Probable distribution of Pachyrhynchus mindoroensis

[Main] [Weevils of PH] [Genus Pachyrhynchus]

Pachyrhynchus mindoroensis Rukmane and Háva, 2020

Distribution

Figure 1. Color plate (artistic rendition) of male and female Pachyrhynchus mindoroensis (left), and map of the Philippine archipelago showing the area where the specimen was said to be collected (right) based on one article published in 2020 [1].

Luzon

MIMAROPA Region

• Province of Oriental Mindoro
• Municipality of Puerto Galera
• possibly Municipality of Baco (see comments on distribution)

• Province of Occidental Mindoro 
• supposedly Mt. Baco (see comments on distribution)

Figure 2. Summary of data on P. mindoroensis in video presentation format.

Comments on Locality Data

In the introduction section, the paper [1] stated: "Island is divided into two provinces: Occidental Mindoro, with its peak Mount Baco (2488) and Oriental Mindoro with Mount Halcon (2586)... According to available data, species is present on both highest peaks of the Mindoro Island" (page 257, reference 1). These statements seem to suggest that collections of P. mindoroensis were done on the highest peaks of Mt. Halcon and Mt. Baco. If so, this means that collections may have been done in both provinces of Mindoro (Occidental and Oriental), requiring two different sets of Local Transport Permits (LTP) from their respective Provincial Environment and Natural Resources Office (PENRO). The LTPs, along with Wildlife Gratuitous Permits (WGP), are needed when applying for Wildlife Export Certifications (WEC) as mandated by Republic Act 9147 [6].

The paper [1], however, does not seem to indicate anywhere if such wildlife permits were acquired or not. Applications for wildlife permits require scientists and "explorers" to indicate specific locations for tracking purposes, but the data presented in the paper does not specifically indicate "Mt. Baco". It merely states "Baco" which can also refer to the Municipality of Baco in the Province of Oriental Mindoro, to which the foreign scientists may not be aware of. The paper, though, was able to specifically indicate "Mt. Halcon". So if the collection was truly done at the highest peak of Mt. Baco, the paper should have specifically indicated "Mt. Baco" to avoid confusion with the municipality name.

Mt. Baco is at least 40 kilometers of straight, aerial distance away from the Municipality of Baco as shown in Figure 3. It becomes even farther, at least twice as far, if the coastal roads and rugged terrestrial paths are followed. Mt. Baco is part of the Iglit-Baco National Park which covers four municipalities in Occidental Mindoro (Sablayan, Calintaan, Rizal, San Jose) and four municipalities in Oriental Mindoro (Gloria, Bansud, Bongabong, Mansalay) [page 43, reference 2]. The Municipality of Baco does not cover any part of Mt. Baco.

Figure 3. Image from Google Maps [4] showing the location of Mt. Baco and the Municipality of Baco.

The paper [1] indicated that the acquisition of the specimens was done by a "local collector" whose name is not mentioned. Such practice of tapping unnamed "local collectors" by foreign scientists is a major source of doubt when it comes to the validity of information, as shown in the scrutiny on some species recently published such as Metapocyrtus pulangi, M. tagabawa, and M. latifasciatus.

To further add suspicion to the already doubtful data, the Municipality of Baco is the usual point of entry for trekkers of Mt. Halcon in the Province of Oriental Mindoro (page 74, reference 3), because the Municipality of Baco covers part of Mt. Halcon (page 20, reference 3). This makes the municipality an attractive destination for mountaineering tourism activities. It is highly likely then that this unnamed "local collector" may have simply just gone somewhere near Mt. Halcon in the Municipality of Baco, captured the P. mindoroensis specimens, labeled them as "Baco", and sent them to Europe. The foreign scientists may then have erroneously misinterpreted this as "Mt. Baco", instead of "Municipality of Baco". This might also be the case for the P. domino specimen labeled as "PHILIPPINES / Mindoro Oriental, Baco" in this very same paper (page 261, reference 1).

Furthermore, Mt. Baco has been declared as one of the protected areas in the Philippines [2], making wildlife permit requirements a bit stricter. Research proposals from scientists and "explorers" are subject to the scrutiny of the Protected Area Management Board (PAMB) prior to the approval of KILLING and preservation of wildlife specimens for EXPORT.

It would have been a bit easier to pinpoint the location if there is only one "Baco" in the island of Mindoro, but there are two, and both of them are prominent. The only way then to ascertain if the specimens officially came from Mt. Baco are as follows:

1. The unnamed "local collector" will come out to vouch for this paper [1] and present the necessary wildlife permits, including the PAMB resolution approving the methods to kill and preserve specimens from the PROTECTED AREA; or,

2. The foreign scientists will produce a copy of the Wildlife Export Certification (WEC) from the DENR, with its VERIFIABLE CONTROL NUMBER, that comes along with the exported wildlife package; or,

3. Investigators will look into the wildlife permits issued to the "local collector", which are filed in the DENR regional offices, by virtue of the Freedom of Information (FOI) request.

If any of these yields affirmative results, then all is well and good. But if wildlife permits for exported specimens do not exist, then the Philippine government may notify some European governments to monitor packages arriving for certain individuals, catch them in the act of accepting possible wildlife CONTRABAND, and trace the transaction all the way back to the "local collector". This practice of foreign scientists, transacting with "local collectors" who may have skipped the legal wildlife acquisition process, might be evident in many scientific papers published within the last decade, and may provide both local and foreign law enforcers with probable cause to take action.

Collecting Philippine wildlife without WGPs and exporting them without WECs are both INAPPROPRIATE and ILLEGAL. Stiff penalties may be imposed, with the "local collector" and possibly the foreigner serving time together in Philippine jails.

On a lighter note, there are some inconsistencies in the locality data of the paper [1] that have less to do with the heavy legal aspect, but more on the familiar methods of research. The obvious one is the lack of supporting environmental parameters such as GPS data and habitat images, while the other is a repeated misspelling of another popular tourist destination with historical significance that these foreign scientists probably did not even bother to know more, with just a few clicks online.

As basic tools for biodiversity and ecological research, a GPS device provides undeniable location reading while a digital camera provides pictures of plants and other wildlife possibly co-occurring with these weevil species. Ambiguous and possibly misleading locality data, such as this "Baco", could have been easily avoided if GPS coordinates with on-site elevation and pictures of the habitat were taken. The statement in the introduction part of the paper [1] saying "... the first author of this paper received new material from the Mindoro Island ..." seems to indicate the absence of truthing on the ground, which a GPS device and a digital camera can address during real scientific field work. The irony here is that these tools, along with Internet access, are already integrated into inexpensive smartphones, which practically almost everyone on the planet owns. And yet, the paper [1] MYSTERIOUSLY did not present the relevant data that a single smartphone can easily provide.

One may argue that the main purpose of the paper [1] may simply be just to study the morphological traits of the specimens. But if this is the case, then the paper [1] should have avoided making distributional claims on locations such as the highest peak of Mt. Baco that foreign scientists clearly know so little about in the first place. Although it is possible that small animals from the area of what is now the Municipality of Baco may have been able to disperse into the area of Mt. Baco within one hundred thousand years, the absence of really comprehensive evidence makes such claims, at best, scientifically anecdotal.

Aside from "Baco", another area where several individuals of P. mindoroensis were said to have been collected is "Puerta" Galera. This is actually the Municipality of Puerto Galera adjacent to Mt. Halcon, which further lends credence that the "Baco" collection site probably refers to the municipality and not the mountain. This is because it is more LOGISTICALLY feasible for the unnamed "local collector" to go from Puerto Galera to Baco town around the vicinity of Mt. Halcon than to go deep into the rough jungle terrains of Mt. Baco tens of kilometers away just to pick up a few specimens.

This misspelling of "Puerto" to "Puerta" would have been skipped from scrutiny if it was made only once, giving benefit of the doubt that it may have just been a typographical error. But the repeated mention of "Puerta" means this may have been either the result of sloppy copy/paste editing, or the result of sloppy literary research work. Either way, it looks sloppy.

In Spanish, "puerto" means port and "puerta" means door, both pertaining to some kind of entry point or gateway. But the word "galera" translates to "galley", which refers to the ocean-going merchant ships largely used for trade between the Philippines and Mexico during the Spanish colonial period from 1565 to 1898, known in local history as the Galleon Trade. In Mindoro, "Puerto Galera" means "Galleon's Port" [5] which is the appropriate name, because "Puerta Galera" translates to "Galleon's Door" which is nonsensical. In the context of galleys, the entry point is a port and not a door. If foreign scientists simply take time to know more about the country they are studying, then sloppy literary mistakes like these will probably not make it to any final published articles.

It is embarrassing to see scientific papers coming from the "First World" get published while containing much doubtful data. They become part of the body of scientific literature that will likely get treated as fact by future generations, owing to other scientists who may cite such works without bothering to double-check the data. Further alarming is the possibility that some scientists, especially tech-savvy ones who are very vocal about environmental conservation on their social media profiles, might unknowingly be the very ones enabling "local collectors" to go into some form of wildlife trade, thereby pushing towards destruction the very environment these scientists so vocally swore to protect.

If foreign scientists wish to study the local wildlife of the Philippines, the right way to do it is to familiarize the Philippine wildlife permit processes and coordinate with legitimate local scientists who are serious in upholding the Philippine wildlife law [6]. These legitimate local scientists should ideally be working at the nearest local university of the particular area where research expeditions are to be conducted for better logistics.

References:

[1] Rukmane, Anita and Háva, Jiří. 2020. A new species of the genus Pachyrhynchus Germar, 1824 together with description of Pachyrhynchus domino Rukmane, 2016 male from the Philippines, Mindoro Island (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Pachyrhynchini). Studies and Reports. Taxonomic Series 16(1): 257-263.

[2] Biodiversity Management Bureau. 2015. Guidebook to Protected Areas of the Philippines. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Philippines.

[3] Provincial Government of Oriental Mindoro, et al. 2012. Mount Halcon Conservation and Management Plan (2012-2022).

[4] Google Maps. Baco, Oriental Mindoro. https://goo.gl/maps/VXJ36Jjva56GC87a6

[5] Official Website of the Municipality of Puerto Galera. "Bief History of Puerto Galera". Retrieved from: http://www.puertogalera.gov.ph/about-us/history-of-puerto-galera/#:~:text=Puerto%20Galera

[6] Republic Act 9147 "Wildlife Resources Conservation and Protection Act".

[Main] [Weevils of PH] [Genus Pachyrhynchus]