DOCSLIB.ORG

Smith Bay Marine Ecological Survey and Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Smith Bay Marine Ecological Survey and Assessment Kangaroo Island Plantation Timbers Pty Ltd Smith Bay Marine Ecological Survey and Assessment Prepared by: David Wiltshire and James Brook SEA Pty Ltd 6th September 2016 Table of Contents SUMMARY 1 Introduction....................................................................................................................... 1 2 Regional setting ................................................................................................................. 3 3 Marine biota of the development site................................................................................ 7 3.1 Methods................................................................................................................................. 7 3.2 Habitat and biota descriptions............................................................................................ 7 3.2.1 Intertidal beach habitat .................................................................................................................... 8 3.2.2 Mixed reef and seagrass habitat (to 10m depth).............................................................................. 8 3.2.3 Seagrass habitat (10-12 m).............................................................................................................. 9 4 Potential impacts and mitigation measures.................................................................... 13 4.1 EPBC listed species............................................................................................................ 13 4.1.1 Introduction................................................................................................................................... 13 4.1.2 Assessment methods ..................................................................................................................... 13 4.1.3 Listed marine species .................................................................................................................... 14 4.2 Direct seagrass loss ............................................................................................................ 15 4.3 Secondary seagrass loss via turbidity effects and erosion .............................................. 16 4.4 Provision of artificial reef.................................................................................................. 17 4.5 Mobilization of sediments by shipping operations.......................................................... 17 4.6 Longshore sand drift.......................................................................................................... 17 4.7 Marine pests ....................................................................................................................... 17 4.8 Land-based abalone aquaculture ..................................................................................... 18 5 Environmental offsets ..................................................................................................... 18 6 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 20 7 References........................................................................................................................ 22 List of Appendices Appendix A: Photographs of typical biota and habitats observed during the survey Appendix B: Listed marine species: marine biological assessment List of Tables Table 1. Taxa recorded during the marine survey. Mixed habitat refers to mixed reef, seagrass and sand habitat in depths to 10m. Seagrass habitat refers to sparse Posidonia habitat over rubble and rhodolith substrate at depths of 10-12m. Abundances are expressed as categories: 1 = 1 or 2 individuals or small patches; 2 = 3-10 individuals or patches, 3 = >10 individuals or patches, or a continuous distribution. Common names have not been provided for macroalgae. Regional reef data from the Reef Life Survey program (Reef Life Survey 2016) have been provided for mobile invertebrates. ........................................................................................................................ 10 List of Figures Figure 1. Smith Bay location map........................................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2. The Smith Bay site showing the preliminary design of the infrastructure (source: Aztec Analysis 2016) (scale: the floating wharf is 120 m long)................................................................................................................. 2 Figure 3. Existing habitat mapping for Smith Bay (data source: DEWNR 2016a)................................................. 5 Figure 4. Existing habitat mapping for the central north coast of Kangaroo Island (data source: DEWNR 2016a). Blue dots indicate locations of independent reef survey sites (Reef Life Survey 2015). ........................................ 6 Figure 5. Tracks for kayak-based underwater photo surveys. Orange = November 2015, Purple = August 2016. 8 Summary This report provides a marine ecological assessment of the proposal to develop a deep water wharf at Smith Bay to export logs from timber plantations on Kangaroo Island. The principal ecological issues were considered to be: the loss of seagrass during dredging of the wharf basin and approaches; indirect effects on seagrass communities from increased turbidity and sediment fallout during dredging; and potential impacts on water quality at the adjacent abalone farm during dredging. The main findings of the assessment are as follows: The marine communities at Smith Bay consist of mixed reef and seagrass communities. The seagrasses Posidonia sinuosa and Amphibolis spp. (A. antarctica and A. griffithii) occur in patches amongst rock bottom in depths up to 10m, and continuously, but sparsely, over a mixed substrate of sand, pebble and shell fragment at depths of 10-12 m. With one exception, it is considered that none of the list marine species is at credible risk from the proposed development. The marine listed Ring-backed Pipefish Stipecampus cristatus was found in Posidonia habitat in the area that will be dredged and is therefore at credible risk of being affected. It is considered, however, that the loss of a small amount of pipefish habitat and potentially some pipefish during dredging will have a negligible effect upon their overall population and viability in the area. Construction of the causeway will result in the direct loss of about 0.5 ha of mixed reef and seagrass habitat that supports dense communities of the seagrasses Posidonia sinuosa and Amphibolis spp. Dredging will result in the direct loss of about 9 ha of relatively sparse seagrass consisting mainly of Posidonia sinuosa. The ecological significance of the loss of these seagrass communities will be minor as there is a large amount of similar habitat within Smith Bay and elsewhere along the north coast of Kangaroo Island. Indirect impacts on adjacent seagrass communities through turbidity and sedimentation effects are likely to be relatively minor as silt curtains will be used to ensure that sediment releases during dredging are minimal. Potential effects on water quality at the intake for the abalone farm will be mitigated by moving the intake to a more distant location, and potentially installing additional sand filters at the abalone farm to remove sediment from the intake water. Winnowing of sediments during shipping operations will be minor as the seafloor in the deep water in Smith Bay consists of rubble, coarse sand and shell grit. Effects on biota through increased turbidity and sediment fall-out will therefore be minor. Should investigations reveal longshore drift to be a significant issue at Smith Bay, the first section of the causeway is likely to be replaced by a pier structure to allow sand to move along the shore. BiosecuritySA will be consulted to determine the most appropriate wharf operating procedures (to be documented in a marine pest management plan) to minimize the risk of introducing marine pests to Smith Bay. The loss of seagrass during construction of the causeway and dredging is likely to be offset by supporting programs to reduce nutrient inputs to the local marine environment. Smith Bay Marine Ecological Assessment 1 INTRODUCTION Kangaroo Island Plantation Timbers (KIPT) proposes to develop a deepwater wharf at Smith Bay on the north coast of Kangaroo Island (Figure 1). The wharf will be capable of accommodating 30,000 DWT bulk carrier ships. Although the primary purpose of the wharf will be to export timber from plantations on the island, KIPT proposes to make it available for other shipping uses. The main features of the development at Smith Bay will be: the construction of a causeway to a floating wharf moored approximately 250 m off- shore at a depth of 10 m at its seaward edge; the dredging of a 200 x 50 m berthing pocket adjacent to the wharf to depth of 13 m; the dredging of approaches approximately 600 x 150 m to a depth of 12 m (Figure 2). The on-shore component of the development at Smith Bay will entail constructing several level tiers over an area of approximately 8 ha to store logs, access roads and associated amenities. SEA undertook a preliminary marine ecological assessment of the Smith Bay site and an alternative wharf site at Ballast Head for KIPT in November 2015 as part of an investigation of the advantages and disadvantages of each site (LBW Environmental Projects 2016). Having confirmed that
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Oceanography and Marine Biology an Annual Review Volume 56
    Oceanography and Marine Biology An Annual Review Volume 56 S.J. Hawkins, A.J. Evans, A.C. Dale, L.B. Firth & I.P. Smith First Published 2018 ISBN 978-1-138-31862-5 (hbk) ISBN 978-0-429-45445-5 (ebk) Chapter 5 Impacts and Environmental Risks of Oil Spills on Marine Invertebrates, Algae and Seagrass: A Global Review from an Australian Perspective John K. Keesing, Adam Gartner, Mark Westera, Graham J. Edgar, Joanne Myers, Nick J. Hardman-Mountford & Mark Bailey (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) Oceanography and Marine Biology: An Annual Review, 2018, 56, 2-61 © S. J. Hawkins, A. J. Evans, A. C. Dale, L. B. Firth, and I. P. Smith, Editors Taylor & Francis IMPACTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS OF OIL SPILLS ON MARINE INVERTEBRATES, ALGAE AND SEAGRASS: A GLOBAL REVIEW FROM AN AUSTRALIAN PERSPECTIVE JOHN K. KEESING1,2*, ADAM GARTNER3, MARK WESTERA3, GRAHAM J. EDGAR4,5, JOANNE MYERS1, NICK J. HARDMAN-MOUNTFORD1,2 & MARK BAILEY3 1CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Indian Ocean Marine Research Centre, M097, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, 6009, Australia 2University of Western Australia Oceans Institute, Indian Ocean Marine Research Centre, M097, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, 6009, Australia 3BMT Pty Ltd, PO Box 462, Wembley, 6913, Australia 4Aquenal Pty Ltd, 244 Summerleas Rd, Kingston, 7050, Australia 5Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 49, Hobart, 7001, Australia *Corresponding author: John K. Keesing e-mail: [email protected] Abstract Marine invertebrates and macrophytes are sensitive to the toxic effects of oil. Depending on the intensity, duration and circumstances of the exposure, they can suffer high levels of initial mortality together with prolonged sublethal effects that can act at individual, population and community levels.
    [Show full text]
  • E Urban Sanctuary Algae and Marine Invertebrates of Ricketts Point Marine Sanctuary
    !e Urban Sanctuary Algae and Marine Invertebrates of Ricketts Point Marine Sanctuary Jessica Reeves & John Buckeridge Published by: Greypath Productions Marine Care Ricketts Point PO Box 7356, Beaumaris 3193 Copyright © 2012 Marine Care Ricketts Point !is work is copyright. Apart from any use permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission of the publisher. Photographs remain copyright of the individual photographers listed. ISBN 978-0-9804483-5-1 Designed and typeset by Anthony Bright Edited by Alison Vaughan Printed by Hawker Brownlow Education Cheltenham, Victoria Cover photo: Rocky reef habitat at Ricketts Point Marine Sanctuary, David Reinhard Contents Introduction v Visiting the Sanctuary vii How to use this book viii Warning viii Habitat ix Depth x Distribution x Abundance xi Reference xi A note on nomenclature xii Acknowledgements xii Species descriptions 1 Algal key 116 Marine invertebrate key 116 Glossary 118 Further reading 120 Index 122 iii Figure 1: Ricketts Point Marine Sanctuary. !e intertidal zone rocky shore platform dominated by the brown alga Hormosira banksii. Photograph: John Buckeridge. iv Introduction Most Australians live near the sea – it is part of our national psyche. We exercise in it, explore it, relax by it, "sh in it – some even paint it – but most of us simply enjoy its changing modes and its fascinating beauty. Ricketts Point Marine Sanctuary comprises 115 hectares of protected marine environment, located o# Beaumaris in Melbourne’s southeast ("gs 1–2). !e sanctuary includes the coastal waters from Table Rock Point to Quiet Corner, from the high tide mark to approximately 400 metres o#shore.
    [Show full text]
  • Quarantine Requirements for the Importation of Live Crustaceans and Molluscs
    Quarantine Requirements for the Importation of Live Crustaceans and Molluscs (In case of any discrepancy between the English version and the Chinese text of these Requirements, the Chinese text shall govern.) Promulgated by Council of Agriculture on April 12, 2004 Amendment by Council of Agriculture on February 16, 2011 Amendment by Council of Agriculture on March 25, 2014 Amendment by Council of Agriculture on August 25, 2014 1. The scope of the species and listed diseases of live crustaceans and molluscs of this Requirements apply to are listed in the Attached tables of the Requirements. The applicant shall apply for an import permit from a central competent authority if the species of live crustaceans and molluscs are referred to Article 24 of Wildlife Conservation Act as protected wildlife or Article 27 as wildlife which are not domestic species. The importation of live crustaceans and molluscs for human consumption shall comply with Article 11 of Act Governing Food Sanitation. 2. The importation of live crustaceans and molluscs for aquaculture or rearing purpose shall comply with the following conditions: (1) Live crustaceans and molluscs shall be kept in the water area or aquaculture facility of origin approved by the exporting country for at least fourteen days prior to the shipment, where high mortality of unknown etiology has not occurred among live crustaceans and molluscs during the previous three months. (2) The water area or aquaculture facility of origin shall meet one of the following conditions: I. The following basic
    [Show full text]
  • W+W Special Paper B-18-2
    W+W Special Paper B-18-2 DIE GENETISCHE FAMILIE DER HALIOTIDAE – HYBRIDISIERUNG, FORTPFLANZUNGSISOLATION UND SYMPATRISCHE ARTBILDUNG Nigel Crompton September 2018 http://www.wort-und-wissen.de/artikel/sp/b-18-2_haliotidae.pdf Bild: Doka54, Public Domain Inhalt Einleitung ................................................................................................ 3 Taxonomie der Seeohren ...................................................................... 6 Die taxonomische Stellung der Seeohren .........................................................7 Glossar ..............................................................................................................7 Seeohren-Arten und Hybriden ......................................................... 9 Genetische Familien und Befruchtung ..........................................14 Genetische Familien und sympatrische Artbildung ......................15 Die Rolle der Wechselwirkung zwischen Ei und Spermium bei der Befruchtung..............................................................................................16 Wechselwirkung zwischen Ei und Spermium und sympatrische Artbildung ....17 Besonderheiten der VERL-Lysin-Bindungsdomänen ......................................18 Wie kann es trotz Hybridisierung zur Artbildung kommen? ..........................19 Weitere Beispiele und vergleichbare Mechanismen bei Pflanzen ......................20 Schlussfolgerung .............................................................................21 Quellen ............................................................................................21
    [Show full text]
  • Quarantine Requirements for the Importation of Live Crustaceans
    Quarantine Requirements for the Importation of Live Crustaceans and Molluscs (In case of any discrepancy between the English version and the Chinese text of these Requirements, the Chinese text shall govern.) Promulgated by Council of Agriculture on April 12, 2004 Amendment by Council of Agriculture on February 16, 2011 Amendment by Council of Agriculture on March 25, 2014 Amendment by Council of Agriculture on August 25, 2014 Amendment by Council of Agriculture on August 25, 2014 Amendment by Council of Agriculture on June 30, 2018 and become effective on September 1, 2018 1. The scope of species and pertinent diseases of concern of crustaceans and molluscs to which these Requirements apply is shown in the attached Tables 1 and 2. 2. Sample collection, testing and surveillance as referred to in these Requirements must be conducted in accordance with relevant provisions in the Manual of Diagnostic Tests for Aquatic Animals of the World Organisation for Animal Health (hereinafter referred to as the OIE Aquatic Manual). For diseases with no sampling, testing or surveillance methods prescribed in the OIE Aquatic Manual, methods that have been published in international scientific journals are to be used. Disease incubation periods referred to in these Requirements are those specified in the OIE Aquatic Manual or the Aquatic Animal Health Code of the OIE (hereinafter referred to as the OIE Aquatic Code). For diseases with incubation periods not specified in the OIE Aquatic Manual or OIE Aquatic Code, incubation periods stated in articles published in international scientific journals shall apply. If no such information can be found either in the OIE Aquatic Manual, OIE Aquatic Code or international scientific journals, the incubation period will be 30 days.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Full Article 1.0MB .Pdf File
    Memoirs of the Museum of Victoria 57( I): 143-165 ( 1998) 1 May 1998 https://doi.org/10.24199/j.mmv.1998.57.08 FISHES OF WILSONS PROMONTORY AND CORNER INLET, VICTORIA: COMPOSITION AND BIOGEOGRAPHIC AFFINITIES M. L. TURNER' AND M. D. NORMAN2 'Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, PO Box 1379,Townsville, Qld 4810, Australia ([email protected]) 1Department of Zoology, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Vic. 3052, Australia (corresponding author: [email protected]) Abstract Turner, M.L. and Norman, M.D., 1998. Fishes of Wilsons Promontory and Comer Inlet. Victoria: composition and biogeographic affinities. Memoirs of the Museum of Victoria 57: 143-165. A diving survey of shallow-water marine fishes, primarily benthic reef fishes, was under­ taken around Wilsons Promontory and in Comer Inlet in 1987 and 1988. Shallow subtidal reefs in these regions are dominated by labrids, particularly Bluethroat Wrasse (Notolabrus tet­ ricus) and Saddled Wrasse (Notolabrus fucicola), the odacid Herring Cale (Odax cyanomelas), the serranid Barber Perch (Caesioperca rasor) and two scorpidid species, Sea Sweep (Scorpis aequipinnis) and Silver Sweep (Scorpis lineolata). Distributions and relative abundances (qualitative) are presented for 76 species at 26 sites in the region. The findings of this survey were supplemented with data from other surveys and sources to generate a checklist for fishes in the coastal waters of Wilsons Promontory and Comer Inlet. 23 I fishspecies of 92 families were identified to species level. An additional four species were only identified to higher taxonomic levels. These fishes were recorded from a range of habitat types, from freshwater streams to marine habitats (to 50 m deep).
    [Show full text]
  • Biodiversity Enhances Reef Fish Biomass and Resistance to Climate Change
    Biodiversity enhances reef fish biomass and resistance to climate change Duffy, J. E., Lefcheck, J. S., Stuart-Smith, R. D., Navarrete, S. A., & Edgar, G. J. (2016). Biodiversity enhances reef fish biomass and resistance to climate change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(22), 6230-6235. <10.1073/pnas.1524465113> Accessed 09 Jan 2021. Abstract Fishes are the most diverse group of vertebrates, play key functional roles in aquatic ecosystems, and provide protein for a billion people, especially in the developing world. Those functions are compromised by mounting pressures on marine biodiversity and ecosystems. Because of its economic and food value, fish biomass production provides an unusually direct link from biodiversity to critical ecosystem services. We used the Reef Life Survey’s global database of 4,556 standardized fish surveys to test the importance of biodiversity to fish production relative to 25 environmental drivers. Temperature, biodiversity, and human influence together explained 47% of the global variation in reef fish biomass among sites. Fish species richness and functional diversity were among the strongest predictors of fish biomass, particularly for the large-bodied species and carnivores preferred by fishers, and these biodiversity effects were robust to potentially confounding influences of sample abundance, scale, and environmental correlations. Warmer temperatures increased biomass directly, presumably by raising metabolism, and indirectly by increasing diversity, whereas temperature variability reduced biomass. Importantly, diversity and climate interact, with biomass of diverse communities less affected by rising and variable temperatures than species-poor communities. Biodiversity thus buffers global fish biomass from climate change, and conservation of marine biodiversity can stabilize fish production in a changing ocean...
    [Show full text]
  • Spatial and Temporal Variability in the Effects of Fish Predation on Macrofauna in Relation to Habitat Complexity and Cage Effects
    MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES Vol. 224: 231–250, 2001 Published December 19 Mar Ecol Prog Ser Spatial and temporal variability in the effects of fish predation on macrofauna in relation to habitat complexity and cage effects Jeremy S. Hindell1, 2,*, Gregory P. Jenkins3, Michael J. Keough1 1Department of Zoology, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3010, Australia 2Queenscliff Marine Station, PO Box 138, Queenscliff, Victoria 3225, Australia 3Marine and Freshwater Research Institute, Weeroona Parade, Queenscliff, Victoria 3225, Australia ABSTRACT: The effects of predation by fishes, in relation to habitat complexity and periodicity of sampling, on abundances of fishes and macroinvertebrates were investigated using controlled caging experiments during summer 1999/2000 at multiple locations (Blairgowrie, Grand Scenic, and Kilgour) in Port Phillip Bay, Australia. A second experiment evaluated biological and physical cage effects. Sites and habitats, but not caging treatments, could generally be differentiated by the assem- blage structure of fishes. Regardless of species, small fishes were generally more abundant in seagrass than unvegetated sand, although the nature of this pattern was site- and time-specific. Depending on the site, abundances of fishes varied between cage treatments in ways that were con- sistent with neither cage nor predation effects (Grand Scenic), strong cage effects (Kilgour) or strong predation or cage effects (Blairgowrie). The abundance of syngnathids varied inconsistently between caging treatments and habitats within sites through time. Although they were generally more abun- dant in seagrass, whether or not predation or cage effects were observed depended strongly on the time of sampling. Atherinids and clupeids generally occurred more commonly over seagrass. In this habitat, atherinids varied between cage treatments in a manner consistent with strong cage effects, while clupeids varied amongst predator treatments in a way that could be explained either by cage or predation effects.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Inshore Habitats Around Tasmania for Life History
    National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication Entry Jordan, Alan Richard, 1964- Assessment of inshore habitats around Tasmania for life-history stages of commercial finfish species Bibliography ISBN 0 646 36875 3. 1. Marine fishes - Tasmania - Habitat. 2. Marine fishes - Tasmania - Development. I. Jordan, Alan, 1964 - . II. Tasmania Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute. 597.5609946 Published by the Marine Research Laboratories - Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute, University of Tasmania 1998 Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute Marine Research Laboratories Taroona, Tasmania 7053 Phone: (03) 6227 7277 Fax: (03) 62 27 8035 The opinions expressed in this report are those of the author and are not necessarily those of the Marine Research Laboratories or the Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute. ASSESSMENT OF INSHORE HABITATS AROUND TASMANIA FOR LIFE-HISTORY STAGES OF COMMERCIAL FINFISH SPECIES A.R. Jordan, D.M. Mills, G. Ewing and J.M. Lyle December 1998 FRDC Project No. 94/037 Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute Marine Research Laboratories Assessment of inshore habitats for finfish in Tasmania 94/037 Assessment of inshore habitats around Tasmania for life-history stages of commercial finfish species. PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS: Dr A. R. Jordan and Dr J. M. Lyle ADDRESS: Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute Marine Research Laboratories Taroona, Tasmania 7053 Phone: (03) 62 277 277 Fax: (03) 62 278 035 Email: [email protected] OBJECTIVES: 1. To determine the abundance and distribution of commercial fish species associated with selected inshore soft-bottom habitats around Tasmania. 2. To categorise the habitat types in these areas and determine the size/age structure of commercial fish species by habitat as a means of assessing the critical habitat requirements of such species.
    [Show full text]
  • Targeted Review of Biological and Ecological Information from Fisheries Research in the South East Marine Region
    TARGETED REVIEW OF BIOLOGICAL AND ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION FROM FISHERIES RESEARCH IN THE SOUTH EAST MARINE REGION FINAL REPORT B. D. Bruce, R. Bradford, R. Daley, M. Green and K. Phillips December 2002 Client: National Oceans Office Targeted review of biological and ecological information from fisheries research in the South East Marine Region Final Report B. D. Bruce, R. Bradford, R. Daley M. Green and K. Phillips* CSIRO Marine Research, Hobart * National Oceans Office December 2002 2 Table of Contents: Table of Contents:...................................................................................................................................3 Introduction.............................................................................................................................................5 Objective of review.............................................................................................................................5 Structure of review..............................................................................................................................5 Format.................................................................................................................................................6 General ecological/biological issues and uncertainties for the South East Marine Region ....................9 Specific fishery and key species accounts ............................................................................................10 South East Fishery (SEF) including the South East Trawl
    [Show full text]
  • Biodiversity Summary: Port Phillip and Westernport, Victoria
    Biodiversity Summary for NRM Regions Species List What is the summary for and where does it come from? This list has been produced by the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPC) for the Natural Resource Management Spatial Information System. The list was produced using the AustralianAustralian Natural Natural Heritage Heritage Assessment Assessment Tool Tool (ANHAT), which analyses data from a range of plant and animal surveys and collections from across Australia to automatically generate a report for each NRM region. Data sources (Appendix 2) include national and state herbaria, museums, state governments, CSIRO, Birds Australia and a range of surveys conducted by or for DEWHA. For each family of plant and animal covered by ANHAT (Appendix 1), this document gives the number of species in the country and how many of them are found in the region. It also identifies species listed as Vulnerable, Critically Endangered, Endangered or Conservation Dependent under the EPBC Act. A biodiversity summary for this region is also available. For more information please see: www.environment.gov.au/heritage/anhat/index.html Limitations • ANHAT currently contains information on the distribution of over 30,000 Australian taxa. This includes all mammals, birds, reptiles, frogs and fish, 137 families of vascular plants (over 15,000 species) and a range of invertebrate groups. Groups notnot yet yet covered covered in inANHAT ANHAT are notnot included included in in the the list. list. • The data used come from authoritative sources, but they are not perfect. All species names have been confirmed as valid species names, but it is not possible to confirm all species locations.
    [Show full text]
  • Trade in Seahorses and Other Syngnathids in Countries Outside Asia (1998-2001)
    ISSN 1198-6727 Fisheries Centre Research Reports 2011 Volume 19 Number 1 Trade in seahorses and other syngnathids in countries outside Asia (1998-2001) Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia, Canada Trade in seahorses and other syngnathids in countries outside Asia (1998-2001) 1 Edited by Amanda C.J. Vincent, Brian G. Giles, Christina A. Czembor and Sarah J. Foster Fisheries Centre Research Reports 19(1) 181 pages © published 2011 by The Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia 2202 Main Mall Vancouver, B.C., Canada, V6T 1Z4 ISSN 1198-6727 1 Cite as: Vincent, A.C.J., Giles, B.G., Czembor, C.A., and Foster, S.J. (eds). 2011. Trade in seahorses and other syngnathids in countries outside Asia (1998-2001). Fisheries Centre Research Reports 19(1). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia [ISSN 1198-6727]. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 19(1) 2011 Trade in seahorses and other syngnathids in countries outside Asia (1998-2001) edited by Amanda C.J. Vincent, Brian G. Giles, Christina A. Czembor and Sarah J. Foster CONTENTS DIRECTOR ’S FOREWORD ......................................................................................................................................... 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................. 2 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................... 2 Methods ...........................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]