Partially protected marine area renders non-fishery benefits amidst high fishing pressure: A case study from eastern Philippines

Partial closure of the marine area to a certain degree of fishing activity is expected to enhance the species richness and abundance of commercially important species compared with those in adjacent unrestricted fishing areas. Although 90% of the total marine protected area in the Philippines is considered partially protected, no studies have focused on the effectiveness of latter areas in this region. Potential benefits of a partially protected marine area for fishes was investigated by comparing the species richness and abundance of commercially important fishes in this area with those in a fully protected area and adjacent unrestricted fishing ground in San Miguel Island, eastern Philippines. Fishing is forbidden in the fully protected area. Fishing activities in the partially protected marine area and open fishing area were also investigated through interviews with local fisherman. Species richness and abundance in the completely protected zone were significantly higher than those in the partially protected and open fishing areas; however, no difference was found between the partially protected and open fishing areas. Similarly, fishing pressure indices (e.g., fishing time, catch, and gear type) between the partially protected and open fishing areas were not different. Overall, full protection of a marine area confers greater benefits than partial protection; however, under high fishing pressure, partially protected areas are rendered less effective than an open fishing zone. Although this study was conducted at a single location, the results raise awareness of the issue of partially protected area management and highlight importance of establishing well designed partially protected areas in this country.