DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES

COURSE TITLE: Fisheries Laws, Policies and Institution

COURSE DESCRIPTION: This course focuses on the laws and policies governing municipal and
commercial fisheries, in particular those provisions of the 1998 Philippine Fisheries Code (Republic
Act [RA] No.8550) that are relevant to fisheries sectors. It also includes a discussion on other
pertinent laws and policies, including international agreements to which the Philippines is a party,
and points out the national policy to contribute in sustainable fisheries.

Meeting times: TBA

Instructor: Joila N. Abao, LFT

Office: Department of Agriculture and Fisheries Office, SEAIT Campus

Email: joilaabo@gmail.coom

Contact No.: 09454562389

Office hours: 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM

Highly Recommended Text: The Implementing Rules and Regulations of Republic Act No. 8550 As
Amended by Republic Act No. 10654

Learning objectives:

This course provides an overview of national agencies and their role in various aspects
concerning coastal and marine management.
The student in this course will be able to understand the value, status and situation
concerning fisheries in the Philippines. And to assess the enhancement of law enforcement to
regulate the capture fisheries sector towards achieving long term resource sustainability. The
objectives will attain through lecture modules and group discussions online, as well as reading
assigned course material. Progress will be assessed through performance on three major
examinations and written activities.

Instruction to the Learner:

Each chapter in this module contains contribution covering the legal framework,
organizations, policies, programs/Initiatives and tools related to fisheries management in the
Philippines. The complex of institutions represents, among others, the instruments by means of
which the society seeks to attain its objective in the fisheries sector and obtain optimum value for
the nation.

All chapters are continuous, and are arranged in such a manner that the present chapter is
associated to the next chapter. For this reason, you are advised to read and understand the content
in this module. At the end of the chapter, there are exercises/activities that you need to accomplish
to assess your understanding. Submission of activities will be every Friday during your scheduled
class hour/s. Attendance is a must during this day.

Fisheries Laws and international agreements, no matter how basic, are not light subject
matters to read, so you will need to give them some serious focus and attention. Still, this module is
designed and organized in a way that should make for, if not entirely easy reading, at least an
interesting learning experience. So make the most out of it — put on your thinking cap, enjoy a good
read, and learn!

IF YOU ARE NOT ABLE TO ATTEND MY CLASS AND SUBMIT YOUR ACTIVITIES, YOU MUST
INFORM ME AHEAD OF TIME THROUGH MESSENGER, EMAIL or OFFICE VISIT TO DISCUSS THE
ALTERNATIVES THAT CAN BE GIVEN TO YOU.

GRADING CRITERIA

Lecture (40.01%)
Quizzes/ activities 30%
Attendance 15%
Assignment 15%
Recitation 20%
Project/ Group Activities 20%
Laboratory (26.66%)
Attendance 40%
Lab exercises 60%
Major exam 33.33%

TOTAL: 100%
 CHAPTER 1
Introduction to
Fisheries Laws
Introduction

The Philippines is an archipelago that made up of of 7,641 islands with a total land area of
301,000 km2. The total area of marine waters including EEZ is 2,200,000 km 2 and the total length of
its coastlines is 36,289 km. The country’s shelf and coral reef areas cover 18.46 million ha and 2.7
million ha, respectively, which dubbed the archipelagic country as the center of marine biodiversity
(BFAR, 2011). It is surrounded by major bodies of water such as South China Sea in the west, Pacific
Ocean in the east, Celebes Sea in the south and Luzon Strait in the north. The surrounding territorial
waters, with the promulgation of the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), is about 2.2 million km 2 (BFAR, 2018) (Figure 1).
Philippine fisheries resources, however, are quickly being depleted, as evidenced by the
decline of fish catch around the country. Fish for food is increasingly becoming out of reach of those
who need it most. With the lifting of trade barriers across the world, fish products have moved into
the immense global market. The icons of export-oriented markets – lobster, groupers and large
tunas – are now rarely found in the local markets or in the baskets of fishers; the few that are still
caught are snapped up and sold in cities or for export. Meanwhile the icons of food security – scads,
sardines and anchovies – have decreased greatly in quantity due to poor or nonexistent
management, and their prices have risen sharply. As a result, the people, who depend on the sea as
their primary food basket, do so precariously. A large majority has slipped down to the bottom of the
economic ladder to become one of the most marginalized sectors in the country.

Figure 1. Map of the Philippines (Source: NAMRIA, 2012)

To ensure national food security, it is necessary to ensure the country’s fish supplies, which
means promoting sustainable fisheries for both the small-scale and commercial fishers (Courtney et
al., 1998). Refocusing the policies and programs of the national government toward capacitating
local government units (LGUs) and law enforcement agencies and redirecting government programs
toward sustainable fisheries management through enhanced coastal law enforcement could be a
key move toward alleviating poverty and ensuring the food security of coastal dwellers, if not the
whole country (DENR, 2001). It would have many positive benefits and could resolve some of the
country’s major security, economic and social problems in one of its most impoverished sectors.

1. FISHERIES LAW
It refers to state and federal legislation regarding the protection of endangered species of
fish and the protection of their habitats, as well as statutes designed to ensure the safety of fish
products used by consumers. Fisheries law also refers to federal and state laws regulating
commercial and sport fishing activities, such as fishing licenses, permits, catch limits and the dates of
the fishing season.
Fisheries laws involves establishing a set of rights and responsibilities in the marine and
coastal environment as to who is allowed to use which resources, in what way, for how long, and
under what conditions as well as who is entitled to transfer rights to others and how.

2. HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF MARINE LAWS IN THE PHILIPPINES

Before the archipelago was first colonize by the Spain in the 17 th century, the island settlers
of what would become the Philippines had a long history of traditional fishing rights. The jurisdiction
over the coastal resources and fishery limits were defined by the barangay (village) (La Viña). During
the long Spanish colonial period the traditional property rights of barangays over fishing grounds
were steadily eroded, with community authority and rights superseded by state government control
(Lopez, 1983). Under the Spanish law, the barangay were removed as administrative entities and the
over fisheries and other natural resources. Under both Spanish and Americans, traditional authority
and rights were superseded by municipal government control of local fishing grounds. This
administrative structure of municipal authority remains in place in the country today. Despite the
historical existence of traditional fishing rights and village-based management systems in the
Philippines, for most part these systems have disappeared in the country (Ferrer, 1989; Mangahas,
1994).

The threats of Japanese invasion move the government to finally pass a Fisheries Law in
1932, restricting commercial fishing activities to American and Filipino-owned corporations. For the
first time, municipal waters were defined as up to 5.5 km from shore; municipal governments now
had authority to grant licenses to commercial fishers within these waters. 1960s and 1970s was the
period of the industrialization. . In the 1960s, the Philippine government, aided by Japanese advisors,
undertook intensive infrastructure, technology, extension and credit programs through the Fisheries
Development Program to ‘develop’ the industry (Heinan and Gonzales, 1993). In the early 1970s, the
country fell under Martial Law and the centralized government control of fisheries was further
reinforced through Presidential Decree (PD) 704, otherwise known as the Fisheries Act of 1975.
Under PD 704, fisheries management is the responsibility of the government, both national and
municipal. The management measures (mainly through regulatory instruments) undertaken by the
government during this time, however, were ineffective in promoting the sustainable development
and management of the country's fisheries. In the mid-1970s, in response to decreasing unit catch of
small-scale fishers, the government embarked on fishery policies and development programs
concentrated on ‘use orientation,’ that is, increasing production and exploitation of the resource
base. In the 1980s, the government continued to support the needs of the sector through the
Expanded Fish Production Program (EFPP) from 1983 to 1987. In the small-scale fisheries sector, the
strategy of the program was geared towards enabling the small fishers to venture into deeper
waters by equipping them with more efficient boats and fishing gears. The underlying assumption
was that the fishery could support increased fishing effort, despite expert opinion as early as 1980
that it could not. Ironically, it was during this period (1984–1988), that there was a decreased rate in
coastal fish production of 1.3% a year, compared to the increasing rate of 6.1% in the preceding five
years from 1979 to 1983 (Agbayani, 1993; Palomares, 2014). Overfishing decreased returns to fishers
and conflicts over resource access and use increased (Briones, 2007). The problems in the fishery
continued to worsen throughout the late 1980s and early 1990s. The management (mainly through
regulatory instruments) and development (increased fishing effort) measures undertaken by the
government were still ineffective in promoting the sustainable management and development of the
country's fisheries. It was realized that with the increasing rate of deterioration of natural resource
systems in the Philippines, there was no way the country could pursue a pathway of sustainable
development. The right to use fishery resources for subsistence is enshrined in the Philippine
Constitution. The ocean area of the Philippines is an open access resource. Management of local
fishery resources is considered not only a responsibility but also a right. Though this right is more
enthroned to the local government rather than fishing communities by the Fisheries Code, it is
evident that the spirit of the law is to devolve powers to manage the coastal resources to the fishers.
The legal framework does not clarify/define the designated tenure area or the management
mechanism for governance. The 1998 Fisheries Code is considered a breakthrough in fisheries
legislation because it “reinforces” the management of municipal waters originally devolved through
the 1991 Local Government Code from national to local governments. Organized community
members are given the opportunity to formally participate in management efforts through, among
others, the Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Management Councils (FARMCs). Legal instruments,
such as the Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title and Mangrove Stewardship Contracts, now also
exist to give coastal communities a semblance of tenure security. These instruments likewise
encourage communities to take charge of resource management planning and implementation.
Tenure rights are imperative in ensuring that fishing communities obtain permanent, exclusive rights
over the resources in a specific area, that fickle politics or legislation will not eventually deprive them
of the long-term benefits of their management efforts (Quicho et al., 1999).

3. NATIONAL LAWS AND POLICIES

The marine tenure and fisheries management narrative has undergone several transitions in
the Philippines, as outlined by the following broad themes (DENR, DA-BFAR, DILG):
• 1970s-early 1980s: Command and control
• 1980s: Community-based management
• 1980s–1990s: Coastal resource management
• 1990s: Co-management
• 2000s: Integrated fisheries management
• 1990s–2000s: Marine protected area management
• 2010s: Ecosystem approach to fisheries management (EAFM)
Table 1. Evolution of integrated coastal management and fisheries management in the Philippines. Fisheries
management in the Philippines evolved over the last century in response to both opportunities and threats to
the fisheries sector. For the most part, the policy thrust was to accelerate the development of the industry. At
first, there was little regard for the need for conservation and regulation. But beginning in the late 1970s, as
the degradation of fishery resources became more evident, the government set about implementing
progressively regulation- and conservation-oriented policy reforms.
1932 Fisheries act gives most management responsibility to central government.
1940 Hundred Islands, Lingayen Gulf, established as National Park.
1930-1960s Resources considered unlimited in supply not requiring management
1960-1970s Robust expansion and development in fisheries and aquaculture
First working municipal marine reserve established by Oslob Municipal and
1974
Siliman University at Sumilon Island, Cebu
1975 Fisheries decree promoted the optimal exploitation and use of fisheries.
1975 Forestry Code established the need to protect mangrove forests.
1976 Environmental Impact system established.
1976 National Mangrove Committee established
1976 Commercial fishing limited to areas beyond 7km of the shoreline
1976-1980 Wide scale survey of coral reefs
1978 Coral gathering is limited to scientific research
Marine Parks Task Force created to recommend sites for marine parks; Philippine
1978 Extended Economic Zone established;
Environment Impact Assessment System established;
1978 The Philippine Extended Economic Zone established.
1979 Coastal zone Management Committee with 22 agencies formed.
1981 Philippines signs CITES
1984 BFAR moved from Ministry of Natural Resources to DA
1986 Kayakas and muro-ami banned
1987 NATIONAL FISH CONSUMPTION PER CAPITA: 40kg
MANGROVES: 140,000 has; First National Marine Park established at Tubbataha
1988
Reefs, Sulu Sea
1990-1997 Fishery Sector Program of DA-BFAR initiates bay-wide management
1991 Local Government Code devolves responsibilities for CRM to local government
1992 PCSD created; Philippines signs Agenda 21; NIPAS Act passed
1993 MANGROVES: 138,000 has; Coastal Environment Project (CEP) of DENR starts
POPULATION: 73 million; CORAL REEFS: < 5% in excellent condition; Fisheries and
1995 Aquatic Resource Management
Councils authorized
1996-2004 Coastal resource management project of DENR and USAID implements ICM
Fisheries Code passed, reinforces role of LGU in CRM; Philippines celebrates
1998 International Year of the Ocean; Ocean
Charter signed
May proclaimed Month of the Ocean in the Philippines; historic Conference of
Coastal Municipalities of the Philippines
1999
convened; ASEAN members adopt Regional Guidelines for responsible fishing
operations
2000 DA and DENR sign memorandum on implementation of Fisheries code.
2001 More than 100 municipalities allocated budget for CRM; municipal water
delineation begins in several municipalities and
cities; CEP of DENR institutionalized as Coastal and Marine Management Office;
 ASEAN members adopt Regional
Guidelines for Responsible Aquaculture
2002 National CRM Policy reviewed at the national level
2003 ASEAN members adopt regional guidelines for fisheries management
Fisheries scientists, managers and field practitioners issue urgent call to rebuild
Philippine fishery resources; 3,500kms of
shoreline meet criteria for improved CRM; Code of Practice for Aquaculture
adopted (FAO 214 s2004); DA issues guidelines
2004 on municipal water delineation for municipalities/cities with no offshore islands
(DAO 01 s2004); ASEAN members adopt
Code of Practice for Sustainable Use of Mangrove Ecosystems for aquacutulture;
and the Regional Guidelines for Post-
Harvest Practices and Trade
The Philippine government officially adopts ICM as the national strategy to ensure
the sustainable development of the
2006 country’s coastal and marine environment; ASEAN members adopt Sustainable
Guidelines for co-management using group
user rights, fishery statistics, indicators and fisheries refugia

Starting in 1990, alternative methods of resource use and management were explored in an
attempt to reverse the negative trends of resource degradation in the Philippines. This is to advocate
resource management over use orientation through community based initiatives to rehabilitate,
conserve and protect the resources.
The degradation of the environment was severe and progressive, prompting the government
to pass in 1975 Presidential Decree (PD) 705 (the Forestry Code), which identified mangroves as
being needed for shoreline protection, and PD 704 (the 1975 Fisheries Decree), which, while
encouraging “maximum economic utilization of fishery resources,” also set down rules that put some
limits to fishing.
Community based coastal resource management (CBCRM) started in the mid-1980s. There
are over 1000 CBRM projects have been implemented by the government, Non-government,
academic and research institutions and fishing communities.
The transition from community based coastal resource management to co management
began in the early 1990’s as the project implementers comprehend that the focus on community
organizing and empowerment of fishers would not be enough to support resource management.
After the enactment of Local Government Code it was realize that local government was needed to
provide legal and enforcement support for the community resource management and marine
protected areas. CBCRM became an integral part of co-management.

A Presidential Commission on Anti-illegal Fishing and Marine Conservation or the Bantay

Dagat Committee was create by President Aquino in 1989, which called for increase coordination
among government agencies in enforcement of fisheries law.
In 1991, the participation in management and devolve control over resource access to local
levels through policy and institutional reforms was enhance. Through several initiatives the
government actively promoted devolution and community-based resource management efforts to
conserve the coastal resources.
The initiatives in CBCRM were embodied in the 1993-1998 Medium-Term Philippine
Development Plan (MTPDP). Among the strategies were to:
1. Implement a community-based fishery management strategy.
2. Regulate fishing effort within sustainable maximum yields.
3. Promote territorial use rights for small fisheries
4. Intensify aquaculture, optimize utilization of offshore, deep sea resources; and
5. Provide diversified occupational opportunities among marginal fishers.

The core program for fisheries implemented under the plan was the Fisheries Sector Program
(FSP) from 1990 to 1995. Among the policy and institutional reforms instituted through the FSP
were:
1. Decentralization of authority and simplification of procedures for clearance of local fisheries
management ordinances subject to national laws.
2. Strengthening the enforcement of fisheries laws through municipal-based interagency law
enforcement teams.
3. Promotion of community based initiatives to rehabilitate, conserve and protect the coastal
resources.
4. NGOs engagement to assist the undertake community organizing; and
5. Shift to limited access in concerned fishing areas.

Through all those years, laws, policies and interventions largely emanated from the national
government and were often hampered by jurisdictional issues. In 1991, with the passage of the Local
Government Code (LGC or RA 7160), the Philippines changed over to a decentralized form of
government. This devolved the fisheries management mandate, along with other environmental
management mandates, to LGUs. The fisheries mandate was subsequently reinforced by the 1998
Fisheries Code of the Philippines (RA 8550).

A key goal of fisheries management should be to maintain supplies of protein to the nation for
present and future generations, while protecting and ensuring a livelihood for as many fishers as
possible. This goal can be achieved through the following objectives and outcomes:
 maximizing sustainable catches;
 maximizing economic returns from fishing;
 maintaining spawning stocks;
 minimizing bycatch, waste and post-harvest losses;
 limiting the number of fishing units to a sustainable number;
 limiting the efficiency of all types of fishing gears to ensure
 minimum inputs and maximum outputs within municipal waters;
 closing fishing grounds deemed to be overfished;
 ensuring minimum mesh sizes and escape gaps left for endangered species;
 setting limits on the fish sizes (minimum and maximum legal lengths) that can be legally
caught;
 setting catch quotas (limits on the amount that can be caught); and
  Enforcing regulations and laws.

4. Hierarchy of Philippines Laws

In the hierarchy of Philippine laws, the Constitution is the supreme and fundamental law. It
was ordained and promulgated by the people, from whom all political authority originates. As the
fundamental law, all laws, rules, regulations, and executive issuances must conform to it. To execute
the mandate of the people, the Constitution authorizes the three equal branches of government,
namely, the executive, legislative, and judicial, to exercise certain powers. It grants the legislative
power to the Philippine Congress and the judicial power to one Supreme Court and lower courts.
The executive power, on the other hand, is vested on the president of the Philippines. In the exercise
of their functions, the three branches of government issue binding declarations through statutes,
rules and regulations, executive issuances, treaties, and judicial interpretations. However, these
declarations must be consistent with the powers granted by the Constitution, whether made in the
direct exercise of the power or delegated to some other entity, to be valid and binding.

Figure 2. Hierarchy of Philippine laws

4.1 The 1987 Philippine Constitution 

 Establishes limits and defines the fundamental powers of government. It is the highest
law of the land, and all other laws and legal issuances may be said to spring from—and must
be in harmony with—its provisions.

The government’s mandate to protect our fishery resources is enshrined in the 1987
Philippine Constitution, which states, “The State shall protect the nation’s marine wealth…
and exclusive economic zone, and reserve its use and enjoyment exclusively to Filipino
citizens” (Art. XII, Sec. 2). The Constitution also specifically declares that the “the State shall
protect the rights of subsistence fishermen, especially of local communities, to the
preferential use of the communal marine and fishing resources, both inland and offshore…
[and] provide support to such fishermen through appropriate technology and research… and
other services” (Art. XIII, Sec. 7).
The prescribed manner by which this is to be accomplished is also stated, through a
declaration of the people’s right “to effective and reasonable participation at all levels of
social, political and economic decision-making” (Art. XIII, Sec. 16).
The Constitution was drafted in 1986 by a Constitutional Commission, which apparently
recognized the urgent need to address festering inequities between small and big fishers –
the haves and the have-nots – in the distribution of fishery resources. The above provisions
deal directly with this social issue, first by underscoring the State’s duty to protect our
marine resources, and then declaring a preferential regard for subsistence fishers and the
people’s right to participate in the government’s decision-making process. And just in time,
too: The inequity problem in our coastal communities was threatening to grow into crisis
proportion, as overfishing, habitat destruction, rapid population growth and an ever
expanding demand for fish intensified the competition over a diminishing resource, pushing
small fishers farther and farther away from the economic mainstream to the edges of
society.
These laws would define the eminent role of LGUs in fisheries management, giving
substance in particular to the Constitution’s expressed concern to protect the nation’s
marine wealth and the rights of subsistence fishers. In them we find unequivocal declaration
that the protection and management of our municipal fishery resources and other coastal
resources is a basic legal mandate that those of you in local government are obligated to
fulfill, and not some “special project” that you can opt to do or not to do.

4.2 National laws 

Are statutes enacted by the legislative authority of the Philippines. Although legislative
authority generally resides in Congress, there have been instances in history when the
executive branch exercised this power. One example is Amendment 6 of 1976, which gave
full legislative powers to then Pres. Ferdinand Marcos. As such, certain Presidential Decrees
(PDs) issued by Marcos are considered as national laws, such as PD No. 705, otherwise
known as “The Forestry Reform Code of the Philippines”, which is still the governing law on
forestry to date.

4.3. International Treaties and Agreements

 Once ratified by the Senate, become part of Philippine law. Section 21 of the 1987
Constitution provides that treaties and international agreements are valid and take effect
when concurred with by at least two-thirds of the Senate.

4.4 Executive Orders

 Are acts of the President which provide for rules of a general or permanent character to
implement constitutional or statutory powers (De Leon, 1998).

4.5 Administrative Orders and Circulars 

Administrative Orders are issuances directed to particular offices, officials or

employees for compliance on specific matters. Circulars are issuances that prescribe policies,
rules and regulations and procedures applicable to individuals and organizations outside
the government. They are designed to supplement provisions of the law or to provide means
and information for carrying out these provisions. (De Leon, 1998) An examination of AOs
and circulars issued by government agencies, however, shows that the terms “order” and
“circular” are used interchangeably.
Many of the AOs in this list cite related but older AOs as an additional reference.
Some of these earlier AOs are still effective, as they have not been expressly repealed, and
may contain provisions that remain consistent with newer AOs.
Older AOs that have been supplanted by the newer AOs are still cited because they
contain definitions that may prove useful in interpreting the newer AOs. If anything else,
these repealed AOs are still helpful in giving the reader a historical perspective of
the development of policies regarding the covered subjects.

4.6 Supreme Court issuances 

Are acts of the High Court designed to govern the implementation of rules of
procedures to be implemented in all courts within the country.

4.7.Ordinances 
Are the legislative enactments of the respective sanggunian  (council) of LGUs. The
power of LGUs to enact ordinances is based on the Local Government Code (RA 7160).
Although ordinances issued by LGUs must not contravene any law passed by Congress, such
ordinances may address local concerns that national laws fail to deal with. They are vital, as
they may plug in gaps in statutes or orders, especially related to problems particular to a
province or municipality that national laws do not respond to.
An application of this is the ban on the use of compressors in fishing. While there is
no express prohibition in RA 8550 regarding the use of compressors in fishing, it is
commonly known that they are employed as breathing device by fishers using cyanide,
which is by itself destructive and prohibited by law. That the use of compressors as a
breathing device is detrimental to the health of fishers and fish workers are also concern
that has been raised. Several cities and municipalities have filled the gap left by RA 8550 by
enacting ordinances that ban the mere possession of compressors on board a banca, or by a
fisher.
 Ordinances, when carefully crafted, may also prove to be a greater deterrent for
coastal law offenders, even though under RA 7160, the maximum imposable penalty by legal
ordinance is only a fine of Php2,500 and imprisonment of 6 months. Violations of RA 8550
are often penalized by a fine and/or  imprisonment; the court, at its discretion, usually
imposes only a minimal fine. Violators are not deterred from criminal acts, and usually even
plead guilty to the crimes, because the fine is a very small fraction of their profit from illegal
activities.
Local government units, on the other hand, may enact fishery ordinances with a
minimum penalty of both fine and  imprisonment, leaving no discretion to the court. This will
ensure that violators not only pay the fine, but are also imprisoned when they plead guilty.
To increase the amount of the fine, and therefore discourage violators from committing the
crime again, the Php2, 500-maximum fine may be imposed per individual just as RA 8550
does (e.g. for each crew member in a fleet of illegal commercial fishing vessels) instead of
per violation. Aside from this, the ordinance may also include as penalty the confiscation of
fishing vessels and all its appurtenances, fishing gears, and fish catch to prevent offenders
from using these in other crimes. Penalties imposed accrue exclusively and automatically to
the municipal treasury (RA 7160, sec. 18).

References
Agbayani, R. (1993). Some Indigenous Cultural Tradition in the Philippines: Their Implications of
Environmental Conservation. J. New Think. Phillip. Soc Issues 2.

Briones, R.M., (2007). Eating for Lifetime: Filling the Policy Gaps in the Philippines Fisheries. Asian J.
Agric.Dev.4 (I)

Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries — ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/005/v9878e/

v9878e00.pdf

Code of Practice for Aquaculture (FAO No. 214 s. 2001 and FAO No. 214-1 s. 2004) – http://bfar.da.
gov.ph/legislation/fao/fao214.htm; http://bfar.da.gov.ph/legislation/fao/ fao214-1.htm

Code of Practice for Sustainable Use of Mangrove Ecosystems for Aquaculture in Southeast Asia –
http://www.seafdec.org.ph/pdf/Code_of_Practice_Mangrove.pdf

Ferrer, E. (1989). Prospects for territorial Use Rights in the Lingayen Gulf Area: Towards Sustainable
Development of the Coastal Resources of Lingayen Gulf, Philippines. ICLARM Conference
Proceedings 17, ICLARM, Manila Philippines.

Full text of EO No. 533 s 2006 (adopting ICM as a national development strategy
http://oneocean.org/download/db_files/eo533.pdf

Full text of JAO No. 1 s 2008 (defining/identifying the areas of cooperation and collaboration among
DA, DENR and DILG in the planning, management and control of aquaculture development
to mitigate impacts on the environment) http://philminaq.eu/pdf/Downloads/ Joint
%20Administrative%20Order.pdf

Managing Aquaculture and Its Impacts – http://bfar.da.gov.ph/news/BFAR-PHILMINAQ [final].pdf

Activity 1.1

Understanding in Fisheries Laws

Objectives:
1. To asses and discuss the fisheries laws mandated by the government.
2. Evaluate the efficiency of laws in the Philippines.
3. To determine the issues in Philippine Sea.

Grading criteria:
Content: 50%
Organization: 35%
Promptness: 15%
TOTAL: 100%

Instruction:
Watch a documentary film on the link provided https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxqgm-
ruiW8&t=1192s. Write a reflective summary based on the film. Your reflective summary must
contain a minimum of 400 words and a maximum of 500 words. The deadline of submission will be
on SEPTEMBER 21, 2021.

FORMAT:
1. Title
2. Introduction
3. Discussion
4. Conclusion
5. Margin (Left 1.5, Right 1, top 1 bottom 1)
6. Font size: 12
7. Font style: Arial
8. Spacing 1.15