Nowadays, dive operations and the divers played an unintentional part in the degradation of the environment, their presence undoubtedly boosted fish numbers in the area and prevented further destruction through fish-bombing and trawling. Because the reefs were their assets, Sipadan´s residents took steps to ensure that illegal fishermen had no opportunity to deplete the waters of Sipadan of its marine life. Destructive fishing practices are unfortunately rampant throughout the waters around Borneo. Divers off Sipadan, Mabul and Kapalai have often reported hearing the boom of dynamite fishing being carried out several kilometers away off the mainland. The presence of dive operators and security on Sipadan around the clock have helped to prevent the island from becoming another statistic in the list of destroyed wonders in the area. One of the first concerns to arise as a result of the eviction of operators from the island was the return of illegal fishing on Sipadan´s reefs. Prominent in the press recently were pictures of fishermen and their fish traps off Sipadan´s South Point and talk was rife of fishing trawlers anchored next to naval vessels, blatantly harvesting innumerable species right under the nose of security forces.
Rumour also has it that the very naval officers who are supposed to protect and preserve the marine and terrestrial wonders of Sipadan are guilty of destructive anchoring practices as well as the consumption of turtle eggs and other wildlife from the islands. Other tales on the ground are of fishermen in cahoots with pirates and marine parks officers on the take.. While most, if not all, of this talk is nothing but pure hogwash, it does reveal the level of uncertainty evident on the ground. Some evicted operators bemoan the lack of information being released by the government and the apparent lack of some sort of system or plan. Then there is the little matter compensation. As should be expected from such a drastic move, jobs have been lost, sunk costs have been forsaken and the future remains incredibly uncertain for many involved in the island. While it will have to take time for the authorities to get themselves organized as they transfer the island from being a gazetted bird sanctuary to a gazetted marine park, the transition, uncertainty and lack of forthcoming information has proven unbearable for several parties unsure of where to go and who to turn to for help given their complete loss of a source of income.
The greater concern now would be the transferred impact of humans on the other islands. Several operators from Sipadan have set up alternative outfits in the vicinity and tourist traffic to these other islands is set to increase exponentially. Waste, sewage and water treatment in these alternative locations are not necessarily any better than how they were on Sipadan and the environmental future of these islands need to be taken care of. The rehabilitation of Sipadan is another area of concern that has surfaced. While all man-made structures have been removed and human impact on the island itself has been reduced, more might need to be done to rehabilitate what´s left of the island, instead of just leaving it to nature to cure.
A more immediate threat is the number of divers still visiting the island´s reefs and their behaviour while they are there. The daily quota is still in effect, but this is largely self-regulated, the boat loads of divers see no signs of easing and many divers´ reef etiquette and buoyancy control leaves a lot to be desired. To uphold the qualities of a World Heritage Site, Sipadan would need a specific management group or authority to actively and consistently manage, monitor, report on and police the area. Dedicated, trained and environmentally aware manpower would be needed to fulfill this responsibility and to do it well.
A management plan for Sipadan must be in place as soon as possible. The management plan needs to be based on sound science in order to manage all human activities on the island and its reefs. Additionally, an annual ‘state of the reef’ report showing the results of coral monitoring and numbers of visitors for the year would assist in the assessment of the reefs. This will highlight management efforts and provide interested stakeholders with information on an area that they care for deeply.
It must also be recognized that there is a difference between managing the security aspects of Sipadan and managing biodiversity of the island. Responsibilities of the island’s security management and of the biodiversity management must be clearly delineated. For the latter, Sabah Parks needs a full mandate and a proper management plan for biodiversity. Sabah Parks should be given full assistance by government, the private sector and local community stakeholders to manage Sipadan and other marine parks. WWF-Malaysia hopes that the management plan will be developed through participation and input from dive operators, divers and local communities as well as non-governmental organisations. A transparent, participatory process will build more capacity amongst all stakeholders to help Sabah Parks manage Sipadan.
Rumour also has it that the very naval officers who are supposed to protect and preserve the marine and terrestrial wonders of Sipadan are guilty of destructive anchoring practices as well as the consumption of turtle eggs and other wildlife from the islands. Other tales on the ground are of fishermen in cahoots with pirates and marine parks officers on the take.. While most, if not all, of this talk is nothing but pure hogwash, it does reveal the level of uncertainty evident on the ground. Some evicted operators bemoan the lack of information being released by the government and the apparent lack of some sort of system or plan. Then there is the little matter compensation. As should be expected from such a drastic move, jobs have been lost, sunk costs have been forsaken and the future remains incredibly uncertain for many involved in the island. While it will have to take time for the authorities to get themselves organized as they transfer the island from being a gazetted bird sanctuary to a gazetted marine park, the transition, uncertainty and lack of forthcoming information has proven unbearable for several parties unsure of where to go and who to turn to for help given their complete loss of a source of income.
The greater concern now would be the transferred impact of humans on the other islands. Several operators from Sipadan have set up alternative outfits in the vicinity and tourist traffic to these other islands is set to increase exponentially. Waste, sewage and water treatment in these alternative locations are not necessarily any better than how they were on Sipadan and the environmental future of these islands need to be taken care of. The rehabilitation of Sipadan is another area of concern that has surfaced. While all man-made structures have been removed and human impact on the island itself has been reduced, more might need to be done to rehabilitate what´s left of the island, instead of just leaving it to nature to cure.
A more immediate threat is the number of divers still visiting the island´s reefs and their behaviour while they are there. The daily quota is still in effect, but this is largely self-regulated, the boat loads of divers see no signs of easing and many divers´ reef etiquette and buoyancy control leaves a lot to be desired. To uphold the qualities of a World Heritage Site, Sipadan would need a specific management group or authority to actively and consistently manage, monitor, report on and police the area. Dedicated, trained and environmentally aware manpower would be needed to fulfill this responsibility and to do it well.
A management plan for Sipadan must be in place as soon as possible. The management plan needs to be based on sound science in order to manage all human activities on the island and its reefs. Additionally, an annual ‘state of the reef’ report showing the results of coral monitoring and numbers of visitors for the year would assist in the assessment of the reefs. This will highlight management efforts and provide interested stakeholders with information on an area that they care for deeply.
It must also be recognized that there is a difference between managing the security aspects of Sipadan and managing biodiversity of the island. Responsibilities of the island’s security management and of the biodiversity management must be clearly delineated. For the latter, Sabah Parks needs a full mandate and a proper management plan for biodiversity. Sabah Parks should be given full assistance by government, the private sector and local community stakeholders to manage Sipadan and other marine parks. WWF-Malaysia hopes that the management plan will be developed through participation and input from dive operators, divers and local communities as well as non-governmental organisations. A transparent, participatory process will build more capacity amongst all stakeholders to help Sabah Parks manage Sipadan.
No comments:
Post a Comment