SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Marketing practices of municipal fishermen in the Philippines have received
little study. However, the few studies which have been conducted have been
useful in formulating nationwide development plans. Unfortunately, these nationally
oriented programs have not always met local needs because of problems peculiar
to specific local areas. In order to provide data for the preparation of a
localized fishery development plan, a baseline survey of fisheries resources
was made.
The findings reported here present a description of marketing practices and
problems of municipal (artisanal) fishermen around Panguil Bay, Mindanao,
Philippines.
Panguil Bay is a 219-square kilometer body of water surrounded by approximately
8,000 hectares of mangrove swamps, of which about 5,000 hectares had been
converted into fishponds. There were 89 coastal barrios (villages) with an
estimated 4,500 municipal fishermen. The outer portion of the bay was used
for fishing and the inner portion for fishing, gathering shellfish, and catching
shrimp. No commercial vessels (over 3 gross tons) were registered in the area.
Commercial fishing was prohibited because of the shallow depth of the bay.
Administratively the area is divided among three provinces (Lanao del Norte,
Zamboanga del Sur, and Misamis Occidental) covering 10 municipalities and
two cities. Ozamiz City is the primary commercial center. Culturally the area
is a mixture of Muslims and Christians. During the survey, sporadic trouble
had occurred with the resultant dislocation of inhabitants and disruption
of business activities.
During May through August 1975, 249 municipal fishermen were interviewed
regarding marketing practices. The interviewees came from barrios in all 10
municipalities and 2 cities adjacent to Panguil Bay. Peace and order conditions
caused the interviewers to conduct rather hasty interviews in some areas.
Data from the questionnaires were coded and transferred to punch cards for
processing.
The municipal fishermen were basically living at a subsistence level. However,
lack of alternative employment opportunities kept the recruitment high. Most
of the fishermen lived along the coast, at the mouth of rivers, or on the
edge of nipa swamps. Fishing was done at night for sales the following morning.
Fishermen reported low catch volume, which they attributed to dynamite fishing,
poisons, use of illegal gear, and overcrowding of the fishing area. Fisher-
men averaged catching only a few kilograms per day. Even with the limited
catch, most of the fishermen sold the entire amount. The fish were usually
marketed within a few hours. Most were sold on the beach although some were
sold at sea and others were delivered to the dealers. Larger, high quality
fish were sold to wholesalers who shipped the fish from the area. Smaller
fish were sold to local retailers or marketed directly to consumers. While
the weight of fish was used in pricing, only 25 percent of the catch was actually
weighed at the time of sale.
Fishermen chose buyers on the basis of cash needs. Retailers paid immediate
cash. Wholesalers were able to buy because of suki arrangements, a system
under which the buyer also represented the lender and the fish were collateral
for the loan. The price paid was only sufficient to maintain the fishermen
at the subsistence level. Marketing costs were low although a customary PI.00
(U.S. $ =P7.40) per kilogram markup existed between sales to retailers and
sales to consumers.
Fishermen borrowed for capital investments and operating (living) expenses.
All lenders except the bank required the borrower to sell the fish to the
lender. No interest was charged, but repayment was daily and the lender paid
a reduced price for the fish. Many of the fishermen did not have ready access
to the government's Foreshore Fisheries Loan Program.
Fishermen reported low price, lack of transportation, difficulties in receiving
payments, and no market as major problems. The low price was associated with
the method of financing and with the presence of dynamited fish in the markets.
Fishermen desired governmental assistance in loans, technical assistance,
and law enforcement to stop illegal fishing. The fishermen could not foresee
an improved level of living unless these problems were alleviated.