Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected MPA Sites in Antique

PENRO-Antique
and GeoTech Solutions

2018

Habitat Mapping and Assessment of
Selected MPA Sites in Antique
GeoTech Solutions
Zone 2, 574 C.N. Cabahug St. Looc, Mandaue City
Land Line : +63 32 2683789
Globe : +63 9163414724
Smart : +63 9292837175
Email : elemia.daniel@gmail.com
Copyright © 2018 by PENRO-Antique and GeoTech Solutions
This report publication was made possible through the technical expertise of Coastal and Marine
Ecosystems Management Program (CMEMP) team under Community Environment and Natural
Resources Office (CENRO) - Culasi and Belison, and Provincial Environment and Natural Resources
Office - Antique. This report has been prepared by GeoTech solutions for PENRO-Antique as part of
the approved Annual Work Plan of CMEMP. This report may be cited in other publications as long as
proper acknowledgment is made. The opinion expressed herein are those of the author and do not
necessarily reflect the views of the DENR.
Please address all correspondence to:

Project Team Leader: Daniel Elemia
elemia.daniel@gmail.com
Cover Photo: A boundary marker buoy in Tingib, Pandan.

Photo by: Roxie Diaz
Citation: PENRO-Antique and GeoTech Solutions (PENRO-Antique & GTS), 2018. Habitat Mapping
and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique. Published by PENRO-Antique under the CMEMP
Program. San Jose de Buenavista, Antique, Philippines. 76 pp.
Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 ii

Table of Contents
LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................... v
LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................. v
LIST OF APPENDICES ........................................................................................................ vi
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ..............................................................................vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................ viii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................... ix
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1
1.1. Rationale .................................................................................................................. 2
1.2. Site Profile: Province of Antique ........................................................................... 3
1.3. Objectives of the Assessment ........................................................................................ 4
1.4 Survey Team ............................................................................................................... 4
METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................. 5
2.1 Biophysical Survey ......................................................................................................... 6
2.1.1 Benthic Attributes ...................................................................................................... 6
2.1.2 Reef Fish Community ................................................................................................ 7
................................................................................................................................................ 9
3.1. PANDAN SURVEY RESULTS.................................................................................. 10
........................................................................................................................................... 11
3.1.1. Barangay Idiacacan, Pandan, Antique..................................................................... 11
3.1.2. Barangay Mag-aba, Pandan, Antique ...................................................................... 13
3.1.3. Barangay Patria, Pandan, Antique........................................................................... 16
3.1.4. Barangay Tingib, Pandan, Antique ......................................................................... 19
3.1.5. Recommendations for Pandan LGU ....................................................................... 21
3.1.6. Enhancement recommendations for Pandan MPAs ................................................ 21
3.2. TOBIAS FORNIER SURVEY RESULTS ................................................................ 24
3.2.1. Barangay Arobo, Tobias Fornier, Antique .............................................................. 25
3.2.2. Barangay Igdalaguit, Tobias Fornier, Antique ........................................................ 27
3.2.3. Barangay Igdanlog, Tobias Fornier, Antique .......................................................... 29
3.2.4. Barangay Paciencia, Tobias Fornier, Antique ......................................................... 31
3.2.5. Recommendations for Tobias Fornier LGU............................................................ 32
3.2.6 Enhancement Recommendations for Tobias Fornier MPAs .................................... 33
3.3. SAN JOSE DE BUENAVISTA SURVEY RESULTS .............................................. 36
3.3.1. Barangay Funda Dalipe, San Jose de Buenavista, Antique..................................... 36
3.3.2. Recommendations for San Jose de Buenavista ....................................................... 38
3.3.3 Enhancement Recommendations for San Jose de Buenavista MPAs ...................... 38
SUMMARY & DISCUSSION .............................................................................................. 40
.................................................................................................................................................. 40
4.1. Benthic Attributes........................................................................................................ 42
4.1.1. Benthos distribution ................................................................................................ 42
Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 iii

4.1.2. As indicators of reef health ..................................................................................... 42
4.1.3. As indicators of change ........................................................................................... 43
4.2. Reef Fish ....................................................................................................................... 44
4.2.1. Species Richness ..................................................................................................... 44
4.2.2. Fish Abundance ....................................................................................................... 45
4.2.3. Fish Biomass ........................................................................................................... 46
4.2.4. Trophic groups ........................................................................................................ 47
4.2.5. Effects of protection ................................................................................................ 47
4.2.6. Recovery.................................................................................................................. 48
4.3 Recommendations Summary ....................................................................................... 49
4.3.1 Legal Instruments ..................................................................................................... 49
4.3.2 Marine Protected Area ............................................................................................. 49
4.3.3 Monitoring................................................................................................................ 50
4.3.4 MEAT Assessment................................................................................................... 50
4.3.5 Recommended Technical Capacity Development / Trainings for LGU’s ............... 51
LITERATURE ....................................................................................................................... 52
CITED ..................................................................................................................................... 52
APPENDICES ........................................................................................................................ 56
Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 iv

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Location of the survey sites in Antique 4
Table 2. Survey team 4
Table 3. Coral condition index for reef health 6
Table 4. Habitat criteria rating chart for seagrass 7
Table 5. Functional group classification, modified from Uychiaoco and Halpern 7
Table 6. Fish condition rating (Nañola, 2002 and Hilomen, 2000) 8
Table 7. Habitat area coverage for sites surveyed in Pandan LGU 10
Table 8. Seagrass data for Brgy. Mag-aba, Pandan 14
Table 9. Seagrass data for Brgy. Patria, Pandan 17
Table 10. Habitat area coverage for sites surveyed in Tobias Fornier & 24
San Jose de Buenavista
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Administrative map of PENRO-Antique 5
Figure 2. The survey team 6
Figure 3.1 Map of marine habitats, with area coverage, of Pandan 12
Figure 3.1.1.a. Map of survey sites in Brgy. Idiacacan, Pandan 13
Figure 3.1.1.b. Mean % substrate cover composition 13
Figure 3.1.1.c. Total species richness composition 14
Figure 3.1.1.d. Mean fish abundance composition 14
Figure 3.1.1.e. Mean fish biomass composition 14
Figure 3.1.2.a. Map of survey sites in Brgy. Mag-aba, Pandan 15
Figure 3.1.2.c. Mean seagrass cover composition 16
Figure 3.1.2.d. Total species richness composition 17
Figure 3.1.2.e. Mean fish abundance composition 17
Figure 3.1.2.f. Mean fish biomass composition 17
Figure 3.1.3.a. Map of survey sites in Brgy. Patria, Pandan 18
Figure 3.1.3.c. Mean % seagrass cover composition 19
Figure 3.1.3.d. Total species richness composition 20
Figure 3.1.3.e. Mean fish abundance composition 20
Figure 3.1.3.f. Mean fish biomass composition 20
Figure 3.1.4.a. Map of survey sites in Tingib, Pandan 21
Figure 3.2 Map of marine habitats, with area coverage, of Tobias Fornier 24
Figure 3.2.1.a. Map of survey sites in Brgy. Arobo, Tobias Fornier 25
Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 v

Figure 3.2.2.a. Map of survey sites in Brgy. Igdalaguit, Tobias Fornier 27
Figure 3.2.3.a. Map of survey sites in Brgy. Igdanlog, Tobias Fornier 29
Figure 3.2.4.a. Map of survey sites in Brgy. Paciencia, Tobias Fornier 31
Figure 3.3.3.a. Map of survey sites in Brgy. Funda Dalipe, San Jose 34
Figure 3.3.3..d. Mean fish abundance composition 35
Figure 4.1. Summary of mean benthic cover composition across all surveyed sites 39
Figure 4.2.1. Summary of total species richness across all surveyed sites 41
Figure 4.2.2. Summary of mean fish abundance across all surveyed sites 42
Figure 4.2.3 Summary of mean fish biomass across all surveyed sites 43
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A Survey Photos 50
Appendix B1 Detailed percentage benthic cover at Arobo, Tobias Fornier 59
Appendix B2 Detailed percentage benthic cover at Funda Dalipe, San Jose 60
Appendix B3 Detailed percentage benthic cover at Idiacacan, Pandan 61
Appendix B4 Detailed percentage benthic cover at Igdalaguit, Tobias Fornier 62
Appendix B5 Detailed percentage benthic cover at Igdanlog, Tobias Fornier 63
Appendix B6 Detailed percentage benthic cover at Mag-aba, Pandan 64
Appendix B7 Detailed percentage benthic cover at Paciencia, Tobias Fornier 65
Appendix B8 Detailed percentage benthic cover at Patria, Pandan 66
Appendix B9 Detailed percentage benthic cover at Tingib, Pandan 67
Appendix B10 Summary of percentage benthic cover in the surveyed sites in Antique 68
Appendix C Fish list of all sites surveyed in Antique 69
Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 vi

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
AL Algae
BAS Bureau of Agricultural Statistics
BFARMC Barangay Fisheries and Aquatic Resource Management Council
CB Coral branching
CE Coral encrusting
CENRO Community Environment and Natural Resources Office
cm Centimeter
CM Coral massive
CMEMP Coastal and Marine Ecosystems Management Program
CORVA Coral Reef Visualization and Assessment
COT Crown of Thorns seastar
DC Dead coral
DCA Dead coral with algae
DENR Department of Environmental and Natural Resources
DOST Department of Science and Technology
FVC Fish visual census
GPS Global positioning system
GTS GeoTech Solutions
HC Hard coral cover
kg Kilogram
km Kilometer
LGU Local government unit
LC Live coral (hard and soft coral)
MA Macro algae
MAO Municipal agricultural office
MENRO Municipal Environment and Natural Resources Office
MPA Marine protected areas
m2 Square meter
NACRE National Assessment of Coral Reef Ecosystems
OT Other animal/invertebrates
PCRA Participatory Coastal Resource Assessment
PENRO Provincial Environment and Natural Resources Office
PIT Point Intercept Transect
PO People’s Organization
R Rubble
RCK Rock/pavement
S Sand/Silt
SC Soft coral
SCUBA Self-contained underwater breathing apparatus
SG Seagrass
SP Sponges
SWM Solid Waste Management
TA Turf algae
Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This report would not have been possible without the steadfast guidance and support of PENR Officer
Andre Untal of PENRO-Antique, along with the valuable advice and continuous encouragement CENR
Officers Cynthia Blancia and Louie Laud of Culasi and Belison, respectively.
We also wish to express our profound gratitude and sincere appreciation to Hon. Jonathan Tan,
municipal mayor of Pandan, Hon. Jose Maria Fornier, municiapal mayor of Tobias Fornier, and Hon.
Elmer Untaran, municipal mayor of San Jose de Buenavista.
For their warm hospitality, we would like to extend our gratitude to the barangay captains, Pandan:
Arnie Riomalos (Idiacacan), Macario Bagac (Mag-aba), Eduardo Mosquedo (Patria), and Carlito
Garzon (Tingib); Tobias Fornier: Pedro Jumapit (Arobo), Carmencita Pelignon (Igdalaguit), Nicolas
Dolloso (Igdanlog), and Conrado Mingo (Paciencia).
Special thanks to Rocelia Campos, Cyndy Sol Rodrigo and Althea Rowan of PENRO-Antique, Kenny
Marie Flores of CENRO-Belison, and Jojo Cangayda and Genevieve Heramis of CENRO-Culasi, for
facilitating the logistical and social preparations of the survey.
For the sacrifices (time and effort) they extended, special thanks are owed to the LGU staffs, barangay
officials, coastal law enforcement team, boatmen, and PO members that kept us nourished and secured
throughout the dives, without these people we could not finished the activity.
When all stakeholders involved in the management of coastal and marine habitats share resources, the
impacts of CMEMP have greater chances of being sustained.
Duro-duro gid na salamat!
This report was prepared under the technical guidance of Terence Dacles.
Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 viii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report presents the results of the baseline biophysical assessment conducted in nine (9) selected
sites in the municipalities of Pandan, Tobias Fornier, and San Jose de Buenavista in Antique. The main
objective of the assessment was to gather baseline information on the status of the benthic communities
of the selected sites using standard survey methods and to further determine its reef health condition
through recognized indices. Quantitative data on fish abundance, biomass and density were also
obtained using fish visual census (FVC) survey. When available, secondary data and information such
as PCRA and other related studies necessary to support the historical background of the site and the
LGU were also obtained from concerned offices and other external sources. Transect coordinates were
collected for reference for future monitoring purposes.
The salient findings of this survey are as follows:
Six of the nine surveyed sites are above the national average coral cover of 36% (Magdaong et al. 2013).
Paciencia in Tobias Fornier had the highest hard coral cover among all the sites, with 66.5% mean coral
cover. The lowest coral cover was observed in Igdanlog of Tobias Fornier (11.5%). The cover of dead
coral with algae was highest in Mag-aba in Pandan (42.5%) and lowest at Funda Dalipe in San Jose
(15%). Abiotic components, mostly sand and silt, was observed highest (60.7%) in Igdanlog in Tobias
Fornier while lowest in Paciencia with 6.2%.
Soft coral was the most dominant substrate in Funda Dalipe in San Jose.
Total distinct fish species for all surveyed sites ranged from “very poor” in Igdanlog, Tobias Fornier to
“high” in Funda Dalipe, San Jose (range: 15 to 77 distinct species).
The mean fish abundance for all surveyed sites reveal an abundance index for all sites ranging from
“very poor” still in Igdanlog, Tobias Fornier to “moderate” in Paciencia, Tobias Fornier (range:
28.50±4.6 ind/500m2 to 970.00±14.6 ind/500m2).
The mean fish biomass for all surveyed sites display challenging results with fish biomass index for all
sites yielding a “very poor” rating (range: 0.34±0.08 mT/km2 to 5.79±0.9 mT/km2).
A full adult Napoleon Wrasse (Cheilinus undulatos) was encountered and recorded in Igdalaguit.
Seagrass cover was quantitatively measured in only two (2) sites, Mag-aba and Patria in Pandan. The
rest of the sites either has very sparse and extremely patchy cover or only occurs seasonally, usually
around Habagat season.
Seagrass cover ranged from “fair” (Patria: 42.21%) to “good” (Mag-aba: 50.09%).
Five (5) distinct seagrass species were identified across both sites.
Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 ix

CHAPTER
1
INTRODUCTION
Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 1

1.1. Rationale
The Philippine archipelago, being located within the highly diverse coral triangle, is widely recognized
as a global priority for marine conservation (Roberts et al. 2002; Carpenter 2005). Despite
overwhelming threats and pressures on its marine resources including climatic threats (White et al.
2000; Burke et al. 2002; Roberts et al. 2002), the Philippines emerged to be successful in exploring the
development of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) as effective tool for meeting various biodiversity
conservation, fisheries management and social goals (Christie and White 2007). Coral reefs, seagrass,
mangroves and soft bottom/mudflats provide various types of habitats for fish, invertebrates and other
marine organisms essential for the completion of their life cycles. Coral reefs, mangroves, and
associated habitats (e.g. beach forests and mudflats) protect coastal communities from strong wave
action, winds, storm surges and tsunamis. More importantly, these habitats are important sources of
food and income such as from fisheries and ecotourism. In addition, coastal and marine ecosystems are
equally efficient sequesters of carbon dioxide making them important repositories tempering effects of
climate change.
As the population increases, the demands for goods and services of coastal and marine ecosystems also
increase often resulting to varying degrees of degradation of habitat condition. The threats include
overexploitation, loss of habitats, pollution, destructive methods of extraction, perverse incentives and
many others. Coastal habitats and resources in the Philippines are also threatened and declining due to
catastrophic events related to climate change. The habitats have the natural capacity to recover from
disturbances, however overall neglect and poor management impede its recovery. Thus, there is a need
for proper management approach in order to decelerate loss and destruction, as well as concerted efforts
to rehabilitate and allow the ecosystems to recover.
In order to develop an appropriate, logical and effective management strategy for the Philippines’
coastal and marine ecosystem, there is a need for an accurate and updated assessment of the extent and
condition of the country’s coastal and marine ecosystems as well as the factors/threats/pressures
affecting its state and health. Information on the condition of the various coastal and marine ecosystems
on a national scale will help the DENR in calibrating appropriate management responses and set
realistic annual targets.
There are ongoing assessments being implemented in selected sites under the DENR and DOST through
DENR’s Coral Reef Visualization and Assessment (CoRVA) and DOST’s National Assessment of
Coral Reef Ecosystems (NACRE). However, additional efforts are urgently needed to cover other sites
in the Philippines.
To boost on-going efforts to sustainably and effectively manage both nationally and locally declared
MPAs, DENR launched The Coastal and Marine Ecosystems Management Program (CMEMP), with
the aim of updating the status of the coastal and marine habitats by conducting mapping and assessment
of these habitats (coral reef, mangrove, seagrass, soft-bottom/mudflats, plankton, crypto-biota) in their
respective areas. Specifically, the program aims to:
1. To determine the extent and cover of the various types of coastal and marine ecosystems within
each jurisdiction (regional); and
2. To determine the condition, using standard and widely accepted methods, of the various coastal
and marine ecosystems.
To monitor progress and to demonstrate improvement of the sites under the CMEMP initiative, baseline
biological status of the habitats need to be established. It is for this reason this report has been drafted
to present the results of the baseline biological assessment conducted last January 2018 by GEOTECH
SOLUTIONS (GTS) commissioned by DENR PENRO-Antique. This report particularly present the
results of the baseline biological assessment conducted in Patria, Tingib, Mag-aba, and Idacacan of
Pandan; Funda Dalipe of San Jose; and Paciencia, Igdalaguit, Igdanlog, and Arobo of Tobias Fornier.

1.2. Site Profile: Province of Antique
Antique is one of the provinces comprising the island of Panay in Western Visayas. It has a total land
area of approximately 2,522 sq. km. It is bounded on the north and northeast by Aklan, on the east by
Capiz, and on the southwest by Iloilo. On the west is the Cuyo East Pass of the Sulu Sea, part of the
vast China Sea. Eighteen municipalities make up the province: fourteen along the coast, three inland,
and one on six islets. Coastal towns are Anini-y, Tobias Fornier, Hamtic, San Jose de Buenavista,
Belison, Patnongon, Bugasong, Laua-an, Barbaza, Tibiao, Culasi, Sebaste, Pandan, and Libertad. The
inland towns are Sibalom, San Remigio, and Valderrama.
Profiled like a seahorse, Antique is an oversized serrated hemline on the western border of the three-
cornered scarf-like land mass that is Panay. It lies between the China Sea to the west and a tall mountain
range, 155 kilometers long and 33 kilometers at its widest, to the east, separating it from the rest of
Panay. Antiqueños speak Kiniray-a with Indo-Malayan origin.
Major products shipped out of the province are palay, rice, copra, muscovado sugar, legumes, fruits and
vegetables, livestock, fish and fish preparations, and seaweeds. Manufactured items like native gifts,
toys, and housewares have found their way in major cities of the country and abroad. Principal mined
products exported include coal, marble, silica, copper, and gemstone.
Preliminary data for the Bureau of Agricultural Statistics (BAS) reported that the total volume of fishery
products reached 24,299 metric tons. The aquaculture sector yields the highest production during the
inclusion of seaweeds in this sector.
Fishing is the major source of livelihood for households in the 15 coastal municipalities. The rich fishing
grounds of the Cuyo East Pass, Sulu Sea, and the municipal waters along the approximately 296.8-
kilometre (184.4 mi) coastline, make fishing a promising venture. The fishing season is year round and
peaks during December to June. A total of 17,437 households are directly dependent on fishing, and
39,055 households are indirectly dependent on it.
Figure 1. Administrative map of PENRO-Antique

Table 1. Location of the survey sites in Antique.
Municipality MPA Longitude Latitude Size (Ha.)
Pandan Patria 122.01402 11.7311
Tingib 122.044341 11.7296

Mag-aba 122.04798 11.7282
Idiacacan 122.09975 11.6832
Tobias Fornier Arobo 121.9562 10.5662
Igdanlog 121.95805 10.5783
Paciencia 121.9173 10.5063
Igdalaguit 121.9163 10.4983
San Jose de Buenavista Funda Dalipe 121.92389 10.7528
1.3. Objectives of the Assessment
This report characterizes the biophysical condition of nine (9) selected sites in the municipalities of
Pandan, Tobias Fornier, and San Jose de Buenavista in the Province of Antique. Specifically the
objectives of the assessment were to:
• Collect baseline biophysical data using Point-Intercept Transect survey and Fish Visual Census
(FVC) on benthic and fish communities in the MPA.
• Produce an updated map with habitat areas.
• Establish transect stations marker for repeat monitoring purposes.
• Provide photo/video documentation of the benthic community and reef fish population.
1.4 Survey Team
Figure 2. The Survey Team.
Table 2. Survey team

GeoTech Solutions DENR
Fish Team Coral Team Admin & Logistics CENRO PENRO
Wenifel Porpetcho Agnes Sabonsolin Daniel Elemia Kenny Marie Flores Rocelia Campos
Dave Valles Dalton Dacal Chelo Elemia Genevieve Heramis Cyndy Sol Rodrigo
Danilo Delizo, Jr. Alexis Cancino Jojo Dirain Jojo Cangayda Althea Rowan
Roxie Diaz Nicholson Tan Ryan Ardaba

CHAPTER
2
METHODOLOGY

2.1 Biophysical Survey
Three (3) 50-meters replicate transects were established. Using handheld global positioning system (GPS)
unit, latitude and longitude points were obtained to mark all transect starting points for future monitoring
reference (Tab. 2).
2.1.1 Benthic Attributes
2.1.1.a Corals
Survey stations were established inside the MPAs, using three replicate 50-meter transects. Benthic surveys
were done using the Point intercept transect (PIT) method from English et al. (1997). This method generated
percent cover of different benthic attributes such as live coral, algae, etc. The 50m transect lines were laid
on the reef bottom (about 20 – 30 ft., depending on reef type and bottom topography) at uniform depth and
oriented parallel to the coast.
The PIT method involves identifying the benthic attribute intercepted by the transect at precise intervals by
recording the benthic category directly below the transect tape in situ. The percent cover was computed
using Microsoft Excel. Percent cover of live hard coral cover was used to determine reef health according
to the proportion of living hard coral cover compared to other benthic components (e.g. dead coral, algae,
abiotic components etc.).
Live coral percentage was computed using the following equation below:
Live Coral Cover (%) = Total Sampled Points of Category X 100

Total no. of points per transect
Table 3. Coral condition index for reef health (Licuanan et al. 2017)
Poor Fair Good Excellent

<22.0% 22.1%-33.0% 33.1%-44.0% > 44.1%
2.1.1.b Macro-Invertebrates
Indicator species for macro-invertebrates, (e.g. giant clams, lobsters, tritons, helmet conchs, crown-of-
thorns (COT) were identified and counted for diversity and abundance within 2-m belt of the same transect
(50 m) used for the benthic survey covering 100m2.

2.1.1.c Seagrass Transect
To determine the abundance and composition of seagrass, a 50 meter transect line was laid perpendicular
to the shore with calibration at every 5 meters. A 1x1 meter quadrat, which was divided into 4 sub-squares,
was used for easy percentage cover estimation. Seagrass, together with other lifeforms, substrate types,
organisms, human and natural impacts were also noted. Based on the cover estimation gathered, the
conditions of the seagrass habitat was determined using the habitat criteria chart (Larkum 2006).
Table 4. Habitat criteria rating chart for seagrass.
Poor Fair Good Excellent

0-25% 26-50% 51-75% 76-100%
2.1.2 Reef Fish Community
To determine fish species composition, abundance and biomass, the standard method of fish visual census
(FVC) by English et al. (1997) was used. FVC was done using the same transects laid for the benthic
survey. A 50-meter length x 10-meter width belt transects that covers an area of 500m2 was created. Starting
at one end of the line, all fishes encountered within the 5 meter on either side and above the transect line
were identified to the lowest taxon possible, counted, and their total length estimated to the nearest
centimeter.
Table 5. Functional group classification, modified from Uychiaoco et al. 2001 and Halpern (2003)
Trophic Group Fish Family

Herbivore Surgeonfish (Acanthurids), Parrotfish (Scarids), Rudderfish (Kyphosids),
Wrasses (Labrids), Damselfish (Pomacentrids), Rabbitfish (Siganids)
Invertebrate Sweetlips (Haemulids), Spinecheeks (Nemipterids), Goatfish (Mullids),

Feeders/Planktivores Triggerfish ( Balistids), Angelfish (Pomacanthids), Moorish idols (
Zanclids), Fusiliers (Caesionids), Fairy basslets (Anthiids), Butterflyfish
(Chaetodontidae)
Carnivores Groupers (Serranids), Snapper (Lutjanids), Emperors (Lethrinids), Jacks

(Carangids)
In the discussion, the fish species were further categorized according to trophic level - corallivore, piscivore,
herbivore, planktivore and omnivore, and according to commercial value as target fish species, major reef
species, and reef health indicator species. FishBase defined target reef species as species sought by the local
fishery. It can either be a primary or secondary target species harvested by fishermen.
Fish families categorized as target fish species were the target family groups identified by Uychiaoco et al.
2001 as follows: Siganidae (rabbit fish), Serranidae (groupers), Scaridae (parrotfish), Carangidae
(jacks/trevally), Lethrinidae (emperor fish), Lutjanidae (snappers), Haemullidae (sweetlips), Caesionidae
(fusiliers), Mullidae (goatfish), and >10 cm individuals of Acanthuridae (surgeonfish/unicornfish).
Major reef species on the other hand are the non-commercially valued species generally not targeted by
fishers. Indicator species are species mostly coming from the Butterflyfish family Chaetodontidae. They
are categorized separately since their abundance and diversity often correlates to good overall reef health.

Functional trophic group classification per fish species was also identified based from the works of
Uychiaoco et al. 2001 and Halpern (2003) (Tab. 4).
Table 6. Fish condition rating (Nañola et al. 2002 and Hilomen et al., 2000)
Fish Density (no. of fish/1,000m2)
Very Poor Poor Moderate High Very High
0-201 202-676 677-2267 2268-7592 >7592
Biomass (target species – no. of kg/1,000m2)

<5.0 6-10 11-20 21-41 >41
Fish Species Diversity (no. of species/1,000m2)

0-26 27-47 48-75 76-100 > 100
Fish biomass and density were then computed per station, comparing both target fish and major reef species
using a database program ReefSum by Uychiaoco (2000). Fish biomass was obtained from the relationship,
W=aLb, where W is the weight in grams; a and b are the growth coefficient values taken from published
length-weight data; and L is the length of the fish in centimeters (English, Wilkinson, & Baker, 1997).
Species richness was expressed as the total number of fish species identified. Mean (+/- SE) fish condition
for density and diversity were determined and expressed following the index of Hilomen et al., (2000) and
biomass that of Nañola et al., (2006) as shown in Table 8. The works of Allen et al, 2003 and Lieske &
Myers, 1994 were used as references in the identification of fish species.

CHAPTER
3
SURVEY
RESULTS

3.1. PANDAN SURVEY RESULTS
Figure 3.1. Map of marine habitats, with area coverage, of Pandan
The municipality of Pandan has a total of 139.7 ha. of reef area, 41 ha. of seagrass beds, and 28.3 ha. of
mangrove cover (fig.3.1). Four (4) sites in Pandan were assessed using FVC and PIT methods for the reef
surveys while two (2) sites were assessed using the transect-quadrat method for seagrass diversity and
abundance on January 8, 2018 by the scientific/technical team of GEOTECH SOLUTIONS, assisted by the
respective BFARMC members and Mr. Jojo Cangayda of CENRO-Culasi.
Presented below are the results and analyses of the surveys from the different sites in Pandan.
Table 7. Table showing area coverage in Hectares for sites surveyed in Pandan LGU
Barangay Reef Area Seagrass Area Mangrove MPA Buffer Core Zone
(Ha) (Ha) (Ha) (Ha) (Ha)
Patria 31.10 14.40 ---- 111.00 17.80
Tingib 52.10 6.50 ---- 106.40 4.50
Mag-aba 51.80 16.10 20.20 106.40 16.10
Idiacacan 4.70 4.80 8.10 52.20 12.70

3.1.1. Barangay Idiacacan, Pandan, Antique
Figure 3.1.1a. Map of survey sites in Brgy. Idiacacan, Pandan
Idiacacan has a total of 4.7 ha. of reef area, 4.8 ha. of seagrass beds, and 8.1 ha. of mangrove cover. The
MPA core zone is 12.7 ha. The surveyed site is a narrow and patchy, reef interspaced with wide sandy
slopes closely attached to the shore (Fig. 3.1.1a). Coral bommies and massive coral colonies were observed
in the area, contributing to medium-high topographic relief. The surveyed area has an opening of a tributary
river, a major contributory factor to the siltation of the site.
Benthic Attributes
The general area is dominated by abiotic components

(61%) comprising mostly of sand. Dead-standing coral
colonies covered with algae (19%) was also observed in IDIACACAN SUBSTRATE
the surveyed area.
Reef health index for the surveyed site is of “poor”

condition, with the mean live hard coral cover of 19% HARD
(Tab. 4). Mushroom corals were observed littered in the ABIOTIC CORAL
COMPON 19%
sandy bottom surrounding the patchy reef (Fig. 3.1.1b). ENT
Three (3) giant clams, Tridacna squamosa, were 61%
encountered during the survey.
DEAD
CORAL/
Secondary data reports a seagrass area covering WITH
approximately 6.4 ha. is present in the area. However, as OTHER ALGAE
FAUNA 19%
per anecdotal accounts, seagrass occurrence were
1%
traditionally seasonal and that they appear during the
southwest monsoon season (Habagat), around the months
of July-October.
Figure 3.1.1b. Mean % substrate cover composition

Reef Fish Community
Species richness in Idiacacan MPA is under “very poor”

condition (Tab. 7). Of the 24 species under 15 families, IDIACACAN
50% (12 spp.) are Target Fish, 46% (11 spp.) are Major
Species, while only 1 species of indicator fish was
recorded (Fig. 3.1.1c). The most diverse family was Indicator, 1, 4%
Labridae (Wrasses), represented by 5 species (Ann. C). Target, 12,

50%
Major reef species make up 40% of the “very poor”

mean fish abundance for all reef species at only 92±11.2
ind/500m2 inside the Idiacacan MPA. It is closely
followed by 37% of the Target fish species and lastly by
the Indicator species with 23%. Labrids (wrasses) are the
most abundant family accounting for 25% of all the reef
species encountered while Acanthurids
(surgeonfishes)are the most abundant target fish family Major, 11,
46%
with 15% of the total fish counts (fig. 3.1.1d). These are
promising results as these fishes help regulate algal
growth and confer competitive advantage on corals,
Figure 3.1.1c. Total species richness composition
especially to coral juveniles, in terms of settlement
space.
Idiacacan yielded the highest mean biomass among all four surveyed sites of Pandan. The mean biomass
index for all reef species was observed to be under “very poor” condition with 3.8±2.0 mT/km2. Target
fish accounted for 96% of its mean biomass while rest is divided equally by both Major (2%) and Indicator
(2%) species (fig. 3.1.1e).
IDIACACAN IDIACACAN
Target
96%
Indicator
Target 23%
37%
Major Major
40% 2%
Indicator
2%
Figure 3.1.1e. Mean fish biomass composition
Figure 3.1.1d. Mean fish abundance composition

3.1.2. Barangay Mag-aba, Pandan, Antique
Figure 3.1.2a. Map of survey sites in Brgy. Mag-aba, Pandan
Mag-aba has a total of 51.8 ha. of reef area, 16.1 ha. of seagrass beds, and 20.2 ha. of mangrove cover. The
MPA core zone is 16.1 ha. The surveyed site is characterized by a wide reef flat dominated by an eroded
back-reef that resembles a bare pavement. The shallow sub-tidal is dominated by sandy patches with
occasional hard coral colonies. Deeper than 10m, the substrate is mostly soft bottom composed of a mixture
of sand and silt (fig. 3.1.2a).
Benthic Attributes
Reef health index for the surveyed site is of

“excellent” condition, with the mean live hard coral
cover of 46% (Tab. 4). Dead coral with algae follows MAG-ABA
with 43% cover. Abiotic Component (10%)
OTHER FAUNA
comprising mostly of sand and silt is the 3rd most 1% ABIOTIC COMPONENT
dominant substrate (fig. 3.1.2b). 10%
Long-spine urchin (Diadema setosum), Blue seastar
(Linckia laevegata), and pin cushion seastar (Culcita
novaeguineae) were observed in the site but outside
DEAD
the transect belt. CORAL/WIT
The site surveyed has a patchy seagrass area, totally H ALGAE HARD
43% CORAL
exposed during low tide with observed siltation in the 46%
area. Four (4) of sixteen (16) known seagrass species
in the Philippines were identified in Mag-aba (Tab.
8). Mean seagrass cover was observed to be in
“good” condition with 56.09% (Tab. 5). Cymodocea
rotundata was the most abundant species
contributing about 43% cover, followed by Thalassia Figure 3.1.2b. Mean % substrate cover
composition

hemprichii (35%). Syringodium isoetifolium accounted
for 19% while Enhalus acoroides was the least abundant 3%
with only 3% cover (fig.3.1.2c). Dense seagrass (1,276 Enhalus
35%
shoots/m2) and mean canopy height of 7.19cm reflects 19% Syringodium Thalassia
the dominance of Cymodocea and presence of
Syringodium species. The site has minimal % algal cover
(0.77%) with less to zero nutrient indicator algae while
having a mean epiphyte cover of 21.91% (composed
mostly of turf algae attached to leaf blades). This is
important to note since high epiphyte coverage on
seagrass usually causes withering of blades that leads to 43% Cymodocea
a shorter life span of leaf blades which eventually results
to less photosynthetic activity.
Figure 3.1.2c. Mean % seagrass cover composition
Table 8. Seagrass data for Brgy. Mag-aba, Pandan
% %
% SG Canopy
Density Algae Epiphyte Sediment
Cover Height
Cover Cover
1,276
56.09% 7.19cm 0.77% 21.91% A mixture of Sand & Silt with Rocks
shoots/m2
Seagrass Species
Enhalus acoroides Cymodocea rotundata
Thalassia hemprichii Syringodium isoetifolium
Reef Fish Community
Mag-aba MPA species richness index is categorized

under “poor” condition (Tab. 7). Of the 37 total species MAG-ABA
identified in Mag-aba MPA, 23 species (62%) were
from Major Reef species while 8 species (22%) were Indicator, 6, 16%
from the target fish species (fig. 3.1.2d). Six (6) species Target, 8, 22%
of indicator fish were also encountered in the MPA. The
most diverse fish family is the Chaetodontids
(Butterflyfish) with 6 species identified (Ann. C).
Mean fish abundance for all reef species in Mag-aba

was under “very poor” index, with only 191±23.9
ind/500m2. Major reef species made up 58% of the mean
abundance. It was followed by 33% of the Target fish
species and lastly by the Indicator species with 9% (fig.
10). Pomacentrids (damselfishes) were the most Major, 23, 62%
abundant family accounting for 55% of all the reef
species encountered while Caesionids (fusiliers) were
the most abundant target fish family with 12% of the Figure 3.1.2d. Total species richness composition
total fish counts (fig. 3.1.2e).

Mean fish biomass for Mag-aba was observed to be “very poor” condition with 1.05±0.4mT/km2, Mag-
aba mean fish biomass composition showed mostly target fish species with 73%. Major reef species
accounts for 20% of the mean biomass while indicator species was recorded at 7% (fig. 3.1.2f.)
MAG-ABA MAG-ABA
Indicator Target
9% 73%
Target
33%
Major
20%
Major
58% Indicator
7%
Figure 3.1.2f. Mean fish biomass composition

Figure 3.1.2e. Mean fish abundance composition

3.1.3. Barangay Patria, Pandan, Antique
Figure 3.1.3a. Map of survey sites in Brgy. Patria, Pandan
Patria has a total of 31.1 ha. of reef area, 14.4 ha. of seagrass beds, and no mangrove cover. The MPA core
zone is 17.8 ha. The surveyed site is characterized by a wide reef flat dominated by an eroded back-reef
that resembles a bare pavement. The shallow sub-tidal is dominated by macro-algae with occasional soft
coral colonies. Hard coral colonies are most dense around 5-7m while deeper than 10m, the substrate is
mostly soft bottom composed of a mixture of sand and silt (Fig. 3.1.3a).
Benthic Attributes
Reef health index for the surveyed site is of “good”

condition, with the mean live hard coral cover of 40%
PATRIA
(Tab. 4). Dead coral with algae follows with 40% cover. OTHER ABIOTIC COMPONENT
18%
Abiotic Component (18%) comprising mostly of sand FAUNA
and silt is the 3rd most dominant substrate (Fig. 3.1.3b). 2%
Long-spine sea urchin (Diadema setosum), Blue seastar

(Linckia laevegata), and Chocolate chip seastar
(Protoreaster nodosus) were observed in the site but
outside transect belt.
The site surveyed was a patchy seagrass area, totally

exposed during low tide with observed siltation in the HARD
CORAL
area. Three (3) of sixteen (16) known seagrass species in 40%
the Philippines were identified in Patria (tab. 8). Mean DEAD CORAL/WITH ALGAE
seagrass cover was observed to be in “fair” condition 40%
with 42.21% (Tab. 5) with both Cymodocea rotundata
and Halodule pinnifolia contributing 44% each for the
cover. Thalassia hemprichii accounts the

remaining 12% of the cover (fig. 3.1.2c). Dense
seagrass (1,253 shoots/m2) and mean canopy 12%
height of 5.45cm reflects the dominance of Thalassia
Cymodocea and Halodule species. The site has 44%
Halodule
low % algal cover (13.03%) but with the
presence of indicator algae (Cladophora sp.,
Enteromorpha sp., and Padina sp.). Minimal
mean epiphyte cover of 2.03% (composed
mostly of juvenile gastropods &
foramineferans). This is important to note since
high epiphyte coverage on seagrass usually 44% Cymodocea
causes withering of blades that leads to a shorter
life span of leaf blades which eventually results Figure 3.1.3c. Mean % seagrass cover composition
to less photosynthetic activity.
Table 9. Seagrass data for Brgy. Patria, Pandan

% SG Canopy % Algae % Epiphyte
Density Sediment
Cover Height Cover Cover
A mixture of Sand & Silt
42.21% 1,253 shoots/m2 5.45cm 13.03% 2.03%
with Rubbles/Rock
Seagrass Species
Thalassia hemprichii Cymodocea rotundata Halodule pinnifolia
Reef Fish Community
Species richness in Patria is under “moderate”

condition index (Tab. 7). Of the 69 species, 59% (41 PATRIA
spp.) are Major reef species, 29% (20 spp.) were
Indicator
Target fishes, while only 8 species (12%) of Target 8%
Indicator fish were recorded (fig. 3.1.3d). The most 19%
diverse family was Pomacentridae (Damselfish)
with 19 species identified (Ann. C).
Major reef species make up 73% of the “moderate”

mean fish abundance for all reef species at only
566.67±40.6 ind/500m2 in Patria. It is followed by
Target fish species with 19%, and lastly by the
Indicator species with 8%. Pomacentrids
(damselfishes) are the most abundant family Major
accounting for 59% of all the reef species 73%
encountered while Acanthurids (surgeonfishes) are
the most abundant target fish family with 7% of the
total fish counts (fig. 3.1.3e). Figure 3.1.3e. Mean fish abundance composition

Mean fish biomass is also under “very poor” condition index with only 2.27±0.6mT/km2 2. Major reef
species accounts for 63% of Patria’s mean biomass, followed by Target fishes (28%) and Indicator species
(9%) (fig. 3.1.3f).
PATRIA PATRIA
Indicator, 8, 12%
Major
63% Target, 20,
29%
Indicator
9%
Major, 41, 59%

Target
28%
Figure 3.1.3d. Total species richness composition

Figure 3.1.3f Mean fish biomass composition

3.1.4. Barangay Tingib, Pandan, Antique
Figure 3.1.4a. Map of survey sites in Brgy. Tingib, Pandan
Tingib has a total of 52.1 ha. of reef area, 6.5 ha. of seagrass beds, and no mangrove cover. The MPA core
zone is 4.5 ha. The surveyed site is adjacent to Mag-aba and exhibited almost an identical characteristic
with a wide reef flat dominated by an eroded back-reef that resembles a bare pavement. The sub-tidal zone
is very patchy with wide sandy slopes. Coral bommies and massive coral colonies were observed in the
area. Deeper than 10m, the substrate is mostly soft bottom composed of a mixture of sand and silt (fig.
3.1.4a).
Benthic Attributes
Reef health index for the surveyed site is of TINGIB

“excellent” condition, with the mean live hard coral ABIOTIC COMPONENT
33%
cover of 44% (Tab. 4). Dead coral with algae follows
with 18% cover. Abiotic Component (33%)
comprising mostly of sand and silt is the 3rd most
dominant substrate (fig. 3.1.4b).
There were no macro invertebrates and seagrasses

ALGAE
seen during the survey. 5%
DEAD CORAL/WITH ALGAE HARD CORAL

18% 44%
Figure 3.1.4b. Mean % substrate cover

composition

Reef Fish Community
Total species richness index for Tingib is

categorized under “moderate” condition (Tab. TINGIB
7). Of the 54 total species identified in Tingib, 33
species (61%) were from Major Reef species Indicator, 4, 7%
while 17 species (32%) were from the target fish Target, 17,
species (fig. 3.1.4c). Four (4) species of indicator 32%
fish were also encountered in the sit. The most
diverse fish family was the Pomacentridae
(Damselfish) with 11 species identified (Ann. C).
Major reef species make up 63% of the “poor”

mean fish abundance for all reef species at only
208±70.3 ind/500m2 inside the Tingib MPA. It is
followed by Target fish species with 25%, and
lastly by the Indicator species with 12%. Major, 33, 61%
Pomacentrids (damselfishes) are the most
abundant family accounting for 47% of all the
reef species encountered while Scarids
Figure 3.1.4c. Total species richness composition
(parrotfishes) are the most abundant target fish
family with 9% of the total fish counts (fig.
3.1.4d).
Tingib with 0.34±0.08mT/km2 is classified as having “very poor” mean biomass index.
Target fishes accounts for 64% of the mean biomass followed by indicator fishes with 22% and lastly by
the Major species with only 14% of the mean biomass (Fig. 3.1.4e).
TINGIB TINGIB Indicator

Target 12%
Target
64% 25%
Major
14%
Major
63%
Indicator
22%
Figure 3.1.4e. Mean fish biomass composition Figure 3.1.4d. Mean fish abundance composition

3.1.5. Recommendations for Pandan LGU
Below are recommendations to improved and sustain management for Pandan’s coastal and marine
ecosystems.
1. Legal Instruments
a. The LGU of Pandan would substantially benefit if they would revisit, update and
institutionalize their legal instruments relating to their local CRM and/or MPA ordinances.
b. Approve and adopt resolutions relating to CRM and MPA Plans.
c. Train, capacitate, empower and, deputize fish wardens.
d. Allocate and/or increase funds for CRM related activities.
2. Capacitation
a. Empower the MFARMC and BFARMCs to perform their roles to bridge the
communication disconnect between policy makers, law enforcers, and the resource users.
b. Orient the youth, women’s, and religious group for inclusive involvement on CRM.
c. Involve local police and other law enforcement bodies on the different local ordinances
and national statutes relating to coastal, marine, and fishery laws.
3. Awareness
a. Organize environmental awareness caravans on local schools to showcase the audience the
coastal and marine resources they have, its current status, the threats it is facing, and how
they can help in conserving and preserving their town’s natural treasures.
b. Install billboards showing captivating pictures of the local spots and communities to ignite
awareness and jumpstart pride campaigns.
c. Showcase ridge-to-reef connectivity by pushing for enhanced solid waste management
practices.
4. Infrastructure Development
a. Construct guardhouses and/or watchtowers to improve protection of MPAs as it will create
deterrence of potential violators.
b. Provide at least 1 bantay dagat boat mainly for patrolling but can also be used for other
CRM related activities.
c. Supply relevant paraphernalia to local law enforcers so they can perform their duties and
functions effectively and safely.
d. Allocate funds and personnel for repair and maintenance of patrol boat and marker buoys.
3.1.6. Enhancement recommendations for Pandan MPAs
1. Idiacacan MPA
a. Given the low percentage of live coral cover with 61% Dead Coral recorded in the area, it
is recommended for potential coral rehabilitation activities under the CMEMP component
b. The MPA can be further enhanced by increasing the core or no take zone to include the
remaining seagrass beds and coral reefs
c. It is also highly recommended to zone the buffer for rehabilitation and recreational areas
d. During the survey, giant clam species were observed, the area is a potential for giant clam
reseeding after proper zoning and regular monitoring and law enforcement. This may
take at least 3-5 years after the rezoning of the MPA
e. The MPA included a 6.4 hectares seagrass beds, special management activities must be
included in the MPA management plan

f. Fish biomass is low due to low/minimal enforcement of the MPA regulations, it is
recommended to include fisheries regulations within the buffer and outside the MPA for
the fish stocks to recover. Regular fish catch monitoring is highly recommended to
provide data for local fisheries regulations
g. The MPA is nearby a river, thus proper zoning and regulation of land activities are
important. The MPA plans must be included in the CLUP of the LGU.
2. Mag-aba MPA
a. The area has a good source for coral rehabilitation, it has 43% live coral cover. It is
recommended to zone areas for coral rehabilitation, scientific surveys and recreational
activities (within the buffer zone)
b. The MPA consist of seagrass beds and mangrove stands, it is recommended to include
these habitats in the MPA management plan. Specific activities for rehabilitation e.g.
reforestation of mangrove and beach forests are necessary to enhance the ecological
integrity of the MPA
c. It is recommended to increase the core zone or no take zone at least 10 hectares, thus
would allow coral and fish recruitment in the MPA
d. It is recorded that the area has low fish biomass, it is recommended to enhance the
fisheries regulations within the buffer and outside the MPA. Regular fish catch
monitoring is highly recommended to provide fisheries data as basis for policies and
management options.
e. It is recommended to conduct regular underwater monitoring using the stations
established within and outside the MPA and to conduct MPA MEAT
3. Patria MPA
a. It was observed that the area has low live coral cover, thus it is a potential site for coral
rehabilitation. Proper zoning is needed within the MPA for restoration, recreational and
research activities.
b. The MPA also has a small patch of seagrass beds, it is recommended to include special
habitat management within the MPA plans
c. The core zone area is very small and with limited coverage, it is recommended to
increase the core zone at least 5-10 hectares and to reshape the core with less points for
better law enforcement and management
d. It is recommended to conduct regular underwater monitoring using the stations
e. It is recommended to enhance the fisheries regulations within the buffer and outside the
MPA. Regular fish catch monitoring is highly recommended to provide fisheries data as
basis for policies and management options.
4. Tingib MPA
a. It was observed that the core zone covers a small area compared to the buffer zones, it is
recommended to increase the core area between 12-16 hectares in order to provide better
fish and coral recruitment. It is also recommended to zone the buffer into recreational,
regulated fishing and rehabilitation/restoration areas
b. The MPA has seagrass beds which need special management schemes that must be
included in the MPA plan

c. There are giant clam species observed and the area is a potential for giant clam reseeding
program after the MPA has been properly zones and managed, with regular law
enforcement activities. This may take a minimum of 5 years, depending on the
municipality
d. It is recommended to zone the land activities in order not to affect the MPA, the MPA
zones must be included in the CLUP of the municipality
e. Regular fish catch monitoring is recommended as basis for fisheries regulations within
the buffer and municipal waters. Strict implementation of fisheries regulations will fast
track fish stock recruitment in the area
f. It is recommended to conduct regular underwater monitoring using the stations

3.2. TOBIAS FORNIER SURVEY RESULTS
Figure 3.2. Map of marine habitats, with area coverage, of Tobias Fornier
A total of 23.25 ha. of reef area and 0.27 ha. of seagrass beds were surveyed in the municipality of Tobias
Fornier (fig.3.2). Four (4) sites in Tobias Fornier were assessed using FVC and PIT methods for the reef
surveys on January 10, 2018 by the scientific/technical team of GEOTECH SOLUTIONS, assisted by the
respective BFARMC members and Ms. Kenny Marie Flores of CENRO-Belison, Cyndy Sol Rodrigo and
Althea Rowan of PENRO-Antique.
Presented below are the results and analyses of the surveys in the different sites in Tobias Fornier.
Table 10. Table showing area coverage in Hectares for sites surveyed in Tobias Fornier and San Jose de Buenavista
Barangay Reef Area Seagrass Area Mangrove MPA Buffer Core Zone
(Ha) (Ha) (Ha) (Ha) (Ha)
Arobo 3.50 --- ---- 129.40 50.70
Igdalaguit 16.10 0.27 ---- 72.50 24.70
Igdanlog 0.55 --- ---- 105.60 51.30
Paciencia 3.20 --- ---- 92.10 25.70
Funda Dalipe 4.98 --- ---- 50.20 9.40

3.2.1. Barangay Arobo, Tobias Fornier, Antique
Figure 3.2.1a. Map of survey sites in Brgy. Arobo, Tobias Fornier
Arobo has a total of 3.4 ha. of reef area. The MPA core zone is 50.7 ha. The surveyed site is characterized
by a small patch of shallow, offshore reef dominated by massive lifeforms of hard coral colonies. Wide
stretches of gently sloping sandy areas surrounds the patch reef on all sides creating an “oasis” effect to
most reef associated species (fig. 3.2.1a).
Benthic Attributes
DEAD
AROBO
Reef health index for the surveyed site is of CORAL/WITH
“excellent” condition, with the mean live hard ALGAE ABIOTIC
coral cover of 64% (Tab. 4). Dead coral with 33% COMPONENT
3%
algae follows with 33% cover. Abiotic
Component (33%) comprising mostly of sand
and silt is the 3rd most dominant substrate (fig.
3.2.1b).
No macro-invertebrates were found during the

survey. HARD CORAL
64%
No seagrass was observed in the survey area.
Figure 3.2.1b. Reef health index

Reef Fish Community
Total species richness index for Arobo is

categorized under “moderate” condition with 48 AROBO
distinct species distributed among 13 families
(Tab. 7). Major Reef species accounts for 47%
while Target fish species account for 39%. Indicator
Indicator species provided 14% of its total 14%
species richness (fig. 3.2.1c). The most diverse Target
fish family was the Pomacentridae (Damselfish) 39%
with 11 species identified (Ann. C).
Mean fish abundance in Arobo was observed to

be in “poor” condition with 467.67±64.9
ind/500m2 . Target fish species make up 51% of
the mean fish abundance for all reef species Major
47%
while Major Reef species accounts for 39%.
Indicator species were the least abundant with
only 10% of the mean abundance (fig. 3.2.1d).
Pomacentrids (damselfishes) and Acanthurids
(surgeonfish) are the most abundant fish family, Figure 3.2.1c. Mean fish biomass composition
each accounting for 30% of the total fish counts.
Mean biomass was observed to be in “very poor” condition calculated to be at 5.79±0.9 mT/km2. Target
fish, Major Reef, and Indicator species accounted for 82%, 11%, and 7%, respectively, of the site’s mean
biomass (fig.3.2.1e)
AROBO AROBO
Indicator
10%
Major,
1.78, 11%
Major
Target 39% Indicator,
Target, 12.50, 1.03, 7%
51%
82%
Figure 3.2.1d. Mean fish abundance composition Figure 3.2.1e. Mean fish biomass composition

3.2.2. Barangay Igdalaguit, Tobias Fornier, Antique
Figure 8. Mean fish biomass

composition
Figure 3.2.2a. Map of survey sites in Brgy. Igdalaguit, Tobias Fornier
Igdalaguit has a total of 16.1 ha. of reef area and 0.27 ha of seagrass bed. The MPA core zone is 24.7 ha.
The survey site is characterized by a narrow and shallow reef flat with multiple spur-and-grove breaks. The
fore-reef exhibits a crest with a steep slope up to 9 m then tapers down to a wide, flat soft-bottom area at
around 12 m depth (fig. 3.2.2a).
Benthic Attributes

“excellent” condition, with the mean live hard IGDALAGUIT
coral cover of 57% (Tab. 4). Dead coral with
algae follows with 17% cover. Abiotic ABIOTIC
Component (25%) comprising mostly of sand COMPONENT
and silt is the 3rd most dominant substrate (fig. 25%
3.2.2b).
Giant clam (Tridacna squamosa), Sea

DEAD
cucumber (Holuthuria sp.), and Long-spine CORAL/WITH
urchin (Diadema setosum) were observed but ALGAE
off the transect belt. 17% HARD CORAL
57%
Anecdotal accounts suggests that seagrass are
seasonal and that they normally appear during
the southwest monsoon season, around the
months of July-October.
Figure 3.2.2.b. Mean % substrate cover composition

Reef Fish Community
Total species richness index for Arobo is IGDALAGUIT

categorized under “moderate” condition with 54
distinct species distributed among 16 families
Indicator
(Tab. 7). Target fish species account for 50% Target 12%
while Major Reef species accounts for 38%. 50%
Indicator species provided 12% of its total
species richness (fig. 3.2.2c) (Ann. C).
Mean fish abundance for all reef species in

Igdalaguit is in “poor” condition index,
dominated by Major Reef species with 60% of the
mean count. Target species account for 25% and
Indicator species supplied about 15% of the mean
density. Acanthurids (surgeonfish) are the most
Major
abundant family accounting for 26% of all the 38%
reef species encountered while Pomacentrids
(damselfish) represented about 12% of the total
fish counts (fig. 3.2.2d).
Figure 3.2.2c. Mean fish biomass composition
Mean biomass was observed to be in “very poor”

condition with only 2.85±.1 mT/km2. Target fishes species accounts for 76% of Igdalaguit’s mean biomass.
The rest is shared by the Major reef species (11%) and Indicator species (13%) (fig. 3.2.2e).
IGDALAGUIT IGDALAGUIT
Target, 4.96, 76%

Indicator
Major,
Target 15%
0.76, 11%
25%
Indicator, 0.84,
Major 13%
60%

Figure 3.2.2c. Mean fish abundance composition

3.2.3. Barangay Igdanlog, Tobias Fornier, Antique
Figure 3.2.3a. Map of survey sites in Brgy. Igdanlog, Tobias Fornier
Igdanlog has a total of 0.55 ha. of reef area. The MPA core zone is 51.3 ha. The surveyed site is
characterized by a small, scattered patch of shallow, offshore reef dominated by massive lifeforms of hard
coral colonies. Wide stretches of gently sloping sandy areas surrounds the patch reef on all sides creating
an “oasis” effect to most reef associated species. This site has almost an identical feature as the Arobo site
(fig. 3.2.3a).
Benthic Attributes
Abiotic Component (63%) comprising mostly of IGDANLOG

sand and silt is the most dominant substrate of the
surveyed site followed by dead coral with algae
follows with 25% cover (fig. 3.2.3b). Reef health ABIOTIC COMPONENT
HARD CORAL
63%
index for the surveyed site is of “poor” condition, 13%
with a mean live hard coral cover of only 13%
(Tab. 4).
No macro-invertebrates were observed during the

survey.
No seagrass were seen in the survey site.

DEAD CORAL/WITH
ALGAE
25%
Figure 3.2.3b. Mean % substrate cover

composition

Reef Fish Community
Total species richness index for Igdanlog is

categorized under “very poor” condition with IGDANLOG
only 15 distinct species representing 7 families
(Tab. 7). Species richness for Igdanlog is mostly Indicator
from the Major Reef species (76%). Target Reef 6%
species contributes about 18% and Indicator Target
species accounts for the remaining 6% of species 18%
richness for this site (fig. 3.2.3c) (Ann. C).
Mean fish abundance for Igdanlog can be

categorized under “very poor” condition with
only 28.50±4.6 ind/500m2. Major reef species
make up 50% of the mean fish abundance for all
reef species in Igdanlog. It is followed by Target Major
fish species with 36%, and lastly by the Indicator 76%
species with 14% (fig. 23). Pomacentrids
(damselfishes) are the most abundant family
accounting for 35% of all the reef species
encountered while Snappers (Lutjanids) are the
most numerous target fish family with 12% of the
total fish counts (fig. 3.2.3d).
Mean fish biomass for Igdanlog is under “very poor” index with only 0.93±0.4 mT/km2. Igdanlog
exhibited a pattern where Major Reef species accounted for the highest with 64% of the mean biomass.
Followed by Target Fish species with 19% and lastly by the Indicator species with 13% (Fig. 3.2.3e).
IGDANLOG IGDANLOG
Indicator,
Major, 1.13, 0.22, 13% Indicator
68% 14%
Target
36%
Major
Target, 0.32, 50%
19%
Figure 3.2.3e. Mean fish biomass composition Figure 3.2.3d. Mean fish abundance composition

3.2.4. Barangay Paciencia, Tobias Fornier, Antique
Figure 3.2.4a. Map of survey sites in Brgy. Paciencia, Tobias Fornier
Paciencia has a total of 3.2 ha. of reef area. The MPA core zone is 25.7 ha. The MPA surveyed is
characterized by a narrow and shallow reef flat with multiple spur-and-groove breaks. The fore-reef exhibits
a crest with a steep slope up to 9 m then tapers down to a wide, flat soft-bottom area at around 12 m depth.
This site has almost an identical feature as the Igdalaguit site (fig. 3.2.4a).
Benthic Attributes

“excellent” condition, with the mean live hard
PACIENCIA
coral cover of only 66% (Tab. 4). Dead coral with OTHER
algae follows with 16% cover. Abiotic Component ALGAE FAUNA ABIOTIC COMPONENT
DEAD 6% 3%
(6%) comprising mostly of sand and silt is the 6%
CORAL/WIT
most and macro algae (6%) are the 3rd most H ALGAE
dominant substrate type (fig. 3.2.4b). 16%
Spiny lobster (Panulirus sp.) was seen during the

dive but off the transect.
Anecdotal accounts suggests that seagrass
SOFTCORAL
seasonally occur and that they normally appear
3%
during the southwest monsoon season, around the HARD CORAL
months of July-October. 66%

Reef Fish Community
Total species richness index for Igdanlog is

categorized under “very poor” condition with 60 PACIENCIA
distinct species representing 14 families (Tab. 7).
A great part of species richness was represented Indicator
by Major Reef species with 63%. A distant Target
13%
second were the Target Fish species, accounting 24%
for 24%, while only 13% were from the Indicator
species (Fig. 3.2.4c) (Ann. C).
Mean fish abundance for all reef species in

Paciencia under “moderate” condition with
970.00±14.6 ind/500m2 and is largely dominated
by Major Ref species with 89% of the mean Major
count. Target species account for 7% and 63%
Indicator species supplied only 4% of the mean
density (fig. 28). Pomacentrids (damselfish) are
the most abundant family accounting for 89% the Figure 3.2.4c. Mean fish biomass composition
total fish counts (fig. 3.2.4d).
Mean fish biomass for Paciencia is under “very poor” index with only 0.63±0.1 mT/km2 and the mean fish
biomass composition followed a similar pattern having target fish with 45%. Major reef species accounts
for 23% of the mean biomass while indicator species was recorded to be 32% (fig. 3.2.4e).
PACIENCIA PACIENCIA
Target, Target Indicator
Major,
0.96, 45% 7% 4%
0.49, 23%
Indicator, Major
0.69, 32% 89%
FIGURE 3.2.4D. MEAN FISH ABUNDANCE FIGURE 3.2.4E. MEAN FISH BIOMASS COMPOSITION
COMPOSITION

3.2.5. Recommendations for Tobias Fornier LGU
Below are recommendations to improved and sustain management for Tobias Fornier’s coastal and
marine ecosystems.
a. The LGU of Tobias Fornier would substantially benefit if they would revisit, update and
2. Capacitation
3. Awareness
practices and start by doing coastal and dive clean-ups.
4. Tourism and livelihood
a. Specifically for Paciencia and Igdalaguit, the presence of a full adult Napoleon Wrasse
(Chelinus undulatos) indicates a healthy reef system. Promote this potential interaction and
create a responsible dive tourism package. Seeing this majestic fish is not that common.
b. Create and develop tourism-based livelihood activities by capitalizing on the what you
have, what the locals know, and what the tourists seeks.
c. Partner with local resorts for promotions and develop user fees systems with respective
incentives.
3.2.6 Enhancement Recommendations for Tobias Fornier MPAs
1. Arobo MPA
• The MPA has a small coral reef area it is recommended for coral rehabilitation activities
under the CMEMP
• Since it is an offshore reef, proper installation of marker buoys are important
• Proper zoning of the MPA is necessary for recreational, regulated fishing and
rehabilitation activities
• It is recommended to conduct regular underwater monitoring using the stations
• It is recommended to enhance the fisheries regulations within the buffer and outside the
MPA. Regular fish catch monitoring is highly recommended to provide fisheries data as
basis for policies and management options.

2. Igdalaguit MPA
• The area has a small core zone or no take zone, it is recommended to increase the core
zone between 5-12 hectares
• Reshape the MPA into rectangular shape to add proper management and law enforcement
• There are small seagrass patches that needs special management schemes in the MPA
plan
• Giant clams were observed in the site, it is a potential for giant clam reseeding under the
CMEMP after proper zoning, updating of MPA plans and regular law enforcement
• There is low fish biomass, it is recommended to enhance the fisheries regulations within
the buffer zone and outside the MPA (within the municipal waters). Regular fish catch
monitoring is highly recommended to provide fisheries data as basis for policies and
management options.
3. Igdanlog MPA
• The coral reef covers a relatively small area; it is recommended to expand the core zone
for coral restoration and recruitment;
• The site is potential for coral rehabilitation using massive and branching life forms from
nearby reefs; this can be supported under the CMEMP component
• Increasing the core zone will provide better recruitment for fish and coral species in the
area.The remaining areas may be zoned for recreational and regulated fishing activities.
• The MPA is offshore, proper boundary markers are necessary for better management and
patrolling activities; Land activities must also be regulated and zoned
• It was observed that the MPA has very poor fish biomass and abundance, it is
recommended to enhance the fisheries regulations within the buffer zone and outside the
MPA (within the municipal waters). Regular fish catch monitoring is highly
recommended to provide fisheries data as basis for policies and management options.
4. Pacienca MPA
• The MPA has a good coral cover, however it is recommended to expand the core zone to
include the remaining coral reef areas.
• Proper zoning of the buffer area for restoration, recreational and regulated fishing
activities. Increasing the core zone will provide better recruitment for fish and coral
species in the area.
• The site is potential for coral rehabilitation within the buffer area under the CMEMP
component
• A spiny lobster was observed in the area, which indicate good coral health. It is also a
potential for giant clam reseeding activities, after proper zoning and enhancement of the
MPA plan. It is recommended to establish giant clam nursery once there is a regular law
enforcement activity in the area.

• In order to increase fish stocks, it is recommended to enhance the fisheries regulations
within the buffer zone and outside the MPA (within the municipal waters). Regular fish
catch monitoring is highly recommended to provide fisheries data as a basis for policies
and management options.

3.3. SAN JOSE DE BUENAVISTA SURVEY RESULTS
Fish visual census and Point Intercept Transect surveys was conducted Funda Dalipe in San Jose de
Buenavista, Antique on January 9, 2018 by the scientific/technical team of GEOTECH SOLUTIONS,
assisted by the MENRO, BFARMC members and Ms. Kenny Marie Flores of CENRO-Belison, Cyndy Sol
Rodrigo and Althea Rowan of PENRO-Antique.
3.3.1. Barangay Funda Dalipe, San Jose de Buenavista, Antique
Figure 3.3.1a. Map of survey sites in Brgy. Paciencia, Tobias Fornier
The surveyed site is characterized by a patch of offshore reef dominated by soft corals and massive lifeforms
of hard coral colonies at the shallowest portions. Multiple spur-and-grove breaks surround the reef crests
with a steep slope up to 9 m then tapers down to a wide, flat soft-bottom area at around 12 m depth. Wide
stretches of gently sloping sandy areas surrounds the patch reef on all sides creating an “oasis” effect to
most reef associated species (Fig. 3.3.1a)
Benthic Attributes
FUNDA DALIPE
ABIOTIC
The most dominant substrate type is the soft
COMPONEN
corals covering about 44% of the surveyed area. T
Reef health index for the surveyed site is of DEAD 12%
“fair” condition, with the mean live hard coral CORAL/WIT
H ALGAE
cover of only 26% (Tab. 4). Dead coral with 15% HARD CORAL
algae follows with 15% cover. Abiotic 26%
Component (12%) comprising mostly of sand
and coral rubble is 4th most dominant substrate
type (Fig. 3.3.1b).
SOFTCORAL
44%

Reef Fish Community
Total species richness for all reef fish species in

Funda Dalipe was established at 77 distinct
FUNDA DALIPE Indicator,
species which can be considered under “High” 12, 16%
(Tab. 7). Of Funda Dalipe MPA’s total species,
Target Fish and Major Reef species each Target, 32,
contributed about 42% while Indicator species 43%
provided 16% of its total species richness. (Fig.
3.3.1c).
The most diverse family was Pomacentridae Major, 31,

(Damselfishes), represented by 16 distinct 41%
species. The most diverse Target fish species
Figure 3.3.1.c. Total species richness composition
family are the Acanthuridae (Surgeonfish) and
Scaridae (parrotfish) both with 6 distinct species
identified, while 12 species of butterflyfish
(Chaetodontidae) were recognized throughout the
survey (Ann. C). FUNDA DALIPE
Indicator
Mean fish abundance was recorded at 212.25±25.4 4%
ind/500m2 of which 117.5±50.6 ind/500m2 is
Major
accounted for by Target Fish species. Major Reef 55%
species accounts for 86.75±23.8 ind/500m2 while
Indicator species is responsible for the remaining
8±1.9 ind/500m2 (fig. 3.3.1d). The most abundant
fish family is the Pomacentridae (damselfish) Target
41%
accounting for 41% of the total abundance while
Lutjanidae (snappers) are the most numerous
Target Fish species. Extrapolating this results to
use the index ratings of Nañola et al 2002 (Tab. Figure 3.3.1d. Mean fish abundance
7) reveals that mean fish density of Funda Dalipe
MPA of San Jose is under “poor” condition.
FUNDA DALIPE
Mean fish biomass inside Funda Dalipe MPA Major
was calculated at 1.43±0.5 mT/km2, of which 31%
Indicator
53% (2.03±0.6 mT/km2) is from Target Fish 16%
species. Major Reef species accounts for 31%
(1.16±0.6 mT/km2) while Indicator species has
only 16% (0.62±0.2 mT/km2) (fig. 3.3.1e). Using
fish biomass index, Funda Dalipe yielded a “very
poor” rating (tab.6).
Target
53%
Figure 3.3.1e. Mean fish biomass composition

3.3.2. Recommendations for San Jose de Buenavista
Below are recommendations to improved and sustain management for San Jose’s coastal and marine
ecosystems.
a. The LGU of San Jose would substantially benefit if they would revisit, update and
2. Capacitation
3. Awareness
practices and start by doing coastal and dive clean-ups.
4. Infrastructure Development
a. Construct guardhouses and/or watchtowers to improve protection of MPA as it will create
deterrence of potential violators.
b. Provide at least 1 bantay dagat boats mainly for patrolling but can also be used for other
CRM related activities.
c. Supply relevant paraphernalia to local law enforcers so they can perform their duties and
functions effectively and safely.
d. Allocate funds and personnel for repair and maintenance of patrol boats and marker buoys.
5. Tourism and livelihood
a. Funda Dalipe has a potential for local dive tourism considering the location, access, and
features. The shallows, where the soft corals are, is a good snorkeling area.
b. Construct and install a small floating guardhouse to control access of guests and manage
emergency incidents.
c. Partner with local resorts for promotions and develop user fees systems with respective
incentives.
3.3.3 Enhancement Recommendations for San Jose de Buenavista MPAs
5. Funda Dalipe MPA

• The MPA is offshore with mostly soft corals and massive corals. It is recommended to expand the
core zone or no take zone of the MPA to include other coral reef areas and for coral rehabilitation.
It is recommended to use mostly massive coral life form species given the spurs and grooves
topography of the reef. Increasing the core zone will provide better recruitment for fish and coral
species in the area.

• Rezoning of the buffer area for restoration, recreational and regulated fishing activities with proper
boundary markers to facilitate efficient and effective management and patrolling.
• The MPA has poor to very poor fish biomass and abundance, it is recommended to enhance the
fisheries regulations within the buffer zone and outside the MPA (within the municipal waters).
Regular fish catch monitoring is highly recommended to provide fisheries data as basis for
policies and management options.
• Conduct regular underwater monitoring using the stations established within and outside the MPA
and to conduct MPA MEAT

CHAPTER
4
SUMMARY &
DISCUSSION

Summary and Discussion. The community, in ecological terms, is an assemblage of populations composed
of two or more species in a specific place and time. It is a complex system wherein each individual organism
have to interact with the both the living and non-living environment for them to survive. A plethora of
factors are involved in the individual’s survival, growth, and eventual death.
The biophysical assessment that we are doing are to a certain point limited as it only captures data from a
sample of the community in a particular area at a given time. Given this, we expect variability in the data
set. We have included standard error bars in our figures to show the how far the values range from the
population mean. Overlapping error bars suggest that the differences in values are not statistically
significant. On the contrary, non-overlapping error bars suggest that the difference may or may not be
statistically significant and requires further testing.
To fully appreciate the wealth of information included in this report, we have included subchapters to
elucidate in further detail some key concepts in ecology, community structure, and data interpretation.

4.1. Benthic Attributes
4.1.1. Benthos distribution
100% 2.8 6.2

10.5 12.3
18.3
24.8
33.0
33.0 15.0
75% 15.5
60.7 42.5 63.3
17.0
39.7
50% 18.0
44.4
63.7 66.5
19.5 57.0
25% 46.2 25.2
40.3 43.5
26.3
18.7
11.5
0%
IDIACACAN MAG-ABA PATRIA TINGIB AROBO IGDALAGUIT IGDANLOG PACIENCIA FUNDA
DALIPE
PANDAN TOBIAS FORNIER SAN JOSE
HARD CORAL SOFTCORAL DEAD CORAL WITH ALGAE ALGAE OTHER FAUNA ABIOTIC COMPONENT
Figure 4.1. Summary of mean benthic cover composition across all surveyed sites
The condition index is an index that looks beyond just coral cover as it takes into account the proportion of
hard coral with respect to the different benthos except abiotic components. It suggests that reefs with good
condition indices are mostly coral-dominated. Live hard coral cover of the surveyed sites ranged from
“poor” to “excellent” (Tab. 4). Paciencia in Tobias Fornier had the highest hard coral cover among all the
sites, with 66.5% mean coral cover. The lowest coral cover was observed in Igdanlog of Tobias Fornier
(11.5%). Six of the nine surveyed sites are above the national average coral cover of 36% (Magdaong et al.
2013).The cover of dead coral with algae was highest in Mag-aba in Pandan (42.5%) and lowest at Funda
Dalipe in San Jose (15%). Abiotic components, mostly sand and silt, was observed highest in Igdanlog in
Tobias Fornier while lowest in Paciencia. Soft coral was the most dominant substrate only Funda Dalipe in
San Jose (Fig. 4.1).
4.1.2. As indicators of reef health
Coral cover is the most commonly used measure of reef health (Kramer, 2001; Gomez et al 2004). Corals
are what we consider foundation species or habitat-forming species that form the base of the reefs (Bruno
et al 2001). The complexity of coral communities bring about diversity of habitats and niches that other
organisms occupy. It is ideal that coral cover and species diversity is high for the structural and ecological
stability of the reef. And because of tightly-bound ecological interactions in coral reefs, changes in coral
cover, structural complexity and/or diversity will have repercussions on the communities of reef-associated
organisms such as fish and invertebrates (Jones, et al., 2004; Bruno, et al., 2007; Selig, et al., 2010). Still,
it is important to note that even in pristine, undisturbed reefs, coral cover may not reach one hundred
percent. Spatial competition in the reefs is very fierce and other bottom-attached organisms (e.g. algae,
sponges, etc.) will more often than not secure some fraction of substrate. Furthermore, not all places have
vast expanses of hard substrate that corals require to grow. Some coasts have sandy bottoms interspersed
with rocks and coral bommies and thus have naturally lower coral cover.

The cover, morphology and species composition of corals is naturally variable as they are influenced by a
combination of factors. Cover is highly dependent on the availability of hard substrate for colonization.
Morphology, which in turn will provide rugosity for the reef, adapts to water energy (current, surges),
sedimentation and light availability (Todd et al 2004).
Species composition may be affected by different levels of disturbance which can disrupt monospecificity
and allow other species to colonize newly opened spaces (intermediate disturbance hypothesis; Rogers
1993). While it is good that coral cover is high, we must stress the importance of species diversity on overall
community stability. Diversity provides redundancy and complexity so that disturbances will only affect
some and not collapse the entire system. Having only one or a few species comprising a community is
precarious, given that if there comes a disease or a stressor to which that/those species is/are vulnerable,
the entire community can be wiped out. In this case, water quality must be improved so that other species
might have a fighting chance to survive and thrive.
While the overall structure and function of the reef is dependent on corals, the rest of the benthic community
can tell some other stories that are not captured by coral cover alone. For Littler and Littler (2006), ideal
reefs have more corals and, if present, coralline algae, than macro and turf algae. According to them, the
preponderance of frondose macroalgae indicates a combination of elevated nutrient levels, reduced
herbivory, and pollution and/or destructive fishing methods. Abundance of turf algae may indicate
inadequate herbivory while the abundance of coralline algae may signal high herbivory levels but elevated
nutrients.
4.1.3. As indicators of change
Hard corals are good indicators of reef health because they are sensitive to various conditions and their
interactions with and proportion to other organisms can give insight to the factors governing the reef.
Because of their sensitivity, coral cover may signal disturbances in the area. Drastic declines in coral cover
may be indicative of storm damage, earthquake, outbreaks of COTS, diseases and other catastrophic events.
We also see typical evidences of the typhoon not only in overturned corals but also in the increase in the
cover of algae and dead coral with algae, indicating the fast colonization of algae after coral mortality.
Furthermore, declines may also indicate poor water quality and/or the occurrence of destructive fishing
methods which can lead to coral mortality and the increase of algal or rubble cover.
It is relatively harder to detect positive changes in coral cover. Corals are generally slow growing organisms
with growth rates varying depending on morphology and environmental conditions. Massive and sub-
massive types usually grow about 1-2 cm per year (Patzold 1984; Lough and Barnes 2000) while tabular
and branching types can grow tens of centimeters in a year (Yap and Gomez 1984). Therefore, it is
anticipated that we may not see significant increases during the two year monitoring period. Small increases
and decreases, particularly those with overlapping error bars are just part of the natural variability.
However, the coral covers in these years are still valuable as data points particularly for long term
monitoring, e.g. 10 years.

4.2. Reef Fish
4.2.1. Species Richness
TOTAL SPECIES RICHNESS

80
60
40 77
69
54 54 60
48
20 37
24
15
0
DALIPE
PANDAN TOBIAS FONIER SAN JOSE
Figure 4.2.1. Summary of total species richness across all surveyed sites
Total species for all surveyed sites of, as shown in Figure 4.2.1, ranged from “very poor” to “moderate”
rating (range: 15 to 77 distinct species) (Tab. 7).
In Pandan, total species richness for all reef fish species was recorded highest in Patria with 69 species
representing 19 families, followed by Tingib with 54 species, also, from 19 families. Mag-aba comes in 3rd
with 37 species distributed among 15 families, while Idiacacan has the least diverse count with 24 species
from 15 families. For Tobias Fornier, total species richness for all reef fish species was recorded highest in
Paciencia with 60 species representing 14 families, followed by Igdalaguit with 54 species from 16 families.
Arobo comes in 3rd with 43 species distributed among 13 families, while Igdanlog has the least species
count with 15 species from 7 families (Fig. 19). Total species richness for all reef fish species in Funda
Dalipe was established at 77 distinct species which can be considered under “High” condition (Tab. 7).
Of Funda Dalipe MPA’s total species, Target Fish and Major Reef species each contributed about 42%
while Indicator species provided 16% of its total species richness. (Fig. 4.2.1).

4.2.2. Fish Abundance
1000
MEAN ABUNDANCE
750
500 970.00
566.67
250 467.67
92 191 208 179.33 28.50 212.25

0
DALIPE
Figure 4.2.2. Summary of mean fish abundance across all surveyed sites
The mean fish abundance for all surveyed sites of, as shown in Figure 3. 123, reveal wide and interesting
results with mean abundance index for all sites ranging from “very poor” to “moderate” rating (range:
28.50±4.6 ind/500m2 to 970.00±14.6 ind/500m2) (Tab. 7).
In Pandan, mean fish abundance was recorded highest at Patria MPA with 566.67±40.6 ind/500m2 followed
by Tingib MPA with 208±70.3 ind/500m2. Mag-aba MPA came in 3rd with 191±23.9 ind/500m2 while
Idiacacan has the least with only 92±11.2 ind/500m2 (Fig.7). Extrapolating the results to use the index
ratings of Nañola et al 2002 (Tab. 7) reveals that Idiacacan MPA would be categorized as having “very
poor” mean fish abundance while Mag-aba and Tingib MPAs under “poor”, and Patria MPA having
“moderate” condition.
For Tobias Fornier, mean fish abundance was recorded highest at Paciencia MPA with 970.00±14.6
ind/500m2 followed by Arobo MPA with 467.67±64.9 ind/500m2. Igdalaguit MPA came in 3rd with
179.33±47.6 ind/500m2 while Igdanlog has the least with only 28.50±4.6 ind/500m2 (Fig.21). Extrapolating
the results to use the index ratings of Nañola et al 2002 (Tab. 7) reveals that mean fish density in the
surveyed MPAs of Tobias Fornier ranges from “very poor” (Igdanlog) to “moderate” (Paciencia). Both
Igdalaguit and Arobo can be categorized under “poor” density index.
Mean fish density of Funda Dalipe MPA of San Jose is under “poor” condition with only 212.25±25.4
ind/500m2 (Fig. 4.2.2).

4.2.3. Fish Biomass
MEAN BIOMASS
7.00
3.50
5.79
3.18 1.05 0.93

2.27 2.85 0.63
0.34 1.43
0.00
DALIPE
Figure 4.2.3 summary of mean fish biomass across all surveyed sites
The population growth of most organisms is exponential then plateaus when the carrying capacity of the
system is reached. Sites with very high abundance and biomass will not show significant increases as it
may be near the limit of what the ecological system can sustain. Those in the moderate category are most
likely to improve with protection. Those in the low and very low category might not show any changes
probably because of depensation. This is a state wherein the population is very low that it cannot reproduce
effectively leading to a very slow recovery.
The mean fish biomass for all surveyed sites of, as shown in Figure 3. 123, reveal challenging results with
fish biomass index for all sites yielding a “very poor” rating (range: 0.34±0.08 mT/km2 to 5.79±0.9
mT/km2) (Tab. 7). For Pandan sites, mean biomass value for all reef species was observed highest in
Idiacacan with 3.8±2.0 mT/km2 followed by Patria with 2.27±0.6 mT/km2. Mag-aba comes in at 3rd with
1.05±0.4 mT/km2, and lastly by Tingib with 0.34±0.08 mT/km2 (fig. 16). When all results were extrapolated
to the index of Hilomen et al. 2000 (Tab. 7), fish biomass index for all MPAs yielded a “very poor” rating
(range: 0.34±0.08 mT/km2 - 3.8±2.0 mT/km2) (Tab. 7).
In Tobias Fornier, Arobo yielded the highest mean biomass among all four sites with 5.79±0.9 mT/km2
followed by Igdalaguit with 2.85±.1 mT/km2. Igdanlog comes in at 3rd with 0.93±0.4 mT/km2, and lastly
by Paciencia with 0.63±0.1 mT/km2.

4.2.4. Trophic groups
Reef fishes have various food preferences and can be classified into various functional groups based on
their diet. Planktivores tend to be the most numerous as plankton is one of the most abundant and important
food source in the sea. Zooplanktivorous fishes are those that prey on the animal-like plankton. Fishes that
form large schools above coral reef slopes often belong to this category. This includes anthiases,
damselfishes, and unicornfishes. Interms of size, however, fusiliers are among the largest and their presence
will contribute significantly to the biomass of this group.
Planktivores were observed in most of the sites. One can speculate that the abundance of this group might
be because there is an abundance of plankton in the area. This can be a function of hydrological features in
the area, such as the presence of strong water currents.
Another interesting group are the herbivores, which feed on macroalgae. Among them are wrasses,
parrotfishes, rabbitfishes, and surgeonfishes. They graze large patches of reef and in the process regulate
the algal cover and provide space for other benthic organisms to colonize. Some large damselfishes graze
on a home patch which they adamantly guard from intruders. Roaming herbivores like the parrotfishes
cover wider areas. Parrotfishes contribute to the sand production in the reef by inadvertently scraping
underlying coralline structure when feeding on overgrowing algae. They are then released as bits of sand
during excretion.
Although, the high abundance of large herbivores is a sign that some ecological changes are taking place,
these herbivores are one of the ecological mechanisms that dampens algal overgrowth. The careful
monitoring of large herbivores (i.e. parrotfishes and surgeonfishes) should be explored further as they play
a pivotal role in benthic community dynamics particularly in the context of climate change.
Another important group to consider are the carnivores which feed on smaller fish and other invertebrates.
Most fishes belonging to the group are commercially important species, i.e. emperors, snappers, breams,
groupers, and large wrasses. These groups are among the most overfished in the country. Very few of the
surveyed sites have substantial carnivore biomass which may suggest target overfishing. No large schools
of snappers or jacks were observed during the surveys. It is recommended that fishing regulations on the
within the entire municipal waters should be introduced or strengthened.
4.2.5. Effects of protection
Unlike corals, we can see an immediate response on the effect of protection on the reef fish community.
Russ and Alcala (1995) have shown the effect of MPA on the fish community in Apo Island. GeoTech
Solutions, having surveyed countless number of transects in the country, have noticed that fishes return to
a reef within a year of protection.
We expect to see increases in biomass in well managed sites, this is due to either an increase in the number
of fishes or that there is an increase in the sizes of fish.
The starting biomass is critical in understanding further changes in the reef fish community. Like any other
population of organisms, the reef fishes observe an exponential growth. Reefs with very few fish, <5
mT/km2, might not register an increase in the following year even with strict enforcement as there are still
not enough fishes to reproduce. The sites with higher biomass, >20 mT/km2, have the possibility of doubling
their value in a couple of years.

4.2.6. Recovery
Recovery is defined as the re-growth of a population after a decline to exceptional densities or local
extinction (Myers et al. 1995). Populations show varying rates of recovery from exploitation and chronic
disturbance. Intrinsic and environmental factors interplay to alter the recovery trajectories of different
species. Unfortunately, recent ecological studies have suggested that populations whose numbers are below
a certain threshold, may not recover even if exploitation is halted. This is known as depensation, wherein
there is a decline of an individual’s reproductive success at low population levels.
The life histories and species interactions greatly affect the recovery processes and an in depth analysis of
both have serious implications to management. In ecology, there is the concept of r and K selected species.
The r selected species are small, grows rapidly, matures early, and have high fecundity. In contrast, K
selected species are large, late maturing, grows slowly, and have low fecundity. In populations with slow
dynamics (K selected), recovery is driven by adult survival. For those with fast population dynamics (r
selected), they are recruitment driven. Reef fishes lean toward the r selected dynamics.
To be reproductively successful, finding a mate is not a problem as most of them are broadcast spawners.
Although reef fishes reproduce year round, there are high spawning peaks that only occur during the inter-
monsoon period (Abesamis et al. 2010). Therefore, the presence of numerous bloodstocks within the
populations increases the recruitment success for succeeding generation. It is important to note that r
selected species are characterized by high mortality of their young.
To increase the likelihood of survival, reef fishes often congregate in groups which would look visually
confusing to the predator. This also imparts a dilution effect to the individual, where the risk of being preyed
upon is reduced because it is part of a larger group.
The feeding behaviour of fish is also a factor in recovery. Generalist species, those that have a wide selection
of food items, will take less time to recover compared to specialists, i.e. corallivores. The foraging method
is important as well. Ambush predators, like groupers, would take more time to recover compared to active
foragers such as wrasses. There are also differences in resource use within a species as determine by age,
size, sex, or life stage.

4.3 Recommendations Summary
The information generated from the data collected during the habitat mapping and assessment in the
selected sites are useful to local stakeholders especially for the policy makers and resource users to adopt
and implement the relevant management strategies and activities stated in the LGU recommendations
section of this report.
This section categorizes those recommendations under a simple framework from which local managers can
identify and prioritize key components needed for their policies to be effective.
4.3.1 Legal Instruments
a. Provincial and municipal government units are encouraged to enact and/or update all necessary
legal instruments, such ordinances and executive orders, and enable policy framework, like
CLUPs, CRM Plans, MPA Plans for marine/fisheries biodiversity conservation in Antique
tapping inter-LGU management programs and systematic conservation planning and enforcement
can and will certainly have significant impact in sustaining and restoring the health of coastal
ecosystems throughout Antique.
Furthermore, adjacent LGUs on the same ecosystem may opt to organize themselves into a
management alliance or be involved in the MPA Support Network so to be updated with new
technologies and best practices of other MPAs that can help them in managing their own sites.
Also, they can also develop mechanisms for sustainable financing so the MPA may be self-
sustaining and independent from the budget of the LGU. There are existing but non performing
LGU alliances in Antique province, we then recommend reviving these networks.
b. Ensuring that a legal instrument, like a comprehensive CRM ordinance that covers conservation,
enforcement, education, tourism and livelihood, is in place is a paramount benchmark within the
CRM process. This defines the roles, scopes, and limitations of all stakeholders. This document
also provides safety and security to law enforcers as well as avoid potential conflict to all resource
users. This is why it urgently recommended to take the necessary steps to create and/or update any
and all legal instruments related to this strategy.
c. The LGUs of Pandan and Tobias Fornier would substantially benefit from this recommendation
if they would revisit, update and amend their local CRM and/or MPA ordinances.
4.3.2 Marine Protected Area
It is important that the individual LGUs review and update the legal instruments specifically the boundaries
and objectives of their MPAs and see if these objectives are still being met. Address the issues why some
are not met, and enhance interventions that work. LGUs must maintain and strengthen the local coastal and
fisheries law enforcement teams for continued protection of the reefs. Incentives may be given to the
enforcers as well.
Establishment of new or enhancement of already established MPAs is hereby recommended. There is no

generic model for a successful MPA, considerations such as sound and manageable design (size and
location), ecosystem based, social acceptability and cultural norms, and political support and sustainability
should be incorporated as early as the planning process.

This general recommendation is aimed at all three LGUs so that they can maximize the benefits of MPAs,
but a specific MPA co-management scheme is suggested for Tingib and Mag-aba in Pandan and Paciencia
and Igdalaguit in Tobias Fornier. This strategy can maximize resource use since the existing MPAs are
adjacent to each other and share a common boundary. This will also encourage cooperation and reduce
potential conflict in the future.
4.3.3 Monitoring
The time of sampling is an important consideration in every field activity. This is critical not only for the
temporal consistency but also for the logistical preparations on site by the resource managers. Some studies
have shown that there are seasonal patterns in composition and abundance of target species, especially
snappers. Diaz-Perez(1998) contends that the biology and population of snappers are controlled by seasons
and reef habitat. They have observed that biomass, abundance, and average weight on the reef peaked on
the rainy season.
They found that the snappers on the reef are represented by larger individuals during the rainy season and
by a few juveniles during the dry season. There were higher biomass and abundance of snappers on seagrass
beds during the dry season. This is a consequence of seasonal patterns of habitat utilization, wherein the
fishes optimize foraging depending on food availability.
For future research activities, it is important to schedule surveys during the same months to reduce the
effects of seasonal variability. Also, include in the next monitoring the mudflats/soft bottom, cyrptobiota
and plankton for these are also support the food web and biodiversity of the entire coastal environment.  
It is then strongly recommended that there should be regular monitoring schedules that will be set by the
DENR or by the LGU in order to update the status of ecosystems’ health. Time series data generate
important information that shows the current status as well as changes over time of the resources being
monitored and this is a valuable tool for policy makers and resource managers to consider if they are to
improve management.
The strength of a time-series dataset depends on how consistent it was collected. Hence, this
recommendation is directed to all three LGUs so that they can see the change over time and understand
what’s driving that change.
4.3.4 MEAT Assessment
Another management tool that is very handy for policy makers and resource managers is the Management
Effectiveness Assessment Tool (MEAT). By doing this assessment, stakeholders will know what have they
accomplished, what still needs to be accomplished. It would also show you what are your strengths and
weakness as a management body. It is basically a roadmap to help managers succeed with the resources
they have.
It is strongly recommended that this assessment be conducted to guide local managers as to what are the
necessarily next steps that they need to take and what support would they be needing to reach the rating
they want to achieve. All three LGUs is encouraged to facilitate the conduct of this recommendation.

4.3.5 Recommended Technical Capacity Development / Trainings for LGU’s
1. Participatory Coastal Resource Assessment PCRA for community stakeholders and LGU
personnel
2. Rapid reef assessment and underwater Reef and fish visual Assessment, data processing, analysis
and packaging (report writing)
3. Open water SCUBA Certification for field assessment
4. Fish catch monitoring and evaluation, data processing, analysis and packaging (report writing)
5. Mangrove and beach forest identification and survey techniques
6. Seagrass identification and management
7. Marine and coastal spatial zoning for CLUP enhancement
8. Vulnerability Assessment of coastal areas and its application to the CLUP and DRM plans

CHAPTER
6
LITERATURE
CITED

Abesamis RA and Russ GR. 2010. Patterns of recruitment of coral reef fishes in a monsoonal environment.
Coral Reefs. 29:911-921
Allen, G., P. Humann and R. Steene. 2003. Reef fish identification – tropical Pacific. New World
Publications, Jacksonville, Florida.
Bruno JF and Bertness MD. 2001. Habitat modification and facilitation in benthic marine communities. In:
Bertness MD, Gaines SD and Hay ME (eds.). Marine Community Ecology. pp 201-218
Bruno JF and Selig ER. 2007. Regional decline of coral cover in the Indo-Pacific: Timing extent, and
subregional comparisons. PLoS ONE. 2(8): e711
Burke, L., E. Selig, and M. Spalding. 2002. Reefs at risk in Southeast Asia. World Resources Institute,
Washington, D.C.
Carpenter, K. E. 2005. The center of the center of marine shore fish biodiversity: the Philippine Islands.
Environmental Biology of Fishes 72:467–480.
Christie, P., and A. T. White. 2007. Best practices for improved governance of coral reef marine protected
areas. Coral Reefs 26:1047–1056.
English S, Wilkinson C, Baker V (eds.). 1997. Survey Manual for Tropical Marine Resources. 2nd ed.
Australian Institute of Marine Science. Townsville, Australia. 390 pp.
Gomez ED, Aliño PM, Yap HT, Licuanan WY. 1994. A review of the status of Philippine reefs. Marine
Pollution Bulletin. 29 (1-3): 62-68. 
Gomez, E. D., Alino, P. M., Yap, H. T. and Licuanan, W. Y. (1994) A review of the status of Philippine
Reefs. Marine Pollution Bulletin 29(1±3), 62±68.
Halpern BS. 2003. The Impact of Marine Reserves: Do Reserves Work and Does Reserve Size Matter?
Ecological Applications, 13(1) Supplement, pp. S117-S137.
Halpern BS. 2014. Conservation: Making marine protected areas work. Nature. 506, 167-168.
Hilomen, VV, Nañola, CL, Dantis, AL. 2000. Status of Philippine reef fi sh communities. Paper presented
in the Workshop on the Status of the Philippine Reefs, January 24, 2000, Marine Science Institute,
University of the Philippines, Diliman, Quezon City.

Jones GP, McCormick MI, Srinivasan M and Eagle JV. 2004. Coral decline threatens fish biodiversity in
marine reserves. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science. 101(21): 8251-8253 
Kramer PA. 2001. Synthesis of coral reef health indicators for the Western Atlantic: Results of the AGRRA
Program (1997-2000). In: Lang JC (ed.), Status of coral reefs in the Western Atlantic: Results of initial
surveys, Atlantic and Gulf Rapid Reef Assessment (AGRRA) Program. Atoll Research Bulletin. 496: 1-55
Larkum, W. D., R. J. Orth, and C. M. Duarte. eds. 2006. Seagrasses: Biology, Ecology and
Conservation Dordrecht (The Netherlands) Springer.
Lieske, E. and R. Myers. 1994. Collins pocket guide. Coral reef fishes: Indo-Pacific and Caribbean
including the Red Sea. Haper Collins Publishers.
Littler MM and Littler DS. 2006. Assessment of coral reefs using herbivory/nutrient assays and indicator
groups of benthic primary producers: A critical synthesis, proposed protocols, and critique of management
strategies. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems. 17(2): 195-215
Lough JM and Barnes DJ. 2000. Environmental controls on growth of the massive coral Porites. Journal of
Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology. 245: 225 - 243 140
Magdaong ET, Masahiko F, Yamano H, Licuanan WY, Maypa A, Campos WL, Alcala AC, White AT,
Apistar D and Martinez R. 2013. Long-term change in coral cover and the effectiveness of marine protected
areas in the Philippines: A meta-analysis. Hydrobiologia. 733 (1): 5-17
Myers RA, Barrowman NJ, Jutchings JA and Rosenberg AA. 1995. Population dynamics of exploited fish
stocks at low population levels. Science. 269(5227): 1106-1108
Nanola, C., Alino, P., Arceo, H., Licuanan, W., Uychiaoco, A., Quibilan, M., . . . Gomez, E. (2006). Status
report on coral reefs of the Philippines - 2004. Proceedings of the 10th International Coral Reef Symposium,
(pp. 1055-1061). Okinawa, Japan.
Patzold J. 1984. Growth rhythms recorded in stable isotopes and density bands in the reef coral Porites
lobata (Cebu, Philippines). Coral Reefs. 3:87-90
Roberts, C. M., et al. 2002. Marine biodiversity hotspots and conservation priorities for tropical reefs.
Science 295:1280–1284.
Rogers CS. 1993. Hurricanes and coral reefs: The intermediate disturbance hypothesis revisited. Coral
reefs. 12:127-137
Russ GR and Alcala AC. 1995. Do marine reserves export adult fish biomass? Evidence from Apo Island,
Central Philippines. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 132: 1-9
Selig ER and Bruno JF. 2010. A global analysis of the effectiveness of marine protected areas in preventing
coral loss. PLoS ONE. 5(2): e9279
Uychiaoco AJ. 2000 Reefsum: A Foxpro-based program for data summarizations. Marine Science Institute,
University of the Philippines, Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines
Uychiaoco AJ, Green SJ, De la Cruz MT, Arceo HO, Aliño PM, White AT 2001. Coral Reef Monitoring
for Management. University of the Philippines-MSI. United Nations Development Programme Global
Environment Facility-Small Grants Program, Guiuan Development Foundation, Inc., Voluntary Service

Overseas, University of the Philippines Center for Integrative and Development Studies, Coastal Resource
Management Project, and Fisheries Resource Management Project. 110pp.
White, A. T., H. P. Vogt, and T. Arin. 2000. Philippine coral reefs under threat: The economic losses caused
by reef destruction. Marine Pollution Bulletin 40:598–605.
Yap HT and Gomez ED. 1984. Growth of Acropora pulchra. II. Responses of natural and transplanted
colonies to temperature and day length. Marine Biology. 81: 209-214

CHAPTER
7
APPENDICES

Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected MPA Sites in Antique

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected MPA Sites in Antique

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

PENRO-Antique

and GeoTech Solutions

Copyright © 2018 by PENRO-Antique and GeoTech Solutions

Please address all correspondence to:

Cover Photo: A boundary marker buoy in Tingib, Pandan.

Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 ii

Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 iv

Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 vi

Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 vii

Duro-duro gid na salamat!

Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 viii

The salient findings of this survey are as follows:

Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 ix

Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 1

Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 2

Figure 1. Administrative map of PENRO-Antique

Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 3

Tingib 122.044341 11.7296

1.3. Objectives of the Assessment

1.4 Survey Team

Figure 2. The Survey Team.

Table 2. Survey team

Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 4

Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 5

2.1.1 Benthic Attributes

Live Coral Cover (%) = Total Sampled Points of Category X 100

Poor Fair Good Excellent

Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 6

Table 4. Habitat criteria rating chart for seagrass.

Poor Fair Good Excellent

2.1.2 Reef Fish Community

Trophic Group Fish Family

Invertebrate Sweetlips (Haemulids), Spinecheeks (Nemipterids), Goatfish (Mullids),

Carnivores Groupers (Serranids), Snapper (Lutjanids), Emperors (Lethrinids), Jacks

Biomass (target species – no. of kg/1,000m2)

Fish Species Diversity (no. of species/1,000m2)

Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 8

Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 9

Figure 3.1. Map of marine habitats, with area coverage, of Pandan

Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 10

Figure 3.1.1a. Map of survey sites in Brgy. Idiacacan, Pandan

The general area is dominated by abiotic components

Reef health index for the surveyed site is of “poor”

Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 11

Species richness in Idiacacan MPA is under “very poor”

Labridae (Wrasses), represented by 5 species (Ann. C). Target, 12,

Major reef species make up 40% of the “very poor”

Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 12

Figure 3.1.2a. Map of survey sites in Brgy. Mag-aba, Pandan

Reef health index for the surveyed site is of

Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 13

Table 8. Seagrass data for Brgy. Mag-aba, Pandan

Reef Fish Community

Mag-aba MPA species richness index is categorized

Mean fish abundance for all reef species in Mag-aba

Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 14

Figure 3.1.2f. Mean fish biomass composition

Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 15

Figure 3.1.3a. Map of survey sites in Brgy. Patria, Pandan

Reef health index for the surveyed site is of “good”

Long-spine sea urchin (Diadema setosum), Blue seastar

The site surveyed was a patchy seagrass area, totally

Habitat Mapping and Assessment of Selected Sites in Antique 2018 16

Table 9. Seagrass data for Brgy. Patria, Pandan

Thalassia hemprichii Cymodocea rotundata Halodule pinnifolia

Reef Fish Community

Species richness in Patria is under “moderate”