Caticugan Marine Protected Area

What the sources describe

The Siquijor Provincial Tourism Office identifies Caticugan Marine Protected Area in Caticugan, Siquijor municipality and lists diving and snorkeling among its activities. The Coral Reef and Rainforest Conservation Project describes seagrass shallows, coral reef and a transition into a wall. Its published monitoring material reports surveys collected from June to October 2024.

Planning a visit

The conservation project advises timing entry and exit with high tide to protect shallow corals and using the designated pathway. Confirm the current route, tide window, permissions and guide arrangements locally before entering. This protected-area guide does not establish that every operator route called Caticugan Wall has the same boundaries.

What remains unknown

This English partial is based on published sources, not a recent Diveity inspection. Exact navigation coordinates, independently checked depth limits, visibility, water temperature, seasonal suitability and certification requirements remain unverified. Wildlife sightings and current access are not guaranteed.

Sources: Siquijor Provincial Tourism Office; Coral Reef and Rainforest Conservation Project.

Management, activities and reported sights

Siquijor Provincial Tourism Office says a People’s Organization manages Caticugan Marine Protected Area and lists kayaking, paddle boating, snorkeling and diving among its activities. It mentions corals, giant clams, sea turtles and clownfish as things visitors may see. This is a promotional itinerary entry, so those sights are possibilities rather than guarantees, and it gives no dive profile or access rules.

Protection and reef recovery

The Coastal Conservation and Education Foundation’s 2025 Siquijor report describes Caticugan Marine Sanctuary as a 13.5-hectare protected area, originally established in 1987 and legally re-established in 2003. It names the Caticugan Marine Management Council and local government as management partners. This sanctuary-scale identity supports the protected-area context here; it does not establish an exact map point or make every nearby wall itinerary identical.

CCEF records severe storm damage in 2011 and 2012, followed by coral rehabilitation within the sanctuary in 2012 and 2013. Its later monitoring distinguishes shallow snorkeling observations from scuba observations, with different proportions of coral, soft coral and non-living substrate. Those differences matter when comparing a shallow visit with a deeper reef outing: one observation should not stand for the entire sanctuary.

A dated picture of the fish community

The report’s 2025 fish assessment identifies parrotfishes, snappers, jacks and fusiliers among the groups contributing strongly to measured biomass. It separately notes that damselfishes were especially numerous. Biomass and numbers of individual fish describe different aspects of the community; they are not interchangeable claims about which animals dominate a visitor’s photographs.

These monitoring results add evidence of conservation work and reef variation without promising current encounters. The reported sanctuary boundary and surveyed habitats also do not replace local confirmation of the designated entry pathway or current permissions.