345
10 The Role of Local Ecological Knowledge in the Conservation and Management...
fi shers to observe that fi shes have declined in a given area over time, and then to
interpret this as being due to the fi sh having moved elsewhere, gone deeper or
changed behaviour, such as no longer biting hooks . The interpretation of the observation in this case is not that the fi sh are no longer in the sea (i.e. possibly overfi shed) but that they are still present in the area but can no longer be caught. Such a
perspective would make the concept of spatial protection or effort reduction in an
area unacceptable or even incomprehensible as a solution to the changes perceived
in catches. Discussion of such perceptions opens up opportunities for additional
possible explanations, including overfi shing, or discussions of various options for
management as well as the longer term implications of inaction.
Interviewers must exercise care in formulating unambiguous questions while
anticipating possible confounding factors. For example, in asking about trends in
catches over time, fi shers may report no changes. The reality could indeed be no
change, but the perception of the fi sher could also be due to him/her spending longer
at sea, or shifting between fi shing grounds, behaviours that could mask overall
declines in the fi shery, to compensate for declining catch per unit effort. A progressive increase in the power of outboard engines, facilitated by well-intentioned government and international aid programmes has also led many fi shers to move further
offshore, often to the edges of shallow water coastal platforms, with an initial boost
in landings, as largely unexploited fi shing grounds were entered.
Even simple gear changes can markedly affect catch rates. Spearfi shers in the
Pacifi c boosted catch rates when new technologies as simple as prefabricated fl ippers
(dive fi ns) dive masks, spearguns and underwater fl ashlights (which enabled night
spearfi shing) were introduced (Gillett and Moy 2006 , YSM and RH personal observations 1996–2011). In many Pacifi c Island locations the relatively recent initiation
of night spearfi shing, especially when combined with compressed air diving, has
resulted in substantially increased catches. This fi shing method in particular is having profoundly negative impacts on populations of large species such as the bumphead parrotfi sh which sleeps on the reef at night and is easy to catch at this time
(Hamilton 2003a ) . Spearfi shing is considered a major problem when aggregations
are targeted in Fiji and the Solomon Islands (Gillett and Moy 2006 ) and is also a
considerable issue in Palau and Papua New Guinea (YSM and RH personal observations
2005). An interview with a Solomon Island spear fi shermen demonstrates this:
I remember a spear fi shing trip in 1985, not long after I had learned to use fi ns, when we
were asked to spear Topa (bumphead parrotfi sh) for an upcoming wedding… I speared 74
big Topa that night. I could have speared many more, but our canoe began to sink from the
weight of all the Topa (Hamilton 2004 , p 66).
In some instances, of course, LEK can be unreliable, and fi shers’ interpretations
of their own observations incorrect, but interviewers should not be too swiftly
judgemental (Johannes 1989 ) . Tibby et al. ( 2007 ) reported on an assessment of a
coastal dune lake in Australia in which local perceptions and accounts were inconsistent and did not always match historical evidence. Johannes ( 1981 ) recorded stories of octopi climbing trees to give birth to young, noting this to be biologically
unlikely. Some initially unlikely reports, however, have turned out to be partially
10 The Role of Local Ecological Knowledge in the Conservation and Management...
fi shers to observe that fi shes have declined in a given area over time, and then to
interpret this as being due to the fi sh having moved elsewhere, gone deeper or
changed behaviour, such as no longer biting hooks . The interpretation of the observation in this case is not that the fi sh are no longer in the sea (i.e. possibly overfi shed) but that they are still present in the area but can no longer be caught. Such a
perspective would make the concept of spatial protection or effort reduction in an
area unacceptable or even incomprehensible as a solution to the changes perceived
in catches. Discussion of such perceptions opens up opportunities for additional
possible explanations, including overfi shing, or discussions of various options for
management as well as the longer term implications of inaction.
Interviewers must exercise care in formulating unambiguous questions while
anticipating possible confounding factors. For example, in asking about trends in
catches over time, fi shers may report no changes. The reality could indeed be no
change, but the perception of the fi sher could also be due to him/her spending longer
at sea, or shifting between fi shing grounds, behaviours that could mask overall
declines in the fi shery, to compensate for declining catch per unit effort. A progressive increase in the power of outboard engines, facilitated by well-intentioned government and international aid programmes has also led many fi shers to move further
offshore, often to the edges of shallow water coastal platforms, with an initial boost
in landings, as largely unexploited fi shing grounds were entered.
Even simple gear changes can markedly affect catch rates. Spearfi shers in the
Pacifi c boosted catch rates when new technologies as simple as prefabricated fl ippers
(dive fi ns) dive masks, spearguns and underwater fl ashlights (which enabled night
spearfi shing) were introduced (Gillett and Moy 2006 , YSM and RH personal observations 1996–2011). In many Pacifi c Island locations the relatively recent initiation
of night spearfi shing, especially when combined with compressed air diving, has
resulted in substantially increased catches. This fi shing method in particular is having profoundly negative impacts on populations of large species such as the bumphead parrotfi sh which sleeps on the reef at night and is easy to catch at this time
(Hamilton 2003a ) . Spearfi shing is considered a major problem when aggregations
are targeted in Fiji and the Solomon Islands (Gillett and Moy 2006 ) and is also a
considerable issue in Palau and Papua New Guinea (YSM and RH personal observations
2005). An interview with a Solomon Island spear fi shermen demonstrates this:
I remember a spear fi shing trip in 1985, not long after I had learned to use fi ns, when we
were asked to spear Topa (bumphead parrotfi sh) for an upcoming wedding… I speared 74
big Topa that night. I could have speared many more, but our canoe began to sink from the
weight of all the Topa (Hamilton 2004 , p 66).
In some instances, of course, LEK can be unreliable, and fi shers’ interpretations
of their own observations incorrect, but interviewers should not be too swiftly
judgemental (Johannes 1989 ) . Tibby et al. ( 2007 ) reported on an assessment of a
coastal dune lake in Australia in which local perceptions and accounts were inconsistent and did not always match historical evidence. Johannes ( 1981 ) recorded stories of octopi climbing trees to give birth to young, noting this to be biologically
unlikely. Some initially unlikely reports, however, have turned out to be partially