Biophysical conditions on the coral reef was conducted both inside (Gili ...... a = preliminary, b = junior high school, c = senior high school, d = tertiary education ...
Challenges of Marine Protected Areas around Lombok, Indonesia
Muhammad Erdi Lazuardi Master of Development Practice Program 2013
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
1
Challenges of Marine Protected Areas around Lombok, Indonesia
Written by: Muhammad Erdi Lazuardi
Supervised by: Prof. Jeffrey Sayer Dr. Agni Klintuni Boedhihartono
November, 2013
Master of Development Practice Program James Cook University PO Box 6811 Cairns QLD 4870 Australia
Cover photograph: Selong Belanak beach of the Central Lombok District. © Muhammad E. Lazuardi
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
2
Content
Abstract ...................................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 6 Objective ................................................................................................................................ 7 Methods ...................................................................................................................................... 8 Results and discussion ................................................................................................................ 9 East Lombok study ................................................................................................................. 9 Gili Sulat – Gili Lawang MPA ......................................................................................... 10 Governance (institutional) indicators ............................................................................... 11 Biophysical conditions ..................................................................................................... 13 Socio-economic indicators ............................................................................................... 18 North Lombok study ............................................................................................................ 19 Challenges ................................................................................................................................ 23 Conclusions .............................................................................................................................. 23 Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................. 24 References ................................................................................................................................ 25 Attachments .............................................................................................................................. 27
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
3
Tables Table 1. Historical time line of marine regulation and conservation in national and district levels. ......................................................................................................................... 10 Table 2. Governance (institutional) indicators checklist of the GSL MPA. ............................ 12 Table 3. Manta tow data conducted 24, 28 and 29 September 2013 in Gili Sulat and Gili Lawang Islands (inside the GSL MPA) and PBK Islands (outside the GSL MPA). . 27 Table 4. List of part respondents .............................................................................................. 31 Table 5. Questionnaire. ............................................................................................................ 32
Figures Figure 1. Study area of East Lombok District (Gili Sulat – Gili Lawang MPA) and islands. (Map: M.I. Lubis) ...................................................................................................... 8 Figure 2.a. Fishermen’s opinions both inside and outside the MPA on the question “Has GSL MPA been effectively managed?”. b. Fishermen’s opinions both inside and outside of MPA on the question “What is needed to be improved in GSL MPA?”. ........... 13 Figure 3. Fishermen’s opinions both inside and outside the GSL MPA on the mangrove cover condition inside the GSL MPA................................................................................ 14 Figure 4. Substrate conditions inside and outside the GSL MPA based on manta tow surveys, September 2013. ...................................................................................................... 15 Figure 5. Hard coral and rubble coverage both inside and outside the GSL MPA based on manta tow survey, September 2013. ........................................................................ 16 Figure 6. The different between hard coral and rubble cover based on the manta tow survey, September 2013 in the GSL MPA and PBK Islands. .............................................. 17 Figure 7. The average of hard coral coverage both inside and outside the GSL MPA based on mantatow survey, September 2013. ......................................................................... 18 Figure 8. Fishermen’s opinions both inside and outside the GSL MPA on their fishing catches and income currently compare to before the establishment of the GSL MPA. ....... 19 Figure 9. Historical timeline of LMNLU in North Lombok District. ...................................... 20
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
4
Pictures Picture 1. Coral damage caused by bomb fishing in Gili Sulat Island. ................................... 15 Picture 2.a. Local fish traders in Sugian village are waiting for fishes catch from liftnet boats. b. Dry anchovy in Sugian village. .......................................................................... 18 Picture 3. Traditional boats in Gangga village of North Lombok District. ............................. 20 Picture 4.a. Gili Lawang and Gili Sulat Islands of the GSL MPA, East Lombok District. b. Beach along the North Lombok District. ................................................................ 22 Picture 5. Manta tow survey in the Gili Sulat – Gili Lawang MPA and PBK Islands. ........... 33 Picture 6. Coral transplantation in Gili Kondo Island. ............................................................ 33 Picture 7. Lifnet boats around the Gili Sulat – Gili Lawang MPA. ........................................ 34 Picture 8. The Gili Sulat – Gili Lawang MPA office and guesthouse. ................................... 34
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
5
Abstract Indonesia has established Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) that encompass more than 15 million ha. The national target is to reach 20 million ha of MPAs by 2020. This paper questions the efficacy of these targets. It posits that many MPAs are ineffective according to the indicators of governance, biophysical conditions, and socio-economic outcomes. We studied two seascapes, in East Lombok and North Lombok. The results in East Lombok indicate ineffective management of the Gili Sulat – Gili Lawang MPA (1,206 ha). In North Lombok (117 km coastline), marine resources are managed by local communities under the North Lombok Fisherman Union (LMNLU). The results in North Lombok indicate effective marine resource management. This is attributed to the strength of the LMNLU and their local rule, known as ‘awig-awig’. There are many challenges in achieving MPA effectiveness. We learn that fishermen-based management can provide lessons learnt regarding the beneficial stewardship of marine resources, ones that can inform the enhancement of MPA management. One lesson learnt is that fishermen, if treated as agents of management, rather than objects to be managed, will be effective marine resource stewards.
Introduction Since the establishment of the Ministry of Marine and Fisheries in 1999, Indonesia has recently allocated many marine protected areas (MPAs) that total more than 15 million hectares. This is part of the national agenda which aims to allocate 20 million hectares of MPAs by 2020 (Directorate for Conservation of Area and Fish Species, 2012). In addition, it is also part of the local autonomy in which local governments attempt to manage their natural resources since the national reform movement in 1998. Furthermore, this achievement shows how the bottom-up and the top-down approaches work, and the development of community involvement. However, many people feel sceptical about the government’s target due to some challenges in achieving the effective management of MPAs. There is widespread agreement that establishing conservation areas is easier than their maintenance. This is a long process where management components such as the management body, management plan and zoning, activities and sustainable financing are developed to ensure natural resources are well maintained by improving the condition of the natural resources and reducing pressure, as well as providing socio-economic benefits to the local community. According to Agus Dermawan, Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
6
the Director of Conservation of Area and Fish Species – The Ministry of Marine and Fisheries (Kompas, 2013) many MPAs have been assessed and determined to be ineffective. To this point, MPAs should be conceived as still in the initiation phase. Their effectiveness can mainly be measured by three indicators: governance (institutional), biophysical conditions, and socio-economic indicators (Directorate for Conservation of Area and Fish Species, 2012; Pomeroy, Parks & Watson, 2004; Carter, Soemodinoto & White, 2011). Therefore, it is interesting to observe how an MPA works and what challenges it faces to be effectively managed in the future. The Gili Sulat – Gili Lawang (GSL) MPA was established in 2004, by the East Lombok District government which is one of five marine conservation initiatives around Lombok Island. These initiatives include Gili Matra, Gili Gede, Teluk Bumbang and Tanjung Cina covering 54,054 hectares (Ningtias, Yulianto, Soemodinoto, Kartawijaya, Herdiana, Warmadewa, Hasbi & Murtawan, 2013). Within 8 years of the establishment of the GSL MPA, there were many challenges to their effective management. On the other hand, in the North Lombok District (comprised of 117 km of coast line), there are no current MPAs (except in Gili Matra), but marine resources are managed by a communal authority named LMNLU (North Lombok Fisherman Union). Thus, there are different experiences and characteristics between East Lombok and North Lombok especially Gili Sulat – Gili Lawang MPA compared with the LMNLU.
Objective This study attempts to examine, first, the effectiveness of MPAs in East Lombok by observing three indicators: governance (institutional), biophysical conditions, and socio-economic benefits and trough a comparison of these characteristics inside and outside the GSL MPA. The effectiveness of management can be assessed by simply determining how the MPA benefits the local people and how the natural capital changing. Secondly, some challenges for the management in the GSL MPA will be identified. Thirdly, the North Lombok coastal area management under LMNLU will be observed to gain a different perspective, experience and benefit from the lessons learnt in the management of marine protected areas. Strengths and weaknesses will be identified and opportunities and threats from both seascapes are provided.
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
7
Methods Observations were made mainly in the East Lombok seascape between 15 August and 6 October 2013. Fishermen’s perceptions were considered in the evaluation of the effectiveness of the Gili Sulat – Gili Lawang MPA, both inside and outside the MPA using quota sampling (Miller & Brewer, 2003). Sugian village fishermen respondents represent the perceptions of fishermen inside the GSL MPA, while Labuan Pandan village fishermen respondents represent fishermen perceptions outside the GSL MPA. Key informants, NGOs and government staff also provided valuable input towards the evaluation using unstructured interviews (Miller and Brewer, 2003). Some documents from academics, NGOs and the government were collected for triangulation of findings (Chambers, 1999; Miller & Brewer, 2003).
Figure 1. Study area of East Lombok District (Gili Sulat – Gili Lawang MPA) and islands. (Map: M.I. Lubis)
Biophysical conditions on the coral reef was conducted both inside (Gili Sulat and Gili Lawang Islands) and outside the GSL MPA which included the Gili Petagan, Bidara and Kondo Islands (PBK Islands) using the manta tow method (English, Wilkinson & Baker, 1997). The condition of the mangroves was collected from the fishermen’s perceptions. Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
8
The other seascape – the North Lombok District (comprising of 117 km of coast line) – was assessed using unstructured interviews, and collecting some documents from academics, NGOs and the government for triangulation of findings. Interviewees included representatives from the following bodies: 1. Local government of the East Lombok and North Lombok District consists of Marine and Fisheries Agency, Forestry Agency, and Planning Agency (Bappeda). 2. Management office of the Gili Sulat – Gili Lawang MPA. 3. Fishermen in Sugian and Labuan Pandan village of the East Lombok District, and Gangga village of the North Lombok District. 4. NGOs and institutions such as LMNLU, Santiri, Konsepsi, Koslata, WCS, Universitas Mataram and WWF-Indonesia Nusa Tenggara Program.
Results and discussion East Lombok study Most of the fishermen in Sugian and Labuan Pandan village utilize traditional practices, including hooks and lines, nets and spear guns and are equipped with small boats (1-4 persons). The East Lombok District government classifies fishermen’s livelihoods into 3 categories which are “real fishermen”; “part time fishermen”; and “occasional fishermen”. Real fishermen are defined as having livelihoods that are built solely on fishing activities, part time fishermen mainly derive their livelihoods from fishing but they have additional income from other sectors such as agriculture, while occasional fishermen use fishing activities to support their main livelihood activities. The total number of fishermen in Sugian village is 118 (8% of the labour force), while the total number of fishermen in Labuan Panda village is 135 (6% of labor force) (BPMPD, 2012; Sahnan, 2010; Sambelia Subdistrict, 2013). According to a participatory meeting in Sugian, participants calculated the ratio of real fishermen, part time fishermen, and occasional fishermen as 1:7:12. This shows that the majority of fishermen in Sugian village are “occasional fishermen”. The questionnaire was given to 24 fishermen respondents in Sugian village (12 respondents) and Labuan Pandan (12 respondents). All respondents were male and most of them (70.8%) graduated from elementary school. More than half the respondents (63%) are
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
9
older than 41 years old. Fifty four percent of respondents were “real fishermen”, while the rest are part time fishermen. Gili Sulat – Gili Lawang MPA Gili Sulat and Gili Lawang are two small unpopulated islands located north east of Lombok Island within a distance of 1.5 km from the mainland (Lombok Island). Gili Sulat and Gili Lawang Islands were declared a MPA in 2004 by the East Lombok District Decree: SK Bupati Lombok Timur No 188.45/452/KP/2004 (Bupati Lombok Timur, 2004) with the purpose of ensuring sustainable management of fisheries and natural resources and being responsible for community welfare (Lombok Timur Marine and Fisheries Agency, 2010). The total conserved area is 1,206 hectares which is located S 80 16.77’ – 20.73’ and E 1160 41.1’ – 44.58’. Formally, this area is located in Sugian, Darakunci and Dadap Village of Sambelia Subdistrict of East Lombok District, West Nusa Tenggara Province. Sugian village can be reached from Mataram city by 3.5 hours of driving, while Gili Sulat and Gili Lawang can be reached from Sugian using motorboat for about 15 minutes. The circumference of Gili Sulat Island is 12.6 km, while Gili Lawang Island is 9.4 km. Table 1. Historical time line of marine regulation and conservation in national and district levels.
Year
Events
Notes National Level
1985
Act number 9
About Fisheries
1990
Act number 5
About Conservation of biological conditions and their ecosystem resources
2004
Act number 31
About Fisheries, a revision on Act number 9 year 1985
Decree of Marine and Fisheries Minister
About general orientation of coral reef
number Kep.38/Men/2004
management
2007
Government Regulation number 60
About Conservation on fisheries resources
2008
Regulation of Minister of Marine and
About conservation area on coastal and small
Fisheries Republic of Indonesia number:
islands
Per.17/Men/2008
2009
Act number 45
About Fisheries, a revision on Act number 31 year 2004
Regulation of Minister of Marine and
About the procedure of determining waters
Fisheries Republic of Indonesia number:
conservation area
Per.02/Men/2009
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
10
2010
Regulation of Minister of Marine and
About Planning on management and zoning waters
Fisheries Republic of Indonesia number:
conservation area
Per30/Men/2010
District Level 1983
Mangrove rehabilitation in Gili Sulat, Gili
Supported by JICA
Lawang, and Gili Petagan islands
1994
Decree of the Ministry of Forestry
Gili Sulat – Gili Lawang as a forest reserve
2004
Decree of Head of East Lombok District
About Gili Sulat and Gili Lawang of Sambelia
number: 188.45/452/KP/2004
Subdistrict as a Local Marine Protected Area
Local Regulation of East Lombok District
The management of Local Marine Protected Area
2006
number 10
2009
2010
The decree of the Minister of Forestry SK
Reconfirms Gili Sulat – Gili Lawang as a forest
Menhut No 598/Menhut – II/ 2009
reserve
Local Regulation of East Lombok District
Prohibition of coral mining in East Lombok
number 2
District
Decree of Head of East Lombok District
Formation of local surveillance and the prevention
number: 188.45/445/KP/2010
of coral mining in East Lombok District
The GSL MPA management office established
2011
Conflict of fishing area
A conflict between local fishermen and fish traders in Sugian with outsider fishermen and fish traders
Awig-awig in Sugian under “SATGAS Pada
Awig-awig about local regulation of fishing
Angen” (local surveillance group)
activities around Gili Sulat and Gili Lawang islands
Governance (institutional) indicators Gili Sulat and Gili Lawang Islands are under forestry management by the decree of the Ministry of Forestry 1994 and 2009. According to the Head of Forest Agency of the East Lombok District, there is no overlapping authority between the Forest Agency and the GSL management office. The mangrove forest is under forest agency authority, while the water area is under the Marine and Fisheries agency. He quotes the Ministry of Forestry regulation number 22, 2012 about the utilization of environmental services and ecotourism in protected forests. However, there is no staff, ranger and office of forestry in Gili Sulat – Gili Lawang Islands.
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
11
Table 2. Governance (institutional) indicators checklist of the GSL MPA.
Governance
Check
components
list
Note East Lombok District Decree in 2004 (SK Bupati Lombok Timur No
MPA established
188.45/452/KP/2004) Structure of
There are only 4 staff. Head of MPA, administration, field staff, and
management body
office assistant
Zoning system
- GSL MPA doesn’t have documentation on natural resources (coral reef, mangrove, fish population) and their changes - Marine patrols only 1 – 2 times a year - There is no natural asset resources and resource use monitoring Zoning system under implementation but not legalised
Budget
The budget is $1,500 per year, of which the majority is used for
Activities
X
administrative costs Community involvement
X
There are no activities that involve the community except for an initial meeting on the MPA establishment process and building an office.
The Marine and Fisheries Agency built an MPA office in 2010. However, according to the Head of Marine and Fisheries Agency of the East Lombok District, the GSL MPA management is not effective due to staff and budgetary limitations. Among fishermen respondents, both inside the MPA and outside the MPA, the majority - 54.5% and 72.7% respectively, agree that the GSL MPA is not effectively managed (Figure 2.a.). It is purported that destructive fishing methods are used and surveillance is unable to keep up with monitoring responsibilities. Thus many fishermen believe that the GSL MPA management body must increase their marine patrol services in order to reduce the destructive fishing practices (Figure 2.b.). In addition, although some research has been carried out by students, academic institutions and NGOs, the GSL MPA management office claims that they don’t have documented findings of this issue.
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
12
a
Yes
b
100.0% 75.0%
All
50.0% 25.0% 0.0%
80.0% 60.0% 40.0% 20.0% 0.0%
Staff
Finance
Don't know
Sea patrol
Publicise
No Inside MPA
Outside MPA
Facilities
Figure 2.a. Fishermen’s opinions both inside and outside the MPA on the question “Has GSL MPA been effectively managed?”. b. Fishermen’s opinions both inside and outside of MPA on the question “What is needed to be improved in GSL MPA?”.
The local community attempted to develop awig-awig and local surveillance such as “Satgas Pada Angin” in Sugian to prevent destructive fishing practices in 2011. They identified the bombing fishermen are from Tanjung and Timbegali of Dadap village, Batusela of Darakunci village, Pedamekan of Belanting village and Labuhan Lombok village, and coral miners are in Menagabaris of Padak village and Kurubian of Padakguar village. However, their efforts don’t have enough support from other villages, so they don’t have the capability to organize a large group of fishermen to prevent destructive fishing. Moreover, the government also attempts to develop local surveillance named KPPL. However, KPPL also hasn’t effectively worked due to the top down approach and limited budget as well as lack of sense of belonging in the community. Biophysical conditions The natural assets in Gili Sulat and Gili Lawang Islands are mangroves, coral reef and seagrass ecosystems. According to the Directorate for Conservation of Area and Fish Species (2013) Gili Sulat and Gili Lawang Islands are predominantly covered by mangrove vegetation such as Rhizopora apiculata, R. stylosa, R. mucronata, Bruguiera gemnorrhyza, Sonneratia alba, Ceriops tagal, Luminitzera recemora and Avicenia marina. The mangrove ecosystems in these islands are considered to be healthier than other mangrove vegetation on Lombok Island. Since 1983, there have been some mangrove projects in Gili Sulat, Gili Lawang and Gili Petagan Islands supported by the Forestry agency and institutions such as JICA and Yayasan JARI Mataram. As a result, most of the respondents (81.8%) feel that mangrove conditions in the GSL MPA have improved (Figure 3.). However, a lack of publicity creates a Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
13
misunderstanding within the community that the establishment of the GSL MPA is only for mangrove protection purposes. Moreover, this fact is supported by the declining condition of coral reefs.
Percentage of respondents
90.0% 80.0% 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0%
Worse
Stable
Improved
Inside MPA
9.1%
9.1%
81.8%
Outside MPA
0.0%
18.2%
81.8%
Figure 3. Fishermen’s opinions both inside and outside the GSL MPA on the mangrove cover condition inside the GSL MPA.
Coral reef surrounding islands in the GSL MPA and PBK islands is the fringing reef type with a slight slope then becoming steep. The result of manta tow surveys performed in September 2013 in 3 – 5 m depth show that many points are damaged by bomb fishing practices (Picture 1.). The survey shows rubble coverage of up to 85% around Gili Lawang Island. The average rubble cover per island inside and outside the GSL MPA is between 25% and 34%. We heard bomb fishing one time in front of Gili Sulat Island during the manta tow survey. No mass bleaching coral occurred both inside and outside of the GSL MPA, but dead coral coverage was found to be up to 25% in Gili Petagan and Gili Kondo Islands. The average dead coral cover per island inside and outside the GSL MPA being between 3% and 11%.
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
14
100% 90%
10%
18%
17% 29%
80% 70%
33% 8%
31%
22%
8%
4%
60%
32% 25%
50% 40% 30%
29%
31%
Abiotic 34%
Rubble 10%
11%
4%
3%
26%
25%
27%
24%
Gili Sulat
Gili Lawang
Gili Kondo
Gili Bidara
5%
20% 10%
Biotic
Dead Coral Hard coral
33%
0% Inside MPA
Gili Petagan
Outside MPA
Figure 4. Substrate conditions inside and outside the GSL MPA based on manta tow surveys, September 2013.
Picture 1. Coral damage caused by bomb fishing in Gili Sulat Island. Photo: author.
The percentage of hard coral inside the GSL MPA is between 5% and 70% with the average 26%, while the percentage of hard coral outside the GSL MPA is between 10% and 65% with the average 30%. The average of hard coral live cover per island inside and outside the GSL MPA is between 24% – 33% (Figure 4.).
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
15
Inside the GSL MPA
Outside the GSL MPA
Figure 5. Hard coral and rubble coverage both inside and outside the GSL MPA based on manta tow
survey, September 2013.
Figure 5. displays hard coral and rubble cover composition around islands inside and outside of the GSL MPA. Results from the two-sample t-test indicate a significant different
between the hard coral means and rubble means (t value = 0.0428)
= -2.0342, df = 320.121326279495, p-
(Figure 6.). Thus, it is very likely that a higher coverage of hard corals
results in a lower coverage of rubble, and vice versa. It is evident that areas of lower perturbation have better hard coral cover, and the areas of higher perturbation have worse hard coral cover. The better conditions of hard coral coverage are found at the southern end of Gili Sulat, south of Gili Lawang and south of Gili Petagan Islands. The area is dominated by branching coral branching and foliose coral varieties. Soft coral cover dominates in the north west Gili Sulat, south of Gili Kondo, around Gili Bidara and north east Gili Petagan.
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
16
100%
80%
80%
60%
60%
40%
Rubble cover
Hard coral cover
100%
40%
20%
20%
0%
0%
Figure 6. The different between hard coral and rubble cover based on the manta tow survey, September 2013 in the GSL MPA and PBK Islands.
The manta tow survey allows for large area analysis and allows one to determine basic reef condition information such as coral bleaching events, Acanthaster outbreaks, damage from bomb fishing practices, coral disease, and sedimentation on corals. The MPA management office could use this basic information as a reference in the management of zoning plans and could provide basic information to design more detail in coral reef monitoring program. In general, based on the manta tow survey the condition of hard corals living along the leeward side of Gili Sulat, Gili Lawang and Gili Petagan Islands displays a better condition than along the windward side. It indicates destructive fishing practices are more frequent on the windward area which is hidden from the mainland and community surveillance. Interestingly, in general the condition is observed to be better outside the MPA (30%) compared to inside the MPA (26%) (Figure 7.). Although bombing fishing practice continues, fishermen in Labuan Pandan (outside the GSL MPA) say that tourism around the PBK islands offers incentives to prevent destructive fishing practices.
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
17
100%
Hard coral cover
80%
60%
40%
20%
0% Inside MPA
Outside MPA MPA
Figure 7. The average of hard coral coverage both inside and outside the GSL MPA based on mantatow survey, September 2013.
During the manta tow survey, no sharks were observed. Only one sea turtle was encountered, near Gili Sulat Island. Fish abundance was not considered, however it was evident that grouper fish (Serranidae) and schooling fish are extremely rare. Socio-economic indicators There are 25 liftnet boats from Sumbawa operating around Gili Sulat and Gili Lawang Islands to catch anchovy. This situation has triggered conflict especially when Sumbawa fishermen sell their fish catch to outsider fish traders. Nevertheless, the conflict can be solved by Sugian awig-awig (local rule) which was introduced in 2011. On the other hand, 25 liftnet boats in a small area like Gili Sulat and Gili Lawang Islands tend to be unsustainable.
a
b
Picture 2.a. Local fish traders in Sugian village are waiting for fishes catch from liftnet boats. b. Dry anchovy in Sugian village. Photos: author. Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
18
Within 8 years of the establishment of GSL MPA, many fishermen, both inside (54.5%) and outside (90% and 80%) the GSL MPA, claim that their fishing catch and income have declined (Figure 8.). To increase their catch, fishermen in Sugian built a “rumpon” (an artificial floating reef to attract pelagic fish aggregation) 7 miles away from their village. Fish catches near the islands (Gili Sulat and Gili Lawang Islands) produced 15 kg per trip, while rumpon catches neared 70 kg per trip. Also, many fishermen in Labuan Pandan became boatmen for tourists who visit PBK islands. In addition, there is a pearl farm company (PT.
Percentage of respondents
Auture) in Labuan Pandan employing 200 local workers. 100.0% 80.0% 60.0% 40.0% 20.0% 0.0%
Fishing catch decrease
Fishing catch stable
Fishing catch increase
Income decrease
Income stable
Income increase
Inside MPA
54.5%
45.5%
0.0%
54.5%
45.5%
0.0%
Outside MPA
90.0%
10.0%
0.0%
80.0%
20.0%
0.0%
Figure 8. Fishermen’s opinions both inside and outside the GSL MPA on their fishing catches and income currently compare to before the establishment of the GSL MPA.
North Lombok study North Lombok has also had to deal with destructive fishing issues. However, fishermen in North Lombok have been able to organise themselves into a large group (1,406 fisherman in 30 fishermen’s groups in 5 subdistricts) named LMNLU with a unified goal to ban destructive fishing practices in their area. They realise that the continual bombing in the past had been reducing catches and was unsustainable. LMNLU was established in 2000, and from 2002 – 2006 anyone found utilizing destructive fishing practices was arrested. From 2006 to the present there have been no recorded bombing activities. They applied a local rule, ‘awigawig’, with a strong punishment system. For effective marine patrol purposes, they use fishermen as informants to monitor resource use activities. They also work together with the Marine and Fisheries Agency of North Lombok District (DKKP3) and the “water police”. As
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
19
a result, the national government gave an award to LMNLU for community surveillance initiative in 2006.
Figure 9. Historical timeline of LMNLU in North Lombok District.
The differences between East Lombok and North Lombok firstly, are associated with the initiation of the MPA. The GSL MPA was initiated by the government while the LMNLU was initiated by the fishing community. Secondly, they have similar threats which are destructive fishing practices. However, the fishing community in East Lombok does not have a unified goal to ban destructive fishing practices. The initiative in Sugian with their local surveillance and “awig-awig” does not have support from other villages. Thus, there are difficulties with the organization the community in East Lombok. The government says that there is an inadequate budget for running activities. On the other hand, the local community feels if the government is able to involve the community and stakeholders, it can solve the budget issue.
Picture 3. Traditional boats in Gangga village of North Lombok District. Photo: author. Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
20
The success story of the LMNLU brings a different perspective to fisheries management, especially regarding how fishermen regulate the area without formal boundaries. Although this is similar to other ecosystem-based management methods for preserving natural assets, fishermen-based management emphasizes the fisherman’s role as an agent of management rather than the object to be managed. The LMNLU approach is prioritises the needs of local fishermen, such as fishing locations and fishing gear. This is different from the government approach that often does not involve community participation, and consequently fails. The SWOT analysis below attempts to identify the difference between the GSL MPA (East Lombok) and LMNLU (North Lombok).
Strength East Lombok
North Lombok
There is a GSL management office. Community support. Small MPA (1,206 ha) that should be relatively easier to manage.
Fishermen based management (with bottom-up approach). Capacity of community organisation. Sense of belonging in securing their natural assets. Strong cohesion among members (1,406 fisherman from 30 groups in 5 subdistricts). Awig-awig rule.
Weaknesses Ecosystem based management (with topdown approach). Lack of community involvement. Limited staff and budget. Zoning system has not been approved. Differing perceptions of prevention of destructive fishing within communities.
• No document describing biophysical and socio-economic indicators.
• No boundary definition of management area (MPA is not established). • Self funding. • Limited facilities.
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
21
Opportunities East Lombok Increasing MPA size. Support from NGOs. Strengthening fishermen’s capabilities in cooperation and association building. Increasing community involvement.
North Lombok
• MPA network and partnership. • Increasing effectiveness of management. • Education. • Tourism. • Aquaculture.
•
Increasing support from government (integration of bottom-up and topdown approach). • Empowering the women’s group to support household’s income.
Threats Destructive fishing practices continue. Distrust of MPA management. Flood event.
a
• Competition with outsiders for space and fishing gear (modern/large scale). • Coral bleaching events.
•
Other illegal fishing gear such as trawling from outsider fishermen. • Sustainable management of LMNLU/ Regeneration. • Waste from land (industries, hotel/ restaurants and households).
b
Picture 4.a. Gili Lawang and Gili Sulat Islands of the GSL MPA, East Lombok District. b. Beach along the North Lombok District. Photos: author.
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
22
Challenges The critical challenge of both East and North Lombok is how the MPA or management area is to be effectively managed. They need support from the government for the community to be involved and empowered especially in East Lombok. On the other hand, the LMNLU has a challenge to regenerate to maintain their management as well as maintaining strong cohesion of fishermen groups within the union. The critical challenge can be addressed through education, providing information (publicity) about the rules of the MPA, the important aspects of marine ecosystems such as mangroves and coral reefs, as well as the disadvantage of destructive fishing practice. It can also be achieved through support for fishermen by introducing and granting eco friendly fishing gear. Furthermore, a program of woman empowerment like LMNLU carry out such as developing home industry of processed fishery products as alternative incomes for fishermen family also can be implemented. Sustainable and sufficient sources of funding are needed to run activities.
For
example, LMNLU received trust to receive a CSR grant for monitoring activities. Thus, a partnership between the government, NGOs and academics and stakeholders can be created to achieve sustainable funding. The lack of biophysical and socio-economic studies of East and North Lombok, creates management challenges because informed decisions are more difficult to make. The important thing is the MPA provides benefits to the local community as well as preserving and managing the natural assets. However, this needs to be measured and people can then be aware of this benefit through this documentation.
Conclusions In conclusion, the GSL MPA management in East Lombok was not effective due to a lack of governance (institutional), biophysical conditions and socio-economic indicators. These inadequacies are expressed by inadequate staff, activities and budgeting, the degradation of coral reef ecosystems as well as fishermen’s incomes and fishing catches. In addition, bomb fishing practices still continue in some areas. On the other hand, North Lombok under LMNLU has been assessed to be more effective due to their success in reducing natural threats even though there is no formal boundary for the MPA. However, reports and documentation of changing biophysical and socio-economic circumstances are needed to measure the effectiveness of the management of East and North Lombok. Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
23
In terms of national targets, size does matter but effective management is more important. Therefore, the government should pay more attention to and support community initiatives rather than establishing new MPAs without an adequate management plan. The government can account for the area such as LMNLU to be included into the national achievement of MPA targets. Fisherman-based management emphasizes the fisherman’s role as an agent of management rather than object to be managed. This study has shown that this approach is more effective in North Lombok, and can serve as a role model to be applied in other areas.
Acknowledgements I am grateful to Prof. Jeffrey Sayer and Dr. Agni (Intu) Boedhihartono as program director and deputy director, respectively, of the Master of Development Practice Program, James Cook University, Cairns Campus. I thank Lalu Adi Gunawan for his tremendous help during my time in Lombok. I am grateful to the numerous individuals and institutions (to all of respondents; the government of the East Lombok and North Lombok District; Aliman of Sugian Diving Club; Pak Ishak, Pak Idun, and Pak Fahrudin of the GSL MPA office; Pak Zainal head of Sugian village; Pak Sahnan head of Labuan Pandan village; Pe Lalu Rizal Ashadi of the East Lombok Planning Agency (Bappeda); LMNLU; Pak Imam Bachtiar of Universitas Mataram; Tasrif and Jambul of WCS; Pak Abidin, Pe Heri and Pak Agus of Konsepsi; Pak Syamsul and Pak Salman of Koslata and LMNLU; Pak Catur and Arum of Santiri; Mas Boen of JARI; and Syafrudin of WWF-Indonesia Nusa Tenggara Program). I thank Tyler Jay Reynolds and James Langston for their help in editing and constructing this report, poster and presentation. I thank Muhammad Irfansyah Lubis and Thol Sem for their support in producing maps. Finally I thank all MDP classmates for sharing their knowledge, friendship and teamwork.
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
24
References BPMPD. (2012). Village profile of Sugian (translated from Bahasa Indonesia). Directorate General of Community Empowerment and Village. Bupati Lombok Timur. (2004). The decree of Gili Sulat – Gili Lawang of Sambelia Subdistrict as a marine protected area. East Lombok District decree. Carter, E., Soemodinoto, A. & White, A. (2010). Guide for Improving Marine Protected Area Management Effectiveness in Indonesia. Bali, Indonesia: The Nature Conservancy Indonesia Marine Program, xi + 49p. Directorate for Conservation of Area and Fish Species (2012). Technical guidelines for evaluating the management effectiveness of aquatic, coasts, and small islands conservation Areas (E-KKP3K). Jakarta: Directorate for Conservation of Area and Fish Species, Directorate General of Marine, Coasts and Small Islands, Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries. Dermawan, A., Suraji, Wiryawan B., Koswara W. and Martosudarmo B. (2007). The guideline of arrangement of the locally marine protected area management plan (translated from Bahasa Indonesia). Jakarta: Coral Reef Rehabilitation and Management Program COREMAP II, Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries. English, S., Wilkinson C. and Baker V. (1997). Survey Manual for Tropical Marine Resources. 2nd edition. Townsville, QLD.: Australian Institute of Marine Science. Directorate for Conservation of Area and Fish Species (2012). Database – Data of conservation areas. Retrieved 5 July 2013 from http://kkji.kp3k.kkp.go.id/index.php/basisdata-kawasan-konservasi/details/1/85 Kompas. (2013). Marine Conservation – Evaluating the effective management of area (translated from Bahasa Indonesia). Newspaper. Lombok Timur Marine and Fisheries Agency. (2010). Role of the local government to initiate the development of locally marine protected area. [Powerpoint presentation] Presented in the national marine protected areas coordination workshop. Miller, R.L. and Brewer J.D. (2003). The A-Z of social research: a dictionary of key social science research concepts. London: Sage Publication. Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
25
Ningtias, P., I. Yulianto, A. Soemodinoto, T. Kartawijaya, Y. Herdiana, I.D.G. Warmadewa, K.M. Hasbi & H. Murtawan. (2013). Efektivitas Pengelolaan Kawasan Konservasi Perairan, Pesisir dan Pulau-Pulau Kecil (E-KKP3K) di Provinsi Nusa Tenggara Barat. Bogor: Wildlife Conservation Society. Pomeroy, R.S., Parks, J.E. & Watson, L.M. (2004). How is your MPA? A guidebook of natural and social indicators for evaluating marine protected area management effectiveness. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. Xvi + 216 pp. Sahnan. (2010). Monograph of Labuan Pandan village (translated from Bahasa Indonesia). Labuan Pandan Village office documentation. Sambelia Subdistrict. 2013. Subdistrict profile of Sambelia year 2013. Sambelia Subdistrict of East Lombok District.
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
26
Attachments Table 3. Manta tow data conducted 24, 28 and 29 September 2013 in Gili Sulat and Gili Lawang Islands (inside the GSL MPA) and PBK Islands (outside the GSL MPA).
Tow no. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38
MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA
GPS Position
Island
Hard coral
Dead Coral
Rubble
Abiotic
Biotic
5% 5% 5% 0% 5% 0% 0% 0% 5% 0% 0% 0% 5% 0% 0% 5% 5% 5% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 5% 0% 0% 5% 5% 10%
25% 15% 30% 60% 45% 45% 50% 70% 25% 50% 40% 50% 40% 40% 45% 25% 30% 10% 10% 10% 5% 15% 30% 15% 10% 15% 15% 10% 20%
15% 25% 20% 10% 20% 30% 25% 15% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 30% 40%
50% 80% 50% 30% 10% 10% 15% 10% 5% 0%
20% 30% 20% 25% 20% 15% 15% 10% 20% 10% 20% 20% 10% 15% 5% 20% 20% 15% 15% 15% 5% 5% 20% 30% 20% 20% 20% 10% 20%
-8
18.698
116
42.539
Sulat
-8
18.623
116
42.666
Sulat
-8
18.557
116
42.807
Sulat
-8
18.505
116
42.973
Sulat
-8
18.534
116
43.114
Sulat
-8
18.620
116
43.248
Sulat
-8
18.754
116
43.372
Sulat
-8
18.887
116
43.504
Sulat
-8
18.988
116
43.595
Sulat
-8
19.083
116
43.669
Sulat
-8
19.175
116
43.730
Sulat
-8
19.271
116
43.810
Sulat
-8
19.353
116
43.892
Sulat
-8
19.438
116
43.963
Sulat
-8
19.528
116
44.054
Sulat
-8
19.609
116
44.135
Sulat
-8
19.707
116
44.215
Sulat
-8
19.805
116
44.314
Sulat
-8
19.888
116
44.424
Sulat
-8
19.984
116
44.532
Sulat
-8
20.091
116
44.604
Sulat
-8
20.182
116
44.656
Sulat
-8
20.270
116
44.675
Sulat
-8
20.375
116
44.695
Sulat
-8
20.471
116
44.702
Sulat
-8
20.580
116
44.689
Sulat
-8
20.695
116
44.679
Sulat
-8
20.815
116
44.673
Sulat
-8
20.909
116
44.577
Sulat
35% 25% 25% 5% 10% 10% 10% 5% 30% 20% 20% 10% 25% 15% 10% 25% 20% 30% 30% 25% 10% 30% 20% 40% 60% 50% 50% 70% 50%
-8
20.900
116
44.410
Sulat
40%
15%
25%
5%
15%
-8
20.828
116
44.287
Sulat
-8
20.698
116
44.213
Sulat
-8
20.645
116
44.036
Sulat
-8
20.527
116
43.955
Sulat
40% 30% 30% 20%
20% 20% 15% 10%
30% 30% 30% 40%
5% 10% 5% 20%
5% 10% 20% 10%
-8
20.454
116
43.792
Sulat
20%
5%
50%
15%
10%
-8
20.442
116
43.648
Sulat
-8
20.346
116
43.510
Sulat
-8
20.270
116
43.439
Sulat
20% 20% 25%
5% 5% 10%
40% 40% 30%
20% 20% 10%
15% 15% 25%
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
25% 25% 40% 40%
27
39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83
Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA
-8
20.166
116
43.347
Sulat
30%
10%
20%
10%
30%
-8
20.114
116
43.236
Sulat
25%
5%
20%
10%
40%
-8
20.026
116
43.133
Sulat
-8
19.935
116
43.026
Sulat
-8
19.865
116
42.916
Sulat
-8
19.788
116
42.811
Sulat
25% 25% 25% 10%
5% 5% 0% 0%
20% 20% 25% 30%
20% 15% 25% 30%
30% 35% 25% 30%
-8
19.719
116
42.703
Sulat
20%
0%
50%
30%
0%
-8
19.665
116
42.641
Sulat
-8
19.592
116
42.566
Sulat
-8
19.514
116
42.515
Sulat
-8
19.434
116
42.450
Sulat
30% 30% 20% 20%
0% 5% 5% 5%
30% 30% 30% 30%
30% 30% 40% 40%
10% 5% 5% 5%
-8
19.338
116
42.421
Sulat
20%
5%
30%
40%
5%
-8
19.242
116
42.381
Sulat
-8
19.125
116
42.347
Sulat
-8
18.999
116
42.305
Sulat
-8
18.870
116
42.351
Sulat
-8
18.745
116
42.475
Sulat
-8
18.539
116
42.422
Lawang
-8
18.522
116
42.501
Lawang
-8
18.472
116
42.567
Lawang
-8
18.416
116
42.616
Lawang
40% 20% 15% 15% 35% 25% 15% 25% 25%
0% 0% 0% 0% 5% 5% 5% 0% 0%
10% 10% 40% 40% 25% 30% 40% 35% 35%
20% 10% 5% 5% 15% 20% 30% 25% 25%
30% 60% 40% 40% 20% 20% 10% 15% 15%
-8
18.351
116
42.675
Lawang
10%
0%
30%
50%
10%
-8
18.278
116
42.742
Lawang
-8
18.160
116
42.781
Lawang
-8
18.008
116
42.768
Lawang
-8
17.877
116
42.693
Lawang
10% 20% 25% 5%
0% 0% 0% 0%
10% 15% 15% 75%
70% 50% 50% 15%
10% 15% 10% 5%
-8
17.786
116
42.616
Lawang
5%
0%
85%
5%
5%
-8
17.700
116
42.537
Lawang
-8
17.611
116
42.458
Lawang
-8
17.527
116
42.378
Lawang
-8
17.423
116
42.294
Lawang
10% 15% 20% 15%
5% 5% 0% 0%
15% 50% 50% 70%
60% 20% 20% 10%
10% 10% 10% 5%
-8
17.327
116
42.217
Lawang
15%
0%
70%
10%
5%
0% 0% 5% 5%
70% 40% 35% 35%
10% 30% 20% 20%
5% 10% 15% 15%
-8
17.241
116
42.146
Lawang
-8
17.143
116
42.061
Lawang
-8
17.054
116
41.983
Lawang
-8
16.979
116
41.830
Lawang
15% 20% 25% 25%
-8
16.886
116
41.707
Lawang
30%
10%
30%
20%
10%
-8
16.773
116
41.591
Lawang
-8
16.670
116
41.473
Lawang
-8
16.614
116
41.316
Lawang
-8
16.665
116
41.251
Lawang
20% 10% 15% 10%
0% 0% 0% 0%
30% 75% 10% 10%
40% 10% 70% 75%
10% 5% 5% 5%
-8
16.726
116
41.209
Lawang
15%
0%
5%
75%
5%
-8
16.778
116
41.180
Lawang
-8
16.851
116
41.148
Lawang
-8
16.910
116
41.072
Lawang
10% 15% 15%
0% 0% 5%
0% 0% 20%
85% 80% 55%
5% 5% 5%
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
28
84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128
Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Inside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA
-8
17.027
116
41.022
Lawang
30%
0%
25%
25%
20%
-8
17.180
116
41.010
Lawang
35%
0%
10%
30%
25%
-8
17.349
116
41.967
Lawang
-8
17.538
116
41.016
Lawang
-8
17.703
116
41.100
Lawang
-8
17.819
116
41.198
Lawang
30% 35% 40% 60%
0% 5% 0% 10%
20% 10% 25% 10%
40% 30% 25% 10%
10% 20% 10% 10%
-8
17.871
116
41.346
Lawang
55%
10%
10%
10%
15%
-8
17.890
116
41.472
Lawang
-8
17.031
116
41.487
Lawang
-8
18.147
116
41.601
Lawang
-8
18.264
116
41.654
Lawang
40% 45% 40% 30%
5% 5% 0% 0%
10% 20% 30% 30%
35% 20% 20% 30%
10% 10% 10% 10%
-8
18.339
116
41.763
Lawang
30%
0%
30%
30%
10%
-8
18.343
116
41.859
Lawang
-8
18.260
116
41.960
Lawang
-8
18.313
116
42.039
Lawang
-8
18.400
116
42.031
Lawang
20% 20% 30% 40%
5% 5% 10% 10%
50% 50% 35% 20%
20% 20% 20% 20%
5% 5% 5% 10%
-8
18.467
116
41.941
Lawang
40%
5%
35%
10%
10%
0% 5%
20% 20%
15% 15%
5% 10%
-8
18.626
116
41.980
Lawang
-8
18.679
116
42.130
Lawang
60% 50%
-8
18.614
116
42.328
Lawang
20%
5%
30%
20%
25%
-8
26.558
116
44.015
-8
26.498
116
43.875
-8
26.687
116
43.718
-8
26.860
116
43.670
-8
26.994
116
43.682
-8
27.079
116
43.702
-8
27.161
116
43.732
-8
27.196
116
43.793
-8
27.157
116
43.899
-8
27.072
116
43.999
-8
26.938
116
44.039
-8
26.810
116
44.054
-8
26.044
116
44.044
-8
26.592
116
44.021
26.578
116
44.152
-8
26.630
116
44.177
-8
26.682
116
44.230
-8
26.589
116
44.333
-8
26.495
116
44.424
-8
26.389
116
44.422
-8
26.321
116
44.318
-8
26.293
116
44.197
-8
26.300
116
44.107
-8
26.386
116
44.101
-8
26.496
116
44.134
25% 40% 30% 35% 35% 30% 20% 30% 30% 30% 30% 20% 10% 15% 30% 15% 15% 20% 20% 15% 15% 25% 30% 40% 35%
25% 20% 15% 15% 15% 10% 10% 5% 5% 5% 5% 10% 5% 5% 10% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5%
30% 10% 30% 20% 15% 30% 20% 30% 30% 25% 30% 20% 15% 50% 30% 40% 40% 35% 45% 45% 40% 30% 30% 20% 20%
5% 0% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 10% 10% 30% 45% 10%
-8
Kondo Kondo Kondo Kondo Kondo Kondo Kondo Kondo Kondo Kondo Kondo Kondo Kondo Kondo Bidara Bidara Bidara Bidara Bidara Bidara Bidara Bidara Bidara Bidara Bidara
15% 30% 20% 30% 35% 30% 50% 35% 35% 30% 25% 20% 25% 20% 30% 40% 40% 40% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 35%
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
5% 10% 10% 5% 5% 5%
29
129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167
Note
Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA Outside MPA
Petagan
50% 50% 50% 50%
10% 20% 20% 15%
10% 10% 15% 20%
0% 0% 0% 0%
30% 20% 15% 15%
44.924
Petagan
30%
20%
30%
5%
15%
116
45.008
Petagan
26.337
116
45.116
Petagan
-8
26.298
116
45.224
Petagan
-8
26.141
116
45.265
Petagan
30% 45% 65% 20%
20% 10% 5% 10%
20% 30% 25% 30%
5% 5% 0% 10%
25% 10% 5% 30%
-8
26.041
116
45.336
Petagan
25%
20%
20%
10%
25%
-8
26.095
116
45.404
Petagan
-8
25.972
116
45.484
Petagan
-8
25.875
116
45.465
Petagan
-8
25.746
116
45.483
Petagan
25% 30% 30% 35%
15% 10% 10% 10%
25% 30% 30% 40%
0% 10% 0% 0%
35% 20% 30% 15%
-8
25.610
116
45.419
Petagan
25%
5%
25%
25%
20%
-8
25.457
116
45.411
Petagan
-8
25.289
116
45.528
Petagan
-8
25.159
116
45.434
Petagan
-8
25.022
116
45.444
Petagan
25% 30% 30% 20%
10% 10% 10% 25%
25% 25% 30% 30%
10% 5% 0% 0%
30% 30% 30% 25%
-8
24.885
116
45.405
Petagan
20%
10%
50%
5%
15%
-8
24.762
116
45.330
Petagan
-8
24.788
116
45.218
Petagan
-8
24.783
116
45.112
Petagan
-8
24.848
116
45.014
Petagan
15% 15% 15% 20%
10% 10% 5% 5%
60% 60% 55% 50%
5% 10% 15% 15%
10% 5% 10% 10%
-8
24.915
116
44.925
Petagan
10%
5%
70%
10%
5%
5% 5% 5% 10%
30% 35% 40% 30%
10% 15% 25% 15%
5% 5% 5% 15%
-8
26.065
116
44.721
Petagan
-8
26.137
116
44.799
Petagan
-8
26.078
116
44.859
Petagan
-8
26.153
116
44.919
-8
26.270
116
-8
26.359
-8
-8
24.984
116
44.843
Petagan
-8
25.063
116
44.787
Petagan
-8
25.140
116
44.723
Petagan
-8
25.230
116
44.648
Petagan
50% 40% 25% 30%
-8
25.329
116
44.578
Petagan
30%
10%
30%
20%
10%
-8
25.404
116
44.518
Petagan
-8
25.505
116
44.489
Petagan
-8
25.576
116
44.484
Petagan
-8
25.683
116
44.492
Petagan
55% 40% 30% 20%
5% 5% 5% 5%
20% 30% 40% 50%
10% 10% 15% 15%
10% 15% 10% 10%
-8
25.770
116
44.456
Petagan
30%
5%
30%
5%
30%
-8
25.858
116
44.485
Petagan
-8
25.948
116
44.494
Petagan
-8
26.027
116
44.561
Petagan
30% 30% 50%
5% 5% 5%
30% 30% 20%
5% 15% 10%
30% 20% 15%
-8 26.094 : hard coral live
116
44.644
Petagan
50%
5%
20%
10%
15%
Hard coral Dead coral
: Recently dead coral
Rubble
: Dead hard coral rubble
Abiotic
: Sand, rock
Biotic
: Soft coral and other biotic such as sponge and algae
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
30
Table 4. List of respondents
No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Name Epa Huseini Muh. Ridwan Sahlim Saprudin Amak Misnun Amak Maknah Nasrin Mangsir Hamdani Muslihin Kasih M. Ridho Malik Sahtun Kamarudin Wa Sikin Pahrudin Hanafi Muh. Nur Sahrudin Suyanto Suladi Amak Rohana Mahruf Amak Suhri
Village Sugian Sugian Sugian Sugian Sugian Sugian Sugian Sugian Sugian Sugian Sugian Sugian Labuan Pandan Labuan Pandan Labuan Pandan Labuan Pandan Labuan Pandan Labuan Pandan Labuan Pandan Labuan Pandan Padak Guar Padak Guar Padak Guar Padak Guar
Age d d b b b e e d b d c d d d a e e d c c e e c e
Education c a b a b a a a a a a a c a b a a a b a c a a a
Additional occupation farmer farmer farmer tourism farmer farmer farmer tourism farmer farmer farmer
Note: Age: a = < 19, b = 20 – 30, c = 31 – 40, d = 41 – 50 e = > 51 years old. Education: a = preliminary, b = junior high school, c = senior high school, d = tertiary education
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
31
Table 5. Questionnaire.
No.
Name
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Epa Huseini Muh. Ridwan Sahlim Saprudin Amak Misnun Amak Maknah Nasrin Mangsir Hamdani Muslihin Kasih M. Ridho Malik Sahtun Kamarudin Wa Sikin Pahrudin Hanafi Muh. Nur Sahrudin Suyanto Suladi Amak Rohana Mahruf Amak Suhri
A Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No
B Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
C Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes
D No No No No Yes No Yes No No Yes No No Yes Yes No Yes
E a c c d a a a a a d d a d c a c
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes
Yes Yes Yes No Yes No Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
d d b a c d b
Question F G Yes b Yes a No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No No No Yes Yes No No
H b b
I
J
K
L
b b
c c
a b
b b
a b b a b b a a a a a b a
a b a a b b a a a a a b a
d b a a b c c c c b b b b
c a c c c b c c c c c c c
a a a b b a b b b b b a b
b b f f b a b b, c b, c b a, b b a, b
a a a
a a a
a a a
b a a
b c b c c d c
b c c b c c c
b b b b b c a
b b b a, b b b b
Note: Questions
a
b
c
A
Do you know the term of MPA?
Yes
No
B
Do you recognise Gili Sulat - Gili Lawang as an MPA?
Yes
No
C
Do you fishing in Gili Sulat - Gili Lawang Islands
Yes
No
D
Do you fishing in Gili Petagan - Gili Kondo Islands?
Yes
No
E
GSL
PBK
F
Which one is provide a better fishing catch? Do you recognise zoning system in Gili Sulat - Gili Lawang MPA?
Yes
No
G
How is your fishing catch after GSL MPA established?
decreased
stable
increased
H
How is your income after GSL MPA established? How is coral reef condition after GSL MPA established? How is mangrove cover condition after GSL MPA established?
decreased
stable
increased
worse
stable
improved
worse
stable
improved
Did GSL MPA effectively managed? What management component that need to be improved?
Yes
No
more staff
sea patrol
I J K L
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
equal
publicity
d
e
don't know
facilities
finance
32
Picture 5. Manta tow survey in the Gili Sulat – Gili Lawang MPA and PBK Islands. Photo: Aliman.
Picture 6. Coral transplantation in Gili Kondo Island. Photo: author.
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
33
Picture 7. Lifnet boats around the Gili Sulat – Gili Lawang MPA. Photo: author.
Picture 8. The Gili Sulat – Gili Lawang MPA office and guesthouse. Photo: author.
Challenges of marine protected areas around Lombok, Indonesia
34
