COMPONENT 2A - Project 2A2 Knowledge, monitoring, management and beneficial use of ecosystems

January 2009

REEF MONITORING

SOUTH-WEST PACIFIC STATUS OF CORAL REEFS REPORT 2007

Edited by Cherrie WHIPPY-MORRIS Institute of Marine Resources

With the support of: Photo: E. CLUA The CRISP programme is implemented as part of the

Regional Environment Programme for a contribution to conservation and sustainable development of coral

T (CRISP), sponsored by France and prepared by the French Development Agency (AFD) as part of an inter-ministerial project from 2002 onwards, aims to develop a vi- sion for the future of these unique eco-systems and the communities that depend on them and to introduce strategies and projects to conserve their biodiversity, while developing the economic and environmental services that they provide both locally and globally. Also, it is designed as a factor for integration between developed coun- - land developing countries.

The CRISP Programme comprises three major components, which are:

Component 1A: Integrated Coastal Management and watershed management - 1A1: Marine biodiversity conservation planning - 1A2: Marine Protected Areas - 1A3: Institutional strengthening and networking - 1A4: Integrated coastal reef zone and watershed management CRISP Coordinating Unit (CCU) Component 2: Development of Coral Ecosystems Programme manager : Eric CLUA - 2A: Knowledge, monitoring and management of ecosytems SPC - PoBox D5 - 2B: Reef rehabilitation 98848 Noumea Cedex - 2C: Development of active marine substances New Caledonia - 2D: Tel : (687) 26 54 71 Component 3: Programme Coordination and Development Email : [email protected] - 3A: Capitalisation, value-adding and extension of CRISP Programme activities www.crisponline.net - 3B: Coordination, promotion and development of CRISP Programme

COMPONENT2A Knowledge, monitoring and management of coral reef ecosytems

■ PROJECT 2A-1 :

restoking ■ PROJECT 2A-2: Improvement of knowledge and capacity for a better management of reef ecosystems ■ PROJECT 2A-3 : Synopsis and extension work on indicators for monitoring the health of co- CRISP contact person: ral ecosystems and developing a remote sensing tool Cherrie MORRIS School of Marine Studies ■ PROJECT 2A-4 : Faculty of Islands and Oceans Testing of novel information feedback methods for local communitis and users of reef and resources , Phone: (679) 3232612 ■ PROJECT 2A-5 : Fax: (679) 3231526 health of coral formation and ii) the development of eco-tourism

This CRISP component is funded by the following agency: ForEward

The West Pacific has the highest diversity of suggestions that reefs are experiencing an increase coral reefs in the world. Coral reefs and their associ- in exposure to chronic stresses such as , ated resources are essential to the livelihoods and sedimentation, coastal development and nutrient well-being of people of the South West Pacific. Reef- enrichment. The impact of these factors remains associated resources form a critical part of the diet difficult to measure. of populations of the small islands and of the The Institute of Marine Resources (IMR) of the Pacific. Reefs support income- generating activities University of the South Pacific has been pleased to such as fisheries and tourism and are, therefore, a act as coordinator of the South West Pacific Node significant component of the economies of many of the GCRMN since 2000. IMR has coordinated Pacific Island Countries and Territories. monitoring activities, facilitated training, provided Monitoring of the status of the coral reefs in the capacity building and functioned as a mentor to the South West Pacific node of the Global Coral Reef authors of the individual chapters. We are pleased Monitoring Network (GCRMN) has shown that with the increase in capacity, frequency and cover- there have been variable changes (both positive age of monitoring that is reflected in this volume. and negative) in the composition of coral reef com- We call for the continued support of our partners munities since 2004. In addition, there are special for both funding and collaborations that will en- challenges due to the large area of reefs, remoteness, sure monitoring and documentation of the status and limited monitoring resources. The quality and of these critical habitats are possible into the future. comprehensiveness of country reports presented We acknowledge the initial support from the In- here are a tribute to the hard work of the scientists, ternational Ocean Institute and the Canada-South local communities, tourist resort staff, students and Pacific Ocean Development Program that initiated various other volunteers who have contributed and this GCRMN node. The funding for coordination assembled monitoring data. Such data has provided of the network since 2006 and publication of this important information to students, scientists and book has come from the Coral Reef InitiativeS for fisheries managers in the region and beyond. the Pacific (CRISP) with considerable thanks to the French Government for this support, and the en- The reports in this book, overall demonstrate that couragement of Eric Clua the CRISP Programme coral reefs of the Pacific are in good condition Manager. when compared to reefs in Asia and the . Relatively fast rates of recovery seem to indicate The development and production of the country that the reefs of the South West Pacific appear to reports presented here would not have been pos- be resilient in the face of continuing acute threats sible without the hard work and commitment of from increased , cyclones, the volunteer country coordinators who are the au- tsunamis, and crown of thorns. However, there are thors of the individual reports. These reports have

v made an important contribution to the 2008 Inter- national Year of the Coral Reef. We are confidant that the information presented here will be useful to donors, researchers, policy makers, community members and all stakeholders involved in coral reef conservation and management.

Kenneth T MacKay, PhD

Former Coordinator of the South West Pacific Node GCRMN, and

Director, Institute of Marine Resources University of the South Pacific

vi TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgement iv

Foreword v

Fiji 1 Helen Sykes and Cherie Morris

New Caledonia 56 Laurent Wantiez, Claire Garrigue, Sabrina Virly and Sébastien Sarramégna

Samoa 84 Joyce Ah-Leong Samuelu and Maria Sapatu

Solomons 117 Nelly Kere

Tuvalu 154 Tupulanga Poulasi

Vanuatu 170 Jason J.J. Raubani Acting Principal Fisheries Officer Acknowledgements

The coordination of the South West Pacific Node Appreciation goes to Ms Philippa Cohen, of the of the Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network World Fish Center, Ms Prerna Chand, a former (GCRMN) is part of component 2A (Knowledge, staff of the University of the South Pacific, Emelita monitoring and management of coral reef ecosys- Wendt-Wilson and Matt Wilson of SAMBA! for tems) of the Coral Reef InitiativeS for the Pacific their edits and proof reading of this report at vari- (CRISP). We would like to acknowledge CRISP for ous stages. providing financial support towards this coordina- tion, the end result of which is this book. Cherie Whippy-Morris Acknowledgement also goes to the other key agen- Fellow – Coral Reefs cies that have financially supported country-mon- Coordinator of the South West Pacific itoring programmes. These include the following: GCRMN Node The David and Lucile Packard Foundation Institute of Marine Resources, () Division of Marine Studies Australian Agency for International School of Islands and Oceans Development - AusAID () Faculty of Science, Technology and Environment The Government of Samoa

French Initiative for Coral Reefs (New Caledonia)

Marine Ecology Consulting (Fiji)

The Government of Tuvalu and Funafuti Island Council (Tuvalu)

Sincere gratitude to the six country coordinators of the South West Pacific GCRMN Node who commit- ted time and effort to coordinating and conducting monitoring activities, and collating all the informa- tion presented here. In addition, many thanks to the various government departments, non-government organisations and local communities in Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, Samoa, New Caledonia, Fiji and Tuvalu for their ongoing support.

iv STATUS OF CORAL REEFS IN THE FIJI ISLANDS, 2007

Helen Sykes and Cherie Morris

Marine Ecology Consulting/Resort Support, Suva, Fiji

Institute of Marine Resources, University of the South Pacific, Suva, Fiji FIJI 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CONTENTS 2

3

4

5

COUNTR CURRENT P 2.1

2.2 2.3 DISCUSSION 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 CURRENT RESOUR 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 THREA 5.1 5.2

2.1.1 M 2.2.4 2.2.3 2.2.2 2.2.1 R 2.3.5 2.3.4 2.3.3 2.3.2 2.3.1 L S Fish I W C C T M S D Endang I C nvertebrates ntegrated threatntegrated analysis ubstrate eagrass urtles ong-term Monitoring TS TO CORAL REEFS//SEAGRASS esults ommunity resourceommunity use oral reef species reef oral oastal developmentoastal eepsea species eepsea ater Temperature onitoring methods andissuesonitoring methods angroves Y INFORMATION

M I Fish S C W W I Fish S

HYSICAL CONDITION OFCORAL REEFS

nvertebrates nvertebrates ubstrate ubstrate ered species urrent Monitoring Period (2005, 2006, 2007)by region

ater Temperature related to andcoral cover ater Temperature onitoring regions

CE USE

2

10 10 10 17 16 14 14 12 12 19 19 19 20 20 21 21 21 22 23 23 23 24 25 25 25 4 6 7 9 7 9 9

FIJI 37 52 32 33 31 30 29 28 27 27 27 26 26

3

AL REEF HEALTH

AL REEF CONSERVATION EFFORTS AL REEF CONSERVATION ATIONS

tbreaks oftbreaks organisms

verfishing urricanes/tsunamis estructive fishing and coral harvesting and fishing estructive leaching, coral disease and predators disease coral leaching, ollution edimentation, nutrient and enrichment edimentation, Ou H B D O S P

RECOMMEND FUTURE OF COR CURRENT COR 5.9 5.8 5.7 5.6 5.5 5.4 5.3 ENDICES CKNOWLEDGEMENTS AND CONTACTS CKNOWLEDGEMENTS

A REFERENCES APP 8 7 6

FIJI atr traeig oa hat ae over-fishing, are health coral threatening factors serious More Drupella. as such snails coral-eating and - COTS) Starfish Thorns of (Crown plancii Acanthaster from predation coral and overgrowthalgal nutrification, over-fishing, as such factors localised morewell, as are,Therestorms. large and cyclones by affected regularly also are which reefs, Fiji’s on stressor only the not is bleaching Coral displaying more extensive bleaching. areas than temperatures water lower regularlyhave to seen have been bleaching major escaped that eas ar-preventedsettlement. Certain dominationcoral algae that or spawn, coral new of sources from so and coral, healthy of areas from remote physically either were reefs that were causes probable slow, be to found was recovery Where levels. bleaching pre-2000 than higher even or to, recovered areas many with monitored, reefs most on good erally gen- was islands the across health coral 2007, By bleaching. coral to due death coral hard extensive water,suffered warm and unusually of pool large a In 2000, the Fiji Islands were at the northern edge of trends changes. aswelllocal overall and status regional the determine to sible sites acrossnetwork of the country, it has been pos- a examining By health. of states various in types, reef Fiji is a large of archipelago a great with variety coral reefs. country’s the of health the on report could that teams survey of network a train to project erative co-op- a began GCRMN the and Check Reef when 2000, in Fiji in started was (GCRMN) Network ing Monitor- Reef Coral Global the of branch Fiji The Ex ecuti v e 4 S atclr Fj’ rmiig tns f osa man- coastal of stands remaining Fiji’s particular, health in the long term, and need to be managed. In coral localised harm seriously to potential the have development coastal planned poorly and fishing over- as such impacts However,human-generated quite catastrophic events. survive can Fiji in that suggest would This pre-bleaching coral cover levels in around five years. to returned reefs Many areas. many in re-growth coral been therehas and well copedsystem has reef whole,Fiji’sthe that,on is bleaching 2000 the since of monitoring years six from finding main The on thereefs inlimited areas. pressure additional creates trade aquarium the for corals and fish small of collection The fish. stun to flats reef shallow on used poison plant a of ception ex- the with used, frequently not are fishing poison dynamiteor tops.as such methods reef Destructive shallow the on walk often and nets, small or lines, hand spears, use normally fishers subsistence Local market, Asian and lobsters for tourism. local the sea for addition, gathered are In cucumbers trade. souvenir for cases, tourism some the in and, food urchins for decorator collected are and Shell Trumpet Triton Clams, Giant fishing. de- subsistence-level populace on the pends of proportion large a as low relatively are invertebrates and fish edible large of numbers the villages, to close reefs on Fiji, Across areas. coastal in (eutrophication) dominance algal in ing increasedfrom nutrients sources land-based result- ummar y FIJI consequences of storm damage, but it will probably willit probably but of damage, storm consequences take 10 to 15 years of data collection to make regu- snap- allow Short-term projects apparent. cycles lar support, long-term without but, health reefof shots of value The spots. data disconnected only are these long-term monitoring of regularly visited sites has become but apparent, cannot be carried out unless the future. well into committed are resources 5 It has become obvious from these studies that there there that studies these obvious from become has It is a need for continuity of long-term monitoring, if changes in coral reef assemblage are to be clearly understood. Six years of monitoring has shown recovery from a single bleaching event, and some groves groves are under serious threat from coastal devel- This opment. could possibly create widespread and fisheriesdepletion. long-term FIJI 850 km 18,500 of area land estimated an has archipelago Fiji The 2004) al. et (Jenkins reefs. barrier longest world’s the of the two largest islands, is exceptional in that it is one of Reef, north Sea Great or Reef Barrier Cakaulevu timated 10,000 km2 of coral reefs (Zann, 1992). The drowned reefs, atolls and near-atolls, forming an es- reefs, ribbon oceanic reefs, platform reefs, barrier reefs, fringing includes system reef diverse Fiji’s theindigenous population. ownership of traditional under (i-qoliqoli), areas rights fishing customary into divided are waters coastal whereby system tenure marine traditionally-governed a has Fiji 2008). Statistics, of Bureau Islands (Fiji 2007 in 827,900 to 1996, 52,823 in 775,077 from years 11 byover increased population country’s The 178013’W; Lat19051’S). (Long.Group Lau Vatoais the extent in I. ernmost east- 08’S). The 170 Is.sawaLat (Long. 176056.5’E; the Ya- 45’S).Toof 210 is Lat ViwaI.,part west the 174036’E; (Long. south the in Ceva-i-Ra to group, 177 (Long. origin, Polynesian of inhabitants its with tuma, Ro- of island the from extends archipelago The island groups. Lau and Ringgold, , Lomaiviti,Mamanuca, the and Kadavu, and by followed lands, is- largest two the are Levu Vanua and Levu Viti habited (South &Skelton, 2000). in- being these cays,of and 106 islets 500 than with 2 ­ 0E; sra oe 30 ilns n more and islands 320+ over spread , a 10S wl nrh f h main the of north well 150’S) Lat COUNTR Y INFORMATION 1 6 al 1 Boiest o mrn fua ad floral and faunal groups inFiji (Vuki al.2001) et marine of Biodiversity 1: Table oyfs 6 aiis ,9 pce BaldwinandSeeto(1986) 162families,1,198species R Bony fish V agoe9species 4species Seagrass 422taxa Algae 60species Marine plants Sea squirts Ascidians Bivalves Opisthobranch Gastropods 15species Molluscs 5species Zoanthids Gorgonians 219species Stony Corals 4species Invertebrates 10species Whales Seabirds Skelton, 2000)(Table 1). & (South species endemic 4 least at including fish, reef coral of species 1198 unpubl.),and chon,1980 cies, (Lovell, 2002; Obura and Mangubhai, 2003; Pi- spe- endemic no but identified, coralsstony of cies spe- 219 been haveTo countries.there date, Island Pacific other to compared Sykes,2007) and (Lovell Fiji’s reefs have a relatively biodiversity level high of ertebrates pie 3species eptiles 228 Rhodophyceae 42 Phaeophyceae 113 Chlorophyceae 39 Cyanophyceae 102 species,25families 253 species 123 species,12families Sources(references) Current information Whippy-Morris &Pratt (1998) Morton andR Ryland etal.(1984) Kott (1981) Muirhead &Ryland(1981) Muzik &Wainwright (1977) Zann andLovell1992 Pichon 1980;Lovell2002; Zann (1992) Clunie (1985) Guinea (1980) N’ Parkinson (1982) Brodie &(1990) Parkinson (1982) Y eurt etal.(1996) aj (1980) FIJI cover, cover, and Belt Transects (BT) for fish and inver- tebrate marine life. In the 13 core regions of Fiji’s islands (Figure1), permanent transects were set up for annual monitoring using four 20m PIT and BT transects as a minimum standard sur- possible vey (Reef this Where Check was 2007). ex- panded and enhanced to Institute ofthe Australian Marine Science (AIMS) benthic lifeform categories (English et al. 1997), and full fish species census. These surveys carriedwere out by the Fiji GCRMN education- contributing of team a and coordinators al organisations, non-government organisations, and tourism resorts. In practice not all sites were but beenhave visited surveyed annually, frequently 1). (Appendix years several over It has been possible to standardise data and com- pare sites at the levels of percentage cover and ani- 7 2 SICAL CONDITION CONDITION SICAL Y OF CORAL REEFS OF CORAL CURRENT PH CURRENT Figure 1: 13 core regions of Fiji’s islands permanent transects set were regions monitoring. 1: 13 core annual up for ofFigure Fiji’s The surveys presented in this report are based on a suite (PIT) of for Transects Intercept benthic Point Reef surveying has become more standardised and concentrated the over past eight years with the for- mation of the Fiji branch of the Global Coral Reef Network (GCRMN), and the Fiji Locally Managed there addition In (FLMMA). Network Areas Marine are now many marine conservation and research projects operating through educational and non- organisations. government 2.1 Monitoring methods issues and 2.1 Monitoring As the central base of the University of the South FijiPacific, has aconsiderable amountof data and reports on reef populations and condition. Moni- toring methods have varied over time and of monitoring focus the on geo- depending area, graphic programmes agencies. and contributing FIJI Table inPITandBT used surveys reef 2:Categories 100m per density mal diversity) al. et (English 1997)(Table 2). changes (used for in population detailed analysis of census species fish full and cover, benthic for ries over-timechanges) expandedand catego-life-form and comparisons regional of analysis for (used ries catego- Check Reef basic into disaggregated is here Silt Sand Rubble Rock Other biota and shortturfs) (all algaeexceptHalimeda,coralline Nutrient indicatoralgae Sponge Recently killedcoral Soft coral(live) eti oe Re hc)Cd eti oe Lffr aeois oeFishgroups(Reef Check) Code Benthiccover(Lifeformcategories) Code Hard coral(live) Benthic cover(Reef Check) 2 , since 1999. Data presented Data 1999. since , INnArpr oa umsieC SurgeonandUnicornfish CS Non- coralsubmassive SI SD RB RC OT Acroporasubmassive NIA Acroporaencrusting SP Acroporatabular Acroporadigitate RKC SC CAcroporabranching HC foliose Non-Acropora coral encrusting Non-Acropora coral massive Non-Acropora coral branching Non-Acropora coral fungoid (mushroom) Non-Acropora coral o-cooacrlMlioa(ie M Jacksand Trevallies CME Non-Acropora coralMillipora (fire) Soft coral Heliopora (blue) Non-Acropora coral Sponge Zoanthid Other biota Halimeda algae Turf algae Macro algae Algal assemblage Dead coral Silt Sand Rubble Rock Dead coral+algae 8 numbers 100m per invertebrate and fish cover, coral percentage as such summaries as data supply to asked were tions organisa- cases, these In sizes. transect or methods other using studies single-case and organisations other by contributed been has data Occasional C Grouper(insizecategories) ACS Sweetlips ACE Snapper ACT Parrotfish ACD FFishgroups(Expanded Reef Check) CF BumpheadParrotfish (B.muricatum) CE Humpheadwrasse(C.undulatus) CM Morayeels CB C Butterflyfish ACB M Goatfish CMR CInvertebrategroups(Reef Check) SC CHE PBandedCoral Shrimp SP OLobster ZO TSeaCucumbers(tospecies) OT ACrownofThorns(COT) CA AGiantClam(insizecategories) HA ATriton Shell TA ASeaUrchins: MA AA DC SI SD RB RC DCA 2 . Tripnuestes gratilla Diadema spp Heterocentrotus spp FIJI

2 of fish in mostregions wasrepresented by parrot fish and butterfly fish. Abbreviated region names are Ltka for , Nma for Namena, and Rtma . for 2.2.4 Invertebrates Figure 4 indicates the average key in invertebrates regions of Fiji for 2005 to 2007. Macro-inver- tebrates are generally very sparse on Fiji’s with reefs, the exception of a small Diadema-like urchin Echinostrephalus aciculatus. Sea cucumbers and gi- ant clams were scattered in low numbers in most regions. No invertebrates were found at three sites Large num- in 4). Figure surveyed (not represented bers of COTS were observed in the Mamanucas Is- lands in 2006 and 2007; their presence was signifi- cant Suva Islands, and in the Lomaiviti, the Yasawa 2007. by Coast Coral The dominance of Diadema urchins masks abundance of the the other invertebrates, so it is pre- sented separately in Figure 5. Significant numbers reefs. and Taveuni Savusavu Yasawas, shown for are 2.2.3 Fish The average key fishdensity inregions of Fiji from were Fish counts 3. 2007 is shown in Figure 2005 to consistently higher in the Mamanuca and Taveuni Islands. In Lomaiviti, the and large schools of snappers Apart were seen. Taveuni, from these schools, the greatest density per 100m 2.2.2 Substrate cov- coral average ofthe representation a is 2 Figure er in regions of Fiji for 2005 - 2007. Highest coral cover was seen in Namena, Rotuma and Vatu-i-Ra Passage. Over most sites, from 2006 – 2007, there was a constant pattern of increasing Three sites hard Savusavu (Mamanuca, and cover. Suva) coral high with coincident cover, coral decreasing showed crown of thorns starfish (COTS)numbers (Figure deviation. +/- 1 standard The represent bars 14). 9 The following figures indicate the relative abun- dance of the fishsubstrate, and in invertebrates the 2007. – 2005 over Fiji of regions monitoring various as However, few regions were monitored in 2005, compari- appropriate an considered not is data that againstson the data of 2006 and 2007. 2.2.1 Current Monitoring Period Period Monitoring 2.2.1 Current region 2007) by 2006, (2005, 2.2 Results In this section, data from the current monitoring period, 2005 – 2007, is presented first.Additional 2004 – 1999 years the for available is data long-term (Lovell and Sykes. 2007). Sea surface temperature pe- monitoring current the for available also is data riod. Sites Sites were selected for monitoring to provide widespread picture of a reef health across the coun- monitoring “Core” try. sites are surveyed annually or bi-annually depending on logistics. Other, less frequent, opportunist surveys from more remote regions are incorporated as “one-off” reports, but figures. in Fiji average not included 2.1.1 Monitoring regions 2.1.1 Monitoring In-water temperature loggers were deployed in temperature loggers In-water deployed cer- were tain sites from 1996 by Drs Norm Quinn and Peter Newell, in cooperation with the tourist diver live- communi- personal R., (Barrell, “Nai’a” ship aboard cation, January 2002). This network of loggers was expanded in 2003 and the by 2006 by Fiji GCRMN, more than 15 loggers were set around the country. Initially loggers were set to record water tempera- period recording the 2005, in hours, every four ture was then changed to sample every two hours and, in certain more detailed water studies, temperature was monitored every 15 minutes (Victor Bonito, personal communication, December 2007). These loggers were downloaded annually wherever possi- areas. remote in more and less frequently ble, FIJI Figure 3. Average Fiji 2005–2007 of in regions fishdensity key Figure 2. Average Fiji of from hard2005–2007 regions coral inmonitoring cover 50 70 60 70 70 70 70 50 70 70 60 60 607 06 07 06 07 06 05 07 06 07 06 05 06 07 06 07 06 07 06 07 07 06 05 07 06 05 eaCoralCoast 70 70 06 05 07 06 07 eaCrlCatKdv TALmiiiMmnc Rtma Mamanuca Lomaiviti LTKA Kadavu CoralCoast Beqa aauLK oavt Mamanuca Lomaiviti LTKA Kadavu 07 07 606 06 70 07 07 07 Nma Nma 10 60 60 60 50 70 70 07 06 07 06 07 06 05 07 06 07 06 05 06 Rtma Savusavu Savusavu Suva Suva Taveuni Taveuni V atu-i-R V atu-i-R a a Y asawas Y asawas FIJI

in 2005 of shallow reefs. These reached the lowest in cover while2001, deeper reefs had the least hard coral cover in 2002. The average coral cover was around 45% with a range of 8% – 60% across all 13 regions. was surveyed regions the in algaecover average The Fig- in shown as coral ofhard that to compared low surveyed sites two the in found were algae No 7. ure in 2001. Figure 8 shows averages of the three main types of coral: Acropora, non-Acropora and soft coral. There was a sharp decrease in Acropora hard coral then a 1999 gradual- from 2001, be- increase cover tween 2002 and 2007, with the exception of 2006, reflecting the impact, and bleaching recovery then respectively. On from the other hand, non- Acropora hard corals cover ranged from 17%-29% in the years from 1999-2007. Soft corals decreased in 2000 and from 2001 – 2003 and 2007. between 2003, and increased 11 Region and Year and Region Kadavu LautokaLomaiViti Savusavu Taveuni Yasawas Coast 2007 2007Beqa 2006 Coral 2006 2006 2006 2007 2006 2007 2006 2007 5 0

75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 Density per 100m2 per Density At At both depths, there was an observed decline in hard coral cover from 1999 - 2001, and a subse- exception the with 2007 – 2002 from increase quent 2.3.1 Substrate from cover coral average the presents below 6 Figure all core survey regions. There is a clear recovery trend following losses from bleaching and COTS, although high standard deviations reflect thecon- variation(trend reefsiderable a in is types.line The statistical ofline) polynomial analysis cover. coral 2.3 Long-term Monitoring 2.3 Long-term Monitoring The various trends obtained from monitoring data the over years from 1999 to 2007 for the re- diverse gions around Fiji have been presented in this sec- tion. The graphs concentrate on trends observed throughout the mentioned above period. These are represented as averages of the relative abundance for substrate, fish and invertebratesfor theregions Fiji. in monitored Figure 5. Average Diadema density urchin in regions 2006 – 2007 from of Fiji Average 5. Figure FIJI Figure 7. Average from 1999-2007 regions themonitoring across onreefs cover algae Figure 6. Average from 1999-2007 hardregions themonitoring coral across onreefs cover 12 FIJI of reef substrate across the 2 monitoring regions from 2002 – 2007. 2002 – 2007. regions from monitoring The data indicates that (especially invertebrate Diadema urchins and numbers sea cucumbers) have declined since 2002. Diadema urchins 3. are in Table separately presented 2.3.3 Invertebrates Figure 10 shows the average indicator invertebrate numbers per 100m 13 Figure Figure 9 shows the average indicator fish numbers in patterns obvious no were There 2000-2007. from fishquantities, apart from asudden abundanceof snapper in affected 2006, by a very large school oc- marinea protected curring(Vadravadra, site one in area on , Lomaiviti). Numbers of large such sweetlips, large as parrot- “food grouper, fish” fish and wrasse were low across theregions from 2007. 2002 to 2.3.2 Fish Figure 8. Average cover of Acropora coral, non-Acropora coral and soft coral across and the softmonitoring coral coral regions from non-Acropora coral, coverAcropora of Average 8. Figure 1999 – 2007 FIJI 2002 -2007 Figure 9. Average 100m per indicator fish numbers Figure 10. Average indicator invertebrate numbers per 100m per numbers invertebrateAverage10. indicatorFigure Y Y ears ears 0220 0420 062007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2 of reef substrate across regions from 2002–2007 regions substrate across reef of 14 2 of reef substrate, across monitoring regions from regions monitoring across substrate, reef of FIJI C o 99 0.24 593457276 0.09 0.08 938 0.15 0.10 176634291052 0.81 5623 0.49 2310 0.16 0.17 0.26 18311668 0.18 11471072 0.09 0.07 0.04 Days over 29.0 degrees Consecutive days over 29 Month & Year No. COTS Total CPUE Sept. ‘06 Oct. ‘06 ‘06 Nov. Dec. ‘06 Jan. ‘07 Feb. ‘07 ‘07 Mar. ‘07 Apr. May ‘07 June ‘07 July ‘07 Aug. ‘07 Sept. ‘07 Oct. ‘07 2.3.4 Water temperatures temperatures Water 2.3.4 The following graphs relate to the significance of sea surface temperatures and the percentage coral cover over an eight year period. An effort has been with temperatures surface sea the correlate to made the extent of coral bleaching events in one of the Vatu-i-Ra. regions – monitoring Table 5. Catch Table per Unit Effort for COTS at four dive sites in betweenIslands the Mamanuca October 2006 and October 2007 C in the Vatu-i-Ra Passage 1997 – 2007 Passage Vatu-i-Ra C in the o 15 11 15 19 6 28 30 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 47.05 25.43 2.12 1.00 8.01 8.64 2 Year 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Year Density: Number/100m N sites Density 0.06 0.05 0.07 0.00 0.08 0.15 Std.Dev. 0.15 0.10 0.13 0.00 0.31 0.31 N sites 11 15 19 6 28 30 Table Table 3. Diadema urchin density across Fiji Islands 2002 – 2007 Figure 11. Number of days with of days 29 above Number temperatures 11. Figure Table Table 5 shows the average catch per dive unit four ofon minute search) per removed (COTS effort sites in the Mamanuca Islands between October the in decrease a was There 2007. October and 2006 numbers of COTS found per search from minute’s 2007. October 2006 to October Table 4 shows the average density of COTS in moni- in COTS of density average the shows 4 Table set data (The2005 2007. – 2002 from regions toring has been omitted as the data from the few surveys carried out would not give a representation of Fiji there that indicates data The whole). a as data COTS has been a slight increase in COTS over the years 2007. 2002 to 4. Table Average density of COTS in monitoring re- gions 2002 - 2007 from FIJI Figure 12. Hard coral cover and extent of bleaching at time of survey inthe FigureVatu-i-Ra 12. Hardsurvey of attime bleaching of coral andextent cover Passage 1999-2007 29 days temperatures numberhad of 2006 ahigh over showsgraph thatin2000, 2001, 2002, 2005and were theyears, during 2000, 2002and2005. The Coral Bleaching andCoral Cover 2.3.5 Water temperature related to periods with consecutive with periods temperatures over 29 in Vatu-i-Ra. alsoindicates This thatthelongest water temperatures above thebleaching threshold Figure days 11showsaverage thenumberwith of is evident in2001,is evident 2002and2006, corresponding corals2000,in bleached hard partly coraland cover bleached fully in increase an is There 2007. – 1999 from PassageVatu-i-Ra the in cover coral hard of condition the of indication an provides 12 Figure secutive days over 29 o C. The years with the highest number of con-C. number of thehighest years The with o C were 2000and2002. o C 16 days over 29 to the years the consecutivenumberwith highest of ent lifeforms after thebleaching event. differ- the of recovery of rate the of indicative also Acroporacoraland branchingmassive 2000.in It is commonthe types coral of decline sharp showsthe regions.clearly Itmonitoring all in years overeight cover lifeform coral hard of trend the is 14 Figure there were in2003and2005.) nosurveys (Note: 2007). (2006, times bleaching post in reefs than categories lifeform of diversity lower a had (1999) year pre-bleaching the in reefs that evident is It 2007. to 1999 years the over corals branching Acropora and coral massive of data of percentage high indicates graph 2007. The – Passage1999 i-Ra Vatu-the MutinyMountin on categories life-form in types coral main average the shows 13 Figure o C evident inFigure 13.C evident FIJI 17 years 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Figure 14. Average Acropora lifeform categories acrossAcropora monitoring regions 1999 – 2007 from Average 14. Figure Note: “coral” life-form categories refer to hard corals other than Acropora species Acropora than other corals hard to refercategories life-form “coral” Note: Figure 13. Average main coral lifeform categories on Mount Mutiny in the Vatu-i-Ra Passage 1999 -2007 Passage Vatu-i-Ra the in lifeform coral main Mutiny categories on Mount Average 13. Figure FIJI such as the fast growing fast the as such corals of removal large-scale whereby effect, fire” “forestthe to due be may This 2007. to 1999 from noticed was diversity lifeform coral in increase An crease (Mamanucas, Savusavu andSuva). de- to started cover had coral regions, some in and amount of White Syndrome Disease, were observed, small a predation,and snail Drupella and COTS as In 2007 some localised coral damaging factors, such years, resilience ahigh indicating to such events. cover recovered from the mass bleaching within five coral brief, In observed. was reefs individual some and 60% coral cover. By 2006 coral cover 80% of on 20% between showed regions individual 2005, By system. reef not across thecountry-wide these occurred in certain regions the of archipelago, but damage, further some caused 2006 and 2005 in COTSoutbreaks2004, and and 2001 in cyclones 2006, and 2005 in events bleaching Smaller 2007). corals. new by overgrown be more once may corals these time In forms. coral of variety wider a of growth new and settlement allows reef, of area large a occupy above 29 elevated temperatureswater of extendedperiods to relate events These country. the across reefs some tween 40% and 80% hardof corals was observed on be- of mortality when 2002 and 2000 in bleaching mass from recovery the been has years seven past the over Fiji in health reef coral of issue main The 3.1 Substrate rwh o ot optd y other by competed out or growth, Acropora o C, (Cumming et al. 2004; Lovell and Sykes, , which normally normally whichAcropora , D iscussion 18 3 veys. that would not have been picked up by simpler sur- catastrophes to responses showed still composition community in alterations much, very change not did cover coral overall where cases some In 8). ure swift recovery these of corals was documented (Fig- following the and evident, was cyclones and COTS bleaching, as such catastrophes to species Acropora of vulnerability the particular, In communities. coral the within changes of picture better much a field,werethe in “Lifeform” provided data category toparisons be made. Where more diversspecialised com- regional allowing thus sites, of variety wide a from data collect to divers non-specialist lowing al- in Check”valuable proved“Reef very categories Check” substrate categories (Reef Check, 2007). The “Reef simple than rather surveys, during 1997) al. the use of “Lifeform” categories coralsof (English et This pattern of increasing diversity was identified by uvy (ye, . n Mca, . proa ob- personal K., MacKay, and H. (Sykes, surveys detailed more although survey, of period the over noticed were assemblages fish in changes Nomajor anysweetlips, size. of wrasse parrotfish and grouper, of numbers low or of, lack the in fishing, commercial small-scale and subsistence heavy of impacts the showed villages to proximity close in Reefs fisheries. local scale small by impacted be to likely most families fish the target which groups, indicator Check” “Reef to limited were report this in surveys The numbers. large in occur these areas manyW.J. Baldwin, in to,J.and and Unpublished) Fiji coral has of a fishreef wide variety species (See- 3.2 Fish FIJI C annually, C annually, o C occur for o South. South. o C, particularly on shallow shallow particularly on C, o South experiencing temperatures one to o C and fall as low as 22 as low as fall and C o more than 75 consecutive days. This is predicted for for predicted is This days. consecutive 75 than more lower significantly storms and cyclones unless 2008, temperatures. sea water In In the past there has been a correlation between elevated water temperatures in the South Pa- West ENSO the with associated events Nina” “La and cific oscillations. (Khan, Z., personal communication, December A 2007). strong La Niña is predicted for person- office, Fiji Meterological S., (McGree, 2008, al communication, December 2007) and in 2007 the water temperature patterns were very similar to those of the preceding 1999, elevated water tem- peratures and mass bleaching event of 2000, sup- porting this prediction. Extensive hard coral mortality due to coral bleach- summer daily when Fiji in experienced been has ing average water temperatures above 29 two degrees highertwo than those at 19 3.4 Water Temperature Water 3.4 Normal average daily sea water temperatures in the Fiji Islands vary between 24 and 31 but through the day temperatures may rise may but through as temperatures the far day as 36 four dive sites, with the highest numbers seen in the in seen numbers highest the with sites, dive four warmer parts of the year, November to February (Appendix 19). CPUE suggested that by late 2007 more time was needed to find each indicat- COTS, ing that density had reduced. This could be due to the combination of removal efforts and a decrease species). coral of desirable food (Acropora reefs (Bonito, V., personal communication, Decem- personal communication, V., (Bonito, reefs ber 2007). Temperatures vary with latitude; reefs above 17 19 Since Since October 2006, a dive operator in the Mama- nuca Islands, (Mott, J., personal communication, January 2008) has been carrying out a COTS re- moval programme over four dive sites. They have kept excellent data of number of COTS removed and minutes of dive time spent, allowing calcula- Catch also and seen, of COTS number of tions total Per Unit Effort (CPUE), expressed as number of COTS found per minute search Al- (Appendix 18). most 2,000 COTS per month were removed from These surveys recorded “Reef Check” like- most invertebrates indicator macro target which groups, ly to be impacted by small scale local fisheries,and those which affect algal cover (Diadema urchins) and coral health (COTS). Reefs in close proximity to villages the showed impacts of heavy subsistence and small scale commercial fishing, in the lack of, or low amount of sea cucumbers and giant clams. Both sea cucumbers, which are actively collected, and Diadema urchins, which are not, decreased in density and 2007. 2002 between 3.3 Invertebrates Anecdotal accounts (Watts, A. and Hill, A., personal personal A., Hill, and A. (Watts, accounts Anecdotal communications, December 2007) suggest tuna mackerel, that as such fish pelagic of large numbers and sharks are decreasing across the country, pre- sumably due to over fishingby larger commercial as long-liners. boats such servations, servations, January 2008) suggest that certain ob- ligate corallivores and coral-dwellers were reduced in numbers in the years immediately following the num- that but 2002, to 2000 of bleaching coral mass recovered. since have bers FIJI village management plans, include overfishing (re- overfishing include plans, management village from noted as grounds, fishing to threats Major glean the reef. andfishinglines nets use mainly women while nets, and spear include men by used gear fishing main The fishers. mercial com- solely are community a of proportion small a whilst selling,for partially and home at sumption con-resourcesfor marine harvest village a in holds house- Most employment. paid other and bers), cucum- sea (fish, resources marine and etc) taro, is villages (kava,crops root of sale the from 29 mostly FJD$636, all for income monthly Average living. and standard of education better searchfor a and/or marriage to ed attribut- be also can and (7%) low also is members village by Out-migration marriage. through ally In-migration into a village is low (5.2%) and is usu- females.are populations village the of 64% around that showed gender people.by composition Village fivesize 312 and an of population averagevillage of household average an with 73), of (SD 54 houses of number average the village, or site typical a For LMMA sites are presented. co-managed (IAS) Science Applied of Institute 29 the from results survey socioeconomic Averagesof throughoutaround Fiji’s 270villages provinces. registered in 2004. Currently, FLMMA is working in formally but 2001, in started which communities, and organisations non-government government, from practitioners resource comprises network (FLMMA) Area Marine Managed Locally Fiji The 4.1 Community resource use CURRENT RESOURCEUSE 20 4 tion, September, 2008). communica- personal Tawake, Alifereti and Vave (Ron problems such to solutions practical ment imple- to organisations partner with working are effluents. Villages washing and waste piggery from pollution liquid include threats Other problem. a also is areas protected marine in Poaching tices. and forestlogging clearing, prac- farming and poor of result a as sedimentation coast, the along or sea the into wastes household invertebrates),dumping and fish certain of sighting no to rare the in sulting , for the aquarium trade. This is managed is This trade. aquarium the for Levu,Viti of island main the of coast the along lected,mainly col- are Rock”) (“Live algae coralline with covered fish, invertebrates, substrate Small fossil corals, and ment). Depart- Fisheries Fiji Report, Annual draft (2005 2005 in outlets market from recorded were brates tion. inverte- and fish Anestimatedtonnes 5,994 of Trochusand marketAsian buttonproduc-for shell vertebratesfor markets, local cucumberssea for the andin- finfish target fishers commercial licensed addition, In harvested. actively are invertebrates, macro- and finfish such as communities,and rural for protein of source main the is Fishing income. of sources and livelihood subsistence, for reefs the on heavily rely resourceowners marine Customary and tourism. harvesting, coral fisheries, commercial small-scale and subsistence by targeted Fiji, in ecosystems rine ma- exploited most the are reefs coral Near-shore Species 4.2 Coral Reef FIJI Seven Seven species of turtles inhabit the Pacific with five These 2003). al., et (Batibasaga Fiji in found these of (Eretmoche- Hawksbill ), mydas (Chelonia Green are lys imbricate), Leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea), Loggerhead (Caretta ) caretta and Olive turtles. The Ridley endangered marine turtle not ecologyofthe marineecosys- in the role key a plays only is tem also importantly, but, revered in culture and customs around the globe (Guinea, 1993). Pacific Islanders have strong cultural relationships with, and traditional knowledge of marine turtles (Mor- 1993). Guinea, 2007; gan, The noticeable decline in marine turtles in the Pa- cific has been concern a over theyears (Weaver, 1996). Marine turtles have long been recognised as vulnerable to development impacts, as well as be- ing of considerable cultural importance to many et Batibasaga 2003). (Adam, countries Island Pacific nest- of number population the estimated (2003) al. ing marine turtles in Fiji as follows: 50-75 nesting 4.3 Turtles In In the vicinity of the capital city of Suva, there is a very active trade in extracting Porites boulder cor- lining septic tanks. used for are which als, Tourism is the largest overseas income generator in the country, (Ministry of Information, 2005) and also the largest non-extractive user of the coral reef Over resource. 75% of all tourists entering the country experience some form of marine based ac- SCU- or snorkelling swimming, be it whether tivity, (Ministry IndustrialRelations, diving, of Lands, and Tourism Environment, 2007a), and the image of pristine beaches and clear water is central to the industry. Some extractive activities are involved in the trade, specifically hand-line fishing, game fish- visits. and shell market ing, 21 Figure 18: Porites boulder corals for sale for septictank for sale for corals boulder Porites 18: Figure districtconstruction Suva in the Greater under under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) (Lovell 2001, Sykes et are coral and rock live volume, of terms In 2002,). al two of the most important products in the marine aquarium in and trade, these interest products, two and in other ornamental species, is growing world- wide. In 2004 Fiji supplied about 161,927 pieces of hard and soft coral and 1.36 million pieces of live mainly rock to markets, in overseas the Hong USA, Fiji also exported and Japan 169,143 Europe. Kong, ornamental fish and 31,900 invertebrates (CITES database with the Fiji Fisheries Department, July 2005). There is a growing international concern the over effects environmental of coral live and live rock harvests from harvest the ofwild. Worldwide, considered generally is wild the from products these to have detrimental effects on the ecology of coral reef ecosystems and on the coastal fisheries sup- and porting Cere- many rural communities (Lal, P. 2005). A., lala,

FIJI has been cleared to the high mark for agricul- for mark tide high the to cleared been has purposes. On larger islands, much of the back forest building and fuel for wood and trade, commercial scale small and subsistence for (Mana), anomala LobsterMud and (Qari) paramamosain Scylla Crab Mangrove the as such invertebrates of harvesting include mangroves of uses Traditional Cultural Advancement (OISCA). NGO, the Organization for Industrial, Spiritual and Japanese the as such organisations by run projects plant cleared areas. out This has under been carried re- to made been have attempts areas some in that Coastal mangroves are now considered so important (Watling, D. andChape, 1992). locha toralis (Kedra viv na yalewa kalou); 4.4 Mangroves population (Jit, 2007;turtle Laveti, 2008). of exploitation leading to the ongoing decline in the rate increasing the enhance may legislation tional na- of enforcement of lack continuing The ister. on request granted to turtles the Min- utilisation of or purposes traditional for exemption an is There derivatives. and meat its of trading commercial any and egg turtle turtle, of use subsistence the on ban total a lays moratorium The Act. Fisheries the under place in moratorium turtle a is there Fiji, In turtles. loggerhead nesting of recordings no with turtles leatherback 20-30 and turtles, hawksbill 150-200 turtles, green (Tiri); (Tiri); trees: mangrove of species nine has Fiji Levu. Vanua of north the in particularly coastlines, Fiji’s of many fringe forests Mangrove (Dogo); hybrid); (sterile selala ra (Sinu gaga); and gaga); (Sinu Tr wai); (Tiri samoensis Rhizophora (Sagali); littorea Lumnitzera (Dabi) granatum Xylocarpus gymnorrhiza Bruguiera stylosa Rhizophora Excoecaria agal- Excoecaria eiir lit- Heritiera Thalassina Rhizopho- 22 2007a). grove areas within tourism developments (Sykes, H. developed as a guideline for sustainable use of man- being is plan management mangrove proposed A through clearance andreclamation. stands estuarine and tidal remaining the of much threatening now is development coastal and ture, 2007). Reddy, and (Sykes beds. seagrass some destroyed have construction over-water and dredging lagoon blasting, channel addition In traffic. boat creased in- and activities construction controlled equately inad- from sedimentation causing properties, tial residen- and tourism for mainly developments, over-water and coastal from been have years few past the over beds seagrass on impacts main The al.Craig et 2004). 2002, (Craig beds feeding such have not do which French and Samoa Polynesia as American afield far as from those including species, these of survival the in instrumental are so and turtles, for ground feeding important are beds seagrass Fiji’s(Veata). Hares Sea and (cawaki), tilla cornea (Kaikoso), edible sea urchins brates, including shellfish such as ark shells tional collecting grounds for many fish and inverte- ovalis. These areas are important habitats and tradi- of amounts smaller plus pinifolia, odule , isoetifolium ringodium species, main flats. three are There reef fringing Fiji has extensive seagrass beds on sandy areas of the 4.5 Seagrass the Fiji fisheries industry (Ministry of Information, of (Ministry industry fisheries Fiji the of section export largest the is industry tuna The species 4.6 Deepsea Halodule uninervis Halodule uninervis Dolabella auricularia auricularia Dolabella Tripnuestes gra- Halophilia and Anadara Hal- Sy- FIJI (vas- derasa T. Tridacna squamosa and Tridacna ua) are collected on shallow reef tops for subsistence subsistence for tops reef shallow on collected are ua) on reduced are numbers result, a As sale. for and use reefs. many Humpback whales pass though the islands in June and July on their way to the breeding grounds of They . do not remain in Fiji waters for long. Minke, Pilot and False Killer whales are frequently reported from scattered areas, as well as Bottle- nosed and Spinner Dolphins. Dolphins and other Cetaceans (whales) all are under Appendix 1 of CITES, as species threatened with extinction. As such, all trade in these species is banned, and they cannot beor exported imported or into, re-export- ed from, signatory countries, except in exceptional traded be not may they particular, In circumstances. purposes. commercial in for long long standing tradition and interest in turtle hunt- ing, despite several government attempts at bans and controls. (See previous section on turtles). In addition, many nesting beaches are being targeted and is there by resort no development, government this. ameliorate or legislation control to Sea cucumbers have been over-collected in many areas (Batibasaga and Vana, 1995). Under present conditions, collectors, using SCUBA or “Hookah” surface supplied compressed air, travel to an area valuable of numbers commercially large collect and sea cucumbers in a short period, before moving on to the next location. This practice results in the re- moval of most sea cucumbers from a reef, result- ing in adverse impacts on the reef ecosystem and a have there addition, In stock. in reduction breeding been human casualties in the form of permanent sickness. decompression paralysis from Giant Clams 23 Bolbometopon muricatum Bolbometopon Cheilinus undulatus (Var- Turtles are heavily threatened in Fiji, as ofa result in Fiji, heavily threatened are a Turtles (Ula rua) is facing extinction in Fiji due to overfish- to due Fiji in extinction facing is rua) (Ula ing, and there has been an observed reduction in the past decade in areas where large schools were sighted. previously commonly The humphead wrasse parrotfish bumphead The 4.7 Endangered species 4.7 Endangered The Fiji Endangered and Species Protected Act was passed by the government of the day in December 2002. This Act is a requirement of the Conven- tion on International in Trade Endangered Species (CITES) in order to regulate and control the do- mestic and international trade of species protected CITES. under ivoce) has recently been added to Appendix II of CITES, through which trade must be controlled in order to avoid utilisation incompatible with their survival (CITES 2007). Under this regulation, all trade in the humphead wrasse has been banned in appears still species this although Fiji throughout outlets. local market 2005), 2005), and large scale commercial fishingexists in the region, ostensibly targeting tuna stocks, but also catches involving of non-target species such as dolphin-fish, mackerel and shark. total The catch by domestic long-line fleet inside (catches and out- was 2005 during Zone) Economic Exclusive the side 13,010mt of which 11,313mt tuna were species and 1697mt were non-target pelagic species. There was a substantial reduction in albacore and bigeye tuna catches and under-reporting of non-target species during this year (2005 draft Annual Report, Fiji Fisheries Department). FIJI reefs with the lowest threat index are those remote those are index threat lowest the with reefs use.development, The concentratedagricultural or urban of centres near those are threat highest der un- areas that shows analysis threat integrated The dium, Low or Very Low (Appendices 9-17). Me- High, as rated are threats where score, threat single a into integrated then and categories, five in assessed are gathered is data where country the of this analysis, potential threats tohealth in reef areas In exist. may regions other in apply not may that threats where available,or not often is information technical detailed where Node, Pacific WestSouth flect local conditions in the small Island states of the al. al.et Burke1998; ant et 2000). Modifications re- thea modification of “Reefs at Risk” (Bry- methods An Integrated Threat Analysis was carried out using Threat 5.1 Integrated Analysis Table 5:Integrated theFiji of Islands threat for index 15regions R T Y aauaI Low Mamanuca Is T Beqa K Lomaiviti V V V V V V V Reef Area asawa Is vui atb Low aveuni, Waitabu aveuni, Somosomo atu-i-R otuma anua Levu,Namena naLv,Svsv Medium anua Levu,Savusavu adavu t eu atk Medium iti Levu,Lautoka Medium iti Levu,MomiBay Medium iti Levu,CoralCoast t eu uaMedium iti Levu,Suva a Low Low V Low Low Low V V Development Coastal ery Low ery Low ery Low THREATS TOCORALREEFS/ MANGRO ihMdu High Medium High V Low eimMdu High Medium Medium o eimHigh Medium Low V V V V V V ihHg High High High V High High Medium V olto Sediment Pollution r o eimLow Medium ery Low r o eimHigh Medium ery Low r o eimHigh Medium ery Low r o eimMdu Low Medium Medium ery Low ery Low r o eimLow Medium ery Low r ihHg High High ery High r ihHg High High ery High r ihHg High High ery High INTEGRATED THREAT INDEX V V Damage r o Low ery Low r o Low ery Low V ES/SEAGRASS 24 5 vrfsigDsrcieFsigOverallThreat DestructiveFishing Over-fishing “Recommendations”. tion policies. This is discussed further in the section conserva- reef for focus a as used be may they as management, reef in tool useful a are ratings threat that could occur from the factors considered. These damage potential the but reefs, to damage past or current reflect not does index this that membered fromcentres.populationshore and re- be Itshould direct reef degradation, reduced water quality due quality water reduced degradation, reef direct involve may which practices construction physical trated.regions,relatedsuchtoInlargely are threats concen- is development tourism large-scale where regions the and townships, cities, around areas in health reef threaten to potential the has but Fiji, of reefs the all affect not does development Coastal 5.2 Coastal development Medium V V Low Low Medium Low V V Medium Medium Medium Medium High ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low High Medium Low High High High Medium Medium Low Medium V V High High V Index Score ery High ery High ery High FIJI 5.4 Sedimentation, nutrient enrich- 5.4 Sedimentation, and eutrophication ment One of the largest threats to coastal fringing reefs, especially in the most populated and developed urban areas, the coral coast of Viti Levu, and the islands of chains, is the eu- Mamanuca and Yasawa trophication (algal overgrowth). This is attributed over-fish- enrichment, nutrientof combination a to ing of herbivorous animals, and/or sedimentation. On the north and west coasts of the two largest is- cane sugar large-scale to related probably is it lands, agriculture. This has caused soil erosion into rivers and and creeks, an influxof nutrients from the use of chemical fertilizers, that wash into waterways 2003, Aalbersberg, and (Mosley rainfallhighduring 2006). S., Pareti, These factors have resulted in long-term ecologi- cal shifts away from coral reefs to alga-dominated platforms along the coral coast, and large season- al algal drifts in the Mamanucas and Yasawa Is- lands. In Beqa lagoon, water clarity is usually high, except at times of high rainfall, when sediment- loaded water from the Navua River on Viti Levu 2007b). H., (Sykes, is washed down the of influence areas, remote theseIn more factors is minor, and water quality is high, except around ings on reefs in Rotuma and Ba have occurred in years. recent Large amounts of litter and rubbish can be found in port areas, often washed down from poor rub- bish disposal in neighbouring urban areas. Inad- equate sewage treatment has resulted in extremely M. (Coreless, harbours many in levels bacterial high Such 1995). poor waste management practices lead ofhigh way their levels finding to rubbish domestic the marineinto environment. 25 5.3 Pollution Fiji is fortunate in being physically remote from large industrialised landmasses, and in not having pol- Industrial processes. manufacturing large-scale lution is confined mainlyto small industrial areas in the main cities and towns. In addition, decrepit boats litter areas of Suva Harbour, and groundings regular and sinkings occur, adding oil other and pollutants to the marine environment. In pollution risks Lautoka and are relatively Savusavu, broken from spillages small-scale to limited and low fuel drums etc, although occasional ferry ground- There There is a relatively new trend towards “inte- large grated resort (IRDs), developments” where resorts lots, house ofresidential areas dense with paired are involving concentrated development along coastal frontage. The new Development Tourism Plan for Tour- Relations, Industrial (MinistryFiji of Labour, ism 2007a) and suggests Environment zoning these IRDs towards the Coral Coast and -Lautoka on development limiting and Levu, Viti on corridor density developments. lower to pristine areas more In In Fiji, development is largely concentrated on the coast, and is increasing rapidly, in particular for tourism. There is relatively little development in- land. Increasing urbanisation means that a higher ofpercentage the population is in concentrated the towns and cities every year. In the Suva city area, land coastal new create to offlats reef “reclamation” is occurring in and, some tourism there is areas, an increase of reef flatdredging and channel cutting 2007). C., and Reddy, H. (Sykes, to to inadequate sewage and waste water treatment, for as such of usage reefthe increased resource, and recreation swimming, subsistence, and commercial exploitation. FIJI Vave, personal communication, August 2008). (Ron invertebrates) and fish certain of sighting no to rare the in (resulting overfishing includedplans, management village from noted as grounds, ing fish- owned customary to threats major the of One of stocks, especially those of high commercial value. mercial purposes, ultimately leading to over-fishing com- and subsistence for pressures fishing creased gear andtechniques have improved, resulting inin- fishing and dramatically, increased has population al.et 2008). Fiji’s frequent (Bell is flats reef fringing on fishing and protein, daily their for fishing ence subsist- on depend dwellers rural Fiji’s of portion pro- large a countries, Island Pacific other with As 5.5 Overfishing (Sykes,growth H., 2007b). coral retarding nutrients of levels high in resulted have colonies nesting bird sea where islands, bird done using best practices on a small scale in rela- in scale small a on practices best using done largely is this VitiLevu,butof coastline the around areas collection from corals and fish ornamental removing for responsible is trade aquarium The ter prawnsinrivers. household bleach is sometimes used to kill freshwa- settlement on limited areas reef flats.of Inaddition, coral new retard may practice This pools. rock low shal- in poison fish-stunning herbal an as used is vine Derris “Duva” but or practiced, not is fishing CyanideDepartment. Fisheries the enforcementby better through and decreases) mining (as obtain to harder becoming dynamite to due diminished has practice The Levu. Viti of parts western and ern north- the in fishers of number small a for except Dynamite (blast) fishing is not normally used in Fiji, harvesting fishingand 5.6 Destructive coral 26 observations, December 2007). personal Sykes, (Helen slopes reef near-shore on breakage coral considerable creates also fishing cial commer- scale small for boats small of Anchoring age on shallow water reef flats close to communities. ence fishingactivities results in localised coral dam- subsist- during trampling coral and walking Reef rock natural collected inthisway.amount of the reduce to rock live “artificial” culturing on ing concentrat- now are traders Some areas. same the in concentrated activities tourism with compatible in- certainly is and 2001a) E., (Lovell disturbance involvesit suggestedthat has habitat activity this of targeted.deliberately Researchnot impacts the into brokencoral is inevitably this process, during but is liveflats.Some reef fringing of areas shallow to age purple coralline algae. This results in localised dam- and pink with covered coral dead collect to order in substrate reef fossil the of breakage deliberate involves Coast Coral the rock” along flats reef from tion to the entireground. fishing ofCollection “live eand ossety bv 29 above consistently remained temperatures water when occurred mortality scale considered to be 29.5 be to considered is Fiji for threshold bleaching coral The islands. few a only surrounding reefs affected event smaller much a 2005 in and areas certain in occurred ing bleach- another 2002 In 2002). al. et (Cumming archipelago the across coral hard of mortality 80% and 40% between in resultedevent 2000 the Fiji In region. the across bleaching coral of degrees fering dif- in resulting temperatures, water sea elevated of periods long to exposed was WestPacific South the 2005, in degree, smaller a toand, 2002 2000,In predators 5.7 Bleaching, coraland disease o C (NOAA 2008), and large- and 2008), (NOAA C o C for periods of of periods for C FIJI 5.8 Hurricanes/tsunamis As an island nation, Fiji is theoretically vulnerable to tsunamis, but these have not occurred very fre- quently or with major damaging in consequences the recent past. Two Tsunami warnings in the past fiveyears did not eventuate in actual tsunami waves. of three Fiji, in recorded been have tsunamis Eleven these generated within Fiji waters. The most dam- aging tsunami, caused by an earthquake offshore of capital the in heights wave with 1953 in was Suva, tsunami small A Kadavu. in 5m about and 2m about was generated in 1975 a by moderate earthquake in the Kadavu Passage. (Ministry of Lands and Min- 2008). eral Resources, The cyclone season is considered to be between November to April each year, although in reality cyclones rarely reach the islands outside January Theyto May. cause terrestrial damage to Fiji every two or to date, three cyclones have years. However, apparently not had major adverse impacts on the marine environment. (Fiji Meteorological Service 2008). observed was damage wave storm high and Cyclone on limited areas of shallow reefs in 2001, 2003 and 2004 confinedto small areasof Acropora- shallow, dominated coral, which have usually returned to H., (Sykes, ofyears couple a within levels cover high 2006). ly Acropora corals, increased. This occur appears to increased. corals, Acropora ly closely more probably is but everyyears, 10 eight to oth- any than supply) food (ie. cover coral to linked have programmes poisoning and Removal factor. er been tried in the Mamancua Islands, with limited success. 27 Predation Predation from Crown of Thorns (COTS) corallivorous and snails occurs across the archipelago in what appears to be regular outbreaks, probably linked to increasing This coral has cover. been best documented on the Suva reefs (Zann and Brodie 1992) and in the Mamanuca Islands (Sykes, H., 2006; J Personal Mott. observations. January 2008) where there were outbreaks in times of high coral (pre bleaching mortality), by cover followed reduc- sub- and low, was cover coral when numbers in tion particular- cover, coral once outbreaks new sequent Little coral disease has been observed reefs, probably due on in part to the physical Fiji’s remote- ness large from land masses and other reef systems. White syndrome has been observed more since the 2000 bleaching, but it is possible that this is due more to increased levels of observance during reef in incidence. an actual increase than to surveys, Long Long term monitoring of coral cover showed that pre-bleaching to returned cover coral reefs many on levels within fiveyears of the mainbleaching event (Sykes, H., 2006). NOAA Sea Surface Temperature Data (SST) suggests that the past decade has been significantly warmer than theprevious one (NOAA 2007 with continue, to appears trend the and 2008), temperature data from in-water loggers being one, av- normal the than higher degrees half a and one to appear reefs Fiji’s Overall, 7). and 6 (Appendix erage to be very vulnerable to temperature-related coral bleaching, which probably occurs to some degree every year (Sykes, H., 2006 and personal observa- tions Jan 2008). Fiji reefs also show withresilience, enough resistant and tolerant areas to assist full re- mortalityyears. from within covery five three months (Lovell and Sykes 2007). 2007). Sykes and (Lovell months three FIJI 5.9 Outbreak of organisms 5.9 Outbreak of 29 above elevated been had temperature water when time a at occurred cyclone this addition, In 2002) February observation personalSykes, (Helen 2002. in settlement coral new for substrate clean creating awayscouringalgae, and rubble coral dead moving re- by function positive a serve to appeared 2008) Office Service Met. (Fiji 2001 of Paula Cyclone 2000, of mortality bleaching-related mass the After section. previous the in discussed are Drupella and COTS severe bleaching event (Appendix 6). more a prevented have may which levels, cyclone perature fell by over1 by fell perature tem- water the cyclone, the During appeared. had o C for over a month, and some coral bleaching coral some and month, a over for C o C and did not return to pre-to return not did and C 28 some coral restoration projects. to coral reef health, but have presented a problem to threat large a represent not do and confined locally been have overgrowths such Todate growth. coral reef flat areas and have thepotential to smother new some in found be to also were sponges Encrusting December 2007). and 2001 February observations, personal 2005, Sykes, (Helen available is explanation no and out carried werenot surveys detailed noticed, although overgrowths disappearedfour within yearsbeing of these cases, most However, in small. be to peared ap- predators as such mechanisms control natural was presumed todamage, reef be an end-stage of as this Initially flats. reef degraded shallow, ticularly overgrowthslarge single-species in some areas, par- in occurred spp) (Didemnum Ascidians Colonial FIJI , involving involving , 2 TION EFFORTS TION A V , with, an size ofaverage 9.7 km 2 28.8% of Fiji’s i-qoliqoli area (Tawake A, December December A, (Tawake i-qoliqoli area 28.8% of Fiji’s 2007). Some are open-ended, fully protected no- take areas. Others are of limited duration, or for a limited number of species, but all involve utilising traditional systems of management to protect ma- rine resources for both biodiversity conservation and preservation of future fishingstocks for the involved. communities To date, full government recognition (gazetting) has been slow, but many areas are recognised at the level of their local provincial council and tra- ditional leaders. Through these small reserves, ad- joining fishing fishhave invertebrates and grounds, the chance to grow to breeding size and popula- tions may be preserved into the future. Although now is there slight, be may functionecological their a move to consolidate these areas into larger Eco- (Macuata (EBMs) zones Management logicalBased WWF and WCS Fiji project). Small FLMMA sites are being organised into larger functional groups under Yaubula Management Support Teams in the provinces of Kadavu and wake, Cakaudrove A., (Ta- and Meo, S., personal communication, 2007). December what this will entail has not been but a formulated, large part of the commitment is being met by gov- ernment support of the Fiji Locally Managed Ma- (FLMMA). network Areas rine In the last 10 years, community-managed marine protection has spread across the islands through FLMMA. There are now more than 205 known community-managed marine sites in 116 of the 411 traditional fishing grounds (i-qoliqoli). These or “tabu” protected areas range in size from 0.3 to 40.5 km 29 6 CURRENT CORAL REEF CONSER CORAL CURRENT The Fiji government has committed to protect and sustainably manage 30% of its marine ecosystems by the year A, personal 2020 communica- (Tawake tion April As 2008). yet a firmdefinition of exactly The Department has ofpublished a Tourism Tour- ism Development Plan to coordinate development Labour, of(Ministry years eight next the over policy Industrial Relations, Tourism and Environment 2007), which includes zoning tourism in different regions of Fiji. This is intended to minimise envi- ronmental impacts in the more pristine regions. regula- but principle, in accepted been has plan The be drawn up. to yet tions have The Department of Environment produced a Na- tional Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (Min- istry of Labour, Industrial Relations, Tourism and Environment 2007) which draws together several reports on Fiji’s biodiversity, along with recom- mended plans of action, including an initial list of sites of national significance. Thisdocument could become the basis of future environmental protec- tion plans. Fiji is a signatory to several conventions, conservation-based including the Convention on Inter- in Endangered Speciesnational Trade (CITES) and Un- (CBD). Diversity Biological on Convention the fortunately, the country’s political problems over the last few years have resulted in actions and leg- islation attached to such being conventions repeat- edly deferred. Many Many NGOs and educational organisations (Uni- versity of the South Pacific)are involved their in own conservation projects, and some coral culture third or in their second are projects and restoration 2007). and Sykes (Lovell years FIJI OS ubek ad a ia odtos do conditions Nina La and outbreaks COTS that presumes This 2014. about by levels current tocover a coral return could regeneration of which period after 2009/2010, health in reef country poor the across of years two would or one this in 1999, result since observed follows patterns reef the the If 2009/2010. possibly and/or 2008 for predicted are outbreaks in- COTS creasing and bleaching coral Widespread become apparent. will cover coral in cycles and years, 10 two or one next the within events “acute” damaging experiencereef coral will Fiji that likely is It frequently degradation. blamedfor coral reef are more and conditions, “chronic” the attract than attention and noticeable, more dramatic, these more Because are suddenly, they health reef affect stresses cyclones. and temperature, in variations predation, include These onslaughts. short for periods of time, allowing for some but recovery between severely quite health reef im- pacting issues global largely are problems “Acute” opment, andare often overlooked or unaddressed. voidable or even acceptable cost economicof devel- “shifting baseline”. They are often treated as an una- a creating thus time, over health coral degrading pressuresthese of are gradual, insidious,and slowly sedimentation and nutrient enrichment. The effects development, coastal over-fishing, come category this Into onslaughts. of severity in only vary and time, of periods overoccurlong that stresses tinual con- The man-made “chronic” local are conditions health:sors on coral reef “chronic” and “acute”. stres- of types two having as regarded be could Fiji FUTURE OFCORALREEFHEALTH 30 7 and local fishing and local resource purposes. biodiversity for both stocks, reef conserve to able be may reefs protected of “oases” small coastline, the of much along continue may development and overfishing although case this In scale. larger a on reefs the of custodians responsible become will Fiji of people the continues, trend this as Hopefully, Cakadrove. of district the in and Kadavu of island the on as areas, managed larger into up join to ing start- are areas “tabu” isolated Small, achieved. is populations reef for protection practical more es, resourc- own their conserving in activemorecome spreads, and ownerscustomary fishingbe- rights of knowledge kit”. community aid As “first reef Fiji’s in measure effective most exponentially,the probably is this and expands network FLMMA The the next 10years. one of the greatest threats to Fiji’s reef population in Viti Levu. Uncontrolled mangrove clearing could be of Coast Coral the on seen already those to similar areas fish-poor and degraded to health, reef coral good or reasonable enjoying currently coastlines some reduce to likely are overfishing and richment en- nutrient sedimentation, action, and legislation proper without expanding; is development Coastal environmentaltion of measures to control impacts. implementa- hinder to continues instability litical obvious more the “acute”po- if events,particularly “Chronic” conditions could have greater effect than suggest. servations to occur more start not frequently currentthan ob- FIJI servation policy, such cooperative efforts must be and enhanced. strengthened It has also become obvious from these studies that there is a need for continuity of long-term moni- toring if patterns are to be made visible. Six years of monitoring has shown recovery from a single bleaching event, and some consequences of storm damage, but it will most likely take 10 to 15 years of data collection to make regular cycles apparent. Short-term projects allow snapshots of reef health. Without long-term support, these are only discon- The ofvalue nected data monitor- spots. long-term ing of regularly visited sites has become apparent, but can only be realised if resources to fund moni- the future. well into committed are toring 31 8 RECOMMENDATIONS Reef management and conservation have proliferated in initiatives Fiji over the past decade, and within the FLMMA network the value of coopera- in the field working tion hasbetween agencies been achieved. Better communications and cooperation between agencies reduces duplication of work and enables centralisation of data and lessons learned. marinecon- united and effective an have to Ifis Fiji Fiji’s Fiji’s marine environment is constantly changing in response to the numerous stressors. However, its reefs have shown remarkable levels of resilience to various stresses and impacts. There is an urgent need for government policymaking support and commitment, but this can only be useful if it is coupled with for adequate resources education and enforcement. compliance FIJI security. MarinePolicy. Ltd. Elsevier and food for fish of use the Planning 2008. press). (in Andrefoulet S. and Pontifex S. Deemke, A. ble, Bell, J.D., M. Kronen, A. Vunisea, W.J. Nash, G. Kee- Department. Fisheries Tavua. Fiji for resources bech-de-mer for Batibasaga and Vana, 1995. Stock assessment survey Unpublished Manuscript Fiji. Suva, Department, Fisheries Fiji status. tion popula- on Estimates Turtles: Sea Fijian on Notes 2003. S. Waqainabete, A., Qauqau, A., Batibasaga, Tower, POBox 2109 ism and Environment, Civic Tower, 3rd Floor, Civic Tour- of Ministry 2005. Act Management mental Environ- 2008. Environment. and Tourism tions, Rela- Industrial Labour, of Ministry 2008. Anon. Floor, Civic Tower, POBox 2109 of Tourismistry and Environment, Civic Tower, 3rd and versity Strategy Action Plan – Fiji Islands. Min- Biodi- National Environment. and Tourism tions, Rela- Industrial Labour, of Ministry 2007. Anon. Fish Reef Aggregations (SCRFA).of forDivision Fisheries and the Society Conservation Fiji 2006. Report. Workshop Fisheries Reef Anon. ests. For- and Fisheries of Ministry Report. Draft ment. Depart- Fisheries Fiji Report. Annual 2005 Anon. MetrologicalFiji Office August 2007. Monitoring Project Monthly dataReport., Climate and Level Sea Pacific South 2007. Anon. thePacific of tariat Commission (SPC), Suva. Secre- the for area. report communityConsultancy Pacific the in Fisheries and TurtlesT.Adam,2003. REFERENCES 32 O.J.S., Toscano, M.A. and Vaughan, D. 2002. Geo- 2002.Vaughan, D.and O.J.S.,Toscano, M.A. Taylor,Sykes,H.R.,N.K., Quinn, Hughes, A., N.K., Dulvy,B.A., Carlson, E.R., Lovell, R.L., Cumming, 116 (2004)433–438www.sciencedirect.com Conservation Biological Pacific South M central the Rice, R., Brainard, GreenTurtles Balazs, G.and of 2004. Migrations in D., Parker, P., Craig, and W.Pac.Regional Management.Council. Fisheries research 2002, Feb cooperative 5-8 Honolulu workshop. management turtle sea Western Pacific Pacific South central the in turtles sea extinction: approaching Rapidly 2002. P. Craig, Applied Science. Suva. Fiji. 28pp. of Institute analysis. structure community benthic using Bay and Harbour Suva in pollution marine in study exploratory An 1995. M.Coreless, gov/satellite/current/sst_series_fijibeqa_cur.html and http://coralreefwatch.noaa. Satellite Service. NOAA Information 2007. Watch Reef Coral cites.org http:www. p9. 2007, September 13 from ValidIII, and II, I, Appendices 2007. in Species, TradeEndangered International on Convention CITES: Risk inSouth East Asia, 2002www.wri.org at Reefs 2000. M. Spalding, and L. Selig, L.,Burke, org www.marine.wri. InstituteWorld Resources257-4, 1-56973- ISBN reefs. coral world’s the to threats of indicator map-based A Risk, at Reefs 1998. M. Spalding, and J. McManus, L., Burke, D., Bryant, 11:53-63. Aust Soc. Malac. J. Fiji. of mollucs opisthobranch Brodie, G.D. and J.E. Brodie, 1990. A checklist of the FIJI Lal, P. and Cerelala, A., 2005. Financial and econom- and Financial 2005. A., Cerelala, and P. Lal, ic analysis of wild harvest and cultured live rock in of of Foundation the South Pacific. the Peoples Fiji. 72pp. Fiji. Suva, Laveti, M.2008. Community based marine turtle conservation and research techniques along the Mamanuca Islands. Unpublished technical report. Institute of Marine Resources, University of the Suva. Pacific, South of coral Collection Report: Status 2001a. E.R. Lovell and other benthic reef organisms for the marine Fund Wide World curioaquariumand trade Fiji. in WWF 2001. Program. Pacific South Nature for Lovell, E.R. 2002. The Coral Reefs ofIsland, Yadua of Trust the to Report submitted National Fiji. Bua, Fiji as part ofMarch K. the Program U. Greenforce 2002. of Status IN Coral Fiji. 2007. H. Sykes, and E Lovell, (ed.), R. Sulu, 2004. Pacific: West in the South Reefs of IPS Fiji, University the publications, Suva, South pp 1 – 82 www.ipsbooks.usp.ac.fj 2007. Pacific Ministry of Information, Communications 2004/2005 and Fiji Today 2005. Relations Media Ministry of Information, Communications www.fiji.gov.fj and [email protected] Relations, Media Ministry of Labour, Industrial Relations, Tourism and Environment. 2007a) Fiji Tourism Develop- ment Plan 2007 – 2016. Department of Tourism, Ministry ofand Civic Environment, Tourism Tow- 2109 PO Box Tower, Civic Floor, 3rd er, Ministry of Lands and Mineral Resources, 2008. Fiji Mineral Page. Resources Department, Tsunami http://www.mrd.gov.fj/gfiji/seismology/tsunami- page. Morgan, C. 2007. Property of Spirits: Hereditary on Retrieved Fiji. in of Turtles Sea Value Global and 33 Kott, P.1981. The Kott, P.1981. ascidians of the reef flatsof Fiji. 105:147-212. Wales South New Soc. Linn. Proc. Jit, Jit, J.N. 2007. Status of sea turtle conservation in Fiji. An assessment of the international, regional and national focus. M.A thesis, University of the Fiji. Pacific, South Jenkins, A., Sykes, H., Skelton P., Fiu, M Fiu, and Lovell, P., Skelton H., Sykes, A., Jenkins, E. 2004. Fiji’s Great Sea Reef. The first marinebio- diversity survey of Cakalevu and associated coastal habitats. WWF Fiji Country Programme, Private Fiji www.wwfpacific.org.fj GPO Suva, Bag, Mail Guinea, M.L. 1993. Sea Turtles of Secretariat of Fiji. Sea Turtles 1993. M.L. Guinea, Re- Programme Environmental Regional Pacific the Apia. 65, Series no. ports, http://www.met.gov.fj/index Fiji Meteorological Service 2008. Cyclone Tropical Summaries 1998 – 2006 Seasonal Fiji Fisheries Department, 2005. CITES database, 2005. July Fiji Islands Bureau of Statistics, 2008. http://www. statsfiji.gov.fj/cens&surveys/cens&surveystats_in- dex.htm ISBN 0 642 25953 4. English, English, S., Wilkinson, C. 1997. and Life- V. Baker, form categories and codes. Survey Marine Resourses 2nd Edition Tropical pp 39 Manual – 40. for of Institute Science Marine Australian Cumming, Cumming, R.L., Aalbersberg, W.G.L., Lovell, E.R., Cor- Country 2004. Profile: V.C. Vuki and H. Sykes, al Reefs of the Fiji Islands. Reef Encounter 32, No. 52-56. 2004 pp April graphic extent and severity of mass coral bleaching in Fiji 2000, in relation to seawater temperature. Proceedings of the 9th International Coral Reef 2002. Bali, Symposium, FIJI sity of theSouth Pacific, of sity Suva, Fiji. Resources.Marine Univer- of Institutemanuscript. unpublished Catalogue, Specimen 1980: May tion, Pichon.M. (Unpublished).1980 Collec- Coral USP Caledonia. New Noumea, Commission, Pacific South Fiji. of resources shell specimen The 1982. B. Parkinson, 2006, pp 3-6. under Threat. Fiji Islands Business magazine March Pareti, S. 2006. Coast of Death: Fiji’s Tourism Mecca wwfpacific.org.fj Programme, Private Mail Bag, GPO Suva, Fiji www. Pacific South WWF Kadavu. Ono, Reef, Astrolabe North and Great Fiji the of Report Survey logical Bio- Marine 2003. S. Mangubhai, and D. Obura, 29 (1): 49-96. Micronesia Rotuma). of island the (including Fiji of algae marine benthic the of checklist revised A D.W.and 1996.Keats. N’Yeurt,South G.R.A.D.R., Sciencerine 27(2). Ma- of Bulletins fans. sea Fijian five of habitat and S.Wainwright. & Muzik,and K.Morphology 1977. 19:323-335. history Natural of Journal Fiji. from records new including (Zoanthidea) 1828 Gray Isaurus henus Muirhead,J.S.the A.and Ryland.of 1981. review A Islands.Fiji Pacific,South Suva,the Science, University plied of Ap- of Institute Fiji.Levu, Viti Coast’ the of “Coral along water river and sea in levels Nutrient 2003. Mosley,.and WilliamL L.M G Aalbersberg, W.G.L. sources, University theSouth Pacific, of Suva, Fiji. Re- Marine of Institute Levu. Viti South and Suva of ecology shore The 1980. Raj.U. and J,Morton, cles/mi_qa3800/is_200704/ai_n19198595.html http://findarticles.com/p/arti- from 2008 April 21 34 Sykes, Helen, Marine Science, Institutetralian of 2000. Aus- 2002, Science, Marine of Institute Australian Wilkinson. Global Coral Reef Ed.Monitoring Network. 2000. World the of Reefs Coral of Status In: TuvaluIslands,Vanuatu. Solomon and Samoa,nia, Caledo- New Nauru, Fiji, Pacific: Southwest the in Reefs Coral Skelton, P.of & R.,Status South,2000. Suva, Fiji. 207pp. Pacific,South the Universitymanuscript). of lished (Unpub- Fish. Fijian of Bibliography a and Fiji of Fishes the of Checklist WJ.Baldwin, A and Seeto,J 80:261-282. flat.Didemnidae (Ascidiacea). Zool. J.Soc. Linnean reef Pacific some of dyamics colonial and Ecology 1984. Muirhead, A. and Wrigley R.A. J.S., Ryland, ecoaction/Monitoring_Instruction http://reefcheck.org/ 2007. Methods Check Reef Sykes, H. and Reddy, C. 2007. Assessment Marineof gyfiji.com. www.marineecolo- Fiji Consulting Ecology Marine 2007. December Islands. Fiji Levu, Viti Harbour, Bay, Rovodrau Resort, Pacific Marina Palms Pacific for Assessment Resource Marine 2007b. H. Sykes, gyfiji.com. www.marineecolo- Fiji Consulting Ecology Marine Resorts Islands, inthe Fiji March 2007 for Plan Management Mangrove 2007a H. Sykes, Pacificwww.crisponline.net South the for Initiative Reef Coral 2006. S 59p. Collection Areas. IAS Technical Report No. 2003/04, Non- and Collection in Populations Fish of Study Pilot A Fiji: in Populations Fish Reef Ornamental on Collection William Aalbersberg,of 2002. Effects ks H 06 Sau o Res n h Fj Islands Fiji the in Reefs of Status 2006. H ykes,

Kristian Kats, Raymond Derksen, and FIJI Whippy-Morris, C. and C. Pratt (eds). 1998. Marine Marine 1998. (eds). Pratt C. and C. Whippy-Morris, Biodiversity Group Technical Report. FijiBiodiver- sity Strategy and Environment Action Plan Project. Fiji. of Suva, Government Fiji. Department, Zann, LP 1992. The State of the Marine Environ- ment Report. National Environmental Manage- Planning, Country and Town of Dept. Project. ment of Fiji. Govt. Unit, Management Environmental Zann, L.P. and Brodie, G. 1992. The in Fiji. planci Acanthaster crown-of- thorns starfish Report to COTSREC, Marine Authority. Park and E.R. Zann, Lovell. 1992. L.P. The coral reefs of descriptions Preliminary Fiji, Group, Mamanuca the and recommendations for management. National Report (NEMP). Project Management Environment 1206. No TA 2/3. Annex Environment. Marine the on and ofCountry Govt. Fiji. Planning, ofDept. Town 35 Weaver, S.1996. The Fiji Sea Turtle Working Group; Group; Working The Fiji Sea Turtle S.1996. Weaver, The Fiji Sea Turtle Conservation Strategy. Unpub- lished Consultancy report for prepared the Fiji De- Fiji. partment of Environment, Watling, Watling, D. and S. Chape, 1992. Enviornment Fiji – The national state of the environment report. Switzerland. IUCN. Vuki V., M. V., Vuki Naqasima and R. 2001. Vave Status of Re- Monitoring Reef Coral Global Reefs. Coral Fiji’s port (GCRMN). Marine Studies Programme. Uni- ofversity Pacific. the South Tawake, A. 2007. Fiji Locally Managed Marine Areas Areas Marine Managed Locally Fiji 2007. A. Tawake, Marine Conserving in role Network (FLMMA) Suva, , workshop CI_MMAS communication areas. Fiji Dec- 07. Resources Resources for proposed development “Vunabaka Bay” Island, Mamanuca Islands, Fiji. No- www. Fiji Consulting Ecology Marine 2007. vember marineecologyfiji.com. FIJI Appendix 1: Details of survey sitesthecountry across survey of Appendix 1:Details Muiavuso Great WhiteWall Samu’s Reef Rick’s Rocks Lomai Namena Anthias Avenue Two ThumbsUp Tetons Rob’s Knobs Human Nature V Sunflower Wonderland Whiskey Reef 18 Momi Bay V CoralCoast Eagle Rock The Edge Beqa Cowrie Crawl Tukituki Clint’s Corner Beqa Sea Fan/StormIsland Nukuboca Dennis Patch Savusavu Fish Patch Cousteau Jetty Mystery Savusavu 16 Lighthouse Golden Nuggets Taveuni East Waitabu MarinePark Rainbow Reef Lion’s Den Cat’s Meow Mount Mutiny Site Names E6 roscatlsts R arious coastalsites esi Bay Y Y K Suva Straits Taveuni Somosomo Lautoka Lomai Namena V V V V Mamanucas Nadi 18 Kadavu 18 Coral Coast Coral Coast Suva Suva Suva Savusavu Savusavu Straits Taveuni Somosomo Lomai V Region asawas asawas atu-i-R atu-i-R atu-i-R atu-i-R atu-i-R otuma adavu V V V a a a a a t aoa 17 17 iti 17 iti Wakaya iti Gau 17 17 17 17 17 16 16 17 17 17 19 19 18 18 18 18 18 18 16 16 16 16 16 16 17 17 12 (WGS 84) Latitude o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 0S 178 10’S 178 09’S 179 48’S 179 48’ S 179 48’S 179 18’S 179 48”S 179 45’S 179 47’S 177 178 33’ S 178 24’S 34’S 179 58’ S 179 179 06’S 178 06’S 178 15’S 178 08’S 08’S 178 20’S 178 19’S 0S179 177 30’S 177 47’S 177 52’S 177 57’S 178 56’S 178 02’S 177 03’S 177 10’S 177 11’S 178 10’S 178 26’E 178 20’S 178 11’S 08’S (WGS 84) Longitude APPENDICES o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 5ELgo ac lp m2003,2004 5m 5m10m Slope Slope 2m LagoonPatch Flat Barrier 25’E 5m10m Slope 24’E Fringing 5m10m Slope 17’E 5m10m Barrier Slope 14’E Barrier 5m 17’E Flat Patch 10m 2004,2007 Slope 17’E 10m Fringing 1999,2000,2001,2007 Flat 10m 2006,2007 50’W Barrier Slope 56’E Barrier 7m 6m 2001,2004,2006,2007 7m Flat Patch 54’E Flat 2004,2007 Flat LagoonPatch 16m 2000,2001 18’E Barrier Flat 2004,2006,2007 56’E 5m 12m 2004,2006,2007 Patch 56’E Flat Flat 5m Patch 13’E 16m Slope SeaMount 03’E Flat Patch 03’E Patch 7m 34’E Slope Patch 31’E 12m SeaMount 31’E Slope 31’E SeaMount 35’E 2EPthSoe7 2005,2006 2003,2006 2002,2003,2006 5m10m 7m 2002,2003,2006 Slope 5m Slope 2000,2001 Flat 10m Fringing 2006,2007 Slope Patch 5m 2005,2006,2007 04’E Slope Patch 5m 2006,2007 12’E Patch 10m Slope 23’E Slope Barrier 15m 2006,2007 19’E Fringing Slope 2007 10m15m 2006,2007 12’E Barrier Slope 10m15m 27’E 2007 2002 Fringing Slope 5m 20’E 2002,2003,2004 5m10m Fringing Slope 40’E Slope 2m Fringing 36’E 2m Fringing Flat 35’E Patch Flat 08’E Fringing 08’E Fringing 28’E 22’E 36 Reef Type Zone Reef et Years Surveyed Depth 2006, 2007 2002, 2003,2004, 2006, 2007 2002, 2003,2004,2005, 2006, 2007 2002, 2003,2004,2005, 2006, 2007 2002, 2003,2004,2005, 2006, 2007 2002, 2003,2004,2005, 2006, 2007 1998, 1999,2002,2003,2005, 2006, 2007 2002, 2003,2004,2005, 2006, 2007 2002, 2003,2004,2005, 2004, 2006,2007 1999, 2000,2001,2002, 2004, 2006,2007 1999, 2000,2001,2002, 2004, 2006,2007 1999, 2000,2001,2002, FIJI and 1m and 16m since 2006 At 5m, 14m and 30m since 2006 at 8m and 17m since 2007 since 2006 Invertebrates loggers (depth) In-water temperature 20m Reef Check 20m Reef Since 2003 20m Reef Check20m Reef At 5m since 1996 Check20m Reef At 2m since 2005 Check20m Reef At 5m since 2003 Check 20m Reef At 7m since 2006 Check 20m Reef At 6m since 2005 37 Fish 20m Reef Check 20m Reef 45min or 50m Fish species census Check 20m Reef Check20m Expanded Reef Check 20m Reef and 30m At 1m, 12m, Check 20m Reef 45min or 50m Fish species census 45min or 50m Fish 45min or 50m Fish species census Benthic cover eef Check and AIMS Check 20m Expanded Reef Check 20m Reef At 5m and 10m since 2006 iti Check and AIMS 20m Reef Check 20m Expanded Reef a AIMS Check and Reef 20m Check 20m Expanded Reef V Region atu-i-R asawas 20m R V Rotuma Check 20m Reef Mamanucas Check and AIMS 20m Reef Check 20m Expanded Reef Check 20m Reef At 5m and 10m since 2006 Y Taveuni EastTaveuni Check and AIMS 20m Reef Check 20m Expanded Reef Taveuni WestTaveuni Check and AIMS 20m Reef Check 20m Expanded Reef Check 20m Reef since 2003 and 30m since 2006 At 10m Nadi Check 20m Reef Namena Check and AIMS 20m Reef Lomai Check 20m Expanded Reef Check 20m Reef Lautoka 21m since 2005 At Check and AIMS 20m Reef Check 20m Expanded Reef Check 20m Reef 1.5m since 2004 Savusavu Check 20m Reef Suva Check and AIMS 20m Reef Beqa Check 20m Expanded Reef Check and AIMS 20m Reef Coral Coast Check 20m Reef Check 20m Reef Check 20m Expanded Reef Kadavu At 10m since 2003 Check 20m Reef AIMS Check and 20m Reef since 2004, At 8m Check 20m Expanded Reef Check 20m Reef 10m since 2005 and at 5m since 2006 At Appendix 2: Survey 2: Appendix methods used survey in regular regions FIJI Appendix 3: Survey teams contributing dataandsupport teams contributing Appendix 3:Survey Lau Northern Rotuma Mamanucas Y Nadi Kadavu Coral Coast Beqa Suva Savusavu Taveuni East Resort Support/MarineEcologyConsulting, Taveuni West Lautoka Lomai Namena V Region Levu asawas atu-i-R V a iti V anua Subsurface Fiji Resort Support/MarineEcologyConsulting, Nanuya IslandResort R Biological Consultants Matava Resort Resort Support/MarineEcology Consulting, Aquasafaris Diveaway, HideawayResort Resort Support/MarineEcology Consulting, Lalati Resort Resort Support/MarineEcology Consulting, University oftheSouthPacific Jean MichelCousteauFijiResort Waitabu MarinePark Resort Support/MarineEcology Consulting, Aquatrek atGardenIslandResort Nai’a Cruises Resort Support/MarineEcologyConsulting, Nai’a Cruises Resort Support/MarineEcologyConsulting, Nai’a Cruises Resort Support/MarineEcologyConsulting, Nai’a Cruises Resort Support/MarineEcologyConsulting, Regular andannualsurveys esort Support/MarineEcologyConsulting, Laje Rotuma Coral CayConservation Coral CayConservation Bruce Carlson Resort Support Walt SmithInternational Biological Consultants Frontier Fiji Wildlife ConservationSociety surveys Occasional andnewlystarted Greenforce 38 Resort Support/MarineEcologyConsulting al 2004) 2001 (OburaandMangubhai2003) Survey ofNorthandGreatAstrolabeReef andopportunisticsurveys One-off Survey ofGreatSeaR eef 2004(Jenkinset FIJI 2007 Spot outbreak Non-outbreak Non-outbreak Non-outbreak Spot outbreak Active outbreak None Spot outbreak Non-outbreak Active outbreak Spot outbreakActive outbreak Spot outbreak Active outbreak Non-outbreak None None None ) 2 2005 2006 None None None None None Spot outbreak Spot outbreak ) 2 39 Non-outbreak Spot outbreak 2004 Spot outbreak None None None None 2003 None None Spot outbreak Spot outbreak Spot outbreak None 2002 None None Spot outbreak None iti a V atu-i-R asawas Beqa Cakau levu Coral Coast Spot outbreak Lautoka Kadavu Lomai Rotuma Suva Harbour Somosomo Taveuni WaitabuTaveuni None V Y Mamanuca Islands Namena Savusavu Active outbreak = >30 COTS per hectare (>0.3/100m per hectare = >30 COTS outbreak Active Spot outbreak = high density of COTS on parts of reef, low numbers elsewhere = high numbers Spot density outbreak parts low on of of COTS reef, Incipient outbreak = high density outbreak ofIncipient juveniles Appendix Appendix 5: Live hard coral cover in the survey(No carried was in 2005) out Mamanuca Islands during the COTS outbreak of 2004 to 2007 Non-outbreak = COTS present but <30 COTS /hectare (<0.3/100m /hectare <30 COTS but present = COTS Non-outbreak (Where table is blank, surveys were not carried surveys were out) is blank, table (Where Appendix 4: COTS outbreak levels – 2007 2002 sites on FCRMN outbreak recorded COTS 4: Appendix FIJI Appendix average 6:Daily inthe water temperature at10mdeep Vatu-Ra passage1997to 2006 40 FIJI ery Low ery Low ery Low (Highest record) V V V ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low V V V Low V V V V V V ery Low ery Low ery Low Low Low ery Low Low Low ery Low Low Low ery Low ery Lowery Low Low Low Low Low V V V V V V V V ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low Low V Low Medium V V V 41 ery Low ery Low High High V ery Low - Medium Low Medium V ery Low - Medium Low Medium ery Lowery Low -ery Low - Low Medium Medium Medium Low Low Low Medium Medium Medium ery Low - ery Low - ery Low - ery Low - ery Low - ery Low - Medium Low Low ery Low - Medium Low Low ery Low - ery Lowery Low - - V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low V V V V V V V V V V V Medium Medium High < 4km away 4 – 10km away 10 - 25km away More than 25km away Low Cities Towns Airports Mines Tourism Coastline Overall Score ------Low a iti Levu, Coral Coast - iti Levu, Suva Medium - iti Levu, Momi Bay - iti Levu, Lautoka - Medium adavu anua Levu, Savusavu -anua Levu, Namena - Medium atu-i-R otuma aveuni, Somosomo - aveuni, Waitabu - asawa Is owns, Population < 50,000 < owns, Population Medium Medium ourist resorts and dive centres Medium T Airports (in use) Cities, Pop 50,000 – 100,000 50,000 Cities, Pop Medium Medium Mines Cities, Population > 100,000 > Cities, Population High V V a) Coastal Development Area Reef T V Any Coastline (shore) V V V V Lomaiviti K Beqa Mamanuca Is Y T T R Appendix 9: Threat index for coastal index for developmentThreat 9: 15 regions for Appendix Islands of the Fiji Appendix 8: : Threat index criteriaThreat 8: : Appendix coastal for development Appendix Appendix 7: Daily average water temperature at 10m deep in passage the Vatu-i-Ra in 2007. Note the end of logger as the retrieved. was in Nov. reading FIJI Appendix 11: Threat index for marine-based pollution for 15 regions of theFiji of Islands for 15regions Appendix pollution 11: Threat for index marine-based pollution for marine-based Appendix 10: Threat criteria index R T T Y Mamanuca Is Beqa Shipping Lanes K Oil storagetanks,refineries Lomaiviti P V P Ports, Medium(Fishingshipsetce.g.Port V ot,Lre(otie hp,tnes ihn hp t,eg ua High Ports, Large(Containerships,tankers,fishingshipsetc,e.g.Suva) V V V V V Reef Area b) Marine-BasedPollution asawa Is aveuni, Waitabu orts, aveuni, Somosomo orts, Small( atu-i-R otuma anua Levu,Namena anua Levu,Savusavu adavu iti Levu,Lautoka iti Levu,MomiBay iti Levu,CoralCoast iti Levu,Suva V ery small(Localoutboardboats) a Y achts andpersonalboats) ihMdu eimHigh Medium Medium High V V V Medium V V V V V ihHg High High High ihHg High High High High Medium OverallScore(Highestrecorded) High Shippinglanes High High OilTanks Medium High Ports ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low V illa) V V V V V V V V V V ery Low r o Low ery Low r o Low ery Low r o Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low r o Low ery Low V V V V V V eimLow Medium High Medium High High k wy4–1k wy1 0maa 30–50kmaway 10–30kmaway 4–10kmaway < 4kmaway ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low 42 V Low Low Medium V V V V V V Medium V V High Medium V Medium High High ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery High ery High ery High ery Low V V V V Medium High ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low V V V V V Medium ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low FIJI Low 43 MediumLow Medium ery Low V High High High Medium Medium Medium Low Low Low High Mining Deforestation Agriculture Livestock ery Low ery Low V V Domestic Commercial High SteepModerateSlight Medium Low Flat Urban and built-up Areas with little vegetation wetland (Swamp) Permanent Grassland Open Shrubland mixed with grass Cropland mixed with natural vegetationand salt bushSmall, dry islands with coconuts Dense planted forest Medium Medium Mixed Forest Dense Shrubland Dense natural forest Large scale croplands Other contributing factors Other contributing Steepness ofSteepness land slope near reef Vegetation type Vegetation Appendix 12: Threat index criteriaThreat 12: Appendix pollution for and sedimentation FIJI Appendix 13: Threat index for pollution and sedimentation for 15 regions of theFiji of Islands for 15regions Appendix 13: Threat andsedimentation for index pollution Appendix 15: Threat index for artisanal overfishing for 15 regions of the Fiji of Appendix 15: overfishing Islands for 15 regions Threat for index artisanal Record Threat asHigh, Medium, Low or Very Low overfishing for artisanal Appendix 14: Threat criteria index K Lomaiviti Rotuma T T Y Mamanuca Is Beqa V V V V V V V Reef Area c) Pollution andSedimentation osa ouainHigh Coastal population Y Mamanuca Is Beqa Kadavu Lomaiviti V V V V V V V Reef Area d) Overfishing(Localfisheries,notlarge-scalecommercial) aen,WiauLow Rotuma Taveuni, Waitabu T asawa Is vui oooo- aveuni, Waitabu aveuni, Somosomo asawa Is naLv,Nmn Island Urban atu-i-R anua Levu,Namena anua Levu,Savusavu vui ooooLow aveuni, Somosomo naLv,Nmn Low atu-i-R High anua Levu,Namena anua Levu,Savusavu adavu t eu oiByColn ihLwHg High High High Low High High Low Cropland High iti Levu,Lautoka Cropland/Urban iti Levu,MomiBay iti Levu,CoralCoast iti Levu,Suva t eu atk High High iti Levu,Lautoka High iti Levu,MomiBay iti Levu,CoralCoast iti Levu,Suva a a lsrta 0maa 10–20kmaway Closer than10kmaway High High High Medium Low High Score High High Forest rpadmxdMdu eimLwMedium Low Medium Forest Medium Cropland mixed Island Island Forest Forest - Urban Urban T V ype egetation Far fromshore/inaccessibletomostlocalfishing Notes onMarineProtection Large R Small LocallyManagedMarineProtected Area(notakearea) Far fromshore/inaccessibletomostlocalfishing o eimLwMedium Low Medium Low eimMdu o Medium Medium V Medium Low Medium Low Medium Medium V Low Low Medium Medium Medium Medium High Low High Low High High Medium Medium V High Low Medium Score High High High Score Medium Score High Score r o eimLwMedium Low Medium ery Low ery Low ery Low Medium ecreational (diving)useMarineProtected Area(notakearea) V V Factors Steepness ery Low ery Low 44 V V V r o Medium ery Low ery Low ery Low oeta 0maa MarineProtected Areawithin10km More than20kmaway Low V (Highest recorded) Overall Score V ery Low ery Low Low FIJI ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low V V V V ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low V V V V Low Low Low Low Low Medium - - Low Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low MediumLow Medium Medium Low Medium High High Medium Medium 45 ery Lowery Low - - Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium - - Medium Low Low Low - Low Medium V V Medium High Low ------Several times a weekSeveral times a times a month Several High High times a year Several Never High High ------Dynamite Chemical Poisons Herbal Poison Breakage Overall Score (Highest recorded)

a not deeper reefs. adavu iti Levu, Lautoka Medium - iti Levu, Momi Bay - iti Levu, Coral Coast - iti Levu, Suva - otuma anua Levu, Savusavuanua Levu, Namena - atu-i-R - aveuni, Waitabu - aveuni, Somosomo - oison (Cyanide or Chlorox) oison (Cyanide or oison (Herbal) asawa Is R T T Y Mamanuca Is Beqa K Lomaiviti V V V V V V V Reef Area Reef e) Destructive Fishing (Poisons or blast) Note: herbal poisons refer to traditional “Duva” or Derris, only used on shallow reef tops, used on shallow reef tops, herbal poisons refer to traditional “Duva” or Derris, only or blast) Note: e) Destructive Fishing (Poisons P P Direct coral breakage (trampling, excavation, harvesting) Dynamite Appendix 17: Threat index for destructive index for Threat regions 17: for 15 Islands Appendix fishing of Fiji the Appendix 16: Threat index criteriaThreat 16: Appendix destructive for fishing FIJI October 2007 October Appendix 18:Number COTS of removed from four dive sites intheMamanuca Islands 2007to October Monthly average Total COTSremovedin13months October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 Month 1,712 22,261 1072 1147 1668 938 1831 276 457 593 2310 5623 1052 3429 1766 Number COTSremoved 46 FIJI 0 4 4 0 2 2 N (Sites) 0 0 6 0 5 5 1 5 2 0 0 1 0 5 2 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 2 0 4 4 3 0 2 2 2 3 3 47 0.11 0.10 0.01 0.08 Std dev 0.10 0.12 0.05 0.07 0.06 0.10 0.16 0.07 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.31 0.13 0.10 0.06 0.07 verage 0.58 0.60 0.34 0.43 A 0.44 0.31 0.34 0.40 0.35 0.45 0.41 0.28 0.37 0.45 0.18 0.45 0.65 0.57 0.49 0.44 0.33 0.33 0.22 0.46 0.32 0.36 ear 2005 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007 Y a atu-i-R asawas Y V Beqa Coral Coast 2005 Kadavu Lautoka Lomaiviti Mamanucas 2005 Namena Rotuma Savusavu Suva Taveuni Region Appendix 19: Average hard coral cover 2007 2006 and in regions coral 2005, of hard Fiji Average 19: Appendix FIJI Appendix 20: Average Fiji 2005,of in2006and2007 regions fishdensity key Y aen 051.500 .035 17 .00.25 0.00 11.75 3.50 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 3.56 V 0.50 10.75 2005 0.19 Taveuni 2005 0.00 Suva 5.19 2005 Savusavu 2005 Rotuma 2005 Namena 2005 Mamanucas Average Year Region aau20 .000 .000 .000 0.00 0.00 4.50 0.00 0.50 Lomai 0.00 2005 Lautoka 2.00 2005 Kadavu 2005 Coral Coast 2005 Beqa sws2005 asawas atu-i-R V t 2005 iti 2005 a 0737 .005 .037 .00.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.75 0.00 4.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.13 2.56 0.50 4.04 0.38 0.13 0.25 0.00 0.88 0.25 0.67 3.75 0.06 2.88 2007 0.50 2006 4.19 6.67 2007 2006 0745 .31.708 06 .00.25 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.13 10.67 0.00 7.25 0.13 0.83 0.00 0.00 2.50 2.25 0.00 14.17 2.50 0.17 7.13 0.00 0.00 0.25 1.83 8.25 0.00 0.07 0.13 6.15 0.00 0.50 4.50 0.00 0.33 0.02 0.00 6.75 2007 2.50 0.00 11.36 2006 0.00 0.94 3.13 0.71 0.92 4.00 0.00 6.63 2007 0.50 0.00 2006 2.73 2.00 0.00 8.33 0.17 0.00 9.19 2007 11.00 0.00 0.00 0.61 2006 10.33 0.00 1.67 0.00 0.00 0.67 2.67 3.87 2007 23.67 2006 6.13 22.67 0.38 6.00 0.00 0.63 2007 1.17 0.33 2006 41.50 5.00 0.00 5.67 2007 0.00 2006 7.83 4.88 2007 2006 0745 .000 .572 .00.00 0.00 0.00 7.25 0.23 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.10 3.50 0.00 0.00 3.60 0.05 0.63 1.00 0.00 0.39 0.00 5.20 0.13 3.80 0.00 1.00 1.45 4.50 0.85 0.00 1.88 2007 2.10 0.00 2006 1.90 0.96 3.13 0.15 3.54 2007 0.25 0.00 2006 6.40 0.00 4.05 2007 2006 9.50 2007 2006 fish Butterfly welp npe Gopr Parrot Grouper Snapper Sweetlips 48 fish oa e Humphead Moray eel wrasse 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 parrot Bumphead 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.05 0.90 0.00 FIJI 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 2.01 0.11 0.00 parrot Bumphead Bumphead head head wrasse Hump- eel Moray Moray fish arrot arrot 49 Sweetlips Snapper Grouper P fish Butterfly Butterfly ear N Stdev 2006 2 0.88 0.00 0.53 0.18 0.88 0.00 0.00 2007 2 1.77 0.00 0.71 0.00 0.35 0.00 0.00 2007 4 0.55 0.13 0.25 0.25 1.20 0.00 0.00 2006 2 0.47 0.71 0.94 0.35 3.24 0.00 0.00 2007 3 2.88 3.18 13.63 0.88 6.39 0.00 0.00 2006 2 0.00 0.18 9.02 1.41 2.47 0.00 0.18 2007 2 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.41 0.18 0.18 2006 2 4.07 0.00 0.00 0.35 1.77 0.00 0.00 2007 0 20062007 4 3 0.38 0.38 0.46 0.52 1.09 2.41 0.47 0.25 2.02 1.32 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 20062007 1 1 20062007 0 1 2006 2 0.42 0.36 1.73 0.41 1.57 0.02 0.10 2006 4 4.40 0.00 83.00 0.75 6.28 0.00 0.00 2007 2 6.36 0.00 0.24 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.24 20062007 0 1 2007 2 1.24 0.00 0.18 0.18 1.41 0.00 0.00 2006 4 0.49 0.00 1.45 0.12 0.42 0.00 0.35 2007 5 3.69 0.22 1.72 0.99 4.00 0.11 0.22 2006 5 3.09 0.00 2.07 1.05 3.33 2.24 0.00 20062007 0 6 5.00 0.00 0.50 1.24 1.46 0.00 0.00 Y a 2005 0 iti 2005 0 V atu-i-R asawas 2005 0 Y V Taveuni 2005 1 Suva 2005 0 Savusavu 2005 4 2.18 0.00 0.24 0.58 3.01 0.00 0.00 Mamanucas 2005 0 Namena 2005 0 Rotuma 2005 0 Lautoka 2005 0 Lomai Kadavu 2005 1 Coral Coast 2005 0 Beqa 2005 0 Region Appendix 21: Site numbers (n) and standard deviations numbers Site 21: and standard (n) Appendix key fish densityregions 2006 and 2007 in of 2005, Fiji FIJI Appendix 22: Average Fiji of 2005, inregions 2006and2007 invertebrate key density Y aen 050.00 2005 Taveuni 2005 Suva 0.00 2005 Savusavu 2005 Rotuma 2005 Namena 2005 Mamanucas 2005 Lomaiviti 2005 Lautoka 0.00 2005 Kadavu 2005 Coral Coast 2005 Beqa V Region sws2005 asawas atu-i-R 2005 a 060.00 2006 0.00 2006 070.00 2007 0.00 2007 070.00 0.00 2007 2006 0.00 0.00 2007 2006 0.67 0.44 2007 2006 0.00 2007 2006 0.00 2007 2006 0.00 0.00 2007 2006 0.00 0.00 2007 2006 0.00 2007 2006 0.00 0.00 2007 2006 0.00 0.00 2007 2006 0.00 2007 2006 Y a A ear shrimp Banded coral verage 75 .020 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.13 57.50 0.00 0.00 50 .000 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 75.00 0.00 0.00 25 .001 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.38 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.50 0.88 0.00 0.08 12.63 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.38 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.08 0.00 29.25 0.29 0.00 0.00 18.69 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.33 0.33 0.00 0.33 0.50 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.13 0.25 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.06 0.10 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.07 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.04 urchins Diadema urchin Pencil cucumber Sea 50 Thorns star Crown-of- .000 .00.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .000 .00.13 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .800 .80.08 0.63 0.08 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.50 0.00 0.25 0.13 0.06 0.25 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 Tripneustes Triton shell urchin ose Giant Lobster Clam FIJI Clam Lobster Giant Tripneustes Tripneustes urchin Triton Triton shell Crown-of- thorns star Sea cucumber 51 Pencil Pencil urchin

Diadema urchin 0.10 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.000.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.11 3.030.00 0.00 0.18 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.18 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.18 0.500.00 0.25 0.00 1.03 0.00 0.50 0.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.01 1.0828.78 0.0028.01 0.00 0.54 0.14 0.60 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.25 0.31 0.25 0.000.00 0.00 0.00 0.88 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.7319.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.88 0.14 0.000.00 0.00 0.0060.10 0.1835.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.18 Banded coral shrimp ear N Stdev Y 20062007 0 6 0.00 2007 5 0.00 2006 5 0.00 2007 2 0.00 2006 4 0.00 20062007 0 1 2006 4 0.00 2007 2 0.00 20062007 1 1 20062007 0 1 2007 0 2006 2 0.00 20062007 4 3 0.38 0.72 2007 2 0.00 2006 2 0.00 2007 3 0.00 2006 2 0.00 2006 2 0.00 2006 2 0.00 2007 4 0.00 2007 2 0.00 a 2005 0 atu-i-R asawas 2005 0 Region Beqa 2005 0 Coral Coast 2005 0 Kadavu 2005 1 Lautoka 2005 0 Lomaiviti 2005 0 Mamanucas 2005 0 Namena 2005 0 Rotuma 2005 0 Savusavu 2005 4 0.00 Suva 2005 0 Taveuni 2005 1 V Y Appendix Appendix 23: Site numbers (n) and standard deviations key invertebrate density in regions of Fiji 2005, 2006 and 2007 FIJI V Y Financial Support Kadavu –South Taveuni –East Taveuni –SsStraits Lomai Mamanucas Coral Coast Beqa Diving support Turtle information SimonMcGreePrincipal ScientificOfficer, All otherdata Weather andLaNina Suva Harbour Savusavu Rotuma Mamanucas COTS Kadavu Astrolabe Gau Beqa Data Contributors Data processing Report asawas atu-i-R V a, Namena, iti –Gau A

cknowledgements Matava Resort, www.matava.com Waitabu MarinePark, www.boumafiji.com Aquatrek/Garden IslandResort, www.aquatrek.com Nai’a cruises,www.naia.com.fj Nanuya IslandR Subsurface/Musket CoveResort, www.fijidiving.com Aquasafari, www.aquasafarifiji.com Diveaway/Hideaway Resort, www.diveaway-fiji.com Lalati Resort, www.lalati-fiji.com Merewalesi Laveti,MarineScienceResearcher, InstituteofMarineResources, USP. [email protected] www.marineecologyfiji.com, www.resortsupportfiji.com [email protected] Marine EcologyConsulting,Resort Support Helen Sykes,DirectorChinnammaReddy, FieldScientist Climate ServicesDivision,[email protected], www.met.gov.fj [email protected], [email protected] Ed Lovell, [email protected], [email protected] Jean-Michel CousteauResort Fiji Islands, Mike Greenfelder, JohnnySingh,MarineBiologists; www.rotuma.net/os/lajerotuma.htm LajeRotuma Initiative Teri Tuxson. MonifaFiu,SydneyMalo Jodie Mott,Reef [email protected] [email protected], www.coralcay.org Simon Harding,CoralCayConservationLtd. [email protected], www.frontier.ac.uk Lesley Brown,Frontier-Fiji [email protected], www.georgiaaquarium.org Bruce Carlson,GeorgiaAquarium Marine EcologyConsulting,[email protected] Simita Singh,ChinnammaR [email protected], www.marineecologyfiji.com Helen Sykes,MarineEcologyConsulting www.marineecologyfiji.com, www.resortsupportfiji.com Marine EcologyConsulting/Resort Support Y ashika Nand,UniversityoftheSouthP esort, www.nanuyafiji.com eddy, 52 acific

and C ontacts NEW CALEDONIA

THE STATUS OF CORAL REEFS IN NEW CALEDONIA 2007

Laurent Wantiez, Claire Garrigue, Sabrina Virly and Sébastien Sarramégna

Aquarium Des Lagons - Université De La Nouvelle-Caledonie

Funded by IFRECOR

53 NEW CALEDONIA EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 2

3

4

5

COUNTR CURRENT PHYSICALCONDITIONOFCORALREEFS 2.1

2.2 2.3 CURRENT RESOURCEUSE 3.1

3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 THREA 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 CURRENT CORAL REEFCONSERV

2.1.2 2.1.1 Monitoring Monitoring sites 2.3.3 2.3.2 2.3.1 R 3.1.3 3.1.2. 3.1.1 Coral R T Mangroves Seagrass Deepsea species Endangered species Integrated ThreatIndex Coastal development P Sedimentation, nutrientenrichmentandeutrophication Over fishing Destructive fishingandcoralharvesting Bleaching, coraldiseaseandpredators Hurricane/tsunamis Outbreak oforganisms urtles TS TOCORALREEFS/MANGROVES/SEAGRASS ollution esults Y INFORMATION

Method Issues Long T T Nov 2006–Apr2007Monitoring T Subsistence, ArtisanalandCommercialFisheries Aquarium T

emporal variations ourism eef Species

erm Variations

rade

CONTENTS ATION EFFORTS

54

56 57 58 58 58 58 60 61 63 62 61 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 65 65 65 66 66 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 68 NEW CALEDONIA

5.1 Government Efforts 68 5.2 Non Government Organisation Efforts 68 6 FUTURE OF CORAL REEF HEALTH 69 7 RECOMMENDATIONS 70 REFERENCES 71 APPENDICES 72 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 79 CONTACTS 80

55 NEW CALEDONIA (27%), satisfactory for 18 stations (60%), and av- and (60%), stations 18 for satisfactory (27%), health status was considered stations forgood eight reef coral overall the taken, samplings Fromtored. In2006-2007, sites10 werestations) 30 (and moni- data processing. and training for resourcepersons as recruited were for monitoring on a long-term basis, two facilitators edonia’sreefs. To reinforce motivationand capacity Cal- New of all to extended zone sampling the and 2003 in reactivated was stations) (30 observatory the Reefs), Coral for Initiative (French IFRECOR from support financial However, with funding. of lack a to due later years two ceased operations Its environment. local the to adapted methods Check Reef using monitoring reef coral for responsible was and Province, South the in 1997 in founded was (RORC), Coralliens Recifs des d’Observation Reseau observatory, reef coral first country’s The ered for World Heritage in2007. listing consid- was seascape area,this lagoon of 40,000km approximately and constructions coral of 7,284km types, reef 150 With Caledonia. New in found be to is systems reef coral largest world’s the of One E xecutive 56 S more than 420km (covering MPAs villages. major the and Nouméa to close reefs coralYachting on impact higher a has stopovers.ship cruise are that islands on and méa, Nou- capital, the around felt be to are tourism of effects main The exploited.. were tonnes) (690 fish mainly resources, marine of tonnes 1,212 2001, In improvedhad from average to satisfactory. station the 2007, later,in TenMaitre.years of tion excep- the with 1997, in survey first the since tory satisfac- been have stations) (6 site Nouméa the at 1997 since observed variations long-term two. The deterioration at three stations and improvements at was There exceptions. few a with 2003-2006, from period the during stable remained stations the of most of status The characteristics. geomorphologic particular or fishing, activities, mining were there where estuaries from sedimentation high had tions sta- average in Reefs (13%). stations four for erage being implementedbeing to limitthese impacts. are areas) disposal and plant treatment wastewater procedures, (extracting policies management new However,sewage. and activities mining by affected with moorings, to limit damage. Coral reefs are also ummary 2 ) have been created, most of them

NEW CALEDONIA

1 Country Information

New Caledonia is located in the South West Pacific, of coral constructions (Andrefouet et al. 2006) 1,500km east of and 2,000km north of and around 40,000km of lagoon area (Clavier et al. . The New Caledonia archipelago is 1995), of which 23,400km surrounds the Main Is- comprised of the Main Island (Grande Terre), the land (Testau and Conand 1983). One hundred and four Loyalty Islands (Ouvéa, Lifou, Tiga and Maré), fifty reef types are to be found (Andrefouet et al. the Belep archipelago, the Isle of Pine, the Entreca- 2006), from fringing reefs to oceanic reefs, and the steaux reefs, the Chesterfield archipelago and some longest continuous, and second largest barrier reef remote reefs (Durand, Walpole, Mathew and Hunt- (1,600km length) in the world. er). The country has a tropical climate cooled by the trade winds. Background A monitoring initiative launched in 1997 used Reef New Caledonia’s population was 230,789 - 9.5% in Check methods adapted to the local environment the Loyalty Islands, 19.3% in the Northern Prov- (Wantiez in press). The study area was limited to ince of the Main Island, and 71.2% in the South- the Southern Province of New Caledonia that fund- ern Province of the Main Island. Forty per cent of inhabitants live in the capital, Nouméa. The gross ed the programme (18 stations). Surveys were com- domestic product (16,900 per habitant) is similar pleted in 1997, 1998, and 2001. to West European countries. New Caledonia holds In 2003, IFRECOR (French Initiative for Coral 25% of the known nickel reserves, with nickel Reefs) financed a new phase of the programme for exports accounting for 90 to 95% of the country’s four years, and the sampling zone was extended to total exports. all New Caledonia reefs. Between 2003 and 2006, 30 It has one of the largest and the most diversified stations were assessed each year. Six of these stations coral reef systems in the world totaling 7,284km have been sampled since 1997.

57 NEW CALEDONIA ants) participated in the surveys and in compiling in and surveys the in participated ants) Volunteersand VirlybyGarrigue Consult- (trained reefs. coral Caledonian New all to extended were surveys The years. four for Reefs) Coral for tiative Ini- (French IFRECOR by funded and created was des d’Observation Récifs Coralliens (RORC), which Réseau the of Lagons des Aquarium from sistance 2002.in Fromsurveys to2005,2003 received he as- the status report. Mr Wantiez began conducting the the guardsSouth Lagoon of Marine Park and wrote the trained who Caledonia), New of (University méa (6 stations). This was done by Laurent Wantiez Nou-near located site the of survey the reactivated Province Southern the of authorities the 2001, In mention site, New Caledonia refers to itasstation. edonia refers to it as site. Where the other countries Where the other countries refer to region, New Cal- are different slightly from the other node countries. unit sampling the of Caledonia,Newdefinitions In interrupted. being surveys successfulthe ORCnot resultingin the was of operation However,the sites. control respective their as well as activities urban or mining tural, agricul- by affected sites in selected were Stations ing of volunteers, and monitoring and data analysis. sultants) was responsible for recruitment and train- Con- (T&W agency consulting private A version. Check Reef modified a using surveys out carried which (ORC), Coralliens Récifs des Observatoire the created and 1997 in the initiative monitoring first funded authorities Province Southern The 2.1.1 Issues 2.1 Monitoring C urrent P hysical C ondition 58 2 and presented. site by pooled are survey 2006-2007 the of Results two more years hence continued. thesurvey for RORC the fund to decided IFRECOR 2007, to 2006 From2005. and 2003 between year each pled sam- were stations Twenty-four report. status the Painted • Butterfly • groups andcodesing species are recorded: follow- The >30cm. and 16-30cm 6-15cm, 0-5cm, size-classes: 4 in estimated is size The line. transect eachwithin section in a 2.5m eachwidth side the of group species per sampled are abundances Fish sampled thefour sections.within were substrate and invertebrates Fish, sections. between gap 5m a with transect the along a constant depth. Four 20m sections were identified at reef the on laid was transect long 100m a station each At used. was method Check Reef modified A 2.1.2 Method Humpback • Other • Humphead • Other • Speckled • Coral • ):tum BOS. BLE. TRU. A GL.

trout groupers sweetlips

sweetlips

of fish grouper

grouper Plectropomus leopardus(Plectropomus ): SAU. parrotfish

(Chaetodontidae): C

(Epinephelinae): and

( oral Epinephelus cyanopodus):(Epinephelus

(Cromileptes): altivelis grunts

Bolbometopon murica- (Bolbometopon

(Haemulidae): R eefs

CHA.

AL O. ): CAS.

NEW CALEDONIA

• Other parrotfish (Scaridae): APE. CRA.

• Humphead wrasse (Cheilinus undulatus): NAP. • Other urchins: AOU.

• Emperors (Lethrinidae): BEB. Substrate type was recorded every 50cm within

• Bluespine unicornfish (Naso unicornis): DAW. each section. The following substrate classes were recorded: • Other surgeonfish and rabbitfish (Acanthuri- dae and Siganidae): API. • Live branching corals: HCB.

Invertebrates abundances are sampled per species • Live massive corals: HCM. group within each section in a 2.5m width each side • Live tabular corals: HCT. of the transect line. The following species groups • Other live corals: HCO. were recorded: • Soft corals: SC. • Giant clams (Tridacna spp): BEN. • Fresh dead corals (white): DC. • Trochus (Trochus niloticus).: TRO • Large seaweeds: FS. • Triton trumpet (Charonia tritonis): TOU. • Sponges: SP. • Spiny lobsters: LAN.

• Slipper lobsters: CEP. • Rocks and dead corals with algae (size > 15cm): RCK. • Crown-of-thorns starfish (Acanthaster planci): ACA. • Rubble (stet) (size < 15cm): RB.

• Other starfish: AEM. • Sand: SD.

• Greenfish (Stichopus choloronotus): STI. • Silt: SI.

• Sand fish (Holothuria scabra): HOL. • Other substrate: OT.

• Prickly redfish (Thelenota ananas): THE. • Coral bleaching: BLA.

• Other sea cucumbers: ABM. • Fresh broken coral: RKC.

• Diadema setosum: DIA. • Abandoned fishing gear: PEC.

• Pencil urchins (Heterocentrus mammilatus): • Other detritus (bottles, cans, etc.): DET.

59 NEW CALEDONIA Figure 1: Map showing the 10 survey sites and 31 stations across thecountry across sites and31stations Figure the10survey 1:Map showing 1forpendix more sites). detailson survey Ap- (See 1 Fig. in illustrated were as 2003, in monitored that those as same the remained sites The 2.2 Monitoring sites 60 NEW CALEDONIA

2.3 Results and discussion 0.4 0.35 2.3.1 Nov 2006 – Apr 2007 0.3 0.25

Monitoring 0.2 A summary of results of the 2006-2007 survey is 0.15 0.1 given in Fig. 2 (See Appendix 2 for additional de- 0.05

Density (targeted invertebrates/m ≤ ) 0 tails). Of the 30 stations sampled, the overall coral Thio Prony Santal Bourail Népoui Nouméa reef health was considered good for 8 stations Luengoni Hienghène Pouembout (27%), satisfactory for 18 stations (60%) and aver- Chateaubriand age for 4 stations (13%). 0.7 0.6 Reasons for the average health status of the four 0.5 0.4 stations were as follows: Grimault (Nepoui) - sedi- 0.3 mentation due to mining activities in the area; Lu- 0.2

Density (targeted fish/m ≤ ) 0.1 engoni1 and Luengoni2bis - particular geo-mor- 0

phological characteristics; Santal2 (Lifou) - density Thio Prony Santal Bourail Népoui Nouméa Luengoni Hienghène of invertebrates keeps reducing every year. Pouembout Chateaubriand

70

60

50

40

30 % hard coral 20

10

0 Thio Prony Santal Bourail Népoui Nouméa Luengoni Hienghène Pouembout Chateaubriand Figure 2: Density of invertebrates and fish (target spe- cies), and the % of hard coral cover on the 10 sites (30 stations) of the 2006-2007 survey in New Caledonia.

61 NEW CALEDONIA test, (Kuskal-Wallis2006) and (2005 6% to (2003) 64% hard covercoral from decrease of significant a with (COTs),crown-of-thorns by impacted was station However,one 3). (Fig. 0.05) > p Anova, 24.6%; = (mean years the over stable was cover coral hard Mean common. and present were cucumbers) sea and commercial invertebrates (giant clams, trochus, (g rine 53% in2006). stat one only on decreased and stations seven on nificantly 3). (Fig. However,indicesincreasedthese sig- of one least at >0.05) (p years between significantly change not did (Anova) fish and (Kruskal-Wallis) commercialinvertebrates Regionally, of density the intérieur.Qanono andRécif Hiengabat and Hienga,Donga and improvement at Santal2, at deterioration was exceptions.There few a with years the over stable remained stations the of most of status The details). more for 3 pendix Ap- (See fishing or activities, mining from tation sedimen- by affected stations 3-4 of exception the weresatisfactory,stations) New(24 Caledonia with throughout sites sampled the of status overall The nia) Caledo- New all (2003-2006, variations Mid-term 2.3.2 Temporal variations incr roupers, parrotfish, surgeonfish and rabbitfish) and surgeonfish parrotfish, roupers, ions (from less than 39% in 2003, to more than more2003, to in 39% than less (from ions

eased

stat p p

rotected < ion

0.05).

sig

(K nificantly

ruskal-Wallis, On ar eas

the

b

utterflyfish,

othe (A nova, r

hand, p

<

p

0.05).

c < har ommercial

0.05) d

I c nside oral

o n

c

over ma tw fish o -

62 coral (24stations). cover hard of % the and species), (target fish and tebrates inver- of density the of variations Mid-term Figure3:

% hard coral Density (targeted fish/m≤) Density (targeted invertebrates / m≤) 10 15 20 25 30 35 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.05 0.15 0.25 0 5 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0 0 2003 2003 2003 2004 2004 2004 2005 2005 2005 2006 2006 2006

NEW CALEDONIA

2.3.3 Long-term variations 0.45 (Nouméa – SW lagoon) 0.4 0.35

The long-term variations observed since 1997 in- 0.3 cluded only the Nouméa site (6 stations). The status 0.25 0.2 of the 6 stations remained satisfactory since the first 0.15 survey in 1997 with the exception of Maitre. How- Density (targeted fish / m ≤ ) 0.1 ever, this station’s status improved in 2007 from av- 0.05 0 déc 97 sept 98 déc 98 déc 01 nov-03 déc-04 avr-06 avr-07 erage to satisfactory.

Fish densities remained relatively stable over the 0.35 years until April 2007 (Fig. 4), when a significant 0.3 increase was recorded (mainly butterfly fish and 0.25 parrot fish; Anova, p < 0.05). The density of the 0.2 0.15 invertebrates remained relatively stable since 1997 0.1 (Fig. 4), with a slight, but not significant, increase

Density (targeted invertebrate / m ≤ ) 0.05 (Kruskal-Wallis, p > 0.05). The regional hard coral 0 déc 97 sept 98 déc 98 déc 01 nov-03 déc-04 avr-06 avr-07 cover also remained relatively stable (Anova, p >

0.05) since 1997 (Fig. 4). It increased in December 60% 2005 however, after COTs significantly impacted 50% two stations. Signs of hard coral recovery were ob- 40% served in Ricaudy and Maitre. On the other hand, 30%

a decrease of the coral cover was observed at Ever % hard coral 20% Prosperity and Signal. This affected the branching 10% Acropora and specimens of COT Acanthaster were 0% found on these stations. déc 97 sept 98 déc 98 déc 01 nov-03 déc-04 avr-06 avr-07

Figure 4: Long-term variations of the density of inver- tebrates and fish (target species), and the % of hard coral cover (Nouméa, 6 stations).

63 NEW CALEDONIA and spear guns. and spear lines hand were gears fishing principal The boat. a used 70% and week, a times three to once fished fishers the of 50% that indicated 2000 in survey A territory. entire the over practised is fishing ence subsist- whereas centres, urban near concentrated discriminate. is to difficult fishing Recreational and Subsistence and recreational fisheries are important (100t shells). trochus and dry) (69t cucumbers sea were targets main the 2003,In (23t). crabs mud and lobsters by followed (690.5t) target main the were fish 2001, In 1989. since stable relatively remained and 2001 b Isle the in 30 and Province Northern the in 114 ince, b fishing commercial Artisanal society. Caledonia New in position a central have activities However, fishing fishing). and aquaculture agriculture, for (3% nia NewCaledo- of product domestic gross the of part Commercial fishingactivities constitute a very small Commercial Fisheries 3.1.1 Subsistence, and Artisanal Species 3.1 Coral Reef centrated around Nouméa. con- are reefs coral on ) stopovers liner cruise ing around annually.visitors 100,000 Tourist (includ- with activities 2000 since stagnated has industry The persons. 3,500 employs and GDP Caledonia’s New of 4% and 3% between constitutes Tourism 3.1.2 Tourism oats in 1976. The landings represented 1,212t in 1,212t represented landings The 1976. in oats Prov- Southern the in boats 144 comprising oats)

P rovince.

is

ma de

T

his up

o fle f

et a

smal st eadily C l

p urrent rofessional

incr eased

fle fr om et

(288

R 154 esource

64 3 Trampling low. remains affected potentially sites of number the However, Koumac. and Koné Bourail, extent, centersban aroundmainly Nouméa and, lesser to a ur- near are areas These moorings. without areas busy in significant be can damage Such available. the South Lagoon Marine Park are where moorings weekends. Anchor damage is limited in the MPAs of MPAat one in moored be can boats 40 than More lagoon.SW the of islets the on particularly impact, considerable have activities marine Recreational authorisation hastoauthorisation given be by authorities. local scheduled, an is fishing traditional time tions.Each celebra- Turtlestraditional exceptprotectedfor are 3.2 Turtles concern inNew Caledonia. Formajor a not moment,is the trade aquarium the 2001. in 7.3t represented exports aquarium Fish 3.1.3 Aquarium Trade pulsory atthe time. pulsory activi- closed. com- werenot measuresprotection because is This have that mining mines old from near especially estuaries ties, sedimenta- some by in impacted tion also are Mangroves grove protection. man- consider would projects development New Nouméa.around protection for awareness rising is there but urbanisation by affected are Mangroves 3.3 Mangroves flats reef the visiting in interest local little is There ists. tour- numerous by visited Amédé) Phare (Canard, c enters where fishing is allowed, and in two MPAs two in and allowed, is fishing where enters

of

the

other is

limit U

MPAs. ed se

t o

fishe d

r eef

flats

near

ur ban

NEW CALEDONIA

3.4 Seagrass Seagrasses are not used in New Caledonia. The im- pacts are limited to coastal areas where sedimenta- tion is high, and to anchoring within frequented areas.

3.5 Deepsea species No particular use, with the exception of a small artisanal fishing activity for outer slope fish (100- 400m depth).

3.6 Endangered species Exploited endangered species are submitted to regulations. Different regulations apply in the three Provinces. A new fishing regulation has been imple- mented in the Northern Province and is being final- ized in the Southern Province.

65 NEW CALEDONIA (Bryant methods Risk” at “Reefs the of modification a ing us- out carried was Analysis Threat Integrated An Threat Index4.1 Integrated It should be noted that this is an index of POTENTIALIt noted THREAT, shouldbe thatthisisanindex of currentcoral health. notone of Table 1:Integrated Threat Index for New Sites Caledonian threat this haveundergone that (Tablesites The 1). score threat single a into integrated then and 8) to 4 Appendices (See fishing), destructive and fishing artisanal sedimentation, and pollution pollution, five categories, (coastal development, marine-based in assessed are gathered is data where country the of areas in health reef to threats potential analysis, this In exist. may regions other in apply not may that threats where or available, not often is mation infor- technical detailed where Node, Pacific West c onditions in the small Island States of the South the of States Island small the in onditions Reef Area OVERALL: INTEGRATED THREAT INDEX Lifou Hienghène Pouembout Népoui Thio Prony Bourail Nouméa

THREATS TOCORALREEFS/MANGROVES/SEAGRASS e t

al.

1998). velopment Coastal De- eimMdu Low Medium Medium eimVr o Low Very Low Medium eimLow Medium ihHg ihLow High High High ihHg ihLow High High High ihHg ihLow High High High eimVr o eimLow Medium Very Low Medium eimHg ihLow High High Medium

M odifications tion based Pollu- Marine

r eflect

lo mentation and Sedi- Pollution eimLow Medium cal

66 4 was artificially set set to Lowwas artificially by thelocal coordinator. indexConsequently, site.this each of station shore the of distance short a within population coastal a “always” is There coast. the along villages small numerous in spread is population coastal the nia directed.as wereNewindicescalculatedInCaledo- the overfishing threathave index if artisanal High a from the coastline to the barrier reef. All sites would stations three regrouping site each station), by not (and site by calculated are Hereafter,indices threat Nepoui, Thio, Bourail, Prony andNouméa. teaubriand and Luengoni), Hienghène, Pouembout, Santal,siteswere: Cha-(grouping assessment Lifou Over-fishing Artisanal Low Low Fishing Destructive Low Low Low Low Low Low eimMedium/High Medium eimHigh Medium Score Threat Index Overall Low Low Medium High High Very High NEW CALEDONIA

Prony is the only site subjected to very high threat Urban development is also a source of pollution. because it has a high biodiversity and is where a Nutrient inputs are limited to the main urban cen- major industrial nickel complex is being devel- tres. In Nouméa, sewage is a source of nutrient for oped. Three other sites are subjected to high threat: the lagoon despite the presence of wastewater treat- Népoui and Thio because of mining activities, and ment plants. Treatment capacity is increasing but Nouméa because of urban development. Bourail is is still insufficient. Several villages (Bourail, Koné, subjected to medium/high threat because of agri- Koumac, Poindimié, Wé) are reaching a threshold cultural and pastoral activities, and urban develop- where they will need modern treatment plants as ment. Pouembout is subjected to medium threat because of agricultural and pastoral activities. This nutrient inputs are increasing in these areas. site will be subjected to very high threat in the next 4.5 Over fishing two years because of the development of a future Over fishing is not yet a major problem in New Cal- industrial nickel complex. Two sites are subjected to edonia. However, population increase will induce low threat, Lifou and Hienghène. For these two sites the two major threats are the increase of the local an increase of the fishing effort in the near future. population and tourism. Actually, the fishing effort is concentrated around Nouméa and the major concerns are for sea cucum- 4.2 Coastal development bers, giant clams, trochus and fish. Coastal development is concentrated around Nou- méa (urban development) and the future industrial 4.6 Destructive fishing and complex (Voh-Koné-Pouembout and Prony). The coral harvesting mangroves are the first ecosystems affected. There is no destructive fishing and coral harvesting 4.3 Pollution in New Caledonia. Pollution is affecting Nouméa and the major min- 4.7 Bleaching, coral disease ing centres. Pesticides may affect near shore lagoon and predators areas near agricultural centres along the West coast No coral bleaching affected New Caledonia from of the main island. 2005 to 2007. 4.4 Sedimentation, nutrient enrichment and eutrophication 4.8 Hurricane/tsunamis Sedimentation is mainly due to mining activities New Caledonia recorded no hurricanes and tsuna- which affect and coastal environ- mis from 2005 to 2007. ment, particularly areas located downstream the 4.9 Outbreak of organisms catchment area of old mines when no regulations were applied. Now mining activity is regulated There was no outbreak of organisms 2005 to 2007. and measures are taken to limit sedimentation. Local limited COT outbreaks were observed in The impact of the new mines is now limited to the Pouembout (Pindaï station) and, to a lower extent, loading port. in Nouméa (Signal station).

67 NEW CALEDONIA permanent closure.permanent areno-take one(Merlet zones with reserve) a being Province. Southern the in Mostlocatedare these of all NearlyTable 2. in listed are and ha 42,000 over represent Caledonia New in MPAs reef coral The in2008. known be theUNESCOwill sion of mitted by the French government in 2007. The deci- the world heritage (UNESCO). The record was sub- to areas reef coral six proposed has CaledoniaNew 5.1 Government Efforts Name Table 2.TheMarineProtected AreasinNewCaledonia Bourail (3sites) Dieppoise Ilot Amédé, récif Aboré No-take zone No-take Ilot Amédé,récifAboré Ilot Amédée Ilot Bailly ltCnr,rcfRcuyFishingfromlandallowed(Ricaudy) Ilot Canard,récifRicaudy Ilot Larégnère Ilot Maitre Ilot Signal Ilot Ténia Humbolt Kuendu Nékoro Ouano Prony (2sites) Yves Merlet Passe deDumbéa Grand Port (Prony) CURRENT CORALREEFCONSERVATION EFFORTS Status No-take zone No-take No-take zone No-take No-take zone No-take No-take zone No-take No-take zone No-take No-take zone No-take No-take zone No-take No-take zone No-take No-take zone No-take No-take zone No-take No-take zone No-take No-take zone No-take No-take zone No-take Fully closed area October and1stMarch Fishing forbiddenbetween1st September and31December Fishing forbiddenbetween1st 68 5 involved surveys. inwhale is Cétacés Opération survey,and turtle involvedin is Nouvelle-Calédonie) de Nature la de vegarde Sau- de (Association ASNNC ecosystems, marine Caledonia New of analysis eco-regional an dinated coor- example, for WWF, Caledonia. New in tion conserva- reef coral in involved are NGOs Several on Government Efforts Organisation 5.2

N ra(a Established Area (ha) 14,990 17,150 2,339 1,002 1,260 2,980 1,153 154 216 191 665 628 246 149 542 13 13 39 1981-96 1993 1990 1989 1989 1989 1989 1981 1989 1998 1996 1998 2000 2004 1993 1970 2005 2006 NEW CALEDONIA

6 FUTURE OF CORAL REEF HEALTH

New Caledonia’s location means its coral reefs lated to industrial mining and urban development, should be relatively protected from the effects of as well as population increase. Sedimentation, pol- global warming. However, rising sea levels may af- lution, coast line preservation, sewage treatment, fect the lowest coralline islands and Ouvéa . waste management, fishing effort will be the main

The main treats to coral reefs in the future will be re- stakes for managers of New Caledonia’s coral reefs.

69 NEW CALEDONIA to • mainrecommendationsThe are: to • to • p the tion policies; rogram;

c c find ontinue ontinue structure and functioning of MPAs of and functioning structure in order

a

sol

ution t t o o

e d nforce evelop

t o

p

erpetuate

manag r esearch RECOMMENDATIONS ement

p the rogrammes

mo and nitoring

p rotec-

o n

70 7 to • wast villages. opment; their management policies to their future devel- adapting in Provinces other benefit will grams pro- these of results The Park. Marine Lagoon South the of policy management optimise to

s upport e management for Nouméa and developing

a

p olicy

o f

se wage

t reatment

and

NEW CALEDONIA

REFERENCES

Andréfouet, S., Muller-Karger, F.E., Robinson, J.A., rigue, C., Kulbicki, M. & Richer de Forges, B. (1995). Kranenburg, C.J., Torres-Pulliza, D., Spraggins, S.A. - Programme LAGON « Connaissances et mise en & Murch, B. (2006). Global assessment of modern valeur du lagon de Nouvelle-Calédonie » : le bilan. coral reef extent and diversity for regional science ORSTOM Éditions, Nouméa, 70 p. and management applications: a view from space. Testau, J.L. & Conand, F. (1983). – Estimation des Proc. 10th int. Coral Reef Symp.: 1732-1745. surfaces des différentes zones des lagons de Nouv- Bryant, D., Burke, L., McManus, J. & Spalding, M. elle-Calédonie. ORSTOM Éditions, Nouméa, 5 p. + (1998). - Reef at risk: a map indicator of threats 4 planches. to the world’s coral reefs.WRI ICLARM WCMC Wantiez, L. (in press). - Les récifs coralliens de Nou- UNEP, Washington, 56 p. velle-Calédonie en 2006 : état des lieux et réseau de Clavier, J., Bour, W., Chevillon, C., Douillet, P., Gar- suivi. Revue d’Ecologie la Terre et la Vie.

71 NEW CALEDONIA Appendix 1: Survey sites across the country between Nov 2006and between Apr 2007 sitesthecountry across Appendix 1:Survey omaMbéré Nouméa omaSignal Nouméa oma Nouville Nouméa omaEe rseiy2°66’ 6°21’ innerbarrierlagoon 166°22.12’E 22°26.63’S EverProsperity Nouméa omaMaitre Nouméa omaRicaudy Nouméa Thio Thio Thio ori Siandé Bourail ori IleVerte Bourail ori Akaïa Bourail rn on ne2°367S165.7’ rnigoenc2003to2006 fringingoceanic 166°52.971’E 22°23.647’S BonneAnse Prony rn Casy Prony inèeDnaHeg 03.3’ 6°432Eotrbriroenc2003to2006 outerbarrieroceanic 165°04.302’E 20°37.831’S DongaHienga Hiengène inèeHegaa 03.7’ 6°893 nemdaelgo 2003to2006 intermediatelagoon 164°58.993E 20°38.679’S Hienghabat Hiengène inèeKoulnoué Hiengène éoiBéco Népoui éoiPindaï Népoui éoiGrimault Népoui oebu asepse2°300S144.6’ ne are aon2003to2006 innerbarrierlagoon 164°45.769’E 21°13.080’S Faussepasse Pouembout oebu Konieme Pouembout oebu Pinjien Pouembout unoiLegn2i 10.6’ 6°472Efign cai 2004to2006 fringingoceanic 167°24.722’E 21°01.568’S Luengoni2bis Luengoni unoiLuengoni1 Luengoni htabin Wéport Chateaubriand htabin Qanono Chateaubriand atlSantal2 Santal atlSantal1 Santal atlJinek Santal Site rn éi ho2°330S162.4’ ne are aon2003to2006 innerbarrier lagoon 166°20.248’E 21°33.380’S Grand récifThio éi néiu ho2°561S161.0’ nemdaelgo 2003to2006 intermediatelagoon 166°15.806’E 21°35.601’S Récif intérieurThio Moara Station 22.3S161.9Einner barrierlagoon 166°14.29’E 22°20.33’S 21.3S161.9Eintermediate lagoon 166°17.79’E 22°17.63’S 21.8S162.4Efringinglagoon 166°23.14’E 22°15.48’S 21.8S162.3Eintermediatelagoon 166°25.43’E 22°19.98’S 21.6S162.2Efringinglagoon 166°27.32’E 22°18.96’S 13.3’ 6°820Efign aon2003to2006 fringinglagoon 166°18.200’E 21°38.530’S 13.9’ 6°718Einrbrirlgo 2003to2006 innerbarrierlagoon 165°27.198’E 21°39.698’S 13.1’ 6°736Eitreit aon2003to2006 intermediatelagoon 165°27.376’E 21°39.211’S 13.9’ 6°720Efign aon2003to2006 fringinglagoon 165°27.250’E 21°37.790’S 22.0’ 6°083Eitreit aon2003to2006 intermediatelagoon 166°50.833’E 22°21.401’S 04.3’ 6°956Efign aon2003to2006 fringinglagoon 164°59.546’E 20°41.435’S 12.3’ 6°757Einrbrirlgo 2003to2006 innerbarrierlagoon 164°57.507’E 21°24.635’S 12.2’ 6°805Eitreit aon2003to2006 intermediatelagoon 164°58.035’E 21°22.820’S 12.3’ 6°885Eitreit aon2003to2006 intermediatelagoon 164°58.835’E 21°22.038’S 11.8’ 6°662Eitreit aon2003to2006 intermediatelagoon 164°46.682’E 21°11.680’S 10.2’ 6°578Efign aon2003to2006 fringinglagoon 164°45.748’E 21°05.228’S 10.5’ 6°518Efign cai 2003to2006 fringingoceanic 167°25.128’E 21°01.857’S 05.4’ 6°644Efign cai 2003to2006 fringingoceanic 167°16.444’E 20°54.940’S 05.0’ 6°582Efign cai 2003to2006 fringingoceanic 167°15.862’E 20°54.400’S 04.3’ 6°946Efign cai 2003to2006 fringingoceanic 167°09.416’E 20°47.637’S 04.8’ 6°708Efign cai 2003to2006 fringingoceanic 167°07.028’E 20°47.080’S 04.7’ 6°737Efign cai 2003to2006 fringingoceanic 167°07.307’E 20°47.273’S aiueLniueTp fRe Years Surveyed Type ofReef Longitude Latitude appendices 72 2003 to2006 1997, 1998,2001, 2003 to2006 1997, 1998,2001, 2003 to2006 1997, 1998,2001, 2003 to2006 1997, 1998,2001, 2003 to2006 1997, 1998,2001, 2003 to2006 1997, 1998,2001, NEW CALEDONIA

Appendix 2: Summary of the results of the 2006-2007 survey on the 30 stations sampled in New Caledonia

Fish InvertebratesInvertebrates Substrate Site Station Major Others Pert urba tion Status Nb Density Nb Density Major species Nb HC Abiotic Dominant species Cas y 5 0,160 AP E 4 0,108 ABM 7 11 71 36 RB , 22 RC BR I + ++ satisfactory P rony Bonne Anse 4 0,135 AP E 7 0,058 ABM, DIA 9 22 72 39 RC, 21 RB DE T +, BR I + + satisfactory

Akaia 4 0,105 APE, PAP 4 0,033 AOU 7 40 54 40 HC, 41 RC BR I +++, DET ++, PEC ++ ++ satisfactory

Bourail IleIle VerteVerte 9 9 0,72 0,72 AP AP I, I, APEAPE 7 7 0,315 0,315 AOU AOU 8 8 26 26 71 71 67 67 RC,RC, 2525 HCHC BR I+++ ++ good

S iandé 5 0,38 APE , AP I 9 0,313 AOU, TRO 9 13 74 40 RC, 28 RB -- ++ satisfactory 57 HC, 17 RC, Moara 5 0,176 AP I 3 0,113 S TI 12 57 24 PEC + ++++ satisfactory 11 SC Thio 30 HC, 36 RC, R écif Intérieur 5 0,183 AP E 4 0,065 DI A 11 30 66 -- ++++ satisfactory 15 SD Grand R écif 8 0,400 AP I, AP E 5 0,068 ABM 9 37 60 34 HC, 43 RC -- + satisfactory

JinekJinek 3 0,350 AP I 7 0,043 S TI, BE N 8 53 44 53 HC, 33 RC BR I ++ ++ satisfactory S antal S antal1 6 0,378 AP I, APE 6 0,078 S TI 5 13 88 81 RC P E C+ + satisfactory

S antal2 4 0,265 AP E 4 0,013 AOU 6 16 79 52 RC, 15 HC BR I+ + average

Luecilla2

Chateaubriandteaubriand Qanono 6 0,415 AP I 2 0,028 BE N 8 59 31 59 HC DE T, P E C ++ good

W é port 7 0,258 AP I 1 0,008 -- 5 36 39 39 RC, 36 HC ++ good

Luengoni1 3 0,108 AP I 3 0,008 BE N, ABM 6 8 71 44 RC, 21 FS -- ++ average Luengoni Luengoni2bis 4 0,215 AP I 2 0,005 DI A, CRA 8 5 71 50 RC, 23 FS -- ++ average

Gr imault 3 0,050 AP I, P AP 4 0,135 DI A, AE M 8 1 91 50 SI, 18 S D -- ++ average

Népoui Pi ndaï 5 0,318 API, AP E 1 0,010 BE N 8 6 78 51 RC, 26 RB -- ++++ good

Beco 6 0,235 API 8 0,508 AOU, BEN 8 26 73 50 R C BR I +, BLA(ACA) + good

P injen 3 0,305 P AP 3 0,017 AE M 9 65 24 65 HC, 19 RC -- + good Pouem bout Pouem bout Koniène 3 0,153 AP I 6 0,250 BE N 7 58 27 57 HC, 20 RC -- + good Fauss e pass e 5 0,175 AP I, AP E 7 0,202 AOU, TRO 7 11 76 72 RC BRI + good

Koulnoué 3 0,063 P AP 3 0,050 AE M 11 19 43 36 FS, 29 SI BR I ++, PE C +, DE T + satisfactory Hienghène Hiengabat 5 0,193 AP I, AP E 6 0,135 BE N 8 15 71 61 RC, 13 S C BR I++, P E C, BLA(ACA) ++ satisfactory

Donga Hienga 4 0,233 AP I 7 0,173 AOU 9 29 66 64 RC BR I++, BLA(ACA)+, DE T, PE C + satisfactory

Ricaudy 5 0.168 PAP, APE 3 0.070 AEM 9 67 21 67 HC, 12 FS BRI+++, BLA(ACA)+, PEC+ +++ satisfactory

Maitre 4 0.398 APE 6 0.083 DIA 9 20 51 26 FS, 21 RB BRI++ +++ satisfactory Ever Prosperity 5 0.423 APE 3 0.020 ABM 6 31 59 38 SD, 31 HC BLA(ACA)+ + satisfactory Nouméa Nouville 4 0.218 PAP, API 4 0.753 DIA 9 28 66 29 RC, 28 SD BRI+, PEC+ +++ satisfactory Signal 5 0.515 APE 6 0.108 DIA 7 15 83 39 RB, 27 SD BRI+, BLA(ACA)+, DET+ + satisfactory Mbéré 4 0.390 APE 6 0.100 AOU 9 24 70 32 RC, 24 HC ++ satisfactory

Density lowlow average average high high Fish < 0,2 0,2 < <0,5 0,5 < Others -- ++ ++ ++ ++++++ Invertebrates < 0,15 0,15 < <0,3 0,3 < Invertebrates < 0,15 0,15 < <0,3 0,3 < Nb occur rences 0 1 2-42-4 5-105-10 >> 10 10

Diversity (Nb) < 5 5 < < 8 8 <

HC < 20 20 < < 40 40 <

73 HC Diversity (Nb) Invertebrates Fish Density Cha oe bout Pouem Hie Nouméa Luengoni teaubriand Népoui Bourail antal S rony P Site Thio nghène ,501 030,3 < <<0,3 0,15 < 0,15 o vrg high average low , , 0505< 0,5 < <0,5 0,2 < 0,2 02 <<4 40 < 20 < <40 < 20 < 8 <8 5 < < 5 Ever Prosperity og ina4023A ,7 O 966 29 9 AOU 0,173 7 I AP 0,233 4 Donga Hienga as ase5015A ,A ,0 O,TO71 76 11 7 TRO AOU, 0,202 7 E AP I, AP 0,175 5 e pass e Fauss cfItrer5013A ,6 IA1 066 30 11 A DI 0,065 4 E AP 0,183 5 écif Intérieur R unoibs4025A ,0 IA R 15 C 2 FS 23 50 RC, 71 5 8 CRA A, DI 0,005 2 I AP 0,215 4 Luengoni2bis on ne4015A ,5 B,DA92 23 C 21RB RC, 39 72 22 9 DIA ABM, 0,058 7 E AP 0,135 4 Anse Bonne Grand R écif 8 0,400 AP I, AP E 5 0,068 ABM 9 37 60 34 HC, 43RC 34HC, 60 37 9 ABM 0,068 5 E AP I, AP 0,400 8 écif Grand R unoi ,0 PI3008B ,AM687 4R, 1FS 21 44 RC, 71 8 6 ABM N, BE 0,008 3 I AP 0,108 3 Luengoni1 inaa ,9 PI PE6015B 57 1R, 3SCB +,PEC BLA(ACA) C, E P I++, BR C S 13 61 RC, 71 15 8 N BE 0,135 6 E AP I, AP 0,193 5 Hiengabat Koulnoué 3 0,063 P AP 3 0,050 AE M 11 19 43 36 FS, 29SI 36FS, 43 19 11 M AE 0,050 3 AP P 0,063 3 Koulnoué Luecilla2 rial ,5 PI P4015D ,A 15 I 8SD S 18 50SI, 91 1 8 M AE A, DI 0,135 4 AP P I, AP 0,050 3 imault Gr l et ,2A ,AE7035AU82 16 C 25HC 67RC, 71 26 8 AOU 0,315 7 APE I, AP 0,72 9 Verte Ile Nouville Ricaudy oin 3 Koniène ot7028A 0,008 1 I AP 0,258 7 port é W aoo6045A ,2 B 0,028 2 I AP 0,415 6 Qanono Station antal2 S antal1 S iandé S Mbéré Signal Maitre injen P indaï Pi Moara Akaia Jinek Beco a y Cas bDensity Nb 4 5 4 5 4 5 ,3 P ,0 O,BN82 73 26 8 BEN AOU, 0,508 8 API 0,235 6 3 0,305 P AP 3 0,017 AE M 9 65 24 65 HC, 19RC 65HC, 24 65 9 M AE 0,017 3 AP P 0,305 3 ,0 P,PP4003AU74 44 C 1RCB +,DT+,PC++ ++, PEC +++, DET I BR 41 C 40 R HC, , 22 RC 36 RB 54 71 40 11 7 7 AOU ABM 0,033 0,108 4 4 APE,PAP E AP 0,105 4 0,160 5 ,1 P,A ,1 EN867 1R, 6RB 26 51 RC, 78 6 8 N BE 0,010 1 E AP API, 0,318 5 ,6 PE4003AU61 95 C 15HC 52RC, 79 16 6 AOU 0,013 4 E AP 0,265 4 ,7 PI P ,7 I51 88 13 5 24 TI S 57 12 0,078 TI S 6 APE I, AP 0,113 0,378 3 6 I AP 0,176 5 3 0,350 AP I 7 0,043 S TI, BE N 8 53 44 53 HC, 33RC 53HC, 44 53 8 RB 28 40 RC, N BE TI, S 74 0,043 13 7 9 I AP TRO AOU, 0,313 0,350 9 3 I AP , APE 0,38 5 0.390 0.515 0.218 0.423 0.398 0.168 0,153 Fish A,AE3000AM9 AEM 0.070 3 PAP, APE PAP, API species Major APE APE APE APE AP I 6 0,250 BE N 7 58 27 57 HC, 20RC 57HC, 27 58 7 N BE 0,250 6 I AP bocrrences Nb occur Others Nb 6 6 4 3 6 Diversity (Nb) HC Invertebrates Fish Density Cha oe bout Pouem Hie Nouméa Density Luengoni 0.100 0.108 0.753 0.020 0.083 teaubriand Népoui Bourail antal S rony P Invertebrates Site Thio nghène 0 - ao pce bH boi Dominant Abiotic HC Nb Major species 1 AOU ABM ,501 030,3 < <<0,3 0,15 < 0,15 o vrg high average low DIA DIA DIA , , 0505< 0,5 < <0,5 0,2 < 0,2 NEW CALEDONIA 931 59 8 N E < 8 <8 5 < < 5 02 <<4 40 < 20 < <40 < 20 - Ever Prosperity og ina4023A ,7 O 966 29 9 AOU 0,173 7 I AP 0,233 4 Donga Hienga as ase5015A ,A ,0 O,TO71 76 11 7 TRO AOU, 0,202 7 E AP I, AP 0,175 5 e pass e Fauss cfItrer5013A ,6 IA1 066 30 11 A DI 0,065 4 E AP 0,183 5 écif Intérieur R unoibs4025A ,0 IA R 15 C 2 FS 23 50 RC, 71 5 8 CRA A, DI 0,005 2 I AP 0,215 4 Luengoni2bis on ne4015A ,5 B,DA92 23 C 21RB RC, 39 72 22 9 DIA ABM, 0,058 7 E AP 0,135 4 Anse Bonne Grand R écif 8 0,400 AP I, AP E 5 0,068 ABM 9 37 60 34 HC, 43RC 34HC, 60 37 9 ABM 0,068 5 E AP I, AP 0,400 8 écif Grand R unoi ,0 PI3008B ,AM687 4R, 1FS 21 44 RC, 71 8 6 ABM N, BE 0,008 3 I AP 0,108 3 Luengoni1 inaa ,9 PI PE6015B 57 1R, 3SCB +,PEC BLA(ACA) C, E P I++, BR C S 13 61 RC, 71 15 8 N BE 0,135 6 E AP I, AP 0,193 5 Hiengabat Koulnoué 3 0,063 P AP 3 0,050 AE M 11 19 43 36 FS, 29SI 36FS, 43 19 11 M AE 0,050 3 AP P 0,063 3 Koulnoué Luecilla2 rial ,5 PI P4015D ,A 15 I 8SD S 18 50SI, 91 1 8 M AE A, DI 0,135 4 AP P I, AP 0,050 3 imault Gr l et ,2A ,AE7035AU82 16 C 25HC 67RC, 71 26 8 AOU 0,315 7 APE I, AP 0,72 9 Verte Ile oin 3 Koniène Nouville Ricaudy ot7028A 0,008 1 I AP 0,258 7 port é W aoo6045A ,2 B 0,028 2 I AP 0,415 6 Qanono Station antal2 S antal1 S iandé S Mbéré Signal Maitre injen P indaï Pi Moara Akaia Jinek Beco a y Cas 24 -0 10 > 5-10 2-4 ++ +++ ++ + 9 7 9 6 63 9R,36HC 39RC, 39 36 5 9 24 15 28 31 20 67 bDensity Nb 4 5 4 5 4 5 ,3 P ,0 O,BN82 73 26 8 BEN AOU, 0,508 8 API 0,235 6 3 0,305 P AP 3 0,017 AE M 9 65 24 65 HC, 19RC 65HC, 24 65 9 M AE 0,017 3 AP P 0,305 3 ,1 P,A ,1 EN867 1R, 6RB 26 51 RC, 78 6 8 N BE 0,010 1 E AP API, 0,318 5 ,6 PE4018AM71 13 B, 22 RC 36 RB 71 11 7 ABM 0,108 4 E AP 0,160 5 ,0 P,PP4003AU74 44 C 1RCB +,DT+,PC++ ++, PEC +++, DET I BR 41 C 40 R HC, 54 40 7 AOU 0,033 4 APE,PAP 0,105 4 ,6 PE4003AU61 95 C 15HC 52RC, 79 16 6 AOU 0,013 4 E AP 0,265 4 ,7 PI3013ST 25 24 57 12 TI S 0,113 3 I AP 0,176 5 3 0,350 AP I 7 0,043 S TI, BE N 8 53 44 53 HC, 33RC 53HC, 88 44 13 53 5 8 TI S N BE TI, S 0,043 0,078 7 6 APE I, AP I AP 0,378 0,350 6 3 ,8AE,A ,1 O, R 37 0R, 8RB 28 40 RC, 74 13 9 TRO AOU, 0,313 9 I AP , APE 0,38 5 Substrate 70 83 66 59 51 16 C 2F BRI+++,BLA(ACA)+,PEC+ 67HC, 12FS 21 0.390 0.515 0.218 0.423 0.398 0.168 0,153 Fish 57 HC, 17RC, 57 HC, 30 HC, 36RC, 30 HC, 32 RC,24HC 29 RC,28SD 38 SD,31HC 39 RB,27SD 26 FS,21RB A,AE3000AM9 AEM 0.070 3 PAP, APE PAP, API 4R RI+ L(C),D ,P C PE T, DE BLA(ACA)+, I++, BR 64 RC 72 RC 59 HC 0RC 50 R 81 RC 11 SC 15 SD species Major APE APE APE APE AP I 6 0,250 BE N 7 58 27 57 HC, 20RC 57HC, 27 58 7 N BE 0,250 6 I AP bocrrences Nb occur Others Nb 6 6 4 3 6 BRI+, BLA(ACA)+,DET+ RI+,P ,D T +, DE C ++, PE I BR RI+ L(CA) +, BLA(AC I BR 74 Density 0.100 0.108 0.753 0.020 0.083 ET+ RI+ I T+, BR DE BRI+, PEC+ BLA(ACA)+ Invertebrates ET C E P T, DE 0 - RI+++ BR Others BR I ++ I BR BRI++ C+ E P E + PEC RI+ I BR RI+ BR RI BR ------ao pce bH boi Dominant Abiotic HC Nb Major species 1 AOU ABM DIA DIA DIA 931 59 8 N E - 24 -0 10 > 5-10 2-4 etub inStatus tion urba Pert ++ +++ ++ + 63 9R,36HC 39RC, 39 36 5 9 7 9 6 9 +++ +++ +++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ + + + + + ++ ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + 24 15 28 31 20 67 Substrate satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory 70 83 66 59 51 16 C 2F BRI+++,BLA(ACA)+,PEC+ 67HC,12FS 21 average average average average good good good good good good good good 57 HC, 17RC, 57 HC, 30 HC, 36RC, 30 HC, 32 RC,24HC 29 RC,28SD 38 SD,31HC 39 RB,27SD 26 FS,21RB 4R RI+ L(C),D ,P C PE T, DE BLA(ACA)+, I++, BR 64 RC 72 RC 59 HC 0RC 50 R 81 RC 11 SC 15 SD BRI+, BLA(ACA)+,DET+ RI+,P ,D T +, DE C ++, PE I BR RI+ L(CA) +, BLA(AC I BR ET+ RI+ I T+, BR DE BRI+, PEC+ BLA(ACA)+ ET C E P T, DE RI+++ BR Others BR I ++ I BR BRI++ C+ E P E + PEC RI+ I BR RI+ BR RI BR ------etub inStatus tion urba Pert +++ +++ +++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ + + + + + ++ ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory average average average average good good good good good good good good NEW CALEDONIA

Appendix 3: Summary of the status of the stations sampled between 2003 and 2006 survey

Site Station Status 2003 Status 2004 Status 2005 Status 2005

Casy satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory Prony Bonne Anse satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory Akaia average average satisfactory Bourail Ile Verte good good good good Siandé satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory Moara satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory Thio Récif Intérieur average average satisfactory satisfactory Grand Récif satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory Jinek satisfactory good good satisfactory Santal Santal1 satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory Santal2 satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory average Luecilla2 satisfactory good Chateaubriand Qanono satisfactory good good good Wé port good satisfactory good good Luengoni1 average average average average Luengoni Luengoni2bis satisfactory average average average Grimault satisfactory average average average Népoui Pindaï good good good good Beco good good good good Pinjen good good good Pouembout Koniène good good good good Fausse passe good good good good Koulnoué satisfactory satisfactory satisfactory Hienghène Hiengabat good good satisfactory satisfactory Donga Hienga good good satisfactory satisfactory

75 NEW CALEDONIA Appendix 5. Threat Pollution Index for Marine-Based Appendix 4. Threat Index for Coastal Development omaHg eyLwVr o eimLwMedium Low Medium Very Low Very Low - High Nouméa ori eimVr o eyLwMdu o Medium Low Medium Very Low Very Low Medium - Bourail rn eimVr o ihMdu o High Low Medium High Very Low Medium - Prony ho-LwVr o ihMdu o High Low Medium High Very Low Low - Thio éoi-Mdu eyLwHg eyLwLwHigh Low Very Low High Very Low Medium - Népoui oebu eimVr o eyLwVr o o Medium Low Very Low Very Low Very Low Medium - Pouembout inhn eimVr o eyLwVr o o Medium Low Very Low Very Low Very Low Medium - Hienghène io eimVr o eyLwMdu o Medium Low Medium Very Low Very Low Medium - Lifou efAe iis on iprsMnsTuimCatieOverallScore Coastline Tourism Mines Airports Towns Cities Reef Area A) CoastalDevelopment ot,Vr ml Lclotor ot)Medium Shipping Lanes High Oil storagetanks,refineries Ports, Very small(Localoutboardboats) Ports, Small(Yachts andpersonalboats) High Ports, Medium(Fishingshipsetc, eg Port Villa) ships, etc,e.gSuva) Ports, Large(Containerships,tankers, fishing iis ouainoe 0,0 High Cities, Population over100,000 iis ouain5,0 0,0 eimMdu o Very Low Low Medium Medium Cities, Population 50,000–100,000 on,Pplto ne 000Mdu eimLwVery Low Low Medium Medium Towns, Population under50,000 Airports (inuse) Mines ors eot n iecnrsMedium Tourist resortsanddivecentres Any Coastline(shore) 4km away Closer than eimMdu eyLwVery Low Very Low Medium Medium High Low away Closer than4km Medium High High away 4 –10km ihMdu Low Medium High ihVr o Very Low Very Low High Low Very Low Very 76 away 10 -25km eyLwVery Low Very Low eyLwVery Low Very Low away 4 –10km o eyLwVery Low Very Low Very Low Very Low Very Low Low Very Low Very Low Very Low Medium Medium Very Low Medium Very Low Medium High High High away 10 –30km 25km away More than away 30 –50km NEW CALEDONIA

B) Marine-Based Pollution Reef Area Ports Oil Tanks / Wells Shipping lanes Overall Score Within 10km Lifou Medium Very Low Low Medium Hienghène Very Low Very Low Very Low Very Low Pouembout Very Low Very Low Low Low Népoui High Very Low Medium High Thio High Very Low Medium High Prony High High High High Bourail Very Low Very Low Very Low Very Low Nouméa High Medium High High

Appendix 6. Threat Index for Pollution and Sedimentation

High Medium Low Very Low Vegetation Large scale Permanent wetland Dense planted Dense natural Type croplands (Swamp) forest forest Urban and built-up Grassland Mixed Forest Areas with little Open shrubland Dense shrubland vegetation mixed with grass Cropland mixed with natural vegetation Small, dry islands with coconuts and salt bush Steepness of Steep Moderate Slight/Flat slope Contributing Deforestation Commercial Domestic factors Agriculture Agriculture Mining Commercial Domestic Livestock Livestock

Appendix 7. Threat Index for Artisanal Overfishing

Closer than 10km away 10 – 20km away More than 20km away Marine Protected Area within 10km Coastal High Medium Low Low population

77 NEW CALEDONIA Appendix 8. Fishing Threat Index for Destructive (trampling, excavation,harvesting) Direct coralbreakage Herbal Poison hmclPio Caieo hoo)Hg eimLwVery Low Low Medium High Chemical Poison (CyanideorChlorox) Dynamite Destructive Fishing D) Overfishing(Localfisheriesnotcommercial) E) DestructiveFishing(Poisons orblast) omaVr o eyLwVr o eimMedium Medium Very Low Very Low Very Low Nouméa ori eyLwVr o eyLwMdu Medium Medium Very Low Very Low Very Low Bourail Prony Thio éoiVr o eyLwVr o Low Very Low Very Low Very Low Népoui oebu eyLwVr o eyLwLow Very Low Very Low Very Low Pouembout inhn eyLwVr o eyLwLow Very Low Very Low Very Low Hienghène Lifou omaLow Nouméa Bourail Low1 Prony Thio Low1 Népoui Low1 Pouembout Score Hienghène Lifou Reef Area efAe yaieChemical Dynamite Reef Area eyLwVr o eyLwLow Very Low Very Low Very Low eyLwVr o eyLwLow Very Low Very Low Very Low eyLwVr o eyLwLow Very Low Very Low Very Low Low Low Low1 Low Poison MPAs withinthesite MPAs withinthesite MPA withinthesite Traditional management Traditional management Notes onMarineProtection ihMdu o Very Low Low Medium High ihMdu o Very Low Low Medium High ihMdu o Very Low Low Medium High ekMnhYear Month Week Severaltimes…….. Poison Herbal 78 raaeOverallScore Breakage Low Low Low Low Low Low (Highest recorded) Never NEW CALEDONIA

Acknowledgements

Aquarium des Lagons IFRECOR, Sébastien Faninoz Provinces Environment Authorities Marc Forêt Lifou Fun Dive, Bourail Sub Loisirs, Babou Dive Center Claire Garrigue

Koulnoué Diving, Népoui plongée, le lagon Club de Philippe Kaennel Koné, Photo Discount Isabelle Makeeff & ALL THE VOLUNTEERS Thierry Rochat The divers: Sébastien Sarramégna Thierry Baboulenne Sabrina Virly Nathalie Baillon

Anne Coindet Laurent Wantiez

Rémi Dodemont Christian Wehdeking

79 NEW CALEDONIA 2. 1.

C Gar M laur N 98851 N BP R4 U Dr GCRMN C laire Garrigue and Sabrina andSabrina laire Garrigue Virly niversity of Newniversity Caledonia of ew Caledonia onitoring facilitators: program . Laurent Wantiez rigue &Virlyrigue Consultants [email protected] ouméa ountry Coordinator: ountry CONTACTS 80 3.

sv N 98802 N BP 12681 Gar se A Sébast o [email protected] quarium des Lagonsquarium ew Caledonia [email protected] [email protected] rigue and rigue Virly consultants ien Sarramégna ouméa SAMOA ision v i D 81 eries h IN SAMOA 2007 IN SAMOA and Maria Sapatu is F Joyce Ah-Leong Samuelu Joyce Ah-Leong STATUS OF CORAL REEFS REEFS OF CORAL STATUS Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries Ministry of Agriculture and SAMOA EXECUTI C 1

2

3

4

ontents COUNTR Background Information CURRENT P 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 CURRENT RESOURCEUSE 3.1 3.2

3.3 3.4 3.5 4.1 T 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 H REATS TOCORALREEFS/MANGRO

V E SUMMARY Monitoring issues Monitoring methods Monitoring sites 2.4.3 2.4.2 2.4.1 R 2.5.1 Discussion Community resourceuse 3.2.3 3.2.2 3.2.1 Coral R Mangroves Marine Mammals Endangered species Integrated threatindex Coastal development P Sedimentation, nutrientenrichment andeutrophication Over fishing Destructive fishingandcoralharvesting Bleaching, coraldiseaseandpredators ollution esults Y INFORMATION

Invertebrates Fish andinvertebrate Substrate cover Substrate coverage Aquarium trade T Subsistence, ArtisanalFisheries H

ourism eef species YSICAL CONDITIONOFCORALREEFS

V ES/SEAGRASS

82

100 100 100 100 101 101 84 86 86 87 87 87 89 89 92 91 89 93 93 95 95 97 97 96 96 97 98 98 99 SAMOA 105 106 107 113 114 104 103 103 103 103 103 103 103 103 101 101

83

rust Institute (METI) TION EFFORTS A V H EALT

H

-based fisheries management programme -based fisheries management

ATIONS Matuaileoo Environment T Matuaileoo Environment Community for the Alepata and Safata districts Marine protected areas Coral reef related projects

urricane/tsunamis

NGOs efforts 5.3.1 Acts and legislations Government efforts 5.1.1 5.1.2 5.1.3 Outbreak of organisms Outbreak of

h

ACTS RECOMMEND FUTURE OF CORAL REEF

5.3 5.2 5.1 CURRENT CORAL REEF CONSER CURRENT 4.9 4.8

CKNOWLEDGEMENTS REFERENCES APPENDICES A CONT 7 6

5

SAMOA average fish density was 0.61 fish perm fish 0.61 was density fish average rot fish were the dominant fish families, and overall par- and surgeonfish fish,15%. striated ing Damsel anaverage 30%,with of followed by compris- algae predominant also was (abiotic) substrate living non- The 65.9%. at cover highest the with 42.8%, of cover coral average an showed regions eight of coverthe highest 65%. being 2006-2007survey The revealedperiod an average coral cover 55%, of with this for results Survey 2004. early in Heta Cyclone by damage after recovery coral reflected surveyed only three were visited from 2005-2006. although All three regions surveyed were sites) as regarded (also regions monitoring eight 2005-2007, During tion initiatives. conserva- and monitoring reef coral leading bodies government main two the are Meteorology and EnvironmentResource, Natural and Fisheries, and Agriculture of Ministries The basis. annual an on the node. Eight permanent sites are now monitored joined Samoa when 2001 in began monitoring reef West Pacific node extending over 490km over extending node Pacific West South the in area reef coral smallest the has Samoa cucumber species (black teat fish, density of 5m of density fish, teat (black species cucumber sea One some. in absent and regions all across low generally were families fish food Popular regions. eight the of one in observed each were fish damsel and fish butterfly fish, Soldier regions. the of jority other hand, several families were absent from a ma- ieiod f h pol o Sma Te oa esti- total The Samoa. of people the of livelihood the to integral remain resources marine Inshore across regionsfor all theentire monitoring period. invertebrates dominant the were urchins sea and EXECUTI 2 O the On . 2 Coral . V 2 ) E SUMMARY 84 ously occupied by local animals and plants (Person- previ- areas in meadows large forming are weeds (Vaiususea- Vaiala).and introduced villages These from Apia’s nearby coastal slopes toof harbour reef and arenicola species, seaweed invasive Two are localised. which of all species, invasive and bleaching coral overfishing, development, coastal include reefs coral to threats human-induced major The – June). (October season nesting the during ) imbricata lys (Eretmoche- turtle hawksbill critically-endangered the for densities nesting low of indication clear a is there years, the over done surveys orology,from Mete- and Environment Resource, Natural of try Minis- the Accordingstatus.to endangeredturtles’ of eggs from nests, are some factors attributed to the meat,forhandicrafts, collection shells the their and ed for commercial purposes. Over-hunting for their parks. Marinespecies are turtle continually exploit- national or reserves declared being areasmangrove most in resultedhave villages local in programmes conservation and awareness However, recent tion. reclama- and development coastal to mainly due years, the over depleted been have areas Mangrove USD127million. in2007of earnings record with boomed has attraction, visitor major a are reefs coral which industry,in tourism The lion. year was 126.47 tonesmetric valued at USD0.6 mil- same the in domestically sold and landed fisheries inshoretotal 56kg.The of consumptionannual age tones valued at USD34 metric million, and an aver- mate subsistenceof fisheries for 2006/07 was 14,000 hv extended have prostratum, Codium Codium SAMOA servation has assisted communities establish 20 in MPAs two districts and have also been involved in an ecosystem restoration project in areas that helpingwith by cor- Heta, Cyclone by affected were aware- community and replanting mangrove and al ness. Samoa has the oldest national marine reserve in the region. The Palolo Deep National Marine Reserve was established in 1974 and is one of the Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN) regions. monitoring 85 The Samoan government is leading coral reef pro- tection and conservation initiatives. Eighty-nine villages from both Savaii and the Upolu, two main islands, are part of the Fisheries Division’s Com- munity-based Fisheries Management Programme (CBFMP) which has produced village by-laws that are recognised by legal Samoa’s system. Forty nine villages have opted to establish fishreserves.In ad- dition, the Department of Environment and Con- al communication, Posa Skelton, December 2007). 2007). December Skelton, Posa al communication, SAMOA the smallest in the region comprising 120,000km comprising region the in smallest the of one is (EEZ) zone economic exclusive mile 200 Samoa (13-17 Samoa since the Year of the Coral Reefs in 1997. In 1974, In 1997. in Reefs Coral the Year of the since Samoa in ongoing been has monitoring reef Coral History Background (Skelton al. et 2000). rxmtl 10,000km proximately ap- of area totalcover a They rise. level sea sequent sub- and activities volcanic past to due nature, in fringing and limited are reefs coral country’s The Finance, of 2006). Department,tics Ministry (Statis- 2001 in census last the from 1.4% of crease in- population a 179,186, was population total sus, metre).square cen- per According 2006 (163 the to km sq per people 63 about of density population overall with 176,848 of population a has Samoa 26°C(79°F). temperature of annual average an with tropical is climate The m). origin and occupy land area of 2,935 km 2,935 of area land occupy and origin smaller islands. These are mountainous, other volcanic of and Savai’i, and Upolu islands, inhabited 0 S,171-173 2 and 50metres depth. The The depth. 50metres and 0 W) consists of twomain consistsof W) COUNTRY INFORMATION 2 (1,093 sq (1,093 2 86 1 an annual basis. on budget local through monitored are sites these sitesthese into annualits activities. Today, toringof moni- 2005,incorporated in FD ended the funding ed as GCRMN permanent monitoring sites. monitoring permanent GCRMN as ed sessments and, in 2002, 10 sites were initially select- as- and monitoring reef coral particular in training underwent taskforce This agency. coordinating as involvedNGOs initiatives, coralin reef FD the with and ministries government from formed was force Samoa joined the GCRMN in 2001. A national task- Solofa, 2007). & (Samuelu initiatives conservation marine other undertakes currently (MNREM) Meteorology and Environment Resources, Natural of Ministry the at (DEC) Conservation Environmentand of vision Di- The Programme. Management Fisheries Based Community- the through conservation reef coral promoting is Fisheries and Agriculture of Ministry the of (FD) Division Reserve. Fisheries Marine The National Deep Palolo the reserve, marine national a first up the set was nation to Pacific Island Samoa

When SAMOA rectly under the 50metre tape and one 1metre either either 1metre one and tape 50metre the under rectly side). 2metreTwenty-five intervals along the main transect were sampled in this manner yielding 75 sample points per transect. The cover of each cat- egory type can then be calculated as the percentage of transect. in each the 75 points it occupies The underwater visual census technique of the Belt Line Transect (BLT) method is used to assess the number of individual fish species and invertebrates present. The method involves counting selected fish species indicators The within the transect strip. same five transectsof 50m x 3m usedfor thesub- strate coverage assessment are employed. Prior to coral counts, fish arecounted first because of their mobility, followed by the sessile and slow moving invertebrates. laying person the of side either on swim people Two the tape and are 1.5 to 3metres from the tape. The same procedure is applied when counting inverte- brates on the The reverse. samplers record fish and invertebrates by tallying them as they swim along. The observers are also instructed to note signs of bleaching. coral In 2007, the fish andcount invertebrate was modi- fied to include length estimations. This first was done in the 2003 monitoring, but was later discon- tinued due to a lack additional ofpeople staff. Two have now joined the staff team carrying out fish included be will estimates These estimations. length year 06/07. fiscal report for in the monitoring 87 2 YSICAL CONDITION OF CORAL REEFS OF CORAL CONDITION YSICAL H CURRENT P CURRENT Benthic cover at each site was described using the 3 Point Intercept (3 Transect PIT) method. It pro- vided an estimate of the percentage cover of each substratum type on each transect. At 2 metre in- tervals along the transect three sampling points perpendicular to the transect were used (one di- Line transect methods were used to undertake base- undertake to used were methods transect Line line surveys and monitoring of the sessile benthic of reefs. coral organisms and coverage 2.2 Method The Department of Environment and Conservation and Environment ofDepartment The (DEC) is also monitoring its As MPAs. it is doing this in conjunction with communities, the pro- grammes are very basic. The DEC and the FD are yet to standardise their methods for better analysis and reporting purposes. Since funding from the Canada South Pacific Ocean Ocean Pacific South Canada the from funding Since Development Programme (CSPOD) ceased at the end of 2004, the Fisheries Division (FD) included annual monitoring in its activities for the 2005/06 in- was team monitoring the as However, year. fiscal Community’s Pacific the ofSecretariat the in volved (SPC) PROC-fishproject, only three siteswere as- 1). Table sessed during to this period (refer 2.1 Monitoring Issues 2.1 Monitoring bio- ofother status the and reefs ofcoral health The Sa- in fish and invertebrates as such diversity logical moa’s inshore waters were monitored periodically the last decade. over SAMOA Figure 1: Map showing survey sitesthecountry across Figure survey 1:Map showing 88 Bleached Deadcorals Abiotic Others Algae Coral Soft Acropora Non Acropora

SAMOA 2006 2005 2004 2005/06 2004/05 Bleached Dead corals Abiotic Others Algae Non Acropora Acropora ** ** *** *** *** Papa Saleapaga Vaisala Years Monitored Years 10-Apr-06 ** Deep *** ********** ******* 01/02 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 The 2005 monitoring was very poor given that only only that given poor very was monitoring 2005 The 2.4 Results cover 2.4.1 Substrate 2005 Monitoring three three sites were assessed. These represented North of West and the South Upolu, West and South West Savaii. 89 Safaatoa 16-Mar-06 Latitude 0 52.32 0 47.43 0 65.15 Figure 3: The various types of substrate recorded in the year 2006-2007 Figure 3: The various types of substrate recorded Figure 4: Comparison of live corals from three monitoring years 2004, 2005 and 2006 0 Longitude Figure 1: Substrate Coverage for the sites surveyed in 2005 surveyed for the sites Coverage 1: Substrate Figure S13°49.504’ W171°45.464’ Samatau 14-Mar-06 Palolo Palolo Siufaga Vaisala Papa Safaatoa Samatau Saleapaga Fagamalo 0 11-Aug-06 5-Sep-06 7-Sep-06 9-Nov-06 14-Nov-06 30-Jan-07 27-Apr-07 3-May-07 65.9 30.15 55.9 44.11 33.03 39.24 19.87 54.37 69.49 31.14 36.45 39.24 15.69 36.41 27.56 47.4 FagamaloDeep Palolo Papa Safaatoa Saleapaga Samatau Siufaga Vaisala North Upolu 0% Vaisala Safaatoa Samatau Fagamalo Siufaga Palolo 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0 100% 0% Figure2: The live coral comparison in eight sites for the monitoring periods, 2004 and the 2005. Figure2: The live coral comparison in eight 80 60 40 20 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 180 160 140 120 100 0 2006 2005 2004 100% 80 60 40 20 120 100 aisala SW Savaii S13°31’ 00.13’’ W171°40’ 24.39’’ * * * * * * * Sites In Samoa Palolo Palolo Deep SaleapagaSafaatoa SE Upolu SW Upolu S14°02.553’ S13°56.541’ W171°30.446’ W171°58.004’ Samatau NW Upolu S13°54.275’ W172°03.062’ PapaSiufaga SE SavaiiFagamalo North Savaii NW Savaii S13°46’ 23.17’’ S13°39’ 34.87’’ S13°26’ 19.40’’ W 172° 21’49.80’’ 58.29’’ W172°10’ W172°20’ 53.77’’ * * * * * V Note: Note: All monitoring was carried out in the back reef (near shore, lagoon, reef flat) indepths rang- ing from 2m to 5m mostly at low or medium tide. The 05/06 is referred to as the fiscalyears from the month of July to June similarly with mon- 2005 is 05/06 06/07 the purposes analysis For 07/08. and and 07/08 is 2007 is 2006 monitoring 06/07 itoring, monitoring. Figure2: The live coral comparison coral The live in eightFigure2: the monitoring for sites periods, 2004 and the 2005. Table 1: Table of survey the country across sites Table 1: Table 2.3.1 Monitoring sites 2.3.1 Monitoring SAMOA crease inlive corals (Samuelu &Tausa, 2004). in- 16% a exhibited since has damage, coral 19% incurred which Vaisalasite, The 15%. was cyclone the from corals damaged of average the since sites 10% (Figure 2). This is quite a recovery for the three been an overall increase in coral cover more of than has there monitoring, 2004 the with Compared damaged by showed a16%increase. the last monitoring period. The Vaisala site, severely comparedsiteswith three the of each for 10% than more of coralslive in increaseoverall an was There the foliose corals andthePorites sp. (Appendix 1). by followed common, most were branching pora In the live corals group, the sp, sp). Discosoma species zoanthid the of mainly consisted ‘others’ The group1). (Figure 7% just Vaisala with Safa’ato’awith 24%, the Samatau site 22% with and low to moderate was group algae The Vaisala. in 30% and Samatau in Safa’ato’a,27% in 23% with predominant also was group abiotic (non-living) The site. each in 20% than more with Acropora the particular in 65%), - (45% corals live with dominant was sites all coverfor substrate The Figure 3: The various types of substrate recorded of Figure intheyear 2006-2007 3: types The various Vaisala and Papa Fagamalo, sites. eight the all in The 2006 Monitoring 100 120 20 40 60 80 100% 2004 0 2005 2006 100 120 140 160 180 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 20 40 60 80 rnhn ws h ms common most the was branching Acropora Figure2: Thelivecoralcomparisonineightsitesforthemonitoringperiods,2004and2005. 0% 100% 0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% asl aataSmtuFgml ifg Palolo Siufaga Fagamalo Samatau Safaatoa Vaisala 0% aaaoPll epPp aataSlaaaSmtuSuaaVaisala Siufaga Samatau Saleapaga Safaatoa Papa Palolo Deep Fagamalo 94 11 64 92 56 64 75 47.4 27.56 36.41 15.69 39.24 36.45 31.14 69.49 593.55. 41 30 92 98 54.37 19.87 39.24 33.03 44.11 55.9 30.15 65.9 1Ag0 -e-67Sp0 -o-61-o-63-a-72-p-73-May-07 27-Apr-07 30-Jan-07 14-Nov-06 9-Nov-06 7-Sep-06 5-Sep-06 11-Aug-06 0 aoo ifg asl aaSfao SmtuSlaaaFagamalo Saleapaga Samatau Safaatoa Papa Vaisala Siufaga Palolo 14-Mar-06 Samatau Figure 1:SubstrateCoverageforthesitessurveyedin2005 0 Figure 4:Comparisonof livecoralsfromthreemonitoringyears2004,2005 and2006 Non-Acropora and Figure 3:Thevarioustypesofsubstraterecordedintheyear2006-2007 23 74 65.15 0 47.43 0 52.32 0 16-Mar-06 Safaatoa (Polythoa Deep Acro- Non- 10-Apr-06 Vaisala aaSaleapaga Papa 90 the macro (Appendix inSamatau algae 3). Vaisala,in and group its dominating algae turf the with algae of types recordedmost Samatau the and Safaato’a.recordedin was only sp thoa Both Vaisala and the and sp The most common coralline algae are the gae found in Samoa are algae and macro algae. The most common macro al- turf the are types algae found commonly most the sites. fromeight the However, frombelow, table the The algae group is among the dominating substrate (Figure 4). sites. other to compared cover coral low had site Siufaga The 2006. in percentage coral live in crease 2004. threeAll sites in assessed 2005 exhibited a de- to compared 15% than more of year this recovery moderate had sites Puleia i Papa Vaisalaand paga, crease, the particularly 2004 monitoring. The Salea- in- percentage overall an showed corals live and 2004, 2005 in monitorings two the to Compared at Papa (Figure 3)(Appendix 2). Vaisala,and and Faga- at nondominant-Acropora coral coverfoliose with live of percentages high relatively showed 2007 Monitoring cover in all, except the Siufaga site. The The site. Siufaga the except all, in cover coral good shows year this for cover substrate The Acropora Acropora Non Algae Others Abiotic corals Dead Bleached Actinotrichia sp. Actinotrichia zoanthid The 2004/05 2005/06 2004 2005 2006 tabulate dominant tabulate Acropora Sargasssum Sargasssum sp and Acropora Non Acropora Soft Coral Algae Others Abiotic coralsDead Bleached Protopaly- Padina sp. Halimeda Acropora SAMOA Bleached Deadcorals Abiotic Others Algae Coral Soft Acropora Non Acropora 2006 2005 2004 Acanthurus Acanthurus lineatus are the most . A drop in algae cover A in drop algae cover sp. Halimeda 2005/06 2004/05 Bleached Dead corals Abiotic Others Algae Non Acropora Acropora The fish and invertebratecount isconducted prior to the substrate count. There are several fish spe- cies used as indicator species depending on their abundance within a site. Major fish indicators as representation of fish and invertebrate abundance Fish Damsel 4. Appendix in summarised are site per Scaridae family the Pomacentridae, family the from and the species 9). (Figure sites in allabundant three fish highest the records Samatau sites, comparing In an However, metre. square per fish 0.83 with density metre square per fish ofdensity0.72 average overall is a good indication of this year for the fish popula- 10). (Figure area. any tion for Line Surgeonfish, Damsel, Of results, the combined Parrotfish, and Wrasses were themajor fish types found. The high numbers of the line surgeons and the mainlyparrotfish, is fish, juvenile an indication of their successful spawning which probably oc- curred two months prior to the assessments. The 2.4.2 Fish & invertebrate 2.4.2 Fish 2005 Monitoring over over two years occurred at Siufaga, Papa Saleapaga and Fagamalo. These decreases are not significant, 8). (Figure 10%. in at under coming pora sp) pora and the 91 Papa Saleapaga Vaisala 10-Apr-06 (Caule- Deep Safaatoa 16-Mar-06 0 52.32 0 47.43 0 65.15 Figure 3: The various types of substrate recorded in the year 2006-2007 recorded in the of substrate The various types Figure 3: Figure 4: Comparison of live corals from three monitoring years 2004, 2005 and 2006 years 2004, 2005 and of live corals from three monitoring Figure 4: Comparison 0 Figure 1: Substrate Coverage for the sites surveyed in 2005 Samatau 14-Mar-06 Palolo Palolo Siufaga Vaisala Papa Safaatoa Samatau Saleapaga Fagamalo 0 11-Aug-06 5-Sep-06 7-Sep-06 9-Nov-06 14-Nov-06 30-Jan-07 27-Apr-07 3-May-07 65.9 30.15 55.9 44.11 33.03 39.24 19.87 54.37 69.49 31.14 36.45 39.24 15.69 36.41 27.56 47.4 FagamaloDeep Palolo Papa Safaatoa Saleapaga Samatau Siufaga Vaisala 0% Vaisala Safaatoa Samatau Fagamalo Siufaga Palolo 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0 100% 0% Figure2: The live coral comparison in eight sites for the monitoring periods, 2004 and the 2005. Figure2: The live coral comparison 80 60 40 20 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 180 160 140 120 100 2006 2005 2004 0 100% 80 60 40 20 120 100 The algae groups consist mainly of coralline al- gae, turf and Theyseaweeds. seem predominant in Palolo Deep in moderate percentages. Vaisala had a small constant increase over the three years, the seaweeds of cover increased of mainly result The abiotic group has shown constant percentages over the years, except at the Samatau site where a moni- year’s this in recorded was drop considerable toring. It can be attributed to the high percentage different at varies this However site. this in of corals most in moderate to Samatu, in cover low from sites and the highest 7). at Saleapaga (Figure sites, The overall coral in cover three years has remained stable in all sites, except for a significant increase of 20% for the Samatau site in this monitor- year’s ing. The status of the Siufaga site, with the lowest percentage of live corals, remained consistent over 6). (Figure years three seems seems dominant at all sites, except for Safa’atoa where Acropora Non- corals dominate. The abiotic group dominates at sites with low coral cover such as Siufaga and Saleapaga. Fagamalo recorded the highest ever in coral ofcover 80%, with more than 50% The corals. Acropora being bleached Non- cor- Vaisa- als and are spot Papa bleaching in Fagamalo, mainly becausela, of the elevated growths of corals 5). (Figure at low exposed that are Figure 4: Comparison of live corals from three monitoring2005 and 2006 three years 4: Comparison from 2004, corals Figure of live SAMOA involved (Figure 12). reserves fish the in fisheries inshore the of recovery monitoring the food fish are targets as they indicate the sites (Appendix 4). of most within seen invertebrates of groups mon and urchin sea Figure 5:Substrate coverage for the2007monitoring This This modification was to provide more information 2003. in stopped being after resumed were tions estima- length fish the monitoring, year’s this In 2007 Monitoring fish/m 0.49 of average an with is moder- ate diversity and density fish the Overall months earlier. three spawning natural a of result the been have could It size. in centimetres seven to five averaging 100s, and 50s of schools huge Parrotfish in the and werethese species mostly Tooth the Bristle Surgeon mainly juveniles, were and at the time the of assessments, the assessments during identified fish The common. most the (Figure 11) are families Scaridae the and Acanthuridae the monitoring year’s this In 2006 Monitoring Figure 8:Algaegroupcomparisons inpastthreemonitoring Figure 7:Abioticgroupcomparisonsinpastthreemonitoring Figure 6:Livecoralcomparisonsinpastthreeyearsmonitoring Figure 5:Substratecoverageforthe2007monitoring Soft Coral Soft Algae Others Abiotic Deadcorals Bleached 2005 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007 2007 2005 2006 100 120 140 100 120 140 160 180 200 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 20 40 60 80 20 40 60 80 0 0 0 100% 20% 40% 60% 80% 0% aoo ifg asl aaSfao SmtuSlaaaFagamalo Saleapaga Samatau Safaatoa Papa Vaisala Siufaga Palolo aoo ifg asl aaSfao SmtuSlaaaFagamalo Saleapaga Samatau Safaatoa Papa Vaisala Siufaga Palolo 62 76 51 71 74 05 22 2.30 4.36 52.23 46.49 30.52 18.71 27.44 30.25 37.18 32.05 25.14 17.69 57.69 59.48 36.24 24.51 33 24 28 .11.11.31.820.9 10.52 13.78 5.13 15.63 25.13 10.51 18.21 6.41 5.39 12.82 13.84 22.44 21.27 33.33 37.76 aooSuaaViaaPp aataSmtuSlaaaFagamalo Saleapaga Samatau Safaatoa Papa Vaisala Siufaga Palolo 64 92 30 89 79 74 45.82 47.44 37.94 58.97 63.04 19.23 36.44 931.75.55. 41 92 33.03 39.23 44.11 55.9 54.35 19.87 29.3 ee h ms com- most the were Holothurians 77%2.7 38%53%1.1 51%51%10.52% 5.13% 4.36% 25.13% 18.21% 46.49% 18.71% 5.39% 30.25% 13.84% 32.05% 21.27% 17.69% 37.76% 59.48% 24.51% 0 .0 %00%00%00%0 .0 0% 0.00% 0.00% 0% 0.00% 3.07% 0.00% 5.90% 1.54% 2.56% 12.31% 0.00% 0.00% 2.56% 0.00% 0% 0.00% 1.28% 0% 0.26% 0.00% 3.33% 0.26% 0.00% 0% 4.62% 0.26% 0.00% 0% 0% 1.29% 0.00% aoo ifg asl aaSfao SmtuSlaaaFagamalo Saleapaga Samatau Safaatoa Papa Vaisala Siufaga Palolo 0 2 . For this year’s this For . 27.94 6.91 65.15 92 ing is 0.6 fish/m monitor- year’s this for average density, the fish In square per metre (Figuregrams 13). which was the assessed area. This is equivalent to 23 sp Scarus the and 150kg was Acanthuridae the for biomass estimated Acanthuridaethe and Scarus the again were fish common most and abundant most The fish reserves. the within stock fish the of biomass the regarding 2005-2007 Monitoring 2.4.3 Invertebrates h lw ouain f e ccmes n Samoa, in cucumbers sea of population low the proved further assessments two these from Results den’s Uppsala University, and the Fisheries Division. by a PhD student, Mr Hampus Eriksson, from Swe- co-conducted assessment extension an by followed was This invertebrate. the for mainly Division ies Fisher- the with team SPC the by out carried was assessment detailed a 2006 In 1997. since banned been has cucumber sea of exportation low. The be to found been has cucumber, sea the particular in Samoa, in population invertebrate the Generally was 0.66fish/m 30 30.26 23.07 0 46 22.06 24.61 2 (Figure 14). 2 , almost the same as last year which with 140kg in the total 6000m2 total the in 140kg with 23 47.43 52.32 2005 2006 2007 Acropora NonAcropora CoralSoft Algae Others Abiotic Deadcorals Bleached species. The 2005 2006 2007 0 66 81 0 2005 2006 2007 SAMOA 2007 2006 2005 0 2007 2006 2005 81 66 0 0 81 66 2007 2006 2005 Bleached corals Dead Abiotic Others Algae SoftCoral AcroporaNon Acropora 2007 2006 2005 0 52.32 47.43 2007 2006 2005 Bleached corals Dead Abiotic Others Algae SoftCoral AcroporaNon Acropora Exception is observed Exception in certain sites where is there Palolo namely substrate, abiotic and algae abundant Deep and Siufaga. The Palolo Deep site is near the which has the highest rate of River nutri- Vaisigano Siufaga environment. marine the towards influx ent has been a dredging site for the past decade and so, with strong waves, the corals in this lagoon area recover. to yet have is established, the reserve where Overall results show there has been slow coral re- covery since 2005 in most sites after cyclone Heta. This is a positive sign given the main objective for establishing fishreserves isto conserve and protect , including corals. Each site has its own unique marine environment. However, most have recorded high levels of live corals, algae and all sites. to be common rubble that appear to The fishcount andbiomass estimation in thisyear shows an overall good density of fish, particularly the food fish. The length estimation is a modifica- tion to give us a better view of the biomass of these purposeits serves certainly It reserves. our in stocks when comparing the catch landings in our local markets, and in providing an understanding of the biomass of the stock that we have in our reefs in 2007 2006 2005 93 24.61 22.06 0 23.07 30.26 52.32 47.43 Acropora and 65.15 , , the green fish 2 6.91 27.94 24.61 22.06 0 0 (Figure 15). This is very 23.07 30.26 2 Palolo Palolo Siufaga Vaisala Papa Safaatoa Samatau Saleapaga Fagamalo 0.00%1.29% 0% 0%0.00% 0.26% 4.62% 0%0.00% 0.26% 3.33% 0.00% 0.26% 0% 1.28% 0.00% 0% 0.00% 2.56% 0.00% 0.00% 12.31% 2.56% 1.54% 5.90% 0.00% 3.07% 0.00% 0% 0.00% 0.00% 0% , , and the brown sandfish with the 0 24.51% 59.48%37.76% 17.69% 21.27% 32.05% 13.84% 30.25% 5.39% 18.71% 46.49% 18.21% 25.13% 4.36% 5.13% 10.52% 2 29.3 19.87 54.35 55.9 44.11 39.23 33.03 36.44 19.23 63.04 58.97 37.94 47.44 45.82 Palolo Siufaga Vaisala Papa Safaatoa Samatau Saleapaga Fagamalo 65.15 37.7633.33 21.27 22.44 13.84 12.82 5.39 6.41 18.21 10.51 25.13 15.63 5.13 13.78 10.52 20.9 24.5136.24 59.48 57.69 17.69 25.14 32.05 37.18 30.25 27.44 18.71 30.52 46.49 52.23 4.36 2.30 Palolo Palolo Siufaga Vaisala Papa Safaatoa Samatau Saleapaga Fagamalo Palolo Palolo Siufaga Vaisala Papa Safaatoa Samatau Saleapaga Fagamalo

0% 80% 60% 40% 20% 100% 0 0 0 80 60 40 20 6.91 80 60 40 20 Acropora corals are found to have about the 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10

200 180 160 140 120 100 140 120 100 2007 2006 2005 2007 2006 2005 2007 2006 2005 Bleached corals Dead Abiotic Others Algae Soft Coral 27.94 Figure 8: Algae group comparisons in past three monitoring Figure 7: Abiotic group comparisons in past three monitoring Figure 6: Live coral comparisons in past three years monitoring Figure 5: Substrate coverage for the 2007 monitoring low indeed, making it a priority area for furtherpriority de- a for it making area indeed, low the Fisheries Division. by tailed monitoring Figure 6: Live coral comparisons coral 6: Live years monitoring in past three Figure Non Non same fair percentage of abundance. Shallow sites show good ofcoverage corals live due to good light penetration circulation. and good water 2.5.1 Substrate Coverage Coverage 2.5.1 Substrate with-substrate dominant the mainly are corals Live in the permanent monitoring sites. 2.5 Discussion From From our monitoring over the past three years, we have observed the low density of the invertebrates, in particular the most common species in our re- serves. The average density for the lollyfish over the three years was 0.05species/m Approximately 20 species of sea cucumber found in found cucumber ofsea species 20 Approximately Samoa are commercially viable. However, density of was one - for teat highly-valuedthe – black these 5 species per hectare. This was an indication of the level of scarcity of the species, making it both un- economical and undesirable for export (Friedman 2006). et al. particularly the commercially high-valuedparticularly species. the commercially 0.01species/m lowest lowest of 0.002species/m 0

Palolo Palolo Siufaga Vaisala Papa Safaatoa Samatau Saleapaga Fagamalo

0.00%1.29% 0% 0%0.00% 0.26% 4.62% 0%0.00% 0.26% 3.33% 0.00% 0.26% 0% 1.28% 0.00% 0% 0.00% 2.56% 0.00% 0.00% 12.31% 2.56% 1.54% 5.90% 0.00% 3.07% 0.00% 0% 0.00% 0.00% 0%

0

24.51% 59.48%37.76% 17.69% 21.27% 32.05% 13.84% 30.25% 5.39% 18.71% 46.49% 18.21% 25.13% 4.36% 5.13% 10.52%

36.4429.3 19.23 19.87 63.04 54.35 58.97 55.9 37.94 44.11 47.44 39.23 45.82 33.03

Palolo Siufaga Vaisala Papa Safaatoa Samatau Saleapaga Fagamalo

37.7633.33 21.27 22.44 13.84 12.82 5.39 6.41 18.21 10.51 25.13 15.63 5.13 13.78 10.52 20.9 36.24 57.69 25.14 37.18 27.44 30.52 52.23 2.30

24.51 59.48 17.69 32.05 30.25 18.71 46.49 4.36 Palolo Siufaga Vaisala Papa Safaatoa Samatau Saleapaga Fagamalo Palolo Palolo Siufaga Vaisala Papa Safaatoa Samatau Saleapaga Fagamalo 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 0 0 0 80 60 40 20 80 60 40 20 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 200 180 160 140 120 100 140 120 100 2005 2007 2006 2007 2006 2005 2007 2006 2005 Bleached corals Dead Abiotic Others Algae Soft Coral Figure 8: Algae group comparisons in past three monitoring Figure 7: Abiotic group comparisons in past three monitoring Figure 6: Live coral comparisons in past three years monitoring Figure 6: Live coral comparisons in past three years Figure 5: Substrate coverage for the 2007 monitoring Figure 5: Substrate coverage SAMOA Figure 7: three inpast Abiotic monitoring groupcomparisons larger average 30cm. size of (Appendix 5) in but numbers smaller in found all were ranidae, fish such as the Lethrinidae, Lutjanidae and theSer- reef commerciallarge reserves. The the juvenilesin the of abundance the indicated lengths averagefish the monitoring, 2007 the In data. landings catch the with data monitoringconsolidate and compare to use can we species food the target to shifted also have counts fish Our stocks. harvesting to relation Figure three inpast 8: monitoring Algae groupcomparisons Figure 8:Algaegroupcomparisonsinpastthreemonitoring Figure 7:Abioticgroupcomparisonsinpastthreemonitoring Figure 6:Livecoralcomparisonsinpastthreeyearsmonitoring Figure 5:Substratecoverageforthe2007monitoring Figure 8:Algaegroupcomparisonsinpastthreemonitoring Figure 7:Abioticgroupcomparisonsinpastthreemonitoring Figure 6:Livecoralcomparisonsinpastthreeyearsmonitoring Figure 5:Substratecoverageforthe2007monitoring Soft Coral Soft Algae Others Abiotic Deadcorals Bleached Soft Coral Soft Algae Others Abiotic Deadcorals Bleached 2005 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007 100 120 140 2007 2006 2005 100 120 140 100 120 140 160 180 200 100 120 140 160 180 200 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 20 40 60 80 20 40 60 80 0 20 40 60 80 0 0 0 0 0 100% 100% 20% 40% 60% 80% 20% 40% 60% 80% 0% 0% aoo ifg asl aaSfao SmtuSlaaaFagamalo Saleapaga Samatau Safaatoa Papa Vaisala Siufaga Palolo aoo ifg asl aaSfao SmtuSlaaaFagamalo Saleapaga Samatau Safaatoa Papa Vaisala Siufaga Palolo 62 76 51 71 74 05 22 2.30 4.36 52.23 46.49 30.52 18.71 27.44 30.25 37.18 32.05 25.14 17.69 57.69 59.48 36.24 24.51 33 24 28 .11.11.31.820.9 10.52 13.78 5.13 15.63 25.13 10.51 18.21 6.41 5.39 12.82 13.84 22.44 21.27 33.33 37.76 aoo ifg asl aaSfao SmtuSlaaaFagamalo Saleapaga Samatau Safaatoa Papa Vaisala Siufaga Palolo aoo ifg asl aaSfao SmtuSlaaaFagamalo Saleapaga Samatau Safaatoa Papa Vaisala Siufaga Palolo 62 76 51 71 74 05 22 2.30 4.36 52.23 46.49 30.52 18.71 27.44 30.25 37.18 32.05 25.14 17.69 57.69 59.48 36.24 24.51 33 24 28 .11.11.31.820.9 10.52 13.78 5.13 15.63 25.13 10.51 18.21 6.41 5.39 12.82 13.84 22.44 21.27 33.33 37.76 aooSuaaViaaPp aataSmtuSlaaaFagamalo Saleapaga Samatau Safaatoa Papa Vaisala Siufaga Palolo 64 92 30 89 79 74 45.82 47.44 37.94 58.97 63.04 19.23 36.44 931.75.55. 41 92 33.03 39.23 44.11 55.9 54.35 19.87 29.3 aooSuaaViaaPp aataSmtuSlaaaFagamalo Saleapaga Samatau Safaatoa Papa Vaisala Siufaga Palolo 64 92 30 89 79 74 45.82 47.44 37.94 58.97 63.04 19.23 36.44 931.75.55. 41 92 33.03 39.23 44.11 55.9 54.35 19.87 29.3 77%2.7 38%53%1.1 51%51%10.52% 5.13% 4.36% 25.13% 18.21% 46.49% 18.71% 5.39% 30.25% 13.84% 32.05% 21.27% 17.69% 37.76% 59.48% 24.51% 0 .0 %00%00%00%0 .0 0% 0.00% 0.00% 0% 0.00% 3.07% 0.00% 5.90% 1.54% 2.56% 12.31% 0.00% 0.00% 2.56% 0.00% 0% 0.00% 1.28% 0% 0.26% 0.00% 3.33% 0.26% 0.00% 0% 4.62% 0.26% 0.00% 0% 0% 1.29% 0.00% aoo ifg asl aaSfao SmtuSlaaaFagamalo Saleapaga Samatau Safaatoa Papa Vaisala Siufaga Palolo 77%2.7 38%53%1.1 51%51%10.52% 5.13% 4.36% 25.13% 18.21% 46.49% 18.71% 5.39% 30.25% 13.84% 32.05% 21.27% 17.69% 37.76% 59.48% 24.51% 0 .0 %00%00%00%0 .0 0% 0.00% 0.00% 0% 0.00% 3.07% 0.00% 5.90% 1.54% 2.56% 12.31% 0.00% 0.00% 2.56% 0.00% 0% 0.00% 1.28% 0% 0.26% 0.00% 3.33% 0.26% 0.00% 0% 4.62% 0.26% 0.00% 0% 0% 1.29% 0.00% aoo ifg asl aaSfao SmtuSlaaaFagamalo Saleapaga Samatau Safaatoa Papa Vaisala Siufaga Palolo 0 0 27.94 6.91 27.94 6.91 65.15 65.15 94 vesting of these species upto thesespecies now.vesting of precautionary approach closing of commercial har- the taken has and serious be to this considersment govern- This 1990s. early the in cyclones tropical stockcucumber neversea quiteour recovered from Fisheries Division in 2006. It has been reported that the with SPC the by out carried assessments tailed de- the by supported further was density. This low indicated have invertebrates of results Monitoring 30 30.26 23.07 0 46 22.06 24.61 30 30.26 23.07 0 46 22.06 24.61 23 47.43 52.32 23 47.43 52.32 2005 2006 2007 Acropora NonAcropora CoralSoft Algae Others Abiotic Deadcorals Bleached 2005 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007 Acropora NonAcropora CoralSoft Algae Others Abiotic Deadcorals Bleached 2005 2006 2007 0 0 66 81 0 66 81 0 2005 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007 SAMOA 2006 Wrasses Grouper Goat fish Soldierfish Parrot fish fish Surgeon Convict surgeon tooth Bristle fish Rabbit Emperor Damsel Butterfly fish Wrasses Grouper fish Goat fish Trigger fish Parrot fish Surgeon Convict fish Surgeon Line fish Rabbit Damsels fish Butterfly 2005 0.64 Safaatoa Samatau 14/03/06 age, age, people consumed finfish 2.8 times week. per in villages with Plans Fisheries Management People consumed more fish more frequently than those in villages without plans (3.0 times per week vs. 2.6). The frequency of consumption is higher on Upolu than on Savaii, and higher in villages that are far- ther away from Upolu. The per capita consump- tion is 59.4 kg per or year, 163 kg per The day. to- tal consumption per year is estimated at 10,508mt (7900mt for Upolu, 2608mt for Savaii). The aver- age market price for the 2005-6 year was $8.00 per kilogram. At this rate, the value of finfish Samoa’s subsistence fishery is approximately $ST (Samoan tala) 84 million. sardines, wahoo, cannedtuna, fish included Tinned mackerel. popular and the ever per times 4.5 fish tinned consuming reported People spe- mackerel canned fish, Tinned average. on week 95 3 0.83 Samatau 16/03/06 Safa’ato’a in the eight permanent monitoring sites in the 2006 monitoring 2 ) of the sample fish from the monitored sites in 2006 2 CURRENT RESOURCE USE RESOURCE CURRENT 0.69 Vaisala Siufaga Vaisala Papa Safaato’a Samatau Saleapaga Fagamalo Vaisala 10/4/2006 Vaisala Samatau Saleapaga PaloloDeep Safaatoa Papa Siufaga Fagamalo Deep Palolo 0 11-Aug-06 5-Sep-06 7-Sep-06 9-Nov-06 14-Nov-06 30-Jan-07 27-Apr-07 2-May-07 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 2005 0 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 600 500 400 300 200 100 Figure 12: The fish density (fish/m Figure 11: Fish abundance per 750m Figure 10: The fish density of the sample fish in the three sites assessed Figure 9: The abundance of the fish sample during the 2005 assessments Figure 9: The abundance of the fish sample during Figure 9: The abundance ofduring the fish sample 9: the 2005 assessmentsFigure One of the main survey highlights was consumption the results. Based on age and the gender, fish quantity of fish peopleconsumed varied. Onaver- 3.1 Community Resource Use Resource 3.1 Community A nationwide socio-economic study was under- taken in 2006 to assess the status of rural fisher- ies in Samoa. 939 households in 49 villages (26 on Upolu, 23 on Savaii) were interviewed about their household composition, income, education level, seafood purchasing and consumption habits, fish- Al- fish. sell they whether and catch, preferences, ing though this study incorporated data comparable to previous studies, it differed significantly from past surveys in conducted Previous Samoa. studies were composed of separate surveys for consumption, fishing, and selling, while currentthe study com- bined these various questionnaires into one and as a unit. surveyed the household SAMOA 2007). Tuaopepe,O. Tauaefa,A., Mulipola,A.,(Valencia,S., consumption fish of frequenciescomes, higher and in- fishing higher CPUE, increased of form the in efforts conservation their to benefits are real seeing (CBFMP) Program Management Based Fisheries Community the in participating villages the that indications clear provided study the tion, addi- In decades. few last the over observed trends the of many supported survey this of findings The purchase, or long term investment. larger a for availabledon’t cash they havethe cause be- amounts, larger in something buy to cheaper significantly is it when evenmoment, that at needs their fulfill to something of enough just buy often people flow. Poor cash limited having of result the This growing preference for canned fish may alsobe fisheachon tinned year ($ST87.4million total). year in Samoa, with almost $ST500 per person spent fresh fish. 13,268mt oftinned fish are consumed per surpassed consumption fish tinned time first the is tion of tinned fish is 75kgper year, or 206g/day.This $1.50 less than fresh fish).Theper capita consump- (about $6.59 is kilogram per price fish, its although fresh to alternative cost low a as viewed cifically, is Figure fishinthethree thesample sites 10: of assessed The fishdensity Figure 11:Fishabundanceper750m Figure 10:Thefishdensityofthesampleinthreesitesassessed Figure 9:Theabundanceofthefishsampleduring2005assessments Figure 12:Thefishdensity(fish/m 100 200 300 400 500 600 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0 2005 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1Ag0 -e-67Sp0 -o-61-o-63-a-72-p-72-May-07 27-Apr-07 30-Jan-07 14-Nov-06 9-Nov-06 7-Sep-06 5-Sep-06 11-Aug-06 0 Palolo Deep asl aaa aepg aooepSfao aaSuaaFagamalo Siufaga Papa Safaatoa PaloloDeep Saleapaga Samatau Vaisala 10/4/2006 Vaisala ifg asl aaSfaoaSmtuSlaaaFagamalo Saleapaga Samatau Safaato’a Papa Vaisala Siufaga Vaisala 0.69 2 ) ofthesamplefishfrommonitoredsitesin2006 2 intheeightpermanentmonitoringsites2006 Safa’ato’a 16/03/06 Samatau 0.83 96 fisheries to the population of Samoa. populationfisheries to the of is an indication of the huge importance of these two which USD) (34.2million million $ST85.5 some tal The value of these two fisheries in the year 06/07 to- Division, finfish(Fisheries 2007). made upof is value total this of percent fifty than MoreUSD). tonnes which is value as $ST1.5 million (0.6 million metric 126.47 is year06/07 the for outlets domestic atthe sold and landed fisheries inshore total The (Valencia56kg/yr al. et 2007). is person one for consumption average that means This USD). million (33.6 $ST84million to alent the year 06/07 is 13,666 tonnes,metric this is equiv- for fisheries subsistence the for landings total The destructive fishing practices. the inshore fisheries resources from over fishing and on strain a put also has changeHowever living.the for drive main the being money of result a as nal artisi- to subsistence from fishers of move sure but slow a been has There people. the of livelihood the for important very remainsarea inshore the within Samoa in fisheries artisanal and subsistence The 3.2.1 Subsistence, Fisheries Artisanal Species 3.2 Coral Reef 14/03/06 Samatau Safaatoa 0.64 2005 Butterfly fish Damsels Rabbit fish Line Surgeon fish Convict Surgeon fish Parrot fish Trigger fish Goat fish Grouper Wrasses Butterfly fish Butterfly Damsel Emperor Rabbitfish Bristletoothsurgeon ConvictSurgeon fish fish Parrot Soldierfish fish Goat Grouper Wrasses 2006 SAMOA 2006 Convict Surgeon fish Surgeon Convict surgeon tooth Bristle fish Rabbit Emperor Damsel Butterfly fish Wrasses Grouper Goat fish Soldierfish Parrot fish Wrasses Grouper fish Goat fish Trigger fish Parrot fish Surgeon Convict fish Surgeon Line fish Rabbit Damsels fish Butterfly 2005 0.64 Safaatoa Samatau 14/03/06 tion, Malaki Iakopo, November 2006). November Iakopo, Malaki tion, There are many small mangrove areas in Samoa which have all shown signs of degradation or de- struction from human activities. These are mainly disposal, rubbish clearing, and cutting uncontrolled land reclamation for housing and other develop- ments, and pollution. The Moataa mangrove area, occupied 9.1 for example, hectares in the 1970s but was reclaimed for a hotel project in 1990. This has the reduced area to mangrove 5 a hectares, 45% re- 1997). duction (Suluvale, Mangroves play a vital role in the coastal environ- as ment, they are shelters and nurseries for juvenile marine organisms. The trees also provide shelter The whole com- and nesting land for and sea birds. plex network of plants and mangroves provide a wide food web for both marine and land animals and humans. They are an ecological shoreline pro- tection and a buffer zone filtering theexcessnutri- our vulnerable entering reefs. from ents The government is taking the lead role in conserv- ing and protecting these ecosystems through regu- lations, by-laws and policies that safeguard any ex- harvesting in the future. cessive 97 0.83 Rhizo- Samatau , with the with , 2 16/03/06 Safa’ato’a in the eight permanent monitoring sites in the 2006 monitoring in the eight permanent monitoring sites in the 2 ) of the sample fish from the monitored sites in 2006 2 0.69 Vaisala Bruguiera gymnorrhiza and the Siufaga Vaisala Papa Safaato’a Samatau Saleapaga Fagamalo Vaisala 10/4/2006 Vaisala Samatau Saleapaga PaloloDeep Safaatoa Papa Siufaga Fagamalo Deep Palolo 0 Xylocarpus Xylocarpus moluccensis which is believed to 11-Aug-06 5-Sep-06 7-Sep-06 9-Nov-06 14-Nov-06 30-Jan-07 27-Apr-07 2-May-07 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 2005 0 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 600 500 400 300 200 100 Figure 12: The fish density (fish/m Figure 11: Fish abundance per 750m Figure 10: The fish density of the sample fish in the three sites assessed Figure 10: The fish density of the sample fish in Figure 9: The abundance of the fish sample during the 2005 assessments sample during the 2005 abundance of the fish Figure 9: The Figure 11: Fish abundance per 11: Fish 750m 2 in the eightFigure permanent monitoring in the 2006 monitoring sites 3.3 Mangroves Three species are found within Samoa; the be found only in a small one hectare of mangrove patch on the island 1993). ofCur- Savaii (Schuster, rently, the total estimated area of coastal swamps 10km than less is Samoa in mangrove and 3.2.3 Aquarium Trade Aquarium 3.2.3 no aquarium trade. is currently There phora samoensis, rarest Tropical Tropical weather, crystal sea, and beautiful corals are some of the main features of tourism in Sa- moa as they in The are the ofrest the South Pacific. natural environment in particular clear waters and what are Samoareefs visitors to has offer to healthy from around the world. Many locals are building traditional Samoan housing on beaches to attract and accommodate tourists, with the reefs as the main attraction. In 2007 tourism earnings reached USD) million (107 million of$ST282.3 heights new 6). (Appendix 3.2.2 Tourism largest largest area being the Bay Vaiusu which is also the communica- (Personal largest in Eastern Polynesia. SAMOA tified (Oremustified al. et 2007). 10 different species of whale and dolphin were iden- cetaceandensity. high had IslandSavaii addition In of northwest the that revealed survey This waters. Samoa in survey cetacean dedicated a conducted (MNRE) Environment and Resources Natural of Ministry the and (SPIWDP) Program Dolphin and Whale Island Pacific South the between collaborative project a when 2001 in until scarce were mammals marine on knowledge and Information alternative income for fishermen. local an provide and industry, tourism expanding the complimentwould that programme watching phin dol- and whale a developing for potential is there tion. However, the increase with in tourist numbers opera- watching dolphin and whale commercial a Pacific.cludingthe Currently, have not does Samoa in- world, of parts many in industry growing idly rap- a are operations watching dolphin and Whale Mammals 3.4Marine Figure fishof thesample (fish/m2) fromthemonitored 12: sites in2006 The fishdensity Figure 11:Fishabundanceper750m Figure 10:Thefishdensityofthesampleinthreesitesassessed Figure 9:Theabundanceofthefishsampleduring2005assessments Figure 12:Thefishdensity(fish/m 100 200 300 400 500 600 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0 2005 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1Ag0 -e-67Sp0 -o-61-o-63-a-72-p-72-May-07 27-Apr-07 30-Jan-07 14-Nov-06 9-Nov-06 7-Sep-06 5-Sep-06 11-Aug-06 0 Palolo Deep asl aaa aepg aooepSfao aaSuaaFagamalo Siufaga Papa Safaatoa PaloloDeep Saleapaga Samatau Vaisala 10/4/2006 Vaisala ifg asl aaSfaoaSmtuSlaaaFagamalo Saleapaga Samatau Safaato’a Papa Vaisala Siufaga Vaisala 0.69 2 ) ofthesamplefishfrommonitoredsitesin2006 2 intheeightpermanentmonitoringsites2006 Safa’ato’a 16/03/06 Samatau 0.83 98 eventually becoming extinct. species turtle marine resultin will suchpractices of and turtles caught for their shells. The continuation eggs, of harvesting gear, fishing in by-catch dental inci- degradation, habitat practices, conservation has been accelerated by the weakening of traditional populations turtle in decline the that believed is It inlong linefishinglines.gled (Figure 15). entan- found been only has ) coriacea (Dermochelys turtle leatherback the while foraging, found monly mydascom-are ) (Chelonia Samoa. Greenin turtles nests that species only the June).is hawksbill– The ) chelys imbricata during its nesting season (October (Eretmo- turtle hawksbill critically-endangered the there is a clear indication of low nesting densities for years, the over surveys MNRE toAccording status. endangered their to contributing factors some are from handicrafts,nests eggs meat, of collection and for shells their for Over-huntingpurposes. mercial com- for exploited continually are turtles Marine 3.5 Endangered species 14/03/06 Samatau Safaatoa 0.64 2005 Butterfly fish Damsels Rabbit fish Line Surgeon fish Convict Surgeon fish Parrot fish Trigger fish Goat fish Grouper Wrasses Butterfly fish Butterfly Damsel Emperor Rabbitfish Bristletoothsurgeon ConvictSurgeon fish fish Parrot Soldierfish fish Goat Grouper Wrasses 2006

SAMOA length (cm) length apa and Siufaga) 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 2005 2006 2007 aisala, Fagamalo) V ES/SEAGRASS Overall Threat Index Score

V

ae

d

i

n

ri

h Let 3 Biomass Av.Length Destructive Destructive Fishing Low Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low 2007 2006

sea urchin

ae

d

0 ri t

ocen l

Ho

e

Artisanal Over-fishing ida Low Low Low Low 2003-04 2005-06

SE Savaii - Southeast Savaii (P SE Savaii - Southeast Savaii near the is located which Deep site The Palolo heart of and ports subject town site is the only the to its proximity to due threat moderate to River, main portVaisigano of Samoa and the marine Apia’s to the principal nutrient provider threats low subject to are Other sites environment. from away furtherreserves and are fish as they are tr N Upolu - North Upolu (Palolo Deep) North Upolu (Palolo N Upolu - Upolu (Saleapaga) SE Upolu - Southeast Upolu (Safa’ato’a) SW Upolu - Southwest NW Upolu - Samatau ( N Savaii - North Savaii

2 n ce 99 4

6

Poma e Abandoned nests Hatched nests

Source:Momoemausu et al, 2006

llida brow nsandfish u M igh

Pollution and Pollution Sedimentation H

0

ae Nests

id 15

n

a

r Ser igh Marine based Pollution H greenfish REAT INDEX REAT

H 46 Labridae Nests Undetermined

79 e

Development

urida

Figure 16: Turtle activities for the years 2003-04 and 2005-06 th

an

c A 23 lollyfish Tracks ERALL: INTEGRATED T ERALL: INTEGRATED 1.110.55 0.83 0.56 0.49 0.61 0.29 0.74 0.49 0.58 0.95 0.63 0.33 0.38 0.76 0.70 67 V

Vaisala Samatau Saleapaga PaloloDeep Safatoa Papa Siufaga Fagamalo

O AreaReef Coastal aridae N Upolu Medium SE Upolu Medium Low Low SW Upolu Medium Low Medium Low N Savaii Medium Low Low SE Savaii Medium Low Low c

S

REATS TO CORAL REEFS/MANGRO TO CORAL REATS # 0 H 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0.00 0 2007 2006 1.80 1.60 1.40 1.20 1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 0.00 80.00 60.00 40.00 20.00

160.00 140.00 120.00 100.00

0.1 Biomass (kg/6000m Biomass )

T (fish/m Density 2 2) 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.12 Figure 13: Total fish biomass in kilograms in 6000m2 (area assessed) and average length from all sites in the length all sites from assessed)average fish in 6000m2 (area biomass in kilograms and Total 13: Figure 2007 monitoring Table 2: Overall Integrated Threat Index of the GCRMN permanent Index Threat sites 2: Overall Integrated Table 4.1 Integrated Index Threat An Integrated Threat Analysis was carried out us- ing a modificationof the “Reefs at Risk” methods. Modificationsreflect localconditions in the small Island states of the Southwest PacificNode, where available, not often is information technical detailed regions other in apply not may that threats where or may exist. In this analysis, potential threats to reef gathered is data where country the of areas in health are assessed in five categories (Appendix 7a-e) and then integrated into a single threat score. The fol- lowing is the key to sites that have undergone this assessment. threat Figure 15: The estimated density of the most common invertebrates sampled during the past three years monitoring Figure 14: The fish density of the sample fish from the monitoring in 2006 and 2007 Figure 13: Total fish biomass in kilograms in 6000m2 (area assessed) and average length from all sites in the 2007 monitoring Figure 13: Total fish biomass in kilograms in 6000m2 (area SAMOA Figure 15:Theestimateddensityofthemostcommoninvertebratessampledduringpastthreeyearsmonitoring Figure 14:Thefishdensityofthesamplefrommonitoringin2006and2007 Figure 13:Totalfishbiomassinkilograms6000m2(areaassessed)andaveragelengthfromallsitesthe2007monitoring constructions. developments nearthesesites are theseawall any major developments. mainminor The coastal in2006and2007 Figure fish thesample from themonitoring 14: of The fishdensity hs olto mil ed u o te oa reefs. coral the on up ends mainly pollution this of product end The dumps. waste as used still are riversides and drains However,swamps, mangrove upcampaigns. clean and landfills users, chemical for licences issuing instance, For chemicals. other and pesticides of use regulate and disposal waste poor control to initiatives many been have There 4.3 Pollution landowner. per permit single a of issuing the through done is This more. no and land his/her of acre ¼ a only reclaim to landowner a allowing by coasts, of ing reclaim-controlonsome governmentimposed has The expansion. or development home or business for coastlines some of reclamation been also has There plants. coastline the and beds seagrass of al coastal area. These include erosion from the remov- the on impacts negative have also they However cyclones. of effects erosion,the in fromfurther and coastline the protect to seawalls of construction the are areas coastal in developments major The 4.2 Coastal development

0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.12 Density (fish/m 2) Biomass (kg/6000m 2) 0.1 100.00 120.00 140.00 160.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 2006 2007 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 0 0.00 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0 # S c aridae asl aaa aepg aooepSftaPp ifg Fagamalo Siufaga Papa Safatoa PaloloDeep Saleapaga Samatau Vaisala 67 .505 .107 .806 .80.70 0.76 0.38 0.33 0.63 0.95 0.58 0.49 0.74 0.29 0.61 0.49 0.56 0.83 0.55 1.11 Tracks lollyfish

23 A c an th Figure 16:Turtleactivitiesfortheyears2003-04and2005-06 urida

e 79 et Undetermined Nests Labridae 46 greenfish

Ser ra n

15 id

Nests ae 0

M u

rwnsandfish brow llida Source:Momoemausu etal,2006 100

bnoe et Hatchednests Abandoned nests e management andby-laws. programmes community-base and awareness by reduced being is littering and dumping from pollution Marine tem intherainy season. which also does not have a well-defined sewage sys- country a for considerations important are These of fishing is carried out in the reef area, with 42% with area, reef the in out carried is fishing of 86% that showed survey economic social recent A 4.5 Over fishing tion. eutrophica- and sedimentation to contribute that mouths, river than other outlets, unknown many are there Henceplace. in put been not have tanks) and sewage tion drainage systemsgood (only septic addi- In reefs. coral surrounding the into washed are sewage raw and fields, agricultural from ticides (Novemberseason and April)excess nutrients, pes- rainy the during Therefore considerably. declined opment and deforestation this percentage may have devel- increasing (Iakopo,With2006). erosion soil to leading and habitats wildlife reducing is estation Although 48 per cent of the island is forested, defor- ment andeutrophication 4.4 Sedimentation, enrich- nutrient Poma 6

ce n

2 tr 2005-06 2003-04 ida e

Ho locen

tri 0 d ae sea urchin sea 2006 2007 Av. Length Av. Biomass 3

Let h ri n id ae 2007 2006 2005 0 5 10 15 20 25 30

length (cm)

SAMOA length (cm) length

30 25 20 15 10 5 0

2005 2006 2007

ae

d

i

n

ri

h Let 3 Biomass Av.Length 2007 2006

sea urchin

ae

d

0 ri t

ocen l Ho

Acanthaster Acanthaster plancii from 2005 to 2007. On

e

ida 2003-04 2005-06

tr 2 n

, christmas tree hydroid, one of one hydroid, tree christmas Pinnariadisticha, ce

6 Poma

No No hurricanes or tsunamis hit Samoa 2005 and 2007. between of4.9 Outbreak organisms There was no outbreak of crown-of-thorns starfish (COTS) Har- Apia the withinsurvey recent a hand other the spe- invasive marine several identified has area bour cies. These introduced species are often misinter- preted as new and curious for discoveries, instance the 4.8 Hurricane/tsunamis Skel- and (South survey the in identified species the ton, 2007). These species are often more resilient hence of food, terms speciesand localin than space the marine to biodiversity. a threat they are ofMany these species are brought into the Samoan Archipelago from places as far away as the Carib- bean, Western Atlantic, Australia and the . Shipping is the likely cause of their intro- past monitoring data this has increased from 4.9% (2003) to 26.4% in 2004. Bleaching in these spots is associated mainly with neap tides August around 2004 for when damage was the re- except year, each Heta. ofsult Cyclone e Abandoned nests Hatched nests

101 Source:Momoemausu et al, 2006

llida brow nsandfish u M

0

ae Nests

id 15

n

. 2007). 2007). al. et a r Ser greenfish

46 Labridae Nests Undetermined

root root have been banned 79

e

urida Derris Figure 16: Turtle activities for the years 2003-04 and 2005-06 th

an

c A 23 lollyfish Tracks 1.110.55 0.83 0.56 0.49 0.61 0.29 0.74 0.49 0.58 0.95 0.63 0.33 0.38 0.76 0.70 67

Vaisala Samatau Saleapaga PaloloDeep Safatoa Papa Siufaga Fagamalo

aridae

c

S # 0 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0.00 0 1.80 1.60 1.40 1.20 1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 0.00 2007 2006 80.00 60.00 40.00 20.00

160.00 140.00 120.00 100.00 0.1 Biomass (kg/6000m Biomass ) Density (fish/m Density

2 2) 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.12 Figure 15: The estimated density 15: sampled duringFigure of the most common invertebrates the past three years monitoring 4.7 Bleaching, coral disease coral and 4.7 Bleaching, predators the in included also are observations corals Bleached substrate assessment of monitoring sites. The past three years (2005-2007) puts bleaching of branch- with comparison In 15.5%. at corals foliose and ing With With the expansion of the community-based fish- eries management programme in conservation Samoa, efforts by and the DEC, there has been widespread awareness of the negative impacts of destructive fishing andcoral harvesting. Dynamite fishing and use of 4.6 Destructive fishing and coral 4.6 Destructive fishing and harvesting This is an indication of over fishing compared to in Samoa. resources coastal the limited of the average household containing at least one fisherman. The catch per uniteffort from 1.8kg/hr in 1990, to 2.1kg/hr in 1997 and most recently has (Valencia 2007 in 2.24kg/hr to increased under Fisheries Regulations 2005 leading to a re- duction in reported cases. However it is believed there are still minor infringements in some places amongst subsistence fishermen. Coral harvesting 1997. been banned since and exportation have Figure 15: The estimated density of the most common invertebrates sampled during the past three years monitoring Figure 15: The estimated density of the most common Figure 14: The fish density of the sample fish from the monitoring in 2006 and 2007 Figure 14: The fish density of the sample fish from the Figure 13: Total fish biomass in kilograms in 6000m2 (area assessed) and average length from all sites in the 2007 monitoring and average length from in 6000m2 (area assessed) fish biomass in kilograms Figure 13: Total SAMOA Figure 15:Theestimateddensityofthemostcommoninvertebratessampledduringpastthreeyearsmonitoring Figure 14:Thefishdensityofthesamplefrommonitoringin2006and2007 Figure 13:Totalfishbiomassinkilograms6000m2(areaassessed)andaveragelengthfromallsitesthe2007monitoring

0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.12 Density (fish/m 2) Biomass (kg/6000m 2) Figure 16: Turtle for 2003-04and2005-06 theyears activities coastal nearby of slopes reef on growing are and harbour Apia from moved now have prostratum species particular Two harbours. the in found are most as duction 0.1 100.00 120.00 140.00 160.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 2006 2007 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 0 0.00 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0 # S c aridae asl aaa aepg aooepSftaPp ifg Fagamalo Siufaga Papa Safatoa PaloloDeep Saleapaga Samatau Vaisala 67 .505 .107 .806 .80.70 0.76 0.38 0.33 0.63 0.95 0.58 0.49 0.74 0.29 0.61 0.49 0.56 0.83 0.55 1.11 Tracks lollyfish

23 A c an th Figure 16:Turtleactivitiesfortheyears2003-04and2005-06 urida

and arenicola Codium e 79 et Undetermined Nests Labridae 46 greenfish

Ser ra n

15 id

Nests ae 0 Codium

M u

rwnsandfish brow llida Source:Momoemausu etal,2006

bnoe et Hatchednests Abandoned nests e 102 Poma 6

and Skelton, 2007). (South plants and animals local by occupied ously previ- areas in meadows large forming are weeds (Vaiususea- Vaiala).and introduced villages These ce n

2 tr 2005-06 2003-04 ida e

Ho locen

tri 0 d ae sea urchin sea 2006 2007 Av. Length Av. Biomass 3

Let h ri n id ae 2007 2006 2005 0 5 10 15 20 25 30

length (cm) SAMOA TION EFFORTS TION A V 5.2 Acts and Legislations Acts 5.2 The conservation, protection and management of coral reefs is the responsibility of the Fisheries Di- vision and the Division of under Environment, the Environment of Division the and 1988 Act Fisheries 1989. Act and Conservation 5.3 NGOs Efforts Trust Environment 5.3.1 Matuaileoo (METI) Institute The METI has been assisting with coral replanting been has of coral restoration The villagereserves. in experts by in this NGO. undertaken local communities to manage and protect their en- vironment. The FD is assisting the villages within their CBFMP programme with the preparation of proposals, and awareness for coral reef rehabilita- service technical provides also FD The projects. tion through periodic monitoring of the resources and implementation of physical restoration of corals if same the providing also is DEC The required. is this assistances to the villages within their MPA pro- grammes. The Cyclone Emergency Recovery Project, a gov- ernment initiative, is currently coordinated by the Its main the DEC. objective is resilience to improve of infrastructural assets, the livelihoods of the in- habitants, and ecosystems against natural hazards the activitiesinclude main Its Heta. Cyclone as such restoration of coastal ecosystems as soft solutions and the upgrading of drainages or crossings from areas mangrove to the sea as major Eight work. vil- lages were selected for this ecosystem restoration, including replanting of corals and mangroves, im- proving community awareness, and upgrading of start- years four for is project The systems. drainage 2008. in June 2004 and ending ing in June 5 103 CURRENT CORAL REEF CONSER CORAL CURRENT The United Nation Development Program (UNDP) Program Development Nation United The is coordinating a small grant aid programme from USD1,500.00 to a maximum of USD26,000.00 for 5.1.3 Coral Reef Related Projects Reef5.1.3 Coral Related The DEC undertakes annual monitoring community-based to assess the current status of the ma- rine resources within the respective no-take zones. These surveys involve community volunteers as part of their contribution to the management and ofprotection the area. The Districts of Aleipata and Safata their established marine environment as protected areas 1999. These in include 11 villages from Aleipata and col- in districtswork Both Safata. from villages nine laboration with the DEC so that their marine bio- Manage- sustainably. used and protected is diversity developed been have by-laws village and plans ment protect- the within faced issues/problems address to them. address action to and appropriate ed areas, 5.1.2 Marine Protected Areas for the for Areas 5.1.2 Marine Protected and Safata DistrictsAleipata 5.1.1 Community-based Fisheries5.1.1 Community-based Programme Management The Fisheries Division Community-based Fisheries Management Programme (CBFMP), which began in 1995, now covers 89 villages on both Savaii and AllUpolu. of these villages have produced by-laws that are recognised by Samoa’s legal system. these 89 villages, Of49 have opted to establish fishre- and assessed are reserves 20 year, fiscal Every serves. re-assessed including the eight permanent sites for villagethe assist to is programme The GCRMN. the communities with management measures and oth- er necessary conserve actions manage, to effectively resources. coastal limited their and protect 5.1 Government Efforts 5.1 Government SAMOA consistently monitors our reefs and provides up-to- that system monitoring proper a and resources, these of status the show clearly that maps coastal Samoa’s of profile resources, with detailed coastal a be will there years, 10 within We that confident are growth. coral thus and temperatures affect certainly will els sealev- andlimitedthe reefsrising and are fringing surelywill have an impact on Samoa’s reefs. Already future the in levels sea in increase suspected The FUTURE OFCORALREEF 104 6 reef protectionreef andconservation. coral in communities of participation 100% have to determined are we protection,so reef include to drafted being is fisheries on approach ecosystem The another. or way one in reefs our of servation con- and protection the in participate to Samoa of whole the expect weimportantly, most Lastly,and reefs.tion of date assistance with decision-making on the protec- H EALT H SAMOA Biodiversity ofBiodiversity reef resources Samoa is still without adequate knowledge of its effortthe by a combined therefore reef biodiversity, Ministriestwo is in- necessary collect and collate to formation for the establishment of a proper store or collection of information. The Division of En- vironment has started its while coral collection, the Fisheries Division has a collection from the early 80s which is now being revised and properly docu- using a database. mented Community involvement Community It is important to always have the support of the local communities for the successful monitoring ofand protection The reeflocal any people project. authorityand of the own, their as viewresource the matai (chiefs) provides the enforcement necessary in- Their managing resources. these successfully for volvement will certainly make conservation efforts succeed. to likely and more easier 7 105 RECOMMENDATIONS The signing of a memorandum of understanding suc- a was 2006 in agencies two the between (MOU) cessful move towards working together to protect the Thisreefs. MOU is designed for the coral reefs, to- was a step in particular It reef coral monitoring. wards standardisation of our monitoring activities recommended, is It sharingofthe and information. that therefore, the two agencies use this MOU and work collaboratively in standardizing monitoring and reporting. analysis methods better for Better collaboration from two lead- two collaborationBetter from agencies ing government Since Since 2004, concerted efforts have been made by both the MAF and MNREM to document the bio- diversity of Samoa’s marine resources. Assistance from international and regional organisations has enabled Samoa to respond to some of the recom- mendations of the 2004 report. The following are ofsome recommendations: those SAMOA ..es, Drcoy f elns n Oceania. Scott, in Wetlands of In Directory A Samoa. D.A.(eds), Western 1993. Schuster,C. Report. Unpublished. Heta.Cycloneafter Samoa in Reefs Coral of Status Samuelu.J.I, Tausa, N. 2004 Summary Report on the tions, University theSouth Pacific, of Suva. Publica- IPS 2004, Pacific: Southwest the in Reefs 2004’ Samoa Samuelu,J.I., Solofa, A. Status Coral ‘The of Reefs in Prog Ser (2007)336:275-289. identificationvidual and genetic diversity. Mar Ecol indi- by revealed Pacific South the in communities dolphin spinner insular among interchange and OremusM,PooleD, MM, Steel CS.BakerIsolation ment. Report. Unpublished. Assess- Status Fishery Cucumber Sea Samoa 2006. Friedman,K., Hampus,E., Pakoa,K., Lasi,F., Solofa,A. Agriculture of andFisheries, Samoa. Ministry 07, 06-June July Report Annual Division Fisheries Finance, Samoa. Government of of Ministry Statistics, of Department 2006. count, population preliminary on Report 2006. Anon. uuR (d 2007. (ed) Sulu,R. in tts f Coral of Status REFERENCES 106 07 Sma ihre ScoEooi Report 2006-07. Report. Unpublished. Socio-Economic Fisheries Samoa 2007. Tuaopepe,O. Tauaefa,A., Mulipola,A., Valencia,S., 86:45-63 dioactivity UpoluIsland,Samoa. basin, River Falefa the in rate (2006) deposition Sediment S. Garimella R.A., Kostachuk JP., Terry ography andEnvironmental Studies. Ge- of Department Adelaide, of UniversityThesis, PHD Samoa. of environment coastal the altering in contaminants of role The 1997. E.T. Suluvale, Nova Hedwigia, 132. 350pgs.reau. ic,Emphasis on the with Apiadistrict. Book, Series: Samoan Archipelago,the of rine Algae Pacif-South Ma- Benthic P.2007. The Skelton, and G.R. South Caledonia. New Vata.Noumea, Anse Symposium, Regional – Initiative Reef Coral International to Report Samoa. of Resources Marine and Reefs Coral the of Status Skelton,P., Bell,L.J., Mulipola,A., Trevor,A.2000. Bureau, and Asian wetland bureau, pp427-444. Research Wetlandsin Waterfowland International Journal of Environmental Ra- Environmental of Journal The SAMOA 0 0 0 0 19 5.1 1.8 1.7 0.8 6.2 31.5 0 0 0.32 1.28 0.32 8.34 1.60 2.56 0.65 8.34 9.94 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.54 0 0 0 0.26 0 0.26 4.1 18.2 9.24 0.76 0.52 19.24 0 0 0 0 0.26 4.1 2.3 8.21 0.51 0.51 0.26 0.51 0.51 11.03 19.49 107 0 0 0.51 0.25 2.30 0 0 0 2.06 0 36.92 0 0 0 0 0 APPENDICES 0 0 27.2 3.33 0.52 1.79 0 0.3 1.79 0 0 3.59 4.62 1.03 0.26 20 15.6 7.69 6.67 18.72 35.39 20.26 5.90 5.4 3.33 17.95 12.30 1.28 4.9 0.27 18.72 2.06 1.28 0.25 0.51 65.15 47.32 52.32 30.15 54.35 55.90 44.11 39.24 33.03 65.90 Vaisala Samatau Safa’ato’a 0 0 0 0 0 5.77 4.49 0.96 0.32 2.56 5.77 19.87 Coral Mushroom Coral Submassive Coral Massive Coral Foliose Coral Branching Coral Encrusted Acropora Encrusted Acropora Submassive Acropora Digitate Acropora Tabulate TOTAL (%) TOTAL CORAL TYPES Acropora Braching LONGTERM SITES LONGTERM TOTAL (%) TOTAL Coral Mushroom Coral Submassive Coral Massive Coral Foliose Coral Branching Coral Encrusted Acropora Encrusted Acropora Submassive Acropora Digitate Acropora Tabulate Acropora Braching LONGTERM SITESLONGTERM Siufaga Deep Palolo Vaisala Papa Safaato’a Samatau Saleapaga Fagamalo Appendix 2: The live coral groups from the monitoring groups from in 2006 monitoring. coral The live 2: Appendix Appendix 1: SummaryAppendix of reef major at permanent groups coral during monitored sites 2005 period. SAMOA Appendix 4: Summary of the proportion of major fishandinvertebrate site. major per of indicators theproportion of Appendix 4:Summary Appendix 3: in2006monitoring groupfromThe algae themonitoring SURVEY DATES LONGTERM SITES Blue starfish Prickly fish Sea urchin Lollyfish INVERTEBRATES Wrasses Grouper Goat fish Trigger fish Parrot fish Convict Surgeonfish Line Surgeonfish Rabbit fish Damsels Butterfly fish FISH SPECIES OGEMSTSSuaaPll epViaaPp aat’ aaa aepg Fagamalo Saleapaga Samatau Safaato’a Papa Vaisala Palolo Deep Siufaga LONGTERM SITES Assessed Dates Turf algae H Coralline algae Macro algae alimeda 50/61/80 70/60/10 41/63/10 70/702/05/07 27/04/07 30/01/07 14/11/06 09/11/06 07/09/06 11/08/06 05/09/06 11.22 0.64 4.49 - 040 60/614/03/06 16/03/06 10/4/06 asl aaaoaSamatau Safa’ato’a Vaisala 130 184 13 31 43 34 78 12 0 0 9 0 2 0 05 1.3 20.51 .67902 .71.79 7.17 0.26 7.9 4.36 .15.9 2.31 0.3 - 126 159 119 27 20 31 15 10 61 00 2 0 0 0 108 160 158 103 234 22 34 58 53 34 3 0 0 0 0 0.52 - - .511.79 0.25 - 0.77 - - .15.4 9.61 .20.3 0.32 0.3 - - - SAMOA 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 76 0 8 0 0 32 0 0 18 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 103 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 19 0 0 0 1 0 0 240 0 0 0 0 0 0 64 3 17 260 0 0 173 309 0 22 16 27 0 109 0 0 7 0 0 3 9 134 3 0 0 4 Vaisala Papa Safaato’a Samatau Saleapaga Fagamalo 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 3 3

Deep Palolo Palolo 0 0 0 58 0 69 0 129 35 0 1 27 0 7 0 0 198 0 0 early 86 115 197 153 78 281 197 220 40 42 77 160 112 85 61 56 99 147 178 Siufaga 05/09/06 11/08/06 07/09/06 09/11/06 14/11/06 30/01/07 27/04/07 02/05/07 0 0.41 40.6 %Y

T$ growth rates US$ Yr SA

96 98.9 9798 10299 115 2.93225500 126 13.1630601 0.36 134 9.20138902 36.8 0.33 14003 38.3 0.33 6.3593 152.6 4.48430504 41.7 163.5 9.155937 0.305 0.28 193.1 7.142857 40.0 06 0.3 39.4 207.8 18.1039807 0.33 45.2 248.9 7.612636 54.5 0.36 282.4 19.77863 69.5 0.37 13.45922 76.9 0.36 89.6 0.38 107 LONGTERM SITES LONGTERM SURVEY DATES Fish Species Butterfly fish Damsel Emperor Rabbit fish Rabbit Striated Surgeon fish Convict Surgeon fish Parrot fish Parrot Soldierfish Goat fish Grouper Wrasses Invertebrate Species Lollyfish Sandfish Sea urchin prickly fish Blue starfish Source: Research & Statistics Division STA, National Department of National Statistics & Central Bank of Samoa & Statistics Division STA, Research Source: Appendix 6: Total earnings tourism in dollars from over the years Total 6: Appendix Appendix 5: Summary 5: Appendix ofthe proportion indicators ofper major in the site invertebrate fish and 2006 Monitoring SAMOA Appendix 7a: Threat Index for Coastal Development Appendix 7b: Threat Pollution Index for Marine-Based ESvi - SE Savaii aai- N Savaii WUou- SW Upolu EUou- SE Upolu pl - N Upolu Port Ports, Medium(Fishingshipsetc,eg ers, fishingships,etc,egSuva) Ports, Large(Containerships,tank- Shipping Lanes Oil storagetanks,refineries boats) P boats) P SE Savaii N Savaii SE Upolu N Upolu Reef Area B) Marine-BasedPollution OverallScore Coastline Tourism Mines Airports Towns Cities Reef Area A) CoastalDevelopment SW Upolu Cities, Population Over100,000 Any Coastline(shore) T Mines Airports (inuse) T iis ouain5,0 0,0 Medium Cities, Population 50,000–100,000 uitrsrsaddv ete Medium ourist resortsanddivecentres Medium owns, Population under50,000 orts, orts, Small(Yachts andpersonal V illa) V ery small(Localoutboard eimMdu - Medium Medium V V V Medium Medium Medium Medium H Ports Medium ery low ery low ery low igh 4km away Closer than H Low H Medium H H H H 4km away Closer than Medium Medium igh igh igh igh igh igh V V V V r o - ery low r o - ery low r o - ery low r o - ery low V V V V H Within 10Km Oil Tanks /Wells ery low ery low ery low ery low igh away 4 –10km H V V H Medium Medium Medium Medium V Medium H H away 4 –10km Low ery Low ery Low ery Low igh igh igh igh eimLwMedium Low Medium eimLwMedium Low Medium eimLwMedium Low Medium eimLwMedium Low Medium eimLwMedium Low Medium 110 Medium V V OverallScore Shipping lanes Low Medium ery low ery low away 10 -25km Medium V V V V Low Low Medium away 10 -30km V V V V H ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low igh Medium Medium Medium Medium H igh 25km away More than Low V V V V V V Medium away 30 –50km V V V V V ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low SAMOA igh H Low Medium Low Low Overall Score Very Low Very Dense natural forest Slight/Flat Low Low Low Low Low Low Factors Low Dense planted forest Mixed Forest Moderate Domestic agriculture Domestic Livestock Low apa Low Low Medium Low Low Steepness 111 aisala and Fagamalo V Notes on Marine Protection Deep Palolo Saleapaga Samatau and Safaatoa Siufaga and P Medium igh H Low Low Low Low Risk Open Shrubland mixed with grassCropland mixed with natural vegetation Dense Shrubland and Small, dry islands with coconuts salt bush Steep Commercial Livestock Medium wetland (Swamp) Permanent Score Low Low Low Low Low egetation igh ype Urban Mixed forest Mixed forest Mixed forest Mixed forest T V Closer than 10km awayH 10 – 20km away More than 20km away Area within 10km Marine Protected Urban and built-up Grassland Areas with little vegetation Mining Deforestation Commercial Agriculture High Large scale croplands ype egetation T N Upolu SE Upolu SW Upolu N Savaii SE Savaii D) Over fishing (Local fisheries not commercial) Area Reef N Upolu SE Upolu SW Upolu N Savaii Reef Area Reef C) Pollution and Sedimentation C) Pollution Steepness of slope Contributing factors V Coastal population SE Savaii Appendix 7d: Threat Index for Artisanal OverfishingArtisanal for Index Threat 7d: Appendix Appendix 7c: Threat Index for Pollution and Sedimentation Pollution for Index Threat 7c: Appendix

SAMOA Appendix 7e: Fishing Threat Index for Destructive Note: reefs. tops not onshallow reef deeper poisons SE Savaii N Savaii SW Upolu SE Upolu N Upolu efAe yaieCeia osnHra osnBreakage HerbalPoison ChemicalPoison Dynamite Reef Area E) DestructiveFishing(Poisons orblast) Direct coralbreakage(trampling,excavation,harvesting) H Chemical P Dynamite Destructive Fishing erbal Poison oison (CyanideorChlorox) ------H H H H Week Severaltimes…….. igh igh igh igh V V V V V ery low ery low ery low ery low ery low 112 Medium Medium Medium Medium Month Medium Medium Low Low Medium Low Low Low Low Year Medium Medium Low Low Medium Overall Score(Highestrecorded) V V V V Never ery Low ery Low ery Low ery Low SAMOA the Marine Conservationthe Marine Section and staff their for input for this are report. We especially grateful for the contribution of NGOs and the support of the communities in our bid to protect, conserve and reefs. use coral the sustainable promote 113 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Firstly Firstly we acknowledge the efforts of present past staff of and the Inshore Fisheries Section re- sponsible for the monitoring of the GCRMN on which the report is based. We acknowledge also the MNREM for its efforts in the protection and conservation of coral reefs in Samoa, in particular SAMOA [email protected] Environmental Science, Officer Fisheries Maria (Ms)BSc– Sapatu [email protected] OfficerSenior Fisheries BSc Marine Science Joyce Ah-Leong Samuelu (Mrs) Authors CONTACTS 114 SOLOMONS rt po e

R s ce) g d n in in a v r o o sl t I Pr 115 n oni May 2008 May Nelly Kere r 2006 – 2007 ter Marine Officer o s f olomon eef M S R

(We l ra Co WWF Solomon Islands Country Programme WWF Solomon Islands Country SOLOMONS 1.0 E 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0

6.0

7.0

10.0 9.0 8.0 xecutive Summary

re d ac c refere IN OBJ MONI SU M 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 6.1 6.2.

6.3 6.4 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 ON IS ET TR SUL RVE

f

f

g t

a KNOWL C f ECT HO USSION O C Survey P Substrate survey W 6.1.5 6.1.4 6.1.3 6.1.2 6.1.1 Substrate 6.2.5 6.2.4 6.2.3 6.2.2 6.2.1 W Marovo Munda T T Y etepare LUSION D ish survey ish abundance ish sizedistribution rnavon Marine izo O N S ater temperature ater I D T VE U

R CE S IM

CT a t g a t g IN

EDGE Munda Marovo Munda Marovo T

S E

etepare etepare

G

rnavon Marine rnavon Marine emperature izo izo

ION

rotocol

TA

SI A

TE BL N M

D

E E S

N

REC

C T onservation S

OMM C C onservation onservation E N Con DAT A rea IONS

A A 116 rea rea te

n t s 117 118 119 120 122 123 123 123 123 125 123 133 132 129 127 125 125 140 138 137 135 133 133 141 145 144 145 145 146 151 150 149 148 147 SOLOMONS y ar umm and Tetepare and are Tetepare two permanent marine protected areas that been have protected for 12 and years five while respectively, Gizo has proposed marine pro- pro- not are sites two other the and sites area tected tected. The reef habitat, oceanic currents and the influenceof human activities within thesurround- ing area mainly determine the distribution of live cover. coral Through the monitoring programme, results dem- abun- and size larger of fish generally, that onstrated with areas protected marine in recorded were dance areas. access open to compared pressure, fishing less The coral in cover all the five permanent sites were generally in healthy condition except for Marovo especially in the inner lagoon where there was very from sedimentation high to due cover coral live low nearby logging. The 2007 earthquake and tsunami had disaster also sub- the and reefstructure coral the affected greatly especiallystrate composition of Ghizo around reefs Island. temperature Water was found to be higher This periodsame the to 2006. in compared 2007, in is that change ofclimate impact the to due be might a global issue. now The information gathered from this monitoring programme can be distributed to resource owners, researchers, reef managers and other stakeholders and effective plans management that are develop to of the status based on practical, the resources. 117

ve S i t u xec E y and at species level for the commercially the commercially y and at species for level ortant reef food fish. ortant reefdepths; food fish at two egories; rofiles at eachsite under majorsix form life o estimate the size of some commercially imp famil imp T cat p

Five Five permanent monitoring sites had been estab- All lished the since 2004. sites situated were around Archipelagos the ofWestern Solomon Islands cov- ering two of the nine provinces. Arnavon Islands

3. by counting fish by fish abundance investigate To 2.

1. To assess the substrate composition at two depth depth at two assess the substrate composition To 1. The main objectives of the monitoring programme were: Coral Coral reefs have a very important role in the live- lihood of about 80% of Solomon Islanders who are coastal dwellers. The reefs provide a source of wealth and food security. With increasing popu- lation and high demand for cash and food using marine resources, the coral reefs have come under great pressure from over fishing, coastal develop- ment, logging and natural disasters such as - of status the on data Gathering tsunami. and quakes the coral reefs is important for the development of effective management plans to sustainably manage marineA national resources. coral reef monitoring network was established in 2003 for this purpose, through the support of the David & Packard Lucile Foundation. SOLOMONS to collect standardised data on the composition and was project the of goal overall The sectors. private and commercialrepresentatives the fromand tions organisa- non-government departments, ernment gov-involvewould that Network Monitoring Reef Coral national a establish to GCRMN and merce Com- of UnitedDepartment the States (NOAA) of Administration Atmospheric and Oceanographic National the from funding initial received (WWF) Programme Country Islands Solomon 2002,WWF Monitoring Network (GCRMN) was established. In resources.rine Consequently, the Global Coral Reef ma- managing in effort conservation effective an for area priority a as practitioners conservation by effective managementplans, identified of mentwas develop- the and reefs coral of status the of toring moni- to enable information scientific Gathering coral reefsmeans thatthefuture isatstake. of ecosystems, reef coral to threats natural and man hu- other and population increasing rapidly a with combined resources. This marine on exerted being is pressure increasing products, marine for cash return high relatively and demand high the With “goddess wealth”. of a as seen is sea The resource. their to connected are people the that Islanders Solomon of tradition cultural the of part is It needs. subsistence their daily protein and and forfood cash income to meet their for resources marine on depend They atolls. and islands smaller numerous and islands main six the around scattered dwellers, coastal are landers Is- Solomon of 80% About Islanders. Solomon of livelihoods the of part integral an form reefs Coral I n tr o d 118 1 u were in2006and once twice visited in2007. and Lucile Packard Foundation in 2006. Survey sites David the from funding of years two with possible here)made onproject (reportedwas the of 2 Phase (Hughes al., et 2005). year a twice visited was location each project the of 1 phase In work. survey the for shop dive local a and CenterWorldFish the partners, on dependent largely therefore was WWF activities. underwater for qualified were whom of two people, three to limited was time that at team marine WWF The Islands. Arnavon and Tetepare Marovo, da/Lola, Gizo, Mun- in locations survey five establishing by began in earnest in 2004, with WWF taking the lead Western Solomons. monitoring Coralactivities reef confinedwas network the tional in only to working na- the tension, ethnic of times during ganisations diveor- of number a of closure the and equipment divers, accessing of difficulties logistical to Due country. the in capabilities research reef coral enhance to individual vided and institutional building capacity pro- training protocol. The survey GCRMN the in organisations partner fromrepresentatives train to Gizo in Fisheries of Department the and WWF by co-hosted was workshop training GCRMN a 2003, In achievements. and objectives project oversee to appointed was region the in activities search re- marine in experience prior with individuals of comprised taskforce A projects. planned or active had organisations partner where areas including country, the around reefs coral selected of status ct ion SOLOMONS VE I 2 119 ECT OBJ Figure 1. Coral reef monitoring locations within the Western Solomons reef monitoring locations Coral Western within 1. Figure the a) To assess the substrate composition at two depth profiles at each site under six major life form life six major under site at each profiles depth at two assess the substrate composition a) To categories. depths. two at by family, counting fish, by abundance fish investigate b) To important of size reef estimate commercially some food fish. c) To The main objectives ofTheobjectives main survey this were: SOLOMONS eeae s h lret nnaie iln i the in island uninhabited largest the is Tetepare (Sulu 2004). They are popular sites for dive tourism. areolatus) (Plectropomus coralgrouper squaretail and ) polyphekadion (Epinephelus grouper ouflage cam- ), fusoguttatus brown- (Epinephelus grouper marbled for sites aggregation spawning known four has area Gizo The . in Ampat Raja to only second world, the in diversity fish highest second the had Island, Njari site, one that found 2006) al., et (Green scientists leading international and WWF Conservancy, Nature The by 2004 in conducted Assessment Ecological Rapid The reefs. submerged and patch barrier, fringing, are Island Ghizo around types reef The islands. surrounding and Island Ghizo around situated are sites Gizo due tooperation tension ethnic in2000. ceased region eastern and central the in staff) and (and,therefore,equipment operatorsdiveto access the of most since reasons logistic for region lands Is- Solomon Western the in situated are sites The slopes. reef on laid were transects the of All surveyed. and laid were transects 50m four profile depth each On surveyed. were 10m) and (5m profiles depth two which within selected were habitat) reef the of tive (representa- sites two stations these of each at and reefs) (separate identified were stations four cation lo- each At1). (Fig Islands)(Arnavon Province bel Ysa- in Tetepare,Munda,one Island, and Marovo) Westernthe (GhizoProvince in four 2004; in tions WWF,fiveestablished monitoringpermanent loca- work (SICRMN) implemented and administered by Net- Monitoring Reef Coral Islands Solomon The MONI T O R 120 3 IN reefs, patch reefs and barrier reef types. One of the of One types. reef barrier and reefs patchreefs, fringing with skirted islets and cays sand islands, scattered of consists It villages. and communities Munda/Lola is an urban area surrounded by coastal Lagoon. Roviana of side northern the and Lagoon The Munda/Lola site is situated between Vona Vona reefs are slopesanddrop mostly steep reef offs. lagoon and the outer lagoon areas. The outer lagoon inner the both in situated reefs fringing and reefs patchbarrier, are Marovo in types reef The world. the in lagoon enclosed double-barrier defined best the has and 700km², around of area an has lands, Is-Solomon the Marovoin lagoon largest the hosts row reefs. sheltered fringing nar- relatively are reefs steep, are shorelines where from shore while on the northern part the of island, 100metres about extending reefs of stretches long areisland the of part southern the reefson fringing The reefs. Teteparefringing at mostly reefs are The toresourceopen harvesting.sustainablefor owners is island the of rest the while protected manently per- is island the of 1100ha About .coriacea chelys Dermo- turtle leatherback endangered critically forthe beaches nesting has also It Pacific. South at each location in2006and2007 location at each done were Table surveys the Monthsthat 1. A May Munda Lola Marovo T G Locations tpr March etepare nvnSeptember rnavon z March izo G SI TE F round 2006 First bur etme September September ebruary S done Nosurvey September October D A round 2006 Second gs June ugust cme October ecember September round 2007 Third SOLOMONS are situated between Choiseul and Ysabel Provinces YsabelProvinces and Choiseul between situated are and consist of three small low-lying islands named Kerehikapa, and Maleivona. These are sur- rounded by coral and reefs, a mixture of rocky and sandy shorelines. The reef types around the Ar- fringing mostly are and barrier Islands reefs. navon 121 Eretmochelys in the Pacific region. The Arnavon Islands Arnavon The region. Pacific the imbricatein The Arnavon Islands are included in the Arnavon Marine Conservation Area (AMCA) which has been in existence for more than 12 It years. has the turtle hawksbill the for rookery largest stations stations is situated on a barrier reef offIs- Rendova area. an exposed land on SOLOMONS tsunami disaster. the Aprilearthquake2007 of and majorthe setback round was surveying doneof in 2007, largely due to one only and constraints weather to owing 2006 of round second the in visited be to able not were Islands Arnavon the However, year. one in twice location each on monitoring out carry to was plan survey The out. carried were surveys the that 2007 The table 2 shows the months in the years 2006 and S u rve y

Tim 122 4 corresponding categories corresponding form AIMS life the and categories form life major six The 2. Table life forms Dominant eta A otcrlS Soft coral Hard coral Acropora Macroalgae ‘Others’ biotic bl e iefrsCodeDescription Life forms C DCA C A CT C A A RC A A C OZoanthids ZO DC M O H CA C AA CE CF T C SP CD SI CT M C M CE R C LBluecoral HL S C M A A B A T S Organpipecoral U K B S R E T in theotherlifeform) not specified Sand D Sponge D ‘ R Silt R Macroalgae Halimeda algae C A submassive Acropora F C A A A branching Acropora C Soft coral Mushroom coral C C C Others’ (includethose urf algae ire coral cropora tabular cropora digitate cropora encrusting ock ubble lgal assemblage oralline algae oral encrusting oral branching oral submassive oral massive oral foliose ead coralwithalgae ead coral SOLOMONS s d 5.4 Water temperature Water 5.4 Two temperature loggers were deployed on two SCRMN sites in NjariThe Gizo, two and Kennedy. loggers were activated on August 2006. The Njari of depth a at 10m picket star a on placed was logger 5.3 Fish survey5.3 Fish Visual Underwater the using collected was data Fish Census (UVC) technique. Every fish seen within 2.5m on either side of the 50m transect and 5m above was recorded. Fish size and abundance were recorded at species level for important reef fish families such as Haemullidae, Labridae, Lethrini- Scaridae, Serranidae Mullidae, dae, Lutjanidae, and at family was recorded Fish abundance Carangidae. level for the reef indicators such as Pomacentridae, Balisti-Acanthuridae, Caesonidae, Pomacanthidae, Ostracidae and Diotonidae. dae, Data onto was underwater recorded paper with the datasheet template photocopied on either sides of the paper. The size estimation categories (Table 3) were de- cided upon on the basis of the accuracy with which size. estimate could our divers were were collected every metre on each 50m transect (4 transects) totalling 1000 points per depth pro- fileor 2000 points per site.Substrate composition along the transects was recorded according to the Australian Institute of Marine Studies (AIMS) life form categories 2), (Table which have been adopt- ed by the Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN) as a standardised form of substrate col- 2005). et al., lection (Hughes 5 123 ho Met 5.2 Substrate survey5.2 Substrate A modified point based method wasemployed for the substrate survey. The substrate data was col- lected using a cross (X) with 35cm long arms at a 90o angle placed at every 1m interval along a 50m point each at taken were readings Substrate transect. of the X (4 points) and directly beneath the centre of the X (1 point). Therefore, a total of five points The survey team consisted of six personnel, two fish two personnel, ofsix consisted team survey The recorders, two substrate recorders, one tape layer using located were sites same The boatdriver. a and handheld GPS. The tape layer went into the water first to lay the tape at shallow depth and then to deep depth before returning to the boat. The two starteddeep at the transectrecorders whilst the fish two substrate recorders started at shallow transect and then vice versa. When the fishand substrate recorders returned to the boat, the tape layer went all retrieve the tapes. to water the into 5.1 Survey Protocol On each site, four 50m transects were deployed on each of the two depth profiles. The shallowdepth ranged from (3-5)m and deep depth ranged from (8-10)m. Global Position System (GPS) readings reference for site monitoring each for recorded were same sites. to when returning The methods used in this study follow the modifica- the follow study this in used methods The methodology. survey GCRMN standard the of tions method substrates was used for The point intercept and the Visual Underwater Census (UVC) for fish. Fish and substrate composition were recorded on the same belt transect. SOLOMONS Table andsize 3.range Size category two hours. perature loggers recorded the sea temperature every tem- The depth. same the at buoy mooring the of base the on placed was logger Kennedy the whilst Size category 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Size range(cm) 76-85 66-75 56-65 45-55 36-45 26-35 16-25 >85 <16 124 SOLOMONS s t lar pattern to the firstround was seenfor all sites (Fig. 8). Hard coral cover remained as the domi- nant cover at both depths with an average cover of 43.41% (±2.94) and 36.61% (±2.21) for shallow and deep strata respectively, for all stations. Mac- roalgae remained the second dominant substrate type with an average cover of 31.63% (±2.21) at abi- The strata. deep at (±2.76) 36.81% and shallow otic category was more prevalent at deep strata for (±1.79). 16.41% of cover average an with stations all The ‘Other’ life form category remained high at Nusa Agana with 20.69% (±2.79) at shallow and 27.41% (±3.15) at deep strata, being less than 10% across low was cover coral Soft stations. other all for all stations The (Fig. 8). third round of surveys was conducted after the earthquake and tsunami disas- 2007. April 2nd on Province Western the hit that ter The shallow (5m) transects at Naru Kennedy, and Njari were not completed due to a very low tide at to refer records shallow all hence ofsurvey, time the only. Agana Nusa the after seen were cover substrate in changes Major compared disaster, to before the disaster (compare Figures 7 and 8, with Figure 9). Abiotic cover was all across stations with an aver- the cover dominant age cover of 60.23% (±6.54) for all deep transects Agana Nusa for water shallow in (±6.31) 36.5% and life form category ‘Other’ had an aver- The 9). (Fig. across transects deep at (±2.11) 16.94% of cover age all stations and 8.30% (±2.01) at shallow transects (Nusa Agana). Both hard coral (9.75% (±0.75) at deep) and (6.89% cover Acropora (±1.32) at deep) were markedly reduced after the earthquake and 6 125 sul e R On the second round of surveys (2006), a very simi- very a (2006), surveysof round second the On At At the Gizo sites macroalgae was the second domi- 32.73% of cover average an typewith substrate nant (±2.73) at shallow stations and 34.95% (±2.76) at deep stations. Acropora cover was very low (<5% for all stations except Njari shallow, where Acro- pora cover reached 22.80% (±4.53). Abiotic cover average an with water deeper in dominant more was cover of 16.41% (±1.79) and 8.99% (±1.12). The highest cover of the ‘Others’ category amongst the Gizo sites was at both depths at Nusa Agana (Fig. 7) (17.75% (±2.16) at 5m and 27.41% (± 3.15) at 10m). Soft coral cover was very low across all sta- 10%. exceeding never tions, 6.1.1 Gizo 6.1.1 Gizo Gizo around form life dominant the was coral Hard cov- coral hard highest The 10m. and 5 both at reefs er was at the shallow depth at withNaru a percent- of 61.30% (±4.03). cover age The results are presented for each regional loca- Marovo, Tetepare, Gizo, tion in the following order, Islands. Arnavon and Munda 6.1 Substrate The substrate results are presented for each station within each location, and by depth (5 and 10m). Data was averaged over the four transects at each depth from two sites per station, i.e. n = 8. Results are presented for each of the three dates on which substrate, For 1). Table (see conducted were surveys domi- six into grouped were forms life different the nant life form 2) categories for (Table simplicity of and data presentation. discussion SOLOMONS Figure 8. A comparison of the dominant substrate life forms at four stations around atfourFigure stations forms Gizo thedominantsubstrate life of on2ndsurvey, 8. A comparison 2006 average for sites two (i.e. depth n=8)±SE per four of transects Figure 7. A of comparison the dominant life forms at four stations around Gizo on 1st (2006). survey Data is the 126 SOLOMONS M

6.1.3 There was very low occurrence of Acropora spe- cies across all stations in Marovo (Fig. arovo 13) with a similar pattern. Macroalgae cover ranged from 8% to 41% across all stations (Fig. 12). Abiotic cover was on average, across all stations, high at shal- low 36.60% (±4.70) transects as compared to deep 16.58% (±2.34) transects. coral coral was more dominant at 10m compared to 5m. Macroalgae cover was higher at 10m than 5m with a maximum average cover of 38%. Abiotic cover varied across depths and stations with a maximum and Soft Coral had a ‘Others’ of cover 12%. average with cover. less than 5% occurrence low In 2007, shallow transects at three sites (T1 & T2, T3 & T4 and T7 & T8) were not carried out due to very low tide and storm surges. For the remain- ing sites Acropora cover ranged from 13% to 20% across depths and stations. Hard coral cover had a 127 T

Figure 9. A comparison of the dominant substrate life forms at four stations around Gizo (3rd survey, 2007) A comparison survey, 9. (3rd of life the dominant substrate Gizo forms stationsFigure at four around On the second 2006 the survey, shallow transect at due surveyed not were T4 & T3 site and T2 & T1 site to high wave surges and low tide. Acropora cover ranged from an average of 15% to 45% similar to ranges recorded earlier in the year (Fig. 11). Hard depths. depths. Abiotic cover was consistently higher at 10m than 5m. Soft coral and ‘Others’ categories all depths. less than 10% for were 6.1.2 In the firstsurvey Acro- of TetepareIsland, 2006 at pora in general etepare showed a higher percentage cover in shallow water as compared to the deep transects (Fig. 10). With the exception of sites T3 and T4, hard coral cover was not markedly different be- tween depths. Macroalgae cover differed amongst stations but was not markedly different between tsunami tsunami compared to before the disaster. roalgae Mac- was cover also reduced on average (12.85% (±1.70) at 10m. SOLOMONS Figure 12. A comparison of the dominant life forms at four stations around atfourFigure stations forms thedominantlife of 12.Tetepare A comparison (3rd survey, 2007) cover 6.90% percentage ‘Others’ while shallow transects (±6.47) to compared (±3.48), 12.15% transects deep at especially Lumalihe, at currence oc- high a had cover coral Soft depths. shallow at a similar pattern. Abiotic cover was more dominant had Macroalgae 13). (Fig. depths both at similar ly abundance of hard coral cover and this was relative- high a was There5%. than less coverof percentage around atfourFigure stations forms thedominantlife of 10.Tetepare A comparison (1stsurvey, 2006) 128 was slightly higher at 5m (38.66% (±3.37) than 10m cover, all across averaged and stations all at form life dominant more the was cover Abiotic 10m. at (±2.00) 32.78% and 5m at (±2.14) 33.49% stations similar occurrence across depths averaging across all relatively a had coral hard survey, second the On was consistently lessthan10%. SOLOMONS coral coral had relatively low occurrence (< 10%) across all stations. Hard coral cover had a high occurrence all across stations, on average across all sites being more dominant at 10m (38.23% (±2.19)) (27.24% (±2.13)). Macroalgae also had a than relatively 5m high occurrence across all stations ranging from 45%. 15% to Acropora had the highest cover at station Haipe at shallow depths 28.85% (±2.79) and deep depths 34.80% (±3.16) while the other stations had less Abiotic stations, across On average than 10% cover. cover was slightly higher in deep (11.59% (±1.71) rather than shallow transects (7.03% oc- low very relatively a have coral Soft and ‘Others’ (±1.31)). all stations. across currence 129 M

Figure 13. A comparison of the dominant life forms at four stations around Marovo (1st survey, 2006) A comparison (1st survey, 13. of the dominant life forms Marovo stationsFigure at four around Hard Hard coral cover and macroalgae were the pre- dominant life forms across all stations (Fig. 16). Hard coral cover across all sites averaged 38.26% (±2.20) at shallow transects and 39.01% (±2.13) at deep transects. Macroalgae cover ranged from 15 to 43% across all sites and depths. Acropora cover was although depths, both at similar reasonably was cover Abiotic sites. other than site Pond the at lower of three behigherin sites 10m at four the to tended ranging from 8% to 20% and ‘Others’ overall. Soft 6.1.4 unda (29.03%) (29.03%) (±2.76). Macroalgae cover tended to be slightly higher in deeper water (Fig. 14). Soft coral was cover high similar at to Lumalihe, the previous it survey. However, was less than 5% cover for the other stations. ‘Others’ cover was recorded at each 10%. not exceed did and station but depth SOLOMONS Figure 14. A comparison of the dominant life forms aroundFigure forms thedominantlife Marovo of 14. (2ndsurvey,A comparison 2006) Figure 15. A comparison of the dominant life forms aroundFigure forms thedominantlife Marovo of 15. (3rdA comparison survey, 2007) 130 SOLOMONS 131 Figure 17. A comparison of the dominant life forms at four stations around Munda (2nd survey, 2006) A comparison (2nd survey, 17. of the dominant life Munda forms stationsFigure at four around Figure 16. A comparison of the dominant life forms at four stations around Munda (1st survey, 2006) A comparison (1st survey, 16. of the dominant life Munda forms stationsFigure at four around SOLOMONS highest occurrence at AMCA sites 5 and 6, where it 6,where and 5 sites occurrenceAMCA at highest the had coral Soft depths. and sites all across 28% to 15% from ranged coverMacroalgae depths. and coralcover from tositesacrossranged 15% 48% all Hard (±5.06)). (36.10% transects shallow to pared com- as (±8.09)) (57.65% transects deep at nant domi- more was it sites, all across average On 19). (Fig. 6 and 5 coverAMCA at highest the with tions sta- all across feature predominant the was cover Abiotic surges. wave high to due 2007 in surveyed The shallow depths at AMCA sites 3 and 4 were not AreaConservation 4.1.5 Arnavon Marine around atfourFigure stations forms Munda thedominantlife of 18. (3rdA comparison survey, 2007) 132 depths andstations. (±054)).across similar ‘Others’relatively (4.06% coverwas transects deep to compared as (±0.90)) (8.78% covershallowtransects at stations acrossall low across all stations, with a slightly higher average was Acropora20). (Fig. types stations Arnavon amongst substrate dominant the were macroalgae and abiotic coral, hard survey, 2006 second the In and 6(Fig. 19). 5 sites AMCA site at water shallow in occurrence 3.80% highest the had (±3.76). category ‘Others’ form life transects deep to compared as (±15.04) was more predominant at shallow17.70% transects SOLOMONS gibbus sighted gibbus Lutjanus during the surveys. Scaridae, Scaridae, Lethrinidae and Siganidae was recorded. After the earthquake and tsunami disaster most of the fish families showed adecline compared to 2006 and most tended to occur in high densities at the on Althoughabundance 23). transect deep (Fig. deep transects remained similar between surveys, there were no Lutjanidae recorded on the shallow transect in 2007 (Fig 25). Lethrinidae showed to a compared transects, shallow at abundance higher 25). to 23 (Figs disaster the before transects deep the the to due largely was of abundance TheLutjanidae snapper the of schools large 133 Figure 19. A comparison of the dominant life forms at four stations around Arnavon Marine Conservation Area ConservationArea Marine Arnavon around stations four at forms life dominant comparisonthe ofA 19. Figure 2006). (1st survey, Fusiliers Fusiliers (Caesonidae) and damselfishcentridae) (Poma- were the most common fish families around Gizo reefs (Fig 21). Surgeonfish (Acanthu- ridae) were the next most abundant fisharound the Gizo reef area at both depths. A relatively low abundance of reef food fish such as Lutjanidae, 6.2.1 Gizo The fishresult was calculated per 50m transect and values The n average = 8). (i.e. sites across averaged transects (10m) each deep and for (5m) shallow for the to according graphs the on presented are station of rounds three in 2006 and 2007. surveys done 6.2. Fish abundance Fish 6.2. SOLOMONS Figure 22. Mean profilestwo depth fishabundanceat around Gizo survey, (2nd 2006). (2nd survey, 2007) Figure 20. A of the comparison dominant life forms at four stations around Arnavon Marine Conservation Area Figure 21. Mean profilestwo depth fishabundanceat around Gizo survey, (1st 2006) 134 SOLOMONS currence currence of Lutjanidae, Serranidae, Siganidae and Lethrinidae. Acanthuridae showed a higher abun- of round on the second dance 25) surveysand (Fig. then decreased on the third round of surveys (Fig. 26). Scaridae tended to be more dominant at deep transects. 135 Figure 24. Mean fish abundance at two depth profiles around Tetepare (1st survey, 2006) Tetepare (1st survey, around fish abundance at depth two profiles Mean 24. Figure Around Around Tetepare reefs Acanthuridae, Caesonidae and Pomacentridae were the dominant fish fami- lies similar to the other locations (Figs. 24 to 26). For the commercially important food fish families, oc- low a was There low. relatively were abundances 6.2.2 Tetepare 6.2.2 Tetepare Figure23. Mean fish abundance at two depth profiles around Gizo (3rd survey, 2007). survey, (3rd Gizo around at fish abundance depth two profiles Mean Figure23. SOLOMONS Figure 26. Mean profilestwo depth fishabundanceat aroundTetepare (3rd survey, 2007). Figure 25. Mean profilestwo depth fishabundanceat around survey,Tetepare (2nd 2006) 136 SOLOMONS for for the high abundance. For the commercially im- portant Scaridae food andLethrinidaefish, showed a slightly higherto the compared abundance Lutja- consistent a had and Labridae and Serranidae nidae, of rounds all through three surveys. abundance 137 Figure 28. Mean fish abundance at two depth profiles around Marovo (2nd survey, 2006) (2nd survey, Marovo around fish abundance at depth two profiles Mean 28. Figure Figure 27. Mean fish abundance at two depth profiles around Marovo (1st survey, 2006) (1st survey, Marovo around fish abundance at depthtwo profiles Mean 27. Figure Marovo reefMarovo areas depicted a similar pattern as the other locations by having Acanthuridae, Caesoni- dae and Pomacentridae as the dominant fish fami- lies. These live in large schools, therefore account 6.2.3 Marovo SOLOMONS Figure 29. Mean profilestwo depth fishabundanceat around Marovo (3rd survey, 2007) ao vlam- (Naso unicornfish Vlaming’s and ) pyroferus (Acanthurus surgeonfish Mimic striatus), chaetus (Cteno- bristletooth Lined spp, Acanthuridae ing pecially at station Haipe where large schools includ- es- abundance high a family Acanthuridaehad The 32). to 30 (Figs. surveys later to compared surveys of round first the in lower was abundance though al- Lethrinidae and as such Lujanidae,fish Scaridae food important commercially of unda number high a was There fish. of diversity high a had areaMunda 6.2.4

M 138 the three rounds of surveys. the three rounds of lowabundanceonshowed a Lethrinidae. Balistidae the shallow transects than the deep transects as were on commonmorewere Acanthuridae and Scaridae surveys. of round third the to round first the from trend declining a showed and shallow tocompared Lutjanidae had a high abundance at deep transects as tions. loca- all for (Pomacentridae), common damselfish and (Caesonidae) fusiliers family fish the of dance abun- high a also was There recorded. were ) ingii SOLOMONS 139 Figure 31. Mean fish abundance at two depth profiles around Munda (2nd survey, 2006) Munda (2nd survey, around fish abundance at depth two profiles Mean 31. Figure Figure 30. Mean fish abundance at two depth profiles around Munda (1st survey, 2006) Munda (1st survey, around fish abundance at depthtwo profiles Mean 30. Figure SOLOMONS Figure 32. Mean profilestwo depth fishabundanceat around Munda(3rd survey, 2007) (1st survey, 2006) Figure 33. Mean profilestwo depth fishabundanceat aroundArnavon Conservation Marine Area previ- the from increase slight a showed families fish the 33). (Fig. of first Most the comparedto 34) (Fig. 2006 of survey second the in recorded were Pomacentridae of numbers Higher 33-34). Acanthuridae (Figs. and Caesonidae Pomacentridae, were the AMCA the around rnavon Marine fish dominant The AreaConservation 6.2.5

A 140 grouper (Variola). louti Yellow-margintail the was AMCA the in occurred that species shown).commonmost Serranidae The not (data undulates) (Chelinus wrasse Maori and ) muricatum (Bolbometopon parrotfish Bumphead were larger than at other locations especially for the AMCA the around fish the Generally survey. ous SOLOMONS from size categoryrange size muricatumfrom B. A range of ofsizes parrotfish Bumphead wasfound across all locations from size category 1 (<16 cm) to was 8 found (76 to – have a 85cm). Tetepare full ofrange size recorded. abundance highest the and 36) (Fig. 8 to 1 This was followed by Munda which had a higher abundance across a size range from 1 to 7 (Fig 37) and had a high abundance for some size categories locations. the other to compared AMCA tended to have fish within the bigger size categories with all fallingfishrecorded into the size categories 3 to 7 (Fig 39). Gizo had a size category range from 3 to 8 (Fig 35) while tended Marovo to have the lowest abundance and small size category 5 (Fig 38). range 2 to 141 One family that showed differences in abundance between locations was Scaridae. The Bumphead parrotfish (B. muricatum) was selected as a rep- resentative of this group to investigate whether abundance differences were reflected in fish size. ifFor example, numbers were high, was this due to small many fish largeor fish? many The Bumphead was selectedparrotfish because it hasfound at been each site and also had a large size range. This spe- cies has been identified as being vulnerableto over fishingdue to highdemand atrestaurants andby consumers. Size Size was measured in situ for some of the com- mercial fish speciessuch as groupers (Serranidae), snappers (Lutjanidae), trevally (Caragnidae), em- peror (Lethrindae), sweetlips (Haemullidae) and wrasse (Labridae). 6.3 Fish size distribution size 6.3 Fish Figure 34. Mean fish abundance at two depth profiles around Arnavon Marine Conservation Area (2nd survey, MarineArea (2nd Conservation survey, Arnavon fish abundance at Mean two deptharound 34. profiles Figure 2006) SOLOMONS Figure 36. Size distribution vs abundance (density) of Bumphead parrotfish (B. muricatum) around (B. Bumpheadparrotfish of muricatum) abundance(density) vs Figure 36. Size distribution Tetepare around (B. Bumpheadparrotfish of Gizo muritacum) abundance(density) vs Figure 35. Size distribution 142 SOLOMONS 143 Figure 38. Size distribution Size 38. Figure vs abundance (density)Marovo muricatum) of Bumphead parrot fish (B. around Figure 37. Size distribution Size 37. Figure Munda. vs abundance (density)muricatum) of Bumphead parrotfish (B. around SOLOMONS Marine Conservation Area Conservation Marine around Arnavon muricatum) (B. fish parrot Bumphead of (density) abundance vs distribution Size 39.Figure Water temperature in August 2006 reached a mini- a Waterreached August2006 in temperature 40). (Fig. 2007 October to 2006 Augustfrom ment deploy- of months 16 after are shown results The working condition in Kennedyremained at placed logger temperature the Only 2007. November in collected was it time the by working not was and lengthways cracked housing its had Njari at logger temperature The 6.4 Water Temperature 144 2007 thanin2006. Mayin to December of months the from higher be to found was temperature water the Islands, mon Solo- and Fiji both For 2007). November comm., pers Coordinator GCRMN Fiji Sykes, (Helen Fiji in years two these for reported was observation lar simi- A higher. Celsius degree one approximately 2007, August in period same the during C degrees 28.5 to falling only whilst C, degrees 27.8 of mum SOLOMONS 7.2 Tetepare has a long stretch of fringing reef on the weather coast side of the island with a short fringing reef on the leeward side. Tetepare Island has a marine protected area and is isolated from impact human the therefore areas, populated highly is minimal. Acropora coral were found be dominant on deep at found was the coral hard while transects shallow transects. Macroalgae cover was found to be more due island the of side weathercoast the on dominant to the high wave energy exposure as compared to was growth coral New island. the of side leeward the Acropora and tabular Acropora for especially found branching corals, particularly on the weathercoast encrusting was Acropora one ofside. the dominant Acropora life forms on the weathercoast side that impact of the recent earthquake and tsunami might tsunami and earthquake recent ofimpactthe destruc- coral-habitat of result a as stocks fish on be tion. 7 145 USSION C IS D Figure 40. Graph showing the water temperature recorded at in one week intervals from August August intervalsweek one in from Island Kennedy at recorded showing temperature water the Graph 40. Figure October2006 to 2007 Gizo Gizo has a large fish market thatsupplies fish daily to cater for locals and also for customers. Gizo has a high population with approximately of withpeople 6,000 mixture groups a multi-ethnic that have different fishing practices. The fishing techniques include night diving, trolling, use of reef Gizo are fish Accordingly, nets and reef fishing. exposed to high fishing pressure due to the high demand for cash. Gizo does have the advantage of large areas of mangrove forest that provide breed- for habitats seagrass as and beds fish for ground ing juvenile fish.It is not known whatthe longer-term branching corals were shattered and other coral col- coral other and shattered were corals branching onies broken and overturned resting next to their bases. Underwater landslides had occurred along the reefsteep boul-slopes coral that huge launched ders to deeper depths. There was also a temporary created that landslides the from effect high patches. sandy 7.1 Gizo SOLOMONS was mainly massive corals, most likely due to their to due likely most corals,massive mainly was lagoon the within coral hard dominant The form. goon in the world. Hard coral la- was the dominant life barrier double largest the is Lagoon Marovo 7.3 Marovo low. were Caragnidae and Lethrinidae Haemullidae, Serranidae, Lutjanidae, as such fish food reef other abundancethe occurred medium whilst in that fish food reef dominant the be to found were Scaridae and Acanthuridae island. the of side weathercoast the on especially abundance highest the recorded also and ) muricatum (B. parrotfish Bumphead the of range size wide a have to found was Tetepare wave high was able to withstand action. the impact of theearthquake. of the impact Figure 41. b. The first picture shows the branchingcorals at Njari reef area pre-earthquakewhile the latter shows Figure areaby theearthquake. 41. reef caused a. thedamage Someof around theNjari

146

n Pmcnrde Te motn re fo fish food reef important The Pomacentridae. and Caesonidae indicators reef common the for except genera all across densities fish low Marovoshowed lagoon. the within remains runoff much therefore flushing oceanic for passages limited has lagoon The ging. log- from runoff land elevated torelated be to ered consid- high, relatively also was Macroalgae 2007). Kere,Nelly (PersonalSeptemberobservation, goon areaare considered la- threatsthe main in the to be the in project plantation a and activities Logging lagoon. the surrounding islands around rapidly spread have that activities logging by affected now is lagoon pristine oncereef.outer The the on water clear in found mostly were species Acropora trast, water. turbid the highly toability withstand In con-

SOLOMONS 7.4 Munda exposed relatively are area Munda around reefs The flush- oceanic continuous have therefore and places of hard representation good a had reefs Munda ing. coral and Acropora cover across all stations. Mac- roalgae was also a dominant life form mainly due to a high proportion of coralline algae and dead coral with Coralline algaealgae. holds the substrata to withstand the high wave surge. The highest live including coral hard cover, coral and Acropora life form, was found at Haipe (Figs 16 – 18). This is to considered be due to its far location, from direct human impacts and in an area exposed to oceanic current. Munda area had high densities across all genera in comparison to the other locations. The dominant Acanthuri- Scaridae, Lutjanidae, reef were food fish dae and Lethrinidae and prevalent these more were at 5m than 10m. Munda supported high densities ging and clearing. ofAchievements this project included consultation representatives, regional community for workshops establishment of a communication network where regional representatives disseminated information to regional members, environment assessment re- offormation enti- legal on material reference ports, ties and associations. Apart from the skills developed by the team, link- made initiatives and pathways friendships, and ages lagoon resource sustainability a realistic option. The greatest lesson learnt was that the most effec- tive way of delivering the benefitsof advanced un- derstandings of marine ecosystems into local com- munity level resource challenges is through close engagement and cooperation at all levels (Duke et 2007). al., 147 and 12,000 people. 2 In In addition to this monitoring a three year project was implemented by a team of scientists from the University of (from 2004 to 2007) to ini- community support to basis scientific a provide tiatives for the sustainable management of marine resources in . The project received financial support from theMacArthur Founda- The initial tion. focus was a scientific assessmentof marine ecosystem along with an assessment of the related socio-political issues. In initial stages, only Activities later ex- two communities were involved. an covering villages 60 than more include to panded ofarea than 70km more The impact of logging around the lagoon which causes sedimentation and high water resulted turbidity, in very poor coral This, cover. along with overfishing,are postulated reasons as for low the abundance of the reef indicator species Caesonidae and Pomacentridae. species that were found in low abundance were Lutjanidae, Serranidae, Scaridae, Acanthuridae All these and species a Lethrinidae. showed marked decrease on the third round of surveys (Fig. 29). Marovo had the lowest abundance and smallest (B. parrotfish Bumphead the for category range size muricatum). The greatest challenge was to find practical solu- tions to local problems such as declines catches, in poor water fish quality in , changes in benthic sediments, deterioration in reef condition, loss of valuable upland forests, uncontrolled log- Apart from the communities, collaboration took place with conservation organisations Wide Fund International for Waters Nature, World such as Man- Marine Locally Islands Solomon Programme, Fish Center. World and Areas aged SOLOMONS giant clams and sea cucumber along the transects, the along cucumber sea and clams giant of occurrence high the to the due ‘Others’ category for cover highest the had Arnavonforms. life pora Acro- for cover low but abiotic and macroalgae coral, hard of cover high a had area reef AMCA Area 7.5 Arnavon Conservation Marine and thesurrounding villages. from the large populace that resides in Munda town overfishing be to likely are Munda around threats ests, seagrass beds and healthy coral cover. The main extensivemangrovefor-surroundingthe to related (B. rotfish par- Bumphead the for categories size most across ). The high densities may be be may densities high The ).muricatum 148 very lowvery direct human impact. has also It areas. populated highly from far is and area protected marine permanent a is AMCA The Lethrinidae. and Siganidae Lutjanidae, for dance shallowat transects. Therelow a pecially was abun- es- fish food reef dominant most the were Scaridae and Acanthuridae genera. the of some across cies spe- fish of abundance medium a showed AMCA oceanic currents. strong very and action wave high to exposed were wave surges. Most of the fringing reefs at the AMCA strong to exposure high the to due sand and rock rubble, coral of presence the of result a was cover abiotic high The locations. other the to compared SOLOMONS Overall Threat Score Index IONS High High Medium Medium DAT N E Fishing High High Medium High Low OMM man impact activities affecting the Short reef. term monitoring only a produces snap shot of the status of the coral reefs. It does not give consolidated in- long over occurring trends overall the on formation This periods. information is important for the long term management of marine protected areas and use ofthe sustainable marine resources. nomic data so as to have social and economic in- dicators to observe relationships between the coral reef and its resources. Gathering this information will users enable and resource managers to develop practical management plans to sustainably manage resources. their an integrated threat index has for been the proposed GCRMN locations in Solomon (Table 4). Islands An integrated threat index has used in been the recent Status of Coral Reefs reports whereby reefs are assessed using coastal development, five pollution, criteria; sediment dam- age, over-fishing and destructive overall threat fishing. index proposed ranges The from medi- um at and Tetepare Arnavon to high at the other sites. three Over-fishing Destructive 2. 2. There is a need for the inclusion of socio-eco- 3. On the basis of the findings of this report, High 8 REC 149

D N Damage A INTEGRATED THREAT INDEX THREAT INTEGRATED Pollution Sediment Medium Medium Medium Low Low Medium Low LUSION LUSION C ON Development C izo Medium High Medium High rnavon Low etepare Low Reef AreaReef Coastal G Munda Medium High Low T Marovo Medium High Medium High A monitoring monitoring of the locations to gather valuable in- formation on the recovery rate and other factors affecting the reefs. Regular monitoring can meas- ure changes in reef health caused by catastrophic events such as the earthquake and tsunami, or hu- Table 4. Integrated threat index for five SICRMN locations in the Western Solomon Islands Western Solomon SICRMN locations five index for in the threat Integrated 4. Table Recommendations 1. It is important to have continuity of long term The water temperature showed a pattern ofincreas- pattern a showed temperature water The ing water temperature last year 2007 compared to sight- major no was There periodsame the 2006. in ing of coral bleaching in the country. However, there were a few sightings of coral bleaching dur- ing the 2007 surveys. There are several factors that might affect the water such as water current, tidal patterns. and the weather movement The variability in abundance and dis- and abundance reeffish coral variabilityin The tribution around the five locationsreflects tosome degree the differences in coral reef habitat and the variety of direct and indirect human impacts on naturalThe disas- ecosystem. and marineresources ter April in 2007 had its own impact on the marine but ecosystem this must be placed ofin context the ongoing destructive human impacts such as log- ging, overfishing and harvestingof corals for con- struction and lime production. SOLOMONS iting and proofreading the report and to Ms Clara Clara Ms to and report the proofreading and iting writing. Special thanks to Ms Jackie Thomas for ed- report and analysis data on discussion and tions invaluablecontribu- their Juliafor Manioli Ms and Schwarz Anne-Maree Dr thank sincerely to wish I EcoregionSeas project. Solomon Bismarck the Commission,through pean Euro- the and Foundation Macarthur the by vided support for components of the project was also pro- Funding programme. monitoring this support to and Lucile Packard Foundation, for providing funds David the donor major the thanks sincerely WWF A C KNOWL EDGE 150 9 Conservation Conservation Area staff. Staff, Zipolo Habu Resort staff and Arnavon Marine Resort Conservancy,NatureUepi Center, The Fish sociation, GCRMN Southwest Pacific Node, World- Teteparestaff, Descendants’Gizo As-Divesources, Re- Marine this and Fisheries of supported Ministry the haveproject, who all to thanks Special fieldwork, anddata entry. logistics in displayed professionalism the for Leve Tingo Mr colleague work my thank sincerely to wish I maps. Berger for and designing producing forartwork the M E N T S SOLOMONS S CE mons. Unpublished report. Unpublished mons. D., A., Ramofafia, C., Notere, Bennett,Schwarz, G., 2007. N. Kere, B., Manele, C., Oengpepa, A., Tewfik, After the earthquake: An assessment of the impact of the earthquake and tsunami on fisheries-related livelihoods in coastal communities of Solomon Province, Report Islands. to the Western Solomon Islands Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources Center and WWF prepared by Solo- the WorldFish 82p. Programme. Islands mon Sulu, R. (Ed.). 2004. Status of Coral Reefs in the 266p. IPS publications. 2004. Pacific West South N 151 REFERE Hughes, A., Sebastien, A., Leve, T. 2005 Solomon Is- Solomon 2005 T. Leve, A., Sebastien, A., Hughes, lands Coral Reef Monitoring Network: A snapshot viewof Solo- western of the status in the reefs coral Green, A., P. Lokani, W. Atu, P. Ramohia, P. Thomas Thomas P. Ramohia, P. Atu, W. Lokani, P. A., Green, Marine Islands Solomon 2006. (eds.) Almany J. and Assessment: reportTechnical of survey conducted IslandCoun- TNC Pacific 2004. 17, 13 to June May 1/06. tries No. Report Duke, N., J. Udy, S. Albert, M. Love, A. Ross, I. Tibet- I. Ross, A. Love, M. Albert, S. Udy, J. N., Duke, ts, G. Neil, C. Prange, Marion, J.C. Roelfserna, J. D. Dart P. and Carter, Care, W. S. Hough. 2007. Con- serving Lagoon. the ofMarine Biodiversity Marovo of Queensland. University STATUS OF CORAL REEFS IN TUVALU 2007

Tupulanga Poulasi CONTENTS TUVALU

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 154

1 COUNTRY INFORMATION 155

2 CURRENT PHYSICAL CONDITION OF CORAL REEFS 156 2.1 Coral Reefs 156 2.2 Monitoring methods and issues 156 2.2.1 Monitoring sites 156 2.3 Results 158 2.3.1 Substrate 158 2.3.2 Fish 159 2.3.3 Invertebrates 160

3 DISCUSSION 161 3.1 Substrate 161 3.2 Hard Coral 161 3.3 Algae 161 3.4 Fish 161 3.5 Invertebrates 161

4 CURRENT RESOURCE USE 162 4.1 Coral Reef Species 162 4.2 Turtles 162 4.3 Mangroves 162

5 THREATS TO CORAL REEFS/MANGROVES/SEAGRASS 163 5.1 Eutrophication 163 5.2 Fishing 163 5.3 Erosion 163 5.4 Bleaching, coral disease and predators 163

6 CURRENT CORAL REEF CONSERVATION EFFORTS 164

7 RECOMMENDATIONS 165

REFERENCES 166

153 TUVALU of 710km of patchand extendreefsthat overby fringing areaan Tuvalu’senvironmentdominated is marine shallow being greatest on the slope habitat. The other sta- other The habitat. slope the on greatest being observed in all the three habitats with the reduction was cover coral in drop notable a site, this At one. of exception the with stations, the all for 2003 in obtained those to similar were 2007 from Results zones, out on threeried reef crest, slopeand floor. regular intervals due to many constraints and is car- ir-accessibility.at 2) happens Monitoringand sets; data- ecological of existence the 1) considerations: monitoring sites were determined based on two key permanent six The cover. substrate and numbers factors:numbers,fish following invertebratethe on the third in late 2007. Monitoring is focused mainly toring Network in 2002. Two were done in 2003 and TuvaluWestSouth the Moni- Pacific Global joined Three ecological surveys have been conducted since some coral-associated fish(Kaly 2001). of number the in reduction a and algae, green blue decreasehardin coralcover, and increaseturf an in a for tendency a with 1996, since Funafuti of goon la- the in in organisms reef-associated of changes abundance suggest data present and Historical level (Sauni, S. 2000). sea above metres three about of elevation average an with low-lying, are All action. wave from tion accre- and erosion corals, living of growth tinuing con- through change constant to subject are lands is- coral low and atolls These 1991). Hosking, and character both of an atoll and a reef island (McLean the has one and material coral and sand of islets single comprise islands three lagoon; central a ing surround- platform reef eroded continuous a with 2 . Five of the islands are true coral atolls, coral true are islands the of Five . EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 154 marine protectedmarine areas (MPAs). islands are also keen to set aside part of their reefs as Other Nui. and Vaitapu Nukulaelae, Funafuti, are reserves’.reefs‘marine their These of part declared have islands Four plans. management of opment devel- and management coastal integrated for ties communi- to given is assistance whereby Samoa of ment has adopted a new programme similar to that govern- The sea-levels. rising and erosion coastal overfishing, eutrophication, include threats Major andbirthdays.weddings fishers are hired to capture turtles forevents such as becomingmore frequent Funafuti.on numberof A is hunting Turtle communities. island three with arrangement partnership a under operating pany com- foreign locally-based a to sold and locals by cash. Sea cucumbers or beche-de-mer are harvested for sell to it collecting in engaged adults and dren chil- both with importance growing of is Tuvalu) in panea as (known species shell cone A forth. so and parties birthdays,Christmas weddings,as such shells and lobsters are reserved for special occasions spider clams, giant as such resources finfish non subsistencefishers.predominantlybyOther sumed rely on the sea for their livelihood and finfish is con- households Many region. this in highest the is ita Tuvalu’s 113kg/cap- of consumption fish estimated from sites. thesetwo particular reported was algae no 2007 respectively.In 82.3% and 65.5% figures of with 2003 in algae centagesof per- high very scored both slope Fualopa and crest Tepuka sites. the of two for particularly obtained were results interesting very some algae, For 2003. in was it than 2007 in lower 3% was (slope).It fatu Fua- was coral of loss significant showing also tion 1 COUNTRY INFORMATION TUVALU

Tuvalu comprises nine atolls and lies in the central low-lying, with an average elevation of about three Pacific, north of Fiji. While the total land area is metres above sea level (Sauni 2000). only 26km², this is spread over a large sea area (Kaly Historical and present data suggest changes in et al. 1999). The nation has a population of around abundance of reef-associated organisms in the la- 9,561, which is distributed unevenly among the is- goon of Funafuti since 1996, with a tendency for a lands. Funafuti is the most densely populated island decrease in hard coral cover, an increase in turf and with 1,610 persons per km2 (2002 Census). blue green algae, and a reduction in the number of Tuvalu’s shallow marine environment is dominated some coral-associated fish (Kaly 2001). by fringing and patch reefs. Five of the islands are Table 1 true coral atolls, with a continuous eroded reef plat- Table Statistics form surrounding a central lagoon; three islands Capital Funafuti Population (2002 census) 95611 comprise a single islet of sand and coral material Land Area 26 sq km

(McLean & Hosking 1991); and one island has the Marine Area 900,000 sq km character of both an atoll and a reef island. These Reef area 100 sq km MPA 4 islands atolls and low coral islands are subject to constant Long-term monitoring sites 6 change through continuing growth of living cor- Source: 1 SPC 2005, 2 FAO 2002, 3 Adapted als, erosion and accretion from wave action. All are from Mclean 1986, 1987

155 TUVALU monitoring wasextended for another three years. sponsorship, Canadian Pacificwith west and, Node MonitoringSouth- Network (GCRMN) Reef Coral problem. In 2001, Tuvalu became the part of Global primary the as reported been has funding but sons rea- many for made was survey further No taken. under- were surveys two 1999, and 1995 Between monitoring. for chosen were sites permanent six occasion, that On Funafuti. in reserve marine the establish to project pilot a of component a as 1995 A coral reef monitoring programme was initiated in little work conducted on theother islands. Funafuti,with on concentrate to tendedhave most undertaken,studiesfew the scarcesporadic.and Of are in Tuvalu studies marine-oriented Scientific part of their reefs as marine protected areas (MPAs). aside set to keen are islands Other Nui. and itapu Va- Nukulaelae, Funafuti, are reserves’. These rine ‘ma- reefs their of part declared have islands Four thesurface 2000). (Sauni 30mof within to rising them of some (EEZ),Zone Economicsive Exclu- the throughout scattered are sizes varying of Seamounts lagoons. with islands to restricted are these but depths different at found be also can reefs patch Numerous prominent. becoming now are species algae various and seen be can livecorals a few flats, reef exposed of top On 2000). (Sauni reefs outer or shore the of kilometres few a within 1000m overto coast the from rapidly very creasing in- waterdepths narrowwith aretypically and valu Tu- reefs are of Fringing seas foundthroughoutthe 2.1 Coral reefs CURRENT PHYSICALCONDITIONOFCORALREEFS 156 2 from elsewhere. compressors of use the for approval get to possible Fisheries does not have a compressor. Often it is im- since very difficult isalso tanks dive of filling the missing parts are too costly to purchase. In addition, the as idle now is It incomplete. be to found was Certain monitoring equipment purchased from Fiji one. dive Lack of equipment is another major issue. main the is shortage Manpowerreasons. many for inconsistent and sporadic been has Monitoring too strong. was current the when or waters deeper in SCUBA and waters, shallow in gear snorkeling used Divers stored andanalysed usingtheexcel programme. cover, respectively. Datasets from these surveys were collect data for fish and invertebrates, and substrate to used were methods TransectIntercept Line the and (5mx25m) Transect Belt The cover. substrate ing factors: fish numbers, invertebrate numbers and follow- the on mainly focused is monitoring Our have andstored. obtained been 2002 to prior surveys from Datasets programme. the of part Tuvalu became before long existed had 2003 and the third in late 2007. However, these sites in done were Two 2002. in Network Monitoring Global WestPacific South from the Tuvalujoined when conducted were surveys ecological Three 2.2 Monitoring andissues methods ised based on two key considerations: 1) the exist- the 1) considerations: key two on based ised final- and weredetermined sites six 1).(Figure The only Funafuti to confined are sites monitoring Our 2.2.1 Monitoring sites ence of ecological datasets; 2) accessibility. Pres- biological monitoring, although dialogue between TUVALU ently, monitoring of reefs is the responsibility of the collaborating partners is continuous, and monitor- Fisheries Department, with some assistance from ing takes place whenever an opportunity arises. the Funafuti Kaupule (Island Council). Monitor- All the sites are situated on the western margin of ing happens at irregular intervals. Again there are the Funafuti atoll impact. Three are free from fish- many reasons for this. In view of the numerous ing pressure (Fualopa, Fuafatu and Tefala), while constraints, there are no fixed dates for conducting the other three are not.

Figure 1: Map of survey sites across the country

157 TUVALU Table 2Hard in2003and2007. Coral observed cover one. At this site, a notable drop in coral cover was cover coral in drop notable a site, this At one. of exception the with stations, the all for 2003 in obtained those to similar were 2007 from Results corals increases from to of south. north ent types differ- of number the (diversity), coral of terms In differentmonitored.habitatsthe and sites the all in dominant coral form, Acropora branching, is found most The habitats. two other the in abundant not is but slopes the on observed is cover coral Good 2.3.1 Substrate 2.3 Results

uft crest Fuafatu

ulp crest Fualopa

euacrest Tepuka

efaiucrest Teafualiku

ulfk crest Fualefeke tto aia Hardcoral Habitat Station

floor slope floor slope floor slope floor slope floor slope

0320 0320 032007 2003 2007 2003 2007 2003 53.0 5062.0 65.0 17.0 201. 82.3 12.0 12.0 13.0 9093.0 89.0 6027.0 26.0 2063.0 62.0 4027.0 24.0 20.0 9030.0 69.0 6010.0 36.0 9.0 1.0 . 3062.5 23.0 6.0 2.0 7.0 na na a46.6 na na Algae 1.0 0.0 0.0 5.3 8.0 0.2 4.1 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 158 from thesetwo sites. reported was algae no 2007 respectively.In 82.3% and 65.5% of figures with 2003 in algae of ages percent- high very scored both slope Fualopa and sites.the Tepukatwofor of particularly tained crest ob- were results interesting very some algae, For 2003. in was it than 2007 in lower 3% was (slope).It fatu Fua- was coral of loss significant showing also tion sta- other The habitat. slope the on greatest being observed in all the three habitats with the reduction . 5137.8 35.1 0.2 0.0 . 3797.9 93.7 0.0 . 11.2 0.0 . 1377.0 31.3 0.0 . 9973.0 69.9 0.0 . 7636.9 37.6 0.0 . 5672.9 75.6 0.0 . 9092.7 79.0 0.0 . 1568.2 31.5 1.7 . 4382.0 64.3 8.0 a47.3 na a82.7 na na a78.9 na Other 4.3 . 88.3 5.5 6.7 na na na na Table 3: Status of the percentage hard coral cover by habitat in 2003 and 2007 for the five sites.

Stations Habitat Live coral Recently dead Long dead Bleached TUVALU

2003 2007 2003 2007 2003 2007 2003 2007

Fualefeke crest 44.5 22 14.5 0 41 78 0 0

slope 60.7 54 20.8 6 18.5 40 0 0

floor 97.1 90 0 0 2.9 10 0 0

Teafualiku crest 81.6 35 0 0 18.4 64 0 2

slope 70.5 40 0 0 29.5 60 0 2

floor 84.6 73 15.4 0 0 26 0 1

Tepuka crest 68.2 37 0 0 31.8 63 0 0

slope 83 77 12 1 5 22 0 0

floor 86.4 na 4.4 na 9.2 na 0 Na

Fualopa Crest 100 100 0 0 0 0 0 0

slope 100 96 0 0 0 4 0 0

floor 52.6 na 10.4 na 37 na 0 Na

Fuafatu crest 65 na 0 na 35 na 0 Na

slope 69.6 64 19.7 0 10.7 35 0 1

floor 80 na 4.1 na 15.9 na 0 Na

Overall there were fewer live corals in 2007 than in 2003. Live corals were significantly lower for Fualefeke, Tefaualiku and Tepuka with coverage ranging between 22% - 90% in 2007 compared to 44.5%-97.1% in 2003. Fualopa crest maintained a 100% live record. Bleaching was observed at Fuafatu slope and at all the three habi- tats at Teafualiku, though this was not serious. 2.3.2 Fish

There are two separate categories of fish - one is 2007 food fish Fualefeke Teafualiku Tepuka Fualopa Fuafatu Total food fish species and the other is indicator species. Orangespine unicorn 50 58 28 55 41 232 Forktail rabbitfish 20 65 82 5 55 227 Included in the food fish category are fish of social Humpback snapper 0 0 17 0 59 76 and economic importance. Indicators include spe- Convict Tang 128 15 22 104 0 269 cies of ecological importance such Chaetodon that Striped bristletooth 183 85 35 8 77 388 Bluebanded surgeonfish 8 104 4 39 0 155 are dependent on live corals for food. Bigeye emperor 63 24 6 0 60 153

A total count of 1,607 fish was made in 2007 for Whitecheek surgeonfish 8 32 21 6 40 107 Total 460 383 215 217 332 1607 the top eight fish species in the food fish category. 2003 food fish In 2003 the total count of the same fish species Orangespine unicorn 16 41 28 20 22 127 was 1206 individually. The striped bristletooth, the Forktail rabbitfish 27 4 6 0 0 37 Humpback snapper 0 0 20 0 50 70 most common fish, was found throughout the dif- Convict Tang 17 18 77 57 0 169 ferent habitats and stations surveyed. Convict Tang Striped bristletooth 146 81 36 0 41 304 was second in abundance followed by Orangespine Bluebanded surgeonfish 22 52 4 54 16 148 Whitecheek surgeonfish 28 133 22 0 42 225 Unicorn. The Humpback snapper, one of the most Bigeye emperor 39 13 51 0 23 126 favored fish in Tuvalu for its delicious taste, was Total 235 279 113 54 122 1206 observed in only two stations. Numbers, however, Table 4: Summary of the top eight fish species (in terms of abundance) in the food fish category observed were relatively low. in the two surveys (2007 and 2003) in 125m2.

159 TUVALU error may responsible be for thisincrease. sampling possibility a is there although 2003, in than 2007 in recorded were invertebrates More Figure 3: Total 2003and2007 invertebrates of number from surveys, thetwo 2.3.3 Invertebrates All the sites have shown a huge increase in fish numbers since the last survey in 2003, except for in2003,except Fualopa. Allsurvey thelast since infish numbers thesitesahuge haveincrease shown Figure 2: Bar graph showing individual fishcounted in 2003 and 2007 160 3 TUVALU Discussion

3.1 Substrate is thought to be extremely high but is less likely to 3.2 Hard coral cause significant impact in these locations given their distance from sources of nutrients. Overall there was very little change observed in cor- al cover since the last survey in 2003. However some 3.4 Fish significant changes were noted for Fualefeke where The fish species surveyed in 2007 were similar to coral cover was reduced substantially throughout those of 2003. The results (Table 4) indicate that the three habitats. The reasons for this change were the fish counts in 2007 were greater than fish counts not determined. in 2003. This could be due to the fact that different For Tepuka, a change in location of transects on the surveyors doing the monitoring had differences in crest was made because there was rarely anything judgment. This change of surveyor was unavoidable growing on the surface of the original positions because at the time of the 2007 survey the 2003 sur- apart from algae. The current is also too strong in veyor was unavailable. Other factors that could have the original location making work difficult, espe- had an effect on the difference in fish counts includ- cially when the tide falls and rises. ed moon phase, tide patterns and the survey times.

Massive coral death occurred at Fuafatu and Reason for the greater number of indicator fish spe- Teafualiku before the 2007 survey. For most colo- cies in 2007 in comparison to 2003, could be due nies of branching corals that exist there, the only to the fact that fewer fish species were considered living parts were the front tips of the branches of in 2003 (only six species) in contrast to the 2007 about 3cm-10cm in length. The possible cause of survey, where the list of the fish species checked has the destruction is not clearly understood but could been doubled. be due to natural phenomenon such as high water temperature and very strong westerlies. At the time 3.5 Invertebrates of the survey, however, signs of recovery were eas- The invertebrate numbers were higher in 2007 ily visible with tips of coral branches showing good compared to 2003 (Fig. 2). This increment may growth. Some corals were bleached. This could pos- be due to the survey in 2007 covering areas with a sibly have been caused by predation. higher invertebrate diversity than those of 2003. For

3.3 Algae instance, the Fualopa slope, the site with the high- est percentage of clams, is located on a fault line. A The decrease in algae as reported for Fualopa slope and Tepuka crest in 2007 may have been a product high nutrient supply from the fault would increase of some recording error. There is a suspicion that al- the microbial activity (producers in a food chain) gae cover at these locations is about the same as pre- which could be one reason for a thriving population viously reported. Nutrient loading into the lagoon of clams (Scearce, 2006).

161 TUVALU ing December 2007, a fisher caught 16green turtles, tles for events such as weddings and birthdays. Dur- nafuti. A number fishersof are hired to capture tur- Fu- on frequent more becoming is hunting Turtle 4.2 Turtles tion mainly to for cash. sell tance. Children and adults are engaged in its collec- impor- in growing now is (panea) shell Cornus occasions. social for special reserved are lobsters and shells spider clams, giant as resources finfish such non sistencefishers.Other hood. Finfish are consumed predominantly by sub- liveli- their for sea the on rely households Many Species 4.1 Coral Reef CURRENT RESOURCEUSE 162 4 islands are now feared to nearextinction. be been exported. Sea cucumbers in the waters of these One shipment weighing over three tons had already community.island Nukufetau the and community include the Funafuti community, Nukulaelae island three island communities. These three communities with arrangement partnership a under operating company foreign locally-based a to sold and locals by collected are beche-de-mer or cucumbers Sea 4.3 Endangered species an alarming figurean alarming thatneeds addressed.be to month, each killed were turtles 15-20 about erage, as food. Other anecdotal reports suggest that, on av- used were 12 other the while Environment-SPREP of Department the by tagged were which of four 5 TUVALU THREATS TO CORAL REEFS/MANGROVES/SEAGRASS

5.1 Eutrophication target for fishermen, are ecologically important. Eutrophication is a long standing problem. It is es- Over-fishing these species would harm the coral pecially pronounced in the waters adjacent to the reef as an ecosystem. main island of Fogafale due to waste from numer- 5.3 Erosion ous pig pens and chicken runs being washed into This problem is a natural one and is caused by the the lagoon. The result is the absence of live coral and yellowish, brownish, or dark water colour. The actions of waves and currents. Sand from eroded lack of action in solving the waste problem will only beaches moves and ends up on reef platforms pre- aggravate the eutrophication problem. venting reef regrowth.

5.2 Fishing 5.4 Bleaching, coral disease and Unregulated and improper fishing practices con- predators tinue to put pressure on coral reefs. Spear fishing Bleaching observed in 2007 was basically caused by is common in Tuvalu. Some fish, (for example par- some coral feeding mollusks. Nonetheless, the im- rot fish, surgeon fish and wrasse), which are a prime pact was minimal and isolated.

163 TUVALU The challenge,The however, liesinimplementation. jurisdiction. their under area the within only but activities, specific control to rules and laws make to power the have communities plans these Under plans. management own their develop to and guidance assistance given are re- Communities fisheries sources. coastal of management to proach ap- holistic a involves It Samoa. in one to similar programme new a adopted has government The CURRENT CORALREEFCONSERVATION EFFORTS 164 6 7 TUVALU RECOMMENDATIONS

Conservation efforts remain a challenge in Tuvalu this report; as not all citizens are aware of the importance of • Source funding to finance necessary tools and coral reefs and thus their activities continue to pose equipment for effective monitoring; threats to ecosystems. Some of the ways in which • Conduct ecological surveys more regularly, at coral reefs can be protected or conserved and better least once a year; managed are: • Establish some controls for nutrient sources • Establish some control over fishing; for instance that directly enter the lagoon or the sea; a ban on spear fishing of ecologically important • Government to commit and support conserva- fish; tion efforts by providing financial assistance for • Minimise possible problem areas illustrated in fisheries research and extension work.

165 TUVALU Resources Survey. Island Report Number 1-8, FAO P.L.Holthusand Hosking.1986-1987.Tuvalu Land P.F. Hawke, D.V. Woodroffe, C.D. R.F., McLean, Council. 22pp. Tuvalu.area,Town conservation Funafuti Funafuti of survey marine Second 1999.Alefaio. S. and toa, Kaly,U.L., T.M. Alefaio, C.M.Ludescher, K.Talaka- preparedport for thegovernment Tuvalu. of Re- suitability. site of assessment and surveys line base- marine landfill: Funafuti of audit Ecological Kaly.U.L.Tuvaluproject.2001. management waste information,country page 147-154. and regional Fisheries, Island Pacific 2002. FAO, REFERENCES 166 Analytical Report.Analytical Noumea, New Caledonia. Census.Housing Population Volume2002.and – 1 Secretariat for the Pacific Community, 2005. Tuvalu discovery guides/vent/review.pdf http://www.csa.com/from:Available 2008). March 14th (Accessed: [Online]. Guides. Discovery CSA Scearce, C. 2006. Hydrothermal Vent Communities. New Caledonia. Noumea, symposium, reef coral the at presented Sauni, S. 2000. coral reefs inTuvalu. Status of Paper Natural PacificJournal Science, of 11:167-189. South Tuvalu. in motu atoll and islands reef of Geomorphology 1991. Hosking & McLean VANUATU ent m art p e D 167 isheries F Ministry of Agriculture, Quarantine, Forestry & Fisheries anu V ATU Jason J.J. Raubani Acting Principal Fisheries Officer Acting Principal Jason J.J. Raubani THE STATUS OF CORAL REEFS IN VANUATU 2007 IN VANUATU OF CORAL REEFS THE STATUS VANUATU 3 2 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMER LIST OFFIGURES

4

3.1 CURRENT P MONIT COUNTR 3.2 3.3

4.3 4.2 4.1 CURRENT RESOUR 4.5 4.4 4.7 4.6 4.8

3.1.3 3.1.2 3.1.1 M 3.2.4 3.2.3 3.2.2 3.2.1 R Discussio 4.1.3 4.1.2 4.1.1 3.3.3 3.3.2 3.3.1 A T F M T De Seag Endang ourism urtles isheries esults quarium trade industry trade quarium ORING HISTORY onitoring angroves ep seaspecies Y INFORMATION rass

S I M W I F S C A S I F S

HYSICAL CONDITION OFCORAL REEFS

ssues nvertebrates nvertebrates

ubstrate ubsistence ubstrate ites ish ish ered species rtisanal ommercial/Industrial fishery ater Temperature ethods

n

Y

CE USE

TABLE OFCONTENTS

168

183 182 186 185 185 184 187 188 188 189 178 176 173 171 170 179 178 178 179 180 180 180 186 185 185 184 183 183 187 188 VANUATU 195 198 201 203 194 195 194 192 192 192 191 191 190 197 199 200 195 194 193 193 192 191 191 190 190

169

AL REEF HEALTH

AL REEF CONSERVATION EFFORTS AL REEF CONSERVATION ATIONS

ructive fishing and coralharvesting ructive fishing and rass beds T clean-up campaignT clean-up tbreak oftbreak organisms dimentation, nutrient enrichment and eutrophication nutrient and eutrophication enrichment dimentation, arine protected areas arine protected angroves ver fishing ver urricane/tsunamis oastal development oral reefs eef Rehabilitation TS TO CORAL REEFS/MANGROVES/SEAGRASS CORAL TO TS leaching, coral disease and predators disease coral leaching, egislation ollution ntegrated Index Threat R CITES CO L M Ou H B Dest O P Se C I Seag M C ENDICES

CKNOWLEDGEMENTS AND CONTACT CKNOWLEDGEMENTS EOPLE CONSULTED REFERENCES APP FUTURE OF COR RECOMMEND A P 6.5 6.3 6.4 6.2 CURRENT COR 6.1 5.12 5.11 5.10 5.9 5.8 5.6 5.7 5.5 5.4 5.3 5.2 THREA 5.1

7 9 12 8 10 11

6

5 VANUATU T List ofTables Figur Figur ap of Vanuatu monitorong showing sites. Figur Figure 1: List ofFigures Table 5: T T anuatu (National Statistics Office, Statistics 1999&2006) T Table 1: T T able 6: able 4: able 3: able 2: able 8: able 7: e 4: e 3: e 2:

M R R V A M s P inc sp r g T M M V T E urveyed in all theregions(Aneityum-3; inall Meleurveyed Bay-3; N. Efate-13; Malekula-7; ock andrecently coral, killed Loose Substrate includes rubble, sand, andsilt; Others include rouped asfollows: Hard Coral, Soft Coral, Substrate Solid which includes otal benthiccover (inpercentage) over regionssurveyedin all Vanuatu. categories are The otal Integrated threat index table ercentage each benthiccover regions. thesurvey of ineach 57sur of A total of xport production (Raubani,xport 2007) anuatu category substrate eef Check eef Vanuatu Invertebrate Indicator Species Check eef Vanuatu FishIndicator Species quarium export production export (Raubani,quarium 2007) ean invertebrates 100m per Density ean Fish Density per 100m per ean FishDensity askelyne-2; Matasso-2; Epi-3; Luganville-1; Malo-2; Mota Lava-3; Gaua-19) onge andzoanthid asdefined Check;by Reef IndicatorNutrient Algae; and Bleached Coral ludes hard both andsoft coral. 2 ineach region

2 ineach region

170

v ey sitesey were

VANUATU y ar mm u vertebrate vertebrate density was generally low across regions, ofwith edible sea cucumbers. the exception There is no information regarding recent subsist- but estimated production ence in production, 1993 was about 2,400 tonnes (National Statistics Office, and industry tourism the are users reef Other 1994). aquarium trade, both vital contributors to the lo- harvest and Turtle consumption cal have economy. a long history and cultural significance,much like in Fiji, with permits issued for traditional use and and seagrass a Mangroves are moratorium in place. food se- for as importantboth regarded ecosystems curity and biodiversity conservation, as well as for protection. coastal Overfishingof coral reef resources due to popula- Natu- reefs. coral to threat major the is increase tion bleaching, earthquakes, cyclones, include threats ral and crown-of-thorns starfish (COTS) outbreaks. Vanuatu has been under regular influence of cy- clones. Pakoa (2007) noted that Cyclone Danny in western the on ofcoral 80% affected/damaged 2003 ofcoast Efate. As with other countries in the region, marine pro- tected areas (MPAs) are regarded as significant for increasing fish biomass. For example, stud- ies of the Nguna-Pele in marine North protected Efate area revealed that and periodic both closures permanent had a higher indicator biomass fish inside than outside of thereserve. This suggests that small-scale,village-based are reserves effective resource management that tools, opening and a reserve temporarily for harvest S 171 ecutive Ex (Spalding et 2001). al, 2 Between Between 2005 and 2007, monitoring teams con- ducted a series of mainly one-off surveys. Results revealed that, overall, abiotic components (rock, rubble, and sand) dominated the substrate cover coral hard while 47% of average an and comprised was 26%. Individual regional data showed that the highest coral cover was 49%, with a small amount of recently killed or bleached coral. Butterfly fish and wereSurgeonfish the mostdominant indicator fish families. However, several other families were absent from a majority of the regions. For exam- of one in observed only was Los Humpback the ple, the regions, the Napoleon Wrasse in four, and the Bump head Parrotfish inthree regions. Mean in- Vanuatu’s Vanuatu’s geographical location makes its corals reefs vulnerable and susceptible to natural phe- nomena, such as cyclones, the effects of , earthquakes and strong waves. These have influenced, in a fundamental way, development hundreds over reefs coral of country’s the processes of years. Coral The Vanuatu Reef Monitoring Net- through work, its Reef Check has Programme, sur- veyed 57 sites in 11 regions throughout the islands. These were to identify and confirm current threats to coral reefs so that measures to or reduce prevent bethe impact developed. of could threats such It It is an important habitat for an array of inshore rural country’s ofthe 80% supports that life marine dwellers who depend largely on fisheries and agri- culture for their economic and social sustenance, and food security. Vanuatu’s inshore Vanuatu’s (reef and lagoon) areas extend 4110km approximately over VANUATU plying cultured Trochus juveniles to communities. to Trochusjuveniles cultured plying sup- by areas reef depleted rehabilitate to is ment Depart- Fisheries the of activities core the of One goals. conservation compatible with practice a be may needs, community to according 172 snail and giant clams. snail andgiant green as such resources reef important other clude in- to project (JICA) Agency Cooperation tional Interna- Japan a through expanded was gramme pro- rehabilitation Department’s the 2006, Since VANUATU ATION M that resulted in coral mortality (Personal Observ., Jason Raubani, February and March, 2002; 2004; 2006). 2005; The country is divided into six provinces namely Shefa Malampa, Sanma, Penama, and Tafea. Torba, (Figure 1) The provinces manage their own affairs, including the adjacent six miles of ocean called the The ‘provincial provinces waters’. can pass by-laws relating to the management of fisheries resources within six miles of the provincial waters (Anon, 1997). The estimated total population of Vanuatu was 221,506 in 2006 according to the Census of the Agriculture Preliminary Report. About 80% of the population lives in rural areas while the remaining estimat- recent The centers. urban the in dwell 20% ed population growth is about 2.7% per annum. Mela- indigenous is population ofthe 98.7% About nesian. The remaining 1.3% is comprised of vari- ous ethnic groups (National Statistics Office, 1999; 2006a). There is currently no information on what per- centage of the population lives in coastal towns and villages. It appears, though, that the majority of villages are situated along the coastlines of all of inhabited Vanuatu’s islands. The coastal dwell- ers depend largely on agriculture and fisheries for their livelihoods. Inter-island migration is about 9.7%. Urban migration, on the other hand, has shown continuous growth in the period from 1999 to 2006 when the urban population increased ten 2006a). 1999; Statistics Office, (National fold 1 173 INFOR Y . Other . 2 and total 2 COUNTR (Done and Navin, 1990). (Done and Navin, 2 Vanuatu is a Y-Shape archipelago comprising is more Y-Shape a Vanuatu than 80 islands, 67 inhabited and 12 described as major. Land area is about 12,190km coastline coastline about 2,528km. The Exclusive Economic km 680,000 estimated an covers (EEZ) Zone The archipelago also lies within the cyclone belt and experiences on average two cyclones annu- ally. Impacts of cyclones are catastrophic to coral variesThe climate from 1990). (Don & reefs Navin, tropical in the north to subtropical in the south. The average annual rainfall ranges from 1,700mm in the The South average 3,000mm to in the North. sea surface temperature in the open ocean ranges from 24°C in the south to 27°C in the north (Pers. Comm. Silas Tigona, Sept. 2007). During El Nino, is a there risesudden and phenomena, and La Nina fall of sea surface From temperature. 2002 to 2007, occurrences of El Nino and La Nina had drastic bleaching impacts on the coral reefs in many areas The country’s geographicalThe country’s location on the western the as known often plate, tectonic Pacific the of edge tectonic to is prone Vanuatu means of‘Islands Fire’, activities, including earthquakes, which are cata- has Vanuatu strophic to 2007). coral health (Pakoa, active, permanently ofare nine which volcanoes, 16 distributed along the North/South island arc from Gaua (in the North) to Tanna (in the South). Of these, six are terrestrial and four are marine (Pers. Comm. Brooks Rakau, Sept. 2007) and remain a reefs. coral to threat biologically-important reef-associated habitats, in- represent lagoons, and estuaries mangroves, cluding of area a total 25km VANUATU Figure 1:Map of Vanuatu sites monitoring showing 174 VANUATU small contribution to the formal economy of an estimated 0.1% of overall GDP, and 5.5% to the fish- domestic However, sector. primaryproduction in ery, particular reef and coastal makesfishery, an important contribution to the rural economy and food security by providing nutrition and income- earning opportunities some to 60% of rural house- holds. The fisheriesVanuatu sector can be catego- rized into three broad sectors, namely: i) Offshore fisheryor industrial fishery; ii) inshore fishery; and iii) aquaculture. 175 2 2 2 2 2 - - - 80% 2.70% 50,692 3000ha 448km 221,507 69 years 5,500km Vt185,000 447,000ha 12,190km 680,000km , 1999 15.3 person/km , 1999 opulation, 2006 P per capita, 2006 P opulation density otal forest area Total EEZ area Total Total reef and lagoon area Total mangrove area Total GD T archipelagic area Total provincial waters (3nm) Total Arable land P Total population, 2006 Total population,1999 Rural Annual growth rate, 2006 Urban Urban growth rate, 1999 Life expectancy land area Total Table 1: Vanuatu Statistics Vanuatu 1: Table Three main sectors form the backbone of Vanuatu’s Vanuatu’s of backbone the form sectors main Three serviceand the and agriculture, are These economy. the on report recent a to According sectors. industry National Accounts of Vanuatu (National Statistics Office, 2006b), the economy grewby 7.2% inreal terms in 2006. The primary which sector, includes agriculture, forestry and fisheries, grew by 2.4% and contributed 6% to economic growth in 2006. about up made sector primary the 2005-2007, From 2006b). Statistics Office, of17% (National GDP the Fisheries, including aquaculture, made a relatively VANUATU management of Fisheries Department. Financial as- and administration the under Vila) Port in Office Corps Peace the of assistance the (with established and founded was Vanuatu Check pro- Reef gramme, monitoring the continue to Government the from support financial of lack to due 2005, In indicator list. species original the in not were that fisheries to important species other include to methodology Check Reef the fied modi- Department Fisheries the 2004, and 2003 in However, health. reef monitor to methodology Check Reef the using been has Programme toring Moni- Reef VanuatuCoral the inception, its Since Santo. Espiritu and Epi of islands the and Efate, on established were sites monitoring other several 2004, In year. a twice conducted was monitoring where Efate of island the on established been have mencement of the programme, two permanent sites com- the Since basis. hoc ad an on conducted was monitoring this, to Prior Programme. (CSPOD) from the Canada South Pacific OceanDevelopment assistance funding through 2001 in began gramme pro- monitoring reef coral systematic Vanuatu’s M ONITORING HISTOR 176 2 submit data. and monitoring consistent out carry to operators tourdive and communitiesmotivate to challenge a is it as collection, data and monitoring reef dinate coor-effectively to aims Department Fisheries The province. Penama in one establish to still had but Torba, Sanma, Malampa, Shefa and Tafea the provinces, in sites monitoring established had Vanuatu Check Reef 2007,locality. In their in reefs monitor to them enables This operators. tour dive and ties communi- rural interested to methodology Check Reef the on training provides also but programme monitoring the conducts only Vanuatunot Check Reef Tafea. and Torba including provinces other to programme monitoring the expanded network their through and VolunteerServices Corps Peace the with closely worked has Vanuatu Check Reef other stakeholders.close collaborationwith coral reefs in ing, of management conservation and on monitor- mainly focusing organization profit non- a as function to aims Vanuatu Check Reef future, In (AusAID). Development International for AustralianAgency the by provided was sistance Y VANUATU Vanuatu Vanuatu Indicator X

Indicator X X X X X X X X X 177 uraenidae Family/Scientific NameFamily/Scientific Indo-Pacific Haemulidae Serranidae Lutjanidae Scaridae M Cromileptes altivelis Cheilinus undulates Bolbometopon muricatum Siganidae Chaetodontidae; Chaetodontidae; Ephippididae rasse arrotfish P oray Eel abbitfish arrotfish Common Name P M R Humphead W Bumphead Barramundi Cod Grouper Snapper Sweetlips Butterflyfish, Batfish, & Bannerfish Butterflyfish, Table 2: Reef Check Vanuatu Fish Indicator Species Indicator Fish Vanuatu Check 2: Reef Table VANUATU Table 3:ReefCheck Vanuatu Invertebrate Indicator Species shell, as Turban such species andSurgeon- invertebrate and fish fish Rabbit as such fish valuable commercially and locally include species indicator Additional list. species indicator modified a with methodology Check Reef basic the use Monitors 3.1.1 Methods 3.1 Monitoring Table 4: Vanuatu substrate category Nutrient Indicator Algae(NIA) Recently KilledCoral(RKC) Soft CoralBleached(BSC) Soft Coral(SC) Hard CoralBleached(BHC) Hard Coral(HC) T Cowrie Shell Green Snail T T Holothurians Giant Clams Edible SeaCucumbers Collector P VanuatuIndicator Diadema Urchin Acanthasterplanci Indo-Pacific Indicator starfish Crown-of-thorns R Genus/ScientificName Stenopushispidus Banded CleanerShrimp Common Name CURRENT urban Shell rochus riton Shell encil Urchin ock andSlipperLobsters sUci Tripeustes sp. ’s Urchin P H Chrysostoma Turbo petholatus&Turbo Cupraea spp. T Trochus niloticus Charoniatritonis T Heterocentrotus mammillatus Diadema sp.&Echinothrixspp. Scyllaridae P Y urbo marmoratus ridacna sp.&Hippopus anulirus sp.& SICAL CONDITIONOFCORALREEFS 178 3 for commercial purposes. harvested are Cowries and Trochus Snail, Green most consumption.addition,In local for the species targeted of some Surgeonfish constitute fish, shells Turban Rabbit and 4. Table in listed are survey substrate the for Categories surveys. Reef Check Vanuatu’s in included species indicator of Green Snail and Cowrie. Tables 2 and 3 provide a list Other (OT) Silt (SI) Sand (SD) Rubble (RB) Rock (RC) Sponge (S X X X X X X X X X

P ) X X X X

VANUATU 2% 3% 26% Nutrient indicator Soft coral Hard (live) coral 20% Loose substare 1% Bleached coral 2% Others 46% Hard substrate 3.1.3 Sites Between 2002 and 2007, teams conducted surveys at 57 different sites in 11 regions around Vanuatu (Figure Appendix 1, 3). The majority of these were one-off, but in the future regular monitoring in ofsome will these sites permanent. become of 3: Figure each Percentage benthic cover over all the regions surveedVanuatu. in tively tively store all monitoring data collated. Currently, this information is stored either in an excel format copy. hard or Community-based Reef Check teams have been an asset monitoring to Vanuatu’s programme as they have been able to gather data in remote areas that Department the for expensive and difficult both are of Fisheries team to It reach. is through trained lo- cal teams that baseline data has been gathered for several of the more remote islands around Van- raising for tool is also an excellent Reef Check uatu. about awareness coral A reefs in goal communities. of the programme over the next few years is to en- courage previously-trained communities to moni- tor their reefs on a regular basis and to use the data to assist in making informed decisions about man- agement of Despite some difficulties reef resources. since 2005, teams have done well, and have man- of the number expand sites. aged to monitoring 179 The Department also lacks the capability to develop develop to capability the lacks also Department The an appropriate data management system to effec- The Department of Fisheries has made efforts to identify permanent monitoring sites around Van- uatu. Challenges include a lack of funding human resources and to ensure consistent monitoring of the Most ofsites. are the con- surveys, therefore, ducted by village-based Reef Check teams. Of the 52 surveys completed in 2007, 45 were carried out by local Reef Check teams, fiveby the Department of team and Fisheries’ two were completed by local dive shop staff. Of the 45 surveys done by village- based Reef Check 38 teams, were conducted on the island of Gaua. Motivating villages to do regular an in resulting difficult been has surveys monitoring inconsistent supply of monitoring data. Strength- ofgoal future a is programme monitoring the ening the Department of Fisheries. 3.1.2 Issues Although Vanuatu’s coral reef monitoring activi- ties are administered by the Department of Fish- eries, there is no provision for funding for this in the annual budget. As a result, it is difficultfor the monitoring team to effectively carry out its yearly planned activities. Consistency is crucial where of and supply both monitoring concerned. are data The two main monitoring groups conducting Reef ofFish- Department Vanuatu the are surveys Check Fish- The teams. Check Reef village-based and eries, of Division the of members staff includes team eries’ Management and and Policy, others. Village-based Reef Check teams consist of local divers who have been trained in basic reef ecology, management, and the Reef Check protocol. There have been ef- forts to include local dive operators and secondary period. in the 2007 monitoring students school VANUATU regions followed by Hard Corals (HC), Rubble (RB) all in cover benthic of category dominant the was (RKC)Coral RecentlyKilled and (RC)Rock cludes (20%). substrate Figure 4 illustrates that the hard substrate which in- loose and (26%) hard coral (live) (46%), substrate hard were components substrate common re- most four the survey of Three gions. monitoring all Check in Reef survey the substrate of results the shows 3 Figure 3.2.1 Substrate to 2007are presented below. 2005 years the for results survey the of summary A 3.2 Results 180 Malekula (37%)andGaua(35%). (40%), Epi by followed (49%), percentage highest and Sand (SD). In terms HC,of North Efate has the three regions. in found ) muricatum (Bolbometopon Parrotfish Bumphead the and four, in recorded was ) dulatus un- (Cheilinus Wrassehumphead or Napolean the regions, the of one in recorded only was ) altivelis (Cromileptes cod Barrramundi or Los Humpback The regions. the of majority the from absent were families several hand, other the On families. nant Butterfly and Surgeonfish fish most domi- the were (Table that density showed 5), fish mean of Results 3.2.2 Fish

VANUATU

and Tangs and

281 141. 8.4 10.3 11.4 12 12.8 . ntcutd 66551. 6.3 11.7 5.5 26.6 counted* *not 5.2 Unicorn Unicorn

Surgeon, Surgeon,

. . 2.1 0 1 0.3 0.9 Rabbitfish 9 2.5 5 3.4 1.8 0

parrotfish

0 0 0 0 0 0.1 0 0 0 0.8 0.2

Bumphead Bumphead

wrasse

0.1 0 0 0 0 . 0.1 0.4 0 0.8 0 0

Humphead Humphead

cod

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0

Barramundi Barramundi

. . 0 0 0 0.1 0.1 eel urray M . 0 0.2 0 0.1 0 0

181

arrot fish arrot P . . . . 4.8 0.4 0.6 1.3 2.5 . . . 1.1 3 0.5 2.6 2.8 0.6

in each region Snapper . . . 0 0.3 0.4 0.5 0 . . . . 6.1 0.7 3.8 2.9 2.9

2 0

Grouper . . . 0.5 0 0.1 0.2 0.1 . 0.6 0.8 0 . 0.1 0.1 0

Sweetlip . . 0 0 0 0.2 0.1 . 0.1 0.5 0.2 . 0.3 0.1 0

Butterfly . . . 4.3 5.6 4.1 4 7.1 0.4 . . . . 5.9 5.9 1.5 5.5 6.9

category Efate Bay

Aneityum ts Epi ataso M askelynes M l uavleGaua Luganville alo M alekula M ota Lava ota M

Fish species/ Fish ele ele M N. N. Table 5: Mean Fish Density Fish per 5: Mean 100m Table VANUATU Table 6:Mean 100m per invertebrates Density 100m per 38.5 to 0 from ranged region each in invertebrates of density mean The 3.2.3 Invertebrates and a possible threat to coral health in almost all all almost in health coral to threat possible a and concern a is COTS that showed Results Aneityum. on density highest mean the recording cucumber Collector idm rhn06707050105041 . . 7.9 1.8 3.5 16 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.5 0.7 7 0.6 P Diadema Urchin starfish Crown-of-thorns lobster Rock andslipper shrimp Banded cleaner Cucumbers Edible Sea Turban Shell Cowrie Shell Green Snail Trochus Triton Shell Giant Clams Invertebrate species ni rhn0811491900108010071.1 0.7 0 0.1 0.8 0.1 0 1.9 4.9 1.1 0.8 encil Urchin sUci . . . . 0 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.3 0 0 0 0.7 0 ’s Urchin 8504140058070323240.4 2.4 2.3 0.3 0.7 5.8 0 0 1.4 0.4 38.5 ...... 0 0.3 0.3 0 0 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.6 0.4 ...... 0.5 0.2 0.3 0 1.2 6.1 0.3 0 2.9 0.2 1.5 . . . . 0 0 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.8 0 3.1 0 0.1 0 0 0 0.4 0.3 0 0 0.1 0 0 0 ...... 0 1.5 0.4 0.4 0 1 0.2 0 0.3 0.6 0.6 0 0 0.5 0.8 0 0 0.4 3 0.2 0 0 0.5 0 0 0 0 0.3 0 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.1 1.2 0 0 0.9 0 0.9 0 0 0 1.1 0.1 0.1 0 0 0 0.1 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 Aneityum 2

Mele Bay sea edible with ,

N. Efate 2 in each region ineach Mataso 182

Epi inonly one region(Tablesightings 6). with rare very are population snail green and shell triton The reefs. the on activity human other and pollution of signs indicate may and high was areas regions. The mean density diademaof urchins in all

Maskelynes

Malekula

Malo

Luganville

Gaua

Mota Lava VANUATU

Mota Lava

Gauta

Luganville

Malo ity to the village, rather than for scientificappro- priateness. Closeness to urban centres and villages is, therefore, a major influence on the substrate composition, and the coral cover observed at sites is not necessarily reflective of hard coral cover in other parts of the country. On North Efate, how- ever, there has been anecdotal evidence that hard corals are regenerating after a major dieback some fiveto 10years The ago. diebackwas probably due changes in to sea caused surface temperatures El by Nino in 1998, 2000 and 2001 Observ., (Pers. Jason was there the surveys, From 2007). March Raubani, little evidence of recently killed or bleached cor- als, and only low percentages of nutrient indicator algae recorded.

Malekula 183

Maskelynes

Epi

Mataso

North Estate

Mele Bay

Aneityum 0% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 100% Figure 3: Percentage of each benthic cover in each of the survey 3: Percentage Figure regions. 3.3.1 Substrate The percentage of hard coral in all the monitoring areas is low, accounting for less than 50% of the substrate composition (Figure 3). The main reason is that most sites were selected for their proxim- 3.3 Discussion As earlier mentioned, regular monitoring is a ma- jor issue, so trends in reef health over a period of time cannot be shown. This is an area in need of improvement. Meteorological Meteorological Department records show that in the period 2005-2006, the average water tempera- ture ranged from 24°C in the South, to 27°C in the North. 3.2.4 Water Temperature Water 3.2.4 VANUATU resource, as they have enjoyed good harvests in the in harvests good enjoyedhave they resource,as munities were concerned about sustainability of the com-(TableMany6). regions survey 11 the of out three in abundant most the were Cucumbers Sea 3.3.3 Invertebrates populations. fish of determined on thestability be can information more monitoring, continuous Check survey, were both present (Table 5). Through Surgeonfish,which were included in Vanuatu’s Reef and, therefore, high fishing pressure.Rabbitfish and centres urban the to closeness to due be to likely is this Again, regions. survey the of majority a from absent were ) muricatum (Bolbometopon rotfish, Par-Bumphead UndulatusWrasseand ), (Chelinius spe- cies, valuable commercially main the of Three 3.3.2 Fish Table (Raubani, production 2007) 7:Export Year 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 o (armni o) Napolean cod), (Barramundi Los Humpback 5271008 15.4 781,050.80 55.2 tV Mt 36 36 35 53 67 73 90 le(S)M au UD icsValue(USD) Pieces Value (USD) Mt alue (USD) Trochus 0,0 8 9 13 700,000 25 509,803 8 343,137 38 607,843 323,529 500,000 -

26 184 certain target communities target certain in Vanuatu. in hippopus) Hippopus and Gigas T. Maxima, T. (Tridacnaclam squamosa, giant of species four and snail, green trochus, of populations restore help to Fisheries the is of Department working on a project heavily exploited. A joint venture through JICA and been Trochus4).also (Appendix has snail green of a moratorium 15 of years on the harvest and export place in had has Fisheries of Department the 2005, October Since exploited. actively therefore are and very valuable for the local curio trade and for export ) tritonis was located in two regions. Both species are (Charonia shell triton the region, while one only in recorded was ) marmoratus (Turbo snail green The 1st2008.ary sea harvest and cucumbers export of effective Janu- past. There Fisheries’is a of Department ban on the Sea cucumber 8,0 205,117 153,266 180,000 130,421 166,666 137,605 127,451 117,647 45,517 127,451 3,1 1,4 200,403.42 216,446 135,810 90949,530 49,019 -

36,000 Aquarium products 218,894 892,158 543,138 595,097 40,392 70,981 84,313 VANUATU Macrobrachium Macrobrachium the aquarium trade fishery and thetuna andtuna- like pelagic species associated with FADs. The ex- 7. port is shown in Table production Trochus, green snail and beche-de-mer form the bulk of the inshore fisheryexport Theproduct. to- tal export production from these three fisheries is decreasing (Appendix 2) and in many areas stocks of these resources have been severely depleted. The aquarium trade fishery, which started in the early 1990s, is now the biggest fisheries export product in terms of volume. Products targeted include live ornamental fish, corals (live dead) & and various invertebrate species. Despite some resistance to- wards the trade, particularly from tour operators, the aquarium trade still offers a huge potential for development. further future The artisanal fleet consists of canoes and skiffs. small The fleet is becoming dominated by skiffs powered by 20-60 horsepower engines. The skiffs made are and length in meters 5-7 about from range Pa- to According of aluminum or fibre wood, glass. artisanalfishing 70 than more are there (2003), koa, boats operating throughout the country. The fish- 500-1000kg, from capacityrangesof skiffsing these but the actual average catch ranges from 40-70kg illus- 5 Appendix 2006). (Raubani, boatper day per trates the landings of the artisanal fleets. Aquaculture development is in its early stages with current focus on small-scale freshwater aquacul- ture, particularly tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus ) and the local freshwater prawn, is Aquaculture one oflar. the priority development areas of the Department of Fisheries (Ministry of 4 185 CURRENT RESOURCE USE RESOURCE CURRENT Artisanal fisheries exploit resources that fall into two main categories; resources that are marketed and consumed locally, and those primarily for ex- fishing, gillnet include employed methods The port. hand line, reef gleaning, spear-fishing, and trap- ping. Some of these methods involve vessels pow- ered with diesel outboard motors. Fishing extends The zone. mile nautical 12 the to foreshore the from main fisheries includedeep bottom snapper (pou- in- various fishery, reef fish fishery, grouper and let) cucumber, sea as trochus, such fisheries, vertebrates lobster, and octopus, the game fishery, 4.1.2 Artisanal4.1.2 Subsistence Subsistence fishery targets the inter-tidalzone and lagoon resources and, in some cases, includes the near-shore pelagic species associated with fishing aggregatingThe devicesgear types(FADs). and ac- tivities employed range from gillnetting, hand line, and reef gleaning, to spearfishing and trapping.In more remote areas traditional fishingpractices are still in use. Data from the Preliminary Report of the 2006 Census of Agriculture indicated 72% of households possessed fishinggear andengaged in fishing activities (National Statistics 2006a). Office, Information on recent subsistence production is not known, however, the estimated production in 1993 was about 2,400 tonnes (National Statistics 1994). Office, 4.1.1 Subsistence 4.1 Fisheries Vanuatu fisheriesare utilised subsistence,on arti- levels. sanal and commercial VANUATU from stocks, exploiting wild to farming. it is anticipated that focus be gradually will diverted cially the resources.reef By promoting fish farming, is the desire to reduce pressure on wild stocks, espe- Vanuatu is to increase food security. Also important in developmentaquaculture of focus principle The tones, valued atover vatu. 3.2million Vate Ocean Gardens harvested a total 12.8 of metric 2007,November to June From tilapia. red fresh of tonnes 2 of production monthly a show records establishment, its Since tilapia. red mainly farming is which Gardens, Ocean Vate operation, sister a of formation the saw company the of Expansion 18 mtvaluedvatu. at34million ). The total stylirostris naeus production in 2007 was erator which is focusing on penaeid shrimp (Litope- op- aquaculture large-scale established first the is investment in aquaculture. Teouma Prawns Limited foreign encouraging in (VIPA) Authority Permit Investment Vanuatu with collaborating also is it ing small-scale community aquaculture pilot farms, While the is Department concentrating on promot- 2006-2015). Agenda Action Priority 2008; 2006- plan porate Cor- Fisheries & Forestry Quarantine, Agriculture, mile zone. The major targeted tuna species are alba- out beyond the 12 nautical miles to the 200 nautical other tuna-like pelagic species. Activities are carried and tuna covers fishery industrial or offshore The fishery 4.1.3 Commercial/Industrial 186 (Pers. Com. RobertJimmy Sept. 2007) annual average USD of 1million through access fees an receives Vanuatu this, Of 2005. in 9,230,000m USD to 1999, in 6,101,000m USD from increased value tuna of caught within the EEZ of Vanuatu has the data, economic calculated (FFA) Agency eries Fish- the PacificForum and the (SPC) Community of Secretariat collatedthe bycatchdata on1. Based vessels within the Vanuatu EEZ is given in Appendix foreign by tuna of catch total annual The vessels. foreign to annually issued are licences 100 of total a average, On vessels. fishing line long foreign by wonus). pelamis is dominated fishery The industrial (Katsu- skipjack and albacares) (Thunnus yellowfin ),),obesus alalunga bigeye,core( Thunnus(Thunnus atr rqiig teto i trs f future of management. terms in attention requiring factors important are These friendly. environmentally be not may systems disposal waste their and areas al coast- near built are hotels most addition, In reefs. coral to pressure add may who divers of numbers increased to leading grow, to continues industry The areas. rural few a in activities tourism limited are There Luganville. and Vila Port near centrated con- are reefs coral Tourismon tractions. activities at- visitor major country’s the of some are reefs coral tropical of appeal aesthetic and quality visual the exceptional and waters Pristine 2006). Office, Statistics (National GDP overall of 40% tributing con- industries Vanuatu’s vital of one is Tourism 4.2 Tourism VANUATU Invertebrates Live coral Year Giant clam dominant fish species exported, representing 12.5% representing exported, species fish dominant of the average total annual export of aquarium fish species. 4.4 Turtles The common species of turtles found in Vanuatu the green turtleare ) and (Cheloniahawksbill mydas (Eretmochelys imbricata). Leatherback (Dermoche- lys coriacea) and the Ridley or olive Pacific (Lepido- chelys ) olivaccea turtles also have been observed oc- widely are Turtles 1994). Amos, (Bell casionally and distributed throughout the from country, in Torba 187 Live rock Live fish 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 0 50000 200000 150000 100000 Quantity (pcs) 4.3 Aquarium tradeAquarium industry4.3 2000 early In quantities. exportwithsmall-scale 1990s early the in startedtradeexport Aquarium exports began increasing dramatically (Figure 4). Despite concerns of sustainability by the tour- the ism social sector, and economic benefits are significant, particularly to rural Currently areas. there are three companies involved in the aquarium trade. These are located in , with their collection areas concentrated around Efate. In 2006, one of the operators began exporting cultured clams following successful culturing. This was a significant milestonefor the industry culture to The initiative the wild. from exportsince had previously predominantly been gathered of was a result clam a fisheriesexport policy banning the of the wild. from clams harvested Exports are mainly live ornamental (live fish, & dead) coral invertebrates and giant clams. The most common target groups of fish includeAngels (Acan- Tangs Gobies (Gobiidae), (Pomacanthidae), thuridae), Damsels (Pomacentridae) and Wrasses (Labridae) (Appendix 6). Of the Pomacanthidae, the flame angel (Centropyge loriculus) has been the The aquarium industry is currently over US$500,000 generating annually in export earnings and contributes about US$1 million (net) to the local economy. Figure 4: Aquarium 4: exportFigure 2007) production (Raubani, VANUATU Maskelynes islands, in2008. to 62turtles harvest the including Malekula southern from Fisheries of Director the with lodged was application an 2007, In use. traditional for turtles harvest to permission tion can be lodged with the Director Fisheries of for applica- an 2005, of 52 Number Order Regulation Amendment Fisheries recent a to according ever, How- illegal. is eggs and shells meat, turtle of use MaskelynesIslands year.a alonein commercial The of residents the by harvested been had turtles 120 and 60 between that estimated (1994) Amos and Bell ceremony. harvesting yam the with coincides that islands some in tradition a is exploitation tle Pedro(2005).Tur-and Hickey in Citedford, 2000) Bed- and 1997 (Kirk, days Lapita the to back ing Turtle has in a harvesting long history Vanuatu dat- theatre group (Hickey &Pedro, 2005). the Wanof torsunderadministration the Smol Bag Vanua-Taimoni- the resource by conducted ment assess- monitoring and programme awareness tive effec- strong, the and Department, Fisheries the by been attributed to management measures instituted has This increased.have sites nesting and numbers However, reports suggest that after 1985, both turtle resource. the of over-exploitation to contributed turtle management measures in place. This may have few very were1980,there Independencein to Prior and Pedro, 2005). (Hickey south the in province Tafea to north the role in the subsistencesemi-subsistencethe roleand in econo- socioeconomic important mangroves’ confirmed Vanuand Esrom (1997) and (1990) Esrom and Lal at 2,460 hectares (David 1985). Results of surveys by coverage mangrove of Vanuatuestimatedthe throughoutwas archipelago area total the 1985, In 4.5 Mangroves 188 Francis Hickey, Sept. 2007). Com. (Pers. 2008 in implemented be will project around beds Efate. projecta to seagrass map The of part as way under is survey preliminary process.A planning the in management proper facilitate to marked clearly be areas these that recommended and country the throughout distributed widely was seagrass (1990), al. et Chambers to According and ciliatum. Thalassodendron hemprichii Thalassia isoetifolium, Syringodium ovalis, phila Enchalus Holop- uninervis, H. pinifolia, serrulata, Halodule acoroides, C. include rotundata, These Cymodocea seagrass. of species nine found (1990), al. et Vanuatu, Chambers in reefs coral of survey the on report A reefs. coral with sociated as- waters shallow to limited usually and tensive, ex- and dense very occasionally are beds Seagrass 4.6 Seagrass combined are landings given in Appendix 5. Two commercial fishingboats are also involved.The motors. outboard using fishers artisanal or fishers ni-Vanuatu small-scale by mainly out carried is grouper and snapper for fishery bottom Deep-sea species 4.7 Deep-sea area totaled some 9.5million Vatu annually. Bay/Port Stanley Crab the in finfish and crabs rial), mate- thatch and (house-posts materials building fuelwood, mangal-related from derived benefits economic the that Vanuestimated and rom(1997) Es- 3.6-4.8-tonnes. be to fuel as mangrove of tion (1990),annualestimatedconsump-that household Esrom and Lal firewood. of source primary the are island of Uliveo in the Maskelynes where mangroves offshore the for so particularly is This areas. grove man- extensive to adjacent communities of mies VANUATU dugong dugong (Dugong ), dugong coconut crab (Birgus la- tro), giant clams ), (Tridacna spp. triton shell (Cha- (Crocodylis marine the crocodile and tritonis ronia ), ). porosus The green snail (Turbo marmoratus) is currently considered critically endangered with stocks se- verely depleted or totally wiped out in most parts of the archipelago where they were once found in abundance. There is a 15-year moratorium, from October 2005, on the harvest and export of this important reef resource to halt further decline and possible extinction (Fisheries (Amendment) Order also are species cucumber sea Some 2005). of 52 No. deemed endangered, especially those of high com- value. mercial Further studies are required by the marine sec- tor to confirm the statusof some importantcoral reef species. Indeed, according to Reef Check sur- vey data, some of the largest reef fish species such as the humphead wrasse (Chelinius ), Undulatus bumphead parrot (Bolbometopon muricatum) and humpback grouper (Cromileptes altivelis), are very 5). (Table and criticallyrare endangered 189 The exploitation of marine endangered species in is subject regulations that to apply nation- Vanuatu ally. A report by the Vanuatu Environment Unit (2007), lists the country’s endangered marine spe- cies. These include all turtle species (Cheloniidae), 4.8 Endangered species 4.8 Endangered In 2004, In the 2004, Department granted a licence to a pri- vate fishingcompany for trial fishing on deep-sea activ- The export. for ) spp. (Chionoecetes crabs snow be to found operationwas the as ityshort-lived was not profitableenough to sustain operations. How- ever, snow crabs were found to be present around Efate at depths ranging from 1000-1500 metres. A oftotal was exported 350 kg in 2003. This is fundamentally an open access fishery and the number of new artisanal fishermen increases every year. Brouard and Grandperrin (1985), es- timated the national Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) to be between 113 and 300 tonnes a year. However, records of landing showed low produc- raising tion, uncertainty about the The MSY figure. for need the recognised has Fisheries ofDepartment further surveys to review the MSY so that effective policies can be developed. management VANUATU coral losses around Efate have been attributed to a to attributed been have Efate around serious losses coral (2007), Pakoa to According reefs. coral Coral bleaching has had a severe effect on Vanuatu’s corals Efate. on the western cent80 per coast of of Cyclonenotedthat (2007) Dannydamaged 2003 in coral reefs following a major cyclone in 1987. Pakoa Efate’s to damage extensive observed (2000) ton As- and Navitisurveyed. sites the of cent per 50 in Navin (1990), reported coral damage from cyclones & Done by survey sediments.A bottom of pension re-sus- and erosion underwater breakage, coral to oncoral reefs. impact rimental Cyclones contribute det- a have cycloneswhich had influence of regular starfish (COTS) outbreaks. Vanuatu has crown-of-thorns been under and bleaching, cyclones, clude in- reefs coral to phenomena natural by Threats Gazetted in2005. regulation fisheries a despite ecosystems reef coral to increase. Illegal gillnet fishing is another threat to growth, pressure from over harvesting will continue population continuous With archipelago. the of parts most in sustenance social and economic of source important an is reef the products, cultural agri- to compared prices higher offer products ies fisher- Sinceproducts. agricultural for prices lower with coupled areas, rural the in options economic systems. coralreef tolimited dueOver is utilisation resources is now, by far, the greatest human threat to (Done & Navin, 1990). Over utilisation coral of reef eutrophicationging,and by disposal caused sewage log- of result a as siltation included Vanuatu in Previously, the major human on impacts coral reefs 5.1 Coral reefs THREATS TOCORALREEFS/ 190 5 tion, pollutionandearthquakes. marine-based nutrifica- and sedimentation including Vanuatu, in reefs coral to threats other noted (2007) Pakoa tour operators andtheIfira community. dive by campaign up clean a prompted areas Bay an outbreak of COTS around the Port Vila and Mele 2007, of quarter last the In 1990). Navin & (Done seen in 20 percentthe majorsites coral mortality of with Malekula and Epi Aneityum,Efate, of islands the around observed also were outbreaks Previous area. the in coral of loss high to contributed ville, Lugan- of vicinity the in outbreaks that reported (2007) Pakoa1990).Navin, & (Done corals of loss significant in resulted usually COTS of Outbreaks monitoring surveys. during observed 2005-2007, spots of bleaching of coral colonies were livecoral. fromoccurredbleaching Whilemajor no of loss 70% to 60 a in resulted that event bleaching ae en eot o dlbrt cern o man- of clearing deliberate of reports been have erate as large areas are far from urban centres. There mod- is development from mangroves on Pressure respectively. year per tonnes 4.8 to 3.6 estimated an was areas two the for wood mangrove of consumption hold house- that reported Malekula, on Stanly Port and islands Maskelyne on (1990), Esrom & Lal by vey the lack of effective monitoring is of concern. A sur- scale; small a on be may levels exploitation though Al- areas. rural the in construction building and subsistence exploitation as a source of wood for fuel to limited are forests mangrove to threats Current 5.2 Mangroves M ANGROVES/SEAGRASS VANUATU

Low Low Low Low High

Index Score Index edium edium edium edium edium edium

Overall Threat Threat Overall M M M M M M Fishing

edium Destructive Destructive

M Over-fishing edium Low edium Low edium Low edium Low edium Low edium Low edium Low edium Low edium Low M M M M M M M M M

5.6 Pollution There is little Information on coral reef pollution. There are concerns though about sand mining in the Mele Bay area, but the extent to which it has affected reef health is not known. Other potential sources of pollution include the run-off from ag- 5.5 Coastal development 5.5 Coastal Coastal development is concentrated in the urban areas of Port Vila and Luganville. This is a major Coastal develop- danger to reefs in close proximity. subjectprovi- to are Vanuatu undertakingsment in sions of and the Management Con- Environmental servation Act of 2000. The Act requires any coastal development considered to have a major environ- mental impact to be subject to an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) prior to commencement of The the threat development. index table indicat- surveyed region each in reefs coral to impact the ing 7 i). Appendix is shown in ing, ing, and destructive fishing, (see Appendix 7 i-v) then integrated into a single threat score. Threats assessed in all 11 survey regions. were damage

191 Sediment Sediment edium High edium edium edium

M M M M Pollution edium High edium edium High M M M

Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low High High High High Low

High

Development edium edium edium Low Low

Coastal Coastal M M M Reef Area Reef Aneityum Mele Bay N. Efate Malekula Maskelynes Matasso Epi Luganville Malo Mota Lava Gaua 5.4 Integrated Threat Index 5.4 Integrated Index Threat An Integrated Threat Analysis (Table 8) was car- ried out using a modification of “Reefs at the Risk” methods (Bryant et al. 1998, Burke et al. 2000). Modificationsreflect localconditions in the small Island states Node, where of Pacific the South West available, not often is information technical detailed regions other in apply not may that threats where or may exist. In this analysis, potential threats to reef in assessed are gathered is data where areas in health five categories:coastal development, marine-based pollution, pollution and sedimentation, over fish- Cyclones are Cyclones the major threat to seagrass beds (Pa- koa, 2007). Coastal development for real estate ex- pansion on is Efate is There also a potential hazard. mak- little baseline information however, available, impact. the likely gauge to accurately ing it difficult 5.3 Seagrass beds grove grove around Efate and Litzlitz on Malekula for tourism and infrastructure development (Pakoa, 2007). This is likely to increase with expansion of the industry. Table 8: Total Integrated threat index table threat Integrated Total 8: Table VANUATU and sedimentation are in assessed Appendix 7iii). Pakoain (2007). Pollutiondetailed are pollution of form this of causes Other 2004-2007. during tion eutrophica- and enrichment nutrient mentation, There were no reports of major occurrences of sedi- andeutrophicationenrichment 5.7 Sedimentation, nutrient (Pers. Observ..Jason Raubani, April 2005, 2007). been observed at the Malapoa Point have monitoring site tyres and gear fishing of remnants the and bags, Plastic regions. surveyed the of each affecting is pollution how demonstrates 7ii) Appendix bags. oil spills, and the indiscriminate plastic dumping of and deforestationuse, land and practices ricultural r a e fco hneig fetv community- effective hindering factor key a are disputes Land outcome. positive a hampering are enforcement weak and management clear of lack the However, areas. management community lish Rural communities are taking the initiative to estab- reefs. depleted severely or depleted to reefs stocked well- healthy from transferred stock brood/bred wild and snail green and trochus artificially-bred both with areas reef depleted of reseeding entails are underway through a JICA/Fisheries project. This Efforts to revitalize stocks of trochus and green snail in Appendix 7iv). cline. surveyed Overfishing all in regions assessed is with over fishing one the of major causes this of de- archipelago, the of parts most in depleted severely are snail green of Stocks country. the throughout harvested over being also are cucumber) sea and (trochus resources reef commercially-important under enormous pressure in populated areas. Other are fish reef (2007) Pakoa to According fisheries. toreef threat significant most the is Overfishing 5.8 Over fishing 192 to increased overfishing. contributing and management,resource reef based There have been reports of major outbreaks of of outbreaks major of reports been have There diseases. coral identification of the in required is development skill Further 2007). (Pers.corals to Observ.,Raubani,2005,Jason2006, threatlimited of be to seem these but Efate on sites monitoring several in observed been have diseases ban black or brown be to appears What known. not is threat this of Vanuatu,extentin the diseases coral on available is information little that Given isconsidered warming to global aminor threat. Jason Raubani, 2005, 2006 and 2007). Bleaching due (Pers.sites monitoring Observ.,several in observed 2005, although isolated spots of bleaching have been No major coral bleaching has affected Vanuatu since predators 5.10 Bleaching, coraland disease management areas isalsobanned. protected rine areas, dive communityand locations ma- in corals of harvesting The corals. farmed for 2007). The export of wild corals is prohibited except negative(Pers. impact Observ., Jason Raubani, May limited very had has Vanuatu in harvesting Coral size limits(Appendix legal 9). ment of establish- the with regulation amendment fisheries the by mitigated been has gillnetting discriminate purposes. Also, in- fishing for herbal, and chemical both poisons, and dynamite of use the forbids 52 number order regulation amendment Fisheries years. recent in reported been have activities such but no 8), (Appendix methods fishing structive de- prohibits 2005) of 55 (No. Act Fisheries The harvesting fishingand 5.9 Destructive coral VANUATU 5.12 Outbreak of5.12 Outbreak organisms Apart from the COTS outbreak in 2007, the occur- ofisland Emau, the on oforganism unknown rence off the north east coast of Efate caused all reef fish, including crabs, lobster and various shellfishto be contaminated by the ciguatera toxin. This is a rare study furtherneeds that poisoning of ciguatera case 2007). July Noah, Tamata Comm. (Pers. 5.11 Hurricanes/tsunamis Since 2005, three cyclones have passed through the Vanuatu archipelago (David Gibson, Meteorology Department. Sept. 2007). The immediate extent of damage to corals was not assessed because of fi- a remain cyclones Nevertheless, constraints. nancial threat. coral major 193 Among natural events threatening coral reefs are cy- are reefs coral threatening events natural Among Cyclones COTS. of outbreaks and bleaching, clones, contribute to coral breakage, underwater erosion by survey A sediments. bottom of re-suspension and Done reported & (1990), coral Navin damage from and in 50 perof cyclones cent surveyed. sites Aston (2000), observed damage extensive to Efate’s Pakoa 1987. in cyclone major a following reefs coral in 2003 damaged Danny (2007) noted that Cyclone of of coast 80 per cent the western on Efate. corals COTS COTS around Mele Bay recently with densities as high as 2-10 animals per square metre. These out- breaks have resulted in coral death in some places (Pers. Comm. Mel Edwards, Sept. 2007). In ad- dition, Drupes snails have been observed feeding on corals. The extent of the is threat, however, not 2005). April Raubani, Jason Observ. known (Pers. VANUATU sation or network on the islands of Nguna and Peleand Nguna of islands ornetworkonthe sation organi- managed and community-based small, a is (NPMPA)Area Protected Marine Nguna-Pele The Mystery area. Island conservation marine the for developed was plan management a ment, Depart- Fisheries the from help with and project, the Through benefit. to first the Aneityum with communities, three in implemented was project The conservation. reef coral with Gardens’assist to projectthrougha called committedhas itself ‘Coral International (FSPI), an NGO operating in Vanuatu PacificSouth the Peoplesof the of Foundation The tenureditional marine system. managed purely under the chiefly system or thetra- and community-initiated were others while Act, Conservation Environmentaland Managementthe under registered were number a Act, Fisheries the under established were MPAs the of Some site. to site from MPAs varied the of effectiveness the that stated further He these. of several listed (2007), Pakoa (MPAs). areas protected marine of ment establish- the through reefs coral conserve to levels (NGO) organisation non-government and munity com- national, the at efforts numerous are There protected6.1 Marine areas (MPAs) measures.conservation and management and resource reef current some are Below importance. paramount of is resource valuable this conserve to efforts so wealth, tional na- of part a is It communities.Vanuatu’s coastal of well-being economic and cultural social, the to contributes that ecosystem vital a form reefs Coral CURRENT CORALREEFCONSERVATION EFFORTS 194 6 conservation goals. conservation with compatible practice a be may needs munity ing a reserve temporarily for harvest following com- target fish species.levels of This suggests that open- different biomass havesignificantly not doclosures periodic and permanent that showed also Results tools. management resource effective are reserves village-based small-scale, that suggests This serve. re- the outside than inside biomass fish higher had revealed that both permanent and closuresperiodic communities and their marine resources. The study ni-Vanuatubenefit areas conservation community small howunderstand research tomajor on barked em- Australia of University Cook James from tists scien- and network MPANguna-Pele the 2005, In tlett, 2007). Bar- and (Tarip independence and sustainability long-term internally-focused, towardsyears, initial MPA’s the of focus project” “pilot the from away moving are villages member its and network The villages on Nguna and Pele have joined the NPMPA. councils).Todayor (chiefs appropriatechannels 16 most the through regulations and rules tablishing es- for responsible is tenuredcommunity Each boundaries. their within management marine over control complete have Pele and Nguna on villages area.reserveor marine Individual village particular anytocentral referVanuatu. in not does name The Conservation Conservation Act 2000. and Management Environmental the and 2005 of No.Act Fisheries the environment55 arecoastal of conservation the for instruments legal main The 6.2 Legislation VANUATU 6.5 Reef rehabilitation activityA core of the Fisheries Department re- is to habilitate depleted reef areas by supplying cultured trochus juveniles to communities. Management advice is also provided and includes establishment of a closed seedsarea where the are placed. juvenile Johannes (1998), reported that, overall, the pro- gramme was most successful when communities their on communities, Other engaged. actively were own initiative, soon followed suit but more target species were included such as sea green cucumber, reef and even fishes. lobsters snail, Since 2006, the Department rehabilitation in- to project JICA a through pro- expanded has gramme clude other important reef resources such as green snail and giant clams. mass Currently, production of green snail and trochus, giant clam are progress- ing well. Through this project the Tridacna gigas Vanuatu, in extinct be to believed was which species, Tonga. from has been re-introduced 6.4 COTS clean-up campaign 6.4 COTS cam- clean-up organising been have operators Tour paigns on an ad hoc basis. In 2007, Hideaway Is- land Resort carried eradication out COTS activities around the reef of Hideaway Island, Mele Bay and were COTS 5,000 - 4,000 estimated An Point. Devils collected over eight months. These were brought ashore and Sept. burnedMel Com. Edwards, (Pers. 2007). The Ifira community also did a clean up around Ifira island.It is becoming apractice that, whenever there is a reported outbreak of COTS, a clean-up campaign is organized to help curb the of destruction.problem mass coral Management Management and ScientificAuthority of CITES in Unit. is the Environment Vanuatu 195 6.3 CITES Corals are listed under Appendix II of the CITES Convention on International ofTrade Endangered is and CITES party to a is Vanuatu (CITES). Species provisions. Convention’s the implement to required The export of live corals (farmed) is subject CITES requirements, which to include a permit. The The Environmental Management and vation Conser- Act of 2000 is conservation-oriented. empowers the It Director responsible for the Envi- ronment Department to protect and register Com- munity Conservation Areas (CCA). There is also that areas ofcommunity conservation for provision have national biodiversity significance.Any coastal impactan adverse to on to have likely development coastal dynamics, including corals, must undergo (EIA). Assessment Impact an Environmental Fisheries Regulation Order No. 52 of 2005 also pro- ofalso 52 2005 No. Order Regulation Fisheries pro- marine any in corals live of collection the hibits tected areas designated by the Minister responsible for Fisheries. A current fisheries policy bans the export of wild corals Coral from Vanuatu. exports require an export license issued by the Director of Fisheries to ensure only coral certified as cultured is exported. Conservation in the Fisheries Act is addressed un- responsi- Minister the empowers and 43 section der areas. protected marine establish to Fisheries for ble established reserves marine two are there Currently, under the provisions of the Act. Other provisions conservation the of to include reefs that relate coral the prohibition of fishingfor marine mammals in Vanuatu waters, the ban on the use of explosives and poisons for fishing, and the establishment of legal of mesh size gillnets. VANUATU ls claoain ih te saeodr, con- stakeholders, other with collaboration close in Fisheries, of Department the programme, tation rehabili- reef and effort conservation its of part As ‘golden sandfish’ in2005and2006. the called Australia from species cucumber sea a introduced also Vanuatu from export and vesting har-cucumber sea companywith privatedealing A 196 vice vice on conservation and to assist them setup farms. ad- technical with provide Officers communities to Fisheries for opportunity an also was training This reefs. their rehabilitate help to importantly, most by selling cultured coral to aquarium operators and, income their subsidise to communities the enable to twofold: was aim The individuals. and munities ducted training on coral farming to interested com- VANUATU turbances causing breakage and death, corals are capable of recovering. Monitoring results solid hard withfringed are regions most that shown have substrate ideal and potential provides that substrate for coral settlement and as recruitment, long as the local threats are controlled. Since Coral Vanuatu’s Reef Monitoring Programme began six years ago, it has been observed that the country’s coral reefs have demonstrated the ability to recover and re- grow after major disasters such as cyclones, preda- tion and bleaching. 7 197 THE FUTURE OF CORAL REEF HEALTH CORAL REEF OF THE FUTURE Coral Coral growth is a process whereby after major dis- As As earlier stated, cyclones, earthquakes and global warming have influenced theVan- development of such With of hundreds over reefs years. coral uatu’s frequency, and intensity in increasing events natural the future health of coral reefs can expect to be af- Also fected. of major concern is the human impact sedimentation via and the overexploitation, expan- sion of coastal development for economic activity. These will undoubtedly increase the stress on Van- so. or 10 years the next in reefs coral uatu’s VANUATU The • Government • Monitoring • coral reefs in Vanuatu: of management the to central recommendations havemany been gaps. Provided below are keysome there 2002, in began efforts monitoring Although base for data storage; needs assistancegramme for developing a data- the country’s coral reefs; s detected; be can trends in changes significant that so ent upport to the monitoring and management of of management and monitoring the to upport

V anuatu

a

ctivities

should C oral

ne c R ommit ed eef

t

RECO o M

b

onitoring e mo

mo re re

financial

MM c onsist-

P ro- ENDATIONS

198 8 The • Coral • The • There • lines of auser-paylines of system. the along conservation, and monitoring reef coral in assist should - individuals other and aq b c such astrochus andseacucumber; MPAs; their for plans management develop munities com- assist to need NGOs and agencies ment ommercial near-shore or coral reef fisheries fisheries reef coral or near-shore ommercial udgeted activity of the Fisheries Department; theFisheries of udgeted activity uarium uarium operators, private seafood companies

main Fishe

r should eef

ries

c mo oral

b nitoring D

e

r epartment, eef a

manag

r esource

should ement

r

elevant

use b

e plan rs-tour an

g

ann overn- f or

and

ual al l

VANUATU My My gratitude also to the following Fisheries Offic- ers for their assistance and willingness to help with monitoring activities - Sompert Rena, John Ma- hit, Andrew William, George Amos, William Hiro, Ham. and Jayven Morris Peace Corps volunteers, Mike Lemier and Jessica Kalhar, contributed their services voluntarily to Vanuatu’s coral reef monitoring programme. In- deed, it has been through their commitment and vision that we are able to realise the status of Van- coral uatu’s reefs So, wherever today. you are Mike you! thank and salute we and Jessica, Reef Check is Vanuatu grateful for the kind assist- itsfor Vila finan- Port in Office ofance AusAID the aware- and training monitoring, the for support cial ness activities associated with coral Vanuatu’s reef Vanuatu. and conservationstatus in 9 199 ENTS AND CONTACTS ENTS M ACKNOWLEDGE I would like to thank the communities and Reef Check rural the teams for their valuable efforts in monitoring their respective areas and sending data to Reef at Check the Vanuatu Department of Fish- eries Reef in Vila. Check Port teams included those from Gaua, Malekula Maskelynes, and Nguna-Pele Area. Protected Marine I would like firstto, of all,conveysincere gratitude to my two colleagues Katie Thomson (US Peace Corps Volunteer) and Richard Abel Donald for their invaluable tireless assistance in conducting monitoring surveys in the islands and coordinat- ing all community-monitoring activities to ensure ofDepartmentFisher- the reached data monitoring ies. My thanks and appreciation to them, too, for their diligent assistance in providing information this report. for This report and its preparation would not ofin- assistance generous the have without possible been organisations and communities. dividuals, VANUATU Hideaway Island Resort Dive Operation Manager, Mel Edwards Private Consultant Francis Hickey Meteorology of Department Principal Forecaster, Gibson David &Mines Geology of Department Brooks Rakau P EO P LE CONSULTED 10 200 Emau Island. WSB Vanua-Tai Resource Monitor, Tamata Noah Meteorology of Department Climate Change Officer, Silas Robson Vanuatu Department Fisheries Acting Director, Robert Jimmy VANUATU David, G. 1985. ‘A survey of village fisheries in Van- survey of village fisheries in ‘A 1985. G. David, Studies 1 Part – the uatu. equipment and the catch’, Vila. Port ORSTOM, 12, No. Oceanography on Department of Economic and Sector 2006. Planning. Priorities and Action Agenda 2006-2015. An Ministry Vanuatu”. Wealthy and Healthy “Educated, of Republic Management. Economic and Finance of Vila. Port Vanuatu, Marine Re- Vanuatu 1990. & K.F. Navin, Done, T.J. sources, Australian Institute of Marine Sciences, Townsville. benefits Socio-economic 1997. Vanu K.D.,A. Esrom, of Mangrove Resources in the Port Stanley-Crab Bay Area on the Island of Malekula, Republic of (Unpublished) Vanuatu. Fisheries (Amendment) 52 Regulations (Order No. of 2005). Government of the Republic of Vanuatu. Vila. Port De- 1997. ofGovernment the ofRepublic Vanuatu, centralization and Local Government Regions Act 13 No. of 1997 (revised Parliament ofversion), the Vila. Port Vanuatu, ofRepublic Government of the Republic Environ- of Vanuatu. of2000. Act Conservation and Management mental Vila. Port Vanuatu, of Parliament Government of Vanuatu, 2005. Fisheries Act No. 55 of 2005, Parliament of the Republic of Vanuatu, Vila. Port R Hickey, F, & Pedro, G. 2005. Documentation of Resource Wan Monitor SmolBag’s Vanua-Tai Pro- (unpublished). Vanuatu gram in Marine Traditional F.R. Resource Hickey, Manage- ment in Views World Vanuatu: in Transformation 201 11 REFERENCES Chambers, Chambers, M.R., Nguyen, F., Navin, K.F. 1990. Seagrass Communities of Their Vanuatu: Compo- sition, Distribution and Resource Value In: Done, Marine Resources. Vanuatu 1990. & T.J K.F. Navin, Townsville. of Institute Sciences, Marine Australian www.wri.org Burke, Burke, L., Selig, L., & Spalding, M. 2000. Reefs at 2002. Asia, East in South Risk http://www.marine.wri.org; http://www.marine.wri.org; risk.wri.org http://www.reefsat Bryant, D., Bryant, L. and McManus Burke, J. D., M. Spalding. (1998). Reefs at Risk: A map-based indicator of threats to the world’s coral reefs. World Resources 56p. Institute, Brouard, F. & Brouard, F. Grandperrin, R. ‘Deep 1985. bottom fishesof theWorking outer reef slopeVanuatu’. in Paper 12, 17th Meeting SPC on Regional Technical New Noumea, Commission. Pacific South Fisheries, Caledonia. Bell, Bell, L. A and Amos, M. J. 1994. Republic of Van- report 93/49. FFA Profiles. uatu Fisheries Resources South Pacific Forum Fisheries Agency, Honiara, Islands. Solomon Bedford S. (2000). Pieces of the Vanuatu Puzzle: ar- Puzzle: ofVanuatu Pieces (2000). the S. Bedford chaeology of the north, south and centre. Volume 1: Doctoral Thesis, Department of Archaelogy and Natural History, Research School of Pacific and Can- University, Asian Australian National Studies, ACT. berra, Bartlett, C. and Tarip, K. 2008 Networks ofcommu- Networks 2008 K. Tarip, and C. Bartlett, nity-based marine reserves in In the Global Pacific. Coral Reef Status Report 2008. Ed: Wilkinson, C. Node. Pacific South-West VANUATU coral reef in the Pacific:the in monitoring; and Status coralreef Re- resourcesVanuatu.of on Symposium Regional The Naviti, W. and Aston, J. 2000. Status of coral reef fish of Vanuatu. Republic of Vanuatu, Port Vila. National Statistics Office. 2006b. National Accounts uatu, Port Vila. Van- of RepublicAgriculture. of Census 2006 port, Re- Preliminary 2006a. Office. Statistics National Republic of Vanuatu, Port Vila. 1999.Report, main Housing Populationand tional Na- Vanuatu The 1999. Office. Statistics National Report, 1994. Republic of Vanuatu, Port Vila. CensusOffice. 1994. Agriculture Statistics National thePacificgramme, of Secretariat Community. Pro- Fisheries Oceanic 13. No. Report Status ery Fish- Tuna National Vanuatu 2007. B. Molony, Vanuatu. Vila, Port 2008. 2006- plan Corporate Fisheries: and Forestry Quarantine, Agriculture, of Ministry National University, Canberra. National Centre for Development Studies, Australia ment of Mangroves, “narong”, resources in Vanuatu. Lal, P.N. & Esrom, D. 1990. Utilization and Manage- the Ocean World. Blackwell Publishers Inc. of Peoples-Ancestors Lapita P.V.Kirk, The (1997). report. lished Unpub- Vanuatu. in Area Protected Marine Pele Kalpat, T. and Bartlett, C. 2008. Case Study: Nguna- 40: 165-186. Journal Management Coastal and Vanuatu.Ocean in resources supported, marine of management Government village-based 1998. E. R. Johannes, 4. (p147-168) UNESCO: Paris, 437p. Sourcebooks Management Coastal agement. Man- and Science Fisheries in Knowledge Fishers’ Haggan,N.,Neis,Baird,in I.G.(eds) B. and (2007) 202 cess in2006). Vanuatu Department.Fisheries 2006. Database (ac- cess in2007). (ac- Database 2007. Vanuatu Department Fisheries Unit. Port Vila, Vanuatu. longVanuatu. Animol 2007.Vanuatu Environment mo ThreatenedPlant blongol EndemicSpecies mo Endangered, 2007. Unit. Environment Vanuatu aspx http://www.reefbase.org/pacific/default. 2008: cific, Pa- ReefBase In Press,Berkeley,USA. California of World Conservation Monitoring Centre. University UNEP the at PreparedReefs. Coral of WorldAtlas E.P.and M.D.,2001,Ravilious ,Spalding,C. Green uatu. A UNUFTPFinalProject 2006. Thesis Management (CFM: Future Consideration for Van- Fisheries Community (unpublished). J.J. Raubani, try of Agriculture, Quarantine, Forestry & Fisheries. nual Report. Vanuatu Fisheries Department. Minis- An- 2007 Department Fisheries J.J.2007. Raubani, Quarantine, Forestry&Fisheries. Agriculture, of Ministry Fisheries. of Department 2008. Plan Management Trade Aquarium Marine National Vanuatu 2008. J.J. Raubani, & K. Pakoa, Pacific, 2007. Suva,Publications,South Fiji.IPS the University of 2004.West Pacific: South the in Reefs Coral of tus Sta- 2007. R. Sulu, In:Vanuatu 2007. M.K. Pakoa, Forestry andFisheries, Port Vila, Vanuatu. Quarantine, Agriculture, of Ministry 2003. Report Annual Department Fisheries 2003. M.K. Pakoa, source and Management; Noumea, New Caledonia. VANUATU ------45 1,613 51 2,784 94 3,199 122 3,122 132 3,532 8 9 8 50 50 39 40 40 50 50 50 50 50 26 38 25 13 15.4 58 98 75 62 51 77 248 179 248 162 203 12 ENDICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 44 51 1,1 2,7 3,9 1,1 0,6 0,7 PP 7,35 0,35 A 750 935 597 257 422 290 184 340 455 ellowfin Bigeye Billfish Skipjack Y 90 90 73 67 53 35 36 36 170 130 150 160 107 100 100 100 100 55.2 6,127 1,450 3,207 2,417 2,299 1,510 2,480 3,036 1,253 2,342 2,561 Albacore rochus (mt) Green snail (mt) Sea cucumber (mt) ear T ear 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2004 2005 2003 2006 2007 Y Y Appendix Appendix 2: Total annual export production for trochus, green snail Department, 2007) and sea cucumber (Vanuatu Fisheries Appendix 1: Tuna and tuna like species catch in Vanuatu EEZ (Molony, 2007) EEZ (Molony, Vanuatu species tuna and like catch in Tuna 1: Appendix VANUATU Appendix 3: Survey sitesthecountry across Appendix 3:Survey Site Names M M Le owoou:Gaua M Lesus: Gaua M M Rah Island: Hat Island Rah Hat Island Totolong: iewyIln:EaeOpruitcFign efRe lt1.5-3m Reef Flat Fringing Reef Opportunistic Hideaway Island:Efate P Three Survivor Beach:Efate Unakap: Nguna M Kulwota: Epi Wamby: Epi Taliko: Epi Ringi Tesu: Sazal Reef: Amal Tabu Area: Bushman’s Bay: Crab BayAccess: Crab BayTabu: Lagoon: Unua: Avanaheo: Avunbaga: Coolidge: Santo Aworor: Gaua Navar: Gaua Letoltol:Gaua M Nwengoro: Gaua Aru: Gaua Dolap: Gaua Legargir: Gaua Onnel Bay:Gaua Ontar: Gaua Taplon: Gaua Tavalar: Gaua Onlem: Gaua Tequla: Gaua Lembot 2:Gaua White Sand:Gaua ango etewe: Gaua ystery Island:Aneityum ystery Island:Aneityum alapoa alapoa ataso enkoro: Gaua P assis: P M M oint: Efate M alekula ast: Efate P P M oint: Efate oint: Efate alekula M M M M M M t aaOeOfFign efRe lt2m Reef Flat Fringing Reef One-Off ota Lava alo alo askelynes t aaOeOfFign efRe lt15-2 o20 ih net. usrt Reef Check Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2006 No 1.5-2m Reef Flat Fringing Reef One-Off ota Lava t aaOeOfFign efRe lt1.5m Reef Flat Fringing Reef One-Off ota Lava askelynes M M M M alekula lkl n-f rnigRe efFa .mN 05Fs,Ivrs,SbtaeReef Check Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2005 No 1.5m Reef Flat Fringing Reef One-Off alekula alekula alekula au Type of Datum P P P P P P P P P One- P P P n-f rnigRe efFa mN 07Fs,Ivrs,SbtaeReef Check Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2007 No 3-4m Reef Flat Fringing Reef One-Off n-f rnigRe efFa 1-2m Reef Flat Fringing Reef One-Off n-f rnigRe efFa 1m Reef Flat Fringing Reef One-Off n-f rnigRe efFa 1.5m Reef Flat Fringing Reef One-Off P P P P P n-f rnigRe efFa .mN 05Fs,Ivrs,SbtaeReef Check Fish,Inverts., Substrate 2005 No 1.5m Reef Flat Fringing Reef One-Off n-f rnigRe efFa 2-6m Reef Flat Fringing Reef One-Off n-f rnigRe efFa 3m Reef Flat Fringing Reef One-Off n-f rnigRe efFa 2-5m Reef Flat Fringing Reef One-Off potnsi rnigRe efFa 6m Reef Flat Fringing Reef Opportunistic P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P raetF ermanent raetInnerBarrierR ermanent raetF ermanent raetInnerBarrierR ermanent raetF ermanent raetF ermanent raetF ermanent raetF ermanent raetF ermanent raetF ermanent raetF ermanent raetF ermanent raetInnerBarrierR ermanent raetInnerBarrierR ermanent raetF ermanent raetF ermanent raetF ermanent raetF ermanent raetF ermanent raetF ermanent raetF ermanent raetF ermanent raetF ermanent raetF ermanent raetF ermanent raetF ermanent raetF ermanent raetF ermanent raetF ermanent raetF ermanent raetF ermanent raetF ermanent raetF ermanent f rnigRe efFa . m o20 ih net. usrt Reef Check Fish,Inverts., Substrate 2005 No 1.5 -3m Reef Flat Fringing Reef Off Reef ign efRe lt1 mN 07Fs,Ivrs,SbtaeReef Check Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2007 No 1-3m Reef Flat ringing Reef ign efRe lt2m Reef Flat ringing Reef ign efRe lt1m Reef Flat ringing Reef ign efRe lt15-3 N 01 07Fs,Ivrs,SbtaeReef Check Fish,Inverts., Substrate 2001-2007 No 1.5-3m Reef Flat ringing Reef ign efRe lt15-3 N 01 07Fs,Ivrs,SbtaeReef Check Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2001-2007 No 1.5-3m Reef Flat ringing Reef ign efDo-f 2-6m Drop-off ringing Reef ign efDo-f 2-6m Drop-off ringing Reef ign efRe lt15-5 N 07Fs,Ivrs,SbtaeReef Check Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2007 No 1.5-5m Reef Flat ringing Reef ign efRe lt15-3 N 07Fs,Ivrs,SbtaeReef Check Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2007 No 1.5-3m Reef Flat ringing Reef ign efRe lt1.5-3m Reef Flat ringing Reef ign efRe lt2m Reef Flat ringing Reef ign efRe lt1-2 o20 ih net. usrt Reef Check Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2005 No 1-2m Reef Flat ringing Reef ign efRe lt1-2m Reef Flat ringing Reef ign efRe lt2m Reef Flat ringing Reef ign efRe lt1.5m Reef Flat ringing Reef ign efRe lt1.5m Reef Flat ringing Reef ign efRe lt2m Reef Flat ringing Reef ign efRe lt1-3m Reef Flat ringing Reef ign efRe lt2 o20 ih net. usrt Reef Check Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2007 No 2m Reef Flat ringing Reef ign efRe lt3m Reef Flat ringing Reef ign efRe lt2 o20 ih net. usrt Reef Check Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2007 No 2m Reef Flat ringing Reef ign efRe lt4m Reef Flat ringing Reef ign efRe lt4m Reef Flat ringing Reef ign efRe lt2m Reef Flat ringing Reef ign efRe lt1 o20 ih net. usrt Reef Check Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2007 No 1m Reef Flat ringing Reef ign efRe lt1 o20 ih net. usrt Reef Check Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2007 No 1m Reef Flat ringing Reef ign efRe lt3-4 o20 ih net. usrt Reef Check Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2007 No 3-4m Reef Flat ringing Reef ign efRe lt1m Reef Flat ringing Reef ign efRe lt1m Reef Flat ringing Reef e efFa 1.5-3m Reef Flat eef e efFa . mys20 ih net. usrt Reef Check Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2007 yes 1.5–3m Reef Flat eef e efFa 2m Reef Flat eef e efFa mN 05-20 ih net. usrt Reef Check Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2005-2007 No 3m Reef Flat eef Zone Reef 204 Range Depth in Located Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y s20 ih net. usrt R Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2007 es s20 ih net. usrt R Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2007 es s20 ih net. usrt R Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2007 es s20 ih net. usrt R Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2005 es s20 05Fs,Ivrs,SbtaeR Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2001-2005 es s20 05Fs,Ivrs,SbtaeR Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2001-2005 es s20 ih net. usrt R Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2006 es s20 ih net. usrt R Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2007 es sN 03-20 ih net. usrt R Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2003-2007 es/No s20 ih net. usrt R Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2006 es s20 ih net. usrt R Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2006 es s20 ih net. usrt R Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2006 es s20 07Fs,Ivrs,SbtaeR Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2005-2007 es s20 ih net. usrt R Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2005 es s20 ih net. usrt R Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2005 es s20 ih net. usrt R Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2006 es s20 ih net. usrt R Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2006 es s20 ih net. usrt R Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2006 es s20 ih net. usrt R Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2006 es s20 ih net. usrt R Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2007 es s20 ih net. usrt R Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2007 es s20 ih net. usrt R Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2007 es s20 ih net. usrt R Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2007 es s20 ih net. usrt R Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2007 es s20 ih net. usrt R Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2007 es s20 ih net. usrt R Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2007 es s20 ih net. usrt R Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2007 es s20 ih net. usrt R Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2007 es s20 ih net. usrt R Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2007 es s20 Fish,Inverts.,Substrate 2007 es MP A Y Surveyed ears

Gathered Information Reef Check M Used eef Check eef Check eef Check eef Check eef Check eef Check eef Check eef Check eef Check eef Check eef Check eef Check eef Check eef Check eef Check eef Check eef Check eef Check eef Check eef Check eef Check eef Check eef Check eef Check eef Check eef Check eef Check eef Check eef Check ethods M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified odified VANUATU

205 15 12 12 6.3 9.3 3.1 10.4 alue (millions of vatu) 9 3 43 34 18 34 28 Quantity (t) V reen snail reen G tober 2020. tober ch or for breeding the species during breeding the period (2).” for or ch in subregulation mentioned chase chase any green snail during the period starting on 1 October 2005 and ending on erson may take or have in his or her possession a green snail for the purpose snail for a green possession her of in his or carrying have or take may a re out erson

egulation 16 substitute epeal Regulation, the ubject to subregulation (3), a person must not take, harm, have in his or her possession, sell or n this Regulation “green snail” means a mollusc of the species Turbo Marmaratus. means a mollusc of the species Turbo snail” “green n this Regulation A p sear “16 I S pur 1 Oc R R

ear 2006 2003 2004 2005 2001 2002 Y 2000

Data from registered projects only Appendix 6: Composition of the target groups of aquarium fish species (Pakoa & Raubani, 2008) 6: Composition of & the targetRaubani, Appendix of groups aquarium fish species (Pakoa

Appendix 5: Deep-sea bottom fish production (Vanuatu Fisheries Department 5: Deep-seaAppendix 2006) production fish bottom (Vanuatu (1) (2) (3)

1 Appendix 4: Green snail moratorium snail regulation Green 4: Appendix Methods Used Reef Check Modified Reef Information Gathered ears Y Surveyed A es 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate es 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef es 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef es 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef es 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef es 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef es 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef es 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef es 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef es 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef es 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef es 2006 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef es 2006 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef es 2006 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef es 2006 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef es 2005 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef es 2005 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef es 2005 - 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef es 2006 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef es 2006 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef es 2006 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef es/No 2003 - 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Modified Check Reef es 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef es 2006 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef es 2001 - 2005 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef es 2001 - 2005 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Modified Check Reef es 2005 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef es 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef es 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef es 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Located Located in MP Depth Range Reef Reef Zone ringing Reef Flat Reef 2m No 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef Reef ermanent Reef Fringing Flat Reef 1m ermanent Reef Fringing Flat Reef 1m ermanent Reef Fringing Flat Reef 3 - 4m No 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef ermanent Reef Fringing Flat Reef 1m No 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef ermanent Reef Fringing Flat Reef 1m No 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef ermanent Reef Fringing Flat Reef 2m ermanent Reef Fringing Flat Reef 4m ermanent Reef Fringing Flat Reef 4m ermanent F ermanent Reef Fringing Flat Reef 3m ermanent Reef Fringing Flat Reef 2m No 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef ermanent Reef Fringing Flat Reef 1 - 3m ermanent Reef Fringing Flat Reef 2m ermanent Reef Fringing Flat Reef 1.5m ermanent Reef Fringing Flat Reef 1.5m ermanent Reef Fringing Flat Reef 2m ermanent Reef Fringing Flat Reef 1 - 2m ermanent Reef Fringing Flat Reef 1 - 2m No 2005 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef ermanent Reef Fringing Flat Reef 2m ermanent Inner Barrier Reef Flat Reef 3m No 2005 - 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef ermanent Inner Barrier Reef Flat Reef 2m ermanent Reef Fringing Flat Reef 1.5 - 3m ermanent Reef Fringing Flat Reef 1.5 - 3m No 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef ermanent Reef Fringing Flat Reef 1.5 - 5m No 2007 Inverts., Substrate Fish, Check Modified Reef ermanent Reef Fringing Drop-off 2 - 6m ermanent Reef Fringing Drop-off 2 - 6m ermanent Reef Fringing Flat Reef 1.5 - 3m No 2001- 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Modified Check Reef ermanent Reef Fringing Flat Reef 1.5 - 3m No 2001- 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef ermanent Reef Fringing Flat Reef 1m ermanent Inner Barrier Reef Flat Reef 1.5 – 3m yes 2007 Fish, Inverts., SubstrateModified Check Reef ermanent Reef Fringing Flat Reef 2m ermanent Inner Barrier Reef Flat Reef 1.5 - 3m ermanent Reef Fringing Flat Reef 1- 3m No 2007 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P Opportunistic Reef Fringing Flat Reef 6m One-Off Reef Fringing Flat Reef 2 - 5m One-Off Reef Fringing Flat Reef 3m One-Off Reef Fringing Flat Reef 2 - 6m One-Off Reef Fringing Flat Reef 1.5m No 2005 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef P P P P P One-Off Reef Fringing Flat Reef 1.5m One-Off Reef Fringing Flat Reef 1m One-Off Reef Fringing Flat Reef 1 - 2m One-Off Reef Fringing Flat Reef 3 - 4m No 2007 Substrate Fish, Inverts., Check Modified Reef P P P One-Off Reef Fringing Flat Reef 1.5 - 3m No 2005 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef P P P P P P P P P Datum of Type oint: Efate oint: Efate oint: Efate assis: Mota Lava One-Off Reef Fringing Flat Reef 1.5 - 2m No 2006 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef etewe: Gaua ango P White Sand: Gaua Lembot 2: Gaua Tequla: Gaua Tequla: Onlem: Gaua Tavalar: Gaua Tavalar: Taplon: Gaua Taplon: Ontar: Gaua Onnel Bay: Gaua Legargir: Gaua Dolap: Gaua Aru: Gaua Nwengoro: Gaua Menkoro: Gaua Letoltol:Gaua Navar: Gaua Aworor: Gaua Aworor: Coolidge: Santo Avunbaga: Malo Avunbaga: Avanaheo: Malo Avanaheo: Unua: Malekula Lagoon: Malekula Crab Bay Tabu: Malekula Crab Bay Tabu: Crab Bay Access: Malekula Bushman’s Bay: Malekula Bay: Bushman’s One-Off Reef Fringing Flat Reef 1.5m No 2005 Fish, Inverts., Substrate Check Modified Reef Amal Tabu Area: Malekula Amal Tabu Sazal Reef: Maskelynes Sazal Reef: Ringi Tesu: Maskelynes Ringi Tesu: Taliko: Epi Taliko: Wamby: Epi Wamby: Kulwota: Epi Kulwota: Mataso Unakap: Nguna Survivor Beach: Efate Three Mast: Efate P Hideaway Island: Efate Opportunistic Reef Fringing Flat Reef 3m 1.5 - Totolong: Mota LavaTotolong: One-Off Reef Fringing Flat Reef 2m Hat Island Rah P Rah Hat Island Rah Island: Mota LavaRah One-Off Reef Fringing Flat Reef 1.5m Malapoa P Malapoa P Lesus: Gaua Mystery Island: Aneityum Le owo ou: Gaua Mystery Island: Aneityum M Site Names VANUATU ii) Threat for index pollution i) Threat development for index coastal Appendix 7: Analysis threats health to reef potential of efAe ot i ak hpigLnsOverallScore ShippingLanes OilTanks Ports Reef Area OverallScore(highestrecorded) Coastline Tourism Mines Airports Towns, Cities Reef Area niymNn None None Aneityum M .EaeNn Nn o oeVr o o Low Low Very low None Low None None N. Efate M M M p oeNn o None Low None None Epi uavleNn ihLwNn ihHg High High High None Low High None Luganville M M aaNn oeVr o oeNn oeVery low None None None Very low None None Gaua uavleHg ihVr ihHigh Very high High Gaua High Luganville Aneityum M M Epi M M M N. Efate M l a oe ihLwHg ihHg High High High High Low High None ele Bay a lkl oeVr o o oeVr o o Low Low Very low None Low Very low None alekula tsoNn oeNn oeNn oeNone None None None None None None atasso l oeNn oeNn oeNn None None None None None None None alo t aaNn oeVr o oeNn oeVery low None None None Very low None None ota Lava tsoVr o Nn Low High High ota Lava None alo None Very high Very Low High Low atasso askelynes alekula High ele Bay klnsNn oeNn oeVr o oeVery low None Very low None None None None skelynes M M M M M M M du Nn Low Low High None None edium high None edium edium None High edium None High None edium edium None edium M du betHg Low High Absent edium M edium 206 M du o Low Low edium (highest recorded) Low Low Low M M M M M M edium edium edium edium edium edium M edium VANUATU edium edium edium edium edium edium Low M M M High M M Low low Very M High edium edium (highest recorded) M M Crab Bay orld heritage/ P edium High ediumedium Low Low edium High 207 M M M M anagement plan M A/Submission for W MP edium High edium Low edium edium Low edium Risk M M M M Steepness FactorsM Overall Score ele P A establish with arine reserve designated under the Fisheries M Act but large area remain open access MP conservation area conservation areas Community management areas ediumedium Community management areas edium Community management areas Community management areas edium Community management areas/IW edium Conservation area for giant clams/community edium Community management areas edium ixed Forestixed Forestixed Forest Lowixed Forest Low Low High Low Low Very high Very Low low Very M M M M M M M natural vegetation natural vegetation Type natural vegetation natural vegetation M M M M natural vegetation alo ota Lava alekula askelynes atasso ele Bay High Community management areas (seasonal) aloota Lava Cropland mixed with Cropland mixed with alekula askelynes atasso ele Bay Urban and built-up High Low High M M Gaua M EpiLuganville High High Community management areas M M M N. Efate High Nguna- Reef AreaReef ScoreAneityum Notes on Marine Protection Aneityum Cropland mixed with Gaua Cropland mixed with M M M M M M N. Efate EpiLuganville with Cropland mixed Urban and built-up High Low High Reef AreaReef Vegetation iv) Threat index for over-fishing index for Threat iv) iii) Threat index for pollution index for sedimentation and Threat iii) VANUATU ably to have them known to have sotaken. been (1) (a),graph the person knows if or reason-ought para- contravenes which means any by taken fish land,sell,anynot receivemust possess person or A referred (1)(a). to in paragraph proved, is purposes the forintended contrary be to the unless presumed, is vessel any board on found substance noxious other or poison explosive, Any notexceedingimprisonment two months, or both. of term a by or exceeding VT10,000,000 not fine a by conviction on punishable offence an of guilty is (1) subsection contravenes who person A (a). paragraph in referredto anypurpose forsubstance such use to intention an indicating circumstances any explosive, poison or other noxious substance in (b) orcaught; easily more fish rendering way any in or fish, ing the killing,purpose of stunning, disabling or catch- for substance noxious other or poison explosive, (a) A person must not: 42 Prohibited FishingMethods Appendix 8:Prohibited Fishing Methods fishing v) Threat for index destructive aaNn oeVr o eylwVery low Very low Very low None None Gaua M M uavleNn oeVr o eylwVery low Very low Very low None None Luganville p oeNn eylwVr o Very low Very low Very low None None Epi M M M .EaeNn oeVr o eylwVery low Very low Very low None None N. Efate M niymNn oeVr o eylwVery low Very low Very low None None Aneityum efAe yaiePiosHra osnBekg OverallScore(highestrecorded) Breakage HerbalPoison Poisons Dynamite Reef Area

t aaNn oeVr o eylwVery low Very low Very low None None ota Lava l oeNn eylwVr o Very low Very low Very low None None alo tsoNn oeVr o eylwVery low Very low Very low None None atasso seye oeNn eylwVr o Very low Very low Very low None None askelynes lkl oeNn eylwVr o Very low Very low Very low None None alekula l a oeNn eylwVr o Very low Very low Very low None None ele Bay

car p ri t b ue, s o atmt o s any use to attempt or use used, be to ermit ry, or have in his or her possession or control 208 (1) 24 BFishingnets Appendix regulation 9:Fishing net ment notexceeding 2months or both. imprison- of term a by or VT1,000,000 exceeding of an offence punishable on conviction by a fine not guilty is (4) subsection contravenes who person A (a) metres indiameter. 2 exceed not does which of radius a or stretched, fully when millimetres 20; than less of size mesh a (a) out a research: (2) exceeds 2metres indiameter.”. that radius a or stretched, fully when millimetres (b) or size of less than 50 millimetres when fully stretched; (b) stretched;fully or when millimetres 50 than less of size mesh a has

a a A an a A p net mentioned in subregulation 1(b) that has that 1(b) subregulation in mentioned net drag net or a beach seine net that has a mesh a has that net seine beach a or net drag e rfre t i sbeuain 1() that (1)(a) subregulation in to referred net person may use for the purpose of carrying carrying of purpose the for use may person y cast net that has a mesh size of less than 20 than less of size mesh a has that net cast y erson must notusefor fishing: