The effects of traditional fisheries management on fisheries yields and the coral-reef ecosystems of southern Kenya

Abstract

Many traditions of coastal peoples may be viewed as traditional forms of marine conservation because, like modern fisheries management, they restrict fishing gear, fishing times, and places, but their effects are little studied in practice. A study was undertaken of human culture and fisheries resources in an area of southern Kenya, designated as a national marine reserve, to determine the effect of the existing 'traditional management' on fisheries yields and on the ecological condition of the fished reefs. This area has one of the oldest and most elaborate cultural traditions concerning sacred sites and rituals of sacrifice along the Kenyan coast. The purpose of the customs is, however, to appease spirits rather than to regulate fish stocks which are traditionally seen to fluctuate independently of fishing effort. Many of these traditions have decayed in recent times as Islamization of the culture has occurred, and authority has shifted towards national organizations, weakening the effectiveness of the traditional leaders. Coincidentally, fishers have adopted new or foreign gear, colleagues, and traditions. Two adjacent landing sites (Mvuleni and Mwanyaza) have, however, successfully stopped pull seiners from landing their catch at their sites for over 20 years through passive means. Other landing sites have adopted pull seining. Both landing areas use arguments based on tradition to justify their use of gear. The two landings that restrict pull seining have higher per capita fish catches than those that do not. Nonetheless, there were no obvious differences in the ecological condition of the reefs at these two management areas; both areas were amongst the most degraded reefs reported in East Africa. Biological diversity and coral cover were reduced greatly in all these areas compared to other fished or fully-protected marine park or reserve sites established by the national government. Presently, traditional management is not effective in protecting species diversity or ecological functions, which was probably never the intention of the customs. The conflict between national organizations and local fishers arises because some resource users are concerned that the management proposed by the national organizations will eventually lead to the total loss of access to, and control of the resource by local fishers. There is, therefore, a need to resolve conflicts concerning gear use and regulation, and a need to increase awareness of the expectations and management programmes among the national and local organizations. Many of the traditional forms of management are compatible with the policies of national organizations, but confusion and conflict occur concerning enforcement and its benefits. To solve these conflicts discussions are required between traditional and national fisheries leaders to develop mutually-acceptable policies that augment and share the power of management.

Impacts of Traditional Shore Seine Operation along the Tuticorin Coast, Gulf of Mannar, Southeast India

“…Trawling primarily reduces the surface roughness of the seabed 13 and destructive harvesting by bottom trawls could potentially reduce future harvests through destruction of essential habitats for commercial species or their prey 11 . Shore seines are said to be the least likely gear to maintain sustainable yields in artisanal fisheries 14,15 , and are referred to as a destructive gear 16 . Beach seine use can severely degrade the condition of the resource, resulting in lower overall fishery yields 9,11 .…”

Avoiding conflicts and protecting coral reefs: customary management benefits marine habitats and fish biomass

“…Benefits of these customary practices include increases in fisheries yields (McClanahan et al, 1997), target species biomass (Cinner et al, 2005a, b) and abundance (Aswani & Sabetian, 2010). Important ecosystem processes, such as herbivory , and metrics of ecosystem health, such as coral cover are often higher in areas under customary management (Baird et al, 2005), Integrating these customary systems with contemporary management practices (e.g., spatially defined marine protected areas) continues to be an area of active research (Johannes, 2002;Aswani et al, 2007) with these alternate forms of marine resource management increasingly being advocated .…”

Trade-Offs in Values Assigned to Ecological Goods and Services Associated with Different Coral Reef Management Strategies

“…The East African coastline has had considerable research into the effectiveness of varying management advances on tropical fisheries (McClanahan and Mangi 2001, McClanahan 2007, Wells et al 2007, McClanahan et al 2008, sociocultural institutions governing resources (McClanahan et al 1997), ecology (McClanahan et al 2007, and perceptions of managers and resource users (McClanahan et al 2005a). Kenyan fisheries are typical of the multi-gear, multi-species coral reef fisheries of many developing countries in the tropics, restricted by economic constraints.…”

“…Traditional conservation in Kenya is based on the belief that species and areas house spirits whose placation was crucial for the well being of society (McClanahan et al 1997). A religious synchronism developed through the merging of the traditional animist spiritual beliefs and Islamic beliefs ca.…”

“…1700 A.D., resulting in the offering of sacrifices to appease the spirits (sadaka) (Glaesel 2000). Cultural traditions also consisted of controls on time, area, gear, and access to the fisheries (McClanahan et al 1997). However, the colonial and post-colonial era drives for economic development and reduced local ethnic authority resulted in an open-access approach to fisheries management that was supported by national government policies and institutions.…”