First published in Thailand in 2002 by the United Nations Environment Programme.
Copyright © 2002, United Nations Environment Programme
This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational
or non-profit purposes without special permission from the copyright holder provided
acknowledgement of the source is made. UNEP would appreciate receiving a copy of
any publication that uses this publication as a source.
No use of this publication may be made for resale or for any other commercial purpose
without prior permission in writing from the United Nations Environment Programme.
UNEP/GEF
Project Co-ordinating Unit,
United Nations Environment Programme,
UN Building, 9th Floor Block A, Rajdamnern Avenue,
Bangkok 10200, Thailand
Tel. +66 2 288 1886; 288 2084
Fax. +66 2 281 2428; 288 1094
http://www.unepscs.org
Prepared for publication by the UNEP/GEF Project Co-ordinating Unit.
DISCLAIMER:
The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of UNEP or
the GEF. The designations employed and the presentations do not imply the expression
of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNEP, of the GEF, or of any cooperating
organisation concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, of its
authorities, or of the delineation of its territories or boundaries.
Cover design: Yihang Jiang
For citation purposes this document may be cited as:
UNEP, 2002. Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and
Gulf of Thailand. Report of the second meeting of the Regional Working Group on
Fisheries.
United Nations
UNEP/GEF South China Sea
Global Environment
Environment Programme
Project
Facility
Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends
in the
South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand
REPORT
Second Meeting of the Regional Working Group for
the Fisheries Component
Phuket, Thailand 7th 11th October 2002
__________________________________________________________________________________
UNEP/GEF
Bangkok, October 2002
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Table of Contents
1. OPENING OF THE MEETING ................................................................................................ 1
1.1 WELCOME ADDRESS................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 INTRODUCTION OF MEMBERS...................................................................................................... 1
2. ORGANISATION OF THE MEETING...................................................................................... 1
2.2 DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE TO THE MEETING..................................................................................... 1
2.3 ORGANISATION OF WORK .......................................................................................................... 2
3. ADOPTION OF THE MEETING AGENDA............................................................................... 2
4. REPORT OF THE SECRET ARIAT CONCERNING THE MID-YEAR REVIEWS AND
REPORTS FROM PARTICIPATING COUNTRIES .................................................................. 2
5. CONSIDERATION OF THE LISTS OF SHARED AND TRANSBOUNDARY FISH STOCKS,
AND DRAFT LISTS OF GLOBALLY THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES FOR
THE SOUTH CHINA SEA, BY COUNTRY.............................................................................. 2
6. PRESENTATION ON THE DEVELOPMENT AND TRIALS OF A BLAST FISHING
DETECTION DEVICE ............................................................................................................ 3
7. REPORTS FROM THE FOCAL POINTS ON INTER-SESSIONAL ACTIVITIES AT THE
NATIONAL LEVEL ............................................................................................................... 4
7.1 PRESENTATIONS BY COUNTRIES OF THEIR DRAFT REPORTS, FOLLOWING THE OUTLINE AGREED
AT THE FIRST MEETING OF THE REGIONAL WORKING GROUP ON FISHERIES ....................................... 4
7.2 DISCUSSION ON PROGRESS TO DATE ON THE DRAFT REPORTS......................................................... 6
7.3 MEMBERSHIP OF THE NATIONAL COMMITTEES .............................................................................. 6
8. PRESENTATION ON TRAWL BASE PROJECT OF THE WORLD FISH CENTRE, AND ITS
POSSIBLE APPLICATION TO THE FISHERIES COMPONENT.............................................. 6
9. PRESENTATION AND REVIEW OF THE OUTCOMES OF THE GIS WORKSHOP JOINTLY
CONVENED BY THE PROJECT CO-ORDINATING UNIT AND SOUTHEAST ASIA START
REGIONAL CENTREIN AUGUST 2002 ................................................................................. 7
9.1 OUTCOMES OF THE WORKSHOP.................................................................................................. 7
9.2 QUESTIONNAIRES DEVELOPED BY THE SEA START RC AND WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS..................... 8
9.3 REVIEW OF PROGRESS IN THE CREATION OF NATIONAL META-DATABASES.......................................... 8
10. REVISION OF THE WORKPLAN AND ACTIVITIES FOR THE REGIONAL WORKING
GROUP ON FISHERIES ........................................................................................................ 9
11. DATE AND PLACE OF THE THIRD AND FOURTH MEETING OF THE REGIONAL
WORKING GROUP ON FISHERIES ...................................................................................... 9
12. ANY OTHER BUSINESS ..................................................................................................... 10
13. ADOPTION OF THE REPORT OF THE MEETING ................................................................ 10
14. CLOSURE OF THE MEETING ............................................................................................. 10
ii
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
List of Annexes
Annex 1
List of Participants
Annex 2
List of Documents
Annex 3
Agenda
Annex 4
Pelagic and Demersal Fish Species, Cephalopods, and Crustaceans of
Transboundary Significance
Annex 5
Preliminary List of Threatened and Near Threatened Species for the South
China Sea
Annex 6
Characteristics of Blast Detection Devices at Different Levels of Sophistication
Annex 7
Amended Workplan and Timetable
iii
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Page 1
Report of the Meeting
1.
OPENING OF THE MEETING
1.1
Welcome address
1.1.1 The Project Director, Dr. John Pernetta, opened the meeting on behalf of Dr. Klaus Töpfer,
the Executive Director of UNEP and Dr. Ahmed Djoghlaf, Director, Division of Global Environment
Facility (DGEF) Co-ordination. He noted that the agenda was very extensive and that, there were
numerous items requiring discussion and decision during the course of the meeting. He noted further
that this was a critical meeting in the development of the project, as it would elaborate the overall
framework for the work plan for the first two years; determine whether this could be completed on time;
and agree any adjustments to the work plan that were required.
1.1.2
Dr. Pernetta noted with regret that a number of members were unable to be present but that,
some of these had sent designated alternates. He expressed the belief that this would not compromise
the completion of the work before the meeting, which was quite extensive as demonstrated by the large
quantity of documents in front of the meeting for their consideration. He noted further that an important
task before the meeting was to initiate discussion on the testing of a blast fishing device and welcomed
Dr. George Woodman who would make a presentation later in the day on a device that offered some
potential for real-time detection of blast fishing.
1.1.3 Dr. Pernetta welcomed all members of the committee, and the observers from Thailand who
had kindly arranged the field visit that would take place on Thursday. He expressed the wish that the
second meeting of the RWG-F would be as productive and enjoyable as the first. He noted that Mr.
Wannakiat, Focal Point for fisheries in Thailand, elected Chair of this Regional Working Group had
been transferred to a newly created Department under the restructuring of the Government of
Thailand and consequently Mr. Ing Try, Focal Point from Cambodia elected as Vice-Chair during the
first meeting was automatically, under the rules of procedure, the Chairperson for this meeting.
1.2
Introduction of members
1.2.1 Mr. Try welcomed participants to the meeting and invited them to introduce themselves.
There followed a brief tour de table during which participants introduced themselves and briefly
outlined their responsibilities and roles in the project. The list of participants is attached as Annex 1 to
this report.
2.
ORGANISATION OF THE MEETING
2.1
Designation of officers
2.1.1 Mr. Ing Try proposed Dr. Dao Manh Son as Vice Chairperson and Dr. Johannes Widodo as
the rapporteur for the meeting. Dr. Son and Dr. Widodo were elected by acclamation.
2.2
Documents available to the meeting
2.2.1 Mr. Kelvin Passfield introduced the documentation available to the meeting
(UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/INF.1) noting that these documents were extensive and included the
published reports of the first round of regional Working Group meetings. He briefly outlined the
contents of the meeting folders noting that a brief summary of Mr. Woodman's presentation had been
added, together with a revised listing of the members of the Thai National Committee, which had been
received only last week and therefore had not been previously circulated. The list of documents is
attached as Annex 2 to this report.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Page 2
2.3
Organisation of work
2.3.1 Mr. Passfield outlined the administrative arrangements for the conduct of the meeting, and the
proposed organisation of work detailed in the draft programme of work (UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-
F.2/INF.3). He noted that the meeting would be conducted in English and in plenary as far as
possible, sessional working groups may be formed as deemed necessary, although the small size of
the group meant that it would probably not be necessary.
3.
ADOPTION OF THE MEETING AGENDA
3.1
The Chairperson invited members to consider the revised provisional agenda prepared by
the Secretariat as document UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/1.Rev.1, and propose any amendments or
additional items for consideration. The agenda was adopted without change and is attached as Annex
3 to this report.
4.
REPORT OF THE SECRETARIAT CONCERNING THE MID-YEAR REVIEWS AND
REPORTS FROM PARTICIPATING COUNTRIES
4.1
The Chairperson invited the Secretariat to present document UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/4
containing a summary of the findings of the Project Co-ordinating Unit (PCU) following receipt of the 6
monthly progress reports, expenditure statements, and cash advance requests from the Specialised
Executing Agencies (SEAs), together with document UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/5, containing the six
monthly progress reports of the Specialised Executing Agencies.
4.2
Mr. Passfield outlined the issues and problems encountered by the PCU and reported in this
document. The subsequent discussion centred on the resolution of the problems identified and the
necessary courses of action required to minimize the problems encountered in future submissions. It
was noted that the PCU would continue to issue pro-forma reports for the project in advance of the
deadline for their final submission and that the Specialised Executing Agencies were in turn expected
to complete and return these documents promptly, in electronic form, to facilitate any necessary
amendments recommended by the PCU.
5.
CONSIDERATION OF THE LISTS OF SHARED AND TRANSBOUNDARY FISH STOCKS,
AND DRAFT LISTS OF GLOBALLY THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES FOR
THE SOUTH CHINA SEA, BY COUNTRY
5.1
Mr. Passfield introduced the listing of threatened fish species for each country, for the Gulf of
Thailand and for the South China Sea that had been extracted from Fishbase and were presented in
document UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/6.
5.2
Mr. Pirochana Saikliang noted that, some of the species on the list for Thailand were not
known from Thai waters and that in other respects the listing was incomplete. A closer examination
revealed that the initial listings taken from the fishbase database did not appear to correspond to the
government agreed lists of endangered and threatened species in the cases of Cambodia, Indonesia,
and Vietnam. It was agreed that the Secretariat would consolidate the available lists from the
countries for subsequent discussion and comparison with the lists derived from the Fishbase
database.
5.3
During subsequent discussion it was further agreed that, the IUCN status categories of
endangered, threatened, rare, vulnerable etc. would be used by the countries, in compiling these lists.
5.4
There followed a discussion of the transboundary and shared stock listing of pelagic fish
species prepared during the first meeting and it was agreed that there was a need for a common
understanding of the definitions of "shared stocks" and "transboundary stocks". In addition it was
noted that the list presented in Annex 6 of the report of the first meeting covered only pelagic fish
species but it had been previously agreed to include, both demersal fish, marine mammals and
invertebrate species of transboundary significance.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Page 3
5.5
It was agreed that the Chairperson and Mr. Passfield would work on the information
presented by the countries in order to produce a consolidated listing of demersal fish species and
invertebrates that included either shared fish stocks or stocks of transboundary significance for further
consideration by the meeting.
5.6
The preliminary listing was presented to the meeting, discussed, expanded, and amended to
include demersal fish species, cephalopods, crustaceans, and transboundary species of marine
mammals and reptiles. This listing was subsequently reviewed by the members overnight who
assigned a rank score for the transboundary importance of these species on a scale of 1 to 5 with five
being the highest. These scores were subsequently consolidated by the Secretariat into an average
score assigned to each species, which was then reviewed by the working group in plenary.
5.7
At this point it was agreed to combine some species which were either difficult to distinguish
and/or for which catch data were aggregated at the point of landing. The final agreed lists of pelagic
and demersal fish species, cephalopods, and crustaceans are attached as Annex 4 to this report.
5.8
A preliminary draft list of threatened and near threatened fish species was prepared to which
were added the threatened and near threatened species of marine mammals and reptiles. This listing
is presented as Annex 5 to this report. It was agreed that participants would review these lists and
propose any modifications or amendments to the PCU within 15 working days of the end of the
meeting.
6.
PRESENTATION ON THE DEVELOPMENT AND TRIALS OF A BLAST FISHING
DETECTION DEVICE
6.1
The Chairperson invited Dr. George Woodman from, Marine Sensors and, Biosensors Group,
Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong, to present a new technology under
development allowing the automated detection of the blast generated by a fish bomb and the
capability to determine its location at ranges up to tens of kilometres.
6.2
Dr. Woodman's presentation provided a brief introduction to the problem of blast fishing,
including the nature of the bombs and their impacts; the technology for blast detection; and the results
of recent monitoring work in Malaysia; alongside anticipated research and development.
6.3
Dr. Woodman noted that during field trials in Sabah in July 2002 a single hydrophone array
based in Tunku Abdul Rahman National Park had detected 15 blasts in a ten day period from up to
eight kilometres away. The system would enable detection of the location of the blasts to within 30
metres of the site of the explosion at a 10-kilometre distance using three hydrophone arrays.
6.4
It was noted that general information regarding who is bombing, where and why is required in
order to evaluate the scale of the problem. In order to assess whether or not the system would be
acceptable or valuable in the detection and control of blast fishing one needed to know who is
interested in controlling the activity, and what plans exist to involve communities in the regulation
process. Authorities with responsibility for marine resources, marine protected areas, artificial reefs,
spawning areas, marine wildlife, tourism and dive sites could all potentially have some interest in
developing enforcement based on such a detection system.
6.5
Dr. Woodman noted that a full-scale test of a location finding system was planned for Hong
Kong which would enable calibration of the simpler single hydrophone systems which potentially had
value in initial determination of the extent and frequency of bombing in different areas. For this initial
test, high quality, more expensive hydrophones would be used. Alongside these, testing would begin
of cheaper hydrophones suitable for use in prototype systems. This trial blast location system would
be operated in close co-operation with the marine police and fisheries divisions in Hong Kong, both of
whom have considerable int erest in the system. At the simplest level the low technology option could
serve as a simple event logger; a slightly more complex system would consist of a single recording
hydrophone; whilst the triple hydrophone array and networks of triple arrays represented more
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Page 4
complex options, which enhanced the value of the system. A brief tabulation of the characteristics of
these systems is provided in Annex 6.
6.6
During the discussion a number of questions were raised regarding the relationship between
bomb size and damage; the power requirements of the system; and the costs and availability. It was
generally agreed that there was a need for precise location and frequency data in order to determine
the extent of reef degradation; and a need for local community involvement and enhanced public
awareness in order to stimulate the will to act at local level.
6.7
The Focal Points from Cambodia and Vietnam both expressed strong interest in testing such a
system whilst for Thailand blast fishing was not so critical in the Gulf of Thailand, though other
destructive fishing methods were a problem.. Indonesia also expressed keen interest in applying this
system within the framework of ongoing community based management activities.
6.8
In the absence of the Philippines Focal Point Mr. Len Garces of ICLARM suggested that blast
fishing was a persistent problem in the Philippines and he expressed the view that the system would
be valuable in the Philippines. He noted that the Philippines Government had taken a loan from the
Asian Development Bank for a Fisheries Resources Management Programme and thus the possibility
existed, to trial the system through the Bay Management Councils established under this programme.
7.
REPORTS FROM THE FOCAL POINTS ON INTER-SESSIONAL ACTIVITIES AT THE
NATIONAL LEVEL
7.1
Presentations by countries of their draft reports, following the outline agreed at the
first meeting of the Regional Working Group on Fisheries
7.1.1 The Chairperson noted that at the first meeting of the RWG-F, it was agreed that draft
National Reports following the agreed outline would be made available from each country by
September 30th, 2002, for review at this meeting. He noted further that reports were available from
Cambodia, Indonesia, Thailand, and Vietnam but that regrettably reports were not available from
either Malaysia or the Philippines.
7.1.2 The Chairperson invited Dr. Son to present the draft report from Vietnam. Dr. Son presented
a summary of the draft report, based on the document UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/7Viet, which was
before the meeting.
7.1.3 Following the presentation, a number of questions were raised by the participants, in
particular concerning the degree of aggregation of the catch per unit of effort (CPUE) data, which
were reported as tons, per horsepower, per year, for the whole fleet, and indicated a decline in CPUE
of approximately 60 to 70% over the 15 years from 1985 to 2001. Dr. Son explained that these data
were prepared for this preliminary report, and that more detailed data were available, from 1998
onwards. Mr. Passfield noted that, the draft questionnaires, which were to be discussed later, under
agenda item 9 would encourage the provision of more detailed data, where these were available. For
example, fishing effort by gear was included in the questionnaires.
7.1.4 Mr. Somsak Chullasorn expressed some concern at the policy of encouraging the expansion
of offshore fisheries. He asked whether sufficient research had been completed for the offshore
fishing areas to justify this policy, to which Dr. Son replied that some acoustic and other stock
assessment surveys had been undertaken, and more were planned in the near future
7.1.5 Dr. Widodo presented a summary of the draft report for Indonesia, based on the report, which
was tabled at the meeting as document UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/7Ind. He explained that he was a
last minute alternate for Ir. Salim for this meeting, who had been instructed to attend another fisheries
management meeting in Indonesia.
7.1.6 Dr. Widodo said that this report should be considered a rough first draft. One of the areas that
he noted still needed considerable input was in the ranking of the habitats associated with species of
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Page 5
trans-boundary significance. He also noted that there was some information in the report dealing with
fresh water species, which it was not necessary to include.
7.1.7 He informed the meeting that although there had been a ban in Indonesia since 1982 on
trawling, the ban was never very effective as trawlers continued to operate by re-designating and/or
redefining their fishing gear as a fish net, or shrimp net, instead of a trawl. The Government was now
going to reopen the trawl fishery, but with controls, including limiting vessel size, and banning the use
of bobbins and chains on the gear. Indonesia was also refining the legal definition of "trawl gear".
Another management initiative that will be introduced is transferable effort quotas at the provincial
level.
7.1.8 In reply to a question on how the baselines for the application of input controls, such as effort
limitations, were determined, Dr. Widodo replied that these were based on estimates of the maximum
sustainable yield (MSY), and then determination of the optimum effort required to harvest 80% of the
MSY.
7.1.9 Mr. Pirochana presented a summary of the draft report for Thailand, based on the document
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/7Tha. He informed the meeting that there was still some work to be done
to finalise the report, and he also required some clarification from the meeting and the Secretariat on
how to complete certain sections, such as the ranking of species with regard to food security.
7.1.10 In response to a question from Dr. Widodo regarding evidence of recovery of stocks or
habitats after management interventions, Mr. Pirochana stated that, both the round scad (Decapterus
spp.) and the Indo-Pacific mackerel (Rastrelliger spp.) stocks had recovered substantially.
7.1.11 Mr. Passfield requested clarification on the catch rates reported in table 14 of the report,
which in general showed an increase, despite the assertion in the presentation that catch rates had
declined by up to 90%. Mr. Pirochana noted that the increase was mainly due to an increase in size
and efficiency of the fishing gear. Mr. Somsak said that if useful comparisons were to be made, then
some standardised measurements of CPUE would be needed, and that where reasons were known
for anomalies such as in these, the reasons should be explained in the report.
7.1.12 Mr. Garces informed the meeting that there were some country reports prepared under the
Asian Development Bank (ADB) funded TrawlBase project that might be useful to the participants in
preparing these reports.
7.1.13 Mr. Try presented a summary of the draft report for Cambodia, based on the report, which
was tabled at the meeting as document UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/7Cam. He explained that the
report was still preliminary, and that there were a lot of gaps to be filled. One of the problems faced by
Cambodia in preparing this draft report was the lack of available data. There were some reports
completed by a Russian team between 1983 and 1986, but these were in French and had not been
translated into English. Much of the information regarding trends in the fisheries was anecdotal.
7.1.14 In response to a question on the reason given by the fishermen for the decline in catch per
unit effort (CPUE) for shrimp, Mr. Try said that they blamed the Government for ineffective
management of the fishery.
7.1.15 Mr. Somsak stated that in Thailand, fishermen now demanded proof to substantiate any
management interventions to be implemented by Government on fisheries. Mr. Try noted that this was
also true in Cambodia, but existing laws that had been in place since colonial rule were still in effect,
despite the fact that there was not necessarily any research which justified the restrictions.
7.1.16 In response to a question on the enforcement of closed season and closed area regulations,
Mr. Try said that there was not 100% compliance, though any offenders that were caught were fined.
He also informed the meeting that pair trawling and the use of lights as an attraction device were
banned fishing methods in Cambodia.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Page 6
7.2
Discussion on progress to date on the draft reports
7.2.1 Members of the working group recognised that there remained substantial work in order to
complete the reports and that it would not be possible to finalise these in advance of the meetings of
the Regional Scientific and Technical Committee (RSTC) and the Project Steering Committee (PSC)
scheduled for December of this year. In this connection it was noted that documents for consideration
by these two meetings must be distributed to members no later than 4th November.
7.2.2 Following an extensive discussion it was agreed that Mr. Passfield in consultation with the
Chairperson would put together a combined report for consideration by these meetings. It was agreed
that individual Focal Points would advise Mr. Passfield on which sections and/or parts of their
individual reports were most suitable for presentation and that these would be combined into a joint
report for presentation to the RSTC and PSC. Members agreed to advise Mr. Passfield no later than
19th October and to send any additional data and/or information, which they wished, included.
7.2.3 It was agreed that Mr. Passfield in consultation with the Chairperson would consolidate the
information into a single report which would be circulated to all members for clearance prior to being
dispatched to the members of the RSTC and PSC.
7.2.4 It was further agreed that Mr. Passfield and the other members of the Project Co-ordinating
Unit would review the drafts presented to the meeting and provide feedback and review comments by
mid-November to assist the Focal Points in expanding and amending the drafts.
7.3
Membership of the National Committees
7.3.1 The lists of members of the National Committees contained in Document UNEP/GEF/SCS/
RWG-F.2/8 were reviewed and it was agreed that amendments and corrections would be provided to
the PCU no later than Friday 19th November.
7.3.2 It was further agreed that the lists containing details of the expertise of the members and their
institutional affiliations would be posted on the project website at <www.unepscs.org>.
8.
PRESENTATION ON TRAWL BASE PROJECT OF THE WORLD FISH CENTRE, AND ITS
POSSIBLE APPLICATION TO THE FISHERIES COMPONENT
8.1
The Chairperson invited Mr. Len Garces, Fisheries Biologist with the Coastal and Marine
Resources Research Programme, of The World Fish Centre, (ICLARM) in Penang, Malaysia, to make
a presentation on the Trawl Base project.
8.2
Mr. Garces presented the highlights and key results of this collaborative project entitled
"Sustainable Management of Coastal Fish Stocks in Asia" (ADB-RETA 5766), also known as the
TrawlBase project. The project was implemented from 1998 to 2001 with funding from the Asian
Development Bank (ADB) with eight participating Developing Member Countries of the Bank (i.e.,
Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, Sri Lanka, and Vietnam) and ICLARM.
Mr. Garces noted that the objective of this project is to promote sustainable management of coastal
fish stocks in Asia, and that data have been collected from five of the countries involved in the
UNEP/GEF Project (Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam).
8.3
Mr. Garces highlighted the key results of the project, which include:
· Development of the database called "Fisheries Resource Information System and Tools"
(FiRST), which contains resource and socio-economic data for the marine fisheries sector in
South and Southeast Asia, and relevant tools for analysis. The FiRST database is now an
important regional repository of information for sustainable management of coastal fish stocks
in developing Asian countries;
· Documentation of the decline in coastal fishery resources throughout the region. Alarmingly,
stocks are down to 10-30 % of original unfished levels in most countries. The assessments
have also shown that the relative abundance of the more valuable fishes (such as groupers,
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Page 7
snappers, sharks and rays) has decreased sharply and that there has been a proportionate
increase in smaller, less valuable species (such as cardinal and trigger fishes). These results
provide a clear picture of the extent of stock rehabilitation required to restore maximum
economic value to the fisheries of the region;
· Identification of the extent of excess fishing in selected coastal areas. In the case of the
Philippines, for example, the level of fishing on the grossly modified stock is 30% higher than
it should be, resulting in economic losses (via rent dissipation) of about US$ 125 million per
year;
· Evaluation of fisheries management in the participating countries, in consultation with key
stakeholders, resulting in strategies and action programs that should improve productivity of
coastal fish stocks on a sustainable basis. These strategies and action programs define the
critical issues and opportunities at the national level, and the regional assistance required to
support the national efforts; and
· Improved capabilities in coastal fisheries assessment, planning, and management within
national institutions.
8.4
The presentation included examples of the resource analysis results relative to the Gulf of
Thailand and South China Sea area (e.g., western Philippines, Sabah Sarawak area), which were
highly relevant to the work of the Regional Working Group and the UNEP/GEF.
8.5
Mr. Garces concluded by presenting the key elements of the proposed follow-up activities and
noted that, Cambodia will be invited to participate in the Phase II project. Mr. Garces also enumerated
the areas for possible collaboration between the TrawlBase and the South China Sea Project,
including:
·
Joint inputting & analysis of data by respective countries (Cambodia, Malaysia,
Philippines, Thailand & Vietnam)
·
Joint consultation and uptake of management measures/interventions by national
institutions (Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam)
·
Joint development of guidelines for MPAs & ecosystem analysis
·
Joint stock structure analysis (PISCES project)
·
Pilot sites for the "Coastal Challenge Program"
8.6
It was agreed that Focal Points in each country would contact the National Focal Points for
the TrawlBase project with a view to obtaining copies of the data and analyses for review and
possible inclusion in the national reports currently being prepared in the context of the UNEP/GEF
project.
9.
PRESENTATION AND REVIEW OF THE OUTCOMES OF THE GIS WORKSHOP JOINTLY
CONVENED BY THE PROJECT CO-ORDINATING UNIT AND SOUTHEAST ASIA START1
REGIONAL CENTRE IN AUGUST 2002
9.1
Outcomes of the workshop
9.1.1 Mr. Passfield presented the report and outcomes of the GIS workshop convened by the PCU
in collaboration with the SEA START RC (UNEP/GEF/SCS/EW.1/3) concerning the technical aspects
of the regional GIS database and the formats to be used in the compilation of the regional meta-
database.
9.1.2 Mr. Passfield drew the attention of members to the objectives of the workshop, which
stemmed from the need for GIS support in each component and sub-component of the project and
the need to ensure comparability and compatibility between all components and countries
participating in the project. He noted that the questionnaires developed by SEA START RC had been
1 START = the Global Change SysTem for Analysis, Research and Training
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Page 8
based on the agreed data and information requirements identified by the various regional working
groups during their initial meetings.
9.1.3 He referred the meeting to the fisheries component discussions and in particular the GIS
meeting agreements regarding actions at the national level. In particular there is a need to review and
advise the PCU on the workability of the geographic units initially identified; ports of landing; and
habitat distributional data relating to spawning, nursery, fishing and feeding areas.
9.1.4 He drew the attention of the meeting to the agreements regarding the responsibility of country
representatives to the GIS workshop, to support the SEA, Focal Points and the agreement of that
meeting that initial work on baseline maps would be completed in advance of the second meeting of
the Regional Working Group. He noted with regret that this had not occurred and drew the attention of
the meeting to Annex 10 of the workshop report, which contained the workplan for the GIS related
activities.
9.1.5 In response to a query raised by the Chairperson Dr. Pernetta explained that the
arrangements for GIS database entry were to have been discussed and agreed at national level and
that these arrangements would need to be fully agreed and understood by all concerned. He noted
that the primary responsibility of the Specialised Executing Agencies and the Focal Points was to
assemble the data and information needed to complete the national reports. The arrangements for
entering these data into the agreed formats would need to be discussed and agreed between the
Focal Points and the GIS specialists in each country.
9.2
Questionnaires developed by the SEA START RC and workshop participants
9.2.1 Mr. Passfield introduced document UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F2/9 containing copies of the
questionnaires developed by the SEA START RC on the agreed outline for the National Reports for
the Fisheries Component. Participants noted that there were a number of issues and problems with
these questionnaires that needed to be taken into account before the members of the group could
effectively use them.
9.2.2 Mr. Passfield undertook to convey these concerns to Dr. Anond and the staff of SEA START
RC and to see whether these could be amended in the immediate future.
9.2.3 During the discussion the Chairperson, Mr. Try expressed on behalf of all members, his
strong concerns that the GIS representatives from each country who had participated in the GIS
workshop had failed to contact or communicate adequately with the Fisheries Focal Points, hence the
noticeable lack of progress in the GIS related work.
9.3
Review of progress in the creation of national meta-databases
9.3.1 Participants reviewed the meta-database formats developed by SEA START RC and
presented in document UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/10. Members were of the opinion that this might be
less detailed than required. In response it was noted that this form was far simpler than the NOAA
meta-database format and somewhat more complicated than the ASEAN agreed format, and had
been constructed to meet the need for some of the levels of detail required by the components and
sub-components of the project.
9.3.2 It was noted that in a number of instances data sets were not well organised at the national
level and that this regional metadatabase format might assist countries in developing their own
databases. During discussion the notes associated with each cell in the questionnaire were briefly
reviewed. It was agreed that the PCU would be happy to review initial entries and provide comments.
It was further noted that this meta-database format would be loaded on the project web-site and that
the meta-database itself would be loaded sometime around the middle of 2003.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Page 9
10.
REVISION OF THE WORKPLAN AND ACTIVITIES FOR THE REGIONAL WORKING
GROUP ON FISHERIES
10.1
During the first meeting of the Regional Working Group a flow chart of activities and
workplan and timetable were developed and agreed. The workplan and timetable were presented to
the meeting by Mr. Passfield for consideration, review, and updating.
10.2
It was noted that in order to agree upon the length of time needed to complete various
actions it would be necessary to agree on the final list of species that would be considered in detail
during the analysis of existing data and information. The tables prepared and revised by the
Secretariat were then presented and it was agreed that the top 13 pelagic and 9 demersal fish
species, together with 10 cephalopod and 11 crustacean species, as indicated in Annex 4 would be
the priority focus of the work of the National Committees. In this context it was agreed that any
additional information relating to the remaining species on these lists could be included at the
discretion of the individual Focal Points.
10.3
Having finalised the scope of work involved in completing the national reports the meeting
agreed that these could be completed by the end of the first quarter of 2003. In this context the draft
meeting schedule contained in document UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F2/11 was examined and it was
noted that the third meeting of the Regional Working Group had been scheduled for February 2003. If
this schedule were maintained then this would mean that, it would not be possible to review the
national reports during the meeting.
10.4
Participants agreed that the third meeting would therefore be rescheduled to 1st to 5th April;
that the draft national reports would be made available to the PCU for distribution on 21st March; and
that the habitat chapter of the report would be made available to the PCU on February 21st for
distribution to the Regional Working Groups for the habitat sub-components, in order that these
working groups will be able to take the findings into consideration when discussing and deciding upon
priorities for habitat related demonstration sites.
10.5
The revised meeting schedule, and amended workplan and timetable as agreed are
attached as Annex 7 to this report.
11.
DATE AND PLACE OF THE THIRD AND FOURTH MEETING OF THE REGIONAL
WORKING GROUP ON FISHERIES
11.1
Dr. Pernetta outlined the rationale for the schedule of meetings indicating that the original
intention had been that the outcome of the fisheries national reviews, particularly in relation to the
importance of the habitats for transboundary stocks would be made available to the Regional Working
Group's for the habitat sub-components as background to their discussions regarding the choice of
demonstration sites. Having decided to re-schedule the third meeting to 1st 5th April the group
agreed that the habitat chapter of the report would be made available in advance of the habitat
Regional Working Group meetings.
11.2
Members noted that Mr. Noel Barut had indicated the willingness of the Philippines to host the
third meeting but that this offer was based on the original set of dates in February. The meeting
instructed the Secretariat to contact Mr. Barut to ascertain the suitability of the new dates. The
Secretariat contacted Mr. Barut who noted that the changed dates would be suitable provided that they
did not conflict with the Easter festival. He noted that should the meeting so decide then it would be
acceptable to convene the third meeting in an alternative location and the fourth meeting in the
Philippines.
11.3
Given uncertainties regarding the timing of Easter it was agreed that the offer of Mr. Ing Try to
host the third meeting would be accepted and that the fourth meeting would be held in the Philippines.
Participants acknowledged with thanks Mr. Barut's flexibility in this regard.
11.4
Mr. Ing Try then proposed for consideration of the meeting three alternative sites in Cambodia
and following some discussion it was agreed to convene the third meeting in Siem Reap.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Page 10
12.
ANY OTHER BUSINESS
12.1
The Chairperson invited members to propose any further items of business under this agenda
item. No additional items were proposed.
13.
ADOPTION OF THE REPORT OF THE MEETING
13.1
The Rapporteur, Dr. Widodo, presented the draft report of the meeting prepared by the
Secretariat. The meeting reviewed the draft, considered, amended, and adopted the report as contained
in this document.
14.
CLOSURE OF THE MEETING
14.1
The Chairperson, invited members to make any final comments. Dr. Somsak expressed his
pleasure at being invited to participate in the meeting and on behalf of the participants expressed his
thanks to the Secretariat for their hard work in preparing the meeting.
14.2
All participants expressed their appreciation for the constructive manner in which the meeting
had been conducted and the excellent organisation. They also expressed the hope that the next
meeting would have in front of it substantial reports from the individual countries and would be as
enjoyable as the present one.
14.3
On behalf of UNEP and the participants Dr. Pernetta expressed his appreciation to the Thai
hosts for the organisation of an excellent and instructive field trip during the previous day; to Mr. Try
for guiding the meeting to a successful conclusion, and his thanks for the hard work and constructive
approach of all participants to the work of the meeting.
14.4
Mr. Try, Chairperson of the Working Group expressed his thanks to all concerned for their
hard work and for the successful conclusion of the work of the meeting. He noted with pleasure that
he would be able to host the group during its next meeting and promised that he would ensure that
the members had an opportunity to visit various sites of significance in Cambodia.
14.5
Mr. Try formally closed the meeting at 1530 on Friday 11th October, 2002.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Annex 1
Page 1
ANNEX 1
List of Participants
Focal Points
Cambodia
Indonesia
Mr. Ing Try, Deputy Director
Dr. Johanes Widodo
Department of Fisheries
(Designated alternate for Ir. Salim)
Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
Research Institute for Marine Fisheries
186 Norodom Blvd., P.O. Box 582
Jl. Muara Baru Ujung
Phnom Penh, Cambodia
Jakarta Utara 14440, Indonesia
Tel:
(855 23) 219256
Tel: (62 21) 660 2044, 661 7908
Mobile: (855) 11 957 884
Mobile: (62) 812 924 4479
Fax: (855 23) 219256; 427048; 215470
Fax: (62 21) 6402640
E-mail: tmmp.cam@bigpond.com.kh
E-mail: jwidodo_uw88@cbn.net.id;
kanlutmb@indosat.net.id
Malaysia
Philippines
Unavailable
Unavailable
Thailand
Vietnam
Mr. Pirochana Saikliang
Dr. Dao Manh Son, Vice Director
Senior Fishery Biologist
Research Institute for Marine Fisheries
Upper Gulf Marine Fisheries Development Center
170 Le Lai Street
49 Soi Phrarachaveriyaporn 16
Haiphong City, Vietnam
Phrarachaveriyaporn Road
Bangphueng Sub-district, Phrapradeang District
Tel: (84 31) 837 898, 836 135
Samut Prakarn 10130, Thailand
Fax: (84 31) 836 812
E-mail: daoson@hn.vnn.vn
Tel:
(66 2) 816 7635-8 ext. 15
Mobile: (66 1) 843 9887
Fax:
(66 2) 816 7634
e-mail: pirochas@fisheries.go.th
Expert Member
Mr. Somsak Chullasorn
Department of Fisheries
Kasetsart University Campus
Chatujak, Bangkok, 10900
Thailand
Tel: (66 2) 561 3150
Fax: (66 2) 562 0561
Mobile: (66 9) 8333934
Email: Somsakc@fisheries.go.th
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Annex 1
Page 2
Project Co-ordinating Unit Member
Mr. Kelvin Passfield, Expert
UNEP/GEF Project Co-ordinating Unit
United Nations Environment Programme
9th Floor, Block A, United Nations Building
Rajdamnern Avenue
Bangkok 10200, Thailand
Tel: (66 2) 288 1116
Fax: (66 2) 281 2428
E-mail: passfield@un.org
Observers
Mr. Len R. Garces
Dr. George Woodman, Head of Science
Fisheries/Marine Biologist
Li Po Chun United World College of Hong Kong
Coastal and Marine Resources Research
10 Lok Woo Sha Lane
Program, International Center for Living Aquatic
Sai Sha Road, Shatin
Resources Management
N.T., Hong Kong
(ICLARM) -The World Fish Center
Jalan Batu Maung, Bayan Lepas
Tel:
(852) 2640 0441; 2644 1587
11960 Penang, Malaysia
Fax: (852) 2643 4088
P.O. Box 500, GPO 10670, Penang, Malaysia
E-mail: george@hwoodman.demon.co.uk
Fax: (604) 626 5530
Ms. Atchara Vibhasiri
Mr. Manoch Roongratri
Chief, Marine Resources Survey Unit
Senior Fishery Biologist
Upper Gulf Marine Fisheries Development Center
Chief of Marine Fauna Life History Unit
49 Phrarachaveriyaporn 16
Eastern Marine Fisheries Development Center
Bangphueng, Phrapradeang
Ban Phe, Muang Distric
Samut prakarn 10130, Thailand
Rayong 21160, Thailand
Tel:
(66 2) 816 7636-8 ext. 22
Tel:
(66 38) 651 764
Mobile: (66 1) 889 9122
Fax: (66 38) 651 763
Fax:
(66 2) 816 7634
E-mail: emdec@loxinfo.co.th
E-mail: atcharav@fisheries.go.th
Mr. Veera Boonrugsa
Mr. Pairoh Sutthakorn
Chief of Stock Assessment Unit
Chief of Marine Life History Unit
Andaman Sea Fisheries Development Center
Andaman Sea Fisheries Development Center
77 Sakdidej Road, Aumphur Muang
77 Sakdidej Road, Aumphur Muang
Phuket 83000, Thailand
Phuket 83000, Thailand
Tel:
(66 76) 391138-40
Tel:
(66 76) 391138-40
Fax:
(66 76) 391139
Fax:
(66 76) 391139
E-mail: afdec@phuket.ksc.co.th
E-mail: afdec@phuket.ksc.co.th
Mr. Jate Pimoljninda
Andaman Sea Fisheries Development Center
77 Sakdidej Road, Aumphur Muang
Phuket 83000, Thailand
Tel:
(66 76) 391138-40
Fax:
(66 76) 391139
E-mail: afdec@phuket.ksc.co.th
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Annex 1
Page 3
Secretariat
Dr. John Pernetta, Project Director
Ms. Unchalee Kattachan
UNEP/GEF Project Co-ordinating Unit
Secretary, UNEP/GEF Project Co-ordinating Unit
United Nations Environment Programme
United Nations Environment Programme
9th Floor, Block A, United Nations Building
9th Floor, Block A, United Nations Building
Rajdamnern Avenue
Rajdamnern Avenue
Bangkok 10200, Thailand
Bangkok 10200, Thailand
Tel:
(66 2) 288 1886
Tel: (66 2) 288 1670
Fax: (66 2) 281 2428
Fax: (66 2) 281 2428
E-mail: pernetta@un.org
E-mail: kattachan.unescap@un.org
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Annex 2
Page 1
ANNEX 2
List of Documents
Discussion documents
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/1
Provisional Agenda
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/2
Provisional Annotated Agenda
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Report of the Meeting
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/4
Report of the Project Co-ordinating Unit Concerning the
Mid-year Reviews and Reports from the Specialised
Executing Agencies.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/5
Six Month Progress Reports from the Participating
Countries.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/6
List of Globally Threatened and Endangered Species for
the South China Sea, as well as for each Participating
Country.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F2/7.Cam
National Report for the Fisheries Component from
Cambodia. Tabled at the meeting.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F2/7.Ind
National Report for the Fisheries Component from
Indonesia.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F2/7.Tha
National Report for the Fisheries Component from
Thailand. Tabled at the meeting.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F2/7.Viet
National Report for the Fisheries Component from
Vietnam.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/8
Members of the National Fisheries Committees in the
Participating Countries.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/9
Questionnaires for Data and Information Entry into the
Regional GIS Database for Fisheries.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/10
Meta-data Formats for Entries in the South China Sea
Regional Meta-database.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/11
Draft Meeting Schedule for the UNEP/GEF Project for
2003.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/12
State of Coastal Fisheries in Developing Asian Countries.
Presentation by Mr. Len Garces, ICLARM.
CD-ROM
Overview of Fish Blasting and Detection Technology.
Presentation by Dr. Woodman, Marine Sensors and
Biosensors Group, Hong Kong University of Science and
Technology.
Information documents
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/INF.1
Provisional List of Documents
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/INF.2
Provisional List of Participants
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/INF.3
Draft Programme
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Annex 2
Page 2
UNEP/GEF/SCS/EW.1/3
UNEP/GEF/SCS and SEA START RC, GIS Workshop in
Support of the UNEP/GEF Project "Reversing
Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China
Sea and Gulf of Thailand", Report of the meeting,
UNEP/GEF/SCS/EW.1/3, Bangkok, Thailand, 7-9 August
2002.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/PSC.1/3
First Meeting of the Project Steering Committee for the
UNEP/GEF Project "Reversing Environmental Degradation
Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand".
Report of the meeting. UNEP/GEF/SCS/PSC.1/3. UNEP,
Bangkok Thailand.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RSTC.1/3
First Meeting of the Regional Scientific & Technical
Committee for the UNEP/GEF Project "Reversing
Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea
and Gulf of Thailand". Report of the meeting. UNEP/GEF/
SCS/RSTC.1/3 Pattaya, Thailand, 14 - 16 March 2002.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-LbP.1/3
First Meeting of the Regional Working Group for the Land-
based Pollution Component of the UNEP/GEF Project
"Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South
China Sea and Gulf of Thailand". Report of the meeting.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-LbP.1/3 Bangkok, Thailand, 3 - 5
April 2002.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-W.1/3
First Meeting of the Regional Working Group for the
Wetland Sub-component of the UNEP/GEF Project
"Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South
China Sea and Gulf of Thailand". Report of the meeting.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-W.1/3 Phuket, Thailand, 24 - 26
April 2002.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-M.1/3
First Meeting of the Regional Working Group for the
Mangrove Component of the UNEP/GEF Project
"Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South
China Sea and Gulf of Thailand". Report of the meeting.
UNEP/GEF/ SCS/RWG-M.1/3 Phuket, Thailand, 29 April -
1 May 2002.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.1/3
First Meeting of the Regional Working Group for the
Seagrass Sub-component of the UNEP/GEF Project
"Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South
China Sea and Gulf of Thailand". Report of the meeting.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.1/3 Bangkok, Thailand, 6 - 8
May 2002.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-CR.1/3
First Meeting of the Regional Working Group for the Coral
Reef Sub-component of the UNEP/GEF Project "Reversing
Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea
and Gulf of Thailand". Report of the meeting. UNEP/GEF/
SCS/RWG-CR.1/3 Bangkok, Thailand, 9 - 11May 2002.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.1/3
First Meeting of the Regional Working Group for the
Fisheries Component of the UNEP/GEF Project "Reversing
Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea
and Gulf of Thailand". Report of the meeting. UNEP/GEF/
SCS/RWG-F.1/3 Bangkok , Thailand, 20 -22 May 2002.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Annex 3
Page 1
ANNEX 3
Agenda
1.
OPENING OF THE MEETING
1.1
Welcome address
1.2
Introduction of members
2.
ORGANISATION OF THE MEETING
2.1
Designation of officers
2.2
Documents available to the meeting
2.3
Organisation of work
3.
ADOPTION OF THE MEETING AGENDA
4.
REPORT OF THE SECRETARIAT CONCERNING THE MID-YEAR REVIEWS AND
REPORTS FROM PARTICIPATING COUNTRIES
5.
CONSIDERATION OF THE LISTS OF SHARED AND TRANSBOUNDARY FISH STOCKS,
AND DRAFT LISTS OF GLOBALLY THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES FOR
THE SOUTH CHINA SEA, BY COUNTRY
6.
PRESENTATION ON THE DEVELOPMENT AND TRIALS OF A BLAST FISHING
DETECTION DEVICE
7.
REPORTS FROM THE FOCAL POINTS ON INTER-SESSIONAL ACTIVITIES AT THE
NATIONAL LEVEL
7.1
Presentations by countries of their draft reports, following the outline agreed at the first
meeting of the Regional Working Group on Fisheries
7.2
Discussion on progress to date on the draft reports
7.3
Membership of the National Committees
8.
PRESENTATION ON TRAWL BASE PROJECT OF THE WORLD FISH CENTRE, AND ITS
POSSIBLE APPLICATION TO THE FISHERIES COMPONENT
9.
PRESENTATION AND REVIEW OF THE OUTCOMES OF THE GIS WORKSHOP JOINTLY
CONVENED BY THE PROJECT CO-ORDINATING UNIT AND SOUTHEAST ASIA START2
REGIONAL CENTRE IN AUGUST 2002
9.1
Outcomes of the workshop
9.2
Questionnaires developed by the SEA START RC and workshop participants
9.3
Review of progress in the creation of national meta-databases
10.
REVISION OF THE WORKPLAN AND ACTIVITIES FOR THE REGIONAL WORKING
GROUP ON FISHERIES
11.
DATE AND PLACE OF THE THIRD AND FOURTH MEETING OF THE REGIONAL
WORKING GROUP ON FISHERIES
12.
ANY OTHER BUSINESS
13.
ADOPTION OF THE REPORT OF THE MEETING
14.
CLOSURE OF THE MEETING
2 START = the Global Change SysTem for Analysis, Research and Training
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Annex 4
Page 1
ANNEX 4
Pelagic and Demersal Fish Species, Cephalopods, and Crustaceans of Transboundary Significance
Table 1 Occurrence and Ranking of the Transboundary Significance of pelagic fish species in the South China and Gulf of Thailand
Table 1a Species to be considered during the initial review
Occurrence
Ranking of transboundary significance
Common name
Species
Thailand Vietnam Cambodia Indonesia Philippines Cambodia Indonesia Philippines Thailand Vietnam Expert Average
Narrow-barred Spanish mackerel Scomberomorus commerson
X
X
X
X
X
5
5
5
5
3
4.5
4.58
Indian mackerel
Rastrelliger kannagurta
X
X
X
X
X
4
5
5
5
2
4.5
4.25
Frigate tuna
Auxis thazard
X
X
X
X
X
3
4
5
5
4
4.5
4.25
Indo-Pacific king mackerel
Scomberomorus guttatus
X
X
X
X
X
5
4
5
4
3
4
4.17
Short mackerel
Rastrelliger brachysoma
X
X
X
X
X
3
5
5
4
3
4.5
4.08
Sardinellas
Sardinella spp
X
X
X
X
X
4
3
4
5
3
4
3.83
Kawakawa
Euthynnus affinis
X
X
?
X
X
5
5
5
3
4.5
3.75
Japanese scad
Decapterus maruadsi
X
X
X
X
2
0
5
5
4
4.5
3.42
Longtail tuna
Thunnus tonggol
X
X
?
X
X
3
5
5
2
5
3.33
Anchovies
Stolephorus, Encrasicholina
X
X
X
X
X
4
3
4
3
3
3
3.33
Shortfin scad
Decapterus macrosoma
X
X
?
X
X
3
5
5
2
4
3.17
Bigeye scad
Selar crumenophthalmus
X
X
X
X
X
2
4
4
4
1
4
3.17
Bullet tuna
Auxis rochei
X
X
X
X
3
2
5
3
2
3
3.00
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Annex 4
Page 2
Table 1b The following species were not considered of to merit consideration during the initial phase
Occurrence
Ranking of transboundary significance
Thai Viet Cam Indo Phil Cam Ind Phil Thai Viet Exp Average
Common name
Species
Torpedo scad
Megalaspis cordyla
X
X
X
X
X
2
3
5
3
1
3.5
2.92
Yellow-stripe scad
Selaroides leptolepis
X
X
X
X
X
2
3
4
3
3
2.5
2.92
Yellowtail scad
Atule mate
X
X
X
X
X
2
3
4
4
1
3
2.83
Talang queenfish
Scomberoides commersonnianus
X
X
X
X
X
4
3
4
2
1
3
2.83
Redbelly yellowtail fusilier
Caesio cuning
X
X
X
X
5
4
4
1
3
2.83
Indo-Pacific sailfish
Istiophorus platypterus
X
X
X
X
4
5
1
3
3.5
2.75
Double -spotted queenfish
Scomberoides lysan
X
X
X
X
X
4
2
4
2
1
3
2.67
Dorab wolf herring
Chirocentrus dorab
X
X
X
X
X
2
4
3
2
2
3
2.67
Whale shark
Rhincodon typus
X
X
X
X
X
3
2
4
1
2
3.5
2.58
Blacktip shark
Carcharhinus limbatus
X
X
X
X
3
3
4
2
3
2.50
Bamboo shark
Chiloscyllium spp
X
X
X
X
X
4
1
4
1
2
3
2.50
Scalloped hammerhead shark
Sphyrna lewini
X
X
X
X
X
3
3
4
2
3
2.50
Indian scad
Decapterus russelli
X
?
X
4
4
3
3.5
2.42
Common dolphin fish
Coryphaena hippurus
X
X
X
X
3
5
1
3
2.5
2.42
Swordfish
Xiphias gladius
X
X
X
X
2
0
5
1
3
3.5
2.42
Skipjack tuna
Katsuwonus pelamis
X
?
X
X
5
5
4
2.33
Trevallies
Caranx spp
X
X
X
X
X
2
4
3
2
3
2.33
Spottail shark
Carcharhinus sorrah
X
X
X
X
X
3
2
2
1
3
3
2.33
Shrimp scad
Alepes djedaba
X
X
X
X
X
2
2
4
2
1
2.5
2.25
Indo-Pacific blue marlin
Makaira mazara
X
X
X
0
5
1
3
3.5
2.08
Black marlin
Makaira indica
X
X
X
0
5
1
3
3.5
2.08
Blacktip reef shark
Carcharhinus melanopterus
X
X
X
3
4
2
3
2.00
Chacunda gizzaard shad
Anodontostoma chacunda
X
X
X
X
3
2
3
1
2
1.83
Yellowfin tuna
Thunnus albacares
X
X
X
0
5
5
1.67
Atlatic blue marlin
Makaira nigricans
X
X
0
5
1
3.5
1.58
Spotted sardinella
Amblygaster sirm
X
?
X
?
4
2
2.5
1.42
Oceanic whitetip shark
Carcharinus longimanus
X
X
4
4
1.33
Thintail thresher shark
Alopias vulpinus
X
X
X
2
4
2
1.33
Whitecheek shark
Carcharinus dussumieri
X
X
2
1
1
3
1.17
Pelagic thresher shark
Alopias pelagicus
X
X
?
2
4
1
1.17
Note: Though it was decided that these species would not be considered in the initial review of species of transboundary significance, some of them, including the whale
shark, are included in the list of threatened and near threatened species in Annex 5
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Annex 4
Page 3
Table 1c Species of uncertain occurrence, importance and/or difficulty of identification which are included within aggregates in Tables 1a and 1b
Occurrence
Ranking of transboundary significance
Thai
Viet
Cam Indo Phil Cam Ind
Phil
Thai
Viet
Exp Average
Shorthead anchovy
Encrasicholina heteroloba
X
X
4
2
3
4
2.17
Commerson's anchovy
Stolephorus commersoni
X
X
X
X
X
3
4
4
1
4
2
3.00
Devi's anchovy
Encrasicholina devisi
X
X
?
1
3
3.5
1.25
Indian anchovy
Stolephorus indicus
X
X
X
X
X
4
3
4
3
3
3
3.33
Island mackerel
Rastrelliger faughni
X
1
2
2.5
0.92
Streaked seerfish
Scomberomorus lineolatus
X
1
4
3
1.33
Barred queenfish
Scomberoides tala
X
1
2
2.5
0.92
Buccaneer anchovy
Encrasicholina punctifer
X
1
3
4
1.33
Smooth hammerhead shark
Sphyrna zygaena
X
3
0.50
Whitefin wolf herring
Chirocentrus nudus
X
2
1
2.5
0.92
Flying fish
Cypselurus spp
X
1
4
1
2
2.5
1.75
Goldstripe sardinella
Sardinella gibbosa
X
X
X
X
X
4
3
4
5
3
4
3.83
Deepbody sardinella
Sardinella brachysoma
X
X
X
4
3
4
1.83
Fringescale sardinella
Sardinella fimbriata
X
X
X
X
X
4
3
4
3
1
2.5
2.92
White sardinella
Sardinella albella
X
X
2
3
2
2.5
1.58
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Annex 4
Page 4
Table 2 Occurrence and Ranking of the Transboundary Significance of demersal fish species in the South China and Gulf of Thailand
Table 2a Species to be considered during the initial review
Occurrence
Ranking of transboundary significance
Common names
Species
Thai Viet
Cam Indo
Phil
Cam
Ind
Phil
Thai
Viet
Exp
Average
Greasy grouper
Epinephelus tauvina
X
X
X
X
X
5
4
4
2
5
3
3.83
Mangrove red snapper
Lutjanus argentimaculatus
X
X
X
X
5
3
4
2
4
3.5
3.58
Malabar blood snapper
Lutjanus malabaricus
X
X
X
X
5
5
4
2
2
3.5
3.58
Malabar grouper
Epinephelus malabaricus
X
X
X
X
X
5
4
4
2
3
3.5
3.58
Threadfin breams
Nemipterus spp
X
X
?
4
4
2
4
3
3.5
3.42
Leopard coralgrouper
Plectropomus leopardus
X
X
X
X
X
4
4
4
2
2
3
3.17
Lizardfish
Saurida spp
X
X
X
X
X
4
3
2
3
3
3.5
3.08
Brownstripe red snapper
Lutjanus vitta
X
X
X
X
5
3
4
2
1
3
3.00
Sixbar grouper
Epinephelus sexfasciatus
X
X
X
X
X
5
2
4
2
2
3
3.00
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Annex 4
Page 5
Table 2b The following species were not considered of sufficiently high transboundary importance to merit consideration during the initial phase.
Occurrence
Ranking of transboundary significance
Common names
Species
Thai
Viet
Cam Indo
Phil
Cam
Ind
Phil
Thai
Viet
Exp Average
Purple -spotted bigeye
Priacanthus tayenus
X
X
X
X
X
3
3
3
3
2
3.5
2.92
Red bigeye
Priacanthus macracanthus
X
X
X
X
X
3
3
3
2
3
3.5
2.92
Duskytail grouper
Epinephelus bleekeri
X
X
X
?
?
4
1
4
2
3
2.5
2.75
Humphead snapper
Lutjanus sanguineus
X
X
X
X
5
4
1
3
3
2.67
Emperor red snapper
Lutjanus sebae
X
X
X
X
5
4
4
2
2.50
Sharptooth jobfish
Pristipomoides typus
X
X
X
X
5
3
4
3
2.50
Croakers
Johnius, Pennahia & Otolithes spp
X
X
X
X
X
2
3
2
2
2
3
2.33
Largehead hairtail
Trichiurus lepturus
X
X
X
X
X
2
3
2
2
2
3
2.33
Bigeye snapper
Lutjanus lutjanus
X
X
5
3
3
3
2.33
Crimson jobfish
Pristipomoides filamentosus
X
X
X
X
5
3
4
2
2.33
Spotted coralgrouper
Plectropomus maculatus
X
X
X
X
3
3
4
1
3
2.33
Spotted eagle ray
Aetobatus narinari
X
X
X
X
2
4
4
1
2.5
2.25
Brown-marbled grouper
Epinephelus fuscoguttatus
X
X
X
X
4
2
4
3
2.17
Giant manta ray
Manta birostris
X
X
X
2
3
5
1
1.83
Blue-spotted stingray
Dasyatis kuhlii
X
X
X
X
2
4
1
1
2.5
1.75
Skate
Raja spp
X
X
?
X
X
2
4
1
1
2.5
1.75
Squaretail coralgrouper
Plectropomus aereolatus
X
X
2
4
1
3
1.67
Snapper species
Lutjanus species for live fish trade
X
5
2
1.17
Hong Kong grouper
Epinepelus akaara
X
0
4
0.67
Blue-spotted ribbontail ray
Taeniura lymma
X
0
1
2
0.50
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Annex 4
Page 6
Table 3 Occurrence and Ranking of the Transboundary Significance of cephalopod species in the South China and Gulf of Thailand
Table 3a Species to be considered during the initial review
Occurrence
Ranking of transboundary significance
Common name
Species
Thai
Viet
Cam
Indo
Phil
Cam
Ind
Phil
Thai
Viet
Exp
Average
Needle cuttlefish
Sepia aculeata
X
X
X
X
X
4
3
3
3
5
3.5
3.58
Indian squid
Uroteuthis (photololigo) duvauceli
X
X
X
X
4
0
3
3
3
3.5
2.75
Swordtip squid
Uroteuthis (photololigo) edulis
X
X
X
X
4
4
3
5
2.67
Bigfin reef squid
Sepioteuthis lessoniana
X
X
X
X
2
3
3
3
4
2.50
Mitre squid
Uroteuthis (photololigo) chinensis
X
X
X
0
3
4
4
3.5
2.42
Pharaoh cuttlefish
Sepia pharaonis
X
X
X
3
2
4
3.5
2.08
Curvespine cuttlefish
Sepia recurvirostra
X
X
X
3
2
3
3
1.83
Octopus
Octopus spp.
X
X
X
4
3
4
1.83
Kisslip cuttlefish
Sepia lycidas
X
X
X
3
1
4
2.5
1.75
squid
Loligo sumatrensis ?
X
X
X
1
3
3
3
1.67
Table 3b The following species were not considered of sufficiently high transboundary importance to merit consideration during the initial phase.
Occurrence
Ranking of transboundary significance
Common name
Species
Thai
Viet
Cam
Indo
Phil
Cam
Ind
Phil
Thai
Viet
Exp
Average
Spineless cuttlefish
Sepiella inermis
X
X
3
2
2.5
1.25
Octopus
Octopus membranaceus
X
X
2
3
2.5
1.25
Shortclub cuttlefish
Sepia brevimana
X
X
3
1
2.5
1.08
Octopus
Octopus aegina
X
4
0.67
Octopus
Octopus macropus
X
4
0.67
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Annex 4
Page 7
Table 4 Occurrence and Ranking of the Transboundary Significance of crustacean species in the South China and Gulf of Thailand
Table 4a Species to be considered during the initial review
Occurrence
Ranking of transboundary significance
Common name
Species
Thai Viet Cam Indo Phil Cam Ind Phil Thai Viet Exp Average
Scalloped spiny lobster
Panulirus homarus
X X X X X 5 4 5 1 4 2.5 3.58
Banana prawn
Penaeus merguiensis
X X X X X 3 5 3 3 3 4 3.50
Giant tiger prawn
Penaeus monodon
X X X X X 3 4 3 2 5 4 3.50
Rock lobster
Panulirus ornatus
X X X X X 5 2 5 1 5 2.5 3.42
Longlegged spiny lobster
Panulirus longipes
X X X X X 5 3 5 1 3 2.5 3.25
Painted rock lobster
Panulirus versicolor
X X X X X 5 2 5 1 2 2.5 2.92
Green tiger prawn
Penaeus semisulcatus
X X X X X 3 3 3 3 2 3 2.83
Pronghorn spiny lobster
Panulirus penicillatus
X X X X X 5 1 5 1 2 2.5 2.75
Slipper lobster
Thenus orientalis
X X X X X 5 4 1 3 3.5 2.75
Jinga shrimp
Metapenaeus affinis
X X X X X 3 2 3 2 3 3 2.67
Greasyback shrimp
Metapenaeus ensis
X X X X 2 3 2 4 3 2.33
Table 4b The following species were not considered of sufficiently high transboundary importance to merit consideration during the initial phase.
Occurrence Ranking
of
transboundary
significance
Common name
Species
Thai Viet Cam Indo Phil Cam Ind Phil Thai Viet Exp Average
Western king prawn
Penaeus latisulcatus
X X X ? 3 3 2 3.5 1.92
Kuruma shrimp
Penaeus japonicus
X
X X 3 0 3 3 1.50
Indian white shrimp
Penaeus indicus
X X X 2 3 2 1.17
Shrimp
Metapenaeus conjuntus
X ? 0 3
1 2.5 1.08
Bird shrimp
Metapenaeus lysianassa
X ? 0 3
1 2.5 1.08
Witch prawn
Penaeus canaliculatus
X
?
3 0 3 1.00
Pink prawn
Metapenaeus intermedius
X 0 1 2.5 0.58
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Annex 5
Page 1
ANNEX 5
Preliminary List of Threatened and Near Threatened Species for the South China Sea
Scientific name
Common name
IUCN cat. (v3.1)*
Aetobatus narinari
Spotted eagle ray
DD
Alopias vulpinus
Thin tail thresher shark
DD
Anoxypristis cuspidata
Knifetooth sawfish
En
Atherinomorus lineatus
Line silverside
Vu
Butis butis
Duckbill sleeper
NT
Carcharhinus amblyrhynchoides
Graceful shark
NT
Carcharhinus amblyrhynchos
Grey reef shark
NT
Carcharhinus borneensis
Borneo shark
En
Carcharhinus brevipinna
Spinner shark
NT
Carcharhinus hemiodon
Pondicherry shark
Vu
Carcharhinus leucas
Bull shark
NT
Carcharhinus limbatus
Blacktip shark
NT
Carcharhinus longimanus
Oceanic whitetip shark
NT
Carcharhinus melanopterus
Blacktip reef shark
NT
Carcharhinus obscurus
Dusky shark
NT
Carcharhinus plumbeus
Sandbar shark
NT
Carcharias taurus
Sand tiger shark
Vu
Carcharodon carcharias
Great white shark
Vu
Cephalopholis boenak
Chocolate hind
DD
Cheilinus undulatus
Humphead wrasse
Vu
Cromileptes altivelis
Humpback grouper
DD
Dalatias licha
Kitefin shark
DD
Doryrhamphus dactyliophorus
Ringed pipefish
DD
Eleotris melanosoma
Broadhead sleeper
NT
Epinephelus lanceolatus
Giant grouper
Vu
Eurypegasus draconis
Short dragonfish
DD
Galeocerdo cuvier
Tiger shark
NT
Glossogobius biocellatus
Sleepy goby
NT
Glyphis gangeticus
Ganges shark
Cr
Glyphis glyphis
Speartooth shark
En
Hexanchus griseus
Blunt-nose six-gill shark
NT
Hippocampus barbouri
Barbour's seahorse
Vu
Hippocampus comes
Tiger tail seahorse
Vu
Hippocampus fuscus
Sea pony
Vu
Hippocampus histrix
Thorny seahorse
Vu
Hippocampus kuda
Spotted seahorse
Vu
Hippocampus mohnikei
Japanese seahorse
Vu
Hippocampus spinosissimus
Hedgehog seahorse
Vu
Hippocampus trimaculatus
Longnose seahorse
Vu
Isurus oxyrinchus
Shortfin Mako shark
NT
Lagocephalus gloveri
Kuro sabafugu (Jap)
DD
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Annex 5
Page 2
Scientific name
Common name
IUCN cat. (v3.1)*
Liza melinoptera
Otomebora mullet
En
Notorynchus cepedianus
Broadnose seven-gill shark
DD
Papillogobius reichei
Indo-Pacific tropical sand goby
NT
Pegasus laternarius
Sticklebacks and seamoths
Vu
Pegasus volitans
Longtail seamoth
DD
Prionace glauca
Blue shark
NT
Pristis microdon
Largetooth sawfish
En
Pristis pectinata
Smalltooth sawfish
En
Pristis zijsron
Longcomb sawfish
En
Rhincodon typus
Whale shark
Vu
Scoliodon laticaudus
Spadenose shark
NT
Solegnathus hardwickii
Hardwicke's pipefish
Vu
Solegnathus lettiensis
Gunther's pipe horse
Vu
Sphoeroides pachygaster
Blunthead puffer
Vu
Sphyrna lewini
Scalloped hammerhead
NT
Sphyrna mokarran
Great hammerhead
DD
Sphyrna zygaena
Smooth hammerhead
NT
Syngnathoides biaculeatus
Alligator pipefish
DD
Taeniura lymma
Bluespotted ribbontail ray
NT
Takifugu niphobles
Puffers and filefishes
DD
Takifugu poecilonotus
Puffers and filefishes
DD
Takifugu xanthopterus
Puffers and filefishes
DD
Teramulus kieneri
Kiener's silverside
DD
Thunnus alalunga
Albacore tuna
DD
Thunnus obesus
Big eye tuna
Vu
Triaenodon obesus
Whitetip reef shark
NT
Urogymnus asperrimus
Porcupine ray
Vu
Xiphias gladius
Swordfish
DD
Marine mammals
Balaenoptera borealis
Coalfish whale
En
Balaenoptera musculus
Blue whale
En
Balaenoptera physalus
Finbacked whale
En
Megaptera novaeangliae
Humpbacked whale
Vu
Orcaella brevirostris
Irawaddy dolphin
DD
Dugong dugon
Dugong
Vu
Marine Turtles
Caretta caretta
Loggerhead turtle
En
Chelonia mydas
Green turtle
En
Dermochelys coriacea
Leatherback turtle
Cr
Eretmochelys imbricata
Hawksbill turtle
Cr
Lepidochelys olivacea
Olive ridley turtle
En
*IUCN categories criteria version 3.1, 2001. Cr = critically endangered; En = endangered; Vu = vulnerable;
NT=, near threatened; DD = data deficient. The term "threatened" includes categories Cr, En and Vu.
Sources. For fishes, Fishbase 2000, ICLARM- The World Fish Centre
For Marine mammals and reptiles; IUCN 2002. 2002 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Annex 6
Page 1
ANNEX 6
Characteristics of Blast Detection Devices at Different Levels of Sophistication
Feature
Event logging
Recording hydrophone
Triple hydrophone Array
Network of triple
hydrophone
hydrophones
Geographical
None
Estimated range
Direction and estimated range Accurate position fix
information
Sensitivity
Low
Medium
High
Highest
(<2 km)
(4-8 km)
(50 km?)
(100 km?)
Reliability
Some false positives
Post analysis can reject
Good discrimination
Excellent discrimination
some false positives.
Deployment
Small, easily hidden,
Small, easily hidden,
Large, greater power
Large, greater power
constraints
good battery life
reduced battery life
requirements.
requirements.
Estimated Cost
1000
2-3000
5000
>15 000
(US$)
Uses
Remote regions,
Remote regions, measure
Patrol boats, tourist resorts to Monitoring large areas,
estimate blast rate
blast rate
improve enforcement
enable immediate response
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Annex 7
Page 1
ANNEX 7
Amended Workplan and Timetable
Workplan and Timetable for completion of agreed activities in the fisheries component: 2002 - 2003 (Revised on 11/10/02 at Second RWG-F)
Year
2002
2003
Quarter
1st
2nd
3rd
4th
1st
2nd
3rd
4th
NATIONAL ACTIVITIES
National Committee meetings (i)
NTWG Meetings (ii)
X
X
X
X
RWG-F meetings (iii)
1
2
3
4
Provide data to RWG-F and RSTC (vi)
Preparation of National Reports3 (vii, xii)
D
1
FD
Identification of spawning, nursery, feeding, and fishing grounds for
transboundary stoc ks
Habitat (chapter 4) of national reports (by 21 Feb 2003, for presentation at third
series of habitat meetings)
Develop criteria for ranking of protected areas (xi)
Review threats at site level (xii)
Review national criteria for zoning fisheries use (x)
Review national level management regimes and legislation (ix)
Create and maintain of National metadatabase (viii)
Development of NAPs to Implement the SAP (xiii)
Provide guidance to IMC on the SAP(xiv)
Develop awareness materials for stakeholders with RWG-F.
Prepare proposals for fishery pilot activities (xvi)
REGIONAL COORDINATION
Regional Criteria development for significant sites (iii)
Assemble regional metadatabase (iv)
Develop awareness raising materials with NFCs (v)
Compile syntheses of national reports (vi)
Recommend to RSTC sites for refugia and examples of effective management.
(vii, viii)
Promote the SEAFDEC code of conduct for fisheries(ix)
Provide input to the RSTC for SAP (x)
The national activities in this workplan are based on the tasks designated for the SEAs and contained in the MOU, where more detailed information is available. Roman numerals in parentheses
indicate the number of the task in the MOU. Regional coordination is based on the terms of reference (TOR) for the RWG-F. Roman numerals refer to the TOR number.
3 The outline of the proposed contents of the National Reports is appended as Annex 6 to the report of the first meeting, UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.1/3.
UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.2/3
Annex 7
Page 2
Provisional Schedule of meetings for 2003
M
T
W
T F S S M T W T
F
S
S
M T W T
F
S
S M T
W T
F
S
S
M T
W T
F
S
S
M
January
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
N.Y
February
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
Chinese N.Y.
RWG-LbP-3
March
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
RWG-M-3
RWG-S-3
RWG-W-3
RWG-C-3
April
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
RWG-F-3
Thai N.Y.
Easter
May
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
RSTC-3
June
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
July
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
August
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
RWG-LbP-4
September
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
RWG-F-4
RWG-S-4
RWG-C-4
October
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
Cont.
RWG-W-4
RWG-M-4
Ramadan
November
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
Ramadan
December
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
Regional Sci.
Mtg.
RSTC-4
PSC-3
Xmas