Kochi University Repository

Bobiles, Renan Ugto

Marine Protected Area Establishment: Part of
the solution toward sustainable development
along Kuroshio region
Renan Ugto Bobiles
Laboratory of Marine Bioresource Production
Graduate School of Kuroshio Science, Kochi University,
200 Monobe, Nankoku, Kochi 783 8502, Japan
An essential management strategy to address threats
affecting marine and coastal ecosystems and the communities
that depend on its resources is the establishment of Marine
Protected Areas (MPAs). A tool recognized globally as
integral component of the solution to various emerging threats
in marine environment (Pauly et. al, 2002). The Apo and
Sumilon Island marine reserves were two well-known marine
protected area located in the Visayan region of the Philippines.
These two marine reserves showed promising results of its
effects in the nearby fishing ground by increasing its fishery
production.
One of the world’s ocean current is Kuroshio (literally
means black current) form in the North Equatorial Current
bifurcation region, the mean bifurcation occurs at about 14.2
o
N near the surface with a depth ranging from 0-100 meters
(Qu and Lukas, 2003). The current carries enormous volume
of warm water from the pacific seaboard of Luzon in the
Philippines passing eastern side Taiwan up to Japan archipelago.
The three countries where lives of the community directly or
indirectly benefit from the resources brought by the Kuroshio
Current were collectively part of the Kuroshio region. In the
Philippines, Lagonoy gulf is one of the major fishing grounds
in the country strategically situated in the region where the
current originates as a result of NEC (North Equatorial
Current) bifurcation. The gulfs have seven established MPA’s
ranging from paper MPA to well manage MPA’s.
Studies conducted in the said MPA’s revealed that the
overall qualities of habitat (coral, seagrass and mangrove)
since the establishment have improved substantially from poor
to fair/good condition (David et. al 2004). Other studies of
MPA’s in the Philippines provide evidence of spill over effect
(e.g. Russ and Alcala, 1996; Russ and Alcala, 2003; Soliman,
2003) to nearby fishing grounds which increases fishery
harvest, interestingly fishery production in Lagonoy gulf
continually decline over the years. This goes to show that the
MPA establishment intended to enhance fishery production
where not achieved. The continued decline in fishery
production in Lagonoy gulf where attributed to the exponential
increase in fishing pressure (Dioneda et. al. 2004). This
suggest that the cumulative MPA size relative to fishing
ground may not provide substantial effects in terms of spill
over. The supposed to be increased in fishery production
109
could have been a rallying point to gain support from fishing
community to establish more MPA’ s, thus increasing the
cover of MPA area. A plausible solution seen by various
fishery managers to the problem is reduction of fishing
pressure/effort, which along the process entail displacement of
fishermen. In developing country e. g. Philippines wherein
fishing community rely mostly on reef fisheries, thus fishing
pressure in most municipal water in the country is high.
Reduction in fishing effort would mean shift from artisanal to
offshore fishery, which is the trend among fishermen.
Although this shift can be seen a viable alternative for
displaced fishermen for source of income, common problem
encountered by fishermen were low market value because of
lack in post-harvest facilities that would prolong the good
quality of fishery product from long fishing time. If this
problem were address fishermen could set a good price for the
fishery product consequently it will redound to increase
income.
Local Government Unit (LGU’s) and Non Government
Organization (NGO’ s) are providing supports and aids to
fishing community in the form of alternative livelihood. The
support given in a way encourages fishing household to lessen
its dependence to fishing as their main source of income. This
was done through the technical assistance and loans to
cooperative composed of fishermen’s wife or household in
their approved small-scale business proposal. The funding
donor encourages coming up with business ventures unique in
certain locality, in this way competition between localities
were averted. Livelihood activities usually focused on value
adding to certain fishery products or commodities in the
locality through sustainable resource utilization. National
government provides post-harvest facilities in some region of
the country and post harvest handling training of fishery
products to prolong the good quality of the product.
Through this intervention from various organization and
stakeholders, tangible reduction of fishing pressure could be
attained. Establishment of MPA’s is part and parcel of the
solution to arrest the decline of fishery and safeguard it from
impending collapse. It should be couple by various measures
such as reduction of fishing exploitation to a certain level
wherein the resource can replenish its stock at the same time
can sustain the needs for protein source of the people; and
strict implementation of fishery laws.
References
David, D.N., Camaya, A.P., Buella, R.B., Mendoza, A.B.,
Soliman, V. S., 2004. Assessment of coral reefs in
Lagonoy Gulf, Bicol Region. In: Soliman, V.S., et al.
(Eds.), Lagonoy Gulf Post-Resource and Socio-economic
Assessment. Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources,
Philippines (BFAR-FRMP), Technical Report. pp. 136-
152.
Dioneda, R.R., Bobiles, R.U., Reginaldo, S.C., Bustamante, F.
B., Soliman, V.S., 2004. Stock assessment of commercial
fish and invertebrate stock in Lagonoy Gulf. In: Soliman,
V. S., et al. (Eds.), Lagonoy Gulf Post-Resource and
Socio-economic Assessment. Bureau of Fisheries and
Aquatic Resources, Philippines (BFAR- FRMP), Technical
Report. pp. 38-55.
Pauly, D., Christensen, V., Guenette, S., Pitcher, T.J., Sumaila,
R., Waters, C., Watson, R., Zeller, D., 2002. Towards
sustainability in world fisheries. Nature 418, 689-695.
Qu T D, Lukas R. 2003. The bifurcation of the North
Equatorial current in the Pacific. Journal of Physical
Oceanography, 33 (1): 5-18.
Russ, G.R., Alcala, A.C., 1996. Do marine reserves export
adult fish biomass? Evidence from Apo Island, central
Philippines. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 132, 1-9.
Russ, G.R., Alcala, A.C., 2003. Marine reserves: Rates and
patterns of recovery and decline of large predatory fish,
1983-2000. Ecol. Appl. 13, 1553-1565.
Soliman, V. S., 2003. San Miguel Island marine fishery
reserve, Philippines: Lesson local leadership, Public test
fishing, and academe-LGU partnership. Case Study
presented at the Second International Tropical Marine
Ecosystem Management Symposium, organized by the
International Coral Reef Initiative, Manila Philippines,
March 24-27, 2003. http: //www.reefbase.org/resource_
center/publication/pub_14735.aspx.
110


Marine Protected Area Establishement : Part of the solution toward sustainable development along Kuroshio region

岩崎, 保道

Iwasaki, Yasumichi

高知県が主な舞台，ロケ地となった映画―地域を活性化する映画―

是永, かな子

石田, 祥代

眞城, 知己

Korenaga, Kanako

Ishida, Sachiyo

Sanagi, Tomomi

スウェーデンにおける知的障害児のインクルーシブ教育―指導内容・指導方法に注目して―

川本, 真浩

西尾, 美穂

Masahiro, KAWAMOTO

Miho, NISHlO

Task-based Practical Seminar:Discuss the role of the radio in today's society and produce radio documentary

杉田, 郁代

lkuyo, SUGITA

Content Analysis of freeword description about Active Learning when a large number of people class

黒潮圏総合科学専攻・黒潮圏科学部門

富永, 明

久保田, 賢

2015年さくらサイエンスプラン　「学際的海洋科学の最前線に触れる」　(事業報告）

高橋, 美樹

Takahashi, Miki

Teaching Okinawan music from Junior High School Music Textbooks ;  A Comparison of the Kyouiku-Geijyutsu-sha and Kyouiku-Syuppan Editions

??????
????????????????
?? ??????????????????????????????????????
?????????????????????????????????????????
??????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????
????????????
??????????????????????????????????????
????????????????
????????? ?????????????????????????????
???????????????????
???????????? ??????????? ?????????
?????????????????? ?????????????
?????????????? ????? ???????
?????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????
? ? ?
???????????????????


高知人文社会科学会第３回総会報告

小牧, 祐里

谷地森, 秀二

斉藤, 知己

加藤, 元海

??????????????????? ???????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ??????????? ?????? ???? ???
???????????????????? ????????????????
???????????????????????
?????????????????????????
??????????????????????
??????????????????????????
?????????????????????????
?????????????????????????
???????????????????????
????????????? ????????????????
???????????? ?????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
?????????????????? ???????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
??????????????????????????
?????????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
?????????????????????
?????
????? ????????????????????
??????????????????????
???????? ??????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
164
?????
???????????????????????
?????????????
???????????????????????????????
? ?
??????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????
??????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????????
????
?????????????????????????????
?????????????????????????
????????????????????????
????????? ??????????
????????????????????????
????????? ??????????????
??????????????
????????? ??????????????
????????????????
????????? ??????????
???????? ??? ?????????????? ?????????????
?????????????? ????????????? ???????? ????
???????????????????????
????????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
??????????????????????
???? ??????????????????
?????????????????????
???????? ?? ??? ????????????? ???????????
?????????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
??????? ???????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
??????????????????????????
???????????????????????
??????????????????????????? ?
????????????????????????
????????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
????????????????????????
????????????????????????
?????????????????????????
????????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
????????????
165
Fig. 1. Study site at Ikumi Beach in Toyo Town, Kochi Prefecture. One camera was set in a coastal windbreak (location A),
and other two cameras were set on an animal trail in a bamboo forest (location B) and on an animal trail near water (location C).
???????????????????????
???????????????????
???? ?????????????????????
???????????????????? ????????
??????? ????????????????????
???????????????????????????
?????????????????????????
??????? ? ?????????????????? ?
????????????????????????
?????????????????????????
?????????????????????????
???????????????????????
?????????????????????????
????????????????????????
????????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???? ? ????????????????????
???????????????????????
??????????? ? ?????????????????
???????????????????????
???? ????????????????????????
?????????????????????????
????????????????????????
????????????? ????????????????
????????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????
????????????? ?????????
?????????????????????????
????????????????????????
??????????????????????
?????? ???? ???????????????????
?????? ??????????????????????
???????????? ???????????????
????????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
?????????????????????????
?????????????????????? ????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
?????????????? ??????
??????????????????????
???????????????????????
?????????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
????????????????????
166
Fig. 2. Barrier used to protect the nests from predation by
foxes. (a) Schematic diagram of the wire fence. (b) Elaborate
barrier consisting of twenty wire fences. (c) Simple barrier
consisting of three wire fences.
????????????????
???????? ????????????????
???????????????????????
?????????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
????????????????????????
???????????????????????
??????????????????????????
??????????
??????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
??????????????????????????
?????????????????????????
???????????????? ???? ????
??????
??
??????????????????????
???????????????????????
??????????????????????????
????????????????????????????
????? ???????????????????????
??????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????
?????????????????????????????????
???????????????????? ??????????????
??????????????????????????
????????? ?????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
??????????
?????????????????????????
????????????????????????????
????????????????????????
????????????????????????
????????????????????????
???????????????????????
?????????????????????????
???????????????????????
????????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???
????????????
167
Fig. 3. Frequencies of the animals observed by the automatic
cameras around the beach. (a) Location A, (b) location B,
(c) location C. See Fig. 1 for the locations. Abbreviations are:
r. dog, raccoon dog; m.p. civet, masked palm civet.
?????????????????????
???????????????????????
??????????????????????????
????????? ?????????????????
???????????????????????
??????????????????
????????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
??????????????????????????
????????????????????????
?????????????????????????
??????????????????????
????
????????????????????????
????????????????? ?????????
????????????????????????
?????????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????? ????????????????????
???????????????????????
??????????? ???????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
????????????????????
168
Table 1. Wild animals observed by automatic cameras at the nest at night in relation to the presence or absence of a barrier
during July 30-October 4, 2015. The nest was surrounded by an elaborate barrier consisting of twenty wire fences during July
30- September 12 and by a simple barrier of three wire fences during September 21-October 4. There was no barrier around the
nest during September 13- 20. The camera was set after sunset and removed before sunrise next morning (the date of this
observation period was expressed by the date when the camera was set). The animal behaviors observed by the camera were
classified as follows: 1, no predatory action; 2, digging the nest; 3, picking an egg in the mouth; 4, preying on an egg.
?????????????????????????
???????????????
????????????????????????
???????????????????????
??????????????????????
????????? ?????????????????
????????????????????????
???????????????????????
??????????????????????
??????????????????????? ???
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
????????????????????????
?????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
?????????????????????????????
???????????????????????
?????????????? ??????
??????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????? ? ?????? ? ????????? ??????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????? ? ?????? ? ?????????
????????????????????????
????????????????????? ? ?????? ?
??????????????????????????
?????????????????? ????????
???????????????????????
?????????????? ? ?????? ? ?????????
???????????????????????
?????? ????????????????????
???????????????????????
?????????????????? ? ?????? ? ??????
???????????????????????
??????????????? ???????????
???????????????????????
??????????????????????????
? ?????? ? ????????? ?? ?
??
????????????????????????
???????????????????????
?????????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
????????????
169
Fig. 4. Predation on turtle eggs by animals at the nest. (a-
b) A fox is picking an egg in its mouth. Notice that these foxes
are different individuals because their tails are different in shape.
(c) Holes made by the sand crab, Ocypode ceratophthalma,
on the transplanted nest.
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
?????????????????????????
???????????????????????
?????????????????? ???????
???????????????????????
?????????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
????????????????????
170
Fig. 5. Densities of crab holes in relation to place and barrier. Data are expressed as mean ± SE. Difference in letters denote
statistically significant differences at P < 0.05 based on Tukey-Kramer tests following one-way ANOVA. (a) Densities of crab
holes during September 10-October 4 at the transplanted nest inside the barrier, at egg disposal site next to the barrier, and at
control site outside the barrier. (b) Densities of crab holes at the transplanted nest in the presence of an elaborate barrier during
September 10- 12, in the absence of a barrier during September 13- 20, and in the presence of a simple barrier during September
21-October 4. (c) Densities of crab holes at the egg disposal site in the presence of an elaborate barrier, in the absence of a barrier,
and in the presence of a simple barrier. (d) Densities of crab holes at the control site in the presence of an elaborate barrier, in the
absence of a barrier, and in the presence of a simple barrier. (e) Ratio of the crab hole density at the transplanted nest to that at the
control site in relation to the presence or absence of barrier. (f) Ratio of the crab hole density at the egg disposal site to that at the
control site in relation to the presence or absence of barrier.
???????????????????
??????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????? ?????????????????????
?????????????????? ?? ??? ???????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
??????????????????????
????????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
?????????????????????
???????????????????????????
?????????????????????????
?????????? ?????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????? ?????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
??????? ??????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????
??????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
??????????????????? ?? ??? ???????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
??????????????? ??? ???? ?????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
?????
??????????????????????
??????????????????? ?????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????? ???????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
?????????????????????
??????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????? ??????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????? ?????????????
????????????
171
Fig. 6. Conceptual scheme describing the interacting
effect of foxes and sand crabs on the predation pressure
upon sea turtle eggs in relation to the barrier scale. The
predation pressure by foxes is assumed to decrease with the
barrier scale, while the pressure by crabs to increase with the
scale. Under these assumptions, the combined predation
pressure by foxes and crabs might be minimized with an
intermediate scale of barrier.
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
????????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
??????????????????????
??
??????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
???????????????????????
?????????????????????????????
????????????
????
Ackerman, R. A. 1980. Physiological and ecological aspects
of gas exchange by sea turtle eggs. American
Zoologist, 20: 575-583.
Barton, B. T. and Roth, J. D. 2008. Implications of
intraguild predation for sea turtle nest protection.
Biological Conservation, 141: 2139-2145.
Ficetola, G. F. 2008. Impacts of human activities and
predators on the nest success of the hawksbill turtle,
Eretmochelys imbricata, in the Arabian Gulf.
Chelonian Conservation and Biology, 7 (2): 255-257.
Hughes, D. A. 1996. Behavioral and ecological
investigations of the crab Ocypode ceratophthalmus
(Crustacea: Ocypodidae). Journal of Zoology, 150:
129-143.
John, A. H. F. 1998. Ghost crab (Ocypode spp.) predation
on green turtle (Chelonia mydas) nests and
hatchlings in Chagar Hutang, Pulau Redang. Final
year project report, Bachelor of Marine Science,
Faculty of Applied Science and Technology,
Universiti Putra Malaysia.
?????????????????? ????? ????
???????????????????????
?? ??????
?????????? ????? ???????????
??????? ??????? ???
?????????????????? ????? ???
?????????????????????
?????????? ?????????? ???
?????
Marco, A., da Graça, J., García-Cerdá, R., Abella, E., and
Freitas, R. 2015. Patterns and intensity of ghost crab
predation on the nests of an important endangered
loggerhead turtle population. Journal of Experimental
Marine Biology and Ecology, 468: 74-82.
Mendonça, V. M., Saady, S. A., Kiyumi, A. A., Erzini, K.
2010. Interactions between green turtles (Chelonia
mydas) and foxes (Vulpes vulpes arabica, V.
rueppellii sabaea, and V. cana) on turtle nesting
grounds in the northwestern Indian Ocean: impacts
of the fox community on the behavior of nesting sea
turtles at the Ras AI Hadd Turtle Reserve, Oman.
Zoological Studies, 49( 4) : 437-452.
Packard, G. C., Tracy, C. R., Roth, J. J. 1977. The
physiological ecology of reptilian eggs and
embryos, and the evolution of viviparity within the
Class Reptilia. Biological Reviews, 52: 71-105.
R Core Team. 2015. R: A language and environment for
statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical
Computing, Vienna, Austria. http:// www.R-project.org/.
???? ????? ?????????????????
??? ???? ???? ??????? ?????
?? ????????
????? ????? ????????????????
??? ????????????? ??? ????
????????????????????? ?????
?????????????????????
?????????? ?????????? ?
???
????????????????????
172
????????????????????????
?????????? ????? ?????????
???????????????????
??????????? ?????????? ??? ????
Protection of loggerhead turtle eggs from predation by
foxes at Ikumi Beach in Toyo Town, Kochi Prefecture
Yuri Komaki
1)
, Syuji Yachimori
2)
,
Tomomi Saito
3)
and Motomi Genkai-Kato
1, 4)*
1)
Department of Biology, Faculty of Science,
Kochi University, 2-5-1 Akebono-cho,
Kochi 780-8520, Japan
2)
Shikoku Institute of Natural History,
470-1 Shimobun Otsu, Susaki,
Kochi 785-0023, Japan
3)
Usa Institute of Marine Biology,
Kochi University, 194 Ijiri, Usa-cho, Tosa-shi,
Kochi 781-1164, Japan
4)*
Graduate School of Kuroshio Science,
Kochi University, 2-5-1 Akebono-cho,
Kochi 780-8520, Japan
Abstract
The nests of the loggerhead turtle, Caretta caretta,
was surrounded by a barrier of wire fences to prevent the
eggs from predation by foxes. Automatic cameras with
infrared sensor switch were set at the nests to monitor the
effect of the barrier. The frequency of the fox visits was
considerably reduced during the period of an elaborate
barrier consisting of twenty wire fences. The frequency
increased and foxes preyed on buried eggs after the
elaborate barrier was removed. These results suggest that
the elaborate barrier was effective in protecting the nest
from fox predation. However, many holes of the ghost
crab, Ocypode ceratophthalma, were observed just above
the nests, implying that an alternative species has the
potential to prey on turtle eggs. In the absence of a
barrier, the activity of foxes increased, while the density
of crab holes decreased. When a simple barrier consisting
of three wire fences was reinstalled, foxes wandered
around the nests without preying on turtle eggs. The
density of crab holes during the period of the simple
barrier was lower than that during the period of the
elaborate barrier. Our results suggest that interactions
between fox and crab activities depend on the scale of the
barrier.
Key words: barrier, fox, ghost crab, loggerhead turtle,
predation.
????????????
173


高知県東洋町の生見海岸におけるアカウミガメ卵のキツネによる食害とその対策

Yusro, Fathul

Ohtani, Kazuhiro

Kubota, Satoshi

Inhibition of α-Glucosidase by Methanol Extracts from Wood Bark　of Anacardiaceae, Fabaceae, Malvaceae and Phyllanthaceae Plants　Family in West Kalimantan, Indonesia

Kōchi University

Not a member yet