NSAP 7 Shark Report 1998-2007) Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 25 SPECIES FISHING GROUNDS SOURCE REMARKS 47. Chiloscyllium griseum Visayan Sea R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) Needs confirmation (refer to Compagno et al. 2005) 48. Chiloscyllium indicum R7 2007 (NSAP 7 Shark Report 1998-2007) Needs confirmation (refer to Compagno et al. 2005) Visayan Sea R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) Needs confirmation (refer to Compagno et al. 2005) 49. Chiloscyllium plagiosum Visayan Sea R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) TTaappiilloonn DDaaaannbbaannttaayyaann R7 2007 (NSAP 7 Shark Report 1998-2007) Batanes Waters Aragon 2007 (NSAP 2 Shark Report: 1998-2006) 50. Chillocylium punctatum San Jose, Mindoro; Mabua, Surigao del Norte; Aparri, Cagayan; Coron, Palawan Barut 2006 Poblacion 1, Pagudpud, Ilocos Norte Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) Zambales coast Bathan 2007 (NSAP 3 Shark Report 1998-2007) Cuyo East Pass; Mindoro Front; Visayan Sea R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) 51. Daenia spp. Gingoog/Butuan Gaudiano unpub ms Needs confirmation. Not in Compagno et al 2005 checklist. 52. Dalatias licha Gingoog/Butuan Gaudiano unpub ms New record; confirmed from photo 53. Eucrossorhinus dasypogon Poblacion 1, Pagudpud, Ilocos Norte Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) Not in Compagno et al. 2005; needs confirmation. 54. Eugomphodus taurus San Jose, Mindoro; Mabua, Surigao del Norte; Aparri, Cagayan; Coron, Palawan Barut 2006 Synonym for Carcharias taurus, sand tiger shark 55. Euptromicrus sp. Gingoog/Butuan Gaudiano unpub ms With photo but unidentified to species level 56. Eusphyra blochii Brgy. Sto. Nino, Abuyog, Leyte Francisco 2007 (NSAP 8 Shark Report 1999-2006) 57. Galeocerdo cuvier San Jose, Mindoro; Mabua, Surigao del Norte; Aparri, Cagayan; Coron, Palawan Barut 2006 Pilar, Sta. Cruz, Ilocos Sur; Poblacion 1, Pagudpud, Ilocos Norte; San Pedro, Narvacan, Ilocos Sur Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) Batanes Waters Aragon 2007 (NSAP 2 Shark Report: 1998-2006) Visayan Sea R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 26 SPECIES FISHING GROUNDS SOURCE REMARKS Usocan, Plaridel Babanto 2007 (NSAP 10 Shark Report 1998-2005) Zambales coast Bathan 2007 (NSAP 3 Shark Report 1998-2007) R7 2007 (NSAP 7 Shark Report 1998-2007) 58. Hemigaleus microstoma Babuyan Channel Aragon 2007 (NSAP 2 Shark Report: 1998-2006) Tayabas Bay R4A 2007 (NSAP 4A Shark Report 2004-2007) 59. Hemipristis elongatus Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) 60. Hemiscyllium ocellatum San Lorenzo-Abaca, Bangui, Ilocos Norte Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) Not in Compagno et al. 2005; needs confirmation. Cagdiano, Surigao del Norte Balambao 2007 (NSAP 13 Shark Report 1998-2005) Not in Compagno et al. 2005; needs confirmation. 61. Hemispristis sp Gingoog/Butuan Gaudiano unpub ms With photo but unidentified to species level 62. Hemitriakis leucopteriptera R7 2007 (NSAP 7 Shark Report 1998-2007) 63. Heterodontus sp. R7 2007 (NSAP 7 Shark Report 1998-2007) Needs identification to species level 64. Heterodontus zebra Visayan Sea R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) 65. Hexanchus gresius [griseus] San Jose, Mindoro; Mabua, Surigao del Norte; Aparri, Cagayan; Coron, Palawan Barut 2006 Misspelling. 66. Hexanchus griseus Batanes Waters Aragon 2007 (NSAP 2 Shark Report: 1998-2006) 67. Hexanchus nakamurai Petal, Dasol, Pangasinan Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) 68. Isurus oxyrhinchus San Jose, Mindoro; Mabua, Surigao del Norte; Aparri, Cagayan; Coron, Palawan Barut 2006 Southern Leyte; bet. Surigao Strait and Southern Leyte Balambao 2007 (NSAP 13 Shark Report 1998-2005) Puro, Magsingal, Ilocos Sur Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) Zambales coast Bathan 2007 (NSAP 3 Shark Report 1998-2007) Region 10 Babanto 2007 (NSAP 10 Shark Report 1998-2005) 69. Isurus paucus Gingoog/Butuan Gaudiano unpub ms With supporting photo by author to confirm presence Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 27 SPECIES FISHING GROUNDS SOURCE REMARKS 70. Loxodon macrorhinus Visayan Sea R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) Abuyog, Leyte Francisco 2007 (NSAP 8 Shark Report 1999-2006) 71. Megachasma pelagios R7 2007 (NSAP 7 Shark Report 1998-2007) 72. Nebrius ferrugineus Batanes Waters Aragon 2007 (NSAP 2 Shark Report: 1998-2006) Cuyo East Pass; Visayan Sea R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) Cagdiano, Surigao del Norte; Surigao del Norte Balambao 2007 (NSAP 13 Shark Report 1998-2005) San Jose, Mindoro; Mabua, Surigao del Norte; Aparri, Cagayan; Coron, Palawan Barut 2006 73. Negaprion acutidens San Jose, Mindoro; Mabua, Surigao del Norte; Aparri, Cagayan; Coron, Palawan Barut 2006 Visayan Sea R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) Region 10 Babanto 2007 (NSAP 10 Shark Report 1998-2005) 74. Notorhynus cepedianus Batanes Waters Aragon 2007 (NSAP 2 Shark Report: 1998-2006) Not listed in Compagno et al. 2005. Needs confirmation. 75. Orectolobus ornatus Poblacion 1, Pagudpud, Ilocos Norte Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) Needs confirmation (refer to Compagno et al. 2005) Visayan Sea R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) Needs confirmation (refer to Compagno et al. 2005) R7 2007 (NSAP 7 Shark Report 1998-2007) Needs confirmation (refer to Compagno et al. 2005: Orectolobus sp. near ornatus.) 76. Orectulobus ornatu [aka, Orectolobus ornatus] San Jose, Mindoro; Mabua, Surigao del Norte; Aparri, Cagayan; Coron, Palawan Barut 2006 Needs confirmation (refer to Compagno et al. 2005) 77. Prionace glauca Puro, Magsingal, Ilocos Sur Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) 78. Rhincodon australiae [Rhynchobatus australiae?] Poblacion 1, Pagudpud, Ilocos Norte Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) No species known. Possibly typo error or mis identification 79. Rhincodon typus Iligan Bay Babanto 2007 (NSAP 10 Shark Report 1998-2005) Poblacion 1, Pagudpud, Ilocos Norte Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) 80. Scoliodon laticaudis [laticaudus] Babuyan Channel Aragon 2007 (NSAP 2 Shark Report: 1998-2006) Mis-spelling Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 28 SPECIES FISHING GROUNDS SOURCE REMARKS 81. Scoliodon laticaudus Visayan Sea R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) Needs confirmation (refer to Compagno et al. 2005) R7 2007 (NSAP 7 Shark Report 1998-2007) 82. Sphyrna lewini San Jose, Mindoro; Mabua, Surigao del Norte; Aparri, Cagayan; Coron, Palawan Barut 2006 83. Sphyrna lewini Puro, Magsingal, Ilocos Sur; Poblacion 1, Pagudpud, Ilocos Norte; Balaoi, Pagudpud, Ilocos Norte; Gaang Curimao, Ilocos Norte; Teppeng, Sinait, Ilocos Sur; Pilar, Sta. Cruz, Ilocos Sur Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) Tayabas Bay R4A 2007 (NSAP 4A Shark Report 2004-2007) Visayan Sea R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) Brgy. Bislig, Tanauan, Leyte; Brgy. Bulusao, Lawaan, E. Samar; Brgy. San Roque, Tanauan, Leyte; Brgy. Sto. Nino, Abuyog, Leyte; Taraguna Beach Macarthur, Leyte Francisco 2007 (NSAP 8 Shark Report 1999-2006) Region 10 Babanto 2007 (NSAP 10 Shark Report 1998-2005) R7 2007 (NSAP 7 Shark Report 1998-2007) 84. Sphyrna zygaena Guimaras Strait R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) Brgy. Rizal Dulag, Leyte; Brgy. Sto. Nino, Abuyog, Leyte Francisco 2007 (NSAP 8 Shark Report 1999-2006) Iligan Bay Babanto 2007 (NSAP 10 Shark Report 1998-2005) 85. Squaliformes sp. San Jose, Mindoro; Mabua, Surigao del Norte; Aparri, Cagayan; Coron, Palawan Barut 2006 Needs confirmation. Unidentified to family/genus/species levels Southern Leyte Balambao 2007 (NSAP 13 Shark Report 1998-2005) Need to be identified and segregated to species level 86. Squalos megalops San Jose, Mindoro; Mabua, Surigao del Norte; Aparri, Cagayan; Coron, Palawan Barut 2006 Needs confirmation. Possibly a mis-identification (refer to Compagno et al. 2005) San Lorenzo-Abaca, Bangui, Ilocos Norte; Poblacion 1, Pagudpud, Ilocos Norte Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) Needs confirmation (refer to Compagno et al. 2005) Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 29 SPECIES FISHING GROUNDS SOURCE REMARKS 87. Squalus sp. Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) Unidentified to species level. Needs confirmation. Visayan Sea R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) Unidentified to species level. Needs confirmation. 88. Squatina japonica Visayan Sea R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) Not in Compagno et al. 2005; needs confirmation. 89. Stegostoma fasciatum Cuyo East Pass R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) Needs confirmation (refer to Compagno et al. 2005) 90. Triaenodon obesus Batanes Waters Aragon 2007 (NSAP 2 Shark Report: 1998-2006) Zambales coast Bathan 2007 (NSAP 3 Shark Report 1998-2007) Dulag, Leyte Francisco 2007 (NSAP 8 Shark Report 1999-2006) R7 2007 (NSAP 7 Shark Report 1998-2007) San Jose, Mindoro; Mabua, Surigao del Norte; Aparri, Cagayan; Coron, Palawan Barut 2006 91. Zameus squamolusos Gingoog/Butuan Gaudiano unpub ms New record; confirmed from photo Gingoog/Butuan Gaudiano unpub ms Confirmed from photo 92. Rhina acylostomata San Jose, Mindoro; Mabua, Surigao del Norte; Aparri, Cagayan; Coron, Palawan Barut 2006 R7 2007 (NSAP 7 Shark Report 1998-2007) 93. Rhinobatos schlegelii R7 2007 (NSAP 7 Shark Report 1998-2007) Needs confirmation (refer to Compagno et al. 2005: Rhinobatos cf. schlegelii) 94. Rhinobatus granulatus Cuyo East Pass R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) Not in Compagno et al. 2005; needs confirmation. 95. Rhinobatus schoegelhi San Lorenzo-Abaca, Bangui, Ilocos Norte Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) Not in Compagno et al. 2005; needs confirmation. 96. Rhinubatus sp. [Rhinobatus sp.] San Jose, Mindoro; Mabua, Surigao del Norte; Aparri, Cagayan; Coron, Palawan Barut 2006 Needs confirmation to species level. There are two species reported present in the Philippines but needs validation. 97. Rhizoprionodon acutus San Jose, Mindoro; Mabua, Surigao del Norte; Aparri, Cagayan; Coron, Palawan Barut 2006 Brgy. Sto. Nino, Abuyog, Leyte; Taraguna Beach Macarthur, Leyte Francisco 2007 (NSAP 8 Shark Report 1999-2006) Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 30 SPECIES FISHING GROUNDS SOURCE REMARKS 98. Rhycobatus djiddensi [Rhyncobatus dijiddensi] San Jose, Mindoro; Mabua, Surigao del Norte; Aparri, Cagayan; Coron, Palawan Barut 2006 Misspelling: Needs confirmation. Possibly a mis identification (refer to Compagno et al. 2005) 99. Rhynchobatus australiae Cuyo East Pass R6 2007 (NSAP 6 Shark Report 1998-2007) PPoobbllaacciioonn,, DDaaaannbbaannttaayyaann R7 2007 (NSAP 7 Shark Report 1998-2007) Pasaleng, Pagudpud, Ilocos Norte; Gaang Curimao, Ilocos Norte; Teppeng, Sinait, Ilocos Sur; San Pedro, Narvacan, Ilocos Sur; Pilar, Sta. Cruz, Ilocos Sur Gaerlan 2007 (NSAP 1 Shark Report) Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 31 CHAPTER 3 Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 32 Figure 3.1. Total production of world fisheries (A) and elasmobranch fisheries (B), 1947-1991, and the Philippine elasmobranch fisheries in the Western Central Pacific (C), 1950-2003. (Source: Compagno 1990 and FAO in Bonfil 1994; FAO FishStat 1950 2003; BAS-DA 1976-2006 in SEAFDEC Fishery Bulletins for South China Sea). CHAPTER 3: PHILIPPINE SHARK FISHERIES 3.1. Historical Information Based on FAO statistics, cartilaginous fishes (with focus on elasmobranchs) are a minor group in global fisheries contributing to an average of only 0.82% of the total world fishery landings from 1947 - 1991 (or about 454,9778,900 mt 2 , elasmobranch catches out of 57,895,580mt total world catches) (see Figure 1.1 and 3.1A-B, Table 3.1; Compagno 1990 and FAO in Bonfil 1994; BAS-DA Data in FAO FishStat 1950-2003 and SEAFDEC 1976-2006. Roughly this translates to about 91 million individual animals (Bonfil 1994). Generally, the production of both total global fisheries and total elasmobranch fisheries has been on an incline from 1947 to 1991 at an average of 57,895,580 mt (or 189%) and 454,980 mt (126%) per year, respectively. Percent contribution of total global elasmobranch fisheries production, however, has been decreasing in relation to the total world fisheries production. In 1947, total elasmobranch catches was at 2002,000 mt, which is about 1% of global catches (i.e., 20,000 mt). In 1991, elasmobranch catches is recorded at 7,804,000 mt., but this only contributed to about 0.7% of total world fisheries (96,926,000 mt.) (see Table 3.1; Compagno 1990 and FAO in Bonfil 1994; BAS-DA Data in FAO FishStat 1950-2003 and/or SEAFDEC 1976-2006). Locally, the Philippine elasmobranch fisheries, which is recorded as early as in the 1950’s, is reported to have landed only about 300 mt. for that year and, within a 20-year period, averaged a 2 mt = metric tonnes Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 33 Table 3.1 Total elasmobranch catches of the Philippines (PEF) and the world (TEF), from 1947-2006, expressed in thousand tons. Legend: PEF = Philippine elasmobranch fisheries; TEF = total global elasmobranch fisheries; TWF = total world fisheries. Data sources: 1 = Compagno 1990 and FAO in Bonfil 1994; 2 = FAO FishStat 1950-2003 and BAS-DA 1976-2006. YEAR TWF1 TEF1 TEF1/TWF1 (%) PEF2 PEF2/TEF1 (%) 1947 20,000 201 1.0% 1948 19,600 211 1.1% 1949 20,100 245 1.2% 1950 21,100 204 1.0% 0.3 0.1% 1951 23,600 197 0.8% 0.1 0.1% 1952 25,200 203 0.8% 0.5 0.2% 1953 25,900 204 0.8% 0.8 0.4% 1954 27,600 194 0.7% 1.0 0.5% 1955 28,900 270 0.9% 1.3 0.5% 1956 30,500 280 0.9% 1.0 0.4% 1957 31,500 310 1.0% 0.6 0.2% 1958 32,800 300 0.9% - 0.0% 1959 36,400 300 0.8% 0.4 0.1% 1960 39,500 320 0.8% 0.8 0.3% 1961 43,000 370 0.9% 0.5 0.1% 1962 46,400 380 0.8% 0.7 0.2% 1963 47,600 400 0.8% 0.3 0.1% 1964 52,000 400 0.8% 0.1 0.0% 1965 52,400 405 0.8% - 0.0% 1966 57,300 433 0.8% - 0.0% 1967 60,400 444 0.7% - 0.0% 1968 63,900 476 0.7% 1.1 0.2% 1969 62,700 502 0.8% 0.5 0.1% 1970 70,388 508 0.7% 6.9 1.4% 1971 70,747 482 0.7% 7.3 1.5% 1972 66,121 519 0.8% 8.2 1.6% 1973 62,824 583 0.9% 9.0 1.5% 1974 66,597 549 0.8% 9.4 1.7% 1975 66,487 586 0.9% 10.4 1.8% 1976 69,930 544 0.8% 9.1 1.7% 1977 69,226 556 0.8% 8.9 1.6% 1978 70,596 600 0.8% 14.3 2.4% 1979 71,331 603 0.8% 9.0 1.5% 1980 72,141 609 0.8% 9.7 1.6% 1981 74,884 612 0.8% 12.6 2.1% 1982 76,810 617 0.8% 11.4 1.9% 1983 77,591 568 0.7% 8.2 1.4% 1984 83,989 598 0.7% 11.3 1.9% 1985 86,454 623 0.7% 11.0 1.8% 1986 92,822 630 0.7% 18.1 2.9% 1987 94,379 666 0.7% 16.2 2.4% 1988 99,016 694 0.7% 17.9 2.6% 1989 100,208 679 0.7% 19.0 2.8% 1990 97,434 695 0.7% 18.4 2.7% 1991 96,926 704 0.7% 19.1 2.7% 1992 9.0 1993 10.9 1994 9.1 1995 9.1 1996 8.6 1997 3.8 1998 4.3 1999 4.5 2000 4.3 2001 5.3 2002 5.5 2003 5.9 2004 5.8 2005 4.7 2006 5.4 AVERAGE (1947-1991) 57,896 455 0.8% 6.55 1.4% Average (1950-2006) 742.3 Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 34 Figure 3.2. Total sharks (A) and batoids (B) production in Philippine elasmobranch fisheries, 1947-1991. (Source: DA-BAS, 1976-2006 in FAO FishStat 1950-2003 and SEAFDEC 1976-2006). Figure 3.3. Percentage of sharks and batoids production in Philippine elasmobranch fisheries. yearly catch of about 500 mt (see Figure 3.1C; Tables 3.1 and 3.2). It gained relative importance in the 1970's and, within the next 20 years, is reported to average annually at 4,821 mt. Although showing yearly variations, the Philippine elasmobranch production since then has been showing a general upward trend, reaching a six-year high between 1986 1991 at an average of 18,094 mt., peaking in 1991 at 19,049 mt and doing a downward trend thereafter at an average of 6,398 mt. per year from 1992 to 2006. From 1947-1991, the Philippine elasmobranch catches account for 1.44 % of the worldwide elasmobranch catch and comprised only 0.8% of the total national fisheries production (FAO FishStat). Available statistics on elasmobranch fisheries, however, do not show segregation of volume data; rather it is lumped under general categories such as “sharks, rays, skates, etc.” and “rays, stingrays, mantas”, as reported in FAO FishStat or as “sharks” and “rays” under DA-BAS and/or SEAFDEC. This highly suggests an arbitrary grouping and needs better refinement of the groupings. There is no separate record found for chimaeran group. Except for a couple of species (e.g., whale sharks and manta/mobulid group), species-specific fishery assessment is usually absent, making management recommendations doubly difficult. However, existing information on catch landing volume from shark and ray fishery grounds forms valid criteria for site prioritization, particularly for research, monitoring and/or management. 3.1.1. Landing Trends of Sharks and Rays Production data for general groups of “sharks” and “rays” is available only from 1976-2006 from the Philippine Bureau of Agriculture Statistics (BAS), as reported in FAO FishStat and SEAFDEC fishery bulletins (Table 3.1; Figure 3.2 A-B)). Generally, the trend in Philippine elasmobranch fisheries increased in the first 10 and 20 years at an average rate of 10533 mt/year (26%) and 14662 mt/year (51%), respectively (see Figure 3.1C). It declined thereafter at a rate of 5341 mt/year in the next 39 years (45%), suggesting collapsing fisheries. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 35 Figure 3.12. Percentage of shark production per gear in Region 1, 1999-2006. (Source: NSAP Region1 Shark Report 2007B). Table 3.2. Elasmobranch fishery production (MT) in the Philippines, 1968-1994. (Sources: FAO FishStat 1950-2003 and BAS-DA 1976-2006 in SEAFDEC Fishery Bulleting for South China Sea 1976-2006). Year Bureau of Agricultural Statistics (BAS), Department of Agriculture (1976-2006), expressed in metric tons GRAND TOTAL (in mt) Sharks Batoids Total Municipal Commercial Sharks Batoids Total Sharks Batoids Total 1976 4,902 4,163 9,065 4,883 3,966 8,849 19 197 216 9,065 1977 4,620 4,255 8,875 4,604 4,192 8,796 16 63 79 8,875 1978 4,302 9,973 4,275 3,876 9,774 13,650 426 199 625 14,275 1979 4,328 4,637 8,965 3,608 4,325 7,933 720 312 1,032 8,965 1980 4,306 5,392 9,698 3,702 4,914 8,616 604 478 1,082 9,698 1981 7,989 4,635 12,624 7,545 4,389 11,934 444 246 690 12,624 1982 6,010 4,531 10,541 5,593 5,111 10,704 417 320 737 11,441 1983 4,887 3,275 8,162 4,661 3,019 7,680 226 256 482 8,162 1984 5,983 5,292 11,275 5,817 5,106 10,923 166 186 352 11,275 1985 5,801 5,147 10,948 5,490 4,827 10,317 311 320 631 10,948 1986 9,853 8,205 18,058 9,386 7,708 17,094 467 497 964 18,058 1987 6,967 9,188 16,155 5,709 8,708 14,417 1,258 480 1,738 16,155 1988 7,134 10,745 17,879 6,379 9,875 16,254 755 870 1,625 17,879 1989 8,103 10,877 18,980 7,440 9,794 17,234 663 1,083 1,746 18,980 1990 7,958 10,484 18,442 7,706 10,059 17,765 252 425 677 18,442 1991 8,060 10,989 19,049 7,800 10,661 18,461 260 328 588 19,049 1992 3,497 5,488 8,985 3,229 5,165 8,394 268 323 591 8,985 1993 4,685 6,243 10,928 4,376 5,717 10,093 309 526 835 10,928 1994 4,175 4,906 9,081 3,846 4,129 7,975 329 777 1,106 9,081 1995 4,079 4,980 9,059 3,935 4,533 8,468 144 447 591 9,059 1996 3,839 4,756 8,595 3,700 4,328 8,028 139 428 567 8,595 1997 1,690 2,165 3,855 1,586 1,899 3,485 104 266 370 3,855 1998 2,087 2,174 4,261 1,965 1,940 3,905 122 234 356 4,261 1999 2,174 2,299 4,473 2,043 2,050 4,093 131 249 380 4,473 2000 2,071 2,248 4,319 1,974 2,026 4,000 97 222 319 4,319 2001 2,681 2,867 5,548 2,553 2,616 5,169 128 251 379 5,548 2002 2,682 2,986 5,668 2,532 2,676 5,208 150 310 460 5,668 2003 3,021 3,156 6,177 2,906 2,819 5,725 115 337 452 6,177 2004 2,976 2,798 5,774 2,851 2,445 5,296 125 353 478 5,774 2005 2,438 2,306 4,744 2,313 1,971 4,284 125 335 460 4,744 2006 2,772 2,584 5,356 2,663 2,268 4,931 109 316 425 5,356 Average 4,712 5,282 9,671 4,409 4,936 9,345 303 375 678 10,023 Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 36 Figure 3.4. Percentage of municipal (MEF) and commercial (CEF) elasmobranch fisheries production in the Philippines. Figure 3.5. Municipal (A; MEF) and commercial (B; CEF) elasmobranch fisheries production in the Philippines, 1976-2006. (Source: DA-BAS, 1976-2006 in FAO FishStat 1950-2003 and SEAFDEC 1976 The same trend is observed for both shark and batoid groups. Shark fisheries showed an immediate decline in the first four years at an average of -8% per year from 1977-1980. Generally, however, it showed about an 18% increase within the first 10-year period from baseline production of about 4902 mt in 1976, and a 19% increase in the next second 10-year period (i.e., 1986-1996) (Figure 3.3A). Within the 20-year period, peaks are notable at short intervals, 1981 to 1982 (at 7989 mt and 6010 mt, respectively), and between 1986-1990, with catches ranging from 7134-9853 mt. Production declined thereafter and in the latter 10-year period by about -50% (see Figure 3.3A). Batoid production, on the other hand, also increased in the first 10 years, roughly about 33% from its baseline value of 4163 mt in 1976, and in the next 20 years at about 89% (or about 8211 mt/yr). As reflected on total elasmobranch fisheries trend, it declined thereafter by about 39% from 1996-2006 (see Figure 3.3B). Batoids seem to be slightly more important than sharks in the catches, representing an average of 53 % of the elasmobranch yields during 1976-2006 fisheries production (Table 3.2; Figure 3.3). There are no other details on shark and batoid catch composition. Targeted and commercial exploitation of the dogfishes started around 1967 due to demand for squalene oil (Chen 1996; Barut and Zartiaga 1997). Prior to this, however, sharks were only caught as by catch of some major fisheries such as those for tuna and trawl fisheries. Whale sharks (Rhincodon typus), has also been traditionally harvested after World War II (Alava et al. 1997), but it is not known if whale shark catches is part of the historical production data. No documentation is found for batoid species, which, as a group contributed the majority of the fisheries production. 3.1.2. Municipal and Commercial Elasmobranch Fisheries Philippine municipal fisheries dominate over commercial fisheries representing about 66% of the elasmobranch yields during 1976-2006 fisheries production period (Figure 3.4; Table 3.2). It showed increasing production trends at a rate of 14% for the first 10 years (1976-1985), 49% in the second 10-year period (1986-1995), but showed progressive decline at a rate of 48% in the third 10-year period (1996-2005) (Figure 3.3A). Municipal fisheries generally operate within municipal waters, suggesting a decreasing elasmobranch production in near-shore waters, particularly within the 15 kilometer zone. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 37 Figure 3.6. Percentage of sharks (MSF) and batoids (MBF) fisheries production in Philippine municipal fisheries. Figure 3.7. Municipal shark (A; MSF) and batoids (B; MBF) fisheries production in the Philippines, 1976-2006. (Source: DA-BAS, 1976-2006 in FAO FishStat 1950-2003 and SEAFDEC 1976-2006). Figure 3.8. Percentage of sharks (CSF) and batoids (CBF) fisheries production in Philippine commercial fisheries. Figure 3.9. Commercial shark (A, CSF) and batoid (B, CBF) fisheries production in the Philippines, 1976-2006. (Source: DA-BAS, 1976-2006 in FAO FishStat 1950-2003 and SEAFDEC 1976-2006). Philippine commercial fisheries, on the other hand, contributed only about 34% of the total Philippine elasmobranch production for 1976-2006, with records of only 216 mt. for 1976 (Figure 3.4; Table 3.2). As with municipal fisheries production, commercial fisheries also show increasing trends in the first 10 and 20 years. It more than doubled its baseline catches of 216 mt. in 1976 in the first 10-year period (i.e., about 593 mt./yr from 1977 1986;), and almost quadrupled in the second 10-year period (i.e., 1046 ./yr from 1987 1996). As with the general elasmobranch fisheries trend, it declined in the years thereafter by about -89% (i.e., 422 mt./yr from 1997-2006). Since commercial fisheries usually operate in offshore areas, beyond the 15km limit from the shore, data suggest an increasing productivity in these waters for elasmobranch resources. As with general Philippine elasmobranch trends, batoids dominate the catches for both municipal and commercial fisheries, at 53% and 55%, respectively (see Figures 3.5 and 3.8). More batoids were being landed in the municipal fisheries rather than in commercial. Over the 30-year period, total volume of batoids from municipal landings was 153,010 mt. and 11,634 mt. for commercial landings compared with sharks at 136,671 mt. for municipal landings and to 9399 mt. from commercial landings. Batoids were landed in greater volume than sharks and are thus impacted more in municipal rather than in commercial fisheries. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 38 Table 3.3. Landing volume (in mt) of elasmobranchs from various fishing gears in Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao. (Source: SEAFDEC 1988; data recalculated from Chen 1996). LUZON VISAYAS MINDANAO TOTAL LARGE SCALE Sharks Rays Sharks Rays Sharks Rays Trawl 454 188 17 443 - - 1,102 Purse seine 45 63 192 96 - - 396 Hook/line 30 - - - - - 30 Others - 31 17 - - - 49 SMALL SCALE Gill/drift net 318 940 139 808 582 4,608 7,395 Hook/line 575 1,315 1,324 423 2,211 398 6,247 Others 91 376 52 77 1,086 569 2,251 Trap - 219 - 58 - 57 334 Otter trawl - - - 19 - 57 76 TOTAL 1,513 3,132 1,742 1,924 3,879 5,689 17,879 Figure 3.10. Percentage of large scale shark (LSF) and batoids (SSF) fisheries production in Philippine commercial fisheries. 3.1.3. Fishing Gears Based on the 1988 catches (i.e., 17879 mt.), small scale fisheries provide the large majority of elasmobranch catches in Philippines (Bonfil, 1994; Figure 3.10; Table 3.3). SEAFDEC 1988 data (in Bonfil, 1994) showed by catch landings from different types of fishing gears, segregated into the three major geographic groupings the Philippines, i.e., Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao. In Luzon, large scale trawlers accounted for 30% of the local shark catches but only 6% of batoids, with purse seiners taking around 3 % of both groups' catches. In Visayas, trawls were the main gear in large scale fisheries for rays (23%) but accounted for only 1 % of that of sharks. Large scale purse seining took 11 % and 8 % of the shark and ray catches respectively in that area. Catches from small scale fisheries for both sharks and rays in Luzon and for sharks in Visayas were mainly taken by hook and line and longline (38%-76%) but also by gillnet (8%-30%). The reverse was the case for catches of rays in Visayas where gillnet catches were greater than those from hook and line and long line (42 % vs. 22 %). Small contributions to the catches of both fishes were made in Visayas and Luzon by "other gear" (< 13%). Minor catches of rays were also taken with traps (< 8%). Small scale fisheries took all the elasmobranch catches in Mindanao. The main gear was with gillnets in the case of rays (81 %) and hook and line for sharks (57%). Small scale gear, classified as "other", was the second most important method of catching both groups (28% of sharks, 10% of rays). Gill nets took 15 % of the small-scale shark catches and traps less than 1 %. For rays, hook and line and longline were the third most important gear in this area taking 7 % of the catch. Traps and otter trawls took little. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 39 Table 3.4. Landing volume (in mt.) of elasmobranchs from various fishing gears in the Philippines, 1990 and 1994. (Source: DA-BAS in Chen 1996). GEAR 1990 1994 Sharks Batoids TOTAL Sharks Batoids TOTAL Purse seine 163.5 262.1 425.6 116 152 268 Trawl 60.1 123.8 183.9 29 447 476 Hook and line 8.2 11.6 19.8 13 16 29 Danish seine 3.3 11.7 15.0 5 118 123 Ring net 6.0 8.5 14.5 158 6 164 Bagnet 2.9 3.1 6.1 Round haul seine 4.3 1.8 6.0 Long line 2.0 1.1 3.1 5 5 Beach seine 1.1 0.4 1.5 Drift gill net 1.6 0.1 1.7 1 1 Gill net 0.2 0.2 0.5 3 37 40 Troll line <0.0 <0.0 TOTAL 250.4 421.36 671.8 329 777 1106 The major gear involved in large scale elasmobranch fisheries in the three areas is the trawl (ca. 1,102mt or 6% of total catch), mainly in Luzon, while in small scale fishing involved gill/drift net (ca. 7395mt, 41% of total catch), followed by hook and line (ca. 6,247mt, 35% of total catch), both mainly in Mindanao (Table 8). Again this data suggests that small-scale fishery provided the majority of the elasmobranch catches in 1988. BAS data in 1990 and 1994, however, shifted this trend towards large-scale fishery providing the majority of the landed catch (Table 3.4). Landings from purse seine accounted for 63% and 24% of the catch in 1990 and 1994, respectively. Trawl, on the other hand, provided 27% and 43% of the catch in 1994. Other gears used by fishers in elasmobranch fishery based on secondary sources are: lines (troll lines, hand lines, single and multiple hook and lines, single and set longlines) and nets (pamo/driftnets, bottom set gill nets, purse seines, ring nets), traps (otoshi-ami, fish corrals, fish pots and fish traps), and spear gun (Maypa et al. 1999; Table 3.5). In Zamboanga alone, Trono (in Chen 1996) reported the use of gears as longlines, bottom set lines and drift nets to catch sharks. Results of fishing household survey conducted by Silliman from December 1998 to June 1999 in southern Philippines revealed that handlines and long lines were the more prevalent gears, by surface and bottom set gill nets. Traps, trawls and spear gun were the least prevalent (see Table 3.5). Based on this preliminary information, small-scale elasmobranch fishery is still prevalent in many areas. However, data on the volume landed by each gear is not available, thus still inconclusive at this point. Long lines, bottom setlines and drift nets are also used to catch sharks in Zamboanga as mentioned by Trono (Chen, 1996). Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 40 Table 3.5. List of gears used in elasmobranch fishery in selected villages of the 10 from December 1998 to June 1999. (Source: Maypa et al. 1999). FISHING GEARS Number of Units (among surveyed fishers) Lines: Handlines 78 Longlines 63 Nets: Surface gill net 42 Bottom set gill net 29 Trawl 2 Others: Fish trap 3 Spear gun 1 Table 3.6. Total catch production of sharks and batoids (in t/year) in Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao (Philippines) from 1976-1980. (Source: SEAFDEC Data in Bonfil 1994). Areas Yearly average catch production (1976-1990) Sharks Batoids Total t/yr % t/yr % t/yr % Luzon 1,993 15 2,312 18 4,305 33 Visayas 1,108 8 1,856 14 4,305 22 Mindanao 3,185 24 2,724 21 8,610 45 TOTAL 6,286 47 6,892 53 17,220 100 Little is known about the species composition of elasmobranch catches in the Philippines. Warfel and Clague (1950) report tiger sharks to be the major catch of shark longlines around the Philippines from exploratory fishing. Other sharks found in the survey include at least six species corresponding to the genus Carcharhinus, plus Sphyrna zygaena, Scyliorhinus torazame, Hexanchus griseus and an unidentified nurse shark. The species taken by gillnets were Pristis cuspidatus and Rhynchobatus djiddensis. Encina (1977) reports on a new dogfish fishery catching Squalus spp. and Centrophorus spp. around the Philippines, primarily directed prosecuted for squalene oil extraction. 3.1.4. Fishing Grounds and Landing Sites SEAFDEC data from 1976-1990 shows Mindanao as the area of largest harvest for sharks and batoids at 5.9mt./yr (45%), followed by Luzon at 4.3mt./yr (33%) and Visayas at 2.9mt/yr (22%) (Bonfil 1994; Table 3.5). This shifted in 1990 and 1994 to Visayas (48 72%), Luzon (44-23%), Mindanao (4-8%) of total volume landed at 694mt in 1990 and 1106mt in 1994). Batoid catches surpassed sharks and were highest in Visayas in both 1990 and 1994 data (SEAFDEC 1988 in Chen, 1996). Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 41 Fishing grounds monitored by DA-BFAR and BAS in 1990 and 1994 for Luzon were: west waters of Palawan (213t, 1990; 238t, 1994), west Sulu Sea (49t, 1990; 12t, 1994), Lamon Bay (23t, 1990), Babuyan Channel (14t, 1990; 3t, 1994), and Cuyo Pass (5t, 1990). For Visayas: Visayan Sea (280t, 1990; 122t, 1994), east Sulu Sea (14.3t, 1990), Guimaras Strait (3.3t, 1990; 444t in 1994), Sibuyan Sea (27t, 1990; 28t, 1994). For Mindanao: South Sulu Sea (55.8t, 1990; 36t, 1994) and Moro Gulf (11t, 1990 and 1994) (See Table 3.7). For 1976-1990, Mindanao was the area of largest harvest for sharks and batoids, at 24% (avg., 3,185t/yr) and 21% (avg., 2,724t/yr) of the total elasmobranch catches, respectively (SEAFDEC data in Bonfil, 1994). Luzon followed at 15% (1,993t/ry) for sharks and 18% (2,312t/yr) for batoids. Visayas was the lowest at 1,108t/yr (8%) for sharks and 1,856t/yr (14%). In BAS-DA data for 1990 and 1994, Luzon was highest in 1990 (307.48t) but was second only to Visayas in 1994 (at 257 t). Visayas had the second highest landing in 1994 (332.78t) but was highest in 1994 (800t). Mindanao had the least landed volume both in 1990 and 1994, at 55.792t and 49t, respectively. Sharks catches declined through the years while batoid catches were increasing (Bonfil, 1994). Batoid catches are highest in Visayas in both 1990 and 1994 data (SEAFDEC 1988 in Chen, 1996). For the whale sharks, Rhincodon typus, the common fishing grounds is in the Bohol Sea for both of the two traditional fishery sites (e.g., Pamilacan Island, Bohol and Talisayan, Misamis Oriental). The Pamilacan whale shark hunters also fish in waters off Tagbilaran waters as well as in Cebu Strait and Tanon Strait. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 42 Table 3.7. Commercial fishery production (in mt) of elasmobranchs by fishing area in the Philippines, 1990 and 1994. (Source: DA-BAS in Chen 1996). GEAR 1990 1994 Sharks Batoids TOTAL Sharks Batoids TOTAL Luzon Babuyan Channel 10.839 3.560 14.399 3 3 Batangas Coast 1 1 2 Cuyo Pass 2.110 2.934 5.044 Lamon Bay 5.994 16.818 22.812 Manila Bay 2.745 0.538 3.283 2 2 West Palawan Waters 96.660 116.190 212.850 91 147 238 West Sulu Sa 32.896 16.200 49.096 11 1 12 Subtotal 151.244 156.24 307.484 105 152 257 Visayas Bohol Sea 0.265 2.370 2.635 163 39 202 Camotes Sea 0.017 0.003 0.0320 East Sulu Sea 3.545 10.752 14.297 Guimaras Strait 0.325 3.033 3.358 14 430 444 Leyte Gulf 0.043 0.007 0.050 Ragay Gulf 0.572 0.661 1.233 Visayan Sea 62.207 218.155 280.362 38 84 122 Samar Sea 0.108 3.608 3.716 1 3 4 Sibuyan Sea 5.612 21.485 27.097 1 27 28 Subtotal 72.694 260.074 332.78 217 583 800 Mindanao Davao Gulf 0.076 0.005 0.081 1 1 Mindanao Waters – Pacific side 1 1 Moro Gulf 10.527 0.528 11.055 2 9 11 South Sulu Sea 14.704 7.140 21.844 5 31 36 Subtotal 31.301 24.491 55.792 7 42 49 TOTAL 253.385 424.482 677.867 329 777 1106 Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 43 Figure 3.57. Map of the Philippines showing the four sampling sites. (Source: Barut 2006). 3.3. Ad Hoc Studies on Sharks 3.3.1. SEAFDEC-NFRDI shark fisheries assessment (2003-2004): Cagayan, Occidental Mindoro, Palawan, and Surigao del Norte Barut 2006 discussed details of this study in his paper entitled “Landed Catch and Effort Monitoring and Biological Study of Sharks in Selected Landing Sites in the Philippines” SEAFDEC 2006 Report on The Study on Shark Production, Utilization and Management in the ASEAN Region. Highlights of the study are shown below. The study was basically conducted to get an overview on shark fisheries in the country. At least four landing/monitoring sites were selected in the following provinces: Cagayan; Occidental Mindoro; Palawan; and Surigao del Norte (see Figure 3.57). In Cagayan, Aparri is known to be one of the major landing sites. Two major gears used for sharks were longline (LL) and the multiple hook and line (MHL), with fishing operations normally lasting from 3-5 days, usually within the Babuyan Channel. In Occidental Mindoro, two major landing sites for sharks were Caminawit and Pagasa. The major gear used in catching sharks in these two sampling sites are gillnet GN) and longline (LL), with average fishing days per trip at around 4-5 days. Fishing areas are generally in northern Palawan. In Palawan, Coron and Salvacion were the two municipalities with major landings of sharks although landings were irregular and dependent on competitive market prices among local markets in the area. The main fishing gear for catching shark was longline (LL). Average fishing days for most gears was from 3-5 days. In Surigao del Norte, Mabua is one of the landing site for both sharks and other marine products. The main gear that is uses was multiple hook and line (MHL) which normally operates from 3-4 days. The fishing ground are in eastern Mindanao waters or the Pacific Ocean. The combined total catch observed in the four landing sites for the month of October 2003 and January 2004 were 5.8 mt and 5.4 mt, respectively (see Appendix 5), totaling to about 1,307 individuals of at least 24 species (Table 3.28). Interview results of traders in Mindoro and Palawan estimates shark production for November 2003 at 3.9 mt and 1.8 mt, respectively. In December 2003, results show Mindoro and Palawan production at 3.5 mt and 2 mt for December 2003 (Table 3.29). At least 24 species of sharks are landed in the areas monitored (Table 3.30). The size of the shark sampled varies from site to site (Table 3.32). Most of the sharks landed in Mindoro are the immature or small sharks while those landed in Palawan are the bigger or mature sharks. Likewise in Surigao and Cagayan the sharks landed are the mature ones. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 44 Table 3.28. Total landed catch of shark by sampling site from October 2003 to January 2004, based on actual landing monitoring and interview of traders. (Source; Barut 2006). Landing Sites October 2003* Nov 2003** Dec 2003** January 2004 No. of Species No. of Individual sharks Total Weight (kg) Remarks Total Weight (kg) Total Weight (kg) No. of Species No. of Individual sharks Total Weight (kg) Remarks Cagayan 1 1 55.0 No catch Mindoro 19 670 4,000.4 Generally small sharks 3,892.0 3,500.0 21 598 4,574.2 Palawan - - 1,100.0 Cut into pieces when landed 1,800.0 2,000.0 5 19 661.0 Surigao del Norte 3 17 690.7 1 2 150.0 TOTAL 688 5,846.1 5,692.0 5,500.0 619 5,385.2 * Source: actual landing site monitoring ** Source: interviews Table 3.29. Catch summary of the four sampling sites from October 2003 to January 2004, based on actual landing monitoring and interview of traders. (Source; Barut 2006). CATCH SUMMARY TABLE FOR QUARTER (30 days) Cagayan Occ. Mindoro Palawan Surigao del Norte TOTAL Production (in kg) AVG # boats Production (in kg) AVG # boats Production (in kg) AVG # boats Production (in kg) AVG # boats Production (in kg) AVG # boats Shark catches per fishing gear Total Shark Catches 55.00 1 4,000.10 8 661.10 6 690.70 15 5,406.90 30 Gillnet 1,964.00 2 1,964.00 2 Long line 55.00 1 2,036.10 14 661.1 6 2,752.20 21 MHL 690.70 15 690.70 15 Total Non-shark Catches 21,058.80 9,007.00 30,065.80 Total Shark and Non-Shark Catches 55.00 25,058.90 661.10 9,697.70 35,472.70 Table 3.30. Species of sharks observed landed in the four landing sites in Palawan (Coron/Panlaitan), Cagayan (Aparri), Occidental Mindoro (San Jose), and Surigao del Norte (Mabua). (Source; Barut 2006). Alopias pelagicus Galeocerdo cuvier Sphyrna lewini Aptychotrema sp. Hexanchus gresius Squaliformes sp. Carcharhinus amboinensis Isurus oxyrinchus Squalos megalops C. albimarginatus Nebrius ferugenius Trieanodon obesus C. altimus Negaprion acutidens C. leucas Orectulobus ornatu C.limbatus Rhina ancylostoma Centrophorus mulloccencis Rhinubatus sp. Chillocylium punctatum Rhizoprionodon acutus Eugomphodus taurus Rhycobatus djiddensi Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 45 Almost all parts of sharks are sold in the local markets (Appendix 5). Fins are targeted for the dried shark fin trade, marketed locally or internationally, depending on the size (i.e., small sized fins sold to local restaurants; larger fins to the international markets where it commands a much higher price). The price of dried fins varies according to species and size (e.g., small sized fins is priced at P3,500 per kg; medium-sized at P 5,000 per kg; and large-sized fins at P 8,000 per kg).. The price of meat is variable and is dictated by demand in the market (Table 3.31). During December and January where sea condition is rough and fishing is limiting, shark meat price can go up to P80.00 per kg in the market. While for the rest of the month the market price ranges from P 40.00-60.00 per kg. In some areas the jaws and other parts are also sold in the souvenir shops. Generally, shark meat is utilized in the local fish balls industry. In recent years, it is exported to the United States as fish balls. Table 3.31. Prices of shark products at landing sites. (Source; Barut 2006). Landing Sites Species Meat Dried Fins Liver oil Jaws Cagayan 30-45 2000-2500 Occidental Mindoro Shovel nosed 15-20 3500-7000 500/gallon 150 300/pcs All other species 500-600 Palawan 28-35 2500-8000 Surigao del Norte 40-50 2500-3000 Table 3.32. Number, size ranges and weight of sharks in the four landing sites. (Source; Barut 2006). Species Number of individuals Size ranges (cm) Weight (kg) Remarks 1. Alopias pelagicus 12 273-320 623 2. Carcharhinus amboinensis 1 170 25 3. C. albimarginatus 5 210-240 115 4. C. altimus 1 178 2 5. C. leucas 1 150 13 6. C.limbatus 13 140-220 150 7. Chillocylium punctatum 51 89-121 183 Headless/gutted 8. Eugomphodus taurus 1 145 12 9. Galeocerdo cuvier 6 200-290 760 10. Hexanchus gresius 1 90 2 11. Nebrius ferugenius 2 140-150 11 12. Negaprion acutidens 13 120-187 62 13. Orectulobus ornatu 1 92 3 14. Rhina ancylostoma 5 110-175 99 15. Rhinubatus sp. 71 70-93 104 16. Rhizoprionodon acutus 1 138 9 17. Rhycobatus djiddensi 15 120-210 298 18. Sphyrna lewini 2 283-320 110 19. Squalos megalops 186 40-105 333 20. Trieanodon obesus 294 75-167 1490 Headless/gutted Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 46 Table 3.33. Landed volume and number of individuals harvested from Butuan Bay per fishing years. (Source: Gaudiano 2007). Years Volume (tons) Individuals (in 1970s 126 184 121 178 1980s 203 310 233 313 2000 106 178 106 184 2001 89 154 106 189 2002 96 164 100 175 Total 620 990 666 1039 Mean 124 198 133.2 207.8 Table 3.34. Landed volume and number of individuals harvested from Gingoog Bay per fishing years. (Source: Gaudiano 2007). Years Volume (tons) Individuals (in 1980s 65 108 45 76 2000 35 54 21 32 2001 20 31 17 27 2002 19 26 16 22 Total 139 219 99 157 Mean 35 55 25 39 A B 0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 0 7 0 8 0 9 0 10 0 11 0 Q u a n t i t y min ma x min ma x min ma x min m ax 1 98 0 s 2 00 0 2 00 1 2 00 2 Ye a rs vo lu me ind iv id ua ls 0 20 40 60 80 1 00 1 20 1 40 1 60 1 80 2 00 2 20 2 40 2 60 2 80 3 00 3 20 m in m a x m in m a x m in m a x m in m a x m in m a x 1 97 0s 1 98 0 s 2 00 0 2 0 01 20 02 Q u a n t i t y Ye ars v o lu m e in d ivid u a ls Figure 3.58. Trend in the landed volume (in tones) and number of individuals (in thousands) of dogsharks harvested in Butuan Bay (A)and Gingoog Bay (B) per fishing year. (Gaudiano 2007). 3.3.2. WWF-Philippines direct and indirect takes of elasmobranchs in selected areas in the Philippines Results of a 3-year WWF-funded Elasmobranch Biodiversity and Conservation Project (1998 2001) in landing and market sites of 10 provinces in central Visayas and northern Mindanao showed high chondrichthyan diversity, most of which were taken directly and incidentally (by-catch) by either or both large scale and small-scale fisheries. Targeted fisheries were often influenced by the shark fin trade or the liver oil trade. By-catch is reported for major fisheries such as tuna and trawl fisheries (Chen 1996; Barut and Zartiaga, 2002). In 2002-2003, WWF initiated a 2-year study on the interaction of cetaceans with fisheries in which ten cetacean by-catch assessment sites. Opportunistic and rapid assessments through market surveys and interviews were conducted in some of these sites, namely: Babuyan Channel, Malampaya Sound, Tanon Strait, Leyte Gulf, Gingoog-Butuan Bays and Moro Gulf. Partial results, particularly focusing on data collected for Gingoog-Butuan, were presented by WWF-Philippines at the Philippine NPOA-Shark 2007 planning workshop. In Butuan and Gingoog (northern Mindanao), however, sharks were targeted for primarily for the shark liver oil trade. Landed volume and individuals harvested from Butuan Bay and Gingoog Bay per fishing years is shown in Tables 3.33-34; Figure 3.58. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 47 0 5 1 0 1 5 2 0 2 5 3 0 3 5 4 0 4 5 5 0 5 5 6 0 6 5 7 0 1 9 7 0s 1 9 80 s 2 0 00 2 00 1 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 3 Yea rs B utuan B ay G ingo o g B a y 0 2 0 4 0 6 0 8 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 1 4 0 1 6 0 1 8 0 2 0 0 2 2 0 2 4 0 2 6 0 2 8 0 3 0 0 1 9 7 0 s 1 9 8 0 s 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 Y e a r s Q u a n t it y 0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 0 7 0 N u m b e r o f b o a ts v o l (A v e ) i n d iv id u a l (a v e ) B o a t s 0 2 0 4 0 6 0 8 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 1 4 0 1 6 0 1 8 0 2 0 0 2 2 0 2 4 0 1 9 8 0s 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 Y e a r s Q u a n ti ty 0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 0 7 0 N u m b e r o f b o a t s v o l in di v i d u a ls b o a t s Figure 3.59. Trend in the number of boats with direct impact on dogshark fishery in Butuan and Gingoog bays. Figure 3.60. Trend in the production of dogsharks in Butuan Bay (A) and Gingoog Bay (B) showing the average volume (tons) and individuals (thousands) and the number of boats per fishing years. 0 .0 0 .5 1 .0 1 .5 2 .0 2 .5 3 .0 3 .5 4 .0 4 .5 5 .0 5 .5 6 .0 1 9 7 0 s 1 9 8 0 s 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 Ye a r s a v e c a t c h p e r d a y ( k g s ) Bu tu an G ingo o g Dalatias licha 43% Daenia quadrispinosum 44% pinyahon 1% others 1% bamer 1% mother lahoy 7% Centrophorus sp. 3% Zameus squamolusus 1% Centrophoru s sp. 2% Mother Lahoy 1% Centrophorus lusitanicus 1% Others 0% Dalatias licha 12% Daenia quadrispinosum 83% Figure 3.61. Trend in the CPUE in Butuan and Gingoog bays. Figure 3.62. Relative abundance of species caught in Butuan Bay (A) and Gingoog Bay (B) in terms of number of individuals. Table 3.35. Classification of shark species based on quality of liver oil produced, Butuan-Gingoog bays. (Source: Gaudiano 2007). Species Name Local Name Class of oil Binsulan Binsulan First class Centrophorus lusitanicus Banggisan First class Centrophorus sp. Dumagahay First class Daenia spp. Raket First class Dalatias licha Lumobog First class Bamer Bamer Reject Danlugan (Unidentified) Danlugan Second class Pinyahon (Unidentified) Pinyahon Second class Zameus squamolusos Intsik Reject Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 48 Figure 3.63. Relative abundance and percent composition of target versus non-target species groups in a tuna longline fisheries (March 2007). (Source: Gaudiano 2007). Production trends show a general decline in terms of volume and number of individuals as well as the resulting catch per unit effort (Figures 3.60 and 3.61), suggesting the fisheries may be collapsing soon also. Shark liver oil is the target for this fishery; oil is sold at PhP 110-130/liter (1st class) and PhP 60-80/li (2nd class). Species considered as first class are shown in Table 3.35. Meat, considered as aphrodisiac, is sold at PhP 25-30/kilo fresh and utilized for family consumption. Previously not a priority, dogshark fins were recently utilized for the fin trade and sold at PhP 250-300/kilo fresh. Large sharks were hunted primarily for the fin trade. Fins are then sold to a major buyer based in Cagayan de Oro and transported to an exporter based in Binondo, Manila for export, primarily to Japan. At present, a systematic monitoring for shark fisheries for both direct and indirect is still absent. Available data on these fisheries show lumped catch volume under “sharks” and “rays” and thus species-specific fishery assessment is necessary for shark management. In a separate WWF study on by-catch fisheries in March 2007, WWF by-catch fisheries study shows sharks contribute to about 24% of total volume (Figure 3.63). Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 49 6.4. Conclusions and Recommendations A lack of data on shark catches, use and discard has hampered stock assessments and the introduction of fisheries management. There is evidence, however, that many large oceanic sharks are being fished unsustainably and that the populations of the most biologically vulnerable of these species are below healthy levels. Improved information on shark catches is essential for effective shark fisheries management but should not be used as an excuse for inaction. Precautionary limits are warranted immediately, based on the low reproductive capacity of sharks and the history of frequent collapse in shark fisheries. Shark fisheries have often been undervalued and ignored, but have boomed in recent decades as international demand has risen for shark products. Shark fins, now among the most expensive seafood products in the world are exported to East and Southeast Asia for processing and preparation of shark fin soup. The European Union is the world’s largest exporter of shark fins to China, the biggest consumer market. Shark meat is usually low value, but is becoming increasingly popular; reported world landings have tripled since 1985. EU countries (particularly Spain and Italy) were responsible for 56% of global shark meat imports in 2005. Other shark products on the international market include liver oil, skins, cartilage, jaws and teeth. Since most shark product trade is under-recorded, it is difficult to estimate the relationship between trade and shark catches, and the total volume of shark fisheries globally. Those data that are available demonstrate that the volume of traded shark products has increased considerably over the past 15 years. Official data on the quantity of shark fins landed, in particular, are clearly huge underestimates. The number of sharks that must be caught globally to produce the fins observed in international trade (some 26 to 73 million sharks per annum) is more than four times higher than the United Nation’s (UN) Food and Agriculture Organization’s (FAO) mid-range estimate of landings, and three times higher than the FAO’s high-end estimate. These calculations demonstrate the benefit of using trade data to generate comparative estimates of fish landings, but require accurate conversion factors from products to whole weight of fish. Accurate fisheries and trade data are needed for effective management. While the precautionary approach to fisheries dictates that fisheries management should not wait until we have all the answers, fisheries scientists need good estimates of how many sharks have been taken out of the sea in order to make sound recommendations for fishing limits. This requires improved records both of shark catches and the products traded. When sharks are processed before they are brought to the dock, scientists and managers must use the volumes of processed products landed (such as meat, liver oil or fins) to determine how many animals were taken. They do this using a ‘conversion factor’ for how much shark product is equivalent to the original live sharks. Without such conversion factors, it is difficult to estimate the relationship between the volume of shark products traded and the quantities of sharks originally taken by fisheries. We do not, therefore, know the global impact that these fisheries are having on shark populations unless we can develop ways to measure how quantities of shark products relate to the number of sharks caught. Conversion factors are also important for the regulation of fisheries. They are used to calculate and enforce fishing quotas, and are widely used to implement bans on shark finning. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 50 CHAPTER 4 Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 51 CHAPTER 4: UTILIZATION AND TRADE 7.3. Shark Products/By-products Cartilaginous fishes in general are a valuable fisheries resource. Shark meat, fins and other by-products such as skin and internal organs, are used for human consumption. Historically considered as a having a relatively minor contribution to the overall production in fisheries of many nations, including the Philippines, their trade and utilization have been poorly documented. In 1994, the TRAFFIC Network began to address the paucity of information by initiating a global study of chondrichthyan fisheries and trade. In 1996, Traffic International published an overview of the fisheries and trade in sharks and other cartilaginous fishes in Southeast Asia (Chen 1996) and the world (Rose 1996) the hope that the available information will also promote efforts to conserve and manage the resources at the national and international levels. Chondrichthyan products in trade are shark meat, fins, liver, skin, teeth, jaws, internal organs/offals. Discussions below are largely from the TRAFFIC reports by Rose (1996) and Chen (1996). Shark meat has traditionally been consumed in dried, slated, and/or smoked form in coastal communities worldwide (e.g., in Germany as belly flaps from piked dogfish; in UK as the “fish” in fish-and-chips) and may be sold under market names designated to disguise their true identities in the marketplace (e.g., piked dogfish = “grayfish”; “rock salmon”. “huss” or “rig”,”flake”; “cape shark” = for other species). Processed forms of meat are often used in the domestic production of minced fish products, including fish balls, fish sausage, tempura, artificial crabs or scallops, and fish “ham”. Fish tempura is popular with consumers in Taiwan but recent trade data showed it to be exported to the USA at some US$3.00 per kg, but no other information is available on the destination of these products (Chen 1996). The advantage of this production method is the ability to utilize most fish regardless of size or species. Shark meat well suited: gives a firm and elastic texture to minced fish products and because this form of processing neutralizes the strong ammonia flavor often associated with shark meat (Chen et al. 1996). Management concerns: status of production of shark meat is difficult to assess; customs data for trade of meat are not available. Shark fins are among the world’s most expensive fisheries commodities. Fins largely consists of ceratotrichia or a soft collagen and elastin fibers commonly referred to as fin rays or fin needles, which have been used for human consumption for centuries. Fins are highly appreciated in Chinese cuisine. Its value varies according to color, size, thickness, and fin needle content, but nearly all species have commercially valuable fins (Kreuzer and Ahmed 1978; Subasinghe 1992). Hong Kong is the world capital of shark fin cuisine, having access to the highest quality and most diverse cooking methods in the world. It, however, has a minimum contribution to global fin trade. It imports fins in a variety of stages of processing, consumption, and/or re-export (Parry-Jones 1996). Preferred species (depending on availability) are the hammerheads, mako and blue sharks which are the most highly valued, followed by requiem sharks, great white, threshers, tiger, tope shark. White fins (e.g., hammerheads; sandbar sharks) are considered more valuable than black fins (e.g., mako sharks and blue sharks) as black fins have 50% less of fin ray content. In Taiwan, fins of the giant guitarfish are considered as most superior. In the Philippines, fins of guitarfishes are highly preferred and earn some US$110 per kg for the fishers. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 52 The Philippines is also reported to be one of the major suppliersuppliers of blacktip reef sharks to the Middle East, and of whale sharks fins to other Asian countries, (at approx US$14/kg of fins). Some fins, however, were considered not commercially valuable such as the fins of nurse sharks, pectoral fins of saw sharks, and the upper caudal lobe of all species. Reported world trade in shark fins currently involves imports, exports and re-exports between China and two other important processing and trade centers: Hong Kong and Singapore (Parry-Jones 1996). Management concerns: status of production of shark fins is confusing to assess. Customs data for trade of meat may be available but largely incomplete: imports and/or are reported in some countries but not in others, and if reported, only in some years not in all, which may lead to falsely assume absence of trade. Another important commodity is the shark liver oil which is used in the textile and tanning industries and in the manufacture of lubricants, cosmetics, vitamins (e.g., Vitamin A), and pharmaceutical products. Sharks have no swimbladdersswim bladders; instead, hydrostatic functions are performed by their large livers saturated with oil. Livers vary in size and weight by species and by season, and the relative weight of the liver to the total body weight tend to increase with size. Liver oils yield various compounds such as squalene, squalane, diacyl glyceryl ethers, and squalamine. Squalene, an acyclic hydrocarbon (C30H62) that appears to serve a biological function related to living at great depths and that is used in the manufacture of lubricants, bactericides, pharmaceuticals, and cosmetic products such as skin creams. Squalene is a non-active ingredient in applications which imparts increased skin permeability. Preferred species for squalene are mostly deepwater sharks (600 to 1000m). Squalane is a compound produced by hydrogenating sauqene, which is miscible with natural skin oils and is therefore useful as skin moisturizer. Diacyl glyceryl ethers (another compound found in shark liver oils) = reported to be effective in the healing of wounds, and to prevent the multiplication of bacteria, protect against radiation. Squalamine has been isolated from dogfish in 1993 in a US study which is found to be effective against bacterial infection, viruses (including HIV). It is reported to slow the process of vascularization in solid brain tumors and thus has been tested for its potential use in the treatment of several sexually transmitted diseases, including herpes, gonorrhea, and Chlamydia. Shark liver oils also yield vitamin A as found in tope shark, piked dogfish, catsharks (Galeus spp.), longfin mako, starspotted smooth-hound, hammerhead shark. Species found to have high squalene, however, were found to have lower vitamin A in their liver oil. The calculation/conversion for 1 ton of squalene is about 2500-3000 shark livers. Development of synthetic substitutes soon caused the shark liver oil to collapse. Chen (1996) described briefly a hook and line fishery for piked dogfish in the Philippines which was reported to catch on average, small sharks ranging from 35-40cm in size. About 60-80 such sharks caught in one boat trip may produce about 151 crude oil, purchased at US$14=17.5 per liter, and sold to buyers in Manila, in gasoline drums of approx 200 liters each, which takes an estimated 800-1000 sharks to produce. Refined oil is packed in 25-li containers eight of which make up a drum of about US$7,700.00, exported primarily to Japan from 1979-1981 at an average of 263t of shark liver oil annually. Export fell to 45t in 1993, and amounted to 1121t in 1994, with exports in those years reported only to Japan (134t or 85% of total exports) and South Korea (23t or 15% of total exports). In recent years, markets opened for soft and hard cartilages of sharks and skates. This offered newer opportunity to utilize a fisheries by-product that would otherwise be discarded or used in low-value fishmeal production. Cartilage has been used in the manufacture of fishmeal and is increasingly marketed as a treatment of cancer, with additional research Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 53 underway to test its efficacy in treating a wide variety of additional ailments. It is increasingly marketed as a health supplement worldwide. Ground rostrums of sawfishes are for sale in apothecaries’ shops in southern China as a medicinal product. Natrium, a chemical compound found in the shark cartilage, is used in Japan as a treatment for eye fatigue and rheumatism; chondroitine = a pharmaceutical substance used in eye drops. AN unknown cartilaginous chemical extract = used in the development of a synthetic skin for burn victims while cartilage capsules = marketed extensively worldwide as treatment for cancers. Management concerns: tracing trade routes is difficult owing to the nature of the trade. Volume of production is difficult to assess because limited companies appear to actually manufacture the cartilage powder; these companies purchase cartilage directly from the vessel (if the shark is processed on board), from the processors or retail outlets, and/or from shark fin dealers who often handle a variety of dried products (e.g., fin, cartilage, sea cucumbers, fish maws). Shark skins are characterized by the presence of small placoid (toothlike) plates, called dermal denticles, on the skin and the attachment of the muscles directly to the skin – making it difficult to skin sharks and to process their hides. In its rough form, is known as shagreen. These were originally used as a rough abrasives for rasping and polishing. Recently, skins may be tanned to produce high-quality and expensive leathers, used in traditional armors and sword handles in Japan and, recently, for handbags, watch straps, cowboy boots, belts and other in the USA, Japan and Europe, . Shark leather is made by polishing the denticles to a high gloss. It is considered extremely durable, with an attractive grain similar to crocodile skin (Kreuzer and Ahmen 1978). Management concerns: fisheries based on the production of hides have historically proven economically unsustainable (Rose 1996). Teeth and jaws of requiem sharks such as mako or great white are utilized largely as tourist curios but traditionally in many cultures used in making both functional and ceremonial objects (e.g., carvings, swords, knives, war clubs, other weapons). Market, however is largely opportunistic and are by-products of growing commercial fisheries. Other curio products are dried and stuffed shark heads, stuffed whole sharks, stuffed rays, vertebrae used in walking sticks. Management concerns: difficult to quantify utilization and trade for this commodity. Other parts of the sharks (e.g., shark waste, offal, internal organs and other related products) are also used in the production for fishmeal for use as in animal feeds or fertilizers, feed for shrimp aquaculture. Other products and uses include: glue in traditional Japanese lacquerware; shark bie (from starspotted smooth-hound) in traditional Chinese medicine in the treatment of laryngopharyngitis; or dogfish carcasses in biology dissections and for medical research. Management concerns: limited or no data available on production, consumption or trade. No anecdotal evidence point to international trade in these products. Live specimens are increasingly used in both public and private aquaria, including some species such as nurse sharks; catsharks (juveniles and egg cases), freshwater stingrays Potamotrygon laticeps, Epaulette sharks Hemiscyllium ocellatum. In the wild, they are now becoming major tourism products for scuba diving and recreational fisheries. In the Philippines, the whale sharks in Donsol, Sorsogon and the thresher sharks in Malapascua are drawing a number of tourists yearly. 7.4. FAO Fishery Statistics Data on Trade Flow (1976-2002) Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 54 Figure 4.1. Production of shark fins (dried and salted) for trade in the Philippines from 1976 to 2002. A = quantity (in mt); B = value (in US$). Source: FAO FishStat 1976-2002). Trade flow on the import and export of shark and shark products are extracted from FAO Fishery Statistics database for 1976 to 2002 (see Appendix 4; Figure 4.1). Records show four statistical classification, namely: “Shark fins, dried, salted, etc.”; “Shark liver oil”; “Sharks, dried, salted or in brine”; “Sharks, fresh or chilled”; and “Sharks, frozen”. Generally, data is patchy, with records for most of the categories available only in the 1990’s. Records available for the trade of shark fins only appear in 1991, although targeted fishery within the country had been recorded as early as 1947 (refer to Chapter 1). Records for shark liver oil is also available from 1991 onwards, although fishery for shark liver and squalene oil has also been reported in previous chapters to have been targeted in the mid 1960s. Figures 4.2-4.4 show trade flow of these four groups in terms of quantity and value. Generally, despite some deep troughs, trends of production quantity for shark fins have been increasing, with export quantity contributing to 64% of total production (Figure 4.2A). The price, however, had not match export/import production trends but rather has shown general decline (Figure 4.2B). For shark liver oil, data suggest congruence of quantity and value: value was relatively high and production was on the rise (see Figure 4.3 A-B). Highest shark liver export and value is observed in 1992 but markedly dropped thereafter. Both import quantity and value of shark liver oil seem to be negligible compared to export quantity. There is only one data set on the trade flow of sharks (dried, salted, or in brine) and it is for the year 1987 (see Appendix 4). It is not known whether this is an under-reporting or there actually was no trade prior to, and after, 1987 for this particular commodity. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 55 Figure 4.2 (A-B). Trade flow of shark fins (dried and salted) in the Philippines from 1976 to 2002. A = quantity (in mt); B = value (in US$). Source: FAO FishStat 1976-2002). Figure 4.3 (A-B). Trade flow of shark liver oil in the Philippines from 1976 to 2002. A = quantity (in mt); B = value (in US$). Source: FAO FishStat 1976-2002). Figure 4.4 (A-B). Trade flow of sharks, dried, salted in the Philippines from 1976 to 2002. A = quantity (in mt); B = value (in US$). Source: FAO FishStat 1976-2002). 7.5. 4.3 Marketing Barut and Zartiga (2002) briefly discussed methods of processing and selling of shark meat in the country. Generally, the methods and prices were variable, depending on the region. Meat when sold fresh will fetch a price of PhP20 – PhP60 per kg in Luzon or PhP10-PhP24 per kg in Visayas and Mindanao. Buying rate at the landing site is usually lower. Dried meat commands a higher price of PhP 35-PhP 75 per kg. Meat is usually consumed locally. In recent years, meat is processed into fish balls. Shark fins are usually dried before being sold and commands a much higher price than dried shark meat, at P1,800-2,000 per kg. Fins are sold in sets consisting of all fins of the sharks (i.e., dorsal, pectoral, anal and caudal fins of an individual shark) (Barut and Zartiga 2002). Prices may also vary depending on the species. Fins are usually exported to other Asian countries, major importers of which are Hong Kong and Taiwan. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 56 Figure 4.5. Philippine export of dried unsalted shark fins (in kg) from 1990-1994. (Source: NSO in Chen 1996). Figure 4.6. Percent composition (%) of countries importing dried unsalted shark fins (in kg) from the Philippines, 1990-1994. (Source: NSO in Chen 1996). Figure 4.7. Average price (expressed in US$/kg) of dried unsalted shark fins from the Philippines, 1990-1994. (Source: NSO in Chen 1996). Shark liver oil, particularly from dogfishes, is also traded and exported to other Asian countries. Data gathered by the WWF Philippine Program for TRAFFIC Southeast Asia in Zamboanga City during a market survey of shark species used and prices of shark products between March-April 1996 is shown in Appendix 15. Whole sharks and most parts of the sharks were reported to have been utilized such as: fins (fresh or dried); meat (fresh or dried), liver oil (from dogfishes, identified in the report as Squalus acanthias3); jaws (fresh or dried); and skin. Dried fins, depending on size, were marketed at a price range of PhP300 – PhP 3,100/kg by traders or between PhP400 – P3,400 when traded in Manila. Larger fins garnered the higher prices, e.g., large white fins from guitarfishes, with sizes 12” and above, were sold for PhP3,100 /kg (or =US$ 110/kg at that time). Large black fins (from a hammerhead or tiger sharks) were marketed at about PhP2,300 and P2,500, by local traders and in Manila, respectively. Fresh meat (e.g., from a small tiger shark) was marketed at PhP 120/kg while dried meat at PhP 40/kg. A 200-liter squalene liver oil was marketed between P2,000-3,000. Jaws were priced at PhP110/kg (fresh) or between PhP 800-1,000/kg (dried). Whole sharks, depending on weight, were marketed from between PhP2,400-P10,000. Dried skin was priced at P50/kg. 7.5.1. National Statistics Office Data on Shark Fins and Shark Liver Oil (1990 1994) National Statistics Office data on the export on shark fins (dried unsalted) from 1990-1994 is reported in Chen 1996 (see Appendix 6). Eight countries are recorded to have imported dried unsalted shark fins from the Philippines, namely: Australia, Brunei, China RP, Hong Kong, Japan, Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan (Figure 4.5). A total of 96.5 mt is reported to have been exported to these countries. The country with highest import of Philippine dried and unsalted shark fins is HongKong, receiving about 90% (86.7 mt) of the total traded commodity from 1990-1994, followed by Singapore (6% or 5.3 mt), Korea (2% or 2.3 mt), and Brunei (1% or 1.2 mt). The rest of the countries only received about 0.5% of total dried fins exports (Figure 4.6). As with trends in the fisheries, a similar trend can 3 Possibly a mis-identification. S. acanthias is a temperate-water species. Species reported may be of other species within the family of dogfishes Squalidae. Data needs to be re-validated. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 57 Figure 4.8. Philippine export of shark liver oil (in kg) from 1990-1994. (Source: NSO in Chen 1996). Figure 4.9. Percent composition (%) of countries importing dried unsalted shark fins (in kg) from the Philippines, 1990-1994. (Source: NSO in Chen 1996). also be seen with the trade in shark fins: low in the first couple of years, increasing in volume towards the middle (i.e, in this case, reaching its peak in 1992 at 36 mt), but declining thereafter, suggesting a possible decline also from sources (Figure 4.7). The price which averaged at US$10.34/kg within the 5-year period has been shown to increase at an average of 17% per year, from US$8.85 in 1990 to US$12.9 in 1994. 7.5.2. National Statistics Office Data on Shark Liver Oil (1990-1994) National Statistics Office data on the export on shark liver oil from 1990-1994 is reported in Chen 1996 (see Appendix 6). Only four countries are recorded to have imported shark liver oil from the Philippines, namely: Hong Kong, Japan, Korea, and Taiwan (Figure 4.8). A total of 517.9 mt is reported to have been exported to these countries, more than four times the volume of shark fins exported in the same year. Though export volume for shark liver oil had been high, trends also show decline within the four-year period. The country with highest import of Philippine shark fin liver oil is Japan, receiving about 71% (365.6 mt) of the total traded commodity from 1990-1994, followed by Hong Kong (18% or 91.9 mt), and Korea (12% or 60.1 mt). Taiwan imports for shark liver oil is only about 0.1% or about 0.4 mt (Figure 4.9). 7.5.3. Philippine Fisheries Statistics Data on Squalene Liver Oil (1973-1981) Fisheries Statistics of the Philippines presented data on the export figures for squalene liver oil as presented in Chen 1996 is shown in Table 4.1. A total of 1,283.6 mt had been exported out of the country from 1973 to 1981. Despite the classic increase-decrease in annual volume, data suggests the trend line for squalene liver oil was increasing (see Figure 4.10). Both annual value (in PHP) and price rate (PhP/kg) also followed the general trends (see Figures 4.10-12). Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 58 Table 4.1. Annual quantity (in kg) and value of squalene liver oil exports, Philippines 1973- 1981. (Source: Fishery Statistics of the Philippines in Chen 1996). Squalene Liver Oil 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 TOTAL Quantity (kg) 7,300 11,412 45,364 252,386 95,546 83,622 261,743 336,079 190,190 1,283,642 Value (PhP) 59,300 150,867 636,895 4,363,710 1,570,572 1,376,395 5,596,588 11,849,896 6,519,156 32,123,379 PhP/kg 8.12 13.22 14.04 17.29 16.44 16.46 21.38 35.26 34.28 25.03 Figure 4.10. Philippine export of squalene liver oil from 1973 to 1981. (Source: Fishery Statistics of the Philippines in Chen 1996). Figure 4.11. Philippine export of squalene liver oil from 1973 to 1981 (in volume). (Source: Fishery Statistics of the Philippines in Chen 1996). Figure 4.12. Price (in PhP/kg) of Philippine export of squalene liver oil from 1973 to 1981. (Source: Fishery Statistics of the Philippines in Chen 1996). 7.5.4. Data on Trade of Sharks from BFAR- Fisheries Regulatory and Quarantine Division (2005-2006). More recent data on the trade of shark by-products in the Philippines is shown in Table 4.2, as presented by Alesna (2007). Five groupings were used in the reporting of shark by products for exports: “Sharks fin, dried”; “Shark liver oil”; “Shark bones, dried”; “Shark gills, dried”; “Shark skin, dried”. Highest volume exported is recorded for dried fins at 293.6 mt for the 3-year period, followed by dried skin at 17mt, and liver oil at 16 mt. Other by-products previously not encountered in other reports are the dried bones and dried gills at 11 mt and 10 mt, respectively (see Figure 4.13). Imported shark products, on the other hand, are grouped as follows: “Sharksfin, dried”; “Dogfish and other sharks, frozen”; “Sharksfin, frozen”; “Headless shark, frozen”; “Shark meat, frozen “; and “Shark head, frozen”. Majority of the shark by-products which are imported to the country were in frozen form. Highest volume imported between 2005 and 2005 was the frozen products of dogfish and other sharks (990.6 mt). In descending orders, volume of other frozen imported shark products were shark meat (290.5 mt), sharksfin (241.9 mt), headless sharks (136.2 mt), shark head (10 mt). Records for dried sharks fin was also reported in 2005 at 1.4 mt (see Figure 4.14). Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 59 Table 4.13. Volume (in kg) of exported shark products in the Philippines, 2005-2007. (Source: NCSO 2005-2006 and OSEDC/BFAR 9 Jan-Oct 2007 in Alesna 2007). Table 4.14. Volume (in kg) of imported shark products in the Philippines, 2005-2007. (Source: NCSO 2005-06 and BFAR FTS-FRQD Jan-Oct 2007 in Alesna 2007). 7.6. Conclusion and Recommendations Globally, sharks resources are valuable. Volume of shark products, primarily for meat and fins from both targeted and incidental catches have been growing but assessment of the conservation and management implications remains a difficult challenge largely because of major gaps in data and information. Status of production of shark meat is difficult to assess; customs data for trade of meat are not available. Knowledge regarding utilization of sharks is often limited as there is no reporting on the production of meat, skins and leather, jaws, fishmeal and fertilizer, liver oil, cartilage or even fins. There are problems in reporting also as many countries use subheadings for “shark fin” in trade but Customs records of trade in shark leather, oil and cartilage are virtually non existent or absent. In the case of shark fins, imports and exports may not always be reported. In cases when imports are reported, there may be no report of outgoing trade. In terms of trade statistics, when available, the categories and classifications are often not standardized nor defined for better interpretation and analysis. Data as presented does not capture all shark trade statistics, and is disjointed at best. The standard six-digit Customs tariff headings adopted under the Harmonized System of classification are specific for meat, categories used being “dogfish” and “other sharks”, which, even then, are often combined into a single category. It cannot be ascertained whether a decline in the volume is a reflection of declines in shark populations, of fishing effort, or of increased under-reporting. Production data at the local/regional levels is also not readily accessible. Artisanal fisheries producing salted meat and other products for local consumption may also be under reported. Trade data does not identify sharks to species level also, thus, making it more difficult for management. Under the Philippine laws, all species listed in the CITES Appendices are prohibited from trade (e.g., whale shark, basking shark, white shark, sawfishes). Whale sharks and manta rays are protected nationally and thus are prohibited in fisheries and trade. There is no regulatory policy on other species of sharks. Regulation may also be difficult to enforce in the absence of trained field personnel and regulatory officers with the Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 60 technical capability to identify species. This is made more challenging by the fact that most traded products are not of whole individual sharks but of parts and by-products or commodities. Other data gaps include: export data from foreign boats entering Philippines to buy fish and fishery products, those entering Palawan and Tawi-Tawi; shark products illegally exported through the country’s back door going to Malaysia and other countries; poaching by foreign fishing vessels in national waters. The following recommendations are thus proposed to address data gaps and concerns identified above: • Propose inclusion of shark scientific name in the Harmonized System Code • Identification of suitable export permitting system for visiting boats buying shark products • Develop capability of fisheries quarantine personnel and the local government units in shark identification at the species level (e.g., taxonomy) • Development of identification guide for sharks and shark products • Enhance current export permitting system by requiring exporters to provide scientific name of shark products to be exported • Recommend for policy to regulate shark species listed as endangered and critically endangered under the IUCN Red List • Define and standardized data collection system and establish database for fisheries quarantine personnel • Develop and implement a bar coding system (i.e., genetic/molecular identification) to identify shark commodities (e.g., fins, jaws, meat, gills, bones, others) to species level. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 61 CHAPTER 5 Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 62 CHAPTER 5: LEGAL AND MANAGEMENT INSTRUMENTS 5.1. International Laws and Policies Applicable to Shark Management A host of international non-fisheries legislation is also promoted by environmental NGOs for the conservation or management of elasmobranchs, again in greater detail by Fowler (1999). International conservation laws are grouped by Fowler into soft-law (not necessarily binding) instruments and the binding instruments such as treaties and conventions. Binding instruments include the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS), Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES), United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), and regional treaties such as the ASEAN. 5.1.1. Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) is an international treaty negotiated under the auspices of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). It was opened for signature at the June 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) and entered into force on 29 December 1993, ninety days after the 30th ratification. As of October 1998, more than 170 countries had become Parties which also includes the Philippines. The three goals of the CBD are to promote the conservation of biodiversity, the sustainable use of its components, and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources. Many parties are developing national strategies for the conservation of their biodiversity. One party (UK) has developed biodiversity action plans for the conservation of certain elasmobranch species such as the basking shark (Cetorhinus maximus), the common skate (Raja raja), and listed three others as species of concern: tope (Galeorhinus galeus), porbeagle (Lamna nasus), and the blue shark (Prionace glauca). 5.1.2. Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) The Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (also known as CMS or Bonn Convention) aims to conserve terrestrial, marine and avian migratory species throughout their range. It is an intergovernmental treaty, concluded under the aegis of the United Nations Environment Programme, concerned with the conservation of wildlife and habitats on a global scale. Since the Convention's entry into force, its membership has grown steadily to include 112, which includes the Philippines. It was signed in 1979 and ratified into effect in 1983. It recognizes the need for countries to cooperate in the conservation of species that migrate across national boundaries. The focus is on species categorized as endangered (CMS Appendix 1 listing) or with unfavorable conservation status (Appendix II listing). CMS currently lists on its appendices the basking shark Cetorhinus maximus and the great white shark Carcharodon carcharias (Appendix I & II), and whale shark Rhincodon typus, shortfin mako Isurus oxyrinchus, longfin mako Isurus paucus, porbeagle shark Lamna nasus, and piked dogfish Squalus acanthias (northern hemisphere populations (Appendix II). In 11-13 December 2007 CMS conducted the “Meeting to Identify and Elaborate an Option for International Cooperation on Migratory Sharks under the Convention on Migratory Species” in Seychelles. The meeting examined the (i) conservation status of sharks defined Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 63 as migratory under CMS, (ii) existing international, regional and other initiatives to improve the conservation status of migratory sharks, including lessons learned, and (iii) options for international cooperation under CMS. The main aim of the meeting was to identify and, to the extent practicable, elaborate a preferred option for international cooperation under CMS, possibly a clear agreement amongst key Range States as to whether there should be a legally or non-legally binding shark instrument under CMS and what its scope should be. 5.1.3. Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES) The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (Fauna (CITES) was established in 1975, to protect species of wild flora and fauna from over-exploitation through international trade. Two listings are defined: Appendix I, species that are threatened with extinction and for which no international trade is allowed except under exceptional circumstances; Appendix II, species that are subject to strict regulation and monitoring to ensure that it is not detrimental to the status of the listed species. Species currently listed in CITES Appendices include all sawfishes (Pristiformes) under) under Appendix I, except Pristis microdon) under Appendix I, the basking shark (Cetorhinus maximus), whale, whale shark (Rhincodon typus), the great white shark (Carcharodon carcharias), and the sawfish Pristis microdon (microdon (under Appendix II). CITES has also adopted the landmark resolution (9.17) in 1994 entitled “The Status of International Trade in Shark Species” which resulted to an increase in the amount of information available on elasmobranch trade useful in future management. This resolution also prompted the FAO’s Committee on Fisheries to organize an expert Consultation on the conservation and management of sharks, which culminated in the agreement of an International Plan of Action for the CpnservationConservation and Management of Sharks (IPOA-Sharks) in October 1998. This was formally adopted by FAO’s 23rd Committee on Fisheries in February 1999. 5.1.4. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), adopted in 1982 and established in 1994, provides the conservation and management of fisheries and other uses of the sea. Its provision on the EEZ (Exclusive Economic Zones) of coastal states and high seas provisions require cooperation between states for the conservation and utilization of highly migratory species. UN Agreement on Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks, adopted in 1995, facilitates implementation of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) provisions relating to the conservation and management of high seas fish stocks. The Agreement will establish rules and conservation measures for high seas fishery resources, and is complemented by the FAO Code of Conductof Conduct for Responsible Fisheries which sets out principles andprinciples and international standards of behavior. Under UNCLOS, oceanic sharks defined as highly migratory species are: bluntnose sixgill sharks (sharks (Hexanchus griseus), basking shark (Cetorhinus maximus), whale shark (Rhincodon typus), Alopiidae spp. Carcharinidae spp., Sphyrnidae and Lamnidae. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 64 5.1.5. Regional Treaties ASEAN Agreement on the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, 1985. Based on the objectives of the World Conservation Strategy, this agreement requires parties to give special protection to threatened and endemic species and to preserve those areas which constitute critical habitats of endangered or rare species, of species that are endemic to a small area, and of migratory species. Fowler (1999) suggested that this could be useful for the conservation of threatened or migratory species, such as the elasmobranchs. 5.1.6. Others (Non-binding) The International Union for Conservation of Nature ( IUCN), founded in 1948 as the world’s first global environmental organization, is the world’s oldest and largest professional global conservation network which brings governments, non-government organizations, United Nations agencies, companies, business, and local communities together to develop and implement policy, laws and best practice toward biodiversity conservation. Its fundamental expertise is on species, habitats and ecosystems. Its mission is to influence, encourage and assist societies throughout the world to conserve the integrity and diversity of nature and to ensure that any use of natural resources is equitable and ecologically sustainable. For nearly 50 years, IUCN, through the Species Survival Commission (SSC), has been assessing the conservation status of species, subspecies, and populations on a global scale to highlight those threatened with extinction, and therefore promote their conservation. The SSC holds the world's most complete body of information on the status of species, most notably of those threatened with extinction. It disseminates this information through the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species4 which is the world's most comprehensive inventory of the global conservation status of plant and animal species. The overall aim of the Red List is to convey the urgency and scale of conservation problems to the public and policy makers, and to motivate the global community to reduce species extinctions. The List is an essential part of the toolkit needed to guide conservation priorities and move towards the sustainable use of our natural resources. Currently there are 1045 species assessed against the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria, about 17% are globally threatened (i.e. Critically Endangered, CR; Endangered, EN; or Vulnerable, VU); 13% are Near Threatened (NT) while about 47% are Data Deficient (DD) (refer to Chapter 6). 4 www.iucnredlist.org Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 65 5.2. National Laws and Policies Applicable to Shark Management 5.2.1. Local Government Code of 1991 (RA 7160) Most of the functions and services of the national government, including fisheries, are devolved to the Local Government Units (LGUs) with the passage of the Republic Act (RA) 7160 (also known as the Local Government Code). LGUs’ essentially cover the barangaysthe barangays, municipalities, cities and provinces. Rural coastal development may be viewed as one of the inherent functions of LGUs in accordance with their general powers for management within their territorial jurisdictions, which include municipal waters within 15 kilometers of the coastline. LGUs are authorized to pass local resolutions and enact ordinances that would strengthen implementation of national laws. They are also authorized to issue licenses and collect fees from any activities within their municipal jurisdiction. In the context of marine resources management, the decentralization or devolution of power is viewed as a positive development but has also led to some complex implementation problems. For example, mechanisms to support fisheries management capacity-building efforts for local governments are necessary and the national line agency (BFAR) is expected to respond to this need, but is dislocated from this role by RA 7160, unless invited to do so by LGUs. In the absence of invitations to BFAR, some support has come from NGOs and private organizations in areas where they are present. However, due to limited resources, a considerable number of LGUs do not consider aquatic resources management important and do not receive this kind of support, thus fisheries extension services are rendered relatively ineffective. 5.2.2. Philippine Fisheries Code of 1998 (RA 8550) The primary mandate for aquatic resources management was further defined by the enactment of Republic Act 8550, also known as the New Philippine Fisheries Code, which became effective on 23 June 1998. It largely clarified issues pertaining to the extent of LGU jurisdiction in municipal waters and the operation of commercial vessels. The Code also aims for food security through development, management and conservation of the aquatic resources. Operationally, BFAR takes its general directives from the Department of Agriculture (DA). The Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) is an agency of the Philippine government under the Department of Agriculture responsible for the development, improvement, management and conservation of the Philippine fisheries and aquatic resources. The Fisheries Code provided for the reconstitution of BFAR as a line bureau and the creation of the Undersecretary for Fisheries and Aquatic Resources under the DA to ensure that the needs of the fishing industry are attended to. The Bureau aims to improve aquaculture productivity within ecological limits; optimize utilization of off-shore fisheries and deep-sea resources; improve product quality; reduce post-harvest resources; conserve, protect and sustain management of the country’s fishery and aquatic resources; alleviate poverty among municipal fishers and provide supplementary livelihoods; and provide a favorable policy environment conducive to increased investment, global competitiveness and people’s participation. In pursuit of these aims, BFAR has to work with LGUs, which have now become its direct clients by virtue of RA 8550. BFAR does not directly engage with fishers because it is the LGUs who are given the power to plan, legislate, regulate, generate revenue, enforce laws Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 66 and ordinances, relate with government agencies, POs and NGOs, and provide extension and technical assistance within their areas of jurisdiction. 5.2.3. Ban on the taking or catching, selling, purchasing and possessing, transporting and exporting of Whale Sharks and Manta Rays (FAO 193 s. 1998). Pursuant to Sections 65 and 107 of RA No. 8550, the Department of Agriculture issued Fisheries Administrative Order No.193 (FAO 193) banning the taking, catching selling, purchasing, possessing, transporting or exporting of whale sharks and manta rays “whether dead or alive, in any state or form whether raw or processed”. The ban, known as the whale shark and manta ray ban, also stated that when same species are accidentally taken (i.e., by catch) in gears targeting other species, immediate release unharmed in the sea is required. Stranded individuals, however, need to be surrendered to the nearest Department of Agriculture (DA) Regional Field Unit or Bureau of Fisheries Regional or Provincial Fishery Office for proper disposition. The ban was published in the Manila Bulletin & Phil. Star – March 27, 1998, with the effectivity date set on April 12, 1998. Offenders are subject to a fine of not less than five hundred (P500.00) pesos to not more than five thousand (P5,000) pesos or imprisonment from six (6) months to four (4) years, or both such fine and imprisonment depending on the discretion of the court. Director of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources is hereby empowered to impose upon the offender an administrative fine not more than five thousand (P5,000.00) pesos or to cancel his permit or license or to impose such fine and to cancel his permit or license at his discretion including the confiscation of the whale shark and/or manta rays for proper disposition/documentation of the government. Since the establishment of the ban, however poaching occurs in many areas of the country (i.e., Bohol, Sorsogon, Palawan), reflecting the limited capacity of the government to implement such a ban. Alava et a.l. (1998) reported at least 31 villages involved in mobulid and other elasmobranch fishery in the country, and the list was growing as the ban was issued. Three confiscations were documented since 1998 for whale sharks alone, while manta ray fishery is still pervasive in a number of villages in the country. One of the difficulties in the implementation of the ban, particularly for manta rays, was reported due to the inadequacy of field personnel and implementing officers to correctly identify species in the landing and market site. More so since the specimens are already cut up to marketable chunks. In 2001, a de facto lifting of the ban was applied for manta rays, amidst clamor from the local fisherfolksfisher folks. A collaborative research on the population and stocks of manta rays and Mobula spp. Was initiated during the de facto lifting. In addition to FAO 193, the New Fisheries Code has been passed (Republic Act 8550), which potentially protects all fishery resources under the “precautionary approach” to management. 5.2.4. Wildlife Resources Conservation and Protection Act of 2001 (RA 9147) With the general aim to conserve the country's wildlife resources and their habitats for sustainability Republic Act 9147, also known as the Wildlife Resources Conservation and Protection Act or Wildlife Act, was issued in 2001, to apply to all wildlife species found in all areas of the country as well as exotic species which are subject to trade, are cultured, maintained and/or bred in captivity or propagated in the country, with the following objectives: to conserve and protect wildlife species and their habitats to promote ecological balance and enhance biological diversity; to regulate the collection and trade of wildlife; to Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 67 pursue, with due regard to the national interest, the Philippine commitment to international conventions, protection of wildlife and their habitats; and to initiate or support scientific studies on the conservation of biological diversity. The Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) has the jurisdiction over all terrestrial plant and animal species, all turtles and tortoises and wetland species, including but not limited to crocodiles, waterbirds and all amphibians and dugong. The Department of Agriculture (DA) has the jurisdiction over all declared aquatic critical habitats, all aquatic resources including all fishes, aquatic plants, invertebrates and all marine mammals, except dugong. In the Province of Palawan, jurisdiction herein conferred is vested to the Palawan Council for Sustainable Development pursuant to Republic Act No. 7611. Pertinent sections to elasmobranch management include which refers to the collection, possession, exportation and/or importation, and transport of wildlife, its by-products and derivatives (Sections 7-11),scientific researches (Section 15), economically important species (Sec. 18), implementation of CITES (Sec 19), identification and protection of threatened species (Sec 22-27), to name a few. Under RA 9147, all threatened species are thus protected. Initial list of species under protection are currently listed under the Fisheries Administrative Order 208 (i.e., Conservation of rare, threatened and endangered fishery species, series 2001). FAO 208 will be amended after more species have been assessed. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 68 CHAPTER 6 Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 69 CHAPTER 6: CONSERVATION STATUS OF PHILIPPINE SHARKS The life histories of shark species generally make them vulnerable to heavy predation. As apex predators, they are on top of food chain, having very low natural mortality from predation from other marine species, but at the bottom of the pyramid in terms of numbers. Sharks are generally described as “k-selected” species. They are generally slow growing, long-lived, have late sexual maturity, long reproductive cycles of about 3-24 months (averaging at 10-11 months), and low fecundity, producing very limited numbers of live young or eggs (i.e., 35% of sharks and batoids are egg laying while 65% are live-bearing). Sharks invest heavily in a small number of well-developed young. As such, they have low reproductive potential and low capacity for population increase, making them vulnerable to heavy predation by humans through fishing. Another characteristic which makes sharks vulnerable to overfishing is that most species segregate by sex and size, which means some fisheries tend to target either female or male groups and prove detrimental to breeding populations and lowers ratio and chances for reproduction. Some shark breeders often give birth in nursery areas which are also separated from the rest of the population. Threats to these nursery grounds also threaten the new recruits. All these characteristics place sharks at risk of overexploitation and population depletion, with an inability to recover from reduced population levels once depleted. An understanding of the biological parameters of a species is important to accurately assess its productivity and thus make inferences concerning its vulnerability to fisheries. Shark populations are being impacted by a wide range of human activities, both directly and indirectly, and as such. The threat of extinction results from several factors as pointed by Camhi et al (1998): • Life history strategy (i.e., k-selected) make them susceptible to overexploitation and impede recovery of depleted populations; • Growing shark fisheries that are generally unregulated and partly driven by unrestricted international trade in shark products (e.g., shark fins, liver oil); • Very high levels of mortality from bycatch (incidental takes) in fisheries; • Degradation of important breeding and nursery grounds and other critical coastal, estuarine, and freshwater habitats from development, alteration, overfishing and pollution. To assess the threat status of sharks, global assessments have been conducted using the IUCN Red List Criteria and Categories. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species is considered the most authoritative and objective system for classifying species’ extinction risk. The global Red List and Red Lists developed at sub-global levels are integral to meeting CBD commitments (e.g. Article 7; Annex 1), particularly for the target of reducing biodiversity loss by 2010. Threat status is also used by the CMS (Article III; Appendix I) to help identify migratory species requiring protection. In addition, biodiversity conservation policies are most often implemented at national (e.g. state, province) and regional (e.g. European Union) levels, and accurate extinction risk assessment is a vital part of this process. Structure of the IUCN Red List Categories illustrates the process that needs to be followed to assess taxa in one of the nine IUCN Categories (see Figure 6.1). Of the nine categories three are categories of threat: Critically Endangered (CR), Endangered (EN), and Vulnerable (VU). Following the Lower Risk category are the three subcategories for taxa that are not Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 70 Figure 6.1. The IUCN Red List Categories. The threatened categories (i.e., Critically Endangered, Endangered, and Vulnerable) are intended to serve as a means of setting priority measures for biodiversity conservation. (Source: www.iucnredlist.org). currently threatened: Conservation Dependent (CD), Near Threatened (NT), and Least Concern (LC). The methodology of Red Listing (IUCN, 2001; IUCN Red List URL, 2004) is applicable to shark like fishes although with some difficulties. The major problem is inadequate data on the population biology of most sharks and shark like fishes which makes it difficult to make a species assessment of extinctions risks. It is anticipated, however, that most if not all Philippine cartilaginous fishes will be assessed for Red Listing as part of an ongoing IUCN Species Survival Commission project conducted by the IUCN Shark Specialist Group to assign ranking to all species of living cartilaginous fishes, and that rankings for presently Listed Philippine species will be modified or changed as knowledge of their status increases. Sharks and rays are among the first marine groups to be systematically assessed. About 547 species have been globally assessed and listed in the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2006). Globally, about 20 % are threatened with extinction. This confirms suspicions that these mainly slow-growing species are exceptionally susceptible to over-fishing and are disappearing at an unprecedented rate across the globe. In the Philippines, the 2006 IUCN Red List URL 2004 included 56 Philippine species (Table 6.1). At least 23 of these globally threatened species are found to occur in the Philippines. Seventeen additional Philippine species have been added to the threatened categories in the 2007 IUCN Red List Assessment, as shown in Table 6.2. Declines in some of the freshwater and marine shark fisheries have been documented (e.g., Herre 1958; Compagno & Cook 1995), the first reports of which was noted for sawfishes and other freshwater elasmobranch populations under pressure from human activities. Some habitats in the Philippines were not adequately investigated for their cartilaginous fish faunas (particularly rivers and lakes) before overfishing and habitat modification took their toll. Although knowledge of the Philippine fauna is still in a stage of discovery and growth, the fauna itself faces serious conservation problems. It is critical that urgent action to greatly improve management practices and implement conservation measures, such as agreed non-fishing areas, enforced mesh-size regulations and international catch limits, is taken before it is too late. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 71 Table 6.1. Shark and batoid species in the Philippines in the 2006 IUCN List of Threatened Species. Family Species Common Name/s IUCN Category* Sharks 1 CARCHARHINIDAE Carcharhinus hemiodon Pondicherry Shark CR A2acd; C2a(i) ver 3.1 (2001) 2 CARCHARHINIDAE Carcharhinus borneensis Borneo Shark EN C2b ver 2.3 (1994) 3 TRIAKIDAE Hemitriakis leucoperiptera Whitefin Topeshark EN B1+2ce, C2b ver 2.3 (1994) 4 SPHYRNIDAE Sphyrna mokarran Great hammerhead EN A2bd+4bd ver 3.1 (2001) 5 RHINCODONTIDAE Rhincodon typus Whale Shark VU A1bd+2d ver 2.3 (1994) 6 LAMNIDAE Charcharodon carcharias White shark/Great white shark VU A1cd+2cd ver 2.3 (1994) 7 GINGLYMOSTOMATIDAE Nebrius ferrugineus Tawny Nurse Shark VU A2abcd+3cd+4abcd ver 3.1 (2001) 8 STEGOSTOMIDAE Stegostoma fasciatum Leopard Shark/ Zebra Shark VU A2abcd+3cd+4abcd ver 3.1 (2001) 9 CARCHARHINIDAE Carcharhinus longimanus Oceanic Whitetip Shark VU A2ad+3d+4ad ver 3.1 (2001) 10 CENTROPHORIDAE Centrophorus squamosus Deepwater Spiny Dogfish/ Leafscale Gulper Shark/ Nilson's Deepsea Dogfish VU A2bd+3bd+4bd ver 3.1 (2001) 11 HEMIGALEIDAE Hemipristis elongatus Fossil Shark/ Snaggletooth Shark VU A2bd+3bd+4bd ver 3.1 (2001) 12 ODONTASPIDIDAE Carcharias taurus Grey Nurse Shark/ Sand Tiger Shark VU A1ab+2d ver 2.3 (1994) Batoid fishes 1 PRISTIDAE Anoxypristis cuspidata Knifetooth Sawfish CR A2bcd+3cd+4bcd ver 3.1 (2001) 2 Dasyatidae Urogymnus asperrimus Porcupine ray VU A1bd, B1+2bcd ver 2.3 (1994) 3 Dasyatidae Taeniura meyeni Black-blotched ribbon tail/Round ribbon tail VU A2ad+3d+4ad ver 3.1 (2001) 4 RHINIDAE Rhina ancylostoma Bowmouth Guitarfish/ Mud skate/ Shark ray VU A2bd+3bd+4bd ver 3.1 (2001) 5 RHYNCHOBATIDAE Rhynchobatus australiae White-spotted Guitarfish/ White-spotted Wedgefish VU A2bd+3bd+4bd ver 3.1 (2001) 6 RHINOBATIDAE Rhinobatos granulatus Sharpnose Guitarfish (E) VU A2bd+3d+4d ver 3.1 (2001) 7 RHINOPTERIDAE Rhinoptera javanica Flapnose ray (E) VU A2d+3cd+4cd ver 3.1 (2001) 8 MYLIOBATIDAE Aetomylaeus nichofii Banded Eagle Ray VU A2d+3d+4d ver 3.1 (2001) 9 RHYNCHOBATIDAE Rhynchobatus sp. nov. B* Broadnose Wedgefish VU A2ad+3d+4ad ver 3.1 (2001) 10 RHINOBATIDAE Rhinobatos formosensis* Taiwan Guitarfish VU A2d+3d+4d ver 3.1 (2001) Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 72 Table 6.2. Additional shark and batoid species in the Philippines in the preliminary 2007 IUCN List of Threatened Species. Family Species Common Name/s IUCN Category* Sharks 1 CARCHARHINIDAE ?Glyphis sp. River shark EN (2000) 2 CARCHARHINIDAE Lamiopsis temmincki Broadfin Shark EN (2007) 3 LAMNIDAE ?Isurus paucus Longfin mako VU (2005) 4 ALOPIIDAE Alopias pelagicus Pelagic thresher VU 5 ALOPIIDAE Alopias superciliosus Bigeye thresher VU 6 LAMNIDAE Charcharodon carcharias White shark/Great white shark VU A1cd+2cd ver 2.3 (1994) 7 SCYLIORHINIDAE Atelomycterus baliensis VU (2007) 8 CARCHARHINIDAE Carcharhinus sorrah Spot-tail shark VU (2007) 9 HEMIGALEIDAE Chaenogaleus macrostoma Hooktooth Shark VU (2007) 10 SCYLIORHINIDAE Halaelurus boesemani Speckled catshark VU (2007) Batoid fishes 1 DASYATIDAE ?Himantura kittipongi EN B1abiii (2007) 2 DASYATIDAE Himantura gerrardi Sharpnose Stingray VU A2bd+3bd (2007) 2 DASYATIDAE Himantura hortlei Hortle's Whip ray VU A2bd+3bd (2007) 4 DASYATIDAE Himantura lobistoma VU A2bd+A3bd 2007 5 DASYATIDAE Himantura pastinacoides Round Whip ray VU A2bd+3bd 2007 6 DASYATIDAE Himantura uarnacoides Whitenose Whip ray VU A2bd+3bd 2007 7 DASYATIDAE Himantura uarnak Honeycomb Stingray VU (2007) Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 73 CHAPTER 7 Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 74 CHAPTER 7: DATA NEEDS, ISSUES AND CHALLENGES, RECOMMENDATIONS AND PRORITIES FOR ACTION 7.1. Data Gaps and Needs A wide range of data types are required to determine the sustainable yield of a fish stocks. To manage it effectively data requirements may include fish biology, fishery (catch and effort statistics), the fishers and fish markets (socio-economic considerations) are important. Biological data generally used to determine stock boundaries, the productivity of a species, and its response to fishing pressure. Fisheries data are used to estimate population losses through fishing mortality, and to monitor trends in stock biomass. Both biological and fishery data can be collected by fishers, fish processors, scientific observers, scientists, and/or fishery administrators. 7.1.1. Fisheries and Socio-Economic Data Needs Much of the assessment, monitoring and management of shark populations relies on fisheries data (referred to as fishery-dependent data).Accurate stock assessments of shark resources are required for fishery managers to make informed decisions that help to conserve exploited shark populations and avoid socio-economic and ecological problems. Available fisheries data in the country, however, are generally deficient, requiring the need to improve and implement mechanisms to collect and enhance the reliability of the reporting and monitoring system as well as improve the accuracy of stock assessments. Collection of fishery and biological data in support of these assessments has been hampered by the relatively low economic value of sharks compared to teleosts. A variety of stock assessment methods, each requiring certain types of data have been used to assess status of shark populations worldwide. Basic fisheries data needs are shark fishing mortality by species, gear type, and region, including current and historical records on the following: commercial, artisanal and recreational catches; size, length-weight, age structure and sex composition of catch; landings (number and volume); by-catch, discards and discard mortalities; catch per unit effort (CPUE); exploitation rates. Additional data needs would be coming from the socio-economic aspects of shark fisheries such as demographic profiles, fisheries profile, fishing operation practices including fleet and vessel size, gears used, areas fishes, numbers of fishers, markets and values for different products, and the structure and flow of trade, problems, and fishery systems. There is also a need for standardized data collection and reporting methods, for comparison of trends, between regions and over time. Commercial and targeted shark fishery data acquisition is required as well as the accurate quantification and/or estimation of by-catch in the numerous fisheries and gear types in which different species are caught. Fishery-independent surveys and studies, particularly on relative abundance are necessary to stock assessments. It is important that these indices be of long duration and covers much of the geographical range occupied by a given stock. In the absence of these fishery independent information, CPUE data from various fisheries can also be used as indices of abundance after adequate standardizations are made. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 75 7.1.2. Biological and Ecological Data Needs Management must be driven by the biological capacity of the sharks to ensure sustainability of the fishery. The life-history characteristics of sharks make it particularly difficult to collect the biological information required in more detailed stock assessment models. While stock assessment methodologies have become increasingly sophisticated, basic knowledge on many species is still fragmentary and underscores the need for good quality data. Basic research, therefore, is required to gain better understanding on the biology and ecology of the animals. Such researches should include taxonomy, as well as the biology and ecology of species and populations. Results of elasmobranch inventory in the Philippines are proof that many more species are being discovered. More often, populations are exploited to extinction before anything is known about them. Greater taxonomic effort is needed, including species description and genetic research into stock structure and dynamics. Species/population biology and/or ecology research should include: reproductive characteristics (age at maturity, gestation, period and average annual pups per female); critical habitats at different life cycles (e.g., mating, popping, nursery, feeding grounds); growth rates and age structure; mortality (natural and fishing) for all age classes; stock and relative abundance; and stock structure and migration patterns. 7.1.3. Conservation and Management needs Camhi et al. (1998) recommended adoption of FAO’s Precautionary Approach to their management, which would dictate that fisheries only be conducted where stock management regimes are in place. It should be noted that there is a need to take management action even where there are uncertainties and gaps in knowledge. The following are recommended: • to improve the quality of ecological and fisheries data • to develop and apply management mechanisms and tools, including to control and monitor trade. • to invest in human and financial resources in research and management, in developing the necessary policy, legal and institutional frameworks, and in training and other capacity-building to implement management measures. FAO’s Precautionary Approach (1995) provides guidance on the minimal management actions needed for both new and existing fisheries. Cooperation is necessary among all parties interested in the long-term productivity of shark populations. 7.2. Issues and Challenges A number of significant issues pertaining to the conservation and management of sharks emerge from the assessment of shark catches—target, byproduct and bycatch—reported in this document. Primary threats to chondrichthyan fishes to date is unregulated fishery, whether it be targeted or by-catch. Since generally they are K-strategists, their life histories make them highly vulnerable to over-exploitation. Effective management regimes, which takes into account the biological constraints and life histories of these fishes, is urgently required to ensure sustainability of exploited stocks and address their broader conservation needs. Issues and challenges associated to needs identified above are listed below: 7.2.1. Monitoring Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 76 • Lack of routine and non-routine mechanisms to improve shark and ray fisheries statistics • Need for regular and sustained monitoring to assess status and trends of shark and ray stocks • Lack of validation programs across some fisheries; • Lack of information on the scale, impact and management of commercial versus municipal fisheries 7.2.2. Data Collection/Compilation/Reporting/Analysis: • Mis-identification of species and other taxonomic concerns • Presence of new unknown and still undescribed species • Lack of voucher specimens to validate initial identification of species reported • Lack of species identification, quantification and reporting of all species of sharks and rays taken in some target and non-target/by-catch shark fisheries and other sources; • Lumping of data into general groupings such as sharks or rays • Lack of consistency and compatibility in recording, compilation and reporting across fisheries • Lack of recording and database of all shark and ray catches • Need to establish minimum standards, guidelines and protocol for data collection • Lack of information on stock structure, abundance, life history or reproductive rate of most species of sharks and rays • Lack of quality information available for stock assessment and effective management • Present statistical data collection does not record landings by species. This does not indicate the status of the resources either by abundance nor vulnerability or threats • Difficulty in species identification and collection of biological data of incomplete (headless, finless or gutted) sharks landed • Need to identify methods in quantification and estimation of shark by-catch in numerous fisheries and gear types in which different species are caught • Standardized data collection and reporting methods, for comparison of trends, between regions and over time • Lack of participation and/or involvement of fishing industry and other stakeholders in shark/ray fisheries data collection and management • Need to develop conversion factors to determine weight and other relevant information of sharks with missing body parts • Lack of socio-economic data on shark fisheries, including fleet and vessel size, gears used, areas fished, numbers of fishers, • Need for demographic profile, fisheries profile, fishing operation practices, problems, and fishery systems. • Need to evaluate socio-economic importance on elasmobranch resources, such as data on markets and values for different products, and the structure of trade • Limited information on marketing mechanisms and trade flows including credit facilities and postharvest processing 7.2.3. Research • Lack of information of the volume and extent of shark finning and its impact • Incomplete reporting of trade statistics and routes • Lack of information on utilization of shark/ray by-products, marketing channels and trade routes Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 77 • Lack of information on the impact of market demand on shark populations • Lack of scientifically defensible stock assessments for some targeted and important by-product species • Need for fishery-independent surveys to assess relative abundance • Develop cost-efficient techniques in stock assessment (e.g., rapid assessment technique) • Need to understand dynamics of exploited stocks. • Lack of understanding on ecosystem effects of shark and ray fisheries and management practices • Lack of risk assessment analysis for targeted and important stocks 7.2.4. Capacity-building • Lack of knowledge on the use of appropriate management and conservation measures to promote effective utilization of shark catches • Insufficient knowledge and experience in data collection, particularly in conduct of biology research including taxonomy and determination of maturity • Lack of capacity and capability to identify and monitor headless, finless, gutless and/or dried catches and/or landings (e.g., training on species identification of sharks by observation of denticles, molecular/genetic identification) • Lack of skill to define the processes for identification of threatened species from various sources of threats (e.g. IUCN Red Listing) or from trade (e.g., CITES); 7.2.5. Conservation and Management (Policy, IEC, Compliance and Enforcement) • Insufficient policies and legal mechanisms to manage shark stocks, including pelagic/shared stocks, deepwater, demersal, and/or endemic species • Insufficient policies and legal mechanisms to regulate/protect globally, regionally and/or nationally threatened populations • Absence of national controls on shark finning, including international trade • Lack of field guides to identify species at the national and regional levels (e.g., Sharks, batoids and chimaeras catalogue; waterproof field guides for species identification; others) • Lack of awareness on shark resource management • Insufficient awareness building materials and products to promote shark/ray conservation and management • Lack of program for compliance and enforcement of policies and laws for the protection and management of sharks/rays • Lack of logistic and financial resources to sustain data collection and management initiatives • Lack of program for shark by-catch reduction and/or mitigation measures 7.3. Recommendations and Priorities for Action Close to 50 issues and challenges have been identified in the assessment of shark resources, fisheries, conservation and management in the Philippines. These issues have been further clarified and refined in the Philippine NPOA-Shark consultation process. Priority issues are re-stated as recommendations and, when applicable, linked to the IPOA objective(s) to which it relates (see Appendix 19, also Introduction), and grouped into major components, as stated in the IPOA and recommended by the ASEAN-SEAFDEC. Each action identified in the NPOA-Shark has been allocated a priority ranking (1A, 1B, 1C, 2 or 3). The distinction between 1A and 1B is made in order to acknowledge that, while all Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 78 Priority 1 actions need to be initiated as soon as possible, the feasible time frame for completion of these actions will vary. It is reasonable to expect that actions categorised as A and 1B can be initiated within the first year of the NPOA-Shark and that actions with a 1A rating can be completed within 2 years. A 1B rating acknowledges that it is not possible to specify a completion date for some actions. A 1C rating recognises that an action is dependent on the completion of another action or other work underway, for example, those Actions that rely on the results of risk assessments will have to be carried out under this NPOA-Shark. Shark species vary in their distribution in Philippine waters as does the fisheries where sharks are captured and the jurisdiction, which has responsibility for managing the fisheries. Therefore, even though this is a National Shark-plan, there will inevitably be some variation between jurisdictions in the timing and implementation of actions and not all actions will be relevant to all jurisdiction. The broad interpretation of each priority category is provided in Table 1. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 79 CHAPTER 8 Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 80 CHAPTER 8: NATIONAL PLAN OF ACTION - SHARKS 8.1 INTRODUCTION In accordance with the requirements of the agreed International Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks (IPOA-Sharks 1999), Philippines has begun preparing its National Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks (NPOA-Sharks). Participation in the IPOA-Sharks and preparation and implementation of an NPOA-Sharks is voluntary. The IPOA Sharks suggests that member States of the FAO (such as Philippines) should adopt a NPOA-Sharks if their vessels conduct directed fisheries for sharks or their vessels regularly catch sharks in non-directed fisheries. The IPOA Sharks requires each member nation that take shark in their fisheries to prepare a shark assessment report (SAR) with the aim of identifying conservation, management and any other issues associated with the shark catch. If necessary, these issues can then be addressed in a NPOA- Sharks. The SAR will be updated regularly to report the status of shark stocks as assessments are made and to identify gaps in knowledge. The NPOA-Sharks requires collection and ongoing synthesis of compatible data at the appropriate resolution, including inter alia commercial data and data leading to improved species identification and, eventually, abundance indices. The shark data collected by Philippines for trans-boundary, highly migratory and high seas shark stocks should be done through international collaboration and data sharing systems and all shark data should be made available to relevant subregional and regional fisheries organisations, and the FAO (IPOA-Sharks 1999). There is a considerable body of literature concerning some Philippine shark species and stocks. In order to clearly and concisely describe the current state of knowledge of these stocks, this document (Shark Assessment Report-Overview) presents an overview of the information available. Other recent Philippines shark studies are listed in a Bibliography and these documents can be obtained by contacting the Secretariat of the NPOA-Shark Technical Working Group. The SAR follows the format as presented at the Philippine NPOA-Shark workshop in Clark, Pampanga in November 2007. 8.2 Philippine Shark Plan: Matrix The Phillippine Shark Plan subdivided into the four major issues: Monitoring, Data Collection and Analysis, Research, Building Human Capacity, and Conservation and Management (which include ). The Shark Action Plan is presented in a matrix format to show each issues’ basic objectives, actions, remarks, responsible agencies andstrategic partners, indicators and level of priority, as follows: Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 81 National Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks* (Philippine NPOA-Shark* or Philippine Shark*-Plan) ISSUES OBJECTIVES ACTIONS REMARKS Agency Responsible/ Strategic Partners Indicators PRIORITY 1. MONITORING 1.1. Lack of routine and non-routine mechanisms to improve shark and ray fisheries statistics 1.1.1. To establish routine and non routine mechanisms in improving shark and ray fisheries statistics 1.1.1a Identify routine mechanisms GA/NGOs • National Shark Assessment Report GA/TWG • Regional Shark Assessment Report BFAR Regions 1.1.1a. Identify non routine mechanisms GA/NGOs 1.2. Lack of regular and sustained monitoring to assess status and trends of shark and ray stocks 1.2.1. Establish system for the regular and sustained monitoring of the status of the fisheries, market and trade of sharks and rays 1.2.1a. Create multi sectoral group to develop monitoring system GA/NGOs/LGUs 1.2.2b. Identify financial mechanisms to sustain monitoring system GA/NGOs/LGUs Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 82 ISSUES OBJECTIVES ACTIONS REMARKS Agency Responsible/ Strategic Partners Indicators PRIORITY 2. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS 2.1. Limited understanding on shark* fisheries 2.1.1. To regularly update NSAP data on sharks, batoids and chimaeras 2.1.1a. Regularly update data and information collection on shark, rays and skates on catch and effort, utilization, trade NSAP-NFRDI FRQD (Regions) 2.1.1b. Segregate shark, batoids and chimaeran species from other fisheries data Need to develop standardized data form for shark* NFRDI-FRQD 2.1.1c. Facilitate participatory resource assessment/focus group discussion on shark fisheries Need for training on data collection, including conduct of focus group discussions (FGDs) and participatory resource assessment (PRA) NFRDI-FRQD Academe/Phil Natl Museum 2.1.1d. Gather catch and effort data, types of fishing gears used LGUs, BFAR RFOs, NSAP, LGU, FARMCs/POs 2.1.2. To review and verify shark identification on catches per region 2.1.2a. seek assistance from experts inter-Regional Fisheries Units (RFUs) NSAP-NFRDI FRQD (Regions) 2.2. Limitied ecological information on shark* species 2.2.1. To be able to determine species distribution and habitat suitability 2.2.1a. provide NSAP enumerators with grid maps mapping FRQD-FIMC Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 83 ISSUES OBJECTIVES ACTIONS REMARKS Agency Responsible/ Strategic Partners Indicators PRIORITY 2.2.1. To determine biological information on species 2.2.1a. provide training for enumerators on species identification, sexual maturity (bio ecological parameters) refer to 4.1 LGUs, BFAR RFOs, FRMD 2.2.3. To improve on information from sightings and strandings 2.2.3a. Develop sightings and strandings reporting system including photos 2.2.3b. Gather sightings, strandings data including photos LGUs, RFOs 2.2.3c. Establish sightings and strandings database including photos FRMD 2.3. Limited understanding on shark* utilization and trade 2.3.1. To improve current knowledge and information of shark utilization, market and trade 2.3.1a. Review current data available on utilization and trade standardization of commodity names FRQD 2.3.2. To determine post harvest technology and marketing channels or outlets for shark products 2.3.2a. Documentation and update on the list of processors on their outlet and market channels. trade route mapping FRQD, BAS 2. 3.2b. Gather export and import data on shark fisheries FRQD Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 84 ISSUES OBJECTIVES ACTIONS REMARKS Agency Responsible/ Strategic Partners Indicators PRIORITY 2.4. Limited cooperation with industry 2.4.1. To develop linkage with the industry 2.4.1a. Networking with the industry meetings/ consultations FRQD, DTI 2.5. Lack of information/ understanding of the socio-economic importance of shark fisheries 2.5.1.To assess socio economic impacts of shark fisheries 2.5.1a. Gather cost and production data on shark fisheries BAS, NGOs, FRQD, NFRDI, Academe 2.5.2. To analyze cost and production on shark fishery industries 2.5.2a. Conduct ROI/ Economic valuation of shark fisheries and shark by-products NFRDI, NGOs, Academe, DTI 3. RESEARCH 3.1. Limited information on the biology and ecology of species, including taxonomy 3.1.1. To improve current knowledge and information on the biology and ecology of species 3.1.1a. Conduct life history researches NFRDI, Ris 3.1.1b. Collation of existing literature NFRDI 3.1.1c. Conduct genetic studies and DNA mapping on headless, gutted and finless sharks NFRDI, National Museum, SharkBOL? 3.1.1d. Integration of GIS on species distribution NFRDI, FIMC, NGOs Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 85 ISSUES OBJECTIVES ACTIONS REMARKS Agency Responsible/ Strategic Partners Indicators PRIORITY 3.2. Limited facilitation and encouragement research on little known shark species 3.2.1. To promote understanding of little known shark species 3.2.1a. Conduct studies on little known shark species NFRDI 3.2.1b. Establishn documentation and reporting system of studies NFRDI, Ris 3.2.2. To establish/ generate baseline information on little known shark species 3.2.2a. Conduct assessment NFRDI, Ris 3.2.2b. Conduct IEC NFRDI, RFOs, LGUs, DILG, Academe 3.3. Limited information and understanding on current utilization of sharks and shark products 3.3.1. To develop technology on value added products 3.3.1a. Conduct studies on post harvest and product development NFRDI, Post Harvest 3.3.2. To maximize full utilization of sharks 3.3.2a. To evaluate existing fishing gears on shark fisheries NFRDI, FTD 3.3.2b. Encourage the use of effective and sustainable fishing practices NFRDI, FPED, FRMD, FRQD, MPA (Media) Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 86 ISSUES OBJECTIVES ACTIONS REMARKS Agency Responsible/ Strategic Partners Indicators PRIORITY 3.3.3. To identify alternative, non consumptive use of sharks and rays 3.3.3a. Review/ evaluation of current practices of alternative uses of sharks and rays (tourism) NFRDI, LGUs, FRMD, DILG, DOT, PTA 3.3.3a. Identify and promote alternative uses of sharks and rays (aquarium trade; tourism) NFRDI, LGUs, FRMD, DILG, DOT, PTA, DTI 3.4. Assessment of threats to shark populations, determine and protect critical habitats 3.4.1. To evaluate existing threats to shark populations 3.4.1a. Conduct status and trends studies NFRDI, RFOS 3.4.1b. Documentation and reporting NFRDI, RFOs 3.4.2. To determine species-gear interactions 3.4.2a. Conduct gear inventory NFRDI, FRQD, LGUs 3.4.2b. Evaluate impacts of various gears on sharks populations and ecosystems NFRDI, Ris, FTD 3.4.2c. Promote shark ‘friendly’ gears Review strategy. There are no shark-friendly gears. Should be part of research. Review of gears and impact on shark population Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 87 ISSUES OBJECTIVES ACTIONS REMARKS Agency Responsible/ Strategic Partners Indicators PRIORITY 3.4.2d. Identify and regulate (manage) gears that critically impacting sharks populations Regulate the use of fishing gears as based on scientific studies 3.4.2d. Conduct valuation study on elasmobranch fisheries refer to 2.5.2a 4. BUILDING HUMAN CAPACITY 4.1. Limited capacity for species identification 4.1.1. To increase capacity of BFAR CO, NFRDI, NSAP and BAS regional staff and field enumerators in elasmobranch identification, strategies, approaches in data collection (to include BFAR-FRQD) 4.1.1a. Develop training modules on Taxonomy, Biology, Ecology, Data Collection NFRDI, FRQD, RFTCs 4.1.1b. Develop field guide to the identification of Philippine elasmobranchs NFRDI, NGOs, FRQD 4.1.1c. Conduct Trainors Training on Taxonomy, Biology and Ecology and Data Collection Methods refer to 4.1.1a 4. Regional Training refer to 4.1.1a Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 88 ISSUES OBJECTIVES ACTIONS REMARKS Agency Responsible/ Strategic Partners Indicators PRIORITY 4.2. Limited capacity for data collection 4.2.1. Improve knowledge on biology, taxonomy and ecology of elasmobranch resources 4.2.1a. Module Development refer to 4.1.1a 4.2.1b. Conduct hands-on training to collect ecological data (eg. Whale shark, dogfish: habitat mapping, life history of commercially exploited species) refer to 4.1.1a 4.2.2. Enhance use of the NSAP database to accommodate elasmobranch fisheries data 4.2.2a. Need to evaluate current database program and regional system to run program. assessment of database requirement for trade and data collection requirements NFRDI, FIMC 4.3. Lack of technical expertise on sharks 4.3.1. To develop a support network of experts 4.3.1a. Establish a network of experts to support conservation and management efforts NFRDI, Ris, SSG 4.3.1b. Establish shark red-list authority/ specialist group in the Philippines 4.3.1c Establish linkages with national and international experts, SUCs NFRDI, SSG Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 89 ISSUES OBJECTIVES ACTIONS REMARKS Agency Responsible/ Strategic Partners Indicators PRIORITY 4.3. Limited knowledge/ understanding on conservation and management needs of threatened species 4.3.1. To enhance knowledge of DA, BFAR, NFRDI, NSAP, BAS, LGUs, DENR, PCSD, PFOs in the IUCN Red Listing Process 4.3.1a. Training on IUCN Categories and Criteria Note: inclusion of DENR due to conflict in the implementation of laws/ policies at the regional level. TWG 4.4. Limited knowledge and appreciation for shark and shark resources 4.4.1. Increase knowledge and appreciation for shark and shark resources 4.4.1a. Develop IEC strategy for appreciation of shark and shark resources. Identify specific problem, public, product and plan (4P) NFRDO, MPA TWG Develop monitoring and evaluation tools for the strategy MPA 4.4.1b. Advocate for inclusion of modules on conservation and management of chondrichthyan fishes in academic curricula focus on sustainability. NFRDI, BFAR 4.4.1c. Conduct valuation study of elasmobranch resources (refer to 2.5.2a) 5. CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT (Policy, IEC, Compliance & Enforcement) 5.1. No definite conservation and management policies on shark and rays 5.1.1 To develop national policies on the conservation and management of sharks and rays 5.1.1a. Assessment of all sharks and rays of the Philippines BFAR, NGOs 5.1.1b. Identification of threatened species and their habitat BFAR, FRQD, NFRDI Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 90 ISSUES OBJECTIVES ACTIONS REMARKS Agency Responsible/ Strategic Partners Indicators PRIORITY 5.1.2. To ensure sustainable shark and ray fisheries 5.1.2a. Identification of protected areas for the threatened species NFRDI, Ris, RFOs, LGUs, NGOs 5.1.2b. Draft of a Fisheries Administrative Order on the regulation and management (e.g. restriction of fishing gears and methods, etc.) of all threatened shark and ray species Amend FAO 208, to include threatened species (i.e, critically endangered, endangered, vulnerable) BFAR-FRQD, BFAR-Legal 5.2. Inconsistencies of existing laws with regards to conservation, i.e. Wildlife Act 5.2.1. To review and amend existing laws for the conservation of sharks and rays 5.2.1a. Creation of a technical working group to review existing laws BFAR/NFRDI, FRQD, BFAR legal, RFOs, FRQD 5.2.1b. Consultation with stakeholders BFAR/NFRDI, FRQD, BFAR legal, RFOs, FRQD 5.3. Lack of information on shark fisheries 5.3.1. To educate and increase the awareness of all stakeholders and agencies on shark biology, conservation, and management 5.3.1a. Develop and disemminate IEC materials (refer to 4.4.1a) (refer to 4.4.1a) 5.4. Lack of information on trade and marketing 5.4.1. To identify distribution areas of shark products 5.4.1a. To conduct extensive studies on shark and ray trade and marketing (refer to 2.3.2a) (refer to 2.3.2a) Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 91 ISSUES OBJECTIVES ACTIONS REMARKS Agency Responsible/ Strategic Partners Indicators PRIORITY 5.5. lack of enforcement for the conservation and management of threatened and endangered shark and ray species 5.5.1. To formulate regulations on the enforcement of policies for the protection of threatened shark and ray species 5.5.1a. (to be reflected/ captured in the FAO to be drafted) 1. raised concern regarding enforcers. 2. define role of other stakeholders in enforcement (e.g FARMCs) (refer to 5.1.2b) BFAR Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 92 BIBLIOGRAPHY Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 93 BIBLIOGRAPHY Alava, M.N.R. (2000). Sulu-Sulawesi Elasmobranch Bio-Assessment Report Submitted to the WWF Sulu Sulawesi Large Marine Ecoregion Program, WWF-Philippines, QC, Philippines, Apr 2000. 30pp. Alava, M.N.R. (2002). “Elasmobranchs” and “Whale Sharks”. pp. 52-53. In P.S. Ong, L.E. Afuang, and R.G. Rosell-Ambal (eds). (2002). Philippine Biodiversity Conservation Priorities: A Second Iteration of the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan. DENR – PAWB/CI-Philippines/BCP/UP-CIDS/FPE, Quezon City, Philippines. 111pp Alava, M.N.R. (2005). National Biodiversity Indicator Profile for Endangered Sharks & Shark-like Species in the Philippines: A Case Study on Whale Shark. DA-NFRDI/ DENR-PAWB/UNEP-WCMC-RIVM Biodiversity Indicators for National Use: Marine and Coastal Ecosystem Component. Alava, M.N.R., A.A.SP.Yaptinchay, G. Acogido, M.L.L. Dolar, C.J. Wood, and S.Leatherwood. (1997a). Fishery and trade of whale shark (Rhincodon typus) in the Philippines. Paper presented during the 13th Annual American Elasmobranch Meeting, Seattle, WA, USA, June 26 – July 2, 1997. Alava, M.N.R., A.A. SP. Yaptinchay, R.B. Trono and E. R. Dolumbal. (1997b). Fishery and trade of whale sharks and manta rays in the Bohol Sea, Philippines. Paper presented at the International Seminar and Workshop on Sharks and Rays Biodiversity, Conservation and Management, Tuaran, Sabah, Malaysia, 7-10 July 1998. Alava, M.N.R., M.L., Maypa, J.P. Gaudiano, A.B.R. Uypitching, and C.A. Almaida. (2000). Elasmobranch Biodiversity and Conservation Project in the Philippines (Phase 1). Paper presented during the 16th Annual Meeting, La Paz, B.C.S., México, U.S.A, 14-20 June 2000. Abstract only. Barut, N.C. (2006). Landed catch and effort monitoring and biological study of sharks in selected landing sites in the Philippines. pp. 107-110. In: SEAFDEC (2006). Report on the Study on Shark Production, Utilization and Management in the ASEAN Region (2003-2004). Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Center (SEAFDEC), Bangkokg, Thailand. 229 pp. Barut, N.C. and J.S. Zartiaga. (1997). Shark fisheries in the Philippines. Paper presented at the International Seminar and Workshop on Sharks and Rays Biodiversity, Conservation and Management, Tuaran, Sabah, Malaysia, 7-10 July 1997. 6 pp. Barut, N.C. And J.S. Zartiaga. (1997). Shark Fisheries in the Philippines. Paper presented at the International Seminar and Workshop on Sharks and Rays Biodiversity, Conservation and Management, Tuaran, Sabah, Malaysia, 7-10 July 1997. 6 pp. Boncodin, E. and M.N.R. Alava (1999). Ecological data collection in Donsol , Sorsogon: Final Report (February– July 1999). Unpublished data. 30pp. Bonfil, R. (1994). Overview of world elasmobranch fisheries. Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (UN-FAO) Fisheries Technical Paper 341. Rome, Italy. Pp. 53-54 Calumpong, H.P., J.S. Estacion and M.V. Lepiten. eds. (1997c). Status of the coastal resources of the Malalag Learning Site. Silliman University COE-CRM. Report submitted to USAID, Manila, Philippines. Calumpong, H.P., J.S. Estacion and M.V. Lepiten. eds. (1997a). Status of the coastal resources of the Bohol Learning Site (from Jetafe to Calape). Silliman University COE-CRM. Report submitted to USAID, Manila, Philippines. Camhi, M., S. Fowler, J. Musick. A. Barutigam, and S. Fordham. (1998). Sharks and their relatives: ecology and conservation. Occasional Paper of the IUCN Species Survival Commission No. 20. 39pp. Camhi, M., S. Fowler, J. Musick. A. Barutigam, and S. Fordham. (1998). Sharks and their relatives: ecology and conservation. Occassional Peper of the IUCN Species Survival Commission No. 20. 39pp. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 94 Cantor, T. (1849). Catalogue of Malaysia fishes. J. Asiat. Soc. Beng. 18 (1): 983-1442. Chen, H. K. (ed). 1996. Shark fisheries and the trade in sharks and shark products of Southeast Asia. TRAFFIC Southeast Asia, Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia, 48pp. Chen, H. K. ed. (1996). Shark fisheries and the trade in sharks and shark products of Southeast Asia. TRAFFIC Southeast Asia, Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia, 48pp. Chen,H.K., G.C.T Kwang-Ming Liu, S.-J. Joung, and M.J. Phippps. 1996. TRAFFIC report on shark fisheries and trade in Taiwan. In: Phipps MK (compiler). TRAFFIC (East Asia) report on shark fisheries and trade in the East Asian region. TRAFFIC East Asia-Taipei. Cinco E., J. Diaz, Q.P. Sia III and G. Silvestre. 1994. A checklist of fishes caught in San Miguel Bay, pp. 000-000. In G. Sivestre, C. Luna and J. Padilla (eds.) Multidisciplinary assessment of the fisheries in San Miguel Bay, Philippines. ICLARM Tech. Rep. Compagno, L. (2000a). Sharks, fishery and biodiversity. Paper presented in Paper presented in Shark 2000 Conference. Honolulu, Hawaii, February 21-24, 2000. (Abstract ). Compagno, L. (2000b, unpublished manuscripts). Checklist of Philippine Chondrochthyes. Draft manuscripts (e-copy), February 20, 2000. 26 pp. Compagno, l. (unpublished). Researches on Philippine cartilaginous fishes. Draft manuscripts (e-copy), April 26, 2001. 6pp. Compagno, L.J.V. (unpublished). Sharks, fishery and biodiversity. Paper presented in Shark 2000 Conference. Honolulu, Hawaii, February 21-24, 2000. Abstract only. Compagno, L.J.V. 1977. Phyletic relationships of living sharks and rays. AM. Zool. , 17 (2):302-22. Compagno, L.J.V. 1984. FAO Species Catalagoue. VOl 4. Sharks of the World. An annotated and illustrated catalogue of sharks species known to date. Parts 1 and 2. FAO Fish. Synop. (125) Vol 4:1 655. Compagno, L.J.V. 2000. Sharks, fishery and biodiversity. Shark 2000 Conference. Honolulu, Hawaii, February 21-24, 2000. (Abstract). Compagno, L.J.V., P.R. Last, J.D. Stevens, and M.N.R. Alava. (2005). Checklist of Philippine Chondrichthyes. CSIRO Marine Laboratories. Report 243. 109pp. http://www.marine.csiro.au/cmr pubs/reports/CSIRO mlrs243 full.pdf. Department of Agriculture, Municipality of Lopez Jaena, Misamis Occidental. (1997). May 1997 Daily fish catch report data sheet (photocopied sheets) Eckert, S.A. and B.S. Stewart. (1998). Telemetry, and the satellite tracking of whale sharks, Rhincodon typus in the Sea of Cortez, Mexico. Paper presented at the International Seminar and Workshop on Sharks and Rays Biodiversity, Conservation and Management, Tuaran, Sabah, Malaysia, 7-10 July 1998. FAO. (1995). Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. Rome. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 41 p. Fowler, H.W. (1941). Contributions to the Biology of the Philippine Archipelago and Adjacent Waters: the fishes of the groups Elasmobranchii, Holocephali, Isospondyli, and Ostarophysi obtained by. The United States Bureau of Fisheries Steamer “Albatross” in 1907 to 1910, chiefly in the Philippine Islands and Adjacent Seas. United States Government Printing Office, Washington. 511pp. Fowler, S. (1999). The role of non-governmental organizations in the international conservation of shafks. In: Case studies of the management of elasmobranch fisheries, FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 378/2: 880-903. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 95 Herre, A.W. (1953). Checklist of Philippine Fishes. United States Government Printing Office. 977 pp. Hoenig, J.M. and S.H. Gruber. 1990. Life-history patterns in elasmobranchs: implications for fisheries management. In Elasmobranchs as Living Resources: Advances in the Biology, Ecology, Systematics, and the Status of the Fisheries, H.L. Pratt Jr., S.H. Gruber and T. Taiuchi, eds., NOAA Technical Report 90:1-16. Kreuzer, R. and Ahmed R. 1978. Shark Utilization and Marketing. FAO, Rome. Last, P.R. and J.D. Stevens. (1994). Sharks and rays of Australia. CSIRO Australia. 513pp. Lepiten, M.V. (1995a). Sarangani Bay fish stock assessment project - first quarter report- June 15 to September 15, 1995. Unpublished. Lepiten, M.V. (1995b). Sarangani Bay fish stock assessment project – third quarter report – October and November, 1995. Unpublished. Luchavez, T.F. (1991). Report on the assessment of the finfish fisheries in the Central Visayas Regional Project Sites in Region 7. 70 pp. Maypa, M.L., A.B.R. Uypitching, J.P. Gaudiano, M.N.R. Alava, and C.A. Almaida. (2000). A preliminary report on the fishery, conservation and management of chondrichthyan fishes in selected areas of the Visayas and Mindanao, Philippines. Presented at the 16th Annual Meeting, La Paz, B.C.S., México, U.S.A. 14-20 June 2000. Abstract only. Maypa, M.L., J.P. Gaudiano, A.B.R. Uypitching, M.N.R. Alava, P.Last, J. Stevens, and L.J.V. Compagno. (2001). Elasmobranch species confirmed fro Philippine waters: the WWF Elasmobranch Collection. Terminal Report submitted to WWF Elasmobranch Biodiversity and Conservation Project (1998-2001). 80pp. McManus, J.W., C.L. Nañola, Jr., R.B. Reyes, Jr. and K.N. Kesner. (1992). Resource ecology of the Bolinao coral reef system. ICLARM Stud. Rev. 22, 117 p. Mindanao State University - Naawan. (1991). Resource and ecological assessment of Panguil Bay. Terminal Report, Volume 1. Morrisey, J.F. (2000). Distribution table of the 14 megamouth sharks (webpage). <http:\\www.Megamouth.tablemega.htm> Moyle, P.B. and J.J. Cech, Jr. (1996). Fishes: an introduction to Ichthyology. 3rd ed. Prentice Hall, New Jersey. Pp 213-217. Oliver, A., G. Sant and S. Fowler. 1998. International Plan of Action for the Conservation of Sharks, Shark News 12: 5. Pacific Rim Innovation and Management Exponents, Inc. (1992). Fisheries resources assessment study of the coastal and marine waters of Antique: Final report. Volume I: An assessment of the fisheries resources of Antique. 217 pp. Parry-Jones, R. 1996. TRAFFIC Report on Shark Fisheries and Trade in Hong Kong. In: Phipps, M.J. (comp.) TRAFFIC [East Asia] report on shark fisheries in the East Asian region. TRAFFIC East Asia – Taipei. Pratt, H.L. and J.G. Casey. 1990. Shark reproductive strategies as a limiting factor in directed fisheries, with a review of Holden’s method of estimating growth-parameters. In Elasmobranchs as Living Resources: Advances in the Biology, Ecology, Systematics, and the Status of the Fisheries, H.L. Pratt Jr., S.H. Gruber and T. Taiuchi, eds., NOAA Technical Report 90:97-109. Rose, D. 1996. An overview of world trade in sharks and other cartilaginous fishes. TRAFFIC International, Cambridge, United Kingdom. 106 pp. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 96 Samaniego, B.R. and M.R. Cruz. (1996). Data on shark fisheries of Zamboanga Philippines (April 1996): report submitted to WWF Philippines Program for TRAFFIC SEA. Samaniego, B.R. and M.R. Cruz. (1996). Data on shark fisheries of Zamboanga Philippines (April 1996): report submitted to WWF Philippines Program. SEAFDEC. 2006. Report on the Study on Shark Production, Utilization and Management in the ASEAN Region 2003-2004, Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Center, Bangkok, Thailand. 229 pp. Sia III Q.P., L.R. Garces and E.A Cinco. (1994). Reef fisheries of northwestern San Miguel Bay. P 000 000. In G. Silvestre, C. Luna and J. Padilla (eds.) Multidisciplinary assessment of the fisheries in San Miguel Bay, Philippines (1992-1993). ICLARM Tech. Rep. 000,000 p. Silliman University Marine Laboratory (SUML). (1994a). Final report on the resource and ecological assessment of Carigara Bay, Leyte. Vol.1. Report submitted by Silliman University Marine Laboratory to FSP-BFAR. pp. 110-129. Silliman University Marine Laboratory (SUML). (1994b). Final report on the resource and ecological assessment of Sogod Bay, Leyte. Vol.1. Fisheries. Report submitted by Silliman University Marine Laboratory to FSP-BFAR. pp. 6-180. Silliman University Marine Laboratory (SUML). (1997). Final report on the Assessment of the Central Visayas Regional Project-I. Nearshore Fisheries Component. Report submitted by Silliman University Marine Laboratory to USAID, Manila, Philippines. pp. 16-61. Silliman University Marine Laboratory, SUML (1999). SUML (1999) reviewed the following sources: Herre (1953); Luchavez (1991); Mindanao State University – Naawan report (1991); McManus et al.(1992); Pacific Rim Innovation and Management Exponents (1992); UBFI (1992).Cinco et al. (1994); Sia III et al. (1994); SUML report (1994a, 1994b, 1997), Lepiten (1995a, 1995b); Chen (1996); Alava et al., (1997); Calumpong, et al. (1997a, 1997c), and the Department of Agriculture, Municipality of Lopez Jaena, Misamis Occidental (1997). The more recent and comprehensive species checklist of species reported in the Philippines is presented by Compagno et al (2005). Silliman University. (1999, unpublished report). Elasmobranch Biodiversity in the Philippines (Phase 1: December 28, 1998-June, 1999): Terminal Report. Submitted to WWF-Philippines, July 9, 1999. Simpfendorfer, C. (2000). Environmental threats to sharks. Paper presented in Shark 2000 Conference. Honolulu, Hawaii, February 21-24, 2000. 8pp. Sottom, R. ed. (1999). Case studies of the management of elasmobranch fisheries. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 378/1 and 378/2. 920 pp. Subasinghe, S. 1992. Shark Fin, Sea Cucumber and Jelly Fish: A Processor’s Guide. Infofish Technical Handbook 6. Infofish, Kuala Lumpur. Torres, D.S., I.A. Lim, C.T. Reyes, Jr., and E.Narida. (2000). Notes on the characteristics of whalesharks (Rhincodon typus) in Honda Bay and some management implications. Paper presented in the 9th Annual Philippine Vertebrate Symposium of the Wildlife Conservation Society of the Philippines (WCSP), Development Academy of the Philippines, Tagaytay City, 10-12 April 2000. Trono, R.B. (1996). Whale shark fishery in the Bohol Sea. WWF-Philippines Programme report. UBFI. (1992). NGO information fact sheet, Puerto Princessa: Ulugan Bay Foundation, Inc. Yaptinchay, A.A.SP., R. Uy, and M.N.R. Alava. (1998). Catch and effort data of whale sharks in the Philippines. Paper presented during the 14th Annual American Elasmobranch Meeting, University of Guelph, Ontario, Canada, July 16 –22, 1998. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 97 APPENDICES Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 98 APPENDIX 1: PHILIPPINE CHECKLIST OF CHONDRICHTHYAN FISHES (Source: Compagno et al., 2005) Class Chondrichthyes Huxley, 1880. Cartilaginous fishes. Subclass Holocephalii Müller, 1835. Chimaeroids and their relatives. Order Chimaeriformes Garman, 1877. Modern chimaeras or silver sharks. Family Chimaeridae Rafinesque, 1815. Shortnose chimaeras. Genus Chimaera Linnaeus, 1758 Chimaera phantasma Jordan & Snyder, 1900. Silver Chimaera. Genus Hydrolagus Gill, 1863. Hydrolagus mitsukurii (Dean, in Jordan & Snyder, 1904). Mitsukurii's chimaera. Genus Hydrolagus Gill, 1863. Hydrolagus sp. Philippines reticulate chimaera. Subclass Elasmobranchii Müller, 1845. Sharklike fishes. Superorder Galeomorphii Compagno, 1973. Galeomorph sharks. Order Heterodontiformes Garman, 1885. Bullhead sharks. Family Heterodontidae Gray, 1851. Bullhead sharks. Genus Heterodontus Blainville, 1816. Bullhead s harks. Heterodontus zebra (Gray, 1831). Zebra bullhead shark. Order Lamniformes Garman, 1885. Mackerel sharks. Family Pseudocarchariidae Compagno, 1973. Crocodile sharks. Genus Pseudocarcharias Cadenat, 1963. Crocodile sharks. ?Pseudocarcharias kamoharai (Matsubara, 1936). Crocodile shark. Family Megachasmidae Taylor, Compagno & Struhsaker, 1983. Megamouth sharks. Genus Megachasma Taylor, Compagno & Struhsaker, 1983. Megamouth sharks. Megachasma pelagios Taylor, Compagno & Struhsaker, 1983. Megamouth shark. Family Alopiidae Bonaparte, 1838. Thresher sharks. Genus Alopias Rafinesque, 1810. Thresher sharks. Alopias pelagicus Nakamura, 1935. Pelagic thresher Alopias superciliosus (Lowe, 1839). Bigeye thresher. Alopias vulpinus (Bonnaterre, 1788). Thresher shark. Family Cetorhinidae Gill, 1862. Basking sharks. Genus Cetorhinus Blainville, 1816. Basking sharks. Cetorhinus maximus (Gunnerus, 1765). Basking shark. Family Lamnidae Müller & Henle, 1838. Mackerel sharks, Pating, Chacon. Genus Carcharodon Smith, 1838. White sharks. Carcharodon carcharias (Linnaeus, 1758). White shark. Genus Isurus Rafinesque, 1810. Mako sharks. Isurus oxyrinchus Rafinesque, 1810. Shortfin mako. ?Isurus paucus Guitart Manday, 1966. Longfin mako. Order Orectolobiformes Compagno, 1973. Carpet sharks. Family Parascylliidae Gill, 1862. Collared carpetsharks. Genus Cirrhoscyllium Smith & Radcliffe In Smith, 1913. Barbelthroat carpetsharks. Cirrhoscyllium expolitum Smith & Radcliffe In Smith, 1913. Barbelthroat carpetshark. Family Orectolobidae Gill, 1896. Wobbegongs. Genus Orectolobus Bonaparte, 1834. Beardless wobbegongs. ?Orectolobus japonicus Regan, 1906. Japanese wobbegong. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 99 Class Chondrichthyes Huxley, 1880. Cartilaginous fishes. Orectolobus sp. near ornatus. Philippine wobbegong. Family Hemiscylliidae Gill, 1862. Longtailed Carpetsharks. Genus Chiloscyllium Müller and Henle, 1837. Bamboosharks. ?Chiloscyllium griseum Müller & Henle, 1838. Gray bambooshark. ?Chiloscyllium indicum (Gmelin, 1788). Slender bambooshark. Chiloscyllium plagiosum (Bennett, 1830). Whitespotted bambooshark. Chiloscyllium punctatum Müller & Henle, 1838. Brownbanded bambooshark. Family Stegostomatidae Gill, 1862. Zebra sharks. Genus Stegostoma Müller & Henle, 1837. Zebra sharks. Stegostoma fasciatum (Hermann, 1783). Zebra shark, tiger shark, Butanding. Family Ginglymostomatidae Gill, 1862. Nurse sharks. Genus Nebrius Rüppell, 1837. Tawny nurse sharks. Nebrius ferrugineus (Lesson, 1830). Tawny nurse shark. Family Rhincodontidae Müller & Henle, 1839. Whale sharks. Genus Rhincodon Smith, 1829. Whale sharks. Rhincodon typus (Smith, 1828). Whale shark. Order Carcharhiniformes Garman, 1913. Ground sharks. Family Scyliorhinidae Gill, 1862. Cat sharks. Genus Apristurus Garman, 1913. Demon catsharks. Apristurus herklotsi (Fowler, 1934). Longfin catshark. Genus Atelomycterus Garman, 1913. Coral catsharks. Atelomycterus marmoratus (Bennett, 1830). Coral catshark, marbled cat-shark. Genus Cephaloscyllium Gill, 1862. Swellsharks. Cephaloscyllium, sp. nov. Philippines swellshark. Genus Galeus Rafinesque, 1810. Sawtail catsharks. Galeus sauteri (Jordan & Richardson, 1909). Taiwan sawtail catshark. Galeus schultzi Springer, 1979. Dwarf sawtail catshark. Galeus sp. nov. near G. nipponensis Nakaya, 1979. Genus Halaelurus Gill, 1862. Tiger catsharks ?Halaelurus cf. boesemani Springer & D'Aubrey, 1972. Speckled catshark. Halaelurus cf. buergeri (Müller & Henle, 1838). Blackspotted catshark. Genus Pentanchus Smith & Radcliffe, in Smith, 1912. Onefin catsharks. Pentanchus profundicolus Smith & Radcliffe, 1912. Onefin catshark. Genus Scyliorhinus Blainville, 1816. Spotted catsharks. ?Scyliorhinus garmani (Fowler, 1934). Brownspotted catshark. ?Scyliorhinus torazame (Tanaka, 1908). Cloudy catshark. Family Proscylliidae Fowler, 1941. Finback catsharks. Genus Eridacnis Smith, 1913. Ribbontail catsharks. Eridacnis radcliffei Smith, 1913. Pygmy ribbontail catshark. ?Eridacnis sp.: Philippine ribbontail catshark. Family Pseudotriakidae Gill, 1893. False catsharks. Genus Gollum Compagno, 1973. Gollumsharks. Gollum sp. nov. Sulu gollumshark. Family Triakidae Gray, 1851. Houndsharks. Genus Hemitriakis Herre, 1923. Combtooth houndsharks. Hemitriakis leucopteriptera Herre, 1923. Whitefin tope. Hemitriakis sp. Ocellate topeshark. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 100 Class Chondrichthyes Huxley, 1880. Cartilaginous fishes. Genus Iago Compagno & Springer, 1971 Iago garricki Fourmanoir, 1979. Longnosed houndshark. Genus Mustelus Linck, 1790. Smooth-hounds. Mustelus 1 cf. manazo Bleeker, 1854. Philippine white-spotted smoothhound. Mustelus 2 cf. griseus Pietschmann, 1908. Philippine brown smoothhound. Mustelus 3 cf. griseus Pietschmann, 1908. Philippine gray smoothhound. ?Genus Triakis Müller & Henle, 1838. Leopard sharks. ?Triakis scyllium Müller & Henle, 1839. Banded houndshark Family Hemigaleidae Hasse, 1879. Weasel sharks. Genus Hemigaleus Bleeker, 1852. Weasel Sharks. Hemigaleus microstoma Bleeker, 1852. Sicklefin weasel shark. Genus Hemipristis Agassiz, 1843. Snaggletooth sharks. Hemipristis elongatus (Klunzinger, 1871). Snaggletooth shark. Family Carcharhinidae Jordan & Evermann, 1896. Requiem sharks, gray sharks, Pating. Genus Carcharhinus Blainville, 1816. Gray sharks, Pating. Carcharhinus albimarginatus (Rüppell, 1837). Silvertip Shark. Carcharhinus altimus (Springer, 1950). Bignose shark. Carcharhinus amblyrhynchoides (Whitley, 1934). Graceful shark. Carcharhinus amblyrhynchos (Bleeker, 1856). Gray reef shark. ?Carcharhinus borneensis (Bleeker, 1858 1859). Borneo shark. Carcharhinus brevipinna (Müller & Henle, 1839). Spinner shark. ?Carcharhinus dussumieri (Valenciennes, 1839). Whitecheek shark. Carcharhinus falciformis (Bibron, 1839). Silky shark. Carcharhinus hemiodon (Valenciennes, 1839). Pondicherry shark. Carcharhinus leucas (Valenciennes, 1839). Bull shark. Carcharhinus limbatus (Valenciennes, 1839). Blacktip shark. Carcharhinus longimanus (Poey, 1861). Oceanic whitetip shark. ?Carcharhinus macloti (Müller & Henle, 1839). Hardnose shark. Carcharhinus melanopterus (Quoy & Gaimard, 1824). Blacktip reef shark, black-finned shark. Carcharhinus sealei (Pietschmann, 1913). Blackspot shark. Carcharhinus sorrah (Valenciennes, 1839). Spot-tail shark. Genus Galeocerdo Müller & Henle, 1837. Tiger sharks. Galeocerdo cuvier (Peron & Lesueur, 1822). Tiger shark, spotted shark. ?Genus Glyphis Agassiz, 1843. River sharks. ?Glyphis sp. River shark. Genus Loxodon Müller & Henle, 1838. Sliteye sharks. Loxodon macrorhinus Müller & Henle, 1838. Sliteye shark. Genus Negaprion Whitley, 1940. Lemon sharks. Negaprion acutidens (Rüppell, 1837). Sharptooth lemon shark. Genus Prionace Cantor, 1849. Blue sharks. Prionace glauca (Linnaeus, 1758). Blue shark. Genus Rhizoprionodon Whitley, 1929. Sharpnose sharks. Rhizoprionodon acutus (Rüppell, 1835). Milk shark, Bongalonon. ?Genus Scoliodon Müller & ?Scoliodon laticaudus Müller & Henle, 1838. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 101 Class Chondrichthyes Huxley, 1880. Cartilaginous fishes. Henle, 1837. Spadenose sharks Spadenose shark. Genus Triaenodon Müller & Henle, 1837. Whitetip reef sharks. Triaenodon obesus (Rüppell, 1837). Whitetip reef shark. Family Sphyrnidae Gill, 1872. Hammerhead sharks. Genus Eusphyra Gill, 1862. Winghead sharks. Eusphyra blochii (Cuvier, 1816). Winghead shark. Genus Sphyrna Rafinesque, 1810. Hammerhead sharks. Awal, Codosan, Binkungan, Balagbagan, Krosan, Ros (Herre, 1953, Philippine names for Sphyrna zygaena, presumably applying to other species of Sphyrna) Sphyrna lewini (Griffith & Smith, 1834). Scalloped Hammerhead. Sphyrna mokarran (Rüppell, 1837). Great hammerhead. Sphyrna zygaena (Linnaeus, 1758). Smooth hammerhead. ?Sphyrna tiburo (Linnaeus, 1758). Bonnethead shark. Superorder Squalomorphii Compagno, 1973. Squalomorph sharks and batoids. Order Hexanchiformes Garman, 1913. Cow and frilled sharks. Family Hexanchidae Gray, 1851. Sixgill and sevengill sharks. Genus Heptranchias Rafinesque, 1810. Sharpnose sevengill sharks. Heptranchias perlo (Bonnaterre, 1788). Sharpnose sevengill shark. Genus Hexanchus Rafinesque, 1810. Sixgill sharks. Hexanchus griseus (Bonnaterre, 1788). Bluntnose sixgill shark, cow shark. Hexanchus nakamurai Teng, 1962. Bigeyed sixgill shark. Order Squaliformes Gill, 1862. Dogfish sharks. Family Echinorhinidae Gill, 1862. Bramble sharks. Genus Echinorhinus Blainville, 1816. Bramble sharks. ?Echinorhinus cookei Pietschmann, 1928. Prickly shark. Family Squalidae Blainville, 1816. Dogfish sharks, spurdogs, spiny dogfishes. Genus Squalus Linnaeus, 1758. Spurdogs. Squalus cf. megalops Macleay, 1881. Philippines shortnose spurdog. Squalus cf. mitsukurii Jordan & Snyder, 1903. Philippines shortspine dogfish. Squalus sp. Philippine fatspined dogfish. Squalus sp. Philippine longnose spurdog. Family Centrophoridae Bleeker, 1859. Gulper sharks. Genus Centrophorus Müller & Henle, 1837. Gulper sharks. Centrophorus isodon (Zhu, Meng, & Liu, 1981). Black gulper shark. Centrophorus lusitanicus Bocage & Capello, 1864. Lowfin gulper shark. Centrophorus cf. moluccensis Bleeker, 1860. Philippine smallfin gulper shark. Centrophorus ?squamosus (Bonnaterre, 1788). Leafscale gulper shark. ? = C. acus Garman, 1906 Genus Deania Jordan & Snyder, 1902. Birdbeak dogfishes. ?Deania cf rostrata Garman, 1906. Deania profundorum (Smith & Radcliffe, 1912). Arrowhead dogfish. Family Etmopteridae Fowler, 1934. Lantern sharks. Genus Centroscyllium Müller & Henle, 1841. Combtooth Centroscyllium cf. kamoharai Abe, 1966. Bareskin dogfish. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 102 Class Chondrichthyes Huxley, 1880. Cartilaginous fishes. dogfishes. Genus Etmopterus Rafinesque, 1810. Lantern sharks. Etmopterus brachyurus Smith & Radcliffe, 1912. Shorttail lanternshark. Etmopterus lucifer Jordan & Snyder, 1902. Blackbelly lanternshark. Family Dalatiidae Gray, 1851. Kitefin sharks. Genus Isistius Gill, 1865. Cookiecutter sharks. Isistius brasiliensis (Cuvier, In Quoy & Gaimard, 1824). Cookiecutter shark. Genus Squaliolus Smith & Radcliffe, 1912. Spined pygmy sharks. Squaliolus aliae Teng, 1959. Smalleye pigmy shark. Squaliolus laticaudus Smith & Radcliffe, 1912. Spined pigmy shark. Order Squatiniformes Jordan, 1923. Angel sharks. Family Squatinidae Bonaparte, 1838. Angel sharks. Genus Squatina Dumeril, 1806. Angel Sharks. Squatina formosa Shen & Ting, 1972. Taiwan angelshark. Order Pristiophoriformes White, 1936. Saw sharks. Family Pristiophoridae Bleeker, 1859. Saw sharks. Genus Pristiophorus Müller & Henle, 1837. Fivegilled sawsharks. Pristiophorus sp. C [Compagno & Niem, 1998]. Philippine sawshark. Order Rajiformes Müller & Henle, 1841. Batoids. Suborder Pristoidei Gill, 1893. Sawfishes. Family Pristidae Bonaparte, 1838. Modern sawfishes. Genus Anoxypristis White & Moy-Thomas, 1941. Knifetooth sawfishes. Anoxypristis cuspidata (Latham, 1794). Knifetooth sawfish. Pristis microdon Latham, 1794. Largetooth or freshwater sawfish, sawfish, Tagan. Pristis pectinata Latham, 1794. Smalltooth sawfish. Pristis zijsron Bleeker, 1851. Green sawfish. Suborder Rhinoidei McEachran, Dunn & Miyake, 1996. Sharkrays. Family Rhinidae Müller & Henle, 1841. Sharkrays. Genus Rhina Bloch & Schneider, 1801. Sharkrays. Rhina ancylostomus Bloch & Schneider, 1801. Shark ray. Suborder Rhynchobatoidei McEachran, Dunn & Miyake, 1996. Wedgefishes. Family Rhynchobatidae Garman, 1913. Wedgefishes. Genus Rhynchobatus Müller & Henle, 1837. Wedgefishes. Spotted guitarfish, Arado, Barewan, Immaradu, Pating sodsod (Herre, 1953, Philippine names for R. djiddensis, probably applying to R. australiae and other species). Rhynchobatus australiae Whitley, 1939. Whitespotted wedgefish. ?Rhynchobatus cf. laevis (Bloch & Schneider, 1801). Smoothnose wedgefish. Rhynchobatus sp. 2 Compagno & Last (1999). Broadnose wedgefish. Suborder Rhinobatoidei Garman, 1913. Guitarfishes. Family Rhinobatidae Müller & Henle, 1837. Guitarfishes. Genus Glaucostegus Bonaparte, 1846. Rough guitarfishes. ?Glaucostegus granulatus (Cuvier, 1829). Sharpnose guitarfish. ?Glaucostegus halavi (Forsskål, 1775). Halavi Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 103 Class Chondrichthyes Huxley, 1880. Cartilaginous fishes. guitarfish. ?Glaucostegus microphthalmus (Teng, 1959). Smalleyed Guitarfish. Glaucostegus typus (Bennett, 1830). Giant shovelnose ray. Genus Rhinobatos Linck, 1790. Guitarfishes. ?Rhinobatos formosensis Norman, 1926. Taiwan guitarfish. Rhinobatos cf. schlegelii Müller & Henle, 1841. Philippine guitarfish. ?Suborder Platyrhinoidei: McEachran, Dunn & Miyake, 1996. Fanrays and thornbacks. ?Family Platyrhinidae Jordan, 1923. Fanrays and thornbacks. ?Genus Platyrhina Müller & Henle, 1838. Fanrays. ?Platyrhina sinensis (Bloch & Schneider, 1801). Fanray. Suborder Torpedinoidei Gill, 1893. Electric rays. Family Narcinidae Gill, 1862. Numbfishes. Genus Narcine Henle, 1834. Numbfishes. Narcine timlei (Bloch & Schneider, 1801). Blackspotted numbfish. Family Narkidae Fowler, 1934. Sleeper Rays. Genus Narke Kaup, 1826. Onefin sleeper rays. ?Narke dipterygia (Bloch & Schneider, 1801). Spottail sleeper ray. Genus Temera Gray, 1831. Finless sleeper rays. ?Temera hardwickii (Bloch & Schneider, 1801). Finless sleeper ray. Family Torpedinidae Bonaparte, 1838. Torpedo rays. Genus Torpedo Houttuyn, 1764. Torpedo rays. Torpedo sp. Philippine spotted torpedo. Torpedo sp. Philippine offshore torpedo. Suborder Rajoidei Garman, 1913. Skates. Family Arhynchobatidae Fowler, 1934. Softnose skates. Genus Insentiraja Yearsley & Last, 1992. Looseskin skates. Insentiraja cf. subtilispinosa (Stehmann, 1989). Philippine looseskin skate. Family Rajidae Blainville, 1816. Hardnose skates, skates, rays, Pagi. Genus Dipturus Rafinesque, 1810. Longnose skates. Dipturus gigas Ishiyama, 1958. Giant skate. Dipturus tengu (Jordan & Fowler, 1903). Goblin skate, tengu skate, acutenose skate. Dipturus sp. 1. Philippine longnose skate. Dipturus sp. 2. Dipturus sp. [Seret] (Philippines) Dipturus sp. Tilted thorn skate. Genus Okamejei Ishiyama, 1958. ?Okamejei boesemani (Ishihara, 1987). Black sand skate. ?Okamejei hollandi (Jordan & Richardson, 1909). Yellow-spotted skate. ?Okamejei kenojei (Müller & Henle, 1841). Spiny rasp skate. Okamejei sp. nov. Philippine ocellate skate. Genus Anacanthobatis von Bonde & Swart, 1924. Smooth legskates. Anacanthobatis cf. borneensis Chan, 1965. Philippine legskate. Suborder Myliobatoidei Fowler, 1941. Stingrays. Family Plesiobatididae Nishida, 1990. Giant stingarees. Genus Plesiobatis Nishida, 1990. Giant stingarees. Plesiobatis daviesi (Wallace, 1967). Deepwater stingray, giant stingaree. Family Hexatrygonidae Heemstra & Smith, 1980. Sixgill stingrays. Genus Hexatrygon Heemstra & Smith, 1980. Sixgill stingrays. Hexatrygon bickelli Heemstra & Smith, 1980. Sixgill stingray. Family Dasyatidae Jordan, 1888. Whiptail stingrays, sting rays, Pagi. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 104 Class Chondrichthyes Huxley, 1880. Cartilaginous fishes. Genus Dasyatis Rafinesque, 1810. Fringetailed stingrays. Dasyatis cf. akajei (Bürger In Müller & Henle, 1841). Philippine red stingray. Dasyatis bennettii (Müller & Henle, 1841). Bennett's cowtail or frilltailed ray. Dasyatis kuhlii (Müller & Henle, 1841). Bluespotted stingray or maskray, Kuhl's stingray, Dahonan, Doragon, Kiampao, Perisan. Dasyatis zugei (Bürger In Müller & Henle, 1841). Pale-edged stingray. Dasyatis sp. Adon's maskray. Genus Himantura Müller & Henle, 1837. Whiprays. Himantura bleekeri (Blyth, 1860). Longtail whipray. Himantura fai Jordan & Seale, 1906. Pink whipray. Himantura gerrardi (Gray, 1851). Sharpnose whipray. Himantura granulata (Macleay, 1882). Mangrove whipray. Himantura imbricata (Bloch & Schneider, 1801). Scaly whipray. Himantura jenkinsii (Annandale, 1909). Golden whipray. Himantura uarnak (Forsskål, 1775). Spotted whipray, marbled stingray, ring-tailed ray, whip-tailed ray, whip ray, Paging bulik, Paging sulatan. Himantura undulata (Bleeker, 1852). Leopard whipray, honeycomb stingray or whipray. .Himantura walga (Müller & Henle, 1841). Dwarf whipray. Genus Pastinachus Rüppell, 1829. Cowtail stingrays. Pastinachus sephen (Forsskål, 1775). Cowtail stingray, feathertail stingray, frill-tailed Pagi. Genus Taeniura Müller & Henle, 1837. Ribbontail stingrays. Taeniura lymma (Forsskål, 1775). Bluespotted ribbontail ray, bluespotted fantail ray, blue spotted stingray, blue-spotted Pagi, ribbontailed stingray. Taeniura meyeni Müller & Henle, 1841. Round ribbontail ray. Urogymnus asperrimus (Bloch & Schneider, 1801). Porcupine ray, thorny ray. Family Gymnuridae Fowler, 1934. Butterfly rays. Genus Aetoplatea Valenciennes, In Müller & Henle, 1841. Finned butterfly rays. Aetoplatea zonurus Bleeker, 1852. Zonetail butterfly ray. Genus Gymnura Kuhl In Van Hasselt, 1823. Butterfly rays. Gymnura cf. micrura (Bloch & Schneider, 1801). Smooth butterfly ray. Gymnura poecilura (Shaw, 1804). Longtail butterfly ray. Family Myliobatidae Bonaparte, 1838. Eagle rays, Pagi Manok. Genus Aetobatus Blainville, 1816. Spotted eagle rays. Aetobatus cf. narinari (Euphrasen, 1790). Spotted eagle ray, bonnetray, eagle ray, Pagi Manok, Paol, Banogan, Taligmanok. Aetobatus cf. guttatus (Shaw, 1804). Indian eagle ray Genus Aetomylaeus Garman, 1908. ?Aetomylaeus milvus (Valenciennes, 1841). Ocellate eagle ray. ?Aetomylaeus niehofii (Bloch & Schneider, 1801). Banded eagle ray. Aetomylaeus vespertilio (Bleeker, 1852). Ornate eagle ray. Genus Myliobatis Cuvier, Myliobatis cf. tobijei Bleeker, 1854. Philippine Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 105 Class Chondrichthyes Huxley, 1880. Cartilaginous fishes. 1816. Eagle rays. kite ray. Family Rhinopteridae Jordan & Evermann, 1896. Cownose rays. Genus Rhinoptera Kuhl in Cuvier, 1829. Cownose rays. Rhinoptera javanica Müller & Henle, 1841. Javanese cownose ray, flapnose ray, cow nosed ray, Palimanok, Ogaog, Banogan. Family Mobulidae Gill, 1893. Devil rays. Genus Manta Bancroft, 1828. Mantas. Manta birostris (Walbaum, 1792). Manta. Genus Mobula Rafinesque, 1810. Devil rays, Salanga, Safiga, Sarafigan. Mobula eregoodootenkee (Bleeker, 1859). Longfin devilray. Mobula kuhlii (Valenciennes, In Müller & Henle, 1841). Shortfin devilray. Mobula thurstoni (Lloyd, 1908). Bentfin devilray. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 106 APPENDIX 2: NSAP REGIONAL REPORTING FORMS FORM 1: REGIONAL DATA SETS Region: Informant: Review of Regional Data Sets DATA SETS YES/NO REMARKS 1. Landings of sharks and rays in Philippines from to 2006. 2. Landings of sharks and rays by Region ( -2003). 3. Fishing grounds of sharks and rays in Philippines waters. 4. Species compositions and relative abundance by landing site (percentage by numbers). 5. Size distribution of sharks by species and area. 6. Percentage of maturity for five most dominant species of sharks by area and sex. 7. Changes in the catch composition of sharks percentage by different gears from – 2006. 8. Price, local usage and marketing destination of shark at six landing sites (2005 or most recent) 9. The import and export of shark’s products in terms of volume (tonnes) and value (US$) during the period -2006. 10. The landing and market prices of sharks and rays in Philippines. 11. The landing and market prices of fins and other products of sharks and rays in Philippines. 12. The value of elasmobranch fishery in Philippines in terms of percentage during -2006. 13. Fishery Statistical Bulletin for South China Sea Area -2006 14. 15. Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 107 FORM 2: REGIONAL DATA SETS Regional Sharks and Rays Profile Period covered: Region: Name of Informant: SPECIES FISHING GROUND 1. Shark Species (True Sharks/ Flat Sharks/ Silver Sharks) endemic/ migrating (indicate specific area in the region) a. Directed Catch b. Indirect Catch 2. Species/produc ts landed Location (specific landing sites) Gears Volume (Min-Max, kg.) # Individual s Unit price Final destinatio n/s a. Sharks (indicate if fins, meat, jaws, entrails, whole) b. Rays (indicate if fins, meat, jaws, entrails, whole) Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 108 FORM 3: PLAN OF ACTION 3. Component Issues and Concerns 3.1. Monitoring (core component) a. Improvement of fisheries statistics (routine and non-routine mechanism, indicators) b. Improvement of fisheries statistics (routine and non-routine mechanisms, indicators) c. Assessment of status and trends of shark stocks and ensure continuous monitoring 3.2. Data collection and analysis a. Review of shark fisheries b. Cooperation with industry c. Gathering of ecological information on shark species d. Understanding shark utilization and trade e. Understanding socio-economic importance of shark fisheries 3.3. Research a. Development of taxonomy b. Facilitation and encouragement research on little known shark species c. Promotion of research activities to maximize utilization of sharks d. Assessment of threat to shark populations, determine and protect critical habitats 3.4. Building human capacity a. Training those concerned with identification of shark species b. Promotion of effective utilization of shark catches c. Building awareness on shark resource management among stakeholders and public. 3.5. Conservation and Management a. Policy b. Institutional Arrangements c. Information, Education and Communication d. Compliance and Enforcement Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 109 APPENDIX 3: REGION 6 SHARK FISHERIES Annual Production (1998 2007) (Source: NSAP Region 6 Shark Report 2007 and 2008) Year Fishing Ground Gear Shark's Species Catch (kg) 2003 Visayan Sea PS True Shark Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sorrah 17.50 Carcharhinidae Scoliodon laticaudus 595.00 Hemiscylliidae Chiloscyllium punctatum 41.00 DS True Shark Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus limbatus 511.00 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sorrah 635.60 Carcharhinidae Galeocerdo cuvier 650.00 Hemiscylliidae Chiloscyllium plagiosum 18.50 Hemiscylliidae Chiloscyllium punctatum 498.00 Sphyrnidae Sphyrna lewini 1.00 Rays Myliobatidae Aetobatus narinari 614.00 Dasyatidae Dasyatis kuhlii 3,806.25 Dasyatidae Dasyatis sephen 560.00 Gymnuridae Gymnura australis 52.25 Dasyatidae Himantura jenkinsii 125.00 Dasyatidae Himantura uarnak 755.00 Mobulidae Mobula sp. 225.00 Rhinobatidae Rhynchobatus australiae 370.75 MWT True Shark Scyliorhinidae Atelomycterus marmoratus 3.00 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus limbatus 179.25 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sorrah 108.00 Hemiscylliidae Chiloscyllium plagiosum 75.25 Hemiscylliidae Chiloscyllium punctatum 572.75 Sphyrnidae Sphyrna lewini 314.50 Rays Dasyatididae Dasyatis kuhlii 42.25 Himantura uarnak 40.00 Taeniura meyeni 27.50 Mobulidae Mobula sp. 579.00 Myliobatidae Aetobatus narinari 1,266.00 OT True Shark Alopiidae Alopias vulpinus 150.00 Alopias pelagicus 436.00 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus limbatus 17.50 Carcharhinus sorrah 17.50 Scoliodon laticaudus 150.00 Heterodontidae Heterodontus zebra 697.50 Scyliorhinidae Atelomycterus marmoratus 17.50 Hemiscylliidae Chiloscyllium plagiosum 279.50 Chiloscyllium punctatum 1,116.00 Sphyrnidae Sphyrna lewini 17.50 Rays Dasyatidae Dasyatis kuhlii 8,572.50 Himantura jenkinsii 3,912.50 Himantura uarnak 100.00 Gymnuridae Gymnura australis 70.00 Mobulidae Mobula sp. 388.00 Myliobatidae Aetobatus narinari 393.00 Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 110 Year Fishing Ground Gear Shark's Species Catch (kg) Rhinobatidae Rhinobatus sp. 70.00 Rhynchobatus australiae 4,117.25 2003 Total 33,205.60 2004 Cuyo East Pass HL True Shark Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus amblyrhynchos 59.50 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus longimanus 2.00 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sp. 1,025.00 Visayan Sea PS True Shark Alopiidae Alopias pelagicus 92.00 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sorrah 29.50 Hemiscylliidae Chiloscyllium punctatum 38.50 Rays Dasyatididae Dasyatis kuhlii 61.25 Himantura uarnak 15.00 Mobulidae Mobula sp. 130.00 Myliobatidae Aetobatus narinari 25.00 Rhinobatidae Rhynchobatus australiae 5.00 DS True Shark Alopidae Alopias pelagicus 1,355.00 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sp. 103.00 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus limbatus 97.00 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus melanopterus 7.00 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sorrah 53.00 Carcharhinidae Loxodon macrorhinus 70.00 Hemiscylliidae Chiloscyllium punctatum 742.75 Hemiscylliidae Chiloscyllium plagiosum 4.00 Rays Dasyatidae Dasyatis kuhlii 3,034.50 Dasyatis sephen 500.00 Himantura jenkensi 870.00 Himantura uarnak 537.00 Taeniura melanospila 480.00 Taeniura meyeni 105.00 Mobulidae Mobula sp. 74.00 Myliobatidae Aetobatus narinari 924.00 Rhinobatidae Rhynchobatus australiae 1,261.75 MWT True Shark Alopiidae Alopias pelagicus 8.00 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus limbatus 10.75 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus melanopterus 30.00 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sorrah 243.20 Scyliorhinidae Atelomycterus marmoratus 1.50 Hemiscylliidae Chiloscyllium plagiosum 16.00 Hemiscylliidae Chiloscyllium punctatum 594.25 Sphyrnidae Sphyrna lewini 17.25 Rays Dasyatididae Dasyatis kuhlii 70.75 Himantura uarnak 70.00 Mobulidae Mobula sp. 195.00 Myliobatidae Aetobatus narinari 1,004.00 OT True Shark Alopiidae Alopias pelagicus 3,192.00 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sorrah 980.00 Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 111 Year Fishing Ground Gear Shark's Species Catch (kg) Hemiscylliidae Chiloscyllium plagiosum 339.00 Hemiscylliidae Chiloscyllium punctatum 4,550.50 Heterodontidae Heterodontus zebra 4,025.00 Rays Dasyatididae Dasyatis akajei 2,225.00 Dasyatis kuhlii 27,263.50 Himantura jenkinsii 6,213.00 Himantura uarnak 1,603.00 Taeniura meyeni 105.00 Mobulidae Mobula sp. 4,156.00 Myliobatidae Aetobatus narinari 2,335.00 Rhinobatidae Rhynchobatus australiae 10,603.00 2004 Total 81,551.45 2005 Cuyo East Pass HL Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus amblyrhynchos 15.00 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sp. 436.00 Visayan Sea DS True Shark Alopiidae Alopias pelagicus 1,575.00 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus limbatus 434.50 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sorrah 1,064.25 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sp. 420.00 Hemiscylliidae Chiloscyllium punctatum 412.25 Scyliorhinidae Atelomycterus marmoratus 1.50 Rays Dasyatidae Dasyatis kuhlii 3,402.50 Dasyatis sephen 607.00 Dasyatis sp. 70.00 Himantura jenkinsii 475.00 Himantura uarnak 1,086.00 Taeniura melanospila 92.00 Taeniura meyeni 145.00 Mobulidae Mobula diabolus 50.00 Myliobatidae Aetobatus narinari 767.00 Rhinobatidae Rhinobatus schlegelii 175.00 Rhynchobatus australiae 334.50 MWT True Shark Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus limbatus 15.00 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sorrah 264.25 Hemiscylliidae Chiloscyllium plagiosum 17.50 Hemiscylliidae Chiloscyllium punctatum 266.00 Sphyrnidae Sphyrna lewini 25.50 Rays Dasyatidae Dasyatis kuhlii 1.25 Himantura uarnak 55.00 Mobulidae Manta birostris 110.00 Mobula sp. 55.00 Myliobatidae Aetobatus narinari 778.00 OT True Shark Alopiidae Alopias pelagicus 3,648.00 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sorrah 70.00 Hemiscylliidae Chiloscyllium punctatum 4,655.00 Heterodontidae Heterodontus zebra 5,215.00 Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 112 Year Fishing Ground Gear Shark's Species Catch (kg) Rays Dasyatididae Dasyatis akajei 525.00 Dasyatis kuhlii 25,694.50 Himantura jenkinsii 3,167.00 Mobulidae Mobula sp. 307.00 Myliobatidae Aetobatus narinari 1,610.00 Rhinobatidae Rhynchobatus australiae 11,357.50 2005 Total 69,399.00 2006 Cuyo East Pass HL True Shark Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus limbatus 55.00 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sp. 513.00 Stegostomatidae Stegostoma fasciatum 6.50 Rays Rhinobatidae Rhynchobatus diabolus 30.00 DS True Shark Stegostomatidae Stegostoma fasciatum 15.00 Rays Dasyatidae Dasyatis sephen 20.00 PS Ginglymostomatidae Nebrius ferrugineus 140.00 Mindoro Front DS True Shark Hemiscylliidae Chiloscyllium punctatum 12.00 Rays Dasyatidae Dasyatis kuhlii 43.75 Dasyatis lymna 17.50 Himantura jenkensi 968.00 Himantura uarnak 120.00 Pastinachus sephen 95.00 Rhinobatidae Rhynchobatus australiae 177.00 Visayan Sea BSGN True Shark Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus falciformis 28.30 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sp 76.60 Rays Dasyatidae Dasyatis kuhlii 35.00 Himantura uarnak 3.50 DGN Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus limbatus 235.00 EGN Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sp 6.50 SLN Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sp 58.00 PS True Shark Hemiscylliidae Chiloscyllium punctatum 210.00 Rays Mobulidae Manta birostris 88.00 Mobula sp. 859.00 Rhinobatidae Rhynchobatus australiae 35.00 DS True Shark Alopiidae Alopias pelagicus 280.00 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus limbatus 232.00 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sorrah 72.00 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus falciformis 2.00 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sp. 21.10 Carcharhinidae Galeocerdo cuvier 30.00 Ginglymostomatidae Nebrius ferrugineus 1.30 Hemiscylliidae Chiloscyllium plagiosum 13.50 Hemiscylliidae Chiloscyllium punctatum 672.00 Rays Dasyatidae Aetobatus narinari 30.00 Dasyatis kuhlii 3,477.75 Dasyatis sephen 105.00 Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 113 Year Fishing Ground Gear Shark's Species Catch (kg) Himantura jenkensi 145.00 Himantura uarnak 881.00 Taeniura melanospila 60.00 Taeniura meyeni 304.00 Mobulidae Manta birostris 70.00 Myliobatidae Aetobatus narinari 800.00 Rhinobatidae Rhynchobatus australiae 571.00 Rhinobatus djiddensis 105.00 MWT True Shark Alopiidae Alopias pelagicus 40.00 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus limbatus 35.50 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sorrah 383.50 Carcharhinidae Galeocerdo cuvier 87.00 Hemiscylliidae Chiloscyllium plagiosum 3.00 Hemiscylliidae Chiloscyllium punctatum 196.00 Sphyrnidae Sphyrna lewini 17.00 Rays Dasyatidae Dasyatis kuhlii 4.75 Himantura jenkensii 15.00 Taeniura meyeni 4.00 Mobulidae Manta birostris 75.00 Myliobatidae Aetobatus narinari 1,445.50 Rhinobatidae Rhynchobatus australiae 6.00 OT True Shark Alopiidae Alopias pelagicus 2,583.00 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sorrah 105.00 Hemiscylliidae Chiloscyllium punctatum 3,508.00 Heterodontidae Heterodontus zebra 4,263.00 Rays Dasyatidae Dasyatis kuhlii 29,260.00 Dasyatis akajei 1,085.00 Himantura jenkensi 3,090.00 Himantura uarnak 35.00 Taeniura meyeni 290.00 Mobulidae Mobula sp. 503.00 Myliobatidae Aetobatus narinari 2,840.00 Rhinobatidae Rhynchobatus australiae 10,220.00 FT True Shark Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus falciformis 27.20 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sp 156.00 Ginglymostomatidae Nebrius ferrugineus 280.20 Rays Dasyatidae Dasyatis kuhlii 25.70 Himantura uarnak 11.50 FC True Shark Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus falciformis 18.00 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sp 20.00 Panay Gulf PS True Shark Shark(chop) Shark(chop) shark(chop) 70.00 Guimaras Strait PS True Shark Sphyrnidae Sphyrna zygaena 630.00 2006 Total 73,053.15 2007 Cuyo East Pass HL True Shark Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus limbatus 18.00 Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 114 Year Fishing Ground Gear Shark's Species Catch (kg) Carcharhinus sp. 367.00 Shark (chop2) Shark (chop2) 36.00 Rays Dasyatidae Dasyatis sephen 10.00 PS True Shark Carcharhinidae Sharks (chop2) Sharks (chop2) 80.00 Rays Mobulidae Manta birostris 32.00 DS Rays Dasyatidae Dasyatis kuhlii 175.00 Dasyatis sephen 315.00 Gymnura japonica 140.00 Himantura jenkensi 50.00 Myliobatidae Aetobatus narinari 105.00 Rhinobatidae Rhychobatus australiae 193.00 Rhinobatus schegelii 175.00 Visayan Sea DGN True Shark Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sp. 70.00 BSGN True Shark Dasyatidae Dasyatis kuhlii 5.20 FT True Shark Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sp 2.30 Ginglystomatidae Nebreus ferrugineus 82.80 PS Rays Mobulidae Manta birostris 184.00 Mobula sp. 96.00 DS True Shark Alopiidae Alopias pelagicus 65.00 Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus limbatus 285.50 Carcharhinus sorrah 476.75 Carcharinus sp 140.00 Nebrius ferrugenius 1.80 Hemiscyllidae Chiloscyllium punctatum 338.40 Ginglystomatidae Nebreus ferrugineus 28.80 Rays Dasyatidae Dasyatis annotata 280.00 Dasyatis kuhlii 2,930.75 Dasyatis sephen 696.00 Himantura jenkensi 377.00 Himantura uarnak 2,059.25 Myliobatidae Aetobatus narinari 237.50 Rhinobatidae Rhynchobatus australiae 215.50 MWT True Shark Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus limbatus 159.50 Carcharhinus sorrah 710.25 Hemiscyllidae Chiloscyllium plagiosum 4.50 Chiloscyllium punctatum 182.75 Sphyrnidae Sphyrna lewini 7.75 Rays Dasyatidae Dasyatis kuhlii 21.00 Himantura uarnak 15.00 Mobulidae Manta birostris 40.00 Mobula sp. 167.00 Myliobatidae Aetobatus narinari 1,128.25 Aetomylaeus vespertilio 35.00 OT True Shark Alopiidae Alopias pelagicus 352.00 Hemiscyllidae Chiloscyllium punctatum 840.00 Rays Dasyatidae Dasyatis kuhlii 26,010.00 Himantura jenkensi 1,610.00 Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 115 Year Fishing Ground Gear Shark's Species Catch (kg) Myliobatidae Aetobatus narinari 678.00 Mobula sp. 28.00 Rhinobatidae Rhychobatus australiae 875.00 Rhynchobatus australiae 5,845.00 Panay Gulf PS True Shark Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus sp. (sliced) 115.00 Sharks (chop2) Sharks (chop2) 32.00 2007 Total 49,124.55 Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 116 APPENDIX 4: REGION 8 SHARK FISHERIES Annual Production (1998 2006) (Source: NSAP Region 8 Shark Report 2007) YEAR Fishing Gear Landing Center Species Sum of Catch (in kg) 1999 Crab Net Brgy. Lupok Guiuan E. Samar Carcharhinus melanopterus 6.00 Danish Seine (Municipal) Brgy. Rizal, Dulag, Leyte Carcharhinus melanopterus 3.00 Danish Seine(Commercial) Brgy. Sto. Nino, Abuyog, Leyte Carcharhinus longimanus 85.00 Drift Gill Net Brgy. Sto. Nino, Abuyog, Leyte Carcharhinus limbatus 10.00 Carcharhinus longimanus 2.60 Carcharhinus melanopterus 11.70 Carcharhinus sorrah 4.30 Loxodon macrorhinus 5.60 Rhizoprionodon acutus 20.00 Sphyrna lewini 37.90 Sphyrna zygaena 2.40 Fish Coral Guiuan Public Market E. Samar Carcharhinus melanopterus 13.00 Gill Net Brgy. Bislig, Tanauan, Leyte Carcharias melanopterus 12.06 Brgy. Lupok Guiuan E. Samar Carcharhinus melanopterus 7.80 Brgy. Rizal, Dulag, Leyte Carcharhinus dussumieri 10.70 Carcharhinus melanopterus 10.20 Sphyrna zygaena 0.70 Guiuan Public Market E. Samar Carcharhinus melanopterus 207.70 Taraguna Beach Macarthur, Leyte Carcharhinus longimanus 9.30 Carcharhinus melanopterus 4.90 Carcharias melanopterus 2.20 Rhizoprionodon acutus 2.92 Sphyrna lewini 11.05 Hook & Line Brgy. Lupok Guiuan E. Samar Carcharhinus melanopterus 197.10 Hook Line Guiuan Public Market E. Samar Carcharhinus melanopterus 60.50 Hook & Line w/ light Brgy. San Jose Dulag, Leyte Carcharias melanopterus 2.00 Trawl Brgy. Sto. Nino, Abuyog, Leyte Sphyrna lewini 2.50 Trawl (Commercial) Brgy. Sto. Nino, Abuyog, Leyte Carcharhinus melanopterus 20.00 Sphyrna lewini 61.10 Sphyrna zygaena 28.00 TOTAL 852.23 2000 Danish Seine(Commercial) Brgy. Sto. Nino, Abuyog, Leyte Carcharhinus limbatus 130.00 Drift Gill Net Brgy. Sto. Nino, Abuyog, Leyte Carcharhinus dussumieri 5.00 Carcharhinus limbatus 26.70 Carcharhinus longimanus 52.10 Carcharhinus melanopterus 648.45 Carcharias melanopterus 1.20 Sphyrna lewini 49.70 Fish Coral Guiuan Public Market E. Samar Carcharhinus melanopterus 9.00 Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 117 YEAR Fishing Gear Landing Center Species Sum of Catch (in kg) Gill Net Brgy. Bislig, Tanauan, Leyte Carcharhinus albimarginatus 15.30 Carcharhinus melanopterus 9.90 Brgy. Rizal, Dulag, Leyte Carcharhinus melanopterus 18.27 Carcharias melanopterus 0.25 Sphyrna zygaena 3.38 Guiuan Public Market E. Samar Carcharhinus melanopterus 314.30 Carcharias melanopterus 6.00 Taraguna Beach Macarthur, Leyte Carcharhinus melanopterus 2.32 Sphyrna lewini 0.92 Gill Net w/ light Brgy. Bislig, Tanauan, Leyte Carcharhinus melanopterus 15.00 Brgy. Bislig, Tanauan, Leyte Charcharhinus albimarginatus 1.50 Hook & Line Brgy. Lupok Guiuan E. Samar Carcharhinus dussumieri 10.00 Carcharhinus melanopterus 220.35 Brgy. Sto. Nino, Abuyog, Leyte Carcharhinus melanopterus 17.10 Guiuan Public Market E. Samar Carcharhinus melanopterus 22.50 Carcharias melanopterus 13.80 Taraguna Beach Macarthur, Leyte Carcharhinus melanopterus 0.15 Hook & Line w/ light Brgy. San Jose Dulag, Leyte Carcharhinus melanopterus 11.25 Hook & Line w/ light Taraguna Beach Macarthur, Leyte Carcharhinus melanopterus 1.95 Multiple Hook & Line Brgy. Lupok Guiuan E. Samar Carcharhinus melanopterus 49.50 Trawl (Commercial) Brgy. Sto. Nino, Abuyog, Leyte Eusphyra blochii 1.50 TOTAL 1,657.39 2001 Danish-Seine Commercial Brgy. Sto. Nino, Abuyog, Leyte Carcharhinus melanopterus 7.00 Drift Gillnet Brgy. Sto. Nino, Abuyog, Leyte Carcharhinus melanopterus 167.17 Gillnet Brgy. Rizal Dulag, Leyte Carcharhinus melanopterus 3.50 Sphyrna zygaena 0.65 Sphyrna zygaena 0.30 Brgy. San Roque Tanauan, Leyte Carcharhinus amblyrhynchos 2.00 Public Market Guiuan Eastern Samar Carcharhinus melanopterus 196.00 Taraguna Beach, Macarthur, Leyte Carcharhinus melanopterus 2.66 Sphyrna lewini 0.21 Hand-line Public Market Guiuan Eastern Samar Carcharhinus melanopterus 45.00 Hook & Line w/ Light Taraguna Beach, Macarthur, Leyte Carcharhinus melanopterus 6.50 Trawl Commercial Brgy. Sto. Nino, Abuyog, Leyte Carcharhinus sorrah 5.00 Troll line Brgy. Sto. Nino, Abuyog, Leyte Carcharhinus melanopterus 5.70 TOTAL 441.69 2002 Crab Net Guiuan Carcharhinus melanopterus 10.00 Tanauan Carcharhinus amblyrhynchos 0.50 Danish Seine(Commercial) Abuyog, Leyte Carcharhinus melanopterus 2.50 Drift Gill Net Abuyog, Leyte Carcharhinus dussumieri 11.60 Carcharhinus limbatus 7.00 Carcharhinus melanopterus 460.44 Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 118 YEAR Fishing Gear Landing Center Species Sum of Catch (in kg) Loxodon macrorhinus 6.80 Gill Net Balangiga, E. Samar Carcharhinus albimarginatus 115.28 Carcharhinus dussumieri 0.25 Carcharhinus limbatus 0.20 Carcharhinus longimanus 1.00 Carcharhinus melanopterus 5.40 Brgy. Bislig, Tanauan, Leyte Sphyrna lewini 0.75 Brgy. Bolosao, Lawaan E. Samar Sphyrna lewini 1.00 Brgy. Sto. Nino, Abuyog, Leyte Sphyrna lewini 24.50 Dulag, Leyte Carcharhinus melanopterus 10.00 Triaenodon obesus 6.25 Guiuan Carcharhinus melanopterus 222.00 Lawaan Carcharhinus albimarginatus 13.00 Macarthur Carcharhinus melanopterus 14.27 Public Market, Balangiga E. Samar Sphyrna lewini 19.25 Tanauan Carcharhinus limbatus 5.25 Gill Net w/ light Dulag, Leyte Carcharhinus melanopterus 6.00 Hook & Line Balangiga, E. Samar Carcharhinus albimarginatus 31.00 Carcharhinus melanopterus 3.00 Guiuan Carcharhinus melanopterus 103.00 Public Market, Balangiga E. Samar Sphyrna lewini 2.50 Hook & line (2 Hooks) Guiuan Carcharhinus melanopterus 3.00 Hook & Line w/ light Dulag, Leyte Carcharhinus melanopterus 4.00 Multiple Hook & Line Balangiga, E. Samar Carcharhinus albimarginatus 4.50 Spear Gun Guiuan Carcharhinus melanopterus 1.65 Trawl (Commercial) Abuyog, Leyte Carcharhinus melanopterus 30.70 Brgy. Sto. Nino, Abuyog, Leyte Sphyrna zygaena 5.00 TOTAL 1,131.59 2003 Danish seine Commercial Brgy. Sto. Nino, Abuyog, Leyte Carcharhinus melanopterus 2,935.10 Drift gillnet Brgy. Bislig Tanauan, Leyte Carcharhinus sorrah 16.00 Brgy. Rizal Dulag, Leyte Carcharhinus melanopterus 12.50 Brgy. Sto. Nino, Abuyog, Leyte Carcharhinus limbatus 642.80 Carcharhinus melanopterus 11,964.40 Gillnet Brgy. Bulusao, Lawaan, E. Samar Carcharhinus albimarginatus 233.49 Sphyrna lewini 79.99 Brgy. Rizal Dulag, Leyte Carcharhinus melanopterus 47.65 Public Market Balangiga E. Samar Carcharhinus albimarginatus 1,944.89 Sphyrna lewini 259.37 Taraguna Beach, Macarthur, Leyte Carcharhinus melanopterus 7.51 Handline Brgy. San Miguel Dulag, Leyte Carcharhinus melanopterus 172.95 Public Market Balangiga E. Samar Carcharhinus albimarginatus 61.40 Trawl Commercial Brgy. Sto. Nino, Abuyog, Leyte Carcharhinus melanopterus 1,900.80 Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 119 YEAR Fishing Gear Landing Center Species Sum of Catch (in kg) TOTAL 20,278.85 2004 Bag Net (Commercial) Tanauan Carcharhinus melanopterus 17.00 Crab Gill Net Brgy. San Roque, Tanauan, Leyte Sphyrna lewini 3.00 Crab Net Tanauan Carcharhinus melanopterus 18.00 Danish Seine(Commercial) Abuyog Carcharhinus melanopterus 10.00 Drift Gill Net Abuyog Carcharhinus limbatus 21.00 Carcharhinus melanopterus 503.27 Gill Net Balangiga Carcharhinus albimarginatus 146.75 Carcharhinus melanopterus 5.50 Brgy. Bolosao, Lawaan E. Samar Sphyrna lewini 5.00 Dulag Carcharhinus melanopterus 10.30 Lawaan Carcharhinus albimarginatus 7.00 Macarthur Carcharhinus longimanus 2.00 Carcharhinus melanopterus 0.72 Public Market, Balangiga E. Samar Sphyrna lewini 38.00 Tanauan Carcharhinus melanopterus 7.50 Carcharhinus sorrah 2.00 Hook & Line Balangiga Carcharhinus albimarginatus 6.00 Hook & Line w/ light Dulag Carcharhinus melanopterus 1.50 Tanauan Carcharhinus melanopterus 5.20 Carcharhinus sorrah 1.50 Multiple Hook & Line Balangiga Carcharhinus albimarginatus 6.50 Spear Gun Lawaan Carcharhinus melanopterus 0.75 Trawl (Commercial) Abuyog Carcharhinus melanopterus 15.00 Brgy. Sto. Nino, Abuyog, Leyte Sphyrna lewini 1.50 TOTAL 834.99 2005 Crab Net Tanauan Carcharhinus melanopterus 8.00 Danish Seine(Commercial) Abuyog Carcharhinus melanopterus 4.30 Drift Gill Net Abuyog Carcharhinus limbatus 1.10 Carcharhinus melanopterus 579.54 Carcharhinus sorrah 17.40 Tanauan Carcharhinus melanopterus 8.00 Fish Coral Guiuan Carcharhinus melanopterus 1.00 Gill Net Balangiga Carcharhinus albimarginatus 115.25 Carcharhinus melanopterus 9.00 Dulag Carcharhinus melanopterus 1.00 Guiuan Carcharhinus melanopterus 9.00 Lawaan Carcharhinus albimarginatus 4.75 Carcharhinus melanopterus 2.50 Public Market, Balangiga E. Samar Sphyrna lewini 3.25 Tanauan Carcharhinus melanopterus 8.50 Carcharhinus sorrah 29.55 Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 120 YEAR Fishing Gear Landing Center Species Sum of Catch (in kg) Hook & Line Balangiga Carcharhinus albimarginatus 13.00 Multiple Hook & Line Balangiga Carcharhinus melanopterus 1.50 Tanauan Carcharhinus sorrah 6.80 Trawl (Commercial) Abuyog Carcharhinus melanopterus 9.50 TOTAL 832.94 2006 Bag Net (Commercial) Tanauan Carcharhinus melanopterus 8.00 Crab Net Tanauan Carcharhinus sorrah 5.00 Drift Gill Net Abuyog Carcharhinus limbatus 15.00 Abuyog Carcharhinus melanopterus 94.80 Gill Net Balangiga Carcharhinus albimarginatus 93.00 Carcharhinus melanopterus 5.50 Brgy. Bislig, Tanauan, Leyte Sphyrna lewini 10.00 Dulag Carcharhinus melanopterus 7.00 Lawaan Carcharhinus albimarginatus 7.50 Macarthur Carcharhinus melanopterus 0.39 Tanauan Carcharhinus melanopterus 29.05 Carcharhinus sorrah 25.00 Hook & Line Balangiga Carcharhinus albimarginatus 8.50 Carcharhinus melanopterus 4.50 Dulag Carcharhinus melanopterus 6.00 Guiuan Carcharhinus melanopterus 41.30 Public Market, Balangiga E. Samar Sphyrna lewini 12.50 Tanauan Carcharhinus melanopterus 10.15 Hook & Line w/ light Tanauan Carcharhinus melanopterus 8.00 Multiple Hook & Line Tanauan Carcharhinus melanopterus 3.00 Trawl (Commercial) Abuyog Carcharhinus melanopterus 28.50 TOTAL 422.69 GRAND TOTAL 26,452.37 Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 121 APPENDIX 5: SEAFDEC-NFRDI Shark Fisheries Assessment (October 2003 – January 2004) (Source: Barut 2006) A. SUMMARY TABLE FOR SHARK SPECIES COMPOSITION AND BIOLOGICAL INFORMATION. Shark Species Species information Biological Parameters Total Sampled (kg) for 7 days No. observation days % of total sampled catch Mean length (cm) Sex Maturity (% per category) % Male % Female Cagayan 1. Sphyrna lewini 55 1 100 45 100 M2 Total for all shark species 55.00 Occidental Mindoro 1. Chiloscyllium puntatum 66.2 2 5.57 108.75 47.62 52.38 2. Triaenodon obesus 754.3 1 63.47 122.67 3. Squalus megalops 277.4 3 23.34 85.74 81.99 18.01 4. Rhizoprionodon acutus 9 1 0.76 138 100 5. Rhyncobatus djiddensis 18 1 1.51 120 100 6. Rhinobatos sp. 3.5 1 0.29 89 100 7. Carcharinus amboinensis 25 1 2.1 170 100 8. Carcharinus leucas 13 1 1.09 150 100 9. Eugomphodus taurus 12 1 1.01 145 100 10. Negaprion acutidens 10 1 0.84 130 100 Total for all shark species 1,188.40 Palawan 1. Carcharinus falcoformes 79.8 60 40 2. Carcharinus dussumieri 130 100 3. Carcharinus melanopterus 132.1 50 50 Total for all shark species 1,188.40 Surigao del Norte 1. Alopias pelagicus 563 5 89.65% 300.5 45 55 2. Squaliformes sp. 5 2 0.80% 50 50 3. Isurus oxyrinchus 60 1 9.55% Total for all shark species 628.00 Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 122 B. SUMMARY TABLE FOR LOCAL USAGE AND MARKETING OF SHARKS FOR QUARTER (30 days)(October 2003 – January 2004) Species Part Shark Source Abundance at landing site Locally consumed (C), Discarded (D), Traded (T), Processed (Type of Processing) Local price per kg2 Market destination Type of fishing boat Type of fishing gear Cagayan 1. Sphyrna lewini Meat LL C P28-35 Aparri Occidental Mindoro 1. Chiloscyllium puntatum Meat GN ++ T P15-20 Mindoro 2. Triaenodon obesus Meat GN +++ T P15-20 Mindoro 3. Squalus megalops Meat GN ++ T P15-20 Mindoro Liver Processed (cooked) P500/ Manila Extract liver oil gallon 4. Rhizoprionodon acutus Meat GN + C Fins T 7000 Manila 5. Rhyncobatus djiddensis Meat GN + T Fins T 7000 Manila 6. Rhinobatos sp. Meat GN + T Fins T 7000 Manila 7. Carcharinus amboinensis Meat LL + C 30-45 Mindoro Fins T 500-600 Manila/Palawan Jaws T 150/pcs Mindoro 8. Carcharinus leucas Meat LL + C 30-45 Mindoro Fins T 500-600 Manila/Palawan Jaws T 150/pcs Mindoro 9. Eugomphodus taurus Meat GN + C 10. Negaprion acutidens Meat LL + C Palawan 1. Carcharinus falcoformes Meat LL ++ C P35-45 Coron, Palawan Fins T P3000 Puerto Princesa/Manila 2. Carcharinus dussumieri Meat LL + C P35-45 Coron, Palawan Fins T P3000 Puerto Princesa/Manila 3. Carcharinus melanopterus Meat LL + C P35-45 Coron, Palawan Fins T P3000 Puerto Princesa/Manila Surigao del Norte 1. Alopias pelagicus Meat MHL ++ C P30-45 Surigao Fins T P2500 Manila 2. Squaliformes sp. 3. Isurus oxyrinchus Meat MHL + C P30-45 Surigao Fins T P2500 Manila Philippine NPOA-Sharks* 123 APPENDIX 6: TRADE FLOW OF SHARK COMMODITIES IN THE PHILIPPINES (1976-2002) (Source: FAO Fishery Statistics 1976-2002) ERROR: stackunderflow OFFENDING COMMAND: ~ STACK: