MANAGEMENT

PLAN

Submitted by:
TERESITA Z. SISON
Course: MMEP

Submitted to:
Dr. Bondee L. Peñaflor
I. Introduction

Apo Reef Natural Park, which is located in the Municipality of Sablayan,

Province of Occidental Mindoro, is the largest coral atoll-like reef in the Philippines

and the second largest contiguous coral reef in the world. The ARNP exhibits a wide

variety of habitat types and a high diversity of corals, fishes, invertebrates and other

biotic assemblages. Apo Reef has high scientific, educational and recreational values.

Ecotourism is one of the most important uses of the ARNP, wherein SCUBA Diving

and other related activities (e.g., snorkeling, swimming) had been undertaken by

visitors since 1970.

The beaches around the ARNP are dependent on a healthy reef for a continued

sand supply, which serve as nesting areas for endangered Green Sea Turtle (Chelonia

mydas) and Hawksbill Turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata). Crustaceans, mollusks and

some worms are also dependent on this habitat.

The mangrove forest and beach type forest at ARNP also serves as rookery and

refuge for the resident and migratory species of birds including the threatened Nicobar

Pigeon.

The mangroves at ARNP serve as a vital nursery area for juvenile fishes and

nutrient production that contribute to the aquatic food chain. The mangrove forest and

the lagoon are home to several species of fish, stingrays, jellyfishes, marine plants and

other marine organisms.

 The sea grass and algal vegetation provides herbivorous species with food and

shelter; it also acts as sediment binders.

Looking forward on the above biophysical features of ARNP, which have high

scientific, recreational and educational values, it is therefore imperative to review the

management plan of the protected area to know whether its management strategies and

programs had contributed to its protection and conservation. ARNP is currently under

the administration of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR),

through the local Protected Area Management Board (PAMB) and the Protected Area

Office (PAO) under the leadership of its Protected Area Superintendent (PASu).

For this research paper, the researcher contemplated to know the Management

Strategies and Programs applied for the management, protection and administration of

Apo Reef Natural Park being a protected area, whose management plan had taken

effect since CY 2000.

II. History and Background of Apo Reef Natural Park

The earliest known event that happened in Apo Reef Park was in 1905 when

American Forces constructed a lighthouse and old Coast Guard building on Apo

Island. The lighthouse placed Apo Reef on the map of mariners. For 93 years, the

lighthouse has guided mariners passing through the Apo West Pass and Apo East Pass

until it was demolished in 1998 and constructed a new one in 1999.

In 1914, the first zoning activity was done in Apo Island. Through Executive

Order No. 118, 1.3340 hectares was designated as reservation area for the old

lighthouse.

In 1980, Apo Reef was designated as Marine Reserve through Presidential

Proclamation No. 1801, authorizing the Philippine Tourism Authority (PTA) to

undertake the development and management of the area.

In 1983, the Sangguniang Bayan declared Apo Reef as Tourist Zone and

Marine Reserve by virtue Municipal Resolution No. 1108, being under the Municipal

Jurisdiction of Sablayan, Occidental Mindoro. This is a landmark resolution passed by

the Sangguniang Bayan of Sablayan, Occidental Mindoro.

In 1990, the Integrated Protected Areas System (IPAS), a program for

protected areas developed by the Haribon Foundation included Apo Reef, being a

marine reserve, as one among the ten chosen as priority sites. In this project
concept, ten (10) priority sites including Apo Reef were chosen based on their

biogeographical location, peace and order condition, legal status, size of the area,

financing need, etc.

In 1992, Apo Reef was identified as one among the Protected Areas (PA)

designated as initial components of RA 7586, otherwise known as the National

Integrated Protected Areas System (NIPAS) Act of 1992.

In 1994, the succeeding phase of IPAS placed Apo Reef under the

Conservation of Priority Protected Areas Project (CPPAP) for a seven-year period

(1994-2001). This project is jointly undertaken by the Government of the Philippines

through the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) and the

NGOs for Integrated Protected Areas, Inc. (NIPA) with financial support from the

Global Environmental Facility (GEF). The Apo Reef Natural Park under the DENR-

CPPA Project had started in the later part of CY 1994 and lasted in the middle part of

CY 2002.

In 1995, joint implementation of CPPAP in Apo Reef Natural Park (ARNP)

commenced. Tasked with its implementation were the Protected Area Office (PAO)

and the Host NGO (HNGO) represented by the Philippine Ecumenical Action for

Community Enlightenment Foundation (PEACE Foundation). The PAO headed by the

Protected Area Superintendent (PASu) and the HNGO are better known as the Project

Implementing Unit (PIU). In 2000, the PEACE Foundation as the HNGO was replaced
by its National NGO, the NIPA, Inc. An Interim Protected Area Management Board

(PAMB) was organized in 1994 to help in the planning and management and as the

site policy-making body of the ARNP.

In 1996, Apo Reef was then proclaimed by former President Fidel V. Ramos,

as Protected Area, under the category of Natural Park and its surrounding waters as

buffer zone under Proclamation No. 868, dated 6 September 1996. This is in pursuance

to NIPAS Law.

In 1999 to 2000, the Management Plan of Apo Reef Natural Park was prepared

in by the Project Implementing Unit (PIU), composed of the DENR-ARNP PAO and

the NGOs' for Integrated Protected Areas (NIPA), Inc., under the CPPAP).

In October 18, 2001, a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) by and between the

DENR (Region IV) and the Municipality of Sablayan (LGU) was made and entered,

wherein the LGU of Sablayan is tasked to initiate, manage and supervise a low impact,

environmentally-sound and community-participatory ecotourism program consistent

with the ARNP Management Plan.

In 2004 (September 24, 2004), a marine law enforcement team for Apo Reef

and Municipal Waters of Sablayan, locally known as the "Task Force Marine and Apo

Reef Law Enforcement for Nature (TF MARLEN)", was established. The TF

MARLEN was officially created and organized on July 28, 2006, under the Office of

the Mayor of the Municipality of Sablayan, by virtue of Executive Order No. 02,
Series of 2006.

In June 2007, the Protected Area Management Board (PAMB) declared the

"NO-TAKE-ZONE POLICY" of Apo Reef, by virtue of PAMB Resolution No. 005,

Series of 2007, followed by the enactment of its rule of implementation under PAMB

Ordinance No. 001, Series of 2007.

 III. Methodology

The management plan is a dynamic document that is subject to review

periodically. In this review, Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Form No. 1 is used by

the researcher to know the reliability, accuracy and applicability of the Management

Strategies and Programs set forth in the Management Plan for Apo Reef Natural Park

in addressing issues and concerns of the protected area.

M and E Form No. 1

Site:

Period Covered:

%
Unit of Issues &
Activity Target Accomp. Accomp Remarks Recommendations
Measure Concerns
 In the management plan review, the M and E Form No. 1 is accomplished using the

following documents:

 The Strategic Management Plan for Apo Reef Natural Park

 Annual Physical Accomplishment Report from CY 2000 to CY 2010

 Records of Users' Fee Collection under IPAF CY 2000 to CY 2010

 Numbers Visitors Recorded CY 2000 to CY 2010

 IV. The Management Plan for Apo Reef Natural Park

Realizing the ecological importance of this highly diverse community, the

Strategic Protected Area Management Plan for the ARNP was prepared focused on its

conservation. The plan serves as a basic long-term framework for the management of the

Apo Reef Natural Park (ARNP) Protected Area. It serves as guide for the implementation

of the plan by the Protected Area Management Board (PAMB) and the Protected Area

Office under the leadership of the Protected Area Superintendent (PASu).

The goals, objectives, strategies, and programs contained in the Management Plan

reflect the concerns expressed in a series of consultations with the various stakeholders in

the ARNP.

The major reasons for the strategic management of the ARNP are: (1) the highly unique

and diverse habitat types, (2) the abundant marine life with varied coral assemblages, fishes and

invertebrates, (3) the presence of endemic and endangered species of birds (Nicobar Pigeon

(Caloenas nicobarica)) and endangered species of marine turtles Green Sea Turtle (Chelonia

mydas) and Hawksbill Turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata), (4) the interesting submarine

physiographic formations such as coral walls, caves and drop-offs, and (5) the ship wrecks which

are popular dive sites among diving enthusiasts.

A. Vision, Mission, Goals and Objectives

The vision, mission, goals and objectives of the plan resulted from the consensus

of the various stakeholders during the training workshop on strengthening integration of

protected area stakeholders for Apo Reef.

1. Vision

"We envision Apo Reef with natural bountiful, peaceful environment and nature on account of

unified citizenry "

2. Mission

"We the stakeholders dedicating and committing in the management, protection and

development of Apo Reef to restore its natural features and conditions for the progress of the

society and future of the youth and integrity of the country. "

3. Goals and Objectives

The management goals for the protected area are reflective of the issues and concerns stressed in

this plan. The principal management goals or long-term desired conditions for the ARNP

Management Plan are:

a. To establish a management framework that will assure the maintenance and protection of

the integrity and quality of habitats and ecological species of flora and fauna therein.

The management framework must be holistic in nature. Not only should it take into

consideration the various concerns (conservation, socio-economic, etc.), the plan must

effectively ensure effective implementation of management programs, participation of

stakeholders, allow measures for fund generation, effectively implement laws and regulations.
This necessitates a multi-disciplinary approach in the operationalization of the management plan.

b. To protect and conserve the biodiversity of the ARNP.

This goal faces the challenge of preserving and conserving the biodiversity resources of the

protected area including genetic resources, habitat and species diversity, and endemism.

c. To establish strong and effective linkages with other institutions, specifically local

stakeholders concerned with coastal and marine resources protection and conservation.

This entails the empowerment of communities by fully involving them in decision making on

resource use and management. It is likewise imperative that the various stakeholders work

together and support the implementation of the management plan.

4. Specific Objectives

The specific objectives of the strategic management plan for the ARNP are:

a. To identify, demarcate, and classify ARNP into management zones;

b. To effectively implement, monitor and evaluate the following management programs,

namely:

• Legal Action

• Park Protection Program

• IEC Campaigns targeting the Visitors and Fisher folks of the PA

• Restoration Program

• Research Program
 • Biodiversity Monitoring System

• Resource management

• Ecotourism development and management

• Conservation Agenda Mainstreaming

• Participatory Zone Management

• Community empowerment

• Alternative livelihood development Strategy

• IEC Campaigns targeting the coastal and surrounding communities

• Capability building and institutionalization

• Networking and Linkaging

c. To enhance the community-based resource use program for the protected area in support

of alternative livelihood; and

d. To develop the ecotourism potential of the area.

 B. Management Issues and Concerns

Issues and Concerns Strategies Applied

 Conservation  Destructive Fishing Methods  Biodiversity

Issues Protection and

 Unregulated and Uncontrolled Conservation

Resource Extraction Approach

 Anchorage Damage

 Destructive Tourism Activities

 Socio-economic  Unregulated human activities  Community-Based Resource

Issues that have detrimental impacts Management / Integrated

on the environment Coastal Management

Approach

 Management  Funding sustainability for PA  Strengthening of

Issues management Institutional Capability

Approach for Biodiversity

 Weak coordinative Conservation and

linkages among Sustainable Use

institutional stakeholders

 Need to strengthen capabilities of

PAMB and the PASu

 C. The Management Strategies

and Programs for the Protected

Area Strategy 1 - Biodiversity

Protection and Conservation

Approach

PROGRAMS ACTIVITIES

Legal Action  Active & Sustained prosecution of violators of laws, PA rules and

regulations

Information,  Content (for fisher folk & PA visitors)

Education & - biodiversity values and features

Communication (IEC) - park policies & guidelines

Campaigns for PA - effects of destructive practices
visitors and Fisher
-
folk
 Forms:

- inter-personal (orientation, guided tour)

- print (comics, posters, brochures)

- interpretive signs

- audio-visuals

- others as deemed necessary

 PROGRAMS ACTIVITIES

Legal Action Active & Sustained prosecution of

violators of laws, PA rules and

regulations

Restoration Program  Assisted Natural Regeneration for degraded coral reefs implementable

in

projects by the PIU and assisted by volunteers and other

supportive technical groups

Research Program  Conduct baseline studies and consolidate existing data on:

- ecological parameters ( i.e. water quality, biological

inventory, productivity, etc.)

- social parameters

- economic parameters

 Continuing assessment of pollution sources and possible control

measures

Biodiversity  Setting up of BMS plots

Monitoring System  Regular conduct of BMS activities by the PIU with assistance

(BMS) from the community and other volunteers (e.g. divers)

Resource Management  Delineation and Demarcation of Boundaries

- PA Boundary

- Buffer Zone Boundary

 Management Zoning Regime

 PROGRAMS ACTIVITIES

- Demarcation

• Open and Close Season

• Resource Monitoring System

• Regulation (volume, type of resource + type of extraction)

 Visitor volume, activities and destinations guided by designated

Ecotourism Management
carrying capacity

 Visitors' activities geared towards education (e.g. reef

resources) and conservation in the park

 Low impact facilities for PA visitors (avoid infrastructure)

 Training:

- park guides

- dive guides

• User fee system in support to Conservation

• Establishment of Facilities and Programs

 Conservation  Incorporate conservation agenda in community, barangay,

Agenda municipal and provincial development plans.

Mainstreaming  Institutionalization of conservation agenda in community organizing

work

 Park Protection Program  Formation & Consolidation of community organized park protection

groups

 Systematic patrolling
  Minimize & mitigate disturbances of threats to threatened and

endangered species (Nicobar pigeon, turtles, giant clams)

Strategy 2 - Community-Based Resource Management / Integrated Coastal

Management Approach

PROGRAMS ACTIVITIES

Participatory Zone Management Community and other stakeholders' participation in zone

management

 Community Empowerment  Consultations/Dialogues

 Linkaging and Networking

 Community Mobilization

 Community Organizing

 Training/Capability Building

 Alternative Livelihood  Capital Build-up & Financial Intermediation scheme in place

Development Strategy  Project Portfolio Investment Plan (PPIP) driven livelihood

development

 Development of alternative livelihood & non-destructive

technologies
  Fisherman to directly market their products for grater

income and less extraction

 Provision of livelihood assistance for Non-Destructive

Livelihood Activities

(NDLAs)

 Information, Education and  Massive IEC campaign aimed at teaching communities basic

ecological

Communication (IEC) concepts and proper utilization techniques

 Campaign for coastal and  Conduct community perception surveys

surrounding communities

Strategy 3 - Strengthening of Institutional Capability Approach for Biodiversity

Conservation and Sustainable Use

PROGRAMS ACTIVITIES
 Capability Building  Seminar, training for PIU PAMB & stakeholders

and

Institutionalization  Regular performance & effectiveness review of then PIU and

PAMB with corrective actions

 Systematic documentation of project implementation

 Networking and Linkaging  Networking & Linkaging with various agencies, stakeholders, etc.
 V. Results and Discussion

A. On Management Strategies and Programs

1. Biodiversity Protection and Conservation Approach

This first strategy in the management plan was formulated to address Conservation

Issues, which includes among others the destructive fishing methods, unregulated and

uncontrolled resource extraction, anchorage damage and destructive tourism activities.

1.1 Legal Action

With regards to legal action, it involves the apprehensions of poachers and protected area

violators, as well as, filing of appropriate charges in court. There are one hundred

twenty-one (121) apprehensions were made from 2000 to 2010. Out of 121

apprehensions, thirty-seven (37) cases were filed in courts (Municipal Trial Court and

Regional Trial Court), eight (8) cases are decided in favor of the government, seven (7)

cases are quashed/dismissed, twenty (20) cases are pending in court and two (2) cases are

archived.

Prior to the declaration of "no-take-zone policy" in 2007, some of violators apprehended

for the first and second offenses are reprimanded with their promissory notes submitted

in the form of affidavits. Administrative Fines are imposed to other violators

apprehended after the declaration of "no-take-zone" policy of Apo Reef Natural Park

under PAMB Ordinance No. 001, Series of 2007.

Despite of numerous apprehensions made and the large number of cases filed, still we

cannot definitely conclude that the protected area has been protected, maintained and

conserved to the fullest. Still there are issues and concerns associated to such actions, to

wit:

 Under PAMB Ordinance No. 001, Series of 2007, there are no provisions for the

corresponding fines or penalties for violators committing offense for the first and

second time.

 There are no legal advisor other than the public prosecutor in the filing and

monitoring of cases in courts. Even paralegal training are given to the law enforcers,

still the need for special prosecutor / legal retainer is needed to boost their morale.

 There is no legal retainer or private lawyer to cater the defense of law enforcers

when special lawsuit against them was filed by the violators. There are several

instances that lawsuits against the apprehending officers are filed in court and even in

the Office of the Ombudsman. The concerned enforcers depended their case in court

and in the Office of the Ombudsman in their own expense and resources.

 There is no designated dry-docking area to secure the apprehended boats and

there is no secured storehouse for the apprehended paraphernalia. These deficiencies

are always used by the defense as grounds for their motion for custody of

apprehended boats and paraphernalia that are always granted by the court.

 Most of the Park Rangers (DENR & LGU) this time are newly hired with no

adequate training on protection and law enforcement works.

Recommendations:

•Enactment of PAMB Ordinance promulgating and amending policies and guidelines for the

protected area;

•conduct training or refresher courses for law enforcers;

•hire legal retainer or private lawyer to be deputized by DOJ as Special Prosecutor

•Acquire/provide dry docking areas and storehouse for the apprehended boats and paraphernalia

under custody and safekeeping pending litigation by the concerned authorities

1.2 Information, Education and Communication

IEC are conducted through production and distribution of brochures/flyers, radio

broadcasting, press and photo releases, film showing and TV interview, lakbay and

dalaw turo, and conducting of orientations, dialogues and meetings for and with the

visitors and fisherfolks.

There are an average of 550 pieces of brochures and flyers are produced and distributed,

however, most of the brochures are computer generated designed only for information of

tourists/visitors, researchers and students, while flyers are designed for mainly for

Sablayan fisherfols prior to the declaration of "no- take-zone" policy.

There is no defined target of radio broadcasting in the annual work and financial plan.

Guesting through radio programs at Radio Natin FM Station Sablayan are conducted,

wherein radio network coverage is limited. Also the airtime devoted for broadcasting are

very limited.
Press Releases are published through print media of local circulations however, it is not

done regularly.

Film showing are conducted within the coastal barangays of Sablayan targeting the

coastal communities, especially fisherfolks, affected in the management of the protected

area. The films used are all about reef conservation, the importance of conserving the

reef and community-based coastal resource management sustainable use of marine

resources. However, there is no official film produce, specifically, Apo Reef

management, protection and conservation.

Lakbay-Turo and Dalaw-Turo are conducted at primary schools, however, there is no

regular activity program has been initiated within the schools and fishing community.

Orientations, dialogues and meetings are the most often activities conducted for

tourists/visitors and fisherfolks. Although, conducted regularly, IEC materials for

effective presentation of the subject matters are lacking.

Billboards, signboards and/or interpretive signs are installed at Apo Reef and strategic

places in Sablayan, Occidental Mindoro. Installation of these materials in the protected

area and other strategic places in the Municipality and the whole province are lacking.
Recommendations:

 Produce brochure/ flyer/ pamphlet/ comics addressing/ targeting the general public;

 Radio program for Apo Reef can be aired also in other radio station outside

Sablayan (e.g., San Jose & Mamburao); Regular Weekly or bi-monthly Radio Program;

 Monthly or quarterly press releases in print media of local and national circulation;

 Produced films of Apo Reef purposely addressing the tourists, local community & general

public;

 Conduct regular lakbay/dalaw-turo program targeting mainly the schools in the

coastal community of Sablayan;

 Procuring/ enhancing IEC materials purposely for orientations/ dialogues with PA

visitors & other PA users;

 Installation of billboards/ tarpaulins in the strategic places in Sablayan & within the

province.

1.3 Restoration Program

Assisted Natural Regeneration (ANR) is the most acceptable program of conservation in

the protected area system. Protection of the reef from human induced or destructive

activities is undertaken within the protected area. As a result of this initiative, a

remarkable increase of 18% of coral cover from 33% in 1994 to 51% in 2006 is noted

based on Coral Reef Survey in CY 2006. However, based on Fish and Coral Survey

conducted in 2009, a dropped of 35% in coral cover from 51% in 2006 to 16% in 2009 is

recorded. The in insignificant decreased of coral cover are attributed on the destruction
brought by the Super Typhoon "Caloy" in May 2006, which is just after the fish and

coral survey in the later part of April 2006. Typhoons "Reming" and "Senyang" that hit

the province in 2006 had also contributed to the destructions of the coral reef. The

destructions brought by the typhoons are followed by the Crown-of-Thorns" (COT)

outbreaks recoded in 2007 through 2008. Although, COT infestation is observed since

2004 through 2006, its adverse and harmful effects to the coral reef are not as bad in

COT outbreaks in 2007 through 2008.

On the other hand, uncontrolled and unsustainable fishing activities, such as cyanide

fishing and collection of threatened and prohibited species of marine wildlife, had also

contributed to the destruction of the reef that constrained the PAMB to declare the "no-

take-zone" policy or the closure of Apo Reef to fishing and fishery related activities,

under PAMB Resolution No. 005, Series of 2007 and PAMB Ordinance No. 001, Series

of 2007. This is a most remarkable ever policy action of the PAMB as a precautionary

principle in preventing the threat of total devastation of the protected area.

The program for the coral transplantation did not materialize due to fund constraint. Its

funding which supposedly came from John Holland Construction Philippines, Inc.

(JHCPI) was not in hand to the PAMB and PASu. The proposed funding, amounting to

Php2.3 million, is the supposed payment of JHCPI for their damages brought during the

construction of Apo Reef Lighthouse in 1998 through 1999. The Apo Reef Management

did not receive any feedback regarding the status on the payment of damages. Coral

transplantation is highly technical method and too much expensive and the Apo Reef
Management cannot pursue this program without financial assistance coming from

outside source.

Tree planting is conducted within the restoration zone of Apo Island using wildlings of

indigenous species of trees such as pagatpat (sonneratia alba) and balibago (Hibiscus

tiliaceus). An area of 1.5 hectare is planted, however, only 30% of wildlings planted had

survived.

Recommendations:

 Declaration of the Permanent Closure of Apo Reef to any fishing and fishery related

activities;

 Strengthen the protection and law enforcement activities within the protected area;

 Lobby with the concerned NGOs and institutions for technical and financial support

for conducting regular fish and coral assessment;

 Protection of the reef and leaving it untouched as the best way of restoring the reef

instead of coral transplantation which is very expensive;

 In restoring the beach forest in Apo Island, planting of indigenous species should be

continued with the establishment of nursery in nurturing and enhancing the survival of

the seedlings.

1.4 Research

In conducting research, baseline studies on corals and fish had already been conducted

for Apo Reef and the last fish and coral survey is conducted on November 2009 by the
WWF Philippines in collaboration with the PAMB and the DENR-ARNP PAO.

However, taxonomic studies on fish and coral species are limited. The 190 species of

hard corals and 7 species of soft corals are identified only in small portion of the reef at

the eastern side of Apo Island by Michael A. Ross and Gregor Hodgson in 1981. About

385 species of fishes in 85 families are identified in the area by BFAR in 1983. This

represents only a portion of the total reef fish community (BFAR 1983). Intensive and

taxonomic studies on terrestrial and coastal resources (e.g., beach plants & animals,

mangroves, algae and seagrass) had not yet been conducted for Apo Reef. The records

on species of algae and seagrass, mammals and reptiles are identified as an ethno

biological account by local staff during the par taxonomic orientation in 1998 and 1999.

On the other hand, consolidation of primary and secondary data of tourists/visitors,

fishermen and fishing boats entering protected area are conducted since 1996. Fishermen

and fishing boats monitoring data are recorded prior to the declaration of "no-take-zone"

policy of Apo Reef Natural Park.

Recommendations:

 Intensive & taxonomic studies on the terrestrial & coastal resources of Apo Reef;

 Follow up assessment of coral reef ecosystem (e.g. marine vertebrates &

invertebrates) including taxonomic identification;

 Assessment & taxonomic identification of algae & seagrass.

1.5 Biodiversity Monitoring System

Biodiversity Monitoring System (BMS) is installed and conducted at Apo Reef Natural

Park. In setting up of BMS plots, there are 15 plots for fish and coral monitoring using

Line Intercept Transect (LIT) Method, 5 plots for Transect Swim (TS) Method, 1 plot for

Transect Walk (TW) Method and 5 plots for Photo Documentation (PD) method are

established in the protected area for regular monitoring.

Most of the concrete block markers of LIT and TS plots are missing and removed, which

allegedly moved and taken away by fishermen fishing within the area. Four (4) Transect

Swim Plots are installed in 2008 in replacement of the five (5) plots prior installed. Only

two (2) plots are installed within the restoration zone and the other two (2) plots are

installed within the sustainable use zone that represents the whole reef in the northern

and south atoll. The markers/signs for every 250 meter stop of the transect walk plot in

Apo Island are now hardly recognized. Also previous markers of photo documentation

plots are already destroyed and moved away by natural calamities.

Fish and Coral Survey are conducted quarterly and bi-annually in 2000 to 2001 under the

CPPAP funding and every three (3) years thereafter with the funding support from World

Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) Philippines or KKP. Previously trained personnel,

specifically SCUBA divers, to do the regular assessment had already been terminated
when the CPPAP ends in 2001-2002. The assessment in 2003, 2006 and 2009 are

conducted by the WWF Philippines, in collaboration with the DENR-ARNP PAO,

through their contracted technical assistants.

BMS using simplified methods (field diary, transect walk, transect swim and photo

documentation) has been conducted since its establishment in 1999. Since 2006,

monitoring using Photo Documentation Method is not conducted due to the lack of

trained personnel. Sometimes, quarterly monitoring is not conducted regularly due to the

frequent turnover of personnel who was trained for this purpose. Frequent turnover of

personnel are attributed to the lack of security of tenure of personnel. The frequent

turnover also caused the need to train and train newly hired personnel to do the

monitoring.

Despite of these issues, the DENR-ARNP PAO was able to implement the BMS using

simplified methods. The results of BMS are very useful for the PAMB and the PASu in

coming up with management actions and policy decisions. The BMS result of serves as

main basis in the declaration of "no-take-zone" policy at Apo Reef Natural Park.

Recommendations:

 Line Intercept Transect (LIT). Replacement of the missing markers in the LIT plots;

The DENR-ARNP PAO may also conduct annual fish and coral monitoring within the

established plots using simplified methods as part of biodiversity monitoring activity;

 Transect Swim (TS). Reestablishment of TS Routes; reinstallation of concrete block

markers in the identified routes; and installation of additional TS plots within the north

and south atoll reef;

 Transect Walk (TW). Reroutes the TW routes; Put markers for every 250-meter stop;
 Photo Documentation (PD). Reestablishment & markings of PD plots; Conduct

regularly monitoring using this method, either annually of bi-annually;

 Capability Building. Train regular personnel coming from the DENR & LGU who

can do the assessment regularly;

 Security of Tenure. Regularization of Protected Area personnel who are tasked to do

the regular biodiversity monitoring activities;

1.6 Resource Management

Boundary Delineation/Demarcation. The Protected Area boundaries and its peripheral

Buffer Zone are delineated in the implementation of the management plan during the

CPPAP term. Sets of marker buoys (sinker, buoy, nylon rope & accessories) are installed

in the four (4) primary corners of the PA Boundary in 1999. However, all the marker

buoys are no longer exists. It was allegedly destroyed and carried away by typhoons

occurs in CY 2000 to CY 2003. The peripheral Buffer Zone had not been demarcated

due to financial constraints.

Recommendations:

 Reinstallation of the marker buoys in the primary corners of the PA after the

enactment into law of the Apo Reef Protected Area Bill;

 Develop a much better design of marker buoys and its accessories for its better &
durable service life; Installation of secondary marker buoys to shorten the distance in

between buoys; Also work for the installation of marker buoys in the peripheral buffer

zone of the PA.

Management Zoning. There are seven (7) management zones delineated within the

protected area. The Boundaries in between the Sustainable Use Zone and Restoration

Zone are demarcated with sixteen (16) sets of markers (sinker, buoys & accessories)

installed. Despite of the installation and presence of management zone markers, some

fishermen coming from Sablayan, who were given privilege to fish within the sustainable

use zone of the protected area, were poached in the restricted zone.

Recommendations:

 Review and updates the management zones of the protected area;

 Rezone the sustainable use zone as Strict Protection Zone in respect to the

declaration of the area as no-take-zone;

 Install boundary markers in-between zones.

Declaration and implementation of open and closed season. Prior to the declaration of

"no- take-zone policy," the PAMB passed and adopted regulatory resolutions declaring

the closed and open season for Octopian Fishing methods. The declaration of closed and

open season also prevents the collection of threatened and prohibited species of shells

and other marine wildlife. The declaration of closed and open season is a management

action of the PAMB in order to prevent the collection threatened and prohibited species
of wildlife undertaken by most octopian fishers as manifested in the result of BMS in the

protected area.

Recommendations:

 Declaration of the permanent closure of Apo Reef to any fishing and other fishery related

activities;

 Declaration of open & closed season to any tourist activities & human disturbances

for certain areas during the nesting seasons of migratory & resident species of birds;

 Declaration of open & closed season for the nesting grounds/sites of marine turtles & birds.

Regulating Fishery Activity. There are six (6) regulatory ordinances and resolutions

passed and adopted by the PAMB in order to regulate fishing and other fishery related

activities within the protected area. One of the most remarkable and foremost action

made by PAMB is the declaration of "no-take-zone policy" by virtue of Resolution No.

005, Series of 2007, and its rules of implementation under Ordinance No. 001, Series of

2007.

Management of Threats to Habitat and Biodiversity. Coastal Cleanup. Coastal and

island cleanups are conducted within the area by the DENR, LGU Sablayan, WWF

Philippines, Philippine Army (16th IB and 80th IB), Philippine National Police - Sablayan

Municipal Police Station (PNP-SMPS), Philippine Coast Guard - Coast Guard

Detachment Sablayan (PCG-CGDS) and other members of the TF MARLEN as part of

their regular activity. Coastal Cleanups are participated also by some civic organizations
and visitors. Non- biodegradable wastes collected from the protected area are brought to

mainland Sablayan for proper disposal. The marine debris collected are brought to Apo

Island Coast by sea movements especially during Southwest monsoon and high tides and

retains in the island when ebb tides occurs. Most of the non- biodegadable waste

collected are allegedly comes from the vessels/boats passing through the Apo East and

West Pass.

Recommendations:

 Strictly implement the "no take zone policy" within the protected area;

 Continue this coastal cleanup as part of the regular activity of Park Personnel & TF

MARLEN;

 Encourage visitors to participate the cleanup activity before leaving the PA;

 Information, Education and Communication (IEC) on the boats/vessels passing

through the Apo East Pas & Apo West Pass.

Crown-of-Thorns (COT) Control. COT Cleanups are conducted by the DENR-ARNP

PAO, WWF Philippines, LGU Sablayan members of the TF MARLEN and fishermen at

Apo Reef Natural Park. COT collection with the use of thong and scoop net is the

method applied to control this invasive species undertaken by snorkelers and divers, and

fishermen with the use of goggles and improvised fins. The COT cleanup had also

participated voluntarily by tour/dive operators and divers as their community service.

The COT outbreaks occur in CY 2006 through CY 2008, however it was rarely observed

in the late 2009.

Recommendations:

 Continue the cleanup as a regular activity even small number of this species were observed;

 Develop/apply other methods of eradication;

 Train/orient the park personnel on every method of eradication;

 Monitor closely the COT to prevent its possible outbreaks in the future.

Eradication of Exotic Species. Rat is one of the exotic species that need special

attention. This species is accidentally introduced in the island by fishing boats

encroaching the area and mostly by vessels and barge anchoring in the area during the

transport of materials for the construction of lighthouse in 1998-

99. Fast reproduction of this species, which breeding takes place 1 to 13 times a year

and capable of producing 1 to 22 young in a litter, resulted to its outbreaks which

threatens the nesting birds and the marine turtle eggs and hatchlings. There are three (3)

control methodologies applied, 1) rat hunting with the use of speargun and airgun, 2)

trapping, and 3) preventing them to the access for foods.

Also, eradication of Agave plants, locally known as maguey, are conducted by the ARNP

personnel by excavating and removing this invasive species. Only portion of this exotic

species, more or less 300 square meters had been eliminated. This plant is introduced in

the island by lighthouse personnel in the early 90's. Gradual eradication of this species is

mandated in the management plan.

Recommendations:

 Continuous rat eradication and control program;

 Massive eradication of Agave Plants and replacing it with the indigenous species available

in the area.

1.7 Ecotourism Management

Imposing User Fee System. Collection of users' fee are imposed at Apo Reef Natural

Park through policies passed and implemented by the PAMB and PASu per Resolution

No. 98-02 and Ordinance No. 98- 002, as revised through Ordinance No. 2003-001 and

2005-001. Only entrance fees, for diving and non- diving activity, and vessel entry fee

are imposed. The LGU Sablayan had also imposed Environmental Fee, pursuant to

Municipal Tax Ordinance No. 2005-004. The policies on restrictions and guidelines,

under Ordinance No. 98-001, 2005-001 and 2007-001, for the entrance to and use of

facilities and resources in the protected area are also imposed in regulating the activities

of visitors and fishermen.

Monitoring of Visitors. Tourists/visitors arrival are monitored and recorded regularly at

Apo Reef Natural Park (Pls. see Annex B and C). The protected area are visited mainly

by tourists for SCUBA Diving and Snorkeling activities. In the records of

tourists/visitors from CY 2000 to CY 2010, 76% are foreign and only 24% are local. An

average of 1,849 visitors/tourists (foreign-1,451 & local-39) is recorded annually from

CY 2000 to CY 2005, while an average of 2,132 visitors/tourists (foreign-1,556 & local-

575) is recorded annually from CY 2006 to CY 2010. Record shows that number of
visitors significantly decreased in CY 2006. However, the record of visitors had

gradually increased annually again till CY 2010 (Pls. see Annex B, C & D).

Establishment of Low Impact Facilities. There are various development made within

the protected area, which includes establishment/ installation of 8 kiosk, 16 mooring

buoys and a pavilion. Eleven (11) dive sites and some snorkeling areas are identified at

Apo Reef Natural Park. Although, the said development are regularly maintained by the

DENR-ARNP PAO & LGU Sablayan, 6 out of 8 kiosk were already destroyed by

typhoons in 2006. Reestablishment of the kiosk/nipa hut are discouraged by the

management due to its ecological impact on nesting sites of marine turtles. Maintenance

and replacement of the nylon rope, swivel and buoys of the mooring set installed are

undertaken.

Recommendations:

 Identify other user's fees to be collected from the Protected Area Users;

 Review & update the existing policies on Ecotourism Management;

 Continue monitoring the in & out of visitors in the PA & solicit their comments &

recommendations re: PA ecotourism development;

 Conduct perception survey for tourist;

 Regulate the construction of additional structures;

 Maintain, reinstall and develop the mooring sets installed and install additional sets;

 Reassess the identified dive sites & snorkeling areas and identify & assess additional sites;
 Install marker/mooring buoys for the identified dive sites & snorkeling areas as necessary.

1.8 Park Protection Program

Formation of Park Protection Group. There are two (2) Park Protection Group

formed, the "Solidong Hanay para sa Apo Reef at Karagatan ng Sablayan" or SHARKS,

Inc., and the "Task Force Marine and Apo Reef Law Enforcement for Nature" or TF

MARLEN. The SHARKS is organized in 2001 by the DENR and NIPA, Inc. It is

composed of subsistence fishermen of Apo Reef and Municipal Fisherfolks, who are also

part of the Bantay Apo Volunteer Brigade and trained Bantay Dagat deputized by BFAR.

As of CY 2008, the SHARKS is no longer active, however some of their members are

still active as Bantay Dagat of Sablayan. On the otherhand, the TF MARLEN is a muti-

stakeholders marine law enforcement team organized in 2004 by the WWF in

collaboration of the DENR-ARNP PAO and LGU Sablayan. The task force is composed

of representatives from the DENR, LGU Sablayan, Philippine Army, Philippine National

Police and Philippine Coast Guard together with some concerned NGO's (e.g., WWF,

PCGA, Kabalikat Civicom), who are tasked to enforce and implement laws, rules and

policies implementable to the Municipal Waters of Sablayan and Apo Reef Natural Park.

The current operations of the TF MARLEN are financed mostly by LGU Sablayan.

Patrolling Works. Patrol works within the Protected Area and its peripheral Buffer

Zones, totaling to 27,469 hectares, are conducted by the DENR, LGU Sablayan, the

SHARKS, Inc. and TF MARLEN.

As what observed, intruders of some poaching incidents are equipped with high

sophisticated equipments such as speedboats, communication facilities and firearms.

Poaching incidents in shallow areas of the reef are undertaken by local fishermen for the

purpose of collecting prohibited species such as Smooth Top Shell (locally known as

samong), sea cucumber (locally known as balatan) and lobster (locally known as

banagan). Although the no-take-zone policy is declared at Apo Reef Natural Park, some

municipal fishermen are intruding the area. Also, fishermen coming from nearby

municipalities of Occidental Mindoro are intruding the protected area, however most of

them were not able to elude arrest.

Minimize and mitigate disturbances. Around 75% of disturbances (e.g., destructive

fishing, poaching) at Apo Reef has reduced since its establishment as protected area. The

disturbances has been minimized through the following actions:

 Management Zoning Regime: Designation of management zones wherein some

areas are allowed to municipal fishermen for regulated fishing activities; and to visitors

for their guided recreational activities.

 Declaration of Open and Closed Season: Imposition of open and closed season to

some fishing and other fishery related activities.

 Declaration of No-Take-Zone Policy: Closure of Apo Reef to any fishing and other

fishery related activities. Although disturbances within the protected area had remarkably

reduced, the following issues and concerns are noted:

 Some areas declared as recreational zone at Apo Island are nesting grounds of marine

turtles. Records shows that some marine turtles had nested their eggs on the ground of some nipa
huts constructed in the recreational zones.

 The recreational zone at Apo Island is the only area best fitted for various activities

that can be offered to visitors.

Recommendations:

 Strengthen the TF MARLEN as the multi-sectoral marine law enforcement team;

 Allocate funding for the operations of TF MARLEN, which includes funds for food,

supplies, first aid kits & medicines & other logistics;

 Conduct quarterly meetings/workshops for the TF MARLEN;

 Conduct trainings on Maritime Law Enforcement;

 Acquire additional equipment such as speedboats, 2-way radios, GPS, telescopes,

binoculars, satellite phones & radar;

 Conduct regular orientations for the members of the Law Enforcement Team;

 Enhance the high & morale of enforcers by providing values formation seminar/

workshop and imposing reward and punishment system for their deed;

 Review & update the management prescriptions of the recreational or multiple use zones;

 Formulate policies & guidelines for the use of the recreational or multiple-use zones

in minimizing and mitigating disturbances.

2. Community Based Resource Management/Integrated Coastal Management Approach

This second strategy in the management plan formulated to address Socio-Economic Issues,

which focus on unregulated human activities that have detrimental impacts on the environment.
2.1 Community Empowerment

Consultations/Dialogues; Twenty (20) consultations and dialogues with the community,

specifically fishersfolks, are conducted. The consultations are all about laws, policies,

guidelines and restrictions in the protected area. As what observed, some fisherfolks did

not participate the consultations. In the declaration of no-take-zone policy of Apo Reef,

some fisherfolks hardly accepts it. However, most of the fisherfolks' communities are

able to understand the need for the declaration of no-take-zone policy.

Linkaging and Networking; The communities in the coastal barangays of Sablayan are

tapped as source of reliable information regarding irregularities they observed within the

protected area. Through linkaging and networking, feedback and information from the

community led to the apprehensions of most intruders. However, some feedbacks from

the community are sometimes misleading that resulted to the escaped of some intruders.

Recommendations:

 Conduct perception survey on the PA value system for the fishing communities of Sablayan;

 Encourage the displaced fishermen to support the management & protection of Apo

Reef by involving & tapping them in the community based-ecotourism activities as their

alternative livelihood;

 Provide/support the displaced fishermen for their alternative livelihood;

 Identify individuals that can be trusted as sourced of reliable information;

 Verify/double check & study the information given by the concerned individuals;

 Organize a reliable intelligence network.

3. Strengthening Institutional Capability Approach for Biodiversity Conservation and

Sustainable Use

This third strategy in the management plan was formulated to address Management

Issues, which focus on funding sustainability; weak coordinative linkages among

institutional stakeholders; and the need to strengthen capabilities of PAMB and DENR-

ARNP PAO headed by the PASu.

3.1 Capability Building and Institutionalization

3.1.1 PAMB Operation

PAMB members Appointment; In CY 2000, eleven (11) members are appointed for the

second set of PAMB for ARNP. On the third set of ARNP-PAMB in CY 2007, thirteen

(13) members are appointed. As of 2010, there was no representative emanating from the

barangays, since the voluntary exit of Hon. Leonilo C. Nicanor, who formerly represents

the Liga ng mga Barangay ng Sablayan; It was also observed that organizations of some

NGOs and POs within the ARNP-PAMB are no longer active; Some PAMB members

are no longer connected to the organization they represented.

PAMB Meeting; Ninety-eight (98) PAMB meetings (regular, special, emergency &

committee) are conducted from CY 2000 to CY 2010. In early years of implementation

of this management plan, the PAMB are conducting monthly meetings regularly.

However, it changed to quarterly regular meetings in the later years of implementation.

As what observed, the schedule of bi-annual meeting in the first set of ARNP PAMB in

1994-1995 is too far, while the monthly schedule is too close.

Policy Development; There are one 141 resolutions and ordinances are passed by

PAMB from 2000 to 2010. Among these resolutions/ordinances are twenty (20)

regulatory resolutions-16 and ordiances-4 enacted by PAMB. The policies enacted by

PAMB had a remarkable effect to the protection and conservation program of Apo Reef

Natural Park. However, most of the regulatory resolutions and ordinances are no longer

effective or applicable to this time. Some policies cannot address all the circumstances

that may arise in the management and protection of Apo Reef.

Recommendations:

 Review & update the membership of the PAMB;

 Invite nominees to the ARNP PAMB following Rule 12.2 of DENR Administrative Order

(DAO) No. 2008-26;

 Facilitate the appointment of new nominees to the ARNP PAMB;

 Schedule the PAMB regular meetings quarterly and special meetings as need arises;

 Update the policies and guidelines enacted by the ARNP PAMB;

 Periodically review and update the policies and guidelines.

3.1.2 Maintenance and hiring of PAO Personnel

Detailed Personnel; As of CY 2010, only four (4) DENR personnel were detailed at

Apo Reef Natural Park Protected Area Office: The CENR Officer of Sablayan as PASu,

an EMS I of CENRO Sablayan as Assistant PASu, a Park Ranger as Special Collecting

Officer (SCO) and a Clerk II of PENRO Occidental Mindoro as Special Disbursing

Officer (SDO). Out of these four detailed personnel, only one (1), the Assistant PASu, is

working in full time capacity at ARNP PAO, while the three (3) are working only in

concurrent capacity.

Contractual Personnel; As of CY 2005, there are nine (9) personnel hired under

Contract of Service; five personnel are charged against the WWF/KKP Support Fund,

while the four are charged against the IPAF Sub-Fund allotment. As of CY 2010, there

only four (4) personnel hired under Contract of Service, which are under the IPAF Sub-

Fund allotment.

There is no security of tenure for the contractual personnel that resulted to fast turnover

of park personnel due to unsustainable funding; contractual personnel leave their job in

the protected area to look for more secured job.

Recommendations:

 Detail of additional technical personnel to Apo Reef from DENR regular personnel

to work in full time capacity to ARNP PAO;

 Allocate items of regular personnel of the DENR to ARNP PAO in the incoming

rationalization of the agency;

 Lobby for 1) the inclusion of provision for the regularization of protected area

personnel in the draft PA Bill submitted to congress; the regularization of trained

contractual personnel; and the provision of regular funding for the personnel services for

Apo Reef.

3.1.3 Training/Seminar/Workshop conducted and attended

There are fifty-three (53) total trainings and seminars conducted for the capacity building

of protected area personnel from CY 2000 to CY 2010. Some of the trainings and

seminars conducted are during the CPPAP term that ended in CY 2002.

Only two (2) contractual personnel hired under the CPPAP are absorbed into the regular

workforce of the DENR. It was observed that most of the park personnel trained are no

longer in the project; This instance requires conduct of trainings every now and then for

newly hired personnel.

Recommendations:

 Conduct trainings for the newly hired and detailed personnel;

 Conduct refresher training courses for the retained personnel.

3.2 Networking and Linkaging

3.2.1 Other Law Enforcement Agencies

Regular coordination are conducted with the Philippine National Police (PNP) -

Sablayan Municipal Police Station (SMPS) and Regional Management Group

(RMG), the Philippine Army - 16th IB and 80th IB, and the Philippine Coast Guard

(PCG) - Coast Guard Station San Jose (CGSSJ) and Coast Guard Detachment

Sablayan (CGDS). Coordination are conducted regarding protection and conservation of

Apo Reef Natural Park, as well as, the operation of Task Force MARLEN. The PNP and

Philippine Army sent their elements regularly at Apo Reef for a weekly shifting, except

when red alert occurs. The PCG also sent their personnel, when their field of authority

and specialization are needed in the protected area. The PCG cannot send their personnel

regularly due to manpower issue.

Recommendations:

 Continue and develop the good working relationship with other enforcers through

the operation of Task Force MARLEN.

3.2.2 Local Government Units (LGUs)

Regular coordination are conducted with the Local Government Unit (LGU) Sablayan re:

protection, conservation and ecotourism development of Apo Reef Natural Park, as well

as, the operation of TF MARLEN. The DENR/PAMB and LGU Sablayan has entered a

Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) on ecotourism in 2001 however, the MOA has not

yet updated since then. The LGU Sablayan had constructed a pavilion and kiosks made

up of local materials within the recreational zone at Apo Island. In support to

ecotourism program, the LGU Sablayan are planning to put up additional facilities at

Apo Reef.

Recommendations:

 Coordinate closely with the LGU with their program and activities for the protection

and conservation of Apo Reef, as well as, ecotourism development of the PA;

 Study the proposed projects prior to PAMB clearance;

 Review and update the MOA by and between the PAMB and LGU Sablayan;

 Reenter into MOA as revised and updated.

3.2.3 Other Government Agencies (OGAs)

Regular and continuous coordination are conducted with the concerned agencies

(Prosecutor's Office, Municipal Trial Court, BFAR, DOTC, DOT, PTA, DPWH)

regarding the program for protection, management and administration of the PA, as well

as ecotourism development.
The Philippine Tourism Authority (PTA) through the Department of Public Works and

Highways (DPWH) has installed a desalination plant at Apo Island. The desalination

plant is composed of mechanism house, desalination machine, overhead tank and other

accessories.

Under the Phase II Project for the construction/development of Ecotourism Facilities at

Apo Reef Natural Park, the PTA through its contractor, the Prismodial Construction, had

undergone with the construction of Administration Building at Apo Island. The

construction affects the habitats and biodiversity within the area.

Recommendations:

 Continue the coordinative works with other government agencies for their support

and involvement in the protection, management and administration of the protected area;

 Inform the agencies who have projects within the protected area to coordinate

closely with the PAMB and the PASu prior to any developmental activities in the area.

3.2.4 Non-Government Organizations (NGOs) / People's Organizations (POs)

Coordination are conducted with the concerned organizations in the private sector (e.g.

NIPA, Inc, WWF Philippines/KKP, Haribon Foundation, FPCI) regarding their

technical, logistical and financial support for Apo Reef. The NGOs/POs extended their
support to the DENR-ARNP PAO. Their support helps a lot for the sustainability of Apo

Reef protection and conservation program, especially when the CPPAP ends in 2002. On

the otherhand, most of the organized Peoples' Organizations of the fisherfolk community

of Sablayan are no longer active.

Recommendations:

 Continue the coordination and partnership with the concerned NGOs to gain their support;

 Continue the coordination with the POs for their support and involvement for the

protection and conservation program;

 Mobilize and strengthen the POs as part of the community-based ecotourism

management programs of the protected area.

3.3 Protected Area Gazetting

Draft Protected Area Bills are prepared during the 11 th, 12th, 13th, 14th and 15th Congress.

The draft bill for Apo Reef was reviewed and updated on every set of congress. The

House and the Senate has different versions of the Apo Reef Bill on some of its

provisions. The Apo Reef bill filed in the 14 th Congress were already approved in the 3 rd

Reading by both houses of Congress, however the bill has not yet been enacted into law

when the congress ends maybe due to political crisis. The bill was re-filed on both

houses in the 15th Congress. The bill is pending on the House and Senate Committee on

Environment and Natural Resources.

Recommendations:

 Submission of position papers to House of Representative and Senate;

 Solicit the support of the Local Government Units (LGUs) in lobbying the enactment of the

PA Bill;

 Continue lobbying for the enactment into law of Apo Reef Bill before the 15th Congress

ends.

3.4 Integrated Protected Area Fund (IPAF) Operation

3.4.1. Collection of Users' Fees

The PAMB, though the DENR-ARNP PAO, collected users' fees from tourism and

fishery activities within the protected area, as well as administrative fines imposed to

violators. The protected area collected an income of than 2.7 million pesos for the period

of six (6) years (2000-2005) (Pls see Summary of Collections on Annex E). Eighty

percent (80%) of which are collected from diving activities; 18% from non-diving

activities; and 2% from fishing and fishery related activities. Fees collected are

increasing since 1999. The fees collected are deposited in the Bureau of Treasury under

the Integrated Protected Areas Fund (IPAF) being maintained by the DENR; the 75% are

deposited under the Sub-Fund Code of Apo Reef, while the 25% are deposited under the

Central IPAF. The 75% serves as the PA Sub- Fund utilized for the management,

protection and administration of the protected area.

Although, the fee collections are increasing monitoring reveals that some tour operators

were not declaring the accurate number of visitors. It observed also that visitor and

tourist activities are mainly SCUBA Diving, snorkeling, swimming and sightseeing.

An income of six million pesos (Php6,047,000.00) are collected for the period of five (5)

years (2006-2010) (Pls. see Summary of Collections on Annex F). An average of

Php1,209,400 users' fees and charges are collected per year based on the records from

2006 to 2010; an average increase of 20.92% per year are recorded.

Recommendations:

 Develop additional tourism product that will enhance fees collection;

 Strictly implement routinary inspection on boats and tourists entering the protected area;

 Require the boat/tour operators for the submission of passengers' manifest issued by

the Philippine Coast Guard from their port of origin.

3.4.2. Utilization of the Protected Area Sub-Fund

The NIPAS Law (RA 7586) mandated that the disbursements from the IPAF shall be

made solely for the protection, maintenance, administration, and management of the

System, and duly approved projects endorsed by the PAMBs, in the amounts authorized

by the DENR. The Fund shall be set up to operate both Central IPAF at the national level

and the Protected Area (PA) Sub-Fund at the site level. The PA Sub-Fund is a trust fund

managed by its respective Protected Area Management Board (PAMB) representing 75%
of the revenues generated by the protected area for its development and operations in

accordance with the Management Plan.

The use and disbursement of PA Sub-Fund are guided by the following:

 Submission of the duly approved Work and Financial Plan (WFP) with PAMB

Resolution approving the project WFP and its documentary requirement;

 The request for the utilization of PA Sub-Fund is submitted to the RED, through the

PENRO;

 Upon approval of the RED, the request is forwarded to the DENR Secretary through

the Protected Areas and Wildlife Bureau;

 The request is endorsed by the DENR Secretary to the Department of budget and

Management (DBM) for the release of the PA Sub-Fund based on the approved Work

and Financial Plan;

 The PA Sub-Fund can be utilized only upon issuance of Special Allotment Release

Order (SARO) and Notice of Cash Allocation (NCA) by the DBM to the DENR-

PENRO.

The PAMB though the DENR-ARNP PAO had accessed and utilized the PA Sub-Fund

annually, since CY 2002, with the corresponding amount authorized by the PAMB based

on approved Work and Financial Plan. Although, the PA Sub-Fund was regularly

accessed, it takes a long time to release it (approximately 6 to 9 months).

Recommendations:

 Design/develop a system wherein PA Sub-Fund can be accessed as early as January of every

year;

 Lobby to the concerned authorities (e.g., IPAF Governing Board) for the

adoption/development of guidelines wherein PA Sub-Fund can be easily accessed just

upon approval of the RED being the Chairman of the Board.

 Preparation of 5-year WFP based on the estimates income for the coming five years,

which serves as basis of the DBM for the annual release of the authorized appropriation.

 Lobby for the inclusion of the Annual Budget of Apo Reef, based on the 5-year

WFP, in the General Appropriation Act (GAA).

VI. Conclusion

In the monitoring and evaluation conducted using M and E Form No. 1, only

targets and accomplishments of the DENR-ARNP PAO are included in the

consolidation. The targets and accomplishments of the Host Non-Government

Organizations (HNGOs), the PEACE Foundation, Inc. and the NGO for Integrated

Protected Area (NIPA), Inc., are not included in the M&E conducted due

unavailability of records. The Host NGOs, who are partners of the PAMB and PASu in

the implementation of the Management Plan, are responsible and the main actor for the

Socio-Economic (SE) and Community-Based Resource Management (CBRM)

Program for Apo Reef. Although, they (HNGOs) are the main actor for SE CBRM,

they are also implementing programs and activities for Biodiversity Protection and

Conservation approach in support to and in collaboration with the DENR-ARNP PAO.

In the assessment of the accomplishments based on the annual targets of the

DENR-ARNP PAO, Apo Reef Natural Park achieved an overall average score of

98.18% for the period of ten (10) years (Please see Summary of % Accomplishment on

Annex F). The ARNP failed to meet a hundred percent accomplishments of its target
in three areas: Restoration, Biodiversity Monitoring and Resource Management

Programs, which falls under Strategy 1: Biodiversity Protection and Conservation

Approach. In the restoration program, the decreased of coral cover from 51.03% in

2006 to 16.09% in 2009 indicates that ARNP failed to meet its target. However, this

indication are attributed on the destruction of

Super Typhoon "Caloy" in May 2006, just after the survey in April 2006, and followed

by the Crown-of-Thorns (COT) outbreaks in 2007 to 2008. In the Biodiversity

Monitoring Program, the ARNP was not able to conduct the monitoring regularly

using some methods due to the limited number and lack of trained personnel to do the

job. Previously trained personnel had already been terminated when the CPPAP ends

in 2001-2002. Some of the trained contractual personnel had also resigned from Apo

Reef to look for a more secured job. Security of Tenure is one of the major issues to

address as an assurance to maintain trained personnel with field expertise in dealing

out the project objectives and targets efficiently. In the Resource Management

Program, the ARNP was not able to install boundary markers within the secondary

corners of the protected area and within the primary corners of Buffer Zone. It is due

to unavailability of funds for the fabrication and installation of boundary markers.

Generally, the ARNP met its objectives indicated in the management plan

wherein strategies and programs were able to address the management issues and

concerns. Although, ARNP meets most of its objectives, there are issues and concerns

(Please see M & E Form No. 1 on Annex A) that affect the effective management of

the protected area. These issues and concerns should be addressed in the successor

Protected Area Management Plan for Apo Reef.

The ARNP should apply an Adaptive Management measure to try

systematically the different management strategies to achieve a desired management

outcome of objective. The adaptive management process is the integration of the

design of an effective management plan to systematically test the assumptions of that

plan in order to learn and adapt to the results.

In the preparation of the successor management plan for Apo Reef Natural

Park, a good design for monitoring and evaluating the management effectiveness of

the protected area shall form as major part of the plan. A management effectiveness

assessment tool tells the degree to which management strategies are achieving the

stated management objectives of the protected area. The results of which can be used

in the preparation of annual work plan and the successor plan.

VII. Sources and References

 NGO's for Integrated Protectes Areas (NIPA), Inc. and Department of

Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). (2001). Management Plan of

Apo Reef Natural Park. (February, 2001). Sablayan, Occidental Mindoro:

Conservation of Priority Protected Areas Project (CPPAP).

 Protected Area Office, Department of Environment and Natural Resources -

Apo Reef Natural Park (2005). Apo Reef Natural Park. Summary of IPAF

Collection (CY 2000 to CY 2005). Sablayan, Occidental Mindoro: DENR-

ARNP PAO.

 Protected Area Office, Department of Environment and Natural Resources -

Apo Reef Natural Park (2005). Summary of PA Visitors Recorded at Apo

Reef Natural Park (CY 2000 to CY 2005). Sablayan, Occidental Mindoro:

DENR-ARNP PAO.

 Protected Area Office, Department of Environment and Natural Resources

- Apo Reef Natural Park (2010). Apo Reef Natural Park. Summary of IPAF

Collection (CY 2006 to CY 2010). Sablayan, Occidental Mindoro: DENR.

 Protected Area Office, Department of Environment and Natural Resources -

Apo Reef Natural Park (2010). Summary of PA Visitors Recorded at Apo

Reef Natural Park (CY 2006 to CY 2010). Sablayan, Occidental Mindoro:

DENR-ARNP PAO.

 Protected Area Office, Department of Environment and

Natural Resources - Apo Reef Natural Park (2001-2010).

Consolidated Annual Physical Accomplishment Report

(CY 2000 to CY 2010). Sablayan, Occidental Mindoro:

DENR-ARNP PAO.