Chumbe Island Management Plan 2017-2027

CHUMBE ISLAND

rd 3 Ten Year Management Plan

2017 - 2027 This document is the third ten-year management plan for Chumbe Island Coral Park in Zanzibar, Tanzania. The two previous management plans covered the periods of 1995 to 2005, and 2006 to 2016 respectively.

2027 Goal

The Chumbe Island Coral Reef Sanctuary and Closed Forest Reserve are effectively and sustainably managed in order to maximize their contribution to biodiversity conservation, serve as a model for effective ecotourism and MPA management, and provide a platform to promote wider environmental awareness for sustainable development and ecological stewardship in Zanzibar.

Produced with support from: Sustainable Solutions International Consulting (SSIC)

Published by: Chumbe Island Coral Park (CHICOP)

Citation: CHICOP (2017) 3rd Ten Year Management Plan for Chumbe Island Coral Park.

Photos & images: Citations provided throughout document where required. All images permissible for use through creative commons or associated licensing, and/or direct owner consent.

Cover photo: © CHICOP

Design & layout: Sustainable Solutions International Consulting

Available from: CHICOP, Zanzibar, Tanzania.

E: [email protected]

T: +255 (0) 242 231 040

3rd Ten Year Management Plan 2017 – 2027 Chumbe Island Coral Park

Contents

Acronyms and Abbreviations ...... 6 Figures ...... 8 Tables ...... 12 1. INTRODUCTION ...... 13 2. THE CHUMBE ISLAND MPA - OVERVIEW ...... 14 3. GOVERNANCE FRAMEWORK ...... 21 3.1. The Marine Sanctuary Agreement ...... 21

3.2. The Closed Forest Reserve Agreement ...... 22

3.3. Key Stakeholders ...... 23

3.4. Operational Management...... 31

4. PHYSICAL FEATURES ...... 34 5. SITES OF CULTURAL & HISTORICAL IMPORTANCE ...... 42 6. CONSERVATION: Biodiversity Management & Trends over Time ...... 45 6.1 The Chumbe Reef Sanctuary (CRS) ...... 45

6.1.3. Plant Diversity in the Coral Reef Sanctuary ...... 78

6.2 The Chumbe Closed Forest Reserve (CFR) ...... 80

6.2.2. Plant Diversity ...... 81

7. EDUCATION: Programmes & Lessons Learned ...... 97 7.1. School children ...... 98

7.2. Teachers (both in-service and trainee’s) ...... 107

7.3. Target & Non-Target Community Environmental Education ...... 108

7.4. Peer Educator Programmes conducted off-island ...... 109

7.5. Universities and Academic Institution Programmes ...... 110

7.6. Governmental Agencies ...... 111

7.7. Local NGOs ...... 111

7.8. Tourists / visitors to the Chumbe eco-lodge ...... 112

8. SUSTAINABLE ECOTOURISM: Service Provision & Sustainable Financing ...... 113 8.1. Tourism Infrastructure & Technology ...... 115

8.2. Guest Activities ...... 122

8.3. Guest Services ...... 124

8.4. Chumbe Tourist Visitors ...... 126

8.5. Marketing ...... 131

8.6. Sustainable Financing for MPA ...... 139

9. CHUMBE AWARDS & RECOGNITION TO DATE ...... 143 10. MANAGEMENT PLAN 2017 – 2027: METHODOLOGY ...... 145 11. STRATEGIC GOALS & OBJECTIVES: 2017 – 2027 ...... 146 11.1. Conservation ...... 148

11.2. Education ...... 155

11.3. Ecotourism ...... 160

12. KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS...... 180 13. MONITORING, EVALUATION & LEARNING ...... 186 13.1. MEL for Conservation...... 186

13.2. MEL for Education ...... 190

13.3. MEL for Ecotourism ...... 191

APPENDIX ONE: Standard Operating Procedures ...... 193 APPENDIX TWO: Rangers Report Template ...... 202 APPENDIX THREE: Coral Genera Diversity in the Chumbe Reef Sanctuary ...... 203 APPENDIX FOUR: Reef Fish Species in the Chumbe Reef Sanctuary ...... 205 APPENDIX FIVE: Preliminary Macroalgae inventory ...... 222 APPENDIX SIX: Vascular Plants in the Chumbe Forest Reserve ...... 223 APPENDIX SEVEN: Bird diversity in the Chumbe Forest Reserve ...... 225 APPENDIX EIGHT: Butterfly diversity in the Chumbe Forest Reserve ...... 229 APPENDIX NINE: Snorkeling Code of Conduct ...... 230 APPENDIX TEN: Chumbe Awards (1998-2017) ...... 231 References ...... 236

Acronyms and Abbreviations

4Cs Conservation, Community, Culture and Commerce APSO Agency for Personnel Service Overseas AWAC Acoustic and Wave Current BMMSY Biomass (fisheries total community) Maximum Multispecies Sustainable Yield BRELA Business Registrations and Licensing Agency CBD Convention on Biological Diversity CFH Closed Forest Habitat CFR Closed Forest Reserve CHICOP Chumbe Island Coral Park CO₂ Carbon Dioxide COLE Commission for Lands and Environment CORDIO Coastal Oceans Research and Development - Indian Ocean COT Crown of Thorns

CPCe Coral Point Count with Excel CR Critically Endangered CRS Chumbe Reef Sanctuary DC District Commissioner DCCFF Department of Commercial Crops Fruits and Forestry DoE Department of Environment EACC East African Coastal Current EE Environmental Education ENSO El Nino Southern Oscillation ESD Education for Sustainable Development FA Fishers Association FAO Food and Agriculture Organization FB Facebook FIMs Floating Information Modules GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel GER Global Ecosystem Reserve GPS Global Positioning System HAT Hotel Association of Tanzania HMS Pegasus An Aircraft/Seaplane carrier bought by the Royal Navy in 1917 ICRAN International Coral Reef Action Network IMS Institute of Marine Science IO Indian Ocean

ISP Independent Study Project ITCZ Intertropical Convergence Zone IUCN International Union for the Conservation of Nature JTTI Jambiani Tourism Training Institute LHCC Live Hard Coral Cover LT&C Linking Tourism & Conservation LTR The Long Run

MANREC Ministry of Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environment Conservation MBCA Menai Bay Conservation Area MCU Marine Conservation Unit MEAB Marine Education Awareness and Biodiversity MEL Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning MoU Memorandum of Understanding MPA Marine Protected Area MSA Marine Sanctuary Agreement MSY Maximum Sustainable Yield MU Marahubi University NE North East NFWF National Fish and Wildlife Foundation NGO Non- Government Organization NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NTA No-Take-Area NTZ No-Take Zone PLD Planktionic Larval Duration PSE Patrol, Surveillance and Enforcement PUWS Porites Ulcerative White Spot ReCoMap Regional Programme for the Sustainable Management of the Coastal Zones of the countries of the Indian Ocean SADC-REEP Southern African Development Community - Regional Environmental Education Programme SE Standard Error SEO Search Engine Optimization SES Senior Expert Services SIT School for International Training SOPs Standard Operating Procedures SSIC Sustainable Solutions International Consultant SST Sea Surface Temperature SUZA State University of Zanzibar TAU Taxonomic Unit TIES The International Ecotourism Society TOC Theory of Change ToP Technology of Participation TRA Tanzania Revenue Authority UK United Kingdom USA United States of America USPs Unique Selling Points VAT Value Added Tax VSO Volunteer Services Overseas WCMC World Conservation Monitoring Center WCS Wildlife Conservation Society WDPA World Database on Protected Areas WIO Western Indian Ocean WWF World Wide Fund

ZANEMA Zanzibar Employers Association ZATI Zanzibar Association of Tourism Investors ZAWA Zanzibar Water Authority ZIPA Zanzibar Investment Promotion Authority ZPC Zanzibar Ports Corporation ZSSF Zanzibar Social Security Funds ZU Zanzibar University

Figures

Figure 1: Map showing the location of Chumbe Island off the East coast of Africa...... 14

Figure 2: A 'Google-eye" view of Chumbe, showing the boundaries of the MPA ...... 17

Figure 3: Simplified Theory of Change for CHICOP ...... 20

Figure 4: Yearly incidents of invertebrate harvesters encroaching the intertidal area along the northern CRS border (Source: CHICOP ranger report data)...... 30

Figure 5: Organochart of CHICOP ...... 32

Figure 6: Average monthly rainfall in Unguja (Source: Zanzibar Meteorological Station, Haji, 2010) ...... 35

Figure 7: (Above right). Spatial distribution of rainfall and rainfall stations in Unguja (Source: Haji, 2010) ...... 35

Figure 8: (Below). Average monthly minimum (min) and maximum (max) temperature (°C) in Unguja (Source: Zanzibar Meteorological Station, Haji, 2010) ...... 35

Figure 9: Left: Maximum current speeds at Chumbe Reef as recorded by the Acoustic and Wave Current (AWAC) profiler in 2008. Depth profiles are from bottom (10m) to the surface (1m). Note that highest values of maximum current speeds are observable between 4 and 7m from the sediment-water interface. Right: Monthly current charts for CRS for the year 2008 (Source: Mzuka et al. 2010) ...... 37

Figure 10: The range of sea surface temperatures experienced on Chumbe through the year, inclusive of 1998 and 2006 – 2016 (Source: Muhando, unpublished data) ...... 38

Figure 11: Bleaching monitoring results 2016, CRS (< 3 meters depth), random swim using 50 x 50 cm photo quadrats by snorkeling, CPCe analyses (41 frames) ...... 39

Figure 12: Bleached white corals in the shallow north of the CRS during the peak of the coral bleaching event, April 2016 © Ulli Kloiber ...... 39

Figure 13: The effect of mortal bleaching. Left: A healthy coral colony photographed in September 2011. Center: The coral bleached in April 2016 and showed some algae overgrowth by June 2016. Right: Coral colony did not recover (mortally bleached), image November 2016...... 39

Figure 14: Comparison of the sea surface temperatures in the two highest bleaching incident years (1998 and 2016). (Source: Muhando, unpublished data) ...... 40

Figure 15: The Chumbe logo, designed by Alison McMullin in 1998, features the Chumbe lighthouse as a landmark of the area ...... 42

Figure 16: Map showing the key habitats and boundaries of Chumbe...... 46

Figure 17: (above) Location of the demarcation buoys ...... 47

Figure 18: Total attempted fishing incidences in the CRS over time (Source: Rangers Reports, 1993-2016)...... 49

Figure 19: Types of vessels attempting incursions into the CRS (Source: Rangers Reports, 1993-2016)...... 50

Figure 20: Number of fishing vessels rescued by the Chumbe Rangers (Source: Rangers Reports, 1993-2016)...... 51

Figure 21: Live Hard Coral Cover (LHCC) % over time (Source: Data provided by the Wildlife Conservation Society, Kenyan Marine Program Office. T.R. McClanahan Principal Investigator) ...... 53

Figure 22: Control site ‘Tele Reef’ in relation to Chumbe Island ...... 54

Figure 23: Comparison of mean number of live hard coral colonies between Chumbe CRS and fished control site. Mean colonies are high, and relatively consistent over time in the CRS (Source: results from long-term ranger monitoring data, 2006 - 2015) ...... 55

Figure 24: Disease occurrence on corals in the Chumbe CRS (Source: results from long-term ranger monitoring data, 2006 – 2015)...... 56

Figure 25: Bleaching incidences (indicated by boxes) have occurred in parallel with increases in sea surface temperature (Sources: Muhando, unpublished data) ...... 56

Figure 26: Trend in colonies affected by bleaching, with color bleaching more prevalent than mortal bleaching (Source: results from long-term ranger monitoring data, 2006 – 2015) ...... 56

Figure 27: Mean biomass (kg/ha) of Serranidae (Groupers) observed in the Chumbe Reef Sanctuary, 2006 – 2015 (Source: results from long-term ranger monitoring data, 2006 – 2015) ...... 58

Figure 28: Population density (ind/500m2) of Balistidae (Triggerfish) observed in the Chumbe Reef Sanctuary, 2006 - 2015 (Source: results from long-term ranger monitoring data, 2006 – 2015) ...... 59

Figure 29: Mean biomass (kg/ha) of Balistidae (Triggerfish) observed in the Chumbe Reef Sanctuary, 2006 – 2015 (Source: results from long-term ranger monitoring data, 2006 – 2015) ...... 60

Figure 30: Above Left: Mean (± SE) species richness (a1-3), abundance (b1-3), species diversity (c1-3), and biomass (d1-3) of fish excavators, scrapers and grazers in five reefs around Zanzibar Island. Horizontal bars above graphs indicate significant differences (p < 0.05) among reefs. Above Right: Size class distribution of (a) fish excavators, (b) scrapers, and (c) grazers in five reefs around Zanzibar Island (Source: Lokrantz et al. 2010) ...... 61

Figure 31: Above Left: Abundance (ind/500m2) and distribution of Scaridae in the North, Middle and South of the CRS in 2006/7. Above Right: Comparative abundance (ind/500m2) and distribution of Scaridae in the North, Middle and South of the CRS in 2015/16 (Source: results from CHICOP long-term ranger monitoring data, 2006 – 2015) ...... 62

Figure 32: Fish abundance (n) in fifteen study sites (Chumbe third from the left). Thick lines indicate median and boxes represent interquartile range. Error bars indicate largest/ smallest calue or maximum 1.5 times the interquartile range. Circles are outliers (Source: Wikstroem, 2013) ...... 63

Figure 33: Mean biomass (kg/ha) of all finfish monitored in the Chumbe Reef Sanctuary, 2006/07 – 2015/16 (Source: results from long-term ranger monitoring data, 2016) ...... 63

Figure 34: Linking ecological thresholds to fisheries management...... 65

Figure 35: Graphic representation of the increased fecundity of larger commercial fish compared to juvenile counterparts (source: Bortone & Williams, US Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report, 1986)...... 66

Figure 36: Graphic showing common distances travelled by different species (Source: Gombos et al. 2013, adapted from Maypa 2012)...... 66

Figure 37: Number of COTs removed from the CRS per year (2004 – 2015) ...... 71

Figure 38: Comparative urchin number (per m2) between the CRS and control site that is fished; and level indicating the target density...... 73

Figure 39: Mean (± SE) density and species composition of sea urchins (n= 20) and sea urchin predator abundance (black circles) (n=10) in five reefs outside Zanzibar Island (Source: Lokrantz et al. 2010) ...... 73

Figure 40: Above left: Humpback whale sighting outside the CRS (July, 2013) © Ulli Kloiber. Above right: Dr. Braulik deploying an acoustic recorder in CRS (August, 2016) © Ulli Kloiber...... 76

Figure 41: IKONOS-based estimation of seagrass biomass around Chumbe Island and field mapped seagrass areas (Nov. 2006). Arrows indicate areas that are covered by seagrass and correctly identified in the field-based study, but mis- classified as non-seagrass substrate by the satellite imagery...... 79

Figure 42: Comparison images of the mangrove pool area (bottom right) from 1995 to 2015 © CHICOP Archive ...... 81

Figure 43: Fruits of Uvariodendron kirkii growing directly on the trunk of the tree © Ulli Kloiber ...... 82

Figure 44: Casuarina equisetifolia growth – image comparison from 1995 – 2015 © Koehler ...... 83

Figure 45: Ader’s duiker sighting incidences within the CFR from 2005-2014 ...... 86

Figure 46: Footage from the camera traps all show ‘Mr. Purple’ – the oldest recorded Ader’s duiker – in 2001, 2005, 2014 and 2015 © CHICOP Archive ...... 87

Figure 47: Tracking the oldest recorded Mangrove Fisher in the world ...... 91

Figure 48: Butterfly ID cards produced (CHICOP, 2016) using CHIOP archive images complemented with internet images. . 96

Figure 49: Total number of participants (students, teachers, government officials, community members, etc.) that have participated in EE trips to Chumbe Island, accumulative from 1996 until 2015/2016...... 99

Figure 50: Break-down of students (school children, University students, College students and NGO students) that have participated in EE trips to Chumbe Island, from 2000 until 2015/2016 (excluding trial phase 1996-2000 data)...... 99

Figure 51: The floating Information Module (FIM) on Chumbe ...... 100

Figure 52: (left) The Chumbe EE programme for schools logo (2003-2016), and (right) the logo upgraded in 2017 (by artist Emma Akmakdjian) ...... 101

Figure 53: A school student plants trees as part of the Chumbe Challenge Award © CHICOP archive ...... 103

Figure 54: Beach clean-up initiative with local students during International Coastal Clean-up Day © CHICOP archive ...... 104

Figure 55: (left) Extensive teacher training provided by CHICOP during Phase 10 to improve the quality and impact of environmental projects submitted to the Chumbe Challenge Award competition. (right) Winners of the 7th Chumbe Challenge Award 2015. Images © Ulli Kloiber...... 105

Figure 56: Assessments (pre and post visit to Chumbe) show increases in knowledge achieved with the school students. 106 10

Figure 57: (left) A Peer Educator field trip to investigate beach erosion in Jambiani, East Coast of Zanzibar © Chumbe archive. (right) A Peer Educator field trip to learn about renewable energies © Ulli Kloiber...... 109

Figure 58: Above left: Environmental radio program sponsored and conducted by CHICOP in 2012. Above right: Live radio program organized by CHICOP during the International Day of Forests in 2015. Guest speakers included students from a local secondary school and government officials from the Department of Forest and Non-Renewable Natural Resources of Zanzibar. Images © Chumbe archive...... 110

Figure 59: Future Zanzibari tour guides from the Kawa Training Center learn about the intertidal habitats as part of their EE excursion to Chumbe Island. Image © KTC ...... 112

Figure 60: (left) Evening presentation held by visiting researchers for staff and eco-lodge guests on Chumbe Island in 2014. (right) Example of an information board displaying marine monitoring programs that are conducted in the CRS. Images © Ulli Kloiber...... 112

Figure 61: (top) Rainwater is funneled through specialized filters for cleaning. (middle) Water is hand-pumped to cisterns in the back of each bungalow before gravity-feeding through a solar water heater. (bottom) Guest showers have press-action hand-sets to conserve water ...... 117

Figure 62: The Wetland greywater filtration schematic for the education center (source: Boehm, 2016)...... 118

Figure 63: Over the years the Malindi fisher boat crews have decorated their vessels with Chumbe motif’s and conservation messages. Main picture © Louise Heal, inset © Lorna Arabia ...... 124

Figure 64: Average annual occupancy rate on Chumbe: 1998 - 2016...... 126

Figure 65: Monthly occupancy rates over ten years, from 2006 – 2016...... 127

Figure 66: Number of individuals booking day trips compared to number of individuals booking overnight stays on Chumbe in 2016...... 128

Figure 67: Number of individuals booking overnights set against their duration of stay on the island (1 night to 16 nights), for 2016...... 129

Figure 68: Responses to guest questionnaire conducted on how guests learned about Chumbe. Source: Chumbe data. ... 133

Figure 69: Nationalities of visitors to Chumbe ...... 137

Figure 70: Trip Advisor rankings for Chumbe ...... 138

Figure 71: Booking.com rankings ...... 138

Figure 72: Ratings of various tourism service elements by booking.com customers ...... 138

Figure 73: Total gross revenue generated through ecotourism on Chumbe, 2010 – 2015...... 139

Figure 74: Proportional annual expenditure on (i) tourism, (ii) education and (iii) conservation. 2015. (CHICOP data) ...... 141

Figure 75: (left) Receiving the British Airways Tourism for Tomorrow Global Award in UK, 1999 © CHICOP; (right) Attending the UN Global Laureate ceremony in Australia, 2000 © CHICOP ...... 143

Figure 76: Basic concept model to achieve overall 2027 goal...... 147

Tables

Table 1: (right) The GPS coordinates of the demarcation buoys (Kloiber, 2015) ...... 47

Table 2: Benthic substrate composition (mean % cover ± SE) in the Chumbe Reef Sanctuary (Source: Data provided by the Wildlife Conservation Society, Kenyan Marine Program Office. T.R. McClanahan Principal Investigator) ...... 51

Table 3: Mean ± SE percentage coverage of benthic coral categories based on ten 50m transects at investigated reefs, show Chumbe is ~ 17 (±) percentage points higher benthic coral cover than the next highest coverage recording in Zanzibar (Source: Eylem, 2015) ...... 52

Table 4: Ecosystems thresholds related to fish biomass (Source: Fujita & Karr, 2012) ...... 64

Table 5: Size range of COTs found in the CRS (2004 – 2015) ...... 71

Table 6: Population estimates of Aders duiker have declined considerably since the early 1980’s ...... 85

Table 7: Bat species found in the CFR ...... 87

Table 8: Summary of ornithological research conducted on the island: 1993 - 2015 ...... 89

Table 9: Revised status and assessed trends of breeding species, and provisional status of species not recorded on Chumbe before as by Koehler, 2014...... 92

Table 10: Summary of studies into Birgus latro conducted on the island; the techniques and population estimates resulting from the work...... 95

Table 11: Sources and hit rates of visitors to the Chumbe website (Source: Google Analytics) ...... 134

Table 12: Routes through which people access the Chumbe website ...... 135

Table 13: List of permits, licenses and fees payable by CHICOP. All prices listed at 2017 rates...... 142

1. INTRODUCTION

A Management Plan is a tool to enable effective planning, development and management of a Marine Protected Area (MPA). It is designed to provide guidance to the MPA management team, through the identification of goals, objectives, targets and indicators over a set period of time.

As Pomeroy et al. (2004) write, “Marine protected areas can only be effectively managed if the managers have a firm, detailed grasp of their overall goals for the MPA, and what exactly is needed to reach those goals. Management planning offers a practical, step-by-step approach to identify the goals, identify the exact steps and resources needed to achieve those goals, put the process in motion, and continually evaluate how well the process is working.” (S4,p.1)

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), to which the United Republic of Tanzania is a signatory, states that management planning at an individual MPA level is important for “..generating clear short and long term management objectives and associated programmes.” (UNEP/CBD/AHTEG- PA/1/2, 30 May 2003).

This ten-year management plan for Chumbe Island Coral Park (CHICOP) is the third to be developed since the MPAs inception. The first management plan was produced in 19951 and outlined plans for the first decade of full operations (1995 to 2005). The second management plan was produced in 20062 and covered the period of 2006 to 2016.

This third management plan covers the period of 2017 to 2027, and is building upon the achievements and experiences of more than two decades of MPA operations. The plan aims to address both persistent and emerging challenges encountered in previous years, and consolidate the successes of the initiative.

The plan reflects upon the status of the MPA and the trends observed over time - from a biophysical perspective, community engagement perspective and financial business perspective – and utilizes these assessments to identify the key needs, areas to address, priorities and target activities for the coming ten years.

The Chumbe MPA is relatively unique in the region. Entering its’ third decadal management planning phase is testament to the foundational sustainability achieved by this MPA to date. This plan aims to complement and consolidate the accomplishments attained, and optimize this strong foundation to enable the ‘Chumbe Team’ to continue to deliver exemplary work in the fields of marine conservation, environmental education and ecotourism.

1 The first plan was developed with support from consultants Castle & Mileto 2 The second plan was developed with support from Environment & Development (E&D) consulting (now known as Sustainable Solutions International Consulting) and the International Coral Reef Action Network (ICRAN). 13

2. THE CHUMBE ISLAND MPA - OVERVIEW

Chumbe Island is located in the Western Indian Ocean (WIO), in the channel between Zanzibars’ Unguja island and mainland Tanzania (see figure 1). It is part of the Zanzibar archipelago, a politically semi-autonomous region within the United Republic of Tanzania.

Figure 1: Map showing the location of Chumbe Island off the East coast of Africa

Historically the island was uninhabited, and in 1904 (during a period when Zanzibar was under British Protectorate status) a lighthouse was built on the island as a navigation aid. Along with this a lighthouse keepers house and associated mosque was built for the lighthouse keeper (see section 5 for more details). This led to the island being occupied by successive lighthouse keepers until the 1960’s when Zanzibar gained independence followed by a revolution, after which management of navigation systems fell into disrepair, and the island was abandoned for decades.

Following this, military training operations on the nearby Unguja Island, active from the 1960’s to early 1990’s, meant that fishermen and other resource users tended to avoid the area. This resulted in the coral-rag forest on the island remaining largely undisturbed, and the coral reef adjacent to the island remaining healthy and highly biodiverse, whilst at the same time neighboring islands and coastal regions started to suffer the impacts of over-exploitation and destructive extraction practices prevalent at the time.

In the early 1990’s a German aid worker, Sibylle Riedmiller, came across the island whilst searching for an appropriate location to establish an environmental education initiative to support raising awareness about marine conservation and sustainable management, primarily targeted towards school children. Chumbe was selected as an appropriate site due to the healthy, biodiverse coral reef, and dense coral-rag forest on the island. At the time, Zanzibar did not have any marine protected areas (MPAs) and little precedent existed for the establishment of such an initiative. Therefore Ms. Riedmiller created Chumbe Island Coral Park (CHICOP) Ltd, a not-for-profit company set up for the sole purpose of establishing and sustainably managing the Chumbe Island MPA.

In the Articles and Memorandum of Association of CHICOP Ltd, the company’s aim is:

“To manage, for conservation purposes, the Chumbe Island Reef Sanctuary and the Chumbe Island Closed Forest Reserve. This includes educational and commercial activities related to the non-consumptive use of the above mentioned natural resources and the doing of all such other things as are incidental or conducive to the attainment of the above object.” (Company Articles of Association, S:3)

To achieve this, the Chumbe MPA is operationalized through three key pillars:

 Conservation

 Education

 Ecotourism

The concept of the initiative was to establish an MPA whereby revenue generated from high-end ecotourism provided all of the funding required for conservation management and environmental education initiatives. This concept has been successfully realized since the late 1990’s, when Chumbe became the first financially self-sustainable MPA in the world.

To date (at the time of writing, 2017) the Chumbe MPA is still one of only two MPAs in the world that is entirely self-financing3, and is the only MPA to have been self-financing for nearly two decades.

3 The other entirely self-financing MPA is the National Park of Brijuni in Croatia 15

CONSERVATION

Under the water in the coral reef sanctuary © CHICOP

EDUCATION

School children on Chumbe © CHICOP

ECOTOURISM

The Chumbe eco-lodge © Hal Thompson

2.1 Conservation

The Chumbe MPA has two core protected zones:

I) The Chumbe Reef Sanctuary (CRS)

The reef sanctuary is situated off the west coast of the island and is host to seagrass beds, fringing coral reef (coral gardens) and slope reef colonies. Covering an area of 55.06 ha, the CRS is home to a vibrant diversity of marine life, including reef fish, a wide array of invertebrates, turtles, dolphins and other sea creatures (outlined in detail in section 6).

The CRS is 100% no-take zone (NTZ), meaning that no fishing, extractive or damaging practices are permitted within the entire area. Scuba diving is permissible only for research and filming purposes, to avoid novice or inexperienced divers damaging the reef, whilst snorkeling is permitted for the tourists and school children visiting the MPA.

Figure 2: A 'Google-eye" view of Chumbe, showing the boundaries of the MPA II) The Closed Forest Reserve (CFR)

Covering an area of 16.64 ha, this dense coral-rag forest exists on fossilized coral substrate with no groundwater lens. It has three key sub-habitats: (a) scrub, (b) tropical dry forest, and (c) a mangrove pool. The CFR is fully protected, with no extractive practices permitted. Trails for visitors and school children are available in the southern area of the forest, leaving the north inaccessible.

The CFR is host to a small population of critically endangered Aders duiker antelopes (Cephalophus adersi), nearly 80 species of birds, and an array of insects, reptiles and crustaceans, including the largest land-living crab in the world (Birgus latro). See section 6 for more detailed information.

Monitoring, managing, and ensuring there is full compliance with the protected status of these areas has been the core responsibility of the Chumbe Ranger team since the MPAs inception. To that end, extensive outreach and communication initiatives have been undertaken for more than twenty years (and are on-going) with proximal communities to the MPA as well as wider society (see section 7); routine and regular biophysical monitoring has been conducted on key habitats; and patrol, surveillance and enforcement (PSE) systems have been operational 7 days/week since preliminary gazettement in 1992 (see section 6).

2.2 Education

Providing environmental education services to the people of Zanzibar and beyond has been a primary objective of the Chumbe MPA since its inception. This is implemented through several key streams of work (see section 7 for more information):

 The Environmental Education (EE) Schools Programme - Operational since 1996, the programme became formally endorsed by the Ministry of Education in 2000. Since this time (to date) the programme has involved more than 6.5 thousand school students. Activities conducted under this programme include: full-day excursion trips to Chumbe Island (where the students learn about marine and forest ecology, sustainable coastal management and ecotourism - including snorkel-based in-water teaching); classroom-based pre- and post- visit teaching activities in schools; running an annual ‘Chumbe Challenge Award’ competition with schools; and engaging in wider schools-based activities (such as guest lecturing and supporting wider field-based activities).

 Teacher Training Support – This initiative supports both in-practice teachers, and trainee teachers, and provides resources and methodologies for educating around issues of sustainability. Since the year 2000 more than 1,200 teachers and trainee teachers have participated in this initiative.

 Fisher & Community-based Outreach, Communication & Education – This has been, and continues to be, a critical element of work for the Chumbe MPA. Outreach based educational initiatives and awareness raising with target audiences of fishers and resource users began in the early years of the projects development, and continues to this day. This work has been complemented over the years by recruiting Chumbe personnel and support staff from the proximal communities and from stakeholders directly involved with resource use activities (see more in section 7.4).

 Wider Stakeholder Outreach & Awareness Raising – Wider awareness raising, outreach and education initiatives have been undertaken over the years targeting a wide spectrum of stakeholders, including government personnel and civil servants, professionals working in the tourism industry in Zanzibar and Tanzania, and tourist visitors coming to Chumbe, as well as the general public.

 University / College Education Support – This initiative is supported through both the provision of field excursions to Chumbe for university and college students, and associated classroom-based teaching at the academic institutions. Additionally Chumbe provides tertiary level students with opportunities to conduct field work and research on the island (see section 7.5).

2.3 Ecotourism

All of the conservation and education activities are funded 100% from revenue generated by sustainable ecotourism. Therefore, while the objectives of CHICOP are non-commercial (not-for- profit), the tourism operations still follow best-practice commercial principles to ensure optimal revenue generation. This revenue is then re-invested to support all MPA operations, conservation and education activities.

The island has a seven (7) bungalow ecolodge, and can host a maximum of 18 overnight guests. In addition to this, daytrips to the island can be arranged as long as the maximum number of tourism (combined overnights and daytrippers) does not exceed 18 people. The target tourism market is high-end, with day trips costing a rack rate of $90 USD/ person ($70 for residents), and overnights costing between $260 (low season) ($200 for residents), and $280 (high season) per person per night (all inclusive), ($220 for residents).4

Each guest bungalow has been built using eco-architecture and technology to ensure there is zero- impact on the environment from tourism operations. This includes: rainwater collection systems through specially designed roofs, filters and storage systems; water heating (for showers) through solar water-heating panels; greywater filtration systems; composting toilets to manage human waste; and electricity provision through solar photovoltaics.

In addition to this: general waste is minimized at source (i.e. re-useable containers, non-use of disposables), organic waste is composted, and night light is provided by solar powered torches (to avoid light pollution and protect the feeding and breeding patterns of nocturnal animals). Also a range of auxiliary services are utilized in collaboration with local communities to maximize benefit streaming to local stakeholders, and promote environmentally sensitive practices on the island (i.e. the development and purchase of organic, biodegradable soaps; souvenirs made from recycled materials [glass bottles, flip flop shoes etc.]; purchase of fish and marine products directly through local traders working with community fishers; purchase of agricultural products locally; and provision of boat and car transportation through partnerships with local operators).

The staff team that manage the lodge operations on-site are predominantly from local communities, and have all received on-the-job training to provide service standards consummate with high-end operations.

Since the lodge first opened in 1998 the occupancy rate has steadily risen, from an average of 34% occupancy in the first five years of operation (1999 – 2003) to an average of 66% occupancy in the most recent five years of operation (2012 – 2016). At the time of writing Chumbe has a five-star rating on Trip Advisor, has the highest rating (‘Superb’) on Booking.com, is ranked the second most romantic hotel in Tanzania and has ranked the highest in service for Tanzania over recent years.

Chumbe MPA has won numerous awards for its achievements in conservation, education and sustainable ecotourism over the years (see section 9).

4 These rates are relevant at the time of writing – 2017 – and are inclusive of all boat transfer (at scheduled times), all meals and soft drinks, all activities, guiding, equipment and taxes. Only alcoholic drinks and boat transfers outside of scheduled times are additional costs. 19

2.4 Simplified Theory of Change

As figure 3 shows, the simplified Theory of Change (TOC) for the Chumbe initiative recognizes sustainable ecotourism as the bedrock of the program, through which 100% of financing is provided for conservation and education activities. This work leads to effective management and enhancement of biodiversity, promotion of ecosystem integrity and associated food security, and wider environmental stewardship towards the environment of Zanzibar cross-sectorally.

Figure 3: Simplified Theory of Change for CHICOP

This TOC leads to Chumbe’s overall operational vision, whereby:

“The Chumbe Island Coral Reef Sanctuary and Closed Forest Reserve are effectively and sustainably managed in order to maximize their contribution to biodiversity conservation, serve as a model for effective ecotourism and MPA management, and provide a platform to promote wider environmental awareness for sustainable development and ecological stewardship in Zanzibar.”

Team meetings for management planning © Aaron Critchley

3. GOVERNANCE FRAMEWORK

Negotiations for the establishment of Chumbe Island Coral Park, that included the gazettement of the MPA, began in 1991. On the 6th October 1992 the reef to the west of Chumbe was declared closed by the Department of Fisheries, and on the 10th September 1993 an area of 2.44 ha of land on the island was leased to Chumbe Island Coral Park Ltd (CHICOP) for development purposes, under a land lease agreement with the Commission for Lands and Environment (COLE) for a period of 33 years.

3.1. The Marine Sanctuary Agreement

On 3rd January 1994, a Marine Sanctuary Agreement (MSA) was signed between the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Natural Resources (now known as the Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries) and CHICOP. This agreement declared the reef to the west of the island to be the Chumbe Reef Sanctuary (CRS) by virtue of section 6 (1) (e) of the 1988 Fisheries Act, Legal notice no. 99 of the 24th December, 1994. This made Chumbe Island the first declared MPA in the country (IUCN, 2001), and gave CHICOP responsibility for preserving, controlling and managing the Reef Sanctuary for an initial period of ten years. The agreement included the establishment of a Chumbe Advisory Committee, which would meet twice a year and would be comprised of a combination of Chumbe staff, government and community representatives (see section 3.4.2 for more information).

Following conclusion of the initial ten year arrangement, the agreement was reviewed and extended between the Ministry of Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environment Conservation - MANREC (as it was named at the time), and CHICOP on 3rd January 2004 for a further period of ten years. Under article 8 of this agreement, reference is made to the Chumbe Management Plan (already being implemented at that time) requiring it to be “..adhered to [in order to] ensure that the company is managing, controlling and preserving the CRS in a manner befitting a Marine Sanctuary.”

On 1st January 2014, following conclusion of the second ten year term, the MSA was again reviewed and extended between the now titled Ministry of Agriculture, Natural Resources, Livestock and Fisheries and CHICOP for a further period of ten years (until 2024), with the following amendments:

1. The Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries declared the CRS and its marine environment as a Chumbe Reef Sanctuary by virtue of the section 9 (1) (e) and (2) under the Fisheries Act. No. 7 of 2010 (updated from gazettement under section 6 (1e) of the 1988 Fisheries Act).

2. The membership of the Advisory Committee was extended to include representatives from the State University of Zanzibar (SUZA) and the Ministry of Tourism.

3. The frequency of Advisory Committee meetings was adjusted from two times per year to only one time per year.

Article 1 of the marine sanctuary agreement (MSA) 2014 declares the CRS as: "All the area of 300m from the western high water mark on the shoreline of Chumbe Island embracing the area between 6 degrees 16 minutes 17 seconds South / 39 degrees 10 minutes 35 seconds East and 6 degrees 17 minutes 0 seconds South / 39 degrees 10 minutes 45 seconds East." This area is defined as a No- Take-Area (NTA) where “No fishing or any extractive use shall be permitted in the area so declared” (Article 2, MSA 2014).

3.2. The Closed Forest Reserve Agreement

On 22nd July 1994 an agreement was signed between the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Natural Resources and CHICOP which declared the land area of Chumbe Island (excluding the area leased for development to CHICOP) as a Closed Forest Habitat (CFH) in accordance with the provisions of Wood Cutting Decree Ch. 121, and entrusted management, including efficient control, conservation management and culturing of the natural resources, to CHICOP for a period of 33 years (up to 2028). This closed forest habitat is now referred to as the Closed Forest Reserve (CFR).

In 1995 Chumbe Island was also registered as a Class II protected area by the World Conservation Monitoring Center (WCMC) World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA) and later categorized as Class II protected status under IUCN. This categorization is defined as: A national park / protected area managed mainly for ecosystem protection and recreation… designated to (a) protect the ecological integrity of one or more ecosystems for present and future generations, (b) exclude exploitation or occupation inimical to the purposes of designation of the area and (c) provide a foundation for spiritual, scientific, educational, recreational and visitor opportunities, all of which must be environmentally and culturally compatible (Dudley, 2008).

3.3. Key Stakeholders

CHICOP engages with a wide range of stakeholders across many different areas of the project. These stakeholders generally fall into the following categories:

 Government Agencies  Fishers and Local Communities  Schools, Universities and Academic Institutions  Non-Governmental Organizations  Tourism Industry

3.3.1. Government Agencies

CHICOP works alongside, and in collaboration with, numerous departments and agencies within the Government of Zanzibar. These include:

 The Ministry of Agriculture, Natural Resources, Livestock and Fisheries5. This is the Ministry with which CHICOP has the CRS and CFR agreements. Within this Ministry, CHICOP closely works with: (a) the Department of Fisheries Development6, and (b) the Department of Forestry and Non-Renewable Natural Resources. These departments support the management of the CRS / CFR (respectively), through collaborative technical engagement, support to tackle any infringements / incidents (see more on this in section 6) and participation in the Chumbe Advisory Committee (see section 3.4).

 The Ministry of Education and Vocational Training7. CHICOP works in collaboration with this Ministry in relation to the Chumbe Environmental Education (EE) programme for schools, as well as various other environmental education initiatives.

 The Ministry of Lands, Water, Energy and Environment, within which CHICOP closely works with: (a) the Department of Environment, whilst primarily responsible for the provision of environmental tools and the coordination of international and regional environmental and climate change contracts, this department is also part of the Chumbe EE stakeholder group supporting the education programmes, as well as participant in the Chumbe Advisory Committee; (b) Zanzibar Water Authority (ZAWA), that supports water quality testing.

 The Ministry of Trade, Industry & Marketing Zanzibar, within which CHICOP works with the Business Registrations and Licensing Agency (BRELA)8, through which CHICOP is registered, legally recognized and licensed to operate.

 The Ministry of Lands, Water, Energy and Environment, within which CHICOP works with the Department of Lands with regards to the Land lease agreement for infrastructural development.

5 http://www.kilimoznz.go.tz/ 6 http://mlfzanzibar.go.tz/index.php?mlf=dptfisheries 7 http://www.moez.go.tz/ 8 http://www.brela.go.tz 23

 The Zanzibar Commission for Tourism (under the Minister of Information, Culture, Tourism and Sports), through which CHICOP is licensed to operate as a tourism enterprise. This commission also issues the management certificate for an authorized Project Manager of CHICOP.

 The Zanzibar Police Commission through Mazizini Police Post. through which security support to the island is provided (when available).

 The Ministry of Finance and Planning, within which CHICOP works with the Zanzibar Investment Promotion Authority (ZIPA) to which investment reports are submitted (see below), and the Tanzania Revenue Authority (TRA) and Zanzibar Revenue Board (ZRB) through which taxes and associated fees are submitted.

 The Zanzibar Port Corporation (ZPC), with which CHICOP collaborates in the management of the lighthouse on the island, as well as other seafaring issues as they may arise

 The District Commissioner for the Western District, as a local representative, this commissioner is Chairman for the Chumbe Advisory Committee meetings.

Official reporting requirements to the Government of Zanzibar include:

 A Quarterly Progress Report outlining the projects’ status, staff development activities, challenges, achievements, marketing, conservation and education activities conducted, as well as a financial analysis for the previous quarter. This report is submitted to the Zanzibar Investment Promotion Authority (ZIPA), and copied to the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Environment; the Department of Fisheries Development; the Department of Forestry and Non-Renewable Natural Resources; the Ministry of Water Construction, Energy and Lands; the Commission of Tourism; the Department of Lands; the Department of Environment; the Zanzibar Port Corporation; the Ministry of Education; the District Commissioner for the Western District and the Attaché for Economic Affairs, Embassy of the Federal Republic of Germany.

 A Quarterly Monitoring Report providing the monitoring data from patrol, surveillance and enforcement (PSE) activities conducted in the MPA. This report is submitted to the Department of Fisheries Development.

 An audited annual financial report is submitted to the Zanzibar Revenue Board.

 An annual corporate tax report is submitted to the Tanzania Revenue Board.

Fishers off the S. Zanzibar coast © Shaun D Metcalfe

3.3.2. Fishers and Local Communities

Zanzibar has a population of approximately 1.4 million people (Zanzibar Basic Demographic and Socio-Economic Report, 2014). Of this population, CHICOP defines local community stakeholders under two categories: target communities and non-target communities.

The target communities are those most proximally located to Chumbe Island. These are six villages under four wards / shehia’s. These are all located in Zanzibar Urban/West District, which is one of 30 primary administrative regions in Tanzania, and has an overall population of approximately 594,000 people.

The six target communities associated with Chumbe are as follows:

I) MAZIZNI (Shehia: Kiembe Samaki)

This community is diverse, as it is host to fishing camps with migrant fishers from other regions staying seasonally. According to a study conducted in 2012 (Kayagambe et al.) the common fishing grounds used by these fishers include Tele, Fumba, the east (unprotected) side of Chumbe, and fishing grounds close to Tanzania mainland. The most common fishing vessels used are Dhows (by 60% of fishers), with 93% of all vessels powered by sails (Thorkildsen, 2006). The two most common gear types used by these fishers are handline’s and fishing traps (madema) (Kayagambe et al., 2012).

Overall nearly 80% of households have declared that they hold diverse (more than one) occupation amongst household members, with approximately 54% of fishers stating they have a second occupation (Thorkildsen, 2006).

Mazizini was one of the first villages that participated in Chumbe’s environmental peer educator program. Hence, 80% of the fishermen surveyed (Kayagambe et al., 2012) stated that environmental issues are discussed at the village level. The village also has a Fishers Association (FA) (formed in the mid 2000’s) that has received grants from the Department of Fisheries in the form of vessels, engines and gears, as well as a community fund for cases of emergency. These have been under the ownership of the FA committee in the form of ‘Cooperatives’, through which 50% of the net revenue is allocated to the fishing crew and 50% to the cooperative to cover the use of the gear. However, today activities of the FA Cooperative are limited.

Through the Kayagambe et al. study conducted in 2012, it was found that 30% of fishers surveyed had experienced boat problems close to Chumbe and had been assisted by the Chumbe rangers, who provided fuel, food, accommodation for recovery and transport back to Zanzibar (see more on Chumbe rescues in section 6).

II) CHUKWANI (Shehia: Chukwani)

Chukwani is one of the larger communities, and is the community geographically closest to Chumbe Island. Fishers most commonly use Ngalawa vessels (53%) with the most common gear type being fishing lines (80%) (Thorkildsen, 2006).

CHICOP has a landing site situated within this village, to manage supplies on and off the island, and thus has a long-standing relationship with many of the community members. Considerable Chumbe staff have been recruited over the years from this community.

Chukwani has the highest total income for households out of all the Chumbe’s target communities, with 80% of fishers stating they have a second occupation (Thorkildsen, 2006). This village has also demonstrated considerable care for their local environment, and have been highly defensive of protecting their home reef and coastal area over the years, with conflicts occasionally flaring with outside fishers using destructive gear types9.

III) BUYU (Shehia: Chukwani)

Buyu community is part of the Chukwani Shehia and borders Chukwani area. It is the smallest of the target communities of Chumbe, with only ~ 90 households (Lokrantz et.al., 2010). Many fishers in this community have secondary or tertiary incomes through diverse occupations, including agriculture, seaweed farming and animal keeping.

A study conducted by Kayagambe et al. (2012) found that the average number of dependents per household was eight people, indicating Buyu is a relatively poor community. Common fishing grounds used by fishers include Tele, Kwale, Pungume and the areas surrounding Chumbe; with the most common fishing gear used being fishing traps (madema).

9 This has included one notorious conflict incident in the late 1990’s where Chukwani fishers tackled outsider destructive fishers that resulted in two hospitalizations and two arrests. 26

IV) NYAMANZI (Shehia: Kombeni)

Fishing is a key activity in this community, though 87% of fishers have second occupation (Thorkildsen, 2006). Other economic activities include agriculture and animal keeping, and the average number of dependents per household ranges from 2 to 12 (Kayagambe et. al., 2012). The most common fishing vessel used is Ngalawa (>90%) (Thorkildsen, 2006), with handlines, madema fish traps and nets being the most common fishing gears used (Kayagambe et. al., 2012). The common fishing grounds utilized are Bawe, Ukambe, Nyanje Mwamba, with 80% of fishers stating the unprotected areas surrounding Chumbe are also a regular fishing location (Thorkildsen, 2006).

This community is also relatively small, with approximately 220 households (Lokrantz et.al., 2010), and is perhaps one of the most environmentally conscious from Chumbe’s target communities, with an operating environmental group (established by the villagers themselves), as well as a registered fishers association that has received grants from the Department of Fisheries to support a range of sustainability initiatives. The environmental group has led regular discussions about environmental issues and conservation within the village area, and leads environmental activities in the community, to ensure people follow the environmental guidelines that have been established. The fisher association committee also monitors fishing activities to ensure no juvenile fish are landed, in order to address recruitment overfishing.

Since the establishment of Chumbe and the associated environmental committees, one study found that ~ 93% of fishers from this community stated they had improved marketable catch (Kayagambe et. al., 2012). Nymanzi fishers were also found to be highly aware of the living status of coral reefs, and their importance for sustainable fisheries.

Community members from Nyamanzi have regularly participated in educational visits to Chumbe, and have stated that they have used the lessons learned from these trips to incorporate conservation and sustainable management into community life. In Kayagambe’s study it was also revealed that 20% of fishers interviewed had received rescue services from the Chumbe rangers (2012).

V) KOMBENI (Shehia: Kombeni)

Kombeni is one of the seventeen villages in the Menai Bay Conservation Area, situated within a coral rag area which is characterized by poor soil conditions. The total population of Kombeni is 3,060 with 649 households (National Population Census, 2002).

The main economic activity for men living in Kombeni and the other villages surrounding Menai Bay is fishing, followed by agriculture, livestock keeping, carpentry and petty trade (Torell et.al., 2006).

From the beginning of the Chumbe project, the Sheha of Kombeni has been a part of the Advisory Committee, as a representative of communities from the neighboring Menai Bay Conservation Area. However, Kombeni was considered a representative, non-target community, until 2013, when the needs for environmental education services were identified, and particular efforts were focused to supporting this community.

Fisher fixing net © C.U.B

VI) DIMANI (Shehia: Dimani)

This community has also shown strong levels of environmental awareness and consciousness over the years. Here, fishing is the main economic activity for male members of the community, with many practicing small-scale agriculture as a secondary occupation. Female members of the community are engaged in food-based shell collection and seaweed farming. (Kayagambe et. al., 2012). Common fishing grounds used by this community include Pungume, Visiwa Tele, Ukambe, Nyemembe and the areas surrounding Chumbe. Common fishing hears used are handlines, madema fish traps and nets (big mesh size and gill nets).

The village has a special committee that monitors fishing activities and ensures no under-sized fish are landed. Additionally, an environmental group has been established that deals with environmental issues in the village. This group also leads educational projects, clean-ups and prepares environmental guidelines for the community. Thus environmental awareness amongst these community members is high, and many have participated regularly in Chumbe related excursions and activities. According to one study, ~ 7% of fishers have also stated they received rescue and support services from the Chumbe rangers (Kayagambe et. al., 2012).

3.3.3. Invertebrate harvesters

In Zanzibar invertebrate subsistence harvesting is a common activity in the intertidal area and almost exclusively involves women who harvest gastropods, octopus and bivalves for both food security as well as cash income. Over the last decades, however, there has been a reduction in available commodity likely due to over-extraction. This has led to increased harvesting effort causing damage to intertidal zones and seagrass beds around Zanzibar, which has in turn exacerbated a decline in animal abundance and seagrass cover (Nordlund et al., 2010).

By the mid-2000’s traditional gleaning grounds were over-exploited and depleted to the extent that harvesters began to seek new areas to glean. This led some groups of gleaners to start arriving on the east, unprotected side of Chumbe. Since this time, invertebrate harvesting has regularly occurred during spring low tides (each full and new moon), with 1-2 boats arriving daily, each carrying between 10-15 people. Activities of the harvesters have been monitored by the rangers, and in the early years of their arrival infringements into the edges of the protected northern area of the CRS occurred regularly and required ranger intervention to ensure harvesters stayed gleaning in the open access area. Over time infringement incidences started to decrease, but were still occurring each year (as shown in Figure 4). When infringements briefly increased again in 2015, prioritized education trips for harvesters from neighboring communities were conducted which led to a better environmental understanding of the MPA’s no-take rules. This resulted in zero reported incidents in 2016 (Kloiber pers.comm., 2016).

Women collecting 29 bivalves in the unprotected seagrass beds on the north-eastern side of Chumbe Island © Ulli Kloiber

Figure 4: Yearly incidents of invertebrate harvesters encroaching the intertidal area along the northern CRS border (Source: CHICOP ranger report data).

3.3.4. Schools, Universities and Academic Institutions

Chumbe has engaged nearly 7,000 local Zanzibari school children in educational activities over the years, through the Chumbe Environmental Education (EE) programme. In addition to this, CHICOP has collaborated with a wide range of Universities and Academic institutions in excursion based educational activities and research. See section 7 for a thorough overview of Chumbe’s engagement with these stakeholders.

3.3.5. Other key stakeholders

Other key stakeholders related to Chumbe operations include non-governmental organizations. For full information on NGO engagement, see section 7.

In addition to this, tourism operators, agents and associations are also key stakeholders in Chumbe’s work. Beyond the direct agent and operator relations critical to promoting Chumbe to a wide visitor audience (see more on this in section 8), CHICOP has membership to a range of sustainable tourism related associations and groups. This includes The International Ecotourism Society (TIES), Responsible Travel and the Zanzibar Association of Tourism Investors (ZATI)10. The Director of CHICOP is also on the Board of the Hotel Association of Tanzania (HAT)11.

In addition to this, Chumbe is a flagship site for the relatively new group ‘Linking Tourism & Conservation’ (LT&C) - an innovative shared network, designed to develop tools and incentives for replication of best practices and examples of sustainable tourism that supports the establishment and management of national parks and other types of protected areas12.

10 http://www.zati.or.tz 11 http://hat-tz.org 12 http://www.ltandc.org 30

Chumbe was also a founding member of The Long Run (LTR) initiative, established in 2008. LTR aims to bring together the top leading organizations and businesses involved in proactively conserving land and sea areas, supporting local communities, and showing the effective integration of business and conservation. The group seeks to support, connect and inspire nature-based businesses to excel in following the highest standards of sustainability encompassing Conservation, Community, Culture and Commerce (the 4Cs) and collectively influencing others to take up best practices for a sustainable future worldwide. Membership of LTR involves extensive evaluation of any initiative based on this 4C approach, and Chumbe became the first certified ‘Global Ecosystem Reserve’ (GER) property recognized under this program13. To date CHICOP remains strongly associated with this initiative as a ‘Long Run Destination’.

3.4. Operational Management

Chumbe is managed through a head office located in Mazizini area of Unguja (mainland Zanzibar). All administrative and operational management is led through this office. On-island, a small administrative office is also operational. Communication between island and office historically relied on VHF radio communication, but today is mostly conducted through cell phone and internet communications (with the island now having its own wifi connection).

3.4.1. Staffing

In the management team14 CHICOP is overseen by an off-site Director (also founder of the Project), as well as an Alternate Director who also acts as key advisor to the project. Within Zanzibar, the team are led by an overall Project Manager with associated departmental managers in conservation and education, island operations, and office administration.

CHICOP has a total of 42 staff. Of these, 16 are based in the Chumbe Head Office in Unguja, with the remaining 26 based on the island. Island staff work in rotation, on one week or five day shifts (depending on positions), staying overnight on the island during their work. Accommodation and all meals are provided for the staff on the island. In the Head Office, accommodation is provided for the Project Manager, Conservation and Education Manager, as well as volunteers or researchers to the project. Lunch is provided week days to all office staff.

All staff are formally and legally contracted through the Department of Labour under the Ministry of Empowerment, Adults, Youth, Women and Children. CHICOP contributes Zanzibar Social Security Funds (ZSSF) for each staff member, and provides medical insurance coverage.

Figure 5 shows the organochart of the organization.

13 http://www.thelongrun.org 14 Relevant at the time of writing, 2017. 31

Figure 5: Organochart of CHICOP 3.4.2. Advisory Committee

The advisory committee for Chumbe meets once per year, to review progress and achievements on the island, and provide guidance and input for annual planning. The committee is comprised of representatives from Chumbe’s key stakeholder groups as outlined below:15

I. District Commissioner (DC) of Western District - Chairperson II. Chief Fisheries Officer of Western District III. Fisheries Development Department representative from the Marine Conservation Unit (MCU) IV. Institute of Marine Sciences (IMS), University of Dar es Salaam V. State University of Zanzibar (SUZA) VI. Department of Forestry and Non Renewable Natural Resources VII. Department of Environment (DoE) VIII. Local leader (Sheha) of Kombeni Village IX. Local leader (Sheha) of Chukwani Village X. Local leader (Sheha) of Dimani Village XI. Project Manager of CHICOP XII. Conservation & Education Manager of CHICOP XIII. Assistant Conservation & Education Manager of CHICOP XIV. Head Ranger of CHICOP XV. Environmental Educator of CHICOP

3.4.3. Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) & Policies

Operations on Chumbe adhere to a range of SOPs and associated internal policies. These include:

 A Staffing policy – that outlines working expectations and associated benefits

 A Sustainability policy – that outlines sustainability practices to observe on the island and in the office (including general procurement policies, waste management, health & safety etc.)

 A Sustainable Seafood Purchasing Policy - ensures only sustainably caught seafood is bought for the island.

 Emergency policies – these include (a) a ‘response for rangers’ policy related to accident and emergencies on the island, and (b) a ‘Fire Plan’ policy for the island.

(see Appendix One)

Safety equipment (fire extinguishers, medical kits etc.) are provided on both the island and in the office.

CHICOP operates three vehicles in the Head Office, and three boats on the island.

Supplies and materials being sent to / from the island are transported via the CHICOP landing site in Chukwani village.

15 In addition to these representatives, the Advisory Committee also seeks input from the Ministry of Education and Ministry of Tourism, though these groups have not joined the committee to date. Chumbe coastal forest reaching the edge of the beach © Eleanor Carter

4. PHYSICAL FEATURES

4.1 Site Description

Chumbe Island is roughly oval in outline with its long axis running roughly north-south. It is approximately 1.1km long and 300m wide at its widest point, and covers a total terrestrial area of 16.64 ha, and marine area of 55.06 ha. The highest point is approximately 5 meters above the high tide level.

4.2 Climate

The climate of Chumbe Island is much the same as for Unguja as a whole which can be categorized as tropical lowland with moderately high temperature and high relative humidity. The weather is determined by the position of the Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ), which is the low pressure belt by which the monsoons from the northern and southern hemisphere meet (Tierney and Russell, 2007).

The northeast monsoon (Kaskazi) is characterized by lower wind speeds, cooler water temperatures, calmer seas and a reduced velocity (1-2 knots) of East African Coastal Current. The southeast monsoon (Kusi) brings high winds, warm water temperatures and rough seas with velocity of East African Coastal Current increasing to speed of 4 knots.

The average annual rainfall on Unguja is about 1,600 mm, spread throughout the year (see figure 6). However, a large spatial variation in precipitation occurs, ranging from 1,100 mm in the eastern parts of the island to over 2,000 mm over the higher elevations in the west (figure 7) The rainfall pattern is bimodal, with the respective main rainfall seasons from March to Figure 6: Average monthly rainfall in Unguja (Source: Zanzibar June (Masika) and October to December Meteorological Station, Haji, 2010) (Vuli). The shorter vuli season is more significant in the western part of the island where it contributes a third of the annual precipitation (Mustelin et al., 2010).

It is suspected that the rainfall on Chumbe Island is slightly less than the Unguja figure, given the rainshadow effect of the islands’ location. However, rainfall data is currently not collected on the island, and the future collection of rainwater data is anticipated to be a component in the improved monitoring operations for the island in the coming years.

In Unguja, the mean annual maximum and minimum temperatures are around 30.1⁰C and 22⁰C respectively. December, January and February are the hottest months and June, July and August are the coolest (Figure 8).

Figure 7: (Above right). Spatial distribution of rainfall and rainfall stations in Unguja (Source: Haji, 2010) Figure 8: (Below). Average monthly minimum (min) and maximum (max) temperature (°C) in Unguja (Source: Zanzibar Meteorological Station, Haji, 2010)

Climate Stressors

Although the climatic data itself is too scarce to enable the conclusion that climate change is taking place in Unguja, the Tanzanian Meteorological Agency, Zanzibar Section, has recorded extreme temperatures and extreme rainfall events that they link to possible climatic changes. In February 2007, the meteorological station at Zanzibar International Airport recorded 39.4oC, which is the highest temperature ever to be recorded for the past 68 years in Zanzibar. In April 2005, a station recorded 474 mm of rainfall just within 24 hours, which is the highest recorded rainfall for the past 50 years. In March 2007, the highest sea-level rise was measured in Zanzibar Town where large parts of the town were covered by seawater (Mustelin et al, 2010). Another suspected impact of climate change is on sea surface temperature, discussed further in section 4.4.

4.3 Currents and Tides

The most important current in the Zanzibar channel is the East African Coastal Current (EACC). Apart from the EACC, which contributes a net northward flow, winds and tides are the main forces that drive the circulation in the channel.

Tides around Unguja are semi-diurnal with spring tidal range of 3.2 m and neap tidal range of 0.9 m, thus classified as a mesotidal coast (Wannas et al., 2002). The tidal circulation inside the Zanzibar Channel is very complex with flood streams entering and ebb streams exiting the channel at both the north and south channel entrances (Mayorga, 2007).

In the Chumbe Reef Sanctuary, Muzuka et al. (2010) showed that the maximum current speeds in 2008 were in the order of 0.38-0.94 m/s. Current patterns depicted by current roses (Figure 9) confirmed that the currents in the Chumbe reef area were also dominantly northwards almost throughout the year, except in December to February where it is impeded by the southward flowing currents due to the influence of the NE trade winds.

Currents around Chumbe Island © Markus Meissl

4.4 Sea Surface Temperature

Sea surface temperatures (SST) around Chumbe have been recorded daily since 1997, in collaboration with the Institute of Marine Science (IMS). As figure 10 shows, the range of temperatures throughout each year has remained relatively consistent, with the exception of peak high temperatures in the months April and May in 1998, with anomalous low temperatures in the corresponding months in 1999; as well as peak high temperatures in 2016.

The high temperatures experienced in 1998 were global and unprecedented, caused by a severe El Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO) event superimposed on the Indian Ocean's 11-year oscillation (Goreau et al., 2000; Strong et al., 1997). Across the Indian Ocean, bleaching was correlated with high coral mortality in this period, with Goreau et al. (2000) reporting mortality ranges were between 70 and 99% of all corals throughout the region. The genera Acropora, Seriatopora, Stylophora, Millepora, and Pocillopora were particularly hard hit over many regions.

Figure 10: The range of sea surface temperatures experienced on Chumbe through the year, inclusive of 1998 and 2006 – 2016 (Source: Muhando, unpublished data)

In this period, Chumbe also suffered coral bleaching and mortality, but at much lower levels than many neighboring reefs, with approximately 30% mortality, predominantly occurring on Acropora species. It is thought that Chumbe managed to survive this bleaching event relatively unscathed due to the resilience conferred to the reef through few other stressors being present (i.e. no fishing or destructive activities take place).

Globally high temperatures and associated bleaching events were recorded in the North Pacific in summer 2014, and affected the Caribbean and Pacific in 2015. By 2016 the East coast of Africa was once more hit, with high temperatures and bleaching events co-occurring on the Great Barrier Reef in Australia. This 2016 event has been classified as the third global coral bleaching event.

During this period the Chumbe SST was over 30°C from the end of March until beginning of April 2016, leading to the second, severe coral mass bleaching event in the CRS with about 80% bleaching across the entire reef sanctuary (though not all mortal). Live hard coral cover decreased by 32-34% overall with almost 50% hard coral mortality in the shallow reef parts by September 2016. Proactive mitigation measures were undertaken in June and July 2016 to remove fast growing brown algae Turbinaria sp (with 17 volunteers involved and a total of 80 kg of wet weight algae removed). This was to mitigate the opportunistic encroachment of the algae onto non-mortal bleached coral and fresh bleached coral (as this algae has been known to overpower areas and occupy niche’s of coral colonies, making re-establishment of new colonies and recovery of existing colonies more challenging). These removal efforts were halted by August as no more invasive growth was observed.

As part of its bleaching management planning, CHICOP helped establish a simplified web-form to assist non-specialists in basic reporting of coral bleaching observations in the WIO and also submitted bleaching observations and data from the CRS to CORDIO throughout 2016 (see Figure 11).

Figure 11: Bleaching monitoring results 2016, CRS (< 3 meters depth), random swim using 50 x 50 cm photo quadrats by snorkeling, CPCe analyses (41 frames)

Figure 12: Bleached white corals in the shallow north of the CRS during the peak of the coral bleaching event, April 2016 © Ulli Kloiber

Figure 14: Comparison of the sea surface temperatures in the two highest bleaching incident years (1998 and 2016). (Source: Muhando, unpublished data)

See section 6 for further discussion on the impact of SST and bleaching on Chumbe reef habitat and biodiversity.

4.5 Geology

Unguja’s substrate is comprised of limestone origin (mostly fossil coral rock) and was probably part of a Pleistocene inshore coral reef system which is now separated from Tanzania mainland by channels of relatively shallow depths (30-50m). The fossil coral limestone cliffs, some of which form entire islands such as Chumbe Island, are frequently undercut by wave action during high tide, and the upper surfaces bear jagged edges and fissures resulting from weathering. These cliffs, including the ones found in Chumbe, reveal fossil coral colonies and giant clams which would have been living in these waters over 10,000 years ago (Richmond, 2011).

However, at the time of writing, sea level history of Chumbe Island is being investigated through a starting project about diagenesis of coral archives in collaboration with GeoMar institute in Kiel/Germany. This research is anticipated to provide more detailed analysis on theFossilized geological clam in the Chumbe history of chumbe, and follow up of this research is included in the anticipated managementcoral- ragactions substrate © Evelyn Mervine in section XXX.

4.6 Hydrogeology

There is no groundwater on Chumbe Island, and no permanent freshwater pools exist. After heavy rain, water collects in rock depressions. The porous rocky substrate and small size of the island make the formation of a permanent freshwater lens highly unlikely.

4.7 Soil

Forest soil is confined to depressions in the coral rag and is rarely more than 0.1m deep, with maximum depths recorded as 10cm (Bayliss and Stubblefield, 1993). There is only a single horizon made up of silty clay with a moderate level of humus, classified as Lithic Leptosol (using the FAO 1998 classifications). In comparison to some mainland coastal forests, Chumbe soil is relatively rich in mineral nutrients with only nitrates (nitrogen) absent in the parent rock (Bayliss & Stubblefield, 1993).

Around the development area of Chumbe there are also two sandy beach areas, comprised of common sand components of silicon dioxide in the form of quartz.

One of the two sandy beach areas near the bungalow, with the lighthouse behind © Hal Thompson 5. SITES OF CULTURAL & HISTORICAL IMPORTANCE

5.1. Lighthouse

A lighthouse was built on Chumbe in 1904, during the period when Zanzibar was a British protectorate and the Sultan of Zanzibar ruled locally. The lighthouse tower, made of coral rock, stands as a five-stage tower, and is approximately 34m (112 feet) high. According to the Rowlett lighthouse directory, housed within the University of North Carolina, USA, it is easily the best known lighthouse in Tanzania. Even the logo of the Chumbe MPA incorporates the lighthouse, which is a landmark sighting for travelers crossing the channel from the mainland African continent to the archipelago of Zanzibar.

Figure 15: The Chumbe logo, designed by Alison McMullin in 1998, features the Chumbe lighthouse as a landmark of the area

In March 1926, the light was converted to acetylene gas operation that reacted to environmental light changes and triggered the gas light in dusk and during storms. The system included an original 500mm (fourth order) Fresnel lens, emitting a beam of light every 11 seconds. A news account at the time of the conversion reported, “His Highness the Sultan opened the new AGA light on Saturday, 13th March, 1926. His Highness went there by H.H.S. Cupid... Tea was served in the saloon en voyage. In a speech addressed to His Highness, Captain Charlewood said that Chumbe was the first lighthouse to be converted to the AGA system, the principal advantages of which were economy of consumption and the dispensation with skilled keepers. The Government now had seven years’ experience with AGA lights, having installed one in a new lighthouse in Pungume in March 1919. The success with which Pungume had been run or rather had run itself, as it only had to be visited once in three months and the supply of dissolved acetylene renewed only every six months, had led the Government to decide to adopt the same type of light in all the lighthouses of Zanzibar.”

In its early days the Chumbe Lighthouse played a key role in a major naval episode. In August 1914, at the beginning of WWI in East Africa, the Koenigsberg, a German heavily armed cruiser, took shelter in the Rufiji River delta, where the captain received word that a British cruiser, the HMS Pegasus, was anchored in Zanzibar harbour undergoing repairs, thus vulnerable to attack. The Koenigsberg set forth for Zanzibar and anchored overnight behind Chumbe in readiness for the confrontation, and early in the morning of September 20, she approached the port and attacked the British vessel. It was reported that the Indian lighthouse keepers stationed on Chumbe at the time had seen the German vessel anchoring behind the island before the attack, but had failed to sound an alarm to the British signal station in Zanzibar out of fear for their lives. The outgunned Pegasus sank after only 45 minutes of fighting with the loss of 38 lives, their graves can be still visited on the small Grave Island off Stonetown. 42 The Pegasus was one of 11 Pelorus-class protected cruisers ordered for the Royal Navy in 1893, with building completed in 1897 The lighthouse falls under the jurisdiction of the Zanzibar Ports Corporation (ZPC) which ensures that it continues to function as an important and essential signal of shallow water to maritime users. In 1992 CHICOP signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with ZPC and the lighthouse was subsequently opened to public access. In 2002 the tower was rehabilitated (painted and minor repairs done) using Norwegian funds. In 2004 the island celebrated the lighthouses centenary with various stakeholder groups and lighthouse historians locally and internationally. In 2013, ZPC replaced the gas-powered system with a solar-powered light through fixing photovoltaic panels to the external balustrade.

However, in 2014 a visiting Australian structural engineer highlighted several defects impacting the structural integrity of the signal light support, which had started to show clear signs of deterioration. CHICOP immediately brought those concerns to ZPC’s attention and during a one-month rehabilitation period in March 2016, through ZPC, the lighthouse regained full structural integrity and continues to be an historical monument of great cultural interest to all visiting guests, especially local school children that climb the lighthouse as part of the EE excursion to Chumbe Island.

5.2. Lighthouse Keepers House

The lighthouse keeper's house was also constructed by the British in 1904, to provide a residence for the lighthouse keeper and his family. The building fell into disrepair when the island was abandoned in the mid-1960’s following the Zanzibar revolution.

After the establishment of CHICOP, architectural plans were drawn up to convert the remains of the lighthouse keepers house into the Education and Visitors Center, and were developed in such a way as to retain the main infrastructure and maintain the remaining original construction as a historic monument. During preliminary cleaning and restoration, original mosaics were found to exist as bands all around the center, and these have been restored to their original design by the Chumbe team.

The crumbled wall on the south-west wing of the building remains as it was found in the early 1990’s. During construction of the Education Center the last remaining lighthouse keeper who lived in the house up until abandonment visited the island to share his memories of the island with the team.

Additionally, there remain small remnants of the submarine telegraph cable in the Chumbe forest that used to provide a connection between Zanzibar, through Chumbe and onto Aden and India. The center managing the telegraph system in Zanzibar is located in what is now the Serena Hotel, where they have various artifacts remaining on display. Laid in 1879 by the British ‘Eastern Telegraph Company’ the metal casings of the cable are all that remain today of this most advanced international communication system of its age.

Top right: The abandoned lighthouse keepers house (© Jan Huelsemann), Middle right: The crumbled exterior wall (© Eleanor Carter), Bottom right: Starting to convert into the Education Center (© Eleanor Carter), Left: The completed Education Center (© Hal Thompson)

5.3. Mosque

A small mosque is also on the island, dating from around 1906. This mosque was built by the Zanzibar Indian Community for the first lighthouse keeper (who was of Indian descent) with the material being provided by the British. While most mosques in Zanzibar are of Arabic design, the Chumbe mosque follows a more Indian architectural style and thus has some unique features.

The mosque on the island is still in permanent use by the Islamic staff who take responsibility for the general upkeep of the building. Non-Islamic visitors are requested not to enter the mosque unless invited.

Below: The mosque on the island (© CHICOP), Right: The original mosaics restored in the

Education Center (© Manolo Yllera)

6. CONSERVATION: Biodiversity Management & Trends over Time

As mentioned in section 2, conservation is one of the three core pillars of the Chumbe Island MPA. The aim of CHICOP ltd, as stated in the organizations’ articles of association, makes specific mention of managing the Chumbe MPA “for conservation purposes”, and implementing effective biodiversity and habitat management in order to contribute to the ecological integrity of the region and support subsequent food security.

Conservation efforts are viewed through the lens of the two core protected areas within the MPA:

 The Chumbe Reef Sanctuary (CRS), and

 The Closed Forest Reserve (CFR)

This section outlines the key achievements to date in CHICOPs conservation activities, the challenges encountered, and opportunities to consider moving forward over the coming ten years (2017 – 2027).

6.1 The Chumbe Reef Sanctuary (CRS)

The Chumbe Reef Sanctuary (CRS) covers a total area of 55.06 ha. Of this, the proportional distribution of key biomes is as follows:

 Mixed Reef and Seagrass (3.85ha),

 Reef slope (8.97ha),

 Intertidal pavement (16.36ha),

 Seagrass beds & crevices (3.98 ha),

 Deep Slope (7.2ha),

 Deep Water (14.7ha).

The map in figure 16 shows the key habitats and their locations within the boundaries of the CRS.

6.1.1. Patrol, Surveillance & Enforcement (PSE) of the Coral Reef Sanctuary

The boundaries of the CRS are clearly marked by four state-of-the-art buoys (Sealite, SLB700) that are equipped with solar powered lights (Figure 17). The GPS coordinates for the buoy locations on- site are presented in Table 1.

Figure 16: Map showing the key habitats and boundaries of Chumbe

Rangers with the demarcation buoys © CHICOP

Buoy location GPS coordinates Demarc North S6 16.440 E39 10.416 Figure 17: (above) Location of the demarcation buoys Demarc North Central S6 16.822 E39 10.365

Table 1: (right) The GPS coordinates of the demarcation Demarc South Central S6 16.988 E39 10.428 buoys (Kloiber, 2015) Demarc South S6 17.197 E39 10.611

The presence of these demarcation buoys has been of utmost importance in supporting MPA patrol, surveillance and enforcement (PSE) activities and promoting effective management of the MPA. They delineate the boundaries of the CRS, which is 100% not-take area (NTA), and so inform fishers and other resource extractors of where is prohibited to enter for fishing or any extractive purposes.

They also provide useful visual aids that are included in the messaging of the MPAs outreach and communication efforts with local communities and associated stakeholders. At different periods in Chumbe’s history, buoys were also provided for mooring for fishers in distress (outside of the boundaries of the MPA).

The buoys are regularly maintained each quarter (through removal of encrustations that weigh the buoys or threaten rope/shackle integrity), and over the coming ten years it will be critical to continue this effective maintenance of the existing buoys, as well as consider future placement of buoys to optimize ‘line of sight’ considerations for fishers and mooring robustness.

PSE is undertaken through a permanent (24/7) presence of patrol rangers on the island, and on occasions when fishers or extractors do attempt to undertake activities within the CRS, rangers will go to meet those involved on-site (by foot or by boat as relevant) and explain about the area being an MPA (i.e. what is an MPA, why is it important etc.) and require them to cease actions.

Observation techniques include:

 Observing from the lighthouse deck (which provides a 360 view of the island and full view of the CRS)

 In-water observations when the boat is travelling within CRS (in association with supply travels and snorkel activities),

 Walking observations at low tide around the island (2 rangers, one walking north, one south)

The ranger ensure that one boat remains in the water and always afloat (moving it out as tide lowers) to enable an immediate reactive response to any infractions observed.

Since the inception of the project in 1992, complementary outreach and communication activities have been implemented by the MPA rangers in a range of ways (outlined further in section 7) to ensure all stakeholders are aware of the MPA regulations and restrictions, and to promote buy-in and support for the MPA work to achieve optimal compliance.

The modus operandi utilized by the rangers for approaching fishers is one of cordial, friendly, non- confrontational and educative engagement. This approach has been highly effective over the years for engaging fishers and promoting support for, and compliance with, the MPA. Unlike many other MPAs and marine national parks internationally, the Chumbe rangers are never armed, never aggressive, and embrace only positive education enforcement techniques.

In the early years of the project this was challenging work for the rangers, as there was resistance from fishers, particularly in 1994, when fishing attempts were at their highest, coinciding with political unrest experienced in Zanzibar that year. Additionally, following incidences of island-based attacks on other islands in Zanzibar in 2005, security of the island was enhanced by stationing two police officers permanently on the island. These officers’ primary purpose is to enhance security for the lodge guests, but they can concurrently provide arrest services on-site should they be required. To date there have been two documented arrests of fishers attempting poaching in the CRS, but no follow up court cases were required, and the matters were settled out of court with support provided by the Department of Fisheries Development.

Since 1993 daily ranger reports have been kept, documenting all activities taking place within the CRS. These reports initially focused on documenting any incidences of attempted fishing that occurred. Overtime they have evolved however, and today document and define incidences of attempted fishing/ extraction, incidences of attempted anchoring, vessels simply passing by the area, vessels requiring assistance, as well as operational use of the CRS by researchers and tourists. Copies of all the ranger reports are quarterly sent to the Director of the Department of Fisheries Development in Zanzibar.

For the record, the rangers will also document the gear type that is being used (i.e. trap, line, spear gun, net or gleaning), the location of the incidence (north, middle, south reef area), time of day, and number of persons involved (see an example of the ranger logbook in Appendix Two).

As figure 18 shows, incidences of attempted fishing / extraction in the CRS have decreased considerably over time, from a high of 171 incidences in 1994, to a low of only 6 incidences in 2016. This is anticipated to be due to: (a) the outreach efforts successfully reaching all the various stakeholders concerned, (b) the MPA regulations becoming familiar over time, and – importantly – (c) fishers and other stakeholders recognizing and experiencing first-hand the benefits being conferred by the MPAs protected status (discussed further in section 7).

180

160

140

120

100

40 # attemptedfishing incidences

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015 2016 YEAR

Figure 18: Total attempted fishing incidences in the CRS over time (Source: Rangers Reports, 1993-2016).

Note: some data gaps exist for years 1999-2004, therefore these incidences may be higher than represented in this table. However, data is complete from 2005 to date, showing a continuing decrease in fishing incidences.

Data from the ranger’s reports also show that the type of vessels attempting incursions in the CRS have been predominantly boats and ngalawa’s, with dhows and canoes also more prevalent than other vessel types (see figure 19). Though a more nuanced look at the data reveals vessels attempting incursion have changed over time, with boats being by far the most dominant vessel form in 1995, to smaller ngalawas being more prevalent ten years later, in 2005, and more mixed vessel incursion attempts visible, with dhows becoming prominent, by 2015 (see figure 19).

Overall: 1995 - 2015

(B)oat (D)how (Y)acht (W)akojani (N)galawa (C)anoe (S)norkel (O)ther 2005

(B)oat 1995 2005 2015 (D)how (B)oat (B)oat (Y)acht(B)oat (D)how (D)how (D)how (Y)acht (W)akojani (Y)acht (Y)acht (W)akojani (W)akojani (W)akojani (N)galawa (N)galawa (N)galawa (N)galawa (C)anoe (C)anoe (C)anoe(C)anoe (S)norkel (S)norkel (S)norkel (O)ther (O)ther (S)norkel(O)ther (O)ther

Figure 19: Types of vessels attempting incursions into the CRS (Source: Rangers Reports, 1993-2016)

However, as stated previously, vessel incursion today is at its lowest observed over the last 20 years, with only six incidences occurring in 2016, suggesting the outreach and communication efforts have been successful in raising appropriate awareness of MPA regulations, and the PSE approaches implemented have successfully reduced incursions attempts over time.

In addition to documenting observations and incursion attempts, the ranger’s reports also document any assistance / rescue services provided by the rangers to fishers in distress. Rangers will always go to the assistance of any vessel in distress, and have, over the last 20 years, rescued 167 vessels in distress, with an average of 4 fishers per vessel (therefore aiding nearly 700 fishers in distress over the years) (see figure 20).

This high level of effective patrolling, surveillance and enforcement (PSE) of the Chumbe Coral Reef Sanctuary (CRS) has been critical for ensuring the full protection of the area as ‘no-take’, and ensuring the preservation of Chumbe’s marine habitat and biodiversity.

# VESSELS RESCUED 25

0 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

Figure 20: Number of fishing vessels rescued by the Chumbe Rangers (Source: Rangers Reports, 1993-2016).

Thanks to the diligence of the rangers PSE efforts, and the resultant reduction of any damaging activities occurring in the marine sanctuary, the benthic substrate composition of the reef area has remained healthy and relatively consistent, with increases in hard coral cover and soft coral observed over time, and decreases in algal turf and macroalgae (see Table 2).

It is noteworthy that this stability and rejuvenation of the reef area has occurred over a period when neighboring, unprotected reefs, have experienced varying levels of significant decline in reef health (see Table 3), indicating the effective management of the CRS is maintaining and enhancing biodiversity conservation in line with the overall goal of the Chumbe MPA.

Substrate 1996 2015 Hard coral 62.74 ± 11.13 74.23 ± 3.15 Algal turf 12.79 ± 3.27 7.98 ± 1.28 Calcareous algae 0.55 ± 0.48 0.10 ± 0.10 Macroalgae 6.61 ± 6.06 1.63 ± 0.17 Coralline 7.26 ± 0.27 6.25 ± 1.02 Soft coral 0.80 ± 0.48 1.46 ± 1.46 Sand 8.92 ± 2.39 8.36 ± 0.53 Rugosity 1.25 ± 0.02 1.22 ± 0.04

Coral type Chumbe Ukombe Kwale Pange soft coral 0.41±0.21 1.16±0.29 0.00±0.00 4.18±2.69 branching 64.41±5.24 25.22±6.99 45.42±4.88 0.37±0.37 massive 16.45±3.70 31.95±4.03 5.94±1.66 47.85±6.43 plate 4.04±1.28 10.75±2.98 1.34±0.57 3.88±2.00 encrusting 1.14±0.50 1.83±0.64 0.72±0.37 0.04±0.03 Overall coral 86.05±2.09 69.76±5.20 53.42±3.87 52.15±6.51

Note: estimates of coral cover vary between researchers. This is anticipated to be the result of varied monitoring methodologies utilized. This is discussed further in section 6.1.2 below).

6.1.2. Animal Diversity in the CRS

Key animals found in the Coral Reef Sanctuary are:

I. Scleractinian corals V. Echinoderms II. Reef fish VI. Other marine invertebrates III. Sponges VII. Marine turtles IV. Molluscs VIII. Marine mammals

I) SCLERACTINIAN CORALS

Baseline surveys conducted on Chumbe in the early 1990s indicated that the scleractinian coral community within the CRS was highly diverse when the MPA was first established, hosting at least 90% of East African’s hard coral species, including a new species (Oulophyllia chumbensis) that is awaiting description (Veron, pers.comm, 1997). Species level identification has remained a challenging research area but recent studies confirmed at least 59 different genera are present in the CRS, (see Appendix Three) and in comparison with nearby reefs, the CRS has the highest diversity of coral species and the highest number of ‘unique’ taxonomic units (TAUs) as well as locally rare TAUs in the region (Zvuloni et al., 2010).

A range of coral studies have been conducted on the island over time, including the in-house monitoring of coral reef health conducted from September to March each year since 2006 by the Head Ranger and team. Through this, considerable data is available. However, explorative methodologies between visiting researchers and in-house monitoring methodologies have differed, making comparative trend analysis ‘between’ different research streams difficult. Trend analysis ‘within’ research streams active on the island has been possible however.

Scleractinian corals in the Chumbe Reef Sanctuary © Markus Meissl

Researcher-based findings

A study conducted by Eylem (2015) showed Live Hard Coral Cover (LHCC) to be 86.05 ± 2.09 %, which indicates an exceptionally healthy reef system.

Surveys repeated over a 20-year period by the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) estimated LHCC to be 62.74 ± 11.13 % in 1996, rising to a high of 75.18 ± 7.76 % in 2012, and dipping slightly to 74.23 ± 3.15 % by 2015 (see Figure 21).

Figure 21: Live Hard Coral Cover (LHCC) % over time (Source: Data provided by the Wildlife Conservation Society, Kenyan Marine Program Office. T.R. McClanahan Principal Investigator)

These differences in estimates of LHCC between Eylem’s study and WCS’s study may be related to the different methodologies utilized. Eylem followed a 50m line-intercept transect method (English et al., 1997), by laying transects using Scuba, whilst WCS followed a 10m line-intercept method using snorkel-surveys only (McClanahan, 2008). This highlights the inherent challenge of using ranging methodologies for research and the risk of inconsistencies in data acquired.

Studies undertaken by the Institute of Marine Science (IMS) in Zanzibar have shown LHCC has always been high (Muhando, 2001), especially in the northern section of the CRS which represents the shallowest reef habitat, dominated by dense Acropora fields. Moving south the reef crest becomes deeper and larger Porites colonies are more dominant. The severe 1998 El Niňo bleaching event reduced LHCC in the northern area of the reef (Acropora fields) to 30% (Mohammed et al, 2000), however, recovery and new growth became prevalent within two years, indicating a high level of resilience (Eylem, 2015).

In-house monitoring findings

In-house monitoring activities undertaken by the Chumbe Team have been long-term and have used consistent methodologies to assess a range of reef health factors. Since 2008 this monitoring has included the use of a ‘control site’ to enable comparative assessment with a non-protected reef habitat and provide insights into the correlation between reef health and protected status.

The control site is situated on Tele Reef (south of Chumbe). This reef is located inside Menai Bay Conservation Area but to date no fishing regulations have been enforced, hence, from a practical point of view it is an unprotected, fished reef.

Figure 22: Control site ‘Tele Reef’ in relation to Chumbe Island

Through this monitoring, the mean number of coral colonies present in the CRS has been shown to be far higher (‘highly significant’, p < 0.001) compared to the fished control site over time. However, both sites have remained relatively consistent (no ‘significant differences’) within their own parameters over time (CHICOP, 2016) (see Figure 23).

The Chumbe monitoring data has also revealed a very low prevalence of coral diseases, the most common of which has been pigmentation response (average 1.25% of colonies affected over ten years), followed by Porites Ulcerative White Spot (PUWS) (av. 0.16%), white splotch disease (av. 0.14%) and white syndrome disease (av. 0.03%) (see Figure 24). All other diseases have extremely low incidences. This indicates the coral colonies are relatively robust and resilient (healthy) to combat disease threats.

Over the years, Chumbe has suffered from bleaching incidences however. The Chumbe monitoring has shown these incidences occur in parallel with sea surface temperature. These temperature increases are recognized by scientists around the world to be a result of climate change (caused by increases of CO2 in the atmosphere from the release of carbon from fossil fuels). This is a challenge being faced by reef systems all around the world.

Interestingly however, monitoring has shown that colour bleaching (i.e. non-fatal temporarily loss of colour during bleaching episodes, followed by recovery) is far more commonly observed on Chumbe than mortal bleaching (resulting in death of the colony) (see Figure 26).

Figure 24: Disease occurrence on corals in the Chumbe CRS (Source: results from long-term ranger monitoring data, 2006 – 2015).

Max Average 31.0 30.5 30.0 29.5

29.0

C) o

28.5 SST ( SST 28.0 27.5 27.0 26.5 26.0 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Figure 25: Bleaching incidences (indicated by boxes) have occurred in parallel with increases in sea surface temperature (Sources: Muhando, unpublished data)

Figure 26: Trend in colonies affected by bleaching, with color bleaching more prevalent than mortal bleaching (Source: results from long-term ranger monitoring data, 2006 – 2015)

This again would indicate the colonies present in the CRS are relatively robust and resilient to climate change factors. This resilience is anticipated to be as a result of the removal of other stressors (fishing pressure, damage to reef from anchoring, destructive fishing practices, irresponsible tourism, direct land-source pollution etc.) as conferred through the protection of the area as 100% no take and fully managed (see more on this in Marshall & Schuttenberg, 2006).

It is noteworthy however, that over time the proportional incidence of mortal bleaching is very slightly increasing, from only 0.3% in 2006/7 to 1% in 2015/16. This suggests the bleaching pressures on the system are increasing and resilience may be diminishing over time. This requires continued monitoring and ensuring all best practice approaches are followed with regards to post-bleaching management, along with fastidious continued implementation of MPA regulations removing other pressure factors.

With regards to coral spawning, scientific observations of spawning events in Tanzania are scarce. However, in the Chumbe CRS, several spawning events of scleractinian coral colonies have been successfully documented and reported (Bronstein & Loya, 2011; Kloiber pers.comm, 2015).

Spawning acropora colony, in the northern CRS, image taken on 3rd Oct 2015 at 21:05 EAT © Martin Leyendecker

II) REEF FISH

Chumbe CRS is host to 474 recorded reef fish species (see full species list in Appendix Four). These include commercially important food fish species from the families Serranidae (groupers), Lutjanidae (snappers), Siganidae (rabbitfish), Scaridae (parrotfish), Haemulidae (sweetlips / grunts), and Balistidae (triggerfish), as well as species from the families Dasyatididae (rays), Carcharhinidae (sharks), Muraenidae (Morays), Synodontidae (lizard fish), Belonidae (needlefish), Syngnathidae (pipe fish), Scorpaenidae (lion / scorpion fish), Lethrinidae (emporers), Apogonidae (cardinals), Chaetodontidae (butterfly fish), Ephippidae (batfish), Mullidae (goatfish), Pomacanthidae (angel fish), Pomacentridae (damsels / clown fish), Labridae (wrasse), Sphyraenidae (barracuda), Carangidae (trevally), Gobiidae (goby’s), and Acanthuridae (surgeon / unicorn fish), amongst others.

Serranidae (Groupers)

Nesbitt and Richmond (2016) conducted a census of the six most commonly occurring grouper species inside the CRS (Plectropomus laevis, Cephalopholis argus, Cephalopholis miniata, Epinephelus fuscoguttatus, Aethaloperca rogaa and Anyperodon leucogrammicus). They found that larger species and individuals inhabited the deeper waters of the reef slope, while smaller species (and juveniles) inhabited the shallower back reef.

The Chumbe monitoring programme has assessed the biomass of this highly commercial food fish family over the last ten years (2006-2016) in both the Chumbe CRS and the control site of Tele reef (non-protected fished area). As figure 27 (below) shows, the difference in mean biomass between the two sites is highly significant, with the Chumbe biomass of Serranidae ranging from a low of 30.7 kg/ha in 2006 to 272.4 kg/ha in 2013, whilst the fished comparison reef ranging between zero biomass and a high of only 9.2 kg/ha in 2016.

Figure 27: Mean biomass (kg/ha) of Serranidae (Groupers) observed in the Chumbe Reef Sanctuary, 2006 – 2015 (Source: results from long-term ranger monitoring data, 2006 – 2015)

Therefore, even at its lowest biomass levels recorded over these ten years, the Chumbe reef still has 300% more groupers present compared to neighboring fished areas, highlighting the positive impact of prohibiting fishing in the CRS.

Balistidae (Triggerfish)

Balistapus undulatus is the most common predator for sea urchins around Zanzibar (McClanahan, 1997, McClanahan, 2000). Due to overfishing in the Zanzibar archipelago, the population of B. undulatus is declining. A population density of > 5 individuals/500m2 of Balistapus undulatus is expected to be normally found in reefs where habitat and environmental conditions are appropriate, however, in many East African marine parks, populations have declined to 1 ind/500m² (McClanahan, 2000). Studies suggest that to recover the population may take more than 30 years (McClanahan, 1997, McClanahan, 2000).

In the Chumbe CRS however, the monitoring programme has shown the population density of Balistidae in the last ten years has remained high, ranging from a ‘low’ of 2.4 ind/500m2 (in 2006) to a high of 6.7 ind/500m2 (in 2010); with densities remaining at or above the level anticipated for healthy reef habitat since 2008 (with the exception of a brief dip in numbers in 2012). This is despite intense fishing for this species that occurs in the fishing grounds at the very border of the CRS (Kolzenburg, 2012), suggesting the CRS is providing a critical refuge for this important fish family.

Figure 28: Population density (ind/500m2) of Balistidae (Triggerfish) observed in the Chumbe Reef Sanctuary, 2006 - 2015 (Source: results from long-term ranger monitoring data, 2006 – 2015)

Figure 29: Mean biomass (kg/ha) of Balistidae (Triggerfish) observed in the Chumbe Reef Sanctuary, 2006 – 2015 (Source: results from long-term ranger monitoring data, 2006 – 2015)

Herbivore fish

There is considerable research interest in understanding the functional role of herbivore fish in coral reef ecosystems. Their position as primary consumers, maintaining the equilibrium between algae and coral, has been promoted as key factor in promoting coral reef resilience.

Herbivorous functional groups have been categorized based on their feeding preferences and behavior (Bellwood et al., 2006, Hoey and Bellwood 2011, Graham et al., 2013), and are subdivided into:

 scrapers which facilitate growth and survival of corals and coralline algae by eliminating algae and sediment by close-cropping

 grazers that prevent corals from macroalgae overgrowth and shading by feeding on algae)

 excavators that facilitate solid substrate for coral and coralline algae settlement, by removing dead brittle coral matrix

 algal browsers that potentially contribute to the reversal of established degraded states by feeding directly on macroalgae

The following herbivore fish studies have been conducted in the CRS, and have provided vital insights in emerging key concepts such as ecological connectivity and coral reef resilience.

Johansson (2006) surveyed Scarus niger, a scraping species and found that there is an exponential relationship between size and function, characterized by a critical size for functional importance of 17-25 cm total fish length. Thyresson (2006) further confirmed that Chlorurus sordidus, only when larger than ~15 cm contributed in any way to the functions and there was an exponential increase in 60

terms of functional performance with body size. When comparing the Chumbe Reef Sanctuary with other reef sites in Unguja, Thyresson found the CRS had the highest total performance due to a high abundance of large, functionally mature fishes.

Another comparative study (Lokrantz et al. 2010) showed that the CRS displayed a significantly higher biomass of excavators compared to other fished reefs (Pange, Bawe and Changuu). Among scrapers and grazers, the results were less clear than for excavators, but in general there were more species, higher abundance and species diversity, and a larger biomass of scrapers and grazers on Chumbe compared to other fished reefs in Zanzibar (see Figure 30 below).

The study concluded however, that compared to other areas, the Zanzibar reefs overall exhibited an extremely low biomass of both scrapers and excavators, including the CRS, because the largest size- class of fish was absent. Lokrantz et al. (2010) argues that this could be owing to a mismatch in scales between the size of the protected area and the home range of herbivore fishes; as the CRS spans about 500 m along the shore, whereas many coral reef fish species move over several kilometers (Kaunda-Arara & Rose 2004). 61

Eylem (2015) further assessed the impact of reef protection on herbivorous fish distribution in Unguja and also found a general pattern of lower herbivorous fish densities observed in the least protected reef (Pange) and the highest densities in the most protected reef (Chumbe). In addition, her study clearly demonstrated the dispersal of reef-associated fish herbivores beyond individual reefs into nearby seagrass beds, hence suggesting ecological connectivity across shallow-water habitats in the back-reef systems around Unguja.

Total fish abundance, biomass & habitat use

The CRS shows generally a high fish abundance, with omnivores being the most abundant functional group constituting 34% of the total fish abundance, followed by algal herbivores (27%) and invertivores (15%) (see Figure 32).

Regarding overall fin fish biomass, the results of the Chumbe reef monitoring over the last ten years (2006 – 2016) showed an exceptional rise in biomass over time (see Figure 33), reaching a high of more than 1,500 kg/ha fin fish biomass in 2015.

This is a particularly interesting result when set against the ‘ecosystem thresholds’ identified by Fujita and Karr (2012)16, building on the work of McClanahan et al. (2011). Fujita and Karrs research suggests ecosystem thresholds are as shown in Table 4.

16 These thresholds were identified relevant to Indian Ocean regions, Indonesia and Solomon Islands; therefore there may be variation across other regions. 62

Figure 33: Mean biomass (kg/ha) of all finfish monitored in the Chumbe Reef Sanctuary, 2006/07 – 2015/16 (Source: results from long-term ranger monitoring data, 2016)

Note: Control site Tele reef studies commenced in 2008/09.

These results show that the Chumbe CRS can be considered extremely ‘healthy and resilient’. Conversely the comparison control site also studied through this period (Tele reef) show that fish biomass has been wavering between a low of only 92 kg/ha to a high of only 443 kg/ha in this period (also shown in Figure 33). This result strongly supports the hypothesis that the closed and protected status of the Chumbe CRS is the cause for the highly significantly different (p<0.001) fish biomass levels observed.

Fish Density Threshold status

> 1130 kg/ha Fish biomass may be close to unfished levels. System likely to be healthy and resilient.

< 850 kg/ha Coral reef system may be near the threshold of a state change to a healthy state that is being fished down, and perhaps somewhat less resilient. close to 640 kg/ha Coral reef system may still be producing relatively good yield (80-100% of MSY) but is in need of strong management to maintain healthy stocks and a healthy coral reef system.

< 500 kg/ha Coral reef system may have crossed a threshold to an unhealthy state that it can recover from if fishing is restricted.

< 300 kg/ha Coral reef system is likely to have shifted to an unhealthy state from which recovery is very difficult and fish stocks may be in an overfished condition. Active ecosystem restoration may also be required, as this threshold may be associated with increased resilience of the unhealthy state.

Table 4: Ecosystems thresholds related to fish biomass (Source: Fujita & Karr, 2012)

This finding is also reflected in an assessment conducted across the entire West Indian Ocean (WIO) linking ecosystem thresholds to fisheries management (see Figure 34). Here, McClanahan et al. (2011) have revealed a high significant difference in fishable biomass in Tanzania, between ‘closed’ sites (such as Chumbe) compared to semi-restricted and fished sites.

Skoglund (2014) also undertook a study evaluating No-Take Areas (NTAs) and multiple use areas with different management levels in Tanzania and Mozambique. He also found that NTAs (including Chumbe) generated more fish species, higher biomass and higher individual fish weight compared to multiple use areas. Furthermore, Skoglund found that private managed reserves like Chumbe were more efficient in terms of conserving higher number of fish species and generating higher fish biomass compared to government managed reserves.

Figure 34: Linking ecological thresholds to fisheries management.

(A) Estimated fishable biomass thresholds (±SE) among Indian Ocean (IO) reefs. Filled circles are posterior mean estimates, and vertical lines are 95% confidence intervals. Horizontal dotted lines define the boundaries of the hypothesized 0.25–0.5 BMMSY window. (B) Mean (±95% confidence intervals) biomass of reef fishes by country and fisheries management, for the studied regions based on sites. Countries on the x axis are ordered by the log of national population per kilometer of coastline, increasing from left to right (Source: McClanahan, 2011).

Impact on wider fisheries

The enhanced biomass and density of species within an NTA is recognized in fisheries science to increase the reproductive potential of commercially important fish species by protecting individuals that are then able to grow to larger individual sizes, making them exponentially more fecund than their smaller, younger counterparts (as illustrated in Figure 35).

Additionally, NTAs are recognized in fisheries science as to enable a ‘spillover’ effect to occur, whereby fish from within an NTA travel to neighbouring fished areas and can support the maintenance and enhancement of overall yields in proximal fisheries. As such, NTAs are a commonly utilized tool within a suite of wider fishery management mechanisms.

Studies using tagged fish from with an NTA have shown some individuals travelling distances of many km’s especially under specific circumstances e.g. spawning (Kaunda-Arara & Rose, 2004). However, many common commercially important reef fish have movement limited to a few km’s from an NTA (Holland et al., 1996; Meyer et al., 2000). Figure 36 shows the distances travelled by various species as a common indicator.

Figure 36: Graphic showing common distances travelled by different species (Source: Gombos et al., 2013, adapted from Maypa 2012).

On Chumbe, a study conducted in 2006 showed that there were significant gradients in density and biomass occurring across reserve boundaries, and that commercially important fish were capable (and observed through tagging) to be moving out of the CRS to nearby fishing grounds. This study showed that fish tagged on Chumbe were recaptured in fishing grounds up to 4 km away (Tyler, 2006).

Using data gathered from fish tagging, habitat surveys and interviews with local fishermen, this study also showed that “There was indirect evidence of spillover (net emigration of adult fish) from [the] NTA.” and 94% of fishermen interviewed said they believed that fish inside the park do travel out and are caught (Tyler, 2006: 179)

Klaus (2012) showed that the Chumbe CRS fish community composition differed between coral reef and seagrass habitats: 72 species were only seen in the coral reef, 14 were only observed in the seagrass bed and 53 species were counted in both habitats. Most of the species showed a significantly higher habitat use at daytime and 13 species revealed a significantly higher habitat use during high tide. Kruse et al (2015) further suggest two distinct fish communities in the CRS, with the coral reef comprising a higher species richness and heterogeneity than the seagrass bed. Through their routine migrations mobile fishes can therefore, provide important functional links between those two habitats and can cause predictable short-term variations in fish communities.

Studies conducted in wider areas across Zanzibar have shown that half of all fish species found within the Zanzibar seascape (including the Chumbe CRS) use more than one habitat (Berkström, 2010); and overall, half of all piscivores and about one third of fish/invertebrate feeders found on Zanzibar’s coral reefs use an alternative habitat as juveniles. This shows that habitat connectivity and multi-habitat usage of fish is a general and important characteristic in the region and further supports the notion that fish from with the Chumbe CRS are indeed ‘spilling over’ to support enhanced fisheries yields locally and enhance food security.

In the future, further monitoring and assessment of proximal potential spillover levels will be useful for enabling greater understanding of Chumbe’s impact on local fisheries, and for supporting improved articulation of the MPAs interconnectivity with food security in the region.

Larval disperal

While there is substantial knowledge within fisheries science of the movements of adult and juvenile fishes and how they are affected by MPA’s, there is a large gap in the knowledge of how the planktionic larval duration (PLD) of fishes is affected by MPAs and the implications of MPAs on larval recruitment (Hedberg, 2015).

Muzuka et al. (2010) describes the main current flow past Chumbe Island as northbound during flood tide and to some extent it even keeps flowing north during ebb tide. Based on this, Muzuka also suggests that the MPA is very likely to be a source of coral larvae for areas further north. The study conducted by Hedberg (2015), examining larval abundance and distribution across a range of areas in Zanzibar, found a low abundance of larvae on Chumbe. However – critically – the study was conducted near Chumbe island, but outside of the protected area, which Hedberg suggests may

have affected the results substantially, as the distance from the reef crest was at least 100 m (300 m from land) and above a depth of more than 20 m. This differed considerably from the general sampling of the other sites examined across Zanzibar, and might explain the low abundance of larvae, as bathymetry affecting eddies and small localized flows is very different that far out and as it is substantially deeper, leaving room for more depth related stratification.

Although fish larvae are much more capable of swimming and retaining their position than coral larvae (Wolanski and Kingsford 2014), the low abundance of larvae is cause for further studies of localized flow influence on dispersal from, and retention at, Chumbe Island. As no deep tows were carried out, this could be one bias for the low abundance result. However, at other sites in Zanzibar where deep tows were carried out they generally reflected the same results as more shallow tows, meaning that sites with low general abundances had low abundances across all habitats and sites with high general abundances had high abundances across all habitats.

Therefore, further studies of larval abundance and dispersal would be valuable to undertake on Chumbe in the coming years. Additionally, spawning activities for any present species should be monitored, as the timing of spawning and the bathymetry strongly influences how eggs and/or larvae disperse by means of water flow.

As the literature on flow dynamics influencing dispersal and retention in reef and seagrass environments is sparse, due to the fact that fisheries biologists typically study pelagic fishes living offshore and oceanographers generally work on larger scale oceanic flows (Bakun 2006; Hamner and Largier 2012), this is a field of research in dire need of exploration.

A blue-spotted Sting-ray in the Chumbe Reef Sanctuary © Markus Meissl

Further, models trying to predict the spatial fate of eggs and larvae indicate that dispersal and retention is dependent on seasonal cycles of hydrodynamics as well, and relatively short dispersal in the order of 10’s of kilometers rather than 100’s of kilometers may be expected (Cowen et al. 2003).

The short dispersal distances suggested by Cowen et al. (2003) indicate that even if dispersed rather than retained, management of protected areas need to consider this, and MPAs such as Chumbe that are located directly next to important fishing grounds may produce larvae dispersal that has more immediate impact on surrounding fisheries than isolated or distant MPAs from fishing grounds.

Further studies into this area will be important in the future and will be highlighted in the associated ‘Research Plan’ being developed in conjunction with this management plan (see more information in section 11).

III) PORIFERA (SPONGES)

Helber et al. (2016) suggests that sponges in Zanzibar are actually competitors to reef-building corals, due to their strong chemical defenses and their ability as filter-feeders to thrive in more productive waters, suggesting their adaptiveness could possibly lead to a phase-shift from coral to sponge dominance.

Unfortunately, the sponge fauna of the Zanzibar Archipelago is poorly studied. Studies have suggested at least five identified species are present in the CRS intertidal area (Spheciospongia florida, Tedania anhelans and Carteriospongia foliascens –Sawicki, 2000; and Biemna humilis, Haliclona fascigera –Kloiber pers.comm, 2016). However, a study by Marshall (2009) found 19 distinct sponge species present, though their taxanomic classification is as yet unclear.

With no formal inventory or monitoring system in place, clarity on sponge diversity in the CRS remains unclear. This will be an area to address in the coming ten years, and partner universities have already shown interest to engage in researching and systemizing surveying of this fauna in the future (discussed further in section 11).

Blue Sponge on the Chumbe Reef © Marshall

IV) MOLLUSCS

A considerable diversity of molluscs have been observed in the Chumbe CRS, including cephalopods (squids, cuttlefish and octopus), gastropods (sea slugs, nudibranchs etc.) and bivalves (razor clams, cockles, and members of the genus Tridacna). A total of 65 different mollusk species have been documented from casual observations, however, no thorough mollusc inventory has been undertaken to date.

One of the most prevalent molluscs in Chumbe’s waters is Andara antiquata (cockle) and these occur in both the CRS and extensively on the eastern side of Chumbe Island (which is not within the protected area). Throughout the year during spring low tides (each full and new moon) this species is extensively harvested from the non-protected eastern side of the island. At this time 1-2 boats arrive daily, with between 10-15 people on board, to work gleaning the inter-tidal of this species in the non-protected area.

From research undertaken (Jacobsen & Esherick, 2007) seagrass beds appear to have significantly higher cockle densities compared to other habitats in the intertidal. Interestingly however, no significant difference in density of this species appears to be observed between the protected and unprotected side.

V) ECHINODERMS

A wide range of echinoderms have been observed in the Chumbe CRS. This is the common name given to any member of the phylum Echinodermata, recognizable by their (usually five-point) radial symmetry, and including animals such as Asteroidea (starfish), sea cucumbers, and urchins.

Asteroidea

Studies conducted in 2001 (Barr & Rasmussen) identified up to 15 different species of starfish in the CRS (over a two-week study period). However, a full and complete inventory has yet to be undertaken.

One of the starfish present in varying levels of abundance at times, and of most concern, is Acanthaster planci (the Crown-of-Thorns). These starfish are hard coral predators, feeding preferably on polyps of staghorn corals from the genus Acropora which are important and abundant reef-building corals in the CRS. Over the years there have been several COT outbreaks on the Chumbe reef that have required management action through the physical removal of the species from the reef area.

This first took place in 2004, when increased densities of COTs were noticed inside the CRS. A manual COT removal program was initiated which involved park rangers collecting, counting and measuring all COTs detected during random swims inside the CRS. A staggering 1,297 COTs were removed in 2004, with a further 1,597 removed in 2005.

Figure 37 shows that after this outbreak in 2004/05, the number of COTs observed and removed has decreased dramatically, and since September 2015 no COTs have been removed due to very few sightings.

Figure 37: Number of COTs removed from the CRS per year (2004 – 2015)

Size information of COTs per year since 2004

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Min (cm) 8 13 16 15 15 20 16 14 8 5 10 8 Max (cm) 45 37 32 34 40 31 33 32 46 36 35 31 Av. Size (cm) 25.0 23.2 24.5 26.4 38.1 25.3 24.8 25.81 28.8 25.5 28.9 26.19

Table 5: Size range of COTs found in the CRS (2004 – 2015)

In 2008, Muhando & Lanshammar looked at coral mortality and recovery after the major El Niño event in 1998, and compared it to coral mortality and recovery after Crown-of-Thorns (COT) outbreaks - comparing the Chumbe reef (protected and managed) with control sites of unprotected / unmanaged reefs (Bawe and Changuu). Benthic data from the three islands showed that during the El Niño event in 1998 the % cover of Acropora corals dropped to around 10-15%, after which a slow coral recovery could be seen on all reefs. However, after the major COT outbreak in 2002/03, the % cover of Acropora corals dropped dramatically further down to around only 1% on the two unmanaged reefs, while on Chumbe the Acropora coverage recovered to pre-bleaching levels.

This suggests the COT removal activities have been vital to maintaining the health of the reef, particularly the Acropora fields, and indicates the success of this programme at tackling the threat of COTs.

In future however, it will be worthwhile exploring and establishing density thresholds for COTs that can be utilized by management to trigger the COT removal process if and when necessary; as COTs are a part of the ecosystem, and removal at low densities may not be necessary.

Sea cucumbers

In Zanzibar local people do not recognize sea cucumbers as food items, but since the 1960’s these animals have become a high valued fishery export (beche-de-mer), putting sea cucumbers throughout the Zanzibar archipelago under increasingly high fishing pressure (Eriksson et al, 2010).

In the CRS, a study conducted in 2004 identified 28 species of sea cucumbers present within the CRS, compared to only 8 species present on the western (unprotected) side of the island (Blaine, 2004).

In 2010, Eriksson et al. found that the Chumbe protected reef was the only site in Unguja where the high value black teatfish sea cucumber species (Holothuria nobilis) occurred (at an abundance of 1.2 ind/ha) as well as the medium value Herrmanns species (Stichopus herrmanni – at 9 ind/ha) and Thelenota anax (at 2.5 ind/ha).

In addition to this, the study found that the Chumbe CRS had a ten times higher density for the medium value species Holothuria atra (5 ind/ha) compared to the sampled areas open to fishing. This endorses and highlights the importance of the MPA as a refuge for commercially over-exploited species.

Sea urchins

Population increases of the long-spined sea urchin Diadema setosum around Zanzibar are believed to have caused loss of seagrass beds and coral cover, and possibly competitive exclusion of herbivorous fishes. This has prompted both conservation organizations and local fishermen to call for management of this species. However, the population dynamics of Diadema setosum are poorly understood, and the effects of any management initiatives are difficult to predict.

Sea urchin density is considered to be an important indicator for live coral cover, and as part of CHICOP’s annual Coral Reef Monitoring program, since 2006, the distribution, abundance and density of the following sea urchin species has been recorded: Diadema setosum, Diadema savignyi, Echinothrix diadema, Echinometra mathaei. Assessments have been undertaken within the Chumbe CRS and at the unprotected, fished control site on Tele Reef.

The resultant observed densities of these species has then been assessed against a regional target density of less than 1 urchin/m2 (as recommended in McClanahan, 2014). Figure 38 shows the results of these surveys since 2006 (with the blue line indicating the regional target density). As the graph shows, the Chumbe CRS reached this target in 2008 (14 years after protection) and since then sea urchin density has further decreased, while density levels on the control fished site also studied (Tele reef) are still high, likely due to predator exploitation (Lokrantz et al. 2010).

Figure 38: Comparative urchin number (per m2) between the CRS and control site that is fished; and level indicating the target density.

VI) OTHER MARINE INVERTEBRATES

In addition to the various invertebrate families and species discussed in the previous section, it should be recognized that a full invertebrate inventory of Chumbe has yet to be conducted. In one very brief study in 2000 (Sawicki) 89 different invertebrate species were identified in the CRS intertidal alone; suggesting further research could reveal far more about the invertebrate assemblage present in the area.

Additionally, WCS led studies have suggested that invertebrate studies can also be useful for assessing the relative effect of different species and trophic interactions between fish and invertebrates inside reserves, as many fish species interact with invertebrates, partly as a food source but also in terms of competition for food (McClanahan et al., 2011).

VII) MARINE TURTLES Out of the five species of marine turtles occurring in Tanzania’s waters, two species – the endangered Green turtle (Chelonia mydas) and critically endangered Hawksbill turtle (Eretmochelys imbricate) are commonly seen within the CRS. Both species use the CRS as a foraging habitat but do not nest on Chumbe Island due to the limited and fluctuating beach habitat available.

Although turtle conservation and management efforts are underway in some areas of Tanzania including Unguja, the conservation status of turtles in Tanzania remains largely unknown. Information concerning population dynamics is incomplete, while knowledge of nesting populations and feeding habitats is patchy, and of developmental habitats almost non-existent (Muir, 2005).

VIII) MARINE MAMMALS Marine mammals (ceataceans) are transitory visitors to the CRS. Out of 19 species reported from Tanzanian waters (Nationwide Survey of Cetaceans in Tanzania, WCS report 2016), three dolphin species have been observed with relative frequency within the protected area: the Spinner dolphin (Stenella longirostris), Indo-pacific bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops aduncus) and Humpback dolphin (Sousa plumbea former Sousa chinensis).

Indian Ocean humpback dolphin (Sousa plumbea)

In 2014, a major taxonomic change in the genus Sousa resulted in formal recognition of the Indian Ocean humpback dolphin (S. plumbea) as a distinct species (Jefferson and Rosenbaum, 2014). Prior to this change, humpback dolphins from South Africa to Australia were classified as the Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin (Sousa chinensis) (Jefferson and Karczmarski, 2001).

Green turtle (Chelonia mydas) © CHICOP

The main diagnostic feature in Sousa plumbea is a distinctive dorsal hump that is present in young animals and gets progressively larger in older animals, especially males. The dorsal fin is small and sits on top of the dorsal hump. In Unguja, Indian Ocean humpback dolphins occur in small groups (sometimes mixed with Indo-pacific bottlenose dolphins), generally less than 10 individuals; they are very shy and do not approach boats. S. plumbea’s IUCN Redlist status is currently in review but Braulik et al. (2015) suggests the species qualifies for “endangered” listing, which makes future monitoring of sightings records by CHICOP highly recommended.

Humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae)

Humpback whales visit Tanzania seasonally and are present from roughly June to November with the peak in numbers in August and September. During this period they are occasionally observed passing by the outside of the CRS.

Since 2008, CHICOP has been documenting sightings as part of a wider network of volunteer observers scattered along the entire coastline of Tanzania (Samaki Consultants Ltd. 2010). Moreover, CHICOP has participated in an acoustic monitoring project conducted by the Tanzania Program of WCS whereby an underwater acoustic recorder was deployed at the bottom of CHICOP’s southern demarcation buoy from July to November 2016 (see Figure 40). Since Humpback whales are highly vocal (they produce social sounds for communication and feeding, while males produce complex songs) the recorder can detect whales from 5 to 50km away.

The collected data is being analysed at the time of writing, but will hopefully reveal more insights in whale migration, identification of high-use habitat areas, and allow a comparison of the relative numbers of whales visiting Zanzibar and their distribution in these waters. The data will also be examined to look for the presence of Blue Whales, Sperm Whales, and Beaked Whales - all little known species in the region.

Figure 40: Above left: Humpback whale sighting outside the CRS (July, 2013) © Ulli Kloiber. Above right: Dr. Braulik deploying an acoustic recorder in CRS (August, 2016) © Ulli Kloiber.

77 Indian Ocean humpback dolphin (Sousa plumbea) © P. Verhoag

6.1.3. Plant Diversity in the Coral Reef Sanctuary

Plant life in the Chumbe Reef Sanctuary consists primarily of seagrass and benthic algae.

I) SEAGRASS

A seagrass area over 140,321 m2 surrounds Chumbe Island, often characterized by small and patchy seagrass beds (Hayford & Perlman, 2006). Of the 13 seagrass species known from the Western Indian Ocean (WIO) region (Bandeira & Bjoerk, 2001), seven are found inside the CRS: Cymodocea rotundata, Halodule sp., Thalassia hemprichii, Thalassodendron ciliatum (formerly Cymodocea ciliata), Halophila ovalis, Syringodium isoetifolium and Cymodocea serrulata.

Mapping the distribution of seagrasses around Chumbe Island is challenging due to the complex nearshore environment with seagrasses, algae and corals in different densities, patch sizes and at different depths. Six of the present seagrass species can dominate a given area, often occurring in mixed-species meadows with densities ranging from a few Halophila ovalis plants to dense stands of Thalassodendron ciliatum, while small patches of seagrass also occur in between coral bommies of similar sizes.

Despite this environment, a field-based study (Hayford and Perlman, 2006) and high-resolution satellite remote sensing (Knudby and Nordlund, 2011) have produced seagrass maps that provide an important baseline against which to measure future changes in seagrass distribution (Figure 41).

In the absence of field data from the past, a historical perspective on seagrass cover dynamics often relies on local knowledge. In the case of Chumbe Island, the park rangers, some of whom have worked on the island since 1992, were interviewed and had the general opinion that the total seagrass distribution around the island decreased from the time of the park’s inception in 1992 to 1998, and has slowly recovered since then but not yet reached the 1992 extent. The cause of the initial decline, mentioned by the rangers, was strong winds burying seagrass meadows north of the island with sand, as well as a large number of sea urchins at one time grazing on the seagrass.

II) BENTHIC ALGAE

Concern in the aftermath of any El Nino event is that opportunistic benthic macroalgae growth on dead coral and rubble could lead to phase shifts in the CRS. After the 1998 bleaching event, Sargassum was present in high abundance on the CRS reef flat (Rearick, 2000). Therefore, diversity and zonation of benthic algae was subsequently studied (Businski, 2001) and resulted in a preliminary macroalgae inventory list that has been further developed through records from visiting scientists from WCS (see Appendix Five). Studies conducted between 2009 and 2015 confirm that macroalgae cover as an indicator for reef health has been low but should be monitored in the prospect of more frequent bleaching events.

79 Seagrass on Chumbe © Lina Mtwana Nordlund

6.2 The Chumbe Closed Forest Reserve (CFR)

The landmass of Chumbe Island covers an area of 16.64 ha. Within this area, ~0.36 ha is developed (in the form of the ecolodge), while 14.73ha is dense forest, with the remainder covered by sparse forest, islets or sandy beaches.

The non-settled area of the landmass is the designated Closed Forest Reserve (CFR). In the center- south area of this forest, narrow footpaths have been provided for guests and education visitors to undertake a forest trail walk. Other than these paths, the forest is unaffected by human presence, is safeguarded, and in some areas is almost inaccessible due to extensive species cover.

No cutting or felling is permitted within the CFR except for the management of invasive species. In this fully protected area there are three distinct habitat types:

I. Mangrove pool: This is a saltwater-inundated pool located close to the visitor center, with water levels varying with the tides, and vegetation dominated by mangroves,

II. Scrub habitat: Relatively short scrub (3m), possibly wind/salt clipped, occurring on the periphery of the forest habitat,

III. Tropical Dry Forest: Relatively tall (6m), dense coastal thicket covering approximately 90% of the island.

The Tropical Dry Forest is a thriving example of an undisturbed 'coral rag' forest habitat, which is becoming increasingly rare in the region and indeed throughout the Western Indian Ocean (Beentje, 1990).

As there is no groundwater on the island, species in this forest rely on adaptive mechanisms for water collection and retention, and epiphytic species are common. Rooting depth is shallow and the habitat in the northern section of the island is extremely dense.

6.2.1. Patrol, Surveillance & Enforcement (PSE) of the Closed Forest Reserve

Similar to the marine patrols, land-based patrols are conducted by the rangers each day. These patrols are mostly conducted at low tide by walking around the island, as this is the time when possible incursions onto the island are most likely. At other tide times the significant overhangs of the island and craggy rock surfaces make accessing the island at any location other than the observed beach sites in the development area virtually impossible.

Additional PSE is conducted from the vantage point of the top of the lighthouse when walking patrols are not workable due to weather conditions and the like.

To date very few attempted incursions on to the land have been observed, and when they have occurred they have been primarily related to fishers in distress, and on such occasions the rangers respond accordingly to provide aid.

6.2.2. Plant Diversity

Plant diversity in the CFR falls into the below categories:

I. Mangroves II. Vulnerable species III. Other vascular plants IV. Invasive species

I) MANGROVES

Out of the nine mangrove species encountered in the WIO-region (Richmond, 2011), five species are found on Chumbe Island. Bruguiera gymnorrhiza (black mangrove) dominates the main mangrove pool close to the visitor centre. Avicennia marina (white mangrove) and Ceriops tagal (tagal mangrove) are represented by only a few trees, located at the edge of the intertidal pool close to the old mosque. Individual Rhizophora mucronata (red mangrove) and Xylocarpus moluccensis trees, growing in fossilized rock crevices on the eastern side of the island, have recently been confirmed by the Chumbe conservation team.

Figure 42: Comparison images of the mangrove pool area (bottom right) from 1995 to 2015 © CHICOP Archive

II) VULNERABLE SPECIES

Uvariodendron kirkii, endemic to East Africa, is classified as “Vulnerable” in the IUCN Red List of threatened species, as the global extent of occurrence is just under 20,000 km², with a severely fragmented population along the coast of Kenya into Tanzania.

This species has shown a continuing decline in recent decades, but has been found to exist on Chumbe. U. kirkii has the unusual characteristic of growing its fruits directly on the trunk and limbs of the tree (Figure 43), and is also favoured in the diet of the rare Ader’s duiker antelope (Aplin, 2003).

Baseline information about this species inside the CFR was provided by Graham (2003) who found a healthy population of 290 U. kirkii trees within a total transect area of 6416 m2 (~0.6ha), with the highest densities in the southern part of the island.

However, repeat surveys since this time have not been undertaken. Therefore, utilizing this baseline to undertake comparison surveys to monitor the on-going population of this species will be important in the coming years.

Figure 43: Fruits of Uvariodendron kirkii growing directly on the trunk of the tree © Ulli Kloiber

III) OTHER VASCULAR PLANTS

Studies have so far confirmed 74 species of vascular plants occurring in the forest (Gillingham, 2011). This includes the impressive Fireball Lily (Scadoxus multiflorus), the common Mother-in-Law’s Tongue (Sansevieria kirkii) and several species within the poisonous Euphorbia family (see Appendix Six).

In addition to this, more than 20 other vascular plants have been recorded, but have so far not been possible to identify.

Certain fruit tree species that were introduced during the period of habitation by the lighthouse keeper (such as banana and papaya) are not found anymore, while other exotic species that were likely introduced through natural seed dispersal from Unguja, such as the Indian Almond tree (Terminalia catappa) are growing well.

The forest of Chumbe is also resource rich in medicinal plant species, of which 13 have been identified so far. However, research still lacks into their potential importance and medical capabilities.

The Department of Commercial Crops Fruits and Forestry (DCCFF), Zanzibar (2005) stated that ‘the Chumbe forest constitutes the last of the important remaining coral rag forest species of Zanzibar’ and if surveyed in more detail is likely to show high plant diversity.

Several forest monitoring programmes have been initiated on the island, but have not been replicated sufficiently, or following the same protocols, to enable temporal analysis and comparative assessment over time. Most recently a monitoring program has been established in 2010 which provides plant ID images and baseline data (Gillingham, 2010). Therefore moving forward it will be

important to more rigorously adhere to forest monitoring schedules and procedures to allow for more robust future assessments. Additionally, identifying the remaining 20 vascular plant species as yet uncategorized, and documenting more thoroughly the medicinal properties of the species identified, will be important elements of future forest conservation efforts in the coming ten years.

IV) INVASIVE SPECIES

Casuarina equisetifolia (whistling pine) is an evergreen, 6-30m tall tree, originally native in Southeast Asia and Australia (Orwa et al., 2009) but its exotic range reaches also Unugja, including Chumbe Island. C. equisetifolia is salt tolerant and only found along the western coastline of the island where it has shown very fast growth as displayed in Figure 44 (image comparison). Although partly protected in its home range because of its importance in controlling coastal erosion, Nowak et al. (2009) reported that forest clearance and over-planting of exotics such as C. equisetifolia is already adversely affecting some forest landscapes on Unguja.

Figure 44: Casuarina equisetifolia growth – image comparison from 1995 – 2015 © Koehler

Therefore, monitoring, and where necessary, removing this species from occupying niches of more native plant species is an important part of the Chumbe forest management. As this species is a principal building material used on the island, any felled specimens are recycled and used for building maintenance.

Additionally, the Boat Lily (Rhoeo spathacea), a succulent perennial herb native to the West Indies & Mexico, has been mentioned as possible threat for encroachment into the challenging environment of the CFR (during a survey conducted in 2005). However, there have been no observations of this species effectively competing with other native plants over the last 10 years, and it is therefore not considered a threat at this time.

The dense Chumbe forest layers the island, backing directly onto the guest accommodation © Markus Meissl

6.2.3. Animal Diversity

Animal diversity in the CFR falls into the below categories:

I) Mammals

II) Birds

III) Reptiles

IV) Invertebrates

I) MAMMALS

Ader’s duiker

The Ader’s duiker (Cephalophus adersi) is a Critically Endangered17 species of mini-antelope, and the Zanzibar population is believed to be the last remaining viable population (Finnie, 2001). The species has been increasingly adversely affected by human activity on the main island of Unguja, especially over the last 30 years. Associated with a large expansion in the human population (over 100% rise since 1967), there has, and continues to be, substantial older growth vegetation cutting on Unguja, and an intensity of illegal hunting activities to meet the continued market demand (Finnie, 2001). To date, three surveys have been carried out within Zanzibar main island to assess the overall population of this species (see Table 6). These surveys showed a significant decline in the population in recent decades.

Survey undertaken Population estimate in Unguja (individuals) 1983 - Swai ~ 5,000 1995 – Williams et al. < 2,000 1999 - Kanga 614 ± 46

Table 6: Population estimates of Aders duiker have declined considerably since the early 1980’s

Historic records suggested that Ader’s had once been present on Chumbe Island (pre-1970’s), but likely hunted to island-based extinction. Therefore in the late 1990’s, in collaboration with the Department of Commercial Crops, Fruits & Forestry (DCCFF)18 a botanical survey was conducted on Chumbe to assess the suitability of existing habitat for the species with the aim to assess the feasibility of translocating a protected population to the island (Aplin, 1998).

17 Listed in the IUCN Red List as CR A4 acd. 18 Formally known as the Commission for Natural Resources, and since transformed into the Department of Forest and Non Renewable Natural Resources 85

The Chumbe forest was found to be suitable habitat for the duikers, and based on these findings a total of six Ader’s were translocated to Chumbe Island (three males and three females) in 1999 and 2000.

This translocation was undertaken with the aims to:

 provide an effective refuge for this species,

 provide an isolated area where biological and ecological research on the species can be conducted in order to assist the main islands efforts of species recovery.

 potentially provide a breeding nucleus for future re-introductions. The animals were ear-tagged and camera-traps (using heat and movement sensors) were established in the forest to monitor them. Additionally professional duiker trackers were brought in periodically to track the animals on foot (‘drives’).

Early results of these monitoring efforts indicated the birth of three new juveniles & the possible loss of two individuals from the original translocated group (Daniels, 2004).

Since 2005, monitoring efforts have included observation of scent marks, sighting records (Figure 45), video and image footage from a new wildlife tracking camera, and implementation of the above-mentioned periodic “drives” to estimate the number of these shy individuals. The latest drive in 2012 confirmed at least four adult individuals and one juvenile.

Figure 45: Ader’s duiker sighting incidences within the CFR from 2005-2014

Although there have been no direct sightings since 2014, video footage derived from the wildlife camera in 2014 and 2015 revealed a healthy male adult that was marked with a purple plastic tag in his right ear. This is one of the originally translocated males (known as Mr. Purple) who was first moved to the island in 2000, which makes this individual at least 15 years old. Mr. Purple is hence the oldest recorded Ader’s duiker in Zanzibar!

2001 2009

2015

2014

Figure 46: Footage from the camera traps all show ‘Mr. Purple’ – the oldest recorded Ader’s duiker – in 2001, 2005, 2014 and 2015 © CHICOP Archive

Bats

On Chumbe Island the Giant leaf-nosed bat (Hipposideros commersoni) was first recorded in 1993 (Bayliss & Stubblefield). Further research by Köhler (1995, 2014) and Hayes (2003) revealed a further four species are present (see Table 7).

Observations are ongoing and recorded in order to get a better understanding of roosting sites and behaviour of the bat species present on Chumbe Island.

Species Common Name Recorded Interesting Facts

Hipposideros Giant leaf-nosed bat 1993, Nocturnal insect eater, rests during the day, photographed in commersoni 2012 2012 Epomophorus Wahlberg’s fruit bat 1995, named for erectable epaulettes of hair, feeds on fruits wahlbergi 2003 Eidolon Straw-coloured 1995, Seasonal island visitor with roosting sites on Chumbe helvum fruit bat 2015, 2016 Tadarida White-bellied 2014 Species not confirmed, young individual measured in 2014 limbata free-tailed bat Lavia frons Yellow-winged bat June 2016 Image taken by Peter Prokosch, only one individual seen, ID confirmed by experts Table 7: Bat species found in the CFR 87

A Yellow-winged bat on Chumbe © Peter Prokosch

Rats

Rattus norvegicus were present in large numbers on the island at the start of the project, suspected to have been introduced to the island during the time of lighthouse construction in the early 1900’s. In 1997 a key initiative was undertaken to eradicate these non-indigenous mammals from the island. This programme was successfully carried out by Dr Patrick Sleeman from Cork University (Ireland), with support from the Irish Agency for Personnel Service Overseas (APSO), and involvement of the Zanzibar Commission of Livestock (whose officials received on-site training for this first eradication effort in the country).

The eradication approach used mammal-specific brodifacoum anticoagulant poison baits at a time when the only other mammals on the island were bat species inhabiting a different canopy level of the forest. Post-eradication, the remaining baits were removed and monitoring is on-going using chew-sticks in key locations likely to be attractive to rats (ie. kitchen area and proximal to the bungalows). To date three re-infestations have occurred and the rats found were immediately exterminated on each occasion, in 1998, 2002 & 2004.

Constant vigilance is required, not only on the island through the chew-stick monitoring, but also at Unguja end, when boat transfers are carrying large amounts of supplies or makutti (thatching) to the island, as these are the occasions when re-introduction can occur.

II) BIRDS

Chumbe Island has a rich bird life. Ornithological observations and studies have been ongoing since the project started in 1993 (Table 8). To date the Chumbe bird inventory includes 77 confirmed species, including the African Fish Eagle (Haliaeetus vocifer), a range of Herons, Egrets, Sunbirds, Sandpipers and the majestic Paradise Flycatcher (Terpsiphone viridis) amongst others (see Appendix Seven).

Year Researcher(s) Output/reports

1993 Peter & Ursula Köhler A preliminary survey of birds on Chumbe Island: First report (6th-18th Jan 1993) 1993 Philip Bowen An ornithological introduction to Chumbe Island (Frontier Tanzania ) 1994 Peter & Ursula Köhler A preliminary survey of birds on Chumbe Island: Second report (5th-19th Jan 1994) 1994/95 Dudley & Penny Iles Extracts from our diaries (observation throughout the year) 1993-95 Dudley Iles Ornithological notes from Chumbe Island, Zanzibar: Summary of Peter & Ursula Köhler observations 1994/95 Peter & Ursula Köhler A preliminary survey of birds on Chumbe Island: Third report (28th Nov - 11th Jan 1995) 1994-95 Dudley & Penny Iles Observations and visitor booklets: Checklist for Chumbe, Chumbe Island Nature Trail 1995 Robert Mileto & Chumbe aves species list 1995 Gill Castle 2000 Heather Skillings The Birds of Chumbe Island: a case study (ISP project for School of International Training) 2003 Hart Webb Migratory Birds on Chumbe Island (ISP project for School of International Training) 2004 Alyssa Robb A survey of the Birds of Chumbe Island (ISP project for School of International Training) 2014 Peter & Ursula Köhler Follow-up Monitoring Survey of Birds on Chumbe Island, Zanzibar, February 2014 Supplement November 2014 to the “ Follow-up Monitoring Survey of Birds on Chumbe Island, Zanzibar, February 2014” 2014 Peter & Ursula Köhler Non-breeding bird species on Chumbe Island, Zanzibar, February and November 2014 2015 Köhler & Kloiber Revised Chumbe Aves List

Table 8: Summary of ornithological research conducted on the island: 1993 - 2015

Chumbe may also be home to the oldest recorded Mangrove Kingfisher (Halcyon senegaloides) in the world, as one of three individual adults ringed in 1994 continues to be seen today, making it at least 23 years old (see Figure 47).

Paradise Flycatcher (Terpsiphone viridis) on Chumbe ©

Jimmy Livefjord 90

Figure 47: Tracking the oldest recorded Mangrove Kingfisher in the world

Amongst the recent highlights in birding activity on the island, was the return of Dr. Peter and Ursula Köhler who undertook the first bird monitoring in 1993 and conducted a follow-up monitoring survey in 2014, providing interesting insights regarding the breeding and non-breeding bird communities on the island.

Comparing the two study periods it can be seen that the community of birds known to breed on Chumbe Island has extended from nine species (in 1993/94) to fourteen (in 2014). Based on extensive field observations, mist netting of birds according to constant effort standards, and interviews with CHICOP staff, Koehler (2014) assessed that only one species out of nine may be declining for unclear reasons (the Mouse-coloured Sunbird), while eight have kept their numbers and status more or less unchanged.

Out of the five species that have become new breeding birds in the meantime, four are expected to have no significant impact on the biocoenosis presently. One species, Centropus superciliosus (the White-browed Coucal), may have a respective potential which makes continuous monitoring advisable. The greater part of the tropical dry “coral rag” forest has remained both untouched and scarcely explored as far as birds are concerned. Therefore a few observations of uncommon forest bird species deserve further attention.

Table 9: Revised status and assessed trends of breeding species, and provisional status of species not recorded on Chumbe before as by Koehler, 2014.

Trend codes: + and ++ (strong) increase; +/- unchanged, - decrease. Status codes: R = Resident all year, W = Winter only, B = Known to breed, C = Commonly seen, U = Uncommonly seen, V = Vagrant (1 or 2 records only), M = Migrant, O = Recorded offshore

Roseate tern (Sterna dougallii)

In Zanzibar the Roseate tern (Sterna dougallii) is a rare migratory coastal seabird. Globally however it is regarded by the IUCN Red List as a species of ‘Least Concern’ due to an extremely large range and an estimated global population of 80,000 individuals. Roseate terns are threatened by a number of factors however, of which hunting in the wintering quarters may be the most significant. Natural predators can also take a great toll on localized colonies, particularly when terns are disturbed from the nest by other birds and humans. Finally, habitat loss and extreme weather events have caused local extinction of some colonies.

In 1994, 2006 and 2012 large breeding colonies (600-800 birds) settled on Chumbe’s small islets in the south area of the MPA for a period of ~ 3 months on each occasion. The colonies were closely monitored on each occasion and detailed reports are available (Kloiber, 2012). The first recorded

visit in 1994 was prior to the rat eradication program implemented on Chumbe, and the nesting sites were abandoned following rat invasions and attacks on the chicks and eggs. This further boosted CHICOPs determination to implement the rat eradication programme which was successfully concluded in 1997.

Overall these occasional, seasonal visitations are not consistent, and Roseate terns have not been observed breeding on Chumbe since 2012, when they once again abandoned the nests, but for unknown reasons.

Indian house crow (Corvus splendens)

A persistent challenge to the protection of the CFR fauna is the presence of the Indian house crow (Corvus splendens). This exotic species was introduced to Zanzibar in 1891 when Sir Gerald Portal sent a request to the Indian Government in Bombay for 50 scavenger birds to control garbage in Stonetown. By 1917 their population had increased so much that they were already considered pests. These birds not only scavenge on grains & fruits etc. but they also out-compete many species for food and nesting sites, and directly feed on chicks and eggs of other bird species. Various eradication programmes have been attempted in Unguja but most have been unsuccessful.

On Chumbe Island the inconsistency (and sporadic losses) of the seasonal breeding population of Roseate Terns (Sterna dougallii) may be connected to the presence of these crows, and from 1998 Chumbe has attempted various initiatives to cull the population, including the laying of specifically made crow-traps, and the use of closely observed poison baits.

Since 2003, CHICOP employed the services of a professional marksman to shoot returning birds. This approach has proven successful, as these birds are considered particularly intelligent in the aves community, and the mere presence of the marksman shooting only one or two individuals has been sufficient to deter others from coming to the island for periods of time. However constant vigilance is required to maintain control over this species.

III) REPTILES

A comprehensive reptile inventory has yet to be completed in the CFR, however, a recently conducted ISP project (2017) confirmed the following species to be present: the coral-rag snake- eyed skink (Cryptoblepharus boutonii), the speckle-lipped skink (Mabuya maculilabris), the writhing skink (Lygosoma sp.), the common house gecko (Hemidactylus mabouia), the baobab gecko (Hemidactylus platycephalus), and the yellow headed dwarf gecko (Lygodactylus luteopicturatus). The non-nonvenomous green tree snake (Philothamnus punctatus) is also abundant on the island.

There was also one specimen of a rock python (Python sebae) in the early years of the project, though no sightings have been observed of this species since 1999. In 2004, specimens of a Typhlopidae blind snake species (most likely Rhinotyphlops) were recorded, though identification could not be confirmed.

IV) INVERTEBRATES

A full invertebrate survey has yet to be undertaken in the CFR. However, of the insect species collected over the years, (not including butterflies) there are predominantly four insect orders present: Coleoptera, Diptera, Hemiptera and Hymenoptera.

A thorough entomological survey is highly recommended for the coming years, as the well-preserved and managed coral-rag habitat has been little studied in terms of the insect populations that it hosts, and the Chumbe forest offers an important opportunity for such work to take place.

Two invertebrate groups that have been looked at to some level of detail in recent years have been the land crabs and the butterflies.

Land Crabs

A full inventory of land crabs has yet to be completed on Chumbe, however observations suggest there is a high diversity and considerable abundance of these animals, especially crabs from the family Grapsidae (shore crabs) and Coenobitidae (hermit crabs). Further investigation into land crab diversity and abundance on Chumbe is highly recommended.

One species that has been studied relatively extensively on the island is the Coconut crab (Birgus latro). This is the largest land-living crab in the world, able to grow to a weight of 4.1 kg (9.0 lb), and up to 1 m (3 ft 3 in) in length from leg to leg (Harries, 1983; Eldredge, 1996).

Listed as Data Deficient in the IUCN Red List, observations of this species from around the world suggest a rapid population decline globally (Sheppard, 1984; Eldredge, 1996). Coconut crab research, especially in the East African region is extremely limited. However, on Chumbe Island various studies have been conducted using marking and recapture techniques, and these studies indicate a large population is present on Chumbe (see Table 10) with one estimate placing as many as 6,000 individuals on the island.

However, as the table also shows, the methods used to capture data (bait locations, number of stations, season of the year studied, replication levels etc.) have all differed widely between different assessments. Additionally, methods used to extrapolate observational data into overall population estimate data has differed (i.e. Schnabel method, Lincoln-Peterson estimator etc.). This has considerably reduced any opportunity for temporal analysis or trend assessment of the data, and has led to widely varied island population estimates (from 354 to 6,000).

Therefore, in the coming years it will be beneficial to establish a standardized technique and seasonal time period to monitor Birgus latro, to acquire more robust data for future assessment. Chumbe is an important island for this species. Along with Christmas Island, the Aldabra Atoll (Seychelles), the Chagos Archipelago and the Cocos Keeling Islands, Chumbe Island is one of the few islands in the Indian Ocean still populated by B. latro.

Researcher Sampling Method Results Island Popn Estimate dates Dr. Hartnoll 10-13 Baiting, mark, release, 50 crabs captured Rough population March, recapture estimate of up to 1999 6,000 Bruggers, 16-28 5 Stations throughout 28 crabs: 12 males and 16 No estimate Seth April, 1999 island, coconut baits, mark, females release, recapture: TL, sex King, 14-30 9 Stations throughout 90 crabs: 40 males and 50 Population estimate Gianna April, 2003 island, coconut baits, mark, females. Av. TL = 47 (males), (Schnabel method): release, recapture: TL, sex 39 (females) 354 Roop, 12 Nov – 2 9 Stations (all in highly 192 crabs: 87 male and 105 No estimate Jeremy Dec 2004 frequented areas): coconut females. Av. TL = 51 (males), baits, mark, release, 38 (females) recapture: TL, sex, time slots for crab activity Singh, Kiran 5- 22 Nov, 9 Stations (similar to Roop 280 crabs: 110 males and No estimate 2010 SIT), coconut baits, mark, 170 females. Av. TL = 50 release, recapture: TL, sex, (males), 39 (females) time slots, crab activity Kilströmer 9 Feb - 6 Similar to above but 394 crabs: 231 males and Estimated population and March, additional Haemolymph 163 females. Av TL = 48 size using Lincoln- Bergwall 2013 samples for genetics taken (males), 39 (females) Peterson estimator = Higher activity during 446

Table 10: Summary of studies into Birgus latro conducted on the island; the techniques and population estimates resulting from the work.

Coconut crab (Birgus latro) on Chumbe © Jimmy Livefjord

Butterflies

Butterfly inventories (Lepidoptera order) have been conducted in 1993 and 2012 (Bayliss & Stubberfield, 1993; Santilli, 2012). The most recent (2012) revision and update to the species list revealed 26 species present on the island, from five families (Acraeidae, Hesperiidae, Nymphalidae, Papilionidae, and Pieridae). This includes both the southern and eastern race of the African monarch (Danaus chrysippus). (See Appendix Nine). However, the surveys conducted were at all times brief, and further research and assessment is recommended. In 2016 a butterfly ID card was produced for the island (see Figure 48).

Figure 48: Butterfly ID cards produced (CHICOP, 2016) using CHIOP archive images complemented with internet images.

7. EDUCATION: Programmes & Lessons Learned

Environmental Education (EE) is a second core pillar of the work conducted on Chumbe. Educational excursions and initiatives have been targeted towards a range of audiences over the years, including:

 School children  Non-target community members  School teachers  Universities and academic institutions  Fishers and marine resource users  Governmental agencies  Target community members (i.e. the  Local NGOs communities most proximal to  Tourists / visitors to the Chumbe eco- Chumbe) lodge

Of these various stakeholders, school children have been by far the largest group targeted; and it was the lack of environmental education in schools that in large part originally prompted the establishment of the Chumbe project.

School education in Zanzibar, as elsewhere in the region, has long been based on rote-learning of an extremely academic syllabus that has had little relationship with the immediate environment or concerns of Zanzibari children. In the early nineties studies showed that whilst Zanzibar is a coral island, coral reef ecology was not sufficiently covered in school syllabi (Riedmiller, 1991). Additionally, extra-curricular activities, such as field excursions were rarely organised and through their schooling few children had a chance to visit their surrounding ecosystems.

The “Chumbe Environmental Education (EE) Programme” was therefore designed to address this need, starting with trial excursions to Chumbe Island for school children from Zanzibar being conducted between 1996 and 1999.

Additional target groups for EE were then identified in the first Chumbe Management Plan (1995- 2005) and the program was expanded.

Activities during educational excursions to the island

In general, educative trips to the island include some core activities related to learning about marine and forest ecology, sustainable coastal management and ecotourism, namely:

 Snorkelling in the CRS – Through this, participants learn about the importance of the coral reef habitat for sustainable fisheries and biodiversity conservation, and the reliance humanity has on coral reef systems to provide essential ecosystem services. For many school children this is the first time they experience snorkelling and seeing a coral reef under water, and many have limited (or zero) swimming experience. Therefore, Chumbe educators proficient in teaching snorkelling lead this work, and various support aids are available, such as inflatables with hand-holds, glass viewers etc.

 Walking the forest trail in the CFR – Here participants are taught about the unique ecology of the coral-rag forest and the importance of sustainable landscape management for the many species that are dependent upon this habitat. 97

 Undertaking an eco-bungalow tour - Here participants learn about sustainable eco-tourism and eco-architecture, and the importance of sustainable tourism management to avoid detrimental impacts on marine and terrestrial environments.

 Climbing the lighthouse – For some education participants this activity is incorporated into an excursion day to include information about the history of the island and of navigational aid infrastructural developments across the region through history.

However, these core activities are tailored to the audiences concerned and adapted to meet needs.

Educational outcomes

Since 1996, CHICOP has conducted environmental field excursions for 6,779 students, 1,169 teachers and 752 community members (prioritized fishers) and government officials (figures at time of writing, April 2016). This equals a total number of 8,700 participants that have participated in Chumbe Environmental Education (EE) excursions up to April 2016 (see Figures 49 & 50).

7.1. School children

The initial trials for EE for school children took place between 1996 and 1999. These trials focused on establishing the modus operandi for school excursions to the island, including: processes for transportation; safety provisions during boat transport; programme design; material development; capacity building for the rangers in EE activities such as snorkel training, managing groups of children, and proactive, positive, participatory teaching techniques; in-water safety standard establishment; and the development and installation of in-water ‘Floating Information Modules’ (FIMs) for the school children to use (see Figure 51).

For many schoolchildren it 98 is their first time snorkeling © CHICOP

Through the lessons learned from these early trials, the Chumbe EE programme for school children officially launched in February 2000, and has progressed since that time through eleven phases, with some focusing on different target aspects of conservation and sustainable development.

PHASE 1: FEBRUARY 2000 – JULY 2000

Excursions conducted during this phase were coordinated in collaboration with the Marine Education Awareness and Biodiversity Programme (MEAB) and involved the participation of staff from the Department of Fisheries, the Institute of Marine Science (IMS) and the wider staff of Chumbe Island. During this phase, the Floating Information Modules (FIM’s) were augmented with underwater fish and coral identification plates for children to better identify the species they saw. On March 13th 2001 the Island Classroom was officially opened. An end of phase evaluation conducted showed that teachers were, however, unprepared for the visits and a clear need was established for teacher training (see section 7.2). Total school children participants in this phase = 239 (+34 teachers).

Figure 51: The floating Information Module (FIM) on Chumbe

PHASE 2: AUGUST 2001 TO NOVEMBER 2002

This phase focused more heavily on teacher preparedness and training. Through this phase the excursions also started to be separated by gender, with school groups being either all girls or all boys. This was in response to observations from the previous phase that when mixed gender groups had come to the island, the girls were often reticent to enter the water in front of their male counterparts (requiring, as necessary, some level of de-robing, which was of concern to some of the girls in the context of their Islamic culture). Additionally, this segregation of genders was found to allow the girls more freedom and flexibility to be more vocal and inquisitive (without feeling intimidated by their more boisterous male classmates). Total school children participants in this phase = 120 (+85 teachers).

100

PHASE 3: FEBRUARY 2003 – MARCH 2004

This phase saw considerable expansion and consolidation of the EE program for schools, with a total of 79 excursions conducted during this period. Intensive on-site training conducted by CHICOP resulted in the development of the Assistant Head Rangers position into the ‘Island-based Education Coordinator’, and the hiring of assistant staff and volunteers resulting in a small but functionable Education department. Through this, funds to run school excursions were expanded through successfully acquiring matching support from the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF), Southern African Development Community Regional Environmental Education Programme (SADC-REEP), and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF).

This phase also saw the start of student programmes being conducted off-island, in schools, to introduce children to the Coral Reef Module CHICOP had developed in collaboration with the Ministry of Education (see section 7.6). Additionally, excursions for disabled children began in collaboration with the Physiotherapy unit of Mnazi Moja hospital.

During this phase the Chumbe EE program acquired its own provisional logo (since upgraded, see Figure 52), and some considerable media interest was aroused through this phase, including the production of four local TV documentaries about the school trips.

The impact of the Education Programmes also started to become clear at a local level with the development of an “Environment and Coral Reef Club” at Chukwani School (a target community located proximal to Chumbe Island & participatory since Phase 1), and an “Environment Club” at Kiembe Samaki School. Total school children participants in this phase = 984 (27% boys, 53% girls), +173 teachers.

Figure 52: (left) The Chumbe EE programme for schools logo (2003-2016), and (right) the logo upgraded in 2017 (by artist Emma Akmakdjian)

101

PHASE 4: OCTOBER 2004 – APRIL 2005

This shorter phase had a total of 32 excursions and concentrated on widening stakeholder involvement, cementing the coral reef module within the Ministry of Education, expanding options for further courses, continuing the teacher training work and school visits, and developing pre-excursion worksheets for students. Support for some equipment purchase and excursion funds was provided by the International Coral Reef Action Network (ICRAN). A wide stakeholder meeting was also conducted during this phase and a study was undertaken amongst participating teachers to examine possible developments to the programme. From these consultations a plan was developed to produce environmental education booklets for all secondary schools in Unguja.

By the end of this phase, 22 environmental clubs had been created in neighbouring communities after teachers and students were ‘inspired by their trip to Chumbe Island.’ (O’Bryan, 2005). This lead in turn to the Ministry of Education running their own seminar on establishing environmental clubs. Total school children participants in this phase = 388 (+59 teachers).

PHASE 5: JUNE 2005 – MARCH 2007

An evaluation conducted at the beginning of this phase showed that most schools in Zanzibar were by now aware of CHICOP’s Education programme (CHICOP, 2005). Focus in this phase was on the wider Environmental Education (EE) initiatives created out of the Chumbe programme, primarily the EE booklets for schools.

A committee was established (comprising of a range of stakeholders and Chumbe representatives) and final booklets were produced on the following topics: 1) Mangroves, 2) Conservation of Natural resources, 3) Deforestation, 4) Eco-tourism, 5) Alternative Energy, 6) Coral Reefs, 7) Sand & coral Mining, 8) Litter/Taka taka

Meanwhile on-site on Chumbe Island school excursions continued. Assessments conducted at the time suggested that CHICOP has been instrumental in assisting and encouraging the Ministry of Education to develop an ‘environmental education’ (EE) agenda in Zanzibar, and in a policy draft from the Ministry of Education an entire section had been given to plans for the emerging issue of environmental education in schools. Total school children participants in this phase = 579 (+105 teachers).

PHASE 6: MARCH 2007 – DECEMBER 2009

A total of 120 excursions were conducted during this phase. Also in this period the “Chumbe Challenge Award” was launched, with the aim of encouraging students to be more action-oriented following their excursion to the island, and motivating them to introduce environmental projects in their school and at home.

102

The award encourages students to investigate environmental issues that affect them, and after each season Chumbe’s Education Team invites the environmental clubs from all participating schools to join the competition. During the competition students, guided by a committed teacher, are asked to establish two environmental projects, one within their school compound and another one outside of the school. At the end of the competition, projects are assessed by the Chumbe Team and are presented at an annual ceremony where the best projects are awarded.

Figure 53: A school student plants trees as part of the Chumbe Challenge Award © CHICOP archive

Also in this phase, an ‘Education for Sustainable Development’ (ESD) concept was introduced to the Chumbe EE programme. Environmental educators from across Africa, including a Chumbe EE team member, were sponsored by SADC for training in both South Africa and Sweden. The outcome was the development of a change project called ‘The Ranger Teaching Pack’.

Other key activities conducted during this phase included: improvements made to the Chumbe on-site classroom; ranger refresher training; incorporation of video and powerpoint media introduced into the pre-visit school-based activities run by the Chumbe EE Team; key environmental days through the year commemorated in schools through the distribution of video materials, talks and activities conducted; and enhancement of the school activities on the island through the introduction of role-play games. Total school children participants in this phase = 1,319 (+305 teachers).

103

PHASE 7: JANUARY 2010 – MARCH 2011

A total of 59 excursions were conducted during this phase. Additionally, in this period CHICOP implemented an Environmental Education and Conservation Expansion Project in Zanzibar, funded by the European Union Regional Programme for the Sustainable Management of the Coastal Zones of the countries of the Indian Ocean (ReCoMap). In consultation with scientists, experts, educators and government this project resulted (after 18 months) in a locally developed environmental education guidebook ‘Environmental Sustainability in Zanzibar' that is now widely available and accessible in Kiswahili and English, to formal and non- formal educators and learners in Zanzibar. Total school children participants in this phase = 630 (+85 teachers).

Figure 54: Beach clean-up initiative with local students during International Coastal Clean-up Day © CHICOP archive

PHASE 8: JUNE 2011 – APRIL 2013

By this phase the operational elements of the Chumbe EE programme for schools were cemented, and a further 89 excursions were conducted. The pre-visit in-school presentations, talks and preparations with the children were augmented in this phase by the inclusion of a new monitoring, evaluation and learning (MEL) system. This involved the introduction of pre-visit questionnaires, completed by the children prior to going to the island, and complemented by a post-visit questionnaire detailing the same topics, in order to better assess the levels of learning during the trip. Total school children participants in this phase = 978 (+142 teachers).

PHASE 9: JUNE 2013 – APRIL 2014

This phase focused on implementing the new MEL mechanisms to determine impact of the visits on the children’s learning and information retention. Pre- and post questionnaires became a permanent component of the program and early analysis was undertaken. A total of 48 excursions were conducted during this period. Total school children participants in this phase = 412 (+72 teachers). 104

PHASE 10: JUNE 2014 – APRIL 2015

This phase focused on reviewing and up-dating the Chumbe Challenge Award teaching material (including improved training for participating teachers) and on conducting more off-island educational activities with local environmental clubs. Total school children participants in this phase = 347 (+57 teachers).

PHASE 11: JUNE 2015 – APRIL 2016

This phase started with a comprehensive teacher evaluation workshop in May 2015 where feedback from teachers was used to plan EE activities in light of the Tanzanian Presidential Elections held in October 2015. Due to political instability throughout this phase (presidential election in Zanzibar had to be re-run in March 2016), CHICOP had to cancel the Chumbe Challenge Award competition and also reduce off island EE activities as schools were often closed and teachers assigned to election-related activities. Total school children participants in this phase = 373 (+50 teachers).

“Through the Chumbe Challenge Environmental competition our students have become more observant and active towards environmental issues in the school!”

Teacher from Bwefum Secondary School

105

Impact on learning

Results from the pre and post-tests given to the school children in the last three phases of EE operations have shown consistent advances in learning. Increases in knowledge have been recorded in all schools except two (where students struggle in general with exams), with overall increases in knowledge observed in every phase assessed (see Figure 56).

During the yearly teacher evaluation workshop conducted at the end of each EE season, the pre/post results are presented to the respective teachers of the schools that have participated in the program and therefore provide not only the EE team with important information about the progress of the students learning.

MEL: Results of the pre-Chumbe and post-Chumbe knowledge tests (averages per phase) % 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 PHASE 9 (n=145) PHASE 10 (n=162) PHASE 11 (n=283)

Av.Pre-test % Av.Post test

Figure 56: Assessments (pre and post visit to Chumbe) show increases in knowledge achieved with the school students.

Over the last three EE seasons, MEL results have also shown that schools that have an active environmental club led by a committed science teacher (e.g. Bwefum Secondary School), score higher and benefit more from the Chumbe EE program than schools that have either non-active environmental clubs or environmental clubs that have been established for the sole purpose of being able to participate in the Chumbe EE program.

The biggest challenge for evaluating the impact on learning has been trying to ensure students participate in all three phases of the evaluation (pre-test, Chumbe excursion and post-test). Improvements to the EE system have been made to ensure that pre-test students are also the ones that actually participate in the island excursion, however, post-visit availability and teacher commitment are often outside the influence of the EE team.

Until today, CHICOP’s EE program is the only regular and large-scale program in Zanzibar that fills the gap in school curricula and provides educational experiences and information for local schools on environmental issues and marine ecology. Not only have schools fully participated in the field excursions but they have also shown great enthusiasm to undertake more field based, hands-on, extra curricula learning in the ordinary school environment. Some of the topics for many environmental clubs are waste management, biodiversity loss and climate change mitigation with activities including litter clean ups, tree and mangrove planting.

106

“We really enjoyed the excursion to Chumbe Island. We are going to educate [our friends] about everything we have learned from Chumbe, especially about

protecting coral reefs in Zanzibar.”

Bububu Secondary School Student.

7.2. Teachers (both in-service and trainee’s)

Teacher training has always been an integral component of the Chumbe EE programme. In 2001 a coordinator from the Ministry of Education was recruited to be liaison for the Chumbe school excursions and to assist with in-service teacher training. At the same time the first ‘Teachers only’ workshop was held on the island, attended by in-service teachers from schools proximal to Chumbe and various representatives from associated Government Departments and the local Teacher Resource Centre.

A result of this workshop was the decision to produce a “Coral Reef Module” for schools to follow (as an extra-curricular activity) in the form of an “Introductory Teachers Pack”. This module has two key aims: (1) to bring issues of coral reef conservation and the importance of the marine environment into more everyday schooling in the region, and; (2) to assist teachers (and students) who are able to attend the Chumbe Education Programmes to make preparations prior to the excursion. This module has proven to be extremely popular and continues to be in use today.

In 2003, a partnership was established with Nkrumah Teacher Training College, and through this a range of teacher training programmes have been delivered, both at the college and through excursion-based learning on the island. In the early years these activities generated considerable interest from the wider teaching community (both in-service teachers and trainee’s) and led to the development of a short training video that was developed and widely distributed.

107

Teachers actively bringing school children to the island are also provided with preparatory support from the Chumbe Education team, and a chance to learn hands-on the more field-based, participatory, fun and proactive methods for teaching the children through the visits. It is through such work that both teachers and students have been inspired to set up Environmental Clubs in schools across Unguja (now at 22 clubs across the region).

The Chumbe Education Team has also collaborated with teachers, the Ministry of Education and other partners to develop a series of eight EE booklets for schools, and a range of teacher training materials and resources.

7.3. Target & Non-Target Community Environmental Education

The ‘target communities’ of the Chumbe project come from six villages (forming four wards/shehias) which are most proximally located near the island. These are:

 Mazizni (Shehia: Kiembe Samaki)

 Chukwani (Shehia: Chukwani)

 Buyu (Shehia: Chukwani)

 Nyamanzi (Shehia: Kombeni)

 Kombeni (Shehia: Kombeni)

 Dimani (Shehia: Dimani)

‘Non-target’ communities refer to all others in Unguja.

In the early years of the project, considerable outreach and awareness raising activities were conducted in the target communities (and less so in the non-target communities) regarding the protected status of Chumbe, the importance of conserving the reef habitat for sustainable fisheries, and the role Chumbe has in providing a model for sustainable ecotourism etc.

Target community EE excursions to Chumbe have taken place every two years (an average of six per year in more recent years), with non-target community EE excursions taking place the alternate years (also averaging six per year).

Specialist EE excursions have also been conducted with fisher associations active in both target and non-target communities, as well as Sheha and Elders groups. Other specialist EE initiatives have been undertaken with women groups (such as the Chaza women groups and women seaweed collective), and other community groups and associations (such as local tourism collectives).

In addition to this there have been specialist EE excursions for disabled community members and patients from the local psychiatric hospital.

108

These community-based EE programmes have been, and continue to be, essential for both enhancing environmental awareness amongst the local population, as well as promoting local resource users to be compliant with Chumbe’s non-extractive regulations and protected status.

7.4. Peer Educator Programmes conducted off-island

Since 2010, following Chumbe’s engagement in the ‘Regional Programme for the Sustainable Management of the Coastal Zones of the countries of the Indian Ocean’ (ReCoMap), a Peer Educator programme initiated during this project, has been continued independently by the Chumbe Education Team. This programme is focused towards training peer educators to enhance their knowledge, skills and capacities to carry out environmental awareness and education activities independently, with children, youth and adults, using non-formal education techniques.

These peer educators are men and women of different ages that are recognized as peer influencers within their own communities / sub-communities, and who have an interest to become community educators. They have, over the years, included teachers, seaweed farmers, fishermen, invertebrate collectors, wood collectors, charcoal makers and individuals already engaged in conservation activities.

Peer educator activities have included field visits, stakeholder workshops, trainings events, seminars and radio shows. Every year CHICOP also plans small events for the commemoration of various international environmental days, in order to inspire communities to take action and to further promote environmental awareness. Since the consequences of climate change have become more evident throughout the region (e.g. increased coastal erosion and changing weather patterns), CHICOP’s stakeholders have shown a growing interest in learning more about how to mitigate these impacts in the coming years.

109

7.5. Universities and Academic Institution Programmes

Since Chumbe opened to visitors in 1998 there has been considerable interest in the project from a wide range of universities and academic institutions, both nationally and internationally.

From the outset, students from the College of African Wildlife Management (Mweke, mainland Tanzanian) and the Institute of Marine Sciences (IMS) (Zanzibar based division of the University of Dar es Salaam) undertook study visits to the island. These were coordinated by the Chumbe Education Team and focused on a range of topics, from coastal management, fish identification, marine and terrestrial monitoring techniques, through to sustainable ecotourism management.

As local Zanzibari higher educational institutions began to be become established in the early 2000’s, student groups from the University College for Education in Chukwani, State University of Zanzibar (SUZA), Marahubi University (MU) and Zanzibar university (ZU) also began to make study visits to the island.

From the international academic community, student groups from the School for International Training (USA), Kilmar University (Sweden) and Oxford University (UK), have been regular visitors to the island, with other university groups visiting including the University of Bayreuth (Germany), University of Stockholm (Sweden), and University of Cambridge (UK).

Study topics for such groups are prepared in advance and the EE excursion conducted are tailored to the students’ interest areas.

In recent years, demand from the local Zanzibari institutions has become such that Chumbe secures study visits for IMS and SUZA, with remaining study excursion slots only being made available through application and bidding.

110

“Many things that we learned today are mostly taught theoretically in our university, but during our field excursion to Chumbe, we have seen practical examples of good tourism, we got wet to see fish and corals and we walked in the forest to learn about trees – this is such an important program!!”

Chukwani University student.

7.6. Governmental Agencies

Environmental Education (EE) activities in support of wide ranging government agencies have been on-going since the projects inception. These government agency-based EE programmes are essential for both creating awareness about the Chumbe project and its role in wider Zanzibars’ efforts towards biodiversity conservation, sustainable development and food security; as well as promoting general environmental awareness amongst the civil service sector.

Excursion-based initiatives have been implemented with a range of cross-sector agencies within the Government of Zanzibar. Common repeat excursions are predominantly for officers from all the departments that are Advisory Committee members (outlined in section 3.4). Undertaking repeat excursion-based EE initiatives with these agency departments is critical due to the high turnover and transition rate of staff within the departments.

7.7. Local NGOs

Since 2011, Chumbe has also undertaken excursion-based EE initiatives with a range of local NGOs focused on providing training for Zanzibaris in the areas of tourism and environment. Among the key organisations/training centers are: Almalik Training Center, Jambiani Tourism Training Institute (JTTI), and the Zanzibar Geography Organisation.

111

Additionally, Chumbe supports the Kawa Training Center. This center has a strong focus on capacity building for Zanzibari Youth, and offers licensed tour guiding courses where EE excursions to Chumbe and pre-visit lectures by the EE team have become a significant part of the program (Figure 59).

Figure 59: Future Zanzibari tour guides from the Kawa Training Center learn about the intertidal habitats as part of their EE excursion to Chumbe Island. Image © KTC

7.8. Tourists / visitors to the Chumbe eco-lodge

All tourists that visit Chumbe Island are able to participate in guided snorkeling, forest trail and intertidal walks to experience and learn more about the exceptional natural environment. To support learning for all visitors, a range of comprehensive information boards are displayed in the Education Centre that cover all aspects of the project. These are regularly up-dated and provide another learning opportunity beyond the guided tours.

Evening presentations by visiting researchers and/or the Conservation Manager are also very popular and allow staff and visitors alike to get further insights in current projects (Figure 60).

112

Revenue generated from ecotourism funds all the conservation and education activities – making Chumbe the first not-for-profit, financially sustainable MPA in the world © Markus Meissl

8. SUSTAINABLE ECOTOURISM: Service Provision & Sustainable Financing

The bedrock of all the conservation and education work taking place on Chumbe Island is ecotourism. The island opened to visitors in July 1998.

The ecotourism on the island both finances all of the above described conservation management and education initiatives, and provides a globally recognized model of excellence for sustainable tourism management.

This section explores all elements of the ecotourism operations to date and identifies key considerations for moving forward in the coming ten years.

113

Chumbe Rack Rates

The standard rates charged to visitors coming to Chumbe vary between high season and low season. High season is from the start of June to end of September, and again from mid-December to end of February. Low season is from the start of October to mid-December, and again from the start of March to early April (when the island closes for between six to eight weeks each year during the heavy rainy season for maintenance work) 19.

The lodge rates are currently as follows:20

 High Season: US$280 per person per night (+ US$ 100 single persons supplement where relevant)  Low Season: US$260 per person per night (+ US$80 single persons supplement where relevant)  Children aged 12 and under receive a 50% discount & infants aged 2 years or under are free of charge  A minimum stay of 3 nights is required for booked between 24th December and 2nd January

This rate has only increased by 40% since the island opened to visitors nearly twenty years ago, in 1998 (from a high season rate of US$200). Thus the rate has increased well under comparable inflation rates in the country over that 20 year period.

The above rates are inclusive of:

 Boat transfers to and from the island on the fixed transfer times  Accommodation in one of the seven award winning Eco bungalows  Full-board meals (breakfast, lunch and dinner)  All activities and associated equipment provided  All sodas, water, coffee, tea and snacks  Laundry service and all taxes

Payment is required from all guests (or associated agents) prior to departing to the island.

Additional goods and services are available, but not included in the above price. This includes: alcoholic beverages (available for sale on the island); day excursions to other areas of Zanzibar (for long-term guests and organized on a case by case basis); any transfer boats on or off the island outside the set transfer times (costing an additional US$50); land transportation to and from the boat meeting point in Zanzibar (these can be arranged and are billed separately depending on distance travelled for pick up / drop off).

Chumbe’s cancellation policy is as follows:

 More than one week before the reservation date: 50% charge of the overall price  48 hours to one week before the reservation date: 75% charge of the overall price  Less than 48 hours before the reservation date: 100% charge of the overall price  Bookings starting on / or during 24th Dec-2nd January: 100% charge of the overall price

19 High and low season periods are relevant at the time of writing, 2017, but may be adjusted in future. 20 These rack rates are relevant at the time of writing, 2017, but may be adjusted in future. 114

In addition to overnight guests, and dependent upon availability, day trips are also possible to the island. However, the total number of tourists on the island (overnighters plus daytrippers) must not exceed 18 people.

The rate for a day trip is US$90 per person21 (all year, not seasonal). This price is inclusive of all the goods and services provided to overnight guests, with the exception of accommodation, and with only lunch provided. Additionally, some of the night-based activities available on the island (such as searching for the coconut crab, or participating in evening talks etc.) are not available to day guests.

Day guests depart Zanzibar (Mbweni Ruins meeting point) at 10:00 am (the same time as overnighters visiting the island), but depart Chumbe at 16:30 pm the same day.

8.1. Tourism Infrastructure & Technology

There are seven eco-bungalows on the island, as well as an eco-designed education center. Key features of these buildings are as follows:

Rainwater collection

Chumbe island has no ground water source and no freshwater source on the island. Therefore, in order to provide water for the lodge, both the bungalows and the education center have been designed with large roof surface areas to maximize rainwater catchment during the two rainy seasons experienced in Zanzibar (the large rains in April / May, and the smaller rains in November).

Rain falling onto these large roof areas is channeled into natural sand and gravel filters, after which the cleaned water is stored in cisterns located underneath each of the bungalows, and underneath the front portion of the education center. Each of the bungalow cisterns can contain up to 15,000 liters of water, sufficient to provide water for the bathroom taps and shower units for the entire year.

However, rain catchment in the education center has proven insufficient in recent years to provide the remaining water needs of the island22. This is in part due to a reduced reliability of rainy season periods (time duration, annual timing and rainfall quantity) expected to be related to climate change impacts. Therefore, at the time of writing additional water needs are being supported through the regular transportation of water in jerry cans, from the Chumbe head office on Unguja to the island. This practice is far from ideal, and moving forward alternative mechanisms for enhancing water provision on the island are expected.

21 2017 figure 22 These remaining needs include: water for use in the guest kitchen and staff kitchen and water for staff showers. 115

The large surface area provided by the specially designed roof structures maximizes rainwater catchment © CHICOP

Solar water heating

Solar water heating panels are located on each bungalow to provide hot shower and tap water for guests. The collected rainwater is hand-pumped into cisterns located in a technical tower at the back of each bungalow. From here it gravity feeds through the solar water heating panel, ensuring guests have hot water showers and tap water available at all times.

Water conservation

To promote the conservative use of water, the shower heads in the guest bungalows are ‘press action’ (requiring the user to press a lever on the handset to get water), with water release automatically stopping when the handset lever is not depressed.

Water conservation is further enhanced through the use of composting toilet systems (see below). Through these systems, water usage on Chumbe is calculated to average 60 liters per person per day (a regular hotel average is > 200 liters per person per day).

116

Greywater management - bungalows

Chumbe provides complimentary biodegradable soaps for use in each of the bungalows, and recommends, in advance, guests bring only biodegradable, environmentally sensitive toiletries to the island to avoid chemical and micro-plastic pollution. Additionally, the greywater run-off from the showers and taps in each of the bungalows is channeled through sprinkler release systems encased in clay-lined individual ‘gardens’ in front of each bungalow. These ensure no greywater can run-off into the marine environment. These gardens have a range of local plants that uptake the phosphates and nitrates from the soil, and dispose of the greywater through evapotranspiration and direct evaporation from the soils.

Greywater management – education center

This greywater management system for the education center has been most challenging over the years. Based on a series of filters, from grease trap, to gravel / sand and ultimately on to reed beds, the system was found to be overwhelmed as the occupancy rates on Chumbe increased over time.

117

Therefore, over the last ten years, CHICOP has received much appreciated assistance from various experts, including engineers from Volunteer Services Overseas (VSO) and German Senior Expert Services (SES), to strengthen the system accordingly.

While the efforts made improved the system, continued monitoring showed it continuing to be sub- optimal in ensuring zero impact run-off into the marine environment (even though all soaps and detergents used within the kitchen are 100% biodegradable).

Therefore, in 2015, an expert from Senior Expert Service (SES), Germany, returned and upgraded the system to become a well-functioning wetland greywater filtration system. In support of this, the kitchen staff now have manuals for use, and an operational manual has been produced for the maintenance team.

Figure 62: The Wetland greywater filtration schematic for the education center (source: Boehm, 2016).

Composting toilets

The composting toilets on Chumbe are advanced, utilizing a semi-dry aerobic decomposting process whereby the toilet lid seals, and a narrow wind-powered turbine attached to the outside of the bungalow draws up smells and gases from the composting process, up and out of the composting chamber and away from the bungalow. Guests are expected to throw two scoops of organic compost (provided next to the toilets) into the chamber after each use. Through this process, the toilets avoid any need for flushwater (thus provide an added measure for water conservation on the island), and ensure a pleasant experience for the guests without unwarranted smells. They also ensure no sewage waste (or ‘blackwater’) is released into the environment.

The decomposed matter from the bottom of the chamber forms excellent compost, is removed annually during maintenance time, and is reused as the organic compost for ‘flushing’ in the bungalow toilets when the new season starts.

118

Photovoltaics provide all energy needs on the island © CHICOP

Solar photovoltaic electricity

Electricity on the island is provided by photovoltaic solar panels. Each bungalow has its own solar panels located on the roof, that provide power for that bungalow independently. A separate array of panels is located behind the mosque on the island, and this array powers the education center and staff quarters. These have proven to be a reliable source of energy, providing enough power for: lights in the bungalows, education center and staff houses; fans in the bungalows; a charging array (for charging computers and phones) in the education center; computers and a wifi modem in the education center.

Temperature regulation

Both the bungalows and the education center have been architecturally designed to maximize flow- through of the natural sea breezes that occur on the island, mitigating any need for air coolant systems. In the bungalows this natural breeze is supplemented by solar-powered fans provided in the bedrooms and living rooms.

Waste management

Waste is carefully managed at all stages, from procurement to disposal, as part of Chumbe’s ‘sustainability policy’ (see Appendix One). At the procurement stage, all supplies and materials are purchased with minimal non-recyclable packaging and transported using re-usable locally made bags. This approach has been aided in recent years by Zanzibar’s ban on the use of plastic bags in shops (which started in 2016).

A comprehensive audit of Chumbe’s waste was conducted in 2012 (Woolven, 2012), and this revealed that the island produces about 11.5 tonnes of solid waste per year. The constituent parts of this waste are predominantly related to the kitchen, with compostable waste being the largest contributor (comprising of uncooked fruit and vegetable peels) at ~ 6-7 tonnes annually (57% of all waste). This is composted on the island and used as supply for the island toilets. The second largest contributor is non-compostable organic waste (i.e. cooked food waste) which is not appropriate for use in the compost toilet systems on the island, and is produced at ~ 4 tonnes/year (35% of all waste). This waste is collected and should be removed from the island and disposed of at the 119

Chumbe office in Unguja. However, this system remains weak and requires strengthening in the coming years.

The remaining far smaller proportions of the waste (combined total 8%) includes: inorganic re- useable items (that are re-purposed for boutique sales products, storage items or other purposes); inorganic, non-re-useable recyclable waste (namely plastics, metal and glass, which are sent to a private recycling company based in Unguja [Zanrec - https://www.zanrec.com/]); and small amounts of non-recyclable and non-re-useable waste (which is removed from the island and collected by the municipality).

Particularly challenging items to dispose of sustainably include non-rechargeable batteries (washed up on shore, or waste from the staff quarters), and tetra pack cartons. Therefore, there remains room for improvement with regards to achieving 100% sustainable waste management.

Notably ~ 1% of all waste managed on the island comes from the daily beach clean ups, removing all and any trash that has washed up on the shores from the ocean. This commonly includes plastic bottles, plastic packaging, glass containers, tetra pack cartons and flip flop shoes.

Night lighting

To avoid light pollution at night, torches are provided to guests to get back and forth to their bungalows. These are solar powered and re-charged daily, to avoid the use of toxic single-use batteries.

Other sustainable infrastructure / systems

Other areas where the tourism infrastructure and / or systems have been carefully developed for sustainability include the following:

 Supplies for the eco-lodge restaurant are nearly all bought from the proximal local communities, to maximize revenue streaming locally.

 A Sustainable Seafood Purchasing Policy is in place to ensure only sustainably caught seafood is bought for the island (though this policy requires regular updating).

 Drinking water for guests on the island and office staff is provided through ‘Drop’ local suppliers, with re-useable large plastic containers (to avoid any single-use plastics).

 Transportation needed for supply runs and the like are well coordinated to minimize unnecessary use of fuel.

 All technologies and equipment (including boat engines) are well maintained to avoid pollutant leakages.

 All laundry is done off-island, in the Chumbe head office in Unguja, to conserve the limited water supplies available on the island, and to ensure no detergent pollution on the island.

 Guests are encouraged to use ‘reef safe’ sun protection on their skin (that doesn’t leach over the reef when people are snorkeling, and which is available on the island). 120

Bungalow Upstairs: the front wall lowers down for a spectacular view and to promote natural breeze cooling © Markus Meissl

121 Bungalow Downstairs: décor & furnishings designed by Jan Huelsemann and produced by local artisans © Manolo Yllera

8.2. Guest Activities

Tourists visiting Chumbe can enjoy a range of activities.

Snorkeling

This is one of the most popular activities on Chumbe given the impressive reef in the CRS. A pre- briefing for all guests is provided by the rangers. This briefing informs visitors of the expected code of conduct whilst snorkeling (see Appendix Nine) that includes no touching of the reef, awareness of the risk of fin kicks, safety procedures, and likely exciting species the guest may see in the water. Snorkeling equipment is provided, and pre-excursion tuition is available to any guests new to snorkeling. Guests are then transported out to the reef in the rangers’ boat, that then stays nearby, manned by the boat ranger observing the snorkelers for safety during the activity. At least one guiding ranger per eight guests accompanies the group, equipped with a floating tube in case people get tired whilst in the water.

No scuba diving is permitted in the CRS, with the exception of scuba for research, buoy maintenance, or professional filming purposes.

Forest Trail

The forest trail winds around the center / south of the island, and takes about one hour to walk. This activity begins with a pre-briefing from the ranger, ensuring guests are aware to wear appropriate shoes, and of the time anticipated for the walk; as well as introducing guests to the history and conservation status of the forest.

Lighthouse

Often taking place after the forest trail, this activity permits visitors to to walk up the 132 steps of the lighthouse and out through the trapdoor at the top of the lighthouse, to take in the spectacular views from that vantage point.

Intertidal walk / walk around the island

When tides are favorable, another activity is the inter-tidal walk. Accompanied by a ranger this walk explores the rock pools, impressive overhangs and inter-tidal marine environment of Chumbe. During spring low tides it is also possible to walk all the way around the island. This is a popular activity given the large sand-bar that is exposed in the north of the island during very low tides. However, guests undertaking this activity are strongly cautioned to be sure to return before the tide comes in, as access on to the island is almost impossible without returning to the landing sites in the developed area of the island.

Ngalawa Sail

In 2012 an Ngalawa (wooden dugout outrigger fishing boat) was donated to Chumbe, permitting a further activity of ‘Ngalawa Sailing’. This is a very popular activity today, and is especially popular when undertaken just before sunset.

122

Snorkeling is one of the most popular activities on Chumbe © CHICOP

Mangrove Boardwalk and Baobab Cave

In the mangrove pool area of Chumbe, a small boardwalk has been built that allows guests to access the area. At high tide this pool offers lush viewing and inviting waters, whilst at low tide it reveals a small cave nestled within the roots of the giant baobabs that border the pool.

Coconut Crabs

Overnight guests to Chumbe have the chance to go into the edges of the forest trail at night to seek out Coconut Crabs – the largest land living crabs in the world. Accompanied by a ranger, these crabs are often found in certain areas near the forest trail at night, and this excursion allows guests to see close up these impressive nocturnal animals.

Bungalow Tour

All guests also receive a bungalow tour, that explains how the bungalows were designed using eco- technology and eco-architecture, and how they have zero impact on the environment.

123

8.3. Guest Services

As well as the above described activities on the island, guests also receive the following services.

Boat Transfers

These are operated daily, leaving the departure point in Unguja, Mbweni Ruins Hotel, at 10am. For day guests the boats depart the island at 4.30pm. For overnighters, the boat departs the island the following day at 9am.

All boat transfers are outsourced with a local boat operator. This operator runs several boats and crew out of the Malindi area of Stonetown. This outsourcing arrangement was established in the early years of the project, following challenges from the Malindi fishermen over the closure of the Chumbe Reef Sanctuary. Through this arrangement, Malindi fishers agree to respect the boundaries of the MPA and the associated no-take regulations, and in exchange receive the livelihood of running boat transfers to the island.

This arrangement has worked well over the years, with the Malindi crews becoming an increasingly integral part of the Chumbe ‘family’. Additionally, many of the boats have been decorated by the crews themselves to celebrate the marine richness of Chumbe and advertise the island – all undertaken independently by the crews (not at the behest of CHICOP), which is a strong indication of the positive relationship that exists with this boating community today.

Figure 63: Over the years the Malindi fisher boat crews have decorated their vessels with Chumbe motif’s and conservation messages. Main picture © Louise Heal, inset © Lorna Arabia

124

Full Board Meals

Overnighters to the island receive full board meals, while day trippers receive lunch. All food is prepared freshly on the island, and is local Swahili style. The food has received exceptional reviews from guests and has become one of the key features of guest experience.

Beverages

Soda’s, juices, water, coffee and spiced teas are provided free of charge to all guests, and are available at all times in the education center. Alcoholic drinks are available for purchase.

Boutique

A small boutique operates on the island, selling locally made sustainable, fair trade products and Chumbe related memorabilia (including a Chumbe cook book and glasses made from recycled wine bottles with the Chumbe logo etched onto them).

Spa

Since 2016 basic massage services have also been made available on the island during high season, through partnership with Mali Spa in Zanzibar. A qualified masseuse from Mali Spa is stationed on the island over these periods, and the massages offered include: head + shoulder; head + shoulder + back; and full body massage. All oil products used are from Inaya Zanzibar and all are pure natural products that are environmentally friendly.

Chumbe food is authentic Swahili cuisine © Markus 125 Meissl

Other

Other services made available to the guests (but not included in the price), are:

 Taxi transportation to and from the boat departure point on Unguja.  Day excursions to other areas of Zanzibar can be arranged for long-term overnighters.

 Participation in research activities is permitted on a case by case basis, where guests show interest to be involved.

 On occasion Yoga retreats are arranged on the island. The island also has a range of relaxation areas. These include swinging beds on the beaches, benches strategically positioned at key view points, an upstairs swinging bench in the education center and beach beds for sunbathing.

8.4. Chumbe Tourist Visitors

Since the opening of tourism on the island in 1998, annual average occupancy rates on Chumbe have ranged from a low of 21% (in 1999) to a high of 89% (in 2007) (see Figure 64).

Chumbe Occupancy Rate 100 89 90 81 80 73 71 71 64 65 63 63 70 59 61 60 60 54

% 50 38 37 40 40 33 30 22 21 20 10 0

YEAR

Figure 64: Average annual occupancy rate on Chumbe: 1998 - 2016

Note: Average annual occupancy rate is calculated based on a total occupancy expectation of 14 pax (lodge guests), divided by how many overnight guests stayed on the island over the total number of days the lodge is open each month. Therefore in April and June, when the island is closed for part of each month for maintenance, the occupancy is calculated against only the days open. Overall occupancy for the year is an average of all months occupancy over 11 months (as the lodge is closed for the whole month of May each year during rainy season for maintenance). Daytrippers are included in occupancy by consideration of three daytrippers equaling one overnight guest. Children under the age of 2 are not considered in occupancy calculations. Children aged 2 – 12 are consider 0.5 occupancy, and single persons’ occupancy is calculated as 1.4% occupancy rate (considering payment of additional single person supplement charge).

126

In the last five years, occupancy rates have been relatively steady, between 60% (lowest) and 71% (highest). A more nuanced assessment of monthly occupancy rates over the years reveals, however, that some months confer far higher occupancy rates than others (as to be expected in any seasonal industry) (see Figure 65).

Monthly Occupancy rates: 2006 - 2016 100

0 JAN FEB MAR APR JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Figure 65: Monthly occupancy rates over ten years, from 2006 – 2016.

Some months have regularly tipped well into 90 + % occupancy, particularly around the months of August, October and January. However, there is not a strong consistency between seasonal highs and lows over the years, indicating seasonal effects on occupancy may not be a prevailing factor to consider in assessing overall annual occupancy averages.

Overall, therefore, it would appear there is room for improvement in strengthening overall occupancy rates on Chumbe in the coming ten years.

One of the causes of sub-optimal occupancy may be related to the rise of day guest numbers and reduction of overnight visitors in recent years. For example, in 2016, the number of individuals booking day trips exceeded the number of individuals booking overnight stays for every month of the year, with the exception of only July and December (see Figure 66).

127

Figure 66: Number of individuals booking day trips compared to number of individuals booking overnight stays on Chumbe in 2016.

This is particularly note-worthy for two key reasons:

(a) The per-capita net revenue23 generated through day guests is considerably lower than the per-capita net revenue generated through overnights. This means that the transition to a predominance of day guest bookings compared to overnight bookings in recent years is failing to maximize the per-capita net revenue potential of the island.

(b) As the occupancy calculations consider three day guests as equaling the equivalent of one overnight guest, this prevalence of day trippers may be giving the perception of lower occupancy figures compared to the actual capacity levels being experienced on the island. This is important, as higher levels of daytrippers compared to overnighters puts additional short-term strains on the island (in terms of staff time, wear and tear on infrastructure, usage of quick-turnaround goods and services such as shower towels and subsequent laundry needs etc.) without the benefits of the revenue potential conferred by overnighters. Thus on-site perception may be one of regular full capacity being experienced, without the gains of full capacity revenue being accrued.

Day trippers also benefit from access to a shared bungalow to use during their stay (max. of 6 day trippers per bungalow) thus compounding the challenge of wear and tear on infrastructure, goods and services etc.

23 “Per capita net revenue” is the amount of money remaining available for conservation and education related expenditure after the immediate costs of tourism goods and services is deducted. In traditional businesses this is regarded as the ‘profit margin’. 128

This challenge of proportionally greater day trippers may be being further exacerbated by the increased tendency observed in recent years for overnighters to stay for only a short number of nights. For example, in 2016, there were more overnight bookings for ‘one-night-only’ compared to the sum total of all the ‘more-than-one-night’ bookings combined (as shown in Figure 67).

Duration of stay: Chumbe Guests

600 571

500

400 327 300

200 144

100 20 13 12 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1N 2N 3N 4N 5N 6N 7N 8N 9N 10N 11N 12N 13N 14N 15N 16N

Figure 67: Number of individuals booking overnights set against their duration of stay on the island (1 night to 16 nights), for 2016.

One night stays are not optimal, for the following key reasons:

(a) From the guests perspective:

 Overnighters staying for just one night tend to arrive on the island alongside day guests. As they also only have one full day on the island (as they are leaving the following morning) they tend to have to participate in all the activities together with day visitors, with the only difference being that the overnighters stay, whilst the day guests depart the island at 4.30 pm. With only one night booked, this means the ‘added’ activities available to the overnighters are: an optional sunset view from the lighthouse or sunset ngalawa cruise (weather dependent) and coconut crab walk. The following day the guests have to depart at 9am, an unusually early check out time for most establishments, due to fixed, and necessary boat transfer times. This means time for additional activities in the morning (such as snorkeling) is very limited. This can lead to a resentment in one nighter guests, as they have paid more than 300% more money to stay overnight, but do not get 300% more experience and activities.

129

 Staying more than one night allows the guests far greater flexibility in activities. They are not pressured into participating in activities alongside the day guests, but can rather take their time and enjoy the island in a far more relaxed fashion. Also, following the first snorkel excursion (that is always accompanied by a ranger), if the rangers see that the guests are competent swimmers, with awareness of managing themselves in the reef environment, then the guests are free to go by themselves snorkeling at any time in their remaining stay; allowing a far greater depth of experience and enjoyment for the guests.

(b) From CHICOPs perspective:

 Overnighters staying for just one night require similar resource use to those staying more than one night in terms of: (i) new bungalow preparedness, (ii) bedsheets, towels and associated linens, (iii) introductory guiding by the rangers, such as bungalow tour etc. Therefore, a higher frequency of one nighters puts additional strain on staff time and logistical resources compared to multi-nighters.

 Additionally, as with any lodge, the desire is to have contented guests staying for several nights, to optimize revenue potential. The tendency in recent times to have predominantly day guests and one nighter stays is not optimal for generating revenue.

 Some overnighters will pay an additional $70 to stay for the full day on the day two and depart in the evening instead of the morning. Whilst this certainly enables an improved guest experience, it still fails to maximize revenue generation potential from increased overnight stays.

Interestingly, it has been noted that sometimes day guests, when they arrive on the island, are not aware of the option of staying overnight. And it is not uncommon for day visitors to ask if they can stay the night once they are on the island (so much so that the Chumbe team keep a stock of basic toiletries, toothbrushes and the like, for last minute guests).

It is also noteworthy that the day guest market tends to come from local hotels and other establishments that have a vested interest to promote the day trip (and acquire the commission) though not the vested interest to promote overnights (as that would compete with their own hotelier businesses).

Therefore, reliance upon the local operators to promote and provide overnight bookings is likely to be inherently limited, though CHICOP management has recently started to promote last minute discounted overnight stays with local operators such as Fisherman Tours, Eco Culture and Tours and Tropical tours, which is aimed at boosting the overnight booking opportunities locally. However, international agents and international mechanisms for overnight promotion are generally far more effective at achieving overnight bookings.

130

Other potential causes of sub-optimal occupancy may also include the following:

A fluctuating tourism market overall in Zanzibar.

In recent years, challenges such as the 2012 acid attack that took place in Zanzibar, as well as political uncertainty and civil unrest during election periods (Nov 2015 and March 2016), have led to speculation regarding overall decreases in tourist visitors to Zanzibar, which in turn impacts visitor numbers to Chumbe.

Additionally, the devaluation of key currencies in recent years (particularly in South Africa and Europe) have resulted in visitors from those areas experiencing higher real-term costs if coming to the region.

Finally, costs of goods and services in Zanzibar have overall increased fairly dramatically in recent years, making Zanzibar as a whole a more expensive destination to visit.

Increasing competition with other eco destinations.

Over the last ten years there has been a marked increase in the number of environmentally and socially responsible destinations available to discerning visitors all around the world. Whilst this is a great step forward for sustainable tourism overall, it may have impacted numbers coming to Chumbe, as wider options are available, and highly competitive, both within Tanzania and globally.

It is important to note however that few to none of these other destinations operate as a not-for- profit enterprise, and whilst that remains one of Chumbe’s Unique Selling Points (USPs) it remains rarely, or perhaps inadequately featured in associated marketing materials, literature and promotional information.

Limited proactive marketing of Chumbe.

CHICOP is without a dedicated marketing staff member, and has no fixed marketing budget, relying instead on promotion of the island to take place through predominantly media articles produced about the project, agent promotions and online visibility. This is discussed in further detail below.

8.5. Marketing

Marketing for Chumbe is generally approached through ‘zero-cost’ (or close to zero-cost) efforts. As a not-for-profit enterprise, expenditure on marketing may diminish available expenditure for other elements of Chumbe’s work, and therefore efforts have been made over the years to capitalize on zero-cost / low-cost approaches wherever possible.

The key mechanisms utilized for marketing have been as follows:

131

Media articles

Given the uniqueness of Chumbe as a not-for-profit enterprise, supporting the first financially self- sustaining MPA in the world, there has been considerable media interested generated around Chumbe for many years. Numerous articles have appeared in leading newspapers, and magazines all around the world. Several television documentaries have been made, and a range of other media attention has benefited the project (including blogs, online articles, journal publications and the like). This media attention has oftentimes been fueled by the various awards Chumbe has received (see section 9), and such awards and associated media attention have proven critical, particularly in the early years of the project, for acquiring free publicity for the project.

The Chumbe website

The chumbe website, www.chumbeisland.com, is well optimized24 and appears readily at the top end of any search for ‘Chumbe’.

Online reviews and booking options

In recent years a strong presence (and high ranking) on online review websites and booking portals has been a critical marketing tool for Chumbe. See more on this below.

Social media

Chumbe has a facebook (FB) page with posts added approximately once per month, featuring news from the island. At the time of writing the FB page has 1,918 followers, predominantly former guests, conservation professionals or individuals who have been connected to the project over the years. Chumbe’s FB page is also automatically linked to a Chumbe Twitter account. There are plans to set up an Instagram account in 2017.

Agents

Both national and international tourism operators and agents promote Chumbe to their clients; particularly agents with a focus on the sustainable travel market.

8.5.1. Impacts of Marketing

As Figure 68 shows, the predominant mechanism through which guests learned about Chumbe has changed considerably over the years. Today, the high ranking and presence on Trip Advisor is the most common method by which guests first learn about the island, with the internet in general coming second to this.

24 Through Search Engine Optimization (SEO) efforts 132

How guests learned about Chumbe 40

Percentage of guests over the years 5

0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Travel agents Media Internet Word of mouth Guidebooks Other Trip Advisor(added to questionnaire 2011)

Figure 68: Responses to guest questionnaire conducted on how guests learned about Chumbe. Source: Chumbe data.

An increasingly popular mechanism for booking Chumbe in recent years has become the website ‘Booking.com’, with which Chumbe has a set-aside arrangement, to which an 18% commission is given.

The increase in bookings coming from these online portals has both advantages and disadvantages. The advantages are that these portals are globally recognized, have a ‘review’ element so that prospective guests can read other guests thoughts on the experience, and have high exposure within the travel industry. The disadvantage is that the high rankings Chumbe has on these websites (see section 8.5.3) can sometimes lead people to book the island without properly reading the information. They are then somewhat surprised to arrive at a functioning conservation and education project, rather than a purely luxury resort.

With regards to bookings coming through Chumbe’s own website, based on google analytics statistics, Table 11 shows that the Chumbe website received more than 37,000 hits in 2016. The origin of people visiting the website are firstly Tanzanian, followed by British, American and German. The high number of searches coming from within Tanzania may be linked to the high prevalence of day trippers and / or guests learning about Chumbe once they arrive into Zanzibar. Additionally, as the proportion of ‘new users’ is lower for this country than all others, the high number of hits may also be connected to the Chumbe Team themselves accessing the website.

For the other top ranked countries accessing the Chumbe website, this correlates well with the origin of guests coming to the island (see section 8.5.2).

133

Proportion Percentage of # Overall Bounce Av. # pages Avg. session COUNTRY new users overall traffic Hits rate (%) per session duration (%) (%)

1 Tanzania 4,780 60 12.75 37.2 3.4 00:03:53 2 United Kingdom 4,538 71 12.11 35.74 4.13 00:04:12 3 United States 4,073 79 10.87 38.67 3.71 00:03:01 4 Germany 3,300 74 8.80 33.3 4.32 00:03:10 5 Russia 2,901 73 7.74 5.93 2.22 00:03:11 6 South Africa 1,828 77 4.88 28.28 4.1 00:03:23 7 France 1,580 77 4.22 36.71 4.11 00:02:36 8 Italy 1,084 82 2.89 34.96 4.38 00:02:51 9 Switzerland 1,029 77 2.75 31.29 4.59 00:03:06 10 Netherlands 901 79 2.40 33.74 3.93 00:02:39 Other 11,465 Averages 31.58 3.89 00:03:04 TOTAL 37479

Table 11: Sources and hit rates of visitors to the Chumbe website (Source: Google Analytics)

The statistics also reveal that the websites bounce rate is ‘moderate’. This is defined as the percentage of visitors who navigate away from the site after viewing only one page (a high bounce rate is a sure sign that a homepage is boring or off-putting). With an overall average bounce rate of 31.58% in 2016, it appears the site is holding sufficient attention, whilst there remains room for improvement.

The average number of pages visited per session is nearly 4 pages, and the average time spent on the site is just over 3 minutes per person. These results are relatively positive, showing the site is holding sufficient interest to make people want to browse further and read the information shown.

The stats show these interactions (1st, 2nd and 3rd tier flow-through) are most commonly related to the pages on (i) rates, (ii) accommodation, and (iii) photo gallery. Therefore it is clear the website is being generally approached by people interested in the tourism element of the Chumbe MPA (i.e. prospective guests) more than people interested to read about the other elements of Chumbe’s work (education, conservation etc.).

With regards to the routes through which people find the Chumbe website, Table 12 reveals that the vast majority of traffic (>60%) comes from ‘Organic Search’ (i.e. through search engine listings) meaning that people are most commonly proactively searching around topics related to Chumbe, or specific to Chumbe. This may likely be through individuals who learned of Chumbe on Trip Advisor and then undertook an organic search for the project (as CHICOP does not have TA membership, therefore no direct weblink is provided on the TA platform).

134

Acquisition Behavior Default Channel Proportional Avg. Grouping # sessions distribution Bounce Rate Pages/Session Session (%) Duration 1. Organic Search 22,817 60.88 31.92 4.16 00:03:38 2. Direct 6,855 18.29 47.18 3.41 00:03:10 3. Referral 5,329 14.22 39.74 3.12 00:03:15 4. Social 2,474 6.60 16.25 2.22 00:01:50 Averages 34.8 3.75 00:03:22

Table 12: Routes through which people access the Chumbe website

Approximately 18% of visitors also find Chumbe through direct means (i.e. through direct input of the URL, or clicking links provided in pdfs, word documents and associated literature). Beyond this ~ 14% of visitors are directed to Chumbe through referral links (i.e. links on other websites).

Of particular interest in these results however is that only ~ 6.6 % of all visitors find the Chumbe website through some form of social media, and when they do access the Chumbe website through social media, they tend to browse far fewer pages on average, and spend far less time on the website. This suggests that: (a) the social media platform is so far being considerably underutilized by Chumbe; (b) what social media presence there is, it is not perhaps reaching the relevant target audience effectively; (c) the website home page and overall design is not in keeping with the short ‘sound-bite’ (limited text / easy access) flow that social media users are more familiar with today, and that may be off-putting to new viewers accessing the site through this portal.

It is also noteworthy that the Chumbe website style is a little outdated and may benefit from upgrading in the coming years. Additionally, the website hosting mechanism that Chumbe has at this time is challenging, with limited access for updating the site, managing domain email options or upgrading design. Therefore, this is something that will require addressing in the coming management plan period.

Guests learning about Chumbe from guidebooks has diminished considerably (as is to be expected, as the guidebook market becomes replaced with online platforms). Likewise, guests learning of Chumbe from travel agents has reduced.

Interestingly ‘word of mouth’ remains a strong method through which guests learn about Chumbe. This has both positive and negative implications. On the positive side, guests booking Chumbe through word of mouth are generally far more aware that Chumbe is not-for-profit and is a functioning project (and not only a luxury resort). On the negative side, the continuing high prevalence of ‘word of mouth’ bookings suggests that exposure about Chumbe on other marketing platforms is relatively very limited.

135

In recent years, bookings coming from media articles also appears to be relatively low. This may be a feature of the reduction in media coverage Chumbe has received in recent years. Tracking media has also been hindered, as on several occasions journalists have visited the island but have not followed up with any publication. Additionally, the approach currently utilized on Chumbe towards dealing with journalists has altered over the years, and in recent times media visits have not been accompanied by managers / staff able to present the unique selling points (USPs) of the island. The media briefing package previously utilized by Chumbe for all visiting journalists is also no longer made available. These elements combined may be a factor in the reduction of Chumbe exposure in media in recent years.

This data may however also be somewhat misleading, as guests who have read a media article likely then go online to make a booking – and therefore may respond to the questionnaire (source of data) by considering their booking portal more strongly than their original introduction to the project. In future it will be important to ensure the wording of the questionnaire is such that this data can be teased apart more effectively.

Overall, in the coming years it will be important to maximize zero-to-low cost marketing effectively, to maximize targeted exposure and, in particular, promote overnight stays of longer time-periods, in order to in turn maximize occupancy and revenue generation potential.

8.5.2. Origin of Guests

In the last five years, the national origin of guests has remained remarkably consistent. Germany remains Chumbes biggest source of visitors, with North America, Scandinavia and Great Britain being the other most common nationalities visiting Chumbe (see Figure 69).

The consistency in this demographic trend may be related to some extent to the historic linkages made by Chumbe (with a German national as founder and Director, and various American, Scandinavian and British managers present over the years).

Certainly it would suggest that making efforts to broaden the demographic coverage of Chumbe in the coming years could be advantageous to boosting potential occupancy and revenue generation.

8.5.3. Guest Experience

Questionnaires are provided to all overnight guests who stay on the island. These questionnaires are used to inform and guide management with feedback, observations and suggestions. Whilst considerable information is available, and utilized by management from these documents, analysis has not been undertaken over the last ten years. And as the questionnaires are paper-based, retroactive analysis was beyond the remit of this management plan development. In future it is recommended that numerical ratings (likert scales and the like) that form part of the questionnaires are routinely written up into a database to enable effective quantitative assessment over time.

136

Nationalities of guests visiting Chumbe 30

5 Percentage of guests over the year 0

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Figure 69: Nationalities of visitors to Chumbe

Data on rankings for guest experience is available however on two key online platforms: Trip Advisor and booking.com.

As Figure 70 shows, the Trip Advisor rankings for Chumbe are exceptional. More than 90% of reviewers have rated the Chumbe experience as ‘Excellent’ (the top ranking available). This strongly endorses Chumbe’s tourist service and operations, and in itself provides excellent marketing for the project. Between 2012 and 2015, Chumbe was also ranked as the #1 destination in Zanzibar on Trip Advisor (now ranked #4).

Chumbe has been awarded the Trip Advisor Travellers Choice Award every year since 2011, and joined Trip Advisors ‘Hall of Fame’ after five consecutive years of achieving a certificate of excellence.

Chumbe has similarly received all top ranks on the German review website www.holidaycheck.de, where all review are #6 (the top ranking score). Likewise on www.booking.com, nearly 70% of all guest ratings are ‘Wonderful’ (the highest rating available), with the remainder being ‘Good’.

Of the breakdown feedback from guests on booking.com, it is also possible to see that the elements of tourism services that received the highest accolades from guests was the ‘Location’ and ‘Staff’, whilst the element receiving the lowest ranking was ‘Value for Money’.

137

Trip Advisor Rankings (to end 2016)

Excellent

Very Good

Average

Poor

Terrible

0 100 200 300 400 500 Terrible Poor Average Very Good Excellent Series1 4 3 10 24 444

Number of reviews

Figure 70: Trip Advisor rankings for Chumbe

Booking.com rankings (to end of 2016)

Wonderful

Good

Okay

Poor

Very poor

0 5 10 15 20 25

Very poor Poor Okay Good Wonderful Series1 0 0 0 9 20

Figure 71: Booking.com rankings

Booking.com service ratings (out of 10) 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Cleanliness Comfort Location Facilities Staff Value for Money

Figure 72: Ratings of various tourism service elements by booking.com customers

138

8.6. Sustainable Financing for MPA

Over the last six years, gross revenue25 from the ecotourism activities on Chumbe peaked in 2012, but has been gradually decreasing since this time (see Figure 73).

GROSS REVENUE 8

3 US$ (000,000) 2

0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Figure 73: Total gross revenue generated through ecotourism on Chumbe, 2010 – 2015.

This aligns with the similar trend found in the overall occupancy rate in the last couple of years, from 71% in 2012, to between 60 and 63% in recent years. With these lower occupancies, lower revenue is to be expected. However, occupancy rates should not be considered in isolation, given the complexity of the occupancy calculation base (i.e. 3 daytrippers = 1 overnight), and the fact that occupancy fails to factor in revenue considerations such as discounts, special offers, varying agent commissions and the like.

Therefore, whilst boosting overall occupancy will be important in the coming years, a caveat is that it should be heavily targeted at boosting overnight occupancies in particular, in order to maximize the per capita income potential of the island.

This may be achieved through a range of approaches, including:

 Improving targeted and systematic social marketing presence, with an emphasis on the lodge element of Chumbe (as opposed to day trip options).

 Promoting greater linkages with local tourism operators as opposed to hotelier operators locally, to avoid competition with other overnight facilities and to target the Chumbe lodge for greater promotion locally.

25 Gross revenue is the total income received by the project before any expenditure. 139

 Promoting / regalvanizing linkages with other, similar high-end lodge destinations, to be able to offer complimentary ‘packages’ to guests (such as safari lodges on mainland, and other eco-lodge destinations within the region).

 In situations where guests are enquiring for a one-night-only stay on the island, it is worthwhile proactively offering them small discounts on extending their stay (to two or more nights), as even with these discounts the per capita increase in revenue is still far beyond that available through a day tripper.

 Undertaking targeted efforts to acquire media attention in nations so far little exposed to Chumbe (to broaden the demographic market access), with publications emphasizing the lodge (overnight) component, and not day trip options.

 Encouraging overnight guests (as opposed to day guests) to write reviews on Trip Advisor about their (lodge) stay on the island, so as to proportionally promote awareness of Chumbe as a predominantly overnight stay location.

 Developing a more systematic approach to managing journalistic visits to the island, including production of a media package of information (for handout to all journalists) with associated lodge information, and to ensure any journalistic visit to the island is accompanied by an appropriate Chumbe representative able to talk to the USPs of the project.

 Ensuring the Chumbe website continues to be optimized for visibility. This involves regularly updating the site (as google and other search engines always prioritize their ‘crawling’26 to sites with new content). Additionally, to ensure the site is appropriately updated in appearance (in keeping with advances in web design and technology) and promotes overnight stays above day trip options.

All of the above actions are possible at zero-to-low cost to Chumbe, and offer mechanisms for enhancing revenue potential. They will however require committed time of an appropriate Chumbe staff member to undertake.

Additionally, improving occupancy will rely always on ensuring the tourism infrastructure, services and activities on the island are being delivered to the highest possible quality.

26 Crawling is the process by which a ‘Googlebot’ (also known as robot, bot or spider on other search engine platforms) discovers new and updated pages to be prioritized on the index.

140

8.6.1. Proportional Expenditure

Of all the revenue generated, CHICOP has had a ‘rule-of-thumb’ target for the following proportional expenditures:

 60% of revenue generated is anticipated to cover all the ecolodge operations, guest costs, all lodge related staffing, transport, goods and services. In traditional for-profit business lodge operations this would be the overall expenditure of the organization, with the remainder being profits for shareholders. However, as a not-for-profit initiative, the remaining 40% of funds generated are utilized for the conservation and education components of the project.  20% of revenue generated goes to the Chumbe’s Environment Education (EE) program

 20% of revenue generated goes to Chumbe’s conservation work (including conservation management, monitoring, surveillance etc.). Analysis on whether CHICOP has met these targets over recent years has not been consistently undertaken. However, using one year – 2015 - as a review example, it was found that these targets remain relevant and robust. In the coming years, an annual assessment of expenditure will be required to assess proportional expenditure and ensure it remains within the target allocations.

Figure 74: Proportional annual expenditure on (i) tourism, (ii) education and (iii) conservation. 2015. (CHICOP data)

8.6.2. Managing costs

Expenditure at CHICOP is closely managed by the Project Manager and finance team, and audited annually. In recent years, costs of goods and services in Zanzibar have increased with high levels of inflation, whilst CHICOP rates have stayed the same in this period, limiting CHICOPs ability to keep up with costs.

141

This is compounded by a weakening Tanzanian currency over the last decade27, which has led to increased costs for utilities (electricity etc.) in the Unguja head office, and increased market costs of produce. Therefore, cautious and closely managed financial expenditure remains critical to the effective functioning of CHICOP.

Expenditure at CHICOP includes a range of permits, leases, licenses and insurance costs as shown in Table 13.

Agency Type Amount Renew date Renewable Tourism certificate $1,000 USD January Annually COMMISSION FOR TOURISM Management Certificate $560 USD January Annually COMMISSION FOR LANDS Land lease - Chukwani $700 USD September Annually COMMISSION FOR LANDS Land lease - Chumbe $4,873 USD October Annually ZATI Certificate of Membership $450 USD January Annually ZANEMA Certificate of Membership $200 USD January Annually ZIPA Investment license $500 USD January Annually Resident Permit (for foreign as expires (per IMMIGRATION DEPARTMENT $2,050 2 years employees) expatriate) January (next due Every two Occupation Safety Tsh. 1,800,000 2019) years Work permit- DEPARTMENT OF LABOR $300 USD For foreign 1st time as expires (per Annually employees Work permit- expatriate) $150 USD Renew TANZANIA January (next due Every ten COMMUNICATIONS Radio frequency $150 USD 2024) years REGULATIONS AUTHORITIES NATIONAL INSURANCE COORPORATION OF Fire insurance $450 USD January Annually TANZANIA LTD NATIONAL INSURANCE COORPORATION OF Island insurance $450 USD October Annually TANZANIA LTD NATIONAL INSURANCE COORPORATION OF Workmen Compensation Tsh. 1,637,000 October Annually TANZANIA LTD WESTERN DISTRICT COUNCIL Liquor license $1,500 December Annual WESTERN DISTRICT COUNCIL Garbage collection fee Tsh. 30,000 as expires Monthly ZANREC Recycling fee Tsh. 50,000 as expires Monthly Road License for vehicles Tsh. 20,000 Per vehicle Annually ZANZIBAR REVENUE BOARD Infrastructure Tax $1 Per guest Monthly ZANZIBAR INSURANCE Road insurance Tsh. 120,000 Per vehicle Annually CORPORATION Table 13: List of permits, licenses and fees payable by CHICOP. All prices listed at 2017 rates.

In addition to this, Chumbe pays VAT on all sales (at 18%), though this is able to be recouped to some extent through reclaiming the VAT from purchases made. End of year corporate tax on any profits made (based on audited profit and loss records) is charged at 30% annually. Therefore, Chumbe operates just as any other business in Zanzibar and despite being a not-for-profit enterprise remains liable for all incumbent charges just as any profit making business.

27 From 0.00086 USD to the shilling in 2006, to 0.00045 USD to the shilling in 2016 142

9. CHUMBE AWARDS & RECOGNITION TO DATE

Over the years, Chumbe has won a wide range of internally acclaimed awards, including becoming the World Winner of the British Airways ‘Tourism for Tomorrow Award’ after only one year of tourism operations in 1999, and receiving the United Nations Global Laureate award for ‘Outstanding Environmental Achievement’ in 2000. Other prestigious awards include the Smithsonian ‘Tourism Cares for Tomorrow’ award (2005), the National Geographic award for ‘Innovative Approaches in Promoting Ecotourism’ (2008), the Pan-African award for ‘Entrepreneurship in Education’ (2009), and the Rio+10 Sustainia Global Solution Award (2012).

Figure 75: (left) Receiving the British Airways Tourism for Tomorrow Global Award in UK, 1999 © CHICOP; (right) Attending the UN Global Laureate ceremony in Australia, 2000 © CHICOP

Chumbe has been voted the best ecotourism destination in the world (Condenast Traveller Magazine, 2001), the most romantic eco-holiday in the world (Harpers & Queen Magazine, 2003), and one of the top 25 worlds best ecolodges (National Geographic Magazine, 2008).

Chumbe was selected to represent Tanzania at the EXPO 2000 World Exhibition in Hannover, Germany, where one of the eco-bungalows was re-constructed at the exhibition for visitors to explore. And within the tourism industry, Chumbe has received numerous accolades, including: Worlds Best Marine & Beach Destination (Responsible Travel, 2004), One of Africa’s Best Ecological Safari Property (Safari Awards, 2012), and the Worlds Best Water Conservation Destination (Responsible Travel, 2013). Chumbe was also featured in the New York Times bestseller ‘1000 places to see before you die’ (2003).

Locally, Chumbe received an award from the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Environment for ‘Outstanding Environmental Conservation and Awareness Raising in Zanzibar’ (2009), and in 2012 Chumbe received special recognition by the UN Secretary General in his report to the General Assembly on Protection of coral reefs for sustainable livelihoods and development in 2012, as part of the preparation for the Rio+20 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development.

Chumbe has been featured in numerous media publications, and more than twenty television documentaries. For a complete list of Chumbe’s Awards, see Appendix Ten.

143

Chumbe beach and Education Center © CHICOP

144

10. MANAGEMENT PLAN 2017 – 2027: METHODOLOGY

As Chumbe Island MPA has been a successful initiative already operational for more than 20 years, this management plan is unlike ‘start-up’ MPAs, or donor funded project cycle plans. The aim for this third ten-year management plan has been, from the outset, one of consolidation and refinement. CHICOP is not aiming to expand operations spatially or detract in any way from the initial mission of the organization, which was, and continues to be: “To manage, for conservation purposes, the Chumbe Island Reef Sanctuary and the Chumbe Island Closed Forest Reserve. This includes educational and commercial activities related to the non-consumptive use of the above mentioned natural resources and the doing of all such other things as are incidental or conducive to the attainment of the above object.” (CHICOP Articles of Association).

With two previous ten-year management plans already in completed (1995 -2005, and 2006 – 2016 respectively), the process for developing this third management plan aimed to refine and re-develop the existing objectives based upon reflection and assessment of achievement and challenges to date.

To that end, in early 2016, two consultants from the Long Run Initiative (LTR) undertook a thorough and comprehensive review of Chumbe’s achievements under the 4C model of LTR (Conservation, Culture, Community and Commerce). Their findings were presented in an extensive report that provided foundational insights into the projects strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats.

Building on these findings, in June 2016, the former Project Manager (and alternative Director of Chumbe), who is also founder of Sustainable Solutions International Consulting (SSIC), came on board to support the full development of the management plan. This started with a full team workshop was on the island that involved a review of CHICOP’s overall vision and mission, followed by an achievement and challenge session (using a consensus-workshop technique, as developed by the Technology of Participation [ToP] Institute). This approach was utilized in order to further solicit input from all Chumbe staff, at all levels within the organization, regarding the projects key achievements and challenges of the previous ten-year period.

Following this, the challenges to address were prioritized using a ‘challenge tree’ approach, and the CHICOP management then held separate focus group discussions to address each challenge in turn and propose solutions to be presented back to the team for feedback, and for later incorporation into objectives and targets moving forward.

From this initial meeting, the Chumbe vision for the coming ten years was refined, a simplified Theory of Change (TOC) developed, and an outline concept model produced to better elucidate the integration and interaction between the three core pillar areas (conservation, education and ecotourism) in achieving Chumbe’s overall vision.

145

In the months that followed, work focused on gathering, collating and consolidating all available data on the three core pillars. Whilst in some areas of Chumbe’s work the data was readily available and had been analyzed and utilized by management in an on-going way, in other areas of work the data was considerably lacking, or was available but had not been collated or analyzed in some time. Therefore, the management planning process provided an opportunity to gather, glean, analyze and consolidate all existing information, and identify the key gaps to address moving forward.

In November 2016 the CHICOP management team met with the Chumbe Advisory Committee. At this meeting the management planning process and findings to date were shared with the committee and input was solicited for the forthcoming management plan period (2017 – 2027). Participants included: the District Commissioner for Western District “B” (Silima H. Haji), the community Sheha of Kombeni (Mussa Khamis Mussa), the community Sheha of Dimani (Khatibu Ame Baraka), a representative from the Department of Forestry (Ameir Himid Ali), a representative from the State University of Zanzibar (Mohammed S. Mohammed), a representative from the Institute of Marine Sciences (IMS) University of Dar es Salaam (Batuli M. Yahya), a representative from the Fishery Departments’ Marine Conservation Unit (Abdulaziz A Mussa), three Planning Officers from the Department of Fisheries Development (Mchanga S. Khamis, Mkubwa S. Khamis and Ali S. Mkarafuu), a Fisheries Officer (Daudi H. Pandu), and the Manager of neighboring Menai Bay Conservation Area (MBCA) (Anas M. Othman).

In February 2017 further focus group discussions were held with Chumbe team members in order to incorporate feedback to date and further refine the objectives and targets for the coming ten years. Mechanisms for effective monitoring, evaluation and learning (MEL) were identified against each objective, and the final management plan was produced.

11. STRATEGIC GOALS & OBJECTIVES: 2017 – 2027

The overall goal for 2027 is as follows:

Figure 76 shows a basic concept model of how the three pillars of ecotourism, conservation (marine and forest) and education, combine to achieve this goal.

146

LHCC, fish biomass & marine Sustainable high-end PSE undertaken 24/7 to ensure Marine area is effectively diversity is maintained or ECOTOURISM provides no CRS non-permitted activities protected against direct increased from 2016 levels the financing for all MPA occur - using educative anthropogenic threats • operations & provides a enforcement approach • Level of incidences LHCC + other obs • Fish kg/ha model for sustainable • Level of incidences • Fish ind/500m2 tourism management in Management actions are Zanzibar Research activities undertaken responsive to mitigate to support management impacts from invasives Marine area is maintained The Chumbe Island Excellence in objectives (COTs) and other factors against impacts from COTS Coral Reef Sanctuary ecotourism • # research initiatives (SST etc.) and SST increases caused by and Closed Forest experience & implemented climate change Habitat are delivery achieved • Time from observation to management • Level of incidences effectively and & maintained • Obs of resilience factors RHM and daily observations reaction sustainably • Trip Advisor conducted to inform managed in order to ranking management response Healthy CRS supports fishery maximize their • Guest feedback productivity & food security • Repeat Schools Programme contribution to • Stability / health of beyond MPA customers / implementation (EE) biodiversity ecosystem (LHCC, fish • rec’mmend’ns Spilover conservation, serve biomass etc.) • # school visits as a model for • # schools Effectively managed habitat Revenue supported supports biodiversity including effective ecotourism generation endangered species and MPA sufficient to Forest monitoring undertaken Peer Education & • Pop’n # C. adersi management, and maintain all MPA Outreach initiatives • Pop’n # B.latro provide a platform operations • Stability of forest diversity implemented • Biodiversity to promote wider environmental • Annual income • # initiatives • Occupancy rate Research activities undertaken awareness for to support management Forest area is proactively sustainable objectives Wider stakeholder managed against invasive development and Sustainable species (inc. rats) • education initiatives ecological ecotourism # research initiatives implemented implemented • Level of incidences stewardship in education (university students, Zanzibar provided to govt official etc.) . stakeholders PSE undertaken 24/7 to ensure Forest area is effectively protected • # of education no forest encroachment / • # initiatives against direct anthropogenic visits incur- extraction threats porating • Level of incidences • Level of incidences sustainable ecotourism

Summary Indicators Outcomes Overall goal Tourism Marine Forest Education strategic Conservation Conservation objectives

Figure 76: Basic concept model to achieve overall 2027 goal. The following sections outline the more detailed objectives, targets, indicators and associated monitoring, evaluation and learning (MEL) methodologies anticipated under each of the three pillars. These MEL approaches are further described in section 13.

11.1. Conservation

The core strategic focus areas for Chumbe’s Conservation Programme are:

 Patrol, Surveillance and Enforcement (PSE)

 In-house Monitoring

 Research (in collaboration with partners)

A. PATROL, SURVEILLANCE AND ENFORCEMENT (PSE)

A.1. Patrol, Surveillance and Enforcement – Coral Reef Sanctuary (CRS)

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

A.1.1 By 2027, active and routine PSE activities in the CRS Daily active PSE is # of active patrols Ranger reports will have effectively managed and deterred 100% of conducted in the CRS conducted in CRS attempted encroachments (poaching, anchoring and # incidences observed any other non-permitted actions) within the CRS 100% of attempted # incidences infringements addressed deterred Ranger reports to be # daily reports filled daily and submitted monthly to Conservation & Education Manager Ranger report data to Database updated Conservation Status be copied, entered in monthly and analyzed Report system and analyzed quarterly quarterly Summary report of # of summary reports ranger report data and sent to Fisheries copies of ranger Department report data sheets sent quarterly to Fisheries Department A.1.2 By July 2017 Security support staff will be re-instated Permanent placement # Security support on island to assist with PSE of security staff staff Description: PSE is proactively implemented through an observation and reaction approach. In-water PSE: undertaken during concurrent activities (i.e. observations during supply trips and guided snorkeling), as well as in- water responsive to land post observations. Land post PSE day: undertaken from top of lighthouse (vantage point across entire MPA) Land post PSE night: undertaken from Jahazi view observation point Land post PSE low tide: undertaken via inter-tidal (2 rangers on foot patrols - one north, one south) PSE complimented by wider team and visitor observations where relevant. PSE utilizes an ‘Education Enforcement’ (EdEnf) non-confrontational technique, to enable positive transfer and reinforcement of conservation messaging. In case of potential escalation scenarios, and for the safety and security of staff and guests on the island, two armed security staff must be deployed on the island from a Police unit in Unguja. This placement has not taken place in recent months due to limited personnel in the local police office; however, efforts are expected to be resumed to ensure their re-installation within the early parts of year 1 of this management plan. PSE is documented through ranger reports that are filled out on a daily basis and submitted to the Conservation & Education Manager at the end of each month. Data from ranger reports is then immediately entered into the PSE database and copied. Copies and a short summary report including graphs are sent quarterly to the Zanzibar Fisheries Department. MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

A.1.3 By 2027 all PSE equipment has been appropriately PSE equipment is fully Presence / absence Reports from maintained and made available to ensure PSE available and (checked by rangers weekly spot checks operational viability at all times operational at all and reported to island conducted by Island times manager) Manager At least 1 boat has Presence / absence Rangers reports been available for (checked by Rangers reactionary PSE at all and boat crew) times in-water A.1.4 By April 2018, additional surveillance equipment PSE equipment on- PSE equipment list Conservation needs are explored and installed / established island adequately department status supports PSE activities report Description: PSE related equipment includes:  At least 1 boat (Virore) available (and afloat) at all times for responsive PSE actions and patrols (equipped with paddle for safety in case of engine failure)  Fuel for boat  Binoculars x 2  Night vision device x 1  Night torches x 3 Future additional PSE equipment to be explored may include:  Camera surveillance equipment from lighthouse vantage point

A.1.5 By 2027, at least three CRS boundary markers have A minimum of 3 CRS Presence / absence Buoy maintenance continued to be in place and effectively functioning boundary markers are (checked by Rangers schedule throughout management period. in place at any given and boat crew) time CRS boundary markers Completed Buoy are maintained each maintenance quarter documentation A.1.6 By June 2018, support systems will be established to System established ensure skilled personnel are available to support buoy (either through ranger maintenance every four months. training or through dive center partnership). Description: Quarterly maintenance checks include:  On-boat: checking solar lantern & all buoy shackles  In-water: Scuba diving to check cement mooring block and cleaning rope/chain with iron brush Skilled support is systematically required for these efforts, and in year 1 of the management plan, further exploration will be undertaken with regards to either (a) implementing appropriate dive and maintenance ranger training, or (b) developing appropriate partnership with a local dive operator to get regular volunteer support with this work.

A.2. Patrol, Surveillance and Enforcement – Closed Forest Reserve (CFR)

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

A.2.1 By 2027, active and routine PSE activities in the CFR Daily active PSE is # of active patrol CFR ranger reports will have effectively managed and deterred 100% of conducted in the CFR observations attempted encroachments (cutting, felling and any 100% of attempted # incidences other non-permitted actions) within the CFR infringements addressed deterred A.2.2 By June 2017 new CFR PSE documentation system Production of CFR CFR ranger report established to compliment CRS data recording ranger report form form available Description: Patrols in the CFR have not been documented to date. Therefore, a new CFR patrol form will be developed to compliment the CRS PSE documentation. To be completed on a monthly basis, and combined with the ‘Occasional Observation’ (OccObs) system described in the Monitoring section below. 149

B. IN-HOUSE MONITORING

B.1. Coral Reef Sanctuary (CRS)

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

B.1.1 By September 2017, the Chumbe Reef Health Updated protocol in Protocol established Conservation status Monitoring (RHM) Protocol is updated in line place by September report with latest international standards. 2017 incorporating new additional elements highlighted below (see elements showing *new protocol) B.1.2 By December 2017, the seagrass monitoring data Seagrass data reviewed Summary report on to date will be fully reviewed by an external and clarity available on findings and advisor, and appropriate trend levels and targets trends and target recommendations for future monitoring identified. development B.1.3 By 2027, full suite surveys within the RHM ≥ av. 50 % LHCC across Live hard coral cover Annual RHM (plus protocol have been implemented annually in all CRS (LHHC) - *new protocol conducted after any order to monitor the ecological health and bleaching incident). status, and manage where necessary, a range of ≥ 1000 kg/ha fish Total fish biomass Annual RHM. marine biomes present in the CRS. biomass in CRS (existing protocol)

2 ≤ 1/m sea urchin Urchin Density Annual RHM (plus

density in CRS (existing protocol) regular monthly observation) < 10 % fleshy algae Fleshy algae cover - Annual RHM (plus cover on reef areas *new protocol conducted after any bleaching incident). < 10 % of colonies Bleaching incidence  Annual RHM surveyed show (existing protocol) (plus conducted indications of mortal after any bleaching bleaching incident).  Bleaching response protocol (in the event of bleaching) -*new < 5 % corals surveyed Disease prevalence Annual RHM show signs of disease (existing protocol) <2/16ha COT density COT density (existing  Annual RHM maintained protocol) (plus regular random swim observations throughout year)  COT removal protocol B.1.4 By September 2018, in-house training of trainers At least two (2) rangers TOT summary report Conservation status (TOT) will be completed with the ranger team to (ideally 3) will be report both expand the number of team members with trained to an existing monitoring skills and provide additional appropriate level to skills building for the new monitoring areas. implement full suite RHM monitoring. Description: By Sept 2017 the CHICOP in-house monitoring protocol to be revised and updated to both continue monitoring the existing monitoring activities and incorporate new additional activities in line with recognized international best practice approaches. To enable and improve implementation, training of trainers will be conducted with the ranger team to enable effective in-house monitoring of the revised protocol. Clarity on seagrass data (trend and future targets) will be achieved with support from PhD student from Stockholm University.

150

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

B.1.5 By 2027, at least two sea surface temperature Two (2) SST loggers Presence / absence  Bleaching (SST) loggers will have been present at all times deployed at any given (through manager response in the CRS to appropriately record SST over time time inside the CRS deployment) protocol (in collaboration with the Institute of Marine Bleaching threshold to Bleaching response  Conservation Sciences - IMS). trigger Bleaching protocol enacted in a Status Report Response Protocol = timely manner in 30.5 °C (SST that is 1°C response to SST findings warmer than the highest monthly mean temperature) Description: Continuing to track SST is critical for regularly assessing potential bleaching thresholds and implementing the bleaching response protocol in a timely manner. More information on bleaching threshold for the region can be found here:http://www.ospo.noaa.gov/data/cb/TS_vs/vs_ts_2yr_Zanzibar_Tanzania.png

B.1.6 By April 2018, baseline water quality data will be  Baseline data  Summary data  Conservation established, and thereafter monitoring will be available by April available for Status Report (to undertaken twice annually to enable 2018 baselines provide baseline observations of status and trends in water quality  Targets for water  Indicators for data) within the MPA (in collaboration with the State quality water quality in  Monitoring MEL University of Zanzibar – SUZA). monitoring TBD monitoring beyond baseline thereafter TBD TBD (see below description) Description: To implement water quality monitoring in cooperation with SUZA and conduct sampling at least twice a year to monitor water quality status. Protocol to be developed (TBD) as well as targets and indicators, which may include (for example) pH levels, salinity, nutrient levels etc.

B.1.7 By June 2017, an Occasional Observation Protocol and data Protocol and data Conservation Status (OccObs) protocol is developed and relevant data capture form capture form available Report capture forms are utilized thereafter to record developed sightings of sharks, turtles, dolphins and other occasional megafauna within and adjacent to the CRS. B.1.8 By 2027, OccObs protocol will have been Completed OccObs OccObs database routinely implemented and data submitted forms submitted monthly to the Conservation Manager. monthly. Description: Occasional Observation data will enable the more systematic capture of observational data related to visiting and transient megafauna within the CRS.

B.1.9 By 2027, CHICOP will have participated in at least Annual whale Synchronized Whale SWWD data sheets ten (10) regional humpback whale monitoring monitoring data Watching Day (SWWD) events (one annually). submitted each year implemented Description: The Synchronized Whale Watching Day (SWWD) is a regional initiative established in 2008 by Dr. Matt Richmond that uses a standard, 11- point log sheet to record sightings of humpback whales seen in the seas of Tanzania, Kenya and Mozambique. The log sheet is circulated by email to interested parties who live or work along the coasts of eastern Africa and data gathered is shared via newsletters.

151

B.2. In-house Monitoring – Closed Forest Reserve (CFR)

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

B.2.1 By December 2017 a new Aders Duiker monitoring New protocol New protocol Conservation Status protocol will be designed and developed in order to established available Report confirm the existing current number of Ader’s duiker present on island, and monitor the population over time. B.2.2 Starting in January 2018, the new Aders Duiker  Existing Duiker # recorded visible TBD monitoring protocol will be implemented. population sightings of Aders numbers clarified Duikers  Population # recorded evidence estimates updated sightings of Aders over time Duikers # Camera trap recordings Description: Methods are going to be discussed (in April 2017) with a PhD student who is currently working with Ader’s duiker on Mnemba Island. Previous ‘drive’ method is very stressful for animals, time intense and requires experienced hunters from Unguja, however, due to dense coral rag forest not the ideal method of regular monitoring and it also doesn’t provide the information that’s needed. Wildlife camera deployed opposite of scent marks that are monitored by Head Ranger most effective and led to most recent recording of Mr. Purple in February 2017.

B.2.3 By April 2018 a systematic methodology will be Coconut crab Methodology Conservation Status designed and developed to enable consistent and monitoring available Report comparable monitoring of the resident coconut methodology and data crab population on the island. analysis system established (with external scientific specialist support) B.2.4 By June 2018, Training of trainers (ToT) on crab At least 3 rangers ToT activity summary methodology will be conducted with ranger team. trained in coconut crab available population monitoring B.2.5 By 2027, at least three coconut crab studies will 3 population Population have been conducted in the CFR, with the first assessments completed assessment results being conducted in year 2 (18/19) available Description: Whilst numerous coconut crab surveys have been conducted over the years, the inconsistent methodologies and incomparable data analysis processes used have resulted in a lack of any temporal trend assessment or quantitative observation on population dynamics to have been undertaken. This new methodology is anticipated to be supported by an appropriate scientific specialist in crab population surveying.

B.2.6 By 2027, regular and effective monitoring of Zero Indian house # Indian House Crows Conservation Status existing and potential invasive species threats will crows on the island observed / shot per Report have been undertaken and appropriate year management responses implemented. Zero rats on the island # chew mark Chewsticks indicators annually established at all # rats observed / times and removed annually monitored weekly Zero rhino beetles on Sightings of adults / Conservation Status the island (adults and larvae and # incidence Report larvae) of removal Casuarina appropriately # incidence of Conservation Status managed to ensure casuarina removal Report non-competition with native plants (in development area) and zero encroachment (in CFR) Description: In an enclosed ecological system such as Chumbe, invasive species (particularly those described above) are a constant challenge, and vigilance, along with swift response systems, are essential for preserving the ecological integrity of the indigenous habitat on the island.

152

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

B.2.7 By 2027, regular conservation meetings with the Meetings conducted Minutes/ reports from Conservation Status ranger team (every two months) will have been every two months meetings Report routinely conducted.

C. RESEARCH

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

C.1 By June 2017 a preliminary research plan has been Preliminary plan Research plan(s) Conservation Status drafted for preliminary sharing with immediate term available June 2017 available Report interested parties * C.2 By April 2018 a full comprehensive research plan will Comprehensive plan be produced that would thereafter be up-dated available April 2018 annually with priority research areas identified in the CRS and CFH. Description: The comprehensive research plan is anticipated to include the following sections:  An introduction to undertaking research on Chumbe  Codes of conduct for researchers undertaking activities in the CRS and CFR  Data sharing agreement templates  Research agreement templates (outlining roles and responsibilities of CHICOP and the researchers; supervisory responsibilities etc)  Priority areas of research identified for both the CRS and CFR (this section to be updated annually) The research plan is anticipated to be shared with all prospective researchers coming to the island. The aim of the plan is to ensure clarity of expectations between CHICOP and the researchers / research institutions, including around areas of data sharing and final presentation of results. It is also intended to focus and prioritize external research efforts to better align with management objectives and areas of management interest, and to minimize ad hoc research.The plan would support the development and strengthening of potential alliances and collaborative arrangements with research institutions both nationally and internationally. * The preliminary plan is proposed in response to existing institutional relationships under development, such as links with the Stralsund Meeresmuseum and Oceanum in Germany.

C.3 By 2027, research and monitoring findings will have At least 1 scientific Publications available Conservation Status been effectively communicated to a range of publication produced in scientific literature Report audiences, and through a range of media, including annually as a result of (journals, books or at least 10 scientific publications, 3 communication research and / or associated collaterals, and the presentation of findings in 10 monitoring conducted professional media). national or international fora. on Chumbe At least three Three communication communication collaterals annually collaterals produced (may be in the form of annually, sharing the factsheets, Facebook / results / insights gained other social media from Chumbe based posts, media articles research and / or etc.) monitoring Presentation of Presentations may be Chumbe science in forums such as (results of research / conferences, monitoring) in at least 1 workshops or national or associated fora. international conservation forum annually Description: Communication collaterals are essential for communicating the results of Chumbe’s research and / or monitoring observations, management experiences and lessons learned to a wide audience. Collaterals would range from professional publications tailored towards fellow conservation practitioners, through to the materials developed that are accessible by lay-men and the general public arena.

153

Rangers conducting seagrass monitoring on Chumbe © Ulli Kloiber

154

11.2. Education

The core strategic focus areas for Chumbe’s Environmental Education (EE) programme are:

 Schools programme

 Peer education and outreach initiatives

 Wider stakeholder education initiatives

D. SCHOOLS PROGRAMME

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

D.1 By June 2018, Phase 13 of the EE programme Phase 13 designed & All associated Phase Education Status Report will be designed and developed ready for roll developed 13 materials, out for EE season 2018/19. curricula prepared.

D.2 By the end of year 1, training-of-trainers (TOT) 3 Chumbe team TOT completed for the Chumbe education team will be members trained in completed, ready for Phase 13 roll out in 2018. Phase 13 roll out.

D.3 By the end of year 5, Phase 14 of the EE Phase 14 designed & All associated Phase programme will be designed and developed developed 14 materials, ready for roll out in 2022. curricula prepared. D.4 By the end of year 5, training-of-trainers (TOT) 3 Chumbe team TOT completed for the Chumbe education team will be trained in Phase 14 completed, ready for Phase 14 roll out in 2022. roll out. Description: In the coming 10 years, two phases (#13 and #14) are planned that will each adapt the existing information and messages used in previous EE excursion to two consecutive (different) tailored thematic focus areas. These tailored approaches will aim to support the enhanced promotion of post-visit activities around key marine & coastal conservation issues. The targeted theme and design of the programmes will be developed in year 1 of the management plan period, for roll out in year 2 (for Phase 13) and again in year 5 for roll out in year 6 (for phase 14). Examples of potential thematic focus include teaching about illegal fishing gears (to promote the production and distribution of school produced posters urging fisher to stop using illegal gears in communities), or promoting particular ‘good’ gears (such as fish traps with escape gaps), or addressing pollution (to promote post-visit beach and village clean ups etc.). At each thematic renewal period, training-of-trainers will be conducted internally with the Chumbe EE team to equip them to be able to deliver the adapted materials appropriately.

D.5 By 2027, at least 190 EE  190 school trips EE reports show total See below objective excursions for local schools will  2,660 school children annual school trips and be conducted, with at least numbers of participating 2,660 participating school school children children D.6 Each year, at least 50% of ANNUALLY:  # of individual pre  Pre and post visit participating school children  50% of school children show and post visit questionnaires show an increase in knowledge increased knowledge after questionnaires that  Follow up post- of marine & coastal visit. indicate increased school visits conservation following the EE  25% of school children knowledge documenting trip to Chumbe Island, and 25% implement proactive post- number of students of participating school children visit activity  # of post-visit implementing post- implement proactive post-visit activities visit activities activities related to their LONG-TERM (10 year): implemented  Full results provided learning.  1,330 children show in Education Status increased knowledge. Report  625 children have implemented post-visit activities Description: These school excursions will be rolling out the EE designs of phases 13 and 14 respectively.

155

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

D.7 By 2027, at least 280 teachers participating in EE  280 participating EE report  MEL method to be field trips to Chumbe Island. teachers developed. Will D.8 By 2027, at least 25% of participating teachers At least 70 teachers EE report focus on conducted 280 teachers are able to articulate how their able to articulate small FGDs with experience on Chumbe has impacted their positive impact on in- participating environmental teaching in-school. school environmental teachers each teaching. season along with pre/post questionnaires.  Full results provided in Education Status Report Description: Each EE field trip to Chumbe Island for local schools, Universities and NGO/training centers is accompanied by at least one teacher/professor per trip. Implementation of a MEL system for teachers is required for the beginning of year 1.

D.9 By 2027 the classroom has Fittings, furnishings and  Classroom fittings,  Conservation Status been consistently maintained fixtures in the classroom are furnishings and fixtures Report to optimize information optimized to ensure targeted are all presented  Annual maintenance display space, messaging and messaging and education attractively and plan functionality for the schools information presentation in functioning optimally programme. line with the education phase  Improvements identified focus topics by the education team are incorporated (where relevant) in the annual maintenance plan D.10 By 2027 the information  Information wall panels  Information panels are  Daily spot-checks panels and associated are updated and clean and up to date  Conservation Status information materials located presentable at all times  Table based information Report throughout the education  Information books / is clean, presentable and  Annual maintenance center have been reviewed an booklets available on the up to date plan updated annually, and table in front of the maintained to a high quality of island office are presentation for visitors. reviewed, kept up to date, streamlined where necessary for consistency, clean and presentable at all times Description: Information, tools, resources and space to learn needs to be maintained to ensure optimal educational support.

E. PEER EDUCATION AND OUTREACH INITIATIVES

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

E.1 By June 2018, a new peer-education program will New peer-education All associated peer- Education Status Report be strategically designed and ready for roll out program designed & education materials, for EE season 2018/19. developed curricula prepared E.2 By June 2018, training-of-trainers (TOT) for peer Number of peer TOT completed educators will be completed, in order for peers to educators to be be able to carry out peer-education activities for trained to be EE season 2018/19. determined during design of program E.3 By 2027, at least 18 peer education activities will  18 peer EE report be conducted outside of Chumbe Island education activities

156

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

Description: The new peer-education program aims to build up on the ReCoMap initiative, however, needs to be strategically re-designed in line with Phase 13 of the EE programme. The previous `peers` are not active anymore, hence, the EE team needs to set up a new group of peers (ideally from target communities and # of peers to be determined) that can then be trained in order to be able to carry out peer-education activities. The re-designing of the peer educator program will require a TOT for new peers

E.4 By 2027, at least 30 EE trips conducted to  30 EE trips for EE report  MEL needs to be Chumbe Island with 6 ‘Target’ communities (1 target developed e.g. 3-4 trip community/year), with at least 450 communities pre/post questions participating fishers  450 fishers given on excursion day and/or focus E.5 By 2027, at least 30 EE trips conducted to  30 EE trips for EE report group discussions Chumbe Island with 6 ‘Non-Target’ communities target  Full results in (1 trip community/year), with at least 450 communities Education Status participating fishers  450 fishers Report

E.6 Each year, at least 50 % of participating fishers ANNUALLY:  # of individual  Pre/post MEL show an increase in knowledge of marine &  50% of pre and post system (to be coastal conservation following the EE trip to participants visit developed) Chumbe Island. show increased questionnaires  Full results in knowledge that indicate Education Status after visit. increased Report knowledge LONG-TERM (10 year):  450 participants show increased knowledge. Description: For the EE programme, fishing communities are divided into ‘Target’ communities (originating from the villages Mazizini, Chukwani, Buyu, Nyamanzi , Kombeni, Dimani) and ‘Non-Target’ communities (originating from any other village in Unguja). EE trips for `Target’ and ‘Non- Target’ communities will alternate each year, targeting 6 villages each year, whereby each village is provided with one trip per year.

F. WIDER STAKEHOLDER EDUCATION INITIATIVES

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

F.1 By 2027, at least 70 EE trips conducted to  10 EE trips for EE report # of applications to show Chumbe Island with Universities, with at least 980 SUZA University demand participating students  10 EE trips for IMS  50 EE trips for other national Universities based on applications F.2 Each year, at least 25 % of participating university 245 students able to Testimonials assessed  MEL method to be students are able to articulate how their articulate influence on as part of EE report developed, but will experience on Chumbe has influenced their career planning incorporate career planning. collection and collation of testimonials from visiting university students  Full results in Education Status Report

157

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

Description: The EE programme for Universities targets the Institute of Marine Science (IMS) and the Marine Program of the State University of Zanzibar (SUZA) by providing each institution with one guaranteed EE field trip to Chumbe Island per EE season. Other local Universities (such as SUZA tourism department, Marahubi University, Zanzibar University and Chukwani University) are also recognized but are required to send in a written application letter in order to be considered for the programme. Implementation of a MEL system for University students is required for the beginning of year 1.

F.3 By 2027, at least 20 EE trips conducted to  20 EE trips for EE report  MEL system to be Chumbe Island with local government government developed. To departmental agencies, with at least 300 officers involve pre/post participating government officers  300 participating questionnaires officers related to Chumbe F.4 By 2027, at least 50% of participating government At least 150 Pre/post project knowledge. officers will show an increased understanding of government officers questionnaires  Full results in the Chumbe project. show an increased Education Status understanding of the Report Chumbe project

Description: The EE programme for local government agencies targets departments that are CHICOP advisory committee members and will rotate trips for departments, targeting those where new staff have been placed. Implementation of a MEL system for local government agencies is required for the beginning of year 1.

F.5 By 2027, at least 20 EE trips conducted to  20 EE trips for EE report  MEL method to be Chumbe Island with local NGO/training centers, local developed, but will with at least 280 participating students NGO/training incorporate centers collection and  280 participating collation of students coming testimonials from from NGO visiting students. F.6 Each year, at least 25 % of participating local 70 students able to Testimonials assessed  Full results in NGOs / training center students are able to articulate influence on as part of EE report Education Status articulate how their experience on Chumbe has their work/ planning Report influenced their NGO operations / career planning. Description: A range of local NGOs that provide training for Zanzibari’s in the areas of tourism and environment are targeted for these EE trips, however, written application is required to be considered. Among the key NGO/training centers that are targeted are: Almalik Training Center, Jambiani Tourism Training Institute (JTTI), Zanzibar Geography Organization and Kawa Training Center. Implementation of a MEL system for NGO students is required for the beginning of year 1.

F.7 By 2027, at least 10 ‘International days’ 10 ‘International days’ EE report  Event Tracking recognized through event based activities on/off event based activities  Education Status the island. conducted Report

Description: At the beginning of each EE season, a calendar which summaries the internationally recognized Environmental Days (such as World Environment Day, World Ocean Day, International Coastal Clean-up Day, etc.) will be produced with the target to implement activities in regards to at least 1 of these international events per season. Activities can be conducted on or off the island but should involve a range of stakeholders, especially youth groups. Implementation of a MEL system for such activities is required for the beginning of year 1.

158

School children heading to the boat for their first time snorkeling © CHICOP

159

11.3. Ecotourism

Ecotourism operations on the island are the bedrock of all activities in the Chumbe MPA (as shown in the concept model). These operations not only provide a model for successful sustainable and socially responsible tourism in East Africa, they also provide all of the financing for the related conservation and activities on the island.

The core strategic focus areas for Chumbe’s Sustainable Ecotourism Operations are:

 Excellence in service delivery and guest experience

 Revenue generation optimized

G. EXCELLENCE IN SERVICE DELIVERY AND GUEST EXPERIENCE

G.1. High quality ecotourism Infrastructure provisioned and maintained effectively

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

THE BUNGALOWS

G.1.1 By 2027 the seven bungalow Rook makutti is repaired and replaced Quality, attractive and  Daily checklist buildings, fittings, according to maintenance schedule and functioning roof expanse  Guest feedback furnishings and fixtures have needs areas  Weekly been consistently Internal fittings (i.e. grouting, cement Internal bungalow maintenance maintained to a high quality murals, paint) are presented to a high fittings, furnishings and plan with standard. quality fixtures are all presented ranked Internal furnishings (chairs, tables, beds, attractively and prioritizations shelving, hammock and soft furnishings) functioning optimally are maintained, attractive and functioning Internal fixtures (lights, light covers, sinks, toilets, showers) are presented and maintained to a high quality and functioning G.1.2 The fittings, furnishings and Fittings reviewed and improved: Improvements identified Annual maintenance fixtures of the bungalows  Groutings and implementation plan plan are reviewed annually, and  Paint coverage and quality clear in annual improvements identified Furnishings reviewed and improved: maintenance plan and implemented to ensure  Shelving provision (particularly in continued high quality bathroom areas) infrastructural provision,  Storage provision in bedroom areas with preliminary  Bathroom matting improvements already  Quality (non-mouldy) cushions, identified and addressed by matresses, covers June 2018. Fixtures reviewed and improved:  Toilet seating (replacement / deep- cleaned wood / plastic, and inner tube deep-cleaning / painting for improved aesthetics)  Shower head improvements (exploration into higher pressure flow models)  Light positionings and consistent coconut shade coverage  Addition of charging plug in bungalows

160

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

Description: As a high end ecotourism location it is essential that Chumbe maintain and strive to improve where necessary the bungalow infrastructure in order to deliver best-possible standards to clients and become / remain competitive with other eco-accommodation destinations globally. This includes keeping up with trends and availability of improved infrastructural provisions (such as shower head systems and the like) that can be utilized to enhance visitor experience.

THE EDUCATION CENTER G.1.3 By 2027 the education Rook makutti is repaired and replaced Quality, attractive and  Daily checklist center building, fittings, according to maintenance schedule and functioning roof expanse  Guest feedback furnishings and fixtures have needs area  Weekly been consistently Internal fittings (i.e. cement floors, inner Education center fittings, maintenance maintained to a high quality mural, paint, wall hangings / decorations) furnishings and fixtures plan with standard. are presented to a high quality are all presented ranked attractively and prioritizations Internal furnishings (chairs, tables, functioning optimally shelving, hammock and soft furnishings) are maintained, attractive and functioning Internal fixtures (lights, light covers, candle shelves) are presented and maintained to a high quality and functioning G.1.4 The fittings, furnishings and Fittings reviewed and improved: Improvements identified Annual maintenance fixtures of the education  Paint coverage and quality and implementation plan plan center are reviewed  Inner mural quality clear in annual annually, and improvements maintenance plan identified and implemented Furnishings reviewed and improved: to ensure continued high  Quality (non-mouldy) cushions, quality infrastructural mattresses, covers provision, with preliminary  High standard tables, chairs and improvements already other furnishings identified and addressed by Fixtures reviewed and improved: June 2018.  Light positionings and consistent coconut shade coverage G.1.5 By 2027 the boutique room Fittings, furnishings and fixtures in the  Boutique room Annual maintenance has been developed, boutique are optimized to ensure the fittings, furnishings plan secured and maintained to room is attractive and secure for visitors, and fixtures are all be aesthetically attractive including: presented  Clear information provided on drinks attractively and availability functioning  A secure glass presentation casing optimally installed for saleable goods to  Improvements prevent thefts identified and  Maintenance of books available (for implementation cleanliness and presentation) plan clear in annual maintenance plan G.1.6 By December 2017 the Re-design optimizes inner space for Inner space is aesthetic Annual maintenance ‘inner restaurant’ area is re- improved utilization and attractiveness for and functional plan designed for improved visitors aesthetics and functionality, with alterations implemented by June 2018 G.1.7 By 2027 the kitchen area has Kitchen area is consistently hygienic and Daily spot-check list items Daily spot-check been maintained at the well presented are consistently 100% template highest quality for hygiene achieved and functionality. G.1.8 By 2027 the education Toilet area is consistently hygienic and well Daily spot-check list items Daily spot-check center adjacent toilet area is presented are consistently 100% template maintained at the highest achieved quality for hygiene and water provision is consistent.

161

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

G.1.9 By March 2018 exploration Additional changing area – possibility and Viability assessment Annual maintenance into the possibility for an viability explored documented and plan additional changing area are available explored (particularly to cater for and separate day visitors), and plans are finalized and implemented (where approved) by June 2018 Description: As a high end ecotourism location it is essential that Chumbe maintain and strive to improve where necessary the education center infrastructure in order to deliver best-possible standards to clients and become / remain competitive with other eco-accommodation destinations globally. In particular, immediate term concerns to address include the boutique room presentation (and sales goods security) and the ‘inner restaurant’ room that has, over the years, become simply an open store room, is not kept well presented, is unsightly and is no longer functional. This is a priority area to address, with a re-design to enable the necessary storage as well as become an aesthetic and appropriate location for guests to utilize..

OTHER TOURIST USE AREAS G.1.10 By June 2018 the snorkel  The snorkel banda is well presented The snorkel banda and Annual maintenance banda has be reassessed for and space is optimized. associated rinse area plan functionality and design  A changing area and (where feasible) functions optimally improvements have been a rinse shower is available for day made accordingly, including visitors to reduce wear and tear exploration of the provision usage of the bungalows of a concrete floor, changing area and (where feasible) a nearby ‘rinse shower’ for day visitors G.1.11 By 2027 all the relaxation All relaxation areas are clean, well Daily spot-check list items Daily spot-check areas for visitors to Chumbe presented, inviting and attractive to are consistently 100% are maintained to the visitors at all times achieved highest quality G.1.12 By March 2018, the viability Walkway in front of bungalows has Viability assessment Annual maintenance of placing solar walkway minimal, discrete and sustainable lighting documented and plan lighting in front of bungalow (to be explored) available area is explored, and plans are finalized and implemented (where approved) by June 2018 Description: In order to both remain competitive with other destinations over the coming years, enhancements described above are to be explored and implemented where feasible. Aspects of enhancement such as the installation of a changing area and a nearby ‘rinse shower’ situated close to the snorkel banda not only offer an improved quality of experience for visitors, but would also allow management to explore greater options for divisioning dayguests and overnighters. This would reduce the use of bungalow shower systems and associated wear and tear (laundry, use of bungalow materials etc.) in order to enable both a more cost-effective management of the dayguest experience, and enhance the ‘benefits’ perceived by overnighters.

SAFETY INFRASTRUCTURE G.1.13 By 2027, fire sand buckets  Fire extinguishers checked and Fire safety equipment Annual Maintenance and extinguishers will have maintained once per year available and functioning Plan been maintained and are  Sand buckets and extinguishers at all times available and functioning at always available and appropriately all times on the island strategically positioned in the event of an emergency Description: It is essential to maintain all fire safety equipment in the event of an emergency

162

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

THE HISTORIC MONUMENTS G.1.14 By 2027 the Port Authority [Note: Responsibility of Port Authority, not Spot-checks confirm  Spot-checks will have consistently CHICOP] lighthouse remains  Annual maintained the lighthouse  Lighthouse is kept well presented presentable, accessible, Maintenance and it continues to be (cleaned / painted as required) secure and effectively plan accessible and secure for  Barriers around viewing area are functioning at all times Chumbe visitors maintained securely  Solar panels are maintained and function effectively to power the lighthouse at night  Access areas and associated information is provided for visitors  A maximum of six (6) guests are permitted in the lighthouse at any given time. G.1.15 By September 2017 upper door information Upper door information Upper door information Weekly maintenance is provided in the lighthouse for guests, to provided visible schedule (Sept 2017) ensure they can safely and securely open, close and manage access to the upper viewing platform G.1.16 By June 2018 water catchment opportunities Guttering and collection Water catchment Annual maintenance from the lighthouse are maximized and systems are checked prior optimized plan (2018) storage systems managed optimally for to each rainy season and enhanced water collection. repaired / maintained to maximize water collection G.1.17 By 2027 the mosque has been consistently Mosque maintained, Spot-checks confirm  Spot-checks maintained, with external areas presentable accessible and mosque remains  Annual for visitors, continues to be accessible, and is presentable presentable, and Maintenance utilized as a place of worship by Chumbe accessible at all times plan staff and Islamic visitors Description: As caretakers of these historical monuments on Chumbe, it is essential to ensure they are maintained, safe to utilize and functional at all times. For safety, the limitation of six visitors at any given time in the lighthouse needs to be strictly enforced by the rangers (promoting a cycling system of groups going into and out of the lighthouse where necessary).

STAFF INFRASTRUCTURE G.1.18 By 2027 the staff  Infrastructure of the staffing quarters Staff infrastructural needs Annual Maintenance accommodation, kitchen meets the needs of staffing numbers are effectively met, to plan area, beach banda and (with each room not exceeding the promote a happy and associated managers house maximum staff numbers identified) healthy workforce have all been maintained to  Staff quarters are maintained to a high standard to ensure promote good hygiene safety, hygiene and security  Each member of staff is provisioned of personnel, as well as with a bed, mattress, pillow, sheets. appropriate living quality for Mosquito nets and storage area for staff personal affects G.1.19 By June 2019 the stairs to Stairs to top floor of managers house secure and useable the top floor of the managers house are re- made / secured for safe access G.1.20 By 2027 the maintenance Maintenance banda is well presented and Technical goods are banda has been maintained functional at all times stored and managed to a high standard to enable effectively, are sufficient storage and retrievable when workable space for the required, the workspace maintenance team, storage is functional and the area of technical goods and is well presented aesthetic presentation for aesthetically passing guests Description: Staff quarters and associated staff use areas need to function optimally, hygienically and to a quality to ensure the workforce’s needs are sufficiently met for an appropriate quality of life whilst on the island

163

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

BOATS G.1.21 By 2027 the transfer boats Transfer boats are at all working times: Transfer boats meet Monthly spotcheck (Nassor owned) are  Clean standards at all times maintained to a high quality  Well presented (no broken / torn standard for safety, hygiene components) and a quality visitor  Structurally safe (wooden experience infrastructure, engines, fuel tanks)  Appropriately equipped (lifejackets, cell for communication, flare for emergency, medical kit, GPS unit, paddle) G.1.22 By 2027 all Chumbe boats Chumbe boats are clean, and at all working Chumbe boats meet  Weekly are maintained to a high times: standards at all times spotcheck quality standard for safety,  Well presented (no broken / torn  Boat hygiene, ranger / boat components) maintenance transfer utilization purposes  Structurally safe (wooden / fibreglass schedule twice and quality visitor infrastructure, engines, fuel tanks) per year experience  Appropriately equipped (tarpaulin, lifejackets, cell for communication, flare for emergency, medical kit, GPS unit, paddle) Description: Boat transfers to and from Chumbe need to be safe at all times, and – when involving tourist visitors – should be appropriately well presented and equipped to ensure a quality visitor experience.

ENERGY INFRASTRUCTURE G.1.23 By 2027 the solar photovoltaic panels All solar photovoltaic systems Energy provisions Annual Maintenance and associated battery systems in all are working optimally and available and functioning plan areas of the island have been providing sufficient energy for 100% of the time effectively and consistently maintained all operations in order to maximize performance G.1.24 By June 2018 additional charging area New charging areas (in the Charging area availability options are explored and installed bungalow and / or other areas) where feasible are available (where explorations reveal feasibility) Description: Sustainable, renewable energy provision on Chumbe (through solar power) needs to be available, optimal and functioning at all times, and meeting the existing (and any emerging) needs of staff and visitors

WATER INFRASTRUCTURE G.1.25 By December 2017, All roof surfaces on the island currently not Opportunities assessed Water Plan for opportunities for expanding being utilized for rainwater collection are and captured in Chumbe (due Dec / enhancing rainwater to be assessed for their potential, associated Water Plan 2017) collection on the island will including: be explored, and a plan  Staff quarters developed to install / modify  Maintenance banda systems accordingly  Snorkel banda  Mosque G.1.26 By March 2018, a Precipitation monitoring system established Annual Chumbe precipitation monitoring business assessment system will be established on the island to monitor rainfall levels annually G.1.27 By 2027, rainwater cistern Cistern water attains ‘potable’ Completed ZAWA test water quality will have been categorization under the Zanzibar Water forms tested annually in Authority (ZAWA) testing collaboration with ZAWA G.1.28 By December 2017, options A range of systems are explored in order to Best-fit approach for new water sourcing find an appropriate best-fit solution to identified and captured in systems are explored, best- Chumbe’s water challenges, including the associated Water Plan fit option is identified and a potential for seawater desalination plan developed to (through reverse osmosis, solar distillation implement the new system and other mechanisms) 164

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

G.1.29 By June 2018, new / Best-fit approach Annual Maintenance augmented water sourcing implemented Plan system is implemented and functioning effectively Description: Chumbe’s current water sourcing challenge (at the time of writing) urgently needs to be addressed, and affordable, environmentally sustainable augmented and / or additional systems need to be implemented. Sourcing water through jerry can transfers from mainland Unguja need to be an emergency measure only, and should no longer be the norm by June 2018.

WASTE INFRASTRUCTURE& MANAGEMENT G.1.30 By September 2018, Non-compostable organic waste is Non-compostable organic Annual Maintenance management systems for managed off-island in a sustainable waste management Plan dealing with non- manner system functioning compostable cooked organic optimally waste (food leftovers from guests) off-island are strengthened and functioning optimally G.1.31 By September 2019, non-compostable cooked Food usage on the island Tonnes / year non- Repeat Waste Audit organic waste produce is equal to or less than is managed effectively to compostable organic to be conducted in 2.5 tonnes/year reduce wastage waste produced 2020 G.1.32 By September 2018, efforts to ‘reduce’ 98% of all non-organic Tonnes / year of non- acquisition of non-recyclable – re-useable or waste items recycled / recycled/ non-repurposed re-purposable items have resulted in less than re-used / re-purposed items 2% of all waste going to municipal dumps sustainably G.1.33 By September 2018, systems for recycling challenging items (i.e. used batteries, tetratech cartons) are developed and implemented. G.1.34 By June 2020 at least 98% of all non-organic waste items from the island are either recycled, re-used or re-purposed G.1.35 By 2027, all human waste from the  Each bungalow chamber is Chambers emptied to Annual Maintenance compost toilets across the island is emptied once per year. schedule Plan effectively composted and removed  Public toilet and staff toilets from the chambers in a timely manner are emptied between 2 and to ensure toilet systems function 4 times a year depending optimally and meets acceptable on levels utilized standards for guest experience G.1.36 By 2027, the kitchen grey water  The kitchen greywater Completed greywater Annual Maintenance system will have been managed and management system is test sheets Plan maintained in line with the associated functioning optimally manuals, and the level of dissolved  BOD levels are < 100 mg/L oxygen (biochemical oxygen demand- post reed-bed treatment BOD) tested every two years (more frequently where necessary) G.1.37 By 2027 all cleaning products utilized Only biodegradable and Only biodegradable and Monthly spotchecks on the island have been consistently ecologically sensitive cleaning ecologically sensitive fully biodegradable and ecologically products continue to be used on products available on sensitive the island island Description: Chumbe’s waste management system, whilst already highly effective, will benefit from continued improvement and strengthening, to ensure infrastructure and systems meet Chumbe’s overall goal for ecological integrity.

MAINTENANCE TEAM MANAGEMENT G.1.38 By 2027, maintenance team Monthly all-maintenance-team meetings Number of meetings Annual Maintenance meetings (full team) will Plan have been conducted monthly to review progress (past) plans (future) and problem-solve challenges together

165

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

G.1.39 By 2027, training needs in  Annual training needs assessment (linked to annual staff appraisal  Annual the Maintenance process) Chumbe department will have been  Annual training provision business assessed and implemented assessment annually with all team members to ensure top quality work Description: To promote team engagement, problem-solving and clear communications, monthly all-maintenance team meetings should be conducted, led by the Project Manager and with the Island Manager also in attendance

G.2. High quality lodge services provided to guests

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

TRANSPORTATION TO (and from) ISLAND G.2.1 By 2027, transportation to / from the island (including taxi 80% satisfaction with Satisfaction Guest experience transfers arranged by CHICOP, and boat transfers) are of a transfers each year responses questionnaires, consistently high standard, reliable and a pleasant from guests analyzed annually experience for guests G.2.2 By June 2018, training needs have been identified (where relevant) with transfer boat drivers to ensure high customer care, effective and positive communication skills G.2.3 By December 2018, training has been provided (where identified) to all key transfer boat drivers G.2.4 By 2027, Mbweni welcome and support to boat is of a consistently high standard (including welcome communications ensuring guests are aware of boat safety [i.e. the availability of lifejackets, the provision of cell communications and GPS units for safety], ease of beachside payment systems, assistance with luggage, provision of support aids including walking shoes and sticks). G.2.5 By 2027, zero transfer boats have exceeded their Safety limits for Boat capacity Spotchecks / office safety capacity (10 persons travelling with luggage transfer capacities are observations inventories for overnight stays, or up 14 persons travelling for met at all times a day trip). Description: Transfer services are provided by contracted third parties, but they nonetheless represent Chumbe and need to be of an appropriately sufficient standard to ensure positive guest experience.

CHUMBE WELCOME / INTRODUCTION G.2.6 By September 2017 the ‘welcome process’ (led by Welcome and Summary plan  Welcome and the rangers) for guests arriving onto the island is introduction process introduction fully reviewed, and plans developed to strengthen reviewed and plan for summary plan the quality of this service for a consistent, improvements  Guest accurate, warm and welcoming introduction to developed (summary / experience the island. This will include a review of: brief) questionnaire  Accuracy of information provided to guests  Body language and communication styles  Length and timing of introduction (and identification of priority information areas required at welcome)  System utilized for dayguests vs overnighters

166

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

G,2,7 By October 2017 a clear plan will be agreed for strengthening this welcome process G.2.8 By November 2017, all training materials for All training materials Presence / absence of strengthening the welcome process will be available and ready for materials produced and ready for delivery (including use briefing cards with correct facts and figures for sharing, support guides and other materials as may be required) G.2.9 By December 2017 all rangers have received Rangers achieve 80% Training assessment Post-training test training on the upgraded welcome process and or higher in post- results welcome system on the island, with ranger training tests assessments showing at least 80% scoring on training received G.2.10 By June 2018 at least 75% of guests rank the At least 75% of guests Likert scale question Guest experience welcome process as eight or higher on a likert satisfied with on guest experience questionnaire (results scale welcome process with regards to ranger from Jan to June 2018 G.2.11 By 2027, rangers have at all times been Ranger team are well welcome added to only – post training) consistently well presented when dealing with presented and guest experience guests, wearing clean uniforms and well turned professional in questionnaire out appearance at all times G.2.12 By June 2017, to complement / support the Bungalow book Presence / absence of Annual Chumbe introduction to the island, each bungalow will be available in each lodge book business assessment equipped with a thorough and professional unit looking ‘bungalow book’ with key information for guests Description: The ranger welcome and introduction to the island provides a critical ‘first impression’ of Chumbe. In recent years, challenges have been observed regarding the accuracy and consistency of information being provided to the guests (particularly in relation to facts and figures about Chumbe). In addition to this, the grouping of dayguests (being welcomed for a day trip) and overnighters (anticipating to ‘check in’ to their bungalow) has led to confusion (for both staff and guests) and has diminished the positivity of the welcome experience. Urgent training and systematic overhaul is required for this process to function effectively, with more strategic separation of daytrippers and overnighters, a more standardized welcome process and information provision.

FOOD & BEVERAGE G.2.13 By 2027, the food and beverage (F&B) service on 80% of guests rank 8 or over on likert  Guest the island will have been maintained to the F&B as ‘8’ or over on scale experience highest quality, with at least 80% of guests rating likert scale questionnaires the service as very good to excellent  Annual Chumbe G.2.14 By 2027, provision of soda’s, juices, water and hot business beverages will be consistently available to guests assessment (from 6.30am to last person sleeping each day) G.2.15 By December 2017, exploration will be undertaken into mechanisms to offer guests in- bungalow hot beverages first thing in the morning (by pre-order) in a manner that befits privacy considerations G.2.16 By January 2018, best-fit mechanisms for providing hot beverage delivery to bungalows in the mornings (by pre-order) will be implemented G.2.17 By December 2018, systems for turning water Potable water is available for all persons on  Annual sourced on the island (through the new water Chumbe Maintenance sourcing system outlined in previous objective Plan into potable water for drinking will be fully  Annual Chumbe explored and best-fit option(s) identified business G.2.18 By June 2019, potable water provision will be assessment systematically available on the island (thus reducing the need to carry drinking water from mainland Unguja, and ensuring all persons on the island – including staff – have access to clean potable drinking water) where investigations have revealed feasible best-fit option(s). Meantime drinking water will be provided in re-useable ‘Drop’ containers to avoid single-use plastics 167

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

G.2.19 By 2027, training needs in the F&B department  Annual training needs assessment (linked  Annual Chumbe will have been assessed and implemented to annual staff appraisal process) business annually with all F&B team members to ensure  Annual training provision assessment top quality service G.2.20 By 2027, bar services will have been consistently Bar services efficient Bar services maximize  Guest available on the island, with waitering staff on and user friendly income experience standby at all key times to take orders questionnaire  Annual Chumbe business assessment G.2.21 By 2027, supply transportation to and from the Supply transportation Supply transportation Annual Chumbe island will be managed efficiently and in a cost- efficient cost effective business assessment effective manner

Description: The F&B services on Chumbe continually receive exceptional acclaim. However, efforts are required to continue to strengthen these services where necessary in order to remain competitive with other high end operations in the region

BOUTIQUE G.2.22 By 2027 the boutique has been consistently well Boutique is well stocked, clean, presentable, and Spotchecks stocked, clean, well presented and inviting to items are easy to purchase Annual Chumbe visitors business assessment G.2.23 By 2027 there has been consistent clarity on the process of purchasing items available (through the island manager) Description: In addition to the infrastructure of the boutique requiring maintaining to high standards (as covered in the previous section) the presentation, accessibility and ease of use of the boutique is also essential to both provide high quality service to guests and to promote revenue generation (covered in later sections)

OTHER GENERAL SERVICE QUALITY CONSIDERATIONS G.2.24 By 2027, all personnel on the island, and engaging 80% of guest rank ‘8’ or more on a likert Guest experience with guests on mainland Unguja, will have been their stay on Chumbe scale questionnaire consistently well presented, polite and respectful as good to excellent at all times G.2.25 By 2027, all personnel on the island will have maintained low noise levels to avoid disturbing guests stays G.2.26 By 2027, the office on the island will have maintained consistent provision of general supplies available to guests for purchase (i.e. toiletries, cigarettes, paper, pens etc.) G.2.27 By 2027, all personnel on the island will have Advanced first aid Number of trained Annual Chumbe maintained their basic first aid training, with at support always personnel available business assessment least two members of staff present at any one available on the island time having advanced first aid certification G.2.28 By 2027 a complete first aid kit will have been Complete first aid kit Spotchecks monthly maintained and available at all times on the island available G.2.29 By 2027, all personnel will have been consistently Once per year staff Number of reminder Annual Chumbe knowledgeable on Chumbes fire and safety reminder trainings on trainings business assessment procedures, with repeat reminder trainings taking fire and safety place once per year procedures G.2.30 By July 2017, armed security personnel (at least 2 Armed security Presence / absence of Annual Chumbe Kikosi Cha Valantia.[KVZ - Volunteer squad, personnel are armed personnel business assessment government branch] officers) are once more available in case of an permanently available on the island. emergency G.2.31 By December 2017 a new guest experience New ‘guest experience Presence / absence of Annual Chumbe questionnaire will have been designed and questionnaire’ enables guest questionnaire business assessment developed (with appropriate back-office set up to appropriate easily assess data as it comes in), with the evaluation of guest questionnaire starting to be actively used on experience January 01st 2018 Description: Overall service provision on the island needs to be maintained to the highest standard

168

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

RANGER TEAM MANAGEMENT G.2.32 By 2027, ranger team meetings (full team) will Monthly all-ranger- Number of meetings Conservation Status have been conducted monthly to review progress team meetings Report (past) plans (future) and problem-solve challenges Annual Chumbe together business assessment Description: To promote team engagement, problem-solving and clear communications, monthly all-ranger team meetings should be conducted, led by the Island Manager and Conservation Manager, with results shared to the Project Manager

F & B TEAM MANAGEMENT G.2.33 By 2027, F & B team meetings (full team) will have Monthly all-F&B-team Number of meetings Annual Chumbe been conducted monthly to review progress meetings business assessment (past) plans (future) and problem-solve challenges together Description: To promote team engagement, problem-solving and clear communications, monthly all-F&B team meetings should be conducted, led by the Island Manager, with results shared to the Project Manager

G.3. High quality activities provided to guests

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

SNORKELING G.3.1 By December 2017 the snorkel briefing will be 80% of guests describe ‘8’ or over on a  Guest experience fully reviewed and improvements / adjustments the snorkel experience likert scale questionnaires identified where appropriate to ensure consistent as good to excellent  Annual Chumbe and accurate presentation of information and business preparation of visitors for snorkeling. assessment G.3.2 By June 2018 the snorkel briefing will be Conservation Status strengthened based on the review, and Report (re: ranger information provided will be accurate and knowledge) consistent. This will include a briefing on reef safety based on Green Fins guidelines and anticipated duration of snorkeling G.3.3 By June 2018, ranger knowledge on marine species and interesting observations ‘in-water’ will be reviewed and improvements identified and implemented where required G.3.4 By June 2018 all guiding rangers will be fully trained in how to provide introductory snorkel training

G.3.5 By June 2018, a factsheet about the Chumbe Reef Sanctuary will be available for guests to read in English, German, French and Italian

G.3.6 By 2027 all guiding rangers will have been trained All guiding rangers Number of trained on marine-specific first aid, with reminder trained in marine- rangers trainings once per year provided specific first aid

G.3.7 By 2027 snorkel equipment will have been Snorkel equipment (all, including masks, fins, Monthly spotchecks checked monthly for damages and hygiene, with snorkels, wet/skin suits and associated gears) is (more during high stock updated as required consistently available in clean and good season) condition G.3.8 By 2027, procurement of high quality snorkel equipment for stock updating will have been conducted in a timely manner, to ensure continuous provision of goods to meet guests needs 169

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

G.3.9 By 2027 snorkel excursion with guests will have Maximum 9 guests per Number of guests in Spotchecks kept to a strict safety size of 9 pax per guiding guiding ranger on group ranger snorkel excursions

Description: Snorkeling is the main activity highlight on the island for many guests, and it is essential to ensure the activity service provided is of top quality and safety conscious

FOREST TRAIL & MANGROVE BOARDWALK G.3.10 By December 2017, to explore opportunities for  Forest trail  A new forest  Conservation engaging a botanist (through the Chumbe experience is trail guiding Status Report research program) to collate, research and updated to reflect protocol is  Forest trail document improved facts and figures about the accurate, available guiding protocol Chumbe Forest Reserve (CFR), interesting consistent and  Guest experience medicinal plants and other interesting botanical interesting  ‘8’ or over on questionnaire features to support guiding services information for a likert scale  Annual Chumbe G.3.11 By March 2018, to have engaged botanist support visitors business and documented associated CFR facts and figures assessment  80% of guests describe the forest G.3.12 By March 2018 existing information on the tour experience as geology of the island will be updated, as well as good to excellent the history of the telecommunications connection, ready for incorporation into the new forest trail guiding protocol G.3.13 By June 2018 all guiding rangers have been trained on revised forest trail guiding (including revised pre-briefing) and an associated protocol has been developed (to include non-botanical information related to history of island [geology] and historic stories [telecommunications system]) G.3.14 By June 2018, a factsheet about the Chumbe Factsheet available Forest Reserve will be available for guests to read in English, German, French and Italian

G.3.15 By 2027 the forest trail will have been maintained Forest trail is safely Accessibility and Monthly spotchecks consistently to ensure ease and safety of visitor maintained and safety of trail access accessible G.3.16 By 2027 the strict rule for no smoking in the Zero smoking in forest Number of persons Spotchecks forest reserve will have been 100% enforced reserve smoking G.3.17 By 2027 the mangrove boardwalk area will have Boardwalk is safe and secure at all times Annual Maintenance been consistently maintained for safety and plan aesthetic appearance G.3.18 By December 2017 facts and figures about the Facts and figures collated Conservation Status mangrove area will have been collated ready for Report inclusion in a factsheet and to provide additional ranger training as part of the forest trail G.3.19 By June 2018, a factsheet about the Chumbe Factsheet available Annual Chumbe Mangroves will be available for guests to read in business assessment English, German, French and Italian

Description: The forest trail activity for guests (and schoolchildren) has, over the years, lost much of its foundational factual information (due to staff changes / lack of institutional memory retention) and needs urgent regalvanizing to meet the standards necessary for Chumbe to be competitive. The mangrove boardwalk requires consistent and high standard maintenance for safety, and guests questions about the area should be possible to address by the rangers

LIGHTHOUSE TOUR G.3.20 By December 2017, the lighthouse tour will be Lighthouse tour is Tour is rated ‘8’ or  Guest experience reviewed and improvements identified related to informative, accurate more on the likert questionnaire facts and figures provided and consistent, with 80% scale  Annual Chumbe of guest rating it as very business good to excellent assessment

170

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

G.3.21 By March 2018 a new lighthouse tour protocol Lighthouse tour protocol available Annual Chumbe will be developed, documenting all relevant business assessment information for the tour G.3.22 By June 2018 all guiding rangers will have All rangers trained Training summary Annual Chumbe received training on the new lighthouse tour business assessment protocol, including all safety procedures

G.3.23 By March 2018 exploration will have been Ascending and Presence of lighting Annual Maintenance undertaken with regards to installing electric descending the plan lighting within the lighthouse (connected to the lighthouse is well lit and solar panels available) to avoid the doors having secure for guests to remain open for lighting G.3.24 By June 2018, a factsheet about the Chumbe Factsheet available Annual Chumbe Lighthouse will be available for guests to read in business assessment English, German, French and Italian

G.3.25 By 2027 the lighthouse will have been maintained Lighthouse is clean, Presentation of the  Spotchecks and cleaned consistently to maintain tour presentable and secure lighthouse  Annual standards at all times Maintenance Plan G.3.26 By 2027 the strict limit on numbers of people Maximum 8 persons at a # of people Spotchecks accessing the lighthouse at any one time (max 8 time access the accessing light- people) will have been strictly complied with at lighthouse house at any one all times time Description: The lighthouse is a key feature on the island and a popular tour to undertake. However, factual information being presented to guests has become limited / lost and this tour requires regalvanizing for consistency, accuracy and safety. Key safety procedures to include in the new lighthouse protocol include:  For safety reasons only 8 guests should climb the lighthouse at any one time.  Guests should not lean on the railings.  The bottom door should always be closed before climbing the lighthouse, and both the top doors closed descending.  Smoking in the lighthouse is strictly prohibited.  Ensure guests understand that they climb the lighthouse at their own risk.

NGALAWA EXCURSION G.3.27 By December 2017, clarity is needed with regards Chumbe owned Ngalawa Presence / absence Annual Chumbe to whether the current Ngalawa (being handed available business assessment over late 2017) will be replaced and this activity will continue to be offered, or if this activity will cease NOTES:  as one of the most popular activities on Chumbe it is highly recommend the activity continue  the remainder of the objectives are based on the assumption of continuation G.3.28 By March 2018 a replacement Ngalawa of equivalent standard and quality is purchased and available on the island

G.3.29 By June 2018 at least two boat rangers will be Rangers trained and available to take Ngalawa sufficiently trained to lead ngalawa tours, with tours (when weather permits) staff rota’s adjusted to ensure one is always available on the island G.3.30 By June 2018, a factsheet about the Chumbe Factsheet available Annual Chumbe Ngalawa Tour will be available for guests to read business assessment in English, German, French and Italian

Description: As a popular activity on the island it is critical this service is readily and consistently available to guests. This requires more than one driver to be able to lead the excursion, and a willingness to deliver this activity routinely

171

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

INTERTIDAL WALK G.3.31 By December 2017, facts and figures regarding Facts and figures Presence / absence Conservation Status the intertidal area will have been collated, ready collated Report for incorporation into a revised intertidal trail protocol G.3.32 By March 2018 opportunity for developing a night Flourescent trail options explored fluorescent intertidal trail will be explored for potential inclusion in the protocol G.3.33 By June 2018 a new intertidal protocol will have New protocol developed Protocol available been developed and all rangers trained on the new protocol G.3.34 By June 2018, a factsheet about the Chumbe Factsheet available Annual Chumbe intertidal area will be available for guests to read business assessment in English, German, French and Italian G.3.35 By 2027 at least 80% of guests have rated the 80% of guests rank >8 on likert scale Annual Chumbe intertidal activity as ‘very good’ or ‘excellent’ activity as 8 or more on business assessment the likert scale Description: The intertidal trail has become less routinely undertaken with rangers having limited detailed knowledge on this area, and requires regalvanizing as a tour to offer guests (recognizing this tour is limited by time availability and tide schedules, this is only / particularly relevant for overnighters staying several nights)

COCONUT CRAB NIGHT EXPLORATION G.3.36 By December 2017, facts and figures regarding Facts and figures Presence / absence Conservation Status the coconut crabs will have been collated, ready collated Report for incorporation into factsheet and associated ranger training G.3.37 By June 2018 all guiding rangers will have been All rangers trained Annual Chumbe trained on up to date and accurate coconut business assessment information, to share with guests during this activity G.3.38 By June 2018, a factsheet about the Coconut Factsheet available Crabs will be available for guests to read in English, German, French and Italian

G.3.39 By 2027 at least 80% of guests have rated the 80% of guests rank >8 on likert scale Annual Chumbe Coconut crab activity as ‘very good’ or ‘excellent’ activity as 8 or more on business assessment the likert scale

Description: Finding the coconut crabs on the island is a hugely popular activity, and it is essential that the information being shared with the guests is accurate and thorough.

SPA SERVICES G.3.40 By 2027, Spa services have been maintained to a 80% of guests describe ‘8’ or over on a  Guest experience consistently high quality the spa experience as likert scale questionnaires good to excellent  Annual Chumbe business assessment Description: Spa services need to be high quality and consistently available

172

G.4. Headquarters in Unguja effectively provisioned and functioning to provide support services to island operations

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

OFFICE EQUIPMENT& MATERIALS G.4.1 By June 2018 all computers in the office are power Computers are all power surge protected Annual Chumbe surge protected business assessment G.4.2 By June 2018 a data back-up system for all A data back up system Data back up system computers has been established and is optimally is established and presence / absence functioning, with Chumbe data being routinely and functioning regularly backed up for security G.4.3 By 2027 all computers and associated Computers and comms devices are functioning communications devices (i.e. phones, modems, fax efficiently and optimally machine etc.) have been well maintained, updated, replaced when necessary and virus free and have continually functioning optimally G.4.4 By 2027 all other technical equipment in the office All technical equipment is effectively functioning (i.e. washing machine, generator, large chest freezers, solar system as back up etc.) has been well maintained and functioning effectively G.4.5 By 2027 all Chumbe road vehicles have been well Road vehicles functioning optimally maintained and are functioning optimally to ensure emissions are limited where feasible and vehicles are available at all times G.4.6 By December 2018, all stored boxes / storage areas Storage boxes / areas sorted have been thoroughly gone through and materials either stored appropriately or disposed of (in consultation with Chumbe Director) Description: All office equipment and materials should be functioning optimally to ensure efficient support services can be provided to island operations

OFFICE INFRASTRUCTURE G.4.7 By September 2018 the office has been painted and Office is appropriately clean and presentable for Annual Chumbe fixtures / fittings repaired, kitchen area thoroughly visitors business assessment cleaned, and bathrooms made functional, such that the area is appropriately presentable for visiting agents, guests and researchers G.4.8 By 2027 the office has been appropriately maintained and is well presented for visiting agents, guests and researchers

G.4.9 By 2027 the office has been maintained securely at Office is Security infrastructure and all times to mitigate against threats of burglary secure personnel are in place and operating effectively G.4.10 By 2027 the Chukwani landing site has been well Chukwani site is maintained and effectively maintained, is accessible and useable to facilitate operational supply runs to / from island

Description: All office infrastructure should be functioning optimally and presentable to ensure efficient support services can be provided to island operations

OFFICE OPERATIONS G.4.11 By September 2018 all operational support systems Effective booking communication processes Annual Chumbe for bookings and reservations are being managed support island operations and financial tracking business assessment 100% effectively, with payment details forms (PDFs) and accountability being filed and available for review and tracking by finance on the same day as the booking is taken, and communication with the island taking place on the same day as each booking is confirmed

173

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

G.4.12 By 2027, bookings for following-day visitors will aim Bookings processes 12 midday deadline to be concluded by a 12 midday deadline the ensure island pre-day bookings previous day unless unusual circumstances prevail operations can be adhered to and the island is prepared to take on last minute conducted effectively bookings G.4.13 By 2027 all bookings processes will have adhered to Carrying capacity of 18 guests / day max is the maximum guest rule (18 per day), with the island is not exceeded consistently exception of ‘special event days’ coordinated and implemented outside communicated well in advance of special event days G.4.14 By 2027 all laundry turnarounds will take a Laundry services Clean materials are maximum of 24 hours (from leaving the island to effectively meet the available at all times returning to the island) demands of the island to meet the needs of island operations G.4.15 By 2027 the HQ will have ensured all materials and Same day requisition Materials and Annual Chumbe supplies requisitioned by the island have been approvals (or challenge supplies are available business assessment reviewed and approved (or challenged) on the same and resolution) when required on the day, and purchased in a timely manner, to ensure Clear deadlines for island the effective functioning of island operations purchase acquisitions G.4.16 By 2027 all supply delivery systems have been Boat and car meet according to the planned optimally functioning to ensure timely delivery to time schedule 90% of the time Chukwani site and the island

G.4.17 By 2027, training needs amongst the office  Annual training needs assessment (linked Annual Chumbe operations team will have been assessed and to annual staff appraisal process) business assessment implemented annually with all team members to  Annual training provision ensure top quality service Description: All office operations should be functioning optimally and presentable to ensure efficient support services can be provided to island operations

FINANCIAL, LEGAL AND HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT G.4.18 By September 2018 all staff will have clear job All staff have clear job descriptions Annual Chumbe descriptions (documented and on file) business assessment

G.4.19 By 2027, all salaries and associated social security Salaries and associated payments are made in a payments will have been paid in a timely manner in timely manner and in legal compliance alignment with staff contracts and the associated requirements under Labour Law G.4.19 By June 2018 an annual staff appraisal process Staff appraisals are Individual appraisal (documented) will have been reinstated and is conducted annually documentation functioning effectively G.4.20 By 2027, all and any staff disciplinary measures will Any disciplinary measures are conducted in legal have been conducted following the regulations as compliance laid out in the labour law G.4.21 By 2027, all emerging laws, policies and regulations Chumbe management Measures to mitigate that may impact on Chumbe operations have been is aware of, and in / manage any impact tracked, assessed and responded to effectively possession of any new to Chumbe / emerging legal operations resulting documentation that from emerging / new could have an impact legal documentation on Chumbe operations are implemented effectively G.4.22 By 2027, all reporting requirements to the All reporting requirements to the Government government of Zanzibar and associated agencies of Zanzibar are effectively met (i.e. ranger report summaries to department of fisheries, ZIPA reports, TRA reports, Department of Statistics report etc.) will have been submitted in a timely manner and in alignment with the agreed reporting schedules

174

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

G.4.23 By 2027 all financial management procedures will Best-practice,  Financial record have adhered to best-practice management accountable financial keeping and principles, with clear, trackable credit and debit management systems analysis is records, and annual audited accounts are implemented at all trackable and times reviewable  Annual audit is produced G.4.24 By 2027, all taxes will have been paid in a timely All taxes paid in a timely manner and in Annual Chumbe manner in alignment with the laws of Zanzibar compliance with the law business assessment G.4.25 By 2027, all licences, permits and insurance payments will have been paid in a timely manner in Annual Chumbe alignment with the laws of Zanzibar and in order to ensure safe and compliant Chumbe operations business assessment  Tourism certificate from Commission for tourism (annually)  Management Certificate from Commission for tourism (annually)  Land lease – Chukwani, from Commission for lands (annually)  Land lease – Chumbe from Commission for lands (annually)  Investment license from ZIPA (annually)  Occupation Safety permit from Department of labor (every two years)  Fire insurance from NIC Tanzania ltd (annually)  Island insurance from NIC Tanzania ltd (annually)  Workmen Compensation insurance from NIC Tanzania ltd (annually)  Liquor license from Western district council (annually)  Garbage collection fee from Western district council (monthly)  Recycling fees from ZANREC (monthly)  Radio frequency permit from Tanzania comms authority (every ten years)  Road License for vehicles from ZRB (annually)  Road insurance from Zanzibar insurance corporation (annually)  Certificate of Membership from ZATI (annually)  Certificate of Membership from ZANEMA (annually)  Resident Permit (foreign employees) from immigration department (every two years) Work permits (for foreign employees) from immigration department (annually) Description: All financial, legal and human resource issues should be thoroughly and transparently conducted, and efficient in order to support island operations

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT MANAGEMENT G.4.26 By 2027 all office operations have been managed to All operations strive to meet best-practice Annual Chumbe consistently consider environmental impact (for environmental sustainability considerations business assessment example: lights, computers and air conditioners turned off when not in use; printed paper used sparingly and on both sides etc.) G.4.27 By 2027 supply runs (to town & Chukwani site) have been managed effectively to ensure efficient use of fuel and car usage

G.4.28 By 2027 all consumables purchases have factored in sustainability of produce consistently in acquisition decisions (including annual updating of the sustainable seafood policy) G.4.29 By 2027 supply purchases have consistently avoided single-use items (plastic bottles, straws, paper napkins, plastic bags etc.)

G.4.30 By 2027 all waste management going through the Chumbe office is managed in line with the waste management targets. Description: As an initiative famed for ecological sustainability, efforts to meet best-practice sustainable approaches need to be implemented in all areas of operations

175

H. REVENUE GENERATION OPTIMIZED

H.1. Zero/low cost marketing efforts effectively target key demographics

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

MARKETING PLATFORMS H.1.1 By October 2017, the management of the website Website challenges Website effectively Annual Chumbe will be reviewed and solutions found to the on- solved manageable Business going accessibility and update issues. Assessment

H.1.2 By December 2017 the website management will be clarified, updating mechanisms reliable, accessible and thorough. H.1.3 By December 2017, web-linked email addresses will All relevant chumbe Communications are Annual Chumbe be established in order to transition team members staff have appropriate appropriately Business away from the use of personal email accounts for chumbeisland.com professional and Assessment Chumbe operations, to ensure long-term retention, email addresses storeable within accessibility and filing of chumbe communications Chumbe system and secure communication records are kept appropriately and professionally H.1.4 By 2027 the website will have provided an up to Website is presented optimally to maximize date, clear, representative, user-friendly interface bookings to promote Chumbe operations and garner bookings H.1.5 By 2027, the website will have received at least 50,000 ‘hits’ per year Google Analytics 50,000 annual ‘hits’ per year, with an overall (total 500,000 hits over annual analysis average bounce rate of less than 20% per year ten years), with consistently low bounce rate (<20% av per year) H.1.6 By 2027, route access to website will be at least 15% annual route 15% from social media linkages traffic to Chumbe website comes through social media links H.1.7 By June 2017, Chumbe has established an Instagram Instagram account established and active Annual Chumbe account on social media Business H.1.8 By 2027 the Chumbe Instagram account will have 1,000 new Instagram # new instagram Assessment recruited at least 100 new followers per year on followers by 2027 followers average (totaling 1,000) H.1.9 By 2027 the Chumbe Facebook account will have 1,000 new facebook # new facebook recruited at least 100 new followers per year on followers by 2027 followers average (totaling at least 2,918) H.1.10 By 2027 the Chumbe Twitter account will have 1,000 new Twitter # new Twitter recruited at least 100 new followers per year on followers by 2027 followers average (totaling 1,000) H.1.11 By 2027 the Trip Advisor rankings will have been 90% of Trip Advisor Percentage ranking as maintained with at least 90% of rankings as rankings are ‘excellent’ ‘excellent’ ‘excellent’

H.1.12 By June 2020, all existing mainstream media Catalogue of mainstream media publications up publications are catalogued and documented to to date and available date H.1.13 By September 2018, a media contact database will Media contact database established have been updated and available to utilize for the dissemination of press releases and the like H.1.14 By June 2019, the number of DMC’s (destination DMC review DMC promotion of Annual Chumbe management companies) including Chumbe completed and Chumbe clarified and Business overnight promotion on their websites will be catalogued opportunities Assessment reviewed, catalogued, and calculated to provide a explored for baseline figure expanding DMC

176

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

H.1.15 By June 2019, DMCs that target appropriate New DMCs identified representation Chumbe demographics that are so far “not” including Chumbe in their websites will have been identified H.1.16 By June 2021 at least 50 new target DMCs will be 50 new DMCs promoting Chumbe by June 2021 Annual Chumbe promoting Chumbe overnight stays on their Business websites Assessment H.1.17 By 2027, amidst an ever-growing online marketing Chumbe appropriately represented on new and world, any new, emerging marketing platforms emerging marketing platforms where relevant (advisory sites, information portals for prospective eco-travellers and the like) will have been reviewed and added to the Chumbe marketing platform portfolio where appropriate Description: Maintaining, managing and establishing demographically targeted marketing platforms is essential to achieving overnight occupancy levels necessary to maximize revenue generation

MARKETING MECHANISMS H.1.18 By June 2018, five social media overnight 5 social media # social media Annual Chumbe promotions should be designed and developed promotions designed promotions designed Business ready for bi-monthly launch for year 2018/ 2019 Assessment

H.1.19 By June 2019, five annual social media overnight 45 social media # social media promotions will have been disseminated on the promotions promotions social media platforms (one every two months disseminated by 2027 disseminated during open season), and will be cycled with five (five per year from annually from this time year 2) H.1.20 By June 2018, interesting Chumbe news-bites are 189 social media # social media stories Annual Chumbe shared at least one time every two weeks across all stories shared by 2027 disseminated Business social media (SM) platforms (at least 21 social Assessment media stories shared annually from June 2018) H.1.21 By June 2018, the website news section will be 189 news stories # social media stories updated at least once every two weeks shared on the website disseminated by 2027 (at least 21 news stories stories shared annually from June 2018) H.1.22 By December 2018, the guest experience Guest experience YR1 questionnaires analyzed questionnaires will have been completed for one for demographic information calendar year, and analysis undertaken to ascertain key up to date demographic information H.1.23 By 2027, utilizing the media database at least two 20 press releases # press releases Annual Chumbe press releases will have been disseminated per issued by 2027 (two Business year. per year) Assessment

H.1.24 By 2027, at least one blog-post per year will have 10 blog-post articles # blog-posts been written and published about Chumbe to produced by 2027 promote bookings

H.1.25 By 2027, at least two mainstream media articles will 20 mainstream media # mainstream media have been published about Chumbe every year articles by 2027 articles H.1.26 By 2027, at least one “Chumbe weekend for two” 10 chumbe giveaways # donated giveaways giveaway will have been donated to a high profile by 2027 to high profile events fundraising / charity event annually in the East Africa region H.1.27 By 2027, Chumbe will have been recognized 5 international awards # international awards through some form of international award at least achieved by 2027 once every two years H.1.28 By 2027, ecotourism on Chumbe will have been 5 ecotourism industry # ecotourism industry featured in at least one ecotourism related industry publications by 2027 publications media every two years

177

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

H.1.29 By June 2019, research into potential “group / At least two new group # new group booking retreat” partnerships (i.e. yoga retreat partners, booking events partners other full island group partners) will have been partners identified explored, and at least two new partnerships established H.1.30 By 2027 at least two ‘group’ (full island booking) At least 16 group # group events on events will have taken place with partners every events (booking entire island year on the island from 2019 island) by 2027

Description: All of the above marketing efforts are necessary to promote Chumbe as a key ‘overnight’ destination in the region, and to maximize revenue generating potential

MARKETING MATERIALS (hard/soft copy) & PERSONNEL H.1.31 By June 2018, the below marketing materials (hard Marketing materials (soft/hard copy )available Annual Chumbe & soft copy) will be readily available in the HQ, and and up to date at all times Business will be updated when required beyond June 2018: Assessment  Chumbe brochure  Chumbe Project Summary  Chumbe one-page factsheet  FAQ document H.1.32 By 2027, hard/soft marketing documentation will have been developed and produced as required to meet marketing demands

H.1.33 By June 2018, a “Media Pack” will be developed and Media pack available Annual Chumbe readily available to give all visiting / interested Business journalists Assessment

H.1.34 By June 2018, clarity will be attained regarding the Roles and responsibilities for marketing clarified roles and responsibilities of the above described marketing efforts amongst the team members of Chumbe, led by the Project Manager Description: Hard/soft copy standard marketing materials should be available at all times to utilize as opportunities allow. Personnel are sufficient skills-equipped to ensure marketing efforts are appropriately implemented.

H.2. Bookings process is user friendly and efficient

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

BOOKINGS MATERIALS H.2.1 By October 2017, all booking materials (emails, Booking materials copy-edited and improved Annual Chumbe attachments) are reviewed, copy-edited to improve Business language flow and streamlined for maximal Assessment information adoption and promotion H.2.2 By December 2017, bookings process has been New booking materials utilized in bookings upgraded with use of new materials process Description: Booking materials are streamlined, effective and functioning optimally to advance enquiries into bookings, and maximize overnight stays

BOOKING PORTALS H.2.3 By 2027, existing bookings portals (booking,com) Booking portals are managed effectively Annual Chumbe will have been managed effectively to ensure Business bookings are optimized Assessment

178

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

H.2.4 By 2027, amidst an ever-growing online booking New booking portals are explored, reviewed and climate, any new, emerging booking platforms will adopted where appropriate have been reviewed, assessed for appropriateness, and added to the Chumbe booking portal portfolio where relevant Description: Booking portals are a growing feature for guests booking holidays, and Chumbe needs to be sure and remain competitive with other destinations through appropriate (and feasible) use of portals where relevant

BOOKING MECHANISMS TO PROMOTE REVENUE GENERATION H.2.5 By December 2017, bookings mechanisms will have Bookings mechanisms reviewed and methods of Annual Chumbe been reviewed and optimized to advance and communication to promote and advance Business prioritize the acquisition of overnight bookings overnight booking acquisition understood by Assessment frontline staff members H.2.6 By June 2018, at least 80% of booking enquiries 80% of enquiries # enquiries translating Annual Chumbe become confirmed bookings become confirmed into bookings Business bookings Assessment

H.2.7 By 2027, the carrying capacity of the island (16 Carrying capacity (max # guests on island overnight guests or 18 guests with a combination of 18 combined guests) is overnighters and daytrippers) will not have been not exceeded exceeded, with the exception of special events being hosted on the island Description: Bookings are the front line of communications between guests, agents and Chumbe, and the process and communication mechanisms utilized need to be optimally professional, efficient and consistent to promote maximal revenue generation

H.3. Revenue generating potential is maximized

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

OVERNIGHT BOOKINGS MAXIMIZED (LODGE INCOME) H.3.1 By June 2020, the number of individuals booking Number of Proportion of Annual Chumbe overnights exceeds the number of individuals overnighters exceeds overnighters vs Business booking daytrips consistently through the year (and number of dayguests dayguest calculations Assessment beyond to 2027) (individuals) H.3.2 By June 2019, at least 60% of all overnight bookings At least 60% of # nights booked per are for ‘more than one night’ overnighters stay more overnighter booking than one night H.3.3 By June 2020, at least 70% all overnight bookings At least 70% of are for ‘more than one night’, with this proportion overnighters stay more being maintained by 2027 than one night H.3.4 By 2027, overall occupancy rates will have averaged Average overall Occupancy rate 60% during low season and 85% during high season occupancy rate: analysis  60% low season  85% high season Description: Overnight bookings bring considerably higher per capita revenue generation that daytrip bookings and need to be promoted and optimized on the island

BAR SALES PROMOTED (BAR INCOME) H.3.5 By 2027, bar menu visibility on the island Bar menu visible and promoted to maximize Annual Chumbe (particularly around sun-downer times) will be sales Business consistently high, with waiters available to take Assessment orders

179

MEL METHOD (see OBJECTIVES TARGET(S) INDICATOR(S) section 13 for more information)

H.3.6 By 2027, at least 10 bar promotions will have been 10 bar promotions per # bar promotions implemented annually (one per month during open year season), featuring a particular drink / cocktail

H.3.7 By 2027 a “sundowner event” will be organized at At least 5 sundowner # sundowner events least once a month during high season to promote events per year bar sales

Description: Bar sales need to be promoted in order to maximize revenue generation

BOUTIQUE SALES PROMOTED (BOUTIQUE INCOME) H.3.8 By December 2017, the range of boutique products Range of boutique Boutique sales Annual Chumbe (particularly ‘Chumbe’ products) will be expanded products expanded Business to promote product diversity and sales and diversified Assessment

H.3.9 By 2027 the boutique will have been kept clean and Boutique presentable presentable at all times, with price tags available for and attractive at all all items, to promote product sales times

Description: Boutique products need to be diverse, attractive and presented optimally to promote boutique sales and maximize revenue generation

COMMISSIONS MAXIMIZED (OUTSOURCE REVENUE COMMISSIONS) H.3.10 By 2027, all commissionable transactions (taxi’s, spa Commissionable transaction optimally promoted Annual Chumbe bookings etc.) will have been promoted optimally to Business advance commission payment acquisition Assessment

Description: Commissionable transactions need to be managed efficiently and optimized where possible to promote maximal revenue generation

12. KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) provide an at-a-glance view of the anticipated measurable milestones and targets for progress under the various departmental pillars over the coming ten years. These will be assessed utilizing the monitoring, evaluation and learning (MEL) mechanisms described against the above objectives and outlined further in section 13.

180

YEARS & MILESTONES Conservation KPI’s 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 TARGET 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26 26/27 # active PSE observations conducted in CRS Compound 365 730 1095 1460 1825 2190 2555 2920 3285 3650 3,650 # CRS boundary marker maintenance checks conducted Annual 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 40 Minimum # Security staff on island to assist with PSE Annual 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 # Ranger reports submitted (filled on a daily basis) to Conservation & Compound 365 730 1095 1460 1825 2190 2555 2920 3285 3650 3,650 Education Manager # Occasional Observation (OccObs) forms completed & submitted to Annual 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 120 Conservation & Education Manager # Summary ranger reports sent to Department of Fisheries Annual 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 40 # scientific publications Annual 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 # presentations at conservation events and scientific conferences Annual 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 # Reef Health Monitoring (RHM) full suite of surveys conducted Annual 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 # water quality surveys conducted (in collaboration with SUZA) Annual - 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 18 # WIO-SWWD (whale watching) annual events conducted Annual 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 # Coconut crab population surveys conduced Annual - 1 - - 1 - - - - 1 3 Total av. Live Hard Coral Cover (LHCC) in CRS (in %) Annual ≥ 50 ≥ 50 ≥ 50 ≥ 50 ≥ 50 ≥ 50 ≥ 50 ≥ 50 ≥ 50 ≥ 50 ≥ 50 Total Fish Biomass in CRS (in kg/ha) Annual >1,000 >1,000 >1,000 >1,000 >1,000 >1,000 >1,000 >1,000 >1,000 >1,000 >1,000 Total sea urchin density in CRS (in m2) Annual ≤ 1 ≤ 1 ≤ 1 ≤ 1 ≤ 1 ≤ 1 ≤ 1 ≤ 1 ≤ 1 ≤ 1 ≤ 1 Total fleshy algae cover in CRS (in %) Annual < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 # Coral colonies observed with Bleaching stress (in %) Annual < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 # individual corals showing evidence of disease in CRS (in %) Annual < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 # COTS observed (in #/16ha) Annual < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 < 2 # of SST loggers inside the CRS Annual 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 # comprehensive research plans in place that are up-dated yearly Annual 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 (developed by April 2018) # Ranger conservation all team meetings Annual 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 60 181

YEARS & MILESTONES Education KPI’s 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 TARGET 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26 26/27 # EE school trips conducted to Chumbe Island Annual 16 17 18 19 20 20 20 20 20 20 190 # school children participating in EE schools trips to Chumbe Island Compound 224 462 714 980 1,260 1,540 1,820 2,100 2,380 2,660 2,660 (14 children/trip) # teaching personnel (including local schools, Universities and NGO- Training Centers) participating in in EE schools trips to Chumbe Island Compound 25 51 78 106 135 164 193 222 251 280 280 (1 teacher/trip) # peer education activities conducted (off island) Annual 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 18 # community EE trips conducted to Chumbe Island with 6 ‘Non- Annual 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 30 Target’ communities (1 trip community/year) # community EE trips conducted to Chumbe Island with 6 ‘Target’ Annual - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 30 communities (1 trip per community/year) # fishers participating in EE community trips to Chumbe Island (15 Compound 90 180 270 360 450 540 630 720 810 900 900 fishers/trip) # EE University trips conducted to Chumbe Island with students from Annual 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 SUZA University # EE University trips conducted to Chumbe Island with students from Annual 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 IMS Zanzibar (DSM University) # EE University trips conducted to Chumbe Island with students from Annual 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 50 other national Universities # University students participating in EE trips to Chumbe Island (14 Compound 98 196 294 392 490 588 686 784 882 980 980 students/trip) # EE trips conducted to Chumbe Island with government Annual 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 20 departmental agencies # Government officers participating in EE trips to Chumbe Island (15 Compound 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 300 officers/trip) # EE trips conducted to Chumbe Island with associated local NGO- Annual 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 20 Training Centers # NGO students participating in EE trips to Chumbe Island (14 Compound 28 56 84 112 140 168 196 224 252 280 280 students/trip) # ‘International days’ recognized through event based activities Annual 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 on/off the island 182

YEARS & MILESTONES Ecotourism KPI’s 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 TARGET 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26 26/27 # island based infrastructure (bungalows, education center, Annual 365 365 365 365 365 365 365 365 365 365 3,650 relaxation areas, snorkel banda etc.) spotchecks for quality control # weekly Maintenance plans Annual 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 520 # Annual Maintenance plans Annual 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 # transfer boat (Nassor owned) spotchecks for quality control Annual 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 110 # chumbe boat maintenance periods Annual 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 20 # Water Plans for Chumbe Annual 1 ------1 # Waste Audits to be conducted Annual - - 1 - - - - 1 - - 2 Amount of non-organic waste items from the island that are either Annual 60% 70% 80% 98% 98% 98% 98% 98% 98% 98% 98% recycled, re-used or re-purposed # times each composting toilet chamber is emptied on the island Annual 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 Percentage of guests express satisfaction with guest boat transfers Annual 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% Percentage of guests considering the ranger welcome / introduction Annual 75% 75% 75% 75% 75% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% to be ‘very good’ to ‘excellent’ (> 8 on likert scale) Percentage of guests considering food & beverage on the island to be Annual 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% ‘very good’ to ‘excellent’ (> 8 on likert scale) # fire and safety trainings conducted annually for all staff Annual 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 # Maintenance full team meetings annually Annual 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 120 # Ranger full team meetings annually Annual 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 120 # F&B full team meetings annually Annual 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 120 Percentage of guests considering the snorkel activity to be ‘very Annual 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% good’ to ‘excellent’ (> 8 on likert scale) # reminder rangers trainings on marine-specific first aid per year Annual 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 Percentage of guests considering the forest trail activity to be ‘very Annual 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% good’ to ‘excellent’ (> 8 on likert scale) Percentage of guests considering the lighthouse activity to be ‘very Annual 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% good’ to ‘excellent’ (> 8 on likert scale)

183

YEARS & MILESTONES Ecotourism KPI’s 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 TARGET 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26 26/27 Percentage of guests considering the intertidal activity to be ‘very Annual 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% good’ to ‘excellent’ (> 8 on likert scale) Percentage of guests considering the coconut crab activity to be ‘very Annual 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% good’ to ‘excellent’ (> 8 on likert scale) Percentage of guests considering the Spa experience to be ‘very Annual 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% good’ to ‘excellent’ (> 8 on likert scale) # staff appraisals per staff member Annual 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 # ZIPA reports submitted Annual 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 40 # full account audits conducted Annual 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 # website ‘hits’ per year Annual 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 500,000 Average website bounce rate per year Annual <20% <20% <20% <20% <20% <20% <20% <20% <20% <20% <20% Annual proportion of traffic route to website through social media Annual 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% # new followers on Instagram Compound 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000 1,000 # new followers on Facebook Compound 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000 1,000 # new followers on Twitter Compound 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000 1,000 Proportion of ratings on Trip Advisor as “excellent” Annual 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% # new DMCs promoting Chumbe Annual - - - - 50 - - - - - 50 # social media promotions disseminated Annual - 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 45 # social media ‘news-bites’ disseminated Annual 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 189 # blog-posts written about Chumbe Annual 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 # mainstream media articles written about Chumbe Annual 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 20 # ecotourism industry articles written about Chumbe Annual - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 5 # full island group-event bookings taken Annual - - 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 16 # bookings enquiries translating into confirmed bookings Annual - 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% Proportion of overnight bookings that are for “more than one night” Annual - 60% 70% 70% 70% 70% 70% 70% 70% 70% 70% Average low season occupancy rate Annual 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% Average high season occupancy rate Annual 85% 85% 85% 85% 85% 85% 85% 85% 85% 85% # bar promotions Annual 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 100 # sundowner events Annual 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 50

184

13. MONITORING, EVALUATION & LEARNING

Monitoring (M) progress, evaluating (E) achievements, and implementing an adaptive management approach based on lessons learned (L) will be essential processes for achieving the various goals and targets identified and achieving overall management effectiveness.

In the previous section, each strategic objective has been assigned an appropriate mechanism for undertaking MEL, described further here:

13.1. MEL for Conservation

Key MEL mechanisms being deployed for measuring the effectiveness of conservation activities are as follows.

Compliance with MPA regulations (patrol, surveillance & enforcement)

Compliance monitoring is undertaken daily by the rangers, PROTOCOL: Marine Rangers Reports documenting activities in the coral reef sanctuary, using a template format. Key metrics measured are related to # UNDERTAKEN: Daily Incidents observed in the CRS. And for each incident: RESPONSE PERIOD: Daily  Time (Morning, Afternoon, Night) REPORT OF FINDINGS PRODUCED:  Location (North, Middle, South) Quarterly (for submission to fisheries  # People  Type of Vessel (Boat, Dhow, Yacht, Wakojani, Ngalawa, department) Canoe, Snorkel, Other) FULL TREND ANALYSIS PRODUCED:  Activity (Fishing, Anchored, Passing, Research, Help required, Tourism/guests). And if found fishing: Annually – Conservation Status Report Fishing Gear (Trap, Line, Spear gun, Net, Collecting)  Response taken

These reports enable an immediate term assessment of compliance levels and responsive management (such as follow up with any fishers encroaching in the CRS) to be implemented immediately when required. The reports also enable trends in compliance to be evaluated and assessed overtime.

186

Compliance with Forest Reserve regulations (patrol, surveillance & enforcement)

Routine PSE activities in the CFR are intended to ensure PROTOCOL: Forest Rangers Reports (to be the reserve is effectively managed and all attempted developed as per objective A.2.2). encroachments are deterred. UNDERTAKEN: Daily Key metrics measured are related to # Incidents observed in the CFR. And for each incident: RESPONSE PERIOD: Daily

 Time (Morning, Afternoon, Night) REPORT OF FINDINGS PRODUCED:  Location (North, Middle, South) Quarterly  # People  Activity (Cutting, Felling, Hunting, Littering, Other non- FULL TREND ANALYSIS PRODUCED: permitted actions) Annually – Conservation Status Report  Response taken

This monitoring will complement the CRS data recording.

Biophysical health of the CRS

Conducted annually, in-house biophysical monitoring is PROTOCOL(S): Reef Health Monitoring undertaken by the ranger team, and the metrics assessed (RHM) protocol (to be refined and include: developed as per objective B.1.1) expanded from, and including:  Total fish biomass [kg/ha]  using Underwater Visual Census (UVC) techniques  Existing CHICOP 2006 protocol  Live hard coral cover (LHHC) [ %]  Bleaching Response protocol  Urchin Density [ind/m2]  COT removal protocol  Fleshy algae cover [% cover]  Bleaching incidence [% of colonies] UNDERTAKEN: Annually (& in response to  Disease prevalence [% cover] any impact changes detected through  COT density [ind/ha] daily observation)  All the above using a combination of quadrat measures (CHICOP protocol 2006) and Point RESPONSE PERIOD: Annual (or immediate Intercept Transects (PIT) term in response to changes detected

through daily observation) Beyond the regular monitoring of the above, additional responsive monitoring will be undertaken for bleaching REPORT OF FINDINGS PRODUCED: Annual and COT incidence as needs arise. RHM report

Additional Sea Surface Temperature (SST) loggers will FULL TREND ANALYSIS PRODUCED: monitor changes in SST daily Annually – Conservation Status Report

187

Water Quality of the CRS

In collaboration with SUZA, MEL for water quality will be PROTOCOL: Water Quality protocol (to be undertaken and will assess elements (such as) pH levels, developed as per objective B.1.6). salinity and nutrient levels within the CRS. UNDERTAKEN: Twice per year

FULL TREND ANALYSIS PRODUCED: Annually – Conservation Status Report

Marine Megafauna of the CRS

Occasional Observation (OccObs) record keeping is PROTOCOL: Occasional Observation intended to capture the occurrence of marine megafauna (OccObs) forms (to be developed as per within the CRS (i.e. sightings of sharks, turtles, dolphins objective B.1.7) and other megafauna species). UNDERTAKEN: Responsive (when Undertaken by the Chumbe Rangers, this monitoring observations occur) enables a systematic capture of observational data related to visiting and transient megafauna within the CRS. REPORT OF FINDINGS PRODUCED: Monthly

FULL TREND ANALYSIS PRODUCED: Annually – Conservation Status Report

Whale migration

Annual whale monitoring data is submitted annually as PROTOCOL: Synchronized Whale Watching part of the regional SWWD initiative. Day (SWWD) data sheets.

Sightings are recorded using an 11-point log sheet and are UNDERTAKEN: Annually focused on sightings of humpback whales seen in the seas of Tanzania, Kenya and Mozambique. REPORT OF FINDINGS PRODUCED: Annually (SWWD submissions)

FULL TREND ANALYSIS PRODUCED: Annually – Conservation Status Report

188

Status of endangered forest species

The Aders Duiker monitoring protocol will be designed and PROTOCOL(S): Aders duiker monitoring developed in order to confirm the existing current number protocol (to be developed as per objective of Ader’s duiker present on island, and monitor the B.2.1), and Coconut Crab monitoring population over time. Metrics anticipated will include: protocol (to be developed as per objective B.2.3).  # recorded visible sightings of Aders Duikers  # recorded evidence sightings (scent marks, feaces) of UNDERTAKEN: Aders duiker monitoring to Aders Duikers be determined (based on new protocol).  # Camera trap recordings Coconut crab monitoring every three

years. The Coconut Crab monitoring protocol will be developed based upon best practice approaches previously utilized RESPONSE PERIOD: In line with monitoring (mark, release, recapture) and focused upon estimating schedule. population size and density on the island. FULL TREND ANALYSIS PRODUCED: Relevant Conservation Status Reports.

Terrestrial invasive species

Invasive species monitoring and management systems will PROTOCOL(S): Invasive species protocol to be established through the new invasive species protocol, be developed (as per objective B.2.6) and will include assessment and management mechanisms for: UNDERTAKEN: to be determined based on above protocol  Indian House Crows (based on existing observation / response shooting procedures) RESPONSE PERIOD: to be determined  Rats (based on chew stick indicators monitored based on above protocol weekly)  Rhino beetles FULL TREND ANALYSIS PRODUCED:  Casuarina Annually – Conservation Status Report

CONSERVATION STATUS REPORT

This assessment reviews achievements against all the conservation related objectives in this management plan. Conducted annually, the conservation status report should present the results of the various analyses undertaken, identify challenges and achievements of the year, and identify key activities that need to be undertaken the following year.

Anticipated to be developed during the annual maintenance period, this assessment is due by July 01st annually, and is submitted to the Director and Alternative Director. The findings should also provide the foundation for discussion and presentation at the annual Advisory Committee Meeting, and be available for sharing to wider stakeholders.

189

13.2. MEL for Education

Key MEL mechanisms being deployed for measuring the effectiveness of education activities are as follows:

Schools programme impact based assessment

Using an adapted Kirkpatricks model (Kirkpatrick & PROTOCOL: Pre / Post questionnaires – Kirkpatrick, 1994, 2005, 2007), CHICOPs pre and post using an adapted Kirkpatrick model questionnaire process for determining impact is based on a three step process: UNDERTAKEN: Per school visit

(1) Reaction (‘happy sheets’) – a measure of satisfaction; i.e. what FULL TREND ANALYSIS PRODUCED: the students thought and felt about the experience. Annually – Education Status Report (2) Learning – a measure of the resultant increase in knowledge or capability. Evaluation here assesses what has actually been learned and absorbed as knowledge. (3) Behaviour – a measure of the extent of behavior and capability improvement and its resultant implementation / application. Evaluation here measures the transfer of what has been learned back into the students’ school life and post-visit activities.

Teacher training impact based assessment

Also utilizing an adapted Kirkpatrick model, these PROTOCOL: Focus group discussions and assessments will be augmented with small focus group Pre/Post Questionnaires (to be reviewed discussions (FGDs) with teacher trainee groups each and updated) season. UNDERTAKEN: Per teacher training . activities

FULL TREND ANALYSIS PRODUCED: Annually – Education Status Report

Peer, non-target & wider stakeholder impact based assessments

All remaining peer, non-target and wider stakeholder PROTOCOL: Pre/post questionnaires (to excursion based educational programmes will be assessed be developed) using randomly selected pre/post questionnaires in line with the adapted Kirkpatrick model; though randomized UNDERTAKEN: Randomized, with at least and not conducted per excursion to reduce monitoring three sets per season burden, and in recognition of the fact that some wider FULL TREND ANALYSIS PRODUCED: stakeholder, peer and non-target excursions are focused at Annually – Education Status Report a highly introductory level, with only knowledge (k) based metrics anticipated to be affected in any way in the immediate term.

190

EDUCATION STATUS REPORT

This assessment reviews achievements against all the education related objectives in this management plan. Conducted annually, the education status report should present the results of the various analyses undertaken, identify challenges and achievements of the year, and identify key activities that need to be undertaken the following year.

13.3. MEL for Ecotourism

Key MEL mechanisms being deployed for measuring the effectiveness of the ecotourism activities are as follows:

Maintenance plans

Maintenance plans are agreed between the Project PROTOCOL(S): Various manuals exist to Manager and Technical Manager. During periods when the support island infrastructure island is operational, these plans are brief and agreed maintenance, including: weekly, to address immediate infrastructure and technical concerns. Prior to Maintenance period (island closed) the  Greywater management protocol  Annual Maintenance plan is developed to map out Solar freezer protocol  Solar panels protocol activities to be completed during the closed period. All  Invertor management objectives in the previous section are to be reviewed at  Charge controllers this period to ensure incorporation in this plan where relevant. UNDERTAKEN: Weekly (when island open), and annually (before closed . maintenance period)

REPORT OF FINDINGS PRODUCED: Annual Chumbe business assessment (see below)

Daily spot check templates

Daily spot check templates are utilized on the island for PROTOCOL(S): Daily spot check templates checking daily standards for key areas, such as the bungalows, the kitchen area, the public toilet area, and the UNDERTAKEN: Daily relaxation areas for visitors. REPORT OF FINDINGS PRODUCED: Annual Chumbe business assessment (see below)

191

Weekly spot check templates

Weekly spot checks are needed for other infrastructural PROTOCOL(S): Weekly spot check conditions, such as the boats. templates for relevant areas

UNDERTAKEN: Weekly

. REPORT OF FINDINGS PRODUCED: Annual Chumbe business assessment (see below)

Monthly spot check templates

Monthly spot checks are conducted for other PROTOCOL(S): Monthly spot check considerations, such as cleaning product inventory, forest templates for relevant areas trail safety, snorkel equipment safety and standards etc. UNDERTAKEN: Monthly

REPORT OF FINDINGS PRODUCED: Annual . Chumbe business assessment (see below)

Boat maintenance schedule

Conducted twice a year (or more often when required), PROTOCOL(S): Schedule checklist this schedule includes a checklist of all factors on the boats to review, check, ensure are in optimally functioning UNDERTAKEN: Twice per year condition, and repair if / where necessary. REPORT OF FINDINGS PRODUCED: Annual Chumbe business assessment (see below)

Guest experience questionnaires

Targeted at overnight guests, these questionnaires are PROTOCOL(S): Guest experience available in the bungalows, and management actively questionnaire (to be revised/ created) encourage guests to complete them. They are intended to provide feedback to assess the level of achievements in UNDERTAKEN: Shared with all overnight service delivery and high quality activity deliverables, as guests well as provide guests with a chance to share any other REPORT OF FINDINGS PRODUCED: Annual general observations, suggestions for improvements etc. Chumbe business assessment (see below)

FULL TREND ANALYSIS PRODUCED: . Annually – Chumbe business assessment (see below)

192

ANNUAL CHUMBE BUSINESS ASSESSMENT

This assessment reviews achievements against all the ecotourism related objectives in this management plan. Conducted annually, the Chumbe business assessment should present the results of the various analyses undertaken, identify challenges and achievements of the year, and identify key activities that need to be undertaken the following year.

APPENDIX ONE: Standard Operating Procedures Appendix includes SOPs for:

A. Sustainable Operations B. Sustainable Procurement C. Health, Safety & Emergency

A. SOP: Sustainable Operations

Aims

 Committed to sustainable conservation and education through eco-tourism  Committed to facilitate research and monitoring systems in support of the above.  Committed to community development and well-being through environmental education.  Committed to prioritizing and working closely with local communities.  Committed to involving all stakeholders in the development of the project.  Committed to minimizing the environmental impacts of all operations and to promote environmentally friendly design and technology within the project.  Committed to ethical operations with not for profit objectives.  Committed to cooperation with National and International conservation and ecotourism organisations to publicise the project and exchange experiences.

PART I. GENERAL

Office administration

 Paper is printed and photocopied on both sides.  Re-use paper only used on one side, e.g. as scrap notepaper, or to print on.  Encouragement of the sale of fair trade, ethical and eco-friendly goods are promoted in the Island boutique.  All non re-usable material that is not biodegradable to be separated and disposed of to the ‘municipality’.  Turn off electric lights and use natural light whenever possible.  Electrical air conditioning is not used and all other electrical items are switched off when not being used.  Large, refillable water tanks are used to provide drinking water in the office which avoids additional plastic waste

Staffing

 Local community members are given high priority for employment opportunities  The importance of gender empowerment is recognised  All staff are trained on ethical environmental concerns  Training and work experience are prioritised for staff skill development  All laws protecting staff rights are adhered to and respected  All staff have a voice within the company and mechanisms are created so that voice is heard and answered from all sectors

Clients

 All tourists are requested to follow the rules and regulations whilst on island.  These rules are displayed and explained during the briefing by the staff to the guests when they arrive.  Only 18 clients to be accommodated on the island at any one time.  All of our clients are issued with a feedback form to complete during their stay. Guest comments are followed up and solved immediately.

194

PART II. SPECIFIC FOR CHUMBE ISLAND

Environmental concerns

 Emissions of carbon dioxide to be minimised, for example by reducing the use of fossil fuels by regulating boat trips and size of engines used and limiting use of cars to essential trips  Large water purifiers are provided for drinking water to the staff. Large, refillable water tanks are used to provide drinking water to the guests which avoids additional plastic waste  All biodegradable raw fruits, vegetables and plant matter to be composted on island  Sensitizing local communities of the benefits of conserving the environment  Use of locally made biodegradable soap with the bungalow greywater systems to minimise pollution and eutrophication

Design and maintenance

 Composting toilets installed to completely avoid sewage (black water) and waste of water for flushing toilets.  Grey water system introduced for the guest kitchen waste water in order to minimise marine eutrophication.  Solar powered electricity to be used.  Bungalows and education centre provided with rain water collection tanks and roofs designed for maximum rainwater collection and storage.  Usage of water in bungalows is conserved and controlled manually, e.g. through water-saving showerheads.  Keep all equipment regularly serviced and in good condition. For example boat engines to minimise oil leakage.

Restrictions and general rules of the island

 Turn off lights & water if not needed where possible to save energy.  Laundry to be done off the Island since water on the island is a precious commodity and washing soaps would pollute the environment.  Environmentally friendly cleaning products to be used to reduce pollution.  Special bins to be placed on the Island for non-biodegradeable waste and regular collections of rubbish from the beach are organised among the Island Team  Guests are encouraged to use “reef safe” sunscreen which is available on the island

Marine Protected Areas (MPA) and Forest Reserve rules.

 No destructive or extractive activities permitted in the CRS or CFR  Scuba diving in the CRS permitted only for approved researchers and film crews  Off-track exploration of the CFR permitted only for approved researchers  The rules to be regularly reviewed by the management at least twice a year (Conservation Evaluation Meetings).

195

B. SOP: Sustainable Procurement Aims

 Committed to sourcing goods in a sustainable manner  Committed to only acquiring and utilizing sustainably produced products  Committed to transporting and managing procurement processes in a sustainable manner

PART I. PROCUREMENT OF CONSUMABLES

 All consumable produce (food stuffs) should be sourced from a sustainable vendor  Consumable product purchasing should target local communities where possible  Consumables should be organically produced, and locally grown / developed where possible  Seafood product purchasing must follow the Chumbe Sustainable Seafood Policy in Part III.

PART II. SUPPLIES MANAGEMENT

 All supplies to be sent to the island in re-usable locally made bags. Plastic is avoided.  Re-using bags to buy supplies for the Island.  Supplies to be bought in local markets, produce from outside the local community is avoided wherever possible and economical.  Dish soaps and products for the kitchen are to be biodegradable  Non recyclable packaging to be minimized as much as possible  Measures to recycle, reuse and reduce are prioritised  Outsource transportation transfers and other services to local contractors wherever possible and economical.

PART III. SUSTAINABLE SEAFOOD PURCHASING POLICY

The Chumbe sustainable seafood purchasing policy ensure’s Chumbe only purchases sustainably sourced marine products from local fishermen, and avoid species that are overfished or have been caught using destructive fishing techniques. Species are categorized by:

Green – Good choices Yellow – Choices with caution Red – Avoid

196

197

198

C. SOP: Health, Safety & Emergencies

Aim

 CHICOP provides a safe work environment for all staff  Chumbe is a safe place for visitors  Both staff and visitor health and safety is considered in all actions and activities as paramount importance

PART I. HEALTH & SAFETY IN THE OFFICE

 First aid kit is provided in the office  Gas stoves are located in open environment to avoid fire.  First Aid training to certificate standard is sponsored by the company  All staff are insured when at work

PART II. HEALTH & SAFETY ON THE ISLAND

 All island-based staff to learn how to swim.  Life jackets are available on boats crossing to the island.  GPS and mobile phones are available on boats and a text message is sent to management when the boat departs the island and returns from Mbweni.  All staff to be trained to be competent in health and safety procedures in both marine & terrestrial environment.  Staff cooks to go for a compulsory, annual medical check.  First aid box & equipment to be provided on the Island.  First aid training to be provided up to certificate level.

PART III: EMERGENCY PROCEDURES – FIRE

 ALERT EVERYONE  EXTINGUISH THE FIRE  SOUND THE ALARM: many strokes on the “bell” while shouting ‘fire/motoooo!’

199

On Island

Assignments for each department

 Guiding rangers - alarm and evacuate all the guests and their luggage from their bungalows  Waiters - alarm and evacuate the staff house including managers house  All other departments (maintenance, staff kitchen, guest kitchen, boat rangers) - help to extinguish the fire and gather at the meeting point (guest beach)

Meeting point (where all guests and staff meet up) - Guest beach

Fire extinguishers on the island are located:

 In the snorkel hut (powder, hand held tanks) to use if there is a fire in the snorkel hut, since there is petrol in there, use the powder!!  In the guest kitchen (CO2, small hand held tanks) to use if there is a fire in the kitchen or electricity fire (i.e office or maintenance shed)  Outside guest bungalows (water, small hand held tanks) to use if there is a fire in the bungalows

In office

Fire extinguishers in the office are located:

 In the main office downstairs (regular)  kitchen (1 x regular, 1 x Carbon dioxide extinguisher)  laundry room area (regular)  conservation and education floor (regular)  top apartment (regular)

PART IV: EMERGENCY PROCEDURES – MARINE / SNORKELING ACCIDENTS

Emergency Plan for Rangers – actions to take for the following marine / snorkel related accidents:

Sunburn / dehydration Lots of water to drink. No coffee or tea. Aloe Vera cream / gel. Rets

Jellyfish sting / burn Apply vinegar as soon as possible. If very painful apply ice.

200

Poisonous fish (stingray, Heat treat immediately. Make sure the injured body part if well covered with hot water (45c) and keep refilling hot water lionfish, catfish, stonefish) until pain subsides (may be up to 4 hours)

If open cut, treat as below

If you suspect the client has an allergic reaction (serious swelling, dizziness, nausea, difficulties breathing etc.) alert the office and send patient to Unguja as soon as possible

Open wound (cut on coral Get victim back to education center as soon as possible trying to avoid getting dirt or sand in the wound. Clean the wound rag/ rock) with freshwater and then antiseptic liquid before applying a plaster and pressure bandage if needed. If heavy bleeding – bring patient to Unguja as soon as possible and alert the office

Near drowning Immediate EFR (rescue breathing and addition of emergency oxygen) by trained ranger / staff. Alert the office and send patient to Unguja as soon as possible. Time is critical.

201

APPENDIX TWO: Rangers Report Template

202

APPENDIX THREE: Coral Genera Diversity in the Chumbe Reef Sanctuary

ORDER FAMILY GENUS SOURCE Helioporacea Helioporidae Heliopora coerulea WCS Scleractinia Mussidae Acanthastrea MP, WCS Sources: Author Year Scleractinia Acroporidae Acropora MP, HER, WCS Surveys conducted as part of 1st G. Castle & R. MP 2006 Scleractinia Poritidae Alveopora MP, HER, WCS Edition Management Plan Mileto Scleractinia Acroporidae Astreopora MP, WCS HER PhD study in progress Herran 2014 Wildlife Conservation Soceity Scleractinia Scleractinia incertae sedis* Blastomussa MP, HER WCS Tim McClanahan 2016 (WCS) monitoring Scleractinia Faviidae Caulastrea MP, HER

Scleractinia Agariciidae Coeloseris MP, HER Scleractinia Siderastreidae Coscinaria MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Fungiidae Cycloseris MP, HER Scleractinia Faviidae Cyphastrea MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Dendrophylliidae Dendrophyllia MP, HER Scleractinia Faviidae Diploastrea MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Pectiniidae Echinophyllia MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Faviidae Echinopora MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Euphylliidae Euphyllia HER, WCS Scleractinia Faviidae Favia MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Faviidae Favites MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Fungiidae Fungia MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Oculinidae Galaxea astreata MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Oculinidae Galaxea fascicularis MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Agariciidae Gardineroseris MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Faviidae Goniastrea MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Poritidae Goniopora MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Caryophylliidae Gyrosmilia MP Scleractinia Fungiidae Halomitra MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Fungiidae Herpolitha MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Dendrophylliidae Heteropsammia MP, HER 203

ORDER FAMILY GENUS SOURCE Scleractinia Merulinidae Hydnophora MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Faviidae Leptastrea MP, WCS Scleractinia Faviidae Leptoria MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Agariciidae Leptoseris MP, HER Scleractinia Lobophyllidae Lobophyllia MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Merulinidae Merulina MP, WCS Scleractinia Faviidae Montastrea MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Acroporidae Montipora MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Pectiniidae Mycedium MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Faviidae Oulophyllia MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Pectiniidae Oxypora MP, WCS Scleractinia Agariciidae Pachyseris MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Agariciidae Pavona MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Pectiniidae Pectinia MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Caryophylliidae Physogyra MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Faviidae Platygyra MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Caryophylliidae Plerogyra MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Scleractinia incertae sedis* Plesiastrea HR, WCS Scleractinia Pocilloporidae Pocillopora MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Fungiidae Podabacia MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Poritidae Porites branching MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Poritidae Porites massive MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Siderastreidae Psammocora MP Scleractinia Mussidae Scolymia MP Scleractinia Pocilloporidae Seriatopora MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Astrocoeniidae Stephanocoenia MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Pocilloporidae Stylophora MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Mussidae Symphyllia MP, HER, WCS Scleractinia Dendrophylliidae Tubastrea MP Scleractinia Dendrophylliidae Turbinaria MP, HER, WCS Anthomedusae Milleporidae Millepora MP, HER, WCS * incertae sedis is "of uncertain placement", a term used for a taxonomic group where its broader relationships are unknown or undefined 204

APPENDIX FOUR: Reef Fish Species in the Chumbe Reef Sanctuary

Class: Chondrichthyes (cartilaginous fish)

Sub-class: Elasmobranchii

Year FAMILY GENUS/SPECIES COMMON NAME IUCN status 2016 Recorder Photo ID by recorded Carcharhinus 1 Carcharhinidae Black tip reef shark Near Threatened unknown 2011 Leyendecker & database melanopterus 2 Ginglymostomatidae Nebrius ferrugineus Indian Ocean nurse shark Vulnerable Elisa Alonso 2014 Leyendecker, 2016

3 Torpedinidae Hypnos monopterygius Numbfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 4 Torpedinidae Torpedo fuscomaculata Black-spotted torpedo ray Data Deficient Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker, 2013 5 Torpedinidae Torpedo sinuspersici Marbled electric ray Data Deficient Leyendecker 2016 Leyendecker, 2016 6 Dasyatididae Himantura jenkinsii Jenkin's whipray Vulnerable Jerker Lokrantz 2004 Hendriksson 7 Dasyatididae Himantura undulata Leopard whipray Vulnerable Jerker Lokrantz 2004 no Kuhl's blue-spotted 8 Dasyatididae Neotrygon kuhlii Data Deficient Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker stingray 9 Dasyatididae Taeniura lymma Blue-spotted stingray Near Threatened Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker & database 10 Dasyatididae Taeniura meyeni Black-bloched stingray Vulnerable Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 11 Dasyatididae Urogymnus asperrimus Porcupine stingray Vulnerable Suzanne Mildner 1994 no

Class: Osteichthyes (Bony fish)

Sub-class: Actinopterygii

Year FAMILY GENUS/SPECIES COMMON NAME IUCN status 2016 Recorder Photo ID by recorded 12 Muraenidae Echidna nebulosa Snowflake moray Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 13 Muraenidae Echidna polyzona Ringed moray Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 14 Muraenidae Gymnomuraena zebra Zebra moray Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Rorvik, 2017 Gymnothorax 15 Muraenidae Yellow-edged moray Not assessed Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker flavimarginatus

205

Year FAMILY GENUS/SPECIES COMMON NAME IUCN status 2016 Recorder Photo ID by recorded 16 Muraenidae Gymnothorax griseus Geometric moray Not assessed Lokrantz & Tyler 2004 Leyendecker 17 Muraenidae Gymnothorax javanicus Giant moray Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 18 Muraenidae Gymnothorax meleagris Whitemouth moray Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 19 Muraenidae Gymnothorax pictus Peppered moray Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 20 Muraenidae Gymnothorax zonipectis Barredfin moray Not assessed Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker 21 Muraenidae Rhinomuraena quaesita Ribbon eel Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 22 Muraenidae Scuticaria tigrina Leopard moray Not assessed Leyendecker 2015 Leyendecker 23 Muraenidae Uropterygius marmoratus Marbled reef eel Not assessed Markus Meissl 2013 Markus Meissl 24 Congridae Conger cinereus Moustache conger Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 25 Congridae Gorgasia sillneri Garden eel Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 26 Ophichthidae Myrichthys colubrinus Banded snake eel Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 27 Bothidae Bothus pantherinus Panther flounder Not assessed Markus Meissl 2013 Markus Meissl 28 Soleidae Pardachirus marmoratus Finnless sole Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 29 Plotosidae Plotosus lineatus Striped catfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 30 Synodontidae Saurida gracilis Graceful lizardfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 31 Synodontidae Synodus dermatogenys Sand lizardfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 32 Synodontidae Synodus indicus Indian lizardfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 33 Synodontidae Synodus variegatus Variegated lizardfish Not assessed Tyler 2004 Leyendecker 34 Belonidae Strongylura leiura Banded needlefish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 35 Belonidae Tylosurus crocodilus Crocodile needlefish Least Concern Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker 36 Hemirhamphidae Hemiramphus far Spotted halfbeak Not assessed Tyler 2004 Leyendecker 37 Holocentridae Myripristis hexagona Doubletooth soldierfish Least Concern Tyler 2004 no 38 Holocentridae Myripristis murdjan Blotcheye soldier Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 39 Holocentridae Myripristis violacea Lattice soldierfish Least Concern Jerker Lokrantz 2004 Leyendecker 40 Holocentridae Myripristis vittata White-tipped soldier Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 41 Holocentridae Neoniphon opercularis Clearfin/Blackfin squirrel Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 42 Holocentridae Neoniphon sammara Bloodspot/Spotfin squirrel Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 43 Holocentridae Plectrypops lima Rough scale soldier Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no Sargocentron 44 Holocentridae Tailspot squirrel Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Santamaria Perez 2016 caudimaculatum 45 Holocentridae Sargocentron diadema Crown squirrel Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no Sargocentron 46 Holocentridae Blackspot squirrelfish Least Concern Leyendecker 2016 Leyendecker 2016 melanospilos 206

Year FAMILY GENUS/SPECIES COMMON NAME IUCN status 2016 Recorder Photo ID by recorded 47 Holocentridae Sargocentron spiniferum Long-jawed squirrel Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Santamaria Perez 2016 48 Dactyloperidae Dactyloptena orientalis Oriental Flying Gunard Not assessed Ulli Kloiber 2013 Ulli Kloiber Herklotsichthys 49 Clupeidae Bluestripe herring Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no quadrimaculatus 50 Engraulidae Stolephorus indicus Indian anchovy Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 51 Atherinopsidae Atherina boyeri Big eye sand smelt Least Concern Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker 52 Carapidae Encheliophis homei Silver Pearlfish Not assessed Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker 53 Aulostomidae Aulostomus chinensis Trumpetfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 54 Fistulariidae Fistularia commersonii Flutemouth Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker Solenostomus Frida 55 Solenostomidae Seagrass ghost pipefish Not assessed 2006 Frida Landshammer cyanopterus Landshammer Corythoichthys 56 Syngnathidae Network pipefish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker flavofasciatus 57 Syngnathidae Corythoichthys intestinalis Scribbled pipefish Not assessed Leyendecker 2015 Leyendecker Trachyrhamphus 58 Syngnathidae Double-ended pipefish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Olivia McGrath bicoarctatus 59 Syngnathidae Hippocampus histrix Thorny seahorse Vulnerable Kerstin Erler 2017 Kerstin Erler 60 Centriscidae Aeoliscus punctulatus Speckled shrimpfish Data Deficient Olivia McGrath 2014 Olivia McGrath 61 Scorpaenidae Dendrochirus zebra Zebra turkeyfish Not assessed Leyendecker 2015 Leyendecker 62 Scorpaenidae Inimicus filamentosus Indian Ocean walkman Not assessed Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker Paracentropogon 63 Scorpaenidae Wispy waspfish Not assessed Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker longispinis 64 Scorpaenidae Pterois antennata Antenna lionfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 65 Scorpaenidae Pterois miles Indian lionfish Not assessed Tyler 2004 Leyendecker 66 Scorpaenidae Pterois mombasae Frilfin turkeyfish Not assessed Leyendecker 2015 Leyendecker 67 Scorpaenidae Pterois radiata Clearfin lionfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 68 Scorpaenidae Scorpaenodes guamensis Guam scorpionfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 69 Scorpaenidae Scorpaenodes minor Minor scorpion Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 70 Scorpaenidae Scorpaenopsis barbata Bearded scorpionfish Not assessed Leyendecker 2015 Leyendecker 71 Scorpaenidae Scorpaenopsis diabolus Devil Scorpionfish Not assessed Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker 72 Scorpaenidae Scorpaenopsis oxycephala Tassled scorpion Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 73 Scorpaenidae Scorpaenopsis venosa Raggy Scorpion Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 74 Scorpaenidae Sebastapistes ballieui Spotfin scorpionfish Not assessed Leyendecker 2015 Leyendecker 207

Year FAMILY GENUS/SPECIES COMMON NAME IUCN status 2016 Recorder Photo ID by recorded Sebastapistes 75 Scorpaenidae Yellowspotted scorpionfish Not assessed Tyler 2004 Leyendecker cyanostigma 76 Scorpaenidae Sebastapistes strongia Barchin scorpionfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker Frida 77 Scorpaenidae Taenianotus triacanthus Leaf scorpionfish Not assessed 2006 Frida Landshammer Landshammer 78 Tetrarogidae Ablabys binotatus Redskin waspfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 79 Platycephalidae Papilloculiceps longiceps Indian Ocean crocodilefish Not assessed Lokrantz 2004 Leyendecker 80 Platycephalidae Sunagocia otaitensis Fringelip flathead Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 81 Serranidae Aethaloperca rogaa Redmouth grouper Data Deficient Lokrantz 2004 Leyendecker Anyperodon 82 Serranidae White-lined rockcod Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker leucogrammicus 83 Serranidae Cephalopholis argus Peacock grouper Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 84 Serranidae Cephalopholis boenak Chocolate hind Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 85 Serranidae Cephalopholis leopardus Leopard hind Least Concern Tyler 2004 no 86 Serranidae Cephalopholis miniata Coral grouper Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker Cephalopholis 87 Serranidae Sixspot grouper Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker sexmaculata 88 Serranidae Dermatolepis striolata Smooth grouper Data Deficient Aaron Critchley 2016 Leyendecker 89 Serranidae Epinephelus chlorostigma Brownspotted grouper Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 90 Serranidae Epinephelus fuscoguttatus Brown marbled grouper Near Threatened Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 91 Serranidae Epinephelus lanceolatus Giant grouper Vulnerable Suzanne Mildner 1994 no

92 Serranidae Epinephelus malabaricus Malabar grouper Near Threatened Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 2016 Epinephelus 93 Serranidae Blackspot grouper Data Deficient Suzanne Mildner 1994 no melanostigma 94 Serranidae Epinephelus merra Honeycomb grouper Least Concern Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker 95 Serranidae Epinephelus ongus Specklefin grouper Least Concern Leyendecker 2014 Leyendecker 96 Serranidae Epinephelus spilotoceps Foursaddle grouper Least Concern Tyler 2004 Leyendecker 97 Serranidae Plectropomus laevis Blacksaddle grouper Vulnerable Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 98 Serranidae Plectropomus pessuliferus Leopard grouper Near Threatened Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 99 Serranidae Plectropomus punctatus Marbled coral grouper Data Deficient Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker Whitemargin lyretail 100 Serranidae Variola albimarginata Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no grouper 101 Serranidae Variola louti Lyretail grouper Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 208

Year FAMILY GENUS/SPECIES COMMON NAME IUCN status 2016 Recorder Photo ID by recorded 102 Anthiidae Pseudanthias cooperi Red-bar anthias Not assessed Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker Pseudanthias Lyre-tail fairy basslet/Sea 103 Anthiidae Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker squamipinnis goldie 104 Anthiidae Serranus tigrinus Harlequin bass Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 105 Grammistidae Belonoperca chabanaudi Chabanaud's soapfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 106 Grammistidae Grammistes sexlineatus Six-stripe soapfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 107 Priacanthidae Priacanthus blochii Bloch's bigeye Not assessed Lokrantz 2004 Leyendecker 108 Priacanthidae Priacanthus hamrur Zaiaer's bigeye Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker Apogonichthyoides 109 Apogonidae Twobelt cardinal Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no taeniatus 110 Apogonidae Archamia bilineata Cardinalfish Not assessed Leyendecker 2015 Leyendecker 111 Apogonidae Archamia bleekeri Gon's cardinalfish Not assessed Aaron Critchley 2016 Critchley 2016

112 Apogonidae Archamia fucata Orange-lined cardinalfish Not assessed Tyler 2004 Leyendecker Archamia 113 Apogonidae Mozambique cardinalfish Not assessed Tyler 2004 no mozambiquensis 114 Apogonidae Cheilodipterus arabicus Tiger cardinalfish Not assessed Lokrantz 2004 Leyendecker 115 Apogonidae Cheilodipterus artus Yellow-lined cardinal Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker

116 Apogonidae Cheilodipterus macrodon Largetoothed cardinalfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker

117 Apogonidae Cheilodipterus pygmaios Cardinalfish Not assessed Leyendecker 2015 Leyendecker Cheilodipterus 118 Apogonidae Five-lined cardinal Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker quinquelineatus 119 Apogonidae Nectamia bandanensis Bigeye cardinalfish Not assessed Leyendecker 2015 Leyendecker 120 Apogonidae Nectamia fuscus Samoan cardinal Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 121 Apogonidae Ostorhinchus apogonides Goldbelly cardinalfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 122 Apogonidae Ostorhinchus aureus Sun cardinalfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker

123 Apogonidae Ostorhinchus cooki Blackbanded cardinalfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no

124 Apogonidae Ostorhinchus cyanosoma Yellow-striped cardinal Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no Ostorhinchus 125 Apogonidae Blackstripe cardinal Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no nigrofasciatus 126 Apogonidae Pristiapogon kallopterus Iridescent cardinal Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no

209

Year FAMILY GENUS/SPECIES COMMON NAME IUCN status 2016 Recorder Photo ID by recorded 127 Apogonidae Pristiapogon exostigma Narrowstripe cardinalfish Not assessed Leyendecker 2016 Leyendecker 2016 128 Apogonidae Rhabdamia gracilis Slender cardinal Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 129 Apogonidae Siphamia tubifer Tubifer cardinalfish Not assessed Leyendecker 2015 Leyendecker 130 Apogonidae Zoramia fragilis White streak cardinal Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 131 Apogonidae Zoramia leptacantha Threadfin cardinalfish Not assessed Olivia McGrath 2014 Olivia McGrath 132 Haemulidae Diagramma pictum Painted sweetlip Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker Plectorhinchus 133 Haemulidae Gold-spotted sweetlip Not assessed Tyler 2004 Leyendecker flavomaculatus 134 Haemulidae Plectorhinchus gaterinus Black-spotted sweetlip Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 135 Haemulidae Plectorhinchus gibbosus Brown sweetlip Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 136 Haemulidae Plectorhinchus obscurus Giant sweetlip Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 137 Haemulidae Plectorhinchus picus Spotted sweetlip Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no Plectorhinchus 138 Pomacentridae Barred rubberlip Not assessed Tyler, Elisabeth 2002 Tyler 2002 plagiodesmus 139 Haemulidae Plectorhinchus playfairi Whitebanded sweetlip Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 140 Haemulidae Plectorhinchus schotaf Grey sweetlip Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 141 Haemulidae Plectorhinchus sordidus Black sweetlip Not assessed Leyendecker 2016 Leyendecker 2016 142 Haemulidae Plectorhinchus vittatus Oriental sweetlip Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 143 Lutjanidae Aprion virescens Big jobfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 144 Lutjanidae Lutjanus bohar Twinspot snapper Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 145 Lutjanidae Lutjanus ehrenbergi Ehrenberg's snapper Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 146 Lutjanidae Lutjanus fulviflamma Dory snapper Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 147 Lutjanidae Lutjanus gibbus Humpback snapper Not assessed Dorenbosch 2003 no 148 Lutjanidae Lutjanus lutjanus Bigeye snapper Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 149 Lutjanidae Lutjanus monostigma Onespot snapper Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 150 Lutjanidae Lutjanus rivulatus Scribbled snapper Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 151 Lutjanidae Macolor niger Black snapper Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker Gnathodentex 152 Lethrinidae Yellowspot emperor Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no aureolineatus Gymnocranius 153 Lethrinidae Blue lined large eye bream Not assessed Leyendecker 2015 Leyendecker grandoculis 154 Lethrinidae Lethrinus amboinensis Ambon emperor Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 155 Lethrinidae Lethrinus borbonicus Snubnose emperor Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 210

Year FAMILY GENUS/SPECIES COMMON NAME IUCN status 2016 Recorder Photo ID by recorded 156 Lethrinidae Lethrinus conchyliatus Red axel emperor Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 157 Lethrinidae Lethrinus erythracanthus Orange-fin emperor Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 158 Lethrinidae Lethrinus harak Blackspot emperor Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 159 Lethrinidae Lethrinus lentjan Pink-ear emperor Not assessed Tyler 2004 no 160 Lethrinidae Lethrinus mahsena Sky emperor Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 161 Lethrinidae Lethrinus microdon Small-tooth emperor Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 162 Lethrinidae Lethrinus miniatus Sweetlip emperor Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 163 Lethrinidae Lethrinus nebulosus Spangled emperor Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 164 Lethrinidae Lethrinus obsoletus Orange-stripe emperor Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 165 Lethrinidae Lethrinus olivaceus Longface emperor Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 166 Lethrinidae Lethrinus rubrioperculatus Redgill emperor Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 167 Lethrinidae Lethrinus variegatus Slender emperor Not assessed Dorenbosch 2003 no 168 Lethrinidae Lethrinus xanthochilus Yellowlip emperor Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 169 Lethrinidae Monotaxis grandoculis Bigeye emperor Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 170 Nemipteridae Scolopsis bimaculata Thumbprint spinecheek Not assessed Tyler 2004 no 171 Nemipteridae Scolopsis frenata Bridled spinecheek Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 172 Nemipteridae Scolopsis ghanam Dotted spinecheek Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 173 Nemipteridae Scolopsis trilineata Threelined monocle bream Not assessed Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker 174 Sparoidae Acanthopagrus latus Yellowfin seabream Data Deficient Markus Meissl 2013 Leyendecker 175 Caesionidae Caesio caerulaurea Scissortail fusilier Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 176 Caesionidae Caesio lunaris Lunar fusilier Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 177 Caesionidae Caesio teres Yellowback fusilier Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 178 Caesionidae Caesio xanthalytos Goldsash fusilier Not assessed Leyendecker 2016 Leyendecker 179 Caesionidae Caesio xanthonota Yellowtop fusilier Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 180 Caesionidae Pterocaesio capricornis Southern fusilier Not assessed Leyendecker 2015 Leyendecker 181 Caesionidae Pterocaesio chrysozona Goldband fusilier Not assessed Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker 182 Caesionidae Pterocaesio pisang Banana fusilier Not assessed Lokrantz 2004 Critchley 183 Caesionidae Pterocaesio tile Bluestreak fusilier Not assessed Leyendecker 2016 Leyendecker 184 Kyphosidae Kyphosus cinerascens Snubnose rudderfish Least Concern Leyendecker 2015 Leyendecker 185 Kyphosidae Kyphosus vaigiensis Brassy chub Least Concern Lokrantz 2004 Leyendecker 186 Ephippidae Platax orbicularis Circular batfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 187 Ephippidae Platax pinnatus Shaded batfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no

211

Year FAMILY GENUS/SPECIES COMMON NAME IUCN status 2016 Recorder Photo ID by recorded 188 Ephippidae Platax teira Longfin batfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 189 Ephippidae Tripterodon orbis African spadefish Not assessed Kim Nesbitt 2014 Kim Nesbitt Mulloidichthys 190 Mullidae Yellowstripe goatfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no flavolineatus Mulloidichthys 191 Mullidae Yellowfin goatfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no vanicolensis 192 Mullidae Parupeneus barberinus Blackstripe goatfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 193 Mullidae Parupeneus ciliatus White-lined goatfish Not assessed Tyler 2004 no 194 Mullidae Parupeneus cyclostomus Yellow saddle goatfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 195 Mullidae Parupeneus macronemus Longbarbel goatfish Not assessed Tyler 2004 Leyendecker 196 Mullidae Parupeneus pleurostigma Sidespot goatfish Not assessed Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker 197 Mullidae Parupeneus rubescens Ruby goatfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 198 Mullidae Upeneus tragula Freckled goatfish Not assessed Tyler 2004 no 199 Pomacanthidae Centropyge acanthops African dwarf-angelfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 200 Pomacanthidae Centropyge bispinosa Two-spined angel Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 201 Pomacanthidae Centropyge multispinis Multispined angel Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 202 Pomacanthidae Pomacanthus asfur Yellowband angel Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 203 Pomacanthidae Pomacanthus chrysurus Earspot angel Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 204 Pomacanthidae Pomacanthus imperator Emperor angel Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 205 Pomacanthidae Pomacanthus maculosus Yellowbar angelfish Least Concern Tyler 2004 no Pomacanthus 206 Pomacanthidae Semicircle angel Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker semicirculatus Pomacanthus 207 Pomacanthidae Blueface angel Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no xanthometopon 208 Pomacanthidae Pygoplites diacanthus Regal angel Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 209 Chaetodontidae Chaetodon auriga Threadfin butterfly Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 210 Chaetodontidae Chaetodon bennetti Bennet's butterfly Data Deficient Suzanne Mildner 1994 Ulli Kloiber 211 Chaetodontidae Chaetodon falcula Sickle butterfly Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 212 Chaetodontidae Chaetodon guttatissimus Spotted butterfly Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 213 Chaetodontidae Chaetodon kleinii White-spotted butterfly Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 214 Chaetodontidae Chaetodon lineolatus Lined butterfly Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 215 Chaetodontidae Chaetodon lunula Racoon butterfly Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 216 Chaetodontidae Chaetodon melannotus Black-backed butterfly Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 212

Year FAMILY GENUS/SPECIES COMMON NAME IUCN status 2016 Recorder Photo ID by recorded 217 Chaetodontidae Chaetodon meyeri Meyer's butterflyfish Least Concern Tyler 2004 Leyendecker 218 Chaetodontidae Chaetodon speculum Ovalspot butterfly Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 219 Chaetodontidae Chaetodon trifascialis Chevronned butterfly Near Threatened Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 220 Chaetodontidae Chaetodon trifasciatus Redfin/melon butterfly Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 221 Chaetodontidae Chaetodon vagabundus Vagabond butterflyfish Least Concern Tyler 2004 no Chaetodon 222 Chaetodontidae Yellowhead butterfly Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker xanthocephalus 223 Chaetodontidae Chaetodon zanzibarensis Zanzibar butterfly Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 224 Chaetodontidae Forcipiger longirostris Longnose butterfly Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 225 Chaetodontidae Heniochus acuminatus Longfin bannerfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 226 Chaetodontidae Heniochus monoceros Masked bannerfish Least Concern Lokrantz 2004 Leyendecker 227 Cirrhitidae Cirrhitichthys oxycephalus Spotted hawkfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 228 Cirrhitidae Paracirrhites arcatus Arc-eye hawkfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker Freckled/ blackside 229 Cirrhitidae Paracirrhites forsteri Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker hawkfish Parapriacanthus 230 Pempheridae Slender sweeper Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker ransonneti 231 Pempheridae Pempheris oualensis Copper sweeper Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 232 Pempheridae Pempheris schwenkii Schwenk's sweeper Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 233 Pempheridae Pempheris vanicolensis Cave sweeper Not assessed Lokrantz 2004 Leyendecker Dusky damsel/ Yellowtail 234 Pomacentridae Abudefduf notatus Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no sergeant Abudefduf 235 Pomacentridae 7-bar or banded sergeant Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no septemfasciatus 236 Pomacentridae Abudefduf sexfasciatus Scissortail sergeant Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 237 Pomacentridae Abudefduf sordidus Spot sergeant Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 238 Pomacentridae Abudefduf sparoides False-eye damsel Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 239 Pomacentridae Abudefduf vaigiensis Sergeant major Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 240 Pomacentridae Amblyglyphidodon indicus Maldives damselfish Not assessed Leyendecker 2015 Leyendecker Amblyglyphidodon 241 Pomacentridae White-belly damsel Not assessed Tyler 2004 no leucogaster 242 Pomacentridae Amphiprion akallopisos Skunk clown Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 243 Pomacentridae Amphiprion allardi Allard's anemonefish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker

213

Year FAMILY GENUS/SPECIES COMMON NAME IUCN status 2016 Recorder Photo ID by recorded 244 Pomacentridae Chromis agilis Agile chromis Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 2016 245 Pomacentridae Chromis atripectoralis Black-axil chromis Not assessed Lokrantz 2004 Leyendecker 246 Pomacentridae Chromis caerulea Blue puller Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 247 Pomacentridae Chromis dimidiata Chocolate dip chromis Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 248 Pomacentridae Chromis lepidolepis Scaly chromis Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 249 Pomacentridae Chromis leucura White-tail chromis Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 250 Pomacentridae Chromis nigroanalis Kenyan chromis Not assessed Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker 251 Pomacentridae Chromis nigrura Blacktail chromis Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 252 Pomacentridae Chromis opercularis Doublebar chromis Not assessed Tyler 2004 Leyendecker 253 Pomacentridae Chromis pembae Yellow edge chromis Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 254 Pomacentridae Chromis ternatensis Golden chromis Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 255 Pomacentridae Chromis viridis Blue-green chromis Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 256 Pomacentridae Chromis weberi Weber's chromis Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 257 Pomacentridae Chromis xutha Buff chromis Not assessed Tyler 2004 no 258 Pomacentridae Chrysiptera annulata Footballer damsel Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 259 Pomacentridae Chrysiptera biocellata Twinspot damselfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 260 Pomacentridae Chrysiptera brownriggii Surge damselfish Not assessed Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker 261 Pomacentridae Chrysiptera glauca Grey demoiselle Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 2016 262 Pomacentridae Chrysiptera rollandi Rollands demoiselle Not assessed Leyendecker 2015 Leyendecker 263 Pomacentridae Chrysiptera unimaculata Onespot damsel Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 264 Pomacentridae Dascyllus aruanus Zebra humbug Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 265 Pomacentridae Dascyllus carneus Indian dascyllus Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 266 Pomacentridae Dascyllus trimaculatus Domino dascyllus Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 267 Pomacentridae Neoglyphidodon melas Bowtie damselfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 268 Pomacentridae Neopomacentrus azysron Yellowtail damsel Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker Neopomacentrus 269 Pomacentridae Regal demoiselle Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker cyanomos 270 Pomacentridae Plectroglyphidodon dickii Narrowbar damsel Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker Plectroglyphidodon Stop-start/bright-eye 271 Pomacentridae Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no imparipennis damsel Plectroglyphidodon 272 Pomacentridae Johnston damselfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker johnstonianus

214

Year FAMILY GENUS/SPECIES COMMON NAME IUCN status 2016 Recorder Photo ID by recorded Plectroglyphidodon 273 Pomacentridae Jewel damsel Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker lacrymatus Plectroglyphidodon 274 Pomacentridae Sash damsel Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 2016 leucozonus 275 Pomacentridae Pomacentrus aquilus Dark damsel Leyendecker 2016 Leyendecker 2016 276 Pomacentridae Pomacentrus baenschi East africa's damsel Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Elizabeth Tyler 277 Pomacentridae Pomacentrus caeruleus Careulean damsel Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 278 Pomacentridae Pomacentrus indicus Indian damsel Leyendecker 2016 Leyendecker 2016 279 Pomacentridae Pomacentrus leptus Slender damsel Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 280 Pomacentridae Pomacentrus pavo Sapphire damsel Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 281 Pomacentridae Pomacentrus similis Similar damsel Not assessed Leyendecker 2015 Leyendecker 282 Pomacentridae Pomacentrus sulfureus Sulfur damsel Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 283 Pomacentridae Pomacentrus trichrourus Yellowtail damsel Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 284 Pomacentridae Pomacentrus trilineatus Three-line damsel Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 285 Pomacentridae Pomacentrus tripunctatus Threespot damsel Leyendecker 2016 Leyendecker 2016 286 Pomacentridae Pomacentrus vaiuli Princess damsel Not assessed Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker 287 Pomacentridae Stegastes albifasciatus Whitebanded gregory Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 288 Pomacentridae Stegastes fasciolatus Pacific gregory Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 289 Pomacentridae Stegastes nigricans Black damsel Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 290 Gerreidae Gerres oyena Common mojarra Least Concern Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker Anampses 291 Labridae Blue-spotted wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker caeruleopunctatus 292 Labridae Anampses lineatus Lined wrasse Data Deficient Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 293 Labridae Anampses melanurus White-spotted wrasse Data Deficient Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 294 Labridae Anampses meleagrides Chequered wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 295 Labridae Anampses twistii Yellow-breasted wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 296 Labridae Bodianus anthioides Lyretail hogfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Critchley 297 Labridae Bodianus axillaris Axilspot hogfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 298 Labridae Bodianus bilunulatus Saddleback hogfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 299 Labridae Bodianus diana Dianaa's hogfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 300 Labridae Cheilinus chlorourus Floral wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 301 Labridae Cheilinus fasciatus Redbreasted wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker

215

Year FAMILY GENUS/SPECIES COMMON NAME IUCN status 2016 Recorder Photo ID by recorded 302 Labridae Cheilinus oxycephalus Snooty wrasse Least Concern Tyler 2004 Leyendecker 303 Labridae Cheilinus trilobatus Tripletail maori wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 304 Labridae Cheilinus undulatus Humphead wrasse Endangered Tyler 2004 no 305 Labridae Cheilio inermis Cigar wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 306 Labridae Cirrhilabrus exquisitus Exquisite wrasse Data Deficient Tyler 2004 Leyendecker 307 Labridae Coris aygula Clown coris Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 308 Labridae Coris batuensis Batu coris Least Concern Tyler 2004 no 309 Labridae Coris caudimacula Spottail coris Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 310 Labridae Coris cuvieri African coris Least Concern Lokrantz 2004 Leyendecker 311 Labridae Coris formosa Indian sand wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 312 Labridae Coris gaimard Yellowtail coris Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 313 Labridae Coris pictoides Blackstripe coris Least Concern Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker 314 Labridae Epibulus insidiator Slingjaw wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 315 Labridae Gomphosus caeruleus Indian ocean bird wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 316 Labridae Halichoeres hortulanus Checkerboard wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 317 Labridae Halichoeres iridis Rainbow wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 318 Labridae Halichoeres leucoxanthus Whitebelly wrasse Least Concern Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker 319 Labridae Halichoeres marginatus Dusky wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 320 Labridae Halichoeres nebulosus Nebulosus wrasse Least Concern Leyendecker 2015 Leyendecker 321 Labridae Halichoeres scapularis Zigzag wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 322 Labridae Halichoeres zeylonicus Goldstripe wrasse Least Concern Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker 323 Labridae Hemigymnus fasciatus Blackedge thicklip Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 324 Labridae Hemigymnus melapterus Thicklip wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 325 Labridae Hologymnosus annulatus Ring wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 326 Labridae Hologymnosus doliatus Longface wrasse Least Concern Tyler 2004 Leyendecker 327 Labridae Labrichthys unilineatus Tubelip wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 328 Labridae Labroides bicolor Bicolor cleaner wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 329 Labridae Labroides dimidiatus Cleaner wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 330 Labridae Larabicus quadrilineatus Four-line wrasse Data Deficient Suzanne Mildner 1994 no Macropharyngodon 331 Labridae Vermiculate wrasse Least Concern Tyler 2004 Leyendecker bipartitus 332 Labridae Novaculichthys taeniourus Rockmover wrasse Least Concern Tyler 2004 Leyendecker 333 Labridae Oxycheilinus arenatus Speckled maori wrasse Least Concern Lokrantz 2004 no 216

Year FAMILY GENUS/SPECIES COMMON NAME IUCN status 2016 Recorder Photo ID by recorded 334 Labridae Oxycheilinus digramma Bandcheek wrasse Least Concern Tyler 2004 Leyendecker 335 Labridae Oxycheilinus mentalis Mental wrasse Least Concern Tyler 2004 no 336 Labridae Oxycheilinus orientalis Oriental maori wrasse Leyendecker 2016 Leyendecker 2016 337 Labridae Pseudocheilinus evanidus Striated wrasse Least Concern Tyler 2004 no Pseudocheilinus 338 Labridae Six-line wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker hexataenia 339 Labridae Pseudodax moluccans Chiseltooth wrasse Leyendecker 2016 Leyendecker 2016 340 Labridae Pteragogus flagellifer Cocktail wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 341 Labridae Pteragogus pelycus Sideburn wrasse Least Concern Lokrantz 2004 no 342 Labridae Stethojulis albovittata Blue-lined wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 343 Labridae Stethojulis bandanensis Red-shoulder wrasse Least Concern Lokrantz 2004 no 344 Labridae Stethojulis interrupta Cutribbon wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 345 Labridae Stethojulis strigiventer Three-ribbon wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no Thalassoma 346 Labridae Twotone wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker amblycephalum 347 Labridae Thalassoma hardwicke 6-bar wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 348 Labridae Thalassoma hebraicum Goldbar wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 349 Labridae Thalassoma jansenii Jansen's wrasse Least Concern Leyendecker 2014 Leyendecker 350 Labridae Thalassoma lunare Crescent wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 351 Labridae Thalassoma purpureum Surge wrasse Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 352 Scaridae Calotomus carolinus Stareye parrotfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 353 Scaridae Cetoscarus bicolor Bicolor parrotfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 354 Scaridae Chlorurus atrilunula Black crescent parrotfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 2016 355 Scaridae Chlorurus japanensis Pale bullethead parrotfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 356 Scaridae Chlorurus sordidus Bullethead parrotfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker Chlorurus Indian ocean steephead 357 Scaridae Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker strongylocephalus parrotfish 358 Scaridae Hipposcarus harid Indian longnose parrotfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 359 Scaridae Leptoscarus vaigiensis Seagrass parrotfish Least Concern Lokrantz 2004 Leyendecker 360 Scaridae Scarus falcipinnis Sicklefin parrotfish Leyendecker 2016 Leyendecker 2016 361 Scaridae Scarus ferrugineus Rusty parrotfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 362 Scaridae Scarus frenatus Bridled parrotfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 363 Scaridae Scarus ghobban Blue-barred parrotfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 217

Year FAMILY GENUS/SPECIES COMMON NAME IUCN status 2016 Recorder Photo ID by recorded 364 Scaridae Scarus globiceps Violet-lined parrotfish Least Concern Tyler 2004 no 365 Scaridae Scarus niger Swarthy parrotfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 366 Scaridae Scarus psittacus Palenose parrotfish Least Concern Tyler 2004 Critchley 367 Scaridae Scarus rubroviolaceus Redlip parrotfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 368 Scaridae Scarus russelii Russel's parrotfish Least Concern Tyler 2004 no 369 Scaridae Scarus scaber Dusky-capped parrotfish Least Concern Tyler 2004 Leyendecker 370 Scaridae Scarus schlegeli Yellowband parrotfish Least Concern Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker 371 Scaridae Scarus tricolor Tricolor parrotfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 372 Scaridae Scarus viridifucatus Greenlip parrotfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 2016 373 Scaridae Sparisoma rubripinne Redfin parrotfish Least Concern Leyendecker 2016 Leyendecker 2016 374 Sphyraenidae Sphyraena barracuda Great barracuda Least Concern Dorenbosch 2003 no 375 Sphyraenidae Sphyraena flavicauda Yellowtail barracuda Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 376 Sphyraenidae Sphyraena forsteri Blackspot barracuda Not assessed Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker 377 Sphyraenidae Sphyraena qenie Blackfin barracuda Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 378 Pinguipedidae Parapercis hexophtalma Speckled sandperch Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 379 Blenniidae Aspidontus taeniatus "Cleaner wrasse mimic" Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 380 Blenniidae Blenniella chrysospilos Red spotted blenny Least Concern Leyendecker 2016 Leyendecker 2016 381 Blenniidae Cirripectes castaneus Chest-nut eyelash blenny Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 382 Blenniidae Cirripectes stigmaticus Redstreaked blenny Least Concern Tyler 2004 Leyendecker 383 Blenniidae Exallias brevis Leopard blenny Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 384 Blenniidae Istiblennius lineatus Lined rockskipper Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no Meiacanthus 385 Blenniidae Mozambique fangblenny Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker mossambicus Plagiotremus 386 Blenniidae Bluestriped fangblenny Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 2016 rhinorhynchos Plagiotremus 387 Blenniidae Scale-eating fangblenny Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker tapeinosoma 388 Gobiidae Amblyeleotris steinitzi Steinitz' prawn-goby Not assessed Tyler 2004 no 389 Gobiidae Amblyeleotris sungami Magnus' prawn-goby Not assessed Tyler 2004 no 390 Gobiidae Amblyeleotris wheeleri Burgundy partner goby Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker Cryptocentrus 391 Gobiidae Harlequin prawn-goby Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no caeruleopunctatus 392 Gobiidae Cryptocentrus lutheri Luther's prawn goby Not assessed Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker 218

Year FAMILY GENUS/SPECIES COMMON NAME IUCN status 2016 Recorder Photo ID by recorded Cryptocentrus 393 Gobiidae Blue-speckled goby Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no octofasciatus 394 Gobiidae Cryptocentrus strigilliceps Target prawn-goby Not assessed Tyler 2004 no 395 Gobiidae Eviota guttata Spotted dwarfgoby Not assessed Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker 396 Gobiidae Exyrias belissimus Mud reef-goby Not assessed Tyler 2004 no 397 Gobiidae Fusigobius neophytus White spotted sand goby Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 398 Gobiidae Gnatholepis cauerensis Gladiator goby Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 399 Gobiidae Gobiodon citrinus Citron goby Not assessed Tyler 2004 no 400 Gobiidae Istigobius decoratus Decorator goby Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 401 Gobiidae Koumansetta hectori Hector's goby Not assessed Lokrantz 2004 no no reference 402 Gobiidae Lotilia graciliosa Whitecap goby Not assessed found 403 Gobiidae Valenciennea helsdingenii Two stripe goby Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 404 Gobiidae Valenciennea strigata Blue-streak goby Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 405 Microdesmidae Ptereleotris evides Scissortail dart goby Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 406 Acanthuridae Acanthurus auranticavus Orange socket surgeon Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 407 Acanthuridae Acanthurus bariene Roundspot surgeon Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 408 Acanthuridae Acanthurus blochii Ringtail surgeon Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 409 Acanthuridae Acanthurus dussumieri Eyestripe surgeonfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Critchley 410 Acanthuridae Acanthurus leucosternon Powderblue surgeon Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 411 Acanthuridae Acanthurus lineatus Lined surgeonfish Least Concern Lokrantz 2004 Leyendecker 412 Acanthuridae Acanthurus mata Elongate surgeonfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 413 Acanthuridae Acanthurus nigricauda Epaulette surgeonfish Least Concern Lokrantz 2004 Leyendecker 414 Acanthuridae Acanthurus nigrofuscus Dusky surgeon Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 415 Acanthuridae Acanthurus nubilus Bluelined surgeon Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 416 Acanthuridae Acanthurus tennenti Circled-spine surgeonfish Least Concern Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker 417 Acanthuridae Acanthurus thompsoni Black&White surgeon Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Critchley 418 Acanthuridae Acanthurus triostegus Convict surgeonfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 419 Acanthuridae Acanthurus xanthopterus Yellofin surgeonfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 420 Acanthuridae Ctenochaetus binotatus Yellowstripe surgeon Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 421 Acanthuridae Ctenochaetus striatus Lined bristletooth Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 422 Acanthuridae Ctenochaetus truncatus Indian goldring bristletooth Least Concern Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker 423 Acanthuridae Naso annulatus White margin unicorn Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 2016 219

Year FAMILY GENUS/SPECIES COMMON NAME IUCN status 2016 Recorder Photo ID by recorded 424 Acanthuridae Naso brevirostris Spotted unicornfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 425 Acanthuridae Naso caeruleacauda Bluetail unicornfish Least Concern Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker 426 Acanthuridae Naso elegans Orangespine unicornfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 427 Acanthuridae Naso fageni Horseface unicornfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 428 Acanthuridae Naso hexacanthus Blacktongue unicorn Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 429 Acanthuridae Naso unicornis Bluespine unicorn Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 430 Acanthuridae Naso vlamingii Bignose unicornfish Least Concern Lokrantz 2004 no 431 Acanthuridae Zebrasoma desjardinii Sailfin tang Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 432 Acanthuridae Zebrasoma scopas Brushtail tang Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 433 Zanclidae Zanclus cornutus Moorish idol Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 434 Siganidae Siganus argenteus Fork-tailed rabbit Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 435 Siganidae Siganus stellatus Starry rabbit Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker African white-spotted 436 Siganidae Siganus sutor Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker rabbit 437 Carangidae Carangoides ferdau Striped/blue trevally Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker Carangoides 438 Carangidae Gold-fleck trevally Not assessed Suzanne Mildner no orthogrammus 439 Carangidae Carangoides plagiotaenia Barcheek trevally Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 440 Carangidae Caranx melampygus Bluefin trevally Not assessed Lokrantz 2004 Leyendecker 441 Carangidae Caranx sexfasciatus Bigeye trevally Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 not from Chumbe 442 Carangidae Elagatis bipinnulata Rainbow runner Least Concern Omari Nyange 1994 no 443 Carangidae Gnathanodon speciosus Golden Pilot Jack Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Ulli Kloiber 444 Carangidae Scomberoides lysan Leatherback trevally Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 445 Carangidae Scomberoides tol Needlescaled queenfish Not assessed unknown no 446 Carangidae Selar boops Oxeye scad Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 447 Carangidae Seriola dumerili Greater amberjack Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 448 Echeneidae Echeneis naucrates Striped remora Suzanne Mildner 1994 Kloiber 2006 449 Balistidae Balistapus undulatus Orange-striped triggerfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 450 Balistidae Balistoides conspicillum Clown triggerfish Not assessed Ulli Kloiber 2014 Ulli Kloiber 451 Balistidae Balistoides viridescens Titan triggerfish Not assessed Tyler 2004 Leyendecker 452 Balistidae Melichthys indicus Indian triggerfish Not assessed Leyendecker 2013 Leyendecker 453 Balistidae Melichthys niger Black triggerfish Least Concern Lokrantz 2010 Leyendecker 454 Balistidae Sufflamen chrysopterum Halfmoon triggerfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 220

Year FAMILY GENUS/SPECIES COMMON NAME IUCN status 2016 Recorder Photo ID by recorded 455 Balistidae Sufflamen fraenatum Bridled triggerfish Least Concern Tyler 2004 no 456 Monacanthidae Aluterus scriptus Scribbled filefish Least Concern Lokrantz 2004 Leyendecker Black brush-sided/ broom 457 Monacanthidae Amanses scopas Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker filefish 458 Monacanthidae Cantherhines dumerilii White-spotted filefish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 459 Monacanthidae Cantherhines pardalis Honeycomb filefish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker Oxymonacanthus 460 Monacanthidae Longnose filefish Vulnerable Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker longirostris Blacksaddle filefish, False 461 Monacanthidae Paraluteres prionurus Least Concern Leyendecker 2015 Leyendecker puffer 462 Monacanthidae Pervagor janthinosoma Earspot filefish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 463 Ostraciidae Ostracion cubicus Cube boxfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Hendriksson 464 Ostraciidae Ostracion meleagris Whitespotted boxfish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 465 Diodontidae Diodon hystrix Common porcupinefish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 466 Diodontidae Diodon liturosus Masked porcupinefish Not assessed Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 467 Tetraodontidae Arothron hispidus Whitespotted pufferfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 468 Tetraodontidae Arothron mappa Map puffer Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 469 Tetraodontidae Arothron meleagris Guineafowl puffer Least Concern Leyendecker 2016 Leyendecker 2016 470 Tetraodontidae Arothron nigropunctatus Blackspotted puffer Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 471 Tetraodontidae Arothron stellatus Giant pufferfish Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 no 472 Tetraodontidae Canthigaster bennetti Bennet's toby Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 473 Tetraodontidae Canthigaster solandri Solander's toby Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker 474 Tetraodontidae Canthigaster valentini Black-saddled toby Least Concern Suzanne Mildner 1994 Leyendecker

221

APPENDIX FIVE: Preliminary Macroalgae inventory

Nr. Phylum GENERA (spp. where ID'd) Source 1 Chlorophyta Avrainvillea obscura KE, TB 2 Chlorophyta Boodlea composita KE, TB 3 Chlorophyta Caulerpa spp. TB 4 Chlorophyta Chaetomorpha crassa TB 5 Chlorophyta Cladophoropsis sundanensis TB 6 Chlorophyta Codium geppiorum TB 7 Chlorophyta Dictyospheria cavernosa TB, TM 8 Chlorophyta Halimeda spp. UK, TM 9 Chlorophyta Ulva pulchra TB 10 Cyanophyta Lyngbya sp. KE 11 Phaeophyta Dictyota TM 12 Phaeophyta Cystoseira myrica TB 13 Phaeophyta Padina sp. TB 14 Phaeophyta Sargassum sp. TB, TM 15 Phaeophyta Sarconema filiforme TB 16 Phaeophyta Turbinaria sp. KE, TM 17 Rhodophyta Amphiroa TM 18 Rhodophyta Dasya elongata TB Sources: Author Year 19 Rhodophyta Dictyurus purpurascens TB 20 Rhodophyta Gelidiella acerosa TB JR Macroalgae abundance, Chumbe Island Janna Rearick 2000 21 Rhodophyta Hypnea TM KE Fauna and Flora of Chumbe Island's seagrass Beds Kari Edwards 2001 22 Rhodophyta Jania TM TB Algal zonation on Chumbe Island Tara Businski 2001 23 Rhodophyta Leveillea jungermanniodes TB UK Chumbe Conservation Manager Ulli Kloiber 2012 24 Rhodophyta Polysiphonia denudata TB TM Wildlife Conservation Soceity (WCS) monitoring Tim McClanahan 1997-2015 25 Rhodophyta Sarconema filiforme TB 26 Rhodophyta Sporolithon sp. TB 27 Rhodophyta Corallinaceae TB

222

APPENDIX SIX: Vascular Plants in the Chumbe Forest Reserve

Nr. GENUS/SPECIES COMMON NAME Source 1 Acalypha fruticosa Shrub hear AG 2 Acridocarpus zanzibaricus Climber yello AG 3 Acylobotrys petersiana Rubber vine AG 4 Adansonia digitata Baobab AG, KU 5 Adenia gummifera Green liane AG 6 Allophylus parvilei no common name / TBD AG 7 Asparagus africanus no common name / TBD AG 8 Boerhavia repens no common name / TBD AG 9 Cassytha filiformis Love vine AG 10 Casuarina equisetifolia Casuarina/Australian Beefwood AG, KU 11 Cissus rotundifolia Arabian wax leave AG, IL 12 Chlorophytum gallabatense no common name / TBD AG 13 Cledendron globrium no common name / TBD AG 14 Cledendron sp no common name / TBD AG 15 Climatis sp no common name / TBD AG 16 Cocos nucifera Coconut Palm AG, KU 17 Cyphostemma adenocaula no common name / TBD AG 18 Diospyros consolatae no common name / TBD AG 19 Drypetes natalensis no common name / TBD AG 20 Ehretia amoena no common name / TBD AG 21 Euclea natalensis no common name / TBD AG 22 Euclea schimperi no common name / TBD AG 23 Eugenia capensis no common name / TBD AG 24 Euclea fruticosa no common name / TBD AG 25 Euphorbia nyikea no common name / TBD AG, KU 26 Euphorbia tirucalli Milk bush AG, KU 27 Ficus elastica no common name / TBD AG 28 Ficus lutea no common name / TBD AG, BS 29 Ficus scassellatii no common name / TBD AG 30 Flacourtia indica Batoka plum AG 31 Flueggea virosa White-berry bush AG, BS 32 Grewia bicolor no common name / TBD AG 33 Grewia mollis no common name / TBD AG 34 Guettarda speciosa no common name / TBD AG 35 Ipomoea pes-caprae Beach morning glory AG, KK 36 Lannea schweinfurthii no common name / TBD AG 37 Laptina platyphyla no common name / TBD AG 38 Lecaniodiscus fraxinifolius no common name / TBD AG 39 Macphersonia gracilis no common name / TBD AG, KK 40 Maytenus mossambicensis Red forest spike-thorn AG, BS

223

Nr. GENUS/SPECIES COMMON NAME Source 41 Mimusops fruticosa no common name / TBD AG 42 Monodora grandidieri no common name / TBD AG 43 Mondia ocunuta no common name / TBD AG 44 Monanthotaxis fornicata no common name / TBD AG 45 Mystroxylon aethiopicum Milk bush AG, KU 46 Ochna thomasiana Mikey Mouse Plant AG 47 Ocimum sp. Mosquito bush AG, BS 48 Panadanus kirkii Screw pine AG, KU 49 Polysphaeria parvifolia no common name / TBD AG, BS 50 Pseuderanthemum no common name / TBD AG hildebrandtii 51 Psiadia arabica no common name / TBD AG, BS 52 Psycotria bibebectrum no common name / TBD AG 53 Rhoicissus revoilii no common name / TBD AG, BS 54 Rhus longipes no common name / TBD AG 55 Rhus natalensis Climber trifolia AG 56 Salacia elegans no common name / TBD AG 57 Sansevieria kirkii Mother in law tongue AG, KU, EK 58 Scadoxus multiflorus Fireball lily AG, KU 59 Sorindeia madagascariensis no common name / TBD AG 60 Sideroxylon inerme Milkwood Tree AG 61 Strychnos spinosa no common name / TBD AG 62 Suregada zanzibariensis Woodland suregada AG, BS 63 Synaptolepis kirkii no common name / TBD AG, BS 64 Tamarindus indica Tamarind AG, KU 65 Tarenna graveolens no common name / TBD AG 66 Terminalia boivinii no common name / TBD AG, BS 67 Terminalia catappa Indian Almond AG, KU 68 Terminalia fatrea no common name / TBD AG 69 Turraea floribunda no common name / TBD AG 70 Tradescantia spathacea Boat lily EK 71 Thylachium africanum no common name / TBD AG 72 Uvariodendron kirkii no common name / TBD AG, SG

Sources:

BS Bayliss J & Stubblefied LK, 1993: Preliminary Results of a Biological Survey of Chumbe KU Köhler U, 1995: Preliminary list of plants on Chumbe Island IL Iles D.B., 1995: Chumbe Island Nature Trail. KK Koehler P and Koehler U, draft: Forest Reserve Chumbe Island CM Castle G. & Mileto R, 1995: Personal observations. Sarah Graham, 2003: Distribution of Uvariodendron kirkii on Chumbe Island. SG AG Antony D. Gillingham, 2010: Chumbe Island Coral Park Forest Monitoring Programme EK Enock Kayagambe, Conservation & Education Assistant, field observations 2016

224

APPENDIX SEVEN: Bird diversity in the Chumbe Forest Reserve

Status on Nr. Family GENUS/SPECIES COMMON NAME IUCN status 2016 Recorded by Chumbe 1 Accipitridae Accipiter tachiro African Goshawk V Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 2 Accipitridae Elanus caeruleus Black-shouldered Kite V Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 3 Accipitridae Gypohierax angolensis Palm-nut vulger C Least concern Carius (2016) 4 Accipitridae Haliaeetus vocifer African Fish Eagle RB Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 5 Acrocephalidae Acrocephalus baeticatus African Reed Warbler RBC Not assessed Dudley Isles (1995) Eastern Olivaceous 6 Acrocephalidae Hippolais pallida V Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) Warbler 7 Alcedinidae Ceryle rudis Pied Kingfisher RC Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 8 Alcedinidae Halcyon senegaloides Mangrove Kingfisher RBC Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 9 Alcedinidae Ispidina picta African Pygmy Kingfisher MU Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 10 Apodidae Apus affinis Little Swift RB C Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 11 Apodidae Apus apus European Swift MU Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 12 Apodidae Cypsiurus balasiensis Palm Swift MU Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 13 Ardeidae Ardea cinerea Grey Heron MU Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 14 Ardeidae Bubulcus ibis Cattle Egret MU Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 15 Ardeidae Butorides striata Green-backed Heron MU Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 16 Ardeidae Egretta dimorpha Dimorphic Egret RBC Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 17 Ardeidae Egretta garzetta Little Egret V Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 18 Burhinidae Burhinus vermiculatus Water Thick-knee MU Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 19 Caprimulgidae Caprimulgus europaeus Eurasian Nightjar V Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) Square-tailed (Gabon) 20 Caprimulgidae Caprimulgus fossii U Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) Nightjar 21 Charadriidae Charadrius hiaticula Ringed Plover MC Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 225

Status on Nr. Family GENUS/SPECIES COMMON NAME IUCN status 2016 Recorded by Chumbe 22 Charadriidae Charadrius leschenaultii Greater Sand Plover MU Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 23 Charadriidae Charadrius mongolus Lesser Sand Plover V Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 24 Charadriidae Pluvialis squatarola Grey Plover MC Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 25 Columbidae Streptopelia capicola Ring-necked Dove V Least concern Heather Skillings (2000) 26 Columbidae Streptopelia semitorquata Red-eyed Dove RBC Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 27 Coraciidae Coracias caudatus Lilac-breasted Roller V Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 28 Corvidae Corvus splendens Indian house Crow MC Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 29 Cuculidae Centropus superciliosus White-browed Coucal RBC Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 30 Cuculidae Chrysococcyx caprius Didric Cuckoo V Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 31 Dicruridae Dicrurus adsimilis Drongo V Least concern Alyssa Robb (2004) 32 Dromadidae Dromas ardeola Crab Plover V Least concern Mileto& Castle (1995) 33 Falconidae Falco cuvierii African Hobby TBD Least concern Dudley Iles (1995) 34 Falconidae Falco subbuteo European Hobby TBD Least concern Bayliss&Stubblefied (1993) 35 Haematopodidae Haematopus ostralegus Oystercatcher V Near threatened Dudley Isles (1995) 36 Hirundinidae Hirundo abyssinica Lesser Striped Swallow V Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 37 Hirundinidae Hirundo rustica Barn Swallow V Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 38 Hirundinidae Riparia riparia Sand Martin V Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 39 Laniidae Lanius collurio Red-backed Shrike V Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 40 Laridae Larus hemprichii Sooty Gull MU Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) Northern Carmine Bee- 41 Meropidae Merops nubicus V Least concern Koehler P & Koehler U (2014) eater 42 Meropidae Merops persicus Blue-cheeked bee-eater M U Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 43 Monarchidae Terpsiphone viridis Paradise Flycatcher RB C Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 44 Monarchidae Trochocercus cyanomelas Crested Flycatcher V Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 45 Muscicapidae Cossypha natalensis Red-capped Robin Chat RB C Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 46 Muscicapidae Muscicapa striata Spotted Flycatcher M C Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 47 Nectariniidae Cinnyris bifasciatus Purple-banded Sunbird RB C Not assessed Dudley Isles (1995)

226

Status on Nr. Family GENUS/SPECIES COMMON NAME IUCN status 2016 Recorded by Chumbe Cyanomitra verreauxii Zanzibar Mouse-coloured 48 Nectariniidae RBC Not assessed Dudley Isles (1995) zanzibarica Sunbird 49 Nectariniidae Hedydipna collaris Collared Sunbird V Not assessed Koehler P & Koehler U (2014) 50 Oriolidae Oriolus oriolus Eurasian Golden Oriole V Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 51 Phalacrocoracidae Phalacrocorax africanus Long-tailed Cormorant V Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 52 Phylloscopidae Phylloscopus trochilus Willow Warbler V Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 53 Ploceidae Euplectes hordacea Black-winged Red Bishop V Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) Andropadus importunus 54 Pycnonotidae Sombre Greenbul RB C Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) insularis 55 Scolopacidae Actitis hypoleucos Common Sandpiper M C Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 56 Scolopacidae Arenaria interpres Ruddy Turnstone V Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 57 Scolopacidae Calidris alba Sanderling V Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 58 Scolopacidae Calidris ferruginea Curlew Sandpiper V Near threatened Dudley Isles (1995) 59 Scolopacidae Calidris minuta Little Stint V Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 60 Scolopacidae Numenius arquata Eurasian Curlew M Near threatened Mileto & Castle (1995) 61 Scolopacidae Numenius phaeopus Whimbrel V Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 62 Scolopacidae Tringa nebularia Common Greenshank MU Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 63 Scolopacidae Xenus cinereus Terek Sandpiper UM Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 64 Stercorariidae Stercorarius parasiticus Arctic Skua V Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 65 Stercorariidae Stercorarius pomarinus PomarineSkua V Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 66 Sternidae Anous stolidus Brown Noddy M U Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 67 Sternidae Sterna anaethetus Bridled Tern V Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 68 Sternidae Sterna bengalensis Lesser Crested Tern M C Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 69 Sternidae Sterna bergii Greater Crested Tern M C Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 70 Sternidae Sterna dougallii Roseate Tern B U Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 71 Sternidae Sterna fuscata Sooty Tern M U Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 72 Sternidae Sterna hirundo Common Tern V Least concern Dudley Isles (1995)

227

Status on Nr. Family GENUS/SPECIES COMMON NAME IUCN status 2016 Recorded by Chumbe 73 Sternidae Sterna saundersi Saunder's Tern M C Least concern Dudley Isles (1995) 74 Strigidae Strix woodfordi African Wood Owl U Not assessed Dudley Isles (1995) 75 Sulidae Sula dactylatra Masked Booby M U Least conscern Dudley Isles (1995) 76 Trogonidae Apaloderma narina Narina Trogon V Least conscern Dick Persson (2009) 77 Viduidae Vidua paradisaea Eastern Paradise Whydah V Least conscern Dudley Isles (1995)

Status: R = Resident all year C = Commonly seen V = Vagrant (1 or 2 records only) B = Known to breed M = Migrant U = Uncommonly see

228

APPENDIX EIGHT: Butterfly diversity in the Chumbe Forest Reserve

Family Nr Genus/Species Common name Acraeidae 1 Acraea natalica Natal Acraea 2 Acraea zetes Large-spotted Acraea 3 Coeliades forestan Striped Policeman Hesperiidae 4 Gegenes sp. Grizzled Skipper 5 Bicyclus safitza Common Bush Brown Nymphalidae 6 Byblia anvatara Spotted joker 7 Danaus chrysippus African Monarch 8 Euphaedra neophron Gold-banded Forester 9 Hypolimnas misippus Danaid Eggfly 10 Junonia hierta Yellow Pansy 11 Junonia natalica Brown Pansy 12 Junonia oenone Blue Pansy 13 Neptis saclava Small-spotted Sailer 14 Phalantha phalantha Common Leopard 15 Pseudoacraea lucretica False Acraea 16 Vanessa cardui Painted Lady 17 Papilio demodocus Citrus Swallowtail Papilionidae 18 Papilio nireus Green-banded Swallowtail 19 Belenois aurota Brown-veined White Pieridae 20 Belenois creona African Common White 21 Belenois thysa False Dotted Border 22 Catopsilia florella African Migrant 23 Colotis ione Purple-tip 24 Colotis sp. Black-barred Red Tip 25 Colotis sp. Salmon Colotis 26 Eurema hecabe Common Grass Yellow

229

APPENDIX NINE: Snorkeling Code of Conduct

On Chumbe we follow the GREEN FINS CODE OF CONDUCT

230

APPENDIX TEN: Chumbe Awards (1998-2017)

*** TOURISM FOR TOMORROW, GLOBAL WINNER 1999 ***

British Airways, Global

*** EXPO 2000 PROJECT AROUND THE WORLD, 2000 ***

Selected to represent Tanzania at the EXPO 2000 World Exibition, Hannover, Germany

*** UN GLOBAL 500 LAUREATE 2000 AWARD, 2000 ***

Outstanding Environmental Achievement Award of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Global

*** AGA KHAN AWARD – FINALIST, 2001 ***

Award for Architecture, Global

*** CONDENAST ECOTOURISM DESTINATION AWARD - WORLD WINNER, 2001 ***

Award of the Condenast Traveler Magazine, Global

*** GREEN HOTELIER OF THE YEAR, 2001 ***

Independent Environmental Award from the International Hotel and Restaurant Association (IH&RA), United Kingdom

*** MOST ROMANTIC ECO-LODGE AWARD OF THE YEAR, 2003 ***

Harpers & Queen Magazine, Special November Supplement, Global

231

*** RESPONSIBLE TOURISM AWARD 2004 ***

Winner in the category ´Best Marine & Beach Destination, Global

***TODO AWARD 2004***

Winner for Socially Responsible Tourism, Germany

*** AGA KHAN AWARD – FINALIST, 2004 ***

Award for Architecture, Global

*** FINALIST, WORLD LEGACY AWARD, 2004 ***

For ‘Nature Travel’ category, Conservation International and National Geographic Traveler, Global

*** BEST WEBSITE FOR SUSTAINABLE TOURISM PRODUCTS, 2005 ***

Awards from the Federal German Ministry of Development and Cooperation, Germany

*** SMITHSONIAN, TOURISM CARES FOR TOMORROW AWARD, 2005 ***

Finalist. Smithsonian, USA

*** RESPONSIBLE TRAVEL, TOURISM AWARD, 2006 ***

Best in the Marine Environment, Global

*** ISLAND HOT 100 (BLUE LIST) AWARD, 2007 ***

Second place. Islands Magazine, Global

*** AWARD FOR INNOVATIVE APPROACHES IN PROMOTING ECOTOURISM, 2008 ***

National Geographic Society’s Center for Sustainable Destinations (CSD) and Ashoka’s Change makers, Global

232

*** ECOTROPHEA ENVIRONMENT AWARD, 2008 ***

Finalist Deutscher ReiseVerband, Germany

*** AWARD FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION & AWARENESS RAISING IN ZANIBAR, 2009 ***

Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Environment, Zanzibar

*** COMMENDATION AWARD WINNER IN EDUCATING AFRICA ‘TEACH A MAN TO FISH’, 2009 ***

Pan-African Awards for Entrepreneurship in Education

*** BBC WORLD CHALLENGE, 2010 ***

Finalist

*** TRIP ADVISOR CERTIFICATE OF EXCELLENCE, 2011 ***

Tanzania

*** VOTED IN THE TOP 25 BEST ECO-LODGE’S IN THE WORLD, 2012 ***

National Geographic, Global

*** SARAFI AWARDS, 2012 ***

Runner up for Best Ecological Safari Property in Africa

*** ENERGY GLOBE NATIONAL AWARD 2012 ***

National Winner, Tanzania

*** TRIP ADVISOR TRAVELER'S CHOICE WINNER, 2012 ***

All Inclusive hotels Africa, Trip Advisor

233

*** TRIP ADVISOR CERTIFICATE OF EXCELLENCE, 2012 ***

Tanzania

*** SUSTAINIA 100 GLOBAL SOLUTION, RIO +10, 2012 ***

Honored as a global sustainable solution to an Eco Lodge with a Tiny Carbon Footprint, Global

*** WORLD RESPONSIBLE TOURISM AWARDS, 2013 ***

Highly Commended for best in Water Conservation, Global

*** TRIP ADVISOR TRAVELER'S CHOICE WINNER, 2013 ***

Ranked #1 for service in Tanzania

*** TRIP ADVISOR CERTIFICATE OF EXCELLENCE, 2013 ***

Tanzania

*** GREEN AFRICA AWARD, 2013 ***

GAA, Africa

*** TRIP ADVISOR TRAVELER'S CHOICE WINNER, 2014 ***

Ranked #1 for service in Tanzania

*** TRIP ADVISOR CERTIFICATE OF EXCELLENCE, 2014 ***

Tanzania

*** SKAL SUSTAINABLE TOURISM AWARDS, 2015 ***

Winner in Marine Category

234

*** GOLD WINNER WORLD RESPONSIBLE TOURISM AWARDS, 2015 ***

Gold Winner Beach Category, Africa

*** TRIP ADVISOR TRAVELER'S CHOICE WINNER, 2015 ***

Ranked #1 for service in Tanzania and #3 for Romance in Tanzania

*** TRIP ADVISOR CERTIFICATE OF EXCELLENCE, 2015 ***

Tanzania

*** BOOKING.COM GUEST REVIEW AWARD 2016***

Africa

*** TRIP ADVISOR TRAVELER'S CHOICE 2016 WINNER ***

Ranked #3 for service in Zanzibar and #2 for Romance in Tanzania, Trip Advisor

*** TRIP ADVISOR CERTIFICATE OF EXCELLENCE, 2016 ***

Tanzania

235

References

Adame, M. and C. Gabriela (2007) Ocean circulation of the Zanzibar channel: a modeling approach. IMS, Zanzibar pp.8.

Aplin, M.D. (1998) The report of the botanical survey of food plants of the Aders duiker, (Cephalophus adersi) for its proposed reintroduction on Chumbe Island Nature Reserve, Zanzibar, East Africa. WWF project, AT104.

Bakun A. (2006) Fronts and eddies as key structures in the habitat of marine fish larvae: opportunity, adaptive response and competitive advantage, Scientia Marina, 2006 vol. 70S2, pp.105-122.

Barr, A. and Rasmussan, B. (2001) A study of starfish, Chumbe Island. SIT Study, Zanzibar Coastal Ecology and Natural Resource Management.

Bandeira, S.O. and M. Björk (2001) Seagrass research in the eastern Africa region: Emphasis on diversity, ecology and ecophysiology. South African Journal of Botany 67(3), pp.420-425.

Boehm, E. (2016) Inspektion und Optimierung einer Pflanzenkläranlage zur Behandlung von Grauwasser. Einsatzbericht TZ-CHICOP 3 / Nr.: 21543655

Braulik, G.T., Findlay, K., Cerchio, S. and R. Baldwin (2015) Assessment of the Conservation Status of the Indian Ocean Humpback Dolphin (Sousa plumbea) Using the IUCN Red List Criteria. In: Thomas A. Jefferson and Barbara E. Curry, editors, Advances in Marine Biology, Vol. 72,Oxford: Academic Press, 2015, pp. 119-141.

Bronstein, O. and Y. Loya (2011) Daytime spawning of Porites rus on the coral reefs of Chumbe Island in Zanzibar, Western Indian Ocean (WIO). Coral Reefs 30(2), pp.441-441.

Businski, T. (2001) Algal Zonation on Chumbe Island. SIT project

CHICOP (2005) Chumbe Island Excursions: Narrative and Financial Report. SADC REEP (WESSA).

Cowen R.K., Paris C.B., Olson D.B. and J.L. Fortuna (2003) The role of long distance dispersal versus local retention in replenishing marine populations. Gulf Caribb Res 14:129–138.

Daniels, C. (2004c) Terrestrial science report for DCCFF. CHICOP.

Dudley, N. (Ed) (2008) Guidelines for Applying Protected Area Management Categories . Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. x + 86pp.

Eldredge, L.G. (1996) "Birgus latro". IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2.3 (2.3). International Union for Conservation of Nature.

English, S., Wilkinson, C. and V.Baker (1997) Survey Manual for Tropical Marine Resources, 2nd edn. Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville.

Eriksson, B. H., de la Torre-Castro, M., Eklöf, J. and N. Jiddawi (2010) Resource degradation of the sea cucumber fishery in Zanzibar, Tanzania: a need for management reform. Aquatic Living Resources 2(4), pp.387- 398.

Eylem, E. (2015) Spatial distribution of herbivorous fish across fringing back-reef systems around Zanzibar. Master Thesis. Tanzania. 236

Finnie, D. (2001) Aders Duiker (Cephalophus adersi) Species Recovery Plan (Revised). DCCFF, Forestry Technical Paper.

Fujita, R. and K. Karr (2012) Primer for Ecosystem Threshold Analysis. Produced by Research and Development Team, Oceans Program, Environmental Defense Fund.

Gillingham, A.D. (2010) Chumbe Island Coral Park Forest Monitoring Programme. A manual prepared for Chumbe Island Coral Park Ltd.

Gillingham, A.D. (2011) An investigation into the connection between environmental gradients and variations in vegetation composition within the Seasonally Dry Tropical Forest of Chumbe Island, Zanzibar. BSc (Hons) Geography and Environmnetal Managament, University of the West of England.

Gombos, M., Atkinson,S., Green, A. and K. Flower (eds.) (2013) Designing Effective Locally Managed Areas in Tropical Marine Environments: A Booklet to Help Sustain Community Benefits through Management for Fisheries, Ecosystems, and Climate Change. Jakarta, Indonesia: USAID Coral Triangle Support Partnership.

Graham, S. (2003) Distribution of Uvariodendron kirkii on Chumbe Island. SIT Project.

Haji, S.H. (2010) Water Balance Assessment in Unguja Island, Zanzibar, Tanzania. Master Thesis. International Institute for Geo-information Science and Earth Observation, The Netherlands.

Hamner, W. M. and J.L. Largier (2012) Oceanography of the planktonic stages of aggregation spawning reef fishes. In Y. Sadovy de Mitcheson & P. L. Colin (Eds.), Reef fish spawning aggregations: Biology, research and management (pp. 159–190). London: Springer.10.1007/978-94-007-1980-4

Harries, H.C. (1983) The coconut palm, the robber crab and Charles Darwin. Principes. 27 (3): 131–137.

Hayford, J. and M. Perlman (2006) Chumbe Seagrass Distribution and Composition. School for International Training. Unpublished report.

Helber, B., Wolff,M., Christopher A.M., Richter,C., Rohde, S. and J. Peter (2016) Schupp: Chemical ecology of Western Indian Ocean reef sponges. Poster presentation In SUTAS conference, Zanzibar

Holland, K.M., Lowe, C.G. and B.M. Wetherbee (1996) Movements and dispersal patterns of blue trevally (Carunx melampygus) in a fisheries conservation zone. In Fisheries Research 25 (1996) pp.279-292

Jacobsen, K. and L. Esherick (2007) A survey of the cockle A. antiquata, Chumbe Island. SIT Study, Zanzibar Coastal Ecology and Natural Resource Management.

Kanga, E.M. (1999) Survey of Ader’s Duiker Cephalophus adersi in Jozani Forest Reserve, and in Ukongoroni, Charawe, Jambiani, Mtende, Kiwengwa and Michamvi Community forests, Zanzibar. A Report for JCBCP and CNR Zanzibar.

Kaunda-Arara, B. & Rose, G. A. (2004) Long-distance movements of coral reef fishes. Coral Reefs 23, 410–412.

Kayagambe, E.B., Kloiber, U. & S. Masuka (2012) Perceived impact of Chumbe Island Coral Park on artisanal fishing communities. Internal report & Recommendations: CHICOP, Conservation & Education

Kirkpatrick, D.L., & J.D. Kirkpatrick (1994) Evaluating Training Programs, Berrett-Koehler Publishers

Kirkpatrick, D.L., & J.D. Kirkpatrick (2005) Transferring Learning to Behavior, Berrett-Koehler Publishers

237

Kirkpatrick, D.L., & J.D. Kirkpatrick (2007) Implementing the Four Levels, Berrett-Koehler Publishers

Kloiber, U. (2012) Final Report on Roseate Terns (Sterna dougallii) breeding colony on Chumbe Island. CHICOP.

Knudby, Anders, and L. Nordlund (2011) Remote sensing of seagrasses in a patchy multi-species environment." International Journal of Remote Sensing 32(8), pp.2227-2244.

Lokrantz, J., Nystrom, M., Norstrom, A.V., Folke, C. and J.E. Cinner (2009) Impacts of artisanal fishing on key functional groups and the potential vulnerability of coral reefs. Environmental Conservation 36(04), pp.327- 337.

Marshall, E. (2009) Sponges on Chumbe Island. SIT Study, Zanzibar Coastal Ecology and Natural Resource Management.

Marshall, P. and H. Schuttenberg (2006) A Reef Manager’s Guide to Coral Bleaching. GBRMPA.

Mayorga-Adame, C.G. (2007) Ocean circulation of the Zanzibar channel: a modeling approach. IMS, Zanzibar 8 (2007).

Maypa, A. (2012) Mechanisms by which Marine Protected Areas Enhance Fisheries Benefits of Neighboring Areas. Doctoral Dissertation: Unversity of Hawai’i at Manoa

McClanahan, T. R., Graham, N. a. J., MacNeil, M.A., Muthiga, N.A., Cinner, J.E., Bruggemann, J. H. and S.K. Wilson (2011) Critical thresholds and tangible targets for ecosystem-based management of coral reef fisheries. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, pp.4-7.

McClanahan, T.R. (ed) (2008) Manual and Field Guide for Monitoring Coral Reef Ecosystems, Fisheries, and Stakeholders. Wildlife Conservation Society, Bronx, NY.

Meyer, C.G., Holland, K.N., Wetherbee, B.M. and C.G. Lowe (2000) Movement patterns, habitat tilization, home range size and site fidelity of whitesaddle goatfish, Parupeneus porphyreus, in a marine reserve. Env Biol Fish 59: 235–242.

Mohammed, Mohammed S., Muhando, C. A. and H. Machano (2000) Assessment of coral reef degradation in Tanzania: Results of coral reef monitoring 1999. Coral reef degradation in the Indian Ocean.

Muhando, C. A. (2001) The 1998 coral bleaching and mortality event in Tanzania: implications for coral reef research and management. Marine Science Development in Tanzania and Eastern Africa: Proc. 20th Anniversary Conference on Advances in Marine Science in Tanzania. Institute of Marine Science/Western Indian Ocean Marine Science Association, Zanzibar.

Muhando, C. A. and F. Lanshammar (2008). Ecological effects of the crown-of-thorns starfish removal programme on Chumbe Island Coral Park, Zanzibar, Tanzania.

Muir, Catharine, and S. Sense (2005) The status of marine turtles in the United Republic of Tanzania, East Africa. Report commissioned by the National Tanzania Turtle Committee. 40pp.

Mustelin, J., Klein, R.G., Assaid, B., Sitari, T., Khamis, M., Mzee, A. and T. Haji (2010) Understanding current and future vulnerability in coastal settings: community perceptions and preferences for adaptation in Zanzibar, Tanzania. Population and Environment 31(5), pp.371-398.

238

Muzuka, A., Dubi, A., Muhando, C.A. and Y.W. Shaghude (2010) Impact of hydrographic parameters and seasonal variation in sediment fluxes on coral status at Chumbe and Bawe reefs, Zanzibar, Tanzania. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 89(2), pp.137-144.

Nordlund, L., Erlandsson, J., de la Torre-Castro, M. and N, Jiddawi (2010) Changes in an East African social- ecological seagrass system: invertebrate harvesting affecting species composition and local livelihood. Aquatic Living Resources, 23(4), pp.399-416.

Nowak, K., Perkin, A. and T. Jones (2009) Update on habitat loss and conservation status of the endangered Zanzibar red colobus on Uzi and Vundwe Islands. Unpublished report for Department of Commercial Crops, Fruits and Forestry, Zanzibar.

O’Bryan, M. (2005) Narrative and Financial Report: Education Phase 4. Report to ICRAN, UNEP-WCMC.CHICOP.

Orwa., C., Mutua, A., Kindt, R. , Jamnadass, R. and S. Anthony (2009) Agroforestree Database: A tree reference and selection guide version 4.0.

Pomeroy, R.S., Parks, J.E. & L.M. Watson (2004) How is your MPA Doing? IUCN, Protected Areas Programme, WWF; United States, NOAA. Gland : IUCN, 2004. xv, 215p: ill.

Rearick, J. (2000) Macroalgae abundance, Chumbe Island. SIT project.

Riedmiller, S. (1991) Environmental Education in Zanzibar: Proposals for Action. Dept. of Environment, Finnida, Zanzibar.

Richmond, M. D.(ed) (2011) A Field Guide to the Seashorses of Eastern Africa and the Western Indian Ocean Islands. Sida/WIOMSA. 464pp. ISBN 9987-8977-9-7

Samaki Consultants Ltd. (2010) Whales ahoy! Humpback whale sightings for Tanzania and beyond. In Newsletter No. 3 2010 Summary. Samaki Consultants, pp.6

Santilli, R. (2012). Revised butterfly species list for Chumbe Island Coral Park. Internal Report, CHICOP.

Sawicki, A. (2000) A study of invertebrates on Chumbe Island. SIT Study, Zanzibar Coastal Ecology and Natural Resource Management.

Sheppard, A.L.S. (1984) The molluscan fauna of Chagos (Indian Ocean) and analysis of its broad distribution patterns. Coral Reefs (3): 43–50.

Stolton, S. Shadie, P. and N. Dudley (2013). IUCN WCPA Best Practice Guidance on Recognising Protected Areas and Assigning Management Categories and Governance Types. Guidelines Series No. 21, Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. ISBN: 978-2-8317-1636-7

Stubblefield, L.K. and J. Bayliss (1993) Preliminary results of a biological survey of Chumbe Island – Zanzibar. Technical report of the Coastal Forest Research Program. 25 pp.

Swai, I.S. (1983) Wildlife Conservation Status in Zanzibar. MSc. Thesis, University of Dar es Salaam.

Thorkildsen, K. (2006) Socio-economic and ecological analysis of a privately managed Marine Protected Area: Chumbe Island Coral Park, Zanzibar. Norwegian University of Life Sciences; Department of International Environment and Development Studies

239

Tierney, J.E. and J.M. Russell (2007) Abrupt climate change in southeast tropical Africa influenced by Indian monsoon variability and ITCZ migration. Geophysical Research Letters34:15. Website: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2007GL029508/full

Torell, E., Mmochi, A. & K. Palmigiano (2006) Menai Bay Governance Baseline Coastal Resources Center, University of Rhode Island. pp. 18

Tyler, E.H.M (2006) The effect of fully and partially protected marine reserves on coral reef fish populations in Zanzibar, Tanzania. DPhil thesis, University of Oxford.

Wannas, K.O., Mahongo, S.B. and Y. W. Shaghude (2002) Biogenic assemblage and hydrodynamic settings of the tidally dominated reef platform sediments of the Zanzibar Channel.

Williams, A.J., Mwinyi, A.A. & Ali, S.J. (1996) A population survey of three mini-antelope – Ader’s Duiker (Cephalophus adersi), Zanzibar Blue Duiker (Cephalophus moniticola sundervalli), Suni (Neotragus moschatus moschaatus) of Unguja Zanzibar. Forestry Technical Paper No. 27. Commission for Natural Resources, Zanzibar.

Woolven, T. (2012) Solid Waste Management Project Report. Chumbe Island Coral Park

Zvuloni, Assaf, V.W. Robert and Y. Loya (2010) Diversity partitioning of stony corals across multiple spatial scales around Zanzibar Island, Tanzania. Plos One 5(3), pp.e9941.

Published by CHICOP August 2017

Support by SSIC

240

241