home icon user icon
Welcome to International Network for Natural Sciences | INNS Pub.
Home My Account
Submit Manuscript
double_slash
breadcumb_bg

Socio-demographic profile and baseline information on Freshwater Clam (Corbicula spp.) “Bennek” in Alcala, Cagayan Valley: Policy recommendation

Paper Details

Research Paper 16/07/2023
Views (804) Download (56)
current_issue_feature_image
publication_file

Socio-demographic profile and baseline information on Freshwater Clam (Corbicula spp.) “Bennek” in Alcala, Cagayan Valley: Policy recommendation

Lenimfa P. Molina, Salvador T. Miranda Jr., Eunice S. Daluddung, Simeon R. Rabanal Jr.
J. Bio. Env. Sci.23( 1), 153-162, July 2023.
Certificate: JBES 2023 [Generate Certificate]
Key: Fisheries dataFreshwater clamGatherersPracticesSocio-Economic Status

Abstract

This study aims to acquire baseline data on the socio-economic profile of the Freshwater Clam “bennek” gatherers, their fishing techniques, conservational practices, and management plans in light of the increasing strain of development on biodiversity. This study used the descriptive-survey method of research. The bennek gatherers were discovered to be middle-aged, to have completed elementary and high school, to have two siblings living with them, and to have their fathers as the primary gatherers of their young. The gatherers had an average harvest of less than 5 gantas each day for 3–4 hours per day, 4-5 days per week, and use their own wooden boat and “Karadikad” as harvesting implement. Majority of bivalve gatherers earned less than 5000.00 pesos per month. Additionally, majority of bennek gatherers reside in concrete homes with electric lighting and deep wells for water source. In addition, the months of March through July are when the harvest is at its greatest. Most of the gatherers’ harvest is used for domestic consumption. Majority of gatherers appreciate the varied management strategies’ relevance. Quarrying and river siltation are two issues that the “bennek” gatherers frequently encounter. Policy recommendations were presented to the Local Government Unit of Alcala for a sustainable supply of Freshwater Clam locally known as bennek in the different study sites where this resource is thriving.

VIEWS 190
Cover PDF

Ayukekbong JA, Ntemgwa M, Atabe AN. 2017. The threat of antimicrobial resistance in developing countries: causes and control strategies. Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control 6(1), p.47.

Dudgeon DAH, Arthington MO, Gessner ZI, Kawabata D, Jknowler C, Lévêque RJ, Naiman AH, Prieur-Richard D, Soto M, Stiassny LJ, Sullivan CA. 2006. Freshwater biodiversity: importance, threats, status and conservation challenges. Biological Reviews 81, 163-182.

Geng L, Xu, J, Ye L, Zhou W, Zhou K. 2015. Connections with nature and environmental behaviors. PloS one 10(5).

Hermoso V, Abell R, Linke S, Boon P. 2016. The role of protected areas for freshwater biodiversity conservation: challenges and opportunities in a rapidly changing world. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 26, pp.3-11.

Lopes‐Lima M, Sousa R, Geist J, Aldridge DC, Araujo R, Bergengren J, Bespalaya Y, Bódis E, Burlakova L, Van Damme D, Douda K. 2017. Conservation status of freshwater mussels in Europe: state of the art and future challenges. Biological Reviews 92(1), pp.572-607.

Lopes-Lima M, Teixeira A, Froufe E, Lopes A, Varandas S, Sousa R. 2014. Biology and conservation of freshwater bivalves: past, present and future perspectives. Hydrobiologia 735, 1-13.

Lydeard CRH, Cowie WF, Ponder AE, Bogan P, Bouchet SA, Clark KS, Cummings TJ, Frest O, Gargominy DG, Herbert R, Hershler K, Perez E, Roth B, Seddon M, Strong EE, Thompson FG. 2004. The global decline of nonmarine mollusks. BioScience 54, 321-330.

Malmqvist B, Rundle S. 2002. Threats to the running water ecosystems of the world. Environmental Conservation 29, 134-153.

Mayor A. Ancog R. 2016. Fishery status of freshwater clam (Batissa violacea, Corbiculidae) (Bivalvia) (Lamarck, 1818) in Cagayan River, Northern Philippines. ISSN: 2347-5129 (ICV-Poland) Impact Value: 5.62 (GIF) Impact Factor: 0.352 IJFAS 4(3), 500-506

Newbold T, Hudson LN, Hill SL, Contu S, Lysenko I, Senior RA, Börger L, Bennett DJ, Choimes A, Collen B, Day J. 2015. Global effects of land use on local terrestrial biodiversity. Nature 520(7545), pp.45-50.

Principe JA. 2012. Exploring climate change effects on watershed sediment yield and land cover-based mitigation measures using swat model, RS and GIS: case of Cagayan River Basin, Philippines. ISPRS Archives XXXIX, 193-198

Régnier C, Fontaine B, Bouchet P. 2009. Notknowing, not recording, not listing: numerous unnoticed mollusk extinctions. Conservation Biology 23, 1214-1221.

Strayer DL, Dudgeon D. 2010. Freshwater biodiversity conservation: recent progress and future challenges. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 29, 344-358.

StrayerDL, Downing JA, Haag WR, King TL, Layzer JB, Newton TJ, Nichols SJ. 2004. Changing perspectives on pearly mussels, North America’s most imperiled animals. BioScience 54, 429-439.

Vorosmarty CJ, Hoekstra AY, Bunn SE, Conway D, Gupta J. 2015. Fresh water goes global. Science 349(6247), pp.478-479.

Vorosmarty CJ, McIntyre PB, Gessner MO, Dudgeon D, Prusevich A, Green P, Glidden S, Bunn SE, Sullivan CA, Liermann CR, Davies PM. 2010. Global threats to human water security and river biodiversity. Nature 467, 555-561.

Ziadat AH. 2010. Major factors contributing to environmental awareness among people in a third world country, Jordan. Environ Dev Sustain 12, 135-45.

Submit Manuscript