Report: Majority of Palauans back national marine sanctuary
- Admin
- 21 minutes ago
- 3 min read
By Jayvee Vallejera
Over 70 percent of Palau residents support the Palau National Marine Sanctuary, one of the world’s largest marine protected areas, but many are concerned about the rising cost and limited availability of offshore pelagic fish, which the sanctuary protects.
A new report from the Palau International Coral Reef Center found that 70.1 percent of survey respondents have varying levels of support for the sanctuary, ranging from 41.3 percent saying they “support” it and 28.8percent saying they “strongly support” it.
A majority of supporters associate the sanctuary with increasing marine resources, maintaining the seafood supply and supporting a healthy ocean.
The Palau sanctuary is a marine protected area within Palau’s exclusive economic zone, covering nearly 500,000 sq.km of open ocean. It closed 80 percent of Palau’s territorial waters and the remaining 20 percent remains open as a domestic fishing zone, where both domestic and foreign commercial fishing are allowed.
Unlike nearshore protected areas within the Palau Protected Areas Network, which conserve coral reefs and seagrass habitats, the national sanctuary, which begins 24 nautical miles away from the shoreline, protects offshore ecosystems that are home to pelagic species such as tuna, wahoo, and marlin.
The report, titled “Understanding the Perceived Human Well-Being Benefits and Values of the Palau National Marine Sanctuary: A Nationwide Study,” presents findings from a survey of 1,277 households across all 16 states of Palau between October 2022 and November 2024.
The study aimed to understand residents’ awareness, attitudes and perceptions of the sanctuary, along with their views on its benefits, challenges, and opportunities for improvement.
The report reveals key knowledge gaps and misperceptions about the sanctuary’s objectives and management.
The report notes that a majority of the respondents (56.7 percent) have not heard of a proposal to expand the sanctuary’s domestic fishing zone.
A slightly lower number of respondents (43.3 percent) have heard of the proposed change, but most of these respondents do not support expanding the zone.
The report showed that 57.9 percent of surveyed households engage in some types of fishing, with 38.9 percent participating in reef fishing, 2 percent in pelagic fishing, and 17 percent in both. For many, it’s mostly for household consumption, giving to others, and recreational reasons. The remaining 41.9 percent do not fish at all.
Notably, only 2.7 percent of households listed reef fishing and 0.8 percent of households listed pelagic fishing as one of their main sources of income.
For most, their main sources of income were government jobs, government benefits (social security and pension plans), private companies, and “makit” (the informal sale of goods, including handmade products, produce, fish, etc.).
When asked if the sanctuary had negatively impacted them, a majority (88.4 percent) replied no.
However, because of significant gaps in knowledge and perceptions about the sanctuary, especially concerns about the rising cost (“fish had become inaccessible due to price”) and limited accessibility to open ocean fish like tuna, wahoo, and marlin, the report recommends:
· Installing fish aggregating devices in each state to improve access to these pelagic fish;
· Making pelagic fish more affordable for local communities;
· Expanding community outreach and education about the sanctuary to deepen public understanding of its boundaries and objectives; and
· Doing follow-up studies to assess the effectiveness and long-term impact of these measures.
“Understanding how our communities perceive the [sanctuary] is essential for improving how we manage it,” said Geraldine Rengiil, PICRC research director.
“This study gives us valuable insight into what community members think and feel about the sanctuary. By listening to these voices, we can make sure that the [sanctuary] continues to support both our ocean’s health and the well-being of our people.”
Subscribe to
our digital
monthly edition