43 who is being harassed or there is an intention to stifle any legal recourse that such person, in this case the fish warden, has taken or may take in the enforcement of the Fisheries Code. d. When the law is strictly and faithfully implemented, positive effects were underscored i.e. the protection of particular fish species “damos” and “kabasi” in San Miguel Bay and the respect for the preferential rights of artisanal fisherfolk within the municipal waters.341 3. Notwithstanding the strict guidelines governing the entry of commercial fishing vessels in municipal waters, participants reported that even in LGUs without relevant ordinances, commercial vessels continue to operate unabated. The DILG disclosed that only 19.22% of coastal LGUs have enacted an ordinance allowing commercial fishing in municipal waters. 342 a. The DILG also monitored LGUs who allowed commercial fishing without proper ordinances. However, 45.3% of LGUs without the proper ordinances have reports of commercial fishing in their municipal waters. 343 The agency has recommended that the DA-BFAR monitor the LGUs allowing commercial fishing and to strictly adhere to the preconditions provided in RA No. 8550. b. The consultation highlights political accommodation and/or affiliation as one reason for the poor implementation of the law, with commercial fleets being owned by politicians or those who have close ties with local officials. c. The lack of a sufficient workforce to police municipal waters is one of the reasons for the continuing incidence of IUU activities and intrusion of commercial vessels in the municipal waters. To reinforce its presence, the PNP-MG has established partnerships with organizations that act as force-multipliers to help curb illegal activities, promote environmental protection, and report violators. d. Commercial vessels often use methods and gear that are destructive and prohibited not only in the municipal waters but also in shallower waters. The participants enumerated examples such as “hulbot-hulbot,” “buli-buli,” “baling,”” liba-liba,” “sud-sud,” and “baby-trawl.” e. The penalties imposed on erring vessels have been criticized as too low compared to the financial capacities of commercial fishing operations. These fishing vessels can easily get off with the violations by paying the relatively small fines or administrative penalties imposed. However, it should be noted that small fines should be imposed in light or less grave felonies, or low-level criminal offenses only. In addition to paying off fines, the commercial fishing vessels pay the fees upon capture to avoid the vessel from being impounded.344 If the commercial vessel is impounded, they do not go into the trouble of paying the fees to get the boats back. Clearly, the fish workers working on the boat are mostly affected because they lose their means of livelihood when the vessels are confiscated and held by the LGU. f. In their efforts to combat IUU fishing activities, the DILG has partnered with OCEANA Philippines and reached out to LGUs with high light detection based on Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite (VIIRS). This possibly indicates high encroachment of commercial vessels in municipal waters. The communication sent to these ‘hotspot’ LGUs is provided to prompt them to manage municipal waters and encourage them to explore available support options from the NGAs and NGOs. Institutionalization of this practice will help curb IUU fishing and the continued encroachment of commercial fishing vessels in municipal waters. g. Implementation of a vessel monitoring system (VMS) is seen as a viable method for controlling commercial fishers' intrusion in municipal waters. VMS is now required under RA No. 10654. Non-compliance carries a punishment of confiscation of catch, suspension or revocation of 341 Consultation with Fisherfolks, supra note 148 342 DILG, Consultation with NGAS, supra note 40 343 Ibid. 344 Consultations with Fisherfolks, supra note 148