EVALUATION

(5) Make the following EAFM benchmark criteria as mandatory requirements for assessing
LGUs’ progress towards EAFM implementation since these criteria are basic activities of all
coastal LGUs in the country as stipulated in Republic Act 8550 (Fisheries Code of 1998):
These are:
Benchmark B3: Fisheries monitoring and early fisheries management planning established.
Under this aspect, it is important to have the “presence of fisheries baseline assessment” to
establish the current and previous status of fishery resources. Issues have been identified
and used for fisheries management options.
Benchmark B4: Fisheries law enforcement team and program established. To manage fishery
resources, the “presence of enforcement team” that is well trained and equipped to do
their job is very important.
Benchmark B7: Fisheries registration and licensing system established. This benchmark gives
an updated information on all fishers and different fishing gears being used for effective
formulation and implementation of fisheries laws and EAFM processes in MKBAs that cut
across LGUs’ politico-administrative boundaries.
(6) Ensure standard application of the method of survey using fish visual census. Fish census
survey is a skill. It may take time to master fish identification, particularly in the estimation
of the total length of different reef fishes with varying body shapes and tail forms. These
parameters have big implications in the computation of fish biomass, which is one of the key
important indicators under Key Result A (i.e., 10 percent increase in fish biomass), as
observed in fish biomass computed for SN MKBA.
(7) For the next fisheries catch monitoring in 2017, it must coincide with the sampling months
conducted during the benchmark data collection in 2013. This was the main reason of the
negative percent change computed for DR MKBA (Key Result A: 10 percent increase in fish
biomass). It is well recognized that there is a seasonality of fishing gears used in the
country.
(8) Emphasizing branding in all project activities
During the MPE period, majority of FGD participants were not familiar with ECOFISH
Project or USAID as the agency providing support to the project activities. While some
participants were aware or able to identify the activities conducted by the project, in many
instances, specific interventions and activities were mistakenly identified as activities of
other groups or projects. It is important that the project’s good practices be properly
recognized so that the participants themselves can duplicate it, or other potential adopters
can seek guidance from ECOFISH Project.
6