DFKI-SLT/copious huggingface dataset:
32 MALAYAN FISHES. The Siakap or Kakap (Lais calcarifer) is also found in the-seas and estuaries of India where it is known to Europeans as the '■ Cock-up '" and its range extends to Queensland and Western Australia, where it is generally known as the " Barramundi' It is a fine sporting fish and runs to a considerable size. The largest that I have heard of was taken in the Bay of Bengal by the Government trawler " Golden Grown '" and weighed 580 pounds. Before I read of this fish I used to le satisfied with 40 or 50 pounders. Tlie Kerapu (Epinephelus sp) are very well represented in our waters and are fine edible fish. Some species lose their bright colouring soon after they are caught and have a dull mottled appearance when exhibited in the fish market which would not attract a purchaser unacquainted with the fish. From an edible point of view the Kerapu differs little from the Ikan merah, the latter fish owing most of its popularity to its colour. Kerapu from 50 to 70 pounds in weight are occasionally Feen in the markets and the Keretang (E. pantherinus) is commonly seen up to two or three hundred pounds in weight. Any Malay fisherman will tell you of a Keretang of fabulous size which he hooked and fought for hours, being worsted in the end because his boat and gear were too light to make any impression on the fish. Yery large ones are occasionally taken in fishing stakes (Kilong) and I have heard that the captors, on these occasions, tickle the monster until they get it (pines and then pass a strong rotan through its gills by which it is finally secured and hauled up. The largest Keretang I ever saw was taken by a Malay and myself. "We had to sink our boat after we had fought the fish to a finish in order to load it; the weight, for there were no means of weighing it, was estimated at 6 piculs, ie. round about 800 pounds. This fish appears to me to be identical with the Queensland Groper illustrated in Stead's "Edible Fishes of New South Wales' under the name Promicrops itaiara. I have read that this fish derives its name Grapes from its habit of groping about the rocks but I suggest that the name originated in Malaya or India. The Tamil name is Kurrapu. The Malay name is Kerapu. The Brunei Malays below it as Kuroda. In the Philippines it is known to the Filipinos as Qarropa from which the transition to Groper or Grouper is a slight one. One of our Kerapu (E. tauvina) is known in Australia under the names Bro-mi -spotted Find and Black-spotted Eoek-cod. and of this fish Eoughley writes, "It is of fine edible quality and grows to. a length of at least four feet" In America nienilers of this family arc known as Sea-bass.
62 BOURNS AND WORCESTER: PRELIMINARY NOTES. Viverra tangalunga Gray. Viverra tangalunga Gray; Everett, P. Z. S. 1893, p. 495. Siquijor, Panay, Mindoro, Mindanao, Palawan, Calamianes. Like the preceding species, V. tangalunga ranges throughout the group. Pells bengalensis Kerr. Felis bengalensis Kerr; Blanford, P. Z. S. 1887, p. 631. Felis lulnuta Temm; Everett, P. Z. S. 1889, p. 223. Panay, Negros, Cebu. An animal which was in all probability a cross between this species and the common house cat was seen by us at the house of Mr. 0. R. Blair Pickford, Toledo, Cebu. Hystrix pumila Gunther. Hystrix pumila G; Everett, P. Z. S. 1893, p. 495. Palawan, Calamianes. Sciuropterus nigripes Thos. Sciuropterus nigripes Thos; Everett, P. Z. S. 1893, p. 495. Palawan. Sciurus steerii Gunther. Sciurus steerii G; Everett, P. Z. S. 1893, p. 496. Palawan. Sciurus samarensis Steere. Sciurus samarensis Steere. List B. & M. Steere Exped. p. 30. Samar. Sciurus mindanensis Steere. Sciurus mindanensis Steere, List B. and M. Steere Exped. p. 29, 1890. Mindanao, Basilan. Sciurus mindanensis Steere and Sciurus cagsi Meyer seem to be synonyms. Sciurus coccineus Thomas. Sciurus coccineus Thomas; Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist. (6) vol. ii, p. 407 (1888). Sciurus philippinensis Steere, List B. and M. Steere Exped. p. 29. Mindanao, Basilan.
Section 1: Introduction Table 1. Examples of national targets relating to MPA networks compiled from information gathered in during preparation of this report Country Targets American Samoa 20% of reefs to be protected as no-take areas by 2010 Australia Soutin Australia 19 MPAS by 2010 Bahamas 20% of the marine ecosystem to be fully protected (no-take) for fisheries replenishment; 20% of marine and coastal habitats to be protected by 2020 (Caribbean Challenge) Belize 20% of all bioregions 30% of reefs 60% of turtle nesting sites 30% of manatee distribution 50% of American crocodile nesting 80% of spawning aggregations Brazil National MPA system by 2012 Chile 10% marine area protected by 2010; national marine network of conservation and management sites by 2015 Colombia San Andres Archipelago Seaflower MPA, 2000 km to be no-take Cuba 22% of continental shelf protected (14678 km), including: 15% of insular shelf 25% of coral reef areas and 25% of each subtype of wetland Dominican Republic 20% of marine and coastal habitats to be protected by 2020 (Caribbean Challenge) Fed States of Micronesia 30% of nearshore marine ecosystems protected by 2020 (Micronesia Challenge) Fiji 30% of reefs protected by 2015; 30% of waters managed as an MPA network by 2020 Germany 38% of waters as MPAS Grenada 25% nearshore marine resources protected by 2020 (Caribbean Challenge) Guam 30% nearshore marine ecosystems protected by 2020 (Micronesia Challenge) Indonesia 100,000 km protected by 2010; 200,000 km protected by 2020 Jamaica 20% of marine and coastal habitats to be protected by 2020 (Caribbean Challenge) Madagascar 100,000 km marine waters protected by 2012 Marshall Islands 30% of nearshore marine ecosystems protected by 2020 (Micronesia Challenge) New Zealand 10% of marine environment protected by 2010 Northern Marianas 30% of nearshore marine ecosystems protected by 2020 (Micronesia Challenge) Palau 30% of nearshore marine ecosystems protected by 2020 (Micronesia Challenge) Peru Representative MPA system to be established by 2015 Philippines 10% fully protected (no-take) by 2020 Senegal Creation of an MPA network St Vincent and Grenadines 20% of marine and coastal habitats to be protected by 2020 (Caribbean Challenge) Tanzania 10% of sea protected by 2010; 20% of sea by 2025 United Kingdom Network of Marine Conservation Zones (MASS) to be established by 2020 USA Central California 29 MPAS covering 18% of state coastal waters (528 km), witt 243 km as no-take areas 15
Acknowledgements South Asian Seas: Ashanti Perera East Asia: Srisuda Jarayabhand (East Asian Seas Regional Co-ordination Unit); Shinichiro, Kazunni Wakita (PERSEA, Philippines), Eleanor Carter (Coral Triangle Initiative) Cliina: Wanfei Qiu Japan: Shinichiro Kakuma and Kohei Hibino Indonesia: Cherryta Unia, Lida Pet-soede, Sangeeta Manghubai Philippines: Porfirio Alino (Marine Science Institute) NOWPAP: Jeung Sook Park Mediterranean and Black Sea: Abderrahnnen Gannoun, Daniel Cebrian and Christine Pergent-Martini (RASPA, Mediterranean Action Plan); Paul Mifsud (UNEPMAP); Alessandra Pome (WWF Mediterranean Programme), Giuseppe Notarbartolo di Sciara (WCPA Marine); Catherine Piante (WWF France); Oksana Tarasova (Black Sea Commission); Zrinka JAKI and Anamarija Francica (Croatia) Europe: Hanna Paulomaki (Helsinki Commission, Finland); Richard Emmerson, Paulo Domingos-paixao Stefan Leiner and Micheal Obriain (European Commission Environment Directorate-general); Richard Emmerson (OSPAR Commission); Iain Shepherd (European Commission's Maritime Task Force); Jeff Ardron (MCI formerly of Bundesamt fiji Naturschutz) UK: Paul Gilliland (Natural England) Baltic: Asa Andersson (Baltic Sea Programme, WWF Sweden) Pacific: Dominique Benzakem (PREP); Eric Clua (CRISP Programme) Fiji: Bill Aalbersberg Solomon Islands: Shankar Aswani New Zealand: Jeremy Nelson Arctic: Jeanne Pagan (WCPA-MARINE Arctic Region); Soffia Guamundsdottir (PAME) Antarctic: Denzil Miller and Keith Reid (CCAMLR, Hobart, Tasmania) High Seas: Colleen Corrigan and Francine Kershaw (UNEP-WCMC) Thanks also to all individuals and institutions who gave permission to use their images: Alejandro Arrivillaga, Philip Kramer Jeanine Almany and Nate Peterson (TNC) Marion Howard (Brandeis University) Anthony Mitchell (CORALINA) Alessandra Pome and Catherine Piante (WWF) Melanie Mcfield (Healthy Reefs for Healthy People Initiative) Dan Laffoley (WCPA-MARINE) John Turner (University of Wales Bangor) Susie Grant (BAS) Charlotte Karibuhoye (LUCN) Frances Humber (Blue Ventures) Richard Wilson (Australian Government Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts) Sebastian Troeng (CI) Anne Walton and Sean Hastings (NOAA) David Johnson and Corinne Michel (OSCAR) 12
Contents 322. Chile 45 323. Ecuador 46 324. Peru 47 325. Panama 47 33 Brazil 47 34 North America 48 341. Baja California to the Bering Sea (B2B) 48 342. Scotian Shelfgulf of Maine 49 343. Mexico National MPA System and Sub-national Gulf of California MPA system 49 344. USA National MPA system 50 345. Canada National MPA Network 53 4. AFRICA AND MIDDLE EAST 57 41. Eastern Africa Regional Seas Programme 57 411. Eastern African Marine Ecoregion (SAME) Programme 57 412. Tanzania Proposed National MPA system 58 413. Seychelles Proposed Integrated MPA system 59 414. Mauritius Proposed MPA system for Rodrigues 60 415. Madagascar 61 42. South Africa Proposed National MPA system 62 43. Western Africa Regional Seas Programme 63 44. Red Sea and Gulf of Aden Regional Seas Programme 65 441. Yemen Socotra Marine Zoning Plan 66 45. Regional Organization for the Protection of the Marine Environment (ROPE) Region 67 46. Caspian Sea Independent Partner Programme 67 5. ASIA 69 51. South Asia Seas Regional Seas Programme 69 52. East Asian Seas Region 70 521. Southeast Asia MPA Network 71 522 Sulu-sulawesi Marine Ecoregionseascape MPA Network 72 523. Philippines National Network 72 524. Indonesia National and Sub-national MPA Systems 73 525. Vietnam National MPA Systems 75 53. North-west Pacific Region 75 531. China National MPA System 75 532. Japan 76 533. Republic of Korea 76
Section 9: Conclusions Table 91. Examples of regional MPA networks (involving two or more countries) Region Mesoamerican Barrier Reef Gulf of Mexico 'Islands in the Stream' North-east Pacific South-east Pacific Tropical Eastern Pacific Marine Corridor Network (MAR or Corredor Marino) Baja California to the Bering Sea (B2B) Countries Mexico, Belize, Guatemala, Honduras USA, Mexico, Belize Countries from Mexico south to Colombia Countries from Panama south to Peru Colombia, Costa Rica, Panama, Ecuador San Jose Declaration USA, Canada, Mexico Scotland Shelfgulf of Maine Canada, USA Eastern African Marine Ecoregion (SAME) Programme MPA network for the countries of the Indian Ocean Commission Western Africa regional network PERSIA MPA network Caspian regional MPA network South-east Asian MPA network Sulu-sulawesi Marine Ecoregion (SAME) Natura 2000 Mediterranean OSCAR HOLCOM Antarctic Arctic Somalia, Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique, South Africa Madagascar, Mauritius, France (Reunion), Comores, Seychelles Progress SEAS and multiple use; several initiatives underway to develop the network with support of TNC and WWF Early proposal Proposal developed Recommendation; to include MPAS and MAPS Implementation of network of five existing MPAS underway 28 sites identified Priority 'seascapes' identified and ranked by WWF and support provided to protect some of these Data-gathering underway Mauritania, Senegal, Gambia, Guinea-bissau, Initial steps underway Guinea, and Cape Verde Djibouti, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen Azerbaijan, Islamic Republic of Iran, Kazakhstan, the Russia Federation and Turkmenistan ASEAN and other countries Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines Member countries of the EU All countries bordering Mediterranean Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, UK Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Russian Federation, Sweden 34 members of CLAMS Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden, USA Master Plan for the network prepared and some sites established Initial discussions underway Action Plan prepared Framework for network developed with criteria for site selection Under development and many sites established Under development; to be comprised of several sub-regional networks Criteria and guidelines developed and process well underway; sites currently being nominated Criteria and guidelines developed and process well underway; sites currently being nominated Planning underway for a regional MPA system Discussions underway for an MPA network 112
-42. METHODS AND COMPILATION OF DATA The information included in this report is derived primarily from literature and correspondence in the possession of the run's Conservation Monitoring Centre at Cambridge (Fauna) and Kew (Flora). In view of the extremely rapid rates of habitat destruction in the Philippines however, much of this information is now outdated and were possible it has been supplemented with data obtained through correspondence with relevant government departments, institutions and scientists who have had recent fieldwork experience in the region. A list of personnel who were contacted for assistance in this regard appears in Appendix Six. FLORA, VEGETATION AND FOREST COVER 31 DESCRIPTION OF THE NATURAL VEGETATION The Philippine flora is composed principally of forest plants and has affinities with those of Borneo, peninsular Malaysia, the Sino-himalayan region and Australia. Endemism Is esteemed at about 27, with at least 33 endemic genera (LUCNUNEP 1986). There are some 8000 species of flowering plants in the Philippines of which over 3000 are arborescent species that can attain a diameter at breast height of 30 cm or more (FAOUNEP 1981). In addition there are about 900 fern species (Parris 1985) 311 THE FORESTS It is convenient to subdivide the forest vegetation of the Philippines into five very broad formations: mixed dipterocarp, tropical montane, mossy (subalpine), molave and pine forests. The following descriptions are based mainly on a report by FAOUNEP (1981).
i) Mixed dipterocarp forests Thes« occur generally up to an elevation of approximately 800 m on well drained soils and on the lower slopes of mountains in localities where the dry season is not pronounced. The family Dipterocarpaceae is represented by approximately 50 species, belonging to eight genera. The more common dipterocarp species include: apitong Dipterocarpus grandis lorus hagakhak. D validus tangile Shorea polysperma red lauan S. negrosensis almon S. almon mayapis S. p alosapis natal S. astylosa guijo S. guiso and white lauan Shorea contorta The composition of dipterocarp forests shows considerable variation depending upon local site factors. On both the larger and the smaller islands there are many microclimatic variations in precipitation and groundwater conditions within short vertical and horizontal distances which are crucial to the composition of particular associations within the broad grouping of dipterocarp forests. Four sub-formations are recognized on the basis of species dominance. They are true' lauan; lauan-apitong; yakal-lauan; and lauan-hagakhak. Dipterocarp forests provide the bulk, of the timber for the country's log export industry as well as most of the wood required for domestic building construction and infrastructure development. ii) Tropical montane forests Tropical montane forests occur in the areas extending from the upper limits of the mixed dipterocarp forest formations to the lower limits of the pine or mossy (subalpine) forest types. The forest composition is mixed aid the undergrowth is prolific. Rattans, palms, bamboos and epiphytes are numerous. Tangile Shorea polysperma and oats Quercus spp. are the main tree species but Hopea, Vatica Agathis Cinnamomum Tristania and Eugenie, species are also common iii) Mossy (subalpine) forests: Mossy forests are found in the high mountainous regions of the Philippines at an altitude ranging from 1000 to 2950 m asl. (Ramoran 1980). This montane forest type consists of a stunted tree vegetation that is often clothed with clinging mosses, liverworts, lichens, epiphytic herbs and ferns. In the Central Cordillera of northern Luzon plant families commonly occurring in mossy forest formations include Fagaceae, Melastomataceae, Podocarpaceae
-7312 OTHKFI VEGETATION TYPES Compared with the forests, other types of vegetation in the Philippines are relatively insignificant. However, beach woodlands, brackish-water swamplands, and freshwater wetlands add to the diversity of the country's terrestrial environment and deserve conservation attention in their own right. i) Beach woodlands Beach woodlands occur both in narrow bands immediately above high-tide levels where the sand dunes have stabilized and, occasionally, on the flood plains of larger rivers. The conifer Casuarina equisetifolia is often the dominant tree species. The leaf-fall from the casuarina forests is heavy and consequently the undergrowth is confined to a few semi-herbaceous vines (eg. Wedelia biflora ) and thorny bushes (eg. Prosopis juli lora ) Casuarina equisetifolia is an important source of canoe and boat-building materials. It also produces a yellow dye which can be used to colour wool and silk. ii) Brackish-water swamplands Brackish-water swamplands occupy areas along tidal rivers where brackish, rather than saline, water conditions prevail. This vegetation association is dominated by the nipa palm Nypa fruticans The long fronds of the nipa palm are widely used for roofing purposes and in areas close to dense settlements it is usually absent (unless under cultivation) because of indiscriminate harvestintiii) Freshwater wetlands Philippine freshwater wetlands cover a total area of approximately 114 000 ha (Alvarez, not dated). Most are seasonal in character and during the dry season present extensive mud flats. In general they are created by the flooding of large rivers. The vegetation of these areas is composed mainly of low-growing marsh plants and tall reed-like grasses. In the southern part of the archipelago the sago palm Metroxylon sanu is abundant in freshwater swamps at low altitudes and is a valuable source of starch. The following wetlands have been identified as priorities for conservation action (Alvarez, not dated)
CHAPTER 12. WALKING CATFISH (PLA DUK-DAN) Introduction The walking catfish, Clarias batrachus s is native to much of Southeast Asia where it occurs widely in slow streams, flooded marshes, and fields. It is the predominant Clarias species raised in Thailand, where it is commonly cultured. Culture of C. batrachus was begun in Thailand about 30 years ago (Tarnchalanukit et al. 1983). In Malaysia, it is mainly captured wild, as the cost of trash fish for supplemental feed is relatively high. In the Philippines, where Clarias macrocephalus is the commonly cultured species, limited availability of trash fish also has caused difficulties in culture. • macrocephalus is the favored species for food and is worth more per pound due to a softer, more yellow flesh of higher fat content. In earthen pond culture in Thailand, however, it is slower growing and more difficult to rear during the early stages. The Clarias batrachus culture system in Thailand will serve as our model type, while differences in the Philippines will also be examined. In Thailand, about 240 to 320 ha are under Clarias culture each year. Annual yields from culture average 12,000 tons, or approximately 40 to 50 tons ha. Feeding Habits Clarias batrachus is mainly carnivorous and feeds actively throughout the water column in shallow ponds. In nature, it commonly feeds on invertebrates and fish, while under culture they are fed supplemental food of animal origin. (. macrocephalus is a more benthic species which feeds predominantly on detritus and benthic invertebrates. Both species can be trained to take food at the water surface) Young C. batrachus feed predominantly on zooplankton, while 87
BIRDS PROM BENGUET PROVINCE, LUZON, AND PROM THE ISLANDS OP LUBANG, MINDORO, CUYO, AND CAGAYANCILLO. By Richard C. Mcgregor. INTRODUCTORY NOTE. In this paper, which is the second in the series of reports on zoological collections made for the Philippine Museum, are recorded all identified species of birds collected or observed on recent expeditions to the Islands of Lubang, Verde, Cagayancillo, and Agutaya, and to the Province of Benguet, Luzon; also species recently secured in Cuyo and Mindoro, which are believed to be new to those islands. As a result of lack of necessary literature, it has proved impossible to identify certain of the species collected. This is especially the case with the birds of prey. These unidentified species will be listed in a supplementary paper after the receipt of the literature which we at present lack. As in the first paper of this series, the nomenclature of this paper follows closely that of Sharpe's Hand List and of the Catalogue of Birds. The work of collecting has been directed by Commissioner Dean C. Worcester, Secretary of the Interior, to whom the author is indebted for the use of literature and other assistance. Mr. Chas. W. Richmond has kindly examined and identified specimens of several species. GEOGRAPHICAL NOTES. LUBANG. The Lubang Group lies west of Cape Santiago, Luzon, and north of Cape Calavite, the western point of Mindoro. The group as a whole is nearer Mindoro than Luzon. Lubang Island is about 20 miles from the Batangas coast and but little more than half that distance from the nearest point in Mindoro. Lubang i§ approximately 15 miles long by 6 wide. In, the central part of the island are mountains of moderate altitude well covered with forest. Near the coast are extensive rice fields and grassy hills. Two small streams enter the sea near Port Tilig, and at their mouths are more or less extensive mangrove swamps, the 3
THE BIRDS OF CALAYAN AND PUGA, BABUYAN GROUP. By Richard C. Mcgregor. INTRODUCTORY NOTE. Due north of Luzon are a number of small islands known as the Babuyanes, and north of this group are the Batanes. The small lot of birds secured on Fuga Island by Mr. John Whitehead has been the only collection known from any of these islands. In August, 1903, we took a steamer to Aparri, in north Luzon, where after much delay we secured a native boat to take us to the Islands of Fuga and Calayan in the Babuyanes. I intended to visit Camiguin as well, but owing to the light and variable breezes it was found to be impracticable. The present paper deals with the collection of over 1,000 skins which was made on Calayan and Fuga. A few species from Luzon and other islands are also discussed in their proper order. Three species from Ticao and one from Lubang, overlooked or not identified before, are now recorded for the first time and may be added to my lists from those islands in former bulletins. The nomenclature of this paper follows closely that of Sharpe's Hand List and the Catalogue of Birds. Salangana has been substituted for Couocalia, and Otus for Scops. My thanks are due to Secretary Worcester, who has continued to direct our collecting operations, and to Dr. Charles W. Richmond, of the United States National Museum, who has kindly identified a number of doubtful species. The following species are described as new: Turnix worcesteri. Eudynamis frater. Macropygia phaea. Zosterops flavissima. Otus cuyensis. Hyloterpe fallax. Otus calayensis. The following forms are new to the Philippines: Sphenocercus formosa. Acrocephalus sorgophilus. Oceanodroma, species. Chelidon dasypus. Sterna fluviatilis. Clivicola riparia. Polionetta zonorhyncha. Astur cuculoides. Mareca penelope. Turdus pallidus. Spodiopsar sericeus. Antigone sharpei. Chrysomitris spinus. Fringilla montifringilla. Saxicola oenanthe.